Also, if you've got the inspection stuff squared away, it's easy peasy to generate reports, csv data, etc... If you can imagine it, you can format it, and generate reports.

There's also less handling if you can get in-machine-inspection working right, reliably, and efficiently.

Thanks for all the replies. I ended up going with the Mill 2 setup sheet and I got a lot of fields down: Here you can see the checkboxes I added, plus SFM and RPM (thanks rgrin!). I think my main problem now is styling. That being said, I wanted to say that I do understand this a little better. When people were saying that the naming convention was important, they weren't kidding. The name in parentheses is the XML tag that the interpreter goes down to. It's almost like you're peeling back layers of an onion, except you can't really go back up, but you can dig deeper down. Another thing I'd like to say is that I still have 0 clue how to use the scripting section. If anyone has any experience with that, please advise. I think it would be a great idea to write some unofficial documentation on this so that everyone can start writing ActiveReports, because when you start to dig down deep and really learn how it works over the course of a few weeks or so, you really start to have fun making things your own and figuring stuff out. Suffice it to say, I got most of my setup sheet done thanks to this forum and thanks to everyone's help. I really appreciate it.

Ask the pushers if they want the machines making more chips or checking parts. Maybe your management team thinks differently, but my management team always wants to make more chips. Some of them may not understand much about manufacturing, but they all understand more chips = more parts = more $$ ...food for thought, a CNC can do a CMM's job but not visa versa.

Support should be the #1 consideration when buying a 5-Axis machine. Much like a multi-tasking lathe support will make or break that machine. You could buy "the best" (whatever that is) machine but when the good for nothing AE shows up to train you, he (or she) has no clue about cutting parameters to utilize the machine to maximize it's capability, it's going to be on YOU to figure out. Oh sure, they'll tell you "... that's the CAM system's responsibility...", and it is, but only to a certain extent. When they cannot explain to you the role of point spacing, cut distance, and tolerance, and how it relates to machine performance, you ARE in for trouble.

This is one of the many areas I believe Matsuura is FAR superior to the toilet bowl lovers in machine design. Matsuura can get closer to the pallet center with the head/spindle. Doing this allows you to run shorter tool assemblies and it requires shorter work holding to get ot he part. All that to say a more rigid machining setup = the best metal removal scenario possible. In the MAM series they offer the MAM72-35V, MAM72-42V, MAM72-52V, MAM72-70V, and MAM72-100H. Then in the CUBLEX series there is a CUBLEX-35 and a CUBLEX-63. There was a CUBLEX-42 but I believe they discontinued it. 350mm, 420mm, 520mm, 700mm, and 1000mm respectively. The number after the dash is the CM value of MAX pallet Changing swing diameter essentially.

Check antivirus software is not tying up your temp folders doing scanning. I have to disable that or I will get the same error. The other option is to make your temp folder a safe place on the computer.

Hi, this must be no problem. Control Definition - Operation Default - Tools Settings and that's all. Good luck!

Tagging this post. I watched Colins's entire youtube course on this and ended up with a pretty nice post.

Ref ISO9001, there were 7xmandates when we got approval (2x man shop) back in 2007. It (9001) was updated in 2015 and the mandates were changed, but at the time I remember the assessor saying he knew of 1x UK company that was a 1x man band who had got approval and another company whose manual was 2 pages....the manual then consisted of flow downs to other documents which specified/controlled the said mandates. My manual was total of 35 pages, which was very padded out as the 1st half was design requirements and the tail end were copies of the things like CofC, Job Traveller, Invoice etc - I reckon I could have consolidated it to 15 pages if I'd removed the padding, as the design stuff was only for "sales" as we weren't "ISO approved" for that. But yes to quote Margaret Thatcher...."sometimes it is best to be specifically vague"....ie if you state ail job cards need sign off in ink, just state ink. If you state black pen, someone will use blue and you'll unnecessarily fail the audit (simplification but you get the idea). AS9100 (aero) was the next step with the only real main difference (at the time) being stock control - you had to control every inch of material, every rivet and screw and washer etc - ISO9001 you could just state (for the same material batch number) job 12345 had 10", job 12346 had 20", job 12347 had 10", of material batch number AXXXX and that was okay. AS9100 took that further by stock control monitoring so you had to detail incoming delivery of batch number AXXXX was 50", and you used 10, 20, and 10" on the 3x jobs above, so you now have 10" still left in stock (unsure of exactly how you get around tolerance of cutting and width of saw blades....for billets, washers, screws (ie "items") it's easy). Initially...."getting approval" can seem daunting, but if you break it all down to bite size chunks, the dauntingness rapidly diminishes. Certain practices you should really be doing anyway - such as material batch traceability gauge control and calibration, and office things like "contract review" which catches things like repeat purchase orders which have a revision/change, so you don't make at previous (old) issue.... Overall, it helped focus my business and got a 2x man band approved to be Tier 1x supplier for some major OEM's. Which then allowed us to grow but with control and focus.

@James - great comment ref your #1 above. I would also add the obvious that part shape material and workholding comes into it too. Measure the part xxxx on! Unclamp the part and distortion.... And Ron - Ref many Inspectors and their job choice...."If you can't do it, View it"

That's not really a concern. The collision detection only works to tilt the tool. Actual motion (the fact that this will cause the B to tilt) is only really a function of the post & machine definition. The part itself is stationary from the toolpath calculation side, which is why when you backplot it (not machine sim!), it shows the tool tilting. If you have the A Axis setup modelled, you can simply select it as part of the Collision Control > Avoidance Geometries selection and it'll be fine.

Adding non manufacturing time adds TAKT time. Added TAKT time = higher cost. That said, WIP = Inventory. Inventory = Money. Money = Taxation Parts in inspection = WIP therefore there's a cost no matter where the part is within the factory. If you can integrate and automate processes you can bring down the labor component of part cost. "There are no perfect solutions, only compromises." Thomas Sowell

Yeah because of what I just mentioned above. When the above is done with a NIST Traceable artifact then the process is not just using the machine to inspect the part it is the process that is support the device which happens to be a CNC Machine. The device collecting the measurements doesn't matter at that point since the process to ensure what is collecting the measurements is validated and verified all is good. A CMM that is not correctly calibrated is not better than a machine tool that is not calibrated correctly either.

Well I learned last week a major very respected builder does their machine calibration services using levels and squares not an interferometer. The issue was our programming process used was called into question. Print states one thing, but then 20 other things state 20 other things. Print is the authority unless some inspector decides no they want a +/-.0005 on a part with a +/-.010 wall thickness on the print. Or a 16 finish when the print calls out 125 and add hundreds of hours of processing time to the project. Cut 6 pockets the same exact way and 2 of the 4 are acceptable, but then as we get to longer tools the deviation between the two tools doing the work became greater. Root cause analysis looks into the root of the problem. Machine has not been calibrated in over a year. I happened to be onsite when they were going through the machine calibration and what an eye opening experience that was. Levels and squares with a spindle gauge. No external way to verify the machine is going where it is told to. This is the extent of the full volumetric machine calibration process. I called James and make sure I hadn't lost my mind and was an internal interferometer installed on the machine in question I was unaware of. NO NOT ONE HE SUPPORTS and he was unaware of one being installed either. We both agreed even it one was that at someone point would have to be calibrated. Why is this an important topic of conversation and how is it related? Here is some light reading for those that take their jobs seriously. All the hates keep on hating. Machine tool calibration: Measurement, modeling, and compensation of machine tool errors There is too much to quote that is important.

It can be done effectively... it just has to be approached in the right manner. The #1 issue with inspecting a part on the machine that produced it isn't that the machine is checking itself, it is that the connection between the coordinate system that manufactured the part and the coordinate system that is inspecting the part isn't broken. You MUST break that connection in order to get an accurate measurement. On a 5-Axis machine with a FANUC control, that means having G68.2, G54.4, machine parameters set correctly, AND the probing software that supports probing with those functions active. Don;t have ALL those things squared away and there WILL be trouble in paradise.

Whether or not inspecting on the same machine that made the part will meet your needs, will depend on your needs. If you want to do it properly, you should meet the same bar as for other measurement methods; get your machine laser / ballbar calibrated, do a measurement repeatability and uncertainty test, etc., and make sure that your uncertainty is less than 1/10 your tightest tolerance. You can include measuring a gauge block / pin / ring as part of your inspection process to warn you of any calibration drift, thermal expansion issue, or other problem.

Ball Lock® (jergensinc.com)

Yes, but the duct tape, bailing wire and chewing gum holding those UMC-750's together is highly susceptible to thermal expansion and compression.