Re: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] Re: Re[2]: axis naming conventions

If the industry is so concerned about getting everyone to use the same
conventions (which is good) then why are these "standards" copyrighted and
must be PURCHASED in order to use them? Sounds to me like one particular
group is attempting to force others to "their" standards at a substantial
financial benefit to them!

"Standards" should be free and available to anyone wishing to use
them....otherwise they aren't really standards.

Smoke

-----Original Message-----
From: Jon Elson <jmelson@...>
To: CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO@egroups.com <CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO@egroups.com>
Date: Wednesday, November 22, 2000 3:39 PM
Subject: Re: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] Re: Re[2]: axis naming conventions

>
>
>ballendo@... wrote:
>
>> Jeff,
>>
>> Thank you for some clarity.
>> Can someone please correct me if I'm wrong. This whole thread started
>> in response to Terrys' post re: A CAM system for EMC? And EMC is used
>> by machinists? Who are "used to" certain names for the "parts" of
>> their machine(s)?
>>
>> Maybe I'm alone on this, but it just seems better to "break down"
>> barriers to communications between the "Designers" and the "Makers".
>> Especially now that they are often one and the same! If you're going
>> to design a product for a certain market, shouldn't the "conventions"
>> of that market be addressed?
>>
>> I'm still talking axis names here.
>>
>> As Jeff points out, MANY CAD systems are used by people who have
>> never seen a mill. So I guess the first thing to do is to decide who
>> this S/W is for!?? Machinists? Designers? Or both? And whether
>> to "pull" the machinists towards the CAD world? Or pull the designers
>> toward the machinists' world. Most of the major CAD players are doing
>> the LATTER.
>
>OK, the whole reason this is important is that EMC (and many other
>CNC control packages, both commercial-grade and hobby-grade)
>use the many conventions in the G-code (RS-274D) specification
>already. Many CAD/CAM and CAM products also use these conventions,
>and they talk to each other pretty well.
>
>If we want to supply a CAM program, or a CAD/CAM package, it
>will be simplest to have it compatible with what EMC already understands.
>It will also be of the most general use if it conforms to what other
>CNC controls already understand.
>
>CNC controls definitely have dialects and variants on how you do
>free-form surfaces, canned cycles, 3 and more axis coordinated
>motions, loops and subroutines, etc. That is enough variation, already,
>on things that the RS-274D spec left totally unaddressed, or at least
>didn't go into strict enough detail that anyone could follow it as a
>guide. That is a shame, and a constant (and hellish) time waster
>in any shop with several different controls on similar-type machines.
>
>But, at least, the axis names and signs, general movement commands,
>etc. ARE nailed down quite well by RS-274D, and we'd be making a big
>mistake to diverge from them.
>
>Jon
>
>
>Welcome to CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO@...,an unmoderated list for the

discussion of shop built systems, for CAD, CAM, EDM, and DRO.

>
>Addresses:
>Post message: CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO@egroups.com
>Subscribe: CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO-subscribe@egroups.com
>Unsubscribe: CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO-unsubscribe@egroups.com
>List owner: CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO-owner@egroups.com, wanliker@...
>Moderator: jmelson@... [Moderator]
>URL to this page: http://www.egroups.com/group/CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO
>FAQ: http://www.ktmarketing.com/faq.html
>bill,
>List Manager
>
>
>