Dumb a$$ cnc controls...

Ten years back I used to post to a 5ax a/b head Cinci Lancer with the

2100a control. Slick as snot. Touch off the tools, run (ok, you had set an initial Z grid if you modified the subplate).

So, you'd think that with the speed of processors even as long as ten years ago, all 5ax ab head mill control companies would have got on board to have the ability to be setup like a 3ax without playing Twister with G43, G93, and the pivots. It's just simple trig on the fly. But no, you still deal with G93, G43, G43.1, G43.4, G143... Sometimes they're available - sometimes not. Forget simple cutter comp. Way to much math... Then there's the redundant code you put out because it can't remember the last line it read to do the math... Then they put in small memory so all that bloater code won't fit.

I guess that's a rant. But after doing a couple different postprocessors this week, I'm tired of reading through redundant bloated code. And, since many shops are now picking up that used machinery with the dumb controls... my work is ahead. Unfortunately, the money is in the finished part, not the post work.

Talk amongst yourselves, I'm feeling verklempt. (ala snl coffee talk)

Reply to
BillT
Loading thread data ...

LOL

Reply to
John R. Carroll

Just wait until you have to program for a profiler that has a perpendicularity error between the secondary and primary rotaries. You will end up having to either swing the primary as you rotate the secondary or adjust the X axis output and even then you will have to program the pivot. I suppose you could correct for that in the post but I do it in the machine definition. Let me know if you need solid models for machines. I've got a bunch and some of them are remarkably complete. My 5 Axis OKK 600 even has sheet metal and the control in it. LOL

Reply to
John R. Carroll

Bostos are the easiest 5ax machines to program... when they are maintained. When not? They suck, as all machines do when not maintained. Where I was employed last, the Bostos were in deplorable shape. Just like J Carroll says - lots of G26 shifts an odd post tweaks to keep them usable. We had a few of the old 4 spindles as well (usually only 3 worked). The topper was they all had the VERY old controls with NO upgrades - except for the 720k floppy upgrade. Imagine how creative one gets to stuff a program on a 720k floppy! Then it has to run off the disk because it can't fit that into memory. My last blade program took 4 disks. That was after much creative license on surface finish. A real shame as they could have upgraded and kept a few more customers.

-- Bill (my teranews server is down...)

Reply to
Bill

You pick your battles If you know that going in and can still make some money... but as you know, the final payment comes with a good part. Yes, I'd simulate that in the machine definition if I had to. In NX now that simulation is tied to the post, it's possible.

I've not had a need for much simulation yet. I had a ton of them I'd built for Vericut over the years. Built a few while at Haas for both NX and Vericut. Now I only have NX but over the last couple years I built a Hermle, couple Bostos, Omnimills, a Cinci. If I'm in a bind I have a couple generics I modify for axis checking.

They're pretty easy to put together. Now though with NX7, they've opened up the CSE style simulation to us mortals so I need to get on board with that someday. As is, I'm using the editable VNC controlled files. Both ways read the same kinematics models.

Perhaps if I worked at the Pratts or GE's I'd spend more time with that.

-- Bill

Reply to
Bill

That is sad. My pieve was with the Cinci controls 850, 950, etc... with their backaswards "sectorized" memory storage. Our machine builders spent so much effort making sure each and every control feature was proprietary, they lost sight of the end user. Look what that did for them. Look who's doing well now... the retro-fit companies with the pc based os's.

-- Bill

Reply to
Bill

PolyTech Forum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.