On 7/28/2018 8:58 AM, Sebastian Kuzminsky wrote:
On 07/27/2018 02:39 PM, Kurt Jacobson wrote:
So the question is, why did LCNC choose to use relative positions for the
probe parameters? There must be a good reason to not follow what seems to
be a standard among other controllers, but the only
On 28 July 2018 at 16:58, Sebastian Kuzminsky wrote:
> I would prefer adding nine new Interpreter parameters containing the
> *absolute* probe location, and adding a new field to the Status buffer
> (and the 'stat' variable in the linuxcnc python module) containing the
> probed position in *work
On 07/27/2018 02:39 PM, Kurt Jacobson wrote:
> So the question is, why did LCNC choose to use relative positions for the
> probe parameters? There must be a good reason to not follow what seems to
> be a standard among other controllers, but the only advantage I can see is
> when probing to
A chap on the forum has a big old HBM with a single drive motor for all axes.
The machine probably never needs to make coordinated moves, so keeping
this drive system might be acceptable.
My first though was to use LOCKING_INDEXER to make this work. I was
thinking that it would supply pins to
