Possible bug or other issue

yoshimitsuspeed wrote:

ArcEye wrote:

I cannot see a problem with the code per se, albeit there is a lot in there that is far from ideal, typical CAM output.
Why is it moving Z to machine 0 and how does it know that is safe?
Normally the tool is touched off at G54 Z0 and a safe G54 height set for start and inter cut moves

Unfortunately this is the gcode straight out of fusion360. There was a thread on here a while back where someone from f360 was trying to get input on their software and gcode generation. There wasn't much interest or response from this community and the few suggestions that were made like changing the name from EMC to linuxcnc in F360 were ignored.

Rhetorical questions really, The output from CAM is universally horrible, just some are more stupid than others.

Your whole routine could be written in about 20 lines with an incrementing loop.

I seldom use CAM and because I hand code ( or semi-auto code through ngcgui routines I wrote anyway ), stuff in CAM generated routines stands out like a sore thumb.

If you are going to stick with it, will certainly be worth making sure the general header and footer codes are set to take off all offsets etc and wherever you are just using the same tool throughout
set up the machine with it first and don't have a toolchange (just delete it if there is no easy way to get rid of it).
Will remove a lot of scope for errors.

regards

andypugh wrote:

yoshimitsuspeed wrote:

If anyone is interested in checking out F360 CAM or it's gcode output you can get f360 as a private user for free..

I use it myself now that my Inventor HSM free trial expired. It actually has all the features of the Pro version of Inventor HSM, and despite some quirks is by far the best CAM out there that you can legitimately use for free.

As a bonus for me, it runs natively on my Mac, which means I can save .ngc files directly to the mill controller from the application over the network.

Yeah I agree with that. As much as I hate F360 the CAM is definitely the best for it's price, even if you do pay for it. F360 in general has a lot of stupid problems but even if I get to where I can afford better CAD I would probably still use F360 for CAM.
Maybe they will get their acts together before that happens. IDK. But yeah as far as overall function goes the post processor hasn't caused me any issues.
I finally just got around to setting things up to post straight to the CNC machine. I ended up using Google drive and insync since I had a paid copy of that that I otherwise never use. It makes my life so much easier than messing with a USB drive.
Now if they can only get the browser version up and running so I could actually make changes out at the machine instead of needing to run into the office every time.

ArcEye wrote:

yoshimitsuspeed wrote:

ArcEye wrote:

I cannot see a problem with the code per se, albeit there is a lot in there that is far from ideal, typical CAM output.
Why is it moving Z to machine 0 and how does it know that is safe?
Normally the tool is touched off at G54 Z0 and a safe G54 height set for start and inter cut moves

Unfortunately this is the gcode straight out of fusion360. There was a thread on here a while back where someone from f360 was trying to get input on their software and gcode generation. There wasn't much interest or response from this community and the few suggestions that were made like changing the name from EMC to linuxcnc in F360 were ignored.

Rhetorical questions really, The output from CAM is universally horrible, just some are more stupid than others.

Your whole routine could be written in about 20 lines with an incrementing loop.

I seldom use CAM and because I hand code ( or semi-auto code through ngcgui routines I wrote anyway ), stuff in CAM generated routines stands out like a sore thumb.

If you are going to stick with it, will certainly be worth making sure the general header and footer codes are set to take off all offsets etc and wherever you are just using the same tool throughout
set up the machine with it first and don't have a toolchange (just delete it if there is no easy way to get rid of it).
Will remove a lot of scope for errors.

regards

I do need more practice reading and writing gcode. That's another priority for another day though.

Thanks for the help everyone. I feel kind of silly for not figuring it out but I don't know how this offset got in there so it didn't occur to me to look there.

Before you post the gcode, the dialog box will tell you the file location of the post processor and allow you to edit it.
Just search for the "53" and it will bring you to the part that sticks in G53 Z0, and you can change it to G1 Z1, or whatever is a safe location depending on your machine and coordinate system.

This is what I did, also I removed the G43 lines because I don't use tool offsets.
You have to learn a little of the syntax they use for their post processor, but it isn't too difficult to figure out.

I see you on an MR2 forum quite a bit.
Your posts are quite helpful there.
I appreciate your comments and explanations. I am getting a 1986 MR2 running with a (1990/1991) 4agze from JDM. This was not my original idea. I purchased this car not running but with the motor installed. It is running now and later today I am having a tuner come in to tune the Haltech Sport 2000 ecu. This has been a labor of (frustration/love/fun) all rolled in to one, multi year, experience.

I am a longtime EMC2/LinuxCNC user with several machines converted.

This is me doing the coolant adjustment and tool changes.


I am seldom on the LinuxCNC forum. I watch the users and developers list all the time. I find the lists much more responsive and useful. It is not that I don't like the forum but I only have so much time in a day. I have to restrict my time on the MR2 forum or I will while away (waste) the day reading. I can only imagine how little I would get done if I did the same thing on other forums.

I believe I am almost done with the MR2 but I have two more to work on.

My long term goal is to have LinuxCNC controlling the motor on one of the MR2s.

Good to see you using LinuxCNC. I am in Wichita, Kansas. If you ever get this way you are welcome to stop by.

Wow that's a massive machine. Makes me really miss having access to something bigger than mine.


Thanks for the reply. Keep me updated on the build and definitely let me know if you need anything.

I am very curious to see what you do with Linuxcnc. In fact I have had very similar thoughts myself. One of which includes trying to come up with a better way to control the valves.
I know that most non cam driven valves use pneumatic actuators. It has always blown my mind that you could control air this quickly and accurately but I have always wondered if there was a stepper, servo or something similar that could react far enough fast enough to give better valve control than a cam. It has been my dream for years to develop an affordable camless valve control but I have never had the time and resources to do it.

Do you know of anything like a servo motor that could do this?

If you actually manage to get a car running on linuxcnc you definitely have to let me know hehe.

The machine in the video is controlled by LinuxCNC.