Viesturs Lācis wrote: > I also agree that separate filter would be better. Because the problem > is solely in the g-code, so the filter to sort out the code is needed. > With proper code the existing LinuxCNC can completely handle the job. > Not completely. Some very correct G-code cannot be fixed completely outside LinuxCNC. You have a case where smooth curves cover a surface, but then at the end of a curve it has to turn around and go back the other way. The machine can handle the smooth curve at high speed because it is smooth. But, LinuxCNC requires it never exceed a velocity where it can stop on the next block. If you fix all the velocities so the motion hardware would never be maxed out, LinuxCNC will still limit the velocity. So, there needs to be an option where this limiting could be turned off. Then you are at the mercy of assuring that the filter never asks for more accel than the motion hardware can deliver.
Jon ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 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
