Need Help! pathpilot - Page 2

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 21 to 40 of 46

Thread: pathpilot

  1. #21
    Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    960
    Downloads
    3
    Uploads
    0

    Default Re: pathpilot

    Ernie IF I can figure out a simple way to call a python script from PathPilot there will be examples of Wizards to use and learn from to make your own. In other controllers I made containers of an empty Wizard. Bascially all teh code to support teh Wizard window as such then all you needed to do is modify the elements to suite yuor functions then add in teh Code to Define the Gcode. It sounds more complicated than it is once you have a model to go by.

    For those that have figured out how to make Glade work with PathPilot I wish you would share your knowledge. I still cannot make it all work here and I have spend many hours trying. There is something I am missing in teh process . I can open Glade and load PathPilot but that is about as far as I can get. I cannot add things or copy and paste. But I have been able to mod a couple of labels BUT then the screenset will not run in pathpilot after that point. But I am still looking for teh magic monkey dust that makes it work.

    (;-) TP



  2. #22
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Posts
    360
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0

    Default Re: pathpilot

    vmax549, have you tried LinuxCNC with Probe Basic VCP? You might find it better than PP with all the modifying you do.



  3. #23
    Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    960
    Downloads
    3
    Uploads
    0

    Default Re: pathpilot

    Well I finally did get the Wizard to run from an Mcode (;-) This could get interesting but there are only 99 user mcodes avaialble (;-(

    (;-) TP



  4. #24
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    35
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0

    Default Re: pathpilot

    Ernie, the other question you had about manuals for Pathpilot, they are available here: https://tormach.com/support/mill Pick a machine such as 1100M and you will have the manual for PathPilot. It explains a lot. There are also videos (by Tormach and others)on YT specifically on using the Conversational. They are also helpful.

    Gerrit



  5. #25
    Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    960
    Downloads
    3
    Uploads
    0

    Default Re: pathpilot

    Hi Steve , no i have not tried that as I am simply helping some friends get a little more function out of PathPilot . I have loaded PP onto my mill for convenience in testing. I have remaped some code to make them the same as fanuc/haas such as G31 G68/69 and created a date code function that engraves the current date/time along with a serial number. I also have a bunch of probing routines that were created specific to how they use them. I also did a PP call home function so teh machines can text the operators if there is a problem. They have already done overnight unattended runs on mold patterns as they can take several DAYS of continous 3d maching to complete.

    I have also worked on a ATC function for PP that does not involve USB control boards .It runs from teh M6 macro function and runs native PP macro coding.

    It is actually fun to create functions and expand PP and help others . I do wish there was a bit more Documentation of how things work in PP but I guess that is just part of teh gig. I do need to figure out a good and simple way to save the Wizard gcode out to PP. I have not found a good method yet . PP's method of saving conversationl Gcode seems a bit contorted but I am still tryng to map it all out. So far teh rest of a Wizard has been simple and easy and pretty much the same as other controllers. It makes a self contained Macro that is simple to add and use . As soon as I get teh save file function working as I like then I will post some examples of simple wizards for everyone that wants to try one.

    The big hangup so far is haveing to work around not beeing able to MOD the screenset for some simple additions . Nothing major as Tormach has already done a good job there. I just really need to make some changes to teh ATC page to match the M6 atc functions seeing how I do not use there ATC method. But could use teh page for other ATC functions (;-)

    Oh well we just keep eating the Elephant one bite at a time. (;-) TP

    (;-) TP



  6. #26
    Member mountaindew's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    earth
    Posts
    2000
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0

    Default Re: pathpilot

    @vmax549
    Wanted to comment a little more about hand, conversational, and full cam for g code generation!
    I see cam as a more advanced conversational program. And what I was wanting to say before is I wish the post files for these cam programs were developed to match the machine better and produce good efficient compact code. Look at a simple drill operation created by an average cam program and one created by Path Pilot! The code is different and from what I see very generic from cam program and very focused from conversational.
    In short I also wish more time was spent developing the posts used by these cam programs. I see fusion gets the most attention in this department. And it shows! all kinds PP users doing clever stuff with the fusion post and electronic probe routines and other cool refinements yet alone what code it produces.



  7. #27
    Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    960
    Downloads
    3
    Uploads
    0

    Default Re: pathpilot

    HI MountainDew I certainly agree with that. Cam Manf only spend time fully developing advanced Post for machines and customers that draw a lot of attention. sales wise. Tormach seems to do a good job there but then again they should. Fusion and Conversational is part of their bread and butter for sales or at least it should be. I do wish that Tormach would spend a little more time making PP more Fanuc/Haas compliant. Users coming from teh comercial world downgrading (retiring) would be more comfortable in teh coding side and users moving up would be more comfortable as what they had learned would be more compatible with what they will be using on comercial machines.

    (;-) TP



  8. #28
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    35
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0

    Default Re: pathpilot

    Fusion posts work in Inventor as well. I think they are also shared with HSMworks as it is all the same codebase afaik.



  9. #29
    Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Switzerland
    Posts
    730
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0

    Default Re: pathpilot

    Quote Originally Posted by mountaindew View Post
    @vmax549
    Wanted to comment a little more about hand, conversational, and full cam for g code generation!
    I see cam as a more advanced conversational program. And what I was wanting to say before is I wish the post files for these cam programs were developed to match the machine better and produce good efficient compact code. Look at a simple drill operation created by an average cam program and one created by Path Pilot! The code is different and from what I see very generic from cam program and very focused from conversational.
    In short I also wish more time was spent developing the posts used by these cam programs. I see fusion gets the most attention in this department. And it shows! all kinds PP users doing clever stuff with the fusion post and electronic probe routines and other cool refinements yet alone what code it produces.
    Hi MD
    You give me the impression you may be over estimating the role the post usually plays (from the posts I've seen) in the code efficiency or quality. Simply put, for most operations the CAM calls the post for each move, one at a time, and the post just translates the request into a line of G-Code. For example, if Fusion calls the post with onRapid(_x, _y, _z) the PP post simply appends a G0 line to the program. There shouldn't be a significant difference between drilling ops from CAM compared to the conversational code unless you have canned cycles disabled in Sprut. In this case Sprut will output each individual move instead of making a single call (plus subsequent location changes). This could also be expanded by the post if necessary but PP doesn't require this.
    CAM offers much more flexibility for path optimization by the user so I'd expect the resulting code to be more efficient in terms of runtime for a more complex part. However, that doesn't necessarily correlate with fewer lines of code. On the other hand, for the purpose of making a couple of quick holes the conversational system is likely to be faster from start to finish.

    The posts do perform some optimization and error checking but in the posts I've worked on there's not a great deal of "clever stuff" done there. The probing routines for example obviously require support from Fusion to set up the required values and call the post correctly. These calls are very like canned cycle calls, making the required data available (positions, overrun etc.) and indicating that a particular probing type has been requested. The post collects the necessary data and adds this information to a subroutine call in the expected format. The Haas post would use a subroutine like a P9811 with the required arguments and my own post would call a PP subroutine like o<probing_x>. If done this way the business is not known to the post at all. It could be programmed entirely in the post but the effort would increase dramatically.

    I'm sure someone familiar with the Sprut post generator (Tormach) could set it up to use the subroutines already provided by PP. I have my own routines so I haven't checked those in PP in any detail but I'm sure they'd be usable by a Sprut post. However, probing would first need to be added to the Sprut application. Perhaps you should contact them (they could use Fusion as an example )?
    Step



  10. #30
    Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    960
    Downloads
    3
    Uploads
    0

    Default Re: pathpilot

    Well I have spent several days now combing through code example trying to get the Wizard to load a Gcode file without any sucesses. All teh functions in Linuxcnc that deal with load gcode do not seem to work in PP and it seems that Tormach wrote thier own functions to load Gcode from their conversational side. I cannot get it to run outside of the original functions in UIcommon. So unless someone has a suggest on how to make a Python Script load a Gcode file into PP I am done with wizards. I can get it to load teh Gcode into the clipboard but only outside of PP then you can post that into a File. But you cannot do it from inside of PP . It seems that PP purges teh clipboard quite often (;-). When I create teh Gcode then save to clipboard and then open Gedit to past there is nothing to paste.

    Close but no Cigar. (;-) TP



  11. #31
    Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    960
    Downloads
    3
    Uploads
    0

    Default Re: pathpilot

    Another odd thing I find is with python code called from a macro the code will run out of programmed order. Very odd. I placed debug message in a specific order along with teh process coding. It then runs out of order running teh last thing first (program_open) then it spits out ALL teh messages last all at teh same time. So there is no way to manually debug any code using messages.

    (;-) TP



  12. #32
    Member kstrauss's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    1695
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0

    Default Re: pathpilot

    Are you outputting the messages to a terminal window or to the PathPilot log file or...? I have done both without any sequence problems. Perhaps if you were to post the code someone might see the problem.



  13. #33
    Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    960
    Downloads
    3
    Uploads
    0

    Default Re: pathpilot

    Hi K then debug message is being sent to teh status log via (debug,Heres a message). It will have to wait to post the code as teh machine is back online now and it has 12 more hours of run time till it finishes.

    but from memory (;-)

    import linuxcnc
    c = linuxcnc.command()
    c.mdi("(debug,StartCode)") # first message
    c.wait_complete()
    c.mdi("(debug,StartCoolant)")
    c.wait_complete()
    c.flood(linuxcnc.FLOOD_ON)
    c.wait_complete()
    c.mdi.("(debug, Move X to 5 and back")
    c.wait_complete()
    c.mdi("G0 X5")
    c.mdi("G0 X0")
    c.mdi("(debug,Coolant Off)")
    c.wait_complete()
    c.flod(linuxcnc.FLOOD_OFF)
    c.mdi("(debug, load program)")
    c.program_open("test.ngc")
    c.mdi("(debug,EndofCode)")

    This was just a test code to test the ordering of operations and one 1 of many different ways of coding it..

    (;-) TP



  14. #34
    Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    960
    Downloads
    3
    Uploads
    0

    Default Re: pathpilot

    OK I have a wizard up and fully running now. The only thing it cannot do is autoload the Gcode into PP as I do not see any way possible to do that with PP . The best I can tell is to run teh Wizard it runs from MDI mode and while it MDI mode you cannot load a Gcode program. Basicaly "Catch22"

    But it can generate teh Gcode and save it out as a ngc file to teh Gcode folder and you can then load and run it from the FILE function as it posts teh Gcode file into the Gcode folder.

    Now to generate a Wizard container file that has all teh needed functions already programed in. From there one can add what they want as far as conversational programing.

    I should have a simple test Wizard out soon for anyone to play with. Maybe you like it and maybe you don't (;-) I know teh guys at teh shop are really happy now that they can have their Wizards in PP.

    (;-) TP



  15. #35
    Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    960
    Downloads
    3
    Uploads
    0

    Default Re: pathpilot

    Here is a picture of a Wizard Template. It will run as is but does nothing as there is no action code . To use it you would edit the label names then add in the action coding . From there you have the option of saving to file or save to teh clipboard.

    (;-) TP

    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails pathpilot-wizard_template-jpg  


  16. #36
    Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    960
    Downloads
    3
    Uploads
    0

    Default Re: pathpilot

    IF there are any brave souls out there that would like to test a sample wizard I have one. The test is to see IF there are any problems with running it on a system that is different than the one it was created on. Linux can be funny that way.

    So it is a simple wizard that draws a square in Gcode. There are 3 inputs for the gcode and 1 input for a filename. The filename does NOT require an ext such as .ngc. The wizardd takes care of that for you. It will install the Gcode program in your Gcode folder.

    To use simply place the M150 macro into your NC_subs folder . Then from the MDI line type in M150 and press enter. The Wizard should popup as a window. Inout values into the Startpoints for X and Y and enter a value for teh square size. you an click on teh entries OR use TAB to move down through the entry points. Then go down to the FileName entried and type in the saved file name with NO ext. From there go to the load file section and select your file to load. Hopefully one shows up (;-) then press cycleStart to start teh program. It should move to X0Y0 Z1 then move to teh start point then lower down to X0 then run a square teh size you defined. Ends back at teh start point and raise up to Z1.

    feel free to look at teh Python code in teh M150 file I am trying to make it super simple for a user to create a usefull wizard by making teh editing simple to do.

    OK It seems I cannot upload teh M150 unless I add the extension " .txt" to it. When you place it in your NC_subs folder you will HAVE to remove teh ".txt " or it will not run as a macro in PP

    Please let me know IF it works for you

    This is just a test of teh American PathPilot Wizard system, nothing more (;-) TP

    Attached Files Attached Files


  17. #37
    Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    960
    Downloads
    3
    Uploads
    0

    Default Re: pathpilot

    OK 1 report back already. By having to add teh .tx and then strip it out it removed teh permision to run it as a file. To fix go to teh NC_subs folder and right click on the M150 file then go to permissions and check allow executing file as a program then close. IT should run after that.

    (;-) TP



  18. #38
    Member mountaindew's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    earth
    Posts
    2000
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0

    Default Re: pathpilot

    Quote Originally Posted by TurboStep View Post
    Hi MD
    You give me the impression you may be over estimating the role the post usually plays (from the posts I've seen) in the code efficiency or quality. Simply put, for most operations the CAM calls the post for each move, one at a time, and the post just translates the request into a line of G-Code. For example, if Fusion calls the post with onRapid(_x, _y, _z) the PP post simply appends a G0 line to the program. There shouldn't be a significant difference between drilling ops from CAM compared to the conversational code unless you have canned cycles disabled in Sprut. In this case Sprut will output each individual move instead of making a single call (plus subsequent location changes). This could also be expanded by the post if necessary but PP doesn't require this.
    CAM offers much more flexibility for path optimization by the user so I'd expect the resulting code to be more efficient in terms of runtime for a more complex part. However, that doesn't necessarily correlate with fewer lines of code. On the other hand, for the purpose of making a couple of quick holes the conversational system is likely to be faster from start to finish.

    The posts do perform some optimization and error checking but in the posts I've worked on there's not a great deal of "clever stuff" done there. The probing routines for example obviously require support from Fusion to set up the required values and call the post correctly. These calls are very like canned cycle calls, making the required data available (positions, overrun etc.) and indicating that a particular probing type has been requested. The post collects the necessary data and adds this information to a subroutine call in the expected format. The Haas post would use a subroutine like a P9811 with the required arguments and my own post would call a PP subroutine like o<probing_x>. If done this way the business is not known to the post at all. It could be programmed entirely in the post but the effort would increase dramatically.

    I'm sure someone familiar with the Sprut post generator (Tormach) could set it up to use the subroutines already provided by PP. I have my own routines so I haven't checked those in PP in any detail but I'm sure they'd be usable by a Sprut post. However, probing would first need to be added to the Sprut application. Perhaps you should contact them (they could use Fusion as an example )?
    Step

    Thanks for the detailed response!
    long hand code does perform very different then the same canned cycles. I was told years ago to use long hand option and avoid canned cycles. I guess I was wanting the long hand code posted to perform more like the canned cycle PP uses in conversation programs.
    The other part I see is things missing.
    Sprutcam has ability to use a subroutine for an operation and then repeat it on say 100 different locations for something like 100 parts on a big fixture plate. The post does not generate the code and only way is to repeat the same code in the file 100 times. Makes for huge files that in the past would cripple path pilot. "not anymore". Anyway That was something that has bugged me for years! Huge files for a single part repeated over and over.
    It tries by making an op and a separate subroutine but it never connects the two up. "(Local CS transformation doesn't supported)" I could never find settings that would make this work when posted. Only way is to uncheck that option and generate the code over and over for each location.
    Anyway, this caused me to conclude some of the post was never completed for some of the operations and program abilities.



  19. #39
    Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    960
    Downloads
    3
    Uploads
    0

    Default Re: pathpilot

    Yes teh use of sub progaming or a proper post can go a long way to reduce code count. Conversational can write subs as well (;-) Some of PP conversational writes to a sub.

    (;-) TP



  20. #40
    Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Switzerland
    Posts
    730
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0

    Default Re: pathpilot

    Quote Originally Posted by mountaindew View Post
    Thanks for the detailed response!
    long hand code does perform very different then the same canned cycles. I was told years ago to use long hand option and avoid canned cycles. I guess I was wanting the long hand code posted to perform more like the canned cycle PP uses in conversation programs.
    The other part I see is things missing.
    Sprutcam has ability to use a subroutine for an operation and then repeat it on say 100 different locations for something like 100 parts on a big fixture plate. The post does not generate the code and only way is to repeat the same code in the file 100 times. Makes for huge files that in the past would cripple path pilot. "not anymore". Anyway That was something that has bugged me for years! Huge files for a single part repeated over and over.
    It tries by making an op and a separate subroutine but it never connects the two up. "(Local CS transformation doesn't supported)" I could never find settings that would make this work when posted. Only way is to uncheck that option and generate the code over and over for each location.
    Anyway, this caused me to conclude some of the post was never completed for some of the operations and program abilities.
    Hi MD
    If I remember correctly, back in the old days of Mach3, canned cycles were rather dodgy and to be avoided. I also used the long hand versions exclusively when working with Sprut - also after switching to PP. The long hand versions can provide more options to allow for a finer control of the operations. It probably depends on the capabilities of control software.
    Sprut does include a subroutine capability (apparently) but from what I could gather this was only for use with coordinate transformations. At least up to Sprut v10. Subroutines didn't seem to be available for X/Y or circular patterns. Maybe I'm missing something or perhaps later versions of Sprut have since added this feature, but your error message "(Local CS transformation doesn't supported)" would appear to indicate that it has an issue with CS transformations. I can't say for sure that this is actually a post issue.

    Quote Originally Posted by vmax549 View Post
    Some of PP conversational writes to a sub.
    As I've mentioned before I'm not very familiar with PP conversational - which PP conversational routines generate subroutines?

    Step



Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  


About CNCzone.com

    We are the largest and most active discussion forum for manufacturing industry. The site is 100% free to join and use, so join today!

Follow us on


Our Brands

pathpilot

pathpilot

pathpilot