While I like the look of the dialog-box that we have now better than the new version, if it helps other people with their problem, I can live with the new (and way older) look.

 

No problem. It will now be a configuration option. If you have problems with the dialogs just set $use_compatible_dialogs to true, inside Constants.rb, and it will use the old looking dialogs.

 

**sigh** I love open source!

 

Hi there,

I am sure I am missing something silly.

I have downloaded the latest Phlatscript. 0.918 I have looked inside the Constants.rb file for the $use_compatible_dialogs = true line which was not there. So I have added it to the end of that file however I am still getting the following screen when I try open the parameters box.

Yes they have been run via dos2unix... I know it is going to be something stupid I am missing I can feel it I just can't see it. ;-) Any help appreciated. Attached files

 

You only missed one small detail. That flag will be available in the next version of the script. PM me and I will help you get this running under Wine until the next version is available.

 

Thanks gasmasher, PM'ed you.. ;-)

 

Still catching up on messages after being away. I sent the instructions to get you up and running. Let me know how it goes.

 

Is there a guide for installing in OSX on the Mac?

 

I'm getting an interesting error in my g-code. Each segment of an arc becomes a full circle in the g-code. See attached pics and .skp

Attached files Arc-problem.skp (74.6 KB)Â

 

For some reason the arc on the right is using the wrong arc gcode (g2 vs g3). I loaded your file and just generated the gcode and it appears to be OK. Can you walk through the steps you used so I can recreate the problem? Working in mm is also not completely supported right now and can cause some problems like this.

Here is the code that I get when I load your sample and generate the gcode without making any changes. Notice that both arcs use G2 and I bet your code has a G3 for the one on the right.[pre]%
(Generated by PhlatscripT {trunk})
(File: Arc-problem.skp)
(Bit diameter: ~ 3.2mm)
(Feed rate: 100)
(Material Thickness: ~ 6.3mm)
(Material length: 540.0mm X width: 1150.0mm)
(www.PhlatBoyz.com)
G90 G20 G49
M3 S8000
G0 Z 0.050
X 5.774606 Y 7.623223
G1 Z -0.350 F 100
Y 18.396216
X 11.155142
G17 G2 X 11.940913 Y 18.335754 Z -0.350000 R 12.535346
X 12.708669 Y 18.155681 Z -0.350000 R 12.535346
X 13.439839 Y 17.860273 Z -0.350000 R 12.535346
X 14.117209 Y 17.456484 Z -0.350000 R 12.535346
X 14.724832 Y 16.953822 Z -0.350000 R 12.535346
X 15.248404 Y 16.364120 Z -0.350000 R 12.535346
X 15.675597 Y 15.701261 Z -0.350000 R 12.535346
X 15.996355 Y 14.980852 Z -0.350000 R 12.535346
X 16.203126 Y 14.219851 Z -0.350000 R 12.535346
X 16.291042 Y 13.436176 Z -0.350000 R 12.535346
X 16.258033 Y 12.648277 Z -0.350000 R 12.535346
X 16.105315 Y 11.876918 Z -0.350000 R 12.535346
G1 Y 7.623223
X 5.774606
G0 Z 0.050
X 19.269161
G1 Z -0.350 F 100
Y 11.876918
G17 G2 X 19.116443 Y 12.648277 Z -0.350000 R 12.535346
X 19.083434 Y 13.436176 Z -0.350000 R 12.535346
X 19.171350 Y 14.219851 Z -0.350000 R 12.535346
X 19.378121 Y 14.980852 Z -0.350000 R 12.535346
X 19.698879 Y 15.701261 Z -0.350000 R 12.535346
X 20.126072 Y 16.364120 Z -0.350000 R 12.535346
X 20.649644 Y 16.953822 Z -0.350000 R 12.535346
X 21.257267 Y 17.456484 Z -0.350000 R 12.535346
X 21.934638 Y 17.860273 Z -0.350000 R 12.535346
X 22.665808 Y 18.155681 Z -0.350000 R 12.535346
X 23.433564 Y 18.335754 Z -0.350000 R 12.535346
X 24.219334 Y 18.396216 Z -0.350000 R 12.535346
G1 X 29.599870
Y 7.623223
X 19.269161
G0 Z 0.050
G0 X0 Y0
M05
G0 Z0
M30
%
[/pre]

 

No, the ones on the right also has G2 code. see below.

It seems that I get this problem for all arcs where the right endpoint of the arc has a higher Y value than the left endpoint.

[pre]%
(Generated by PhlatscripT {0.921})
(Bit diameter: 1,6mm)
(Feed rate: 100)
(Material Thickness: 6,0mm)
(Material length: 540,0mm X width: 1150,0mm)
(www.PhlatBoyz.com)
G90 G20 G49
M3 S8000
G0 Z 0.050
X 5.774606 Y 7.623223
G1 Z -0.236 F 100
Y 18.396216
X 11.155142
G17 G2 X 11.940913 Y 18.335754 Z -0.236220 R 12.535346
X 12.708669 Y 18.155681 Z -0.236220 R 12.535346
X 13.439839 Y 17.860273 Z -0.236220 R 12.535346
X 14.117209 Y 17.456484 Z -0.236220 R 12.535346
X 14.724832 Y 16.953822 Z -0.236220 R 12.535346
X 15.248404 Y 16.364120 Z -0.236220 R 12.535346
X 15.675597 Y 15.701261 Z -0.236220 R 12.535346
X 15.996355 Y 14.980852 Z -0.236220 R 12.535346
X 16.203126 Y 14.219851 Z -0.236220 R 12.535346
X 16.291042 Y 13.436176 Z -0.236220 R 12.535346
X 16.258033 Y 12.648277 Z -0.236220 R 12.535346
X 16.105315 Y 11.876918 Z -0.236220 R 12.535346
G1 Y 7.623223
X 5.774606
G0 Z 0.050
X 19.269161
G1 Z -0.236 F 100
Y 11.876918
G17 G2 X 19.116443 Y 12.648277 Z -0.236220 R 12.535346
X 19.083434 Y 13.436176 Z -0.236220 R 12.535346
X 19.171350 Y 14.219851 Z -0.236220 R 12.535346
X 19.378121 Y 14.980852 Z -0.236220 R 12.535346
X 19.698879 Y 15.701261 Z -0.236220 R 12.535346
X 20.126072 Y 16.364120 Z -0.236220 R 12.535346
X 20.649644 Y 16.953822 Z -0.236220 R 12.535346
X 21.257267 Y 17.456484 Z -0.236220 R 12.535346
X 21.934638 Y 17.860273 Z -0.236220 R 12.535346
X 22.665808 Y 18.155681 Z -0.236220 R 12.535346
X 23.433564 Y 18.335754 Z -0.236220 R 12.535346
X 24.219334 Y 18.396216 Z -0.236220 R 12.535346
G1 X 29.599870
Y 7.623223
X 19.269161
G0 Z 0.050
G0 X0 Y0
M05
G0 Z0
M30
%
[/pre] Attached files

 

Hmm, except for the Z values the gcode you posted is the same as mine. I opened your code in EMC2 and it appears just like the SU model, two boxes with a rounded off corner. I will try a few more tests but I can't seem to recreate it right now.

 

janbjorn's gcode simulates fine in ncplot, also. Maybe it's a bug with the NCSim program he's using to simulate.

Attached files

 

Oh, I never thought about there being a problem in NCSim. I will investigate some more...

 

The 0.921 version of the Phlatscript seems to have problems making G-code for gears generated by the gear.3.rb plugin. The gear has a 3.175mm diameter plunge cut in the center.

The gear I used was ungrouped and everything, but the G-code generated always ends up with only the plunge cut and the starting position for the outside cut.

However, any other object works fine.

 

This is probably due to the offset bug that everyone has been working around. If you zoom in close do you see the orange outside cut line overlapping itself between the gear teeth?

Could you post a Sketchup file with a sample of the problem part? There has been a lot of progress on the bug and I would like to try the development version of the script on your sample.

 

Looks like your inside faces need reversed, your cut out example shows a lot of fuzzy edges. There looks to be a ton of extra lines in the lower portion of the drawing also. They could cause you problems and they did for me.
Inside faces should turn white when you apply an inside cut to the or the bit runs the wrong way on the cutout causing fuzzy/jagged edges.

 

There is something going on, that is strange. I generated the g code from Randy's sketchup file and that inside cut was not there, like Randys said. But I simply ungrouped (exploded) it and the inside cut was now in the g code. I grouped the whole then again and the inside cut was still there, unlike the orginal.

-Kwok

 

I think you hit the nail on it's head, Kwok. While I don't know what Randy did, I think he grouped it and then noticed he forgot the one spot and did it. That may leave the cut out when making the G-code