On Wed, 12 May 2010 22:16:13 +0200, you wrote:
>> On 12 May 2010 19:19, Slavko Kocjancic wrote:
>>
>>
>>> I still prefer to have complete program (or split part) inside travel's.
>>> Just in case if somebody ring in the door and that take little more time
>>> that I think.
Feed hold, jog too
> I had a program that drilled a grid of holes in a plate. The plate was
> bigger than my machine's travel limits, so I set up the program to do as
> much as the machine could reach in one run. Then I moved the plate and
> tried to use the same program to do another section of the plate, but
Michał Geszkiewicz wrote:
>
>
> Problem is that emc has 1000 lines readahead buffer so it will preload
> and check against limits every preload line.
> We will fix it, but for now if you all want to run it even if some line
> in program is out of limit you must (only in 2.4.0 and further)
> add l
Dave pisze:
> On 5/12/2010 4:16 PM, Michał Geszkiewicz wrote:
>
>> Andy Pugh pisze:
>>
>>
>>> On 12 May 2010 19:19, Slavko Kocjancic wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
I still prefer to have complete program (or split part) inside travel's.
Just in case if somebody ring in t
On 5/12/2010 4:16 PM, Michał Geszkiewicz wrote:
> Andy Pugh pisze:
>
>> On 12 May 2010 19:19, Slavko Kocjancic wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>> I still prefer to have complete program (or split part) inside travel's.
>>> Just in case if somebody ring in the door and that take little more time
>>> tha
Andy Pugh pisze:
> On 12 May 2010 19:19, Slavko Kocjancic wrote:
>
>
>> I still prefer to have complete program (or split part) inside travel's.
>> Just in case if somebody ring in the door and that take little more time
>> that I think.
>>
>
> Well, perhaps the "Run Anyway?" should be fol
On 12 May 2010 19:19, Slavko Kocjancic wrote:
> I still prefer to have complete program (or split part) inside travel's.
> Just in case if somebody ring in the door and that take little more time
> that I think.
Well, perhaps the "Run Anyway?" should be followed by "Are you really
sure? you do r
On Tue, 11 May 2010 23:32:29 -0500, you wrote:
>Any comments on this? The "run anyway" button now appears to not be
>usable anymore.
Yes, looks like nanny state police action :( If it asks me and I tell it
to "run anyway" - I expect it to, no matter what. My deliberate
decision, my problem if
Dave pravi:
> On 5/12/2010 3:02 AM, Slavko Kocjancic wrote:
>
>> Jon Elson pravi:
>>
>>
>>> There used to be a capability to run part of a G-code program that
>>> exceeds the machine limits.
>>> I tried doing this today, and got the first big dialog box that says
>>> "program exceeds ma
On 5/12/2010 3:02 AM, Slavko Kocjancic wrote:
> Jon Elson pravi:
>
>> There used to be a capability to run part of a G-code program that
>> exceeds the machine limits.
>> I tried doing this today, and got the first big dialog box that says
>> "program exceeds machine minimum on axis Y" and hit
Slavko Kocjancic wrote:
> I don't want to run program that exceds machine limits.
> If part is bigger than machine is capable I think the splitting file to
> sections is "safe" way to do.
> So each part fit into machine limits. Anyway when we move part in
> machine then some new offset should be
Jon Elson pravi:
> There used to be a capability to run part of a G-code program that
> exceeds the machine limits.
> I tried doing this today, and got the first big dialog box that says
> "program exceeds machine minimum on axis Y" and hit the "run anyway"
> button. I intended to stop the prog
There used to be a capability to run part of a G-code program that
exceeds the machine limits.
I tried doing this today, and got the first big dialog box that says
"program exceeds machine minimum on axis Y" and hit the "run anyway"
button. I intended to stop the program before it ran into the
13 matches
Mail list logo
