Re: TECHNO.PST not proper.
Watching this with interest. Might be easier to remove the extra commands from the mptechno.pst than to troubleshoot and correct the other one.
Re: TECHNO.PST not proper.
Yea, I can easily do that with the code it spits out but I'd prefer if the post itself was configured to do it automatically.
BTW if you still intend on watching with interest, I'm cutting and pasting this thread to the Mastercam portion of the forum. So stay tuned over there.
Re: TECHNO.PST not proper.
Mastercam techno isel posts are easy enough to figure out what to delete.....techno is a very simple post, but there is a lot of crap (probably) in the post you will never use....just print it out and save a copy and delete what looks right. Mastercam checks the post for errors, and air cut tests would be the rest of the way.
Keith, I assume you got my techno post? If not, I can email it.....it's basically unchanged from when I moved to Mastercam 9 I think, just updated as I got newer versions of Mastercam (which I have finally pulled the plug on this year, Vectric for me now). Not sure how it compares to the posts mentioned here.
Greg
Re: TECHNO.PST not proper.
The thing is these two posts operate completely differently. For some odd reason the one I like won't allow me to let the gcode determine feed rate.
Does anyone have a Techno .pst file I could try out???
Someone at cnc software said they did a few months ago but never sent me no file.
Re: TECHNO.PST not proper.
Well, my apologies for not asking that particular question previously, glad you figured it out! After 20 years of one method (ok, not all of them with servo controls but as far back as I can remember), I would have never have considered anyone way using step mode and not preprocessing, especially a guitar maker.
Greg
2 Attachment(s)
Re: TECHNO.PST not proper.
The thing is Greg,
When you preprocess, it tells you that file has been preprocessed for such and such a speed. Therefore someone with limited capacity (such as myself) simply assumed that the act of preprocessing locks the controller into that particular speed that was set prior to the preprocess.
In reality however, this is not the case.
Although [ ]Overide Program Spd has been unchecked and the gcode has been properly posted to call out feed rate changes, the controller will still report back that it has been preprocessed for a set speed as shown in the pictures.
There you have it in a nutshell. I always thought the only way to vary the feed rate was to put it into step mode. I was duped!
Nevertheless and despite the false reports of the controller, the machine obviously shows variable feed rate and continuous motion.
When the depth and width of cut increases, the machine slows down. When the depth and width of cut decreases, the machine speeds up. When the machine comes close to a corner, it slows down. The machine will then increase speed after it exits a corner. All of this is programmable.
Success baby!
Next challenge: G64 P
From my understanding this is a call to control the accuracy of the cut during continuous motion.
Is that even possible with this setup?
1 Attachment(s)
Re: TECHNO.PST not proper.
Ah, I see,
I never saw that confirmation....maybe a different version (edited as I saw you had servos, thought maybe this confirmation was a stepper thing)
Also, I would hope that G64 isn't necessary as one would hope that the reason it pro-processes the files at all is to allow good accuracy in the continuous motion file. I also doubt it supports G64 at all, there should be a list of g-codes supported though somewhere on the net....now this thread is one of those places (see attached PDF).
But, no G64. The techno g-codes supported is very limited. Glad to here that variable speeds worked from the post though. That's the beauty of posts, they can make these few g-codes do a lot more....at the expense of long programs but do-able.
Re: TECHNO.PST not proper.
Today was a milestone day and I just figured I'd mark it.
After much testing, I successfully cut pine at varying feeds from about 20ipm to 100ipm with an 1/8" two flute endmill. I ran a pocketing toolpath with a conservative stepover of 20% of the tool at a depth of cut of 1/4" and a spindle speed of 16,000 rpm.
It was glorious!
When the tool did a full slot, the feed rate dropped to a crawl. When there was hardly any engagement it accelerated quickly to top speeds. As the tool encountered more material of my previously machined part, it slowed down accordingly. It took hairpin turns gracefully by slowing down and speeding up taking into account the varying amounts of wood it was plowing through. It just ran like a well oiled champ and smooth as butter!
After the cutting was done I inspected the carbide bit and found it to be only slightly warm to the touch, cleaner, and it almost seemed sharper!
I guess I let my imagination run away with me just a little. But today is a landmark day! One for the history books, and all I can say is...
Yea, baby! Constant volumetric material removal rate is the bomb! I would have never put an eighth inch tool down a quarter of an inch below the deck, or even fathomed running it at 100ipm unless I was testing with foam. Are you kidding me? The rule of thumb is half the diameter of the tool. Not anymore.
The rules have changed!