Since new postprocessor setup, the view on my HURCO graphics monitor is weird

[harriebouwens]

Using the new post processor setup, and the latest Hurco post processor the graphical monitor of our HURCO VM10, the part looks different. The old.jpg is from an NC file with the old setup/postprocessor, the new.jpg is from the latest combination.

In the attached pictures it is visible. In the "Old" the part to be machined is visible. In the "New" a kind of overview is visible, but not the part.

No changes have been made to the graphical monitor

What is the reason, and what to do to solve it

[seth.madore]

My guess is that you've selected the incorrect post processor. Are you regularly using posts from the generic library, or were you proactive and saved one to your personal library or the Cloud?

[John_Wright]

I'm with Seth on this one, it looks like the wrong post processor. Can you run "check for errors" on the Hurco console? It may be doing what my Hurco did and just drawing something up to the first g-code that is doesn't understand without flagging an error.

[harriebouwens]

The Hurco.cps I used so far didn't work with the new post processor menu, so I loaded from the same site as before a new Hurco.cps site as before

[harriebouwens]

I Will use youre check for errors'

[harriebouwens]

In the meantime I tried all the Graphics settings F8, but no change in view.  Tomorrow we will try the Check for errors F4.

[harriebouwens]

Seth,

What postprocessor should I use else  for my HURCO .

In the screenshot is the one I downloaded

[seth.madore]

What vintage is your Hurco?

[harriebouwens]

Seth,  Maybe vintage but it is a good working mill center HURCO VM10, perfect for the jobs to do

[seth.madore]

Oh, it wasn't a slight on the quality and capability of the machine, but more a question as to whether you choose that post processor, or THIS one

 

[harriebouwens]

We will try this one too, thanks

[seth.madore]

And give some heed to the different modes of posting code with that post processor; ISNC (ISO NC mode) or optional BNC (Basic NC mode).

[harriebouwens]

Seth, I tried the hurco3d version but get the same result, and isn't ISNC the only version for the HURCO?

It seems that the screen shows the complete volume, from toolchange position up to the solid to machine.

[serge.quiblier]

Hi @harriebouwens 

Can you share your previous post processor?

I don't see any reason for a post processor not to work with the newer posting dialog.

As the new and old dialog have cohabited for a year, and we have not modified the posts in any ways for supporting the new dialog.

Your older post should always work, BUT you may have lost some default settings, making it unsuitable now.

It can be just a matter of resetting the values.

Can you explain the errors you encountered with the new dialog, please?

Regards

______________________________________________________________

If my post answers your question, please click the "Accept Solution" button. This helps everyone find answers more quickly!

[harriebouwens]

sorry Seth, BNC is also possible, we will try

[harriebouwens]

Serge,

that is exactly my opinion, but....

My troubleshooting 

step 1  Using the old .cps with the old dialog  >>> no errors, working as it should do

step 2  Using the old .cps  with the new dialog >> not working, not found out why

step 3  Using the new .cps with the new dialog >> working

             - but strange graphical view on the machine
             - no errors found on the machine,  tried different graphical settings 

             - the machine does the job as usual

If settings in the dialog are the reason, what setting could cause the graphical effect

[billcainautodesk]

Hello harriebouwens

I made a part with a similar pocket. I compared the old vs the new code. The old code is outputting arcs (G2/G3) on G18 and G19 planes but not outputting the plane code. The new post is linearizing the arcs for those planes. This might cause some of the issue. I ran both through WinMax Desktop and both looked like the pocket I made. I have the newest version of WinMax. Not sure that makes a difference. Can you share your NC Code for both the good and bad simulation? If so I can see what happens here. 

[serge.quiblier]

i @harriebouwens 

In the old postpro, we don't have a property to select the safe positionning method, selecting between G53 and Clearance Height.
Default properties in both posts are set identically.
Generating a simple facing operation is giving the exact same program. (but just one operation, on toolpath...so not an extensive test)
As we are not outputting any function or commands, to define the simulation view, i don't see anything in the program that could cause issue.
(On siemens or heidenhain we are passing the stock defintion between Fusion and the nc program, but NOT on Hurco controllers)

[harriebouwens]

Defenitely the postprocessor caused the error. I tried another local Hurco.cps and everything is as before. I attached the succesfull PP 

[serge.quiblier]

Can you please a gcode created by each post, with the same Fusion document?

I want to check something with you session and files.