define checkboxs request - linear / rotary Axis XYZABC

[Robertspark]

Balaz,

Can I request 6 checkboxes to be defined now please (even through they will have no purpose at present), they will be to define if the axis are set as linear or rotary. I presume at some point uccnc will allow for rotary axis within your development plan, hence presume these will be required in the future so could be defined now.

Something like Xaxisrotary, Yaxisrotary, Zaxisrotary, Aaxisrotary, Baxisrotary, Caxisrotary

given the default setting would be unchecked checkboxes indicating linear axis is why they are denoted as "rotary" which will be true if they are set as rotary

I am presently writing some rotary macros for a 4th axis on the plasma cutter and it would be more useful if the checkboxes were defined now and that way they would be static. The macros basically allow for the rotary axis to be treated as a linear axis so that shapes can be cut on them at equal velocity (i.e. similar to a linear axis) It will allow for writing to be engraved on the axis. it basically allows for the units, velocity and acceleration settings to be adjusted relative to the OD of the stock / workpiece to be cut. I can then set these static checkboxes which will allow for later checks and redefining the axis via an axis reset macro when I want to run the machine as a linear setup.

I know that I could use a different profile, but this arrangement I believe will allow for a tidier setup of sub-folders.

If you are willing to set them up, then just let me know the defined checkbox numbers ( 345, 346, 347, 348, 349, 350 ??) and then when the next development release is issued they will be available then (there is nothing urgent behind this at all).

Thanks,

[ger21]

I am presently writing some rotary macros for a 4th axis on the plasma cutter and it would be more useful if the checkboxes were defined now and that way they would be static. The macros basically allow for the rotary axis to be treated as a linear axis so that shapes can be cut on them at equal velocity (i.e. similar to a linear axis) It will allow for writing to be engraved on the axis. it basically allows for the units, velocity and acceleration settings to be adjusted relative to the OD of the stock / workpiece to be cut. I can then set these static checkboxes which will allow for later checks and redefining the axis via an axis reset macro when I want to run the machine as a linear setup.

Don't you always know which axis is the rotary in your g-code?

When proper rotary axis support is added to UCCNC, I would expect that UCCNC will handle this, negating the need for your macros??



There was talk a week or two ago that CNC Drive would start a discussion about rotary axis to get an idea of what users want/expect, before they start to implement it.

[Robertspark]

Don't you always know which axis is the rotary in your g-code?

Yeah, I do, but I was going to create a macro I could share on here, hence first I thought about just 1 axis (as I swap my X), then I thought that if I created a flag (setting, checkbox etc) somewhere it would indicate if I'd left the machine in rotary setting, hence I could set something up as a warning at the start of a job which would check (ask) if I really wanted it set rotary
Hence thought I'd ask if some of the checkboxes that will need to be added anyway may as well be added now.

When proper rotary axis support is added to UCCNC, I would expect that UCCNC will handle this, negating the need for your macros??

There was talk a week or two ago that CNC Drive would start a discussion about rotary axis to get an idea of what users want/expect, before they start to implement it.

More than likley yes I expect that they will be redundant (they would have only been a temporary hack anyway), problem is I did not know how long the lead time on rotary was likley to be.

I didn't realise that there had been a recient discussion on it and if there were many people interested. hobby cnc users tend to be all 3-axis (2.5D) mill (where everyone starts out) .... didn't think many were "really" pushing for rotary.

Also rotary milling I thought would be something complex given as the stock gets smaller, the diameter changes and the rotary motion would need to increase to maintain the feedrate (expected that to be very complex)
Where as all I was trying to do was fudge one axis setting to make a rotary motion appear linear, hence the fudge was based upon the diameter of the material in the chuck.

I'm wondering if the axis scale parameter may be able to adjust the setting for the material stock, only just started thinking about it as I was in need of G68/G69 which is now available Early days brainstorming underway of how I could implement the macro easily. Would like to mainly do simple cuts on tube (stuff that I don't need sheetcam+rotary plugin for [which I have]), kind of like tube cutoffs, and maybe a rotary plasma / engraver centre punch (3 centres at 120 degrees around a tube), and some other basic cuts / notches I've got to do in some tube (not intersecting tube fishmouths, I'll use sheetcam for that with something like the dxf export from here http://cq.cx/tubejoin.pl

[ger21]

I didn't realise that there had been a recient discussion on it and if there were many people interested. hobby cnc users tend to be all 3-axis (2.5D) mill (where everyone starts out) .... didn't think many were "really" pushing for rotary.

There hasn't been any discussion yet.
I had asked about it, and they said they would probably start a discussion to get user input. No idea what the time frame to implement it would be.

Also rotary milling I thought would be something complex given as the stock gets smaller, the diameter changes and the rotary motion would need to increase to maintain the feedrate (expected that to be very complex)

If you set Z zero to the center of rotation, the software will always know the diameter of the cutting by the Z axis location. This is probably the best way to go about it.

[cncdrive]

Hi Guys,

Well, Terry know me well enough that he knew my answer.
I really don't want to add thing like checkboxes on the screen which things are not yet implemented, because I imagine users e-mailing about it, I mean if it will do nothing then people will get confused about it, because they will expect something to happen when they tick the checkbox, but nothing will happen so they will start asking.

Also rotary milling I thought would be something complex given as the stock gets smaller, the diameter changes and the rotary motion would need to increase to maintain the feedrate (expected that to be very complex)

If you set Z zero to the center of rotation, the software will always know the diameter of the cutting by the Z axis location. This is probably the best way to go about it.

Yes, this is one thing why it is not very easy to add this feature, because with the changing radius the feedrate has to change.
We really did not start the discussion about this yet, it is just planned yet. Will try to get to it asap.

[Robertspark]

Gents,

ignore this post, think I've solved my own problem whilst thinking about it in a little more detail

(note: application is 4th axis plasma cutter.

Answer is in G51 for the a-axis, plus touching off on the outer body of the chuck, then touching off on the OD of the tube short distance in front of the chuck, which will automatically give me the radius of the tube (as the OD of the outer chuck body is known), then scaling the A-axis (which is really being treated as a linear axis so that if I typed G1 Y20 A20, it would cut a line at 45 degree on the tube).
note, never tried this before so may be adding to my scrap pile.... all part of the learning process...

(note, didn't ask for the screenset to be altered, only for the checkboxes to be defined (numbers reserved). I know that in order for me to use the fields I would have had to have added a screenset object with the corresponding number so little confusion would have been had, only by those who may have looked at the defined checkboxes and wondered why there was 6 listed which related to "rotary axis" and which were not shown on a screenset or did not work [which would have been a relativly small number in my opinion..... having typed out the LEDs, buttons, checkboxes and fields.... I know how many there are... needle in a heystack if you find something not working in there.....]