> in my shop we have used small offsets in EMC2 for a long time > we have had no issues of resulting incorrect geometry from entry or exit > motion
If you look at the docs on radius comp you will see that if you don't have a lead in, the first move will become the lead in. The start of the move will be un compensated and the end of the move will be fully compensated. I don't know what happens if the first move is an arc. > if you have artistic designs and generate tool centerline code with a lot of > small linear (and possibly circular) moves then EMC2 and its radiusing of > the outside and inside corners will be problematic at best and unworkable at > worst Which is why I am adding G41/G42 support. If SheetCam knows about the offset it can generate the correct tool paths to allow for it. In some cases it does mean that parts of the original drawing may be optimized out but the generated tool paths will be completely legal for EMC or any control as long as you don't specify a larger radius in the control than you specified in SheetCam. > if you change to part geometry code (offset by the tool radius) you will > have a different program but you will still encounter the same problems with > the cutter comp > the same amount of change ie .002 inch > with centerline code total adjustment is -.002 > with geometry code total adjustment is still -.002 even though > the number for a 1/4 cutter is .123 instead of .125 > both will not work for the same reason The difference is that if SheetCam knows about the offset then it can make sure that for instance inside corners always have a big enough radius to allow for the tool without any warnings that you will gouge the part. > I ,too, would like to have the choice of using this feature or not > I have requested this option and argued this point more than one time (to no > avail YET) :) > > I want 5 axis cutter comp - with this 'feature' enabled 5 axis cutter comp > is not workable - with this feature disabled then 5 axis cutter comp would > be possible My brain hurts trying to think about 5-axis comp. I assume you could only use it with a ball nosed cutter. Thinking about it, surely kinematics would have to add the comp, not the interpreter. The interpreter doesn't know about the kinematics of the machine so it doesn't know the cutter orientation. Actually adding squared corners isn't that difficult. Instead of calculating the angles of the two lines to add an arc you simply find the intersection of the two lines. The difficult bit is finding someone motivated enough to do it. I am afraid I don't have a plasma or waterjet so I don't have a lot of incentive to do it myself. Unfortunately my spare time is rather limited. I am only just finishing off my EMC controlled lathe now and I started that about 2 years ago... Les ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Enable your software for Intel(R) Active Management Technology to meet the growing manageability and security demands of your customers. Businesses are taking advantage of Intel(R) vPro (TM) technology - will your software be a part of the solution? Download the Intel(R) Manageability Checker today! http://p.sf.net/sfu/intel-dev2devmar _______________________________________________ Emc-users mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users
