Michel, On Aug 21, 2007, at Aug 21, 2007--5:27 AM, mgouget wrote: > But, for small jobs like surfacing, pocketing or making holes, I > found that > creating gcode is longer that doing the job by hand. > Michel
I created a starter file over time with a bunch of macros that I use regularly. In order to machine a new simple part, I often only have to write a few lines of code to call the appropriate macros with the correct parameters. So to drill a hole requires one line of code, a pocket requires one line of code, the outline of the part can be one line of code if it is a rectangle. If I want a bearing pocket with a through hole it requires two lines of code. I could write a macro for surfacing a rectangular area that would only require one line of code to call. I have a bunch of variables at the start of the program that allow me to change the diameter of the bit that I am using, and set the machine offset for the part's origin, and the thickness of the material and the location of the zero point for the z axis. I can also set the step down with the variables. What does this all buy me? Well I know the routines work, so I don't have to spend a lot of time debugging. I also know their limitations, so if I need to do something new and unique I can decide whether it should be generalized as a modification to my starter file or just a quick and dirty routine for that job. Alan --- Alan Condit 1085 Tierra Ct. Woodburn, OR 97071 Email -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] Home-Office (503) 982-0906 ------------------------------------------------------------------------- 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 [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users
