What's new
What's new

X axis motion is backward on a Haas CL-1

Also, all the arc moves look wrong...the convention is that G02 makes a clockwise arc when your're looking down on the job and it's at the back of the centerline and your tool is upside down and X positive is away from you.
Since I am a theoretician, I will complicate this description a bit!
The convention is to look at the plane of circular interpolation from the positive side of the third axis.
On a 2-axis lathe, Y-axis control is not there, still it is mathematically defined.
On a rear-type lathe, the Y axis points upward, whereas it points downward on a front-type lathe.
This is the reason why G02/G03 appear reversed on a front-type lathe, as we are looking at it from the wrong side.

And, the insert facing upward/downward has nothing to do with G02/G03. One only has to choose M03 or M04, as appropriate.
 
That's just a dumb fucking excuse so far as I'm concerned

No, it's not a dumb fucking excuse, there's actually rules for all this stuff from at least way back in in the fifties when nc was first conceived. The only peculiar thing about the right hand rule is how you look at the spindle - from the front or the back - and that has to do with which direction it is rotating.

When you start talking "by convention" then you are getting into dangerous territory, because "conventions" change while standards do not. If you only have 'conventions' then a 1/2 coarse bolt could be 1/2-13 or 1/2-12 or 1/2-18 or 1/2-6 or god-knows-what, depending on which bolt company had the best marketing department.

That's why we have standards.
 
Hi Emanuel:
My experience is mostly with gang chuckers, so I commonly have tools cutting on both sides of the spindle axis.
That's the problem. You are used to running unusual lathes. Our J&Ls had tools on both sides of the spindle. Upper station turret was X+ and lower station turret was X-.

Almost every single single turret 2-axis lathe whereas X+ is moving the tool to a larger diameter away from spindle centerline, regardless where the tool is orientated relative to the operator.
 
No, it's not a dumb fucking excuse, there's actually rules for all this stuff from at least way back in in the fifties when nc was first conceived. The only peculiar thing about the right hand rule is how you look at the spindle - from the front or the back - and that has to do with which direction it is rotating.

When you start talking "by convention" then you are getting into dangerous territory, because "conventions" change while standards do not. If you only have 'conventions' then a 1/2 coarse bolt could be 1/2-13 or 1/2-12 or 1/2-18 or 1/2-6 or god-knows-what, depending on which bolt company had the best marketing department.

That's why we have standards.
very well said.
 
TLDR, It may be switchable by a parameter.

Friend of mine had a Mori 2 axis (Fanuc) that was -x. All other machines in their shop were +x. They had Fanuc come in and change a parameter so it programmed +x like all their other lathes.
 
Hi All:
I'm discovering where my complaint actually lies because of this discussion, and I thank you all for that.

A consensus has emerged, that the handedness of the X axis is not "wrong", considering that Haas has decreed that tools will primarily be run right side up on the operator side of the spindle centerline.

It turns out that here's why I'm actually miffed at Haas...that was a stupid decision for this configuration of lathe.
Anybody with half a brain could see how poorly the machine is suited for this style of tool mounting...the turret is crammed with stuff all of which is bulky, gets in the way of every other tool, and will enhance the risk of a crash.
So you cannot populate the turret very well if you set it up this way.
Haas should have seen that...it was obvious.

If they had seen it, they could just as easily have set up the axes so they are handed the same way that almost every other lathe out there is handed...X positive toward the back of the machine, running upside down tools.
No rules would have been violated, and every piece of CAM software out there would have simulated just like it should, and I would have had no complaint.

Seymour Dumore comments that Haas indeed made a gang lathe that was set up this way, and it was a better lathe in almost every respect if some of the past commentary is to be believed.
So they made a dog, when they previously had a champ...typical Haas.

They stuck a turret on an OL-1 and called it a CL-1 but they kept that dumb tool orientation scheme from the OL-1, even though it offers no real advantage and has real drawbacks.

BTW I did find a good Mastercam workaround...I simply orient my viewscreen to "TOP" and then flip it 180 degrees so I'm looking from the underside, as if I was laying in the chip pan looking up.

I do not flip the part in the CAM system, I simply orient my viewscreen so I'm looking from the underside.
I can now make a custom view in Mastercam that I can flip to whenever I want
Now when I run the sim, it looks like it will when I run the actual lathe...not for my benefit so much, but for the benefit of those novices who want to see their simulation looking exactly like the machine movements will look and want to see a G03 going counterclockwise in the simulation, just like they were taught.

So, Haas...I apologize for telling you you got the X axis handedness wrong considering how you envisioned setting up the turret with tooling.
I don't apologize for slagging the stupidity of the decision to favour setting the turret up the way you did... assuming stick tooling, mounted like you would on a manual lathe, on that hopelessly unsuitable turret design.

So thanks again everyone for contributing to the conversation...I have a workable fix, I've apologized to Haas, I learned something and I got something off my chest too.

I feel much better now!

Cheers

Marcus
www.implant-mechanix.com
www.vancouverwireedm.com
 
Last edited:
Marcus, I am 100% with you!
That setup may seem logical from a manual lathe operator's perspective, but not if you look at how an automated machinetool works and considers the coordinate system.
Lathe, mill or CNC paper shredder, it does not matter.
It should be ( I know it isn't on the Haas TL ) -X tool towards the operator, +X away.
If you tell me that the CL is the opposite ( and apparently so is the OL ), the Haas double screwed up as my Minilathe is the predecessor of the OL and the CL, and it sure
does work as expected, -X is towards you, +X is away.



You are forgetting one crucial piece: It absolutely DOES matter which direction you move away from the spindle, therefore positive and negative numbers do in fact very very relevant!
Think of it like asking someone where they live, and their answer is: 2.78 miles from you.
Think of a 2-axis lathe, and someone telling you they live 2.78 miles from you. You know the exact direction they live.
 
Anybody with half a brain could see how poorly the machine is suited for this style of tool mounting...the turret is crammed with stuff all of which is bulky, gets in the way of every other tool, and will enhance the risk of a crash.
So you cannot populate the turret very well if you set it up this way.
Haas should have seen that...it was obvious.

At the risk of not having half a brain.... Given the same travels and turret size, how would reorienting the X axis help tool interference?

I completely understand the limitations, which is one of the reasons I no longer own the CHNC, but for short <1-1/16" diameter parts it's workable.
 
Hi LOTT:
Good question, and the answer lies in the recognition that this turret design is not really suitable for conventional stick tooling, but will work just fine with gang type tooling and a corresponding programming strategy.

If you go back to my post # 10 and look at the first picture it's obvious that the tooling holders for stick tooling (rectangular tools with the insert protruding from the end so they need to be mounted sideways for those unfamiliar with the term "stick tooling") use up a lot of space you don't really have to spare around the turret.

The whole point of Haas deciding to make X positive point toward the operator was to use stick tooling mounted to the turret in an upright position with the tools on the operator side of the spindle axis.
That decision appears to have been made by Haas to make the whole idea of CNC less intimidating to new users with manual turning backgrounds where the tools are right side up and in front of the spindle centerline.

That's OK for a TL-1 with a Dorian or Multifix toolpost on it.
It's a bit dumber for the OL-1 which was a normal gang chucker, but Haas apparently persisted with this dumbass idea nonetheless.

It's even dumber for a machine that does not readily accept stick tooling like the CL-1.

As soon as you go with boring bars for all your external turning too, you free up the turret and can pack lots of tools on it...up to 16 if you put dual station toolholder blocks at each position.

This is unconventional enough that the whole argument for keeping the tool in front of the spindle centerline so the beginner won't freak out gets stupid.

Now there is zero incentive to make X positive go toward the operator and make every CAM system out there look wrong when it simulates.

You can make it exactly the same as every other lathe that has a turret...tools upside down and external turning mostly happening on the back side of spindle center, so X positive going toward the rear of the machine.
Now the CAM will look just like what the real tool does, and nobody who doesn't know much yet, will freak out.

In this scenario, when you want to run a tool on the near side (also a boring bar to unclutter the turret BTW, but with the insert facing up) you program on the bottom turret in CAM.

It's the special case and you program it that way so all the X axis moves become negative for every movement away from the spindle centerline, which is how bottom turret programming (in Mastercam at least) works.
You KNOW it was the special case and the code reflects that.
If you make X positive go toward the operator in the machine, many of those rules we all know look wrong...G02 is going counterclockwise, G03 is going clockwise unless you crawl into the chip pan and look up.

That's where the stupidity resides IMO.

Cheers

Marcus
www.implant-mechanix.com
www.vancouverwireedm.com
 
That's where the stupidity resides IMO.
There is no stupidity. You just have to realize that lathes are all different, depending on their layout. All you really need to remember is that as the numbers get larger, the tool is farther away from the center line. Then when you do a program, you check which way the lathe you are working with is set up.

That's why there are post-processors.

(It doesn't help that some lathes do not follow the rules so you can't figure out using logic which way they are supposed to go. So you just look at the programmer's manual and take their word for it. )
 
Hi Emanuel:
This is one of the few times I am going to have to disagree with you.

1) Haas made the decision to make it so the preferred way to set up, is stick tools in front of the spindle centerline even though the lathe isn't well suited for those tools because of the turret design.

2) In order to force that tool layout to be the preferred one, , they made the X axis go the same way, per the standard you and sinha have referenced, that X positive bring the tool away from the spindle centerline.

I'm not arguing that #2 was stupid...I'm arguing that #1 was stupid and IMO, it is.
It's opposite to the way most CNC lathes are set up ,blah, blah, blah...I've beaten the subject almost to death already.

So can we still remain friends in spite of our disagreement, do you think? :D

And sinha, while I'm at it...yeah I get what you're saying in post #32, but why on earth would you first stand on your head, in order to decide which way is up and which way is down.:D
That's what Haas has done, and they appear to have done it to make things "easier" for novices.
That's stupid!

Cheers

Marcus
www.implant-mechanix.com
www.vancouverwireedm.com
 
Need to keep in mind the TL was made as a step up from an engine lathe which is why the tools are on the operator side, face up. You used to be able to actually crank the handles.

Nothing about the setup is “wrong”. X+ is away from centerline and literally no different than if they were on a turret “upside down” it’s just a different perspective, rotated about the spindle centerline. The simulation isn’t wrong either, adjust the view by rotating around Z so the tools are in front.

These aren’t designed to run tools on the backside of the spindle, although possible if necessary. They’re simply a CNC version of a “manual/engine” lathe.
 
So can we still remain friends in spite of our disagreement, do you think? :D
I dunno, we were only 5 miles apart (in the plus direction from my side, minus for you) and you didn't come visit, hurt my feelings :(

(Just kidding, getting across the border was a nightmare for all that time ... altho you could still go to the park and swap parts for cash, which I did on some craigslist purchases. Added smuggling to the rap sheet :D)
 
Hi couch:
Yeah, true for the TL lathes, and as I remarked, I get it for those machines.
Not true for the old Minilathe that was designed to be a companion to the Minimill when it first came out and was apparently a very good little lathe with X and Z oriented as they should be.

Then came the TL series.
Then they apparently used the same TL scheme for the Office lathe which was marketed as the successor to the Minilathe.
That was dumb IMO because it was a conventional gang lathe just like the Minilathe was.

Then they did the same stupid thing on the CL-1.

Thankfully it's not my lathe even though I'm going to be the one who does most of the programming for it.
I know now that it is backassward, so I can accommodate it easily.

I'm persisting in my pissy rant partially because I'm indulging in a little satisfying Haas bashing after having my WTF moment when I first discovered it.
When I saw just how crappy and crashworthy the machine looks when it's loaded up with stick tools on that laydown turret, I just shook my head.
I don't know how popular or unpopular these things are, but I sure wouldn't buy one...and that ultra dumb layout is one of the reasons.

Funny enough, I did consider one once upon a time because I hate the Fanuc OiTC Mate control so much on my Prodigy.

Can you tell I'm not always fully rational about these things? :ack2:
But I'll make it work...I have no choice!

Cheers

Marcus
www.implant-mechanix.com
www.vancouverwireedm.com
 
Last edited:








 
Back
Top