New DNC System

[Thee Byte]

part#_OP#_version#_machine#.NC
This is what we are using for the file name, which will also be the first line of the g-code header.

Someone else proposed this naming convention and my first question "is someone updating all our posts?" (22 individual posts). So far I've done the header updates on 3 of them (as I needed them).

That ought to do it, ofc u still run the risk of the operator not checking.

The best way is to have a work order with the program name as a bar code and u scan it to load the program, so the mistake of loading the wrong program wouldn't happen.

Why all this action? Lots of mistakes happening or just people are bored?

[SuperHoneyBadger]

The best way is to have a work order with the program name as a bar code and u scan it to load the program, so the mistake of loading the wrong program wouldn't happen.

Can you send a link or something about this method? Scanner at the computer? On a tablet? Attached to the control? I'm interested

[Thee Byte]

Can you send a link or something about this method? Scanner at the computer? On a tablet? Attached to the control? I'm interested

Usually the scanner is attached to the control

[JakeL]

Why all this action? Lots of mistakes happening or just people are bored?

We've needed to upgrade our DNC system for years now (we were using focal point). With the new DNC (Cimco) we needed to standardize our NC file naming because that's what the operators look at to download programs.

People weren't bored so much as lazy. Almost everyone besides my boss and I were pushing for O0001. The other programmers liked it because one less number to keep track of. Engineers liked it because "only one program can be kept in the machine". They weren't considering how much of a headache it would be for the machinists.

[Thee Byte]

We've needed to upgrade our DNC system for years now (we were using focal point). With the new DNC (Cimco) we needed to standardize our NC file naming because that's what the operators look at to download programs.

People weren't bored so much as lazy. Almost everyone besides my boss and I were pushing for O0001. The other programmers liked it because one less number to keep track of. Engineers liked it because "only one program can be kept in the machine". They weren't considering how much of a headache it would be for the machinists.

I don't know very much about you're company, but when u say the machinists, do u have dedicated setup guys and operators, or some kind of hybrid position?

If the answer is the latter, there's your problem right there.

[JakeL]

I don't know very much about you're company, but when u say the machinists, do u have dedicated setup guys and operators, or some kind of hybrid position?

If the answer is the latter, there's your problem right there.

Every guy (25-30ish mill guys) on the floor can do setups. 99% of the time the guy that sets up a job is the one who runs it.

I'd guess less than 60% of the jobs we do are repeats. A typical quantity is between 1 - 100. Most common material is aluminum and stainless, but we do everything from plastic to inconel. Mostly aerospace parts but we'll make anything if you got deep enough pockets.

It's a fun place to work because you never know what the next part is going to look like. The typical commonality between the parts we do is the "reason we got the part". Usually it's obvious, sometimes not, but you look at one of our parts long enough you'll likely find a feature you don't want to have to manufacture, and that's what makes this job interesting (albeit incredibly frustrating at times).

[TSmcam]

We've needed to upgrade our DNC system for years now (we were using focal point). With the new DNC (Cimco) we needed to standardize our NC file naming because that's what the operators look at to download programs.

People weren't bored so much as lazy. Almost everyone besides my boss and I were pushing for O0001. The other programmers liked it because one less number to keep track of. Engineers liked it because "only one program can be kept in the machine". They weren't considering how much of a headache it would be for the machinists.

Focal Point. Dang, that is a name I haven't heard in a long time. It was touted as a Windows alternative to Easytalk, the old trusty DOS DNC application I used for years. I had high expectations of Focal Point, but when I first used it, it sucked (mind you, that was an early version of it).

I've spent a lot of time with barcode scanners and Cimco DNC. Best way to control the program going to the machine. The works order/job sheet has the program barcode, so the only way the operator can mess up, is to scan the wrong sheet.

[JParis]

Every guy (25-30ish mill guys) on the floor can do setups. 99% of the time the guy that sets up a job is the one who runs it.

IMNSHO, Best plan for now...plan on not having those guys in a few more years...

Shop after shop is is losing people and they simply cannot replace them with experienced people. Plan and set the new system up to "dumb it down"...

I don't miss the shop days and the daily churing door...I am far more focused now on process and establishing systems to keep things moving.

[Thee Byte]

Every guy (25-30ish mill guys) on the floor can do setups. 99% of the time the guy that sets up a job is the one who runs it.

I'd guess less than 60% of the jobs we do are repeats. A typical quantity is between 1 - 100. Most common material is aluminum and stainless, but we do everything from plastic to inconel. Mostly aerospace parts but we'll make anything if you got deep enough pockets.

It's a fun place to work because you never know what the next part is going to look like. The typical commonality between the parts we do is the "reason we got the part". Usually it's obvious, sometimes not, but you look at one of our parts long enough you'll likely find a feature you don't want to have to manufacture, and that's what makes this job interesting (albeit incredibly frustrating at times).

Setup guy and operator imo should be different job types imo, I was a setup guy, it's possible I would run the machine, but it's not possible an operator would do a setup without it being checked by whoever was doing setup.

 having a single point of responsibility for loading the right program and dialing in the vice etc is crucial.

I just can't stress that enough

[Thee Byte]

I would also say hiring professionals with an educational background in machining makes a big difference, companies where I worked in the past would start to hire exclusively students who graduated from my school for example, because it is a hard program 1.5 years + 6 months of mastercam and you need over 90% to pass and are able to precision machine +- 1 tenth out of school, we even covered stuff like temperature control in the machine environment such as coolant related to precision and things like material expansion after roughing or tolerancing before plating etc

[JakeL]

IMNSHO, Best plan for now...plan on not having those guys in a few more years...

Shop after shop is is losing people and they simply cannot replace them with experienced people. Plan and set the new system up to "dumb it down"...

I don't miss the shop days and the daily churing door...I am far more focused now on process and establishing systems to keep things moving.

That's the direction we're moving towards in the past few years. Much more high quantity work (800-1100 pcs) has been coming thru the door.

Seems like a tough task to essentially change the whole culture of the business. A lot of people wouldn't be too happy if management introduced "setup" guys.

[JParis]

Seems like a tough task to essentially change the whole culture of the business.

It is.  Change like that NEEDS to be supported top - down. If it is not, it is DOA.

Perhaps is starts with "new hires", those that don't quite have the setup ability or who are planned to just operate. In so much, it does not affect the existing crew greatly but begins to position the company to fully transition as the skill of that current force begins to dwindle. It isn't a matter of "if" that will happen, the only question is when it will happen.

This company where I am existed in too comfortable a state for too long in many ways and we are running and slightly struggling to get the changes required into place. We are an OEM so it's a more complex system that is evolving. The basis of everything though is much the same, put in systems and processes, documentation that lay out not just what but how and with what tools.

I hate to say this because it goes against so much of what "we" used to do on shop floors but every detail must be documented. With the resultant missing and lacking skill sets and knowledge, removing any obvious questions is critical.

I would not commit to any change or putting a system in place until it has been worked over not only by those who will have to function in & under it but from management who may see pitfalls that laymen can miss.

I spent nearly 6 months going over everything before even starting to implement.

Think it through fully before acting.

JM2C YMMV

[Thee Byte]

It is.  Change like that NEEDS to be supported top - down. If it is not, it is DOA.

Perhaps is starts with "new hires", those that don't quite have the setup ability or who are planned to just operate. In so much, it does not affect the existing crew greatly but begins to position the company to fully transition as the skill of that current force begins to dwindle. It isn't a matter of "if" that will happen, the only question is when it will happen.

This company where I am existed in too comfortable a state for too long in many ways and we are running and slightly struggling to get the changes required into place. We are an OEM so it's a more complex system that is evolving. The basis of everything though is much the same, put in systems and processes, documentation that lay out not just what but how and with what tools.

I hate to say this because it goes against so much of what "we" used to do on shop floors but every detail must be documented. With the resultant missing and lacking skill sets and knowledge, removing any obvious questions is critical.

I would not commit to any change or putting a system in place until it has been worked over not only by those who will have to function in & under it but from management who may see pitfalls that laymen can miss.

I spent nearly 6 months going over everything before even starting to implement.

Think it through fully before acting.

JM2C YMMV

Bro stop capping like u know what you're talking about 

[Thee Byte]

That's the direction we're moving towards in the past few years. Much more high quantity work (800-1100 pcs) has been coming thru the door.

Seems like a tough task to essentially change the whole culture of the business. A lot of people wouldn't be too happy if management introduced "setup" guys.

I worked at a place where people would set up and operate, but those employees did repetitive parts or tasks, one guy drilled and tapped holes all day, one guy would be cnc grinding all day, I was cutting grooves all day into premade parts, but for job shop it's difficult if complex setups are required for one offs, not everyone is so good at setup, it only takes one mistake..

[CNCAppsJames]

I hate to say this because it goes against so much of what "we" used to do on shop floors but every detail must be documented. With the resultant missing and lacking skill sets and knowledge, removing any AND ALL questions is critical.

Free fiss.



When I do a turn-key today, the level of detail required in the documentation is close to about quadruple what was required in the late 1990's early 2000's. No exaggeration. Text was sufficient BITD, now images, drawings, illustrations are required. I don't mind doing it, it's only time. It just seems like the more details that are present, the more details that need to be added to successful execute the task whatever it is. It's like a viscous circle.

As people become more dependent on technology to do their thinking for them, they loose the ability to think for themselves, and troubleshoot.

IMHO of course.