Plunge per pass & repititons?

[Romper]

i will try to explane this the best that i can so bare with me.

- I write a file on cad conveterting it to a sbp file assign color #1 a depth of 0.00
then i open the file with FP and tell it i want to plunge -0.125 per pass with 6 passes and tabs on the last pass. what i would like this to do is take the file and repeat it 6 times 0.125 lower each time. but it does not do this.
i have found t ways to get past this however both are problematic
Fix #1
edit the program by copying and pasting the file 6 times and changing the Z Axis accordingly to incrament -0.125 for each pass
Problem with fix #1
no tabing on the last

Part of post edited out by admin. The choice was either delete entire message or remove inappropriate part. As there is not a valid email address associated with this post, sender could not be notified privately with explanation and request to repost.

[bitbreaker]

READ the Shopboter's Chronicle on the SB pages.
Look carefully at the use of varibles.
No copy and paste.
No extra lines to add except for the label and test lines.
Clean and simple ... IF you grasp the use of SB variables.

[bill.young]

I don't believe that you can use the multiple-pass feature of the FP command if you have any Z-axis moves in your file. You could use a variable for your cutting depth like Bitbreaker suggests, and have a loop that runs the file six times with a deeper cut each time. You could also create a master file that runs your file 6 times, changing the depth each time and turning tabbing on the last time it's run.

There's information on cutting with multiple passes in the FP section of the command reference. You can view it by typing HC while you're in the ShopBot software, then highlighting the FP command. If you're interested in learning about the ShopBot language's programming features you can also download the Programming manual from their web site.

Bill

[romper]

ended up doing this
copying an pasting the file 5 times and using find and replace to change the plunge depth for each pass then entered fP,part.sbp,1.00,1.00,1.00,1,,,1,1
saved as Spart.sbp
Changed part.sbp to Cut with the apropriate plunge depth.
thanks for the help Bitbreaker and Bill i am gong to take your advise and read the chronile and review the fp comand
Romper


c

[kaaboom_99]

I have experienced one for this post. Take into mind that I have 5 computers in my household. I have loaded the Shopbot software (ver 2.29m) on 3 of these machines. My computer driving my Shopbot is a 386 mhz with 4 megs of ram. It has "PC Dos" loaded on it as the operating system. The other two computers have Windows 98SE loaded on them. The problem lies with the repitition/plunge function. The computer that is connected to the Shopbot does not correctly interpret the command. Where the other two computers WILL perform according to the Shopbot documents. When the same file is executed on the computer driving the Shopbot and it is instructed to plunge -0.050" with 10 repititions, it plunges to 0.500", runs the file and repeats 10 times. (0.500" is 100% full depth). This was tested on all three machine while in preview mode (after the present job on the table got messed up!). The two machines running Windows98SE ran the file perfect. My question is: does the version of Dos, the brand of Dos have a bearing on how the math and instructions are interpreted? Has anyone else seen this problem before? Just curious as to whether a harddrive change, operating change, or computer change is in order.
Thanks guys!!

[gerald_d]

Computer change is a definite step one!

Our starter 486 was far too small/slow/jerky for our September 2000 model PRT. An early model pentium was a big improvement. Your 386 must really be suffering!

[bill.young]

Perry,

Are you running sbx.exe as the executable instead of sb.exe? It's the version of the ShopBot software for slower (386) computers and is installed with the regular software. I don't know if it will help your problem but if you're not using it it's probably worth a try.

Bill

[Jay Wiese]

Bill,

Thanks for the sbx.exe tip. I'm using a slow 486 to run my machine and your suggestion made a world of difference. The Shopbot runs smooth as a Swiss watch!

Jay

[kaaboom_99]

Thanks for the tip. As it stands now (and upon further tinkering), my 386 is really a 486dx with 8 megs of ram. It still has issues and consequently is waiting for the pc doctor to show up. I am going to try to run the file from my laptop (550 mhz with 192 megs of ram and running Windows 98SE). We shall see how this goes.
This is such a great forum.
Thanks again

[birdsofplay]

Bit Breaker had the right idea IMHO

Variable between FP are probably NOT going to work
BUT ...
A little editing on the target FP file would
do the job. You wouldnt be offsetting X or Y
just RECUTTING at a new depth.
A good editor is a MUST.
One that allows you to do FIND AND REPLACE
and even better yet MACRO's
I have been testing Texpad http://www.textpad.com/
It's shareware or $27 if you like it !
It's a little tricky to get the macros entered but
it's well worth it if you want to do replacments or
"ADDITIONS" to already existing command lines.
Like those comming from the dxf2sbp converter.

For Z command this is not a biggy but for
X or Y commands it is MAJOR !

Say you wanted to add +&XO to every line that
contains a J2, M2, J3 or M3 ...
You'd have to find the line then go to the SECOND
comma then backup one and then insert the &XO.
NOT POSSIBLE with a whimpy editor BUT with the
MACRO function of Texpad you can do it easily
and on the WHOLE FILE. IE hundreds of lines !

This aint yer NORMAL Woodworking job Dorthy !
It's ShopBot time :-)
Get used to editing files and get more out of
your machine.

[gerald_d]

In 2 years we have never needed to edit any files. We draw every single move/jog as a line (or arc) in Autocad then use Vector for 2 minutes to get the sequence right. If a file doesn't do what we expect (extremely rare) then we go back to the Autocad file and fix the graphics.

Editting of .sbp files with text editors and macros is for the real enthusiast - like Bob

[birdsofplay]

Coming from the world of programming and not woodworking my gage for perfection is somewhat different.

I like to produce the smallest possible code especially since I have to move it via floppy out to my shop.
IF I used ACAD I'd probably get into LISP and write some improvments for it.

Ted and the SB guys put all those "Programming" functions into the SB code to allow for compact, iterative code. I was glad to see those old friends in there.

So I guess it's a matter of where you have skill.
If CAD skills get the job done then there is no argument against using them.
If your a total geeky nerd and programing is fun then SB has a place for you also.

ShopBot is spelled WHEEEE around here :-)

Thanks guys

[gerald_d]

@ Bob