To be fair, I haven't touched a Heidenhain controller in at least ten years. And I wasn't that great with them, anyway.
I just feel like, outside of drilling routines, most canned cycles don't have very robust algorithms - it's not like they are optimizing for anything but ease. The seem mostly to have a constant step over that doesn't account for things like angle of engagement in corners, etc. Obviously, lathe turning cycles are a different beast. There was a point in time, when I wrote all my gcode by hand, that I wrote out some cycles for myself in sub programs - but even those weren't that great compared to what I know now. Given the right sort of feedback, it'd be super interesting to see canned cycles for linuxcnc that take in to account feedback and adapt on the fly - but I'm pretty sure that's out of scope for this discussion. On Wed, Apr 15, 2020 at 11:27 PM Reinhard <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Donnerstag, 16. April 2020, 04:58:29 CEST Jared McLaughlin wrote: > > I haven't seen a canned cycle for pocketing that I really liked. The > > more I learn about machining, the less I like them. > > I only know 2 Variants: Siemens and Heidenhain. > Siemens is pretty hard stuff. You need to know the meaning and sequence/order > of the cycle parameters. > On recent controller I saw, that on programming cycles at the machine, the > controller shows a picture of the cycle and highlights each parameter. > But coding a cycle from outside the machine its a real pain, where you often > end in counting the parameters. > > In Heidenhain pocket definition is separated from execution of the cycle and > on > cycle definition named parameters (Q-words) are used. The Q-words are common > to > all cycles, so coding some time you learn to know the Q-words. > Beside that, on writing a cycle at the machine, the editor writes the whole > command with all Q-words (each on a line) and every Q-word has its meaning in > comment. > Between execution of a defined cycle values of parameters may be changed. That > way it is easy to mill different pockets with very few lines of code. > > linuxcnc already supports named parameters, so may be the Heidenhain way is > easier to adopt. > > > Reinhard > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Emc-developers mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-developers _______________________________________________ Emc-developers mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-developers
