On 18 November 2014 12:56, Mark Wendt <[email protected]> wrote: > Yes, I do need the inch by inch interpolation. The fly rod's action, > depends heavily on getting the numbers over the length of the rod spot on > to the cross-sectional dimensions calculated. Little differences at > different points in the taper can make huge differences in the action of > the rod. It really does need, and really does depend, on the taper > cross-sectional dimension at each inch in order for the taper to do what it > was intended to do. There's a lot of cantilever beam theory that goes into > creating the taper, and the numbers work for a given station along the X > axis. Stretching it out and making the machine interpolate the > cross-sectional dimension over a greater difference between the X stations > would, and could, give you a completely different taper, changing the > action of the rod, and also possibly changing the line weight required.
You are incorrectly conflating your error and your width. You probably do need to define your profile every inch, but unless the X-slide error is discontinuous there should be no need to define the _error_ map with anything like that resolution. The correction in the error lincurve would be a correction to the existing date (G-code?) -- atp If you can't fix it, you don't own it. http://www.ifixit.com/Manifesto ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Download BIRT iHub F-Type - The Free Enterprise-Grade BIRT Server from Actuate! Instantly Supercharge Your Business Reports and Dashboards with Interactivity, Sharing, Native Excel Exports, App Integration & more Get technology previously reserved for billion-dollar corporations, FREE http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=157005751&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk _______________________________________________ Emc-users mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users
