Re: [Emc-users] G04 dwell in seconds not milliseconds?

2012-05-23 Thread andy pugh
On 23 May 2012 06:35, Claude Zervas cla...@utlco.com wrote: Just wondering if someone might know why LinuxCNC interprets the G04 dwell command parameter as seconds instead of milliseconds? The glib answer is because that is how the programmer coded it. I suspect that the G04 code has been

Re: [Emc-users] G04 dwell in seconds not milliseconds?

2012-05-23 Thread charles green
U and X can't be used as these are axis position commands. isn't T one of the modern coordinate axes as well? -- Live Security Virtual Conference Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's security and threat

Re: [Emc-users] G04 dwell in seconds not milliseconds?

2012-05-23 Thread John Thornton
You might reference the g code manual for LinuxCNC rather than guess or assume LinuxCNC G code is the same as some other control. John On 5/23/2012 12:35 AM, Claude Zervas wrote: Hello, Just wondering if someone might know why LinuxCNC interprets the G04 dwell command parameter as seconds

Re: [Emc-users] G04 dwell in seconds not milliseconds?

2012-05-23 Thread Stuart Stevenson
Gentlemen, I remember NC/CNC controls that use/used the X in ways other than just an axis designation. I was uncomfortable with that on the first such control I used. The previous G code determined the treatment of the X in each position on the line. I seem to remember drill cycles as follows G81

Re: [Emc-users] G04 dwell in seconds not milliseconds?

2012-05-23 Thread andy pugh
On 23 May 2012 12:25, charles green xxzzb...@yahoo.com wrote: U and X can't be used as these are axis position commands. isn't T one of the modern coordinate axes as well? No, the axes are ABC UVW XYZ. T is tool number. (and acts as a standalone command, changing the value of tool-prepare

Re: [Emc-users] G04 dwell in seconds not milliseconds?

2012-05-23 Thread Stuart Stevenson
Gentlemen, Many CNC controls have user switchable 'modes' for G code interpretation. I have a Fadal that will interpret Fadal code or Fanuc code depending on the switch position. G code is just an agreed upon symbolic representation of motion commands. This allows human readability.

Re: [Emc-users] G04 dwell in seconds not milliseconds?

2012-05-23 Thread John Thornton
My old Anilam 1100m which is a conversational control will convert a G code file if it is simple enough and uses G codes that the Anilam can understand. I've never tried Hieroglyphics on it though... John On 5/23/2012 7:41 AM, Stuart Stevenson wrote: Gentlemen, Many CNC controls have user

Re: [Emc-users] G04 dwell in seconds not milliseconds?

2012-05-23 Thread Kent A. Reed
On 5/23/2012 5:53 AM, andy pugh wrote: Unfortunately the G-code standard is not very standard. Every information-representation standard I ever met was encumbered with exceptions, variants, special cases. After all, they're written by committees (on some of which I served, so I'm guilty too).

Re: [Emc-users] G04 dwell in seconds not milliseconds?

2012-05-23 Thread Jon Elson
andy pugh wrote: On 23 May 2012 06:35, Claude Zervas cla...@utlco.com wrote: Just wondering if someone might know why LinuxCNC interprets the G04 dwell command parameter as seconds instead of milliseconds? The glib answer is because that is how the programmer coded it. I suspect

Re: [Emc-users] G04 dwell in seconds not milliseconds?

2012-05-23 Thread Jon Elson
Kent A. Reed wrote: On 5/23/2012 5:53 AM, andy pugh wrote: Unfortunately the G-code standard is not very standard. Every information-representation standard I ever met was encumbered with exceptions, variants, special cases. After all, they're written by committees (on some of

Re: [Emc-users] G04 dwell in seconds not milliseconds?

2012-05-23 Thread Claude Zervas
Thanks for all your answers! I did indeed read the LinuxCNC G code manual and tested it before asking my question. I just wanted a clarification since I'm just learning G code and some of it, like some of you have mentioned, doesn't seem to be very standardized. It's a bit surprising to me to find

Re: [Emc-users] G04 dwell in seconds not milliseconds?

2012-05-23 Thread Claude Zervas
On Wed, May 23, 2012 at 2:08 PM, Claude Zervas cla...@utlco.com wrote: ... It's a bit surprising to me to find out there isn't some standards body (like IEEE or ISO) that oversees a G code standard, considering it's been used for such a long time by so many. ... Good grief I'm stupid, a brief

Re: [Emc-users] G04 dwell in seconds not milliseconds?

2012-05-23 Thread andy pugh
On 24 May 2012 00:37, Claude Zervas cla...@utlco.com wrote: According to The NIST RS274NGC Interpreter, version 3, NISTIR 6556 (2000), section 3.5.4, the G04 parameter 'P' is in seconds... there you have it. Yes and no. Because NIST wrote EMC… -- atp If you can't fix it, you don't own it.

Re: [Emc-users] G04 dwell in seconds not milliseconds?

2012-05-23 Thread Kent A. Reed
On 5/23/2012 7:44 PM, andy pugh wrote: On 24 May 2012 00:37, Claude Zervascla...@utlco.com wrote: According to The NIST RS274NGC Interpreter, version 3, NISTIR 6556 (2000), section 3.5.4, the G04 parameter 'P' is in seconds... there you have it. Yes and no. Because NIST wrote EMC… And

[Emc-users] G04 dwell in seconds not milliseconds?

2012-05-22 Thread Claude Zervas
Hello, Just wondering if someone might know why LinuxCNC interprets the G04 dwell command parameter as seconds instead of milliseconds? I'm fairly certain most other machines (ie Fanuc and others) interpret the P value as milliseconds. For example, the command: G04 P3000 is interpreted by most