Is there a way to Flip X or Y
It is generally easier to home to (close to) 0,0,0 and some CAM packages assume that machine-zero is at the top of the Z axis.
So, you might want to configure with Z max = 0 and Zmin = -something and possibly the same for X and/or Y.
It's absolutely no problem if the machine coordinates are negative numbers, you rarely see them.
Though it is quite common to set the work coordinates so that Z = 0 is the top of the work and all Z positions are negative.
And in lathe operations Z = 0 is commonly the tailstock end of the workpiece, and again the Z-numbers in G-code will be negative.
I just felt bad because I am not used to needing so much help.
I did need the following trick, though, as well as using a negative homing offset. That was the only way I could get it to X-home to the left.
It was fun to finally make the machine at least move through the "LinuxCNC" test gcode. Musically, my machine sings a mournful dirge in minor 3rds.
I guess, that it's getting about time to get a spindle motor. Aside from coolant relays, the only other carriage I could put in front of the horse is making sure that between PyCam and FreeCad3D, I have some practice generating toolpaths. I usually use Rhino3D, but the CAM plug-ins for it, are too spendy, so I'm going to do it frugally.
BrendaEM wrote: I use Windows, Mac, Linux. I am okay with that.
Anything autodesk...is not my preference.
I can see that, and Fusion360 does feel like an attempt to kill off the competition prior to Turning Evil.
But it works so well (And I used to be a full-time Autodesk Inventor user in a previous job)
AFAIK, Fusion has a weakness: working with complicated things.
Well, I am glad there so many good design programs. I prefer Rhino because it's so interactive that I can flesh-out ideas without using much of any paper.
I am going to try the newer versions of Pycam, and I want to familiarize myself with FreeCad3D because I like opensource tools--even if OpenCascade's license has been a little suspicious in the past.
BrendaEM wrote: AFAIK, Fusion has a weakness: working with complicated things.
Are you thinking of Wintergatan here? He is modelling a _very_ complicated thing indeed.
That said, I mainly use Fusion for the CAM after importing parts from Inventor, so I haven't used it for assemblies.
(As a side effect of my day-job I get a free Inventor license for home use)
I used TC 2.03 when I was a frame & truss designer, to nut out joist layouts for the builders and a few details for frames and such (if some could be called that) and that was on WFWG.......man I'm showing my age. And occasionally to fix architects' FUs. Some couldn't under stand that they just couldn't use the same plan & change the roof pitch and still have usable floor space. Wasn't fun being 19 or 20 years old and explaining to a customer that the plan they paid big money for didn't work as intended and needed redrawing.
I'm still a bit of a luddite and I guess I don't use my machine to it's full extents.
BrendaEM wrote: Rhino handled this in Version 5--even before they made it faster for large projects. Except for the motor, valves, and a few bits, I drew this for a friend.
Is that an actual assembly? I thought that Rhino just did direct modelling. (But that impression dates from a long time back)
As in, are the parts held together by the holes, or just placed at the right point in space?