Daniel Goller wrote: > I am planning on (slowly) implementing a G71 roughing cycle for EMC2. > > The syntax varies between manufacturers and i would like to use this > post to setup a syntax everyone can agree on. > I think the goal is easy, it has to work well within EMC2's gcode and > variable use, some may hope it's just like "their" G71, but that might > not happen, if the result is just like you are used to, you are lucky > :).
SNIP > My current goal is to implement G71 in a way that it will not consider > undercuts, it is the safer of the two variants of G71 cycles. And > still a most useful tool. > > I am looking forward to hear your suggestions, > > Daniel This is from last June, has it gone anywhere since? A roughing sub or some such could be done easily enough but would be alien to most shops that do use G71/G72. The major advantage to the G71 is that you can put a complicated contour on a part with only one input of coordinates, if it also came with the ability to do the G70 finish cycle it would be about perfect. On a related note, a friend is thinking about doing a retrofit on a 66 inch VTL and he asked specifically about roughing cycles. Ed. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ The ultimate all-in-one performance toolkit: Intel(R) Parallel Studio XE: Pinpoint memory and threading errors before they happen. Find and fix more than 250 security defects in the development cycle. Locate bottlenecks in serial and parallel code that limit performance. http://p.sf.net/sfu/intel-dev2devfeb _______________________________________________ Emc-users mailing list Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users
