2 minutes ago, Aaron Eberhard said:

With tool break detection, is it necessary to do it as a drill cycle?  I mean, if you're okay with it happening as a standalone toolpath anyway, just do it as a manual entry.   The big benefit to doing a custom drill cycle is it allows you transfer positional information to whatever you're trying to do (i.e., Probe at this XYZ), which seems unnecessary for a tool break cycle?

Or am I missing something?

Manual entry, hadn't considered that option, thanks. No need for positional information that's all stored in the machine. 

Think I was trying to fit a round peg in a square hole. My head went "hey I know how to implement that with the post" so that's the direction I took off in. Kind of forgot to look for other options.

Thanks Aaron!

It seems most people use misc integers to implement tool break detection. Would it be dumb to use a custom drill cycle?

I'd like to let the programmer make adjustments to all the variables on the tool break detect line. Ex. spindle speed, tolerance, radial offset, z safety plane, etc. But I'd hate to have the majority of my misc integers hogged by one function.

Is there a better way to implement this? Am I trying to do too much customization?

MC2023 TIA

2 minutes ago, AHarrison1 said:

I had one a while back, honestly, the only thing I used it for was to help me remove slivers from my hands and / or fingers.

Are you intending to use it to check cutting edges and what not?

Yessir. Mostly for machinist's use on the floor

We're tired of holding a flashlight in one hand and a loupe in the other

Curious what you all use for loupes?

We currently use these: Loupe Link MSC

Just started looking into ordering a loupe with a built in light. Anyone use one like that, any recommendations?

15 hours ago, gcode said:

Find an online time calculator

Subtract the Regen line  (2nd from the top)

from  the last line   = 1 minute 55 seconds... nice !!!

From Boxx, that probably came in at about $8k

I'm guessing about $5.5K from Xi

 

 

 

To be honest it came in around $5.6K

As far as I know he didn't get multiple quotes, would've been interesting to see where Xi was at

9 minutes ago, gcode said:

Nice machine, where did you buy it??

I would've gone with Xi per your recommendation. But our IT guy quoted and ordered it for me. He went with Boxx

5 minutes ago, crazy^millman said:

2 minutes even? or 1:54 What you are saying?

Agree with Gcode impressive time.

I wasn't sure what number I was supposed to go by, the "time" column or "total time" column? Either way I was impressed

New computer day! 

Intel i9-14900k liquid cooled overclocked to 6.0GHz

96GB RAM

NVIDIA RTX A4000

1TB Samsung SSD 990 PRO

ran the benchmark 3 times, all 3 runs within a second:

Thanks for the replies! Looks like I'll be overriding the default.

6 minutes ago, Kyle F said:

Out of curiosity, what are some of the settings you like to change in verify? I usually will use machine simulation for "final review", so it's pretty rare I use verify. When I do, I have all settings at default. 

Although now that I'm digging into the options it's got me curious about the 3 and 5 axis simulation engines

I usually leave most of the "settings" (File > Options) as default.

What I do like saved is the current state of the interface. For example I like my stock and fixture visibility to be on, and my tool visibility to be on but transparent. I also don't like the default settings for collision checking. Not having to click all these on/off every new session is what I'm after.

Do yall just overwrite the default file? I can't imagine I'm the only one who's ever wanted to save a default setup in verify?

On 11/18/2023 at 5:14 AM, byte said:

Is this a c++ c# question or a post language question

fq 1 is post language

On 11/16/2023 at 8:06 AM, Nguyễn Tuyến said:

i use code  password

                                 q1

and use fq 1 to call this code 

and i want hidden it. how can i hidden when i type on command

 THANK YOU EVERY ONE

Unfortunately I don't have an answer to the question, but you'll get more eyes on this if you post it in the Post Processor Development Forum

https://www.emastercam.com/forums/forum/32-post-processor-development-forum/

11 minutes ago, Colin Gilchrist said:

C++, Posts, Buffers ???

We should talk. Do you like where you work and what you do? Opportunities abound.

Where in Western Mass? Springfield area?

Yes Springfield area.

I do enjoy where I'm at and what I do. The two biggest things I like:

1. I work side by side with my dad. I program everything he runs, we make a real kick butt team.

2. management gives me a LOT of freedom to do what I want. 

Because of this freedom I can program and run machines, write simple c-hooks, do a bit of post editing, and our hottest jobs usually hit my desk.

With that being said, I'll never turn down a conversation. Always looking to learn more and widen my horizons.

Quick follow up, ended up using a buffer. Intimidating at first but not too crazy once I got into it.

For anyone with the same issue down the road:

Just now, JParis said:

That was one of my suggestions further up 

That will allow single program now

 

Ah shoot don't know how I missed it, sorry about that. Also thank you for all the time and information you have provided.

2 hours ago, Jake L said:

After changing the parameters James suggested this is the code I end up with:

%
O1314(MAIN PROGRAM)

(T1 SUB CALL)
M98 P0001 Q1234

(T2 SUB CALL)
M98 P0001 Q1235

M30
%

%
O0001(SUBPROGRAMS)

(T1 SUB)
N1234
(CODE)
M99

(T2 SUB)
N1235
(CODE)
M99
%

So I have a main program and I have a second program with all my sub programs in it. The Pxxxx is still a regular subprogram call, but the Qxxxx tells the machine to start on line Nxxxx within the subprogram.

 

New discovery. My machine provider just got back to me. I can omit the Pxxxx from the M98 call line and it will search the current program for Nxxxx based on Qxxxx.

%
O1314(MAIN PROGRAM)

(T1 SUB CALL)
M98 Q1234

(T2 SUB CALL)
M98 Q1235

M30


(T1 SUB)
N1234
(CODE)
M99

(T2 SUB)
N1235
(CODE)
M99
%

I am currently modifying a MPFAN post to reformat the sub programs output. I would like the subprogram number to be 4 digits. Digit 2-4 = tool number, and digit 1 = call number. "Call number" meaning if T2 is called 3 times in the same program I'd like the first call sub number to be 1002 the second sub to be 2002 and third to be 3002. 

Is there a simple way to do this? My c++ brain is saying just make an array of all the tool numbers as you use them and loop thru the array every time you need to output a subprogram number to check how many times the tool has been previously used. But not sure if that code would be a pain to write into a post.

I also see that I could use pwrtt$ to pre-read all the tool numbers. So I could track how many times each tool is used and then somehow use that when I'm ready to output sub numbers?

Any info is appreciated! MC2023 TIA

8 minutes ago, Tim Johnson said:

What kind of fixtures are you using?

We use custom fixtures. 

Matsuura H.Plus-630 4-axis HMC. We have a custom tombstone on the machine pallet and custom fixtures on the tombstone.

 Tombstone City Link This is similar to the custom tombstones we use.

The fixtures are all 4140 steel with mitee bites to hold the parts. 

16 hours ago, JParis said:

That'll make file management a WHOLE lot easier!

You ain't kidding. We've got a job with 110 tools and each has its own separate sub program, really makes a mess.

After changing the parameters James suggested this is the code I end up with:

%
O1314(MAIN PROGRAM)

(T1 SUB CALL)
M98 P0001 Q1234

(T2 SUB CALL)
M98 P0001 Q1235

M30
%

%
O0001(SUBPROGRAMS)

(T1 SUB)
N1234
(CODE)
M99

(T2 SUB)
N1235
(CODE)
M99
%

So I have a main program and I have a second program with all my sub programs in it. The Pxxxx is still a regular subprogram call, but the Qxxxx tells the machine to start on line Nxxxx within the subprogram.

My next question is what you use for a naming convention, here's what I'm thinking:

N101033

10 (op#10) 1 (1st call) 033 (tool #33)

N253112

25 (op#25) 3 (3rd call)  112 (tool #112)

Because we will have multiple ops, and possibly multiple tool callouts, this seems like a good solution. But I'm interested to hear others thoughts on this.

Here's the response from @cncappsjames:

Set #3201.6(NPE) = 1 Program registration not completed on M02, M30, or M99

Set #3201.5(N99) = 1 Program registration not completed on M99

Set #6005.0 (SBC) = 1 This will allow you to use Q as a line number jump.

I have not tested this yet but it looks promising. I'll return with results after testing.

2 minutes ago, JParis said:

@cncappsjames

Funny, I just sent him an email.

Unfortunately I didn't find anything on my initial surf thru the manuals.

Just now, JParis said:

What control?

I know for our Mazaks the internal calls work as such

M98H40001

that calls 

N40001

at the bottom..

You might look through the controls book and see if it calls internal subs using different headers

 

Fanuc G-Tech 16i

I'll take a look thru the book because I've only ever seen M98 Pxxxx to call Oxxxx. I've never seen M98 Hxxxx to call Nxxxx.

I'll follow up

22 minutes ago, JParis said:

I remember back in the day on some older Fanucs...I would have them all after the M30....

I would make sure there was no % as that signals the end of the program, after the M30. I would edit the M30 to M99 for loading, then change it back after loading it..

 

Here's the current code:

%

O1314
G90 G80 G40 G0 G49 G17
 
N138 M6 T138 ( 1/2 EM )
M22
G90 G0 G54.1 P1 B0.
M21
G5.1 Q1
G0 G90 G54.1 P1 X-3.1165 Y-2.3 S7640 M3
G43 H138 Z1. M8 T104
M50
M98 P0001

G90 G54.1 P8 X-3.1165 Y-2.3
Z1.
M98 P0001
G5.1 Q0
M09
M22
M5
G49 G53 Z0.
M00 (changed from M30)

O0001

(code)

M99

%

We just tried loading this into the machine and it split the programs into two programs O1234 and O0001.

I was excited about the changing the M30 suggestion but it seems like the machine may break up the program each time it sees an O.

Just now, JParis said:

I am curious as to why you would want them as separate files as opposed to in the same file?

In my own head it seems they would be easier to manage all in a single file..

Thanks for the response. If they're all in a single file, when we load them into the machine it splits them into separate files. Then when we go to save the programs they save as separate files. So we either have to mush them all back together, or save each file individually. I imagine it would be less work to start with them split up.

If there's a better way around this issue I'm all ears. We don't do a ton with sub programs so I'd guess our "sub program best practices" may be lacking.

I was hoping the link in the OP was still good but it's not.

I'm working with a slightly modified MPFAN post, looking to have subprograms output as individual files. A while back I saw a post explaining how to do this but I can't seem to find it again. Any chance someone can point me in the right direction here? I honestly don't know where to even start.

MC2023 TIA

Is there a config setting somewhere to change the default file for verify options? I can't seem to find anything.

In a verify session > File > Defaults > Save to Defaults allows you to save your current settings to an xml file. But I can't find where to set the new xml file as default instead of "MastercamSimulatorDefaults.xml"

Current work around is: in a verify session > File > Defaults > Read from Defaults > select saved xml file.

MC2023 TIA

Used to be 5 of us programming for about 15 3-axis VMC, 7 4-axis HMC,  6 5-axis. 

Since then we've added some machines and we're up to 8 mill programmers.

Now a days I personally do a mix of process improvement and new parts. Whatever the boss thinks we can/should be making more money on hits my desk, it's a pretty cool gig.