Axis can't be renamed, generally this can be easily done in the POST processor file of your CAM software. If you want then we can look at the CAM POST file, what CAM software are you using to generate gcode?
Can you please first explain your process in fusion because in fusion it will generate the gcode as A and B axis, but maybe we are missing something regarding your job. So maybe a video or something to explain what you are trying to do.
Yes, Masso mill post processor generate gcode as A and B axis. But I am building machines with (A or B) and C axis. So joint are screenshots for a swarf operation example and post process properties in fusion360 and a gcode generated using HAAS UMC-750 where you can notice the motion on (XYZ B and C) axis.
I want perform the same operation using MASSO MILL.cps post processor.
I hope my question is clear enough, and I wish I could use your controller for my machines.
I confirm again that it is a 5 axis head/head, anyway I will try to proceed to create my own post processor if MASSO don't judge it as an urgent task for masso. If I success to generate the gcode, I wish MASSO users will accept to give it a try .
its not about being urgent or not urgent, its just that we are unable to understand your requirement, if its a 5 axis setup then we are trying to understand that wouldn't it be just X,Y, Z, A & B axis only?
Apologise for this but at times its hard to understand / visualise ones requirement, so will appreciate some more details.
thank you, thats all clear now and your English is just fine, its just that we are talking to so many people everyday and at times we just cant visualise the requirments.
So now the question that we have here is that the naming to the axis can be anything because its more of a reference when designing or using the machine, so calling that axis B or C wont make any difference, the only thing what we need to see now is that when generating gcode in fusion, when setting up the CAM does fusion only let to define this axis as C axis or can rename it to B axis? and I am not taking in post but in the fusion machine settings because then we can just use the same POST.
According to my humble experience in post processors building, any CAM software will generate the information which tells the plane of rotation/translation performed in a particular setup then it is the job of the post processor to assign this rotation/translation to a designated axis in the machine. Therefore using the same post processor in different machines configurations become impossible especially when taking into account whether the axis is dependent or independent one.
there are a few things that need to be discussed for this, will you be able to have a talk on skype tomorrow so that we can discuss this and then we can also share your screen and see things in fusion.
Can you please email us on support your skype ID and a good time to talk.
I guess I should have waited to post as my unit wont arrive until later this week. I was just trying to get a head start and after reading this post it looks like you only have axis A and B as an option. Standards for Axis rotation as I understand them (and how I have my system setup) is "A around X", "B around Y" and "C around Z". So in my head/head machine I have configure C and B.
My current setup is Mastercam -> gcode -> Mach4. I bought your unit as I am building another machine and was hoping that I wouldn't have to go in and reconfigure my MasterCam/Mach4 setup and only have to create the gcode once and use it with either setup.
so as per your machine, as you mentioned that you only need C & B, you can either change some settings in master cam to output C axis as A axis or simply edit the post processor file to replace C as A axis for the gcode output.
Yes...but I have two machines....My current one and one I am building and I want to be able to share the gcode. So I will have to reprogram Mastercam (machine definition), the Mastercam simulator and Mach4 (old setup). I am also use to looking at the gcode and seeing an axis C as it is the "standard" (I know there is some debate on that). In the end its not a huge problem but it would be nice if you added axis labeling as an option to future firmware builds. Something like Axis 4 = Axis?? Axis5= Axis?? ....This would let the enduser pick which axis went to what output.