Have worked with a couple of there machines no 5 axis either but one was an FMS 48 pallet cell two horizontal machine configuration. good money maker very few problems.

Looks pretty good to me. kinda pricy but should do well out of the box (your time is worth $). jus sayin instead of custom build.

Dells have been pretty solid in my experience, good cooling and power supply etc.

Here is some pretty good information regarding the subject.

https://www.makino.com/resources/webinars/archive/Proper-selection-and-economics-of-lift-up-chip-conveyors/362/

What do you power users prefer?  I've been using standard Verify 98% of the time since Simulation came out simply out of a lack of taking the time to familiarize myself with it.  Have been working with Simulation a little more at a time, and find that it loads and runs faster on large toolpaths, and like that Backstep ability.  I have found that it lacks the ability to use Stock Model for stock, which I find frustrating, and I havent figured out where stop on collision is yet, or if it checks against fixture collision.

standard verify then Vericut for meh. but that is just because we are spoiled with Vericut.

If I did not have that tool I would surely dig into setting up Simulation within Mastercam.

with some exceptions I do not think there is a right or wrong answer to this question?

some good points have been made in either direction to help one decide what fits for them.

something to be said about standardization but boxing oneself into a corner (not allowing appropriate exceptions) is a bad move IMHO

Doug

Good time to set a standard practice. but I agree sometimes things lend themselves to exception of the set rule.

ya, sometimes I feel like a YO YO in the business of programming. if it will work and cant come up with a good reason for me to change it just run it.

na they say that would force them to do there job

just one way of looking at it.

level of competence on machine (machinist- setup person- operator).

low skill level center line all the way, otherwise you will end up with unrecognizable parts.

high skill level individual offsets, they will dial it to a work of art.

Just dont turn em loose on someones horked up customized work station.

Mastercam is so customisable you will not get a true scale value of proficiency.

walked out of an interview that was set up to fail in this manor.

 

 

I am sure we can all see some very big flaws, the problem I am faced with is more that people are extremely resistance to change. Any ideas on that one?

 

 

A financial incentive usually helps.

 

I think you will find the a perpetual temporary solution but hey everyone likes money.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1yhpORsw2T_xgUcLdK_eKOYGTmPnf-szBp_y50yzTocI/pub?hl=en&single=true&gid=1&output=html

like I said get them to buy in and own the processes.

when something goes sideways ask the people involved for solutions, listen, plan and then make suggestions combining and commending there idea's.

way too many ways to get things done in this business to have tunnel vision.

I do feel your pain, it will take time. meld with the masses.

Kinda open question but one suggestion I would make is pick someone that you trust to do a good job and limit access to the writing and storage of proven programs and documentation to that person and yourself. dont try and do it all yourself but dont let the whole shop drive it either, it can create chaos.

guess this could apply to tooling for repeat jobs as well, maybe appoint another person for that? keep them all involved and make sure they know their contributions count. buy in and ownership of the processes goes a long way.

in a nut shell

Doug

Might want to check into Icam and or Camplete.

interesting approach, seems many times in a jobshop environment we do not know exactly what machine a job is going to load in. hmm?

ask him how to check it

one method that I have seen is g10 line is hard coded in the post as machine to cl rotation and all programming was done relative to cl. just one approach of many options.

Me two

I have seen a dozen attempts to control tooling but would not consider any one or combination there of 100% successful.

hard sell but the closest i have seen involves a full time person managing all shop tooling.

most shops do not understand but $100k's in inventory justifies it to me. last place i was at they discovered an employee checking out cutters to put on e-bay. hang em high I say.

hopefully this is an interesting and enlightening thread.

doug

sorry realized when saving It was mcx5 am running 7.

would suggest 2d core mill if I am understanding your task at hand.

hth

AREA-PEELMILL.MCX-7

thanks Colin, we just got a new machine that they wanted this done on. you helped me nail it down much quicker.

oh and this is a router they see no harm in running air all tools.

I like to run dry verses coolant when I can, coolant costs and not all can be recovered. jus sayen

I have run duravertical 5100's in two shops. they have done whats asked of them with very minimal problems. they are a small light to medium duty machine. I do not know if they fall in the ecoline group?? given the choice without having to think about $ they would not be my top pick but that is unrealistic in a business sense. its about the $

if I understand you question correctly Yes. I have had good success with this approach in shops that have limited skill resources at the machine.

In my case I programmed every job with G54 (work offset) x centerline of rotation, y top of pallet and z centerline of rotation. setup instructions must specify EXACTLY where the operator mounts fixture. The initial B face must also be inclusive to the program.

hope that helps, it is only one way to approach horizontal work.

I have seen haas routers accomplish what your looking to do with good reliable success. sounds like you are already familiar with the brand and control and support is good where you are located.

not too familiar with any other brand newer routers, all the rest were odd ball old machines.

hope that helps?

siemens control. has problems keeping up with code and errors on some arcs for unknown reasons. the control has what looks to be robust look ahead but we have not figured out how to tune it in and support has been ??? regarding it.

still trying to nail down the arc errors but seems to be kinda random so not seeing any thing in common yet.

I would be interested in comments and tips regarding Celos, have a couple machines with that control coming soon. I am a Fanuc and Okuma fan boy so my view is slighted.

Is this a recent experience? We have some people here that were very happy with this equipment.

 

TIA

I think the machine is coming up on a year if not a little older. low rigidity and quirky control are our main issues. small work envelope is another but that was our fault for not specing for our needs.

We have a 50. I would consider one for my garage at home if it were cheaper than a Haas. sorry not much good to say about ours, maybe a lemon?? IDK

ya what he said ^

also might want to consider dwell when spooling up spindle to drill?