MEW 186, Best ever issue

[Ray LyonsParticipant @raylyons29267]

Thanks Martin, I look forward to seeing No 188 where David has penciled in to include your article on CNC.

 

I don’t know if No 186 is the best yet , my shelves are full going back to day 1. All have been interesting and good value compared with my old Model Engineers going back to the 50’s when paper was poor quality and the photos were all black and white. Now we have a large format magazine with glossy white (or coloured) paper with sharp, brilliant colour pictures.

 

I look forward to the magazine dropping on my door mat. It signals a large mug of coffee and my favourite chair for at least an hour of sheer bliss. OK so some people must grumble but we all do that, if is not the weather it is something else and we have experts in every field of our hobby who are well qualified to punch holes in any article written. Our contributers have to have thick skins, especially the editor not to over react to some of the comments in these pages.

 

For now, I only hope David will find a space for Martin’s item in issue 188.

 

 

[David Clark 13Participant @davidclark13]

Hi Merry Miller

I don’t have money on the budget to pay contributors for part of the article

being put on the website.

regards David

 

 

[David Clark 13Participant @davidclark13]

Hi There

Thinking about CNC articles. If there is no need for code, what could the articles be about? If everybody codes with Cad Cam programs, there is really no need for CNC in MEW.

For several years I used an XYZ Pro Trak system.

This was a mill that was CNC controlled in the X and Y directions and manually controlled in the Z direction. You could mill and drill on this with no problems.

Faster than manual, easier than full CNC.

This would be ideal to the beginner to CNC.

Whenever I learnt a new machine, I always learnt to program the X and Y first anyway.

Much easier to learn at the start without programming the Z.

regards David

Edited By David Clark 1 on 20/01/2012 08:16:40

[John Stevenson 1Participant @johnstevenson1]

Not everyone has a Pro Trak.

In the realms of the home workshop Mach3 is king, but there are features in Mach that are little known but very useful.

 

One is the MDI command where you put a line of code in and it follows just this one line.

 

Now before anyone says this is G Code and we don’t want G code in the mag let me explain with an example.

 

If we type in G01 X100.0 F250 and press enter the tool will make a linear move 100 units [ in my case millimetres ] to the right [ because it’s a plus figure ] at a feed rate of 250 mm / min.

 

This is no different to looking at a drawing and winding the tool 100 mm to the right whilst reading a drawing, none at all.

You can then go on to convert the rest of the drawing into one line codes, ideal for simple work.

 

Now one of the little know features, on the MDI screen there is a start teach button. If this is pressed before starting any moves and the end teach button is pressed at the end then these moves are remembered and a second, third or 100th article can be made using your existing commands.

 

They are stored in a file called teach.tap which can be read with notepad or any word editor and if you made a mistake on the first part it can be corrected and saved.

 

I’ll start a new post tonight about an idea I have, not CNC, to try to get some feedback.

 

Have to do it tonight as I have to go insult some customers now.

 

John S.

Edited By John Stevenson on 20/01/2012 09:39:59

[blowlampParticipant @blowlamp]

Posted by David Clark 1 on 20/01/2012 08:12:29:

Hi There

Thinking about CNC articles. If there is no need for code, what could the articles be about?

 

If everybody codes with Cad Cam programs, there is really no need for CNC in MEW…

 

 

It’s about expanding your skill set beyond what you may have at the moment and keeping it both interesting and understandable.

 

Here’s a tiny snippet of G-code for anyone that’s not seen any before…

 

( Profile1 )
G17
M3 S1000
G0 X-9.2669 Y5.8091
G0 Z0.18
G1 F100.0 Z0.0
G3 F150.0 X-6.7691 Y3.7682 Z-0.0031 I1.4063 J-0.8278
G3 X-6.7574 Y3.7789 I-0.824 J0.9157
G3 X-6.721 Y3.8135 I-1.1618 J1.2582
G3 X-6.7178 Y3.8166 I-0.8619 J0.8801
G3 X-6.6734 Y3.8623 Z-0.0032 I-1.1086 J1.124
G3 X-6.633 Y3.9071 I-1.1722 J1.0966
G3 X-6.6328 Y3.9073 I-0.9306 J0.8072
G3 X-6.5934 Y3.9546 I-1.2081 J1.0475

 

…And it’s fair to say that it’s mind-numbingly boring to look at.

 

So it’s boring stuff to have to read, but it is incredibly powerful and totally necessary for controling the machine tools that help to make all the complex shapes we see all around us – and might want to make for ourselves.

 

Years ago, G-code was frequently hand produced, which limited what could be made because it is tedious to write.

 

The advent of CAD/CAM pretty well eliminates the need of human intervention to write the code and replaces the task with the pleasant experience of producing a drawing and having a computer do all the dirty work of plotting coordinates etc. Bear in mind this is a condensed version of reallity to keep this post to a reasonable size.

 

There must be a million topics beyond writing about G-code, from how to develop a new idea and draw the part, all the way up to discussion about clamping and tool selection.

It’s a massive subject!

 

Martin.

Edited By blowlamp on 20/01/2012 10:48:23

[Ian PParticipant @ianp]

I see no point whatsoever in having listings of G code printed in the magazine, regardless of how big the circulation is I cannot imagine even one person laboriously typeing in the code by copying from the page. When I first took up ‘computing’ I copied code from listings for a BBC computer, because it the only way I could do it as the magazines did not include a cassette or disk in those days. The chances of getting it right firts time were very slim so much debugging was called for (very educational though!)

 

By all means show examples of code if its going to get a point over, ot its part of a tutorial, but not a listing for something that only the author made for himself.

 

I vote for putting and keeping CNC topics in MEW as long as there is some variety. I find it interesting to see how people add scales and stepper motors in their conversions although some article have left me feeling a bit cheated. As an example, some time ago there was article about integrating a rotary encoder into the base of a Myford? top slide. Unfortunately as far as I remember there was no sectioned view to show how the thing was arranged and not enough detail for (me at least) to copy even the principle of operation.

 

Ian P

 

Ian P

[John McNamaraParticipant @johnmcnamara74883]

Hi All
A link to a text file is not a big deal for a website manager effectively its the same as an image except compared to an image it is a far smaller and takes up little disk space.
For a published article I do not see an issue with offline support material (files) depriving the writers of their income. The main thrust of the discussion would most likely be of a mechanical nature and images and text would appear in the magazine. If on the other hand the article was about program code itself then naturally that would appear anyway. Maybe the offer to contributors could be clarified re web based support material.
Cheers
John

[The Merry MillerParticipant @themerrymiller]

Another option is for the author to create a PDF or high quality Jpeg of the code data and download/upload into a previously created album on this site with reference to the fact mentioned in his magazine article.

 

Len. P.

 

[Richard ParsonsParticipant @richardparsons61721]

There are three types of workshop
Type 1 All manual
Type 2 Mainly manual, but which have some bits of electronics. This is like mine I use electronic measuring gear.
Type 3 the full blown CNC stuff which I cannot afford. In my case I am to old to learn to use.
The problem is balance between these three types of shop.
I would be quite happy to dig out my soldering iron and build small item which did one thing and had one specific use. I know it can be done. I have the basic logic written down, but everyone who could help me with a simple electronics design wants not only to add bells, gongs and whistles but drums as well. I want it to do one thing and one thing only. I do not even want to reverse/joggle.

I looked at the item by Tony Jeffree which I have known about for some time. It is very close to what I want BUT it can do so much more. I do not want to cut threads electronically. Two of my lathes can do exactly this without being modified. The third is a watchmaker’s lathe. In most cases I can do this by moving a couple of leavers and in the extreme I can do it by simply changing a few cogs in the box. I can turn tapers no problem.

It is like the business of speed controllers. My belt changing/gear changing is adequate, simple and easy to fix when it goes wrong. Like many mechanical systems it gives you warnings beforehand if you heed them. The first thing you know with electronic stuff either the awful smell or it just don’t work. Nuff said!

Ok call me a flat earth-ist or a Luddite. If I am doing repetition work I will make jigs and fixtures to help me. If I can only machine the thing using CNC then I probably will not tackle the project. I seem to remember someone writing a tale where the old fashioned ‘knife and fork’ methods were superior to the CNC stuff.

Oh what do I want from the electronic wizards? I want to be able to measure the rotational speed of a shaft and get another shaft to rotate at an exact speed slower than the main shaft. I need to be able to change the ratios of the shafts at will, but the ratios are always a whole number. I want to do this as I cannot fit a takeoff gear to the main shaft and the two shafts are at right angles (or worse) to each other. What is it for? Gear hobbing in my vertical mill.

My machines make things and that is what I enjoy doing.

Rdgs

Dick

[John Stevenson 1Participant @johnstevenson1]

Len,

The problem with a pdf or jpg file is that it would have to be transcribed by hand to a machine, which is what Ian states above.

 

The problem has already been solved, if a problem existed in the first place.

 

Digital machinist has it’s own website inside the Village Press umbrella, just as ME and MEW has here although Model Making and Workshop menus at the top of the page may not be intuitive to some [ How about ME and MEW ? ]

 

Digital Machinist’s website

 

Under interactive they list a contents per issue and any files that are needed to be downloaded from this issue.

 

The writers have given permission for these digital files, usually code, that can be copied directly to a machine.

 

I feel that people including David are generation road blocks where no road blocks exist.

[David Clark 13Participant @davidclark13]

Hi John

Can you confirm that the code does not appear in the magazine, only available for download?

regards David

 

 

 

[John Stevenson 1Participant @johnstevenson1]

Yes David, no code in the mag unless it’s a snippet for learning or like an article of doing some code using just a drawing.

 

Certainly no pages and pages of code.

 

Go to the link I posted and download the Winter 2006 file called Friestad

 

This is all the code needed to make the nested block, however you can work your way thru it but reading the article is advised.

 

If Roland hadn’t been so good in commenting the code it would have tied up better to the article as it stands it’s one of the best examples of talking anyone thru G Code.

 

It’s a nice mag, pity we didn’t lead on this before the cousins.

 

John S.

[BazyleParticipant @bazyle]

The success of MEW as well as ME shows the community is as interested in making machines as in making models. However operating them is not a popular subject. Would ME print “I drove my Loco round the track and put a big lump of coal on the fire and a little lump and a square lump….”.

Gcode is the equivalent of that or “chuck a piece of brass and drill 1/8 then open out to 1/4” which is not that exciting to read and pointless if the drawing is clear. What makes LBSC’s and some other author’s articles so good is the bits of advice that are not obvious on the drawing and the snippets of remenicenses from their life.

[mgnbukParticipant @mgnbuk]

G17
M3 S1000
G0 X-9.2669 Y5.8091
G0 Z0.18
G1 F100.0 Z0.0

G3 F150.0 X-6.7691 Y3.7682 Z-0.0031 I1.4063 J-0.8278

Martin,

How was this created – CAM program ? No tool call, no tool radius compensation suggests so, but Z moves incorporated in G3 moves (with no K value?) suggests a helical move ?

In my case I am to old to learn to use.

 

Dick,

 

May be to old to want to learn, maybe ? I can understand some of your positioning regarding using manual machines, the challenges that using them pose and the satisfaction gained doing so., but I am pretty sure that you could learn more modern methods if you had a reason (or desire) to do so. In nearly 30 years of teaching machinists to use CNC controls, I have not come across any (regardless of age) who could not get tp grips with it in the 2 or 3 days allocated – even the ones who were anti or belittled their capabilities at the start of proceedings Doesn’t mean to say that you should change doing things how you do them for the sake of it, though !

 

I was suprised to get issue 186 though the door this week, as I cancelled my subscription at issue 184. More involved articles on CNC would possibly make me want to subscribe again. The “half way house” solution to part automate a lathe appears (to me) to be a solution looking for a problem – reminisant of an all-but-useless Harrison Alpha lathe we mistakenly bought at work. All the “diasdvantages” of a manual lathe & few of the “advantages” of a full-blown CNC solution.

 

£0.02

 

Nigel B.

[Another JohnSParticipant @anotherjohns]

Stub Mandrel wrote:

 

The problem with CNC is that the real challenges are how to solve machining difficult parts, but the articles coming though area mostly about ‘this is my gear’.

 

Absolutely agree.

 

I’m very technically literate, computer wise; Enjoy using my hands to make things; enjoy using my mind to create things; putting two+two together (cnc machining) is magic.

 

Nothing wrong with progressing; after all, how many of us still use carbon steel tooling, lathes without dials, (or even chucks), and how many of us mill/drill on the lathe?

 

Another JohnS.

 

 

[blowlampParticipant @blowlamp]

Posted by Nigel Barraclough on 20/01/2012 13:37:56:
G17
M3 S1000
G0 X-9.2669 Y5.8091
G0 Z0.18
G1 F100.0 Z0.0

G3 F150.0 X-6.7691 Y3.7682 Z-0.0031 I1.4063 J-0.8278

Martin,

How was this created – CAM program ? No tool call, no tool radius compensation suggests so, but Z moves incorporated in G3 moves (with no K value?) suggests a helical move ?

 

 

Hi Nigel.

 

Yes, it was created with a CAM program

I just copied & pasted bit of Mach3 G-code from near the top of the file, but left out most of the initialisation codes.

 

The G3 helical move is a lead-in move to let the cutter slowly sink into the workpiece to save it from the shock of a straight plunge.

 

Martin.

 

 

Sample from the start of a different file.

 

( Made using CamBam – http://www.cambam.co.uk )
( oval 8/5/2011 7:23:10 PM )
( T10 : 30.0 )
( CUTVIEWER )
( FROM/0,0,5 )
( Select dummy tool to avoid warnings )
( TOOL/MILL,1,0,20.0,0 )
( STOCK/BLOCK,,,,,, )
G21 G90 G91.1 G64 G40
G0 Z3.0
( T10 : 30.0 )
( Tool Taper coming soon )
( TOOL/MILL,30.0,0.0,0.0,0 )
T10 M6
( Profile2 )
G17
M3 S2000
G0 X-59.8472 Y19.2799
G0 Z-14.4
G1 F100.0 Z-14.5
G3 F150.0 X-60.9424 Y18.8079 Z-14.5834 I49.9439 J-117.3959
G3 X-61.4901 Y18.5652 Z-14.6253 I41.1812 J-93.6697
G1 X-62.0854 Y18.2956 Z-14.671
G1 X-62.4621 Y18.1216 Z-14.7
G3 X-74.0 Y0.0 I8.4621 J-18.1216
G3 X-62.4436 Y-18.1302 I20.0 J0.0
G2 X-62.4033 Y-18.1491 I-6.3327 J-13.5977

 

 

 

 

[Tony JeffreeParticipant @tonyjeffree56510]

Posted by Ray Lyons on 18/01/2012 18:41:52:

I remember some time ago, Tony Jeffree wrote in these pages that there is no need to learn G-Code. He said that using a CAD programme the drawing can be transferred to the computer for cutting.

 

I believe he was preparing an article on this for MEW which would be great for many of us trying to understand the system and could be a better way of introducing CNC

 

Ray –

 

I did indeed write that, and it is absolutely true. I have been using (and building) CNC machines for more than a decade now, and I have yet to find a problem that requires me to learn G-code, so I haven’t bothered to do so. Not that learning it would be a problem for me – I started my working life as a computer programmer, and in any case, G-code is a trivial language for anyone to learn. It just isn’t necessary for the vast majority of things that you might want to do with a CNC machine, assuming that you have the right software to start with.

 

On my two CNC mills, I run Desk CNC; this takes CAD files as input and generates the right G-code as output, so I never need to write or even look at the G-code. On my CNC-converted ML-7 I run Mach 3, which has a number of “wizards” that allow you to fill in boxes on the screen to define the usual turning operations (threading, plain turning, tapers, facing…) and again, Mach 3 generates the necessary G-code for me. I also use the ELS and Puttnam lathe controllers with the lathe (as seen in my article in #186) and those devices don’t even understand G-code – you set up the operations from the keypad, a bit like (and no harder than) a pocket calculator.

 

I was indeed planning to write something about all of this, but as Martin (Blowlamp) seems to have got there first I will be holding off on that until I see what his article covers. The other aspect(s) of CNC that might usefully be covered are an overall introduction to CNC so that readers will have a better understanding of what the components of a CNC system are and how it all fits together. Sort of a dummies guide to CNC, which would help would-be purchasers and/or builders of CNC systems to understand what they need to buy/do. I have made a start on writing something along those lines but it may take a while!

 

Regards,

Tony

[Sub MandrelParticipant @submandrel]

Perhaps the answer is simple –

 

Allow site users to share files other than jpegs, and announce that you don’t want to put code in the magazine, but if anyone is willing to share their code online to accompany an article, they can do so here.

 

Either it will work or it won’t.

 

I for one don’t have any CNC files but if I had a place to share them I would probably crteate a few simple utilities in BBC BASIC or as excel spreadsheets that I would happily share here.

 

For example, i a few folk have asked me for advice on bevel gears- I could describe my method in an article, and put a calculator spreadsheet up on the website to go with it.

 

Neil

[David Clark 13Participant @davidclark13]

Hi There

Moderators can upload files, not sure how to do it but it has been done.

regards David

 

[Tony JeffreeParticipant @tonyjeffree56510]

Posted by Stub Mandrel on 20/01/2012 21:13:34:

Perhaps the answer is simple –

 

Allow site users to share files other than jpegs, and announce that you don’t want to put code in the magazine, but if anyone is willing to share their code online to accompany an article, they can do so here.

 

Either it will work or it won’t.

 

I for one don’t have any CNC files but if I had a place to share them I would probably crteate a few simple utilities in BBC BASIC or as excel spreadsheets that I would happily share here.

 

For example, i a few folk have asked me for advice on bevel gears- I could describe my method in an article, and put a calculator spreadsheet up on the website to go with it.

 

Neil

 

I agree.

There’s absolutely no point in putting G-code in the magazine unless it is part of an article describing how to code in G-code, in which case it would only be short fragments to give examples. Apart from anything else, the thought of typing in a G-code program, and then fixing the numerous transcription errors that you would inevitably make, is too horrific to contemplate. So publishing G-code programs on paper is a complete waste of magazine space and the reader’s time. The only thing that makes any sense is to make programs available on-line somehow, or maybe for the author to offer to email the files to interested readers (I have done that in the past for MACH config files and for the code files for my rev counter, for example).

 

Regards

Tony

[blowlampParticipant @blowlamp]

Another problem that I don’t recall has been mentioned is that G-codes can be machine specific, so whatever is printed in the magazine will probably only work with the target controller for which it has been produced.

 

That’s to say G-code intended for use with Mach3 might not work with (say) TurboCNC, because they speak a slightly different dialect and so from that point of view it’s pointless to print it.

 

Give us a space on the website where we can upload files that we are willing to share for free – we can already do it with photo’s and would cost almost nothing to implement, but would be a huge benefit to the site.

 

Martin.

Edited By blowlamp on 21/01/2012 12:53:51

[Author]

Posts