Another plasma component...
07 May 2019 04:58 #133022
by rodw
Replied by rodw on topic Another plasma component...
Thats actually a separate userspace module written in Python. You should be able to control it from sheetcam settings from your post processor.
See here: forum.linuxcnc.org/plasma-laser/33783-po...with-linuxcnc#106083
Neither, Phill, John or myself have a RS485 machine.
See here: forum.linuxcnc.org/plasma-laser/33783-po...with-linuxcnc#106083
Neither, Phill, John or myself have a RS485 machine.
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
07 May 2019 04:59 #133023
by rodw
Actually, with Pedro's consent maybe it could be deployed with plasmac to master.
Replied by rodw on topic Another plasma component...
Thats actually a separate userspace module written in Python. You should be able to control it from sheetcam settings from your post processor.
See here: forum.linuxcnc.org/plasma-laser/33783-po...with-linuxcnc#106083
Neither, Phill, John or myself have a RS485 machine.
Actually, with Pedro's consent maybe it could be deployed with plasmac to master.
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
07 May 2019 05:28 - 07 May 2019 05:28 #133024
by phillc54
Replied by phillc54 on topic Another plasma component...
Well, tool handling is crap.
There is something that is causing the loaded tool to be one tool change ahead of what it should be. At this stage I have no clue as to what is causing this.
If you do not change a tool during cutting you will not notice this problem, it only becomes apparent when you change a tool during a job.
If you want to play it safe you can disabled it by commenting out the following line in the ini file.
Cheers, Phill.
There is something that is causing the loaded tool to be one tool change ahead of what it should be. At this stage I have no clue as to what is causing this.
If you do not change a tool during cutting you will not notice this problem, it only becomes apparent when you change a tool during a job.
If you want to play it safe you can disabled it by commenting out the following line in the ini file.
#REMAP = T prolog=plasmac_tool_prolog ngc=plasmac_tool epilog=plasmac_tool_epilogJohn, you win that bet.I bet Phill might like to finish his machine some day instead of chasing new features in Plasmac
Cheers, Phill.
Last edit: 07 May 2019 05:28 by phillc54.
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
07 May 2019 05:43 #133026
by rodw
Replied by rodw on topic Another plasma component...
Phill, can you post the gcode you are using? Let somebody else check it out in case you got something wrong just to be safe.
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
07 May 2019 06:31 #133029
by phillc54
Replied by phillc54 on topic Another plasma component...
Rod,
I am using metric_tool_change.ngc in the nc_files directory.
If definitely has problems, seems like something to do with remapping, I must be doing it wrong.
You can see when you press run that the second tool loads, it actually does load the first one but goes straight through and loads the second.
Cheers, Phill.
I am using metric_tool_change.ngc in the nc_files directory.
If definitely has problems, seems like something to do with remapping, I must be doing it wrong.
You can see when you press run that the second tool loads, it actually does load the first one but goes straight through and loads the second.
Cheers, Phill.
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
07 May 2019 09:37 #133041
by rodw
linuxcnc.org/docs/devel/html/gcode/other...html#sec:select-tool
Should be
It is valid to call tool prepare (T4) well before the tool is used to give the magazine time to get ready
I'm just looking on Git so have not tried this.
Replied by rodw on topic Another plasma component...
Phill, I'm no expert on gcode but according to the docsRod,
I am using metric_tool_change.ngc in the nc_files directory.
If definitely has problems, seems like something to do with remapping, I must be doing it wrong.
You can see when you press run that the second tool loads, it actually does load the first one but goes straight through and loads the second.
Cheers, Phill.
linuxcnc.org/docs/devel/html/gcode/other...html#sec:select-tool
M6 T4Should be
T4 M6It is valid to call tool prepare (T4) well before the tool is used to give the magazine time to get ready
I'm just looking on Git so have not tried this.
The following user(s) said Thank You: phillc54
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
07 May 2019 21:26 #133098
by andypugh
Which is why I have been speculating on whether replacing "task" makes sense.
linuxcnc.org/docs/2.7/html/config/ini-config.html#_task_section
The code is here:
github.com/LinuxCNC/linuxcnc/tree/master/src/emc/task
I don't know how much is relevant, redundant or reusable.
Well, one point of a database is that anyone can add their own dates items, and as long as the expected ones also exist, there is no problem. (whereas adding new items to the current tool table is a problem)
Replied by andypugh on topic Another plasma component...
As you say this is not a milling machine, its a plasma machine.
Which is why I have been speculating on whether replacing "task" makes sense.
linuxcnc.org/docs/2.7/html/config/ini-config.html#_task_section
The code is here:
github.com/LinuxCNC/linuxcnc/tree/master/src/emc/task
I don't know how much is relevant, redundant or reusable.
I revisited your SQL wiki page recently to see if it could be incorporated into a plasma model and there was not one relevant data entity for plasma.
Well, one point of a database is that anyone can add their own dates items, and as long as the expected ones also exist, there is no problem. (whereas adding new items to the current tool table is a problem)
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
07 May 2019 21:58 #133101
by rodw
Andy, I could see how a plasma task would work so its food for thought and a pretty big Task to implement I think. But it would get access to start spindle to do all of the touch off stuff and total control over what the tool table looks like so its food for thought.
As far as changing the tool table fields, its more than that as the tables themselves are not applicable to plasma (eg totally wrong data entities)
Imagine if all the user had to do to implement a plasma machine was change one line in the ini file!
If I had more time at my disposal, I might even be tempted to try. How would the plasma task be incorporated into the build process?
Replied by rodw on topic Another plasma component...
As you say this is not a milling machine, its a plasma machine.
Which is why I have been speculating on whether replacing "task" makes sense.
linuxcnc.org/docs/2.7/html/config/ini-config.html#_task_section
The code is here:
github.com/LinuxCNC/linuxcnc/tree/master/src/emc/task
I don't know how much is relevant, redundant or reusable.
I revisited your SQL wiki page recently to see if it could be incorporated into a plasma model and there was not one relevant data entity for plasma.
Well, one point of a database is that anyone can add their own dates items, and as long as the expected ones also exist, there is no problem. (whereas adding new items to the current tool table is a problem)
Andy, I could see how a plasma task would work so its food for thought and a pretty big Task to implement I think. But it would get access to start spindle to do all of the touch off stuff and total control over what the tool table looks like so its food for thought.
As far as changing the tool table fields, its more than that as the tables themselves are not applicable to plasma (eg totally wrong data entities)
Imagine if all the user had to do to implement a plasma machine was change one line in the ini file!
If I had more time at my disposal, I might even be tempted to try. How would the plasma task be incorporated into the build process?
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
07 May 2019 22:19 #133104
by andypugh
Replied by andypugh on topic Another plasma component...
Milltask is created as a named binary by the submakefile:
github.com/LinuxCNC/linuxcnc/blob/0f91c5...emc/task/Submakefile
(I made up the phrase "named binary" as I am not particularly accomplished with build systems, all my LinuxCNC work has slotted into the existing build)
github.com/LinuxCNC/linuxcnc/blob/0f91c5...emc/task/Submakefile
(I made up the phrase "named binary" as I am not particularly accomplished with build systems, all my LinuxCNC work has slotted into the existing build)
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
08 May 2019 01:08 #133105
by rodw
Replied by rodw on topic Another plasma component...
Well Andy this turned out far simpler than I imagined. It took all of 10 minutes.
1. Copied the src/emc/task folder to src/emc/plasma
2. Edited the submake file to compile plasmatask
3. Commented out these lines in the sub make file as I was getting a duplicate main() function between plasma and task4. added the new /emc/plasma folder to the main Makefile in the /src folder
5. Compiled using make
6. changed my ini file to use plasmatask instead of milltask
And my machine ran as normal with the new task system!
How could we add new pins from here? It would be nice to alter the iocontrol module to provide plasma specific signals.Could we make a new module for plasma iocontrol in a similar way to what I've just done? (eg. ioplasma)
I might mention it would be really nice if the StateTags branch was merged to master as then we should be able to save the user commanded feedrate and do away with remapping totally!
So now, I think we could alter the whole tool handling system to suit plasma. I'm not sure Phil will be up to the challenge when he's staring at the finish line.
1. Copied the src/emc/task folder to src/emc/plasma
2. Edited the submake file to compile plasmatask
3. Commented out these lines in the sub make file as I was getting a duplicate main() function between plasma and task
EMCSVRSRCS := \
emc/task/emcsvr.cc5. Compiled using make
6. changed my ini file to use plasmatask instead of milltask
And my machine ran as normal with the new task system!
How could we add new pins from here? It would be nice to alter the iocontrol module to provide plasma specific signals.Could we make a new module for plasma iocontrol in a similar way to what I've just done? (eg. ioplasma)
I might mention it would be really nice if the StateTags branch was merged to master as then we should be able to save the user commanded feedrate and do away with remapping totally!
So now, I think we could alter the whole tool handling system to suit plasma. I'm not sure Phil will be up to the challenge when he's staring at the finish line.
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
Moderators: snowgoer540
Time to create page: 0.167 seconds