Hi Jyardley,
I'll try to help you the best I can as I don't want us to be the reason for your hair loss. Hehe.
First, I took a look at your station, and for a weird reason, you are using one of the legacy post-processor.
The "white" post-processors are only there for backward compatibility. I would recommend you to use the "black" ones. See screen capture below (select either IRC5 or S4C depending on the controller you are using):
This should solve the "smoothing" problem you are experiencing.
If this doesn't solve the MoveC problem we have a few other solutions.
It would be nice to know at which line of the ABB code the program crashes. That would help us narrow down the error.
The first, and ideal, solution would be to make sure that your CAM program doesn't generate MoveC smaller than the minimum value your robot controller can handle. There's generally a "tolerance" setting that you can manage in the CAM software for the linear movement, I imagine that the same thing is possible for MoveC.
Small note here, I see that you generated a .NC file from your CAM software, did you do it manually or using one of our plugins? If the answer is "manually" try to see if your CAM software includes a post-processor generating .apt files. We usually have better results with that file format. (This should not affect the present situation, it's just a tip for the future.)
The second solution would be to request your CAM software not to generate MoveC, but rather generate a bunch of small MoveLs. If the linear movements are small enough, you shouldn't see the difference in the real program executed on the robot. Better than that, the older robots/controllers are not always super good at maintaining the real trajectory on MoveC, therefore transforming the MoveC in a bunch of small MoveL can possibly improve the actual accuracy of the path.
The third solution would be to modify the "Minimum arc size" in the RoboDK options.
"Main menu" -> "Tools" -> "Options" (can also be reached with "shift + o") -> "Programs"
This option will only affect the post-processed program, you shouldn't see any difference in the RoboDK station.
Let me know if it helps.
Also, make sure you are using the latest version of RoboDK:
"Main menu" -> "Help" -> "Check for updates".
Jeremy
I'll try to help you the best I can as I don't want us to be the reason for your hair loss. Hehe.
First, I took a look at your station, and for a weird reason, you are using one of the legacy post-processor.
The "white" post-processors are only there for backward compatibility. I would recommend you to use the "black" ones. See screen capture below (select either IRC5 or S4C depending on the controller you are using):
This should solve the "smoothing" problem you are experiencing.
If this doesn't solve the MoveC problem we have a few other solutions.
It would be nice to know at which line of the ABB code the program crashes. That would help us narrow down the error.
The first, and ideal, solution would be to make sure that your CAM program doesn't generate MoveC smaller than the minimum value your robot controller can handle. There's generally a "tolerance" setting that you can manage in the CAM software for the linear movement, I imagine that the same thing is possible for MoveC.
Small note here, I see that you generated a .NC file from your CAM software, did you do it manually or using one of our plugins? If the answer is "manually" try to see if your CAM software includes a post-processor generating .apt files. We usually have better results with that file format. (This should not affect the present situation, it's just a tip for the future.)
The second solution would be to request your CAM software not to generate MoveC, but rather generate a bunch of small MoveLs. If the linear movements are small enough, you shouldn't see the difference in the real program executed on the robot. Better than that, the older robots/controllers are not always super good at maintaining the real trajectory on MoveC, therefore transforming the MoveC in a bunch of small MoveL can possibly improve the actual accuracy of the path.
The third solution would be to modify the "Minimum arc size" in the RoboDK options.
"Main menu" -> "Tools" -> "Options" (can also be reached with "shift + o") -> "Programs"
This option will only affect the post-processed program, you shouldn't see any difference in the RoboDK station.
Let me know if it helps.
Also, make sure you are using the latest version of RoboDK:
"Main menu" -> "Help" -> "Check for updates".
Jeremy