TCP 5-axis kinematics
04 Mar 2023 06:52 #265824
by JackRay
Replied by JackRay on topic TCP 5-axis kinematics
Hello,
when I changed my configuration from XYZAC to XYZBC I changed almost nothing in my .hal file, just the letter of the A axis in B.
would there be something else to change in my .hal file
Thanks
when I changed my configuration from XYZAC to XYZBC I changed almost nothing in my .hal file, just the letter of the A axis in B.
would there be something else to change in my .hal file
Thanks
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
04 Mar 2023 09:33 #265830
by Aciera
Replied by Aciera on topic TCP 5-axis kinematics
As your configuration works for manual (MDI) mode but not with the gcode from your post processor (PP) you need to focus on the PP to fix it. It is the PP that is responsible for orienting the part according to your machine kinematic. If you have a chamfer operation along the x-axis in your CAM then the gcode from your PP needs to rotate the workpiece by 90° using the c-axis first so the chamfer is aligned with the y-axis because that is the only way it can actually be oriented in your XYZBC kinematic.
As long as that doesn't work there is really no point in loading the gcode into linuxcnc. I have little experience with modifying postprocessors and none with fusion360, so I'm afraid I cannot help you with that. There are very few users of 5axis machines on this forum so maybe try on a more machinist oriented forum like 'Practical Machinist'.
As long as that doesn't work there is really no point in loading the gcode into linuxcnc. I have little experience with modifying postprocessors and none with fusion360, so I'm afraid I cannot help you with that. There are very few users of 5axis machines on this forum so maybe try on a more machinist oriented forum like 'Practical Machinist'.
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
05 Mar 2023 13:19 #265912
by JackRay
Replied by JackRay on topic TCP 5-axis kinematics
Hello, thank you for your feedback.
Just to illustrate my problem I attach two videos that represent the simulation and the other the movements of the machine. Maybe something will jump out at you, something I don't see.
the programmed machining is a chamfer in rolling
In any case thank you for your help.
drive.google.com/file/d/18AwfmqbwiTT7CzN.../view?usp=share_link
drive.google.com/file/d/18LofaJk8OwOP346.../view?usp=share_link
Just to illustrate my problem I attach two videos that represent the simulation and the other the movements of the machine. Maybe something will jump out at you, something I don't see.
the programmed machining is a chamfer in rolling
In any case thank you for your help.
drive.google.com/file/d/18AwfmqbwiTT7CzN.../view?usp=share_link
drive.google.com/file/d/18LofaJk8OwOP346.../view?usp=share_link
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
05 Mar 2023 15:20 - 05 Mar 2023 15:27 #265920
by Aciera
Replied by Aciera on topic TCP 5-axis kinematics
I have no experience in 5axis machining but from looking at the simulation this should be a swarf operation (ie the cut is done using the circumference of the cylindrical milling tool) on the real machine however it looks more like the gcode is executing the cut with the flat face on the end of the tool.
It might be more enlightening to try a chamfer on a single edge. I would generally suggest to start with simpler operations that involve only one rotational axis at a time. Also maybe try simple 3+2 operations first instead of full simultaneous TCP toolpaths.
[edit]
First thing I would look at is that the rotation direction of the B axis is correct?
It might be more enlightening to try a chamfer on a single edge. I would generally suggest to start with simpler operations that involve only one rotational axis at a time. Also maybe try simple 3+2 operations first instead of full simultaneous TCP toolpaths.
[edit]
First thing I would look at is that the rotation direction of the B axis is correct?
Last edit: 05 Mar 2023 15:27 by Aciera.
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
05 Mar 2023 18:03 #265930
by JackRay
Replied by JackRay on topic TCP 5-axis kinematics
Thank you,
all my tests in 3+2 work, only the TCP has a problem but I can't understand why. I tried many things. I changed the rotations of the B&C axes in the post processor and in the machine configuration. changed the direction of my axes in my CAM. nothing to do.
we see on the video that the Z axis should (be anywhere on the toolpath) opposite its position to make a chamfer as on the simulation.
I have already worked in 5 axes with an XYZAC configuration and I did not have this problem.
I am sure that I have a parameter that does not conform either in my post processor or in my machine configuration.
But which one ?????
I have changed all the possible settings in my post pro but still the same results.
The path is correct around the part but the attack of the angle by the Z axis is not conform.
Or maybe I don't put the M428 in the right place in my program ...
all my tests in 3+2 work, only the TCP has a problem but I can't understand why. I tried many things. I changed the rotations of the B&C axes in the post processor and in the machine configuration. changed the direction of my axes in my CAM. nothing to do.
we see on the video that the Z axis should (be anywhere on the toolpath) opposite its position to make a chamfer as on the simulation.
I have already worked in 5 axes with an XYZAC configuration and I did not have this problem.
I am sure that I have a parameter that does not conform either in my post processor or in my machine configuration.
But which one ?????
I have changed all the possible settings in my post pro but still the same results.
The path is correct around the part but the attack of the angle by the Z axis is not conform.
Or maybe I don't put the M428 in the right place in my program ...
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
05 Mar 2023 19:00 - 05 Mar 2023 19:06 #265936
by Aciera
Replied by Aciera on topic TCP 5-axis kinematics
Yes, as you say the tool position seems correct but the orientation is off.
So if you use your PP to create gcode for say a chamfer along a single edge every thing works fine? If so does it also work for all four edges individually?
[edit]
It might be a good idea to post a simple gcode produced by your PP that shows the problem. As short and simple as possible.
So if you use your PP to create gcode for say a chamfer along a single edge every thing works fine? If so does it also work for all four edges individually?
[edit]
It might be a good idea to post a simple gcode produced by your PP that shows the problem. As short and simple as possible.
Last edit: 05 Mar 2023 19:06 by Aciera.
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
07 Mar 2023 17:22 #266044
by JackRay
Replied by JackRay on topic TCP 5-axis kinematics
Hello ,
This is , in file, the Gcode program.
Thanks
This is , in file, the Gcode program.
Thanks
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
07 Mar 2023 18:11 #266051
by Aciera
Replied by Aciera on topic TCP 5-axis kinematics
Not sure if the gcode was the same as in the videos you posted earlier but if that is supposed to be for a 45° chamfer then I would expect the B axis values to be 45° or larger and not smaller then 45° as in your gcode. (presuming that the C-rotary table is horizontal for B=0°).
As I suggested before, you could maybe test easier this by running a 45° chamfer along a single edge through your PP instead of all four.
As I suggested before, you could maybe test easier this by running a 45° chamfer along a single edge through your PP instead of all four.
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
10 Mar 2023 19:23 #266320
by JackRay
Replied by JackRay on topic TCP 5-axis kinematics
Hello,
I apologize for the delay but I was away on business.
I enclose my last Gcode a chamfer only on two edges of the rectangle. I did not manage to do it on only one edge, as requested, my software does not generate the tool path
The programmed chamfer is 60°.
Thank you
I apologize for the delay but I was away on business.
I enclose my last Gcode a chamfer only on two edges of the rectangle. I did not manage to do it on only one edge, as requested, my software does not generate the tool path
The programmed chamfer is 60°.
Thank you
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
12 Mar 2023 04:16 #266469
by cngbrick
Replied by cngbrick on topic TCP 5-axis kinematics
JackRay,
I left a reply for you in another machinist forum concerning this issue. To recap: it looks to me that the trajectory is calculated for an XYZAB configuration, the endmill looks like it should be perpendicular to Z. You could verify this by checking if the end of the tool is roughly a half diameter distance from the part edge you intended to chamfer.
I don't know if you've already posted there, but the Autodesk Fusion 360 forum is a good place to get assistance with post processor behaviour.
RT
I left a reply for you in another machinist forum concerning this issue. To recap: it looks to me that the trajectory is calculated for an XYZAB configuration, the endmill looks like it should be perpendicular to Z. You could verify this by checking if the end of the tool is roughly a half diameter distance from the part edge you intended to chamfer.
I don't know if you've already posted there, but the Autodesk Fusion 360 forum is a good place to get assistance with post processor behaviour.
RT
The following user(s) said Thank You: JackRay
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
Time to create page: 0.241 seconds