Machsupport Forum
Mach Discussion => Mach4 General Discussion => Topic started by: propstuff on July 06, 2021, 06:41:42 PM
-
Mach4 4.2.0.4612
ESS build 275
Hi
There used to be a setting in configurations: Ignore Tool Changes.
I cant find it anymore.
Can someone advise?
TIA.
-
Maybe someone else knows if there is a better way but I think you need to modify your m6.mcs so that it does nothing but return.
HTH
RT
-
I think if you go into mach4 config-tools and check T on M6 line is next tool it will not stop and ask for a tool change..
-
Thanks for the replies.
So the Ignore Tool Change setting no longer exists?
I did try "T on M6 line " setting but it didn't make any difference.
However on some other old files which worked as expected previously, the original setting did successfully pass the tool change code, but hung a little later as per my other thread:
https://www.machsupport.com/forum/index.php?topic=44993.0
Is this some configuration issue that I need to address in the new version, or should I be submitting a bug report??
-
if you do not select a tool in your CAM setting in aspire what happens ?
would it be possible to edit the Post Processor file to not output a M6 command then Mach4 would have nothing to do
-
What CAM you use, why not just ignore the tool changes from post processor?
-
I may be wrong.... but I don't think Mach4 ever had that option; mach3 did.
If you wish to use the tool change at a later date, then you should do what I did on a machine; I added a button that toggled an input to either use the ATC or not.
If the input was active the machine would just sit and wait for a manual tool change with a message box popped up, if it was not active, it ran through the automatic tool change sequence.
You could do the same thing, where if you have your own "Ignore tool change" button active then the machine would just run to the end of the m6 macro and ignore everything in the middle.
-
Thanks for the replies
if you do not select a tool in your CAM setting in aspire what happens ?
I'm not sure what the reference to aspire means here.
I'm using SheetCam, and according to them Tool Change code is written into all their Router posts.
I did try deleting out the Tool Change G code from files in question.
I also tried making a copy of the Post processor, deleting out the Tool Change macro and re-running the file.
In each case the cycle froze immediately after where the tool change code was. IE as per my other posting.
The suggestion to create a custom toggle sounds good, but I think is beyond me at the moment.
In any case the files which are now freezing worked perfectly in the previous version of Mach4 I was on.
So; it seems either something has been changed in Mach4 that I need to address, or there is a bug.
Is there alternate explanation/s why files which previously ran would stop running after an update?
regards,
N.
-
I use Sheetcam with same vs of Mach4 and no problem with tool changes, but in files i don't make tool change..
Panos
-
I had exactly the same problem as you regarding your other posting.
With me it was caused by having the "Wait On Spindle To Stabilize "xx " Percent" Box checked (Under Mach4 Spindle Configuration Tab).
At the time, I didn't have any Spindle feedback to Mach via the ESS, so Mach just sat there waiting for a signal that was never going to appear.
Regards,
Nick.
-
THANKYOU Nick952
All is working again now.
Perhaps this option is turned on by default by the update.
As for the original subject;
Somewhere along the line Mach4 stopped freezing at the Tool Change code line and now passes through as previously.
The only thing I really fiddled with was the "T on M6 line is next tool" option mentioned by
gorf23
"I think if you go into mach4 config-tools and check T on M6 line is next tool it will not stop and ask for a tool change"
This was the way it was already set when it was freezing at the tool change line.
Perhaps fiddling with it had something to do with the preference "sticking" along the lines of the general computer "Turn it off and turn it on again" paradigm.
Anyhow,
Thanks to the contributors for your input.
Cheers,
Nicholas