Sheetcam and trying to generate spotting gcode.

PlasmaC or QtPlasmaC

Plasmac. Will upgrade when I have a bit of spare time...

Hmm, that is weird, I have no issue in PlasmaC but I get that error in QtPlasmac. I can see what is happening/ not happening but I am not sure why.

You are attemting to use two temporay materials in this file which doesn't work, only the last one will be used.
linuxcnc.org/docs/devel/html/plasma/plas....html#magic-comments

It seems to fall over because it reads the gcode file quicker than it can create the temporary materials, I think it needs to be reversed and only use the first one then give an error popup if it sees any more.

This works around the timing issue if you want to try it. In /configs/by_machine/plasmac/plasmc_gcode.py there is a function:
def write_temp_default_material(data):
add this as the first line:
time.sleep(0.25)

rodw wrote:

phillc54 wrote: I found the result from when we tested this some time back, with 500 materials the maximum time to change was 0.16 seconds. I don't "think" anything has changed in the meantime.

This is the error I'm getting on loading the file with magic comments

Attachment not found

Using the post above

Attachment not found

which does:

Code:

;begin material setup T0 M6 (select plasma tool) G43 H0 (apply tool offsets) (o=0, ph=4.1, pd=0, ch=4.1, fr=100, pe=0.5) F#<_hal[plasmac.cut-feed-rate]> ;end material setup

In the attached file, there are two different material magic comments in the same cut file.

I am curious, why would you want to have two different materials in the same cut file?

Just intrigued what the use case is for this.

snowgoer540 wrote:
In the attached file, there are two different material magic comments in the same cut file.

I am curious, why would you want to have two different materials in the same cut file?

Just intrigued what the use case is for this.

Because one is a drilling operation for spotting on one layer and the other is a jet tool for plasma cutting.

Sheetcam loads a tool for each operation.

rodw wrote:

snowgoer540 wrote:
In the attached file, there are two different material magic comments in the same cut file.

I am curious, why would you want to have two different materials in the same cut file?

Just intrigued what the use case is for this.

Because one is a drilling operation for spotting on one layer and the other is a jet tool for plasma cutting.

Sheetcam loads a tool for each operation.

Using magic comments?

Well no cos it would not load as above.
But yes, that was the whole point as magic comments will let Sheetcam be the master of the materials with Les's post..

I think that would be expected behaviour from the post processor on a tool change for the second operation.
I didn't write the code, Les did!

rodw wrote: Well no cos it would not load as above.
But yes, that was the whole point as magic comments will let Sheetcam be the master of the materials with Les's post..

I think that would be expected behaviour from the post processor on a tool change for the second operation.
I didn't write the code, Les did!

I just didnt know because I never use that work flow. All my tools, etc. are already defined in sheetcam.

snowgoer540 wrote:

rodw wrote:
I just didnt know because I never use that work flow. All my tools, etc. are already defined in sheetcam.

Yes me too, but I was testing Les's new post processor in this thread that allows Sheetcam to send its tool info direct to Plasmac which avoids any issues where the plasmac and shhetcam settings are not the same.