Page 1 of 1

Thoughts on current Safe Z implementation.

PostPosted: Fri Nov 04, 2016 1:45 am
by ger21
It appears that the way the SafeZ value is currently used in UCCNC, is that SafeZ is in work coordinates.
This has a major disadvantage, in that the SafeZ position will move with varying material thickness, or fixture height.

Mach3 gives you an option to specify Safe Z in Machine Coordinates. This is a better option, imo, as it gives a consistent SafeZ height that won't allow a crash into the upper Z axis limit.

Any thoughts?

Re: Thoughts on current Safe Z implementation.

PostPosted: Fri Nov 04, 2016 2:43 pm
by ger21
When it's in Work Coordinates, I agree.
The issue here is that you don't exactly have a choice. It's used when you click the Stop button, and Run from Here. (but you can edit it when using Run from here).

Re: Thoughts on current Safe Z implementation.

PostPosted: Fri Nov 04, 2016 4:06 pm
by ger21
Vmax549 wrote:
I could be wrong (;-)


So could I. :lol:

Re: Thoughts on current Safe Z implementation.

PostPosted: Mon Nov 07, 2016 8:30 pm
by CT63
I would like to see the option of selecting safe Z in work or machine coordinates. I prefer to use machine coordinates safe Z.

Re: Thoughts on current Safe Z implementation.

PostPosted: Mon Nov 07, 2016 8:41 pm
by ger21
In the screenset I'm making, I added a second Safe Z that can be set in Machine coordinates. The default is use for Run From Here, and the added one will be used for auto zero and toolchange routines.