Re: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] Re: re:Re: programming by hand

I think maybe having the sub-routines at the beginning or at the end is
inherently irrelevent and is a matter for the user to decide. What's more
"intuitive" for you is just the opposite for someone else. Sort of like the
old righties versus lefties question.

The user might even find it better to put the sub-routines in the middle.
Another option would be to have a "sub-routine" that is specifically geared
to tool selection. Then the user would only need to place a "go to" line in
the program to obtain the desired tool. With a number of the most commonly
used tools being "standardized" in this manner a great deal of programing
time would be saved over a period of time. Non-"standard" tools could be
added for special jobs.

This is why I've got my Dream Machine designed so a left hander could
phyically build his machine as a left handed machine by simply reversing
some of the components.

Smoke

>I have found this to be a very useful practice in the past when working in

a production

>CNC environment. I don't use it too much in my hobby activities, but

whenever I am

>Trying to earn a living from in front of a CNC machine it becomes

important. I do not however,

>agree that subroutines should be placed at the beginning of a program. The

most elegant

>that I have seen is to place the individual routines in sub-programs. It

is much more

>intuitive also to have them at the end "out of the way", and to call them

from a main

>program that is much better to have at the beginning. That way it is

easier to see the

>order of processing and what tools are required, etc.
>
>
>>You could also include your personal canned package as you edit the gcode
>>produced by your CAM package as well.
>>
>>CAD is NOT a must...unless your doing really complicated parts. I ran an
>>experiment the other night to generate some gcode using the BobCAD demo.
>>The code it generated was extremely long for the part to be machined.

Also,

>>it generated the part with only one tool size.
>
>If you knew what you were doing with even Bobcad, you can run circles

around

>anyone doing manual programming at the machine. You may not be able to do
>this 5 minutes after installing your cam system, but the time to setup the

macros,

>subroutines etc, will be shorter with the CAM system than doing it directly

at the control.

>The reason, is that it is easy to set up prepared series of instructions

that can be

>customized on the fly to cut a particular item. You can also include

instructions

>to yourself to, for example set the value of Va=-.5 to the actual depth

required for your

>part. Since you are working in Windows, the editor in most any cam system

is more

>productive than most machine controllers, especially the DOS based

controllers, and

>the older dedicated controllers such as Fanuc, Allen-Bradley, etc..
>
> >With a good isometric
>>drawing of the part I can write a MUCH simpler program. I'd also save

time

>>by inserting a tool change and bigger Z moves. Having canned cycyes
>>mentioned above would make the whole process that much simpler.....and
>>probagbly faster since I wouldn't have to wade thru the generated code to
>>make changes that didn't need to be there in the first place.
>>
>
>If you spent a little time with a good Cad-Cam system, you would realize

that

>when you know what you are doing, you can exercise MUCH more control over
>the toolpath than you can manually. Also most drawings being generated

today

>are in electronic CAD format, so the issue of having to draw the part to

machine it,

>is becoming obsolete.
>
>
>
>>Incidently, I've got another part to cut that can be done using three

tools

>>rather than one. In fact, I'd get a better cut using three tools rather
>>than one strait cutting (or a bull nose) end mill. I'd use two ball end
>>mills to cut the required radii using only ONE "move" with each tool.

Rather

>>than cutting the radii via a complex program using step cutting ...which
>>leaves a rough surface.
>>
>>So there IS a place for generating your own gcode programs by hand.
>>
>Again if you know what you are doing, it is no problem to produce this cut,
>even with Bobcad. The benefit is that you won't make a typographical error
>when you try to type in a coordinate value like X10.0 instead of X1.0. The
>CAM programs won't make this kind of mistake, but operators/programmers DO!
>
>
>>Smoke
>>
>>>Nice post! It's good to remember that it all boils down to lines and
>>>arcs! For those who HAVE the 'canned cycles' at the level you
>>>mention ; i.e.,bolt circles, pockets,macros, etc.(many will just have
>>>drill cycles) it is good advice. Single line programs and cutter
>>>comp 'tricks'.
>>>
>>>>But, I think their(CAM) need is overrated. On the other hand a CAD
>>>>system is a must.
>
>Last point, lest some think I am biased in favor of CAM systems, and this
>is a point that many who squeezed in to the CNC discussion last year at

Names

>have already heard:
>
>Often times it is more efficient to produce the part with a manual machine

rather than a CNC.

>
>This is not a particularly popular thesis, but I can guarantee you that for

a single hole I can walk

>over to my Bridgeport and poke it into a part faster than you can warm up

and boot the controller

> on most CNC machines. You want it tapped and a chamfer at the top? 3

tools? I will have it done

>before you poke the macro program on your conversational machine OR program

it on your Cad-Cam system.

>
>I am concerned that those getting advice don't always understand the

background of the advisor & maybe

>it would help in some cases if people would describe a little about the

kinds of parts that given kinds of

>approaches are suggested for.
>
>As an example sometimes Rhino is suggested as a great Cad system. It is ,

provided

>that you want to make swoopy, nurbs surfaces. It is however not that great

if you want

>to make simple 2 axis CAD drawings of parts with edges. The free

Intellicad may do a

> better job in this case.
>
>For another instance, if I make parts that consist solely of shapes cut

from solid

>rectangular bar stock, with drilled and tapped holes, my techniques will be

very different

>than if I make 3D sculpted artwork, with no straight lines anywhere. I

often times see

>people arguing over the best technique to do these two things, but they

don't say that

>the techniques are for making different kinds parts.
>
>
>Best Regards, Fred Smith- IMService
>Listserve Special discounts and offers are at:

http://209.69.202.197/cadcamedmdro.html

>
>imserv@... Voice:248-486-3600 or 800-386-1670 Fax: 248-486-3698
>
>
>Welcome to CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO@...,an unmoderated list for the

discussion of shop built systems, for CAD, CAM, EDM, and DRO.

>
>Addresses:
>Post message: CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO@egroups.com
>Subscribe: CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO-subscribe@egroups.com
>Unsubscribe: CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO-unsubscribe@egroups.com
>List owner: CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO-owner@egroups.com, wanliker@...
>Moderator: jmelson@... [Moderator]
>URL to this page: http://www.egroups.com/group/CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO
>FAQ: http://www.ktmarketing.com/faq.html
>bill,
>List Manager
>
>
>