You wrote: "Based on what we've done with Mach3, I don't expect we're going
to do toolchanges within a single file.  When we generate toolpaths with
Vectric Aspire for example, if you use multiple tools and it's not an ATC
you generate one G-code file per tool."

I frequently use Vectric Cut2D for CAM with a LinuxCNC system (actually
Tormach's PathPilot). I don't have an ATC but frequently generate a single
GCode file using multiple tools. I believe that all Vectric products use
similar posts and that having a "begin TOOLCHANGE" section in the post is
what it takes to allow multiple tools in a single file. Also, all tool table
fields can be zero without complaint but that could be a PathPilot change.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Danny Miller [mailto:dan...@austin.rr.com]
> Sent: Saturday, April 16, 2016 2:11 PM
> To: 'Enhanced Machine Controller (EMC)'
> Subject: [Emc-users] Toolchange M6
>
> I am setting up a manual toolchange CNC router system.   In the past
> I've worked extensively with Mach3.
>
> Someone just brought up g-code from an automated CAM that started with
> "M6 T1", and it barfed on loading because "T1 isn't a defined tool in the
tool
> table".  This was the one and only tool in the file and already manually
zeroed
> so nothing needed to be done for it, but being an automated CAM, we
couldn't
> readily tell the CAM program to simply not say that.
>
> We made a tool table entry for T1 with bogus values ("T1" may be a 1/4
ball
> mill on one CAM generation, then a 1/8" endmill on another, but at least
it's in
> a tool table) and yet still got some sort of error (sorry I don't have it
written
> down), then in the MDI typed "M6 T1" and got it to accept it it to run.
Weird.
>
> Based on what we've done with Mach3, I don't expect we're going to do
> toolchanges within a single file.  When we generate toolpaths with Vectric
> Aspire for example, if you use multiple tools and it's not an ATC you
generate
> one G-code file per tool.
>
> IIRC, I had Mach3 set up to ignore the FIRST tool setup, because it was
> presumed you'd already set that up and to throw a "please change tool"
> message with a superfluous stop is annoying.  But a second tool
specification
> WOULD, because that's an actual change.  At least I think it did, I rarely
used
> multiple tools in the same file.
>
> I see there's the "hal_manualtoolchange" component which seems like it
would
> fix this.  Is that the logical answer?  Can I ditch the tool table?
>
> Danny
>
>
>
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
--
> Find and fix application performance issues faster with Applications
Manager
> Applications Manager provides deep performance insights into multiple
tiers of
> your business applications. It resolves application problems quickly and
reduces
> your MTTR. Get your free trial!
> https://ad.doubleclick.net/ddm/clk/302982198;130105516;z
> _______________________________________________
> Emc-users mailing list
> Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users



------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Find and fix application performance issues faster with Applications Manager
Applications Manager provides deep performance insights into multiple tiers of
your business applications. It resolves application problems quickly and
reduces your MTTR. Get your free trial!
https://ad.doubleclick.net/ddm/clk/302982198;130105516;z
_______________________________________________
Emc-users mailing list
Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users

Reply via email to