On Sun, 13 Dec 2009 20:27:17 -0600, you wrote:
>On Mon, Dec 14, 2009 at 02:01:16AM +, Steve Blackmore wrote:
>
>> >No I wouldn't object to someone adding G32. Do you plan to contribute
>> >this? I'd happily review this contribution.
>>
>> Yes - how do I go about it.
>>
>> Third time of ask
On Mon, Dec 14, 2009 at 02:01:16AM +, Steve Blackmore wrote:
> >No I wouldn't object to someone adding G32. Do you plan to contribute
> >this? I'd happily review this contribution.
>
> Yes - how do I go about it.
>
> Third time of asking, so far still no response?
Well I'm not sure what y
On Sat, 3 Oct 2009 16:59:36 -0500, you wrote:
>On Sat, Oct 03, 2009 at 09:21:43PM +0100, Steve Blackmore wrote:
>>
>> Ahh - it's a second one being added not a replacement for the existing,
>> even though it's an obsolete Fanuc foible?
>
>I thought that was clear from the start.
>
>> If you're u
On Sun, 04 Oct 2009 00:00:14 +0100, you wrote:
>>> If you're up to adding second commands, there should be no objection
>>> then to adding a current Fanuc lathe command like G32 with F for the
>>> feed word that also does taper threads properly (along the Z axis NOT
>>> the hypotenuse) in addition
Steve Blackmore wrote
<<<. >
Thanks Steve, I had missed that trick!
Ian
--
Come build with us! The BlackBerry® Developer Conference in SF, CA
is the only developer event you need to attend this year. Jump
On Sat, 3 Oct 2009 16:59:36 -0500, you wrote:
>On Sat, Oct 03, 2009 at 09:21:43PM +0100, Steve Blackmore wrote:
>>
>> Ahh - it's a second one being added not a replacement for the existing,
>> even though it's an obsolete Fanuc foible?
>
>I thought that was clear from the start.
No - it wasn't.
On Sat, Oct 03, 2009 at 09:21:43PM +0100, Steve Blackmore wrote:
>
> Ahh - it's a second one being added not a replacement for the existing,
> even though it's an obsolete Fanuc foible?
I thought that was clear from the start.
> If you're up to adding second commands, there should be no objecti
On Fri, 2 Oct 2009 16:14:49 -0500, you wrote:
>I see a use for both systems. I see that you strongly prefer one over
>the other. I do not understand yet why you object so strongly to the
>second one being added.
Ahh - it's a second one being added not a replacement for the existing,
even thoug
>
> I am embarassed to say that I have never noticed if EMC holds relative
> position information during a power-down, or machine position for that
> matter.
>
Only when you use the position_file option
POSITION_FILE = position.txt If set to a non-empty value, the joint
positions are stored be
2009/10/3 Ian W. Wright :
> It will be no use having a system where,
> if the last job you did was milling a 12" length of 40
> thread, hitting the home button will cause the rotary to set
> off on an interminable unwind..
A rotary axis will only ever home to the home switch, and it is hard
to thi
You can disable that feature if you wish.
http://www.linuxcnc.org/docview/html//config_ini_config.html#sub:[TRAJ]-section
John
On 3 Oct 2009 at 8:54, Ian W. Wright wrote:
> problem and homing is now easy. However, as EMC will not now
> allow any operation without all the axes being homed first
On Fri, 2 Oct 2009 22:32:02 +0100, you wrote:
>2009/10/2 Chris Radek :
>
>>> Also as Andy pointed out, you can do an optional short move to zero in
>>> some controllers, invent a code for it if considered essential.
>>
>> OK, I agree a counterproposal might have this scheme.
>
>G1.1 and G0.1 ? Tak
On Sat, 03 Oct 2009 08:54:25 +0100, you wrote:
> However, as EMC will not now
>allow any operation without all the axes being homed first,
>optionally running such as 'position setting' script before
>a rotary sets off on a long unwind is not now possible.
>
Hi Ian, put
NO_FORCE_HOMING=1
in t
One thing which does need addressing is that, whatever
solution is found ( and I suspect that we may actually be
approaching a consensus on what is required...). the rotary
axis/axes need to be able to home either to the position in
which they currently are or to the nearest '0' when EMC2 is
f
As a spur gear tooth cutter one needs 0-360, but a helical gear cutter
goes above 360, a worm maker may need up to 10 turns, a thread miller
may want a lot more.
For a hobbing machine many hundreds or thousands of turns but
returning to the real homed 0 or arbitary angle in less than one turn
is th
2009/10/2 Chris Radek :
>> Also as Andy pointed out, you can do an optional short move to zero in
>> some controllers, invent a code for it if considered essential.
>
> OK, I agree a counterproposal might have this scheme.
G1.1 and G0.1 ? Take the shortest route and reset the machine
coordinates
On Fri, Oct 02, 2009 at 04:05:54PM +0100, Steve Blackmore wrote:
> Ehh?
Ehh?
> It's sane for any rotary, particularly those that CAN rotate forever.
OK, matter of opinion. Let me explain and justify my opinion further
down. Simply restating it is silly.
> Also as Andy pointed out, you can do
On Fri, 2 Oct 2009 08:25:32 -0500, you wrote:
>On Fri, Oct 02, 2009 at 12:18:50PM +0100, Steve Blackmore wrote:
>
>> " One occurrence that is interesting - when the rotation in the same
>> direction reaches 360.0 (a full circle), it continues to increase. It
>> does not become zero degrees again."
On Thu, Oct 01, 2009 at 03:53:02PM -0500, Chris Radek wrote:
>
> G53 still does the full unwind.
Not anymore - now it uses the sign to determine which way to turn,
and goes to the specified coordinate in that direction while
disregarding g5x and g92 offsets.
---
On Fri, Oct 02, 2009 at 12:18:50PM +0100, Steve Blackmore wrote:
> " One occurrence that is interesting - when the rotation in the same
> direction reaches 360.0 (a full circle), it continues to increase. It
> does not become zero degrees again."
I think your book is describing the same behavior
On Thu, 1 Oct 2009 15:53:02 -0500, you wrote:
> exactly 1 full turn requires using g91
> more than one full turn requires using g91
Argghhh... N
One flavour of Fanuc only (15b)! Why follow a bad design?
Fanuc, as is their habit, changed it. Sensibly later Fanuc controllers
treat rotary axi
On Thu, Oct 01, 2009 at 01:56:32PM -0500, Stuart Stevenson wrote:
>
> exactly 1 full turn requires using g91
> more than one full turn requires using g91
> g91 move the axis in the direction and magnitude of the command ie.
> g91g00c-720 is two revolutions in the negative direction
> g91c-10 set t
22 matches
Mail list logo
