grbl/grbl — Issue #54: More or revamped coordinate systems?
Author: chamnit
Created: 2012-02-02 19:09:39+00:00
State: open

Grbl v0.8 and v0.7d both have G92 coordinate offset support to help define a part zero that can be difficult to locate when grbl always just resets to [0,0,0]. I have been looking into and pondering whether or not to add the standard G54 coordinate systems.

We can do just about everything we need to with G92, but my friend Machinist Mike did not agree. After debating with him, he was absolutely adamant that G54 work coordinate system should be used instead of the current G92 implementation. His argument was based on that G92 is not a complete industry standard and may vary slightly from machine to machine. G54 is a defacto standard and used on all CAM systems. He stated that G92 is used very infrequently in industry because it can complicate programs and isn't 100% portable to different machines.

So, the question is: Should we drop G92 in favor of G54? Or should we add G54 or possibly more work coordinate systems and keep G92 as legacy support? Does anyone use G92? (I know I have several times.)

G54 shouldn't too difficult to add, since I have already written in the needed functions last week. I could likely finish it this weekend.