Looping Parts on a Grid

you have to do a double loop.

(the way I would do it)
Step 1, program the part, make it run.
Step 2, put in loop #1 for the 'x' direction, put in the loop end (at the end of the program)
Step 3, put in loop #2 for the 'y' direction, put THIS loop start before loop #1, put the loop end after the loop end for the first loop.

DO NOT try to copy & paste loop starts or ends. Do not 'open' a loop without closing it before doing a second loop.

I have tried to get our vertical mills to use this format. It works, we just don't know how to get it to show the correct quantity of parts in our verification software before running it on the machine. 1.pdf I highlighted the looping and at the beginning I set all the variables with null values to be sure they did not have stray numbers attached. You'd have to replace the format with what works in PC-Dmis. Scroll down until you see the first G52, that's where the loop for the step and repeat starts. This was just a test program, not very long. As far as I can remember the end results are #141 and #142 which is the new location. This always steps in the x direction until it gets to the maximum number of parts in x, then it steps to the next row in y and starts the x at the beginning again. So if you want it to step in the y direction first you'd have to change it a little. #140 is the counter and the others calculate to step over and up or down when needed. The rest of the code is from a G-code post processor. I had to reset the G52X0Y0 after because if I did not, it would run over and over again in the same position. There's one in front of the loop also. I also had to make the second side tape act different from one machine to the other since one flipped across the y axis and the other flipped across the the x,y axis (at 45 degrees). this one just flips across the y axis. 1.pdfChecked and confirmed, this does work.

Thanks for the input and quick response! After consulting with the department I was getting the parts from I found out there was no consistency to the part layout other than a rough grid. The parts were separated by whatever parallel bars were laying around so I am going to use an input comment to get the offset distance and number of parts in a row and run the parts in sets of 3 or 5 at a time. Not totally autonomous, but better than manually aligning every part(they can't be removed from the magnet they arrive on).

Doesn't the magnet have an adverse affect on the probe? Seems like I remember someone talking about the probe changer having a magnet to release the probe or something like that. Do they have to write the program or at least change the machine zero positions every time they run these parts? Sounds to me like consistency would be a better approach for them and allowing you to have a less complicated program to offset to the correct next part position. maybe they just like to have to spend time changing things all the time?