After update, LinuxCNC post is repeating the header with each new operation?

[Hardened]

What an extraordinary pain in the butt.

As it is, I am accustomed to stripping most of the header out of Fusions output for LinuxCNC, because the Fusion post for LinuxCNC does not output what my LinuxCNC mill expects to see.  This has worked alright, even though it is a hassle.

Now, all of a sudden, this unnecessary and troublesome header appears with every single cutting operation within a given toolpath?

Please tell me how I stop this repetition.  We have work to do, and once again, Fusion's backdoor updates have created a new and interesting problem I did not foresee.

[Steinwerks]

Exactly what header do you want to get rid of? We have no example. Presumably this would be simply fixed by a post edit. If you can provide a sample both edited and unedited, and let us know which post processor you are using (or attach the .cps file here) we can help you.

[Hardened]

I am using the latest Linuxcnc.cps

It outputs this as a header, We have been manually removing the strike-thru text:

%
(OP_G2_LINUXCNC)
(T1 D=0.125 CR=0. - ZMIN=-0.4921 - FLAT END MILL)
(T4 D=0.125 CR=0. - ZMIN=-0.4921 - FLAT END MILL)
N10 G90 G94 G17 G91.1
N15 G20
N20 G53 G0 Z0.
(BORE26)
N25 M9
N30 T1 M6
N35 T4
N40 S8000 M3
N45 G54
N50 M8
N60 G0 X14.3008 Y4.6619
N65 G43 Z0.6299 H1
N70 G0 Z0.0787
N75 G1 Z0.0125 F47.244

<snip>

...it then repeats the above header for every new cutting operation within the cutter path.  It never did that before, and it is nothing but trouble.  This is the behavior that is new, unannounced, and stopped us from machining yesterday.  It appears to have been changed on most, if not all, cps files.  I assume I am not the only person that has been impacted by the change.

Instead of the header above, all we need is this: 

T1M6
G17

Only once, at the beginning of the file.

[Mike.Grau]

Hi @Hardened,

Thank you for your post in the Forum.

I will add @martin.dunschen to this thread.

It would be great if you could share your design with us via Public Link

that we can reproduce the code.

Thank you,

[Steinwerks]

Essentially you want the most neutered G-code ever! 

To clarify, you are using this post, correct? http://cam.autodesk.com/posts/?p=linuxcnc

I used a previous version of this post to help a friend set up his hobby machine and it definitely posted G54, tool length compensation (G43), and others, but we can certainly strip all of that functionality out of the post, but it may be simpler to edit the RS274D post to match.

Currently the preload tool option can be set manually in the post dialogue (your T4 on line N35 after the M6T1) to No, as can the tool list (writeTools to No).

Edit: you can also try this post, which is very stripped-down as well, although it looks like to the point of not including feedrates either: http://cam.autodesk.com/posts/?p=xyz

[Hardened]

Yes, that is the post I am using.

Yes, it is a simple g-code that I need.  Neutered, perhaps, but I like simplicity when it comes to inherently complex things (like CNC machining).

I am just trying to get the output described in my post above.

[Hardened]

Neal,

   How do I know if this is being worked on?  Hopefully somebody there is making my stripped down post?  I have been unable to run an important machine because of this update, and I need to know if something is happening or if I need to figure it out on my own?

  The post worked all right for us until it was fixed by AutoDesk.  Now it does not.  Could someone please unfix it?

[Steinwerks]

Sorry, I haven't had an opportunity (I'm not an Autodesk employee, just an enthusiast volunteer). I may be able to get to it this evening.

[Hardened]

Neal,

  I am so sorry!  I assumed the 'expert elite' tagline made you an employee.  I truly did not mean to impose or to expect work from you.  😉

We are just stuck with a milling machine that is down, and I am trying to get it running again.  Two projects are likely to be late because of this.  Not your problem, I know.

I would hope that AutoDesk would fix this, since they messed it up...

If you can do something, that would be great, but I do not expect it.  😉

Best,

Bill

[Steinwerks]

To be fair, I got here by helping. And being one of the few obsessed with fixing issues and solving problems. I like editing posts, I'm just not all that fast at it unfortunately.

[Steinwerks · Accepted solution]

@Hardened

Alright, I disable a TON of things in the RS274 post, and so far it shows up how you'd want I think.

As with any post, test very carefully.

This may not work in all situations so make sure to check your code every time, especially when using new toolpaths or options.

Please let me know of any issues here.

[Hardened]

Steinworks, thank you!

The post works, and it is dirt-simple.

Thanks again for the help.  I hope to somehow return the favor.  😉

[mike.mattera]

I'm glad you got what you wanted, but I would like to point out a few things...

It's common for the beginning of an NC program to contain "Start-Up Codes".

Even though the conditions set with these codes may be the machines defaults, it's possible for a new code condition to be switched on for some reason (i.e. if the program is in the middle of a special operation and the program is stopped). The reason for having these Start-Up Codes to to insure the control is always reset to the proper/normal operating conditions.

I mention this because at some point, your program may not work as you expect and it will most likely be because there was nothing to switch it back to the normal operating conditions at the start of the file.