Turning - using IPR instead of IPM?
- Zahnrad Kopf
- Offline
- Elite Member
Less
More
- Posts: 218
- Thank you received: 3
09 May 2013 10:02 #33809
by Zahnrad Kopf
Turning - using IPR instead of IPM? was created by Zahnrad Kopf
Does LinuxCNC support IPR ( Inch Per Revolution ) or IPT ( Inch Per Tooth ) < for drilling >? I tried to search for it, but didn't get any hits just now. Very common, so surprised at a lack of info on it. Thanks.
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
09 May 2013 11:12 #33810
by cmorley
Replied by cmorley on topic Turning - using IPR instead of IPM?
www.linuxcnc.org/docs/2.5/html/gcode/gco...sec:G93-G94-G95-Mode
probably should be added to the lathe user information section.... John T what you think?
Chris M
probably should be added to the lathe user information section.... John T what you think?
Chris M
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
- Zahnrad Kopf
- Offline
- Elite Member
Less
More
- Posts: 218
- Thank you received: 3
09 May 2013 17:07 #33816
by Zahnrad Kopf
Ah! Okay. My mistake. I should have known to search for it by G code. I'll just be over here, feeling silly...
Thanks.
Replied by Zahnrad Kopf on topic Turning - using IPR instead of IPM?
www.linuxcnc.org/docs/2.5/html/gcode/gco...sec:G93-G94-G95-Mode
probably should be added to the lathe user information section.... John T what you think?
Chris M
Ah! Okay. My mistake. I should have known to search for it by G code. I'll just be over here, feeling silly...
Thanks.
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
09 May 2013 18:11 #33818
by BigJohnT
Replied by BigJohnT on topic Turning - using IPR instead of IPM?
Arrrg, I almost had duplicate info in the lathe section... fixed and added feed per rev.
John
John
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
- Zahnrad Kopf
- Offline
- Elite Member
Less
More
- Posts: 218
- Thank you received: 3
09 May 2013 18:43 #33822
by Zahnrad Kopf
Replied by Zahnrad Kopf on topic Turning - using IPR instead of IPM?
Great. Thank you.
By the by, I was reading your NGCGUI stuff last night. Thank you for posting it up there.
By the by, I was reading your NGCGUI stuff last night. Thank you for posting it up there.
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
09 May 2013 18:45 #33823
by BigJohnT
Replied by BigJohnT on topic Turning - using IPR instead of IPM?
I really love ngcgui and use it for 95% of all Ops on my lathe.
John
John
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
- Zahnrad Kopf
- Offline
- Elite Member
Less
More
- Posts: 218
- Thank you received: 3
09 May 2013 18:50 - 09 May 2013 18:51 #33824
by Zahnrad Kopf
If I am understanding it correctly, it comes fairly close to a good conversational programming tool. I will definitely be playing with it a bit.
On a related note, I will very likely be pinging you for input/advice/assistance on this retrofit, given that you've been here before.
Will be ordering a bunch of stuff in the next week or so in effort to hit the ground running. Will start with the replacement stepper drivers and MESA cards.
After, I'll concentrate on getting the operator panel laid out and made.
Thanks.
Replied by Zahnrad Kopf on topic Turning - using IPR instead of IPM?
I really love ngcgui and use it for 95% of all Ops on my lathe. John
If I am understanding it correctly, it comes fairly close to a good conversational programming tool. I will definitely be playing with it a bit.
On a related note, I will very likely be pinging you for input/advice/assistance on this retrofit, given that you've been here before.
Will be ordering a bunch of stuff in the next week or so in effort to hit the ground running. Will start with the replacement stepper drivers and MESA cards.
After, I'll concentrate on getting the operator panel laid out and made.
Thanks.
Last edit: 09 May 2013 18:51 by Zahnrad Kopf.
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
09 May 2013 19:56 #33831
by BigJohnT
Replied by BigJohnT on topic Turning - using IPR instead of IPM?
Actually it is much more powerful than a conversational control. You can program many steps then concatenate them into a full program in a matter of minutes. My preferred way when doing multiple parts is to program each step, test it, make adjustments then concatenate them. You can also have multiple steps with the same subroutine by clicking on the new button. Say you have a part with 3 different OD's, you create 3 copies of the OD subroutine and enter the values for each one.
John
John
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
Moderators: piasdom
Time to create page: 0.074 seconds