Hello Guest it is November 12, 2019, 11:52:37 PM

Author Topic: PCNC3 vs. Mach3 Paths  (Read 6454 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

PCNC3 vs. Mach3 Paths
« on: September 22, 2007, 11:48:39 PM »
I am using the PCNC mill with Mach 3 software and just purchase the NFS WIzards.  It won't run properly because it is looking for files in the Mach3 folder and the PCNC uses "PCNC3" insyead of "Mach3" for the folder name.  I have done a psuedo workaround but it is not very clean.

Can you make the program capable of handling the different path .....maybe by allowing it to be entered in the "Initialiazation" file?

Thanks,
Pat
Re: PCNC3 vs. Mach3 Paths
« Reply #1 on: September 23, 2007, 11:18:59 AM »
Do you have the Tormach PCNC 1100 mill?  I'll be upgrading to Mach3 on that mill soon and will probably be having the same problem with the wizards.

Mike
Re: PCNC3 vs. Mach3 Paths
« Reply #2 on: September 23, 2007, 11:08:19 PM »
Mike,
Yes.  I have the PCNC 1100 with Mach 3.  The NFSwizard is the only one I hqve found so far with the problem.  I have a work around if you are interested but I'd rather see NFS fix the problem in the code.  It is the paths hard coded into the program that want to get files from the Mach3 folder that is called PCNC3 in the installation of the PCNC 1100 software.

Pat
Re: PCNC3 vs. Mach3 Paths
« Reply #3 on: September 24, 2007, 09:42:56 PM »
I am aware of the path problem and it will be fixed in the next release of the wizard set. I now have 3 or 4 other fixes, so I hope to have a new version in a couple weeks. The wizard does call the full path, and assumes the standard C:\Mach3\Addons.
Re: PCNC3 vs. Mach3 Paths
« Reply #4 on: September 24, 2007, 10:06:40 PM »
Thanks Ron,  I was confident that you were aware of the problem and would modify  for the next release.

These wizards are great.  The whole process is well thought out and I find them very useful.  Thanks for a great product.

Can you publish an list of the fixed you are working on at this time.  That way I can compare the few nigly items I have noticed in the program that I was going to report to you and not bother you with them if you are already working on them.

Pat
Re: PCNC3 vs. Mach3 Paths
« Reply #5 on: September 24, 2007, 10:34:16 PM »
There is a bug in the circular pocket wizard when the pocket size is small enough to do in one pass, it does it all at plunge feed, not the requested feed.

The surface wizard sometimes makes an unnecessary pass depending on the tool size and stepover.

It has been requested to add a Z top DRO instead of assuming all wizards start at Z=0. This may be a lot more work because it potentially impacts every one of the screens.

Any other things you would like to see fixed?
Re: PCNC3 vs. Mach3 Paths
« Reply #6 on: September 25, 2007, 12:32:57 AM »
Pat,

Thanks - I may get back to you on that fix later, but at the rate I'm getting projects done Ron will have upgraded the Wizards before I get Mach3 loaded.

Mike
Re: PCNC3 vs. Mach3 Paths
« Reply #7 on: September 25, 2007, 11:27:22 PM »
Ron,

A few other things that would be helpful and/or minor bugs:

+ Can the tool diameter be pulled up automatically from the tool table when the tool number is entered (rather than having to type it in)?
+ the "traverse height" on the circular hole pattern screen sets to 100.00 each time I open the screen instead of remembering the last setting
+ after I use the circular hole pattern operation and change the traverse height as in the previous bullet above, the "feed % override" in the "tool properties" screen defaults to 1% instead of 100%

Hope my input is seen as constructive.

Pat
 
Re: PCNC3 vs. Mach3 Paths
« Reply #8 on: September 30, 2007, 11:42:17 AM »
Ron,

Wanted to make sure you got this info from Graham on another post.  Looks like a good solution to accessing the tool table info.

GetToolParam(SHORT toolnum, SHORT param) where paramaters are: 1 - tool dia, 2 - tool rad........

Pat
Re: PCNC3 vs. Mach3 Paths
« Reply #9 on: September 30, 2007, 11:06:06 PM »
Ron,

Can you also have the thread milling wizard give the user the option to start on the bottom of the hole and move up?  I have found in my experience that this works better to keep you from cutting the chips just created.
Thanks,
Pat