We have been looking at this situation also. Some of the machines are older and either you can't select the characters in the program name because they aren't available, or it is a total PITA to do so. We have proven programs in one location and unproven in another. We started with Cimco and have been looking at adding ports because they are already wired, using the switch box, but the file name thing may cause a stumble. What are any of you using for program names and have you always used "O" numbers or do you now?

While I could comment on the whole list(s), or the ones that I also experience anyway, this one is total PITA. I have to manage a bunch of workstations and some of the guys aren't super experienced outside of starting up and running the software. The changes over the years to machine defs and all create some wonderful opportunities to do things, but we won't use net-HASP and we must have everyone using the same files when they select machine def and post and such. This creates confusion for some as MCX throws warnings and creates files when versions change and tries to force all the stuff in one location. It is all fixable and if the operator is paying attention nothing gets lost (though this can happen easily) but it pretty much suks. Especially for the person who has to clean it up and set it up. If you haven't seen this, there is no way to back out. You are forced to allow the files to be created.

I will also second Chris. I bought a Sager in ~'03 and used it as a MCX workstation for several years until ~'08 and everything he says is true. When I bought that one the cool running chip-sets weren't really out and it produced massive heat so you really couldn't use it on your "lap". Great machine and it got relegated to home use until just last year when I replaced my home box. So I haven't used one of their newer products but I would sure look at them if I was going to do self employed work as you are.

I will only buy another tombstone from "Tombstone City" if I am the most desperate man on earth. I can't find huge fault with their product, though it is low end. I will not tolerate crappy service and rude people. I don't mean average rude, I mean flaming hole out of control. As for shape my recommendation would be plan by the jobs you intend to run. If they are sharing many jobs then you can make a good case for going with a simple design and some will benefit, some will not. I have some real odd designs that work wonderful, but they were for specific reasons. As for where to purchase we use a lot of Amrok from AME. They do custom if you want, and we have on some. We normally put grid holes and such in ourselves though. They are not cheap but you can expect excellent workmanship. Like most custom builders I pad their quote time by at least two weeks if my production dates are counting on it being there.

I should have added that I have used steel pins in Be-Cu inserts/cavity/core blocks and not had an issue with anything.

Are you talking Be-Cu material? I don't remember using both together. I would probably add .0005 in clearance if the material will allow it. What type of material is the part? Also the possibility of plating the pin would help if allowed.

^^^ G-about that, mine is ancient and it has started an intermittent "jumping" thing. Out of nowhere it will jump and everything moves off screen. Doesn't happen all the time but mildly aggravating when it does. So the question is; has anybody ever used a cleaning agent of any kind (besides air) or taken one apart? I am thinking it might be a dirt thing but don't really know.

Well it is Royal PITA when you don't want it. It has now happened at four out of seven workstations; safe to say not a hardware thing. We have been trying not merging in any files that aren't already saved in X7, but not enough history to tell if that has an affect. Happens both with files started at the workstation and those opened that were created on another workstation.

HAAS?

The short answer is under the "Roughing" page/tab, but I wasn't sure what you were having trouble with. The stock geometry doesn't show that much material. If the cylinder is your actual stock then I can see where you will need depth cuts. HTH

Bump. This has happened so many times it is hard to believe nobody here has seen it. We use all default settings to install, run decent hardware, pretty simple stuff really.

Have you tried creating an offset surface and projecting the point you have onto the newly created offset surface with the setting to "normal"?

So these weird things are always the most frustrating. Total of seven programmers running similar hardware and all running the same install of X7MU2 and all hasps carry the same options. We started the migration to X7 a short time ago and have begun using it for all new parts. One programmer gets dirty operations for no apparent reason and operations that floated in the tree. He was the only one so I did a repair install of X7MU2 to be certain nothing had happened we couldn't account for, or that it would be restored. I am copying the direct information below of a different programmer from last night. ***************************** SPONTANEOUS CREATION OF MACHINE GROUPS SAVED A FILE BEING WORKED IN X7 AND CLOSED SO I COULD OPEN X5 FOR FIXTURE DIMENSION CHECKS TO QUALIFY A FIXTURE. RE-OPENED X7 FILE BEING WORKED AND GOT 8 WARNING MESSAGES THAT MACHINE DEFINITION FILE DOES NOT EXIST. X7 SPONTANEOUSLY CREATED 4 GROUPS: “MACHINE GROUP-11”, -111, -1112, & -11123 WITH GENERIC MILL DEFINITIONS. CLOSED X7 AND RE-OPENED THE FILE WITH THE SAME RESULT. I DELETED THE 4 NEW MACHINE GROUPS AND RE-SAVED THE FILE. CLOSED X7 AND RE-OPENED WITH NO ERRORS. NO OTHER EFFECTS NOTICED ************************************* Ok so now the previous guy is having this problem, after I had done the repair install though things seemed to be fine for a day. We had spent a considerable amount of time in X5 and the bug where machine defs were regrouped and operations all dropped into one group we could narrow to file imports from MCX where solids had history. We dealt with it by either dumping history or importing through another format, which in effect dumped history. In this case there is no import involved, or at least when the corruption happens. Just wondering if anyone else has seen this or experienced it? If so did you find resolution and what was that action? I have tried every search combination I can think of and found nothing here addressing this so we could be freaks.

Bingo! Thanks for that. A quite logical answer that I never thought of.

I would agree that Greg's questions need answered, primarily "has it worked before?" as you are getting into SO many variables when pulling down to that tolerance, on a mill, that the list is quite long.

When going through the .xml file to change defaults on Verify settings I can't seem to find a way to change the "Color Loop" where if you go "File/Options/Graphics" you can select "Loop by: Operation or Tool Change". I want to default to "Tool Change" instead of Operation but I can't find the line in the .xml file. Am I looking in the wrong spot?

OH NO!! Version 7 was the best......................................at bending you over without lubrication.

I would beg to differ with that. Like you we have a DLS 4020 Doosan that is about 8 years old and rocks out and very consistent, especially considering the cost. However we need to add capacity so went with the DNM 500 machine and we all hate it. Programs from the older machine have to be modified as the smaller machine has rigidity and power issues we never had with the older one. The AICC works, but the scale is off, way off. If we use an R1 value in the older machine it will hold most of our tolerances, probably 90% and the rest we bump it up. You can't get the 500 to follow worth crap without high settings and or slowing it down. We have screamed bloody murder and had reseller working on parameters and tweaking and telling them our problems, but no real fix yet. So I believe the newer machine is just not as well made, period. As for Makino we don't have a PS-95 but one of our sister shops does and they love it. I will admit to being a Makino fan, we have six horizontals and two more on the way. We switched to a Matsuura for the next vertical purchase after the DNM-500 disappointed. So my two pennies go to not buying the Doosan.

I don't believe that is accurate. We have experienced "permanent" loss when the file was not saved. The toolpath crap where machine groups get added and toolpath groups get hosed and your original machine def is changed always seem to be tied to a "file-merge" function. Whenever the possibility exists for this to happen, meaning a file with significant toolpath data, I try to use a non-Mastercam format to bring in what I need. This seems to help a great deal, but I can't say for sure it is 100% safe working from memory. The other issue is solids with names, and certain other history items, that I have yet to be able to define. I have had instances where just removing the actual name in the tree that has been given to the solid will allow them to be merged without getting the "missing op file" and losing the solid. Other times I have to use "no-hist" to get rid of all history before merging in. The situation is frustrating for sure, but as we have done for a couple decades we find a work around so we can be productive. Once in a while resorting and reorganizing the toolpaths is the only choice.

G--while we demoed the Rego-Fix system we didn't think the cost justified the advantage over the system we were using. I would put a plug in for PH Horn and the Fahrion system. No rocket science, just tight tolerance quality. We are using their ER-32 size and when the guy at IMTS "guaranteed" me I wouldn't pull a tool out of his holder, he wasn't lying. We are all 40 taper so small stuff, and they currently only catalog up to HSK-A100, but they have been expanding the line. Maybe once you get that big it loses it's advantage, I don't know. But if you have any pull out or runout problems in your smaller stuff I can say they work well.

We use them quite a bit. One thing we found out was that you should follow the cleaning instructions if they are going to spend much time not in use. We have been drilling Ø.221 holes for 4 or 5 years, but when we went to doing smaller holes with tighter location tolerance our spindle orientation (beacuse of the difference in lock up at tool change) was problematic. I will be implementing our first run using an endmill pretty soon. We use the 1M heads for drilling anyway.

Glad to see you back Kathy!

We are working with our first Fanuc oi D control and it won't load programs that are 22 characters or have spaces in the name. I have searched the parameter manual looking for the ability to change this and can't find it. Is there a spot to change this? We have lots of 18i and 21i controls that take these programs but i couldn't find the parameter there either. What say you?

Craig, So with this config. you are posting what runs on pallet-1 as a separate prg. from what runs on pallet-2, correct? Didn't think of that. We have just the one Okuma and many Fanuc controls so I let my brain get stuck I guess.

I should have stated that more clearly. When I said we block skip, we block skip the M30 for M99 on the Fanuc controls. On the Okuma it won't read M99. The applications guy suggested a "GOTO N01" before the M02 and putting the N01 in the beginning. However the problem seems to be we are runnign off an internal card for memory and not the control memory. Do we need to run all programs as a sub and run from the memory?