Jeff, I think your right. This is an internal .NCI function. The only way is to draw the full line and noth use extend/shorten. I hate ugly code!!! And also, if the operator is single blocking through the program it will stop on the part (face milling) twice. Maybe they don't know that this is annoying to programmers/operators? Where do you send product enhancement requests to CNC Software?

I noticed when if you use the extend start/end of contour that the code will be 3 x-moves instead of combining them into 1. Is there any easy way the post can combine these into just one x-move? I know my horizontal guys will look askance at this.

Verticals have the advantage in that gravity is working for you as far as workholding goes. On the other hand, on a horizontal when drilling, tapping etc. gravity helps in chip evacuation since they are far less likely to fall back in. As far as set-up goes, I don't see how it is more difficult except for what I mentioned here 1st. If you have a 4th axis on a vertical, you basically have a horizontal laying on it's side. I would say the complexity is only added if you are using a 4th axis. I would also add that any vise-work would be a pain on a horizontal again due to gravity. (Unless you buy the kurt/chick fixturing mentioned above)

check out our website: www.weilerengineering.com

Machinemasterg, Nope, I'm in Elgin, IL a suburb of Chicago. We make pharmaceutical machinery. Scott

Thanks, I've got a call into Kuraki about this G173 which is supposed to switch the Z & W. I do have a post that drills with the W, it just calls W instead of Z on the canned cycle. That is easy. The way we do it involves using: using G54 with W = -3.000" (from W machine home) for milling: G90 G0 G54 W0. (W is out -3" from machine W-home) G43 Z3. H01 for drilling: G90 G0 G54 W3. (W is at machine W-home) G43 Z0 H01 In both examples the tool is positioned 3" above the part. This is what I mean by switching the W & Z. Another issue is if you use an endmill to drill & mill! Scott

Anyone???

Anyone out there have this option on a horizontal with a W-Axis? It is used to easily drill with the W-axis. I'd like to know how it works before I really get deep into getting my post set-up. I'm hoping this will make it simpler but yet allow drilling with the W. Thanks, Scott

Roger, Eric Hendriks said to uncheck the optimize switch in the compensation page. This fixed the stop location but also doubled the code length. per Eric: "Optimize is designed to filter out arc moves that are smaller than the wire diameter. For some reason an Arc is getting broken into small linear moves with optimize off. We’re digging a little more into it." Eric sent me a new post that works fine now. The stop problem is fixed in X3. Scott

I personally prefer no B0 output if using only one work offset. I have 3 Kurakis here and our largest one has no B-axis. This way the programs that do not involve rotating the B-axis will work on all machines (most of our programs). The operator would have to be a complete dunderhead to not be able to set-up one work offset correctly. My 2 cents. Scott

I'll do that, I'll send a .z2g file.

I've got a simple wire profile that is simply one rough cut with a .06" long stop short of the end of the whole profile. I've used these same exact settings before and no problem. For some reason the stop is coming out about 3 moves too early. I'm starting and stopping on a line as well. Is this a bug????? I'm running MR2.

That's why you have a lead-in move so that at the end of that move your comp has been picked-up. I prefer it that way because say you are starting in an existing hole and don't have much room, this is where picking up comp above the part could be a problem. As long as your tool is in the correct position at the end of the lead-in move you are good to go.

Just seems logical to me to have the B0. in the work offset because it is just a 4th zero location for that work offset. The real only reason you can do it with the angle in the program is that the B angles are simple, usually an increment of 90 degrees. If not, then this would not even be an option. I do see the logic in having one angle in the offsets so that is known to be the home face and less chance of the operator putting in the wrong angle in an offset as well. Not to mention my post is already working this way. I guess that this is the main programming difference between a linear & rotary axis. I think I will stick to having the angle in the program, also might be easier to follow in the program as well. Thanks all for your opinions. Thanks all.

Wouldn't that be the 1st option? All work offsets with the same B and call out Bxx in program? Scott

Brett, what do I set this to in order to get negative B-values? rot_type : 0 #Rotary type - 0=signed continuous, 1=signed absolute, 2=shortest direction

Brett, my post is this: one_rev : 0 #Limit rotary indexing between 0 and 360? (0 = No, 1 = Yes) should it be set to 1? does 0-360 exclude negative values?

Just a poll, if you program a horizontal using multiple work offsets with a rotary B-axis do you like to put the B-zero in the work offset or in the control? Take a rectangular part using G54 for the top and G55 & G56 for the sides 90 deg. each way. program: G54 X0 Y0 B0 G55 X0 Y0 B0 G56 X0 Y0 B0...ETC... control work offsets: G54 X..Y..Z.. B0 G55 X..Y..Z.. B90 G56 X..Y..Z.. B-90 or do you call the B angle in the program? program: G54 X0 Y0 B0 G55 X0 Y0 B90 G56 X0 Y0 B-90 control work offsets: G54 X..Y..Z.. B0 G55 X..Y..Z.. B0 G56 X..Y..Z.. B0 Obviously G54 B0 can be something other than 0 depending on the fixturing where it is the change in angle between the offsets that matters, in this example it is 90 degrees. I tend to go with the latter because a work offset should include what angle the table is from machine B0. As long as the operator has a set-up sheet showing that G55 is at B90. and G56 is at B-90 relative to G54 at B0. I realize this is using the axis more like an indexer but even if you are machining with the B-axis, wouldn't it make sense for the B coordinate to be B0 when perpendicular to the tool plane it is using? I don't see the advantage to having a "Master work offset B-zero" which is what you have the way the MP master post is set-up. Any horizontal programmers out there with an opinion? Scott

Got another question, no matter what the machine def is set to for that B-axis, I cannot get a B-90. i always get B270. I thought if I selected signed continuous or signed direction I would get a B-90. Is this a change I need to make to the post? Thanks.

Got it, seems the limits in the mach. def for the rotary axis were all set to 0 for some reason. Thank you much! I think I'm on my way to understanding these how these planes work. I even had training at our reseller and the trainer couldn't give me a good explaination of how they work. BTW, he was just recently fired, no big suprise to me. Thanks, Scott

Hey, that did it! Thanks! I had my wcs set to the planes I created (copies of front, left & right. The back of the part would be in the vise. The only thing is I get an rotation limit exceeded message.

Do you mean the world z? I've got it set up that way. All of my planes are 90 apart around the world Z.

I'll try it in a different orientataion. Thanks.

I'm milling in the front, left & right planes. What do you mean rotation around the plane? I believe my rotation is around the world Y-axis like it is set in the machine def.

Also, I forgot to mention I'm using the MPMASTER POST.