Search found 2201 matches
- Fri Mar 29, 2024 6:55 am
- Forum: Path/CAM
- Topic: How can I access Start Depth, Safe Height in a postprocessor?
- Replies: 10
- Views: 428
Re: How can I access Start Depth, Safe Height in a postprocessor?
Suggest something like this: totally untested pseudo code, caveat emptor. parser.add_argument( "--chipbreak", type=float, default=0, help="Chip break retraction for G73, default=0", ) if ((cmd == "G83") and clearance_depth < RETRACT_Z): trBuff += linenumber() + strG0_re...
- Fri Mar 29, 2024 6:01 am
- Forum: Path/CAM
- Topic: How can I access Start Depth, Safe Height in a postprocessor?
- Replies: 10
- Views: 428
Re: How can I access Start Depth, Safe Height in a postprocessor?
OK, I've checked into this a bit. chip break in UI replaces g83 with g73 as you stated, so no worries there,it's in the UI. G73 is ignored by GRBL so needs expanding in post-processor. regarding NIST compatibility: I'm the wrong man to scrutinize standards. If you want start making changes to FreeCA...
- Thu Mar 28, 2024 4:39 pm
- Forum: Path/CAM
- Topic: How can I access Start Depth, Safe Height in a postprocessor?
- Replies: 10
- Views: 428
Re: How can I access Start Depth, Safe Height in a postprocessor?
But may be my expectations do not conform with NIST. There is a general intent to stick to NIST where ever possible. If you want to suggest and code changes you need to look closely at the NIST definitions. These cycles are quite complex and very clearly specified but you need to go through it a fe...
- Thu Mar 28, 2024 12:38 pm
- Forum: Path/CAM
- Topic: How can I access Start Depth, Safe Height in a postprocessor?
- Replies: 10
- Views: 428
Re: How can I access Start Depth, Safe Height in a postprocessor?
What do you consider is not correct? Unless it has changed again since I did a PR for this a couple of years back in IMO it does conform to NIST definition.correct implementation of G98 / G99
If you see something wrong please post details.
- Thu Mar 28, 2024 12:32 pm
- Forum: Path/CAM
- Topic: How can I access Start Depth, Safe Height in a postprocessor?
- Replies: 10
- Views: 428
Re: How can I access Start Depth, Safe Height in a postprocessor?
G73 would be a good addition. I also find the need to not withdraw the drill bit on peck because this means multiple re-entries which ends with a degraded hole at the surface. I usually set R to a negative value (below the stock surface) and uncheck the keeptooldown option to ensure it does not stay...
- Thu Mar 21, 2024 12:16 pm
- Forum: Path/CAM
- Topic: master: Where is 3D-Surface? Missing OCL? [Fixed]
- Replies: 37
- Views: 2751
Re: master: Where is 3D-Surface? Missing OCL?
This issue was due to a change in Python initialisation between 3.10 and 3.11 , astutely fixed by wmayer in current master branch.
viewtopic.php?t=86060&start=50#p748379
viewtopic.php?t=86060&start=50#p748379
- Thu Mar 21, 2024 12:14 pm
- Forum: Install / Compile
- Topic: [Fixed] site.getsitepackages() incorrect inside FreeCAD
- Replies: 62
- Views: 3151
Re: [Fixed] site.getsitepackages() incorrect inside FreeCAD
Thanks, I've added a note in case anyone else hits this .
- Thu Mar 21, 2024 7:50 am
- Forum: Install / Compile
- Topic: [Fixed] site.getsitepackages() incorrect inside FreeCAD
- Replies: 62
- Views: 3151
Re: [Fixed] site.getsitepackages() incorrect inside FreeCAD
I was going to add a note to the build instructions but I can't even find where it is now. Can someone point me to it ?
- Wed Mar 20, 2024 8:19 pm
- Forum: Install / Compile
- Topic: [Fixed] site.getsitepackages() incorrect inside FreeCAD
- Replies: 62
- Views: 3151
Re: [Fixed] site.getsitepackages() incorrect inside FreeCAD
Ah, hang on. I just checked the build process and it looks like it did not complete due to a change in qt5 earlier today. I've just run make clean. Back in 3h when I get a new clean build. ...... OK, I can confirm this patch fixes the path issue on my fedora38 / python 3.11 system . :) Many thanks t...
- Wed Mar 20, 2024 6:45 pm
- Forum: Install / Compile
- Topic: [Fixed] site.getsitepackages() incorrect inside FreeCAD
- Replies: 62
- Views: 3151
Re: [Fixed] site.getsitepackages() incorrect inside FreeCAD
Yes, I saw that. Is that any different from what I added to my local master and which did not seem to fix the problem?
viewtopic.php?p=748385#p748345
viewtopic.php?p=748385#p748345