Re: Setx,y vs. G52

"PrecisionMachinisT" <precisionmachinist@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:1LudnXoki9NBGrLeRVn-jg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>
> "Proctologically Violated©®" <physical@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
> news:CvmdnWNads8zG7LeRVn-ug@xxxxxxxxxx
>> Awl--
>>
>> Recently I axed sumpn about Setx, and from what I can tell G52 is really
>> a
>> better way to go about this, much more convenient, of course edit-able,
> etc.
>> Appears to be quite helpful if yer running out of offsets in the offset
>> table. In my case, it seems to be making my macros and left/right handed
>> parts much more "doable", less confusing.
>>
>> A Q might be, then, why would one want to use Setx at all? Unless you
> just
>> working at the machine, in MDI, etc. (no program).
>>
>
> Suggest just use "E" instead...
>

I do... so many, in fact, I gotta resort to g52!
Used it once some time ago, worked well, then forgot about it. I'll find
out tonite how well it works here.
----------------------------
Mr. P.V.'d
formerly Droll Troll

> --
>
> SVL
>
>


.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Setx,y vs. G52
    ... > Recently I axed sumpn about Setx, and from what I can tell G52 is really a ... > Appears to be quite helpful if yer running out of offsets in the offset ... > A Q might be, then, why would one want to use Setx at all? ...
    (alt.machines.cnc)
  • Setx,y vs. G52
    ... Recently I axed sumpn about Setx, and from what I can tell G52 is really a ... Appears to be quite helpful if yer running out of offsets in the offset ... A Q might be, then, why would one want to use Setx at all? ...
    (alt.machines.cnc)