ProtoTRAK posts

[bpmufx]

Anyone know of a MC post for Southwestern Ind. ProtoTRAK? For those unfamiliar with it, their controller is conversational, and as I found with using BobCAD, there needs conversions written into the posts for addressing the canned routines.

[PBMW]

MX2 or MX3?
they are both on the original distribution disc I do some programing for a guy with an MX3 and have never had to edit code....

[bpmufx]

Hey PBMW,
Thanks for the reply. Im' sorry for being unclear in 1st post but I didn't mean to say the post code needs editing. However I did need to have BobCAD add some routines that matched the routines found on the Prototrak controller.
For example if a toolpath was a concentric circle, simply selecting it and running a pocket or contour would not work. I needed a separate routine written to select the circle as a "Circle Frame" to match the way the controller handles Concentric Circles.
Same for "Rectangular Frames" patterned drill ops were not affected, they worked OK.

So my Question really should be "Is there a way to resolve this re: MC? I tryed both MX2 & MX3 in the first place, to no avail. But this was almost two years ago now. I've got BobCAD dialed in, but would love to get MC running as well.

[Mike Mattera]

So are you saying Mastercam wont output the code to cut the circular pocket? Or it's not outputting the canned cycle. Because if it makes the cut who cares what the code looks like? As long as it makes the right part.

Mike Mattera

[bpmufx]

To answer your question, Mike, I remember creating perfectly sound toolpaths that were provable within MC, but when posted to the controller, it would fail to execute. I'm using the "Circle Frame" as an example of one type of MX routine that seemingly needs to be duplicated to work.

Ok, Let me back up in time to think this through.

1- Running MC in initial tests did not work. Didn't know why at the time and we had parts to run.
2- We then tried BobCAD and quickly found that the canned routines needed to be duplicated in CAM so the post created the same code as need at the controller. This took weeks to iron out. But the guys at BobCAD were very excited to work through this with us. So now, BobCAD has additional code written specifically for the MX that provides for these canned routines.

3- Having a functional seat of CAM for the MX got us through the jobs at hand, but now I'm just going back to see what gives regarding MasterCAM. I'm curious if we would have to create edited posts in order to communicate with that darned controller.

[lakeside]

Bdmufx Had The Same Issue About 1 1/2 Years Ago On The Mx3 Age Prototrak Dpm Controller With Bobcad The Set Up Page On Cam Side Needed To Be .cam To Send Dnc It Had To Be .dnc The Mx3 Was So Fussie With Arcs And Contours In The End It Was The Setting In Software Min. Line Lenght and Tolerance Had To Be Set At .001 No Less Before The Controller Would Accept The Code If Less The Controller Will Give Alarm "Line To Short"

[Mike Mattera]

If you still have to original post from Mastercam, open it with an editor (the .pst file) and read the first 1.5 pages of comments. There are some rules (imposed by the functionality of Prototrak) on getting desent code.

Mike Mattera

[bpmufx]

Mike,
OK, I opened the .pst file & see what you're talking about. But I'm not sure I see a way of addressing the issues I ran into.

Just for more info: the exact post in question would be the MX2. The guys at this particular shop are more than content with only 2D CNC. In fact I'm the only one bucking the system for a CAM interface. But thats another story.

So to reiterate: if I had a part to run out of .25" plate that has 3 ops, the 1st being a drill op
2nd being a Concentric circle (essentially making a hole thru plate)
3rd being a nondescript contour around it all.

If I selected each and ran the appropriate operations: 1drill op, 2 contours, or even 1 pocket & 1 contour.

The drill op will work
The circle would fail producing a couple of messages (I can't remember them tho)
The nondescript profile would tend to work fine.

There needs to be a way to define the circle not as a path, but as a "Circle Frame" as the controller wants. The same would be needed for a rectangle also.

Hope this makes sense,

Thanks

[Mike Mattera]

Are you using Comp in Control or Com in Computer? Use Comp in Computer and try it.

Mike Matterra

[bpmufx]

I knew that comp would mess with the tests so I did all tests with no Comp.

[Mike Mattera]

No comp as in Comp Off ?

Settings for Compensation are....
You have Comp in Control, Comp in Computer.
Then you have Left, Right, Wear, Off.

So.... Now.... What do you have set?

Mike Mattera

[bpmufx]

Sorry, I would set Computer comp set to Left, Right, & OFF & the Control always set to OFF. I later noticed that the comp set either left or right (in computer) worked fine on paths that were acceptable. Meaning not a canned routine.
Either way I never gave comp to control.