A Widescreen Blender-Style Interface

Well, I don't mean it to be ER specific, either. If a bit was put into a R8 collet, or a MT, I would like to know how far from the tip to the collet, so the bit can be replaced, when dull.

In the end, a manual change user is going to touch off from tool to workpeice or test area, but for replacing the bit, it would be nice to know how much stickout there should be to get it in the ballpark.

BrendaEM wrote: Well, I don't mean it to be ER specific, either. If a bit was put into a R8 collet, or a MT, I would like to know how far from the tip to the collet, so the bit can be replaced, when dull.

In the end, a manual change user is going to touch off from tool to workpeice or test area, but for replacing the bit, it would be nice to know how much stickout there should be to get it in the ballpark.

Generally, these are all measurements that are recorded in the cam. I think it would be great to have a reference in the controller as well, I thought that's what you were going to add in initially, but if you are going to rely solely on n the existing tool table, there are only two inputs currently available. You would have to add or code additional information into linuxcnc I believe to record any additional data that was column specific. Otherwise you'll have to add it in the comments section in the name.

I currently name my tools with quite a bit of information for this reason so I can verify the tool by more that just it's number. For example:

Tool 3: 1/2" 3FL-EM 1.00"-LOC 1.375"-SO CRB

BrendaEM wrote: Well, I don't mean it to be ER specific, either. If a bit was put into a R8 collet, or a MT

I would pose anyone cnc'd running an R8 or MT spindle will migrate to TTS tooling, it's a natural progression for anyone who uses their machine more than once every couple of months, the benefits of repeatable holders makes cam and machine work so much easier it becomes a must have. And the frustration level without it is enough to drive even the most frugal hobbiest to pony up at least for the chinese versions available or make their own.

If you are doing this on the cheap, machine a collar/sleeve/washer/etc... and either press, or glue it onto your individual tools. Depending on how you value your time, this can be really cheap, or free, depending on what is in your scrap box. Loctite type bearing adhesive works really well when gluing a collar or sleeve to a tool.

Saying that, now that I have several of them, I really like my TTS holders. They are a lot cheaper than some other tool holding setups, and easier to set up and measure than the previously mentioned method.

BrendaEM wrote: Well, I don't mean it to be ER specific, either. If a bit was put into a R8 collet, or a MT, I would like to know how far from the tip to the collet, so the bit can be replaced, when dull.

The length reference isn't necessarily from the gauge line of the taper. Quite often it will be relative to the probe-tool. for example.

On my mill the reference is the machine table when the tool is in the setting hole. I don't know, or care. whether the holder gauge line is actually level with the table. It just needs to be a consistent reference.

Many lathes have a tool table relative to a "master" tool, which is always kept with zeros in the offsets. Then the G54 (etc) offset is the number needed to make that tool turn a true diameter.

Just to be clear, I not going to propose an CNC interface that requires a certain type of collet, or a minimum collet/tool holding standard. I want the interface to support ATC and Taper-type holding standards, but I want it to support collets as well. That it.

I will be on-going working on new Settings Menu, but I am going to revisit the Tool Menu, and I am going make enough room for additional controls for ATC.

Though, I've identified a problem: the tool name shown in the progressive indicator is too short. Currently, the progressive indicators have 2 rows of text in them: a label/legend and a value. Currently, the indicators are 256 pixels across, which go most of the way across the machine-specific panels for both the Mill and Lathe. The tool name shown, is too short.

Last night, I came up with 2 fixes, adding settings for: omitting the tool-number, and/or using a smaller font on the name. I don't feel this is enough.

I like the tool-specific panel to be a vertical strip, oddly, just the way it is in Axis, using progressive incrementers like in Gmoccapy. So, what I think needs to be done: add a third row of text. I don't like making a control that only gets used once, because it's bad for the programmer(s) and bad for the user but I don't see another option. Also, this control will look different than the others because it will be taller. The tool name can have a certain amount of characters a space and more characters. The lines will wrap on the control. This also introduces a usability issue as certain characters such as WWWW is much wider than Hill and it does make a difference with proportional fonts.

I still like the incrementer design in that it shows the user the position, in the changer, on the shelf, whereever, and how many clicks to go, to select a tool if they are impromptu machining, not under gcode.

I am going to experiment with a taller control, as well as miniature version of the control set that is used in the Tools menu. Originally, I wanted to have a mini-icon shown for the tool as well, so you can also see the tool or at least the tip in the machine-specific controls on the right portion on the screen.