What you're talking about here, I can do with a combination of manual and mdi. Using gcode when appropriate and manual positioning (jog). It is just as easy to manually operate a cnc as it is to operate a bridgeport with DRO. Actually can be easier? no languages required. as for bolt circles and arcs etc. a calculator is all that's needed and input via mdi. I did just that for years.
A few simple cuts on one part that I'll most likely will never see again doesn't warrent the time it takes to draw it or use any cam to generate a program or even write program manually. Think of it as a manual machine with fly-by-wire. In manual, jog down z to touch off the top surface with a face mill the jog clear, and in incremental jog down the depth of cut. Go back to continious jog and turn the speed override down to an appropriat speed and jog the cutter across the piece till it clears. cut is made, done, no programming required. If that's all that was required then you didn't even have to indicate and align the part just eyeballed and clamped down. Wouldn't even need to pickup x and y zero in a case like that. Why on earth would you want to make it more complicated than it needs to be? Dale Ron Ginger wrote: > I am not for a second suggesting Interactive machining should replace > conventional CAD-CAM, Gcode generation. As Stuart describes there are > large complex machines for which Gcode is the appropriate tool, and EMC > works very well. > > However, I see application for the much simpler Interactive work. My > example would be a 3 axis mill, om which I want to do a simple set of > tasks like face off some stock, drill a bolt circle, then maybe mill a > couple circular pockets around it. Yes, one could go to the CAD system, > draw it all, then process it to Gcode, then load and run that. > > But with a simple Interactive screen I can simply fill in a couple > fields, like length and width and depth of cut, then press a 'DoIt' > button and the machine does the job. Using the wizards in Mach I have > often demonstrated such a sequence in a matter of a minute or two- > faster that I can walk from my shop to my CAD computer and back again. > > The Gcode with parameters and subroutine that lead into this thread is > an example of trying to make a universal gcode program for some > repetitive task. But editing that parameter list and getting it to run > correctly would be much slower that a screen that let you simply enter > the appropriate parameters, in a nice graphical view that looked like > the part, then just run it. > > Interactive machining is NOT to replace Gcode, its for a different class > of work, and there are a lot of shops that could use it very > productively. Jon, Ray, some others may recall Ive been beating this > drum for years, starting back at NAMES several years ago with my Win 3.1 > VB code to mimic the Acurite control. > > ron ginger > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------- > This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc. > Still grepping through log files to find problems? Stop. > Now Search log events and configuration files using AJAX and a browser. > Download your FREE copy of Splunk now >> http://get.splunk.com/ > _______________________________________________ > Emc-users mailing list > Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users > ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc. Still grepping through log files to find problems? Stop. Now Search log events and configuration files using AJAX and a browser. Download your FREE copy of Splunk now >> http://get.splunk.com/ _______________________________________________ Emc-users mailing list Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users
