Does someone know how to know the transfer motion (Red line)between the two operations? There is one setting or not. Or this will be controlled by the controller?
Normally, safe retract before repositioning to another 5-axis operation is handled by the postprocessor. In this case which you showed at the picture it is mandatory that postprocessor should add some safe reposition.
In the future, probably we will be able to control it also directly in NX.
Development: C#, Tcl/Tk, CSE
I made a call ER 9237315 "Interoperation transition path using clearance geometry"
So we can only hope.
(dont miss it with interoperation path what would be available in simulation, path is not created in clearence geometry, as I saw it is simple tool path created by moving axes )
ER ------------------- Short Description: <Problem rather than a solution> -In NX we cant connect operations with the path automatically in clearence geometry. We can just do positionng of the axes and make sure we have large clearence space. Or move spindle to machine limits and then do positionng. And this also do current interop path feature - it doesnt handle it like we suggest. What activity in your process is NX not able to currently handle? - We want to connect operations safely (with the same tool) in clearence geometry. What result are you trying to achieve? - To connect operations with path along clearence geometry. Do you currently have a workaround? If yes, please describe it. -Use Generic motion - find last point of one operation and first point of next operation + their orientations. Than use this points and connect them along clearence geometry. And also changing orientations in several steps for eample. But it is tedious. (Holemaking has automatic between feature path we want between operations) Do you have a proposal for the solution you envision NX providing for this capability? Time savings, no extra time consuming moves. Collision checked moves. What is the level of productivity gained from such an enhancement? hi.
Other CAMs has it too. (Hypermill?)
I will definitely add myself to the ER. I have seen the hypermill demo and its very impressive. I’m not sure how it’s done ( Post , or Pivot Point in MCS)
we are already working on this feature :-)
It is available in Preview in NX12.0.2 and also in our Early Adopter Program.
If you have interest to test this feature, please send me a PM.
as I test it these moves/tool path are only "tracking" of tool tip when rotary motions are executed.
They depends on pivots and so on and machine model has to exists.
So it is like G00 A0 C0 blocks in postprocesor.
There are not generated in clearence plane.
I spoke to GTAC and they confirm my observations.
Check that ER if you want
The problem I've always had, especially with spherical clearance plane, is since it's a rapid the move, the post outputs a bunch of stair step motions (2nd pic), even though it appears as a smooth transition in NX (1st pic). I have worked around this by setting the rapids as feed rates, and unlocking the axis on the post. It is still a lot of playing around. I am sure the post could be somehow set up to handle this, but I have yet to see anyones post that has. The rapids really need to be feeds on most controls to have the ability to control position.
What you showed is splited XY-Z or Z-XY motions (rapid). Solution for you = make output XYZ.
*Your issue doesnt belongs to this thread a little bit.*
*Here we dont discuss about transfers within operation, niether the linearization, niether the splitting moves.*
*This thread is about transfers moves between operations with the same tool.
(to make it clear )
It is still a rapid move to another area. I'd have to test the new feature. I am concerned I would get the output that I showed in my previous post.
I cannot just switch to XYZ rapid output. Every program I have made in the past would end up with a crash. "Work Plane" doesn't work with rapid set to XYZ at same time.
again, you are talking about splitting issue.
I am not telling to switch every workplane change to XYZ. Just where/when it si needed. Thats the magic.
To that new feature - it is working different way, there restrictions. it doesnt work as you think (I thought it too). So for now dont compare this new feature with transfers within operation because it is not the same.
(As I wrote in previous comments. )