Re: [Emc-developers] GSOC 2016-Contributing to LINUX CNC

On Monday 28 March 2016 00:27:18 Tanay Gahlot wrote: > Sebastian Kuzminsky writes: > Hello Seb, > > > You say in your Detailed Approach that you intend to test on a real > > machine. Do you have access to a CNC machine with a spindle encoder > > (needed for rigid tapping) or will you

Re: [Emc-developers] GSOC 2016-Contributing to LINUX CNC

andy pugh writes: > On a point of style you should probably choose a consistent way to > spell "G-code" and "LinuxCNC". It might be sensible to briefly > describe what G-code is. Thanks, I have made these changes in the DOC, but unfortunately i had to submit the pdf before deadline

Re: [Emc-developers] GSOC 2016-Contributing to LINUX CNC

Sebastian Kuzminsky writes: Hello Seb, > You say in your Detailed Approach that you intend to test on a real > machine. Do you have access to a CNC machine with a spindle encoder > (needed for rigid tapping) or will you need help with this? I will need help with this since access

Re: [Emc-developers] GSOC 2016-Contributing to LINUX CNC

On 03/25/2016 01:34 AM, Tanay Gahlot wrote: > I have created my first draft of GSOC proposal based on > your valuable inputs. Can you please review it and > help me improve upon it. Here is the link > https://docs.google.com/document/d/1YYe- >

Re: [Emc-developers] GSOC 2016-Contributing to LINUX CNC

On 25 March 2016 at 07:34, Tanay Gahlot wrote: > I have created my first draft of GSOC proposal based on > your valuable inputs. Can you please review it and > help me improve upon it. Here is the link >

Re: [Emc-developers] GSOC 2016-Contributing to LINUX CNC

andy pugh writes: > > Whether you would add an extra optional parameter to G33.1 or define a > G33.2 would be a decision to be made. Hello All, I have created my first draft of GSOC proposal based on your valuable inputs. Can you please review it and help me improve upon

Re: [Emc-developers] GSOC 2016-Contributing to LINUX CNC

Chris Radek writes: > If Tanay chooses to implement design #2 I can imagine someone being > able to change it to design #1 in the future with easy backward > compatibility (because the gcode would not change). > > Chris Hey Chris, I will go by design #2 and focus more of my time

Re: [Emc-developers] GSOC 2016-Contributing to LINUX CNC

On Thursday 24 March 2016 12:13:04 Tanay Gahlot wrote: > Gene Heskett writes: > > On Wednesday 23 March 2016 07:58:40 Tanay Gahlot wrote: > > > andy pugh ...> writes: > > > > Whether you would add an extra optional parameter to G33.1 or > > > > define a G33.2 would be a decision

Re: [Emc-developers] GSOC 2016-Contributing to LINUX CNC

Gene Heskett writes: > > On Wednesday 23 March 2016 07:58:40 Tanay Gahlot wrote: > > > andy pugh ...> writes: > > > Whether you would add an extra optional parameter to G33.1 or define > > > a G33.2 would be a decision to be made. > > > > Hello, > >I will add an optional

Re: [Emc-developers] GSOC 2016-Contributing to LINUX CNC

On Thursday 24 March 2016 00:06:38 Gene Heskett wrote: > On Wednesday 23 March 2016 09:06:30 Gene Heskett wrote: > > On Wednesday 23 March 2016 07:58:40 Tanay Gahlot wrote: > > > andy pugh writes: > > > > Whether you would add an extra optional parameter to G33.1 or > > > > define

Re: [Emc-developers] GSOC 2016-Contributing to LINUX CNC

On Wednesday 23 March 2016 09:06:30 Gene Heskett wrote: > On Wednesday 23 March 2016 07:58:40 Tanay Gahlot wrote: > > andy pugh writes: > > > Whether you would add an extra optional parameter to G33.1 or > > > define a G33.2 would be a decision to be made. > > > > Hello, > >I

Re: [Emc-developers] GSOC 2016-Contributing to LINUX CNC

On Wednesday 23 March 2016 11:25:30 Jon Elson wrote: > On 03/23/2016 06:58 AM, Tanay Gahlot wrote: > > andy pugh writes: > >> Whether you would add an extra optional parameter to G33.1 or > >> define a G33.2 would be a decision to be made. > > > > Hello, > > I will add an

Re: [Emc-developers] GSOC 2016-Contributing to LINUX CNC

On Wed, Mar 23, 2016 at 10:25:30AM -0500, Jon Elson wrote: > A pecking routine should not need to re-synchronize the Z to > the spindle. Just keep the Z in synch, and flip the spindle > from forward to reverse, and the Z should follow the thread > pitch up and down. So, you would synch to

Re: [Emc-developers] GSOC 2016-Contributing to LINUX CNC

On 03/23/2016 06:58 AM, Tanay Gahlot wrote: > andy pugh writes: > >> Whether you would add an extra optional parameter to G33.1 or define a >> G33.2 would be a decision to be made. >> > Hello, > I will add an optional parameter in G33.1 which will wrap it in a six > line

Re: [Emc-developers] GSOC 2016-Contributing to LINUX CNC

On Wednesday 23 March 2016 07:58:40 Tanay Gahlot wrote: > andy pugh writes: > > Whether you would add an extra optional parameter to G33.1 or define > > a G33.2 would be a decision to be made. > > Hello, >I will add an optional parameter in G33.1 which will wrap it in a > six

Re: [Emc-developers] GSOC 2016-Contributing to LINUX CNC

andy pugh writes: > Whether you would add an extra optional parameter to G33.1 or define a > G33.2 would be a decision to be made. > Hello, I will add an optional parameter in G33.1 which will wrap it in a six line utility as pointed by Gene to perform pecking. Though i am

Re: [Emc-developers] GSOC 2016-Contributing to LINUX CNC

developers <emc-developers@lists.sourceforge.net> Subject: Re: [Emc-developers] GSOC 2016-Contributing to LINUX CNC Hello, I can not say enough about how important tapping cycles are. One thing that would be really handy to have is peck tapping. Currently, I am doing it by using several G33.1 c

Re: [Emc-developers] GSOC 2016-Contributing to LINUX CNC

On 16 March 2016 at 11:49, johnson wrote: > > > I would think that the G84 is important to users without spindle feedback or > a pulse code to start the G33. Ah, you think it is a cycle for a tapping head? -- atp "A motorcycle is a bicycle with a pandemonium

Re: [Emc-developers] GSOC 2016-Contributing to LINUX CNC

I would argue that to a large degree, most canned operations are unnecessary when we have gcode subroutines. They only have real value when there is a need to be compatible with an existing machine. Ken On Sun, Mar 13, 2016 at 5:14 PM, John Thornton wrote: > I have one I

Re: [Emc-developers] GSOC 2016-Contributing to LINUX CNC

I have one I wrote in Python that allows you to pick from several different hole ops and the positions are entered into a list and will get done in the order you enter the XY coordinates. Plus speed and feed calculators. http://gnipsel.com/files/mill-g-code/ JT On 3/13/2016 3:41 PM, Jon

Re: [Emc-developers] GSOC 2016-Contributing to LINUX CNC

> > Also i am trying to familiarize myself > with the structure of the code by > going through it and mapping it to > documentation, any suggestion > on how can i better understand > the code? > > TanayG > Actually, documenting the Code and adding it to the developer docs would be a great

Re: [Emc-developers] GSOC 2016-Contributing to LINUX CNC

On 03/13/2016 02:30 PM, andy pugh wrote: > On 13 March 2016 at 00:17, EBo wrote: >> It would also me nice to have the full list of g-codes >> available for discussion >> -- even if they are just place holders like: >> >> G84

Re: [Emc-developers] GSOC 2016-Contributing to LINUX CNC

On 13 March 2016 at 19:49, John Thornton wrote: > The interesting thing about open source software is you have no idea how > many people use it and what parts they find useful... You get the occasional clue when serious bugs go unreported for several years :-) -- atp "A

Re: [Emc-developers] GSOC 2016-Contributing to LINUX CNC

The interesting thing about open source software is you have no idea how many people use it and what parts they find useful... JT On 3/13/2016 2:30 PM, andy pugh wrote: > On 13 March 2016 at 00:17, EBo wrote: >> It would also me nice to have the full list of g-codes >>

Re: [Emc-developers] GSOC 2016-Contributing to LINUX CNC

On 13 March 2016 at 00:17, EBo wrote: > > It would also me nice to have the full list of g-codes > available for discussion > -- even if they are just place holders like: > > G84 Right-Hand Tapping Cycle: > This code is

Re: [Emc-developers] GSOC 2016-Contributing to LINUX CNC

EBo writes: > > On Mar 12 2016 12:39 PM, John Thornton wrote: > > The 80's are here http://linuxcnc.org/docs/2.7/html/gcode/g-code.html > > > > The 70's are lathe turning cycles. > > G70: Finishing Cycle > > G71: Rough Turning Cycle > > G72: Rough Facing Cycle > > G73: Pattern

Re: [Emc-developers] GSOC 2016-Contributing to LINUX CNC

On Mar 12 2016 12:39 PM, John Thornton wrote: > The 80's are here http://linuxcnc.org/docs/2.7/html/gcode/g-code.html > > The 70's are lathe turning cycles. > G70: Finishing Cycle > G71: Rough Turning Cycle > G72: Rough Facing Cycle > G73: Pattern Repeating Cycle > >

Re: [Emc-developers] GSOC 2016-Contributing to LINUX CNC

On 03/12/2016 02:05 PM, Gene Heskett wrote: > On Saturday 12 March 2016 14:39:26 John Thornton wrote: > >> The 80's are here http://linuxcnc.org/docs/2.7/html/gcode/g-code.html >> >> The 70's are lathe turning cycles. >> G70: Finishing Cycle >> G71: Rough Turning Cycle >> G72: Rough Facing Cycle

Re: [Emc-developers] GSOC 2016-Contributing to LINUX CNC

On Saturday 12 March 2016 14:39:26 John Thornton wrote: > The 80's are here http://linuxcnc.org/docs/2.7/html/gcode/g-code.html > > The 70's are lathe turning cycles. > G70: Finishing Cycle > G71: Rough Turning Cycle > G72: Rough Facing Cycle > G73: Pattern Repeating Cycle > >

Re: [Emc-developers] GSOC 2016-Contributing to LINUX CNC

The 80's are here http://linuxcnc.org/docs/2.7/html/gcode/g-code.html The 70's are lathe turning cycles. G70: Finishing Cycle G71: Rough Turning Cycle G72: Rough Facing Cycle G73: Pattern Repeating Cycle http://www.cnccookbook.com/CCCNCGCodeG71RoughTurning.htm JT On 3/12/2016 1:20 PM, Gene

Re: [Emc-developers] GSOC 2016-Contributing to LINUX CNC

On Saturday 12 March 2016 08:01:52 John Thornton wrote: > What about the missing lathe canned cycles G70, G71, G72, G73 and the > missing mill canned cycles G84, G87, G88 > > JT Never having seen or used anything but LCNC John, can you relate what these commands do? Some of them or all, might

Re: [Emc-developers] GSOC 2016-Contributing to LINUX CNC

On Mar 12 2016 6:01 AM, John Thornton wrote: > What about the missing lathe canned cycles G70, G71, G72, G73 and the > missing mill canned cycles G84, G87, G88 Great idea! Actually any of the missing g-codes would be great. A good start would be putting together a list of g-codes missing from

Re: [Emc-developers] GSOC 2016-Contributing to LINUX CNC

2016-03-12 15:01 GMT+02:00 John Thornton : > What about the missing lathe canned cycles G70, G71, G72, G73 and the > missing mill canned cycles G84, G87, G88 > Great idea! I would like to see this too.

Re: [Emc-developers] GSOC 2016-Contributing to LINUX CNC

What about the missing lathe canned cycles G70, G71, G72, G73 and the missing mill canned cycles G84, G87, G88 JT On 3/12/2016 4:20 AM, andy pugh wrote: > On 12 March 2016 at 05:45, Tanay Gahlot wrote: > >> I am interested in StepConf improvement and Add >> Peck to Rigid

Re: [Emc-developers] GSOC 2016-Contributing to LINUX CNC

On Saturday 12 March 2016 05:20:43 andy pugh wrote: > On 12 March 2016 at 05:45, Tanay Gahlot wrote: > > I am interested in StepConf improvement and Add > > Peck to Rigid Tapping. Can you help me understand this problem > > better. Also, is there possibility of including

Re: [Emc-developers] GSOC 2016-Contributing to LINUX CNC

On 12 March 2016 at 05:45, Tanay Gahlot wrote: > I am interested in StepConf improvement and Add > Peck to Rigid Tapping. Can you help me understand this problem better. > Also, is there possibility of including our work in Automating Toolpath > generation for 3-axis CNC

[Emc-developers] GSOC 2016-Contributing to LINUX CNC

Hello, I am final year student in Computer Science at National Institute Of Technology, Goa, India. My thesis is based on intelligent control of 3-Axis CNC using techniques from Artificial Intelligence(Mostly CAM). I am deeply passionate about bringing CNC machining to common makers(Our work