I went to an interview where the shop manager wanted somebody to run his
Mazaks. That's all the shop had in the place and he had a few. The were
fairly new. I've run Mazaks for probably 4-5 years but I've been doing it
all in G&M code, and if I got stuck I'd use Surfcam. He said he'd prefer
someone who knew Maztrol. I told him it probably wouldn't be a huge deal to
figure out I've used lots of different machines with different controls and
another one had conversational, but he was quite insistant. The stuff they
were doing didn't look like rocket science or anything pretty much, keyways,
a few tapped holes, couple bores. Nothing with compound angles or funky
stuff. Am I thinking wrong about this? I'm going to grab the book from the
place I work at now, they've got a couple Mazaks with it but they never use
it if they didn't throw the manuals in the trash.
Russ

Russ Wizinsky wrote:
I went to an interview where the shop manager wanted somebody to run his
Mazaks. That's all the shop had in the place and he had a few. The were
fairly new. I've run Mazaks for probably 4-5 years but I've been doing it
all in G&M code, and if I got stuck I'd use Surfcam. He said he'd prefer
someone who knew Maztrol. I told him it probably wouldn't be a huge deal to
figure out I've used lots of different machines with different controls and
another one had conversational, but he was quite insistant. The stuff they
were doing didn't look like rocket science or anything pretty much, keyways,
a few tapped holes, couple bores. Nothing with compound angles or funky
stuff. Am I thinking wrong about this?
No, the shop owner is thinking wrong, but trying to convince him will
be like talking to a wall. They are not doing "rocket science" because
conversational programming (I'm assuming that is what Maztrol is) is
usually so limited that anything really complex can't be done with it.
Our shop at work is the same way. Since the only guy who knew the
CAD-CAM system died, they call up a consultant at bridgeport to write
all the tough lines of G-code for them that they can't get the
conversational mode to do.

Jon

Jon Elson wrote in
rvers.com:

Russ Wizinsky wrote:
I went to an interview where the shop manager wanted somebody to run
his Mazaks. That's all the shop had in the place and he had a few.
The were fairly new. I've run Mazaks for probably 4-5 years but I've
been doing it all in G&M code, and if I got stuck I'd use Surfcam.
He said he'd prefer someone who knew Maztrol. I told him it probably
wouldn't be a huge deal to figure out I've used lots of different
machines with different controls and another one had conversational,
but he was quite insistant. The stuff they were doing didn't look
like rocket science or anything pretty much, keyways, a few tapped
holes, couple bores. Nothing with compound angles or funky stuff.
Am I thinking wrong about this?
No, the shop owner is thinking wrong, but trying to convince him will
be like talking to a wall. They are not doing "rocket science"
because conversational programming (I'm assuming that is what Maztrol
is) is usually so limited that anything really complex can't be done
with it. Our shop at work is the same way. Since the only guy who
knew the CAD-CAM system died, they call up a consultant at bridgeport
to write all the tough lines of G-code for them that they can't get
the conversational mode to do.

Jon



crossposted to a.m.c as the OP posted there also

Actually Jon, Mazatrol can do pretty much anything you can do in G-code,
abiet sometimes with a slower cycle time due to excessive safe moves,
etc. That said, however, the advantage to Maz is that once you are
somewhat fluent in programming it, you can program, set up and be running
parts probably before the CAM guy even gets his PC booted up. That is
where Maz shines, a job shop where onesies/twosies are the norm. Maz is
probably the best conversational program out there, especially for lathe
work. Ask DW how complex things can be done in Maz, he uses it every day,
for sometimes very complex parts.
It is used in our jigs shop daily on an Integrex (lathe/mill combo
machine), for very complex fixturing parts.
If you are doing high-volume production on a Maz, Mazatrol is not for
you, EIA rules in that environment where optimization is key.


--
Anthony

You can't 'idiot proof' anything....every time you try, they just make
better idiots.

Remove sp to reply via email

Anthony wrote:
Jon Elson wrote in
rvers.com:



No, the shop owner is thinking wrong, but trying to convince him will
be like talking to a wall. They are not doing "rocket science"
because conversational programming (I'm assuming that is what Maztrol
is) is usually so limited that anything really complex can't be done
with it. Our shop at work is the same way. Since the only guy who
knew the CAD-CAM system died, they call up a consultant at bridgeport
to write all the tough lines of G-code for them that they can't get
the conversational mode to do.

Jon




crossposted to a.m.c as the OP posted there also

Actually Jon, Mazatrol can do pretty much anything you can do in G-code,
abiet sometimes with a slower cycle time due to excessive safe moves,
etc. That said, however, the advantage to Maz is that once you are
somewhat fluent in programming it, you can program, set up and be running
parts probably before the CAM guy even gets his PC booted up. That is
where Maz shines, a job shop where onesies/twosies are the norm. Maz is
probably the best conversational program out there, especially for lathe
work. Ask DW how complex things can be done in Maz, he uses it every day,
for sometimes very complex parts.
It is used in our jigs shop daily on an Integrex (lathe/mill combo
machine), for very complex fixturing parts.
If you are doing high-volume production on a Maz, Mazatrol is not for
you, EIA rules in that environment where optimization is key.



OK, this is obviously way better than the conversational systems
I've seen.

Jon

On Mon, 30 Aug 2004 02:35:26 GMT, "Russ Wizinsky"
wrote:

I went to an interview where the shop manager wanted somebody to run his
Mazaks. That's all the shop had in the place and he had a few. The were
fairly new. I've run Mazaks for probably 4-5 years but I've been doing it
all in G&M code, and if I got stuck I'd use Surfcam. He said he'd prefer
someone who knew Maztrol. I told him it probably wouldn't be a huge deal to
figure out I've used lots of different machines with different controls and
another one had conversational, but he was quite insistant. The stuff they
were doing didn't look like rocket science or anything pretty much, keyways,
a few tapped holes, couple bores. Nothing with compound angles or funky
stuff. Am I thinking wrong about this? I'm going to grab the book from the
place I work at now, they've got a couple Mazaks with it but they never use
it if they didn't throw the manuals in the trash.
Russ

If you can't find them, probably some thieving employee beat you to
them.

Anthony wrote in message 8...

That said, however, the advantage to Maz is that once you are
somewhat fluent in programming it, you can program, set up and be running
parts probably before the CAM guy even gets his PC booted up. That is
where Maz shines, a job shop where onesies/twosies are the norm.

Probably not, Anthony.
To begin with, the user would need re-input the geometry from
a print or something. Much data is CAD or CAD/CAM these days.

A good CAD/CAM or CAM system probably also allows many more
ways to machine things (process-wise) that Mazak ever thought of,
making doing it on the machine much harder in some cases.

Then you have DNC systems and office layout .. space to sit
& study things. I'd hate to stand and input geometry from a
10' roll of print all day G. Not to mention typos that may not
be seen til the scrap parts are inspected.

In many cases, the parts might even fall into a family ...
--
Cliff

"Cliff Huprich" wrote in message
om...
Anthony wrote in message
8...



I'd hate to stand and input geometry from a
10' roll of print all day G


Cliff, I doubt you stand to do anything. I'll bet you sit to pee eh?






That said, however, the advantage to Maz is that once you are
somewhat fluent in programming it, you can program, set up and be
running
parts probably before the CAM guy even gets his PC booted up. That is
where Maz shines, a job shop where onesies/twosies are the norm.

Probably not, Anthony.
To begin with, the user would need re-input the geometry from
a print or something. Much data is CAD or CAD/CAM these days.

A good CAD/CAM or CAM system probably also allows many more
ways to machine things (process-wise) that Mazak ever thought of,
making doing it on the machine much harder in some cases.

Then you have DNC systems and office layout .. space to sit
& study things. . Not to mention typos that may not
be seen til the scrap parts are inspected.

In many cases, the parts might even fall into a family ...
--
Cliff