Hi Ray,
I agree it sounds like a bug. But I can't get it to cause an error in either normal or simulation. I assume this is an Inch job?
Maybe some huge offset causes some numerical problem? Please send us as much info as you can. Screen Shot of your TP settings (although that really shouldn't matter if it is complaining about the raw GCode). Also any offsets (or maybe just try with no offsets to simplify diagnosis).
GCode seems ok I calculate only ~50ui of error and the error message threshold is 500ui in Inches or 5um in metric.
Thanks
TK
| Group: DynoMotion |
Message: 3042 |
From: Brad Murry |
Date: 1/10/2012 |
| Subject: Re: KMotion Doesn't Like My G-Code.... |
Ray, It is not from the TP, but from the interpreter- sorry to mislead. I checked your code in cad and is only slightly off, should be below the interpreter’s tolerance. -Brad From: DynoMotion@yahoogroups.com [mailto:DynoMotion@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of himykabibble
Sent: Tuesday, January 10, 2012 12:08 PM
To: DynoMotion@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [DynoMotion] Re: KMotion Doesn't Like My G-Code.... Brad,
But what param? I have them at the defaults, and it's not clear to me any of them would affect this code anyway. I assume it's some tolerance issue or something, but the numbers in the code look right to me, so I don't understand what it's unhappy with. And, if the code is wrong, or planner settings are wrong,why doesn't the error get flagged in simulation?
Regards,
Ray L.
--- In DynoMotion@yahoogroups.com, Brad Murry <bradodarb@...> wrote:
>
> I think you are not setting your TP params correctly..?
>
>
>
> From: DynoMotion@yahoogroups.com [mailto:DynoMotion@yahoogroups.com] On
> Behalf Of himykabibble
> Sent: Tuesday, January 10, 2012 11:53 AM
> To: DynoMotion@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: [DynoMotion] Re: KMotion Doesn't Like My G-Code....
>
>
>
>
>
> When I run in simulate mode in KMotion CNC, I get no error....
>
> Regards,
> Ray L.
>
> --- In DynoMotion@yahoogroups.com <mailto:DynoMotion%40yahoogroups.com> ,
> "himykabibble" <jagboy@> wrote:
> >
> > Today I finally got the KFlop on the machine, everything appears to be
> working nicely, so I tried to do the first "air cut" with a real program. It
> actually went pretty well, up to a point...
> >
> > The first profile went fine, but it gags on the second one, When it hits
> the G02 flagged in the below code, it complains about "Radius to start of
> arc is different from radius to end of arc", or whatever that error message
> is. Funny thing is, this code runs fine under simulation in SheetCAM, and in
> CutViewer, and in Mach3. It had no problem doing the roughing cut on the
> same profile, which was also all arc moves.
> >
> > What is wrong with that line?
> >
> > G00 Z1.5000
> > G00 X0.0000 Y0.0000
> > (1/4 HSS, uncoated, 2-Flute, Aluminum Cutter, 3.0XFinishing [40] ; Putnam
> #93950; SPEEDS=H:4:84)
> > (TOOL/MILL,0.2500, 0.0000, 0.6250)
> > (COLOR,255,255,255)
> > G00 Z1.5000
> > G00 X1.7020 Y-1.9101
> > S7640 (Spindle 7640 RPM)
> > G04 P3.0000 (Wait For Spindle #1)
> > M07 (Mist Coolant On)
> > G00 Z-0.1928
> > G01 Z-0.2125 F12.84 S7640
> > G03 X1.7453 Y-1.8970 I0.0151 J0.0282 F25.67
> > ==> G02 X2.8903 Y-1.0045 I1.5797 J-0.8460
> > G03 X2.9677 Y-0.9604 I-0.0400 J0.1601
> >
> > Regards,
> > Ray L.
> >
> |
|
| Group: DynoMotion |
Message: 3043 |
From: Brad Murry |
Date: 1/10/2012 |
| Subject: Re: KMotion Doesn't Like My G-Code.... |
Hello Tom, More of an exercise really, but I came up with a difference of 0.0025 between starting and end radii. How did you arrive at ~ 0.00005? -Brad Murry From: DynoMotion@yahoogroups.com [mailto:DynoMotion@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Tom Kerekes
Sent: Tuesday, January 10, 2012 12:34 PM
To: DynoMotion@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [DynoMotion] Re: KMotion Doesn't Like My G-Code.... I agree it sounds like a bug. But I can't get it to cause an error in either normal or simulation. I assume this is an Inch job? Maybe some huge offset causes some numerical problem? Please send us as much info as you can. Screen Shot of your TP settings (although that really shouldn't matter if it is complaining about the raw GCode). Also any offsets (or maybe just try with no offsets to simplify diagnosis). GCode seems ok I calculate only ~50ui of error and the error message threshold is 500ui in Inches or 5um in metric. From: himykabibble <jagboy@...>
To: DynoMotion@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Tuesday, January 10, 2012 11:08 AM
Subject: [DynoMotion] Re: KMotion Doesn't Like My G-Code.... Brad,
But what param? I have them at the defaults, and it's not clear to me any of them would affect this code anyway. I assume it's some tolerance issue or something, but the numbers in the code look right to me, so I don't understand what it's unhappy with. And, if the code is wrong, or planner settings are wrong,why doesn't the error get flagged in simulation?
Regards,
Ray L.
--- In DynoMotion@yahoogroups.com, Brad Murry <bradodarb@...> wrote:
>
> I think you are not setting your TP params correctly..?
>
>
>
> From: DynoMotion@yahoogroups.com [mailto:DynoMotion@yahoogroups.com] On
> Behalf Of himykabibble
> Sent: Tuesday, January 10, 2012 11:53 AM
> To: DynoMotion@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: [DynoMotion] Re: KMotion Doesn't Like My G-Code....
>
>
>
>
>
> When I run in simulate mode in KMotion CNC, I get no error....
>
> Regards,
> Ray L.
>
> --- In DynoMotion@yahoogroups.com <mailto:DynoMotion%40yahoogroups.com> ,
> "himykabibble" <jagboy@> wrote:
> >
> > Today I finally got the KFlop on the machine, everything appears to be
> working nicely, so I tried to do the first "air cut" with a real program. It
> actually went pretty well, up to a point...
> >
> > The first profile went fine, but it gags on the second one, When it hits
> the G02 flagged in the below code, it complains about "Radius to start of
> arc is different from radius to end of arc", or whatever that error message
> is. Funny thing is, this code runs fine under simulation in SheetCAM, and in
> CutViewer, and in Mach3. It had no problem doing the roughing cut on the
> same profile, which was also all arc moves.
> >
> > What is wrong with that line?
> >
> > G00 Z1.5000
> > G00 X0.0000 Y0.0000
> > (1/4 HSS, uncoated, 2-Flute, Aluminum Cutter, 3.0XFinishing [40] ; Putnam
> #93950; SPEEDS=H:4:84)
> > (TOOL/MILL,0.2500, 0.0000, 0.6250)
> > (COLOR,255,255,255)
> > G00 Z1.5000
> > G00 X1.7020 Y-1.9101
> > S7640 (Spindle 7640 RPM)
> > G04 P3.0000 (Wait For Spindle #1)
> > M07 (Mist Coolant On)
> > G00 Z-0.1928
> > G01 Z-0.2125 F12.84 S7640
> > G03 X1.7453 Y-1.8970 I0.0151 J0.0282 F25.67
> > ==> G02 X2.8903 Y-1.0045 I1.5797 J-0.8460
> > G03 X2.9677 Y-0.9604 I-0.0400 J0.1601
> >
> > Regards,
> > Ray L.
> >
> |
|
| Group: DynoMotion |
Message: 3044 |
From: Tom Kerekes |
Date: 1/10/2012 |
| Subject: Re: KMotion Doesn't Like My G-Code.... |
I don't know. I did as the G3->G2 Here is may math.
TK
Start 1.7453 -1.897 I J 1.5797 -0.846 IJ Dist 1.791973239
End 2.8903 -1.0045 center 3.325 -2.743 To End Dist 1.792022974
difference 4.9735E-05
To End -0.4347 1.7385
| Group: DynoMotion |
Message: 3045 |
From: himykabibble |
Date: 1/10/2012 |
| Subject: Re: KMotion Doesn't Like My G-Code.... |
Guys,
I'm afraid this was a wild goose chase, caused by a bad sector in the FLASH drive. When I examined the file on the machine, it was not right - the end was missing, and some other code put in its place. I went back in the house, checked the original file on my laptop, and ir was fine. I re-copied it to the FLASH drive, then opened it on the FLASH drive, and it was fine. But if I unplugged, then re-plugged the FLASH drive, the file was again corrupted! I copied it to another location on the FLASH drive, and it was fine. So I flagged the corrupted file as bad. With the un-corrupted file, the program ran fine. Five times, in fact!
This was the very first time I've actually cut metal with KFlop, and with the exception of this little detour, it went quite smoothly. I had to spend a few hours working through a few bugs in the hundreds of lines of C code I wrote, but all is working now. I just have a few minor additions to make, and I have to figure out how to mount the KFlop and adaptor boards in my E-Box, but that's all minor stuff.
I also have almost everything working with KFlop under Mach3.
The differences between life with KFlop and life with Mach3+SmoothStepper are interesting. In particular, I find the sound of the machine surprisingly different, and the "feel" of jogging is radically different, perhaps not surprisingly, since I must use the Mach3 jogging code with Mach3/SmoothStepper, but wrote my own for KFlop. I am really pleased with the way my variable rate jogging code works - it gives me a degree of control I never had with Mach3/Smoothstepper - very precise control at the bottom end, and full rapids at the top end. And it's very easy to modulate. Overall, jogging seems smoother.
Another nicety was being able to "correct" the PWM response. For whatever reason (something in the hardware), PWM duty cycle does not map quite linearly to VFD frequency. But, with KFlop, it was trivial to correct for this, so my VFD frequencies are now dead-on at any speed.
KFlop will also allow me to do something I've been wanting to do ever since I switched to flood coolant - I want to use my old mister to do timed air-blasts, to clear chips from the cutter when doing deep slotting and pocketing. The flood just doesn't have enough cojones to blow the really big, heavy chips from roughing out of deep slots and pockets. So, I will setup a program that will, whenever Mist is enabled, blow the mister for perhaps one second every 10 seconds. That should do the trick nicely. I was planning to use an external micro to do this previously. And, I should also be able to use the DSP to control my new stepper-controlled power drawbar, to tighten/loosen the drawbar so I can either loosen one turn for Tormach toolholders, or completely unscrew the drawbar for R8 toolholders.
Can't wait to get my CNC Controller app to the point I can use it for real work!
Regards,
Ray L.
--- In DynoMotion@yahoogroups.com, Tom Kerekes <tk@...> wrote:
>
> I don't know. I did as the G3->G2  Here is may math.
> Â
> TK
>  Start     1.7453  -1.897   I J           1.5797  -0.846                   IJ Dist   1.791973239
> End       2.8903  -1.0045center  3.325    -2.743                   To End Dist         1.792022974
>                                                                                                                difference          4.9735E-05
>                                                To End -0.43471.7385                 Â
> Â
>
> From: Brad Murry <bradodarb@...>
> To: DynoMotion@yahoogroups.com
> Sent: Tuesday, January 10, 2012 11:57 AM
> Subject: RE: [DynoMotion] Re: KMotion Doesn't Like My G-Code....
>
>
> Â
> Hello Tom,
> Â
> More of an exercise really, but I came up with a difference of 0.0025 between starting and end radii. How did you arrive at ~ 0.00005?
> Â
> -Brad Murry
> Â
> From:DynoMotion@yahoogroups.com [mailto:DynoMotion@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Tom Kerekes
> Sent: Tuesday, January 10, 2012 12:34 PM
> To: DynoMotion@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: Re: [DynoMotion] Re: KMotion Doesn't Like My G-Code....
> Â
> Â
> Hi Ray,
> Â
> I agree it sounds like a bug. But I can't get it to cause an error in either normal or simulation. I assume this is an Inch job?
> Â
> Maybe some huge offset causes some numerical problem? Please send us as much info as you can. Screen Shot of your TP settings (although that really shouldn't matter if it is complaining about the raw GCode). Also any offsets (or maybe just try with no offsets to simplify diagnosis).
> Â
> GCode seems ok I calculate only ~50ui of error and the error message threshold is 500ui in Inches or 5um in metric.
> Â
> Thanks
> TK
> Â
> From:himykabibble <jagboy@...>
> To: DynoMotion@yahoogroups.com
> Sent: Tuesday, January 10, 2012 11:08 AM
> Subject: [DynoMotion] Re: KMotion Doesn't Like My G-Code....
> Â
> Brad,
>
> But what param? I have them at the defaults, and it's not clear to me any of them would affect this code anyway. I assume it's some tolerance issue or something, but the numbers in the code look right to me, so I don't understand what it's unhappy with. And, if the code is wrong, or planner settings are wrong,why doesn't the error get flagged in simulation?
>
> Regards,
> Ray L.
>
> --- In DynoMotion@yahoogroups.com, Brad Murry <bradodarb@> wrote:
> >
> > I think you are not setting your TP params correctly..?
> >
> >
> >
> > From: DynoMotion@yahoogroups.com [mailto:DynoMotion@yahoogroups.com] On
> > Behalf Of himykabibble
> > Sent: Tuesday, January 10, 2012 11:53 AM
> > To: DynoMotion@yahoogroups.com
> > Subject: [DynoMotion] Re: KMotion Doesn't Like My G-Code....
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > When I run in simulate mode in KMotion CNC, I get no error....
> >
> > Regards,
> > Ray L.
> >
> > --- In DynoMotion@yahoogroups.com <mailto:DynoMotion%40yahoogroups.com> ,
> > "himykabibble" <jagboy@> wrote:
> > >
> > > Today I finally got the KFlop on the machine, everything appears to be
> > working nicely, so I tried to do the first "air cut" with a real program. It
> > actually went pretty well, up to a point...
> > >
> > > The first profile went fine, but it gags on the second one, When it hits
> > the G02 flagged in the below code, it complains about "Radius to start of
> > arc is different from radius to end of arc", or whatever that error message
> > is. Funny thing is, this code runs fine under simulation in SheetCAM, and in
> > CutViewer, and in Mach3. It had no problem doing the roughing cut on the
> > same profile, which was also all arc moves.
> > >
> > > What is wrong with that line?
> > >
> > > G00 Z1.5000
> > > G00 X0.0000 Y0.0000
> > > (1/4 HSS, uncoated, 2-Flute, Aluminum Cutter, 3.0XFinishing [40] ; Putnam
> > #93950; SPEEDS=H:4:84)
> > > (TOOL/MILL,0.2500, 0.0000, 0.6250)
> > > (COLOR,255,255,255)
> > > G00 Z1.5000
> > > G00 X1.7020 Y-1.9101
> > > S7640 (Spindle 7640 RPM)
> > > G04 P3.0000 (Wait For Spindle #1)
> > > M07 (Mist Coolant On)
> > > G00 Z-0.1928
> > > G01 Z-0.2125 F12.84 S7640
> > > G03 X1.7453 Y-1.8970 I0.0151 J0.0282 F25.67
> > > ==> G02 X2.8903 Y-1.0045 I1.5797 J-0.8460
> > > G03 X2.9677 Y-0.9604 I-0.0400 J0.1601
> > >
> > > Regards,
> > > Ray L.
> > >
> >
> Â
> |
|
| | | |
