Are new machines today meaningfully better than older machines? - Page 5
Close
Login to Your Account
Page 5 of 7 FirstFirst ... 34567 LastLast
Results 81 to 100 of 130
  1. #81
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Gilbert, AZ
    Posts
    7,334
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    9822
    Likes (Received)
    9382

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by boosted View Post
    I used to share your distaste for touchscreens on industrial equipment, but when done right - they are actually a pretty big improvement. @wheelieking I bet if you try it (a good industrial touchscreen) you will like it. And I bet Garwood would find the same. Typically the complaints only come from folks who haven't actually owned one.
    That was why I made my admission. After learning through about 10 mins on google, I figured my "opinion" was in-valid (I didn't know WTF I was talking about! LOL).
    I can be schooled. I'll only argue if I know for certain I'm right HAHAHA

  2. Likes boosted, gregormarwick liked this post
  3. #82
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Location
    Hondo, TX
    Posts
    32
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    1
    Likes (Received)
    11

    Default

    IMO we are on the verge of a major evolution. With all of the open source software and more programmers getting into CNC like arenas, I believe we will see major changes in how we interact with the machines. To me the current state of things seems archaic, I envision augmented reality programming, LIDAR generated simulations, quasi AI programming like removing air cuts based on my model rather than me telling etc. My biggest hope is high level programming rather than G-code and I believe this is only a matter of time.

    I use Mastercam quite extensively, The simulations take forever to set up correctly and use a lot of computer power. The $150 3d print slicer I just bought generates a CNC simulation is milliseconds.

  4. #83
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Country
    UNITED STATES
    State/Province
    Oregon
    Posts
    868
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    249
    Likes (Received)
    667

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Badbascom View Post
    My biggest hope is high level programming rather than G-code and I believe this is only a matter of time.
    I'm hoping with you, but I don't think it's going to happen anytime soon.

    There is no financial incentive (though there may be a dis-incentive) for a machine tool builder to adopt and support something significantly more substantial than G-code. Some CNC languages definitely do offer more parametric capabilities, but the basics of motion control are only slightly improved from the paper tape these machines used when machine tool automation fist started.

  5. #84
    Join Date
    Nov 2015
    Country
    UNITED STATES
    State/Province
    Colorado
    Posts
    481
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    94
    Likes (Received)
    269

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by wheelieking71 View Post
    Okay, I need to make an admission here: I have never used a touch-screen on a machine-tool. And until this thread, I thought the technology was all the same (touch-screen).
    I had no idea until I hit google after this thread went off that tangent, that there were different touch-screen technologies.
    Having said that: the reason I hate touch screens: my sausage fingers, for whatever reason? do not make them work as intended! Not at all!
    This is based on phones and lap-tops. Me trying to do anything important on my phone is a fucking disaster! And a huge time-suck! Because, the shit doesn't fucking work!
    Wait wait you're shitting on a touchscreen and you say you've never used one...what the fuck? Attaboy. Calling me out for being a troll!

  6. #85
    Join Date
    Nov 2015
    Country
    UNITED STATES
    State/Province
    Colorado
    Posts
    481
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    94
    Likes (Received)
    269

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by wheelieking71 View Post
    What in the ever lovin' fuck are you smoking?

    I have a good buddy that has a '95 Dodge truck that has well over a million miles on it. And every single piece of plastic on that truck has fallen apart.
    The instrument cluster is literally zip-tied to the cowl because the dash-board (plastic) disintegrated.

    I also know of a 1962 Dodge Dart with a 170/6 in it, that has over 900,000 miles with nothing more than fluids,tires,brakes.

    "The bones of the cars haven't changed that much" are you kidding me???!!!

    2009 Chevy Malibu vs 1959 Bel Air Crash Test | Consumer Reports - YouTube

    Yea, haven't changed at all!

    I'm gonna stop now. I could totally destroy every single word in the above quote. You have no freaking clue man.

    My points have absolutely nothing to do with interface/comfort/safety. Only longevity. Not mileage (as you suggest). TIME!

    How old are you anyway?
    What does my age have to do with it? Im 33 for your information...and I have been in machine shops since I was 18. I guess my ego is too large to handle because I oppose your point of view? I guess I am not a real machinist because I think new machines are better than 90s era machines?

  7. #86
    Join Date
    Nov 2015
    Country
    UNITED STATES
    State/Province
    Colorado
    Posts
    481
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    94
    Likes (Received)
    269

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by gregormarwick View Post
    Man, just go and take a look at the first few pages of his posting history and don't waste your time. Just another inexperienced inflated ego.
    Sooooo pretty much every machinist on this forum?

    I wouldn't say I am inexperienced. Maybe less experienced than you and many others.

  8. #87
    Join Date
    Nov 2015
    Country
    UNITED STATES
    State/Province
    Colorado
    Posts
    481
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    94
    Likes (Received)
    269

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Badbascom View Post
    IMO we are on the verge of a major evolution. With all of the open source software and more programmers getting into CNC like arenas, I believe we will see major changes in how we interact with the machines. To me the current state of things seems archaic, I envision augmented reality programming, LIDAR generated simulations, quasi AI programming like removing air cuts based on my model rather than me telling etc. My biggest hope is high level programming rather than G-code and I believe this is only a matter of time.

    I use Mastercam quite extensively, The simulations take forever to set up correctly and use a lot of computer power. The $150 3d print slicer I just bought generates a CNC simulation is milliseconds.
    Can you explain this simulation with a 3D printer? Are you saying it models your toolpath results as an STL faster than Mastercam can run a sim?

  9. #88
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    CT
    Posts
    8,443
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    464
    Likes (Received)
    2266

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Badbascom View Post
    My biggest hope is high level programming rather than G-code and I believe this is only a matter of time.
    You know, this exact comment pops up on PM regularly about twice or three times a year, almost ( actually always ) by someone who couldn't program his/her way
    out of a paper bag.

    And then the return question is: What do you mean by "higher level programming language"?
    What is it that G-code cannot convey to the electronic guts of the machinetool?

    (This fossil is eagerly awaiting your comprehensive response...)

  10. Likes empwoer liked this post
  11. #89
    Join Date
    Nov 2015
    Country
    UNITED STATES
    State/Province
    Colorado
    Posts
    481
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    94
    Likes (Received)
    269

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SeymourDumore View Post
    You know, this exact comment pops up on PM regularly about twice or three times a year, almost ( actually always ) by someone who couldn't program his/her way
    out of a paper bag.

    And then the return question is: What do you mean by "higher level programming language"?
    What is it that G-code cannot convey to the electronic guts of the machinetool?

    (This fossil is eagerly awaiting your comprehensive response...)
    Didn't STEP-NC already try this and fail? Well, they succeeded in technical terms but it didn't take off like they expected. I personally think it is just hard to convey everything necessary for a machine to make a part without any operator intervention including hitting all tolerances and doing all offsets. Yes probing can handle this quite well but we would be talking about every feature...on some components the only way to verify a process is to run a surface scan using a CMM to capture the data.

    As far as I am concerned most programmers aren't sitting there finger CAMming all day, they use CAM software for that and perhaps they need to make some cursory changes to the posted code but if your posted code is really bad then that calls for a post-edit, which IS a more high level than Gcode. The "high level" coding is taking place on the CAM system and the post with the software devs and post-houses. The output is still gcode because Gcode just works really well. It is simple language. I would much rather interact with a nice GUI CAM system than have to learn a new high-level machine control language that seeks to replace Gcode...of course unless it is actually the best thing since sliced bread. No one has gotten that nailed yet.

  12. Likes mhajicek liked this post
  13. #90
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Country
    UNITED STATES
    State/Province
    Oregon
    Posts
    868
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    249
    Likes (Received)
    667

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SeymourDumore View Post
    You know, this exact comment pops up on PM regularly about twice or three times a year, almost ( actually always ) by someone who couldn't program his/her way
    out of a paper bag.

    And then the return question is: What do you mean by "higher level programming language"?
    What is it that G-code cannot convey to the electronic guts of the machinetool?

    (This fossil is eagerly awaiting your comprehensive response...)
    For me personally, I don't care at all about "improved" motion handling (unless it speeds up the machine). However, I would love to see a language that had better variable handling, ability to compile, robust file generating and interrogating capabilities, etc... etc... Something like C# or VB.

    That stuff is not important for 99% of use cases, but some of us would certainly utilize more parametric power if it was available. AFAIK the Siemens language is as close as it gets to a "real" programming language, and I think it has about half of the functionality I'd like to see.

    CAD/CAM will always be the life-breath of our shop, but we have also developed quite a bit of machine-side automation that makes life a lot easier. I wish we had better tools to automate even more.

  14. #91
    Join Date
    Jun 2016
    Country
    UNITED STATES
    State/Province
    Minnesota
    Posts
    251
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    73
    Likes (Received)
    112

    Default

    You got shops that are in house production that still think it's a good idea to by a Mazak with Mazatrol( no offense to Toolcat or job shop). So any new programming language wont happen for another 30yrs if anything.

    What is happening...oh wait you don't need to know nothin. Just put this doo dad model directly in the control and it will do everything for you no questions asked!

    BANG!

  15. #92
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    CT
    Posts
    8,443
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    464
    Likes (Received)
    2266

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by boosted View Post
    AFAIK the Siemens language is as close as it gets to a "real" programming language, and I think it has about half of the functionality I'd like to see.
    Splain' to me Lucy!
    What do Siemens controls do so different from all others?

  16. #93
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Midwestern MN/Wi USA
    Posts
    1,419
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    74
    Likes (Received)
    406

    Default

    I like the guys that say..."its new technology to take a bunch off with a little endmill". Newer machines are using more tested methods and more creature comforts. But for machining in general we are still using a semi blunt edge traveling at a certain speed to crack the bonds of materials. Its time to start using high speed EDMing instead. Remember the law of thermo-dynamics in reguards to the conservation of energy. It wont be long before california says 1lb of chips per every kilowatt of energy by 2050...just because the english did it first.

  17. #94
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Midwestern MN/Wi USA
    Posts
    1,419
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    74
    Likes (Received)
    406

    Default

    Yes true story. The AI will figure it out. Underwear fits both sides and has no inside out anymore.


    Quote Originally Posted by EndlessWaltz View Post
    You got shops that are in house production that still think it's a good idea to by a Mazak with Mazatrol( no offense to Toolcat or job shop). So any new programming language wont happen for another 30yrs if anything.

    What is happening...oh wait you don't need to know nothin. Just put this doo dad model directly in the control and it will do everything for you no questions asked!

    BANG!

  18. #95
    Join Date
    May 2018
    Country
    UNITED STATES
    State/Province
    Missouri
    Posts
    18
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    2
    Likes (Received)
    6

    Default

    this is the one that got me interested in machining..

    5Axis Machine Cutting HELMET / DAISHIN SEIKI CORPORATION - YouTube

  19. #96
    Join Date
    Nov 2014
    Country
    UNITED STATES
    State/Province
    Florida
    Posts
    6,336
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    2523
    Likes (Received)
    3137

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by metalmadness View Post
    Can you explain this simulation with a 3D printer? Are you saying it models your toolpath results as an STL faster than Mastercam can run a sim?
    I think what he means is the software will 'slice' (create layers) a fairly large file in next to no time and you can preview (similar to a simulation) what the print will look like with supports and such.

    But I don't know what he means about it taking forever to set up a simulation in Mastercam?? Most of the time I am using the stock setup value (default) in the simulator, click the button, pops up, click play, done....

    Even using a pre-existing stock model from say the first op, just click the setup button, click stock model, done...

  20. #97
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Country
    UNITED STATES
    State/Province
    Oregon
    Posts
    868
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    249
    Likes (Received)
    667

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SeymourDumore View Post
    Splain' to me Lucy!
    What do Siemens controls do so different from all others?
    They have much, much more powerful automation tools, variable handling capabilities, and tool management than a regular FANUC or FANUC-like controller. Just the ability to name variables and pass strings (including text) as variables is pretty big, so you can actually do some cool stuff with text like parse tool names out of a program.

    Imagine the difference between Macro B and C#. Siemens language is not as powerful as the latter, but it's at least halfway there. It opens up a lot of capabilities for those who like to write machine-side automation for things like probing and interfacing with other equipment.

  21. #98
    Join Date
    Apr 2018
    Country
    UNITED STATES MINOR OUTLYING ISLANDS
    Posts
    8,847
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    0
    Likes (Received)
    4292

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by boosted View Post
    They have much, much more powerful automation tools, variable handling capabilities, and tool management than a regular FANUC or FANUC-like controller. The ability to pass strings is pretty big, so you can actually do some cool stuff with text like parse tool names out of a program.
    Fanuc 6's often came with FAPT. Kicks butt over anything that's been created by a bunch of dorks in Mum's basement since.

    Everything you are excited about has been around for fifty years. Besides STEP, there was a big push (but not from builders) to put the post into the control so you could drop a CL file from any cam program directly into the control, no posts. That went nowhere. And K&T plus others had "Advanced Programming Language" in their controls that would do everything you've mentioned plus more. Adaptive control was around in the late seventies. Nothing new, except the modern implementations are by people who never ran a machine and don't have a clue what's important or useful, e.g. "parse tool names out of a program". Like that's so difficult with a simple grep, wah. And useful, too. Pfffft.

  22. #99
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Country
    UNITED STATES
    State/Province
    Oregon
    Posts
    868
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    249
    Likes (Received)
    667

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by EmanuelGoldstein View Post
    Everything you are excited about has been around for fifty years. Besides STEP, there was a big push (but not from builders) to put the post into the control so you could drop a CL file from any cam program directly into the control, no posts. That went nowhere. And K&T plus others had "Advanced Programming Language" in their controls that would do everything you've mentioned plus more. Adaptive control was around in the late seventies. Nothing new, except the modern implementations are by people who never ran a machine and don't have a clue what's important or useful, e.g. "parse tool names out of a program". Like that's so difficult with a simple grep, wah. And useful, too. Pfffft.
    I have posted in detail some of the stuff we have done with automation in other threads. I promise you it can't be done (at least in an as-equipped fashion) with a FANUC. It's not just parsing names from programs. Do I have to go through it all in detail to satisfy you?

    I completely agree that the ability to do some novel shit has been around for decades. It just hasn't found it's way into most of the mainstream CNC controllers. Don't be so antsy to shit on everything that you run off the last of us that actually have relevant feedback. Just like you my roots run deep in this industry, and I don't appreciate being dismissed as a wide-eyed newbie...

    There have been innovations in the last few decades, and you're missing out if you can't stop telling everyone how you had the world by the balls in 1982.

  23. Likes empwoer, Keyfox, mountie liked this post
  24. #100
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    CT
    Posts
    8,443
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    464
    Likes (Received)
    2266

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by boosted View Post
    They have much, much more powerful automation tools, variable handling capabilities, and tool management than a regular FANUC or FANUC-like controller. Just the ability to name variables and pass strings (including text) as variables is pretty big, so you can actually do some cool stuff with text like parse tool names out of a program.

    Imagine the difference between Macro B and C#. Siemens language is not as powerful as the latter, but it's at least halfway there. It opens up a lot of capabilities for those who like to write machine-side automation for things like probing and interfacing with other equipment.
    I still fail to see the shortcomings of G-code in that post.
    Is the control capable of some fancy things? Sure, but that's got nothing to do with G-code.
    Makino Wire EDM's Hyper-I control is a pretty fancy front end, it is capable of some amazing stuff.
    Hell, the latest generation even has an Alexa-like interface ( I've asked the install guy to kindly keep that portion neatly wrapped in the original packaging and away from me )
    They (Makino) did such a nice job with the GUI, that even though it is a Windows based front end, in no part can you detect a single Windows-like icon, text, behavior or graphical depiction.

    And yet, the actual machine commands are G-code with a Fanuc controller in the background.
    I am sure that if they so decide that to equip the machines with a built-in self leveling capability, a single G378 V0 H0 command could activate it.

    Look at Mori's Celos controls.
    Do you think it's hindered by G-code?
    The UI is the UI, regardless whether it has a Fanuc, Siemens or Mits back end.
    They all have their strengths and weaknesses, but the fact that they're all commanded by G-code is not one of them!


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
  •