Messages

1

General Mach Discussion / Re: Arc's in planes other than G17

« on: March 23, 2010, 11:05:29 AM »

There really is no other way to run the code I need to run other than to just get the machine to run as it's documentation suggests. Additionally to the above requirements I need to make a move in the A axis while the helix is going on.  For testing purposes I have removed the A axis moves to just try and generate a correct arc (to no avail).  While it *may* run the code but display it wrong, it doesn't help me to think that it might at some point display correctly and not cut correctly or any one of a number of bizarre scenarios. 
Pretty much the final nail in the coffin for me, time to look elsewhere for reliable software...

2

General Mach Discussion / Re: Arc's in planes other than G17

« on: March 22, 2010, 09:33:57 PM »

I am unwilling to run code that won't display, just doesn't seem like a way to be able to check yourself.  Does not instill me with confidence.  I think it may be time to move on to other software options..

3

General Mach Discussion / Arc's in planes other than G17

« on: March 22, 2010, 05:54:28 PM »

Trying to program a helix in G18 (which would be XZ plane, axis of arc parallel to Y axis).  An example of the code would be:

G00 X0.375 Y0. Z0.375
G18
G02 X0. Y0. Z0. I-0.375 F10.

IJK is set to incremental, and I do get an arc on the toolpath display.  However there is no difference shown between G02 and G03. Both would generate what would be a CCW arc.  Now it's entirely possible that I missed something stupid, and I did try multiple computers with multiple profiles and the issue repeats itself.  Although I mentioned cutting a helix, which is the end goal, I have cut back the code to just get an arc to cut.  I also tried with R values. 
I know arcs (let alone helix's) in planes other than G17 aren't that common so maybe this hasn't come up before.

4

General Mach Discussion / Re: Sheet MEtal Bending with Mach3

« on: January 18, 2010, 12:34:27 PM »

You can't control the bend angle with this. If you need a different angle, which is very rare (all the bends usually 90 degrees) you'd use a suitable die and tool. Thus, with a sheet bender you only control one axis and only in single block mode.

That's not true at all.  Working in a sheet metal shop I see dozens of unique parts, and I can tell you that all the bends are NOT 90 degrees.  Furthermore you have direct control of the angle of the bend by the distance the press ram travels.  Also factoring into this are the die opening and punch radius.  You can even use an accute 88 degree bottom and a narrow punch to over bend when in metals where springback is an issue.  Bottoming the dies out to bend the exact angle required is actually rarely done as it takes more tonnage for a given bend and it is actually more difficult to control the resultant angle.  Research "air bending" for further details. 
Current tech press brakes have 5 or more axis of motion in the flying back gauges, and can be programmed to do multiple bends across a part.  Mach 3 would make a great front end to a system like this, or even just a single axis back gauge. 

5

General Mach Discussion / Re: USB and Mach

« on: January 17, 2010, 03:15:45 PM »

I wouldn't take a reply as "your doing something wrong" but rather think in terms of why does something work for another and what are the differences. Sounds easy, but at times it can be something simple or very complex.
Many times, transparent to the user,  someone is spending time to replicate the problem and look into.
One thing for sure, nothing is standing still. May not be moving at the pace to suit us, and certainly something will creep in no matter what.
I see the USB  use as a transition away  PP and the system evolution just has to take it's course over time

RICH

This becomes difficult to do when the reply states that I'm doing something wrong.  There are a lot of very well meaning individuals out there who like to provide help, but are misguided in their information.  This does not move the ball forward. 
Being defensive about a particular product's shortcomings also does not move the ball forward.  It does not improve the product, or provide valid feedback to the developer of said product in order to fix problems with it. 

6

General Mach Discussion / Re: USB and Mach

« on: January 17, 2010, 11:31:09 AM »

I am one who needs the swap axis function. If Mach had the ability to run an axis continuously, there would not be a need, and hopefully that may find its way into Mach4.

My objective is to implement some of the capabilities of a machining center and thereby add a great deal of versatility and capability to a standard milling machine. Without the swapaxis function in mach, I know of no other way to get at this functionality.

Selecting a differnet plane is not a trivial task either is there are circular moves involved. I have not had to do this very much and so far I have simply 'messaged' the G-code rather than explore the application of swapaxis to this issue, but it seems like swapaxis would be a good, if not the best solution there if there was a larger program or the need to make a lot of smaller programs run on a different plane than XY. 

I don't understand why smoothstepper would eliminate this important feature of Mach, but that's the reality at the moment. Hopefully Mach4 will implement some more sophisticated interface options so that a single product with buggy firmware and drivers is not the only available choice. How long does a product need to stay in beta and have holes in it's functionality? I keep reading that 99% of SS users are happy campers to the point where it starts to look as if that is justification for the remaining bugs and limitations  . . . .  just my impression.

The thing is that not everyone cuts the same kind of parts and therefore don't see the same bugs.  This happens a surprising amount here, many people refuse to see a problem because it doesn't show up in their setups with the kind of code they run.  A lot of folks run simple code generated by simple CAM programs, or 2D hand code as it's cheap to produce.  It's also not very taxing on the system. 
But because it "works fine for them" you must be doing something wrong, and it's not a problem. 
I like the product, and I respect the difficulties in bringing the software to completion, especially in light of the tremendous variation in workflow and skill level of the folks reporting problems with the code.  I continue to be hopeful that these issues will be ironed out.  But it certainly isn't done yet.

7

General Mach Discussion / Re: USB and Mach

« on: January 15, 2010, 06:36:53 PM »

Hood koKo i have just looked it is called 0.015.OGX the previous version was called 0.015OGB if memory serves me correct.

But in the plugins folder it has the 2 on the end IE ver 0150gx2.dll

KoKo if you hit STOP which is as good as an as E Stop you must re reference anyway.

Phil

No it is not, and there is a difference between "re-reference" and re-pick up a part.  Sometimes you don't like what a program is doing, you want to stop, edit the code before disaster hits, and avoid the problem.  With STOP you can halt the execution of the program, and run something else without re-referencing anything, STOP does not cause an ESTOP, the drives don't lose position, nothing.  I'm not going to argue with you further on this, as it's not productive.  The software is still in beta, even according to the writer of it.  Nuff said.

8

General Mach Discussion / Re: USB and Mach

« on: January 15, 2010, 06:18:46 PM »

Koko you will find what version you are using by clicking on PLUGIN CONTROL

As Hood says it may be in your plugin folder but it has to be enabled.

You can do this click FUNCTION CFG'S then reset DEVICE SELECT

Then restart Mach and choose the new plugin then it WILL BE FIXED FOR YOU as well 

Phil

Yeah, it's enabled.  It was the only one ever installed, it's the version you say, and NO, IT IS NOT FIXED.  You'd expect the same thing for everyone, but in this case it is not. 

9

General Mach Discussion / Re: USB and Mach

« on: January 15, 2010, 05:42:58 PM »

I read and understand very well thank you.  As it so happens that IS the version of the software I am using, and although it may be fixed for you, it is NOT FIXED for me.  I will try and re-download the plugin in and re-install it to see if that makes a difference. 

10

General Mach Discussion / Re: USB and Mach

« on: January 15, 2010, 04:24:23 PM »

I get an awesome pop up that says the SS ran out of data during a move, and has to be restarted, saying that "hopefully this will be handled better in the future".

There is a newer version on the warp9 site that does indeed handle it better.
I did make a forum post about it, you must have missed it.

Phil

I downloaded the latest release in November after it came out.  Although I see a note about OGX2 there now, I can't remember if I got it before or after that.
Even if that is fixed (and it sure would be nice, it's silly not to have a STOP option)  that doesn't change my point one bit.  The software is not complete, and people need to understand that.  If they expect this to perform completely reliably it isn't there yet. It's not insulting or derogatory in any way, just a statement of fact that may or may not be important to your individual use.  I look forward to the day it's out of beta, and I would, and will buy more of them for other projects.