Quote from: BR549 on April 23, 2014, 08:47:47 PM

(;-) I worked on that one for well over a year. Without success, well it could be done with a LOT of block deletes statements but that was a PAIN in itself.

But I will review it ONE more time

(;-) TP

No block deletes needed.

The suspense is killing me 

Tweakie.

The suspense is killing me 

 

hopefully you're not the only one 

Ian

OK thinking out loud the problem with the G28.1 and RFH is it cycles the G28.1 EVERY time it sees it. This causes the Torch to RAISE up a bit. The more times it is run the higher that torch gets off the material. So when it is ready to cycle start the torch fires WELL off the material. OR it cycles UP far enough to trip the Z limit.

Now running the G28.1 from a macro then Mach3 does NOT see it when cycling thru the RFH thus does NOT raise the torch each time.

Running with Block delete you use the block delete to delete those lines of code in the G28.1 routine so it also does not raise the torch during the RFH.

You might could Recreate a RFH button that added the TOM code in after it cycles so it refinds the the material top(needs testing again)but I think I did that once and it did not cycle correctly with the RFH.

I do not have the old test notes anymore so off hand I do not know of a way from Gcode to do it.

Here is you chance to be famous and a MASTER  Mach3 WIZARD   

OK thinking out loud the problem with the G28.1 and RFH is it cycles the G28.1 EVERY time it sees it. This causes the Torch to RAISE up a bit. The more times it is run the higher that torch gets off the material. So when it is ready to cycle start the torch fires WELL off the material. OR it cycles UP far enough to trip the Z limit.

OK - not what I see here so we need to make sure we're looking at the same problem. Here when I do a RFH, it runs the code from the start to set up modals etc. until it gets to the RFH selected line. However in plasma it never actually get's to the RFH line because when it hits a TOM (G31 or G28.1) it just stops (actually on the line following the G31/G28.1 in the code window) - i.e. never gets to the chosen RFH line. All you can then do is hit stop or reset. Here I'm on 3.043.022

HUM I have never seen that here(;-) or even heard of that one. 

Here I am on .067  That is the release that Brian and Tom from Candcnc worked on to get some glitches fixed for plasma.

(;-) TP

The CURE would be for Brian to exclude the G28.1 and G31 routines from the RFH routine but that is not going to happen, already asked. Answer was NOTTA.

They are to busy with Mach4.

It can be made to work with a macro with limited Gcode/CB code  as Mach3 will not run the macro in the RFH.   BUT then you have to mod your Cam post to make that work AND your code will NOT run on someone else's machine.

(;-) TP

OK - it seems different symptoms but same cause - i.e. we need to stop 28.1 or 31 being active during a RFH approach and then become active again once we're ready to resume. Yes?

Unfortunately I need to mod the CAM post but you seem to not want to do that for some reason.

Don't know why you're disallowing that though - that's exactly what CAM posts are for surely.

Ian

OK some more thought on this . I don't think it is the G28.1 that is causing the real problem but the G92 calls after it. It keeps resetting the Z height after the G28.1. THAT causes the Z height to be way high at the end of the RFH sequence.

NOW how do we account for the G92 sequence > MAYBE all we need to do is set the Z home offset in the Homing section and NOT run the G92 after the G28.1. The change in Zheight will be accounted for from inside the G28.1 sequence itself as it will reset the Z internally and not from Gcode.

You cannot account for the change in the G28.1 sequence in CAM. The CAM does NOT know when you are going to call for a RFH in Mach3.

Just a thought, More Testing,(;-) TP

Terry - you appear to missing one minute teeny weeny itsy bitsy detail here....

I've already solved this - I did it years ago - I was seeing if YOU wanted to have a go - that's all.

Cheers

Ian

I've already solved this - I did it years ago - I was seeing if YOU wanted to have a go - that's all.

Ian, you are such a tease 

Tweakie.