Multi-path (multi-channel) control support

Multi-path (multi-channel) control support

steveHDPJT
Advocate Advocate
2,298 Views
6 Replies
Message 1 of 7

Multi-path (multi-channel) control support

steveHDPJT
Advocate
Advocate

Is there any plan for Fusion to support multi-channel/multi-path controls for lathes/millturns/swiss machines with multiple turrets and multiple control channels? A very rudimentary version could be cobbled together I feel, if it was simply able to show multiple setups with the operations lists side by side and allow insertion of synchronization/wait codes to separate/sync the operations as required. 

2,299 Views
6 Replies
Replies (6)
Message 2 of 7

seth.madore
Community Manager
Community Manager

It's on our long-term list of manufacturing goals, but nothing that's going to make an appearance in the short term.


Seth Madore
Customer Advocacy Manager - Manufacturing


0 Likes
Message 3 of 7

Infernalmecanix
Enthusiast
Enthusiast

Hi Steve,

I also need something like this for my nakamura mill turn lathe. I am trying to work out how it all goes together. See here:

 

https://forums.autodesk.com/t5/fusion-360-manufacture/nakamura-tome-tw10mm-lathe-with-fanuc18-contro...

 

I am no post expert and will try to find someone to pay to do this as I need it now. It looks like you can hack something together with two setups and manually inserting a few variables (distance between end of job and grab collet etc), just about doable for me but no good for a swiss (to complicated). Bit of a disappointment fusion can not handle this. I have no idea what other software options there are - esprit I think but get ready to take a second mortgage...

 

Please post your thoughts on all this.

 

cheers! James

0 Likes
Message 4 of 7

steveHDPJT
Advocate
Advocate

I don't know, it's the cheapest CAM software out there, not really too surprised when it can't do the most complex stuff for $500k+ machines. If you were to complain about turning tool definitions being painful or drawings still being a steaming turd and lacking truly basic functionality, then yes I'd agree.

 

We do actually program a Swiss machine on it currently, just posting out movement code and pasting into a two-path editor, but it's quite a lot of steps, a heavily modified post, and a lot of potential for human error. Esprit, Mastercam, Featurecam, Solidcam, NX etc all have multi-path options, and they all cost about as much as 20 years of Fusion subscriptions at current pricing. Our Tornos swiss machine has macros for part pickoff etc that asks you for part length, collet nose length, how far on to the part you want to grab, and then goes and does it all for you. It would be relatively easy to write yourself a macro that does the same things and requests all the necessary variables from you, calculates the necessary subspindle position and then goes and grabs the part. We just use the Nakamura-provided templates in Manual Guide-i on our other lathe for pickoff though. Hand-wheel the subspindle position in to where we want it, enter the value, and we're good. You could use ManualNC to do that, or modify your part handling (subspindle grab, partoff, subspindle return) using the Fusion commands.

 

It is pretty easy to use the Manual NC function in setups to write your wait codes into the CAM, without requiring any post mods. Click Setup --> ManualNC, select type as "pass through" (meaning whatever you type in there will get passed through to the output .nc file without being changed at all, so you can write something like "M901;" in the box and "M901;" will then get written into your output file verbatim - no quotation marks needed but end-of-blocks are), create a bunch of them from M100 to M120 (or however many wait codes you think you'll ever need at max), give each function the same name as its wait code (or something like Wait 1, Wait 2, etc) and then you can drag and drop them in between operations as required to have it insert the wait codes in the output. 

 

There are some potential traps to be aware of with doing this, like if you put wait codes between two operations with the same tool, the post won't recognize anything you've written in the ManualNC window (it just copies & pastes it into the output file without reading it), so it won't necessarily retract or force a tool change or do any of the things you might typically expect it to do otherwise. Fusion also won't read/interpret anything you write in a ManualNC in any way as you're effectively hand-writing G-code), so when you run a simulation, it'll still just run everything in Setup 1 sequentially, then everything in Setup 2 sequentially. But if you're just trying to sync up a few things and you can model it in your head, it'll help.

Message 5 of 7

Infernalmecanix
Enthusiast
Enthusiast

Hi Steve,

thanks for sharing your thoughts. I like fusion for lathe and think it is the best value for money out there, no question. Basically it gets the job done and I am happy. The post I am using mostly works and I think what I want can be hacked together so that is also good. There are many small issues but the price is right. I don't use it for cad as I am able to use NX elsewhere and that is what I know. Thankfully fusion will import .prt files nicely.

 

That is the issue, number of steps to get what you need and places for error. Always best to keep that exposure as small as possible. I am just trying to get the job done as best I can with the resources I have. Not being an experienced fusion user I am exploring all options and trying to learn what it can do.

 

The Nak is relatively new for me and I am really still learning how to make it run. Just looking at the manual i-guide stuff now. Do you find it useful?

 

Thanks for the info about ManualNC mode - that is very nice, I will have a look at that.

 

I appreciate the input, thank you!

 

cheers,

james

 

 

0 Likes
Message 6 of 7

leo.castellon
Collaborator
Collaborator

@steveHDPJT   Thanks for that nice, detailed explanation. 

 

LeoC

0 Likes
Message 7 of 7

steveHDPJT
Advocate
Advocate

Is MGi useful? Hell yes, especially if you do a lot of turning-heavy prototype/small batch work, or if for any reason you expect to have to modify things during programming (eg you want the tool to not cut one face but do everything else) that would otherwise necessitate reposting your code. It also automatically incorporates cutter compensation for angled surfaces. It's great (meaning "better than CAM") for:

  • Pretty much all turning ops, unless you have particularly complex curves
  • Easily defining your cutting conditions (feed, depth of cut, pecking depths where relevant, SFM/RPM etc)
  • Grooving/threading
  • Drilling/tapping on the face or the side
  • Part transfers (it includes templates, you just edit a few values)
  • Getting accurate outputs fast
  • Making changes to GEOMETRY at the control, in a graphical way, in a matter of seconds. This is the big one for us. You want to put an edge break in where it isn't modeled? Done. Want to only do a spring pass over a certain segment? Done. Chamfer is a tiny bit too small? Three keys and you're done. Rather have a radius than a chamfer? 5 seconds to fix. Decided you'd rather have one tool not touch that surface, and use a different one to blend it better instead? Super easy.
  • Basic milling (eg wrench flats, or milling a hex on something).
  • Not having to rely on the post being bulletproof is also nice... especially since none of the Nakamura/Autodesk ones are completely there yet.

It sucks for:

  • Any milling more complicated than a hex
  • Turning complicated geometry (eg non-circular curved surfaces)
  • Variable feed rates
  • Super precise control of lead-in/lead-outs on grooving ops (because unlike Fusion it doesn't just read the contour you're using, you have to tell it the cartesian coordinates of at least one point defining the groove corner.)
  • Absolute minimization of cycle time - it takes a second or two for it to read/buffer the code into g-code every cycle, so the tool pauses for 0.5-2 seconds before beginning the progammed motions
  • Opacity - being able to read the code ahead of tool movement is sometimes handy if you're single-blocking, but you can't easily do that when using MGi

The last two points can be averted by using the "convert to NC code" function, but you then lose the ability to rapidly edit it. Worth it if you're trying to cut seconds out of a cycle for 1000+ pieces production though.

0 Likes