, John Thornton wrote:
> From: John Thornton
> Subject: Re: [Emc-users] cutter radius compensation versus tool table data
> To: "Enhanced Machine Controller (EMC)"
> Date: Tuesday, May 29, 2012, 6:22 AM
> Typically inserts used in a lathe
> have the nose radius meas
On 29 May 2012 14:08, charles green wrote:
> why should one linear axis have a metric that is 2x or 1/2x any of the
> others, even on a lathe?
Inserts are described by nose radius, not nose diameter, whereas
milling cutters are described by diameter.
Though, the pedant in my would like to point
: [Emc-users] cutter radius compensation versus tool table data
>> To: "Enhanced Machine Controller (EMC)"
>> Date: Tuesday, May 29, 2012, 5:03 AM
>> On 29 May 2012 12:30, John Thornton
>>
>> wrote:
>>> Actually the docs should/will say Cutter Diameter
>&g
why should one linear axis have a metric that is 2x or 1/2x any of the others,
even on a lathe?
--- On Tue, 5/29/12, andy pugh wrote:
> From: andy pugh
> Subject: Re: [Emc-users] cutter radius compensation versus tool table data
> To: "Enhanced Machine Controller (EMC)"
&
: Re: [Emc-users] cutter radius compensation versus tool table data
> To: "Enhanced Machine Controller (EMC)"
> Date: Tuesday, May 29, 2012, 4:30 AM
> Actually the docs should/will say
> Cutter Diameter Compensation to avoid
> that confusion. And yes your correct the ra
Yea, the tool table is diameter as well as all the G codes no matter if
your in lathe mode or not.
John
On 5/29/2012 7:03 AM, andy pugh wrote:
> On 29 May 2012 12:30, John Thornton wrote:
>> Actually the docs should/will say Cutter Diameter Compensation to avoid
>> that confusion.
> Even for a
On 29 May 2012 12:30, John Thornton wrote:
> Actually the docs should/will say Cutter Diameter Compensation to avoid
> that confusion.
Even for a lathe?
--
atp
If you can't fix it, you don't own it.
http://www.ifixit.com/Manifesto
---
Actually the docs should/will say Cutter Diameter Compensation to avoid
that confusion. And yes your correct the radius is calculated from the
diameter information to do the actual offsetting.
Do you have a link to the example that is confusing?
John
On 5/29/2012 2:13 AM, charles green wrote:
i am confused about the treatment of the value used for cutter radius
compensation. it looks like the examples in the documentation use a program
command to write a radius value in the tool table, but when i edit the tool
table from axis, there is a diameter value column. are g41/42 using half
