Kinetic control functions

It appears the “Run from line #” feature was removed from the software interface. I’d like to request that be reimplemented in the next revision.

Another suggestion would be to enable single line mode prior to cycle start, similar to the optional stop toggle which would allow running single line from the very beginning of the program instead of hitting cycle start followed by quickly clicking on single line.

I’m really enjoying using the new control software and the interface is quite elegant. Only just now noted these two items which would be nice to haves. Kudos to the team!!

We’re happy to hear you’re liking Kinetic Control! We found that the run from line function caused more confusion than success as it requires understanding that the previous lines will not run, so your modal state when jumping directly to a specific line may not be the same as when running the program from the beginning. We do plan to bring it back in a more hidden place for more advanced usage (likely in a context menu in the G code editor after clicking on a specific line).

We’ve had similar requests for the single step to start a program so you don’t have to quickly pause the program before single stepping, so it’s on the list.

Thanks for the feedback!

Is there any update to this request? If not, this reply is just to signal my interest in the ‘run from line #’ feature as well.

I was going over the ‘my first part’ tutorial and accidentally messed up my TLO so the program threw me an ‘exceed joint’s negative limit’ error about halfway through the 40 min program. I should have been more careful in my simulation. I was able to fix this problem by pulling out the tool by 1/8" but I had to run the program from the beginning which was fairly annoying.

Any tips on dealing with this would be appreciated. Otherwise, I’ll be more careful with my work offsetting in the future. Thanks.

Hi Griff,

There’s nothing more frustrating than to be well into a program and have it stop. Then you are faced with restarting and wasting time cutting air.

The best approach is to use our simulator that is available on our website, click here.

The trick is know where the program stopped and create a modified program that eliminates the tool operations that have already finished.

This is where you need to be careful. You need to keep the beginning part of your code, the parts that tell the machine the units of measure (G20 and G21), the spindle speed, tool selection (G43), and rotated work offsets. That’s why I recommend doing the code editing in the simulator. Then you can check to make sure you aren’t going to damage your tool or your part.

Once you stop the program in our simulator, you can then edit (change or remove lines of code) and save your modified program.

Unfortunately, we do not currently have a tutorial that explains this process. Contact me at and I’ll follow up with a document that better explains how to use the simulator to create an interim g-code program that eliminates completed tool operations.

I’ll look for your email.

Hi Griff,

Chuck’s solution is great for when you are not near the computer and software you used to post the g-code. However, if you are able to easily post a new program, I find that it is simpler (and safer) to just post out the operations that are unfinished.

So if you have operations/toolpaths 1 thru 6 and the machine errors in the middle of number 3, you would go back to your computer and post just 3 thru 6. This will, of course, repeat some of number 3, but it will ensure all the right codes and modes are present and still save you time compared to running from the beginning.

Hopefully this makes sense but if I need to elaborate, please let me know.