In my lathe(s) I have VDI tooling.
Each tool settles only on its holder, and each tool is numbered. So I
will always use the same tool without changing offsets or angles.
Each time I need a new tool, I buy a new holder (VDI) so that my tool
library gets larger. This is expensive but is very effective at the long
run, due to time AND to avoid tool collisions. I even do this for drilling
where I keep each commun drill in each holder.
Bottom rule is that a lathe collision is very nasty and make you think:
"Why didn't I use the manual one ..."
By the way, I sell toolholders :-)
Citando Gene Heskett <[email protected]>:
> On Sunday 04 December 2016 08:36:35 Filipe Tomaz wrote:
>> Ok, but still it would be good that the machine could make the
>> "possible" part, skipping without damage the part and the tool.
>> On a later tool, the final toolpath could be reached if the tool
>> allows, and the user could in fact use the same programmed tool path.
>>
>> This is my opinion.
>>
>> Citando andy pugh <[email protected]>:
>> On 4 December 2016 at 11:35, Filipe Tomaz
>> <[email protected]> wrote: > With this information
>>
>> is possible to "know" the points on the toolpath where the tool
>> can ACTUALLY REACH without damaging both the tool and the work
>> part. This would provide a large improvement even over standard
>> industrial controllers.
>>
>> We already have a warning about this.
> I think thats a good idea, great in fact. My problem is that of putting
> the tool angle at the best compromise for my instant job, usually by
> eye, driving the tool to various locations to see if this angle can do
> it, and not telling the tooltable because I've no quick and accurate
> enough device to measure the angle. The pro's here probably do know how
> or have a measuring tool. I believe thats largely my fault because I
> believe the tool table can now accept the left and right angles of the
> face of the tool, plus the tip radii if its known. But looking all that
> up, if indeed it's even published for every tool in the drawer, is a
> right PITA.
>
> How successful we are depends on our ability to be able to type the 4 or
> 5 character chip style itself into a slot in the tool table, and the
> angle of the lengthwise axis of the tool holder, and let the tooltable
> code do the lookups to control all of that. Leaving a single variable
> up to a SWAG by me is an invite for a disaster.
>
> I would offer the guess that the uptake of such an idea in the onsies to
> tensies shops would be considerably higher if a one time tooltable entry
> really could cover a single tool holder that well. It sure would
> promote the tool holder sales for our quick change posts. :)
>
> G71-72 and this raspi.driver I'm trying to crash and haven't in 2.8
> final, the tool table might be LinuxCNC-3.0 stuff maybe?
>
> My $0.02, probably ignoreable. Got to get me ready to go to a
> musical/dinner.
>
> Cheers, Gene Heskett
> --
> "There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty:
> soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order."
> -Ed Howdershelt (Author)
> Genes Web page <http://geneslinuxbox.net:6309/gene>
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
> engaging tech sites, SlashDot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
> _______________________________________________
> Emc-developers mailing list
> [email protected]https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-developers
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, SlashDot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
_______________________________________________
Emc-developers mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-developers
