Hello NX'ers ...
I've got a machine here that I'm creating a post and sim for - for simplicity let's say it's a horizontal boring mill with X-Y-Z geo axes, an AC head, and a B table. There is a scenario where I'd like to be able to position the B table at not only 0, but also 90, 180, or 270 degrees, and perform an XYZ+AC 5axis simulataneous operation at the new table orientation. Everything works great at 0 degrees B angle (default). If I rotate my WCS (ex G55) by 90 degrees and create the program, the toolpath looks correct for if the table and part rotated to that position. The issue is in the sim, when I actually command B table rotation (either before, or after TRAORI is activated) the offsets are affected as if B was part of the transformation, however, the GV_strSwivelingChainName is XYZ+AC. Are all rotary axes compensated for in SetKinematicTransformation? I don't expect the actual machine behavior to be like this. If so, is there a workaround? I'm in NX10 for this project, btw. I've already tried to "DetachJoint("B") after the rotation, but it doesn't seem to be a supported kernal command in NX10. Also worth noting that the machine zero is not at the center of the rotary table.
Any help is much appreciated!
@Study you are correct. The base machine has both X-Y-Z chain and X-Y-Z-B chain. In this case, the active chain is only X-Y-Z+C-A. Which is the reason for my confusion - as I understand it, B axis should not enter into the transformation.
I asked for the kinematic tree and no for the kinematic chain defintion ;-)
Background is the following. A deselection of an axis in the kinematic chain definiton does not effect a non consideration of this axis when it moves. This axis can only be excluded (from kinematic chain definition) when its outside the part end and tool end tree.
Sorry for my misunderstanding ... please see new attached image. I think I now understand how "B" is trapped in the kinematic tree between part and tool. Is "GV_strSwivelingChainName" then, mainly for calculations inside CSE, and doesn't have the ability to selectively ignore any of these axes in the tree? If this is the case, I don't expect it to mimic real machine behavior, when an XYZ-CA transformation is active. Any suggestions on how we can accurately simulate this?
Thanks and regards,