quote: I hope you did not take that as a personal dig John, not at all. No worries. Thanks for the enocuragement and what-not. Once I get something definitive to read and a few excercises to do, I'm sure the 'code will come easy enough. That one with my name is a good idea to start with. Im really not too worried about it. Not to toot my own horn, but I feel I've come a long way in a short time. In January of this year I didnt know what CNC was. Now I can program and machine anything thats brought to me (so far anyway). In fact, I can't wait to start on a cylinder head. Code might be challenging, but it won't be impossible. And like we've said, I just need to make a warm-up program for now. Cheers

Storkie teh "show me state". Amen to that. A manual will just fill in the blanks quickly. I'll still have to go DO it and SEE it before I remember though. John luckily I dont think you have to worry about the industry based off of my particular ignorance I think (hope..) my situation is rather uncommon. i.e. not too many programmer/operators are tossed into the job with ZERO experience or knowledge. Buuuut in my situation it was a necessity to learn to machine parts asap, and that meant just using MCX. I agree that knowing the code I am programming is a must to really be proficient at what I'm doing, but I am able to make parts so it got put on the back burner. The mazak book is a little difficult to understand so I was thinking of getting the 'Machining Center Programming, Setup, and Operation..' manual from CNC Concepts. If anyone else has any recommendations let me know. Cheers

Yep, just found it in the other programming manual. Looks like I can just learn from that. Free is my favorite four letter word after all.

Thanks for the replies. I have a Mazak with a Mazatrol M-plus control. I will look again, but I think my manual only descrbes how to prog in mazatrol-speak. Which I could learn but the machine takes regular EIA/ISO code so, eh why bother. I'll double check though. Our machine has a 10,000-50,000rpm spindle (3.5 hp piece of ) which needs to be warmed up at 12,500 rpm for 20 min. I also need to move all axis full range of motion at cutting feedrates (about 100 ipm). I only know code from watching my posts. Example: % 1001(Ryan's sweet-xxxx warm-up program version .0001 etc etc) S12500 M03 G54 G90 x0y0z0 x40.0 y20.0 z18.5 ... ... M30 % I understand some of the commands, but need to learn the format and whatnot. For instance how do I tell the mill to operate the spindle for a set period of time? Tim, I haven't checked out the website yet. Going there next. Thnaks

Hi all, I need to learn to program in code so I can write a warm-up program for our mill. Could anyone recommend a book or website? I tried the search function but didn't come up with anything. Cheers, Ryan

Yep. You both nailed it. Thanks. I hadn't tried using 'trim solid to..' before. Don't see how I lived without it actually... THANKS!

Hi all, I'm trying to draft a solid face into a part to make a recess of a specific shape. I posted the file on the FTP under 'DRAFTED FACE.MCX' in the MCX folder. Looking at the file, the green face is the one I want drafted. I would like it to draft the other way INTO the part. When I try to reverse the way it creates the draft I just get a 'parasolid interface error' or something. Can anyone spot what I've done wrong, or learn me a better way? Thanks folks, Ryan

Welcome!

I've experienced that also. I think every time I deleted the toolpath and started over. Not sure how it happens or how to fix it really. But like you said it creates annoying, random, -z 'tabs' around your contour.

...except now when I move to the next threadmill for the M6 holes the 'major diameter' is grey locked out and set at the previous holes diameter. It sets .1968 instead of .2362. *edit* but it verifies ok, so I guess I dont know.

Woohoo! That did the trick. Thanks Tim! quote: BTW nice job on the tool! Thanks its my first one.

So just when I thought I was getting smart I start learning to threadmill...not feelin' so smart anymore. I posted an example on the ftp named M5 THREADMILL.MCX If anyone wanted to have a look that would be fabulous. I am trying to create M5 x 0.8 threads in a .1654 hole. I have created a custom tool profile on level 2 of the program. When I mill the threads they look like they are much too shallow xy. The only way I have been able to make them larger is to shrink the tool diameter, but thats treating the symptom not the problem. Any ideas would be greatly appreciated. [ 04-21-2006, 02:16 PM: Message edited by: RMagnusson ]

Our Mazak FJV-25 was just doing the same thing. I dont know how your toolchanger is setup, but ours is a carousel style system. Anyway, same exact problem: toolchange cycle froze midway. We got a 'tool clamp' or 'tool unclamp' sensor malfunction though. Ours was attributed mostly to the jaws on the ATC magazine being worn and out of alignment. We ended up taking the toolchanger magazine out, removing, cleaning, and recalibrating the jaws one by one. We only have a 21 position changer though. That seemed to eliminate the problem for us.

It seems that maybe I am not understanding the setting of the WCS in the mill correctly. I just ran an op with a face mill. It too ran too high over the top of my part. It was too high by the difference between the length of the tool I used to set the Z zero depth and the length of the face mill (lengths from gauge line). I thought that when you were setting your workpiece zero point, you took a measured tool and touched the spot where you wanted your zero and 'taught' the mill where that was. Then the mill knows where to place the tip of each tool as they are measured and recorded within the mill as well. Is this not the case? I am obviously doing something very wrong. And thanks for helping out everyone. I know I can eventually figure this out, but as to how long it might take is anyone's guess...

No, it doesn't. I just made the surface for that toolpath .5 lower in MC and it seems ok. I dont like having to do that to get the desired result though.

Haha, this is almost getting funny. Yeah, tip comp set to tip. Backplot looks good in MC, post looks fine, tool off of the part in the mill. Part length is measured using the automatic measuring device in the mill, so its super accurate. The old cutter I was using was tool #2 .375 ball nosed endmill 4.1975 long from the gauge line. New cutter is tool #4 .250 ball nosed endmill 3.6975 from the gauge line. And I'm, as you may have guessed, .5 off of where I want to be. I'm thinking its time for a work-around of some sort unless someone here hits the nail on the head. I'm totally freaking stumped.

Yep, tried that too. Deleted it, edited it, reselected it, renumbered it, still get same H # as tool and Z remains constant at .7398.

Yep, tool length is set in the mill, T4 and H4, Depth Limit not checked, Only correct surfaces selected, All good things to check, thank you. But still no dice..

I'm using a surface flowline toolpath to contour a filleted corner. We changed the tool we are using to do it, but the Z depth of the flowline WONT change. Tool is ~.5 off the part like it had the old tool in the holder. Tool length at .5" or 20" doesnt matter. Updated tool in machine group, in library, in the toolpath parameter, nothing is getting the tool down Am I understanding correctly that since there is no cutter comp. active in flowline then it takes the tool height from MC, not from the mill as with everything else? If our RS-232 connection hadn't skipped a few digits in the last transmission and sent the X axis off course 2085" and snapping off the old tool, I'd just put it back in and forget about it....but I can't. Thanks for reading my rant. Any advice would be highly appreciated. Ryan

Woohoo! I might have had to cry if your first post had been about the correct file Jim, haha. Peter, thanks. That did it. Super sweet. Now maybe we can start making some chips. THANKS EVERYBODY!

Lol, either I'm slower than I thought (totally possible) or maybe you looked at the file 'Drum and Holes' instead of 'Drum Drill and Engrave'...? Looking at the file I am talking about, the drum sits along the X axis. But it does sit on the Y in the previous file (drum and holes). I used the method described in tutorial 1 of the 4/5/ Axis Mill Tutorial book by In-House Solutions. Automatic selection of the points by selection 1st, 2nd, and last. I selected 'rotary axis positioning' from the toolpath param's box. etc. etc. Lemme know if I still need to do as you suggested. Looking at the file again, it sure does verify nicely. The backplot though, as I said, is kinda funny... Thanks and happy monday. *edit* and I deleted the WCS 'drum on 4th axis' and all the rest of the custom ones I had that weren't being used for anything. Thanks for the tip.

I know I've been asking a lot of really ignorant questions lately too, but now that I have some books and a slightly better understanding of how things work I should smarten up pretty quick. I hope. Thanks again for all your time everyone.

...and I figured this out. I was adding a boss to an edge used as a reference for a toolpath.

I think I finally got the 4th axis figured out. (Woohoo! ) I completed the drum I was working on drilling and even managed to engrave some stuff with axis substitution. Its all pretty easy so far. Too easy actually. Could someone look at 'Drum drill and engrave' in the MCX folder on the ftp? One of the things I'm worried about is when backplotting, the part and tool rotate 90 deg from their correct orientation. It also does the engraving 90 off, and in the center of the part instead of on the surface. It looks perfect in verify though. Also, will this post ok? (Assuming I can find a post that works with my mill and MCX)

Mike, I dont know if you were following my other thread about which instructional info to buy. Long story short, your products looked excellent, but my boss's pocket book dictated the In-House Solutions tutorials. When they start paying me more I might pick yours up for myself just for the added perspective. Also, Peter Scott went through my part and thinks it is a bug with Solid Drill. He also proposed a work-around that should do the trick without taking too much more time. heres to everyone, thanks for the help.