Re: EHP External Hardware Proposal

> From: "Matt Shaver" <mshaver@...>
>
> > From: "Fred Smith" <imserv@...>
> >
> >> From: hansw <hansw@...>
> >>
> >> It appears there is not real standard for G-Code, just bits and snippets
> everywhere, some committee has folded and appears not
> >> to have done a good job.. See previous postings about this...
> >
> > I guess I missed the previous Postings. Here is the standard:
> >
> > : ANSI/EIA 274-D-1980 (R1988): Interchangeable
> > Variable Block Data Format for Positioning, Contouring, and
> > Contouring/Positioning Numerically Controlled Machines.
>
> Actually what I said was:
> "As to who is in charge of RS-274, the best answer I can give you is that no
> one is. As far as I know the EIA is finished with it, the committee is
> disbanded, never to meet again. The National Center for Manufacturing
> Sciences wrote a greatly expanded version called RS-274NGC (Next Generation
> Controller), but it was never finalized (I can send you the draft copy)."
>
> I'm sorry if I was not clear in what I said originally. my point was that
> there wasn't anyone currently _maintaining_ the RS-274 "G Code" standard
> (that I know of), and that defacto industry standards* have progressed beyond
> the "official" version. One thing I have learned about standards bodies like
> ANSI, EIA, and NIST (among others) is that they do not dictate the terms of
> standards to force industry into doing things "their way". The purpose of
> standards seems to be twofold; First to codify and clarify existing "industry
> standards" so that others can create compatible products. Second, in the case
> of new technologies where there is no clear "industry standard", standards
> are written to promote debate among interested parties, and then revisions
> are made until everyone is (reasonably) happy. The main point is that
> standards are supposed to be promulgated from the "bottom up", rather than
> dictated from the "top down". Who should be in charge of standards? Answer:
> End users and product manufacturers!
>
> I think that RS-274 needs to be updated to reflect the current "state of the
> art" by surveying all the additions and improvements that various control
> manufacturers have adopted, and resolve any conflicts (ie G2846.3 is used by
> two companies for different purposes).
>
> * Ref: Fred Smith's post regarding GE/Fanuc's improvements to threading
> cycles, etc.
>
> Matt
>
> P.S. It sure would simplify post processors!
>
> --------------------------- ONElist Sponsor ----------------------------
>
> GET A NEXTCARD VISA, in 30 seconds. Get rates as low as 2.9 percent
> Intro or 9.9 percent Fixed APR and no hidden fees. Apply NOW.
> <a href=" http://clickme.onelist.com/ad/NextcardCreative4SR ">Click Here</a>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Welcome to CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO@...,an unmoderated list for the discussion of shop built systems in the above catagories.
> To Unsubscribe, read archives, change to or from digest.
> Go to: http://www.onelist.com/isregistered.cgi
> Log on, and you will go to Member Center, and you can make changes there.
> For the FAQ, go to http://www.ktmarketing.com/faq.html
> bill,
> List Manager