G10 L1 Pn not winning out over defined tool table

I've got a tool table defined, and I start up Axis with that tool table identified in the .ini file. I have some gcode, in which I'm trying to do a G10 L1 Pn Rr Zz (n, r, z are specific values), but the G10 L1 command doesn't seem to have any effect. What is in the specified tool table persists, despite the G10 L1 command.

I have different sets of tools that I use for different operations, so it would be nice to just be able to load the needed tools and associated tool params at the start of my program, vs having to restart Axis with a different .ini file, pointing to different tool tables.

Any suggestions on what I can do to make the G10 L1 command actually have an effect?

Thanks!

Need more info.

Show:
exactly what you do,
what you expected
what you got
and how you decided that's what you got.

Hi

Even by setting the tool.tbl to read-only (444) I cannot replicate this.

Try this:

Start the axis_mm sim

Do a MDI command T1M6

Then from MDI, G10 L1 P1 R?? where ?? is twice the displayed tool diameter

The tool diameter displayed should now be 4x what it was previously and the tool table will agree

I am using a branch of the master, but don't expect any different from 2.5.x

regards

OMG, I'm SO sorry. I want to go crawl under a table and hide my face.

Upon looking at my code this morning (amazing what a night of sleep will do), I realized that I wasn't calling G43 Hn after the M6 Tn. Now that I'm doing that, all is right with the world.

Sorry to waste folks' time on this.

No problem.

It is kind of counter intuitive to change tool and have the change completely ignored until G43 is used.

It makes the whole thing more flexible, as you can specify the offset from another tool, but it is certainly not what some other controllers do.

regards

IMHO this is stupid behaviour.
My experience was from a lathe where you specify the tool and tool offset in the same command.
I haven't programmed mills but I can't think of why you wouldn't want to do the same thing.
and the offset was applied at toolchange automatically.
Chris M

I could see an advantage if your current tool is significantly longer than your next tool, and you needed to go to a relative Z to allow removal of the current, longer tool (I've got a very small mill, and run into this not-infrequently), but if its the other way, its obviously not helpful for that. I don't do enough of this to know of other situations in which it would be advantageous, but I'd be curious to hear what those scenarios would be, from someone who knows a lot more about this than I do.