Re: [Emc-users] Radius to start differs from radius to end...
Thank to everyone who answered my question about this yesterday. Once I set the tool diameters to zero in EMC, the gcode from Synergy ran correctly without any modification (though I did need to scale the feed rate down to 20%; that's a different story). So far I am really impressed with Synergy and I've actually just bought the 3D solid version. Its not easy to learn, but I think that's in part because I am not familiar with any 3D package really. Ben Dave Engvall wrote: > Hi Ben, > Remember, Synergy does things differently. It writes code that is > offset by cutter radius and also uses G41/G42. > This means the tool table diameters need to be zero. Small deviations > are then entered into the tool table to > compensate for sharpening or small adjustments in dimensioning. I've > not been successful in making that work so I just live with zero. If > anyone knows how to make that work I'd be interested. > > Synergy will let you rough with a tool that is tool big and then come > back with a smaller tool and just cleanup the inside corners. Really > a handy feature. > > HTH > > Dave > > > On Mar 10, 2008, at 4:26 AM, Ben Dugan wrote: > >> I'm pretty sure I've seen this asked before, but I couldn't find it in >> the archives for this mail list. >> >> I'm running EMC2. I get this error on lines with G2 or G3 in them. >> (The >> code is output from Synergy). If I get this error, is there still a >> setting (like INCH_TOLERANCE) that will relax the conditions that >> produce this error? >> >> Also: is this affected by cutter diameter compensation settings, or by >> relative vs incremental vs absolute modes? Google has showed me some >> mention of this on other mail lists, but I fiddled with those settings >> and couldn't resolve it that way. >> >> Is there a place in the documentation where I can read about this? >> >> Thanks in advance! >> >> Ben >> >> >> >> -- >> --- >> This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft >> Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2008. >> http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse012070mrt/direct/01/ >> ___ >> Emc-users mailing list >> Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net >> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users > > > - > This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft > Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2008. > http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse012070mrt/direct/01/ > ___ > Emc-users mailing list > Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users > > - This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2008. http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse012070mrt/direct/01/ ___ Emc-users mailing list Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users
Re: [Emc-users] Radius to start differs from radius to end
At 01:01 PM 3/10/2008, you wrote: >Gentlemen, > Does Synergy's post allow you to specify the end point of the arc >to be exactly on the circle? The distance between the starting point >and the center of the radius AND the distance between the ending point >and the center of the radius must match. > I don't know the numeric precision of the calculations in EMC but >on a Fanuc control I have had to round down by a part of one ten >thousandth of an inch in some of my manual calculations to make the >circle interpolation work. >thanks >Stuart There should be a parameter that you can set to the radius error you can live with, on the Fanuc's I have used it was 3410 but that may depend on which Fanuc control. On some controls I have changed this radius tolerance to 0.5 inches or more because they will then cut a smoothly changing radius from start to end, other controls are less useful and just cut the arc at the starting radius and then add a straight line move at the end to get to the programmed finish position. __ Andre' B. Clear Lake, Wi. - This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2008. http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse012070mrt/direct/01/ ___ Emc-users mailing list Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users
Re: [Emc-users] Radius to start differs from radius to end
Hi Stuart, I have to play dumb here. I just let Synergy do it's thing. I didn't find anything in the post. If you draw it correctly it seems synergy will do it. I think emc is double precision internally. Plenty of resolution. :-) Someone will correct me if this is incorrect. ;-) Dave On Mar 10, 2008, at 11:01 AM, Stuart Stevenson wrote: > Gentlemen, > Does Synergy's post allow you to specify the end point of the arc > to be exactly on the circle? The distance between the starting point > and the center of the radius AND the distance between the ending point > and the center of the radius must match. > I don't know the numeric precision of the calculations in EMC but > on a Fanuc control I have had to round down by a part of one ten > thousandth of an inch in some of my manual calculations to make the > circle interpolation work. > thanks > Stuart > > -- > --- > This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft > Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2008. > http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse012070mrt/direct/01/ > ___ > Emc-users mailing list > Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users - This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2008. http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse012070mrt/direct/01/ ___ Emc-users mailing list Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users
Re: [Emc-users] Radius to start differs from radius to end
Gentlemen, Does Synergy's post allow you to specify the end point of the arc to be exactly on the circle? The distance between the starting point and the center of the radius AND the distance between the ending point and the center of the radius must match. I don't know the numeric precision of the calculations in EMC but on a Fanuc control I have had to round down by a part of one ten thousandth of an inch in some of my manual calculations to make the circle interpolation work. thanks Stuart - This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2008. http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse012070mrt/direct/01/ ___ Emc-users mailing list Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users
Re: [Emc-users] Radius to start differs from radius to end...
Hi Kirk, I have two EMC posts on my machine. The standard one labeled EMC and one that uses R rather than I,J for circular interp. D On Mar 10, 2008, at 9:30 AM, Kirk Wallace wrote: > So far, I have used Synergy to draw the part, then draw the tool paths > and use the path way points to write G-code. That method may not be > usable for complex parts, but I suppose it lets you use tool > compensation. I have only written a few programs, so writing > programs by > hand is probably good, but I guess I will need to upgrade my skills in > the near future. > > I am not sure of the term, but is there a mill and lathe machine > personality that fits EMC? > > Kirk > > On Mon, 2008-03-10 at 08:37 -0700, Dave Engvall wrote: >> Hi Ben, >> Remember, Synergy does things differently. It writes code that is >> offset by cutter radius and also uses G41/G42. >> This means the tool table diameters need to be zero. Small deviations >> are then entered into the tool table to >> compensate for sharpening or small adjustments in dimensioning. I've >> not been successful in making that work so I just live with zero. If >> anyone knows how to make that work I'd be interested. >> >> Synergy will let you rough with a tool that is tool big and then come >> back with a smaller tool and just cleanup the inside corners. Really >> a handy feature. >> >> HTH >> >> Dave >> >> >> On Mar 10, 2008, at 4:26 AM, Ben Dugan wrote: >> >>> >>> I'm pretty sure I've seen this asked before, but I couldn't find >>> it in >>> the archives for this mail list. >>> >>> I'm running EMC2. I get this error on lines with G2 or G3 in them. >>> (The >>> code is output from Synergy). If I get this error, is there still a >>> setting (like INCH_TOLERANCE) that will relax the conditions that >>> produce this error? >>> >>> Also: is this affected by cutter diameter compensation settings, >>> or by >>> relative vs incremental vs absolute modes? Google has showed me some >>> mention of this on other mail lists, but I fiddled with those >>> settings >>> and couldn't resolve it that way. >>> >>> Is there a place in the documentation where I can read about this? >>> >>> Thanks in advance! >>> >>> Ben > > -- > Kirk Wallace (California, USA > http://www.wallacecompany.com/machine_shop/ > Hardinge HNC lathe, > Bridgeport mill conversion, doing XY now, > Zubal lathe conversion pending) > > > -- > --- > This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft > Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2008. > http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse012070mrt/direct/01/ > ___ > Emc-users mailing list > Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users - This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2008. http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse012070mrt/direct/01/ ___ Emc-users mailing list Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users
Re: [Emc-users] Radius to start differs from radius to end...
So far, I have used Synergy to draw the part, then draw the tool paths and use the path way points to write G-code. That method may not be usable for complex parts, but I suppose it lets you use tool compensation. I have only written a few programs, so writing programs by hand is probably good, but I guess I will need to upgrade my skills in the near future. I am not sure of the term, but is there a mill and lathe machine personality that fits EMC? Kirk On Mon, 2008-03-10 at 08:37 -0700, Dave Engvall wrote: > Hi Ben, > Remember, Synergy does things differently. It writes code that is > offset by cutter radius and also uses G41/G42. > This means the tool table diameters need to be zero. Small deviations > are then entered into the tool table to > compensate for sharpening or small adjustments in dimensioning. I've > not been successful in making that work so I just live with zero. If > anyone knows how to make that work I'd be interested. > > Synergy will let you rough with a tool that is tool big and then come > back with a smaller tool and just cleanup the inside corners. Really > a handy feature. > > HTH > > Dave > > > On Mar 10, 2008, at 4:26 AM, Ben Dugan wrote: > > > > > I'm pretty sure I've seen this asked before, but I couldn't find it in > > the archives for this mail list. > > > > I'm running EMC2. I get this error on lines with G2 or G3 in them. > > (The > > code is output from Synergy). If I get this error, is there still a > > setting (like INCH_TOLERANCE) that will relax the conditions that > > produce this error? > > > > Also: is this affected by cutter diameter compensation settings, or by > > relative vs incremental vs absolute modes? Google has showed me some > > mention of this on other mail lists, but I fiddled with those settings > > and couldn't resolve it that way. > > > > Is there a place in the documentation where I can read about this? > > > > Thanks in advance! > > > > Ben -- Kirk Wallace (California, USA http://www.wallacecompany.com/machine_shop/ Hardinge HNC lathe, Bridgeport mill conversion, doing XY now, Zubal lathe conversion pending) - This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2008. http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse012070mrt/direct/01/ ___ Emc-users mailing list Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users
Re: [Emc-users] Radius to start differs from radius to end...
Hi Ben, Remember, Synergy does things differently. It writes code that is offset by cutter radius and also uses G41/G42. This means the tool table diameters need to be zero. Small deviations are then entered into the tool table to compensate for sharpening or small adjustments in dimensioning. I've not been successful in making that work so I just live with zero. If anyone knows how to make that work I'd be interested. Synergy will let you rough with a tool that is tool big and then come back with a smaller tool and just cleanup the inside corners. Really a handy feature. HTH Dave On Mar 10, 2008, at 4:26 AM, Ben Dugan wrote: > > I'm pretty sure I've seen this asked before, but I couldn't find it in > the archives for this mail list. > > I'm running EMC2. I get this error on lines with G2 or G3 in them. > (The > code is output from Synergy). If I get this error, is there still a > setting (like INCH_TOLERANCE) that will relax the conditions that > produce this error? > > Also: is this affected by cutter diameter compensation settings, or by > relative vs incremental vs absolute modes? Google has showed me some > mention of this on other mail lists, but I fiddled with those settings > and couldn't resolve it that way. > > Is there a place in the documentation where I can read about this? > > Thanks in advance! > > Ben > > > > -- > --- > This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft > Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2008. > http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse012070mrt/direct/01/ > ___ > Emc-users mailing list > Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users - This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2008. http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse012070mrt/direct/01/ ___ Emc-users mailing list Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users
Re: [Emc-users] Radius to start differs from radius to end...
Ben Dugan wrote: > I'm pretty sure I've seen this asked before, but I couldn't find it in > the archives for this mail list. > > I'm running EMC2. I get this error on lines with G2 or G3 in them. (The > code is output from Synergy). If I get this error, is there still a > setting (like INCH_TOLERANCE) that will relax the conditions that > produce this error? > > Also: is this affected by cutter diameter compensation settings, or by > relative vs incremental vs absolute modes? Google has showed me some > mention of this on other mail lists, but I fiddled with those settings > and couldn't resolve it that way. > > Is there a place in the documentation where I can read about this? > > Thanks in advance! > > Ben > If you are using inches, arc coordinates need to be 4 digits. If using mm they need to be 3 digits. I believe that if you stick to those rules you will have no problems. Regards, John Kasunich - This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2008. http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse012070mrt/direct/01/ ___ Emc-users mailing list Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users
