Suggestion for improvement to SOFT LIMIT feature

ytliu · Posted at 2018-10-16 06:15:09

Please tell me your relevant parameters and provide a simple test gcode . Thank you

Nikolay81 · Posted at 2018-10-16 18:06:19

ytliu Posted at 2018-10-16 06:15
Please tell me your relevant parameters and provide a simple test gcode . Thank you

Sending my settings and test program.
The fact is that to accelerate-decelerate axes in G-code mode, it uses data from parameters 45-48.

As for the external program for calculating the processing area, I think you can assign another important function to it, which is very lacking in DDCSV:
Calculate the time until the end of the program and until the next tool change. The value will be written at the beginning of the program, in the form of a variable.
And knowing this data, DDCSV will be able to:
-Rightly define the processing area for the soft limit
-Rightly define the processing area for the visualization of the tool path
-Display the time until the end of the program or until the next tool change (this is very important when changing the tool manually)

Most postprocessors can run an exe file with parameters.
Complex postprocessors (such as Powermill and Solidcam) allow you to implement these features without an external program. Only by their own means.

How do you rate this idea? Do you like her?

math_indy · Posted at 2018-10-17 04:32:33

I tested the soft limit changes in version V2018-10-12-102-1 and I like what has been done--a big improvement for STEP, MPG, and CONT modes and I was able to safely move my soft limits much closer to the hard limits.

It is OK with me if soft limit behavior in automatic (G-CODE) operation is updated later. I am unlikely to write a program that would command to a location outside of the soft limits anyway. However, in the G-CODE case, it would be OK with me if the offending G-CODE triggered an immediate soft limit error without ever moving the axis at all. This or maybe go to the soft-limit, stop there, and trigger the alarm--either behavior would be good.

Nikolay81 · Posted at 2018-10-29 22:02:04

Video of malfunction of parameter # 2031.
https://radikal.ru/video/wkq5retOtHU

ytliu · Posted at 2018-10-30 06:30:54

When #2031 is set to 1, when the component of acceleration(#99) in each axis is less than #45-#48, the acceleration is determined by #45-#48.

I watched the video, I think there is no problem, the action in the video is consistent with my design idea.

Nikolay81 · Posted at 2018-10-30 18:19:19

Perhaps we do not understand each other.
I have #45-#48=3 and #99=400. That is, #99 is more than #45-#48 and not less.
In the video, I execute the code:
G1 X30 F600
G1 X0
For manual movements, there must be a low acceleration in order to more accurately position the axes.
For G-code, there should be as much as possible acceleration, because:
-It reduces processing time.
-The axies must accelerate to working speed as quickly as possible, because some materials cannot be cut at low speed. This leads to overheating of the cutter, burning of the material or sticking of the material to the cutter.

If this is the case, please make it disabled. Because such a decision makes it impossible to use this setting in most cases.
Because:
With a low acceleration rate, many materials cannot be cut.
There are many such materials. For example: wood, pure aluminum, thermoplastic plastics, and so on.

Also, if you set a high acceleration speed for axes in manual mode, the axes are difficult to position.

Suggestion for improvement to SOFT LIMIT feature

TEL

0755-87654321