Version R3.043.066

Whilst Leafboy say that their product supports R3.043.066 there have been issues reported here on the forum which would indicate otherwise.
In addition to the things I have mentioned perhaps reverting back to an earlier version of Mach3 may also be a prudent move (earlier versions can be found in ftp downloads http://www.machsupport.com/software/downloads-updates/).

Tweakie.

OK thanks, any suggestions as to which version please?

We all seem to have our own personal choice but I use R3.043.056 if that's any help.

Tweakie.

Cheers, I will try that with the mods you suggested to kernel and accelleratiuon, but not ports and pins I guess ?

OK, I installed the older version of mach3 with the suggested modifications.

I produced a series of test squares to cut using different tools to see what would happen, code attached.

These are simple squares, cut with an engraving tool for the fist 3 using code generated by Aspire in Vcarve, profile and pocket options without the 'display on 3d model' selected, the second 3 with that option selected, all set to 1mm depth of cut by Aspire. The third set of 3 use the same Aspire options but with a 2mm ball nose tool.

The results were interesting and confusing.

The first 3 cut to 1.80mm deep, the second 3 to , 2.10 mm and the 3rd set to3.46 !  I then changed the tool to a 4mm mill and using the code from the ball end setup and ran that, these cut to 2.18mm deep.

I had manually set the depth z=0 so it was not an issue with the auto zero tool, I also checked the calibration in the approved method and all was spot on.  ( the x and y axis cuts were precise)

Then, just when I thought I could not get more confused     I set the 4mm end mill to z=0 dropped the depth using Mach3 to 1mm and simply ran a straight line cut by jogging the x axis across, it cut to 1mm deep. So it would appear that the Mach3 is working correctly  (??)

I have to say I did not notice any difference in the performance with the changes made to the Mach3 version or the suggested modifications to kernel speed etc. but this was a very simple set of code and perhaps it would be more stable on more complex cuts.

As a self-confessed ignoramus on these matters I am totally baffled, why, when the code shows -1mm Z in all cases, should it cut differently in the different examples when the calibration would appear to be OK.

I am saving the files from Aspire in what I think is the correct format,  Mach2/3 Arcs (mm) (*.txt), and as the x and y are correct I can't be that far out, can I ??

I even installed Mach3 on a different, more powerful computer, just in case that was a problem source, but the results were the same.

I ran a series of tests today using a very simple square cut calculated from Aspire, see attached file.

Following advice from the Aspire forum, I changed line N10 in 2 ways ,  once I changed the G43 to G49 and the H1 to H0, then I removed the G43 and the H completely.

I ran the test  cut 3 times, as generated, with g49 H0, and without G43  h

There was no appreciable difference in the cut depths, which were all +-1mm     as required, I ten ran the logo file which I had first noticed the problem on, and it also was correct.

i think the reversion to the earlier Mach3 must have done the trick, I did check the version which came with the machine, which I did not use because it was a cracked copy, I just went ahead and bought a real one and downloaded the latest version when I bough it, the original one was 3.043.056, do you think I should revert to that?  or leave it as is because it appears to be working OK now?

Thanks again to all for your inputs, most valued 

the original one was 3.043.056, do you think I should revert to that?  or leave it as is because it appears to be working OK now?

Leave it as it is (If it ain't broke don't fix it) 

Tweakie.