++On Fri, 20 Apr 2012 09:53:05 +0300
Viesturs Lācis <[email protected]> wrote:

> 2012/4/20 Scott Hasse <[email protected]>:
> > It seems to me that the likelihood of fixing all of the methods of
> > gcode generation such that they don't generate short line segments
> > is approximately zero.  Also, it seems that even if a proprietary
> > LinuxCNC gcode extension allowed arbitrary plane arcs, splines,
> > etc. that the likelihood of CAM packages being able to make proper
> > use of that is also approximately zero.
> 
> Unfortunately it seems to be true :(
> 
> I was thinking about Kenneth's idea:
> 
> 2012/4/19 Kenneth Lerman <[email protected]>:
> >
> > Is anyone here interested in writing a filter that takes as input a
> > tolerance (error band) and a sequence of motions (arcs and line
> > segments) and generates a new sequence of motions that duplicates
> > the original within the error band? It sounds like that would be
> > one way to address the problem.
> 
> Is there a way to create a filter that would convert those small, tiny
> G1s into a 3D Nurbs lines?
> I do not know, how many people have seen this:
> http://158.110.28.100/amst08/papers/art837759.pdf
> This paper shows the difference of the machining velocity, which
> substantially increases as "better" code is presented to the cnc
> controller.
> It seems that the version in the paper is 2D Nurbs, but Yishin says
> that they have 3D Nurbs in Araisrobo branch.
> The only thing I do not get, is how to do the reverse math - describe
> a line, if (a lot of) points on it are provided. It does not seem to
> be problem finding formulas on the web to calculate a coordinates of a
> point on a described line. But reversing that seems difficult.
> 
> Viesturs
Just thinking out loud; usually gets me in trouble. ;-)

However:
Long before I knew anything about g-code it seemed obvious that any
capable machine would be able to use at least a 2nd order polynomial.
Some years ago I tried fitting curved sections of a lockplate (think
flintlock or percussion). They would fit over distances of one or two
inches with a tolerance of +- 0.001 which I think is reasonable since
few of us can cut to better than a thou anyway. ;-)

Now to extend the above: as long as we constrain ourselves to work
external to the machine we are stuck with short segments. (no proof
included). However, adding internal functionality to emc in a manner
much like G2/G3 I think has merit. 

a. add nurbs, apparently already done the ara... branch.
 
b. extend G2/G2 to the general case ... ellipse which collapses to a
circle when the axes are colinear(?).
 
c. add a polynomial of nth-order.

Maybe nurbs actually takes care of the other cases but I'm not at all
certain of that. 

Since those would be calculated by traj the movement for a block of
code would be longer and hopefully much smoother; much like the present
G2/G3. 

Unfortunately, I can conceptualize things that I don't have the brain
power to program. Darned!

Just my tuppence.

Dave

 

> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> For Developers, A Lot Can Happen In A Second.
> Boundary is the first to Know...and Tell You.
> Monitor Your Applications in Ultra-Fine Resolution. Try it FREE!
> http://p.sf.net/sfu/Boundary-d2dvs2
> _______________________________________________
> Emc-users mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
For Developers, A Lot Can Happen In A Second.
Boundary is the first to Know...and Tell You.
Monitor Your Applications in Ultra-Fine Resolution. Try it FREE!
http://p.sf.net/sfu/Boundary-d2dvs2
_______________________________________________
Emc-users mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users

Reply via email to