Programming. Haas vs Mazak

[toolsntoys4u]

Could someone shed some lights on similarities or differences of programming
a Haas machine comparing to Mazak? Are these two machines very different as
far as programming concern?

Thanks

tools

[Mark Mossberg]

Haas doesn't have a coversational language like Mazatrol, it's a G code
machine.

At the G code level most machines are about the same. Mazak can run G code,
but I think it's an extra cost option.

Mark

Post by toolsntoys4u
Could someone shed some lights on similarities or differences of programming
a Haas machine comparing to Mazak? Are these two machines very different as
far as programming concern?
Thanks
tools

[Bad Bob]

Post by toolsntoys4u
Could someone shed some lights on similarities or differences of programming
a Haas machine comparing to Mazak? Are these two machines very different as
far as programming concern?
Thanks
tools

No similarities. The Mazak is the easiest and fastest to program.

[Stan-O]

If your mazak has EIA/ISO option, the G code programming is almost
identical to FANUC style, i had EIA/ISO on my mazak V7.5 Mill and 8n
and 10ms lathe. and use EIA for the mill, and sometimes used it for the
lathes (the mazatrol is amazing to use)

-S

[clay]

Post by Stan-O
If your mazak has EIA/ISO option, the G code programming is almost
identical to FANUC style, i had EIA/ISO on my mazak V7.5 Mill and 8n
and 10ms lathe. and use EIA for the mill, and sometimes used it for the
lathes (the mazatrol is amazing to use)
-S

I have a friend that has a Mazak QT-10 (I think) Is the EIA/ISO an
option on this? How much to upgrade?

ca

[Anthony]

clay <***@citlink.net> wrote in news:***@citlink.net:
Which control clay? It is an option on all of them I am aware of. Not
sure of the cost, but it isn't a whole lot on a new machine.

[Joe788]

All of the newer Fusion 640 controls come standard with EIA/ISO
operation, along with a bunch of other handy stuff like 48 additional
work coordinates, Macro B, Helical Interpolation macros, etc. etc...

As far as I know, the EIA/ISO operation function was an added cost
option on older controls only.

[Billy K.]

I have both,

I have the Newer Fusion Control that is on the Mazak and the
Haas. As far as Programming .EIA they are almost identical. I feel that
strait G-code to G-code that the Haas is more user friendly due to the fact
that Mazak doesn't exactly promote it's .eia side of the control. One
example is all of the sub routines for pocketing on the mill that Haas
offers. As well as the automated sequential engraving Macros that are built
into the control. Try setting up a job on a Mazak 4th axis to do sequential
engraving around a 6" dia. It takes less than five minutes on a Haas, try
it on your Maz.. BUT!!! As far as at the control programming the Mazak has
Haas beat hands down. At least it better for the extra 20 grand you pay for
their Conversational "CAM" system that's built in. You can buy a sweet
offline cam setup for 20k. Haas's Visual Quick Code Conversational Macro
system is not too bad, and if you have not tried it, you should. It's neat
for little things and plus it's basically free with the machine, but it
doesn't compare to Mazatrol. Therefore, it really depends on what type of
work you will be doing and on what type of Machine.

Are you looking at a direct comparison i.e. VF3~Nexus 410 mill or SL20 ~
Nexus 200 lathe? What type of work?





Billy K.

Post by toolsntoys4u
Could someone shed some lights on similarities or differences of programming
a Haas machine comparing to Mazak? Are these two machines very different as
far as programming concern?
Thanks
tools

[Cliff]

On Mon, 25 Apr 2005 18:33:58 -0500, "Billy K."

Post by Billy K.
At least it better for the extra 20 grand you pay for
their Conversational "CAM" system that's built in. You can buy a sweet
offline cam setup for 20k.

You can probably buy a seat of full UG with almost
all the bells for less than that.
(Third party software is often extra.)

[Joe788]

Post by Cliff
On Mon, 25 Apr 2005 18:33:58 -0500, "Billy K."

Post by Billy K.
At least it better for the extra 20 grand you pay for
their Conversational "CAM" system that's built in. You can buy a sweet
offline cam setup for 20k.

You can probably buy a seat of full UG with almost
all the bells for less than that.
(Third party software is often extra.)
--
Cliff

As far as I know, ALL Mazaks include Mazatrol as a no-cost feature
(Other than the few oddball machines that use a Fanuc 30i or 18i). The
3D Surfacing Mazatrol software is an added cost option, but it
certainly isn't $20,000.

I believe he's just talking about the overall $20,000 cost difference
between the two machines. There are plenty of reasons the Mazak is
$20,000 more than the Haas, and Mazatrol is only one of them.

[Cliff]

Post by Joe788

Post by Cliff
On Mon, 25 Apr 2005 18:33:58 -0500, "Billy K."

Post by Billy K.
At least it better for the extra 20 grand you pay for
their Conversational "CAM" system that's built in. You can buy a

sweet

Post by Cliff

Post by Billy K.
offline cam setup for 20k.

You can probably buy a seat of full UG with almost
all the bells for less than that.
(Third party software is often extra.)

As far as I know, ALL Mazaks include Mazatrol as a no-cost feature
(Other than the few oddball machines that use a Fanuc 30i or 18i). The
3D Surfacing Mazatrol software is an added cost option, but it
certainly isn't $20,000.
I believe he's just talking about the overall $20,000 cost difference
between the two machines. There are plenty of reasons the Mazak is
$20,000 more than the Haas, and Mazatrol is only one of them.

I commented on the "the extra 20 grand you pay for
their Conversational "CAM" system that's built in."
comment.

[Anthony]

Post by Joe788
I believe he's just talking about the overall $20,000 cost difference
between the two machines. There are plenty of reasons the Mazak is
$20,000 more than the Haas, and Mazatrol is only one of them.

One important reason is that the Mazak will still be running in 20
years...the Haas....probably not so much....

We've got some early 1996 Mazaks with over 15 million cycles on them still
on the floor, still running production every day. These aren't easy cycles
either.....

[Anthony]

Post by Billy K.
Are you looking at a direct comparison i.e. VF3~Nexus 410 mill or SL20
~ Nexus 200 lathe? What type of work?

This means a lot...
If it is a lathe you want...there is *NOTHING* I have seen or used, that
will beat Mazatrol. You can program the machine and be cutting chips before
the guy with the cam system gets his computer booted.
On the Mill side...it's kind of a toss-up. You will get a better overall
machine with the Mazak.

[jon_banquer]

Post by Anthony

Post by Billy K.
Are you looking at a direct comparison i.e. VF3~Nexus 410 mill or SL20
~ Nexus 200 lathe? What type of work?

This means a lot...
If it is a lathe you want...there is *NOTHING* I have seen or used, that
will beat Mazatrol. You can program the machine and be cutting chips before
the guy with the cam system gets his computer booted.
On the Mill side...it's kind of a toss-up. You will get a better overall
machine with the Mazak.
--
Anthony
You can't 'idiot proof' anything....every time you try, they just make
better idiots.
Remove sp to reply via email

"You can program the machine and be cutting chips before the guy with
the cam system gets his computer booted."

Agreed! Yet we still have someone who insists full associativity with a
CAD model is the solution in *all cases* and that no one should be
programming at the machine.

In this thread he stated that one can buy a full seat of UG for....

Who gives a shit if the most important element is how fast can you
produce the part.

VX ain't gonna help either. Like it most likely ain't gonna help Mr.
P.V. or D Murphy and many not be applicable in many cases just like UG
isn't.

Of course one who need to work in today's small job shop environment or
have worked in a small job shop environment in the past to understand
this.

What comes to mind are the words his dad or mom most likely called him:

idiot, clueless, janitor, etc.

I'm beginning to think he uses these terms as a form of endearment and
he really loves me. I think I'm going to be sick now.


jon

[Cliff]

Post by jon_banquer
Agreed! Yet we still have someone who insists full associativity with a
CAD model is the solution in *all cases* and that no one should be
programming at the machine.

Why redraw it or reenter all the data?
Why risk crashes & scrap from typos?
Why waste your time?

Why spend more PER MACHINE for an optional programming
item than for a full CAD/CAM system?
Just so that the part's loaders can play?

Post by jon_banquer
In this thread he stated that one can buy a full seat of UG for....

Which can be used for all sorts of things as well as programming
a LOT of machines .....
And you can archive & store the parts, programs, tooling
data, print setup sheets, part prints, operations planning,
..... LOL ....

Post by jon_banquer
Who gives a shit if the most important element is how fast can you
produce the part.

Which can take seconds in some cases to program using an
actual CAD/CAM system ..... but YOU have never used one.

Bet you've crashed a LOT of machines & ruined a LOT of
tooling though ... IF anyone actually ever hired you for any job
dealing with machines beyond pushing a broom. Even those
would not last long, right?

[Steve Walker]

Oooh!! Can I play?? My reply applies only to lathes, or mill turn
centers, WITHOUT 3d surfaces.

Post by Cliff

Post by jon_banquer
Agreed! Yet we still have someone who insists full associativity with a
CAD model is the solution in *all cases* and that no one should be
programming at the machine.

Why redraw it or reenter all the data?
Why risk crashes & scrap from typos?
Why waste your time?

Same part family:

Mazatrol: Copy the program, change a few numbers, make parts.

G-code CAM: boot computer, load CAD/CAM, open CAD file, make changes,
post-process, send to machine.

Post by Cliff
Why spend more PER MACHINE for an optional programming
item than for a full CAD/CAM system?
Just so that the part's loaders can play?

Programming at the machine for SMALL RUNS or one-offs is more efficient.
Don't forget the cost of the engineer/programmer's yearly salary to run
the CAD/CAM, his training, everyone else's training, the yearly
licensing fees, etc.

How long does it take to redo the program, if you have to use different
tool nose radii, and/or different end mill dia's? Change a corner
radius? Back to the CAD/CAM system. Mazatrol, change a number.

Give me a print for a lathe part, or mill/turn part, and I WILL be
making chips before a full blown CAD/CAM G-coded program is generated
and put into the machine and starts cutting chips.

I will admit, G-code is faster in many cases running a program, and is
probably more suited for long run jobs, with different parts in the same
part family. (remember, my opinion only counts for non 3d stuff)<G>.


I have 20+ yrs. NC and CNC experience, started out on a FANUC 2000C
(single register display, pixie tubes and all <G>), then a FANUC 6TA,
got introduced to MAZATROL in 1984, and that's what I've been dealing
with since, with a few odd FANUCs here and there. The only CAM system
I've used was (I'm ashamed to admit, as it dates me) was COMPACT II.


YMMV

[Billy K.]

""""> Finished parts shipped to the customer are what pays the bills, not
which

cam system you use, or how fancy a computer you own."""

How true is that. Espesially with lot sizes getting smaller, quick setups
at the machine is key to making money and sometimes that means programming
at the machine. Plus, I can teach a kid that wants to learn on a
conversatonal control alot faster than he can learn SurfCam. Plus, I
already have Okuma's I.G.F. and Mazatrol @ the machine. I.G.F. does a great
job of writing clean programs, and it actually post to an .eia program.
Your can have good control with Mazatrol if your willing to take the time to
setup the parameters like you want them, I.e. lead-in, lead-outs, clearance
heights, retract methods, etc...

[Cliff]

On Wed, 27 Apr 2005 21:01:41 -0500, "Billy K."

Post by Billy K.
I.G.F. does a great
job of writing clean programs, and it actually post to an .eia program.

Just like a decent CAD/CAM or CAM system ....... except they can
also post as ASCII/ISO, among many others ....

Post by Billy K.
Your can have good control with Mazatrol if your willing to take the time to
setup the parameters like you want them, I.e. lead-in, lead-outs, clearance
heights, retract methods, etc...

Exactly like any halfway decent CAD/CAM or CAM system?

You have to start all over inputing geometry at the control,
typos, fewer capabilities in a logical sense ....
Can you dimension it at the control as an error check?
Do 3D models?

[roysol]

Play nice boys!

As some one who started out g code programming on a flex-o-writer, I
found the transition to a mazatrol daunting. What took the most getting
used to was not knowing exactly what the machine was going to do when.
As I got more familiar with it, I came to appreciate the power and
flexibility. With correctly modeled tools and chucks, the crash
protection was quite good. Occasionally I would have to lie to the
control to get it to do what I wanted, and sometimes there was just no
way.

The haas is a basic general g code machine. I did not find haas quick
code to be particuarly helpful. I currently use dp esprit, and have
used several other cam systems as well. Mostly this comes down to shop
culture. I have worked where one person does all the programming, and
at places where each person does their own. There are advantages and
disadvantages to each.

Beyond that, look at other factors, price, machine functionality,
dealer suppourt, etc.
Cheers!

Roy Solomon

[Cliff]

Post by Steve Walker
The only CAM system
I've used was (I'm ashamed to admit, as it dates me) was COMPACT II.

This may explain your opines <G>.
If any agree with clueless jb ....... he just said that
modern CAD/CAM & CAM programming systems are
a useless waste of his time <G>.

BTW, I've used COMPACT II too. Long ago.
As I once knew simple trig & stuff it could be quicker,
all things considered, to program in G code (the teletype
was about 1/2 mile farther than the machines and often
reserved for other uses ... which you'd find out when you
got there and past the president's & CEO's secretaries <G>).

[Anthony]

Post by jon_banquer
Who gives a shit if the most important element is how fast can you
produce the part.

Finished parts shipped to the customer are what pays the bills, not which
cam system you use, or how fancy a computer you own.

[Cliff]

Post by Anthony

Post by jon_banquer
Who gives a shit if the most important element is how fast can you
produce the part.

Finished parts shipped to the customer are what pays the bills, not which
cam system you use, or how fancy a computer you own.

Having many machines making the same part on 3 shifts with
many operators doing MDI programming for each part on each
machine .....
Even if most such parts really are fairly simple ....

In the general case, I doubt that the comments were very valid.
There are lots of things beyond simple turning .... not that jb
seems to have ever done any of that even.

Ask him to try to post something about machining or
programming that he did not copy <G>.

[jay s]

one thing that everyone had not metioned is the tool callouts
eia the tool number is the same every time you run the program but what if
you need to setup the job with a job already setup. say originally you used
tools 1-5 but now need to use tools 6-10 who will renumber the program with
the proper T and H and D numbers?
on the mazatrol you can use the tool layout and tell the machine what pocket
to put them in and be done with the H and D change problem, then use your
laser measure unit for length and diameter and the tools are measured. the
mazak can be bought with the renishaw probe (sweet) and measure for your
work coordinates and you should be set to go.
the only differences between eia and mazatrol that i see are if you run
short run production or long run production. once you have the program done
proven out then if you run this job multiple times a year the tool H and D
number thing might be a problem. also who is going to program the machines
and what if that person quits, can you find a new programmer for the money
you want to pay who has the proper experience?

Post by toolsntoys4u
Could someone shed some lights on similarities or differences of programming
a Haas machine comparing to Mazak? Are these two machines very different as
far as programming concern?
Thanks
tools