Ask the Users: Center part in-front of door on Manual NC - Stop

[al.whatmough]

This one started as an Instagram post.

Morganoliff is suggesting that the when a Manual NC - Program stop is used the machine should put the part in front of the door.

https://www.instagram.com/p/BIvdnoOBX59/

[Laurens-3DTechDraw]

I much rather have people that want that put a Manual NC in front and not force a move on a stop command.

[LibertyMachine]

I would partially agree with @Laurens-3DTechDraw

While I often end up moving the part to the door, it's not always the case. Sometimes it's just to take chips off of a drill, other times it's to add cutting oil to a tap.

Perhaps the better suggestion would be to have an option for "Program Stop and Move to Door"? as well as the conventional "Program Stop"

[al.whatmough]

Guys,

This is great feedback!  exactly why I posted to the idea station first.

keep it coming.

[Steinwerks]

I'm going to agree with @Laurens-3DTechDraw and @LibertyMachine and say that Stop should mean STOP. I modified both our post processors (Fadal and Haas) to use Clean to put the part in front of the door. Now the issue here becomes the fact that HSM, back in the day, never made these default to any behavior, so everyone has a different idea of what they're supposed to do based on their own definitions and expectations.

I used Clean because it made the most sense to me, and it was a good placeholder instead of attempting to modify the PP to home the part when posting multiple programs, as I generally program to flip the part in a single program and probe or set against a work stop, not run multiple stations as the default behavior seems to be. Since we often only have single-digit part runs, this makes more sense for our workflow.

I think a more valuable conversation would be to try and choose what all these Manual NC's should do as default behavior (some of them being quite obvious, but several existing in very grey areas right now).

[Greg_Haisley]

The STOP function should be a program stop and nothing else.

Since the Manual NC functions are what ever development wants them to be, how about adding "load/unload park position"?

                                                                                      OR

What would really be cool , is for the user to be able to customize his own manual NC functions. 

This could be done with a few custom variables with in the core code. Something like "Manual NC variable 1" where NC variable 1 is a user text that the user sets up at a global area like the compare and edit section or some other place that gets loaded when the HSMWorks gets loaded.

The post would interact with the Manual NC variable within the post the way the user wishes. I'm not a coder by any means just throwing ideas out there to see if any stick.

A little bit of common sense and logic goes a long way in the real world.

[Laurens-3DTechDraw]

I have such an idea on the fusion IdeaStation: https://forums.autodesk.com/t5/ideastation-request-a-feature-or/create-your-own-manual-nc-options/id...

That could be moved here since it's more a general CAM idea. 

[Greg_Haisley]

I have such an idea on the fusion IdeaStation: https://forums.autodesk.com/t5/ideastation-request-a-feature-or/create-your-own-manual-nc-options/id...

That could be moved here since it's more a general CAM idea. 

I had no idea, I don't go to the ideastation. This is why the "idea places on ADSK" need to be combined. Eliminate the redundancy of users trying to get a point across.

I did see on TV this weekend that many times the same idea is created at roughly the same time in history by people from different locations around the globe. Interesting. Hope this gets implemented, seems logical to me.

[Laurens-3DTechDraw]

That topic has been moved to this IdeaStation so we can all vote on it.

So vote here now: http://forums.autodesk.com/t5/hsm-ideas/create-your-own-manual-nc-options/idi-p/5945479

[Rob.Lockwood]

There's another Idea asking for the implementation of generic motion; I think between adding your own Manual NC and a generic motion implementation, the correct way to move the table to the operator position could be achieved 🙂

[LibertyMachine]

Voted! I think that is an AWESOME idea

[al.whatmough]

@Rob.Lockwood link to the other idea.  I will pull it over also.

[Rob.Lockwood]

@al.whatmough - http://forums.autodesk.com/t5/hsm-ideas/add-a-manual-move-operation/idi-p/6472778

The manual-NC portion should just create a stop, and manual motion should be used to position the table first. I don't really see anything wrong with adding table positioning into the post processor and a manual-NC move, most of my posts have some customization built in like this, and I have a template that issues a CLEAN->COMMENT->STOP that runs a sub-routine to blow the table off, adds a comment so you can remember why the machine stopped, and position the table at home. Building this stuff in as default is more difficult though, if someone ran my post and issued clean, at a minimum they'd get an error.. worse they'd run some program entirely unexpectedly. Splitting it off to a true manually controlled motion is much safer.

[Laurens-3DTechDraw]

@Rob.Lockwood

Problem with the way Autodesk CAM is built that we wouldn't be really able to do table motion to home positions.

Due to the fact that the system has no idea what kind of machine it is working on such moves are hard to make paths for. I mean you probably know what G28 or G53 value your Y-axis needs to come to the door but you don't know the amount of Y-travel needed from your part coordinate system.

So while I like that idea it would mean doing the hole software again to implement such moves right.

[Rob.Lockwood]

It's really no different in NX, you're ultimately reliant on the post to do the right thing.

Generic motion is generally done in reference to primary coordinate system, and used more like Achim suggested, or in cases where actual toolpath based operations are overkill or incapable. The option is there to do it in reference to world, but the user/post have to know what they're doing. Perhaps the biggest differentiator is in thr g-code back plot and and everything (machine sim) that goes into supporting that, as it (if reliable) gives a method for verifying the generic motion is correct.

[Laurens-3DTechDraw]

Yeah that's kind of my point. It's not possible to simulate this correctly if you have no idea how the machine actually works.

[Rob.Lockwood]

Right; but it's not as though machine simulation, or even having a machine
loaded, is a requirement in NX.. either way, I don't think it's out of the
realm of possibilities to implement this in the existing machine
simulation, or in presumably whatever eventually makes its way into
fusion/Inventor. Besides, plenty happens within HSM without being
internally simulated, what's one more? Is there a reasonable method that
could be simulated?

[Laurens-3DTechDraw]

No method that could be simulated. But you know that with a Manual NC. Since it's like calling a macro of the machine.

A operation that gives in manual moves should be fully simulated if you ask me. If you can't simulate the manual moving operation it's useless to me.

[Anonymous]

Hypermill has the option to insert a NC event at different point in the program. this is how it looks.