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

Gordon:
if you put the subroutines at the middle or at the end of the program if you have
a long program they wont execute I think
regards
mariano


Smoke wrote:

> 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
> >
> >
> >
>
> 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