Hello Guest it is March 29, 2024, 06:45:13 AM

Author Topic: Setting cutter radius with G10?  (Read 19434 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline ger21

*
  • *
  •  6,295 6,295
    • View Profile
    • The CNC Woodworker
Re: Setting cutter radius with G10?
« Reply #20 on: November 11, 2011, 06:49:02 PM »
Brian posted a test version about 3 years ago, and he showed an example of it working in subs.

http://www.machsupport.com/forum/index.php/topic,9915.0.html
Gerry

2010 Screenset
http://www.thecncwoodworker.com/2010.html

JointCAM Dovetail and Box Joint software
http://www.g-forcecnc.com/jointcam.html

Offline BR549

*
  •  6,965 6,965
    • View Profile
Re: Setting cutter radius with G10?
« Reply #21 on: November 11, 2011, 07:27:35 PM »
I'll have to admit the later versions seem to be terrible.

(;-) TP

Offline rcaffin

*
  •  1,052 1,052
    • View Profile
Re: Setting cutter radius with G10?
« Reply #22 on: November 11, 2011, 07:33:08 PM »
Brian posted a test version about 3 years ago, and he showed an example of it working in subs.
http://www.machsupport.com/forum/index.php/topic,9915.0.html

If someone could explain to me how to upload an image to a posting without using an external web site, I could show what I am getting. It is not for internal holes but for external outliones. It's pretty wild!
Anyone?

Cheers

Offline ger21

*
  • *
  •  6,295 6,295
    • View Profile
    • The CNC Woodworker
Re: Setting cutter radius with G10?
« Reply #23 on: November 11, 2011, 07:36:47 PM »
If your options are Post, Preview, and Spell Check, then click Preview, and choose Additional Option in the lower left corner below the text entry box. You can attach images there.
Gerry

2010 Screenset
http://www.thecncwoodworker.com/2010.html

JointCAM Dovetail and Box Joint software
http://www.g-forcecnc.com/jointcam.html

Offline rcaffin

*
  •  1,052 1,052
    • View Profile
Re: Setting cutter radius with G10?
« Reply #24 on: November 11, 2011, 08:05:33 PM »
OK, thasnks. Trying ...
Top one is outline without G41
Bottom one is outline with G41 turned on - pretty wild?

Um ... ??
Cheers

Offline ger21

*
  • *
  •  6,295 6,295
    • View Profile
    • The CNC Woodworker
Re: Setting cutter radius with G10?
« Reply #25 on: November 11, 2011, 08:38:50 PM »
Can you post the code for that?
Gerry

2010 Screenset
http://www.thecncwoodworker.com/2010.html

JointCAM Dovetail and Box Joint software
http://www.g-forcecnc.com/jointcam.html

Offline rcaffin

*
  •  1,052 1,052
    • View Profile
Re: Setting cutter radius with G10?
« Reply #26 on: November 11, 2011, 09:23:19 PM »
Herewith.
Note that the full code actually is meant to create 4 units, while the pics just show 1 unit.
Also, there are some commented-out sections for drilling clamping holes.

If I have any errors in the code which are causing the problem, I would be grateful if anyone can educate me!

Cheers

Offline BR549

*
  •  6,965 6,965
    • View Profile
Re: Setting cutter radius with G10?
« Reply #27 on: November 12, 2011, 11:35:05 AM »
I don't think you will ever get that to work with just setting the TC  1 TIME(;-). I believe you will need to rethink the use of the ToolComp.

First ,Nice program.   I would never had tried Tool comp with it BUT if I did I would use TC a bit different. The TC should be used to move into a cut then when done Move OUT of TC. Then move to the next section and reapply it do the cut then Move out,etc,etc.

There are times when you jump through 3 subs with TC on and never made a cut. I don't think the TC in MACH3 will every be able to follow your Logic.  

I am surprised that MACH3 can even follow the SUB logic that deep and not get lost.  

(;-) TP

Offline rcaffin

*
  •  1,052 1,052
    • View Profile
Re: Setting cutter radius with G10?
« Reply #28 on: November 12, 2011, 03:33:27 PM »
Hi TP

I don't think you will ever get that to work with just setting the TC  1 TIME(;-).
I do get simpler programs with much less SR nesting to run very nicely with TC on. There's some hope ...

Quote
First ,Nice program.
Thanks! SW programming background.

Quote
The TC should be used to move into a cut then when done Move OUT of TC. Then move to the next section and reapply it do the cut then Move out,etc,etc.
Oh yes, there is a lead-in move all right. I guess it is hard to see :-)
As for move out - that is done by a Z lift and end of program. The Z-lift is mandatory of course.

Quote
There are times when you jump through 3 subs with TC on and never made a cut. I don't think the TC in MACH3 will every be able to follow your Logic.  
Dunno about that. Just because the program jumps down a few sub levels does not mean that position gets lost; equally the TC offset should not get lost. After all, sub level should not really have anything to do with position calculation.

Quote
I am surprised that MACH3 can even follow the SUB logic that deep and not get lost.
That should not be a problem, as I suggested above. And yes, Mach3 manages just nicely. I would expect it to handle far deeper nesting than that - virtually unlimited in fact. Sub level is just stack control - nothing to do with position and offset. Think of it as the machine just bringing the sub code 'in-line', that's all.

I will play some more and see if I can get a tighter definition of where the problem arises.

Cheers

Offline BR549

*
  •  6,965 6,965
    • View Profile
Re: Setting cutter radius with G10?
« Reply #29 on: November 12, 2011, 07:16:27 PM »
Even Art has said that Machs sub nesting is limited(;-) The fact of a stack is not a problem but what can occurs in each layer of that stack can be extemely complicated to positional tracking.

Remember the the fanucs of this world have about 40-50 years of software enginerring to create what you see today and they may run on as many as 8 processors to get it all done.


I think even Fanuc has a known  limit on nesting subs.

I think IF you were to rethink where you actually NEED to apply the TC and then turn it off after it has done its job and then reapply it as needed you will see more success with it. I don't think the idea of turning on in the begginning and leaving on until the end of the program will ever pan out in the cases of deeply nested subs.

Just a thought, (;-) TP