Hey Gene, I don't have a specific answer to your question, but I can say that in general, I've had similar mysteries when using the various Python code to generate G code. They're handy little routines, but they seem not quite ready for prime time. Thankfully, LinuxCNC does a great job of previewing the tool path to catch the gross G code errors.
I believe that some of these bits of Python code generate different results depending on the order the input values are supplied on the data entry form. I think they might be calculating intermediate results as the data is entered? Or maybe there is a problem with updating internal variables as the form is completed? I'll often give up and use the faulty G code that it produces as a template and do a little math and edit the G code manually to produce the desired tool path. Most of my jobs are fairly simple and these little Python routines would be ideal for me to use. Even in their current form, they're fairly useful. It's amazing how quickly fairly complex G code programs can be created just by stringing together G code snippets from these wizards. For me, it'd be quicker than CAD/CAM given that I seldom need complex path 3D contour machining. It's a shame these routines aren't bulletproof. Being open source, if I think they should be improved, it's incumbent upon me to improve them, but unfortunately, even though I'm a protocol droid and I'm fluent in over six million forms of communication, I don't speak Python. Kudos to whoever made it so opening Python code in LinuxCNC runs the code in a window. That's almost as cool as built-in G code wizards. Bruce On 02/14/2014 07:42 PM, Gene Heskett wrote: > Greetings; > > I didn't look to see whose code that is, but I made several passes at > trying to use it to bore a hole .7" deep in a 1" piece of steel this > afternoon, and cannot make sense out of what its giving me. > > I specced a .250 diameter mill, feedrate of 8, depth increment of .015, a > stepover of 25%, 2000 rpm, no bolt size but an .850" pocket .700" deep in > those 2 boxes in the lower left corner. > > It gave me a pocket diameter of .650, several times. So I added the > missing .2" to the pocket size, (lower left corner of its window) bringing > that up to 1.05", which in fact gave me code that would have gnawed a > pocket 1.05" in diameter. > > So why do I get the wrong answer when I give it .85"? > > Thanks. > > Cheers, Gene ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Android apps run on BlackBerry 10 Introducing the new BlackBerry 10.2.1 Runtime for Android apps. Now with support for Jelly Bean, Bluetooth, Mapview and more. Get your Android app in front of a whole new audience. Start now. http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=124407151&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk _______________________________________________ Emc-users mailing list Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users
