Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Do you mean 
Reply

CYCLE800 ALARM 61189 CSE-simulation

[ Edited ]

Morning!

Again about CYCLE800. No problem, working, but I see some little differences from real CNC, try to explain, I want to uderstand a reason.

I have finished CSE-model for 5-axis CNC, B-C-table.

 

TWINHORN-5axis.png

 

 

All data for $TC_CARR I have downloaded from real CNC, from TABLE.MPF.

N300 $TC_CARR30[1]=-30
N310 $TC_CARR31[1]= 0 ; Min for C-axis
N320 $TC_CARR32[1]=120
N330 $TC_CARR33[1]=360 ; MAX limit for C-axis

 

I set a same limits for my CSE-model, run simulation and - for CYCLE800 I see ALARM 61189 (this alarm about mismatch limits).

I set for my TCCARR.def

N310 $TC_CARR31[1]= -360 ; Min for C-axis

and problem disappear, but - .... this is not real simulation.....

 

 

6 REPLIES

Re: CYCLE800 ALARM 61189 CSE-simulation

Hi Yuri,

 

please add the following information to this post:

- NX Version

- programmed Cycle800 line

- kinematic tree/rotary axis configuration in KIM

 

Please check the setting of:

$MA_ROT_IS_MODULO[AXNAME($TC_CARR35[xxx])

 

Thanks

Thomas

 

Re: CYCLE800 ALARM 61189 CSE-simulation

Thanks, Thomas!

Sorry, NX 10.0.3.5

 

N1462 CYCLE800(0,"TABLE",100000,192,0,0,0,60.000,-45.000,0,0,0,0,-1,100,1)

 

 

 CYCLE800_.png

 

 

Re: CYCLE800 ALARM 61189 CSE-simulation

Hi Yuri,

 

do it right the first time and you will not get those problems Smiley Tongue

 

The problem is the mismatch in axis limit settings between kinematic model and toolcarrier definition. The MD´s $MA_MODULO_RANGE[n] and $MA_MODULO_RANGE_START[n] are used within cycle800 for this direct mode. These variables are set with the limits (from kinematic model) of the rotary axis. I marked the limits in the screenshot below.

 

I suggest that you enter the limits from toolcarrier +9999 and -9999 as axis limit for the C axis in kinematic model. For sure you can also enter the 5729xxxx value in tool carrier definition. 

 

2017-08-01 11_25_49-Program Manager.jpg

 

Let me know if that helps.

 

Thanks

Thomas

Re: CYCLE800 ALARM 61189 CSE-simulation

Thank you, Thomas!!

Of course, I did a same - I set limits for my CSE-model for C-axis -9999....99999, and problem disappear. But! Before today I hope if I copy TCARR data from CNC - it will be warranty for  correct simulation CYCLE800... 

Re: CYCLE800 ALARM 61189 CSE-simulation

Hi Yuri,

the problem is that the cse driver uses values from different places (KIM, toolcarrier). Sure we can say, lets take all values from KIM, but then you have to ensure that the KIM is fully configured as the real machine.
Or the other way around, we use all information from machine data. But then you have to ensure that all machine files are setup correctly. From my perspective we cannot make it black or white only.

In NX12 I wrote a method that collect some information from the kinematic model and fills internally the toolcarrier data. Unfortunately there are some open points to fullfill the entire dataset. If you are not working correctly, the dataset will not reflect the real dataset.

At the end, I suggest as best practise to bring the toolcarrier data in sync with the kinematic model or the other direction. This will always be a manual step.

Thomas

Re: CYCLE800 ALARM 61189 CSE-simulation

Thank you, Thomas! One more confirmation of your deep experience!

Learn online





Solution Information