Part Programming Test 1

To All:
Ok, here is a simple part to program. Triangle-Circle-Square. Here's what it should resemble after cut part rendering/verifying.
http://i233.photobucket.com/albums/e...hoto/Test1.jpg
Now it is just a 2 1/2 axis part, I wouldn't bother trying to make it a solid unless you really think it would be faster to program in your CAM system. The steps are .500" deep, and the overall height is 1.5"
We could do a 3 axis profiled/surfaced part later, if this little test is popular.
Here are some dimensions.
http://i233.photobucket.com/albums/e...hoto/Test2.jpg
The holes are 1/4-20 tapped 1/2 deep on a 1" bolt circle with a .010-.015 chamfer on the top. I used a 1" end mill for the contouring, Rough it leaving .005 stock, then finish it to size.
Please list your elapsed time and the CAM system you used.
Here's a stopwatch if you need one.
http://www.online-stopwatch.com /
And I hope you have fun doing it.
(BTW this exact post was sent to the CAD/CAM section of Practical Machinist as well)
--
BottleBob
http://home.earthlink.net/~bottlbob
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
BottleBob wrote:

4 minutes. Mazatrol Fusion
--
Steve Walker
snipped-for-privacy@verizonwallet.com (remove wallet to reply)
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

I am getting error "Page not found" from your links
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
larryrozer wrote:

Sorry, they must not have copied right from PM. They work fine over there. Here, try these I E-mailed them to myself and they seem to work:
http://i233.photobucket.com/albums/ee126/BottleBob_photo/Test1.jpg
http://i233.photobucket.com/albums/ee126/BottleBob_photo/Test2.jpg
--
BottleBob
http://home.earthlink.net/~bottlbob
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Does DXF on Hurco count?
--
Gil

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

If so making chips in less than 5min. import dxf :10s import Hurco tools: 5s (all tool offsets set in relation to each other) select 0,0 :10s 5 tool paths : 2m (top needs cut) vise: raw oversize stock/eyeball set X-Y & touch (1) tool in Z 2m
I know this is a CAM system geometry creation / cnc toolpath test- I'm cheating. All good moldmakers are thou, just ask Vinny.<g>
--
Gil

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
cncmillgil wrote:
Gil:
    Sure, Steve Walker used Mazatrol Fusion and that's Conversational programming at the machine - isn't it?

    But you've got to count drawing the DXF as well. Creating the geometry is a part of this test.

    Other than skipping the DXF creation time, it's not really cheating. And this it just a fun exercise in any case, nobody's making or losing any money here.
--
BottleBob
http://home.earthlink.net/~bottlbob
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Well I'm lazy? Dyslexic? When I see a cad file drawing that's all done, like yours, I ask for it. No matter how simple it is. Made too many mistakes with typo's & mis interpretations from DIN vs ANSI = 1st angle/ 3rd angle projection. Plus I'm really good at taking a properly drawn 2d cad file, fliping the views up & making a 3D wireframe or solid without ever inputing a single dim off the hard copy. Something I've kinda developed over the years. When I make a cad file I offer it in any format for outsourcing. Why re-invent the wheel? Its done. Just make it work.
Any way I would qoute<g> 1/2hr for a g-code file on that job using Cimatron. At a conservative labor rate of 75/hr that'el be 37.50 sir. ;-) Damn guy out in the sticks working in a pole barn shop using Bobcam is get'in 10bucks. China will to 3 for 1/3 that- 3 g-code files :mirror image, climb & conv. cut no extra charge, be done fist thing in the morning. Because today is tomorrow in China.
Oh I did moonlight programm/design out of my house for years. Those days & work are long gone. Ah it aint that bad. Lots of time now to be an opinionated grump on AMC<g>, play at work for 8hrs, play with the kitty. Hey she cought 5 mice in one night! No front claws! Dosen't kill'm just walks around with them in her mouth, making this un heard of scretching howl. I get'em from her, take it outside, let go & before long a hawk or an owl have a nice treat.
--
___ ___
/ /\ / /\
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Do you want to just machine it or create geometry and then machine it? Jerry
wrote:

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
I just read your message. Geometry is a part of the test. Jerry
wrote:

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

New job, and the only CAM system I have is my brain. It took me about five seconds to figure out how to build the part. No CNC machines means it will take me a little longer than that to actually make the part.
Later,
Charlie
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Are you saying CROSS SLIDE TURNTABLE on a Bridgeport with no read outs? Now we're having fun!
--
Gil

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

Almost. The knee mill does have a digital readout. ;-)
Later,
Charlie
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
I must be very slow because it took me over 6 minutes (I know, it's the piece of s Gibbs). http://www.fotothing.com/photos/229/229a40449b1e2506701b241100bf5005.jpg?ts 58801741 Anyone that thinks it should take 1 minute has his head in the clouds. Making tools takes very little time, it almost doesn't count. But I would not want to work that way every day. I like to put in a description of the part, rough material, each tool and operations or at least groups of operations. I created the geometry using shortcuts as fast as I could but in real life if I try to save time like this I will end up with a lot of scrap. Jerry

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

Jerry:
    I think one added advantage to little speed tests like this is that they can hone your skills, and make you look for ways to improve your productivity.
    On the (Gibbs specific - for you) geometry creation, I chose the polygon feature and for the triangle just filled in "3" sides, "Distance to Flat" 1", then "Do It". The second figure I created was the square using the the same polygon feature, just change the sides to "4", and click the button for "Distance to corner" 1", and "Do it". The circle was done last with the "Radius and Two points" option. Click any two diagonal points on the square and the circle with be drawn centered. It will add a center point that has to be clicked off.
    And you're correct this is a test of the bare bones features. To record and save file names, or if you wanted to print out operation, tool list, and workgroup summaries, it would entail more time.
    And like I said somewhere else, I made the part a little too simple. I just wanted something that would be quick and easy and fun, and take under 10 minutes. Not some long onerous task with tolerance and finish callouts. Most everyone does that at work everyday.
    Oh, another little tip that came to mind while doing all this. I normally have my mouse on right side of my keyboard, which makes me tend to use the upper row of number keys. If someone could get in the habit of using the mouse on the LEFT side then they could have their hand on the number keypad and type the numbers in without looking and still keep their hand on the mouse to change data box locations.
--
BottleBob
http://home.earthlink.net/~bottlbob
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
BottleBob wrote:
Copied from a PM post I just made.
To All:
Ok, here are some times from my antique 2004 GibbsCAM on my home computer.
52 seconds: To create the geometry - Triangle, Circle, Square, Bolt hole pattern.
42 seconds: To create the 4 tools on the fly.
3 minuted 17 seconds: To program the part roughing all the steps leaving .005 stock on each, and then going back and doing a finish pass to size. (the old standard - rough everything before finishing anything)
4 minutes 51 seconds: Is the total time using this method, INCLUDING geometry creation.
Now there are a couple of ways to automate some of this. IF the tools were "Saved As Process" it would take 30 seconds to load them. (this old Gibbs can only load them one at a time)
Gibbs can also save processes - tools & operations.
2 minuted 43 seconds: Is what the machining would take by saving the spotting/drilling/tapping cycles as a process and just selecting the bolt circle points and hitting the "Do it" button. And this includes the manual programming of profiling with the 1" end mill. But WITHOUT adding the geometry creation step.
3 minutes 35 seconds: Total time INCLUDING the geometry creation step.
So what's the conclusion here? Heh, that there are quite a few time variables depending on how you want to plan your processes, even using ONE CAM system, let alone considering all the varied features of different CAM systems.
Actually IMO this is a fun learning experience. I wish I had thought about doing this years ago.
--
BottleBob
http://home.earthlink.net/~bottlbob
  Click to see the full signature.
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.