CAD CAM EDM DRO - Yahoo Group Archive

Re: G_Code sharing

Posted by doug98105
on 2004-04-29 08:02:50 UTC
--- In CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO@yahoogroups.com, Jon Elson <elson@p...> wrote:
>
> I sometimes write G code for simple tasks. I found myself writing
the same
> g-code over and over for certain things so I wrote some C programs
to
> do it for me. These are things like rectangular pockets,
trepanning
> rectangular
> and round holes in sheet material, circles and grids of holes,
etc. I
> have a few
> more that I haven't put on the web page yet.
>
> See http://jelinux.pico-systems.com/gcode.html for the programs
and how
> to download and run them.
>
> Jon


Group,

For years I've been harping about the advantages of commercial
controllers because this type of stuff is built into the control.
Use the appropriate canned cycle (that's what these are called),
input the parameters to match your project and off you go. The
control's built-in canned cycles have an advantage over the off-line
programming in that they utilize the machine's tool table to access
cutter diameter/length data while cutting. The controller, then,
automatically uses cutter radius compensation. The operator can
tweak a part feature to exact size, if needed, by simply adjusting
the tool table's diameter or length values.

Another major advantage of canned cycles is the
readability/understandability of the program. In a few lines of
code you accomplish tasks that require hundreds and hundreds of
lines of code if generated off-line. Modifying/tuning the programs
becomes simple when you aren't dealing all those lines of code.

Of the CNC machining in my shop, we do the vast majority of
production programming working off prints right at the machine using
canned cycles to simplify the process. Maybe 5% of the time the
part will have a contour/feature that's not easily done with a
canned cycle, then we program it off-line with CAM.

IMO, the hobby type controls (EMC, etc) would be made much more
powerful by the addition of a variety of canned cycles beyond the
typical drilling type. Of course, this involves substantial
programming on the control-author's part.

Discussion Thread

bdrmachine 2004-04-25 14:39:54 UTC G_Code sharing Greg Nuspel 2004-04-25 14:45:13 UTC Re: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] G_Code sharing Vince Negrete 2004-04-25 16:23:24 UTC Re: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] G_Code sharing Ron K 2004-04-25 18:19:07 UTC Re: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] G_Code sharing Greg Nuspel 2004-04-25 20:05:57 UTC Re: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] G_Code sharing Alan Marconett KM6VV 2004-04-26 11:26:00 UTC Re: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] G_Code sharing Vince Negrete 2004-04-26 16:40:36 UTC Re: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] G_Code sharing Jon Elson 2004-04-28 22:09:17 UTC Re: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] G_Code sharing Ron K 2004-04-29 06:57:54 UTC Re: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] G_Code sharing hal_eckhart 2004-04-29 07:15:01 UTC Re: G_Code sharing doug98105 2004-04-29 08:02:50 UTC Re: G_Code sharing cnc002@a... 2004-04-29 09:59:11 UTC Re: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] Re: G_Code sharing Alan Marconett KM6VV 2004-04-29 12:21:55 UTC Re: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] Re: G_Code sharing ballendo 2004-04-30 06:50:49 UTC Mach2 is as close to a commercial control as you can get without buyng one tomp_tag 2004-05-02 21:29:30 UTC Re: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] G_Code sharing