Loading...

emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net

[Prev] Thread [Next]  |  [Prev] Date [Next]

Re: [Emc-users] CAM Post-processors: how much of the specification(s) do they span? Kenneth Lerman Sun Feb 19 16:00:35 2012

On 2/19/2012 5:31 PM, Kent A. Reed wrote:
> Gentle persons:
>
> Eric said of my recent bout of pneumonia, "[A]nd the antibiotics leave
> you like a wrung-out dishrag too, ISTR."
>
> Truer words were never spoken.
>
> While lazing about, I visited www.camzone.org for the first time. As I
> understand it, the site was created by and most of the blog entries are
> written by a person named Daniel who would seem to be German and living
> in Brazil (but maybe I was just too wrung out when I visited the site).
> I like the way Daniel thinks, the way he writes, and the topics he
> chooses to write about. His blog entry "Why PLM is killing the
> innovation in CAD/CAM" made me wish I'd known him while I was still
> working. The entry on Component Technology should be required background
> reading for all of us.
>
> I was induced to compose this email by his blog entry "Post-processors
> --- What you should know about them." I commend it to you.
>
> My question is, how much of the total (choose your favorite spec
> here---RS274D, RS274X, RS274/NGC, LinuxCNC) capability do these
> commercial post-processors span?
>
> A first step in answering this question would be to tabulate all the
> codes that can possibly be emitted by specific post-processors. I tried
> searching the web but couldn't find any tabulation more specific than
> http://www.enotes.com/topic/G-code which speaks of "Fanuc and similarly
> designed controls" and is pretty schematic. I looked at the websites of
> several CAM programs and see they typically claim to support a number
> CNC controller dialects in their post-processors, but that is the color
> of a different horse.
>
> And, yes, I own a copy of the Machinery's Handbook and a copy of Smid's
> CNC Programming Handbook should be in my hands soon.
>
> In my experience with neutral-format data exchange standards in the CAD
> world, the variations in the capabilities of various CAD systems led to
> standards with large scopes. Despite the resulting smorgasbord of
> capabilities, the post-processor writers tended to stick to a relatively
> small number of entities within those scopes. We achieved very good
> interoperability over a relatively limited span of the total capability
> supported by the standards.
>
> Of course, in the world of CAD, many of the data exchanges occur between
> CAD systems, so the pre- and post-processor writers face a different
> problem that in our world where we are most concerned about moving data
> between some CAM system and some CNC controller. Still, I suspect the
> CAM post-processor writers also work with a relatively small number of
> entities (e.g., G-Codes).
>
> At the outset, it seems likely that our O-codes are completely outside
> the ken of post-processor writers, but that's just one aspect.
Thank you for the pun.... -- although I'm not a post-processor writer.

Ken
>
> Any thoughts?
>
> Regards,
> Kent
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Virtualization&  Cloud Management Using Capacity Planning
> Cloud computing makes use of virtualization - but cloud computing
> also focuses on allowing computing to be delivered as a service.
> http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfnl/114/51521223/
> _______________________________________________
> Emc-users mailing list
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Virtualization & Cloud Management Using Capacity Planning
Cloud computing makes use of virtualization - but cloud computing 
also focuses on allowing computing to be delivered as a service.
http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfnl/114/51521223/
_______________________________________________
Emc-users mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users