Mastercam and Okuma collision avoidance

[gcode]

We are taking delivery of a new Okuma MH1000-H 5 axis HMC this week
This is our second MU-1000. The first one has an OSP200 control and we were told
the control was not powerful enough to run my 5x impeller files and CAS (collision avoidance system) 
We have never run CAS on the first one.
The new machine is supposed to be capable of running CAS and 5X files

We also have an Okuma VTM-1200 that has CAS as well
We tried using it when the machine was new, but the control did not like the models I gave it
Okuma gave me a little app that was supposed to make my STL's Okuma control friendly, but it never worked

Management is going to be pushing hard to use CAS on this new machine
The problem I'm worried about is providing models  tools and tool holders that the OSP300 control will
accept without spending the rest of my life modeling tools

Does anyone know a simple was to make Mastercam tools OSP300 friendly
or maybe Vericut tools ... run the Mastercam/Vericut  interface then do some Vericut magic
with the VC tools

[Jeff]

You could look at some of the videos that Charlie from Gosiger has on YouTube.
Maybe this one?

[YoDoug]

We use MeshMixer to fix models and shrink the size to use in our Okuma's with CAS. It is a free download. We still use the Okuma app just to check that MeshMixer did a good job fixing the STL. The normal process flow is;

1. Output the STL from TopSolid, make sure origin is output where you want it in the CAS system.
2. Check the Model in Okuma app to see if it is good and how big it is (STL triangles).
3. If not good open it in Meshmixer and fix/shrink model. Output corrected STL.
4. Check model again in Okuma app.
5. Import model into CAS.

It seems like a lot of steps but it really only takes about 5 minutes to get a good model from TopSolid and read in into the Okuma CAS. We use it for SubSpindle stock models of parts half machined, Capto tooling, Chuck jaws, etc.

MeshMixer.com

[kccadcam]

Curious, would the new Mesh tools in Mastercam do the same thing as MeshMixer?
(I have not had a chance to play with the mesh tools yet)

[gcode]

So would it cost "that much" to do it, and then you'd have compatibility between this and #2?

#1 and #2 are compatible as far as running machining files (*.min in Okuma speak)
I even wrote into the PO that the high pressure coolant M codes must be identical between #1 and #2
I personally could care less about CAS.
Everything that runs on that machine goes through Vericut and we have crashed Okuma #1 exactly zero times in 9 years.
The bosses blubber like babies about programming time, setup time and run times already.
Implementing CAS on Okuma #2 is just going to make that worse.

[gcode]

Curious, would the new Mesh tools in Mastercam do the same thing as MeshMixer?
(I have not had a chance to play with the mesh tools yet)

I don't know.. we were trying to implement CAS on our VTM 1200 in 2013 and it was a major PIA
It slowed setup times to a dead stop. We have had one crash on the VTM that CAS would have prevented
but it was just a broken drill with no damage done.

[gcode]

We use MeshMixer to fix models and shrink the size to use in our Okuma's with CAS. It is a free download. We still use the Okuma app just to check that MeshMixer did a good job fixing the STL. The normal process flow is;

1. Output the STL from TopSolid, make sure origin is output where you want it in the CAS system.
2. Check the Model in Okuma app to see if it is good and how big it is (STL triangles).
3. If not good open it in Meshmixer and fix/shrink model. Output corrected STL.
4. Check model again in Okuma app.
5. Import model into CAS.

It seems like a lot of steps but it really only takes about 5 minutes to get a good model from TopSolid and read in into the Okuma CAS. We use it for SubSpindle stock models of parts half machined, Capto tooling, Chuck jaws, etc.

MeshMixer.com

The big problem I have is with tools
How can you turn a Mastercam tool library into CAS friendly STL files without making a federal project out of it??
The other issue is shop discipline. No mater how meticulously I define tools, what they end up running is not what
they end up running... so all my fancy stl tool models and the resulting CAS session are pretty much garbage 

[YoDoug]

The big problem I have is with tools
How can you turn a Mastercam tool library into CAS friendly STL files without making a federal project out of it??
The other issue is shop discipline. No mater how meticulously I define tools, what they end up running is not what
they end up running... so all my fancy stl tool models and the resulting CAS session are pretty much garbage 

It only takes a few minutes for most tool models. For mill tools it is even quicker if you use similar holders. We have all of our ER32, ER20, About a dozen size shrink fit, mill chucks, etc. already modelled in CAS. The setup person just creates the new drill or endmill in CAS at the machine, adds the holder, and off they go. If you already have a huge library of tools that could take some time. I always say CAS is going to take at least a day or two, up to a week get 90+% of the work done. The rest will be quick updates for new jobs.

However, If they are not going to use it at the machine then making models is worthless. The eight years I worked at the Okuma Distributor, I can only think of a couple customers that used CAS out of the dozens of machine we sold that had it. Some would crash the machine once or twice a year and the owner would call us in and yell at us saying the operators say the machine is too difficult. We would explain CAS to the owner, they would insist we train the operators, we would, then they would immediately stop using it and crash the machine again.

[CNCAppsJames]

...
Everything that runs on that machine goes through Vericut and we have crashed Okuma #1 exactly zero times in 9 years.
The bosses blubber like babies about programming time, setup time and run times already.
...

Wait until they see that bill to repair a crash. Then the costs of rework because the machine isn't quite the same anymore. A few microns here, a few microns there, a few microns everywhere adds up to REAL dimensions. 

REAL collision checking is worth it's weight in gold.

[CNCAppsJames]

...
The other issue is shop discipline. No mater how meticulously I define tools, what they end up running is not what
they end up running... so all my fancy stl tool models and the resulting CAS session are pretty much garbage.

You should beat on that kid in the tool crib until he gets it.

[TSmcam]

#1 and #2 are compatible as far as running machining files (*.min in Okuma speak)
I even wrote into the PO that the high pressure coolant M codes must be identical between #1 and #2
I personally could care less about CAS.
Everything that runs on that machine goes through Vericut and we have crashed Okuma #1 exactly zero times in 9 years.
The bosses blubber like babies about programming time, setup time and run times already.
Implementing CAS on Okuma #2 is just going to make that worse.

This..

We've got CAS. Every chance to use it, but never have. I found it pretty clunky, and just another app to cloud the system. TopSolid (Verificiation and Simulation Check there) -> Vericut (Verification and Simulation Check on actual G-Code) -> Run on machine.

We do that for our B400W and U3000 Multii and our MU500 5ax and MB56 four axis vertical. Tempting fate, we haven't had a crash on any of those machines since we have had Vericut. And I honestly can't remember a crash on any of them.

We're strict on the tool models matching the actual tools in the machine though.

[gcode]

Thanks for all the feed  back
I think they will be releasing the new machine early next week
I've got a programmer modeling all the tools up
We'll see how it goes

[mkd]

Trollololol