On 05/09/2012 03:00 PM, Chris Lesiak wrote:
> On 05/09/2012 02:18 PM, andy pugh wrote:
>>
>> So, we would need a second tool-table?
>>
> The wear offset table isn't really a tool table because the entries can
> be used with any tool.  But it is an additional table.
>
> If you only need one wear offset per tool, you would likely use the same
> wear offset number that you are using for geometry offset.  This helps
> you keep things straight.
> Example: T0101 or T0202
>
> But, if you need a second wear offset for the same tool you can.
> Convention might be to allocate wear offset entries 01, 11, 21, etc for
> use with tool 01.  Wear offsets 02, 12, 22, etc would be used with tool
> 02.  But you can use any wear offset with any tool if you want to
> confuse yourself.
>

Sorry for replying to myself but, a non-Fanuc way of doing things might 
be simpler.

Instead of having a completely separate wear offset table, multiple wear 
offset entries could be added to each tool in the tool table.  Each tool 
in the tool table would then have one geometry offset and (say) ten 
different wear offsets.

This would prevent someone from using the same wear offset entry for two 
different tools -- something possible with Fanuc, but I'm not sure it is 
useful.

-- 
Chris Lesiak
[email protected]

Any opinions expressed are those of the author and
do not necessarily represent those of his employer.


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Live Security Virtual Conference
Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's security and 
threat landscape has changed and how IT managers can respond. Discussions 
will include endpoint security, mobile security and the latest in malware 
threats. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfrnl04242012/114/50122263/
_______________________________________________
Emc-developers mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-developers

Reply via email to