Re: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] Re: Ref: PC to controller comunication protocols

Hi ?,

Loading DXF files directly has been done before, but I prefer to let my
CAD/CAM program do that work. Gcode works fine for me. I sure wouldn't
skip it.

I do like to have MDI functions in my controller, and mine has a
"history" such that I can "line edit" and replay previously issued commands.

Yes, 18F's should be up to the task, and FP is available. The "fast
spin" to actually generate the steps shouldn't need FP.

By all means, keep on with your project!

Alan KM6VV

mrclicit wrote:

>
>Well, here's another.
>I have built a windows app with a nice gui that allows loading dxf
>output directly, displaying the toolpath, allowing a few simple
>adjustments,such a mirroring and offsets, then launches it to a
>microcontroller on my stepper driven 2 1/2 axis machine.
>
>I started going further, such as bresenham and ellipses, but then i
>asked - "would anyone want such a system?" i have started working with
>Inventor 2008, and realized the import of a full 3rd axis and the
>ability to read whatever filetype it will export, and the whole project
>continued to grow in my mind.
>
>Now i see so many on this list are working on similar projects, that I
>am not sure if I'll continue. What i would appreciate knowing is if
>anyone thinks the idea of skipping the g-code altogether might have
>been a good idea.....It seems to me that textiles and garments are cut
>everyday on commercially produced machines that do not rely on any
>single standard - has anyone worked with OptiTex software, for example?
>
>As for microcontrollers, there's a number of pic 18's that will handle
>all the line and curve calculations. It really shouldn't matter how
>it's written - I've done much larger projects based on PIC 18's in
>assembly, C, and basic....yes, basic - there are many ways to not need
>to rely on floating point and to crunch a fair number of decimal places
>even in picbasic.
>
>So, should I continue with my project? What is the collective view?
>
>