[step-manufacturing] Minutes of August 13th conference call

[Martin Hardwick]

Hi Laurent,

Thanks for your contribution. I think I understand all your points, but 
apologize if I have missed something in the translation.

We need to remember that STEP-NC is seeking to replace M & G codes (ISO 
6983) with models. The goals are to make the controls easier to use 
because the models include information on what is being machined, and to 
enable more reuse of manufacturing solutions.

For some customers the perfect solution is going to be to include the 
CAM system on the control because the solution can be developed off-line 
and then fine-tuned on-line. These customers will not need STEP-NC-  
until they need to send their solution to someone who prefers a 
different CAM solution - and this may be never.

The STEP-NC perspective is that the development of a solution in CAM is 
a different task to running a solution on the CNC. The CNC should be as 
easy and safe to use as possible, and it should be able to run faster or 
slower depending on the production schedule, because running faster 
usually means more tool wear.

Safety and flexibility require a model of all aspects of the machining 
including the tolerances and PMI constraints that have to be met on the 
final part, and the geometry of the setup and fixtures so that the 
machine supervisor can know where material is to be cut and where 
material is to be avoided.

Ease of use requires a complete model of the machining at all times so 
that the process can be restarted graphically and so that corrections 
(compensations) can be made against the AS-IS or TO-BE geometry of the 
part in the context of the tolerances that must be met.

We have not talked about the operation parameters yet. These are not 
required for the machining (only the motions are required) but they are 
desirable. For example, an operator may want to make a quick change on 
the control without going back to the CAM. Hence there is a need for 
balancing. If a vendor like Delcam has invested millions of dollars in 
developing a new feature then it would be completely wrong for STEP to 
harm the value of that IP by including a description in the standard. On 
the other hand there are some operations, such as pocketing and 
drilling, where the required parameters are known across the industry 
and in these cases it would be wrong to deny the CNC operator the 
ability to quickly edit a solution.

There are two additional qualities of STEP that need to be understood. 
The first is that it is almost infinitely extendible. Because of its 
internal architecture, upward compatible extensions are always possible. 
These can be done in private fashion by the vendor (though this is not 
encouraged) or in public by releasing a new edition of the standard. 
Because the standard is upward compatible a solution that worked before 
the extension will continue to operate after the extension, while new 
solutions take advantage of whatever new features have been added. While 
some may cast doubts on this, it is the reason why STEP has been able to 
survive for 20 years in the CAD world, and why it will be able to 
survive for many years in the manufacturing world.

Finally, there are the security and authorization requirements. There 
are several security features in STEP and STEP-NC already but we are now 
in the process of updating the file format to support digital signatures 
and fingerprints (as part of the PLOT project). The new file format will 
allow you to be sure the data has not changed since it was sent with 
multiple levels of authorization so that you can be sure the model, or 
the PMI, or the process has not changed, since it was published.

Thanks again for your comments. I am looking forward to continuing this 
discussion on Wednesday.

Martin Hardwick
Team Leader STEP-Manufacturing

On 8/18/2014 9:17 AM, Lalliard Laurent wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> I regularly follow the development on the STEP-NC standard. 
> Unfortunately my schedule does not allow me to participate to  your 
> discussions.
>
> However, I am always amazed in your discussions to read your positions 
> and the reality of my situation. You mentioned the case of the 
> exchange from the CAM to the NC controller through the APT or the BCL 
> formats and via a third-party solutions to convert these formats. If 
> it's true for users of solutions like CATIA, NX, Creo or even 
> MasterCAM, the situation changes and this conversion step is for us no 
> more a reality. We use the 5 following CAM solutions :
>
> . WorkNc (Vero Software-- Sweden after the recent acquisition by the 
> Hexagon metrology group)
>
> . PowerMILL and PowerInspect OM (Delcam -- UK)
>
> . Tebis (Tebis - Germany )
>
> . Esprit (DP Technology - USA)
>
> . TopSolid (Missler Software - France)
>
> /(According to the last CIMdata  NC Software Market Analysis Report, 
> these 5 companies represent 35% of the *CAM* market in terms of of 
> installed software licenses against 28% to Dassault+Siemens +PTC and 
> CNC Software)/
>
> //
>
> For these five CAM package, conversion goes through an internal 
> solution and the software evolutions by taking into account the 
> "machine context" (Consideration of the machine kinematics / tool 
> library /  machining related processes ) have made the use of an 
> external postprocessor virtually more and more difficult. This 
> difficulty comes from the stronger link between the software 
> parameters/strategies  and the higher level of the generated code. 
> Under these conditions use an internal postprocessor integrate and 
> sell the postprocessor is also a part of his income for an editor. Use 
> of a single NC-STEP format would also be a loss of activity (as the 
> code generation must run within his solution and his technicians).
>
> His interest is to have a machine code generation that is still 
> compatible with the newest developed strategies. I take as an example 
> the "polar milling" strategy of Delcam. Using it require an update of 
> its Postprocessor so even if you don't have to pay for this function 
> using the new feature generates revenue for the editor. (Web page on 
> the Polar milling 
> :http://www.delcam.com/news/press_article.asp?releaseId=1335 )
>
> Finally, I draw your attention to the case of the Tebis solution. 
> Tebis has a very unique approach to data management : in a single CAD 
> file (*.cad) you can find all the informations of your machining 
> process. You can have not only the geometry information, but also the 
> machines definitions, the tools libraries, all automatic machining 
> process called NCSet but also your POSTPROCESSORS, everything... In 
> these conditions all the knowledge of your business can be stored in 
> ONE file.
>
> To organize and secure  the exchanges between users of their solution 
> (eg within the same group or with a subcontractor) Tebis introduced 
> since version 3.5 the concept of "Know how protection". Users or 
> administrators can now define the levels of protection on the use of 
> these data by a third user. This fundamental notion in collaboration 
> between supplier and subcontractor is absent from the standard Step NC 
> yet it is one of the future challenges of data exchange and 
> collaboration.
>
> On this point the evolution of Step-Nc should provide an answer on 
> this point, before trying to integrate everything into a single 
> format. This concept is much more important in my view that the risks 
> associated with loss of income for editors for accepting a single 
> exchange format.
>
> I recommend to read the Tebis brochure : Increase the productivity  
> within your CAD/CAM process according to plan(Page 10 to 11)  : 
> http://www.tebis.com/cms/fileadmin/broschueren/en_ca_Tebis_V35_R1_A4_2010.pdf
>
> The situation in Europe may be different but I think from my point of 
> view that your analyzes are too limited to a situation that is already 
> outdated.
>
> Just my point of view.
>
> Best regards, (I'm sorry for my English which is not as good as I 
> would like)
>
> Laurent LALLIARD
>
> *P*rocédés*P*erformants et*I*nnovants
>
> +33 (0)4 77 79 41 38
>
> Description : CETIM www <http://www.cetim.fr/>
>
> *De :*step-manufacturing 
> [mailto:step-manufacturing-bounces at steptools.com] *De la part de* 
> Martin Hardwick
> *Envoyé :* vendredi 15 août 2014 21:02
> *À :* step-manufacturing at steptools.com
> *Objet :* [step-manufacturing] Minutes of August 13th conference call
>
> Attendees
> --------------
> Martin Hardwick, STEP Tools, USA
> David Loffredo, STEP Tools, USA
> Julie Huang, Sandvik Sweden
> Alain Brail, Airbus (retired), France
> Mike Restall, Sandvik, USA
> David Odendahl, Boeing, USA
> Sid Venkatesh, Boeing, USA
> Leon Xu, Boeing, USA
> Jim Kosmala, Okuma, USA
> Thanh Huynh, Okuma, USA
> Bob Baldizzi, Okuma, USA
> Paul Kingsley, Okuma, USA
> Rod Tojdowski, Okuma, USA
> Thanh Huynh, Okuma, USA
> Brian Sides, Okuma, USA
> Vincent Marchetti, Ameritech, USA
> Wayne Myers, Gosinger, USA
> Zhigang Wang, Makino, USA
>
> The press release for the IMTS demonstration was sent on July 31st.
>
> We agreed that it is becoming inappropriate to discuss details of a 
> demonstration to be given in the Okuma booth at IMTS in a public 
> domain (ISO) conference call.
>
> We discussed the advantages of replacing the multiple different 
> formats used by the CAM industry for process data with STEP-NC.
>
> Each CAM vendor has its own data format for communicating the process 
> data designed in its system to the developers of post processors. The 
> most well known is the NCI format of Mastercam. The formats are 
> designed to be simple to convert into G-codes. The conversion is 
> usually done by third parties who know the coordinate configurations 
> of the machine, and the preferences of the customer. For the customer 
> the cost of developing and maintaining the postprocessor is an 
> undesired cost and the cause of errors because of misunderstanding 
> between the CAM operators, the post-processor developers, the CNC 
> operators and the machine tool builders.
>
> Several attempts have been made to replace the CAM outputs with with a 
> single standardized file. APT-CL was an early example but it did not 
> have enough functionality and too many flavors were added to create 
> that functionality. BCL was another example. Its features were more 
> closely controlled but it failed because the cost of developing and 
> maintaining a post processor from BCL was greater than the cost of 
> developing and maintaining one from the CAM export formats.
>
> The CAM export formats have the advantage of working closely with the 
> CAM systems so the post-processor writer can visualize what is going 
> on by looking at the process definition in the CAM system. APT-CL and 
> BCL do not have a model of the stock or workpiece so process 
> visualization is very difficult. STEP-NC is different because it 
> includes geometry models for all of the key elements including the 
> stock and workpiece but also the cutting tools, fixtures and machine. 
> Therefore, the process can be understood in context and systems such 
> as STEP-NC Machine can show simulations to further enforce data 
> correctness.
>
> Consequently we discussed whether the industry can replace the 
> non-standard CAM file formats with ISO 10303-238 STEP-NC. For the CAM 
> industry there is the cost of developing the software to export the 
> new data. We estimate this cost to be about $100K including two months 
> of work and the cost of purchasing a STEP toolkit. The cost is low 
> because all the geometry models are already being made in CAD so they 
> only have to be linked into the process model.
>
> In return the CAM vendor can reduce costs by no longer having to 
> manage a post-processor industry. The potential price is the loss of 
> business if the end user can change between CAM vendors more easily. A 
> leading vendor will have the winning functionality and an emerging 
> vendor will like the reduced costs for market entry, but the other 
> vendors will worry about the customers currently locked into their 
> post-processor base.
>
> A recording of the call is on the ftp site.
> ftp://www.steptools.com/private/CAM_exchange/Cycle_4/stepmanuf_telecon_20140813.wmv 
> <ftp://www.steptools.com/private/CAM_exchange/Cycle_4/stepmanuf_telecon_20140709.wmv>
>
> The next conference call will be held at the regular times on 
> Wednesday  August 20th
>
> Martin Hardwick
> Team Leader ISO STEP-Manufacturing
>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.steptools.com/pipermail/step-manufacturing/attachments/20140818/a0d0d671/attachment.html>