Fagor 8055 4th axis turn direction definition

[thomaspilot1991]

Hi everyone,
I am using a three axis mill with an additional A-Axis, with a Fagor 8055 controller. I am having trouble with the way that the Fagor 8055 post processor is defining a-axis values.
According to the Fagor 8055 installation manual a "normal" rotary axis (Rollover=Yes, Limit +/-=0 ) counts between 0 and 360 degrees, while the sign defines the turn direction. There are a couple of ways that a rotary axis can be defined, and this one seems to be the most logical to me (see attached picture below). However I can´t get Fusion to define a-axis movements in that way.
A functioning solution would be the Limit+/-=8000, Rollover=no -definition, but this would require an unnecessary rewind in case of more than 22 full rotations.
Is there a way of setting this up correctly in Fusion or by changing sth in the post processor?

Many regards,
Thomas

[a.laasW8M6T]

Hi, try the attached post, you will need to select the axis the rotary is on in the config:

What I changed was adding a function that give a sign for the direction rather than shortest path traverse.

This can be found in the post training guide section 7.2

Make sure you test carefully, as I'm still not sure that this will solve your problem

[thomaspilot1991]

Hi there,
thanks so much, you are a savior!
I am running a G-code on my machine as I am writing this and it works basically perfect straight away.
Only two minor details appeared:
- the post sometimes writes A-360. My machine complains about that, says the max value is 359.999, so i had to replace those lines with A-0. Not really an issue, just wondering how your machine handles that?
- it forgets to define the A position at the beginning. Was that a change that you implemented? The standart post always wirtes that line, wether the A-Axis is in use or not, usually a simple G0 A0.

Regards and many thanks,

Thomas

[a.laasW8M6T]

Hi, I don't have a Fagor controlled mill, We have Heidenhain, which doesn't have the limitations that the Fagor seems to have, The Heidenhain just treats 360 as 0, and also doesn't need a linear scale output for the rotary(Which is the mod I did for you)

I have updated the post to limit the range to +- 359.999 so you shouldn't get any +- 360 anymore

As far as it putting out A0, I tried the standard post and it doesn't seem to do this for me, I do get this behavior with my machine if I have a machine selected in the setup though.

[thomaspilot1991]

Hi and thanks again!
I am still getting the "A-360" line. I have the feeling that it will need a line of code that says as much as: if value equals 360 then insert 0. I will try to put that in and let you know!

Many regards,
Thomas

[a.laasW8M6T]

Ahh OK, in my testing it seemed to work but that could have been a fluke.

This is a bit beyond my amateur skills in post editing.

It may be worth reaching out to a Professional to get the correct results

You can search for some one in your area here:

https://customersuccess.autodesk.com/partners/search?search=&solutions%5B%5D=Fusion%20360&services%5...

[thomaspilot1991]

Hi,
I have good news. After some trial and error, I managed to insert the afore mentioned function into the post. It now works like the Fagor control needs it to (aka 0-359.999 degrees, +/- defines direction, A360 is A0 and A-360 is A-0).

Beyond that I had a second issue with the post, that I did not mention here but also read in other parts of the forum. Despite activating the "Use G16" option, that would avoid the usage of G17/18/19, I still got a G17 at several places throughout my G Codes. Up until now I always deleted them manually and that was it. I now found that several places in the post that did not have the "conditional" function for writing G17, so I inserted it in the missing places.

So I replaced "gPlaneModal.format(17)" with "conditional(!getProperty("useG16"), gPlaneModal.format(17))".
I found it written this way in other places in the post and simply copy-pasted it from there. This works now and no unwanted G17 appears in the finished G Code.

I want to thank you again for your help!
I have attached the post file to this message. If anyone uses it please do so at your own risk. It works for my machine but please proceed carefully.

Many regards,
Thomas