[Elie_Roy]

Hi,

I’m creating a bunch of programs, but I can only generate them if the tools are processed in a specific order.

If I generate a program using a mill and then generate a saw program, the mill program won’t generate correctly and I get an error message. However, if I generate the saw program first and then the mill program, everything works fine.


I can generate multiple mill programs back-to-back without any issues, but as soon as I switch from mill to saw, everything breaks. At that point, I would need to manually update each mill program, which I can’t do because they would lose their I/O calls and my speed-call modifications.

All of these programs are then called from a main program.

In my programs the set tool and set frame is called before any type of moves.

Any suggestions ?

Both Mill and Saw programs are built about the same way.

Cheers

[Albert]

Do both programs start with a joint movement as the first movement? Can you share your RoboDK project file? We can better take a look.

By the way, looking at the images you shared, there is a strange size of your text in the tree compared to the size of the icons in the tree. Did you change the default settings? You can adjust the size in the menu Tools-Options.

[Elie_Roy]

Hi Albert,

Yes, both programs start with a MoveJ as their first movement. In both programs, the tool and reference frame are set before the MoveJ.

I shared the station containing both programs on the “Preverco” shared drive.

Thanks,

Élie

*I also adjusted the font size

[Elie_Roy]

Hi Albert,

I just wanted to let you know that I was able to find the bug.

In one of my programs, I had changed the number of iterations to find a good solution:

AxisOptimization["MaxIter"] = 600 # Max. number of iterations

Meanwhile, my other programs were still set to 100 (default). Normally, everything should still have worked fine because the change was local and contained within my function.

Once I changed it back to 100, everything went smoothly.

Élie

[Albert]

Excellent! I'm happy to hear that adjusting the axis optimization parameters helped solve this issue. Thank you for letting us know.