Format 1 vs. Format 2

Awl--
Is this unique to fadal, or a generic g-code thingy?
I notice in format 1, when I save the program, the line numbers are saved as
well, which is nice, when printing out programs, for bathroom reading, etc. Format 2 seems to strip the line #'s, and reinsert them upon loading.
But here's the kicker: If you take a a format 1 program and load it up w/ the machine set in format 2, you get *double line numbers*! The program appears to still work, but it's a little disconcerting. I have had to take several hundred line pgms and manually remove line numbers, in transferring over from format 1 to 2.
Any ideas on how to get format 2 to save line numbers? How to avoid the pita transfer of a pgm already in #1 and over to #2, ie, stop 'double numbering'?
Oh, and while I'm at it, what's the diff. between a fadal control vs say a Fanuc control? Same g,m-codes, right? ---------------------------- Mr. P.V.'d formerly Droll Troll
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

as
etc.
format
I've never had line numbering problems as you describe, probly there is some settings in your comm application that need tweaked is all.....I doubt the machine controller has anything to do with this.

For the most part, the codes are the same--just the instructions are carried out a little differently or require different words..."P" instead of "Q" and that sort of thing...
Apparently, at some point Fadal had a handful of unique rules and conventions and so they added "format II" in order to gain greater compatability with standard machine coding, (IE, Fanuc ).....I would speculate "format I" has been retained in order to allow compatability with the users archived files that were created for the earlier controls.
Suggest just pick one format or the other and then stick with it......FWIW, I use format II.....for you, probly makes it easier for others to troubleshoot if you have a problem and have to post code snippets to the newsgroup....for me, makes it easier to move work to a fanuc controller should the need ever arise.
--
SVL



Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Thanks, but no, I think I'll just email BD/ND directly. Or call him, if I'm feeling lonely or insecure. ---------------------------- Mr. P.V.'d formerly Droll Troll
for me, makes it easier to move work to a fanuc controller

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Never seen that, may be a fadalism. There is no complete *Standard* set of G/M codes. The *standard* is only a guideline, the machine manufacturers are free to either follow the guide, or totally abandon it. Most follow the most common ones, i.e. G1, G0, G2,3, etc, and the same on the M codes, M1, M0, M3, M4, M5, M8, M9 are pretty universal, everything else, is up to the machine manufacturer (User defined, as such).
--
Anthony

You can't 'idiot proof' anything....every time you try, they just make
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Compared to a Siemens, Fanuc controls suck the zooch....(IMHO)
--
Anthony

You can't 'idiot proof' anything....every time you try, they just make
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Can you give examples as to what raises or lowers the ZSQ (zooch-sucking quotient) between two (or three) controls? ---------------------------- Mr. P.V.'d formerly Droll Troll

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

A: Fanuc - Having to power the control down TWO TIMES PER AXIS, and follow a very specific, and long procedure, just to set home. Siemens - Hitting the 'Preset' button on the screen and typing in where it is at, hit 'ok', DONE.
B: Fanuc - Base controller comes with 3-axis capable, any TWO of which can be interpolated, need the third interpolated?...That's an option-$$$, or move up to a more $$ controller. Siemens: Comes standard with 4 axis capable, 3 of which are interpolated. (on the 810), 840 is 5 axis capable with 5 axis interpolation in standard trim.
C: Fanuc - Need macros?...get out the checkbook.... Siemens - Need macros?...no problem, standard equipment
D: Fanuc - Need canned cycles?..---get out the checkbook... Siemens - Need canned cycles?...no problem...more than you would probably ever use included standard....
E: Fanuc - Do you need a mill control...or a lathe control?...need a scientist to figure out which one you need... Siemens - You buy one control, and tell it whether it is mounted on a lathe or mill or grinder....or whatever...
F: Final price....for what you actually need...the Siemens will be cheaper.
G: I personally find it easier to move around in the Siemens contol. I personally like the programming language adaptation that Siemens has over Fanuc. It has way more options (read: way more powerful) and easier methods of doing things (program wise) than Fanuc.
Just to list a few....
--
Anthony

You can't 'idiot proof' anything....every time you try, they just make
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Proctologically Violated wrote:

saved as

reading, etc.

format
but
ie,
say a

P.V.'d-- I suspect that in Format2 SETP you have the ORDERED N WORDS parameter set to no. This would allow N words that are not in sequence to be loaded in and the control would supply a set of ordered N wors giving you both sets. Change it to YES and it won't do this. BTW- Fadal uses ANSI/EIA RS-274D standard with D617.524.665 shorthand.
Neal
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
| Proctologically Violated wrote: | | Awl-- | | | | Is this unique to fadal, or a generic g-code thingy? | | | | I notice in format 1, when I save the program, the line numbers are | | saved as well, which is nice, when printing out programs, for | | bathroom reading, etc. Format 2 seems to strip the line #'s, and | | reinsert them upon loading. | | | | But here's the kicker: | | If you take a a format 1 program and load it up w/ the machine set | | in format 2, you get *double line numbers*! The program appears to | | still work, but it's a little disconcerting. | | I have had to take several hundred line pgms and manually remove | | line | | | numbers, in transferring over from format 1 to 2. | | | | Any ideas on how to get format 2 to save line numbers? | | How to avoid the pita transfer of a pgm already in #1 and over to | | #2, ie, stop 'double numbering'? | | | | Oh, and while I'm at it, what's the diff. between a fadal control | | vs say a Fanuc control? Same g,m-codes, right? | | ---------------------------- | | Mr. P.V.'d | | formerly Droll Troll | | P.V.'d-- | I suspect that in Format2 SETP you have the ORDERED N WORDS | parameter set to no. This would allow N words that are not in | sequence to be loaded in and the control would supply a set of | ordered N wors giving you both sets. Change it to YES and it won't do | this. BTW- Fadal uses ANSI/EIA RS-274D standard with D617.524.665 | shorthand.
Yeah, what he said.
Also, Format 1 has some slightly different conventions for little things that (to me) are easier to do than in Fanuc (Format 2) mode. OTOH, I learned in F1. Just about all fo the programs that I have, though, will run virtually unchanged in either mode. When I get into funky radii and canned cycles, though, I need to change.
FWIW, I used F1 for a few years, then the guy I hired after me switched the machines to F2. He trained some kid who stuck with F2, even after I showed him some of the neat features. Some of those machine guys can get into a rut ;-) But if you expect to buy several more, then maybe you're better off switching to F1 and becoming your own Fadal expert.
And I agree with Bottlebob: Fadal controls are much better than Fanuc (at least in my little experience) and nobody should learn on a Fadal and have to go back to the horse'n'buggy methods.
moT
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Nocturnal Dragon wrote:

BD:
    Personally, I've found the opposite to be true. We have a Fanuc control on our Makino and man what a PITA dinosaur of a control (and it's NEWER than our Fadals and Haas), multiple key strokes to do the simplest things, having to constantly change screen pages during setups, no automatic tool length offsets, no complete keyboard (you have to use shift to access all the keys), etc., etc.     No one should EVER learn on a Fadal or Haas and then have to use a Fanuc controller or he'll be hatin' life.      -- BottleBob http://home.earthlink.net/~bottlbob
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
BottleBob wrote:

BD:
    You know, on second thought, when you use "Mass Modify" I don't think the Fadal control gives you the option to "Accept or "Reject" your entry, it just does it. -- BottleBob http://home.earthlink.net/~bottlbob
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Just push "enter" a second time....on mine...

Yup--gotta kinda watch that command.
--
SVL



Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
PrecisionMachinisT wrote:

SVL:
    It works that way on all our Fadals too, hit Enter to accept.

    Just the other day I was making two of 8 different sized double ended hexes out of 4130, the round blanks were bandsawn to about 2". I took the shortest one and put it in a lathe chuck clamped to the mill table and faced, rough milled, then finish milled with an inserted radius cutter. After two were done on one side I "Mass Modified" all the tools down -.050 and cut the other side. Then had to "Mass Modify" all the tools back up .050 to run then next program that cut the next size hex.     I know it would have been possible to screw up somewhere along the line, what with all the distractions in the shop and doing three jobs at once, so I just wrote down the tool lengths of tool #1 on the virgin size and the machined side. No problem then, the one time I would have forgotten where I was I just looked at what I had written and was home free. <g>
-- BottleBob http://home.earthlink.net/~bottlbob
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

The way I handle mass modify is this: If I am using 6 tools, I will mass modify 7 offsets. That way I always know the modify value by simply looking at #7. To return all tools to the original values, just mass modify by the value in #7 in the opposite sign (+ or -).
Gary
--
Gary B.
snipped-for-privacy@cascadeaccess.com
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Gary wrote:

Gary:
    That is what Fred suggested elsewhere in this thread, and I think it's a very good idea.
-- BottleBob http://home.earthlink.net/~bottlbob
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
BottleBob wrote:

Yeah, it just "does it" with Mass Modify so I try to include a tool number which is still set at zero to show how much all the tools were adusted. Nice feature on the Fadals is the RI command which zeroes all the tool offsets, work offsets, home position and clears the program memory and it gives you the choice of keeping any of those intact too. Another thing I like is punching the tool and work offsets with the program. So we can fit in a quick job, then go back to the production job in a snap.
Bob, if you'd a like point and click type control, try the Mazak M32 Fusion. Use a mousepad to move around the screen, then tap the pad to select an item. There is a navigation page which is allows shortcuts to any page just by point/click
fred
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
ff wrote:

Fred:
    That is an excellent idea, I don't know why I never thought of it, but I'll make use of it from now on. Thanks for relaying it.
-- BottleBob http://home.earthlink.net/~bottlbob
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Bob,
The FADAL control is a POS.
BD as per usual has it right.
Whatever one want to say about a Haas, I don't think it can be argued that the Haas control is not well thought out and well implimented. It can easily be argued that the FADAL control is anything but well implimented and thoughout. It's also far from stable.
About the best that can be said about a FADAL control is that you learn to live with it, it's bugs and your sore fingers from pressing buttons paging through to get where you want go because the FADAL control is so poorly designed.... round and round we go, over and over and over again.
I don't miss using a FADAL.
Perhaps this is why a shop really needs to hire Bill Gibbs... so that he can run the FADAL. :>)
jon
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
jon banquer wrote:

Jon:
    Well, like I originally said, I believe it's a personal preference issue. People tend to be more comfortable with something they already know than something new and different, even if the new and different item may be easier and save time.

    I like the Haas control, but IMO, it's not ALL that much better than the Fadal control. All controls have their own little quirks.
-- BottleBob http://home.earthlink.net/~bottlbob
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

that
Bob,
I don't agree... at all.
1. The Haas control is stable where as the FADAL control is not.
2. The FADAL control has bugs that are not present in the Haas control.
3. The Haas control does not force you to go round and round to get to what you want to do.
4. The Haas control offers editing options that the FADAL control does not.
5. The Haas control offers manual override options that the FADAL does not.
IMO, the Haas control is as stable as a FANUC.
jon
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Polytechforum.com is a website by engineers for engineers. It is not affiliated with any of manufacturers or vendors discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.