On Jul 5 2013 1:19 PM, Charles Steinkuehler wrote: > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA1 > > On 7/5/2013 1:59 PM, EBo wrote: >> I've given this a bit of a sit and still have to disagree. Granted >> the Lasersaur and Makerbot groups/company have not necessarily >> played nice, but most of the stuff is open source. After letting >> it settle and giving it a rethink, I guess what you ment by >> "...minimum barrier for entry" is often the attitude that if it is >> not open source, it is not worth my time mucking with. So do I >> take it that you see LinuxCNC's non adoption in the 3D printing >> world stemming from being open enough? I'm still confused. I know >> for a fact that until recently it would not run on low end hardware >> that is good enough to do the job, and is a bloody pain to get up >> an running by all by the initiated, uber skilled, or those who just >> use it off the distribution disk without modification. Do not get >> me wrong, it is MUCH better, but still plug-and-pray. >> >> I'm still curious what you mean... > > IMHO LinuxCNC being open-source is not enough to get people to switch > from their currently working open-source Arduinos solution. There > needs to be some other compelling reason to get them to want to > switch > to LinuxCNC. > > I was simply trying to convey that going to the maker community and > saying "Use LinuxCNC!!! It's open-source!" isn't going to get a lot > of people interested. > > The "pitch" needs to be something more like: > > Use LinuxCNC!!! I did and I was able to: > > * Program working reverse kinematics for my non-Cartesian 'bot in > minutes! > > * Run my maximum speeds to 1000 mm/s with 10,000 mm/s/s acceleration! > > * Use nurbs to make prettier printed parts! > > ...or whatever. > > I think raw performance (step speed and timing quality) and hard > floating point for reverse kinematics are big things that can help > motivate people to migrate. I'm sure there are others.
on this I agree. The typical Arduino motor drivers are good enough for many things, but when you get to pushing the limits or weight, speed, or smoothness, it is time to step up to LCNC. We could even do a little demo showing the different between an arduino based stepper motor controller, and something like LCNC with NURBS for both speed and smoothness. In fact I have a couple of machines I plan to hack with the NURBS FPGA board... With LCNC-3.0 I would also like to see if we can add minimization of jerk (the 4'th order derivative of position, so you end up taking the derivative of acceleration and smooth it). This is important for VERY LARGE machines. I first learned about it from one of the technicians who help build the VLA, and when you are moving a 3 story tall antenna that is something like 25 meters across you cannot drive it without acceleration, and you will tear up the bearings if you do not minimize jerk... EBo -- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ This SF.net email is sponsored by Windows: Build for Windows Store. http://p.sf.net/sfu/windows-dev2dev _______________________________________________ Emc-developers mailing list Emc-developers@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-developers
