In aerospace shops there is usually a requirement for certification of the
NCcode that produces the part. This means gcode that is in the CNC machine
must come from a secure directory on your system. To be written in the
secure directory the program must be certified by inspection the parts
created
> On 09/07/2020 03:24 PM, Leonardo Marsaglia wrote:
> > Is it any advantage in using cutter compensation when programming the
> > g-code using CAM? Because since I've started working with CAM for my
> > turning programs I like to let the software do all the compensation. By the
> > way, I'm talking
On Tue, 8 Sep 2020 at 01:17, Leonardo Marsaglia wrote:
>
> . I only have to compensate for Z and
> X differences when they are too much of a trouble for the finishing
> grinding process after, and I usually do that by hand from time to time. I
> certainly can give cutter compensation a try.
Manu
Thanks for the feedback guys. I'm too used to not using tool wear
compensation that I forget about that. I only have to compensate for Z and
X differences when they are too much of a trouble for the finishing
grinding process after, and I usually do that by hand from time to time. I
certainly can
On 09/07/2020 03:24 PM, Leonardo Marsaglia wrote:
Is it any advantage in using cutter compensation when programming the
g-code using CAM? Because since I've started working with CAM for my
turning programs I like to let the software do all the compensation. By the
way, I'm talking only about lath
Could change cutter diameter and program still works but this should be the
only advantage.
Used CAM module, "path workbench" in Freecad, not sure if I made some error but
it did not work well for me. Simple path, should have an arc in each corner. It
upper right corner it decided some kind of
On 9/7/20 2:48 PM, N wrote:
On Mon, 7 Sep 2020 at 20:20, N wrote:
First thing I noticed then reading about cutter compensation is some use
G41,G42 while Linuxcnc use G42,G43 for different side of cutter.
I don't think so. G43 is cutter _length_ compensation.
Yes reading again, work to long d
Is it any advantage in using cutter compensation when programming the
g-code using CAM? Because since I've started working with CAM for my
turning programs I like to let the software do all the compensation. By the
way, I'm talking only about lathe programs. I don't know if this could be
an advanta
> On Mon, 7 Sep 2020 at 20:20, N wrote:
> >
> > First thing I noticed then reading about cutter compensation is some use
> > G41,G42 while Linuxcnc use G42,G43 for different side of cutter.
>
> I don't think so. G43 is cutter _length_ compensation.
Yes reading again, work to long days and are p
On Mon, 7 Sep 2020 at 20:20, N wrote:
>
> First thing I noticed then reading about cutter compensation is some use
> G41,G42 while Linuxcnc use G42,G43 for different side of cutter.
I don't think so. G43 is cutter _length_ compensation.
http://linuxcnc.org/docs/2.8/html/gcode.html
--
atp
"A m
First thing I noticed then reading about cutter compensation is some use
G41,G42 while Linuxcnc use G42,G43 for different side of cutter.
Sometimes I get a little bit confusing moves. Turning off cutter compensation
with G40 and move in one direction only and it seems to decompensate in other
d
On Tuesday 07 August 2018 04:10:25 andy pugh wrote:
> On 7 August 2018 at 01:00, Gene Heskett wrote:
> > I was thinking in terms of carving the example/lathe pawn. None of
> > the shown positions can carve it exactly
>
Without gouging.
> I think you are confusing positions and angles still.
> I
On 7 August 2018 at 01:00, Gene Heskett wrote:
> I was thinking in terms of carving the example/lathe pawn. None of the
> shown positions can carve it exactly
I think you are confusing positions and angles still.
I am pretty sure that position 2 with an MVJNR holder (VNMG tip) can do it
Front an
On Monday 06 August 2018 05:18:31 andy pugh wrote:
> On 6 August 2018 at 03:36, Gene Heskett wrote:
> > Tool paths (corrected) are I assume to be the nearest of the 8
> > positions, or are those actually calculated from data in the tool
> > table (and fussed about if obviously wrong I hope.
>
> T
> -Original Message-
> From: Gene Heskett [mailto:ghesk...@shentel.net]
> Sent: Sunday, August 05, 2018 11:06 PM
> To: emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net
> Subject: Re: [Emc-users] Cutter compensation with mill turning
>
> On Sunday 05 August 2018 22:39
On 6 August 2018 at 03:36, Gene Heskett wrote:
> Tool paths (corrected) are I assume to be the nearest of the 8 positions,
> or are those actually calculated from data in the tool table (and fussed
> about if obviously wrong I hope.
Tool radius correction is based entirely on the stated tool
ori
On Sunday 05 August 2018 22:39:18 Ken Strauss wrote:
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Gene Heskett [mailto:ghesk...@shentel.net]
> > Sent: Sunday, August 05, 2018 10:27 PM
> > To: emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net
> > Subject: Re: [Emc-users] Cutter
> -Original Message-
> From: Gene Heskett [mailto:ghesk...@shentel.net]
> Sent: Sunday, August 05, 2018 10:27 PM
> To: emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net
> Subject: Re: [Emc-users] Cutter compensation with mill turning
>
> Thats a sweet idea, but all holders would app
On Sunday 05 August 2018 18:03:53 andy pugh wrote:
> On 5 August 2018 at 19:31, Gene Heskett wrote:
> > Are these angles to be expressed as the angle from the chip
> > centerline, or in an absolute angle assuming 0 degrees is exactly
> > away from the operator?
>
> Neither.
> They are the angles
On Sunday 05 August 2018 17:03:42 Ken Strauss wrote:
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Gene Heskett [mailto:ghesk...@shentel.net]
> > Sent: Sunday, August 05, 2018 2:31 PM
> > To: emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net
> > Subject: Re: [Emc-users] Cutter compensatio
On Sunday 05 August 2018 13:43:45 Ken Strauss wrote:
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Gene Heskett [mailto:ghesk...@shentel.net]
> > Sent: Sunday, August 05, 2018 12:57 PM
> > To: emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net
> > Subject: Re: [Emc-users] Cutter compensatio
On 5 August 2018 at 19:31, Gene Heskett wrote:
> Are these angles to be expressed as the angle from the chip centerline,
> or in an absolute angle assuming 0 degrees is exactly away from the
> operator?
Neither.
They are the angles of the tool flanks from a zero-degree line that
extends along th
> -Original Message-
> From: Gene Heskett [mailto:ghesk...@shentel.net]
> Sent: Sunday, August 05, 2018 2:31 PM
> To: emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net
> Subject: Re: [Emc-users] Cutter compensation with mill turning
>
> On Sunday 05 August 2018 13:43
On Sunday 05 August 2018 13:43:45 Ken Strauss wrote:
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Gene Heskett [mailto:ghesk...@shentel.net]
> > Sent: Sunday, August 05, 2018 12:57 PM
> > To: emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net
> > Subject: Re: [Emc-users] Cutter compensatio
> -Original Message-
> From: Gene Heskett [mailto:ghesk...@shentel.net]
> Sent: Sunday, August 05, 2018 12:57 PM
> To: emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net
> Subject: Re: [Emc-users] Cutter compensation with mill turning
>
> On Sunday 05 August 2018 09:07:29 Ken Strauss
On Sunday 05 August 2018 09:33:22 andy pugh wrote:
> On 5 August 2018 at 14:07, Ken Strauss wrote:
> > I had looked at
> > http://linuxcnc.org/docs/2.7/html/lathe/lathe-user.html#_lathe_tool_
> >orientation_a_id_lathe_tool_orientation_a but obviously not
> > understood the drawing. Is "Position 9
broken insert.
> > -Original Message-
> > From: andy pugh [mailto:bodge...@gmail.com]
> > Sent: Sunday, August 05, 2018 7:52 AM
> > To: Enhanced Machine Controller (EMC)
> > Subject: Re: [Emc-users] Cutter compensation with mill turning
> >
> > On
On 5 August 2018 at 14:07, Ken Strauss wrote:
> I had looked at
> http://linuxcnc.org/docs/2.7/html/lathe/lathe-user.html#_lathe_tool_orientation_a_id_lathe_tool_orientation_a
> but obviously not understood the drawing. Is "Position 9" the controlled
> point? I
No, position 9 is a round "button"
ot understood the drawing. Is "Position 9" the controlled
> point? If I use G10 L1 in mill mode are the I/J/Q parameters ignored in
> subsequent commands?
>
> > -Original Message-
> > From: andy pugh [mailto:bodge...@gmail.com]
> > Sent: Sunday, August
on 9" the controlled
point? If I use G10 L1 in mill mode are the I/J/Q parameters ignored in
subsequent commands?
> -Original Message-
> From: andy pugh [mailto:bodge...@gmail.com]
> Sent: Sunday, August 05, 2018 7:52 AM
> To: Enhanced Machine Controller (EMC)
> Subj
On 5 August 2018 at 04:31, Ken Strauss wrote:
> I want to use mill turning using hand written code and I am confused about
> cutter compensation.
Is this using the mill spindle as the spindle, or using a subsidiary spindle?
> Is the controlled point at the centre of a circle specified by the D
>
On Saturday 04 August 2018 23:31:44 Ken Strauss wrote:
> I want to use mill turning using hand written code and I am confused
> about cutter compensation.
>
> If I select the ZX plane (G17) and use G41.1/G42.1, is the L parameter
> acted upon? Is the controlled point at the centre of a circle
> sp
I want to use mill turning using hand written code and I am confused about
cutter compensation.
If I select the ZX plane (G17) and use G41.1/G42.1, is the L parameter acted
upon? Is the controlled point at the centre of a circle specified by the D
parameter?
Thanks in advance for any help.
---
33 matches
Mail list logo
