Don't forget to check the PDF documentation first since that is the
one that comes with the EMC2 system and check what else is missing or
not according to the reality there.
On 7/9/08, Jon Elson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Chris Radek wrote:
> > On Tue, Jul 08, 2008 at 12:37:07PM -0400, Stephen
Chris Radek wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 08, 2008 at 12:37:07PM -0400, Stephen Wille Padnos wrote:
>
>>You could always save the offsets in other vars, like #1001..#1009 =
>>#5211..#5219 when you touch off.
>>Then, when you do the G92.1 to reset, just move to 0,0,0 (,0,0,0), and issue
>>G92 X#1001 Y#1002
On Tue, Jul 08, 2008 at 12:37:07PM -0400, Stephen Wille Padnos wrote:
>
> You could always save the offsets in other vars, like #1001..#1009 =
> #5211..#5219 when you touch off.
> Then, when you do the G92.1 to reset, just move to 0,0,0 (,0,0,0), and issue
> G92 X#1001 Y#1002 Z#1003 (maybe negativ
Kenneth Lerman wrote:
> The way I would have done that is to write a gcode subroutine that took
> arguments of the center X and center Y points. (That's probably because
> I never did learn to use offsets -- other than through Axis).
>
> If I were doing it today, I would also make sure that my g
Jon Elson wrote:
> Chris Radek wrote:
>> I see what you're trying to do now. I still suggest that G92 is the
>> way to do it. Say for clarity's sake you have your fan program in a
>> subroutine called O100 and it cuts around 0,0. You want a fan every
>> six inches. You have used touch-off to se
Jon Elson wrote:
>Chris Radek wrote:
>
>
>>[snip]
>>
>>G92.1 (clear G92 offset to go back to the normal G54)
>>M2
>>
>>
>Well, this will work, but it upsets the alignment of the G54
>system, and you can't get that restored with a G54. So, I kind
>of like my scheme to set the G55 system re
Chris Radek wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 07, 2008 at 10:19:44PM -0500, Jon Elson wrote:
>
>>Interesting how this comes up every July! Well, no question the
>>touch-off menu in Axis works correctly, but I'm trying to figure
>>out how to do it from within a G-code program. I will have to
>>experiment w
The way I would have done that is to write a gcode subroutine that took
arguments of the center X and center Y points. (That's probably because
I never did learn to use offsets -- other than through Axis).
If I were doing it today, I would also make sure that my gcode
subroutine is general enou
On Mon, 2008-07-07 at 23:07 -0500, Chris Radek wrote:
> I see what you're trying to do now.
Yep. Jon's program offsets from whatever 0,0 it used for the first one.
What I can't for the life of me figure out is how Jon accomplished that
by setting g54 to that location and expected the other coord
On Mon, Jul 07, 2008 at 10:19:44PM -0500, Jon Elson wrote:
>
> Interesting how this comes up every July! Well, no question the
> touch-off menu in Axis works correctly, but I'm trying to figure
> out how to do it from within a G-code program. I will have to
> experiment with it some more next
Chris Radek wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 07, 2008 at 02:22:48PM -0500, Chris Radek wrote:
>
>>Deja vu! You must run this gcode once every two years!
>
>
> Err 2008 - 2007 = ??
>
> Every summer then. I hope that old link helps.
Interesting how this comes up every July! Well, no question the
touch-of
Ray Henry wrote:
> Hi Jon
>
> I've never seen a case where changing the value of a g54 offset would
> affect any of the other offset systems.
No, I wasn't meaning that, but that the other systems would be
relative to the G54 system at the time the G55, etc. system was
set up.
Tom Kramer's des
Gentlemen,
I currently have machine tools with Fanuc controls that use the G54
in both fashions. Depending on how the builder set the parameters one
machine uses the G54 as a common offset. The common offset changes the
position of every other offset by the value in the G54 registers.
Another ma
On Mon, Jul 07, 2008 at 02:22:48PM -0500, Chris Radek wrote:
>
> Deja vu! You must run this gcode once every two years!
Err 2008 - 2007 = ??
Every summer then. I hope that old link helps.
-
Sponsored by: SourceForge.net
On Mon, Jul 07, 2008 at 11:56:28AM -0500, Jon Elson wrote:
>
> Any suggestions would be welcome.
Deja vu! You must run this gcode once every two years!
http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.distributions.emc.user/2451/focus=2597
--
Hi Jon
I've never seen a case where changing the value of a g54 offset would
affect any of the other offset systems. Tom Kramer's description of
these ten was clear that they were all independent from each other
because each of them referenced absolute machine zero. I remember this
behavior on
Ray Henry wrote:
> On Mon, 2008-07-07 at 09:33 -0400, John Kasunich wrote:
>
>>Jon Elson wrote:
>>
>>
>>>The other thing is I used to barely understand the G10 L2 Px
>>>behavior before, and it seems to have changed. I think in the
>>>EMC1 past, all G55 - G59.3 work offsets were relative to the
John Kasunich wrote:
> Jon Elson wrote:
>
>
>>The other thing is I used to barely understand the G10 L2 Px
>>behavior before, and it seems to have changed. I think in the
>>EMC1 past, all G55 - G59.3 work offsets were relative to the G54
>>system,
>
>
> That seems rather insane. G54 is no
On Mon, 2008-07-07 at 09:33 -0400, John Kasunich wrote:
> Jon Elson wrote:
>
> > The other thing is I used to barely understand the G10 L2 Px
> > behavior before, and it seems to have changed. I think in the
> > EMC1 past, all G55 - G59.3 work offsets were relative to the G54
> > system,
>
>
Jon Elson wrote:
> The other thing is I used to barely understand the G10 L2 Px
> behavior before, and it seems to have changed. I think in the
> EMC1 past, all G55 - G59.3 work offsets were relative to the G54
> system,
That seems rather insane. G54 is no different than G55 or any of the
o
Hello, all,
I've been doing some serious machining this weekend, and had two
things pop up.
One was that when making long traverses under manual jog with
the jog buttons, on the Axis interface, the jog got "stuck on",
like the old problem with hitting too many jog buttons at one
time. Tappin
21 matches
Mail list logo
