#emc | Logs for 2006-06-23

[09:30:56] <Lerneaen_Hydra> woo!
[09:31:01] <Lerneaen_Hydra> logger_aj: bookmark
[09:31:01] <Lerneaen_Hydra> See
[09:31:11] <giacus> hello
[09:31:31] <Lerneaen_Hydra> oh, it logs by itself, and doesn't use the linuxcnc.org listing
[09:31:41] <Lerneaen_Hydra> so who logs the linuxcnc.org logs?
[09:31:49] <alex_joni> what linuxcnc.org logs?
[09:32:19] <Lerneaen_Hydra> http://www.linuxcnc.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=4&Itemid=8&lang=en
[09:32:42] <Lerneaen_Hydra> there's a link to an archive of the #emc and #emc-devel logs
[09:32:54] <alex_joni> same place
[09:33:00] <Lerneaen_Hydra> however now that I look at them they seem to be at the same place
[09:33:09] <alex_joni> right ;)
[09:38:13] <giacus> did someone machined the tux model we found a week ago ?
[09:38:27] <alex_joni> nope
[09:38:56] <giacus> going to add an armature to it today
[09:39:13] <giacus> I want to see if is possible to change pose
[09:39:43] <giacus> maybe move the arms in a different position
[09:40:15] <giacus> a bit away from the body
[09:40:37] <Jymmm> G'Night Folks!
[09:41:54] <Lerneaen_Hydra> if someone sends me a mill I'll machine it ;)
[09:43:58] <giacus> Lerneaen_Hydra: $. 200 (maybe less) and you're ready to go
[09:45:36] <Lerneaen_Hydra> I can't imagine finding a reasonably good manual mill for under 1000$, what type of mill were you thinking about?
[09:45:51] <giacus> the mine
[09:46:42] <Lerneaen_Hydra> what?
[09:46:44] <giacus> no metal work, just on light wood
[09:46:56] <giacus> no 24/24 works ..
[09:47:00] <giacus> just test
[09:47:15] <giacus> no new motors, susplus stepper
[09:47:17] <Lerneaen_Hydra> 24/24? which mill are you talking about?
[09:47:24] <Lerneaen_Hydra> oen that you have?
[09:47:40] <giacus> the one I play for fun ..
[09:47:48] <Lerneaen_Hydra> oh, ok
[09:48:02] <Lerneaen_Hydra> what is 24/24?
[09:48:17] <giacus> no stop machining
[09:48:32] <Lerneaen_Hydra> oh, ok
[09:48:38] <Lerneaen_Hydra> without overheating and so on?
[09:48:57] <giacus> going not so fast too
[09:49:40] <giacus> http://www.giacus.org/photo/hobby/cnc/index.html
[09:50:21] <Lerneaen_Hydra> oh, a gantry style mill
[09:50:22] <giacus> however it can do some 'real job' as you see
[09:50:43] <Lerneaen_Hydra> yep, mainly wood and similar stuff?
[09:51:13] <giacus> http://digilander.libero.it/jackydgl0/photos/lab/img010.jpeg
[09:51:23] <Lerneaen_Hydra> nice!
[09:51:28] <giacus> yes
[09:51:39] <giacus> can't think to cut metal.. :D
[09:51:42] <Lerneaen_Hydra> how long time did each object take to machine?
[09:52:12] <giacus> 2-3 hours for a piece 20x20 cm
[09:52:18] <giacus> 3d relief
[09:52:21] <Lerneaen_Hydra> not that bad
[09:52:29] <Lerneaen_Hydra> what type of tool? pointy-taper?
[09:52:30] <giacus> it depend on how many passes
[09:52:43] <giacus> ballnose generally
[09:52:47] <Lerneaen_Hydra> oh, ok
[09:52:50] <Lerneaen_Hydra> size?
[09:52:54] <giacus> engraving is faster
[09:52:59] <Lerneaen_Hydra> indeed
[09:53:28] <giacus> 20x20x3 cm
[09:54:08] <giacus> the X axis can reach about 30 cm of travel
[09:54:08] <Lerneaen_Hydra> I was thinking the size of the endmill (ballnose radius)
[09:54:14] <Lerneaen_Hydra> not that bad
[09:55:14] <giacus> from 6 to 3 mm ballnose
[09:55:35] <giacus> first pass with 6 mm
[09:55:42] <Lerneaen_Hydra> and which cam app?
[09:55:50] <Lerneaen_Hydra> oh, toolchange midway through?
[09:55:56] <giacus> you can use what you want
[09:56:13] <giacus> in that case I used artcaz ..
[09:56:16] <Lerneaen_Hydra> which did you use?
[09:56:19] <Lerneaen_Hydra> oh, ok
[09:56:26] <giacus> cam*
[09:57:56] <giacus> if you instead can afford more, I'd look at some sherline machine
[09:59:20] <giacus> or such
[09:59:33] <giacus> they looks strongs and good
[10:00:30] <giacus> the mine looks like a poor printer hacked :D
[10:02:00] <Lerneaen_Hydra> haha
[10:02:07] <giacus> :)
[10:02:51] <Lerneaen_Hydra> I want to find a mill that is semi-small but prescise and can cut in steel (prefferably even stainless). preffereably a manual mill
[10:03:04] <giacus> yeah
[10:03:35] <fenn> good luck
[10:03:44] <fenn> small mills were never common
[10:03:54] <Lerneaen_Hydra> that's the trouble ;)
[10:05:02] <giacus> a friend of mine found a good scanner ..
[10:05:39] <giacus> for free
[10:05:42] <giacus> http://www.jofi.it/fiser/page50.html
[10:05:58] <giacus> if you find something like that, you're lucky ..
[10:06:15] <giacus> 70% of work is done
[10:06:56] <giacus> otherwise a commercial solution should be better I think
[10:07:04] <giacus> and cheap at the end
[10:07:57] <Lerneaen_Hydra> I don't really need it to be cnc to begin with, completely manual is fine. I've got plenty of time to cnc-ify it
[10:08:21] <giacus> he says the cost of that scanner was about $. 25k
[10:08:26] <giacus> in the website
[10:08:50] <giacus> wanna start manually ?
[10:08:53] <giacus> nah ..
[10:09:13] <giacus> * giacus do not agree
[10:10:02] <fenn> its easy enough to slap handles on an incomplete cnc mill, not as easy the other way around
[10:10:47] <Lerneaen_Hydra> I've got the parts lying around (steppers, IC's, hardware and so on) and I've got plenty of time
[10:11:02] <fenn> so get busy! ;P
[10:11:23] <Lerneaen_Hydra> I need a mill first...
[11:11:24] <Lerneaen_Hydra> goddagens
[12:06:51] <cradek> hi LH
[12:07:06] <cradek> could you help me with another lathe thing
[12:07:35] <cradek> on the tool shape diagram (1-9) could you mark which way is +x and +z?
[12:07:46] <Bo^Dick> Lerneaen_Hydra: tjena
[12:07:52] <cradek> I'm guessing +z is to the right, but I don't know about x
[12:08:01] <cradek> I don't want to get all the tool numbers wrong
[12:10:10] <jepler> cradek: have you broken axis yet, with your lathe branch changes?
[12:10:21] <cradek> nope
[12:10:41] <cradek> but last night I branched all of emc, which makes me nervous (and anxious to finish the changes)
[12:12:33] <cradek> so far I haven't seen where it will have to break anything
[12:25:52] <jepler> CANON_TOOL_TABLE GET_EXTERNAL_TOOL_TABLE(int tool) {
[12:25:52] <jepler> CANON_TOOL_TABLE t = {0,0,0};
[12:25:57] <jepler> ...
[12:26:03] <jepler> return t;
[12:26:04] <jepler> }
[12:26:10] <jepler> -- gcodemodule.cc
[12:28:12] <jepler> for axis to properly fill out the tool table for the embedded gcode interpreter, it will have to know about the new fields
[12:29:29] <jepler> (so we'll need to be able to write something like '#if CHECK_EMC_VERSION(2,1,0) ... #endif')
[13:29:46] <alex_joni> what's a wait in a runscript?
[13:29:58] <alex_joni> not like sleep, but indefinately long (till an enter)
[13:30:06] <cradek> read
[13:30:30] <alex_joni> yay, thanks ;)
[13:31:02] <alex_joni> is it possible to make a loop to check for a pid?
[13:31:05] <cradek> jepler: I also thought of that right after I said what I did
[13:32:11] <alex_joni> cradek: while [ ! -z $PIDOF foo ] ; done ?
[13:32:35] <cradek> yeah, that might work
[13:33:15] <cradek> while []; do :; done
[13:36:21] <alex_joni> yeah, the while works
[13:36:26] <alex_joni> only the condition is not quite right
[13:36:43] <alex_joni> cradek: while [ -n `$pidof foo`]; do
[13:37:53] <cradek> why not use the return value instead of the output
[13:38:06] <alex_joni> like.. ?
[13:38:34] <alex_joni> err.. mean how?
[13:38:39] <cradek> while ! pidof ls >/dev/null; do :; done
[13:39:14] <cradek> pidof should have a -q to suppress the output, but it doesn't
[13:40:29] <alex_joni> that seems to exit the loop imediately
[13:40:57] <cradek> works for me...
[13:41:03] <cradek> I even tested it
[13:41:18] <cradek> pidof in your path?
[13:41:27] <alex_joni> I'm usign $PIDOF
[13:41:34] <alex_joni> which is detected by configure
[13:41:46] <alex_joni> and `$PIDOF foo` does return the pid number
[13:42:02] <cradek> strange
[13:42:15] <cradek> you should probably put a short sleep in the loop
[13:42:18] <alex_joni> oh, duh
[13:42:23] <alex_joni> I don't want the !
[13:42:30] <alex_joni> lol.. sorry ;)
[14:33:48] <Lerneaen_Hydra> cradek: I'm here now
[14:34:37] <Lerneaen_Hydra> hmm, that's no easy thing to define
[14:34:48] <Lerneaen_Hydra> it depends on the lathe's layout
[14:37:06] <Lerneaen_Hydra> if the tool is "in front" of the workpiece, like most manual lathes, then tooltype 1,2,6 are for outer turning operations. for lathes that have the tools "behind" the workpeice, like most large cnc lathes, tooltypes 3,4,8 are for outer turning operations
[14:37:18] <Lerneaen_Hydra> so as it is now there is no real spec over that
[14:37:49] <Lerneaen_Hydra> and it depends on the lathe's layout
[14:38:22] <Lerneaen_Hydra> maybe another parameter in main_settings.ini? tool_position= front/behind or something similar?
[14:39:06] <cradek> argh! that's terrible!
[14:39:19] <Lerneaen_Hydra> becuase if you hardcode it like you first were talking about things would get confusing for tools behind the workpeice lathes, you would mentally have to rotate the lathe
[14:39:22] <Lerneaen_Hydra> yes, it is ;)
[14:39:34] <cradek> argh
[14:39:41] <Lerneaen_Hydra> in other words, do as you see fit ;)
[14:39:43] <cradek> thanks
[14:39:45] <cradek> ok I will
[14:39:49] <cradek> :-)
[14:40:01] <Lerneaen_Hydra> what are you going to code?
[14:40:08] <cradek> I have no idea
[14:40:11] <Lerneaen_Hydra> haha, o
[14:40:13] <Lerneaen_Hydra> *ok
[14:40:22] <cradek> maybe I'll make it right for my lathe and make everyone else adapt
[14:40:25] <cradek> :-P
[14:40:29] <cradek> brb
[14:40:40] <Lerneaen_Hydra> I'm also thinking that if it's hardcoded then choosing g41 or 42 will be even harder
[14:40:42] <Lerneaen_Hydra> ok
[15:05:06] <cradek> it's true that the right/left for g41/42 will be opposite if the tool numbers are wrong
[15:05:40] <cradek> but this is simply a matter of one number in the tool table
[15:07:28] <cradek> if I set it up for front tools, a user with back/top tools will swap 2/6/1 with 3/8/4 and it will all work
[15:08:25] <cradek> I could draw on your picture +x and +z arrows and make it all consistent based on that
[15:23:53] <cradek> here's what I'm thinking of doing
[15:24:14] <cradek> on your picture, make an arrow pointing right that says +Z, and an arrow pointing down that says +X
[15:24:44] <cradek> then at the top of the picture, say "turning" at the bottom "boring" at the left "facing" at the right "back facing"
[15:25:33] <cradek> I think it's crazy that the numbers change depending on the layout of the lathe
[15:25:57] <cradek> I think this would make it consistent and well-documented
[15:26:38] <alex_joni> * alex_joni totally agreed .)
[15:26:44] <alex_joni> agrees even
[15:27:05] <cradek> unfortunately my attempts to use gimp failed :-/
[15:27:16] <alex_joni> want me to do the arrows?
[15:27:26] <giacus> ?
[15:27:27] <cradek> if you like
[15:27:39] <giacus> :)
[15:27:42] <cradek> and the four labels too please?
[15:27:55] <alex_joni> http://wiki.linuxcnc.org/uploads/cutting_orientation.png this one?
[15:27:59] <cradek> yes
[15:28:29] <alex_joni> 4 labels?
[15:28:37] <cradek> yes
[15:28:38] <alex_joni> so you want X+/X- ?
[15:28:52] <alex_joni> err.. the ones for facing, back facing.. ok ;)
[15:28:58] <cradek> whatever you think is clearest
[15:29:19] <cradek> do you understand what I mean for it to say?
[15:29:32] <SWPadnos> and drop a spindle head on there, while you're at it ;)
[15:29:32] <cradek> at top is "turning" and left is "facing"
[15:29:50] <cradek> so tool 2, which is in the top left corner, is the one that can be used for turning and facing
[15:30:07] <SWPadnos> orientation 2, not tool 2 (I think)
[15:30:12] <cradek> right
[15:30:20] <cradek> sorry for the imprecision
[15:30:38] <SWPadnos> no problem - it just gets confisung for someone who knows nothing on the subject (me)
[15:31:20] <cradek> I know only enough to say it's crazy and should be consistent and I'm going to pick/make a standard for emc
[15:31:35] <anonimasu> cradek: great!
[15:31:41] <anonimasu> cradek: I like the thought of htat
[15:31:42] <anonimasu> that..
[15:31:55] <cradek> me too
[15:32:00] <anonimasu> making sane standards when it's nescessary
[15:32:18] <cradek> LH says there's not a standard for most of this stuff, so I think (and I'm sure he agrees) we should do things with as little craziness as possible
[15:32:21] <anonimasu> compilance with stuff that's good/standardized and not too insane
[15:33:04] <anonimasu> and then making sane standards :)
[15:33:33] <cradek> for instance "As it stands today we don't know of any sane canned cycle spec, so probably EMC will have it's own canned cycle, with these parameters:"
[15:34:34] <anonimasu> hm what is a canned cycle?
[15:34:36] <alex_joni>
[15:34:43] <alex_joni> cradek: comments expected
[15:34:48] <anonimasu> is it like you say threading..
[15:34:48] <jepler> anonimasu: like G81
[15:34:52] <anonimasu> ah..
[15:34:57] <jepler> anonimasu: that's a canned cycle for drilling
[15:34:59] <anonimasu> like "thread here x passes"
[15:35:08] <websys> G76
[15:35:16] <alex_joni> hi bob
[15:35:22] <websys> hi
[15:35:22] <cradek> alex_joni: perfect
[15:35:33] <SWPadnos> is that arrow correct for X+?
[15:35:45] <SWPadnos> ah - increasing radius
[15:35:45] <cradek> SWPadnos: that's debatable
[15:35:48] <SWPadnos> heh
[15:36:00] <cradek> SWPadnos: swapping top/bottom on the picture is the issue at hand
[15:36:05] <SWPadnos> right
[15:36:18] <cradek> this happens to match my lathe :-)
[15:36:28] <alex_joni> cradek: will you upload to wiki?
[15:36:36] <cradek> alex_joni: I'll try
[15:36:39] <SWPadnos> I'd think of X+ as moving "in", toward the axis of rotation. though the "increasing radius" makes sense as well
[15:36:45] <alex_joni> ok, then I'll go back to HAL stuff ;)
[15:36:54] <SWPadnos> and this is a right-hand coordinate system, which is probably desirable
[15:36:59] <cradek> SWPadnos: x=r is pretty universal I guess
[15:37:12] <cradek> SWPadnos: the real issue is whether the tool is in front or on top of the workpiece
[15:37:34] <SWPadnos> on top?
[15:37:36] <cradek> x down is more natural with the tool in front
[15:37:53] <cradek> yes I guess some large lathes have it on top and the work spins the "wrong" way
[15:37:54] <SWPadnos> yes - for tools in the back, this would be non-intuitive
[15:38:14] <cradek> that's what the labels are for I guess
[15:38:17] <SWPadnos> yep. I think it keeps the chips firther from the operator or something
[15:38:21] <SWPadnos> further
[15:38:50] <cradek> well an upside-down tool in the back of a manual lathe, with this setup, would be still 2/6/1
[15:39:10] <cradek> because "turning"
[15:39:24] <anonimasu> hehe
[15:39:30] <anonimasu> you are rarely machining the wrong way..
[15:39:42] <anonimasu> turning lathe backwards and tools upside down..
[15:39:54] <anonimasu> well I do sometimes, when I dont have the right toolholders..
[15:40:09] <anonimasu> ;)
[15:40:10] <SWPadnos> if the tools are behind the spindle, then the spindle has to go the other way, or you need to flip the tools over
[15:40:13] <SWPadnos> heh
[15:40:15] <anonimasu> yep
[15:40:17] <cradek> right
[15:40:21] <anonimasu> it's the same no matter what way
[15:40:37] <SWPadnos> but why would that still be 2/6/1?
[15:40:37] <anonimasu> x+ should alawys be close to the spind.e
[15:40:39] <cradek> but it's still orientation 2/6/1
[15:40:39] <anonimasu> amd - away..
[15:40:43] <anonimasu> yeah
[15:40:48] <jepler> if the spindle goes the other way, how do you cut threads?
[15:41:09] <cradek> jepler: you use all left-handed threads
[15:41:10] <SWPadnos> move the other direction in Z
[15:41:38] <cradek> or that :-)
[15:41:41] <SWPadnos> heh
[15:42:20] <cradek> hmmm
[15:42:32] <cradek> the back upside-down tool does point the other way in X
[15:42:40] <cradek> so maybe I'm wrong about it still being #6
[15:42:59] <cradek> well, don't do that
[15:43:00] <anonimasu> hm,no your not
[15:43:25] <anonimasu> you still feed towards the spindle x+
[15:43:40] <cradek> towards the spindle is Z
[15:43:43] <cradek> -Z
[15:43:49] <anonimasu> ah.. my mistake..
[15:44:07] <SWPadnos> anonimasu, rotation axis or spindle?
[15:44:09] <cradek> the tool on the back would cut from x=-r to 0
[15:44:39] <cradek> back upside-down tools is nonstandard hackery anyway, we shouldn't worry about it
[15:44:46] <SWPadnos> X=0 is zero radius/diameter? (ie, tool tip at the axis of rotation)
[15:44:48] <cradek> it's just that I do it all the time
[15:44:53] <anonimasu> SWPadnos: err towards the workpiece I mean...
[15:44:54] <cradek> SWPadnos: that's the typical setup
[15:45:01] <SWPadnos> I noticed that, with the parting tool ;)
[15:45:19] <cradek> wish I had saved skunkworks's photo, I never can find his stuff
[15:46:04] <SWPadnos> well, without some axis flipping, you don't get "+x toward the workpiece" from both the front and the back
[15:46:18] <cradek> that's right
[15:46:24] <cradek> "the tool on the back would cut from x=-r to 0"
[15:47:02] <SWPadnos> ok, so wouldn't you need to use orientations 3/8/4 for gouging checks?
[15:47:23] <SWPadnos> because 2/6/1 point the other way
[15:47:44] <cradek> yes, it seems like maybe you would
[15:48:00] <anonimasu> hm, question, will we have collission detection?
[15:48:02] <cradek> I'm still fuzzy about how gouging checks will work
[15:48:38] <cradek> I think they can only work while doing radius comp (because that's the only time you know what side of the work you're cutting on)
[15:50:43] <anonimasu> *dosent get what you mean by gouging*
[15:51:31] <cradek> a mill tool can cut in any direction because it's round, but a lathe tool can only cut in certain directions
[15:51:44] <cradek> gouging protection is giving an error when the user programs an inappropriate angle of cut
[15:54:43] <cradek> I see nobody is elaborating on this
[15:54:56] <cradek> that's all I know, and the more I think about it, the fuzzier the details get
[15:55:25] <alex_joni> aiee.. ../scripts/fdgui: line 424: 4599 Segmentation fault $FDGUI
[15:55:29] <alex_joni> :(
[15:55:47] <cradek> oops
[15:55:58] <alex_joni> probably I foobared some hal pointers :(
[15:57:17] <anonimasu> cradek: cant you check that aginst spindle rotation?
[15:58:59] <anonimasu> cradek: as you are always cutting and never scraping
[15:59:57] <cradek> I don't understand what you mean
[16:01:42] <anonimasu> actually me neither I forgot my train of thought
[16:06:42] <anonimasu> :)
[16:07:00] <cradek> ok :-)
[16:07:30] <anonimasu> I should machine some more parts then sleep and come back
[16:08:30] <cradek> or maybe the other way around
[16:10:42] <anonimasu> hm, waiting for dinner to get ready
[16:19:28] <anonimasu> <- is the conversation killer
[16:20:04] <giacus> ah ! talking about to kill ..
[16:20:15] <giacus> I'm thinking to kill the stats page
[16:20:52] <giacus> it make no sense to upload files every 15 just for my personal use
[16:21:10] <giacus> I can see it by my irc logs
[16:21:21] <giacus> I just did it for the new visitors
[16:22:10] <giacus> so, if anybody op want to add the url its ok
[16:22:23] <giacus> otherwise I'll delete it soon
[16:22:26] <giacus> :)
[16:22:41] <giacus> or kill it ;)
[16:25:59] <giacus> it is 45 days running and seems stable
[16:26:11] <giacus> http://www.giacus.org/emcstats/emc.html
[16:26:19] <giacus> think up what wanna do
[16:30:56] <anonimasu> :)
[16:30:59] <anonimasu> *yawns*
[16:31:00] <anonimasu> laters
[16:31:27] <giacus> anonimasu: set the alarm clock :P
[16:37:06] <anonimasu> yeah
[16:38:22] <giacus> later
[16:43:53] <robin_sz> meep?
[16:44:52] <anonimasu> hi
[16:52:43] <fogl> hello
[16:53:15] <giacus> good reboot
[16:53:29] <giacus> got 250 mb of updates !
[17:01:27] <fogl> can you tell me where can i find the emc forum/mailing list
[17:03:13] <SWPadnos> fogl, there isn't really a forum, but the mailing lists are on sourceforge
[17:03:14] <fogl> i found it...
[17:03:57] <fogl> but it doesnt work
[17:04:02] <fogl> at the moment
[17:04:18] <SWPadnos> what isn't working?
[17:04:54] <fogl> the web page with mailing list
[17:05:07] <SWPadnos> hmmm
[17:05:51] <SWPadnos> ah. this must be one of the ongoing issues with sourceforge
[17:06:10] <fogl> i get an error message: "Either your mailing list name was misspelled or your mailing list has not been archived yet." when i want to see the archive
[17:06:22] <alex_joni> ( 2006-06-20 12:41:07 - Mailing List Service ) On 2006-06-20 the Mailing List Archives were taken down for preventative maintenance that occurs about once every two years. We expect the duration of this downtime to last between 1 to 3 days.
[17:06:52] <K4ts> hello
[17:06:58] <fogl> maybe you can help me...i would like to change the direction of movement of one axis
[17:07:20] <fogl> how can i do that...i didnt found the option in ini file
[17:07:22] <alex_joni> make the INPUT_SCALE negative
[17:07:24] <SWPadnos> change the sign of INPUT_SCALE and OUTPUT_SCALE for that axis in the ini file
[17:07:47] <fogl> ok, thank you
[18:36:44] <dmessier> merry friggen FRIDAY... all
[18:38:07] <SWPadnos> thanks - how did you know?
[18:38:14] <Dallur> Merry friday to you and happy new beers
[18:39:02] <SWPadnos> I suppose I should make some dinner plans - it's my anniversary
[18:39:07] <SWPadnos> and my wifes
[18:39:10] <alex_joni> SWPadnos: congrats
[18:39:19] <SWPadnos> thanks
[18:39:27] <alex_joni> SWPadnos: you do know that your years should be counted twice..
[18:39:29] <alex_joni> right?
[18:39:32] <dmessier> thx
[18:39:42] <SWPadnos> wow - 18 years. it seems like half that ;)
[18:40:40] <dmessier> congrats... we've been 17.. and my parents just passed thru 40...
[18:40:51] <SWPadnos> cool
[18:41:04] <SWPadnos> actually, it's only 9 - I was just counting twice :)
[18:41:26] <dmessier> we'e been together 190 i guess..
[18:41:33] <SWPadnos> heh
[18:41:35] <dmessier> 10 yrs..
[18:41:52] <dmessier> 19.. new beer typing... LOL
[18:43:05] <dmessier> but it ain easy being ME....
[18:43:20] <SWPadnos> it's not easy trying to understand you either ;)
[18:43:38] <dmessier> translation??
[18:43:55] <SWPadnos> heh - we need a "de-beer-inator"
[18:44:25] <dmessier> hint.. i usually type in 2 finger newfanese...
[18:50:32] <dmessier> just a very STRESSFUL 1/2 day at work....
[18:51:32] <dmessier> apperantly we ARE the ROMPER Room of landing gear mfg's
[18:51:42] <dmessier> or it seems to mee... ; )
[18:52:56] <SWPadnos> well - gotta reboot. see you all a bit later
[19:32:49] <Lerneaen_Hydra> cradek: that sounds reasonable
[19:33:06] <Lerneaen_Hydra> (all the stuff about the tool positions)
[19:33:22] <cradek> great
[19:33:43] <Lerneaen_Hydra> and IRT gouging protection, does g41/42 really need to be activated to be able to gouge-protect?
[19:34:41] <cradek> I have not thought through gouge protection very well
[19:34:53] <cradek> it seems like you need to know which side of the tool the work is on
[19:35:55] <Lerneaen_Hydra> yes, isn't the tool-position enough of a helper?
[19:36:31] <cradek> let me just back up and say I don't understand how it's supposed to work
[19:37:12] <Lerneaen_Hydra> oh
[19:37:34] <jepler> without g41/g42, the tool tip should move through the specified path and not bitch about it
[19:37:36] <Lerneaen_Hydra> anything I can clarify or is it just that you haven't thought much about it yet?
[19:38:21] <Lerneaen_Hydra> jepler: I agree, I was just thinking if it is needed from a programming standpoint
[19:38:26] <cradek> well there are two angles specified for the tool that, along with the orientation, represent its shape
[19:38:47] <cradek> I don't yet see how to go from that shape to the allowed cutting directions
[19:40:01] <cradek> say you have a corner tool like #2
[19:40:28] <cradek> if you are in right comp mode, you are cutting with the left side of the tool
[19:40:43] <cradek> so you can probably go straight ^^ "up"
[19:40:57] <cradek> if you're in left comp mode, you're cutting on the right, so going that way will definitely gouge
[19:40:57] <Lerneaen_Hydra> ah, I don't think it can let you do that
[19:41:09] <Lerneaen_Hydra> or wait,
[19:41:21] <Lerneaen_Hydra> oh, I reversed what you meant with left/righ
[19:41:30] <Lerneaen_Hydra> so mostly you'd be in left mode?
[19:41:42] <cradek> for turning with tool 2, yes
[19:41:50] <Lerneaen_Hydra> oh, ok
[19:41:51] <cradek> for facing you'll be in right with tool 2
[19:41:53] <Lerneaen_Hydra> then I'm with you
[19:42:10] <cradek> so if comp is off, do I allow "up"?
[19:42:27] <Lerneaen_Hydra> IMO comp off should allow everything, like jepler said
[19:42:49] <cradek> ok
[19:42:51] <Lerneaen_Hydra> that however is very much a matter that should be discussed
[19:43:11] <cradek> I must have misunderstood your question "does g41/42 really need to be activated to be able to gouge-protect?"
[19:43:46] <Lerneaen_Hydra> yes, I was thinking purely from a programming standpoint
[19:44:06] <Lerneaen_Hydra> rather than a "what should emc do" standpoint
[19:44:10] <cradek> ok right now I'm trying to understand how it should work, I'll worry about programming later
[19:44:35] <Lerneaen_Hydra> oh, ok
[19:44:59] <Lerneaen_Hydra> that's a good question though, should g40 disable gouge protection or not?
[19:45:15] <cradek> I think we already decided g0 should not have any protection
[19:45:26] <cradek> it sure makes it hard to get up to the work otherwise
[19:45:27] <Lerneaen_Hydra> oh, yes that's true
[19:45:32] <Lerneaen_Hydra> indeed
[19:45:53] <Lerneaen_Hydra> however.. that could cause some unexpected behavior
[19:46:48] <Lerneaen_Hydra> imagine this:
[19:46:50] <Lerneaen_Hydra> <start>
[19:46:51] <Lerneaen_Hydra> g0 x10 z0
[19:46:53] <Lerneaen_Hydra> g41
[19:46:54] <Lerneaen_Hydra> g1 z-1 x11
[19:46:56] <Lerneaen_Hydra> ...
[19:46:58] <Lerneaen_Hydra> if the material starts at z0
[19:47:20] <Lerneaen_Hydra> typically one would think that that would make a 45° chamfer, but would the g41 affect that?
[19:47:55] <cradek> g41 is right?
[19:48:06] <alex_joni> g41 is wrong
[19:48:13] <alex_joni> lol
[19:48:14] <cradek> you need g42 (right side)
[19:48:58] <Lerneaen_Hydra> what?
[19:49:04] <Lerneaen_Hydra> if it's tooltype 2?
[19:49:07] <cradek> no sorry it's left
[19:49:09] <cradek> arg
[19:49:20] <Lerneaen_Hydra> haha
[19:49:31] <cradek> ok the work is r=11
[19:49:35] <Lerneaen_Hydra> right/left sure can get confuzing
[19:49:38] <Lerneaen_Hydra> yes
[19:49:58] <cradek> with emc you need an entry cut to turn on comp
[19:50:04] <cradek> you won't get 45 degrees with this program
[19:50:41] <cradek> g0 x8 z2
[19:50:44] <cradek> g41 g1 x10 z0
[19:50:46] <cradek> g1 z-1 x11
[19:51:01] <Lerneaen_Hydra> exactly, that is what could be confusing
[19:51:01] <cradek> I think this will give you the cut you want
[19:51:22] <Lerneaen_Hydra> I know that emc wouldn't give you a good cut, it's just that a common user may not expect that
[19:51:34] <cradek> then he needs to read about radius compensation :-)
[19:51:35] <Lerneaen_Hydra> but one would see that in axis, right?
[19:51:38] <cradek> sure
[19:51:43] <cradek> you see the exact path
[19:52:10] <Lerneaen_Hydra> oh, do you see machine toolpath or programmed toolpath?
[19:52:22] <cradek> machine toolpath
[19:52:33] <cradek> so you see the comp entry moves
[19:52:59] <Lerneaen_Hydra> ok, that's good
[19:53:40] <giacus> interesting
[19:53:53] <Lerneaen_Hydra> uh, what were we discussing again+
[19:54:01] <cradek> gouging
[19:54:04] <Lerneaen_Hydra> oh, right, g40 should gouge protect or not
[19:54:17] <cradek> I still think it can't
[19:54:39] <Lerneaen_Hydra> why not?
[19:54:54] <Lerneaen_Hydra> I'll just whip up an image...
[19:55:09] <cradek> does it allow up with orientation 2? you can't know
[19:55:25] <cradek> great, your images are good
[19:57:41] <giacus> dmessier: I'm watching a bad match this evening ..
[19:58:04] <giacus> never seen the France playng so bad
[19:59:17] <cradek> http://timeguy.com/cradek-files/emc/entry.png
[19:59:34] <cradek> this is the same path twice, with and without comp
[19:59:46] <cradek> you can see the line-arc-arc entry move it makes
[19:59:58] <Lerneaen_Hydra> the inner one without then?
[20:00:06] <cradek> inner with
[20:00:12] <Jymmm> ew
[20:01:05] <Jymmm> SWPadnos Get me a beer! I'll bring the pizza
[20:01:27] <cradek> http://timeguy.com/cradek-files/emc/entry2.png
[20:01:36] <cradek> here is a nice g41 entry
[20:01:38] <alex_joni> try tsipuro
[20:01:45] <Lerneaen_Hydra> is this a mill or lathe?
[20:01:46] <SWPadnos> sorry jymmm, I'm going out with the wife tonight :)
[20:01:53] <Lerneaen_Hydra> I'm thinking lathe and getting confuzed
[20:01:55] <cradek> lathe
[20:02:01] <cradek> x is down, z is right
[20:02:05] <Jymmm> SWPadnos that's fine, she can drive!
[20:02:17] <cradek> the upper line is the workpiece, the lower line is the tool path
[20:02:37] <SWPadnos> what's the programmed path?
[20:02:50] <Lerneaen_Hydra> oh! it shows both paths?
[20:02:53] <cradek> up then arc then right
[20:02:53] <SWPadnos> (or is the lower line the programmed path, and this isn't showing compensation?)
[20:02:57] <Lerneaen_Hydra> I was thinking that there were two passes
[20:03:22] <cradek> there are two passes, the upper one is without comp
[20:03:26] <SWPadnos> ok
[20:03:30] <cradek> so the upper one is the programmed path exactly
[20:04:03] <Lerneaen_Hydra> I still fail to see how a straight move can give different positions g40/41
[20:04:25] <SWPadnos> left or right side of the work (possibly no different on a lathe though)
[20:04:27] <Lerneaen_Hydra> a straight move should give exactly the same path regardless of compensation
[20:04:29] <cradek> oh I understand your confusion
[20:04:34] <Lerneaen_Hydra> only non-straight moves
[20:04:40] <Lerneaen_Hydra> or is this tooltype 9
[20:04:41] <cradek> this is showing the center of the radius, tool orientation 9
[20:04:45] <Lerneaen_Hydra> ah, ok
[20:05:05] <Lerneaen_Hydra> that clears things up greatly ;)
[20:05:16] <Lerneaen_Hydra> so one could say it's mill-esque
[20:05:20] <cradek> yes
[20:05:28] <Lerneaen_Hydra> since pos 9 is the same as a mill
[20:06:22] <giacus> wow
[20:06:24] <cradek> hmm you know axis isn't going to show the tool origin, it will always show the radius center
[20:06:30] <giacus> dmessier: :))
[20:07:01] <cradek> because the tool origin doesn't even move in an arc when going around an arc
[20:07:12] <cradek> it goes INTO the workpiece
[20:07:48] <Lerneaen_Hydra> I don't get that
[20:08:04] <cradek> say you have an arc that's a quarter circle
[20:08:13] <cradek> you cut it with tool type 2
[20:08:19] <Lerneaen_Hydra> "tool origin doesn't even move in an arc when going around an arc" is what's confusing
[20:08:24] <cradek> meanwhile, watch tooltype 2's origin
[20:08:33] <Lerneaen_Hydra> is this with g41?
[20:08:33] <cradek> it starts on the circle, goes inside, then comes back out
[20:09:05] <cradek> doesn't matter
[20:09:05] <Lerneaen_Hydra> oh, you mean like so
[20:09:18] <Lerneaen_Hydra> that it's not a circular motion
[20:09:21] <cradek> right
[20:09:30] <Lerneaen_Hydra> rather more like a hyperbola or an oval
[20:09:36] <cradek> axis isn't going to show that - it's going to show circular motion
[20:09:53] <SWPadnos> the origin is the red X (or plus) on the orientation diagram?
[20:09:56] <cradek> yes
[20:09:59] <SWPadnos> ok
[20:10:02] <Lerneaen_Hydra> because the start and end are "in line" with the peice, but in the middle it's "inside" the part
[20:10:08] <cradek> yes
[20:10:15] <cradek> so it's not a circular arc anymore
[20:10:27] <cradek> emc only does circular arcs
[20:10:28] <Lerneaen_Hydra> indeed
[20:10:31] <Lerneaen_Hydra> oh
[20:10:37] <cradek> so the control point will need to be the center of the radius
[20:10:40] <Lerneaen_Hydra> this could be an issue
[20:10:44] <cradek> and axis will show that
[20:10:47] <SWPadnos> with a curcular end on the tool, the origin path should still be a circular arc
[20:10:52] <SWPadnos> circular
[20:11:01] <Lerneaen_Hydra> "emc only does circular arcs" did you mean axis?
[20:11:08] <cradek> SWPadnos: pretty sure you're wrong about that
[20:11:18] <SWPadnos> hmmm - could be, bu tI'd need to think about it
[20:11:29] <Lerneaen_Hydra> SWPadnos: it depends on what the origin is
[20:11:54] <SWPadnos> ok - the distance from cutting edge to origin isn't constant, so I'm wring
[20:12:00] <SWPadnos> gah - wrong
[20:12:02] <cradek> Lerneaen_Hydra: no, all of emc does circular arcs because that's what gcode specifies
[20:12:39] <cradek> this is no matter
[20:12:40] <Lerneaen_Hydra> cradek: now I'm starting to become uncertian as to whether a g41 & tooltype 2 should gouge protect when going straight up if the tool is angled inwards
[20:12:42] <SWPadnos> ther's an ellipse defined in canon, I think
[20:12:54] <cradek> SWPadnos: shhhhh
[20:12:58] <Lerneaen_Hydra> cradek: so what will emc do? divide to lines?
[20:13:04] <SWPadnos> oops - see, I'm wrong again ;)
[20:13:13] <cradek> Lerneaen_Hydra: no it will move the controlled point in a circular path
[20:13:24] <cradek> Lerneaen_Hydra: that's FINE if the controlled point is the center of the radius on the tool
[20:13:35] <cradek> SWPadnos: no, I think there is one, but I'm not about to use it
[20:13:45] <SWPadnos> right - I was recanting for you :)
[20:13:46] <Lerneaen_Hydra> wouldn't that give a bad part?
[20:13:56] <Lerneaen_Hydra> oh
[20:13:56] <cradek> Lerneaen_Hydra: no
[20:14:23] <cradek> think of the tool as circular with some crap glued to one side
[20:14:34] <cradek> now follow the lower path in my screenshot with the center of the circle
[20:14:39] <cradek> you'll see it gives the upper path
[20:14:40] <Lerneaen_Hydra> regardless of how the origin is handled the tool must move in a non-circular path, right?
[20:14:56] <cradek> no
[20:15:11] <Lerneaen_Hydra> hmm, that's correct
[20:16:17] <Lerneaen_Hydra> so all emc will need to do is move the origin to the center and all is good?
[20:16:22] <cradek> yes
[20:16:50] <Lerneaen_Hydra> ok. what do you think about tooltype 2 & g41? (the thing I wrote above)
[20:18:18] <cradek> orientation 2, g41 (tool on left) I don't think should go straight up
[20:18:43] <cradek> for facing, when it's natural to go up, you'd use g42
[20:18:46] <giacus> pier "Sto andando via" ?
[20:18:51] <cradek> but you're the expert, not me
[20:18:54] <giacus> doh
[20:19:26] <Lerneaen_Hydra> hmm, typically in commercial lathes you don't change between g41/42 with a certian tool
[20:19:39] <Lerneaen_Hydra> I fail to see how you even can have g42 with tooltype 2
[20:20:03] <cradek> when facing the tool is on the right of the work
[20:20:07] <cradek> that's g42
[20:20:24] <cradek> when moving from +x to -x
[20:20:37] <SWPadnos> it depends on which direction the tool is moving (in X)
[20:20:42] <cradek> right
[20:20:52] <cradek> when facing inward
[20:20:59] <cradek> the tool is on the right
[20:21:03] <Lerneaen_Hydra> oh
[20:21:09] <Lerneaen_Hydra> that's actually rather neat
[20:21:21] <SWPadnos> so if you want to "zig-zag" when either facing or turning, then you still need both G41 and G42 available
[20:21:30] <cradek> yes
[20:21:33] <Lerneaen_Hydra> it gives lot's of security against gouging
[20:21:39] <cradek> and you'll have to re-enter every time you reverse
[20:21:41] <SWPadnos> even for tool orientation 2
[20:21:43] <SWPadnos> yes
[20:21:44] <cradek> I bet people don't zig-zag
[20:21:52] <SWPadnos> for roughing, I'd bet they do
[20:21:53] <Lerneaen_Hydra> I've never actually used more than one per tool
[20:22:04] <cradek> zig-zagging for facing is bad because you have to plunge in the center
[20:22:18] <Lerneaen_Hydra> typically though one only uses the depth-gouge protection
[20:22:34] <cradek> what does that mean?
[20:22:38] <Lerneaen_Hydra> uh
[20:22:39] <SWPadnos> even gouge protection is difficult, since you need to know the shape of the workpiece
[20:23:16] <Lerneaen_Hydra> I only gouge-protect in X axis, inwards to X0 (for tooltype 2)
[20:23:21] <cradek> it can't be perfect
[20:23:22] <Lerneaen_Hydra> so I can't feed in too far
[20:23:42] <Lerneaen_Hydra> I havn't felt the need for other protection, though in some cases it's probably good
[20:23:56] <cradek> I don't understand "so I can't feed in too far"
[20:24:03] <cradek> I thought this was all about angle of feed
[20:24:08] <Lerneaen_Hydra> yes
[20:24:13] <Lerneaen_Hydra> I'm just tired ;)
[20:25:36] <cradek> I'm going to go get some coffee
[20:25:40] <cradek> maybe we'll talk more this weekend
[20:25:55] <Lerneaen_Hydra> uh
[20:25:57] <Lerneaen_Hydra> ok
[20:25:58] <Lerneaen_Hydra> um
[20:26:15] <Lerneaen_Hydra> ftp://basic:basic@
[20:26:20] <Lerneaen_Hydra> in folder gouge
[20:27:00] <Lerneaen_Hydra> the file typical shows what I usually use (this is thought to be in a large, tools-behind-the-workpeice lathe)
[20:27:19] <Lerneaen_Hydra> that tool with an upper angle limit would not be able to do much
[20:27:58] <cradek> not sure I see
[20:28:40] <Lerneaen_Hydra> as I've drawn it now, the angle shows the shape of the tool, and the red shows where the tool is not allowed to move
[20:28:57] <cradek> ok
[20:29:07] <Lerneaen_Hydra> the red area always follows the tool (the tool's max plunge angle in this case)
[20:29:26] <cradek> ok
[20:29:37] <Lerneaen_Hydra> this is typically the only gouging protection that commercial lathes have
[20:29:55] <Lerneaen_Hydra> they don't protect the other side (lead angle)
[20:29:58] <Jymmm> is there an install ISO that has emc3 on it?
[20:30:03] <Jymmm> emc2
[20:30:05] <Lerneaen_Hydra> haha
[20:30:24] <cradek> ok I see
[20:30:32] <Lerneaen_Hydra> however it may be good to have full support for gouge protection
[20:30:38] <SWPadnos> I believe Alex's liveCD has an install option
[20:31:06] <SWPadnos> http://www.cncgear.com/EMC/
[20:31:27] <Lerneaen_Hydra> and with the habits I have I can't have that safety, but if I switch between g41/42 often I can (as you were talking about before, WRT face turning and then rough turning)
[20:32:09] <Lerneaen_Hydra> however I don't see how to safely switch between g41/42 while doing a rough turn and in a.. uh.. pocket
[20:32:30] <Lerneaen_Hydra> if you think of the line that is currently dotted as a solid line
[20:32:47] <Lerneaen_Hydra> how would you switch from g42 (as it is now) to g41?
[20:33:24] <SWPadnos> ideally, if you had the following two blocks one after the other, it would "just work"
[20:33:30] <SWPadnos> G40 X1
[20:33:33] <SWPadnos> G41 X0
[20:33:42] <SWPadnos> (assuming you started at X=0)
[20:33:57] <Lerneaen_Hydra> oh, it doesn't go all strange?
[20:34:13] <SWPadnos> I don't know - hence the "ideally" ;)
[20:34:20] <Lerneaen_Hydra> some moves will create borkage though
[20:34:27] <Lerneaen_Hydra> think something like this:
[20:34:45] <Jymmm> SWPadnos: I asked him, he doens't know.
[20:34:49] <SWPadnos> it shouldn't, since the tool is already at the correct compensation point when you reverse both the motion and the "side" for comp
[20:35:03] <SWPadnos> Jymmm, well, boot it and see ;)
[20:35:05] <Jymmm> SWPadnos: but no install option on the boot menu.
[20:35:17] <SWPadnos> not on the boot menu - it's an icon on the desktop after you boot
[20:35:30] <Lerneaen_Hydra> <start code>
[20:35:31] <Lerneaen_Hydra> (tooltype 2, conventional lathe)
[20:35:33] <Lerneaen_Hydra> g41
[20:35:34] <Lerneaen_Hydra> g0 x5 z1
[20:35:36] <Lerneaen_Hydra> g1 z-10
[20:35:37] <Lerneaen_Hydra> x7
[20:35:39] <Lerneaen_Hydra> z10 <- this move will not be that good
[20:35:56] <SWPadnos> starting at Z=0, X=0?
[20:36:04] <Jymmm> SWPadnos: only saw a CDROM icon
[20:36:18] <SWPadnos> Jymmm, ok. dunno then.
[20:36:37] <SWPadnos> I may have been thinking of the dapper liveCD
[20:37:01] <Jymmm> ah, ok. where's that available from? with emc2 on it?
[20:37:09] <SWPadnos> there isn't one
[20:37:13] <SWPadnos> not released, anyway
[20:37:19] <Lerneaen_Hydra> starting at whereever, it doens't really matter
[20:37:30] <SWPadnos> ok - I noticed that after I asked
[20:38:02] <SWPadnos> it makes sense that you'd havea problem with that. you would want to insert a G40 before the z10 line
[20:38:28] <SWPadnos> the compensation is done as though you're a little person walking along the G-code path
[20:38:44] <SWPadnos> that's where the "left hand" or "right hand" is decided from
[20:39:38] <Lerneaen_Hydra> exactly
[20:40:09] <SWPadnos> so the last line of your code asks emc to compensate by putting the tool inside the workpiece
[20:40:27] <Lerneaen_Hydra> yes, and that is not very good
[20:40:31] <SWPadnos> nope ;)
[20:40:44] <Lerneaen_Hydra> hopefully emc can give an error message
[20:41:04] <SWPadnos> again, I'm not sure if emc does the right thing now, but inserting G40 should fix that problem
[20:41:13] <SWPadnos> it's not an error though
[20:41:17] <Lerneaen_Hydra> yes, AFAIK that should work
[20:41:43] <Lerneaen_Hydra> the commercial lathes say: warning, possible gouge blahblahblah
[20:41:47] <SWPadnos> remember that emc doesn't know what the workpiece looks like, only the toolpath you ask it to follow
[20:42:36] <SWPadnos> it's possible to detect reversals, and warn if compensation is enabled, and not changed, between moves (though that looks like an ugly solution to me)
[20:43:16] <Lerneaen_Hydra> so what I'm thinking of is when can you safely switch from g41 to g42? would this work?
[20:43:17] <Lerneaen_Hydra> <start stuff>
[20:43:19] <Lerneaen_Hydra> (tooltype 2, conventional lathe)
[20:43:20] <Lerneaen_Hydra> g0 x5 z1
[20:43:22] <Lerneaen_Hydra> g41
[20:43:23] <Lerneaen_Hydra> g1 z-10
[20:43:25] <Lerneaen_Hydra> g42 x7
[20:43:26] <Lerneaen_Hydra> g41 z-20
[20:43:28] <Lerneaen_Hydra> g42 x10
[20:43:29] <Lerneaen_Hydra> g40 x12 z0
[20:43:52] <Lerneaen_Hydra> SWPadnos: yes, I beleive that's what they do, if the cutting edge is where it's not supposed to be
[20:44:44] <SWPadnos> I'm not sure if the code you posted will work correctly, but I think we're saying the same thing -you should be able to change comp on the fly, and have it "just work" if the cutter is already in the right spot
[20:45:21] <Lerneaen_Hydra> yes
[20:45:54] <Lerneaen_Hydra> you do however need some inteligence to figure out when it's OK to have compensation and when it's not ok
[20:46:09] <Lerneaen_Hydra> such as the borken code example above
[20:46:35] <SWPadnos> oops - got to run for a bit. see you later (maybe tomorrow)
[20:46:39] <SWPadnos> SWPadnos is now known as SWP_Away
[20:47:13] <Lerneaen_Hydra> ok
[20:47:16] <Lerneaen_Hydra> cya
[20:58:36] <cradek> after more study I think it makes an arc with larger radius
[21:00:20] <cradek> I doubt you can switch comp modes without reentry
[21:02:35] <les_w> bleh terrific straight line winds here from a thunderstorm
[21:02:46] <les_w> I think about 100 mph....
[21:02:47] <Jymmm> no wind here.
[21:02:50] <les_w> lost some trees
[21:02:52] <Jymmm> just hot
[21:03:29] <Lerneaen_Hydra> cradek: oh
[21:03:31] <Lerneaen_Hydra> hmm
[21:03:50] <Lerneaen_Hydra> what should be done about gouge protection then?
[21:04:01] <Lerneaen_Hydra> only the standard protection most other lathes have?
[21:04:08] <Lerneaen_Hydra> (plunge angle)
[21:04:31] <Lerneaen_Hydra> les_w: oh, that sounds rather intense
[21:04:33] <Lerneaen_Hydra> where are you?
[21:04:43] <les_w> north georgia usa
[21:04:50] <giacus> hi les_w
[21:04:57] <Jymmm> 3 miels for deliverance
[21:05:01] <les_w> well hi giacus
[21:05:10] <les_w> lts of firewood to cut!
[21:05:35] <les_w> yes, deliverance was filmed right here.
[21:05:37] <les_w> ahem.
[21:06:00] <Jymmm> and les was an extra!!!
[21:06:04] <les_w> I keep my compound bow ready...
[21:06:12] <Jymmm> lol
[21:06:38] <Lerneaen_Hydra> deliverance?
[21:06:43] <Jymmm> the movie
[21:06:48] <Lerneaen_Hydra> a movie?
[21:06:55] <Lerneaen_Hydra> * Lerneaen_Hydra checks imdb
[21:07:11] <Jymmm> that aint gonna help understanding the "context" =)
[21:07:18] <Lerneaen_Hydra> from 1972?
[21:07:23] <Jymmm> sounds right
[21:07:27] <Lerneaen_Hydra> oh, ok
[21:07:37] <Lerneaen_Hydra> what was teh interesting part?
[21:07:48] <Jymmm> a lil lovin
[21:10:48] <Lerneaen_Hydra> oh, heh
[21:11:09] <Lerneaen_Hydra> and les_w was an extra? sounds fishy ;)
[21:13:39] <pier> ciao giacus: ubuntu breezy badger installed and emc2 running :)
[21:13:55] <giacus> ciao pier cool :)
[21:14:21] <pier> incredibly easy....
[21:14:45] <giacus> hehe
[21:15:02] <pier> but a bit unconfortable as never used any other system but slack
[21:15:29] <pier> don't know where to put hands to customize it
[21:15:40] <giacus> you can start playng with halscope, linking signals, testing etc :P
[21:16:59] <giacus> customize emc or ubuntu ?
[21:17:17] <pier> Ubuntu now I am just having a go with it at home .... I am waiting to
[21:17:40] <pier> get my garage pc connected to the net
[21:17:42] <giacus> apt is your friend
[21:18:21] <giacus> for any needs ask here :)
[21:18:44] <giacus> you can find an excellent support on #ubuntu too (for ubuntu of course)
[21:19:19] <pier> I am a bit scared by this os.... no root around leaves me a bit puzzled
[21:19:33] <giacus> I'd start installing you prefered window manager, editors, and so on
[21:20:17] <pier> gnome is fantastic... I used it on previous Slack version as now is no longer included
[21:20:31] <giacus> yeah
[21:20:42] <pier> so I lately switched to WMaker
[21:21:01] <pier> which is very light and looks nice
[21:21:06] <giacus> good, I also like light WM's
[21:21:33] <pier> yet I didn't find the program sim-AXIS
[21:21:47] <giacus> AXIS ?
[21:22:06] <pier> I wanted to do some "dry" practice with no hw wired
[21:22:15] <giacus> you have to configure the 'ini' file to use it
[21:22:30] <pier> http://www.timeguy.com/cradek/emc/ubuntu
[21:22:51] <pier> I am so ignorant and I have everything to learn
[21:24:02] <giacus> most important files are under ~/emc2/configs/
[21:24:26] <pier> ok going to have a look at it
[21:25:12] <pier> no ~/emc2/configs/ here :(
[21:25:28] <pier> can't even start mc
[21:25:36] <giacus> emc2/configs/stepper/stepper_mm.ini is what I use
[21:25:52] <alex_joni> pier: add the universe repository, and apt-get install mc
[21:26:05] <pier> thanks alex
[21:27:06] <pier> won't the usual wget filenedded .configure make make install do?
[21:29:14] <alex_joni> sure, but the point is to not bother
[21:29:22] <alex_joni> most of the software out there is already precompiled
[21:31:05] <pier> damit I have installed the Italian language support and now can't find my way around
[21:31:13] <Jymmm> lol
[21:31:27] <Jymmm> pier: well then, learn German!
[21:31:57] <pier> already doing... :)
[21:31:58] <Jymmm> pier then you can install the French lang pack and understand =)
[21:32:26] <pier> vielleicht hast du rechts
[21:40:49] <alex_joni> recht ;)
[21:41:02] <pier> sorry :)
[21:41:37] <pier> don't tell my lehererin
[21:42:42] <alex_joni> ich werde schweigen ;)
[21:43:39] <pier> Ich habe kein wortbuch hier so please be good :)
[21:47:16] <alex_joni> bonne nuit tous
[21:47:57] <pier> bonne nuit
[22:26:03] <Lerneaen_Hydra> g'night
[22:26:38] <giacus> yaa I got tux dancing :D
[22:27:00] <giacus> http://www.giacus.org/files/gnutux.avi
[22:27:55] <giacus> blues tux :P
[22:39:05] <pier> fine del godfather :) magari :)))))))
[22:40:11] <giacus> hehe
[22:40:44] <giacus> waiting the referendum ..
[22:41:32] <pier> don't tell me
[22:41:38] <giacus> io sono un coglione orgoglione ;)
[22:41:49] <pier> purio
[22:41:57] <giacus> haha
[22:42:02] <pier> so am I
[22:42:13] <pier> meglio essere il doppio
[22:42:42] <giacus> ;)
[22:42:46] <pier> you never feel alone :)
[22:45:14] <pier> Giacus: This is my wrech: http://www.nablativede.s5.com/router.html
[22:47:05] <giacus> neat :)
[22:48:05] <pier> :(
[22:48:09] <giacus> some doubt on the 2 X motors
[22:48:21] <pier> tell me
[22:48:25] <giacus> I'd prefer only one
[22:48:44] <giacus> btw, its not so .. important at that level
[22:49:05] <giacus> if it work :)
[22:49:10] <pier> with that rusty screws of mine two aren't enough:
[22:49:39] <pier> retrieved everything from a scrap heap
[22:50:02] <pier> in any case there are two timing belts
[22:50:11] <giacus> yeah , seen
[22:50:42] <pier> 50eur e passa la paura :)
[22:50:52] <pier> for the whole lot
[22:51:28] <giacus> hehe
[22:52:16] <pier> I'll have t download the win codec to see gnutux
[22:54:03] <giacus> this guy has been lucky http://www.jofi.it/fiser/page50.html
[22:54:17] <giacus> some nice stuff also in his page ..
[22:57:12] <giacus> yeah, I've to find out the best codec to use yet
[22:58:32] <pier> fiser di cncitalia?
[22:59:36] <giacus> I know him in roboitalia.com
[22:59:42] <pier> ok
[22:59:50] <giacus> dunno if he's also there
[23:03:13] <pier> good night everybody
[23:03:28] <giacus> G'Night pier ;)
[23:04:37] <pier> nite