On Tue, 04 Mar 2014 16:51:51 -0500, you wrote:
Have you looked at Michael's jog during pause demo video?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HNuu_D4X_EM
http://wiki.linuxcnc.org/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?Jog-While-Paused
Not yet.
What do you think of the jog-during-pause of the USBCNC hardware.
Does it
Cool Sam/Rob,
So do I sense that a new message thread is about to be created on the
Mach3 email list.. ;-)
Steve, I think you may need to swap out the control on your router if
you want to get in on this!
You have waited a long time for this!
Dave
On 3/3/2014 3:20 PM, sam sokolik wrote:
nah - I got radio silence with the last couple posts.. Mach4 will fix
all these problems.
I doubt Steve will switch - jog while pause seems to be a real show
stopper for him.
sam
On 3/4/2014 12:22 PM, Dave Cole wrote:
Cool Sam/Rob,
So do I sense that a new message thread is about to be
Just wondering how long before we see this in mainstream Linuxcnc.
In particular on the beaglebone.?
Everything i do is programs generated from cam systems with lots of
little G01's and G03's.
And the current TP really does make a meal of it.
On 04/03/14 18:27, sam sokolik wrote:
nah - I got
Oh well.. no joy. ;-)
Its pretty hard to argue with all of the graphs you made.
Mach4 will fix all these problems.
That was the mantra for a while, but I think that reality has slowly
sunk in.
I hope that all of the Mach4 work they have put in, pays off eventually.
It has taken a long,
On Tue, 04 Mar 2014 12:27:02 -0600, you wrote:
nah - I got radio silence with the last couple posts.. Mach4 will fix
all these problems.
I doubt Steve will switch - jog while pause seems to be a real show
stopper for him.
It is Sam.
I last used it on Sunday when a big fur ball of stringy
On Tue, 04 Mar 2014 14:18:55 -0500, you wrote:
I thought that Steve was using the jog while pause tweak that Les wrote
up a while ago.
That's only for jog and zero during tool changes into collets with no
back stop.
Steve Blackmore
--
On 3/4/2014 3:45 PM, Steve Blackmore wrote:
On Tue, 04 Mar 2014 14:18:55 -0500, you wrote:
I thought that Steve was using the jog while pause tweak that Les wrote
up a while ago.
That's only for jog and zero during tool changes into collets with no
back stop.
Steve Blackmore
--
You are
One thing I have noticed - with the new TP - the path reaches commanded
speed. mach gets close but is usually a few percent under.
Take this program steve posted a while back. (
http://electronicsam.com/images/KandT/testing/steve.ngc )
New TP
http://imagebin.org/296859
If you calculate it
Have you tried the new tp with g41/g42? Im sure it wont matter but just in
case...
Terry
One thing I have noticed - with the new TP - the path reaches commanded
speed. mach gets close but is usually a few percent under.
Take this program steve posted a while back. (
Terry, that's a good idea. I suspect G41/G42 won't affect much since the
offsets are applied before the path is sent to the motion module, but it
would be nice to be sure. Do you have a program handy that use G41/42
extensively? If so, I'd be happy to add it to the tests I run.
-Rob
On Mon,
I can send one but will be tomorrow.I have one that cuts the
outside of a 6in gear it has many transitions between G2-G3 so
should be a good test.
Terry
On Mar 3, 2014 8:34 PM, Robert Ellenberg rwe...@gmail.com wrote:
Terry, that's a good idea. I suspect G41/G42 won't affect much since the
I had a copy on an old stick.
T4 dia is .05 in the tool table
This is the 45deg tool to break the edge but
still roughly the same code as the end mill code.
You will have to change the feedrate to really test
the speed as this feedrate works fine with old tp(at least on my VMC it
does.
I use v
Sorry I changed from the 65ipm to 100 before I sent it
I usually run that operation at 65 to get the surface finish
I may need more spindle speed with the new tp :)
Terry
On Mon, Mar 3, 2014 at 10:20 PM, TERRY Christophersen
tcninj...@gmail.comwrote:
I had a copy on an old stick.
T4 dia is
Steve!
Here is your sample of gcode running the newest TP
Original TP
http://imagebin.org/294551 (limit of the 1 segment look-ahead)
New TP (which does arc-arc , Line-arc and line-line look-ahead.)
http://imagebin.org/294550
Robs hard work is awesome! (and it keeps improving)
sam
On
Here is a link to g-code of full 5axis milling a section of impeller blade. I'm
publishing it for testing purposes in simulation mode of linuxcnc, if someone
is or will work on speed of linuxcnc execution of that kind of heavy code...
2013/4/12 Kenneth Lerman kenneth.ler...@se-ltd.com
On 4/10/2013 5:01 PM, andy pugh wrote:
On 10 April 2013 21:50, dave dengv...@charter.net wrote:
No panacea anywhere in sight.
Something I saw somewhere on the Internet (possibly a link from mah)
was an article about different
On Fri, Apr 12, 2013 at 06:54:10PM +0300, Viesturs L??cis wrote:
Am I missing something or s-curve velocity profile, which means also
implemented jerk limits has been developed by Araisrobo and is already in
joints_axes branch? IIRC the problem for this not being ready for
mainstream is lack
On 4/10/2013 5:01 PM, andy pugh wrote:
On 10 April 2013 21:50, dave dengv...@charter.net wrote:
No panacea anywhere in sight.
Something I saw somewhere on the Internet (possibly a link from mah)
was an article about different approaches.
One very interesting idea was that every move as well
Ah! your timing is impeccable. I just sent some references to Kent with
hope they will get added to the wiki.
Dave
On Thu, 2013-04-11 at 18:56 -0400, Kenneth Lerman wrote:
On 4/10/2013 5:01 PM, andy pugh wrote:
On 10 April 2013 21:50, dave dengv...@charter.net wrote:
No panacea anywhere
On 11 April 2013 23:56, Kenneth Lerman kenneth.ler...@se-ltd.com wrote:
While we are looking at this, we should be sure to consider adding jerk
limits to the system.
I don't think this is rocket science.
But then, neither is rocket science:
http://youtu.be/THNPmhBl-8I
I have tried writing a
On Thu, 2013-04-11 at 18:56 -0400, Kenneth Lerman wrote:
On 4/10/2013 5:01 PM, andy pugh wrote:
On 10 April 2013 21:50, dave dengv...@charter.net wrote:
No panacea anywhere in sight.
Something I saw somewhere on the Internet (possibly a link from mah)
was an article about different
On 4/11/2013 6:56 PM, Kenneth Lerman wrote:
I don't think this is rocket science. (Having worked on the Lunar Module
project, I have a chance of recognizing rocket science.)
Come on, Ken, the rocket-science part is dead easy. When you say F=ma
you've said it all.
Rocket engineering, on the
On Tue, 09 Apr 2013 17:11:00 -0400, you wrote:
On Tue, Apr 9, 2013, at 05:04 PM, Steve Blackmore wrote:
On Tue, 09 Apr 2013 19:18:13 +0200, you wrote:
I tried your value, and it seem you are really close to the max
frequency drive for the stepper.
Claude - if that were so it would not
On Tue, 9 Apr 2013 23:44:23 +0100, you wrote:
On 9 April 2013 23:14, Steve Blackmore st...@pilotltd.net wrote:
The problem is apparent at the first G2 move. The machine appears to
change feedrate between G2 and G1 moves. Moving from one G2 line to
another G2 line is smooth, and moving from
On 10 April 2013 08:24, Steve Blackmore st...@pilotltd.net wrote:
Do a line connected to an arc and vice versa then try. The slowdown is
on the transition here.
If you run the code you can actually see the slowdown on the feed
display in the gui in Axis.
I put that down to the arcs and
Agree, for example this line to arc is NOT tangent:
N300 G1 X4.121 Y88.649 Z-1.000
N310 G1 X4.891 Y91.654 Z-1.000
N320 G2 X8.045 Y101.818 I125.643 J-33.412
I don't know what mach3 is doing to go full speed trough this, but it is
theoretically not possible to go full continuous speed trough this
Cutting corners for sure...
On 4/10/2013 6:10 AM, Claude Froidevaux wrote:
Agree, for example this line to arc is NOT tangent:
N300 G1 X4.121 Y88.649 Z-1.000
N310 G1 X4.891 Y91.654 Z-1.000
N320 G2 X8.045 Y101.818 I125.643 J-33.412
I don't know what mach3 is doing to go full speed trough
What do you think about this guys, and their approach to high speed machining:
http://youtu.be/w7B8C9Rv-eo?t=23s
Their machines are sure capable of really high accelerations, but there is
probably done something also on controllers side (approximations of path)?
I'd like to weigh in with the following test:
Running LCNC 2.5, copy the sim/axis config to your local configs, then change
the max_acceleration for axis 0, 1, and 2 to 1.0 (previously 100):
MAX_ACCELERATION = 1.0
Then run both of the following programs:
%
(1 inch square)
G90
On Wednesday 10 April 2013 11:43:50 Steve Blackmore did opine:
On Tue, 09 Apr 2013 17:11:00 -0400, you wrote:
On Tue, Apr 9, 2013, at 05:04 PM, Steve Blackmore wrote:
On Tue, 09 Apr 2013 19:18:13 +0200, you wrote:
I tried your value, and it seem you are really close to the max
frequency
On Wednesday 10 April 2013 11:58:51 andy pugh did opine:
On 10 April 2013 08:24, Steve Blackmore st...@pilotltd.net wrote:
Do a line connected to an arc and vice versa then try. The slowdown is
on the transition here.
If you run the code you can actually see the slowdown on the feed
On 4/10/2013 10:01 AM, Daniel Rogge wrote:
I'd like to weigh in with the following test:
Running LCNC 2.5, copy the sim/axis config to your local configs, then change
the max_acceleration for axis 0, 1, and 2 to 1.0 (previously 100):
MAX_ACCELERATION = 1.0
Then run both of
On Wed, Apr 10, 2013 at 2:33 PM, Kent A. Reed kentallanr...@gmail.comwrote:
From my seat in the peanut gallery,
it seems there is a divide between those who believe we have a proper
set of algorithms properly implemented that have been tested
successfully and those who believe this reported
snip-snap
All:
I am a total ignoramus when it comes to the trajectory planning and
motion control aspects of LinuxCNC. From my seat in the peanut gallery,
it seems there is a divide between those who believe we have a proper
set of algorithms properly implemented that have been tested
--- On Wed, 4/10/13, Tomaz T. tomaz_...@hotmail.com wrote:
What do you think about this guys,
and their approach to high speed machining:
http://youtu.be/w7B8C9Rv-eo?t=23s
Their machines are sure capable of really high
accelerations, but there is probably done something also on
On 10 April 2013 15:01, Daniel Rogge dro...@tormach.com wrote:
Running LCNC 2.5, copy the sim/axis config to your local configs, then change
the max_acceleration for axis 0, 1, and 2 to 1.0 (previously 100):
MAX_ACCELERATION = 1.0
(1 square with rounded corners)
G90 G54 G20
On 10 April 2013 21:50, dave dengv...@charter.net wrote:
No panacea anywhere in sight.
Something I saw somewhere on the Internet (possibly a link from mah)
was an article about different approaches.
One very interesting idea was that every move as well as being an
end-point also includes an end
On Wed, 10 Apr 2013 06:16:59 -0500, you wrote:
Cutting corners for sure...
Yes it's deviating by up to by 0.1mm as set in it's config. For LinuxCNC
to do a similar feed the deviation has to be 0.5mm?
Steve Blackmore
--
On Wed, 10 Apr 2013 22:01:32 +0100, you wrote:
On 10 April 2013 21:50, dave dengv...@charter.net wrote:
No panacea anywhere in sight.
Something I saw somewhere on the Internet (possibly a link from mah)
was an article about different approaches.
One very interesting idea was that every move as
On Wed, 10 Apr 2013 13:56:16 -0700 (PDT), you wrote:
--- On Wed, 4/10/13, Tomaz T. tomaz_...@hotmail.com wrote:
What do you think about this guys,
and their approach to high speed machining:
http://youtu.be/w7B8C9Rv-eo?t=23s
Their machines are sure capable of really high
accelerations,
so how far does lcnc actually look ahead?
On Wed, Apr 10, 2013 at 6:21 PM, Steve Blackmore st...@pilotltd.net wrote:
On Wed, 10 Apr 2013 13:56:16 -0700 (PDT), you wrote:
--- On Wed, 4/10/13, Tomaz T. tomaz_...@hotmail.com wrote:
What do you think about this guys,
and their
On Wed, 10 Apr 2013 11:57:32 -0400, you wrote:
FWIW, I noted that despite a g64.1 P.001 at the top of the file, my carving
of that brass handle yesterday on a 2.6.0-pre install, was also coming to a
complete stop at those straight line to arc transitions, 4 times per loop,
not all of which
On the water jet site (I want to think it was CMC, but memory is hazy) the
comparison between their full path pre scanning and short distance lookahead
was that the full pre scan could adjust to things like a long straight followed
by a series of curves and short straights by slowing down to a
I have also found problems with curve-line and line-curve transitions. My
machine is used to paint lines and uses a fourth tangential axis to keep
the brush tangent to the tool path. I get
significant decelerations/accelerations on these transitions and it shows
up as aberrations in the paint
andy pugh wrote:
On 10 April 2013 21:50, dave dengv...@charter.net wrote:
No panacea anywhere in sight.
Something I saw somewhere on the Internet (possibly a link from mah)
was an article about different approaches.
One very interesting idea was that every move as well as being an
On Wednesday 10 April 2013 21:56:36 Steve Blackmore did opine:
On Wed, 10 Apr 2013 11:57:32 -0400, you wrote:
FWIW, I noted that despite a g64.1 P.001 at the top of the file, my
carving of that brass handle yesterday on a 2.6.0-pre install, was
also coming to a complete stop at those straight
jeremy youngs wrote:
so how far does lcnc actually look ahead?
One block! It always operates at a speed such that it can come to a full
stop on the next G-code block. Some users who do high-speed
contouring need more lookahead, and then it becomes arbitrary
how far ahead you have to
wow i have not used any high speed paths on my mill as its top is only 60
ipm .
so i havent noticed this , but being that mastercam does exactly as you
staed above i do not know if it will be an issue unless contouring .
although all the programming i do at work tends to be high speed paths on
2013/4/9 Steve Blackmore st...@pilotltd.net
On Sun, 7 Apr 2013 10:21:11 -0500, you wrote:
On Sun, Apr 07, 2013 at 10:13:11AM +0100, Steve Blackmore wrote:
CV in LinuxCNC still does not work well. Have a look at this
http://youtu.be/ph_IVXg1C9Y
Please share your gcode and your full
On 9 April 2013 09:07, Viesturs Lācis viesturs.la...@gmail.com wrote:
Am I really missing something or are You complaining about really old
version of LinuxCNC?
Possibly, but I don't think that the motion system has changed.
--
atp
If you can't fix it, you don't own it.
2013/4/9 andy pugh bodge...@gmail.com
On 9 April 2013 09:07, Viesturs Lācis viesturs.la...@gmail.com wrote:
Am I really missing something or are You complaining about really old
version of LinuxCNC?
Possibly, but I don't think that the motion system has changed.
That is what I also
On 8 April 2013 22:57, Steve Blackmore st...@pilotltd.net wrote:
ini file
http://pastebin.com/keXTHWyn
I don't really have the tools here to analyse this, but a few observations.
At 800mm/sec2 accel and 1200mm/min traverse speed the minimum arc
radius is 0.5mm.
The circular moves do not
I tried your value, and it seem you are really close to the max
frequency drive for the stepper.
Can you try to change scale on all 3 axis (divide bay 10) and check that
the total time is still the same or not ? this will help to understand
if this a trajectory interpolation limitation or a
On Tue, 09 Apr 2013 19:18:13 +0200, you wrote:
I tried your value, and it seem you are really close to the max
frequency drive for the stepper.
Claude - if that were so it would not work with identical settings under
Mach3. Same step frequency, same drivers same PC same everything.
Steve
On Tue, Apr 9, 2013, at 05:04 PM, Steve Blackmore wrote:
On Tue, 09 Apr 2013 19:18:13 +0200, you wrote:
I tried your value, and it seem you are really close to the max
frequency drive for the stepper.
Claude - if that were so it would not work with identical settings under
Mach3. Same
On Tue, 9 Apr 2013 09:48:33 +0100, you wrote:
On 9 April 2013 09:07, Viesturs L?cis viesturs.la...@gmail.com wrote:
Am I really missing something or are You complaining about really old
version of LinuxCNC?
Possibly, but I don't think that the motion system has changed.
I am using the latest
On Tue, 9 Apr 2013 11:07:22 +0300, you wrote:
Both of these files are generated by stepconf wizard back in 2009.
And there are some things, like PROGRAM_PREFIX = /home/steve/emc2/nc_files
and INTRO_GRAPHIC = emc2.gif, which clearly show that You are not using
2.5.x version;
Clearly it shows no
On Tue, 9 Apr 2013 13:55:30 +0100, you wrote:
On 8 April 2013 22:57, Steve Blackmore st...@pilotltd.net wrote:
ini file
http://pastebin.com/keXTHWyn
I don't really have the tools here to analyse this, but a few observations.
At 800mm/sec2 accel and 1200mm/min traverse speed the minimum arc
The drawing is the outline of a Fender Telecaster, the file was
optimised using Rhino V4 before producing the code using FeatureCam V15.
The lines are contiguous to +/- 0.0001mm. If there were errors with the
drawing both would complain and not accept it as one continuous outline.
i see no
On 9 April 2013 23:14, Steve Blackmore st...@pilotltd.net wrote:
The problem is apparent at the first G2 move. The machine appears to
change feedrate between G2 and G1 moves. Moving from one G2 line to
another G2 line is smooth, and moving from one G1 line to another G1
line is smooth. G1
andy
That does seem to be what you are seeing. However I just tried a test
200mm move and a 32.8mm radius circle and they both took the same
length of time
Do you get the same result?
(I was running in a sim, so it might not be a valid test)
steve
100 G0 G21 G17 G90 G40 G49 G80
N110 G91.1
N120
On Sun, 7 Apr 2013 10:21:11 -0500, you wrote:
On Sun, Apr 07, 2013 at 10:13:11AM +0100, Steve Blackmore wrote:
CV in LinuxCNC still does not work well. Have a look at this
http://youtu.be/ph_IVXg1C9Y
Please share your gcode and your full config directory.
Chris
Hal file
CV in LinuxCNC still does not work well. Have a look at this
http://youtu.be/ph_IVXg1C9Y
Identical gcode and machine settings. First clip is LinuxCNC second
Mach3.
Steve Blackmore
--
--
Minimize network downtime and
Can you post the G-code for this somewhere? Do you know if the G-code has
strictly continuous direction(tangent) or better yet: continuous curvature
(acceleration)?
Did you try different G64 tolerances? What tolerance does Mach3 use?
Can you log the actual position of the machine and compare
I watched the whole video and never saw a lathe. CV works fine for me on
my lathe. I never could get Mack to work.
John
On 4/7/2013 4:13 AM, Steve Blackmore wrote:
CV in LinuxCNC still does not work well. Have a look at this
http://youtu.be/ph_IVXg1C9Y
Identical gcode and machine settings.
Probably a dumb question, but, what acceleration values are you using on the
LinuxCNC setup?
My little mill was transformed when I added a 5i25, and really looked at what
some of the values are. It now runs up to 10x faster than before.
Two values were tweaked; acceleration, and max velocity.
On Sun, Apr 07, 2013 at 10:13:11AM +0100, Steve Blackmore wrote:
CV in LinuxCNC still does not work well. Have a look at this
http://youtu.be/ph_IVXg1C9Y
Please share your gcode and your full config directory.
--
On Sun, 7 Apr 2013 10:21:11 -0500, you wrote:
On Sun, Apr 07, 2013 at 10:13:11AM +0100, Steve Blackmore wrote:
CV in LinuxCNC still does not work well. Have a look at this
http://youtu.be/ph_IVXg1C9Y
Please share your gcode and your full config directory.
Hi Chris - Here's part of the
69 matches
Mail list logo
