[Vortex_bits]

That's the way I see it Stefan....... but he wants to run the same old programs that are already in his system without re-programming which is why I suggested G68 as an option short of changing a bunch of stuff in the machine/control.....

Vortex... are you there????

Yes, I'm here, just working alot! I haven't even had time to check my mail!! I think everyone here is onto what my problem is, and thank everyone for that. I haven't been able to get enough machine time to test out the G68 code, or see if it's even enabled. Hopefully next week, but we have alot of orders coming in, so I never know when I get to "play" with the machines.

Thanks,

-Zak

[Vortex_bits]

I know it takes more. I just pointed out that they need to be moved.
With all that has to be done, it's a lot of work.

Yep, I think if the G68 doesn't work, then it'll be easier just to re-do all the programs.. it just sucks because they're elevated fabric panels, and they're not that much fun to do.

Oh well.. job security..

-Zak

[Mitsui Seiki]

At the risk of sounding stupid.
You have moved the control to the other side of the machine.
Why do you want to change "home" position?

[psychomill]

Why do you want to change "home" position?

Exactly.... if Stefan is thinking what I'm thinking. Something dawned on me as I was "leisurely" driving down the road during my daily commute in this ridiculously over-crowded Silicon Valley, California...

Why change it at all? Tool change isn't a problem (and now I know why since you've stated you have a KOMO), pallet isn't an issue.... so why bother. Just leave the part set up the way you originally had it. It will still run, the zeros are still in the same spot, machine home is still the same spot, no parameter has to be changed, no switches have to be moved, no fixtures have to be rotated and possibly modified, etc. The only difference is that you're on the other side of the part now. So what? Yes, the machine travel directions are no longer "normal" to the control or operator,... but that's it. I don't think its worth the trouble. Just make a big ass sign that show the +'s and -'s move in the opposite direction if you want....

And for what its worth... I'd be surprised if KOMO didn't have the G68 as a standard. It's also referred to pattern rotation.... pretty much what most people do on a KOMO.....

[Mitsui Seiki]

Just make a big ass sign that show the +'s and -'s move in the opposite direction if you want....

Right!

[Vortex_bits]

At the risk of sounding stupid.
You have moved the control to the other side of the machine.
Why do you want to change "home" position?

Mostly so that the operators don't have to run around to the other side of the table everytime they run a single part.. (which we run alot of). Just to make things easier, and such.

-Zak

[Andre' B]

So why not just use a work offset?

[psychomill]

Andre'...... read the thread from the beginning and you'll see why Vortex doesn't want to "just change the offset"....

So Vortex.... what about what Stefan (Mitsui) and I were talking about? Where are you at with this now??

[codyst]

If you're still set on changing the 0,0 point, you should be able to just change your motor rotation parameters and change your home position (along with the necessary Limit switches).

I didn't catch exactly what model Fanuc controller you're using, but on newer controls (16/18/21i) it's parameter 2022. A value of -111 tells the motor to rotate CW when a positive integer is programmed, and a value of 111 tells the motor to rotate CCW when a positive integer is programmed. Changing those values to their opposite and re-zeroing the machine should bring you to where you want to be.

Motor rotation can also be changed from the Servo Settings page.

[Vortex_bits]

Andre'...... read the thread from the beginning and you'll see why Vortex doesn't want to "just change the offset"....

So Vortex.... what about what Stefan (Mitsui) and I were talking about? Where are you at with this now??

Well, I had a chance to try it today, but I did the worst thing I've done to date.. which was basically flycutting into the aluminum bed. I need to make some serious changes.. as whoever set this thing up didn't have a clue as to what they were doing.. or it's just an old setup.

So, I'm still not quite 'there' yet. I'm going to have to put it on the back burner until I can get some more time to experiment and such. As it is right now, I'm thinking about changing all the programs anyways, because some idiot was using drill calls that require that the machine completely home itself inbetween drill calls, instead of just going to Z0M5 and going to the next bit.

Thank you, and I'll keep you informed if I make a break through!

-Zak

[Vortex_bits]

If you're still set on changing the 0,0 point, you should be able to just change your motor rotation parameters and change your home position (along with the necessary Limit switches).

I didn't catch exactly what model Fanuc controller you're using, but on newer controls (16/18/21i) it's parameter 2022. A value of -111 tells the motor to rotate CW when a positive integer is programmed, and a value of 111 tells the motor to rotate CCW when a positive integer is programmed. Changing those values to their opposite and re-zeroing the machine should bring you to where you want to be.

Motor rotation can also be changed from the Servo Settings page.

It's a 180i or 180is, can't remember right now. I have the book for it sitting right here.. GE FANUC AUTOMATION series 16i through 180is. It's not the rotation parameters I'm worried about.. it's the fact that being on the other side of the bed means the code is all negative instead of positive... which wouldn't mean squat, except I have a crapload of programs that I really don't want to re-do that are all made at the former 0,0.

Thanks,

-Zak

[codyst]

But changing the rotation parameters would in turn make the ballscrews drive the opposite direction of what they are right now. From the perspective of the control when you tell it to go positive it's going negative, and negative positive. If you tell the control to turn the screws the opposite direction it would make the machine go in the correct direction from your new perspective.

[NateTG]

Yep, I think if the G68 doesn't work, then it'll be easier just to re-do all the programs.. it just sucks because they're elevated fabric panels, and they're not that much fun to do.

My CNC experience is minimal, but automating the coordinate transform on the G-code should be straightforward. If there's a general interest in that sort of thing, I can look into writing a transform tool and making it available.

[Vortex_bits]

But changing the rotation parameters would in turn make the ballscrews drive the opposite direction of what they are right now. From the perspective of the control when you tell it to go positive it's going negative, and negative positive. If you tell the control to turn the screws the opposite direction it would make the machine go in the correct direction from your new perspective.

And that doesn't affect anything else? Not the tool changer, or the automatic position sensor? That just sounds too easy.. and from my experience, sometimes easy is only easy because you forgot something critical. However, that is what I was looking for, is simply a change from one direction to the other...


-Zak

[Vortex_bits]

My CNC experience is minimal, but automating the coordinate transform on the G-code should be straightforward. If there's a general interest in that sort of thing, I can look into writing a transform tool and making it available.

Are you talking about manually changing all the co-ordinates in the G-codes from +'s to -'s?

thanks,

-Zak

[NateTG]

Are you talking about manually changing all the co-ordinates in the G-codes from +'s to -'s?

thanks,

-Zak

Effectively, but only X,Y, I, and J coordinates - and maybe R if the code involves G18 or G19.

[codyst]

And that doesn't affect anything else? Not the tool changer, or the automatic position sensor? That just sounds too easy.. and from my experience, sometimes easy is only easy because you forgot something critical. However, that is what I was looking for, is simply a change from one direction to the other...


-Zak

It shouldn't affect the ATC since you said it travels with the Z. I'm assuming when you do a t/c you just tell it to go to Z 0 and change tools.

I'm not familiar enough with you machine to know exactly what you would need to move but if you go this route, I would assume, you would have to relocate any limit/position switches the machine uses to coincide with the new axis directions of travel, and your software overtravel parameters will most likely need to be fine tuned once you set up a new home position.

If all that the machine is equipped with on the X and Y as far as switches go is Overtravel switches you could likely leave them as is, you would just get an error stating overtravel opposite of what you were actually moving if you hit the overtravel switch.

[neilw20]

0). Hang the operator upside down. (LOL not practical)
0.1) Live with it and remain confused.
0.2) Was it worth moving the control. Was it ALL thought out? 12000 lbs. still can be rotated. Only the electrician,forklift operator and waste money department will curse.

LOGICAL SOLUTION but may not be practical.
1). Change the direction of the servos. PLC or hardwired. - Now the directions are correct.
2). Reverse the scales so that zero(s) are at the opposite ends. Or make scaling factor minus one and redo the machine offsets. Now the numbers go the correct way.
3). Swap the overtravel switches end for end each axis or reconfigure PLC.
4). Put the home switch at the opposite ends ends of X and Y travel.

[beege]

Which Fanuc controller?

[Vortex_bits]

Effectively, but only X,Y, I, and J coordinates - and maybe R if the code involves G18 or G19.

Hmm.. I never tried that, never knew if it would work or not. Occasionally our automated nesting software spits out code that makes the machine overtravel by throwing in a negative number... Well, I guess I have 3 or 4 ways to try this. I get pretty busy, so manually doing *anything* is going to make it tough.. so I'm going to see if I can find an easier way.. and if not.. well.. I dunno yet. I'll cross that bridge then I guess. .but I'd be interested to try this method your talking about, just to see it work.

thanks,

-Zak