Gcode, not learning canned cycles very well. - Page 2
Close
Login to Your Account
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 21 to 38 of 38
  1. #21
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Country
    UNITED STATES
    State/Province
    New Jersey
    Posts
    1,719
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    162
    Likes (Received)
    907

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by litlerob1 View Post
    Fuck off

  2. #22
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Victoria Australia
    Posts
    3,560
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    0
    Likes (Received)
    1397

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Blakews2217 View Post
    Well, everyone is entitled to there own opinion, you included. On my specific machine, there is no requirement to enable write and have alarm 100 on. If the op is that lost why not take some classes at a trade school? It’s a great starting point.
    There’s no one way to skin a cat.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    And what control would be on that specific machine? There is a reason for having to enable parameter write and that's to protect the control from some lame brain that may poke around in the parameters for no good reason. From your example code, I assumed a Fanuc control and not only do you have to enable Parameter Write to change parameters on a Fanuc control, but when changing the Grid Shift parameters, error "000" is raised requiring the power to the control to be cycles to extinguish it. Another good reason to modify the Reference Return Position instead of the designed for purpose Work-shift Offsets; NOT.

    Fanuc isn't the only control manufacturer that had the forethought of protecting the parameters from knobs.

    Quote Originally Posted by Blakews2217 View Post
    If the op is that lost why not take some classes at a trade school? It’s a great starting point.
    Now that's what I call ironic. Someone that thinks using the Grid Shift parameter as Work-shift is acceptable, should suggest that someone else take some classes at a trade school. Hell, after reading that, I've not grimaced so much since granny got her left tit caught in the washing mangle.
    Last edited by angelw; 04-15-2019 at 09:39 AM.

  3. Likes Vancbiker liked this post
  4. #23
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Country
    UNITED STATES
    State/Province
    Oregon
    Posts
    2,080
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    398
    Likes (Received)
    1550

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Blakews2217 View Post
    That is indeed what I meant. It seems that shop to shop terminology can differ. Yes, it the work shift that is changed.
    Terminology may differ shop to shop, but grid shift is grid shift. As Bill said, it's how the zero return position is set.

    You can't possibly be using grid shift to set Z zero, because a Z.1 move would generate a Z overtravel alarm. Any tool longer than the one you touched off with would generate a Z overtravel alarm. When you home out the machine, it would home to absolute Z zero.

    The work shift is your G54 position (distance from Z home position)- I am sure that is what you are changing. No one sets Z zero with grid shift.

  5. Likes Vancbiker, Winterfalke liked this post
  6. #24
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Country
    UNITED STATES
    State/Province
    Washington
    Posts
    4,062
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    761
    Likes (Received)
    2143

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jancollc View Post
    ......The work shift is your G54 position (distance from Z home position)- I am sure that is what you are changing. No one sets Z zero with grid shift.
    Yep.

    Pretty much impossible to effectively use grid shift for coordinate system setting like Blakews2217 is saying. Using grid shift would only allow at most a bit less than 1 pitch of the screw worth of adjustment.

    It really bugs me when folks post up stuff when they do not know WTF they are talking about.
    Last edited by Vancbiker; 04-15-2019 at 03:05 PM.

  7. Likes litlerob1 liked this post
  8. #25
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Country
    UNITED STATES
    State/Province
    New Jersey
    Posts
    1,719
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    162
    Likes (Received)
    907

    Default

    Maybe by grid shift he means moving the numbers in g54 or whatever...or maybe he is using a convoluted way. Doesn't sound the least bit practical though. Ive worked some CNC lathes and usually we adjusted wear for individual tools and the work offset to move everything...gets fun remembering what you did when you have to start over on a twin spindle/turret lathe. And then we used different numbers for the opposite sides of the turret. It was real easy to get in a jam with that thing lol.

    On a side note, never had a tool pull out like in the other thread unless it crashed or was moving in the cut when it shouldn't.

  9. #26
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Country
    UNITED STATES
    State/Province
    New Jersey
    Posts
    798
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    466
    Likes (Received)
    305

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Higgins909 View Post
    Just wondering if anyone knew of a place to learn Gcode for the lathe.

    Thanks,
    Higgins909
    I've been training for years. The Lathe cycles are a little cryptic, but allow me to put it this way:

    In Multi cycles such as G71 and G72 the "P" and "Q" represent where the cycle "starts" reading the part definition and where it "stops." It is - for the most part - the only time where sequence numbers really mean anything in a Fanuc program. There are some caveats with this, however.

    For instance if you have a G72 cycle roughing the face of the part using "P1" and "Q2" to define it, you MUST use DIFFERENT numbers for a cycle that may be, for instance, roughing out a bore. That would have to be a G71 with "P4" and "Q5". I was training for Doosan for years and now do so independently, feel free to inquire!

  10. #27
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Location
    West Unity, Ohio
    Posts
    24,736
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    4864
    Likes (Received)
    7572

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Higgins909 View Post
    Thank you everyone. I was thinking I could manually program it with G01 as it's just a .015" roughing pass, leaving .005" for finish facing. But then I still need to learn G71 and G70.

    Why?

    The only canned cycle that I use on the lathes is G76.
    On smaller work it doesn't take long to code.

    But then I got a cpl of 40" swing lathes and figgered tha'd be a good app for those canned cycles, only to find that they feed all the way back to the original starting X value every pass, adding much time to each cycle time, so even there I find it beneficial to just long code it by hand.

    Shortcuts are great if they are simple AND actually save something - like .. time....


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

    Think Snow Eh!
    Ox

  11. #28
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    CT
    Posts
    7,679
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    296
    Likes (Received)
    1796

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ox View Post

    only to find that they feed all the way back to the original starting X value every pass,

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

    Think Snow Eh!
    Ox
    Huh Ox? Where did you get THAT option?

    If the P block is a G01, then the tool will feed to the start of the next X, if it's G00 then it will rapid there.
    In all cases however the return is always rapid ( at least on every control I've ever seen )

  12. #29
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Location
    West Unity, Ohio
    Posts
    24,736
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    4864
    Likes (Received)
    7572

    Default

    Been quite a while since I played with it, but that's how it acted for me on a 16T.


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

    Think Snow Eh!
    Ox

  13. #30
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Huron
    Posts
    1,331
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    1846
    Likes (Received)
    819

    Default

    I think I've programmed a lathe part like 4 times, it always amazes me how much less sense the programming conventions have, although I can understand some of it considering the physical constraints and the lack of memory on a lot of older machines. Most places I've looked really do a piss poor job of explaining what the variables mean. It's pretty obvious they were written by an engineer, by someone familiar with the language for someone familiar with the language. There are usually no attempts made to explain the language. Haas, I have to say, did a far better job than most, I could read it and figure out what they were talking about by the examples. I think Fanuc did the best job of writing a manual that explained absolutely nothing. I used to have to sit there and read entire robot programming manuals to troubleshoot them, and Fanuc was always the most useless.

  14. #31
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Country
    UNITED STATES
    State/Province
    Utah
    Posts
    4,166
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    1135
    Likes (Received)
    2281

    Default

    I have about sleventy canned cycles memorized, I don't think it's all that hard. With a little spare time and a working example it's easy. Remembering them might be tough, but that's why they invented pencils-to remember all the abstract canned cycles.

    R

  15. #32
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    india
    Posts
    1,191
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    68
    Likes (Received)
    205

    Default

    One should, of course, know the syntax of canned cycles, and a basic understanding of what each word means. What else is there to remember? At least, G71/G/72 are quite simple; G73 might be a bit confusing. These cycles provide the most efficient machining method. How can one avoid learning/using these!

  16. #33
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    Indiana
    Posts
    3,103
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    4545
    Likes (Received)
    1588

    Default

    All the canned (G90, G92, G94) (G70-G76) (G80-G89) cycles are in the "FUNCTIONS TO SIMPLIFY PROGRAMMING" section in the operator's manual.

    That they do very well. I'd hate to have to drive a lathe without turning and facing cycles. When using type 2 roughing they do a pretty good job. My only wish would be is with Fanuc G71 G72 I wish they employed TNRC to account for the trailing eadge of the the tool and leave a more even amount of stock on all features.

    With the 2 line canned cycles the user has the ability to manipulate the retract amounts. It would have been nice 25 years ago to have known this was parameter adjustable in tight hole situations.

    I wish the 2 line G76 cycle uses the P1 P2 P3 P4 threading patterns that is available with the single line cycle. All in all I think they do a good job at what they were intended to do

    Brent

  17. #34
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Victoria Australia
    Posts
    3,560
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    0
    Likes (Received)
    1397

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ox View Post
    Why?

    The only canned cycle that I use on the lathes is G76.
    On smaller work it doesn't take long to code.

    But then I got a cpl of 40" swing lathes and figgered tha'd be a good app for those canned cycles, only to find that they feed all the way back to the original starting X value every pass, adding much time to each cycle time, so even there I find it beneficial to just long code it by hand.

    Shortcuts are great if they are simple AND actually save something - like .. time....


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

    Think Snow Eh!
    Ox
    Hello Ox,
    That is a very weird behavior. It should be as Seymour described; I've never seen it otherwise in a fairly long association with Fanuc Controls.

    The thing that is a real benefit with a cycle such as a G71 Roughing Cycle, is that the DOC can be changed with the edit of just one address word in the Cycle Block. Often it can be an advantage to get a program going with conservative cutting data and ramp it up in successive cycles. Nothing much gained going for the throat in the first cycle only to loose the part out of the chuck and then spend the next few hours aligning the components of the machine.

    Sure, DOC can be changed in a CAM generated program, but it requires Re-posting the program, depleting the current and uploading the new version.

    Regards,

    Bill

  18. Likes Ox liked this post
  19. #35
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Victoria Australia
    Posts
    3,560
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    0
    Likes (Received)
    1397

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by yardbird View Post
    That they do very well. I'd hate to have to drive a lathe without turning and facing cycles. When using type 2 roughing they do a pretty good job. My only wish would be is with Fanuc G71 G72 I wish they employed TNRC to account for the trailing eadge of the the tool and leave a more even amount of stock on all features.Brent
    Hello Brent,
    There are quite a few versions of the Multi-repetitive Cycles, the details of which are not well publicized.

    TNCR in G71/G72/G73 was common place in FS10/11/12 controls, as well as being able to specify a Semi Finish allowance and Pass, in addition to a Finish Allowance. Why Fanuc didn't retain this I'm not sure.

    Regards,

    Bill

  20. #36
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Location
    West Unity, Ohio
    Posts
    24,736
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    4864
    Likes (Received)
    7572

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by angelw View Post
    Hello Ox,
    That is a very weird behavior. It should be as Seymour described; I've never seen it otherwise in a fairly long association with Fanuc Controls.

    The thing that is a real benefit with a cycle such as a G71 Roughing Cycle, is that the DOC can be changed with the edit of just one address word in the Cycle Block. Often it can be an advantage to get a program going with conservative cutting data and ramp it up in successive cycles. Nothing much gained going for the throat in the first cycle only to loose the part out of the chuck and then spend the next few hours aligning the components of the machine.

    Sure, DOC can be changed in a CAM generated program, but it requires Re-posting the program, depleting the current and uploading the new version.

    Regards,

    Bill

    Well, I can try it again some day, but what it was doing for me was to take the pass in Z, and then feed out to the start point in X. The VERY start point...

    {not sure how the macro is coded right off the top}

    So if I start the macro at X40", the end of each pass - it will feed out to X40. before rapiding back to the Z start point.

    Well, if you are at 39" that may not be so bad, but if you are down to 30" and you have to wait for it to feed out to 40" every pass - at the same feedrate of the Z cutting feedrate, I lose a boat load of time!
    So taking many passes at all in the canned cycle only adds a bunch of time, and recoding the macro forty-leven times doesn't save anything from simple hard coding, so ...


    Maybe I am missing something in my code?
    I don't have a fer instance code to post, but maybe I can try aggin some day...


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

    Think Snow Eh!
    Ox

  21. #37
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Country
    UNITED STATES
    State/Province
    Utah
    Posts
    4,166
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    1135
    Likes (Received)
    2281

    Default

    It seems somewhere in my own limited (and soggy) memory, I too have seen what Ox is describing. But it also seems like we figured it out, I think we were using a 1 line G71 when 2 lines were possible, thus more control. But I can't prove that's what we did.

    R

  22. #38
    Join Date
    Sep 2017
    Country
    UNITED STATES
    State/Province
    Wisconsin
    Posts
    423
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    27
    Likes (Received)
    230

    Default

    The FANUC 0i-TF manual has a great explanation of these (well, as far as "great" and "FANUC" go together).

    The biggest issue I've run into is the tool nose radius comp making the Type I form into a Type II, that is, creating a tiny deviation in a direction the cycle doesn't want to go and alarming out for not having a continuous form or something like that. We fixed it by giving more allowance in the tool nose radius comp parameter.

    We have done a few forms where it was crazy fast to hand program from a drawing using these cycles.


Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •