Really....?!!! Man that is a real downer. We don't do any multiaxis toolpaths here so haven't used Moduleworks, but I used to use multiaxis all the time on our 4 axis machines when I worked at another shop, used them on virtually every prog I wrote.....tricky deburr, fillets on undercut walls its amazing the number of uses you could find if you were looking... So is locking individual axis rotations completely gone , or just on this particular toolpath?

Oh and of course you need a 4 axis post that can handle multi axis........

Assuming this is multi axis and not machine sym. In the days before module works I worked in a shop where we did this all the time. There were radio buttons which allowed you to lock individual axis and voila. Key to the whole thing is how you arrange the part on the tooling.....If this option isn't available in moduleworks it is a crying shame.

The problem with Mazak and Okuma is the proprietary code. If you already have these controls and you want to standardize , that's fine. But be aware that the vast majority of machinists out there are used to Fanuc/Haas, and the Okuma especially can be a steep learning curve for some. I haven't run a new Okuma lately but I wasn't impressed with their newer machines when they went from the old "cast component" to "fabricated component" machines. Their 50T horizontals with fabricated spindle carriages weren't a patch on the Moris which stuck with the cast spindle carriage. Mazaks are fine but the lightweight spindles restrict your machining techniques which can cramp you style on larger parts. I have always liked Matsuras but some are not very ergonomic. And they run code familiar to most machinists. IMHO you still can't beat Mori Seki as a good general purpose machine (yeah there are higher spec machines out there). They have a good balance between Speed , Rigidity and Ergonomics. So you can use HF techniques and more traditional strategies to suit your job. We recently got a 40" travel Mori NV5100 with 4 axis and probe and it is a lovely machine, you can drive a bus through the door and park it on the table......

I have always found 1/2 hard to be much easier to deal with, even if it causes extra steps at heat treat. But some aerospace process specs don't allow this, so it depends on the customer what you can get away with. The problem is that it is difficult to make good chips with annealed 4000 series because it is so soft and gummy. And if you can't make good chips it usually turns into a battle.....

We got a "Demo" machine at a great price. When this came up on installation one of the AEs gave me the "this is how it is now" pitch and my sideways glance caused his mouth to move up at the corners so I was pretty certain we weren't stuck with it. Having said that because it was a demo and there was nothing on the PO about changing this it was more trouble that it was worth at the time to get it changed, things like this also effect the CAR which sends corporate into a tailspin.....so it is what it is unless it causes trouble, which it isn't really. At a previous shop we had a Toyoda HMC with tool management turned on and you had to be very careful with offset changes and restarts, but this is not an issue with CELOS

Totally agree with ahaslam. If the association is correct something has changed in the table structure. Check a new (unedited) copy of whatever version your post is based on.

Search for sgdrill in the post. That will take you to the string select table for the drill cycles. G74 is normally for one of the tap cycles, just above the bore cycles. Make sure Bore 1 has the string G85 associated with it.

This might be easier with Active Reports

There's an extensive PDF Creating Setup Sheets with Active Reports Designer available through reseller or MC site that covers a lot of stuff. There are also a couple of youtube vids which I found useful.

Could this be a Primary screen issue? Keep MC on the primary screen (set in screen properties) and OPS and Level managers on secondary and I have no problems.

I have been amused by some of the variable names I have come across. I especially liked djsteadmans "insanity" variable...! Can't wait to find the right time for telhim_twopoff....

Hi Matthew, That would be excellent and much appreciated. What do you need from me to proceed...?

Thanks for the replies gentlemen. Unfortunately holding on to the "non-thread end" is even more complicated due to the widely differing geometries of the hundreds of p/ns we have. And Matthew can we get really trick and do an automatic pass over by keeping track of our thread start angle depths when we make the collet? There are also some parts that have a little bit of full conical surface before the other features start so capturing that would help a lot with rigidity. We have done a lot of the larger clevises on the 4 axis mills and my experience there has been that the greater the difference in size of the stem diameter to the end features has the biggest effect on the rigidity of the system. So small diameter stem with large end feature causes more problems than when they are closer to the same size (diameter). Any other observations, experience or opinions greatly appreciated.

A question for all the lathe and mill/turn guys from a mill guy. Has anyone ever used a threaded collet to hold onto parts with a threaded stem and various features on the end such as clevises or bearing carriers? I think we could increase our efficiency in our mill/turn dept. if we could cut the threaded stem on one spindle and pass it over to the other completely thus freeing up first spindle to start the next part while finishing simultaneously on the second spindle. Or some other method of holding the stem without damaging the thread but holding firmly enough to machine stainless steel. All/any suggestions welcome....

That worked great Mr. Paris. So just to review, using the variable (rather than forcing with a string literal) allows the modal check in the postblock to do its thing and prevent the extra D1 outputs on subsequent lines...? Just as a matter of interest, I was going to call my variable thevariablemrjparisadvisedmetocreatetofixmyoffsecalls_doff but I remembered Ron Branch suggesting a couple of times to people to keep it short and easier to type so I called it force_doff instead. Thanks again

Thanks JP, it's clock off time here so I will give this a blast in the morning and let you know. I tried manipulating the 2 lines you did but separately, I'll run it through the debugger when I finish so I can understand better what is happening. Thanks again

Hi Folks, Just been dabbling in some post mod work and have had some success reading and searching the Forum. I have finally been stumped so here goes. We have a new Mori VMC. Great machine with the new CELOS control, which the machinists like. Problem is it uses tool management so it grabs the offset numbers and loads them into H1 and D1 for all the tools regardless of tool#. I "hardlined" the initial call in ptlghg_com with string literals and that works fine. But it (of course) wants to still post the original D# for subsequent G41 calls within the same toolpath (for instance spring passes). Running it through the debugger it seems the postblock I need to change is pccdia but I can't figure out what to change (I've tried a couple of things but the closest I got was D1s on every line), or am I barking up the wrong tree....? Thanks in advance for help

Happy to help. Notice that my suspicion was started because of your output, with profile changing in z level in the code (backplot is reading the NCI code) but not in the geometry relative to the surface....almost certainly a "center of rotation issue". Controlling your COR is the most important aspect of 4 axis programming, regardless of toolpath type or machine set up.

Hi Jackline, From your description of the output it seems like center of rotation problem. Or the position of the "un-rolled" geometry relative to the cylinder. I would point out though that this is really not a good application for axis substitution. It would be better done as a 4 axis index. I can explain further if that would be of value.

Never been very impressed with the blowing fans. Using an indexable drill (or most other thru coolant tools) gives a spiral spray pattern which is great getting into pockets and other nooks and crannies, kind of like a dish washer. It also has the advantage of being an "existing tool", so you are not using what might be valuable "tool pot real estate". It is frighteningly easy to fill up even a 200 tool carousel, although I would never recommend completely filling any carousel completely with any "standard tool load", the number of available pots can still be an issue. Having said that I like the idea of the thin copper pipe for holes, I can remember a few jobs where sticking the tube down a small hole and giving it a blast would definitely have helped with part change over. So it really comes down to what you are doing and what your strategy is (for example are you trying to run a standard tool load), and do you have a spare pot for a dedicated tool.

Just another thought have you tried different settings on the motion - retract drop down? If it changes the sorting order then it might give some insight into what the algorithm is looking at......

I am totally with jlw here, the HS toolpaths are great even with conventional speed feed and step overs. On conterbores you only have one entry and exit which can be especially beneficial in difficult materials. I would just do one HS toolpath down to the conterbores and then create curves at the counterbore depths I wanted and then chain the order I want. No real extra work here because you can combine your finish into the dynamic contour.....and now you have control of the individual features. I think the problem here is that the HS toolpaths are basically looking at intersections of curves from a profile and entries and constructing the longest engagement it can manage, which is working against any decision about the nearest entity, but I am just guessing. Perhaps Colin could give us some insight on how these algorithms are functioning.....?

So are you just picking the solid or have you got some geometry?

I usually use dynamic contour for holes and counter bores. Then play with the contour wall tab settings (I have more luck using stock on walls parameter rather than the previous tool parameters which I usually leave at 0.0). By manipulating the stock on wall and the entry parameters you can get either a center plunge for pre drilled or a helical entry if you have enough motion on the tool and / or depending on material. Does that help?