Re: Re[3]: axis naming conventions

Smoke wrote:

>Using the upper left corner for the origin point did not begin until
>CNC machines were designed using "bass ackwards" conventions decided
>upon by a group of supposed "engineers".

I've never seen a CAD/CAM program which DEFAULTS to upper left corner
for origin. (except screen design tools for computer programming)
Have you?

>In regards to Ballendo's post about axis naming: With the advent of
>PC usage in the CNC field, it would seem to me a TRULY INTELLIGENT
>programmer could write a user friendly program to do exactly that!

At what point would the "translation" take place? Is the G code
standard? Some cnc p-port controller S/W allows "Labels" for things
in the program. Usually used with M codes and Aux(4th) axes. It WOULD
be relatively easy to "design in" user-supplied labels for the axes...
I'm not seeing what you gain by this? Or are you suggesting a "post-
processor" which takes the non-standard axis names and "converts"
them to "standard"?! So that the part can be run on a typical machine.
Why not START there?!

>mentioned having a 12 axis G code program in the works. I would
>definitely like to see user friendly programing built into it!

I don't know who this might be. I'd be interested to know?

>By the way....just because the "standard" says which G code "goes"
>with which axis, doesn't mean some one can't hard wire the machine
>controllers to negate the "standards".

Yes. And we've done this for things like rotary tables (in previous
posts). And making a 90 degree rotation by swapping x and y. Or
mirroring a part by switching axis "direction bit" polarities. All
are useful "cheats".

>Besides....all the G code programming used by various manufacturers
>is NOT the same. Many of them use proprietary G codes in addition
>to the "standards".

It's getting Better! several years ago there WERE less "agreed upon"
G codes than there are today. The CNC world HAS realised that it IS
better to ADHERE to the standard, if possible.

Actually, this goes both ways. Some MFRs (usually older,large market
share) feel that if we use "strange" code, than once they learn it,
they'll stay with us (since thay have so much time and
money "invested" in learning it in the first place). Others look at
the changing job market (that people change jobs more now) and sell
the "benefit" of standard code so ANYONE can use it! A third group
takes advantage of the ability to "emulate" any control, and
sez, "whadd'ya want it to be?". And spends more on tech support...

The "opening up"(increased usage by smaller and smaller companies and
individuals) of the CNC market is driving the old ways out, and the
benefit is MORE "standard" codes. Which frustrates the guy who makes
his living writing "post-processors" (g code "flavor" translators),
but helps the rest of us.

In any "living" development(whether language, or gcode, trees, or
racecars, etc) there will be a "solid" part, a "settling" part, and
a "growing, flexible" part. Sometimes it IS a good idea to "chop
down" the tree, but once you do...

Hope this helps.

Ballendo