Pete wanted to see my machine. I made NO ATTEMPT to clean up. Lots a
wires hanging around. You can see I'm not done yet.

Problem of the moment is not being able to turn the Z axis ball screw.
I started work on the Z while waiting for some stupid little pins from
Mouser. Otherwise, X and Y servos are ready for testing. I normally
finish one step before starting the next.

The two panel pics is where I've been living lately. Still a lot of
connections to complete. I have the control running and I check out as
I go. Perhaps a more experience refitter would wire the whole damn
thing then check out.

Lots of pics have the camera turned, they are sideways in the dropbox.

http://www.metalworking.com/dropbox/..._left_high.JPG
http://www.metalworking.com/dropbox/...high_front.JPG
http://www.metalworking.com/dropbox/...a_io_panel.JPG
http://www.metalworking.com/dropbox/...left_front.JPG
http://www.metalworking.com/dropbox/..._left_side.JPG
http://www.metalworking.com/dropbox/...ower_panel.JPG
http://www.metalworking.com/dropbox/...right_side.JPG
http://www.metalworking.com/dropbox/...ol_changer.JPG
http://www.metalworking.com/dropbox/...a_side_low.JPG
http://www.metalworking.com/dropbox/...ra_spindle.JPG
http://www.metalworking.com/dropbox/...lief_valve.JPG
http://www.metalworking.com/dropbox/...s_coupling.JPG
http://www.metalworking.com/dropbox/...axis_servo.JPG

Karl

Karl Townsend wrote:
Pete wanted to see my machine. I made NO ATTEMPT to clean up. Lots a
wires hanging around. You can see I'm not done yet. ...

Dang - that's a complicated machine. What's the Mean Time Between
Failures - an hour or two? G You know, with n parts, each of which
has a probability P of failure in the next hour, the probability that at
least one of the will fail in the next hour is 1-(1-P)^n. E.g., 1000
parts & .01% (10,000 hours MTBF) each is 10% overall.


Lots of pics have the camera turned, they are sideways in the dropbox.
...

You know, you don't have to go to a lot of trouble to rotate a picture -
Windows Picture Viewer ("Preview") will do it. My neck is sore from
twisting to see them. G

Bob

Karl Townsend wrote:

Pete wanted to see my machine. I made NO ATTEMPT to clean up. Lots a
wires hanging around. You can see I'm not done yet.

Problem of the moment is not being able to turn the Z axis ball screw.
I started work on the Z while waiting for some stupid little pins from
Mouser. Otherwise, X and Y servos are ready for testing. I normally
finish one step before starting the next.

The two panel pics is where I've been living lately. Still a lot of
connections to complete. I have the control running and I check out as
I go. Perhaps a more experience refitter would wire the whole damn
thing then check out.

Lots of pics have the camera turned, they are sideways in the dropbox.

http://www.metalworking.com/dropbox/..._left_high.JPG
http://www.metalworking.com/dropbox/...high_front.JPG
http://www.metalworking.com/dropbox/...a_io_panel.JPG
http://www.metalworking.com/dropbox/...left_front.JPG
http://www.metalworking.com/dropbox/..._left_side.JPG
http://www.metalworking.com/dropbox/...ower_panel.JPG
http://www.metalworking.com/dropbox/...right_side.JPG
http://www.metalworking.com/dropbox/...ol_changer.JPG
http://www.metalworking.com/dropbox/...a_side_low.JPG
http://www.metalworking.com/dropbox/...ra_spindle.JPG
http://www.metalworking.com/dropbox/...lief_valve.JPG
http://www.metalworking.com/dropbox/...s_coupling.JPG
http://www.metalworking.com/dropbox/...axis_servo.JPG

Karl

I'll look at them in more detail in the next day or two. I see that your
ATC is not the basic carousel style used on the somewhat smaller
machines. Looks like you'll be needing at least four outputs and about
eight inputs to control it, and a bit more scripting for the tool change
routine. Nothing overly complicated, just a bit more than the basic
carousel type. On that relief valve I believe that the hex nut seen just
past the black knob is the lock nut which prevents the setting from
changing due to vibration. You'll likely need to back that off a good
half to one turn before the knob will turn.

On Sat, 13 Nov 2010 20:14:40 -0500, Bob Engelhardt
wrote:

Karl Townsend wrote:
Pete wanted to see my machine. I made NO ATTEMPT to clean up. Lots a
wires hanging around. You can see I'm not done yet. ...

Dang - that's a complicated machine. What's the Mean Time Between
Failures - an hour or two? G You know, with n parts, each of which
has a probability P of failure in the next hour, the probability that at
least one of the will fail in the next hour is 1-(1-P)^n. E.g., 1000
parts & .01% (10,000 hours MTBF) each is 10% overall.


Matsura is Good Stuff. Even machines that old. And it looks to have been
well taken care of. Most often the control boxes are an oil soaked
********. Those look...Nice.

Lots of pics have the camera turned, they are sideways in the dropbox.
...

You know, you don't have to go to a lot of trouble to rotate a picture -
Windows Picture Viewer ("Preview") will do it. My neck is sore from
twisting to see them. G

Bob

--
"Confiscating wealth from those who have earned it, inherited it,
or got lucky is never going to help 'the poor.' Poverty isn't
caused by some people having more money than others, just as obesity
isn't caused by McDonald's serving super-sized orders of French fries
Poverty, like obesity, is caused by the life choices that dictate
results." - John Tucci,

On Sat, 13 Nov 2010 22:26:49 -0800, Gunner Asch
wrote:

On Sat, 13 Nov 2010 20:14:40 -0500, Bob Engelhardt
wrote:

Karl Townsend wrote:
Pete wanted to see my machine. I made NO ATTEMPT to clean up. Lots a
wires hanging around. You can see I'm not done yet. ...

Dang - that's a complicated machine. What's the Mean Time Between
Failures - an hour or two? G You know, with n parts, each of which
has a probability P of failure in the next hour, the probability that at
least one of the will fail in the next hour is 1-(1-P)^n. E.g., 1000
parts & .01% (10,000 hours MTBF) each is 10% overall.


Matsura is Good Stuff. Even machines that old. And it looks to have been
well taken care of. Most often the control boxes are an oil soaked
********. Those look...Nice.

You're right, this is an extremely clean example of a very fine
machine. This old girl don't deserve the scrap heap.

Now, the inside of all the electrical was indeed an oil soaked
********. The two panels you're looking at were stripped bare and
cleaned. There's a lower wire way out to X,Y and the operator panel.
They held more dirt oil and swarf than wire. Julie has been calling me
her laundry problem.

Karl

....
I'll look at them in more detail in the next day or two. I see that your
ATC is not the basic carousel style used on the somewhat smaller
machines. Looks like you'll be needing at least four outputs and about
eight inputs to control it, and a bit more scripting for the tool change
routine. Nothing overly complicated, just a bit more than the basic
carousel type. On that relief valve I believe that the hex nut seen just
past the black knob is the lock nut which prevents the setting from
changing due to vibration. You'll likely need to back that off a good
half to one turn before the knob will turn.

Existing ATC has WAY more I/O than that. About 18 outs and 24 - 30
ins. I could reduce ins considerably with two encoders. But, that's
next year's problem.

I'll try again on that relief valve. With two combination wrenches, I
couldn't get these to separate. The whole vave end will easily screw
out though. You can't see from the pic but that 8x8 hole in front of
the relief valve opens up to a cavern that is the whole inside of the
machine and coolant sump. That's where the spring and ball would go
if I take it apart.

Karl

On Sun, 14 Nov 2010 06:14:29 -0600, Karl Townsend
wrote:

On Sat, 13 Nov 2010 22:26:49 -0800, Gunner Asch
wrote:

On Sat, 13 Nov 2010 20:14:40 -0500, Bob Engelhardt
wrote:

Karl Townsend wrote:
Pete wanted to see my machine. I made NO ATTEMPT to clean up. Lots a
wires hanging around. You can see I'm not done yet. ...

Dang - that's a complicated machine. What's the Mean Time Between
Failures - an hour or two? G You know, with n parts, each of which
has a probability P of failure in the next hour, the probability that at
least one of the will fail in the next hour is 1-(1-P)^n. E.g., 1000
parts & .01% (10,000 hours MTBF) each is 10% overall.


Matsura is Good Stuff. Even machines that old. And it looks to have been
well taken care of. Most often the control boxes are an oil soaked
********. Those look...Nice.

You're right, this is an extremely clean example of a very fine
machine. This old girl don't deserve the scrap heap.

Now, the inside of all the electrical was indeed an oil soaked
********. The two panels you're looking at were stripped bare and
cleaned. There's a lower wire way out to X,Y and the operator panel.
They held more dirt oil and swarf than wire. Julie has been calling me
her laundry problem.

Karl

LOL!

very nicely done Karl. Very nicely done indeed. Im looking forwards to
you completing the conversion.

Gunner

--
"Confiscating wealth from those who have earned it, inherited it,
or got lucky is never going to help 'the poor.' Poverty isn't
caused by some people having more money than others, just as obesity
isn't caused by McDonald's serving super-sized orders of French fries
Poverty, like obesity, is caused by the life choices that dictate
results." - John Tucci,

Karl Townsend wrote:

...
I'll look at them in more detail in the next day or two. I see that your
ATC is not the basic carousel style used on the somewhat smaller
machines. Looks like you'll be needing at least four outputs and about
eight inputs to control it, and a bit more scripting for the tool change
routine. Nothing overly complicated, just a bit more than the basic
carousel type. On that relief valve I believe that the hex nut seen just
past the black knob is the lock nut which prevents the setting from
changing due to vibration. You'll likely need to back that off a good
half to one turn before the knob will turn.

Existing ATC has WAY more I/O than that. About 18 outs and 24 - 30
ins. I could reduce ins considerably with two encoders. But, that's
next year's problem.

Good grief, are you sure? Looking at it I can't see where they could be
using that many I/Os.


I'll try again on that relief valve. With two combination wrenches, I
couldn't get these to separate. The whole vave end will easily screw
out though. You can't see from the pic but that 8x8 hole in front of
the relief valve opens up to a cavern that is the whole inside of the
machine and coolant sump. That's where the spring and ball would go
if I take it apart.

You might need to hold the round part with vise grips while loosening
that lock nut if the locknut is tighter than the round part. If you do
take it apart, duct tape a gal zip lock bag around the area and remove
the part inside the bag.

Existing ATC has WAY more I/O than that. About 18 outs and 24 - 30
ins. I could reduce ins considerably with two encoders. But, that's
next year's problem.

Good grief, are you sure? Looking at it I can't see where they could be
using that many I/Os.

I've only spent a few minutes with the ins going to the ATC. Just
enough to know there's no need to wire now. But I did count 30 and
have to leave that much room on the input panel for later. The outs
are connected and the solenoids all click, Here's a note listing:

relay green tape power panel - coolant
110- SOL 3R Key lock (Right)
110- SOL 7 Shift H
110- SOL 8 Shift L
110- SOL 11R Drum Revolution CW(Right)
110 SOL 12R Drum Revolution CCW (Right)
110 SOL 13R Drum Revolution Rapid (Right)
110 SOL 14R Drum Pin Out (Right)
110 SOL 9 Oil Mist
110 SOL 10 4 axis clamp
110 SOL 1R Arm Forward (Right)
110 SOL 2R Arm Down (Right)
110 SOL 4R Arm Swing (Right)
110 SOL 5R Unclamp (R )
Keylock (L) SOL 3 (L) 110
Drum Revolution CW ( L) SOL 11L 110
Drum Revolution CCW ( L) SOL 12L 110
Drum Revolution Rapid (L) SOL 13L 110*
Arm Forward (L) SOL 1L 110
Arm Down (L Sol 2L 110
Arm Swing (L) Sol 4L 110
Unclamp (L) SOL 5L 110
hydraulic pump
Spindle Brake 110 volt Or Z axis clamp


Look to the bottom of the IO panel. Its the Opto with all 24 red wires
connected. I'm OUT OF OUTPUTS! The 72 inputs look to all be spoken
for also.

I'm working on a trick to get 16 more outs from the two galil boards
at the very bottom of the IO panel. Don Foreman did the design work on
my last CNC mill when I ran short on that one. Generation 2 will be a
slight improvement. Right now, I'm only a couple short that I know of
- oil cooler and air blast, but there will be more.

Karl

Karl Townsend wrote:

Existing ATC has WAY more I/O than that. About 18 outs and 24 - 30
ins. I could reduce ins considerably with two encoders. But, that's
next year's problem.

Good grief, are you sure? Looking at it I can't see where they could be
using that many I/Os.

I've only spent a few minutes with the ins going to the ATC. Just
enough to know there's no need to wire now. But I did count 30 and
have to leave that much room on the input panel for later. The outs
are connected and the solenoids all click, Here's a note listing:

relay green tape power panel - coolant
110- SOL 3R Key lock (Right)
110- SOL 7 Shift H
110- SOL 8 Shift L
110- SOL 11R Drum Revolution CW(Right)
110 SOL 12R Drum Revolution CCW (Right)
110 SOL 13R Drum Revolution Rapid (Right)
110 SOL 14R Drum Pin Out (Right)
110 SOL 9 Oil Mist
110 SOL 10 4 axis clamp
110 SOL 1R Arm Forward (Right)
110 SOL 2R Arm Down (Right)
110 SOL 4R Arm Swing (Right)
110 SOL 5R Unclamp (R )
Keylock (L) SOL 3 (L) 110
Drum Revolution CW ( L) SOL 11L 110
Drum Revolution CCW ( L) SOL 12L 110
Drum Revolution Rapid (L) SOL 13L 110*
Arm Forward (L) SOL 1L 110
Arm Down (L Sol 2L 110
Arm Swing (L) Sol 4L 110
Unclamp (L) SOL 5L 110
hydraulic pump
Spindle Brake 110 volt Or Z axis clamp

Look to the bottom of the IO panel. Its the Opto with all 24 red wires
connected. I'm OUT OF OUTPUTS! The 72 inputs look to all be spoken
for also.

I'm working on a trick to get 16 more outs from the two galil boards
at the very bottom of the IO panel. Don Foreman did the design work on
my last CNC mill when I ran short on that one. Generation 2 will be a
slight improvement. Right now, I'm only a couple short that I know of
- oil cooler and air blast, but there will be more.

Karl

Ok, some of those connections look like they have nothing to do with the
ATC, such as the 4th axis clamp output, shift H/L outputs and the
hydraulic pump output (since hydraulics needed for spindle
counterbalance also).

I see this machine actually has two separate ATCs. The obvious answer
there is to just use one initially and ignore the other, cutting your
I/O needs in half. You're not doing production stuff, right, so I can't
see where you would ever really have a use for the second spindle and
ATC.

Presumably "drum" is referring to the tool carousel. Since you're not
doing production, you can probably dispense with both the CCW rotation
and rapid rotation outputs, and simply use one CW rotation output. This
of course would be slower to select the correct tool than bi-directional
rapid searches for the correct pocket, but for non-production use, does
the extra 45 seconds to index fully around vs. reverse one pocket
matter?

Looks like that gets you down to around 8 outputs or so:

1 ATC rotate
2 ATC arm swing
3 ATC arm up/down
4 ATC arm forward/back
5 Spindle unclamp
6 Oil mist (spindle blow I think, this could share an output with
spindle unclamp)

7 Drum pin out (ATC carousel lock?)
8 Keylock (possibly for spindle orient?)

I would expect around 8 inputs as well:

1 ATC carousel home
2 ATC carousel index
3 ATC arm at ATC
4 ATC arm at spindle
5 ATC arm up
6 ATC arm down
7 ATC arm forward
8 ATC arm back

On Mon, 15 Nov 2010 02:26:10 -0600, "Pete C."
wrote:


Karl Townsend wrote:

Existing ATC has WAY more I/O than that. About 18 outs and 24 - 30
ins. I could reduce ins considerably with two encoders. But, that's
next year's problem.

Good grief, are you sure? Looking at it I can't see where they could be
using that many I/Os.

I've only spent a few minutes with the ins going to the ATC. Just
enough to know there's no need to wire now. But I did count 30 and
have to leave that much room on the input panel for later. The outs
are connected and the solenoids all click, Here's a note listing:

relay green tape power panel - coolant
110- SOL 3R Key lock (Right)
110- SOL 7 Shift H
110- SOL 8 Shift L
110- SOL 11R Drum Revolution CW(Right)
110 SOL 12R Drum Revolution CCW (Right)
110 SOL 13R Drum Revolution Rapid (Right)
110 SOL 14R Drum Pin Out (Right)
110 SOL 9 Oil Mist
110 SOL 10 4 axis clamp
110 SOL 1R Arm Forward (Right)
110 SOL 2R Arm Down (Right)
110 SOL 4R Arm Swing (Right)
110 SOL 5R Unclamp (R )
Keylock (L) SOL 3 (L) 110
Drum Revolution CW ( L) SOL 11L 110
Drum Revolution CCW ( L) SOL 12L 110
Drum Revolution Rapid (L) SOL 13L 110*
Arm Forward (L) SOL 1L 110
Arm Down (L Sol 2L 110
Arm Swing (L) Sol 4L 110
Unclamp (L) SOL 5L 110
hydraulic pump
Spindle Brake 110 volt Or Z axis clamp

Look to the bottom of the IO panel. Its the Opto with all 24 red wires
connected. I'm OUT OF OUTPUTS! The 72 inputs look to all be spoken
for also.

I'm working on a trick to get 16 more outs from the two galil boards
at the very bottom of the IO panel. Don Foreman did the design work on
my last CNC mill when I ran short on that one. Generation 2 will be a
slight improvement. Right now, I'm only a couple short that I know of
- oil cooler and air blast, but there will be more.

Karl

Ok, some of those connections look like they have nothing to do with the
ATC, such as the 4th axis clamp output, shift H/L outputs and the
hydraulic pump output (since hydraulics needed for spindle
counterbalance also).

I see this machine actually has two separate ATCs. The obvious answer
there is to just use one initially and ignore the other, cutting your
I/O needs in half. You're not doing production stuff, right, so I can't
see where you would ever really have a use for the second spindle and
ATC.

Presumably "drum" is referring to the tool carousel. Since you're not
doing production, you can probably dispense with both the CCW rotation
and rapid rotation outputs, and simply use one CW rotation output. This
of course would be slower to select the correct tool than bi-directional
rapid searches for the correct pocket, but for non-production use, does
the extra 45 seconds to index fully around vs. reverse one pocket
matter?

Looks like that gets you down to around 8 outputs or so:

1 ATC rotate
2 ATC arm swing
3 ATC arm up/down
4 ATC arm forward/back
5 Spindle unclamp
6 Oil mist (spindle blow I think, this could share an output with
spindle unclamp)

7 Drum pin out (ATC carousel lock?)
8 Keylock (possibly for spindle orient?)

I would expect around 8 inputs as well:

1 ATC carousel home
2 ATC carousel index
3 ATC arm at ATC
4 ATC arm at spindle
5 ATC arm up
6 ATC arm down
7 ATC arm forward
8 ATC arm back


I plan to go the other way, actually more I/O. This machine is a gift
and I promised better than new. On the computer end each I/O point
costs about $5 so there's no reason to drop stuff that makes the
machine better. I will be at a limit of 40 outs and 90 ins (plus 15
more for limits and homes) The one indisputable strength of Camsoft is
how well it integrates I/O with the control.

Now, this tool change logic will be a stone bitch. "The Kid" has asked
for ability to load tools every other pocket and then always put the
tool in the empty next to the one you need for very rapid tool change.
This could get REAL COMPLEX and may not happen.

But, lets not worry about next year now.

Karl Townsend wrote:

On Mon, 15 Nov 2010 02:26:10 -0600, "Pete C."
wrote:


Karl Townsend wrote:

Existing ATC has WAY more I/O than that. About 18 outs and 24 - 30
ins. I could reduce ins considerably with two encoders. But, that's
next year's problem.

Good grief, are you sure? Looking at it I can't see where they could be
using that many I/Os.

I've only spent a few minutes with the ins going to the ATC. Just
enough to know there's no need to wire now. But I did count 30 and
have to leave that much room on the input panel for later. The outs
are connected and the solenoids all click, Here's a note listing:

relay green tape power panel - coolant
110- SOL 3R Key lock (Right)
110- SOL 7 Shift H
110- SOL 8 Shift L
110- SOL 11R Drum Revolution CW(Right)
110 SOL 12R Drum Revolution CCW (Right)
110 SOL 13R Drum Revolution Rapid (Right)
110 SOL 14R Drum Pin Out (Right)
110 SOL 9 Oil Mist
110 SOL 10 4 axis clamp
110 SOL 1R Arm Forward (Right)
110 SOL 2R Arm Down (Right)
110 SOL 4R Arm Swing (Right)
110 SOL 5R Unclamp (R )
Keylock (L) SOL 3 (L) 110
Drum Revolution CW ( L) SOL 11L 110
Drum Revolution CCW ( L) SOL 12L 110
Drum Revolution Rapid (L) SOL 13L 110*
Arm Forward (L) SOL 1L 110
Arm Down (L Sol 2L 110
Arm Swing (L) Sol 4L 110
Unclamp (L) SOL 5L 110
hydraulic pump
Spindle Brake 110 volt Or Z axis clamp

Look to the bottom of the IO panel. Its the Opto with all 24 red wires
connected. I'm OUT OF OUTPUTS! The 72 inputs look to all be spoken
for also.

I'm working on a trick to get 16 more outs from the two galil boards
at the very bottom of the IO panel. Don Foreman did the design work on
my last CNC mill when I ran short on that one. Generation 2 will be a
slight improvement. Right now, I'm only a couple short that I know of
- oil cooler and air blast, but there will be more.

Karl

Ok, some of those connections look like they have nothing to do with the
ATC, such as the 4th axis clamp output, shift H/L outputs and the
hydraulic pump output (since hydraulics needed for spindle
counterbalance also).

I see this machine actually has two separate ATCs. The obvious answer
there is to just use one initially and ignore the other, cutting your
I/O needs in half. You're not doing production stuff, right, so I can't
see where you would ever really have a use for the second spindle and
ATC.

Presumably "drum" is referring to the tool carousel. Since you're not
doing production, you can probably dispense with both the CCW rotation
and rapid rotation outputs, and simply use one CW rotation output. This
of course would be slower to select the correct tool than bi-directional
rapid searches for the correct pocket, but for non-production use, does
the extra 45 seconds to index fully around vs. reverse one pocket
matter?

Looks like that gets you down to around 8 outputs or so:

1 ATC rotate
2 ATC arm swing
3 ATC arm up/down
4 ATC arm forward/back
5 Spindle unclamp
6 Oil mist (spindle blow I think, this could share an output with
spindle unclamp)

7 Drum pin out (ATC carousel lock?)
8 Keylock (possibly for spindle orient?)

I would expect around 8 inputs as well:

1 ATC carousel home
2 ATC carousel index
3 ATC arm at ATC
4 ATC arm at spindle
5 ATC arm up
6 ATC arm down
7 ATC arm forward
8 ATC arm back

I plan to go the other way, actually more I/O. This machine is a gift
and I promised better than new. On the computer end each I/O point
costs about $5 so there's no reason to drop stuff that makes the
machine better. I will be at a limit of 40 outs and 90 ins (plus 15
more for limits and homes) The one indisputable strength of Camsoft is
how well it integrates I/O with the control.

Sorry, both EMC/EMC2 and Mach3 also handle as much I/O as you need quite
happily


Now, this tool change logic will be a stone bitch. "The Kid" has asked
for ability to load tools every other pocket and then always put the
tool in the empty next to the one you need for very rapid tool change.
This could get REAL COMPLEX and may not happen.

That would be pretty insane since you'd have to constantly be changing
the tool table. The big machines do fast tool changes by using a double
ended tool changer arm, pre-fetching the next tool on one side and then
doing the quick swap at the spindle letting it get back to work while
the old tool is being put away. Looking at the pictures, you don't have
clearance to change to a double ended ATC arm.

The most practical way to modify the machine for a super fast tool
change that I can think of would be to add an intermediate stop position
to the arm swing and an extra tool pocket above that position to allow
you to pre-position the ATC carousel to the next tool, remove the
current tool from the spindle, park it up in the intermediate tool
pocket, grab the next tool from the ATC carousel, install it in the
spindle, and then when the machine is back to work, retrieve the old
tool from the intermediate pocket and return it to it's ATC carousel
position.

On Mon, 15 Nov 2010 08:11:45 -0600, Pete C. wrote:
Karl Townsend wrote:
On Mon, 15 Nov 2010 02:26:10 -0600, "Pete C." wrote:
....
I see this machine actually has two separate ATCs. The obvious answer
there is to just use one initially and ignore the other, cutting your
I/O needs in half. You're not doing production stuff, right, so I
can't see where you would ever really have a use for the second
spindle and ATC.

Presumably "drum" is referring to the tool carousel. Since you're not
doing production, you can probably dispense with both the CCW rotation
and rapid rotation outputs, and simply use one CW rotation output.
This of course would be slower to select the correct tool than
bi-directional rapid searches for the correct pocket, but for
non-production use, does the extra 45 seconds to index fully around
vs. reverse one pocket matter?

Looks like that gets you down to around 8 outputs or so:

1 ATC rotate
2 ATC arm swing
3 ATC arm up/down
4 ATC arm forward/back
5 Spindle unclamp
6 Oil mist (spindle blow I think, this could share an output with
spindle unclamp)

7 Drum pin out (ATC carousel lock?)
8 Keylock (possibly for spindle orient?)

I would expect around 8 inputs as well:

1 ATC carousel home
2 ATC carousel index
3 ATC arm at ATC
4 ATC arm at spindle
5 ATC arm up
6 ATC arm down
7 ATC arm forward
8 ATC arm back

I plan to go the other way, actually more I/O. This machine is a gift
and I promised better than new. On the computer end each I/O point
costs about $5 so there's no reason to drop stuff that makes the
machine better. I will be at a limit of 40 outs and 90 ins (plus 15
more for limits and homes) The one indisputable strength of Camsoft is
how well it integrates I/O with the control.

Sorry, both EMC/EMC2 and Mach3 also handle as much I/O as you need quite
happily


Now, this tool change logic will be a stone bitch. "The Kid" has asked
for ability to load tools every other pocket and then always put the
tool in the empty next to the one you need for very rapid tool change.
This could get REAL COMPLEX and may not happen.

That would be pretty insane since you'd have to constantly be changing
the tool table. The big machines do fast tool changes by using a double
ended tool changer arm, pre-fetching the next tool on one side and then
doing the quick swap at the spindle letting it get back to work while
the old tool is being put away. Looking at the pictures, you don't have
clearance to change to a double ended ATC arm.

The most practical way to modify the machine for a super fast tool
change that I can think of would be to add an intermediate stop position
to the arm swing and an extra tool pocket above that position to allow
you to pre-position the ATC carousel to the next tool, remove the
current tool from the spindle, park it up in the intermediate tool
pocket, grab the next tool from the ATC carousel, install it in the
spindle, and then when the machine is back to work, retrieve the old
tool from the intermediate pocket and return it to it's ATC carousel
position.

Maybe what Karl meant (or, what he could do) is something like that -- eg,
pre-position ATC to empty pocket left of next tool y; remove current tool
x from spindle; park x in empty pocket; shift ATC left; pick y; install y
in spindle and start mill ops; shift ATC right; pick x; shift ATC to home
pocket of x; park x; repeat ad lib.

--
jiw

....
more for limits and homes) The one indisputable strength of Camsoft is
how well it integrates I/O with the control.

Sorry, both EMC/EMC2 and Mach3 also handle as much I/O as you need quite
happily

I can see agreeing on which control is best is just like agreeing
whose religion is best.

My control is better, but its too expensive. If EMC were this well
developed when I started doing serious refits, I would have went that
route. I would, and have, recommended EMC to other hobbyists. I
personally still wouldn't suggest EMC to a shop in business for $
unless they had a refit guru on site.

Now the other control you mention has a concept design problem for
serious machines. No amount of good engineering can overcome a poor
concept.

Like I said, its like religion. If you aren't a Lutheran, you're just
not right VBG. My two cents. I'm not changing your mind, you won't
change mine.

Now, this tool change logic will be a stone bitch. "The Kid" has asked
for ability to load tools every other pocket and then always put the
tool in the empty next to the one you need for very rapid tool change.
This could get REAL COMPLEX and may not happen.

That would be pretty insane since you'd have to constantly be changing
the tool table. The big machines do fast tool changes by using a double
ended tool changer arm, pre-fetching the next tool on one side and then
doing the quick swap at the spindle letting it get back to work while
the old tool is being put away. Looking at the pictures, you don't have
clearance to change to a double ended ATC arm.

Yea, I'm not modifying the machine. I may play with a dynamic tool
table. WAY down the road.

Karl

James Waldby wrote:

On Mon, 15 Nov 2010 08:11:45 -0600, Pete C. wrote:
Karl Townsend wrote:
On Mon, 15 Nov 2010 02:26:10 -0600, "Pete C." wrote:
...
I see this machine actually has two separate ATCs. The obvious answer
there is to just use one initially and ignore the other, cutting your
I/O needs in half. You're not doing production stuff, right, so I
can't see where you would ever really have a use for the second
spindle and ATC.

Presumably "drum" is referring to the tool carousel. Since you're not
doing production, you can probably dispense with both the CCW rotation
and rapid rotation outputs, and simply use one CW rotation output.
This of course would be slower to select the correct tool than
bi-directional rapid searches for the correct pocket, but for
non-production use, does the extra 45 seconds to index fully around
vs. reverse one pocket matter?

Looks like that gets you down to around 8 outputs or so:

1 ATC rotate
2 ATC arm swing
3 ATC arm up/down
4 ATC arm forward/back
5 Spindle unclamp
6 Oil mist (spindle blow I think, this could share an output with
spindle unclamp)

7 Drum pin out (ATC carousel lock?)
8 Keylock (possibly for spindle orient?)

I would expect around 8 inputs as well:

1 ATC carousel home
2 ATC carousel index
3 ATC arm at ATC
4 ATC arm at spindle
5 ATC arm up
6 ATC arm down
7 ATC arm forward
8 ATC arm back

I plan to go the other way, actually more I/O. This machine is a gift
and I promised better than new. On the computer end each I/O point
costs about $5 so there's no reason to drop stuff that makes the
machine better. I will be at a limit of 40 outs and 90 ins (plus 15
more for limits and homes) The one indisputable strength of Camsoft is
how well it integrates I/O with the control.

Sorry, both EMC/EMC2 and Mach3 also handle as much I/O as you need quite
happily


Now, this tool change logic will be a stone bitch. "The Kid" has asked
for ability to load tools every other pocket and then always put the
tool in the empty next to the one you need for very rapid tool change.
This could get REAL COMPLEX and may not happen.

That would be pretty insane since you'd have to constantly be changing
the tool table. The big machines do fast tool changes by using a double
ended tool changer arm, pre-fetching the next tool on one side and then
doing the quick swap at the spindle letting it get back to work while
the old tool is being put away. Looking at the pictures, you don't have
clearance to change to a double ended ATC arm.

The most practical way to modify the machine for a super fast tool
change that I can think of would be to add an intermediate stop position
to the arm swing and an extra tool pocket above that position to allow
you to pre-position the ATC carousel to the next tool, remove the
current tool from the spindle, park it up in the intermediate tool
pocket, grab the next tool from the ATC carousel, install it in the
spindle, and then when the machine is back to work, retrieve the old
tool from the intermediate pocket and return it to it's ATC carousel
position.

Maybe what Karl meant (or, what he could do) is something like that -- eg,
pre-position ATC to empty pocket left of next tool y; remove current tool
x from spindle; park x in empty pocket; shift ATC left; pick y; install y
in spindle and start mill ops; shift ATC right; pick x; shift ATC to home
pocket of x; park x; repeat ad lib.

Yea, that could work, however having to leave every other ATC pocket
empty /= "better than new".

Personally, if it were my machine I'd simply treat one side of the
machine as spare parts for the other side since a dual spindle machine
isn't very useful for non production work, or even production work these
days.

Maybe what Karl meant (or, what he could do) is something like that -- eg,
pre-position ATC to empty pocket left of next tool y; remove current tool
x from spindle; park x in empty pocket; shift ATC left; pick y; install y
in spindle and start mill ops; shift ATC right; pick x; shift ATC to home
pocket of x; park x; repeat ad lib.

This route would work and probably be safer. I really haven't serously
thought it all out. The other concept is just always put the tool in
the closest empty spot to the next tool you need. My control has look
ahead so this isn't a problem. But you would always be changing your
tool table as to what tool is where. Screw up, even once, and break
some serious ****.

Karl

Karl Townsend wrote:

...
more for limits and homes) The one indisputable strength of Camsoft is
how well it integrates I/O with the control.

Sorry, both EMC/EMC2 and Mach3 also handle as much I/O as you need quite
happily

I can see agreeing on which control is best is just like agreeing
whose religion is best.

Nope, it's not about agreeing on which control is best, the answer there
is clearly the big guys like Fanuc. The issue is about not making untrue
claims that one retrofit control handles lots of I/O better than the
others.


My control is better, but its too expensive.

Better than EMC/EMC2 or Mach3 how?

If EMC were this well
developed when I started doing serious refits, I would have went that
route.

Mach3 was that well developed when you started, but you didn't notice
that it could handle as much I/O and as much scripting as any of the
competitors.

I would, and have, recommended EMC to other hobbyists. I
personally still wouldn't suggest EMC to a shop in business for $
unless they had a refit guru on site.

Which is why I also would not recommend EMC to a commercial shop for a
retrofit, even if they had a guru since gurus can leave. I'd recommend
Mach3 which is very user friendly, or possible EMC2 which I believe is
pretty close to Mach3 in terms of user friendlieness now.


Now the other control you mention has a concept design problem for
serious machines. No amount of good engineering can overcome a poor
concept.

What is this mysterious concept design problem you think Mach3 has?
People are using Mach3 for serious machines and many commercial machines
are using it as well, not just hobbiest ones. You just seem to want to
dismiss Mach3 without taking a good look at it.


Like I said, its like religion. If you aren't a Lutheran, you're just
not right VBG. My two cents. I'm not changing your mind, you won't
change mine.

You haven't provided any details on why you think Mach3 is inferior.


Now, this tool change logic will be a stone bitch. "The Kid" has asked
for ability to load tools every other pocket and then always put the
tool in the empty next to the one you need for very rapid tool change.
This could get REAL COMPLEX and may not happen.

That would be pretty insane since you'd have to constantly be changing
the tool table. The big machines do fast tool changes by using a double
ended tool changer arm, pre-fetching the next tool on one side and then
doing the quick swap at the spindle letting it get back to work while
the old tool is being put away. Looking at the pictures, you don't have
clearance to change to a double ended ATC arm.

Yea, I'm not modifying the machine. I may play with a dynamic tool
table. WAY down the road.

I'm not sure why there is this need for ATC speed, are you going to be
producing some product? Heck, I can't see the need for the second
spindle at all, I'd just keep one side of the machine as spare parts for
the other. I don't recall seeing any dual spindle machines at the IMTS
show, they are a barnacle left from the days when controls were really
expensive so you wanted to double the output of the machine.

Karl Townsend wrote:

Existing ATC has WAY more I/O than that. About 18 outs and 24 - 30
ins. I could reduce ins considerably with two encoders. But, that's
next year's problem.

Good grief, are you sure? Looking at it I can't see where they could be
using that many I/Os.

I've only spent a few minutes with the ins going to the ATC. Just
enough to know there's no need to wire now. But I did count 30 and
have to leave that much room on the input panel for later. The outs
are connected and the solenoids all click, Here's a note listing:

relay green tape power panel - coolant
110- SOL 3R Key lock (Right)
110- SOL 7 Shift H
110- SOL 8 Shift L
110- SOL 11R Drum Revolution CW(Right)
110 SOL 12R Drum Revolution CCW (Right)
110 SOL 13R Drum Revolution Rapid (Right)
110 SOL 14R Drum Pin Out (Right)
110 SOL 9 Oil Mist
110 SOL 10 4 axis clamp
110 SOL 1R Arm Forward (Right)
110 SOL 2R Arm Down (Right)
110 SOL 4R Arm Swing (Right)
110 SOL 5R Unclamp (R )
Keylock (L) SOL 3 (L) 110
Drum Revolution CW ( L) SOL 11L 110
Drum Revolution CCW ( L) SOL 12L 110
Drum Revolution Rapid (L) SOL 13L 110*
Arm Forward (L) SOL 1L 110
Arm Down (L Sol 2L 110
Arm Swing (L) Sol 4L 110
Unclamp (L) SOL 5L 110
hydraulic pump
Spindle Brake 110 volt Or Z axis clamp


Look to the bottom of the IO panel. Its the Opto with all 24 red wires
connected. I'm OUT OF OUTPUTS! The 72 inputs look to all be spoken
for also.

I'm working on a trick to get 16 more outs from the two galil boards
at the very bottom of the IO panel. Don Foreman did the design work on
my last CNC mill when I ran short on that one. Generation 2 will be a
slight improvement. Right now, I'm only a couple short that I know of
- oil cooler and air blast, but there will be more.

Karl


You could use a couple of the outputs and run them through a binary to
decimal converter. Two outputs would change to four outputs, four
outputs would control sixteen outputs.

John

Pete C. wrote:

Karl Townsend wrote:

On Mon, 15 Nov 2010 02:26:10 -0600, "Pete
wrote:


Karl Townsend wrote:

Existing ATC has WAY more I/O than that. About 18 outs and 24 - 30
ins. I could reduce ins considerably with two encoders. But, that's
next year's problem.

Good grief, are you sure? Looking at it I can't see where they could be
using that many I/Os.

I've only spent a few minutes with the ins going to the ATC. Just
enough to know there's no need to wire now. But I did count 30 and
have to leave that much room on the input panel for later. The outs
are connected and the solenoids all click, Here's a note listing:

relay green tape power panel - coolant
110- SOL 3R Key lock (Right)
110- SOL 7 Shift H
110- SOL 8 Shift L
110- SOL 11R Drum Revolution CW(Right)
110 SOL 12R Drum Revolution CCW (Right)
110 SOL 13R Drum Revolution Rapid (Right)
110 SOL 14R Drum Pin Out (Right)
110 SOL 9 Oil Mist
110 SOL 10 4 axis clamp
110 SOL 1R Arm Forward (Right)
110 SOL 2R Arm Down (Right)
110 SOL 4R Arm Swing (Right)
110 SOL 5R Unclamp (R )
Keylock (L) SOL 3 (L) 110
Drum Revolution CW ( L) SOL 11L 110
Drum Revolution CCW ( L) SOL 12L 110
Drum Revolution Rapid (L) SOL 13L 110*
Arm Forward (L) SOL 1L 110
Arm Down (L Sol 2L 110
Arm Swing (L) Sol 4L 110
Unclamp (L) SOL 5L 110
hydraulic pump
Spindle Brake 110 volt Or Z axis clamp

Look to the bottom of the IO panel. Its the Opto with all 24 red wires
connected. I'm OUT OF OUTPUTS! The 72 inputs look to all be spoken
for also.

I'm working on a trick to get 16 more outs from the two galil boards
at the very bottom of the IO panel. Don Foreman did the design work on
my last CNC mill when I ran short on that one. Generation 2 will be a
slight improvement. Right now, I'm only a couple short that I know of
- oil cooler and air blast, but there will be more.

Karl

Ok, some of those connections look like they have nothing to do with the
ATC, such as the 4th axis clamp output, shift H/L outputs and the
hydraulic pump output (since hydraulics needed for spindle
counterbalance also).

I see this machine actually has two separate ATCs. The obvious answer
there is to just use one initially and ignore the other, cutting your
I/O needs in half. You're not doing production stuff, right, so I can't
see where you would ever really have a use for the second spindle and
ATC.

Presumably "drum" is referring to the tool carousel. Since you're not
doing production, you can probably dispense with both the CCW rotation
and rapid rotation outputs, and simply use one CW rotation output. This
of course would be slower to select the correct tool than bi-directional
rapid searches for the correct pocket, but for non-production use, does
the extra 45 seconds to index fully around vs. reverse one pocket
matter?

Looks like that gets you down to around 8 outputs or so:

1 ATC rotate
2 ATC arm swing
3 ATC arm up/down
4 ATC arm forward/back
5 Spindle unclamp
6 Oil mist (spindle blow I think, this could share an output with
spindle unclamp)

7 Drum pin out (ATC carousel lock?)
8 Keylock (possibly for spindle orient?)

I would expect around 8 inputs as well:

1 ATC carousel home
2 ATC carousel index
3 ATC arm at ATC
4 ATC arm at spindle
5 ATC arm up
6 ATC arm down
7 ATC arm forward
8 ATC arm back

I plan to go the other way, actually more I/O. This machine is a gift
and I promised better than new. On the computer end each I/O point
costs about $5 so there's no reason to drop stuff that makes the
machine better. I will be at a limit of 40 outs and 90 ins (plus 15
more for limits and homes) The one indisputable strength of Camsoft is
how well it integrates I/O with the control.

Sorry, both EMC/EMC2 and Mach3 also handle as much I/O as you need quite
happily


Now, this tool change logic will be a stone bitch. "The Kid" has asked
for ability to load tools every other pocket and then always put the
tool in the empty next to the one you need for very rapid tool change.
This could get REAL COMPLEX and may not happen.

That would be pretty insane since you'd have to constantly be changing
the tool table. The big machines do fast tool changes by using a double
ended tool changer arm, pre-fetching the next tool on one side and then
doing the quick swap at the spindle letting it get back to work while
the old tool is being put away. Looking at the pictures, you don't have
clearance to change to a double ended ATC arm.

The most practical way to modify the machine for a super fast tool
change that I can think of would be to add an intermediate stop position
to the arm swing and an extra tool pocket above that position to allow
you to pre-position the ATC carousel to the next tool, remove the
current tool from the spindle, park it up in the intermediate tool
pocket, grab the next tool from the ATC carousel, install it in the
spindle, and then when the machine is back to work, retrieve the old
tool from the intermediate pocket and return it to it's ATC carousel
position.

Many machines use random tool selection. You load the tool in an empty
pocket and tell the machine an assigned tool number. The machine
remembers what pocket it puts the tool and will go to that pocket to
load it when you call up the tool number. The machine usually puts the
unloaded tool in the pocket of the tool that just got loaded. It will
also compute the fastest way to the new called up tool and rotate the
carousel in the shortest direction. Some machines you can also call up
the tool by the pocket number rather than the tool number at your option.

John

John wrote:

You could use a couple of the outputs and run them through a binary to
decimal converter. Two outputs would change to four outputs, four
outputs would control sixteen outputs.


A binary to decimal converter would change 4 ouputs to 10 outputs.


--
Politicians should only get paid if the budget is balanced, and there is
enough left over to pay them.

....
Many machines use random tool selection. You load the tool in an empty
pocket and tell the machine an assigned tool number. The machine
remembers what pocket it puts the tool and will go to that pocket to
load it when you call up the tool number. The machine usually puts the
unloaded tool in the pocket of the tool that just got loaded. It will
also compute the fastest way to the new called up tool and rotate the
carousel in the shortest direction. Some machines you can also call up
the tool by the pocket number rather than the tool number at your option.

John

This is what "the Kid" has seen and wants me to do. He looks at the
machine mechanically and says, "easy peasy, just make it do this"

If nothing never ever went wrong, I can see how to do it. But, I
worked as an engineer making machines do my bidding for far too long
to know this will work.

Karl

On Tue, 16 Nov 2010 00:51:02 -0500, "Michael A. Terrell"
wrote:


John wrote:

You could use a couple of the outputs and run them through a binary to
decimal converter. Two outputs would change to four outputs, four
outputs would control sixteen outputs.


A binary to decimal converter would change 4 ouputs to 10 outputs.

I don't go BCD, but I use this concept on inputs all the time. A
rorary switch with three inputs has eight detents or positions. A
rotary switch with two inputs has four positions. Or four inputs can
have 16 positions. Useful in operator panels for things like speed,
feed, jog increment, mode etc. saves a lot of inputs.

I'm not seeing this concept on outputs. I'm still going to need one
opto device per out to go from 5 volt TTL to real world 110 VAC or 24
VDC. The optos are the limiting thing, there's lots of computer
resource.

Karl

Karl Townsend wrote:

On Tue, 16 Nov 2010 00:51:02 -0500, "Michael A. Terrell"
wrote:


John wrote:

You could use a couple of the outputs and run them through a binary to
decimal converter. Two outputs would change to four outputs, four
outputs would control sixteen outputs.


A binary to decimal converter would change 4 ouputs to 10 outputs.

I don't go BCD, but I use this concept on inputs all the time. A
rorary switch with three inputs has eight detents or positions. A
rotary switch with two inputs has four positions. Or four inputs can
have 16 positions. Useful in operator panels for things like speed,
feed, jog increment, mode etc. saves a lot of inputs.

I'm not seeing this concept on outputs. I'm still going to need one
opto device per out to go from 5 volt TTL to real world 110 VAC or 24
VDC. The optos are the limiting thing, there's lots of computer
resource.


You would want to latch the data on the outputs if you multiplex it.
Old TTL ICs were made for 16 to 1 and 1 to 16 mutiplexer and
demutiplexer applications. The 74LS150 comes to mind. It looks like
the major manufaturers have dropped all the older logic ICs and only
supply some CMOS versions. Jameco might still have some wide
de/mutiplexers in stock. I prefer LS around electrical noise.


--
Politicians should only get paid if the budget is balanced, and there is
enough left over to pay them.

On 2010-11-16, Michael A. Terrell wrote:

John wrote:

You could use a couple of the outputs and run them through a binary to
decimal converter. Two outputs would change to four outputs, four
outputs would control sixteen outputs.


A binary to decimal converter would change 4 ouputs to 10 outputs.

As long as you only need one of those outputs at a time.

Enjoy,
DoN.

--
Remove oil spill source from e-mail
Email: | Voice (all times): (703) 938-4564
(too) near Washington D.C. | http://www.d-and-d.com/dnichols/DoN.html
--- Black Holes are where God is dividing by zero ---

"DoN. Nichols" wrote:

On 2010-11-16, Michael A. Terrell wrote:

John wrote:

You could use a couple of the outputs and run them through a binary to
decimal converter. Two outputs would change to four outputs, four
outputs would control sixteen outputs.


A binary to decimal converter would change 4 ouputs to 10 outputs.

As long as you only need one of those outputs at a time.


I pointed out in another message that you would need to latch the
output data.


--
Politicians should only get paid if the budget is balanced, and there is
enough left over to pay them.