Jump to content

Welcome to eMastercam

Register now to participate in the forums, access the download area, buy Mastercam training materials, post processors and more. This message will be removed once you have signed in.

Use your display name or email address to sign in:

AXYZ A2MC post missing coolant for one tool


Recommended Posts

Hi,

I'm having an issue with an old post processor for an AXYZ router with an A2MC controller. Ever since the post processor was created, we have added a tool to our library. The router has 3 heads and each head has its own M code for mister coolant On/Off. Head #2 & #3 have exclusive tools that we leave in there and head #1 is where we swap the rest of the tools. So basically we need the post to go "if Tool #4 is called, activate mister for head #3, if tool #2 is called, activate mister for head #2, etc. I looked up the post in notepad and I found the following:

# Coolant M code selection
sm09     : "M09"     #Coolant Off
sm08     : "M418"     #Mister tool On # 1-5-6-7
sm08_1   : "M420"     #Mister tool On # 2
sm08_2   : "M424"     #Mister tool On # 4
sm09_1   : "M419"     #Mister tool Off # 1-5-6-7
sm09_2   : "M421"     #Mister tool Off # 2
sm09_3   : "M425"     #Mister tool Off # 4

scoolant : ""        #Target for string

fstrsel sm09 coolant$ scoolant 7 -1


As you can see, each head has its own set of M code. Head #1 is M418/419, Head #2 is M420/421 and Head #3 is M424/425. We now have a tool #9 and I don't know how to add it to head #1's pool of available tools (it currently triggers on tool #1-5-6-7). How do I tell the post processor to trigger M418/419 on tool #9 as well? I looked everywhere and couldn't find anything.

Thank you very much for your time

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Some where in the post there is a trigger looking for a tool number to activate the correct coolant output based on the tool. Looking at that it was only written to tool 7. You will need to find that logic and change it to support more tool numbers and think you will have solved your program.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, crazy^millman said:

Some where in the post there is a trigger looking for a tool number to activate the correct coolant output based on the tool. Looking at that it was only written to tool 7. You will need to find that logic and change it to support more tool numbers and think you will have solved your program.

Thank you for your reply. That was my first thought as well but I scoured the entire file and didn't find anything relating to that. Would it be in the same .PST file or could it be in another file somewhere?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, samysnes said:

Thank you for your reply. That was my first thought as well but I scoured the entire file and didn't find anything relating to that. Would it be in the same .PST file or could it be in another file somewhere?

If there is a .psb file with it then it could be in that encrypted part of the post. Have you tried reaching our to your reseller and seeing what they say by chance?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Just now, crazy^millman said:

If there is a .psb file with it then it could be in that encrypted part of the post. Have you tried reaching our to your reseller and seeing what they say by chance?

Yes, I have tried opening that .PSB file to no avail. Do you know of any software that can read that PSB file? I have tried Notepad++, no luck. Yes I reached out to my reseller. Waiting on a call back. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, samysnes said:

Yes, I have tried opening that .PSB file to no avail. Do you know of any software that can read that PSB file? I have tried Notepad++, no luck. Yes I reached out to my reseller. Waiting on a call back. 

The PSB is like I said encrypted to protect someone's intellectual property. You can run the post debugger and then see what that section shows you. If it is in the PSB then you will find out. If so then whoever created the post will have to be the ones to changed it. Sorry it is what it is.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, crazy^millman said:

The PSB is like I said encrypted to protect someone's intellectual property. You can run the post debugger and then see what that section shows you. If it is in the PSB then you will find out. If so then whoever created the post will have to be the ones to changed it. Sorry it is what it is.

Wait so you are telling me we can't properly edit our own post processor?? That sucks! I'll wait on the call from my reseller then... Again thank you very much for your time!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, samysnes said:

Wait so you are telling me we can't properly edit our own post processor?? That sucks! I'll wait on the call from my reseller then... Again thank you very much for your time!

Well you can edit the open parts of the Post, but the locked part that you didn't pay$1,000,000 for you cannot. You pony up $1,000,000 or maybe $10,000,000 for it then I am sure they will be glad to give you that. You don't own Mastercam just like you don't own Windows. You are renting the software and the company has been given a perpetual license to rent it for as long as your company is in business. Paying maintenance allows you to keep up with the current release of that rented software, but you don't own Mastercam and the post is locked because if it were open source like so many free post are then whoever put in the sweat equity to make it wouldn't be able to earn a living. Educate yourself on software ownership and you will see I am not being mean just honest.

You buy a license, but don't own

Another link to learn you don't own purchased Software

Link to comment
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, crazy^millman said:

Well you can edit the open parts of the Post, but the locked part that you didn't pay$1,000,000 for you cannot. You pony up $1,000,000 or maybe $10,000,000 for it then I am sure they will be glad to give you that. You don't own Mastercam just like you don't own Windows. You are renting the software and the company has been given a perpetual license to rent it for as long as your company is in business. Paying maintenance allows you to keep up with the current release of that rented software, but you don't own Mastercam and the post is locked because if it were open source like so many free post are then whoever put in the sweat equity to make it would be able to earn a living. Educate yourself on software ownership and you will see I am not being mean just honest.

You buy a license, but don't own

Another link to learn you don't own purchased Software

I am not sure why you felt attacked by my comment but you need to relax. I was never implying you were being mean and I have nothing against you, I am in fact very grateful you took the time to comment. I am fully aware how software license ownership works. Don't be condescending and telling me I need to educate myself. Maybe you mistook me for some clueless dunce and your frustrations came out. I never said that I should own Mastercam and its source code. You are putting words in my mouth. I can't believe you felt the need to remind me that I don't own Windows...

I do not equate owning a post processor to owning Mastercam in its entirety, that's a ludicrous statement. They are two separate things. The post processors I can purchase from my reseller is a standalone purchase and not a recuring subscription, therefore I assumed it would be DRM free. Also, english is not my first language so sometimes I use the wrong words trying to convey something. Still, not sure how you got the feeling I was claiming I should own Mastercam and Windows.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Just now, samysnes said:

I am not sure why you felt attacked by my comment but you need to relax. I was never implying you were being mean and I have nothing against you, I am in fact very grateful you took the time to comment. I am fully aware how software license ownership works. Don't be condescending and telling me I need to educate myself. Maybe you mistook me for some clueless dunce and your frustrations came out. I never said that I should own Mastercam and its source code. You are putting words in my mouth. I can't believe you felt the need to remind me that I don't own Windows...

I do not equate owning a post processor to owning Mastercam in its entirety, that's a ludicrous statement. They are two separate things. The post processors I can purchase from my reseller is a standalone purchase and not a recuring subscription, therefore I assumed it would be DRM free. Also, english is not my first language so sometimes I use the wrong words trying to convey something. Still, not sure how you got the feeling I was claiming I should own Mastercam and Windows.

Sorry seems I come across the wrong way when I never meant to. I suck an English also so we do share that. You asked a question and I thought you were wanting an answer so I gave the answer. I didn't mean to insult your intelligence and again sorry it came across that way as it was never my intention.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, crazy^millman said:

Sorry seems I come across the wrong way when I never meant to. I suck an English also so we do share that. You asked a question and I thought you were wanting an answer so I gave the answer. I didn't mean to insult your intelligence and again sorry it came across that way as it was never my intention.

No hard feelings, my man! It was just a rhetorical question because I was disappointed to find out that such a basic function (adding tools to coolant logic) is not part of the "open" portion of the post processor code. I do apologize if I came across the wrong way. I just wanna take the time to thank you again for trying to help me though. It is much apreciated.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, samysnes said:

No hard feelings, my man! It was just a rhetorical question because I was disappointed to find out that such a basic function (adding tools to coolant logic) is not part of the "open" portion of the post processor code. I do apologize if I came across the wrong way. I just wanna take the time to thank you again for trying to help me though. It is much apreciated.

Most Post Processors which you purchase through your Reseller have some portion of the Post Processor encrypted. This is to protect the developer's intellectual property (logic & math). Often, the developers include logic to "lock" the Post Processor to your individual HASP Number. That way, you are prevented from distributing the Post to other users.

If you want a truly "open" Post Processor, there are Generic Posts available which can be fully customized to your liking, with no critical parts of the Post encrypted. However, for something like "multi-head" support, it is best to leave that Development work to the professionals.

I'm sure your Reseller will be able to assist you in making these changes, since the section of the Post that you need to access is encrypted. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, samysnes said:

No hard feelings, my man! It was just a rhetorical question because I was disappointed to find out that such a basic function (adding tools to coolant logic) is not part of the "open" portion of the post processor code. I do apologize if I came across the wrong way. I just wanna take the time to thank you again for trying to help me though. It is much apreciated.

Your welcome and it can be very frustrating trying to solve a problem and running into a another road block. Sorry I guess years of getting run through the ringer on the forum have taken a toll on me. I do my very best to help others and share what knowledge I have. I will try to better my approach and give answers that hopefully come across better so it will not be perceived in the wrong tone since that isn't where my heart is at when answering questions. This is a hard enough profession without feeling like someone is not there trying to help you along. 

Hopefully it is a simple fix and your dealer gets you fixed up without a lot of hassle. IF not feel free to put a sample Zip to Go file with the post in it and someone like Colin might be able to check it out and see that it is not in the locked part of the post and just a simple fix. Without something to really see what your seeing it is really hard to know for certain.

Have a good day. :cheers:

Link to comment
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Colin Gilchrist said:

Most Post Processors which you purchase through your Reseller have some portion of the Post Processor encrypted. This is to protect the developer's intellectual property (logic & math). Often, the developers include logic to "lock" the Post Processor to your individual HASP Number. That way, you are prevented from distributing the Post to other users.

If you want a truly "open" Post Processor, there are Generic Posts available which can be fully customized to your liking, with no critical parts of the Post encrypted. However, for something like "multi-head" support, it is best to leave that Development work to the professionals.

I'm sure your Reseller will be able to assist you in making these changes, since the section of the Post that you need to access is encrypted. 

Thank you for clarifying. I incorrectly assumed that the only part of the post processor's code that would be encrypted would be the part that's binding it to my HASP number. I thought I could edit it as a whole but that if someone else tried to run it, it would just refuse to post. But yes it makes sense that some part of the code would be locked to prevent someone from creating their own post processor from it. I guess I just consider adding a tool to the code to be something that I should be able to do on my own and it's frustrating that the part that shows the M codes with a comment of which tool triggers them is open but not the way to change said tools... I mean, I could just create a script that adds M418 and M419 for every T9 operations at this point so why make me go through the hassle. Am I making sense or am I just coming across as an entitled whiner? I guess working with Linux has clouded my judgement on open vs closed source.

Thank you for your time Colin!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, samysnes said:

Thank you for clarifying. I incorrectly assumed that the only part of the post processor's code that would be encrypted would be the part that's binding it to my HASP number. I thought I could edit it as a whole but that if someone else tried to run it, it would just refuse to post. But yes it makes sense that some part of the code would be locked to prevent someone from creating their own post processor from it. I guess I just consider adding a tool to the code to be something that I should be able to do on my own and it's frustrating that the part that shows the M codes with a comment of which tool triggers them is open but not the way to change said tools... I mean, I could just create a script that adds M418 and M419 for every T9 operations at this point so why make me go through the hassle. Am I making sense or am I just coming across as an entitled whiner? I guess working with Linux has clouded my judgement on open vs closed source.

Thank you for your time Colin!

It looks like the Post Developer did some work to modify the "Coolant String Select Table" to output those M-Codes.

That 'String Select Table' uses the value (and modality) of 'coolant$', to select the appropriate M-code.

Search in your Post for 'coolant$', and you may find the code where the value of that variable is being set. If you don't find any code which controls the value of the variable, then the manipulation is being performed in the PSB portion of the Post. 

You can add additional strings to the String Select Table, and change the "number of strings in the implied array", but if you don't have access to where the value of 'coolant$' is controlled, it is a moot point. 

This is a case where the Post Developer modified a "default Post Function" to accomplish their goal. It is fine that they did that, but I'd be curious to see if the function is indeed hidden.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
48 minutes ago, Colin Gilchrist said:

It looks like the Post Developer did some work to modify the "Coolant String Select Table" to output those M-Codes.

That 'String Select Table' uses the value (and modality) of 'coolant$', to select the appropriate M-code.

Search in your Post for 'coolant$', and you may find the code where the value of that variable is being set. If you don't find any code which controls the value of the variable, then the manipulation is being performed in the PSB portion of the Post. 

You can add additional strings to the String Select Table, and change the "number of strings in the implied array", but if you don't have access to where the value of 'coolant$' is controlled, it is a moot point. 

This is a case where the Post Developer modified a "default Post Function" to accomplish their goal. It is fine that they did that, but I'd be curious to see if the function is indeed hidden.

I can confirm that the variable is not present. I looked at what I had available line by line last night. My reseller finally got back to me and they are gonna change the PSB. I wish it wasn't such a bother to do something so trivial. My operators are getting impatient haha

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If there are certain areas of the post you want to edit the post writer may be willing to remove that section from the .psb file.  Our Okuma post had the drilling section in the .psb file and I ask our reseller if we could possibly get the drill section in the .pst file.  They were able to get it removed for me so I can now edit our drilling section.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Ben Wood said:

If there are certain areas of the post you want to edit the post writer may be willing to remove that section from the .psb file.  Our Okuma post had the drilling section in the .psb file and I ask our reseller if we could possibly get the drill section in the .pst file.  They were able to get it removed for me so I can now edit our drilling section.

Oh, that's a great idea! I didn't think of that. I will ask them ASAP. Thanks for the insight :)

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

Join us!

eMastercam - your online source for all things Mastercam.

Together, we are the strongest Mastercam community on the web with over 56,000 members, and our online store offers a wide selection of training materials for all applications and skill levels.

Follow us

×