Re: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] Re: CAD experiment entry

I´ll do one in Rhino.
Will take a few minutes, when drawn.

Rhino opens nicely all the IGES files so far.
Rhino supports EXCEL links for table driven objects, to an extent.

If there was need, I could do a 3DStudio version as well.
(Some sw is not yet installed on this, me new PC. Still setting up mills
and lathes after move).

Tim G. ...
Your explanation re: named dimensions was EXCELLENT !
Many, many thanks.
Implementing similar stuff for me will be easy, now I know what to base
it on, ie named dimensions, in Rhino.

Also, the explanation re: production stuff was great, great, great.
Very much appreciated.

> --- In CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO@yahoogroups.com
> <mailto:CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO%40yahoogroups.com>, Kevin Martin
> <kpmartin@...> wrote:
> >
> > Ron,
> > I think Bill was suggesting using the lathe+live tooling approach
> that Tim mentioned, but feeding rectangular stock into the lathe
> rather than round stock.
> >
> > For that matter, I don't see any reason why a milling machine could
> not have an automatic bar feeder.
> >
> > -Kevin Martin
>
> Reason for round is many fold.
> Round collets are standard, square are not.
> Round stock has better tolerances. Square is not really square and
> tends to have raised corners and bellies on the faces so even in a
> square collet you get jambing issues.
> Bar pullers have a hard time grabbing non-round shapes. Hex is better,
> but it still is a feed issue. A missed pull tends to lead to scrap and
> broken tools.
> Round stock is easy to locate, other shapes are not as common.
>
> I have pondered a bar feed on the mill as well. No reason it could not
> work, but it would take custom design and custom macros in the G code
> and for the machine. In a lathe it is already baked in. Just have to
> spend the $500 or so for a bar puller.
>
> T
>

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]