On 05/09/2012 03:34 PM, Viesturs Lācis wrote: > 2012/5/9 Chris Lesiak<[email protected]>: >> Each tool >> in the tool table would then have one geometry offset and (say) ten >> different wear offsets. > Could You, please, explain the difference? The wear changes the tool's > diameter and length offsets, so why can't You live with one offset > value for each situation? For example, if diameter of fresh tool is > 10,00 mm and wear is 0,03 mm, why do You need 2 values - 10,00 and > 0,03 - instead of one - 9,97 - which also represents tool's actual > diameter? > >
If you are using the wear offset to account for tool wear, then it is just a convenience. You could certainly achieve the same thing by adjusting the geometry offset. But the second and third reasons for using wear offsets (that don't have anything to do with tool wear) that I mentioned in my earlier message remain. -- Chris Lesiak [email protected] Any opinions expressed are those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of his employer. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Live Security Virtual Conference Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's security and threat landscape has changed and how IT managers can respond. Discussions will include endpoint security, mobile security and the latest in malware threats. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfrnl04242012/114/50122263/ _______________________________________________ Emc-developers mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-developers
