G code Quick Reference

Nice work John, I think that does make it easier to find the codes faster!

Rick G

Hi and thanks for the references, its plenty helpful!

need to also know if these linuxCNC "G" & "M" codes are the same we saw over fanuc?

because I'm trying to edit the original or generic fanuc 3x, 4x, 5x in the masterCam X7.
looking over the .pst files that is in existance with the software pack, it seems some of what they are adding to the file is not actually needed by linuxCNC.

that's why I'm asking if anything else is difference or at least that I know what linuxCNC needs and doesn't.
that way, I can edit the post processors to output the correct paths and codes to linuxCNC so I don't have to re-edit or delete out every post I made from masterCam X7.

many many thanks !

There are many differences between the Fanuc code and the Linuxcnc one.
It also depends if you are talking about a milling machine or a lathe, or other.

Hi,
it will be on a mill machine.
currently running on 3 axis.

and another mill on 4 axis.

but, if I can use the mastercam x7 generic or fanuc processor then change it to the linuxCNC, it would be easier for me to follow the same format for all the other 4 or 5 axis.
posting the file or format here will also help others in need of finding or editing a post processor much easier.

but am needing to find out what's the main differences, example compensation or "G" numbers being different for other functions?
have tried out the previous EMC2 pp from mastercam v9, but turns out after upgrading it to X7, the linuxCNC has some "O" or "A" letters that are not required, as well as tool table calling and tool number.

hence, I'm thinking of just making it simple to format the pp.

let me know if you need any sample files from mastercam?
I'm uploading the generic and fanuc pp from the mastercam X7 here for references.

am still reading up on the things that was posted, lots of good information on this forum, still referencing them.

not sure why i am unable to post the generic fanuc 3x here...
if you need, please send me email.

Picking this up after a long absence and saw your G code quick reference link - looks to be very useful - but the links inside it appear to be broken?

Regards

Chris Parsons

I've just run it through a link checker and it has found 466 valid URL's and 0 invalid URL's so good job!

Thanks very much

Chris

The link seems broken again. Can it be fixed? If not, perhaps unpin the topic?