Feature Request

More
07 Sep 2020 04:17 #181091 by phillc54
Replied by phillc54 on topic Feature Request
Oops, I am blind B)

Can you try with it with [JOINT_3]HOME = -0.2

I learnt something today from your config, previously I was always under the assumption that HOME_OFFSET was required to be within or equal to the soft limits. Now I need to fix the PlasmaC docs...

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
07 Sep 2020 10:34 #181113 by snowgoer540
Replied by snowgoer540 on topic Feature Request

phillc54 wrote: Oops, I am blind B)

Can you try with it with [JOINT_3]HOME = -0.2

Sure can, do I need to update or anything first? Or just change that value?


I learnt something today from your config, previously I was always under the assumption that HOME_OFFSET was required to be within or equal to the soft limits.

Well if whatever I did in my config seemed like a stroke of brilliance on my part I can assure you it was an accident...it was :)

Now I need to fix the PlasmaC docs...

We need to find a way to keep those in sync... or maybe you can send me the changes and I will work them into the doc I am editing? Hopefully we can avoid my editing a doc that's too far out of date haha. Open to suggestion.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
07 Sep 2020 10:39 #181115 by phillc54
Replied by phillc54 on topic Feature Request

snowgoer540 wrote: Sure can, do I need to update or anything first? Or just change that value?

Yep, just change the value.


We need to find a way to keep those in sync... or maybe you can send me the changes and I will work them into the doc I am editing? Hopefully we can avoid my editing a doc that's too far out of date haha. Open to suggestion.

Shoot, I forgot about that. I'll think of something...

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
07 Sep 2020 11:02 #181124 by snowgoer540
Replied by snowgoer540 on topic Feature Request
Changed to -0.2. Seemed to work fine now!

Why does that make a difference??

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
07 Sep 2020 11:08 #181129 by phillc54
Replied by phillc54 on topic Feature Request

snowgoer540 wrote: Changed to -0.2. Seemed to work fine now!

Why does that make a difference??

As Dewey pointed out to me a while ago, when offsets are active the axis should not go near the soft limits. I set the maximum Z offset to 5mm (0.0196") below X max. In your config the Z home was 0.001" below the Z max while still active.
I will need to fix the docs and maybe have a popup warning when LinuxCNC is loaded when it finds the settings may cause issues.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
07 Sep 2020 11:17 #181132 by snowgoer540
Replied by snowgoer540 on topic Feature Request

phillc54 wrote:

snowgoer540 wrote: Changed to -0.2. Seemed to work fine now!

Why does that make a difference??

As Dewey pointed out to me a while ago, when offsets are active the axis should not go near the soft limits. I set the maximum Z offset to 5mm (0.0196") below X max. In your config the Z home was 0.001" below the Z max while still active.
I will need to fix the docs and maybe have a popup warning when LinuxCNC is loaded when it finds the settings may cause issues.


One thing I dont quite understand is when I home my Z now, it parks it -0.2 down, but I can jog up past that. To 0.050" below the limit switch.

my X and Y are set up similarly to how Z was. Do they need to be changed?

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
07 Sep 2020 11:25 #181136 by phillc54
Replied by phillc54 on topic Feature Request

snowgoer540 wrote: [One thing I dont quite understand is when I home my Z now, it parks it -0.2 down, but I can jog up past that. To 0.050" below the limit switch.

Because that is the max limit. If you start a program from that position then you will likely see this issue.


[/quote] my X and Y are set up similarly to how Z was. Do they need to be changed?[/quote]
No they should be fine.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
07 Sep 2020 11:54 #181137 by snowgoer540
Replied by snowgoer540 on topic Feature Request

phillc54 wrote: Because that is the max limit. If you start a program from that position then you will likely see this issue.

It doesn't appear to cause the issue for whatever reason. But I don't want to tempt fate, so how do I prevent it from letting me park it that high then? Because I'm used to jogging it to the top before doing a run.

I'm not fully wrapping my head around what's going on here, for some reason.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
07 Sep 2020 12:03 - 07 Sep 2020 12:04 #181138 by phillc54
Replied by phillc54 on topic Feature Request
You could just home your machine and leave the Z axis where it is.
It is probably my explanation...:)

Edit: do you use a pendant?
Last edit: 07 Sep 2020 12:04 by phillc54.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
07 Sep 2020 12:08 #181141 by snowgoer540
Replied by snowgoer540 on topic Feature Request

phillc54 wrote: You could just home your machine and leave the Z axis where it is.
It is probably my explanation...:)

Edit: do you use a pendant?

True, but I often jog the torch down so I can see where it's going to end up when I'm touching off. When I jog back up, it doesnt stop at the -0.2, goes happily up to where the offset is from homing.

No pendant here..yet :evil:

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

Moderators: phillc54
Time to create page: 0.136 seconds
Powered by Kunena Forum