. .
Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst ... 234
  1. #31
    Muzzer's Avatar
    Lives in Lytham St. Annes, United Kingdom. Last Activity: 10 Hours Ago Has been a member for 6-7 years. Has a total post count of 417. Received thanks 61 times, giving thanks to others 10 times.
    I read Peter Smit's bible on g code to understand what G28 was about. I suspect the reason I edited my post was to ensure it actually did what was required ie retract fully to machine Z home position. Don't recall the specifics but I may have struggled to understand what Newker were actually doing with it.

    I also ended up rewriting the tool length macros because they didn't work correctly, something to do with my machine being a knee mill and they probably targetted a bed mill..

    You can edit the post processor easily enough to spit out the correct g code for end of program, tool change etc. I also put in an option to decide whether to move the table to an accessible position after finishing the machining. That comes up as an option in the Fusion dialogue box when you post process the job.

  2. #32
    Interesting discussion, at least to me who has had perhaps more limited access to different controller types than you guys!

    Absolutely right, Dean - I got my G90 and G53 in a twist. Stupid of me - I've used enough of both in things like tool-height setting macros to be aware of the difference. Your detailed description of why absolute/incremental around the G28 is needed is a subtle point that isn't really that obvious when you read the manuals. Not until you've driven the tool through the bed and then had to figure out why...

    I've only used G28 in the context of Mach3/CSMIO and MyCNC/ET6, and it works the same way in both - "go to predefined ref posn", and the user can specify the ref posn in parameters somewhere. Sounds like this is rather different to the Fanuc interpretation. Another case of "both are right but both are different" - you just need to understand what's happening. Now I know about the Fanuc view of G28, the SZGH manual makes a lot more sense. I would guess that they have added the "G281" etc format so that instead of
    G90 G28 Z0
    G91
    you could just use G283 ("move to ref posn along Z axis")
    Not that much of a saving, really

    I understand the point about the Fanuc G30 taking a position parameter for the destination position although moving via an intermediate point. What I read in the SZGH manual, though, sounds as if the position parameter concept doesn't exist and they use the work coordinate zero as the final destination. Frankly, I'm going to end up experimenting once the machine is up and running but even if we end up redefining machine zero somewhere other than the home switch position because that's more useful for manual tool-change, that's not a big deal. I've left the default action in F360 to move to the toolchange position at the end of a toolpath in place although Muzzer's idea of making that a tick box option in the PP is interesting. On the odd occasion when I've wanted to move the tool out of the way at the end of a run, I've edited the gcode manually.

  3. #33
    Muzzer's Avatar
    Lives in Lytham St. Annes, United Kingdom. Last Activity: 10 Hours Ago Has been a member for 6-7 years. Has a total post count of 417. Received thanks 61 times, giving thanks to others 10 times.
    I you are interested, here's my post processor. You'd need to change the file ending to .CPS to use it with Fusion.

    Pretty sure it will work with the SZGH controllers.
    Attached Files Attached Files

  4. #34
    Many thanks. Shall hold off doing anything until the machine is up and running for testing. So far, we know that we can generate gcode from F360 using the built-in Fanuc PP and that runs (it makes the servos go round on the bench!) but at least that means that there are no unrecognised commands or syntax errors in there. Whether it does what it is supposed to is another thing and will have to wait for now. I feel a bit of air-cutting coming on!

  5. #35
    Muzzer's Avatar
    Lives in Lytham St. Annes, United Kingdom. Last Activity: 10 Hours Ago Has been a member for 6-7 years. Has a total post count of 417. Received thanks 61 times, giving thanks to others 10 times.
    Yes, IIRC, the Fanuc post works 99% out of the box with these things - it's just that you probably want to customise it to generate the desired opening and closing commands. Also, they haven't 100% implemented Macro B and I have a feeling they added a few variations of their own. I was also unable to get my original 4th axis to work correctly (inverse time etc).

  6. #36
    Indeed - wouldn't expect a major issue with that.

    But remembering that I know nuffin' - what's Macro B?

  7. #37
    Muzzer's Avatar
    Lives in Lytham St. Annes, United Kingdom. Last Activity: 10 Hours Ago Has been a member for 6-7 years. Has a total post count of 417. Received thanks 61 times, giving thanks to others 10 times.
    That's the full fat name for the Fanuc g code std AFAIK.

Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst ... 234

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Upgrade questions fro beaver mill VBRP Mk2 with Anilam Crusader II controls
    By Breg90 in forum Milling Machines, Builds & Conversions
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 25-05-2020, 08:08 PM
  2. RFQ: Semi automatic welding system Linear beam control system
    By richway in forum Projects, Jobs & Requests
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 24-01-2017, 08:54 PM
  3. Replies: 3
    Last Post: 18-05-2014, 03:40 AM
  4. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 06-02-2014, 09:52 PM
  5. drive control system
    By oadamo in forum General Electronics
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 22-05-2011, 07:30 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •