of course I meant that point 2's weight is vastly different from 1 and 3...
anyway, I am most interested now in finding a solution to the tool path compensation not working with nurbs. Bruno On 6/2/14 7:06 PM, [email protected] wrote: > Message: 8 > Date: Mon, 02 Jun 2014 19:05:59 +0200 > From: bruno<[email protected]> > Subject: Re: [Emc-developers] bug with nurbs ? > To:[email protected] > Message-ID:<[email protected]> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed > > Hi Chris, > > I did not know how to give the first point a weight, in addition I > definitely had a bug in my GCode, in the sense that I wanted points 1 > and 3 to have the same lower weight, but not point 2. With this change, > the curve looks like I wanted and the path is followed very closely, > even when the weight of point 3 is vastly different from 1 and 2 . > Thanks for pointing this out. > > Now there is just the issue of G41, G42 that have no effect, do you have > a fix for that ? > > I understand what you say about the nurb approximation. I think the > optimal way to subdivide would be to use the curvature function of the > curve and subdivide on each point where the curvature exceeds a given > epsilon compared to the previous subdivision point. That way there would > be more segments (or arcs) in sections of high curvature and fewer in > flatter sections. > > Could you point me where in the code this is handled ? Maybe I could > take a stab at implementing that... > > Cheers > > Bruno > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Learn Graph Databases - Download FREE O'Reilly Book "Graph Databases" is the definitive new guide to graph databases and their applications. Written by three acclaimed leaders in the field, this first edition is now available. Download your free book today! http://p.sf.net/sfu/NeoTech _______________________________________________ Emc-developers mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-developers
