Multus U3000 vs. CTX Beta 1250 TC - Page 2
Close
Login to Your Account
Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 21 to 40 of 65
  1. #21
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Country
    UNITED STATES
    State/Province
    Utah
    Posts
    4,360
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    1168
    Likes (Received)
    2392

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by gregormarwick View Post
    I dislike salesman bullshit. We will see.
    Yeah, I have a very low tolerance threshold for that kind of googoo too. It makes my skin crawl.

  2. #22
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    California
    Posts
    1,354
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    877
    Likes (Received)
    1449

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by gregormarwick View Post
    Thanks for all the responses.

    I knew going in that the overwhelming majority would be in favour of Okuma. My biggest fear is based in the fact that we are in a very different place geographically from all of you. DMG have an overnight parts service from Germany to the UK, and somewhere between 100-200 (I forget the exact number) service guys on staff in the UK. That's a lot of manpower for a country this size. Okuma are on the other side of the planet, and are represented by a single dealership with an unknown service force. Okuma were very responsive to us during previous enquiries but their local representative has changed since then and I'm not really getting the same sense of urgency from the new guy. DMG were here in person two days after first contact.

    DMG (as in DMG - there are plenty of Mori's around) and Okuma both are pretty thin on the ground in Scotland. Mazak dominate in the bigger shops that buy new machines frequently, but I don't want to deal with them for reasons already explained.
    We're a very satisfied DMG Mori shop, but our machines are squarely from the Mori side (NLX, NHX), as is the case with most USA shops. If/when we pick up a mill-turn, it's going to be difficult to steer us away from the NTX. I'm not familiar with the DMG side of the things, other than the fact that the DMU line has been picking up traction here in the states.

    We also happen to be in Southern California, somewhat of a priority location for DMG Mori (high density of machine shops) and just a one hour flight from their Davis factory. For the minimal amount of service we've required, we've never had any issues with getting a tech in here.

    It sounds like the UK has similar advantages to Socal. Have you visited other shops to see what they have to say about the machines and service? Are any shops there running the NTX instead of the CTX?

  3. #23
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Country
    UNITED STATES
    State/Province
    Oregon
    Posts
    191
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    34
    Likes (Received)
    93

    Default

    I just have to point out that the FANUC CELOS control on the NTX and the SIEMENS CELOS control on the CTX don't share any similarities besides the CELOS apps.

    Also, I want to hear somebody with real experience on a wide variety of platforms say that the OSP is the best controller. I own a machine with an OSP300, and a machine with a Siemens 840D. I love the Okuma iron, but the Siemens controller is leaps and bounds superior.

    The CTX is a fantastic platform. However, in my experience they are very, very finicky. Comparing it to a Lambo (before the Germans took over) is a great comparison. If you have a good service network, and confidence that you will put the machine through the ringer before the warranty runs out, it might be okay.

  4. #24
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Country
    UNITED STATES
    State/Province
    Utah
    Posts
    4,360
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    1168
    Likes (Received)
    2392

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by boosted View Post
    Also, I want to hear somebody with real experience on a wide variety of platforms say that the OSP is the best controller.
    But I already posted. There is no comparison, OSP is better. Eventually you will see, especially if you're the person running it 2600 hours a year. IMO it's not even a topic worth discussing.

    R

  5. #25
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Country
    UNITED STATES
    State/Province
    Oregon
    Posts
    191
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    34
    Likes (Received)
    93

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by litlerob1 View Post
    But I already posted. There is no comparison, OSP is better. Eventually you will see, especially if you're the person running it 2600 hours a year. IMO it's not even a topic worth discussing.

    R
    Do you actually use a Siemens 840D?

  6. #26
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Aberdeen, UK
    Posts
    3,475
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    1213
    Likes (Received)
    1296

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by boosted View Post
    I own a machine with an OSP300, and a machine with a Siemens 840D. I love the Okuma iron, but the Siemens controller is leaps and bounds superior.
    Could you elaborate on that? Like I said, I have no experience with either so I'm really keen to get some hard information on this from people who know both.

    I am familiar with Fanuc, and I do know that I definitely don't want a Fanuc control on this machine. Doosan are keen to sell us one of their SMX machines, but it's a Fanuc. The SMX would probably be a good enough machine in production but that's not what we're buying this for. I want operator friendliness and features that will cut setup times and help me get the first part right first time, not an obtuse control that gets in the way. I also want a higher end machine with better thought out features and more carefully implemented control integration. I have a Doosan and some other Korean and Taiwanese machines, all Fanuc, and they are good enough for what they are, but they really have lots of niggling little things that are frustrating, on the hardware and the software side.

  7. #27
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Country
    UNITED STATES
    State/Province
    Oregon
    Posts
    191
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    34
    Likes (Received)
    93

    Default

    I have an M560V with the OSP300 controller. The machine is bulletproof. Literally zero issues in almost 4 years. I can't speak for the Multus, and I have zero experience with Okuma turning. I do have some experience with the CTX. It is an awesome platform, and I really like the Siemens integration on the CTX beta. However, as much as I do like them, DMG is not known for the robustness of any of their products. The CTX specifically is notorious for being full of "quirks".

    Here are some positives of each controller, in my super subjective view.

    840D:
    -Much, much more powerful automation, variable handling, etc.
    -Ability to use tool names at M6 instead of numbers.
    -Easier to navigate the tool management. Load monitoring, etc is really intuitive.
    -A conversational menu for almost every canned cycle, even when running posted code.
    -Ability to jog multiple axis simultaneously by hand.
    -Really good conversational probing menus, which can be run in jog mode.
    -Simulation can be done in the background, while something else is running.
    -Ability to write more than one line on an MDI command.
    -Much more "modern" navigation for the program manager.
    -There is no internal DNC. Massive programs handle loading, editing, etc exactly the same way as small ones.
    -Calling up sub programs from a main is really easy.

    OSP300
    -Registering new M or G codes is stupidly simple.
    -Nonmodal restarts are really quick, if you are picking up at a sequence number.

  8. #28
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    MT USA
    Posts
    47
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    0
    Likes (Received)
    7

    Default

    Having both Okuma and DMG here in the shop, I would have to say the 840D is the more user friendly control.

    Each has things that is does better than the other. It's really up to the experience of the operator.

    Iron wise, our Multus has been more reliable than the DMG. All of our DMG issues have been software related.

    I'd choose the brand that has the best service in your area.

  9. Likes dstryr liked this post
  10. #29
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Country
    UNITED STATES
    State/Province
    Utah
    Posts
    4,360
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    1168
    Likes (Received)
    2392

    Default

    @Boosted, everything you posted as plus' for the 840 you can do with OSP. EXCEPT jogging multiple Axes simultaneously (why someone would do that, no idea, but okay), and running a simulation in the background (I didn't know that, and sounds pretty cool).

    R

    If you use descriptors like "easier" and "more" please elaborate.

  11. #30
    Join Date
    Nov 2014
    Country
    UNITED STATES
    State/Province
    Colorado
    Posts
    2,703
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    3216
    Likes (Received)
    711

    Default

    @GregorW Have you seen or visited other shops in the Uk that have happily running CTX Beta 1250 TCs ?

    DMG ARE very good on the sales side.

    I have had Okuma reps / sales engineers also tell all kinds of "Porkies" about DMG machines.

    As you know the sales people don't engineer , build or maintain or supply actual technical support for the machines; I don't judge or get overly lured by the sales end of the business.


    It's all about connecting those dots, from MTB ---> Vendor + support ---> Client.


    Some of the problems DMG / celos side has also been for folks that have some trouble with NX and NX cam connecting all the dots properly there (has been a challenge for some USA based outfits) less so for European enterprises.


    Seems the number of "Dots" you have to connect will be less going with DMG.

    I believe Okuma HQ Europe is in Germany also.

    So if you have applications problem , a serious one the dots go like this...

    You ----> Vendor (Okuma UK) ---> (Okuma Germany / Europe) ----> (Okuma Japan) if it ever gets that far. and back.

    with DMG,

    You ---> competent support in UK (DMG) :--> Extra difficult issue ---> Bielfeld or Pfronten DMG HQ

    ^^^ That will be a much easier catch all.

    OTOH Okuma Multus (B axis mill turn) + ESPRIT (CAD CAM) seems like a very stable / well worked out solution.

    Depending on the complexity of your parts I'd still try to bust DMG's balls a bit to show a reliable well worked out and straight forward workflow for CAD/CAM with the CTX Beta 1250 TC. Get them to really prove that there is experienced applications support for that locally.


    __________________________________________________ __________________________________________________ ________________


    I'm not exactly saying that the Multus U3000 is a knock off of the Mazak Integrex layout but has striking similarities.


    It Seems the CTX Beta 1250 has solved some of the more practical and obstructive aspects of the integrex / Multus type layout, so that a greater range of workpieces can be machined / accomplished without issue.


    I have to admit you have kinda got me interested in the CTX Beta 1250 TC... Seems some of the extra complexity of the machine has been to make it more "Green"; From the broschure, "Needs based sealing air", "Breaking energy recover since 2009", "Regulated hydraulic unit", and clean up of other issues " Low oil leakage breaking cylinder", "Direct drive with asynchronous motor since 2009"...

    Seems they are keen to impress that various issues that there have been with such systems are now more stable and had the kinks ironed out ?

    __________________________________________________ __________________________________________________ _________________

    Curious isn't a new Multus U3000 in the $450K to $600K range... Is the CTX Beta 1250 (minimally specc's really the better chunk of $500K ? ).

    Ta.

  12. #31
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Country
    UNITED STATES
    State/Province
    Oregon
    Posts
    191
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    34
    Likes (Received)
    93

    Default

    litlerob

    Please correct me if I'm wrong, because I would love to get the OSP to behave as nicely as the 840D. There are a bunch of things the OSP can't do on that list.

    -The OSP doesn't have conversational menus for canned cycles on code that has been posted from CAM.
    -The OSP requires tool numbers, instead of names for tool changes. I want it to read like M6 T=".500 EM".
    -The OSP requires switching between A mode and B mode for handling large programs. Large program mode disables quick edit.
    -The OSP only allows single line MDI commands.
    -The OSP requires a specific syntax for naming of nested programs. Siemens literally just requires you to enter the name.

    Things like tool management, probing, etc are 100% subjective. However, this is why I asked if you actually use machines with the 840D controller. I can't see how anybody who is a power user at both controllers would think that the OSP handles those "subjective" things as well as the 840D.

    For "more" powerful parametric programming, there is no comparison. Just the fact that the 840D can handle strings makes it a winner. It's probably the premier industrial automation controller for complex custom equipment, not just something used by CNC machine tool builders. As a result, it gives the user an insane amount of power to dive into system variables, create their own permanent variables, interactive menus, etc...

    I'm not saying the Siemens 840D is the end-all-be-all. Every system has its merits. I just take offense to the claims that read like "the OSP is obviously the best controller for operators", because I would much rather run a machine with an 840D. Frankly, those claims read like something the HAAS fanboys would put up, and hopefully we are all in agreement that their controllers suck.

  13. Likes nscele liked this post
  14. #32
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Aberdeen, UK
    Posts
    3,475
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    1213
    Likes (Received)
    1296

    Default

    Rob/Boosted, I appreciate the argument you two are having! This is great information, and I am grateful.

    Boosted, when you say jog multiple axis simultaneously, do you mean jog along a virtual axis/tool vector/interpolated line/something else? And re. the conversational menus for posted code, you mean that if I post a canned cycle from cam I can pull that line up on the control in a conversational format for adjustments? Because that sounds like a really nice feature...

    Freeflyer, you say all your issues were software related. Were they quickly/easily rectified? DMG were talking big about their remote service system where they can fix control/software issues over the internet...

    Cameraman; I'm not too concerned about the cam workflow. I am confident I can make whatever work. I haven't visited others to look at machines or been to showrooms - neither Okuma nor DMG have the machine we're looking at on their showroom floor in this country and time for those kind of trips is hard to find right now. Also, the only shops I know of that have either of these machines even remotely local to us are not the kind of places that will let me walk in to look at their machines!

    Regarding construction, if you break them right down they all share the same fundamental design. Y/Z travelling column with vertical X. The only significant difference is the technology used for the B axis. Even the Taiwanese machines (Hyundai-Wia KM / Victor VTurn-X, probably others) use a cam roller B. I haven't studied the newer integrexes all that carefully I must admit. There's so many different models...

    The CTX does seem to have the "cleaner" workspace. The rep even pointed that out as one of the common reasons their customers choose the ctx over the ntx, and I must admit it's a big part of the appeal for me.

    Re. ironing out the kinks - they've been building more or less the same machine for over a decade now. I really have to wonder how many kinks are left unironed, and if there are some remaining, why?

  15. Likes cameraman liked this post
  16. #33
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Country
    UNITED STATES
    State/Province
    Oregon
    Posts
    191
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    34
    Likes (Received)
    93

    Default

    In regards to the Siemens questions:

    Almost every day on the mill I jog in X and Z at the same time, or Y and Z, or X and Y. It's not a huge deal, but it is a really nice feature. The buttons are setup in a way that makes this easy to do without looking.

    For conversational cycles, your interpretation is correct. Simply open up the mask on any canned cycle from the editor.

    g-code.jpg

    cycle.jpg

    buttons.jpg

  17. #34
    Join Date
    Nov 2014
    Country
    UNITED STATES
    State/Province
    Colorado
    Posts
    2,703
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    3216
    Likes (Received)
    711

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by gregormarwick View Post


    Re. ironing out the kinks - they've been building more or less the same machine for over a decade now. I really have to wonder how many kinks are left unironed, and if there are some remaining, why?
    Exactly; so really press them on that... IME with the sales "Peeps" for DMG Mori in my "Territory" they are actually really honest about those kind of things as they don't want their clients to tear their arses on these things and have to have the hassle of cleaning up the wreckage afterwards. The sales people I have dealt with over here have been really good/ responsible (in that way) and really want to help your business grow for a longer term successful partnership than just sell one "Dodgy" machine and watch you slowly tank 'cuz they couldn't bridge the gaps that were beyond their control. [Not saying that never happens, but at least they usually won't want to repeat that and prefer to stear clients to a different machine if one of their lines proves genuinely problematic and bad for business all round.].

    Really press and ask them as to what improvements have been made to the machine, and really press them for service and reliability issues of that platform. General history and things to watch for. If there's some likely failures for things that wear out or go weird sooner than they should then that needs to be budgeted for. They can reach to their deeper bench from Germany for that kind of info.

  18. #35
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Country
    UNITED STATES
    State/Province
    Utah
    Posts
    4,360
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    1168
    Likes (Received)
    2392

    Default

    Some part of this conversation seems to be missing.

    Are we talking Siemens attached to a 9 Axis Lathe? Or even a 5 Axis (no sub)?

    I'm sorry but the features listed are preferences(tool name vs number) just seems silly to me. I've never needed to switch from A to B unless I'm dripping. I honestly have no idea what a "conversational menu for canned cycles, posted from CAM" means.

    Robert, proficient with most Fanuc controls, OSP from U10 on, Haas, Prototrak, Omniturn, Centurion, Mazatrol, Rebel, NOT Siemens. Mastersuk, Gibbscam, Esprit, Featurecam, Inventor, Catia.

  19. #36
    Join Date
    Nov 2014
    Country
    UNITED STATES
    State/Province
    Colorado
    Posts
    2,703
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    3216
    Likes (Received)
    711

    Default

    @GregorW are you getting the linear drive option on the Z axis ?

  20. #37
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    Finland
    Posts
    14
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    0
    Likes (Received)
    3

    Default

    The tool name vs number can be a matter of preference and much about work enviroment as well. There is no right or wrong here. Prefer a name because it's easier to remember.

    Regardless of machine type, 9/5/4 axis machine, we use same names, and same "rule of thumb", there was a time when someone had different idea of name/number of the tool, and we end up having to change name/number between setups even though the tool was same (Ok this is bad management).

    I don't know what size parts you are planning to hold, but be wary of work area specially in radial direction.

    For some reason we had different manufacturer chuck on one of the machines, from berg. It had very very limited supply of possible jaws to choose from, up to point where we had to actually manufacture some of them ourself.

  21. #38
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Country
    UNITED STATES
    State/Province
    Utah
    Posts
    4,360
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    1168
    Likes (Received)
    2392

    Default

    If you guys want to use the name of the Tool, instead of the Tool number that's fine. I doubt anyone will tell you it's wrong. BUT I gotta tell ya, you'll be the odd man out. I don't know anyone who does it. And without parentheses it won't work on any othe interface. T1M6 is the standard for Milling Machines.

    R

  22. #39
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Country
    UNITED STATES
    State/Province
    Washington
    Posts
    4,384
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    803
    Likes (Received)
    2362

    Default

    Name versus number seems a trivial thing. One can always add the tool name as a comment on the tool line with most any control.

    Based on past experiences, I'd be more concerned about long term Siemens support. A super U/I or tool calls by name is little good if your 10-15 year old machine is hard to get control or servo/spindle drive parts for. Hopefully Siemens is doing a better job now than in the past. They would have to work hard to earn my confidence on that point.


    Quote Originally Posted by litlerob1 View Post
    ......T1M6 is the standard for Milling Machines.
    M6 T1 (TOOL DESCRIPTION HERE) is the standard for my Mori.....

  23. #40
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Near Seattle
    Posts
    4,666
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    2911
    Likes (Received)
    1232

    Default

    Heidinhein's allow names for tool loads, but the HH ".h" language has a different class of stripes from the other controls being discussed - note, however, that it is semantically "g-code".

    More to Gregor's question - I have a DMU60 which faults out whenever the B-axis is swiveled at full rapid - DMG and I spent months, and in the end 10s of K in 2016, and we were never able to fix it, even when various consultants were called in. (It was long out of warranty.)

    Mill turns are complicated beasts, and it seems that even largeish machine tool builders are not super consistent in their integrations (in part because they all seem to have options catalogs that go on for 100s of pages.)

    And so you might think long and hard about whether the particular configurations you need are center-of-business common-configuration for that vendor. Put another way, you don't want the only Multus on Earth with a particular control, nor the only TC Beta on Earth with some arrangement.

    I would also suggest you require all manuals be made available to you, in searchable form, and you that you get to verify that the manuals accurately describe the machine. (I have a lathe with a Siemans control, and the manuals and the machine disagree about all manner of things. This gets old fast.) [So if the manual says that if parameter XYZ123 = 1 means the machine speaks sublanguage A, and you find by experiment that it actually speaks sublanguage B, even though XYZ123 is clearly == 1, well, that's a bad omen.] (This is unrelated to the DMU, a different machine.)


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
  •