603,390 active members*
2,750 visitors online*
Register for free
Login
IndustryArena Forum > Machine Controllers Software and Solutions > Fanuc > I don't think so but want to check anyway....
Results 1 to 6 of 6
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    0

    Exclamation I don't think so but want to check anyway....

    I've programed Fanuc controls for a while now and I was asked a question the other day by a new guy that ran Okuma's before. He asked me if Fanuc's could run "subs" that are attached to the bottom of the main program like Okuma's can.

    One reason I ask is we were running a program using a standard sub and the control would hesitate when switching between the main program and sub. When we run a sub that repeats (M98 P1000 L20) it also hesitates.

    I think the hesitation is because the control can't read fast enough to make a reasonably smooth motion but that is just my guess. I was thinking that if the control would allow a sub in the main it would not hesitate as much.


    Thanks

    Steve

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Posts
    2932
    You can use M99 Pnnnn in a program to "jump" to a sequence number in the same program.

    If your control has the Custom Macro option, you could add a counter and an IF statement to exit the branch when the counter reaches 21.

    I'm not sure how much faster this would be, however.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    640
    I never tried, but theres parameters that set non-bufferred m codes- might try (carefully) with setting to 98 (and 99 for the return) and trying it. any non motion block in a fanuc results in in-position check- I think though if defined as not bufferred, might just buffer the next line(needs to be a motion block to prevent stops). I'll have to try it when I get a chance too
    Tim

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    1792
    I believe, the sub/macro has to be a separate program in Fanuc.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    684
    If you can use macro b on the control, and if it is suitable for your needs, I find a repeating WHILE, DO loop to be quicker than IF, GOTO.

    DP

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    1792
    Quote Originally Posted by christinandavid View Post
    I find a repeating WHILE, DO loop to be quicker than IF, GOTO.
    That is true.
    I actually verified it with a stop watch some time back.
    The reason perhaps is, GOTO has to search all the sequence numbers, whereas WHILE_DO_ loop is fixed.

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 3
    Last Post: 01-19-2007, 02:59 PM
  2. Check Out !
    By vijaychd in forum Uncategorised CAM Discussion
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 05-31-2005, 06:24 PM
  3. Check out !!
    By vijaychd in forum News Announcements
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 05-31-2005, 05:14 PM
  4. Check this DRO
    By Konstantin in forum CNC Machine Related Electronics
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 05-02-2004, 05:41 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •