Another plasma component...
- thefabricator03
- Offline
- Platinum Member
-
Less
More
- Posts: 1130
- Thank you received: 531
29 Jun 2019 02:18 #138148
by thefabricator03
Replied by thefabricator03 on topic Another plasma component...
Phill,
It wouldn't be a bad idea to attach the Gcode file of the PlasmaC wrench to the first post as a basic test for new users with the PlasmaC branch.
It wouldn't be a bad idea to attach the Gcode file of the PlasmaC wrench to the first post as a basic test for new users with the PlasmaC branch.
The following user(s) said Thank You: phillc54
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
- thefabricator03
- Offline
- Platinum Member
-
Less
More
- Posts: 1130
- Thank you received: 531
29 Jun 2019 02:22 - 29 Jun 2019 02:22 #138149
by thefabricator03
I was using a post that was put up by John,
I hacked it to remove the material file section so I could load the parts without using PlasmaC built in material feature, No wonder why it did not work!
Replied by thefabricator03 on topic Another plasma component...
What post processor were you using? DO you want to post about it on the sheetcam thread?
I was using a post that was put up by John,
I hacked it to remove the material file section so I could load the parts without using PlasmaC built in material feature, No wonder why it did not work!
Last edit: 29 Jun 2019 02:22 by thefabricator03.
The following user(s) said Thank You: rodw
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
29 Jun 2019 04:17 #138151
by rodw
Yeh, I was wondering if there should not be a variable in the POST to select between modes. But why don't you save your toolset from sheetcam and import it into plasmac with Phill's materialverter script? Thats what I did. It only take a few seconds.
Replied by rodw on topic Another plasma component...
What post processor were you using? DO you want to post about it on the sheetcam thread?
I was using a post that was put up by John,
I hacked it to remove the material file section so I could load the parts without using PlasmaC built in material feature, No wonder why it did not work!
Yeh, I was wondering if there should not be a variable in the POST to select between modes. But why don't you save your toolset from sheetcam and import it into plasmac with Phill's materialverter script? Thats what I did. It only take a few seconds.
The following user(s) said Thank You: thefabricator03
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
29 Jun 2019 04:41 #138154
by phillc54
Replied by phillc54 on topic Another plasma component...
I have pushed an update that allows you to enter zero for the Safe Height which will use the Z axis maximum as the safe height and disable the reduced safe height error message.
I have attached the wrench.ngc files as samples for cutting to the first post.
There is still no sign of an update on the buildbot yet nor has the user guide made it into the docs. I don't know how long this will take...
I have attached the wrench.ngc files as samples for cutting to the first post.
There is still no sign of an update on the buildbot yet nor has the user guide made it into the docs. I don't know how long this will take...
The following user(s) said Thank You: mkardasi
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
29 Jun 2019 05:15 #138156
by phillc54
Replied by phillc54 on topic Another plasma component...
Probing seems to be causing a few issues and Rod made a suggestion in
this post
that seems to make sense.
I am thinking of expanding on Rod's idea a bit further and I would like to hear your thoughts on it.
Remove the Probe Height setting.
Every probe attempt would then initially move Z down at the Setup Speed rate.
When the workpiece is sensed Z moves up 10mm (0.4") above the surface at the Setup Speed rate.
The down probe is then done at the Probe Speed rate.
The final up probe is done at the same rate as it currently does which is 0.001mm (0.00004") per servo cycle.
I think in most cases this would result in less time spent probing and would completely remove the confusion about Probe Height.
I am thinking of expanding on Rod's idea a bit further and I would like to hear your thoughts on it.
Remove the Probe Height setting.
Every probe attempt would then initially move Z down at the Setup Speed rate.
When the workpiece is sensed Z moves up 10mm (0.4") above the surface at the Setup Speed rate.
The down probe is then done at the Probe Speed rate.
The final up probe is done at the same rate as it currently does which is 0.001mm (0.00004") per servo cycle.
I think in most cases this would result in less time spent probing and would completely remove the confusion about Probe Height.
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
29 Jun 2019 09:19 #138165
by rodw
Replied by rodw on topic Another plasma component...
Phill, sounds interesting. I think the 10mm should be after the ohmic sensor or float switch resets. At that sort of speed, you could get a fair bit of deflection. In fact, it might not even need to be lifted 10mm. Maybe
1. Move down fast until a sensor triggers
2. Back up fast until sensor lets go
3. Move down slow until sensor triggers
4. Back up at 0.001mm per cycle
1. Move down fast until a sensor triggers
2. Back up fast until sensor lets go
3. Move down slow until sensor triggers
4. Back up at 0.001mm per cycle
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
29 Jun 2019 09:31 #138166
by phillc54
Replied by phillc54 on topic Another plasma component...
Yep, that's what I meant by 10mm above the surface.
I agree, less than 10mm may be OK.
I could leave the spinbox from Probe Height and make it Probe Backoff then users could pick a value to suit their machine
I agree, less than 10mm may be OK.
I could leave the spinbox from Probe Height and make it Probe Backoff then users could pick a value to suit their machine
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
29 Jun 2019 16:59 #138181
by mkardasi
Replied by mkardasi on topic Another plasma component...
Page 9 of the User's guide
PID P Gain is listed as used by mode 0. Shouldn't this be modes 0,1?
PID P Gain is listed as used by mode 0. Shouldn't this be modes 0,1?
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
- islander261
- Offline
- Platinum Member
-
Less
More
- Posts: 757
- Thank you received: 216
29 Jun 2019 23:03 #138211
by islander261
Replied by islander261 on topic Another plasma component...
Guys
I am most likely in the minority here. I have not had any probing problems since the middle of May. I find the current probing with rapid to a clearance height and then probe speed to material to work well. I can easily see that results of rapid down coupled with an ohmic or float switch malfunction to cause damage to your torch or the mounting. I am having a hard time seeing how two moves to the material surface will be faster.
I will have to wait until after 8/7 before I can try using PlasmaC from the new master branch.
John
I am most likely in the minority here. I have not had any probing problems since the middle of May. I find the current probing with rapid to a clearance height and then probe speed to material to work well. I can easily see that results of rapid down coupled with an ohmic or float switch malfunction to cause damage to your torch or the mounting. I am having a hard time seeing how two moves to the material surface will be faster.
I will have to wait until after 8/7 before I can try using PlasmaC from the new master branch.
John
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
30 Jun 2019 00:01 #138215
by phillc54
Replied by phillc54 on topic Another plasma component...
Yes, it should.Page 9 of the User's guide
PID P Gain is listed as used by mode 0. Shouldn't this be modes 0,1?
The following user(s) said Thank You: mkardasi
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
Moderators: snowgoer540
Time to create page: 0.255 seconds