What's new
What's new

45° with radius does not work

These are the latest greatest, whiz bang Swiss lathes, like this:
XYZ, full C on main and sub. This machine has programmable B axis and ATC, we don't have those because we don't need 'em, but they use G50 too.

Though we've got no 32mm machines, there's plenty of 12, 16, and 20mm machines.

And yes, G50W would be an incremental shift, often used when rechucking with a Swiss lathe in following mode, otherwise your sub spindle would try to drive itself into your guide bushing while rechucking.

Swiss is my lifeblood, and I'm happy about it. No steel toes. No stinky coolant. No struggling to load a 15lb tool assembly into a spindle that's 30" from the operator door (I'm 5'3"). No heavy stock to load, no stoning the table and sweeping vises. 12ft bars of 1/4" steel are surprisingly manageable. I can drop 1000 of my pieces at once and not worry about breaking a toe.

I always tell other machinists anything they can do, we can do smaller.

#Swiss4Lyfe.
see now... in my head I'd rather use g10/g92 so that there isn't potential interferance with g50 for spindle limiting reasons, it also means other dummies(such as myself) will understand WTF is going on. to be fair though, Swiss machines seem to have their own special breed of operator/programmers etc to be fair though most swiss parts can run just about balls out and not have any limiting issues, except maybe chatter?

Personally I like big funky parts and massive intricate setups, keeps the mind working harder, granted the workout of putting all this stuff together can be rough, but it is fun.

And I never liked the oil the swiss guys I worked with used lol, shizz got everywhere and didn't wash off very easily, used the same stuff in the hardinge turret lathes, so the shop was coated in the stuff., water based coolant rinses off (and don't stank if you run yer machines hard enough to burn off coolant)
 
see now... in my head I'd rather use g10/g92 so that there isn't potential interferance with g50 for spindle limiting reasons
If you think there is a potential interference with G50 for spindle rev capping, which there isn't, it will exist to exactly the same extent with G92 when used with a lathe control. You should note from the following extract from a late series Fanuc Lathe Manual, that G50 and G92 are in the same row, and the description for their use is exactly the same. The headings for the three left most columns of the full table are A, B and C, which corresponds to G Code System A, B and C. If the control is set to use G Code System B or C via parameter, then G92 will be used in exactly the same way as G50 when the control is set to use G Code System A.

Some other makers of lathe controls, such as Cincinati, use G92 straight off the bat to set the Work Coordinate System and limit the spindle revs and have no other option. Accordingly, your thinking is askew with regards G92 of a lathe control having less potential to interfere with the spindle rev limit.

1710403180426.png
 

Attachments

  • 1710402485449.png
    1710402485449.png
    118.4 KB · Views: 1
Modern Haas lathes still use G50 as a coordinate system as well as a speed limiter when coupled with a S address like Bill said earlier. So it is not something that just older machines used.
 
G50/G92 are not recommended for coordinate setting.
However, these are not discontinued on newer machines, because of program-portability reasons.
 
If you think there is a potential interference with G50 for spindle rev capping, which there isn't, it will exist to exactly the same extent with G92 when used with a lathe control. You should note from the following extract from a late series Fanuc Lathe Manual, that G50 and G92 are in the same row, and the description for their use is exactly the same. The headings for the three left most columns of the full table are A, B and C, which corresponds to G Code System A, B and C. If the control is set to use G Code System B or C via parameter, then G92 will be used in exactly the same way as G50 when the control is set to use G Code System A.

Some other makers of lathe controls, such as Cincinati, use G92 straight off the bat to set the Work Coordinate System and limit the spindle revs and have no other option. Accordingly, your thinking is askew with regards G92 of a lathe control having less potential to interfere with the spindle rev limit.

View attachment 432918
Bill was it the old Seiki machines that had the single tool offset column? I was pretty young and did a lot of drugs back then, so I could be wrong, lord knows it won't be the first time, but I seem to remember a shop I worked at with a Seiki mill and to call your tools you had to use a different offset number for the D than the H because there was only one column. It looked something like this in the program from what I remember. I was really green in the industry at the time and I could be completely wrong.

T1 M6
GO G54 X1.0 Y0.0
G43 H1 Z1.0
G1 Z-.325
G1 G42 X.1 Y0.0 D21
 
Bill was it the old Seiki machines that had the single tool offset column? I was pretty young and did a lot of drugs back then, so I could be wrong, lord knows it won't be the first time, but I seem to remember a shop I worked at with a Seiki mill and to call your tools you had to use a different offset number for the D than the H because there was only one column. It looked something like this in the program from what I remember. I was really green in the industry at the time and I could be completely wrong.

T1 M6
GO G54 X1.0 Y0.0
G43 H1 Z1.0
G1 Z-.325
G1 G42 X.1 Y0.0 D21
Hello rj,
There were and are, many machines like that. It all depends on the Offset System Option supplied with the control.

Regards,

Bill
 
If you think there is a potential interference with G50 for spindle rev capping, which there isn't, it will exist to exactly the same extent with G92 when used with a lathe control. You should note from the following extract from a late series Fanuc Lathe Manual, that G50 and G92 are in the same row, and the description for their use is exactly the same. The headings for the three left most columns of the full table are A, B and C, which corresponds to G Code System A, B and C. If the control is set to use G Code System B or C via parameter, then G92 will be used in exactly the same way as G50 when the control is set to use G Code System A.

Some other makers of lathe controls, such as Cincinati, use G92 straight off the bat to set the Work Coordinate System and limit the spindle revs and have no other option. Accordingly, your thinking is askew with regards G92 of a lathe control having less potential to interfere with the spindle rev limit.

View attachment 432918
so we circle back to how the machine settings are then?
which also is predicated on all the machines in the shop being set the same way. as they should, but experience dictates otherwise. Now thankfully, most of the lathes I've ever ran were in competent shops, that did have things set to the same setting, hence why I'm not famaliar with using g50 as a coordinate thang.

I was looking for the polygonal turning for a different other thread... so thanks for that lol.
 
so we circle back to how the machine settings are then?
which also is predicated on all the machines in the shop being set the same way. as they should, but experience dictates otherwise. Now thankfully, most of the lathes I've ever ran were in competent shops, that did have things set to the same setting, hence why I'm not famaliar with using g50 as a coordinate thang.

I was looking for the polygonal turning for a different other thread... so thanks for that lol.
What lathes? What controls/ I bet some of them used G50 in both a coordinate setting and speed limiting way. Have you ever done any polygonal turning?
 
see now... in my head I'd rather use g10/g92 so that there isn't potential interferance with g50 for spindle limiting reasons, it also means other dummies(such as myself) will understand WTF is going on. to be fair though, Swiss machines seem to have their own special breed of operator/programmers etc to be fair though most swiss parts can run just about balls out and not have any limiting issues, except maybe chatter?

Personally I like big funky parts and massive intricate setups, keeps the mind working harder, granted the workout of putting all this stuff together can be rough, but it is fun.

And I never liked the oil the swiss guys I worked with used lol, shizz got everywhere and didn't wash off very easily, used the same stuff in the hardinge turret lathes, so the shop was coated in the stuff., water based coolant rinses off (and don't stank if you run yer machines hard enough to burn off coolant)

G10 is output offsets via RS232, and G92 is a threading cycle. G50 can be used with an S for spindle speed control (which is important when we can go to 10K and often work sub .100" diameters) and with an XYZ address for coordinate system setting.

I think what everyone's getting at is that while your way may have worked for you, blindly stating that your way is THE way is not the way.

Just like, while I'm pretty darn good at Swiss, I wouldn't dream of telling the rest of you how to run a lathe with a 300lb workpiece, because I don't know squat about it, I've never done it.
 
so we circle back to how the machine settings are then?
which also is predicated on all the machines in the shop being set the same way. as they should, but experience dictates otherwise. Now thankfully, most of the lathes I've ever ran were in competent shops, that did have things set to the same setting, hence why I'm not famaliar with using g50 as a coordinate thang.

I was looking for the polygonal turning for a different other thread... so thanks for that lol.
Fanuc controls have this facility of being able to set a particular G Code System for lathe controls, so as consistency across a number of machines under the one roof can be achieved.

If even some of the lathes that you've been involved with are Fanuc, and you're not aware of the use of G50, its clear that you've never bothered to read, or refer to a Fanuc Operators manual. Mitsubishi lathe Controls have a similar facility of setting the G Code System, so that rules out your exposure to Mitsubishi controlled lathes as well, or at least you bothering to pick up a manual and become familiar with the controls you're working with. G50 is the overwhelming default setting for these controls. Okuma lathe controls only use G50, so no exposure to that make of control for you either. In a nut shell, your Posts on this forum simply displays your lack of experience.

It would be people with your obvious lack of knowledge, being in charge of a number of Turning Centres in a shops, that would lead to the incompetent shops that you refer to. Your Posts come across as if you're never wrong and your example of why you're not familiar with G50 is because you've mostly worked in competent shops, when in fact, the reason is that you lack experience and reluctance to pick up a manual and learn something about programming these various controls.
 
Last edited:
Fanuc controls have this facility of being able to set a particular G Code System for lathe controls, so as consistency across a number of machines under the one roof can be achieved.

If even some of the lathes that you've been involved with are Fanuc, and you're not aware of the use of G50, its clear that you've never bothered to read, or refer to a Fanuc Operators manual. Mitsubishi lathe Controls have a similar facility of setting the G Code System, so that rules out your exposure to Mitsubishi controlled lathes as well, or at least you bothering to pick up a manual and become familiar with the controls you're working with. G50 is the overwhelming default setting for these controls. Okuma lathe controls only use G50, so no exposure to that make of control for you either. In a nut shell, your Posts on this forum simply displays your lack of experience.

It would be people with your obvious lack of knowledge, being in charge of a number of Turning Centres in a shops, that would lead to the incompetent shops that you refer to. Your Posts come across as if you're never wrong and your example of why you're not familiar with G50 is because you've mostly worked in competent shops, when in fact, the reason is that you lack experience and reluctance to pick up a manual and learn something about programming these various controls.
beings how YOU chose G50 as the example of coordinate system, and NOT the very much standard of max spindle. then got all shirty about me defining either, correctly I might ad, I think its not MY attitude that is the issue here, in fact its fuck heads such as yourself that can't or won't give a straight answer even when cornered that made working in said crap shops unbearable. In fact you have changed how YOU would use g50 at least twice in this thread alone, just to say I was wrong

YOU ASS-u-me that I don't understand, so you leap to conclusions about my, and more then likely everyone you've ever dealt withs abilities, which make you an asshole.

Its the very attitude of "if they can't figure it out" while arbitrarily changing what YOU define as a correct answer, is the reason its getting near impossible to find replacements for those, like myself that have left the world of CNC.

My ORIGINAL point, with the IJK ,C ,R thing, is so that when a new guy shows up, there isn't a guessing game as to which whackadoodle BS program are we running today, making it easier to learn and easier to train new people i.e. consistency, if you want some one to learn YOU have to be consistent. But I feel your the very type of person that leaves in weird shit in a program just to set a trap for the new guy, so that your job is safe.

I'm never wrong huh? even though I have clearly said so on this very thread. I've made many mistakes, I like to think i've learned from them, I'm also not so arrogant as to think myself perfect, I'm demonstrably not.
 
G10 is output offsets via RS232, and G92 is a threading cycle. G50 can be used with an S for spindle speed control (which is important when we can go to 10K and often work sub .100" diameters) and with an XYZ address for coordinate system setting.

I think what everyone's getting at is that while your way may have worked for you, blindly stating that your way is THE way is not the way.

Just like, while I'm pretty darn good at Swiss, I wouldn't dream of telling the rest of you how to run a lathe with a 300lb workpiece, because I don't know squat about it, I've never done it.
G10 can be used in program as well, its not a great idea, but it does work, you can just send offsets via RS232, at least on some machines, unless you send them as part of the program then use g10, which works I guess... some shops do things this way. (I'm not a fan of it, but its not my shop either)

I was never trying to say my way or nuthin, just that consistency/interchangeability from machine to machine saves headaches, rather then reinventing the wheel every time you switch machines... but I've beat that horse and its clearly fell on deaf ears.


And Yeah, I stay in my lane as best as possible, you won't see me commenting on Mazaks, or Okuma's, both are goofy, and I don't have enough exp. on either to offer any substantial advice.
 
beings how YOU chose G50 as the example of coordinate system, and NOT the very much standard of max spindle.
You don't know when to shut up and learn something. This opening comment of yours further indicates just how little you know. In previous Posts of yours, you talk about old machines and how worthy they can be in production and I agree with that, then you go on to talk about what is tantamount to dumbing the programs for the more modern controls with many more features, so that the programs are compatible for all. Using G50 was the most appropriate example of why your scheme is somewhat impractical and introduces more risk of crashes across the board. Then you came back with the lame suggestion that one merely does a global Replace of G50, with G54, or whatever the Work Shift Offset that may required, not even understanding how G50 actually worked.

And for you to say in this latest written diarrhea, that the standard use of G50 is for clamping the maximum spindle revs, when my reference was for earlier controls, those controls that you have to dumb the programs down to, just further shows what little you know.
in fact its fuck heads such as yourself that can't or won't give a straight answer
Kevin and I gave very accurate and specific answers, as have others in this Thread and you then demanded proof regarding G50; what a Dick Head. If you picked up a manual and had a read, you wouldn't have made such a prick of yourself.
I was looking for the polygonal turning for a different other thread... so thanks for that lol.
And if you had bothered to read an operating manual once in a while, you'd know the G code for Polygonal Turning also. It's cock heads like you, who just don't know when to shut the fuck up and learn something that make me and other that are regular contributors think, why the fuck do I bother. Then you get someone that sincerely needs help and appreciates the assistance given by members of this Forum that makes it worthwhile.

But the likes of you, you have your mouth open so often spewing out nonsense that your ears are closed, and you learn Zero...
 
Last edited:
You don't know when to shut up and learn something. This opening comment of yours further indicates just how little you know. In previous Poss of yours, you talk about old machines and how worthy they can be in production and I agree with that, then you go on to talk about what is tantamount to dumbing the programs for the more modern controls with many more features, so that the programs are compatible for all. Using G50 was the most appropriate example of why your scheme is somewhat impractical and introduces more risk of crashes across the board. Then you came back with the lame suggestion that one merely does a global Replace of G50, with G54, or whatever the Work Shift Offset that may required, not even understanding how G50 actually worked.

And for you to say in this latest written diarrhea, that the standard use of G50 is for clamping the maximum spindle, when my reference was for earlier controls, those controls that you have to dumb the programs down to, just further shows what little you know.

Kevin and I gave very accurate and specific answers, as have others in this Thread and you then demanded proof regarding G50; what a Dick Head. If you picked up a manual and had a read, you wouldn't have made such a prick of yourself.

And if you had bothered to read an operating manual once in a while, you'd know the G code for Polygonal Turning also. It's cock heads like you, who just don't know when to shut the fuck up and learn something that make me and other that are regular contributors think, why the fuck do I bother. Then you get someone that sincerely needs help and appreciates the assistance given by members of this Forum that makes it worthwhile.

But the likes of you, you have your mouth open so often spewing out nonsense that your ears are closed, and you learn Zero...
Unfortunately Bill I have learned the hard way. Machines are easy ....people are the PITA.
 
You don't know when to shut up and learn something. This opening comment of yours further indicates just how little you know. In previous Posts of yours, you talk about old machines and how worthy they can be in production and I agree with that, then you go on to talk about what is tantamount to dumbing the programs for the more modern controls with many more features, so that the programs are compatible for all. Using G50 was the most appropriate example of why your scheme is somewhat impractical and introduces more risk of crashes across the board. Then you came back with the lame suggestion that one merely does a global Replace of G50, with G54, or whatever the Work Shift Offset that may required, not even understanding how G50 actually worked.

And for you to say in this latest written diarrhea, that the standard use of G50 is for clamping the maximum spindle, when my reference was for earlier controls, those controls that you have to dumb the programs down to, just further shows what little you know.

Kevin and I gave very accurate and specific answers, as have others in this Thread and you then demanded proof regarding G50; what a Dick Head. If you picked up a manual and had a read, you wouldn't have made such a prick of yourself.

And if you had bothered to read an operating manual once in a while, you'd know the G code for Polygonal Turning also. It's cock heads like you, who just don't know when to shut the fuck up and learn something that make me and other that are regular contributors think, why the fuck do I bother. Then you get someone that sincerely needs help and appreciates the assistance given by members of this Forum that makes it worthwhile.

But the likes of you, you have your mouth open so often spewing out nonsense that your ears are closed, and you learn Zero...
I never claimed G50 was for max clamping force. now your just imagining what I've said.
Makin S up about me, which is exactly the kind of shit stain behavior I despise.

You want someone to learn maybe try and be a little less of a condescending asshole.
 
The word revs, missing after Spindle; now fixed.
I'm not being condescending, I just don't suffer fools gladly.
whatever dude, pretty fucking hard to have a typo that involves 2 totally different words.

And considering you've willfully, or not, misunderstood pretty much my entire point. must be tough living with yourself then.
 
Well you are completely right. It did not run as expected. I took a closer look when I was running in the air. So I did even try to test cut.

So I’m back to zero again.

I don’t know how to make this work.

I could run the part in my mazak lathe. It’s two lines of code.
But I don’t have a chuck in that machine. Just a collet chuck.
take the Z0 and make it Z2.0
 
And considering you've willfully, or not, misunderstood pretty much my entire point. must be tough living with yourself then.
Oh, I understand your point perfectly, but I'm in the same camp as other respondents, and I suspect, the majority of onlookers of this Thread, to your suggestion of dumbing down programs to the lowest denomination control that you have on the floor and circumvent the use of any of the superior features of the later controls.

I hope that the Competent shop that you work for doesn't fall for paying for all the useful options that won't be used on any new machine they may purchase.

Fanuc actually provide a parameter bit to circumvent the mixing of Workshift Offsets and Coordinate System Setting with G50. But you wouldn't know that, for it seems you don't get up to speed as to what command for various controls do, by reading the operating manuals. For your convenience, following is an extract from such manual.

When bit 2 (G50) of parameter No. 1202 is set to 1, executing the G50
command results in the issue of P/S alarm No. 10. This is designed
to prevent the user from confusing coordinate systems.


Or should I have taken a screen shot of the page and Posted it here as proof; after all, it seems in your mind, I could have made the former comment up and simply typed it.
 








 
Back
Top