Auto-suggest helps you quickly narrow down your search results by suggesting possible matches as you type.
Showing results for
Show only
|
Search instead for
Did you mean:
This page has been translated for your convenience with an automatic translation service. This is not an official translation and may contain errors and inaccurate translations. Autodesk does not warrant, either expressly or implied, the accuracy, reliability or completeness of the information translated by the machine translation service and will not be liable for damages or losses caused by the trust placed in the translation service.Translate
We are working on a generic post processor for the Biesse Woodworking Router with CIX Format.. We would be happy to get some feedback from you before we put them into production.
Feel free to download and test this post processor and provide any feedback you might have.
Currently the tool manager does not propagate diameter changes to documents, so every time tool diameter changes (eg, after sharpening) we need to update it on every contour that uses that tool, in every document. We have lots of documents using the same tool and that tool wears by the week.
Theoretically - if you have your compensation type in Fusion set to 'In Control' on an operation that supports it, it should pass through to BiesseWorks. From there it is up to the tool library in the machine to adjust for diameter.
When you post out to BiesseWorks does the toolpath show up as to the left side or right side of the line?
Thank you for your reply, I tried that but encountered that if we choose "In control" it requires us to use "Lead in & Lead out" which compromises our neighbouring pieces. We would much rather use "Ramp" to go in the board. As we are nesting our pieces. I would love to hear for more ideas.
Is there any way to propagate tool library tool diameter changes to documents using that tool? I mean, If we change the diameter of a tool in the library, then open up a document where that tool is used, change is not reflected there nor is there any warning about the difference. This means that every time we sharpen our tool, we need to go to all of our operations in every document (manually) and reflect the change.
Another question: Is there any way in API to set/refresh the used tool for a operation? We are currently using a script to generate all the toolpaths and run post on setups, so it would be quite trivial to refresh the used tool/diameter....
Sorry I missed your question about the toolpath. I did not try it that far as the path from lead in would cross other pieces. Compensation "in computer" is the best choice for us as we need to manage the "run inside/outside the line" from cam.
Where can I get help with the toollibrary problem? I bet it affects a bunch of your users...
Use tool compensation. no matter what your program is. biesseworks or iso-code. changing the diameter of the tool on the machine. it will be adjusted in all programs. just use compensation. I also have a lot of tools that change the diameter after sharpening.for me it would be crazy to rewrite more than 5000 programs after the tool has been sharpened.
The only way to do that is to use the BiesseWorks tool library. To do what you suggest would require a command sent when a program is run to write to the machine data the new tool diameter - even then, that would mean that you would have to re-post a program with the new diameter every time you sharpen a tool. That's what the G41/42 function was created to avoid, so we're going to make a way to use it.
We need to use 'incontrol' type compensation.
To that end, what I'm going to try for you is make an edit that will activate the tool corrector mid-air before it enters the panel.
Can we avoid using the "lead in/lead out" option? I fiddled with that and found no way to have it go in anywhere else than corner. Corner is bad because there might be neighboring part. Going in while staying in contour "airspace" would be better as it only uses the space which is going to be cut out anyways.
With that G41/G42, does the machine "stop and ask" or is it fully automatic and behind the curtains?
There is a way to push it put of the corner, and it's actually quite simple. I'll show you when I'm next with the machine!
You DON'T want to use tool compensation, but DO want to use G41/42? Slight problem there, as it's the same thing!
Your reason for not wanting to use it is because of it hitting other nested parts. To avoid that, we'll shift the lead in and out position away from the corner onto a straight edge. The 'correction move' is what happens when the machine transitions from using the tool centre to the tool edge. This shift will occur in mid air after me making a small post processor edit. The tool will then ramp down into your part, away from the corner.
I've tried using some of the generic post processors for biesse that I've found around the forum, haven't tried out the CIX one to see if that works yet. So far my machine is giving me back the INT (*)10119 error which means it doesn't recognize the file. I'm currently lost for what to do.
I'm still learning and basically a noob when it comes to the g-code side of things but here is the deal. My shop just got an older Biesse Rover 24 (no letter after) from around 2003, it runs off an NC1000 numerical controller. Are any of you running machines with this numerical controller and what post processors are you using?
We don't have BiesseWorks or any other secondary software at this time. I don't know if we need to at some point, advise on that would be appreciated too.
I'm just trying to get this machine working cutting out new parts. Any advise is appreciated, thanks!
I can have a working post processor for NC1000 machines written within a day. I started on a Rover 27 and know that system better than the newer controls as I used to hand code them.
I'm new to this forum and also just getting in to the CNC world.
At my job we have three "3 axis, biesse rover's". For now we make all our programs in "BiesseWorks" which is boring and time consuming...
So i have downloaded you'r "Biesse CIX" Post processor and made a test program with it.
First i tried to post it as GEO/ROUTG but since the purpose of using this post processor is to make 3d carvings and programs with X,Y and Z movement simultaneously I think I have to use ROUT? (Correct me if i'm wrong).
Now to the actual question.
When i imported the .CIX file i got this ERROR/MESSAGE...
It's on Norwegian, I will translate below.
! There may be some ambiguities during importing procedures.
The operation can be completed anyway.
Line 40 - The process ROUT does not have a parameter named EML.
Line 24697 - The process ROUT does not have a parameter named EML.
Line 27742 - The process ROUT does not have a parameter named EML.
Line 30571 - The process ROUT does not have a parameter named EML.
Line 33436 - The process ROUT does not have a parameter named EML.
Line 35845 - The process ROUT does not have a parameter named EML.
Line 38222 - The process ROUT does not have a parameter named EML.
Line 59791 - The process ROUT does not have a parameter named EML.
Line 60168 - The process ROUT does not have a parameter named EML.
Line 82049 - The process ROUT does not have a parameter named EML.
Line 82422 - Some of the values have not been changed.
If i choose ok it opens with just all the lines and no MACRO?/Operation.
Most of the users I've dealt with are using the GEO/ROUTG Macros for their Biesse machine. Have you tried this output? You can also comment out the following line in the writeRoutMacro function to get rid of the EML block so that your machine does not generate the error messages when using the ROUT Macro.
Thank's a lot for your work on the CIX postprocessor, however, we have a small issue with the 5 axis.
Im programming with Fusion 360 and some of my operations seems to be offset (as shown on the pics below) for some reasons, otherwise everything is fine. Do you know someting about this?
@bob.schultz Finally just solved my problem! it was because i choosed my origin on the center of my stock in fusion and the post pro seems to don't like it that much. just choosed a corner and it work fine!
@bob.schultz - Thank you very much for working on a 5-Axis ISO post! I contacted you some time ago with a 3 axis post I had in development which I have now picked up again. We also now own a 5 axis Biesse machine. It's worth noting that the HSD 2 axis spindles that Biesse uses do not require rewind, they have infinite rotation capability.
I'll be in touch as this develops, and post some videos as we go.
