Fanuc 18T - Inconsistent W moves - Depending on Application

[Ox]

I have this posted in a "Swiss" specific thread, where I would like the discussion to be, but I think that it needs it's own title for this type of question.

Sometimes it is INCR and sometimes ABS, depending on ???


Click link.

Note that the text in the link shown is NOT where the link goes to.

Cut-Off on Swiss

Yeah, I like that, but will have to look at the coding per bar change and see how that effects that. Actually, I just started running with the sub this weekend. The sub was down when I bought it, and I just got it going on ... Friday? -------------------- Think Snow Eh! Ox

www.practicalmachinist.com

------------------

Think Snow Eh!
Ox

 

[Ox]

Back To The Top.

Nobody else has any ideas?

@angelw - any guess?

Anyone else?


----------------------

Think Snow Eh!
Ox

 

[DouglasJRizzo]

I rarely go incremental on anything. With that said, the inconsistencies can grow exponentially with even small differences.

 

[angelw]

Back To The Top.

Nobody else has any ideas?

@angelw - any guess?

Anyone else?


----------------------

Think Snow Eh!
Ox

Hello Ox,
As a test, put an M00 or M01 just before the Incremental move, so that you can catch the move and log what happens with the execution of the W move in the different scenarios, to see if there is any consistency.

When the Z axis does move with the W0.0 command, does the axis actually move to Absolute Z Zero?

Regards,

Bill

 

[Ox]

The job is finishing up right now (for this run) as I just now heard the barfeeder drop the remnant of what I think should be the last bar, so, may be next time before I can dink with it much.

But - I will say that as is, when in cycle - the bar pulls back behind the trigon. (so, maybe a Z-.600 move or whatnot.
But if I start at N400, the bar will actually move fwd .. maybe .050 (?) in stead of moving back .600.

I have not documented the exact amounts, but can Shirley doo that next time it comes up.
Fortunately it is only an issue when messing with it "manually", and it still works the same during bar change as it does in-cycle, so at least I don't have to worry about that crashing.

Thank you for the response.


------------------

Think Snow Eh!
Ox

 

[Ox]

Actually, one thing that I thought of - that I haven't tried yet, is to try just Path1 alone - in cycle, just to see if somehow a code from Path2 is somehow effecting it.


--------------------

Think Snow Eh!
Ox

 

[angelw]

The job is finishing up right now (for this run) as I just now heard the barfeeder drop the remnant of what I think should be the last bar, so, may be next time before I can dink with it much.

But - I will say that as is, when in cycle - the bar pulls back behind the trigon. (so, maybe a Z-.600 move or whatnot.
But if I start at N400, the bar will actually move fwd .. maybe .050 (?) in stead of moving back .600.

I have not documented the exact amounts, but can Shirley doo that next time it comes up.
Fortunately it is only an issue when messing with it "manually", and it still works the same during bar change as it does in-cycle, so at least I don't have to worry about that crashing.

Thank you for the response.


------------------

Think Snow Eh!
Ox

Hello Ox,
When you get to use the machine again when it operates in the same manner, note the Absolute Display value at the end of the W0.0 move if the axis moves with the W0.0 command. If it's not Zero, then its not a case of the control making an Absolute move instead Incremental. The result of that observation would go a long way in determining what Rabit hole to follow.

Regards,

Bill

 

[angelw]

Actually, one thing that I thought of - that I haven't tried yet, is to try just Path1 alone - in cycle, just to see if somehow a code from Path2 is somehow effecting it.

Yes, that would be a good idea, if for nothing more than to rule it out.

Regards,

Bill

 

[angelw]

Hello Ox,
What control is on this machine?
I can send you a small Macro Program that will mimic an Incremental move without using the "W" address. This will do two things for you:
1. It will absolutely force an Incremental Move, Zero included and if a move still results (when not wanted), it will prove that it has nothing to do with the "W" move per se, but something else in your program.
2. If no logical solution can be found for the machine's behavior; it will be a solid workaround.

Regards,

Bill

 

[Ox]

18 (1999?)


------------------

Think Snow Eh!
Ox

 

[plastikdreams]

What is a "w" move?

 

[Booze Daily]

Incremental Z I think.

 

[Ox]

Incr Z on a T control

Or

An aux Z (quill) on an M control
(HBM)


------------------

Think Snow Eh!
Ox

 

[plastikdreams]

Interesting