G-codes past RS-274 a waste?

"Lloyd E. Sponenburgh" fired this volley in news:Xns9E44AF679ED25lloydspmindspringcom@216.168.3.70:

As usual... I should have added something.

I have been using G-Simple to generate codes. Even with the "Brigeport" post processor, it doesn't generate extended codes. And, of course, it works fine. But it does make long programs, and the R2E4 has limited part program storage (yeah, I know... retrofit it! )

But I'm damned curious about these extensions, because they look useful, and G-simple's post processor is configurable.

LLoyd

It couldn't have anything to do with preventing programs from being portable from one brand of machine to another, of course.

You have to wonder on that but I have a feeling in the pre-cad cam days creating a code that could do common tasks easily was a selling feature.

Wes

-- "Additionally as a security officer, I carry a gun to protect government officials but my life isn't worth protecting at home in their eyes." Dick Anthony Heller

No -- I don't *know*. But guessing from the name, I would suggest that it does not bother clearing out the center area -- it

The main thing is that it will save time and tool wear if you only need to cut all the way through the workpiece instead of milling out a blind bottomed pocket.

Try it and see what it does. (Or do you not have the machine off the trailer and running yet?)

Enjoy, DoN.

"DoN. Nichols" fired this volley in news: snipped-for-privacy@Katana.d-and-d.com:

Did... that's why I'm asking. It just milled a pocket, as far as I can see, just like any other canned pocket cycle.

Oh, yes, the machine makes parts, but so far only with G-simple codes, which (even with basic post-processing) gives only the basic moves. It doesn't use canned cycles unless specifically instructed by the post processor defs. (that's understandable, since every machine has different canned cycles).

Lloyd

Was the pocket large enough relative to the end mill so it would have needed to make extra passes to clear out the center?

Enjoy, DoN.

"DoN. Nichols" fired this volley in news: snipped-for-privacy@Katana.d-and-d.com:

Yes, Don. That would be intuitively obvious. I milled a 2.5" square "pocket frame" .125" deep with a 3/8" bit, just to be sure.

G78 == Pocket Mill G172 == Pocket Frame Mill

So far, the only thing I can see that is apparently different (don't have any docs on the parameters, except from ONE programming example) is that the "pocket frame" cycle appears to have a parameter for the radius of the corners.

???

LLoyd

Good enough! That was not clear from what I saw before.

O.K. It may have another parameter for width of frame, and when not set, it defaults to normal pocketing.

Enjoy, DoN.

"DoN. Nichols" fired this volley in news: snipped-for-privacy@Katana.d-and-d.com:

Possible, but the one example I have is _supposed_ to mill an island, and doesn't, just a pocket.

LLoyd

O.K. An island is sort of like what I was thinking of -- but just not penetrating through the workpiece. And then, yes it *should* have extra parameters to show the size of the outer part and the island itself. The example must be missing something. (Hmm ... perhaps an M-code is used to set two of the parameters prior to invoking the others in the G-code?) Does the example code have an M-code somewhere above the G-code in question -- or perhaps immediately following it? (There are some G-codes which work like that on my little Emco-Maier Compact-5 CNC lathe, and some which are extremely picky about the values of parameters, e.g. when turning a radius of less than 90 degrees. :-)

Enjoy, DoN.