In aerospace shops there is usually a requirement for certification of the NCcode that produces the part. This means gcode that is in the CNC machine must come from a secure directory on your system. To be written in the secure directory the program must be certified by inspection the parts created by the program meet all the criteria on the work order referencing the purchase order. All programs in the secure directory are read only and can only be written into the directory by specific personnel. Going to your CAM system to reprocess a program to change a tool will then trigger another First Part Inspection to recertify the NCcode. The whole exercise must be documented in the quality system subject to audit at a future time. This is a MAJOR PITA and a very costly event. Changing the gcode program is not very useful in this environment. Cutter compensation is very useful. Multiple tools of every finishing size is also very useful and will not trigger recertification of the program. Boeing calls this DPD (Digital Product Definition). I don't know if it is still referred to as this but I am certain the requirements are still in place no matter what it is called. Every aerospace OEM will have a similar expectation and will audit to monitor compliance.
It gets to the point some OEMs require any change in the shop plan (router) requires submission to the OEM for recertification of the shop plan. On Tue, Sep 8, 2020 at 11:19 AM N <nicklas.karlsso...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On 09/07/2020 03:24 PM, Leonardo Marsaglia wrote: > > > Is it any advantage in using cutter compensation when programming the > > > g-code using CAM? Because since I've started working with CAM for my > > > turning programs I like to let the software do all the compensation. > By the > > > way, I'm talking only about lathe programs. I don't know if this could > be > > > an advantage for the mill machine user. > > > > > > > > The advantage is you can adjust the size of the part or > > compensate for tool wear without recreating the G-code. > > This is less of an issue today than when G-code programs > > came on punched paper tapes. > > For me it still sound like a very good idea fine tuning diameter instead > of changing the g-code. > > > _______________________________________________ > Emc-users mailing list > Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users > -- Addressee is the intended audience. If you are not the addressee then my consent is not given for you to read this email furthermore it is my wish you would close this without saving or reading, and cease and desist from saving or opening my private correspondence. Thank you for honoring my wish. _______________________________________________ Emc-users mailing list Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users
