Jared
Aluminum
- Joined
- Jan 17, 2006
- Location
- Portland, OR
This is a rather long post and im really not even asking a question, but I thought I would share the experiences of my company and maybe this info will help out others stuck in similar situations. I would also love any input from people that are familiar with the Renishaw systems.
I work for a shop that does target machining and final machining of Ti castings. The business started as a contract CMM lab so in addition to the machine shop we also have a full CMM lab. Most every part (probably 90+ percent) has a pre target/machining inspection done, sometimes just for point data for the probing routines others because it’s part of what the customer wants as a final product.
We take the data from the pre inspection and use it to generate a series of deviation numbers which are input into the machining center as 600 series variables. That is the first program, to write the number to memory and then we have a second program that reads those variables and while probing the part in the fixture, outputs material condition numbers to the 800 series variables. That is what the operator monitors to determine if the part has been loaded in the fixture correctly and is not being distorted. This is where we have been having problems.
Recently (sept or so of 2007) we purchased our third machining center, a Haas VF-3. Seemed like everything was set and ready to go. This newer haas was ordered with the Haas probing package, which I had assumed was the same thing that was ordered for the VF-5 roughly 6 years ago when it was purchased.
The probe that came with the machine was a good bit different then the MP700 I was used to seeing. I think they called it an OMP40 or something along those lines. I figured it was just an updated version of the MP700 in a smaller package. So did the owner, and everyone who was involved in the purchase and selection of this machine. It seems looking back on it we were simply talking to the wrong people, the service tech for Renishaw that was flown down much later in the saga pointed out several large differences in the probes that I would have thought someone would have brought up, knowing our extensive use of the probe in our day to day work.
Of course after getting a new machine, all we wanted to do was get it set up and start making chips with it. Well after setting a fixture up and getting the work offsets figured out we simply couldn’t get a probing routine to run. After a few calls to the Haas dealer we were told that Haas in there infinite wisdom changed the variable set that the probe uses to make room for accessory functions. So numbers like #146(material condition) became #196 and so on. So at this point we are wondering if it might be so simple as to create a excel program to shift all of the 100-200 series variables up 50. We then realize that it even uses different subroutine macros to do all the probe work, which means all the g65 sub-routine numbers were different. Furthermore, the program that does multi-axis probing uses polar coordinates instead of standard Cartesian coordinates.
The whole time we were working with our local Haas dealer trying to sort all this out. After the most recent discoveries we were told we had a few options: Lose the tool setter and a lot of the extra Haas software junk and switch to a standard MP700 Renishaw system. There might have been some arrangement regarding cost with this option, but I’m not sure. The second option was to re-write every probing routine we have for the new machine, and continue to write a duplicate program dedicated to this machine. I think most of us can assume that this option would be the last and final choice due to the continued cost and complexity involved in keeping and writing two copies. The third choice, and the one that was decided upon, was to have custom software written for this machine by someone who knows and understands Renishaw code and is familiar with modifying it.
Renishaw sent us a tech from Washington who ate drank and breathed Renishaw code. He was previously a programmer for Boeing and was retired doing tech work for Renishaw and 5 axis probing contract work. Seems to be quite the niche if you know what you’re doing. As of right now we are using that modified code with the re-assigned variables. We have not begun to cut parts yet, this all took place on Thursday and I haven’t been at work since. I imagine the next issue we will run into is transferring all of our work offsets to take into account the different machine travels.
I work for a shop that does target machining and final machining of Ti castings. The business started as a contract CMM lab so in addition to the machine shop we also have a full CMM lab. Most every part (probably 90+ percent) has a pre target/machining inspection done, sometimes just for point data for the probing routines others because it’s part of what the customer wants as a final product.
We take the data from the pre inspection and use it to generate a series of deviation numbers which are input into the machining center as 600 series variables. That is the first program, to write the number to memory and then we have a second program that reads those variables and while probing the part in the fixture, outputs material condition numbers to the 800 series variables. That is what the operator monitors to determine if the part has been loaded in the fixture correctly and is not being distorted. This is where we have been having problems.
Recently (sept or so of 2007) we purchased our third machining center, a Haas VF-3. Seemed like everything was set and ready to go. This newer haas was ordered with the Haas probing package, which I had assumed was the same thing that was ordered for the VF-5 roughly 6 years ago when it was purchased.
The probe that came with the machine was a good bit different then the MP700 I was used to seeing. I think they called it an OMP40 or something along those lines. I figured it was just an updated version of the MP700 in a smaller package. So did the owner, and everyone who was involved in the purchase and selection of this machine. It seems looking back on it we were simply talking to the wrong people, the service tech for Renishaw that was flown down much later in the saga pointed out several large differences in the probes that I would have thought someone would have brought up, knowing our extensive use of the probe in our day to day work.
Of course after getting a new machine, all we wanted to do was get it set up and start making chips with it. Well after setting a fixture up and getting the work offsets figured out we simply couldn’t get a probing routine to run. After a few calls to the Haas dealer we were told that Haas in there infinite wisdom changed the variable set that the probe uses to make room for accessory functions. So numbers like #146(material condition) became #196 and so on. So at this point we are wondering if it might be so simple as to create a excel program to shift all of the 100-200 series variables up 50. We then realize that it even uses different subroutine macros to do all the probe work, which means all the g65 sub-routine numbers were different. Furthermore, the program that does multi-axis probing uses polar coordinates instead of standard Cartesian coordinates.
The whole time we were working with our local Haas dealer trying to sort all this out. After the most recent discoveries we were told we had a few options: Lose the tool setter and a lot of the extra Haas software junk and switch to a standard MP700 Renishaw system. There might have been some arrangement regarding cost with this option, but I’m not sure. The second option was to re-write every probing routine we have for the new machine, and continue to write a duplicate program dedicated to this machine. I think most of us can assume that this option would be the last and final choice due to the continued cost and complexity involved in keeping and writing two copies. The third choice, and the one that was decided upon, was to have custom software written for this machine by someone who knows and understands Renishaw code and is familiar with modifying it.
Renishaw sent us a tech from Washington who ate drank and breathed Renishaw code. He was previously a programmer for Boeing and was retired doing tech work for Renishaw and 5 axis probing contract work. Seems to be quite the niche if you know what you’re doing. As of right now we are using that modified code with the re-assigned variables. We have not begun to cut parts yet, this all took place on Thursday and I haven’t been at work since. I imagine the next issue we will run into is transferring all of our work offsets to take into account the different machine travels.
