G-Code... BRING IT ON!

[lootlam]

I'm an old G Code aerospace programmer from the eighties and would like to have the capability to write G Code programs for the CW machine. Are there other folks interested in this G Code programming? Please let LHR Technologies know you want it. And SOON!

[HighTechOkie]

We would need a way for the machine to understand G-code first, and LHR is not going to give that away. I suspect that even when LHR develops support for g-code, it will be in the form of a converter/translator taking g-code to CW machine code, and thus stripping all of the advantage of using g-code to begin with. The machine (and vast majority of its user base) are not ready to have complete control over the machine. LHR would need some type of g-code user waiver releasing them from any damage caused by poor g-code programming.

I would say that those that want/need complete control of their machine via g-code, would be served better to investigate a different machine.


Besides, who the heck writes line of code anymore? Its all point, click, drag and drop elements. Shouldn't you code guys be working on your rockers for retirement? :D

Rob

[lootlam]

Rob,

I feel that having the ability to write in G-Code will give you more control of your tool path. I don't write in G-Code... I use a program that compiles into G-Code. Still I can modify the G-Code if I want.

A translator will be fine as long as the CW machine will read the tool path you programmed. I think there's another market CW can address with a G-Code interface. Some programming software will produce a simple GOTO X-Y-Z points 3D sculpture path that could run on the CW through a translator.

It would be helpful if the designer program would have a small amount of CAD functions. Constructing lines tangent to arcs. Offset geometry for the actual centerline of the tool path.

What are you thoughts?

[lootlam]

One great feature of CW machine is the SMALL footprint. The X axis can be almost as long as you need without taking up a three or four foot area of your shop. All the other CNC machines I've seen need a large area to work in. But for the space of a thickness planner you get a CNC routing machine. It does great carvings. If the CW could do milling operations with greater control reading code from existing CNC programs, folks that do not do carving and are comfortable with their G-Code programming software may come on board.

[jlitz]

Rob,

I feel that having the ability to write in G-Code will give you more control of your tool path. I don't write in G-Code... I use a program that compiles into G-Code. Still I can modify the G-Code if I want.

A translator will be fine as long as the CW machine will read the tool path you programmed. I think there's another market CW can address with a G-Code interface. Some programming software will produce a simple GOTO X-Y-Z points 3D sculpture path that could run on the CW through a translator.

It would be helpful if the designer program would have a small amount of CAD functions. Constructing lines tangent to arcs. Offset geometry for the actual centerline of the tool path.

What are you thoughts?

There is potential here and I might be able to help. I sent you a private message. A lot of the carving I do with the CW is beyond the current capabilities of Designer and might be of interest.

[HighTechOkie]

Rob,

I feel that having the ability to write in G-Code will give you more control of your tool path. I don't write in G-Code... I use a program that compiles into G-Code. Still I can modify the G-Code if I want.

A translator will be fine as long as the CW machine will read the tool path you programmed. I think there's another market CW can address with a G-Code interface. Some programming software will produce a simple GOTO X-Y-Z points 3D sculpture path that could run on the CW through a translator.

It would be helpful if the designer program would have a small amount of CAD functions. Constructing lines tangent to arcs. Offset geometry for the actual centerline of the tool path.

What are you thoughts?

If I understand you correctly, you are seeking more CAD style drawing/layout ability rather than needing to control feed and speed? In that regard, I completely agree that improvements need to be made or support third party cad files. With that said, there are ways of accomplishing the tasks you mentioned.

To create a line tangent to an arc, you could turn on snap to grid, draw a line, then the arc and stretch it to touch. You could also constrain all the points of the arc to draw your tangent and constrain it to touch the arc.

Inset/Offset is available in 1.125 for closed paths.

I agree that some better tools are needed to create paths in 3D space. I'm not sure that going from a cad file to g-code to CW code is the right direction. I don't foresee LHR every granting complete machine control to its customers. There are just too many variables to account for and keep it easy to use for the average joe.


Rob

[deemon328]

I'd prefer better tools to work with inside of designer. In my perfect world, we'd get a more complete feature set like AutoCAD LT and add the ability to make custom plugins. I'm not really interested in needing to learn some other language to use the machine.

[lootlam]

HighTechOkie,

Thanks for the SNAP tip. I'll give it a try. I'm using the 1.124 version. I suppose I'll need to get the later 1.125 ver.

[HighTechOkie]

I'd prefer better tools to work with inside of designer. In my perfect world, we'd get a more complete feature set like AutoCAD LT and add the ability to make custom plugins. I'm not really interested in needing to learn some other language to use the machine.

I personally would rather see LHR spend their time incorporating support for a well established software package that has 10,000's of users to seek assistance from rather then watch these guys reinvent the wheel.

Rob

[deemon328]

I personally would rather see LHR spend their time incorporating support for a well established software package that has 10,000's of users to seek assistance from rather then watch these guys reinvent the wheel.

Rob

Yep, good point. I really dislike using 2 different programs to make an imperfect compatible version of what I want before importing into Designer. I shouldn't need to deal with compression errors on imports with a precision machine that cuts to the .001.

[lootlam]

I'm not trying to reinvent anything. I would like to use my style of NC programming. The designer program is great for carving but if I want to do some wood machinning I have a program that I already know and use. All I looking for is a program that could convert a G-Code text file into the CW machine language and write it to the memory card. I believe this would open up a new area for the CW.

[Bubbabear]

BUt if thy make ever change and addition that everyone ask for them it is going to be a professional machine at professional price and hobbiest will be out of luck again

[jlitz]

BUt if thy make ever change and addition that everyone ask for them it is going to be a professional machine at professional price and hobbiest will be out of luck again

Or, someone in the CW community could step up and fill the void for those who want slightly more control. The machine is definitely capable. :)

[HighTechOkie]

George, my comment about reinventing the wheel was in reference to LHR adding support for industry standard 3d file formats, rather than LHR trying to include those tools in Designer. I agree that we need these type of conversion tools so those experienced in other 3d packages could extend their talents to the cw communtiy.

I think jlitz is headed in the right direction with some of his current work, and suspect that between the two of you, could probably produce a working converion tool to do just that for g-code at least.

Rob

[hotpop]

I was just wondering if all the machine operations and processing is done in the computer before it is up loaded to the flash card and the machine just reads the data. OR Does the computer upload data and processing is done onboard the flash card and the machine just reads it OR is the data passed to the machine for the final processing.

I don't know why I want to know, just another flaw in my character I guess.