GearHeads Corner

Ya-Nvr-No wrote: This is where Art is telling you to place the Code
you seem to not be seeing the first move that puts you in position for the first feed move down.

( No Prolog Set )( GCode Objects Begin. )
( Object Ratchet Begins )
G20 (Imperial Mode)
G0 X3.445  Y3.307  Z0.250  A0.000  (this is a rapid move to the center 1/4" above part face)
(  Shaft Hole path - Inside Profile )
( Tool --: EndmillInch-E-R0.13-T0.0-F0.0 posted as T5 )
M5
M6 T5
M3 S1750
G1 Z-0.050  F20.00
G1 X3.441  Y3.307  F50.00  
G1 X3.438  Y3.308  

ArtF wrote: Rocket:

I can see where changing that line helped, but it also makes your first pass in the air , then drops double the amount
for the true  first cut. So I do think its ignoring that line. Lets focus on that line alone till we find it.

Remove the A.. see what it does.. we'll go from there..

Art

aawfm wrote: Rocket

I don't know what your background is or your experience with programming.  I see from your earliest posts on this subject that you did successfully install a turbo charger and build a brick pizza oven.  You obviously like challenging projects.

My backgound is electrical engineering, most of my career involved computer programming. I've been retired since 2007.  Last August I had the opportunity to work alongside a clock repairer on an 1860's tower clock.   I knew little or nothing about clocks...so I began searching for info on clock repair.

In September 2014, there was an exhibit from the Royal Maritime Museum that included working replicas of John Harrisons first three sea clocks and a display version replica of his winning chronometer.  When I found out that the description of the clock along with diagrams had been published by the Royal Astronomer in the late 1700's, I figured out how to download images of that document.   The challenge was to figure out the workings of the chronometer. That's when I found out that I knew little or nothing about gears or general clock theory.

Terms such as addendum, dedendum, diametric pitch, module, etc were greek to me.  I found online free resources to learn more about gear design, gear theory.   I also found a free document on Horology to understand the theory behind clock designs.  There were also good, free online descriptions of escapements.  If you want to build clocks you really need to understand what/how they work.

In January this year I decided to invest in Gearotics. It takes time/patience to explore the features of any software product.  The online videos, documentation, and the gear head forum have been a great help.

Since January, I've been able to build a simulation of a chronometer and the tower clock.  I tend to look at any software package a tool that needs to be mastered in order to know what its features/ limits are.   I think at this point I've pushed the simulation modeling of Gearotics capabilities pretty far.

I thought about building a wooden gear clock.  I too am more interested in clocks rather than tickers.  I decided that to build a wooden clock I'd be better off buying a kit rather than purchasing all of the equipment needed to build one from scratch ...I have a table saw, small drill press, and hand tools....that's it.  I may still try to build one using hand tools.

I have begun learning about Gcode to better understand the issues being raised in this thread (even though the equipment costs are outside of my retirement budget).  

Gcode is a programming language and if I ever do invest in a machine I have already learned that understanding the features/limits of a particular CNC machine and of Gcode would be crucial to creating good outputs...whether it be gears, escapements, etc.   If you don't understand what commands you are sending to a machine and what the machine expects then it will be impossible to accurately control it.   If you modify code generated by a computer program, there is always a possibility that you may be creating problems rather than solving them.

I think talking with the CNC machine manufacturer is the right thing to do.  I would suggest creating a simple Gcode program, perhaps machine a square which if it doesn't work, then the manufacturer have to figure out why.

Bill

ArtF wrote: Rocket:

I can see where changing that line helped, but it also makes your first pass in the air , then drops double the amount
for the true  first cut. So I do think its ignoring that line. Lets focus on that line alone till we find it.

Remove the A.. see what it does.. we'll go from there..

Art