Saw some other posts about just running the file. I did that and it ran fine. Ran the same job the day before w/o error. Turned machine on the next day to run same job with the same previous Zero settings. I got some kinda zero warning at initialize and ignored it. Does something get scrambled in this scenario?
Either way, it’s quite unsettling to see this when I’m almost certain the gcode is fine. Really ramps up the anxiety when you’re just about to run a job. Would rather prefer not to have the Bounds Check if it’s giving false alarms.
Also, here’s the Zero Not Set message that I was referencing before.
This comes up when CM is shut off, then turned back on and try to run a job at the same zero that was previously set from the last job. Can you please explain this message? My understanding was that CM stores the last zero spot so that you can stop a job, shutdown, and come back to it later. Also, finish a job, shutdown, come back and set a board and use the same zero (like batching the same job). What am I missing here? Thanks.
At a guess, it appears that you’ve surfaced off your working area enough that the depth to which this file cuts is just deeper the defined safe working area.
While Grbl preserves the origin, Carbide Motion only knows when it was set in the current run — the warning is that origin wasn’t set yet for the current session.
Thanks for your replies, but I don’t see how it can be determined that it’s cutting “deeper than the defined safe working area” when the material surface is the z-origin. The material is 1/2" thick, so this seems well within a safe working area. Anyway, just want to throw this out there. The zero, material, and file were fine. This Bounds thing wasn’t.
Along the Z-axis it has to have a bit of leeway for how much of the MDF has been cut away — your machine seems to be at an edge case where enough has been cut away that the warning triggers, but not so much that it bottoms out so that the cut isn’t completed successfully — if you replace your MDF with full-thickness filler strips the warnings should go away.
I look at it as a warning that I can ignore or pay attention to. A small amount, no problem. I have saved my rails by looking when I think it may be right, and it was.
Shouldn’t a warning be paid attention to? After all…caution, warnings ahead.
Also, not sure how jobs can be so out of bounds. Make the gcode, set the work piece, zero, and run it. Also, there are limit switches so things don’t get too crazy. Keep an eye on that bit depth though.
True. I check. .9mm I can live with. When I get a large discrepancy, let’s say 2.7 as I got once, it is time for me to recheck everything. It was a job I had just designed. I fat fingered a value.
It is just another check and balance that I am glad is there for this feeble old mind.
