Ive never had any problems with stability, except when the part geometry was bad to begin with--then, very rarely there will be an odd toolpath when in cutter comp mode and without any alarm being generated.
Had several FADAL's that I worked with that constantly lost the ability to receive or send data. Shutting down the machines and restarting them always solved the problem. This occured at two shops I have worked at. I'd call this a bug in the FADAL control.
The FADAL control has good ideas, Sam but it's development never got to the point that FANUC or Haas have and now it's on to a new control with all new problems.
See:
jon
Never had this problem, unfailingly any problems as you describe have been because of faulty cabling except once, where the comm port had gone bad in the host computer.
I just can't condone the idea of selling "parameters" in order to "turn on options"....so..Haas and Fanuc can kiss my ass......
And as far as operator interface, I still think the ole blue Milacron was the bestest that was ever made.
I'm really not all that picky though...set em up, push the 'go button' and with pretty much all of them they make parts....for one off I would certainly prefer Fadal to Fanuc, and having no personal exp with Hass I can't give any comparison.
As to the "round and round" you mention, there is only a set number of menus, and they are ordered--in time, you memorize where they are so you know beforehand how many times to press the space bar,etc to arrive at the one you desire...though I admit, sometimes I might get in a hurry and go past the one I wanted so will have to go another round...in this case, I blame myself, not the controller--after all, I've been running that controller for near 10 years now--I SHOULD be able to work the panel, no ???
Jon,
It's obvious you have no grasp of the concept of "business"
Mark
I actually plan for it in advance.
Mark,
What's obvious is that you can't and won't be objective in regards to SolidWorks.
For the record :
I started my own business when I was in high school. By the time I was in
11th grade I was making $500 a week. I went on to sell that business and develop real estate. All told I was in business for myself for 13 years before ever getting involved in machining.jon
Jon,
There could be alot of causes for that. One that comes to mind is grounding. Fadals "are" touchy about how they're grounded. An improperly grounded Fadal can do all kinds of weird stuff.
Alot has to do with the firmware version as well. Like any other software, it can have bugs. The version my machine was shipped with is solid as a rock. Had the factory tech put in the latest spin about a year ago (free by the way). After he left I started a part set up, punching up the same utillities, and following a similar proceedure I've done a thousand times. All of a sudden, the table took off in the X and slammed against the limit. After I changed my underware, I put the old executive module back in. No problems since.
Kind of irresponsible on their part to even distribute something like that, but that's the only incident I've experienced in 18 years of using them.
Regards
Mark
Mark,
Grounding wasn't the problem.
FADAL's former distributor for Arizona (Magna Machinery) ailenated many shops here and left a bad taste (lawsuit city) with several Phoenix area shops.
You won't hear Neal talk about Magna or what is documented at:
www.cncz There simply is no comparison between a Haas control and a FADAL control.
I'm not a big Haas fan but the Haas control is well though out, rock solid and does not suffer from what FADAL's controls have a proven track record of suffering from.
jon
Jon,
So your saying that switching from a CAD system that your customers use, to one that nobody uses (in my neck of the woods anyway), and losing said customers, is a good business decision ?? Oh, I forgot, It's all for the sake of creativity. "Now" it makes good business sense.
Not in business anymore are ya. Can't imagine why
Regards
Mark
Mark,
You failed to be specific on how switching to a better design product would cause your company to lose customers. This is very similar to how you failed to specifically answer the question that I have asked you numerous times now...
Is VX now as fast or faster than SolidWorks on larger assemblies ?
It's clear that you and many other SolidWorks users would rather use an inferior product because it's *more popular* rather than a product (VX) that has *significantly better technology* and works far better and faster in many, many ways.
Well Mark, it doesn't appear that imagination is your strong suit, so what you wrote above does make perfect sense to me.
Since you wish to focus on business rather than on better technology and better methods of being creative because of that advanced technology, perhaps you can tell me why being in manufacturing in the first place is a good business decision.
If imagination was your strong suit you probably would have more of an interest in a product ( VX ) that has significant advantages over SolidWorks.
jon
Jon,
I'm not going to go over the obvious with you again. Re-read Ed Eatons response, we're in the same situation. You'll probably never understand it, it requires common sense. You just want to argue for it's own sake, and I ain't in the mood.
Over and out
Mark
Jon,
Here,, I'll even give ya a link
Jon,
This is better
Common sense isn't very common as evidenced by your latest round of posts, Mark.
You continue to refuse to answer even the most basic of questions put to you.
At one point you claimed that VX did not do very well with large assemblies. For months now, I have asked you how VX's latest, free, non-expiring, downloadable trial version does when compared to SolidWorks on handling large assemblies.... and you have steadfastly ignored answering this question. You do the same in this post.
I find this particuarly disturbing because it was the one major knock you had against VX when you had VX demo for you.
As far as comparing your situation to Ed Eaton's situation, were all individuals with are own unique situations and this has very little to do with the subject matter at hand despite your continued efforts to insist your in bed with SolidWorks for life.
I'm not into arguing with you for arguments sake but I refuse to let you skate on your previous claim of poor assembly performance... while it might have been the case then I tend to doubt it's the case now. Further, I don't buy for one minute that you or Ed Eaton are as chained to SolidWorks as you seem to feel you are.
It's more like your afraid of change and the work that change brings.
jon
Just answer the question, Mark.
jon
A direct answer to my question is what I'm asking for.... not a link or a better link.
jon
Jon,
Your making it difficult to say the least......not to jerk your chain-- but afaik aaaaaaaaai
I couldnt give a rats asss if someone else bought a hAAS machine...
Sam,
Many people are very loyal to FADAL because they view it as an affordable machine that they have made money with and as a machine that has given them the chance to start their own business.
While I do agree it's a more user friendly control than say a FANUC I don't feel the FADAL control is in the same class as a Haas control and it simply does not have the rock solid stability of a FANUC.
The control is just one aspect of a CNC machine. No one should buy a CNC machine just based on the control.
I have posted many times what kind of machine I favor as an affordable 2 1/2 axis production mill.... a used Matsuura with either a Fanuc or a Yasnac control.... neither of which are as good as the Haas control.
Does this make it easier or more difficult for you ? :>)
jon
I could have chosen any number of others.
I laugh at you... having much personal experience with the earlier Fanuc controls....
Does 'documentation' mean anything to you ???
Agreed...
At least one outfit has apparently made good in re-fitting the base machine.
Makes little differn at all to me, probly.....I just feed it code.
The above question doesnt make any sense in this context.
Ok, I wanted to stay out of this, really I did...
Why do all the manufactures put a Z work offset feature on controls if it is just some "crash generator"?
IMHO,
A lack of understanding for how setups are done and managed on a CNC is "risk" not Z fixture offsets. Mass modify, what would create that need? Only needing to move "some" tools? I don't get it. Sounds like a setup gone FUBAR to me, only having to move "some" tools. Now you have a tool load with "some tools" focked? What about running those tools on the next part? This whole mass modify is "smelly" to me. Sounds like some scrapped out parts later.
This Z fixture offset mentality that ND refers to is rampant in our industry. I thank GOD every time I read something like this thread that I grew up in a shop that took the time to teach people WTF the deal is with axis location on a CNC. This allows people to run ANY machine, not just one machine. If you get location and offsets, you can run anything crash free. This includes, machines setup with probes, pallets, etc.
2-X number of axis as well.People who don't get it should not be programming or operating a CNC machine, if they do its likely they will break some stuff. Regardless of if they use a Z fixture offset. The "root" problem in this case is lack of training/understanding. Nobody I oversee will ever get close to a CNC until they get it, with regards to location. Loading part and pushing the button not included.
Best regards, Sean
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.