X4 Post .err file from update

[gcode]

That's what the X4 update chook outputs.

The problem is something else

[peon]

guru, i just tried that suggestion using a generic md/cd and it didn't work. gcode, i altered those lines in the post and that didn't work either

[Tony35]

X4 Mu1 anyone?

[peon]

Tony, wait till this tornado flies by first!!

[gcode]

guys.. you need to review the log files that were

created when you updated your posts.. They will

give the the lines that update had issues with and clues as to where the error is coming from

[Leigh @ Kodiak]

My log file showed some "Possibly incorrect parameter numbers", but when I compared the values in my post to the ones in the NCI Parameter Reference, they checked out as being OK.

[peon]

Here is the log file of a posted toolpath.

 

08 Jun 2009 04:08:27 PM - <0> - Report created.

08 Jun 2009 04:08:27 PM - <2> - Initialize posting log file

08 Jun 2009 04:08:28 PM - <2> - Using MP run version 13.00 and post components version 10.00

08 Jun 2009 04:08:28 PM - <2> - Initiate opening the post processor file(s).

08 Jun 2009 04:08:28 PM - <2> - Post processor file name: C:MCAMXMILLPOSTSMAZAK TRODE.PST

08 Jun 2009 04:08:28 PM - <2> - The post processor file has been successfully opened.

08 Jun 2009 04:08:28 PM - <2> - Post version information (input):

08 Jun 2009 04:08:28 PM - <2> - UPDATEPOST Version 13. was used to modify this file.

08 Jun 2009 04:08:28 PM - <2> - The file was modified by this product on 08 Jun 09 15:19:05

08 Jun 2009 04:08:28 PM - <2> - The post was written to run with Mastercam Version 13.

08 Jun 2009 04:08:28 PM - <2> - The post product type is Mill.

08 Jun 2009 04:08:28 PM - <2> - Initialization of pre-defined post variables, strings, postblocks was successful.

08 Jun 2009 04:08:28 PM - <2> - Search for defined post variables, strings, postblocks was successful.

08 Jun 2009 04:08:28 PM - <2> - PST LINE (734) - Missing a matching open bracket

08 Jun 2009 04:08:28 PM - <2> - CONTROL DEFINITION - - Post variable 'dec_seq_right$' was re-initialized from 3. to 0.

08 Jun 2009 04:08:28 PM - <2> - CONTROL DEFINITION - - Post variable 'spaces$' was re-initialized from 1. to 0.

08 Jun 2009 04:08:28 PM - <2> - CONTROL DEFINITION - - Post variable 'omitseq$' was re-initialized from 1. to 0.

08 Jun 2009 04:08:28 PM - <2> - CONTROL DEFINITION - - Post variable 'arcoutput$' was re-initialized from 1. to 0.

08 Jun 2009 04:08:28 PM - <2> - CONTROL DEFINITION - - Post variable 'arctypexz$' was re-initialized from 2. to 5.

08 Jun 2009 04:08:28 PM - <2> - CONTROL DEFINITION - - Post variable 'arctypeyz$' was re-initialized from 2. to 5.

08 Jun 2009 04:08:28 PM - <2> - CONTROL DEFINITION - - Post variable 'larcoutput$' was re-initialized from 1. to 0.

08 Jun 2009 04:08:28 PM - <2> - CONTROL DEFINITION - - Post variable 'larctypexz$' was re-initialized from 2. to 5.

08 Jun 2009 04:08:28 PM - <2> - CONTROL DEFINITION - - Post variable 'larctypeyz$' was re-initialized from 2. to 5.

08 Jun 2009 04:08:28 PM - <2> - CONTROL DEFINITION - - Post variable 'breakarcsxz$' was re-initialized from 2. to 1.

08 Jun 2009 04:08:28 PM - <2> - CONTROL DEFINITION - - Post variable 'breakarcsyz$' was re-initialized from 2. to 1.

08 Jun 2009 04:08:28 PM - <2> - CONTROL DEFINITION - - Post variable 'lbreakarcsxz$' was re-initialized from 2. to 1.

08 Jun 2009 04:08:28 PM - <2> - CONTROL DEFINITION - - Post variable 'lbreakarcsyz$' was re-initialized from 2. to 1.

08 Jun 2009 04:08:28 PM - <2> - CONTROL DEFINITION - - Post variable 'do_xz_arcs$' was re-initialized from 1. to 0.

08 Jun 2009 04:08:28 PM - <2> - CONTROL DEFINITION - - Post variable 'do_yz_arcs$' was re-initialized from 1. to 0.

08 Jun 2009 04:08:28 PM - <2> - CONTROL DEFINITION - - Post variable 'ldo_xz_arcs$' was re-initialized from 1. to 0.

08 Jun 2009 04:08:28 PM - <2> - CONTROL DEFINITION - - Post variable 'ldo_yz_arcs$' was re-initialized from 1. to 0.

08 Jun 2009 04:08:28 PM - <2> - CONTROL DEFINITION - - Post variable 'rotfeed4$' was re-initialized from 2. to 1.

08 Jun 2009 04:08:28 PM - <2> - CONTROL DEFINITION - - Post variable 'rotfeed5$' was re-initialized from 3. to 1.

08 Jun 2009 04:08:28 PM - <2> - CONTROL DEFINITION - - Post variable 'lrotfeed4$' was re-initialized from 2. to 1.

08 Jun 2009 04:08:28 PM - <2> - CONTROL DEFINITION - - Post variable 'lrotfeed5$' was re-initialized from 0. to 1.

08 Jun 2009 04:08:28 PM - <2> - CONTROL DEFINITION - - Post variable 'peckacel$' was re-initialized from 0. to 1.

08 Jun 2009 04:08:28 PM - <2> - RUN TIME - PST(785), NCI(94) - The math calculation/formula has an error

08 Jun 2009 04:08:28 PM - <2> - Successful completion of posting process!

[Tony35]

gcode

i did. it told me that a possible parameter number detected 17044 please check number

ok looked it up in the ref book

told me nothing to help me or what to change it to

 

so you are saying my X3 post is messed up and X4 is not happy with it and had problems with the update so it ran good in X3 i will just go back i dont have the time to screw around with this i should have known better than to update

 

thanks for the help guys

[gcode]

quote:

---

08 Jun 2009 04:08:28 PM - <2> - RUN TIME - PST(785), NCI(94) - The math calculation/formula has an error

---

try commenting out (#) the offending line.

if that kills your err file, figure out what's wrong with the formula

[peon]

line 785 stated: spaces$ ?

 

changed that to spaces$ = 0

 

That fixed that one particular error. All of the other errors are present. I assume the updatepost utility does not work.

[Tony35]

this is my line 785

scc1 : "G41" #Cutter compensation left

 

but this post has been tweaked for a makino and i added some misc intergers so the line # wont work out for me

[peon]

It appears the CD is not changing the parameters into the post. I have spaces set to 0 in the CD, but the post wasn't updated. SPACES in the post was set to 1. I changed it to 0 amd the error went away.

[Robert Bernobic from CNC Software]

Tony35 --

 

"it told me that a possible parameter number detected 17044 please check number

ok looked it up in the ref book

told me nothing to help me or what to change it to"

 

According to the post ref, that parameter was removed in X3, so it's no longer being output, in either X3 or X4.

 

The logic for UpdatePost to look at possible parameter problems is a new feature for X4.

 

HTH,

Robert

[Rob @ Target Machine]

Tony - In my case, I had no MD/CD to update, I was moving from V9 to X2, in that case update post dll creates them for you. I thought maybe you were having this problem because you updated the post Before the MD's/CD's.

 

Looking at the logs, its clear that you have some structural errors in your post. They are what is creating the .err log.

 

You will likely have to hunt them all down and fix them, one post at a time.

 

If you put your post with the log file on the ftp maybe you can get some help with those issues.

 

Like gcode and JP have said "read the logs".

 

Maybe the dll doesn't "work" flawlessly, but most of the work has been done for you.

[Robert Bernobic from CNC Software]

peon -- "It appears the CD is not changing the parameters into the post."

 

CD isn't supposed to change the post or update the post -- the idea is that you set them in the control def INSTEAD of initializing them in your post. You're setting the same variable twice to different values, once in CD and once in the PST, so that's why Mastercam is calling it to your attention.

 

HTH,

Robert

[peon]

I think my reseller is gonna get a call. I had everything working excellent in X3 and this damn new release turned everything to crap. This should NEVER happen! My time as a programmer should be spent programming parts, NOT trying to get good code!!! Luckily I set a restore point in windows to get back easily.

[gcode]

It is very likely that you are getting good code.

The main difference is what X4 conciders an error worthy of an error report. Those errors in your post have probably been there all along, you just weren't being told about them.

You should give your dealer a call. The error report can probably be straightened out in short order.

The mpmaster error I posted earlier had been there for years. A variable was not properly defined.. the only difference is now Mastercam

is reporting the error.

[peon]

Gcode. I did find some of the reported errors on the X3 post when I dug into the post (a couple misspelled words). Although, they don't error in MX3. I did a side by side installation at home, and when I post a toolpath, I don't get the errors. Although at the office, I overwrote X3 and I get the errors when I post every toolpath. I agree that the code is most likely perfect.

[Tony35]

peon

i agree the code looks good (cimco backplot)

but what a way to panic when the posts worked good in X3 and after update you start getting the .err file you start to second guess yourself about what update did. i program for more than 10 cncs i cant afford a crash i finally got the operators to just run the programs very little prove out and whats the difference anyway at 567ipm they are not going to stop it in time

[peon]

I think I'm gonna make new posts for all the machines starting with the new master post to rid the error. I just used Window's system restore, and of course it didn't work. Hopefully I can repair using the MX3 disc. More wasted time!!!

[peon]

Tony, thanks for verifying in Cimco. I don't have an aftermarket verification package. I feel more confident bout the code to the machine.

[crazy^millman]

per request of Crazy^Millman

 

[ 06-09-2009, 04:01 PM: Message edited by: JParis@CNC Programming Solutions ]

[Tony35]

i think i might do the same (if we ever get slow)

just start with a fresh post tweak as needed for X4 and move on. it will be quicker than going thru all of the errors in the X3 posts that have an issue now and not before

 

i bad mouth edgecam all the time but they have updates that go flawlessly no post issues at all but otherwise the software sucks

 

maybe someday we will have that

[Tony35]

crazy millman

 

could it have been you that said something

[gcode]

guys..

you've got to keep one thing in mind.

the more you edit a post, the more likely

it is for an automated update proccess to fail.

The developers cannot possibly accomidate all

the edits tweaks and mistakes users

make tweaking thier posts.

I don't know why they decided to rachet up the

definition of a "fatal" error but most of these

"errrors" have always been there, X4 just tells

tell you about them

 

[ 06-09-2009, 10:14 AM: Message edited by: gcode ]