Messages

1401

General Mach Discussion / Re: How many people here are running mach3 on industrial machines?

« on: February 25, 2016, 07:16:49 AM »

Yeah, lots of people use mach3 for hobby use on large machines.
Also, regarding Terry's comments. Just because Mach3 may not do what you need, doesn't mean that you can't convert the machine. There is a lot of competition in the DIY CNC control field.

1402

General Mach Discussion / Re: tabs

« on: February 25, 2016, 07:14:08 AM »

Bearing on the bottom, cut with the sheet upside down.
Something like an Amana 47090.

1403

G-Code, CAD, and CAM discussions / Re: The Arc Command

« on: February 24, 2016, 03:03:16 PM »

Curl the fingers of your right hand into a fist with your thumb pointing out (like the Fonz). If you point your thumb in the positive direction of an axis, your fingers point in the direction of positive rotation.

1404

General Mach Discussion / Re: tabs

« on: February 24, 2016, 02:24:00 PM »

I use a trim router with onion skinned parts.

1405

General Mach Discussion / Re: G31 causes driver fault

« on: February 23, 2016, 08:18:53 PM »

Ask CS Labs if their devices will work with the digitize wizard.

1406

General Mach Discussion / Re: G31 causes driver fault

« on: February 23, 2016, 07:00:08 PM »

I think  you need to use a different code other than G31 with the CS Labs boards.

http://www.cs-lab.eu/en/artykul-129-M31_as_an_alternative_to_G31.html

1407

General Mach Discussion / Re: Auto Zero Touch off issues

« on: February 23, 2016, 01:54:43 PM »

Are you using the latest SS plugin?

The people I've seen with the apparently same issue didn't have any problems when using 3.043.062.

1408

G-Code, CAD, and CAM discussions / Re: The Arc Command

« on: February 23, 2016, 01:27:24 PM »

So if I leave out either of these commands, wouldn't Mach3 just default to the Config page?

Yes. But if your code is expecting something other than what's in the config page, then what Mach3 cuts won't be what you were expecting.

It appears they do different things so are not in conflict.

They are in the same modal group, so the g-code interpreter only reads on of them per line. It's not that they confict, but rather, one of them is ignored. If they are on separate lines, they work fine.

G90
G91.1
Works fine.

G90 G91.1
does not.

1409

G-Code, CAD, and CAM discussions / Re: The Arc Command

« on: February 23, 2016, 11:34:59 AM »

Yes, a Mach3 (and 4) thing. I noticed in the Mach4 manual that they are in different groups in Mach4.

1410

G-Code, CAD, and CAM discussions / Re: The Arc Command

« on: February 23, 2016, 10:28:56 AM »

G90 is absolute and G91.1 is incremental arcs.
But the way cambam is doing it is wrong.

Run this code, and watch the mode in the status bar. It will never change to G91. And if you were in G91 mode when you started, it won't change to G90.

G90 G91.1
G4 P2
G91 G90.1
G4 P2
G90 G91.1
G4 P2
G91 G90.1