Re: Mori Seki SL1 NC lathe programming


See prior comments in another thread.

The other thread

May 27th brewertr wrote:

Cliff wrote: > > Tom, > > I think you've confused bits of the arguments, just as I think Dan has > > from time to time. > > -- > > Cliff > > Cliff, > > Your all talk and no show. > > When repeatedly asked for examples to prove your point you won't post. > The one time you did post you posted bad code on a simple corner radius > proving your method was cumbersome, prone to error and your confused by > even the simplest of tasks. > > Tom

Cliff wrote:

> >Where is your sample profile, that can be run on his machine with your > >method that can't with mine? > See prior comments in another thread.

Top posted that thread, NO ANSWER, above is just more evasion and a normal Cliffism Troll tactics for a non-answer.

Very simple question, where have you posted this example profile that your G50 calculation method can produce that mine cannot?

(For those new to this old subject with Tom he's setting his tools > for 2 axes lathe work to a zero touch-off point in both axes. The > intersection point of these axes is thus out in space, away from the > actual tool nose radius {TNR} -- which cannot cut as there is no tool > there -- and then programming that point as his tool ... )

More Cliffism Troll-ism BS.

I posted a detailed method for the OP of that thread on how he could calculate his G50 settings for his machine. The method I posted is the same method I have been using successfully for more than 15 years, the same method recommended by FANUC Manuals, other Control manufacturers as well as Machine Tool Manufacturer's. It is the method that the vast majority of shops with CNC lathes use.

Cliff jumped to inaccurate conclusions and upon his bandwagon and said I was wrong in my method because there were no calculations in the G50 method I posted for TNR. He insists that I am programming the sharp edge and he is wrong.


At the machine tool touch off, touch the TNR on the left side (Z) and touch off on the Bottom (X) which is the detailed method I posted. Tool

has a TNR of .015 do we not know where the center of the tool nose radius is?

Example End

What Cliff insists upon and where I differ with him is that the operator needs to offset the tool nose radius in his G50 calculations.

In my opinion the added difficulty and calculations at the machine are only more opportunities for error at setup for a machine control that cannot use the information Cliff insists is needed even for a machine that does not have that capability. What Cliff did not know at the time

of his rant is that this Vintage Mori-Seiki, 2 axis, SL-1 Lathe has no TNR compensation. Even after I pointed this out to Cliff he insists it does not matter, you still have to make TNR calculations at machine set

up. I stated that unnecessarily adding TNR calculations at the machine tool and offsetting them in a program thus the G Code program points do

not have a resemblance to the print dimensions just adds confusion and two levels of difficulty on the shop floor for a machine tool that can not utilize it. Doesn't matter according to Cliff, that BEST PRATICES (his Buzzword) dictate his method is the only proper way to calculate

50's and programme machine G Code. Doesn't add difficulty at the machine tool and his posted example two lines of code in response to another poster had two mistakes in it proving my point that his method is prone to error.

If Cliff has ever programmed a machine tool it would be a mill. He knows only one way to do things and believes his way is the only way. What Cliff will not admit is that there are different ways to do the same task, doesn't make it wrong only makes it different.

>I ask you again "When was the last time you programmed a lathe? Have > >you ever programmed a lathe? You have been asked numerous times and > >have never answered so that in itself is an answer in the negative, you > >have never programmed a cnc lathe, Cliff aka > LOL ....

Still no posted answer, Cliff, have you EVER programmed a CNC Lathe?

>I and others have asked you numerous times to post an example profile > >that your method can produce correctly and mine can't. What is this > >now, going into the mid 40th request. Again no response and no posted > >example is an answer in the negative. You cannot post an example > >profile that your method can properly produce and mine cannot. > See prior posts.

Again no answer, where is this example profile? I don't care about prior posts, where your example profile that will stand pier review?

Post your example profile for pier review, prove your point, its simple

geometry according to you so post it. Unlike you if I am wrong I will admit it, so post your profile and let us learn something.

>I can only assume you are a desk-bound-know-it-all bookworm/computer > >nerd that only knows what he has read. > Like geometry, machining, CAD/CAM, programming, best practices, fishing ....

Yes, exactly, to the point where you are a know-it-all-that-doesn't-know-anything.

You can't post a profile that your method can produce that my detailed posted method cannot because it doesn't exist.


Reply to
Loading thread data ...

Cliff wrote in news:i37q9294divsilaa9n9fgkdn56si92ep8l@

Because a mill has only one centerline. Sheesh.

Reply to
D Murphy

no offence guys but can you remove the SW group from your posting list when you reply cos its beginning to get a bit polluted with cnc and jon/cliff stuff again here :o) thanks

Reply to

Cliff wrote in news:

OK, so your method works best on one tool jobs. Got it.

Reply to
D Murphy

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.