Why doesn't Fusion machine simulation simulate passthrough commands

[adrian8B2L2]

As per the subject, why doesn't Fusion machine simulation simulate passthrough commands?

Example 1:  I want to program some moves using machine coordinate values to perform tasks like presenting a fixture in more operator friendly manner for loading and unloading

Example 2: I want to tip my rotaries and then spin them around to clear swarf out of a deep cavity

Example 3: I want to evaluate a macro.

All of these things require 4 - 10 lines of code, typically I use pass through to insert them into my program, I know the code is correct because it runs successfully on the machine. BUT, I would much prefer to have these moves simulated and checked before it gets to the physical machine.

So, if Fusion machine simulation is G code simulation, why cant it, or why doesn't it simulate commands entered via passthrough? 

[seth.madore]

Because "Passthrough" isn't g-code that the post or Fusion can interpret. Passthrough could be literally anything; comments, macros, etc. It's "dumb" data as far as Fusion/posts are concerned.

[programming2C78B]

Im assuming the quick answer will be that fusion is CAD/CAM, not a dedicated machine simulation software and thus simply can't process those commands right now. 

[adrian8B2L2]

Hi @seth.madore 

I am not entirely sure I understand you. Are you saying that the simulation is interpreting CL data for movements while concurrently post processing the CL data for display purposes in the G Code window, and that is why commands from pass through are not able to be simulated?

[seth.madore]

CL data?

Calculated toolpaths generate motion, feeds and speeds. This is data that can be understood by simulation.

Pass through commands are just raw data that does not map to anything understood by simulation. As Pass Through can literally be anything (Hello World), we cannot (and do not) do anything with those.

[viacheslav.shapilov]

Fusion machine simulation is not a G-code simulator. But not a pure CL-data simulator either. It is somewhere in between.

Machine simulation processes CL-data by running selected post through the postprocessor to generate both G-Code and Simulation commands. So, it is a postprocessor + post responsibility to drive simulation correctly for G-code output. As Seth said, neither postprocessor, nor Fusion currently interpret any passed through commands. So, they appear in simulation as a G-code, that does not have corresponding simulation commands.

In theory, it should be possible to update post in a way, it will parse passthrough commands and generate corresponding motions for simulation through the Simulation class. But it will require to write some sort of reverse post in pure JS. Alternatively, instead of writing passthrough commands in Fusion, you can use some custom commands and replace them with sequence of "invokeOnXXX" functions in the post. These functions do both: write G-Code and output simulation commands automatically.

[adrian8B2L2]

@viacheslav.shapilov @seth.madore 

Thank you both for answering my question, I now have a better understanding of what is happening, and why. Now I need to figure out what I want to do and how.

[Christoph_360]

Hello

Are there any considerations to support connection movements in Fusion?

e.g.

Absolute and incremental movements related to the Machine Coordinate System (MCS), the Work Coordinate System (WCS), the Tool Coordinate System (TCS) and CAD geometry.

Incremental movements with respect to the end positions of the axes in the MCS, WCS, or TCS.

The NC output of the movement can be selected in the MCS or WCS with or without length correction.

Thanks

Christoph

[viacheslav.shapilov]

---

Are there any considerations to support connection movements in Fusion?

Sure. Simulation of connection moves is supported by some posts already. You can search for function `machineSimulation` in haas NGC post for example, to see, how it is done. Basically, Simulation class was introduced specifically for supporting connection moves generated by post.

If you are talking of creating connection moves in Fusion by user, it is not possible at the moment.

[Christoph_360]

Hello

---

@viacheslav.shapilov wrote:

---

Are there any considerations to support connection movements in Fusion?

Sure. They are supported by some posts already. You can search for function `machineSimulation` in haas NGC post for example, to see, how it is done. Basically, Simulation class was introduced specifically for supporting connection moves generated by post.

---

---

---

Many thanks for your support

I mean it differently, I want to program these instructions in Fusion, like a drill command where I can select the MCS, the WCS or the TCS and then I can define the movements.

Thanks

Christoph

[Christoph_360]

Hello

---

@viacheslav.shapilov wrote:

---

If you are talking of creating connection moves in Fusion by user, it is not possible at the moment.

---

Thanks, yes I mean this

Christoph