Messages

671

General Mach Discussion / Re: DRO's dont match movement?

« on: October 08, 2010, 12:11:11 PM »

Hood, I reset the kernel speed to 35hz this morning with no difference that I can tell in operational speed. I did confirm that my machs native units were in inch and did a compplete restart of the system (mach and computer). I did a little test with jogging and for every 1" of movement in X of the table shows 9" in the DRO's ? MDI of G0 or G1 makes no difference if asking for Z-2", I get about .1535"?Ok I was testing while I was typing. I am an idiot apparently. I was off by the difference my paycheck should be. I needed 101552-101660 step per unit not 10161! Anyway all is working fine I think. I did uncheck CV and checked ES (exact stop). I am not sure which way this setting should be? Tips? Anyway I do have the steps working out alright at the moment.

672

General Mach Discussion / Re: DRO's dont match movement?

« on: October 08, 2010, 03:18:23 AM »

I was under the impression kernel speed would allow more steps vs time? I am running around 10000 steps per unit so I thought that might help with the speed. The DRO's are wrong when jogging, seem to be fine by MDI. I will look into it more tomorrow but always Hood, Thanks!

673

General Mach Discussion / DRO's dont match movement?

« on: October 08, 2010, 02:48:21 AM »

Installed my G540 on my Dyna today. I was setting the steps per unit. I had everything in native units set to inch. After testing the X, Y & Z multiple times and getting 10094.7876 for X, 10161.0161 for Y and 10110.4477 for Z. In MDI  it will move the amount commanded (exactly) but shows something totally different in the DRO's. Looked all over at any and all of the settings. cant find anything out of the ordinary. I am running version R3.043.022. Anybody got any ideas as to why? I need to measure the distance it moves when I am jogging because my mill doesnt have 37" of Z! LOL It almost seems like it might be showing 10x what the actual movement is, but that is just a guess. I will measure it later or tomorrow, as 2 am is late. I am running at 75hz if that makes any difference.

674

G-Code, CAD, and CAM discussions / Re: Subroutine confusion.

« on: October 04, 2010, 03:15:29 PM »

Graham
   On this code you wrote for me. I pictured the opposite being done. Is there a way that the steps down in Z would be the sub and the X & Y movement be the main program? The 1 you wrote worked fine but I was just curious as my vision was different. 
%
G20 G40
T1 M6
G92 A0
G00 G90 X0 Y0 Z.1 A0
G01 Z-.0214 F360.
M98 P0002 L6
G01 Z-.022 F360.
M98 P0002 L6
G01 Z-.03 F360.
M98 P0002 L6
G01 Z-.0375 F360.
M98 P0002 L6
G00 Z.1
M30

O0002(SUB)
G91
G01 X3. A1080. F1080.
G00 Z.1
X-3. A60.
Z-.1
G90
M99
%

Edit : Revised code to remove excess rapids.

Graham

[/quote]

675

G-Code, CAD, and CAM discussions / Re: Subroutine confusion.

« on: October 03, 2010, 09:34:27 PM »

Cool, I took the code you made ran it, edited it a bit to see the differences and ran it again and repeat. That should give me a day or 2 to manipulate it to see what is going on. Id di get a few different results than I expected in a case or 2 but I will really just have to examine the piece and the code to make sense of it all. Your help has made my week and weekend. I had read quite a bit just to get the basics of a sub. Nice to get a bone occasionally. Thanks again many more questions to follow.

676

G-Code, CAD, and CAM discussions / Re: Subroutine confusion.

« on: October 03, 2010, 05:53:22 PM »

If you want to use the same sub program in many different gcode files then is must be stored in the subroutines folder inside the Mach3 folder and called with a M98 (filename.tap) command.
   That is exactly what I wanted to know regarding the sub and its storage, thanks.
   The feed rate and depth of cut are taken from your original gcode.
G1 A0 F360
G1 Z0 X0 Y0 F8
G1 Z-.0214
I did just notice that what I thought I had put in there isnt what I did. I was using the feedrate of F360 in the code for the rotary table and that was in degrees. I had determined that was too slow and sped it up to 1080 in all following lines interpreting it as being able to do 3 revolutions in 1 minute. Then looking closer at my original code wouldnt the Z feed be at F8? due to the line above and no specific feed rate being on this line? My original intent was for a FR of 1 in the Z. I was messing with that file on the fly while cutting and editing it. I apparently didnt go back thru all of it as I was just on the verge of understanding the relationships.

677

G-Code, CAD, and CAM discussions / Re: Subroutine confusion.

« on: October 03, 2010, 04:54:35 PM »

Graham
Thanks for the rewrite.  A few more questions if you dont mind.
Line 4?
G01 Z-.0214 F360. Wouldnt this lower my Z at a feedrate of 360ipm (yikes on a Sherline) with a .0214 doc? and do it 6 times as indicated by L6?
O0002(SUB)
G91                              
G01 X3. A1080. F1080.
G00 Z.1
X-3. A60.
Z-.1
G90
M99
 Does this mean it goes to (G90 an absolute location of X0 A0?) then go to X3 while rotating 3 times, retracting Z to .1 and then rotating 60 degrees and (G91 incrementally moving down from the prior absolute location?) Am I close?
 Also as stated before regarding the sub, besides it physically being the last 8 lines of code, is it stored anywhere else? Or is it just referred to at the top of the file and then the definition given at the end?. I am beginning to think the sub is created in the program and could be stored and referred to permanently but not necessarily saved unless aditional steps are taken to do so.
 The more I look at your code and try to understand it, there is a lot more going on than I thought. The order is so different than what I would expected. Almost like reading from the bottom up, then right when I think I understand a little bit. It goes to another block entirely.

678

G-Code, CAD, and CAM discussions / Re: Subroutine confusion.

« on: October 03, 2010, 02:15:22 PM »

Unfortunately I have no sketch as this was hand coded. I believe only now am I starting to grasp the different uses of the g codes ( I have been doing a lot of reading of Peter Smids and it is deep for a person weak in the mathematics needed). I have a lot of comments to add on what I think I should have done now after this attachment was written and executed. It was an idea and I was tired of waiting and had to try something. Fortunately it worked and did so pretty well if time isnt of a concern. After sleeping on it and realizing what the code was doing (maybe) I think there was a lot of wasted motion. All in all it was fun and rewarding though nothing of significance was made, possibibly a column for my daughters "Barbie" houses?

679

G-Code, CAD, and CAM discussions / Re: Subroutine confusion.

« on: October 03, 2010, 10:36:02 AM »

I posed that question because I had placed a rotary table upon my mill with the workpiece paralleling the X axis. The workpiece is held horizontally and referred to as "A" ( though I am not sure it really is "A" in this configuration but the "A" commands do spin it like I desired). I all of a sudden had this idea that hand coding was what I wanted to do since my Z was now an end mill in almost a lathe configuration. Watching "Simpsons36"( http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2KNit__LJE4&videos=h667Lr8IJS4) creations on YouTube (also a member on cnczone) used to be absolutely baffling but I believe I am seeing how he achieves the desired result. Just recently I saw his shaving video also referred to as single point broaching? I dont think he uses CAD at all for this. It is just amazing at how many ways there are to solve a problem. Plus on a Sherline/A2ZCNC mill, it actually seems much more capable than it is as a lathe or a mill alone. I would like to post a g code I wrote here in the last day or so and see just where and how you would shorten it. The code cuts a spiral along the X axis 6 times (every 60 degrees) into a piece of bar stock and ends up looking like a ball screw or fluted column. I cut it with a ball end mill and though the results were as intended there was a lot of repitition and copy and pasting going on. I am sure there is a better way.

680

G-Code, CAD, and CAM discussions / Re: Subroutine confusion.

« on: October 03, 2010, 09:56:45 AM »

Graham
   Your tireless efforts to teach us is appreciated. Even the amount of information given in response was incredible. I will definitely read and reread this a few times as it has given me a quite few more questions.
 
   However I am still confused about the location of the subroutines. If I look in my Mach folder under subroutines, I find 1 file. It is labeled "subtest.tap". I might have created this file at some point in the past but I dont remember doing it. I have never called a sub though I have attempted with no success a few months ago but other projects sidetracked me. These are the contents of that file.
G0X1
G0Y1
G0X0
G0Y0
M99
When looking at this file it doesnt seem like it would work or throw an error with what little I know. I would think it would have a conflict as there are 2 points for the same axis in both X & Y. Isnt that what this file is saying?

"A sub program can be anything from a single gcode command to a complete multi tool program."
Thank you for this simple statement as this was a big question on the extent of what a sub can do. With terms like macros, subroutines, looping and the like, these terms can be very confusing.