EMC: 03rayh 07TRUNK * 10emc2/docs/src/common/Glossary.lyx: Chapter headings to ease appendex setups.
EMC: 03rayh 07TRUNK * 10emc2/docs/src/Master_User.lyx: Fix appendex a bit in TOC.
EMC: 03rayh 07TRUNK * 10emc2/docs/src/Master_Integrator.lyx: Fix appendex a bit in TOC.
rayh: thanks for your work on the docs
Glad that I found that bit of stuff.
Hope that I didn't break any of the html.
BTW I notice that make clean does not remove any of the man docs. Should it?
I'll see if I can fix that. I did something in that makefile a while back.
there is a "docclean" target in docs/src/Submakefile, and when docs are enabled that should be executed when clean is
clean: docclean pythonclean
if it's not working I'm not sure why
if you don't get it, remind me and I'll have a look -- I'm distracted by other stuff at the moment
catch you later.
jepler: other stuff = acme leadscrews?
jmkasunich: not yet -- I have the screw but not the new nuts
two different sources?
yeah. screws from mcmaster, nuts from dumpstercnc
though you're right that I was playing with the machine
I've been looking at PCB mills on youtube and getting ideas
like I need another project
what does the zenbot use for ways?
for each axis it has two 1/2 inch aluminum tubes or rods, and the plastic rides directly on that. http://axis.unpy.net/files/01188441458/img_7050.jpg
anyway, my machine had started stalling, particularly during the last step of homing. I scratched my head about that, then decided to just increase the driver current (I had it at 50% of rated for a long time, and increased it to 70%). Then I started playing to see how much higher that let me set the velocity
.. and I ended up getting an 80% speed increase, from 1.0 in/sec to 1.8in/sec, to my great surprise
those rods are aluminum? they don't look it
and I'd think aluminum would suck for that, unless anodized or hardcoated
I guess I'm not sure what metal they are
is it supposed to run dry (no oil)?
hm .. this old e-mail from the seller suggested using "a light oil like tri-flow or even wd-40" on them if I thought it was rough -- at certain speeds there is a "honk" sound, which I think comes from the motion between the rails and plastic
I tried WD-40 and a silicone spray lubricant but it didn't seem to make a difference
dip it in Vactra #2 ;-)
remind me to give you some
I already have a gallon
[02:31:03] <jmkasunich> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-gzjw0svMA8&feature=related
Lerman_ is now known as Lerman
Lerman_ is now known as Lerman
while studing changing soft limits in runtime, I saw that It will be very effective to have different soft limit to program and jog
while there is different tp to program and jog this is possible
EMC: 03bigjohnt 07TRUNK * 10emc2/docs/src/gui/ (axis.lyx tkemc.lyx): fix broken reference
BigJohnT: you didn't mail me :)
no but I did create an account on the emc page
bbl time for work
SWPadnos, Got your coffee yet?
if I'm not around.. would you guys let BigJohnT know, that I updated his account to "Publisher"
and let him read http://www.scribd.com/doc/2300190/Joomla-v-1-5-Webmaster-and-Publisher-Tutorial
how's it going ray?
micges: I don't immediately understand the value of that. Do you want to jog to locations that it's not OK for the program to go? or the reverse?
jepler: I mean program have larger area that jog has
micges: can you tell me why that's desirable?
1: machine have definable "safe" area above the material (can't destroy tool)
2: when have table with specyfic areas (tool change area, anything else change area) all of that must be automatic without chance to jog into them
our current machine have this
we will do it ourself but it will be very cool that ability of make such of thing will be in future version of emc
if I recall correctly, the NML message is in 2.2. TRUNK only exposes it to Python. I still have no plans to create a user interface for it.
the use I had in mind was to modify the soft limits on a lathe to reflect the distance of the tailstock along "Z"
safe move area is cool thing in mill that have large speeds
rayh: what it is ?
So you don't run a tool into the chuck jaws.
yeah, something more sophisticated than "inside this box OK, outside not OK" would really be much more powerful
Yes it really would.
Chuck barriers can include the ability to run a drill or boring bar into the center as well as avoiding the jaws.
And they should include include tool length both in x and z.
But as micges understands, we've got a start at it.
as long as you don't define it as boxes :)
there always was an nml message to modify soft limits
I didn't do much, mostly allowed it to be sent from Python code
this is also usefull to limits around singularities of kins
this = this idea
in that case, one of you guys get to work
your assignment is due next friday
There you go. I could have a drawing of the theory by then ;)
keywords: octree, CSG
sounds like a plan
rayh does the drawing of the theory
ooh my nuts shipped last night
SWPadnos does the pseudocode
jepler (with his new nuts) can do bugfixing
nah, I'll just whine that whatever the user interface is, I don't like it
hmm.. I bought alibre 3d-cad, and it features a very nice Machinist Toolbox
if anyone needs some info regarding machining speeds, etc.. I suspect it's in here
i can't picture CSG describing singularities since they are 6d (they move around depending on rotation)
singularities are about the worst case
I'm still having a problem with TRUNK.
Anyone available to talk?
I would very happily use a negative Z limit based on the loaded tool. It wouldn't have to be any more complex than that.
Lerman: the limits error?
Lerman: you pastebinned the gcode, maybe we should take a look at your inifile too
Yup. I just ran a one line program (well, a few more) that failed. The debug msg: Issuing emc traj linear move displays the move that causes the error.
Are the coords in that message absolute (machine) or relative coords?
Well, then the problem is that the g54 offsets are not being applied.
What might cause that?
when you touch off, do the program preview and axes move?
I seem to remember something about the "var" file.
yes, offsets won't work if the var file isn't writable
They did (now they are set so they won't move again).
-rw-r--r-- 1 lerman lerman 1526 2008-09-05 09:31 univpwm.var
when you touch off, do the program preview and axes move?
They did move. I'll go try again with a different offset. I'll be back in a minute.
it might be useful to bring that config to a net connected computer and change the hal files so that it runs as sim..
since this particular problem seems like it would demonstrate perfectly well without the hardware around
Yes. Setting the touch off to 1.0 moved. As did setting it back to zero.
this is very puzzling because I *know* trunk works. I cut several things last night by moving G54 around.
so we don't have many clues about what makes your setup different. You have to get us those clues.
at least a tar of your entire config, preferably modified so it still loads without the ppmc hardware
Yup. What would be most useful.
we already have the gcode but it doesn't sound like that's even relevant
do you have a PPMC cage or a USC/UPC?
ok. I can hook up mine and test the complete config, if it comes to that
g1 f5.0 y1 x-.1
That is the simplest program that fails.
What should I see in the univpwm.var file? Everything is zero except for 5220 which is 1.000...
then there are no g54 offsets. they should be in there.
PARAMETER_FILE = emc.var
check this setting to see if it's using the var you think it is
they're only guaranteed to be there if you've exited from EMC with G54 active though, I think
err - with G54 offsets set anyway
that is incorrect
Which vars contain g54 offsets? It is using univpwm.var
ok that's more correct
If 5221... contains the G54 offsets then they are set to zero.
In the file I'm using.
That file does seem to get touched at least, so that means I'm using the correct univpwm.var (not one in another directory).
strange, I can't find that answer in the docs, even though I know it's there
[13:59:34] <SWPadnos> http://www.linuxcnc.org/docs/devel/html/common_machining_center.html#cap:Parameters-Used-by
well there you go.
Also page 59 of the user manual.
just found it myself :)
Lerman: can you tar up your entire config directory and get it to us?
AXIS running an arduino board
(for something - I haven't read the whole thread)
[14:04:06] <Lerman> http://www.se-ltd.com/~lerman/files/
-- see the file univpwm.tar
I don't see the problem :(
But do you see the solution? :-)
no, I mean it works for me
I copied core_sim.hal from configs/sim and modified the inifile like this: http://pastebin.ca/1194853
I put your 3-line program with %-signs in a gcode file
start emc, hit F1 F2 X HOME Y HOME Z HOME to home all axes
while at machine origin I touch off X -1 Y -1 Z 1
load program, hit run
no warnings from axis or emc, though because Z is not specified in the program the preview and the backplot don't match up
Well, I'm touching off by homing. Then jogging to where I want to be the origin. Then touching off zero.
what is touching off by homing?
explain what you do, please
Sorry. First I home. Then I jog to where I want zero to be. Then I touch off with the value zero in the screen.
oh, I see what you mean
jepler: the var file gets written for you, right after you do the touch off?
When done with that, X, Y, Z show as 0,0,0.
$ grep -v '0\.00000' univpwm.var
Lerman: check for that behavior on yours?
So, the values I'm giving are all zeros.
ok, that shouldn't matter, but jepler could try it that way too for grins
OK. I'll go touch off 1.0 1.0 1.0 and see what I get.
no hang on.
jepler did touch off -1,-1,-1, so he got +1 in the var file
if you jog to +1 and touch off 0, you'll also get +1
but I still suspect the var file is not being written
OK. I touched off in the same position with X of 0 and Y of 0. The .var file has been changed so that 5221 shows -1.000... and 5222 also shows -1.000...
Note that these values are negative. Also note that the table is about 18" from the X zero position.
Ooops correction above. I touched off with X of +1.0 and Y of +1.0.
so you home X, move to machine's X18, touch off X +1, and you get 5221 = -1?
So that I would think the 5221 (X) value that should be stored would be -18.0 (or possibly +18.0) depending on conventions.
yeah, or -17 or -19 or +17 or +19 or something like that
turn on task issue debug again, then when you do the touch off, you can see the MDI command that AXIS is sending
also the TRAJ_SET_ORIGIN nml message
see which is wrong
Issuing EMC_TASK_PLAN_EXECUTE -- (+509,+268, +59,G10\032L2\032P1\032x[0.907059996639-[1.000000*[0.0]]]\n,)
Issuing EMC_TRAJ_SET_ORIGIN -- (+224,+84, +0,0.907060,0.825733,-0.874133,0.000000,0.000000,0.000000,0.000000,0.000000,0.000000,)
Issuing EMC_TRAJ_LINEAR_MOVE -- (+220,+116, +0,0.807060,1.825733,-0.874133,0.000000,0.000000,0.000000,0.000000,0.000000,0.000000, +2,0.083333,1.500000,6.000000, +0,)
(this is using the X HOME Y HOME Z HOME jogjogjog X END 0 Y END 0 Z END 0 method)
when I move to machine 5 (g0g53x5) I get the touch-off mdi command x[5.000000000000-[1.000000*[0.0]]]
then Issuing EMC_TRAJ_SET_ORIGIN -- (+224,+84, +0,5.000000,0.000000,0.000000,0.000000,0.000000,0.000000,0.000000,0.000000,0.000000,)
wonder what is different over there.
OK. traj_set_origin ... -1.234 (I used +1.234)
task_plan_execute... G10 L2 P1[0.00 - [1.0000 * [1.234]]]
(with some interspersed \032's and some addition insignificant zero digits)
the first 0.00 should be the current axis position in machine coordinates
And clearly it is NOT.
but with jeff running your config it is...
I'm going back out to tell axis to display the current machine coords instead of relative coords to see what it says. Also, I'll try jogging in a negative cirection and see if that works.
I would say next that you're not running the same code, but this hasn't changed for moons and moons
Axis was displaying zero for the machine coordinates. But I was able to jog in a negative direction. (Does jogging obey soft limits?)
after homing, jogging obeys soft limits
Then I homed the X axis again. Jogged back about 15 inches. And everything seems fine for that axis.
is it a transcription error that your task_plan_execute line didn't have an axis letter after P1?
Well, the axis had been homed. Hold on BRB.
what did you mean "seems fine"? did it show correct machine coordinates after you homed again?
because a zero machine coordinate after jogging around does not sound right
Sorry about wasting your time. Apparently, I had NOT homed the axis. So, it took the position when I started the machine as zero, zero, zero.
Sorry, sorry, sorry. I owe you guys a slice of pie at the next fest. Maybe even a slice each. Or a whole pie.
I'm still recovering from the 7 pies you bought at the last one
That's how legends are created. Two pies becomes seven. We couldn't drink the tap water, so we drank...
cradek: yeah, I was thinking that for "lunch" we need to eat another bagel at 11:30, then head to stauffer's and order just pie and coffee
Lerman: was it only 7? I remember 9
jepler: is friday apple dumpling day?
cradek: it often is
I'm not sure it's as systematic as that
oh maybe I was a fool for looking for a pattern
on a lathe, you (I?) always want touch-off of X to change the tool table. I never want a g54 X offset
you mean you want a tool table editor?
or maybe not touch off, but editing the X offset in the tool table is something you do constantly
yes maybe that's what I mean
I'm not sure what I mean
I'm a "user story"
I should have a funny name
welcome to the club
heh - everyone here has a "funny name"
(except maybe Ray)
but I don't really want to edit the tool table, just like I don't want to edit a list of offsets. I know tool 3 cut the diameter 0.0014 oversize, so I need to make the tool [longer|shorter] by [.0014|.0007], which is tedious and easy to screw up
since it is currently 1.3426 and I can't do math
Some of the later controls on the Hardinge had two pages of overlapping offsets.
One the measured offset the other an offset from that offset.
rayh: is that what they call a tool wear offset?
That would be one way to name it.
so, in summary, someone should come up with a coherent design for what I want, and then implement it
EMC: 03cradek 07TRUNK * 10emc2/docs/html/gcode.html: make this more useful for canned cycles
EMC: 03cradek 07TRUNK * 10emc2/docs/html/gcode.html: g28.1, g30.1 are new in trunk
what are they do ?
set the reference points
seb_kuzminsky: aren't you somewhere in the denver/boulder area? I am going to be travelling to denver at the end of the month.
hi jeff, yep i'm in boulder, we should get together for a beer or something
yeah I was thinking something like that would be nice
what days are you free?
the driving days are the 25th and 28th (thursday and sunday), and I don't have specific plans for the other two days -- my girlfriend and I are just going to visit some friends in the area
i'm free that whole window, so whenever you've got time let's get together for a bit
you're going to be in denver? boulder's about 30-60 minutes north of there, depending on where in denver you are
yeah -- we'll have a car though
one set of friends is in a denver suburb, the other lives in the mountains 15 minutes outside of boulder
do you want to go for a hike in the foothills? there's some gorgeous spots just above boulder
or drinking's always fine by me too :-)
one followed by the other is even better
it depends how much time you have
I'll drive the beer cart :)
i'm always free in the evenings after about 8, and i can probably swing an afternoon + evening if we plan it out
ok -- I wanna get out of the office at the moment, we can set the details up later
if I had to guess, I'd say saturday for boulder, but there are too many things up in the air at the moment
saturday would be great, let's figure out the details via email
ok, talk to you later
BigJohnT: you'll drive the sagwagon? ;-)
if that means the beer cart yes :)
where do you live?
LOL, Poplar Bluff MO
better start driving :-)
I am but it is to the house and the easy chair :)
* BigJohnT looked up sagwagon :)
see you guys later