hexagon logo

Move Points vs. Incremental Moves

FIRST POST EVER! Ive been programming for a little over a year. A company we make parts for is in a pickle. They have asked if we could make a few CMM programs for them. I guess there programmer has left the company on bad terms, and the replacement is now swamped with work and needs programs made for him. Now, I have completed a couple programs for them, and they ran successfully with no crashes (I rarely program without having the actual part on my table, so I was a bit nervous).
Now here is my question. The programmer at the other company was happy with the programs I sent. But he told me he would prefer if I used Incremental Moves instead of Move Points. What is the reasoning for this? I don't understand why one is better than the other? Can someone please explain for me.
Parents
  • One of the applications engineers from Hexagon once told me "Use all the tool in the toolbox". Good advice.
    Move points
    move incremental
    clearance planes or cubes
    avoidance moves in autofeatures
    Whatever you are comfortable with.
    another trick he showed me was with a move point is that if you don't put values in some of the fields it won't do anything
    MOVE/POINT, NORMAL,<,,5>
    doesn't move X or Y but goes to 5mm from current alignment Z zero.
  • that only works in the 'newer' versions of Pcdmis. If you don't have the < > surrounding the move info, then it won't work. Without a number for all 3, you get 'invalid number entered' error.
Reply Children
No Data