On Wed, Nov 24, 2010 at 01:15:47PM -0600, Stuart Stevenson wrote: > Gentlemen, > What would be the difficulty level and/or objections to reading the tool > table on 'CYCLE START' rather than a separate 'reload tool table' operation? > My ultimate preference would have the tool table read continuously so > changes would be available on the next line read from the program. > We just scrapped a multi-thousand dollar part because the operator forgot > to invoke the 'reload tool table' operation.
I looked into this briefly - it isn't as easy as I had hoped. I wanted to reload the tool table (into the canon level) at every resync (whenever the interpreter asks canon for the current machine state). The interpreter already reloads the tool table from canon at sync. Frankly I am not sure what this would break. I am nervous about encouraging people to edit the tool table manually, because especially on a random tool change machine, EMC modifies and rewrites it all the time. If you have a stale copy in an editor and you overwrite an updated one, you can cause yourself spectacular problems because EMC would lose track of pockets vs tools. Do you know in more detail what happened? Why did the operator manually edit the tool table? What did he change? On my touchy-based system I use only tool touch off, and I set tool diameters with G10 L1 Pn R... This is foolproof, even for me. (Besides, it doesn't have a keyboard...) Chris ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ What happens now with your Lotus Notes apps - do you make another costly upgrade, or settle for being marooned without product support? Time to move off Lotus Notes and onto the cloud with Force.com, apps are easier to build, use, and manage than apps on traditional platforms. Sign up for the Lotus Notes Migration Kit to learn more. http://p.sf.net/sfu/salesforce-d2d _______________________________________________ Emc-users mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users
