Thread: Using a cross section curve to drive threading passes - how many CAM supports this?

Originally Posted by gregormarwick

Indulge me then, and write a program in apt to generate, for example, a TR100x36P12 (12mm pitch / 36mm lead, three start) external thread using a 4mm grooving tool. I'm genuinely interested to see how it compares to doing the same in Macro B.

Design something in inches, if you wouldn't mind - like wechat, I don't do metric cuz I don't have to, and it sucks - and I'd never use a "4 mm grooving tool" for something like that.

Meanwhile, are you sure bobcad or fusion can do this ? I mean, all the low-end modern cam systems are superior, yes ?

https://youtu.be/FGK8fx9CKHM

p.s. I'd never use a cam program to create a simple thread, either. It's a waste of time and a complexity you don't need.

Originally Posted by EmanuelGoldstein

There's nothing the most advanced modern CAM system can do that APT cannot. Nothing.

lol, that's a bit far fetched.

Modern CAM systems are more than just toolpath creators. Cutting simulation, machine optimization, automation, integrated CAD, etc, etc, etc. APT is just not comparable to todays CAM. Can it do some of the same things, sure, but at what cost to efficiency? 'just cause you can doesn't mean you should'

If you wanted to go down this odd ball thread programming path with APT, you'd probably be better off using CAM anyways, even if the CAM system doesn't have a toolpath for it. For this thread scenario, you could program a groove that is the shape of your desired thread with whatever tool you wanted, and use those groove points as starting points for a G32 thread cycle. You would have to manually edit the gcode to do this but it would work. Not fully automated like a built in toolpath would be but at least you're getting your CAM system to do the heavy math for you.


Comparing APT to CAM is like comparing DOS to Windows!

Originally Posted by EmanuelGoldstein

Design something in inches, if you wouldn't mind - like wechat, I don't do metric cuz I don't have to, and it sucks - and I'd never use a "4 mm grooving tool" for something like that.

Meanwhile, are you sure bobcad or fusion can do this ? I mean, all the low-end modern cam systems are superior, yes ?

https://youtu.be/FGK8fx9CKHM

p.s. I'd never use a cam program to create a simple thread, either. It's a waste of time and a complexity you don't need.

Come on man, respond on topic.

Originally Posted by goooose

lol, that's a bit far fetched.

Modern CAM systems are more than just toolpath creators. Cutting simulation, machine optimization, automation, integrated CAD, etc, etc, etc.

Okay, that I can accept. There's a lot of other stuff that flies under the heading "cam" now, and APT is just for creating toolpaths.

But I don't accept that there's anything toolpath related that "modern" systems can do that APT cannot. In fact, for real control, there's a select group of people still running NCL and its brethren because graphics toolpath generation doesn't do what they need. That's why NCCS still exists.

Originally Posted by gregormarwick

Come on man, respond on topic.

I told you, I don't do metric. I don't have to and I'm not going to.

And I would never use a stupid grooving tool for cutting threads. That's dumb.

So figure out a different model.

Originally Posted by EmanuelGoldstein

Okay, that I can accept. There's a lot of other stuff that flies under the heading "cam" now, and APT is just for creating toolpaths.

But I don't accept that there's anything toolpath related that "modern" systems can do that APT cannot. In fact, for real control, there's a select group of people still running NCL and its brethren because graphics toolpath generation doesn't do what they need. That's why NCCS still exists.


I told you, I don't do metric. I don't have to and I'm not going to.

And I would never use a stupid grooving tool for cutting threads. That's dumb.

So figure out a different model.

Do a similar ACME then, it's not important.

The method is not dumb, it's extremely effective.

Originally Posted by gregormarwick

The method is not dumb, it's extremely effective.

No, what's effective is putting the part in a thread grinder. Then you get a nice part

I would only consider doing a worm that way if I was desperate. What the heck are you making ?

(This is pretty pictures on top of an APT sibling. In fact, it's probaly APT itself behind the covers, but APT is public domain so companies do not like to admit to selling that. All the low end cam systems can match these capabilities ?)

http://cfnewsads.thomasnet.com/pnn-pdf/511762.pdf

Originally Posted by gregormarwick

You have probably picked up on my interest in old computer technologies, but it's a fools errand to pursue obsolete technologies in the workplace and I am careful to keep my work and my hobbies separate!

Everything APT can do is possible in all but the lowest end of the modern CAM systems, and if I really need to do something programmatically I can leverage the API in any language I want, if macros are not sufficient. That's not to say APT isn't capable, but it has been fully superceded, and not recently...

Back on topic, nobody else going to chime in? I was hoping to hear about Esprit, NX CAM etc.

ESPRIT does indeed support this, through the "Profile Threading Add-On".

Originally Posted by dpeer15

ESPRIT does indeed support this, through the "Profile Threading Add-On".

Thanks for the data point.

Originally Posted by Qwan

NX can use cad thread features from the model and will figure everything out for you and can also use a simple modeled tap drill hole and figure everything out for you. I think you can even pick a point and and manually fill in the cut data if users prefer to do things like 25 years ago lol.

NX 1946
NX 1953 testing

This doesn't answer the original question though. Know anything about that that the previous responder might have missed?

Originally Posted by Qwan

NX can use cad thread features from the model and will figure everything out for you and can also use a simple modeled tap drill hole and figure everything out for you. I think you can even pick a point and and manually fill in the cut data if users prefer to do things like 25 years ago lol.

NX 1946
NX 1953 testing

Custom Thread—Lathe Toolpath in Mastercam 2021 - YouTube

This is what I think the Op is referring to, which to my knowledge NX cannot do.

Originally Posted by CAMasochism

Custom Thread—Lathe Toolpath in Mastercam 2021 - YouTube

This is what I think the Op is referring to, which to my knowledge NX cannot do.

LOL my bad. Please ignore my previous reply.