47Rc is pretty hard and right on the cusp of needing specific tooling for it. Is your customer trying to pull one over on you? I machine parts for a customer of mine that has two versions. One is Rc45 and the other is Rc54. The parts at Rc54 are a completely different animal and a real pain to deal with. Once you get up to 45+ a few points makes a big difference in speeds and feeds and tool life. The annealed state should be WAAAY below Rc47 though...

Depends what your time is worth. My time is better spent making parts and keeping customers happy with on-time deliveries. i couldn't even design a system for $10k given what my time is worth making parts. Building a system might save you $10k but if it costs you $20k in lost productivity it is pretty much a waste of time.

Yeah, it gets frustrating not knowing what actually controls the feature and what does absolutely nothing. It would be nice if they would clean out the crap so only the functional items remained.

I have merged surfaces in the past but it was a long time ago. What is the best way to go about this? - merging surfaces

Yes, I have tried about every combination with those parameters and it always wants to post the unwind routine. The way we are getting around this right now is forcing tool changes between operations and that resets the C value in the posted code. Each operation only spins the C up to ~60000 degrees so forcing tool changes gets us where we need to be. I'd like to come up with a permanent fix though.

#Set pri_limtyp and sec_limtyp on following conditions #0 = Less than 180 degrees #1 = Equal or greater than 180 degrees and less than 360 degrees #2 = Soft limit at 0-360 degrees with hard limits slightly beyond #Set limhi-limlo to hard limits, inthi-intlo to 360 degrees total #limhi-limlo are expected equal amount from inthi-intlo #3 = Greater than 360 degrees auto_set_lim : 3 #Set the type from the angle limit settings (ignore these) pri_limtyp$ : 0 sec_limtyp$ : 0 #Rotary axis travel limits, always in terms of normal angle output #Set the absolute angles for axis travel on primary pri_limlo$ : -99999 pri_limhi$ : 99999 #Set intermediate angle, in limits, for post to reposition machine pri_intlo$ : -360 pri_inthi$ : 360 #Set the absolute angles for axis travel on secondary sec_limlo$ : -120 sec_limhi$ : 120 #Set intermediate angle, in limits, for post to reposition machine sec_intlo$ : -120 sec_inthi$ : 120 Here is the rotary section of my post

Yes, the machine is working perfectly and it loops just fine. When continuously rotating it counts up to 359.999 and resets back to zero without a hitch. The problem is that my post wants to unwind it once the max limit is reached. Currently the max limit in the post is 99999.999 and it will try to unwind the machine (retract, G0, C0, etc...) when it reaches that limit. I would like to tweak my post so the max limit is +/- 359.999 and when this is reached it resets to zero (just like the machine) and doesn't try to post the unwind crap. Is there a post setting that handles this?

We are machining some parts with a 5-axis toolpath that involves rotating the C-axis constantly with only small movements in the B-axis. The issue we are running into is the C-axis winds up to the point where it causes a machine alarm because there are too many digits in the G-code (C100000.000). The most the control will accept is 99999.999. The machine itself (Fanuc 31i) does not wind up. Once the C-axis position moves beyond 359.999 degrees is sets back to zero so everything on the machine side is fine, the problem is in the posted code. I tweaked my post to limit the output to 99999.999 degrees for that axis but when it is reached it wants to retract and unwind the machine. Since the machine doesn't wind up all it is really doing is retracting, dropping back down, and proceeding with the program. Is there a setting in the post or machine definition that will make it behave as the machine behaves, where once 359.999 degrees is reached it will proceed to 0.0 degrees without trying to unwind?

Agree. I have done testing and the amount of drill 'walking' was the same when using a center drill or nothing at all. When properly using a spotting drill (120 degree for 118 degree drill, engaging short of the shoulder) the holes were perfect.

picture the cavity that would be needed to cast a .25" diameter Torx bit that is .75" long.

What sort of accuracy are you wanting to get? It sounds like you will need to use the vector probing cycles and I'm not sure the Haas probes will do that very well if you are looking for the utmost accuracy. With the vector cycles you will most likely need to do the math yourself to calculate the radius.

There is a feature I need to machine in 5-axis and I am looking for some ideas as to the best toolpath to tackle this. The feature is a cavity that consists of a cylindrical hole that is .25" diameter x .75" deep with six cylindrical splines protruding inwards. We are currently machining this with the parallel to surfaces toolpath but it runs slow because the tight spaces between the splines. If this could be run with the tool motion running vertically (parallel to the hole axis) it would run much faster because there wouldn't be as many tight spaces, they would be in-line with the cutting direction. Is there a good toolpath that would accomplish this? One idea was a 3-axis radial toolpath converted to 5-axis but the radial was giving me issues because the cavity walls are vertical.

Making parts is the easy part. Lucky for me my shop is next to my house so I am always around, sort of, and my wife is very accommodating with the crazy demands (time and $$$) of running a shop. Without the close proximity of the shop to my house I would have been out of the business or single years ago.

In a machine shop and air dryer is NOT optional. In many instances it will void the machine warranty if there isn't one and installation techs usually verify that one is present.

Post editing is a super handy skill to have. Sometimes it takes longer to explain to someone what you want the post to do than it does to just fix it yourself. This is exactly why I got good at post editing

I have the same problems with my posts but it isn't enough of an issue for me to fix it. I'm not really sure how to fix it but I do believe you need to create a buffer. Not much help I know but do some searches on creating a buffer for comments and you might find something useful. I don't think it is trivial but probably doable.

Are you sure you don't need a refrigerated air dryer? This is a machine tool, correct? I currently have four air dryers for my three machines. I have one big one (200 cfm) at the compressor and one small one (20 cfm) at each machine. These typically run about $1000 for a small one which should work just fine for a machine tool. Typical brands are Ingersol Rand and Chicago Pneumatic. These have refrigeration units built into them to chill the air to condense all of the moisture out before the air gets to the machine. The units themselves have no filter elements or consumables but you will need a filter on the inlet of the dryer unless you know it is clean air coming in.

A few questions... 1. What sorts of parts will you be making? 2. Where would you like to be in 5 years? 3. Will this be your primary source of income? If it were me I would buy a NEW Haas and finance it. I would get a VF2 with a side mount tool changer and some of the key options and my budget would be ~$65k or so. I'm not sure what these go for these days but that should do the trick and the factory has very good financing terms. If you honestly think you can find the work and pull it off you should do it right and get a machine you can grow into over the next few years and NOT a machine you will grow out of in a year. You also want a machine that will allow you to be competitive at a reasonable shop rate and not have to kill yourself at $25/hr because the machine is so damn slow it takes all night to make a bracket. Here are the keys to success IMHO. Work your @ss off, no down time... Work making parts, then when that is done work on learning every detail of the machine, set up tool libraries, work on your post, create Mastercam templates, make generic fixtures (sub plates, etc...). INVEST in your business with sweat equity. You will never have worked as hard as you will when you start your own shop, if you want to be successful. Prepare to work 60+ hours per week making every part that comes your way to develop a solid customer base. The reward will come in a few years when you have a solid customer base, a paid-for machine, and a six figure+ net income. If this will not be your primary source of income (aka, side job) then get the cheap machine as it will do great for that and taking a bigger risk wouldn't be justified. One thing I should add is that this is just my opinion. I have taken this approach and it has worked for me but that doesn't mean it is right, or the only way by any means. There is a lot to be said buying with cash and zero debt but I don't have that much patience :-)

I guess I favor re-posting because I have so much more in my programs that are specific to each machine (machine modes, movement style - tight linear vs. arcs, probing, work offsets, break detection routines, macro routines, etc...) that getting them all transferred and accounted for would be a lot more work than simply re-posting. If the code is dead simple maybe it wouldn't be much of an issue and there is an easy button. One mistake and the easy button becomes a stupid button.

Any reason to not re-post the program? For me, I would save-as a new Mastercam file (if I wanted to keep the original in tact), replace the machine definition, and dynamically rotate the WCS and all associated planes to index about Y instead of X. The whole process would take a few minutes and be a lot less likely to miss something that could cause major issues.

You are correct, I was looking at the H-plus 300, not the 405.

When I was shopping for machines a few years ago I was looking at the H-plus 405 H plus 300, NH 4000, NHX 4000, and A51nx. I quickly came to the conclusion that the NHX was a budget machine and was not in the same class as the others. The NH 4000 couldn't have the control upgraded to 5-axis in the field and was considerably more expensive than the A51nx. The H-plus had the smallest work envelope and was much more expensive. Early on the NHX was out fo the running. There was a shop owner in the market for a machine to replace his 2011 NHX and Makino brought him by my shop to have a look at my A51. What a bummer to buy a machine like that in 2011 and already need to replace it. Apparently it was junk and I'm glad I didn't go that direction because I'm sure I would have regretted it. The price was attractive though but so is the price of Haas machines...

Kevin, my partner in crime told me a story about a shop he worked at once. There was a machine operator/ programmer that repeatedly crashed the machines and one day he was mounting a vise to the mill table with bolts and strap clamps cranked down so tight they were bowing in the middle. When asked why he wanted it so tight his response was "I don't want it to move it if I crash the spindle into it." I almost fell out of my chair I laughed so hard.

When I had my TR160 trunnion I mounted a Lang plate permanently and then I could install/ remove any fixture in a few seconds. It worked great for production parts because I would make duplicate fixtures and change out the entire fixture at the end of each cycle and change the parts in the fixture outside of the machine. The Lang plates work REALLY well and are worth every penny.

No, I'm talking about ADDING to tool definitions and leaving the existing configuration at the operation level intact.