Re: [Emc-users] Tool Offset Parameters?

[Chris Morley]

Adding offsets with g43.1 or g43.2 are not tracked AFAIK.
Yes I agree it's not the best - for a lathe we tracked wear setting in the tool 
remap code.
But getting that info to the GUI ends up messy - I think I used a HAL pin in my 
test case.

But we are seriously running out of active developers that know that part of 
the code.

Chris M


From: Todd Zuercher via Emc-users 
Sent: May 29, 2024 6:58 PM
To: Enhanced Machine Controller (EMC) 
Cc: Todd Zuercher 
Subject: [Emc-users] Tool Offset Parameters?

I was just trying to figure out something and found in my opinion the Linuxcnc 
parameters for #5401-5409 seem to be very broken.  The parameters only return 
the stored offsets for what ever tool number is loaded.  This seems very wrong 
to me, because the tool number loaded may have nothing to do with what tool 
offsets are actually applied.  I've often used a different tool offset with a 
tool number, such as for example using tool offset #102 with tool #2 to touch 
off on a feature of a profile tool rather than the tool tip.  But parameter 
#5403 will display the offset for the loaded tool number reguardless of what 
tool offset is actually applied using G43Hn or if additional offsets are 
applied using G43.1 or G43.2).  This seems like a big error to me.  Shouldn't 
these parameters return the offsets (or total offsets) applied by G43, G43.1, 
and G43.2 and not simply what is saved for the loaded tool number?

And if the developers feel the current behavior is correct, then how is a 
person supposed to look up what the current applied tool offset in fact is when 
it doesn't equal what is saved for the current tool number?

Todd Zuercher
P. Graham Dunn Inc.<http://www.pgrahamdunn.com/index.php>
630 Henry Street
Dalton, Ohio 44618
Phone:  (330)828-2105ext. 2031


___
Emc-users mailing list
Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users

___
Emc-users mailing list
Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users

[Emc-users] Tool Offset Parameters?

[Todd Zuercher via Emc-users]

I was just trying to figure out something and found in my opinion the Linuxcnc 
parameters for #5401-5409 seem to be very broken.  The parameters only return 
the stored offsets for what ever tool number is loaded.  This seems very wrong 
to me, because the tool number loaded may have nothing to do with what tool 
offsets are actually applied.  I've often used a different tool offset with a 
tool number, such as for example using tool offset #102 with tool #2 to touch 
off on a feature of a profile tool rather than the tool tip.  But parameter 
#5403 will display the offset for the loaded tool number reguardless of what 
tool offset is actually applied using G43Hn or if additional offsets are 
applied using G43.1 or G43.2).  This seems like a big error to me.  Shouldn't 
these parameters return the offsets (or total offsets) applied by G43, G43.1, 
and G43.2 and not simply what is saved for the loaded tool number?

And if the developers feel the current behavior is correct, then how is a 
person supposed to look up what the current applied tool offset in fact is when 
it doesn't equal what is saved for the current tool number?

Todd Zuercher
P. Graham Dunn Inc.
630 Henry Street
Dalton, Ohio 44618
Phone:  (330)828-2105ext. 2031


___
Emc-users mailing list
Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users

Re: [Emc-users] Tool offset

[Dave Cole]

Glad you got it going.   Life is much easier if you don't need to use 
Tool comp!  :-)

Dave

On 7/1/2016 9:07 AM, Eric H. Johnson wrote:
> Thanks for all the help everyone, I think I have the problem resolved. For
> anyone that cares, here are the sordid details. We had been having a problem
> with the knife rotational axis losing a very small number of encoder counts
> (generally less than a couple of degrees over a full pattern). The problem
> had been isolated to one length of robotic cable but the error was small
> enough to live with for all but the densest material we were cutting. So the
> problem was initially attributed to the knife. Last weekend we re-ran the
> one length of robotic cable, and the encoder problem went away, but not the
> fit problem with the one material.
>
> It also seemed that the inset pieces were always coming out large by just a
> few thous, and mostly on curves. Note: I had previously run some tests just
> scoring cardboard, so as to have no load on the knife, and those all came
> out dead nuts. Closer examination when cutting the dense material revealed
> that the error was almost entirely in the Y axis. So I went back to the
> tuning for Y, and pushed up mainly P. I am now getting a small amount of hum
> in that motor, but the accuracy, and hence the fit is much improved. The
> motor still  runs cold, so I do not think it is harming the motor. There is
> about a two week backlog that needs to be cleared out,  but once that is
> done, I can play with it a little more and see if I can get turn out the
> hum.
>
> Thus in the end I did not need the tool offset, but perhaps uncovered an
> oversight in use of auxiliary outputs with tool compensation.
>
> Thanks again,
> Eric
>
>
> is the part moving or the kerf filling with swarf thus affecting the size?
> tho i cant picture how the part gets larger maybe in some direction and not
> overall?
> or some sort of stress relief is ocurring if the above, try glue-stops or
> tabs else, i dunno (fiddler on the roof said.
> you want to know why?
> I'll tell you..
> I dont know )
>
>
> --
> Attend Shape: An AT Tech Expo July 15-16. Meet us at AT Park in San
> Francisco, CA to explore cutting-edge tech and listen to tech luminaries
> present their vision of the future. This family event has something for
> everyone, including kids. Get more information and register today.
> http://sdm.link/attshape
> ___
> Emc-users mailing list
> Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users

--
Attend Shape: An AT Tech Expo July 15-16. Meet us at AT Park in San
Francisco, CA to explore cutting-edge tech and listen to tech luminaries
present their vision of the future. This family event has something for
everyone, including kids. Get more information and register today.
http://sdm.link/attshape
___
Emc-users mailing list
Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users

Re: [Emc-users] Tool offset

[Eric H. Johnson]

Thanks for all the help everyone, I think I have the problem resolved. For
anyone that cares, here are the sordid details. We had been having a problem
with the knife rotational axis losing a very small number of encoder counts
(generally less than a couple of degrees over a full pattern). The problem
had been isolated to one length of robotic cable but the error was small
enough to live with for all but the densest material we were cutting. So the
problem was initially attributed to the knife. Last weekend we re-ran the
one length of robotic cable, and the encoder problem went away, but not the
fit problem with the one material.

It also seemed that the inset pieces were always coming out large by just a
few thous, and mostly on curves. Note: I had previously run some tests just
scoring cardboard, so as to have no load on the knife, and those all came
out dead nuts. Closer examination when cutting the dense material revealed
that the error was almost entirely in the Y axis. So I went back to the
tuning for Y, and pushed up mainly P. I am now getting a small amount of hum
in that motor, but the accuracy, and hence the fit is much improved. The
motor still  runs cold, so I do not think it is harming the motor. There is
about a two week backlog that needs to be cleared out,  but once that is
done, I can play with it a little more and see if I can get turn out the
hum.

Thus in the end I did not need the tool offset, but perhaps uncovered an
oversight in use of auxiliary outputs with tool compensation.

Thanks again,
Eric


is the part moving or the kerf filling with swarf thus affecting the size?
tho i cant picture how the part gets larger maybe in some direction and not
overall?
or some sort of stress relief is ocurring if the above, try glue-stops or
tabs else, i dunno (fiddler on the roof said.
you want to know why?
I'll tell you..
I dont know )


--
Attend Shape: An AT Tech Expo July 15-16. Meet us at AT Park in San
Francisco, CA to explore cutting-edge tech and listen to tech luminaries
present their vision of the future. This family event has something for
everyone, including kids. Get more information and register today.
http://sdm.link/attshape
___
Emc-users mailing list
Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users

Re: [Emc-users] Tool offset

[TJoseph Powderly]

is the part moving or the kerf filling with swarf
thus affecting the size?
tho i cant picture how the part gets larger
maybe in some direction and not overall?
or some sort of stress relief is ocurring
if the above, try glue-stops or tabs
else, i dunno
(fiddler on the roof said.
you want to know why?
I'll tell you..
I dont know )
tomp
tjtr33

On 06/30/16 22:52, Eric H. Johnson wrote:
> I have been looking at several other possibilities, including that. The odd 
> thing is that it only happens with the one material. The densest of the 
> materials we are running.
>
> Thanks,
> Eric
>
>
> On June 30, 2016 11:21:03 AM EDT, Todd  Zuercher 
> <zuerc...@embarqmail.com> wrote:
>> Just a thought, is there a chance you have an imperfection in your head
>> assembly or the kinimatics, that is causing your cut to be offset
>> slightly?  In other words are the pieces the same size if you cut them
>> out in the opposite direction?
>>
>> - Original Message -
>> From: "Eric H. Johnson" <ejohn...@camalytics.com>
>> To: emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net
>> Sent: Wednesday, June 29, 2016 11:18:39 AM
>> Subject: [Emc-users] Tool offset
>>
>> All,
>>
>>
>>
>> I am cutting a dense mat material with an ultrasonic knife. It appears
>> that
>> when the fibers are cut I get a small amount of expansion so the part
>> to be
>> inset ends up just a little too large, even though it is cutting
>> exactly the
>> same size as the base in which it is to be inset. I was looking at tool
>> compensations to see if I can adjust the tool path by a very small
>> amount
>> (0.005" - 0.01") to make the inset part just a little bit smaller,
>> following
>> the example here:
>>
>> http://linuxcnc.org/docs/2.5/html/gcode/tool_compensation.html
>>
>>
>>
>> The pattern runs entirely CW, so G41 should compensate in the
>> appropriate
>> direction.
>>
>>
>>
>> The example shows:
>>
>> G10 L1 P1 R0.25 Z1
>>
>>
>>
>> Does Z1 have any meaning in compensating only in X and Y?
>>
>>
>>
>> If I set the compensation for the entire file, do I have to deal with
>> individual lead-ins?
>>
>>
>>
>> And of course, is there an easier way to accomplish this?
>>
>>
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> Eric
>>
>> --
>> Attend Shape: An AT Tech Expo July 15-16. Meet us at AT Park in San
>> Francisco, CA to explore cutting-edge tech and listen to tech
>> luminaries
>> present their vision of the future. This family event has something for
>> everyone, including kids. Get more information and register today.
>> http://sdm.link/attshape
>> ___
>> Emc-users mailing list
>> Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net
>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users
>>
>> --
>> Attend Shape: An AT Tech Expo July 15-16. Meet us at AT Park in San
>> Francisco, CA to explore cutting-edge tech and listen to tech
>> luminaries
>> present their vision of the future. This family event has something for
>> everyone, including kids. Get more information and register today.
>> http://sdm.link/attshape
>> ___
>> Emc-users mailing list
>> Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net
>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users


--
Attend Shape: An AT Tech Expo July 15-16. Meet us at AT Park in San
Francisco, CA to explore cutting-edge tech and listen to tech luminaries
present their vision of the future. This family event has something for
everyone, including kids. Get more information and register today.
http://sdm.link/attshape
___
Emc-users mailing list
Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users

Re: [Emc-users] Tool offset

[Gene Heskett]

On Thursday 30 June 2016 08:26:43 Eric H. Johnson wrote:

> Ok, next problem. The Z is a two position air cylinder, where I use
> M64 / M65 to lift and lower. That seems to be generating the error
> "Cannot set auxiliary digital output with cutter radius compensation
> on".
>
> Is there any way around this. Do I have to turn radius compensation
> off before each head lift / drop.
>
> Thanks,
> Eric

Thats odd. I cannot read anything like that into the very sparsely 
described M62-M65 in the docs.
What I do read is:

3.4.15
M62 - M65 Digital Output Control
• M62 P- - turn on digital output synchronized with motion. The P- word 
specifies the digital output number.

• M63 P- - turn off digital output synchronized with motion. The P- word 
specifies the digital output number.

• M64 P- - turn on digital output immediately. The P- word specifies the 
digital output number.

• M65 P- - turn off digital output immediately. The P- word specifies the 
digital output number.

The P-word ranges from 0 to a default value of 3. If needed the the 
number of I/O can be increased by using the num_dio parameter when 
loading the motion controller. See the Motion Section for more 
information.

The M62 & M63 commands will be queued. Subsequent commands referring to 
the same output number will overwrite the older settings.

More than one output change can be specified by issuing more than one 
M62/M63 command.

The actual change of the specified outputs will happen at the beginning 
of the next motion command. If there is no subsequent motion command, 
the queued output changes won’t happen. It’s best to always program a 
motion G code (G0, G1, etc) right after the M62/63.

M64 & M65 happen immediately as they are received by the motion 
controller. They are not synchronized with movement, and
they will break blending.

I read that as the M64-M65, since the motion controller is reading ahead 
in order to do blending, the M64-M65 will be executed immediately, 
possibly when in the middle of actually doing the XY cut motion several 
lines above the M64 or M65 in your code.  I can't think of a reason that 
I would want that to happen.

Since the M62-M63 are synchronized with motion, and take effect at the 
beginning of the next motion, It seems to me like you would want that 
command in the code flow at the end of that cut, issue a very small 
motion after the end of the cut, perhaps .0001" then a g64p.05 after 
that very small motion to give the cutter time to actuate, and then 
direct it to the starting position of the next cut sequence.

But it is something (M62-M63) I would try based on the undesirability of 
actuating the lift or drop in the middle of a cut. The P value shouldn't 
change.

One further note but I believe you have that covered in your hal file;

Note:
M62-65 will not function unless the appropriate motion.digital-out-nn 
pins are connected in your hal file to outputs.
==

Thats a bit of a duh, but thats the end of that subject in the docs.  

Verbose, no, overly concise, yes. I am in favor of an example line and a 
short explanation of what that line actually does.

And I totally fail to see why the presence of cutter compensation in 
effect, or not, should have a thing to do with it since this is a Z only 
motion.  OTOH I am not one of the LinuxCNC coders.  I may hack something 
in my hal file to scratch a particular itch in a particular machine, or 
I might play with a module to be compiled with hal_compile, but its been 
much of a decade since I waded around in C deep enough to drown.

However , in the docs on G41-G49, there is mention of TLO, tool length 
offset, which would/could effect Z, and likely is the cause of the 
error. Can I assume that the Z entry in the tool table for that tool is 
0.?  In which case it should be a never mind, but its a special case 
so 0. may not be being checked for.

But I am still bumfuzzled as to why motion would somehow connect any of 
the M62-65 commands with the execution of the tool offsets.  Its a 
separate, output0 to output3 as specified by the P word. Not being 
totally aware of those motion outputs, when I needed to do something 
like flip a jigs location bar in and out of position, or start a vacuum 
to help clean up the mess, I high jacked the M7-8-9 outputs for those 
functions.  Never saw such an error, but I also do not make any great 
use of tool compensation either, doing it in the code I write instead.

If switching to the use of M62-M63 with the motion sequence I described 
above doesn't fix it, I'd say in the vernacular that this one needs 
kicked upstairs.  Possibly to the developers list. So, I'll send this to 
both lists.  And I'll snip the previous exchange to help get this down 
to a readable size.

Cheers, Gene Heskett
-- 
"There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty:
 soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order."
-Ed Howdershelt (Author)
Genes Web page 

Re: [Emc-users] Tool offset

[Eric H. Johnson]

I have been looking at several other possibilities, including that. The odd 
thing is that it only happens with the one material. The densest of the 
materials we are running.

Thanks,
Eric


On June 30, 2016 11:21:03 AM EDT, Todd  Zuercher 
<zuerc...@embarqmail.com> wrote:
>Just a thought, is there a chance you have an imperfection in your head
>assembly or the kinimatics, that is causing your cut to be offset
>slightly?  In other words are the pieces the same size if you cut them
>out in the opposite direction?
>
>- Original Message -
>From: "Eric H. Johnson" <ejohn...@camalytics.com>
>To: emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net
>Sent: Wednesday, June 29, 2016 11:18:39 AM
>Subject: [Emc-users] Tool offset
>
>All,
>
> 
>
>I am cutting a dense mat material with an ultrasonic knife. It appears
>that
>when the fibers are cut I get a small amount of expansion so the part
>to be
>inset ends up just a little too large, even though it is cutting
>exactly the
>same size as the base in which it is to be inset. I was looking at tool
>compensations to see if I can adjust the tool path by a very small
>amount
>(0.005" - 0.01") to make the inset part just a little bit smaller,
>following
>the example here:
>
>http://linuxcnc.org/docs/2.5/html/gcode/tool_compensation.html
>
> 
>
>The pattern runs entirely CW, so G41 should compensate in the
>appropriate
>direction.
>
> 
>
>The example shows:
>
>G10 L1 P1 R0.25 Z1
>
> 
>
>Does Z1 have any meaning in compensating only in X and Y?
>
> 
>
>If I set the compensation for the entire file, do I have to deal with
>individual lead-ins?
>
> 
>
>And of course, is there an easier way to accomplish this?
>
> 
>
>Thanks,
>
>Eric
>
>--
>Attend Shape: An AT Tech Expo July 15-16. Meet us at AT Park in San
>Francisco, CA to explore cutting-edge tech and listen to tech
>luminaries
>present their vision of the future. This family event has something for
>everyone, including kids. Get more information and register today.
>http://sdm.link/attshape
>___
>Emc-users mailing list
>Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net
>https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users
>
>--
>Attend Shape: An AT Tech Expo July 15-16. Meet us at AT Park in San
>Francisco, CA to explore cutting-edge tech and listen to tech
>luminaries
>present their vision of the future. This family event has something for
>everyone, including kids. Get more information and register today.
>http://sdm.link/attshape
>___
>Emc-users mailing list
>Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net
>https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users

-- 
Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.
--
Attend Shape: An AT Tech Expo July 15-16. Meet us at AT Park in San
Francisco, CA to explore cutting-edge tech and listen to tech luminaries
present their vision of the future. This family event has something for
everyone, including kids. Get more information and register today.
http://sdm.link/attshape
___
Emc-users mailing list
Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users

Re: [Emc-users] Tool offset

[Todd Zuercher]

Just a thought, is there a chance you have an imperfection in your head 
assembly or the kinimatics, that is causing your cut to be offset slightly?  In 
other words are the pieces the same size if you cut them out in the opposite 
direction?

- Original Message -
From: "Eric H. Johnson" <ejohn...@camalytics.com>
To: emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net
Sent: Wednesday, June 29, 2016 11:18:39 AM
Subject: [Emc-users] Tool offset

All,

 

I am cutting a dense mat material with an ultrasonic knife. It appears that
when the fibers are cut I get a small amount of expansion so the part to be
inset ends up just a little too large, even though it is cutting exactly the
same size as the base in which it is to be inset. I was looking at tool
compensations to see if I can adjust the tool path by a very small amount
(0.005" - 0.01") to make the inset part just a little bit smaller, following
the example here:

http://linuxcnc.org/docs/2.5/html/gcode/tool_compensation.html

 

The pattern runs entirely CW, so G41 should compensate in the appropriate
direction.

 

The example shows:

G10 L1 P1 R0.25 Z1

 

Does Z1 have any meaning in compensating only in X and Y?

 

If I set the compensation for the entire file, do I have to deal with
individual lead-ins?

 

And of course, is there an easier way to accomplish this?

 

Thanks,

Eric

--
Attend Shape: An AT Tech Expo July 15-16. Meet us at AT Park in San
Francisco, CA to explore cutting-edge tech and listen to tech luminaries
present their vision of the future. This family event has something for
everyone, including kids. Get more information and register today.
http://sdm.link/attshape
___
Emc-users mailing list
Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users

--
Attend Shape: An AT Tech Expo July 15-16. Meet us at AT Park in San
Francisco, CA to explore cutting-edge tech and listen to tech luminaries
present their vision of the future. This family event has something for
everyone, including kids. Get more information and register today.
http://sdm.link/attshape
___
Emc-users mailing list
Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users

Re: [Emc-users] Tool offset

[Dave Cole]

Eric,

Are you doing tool comp with a rotating knife head?

If so I am wondering why?   I didn't think that knives required tool comp?

Dave

On 6/30/2016 9:31 AM, Eric H. Johnson wrote:
> I did that and ran into another problem I am not sure how to get around. If 
> the vector angle exceeds a certain value (20 degrees in this case), a head 
> lift and knife rotation is introduced, but X/Y do not move. So I am getting 
> the error "Length of cutter compensation entry move is not greater than the 
> tool radius". This is discovered in the look ahead, so it threw me for a 
> moment.
>
> Any bright ideas on how to get around this?
>
> Thanks,
> Eric
>
>
> On June 30, 2016 9:14:13 AM EDT, andy pugh  wrote:
>> On 30 June 2016 at 13:26, Eric H. Johnson 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Is there any way around this. Do I have to turn radius compensation
>> off before each head lift / drop.
>>
>> I think so.
>>
>> I spotted this in the code last week. I have absolutely no idea what
>> the reasoning is behind this restriction.
>>
>> -- 
>> atp
>> "A motorcycle is a bicycle with a pandemonium attachment and is
>> designed for the especial use of mechanical geniuses, daredevils and
>> lunatics."
>> — George Fitch, Atlanta Constitution Newspaper, 1916
>>
>> --
>> Attend Shape: An AT Tech Expo July 15-16. Meet us at AT Park in San
>> Francisco, CA to explore cutting-edge tech and listen to tech
>> luminaries
>> present their vision of the future. This family event has something for
>> everyone, including kids. Get more information and register today.
>> http://sdm.link/attshape
>> ___
>> Emc-users mailing list
>> Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net
>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users

--
Attend Shape: An AT Tech Expo July 15-16. Meet us at AT Park in San
Francisco, CA to explore cutting-edge tech and listen to tech luminaries
present their vision of the future. This family event has something for
everyone, including kids. Get more information and register today.
http://sdm.link/attshape
___
Emc-users mailing list
Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users

Re: [Emc-users] Tool offset

[Eric H. Johnson]

I did that and ran into another problem I am not sure how to get around. If the 
vector angle exceeds a certain value (20 degrees in this case), a head lift and 
knife rotation is introduced, but X/Y do not move. So I am getting the error 
"Length of cutter compensation entry move is not greater than the tool radius". 
This is discovered in the look ahead, so it threw me for a moment.

Any bright ideas on how to get around this?

Thanks,
Eric


On June 30, 2016 9:14:13 AM EDT, andy pugh  wrote:
>On 30 June 2016 at 13:26, Eric H. Johnson 
>wrote:
>
>> Is there any way around this. Do I have to turn radius compensation
>off before each head lift / drop.
>
>I think so.
>
>I spotted this in the code last week. I have absolutely no idea what
>the reasoning is behind this restriction.
>
>-- 
>atp
>"A motorcycle is a bicycle with a pandemonium attachment and is
>designed for the especial use of mechanical geniuses, daredevils and
>lunatics."
>— George Fitch, Atlanta Constitution Newspaper, 1916
>
>--
>Attend Shape: An AT Tech Expo July 15-16. Meet us at AT Park in San
>Francisco, CA to explore cutting-edge tech and listen to tech
>luminaries
>present their vision of the future. This family event has something for
>everyone, including kids. Get more information and register today.
>http://sdm.link/attshape
>___
>Emc-users mailing list
>Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net
>https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users

-- 
Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.
--
Attend Shape: An AT Tech Expo July 15-16. Meet us at AT Park in San
Francisco, CA to explore cutting-edge tech and listen to tech luminaries
present their vision of the future. This family event has something for
everyone, including kids. Get more information and register today.
http://sdm.link/attshape
___
Emc-users mailing list
Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users

Re: [Emc-users] Tool offset

[andy pugh]

On 30 June 2016 at 13:26, Eric H. Johnson  wrote:

> Is there any way around this. Do I have to turn radius compensation off 
> before each head lift / drop.

I think so.

I spotted this in the code last week. I have absolutely no idea what
the reasoning is behind this restriction.

-- 
atp
"A motorcycle is a bicycle with a pandemonium attachment and is
designed for the especial use of mechanical geniuses, daredevils and
lunatics."
— George Fitch, Atlanta Constitution Newspaper, 1916

--
Attend Shape: An AT Tech Expo July 15-16. Meet us at AT Park in San
Francisco, CA to explore cutting-edge tech and listen to tech luminaries
present their vision of the future. This family event has something for
everyone, including kids. Get more information and register today.
http://sdm.link/attshape
___
Emc-users mailing list
Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users

Re: [Emc-users] Tool offset

[Eric H. Johnson]

Ok, next problem. The Z is a two position air cylinder, where I use M64 / M65 
to lift and lower. That seems to be generating the error "Cannot set auxiliary 
digital output with cutter radius compensation on". 

Is there any way around this. Do I have to turn radius compensation off before 
each head lift / drop.

Thanks,
Eric


On June 29, 2016 1:06:08 PM EDT, Gene Heskett  wrote:
>On Wednesday 29 June 2016 11:18:39 Eric H. Johnson wrote:
>
>> All,
>>
>>
>>
>> I am cutting a dense mat material with an ultrasonic knife. It
>appears
>> that when the fibers are cut I get a small amount of expansion so the
>> part to be inset ends up just a little too large, even though it is
>> cutting exactly the same size as the base in which it is to be inset.
>> I was looking at tool compensations to see if I can adjust the tool
>> path by a very small amount (0.005" - 0.01") to make the inset part
>> just a little bit smaller, following the example here:
>>
>> http://linuxcnc.org/docs/2.5/html/gcode/tool_compensation.html
>>
>>
>>
>> The pattern runs entirely CW, so G41 should compensate in the
>> appropriate direction.
>>
>>
>>
>> The example shows:
>>
>> G10 L1 P1 R0.25 Z1
>>
>>
>>
>> Does Z1 have any meaning in compensating only in X and Y?
>
>No
>
>>
>>
>> If I set the compensation for the entire file, do I have to deal with
>> individual lead-ins?
>>
>One of the problems I dealt with, and found not worth the effort, so I
>do 
>it directly in the gcode I write for furniture projects, very handy to 
>be able to create a huge (.75" to 1.125" wide) box joint for the Green
>& 
>Green look, with the proper clearance for the glue line by telling my 
>code the 1/4" tool doing the carving is actually only .247" in
>diameter.  
>With the expansion of the wood fibers as the glue penetrates, its a
>very 
>nice fit with a nearly invisible glue line. To loosen the fit, use 
>a .246" for tool_dia, or to tighten, a .248" tool_dia.
>>
>> And of course, is there an easier way to accomplish this?
>>
>When dealing with just that small a diff, setting a tool diameter to a 
>couple thou one way or the other shouldn't be that big a leadin 
>headache, provided the tool table and the code that reads it, can 
>tolerate small negative values.  That is something I have not tested. 
>
>One side effect of the teeny, possibly negative, diameter value is that
>
>the tool icon in the backplot will probably disappear.  I'm rather fond
>
>of being able to see the tools position in the backplot by something 
>that can be seen and that is not just the backtrace red line itself.
>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> Eric
>
>Cheers, Gene Heskett
>-- 
>"There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty:
> soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order."
>-Ed Howdershelt (Author)
>Genes Web page 
>
>--
>Attend Shape: An AT Tech Expo July 15-16. Meet us at AT Park in San
>Francisco, CA to explore cutting-edge tech and listen to tech
>luminaries
>present their vision of the future. This family event has something for
>everyone, including kids. Get more information and register today.
>http://sdm.link/attshape
>___
>Emc-users mailing list
>Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net
>https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users

-- 
Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.
--
Attend Shape: An AT Tech Expo July 15-16. Meet us at AT Park in San
Francisco, CA to explore cutting-edge tech and listen to tech luminaries
present their vision of the future. This family event has something for
everyone, including kids. Get more information and register today.
http://sdm.link/attshape
___
Emc-users mailing list
Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users

Re: [Emc-users] Tool offset

[Gene Heskett]

On Wednesday 29 June 2016 11:18:39 Eric H. Johnson wrote:

> All,
>
>
>
> I am cutting a dense mat material with an ultrasonic knife. It appears
> that when the fibers are cut I get a small amount of expansion so the
> part to be inset ends up just a little too large, even though it is
> cutting exactly the same size as the base in which it is to be inset.
> I was looking at tool compensations to see if I can adjust the tool
> path by a very small amount (0.005" - 0.01") to make the inset part
> just a little bit smaller, following the example here:
>
> http://linuxcnc.org/docs/2.5/html/gcode/tool_compensation.html
>
>
>
> The pattern runs entirely CW, so G41 should compensate in the
> appropriate direction.
>
>
>
> The example shows:
>
> G10 L1 P1 R0.25 Z1
>
>
>
> Does Z1 have any meaning in compensating only in X and Y?

No

>
>
> If I set the compensation for the entire file, do I have to deal with
> individual lead-ins?
>
One of the problems I dealt with, and found not worth the effort, so I do 
it directly in the gcode I write for furniture projects, very handy to 
be able to create a huge (.75" to 1.125" wide) box joint for the Green & 
Green look, with the proper clearance for the glue line by telling my 
code the 1/4" tool doing the carving is actually only .247" in diameter.  
With the expansion of the wood fibers as the glue penetrates, its a very 
nice fit with a nearly invisible glue line. To loosen the fit, use 
a .246" for tool_dia, or to tighten, a .248" tool_dia.
>
> And of course, is there an easier way to accomplish this?
>
When dealing with just that small a diff, setting a tool diameter to a 
couple thou one way or the other shouldn't be that big a leadin 
headache, provided the tool table and the code that reads it, can 
tolerate small negative values.  That is something I have not tested. 

One side effect of the teeny, possibly negative, diameter value is that 
the tool icon in the backplot will probably disappear.  I'm rather fond 
of being able to see the tools position in the backplot by something 
that can be seen and that is not just the backtrace red line itself.

> Thanks,
>
> Eric

Cheers, Gene Heskett
-- 
"There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty:
 soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order."
-Ed Howdershelt (Author)
Genes Web page 

--
Attend Shape: An AT Tech Expo July 15-16. Meet us at AT Park in San
Francisco, CA to explore cutting-edge tech and listen to tech luminaries
present their vision of the future. This family event has something for
everyone, including kids. Get more information and register today.
http://sdm.link/attshape
___
Emc-users mailing list
Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users

Re: [Emc-users] Tool offset

[andy pugh]

On 29 June 2016 at 17:01, Eric H. Johnson  wrote:

> It does not have a controllable Z, it is a two position up/down.

In that case the Z offset is irrelevant, but you probably still want
to leave it out.

-- 
atp
"A motorcycle is a bicycle with a pandemonium attachment and is
designed for the especial use of mechanical geniuses, daredevils and
lunatics."
— George Fitch, Atlanta Constitution Newspaper, 1916

--
Attend Shape: An AT Tech Expo July 15-16. Meet us at AT Park in San
Francisco, CA to explore cutting-edge tech and listen to tech luminaries
present their vision of the future. This family event has something for
everyone, including kids. Get more information and register today.
http://sdm.link/attshape
___
Emc-users mailing list
Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users

Re: [Emc-users] Tool offset

[Eric H. Johnson]

Andy,

It does not have a controllable Z, it is a two position up/down.

Regards,
Eric


> Does Z1 have any meaning in compensating only in X and Y?

Does your machine have a Z-axis?


--
atp
"A motorcycle is a bicycle with a pandemonium attachment and is designed for 
the especial use of mechanical geniuses, daredevils and lunatics."
— George Fitch, Atlanta Constitution Newspaper, 1916

--
Attend Shape: An AT Tech Expo July 15-16. Meet us at AT Park in San 
Francisco, CA to explore cutting-edge tech and listen to tech luminaries 
present their vision of the future. This family event has something for 
everyone, including kids. Get more information and register today.
http://sdm.link/attshape
___
Emc-users mailing list
Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users


--
Attend Shape: An AT Tech Expo July 15-16. Meet us at AT Park in San
Francisco, CA to explore cutting-edge tech and listen to tech luminaries
present their vision of the future. This family event has something for
everyone, including kids. Get more information and register today.
http://sdm.link/attshape
___
Emc-users mailing list
Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users

Re: [Emc-users] Tool offset

[andy pugh]

On 29 June 2016 at 16:18, Eric H. Johnson  wrote:
> G10 L1 P1 R0.25 Z1
>
>
>
> Does Z1 have any meaning in compensating only in X and Y?

Does your machine have a Z-axis?


-- 
atp
"A motorcycle is a bicycle with a pandemonium attachment and is
designed for the especial use of mechanical geniuses, daredevils and
lunatics."
— George Fitch, Atlanta Constitution Newspaper, 1916

--
Attend Shape: An AT Tech Expo July 15-16. Meet us at AT Park in San
Francisco, CA to explore cutting-edge tech and listen to tech luminaries
present their vision of the future. This family event has something for
everyone, including kids. Get more information and register today.
http://sdm.link/attshape
___
Emc-users mailing list
Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users

[Emc-users] Tool offset

[Eric H. Johnson]

All,

 

I am cutting a dense mat material with an ultrasonic knife. It appears that
when the fibers are cut I get a small amount of expansion so the part to be
inset ends up just a little too large, even though it is cutting exactly the
same size as the base in which it is to be inset. I was looking at tool
compensations to see if I can adjust the tool path by a very small amount
(0.005" - 0.01") to make the inset part just a little bit smaller, following
the example here:

http://linuxcnc.org/docs/2.5/html/gcode/tool_compensation.html

 

The pattern runs entirely CW, so G41 should compensate in the appropriate
direction.

 

The example shows:

G10 L1 P1 R0.25 Z1

 

Does Z1 have any meaning in compensating only in X and Y?

 

If I set the compensation for the entire file, do I have to deal with
individual lead-ins?

 

And of course, is there an easier way to accomplish this?

 

Thanks,

Eric

--
Attend Shape: An AT Tech Expo July 15-16. Meet us at AT Park in San
Francisco, CA to explore cutting-edge tech and listen to tech luminaries
present their vision of the future. This family event has something for
everyone, including kids. Get more information and register today.
http://sdm.link/attshape
___
Emc-users mailing list
Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users

Re: [Emc-users] Tool offset and cutter comp, confused

[Bruce Klawiter]

OK this is very irritating, I can run my program using G10 L1, but if I happen 
to put in to great of R value EMC tells me there is an error with the cutter 
comp. I then have to manually change the ppmc.tbl to a smaller value and 
restart EMC so I don't get an error when loading the program again. 
I have tried to MDI T0M6 but this does not help.
Any one have any idea how I can fix it so I can use the Tool Table.

Your help is greatly appreciated,
Bruce

--- On Wed, 10/26/11, Bruce Klawiter bmkl...@yahoo.com wrote:

From: Bruce Klawiter bmkl...@yahoo.com
Subject: Re: [Emc-users] Tool offset and cutter comp, confused
To: Enhanced Machine Controller (EMC) emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net
Date: Wednesday, October 26, 2011, 12:15 AM

I am the owner and I do have permission of of my ppmc.tbl file

After you change the tool table manually, you must invoke
 File/Reload Tool Table to tell EMC you changed it.

 Tried this, it still did not work

Could this be a permissions thing? I am sure we would have a lot more
people complaining if it din't work for anyone.
Who is the owner of your tool table?

-- 
atp
Torque wrenches are for the obedience of fools and the guidance of wise men

--
The demand for IT networking professionals continues to grow, and the
demand for specialized networking skills is growing even more rapidly.
Take a complimentary Learning@Cisco Self-Assessment and learn 
about Cisco certifications, training, and career opportunities. 
http://p.sf.net/sfu/cisco-dev2dev
___
Emc-users mailing list
Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users
--
The demand for IT networking professionals continues to grow, and the
demand for specialized networking skills is growing even more rapidly.
Take a complimentary Learning@Cisco Self-Assessment and learn 
about Cisco certifications, training, and career opportunities. 
http://p.sf.net/sfu/cisco-dev2dev
___
Emc-users mailing list
Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users
--
The demand for IT networking professionals continues to grow, and the
demand for specialized networking skills is growing even more rapidly.
Take a complimentary Learning@Cisco Self-Assessment and learn 
about Cisco certifications, training, and career opportunities. 
http://p.sf.net/sfu/cisco-dev2dev
___
Emc-users mailing list
Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users

Re: [Emc-users] Tool offset and cutter comp, confused

[Bruce Klawiter]

I am the owner and I do have permission of of my ppmc.tbl file

After you change the tool table manually, you must invoke
 File/Reload Tool Table to tell EMC you changed it.

 Tried this, it still did not work

Could this be a permissions thing? I am sure we would have a lot more
people complaining if it din't work for anyone.
Who is the owner of your tool table?

-- 
atp
Torque wrenches are for the obedience of fools and the guidance of wise men

--
The demand for IT networking professionals continues to grow, and the
demand for specialized networking skills is growing even more rapidly.
Take a complimentary Learning@Cisco Self-Assessment and learn 
about Cisco certifications, training, and career opportunities. 
http://p.sf.net/sfu/cisco-dev2dev
___
Emc-users mailing list
Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users
--
The demand for IT networking professionals continues to grow, and the
demand for specialized networking skills is growing even more rapidly.
Take a complimentary Learning@Cisco Self-Assessment and learn 
about Cisco certifications, training, and career opportunities. 
http://p.sf.net/sfu/cisco-dev2dev
___
Emc-users mailing list
Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users

Re: [Emc-users] Tool offset and cutter comp, confused

[Bruce Klawiter]

After you change the tool table manually, you must invoke
File/Reload Tool Table to tell EMC you changed it.

Tried this, it still did not work

Also consider using G10 L1 to change the tool table, which lets you
do it in one step.

This did work, it is a little annoying I can use Diameter with G10 L1

What is the difference between G0 L1 and G0 L10, I have read the information 
here http://linuxcnc.org/docs/html/gcode_main.html but this is not entirely 
clear to me.

Thanks much

--
The demand for IT networking professionals continues to grow, and the
demand for specialized networking skills is growing even more rapidly.
Take a complimentary Learning@Cisco Self-Assessment and learn 
about Cisco certifications, training, and career opportunities. 
http://p.sf.net/sfu/cisco-dev2dev
___
Emc-users mailing list
Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users
--
The demand for IT networking professionals continues to grow, and the
demand for specialized networking skills is growing even more rapidly.
Take a complimentary Learning@Cisco Self-Assessment and learn 
about Cisco certifications, training, and career opportunities. 
http://p.sf.net/sfu/cisco-dev2dev
___
Emc-users mailing list
Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users

Re: [Emc-users] Tool offset and cutter comp, confused

[andy pugh]

On 23 October 2011 14:22, Bruce Klawiter bmkl...@yahoo.com wrote:

 What is the difference between G0 L1 and G0 L10, I have read the information 
 here http://linuxcnc.org/docs/html/gcode_main.html but this is not entirely 
 clear to me.

G10 L1 says This is the length of my tool
G10 L10 says My tool is at this position in the current coordinate
system, set the tool offsets to make that consistent with the axis
positions

Or, looked at another way, G10 L1 is equivalent to editing the tool
table, G10 L10 is equivalent to using tool touch-off in the GUI.

-- 
atp
Torque wrenches are for the obedience of fools and the guidance of wise men

--
The demand for IT networking professionals continues to grow, and the
demand for specialized networking skills is growing even more rapidly.
Take a complimentary Learning@Cisco Self-Assessment and learn 
about Cisco certifications, training, and career opportunities. 
http://p.sf.net/sfu/cisco-dev2dev
___
Emc-users mailing list
Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users

Re: [Emc-users] Tool offset and cutter comp, confused

[andy pugh]

On 23 October 2011 14:22, Bruce Klawiter bmkl...@yahoo.com wrote:

After you change the tool table manually, you must invoke
 File/Reload Tool Table to tell EMC you changed it.

 Tried this, it still did not work

Could this be a permissions thing? I am sure we would have a lot more
people complaining if it din't work for anyone.
Who is the owner of your tool table?

-- 
atp
Torque wrenches are for the obedience of fools and the guidance of wise men

--
The demand for IT networking professionals continues to grow, and the
demand for specialized networking skills is growing even more rapidly.
Take a complimentary Learning@Cisco Self-Assessment and learn 
about Cisco certifications, training, and career opportunities. 
http://p.sf.net/sfu/cisco-dev2dev
___
Emc-users mailing list
Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users

Re: [Emc-users] Tool offset and cutter comp, confused

[andy pugh]

On 22 October 2011 06:10, Bruce Klawiter bmkl...@yahoo.com wrote:
 If my ppmc.tbl file says that Tool 1, is D.100 and after I start EMC/Axis, I 
 either MDI T1M6 or the program does I can see that the tool information is 
 displayed in the Axis interface.

Don't forget the G43.

 If I run a program with G41 it does pick up cutter comp, now if I open the 
 tool table from within the Axis interface and change the diameter of Tool 1 
 to D.01 it does write that information to the ppmc.tbl file.

I find the tool table editor box to be a bit counterintuitive. You
need to press the write button, then close the editor, or you end up
with several editor boxes in the background. When you select edit
tool table you seem to get another instance of the tool table editor,
not the existing one brought to the foreground. This might be
version-dependent, and I am not sure which version my machine is on
(it's a semi-random build from source)

-- 
atp
Torque wrenches are for the obedience of fools and the guidance of wise men

--
The demand for IT networking professionals continues to grow, and the
demand for specialized networking skills is growing even more rapidly.
Take a complimentary Learning@Cisco Self-Assessment and learn 
about Cisco certifications, training, and career opportunities. 
http://p.sf.net/sfu/cisco-dev2dev
___
Emc-users mailing list
Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users

Re: [Emc-users] Tool offset and cutter comp, confused

[Bruce Klawiter]

I find the tool table editor box to be a bit counterintuitive. You
need to press the write button, then close the editor, or you end up
with several editor boxes in the background.

Even if I press the write button and close the tool table the ppmc.tbl file 
gets written back to what it was when I opened EMC/Axis.

OK I just went and checked, if I have the ppmc.tbl file open and I start 
EMC/Axis and run a program without ever calling up the tool table menu and then 
run a program I have to reload the ppmc.tbl because it has been overwritten.  

Any ideas of why if I try to do this with EMC/tkemc I can not open the tool 
table window or the calibration window.


--
The demand for IT networking professionals continues to grow, and the
demand for specialized networking skills is growing even more rapidly.
Take a complimentary Learning@Cisco Self-Assessment and learn 
about Cisco certifications, training, and career opportunities. 
http://p.sf.net/sfu/cisco-dev2dev
___
Emc-users mailing list
Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users

Re: [Emc-users] Tool offset and cutter comp, confused

[Chris Radek]

On Sat, Oct 22, 2011 at 01:09:27PM -0700, Bruce Klawiter wrote:
 
 I find the tool table editor box to be a bit counterintuitive. You
 need to press the write button, then close the editor, or you end up
 with several editor boxes in the background.
 
 Even if I press the write button and close the tool table the ppmc.tbl 
 file gets written back to what it was when I opened EMC/Axis.

After you change the tool table manually, you must invoke
File/Reload Tool Table to tell EMC you changed it.

Also consider using G10 L1 to change the tool table, which lets you
do it in one step.

--
The demand for IT networking professionals continues to grow, and the
demand for specialized networking skills is growing even more rapidly.
Take a complimentary Learning@Cisco Self-Assessment and learn 
about Cisco certifications, training, and career opportunities. 
http://p.sf.net/sfu/cisco-dev2dev
___
Emc-users mailing list
Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users

Re: [Emc-users] Tool offset and cutter comp, confused

[James Louis]

Bruce,

Try to not edit your tool table outside of Axis.  In EMC2.4.6 the tool table is 
edited from a pulldown menu in the Axis interface.  When a tool call (Tx M6) is 
performed either in MDI or from a G-code program running, the values for your 
tool diameter and length will be displayed in the lower left corner of the Axis 
interface.  It's safe practice to always look there before running.
If these values are active (displayed) then they will be used for G41 Cutter 
Compensation Left and G43 Tool Length Compensation.  It is also good practice 
to put these in a XY move block and Z move block respectively.
After the cancel codes G40 and G49 are active, the display will read no tool.
I hope this helps, because I am unclear what you mean when you say it is not 
working or what that error means.

Jim
-Original Message-
From: Jon Elson [mailto:el...@pico-systems.com]
Sent: Thursday, October 20, 2011 9:21 PM
To: Enhanced Machine Controller (EMC)
Subject: Re: [Emc-users] Tool offset and cutter comp, confused

Bruce Klawiter wrote:
 Thanks Jon I added that the hal component to motion.hal file and I was able 
 to run the program.

 The problem now is the cutter comp does not work if I change the comp in the 
 tool table, when I run the program the I get an error message in the 
 tooledit: ppmc.table that says Warning file changed by another process
 Even if I set up tools in the ppmc.tbl file before I start EMC Axis,  the G43 
 comp does not work.

I don't run the very latest EMC on my production machine, and there has
been some
work on the tool table and tool table editor since then.  If anyone else
knows,
please jump in.  Anyway, this is an EMC/Axis issue and is very unlikely to
have anything to do with my servo interface.

Jon

--
The demand for IT networking professionals continues to grow, and the
demand for specialized networking skills is growing even more rapidly.
Take a complimentary Learning@Cisco Self-Assessment and learn
about Cisco certifications, training, and career opportunities.
http://p.sf.net/sfu/cisco-dev2dev
___
Emc-users mailing list
Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users

This communication is for the use of the intended recipient only. It may 
contain information that is privileged and confidential. If you are not the 
intended recipient of this communication, the disclosure, copying, distribution 
or use hereof is prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, 
please advise me by return e-mail or by telephone and then delete it 
immediately.

--
The demand for IT networking professionals continues to grow, and the
demand for specialized networking skills is growing even more rapidly.
Take a complimentary Learning@Cisco Self-Assessment and learn 
about Cisco certifications, training, and career opportunities. 
http://p.sf.net/sfu/cisco-dev2dev
___
Emc-users mailing list
Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users

Re: [Emc-users] Tool offset and cutter comp, confused

[Bruce Klawiter]

If my ppmc.tbl file says that Tool 1, is D.100 and after I start EMC/Axis, I 
either MDI T1M6 or the program does I can see that the tool information is 
displayed in the Axis interface. 
If I run a program with G41 it does pick up cutter comp, now if I open the tool 
table from within the Axis interface and change the diameter of Tool 1 to D.01 
it does write that information to the ppmc.tbl file. I can open the file 
ppmc.tbl and see that the value has been changed to D.01, but as soon as I run 
the program I get an error message from within the tool table window that says 
Warning file changed by another process 
If I go back and look at the ppmc.tbl file it has been changed back to D.100
Now that I think of it I get the error message Warning file changed by another 
process even if I have not made any changes to the tool table.

Also it will not let me set the Diameter to zero.

See a screen shot of the error message, Image 2: 
https://sites.google.com/site/bmklawt/home/pictures

I tried to do this with EMC/tkemc but the tool table window would not pop up, 
also the calibration window.

Your help is appreciated,
Bruce



--- On Fri, 10/21/11, James Louis james.lo...@gastechnology.org wrote:

From: James Louis james.lo...@gastechnology.org
Subject: Re: [Emc-users] Tool offset and cutter comp, confused
To: Enhanced Machine Controller (EMC) emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net
Date: Friday, October 21, 2011, 8:33 AM

Bruce,

Try to not edit your tool table outside of Axis.  In EMC2.4.6 the tool table is 
edited from a pulldown menu in the Axis interface.  When a tool call (Tx M6) is 
performed either in MDI or from a G-code program running, the values for your 
tool diameter and length will be displayed in the lower left corner of the Axis 
interface.  It's safe practice to always look there before running.
If these values are active (displayed) then they will be used for G41 Cutter 
Compensation Left and G43 Tool Length Compensation.  It is also good practice 
to put these in a XY move block and Z move block respectively.
After the cancel codes G40 and G49 are active, the display will read no tool.
I hope this helps, because I am unclear what you mean when you say it is not 
working or what that error means.

Jim
-Original Message-
From: Jon Elson [mailto:el...@pico-systems.com]
Sent: Thursday, October 20, 2011 9:21 PM
To: Enhanced Machine Controller (EMC)
Subject: Re: [Emc-users] Tool offset and cutter comp, confused

Bruce Klawiter wrote:
 Thanks Jon I added that the hal component to motion.hal file and I was able 
 to run the program.

 The problem now is the cutter comp does not work if I change the comp in the 
 tool table, when I run the program the I get an error message in the 
 tooledit: ppmc.table that says Warning file changed by another process
 Even if I set up tools in the ppmc.tbl file before I start EMC Axis,  the G43 
 comp does not work.

I don't run the very latest EMC on my production machine, and there has
been some
work on the tool table and tool table editor since then.  If anyone else
knows,
please jump in.  Anyway, this is an EMC/Axis issue and is very unlikely to
have anything to do with my servo interface.

Jon

--
The demand for IT networking professionals continues to grow, and the
demand for specialized networking skills is growing even more rapidly.
Take a complimentary Learning@Cisco Self-Assessment and learn
about Cisco certifications, training, and career opportunities.
http://p.sf.net/sfu/cisco-dev2dev
___
Emc-users mailing list
Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users

This communication is for the use of the intended recipient only. It may 
contain information that is privileged and confidential. If you are not the 
intended recipient of this communication, the disclosure, copying, distribution 
or use hereof is prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, 
please advise me by return e-mail or by telephone and then delete it 
immediately.

--
The demand for IT networking professionals continues to grow, and the
demand for specialized networking skills is growing even more rapidly.
Take a complimentary Learning@Cisco Self-Assessment and learn 
about Cisco certifications, training, and career opportunities. 
http://p.sf.net/sfu/cisco-dev2dev
___
Emc-users mailing list
Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users
--
The demand for IT networking professionals continues to grow, and the
demand for specialized networking skills is growing even more rapidly.
Take a complimentary Learning@Cisco Self-Assessment and learn 
about Cisco certifications, training

Re: [Emc-users] Tool offset and cutter comp, confused

[Bruce Klawiter]

Thanks Jon I added that the hal component to motion.hal file and I was able to 
run the program.

The problem now is the cutter comp does not work if I change the comp in the 
tool table, when I run the program the I get an error message in the tooledit: 
ppmc.table that says Warning file changed by another process
Even if I set up tools in the ppmc.tbl file before I start EMC Axis,  the G43 
comp does not work.

See image 2 here:
https://sites.google.com/site/bmklawt/home/pictures

Regards,
Bruce 

--- On Wed, 10/19/11, Jon Elson el...@pico-systems.com wrote:

From: Jon Elson el...@pico-systems.com
Subject: Re: [Emc-users] Tool offset and cutter comp, confused
To: Enhanced Machine Controller (EMC) emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net
Date: Wednesday, October 19, 2011, 10:07 PM

Bruce Klawiter wrote:
 I am trying to run my first program with EMC using cutter comp I must not 
 have the tool info right, when I start the program EMC Axis hangs and I have 
 to restart
 it. 
 If I remove lines N104 and N108 it runs fine.
 I have read the manual but I must be missing something, any help would be 
 great.

 See image 2 here:
 https://sites.google.com/site/bmklawt/home/pictures

 N100 G20 G64
 N102 G0 G17 G40 G90
 N103 G10 L1 P1 Z0...tried with and without this line 
 N104 T1 M6
 N106 G0 G90 X0. Y0. S400 M3
 N108 G43 H1 Z.25.tried with T1 or H1 here
   
OK, I know this one, as I have run into it myself!  What is happening is the
T1 M6 is requesting a tool change.  If you had an ATC, it would execute some
procedure to change the tool and then inform EMC that the change was 
completed.
There is a hal pin commanding the change that needs to be linked to a 
hal pin
signaling
 the change is complete, if you have no ATC mechanism.

There is a better way to do this, but it involves adding another hal 
component
to your configs files.
See http://wiki.linuxcnc.org/cgi-bin/emcinfo.pl?Tool_Changes
for some more info on this.

Jon

--
The demand for IT networking professionals continues to grow, and the
demand for specialized networking skills is growing even more rapidly.
Take a complimentary Learning@Ciosco Self-Assessment and learn 
about Cisco certifications, training, and career opportunities. 
http://p.sf.net/sfu/cisco-dev2dev
___
Emc-users mailing list
Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users
--
The demand for IT networking professionals continues to grow, and the
demand for specialized networking skills is growing even more rapidly.
Take a complimentary Learning@Cisco Self-Assessment and learn 
about Cisco certifications, training, and career opportunities. 
http://p.sf.net/sfu/cisco-dev2dev
___
Emc-users mailing list
Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users

Re: [Emc-users] Tool offset and cutter comp, confused

[Bruce Klawiter]

Sorry that should read G41 Comp does not work

--- On Thu, 10/20/11, Bruce Klawiter bmkl...@yahoo.com wrote:

From: Bruce Klawiter bmkl...@yahoo.com
Subject: Re: [Emc-users] Tool offset and cutter comp, confused
To: Enhanced Machine Controller (EMC) emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net
Date: Thursday, October 20, 2011, 5:20 PM

Thanks Jon I added that the hal component to motion.hal file and I was able to 
run the program.

The problem now is the cutter comp does not work if I change the comp in the 
tool table, when I run the program the I get an error message in the tooledit: 
ppmc.table that says Warning file changed by another process
Even if I set up tools in the ppmc.tbl file before I start EMC Axis,  the G43 
comp does not work.

See image 2 here:
https://sites.google.com/site/bmklawt/home/pictures

Regards,
Bruce 

--- On Wed, 10/19/11, Jon Elson el...@pico-systems.com wrote:

From: Jon Elson el...@pico-systems.com
Subject: Re: [Emc-users] Tool offset and cutter comp, confused
To: Enhanced Machine Controller (EMC) emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net
Date: Wednesday, October 19, 2011, 10:07 PM

Bruce Klawiter wrote:
 I am trying to run my first program with EMC using cutter comp I must not 
 have the tool info right, when I start the program EMC Axis hangs and I have 
 to restart
 it. 
 If I remove lines N104 and N108 it runs fine.
 I have read the manual but I must be missing something, any help would be 
 great.

 See image 2 here:
 https://sites.google.com/site/bmklawt/home/pictures

 N100 G20 G64
 N102 G0 G17 G40 G90
 N103 G10 L1 P1 Z0...tried with and without this line 
 N104 T1 M6
 N106 G0 G90 X0. Y0. S400 M3
 N108 G43 H1 Z.25.tried with T1 or H1 here
   
OK, I know this one, as I have run into it myself!  What is happening is the
T1 M6 is requesting a tool change.  If you had an ATC, it would execute some
procedure to change the tool and then inform EMC that the change was 
completed.
There is a hal pin commanding the change that needs to be linked to a 
hal pin
signaling
 the change is complete, if you have no ATC mechanism.

There is a better way to do this, but it involves adding another hal 
component
to your configs files.
See http://wiki.linuxcnc.org/cgi-bin/emcinfo.pl?Tool_Changes
for some more info on this.

Jon

--
The demand for IT networking professionals continues to grow, and the
demand for specialized networking skills is growing even more rapidly.
Take a complimentary Learning@Ciosco Self-Assessment and learn 
about Cisco certifications, training, and career opportunities. 
http://p.sf.net/sfu/cisco-dev2dev
___
Emc-users mailing list
Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users
--
The demand for IT networking professionals continues to grow, and the
demand for specialized networking skills is growing even more rapidly.
Take a complimentary Learning@Cisco Self-Assessment and learn 
about Cisco certifications, training, and career opportunities. 
http://p.sf.net/sfu/cisco-dev2dev
___
Emc-users mailing list
Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users
--
The demand for IT networking professionals continues to grow, and the
demand for specialized networking skills is growing even more rapidly.
Take a complimentary Learning@Cisco Self-Assessment and learn 
about Cisco certifications, training, and career opportunities. 
http://p.sf.net/sfu/cisco-dev2dev
___
Emc-users mailing list
Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users

Re: [Emc-users] Tool offset and cutter comp, confused

[Jon Elson]

Bruce Klawiter wrote:
 Thanks Jon I added that the hal component to motion.hal file and I was able 
 to run the program.

 The problem now is the cutter comp does not work if I change the comp in the 
 tool table, when I run the program the I get an error message in the 
 tooledit: ppmc.table that says Warning file changed by another process
 Even if I set up tools in the ppmc.tbl file before I start EMC Axis,  the G43 
 comp does not work.
   
I don't run the very latest EMC on my production machine, and there has 
been some
work on the tool table and tool table editor since then.  If anyone else 
knows,
please jump in.  Anyway, this is an EMC/Axis issue and is very unlikely to
have anything to do with my servo interface.

Jon

--
The demand for IT networking professionals continues to grow, and the
demand for specialized networking skills is growing even more rapidly.
Take a complimentary Learning@Cisco Self-Assessment and learn 
about Cisco certifications, training, and career opportunities. 
http://p.sf.net/sfu/cisco-dev2dev
___
Emc-users mailing list
Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users

[Emc-users] Tool offset and cutter comp, confused

[Bruce Klawiter]

I am trying to run my first program with EMC using cutter comp I must not have 
the tool info right, when I start the program EMC Axis hangs and I have to 
restart it. 
If I remove lines N104 and N108 it runs fine.
I have read the manual but I must be missing something, any help would be great.

See image 2 here:
https://sites.google.com/site/bmklawt/home/pictures

N100 G20 G64
N102 G0 G17 G40 G90
N103 G10 L1 P1 Z0...tried with and without this line 
N104 T1 M6
N106 G0 G90 X0. Y0. S400 M3
N108 G43 H1 Z.25.tried with T1 or H1 here
N110 Z.1
N112 G1 Z0. F6.42
N114 X.224 Y.224 F4.
N116 G3 X0. Y.448 I-.224 J0.
N118 X-.448 Y0. I0. J-.448
N120 X0. Y-.448 I.448 J0.
N122 X.448 Y0. I0. J.448
N124 X0. Y.448 I-.448 J0.
N126 X-.224 Y.224 I0. J-.224
N128 G1 X0. Y0.
N130 G0 Z.25
N132 M2
--
The demand for IT networking professionals continues to grow, and the
demand for specialized networking skills is growing even more rapidly.
Take a complimentary Learning@Ciosco Self-Assessment and learn 
about Cisco certifications, training, and career opportunities. 
http://p.sf.net/sfu/cisco-dev2dev
___
Emc-users mailing list
Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users

Re: [Emc-users] Tool offset and cutter comp, confused

[Jon Elson]

Bruce Klawiter wrote:
 I am trying to run my first program with EMC using cutter comp I must not 
 have the tool info right, when I start the program EMC Axis hangs and I have 
 to restart it. 
 If I remove lines N104 and N108 it runs fine.
 I have read the manual but I must be missing something, any help would be 
 great.

 See image 2 here:
 https://sites.google.com/site/bmklawt/home/pictures

 N100 G20 G64
 N102 G0 G17 G40 G90
 N103 G10 L1 P1 Z0...tried with and without this line 
 N104 T1 M6
 N106 G0 G90 X0. Y0. S400 M3
 N108 G43 H1 Z.25.tried with T1 or H1 here
   
OK, I know this one, as I have run into it myself!  What is happening is the
T1 M6 is requesting a tool change.  If you had an ATC, it would execute some
procedure to change the tool and then inform EMC that the change was 
completed.
There is a hal pin commanding the change that needs to be linked to a 
hal pin
signaling the change is complete, if you have no ATC mechanism.

There is a better way to do this, but it involves adding another hal 
component
to your configs files.
See http://wiki.linuxcnc.org/cgi-bin/emcinfo.pl?Tool_Changes
for some more info on this.

Jon

--
The demand for IT networking professionals continues to grow, and the
demand for specialized networking skills is growing even more rapidly.
Take a complimentary Learning@Ciosco Self-Assessment and learn 
about Cisco certifications, training, and career opportunities. 
http://p.sf.net/sfu/cisco-dev2dev
___
Emc-users mailing list
Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users

Re: [Emc-users] tool offset compensation and gouging

[Igor Chudov]

By the way, I think that it is great that you let us use cutter compensation
while doing inside corners. Every one knows that these corners will have a
radius of the end mill, anyway, and this is usually acceptable when
pocketing. For perfectly sharp inside corners, after all, we would need to
broach, not mill.

i

On Fri, Mar 4, 2011 at 6:58 AM, Chris Radek ch...@timeguy.com wrote:

 On Thu, Mar 03, 2011 at 11:25:19PM -0600, Jon Elson wrote:

  Well, shows how out of date I am!  But, doesn't that cause a gouge?  I
  got used to using arcs on inside corners to
  avoid the gouge and cutter load increasing on them.  Or, does the
  trajectory compensate to avoid the gouge?
  If so, it seems like it would HAVE to insert an arc segment between the
  two straight lines.

 No, it doesn't gouge the part outline.  It moves along the path on the
 specified side.  Every adjacent pair of moves (whether line or arc)
 cause a concave or convex corner.  If the corner is concave, it
 calculates a new corner point that puts the tool inside and tangent to
 both.  If it is convex, it makes an arc around the corner.

 You can still get the gouging error if you program *three* moves
 where placing the tool tangent to moves 1,2 causes it to gouge 3.
 This can happen if move 2 is short compared to the tool:

  - O _,|

 Imagine the , is a tiny move in the corner, that the large tool O
 can't touch without cutting into _ or | moves.  This will give a
 gouging error.  Some CAM systems unfortunately generate this.

 Like Igor said earlier, using a smaller tool can cause this gouging
 error to go away because the , move becomes reachable.  (It also
 minimizes the leftover fillets of course.)

  I rarely use the G41, G42 offsets, I have my little C programs that code
  the paths I need without using tool
  radius offsets, so I am rusty.

 You should try it again!

 Chris



 --
 What You Don't Know About Data Connectivity CAN Hurt You
 This paper provides an overview of data connectivity, details
 its effect on application quality, and explores various alternative
 solutions. http://p.sf.net/sfu/progress-d2d
 ___
 Emc-users mailing list
 Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net
 https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users

--
What You Don't Know About Data Connectivity CAN Hurt You
This paper provides an overview of data connectivity, details
its effect on application quality, and explores various alternative
solutions. http://p.sf.net/sfu/progress-d2d
___
Emc-users mailing list
Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users

Re: [Emc-users] tool offset compensation and gouging

[Viesturs Lācis]

2011/3/4 Chris Radek ch...@timeguy.com:
 On Thu, Mar 03, 2011 at 08:34:35PM -0600, Jon Elson wrote:

 Specifically, when using cutter radius compensation and straight lines,
 you can only make convex shapes on the outside of a part.
 So, if you have G42 in force (tool on right), then you can only make
 left turns.

 This has not been true in EMC since 2.3 was released in early 2009.
 You can program concave corners in EMC.


I cannot completely agree to that - just like author of this thread I
had the same error message about gouging and concave corners on my
waterjet machine in the autumn last year. I had 2.4.3 version, if I
recall correctly (it was one of the latest at that moment).
The conclusion of the reason, why did I get the error, was that the
inside corner was created by straight lines, which were smaller that
cutter radius (~0,5mm).

So receiving this error message means that G-code has to be corrected.
One of possible options - offset the cutter path so that required part
can be created without G41/G42 compensations. More advanced fix would
be finding out, why the code consists of such a small linear lines and
checking, if that reason can be avoided - bad choice of CAM
application, bad drawing or maybe something else.

Viesturs

--
What You Don't Know About Data Connectivity CAN Hurt You
This paper provides an overview of data connectivity, details
its effect on application quality, and explores various alternative
solutions. http://p.sf.net/sfu/progress-d2d
___
Emc-users mailing list
Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users

Re: [Emc-users] tool offset compensation and gouging

[Kirk Wallace]

On Fri, 2011-03-04 at 06:58 -0600, Chris Radek wrote:
... snip
 No, it doesn't gouge the part outline.  It moves along the path on the
 specified side.  Every adjacent pair of moves (whether line or arc)
 cause a concave or convex corner.  If the corner is concave, it
 calculates a new corner point that puts the tool inside and tangent to
 both.  If it is convex, it makes an arc around the corner.

(Sorry for being blunt, but this best conveys how I feel)
I prefer to code the part surface path, which ultimately, is the only
thing that  matters. If the surface can not be machined, the surface
needs to be fixed or the process changed. EMC2 should not be expected to
compensate for laziness or lack of understanding. I don't think it is
worth bloating EMC2 for the sake of convenience, that's what Windows
(xconfig?) is for. What good is something that conveniently doesn't
work?

On the other hand, I don't mind making EMC2 more convenient, but it
should not affect the core function. If a gouge alarm triggers, it might
be better to have a widget that leaves EMC2, invokes a g-code editor,
then suggests code that fixes the error, offers to correct the code,
then saves the g-code file and reloads the file in EMC2.

Is there a parameter that can be set to put the strict gouging alarm
back in?
-- 
Kirk Wallace
http://www.wallacecompany.com/machine_shop/
http://www.wallacecompany.com/E45/index.html
California, USA


--
What You Don't Know About Data Connectivity CAN Hurt You
This paper provides an overview of data connectivity, details
its effect on application quality, and explores various alternative
solutions. http://p.sf.net/sfu/progress-d2d
___
Emc-users mailing list
Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users

Re: [Emc-users] tool offset compensation and gouging

[Chris Radek]

On Fri, Mar 04, 2011 at 09:14:41AM -0800, Kirk Wallace wrote:
 
 (Sorry for being blunt, but this best conveys how I feel)
 I prefer to code the part surface path, which ultimately, is the only
 thing that  matters. If the surface can not be machined, the surface
 needs to be fixed or the process changed. EMC2 should not be expected to
 compensate for laziness or lack of understanding. I don't think it is
 worth bloating EMC2 for the sake of convenience, that's what Windows
 (xconfig?) is for. What good is something that conveniently doesn't
 work?
 
 On the other hand, I don't mind making EMC2 more convenient, but it
 should not affect the core function. If a gouge alarm triggers, it might
 be better to have a widget that leaves EMC2, invokes a g-code editor,
 then suggests code that fixes the error, offers to correct the code,
 then saves the g-code file and reloads the file in EMC2.
 
 Is there a parameter that can be set to put the strict gouging alarm
 back in?


Sorry to be blunt, but your final question makes me wonder whether you
understand the issue.

This is about using cutter comp with concave corners.  When you do
that, a fillet is left because the cutter is round.  It does not cause
a gouge.   I do not know what you mean by strict gouging alarm.

Chris

--
What You Don't Know About Data Connectivity CAN Hurt You
This paper provides an overview of data connectivity, details
its effect on application quality, and explores various alternative
solutions. http://p.sf.net/sfu/progress-d2d
___
Emc-users mailing list
Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users

Re: [Emc-users] tool offset compensation and gouging

[Igor Chudov]

On Fri, Mar 4, 2011 at 11:20 AM, Chris Radek ch...@timeguy.com wrote:

 On Fri, Mar 04, 2011 at 09:14:41AM -0800, Kirk Wallace wrote:
 
  (Sorry for being blunt, but this best conveys how I feel)
  I prefer to code the part surface path, which ultimately, is the only
  thing that  matters. If the surface can not be machined, the surface
  needs to be fixed or the process changed. EMC2 should not be expected to
  compensate for laziness or lack of understanding. I don't think it is
  worth bloating EMC2 for the sake of convenience, that's what Windows
  (xconfig?) is for. What good is something that conveniently doesn't
  work?
 
  On the other hand, I don't mind making EMC2 more convenient, but it
  should not affect the core function. If a gouge alarm triggers, it might
  be better to have a widget that leaves EMC2, invokes a g-code editor,
  then suggests code that fixes the error, offers to correct the code,
  then saves the g-code file and reloads the file in EMC2.
 
  Is there a parameter that can be set to put the strict gouging alarm
  back in?


 Sorry to be blunt, but your final question makes me wonder whether you
 understand the issue.

 This is about using cutter comp with concave corners.  When you do
 that, a fillet is left because the cutter is round.  It does not cause
 a gouge.   I do not know what you mean by strict gouging alarm.


Exactly. I consider the old method of warning about those round corners, to
be a bug or at least a poor implementation.

Everyone knows that milling out concave corners with a round end mill leaves
round corners, why warn about it?
--
What You Don't Know About Data Connectivity CAN Hurt You
This paper provides an overview of data connectivity, details
its effect on application quality, and explores various alternative
solutions. http://p.sf.net/sfu/progress-d2d
___
Emc-users mailing list
Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users

Re: [Emc-users] tool offset compensation and gouging

[andy pugh]

On 4 March 2011 17:29, Igor Chudov ichu...@gmail.com wrote:

 Everyone knows that milling out concave corners with a round end mill leaves
 round corners, why warn about it?

Devils Advocaat
Because you are asking for a square corner, and not getting it.
You should know that you are going to have a rounded corner, and the
G-code should determine what the corner radius should be, not the
interpreter.

However, it is so long since I used cutter comp that I have forgotten
what the actual behaviour is. I can see arguments both ways, but
anything which stops folk with braindead postprocessors blaming the
EMC2 devs gets my vote :)


-- 
atp
Torque wrenches are for the obedience of fools and the guidance of wise men

--
What You Don't Know About Data Connectivity CAN Hurt You
This paper provides an overview of data connectivity, details
its effect on application quality, and explores various alternative
solutions. http://p.sf.net/sfu/progress-d2d
___
Emc-users mailing list
Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users

Re: [Emc-users] tool offset compensation and gouging

[John Prentice]

From: andy pugh bodge...@gmail.com

 On 4 March 2011 17:29, Igor Chudov ichu...@gmail.com wrote:

 Everyone knows that milling out concave corners with a round end mill 
 leaves
 round corners, why warn about it?

 Devils Advocaat
 Because you are asking for a square corner, and not getting it.
 You should know that you are going to have a rounded corner, and the
 G-code should determine what the corner radius should be, not the
 interpreter.

 However, it is so long since I used cutter comp that I have forgotten
 what the actual behaviour is. I can see arguments both ways, but
 anything which stops folk with braindead postprocessors blaming the
 EMC2 devs gets my vote :)


 -- 
 atp

Perhaps speaking from ignorance, but my belief was that an inside corner 
being rounded to tool radius is not warned about, it certainly isn't a 
gouge - i.e. a cut beyond the programmed face - but that the warning relates 
to the case of a sequence of short line segments in a corner; when, with 
limited lookahead, steps would be done which crash the outgoing face of 
the corner before the planner even knows there is a corner coming up.

One probably does not hand code this except by accident or in very odd 
geometry but CAM is very prone to do it when approximating curves. In the 
CAM case if one makes the CAM output tool centreline data it has the benefit 
of knowing all about the geometry so will turn early enough to avoid a 
gouge. One can still apply wear compensation - the crude requirement becomes 
that the wear value is small compared with the line segments.

John Prentice



--
What You Don't Know About Data Connectivity CAN Hurt You
This paper provides an overview of data connectivity, details
its effect on application quality, and explores various alternative
solutions. http://p.sf.net/sfu/progress-d2d
___
Emc-users mailing list
Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users

Re: [Emc-users] tool offset compensation and gouging

[Kirk Wallace]

On Fri, 2011-03-04 at 11:20 -0600, Chris Radek wrote:
... snip
 Sorry to be blunt, but your final question makes me wonder whether you
 understand the issue.
 
 This is about using cutter comp with concave corners.  When you do
 that, a fillet is left because the cutter is round.  It does not cause
 a gouge.

It doesn't gouge, because currently EMC2 sees that I did a silly thing
and tries to compensate.

I do not know what you mean by strict gouging alarm.
 
 Chris

I want to be warned if the cutter gouges at the end of the commanded
path, without the automatic path compensation. When I create g-code for
a concave corner, I include the largest radius that the design will
tolerate, then use a cutter with a radius equal to or less than the
designated radius. 

This is part of the ancient issue of the designer usually not providing
a drawing or g-code program complete enough for the machinist to make
the part without guessing what the the designer intended. Design +
Guessing = Result, the guessing component (by EMC2 or a machinist)
should be as small as it can practically and economically be.
-- 
Kirk Wallace
http://www.wallacecompany.com/machine_shop/
http://www.wallacecompany.com/E45/index.html
California, USA


--
What You Don't Know About Data Connectivity CAN Hurt You
This paper provides an overview of data connectivity, details
its effect on application quality, and explores various alternative
solutions. http://p.sf.net/sfu/progress-d2d
___
Emc-users mailing list
Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users

Re: [Emc-users] tool offset compensation and gouging

[kqt4at5v]

I apologize if this is off topic but it was pointed out that my original 
problem had nothing to do with gouging but rather using offset compensation and 
rotating the axis
Is it possible this feature will be added in the future
From what I have read it seems folks who use offset compensation are looked 
upon as lower class :)
I will try and remember my place :)

Richard

--
What You Don't Know About Data Connectivity CAN Hurt You
This paper provides an overview of data connectivity, details
its effect on application quality, and explores various alternative
solutions. http://p.sf.net/sfu/progress-d2d
___
Emc-users mailing list
Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users

Re: [Emc-users] tool offset compensation and gouging

[Jon Elson]

Chris Radek wrote:
 On Thu, Mar 03, 2011 at 11:25:19PM -0600, Jon Elson wrote:
   
 I rarely use the G41, G42 offsets, I have my little C programs that code 
 the paths I need without using tool
 radius offsets, so I am rusty.
 
 You should try it again!
   
Well, these little C routines have served me well, for the typical panel 
cutouts I do all the time,
and there really is little need for cutter offsets there, the program 
figures it all out from tool
size and cutout dimensions.

But, once in a while I have something with off angles and shapes, and I 
use a CAD/CAM
package to code it.  I will be making a feeder lane for my pick and 
place machine soon to
accommodate a different size chip, and I could do that with offsets.  It 
has angled lines that
funnel chips into a straight section.  I can tweak the cutter diameter 
in the tool table to
adjust for tool deflection to get the size exact.


Jon

--
What You Don't Know About Data Connectivity CAN Hurt You
This paper provides an overview of data connectivity, details
its effect on application quality, and explores various alternative
solutions. http://p.sf.net/sfu/progress-d2d
___
Emc-users mailing list
Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users

Re: [Emc-users] tool offset compensation and gouging

[Chris Radek]

On Fri, Mar 04, 2011 at 12:22:19PM -0600, kqt4a...@comcast.net wrote:

 I apologize if this is off topic but it was pointed out that my
 original problem had nothing to do with gouging but rather using
 offset compensation and rotating the axis 
 Is it possible this feature will be added in the future

It is certainly possible, but I have no immediate plans to do it.

Perhaps someone else will tackle it.  For symmetry it would be good if
this hypothetical future person would also allow changing G92 and G43
offsets with compensation on.

Chris

--
What You Don't Know About Data Connectivity CAN Hurt You
This paper provides an overview of data connectivity, details
its effect on application quality, and explores various alternative
solutions. http://p.sf.net/sfu/progress-d2d
___
Emc-users mailing list
Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users

Re: [Emc-users] tool offset compensation and gouging

[Kirk Wallace]

On Fri, 2011-03-04 at 12:22 -0600, kqt4a...@comcast.net wrote:
... snip
 From what I have read it seems folks who use offset compensation are
 looked upon as lower class :)

I would be interested seeing any links you might have.

 I will try and remember my place :)
 
 Richard

I think your place is here, in the circle of trust, speaking your
mind.  :)

-- 
Kirk Wallace
http://www.wallacecompany.com/machine_shop/
http://www.wallacecompany.com/E45/index.html
California, USA


--
What You Don't Know About Data Connectivity CAN Hurt You
This paper provides an overview of data connectivity, details
its effect on application quality, and explores various alternative
solutions. http://p.sf.net/sfu/progress-d2d
___
Emc-users mailing list
Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users

Re: [Emc-users] tool offset compensation and gouging

[gene heskett]

On Friday, March 04, 2011 10:57:48 pm andy pugh did opine:

 On 4 March 2011 17:29, Igor Chudov ichu...@gmail.com wrote:
  Everyone knows that milling out concave corners with a round end mill
  leaves round corners, why warn about it?
 
 Devils Advocaat
 Because you are asking for a square corner, and not getting it.
 You should know that you are going to have a rounded corner, and the
 G-code should determine what the corner radius should be, not the
 interpreter.
 
 However, it is so long since I used cutter comp that I have forgotten
 what the actual behaviour is. I can see arguments both ways, but
 anything which stops folk with braindead postprocessors blaming the
 EMC2 devs gets my vote :)

Chuckle's galore Andy, +100 at least.

-- 
Cheers, Gene
There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty:
 soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order.
-Ed Howdershelt (Author)
http://tinyurl.com/ddg5bz
The fact that it works is immaterial.
-- L. Ogborn

--
What You Don't Know About Data Connectivity CAN Hurt You
This paper provides an overview of data connectivity, details
its effect on application quality, and explores various alternative
solutions. http://p.sf.net/sfu/progress-d2d
___
Emc-users mailing list
Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users

[Emc-users] tool offset compensation and gouging

[kqt4at5v]

I am making small wooden toy parts and frequently I get the error
Straight feed in concave corner cannot be reached by the tool without gouging
For what I am doing slight imperfections are OK
Can this feature be disabled

Richard

--
Free Software Download: Index, Search  Analyze Logs and other IT data in 
Real-Time with Splunk. Collect, index and harness all the fast moving IT data 
generated by your applications, servers and devices whether physical, virtual
or in the cloud. Deliver compliance at lower cost and gain new business 
insights. http://p.sf.net/sfu/splunk-dev2dev 
___
Emc-users mailing list
Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users

Re: [Emc-users] tool offset compensation and gouging

[Chris Radek]

On Thu, Mar 03, 2011 at 11:10:33AM -0600, kqt4a...@comcast.net wrote:
 I am making small wooden toy parts and frequently I get the error
 Straight feed in concave corner cannot be reached by the tool without gouging
 For what I am doing slight imperfections are OK
 Can this feature be disabled

No, you have to fix it in the gcode.  If you say how you are
generating the gcode, I (or someone else) might have some ideas for
you.

--
Free Software Download: Index, Search  Analyze Logs and other IT data in 
Real-Time with Splunk. Collect, index and harness all the fast moving IT data 
generated by your applications, servers and devices whether physical, virtual
or in the cloud. Deliver compliance at lower cost and gain new business 
insights. http://p.sf.net/sfu/splunk-dev2dev 
___
Emc-users mailing list
Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users

Re: [Emc-users] tool offset compensation and gouging

[Igor Chudov]

As far as I know, this error always, without exception, points to a bug in G
code.

Most likely you are trying to mill out some area with an end mill that is
larger than the width of the area.

You may need a smaller end mill.

i

On Thu, Mar 3, 2011 at 11:10 AM, kqt4a...@comcast.net wrote:

 I am making small wooden toy parts and frequently I get the error
 Straight feed in concave corner cannot be reached by the tool without
 gouging
 For what I am doing slight imperfections are OK
 Can this feature be disabled

 Richard


 --
 Free Software Download: Index, Search  Analyze Logs and other IT data in
 Real-Time with Splunk. Collect, index and harness all the fast moving IT
 data
 generated by your applications, servers and devices whether physical,
 virtual
 or in the cloud. Deliver compliance at lower cost and gain new business
 insights. http://p.sf.net/sfu/splunk-dev2dev
 ___
 Emc-users mailing list
 Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net
 https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users

--
Free Software Download: Index, Search  Analyze Logs and other IT data in 
Real-Time with Splunk. Collect, index and harness all the fast moving IT data 
generated by your applications, servers and devices whether physical, virtual
or in the cloud. Deliver compliance at lower cost and gain new business 
insights. http://p.sf.net/sfu/splunk-dev2dev 
___
Emc-users mailing list
Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users

Re: [Emc-users] tool offset compensation and gouging

[kqt4at5v]

On Thu, 3 Mar 2011, Chris Radek wrote:


On Thu, Mar 03, 2011 at 11:10:33AM -0600, kqt4a...@comcast.net wrote:

I am making small wooden toy parts and frequently I get the error
Straight feed in concave corner cannot be reached by the tool without gouging
For what I am doing slight imperfections are OK
Can this feature be disabled


No, you have to fix it in the gcode.  If you say how you are
generating the gcode, I (or someone else) might have some ideas for
you.



Code is created by hand
I attached an example
g20
g17


t1m6 ;0.0625 end mill

f5
g40
g01 x1.3 y1
g42 x1 y1

#100 = 0

o100 repeat[4]

g10 l2 p1 r#100

g01 x0.1
g01 y0.75
g01 x-0.1
g01 y1
g01 x-1

#100 = [#100 + 90]

o100 endrepeat

m2
--
Free Software Download: Index, Search  Analyze Logs and other IT data in 
Real-Time with Splunk. Collect, index and harness all the fast moving IT data 
generated by your applications, servers and devices whether physical, virtual
or in the cloud. Deliver compliance at lower cost and gain new business 
insights. http://p.sf.net/sfu/splunk-dev2dev ___
Emc-users mailing list
Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users

Re: [Emc-users] tool offset compensation and gouging

[dave]

On Thu, 2011-03-03 at 14:00 -0600, kqt4a...@comcast.net wrote:
 On Thu, 3 Mar 2011, Chris Radek wrote:
 
  On Thu, Mar 03, 2011 at 11:10:33AM -0600, kqt4a...@comcast.net wrote:
  I am making small wooden toy parts and frequently I get the error
  Straight feed in concave corner cannot be reached by the tool without 
  gouging
  For what I am doing slight imperfections are OK
  Can this feature be disabled
 
  No, you have to fix it in the gcode.  If you say how you are
  generating the gcode, I (or someone else) might have some ideas for
  you.
 
 
 Code is created by hand
 I attached an example

I must say I only write hand code when absolutely necessary. However, if
you program center of tool rather than G41/G42 I think it works anyway. 

I've gotten completely spoiled by synergy. (Weber Systems). Yes, it does
cost $250 for the 2D CAM or there is a 30 day free trial.
2D drawing is free. 
It depends on how valuable your time is and your tolerance for
frustration. 

http://webersys.com


It allows you to use tools that won't fit the radius/corner and then
come back with a smaller tool and clean up the corners.


HTH


Dave 

 
 

 --
 Free Software Download: Index, Search  Analyze Logs and other IT data in 
 Real-Time with Splunk. Collect, index and harness all the fast moving IT data 
 generated by your applications, servers and devices whether physical, virtual
 or in the cloud. Deliver compliance at lower cost and gain new business 
 insights. http://p.sf.net/sfu/splunk-dev2dev 
 ___ Emc-users mailing list 
 Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net 
 https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users


--
Free Software Download: Index, Search  Analyze Logs and other IT data in 
Real-Time with Splunk. Collect, index and harness all the fast moving IT data 
generated by your applications, servers and devices whether physical, virtual
or in the cloud. Deliver compliance at lower cost and gain new business 
insights. http://p.sf.net/sfu/splunk-dev2dev 
___
Emc-users mailing list
Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users

Re: [Emc-users] tool offset compensation and gouging

[Chris Radek]

On Thu, Mar 03, 2011 at 05:15:58PM -0600, Chris Radek wrote:
 
 I think this is a bug you have found by rotating the coordinate system
 while cutter compensation is turned on.

I've fixed this by disallowing what your code does, and giving a
proper error message if you try it.  Thanks for bringing it to my
attention!

You could still write your code like you've done, but you need to turn
off cutter compensation, then rotate the coordinate system, then
program another entry move.

Chris

--
What You Don't Know About Data Connectivity CAN Hurt You
This paper provides an overview of data connectivity, details
its effect on application quality, and explores various alternative
solutions. http://p.sf.net/sfu/progress-d2d
___
Emc-users mailing list
Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users

Re: [Emc-users] tool offset compensation and gouging

[kqt4at5v]

On Thu, 3 Mar 2011, Chris Radek wrote:

 On Thu, Mar 03, 2011 at 05:15:58PM -0600, Chris Radek wrote:

 I think this is a bug you have found by rotating the coordinate system
 while cutter compensation is turned on.

 I've fixed this by disallowing what your code does, and giving a
 proper error message if you try it.  Thanks for bringing it to my
 attention!


Do you plan to add this in the future


--
What You Don't Know About Data Connectivity CAN Hurt You
This paper provides an overview of data connectivity, details
its effect on application quality, and explores various alternative
solutions. http://p.sf.net/sfu/progress-d2d
___
Emc-users mailing list
Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users

Re: [Emc-users] tool offset compensation and gouging

[Jon Elson]

Igor Chudov wrote:
 As far as I know, this error always, without exception, points to a bug in G
 code.

 Most likely you are trying to mill out some area with an end mill that is
 larger than the width of the area.

 You may need a smaller end mill.
   
Specifically, when using cutter radius compensation and straight lines, 
you can only make convex shapes on the outside of a part.
So, if you have G42 in force (tool on right), then you can only make 
left turns.  Any turn
to the right would make a concave (inside) corner, and would not be 
sharp, it would necessarily
have the radius of the cutter.  If you want to make inside corners, you 
need to blend the straight
segments into an arc move with a radius greater than the cutter's radius.

A smaller end mill will not fix it if the diameter is even slightly 
greater than zero, if you try to
make inside corners with straight lines only.

Jon

--
What You Don't Know About Data Connectivity CAN Hurt You
This paper provides an overview of data connectivity, details
its effect on application quality, and explores various alternative
solutions. http://p.sf.net/sfu/progress-d2d
___
Emc-users mailing list
Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users

Re: [Emc-users] tool offset compensation and gouging

[Chris Radek]

On Thu, Mar 03, 2011 at 08:34:35PM -0600, Jon Elson wrote:

 Specifically, when using cutter radius compensation and straight lines, 
 you can only make convex shapes on the outside of a part.
 So, if you have G42 in force (tool on right), then you can only make 
 left turns.

This has not been true in EMC since 2.3 was released in early 2009.
You can program concave corners in EMC.

--
What You Don't Know About Data Connectivity CAN Hurt You
This paper provides an overview of data connectivity, details
its effect on application quality, and explores various alternative
solutions. http://p.sf.net/sfu/progress-d2d
___
Emc-users mailing list
Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users

Re: [Emc-users] tool offset compensation and gouging

[Jon Elson]

Chris Radek wrote:
 On Thu, Mar 03, 2011 at 08:34:35PM -0600, Jon Elson wrote:

   
 Specifically, when using cutter radius compensation and straight lines, 
 you can only make convex shapes on the outside of a part.
 So, if you have G42 in force (tool on right), then you can only make 
 left turns.
 

 This has not been true in EMC since 2.3 was released in early 2009.
 You can program concave corners in EMC.
   
Well, shows how out of date I am!  But, doesn't that cause a gouge?  I 
got used to using arcs on inside corners to
avoid the gouge and cutter load increasing on them.  Or, does the 
trajectory compensate to avoid the gouge?
If so, it seems like it would HAVE to insert an arc segment between the 
two straight lines.

I rarely use the G41, G42 offsets, I have my little C programs that code 
the paths I need without using tool
radius offsets, so I am rusty.

Jon

--
What You Don't Know About Data Connectivity CAN Hurt You
This paper provides an overview of data connectivity, details
its effect on application quality, and explores various alternative
solutions. http://p.sf.net/sfu/progress-d2d
___
Emc-users mailing list
Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users