On Fri, Mar 04, 2011 at 09:14:41AM -0800, Kirk Wallace wrote: > > (Sorry for being blunt, but this best conveys how I feel) > I prefer to code the part surface path, which ultimately, is the only > thing that matters. If the surface can not be machined, the surface > needs to be fixed or the process changed. EMC2 should not be expected to > compensate for laziness or lack of understanding. I don't think it is > worth bloating EMC2 for the sake of convenience, that's what Windows > (xconfig?) is for. What good is something that conveniently doesn't > work? > > On the other hand, I don't mind making EMC2 more convenient, but it > should not affect the core function. If a gouge alarm triggers, it might > be better to have a widget that leaves EMC2, invokes a g-code editor, > then suggests code that fixes the error, offers to correct the code, > then saves the g-code file and reloads the file in EMC2. > > Is there a parameter that can be set to put the strict gouging alarm > back in?
Sorry to be blunt, but your final question makes me wonder whether you understand the issue. This is about using cutter comp with concave corners. When you do that, a fillet is left because the cutter is round. It does not cause a gouge. I do not know what you mean by strict gouging alarm. Chris ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ What You Don't Know About Data Connectivity CAN Hurt You This paper provides an overview of data connectivity, details its effect on application quality, and explores various alternative solutions. http://p.sf.net/sfu/progress-d2d _______________________________________________ Emc-users mailing list Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users
