Re: [Emc-users] part 2 - Mach3 to LinuxCNC
On 10/23/2014 8:59 AM, Gene Heskett wrote: If you want the fan to not fail again, use a drop of silicone oil on its bearings. Silicone brake fluid is ideal for the job. It's essentially silicone oil with a touch of purple dye and possibly some corrosion inhibitors. It has much better heat resistance and will not dry out due to evaporation of VOCs. That is not something I would recommend Greg, although its not anything I have tried either. The reason I wouldn't try it is, particularly in a sintered bushing bearing, silicone has essentially zero surface tension, and will allow metal to metal contact, accelerating shaft wear considerably. Only if well flooded, and spinning fast enough that those teeny bearings could float on the hydrodynamic oil film, could I see where it might be a good idea. OTOH, when such a dot4 fluid is analyzed, how much of it is actually silicon based. Good question. Anecdote about cheap dot3/4 stuff. Silicone brake fluid is DOT5. I've had no problems using it to lube sleeve and ball bearing computer fans. In some cases after several times of having oils like 3-in-1 dry up and the fan seize up, a couple of drops of DOT5 fixed it permanently. Got one on the PC I'm using currently with a dual core AMD Phenom II 555. The brand new fan didn't last very long before it got noisy. It's now been in use far longer than that with DOT5 for lube. Those fan bearings, while fast spinning, are very lightly loaded. Silicone brake fluid does not absorb water, unlike the garden variety DOT3. That's why it's so often used in vehicles that don't get driven much. However, the silicone fluid is somewhat compressible so your brakes may feel a bit soft or squishy, you won't get the same really firm pedal or hand lever feel as you do with DOT3. You do not want to put DOT5 into a brake system that is not completely flushed of DOT3 or other fluid. Ideally, all rubber parts of the brake system should be replaced with new parts before switching to DOT5. --- This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active. http://www.avast.com -- ___ Emc-users mailing list Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users
Re: [Emc-users] part 2 - Mach3 to LinuxCNC
On Friday 24 October 2014 04:24:20 Gregg Eshelman did opine And Gene did reply: On 10/23/2014 8:59 AM, Gene Heskett wrote: If you want the fan to not fail again, use a drop of silicone oil on its bearings. Silicone brake fluid is ideal for the job. It's essentially silicone oil with a touch of purple dye and possibly some corrosion inhibitors. It has much better heat resistance and will not dry out due to evaporation of VOCs. That is not something I would recommend Greg, although its not anything I have tried either. The reason I wouldn't try it is, particularly in a sintered bushing bearing, silicone has essentially zero surface tension, and will allow metal to metal contact, accelerating shaft wear considerably. Only if well flooded, and spinning fast enough that those teeny bearings could float on the hydrodynamic oil film, could I see where it might be a good idea. OTOH, when such a dot4 fluid is analyzed, how much of it is actually silicon based. Good question. Anecdote about cheap dot3/4 stuff. Silicone brake fluid is DOT5. I've had no problems using it to lube sleeve and ball bearing computer fans. In some cases after several times of having oils like 3-in-1 dry up and the fan seize up, a couple of drops of DOT5 fixed it permanently. Got one on the PC I'm using currently with a dual core AMD Phenom II 555. The brand new fan didn't last very long before it got noisy. It's now been in use far longer than that with DOT5 for lube. Those fan bearings, while fast spinning, are very lightly loaded. But generally, the shaft od is so small that hydrodymanic effects will not be seen to any great degree at the leisurely rpms they do. So even a 6krpm cpu fan would be considered slow at the shaft surface. Many shafts are 1/8, one I took apart reoiled was maybe 1/16. Silicone brake fluid does not absorb water, unlike the garden variety DOT3. That's why it's so often used in vehicles that don't get driven much. However, the silicone fluid is somewhat compressible so your brakes may feel a bit soft or squishy, you won't get the same really firm pedal or hand lever feel as you do with DOT3. You do not want to put DOT5 into a brake system that is not completely flushed of DOT3 or other fluid. Ideally, all rubber parts of the brake system should be replaced with new parts before switching to DOT5. Also good to know, but why is it compressible? Even water is considered un-compressible, until you take it down in the mohole... It is compressible enough that the batteries that ran the Trieste, which were off the shelf Sears DieHards, each cell of which had a small weather balloon with a half pint of battery acid at 1.26 sg, poured into it and then snapped over the cells neck. A wire cage fitted over the top of the battery kept the water currents from dislodging the balloons letting sea water into the battery. One of the pix Jacques Picard brought back was one of the battery racks, balloons visible as they started down, balloons not visible at 37,000 feet down, they were stuffed inside the battery by the pressure. Nearly 18kpsi down there. No braking system can do that. 2.5kpsi in a lock em all up stop maybe. --- This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active. http://www.avast.com --- --- ___ Emc-users mailing list Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users Cheers, Gene Heskett -- There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order. -Ed Howdershelt (Author) Genes Web page http://geneslinuxbox.net:6309/gene US V Castleman, SCOTUS, Mar 2014 is grounds for Impeaching SCOTUS -- ___ Emc-users mailing list Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users
Re: [Emc-users] part 2 - Mach3 to LinuxCNC
On 10/23/2014 8:59 AM, Gene Heskett wrote: If you want the fan to not fail again, use a drop of silicone oil on its bearings. Silicone brake fluid is ideal for the job. It's essentially silicone oil with a touch of purple dye and possibly some corrosion inhibitors. It has much better heat resistance and will not dry out due to evaporation of VOCs. That is not something I would recommend Greg, although its not anything I have tried either. The reason I wouldn't try it is, particularly in a sintered bushing bearing, silicone has essentially zero surface tension, and will allow metal to metal contact, accelerating shaft wear considerably. Only if well flooded, and spinning fast enough that those teeny bearings could float on the hydrodynamic oil film, could I see where it might be a good idea. OTOH, when such a dot4 fluid is analyzed, how much of it is actually silicon based. Good question. Anecdote about cheap dot3/4 stuff. Silicone brake fluid is DOT5. I've had no problems using it to lube sleeve and ball bearing computer fans. In some cases after several times of having oils like 3-in-1 dry up and the fan seize up, a couple of drops of DOT5 fixed it permanently. Got one on the PC I'm using currently with a dual core AMD Phenom II 555. The brand new fan didn't last very long before it got noisy. It's now been in use far longer than that with DOT5 for lube. Those fan bearings, while fast spinning, are very lightly loaded. Silicone brake fluid does not absorb water, unlike the DOT3 type. --- This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active. http://www.avast.com -- ___ Emc-users mailing list Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users
Re: [Emc-users] part 2 - Mach3 to LinuxCNC
Reminds me of when I worked for an ISP and telco at the turn of the century. They installed a calling card phone at a food processing plant. The thing looked massive and it was quite expensive. The heavy steel box was 99.9% empty space. The phone electronics were on a circuit board the size of the keypad. On 10/22/2014 1:46 PM, Pete Matos wrote: unfortunately that is completely accurate. There is BIG money in keeping the commercial controls proprietary and away from the open source cheap and free options. In my view that is never gonna change but what it does do is make THOUSANDS of nice used machines available for scrap prices just because the owner got sick and tired of dumping umpteen thousands of dollars into a control that is less than a decade old or so. It is a vicious cycle not all that unlike the cellphone wars and PC wars we see in other avenues. People gotta make money tho so I can't fault them. I would not want someone to rip the carpet out from underneath my feet either if I had ownership and royalties coming in from a system I built and sold. It's the nature of things nowadays it seems. Pete On Wed, Oct 22, 2014 at 3:35 PM, jrmitchellj . jrmitche...@gmail.com wrote: If those service techs understood what is really inside, at the core of those expensive, name brand control systems! Their job is to sell the end user module based repairs that cost several thousands of dollars. The commodity based solution, like a LinuxCNC installation, does not fit that paradigm, and cannot support them. --- This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active. http://www.avast.com -- ___ Emc-users mailing list Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users
Re: [Emc-users] part 2 - Mach3 to LinuxCNC
On 10/22/2014 2:18 PM, jrmitchellj . wrote: As an example of what I am talking about, a couple of years ago, I had a film scanner, costing new several hundreds of thousand of dollars, fail. The service tech came out and stated a box in the system had failed, and would cost $6500 + labor to replace. I sent him home! I pulled the box out of the system, opened it up to find a Pentium 5 SBC, and several servo control boards (that I looked up on the internet). On close inspection, I found that the fan on the Pentium heat sink had failed. I pulled the chip out of the socket, and it showed that the magic smoke had leaked out due to excessive heat. I found one on Ebay, ordered it, got for less than $7, delivered. Installed it, put everything back together, and tested. SUCCESS! If you want the fan to not fail again, use a drop of silicone oil on its bearings. Silicone brake fluid is ideal for the job. It's essentially silicone oil with a touch of purple dye and possibly some corrosion inhibitors. It has much better heat resistance and will not dry out due to evaporation of VOCs. --- This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active. http://www.avast.com -- ___ Emc-users mailing list Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users
Re: [Emc-users] part 2 - Mach3 to LinuxCNC
On 23/10/14 02:30, andy pugh wrote: My first exposure to Unix was PDP-11 with 64K words of memory. I was using a PDP for a real-time control task two years ago. It still did the same job as when it was installed in 1982. (running an engine dyno) The component distributor that I worked for in the 80's ran a PDP8 and a PDP11 running 100 sales desks and worked well most of the time. At the same time I had a VAX hidden away in the plant room which just had two terminals for doing custom chip designs. The PDP's were eventually replaced with a very expensive cluster of 4 Amdahl, at a cost somewhat higher than my current house is worth, and packet calculators compared to the rack of hardware currently in the garage. But I'd still prefer the older system software to todays ... -- Lester Caine - G8HFL - Contact - http://lsces.co.uk/wiki/?page=contact L.S.Caine Electronic Services - http://lsces.co.uk EnquirySolve - http://enquirysolve.com/ Model Engineers Digital Workshop - http://medw.co.uk Rainbow Digital Media - http://rainbowdigitalmedia.co.uk -- ___ Emc-users mailing list Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users
Re: [Emc-users] part 2 - Mach3 to LinuxCNC
On Thu, Oct 23, 2014 at 3:50 AM, Lester Caine les...@lsces.co.uk wrote: The component distributor that I worked for in the 80's ran a PDP8 and a PDP11 running 100 sales desks and worked well most of the time. At the same time I had a VAX hidden away in the plant room which just had two terminals for doing custom chip designs. The PDP's were eventually replaced with a very expensive cluster of 4 Amdahl, at a cost somewhat higher than my current house is worth, and packet calculators compared to the rack of hardware currently in the garage. But I'd still prefer the older system software to todays ... -- Lester Caine - G8HFL Saved this from my old VMS sysadmin days: http://www.netfunny.com/rhf/jokes/89q1/vax.253.html Mark -- ___ Emc-users mailing list Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users
Re: [Emc-users] part 2 - Mach3 to LinuxCNC
Years ago I used to tie control systems into PDPs and Vax systems.. this was in the days of fast 9600 baud serial links. I have a never used PDP 6 foot plus rack in my garage. It still had the shrink wrapped when I got it. Back in the early 80's they were going to toss it into a dumpster, still stuck to a shipping pallet. Instead it was saved by my 1978 Chevy van. I think they told me that it was near $10K when it was purchased. The rack weighs hundreds of pounds empty. The project was cancelled so it was never used and sat in a storage room for years. I put some shelves in it and it makes a nifty power tool storage cabinet. :-) Dave On 10/23/2014 5:17 AM, Mark Wendt wrote: On Thu, Oct 23, 2014 at 3:50 AM, Lester Caine les...@lsces.co.uk wrote: The component distributor that I worked for in the 80's ran a PDP8 and a PDP11 running 100 sales desks and worked well most of the time. At the same time I had a VAX hidden away in the plant room which just had two terminals for doing custom chip designs. The PDP's were eventually replaced with a very expensive cluster of 4 Amdahl, at a cost somewhat higher than my current house is worth, and packet calculators compared to the rack of hardware currently in the garage. But I'd still prefer the older system software to todays ... -- Lester Caine - G8HFL Saved this from my old VMS sysadmin days: http://www.netfunny.com/rhf/jokes/89q1/vax.253.html Mark -- ___ Emc-users mailing list Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users --- This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active. http://www.avast.com -- ___ Emc-users mailing list Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users
Re: [Emc-users] part 2 - Mach3 to LinuxCNC
You could also go the way of the VAXbar... Perhaps modernize it ala RaspberryPi and an automated drink mixing system? --Original Mail-- From: Dave Cole linuxcncro...@gmail.com To: emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net Sent: Thu, 23 Oct 2014 10:06:17 -0400 Subject: Re: [Emc-users] part 2 - Mach3 to LinuxCNC Years ago I used to tie control systems into PDPs and Vax systems.. this was in the days of fast 9600 baud serial links. I have a never used PDP 6 foot plus rack in my garage. It still had the shrink wrapped when I got it. Back in the early 80's they were going to toss it into a dumpster, still stuck to a shipping pallet. Instead it was saved by my 1978 Chevy van. I think they told me that it was near $10K when it was purchased. The rack weighs hundreds of pounds empty. The project was cancelled so it was never used and sat in a storage room for years. I put some shelves in it and it makes a nifty power tool storage cabinet. :-) Dave On 10/23/2014 5:17 AM, Mark Wendt wrote: On Thu, Oct 23, 2014 at 3:50 AM, Lester Caine les...@lsces.co.uk wrote: The component distributor that I worked for in the 80's ran a PDP8 and a PDP11 running 100 sales desks and worked well most of the time. At the same time I had a VAX hidden away in the plant room which just had two terminals for doing custom chip designs. The PDP's were eventually replaced with a very expensive cluster of 4 Amdahl, at a cost somewhat higher than my current house is worth, and packet calculators compared to the rack of hardware currently in the garage. But I'd still prefer the older system software to todays ... -- Lester Caine - G8HFL Saved this from my old VMS sysadmin days: http://www.netfunny.com/rhf/jokes/89q1/vax.253.html Mark -- ___ Emc-users mailing list Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users --- This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active. http://www.avast.com -- ___ Emc-users mailing list Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users -- ___ Emc-users mailing list Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users
Re: [Emc-users] part 2 - Mach3 to LinuxCNC
On Thursday 23 October 2014 03:22:11 Gregg Eshelman did opine And Gene did reply: On 10/22/2014 2:18 PM, jrmitchellj . wrote: As an example of what I am talking about, a couple of years ago, I had a film scanner, costing new several hundreds of thousand of dollars, fail. The service tech came out and stated a box in the system had failed, and would cost $6500 + labor to replace. I sent him home! I pulled the box out of the system, opened it up to find a Pentium 5 SBC, and several servo control boards (that I looked up on the internet). On close inspection, I found that the fan on the Pentium heat sink had failed. I pulled the chip out of the socket, and it showed that the magic smoke had leaked out due to excessive heat. I found one on Ebay, ordered it, got for less than $7, delivered. Installed it, put everything back together, and tested. SUCCESS! If you want the fan to not fail again, use a drop of silicone oil on its bearings. Silicone brake fluid is ideal for the job. It's essentially silicone oil with a touch of purple dye and possibly some corrosion inhibitors. It has much better heat resistance and will not dry out due to evaporation of VOCs. That is not something I would recommend Greg, although its not anything I have tried either. The reason I wouldn't try it is, particularly in a sintered bushing bearing, silicone has essentially zero surface tension, and will allow metal to metal contact, accelerating shaft wear considerably. Only if well flooded, and spinning fast enough that those teeny bearings could float on the hydrodynamic oil film, could I see where it might be a good idea. OTOH, when such a dot4 fluid is analyzed, how much of it is actually silicon based. Good question. Anecdote about cheap dot3/4 stuff. 30 years ago, when I was using a CB350F for a chair car in northeastern Kalipornia, I had to add some fluid to the front brake. Took about 3 oz of a fresh half pint of what was supposedly good stuff. Yeah, sure it was, it ate, rotted, swelled and froze every piece of OEM rubber in the system. I wound up replacing the handlebar master cylinder, all the hose down to the caliper, and the caliper which froze the front wheel up solid. I had to stop (it stopped me anyway), get out a screwdriver hammer to wedge the caliper pistons back away from the disk, then using only the back brakes, went to the bike shop and got the hose and the two kits to rebuild the whole maryann. In those days they would sell you a cylinder kit, now the feds have mandated you have to buy it all new, raising the price by about $400 in 1980 dollars. Moral, if you can smell it, put it back on the shelf try another brand, there is, or was, lots of dot3 and dot4 stuff on the shelf that would quickly destroy the rest of the system. This one even had a dot-3 on the master cylinder cap! Lasted about 12 hours after adding some cheap dot3/4 stuff. Cheers, Gene Heskett -- There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order. -Ed Howdershelt (Author) Genes Web page http://geneslinuxbox.net:6309/gene US V Castleman, SCOTUS, Mar 2014 is grounds for Impeaching SCOTUS -- ___ Emc-users mailing list Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users
[Emc-users] part 2 - Mach3 to LinuxCNC
I'm always interested to see how the younger set build things. Quite often they use Mach3 - here's an example: http://www.buildlog.net/sm_laser/drawings.html Charles and Co. are doing great things with Machinekit and 3D printers, but, how do we get the younger set to use LinuxCNC more? I don't know the answers, but I keep pushing LinuxCNC in my own quiet way. JohnS. -- Comprehensive Server Monitoring with Site24x7. Monitor 10 servers for $9/Month. Get alerted through email, SMS, voice calls or mobile push notifications. Take corrective actions from your mobile device. http://p.sf.net/sfu/Zoho ___ Emc-users mailing list Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users
Re: [Emc-users] part 2 - Mach3 to LinuxCNC
One of our engineering students was tasked with retrofitting a knee mill with an old Delta control down in the Technology department. They handed him a PC and Mach3 for the purpose. He happened to ask me something about the upcoming work, and I pointed out that Mach3 wouldn't work with the DC servo drives and encoders on the machine. I explained about LinuxCNC, and they ended up buying a Mesa 5I25 and 7I77. He spent quite a few hours on the retrofit, but ended up quite successful. He is now building his own CNC router for his engineering senior project, and will be using LinuxCNC for it. So there is hope... -- Ralph From: John Alexander Stewart [ivatt...@gmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, October 22, 2014 5:57 AM To: Enhanced Machine Controller (EMC) Subject: [Emc-users] part 2 - Mach3 to LinuxCNC I'm always interested to see how the younger set build things. Quite often they use Mach3 - here's an example: http://www.buildlog.net/sm_laser/drawings.html Charles and Co. are doing great things with Machinekit and 3D printers, but, how do we get the younger set to use LinuxCNC more? I don't know the answers, but I keep pushing LinuxCNC in my own quiet way. JohnS. -- Comprehensive Server Monitoring with Site24x7. Monitor 10 servers for $9/Month. Get alerted through email, SMS, voice calls or mobile push notifications. Take corrective actions from your mobile device. http://p.sf.net/sfu/Zoho ___ Emc-users mailing list Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users -- Comprehensive Server Monitoring with Site24x7. Monitor 10 servers for $9/Month. Get alerted through email, SMS, voice calls or mobile push notifications. Take corrective actions from your mobile device. http://p.sf.net/sfu/Zoho ___ Emc-users mailing list Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users
Re: [Emc-users] part 2 - Mach3 to LinuxCNC
Gentlemen, I am at a loss as to why the LinuxCNC community cares about Mach(whatever)'s market share or usability or capabilities. This applies to all other control systems as well. Also, the only reason to promote LinuxCNC is to enhance the capabilities for our own use. It matters not if anyone else uses LinuxCNC. If we focus on LinuxCNC we will have a better tool to use. That in itself will promote LinuxCNC to others outside the LinuxCNC world far better than ANY words or arguments. Just my 2 cents. :) Stuart On Oct 22, 2014 8:00 AM, John Alexander Stewart ivatt...@gmail.com wrote: I'm always interested to see how the younger set build things. Quite often they use Mach3 - here's an example: http://www.buildlog.net/sm_laser/drawings.html Charles and Co. are doing great things with Machinekit and 3D printers, but, how do we get the younger set to use LinuxCNC more? I don't know the answers, but I keep pushing LinuxCNC in my own quiet way. JohnS. -- Comprehensive Server Monitoring with Site24x7. Monitor 10 servers for $9/Month. Get alerted through email, SMS, voice calls or mobile push notifications. Take corrective actions from your mobile device. http://p.sf.net/sfu/Zoho ___ Emc-users mailing list Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users -- Comprehensive Server Monitoring with Site24x7. Monitor 10 servers for $9/Month. Get alerted through email, SMS, voice calls or mobile push notifications. Take corrective actions from your mobile device. http://p.sf.net/sfu/Zoho ___ Emc-users mailing list Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users
Re: [Emc-users] part 2 - Mach3 to LinuxCNC
Well spoken Stuart and dead on. :-) Dave On Wed, 2014-10-22 at 09:00 -0500, Stuart Stevenson wrote: Gentlemen, I am at a loss as to why the LinuxCNC community cares about Mach(whatever)'s market share or usability or capabilities. This applies to all other control systems as well. Also, the only reason to promote LinuxCNC is to enhance the capabilities for our own use. It matters not if anyone else uses LinuxCNC. If we focus on LinuxCNC we will have a better tool to use. That in itself will promote LinuxCNC to others outside the LinuxCNC world far better than ANY words or arguments. Just my 2 cents. :) Stuart On Oct 22, 2014 8:00 AM, John Alexander Stewart ivatt...@gmail.com wrote: I'm always interested to see how the younger set build things. Quite often they use Mach3 - here's an example: http://www.buildlog.net/sm_laser/drawings.html Charles and Co. are doing great things with Machinekit and 3D printers, but, how do we get the younger set to use LinuxCNC more? I don't know the answers, but I keep pushing LinuxCNC in my own quiet way. JohnS. -- Comprehensive Server Monitoring with Site24x7. Monitor 10 servers for $9/Month. Get alerted through email, SMS, voice calls or mobile push notifications. Take corrective actions from your mobile device. http://p.sf.net/sfu/Zoho ___ Emc-users mailing list Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users -- Comprehensive Server Monitoring with Site24x7. Monitor 10 servers for $9/Month. Get alerted through email, SMS, voice calls or mobile push notifications. Take corrective actions from your mobile device. http://p.sf.net/sfu/Zoho ___ Emc-users mailing list Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users -- Comprehensive Server Monitoring with Site24x7. Monitor 10 servers for $9/Month. Get alerted through email, SMS, voice calls or mobile push notifications. Take corrective actions from your mobile device. http://p.sf.net/sfu/Zoho ___ Emc-users mailing list Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users
Re: [Emc-users] part 2 - Mach3 to LinuxCNC
It goes back to fit and finish and ease of configuration. In Mach3 the graphical configuration utility is integral, rather than a separate program or programs (pncconf, stepconf,etc) which vary depending on what setup you are using. In Mach3 the I/O debug is integral rather than several separate utilities (HALscope, HALcmd,etc). This makes it signifiantly easier and faster for a newbie to configure and tune a setup and get things running. Documentation is another issue, with Mach3 documentation full of clear examples and diagrams, while LinuxCNC documentation is quite disjointed, inconsistent and often incomplete. Is LinuxCNC more capable and versatile than Mach3, certainly, but it is less accessible to the average person and those who try it may well give up on it after fumbling through the configuration for a while with confusing documentation without success. As it is, in my first attempt to use LinuxCNC (after testing EMC way back when and going with Mach3 instead), I found what appears to be a bug in pncconf, and despite posting on this forum for help and posting the config files produced by pncconf, it ended up that I found the issue myself. --Original Mail-- From: John Alexander Stewart ivatt...@gmail.com To: Enhanced Machine Controller (EMC) emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net Sent: Wed, 22 Oct 2014 08:57:13 -0400 Subject: [Emc-users] part 2 - Mach3 to LinuxCNC I'm always interested to see how the younger set build things. Quite often they use Mach3 - here's an example: http://www.buildlog.net/sm_laser/drawings.html Charles and Co. are doing great things with Machinekit and 3D printers, but, how do we get the younger set to use LinuxCNC more? I don't know the answers, but I keep pushing LinuxCNC in my own quiet way. JohnS. -- Comprehensive Server Monitoring with Site24x7. Monitor 10 servers for $9/Month. Get alerted through email, SMS, voice calls or mobile push notifications. Take corrective actions from your mobile device. http://p.sf.net/sfu/Zoho ___ Emc-users mailing list Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users -- Comprehensive Server Monitoring with Site24x7. Monitor 10 servers for $9/Month. Get alerted through email, SMS, voice calls or mobile push notifications. Take corrective actions from your mobile device. http://p.sf.net/sfu/Zoho ___ Emc-users mailing list Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users
Re: [Emc-users] part 2 - Mach3 to LinuxCNC
I think there is plenty of reason to care about why another control may be more popular, including commerical/industrial controls. Looking at how other controls do things and understanding why they may be more popular provides valuable information on what might be improved in LinuxCNC. With larger volumes of users come larger volumes of unique perspectives and feedback on what could be better. --Original Mail-- From: Stuart Stevenson stus...@gmail.com To: Enhanced Machine Controller (EMC) emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net Sent: Wed, 22 Oct 2014 09:00:21 -0500 Subject: Re: [Emc-users] part 2 - Mach3 to LinuxCNC Gentlemen, I am at a loss as to why the LinuxCNC community cares about Mach(whatever)'s market share or usability or capabilities. This applies to all other control systems as well. Also, the only reason to promote LinuxCNC is to enhance the capabilities for our own use. It matters not if anyone else uses LinuxCNC. If we focus on LinuxCNC we will have a better tool to use. That in itself will promote LinuxCNC to others outside the LinuxCNC world far better than ANY words or arguments. Just my 2 cents. :) Stuart On Oct 22, 2014 8:00 AM, John Alexander Stewart ivatt...@gmail.com wrote: I'm always interested to see how the younger set build things. Quite often they use Mach3 - here's an example: http://www.buildlog.net/sm_laser/drawings.html Charles and Co. are doing great things with Machinekit and 3D printers, but, how do we get the younger set to use LinuxCNC more? I don't know the answers, but I keep pushing LinuxCNC in my own quiet way. JohnS. -- Comprehensive Server Monitoring with Site24x7. Monitor 10 servers for $9/Month. Get alerted through email, SMS, voice calls or mobile push notifications. Take corrective actions from your mobile device. http://p.sf.net/sfu/Zoho ___ Emc-users mailing list Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users -- Comprehensive Server Monitoring with Site24x7. Monitor 10 servers for $9/Month. Get alerted through email, SMS, voice calls or mobile push notifications. Take corrective actions from your mobile device. http://p.sf.net/sfu/Zoho ___ Emc-users mailing list Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users -- Comprehensive Server Monitoring with Site24x7. Monitor 10 servers for $9/Month. Get alerted through email, SMS, voice calls or mobile push notifications. Take corrective actions from your mobile device. http://p.sf.net/sfu/Zoho ___ Emc-users mailing list Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users
Re: [Emc-users] part 2 - Mach3 to LinuxCNC
Except that the only reason that Mach3 is popular is because it runs on Windows, which is a feature that LinuxCNC will never have :-P Len On 10/22/2014 9:20 AM, p...@wpnet.us wrote: I think there is plenty of reason to care about why another control may be more popular, including commerical/industrial controls. Looking at how other controls do things and understanding why they may be more popular provides valuable information on what might be improved in LinuxCNC. With larger volumes of users come larger volumes of unique perspectives and feedback on what could be better. -- Comprehensive Server Monitoring with Site24x7. Monitor 10 servers for $9/Month. Get alerted through email, SMS, voice calls or mobile push notifications. Take corrective actions from your mobile device. http://p.sf.net/sfu/Zoho ___ Emc-users mailing list Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users
Re: [Emc-users] part 2 - Mach3 to LinuxCNC
On Wednesday 22 October 2014 10:00:21 Stuart Stevenson did opine And Gene did reply: Gentlemen, I am at a loss as to why the LinuxCNC community cares about Mach(whatever)'s market share or usability or capabilities. This applies to all other control systems as well. Also, the only reason to promote LinuxCNC is to enhance the capabilities for our own use. It matters not if anyone else uses LinuxCNC. If we focus on LinuxCNC we will have a better tool to use. That in itself will promote LinuxCNC to others outside the LinuxCNC world far better than ANY words or arguments. Just my 2 cents. :) Stuart +1 (can I vote 100 times?) My 4 boys, 2 at a time were here to visit, ostensibly to help me celebrate my 80th. All 4 are, or have been in heavy machinery maintenance. My toy mill, carving the LinuxCNC logo, and my toy lathe running a G33.1 in a peck loop, blew them away. 2 of them are pretty good with computers but married to windows. I suspect that will change when they get a chance to change. Old age treachery folks, I have to prove my boys still need to learn. On Oct 22, 2014 8:00 AM, John Alexander Stewart ivatt...@gmail.com wrote: I'm always interested to see how the younger set build things. Quite often they use Mach3 - here's an example: http://www.buildlog.net/sm_laser/drawings.html Charles and Co. are doing great things with Machinekit and 3D printers, but, how do we get the younger set to use LinuxCNC more? I don't know the answers, but I keep pushing LinuxCNC in my own quiet way. JohnS. Cheers, Gene Heskett -- There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order. -Ed Howdershelt (Author) Genes Web page http://geneslinuxbox.net:6309/gene US V Castleman, SCOTUS, Mar 2014 is grounds for Impeaching SCOTUS -- Comprehensive Server Monitoring with Site24x7. Monitor 10 servers for $9/Month. Get alerted through email, SMS, voice calls or mobile push notifications. Take corrective actions from your mobile device. http://p.sf.net/sfu/Zoho ___ Emc-users mailing list Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users
Re: [Emc-users] part 2 - Mach3 to LinuxCNC
Except that is totally false. See my other post for the reasons Mach3 is more popular with new users. --Original Mail-- From: Len Shelton l...@probotix.com To: Enhanced Machine Controller (EMC) emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net Sent: Wed, 22 Oct 2014 09:24:39 -0500 Subject: Re: [Emc-users] part 2 - Mach3 to LinuxCNC Except that the only reason that Mach3 is popular is because it runs on Windows, which is a feature that LinuxCNC will never have :-P Len On 10/22/2014 9:20 AM, p...@wpnet.us wrote: I think there is plenty of reason to care about why another control may be more popular, including commerical/industrial controls. Looking at how other controls do things and understanding why they may be more popular provides valuable information on what might be improved in LinuxCNC. With larger volumes of users come larger volumes of unique perspectives and feedback on what could be better. -- Comprehensive Server Monitoring with Site24x7. Monitor 10 servers for $9/Month. Get alerted through email, SMS, voice calls or mobile push notifications. Take corrective actions from your mobile device. http://p.sf.net/sfu/Zoho ___ Emc-users mailing list Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users -- ___ Emc-users mailing list Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users
Re: [Emc-users] part 2 - Mach3 to LinuxCNC
The real impediment to LinuxCNC having a larger adoption is.. Arduino. Not Mach. Not LinuxCNC itself. The whole way the younger generation is being taught that what they are doing is cutting edge and new and exciting and that there is nothing to learn from CNC as it is old and outdated is the real problem. Was on Slashdot a month, or so, ago and was discussing the Dremel 3D printer. Someone asked why they did not have a commodity CNC mill instead. I pointed out that the 3D printer was a very simplified CNC machine. A milling machine has orders of magnitude greater complexity and the skill of the operator needed to be higher, in general. I had someone present a number of cases of how skilled the operator of a 3D printer needed to be (all of which dealt with how flimsy the reprap derived hardware was) and someone else who referred to me as a buggy whip manufacturer. (Yes, and I have been watching the newer generation work from starting principles recreating buggy whips using christmas tree tinsel). Machinists - or even people who understand the concepts - can make informed decisions about which CNC interface to use. If I want to quickly re-skin something for someone who is tech adverse, I would go with Mach in a second. The young want new even if they have to buy into a myth to make it happen. You want people to adopt LinuxCNC? You have to tie it to a new machine that is cutting edge, then bill it as open source. Right now, Instructables is hyping their new desktop milling machine and Make is excited about this new innovation. On Wed, Oct 22, 2014 at 8:24 AM, Len Shelton l...@probotix.com wrote: Except that the only reason that Mach3 is popular is because it runs on Windows, which is a feature that LinuxCNC will never have :-P Len On 10/22/2014 9:20 AM, p...@wpnet.us wrote: I think there is plenty of reason to care about why another control may be more popular, including commerical/industrial controls. Looking at how other controls do things and understanding why they may be more popular provides valuable information on what might be improved in LinuxCNC. With larger volumes of users come larger volumes of unique perspectives and feedback on what could be better. -- Comprehensive Server Monitoring with Site24x7. Monitor 10 servers for $9/Month. Get alerted through email, SMS, voice calls or mobile push notifications. Take corrective actions from your mobile device. http://p.sf.net/sfu/Zoho ___ Emc-users mailing list Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users -- ___ Emc-users mailing list Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users
Re: [Emc-users] part 2 - Mach3 to LinuxCNC
Personally I feel like linuxCNC has nothing to prove to Mach3. It is a far superior product in my mind and from what I have seen of it. Having built and run a machine on both systems now I feel that LinuxCNC is a much more pro control in the way it works. It feels and runs a lot more like something you would see on a commercial machine whereas Mach3 looks and runs like something you would put on a hobby router. I honestly feel that the BIGGEST reason people go to Mach3 is because it is just easy. It is windows based, everything is laid out for you in a couple simple panels that you input your information in and you can be up and running however buggy in short order. LinuxCNC apparently has come a long way towards this in the addition of the Stepconf and PNCconf setups that allow a lot more seamless approach to setting up the basic machine and getting it running. Once one looks beyond the ease of setup and nintendo look display of mach3 and seriously looks at linuxCNC it becomes quite clear which is more adaptable and has more built in features that can be taken advantage of. The real problem in my view is that you have to have a pretty damn good working knowledge of linux and programming to get those advantages. I am speaking here about adding some of the more advanced things like toolchangers and spindle orientation etc. All of which is either impossible or difficult even in mach3 but from what I have seen it is not something that someone without some programming experience can just download and input some settings into and be running with. Of course once it is setup and running it will be far more reliable and capable than anything in mach3 but it is what it is. Perhaps I am speaking here as someone who does not have the programming knowledge and experience as most do but the reality is that I think that is what keeps a lot of folks away. If you really want to get people to move away from Mach3 and into linuxCNC I think more effort is needed to make things as plug and play as humanly possible and try to implement setups like stepconf and Pncconf for the most varied and wide user base and machine setup possible. That basically takes away any excuse to NOT use linuxCNC. I mean hell you have to pay for mach3 and linuxCNC is dead free so If I had even the slightest reason to use linuxCNC over mach3 in the beginning I would have done exactly that. Peace Pete On Wed, Oct 22, 2014 at 11:24 AM, Charles Buckley rijrun...@gmail.com wrote: The real impediment to LinuxCNC having a larger adoption is.. Arduino. Not Mach. Not LinuxCNC itself. The whole way the younger generation is being taught that what they are doing is cutting edge and new and exciting and that there is nothing to learn from CNC as it is old and outdated is the real problem. Was on Slashdot a month, or so, ago and was discussing the Dremel 3D printer. Someone asked why they did not have a commodity CNC mill instead. I pointed out that the 3D printer was a very simplified CNC machine. A milling machine has orders of magnitude greater complexity and the skill of the operator needed to be higher, in general. I had someone present a number of cases of how skilled the operator of a 3D printer needed to be (all of which dealt with how flimsy the reprap derived hardware was) and someone else who referred to me as a buggy whip manufacturer. (Yes, and I have been watching the newer generation work from starting principles recreating buggy whips using christmas tree tinsel). Machinists - or even people who understand the concepts - can make informed decisions about which CNC interface to use. If I want to quickly re-skin something for someone who is tech adverse, I would go with Mach in a second. The young want new even if they have to buy into a myth to make it happen. You want people to adopt LinuxCNC? You have to tie it to a new machine that is cutting edge, then bill it as open source. Right now, Instructables is hyping their new desktop milling machine and Make is excited about this new innovation. On Wed, Oct 22, 2014 at 8:24 AM, Len Shelton l...@probotix.com wrote: Except that the only reason that Mach3 is popular is because it runs on Windows, which is a feature that LinuxCNC will never have :-P Len On 10/22/2014 9:20 AM, p...@wpnet.us wrote: I think there is plenty of reason to care about why another control may be more popular, including commerical/industrial controls. Looking at how other controls do things and understanding why they may be more popular provides valuable information on what might be improved in LinuxCNC. With larger volumes of users come larger volumes of unique perspectives and feedback on what could be better. -- Comprehensive Server Monitoring with Site24x7. Monitor 10 servers for $9/Month. Get alerted through email, SMS, voice calls or mobile push
Re: [Emc-users] part 2 - Mach3 to LinuxCNC
On 22 October 2014 15:00, Stuart Stevenson stus...@gmail.com wrote: I am at a loss as to why the LinuxCNC community cares about Mach(whatever)'s market share or usability or capabilities. It doesn't bother me at all, except in one particular situation. On (for example) CNCzone someone arrives and says I need to retrofit my mill, I need it to be making money in 2 weeks, it has DC servos and resolvers. I reply It is unlikely you will have that going in 2 weeks, The Mach3 yahoos (a small subset of Mach3 enthusiasts) say no problem, that's easy. So the guy goes with Mach and 6 months later is still struggling with Granite drives and Smoothsteppers and has completely changed his motors to get encoders, and his power supply and nigh-on every other electrical part. I think that Mach probably _is_ easier to configure, but then it has a much smaller configuration space to cover. My mill uses resolvers and brushless servos, with commutation in software and drives that take current and position down a serial link. I suspect that would be difficult in Mach. I can't claim it was easy in LinuxCNC, I had to write the drivers for the resolver cards, the serial link and the commutation module. But it was possible for me to do that. -- atp If you can't fix it, you don't own it. http://www.ifixit.com/Manifesto -- ___ Emc-users mailing list Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users
Re: [Emc-users] part 2 - Mach3 to LinuxCNC
On 10/22/2014 08:24 AM, Charles Buckley wrote: ... snip You want people to adopt LinuxCNC? You have to tie it to a new machine that is cutting edge, then bill it as open source. Right now, Instructables is ... snip Hows about: http://www.tormach.com/product_lathe.html -- Kirk Wallace http://www.wallacecompany.com/machine_shop/ http://www.wallacecompany.com/E45/ -- ___ Emc-users mailing list Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users
Re: [Emc-users] part 2 - Mach3 to LinuxCNC
Gentlemen, I guess I was not clearly expressing myself. This may be a little more direct. I don't see ANY competition between Mach and LinuxCNC. When you compare the quality of apple to the quality of oranges any argument fails. The competition between the new youngsters and old cnc guys does not exist either. When the youngsters need the capability of LinuxCNC then they will learn it and adopt it. I see service guys (here in Wichita) that will not 'consider' putting a garden variety PC on a machine tool. That would be heresy. It is difficult to get some of them to come in and service the commercial controls they specialize in. They will not even look at the LinuxCNC running in my shop. They will not discuss it with me. History of more than a decade of PC based solutions here (first with MDSI's OpenCNC installed in 1997 still running and then multiple LinuxCNC installs) has no sway in the argument. One consolation is they will not consider Mach either. All PC based solutions are lumped together in one trash bin. I do not mean to ignore progress in all other solutions. We need to improve the LinuxCNC solution. Not so it is more competitive with another solution but so the LinuxCNC users are more competitive with their competition. We can worry about what another solution has but if we don't have solutions that enhance LinuxCNC we will lose because it cannot be used profitably in industry. If the LinuxCNC community improves the solution then progress is made. The way I see it we need to show the installed base of users and techs LinuxCNC is a viable solution. Then we will have more competent people installing and using LinuxCNC. That will then allow the 'new' blood to learn how to make a real machine run. now this is 4 cents :) Stuart On Wed, Oct 22, 2014 at 11:11 AM, Kirk Wallace kwall...@wallacecompany.com wrote: On 10/22/2014 08:24 AM, Charles Buckley wrote: ... snip You want people to adopt LinuxCNC? You have to tie it to a new machine that is cutting edge, then bill it as open source. Right now, Instructables is ... snip Hows about: http://www.tormach.com/product_lathe.html -- Kirk Wallace http://www.wallacecompany.com/machine_shop/ http://www.wallacecompany.com/E45/ -- ___ Emc-users mailing list Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users -- Addressee is the intended audience. If you are not the addressee then my consent is not given for you to read this email furthermore it is my wish you would close this without saving or reading, and cease and desist from saving or opening my private correspondence. Thank you for honoring my wish. -- ___ Emc-users mailing list Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users
Re: [Emc-users] part 2 - Mach3 to LinuxCNC
Stuart, I agree wholeheartedly with your comments. Anyone that has run a commercial control can see that there are quite a few differences and options that are not build into the basic linuxCNC control. Sure you can add a lot of whatever you want but it seems like some should work or at least have the option of working right off the bat when it is installed for say a mill or lathe setup. There are a lot of things that I was able to do on the Haas control that I would need to add custom work for in the linuxCNC control. Having said that tho there are already a great many things to like about linuxCNC. The graphical display is quite good and it is nice to be able to see toolpaths clearly and affirm what you programmed into the machine is actually what is going to happen. The haas control had almost zero of that for all intents and purposes. I am about to embark on a CNC lathe build for my shop here and I am anxious to see how it will work. Apparenlty there are a lot of nice conversational controls available with it which sounds real nice altho I am a CAD CAM guy at heart really. I think you are correct when you say that linuxCNC has so much more capability and configurability for so many options that people will HAVE to gravitate to it when their cnc retrofit projects move to the next level. I think most go with mach3 because they have lots of folks running simple 3 axis table top machines and there are tons of guys just playing around with it. When you have to step up to a more commercial machine or simply add multiple axes and probing and other things is when the gap widens substantially. This is just my opinion of what I have seen so far of the control. I am now a believer in linuxCNC and would not switch to mach3 or most any other control for that matter from what I have seen so far. Just wish it was a little easier for the non-techie guys like me to be able to setup things is really my only gripe. Peace Pete On Wed, Oct 22, 2014 at 12:40 PM, Stuart Stevenson stus...@gmail.com wrote: Gentlemen, I guess I was not clearly expressing myself. This may be a little more direct. I don't see ANY competition between Mach and LinuxCNC. When you compare the quality of apple to the quality of oranges any argument fails. The competition between the new youngsters and old cnc guys does not exist either. When the youngsters need the capability of LinuxCNC then they will learn it and adopt it. I see service guys (here in Wichita) that will not 'consider' putting a garden variety PC on a machine tool. That would be heresy. It is difficult to get some of them to come in and service the commercial controls they specialize in. They will not even look at the LinuxCNC running in my shop. They will not discuss it with me. History of more than a decade of PC based solutions here (first with MDSI's OpenCNC installed in 1997 still running and then multiple LinuxCNC installs) has no sway in the argument. One consolation is they will not consider Mach either. All PC based solutions are lumped together in one trash bin. I do not mean to ignore progress in all other solutions. We need to improve the LinuxCNC solution. Not so it is more competitive with another solution but so the LinuxCNC users are more competitive with their competition. We can worry about what another solution has but if we don't have solutions that enhance LinuxCNC we will lose because it cannot be used profitably in industry. If the LinuxCNC community improves the solution then progress is made. The way I see it we need to show the installed base of users and techs LinuxCNC is a viable solution. Then we will have more competent people installing and using LinuxCNC. That will then allow the 'new' blood to learn how to make a real machine run. now this is 4 cents :) Stuart On Wed, Oct 22, 2014 at 11:11 AM, Kirk Wallace kwall...@wallacecompany.com wrote: On 10/22/2014 08:24 AM, Charles Buckley wrote: ... snip You want people to adopt LinuxCNC? You have to tie it to a new machine that is cutting edge, then bill it as open source. Right now, Instructables is ... snip Hows about: http://www.tormach.com/product_lathe.html -- Kirk Wallace http://www.wallacecompany.com/machine_shop/ http://www.wallacecompany.com/E45/ -- ___ Emc-users mailing list Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users -- Addressee is the intended audience. If you are not the addressee then my consent is not given for you to read this email furthermore it is my wish you would close this without saving or reading, and cease and desist from saving or opening my private correspondence. Thank you for honoring my wish. --
Re: [Emc-users] part 2 - Mach3 to LinuxCNC
Comparing LinuxCNC to Mach3 is really comparing apples to oranges. They are totally different. If someone wants to do a xyz mini mill and has no knowledge of Linux but can sort of run a Windows PC, why would he want to use LinuxCNC? Assuming he doesn't want to do rigid tapping ( an advanced concept for garage machinist hackers ) I think that Mach3 might work fine if he is using steppers. A lot of Mach3 users get lost when it comes to scaling the axes. And I mean LOST. Pulses per inch per what?? Tell them they need to use the command line and do an apt-get and you might as well be talking Chinese to an English only speaking American.. If he needs to do servos, chances are any Mach3 servo solution will be way over his head also. Most machinists know that servo motors have shafts and go round and round and that is about it. Most machinists are NOT electrically oriented. Software programming for them is Gcode.Tell them they need to tune PID parameters and they will be lost AGAIN. Don't forget that Mach3 is now a static product. Development on Mach3 is done. Mach4 is their future. LinuxCNC is constantly being developed and redeveloped. Do you see any derivation of Mach3/4 being used on 3D printers. No. Its truly Apples vs Oranges. Mach3 will have the simple XYZ market with steppers for computer neophytes as long as Mach3 runs on Windows. Users know what Windows is; Its the stuff that comes on every PC they buy. They have to use Google to find out what Linux is. When they Google Linux to find out what it is they find this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linux .is a Unix-like http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unix-like and mostly POSIX http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/POSIX-compliant^[8] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linux#cite_note-8 computer operating system http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operating_system assembled under the model of free and open-source software http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_and_open-source_software development and distribution. The defining component of Linux is the Linux kernel http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linux_kernel,^[9] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linux#cite_note-9 an operating system kernel http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kernel_%28computing%29 first released on 5 October 1991 by Linus Torvalds http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linus_Torvalds.^[10] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linux#cite_note-10 ^[11] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linux#cite_note-11 If they don't know what Windows is they do a search and find this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microsoft_Windows *Microsoft Windows* is a series of graphical interface http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Graphical_user_interface operating systems http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operating_system developed, marketed, and sold by Microsoft http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microsoft. Notice any difference? You gotta be a computer geek just to understand the Linux description! While an ordinary human can read the Windows description and likely understand it. Dave On 10/22/2014 12:40 PM, Stuart Stevenson wrote: Gentlemen, I guess I was not clearly expressing myself. This may be a little more direct. I don't see ANY competition between Mach and LinuxCNC. When you compare the quality of apple to the quality of oranges any argument fails. The competition between the new youngsters and old cnc guys does not exist either. When the youngsters need the capability of LinuxCNC then they will learn it and adopt it. I see service guys (here in Wichita) that will not 'consider' putting a garden variety PC on a machine tool. That would be heresy. It is difficult to get some of them to come in and service the commercial controls they specialize in. They will not even look at the LinuxCNC running in my shop. They will not discuss it with me. History of more than a decade of PC based solutions here (first with MDSI's OpenCNC installed in 1997 still running and then multiple LinuxCNC installs) has no sway in the argument. One consolation is they will not consider Mach either. All PC based solutions are lumped together in one trash bin. I do not mean to ignore progress in all other solutions. We need to improve the LinuxCNC solution. Not so it is more competitive with another solution but so the LinuxCNC users are more competitive with their competition. We can worry about what another solution has but if we don't have solutions that enhance LinuxCNC we will lose because it cannot be used profitably in industry. If the LinuxCNC community improves the solution then progress is made. The way I see it we need to show the installed base of users and techs LinuxCNC is a viable solution. Then we will have more competent people installing and using LinuxCNC. That will then allow the 'new' blood to learn how to make a real machine run. now this is 4 cents :) Stuart On Wed, Oct 22, 2014 at 11:11 AM, Kirk Wallace kwall...@wallacecompany.com wrote: On 10/22/2014 08:24 AM, Charles
Re: [Emc-users] part 2 - Mach3 to LinuxCNC
On 22 October 2014 18:03, Pete Matos petefro...@gmail.com wrote: There are a lot of things that I was able to do on the Haas control that I would need to add custom work for in the linuxCNC control. A list would be a good starting point. I have wondered if a generic toolchanger is possible, a component that takes a string such as Z10bout10bout21Bin11fmotor4 More thought is needed, but that would create HAL pin outputs of bit type called out and out2, a bit Input called in1 and a float output called motor Then the component would send Z to G53 10 (this is actually the hard part) set out1 to 0, set out2 to 1, wait for in1 to be set, then set motor to 4.. Most toolchanges are probably made of fairly standard operations. But then the capability of this would be almost identical to classic ladder. Hmm, thinking about it, how hard would it be for CL to drive axes directly? Perhaps that would go a long way towards helping. -- atp If you can't fix it, you don't own it. http://www.ifixit.com/Manifesto -- ___ Emc-users mailing list Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users
Re: [Emc-users] part 2 - Mach3 to LinuxCNC
On 10/22/2014 1:40 PM, andy pugh wrote: Hmm, thinking about it, how hard would it be for CL to drive axes directly? Perhaps that would go a long way towards helping. I think I have done what you are talking about. The limit3 component was key. CL can load a new position and limit3 controls the motion. I believe I had the drives do the homing sequence on their own. I was using step and direction servo drives with stepgens but I can't see why servos could not be used the same way. I can probably find the hal configs if you would like to see it. Dave --- This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active. http://www.avast.com -- ___ Emc-users mailing list Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users
Re: [Emc-users] part 2 - Mach3 to LinuxCNC
If those service techs understood what is really inside, at the core of those expensive, name brand control systems! Their job is to sell the end user module based repairs that cost several thousands of dollars. The commodity based solution, like a LinuxCNC installation, does not fit that paradigm, and cannot support them. Ray --J. Ray Mitchell Jr. jrmitche...@gmail.com (818)324-7573 The things we admire in men, kindness and generosity, openness, honesty, understanding and feeling are the concomitants of failure in our system. And those traits we detest, sharpness, greed, acquisitiveness, meanness, egotism and self-interest are the traits of success. And while men admire the quality of the first they love the produce of the second. -John Steinbeck, novelist, Nobel laureate (1902-1968) On Wed, Oct 22, 2014 at 9:40 AM, Stuart Stevenson stus...@gmail.com wrote: Gentlemen, I guess I was not clearly expressing myself. This may be a little more direct. I don't see ANY competition between Mach and LinuxCNC. When you compare the quality of apple to the quality of oranges any argument fails. The competition between the new youngsters and old cnc guys does not exist either. When the youngsters need the capability of LinuxCNC then they will learn it and adopt it. I see service guys (here in Wichita) that will not 'consider' putting a garden variety PC on a machine tool. That would be heresy. It is difficult to get some of them to come in and service the commercial controls they specialize in. They will not even look at the LinuxCNC running in my shop. They will not discuss it with me. History of more than a decade of PC based solutions here (first with MDSI's OpenCNC installed in 1997 still running and then multiple LinuxCNC installs) has no sway in the argument. One consolation is they will not consider Mach either. All PC based solutions are lumped together in one trash bin. I do not mean to ignore progress in all other solutions. We need to improve the LinuxCNC solution. Not so it is more competitive with another solution but so the LinuxCNC users are more competitive with their competition. We can worry about what another solution has but if we don't have solutions that enhance LinuxCNC we will lose because it cannot be used profitably in industry. If the LinuxCNC community improves the solution then progress is made. The way I see it we need to show the installed base of users and techs LinuxCNC is a viable solution. Then we will have more competent people installing and using LinuxCNC. That will then allow the 'new' blood to learn how to make a real machine run. now this is 4 cents :) Stuart On Wed, Oct 22, 2014 at 11:11 AM, Kirk Wallace kwall...@wallacecompany.com wrote: On 10/22/2014 08:24 AM, Charles Buckley wrote: ... snip You want people to adopt LinuxCNC? You have to tie it to a new machine that is cutting edge, then bill it as open source. Right now, Instructables is ... snip Hows about: http://www.tormach.com/product_lathe.html -- Kirk Wallace http://www.wallacecompany.com/machine_shop/ http://www.wallacecompany.com/E45/ -- ___ Emc-users mailing list Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users -- Addressee is the intended audience. If you are not the addressee then my consent is not given for you to read this email furthermore it is my wish you would close this without saving or reading, and cease and desist from saving or opening my private correspondence. Thank you for honoring my wish. -- ___ Emc-users mailing list Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users -- ___ Emc-users mailing list Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users
Re: [Emc-users] part 2 - Mach3 to LinuxCNC
unfortunately that is completely accurate. There is BIG money in keeping the commercial controls proprietary and away from the open source cheap and free options. In my view that is never gonna change but what it does do is make THOUSANDS of nice used machines available for scrap prices just because the owner got sick and tired of dumping umpteen thousands of dollars into a control that is less than a decade old or so. It is a vicious cycle not all that unlike the cellphone wars and PC wars we see in other avenues. People gotta make money tho so I can't fault them. I would not want someone to rip the carpet out from underneath my feet either if I had ownership and royalties coming in from a system I built and sold. It's the nature of things nowadays it seems. Pete On Wed, Oct 22, 2014 at 3:35 PM, jrmitchellj . jrmitche...@gmail.com wrote: If those service techs understood what is really inside, at the core of those expensive, name brand control systems! Their job is to sell the end user module based repairs that cost several thousands of dollars. The commodity based solution, like a LinuxCNC installation, does not fit that paradigm, and cannot support them. Ray --J. Ray Mitchell Jr. jrmitche...@gmail.com (818)324-7573 The things we admire in men, kindness and generosity, openness, honesty, understanding and feeling are the concomitants of failure in our system. And those traits we detest, sharpness, greed, acquisitiveness, meanness, egotism and self-interest are the traits of success. And while men admire the quality of the first they love the produce of the second. -John Steinbeck, novelist, Nobel laureate (1902-1968) On Wed, Oct 22, 2014 at 9:40 AM, Stuart Stevenson stus...@gmail.com wrote: Gentlemen, I guess I was not clearly expressing myself. This may be a little more direct. I don't see ANY competition between Mach and LinuxCNC. When you compare the quality of apple to the quality of oranges any argument fails. The competition between the new youngsters and old cnc guys does not exist either. When the youngsters need the capability of LinuxCNC then they will learn it and adopt it. I see service guys (here in Wichita) that will not 'consider' putting a garden variety PC on a machine tool. That would be heresy. It is difficult to get some of them to come in and service the commercial controls they specialize in. They will not even look at the LinuxCNC running in my shop. They will not discuss it with me. History of more than a decade of PC based solutions here (first with MDSI's OpenCNC installed in 1997 still running and then multiple LinuxCNC installs) has no sway in the argument. One consolation is they will not consider Mach either. All PC based solutions are lumped together in one trash bin. I do not mean to ignore progress in all other solutions. We need to improve the LinuxCNC solution. Not so it is more competitive with another solution but so the LinuxCNC users are more competitive with their competition. We can worry about what another solution has but if we don't have solutions that enhance LinuxCNC we will lose because it cannot be used profitably in industry. If the LinuxCNC community improves the solution then progress is made. The way I see it we need to show the installed base of users and techs LinuxCNC is a viable solution. Then we will have more competent people installing and using LinuxCNC. That will then allow the 'new' blood to learn how to make a real machine run. now this is 4 cents :) Stuart On Wed, Oct 22, 2014 at 11:11 AM, Kirk Wallace kwall...@wallacecompany.com wrote: On 10/22/2014 08:24 AM, Charles Buckley wrote: ... snip You want people to adopt LinuxCNC? You have to tie it to a new machine that is cutting edge, then bill it as open source. Right now, Instructables is ... snip Hows about: http://www.tormach.com/product_lathe.html -- Kirk Wallace http://www.wallacecompany.com/machine_shop/ http://www.wallacecompany.com/E45/ -- ___ Emc-users mailing list Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users -- Addressee is the intended audience. If you are not the addressee then my consent is not given for you to read this email furthermore it is my wish you would close this without saving or reading, and cease and desist from saving or opening my private correspondence. Thank you for honoring my wish. -- ___ Emc-users mailing list Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users
Re: [Emc-users] part 2 - Mach3 to LinuxCNC
As an example of what I am talking about, a couple of years ago, I had a film scanner, costing new several hundreds of thousand of dollars, fail. The service tech came out and stated a box in the system had failed, and would cost $6500 + labor to replace. I sent him home! I pulled the box out of the system, opened it up to find a Pentium 5 SBC, and several servo control boards (that I looked up on the internet). On close inspection, I found that the fan on the Pentium heat sink had failed. I pulled the chip out of the socket, and it showed that the magic smoke had leaked out due to excessive heat. I found one on Ebay, ordered it, got for less than $7, delivered. Installed it, put everything back together, and tested. SUCCESS! Moral of the story: many systems are put together with commodity parts and made to look like proprietary systems with custom software! I put my LinuxCNC system together, inside of a high end PC case, and made it look like my own proprietary system. Cables out the bottom to the steppers sensors. Mounted it on the same brackets that the 70's era NC controller previously occupied, did a small customization of the axis screens, and nobody is any wiser that it is not an expensive, commercial controller. It is used by a high school robotics team. Ray --J. Ray Mitchell Jr. jrmitche...@gmail.com (818)324-7573 The things we admire in men, kindness and generosity, openness, honesty, understanding and feeling are the concomitants of failure in our system. And those traits we detest, sharpness, greed, acquisitiveness, meanness, egotism and self-interest are the traits of success. And while men admire the quality of the first they love the produce of the second. -John Steinbeck, novelist, Nobel laureate (1902-1968) On Wed, Oct 22, 2014 at 12:46 PM, Pete Matos petefro...@gmail.com wrote: unfortunately that is completely accurate. There is BIG money in keeping the commercial controls proprietary and away from the open source cheap and free options. In my view that is never gonna change but what it does do is make THOUSANDS of nice used machines available for scrap prices just because the owner got sick and tired of dumping umpteen thousands of dollars into a control that is less than a decade old or so. It is a vicious cycle not all that unlike the cellphone wars and PC wars we see in other avenues. People gotta make money tho so I can't fault them. I would not want someone to rip the carpet out from underneath my feet either if I had ownership and royalties coming in from a system I built and sold. It's the nature of things nowadays it seems. Pete On Wed, Oct 22, 2014 at 3:35 PM, jrmitchellj . jrmitche...@gmail.com wrote: If those service techs understood what is really inside, at the core of those expensive, name brand control systems! Their job is to sell the end user module based repairs that cost several thousands of dollars. The commodity based solution, like a LinuxCNC installation, does not fit that paradigm, and cannot support them. Ray --J. Ray Mitchell Jr. jrmitche...@gmail.com (818)324-7573 The things we admire in men, kindness and generosity, openness, honesty, understanding and feeling are the concomitants of failure in our system. And those traits we detest, sharpness, greed, acquisitiveness, meanness, egotism and self-interest are the traits of success. And while men admire the quality of the first they love the produce of the second. -John Steinbeck, novelist, Nobel laureate (1902-1968) On Wed, Oct 22, 2014 at 9:40 AM, Stuart Stevenson stus...@gmail.com wrote: Gentlemen, I guess I was not clearly expressing myself. This may be a little more direct. I don't see ANY competition between Mach and LinuxCNC. When you compare the quality of apple to the quality of oranges any argument fails. The competition between the new youngsters and old cnc guys does not exist either. When the youngsters need the capability of LinuxCNC then they will learn it and adopt it. I see service guys (here in Wichita) that will not 'consider' putting a garden variety PC on a machine tool. That would be heresy. It is difficult to get some of them to come in and service the commercial controls they specialize in. They will not even look at the LinuxCNC running in my shop. They will not discuss it with me. History of more than a decade of PC based solutions here (first with MDSI's OpenCNC installed in 1997 still running and then multiple LinuxCNC installs) has no sway in the argument. One consolation is they will not consider Mach either. All PC based solutions are lumped together in one trash bin. I do not mean to ignore progress in all other solutions. We need to improve the LinuxCNC solution. Not so it is more competitive with another solution but so the LinuxCNC users are more competitive with their competition. We can worry
Re: [Emc-users] part 2 - Mach3 to LinuxCNC
On 10/22/2014 12:38 PM, Dave Cole wrote: LinuxCNC is constantly being developed and redeveloped. Do you see any derivation of Mach3/4 being used on 3D printers. No. To be fair, some 3D printers *DO* run Mach. AFAIK, it's not that many, and mostly the retrofit sort of printer where someone attaches an extruder to the business end of an existing mill (known as a Rep-Strap by the 3D printer folks), but they are out there, and it's not really any more or less hassle to use Mach than LinuxCNC (both support normal gcode, are confused by the RepRap flavor gcode, need some sort of file translation to get things working, and are not without sharp edges). I think LinuxCNC is overall a better fit than Mach for the Maker / Hacker crowd because: * It's open source (this is a *BIG* deal with most makers) * Most of the maker folks have experience with Linux, or at least aren't scared of it * LinuxCNC is far more powerful and configurable than Mach or the other machine control options (think Linux is hard? Try writing real-time microcontroller firmware for an AVR based Arduino that's heavily CPU bound!). I'm working on beating the drum (with the last point especially), but it's hard to convince folks of what they're missing (halscope, run time editable configurations, etc) when they are used to having to compile firmware to do something like change the axis gain. sigh -- Charles Steinkuehler char...@steinkuehler.net signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature -- ___ Emc-users mailing list Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users
Re: [Emc-users] part 2 - Mach3 to LinuxCNC
To be fair, some 3D printers *DO* run Mach. I didn't know that, thanks for correcting me. How are they doing temperature control with Mach3 ?? Or are they not doing that. Dave On 10/22/2014 4:24 PM, Charles Steinkuehler wrote: On 10/22/2014 12:38 PM, Dave Cole wrote: LinuxCNC is constantly being developed and redeveloped. Do you see any derivation of Mach3/4 being used on 3D printers. No. To be fair, some 3D printers *DO* run Mach. AFAIK, it's not that many, and mostly the retrofit sort of printer where someone attaches an extruder to the business end of an existing mill (known as a Rep-Strap by the 3D printer folks), but they are out there, and it's not really any more or less hassle to use Mach than LinuxCNC (both support normal gcode, are confused by the RepRap flavor gcode, need some sort of file translation to get things working, and are not without sharp edges). I think LinuxCNC is overall a better fit than Mach for the Maker / Hacker crowd because: * It's open source (this is a *BIG* deal with most makers) * Most of the maker folks have experience with Linux, or at least aren't scared of it * LinuxCNC is far more powerful and configurable than Mach or the other machine control options (think Linux is hard? Try writing real-time microcontroller firmware for an AVR based Arduino that's heavily CPU bound!). I'm working on beating the drum (with the last point especially), but it's hard to convince folks of what they're missing (halscope, run time editable configurations, etc) when they are used to having to compile firmware to do something like change the axis gain. sigh -- ___ Emc-users mailing list Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users --- This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active. http://www.avast.com -- ___ Emc-users mailing list Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users
Re: [Emc-users] part 2 - Mach3 to LinuxCNC
On 10/22/2014 3:40 PM, Dave Cole wrote: To be fair, some 3D printers *DO* run Mach. I didn't know that, thanks for correcting me. How are they doing temperature control with Mach3 ?? Or are they not doing that. I believe most of the RepStrap style mill refits use off-the-shelf stand-alone temperature controllers for the exturder. -- Charles Steinkuehler char...@steinkuehler.net signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature -- ___ Emc-users mailing list Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users
Re: [Emc-users] part 2 - Mach3 to LinuxCNC
I have a JGRO style CNC router with the router temporarily removed and an extruder in its place. I use MACH3 to run the extruder and have external temperature controllers for the heater. It works. It's not the best by any means. It's not as fast as the reprap products simply because the mass of the gantry is large enough that the rapid movements required for extruding set up quite the shaking. But that's nothing to do with MACH or any other CNC product but more the size of the JGRO. I'm sure you could mount an extruder in place of the plasma torch on a 8'x4' plasma cutter but the speeds just won't be there compared to the lightweight size 23 based repraps. BTW, I use the A axis for feed. John Dammeyer -Original Message- From: Charles Steinkuehler [mailto:char...@steinkuehler.net] Sent: October-22-14 2:01 PM To: Enhanced Machine Controller (EMC) Subject: Re: [Emc-users] part 2 - Mach3 to LinuxCNC On 10/22/2014 3:40 PM, Dave Cole wrote: To be fair, some 3D printers *DO* run Mach. I didn't know that, thanks for correcting me. How are they doing temperature control with Mach3 ?? Or are they not doing that. I believe most of the RepStrap style mill refits use off-the-shelf stand-alone temperature controllers for the exturder. -- Charles Steinkuehler char...@steinkuehler.net -- ___ Emc-users mailing list Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users
Re: [Emc-users] part 2 - Mach3 to LinuxCNC
On 22 October 2014 21:24, Charles Steinkuehler char...@steinkuehler.net wrote: I'm working on beating the drum (with the last point especially), but it's hard to convince folks of what they're missing (halscope, run time editable configurations, etc) when they are used to having to compile firmware to do something like change the axis gain. sigh To be fair, with an Arduino recompiling the firmware is indistinguishable from uploading the changes from the PC to the box so it isn't the chore it sounds like. The BIG thing is that you really can't see what is going on inside an Arduino, unless you get really creative with leds and morse. :-) -- atp If you can't fix it, you don't own it. http://www.ifixit.com/Manifesto -- ___ Emc-users mailing list Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users
Re: [Emc-users] part 2 - Mach3 to LinuxCNC
On 10/22/2014 6:10 PM, andy pugh wrote: unless you get really creative with leds and morse.:-) Morse ...as in Morse Code?? 8-O So a command line would be a luxury?? Yeah.. and now I remember why I have avoided Arduinos.. Dave --- This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active. http://www.avast.com -- ___ Emc-users mailing list Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users
Re: [Emc-users] part 2 - Mach3 to LinuxCNC
On 23 October 2014 01:19, Dave Cole linuxcncro...@gmail.com wrote: So a command line would be a luxury?? Well, to be fair you can output to a serial log, unless you are using those pins for something else, but there is no OS, it really is just a uP doing a job. Yeah.. and now I remember why I have avoided Arduinos.. They have their uses. It's almost not worth building any sort of one-off digital (or limited analogue) circuit any more when you can buy an Arduino for a few pounds. And if you change your mind, it is programming, not soldering. -- atp If you can't fix it, you don't own it. http://www.ifixit.com/Manifesto -- ___ Emc-users mailing list Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users
Re: [Emc-users] part 2 - Mach3 to LinuxCNC
It's not so much an Arduino as a small embedded processor be it a PIC, ATMEL, TI, etc... We've become spoiled by our telephones. My iPhone has more storage, memory and I believe runs faster than the AMDAHL 470 computer I used in University. Yet that AMDAHL supported over 350 users on terminals. My first exposure to Unix was PDP-11 with 64K words of memory. Nowhere near what I have on my BeagleBone Black but the BeagleBone does run a version of LinuxCNC although I have yet to try it on the JGRO router. But note that EMC has to run a particular real time variant of Linux in order to do the CNC. That writing code on a Linux based system to create a pulse stream to run GE-35 Christmas Lights is pretty well impossible without the real time Linux and then the programmer needs in depth knowledge of the OS. Contrast that to any of the small 8 or 16 bit processor and the project is dirt simple. John Dammeyer -Original Message- From: andy pugh [mailto:bodge...@gmail.com] Sent: October-22-14 5:59 PM To: Enhanced Machine Controller (EMC) Subject: Re: [Emc-users] part 2 - Mach3 to LinuxCNC On 23 October 2014 01:19, Dave Cole linuxcncro...@gmail.com wrote: So a command line would be a luxury?? Well, to be fair you can output to a serial log, unless you are using those pins for something else, but there is no OS, it really is just a uP doing a job. Yeah.. and now I remember why I have avoided Arduinos.. They have their uses. It's almost not worth building any sort of one-off digital (or limited analogue) circuit any more when you can buy an Arduino for a few pounds. And if you change your mind, it is programming, not soldering. -- atp If you can't fix it, you don't own it. http://www.ifixit.com/Manifesto -- ___ Emc-users mailing list Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users -- ___ Emc-users mailing list Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users
Re: [Emc-users] part 2 - Mach3 to LinuxCNC
On 23 October 2014 02:22, John Dammeyer jo...@autoartisans.com wrote: It's not so much an Arduino as a small embedded processor be it a PIC, ATMEL, TI, etc... Yes. However Arduino just needs a USB cable rather an a JTAG or equivalent programmer, and you can program it in C rather an PIC machine code or whatever. It is much cheaper to use the standalone chips, but when an Arduino Nano is $5 I can't be bothered. My first exposure to Unix was PDP-11 with 64K words of memory. I was using a PDP for a real-time control task two years ago. It still did the same job as when it was installed in 1982. (running an engine dyno) -- atp If you can't fix it, you don't own it. http://www.ifixit.com/Manifesto -- ___ Emc-users mailing list Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users
Re: [Emc-users] part 2 - Mach3 to LinuxCNC
On 10/22/2014 10:40 AM, Stuart Stevenson wrote: I see service guys (here in Wichita) that will not 'consider' putting a garden variety PC on a machine tool. That would be heresy. It is difficult to get some of them to come in and service the commercial controls they specialize in. They will not even look at the LinuxCNC running in my shop. They will not discuss it with me. History of more than a decade of PC based solutions here (first with MDSI's OpenCNC installed in 1997 still running and then multiple LinuxCNC installs) has no sway in the argument. One consolation is they will not consider Mach either. All PC based solutions are lumped together in one trash bin. I wonder what they'd have to say about the series of CNC turret punch presses made by Strippit that used a Macintosh IIcx as the control computer? The proprietary NuBus hardware and the software will (supposedly) only work with a Macintosh IIcx. --- This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active. http://www.avast.com -- ___ Emc-users mailing list Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users
