Feature Request - Canned Cycle Termination - G80

Here's the place for discussion related to CAM/CNC and the development of the Path module.
Forum rules
Be nice to others! Respect the FreeCAD code of conduct!
User avatar
freman
Veteran
Posts: 2200
Joined: Tue Nov 27, 2018 10:30 pm

Re: Feature Request - Canned Cycle Termination - G80

Post by freman »

The order of paths is currently pretty uncontrollable from the user point of view, sadly.

You could try breaking it down into two, two hole ops to get the order, but of course it would pull out at the end of the first one.

This was discussed in the last week in a similar thread on Path/CAM.

Hopefully at some stage there will be a means for users to alter the automatic order of holes within a group.
User avatar
freman
Veteran
Posts: 2200
Joined: Tue Nov 27, 2018 10:30 pm

Re: Feature Request - Canned Cycle Termination - G80

Post by freman »

Many thanks, that's too recent to me to able to remember ;)
User avatar
luvtofish
Posts: 83
Joined: Thu Mar 31, 2022 8:45 pm

Re: Feature Request - Canned Cycle Termination - G80

Post by luvtofish »

I just created a simple square with 6 holes. I wanted to eliminate any vestiges of the old version 19.4 that I had installed previously. I selected just two of the 6 holes for drilling using "G83" peck. As you will see in the youtube animation below, the tool starts above hole 1, raises to safe height, rapids to hole 2, lowers as if to drill hole 2, rapids back to hole 1, drills the hole 1, raises and rapids back to hole 2, drills hole 2.

It seems the pathing worked in v19.4 but there was the issue with a G80 being issued after every hole. Now, with v20, the G80 issue is resolved but the pathing seems to be messed up.

Here's a link to a short video demonstrating the issue:

https://youtu.be/PvM1gbCQt9w

OS: Windows 10 Version 2009
Word size of FreeCAD: 64-bit
Version: 0.20.27428 (Git)
Build type: Release
Branch: master
Hash: 27460358508a2057e0ec57a418641435f12628dd
Python version: 3.8.6+
Qt version: 5.15.2
Coin version: 4.0.1
OCC version: 7.5.3
Locale: English/United States (en_US)
User avatar
freman
Veteran
Posts: 2200
Joined: Tue Nov 27, 2018 10:30 pm

Re: Feature Request - Canned Cycle Termination - G80

Post by freman »

Thanks. I would be wary about putting too much confidence in the sim., not that I'm saying it is misleading you here.

Could you post the FCStd which you created using v0.20 which corresponds to this video, so it can be confirmed and investigated in detail. Thanks for the time spent so far.
User avatar
luvtofish
Posts: 83
Joined: Thu Mar 31, 2022 8:45 pm

Re: Feature Request - Canned Cycle Termination - G80

Post by luvtofish »

Sure can, see attached. The gcode also confirms the erratic behavior. Thanks
test gcode.jpg
test gcode.jpg (45.83 KiB) Viewed 1220 times
Attachments
test.FCStd
(25.33 KiB) Downloaded 28 times
User avatar
luvtofish
Posts: 83
Joined: Thu Mar 31, 2022 8:45 pm

Re: Feature Request - Canned Cycle Termination - G80

Post by luvtofish »

Actually -- the last file I uploaded had the wrong two holes selected. Here's the updated file that matches the video:
Attachments
test.FCStd
(25.41 KiB) Downloaded 26 times
bmsaus4ax
Posts: 255
Joined: Sat Nov 14, 2020 9:16 pm
Location: Bargara, Queensland, Australia UTC+10

Re: Feature Request - Canned Cycle Termination - G80

Post by bmsaus4ax »

luvtofish wrote: Sat Apr 23, 2022 7:53 pm Sure can, see attached. The gcode also confirms the erratic behavior. Thanks

test gcode.jpg
There is something odd going on with this model.
The Z values output by the post processor are too small for the setup. It does not matter where Z0.0 is set to, the output is always the same?
Using my own post processor produces the same results.

A newly created model produces correct output.
.

Code: Select all

OS: Ubuntu 20.04.4 LTS (ubuntu:GNOME/ubuntu)
Word size of FreeCAD: 64-bit
Version: 0.20.28717 (Git) AppImage
Build type: Release
Branch: (HEAD detached at fee4046)
Hash: fee404602bee4e1d576cb6f979a8623c63c6815a
Python 3.9.12, Qt 5.12.9, Coin 4.0.0, OCC 7.5.3
Locale: English/Australia (en_AU)
Installed mods: 
  * Curves 0.3.0
  * CurvedShapes
jffmichi
Posts: 22
Joined: Sun Feb 23, 2020 11:25 pm

Re: Feature Request - Canned Cycle Termination - G80

Post by jffmichi »

Maybe I am missing something about canned cycles but aren't the G0 and G1 moves inbetween the G83s canceling the canned cycle anyway (as if by inserting a G80 after every G83). See the LinuxCNC documentation for G80: "[...] programming any other G code from modal group 1 will also cancel the canned cycle". Modal group 1 is the Motion group including G0 and G1.

So the way I see it we should just ditch all G0 and G1s inbetween G83s and let the canned cycles take care of the inbetween moves (???)

Best wishes and thank you all,
jffmichi
User avatar
luvtofish
Posts: 83
Joined: Thu Mar 31, 2022 8:45 pm

Re: Feature Request - Canned Cycle Termination - G80

Post by luvtofish »

bmsaus4ax wrote: Sat Apr 23, 2022 11:43 pm
luvtofish wrote: Sat Apr 23, 2022 7:53 pm Sure can, see attached. The gcode also confirms the erratic behavior. Thanks

test gcode.jpg
There is something odd going on with this model.
The Z values output by the post processor are too small for the setup. It does not matter where Z0.0 is set to, the output is always the same?
Using my own post processor produces the same results.

A newly created model produces correct output.
.

Code: Select all

OS: Ubuntu 20.04.4 LTS (ubuntu:GNOME/ubuntu)
Word size of FreeCAD: 64-bit
Version: 0.20.28717 (Git) AppImage
Build type: Release
Branch: (HEAD detached at fee4046)
Hash: fee404602bee4e1d576cb6f979a8623c63c6815a
Python 3.9.12, Qt 5.12.9, Coin 4.0.0, OCC 7.5.3
Locale: English/Australia (en_AU)
Installed mods: 
  * Curves 0.3.0
  * CurvedShapes
Can you share the model you created so I can test it? Thanks
Post Reply