Re: found a problem... Supertech mill

I figured it might be that, just like Excel does with very tiny
numbers...but I can't understand why it would want to when it's set
up to increment the one axis in moves of .050, and the not-quite-
zero's are NOT evenly split between the two .050 increments on either
side...

--- In CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO@yahoogroups.com, Stephen Wille Padnos
<spadnos@...> wrote:

>
> Lurch wrote:
>
> >still fighting with my supertech mill. the .CAM file it creates,

has

> >some odd code in it...I understand every line of the file except
> >one. Here's an excerpt:
> >
> >line -3,0.15,3,0.15
> >line 3,0.1,-3,0.1
> >line -3,0.05,3,0.05
> >line 3,1.259e-006,-3,1.259e-006
> >line -3,-0.05,3,-0.05
> >line 3,-0.1,-3,-0.1
> >line -3,-0.15,3,-0.15
> >line 3,-0.2,-3,-0.2
> >
> >when it gets to the line with the "e-006" part, it indexes the
> >spindkle to the retract height, resets the x-axis to whatever

value

> >it would have been at the end of that cut, and carries on...with

the

> >x-axis now out of calibration by whatever amount is the difference
> >between where it was at when it happened and where it would have

been

> >at the end of the cut.
> >
> >I don't even know what "e-006" IS...but at least now I know what's
> >happening. I'm going to manually edit the file to remove those
> >glitches and do a 'dry run' with no tool and see whre it finishes
> >up...
> >
> >
> It's printing out very small nubers as exponential. 1e-06 is 10 ^ -

6,

> or 0.000001. 1.259e-06 is 0.000001259
> Why it's doing that, I have no idea :)
>
> >Lurch
> >
> >
> - Steve
>