Re: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] Re: Irrelevant Gcode?!?

amen
--
Phil Mattison
http://www.ohmikron.com/

----- Original Message -----
From: Dennis Schmitz <denschmitz@...>
To: <CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Wednesday, May 17, 2006 10:01 PM
Subject: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] Re: Irrelevant Gcode?!? wasRe: Interface. Gauging
interest.


> I'm with the other guy here, but from a different direction. Gcode is
> a constraint that keeps the machine from doing everything that it
> could do rather than an enabler. It was designed in a time when the
> controller boxes had much less compute power than the Silicon Graphics
> CAD stations where the parts were designed, so it simplifies basically
> everything.
>
> Its only staying power is inertia of installed machinery and CAD/CAM
> software. But that translates to money, which I do respect.
>
> Anyway, a machine controller should be able to take multiple CAD file
> formats directly along with input about ambient temperature, cutter
> dimensions and type, and stock alloy. Then scan the work surface for
> workpiece placement, establish fiducials for multiple operations, then
> map the finished part into the block of steel. Like a sculptor sees
> the finished head of Caesar in a block of marble, the controller sees
> the part inside the steel. THEN it carves the part in the most
> efficient manner possible. When finished, it then picks up a precision
> grinder, and in conjunction with the same laser scanner that saw the
> block proceeds to give it a high polish to micron tolerance (or
> whatever finish you tell it to give).
>
> And it should be able to do all this with the processor in my PDA.
>
> So much like the Visual BASIC macros in an an Excel spreadsheet
> thinking about G-code as anything other than a necessary evil is a
> mistake.
>
> Seriously, no offense to people making their living off G-code. Feel
> free to say bad things about the TRS-80 if it makes you feel better.
>
> On 5/17/06, ballendo <ballendo@...> wrote:
> > Phil,
> >
> > You're off the mark on this one IMO.
> >
> > Those "irrelevant" items you mention are QUITE relevant in today's
> > modern machine shop. Even one with 50 thousand buck CADCAM...
> >
> > AND, also in a one man shop with cheap or NO cadcam. In fact
> > those "irrelevant things like alternate COsys's are what allow that
> > one man shop to compete with the big guys...
> >
> > Grab Peter Smid's book on Gcode programming, and anything by Mike
> > Lynch. CNCconcepts.com
> >
> > Ballendo
> >
> > --- In CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO@yahoogroups.com, "Phil Mattison"
> > <mattison20@...> wrote:
> > >
> > > Hi Chris,
> > >
> > > I think I said I didn't expect it change any time soon. I said the
RS274NGC
> > > spec is a piece of crap. It is obviously from a time when most CNC
code was
> > > written by hand, like the days when my dad wrote financial programs in
> > > assembly language. It is full of constructs supporting things that are
> > > largely irrelevant now, like alternate coordinate systems for array
> > > machining, automatic tool radius compensation, etc. G-Code as a
convention
> > > (i.e. G0 G1, etc.) is as good as any equivalent, but the collection of
> > > capabilities is mostly obsolete because most of what was created to
simplify
> > > manual G-Code writing is no longer necessary with all the automatic
code
> > > generators already available. Whoever produces the desired results in
the
> > > cheapest, easiest manner will ultimately win, tradition
notwithstanding.
> > > --
> > > Phil Mattison
> > > http://www.ohmikron.com/
> > >
> > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > From: lcdpublishing <lcdpublishing@...>
> > >
> > > > Hi Phil,
> > > >
> > > > Not sure what you are basing this opinion on, but, don't expect
RS274
> > > > (or simply put, G-Code programming) to go away. The most complex
> > > > shapes that are machined today are done with G-codes on ordinary CNC
> > > > machines all over the world.
> > > >
> > > > The G-Code method of programming has been around since the beginning
> > > > of CNC, and will remain there, probably forever. There really isn't
> > > > anything lacking with it, nor is there anything that can't be
machined
> > > > with it.
> > > >
> > > > There have been a number of attempts over the years to "change the
> > > > world", most have failed, some have done okay. For example, at one
> > > > point in time, it was thought that programming on the shop floor was
> > > > the best way to get things done. During that phase, control mfgs.
came
> > > > out with various "Conversational" controls which were somewhat of a
> > > > CAM system on top of the basic G-Code interpreting control.
> > > >
> > > > While this method of programming is still around and still
applicable
> > > > in short-run shops, production shops frown on it as being very
> > > > inefficient. I mean really, you have a $150,000.00+ machine tool
> > > > being used as a $5,000.00 CAM system.
> > > >
> > > > As to the various flavors of G-Code programming, there have been
many
> > > > attempts to change and it seems as though every control mfg puts
their
> > > > own little spin on it. But it's still the basic G-Code and
cartesian
> > > > coordinate system that gets the work done on machine tools.
> > > >
> > > > So, while you may think it is "Crap", the leaders in the machine
tool
> > > > industry put their money on G-Code programming as THE method of
> > > > programming CNC machines.
> > > >
> > > > Don't expect it to change anytime soon.
> > > >
> > > > Chris
> > > >
> > > > > After a careful reading of the various flavors of RS274 it looks
to me like
> > > > > RS274NGC is pretty much an outdated piece of crap when it comes to
machine
> > > > > control, surviving only by virtue of familiarity and inertia. Not
that I
> > > > > think it is going away any time soon, but it certainly doesn't
look like
> > > > > golden handcuffs if you're interested in the general
motion-control market.
> > > > > I suspect it may not really have much of a strangle-hold on the
hobby CNC
> > > > > market either, since that will have many new-comers if it is in
fact growing
> > > > > rapidly.
>
>
> Addresses:
> FAQ: http://www.ktmarketing.com/faq.html
> FILES: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO/files/
> Post Messages: CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO@yahoogroups.com
>
> Subscribe: CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
> Unsubscribe: CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
> List owner: CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO-owner@yahoogroups.com, wanliker@...,
timg@...
> Moderator: pentam@... indigo_red@... davemucha@...
[Moderators]
> URL to this group: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO
>
> OFF Topic POSTS: General Machining
> If you wish to post on unlimited OT subjects goto:
aol://5863:126/rec.crafts.metalworking or go thru Google.com to reach it if
you have trouble.
> http://www.metalworking.com/news_servers.html
>
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/jobshophomeshop I consider this to be a
sister site to the CCED group, as many of the same members are there, for OT
subjects, that are not allowed on the CCED list.
>
> NOTICE: ALL POSTINGS TO THIS GROUP BECOME PUBLIC DOMAIN BY POSTING THEM.
DON'T POST IF YOU CAN NOT ACCEPT THIS.....NO EXCEPTIONS........
> bill
> List Mom
> List Owner
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>
>