On Donnerstag, 16. April 2020, 08:33:31 CEST Gene Heskett wrote:
> That's now fixed, and the need to purchase a rider because my place us
> turning into a jungle, plus the ever increasing needs of my bride of 30+
> years as she is close to dying from COPD. That and medical emergencies
> since I am
On Wednesday 15 April 2020 23:51:38 Jared McLaughlin wrote:
> To be fair, I haven't touched a Heidenhain controller in at least ten
> years. And I wasn't that great with them, anyway.
>
> I just feel like, outside of drilling routines, most canned cycles
> don't have very robust algorithms - it's
On Donnerstag, 16. April 2020, 05:51:38 CEST Jared McLaughlin wrote:
> it'd be super interesting to see canned cycles for linuxcnc
Just happened to discover ...
Do you know about ./nc_files/ngcgui_lib/qpocket.ngc ?
Looks like it is already done.
Reinhard
__
> On 15 Apr 2020, at 9:21 pm, andy pugh wrote:
>
> On Wed, 15 Apr 2020 at 06:17, Phill Carter wrote:
>>
>> I have just noticed that I cannot set outputs like M62, M67 etc.while cutter
>> compensation(in my case G41.1) is on. Is there any particular reasoning
>> behind this?
>
> Good quest
To be fair, I haven't touched a Heidenhain controller in at least ten
years. And I wasn't that great with them, anyway.
I just feel like, outside of drilling routines, most canned cycles
don't have very robust algorithms - it's not like they are optimizing
for anything but ease. The seem mostly to
On Donnerstag, 16. April 2020, 04:58:29 CEST Jared McLaughlin wrote:
> I haven't seen a canned cycle for pocketing that I really liked. The
> more I learn about machining, the less I like them.
I only know 2 Variants: Siemens and Heidenhain.
Siemens is pretty hard stuff. You need to know the meani
I haven't seen a canned cycle for pocketing that I really liked. The
more I learn about machining, the less I like them.
On Wed, Apr 15, 2020 at 10:46 PM Reinhard
wrote:
>
> Greetings,
>
> On Mittwoch, 15. April 2020, 19:40:09 CEST Stuart Stevenson wrote:
> > When I rough a pocket using cutter co
Greetings,
On Mittwoch, 15. April 2020, 19:40:09 CEST Stuart Stevenson wrote:
> When I rough a pocket using cutter comp in
> LinuxCNC I must describe a fillet for EVERY change of cutter direction.
> This is not necessary for efficient roughing and is a pita.
Why not go for a canned cycle?
Pocket
Stuart,
Hmm. This doesn't sound right, and I haven't noticed that behavior ( not
that I'm saying it doesn't happen). You can't just say...
G1 G91 X.5;
G1 G91 Y.5;
With G41 / G42 turned on?
I disagree on your machining strategy, but agree that if the above
generates an error, then the behavior i
Jared,
A milled pocket will have a fillet in the corners at least equal to the
radius of the cutter used but that does not make it a requirement to
describe a fillet to be able to cut it. I like to use G41/G42 during even
the roughing of a pocket. When I rough a pocket using cutter comp in
LinuxCN
On Wednesday 15 April 2020 12:35:39 Jon Elson wrote:
> On 04/15/2020 08:00 AM, Stuart Stevenson wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > It sounds to me like you will run into a problem with G41/G42 when
> > you get the roughing radius offset working like you want.
> > When using G41/G42, if the tool radius (plus a
On 04/15/2020 08:00 AM, Stuart Stevenson wrote:
Hi,
It sounds to me like you will run into a problem with G41/G42 when you get
the roughing radius offset working like you want.
When using G41/G42, if the tool radius (plus any diameter/radius
modification for roughing) is not smaller than the pro
I know I'm jumping in the middle of the conversation, but I can't see
what other behavior would be desired.
On Wed, Apr 15, 2020 at 11:30 AM Stuart Stevenson wrote:
>
> I have tried, without success, to convince a developer to add a switch to
> the config file to enable/disable the "feature". I d
OK, so in RTAI this code from src/shm.c:53
static inline void *_rt_shm_alloc(unsigned long name, int size, int suprt)
{
void *adr;
//suprt = USE_GFP_ATOMIC; // to force some testing
if (!(adr = rt_get_adr_cnt(name)) && size > 0 && suprt >= 0 &&
RT_SHM_OP_PERM()) {
size = ((size - 1) & PAGE_MA
I have tried, without success, to convince a developer to add a switch to
the config file to enable/disable the "feature". I don't like this
behavior. I would always run with the feature disabled.
On Wed, Apr 15, 2020, 8:26 AM Reinhard
wrote:
> Greetings,
>
> On Mittwoch, 15. April 2020, 15:00:3
On Wed, 15 Apr 2020 at 03:22, Alec Ari via Emc-developers
wrote:
>
> Yes, now what do we do about it? I need ideas!
Interesting info in the RTAI code:
* rtai_malloc is used to allocate shared memory from user space.
*
* @param name is an unsigned long identifier;
*
* @param size is the amou
On Mittwoch, 15. April 2020, 15:24:11 CEST Juergen Gnoss wrote:
> Thinking further that direction, it may be a starting point in order to
> solve some actual problems.
Yes sir :)
> My idea is, sorting out the g-code interpreter and make it loadable modules
That's a really sexy idea.
But for that
Chris mentioned
> It would be nice to keep moving linuxcnc towards more commercial cnc
capability.
I've thought of that too but it's a really hot topic.
Thinking further that direction, it may be a starting point in order to solve
some
actual problems.
My idea is, sorting out the g-code interpr
Greetings,
On Mittwoch, 15. April 2020, 15:00:38 CEST Stuart Stevenson wrote:
> It sounds to me like you will run into a problem with G41/G42 ...
> When using G41/G42, if the tool radius (plus any diameter/radius
> modification for roughing) is not smaller than the programmed radius of the
> corne
Hi,
It sounds to me like you will run into a problem with G41/G42 when you get
the roughing radius offset working like you want.
When using G41/G42, if the tool radius (plus any diameter/radius
modification for roughing) is not smaller than the programmed radius of the
corner LinuxCNC will give yo
On Wed, 15 Apr 2020 at 06:17, Phill Carter wrote:
>
> I have just noticed that I cannot set outputs like M62, M67 etc.while cutter
> compensation(in my case G41.1) is on. Is there any particular reasoning
> behind this?
Good question.
Looking in the code:
https://github.com/LinuxCNC/linuxcnc/b
Hi,
On Dienstag, 14. April 2020, 18:10:51 CEST andy pugh wrote:
> Maybe G43.2 could be tweaked to take either a H number or axis codes.
> > That would be very nice indeed!
> Take a look at the andypugh/G43.2-direct branch and see if that does
> what you expect.
my dev-box died, so I have to look
22 matches
Mail list logo
