Ron,
Running Mach 3.042.040 and TW V.04.

I am seeing different code when a run a process in TW vs going back to Mach3.  For example in TW once I do a tool change it won't post the code in TW, it assumes TC was done.  It skips the move to the TC position and starts the next operation.  If I exit and run the same file in Mach it post the code with the TC first and then it moves to the TC position.   If I go back to TW and look at the code there it is the same as when in Mach, that is it does the TC and then the move to the TC position.

If I run say a TC and then a Facing op in TW the end of the Facing op has a M3 command.  No other ops follow so an M5 would make sense to me.   Now if I go back to TW from Mach and look at the code there is no M command at the end.

Maybe I am thinking about this wrong since I haven't used TW that much yet, but I would like to see the code more consistent when I run a file in TW vs Mach.

Thanks,
George

The tool change issues were fixed in the latest version. Go the top reply in this topic to get the code.

The wizard creates a file called New Program.tap No changes are made to the file when you exit from the wizard, unless there is no license. I dont see how you can see  different code when view directly in Mach. The file end button adds an M30 to the end of the file. If you exit the wizard without the file end you wont have that M30 so Mach may not display the end of the file correctly

Ron,
I am running version .04 I downloaded it this morning.  In TW the move to TC position is before the TC, when I go to Mach the code that shows up has the TC then the move to the TC position.
George

Been a bit busy on the lathe today I am afraid so never got much testing done, did manage to do a rough turn on dia and then a finish turn and it seemed fine although I did get an cypress error, forgot to bring the screenshot home with me I am afraid so cant post, will attach tomorrow.
Also still cant bore due to the negative values for X that I need, do you think you will get that worked out or is it going to be a problem?

One thing that gets me every time is the Start X , I keep putting in the dia of the stock and it will run a pass at that dia so have to remember to deduct my DOC from stock so as not to waste a pass. Also similar on a finish pass, say its 52mm dia and I want to take to 50mm with DOC of 1mm then it will do two passes if I put in 52 as start and 50 as end, first pass being 52mm. So what is needed is 50mm for X start and 50mm for X End, just seems a bit strange to have to do that?
Hood

Oh just to say my Toolchange was fine with this version.
Hood

Also still cant bore due to the negative values for X that I need, do you think you will get that worked out or is it going to be a problem?

I fixed the DRO so you can enter negative numbers. I still have the test and error message. I suppose I could make the message just a warning, and go ahead and post the code. If you are using a back tool you will understand the message.

One thing that gets me every time is the Start X , I keep putting in the dia of the stock and it will run a pass at that dia so have to remember to deduct my DOC from stock so as not to waste a pass. Also similar on a finish pass, say its 52mm dia and I want to take to 50mm with DOC of 1mm then it will do two passes if I put in 52 as start and 50 as end, first pass being 52mm. So what is needed is 50mm for X start and 50mm for X End, just seems a bit strange to have to do that?

I thought about that for a while. It seems wrong to make Xstart the stock value, then start cutting at a different number. Making Xstart be the actual start value seems more correct.

Yes message would be fine for me.

Any CAM I have used works on stock dia and makes the first cut as stock minus DOC but only used a couple of different CAMs on the lathe so maybe thats not the norm?.
Hood

I agree with Hood

I on Mazak's and in Mastercam you enter stock size, not first cut.

If i have a 1.0 diam. and I want to take .0312 depth of cut, I would need to 1.0 - .0312 = .9688.

So I would need a calculator, or do the math in my head. Too easy to mess up, or typo.

I would trust the software over my brain most days.

Or if I need to change depth of cut I also need to change start of cut. (the way it is now)

Also it would be nice to have 4 places after "." for us inch guys

Would it be hard to add a mm/inch button? This way you could have 3.4 for inch and 4.3 for mm?

Thanks, Mike

I agree that the stock size makes sense on the turn operation. But then in other screens, like face or taper, it seems Xstart should be the exact start size of the first cut. So if I made turn be stock size it would make Xstart inconsistent.

Would it be hard to add a mm/inch button? This way you could have 3.4 for inch and 4.3 for mm?

That cannot be done, the size of the DROs is set in the screenset design process, it cannot be altered by code. Do guys really use 4 decimal places in turn code? Im happy when I get my turn stuff right to a thou :-)

Do guys really use 4 decimal places in turn code?

I do.
Ron,
Four decimal places is a practical limit. Some machines will not achieve it but there are some which will or spllt that thou.
Additionaly for threading, the three decimal places will affect lead and class fit.

I would say that the code / software should never be a determining factor on the accuracy for a machining operation.

RICH