Back
[19:28:07] <ChanServ> [#emc] "This is the #emc channel - talk related to the Enhanced Machine Controller and general machining. Website:
http://www.linuxcnc.org/, wiki at
http://wiki.linuxcnc.org/"
[19:29:18] <Jon_geo01005> Is there a way in the HAL to bundle several signals into a "Cable"
[19:31:16] <jepler> Jon_geo01005: no
[19:31:37] <Jon_geo01005> Ok, I just thought it might be handy :)
[19:34:03] <jepler> I agree, it's a frequent concept in schematic capture programs. I'm just not sure how to express it in HAL terms (for instance, what would the equivalent of 'halcmd net' be?). You can establish whatever naming convention you want for signals, and they are free to contain dots among other letters and then do things like 'show sig bundle.*' to see signals inside 'bundle'..
[19:34:06] <bbernd_> kann ich die Bezeichnungen die mir die Step konfigWizzard gibt wie both-home-x <= parport.0.pin-10-in nach both-home-x <= m5i20.0.in-10 nutzen ?
[19:34:06] <alex_joni> usually that's called a "bus"
[19:34:38] <jepler> alex_joni: ah yes that is the usual term isn't it
[19:34:42] <alex_joni> bbernd_: im Prinzip ja, aber du musst den rest mitnehmen
[19:34:58] <alex_joni> I hope the german is not an issue.. or we'll grab another channel ;)
[19:35:30] <alex_joni> Jon_geo01005: a "bus" is usually usefull when you connect 8 (or some bigger number) of similar items
[19:35:37] <alex_joni> like a data or address bus
[19:35:47] <alex_joni> I'm not sure what such a bus would be for emc2/HAL
[19:35:59] <bbernd_> Ja aber so komme ich einfach hinter die Bezeichnungen die vo EMC gebraucht werden
[19:36:23] <alex_joni> the only part I can think of to bind things together might be between halui and a vcp (like the limits of all 9 joints, etc)
[19:36:50] <alex_joni> bbernd_: both-home-x ist nur ein Name der von stepconf gewaehlt wurde, der koennte gleichgut auch "otto" heissen ;)
[19:37:34] <alex_joni> was wichtig ist ist das dieses Signal an zwei axis.*.home-switch geht
[19:38:52] <Jon_geo01005> I was just wanting to bundle three u32 signals, and a Bit together to connect some pins from the HM2 driver to SPI device drivers.
[19:38:53] <bbernd_> OK der EMC2 Name ist dann vorgegeben (linksp Zminlim) mit Ihm muss über einen Hilfsnamen (Übersichtlichkeit) verbunden werden.
[19:40:01] <Jon_geo01005> Not a big deal it is not available, just would reduce the number of lines in the HAL file and make it is little less confusing.
[19:41:03] <jepler> Jon_geo01005: no, it sure doesn't exist now
[19:45:04] <bbernd_> Woran macht der hostmod2 treiber denn die stepperpins fest
[19:55:13] <alex_joni> bbernd_: das liegt an der BIT file
[19:55:22] <alex_joni> die sagt aus wo was ausgegeben wird
[19:55:53] <alex_joni> (sollte in demselben Verzeichnis wie die BIT file sein)
[19:56:01] <alex_joni> ich meinte grade .PIN datei
[19:57:17] <alex_joni> bbernd_:
http://cvs.linuxcnc.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/emc2/src/hal/drivers/mesa-hostmot2/firmware/5i20/SVST8_4.PIN?rev=1.1.2.1;only_with_tag=RELEASE_2_2_8
[19:57:50] <bbernd_> Kann ich das darin einstellen
[19:59:13] <bbernd_> Also kommen alle Schrittmotoren an P4
[20:01:45] <bbernd_> werden diese durch <=m5i20.0.10-out überschrieben
[20:09:58] <alex_joni> einstellen kann man es nicht, da wird beschrieben wo was angebracht ist
[20:10:20] <alex_joni> ein pin ist entweder als I/O oder spezielle funktion (encoderzaehler, stepgen, usw) ausgelegt
[20:15:02] <bbernd_> also habe ich kaum freis I/o s
[20:16:28] <JymmmEMC> Just FYI... AAA not only gives jump starts, but they sell & install batteries on site and warranties them for 72 months. They'll even replace a battery at 3am.
[20:16:44] <JymmmEMC> 36 exchange, balance pro-rated.
[20:17:02] <JymmmEMC> Warranty good in US/Canada/Mexico
[20:19:09] <JymmmEMC> Cost for 2001 Ford Expedition 2WD 4.6L = $137 USD out the door. And they have this really neat tester now. It checks everything =)
[20:20:59] <alex_joni> bbernd_: wieviele stepgen's brauchst du ?
[20:23:28] <gkamysz> Sorry, I stepped away for lunch. I see while at lunch I was thinking that is probably doesn't matter how many channels are steppting as they all step at the same time.
[20:23:38] <gkamysz> It's clear now
[20:25:45] <bbernd_> alex Vielen Dank Ich komme erst mal weiter
[20:35:34] <gkamysz> Thank you for the help today.
[20:46:24] <JymmmEMC> This isn't a bad deal... Never seen a 40ft one, much less 12/3
http://www.harborfreight.com/cpi/ctaf/displayitem.taf?Itemnumber=91470
[20:47:46] <JymmmEMC> 4' 7" plug-in cord length
[20:48:32] <JymmmEMC> WTH?! Lead cord is 14ga, Cord is 12/3
[20:48:39] <JymmmEMC> err 12ga
[20:49:01] <alex_joni> maybe it was shorter, and they streched it
[20:49:14] <JymmmEMC> heh, but still.
[20:50:05] <JymmmEMC> 40' reel still isn't bad. at least it isn't the other way around.
[20:50:24] <JymmmEMC> all I ever see is 25' which is just never long enough
[20:50:28] <alex_joni> we have 100-150m cords here
[20:50:33] <JymmmEMC> reels?
[20:51:15] <JymmmEMC> alex_joni: you have 100m reeled?
[20:52:10] <alex_joni> JymmmEMC: this type
http://www.bizoo.ro/img/Prelungitor-Cu-Derulor-Ceramic-Cu-Contact-De-Protectie/img100/sale/6142_1171554635.gif
[20:52:39] <JymmmEMC> I have 25, 100 and 300 ft extension cords, but not reeled auto wind ready-to-go
[20:52:55] <JymmmEMC> I've seen those, kinda a pain.
[20:54:23] <JymmmEMC> This would be so convienant. pull out the shopvac and not have to hassle with un/winding ext cord when done
[21:02:12] <alex_joni> JymmmEMC:
http://www.acefixings.com/filestore/images/product/Cable_Reel_110V.jpg
[21:02:52] <JymmmEMC> I'm lazy and want it to wind up on it's own =)
[21:03:48] <alex_joni> well.. good luck on a 50m one ;)
[21:04:52] <JymmmEMC> No 40' is fine. I have a 300' It's the convienance of it ready-to-go that I like.
[21:05:29] <JymmmEMC> that'll get me outside the garage and into the driveway
[22:49:49] <JymmmEMC> Dont know if anyone cares, but... good thru tomorrow (I believe)
http://newspaperads.mercurynews.com/ROP/ads.aspx?advid=32664&adid=7563293&subid=25237702&type=
[23:02:34] <dareposte> hi all
[23:03:34] <dareposte> anybody familiar with G96 on emc2 (constant surface speed)? I am seeing opposite behavior from what I expected... its slowing down the spindle as the diameter gets smaller??
[23:04:06] <dareposte> the normal RPM speed changes work as expected but not the css for some reason
[23:05:25] <dareposte> I'm using: G96 S61
[23:05:38] <dareposte> hoping for 61 m/min surface cutting speed
[23:06:04] <dareposte> then g0 x0 should (i thought) run my spindle up to max speed of about 2500 rpm, but in fact it slows it down to minimum speed
[23:06:22] <dareposte> oh
[23:06:26] <dareposte> dang I think i found it
[23:07:21] <dareposte> tool offsets maybe?
[23:07:34] <toastatwork> you must have an accurate tool offset for css to work
[23:07:48] <dareposte> If I go out to g0x80 then it speeds up and slows back down\
[23:07:49] <toastatwork> i.e. when you type x0, the tool must actually reach x0 and not some other number
[23:07:56] <dareposte> yeah it does in fact
[23:08:02] <toastatwork> then that's not it
[23:08:22] <dareposte> m43 h7, is my parting tool and when it gets to x0 then the piece is parted
[23:08:24] <dareposte> just parted one with it
[23:08:53] <dareposte> going from x0 to x50 it goes from very slow, to highest speed, and then slows back down to mid speed again
[23:08:58] <toastatwork> i'm not sure why it would slow down.
[23:09:19] <toastatwork> i don't use emc, so you'll unfortunately have to wait until one of the crazy guru folks show up
[23:10:20] <dareposte> okay thanks though
[23:10:34] <dareposte> i think you are on the right track, maybe some problem with my tool offsets
[23:12:42] <dareposte> if i go to x-20 then it goes even slower..
[23:13:28] <toastatwork> you don't have any numbers in the g54 x offset, do you?
[23:13:40] <dareposte> hmm don't think so
[23:13:51] <dareposte> it might be from homing? my limit switch is not actually where i said it was
[23:14:20] <dareposte> i wonder if that changes the g54 offset
[23:14:33] <dareposte> but i'm not really sure how to check honestly
[23:14:35] <toastatwork> g92?
[23:14:58] <dareposte> "all axes missing with G92" popped up
[23:15:06] <toastatwork> no, i meant have you used g92
[23:15:17] <dareposte> oh
[23:15:20] <dareposte> no i don't believe I have
[23:15:30] <toastatwork> how did you get your x0 on machine startup?
[23:15:34] <toastatwork> limit switch?
[23:17:02] <toastatwork> because i bet if you note where the machine hits top speed then starts slowing down again
[23:17:03] <rob> u solved your CCS problem? have you set the machines co-ordunts into the middle of the spindle on X axis?
[23:17:20] <rob> coordanents
[23:17:30] <dareposte> i believe that i have not?
[23:17:34] <cradek> rob is right
[23:17:42] <dareposte> the set up is,,, i'm using a homing limit switch on X
[23:17:58] <cradek> G0 G53 X0 has to put your reference tool (the one with zero tool length) at the center of rotation
[23:18:05] <dareposte> so i turn it on, home x, manually home z at 300mm from spindle, then start cutting
[23:18:17] <dareposte> ahhh
[23:18:24] <cradek> then do not put any G54 offset on X
[23:18:29] <dareposte> okay so i have to ask an ignorant question then
[23:18:36] <cradek> use ONLY tool length offset for X on your tools
[23:18:46] <dareposte> i just set my tool file up so the tools would all cut on center after it homed
[23:18:47] <rob> lol, dw iv been there done that hehe ;)
[23:18:51] <dareposte> i did not use any sort of a reference tool
[23:19:08] <dareposte> just plopped tool 1 in, took a test cut on a piece of scrap, measured, and set the offset in the tool file
[23:19:17] <dareposte> apparently that is not the optimal way to do this
[23:19:25] <toastatwork> no, that's the right way to set x
[23:19:32] <toastatwork> what they're saying is your machine thinks the spindle is somewhere it isn't
[23:19:36] <cradek> when you program G49, G0 G53 X0, that has to be the center of rotation
[23:19:37] <dareposte> yeah it seems that way
[23:19:52] <cradek> exactly what toastatwork says
[23:20:10] <cradek> EMC doesn't know where your spindle is - EMC thinks spindles are at X0 (a very reasonable thing to think)
[23:20:17] <dareposte> hm
[23:20:24] <cradek> I think yours might be at +300 or -300 from what you're saying
[23:20:25] <dareposte> so when i program g43 h1, it knows the tool is at 0
[23:21:09] <cradek> yes, g43 h1 sets an offset to bring tool 1's tip to the spindle center at X0
[23:21:22] <dareposte> hm
[23:21:41] <dareposte> i understand my problem (I think), but i'm not sure how to correct it
[23:21:55] <dareposte> g49 starts the spindle for some reason (??)
[23:22:06] <cradek> what version?
[23:22:13] <dareposte> 2.3 head
[23:22:30] <cradek> how old a head? that's a very old bug, fixed long ago, I hope it's not back
[23:22:36] <dareposte> its an old head
[23:22:38] <dareposte> a few months old
[23:22:42] <cradek> update update update
[23:22:52] <cradek> that's a dangerous bug
[23:22:55] <dareposte> yeah it is
[23:23:12] <dareposte> i will update tonight
[23:23:22] <dareposte> so G49 turns off the tool offsets
[23:23:31] <cradek> yes
[23:23:32] <dareposte> G0 G53 X0
[23:23:35] <dareposte> does... what
[23:23:51] <cradek> moves X to absolute zero
[23:23:55] <dareposte> i mean i know what the codes do, but why does that help
[23:24:02] <cradek> should be the same as G0, because you should not have a G54 X offset
[23:24:05] <dareposte> and what is it using to reference x
[23:24:22] <cradek> your homing settings are the only thing that says where absolute zero is
[23:24:37] <dareposte> okay so my homing switch is maybe the root of the problem then
[23:24:46] <cradek> HOME_OFFSET is the absolute position of your home switch
[23:24:52] <dareposte> okay
[23:25:17] <cradek> yes you need to adjust your homing so X0 brings "something" to the spindle centerline
[23:25:25] <cradek> then you measure your tool offsets from that "something"
[23:25:48] <dareposte> so that's what i did, excpet i used "nothing" for "something"
[23:25:54] <cradek> for me that's the center of the turret
[23:26:14] <cradek> well wherever it is, that's where you measure tool lengths from
[23:26:39] <dareposte> and using "nothing", i then set tool offsets to get each tool to cut a test piece to the appropriate size
[23:27:03] <cradek> seems like that would work. You don't have G92 or G54 X offset do you?
[23:27:24] <dareposte> no i do not have any offsets set (intentionally... )
[23:27:26] <cradek> program G92.1, G10 L2 P1 X0
[23:28:04] <dareposte> okay i did that
[23:28:06] <cradek> did X change?
[23:28:11] <dareposte> no motion
[23:28:19] <cradek> right, it just clears the offsets
[23:28:21] <dareposte> a few of the active g-codes changed
[23:28:26] <cradek> I meant X on the screen
[23:28:29] <dareposte> oh
[23:28:30] <toastatwork> dareposte re-do g0 g53 x0
[23:28:47] <toastatwork> or don't, because that doesn't make any sense
[23:28:48] <cradek> oh hey, you know X is radius, right??
[23:28:55] <dareposte> yeah i know
[23:29:00] <cradek> ok just checking
[23:29:05] <cradek> I bet that would foul it all up
[23:29:07] <dareposte> oh
[23:29:21] <dareposte> wait maybe that's it
[23:29:23] <cradek> (recent trunk has radius and diameter modes now)
[23:29:35] <dareposte> my trunk does not have diameter mode... i tried it
[23:29:43] <cradek> update update :-)
[23:29:59] <dareposte> well my tools cut to x=0 when i tell them g0 x0
[23:30:07] <cradek> if you set X to be a measured diameter, your origin will surely be wrong
[23:30:17] <cradek> oh, ok, that's the important test
[23:30:32] <dareposte> so i think that means that the tool offsets are right, correct?
[23:30:37] <cradek> did you try g0 x0 after clearing g92.1, g10l2p1x0 ?
[23:31:55] <dareposte> yeah
[23:31:56] <dareposte> i did
[23:32:09] <dareposte> now the tool is nowhere near the centerline, but it does actually go to top speed at x0
[23:32:16] <cradek> ok
[23:32:20] <dareposte> i am going to re-home it and test again
[23:32:22] <cradek> you had an offset in X that you didn't want
[23:32:37] <cradek> you will have to remeasure your TLOs
[23:33:27] <dareposte> damn
[23:33:36] <dareposte> pardon me
[23:34:05] <dareposte> i gotta read up more on these coordinate systems i guess
[23:34:27] <cradek> the rule is don't ever offset X except with tool lengths
[23:34:42] <dareposte> so you think a g92 was somehow offset?
[23:34:43] <cradek> other than that gotcha, you're fine
[23:34:50] <cradek> one or the other was, yes
[23:34:59] <dareposte> g92 or which other
[23:35:03] <cradek> g54
[23:35:30] <cradek> (I bet you can add the same number to all your lengths to fix them)
[23:35:37] <dareposte> yeah i was just wondering that actually
[23:35:42] <cradek> whatever the offset was...
[23:35:52] <dareposte> i bet those offsets stay after you power down don't they
[23:36:01] <cradek> yes
[23:36:04] <dareposte> because i can remember a long long time ago making an offset to see what happened
[23:36:08] <dareposte> and maybe didn't get it cleared right
[23:36:30] <dareposte> so g54 is like a work offset right, for a mill
[23:36:34] <cradek> yes
[23:36:42] <dareposte> if you have a row of 3 blanks and want to run the same program for each
[23:36:43] <cradek> you can use it for the end of material, etc
[23:36:48] <cradek> yes
[23:36:55] <dareposte> okay then g92 is for. ..?
[23:37:04] <cradek> g92 moves ALL the work offsets
[23:37:08] <dareposte> ahh
[23:37:12] <dareposte> like a fixture offset?
[23:37:14] <cradek> don't use g92, just use g54
[23:37:22] <cradek> g54, g55, g56, ... are fixture offsets
[23:37:32] <dareposte> okay
[23:37:32] <cradek> g92 moves all those fixture offsets
[23:37:46] <dareposte> like for a pallet swap maybe? or what would be a real-life usage of it
[23:38:04] <cradek> there isn't one that I've run into :-)
[23:38:07] <dareposte> okay
[23:38:18] <dareposte> someone took the time to program it for a reason i assume..
[23:38:24] <dareposte> i can read up on it i guess
[23:38:28] <dareposte> you have been very generous with your help
[23:38:30] <cradek> the mists of time obscure the reason for it...
[23:38:31] <dareposte> and toastatwork too
[23:38:48] <dareposte> and i just crashed it
[23:38:53] <cradek> uh-oh
[23:38:59] <dareposte> time for a new parting tool it looks like
[23:39:04] <dareposte> do'h
[23:39:09] <cradek> was probably dull anyway
[23:39:12] <dareposte> yeah it was
[23:39:17] <cradek> ha
[23:39:24] <dareposte> i'd been parting stainless with it
[23:39:30] <rob> G92 if you do a lot of fixure/vises you can just program to add a value to G54, run a subprogram, saves on lots of G54 g55, as u cant run out when using G92, but you must set it back to zero when done
[23:39:46] <cradek> true
[23:40:00] <cradek> say you have 4 parts in 4 vises, you cut the left "feature" on all 4 of them
[23:40:03] <dareposte> oh i see... so if you had two vices holding a fixture of 4 parts each
[23:40:09] <cradek> then g92 to move to the "right" feature on all of them
[23:40:18] <dareposte> okay i see that does make sense then
[23:40:33] <cradek> I don't do setups like that, but someone probably does...
[23:40:54] <dareposte> i find if i can understand the reasoning for a feature, it sticks a little better in my head
[23:40:56] <dareposte> so that should help
[23:40:59] <rob> some times i put two blocks in 1 vice, one on left side one on right side, i will then sub my program up, say mill a feature in right hand block, then using G54 still, do a G92 X50 Y0 and it will add 50mm to G54 offset and call my sub
[23:41:34] <dareposte> very cool
[23:41:35] <rob> but i use G52, as if u reset machine, or do something else etc, it is auto cancled for you and resets G54 back to true X Y Z
[23:41:55] <cradek> yep, sounds like the same idea, different gcode
[23:42:16] <dareposte> cradek would recommend using the G56 for that I think?
[23:42:19] <rob> yea, i did make a wiki page cradek other day, so ill add up info on G52 so you can look into it
[23:42:47] <rob> also i did find the spare fanuc book so have to sort out getting it to you
[23:42:49] <dareposte> or rather the G54-G56
[23:43:17] <cradek> dareposte: more than one way to feed a cat
[23:43:36] <rob> yes, G54-G56 works just as well ;) and 1 code to call, but if u have 4 vises thats 4 G5x offsets used ;), if u had two parts in them 4 vise, well u can see
[23:44:02] <cradek> I think we have 9 of them...
[23:44:13] <cradek> but yeah you'd eventually run out
[23:44:19] <cradek> you can g92 forever
[23:44:31] <rob> then if u had a tomb stone, with 4 sides, and i dunno how many bits lol
[23:44:57] <rob> its only realy usefull in production id say when doing alot of parts
[23:45:25] <dareposte> i see
[23:46:01] <dareposte> fortunately (unfortunately??) my mill barely holds one vise, and it's not cnc'd yet
[23:46:21] <dareposte> i am totally stoked that the css appears to be working now though!
[23:46:50] <dareposte> it made for some weird surface finish slowing down as it faced the bar
[23:47:22] <cradek> yeah, speeding up at the center is probably better :-)
[23:49:08] <cradek> if your trunk is old, be careful with CSS + M4. another bug is lurking there.
[23:49:36] <cradek> also fixed now of course
[23:51:01] <dareposte> okay
[23:51:01] <rob> can you display current/active gcodes into a pyvcp
[23:51:17] <dareposte> axis has a little window with them in it
[23:51:29] <rob> mdi
[23:51:32] <cradek> rob: I don't think so
[23:51:55] <cradek> the main problem is they're not too useful becuase they are set as the interpreter reads ahead, as it does while running a program
[23:52:06] <cradek> in mdi they're useful, because they're always current
[23:52:48] <dareposte> cradek: what version of head would you recommend? latest?
[23:53:00] <cradek> definitely
[23:53:06] <cradek> it will soon be EMC2.3
[23:53:29] <jepler> latest CVS TRUNK is very stable, and we hope to publish "emc 2.3 beta1" packages within the next week or two.
[23:53:34] <cradek> more smart people using it and reporting any remaining problems is a good thing
[23:53:49] <jepler> several of the developers have been using it exclusively for their own machines (not me, but only because I haven't touched my machine in 3 weeks :( )
[23:54:06] <cradek> 2.3 will be the best EMC ever, like all our releases!
[23:54:27] <rob> id use it on my mill but its still in bits lol
[23:54:30] <jepler> bbl
[23:56:02] <dareposte> great! i will get it as soon as i find an ethernet cable long enough to reach my router
[23:56:55] <cradek> bbl, me too
