Re: [Emc-users] Snapshot of backplot

[Gene Heskett]

On Monday 12 October 2015 07:48:58 John Thornton wrote:

> I just ticked over the 62 mark a few days ago and I hope I'm still
> kicking like you when I get to 82. Your an inspiration for me. When
> people ask me when I will retire my answer is always "NEVER" because
> to me retiring means giving up and doing nothing. After decades of
> being in the obese class I range and sometimes in class II I have
> recently regained control of my gravitational attraction to the earth
> and have managed to get to the overweight class which I feel will be
> important for my health in the next 20 years.
>
> JT
>
I've a similar tale. I weighed 205 on a frame that had shrunk to about 
5'4" by the time I was 67.  But also being a DM-II for 40 years, I got 
to the point where I don't eat until my glucose is below  120.  So, 
since then I've burned off enough to get to the 160 area, but now I've 
been stuck there for a year or more.  But the frame shrinkage is still 
going on, arther is slowly destroying the disks in my back, to the 
extent I'm having leg pains that aren't, they are phantom from the 
pinched nerves that go to the legs.

I just had a wakeup with the thought that instead of putzing with the 
co-ordinate system, I should instead be adjusting the 'seed' values that 
work their way thru this code.  I'd have to add a z_seed, but thats no 
big deal.

That I can put in a separate file as I've found the only way to destroy 
an LCNC "named" variable is a powerdown reboot, clearing memory.  So its 
inheritable by name in the next file loaded.

What do you think of that idea?  It seems as if it would solve the 
backplot miss-registration problem because the "seed" data would exist 
at initial scan time.

But I just tried that with sim-axis and it didn't work.  Lots of stuff 
doesn't work in sim-axis though.

At 08:30 I've been running on the standby since about 06:18 this morning. 
I wonder what MonPower blew up this time.

I made coffee but since it was in the 40's out. went back for a nap.  Now 
iots about 10:30.

> On 10/11/2015 7:30 PM, Gene Heskett wrote:
> > Getting old isn't fun John,I made it to 81 a week ago, so avoid it
> > like the plague.:)
> >
> > Cheers, Gene Heskett
>
> --
> ___
> Emc-users mailing list
> Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users


Cheers, Gene Heskett
-- 
"There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty:
 soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order."
-Ed Howdershelt (Author)
Genes Web page 

--
___
Emc-users mailing list
Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users

Re: [Emc-users] Snapshot of backplot

[John Thornton]

I just ticked over the 62 mark a few days ago and I hope I'm still 
kicking like you when I get to 82. Your an inspiration for me. When 
people ask me when I will retire my answer is always "NEVER" because to 
me retiring means giving up and doing nothing. After decades of being in 
the obese class I range and sometimes in class II I have recently 
regained control of my gravitational attraction to the earth and have 
managed to get to the overweight class which I feel will be important 
for my health in the next 20 years.

JT

On 10/11/2015 7:30 PM, Gene Heskett wrote:
> Getting old isn't fun John,I made it to 81 a week ago, so avoid it like
> the plague.:)
>
> Cheers, Gene Heskett


--
___
Emc-users mailing list
Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users

Re: [Emc-users] Snapshot of backplot

[Gene Heskett]

On Sunday 11 October 2015 16:55:11 John Thornton wrote:

> On 10/11/2015 2:14 PM, Gene Heskett wrote:
> > On Sunday 11 October 2015 14:32:08 John Thornton wrote:
> >> the first thing I noticed is your wrapping your
> >> code with % AND using a program end M2. You only use one or the
> >> other. M2 resets a bunch of things (see the manual) and %% does
> >> not.
> >
> > It doesn't matter it seems, everything I write, regardless of the
> > termination line, fusses about a "file ended with no percent sign." 
> > So I have no idea how to get rid of that squawk.
>
> I just removed the %'s from your file with no complaints. The only
> time you get that error is if you don't have a Program End either M2
> or M30. I don't think M30 does anything different that M2 so I prefer
> to use M2.
>
> > But this all depends on a way to do a touch-off in gcode, including
> > clearing it back to zero so G53 and G54 are again equal. Has anyone
> > here produced some M1nn codes to do that? Or is that missing from
> > the halcmd language? Thanks a bunch John. Your thoughts are
> > educational, and welcome. Cheers, Gene Heskett
>
> I'm just suggesting that you run a touch off program to "set up" your
> coordinate system then run your part program and let it clear any
> offsets at the end. This way when you open the program the preview and
> backplot will match.

Reading up on the G92 functions, these look like the gcode equ of a 
manual touch-off.

So how about I home that machine, then run it manually to the left edge 
of the mounted board, and set a G92 X0.125 at that point, then do the 
same with Y, setting the center of the .250 diameter tool at 0.125 and 
Z0.0 with it touching a .002" feeler laid on top of the board?  Homing 
the machine does not clear those, so a rehome would give me a set of DRO 
readings I could mirror the values of and put into effect before the 
code ever moves the machine.  This assumes the machine is sitting at 
home when the program is loaded.

Redo the program so that all X's are then referenceing that zero & mostly 
positive, and all the Y's reference that new zero, but except for the 
clearance move when retracing to the left, will be negative.

Then at the exit, do a G92.1 to remove/clear the offsets.
So all the g92 work will be done before the machine is ever moved off 
home.

Would that result in an overlaid preview?

I'll play with it some later today Just for S&G.

Except for Z, I have it moving at about twice the speed as before. Z 
needs air spring help, and probably at least 100 volts on that big a 
motor to be able to match the speed of X & Y.  But to do that, the DM860 
driver would have to be upgraded to a higher voltage driver.

> I would love to see a photo of that machine!
>
> JT
>
> --
> ___
> Emc-users mailing list
> Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users


Cheers, Gene Heskett
-- 
"There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty:
 soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order."
-Ed Howdershelt (Author)
Genes Web page 

--
___
Emc-users mailing list
Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users

Re: [Emc-users] Snapshot of backplot

[Gene Heskett]

On Sunday 11 October 2015 16:55:11 John Thornton wrote:

> On 10/11/2015 2:14 PM, Gene Heskett wrote:
> > On Sunday 11 October 2015 14:32:08 John Thornton wrote:
> >> the first thing I noticed is your wrapping your
> >> code with % AND using a program end M2. You only use one or the
> >> other. M2 resets a bunch of things (see the manual) and %% does
> >> not.
> >
> > It doesn't matter it seems, everything I write, regardless of the
> > termination line, fusses about a "file ended with no percent sign." 
> > So I have no idea how to get rid of that squawk.
>
> I just removed the %'s from your file with no complaints. The only
> time you get that error is if you don't have a Program End either M2
> or M30. I don't think M30 does anything different that M2 so I prefer
> to use M2.
>
> > But this all depends on a way to do a touch-off in gcode, including
> > clearing it back to zero so G53 and G54 are again equal. Has anyone
> > here produced some M1nn codes to do that? Or is that missing from
> > the halcmd language? Thanks a bunch John. Your thoughts are
> > educational, and welcome. Cheers, Gene Heskett
>
> I'm just suggesting that you run a touch off program to "set up" your
> coordinate system then run your part program and let it clear any
> offsets at the end. This way when you open the program the preview and
> backplot will match.
>
> I would love to see a photo of that machine!
>
> JT
>
I'll see if I can arrange that tomorrow.  Today is wasted. The missus 
noticed some erosion in the general area of a downspout, which seems to 
have rotted/rusted/corroded away in the joint where the downspout 
connects to the bottom of the gutter  The gutter itself, even though it 
has leaf coversm more than likely has some debris clogging it up, so 
after she found that, I spent the rest of the afternoon clipping a sweet 
bush that thinks its a full grown tree, back away from the house far 
enough that I can get an extension ladder in place to take a better 
look.  I can see daylight thru a couple of holes so its probably time to 
call a gutter maker & see if they can do a better job of seemless 
gutters than the did 5 years ago when a direcho came thru & did 18 G's 
worth of damage.  I had a wagon I had made to haul heavy stuff on 
sitting there also, backed out of sight, and the tongue broke out of it 
a year ago when I loaned it to a neighbor who needed to get his standby 
generator from the pickup in the driveway around to the other end of his 
house.  I guess moving 2, 20kw generators around in the same year was 
too much for a piece of plywood I had hung the tongue hinge on, it 
wasn't CD plywood, so it came undone.  So I fixed that with a sheet of 
alu, blew up the tires & drug it out to allow the ladders feet to sit on 
the ground.  So now I have a pile of sweet shrub about 10 feet around & 
4 or 5 feet high to dispose of, and 75 feet of super duty garden hose to 
wind back up in its little plastic box.  And I started backfilling the 
erosion ditch with some of the rock hard dried clay I took out of a hole 
in the basement floor when I installed a sump pump last summer.  I'd 
been trying to figure out where to put it as its sitting in 5 gallon 
buckets on the back porch & that looked like as good a place as any to 
dispose of it.

Then I sat down and I think I have got that machine running natively in 
inch mode now, which should somewhat simplify things for this code.
But I am wasted & sent the missus out for a Baconater at Wendy's.  A 
naproxin is helping the back ache some, and a beer to go with that 
sandwich that just landed on the desk will about finish me off.

Getting old isn't fun John,I made it to 81 a week ago, so avoid it like 
the plague. :)

Cheers, Gene Heskett
-- 
"There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty:
 soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order."
-Ed Howdershelt (Author)
Genes Web page 

--
___
Emc-users mailing list
Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users

Re: [Emc-users] Snapshot of backplot

[John Thornton]

On 10/11/2015 2:14 PM, Gene Heskett wrote:
> On Sunday 11 October 2015 14:32:08 John Thornton wrote:
>
>> the first thing I noticed is your wrapping your
>> code with % AND using a program end M2. You only use one or the other.
>> M2 resets a bunch of things (see the manual) and %% does not.
> It doesn't matter it seems, everything I write, regardless of the
> termination line, fusses about a "file ended with no percent sign."  So
> I have no idea how to get rid of that squawk.
I just removed the %'s from your file with no complaints. The only time 
you get that error is if you don't have a Program End either M2 or M30. 
I don't think M30 does anything different that M2 so I prefer to use M2.
> But this all depends on a way to do a touch-off in gcode, including 
> clearing it back to zero so G53 and G54 are again equal. Has anyone 
> here produced some M1nn codes to do that? Or is that missing from the 
> halcmd language? Thanks a bunch John. Your thoughts are educational, 
> and welcome. Cheers, Gene Heskett 
I'm just suggesting that you run a touch off program to "set up" your 
coordinate system then run your part program and let it clear any 
offsets at the end. This way when you open the program the preview and 
backplot will match.

I would love to see a photo of that machine!

JT

--
___
Emc-users mailing list
Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users

Re: [Emc-users] Snapshot of backplot

[Gene Heskett]

On Sunday 11 October 2015 14:32:08 John Thornton wrote:

> Wow that is a mess... 

You are being too kind..

> the first thing I noticed is your wrapping your 
> code with % AND using a program end M2. You only use one or the other.
> M2 resets a bunch of things (see the manual) and %% does not.

It doesn't matter it seems, everything I write, regardless of the 
termination line, fusses about a "file ended with no percent sign."  So 
I have no idea how to get rid of that squawk.

> I commented out the G38 and corresponding G10 lines and the back plot
> as viewed from Z is perfectly over the preview. The reason your back
> plot is shifted in the X and Y directions is on line 128 and 131 you
> set a G10 L2 which shifts the G54 coordinate system over.

Intended, although not mandatory, I intended to make it immune to the 
removal, and replacement, of the jig on the table.  Its keyed to a 
t-slot on both ends, so y alignment is always within a couple thou, but 
not equipt with a stop stick to slide it against the end of a slot to 
establish a repeatable X location.  The G38.2 stuff is repeatable to 
half a thou or better, but I am not married to it.  What I would love to 
be able to do is to marry the G38.2 to the touch off function right in 
the gcode, including a way to cancel it so it has to redo it on every 
run startup.  That way I could still use the G38.2 to find the jig, but 
establish the touch-off's zero point at a fixed offset.  Having all 
values fixed at one corner of the work, in this case to the left rear 
corner, without ever a sign reversal except to run it to a plus value so 
the bit clears the back of the workpiece as it retraces back to the 
starting point. All cuts are climb cuts, digs are obviously dangerous in 
wood.

Right now, I am so disappointed in the rapids this machine can do, that I 
think I will spend the afternoon seeing if I can get some more speed out 
of it w/o following errors.  More Pgain yet seems to be the answer.  

But relatively little except what Peter has written to me, gives a good 
overview of setting up a stepper system in velocity mode.  Our docs need 
some TLC in that dept as they all seem to be aimed at position servo's, 
which use the pid differently.

So thats this afternoons project, try & get more than 35 IPM out of it.  
I's so far out of kilter right now that feed override doesn't actually 
reduce the speed till its below 65%.
>
> I think your having way too much fun writing G code! My normal way to
> run G code is to touch off and set the X and Z offsets so that X0 is
> the left side of the material, Y0 is the back side of the material and
> Z0 is the top of the material. This way I just have to create G code
> that assumes that X0 is the left side and Y0 is the back side and Z0
> is the top side.

I could I think, rig a different corner contact set on the board locator 
bar, one that sets a pcb wrapper around the (clean, no whiskers sticking 
out) left rear corner of the board, so it drops into place with the jigs 
locator bar, and G38.2 to that, adding the nominally 0.063" offset that 
is the PCB thickness to the touch-off.  Or adding this gauges offsets to 
the touchoff, either way would be fine.

But this all depends on a way to do a touch-off in gcode, including 
clearing it back to zero so G53 and G54 are again equal.

Has anyone here produced some M1nn codes to do that?  Or is that missing 
from the halcmd language?

Thanks a bunch John.  Your thoughts are educational, and welcome.


Cheers, Gene Heskett
-- 
"There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty:
 soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order."
-Ed Howdershelt (Author)
Genes Web page 

--
___
Emc-users mailing list
Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users

Re: [Emc-users] Snapshot of backplot

[John Thornton]

Wow that is a mess... the first thing I noticed is your wrapping your 
code with % AND using a program end M2. You only use one or the other. 
M2 resets a bunch of things (see the manual) and %% does not.

I commented out the G38 and corresponding G10 lines and the back plot as 
viewed from Z is perfectly over the preview. The reason your back plot 
is shifted in the X and Y directions is on line 128 and 131 you set a 
G10 L2 which shifts the G54 coordinate system over.

I think your having way too much fun writing G code! My normal way to 
run G code is to touch off and set the X and Z offsets so that X0 is the 
left side of the material, Y0 is the back side of the material and Z0 is 
the top of the material. This way I just have to create G code that 
assumes that X0 is the left side and Y0 is the back side and Z0 is the 
top side.

As I said the other day when you have a probe move LinuxCNC can't know 
where the probe is going to touch off so it can't put the preview in the 
correct spot unless you probe first and set the coordinate system then 
open and run your program. Try splitting out the two functions and lose 
the %%.

JT

On 10/11/2015 9:43 AM, Gene Heskett wrote:
> On Sunday 11 October 2015 07:06:44 John Thornton wrote:
>
>> Gene,
>>
>> Can you attach the G code that you ran?
>>
>> JT
>>
> Attached John.  It is a mess, a mass of control switches because its
> intended to do all 4 side parts, and all 4 base parts, just by setting
> control vars at the top of the file.  If #<_upper> is a 1.0, it carves a
> 1x12.  If #<_side> is a 1.0, it does the long front and back side ends
> of the chest. If its a 0.0, the carved pattern is mirrored for the ends
> of the end boards.  If 'upper' is 0.0 it carves the ends of the much
> narrower base boards, following the state of 'side' rules by mirroring
> the cuts so they all fit together as in the picture.
>
> And much of that mess is because there is a not quite duplicate path if
> #<_roundover> is set.  The boards if carved without the roundover, need
> a huge amount of sanding to roundover the edges of the fingers so that
> when the fingers are meshed, they will sit clear to the  bottom of the
> corresponding pocket, not being held out 1/8" by the square edges the
> 1/4" mill leaves.
>
> That roundover isn't near fully functional yet.  But not having a
> backplot that means much, will make it 10x more difficult for me to
> single step thru it and determine where I need to adjust a "fudge"
> factor.
>
> Because this uses G38.2's to reset a co-ordinate maps 0,0,0 points, to
> run it on a sim session, I cobbled up a timer set for 3 seconds to
> simulate those G38.2 contact events in the sim setup, and the offset
> results shown are identical to what I see on the real machine.
>
> The sim is running V2.7 and the real machines are running the latest
> 2.8.0pre.  Again, same results.
>
> On my machine, the M7-8-9 controls have been re-dedicated, with the mist
> checkbox controlling a motor & gearbox from a junked out paper shredder
> to swing the gauging bar on the rear of the jig into position to serve
> as a fence to locate the end of the board when clamping up the next
> board, it also carries a 3 sided brass dohicky which is the 3 contact
> points the G38.2's search for.  Its a 1.5"x .5" mahogany bar about a
> foot long, mounted to the rear edge of the jig, swinging on a section of
> piano hinge that has an o-ring hooked up to pull the end play out of the
> hinge, and the output gear of this motor is connected to the bar with
> about 8" of junky plastic hose which can bend and absorb motor
> overtravel. A homemade cam on the reduction gear triggers a couple
> microswitches with diodes across them so that all I have to do is the
> usual DPDT relay reverseing on the armature polarity.  So it runs not
> quite 180 degrees from switch to switch when I toggle the "mist" button'
>
> The same general idea but using a charge pump, starts and stops a vacuum
> cleaner whose nozzle is right behind the cutting tool in an attempt to
> contain the huge pile of wood swarf.  Thats what the M7-M8-M9's in the
> code do.  Unfortunately, by the time I got a big enough path thru the
> vacuum plumbing yesterday so it would pass & not get clogged up when it
> picks up the little blocks of wood released by the final cut, I was up
> to 1.25" plastic pipe and a rubber radiator hose to allow the mills Z
> motion, and a measly 6.5 amp vacuum needs about 2 or 3 x the amount of
> air flow than what it can deliver if its to really keep the area clean.
>
> Too big a nozzle equals slower air flow.  A work in progress so to speak.
> My 1.5 hp dust collector with a 4" intake I use on the planer has the
> air flow, but not the vacuum to move the air thru as much plumbing as is
> involved with a centrifugal debris separator I made (and it works pretty
> good) out a pile of pvc pipe, 1.5" drain pipe and a 4" drain for the
> spin section.  BTDT. I'll have to see if I can find a bigger vac that
> i

Re: [Emc-users] Snapshot of backplot

[Gene Heskett]

On Sunday 11 October 2015 07:06:44 John Thornton wrote:

> Gene,
>
> Can you attach the G code that you ran?
>
> JT
>
Attached John.  It is a mess, a mass of control switches because its 
intended to do all 4 side parts, and all 4 base parts, just by setting 
control vars at the top of the file.  If #<_upper> is a 1.0, it carves a 
1x12.  If #<_side> is a 1.0, it does the long front and back side ends 
of the chest. If its a 0.0, the carved pattern is mirrored for the ends 
of the end boards.  If 'upper' is 0.0 it carves the ends of the much 
narrower base boards, following the state of 'side' rules by mirroring 
the cuts so they all fit together as in the picture.

And much of that mess is because there is a not quite duplicate path if 
#<_roundover> is set.  The boards if carved without the roundover, need 
a huge amount of sanding to roundover the edges of the fingers so that 
when the fingers are meshed, they will sit clear to the  bottom of the 
corresponding pocket, not being held out 1/8" by the square edges the 
1/4" mill leaves.

That roundover isn't near fully functional yet.  But not having a 
backplot that means much, will make it 10x more difficult for me to 
single step thru it and determine where I need to adjust a "fudge" 
factor.

Because this uses G38.2's to reset a co-ordinate maps 0,0,0 points, to 
run it on a sim session, I cobbled up a timer set for 3 seconds to 
simulate those G38.2 contact events in the sim setup, and the offset 
results shown are identical to what I see on the real machine.

The sim is running V2.7 and the real machines are running the latest 
2.8.0pre.  Again, same results.

On my machine, the M7-8-9 controls have been re-dedicated, with the mist 
checkbox controlling a motor & gearbox from a junked out paper shredder 
to swing the gauging bar on the rear of the jig into position to serve 
as a fence to locate the end of the board when clamping up the next 
board, it also carries a 3 sided brass dohicky which is the 3 contact  
points the G38.2's search for.  Its a 1.5"x .5" mahogany bar about a 
foot long, mounted to the rear edge of the jig, swinging on a section of 
piano hinge that has an o-ring hooked up to pull the end play out of the 
hinge, and the output gear of this motor is connected to the bar with 
about 8" of junky plastic hose which can bend and absorb motor 
overtravel. A homemade cam on the reduction gear triggers a couple 
microswitches with diodes across them so that all I have to do is the 
usual DPDT relay reverseing on the armature polarity.  So it runs not 
quite 180 degrees from switch to switch when I toggle the "mist" button'

The same general idea but using a charge pump, starts and stops a vacuum 
cleaner whose nozzle is right behind the cutting tool in an attempt to 
contain the huge pile of wood swarf.  Thats what the M7-M8-M9's in the 
code do.  Unfortunately, by the time I got a big enough path thru the 
vacuum plumbing yesterday so it would pass & not get clogged up when it 
picks up the little blocks of wood released by the final cut, I was up 
to 1.25" plastic pipe and a rubber radiator hose to allow the mills Z 
motion, and a measly 6.5 amp vacuum needs about 2 or 3 x the amount of 
air flow than what it can deliver if its to really keep the area clean.  

Too big a nozzle equals slower air flow.  A work in progress so to speak.  
My 1.5 hp dust collector with a 4" intake I use on the planer has the 
air flow, but not the vacuum to move the air thru as much plumbing as is 
involved with a centrifugal debris separator I made (and it works pretty 
good) out a pile of pvc pipe, 1.5" drain pipe and a 4" drain for the 
spin section.  BTDT. I'll have to see if I can find a bigger vac that 
isn't also too big to fit the space.  What the bucket max has going for 
it is its price, $22 USD at Lowes, its a small vac motor and a short 
hose, mounted to a 5 gallon bucket lid, you supply the bucket.

I'll shut up now, but I expect it will generate more questions.

Thanks for offering to look at it, John.  This thing can be a real time 
sink. But until I fall over, thats what I have. ;-)

> On 10/11/2015 3:51 AM, Gene Heskett wrote:
> > Greetings all;
> >
> > I had asked for an explanation of why the run trace, and the initial
> > trace, do not align in the backplot, and it was suggested that I was
> > using something in the G90 to G92 in my code.  So It removed any of
> > that from my code, with no effect detectable in removing them.
> >
> > The first thing my code does is take the machine back to its G53
> > home position, and when that is reached, the g10 command to zero the
> > global co-ordinates to that position, this to keep my g55 mods from
> > accumulating run to run.
> >
> > So enclosed is a screen snapshot taken from the simulator, backplot
> > in overhead view mode, trimmed down to just the backplot window. It
> > exactly matches what I see on the real machines monitor so its at
> > least consistent. According to the MDI window, th

Re: [Emc-users] Snapshot of backplot

[John Thornton]

Gene,

Can you attach the G code that you ran?

JT

On 10/11/2015 3:51 AM, Gene Heskett wrote:
> Greetings all;
>
> I had asked for an explanation of why the run trace, and the initial
> trace, do not align in the backplot, and it was suggested that I was
> using something in the G90 to G92 in my code.  So It removed any of that
> from my code, with no effect detectable in removing them.
>
> The first thing my code does is take the machine back to its G53 home
> position, and when that is reached, the g10 command to zero the global
> co-ordinates to that position, this to keep my g55 mods from
> accumulating run to run.
>
> So enclosed is a screen snapshot taken from the simulator, backplot in
> overhead view mode, trimmed down to just the backplot window. It exactly
> matches what I see on the real machines monitor so its at least
> consistent. According to the MDI window, there is a G91.1 in effect, but
> it is not in my code.  And its not present in any file in the sim-axis
> directory. So I assume its an internal default.
>
> Note from the snapshot that the offset in the Y direction is nominally 2x
> that shown in the x direction.  The white line segments can be clicked
> on if one is patient enough with his clicking, so that the line of code
> in the code window is highlighted.  If one could call it high lighted,
> the colors chosen renders it very close to invisible.  Extremely low
> contrast result.  This needs to be fixed, but I've no clue how.
>
> None of the traced, red lines are clickable.
>
> The default co-ordinate map used for reference is G54, the actual
> movements are, with the exception of the G38.2 stuff to find and
> calibrate it to the contacts on the jig, done in the G55 co-ordinate
> map.  Are/can these offsets be responsible for the apparent miss-match?
>
> Thanks all.
>
> Cheers, Gene Heskett
>
>
> --
>
>
> ___
> Emc-users mailing list
> Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users

--
___
Emc-users mailing list
Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users

[Emc-users] Snapshot of backplot

[Gene Heskett]

Greetings all;

I had asked for an explanation of why the run trace, and the initial 
trace, do not align in the backplot, and it was suggested that I was 
using something in the G90 to G92 in my code.  So It removed any of that 
from my code, with no effect detectable in removing them.

The first thing my code does is take the machine back to its G53 home 
position, and when that is reached, the g10 command to zero the global 
co-ordinates to that position, this to keep my g55 mods from 
accumulating run to run.

So enclosed is a screen snapshot taken from the simulator, backplot in 
overhead view mode, trimmed down to just the backplot window. It exactly 
matches what I see on the real machines monitor so its at least 
consistent. According to the MDI window, there is a G91.1 in effect, but 
it is not in my code.  And its not present in any file in the sim-axis 
directory. So I assume its an internal default.

Note from the snapshot that the offset in the Y direction is nominally 2x 
that shown in the x direction.  The white line segments can be clicked 
on if one is patient enough with his clicking, so that the line of code 
in the code window is highlighted.  If one could call it high lighted, 
the colors chosen renders it very close to invisible.  Extremely low 
contrast result.  This needs to be fixed, but I've no clue how.

None of the traced, red lines are clickable.

The default co-ordinate map used for reference is G54, the actual 
movements are, with the exception of the G38.2 stuff to find and 
calibrate it to the contacts on the jig, done in the G55 co-ordinate 
map.  Are/can these offsets be responsible for the apparent miss-match?

Thanks all.

Cheers, Gene Heskett
-- 
"There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty:
 soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order."
-Ed Howdershelt (Author)
Genes Web page 
--
___
Emc-users mailing list
Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users