Re: [Emc-users] Choice of CNC conversions

[gene heskett]

On Tuesday, December 28, 2021 12:45:44 PM EST Kenneth Lerman wrote:
> Hi Gene,
> 
> Don't give up your only ethernet port. Instead, add one with a $10 USB
> dongle.
> 
> Regards, Ken
> 
> Kenneth Lerman
> 55 Main Street
> Newtown, CT 06470
> 
But but but, all my usb ports are already occupied. The 2 usb3 ports have a 
SSD on them with a startech usb3 to sata adapter, because it is already a 
full development system, and there are 2 port expanders plugged into the 
usb2 sockets.  Machine control to run the Sheldon is a 7I90HD, fed by SPI.

Thanks Kenneth, take care and stay well.

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, 1940)
If we desire respect for the law, we must first make the law respectable.
 - Louis D. Brandeis
Genes Web page 





___
Emc-users mailing list
Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users

Re: [Emc-users] Choice of CNC conversions

[Kenneth Lerman]

Hi Gene,

Don't give up your only ethernet port. Instead, add one with a $10 USB
dongle.

Regards, Ken

Kenneth Lerman
55 Main Street
Newtown, CT 06470



On Mon, Dec 27, 2021 at 4:37 PM gene heskett  wrote:

> On Sunday, December 26, 2021 1:30:42 PM EST John Dammeyer wrote:
> > Hi Mark,
> > I'll summarize your basic premise here that all machines are different.
> > That's true!
> >
> > And MACH2/3/4 has a huge user base without ever needing a command line
> > editor.  So if it can be done for Windows then certainly it can be done
> > for LCNC.
> >
> > Having said that I'm also not suggesting we do away with the underbelly
> of
> > what is LCNC.   Please recall my original post in this subject.   The
> > ACORN based system cannot run an old iron system with existing servo
> > drives.  It's likely it can't even run a system with a STMBL drive that
> > faults on low power supply voltage which mine does because I have a soft
> > start delay on mine so ENABLE shows up before the Voltage is there.
> > Doesn't look like it can even do step/dir for the spindle (which MACH3
> > can).  So there is a place for the 'raw' LinuxCNC install and HAL/INI
> > file model.
> >
> > But that user I mentioned wasn't interested in learning a new OS and the
> > ACORN was a one stop shop for the Ethernet controlled step/dir/VFD/IO
> > board and windows CNC software.  He went with Clearpath Servos so he
> > wasn't adverse to spending money.  He could just as easily have installed
> > LCNC 2.8.2 and the MESA board with terminal strips and used the config
> > screens in AXIS and I suspect for less money.  But the LinuxOS itself
> > appeared to also scare him away so he likely would never be a user.
> >
> > I think everyone who likes using an editor for configuration and issuing
> > multiple commands with a command line interface has already been brought
> > over to the dark side so to speak.   They aren't the market for expanding
> > the LCNC user base.
> >
> > I've attached a screen shot of something I've been playing with.  Took
> > about an hour to write using a modern GUI based software development
> > tool; in this case Lazarus Free Pascal.  The TCanvas Property has all
> > sorts of drawing tools so I thought I'd take a quick look at the Axis
> > source code.  To see how easy it would be to port over the Preview screen
> > to Pascal.
> >
> > I was immediately reminded of something I written many years ago by
> > Nicholas Wirth the author of Pascal.  "Those who learn Fortran as their
> > first language are brain damaged for life". Rather harsh actually and
> > taken out of context appears elitist .  OTOH, 4195 lines of essentially
> > undocumented python code does look like a lot of the Fortran code the
> > Electrical Engineers were writing in University while we in the Comp Sci.
> > stream were writing in structured languages Algol-68.  And those were not
> > for GUI type interfaces which add to complexity.
> >
> > For example:
> > if o.canon:
> > x = (o.canon.min_extents[0] + o.canon.max_extents[0])/2
> > y = (o.canon.min_extents[1] + o.canon.max_extents[1])/2
> > z = (o.canon.min_extents[2] + o.canon.max_extents[2])/2
> > o.set_centerpoint(x, y, z)
> >
> > If you go searching for o.cannon you find:
> >   o.canon = canon = AxisCanon(o, widgets.text, i, progress, arcdivision)
> >
> > Search for AxisCAnon and we find the object definition:
> > class AxisCanon(GLCanon, StatMixin):
> >
> > Now we're into the include side of things where the rs274 library is
> > needed: from rs274.interpret import StatMixin
> > from rs274.glcanon import GLCanon, GlCanonDraw
> >
> > which takes us to here:
> > https://github.com/LinuxCNC/linuxcnc/blob/master/lib/python/rs274/
> glcanon.
> > py which is another 1886 lines of undocumented code.
> >
> > The excuses that will be made for no documentation will be the same ones
> > given for command line operation of Linux and LCNC.   It's much better
> > than windows or it's self documenting. You just have to learn a few
> > commands and you can do so much more than with windows
> >
> > I believe we need to step outside the box and ask ourselves this
> question.
> >  How can we attract more people who just want simple CNC (maybe without
> > limit switches even), a VFD and encoder on the spindle and possibly
> > coolant or a few other outputs.
> >
> > One really simple way is that the companies (or people) building the
> > intelligent CNC controls like the MESA change their web sites to have at
> > least one menu choice for "SimpleCNC".
> >
> > I went here:
> > http://wiki.linuxcnc.org/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?LinuxCNC_Supported_Hardware
> >
> > Eventually with more Google searching I ended up here:
> > http://store.mesanet.com/index.php?route=product/
> product_id=290
> > arch=7i76e
>
> That is a very nice board, I use 2 of them myself, but not in the E
> version. I use the much cheaper parport version. Why? I refuse to give up
> my only ethernet port just to carve metal. The net access is 

Re: [Emc-users] Choice of CNC conversions

[Sam Sokolik]

wow - that was a walk down memory lane..  JohnK, JonE and Peter all posted
in those threads...

On Mon, Dec 27, 2021 at 7:16 PM Sam Sokolik  wrote:

> Hmm - I mean - if you want to do a ton of reading - you can watch the
> journey...  This was a big project because it originally was 2.5 axis
> hydraulic servos.
>
>
> https://www.cnczone.com/forums/linuxcnc-formerly-emc2-/25929-large-brushed-servo-setup-cheap-wip.html
> then
>
> https://www.cnczone.com/forums/vertical-mill-lathe-project-log/24-large-kearney-amp-trecker-hmc-conversion.html
>
> On Mon, Dec 27, 2021 at 6:34 PM John Dammeyer 
> wrote:
>
>> Web Link?
>>
>> > From: Sam Sokolik [mailto:samco...@gmail.com]
>> >
>> > Lol.. let me do that again...
>> >
>> > The Kearney and Trecker has at least 96 i\o and 5+ analog axis.
>> Everything
>> > (and I mean everything) is controlled within LinuxCNC using classic
>> ladder,
>> > Hal and one poorly written realtime component to do the spindle
>> shifting.
>> > Been 100% stable for years.
>> >
>> > Sam
>> >
>> > On Mon, Dec 27, 2021, 5:35 PM Sam Sokolik  wrote:
>> >
>> > > The Kearney and trecker
>> > >
>> > > On Mon, Dec 27, 2021, 5:33 PM Feral Engineer <
>> theferalengin...@gmail.com>
>> > > wrote:
>> > >
>> > >> The pay walls, axis limits and markups on accessories are the
>> reasons I
>> > >> avoided centroid.
>> > >>
>> > >> The thing I love most about Linuxcnc is the flexibility, reliability
>> and
>> > >> yes, classicladder - or at least ladder based plc in general, which
>> makes
>> > >> it incredibly easy to figure out for someone with an industrial
>> > >> electronics
>> > >> background. I do miss some of the functionality of industrial
>> controls
>> > >> inside of LinuxCNC that I think should be implemented, but all in
>> all,
>> > >> it's
>> > >> an incredible tool.
>> > >>
>> > >> I do think that in order for it to gain traction, it needs some more
>> > >> "black
>> > >> box" usability, though. As an example, an input sniffer to assign
>> hal pins
>> > >> to button presses on a game controller or hardware buttons on a Mesa
>> card
>> > >> would be kinda cool to implement.
>> > >>
>> > >> Phil T.
>> > >> The Feral Engineer
>> > >>
>> > >> Check out my LinuxCNC tutorials, machine builds and other antics at
>> > >> www.youtube.com/c/theferalengineer
>> > >>
>> > >> Help support my channel efforts and coffee addiction:
>> > >> www.patreon.com/theferalengineer
>> > >>
>> > >> On Mon, Dec 27, 2021, 4:38 PM gene heskett 
>> wrote:
>> > >>
>> > >> > On Sunday, December 26, 2021 1:30:42 PM EST John Dammeyer wrote:
>> > >> > > Hi Mark,
>> > >> > > I'll summarize your basic premise here that all machines are
>> > >> different.
>> > >> > > That's true!
>> > >> > >
>> > >> > > And MACH2/3/4 has a huge user base without ever needing a
>> command line
>> > >> > > editor.  So if it can be done for Windows then certainly it can
>> be
>> > >> done
>> > >> > > for LCNC.
>> > >> > >
>> > >> > > Having said that I'm also not suggesting we do away with the
>> > >> underbelly
>> > >> > of
>> > >> > > what is LCNC.   Please recall my original post in this subject.
>>  The
>> > >> > > ACORN based system cannot run an old iron system with existing
>> servo
>> > >> > > drives.  It's likely it can't even run a system with a STMBL
>> drive
>> > >> that
>> > >> > > faults on low power supply voltage which mine does because I
>> have a
>> > >> soft
>> > >> > > start delay on mine so ENABLE shows up before the Voltage is
>> there.
>> > >> > > Doesn't look like it can even do step/dir for the spindle (which
>> MACH3
>> > >> > > can).  So there is a place for the 'raw' LinuxCNC install and
>> HAL/INI
>> > >> > > file model.
>> > >> > >
>> > >> > > But that user I mentioned wasn't interested in learning a new OS
>> and
>> > >> the
>> > >> > > ACORN was a one stop shop for the Ethernet controlled
>> step/dir/VFD/IO
>> > >> > > board and windows CNC software.  He went with Clearpath Servos
>> so he
>> > >> > > wasn't adverse to spending money.  He could just as easily have
>> > >> installed
>> > >> > > LCNC 2.8.2 and the MESA board with terminal strips and used the
>> config
>> > >> > > screens in AXIS and I suspect for less money.  But the LinuxOS
>> itself
>> > >> > > appeared to also scare him away so he likely would never be a
>> user.
>> > >> > >
>> > >> > > I think everyone who likes using an editor for configuration and
>> > >> issuing
>> > >> > > multiple commands with a command line interface has already been
>> > >> brought
>> > >> > > over to the dark side so to speak.   They aren't the market for
>> > >> expanding
>> > >> > > the LCNC user base.
>> > >> > >
>> > >> > > I've attached a screen shot of something I've been playing
>> with.  Took
>> > >> > > about an hour to write using a modern GUI based software
>> development
>> > >> > > tool; in this case Lazarus Free Pascal.  The TCanvas Property
>> has all
>> > >> > > sorts of drawing tools so I thought I'd take a quick look at the
>> Axis
>> > >> > > source code.  

Re: [Emc-users] Choice of CNC conversions

[Sam Sokolik]

Hmm - I mean - if you want to do a ton of reading - you can watch the
journey...  This was a big project because it originally was 2.5 axis
hydraulic servos.

https://www.cnczone.com/forums/linuxcnc-formerly-emc2-/25929-large-brushed-servo-setup-cheap-wip.html
then
https://www.cnczone.com/forums/vertical-mill-lathe-project-log/24-large-kearney-amp-trecker-hmc-conversion.html

On Mon, Dec 27, 2021 at 6:34 PM John Dammeyer 
wrote:

> Web Link?
>
> > From: Sam Sokolik [mailto:samco...@gmail.com]
> >
> > Lol.. let me do that again...
> >
> > The Kearney and Trecker has at least 96 i\o and 5+ analog axis.
> Everything
> > (and I mean everything) is controlled within LinuxCNC using classic
> ladder,
> > Hal and one poorly written realtime component to do the spindle shifting.
> > Been 100% stable for years.
> >
> > Sam
> >
> > On Mon, Dec 27, 2021, 5:35 PM Sam Sokolik  wrote:
> >
> > > The Kearney and trecker
> > >
> > > On Mon, Dec 27, 2021, 5:33 PM Feral Engineer <
> theferalengin...@gmail.com>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > >> The pay walls, axis limits and markups on accessories are the reasons
> I
> > >> avoided centroid.
> > >>
> > >> The thing I love most about Linuxcnc is the flexibility, reliability
> and
> > >> yes, classicladder - or at least ladder based plc in general, which
> makes
> > >> it incredibly easy to figure out for someone with an industrial
> > >> electronics
> > >> background. I do miss some of the functionality of industrial controls
> > >> inside of LinuxCNC that I think should be implemented, but all in all,
> > >> it's
> > >> an incredible tool.
> > >>
> > >> I do think that in order for it to gain traction, it needs some more
> > >> "black
> > >> box" usability, though. As an example, an input sniffer to assign hal
> pins
> > >> to button presses on a game controller or hardware buttons on a Mesa
> card
> > >> would be kinda cool to implement.
> > >>
> > >> Phil T.
> > >> The Feral Engineer
> > >>
> > >> Check out my LinuxCNC tutorials, machine builds and other antics at
> > >> www.youtube.com/c/theferalengineer
> > >>
> > >> Help support my channel efforts and coffee addiction:
> > >> www.patreon.com/theferalengineer
> > >>
> > >> On Mon, Dec 27, 2021, 4:38 PM gene heskett 
> wrote:
> > >>
> > >> > On Sunday, December 26, 2021 1:30:42 PM EST John Dammeyer wrote:
> > >> > > Hi Mark,
> > >> > > I'll summarize your basic premise here that all machines are
> > >> different.
> > >> > > That's true!
> > >> > >
> > >> > > And MACH2/3/4 has a huge user base without ever needing a command
> line
> > >> > > editor.  So if it can be done for Windows then certainly it can be
> > >> done
> > >> > > for LCNC.
> > >> > >
> > >> > > Having said that I'm also not suggesting we do away with the
> > >> underbelly
> > >> > of
> > >> > > what is LCNC.   Please recall my original post in this subject.
>  The
> > >> > > ACORN based system cannot run an old iron system with existing
> servo
> > >> > > drives.  It's likely it can't even run a system with a STMBL drive
> > >> that
> > >> > > faults on low power supply voltage which mine does because I have
> a
> > >> soft
> > >> > > start delay on mine so ENABLE shows up before the Voltage is
> there.
> > >> > > Doesn't look like it can even do step/dir for the spindle (which
> MACH3
> > >> > > can).  So there is a place for the 'raw' LinuxCNC install and
> HAL/INI
> > >> > > file model.
> > >> > >
> > >> > > But that user I mentioned wasn't interested in learning a new OS
> and
> > >> the
> > >> > > ACORN was a one stop shop for the Ethernet controlled
> step/dir/VFD/IO
> > >> > > board and windows CNC software.  He went with Clearpath Servos so
> he
> > >> > > wasn't adverse to spending money.  He could just as easily have
> > >> installed
> > >> > > LCNC 2.8.2 and the MESA board with terminal strips and used the
> config
> > >> > > screens in AXIS and I suspect for less money.  But the LinuxOS
> itself
> > >> > > appeared to also scare him away so he likely would never be a
> user.
> > >> > >
> > >> > > I think everyone who likes using an editor for configuration and
> > >> issuing
> > >> > > multiple commands with a command line interface has already been
> > >> brought
> > >> > > over to the dark side so to speak.   They aren't the market for
> > >> expanding
> > >> > > the LCNC user base.
> > >> > >
> > >> > > I've attached a screen shot of something I've been playing with.
> Took
> > >> > > about an hour to write using a modern GUI based software
> development
> > >> > > tool; in this case Lazarus Free Pascal.  The TCanvas Property has
> all
> > >> > > sorts of drawing tools so I thought I'd take a quick look at the
> Axis
> > >> > > source code.  To see how easy it would be to port over the Preview
> > >> screen
> > >> > > to Pascal.
> > >> > >
> > >> > > I was immediately reminded of something I written many years ago
> by
> > >> > > Nicholas Wirth the author of Pascal.  "Those who learn Fortran as
> > >> their
> > >> > > first language are brain 

Re: [Emc-users] Choice of CNC conversions

[John Dammeyer]

Web Link?

> From: Sam Sokolik [mailto:samco...@gmail.com]
> 
> Lol.. let me do that again...
> 
> The Kearney and Trecker has at least 96 i\o and 5+ analog axis.  Everything
> (and I mean everything) is controlled within LinuxCNC using classic ladder,
> Hal and one poorly written realtime component to do the spindle shifting.
> Been 100% stable for years.
> 
> Sam
> 
> On Mon, Dec 27, 2021, 5:35 PM Sam Sokolik  wrote:
> 
> > The Kearney and trecker
> >
> > On Mon, Dec 27, 2021, 5:33 PM Feral Engineer 
> > wrote:
> >
> >> The pay walls, axis limits and markups on accessories are the reasons I
> >> avoided centroid.
> >>
> >> The thing I love most about Linuxcnc is the flexibility, reliability and
> >> yes, classicladder - or at least ladder based plc in general, which makes
> >> it incredibly easy to figure out for someone with an industrial
> >> electronics
> >> background. I do miss some of the functionality of industrial controls
> >> inside of LinuxCNC that I think should be implemented, but all in all,
> >> it's
> >> an incredible tool.
> >>
> >> I do think that in order for it to gain traction, it needs some more
> >> "black
> >> box" usability, though. As an example, an input sniffer to assign hal pins
> >> to button presses on a game controller or hardware buttons on a Mesa card
> >> would be kinda cool to implement.
> >>
> >> Phil T.
> >> The Feral Engineer
> >>
> >> Check out my LinuxCNC tutorials, machine builds and other antics at
> >> www.youtube.com/c/theferalengineer
> >>
> >> Help support my channel efforts and coffee addiction:
> >> www.patreon.com/theferalengineer
> >>
> >> On Mon, Dec 27, 2021, 4:38 PM gene heskett  wrote:
> >>
> >> > On Sunday, December 26, 2021 1:30:42 PM EST John Dammeyer wrote:
> >> > > Hi Mark,
> >> > > I'll summarize your basic premise here that all machines are
> >> different.
> >> > > That's true!
> >> > >
> >> > > And MACH2/3/4 has a huge user base without ever needing a command line
> >> > > editor.  So if it can be done for Windows then certainly it can be
> >> done
> >> > > for LCNC.
> >> > >
> >> > > Having said that I'm also not suggesting we do away with the
> >> underbelly
> >> > of
> >> > > what is LCNC.   Please recall my original post in this subject.   The
> >> > > ACORN based system cannot run an old iron system with existing servo
> >> > > drives.  It's likely it can't even run a system with a STMBL drive
> >> that
> >> > > faults on low power supply voltage which mine does because I have a
> >> soft
> >> > > start delay on mine so ENABLE shows up before the Voltage is there.
> >> > > Doesn't look like it can even do step/dir for the spindle (which MACH3
> >> > > can).  So there is a place for the 'raw' LinuxCNC install and HAL/INI
> >> > > file model.
> >> > >
> >> > > But that user I mentioned wasn't interested in learning a new OS and
> >> the
> >> > > ACORN was a one stop shop for the Ethernet controlled step/dir/VFD/IO
> >> > > board and windows CNC software.  He went with Clearpath Servos so he
> >> > > wasn't adverse to spending money.  He could just as easily have
> >> installed
> >> > > LCNC 2.8.2 and the MESA board with terminal strips and used the config
> >> > > screens in AXIS and I suspect for less money.  But the LinuxOS itself
> >> > > appeared to also scare him away so he likely would never be a user.
> >> > >
> >> > > I think everyone who likes using an editor for configuration and
> >> issuing
> >> > > multiple commands with a command line interface has already been
> >> brought
> >> > > over to the dark side so to speak.   They aren't the market for
> >> expanding
> >> > > the LCNC user base.
> >> > >
> >> > > I've attached a screen shot of something I've been playing with.  Took
> >> > > about an hour to write using a modern GUI based software development
> >> > > tool; in this case Lazarus Free Pascal.  The TCanvas Property has all
> >> > > sorts of drawing tools so I thought I'd take a quick look at the Axis
> >> > > source code.  To see how easy it would be to port over the Preview
> >> screen
> >> > > to Pascal.
> >> > >
> >> > > I was immediately reminded of something I written many years ago by
> >> > > Nicholas Wirth the author of Pascal.  "Those who learn Fortran as
> >> their
> >> > > first language are brain damaged for life". Rather harsh actually and
> >> > > taken out of context appears elitist .  OTOH, 4195 lines of
> >> essentially
> >> > > undocumented python code does look like a lot of the Fortran code the
> >> > > Electrical Engineers were writing in University while we in the Comp
> >> Sci.
> >> > > stream were writing in structured languages Algol-68.  And those were
> >> not
> >> > > for GUI type interfaces which add to complexity.
> >> > >
> >> > > For example:
> >> > > if o.canon:
> >> > > x = (o.canon.min_extents[0] + o.canon.max_extents[0])/2
> >> > > y = (o.canon.min_extents[1] + o.canon.max_extents[1])/2
> >> > > z = (o.canon.min_extents[2] + o.canon.max_extents[2])/2
> >> > > 

Re: [Emc-users] Choice of CNC conversions

[Sam Sokolik]

Lol.. let me do that again...

The Kearney and Trecker has at least 96 i\o and 5+ analog axis.  Everything
(and I mean everything) is controlled within LinuxCNC using classic ladder,
Hal and one poorly written realtime component to do the spindle shifting.
Been 100% stable for years.

Sam

On Mon, Dec 27, 2021, 5:35 PM Sam Sokolik  wrote:

> The Kearney and trecker
>
> On Mon, Dec 27, 2021, 5:33 PM Feral Engineer 
> wrote:
>
>> The pay walls, axis limits and markups on accessories are the reasons I
>> avoided centroid.
>>
>> The thing I love most about Linuxcnc is the flexibility, reliability and
>> yes, classicladder - or at least ladder based plc in general, which makes
>> it incredibly easy to figure out for someone with an industrial
>> electronics
>> background. I do miss some of the functionality of industrial controls
>> inside of LinuxCNC that I think should be implemented, but all in all,
>> it's
>> an incredible tool.
>>
>> I do think that in order for it to gain traction, it needs some more
>> "black
>> box" usability, though. As an example, an input sniffer to assign hal pins
>> to button presses on a game controller or hardware buttons on a Mesa card
>> would be kinda cool to implement.
>>
>> Phil T.
>> The Feral Engineer
>>
>> Check out my LinuxCNC tutorials, machine builds and other antics at
>> www.youtube.com/c/theferalengineer
>>
>> Help support my channel efforts and coffee addiction:
>> www.patreon.com/theferalengineer
>>
>> On Mon, Dec 27, 2021, 4:38 PM gene heskett  wrote:
>>
>> > On Sunday, December 26, 2021 1:30:42 PM EST John Dammeyer wrote:
>> > > Hi Mark,
>> > > I'll summarize your basic premise here that all machines are
>> different.
>> > > That's true!
>> > >
>> > > And MACH2/3/4 has a huge user base without ever needing a command line
>> > > editor.  So if it can be done for Windows then certainly it can be
>> done
>> > > for LCNC.
>> > >
>> > > Having said that I'm also not suggesting we do away with the
>> underbelly
>> > of
>> > > what is LCNC.   Please recall my original post in this subject.   The
>> > > ACORN based system cannot run an old iron system with existing servo
>> > > drives.  It's likely it can't even run a system with a STMBL drive
>> that
>> > > faults on low power supply voltage which mine does because I have a
>> soft
>> > > start delay on mine so ENABLE shows up before the Voltage is there.
>> > > Doesn't look like it can even do step/dir for the spindle (which MACH3
>> > > can).  So there is a place for the 'raw' LinuxCNC install and HAL/INI
>> > > file model.
>> > >
>> > > But that user I mentioned wasn't interested in learning a new OS and
>> the
>> > > ACORN was a one stop shop for the Ethernet controlled step/dir/VFD/IO
>> > > board and windows CNC software.  He went with Clearpath Servos so he
>> > > wasn't adverse to spending money.  He could just as easily have
>> installed
>> > > LCNC 2.8.2 and the MESA board with terminal strips and used the config
>> > > screens in AXIS and I suspect for less money.  But the LinuxOS itself
>> > > appeared to also scare him away so he likely would never be a user.
>> > >
>> > > I think everyone who likes using an editor for configuration and
>> issuing
>> > > multiple commands with a command line interface has already been
>> brought
>> > > over to the dark side so to speak.   They aren't the market for
>> expanding
>> > > the LCNC user base.
>> > >
>> > > I've attached a screen shot of something I've been playing with.  Took
>> > > about an hour to write using a modern GUI based software development
>> > > tool; in this case Lazarus Free Pascal.  The TCanvas Property has all
>> > > sorts of drawing tools so I thought I'd take a quick look at the Axis
>> > > source code.  To see how easy it would be to port over the Preview
>> screen
>> > > to Pascal.
>> > >
>> > > I was immediately reminded of something I written many years ago by
>> > > Nicholas Wirth the author of Pascal.  "Those who learn Fortran as
>> their
>> > > first language are brain damaged for life". Rather harsh actually and
>> > > taken out of context appears elitist .  OTOH, 4195 lines of
>> essentially
>> > > undocumented python code does look like a lot of the Fortran code the
>> > > Electrical Engineers were writing in University while we in the Comp
>> Sci.
>> > > stream were writing in structured languages Algol-68.  And those were
>> not
>> > > for GUI type interfaces which add to complexity.
>> > >
>> > > For example:
>> > > if o.canon:
>> > > x = (o.canon.min_extents[0] + o.canon.max_extents[0])/2
>> > > y = (o.canon.min_extents[1] + o.canon.max_extents[1])/2
>> > > z = (o.canon.min_extents[2] + o.canon.max_extents[2])/2
>> > > o.set_centerpoint(x, y, z)
>> > >
>> > > If you go searching for o.cannon you find:
>> > >   o.canon = canon = AxisCanon(o, widgets.text, i, progress,
>> arcdivision)
>> > >
>> > > Search for AxisCAnon and we find the object definition:
>> > > class AxisCanon(GLCanon, StatMixin):
>> > >
>> > > Now 

Re: [Emc-users] Choice of CNC conversions

[Sam Sokolik]

The Kearney and trecker

On Mon, Dec 27, 2021, 5:33 PM Feral Engineer 
wrote:

> The pay walls, axis limits and markups on accessories are the reasons I
> avoided centroid.
>
> The thing I love most about Linuxcnc is the flexibility, reliability and
> yes, classicladder - or at least ladder based plc in general, which makes
> it incredibly easy to figure out for someone with an industrial electronics
> background. I do miss some of the functionality of industrial controls
> inside of LinuxCNC that I think should be implemented, but all in all, it's
> an incredible tool.
>
> I do think that in order for it to gain traction, it needs some more "black
> box" usability, though. As an example, an input sniffer to assign hal pins
> to button presses on a game controller or hardware buttons on a Mesa card
> would be kinda cool to implement.
>
> Phil T.
> The Feral Engineer
>
> Check out my LinuxCNC tutorials, machine builds and other antics at
> www.youtube.com/c/theferalengineer
>
> Help support my channel efforts and coffee addiction:
> www.patreon.com/theferalengineer
>
> On Mon, Dec 27, 2021, 4:38 PM gene heskett  wrote:
>
> > On Sunday, December 26, 2021 1:30:42 PM EST John Dammeyer wrote:
> > > Hi Mark,
> > > I'll summarize your basic premise here that all machines are different.
> > > That's true!
> > >
> > > And MACH2/3/4 has a huge user base without ever needing a command line
> > > editor.  So if it can be done for Windows then certainly it can be done
> > > for LCNC.
> > >
> > > Having said that I'm also not suggesting we do away with the underbelly
> > of
> > > what is LCNC.   Please recall my original post in this subject.   The
> > > ACORN based system cannot run an old iron system with existing servo
> > > drives.  It's likely it can't even run a system with a STMBL drive that
> > > faults on low power supply voltage which mine does because I have a
> soft
> > > start delay on mine so ENABLE shows up before the Voltage is there.
> > > Doesn't look like it can even do step/dir for the spindle (which MACH3
> > > can).  So there is a place for the 'raw' LinuxCNC install and HAL/INI
> > > file model.
> > >
> > > But that user I mentioned wasn't interested in learning a new OS and
> the
> > > ACORN was a one stop shop for the Ethernet controlled step/dir/VFD/IO
> > > board and windows CNC software.  He went with Clearpath Servos so he
> > > wasn't adverse to spending money.  He could just as easily have
> installed
> > > LCNC 2.8.2 and the MESA board with terminal strips and used the config
> > > screens in AXIS and I suspect for less money.  But the LinuxOS itself
> > > appeared to also scare him away so he likely would never be a user.
> > >
> > > I think everyone who likes using an editor for configuration and
> issuing
> > > multiple commands with a command line interface has already been
> brought
> > > over to the dark side so to speak.   They aren't the market for
> expanding
> > > the LCNC user base.
> > >
> > > I've attached a screen shot of something I've been playing with.  Took
> > > about an hour to write using a modern GUI based software development
> > > tool; in this case Lazarus Free Pascal.  The TCanvas Property has all
> > > sorts of drawing tools so I thought I'd take a quick look at the Axis
> > > source code.  To see how easy it would be to port over the Preview
> screen
> > > to Pascal.
> > >
> > > I was immediately reminded of something I written many years ago by
> > > Nicholas Wirth the author of Pascal.  "Those who learn Fortran as their
> > > first language are brain damaged for life". Rather harsh actually and
> > > taken out of context appears elitist .  OTOH, 4195 lines of essentially
> > > undocumented python code does look like a lot of the Fortran code the
> > > Electrical Engineers were writing in University while we in the Comp
> Sci.
> > > stream were writing in structured languages Algol-68.  And those were
> not
> > > for GUI type interfaces which add to complexity.
> > >
> > > For example:
> > > if o.canon:
> > > x = (o.canon.min_extents[0] + o.canon.max_extents[0])/2
> > > y = (o.canon.min_extents[1] + o.canon.max_extents[1])/2
> > > z = (o.canon.min_extents[2] + o.canon.max_extents[2])/2
> > > o.set_centerpoint(x, y, z)
> > >
> > > If you go searching for o.cannon you find:
> > >   o.canon = canon = AxisCanon(o, widgets.text, i, progress,
> arcdivision)
> > >
> > > Search for AxisCAnon and we find the object definition:
> > > class AxisCanon(GLCanon, StatMixin):
> > >
> > > Now we're into the include side of things where the rs274 library is
> > > needed: from rs274.interpret import StatMixin
> > > from rs274.glcanon import GLCanon, GlCanonDraw
> > >
> > > which takes us to here:
> > > https://github.com/LinuxCNC/linuxcnc/blob/master/lib/python/rs274/
> > glcanon.
> > > py which is another 1886 lines of undocumented code.
> > >
> > > The excuses that will be made for no documentation will be the same
> ones
> > > given for command line operation 

Re: [Emc-users] Choice of CNC conversions

[Feral Engineer]

The pay walls, axis limits and markups on accessories are the reasons I
avoided centroid.

The thing I love most about Linuxcnc is the flexibility, reliability and
yes, classicladder - or at least ladder based plc in general, which makes
it incredibly easy to figure out for someone with an industrial electronics
background. I do miss some of the functionality of industrial controls
inside of LinuxCNC that I think should be implemented, but all in all, it's
an incredible tool.

I do think that in order for it to gain traction, it needs some more "black
box" usability, though. As an example, an input sniffer to assign hal pins
to button presses on a game controller or hardware buttons on a Mesa card
would be kinda cool to implement.

Phil T.
The Feral Engineer

Check out my LinuxCNC tutorials, machine builds and other antics at
www.youtube.com/c/theferalengineer

Help support my channel efforts and coffee addiction:
www.patreon.com/theferalengineer

On Mon, Dec 27, 2021, 4:38 PM gene heskett  wrote:

> On Sunday, December 26, 2021 1:30:42 PM EST John Dammeyer wrote:
> > Hi Mark,
> > I'll summarize your basic premise here that all machines are different.
> > That's true!
> >
> > And MACH2/3/4 has a huge user base without ever needing a command line
> > editor.  So if it can be done for Windows then certainly it can be done
> > for LCNC.
> >
> > Having said that I'm also not suggesting we do away with the underbelly
> of
> > what is LCNC.   Please recall my original post in this subject.   The
> > ACORN based system cannot run an old iron system with existing servo
> > drives.  It's likely it can't even run a system with a STMBL drive that
> > faults on low power supply voltage which mine does because I have a soft
> > start delay on mine so ENABLE shows up before the Voltage is there.
> > Doesn't look like it can even do step/dir for the spindle (which MACH3
> > can).  So there is a place for the 'raw' LinuxCNC install and HAL/INI
> > file model.
> >
> > But that user I mentioned wasn't interested in learning a new OS and the
> > ACORN was a one stop shop for the Ethernet controlled step/dir/VFD/IO
> > board and windows CNC software.  He went with Clearpath Servos so he
> > wasn't adverse to spending money.  He could just as easily have installed
> > LCNC 2.8.2 and the MESA board with terminal strips and used the config
> > screens in AXIS and I suspect for less money.  But the LinuxOS itself
> > appeared to also scare him away so he likely would never be a user.
> >
> > I think everyone who likes using an editor for configuration and issuing
> > multiple commands with a command line interface has already been brought
> > over to the dark side so to speak.   They aren't the market for expanding
> > the LCNC user base.
> >
> > I've attached a screen shot of something I've been playing with.  Took
> > about an hour to write using a modern GUI based software development
> > tool; in this case Lazarus Free Pascal.  The TCanvas Property has all
> > sorts of drawing tools so I thought I'd take a quick look at the Axis
> > source code.  To see how easy it would be to port over the Preview screen
> > to Pascal.
> >
> > I was immediately reminded of something I written many years ago by
> > Nicholas Wirth the author of Pascal.  "Those who learn Fortran as their
> > first language are brain damaged for life". Rather harsh actually and
> > taken out of context appears elitist .  OTOH, 4195 lines of essentially
> > undocumented python code does look like a lot of the Fortran code the
> > Electrical Engineers were writing in University while we in the Comp Sci.
> > stream were writing in structured languages Algol-68.  And those were not
> > for GUI type interfaces which add to complexity.
> >
> > For example:
> > if o.canon:
> > x = (o.canon.min_extents[0] + o.canon.max_extents[0])/2
> > y = (o.canon.min_extents[1] + o.canon.max_extents[1])/2
> > z = (o.canon.min_extents[2] + o.canon.max_extents[2])/2
> > o.set_centerpoint(x, y, z)
> >
> > If you go searching for o.cannon you find:
> >   o.canon = canon = AxisCanon(o, widgets.text, i, progress, arcdivision)
> >
> > Search for AxisCAnon and we find the object definition:
> > class AxisCanon(GLCanon, StatMixin):
> >
> > Now we're into the include side of things where the rs274 library is
> > needed: from rs274.interpret import StatMixin
> > from rs274.glcanon import GLCanon, GlCanonDraw
> >
> > which takes us to here:
> > https://github.com/LinuxCNC/linuxcnc/blob/master/lib/python/rs274/
> glcanon.
> > py which is another 1886 lines of undocumented code.
> >
> > The excuses that will be made for no documentation will be the same ones
> > given for command line operation of Linux and LCNC.   It's much better
> > than windows or it's self documenting. You just have to learn a few
> > commands and you can do so much more than with windows
> >
> > I believe we need to step outside the box and ask ourselves this
> question.
> >  How can we attract more 

Re: [Emc-users] Choice of CNC conversions

[gene heskett]

On Sunday, December 26, 2021 1:30:42 PM EST John Dammeyer wrote:
> Hi Mark,
> I'll summarize your basic premise here that all machines are different.  
> That's true!
> 
> And MACH2/3/4 has a huge user base without ever needing a command line
> editor.  So if it can be done for Windows then certainly it can be done
> for LCNC.
> 
> Having said that I'm also not suggesting we do away with the underbelly 
of
> what is LCNC.   Please recall my original post in this subject.   The
> ACORN based system cannot run an old iron system with existing servo
> drives.  It's likely it can't even run a system with a STMBL drive that
> faults on low power supply voltage which mine does because I have a soft
> start delay on mine so ENABLE shows up before the Voltage is there. 
> Doesn't look like it can even do step/dir for the spindle (which MACH3
> can).  So there is a place for the 'raw' LinuxCNC install and HAL/INI
> file model.
> 
> But that user I mentioned wasn't interested in learning a new OS and the
> ACORN was a one stop shop for the Ethernet controlled step/dir/VFD/IO
> board and windows CNC software.  He went with Clearpath Servos so he
> wasn't adverse to spending money.  He could just as easily have installed
> LCNC 2.8.2 and the MESA board with terminal strips and used the config
> screens in AXIS and I suspect for less money.  But the LinuxOS itself
> appeared to also scare him away so he likely would never be a user.
> 
> I think everyone who likes using an editor for configuration and issuing
> multiple commands with a command line interface has already been brought
> over to the dark side so to speak.   They aren't the market for expanding
> the LCNC user base.
> 
> I've attached a screen shot of something I've been playing with.  Took
> about an hour to write using a modern GUI based software development
> tool; in this case Lazarus Free Pascal.  The TCanvas Property has all
> sorts of drawing tools so I thought I'd take a quick look at the Axis
> source code.  To see how easy it would be to port over the Preview screen
> to Pascal.
> 
> I was immediately reminded of something I written many years ago by
> Nicholas Wirth the author of Pascal.  "Those who learn Fortran as their
> first language are brain damaged for life". Rather harsh actually and
> taken out of context appears elitist .  OTOH, 4195 lines of essentially
> undocumented python code does look like a lot of the Fortran code the
> Electrical Engineers were writing in University while we in the Comp Sci.
> stream were writing in structured languages Algol-68.  And those were not
> for GUI type interfaces which add to complexity.
> 
> For example:
> if o.canon:
> x = (o.canon.min_extents[0] + o.canon.max_extents[0])/2
> y = (o.canon.min_extents[1] + o.canon.max_extents[1])/2
> z = (o.canon.min_extents[2] + o.canon.max_extents[2])/2
> o.set_centerpoint(x, y, z)
> 
> If you go searching for o.cannon you find:
>   o.canon = canon = AxisCanon(o, widgets.text, i, progress, arcdivision)
> 
> Search for AxisCAnon and we find the object definition:
> class AxisCanon(GLCanon, StatMixin):
> 
> Now we're into the include side of things where the rs274 library is
> needed: from rs274.interpret import StatMixin
> from rs274.glcanon import GLCanon, GlCanonDraw
> 
> which takes us to here:
> https://github.com/LinuxCNC/linuxcnc/blob/master/lib/python/rs274/
glcanon.
> py which is another 1886 lines of undocumented code.
> 
> The excuses that will be made for no documentation will be the same ones
> given for command line operation of Linux and LCNC.   It's much better
> than windows or it's self documenting. You just have to learn a few
> commands and you can do so much more than with windows
> 
> I believe we need to step outside the box and ask ourselves this 
question.
>  How can we attract more people who just want simple CNC (maybe without
> limit switches even), a VFD and encoder on the spindle and possibly
> coolant or a few other outputs.
> 
> One really simple way is that the companies (or people) building the
> intelligent CNC controls like the MESA change their web sites to have at
> least one menu choice for "SimpleCNC".
> 
> I went here:
> http://wiki.linuxcnc.org/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?LinuxCNC_Supported_Hardware
> 
> Eventually with more Google searching I ended up here:
> http://store.mesanet.com/index.php?route=product/
product_id=290
> arch=7i76e

That is a very nice board, I use 2 of them myself, but not in the E 
version. I use the much cheaper parport version. Why? I refuse to give up 
my only ethernet port just to carve metal. The net access is much much more 
useful to me.

> That link to the page I think would be best right at the top of the MESA
> site.  And on that page should be a link to a page with a pictorial
> connection diagram like:
> https://www.centroidcnc.com/centroid_diy/acorn_cnc_controller.html

For the basic, get you hooked, system that's not a bad price. But some of 
the accessories clearly have a 

Re: [Emc-users] Choice of CNC conversions

[John Dammeyer]

> From: Stuart Stevenson [mailto:stus...@gmail.com]
> LinuxCNC is not Staples. There is no Big Red easy button.
Doesn't mean that there can't be a Big Red easy button for a basic install.

> A lot of words to say this. The LinuxCNC developers (past and present) give
> their time and effort to this project. I offer a hearty THANK YOU and
> appreciate the base I have with which to help achieve my goals.

I too offer a THANK YOU and do wish to say if I haven't said it clearly enough 
I am very impressed with the system.  The more I dig into it the more I see the 
thought that has gone into the internals.

I forget which Comp. Sci book I found this in but it was a cross reference 
table with I think 5 columns and 5 rows with the same entries.
Speed of Operation, Code Readability, Documentation, Code Size, Speed of 
Development.

The table showed that many of the items are mutually exclusive.  

You can't always have fast code and also small code.  As an example, for the 
programmers reading this, unrolling loops into linear sequences is faster but 
takes more space.  A jump table for a switch/case statement with 256 possible 
choices and 7 entries is also faster than the compiled if then elseif then 
elseif that a switch/case statement becomes.

Want it developed fast?  Might not be efficient, readable, documented, fast or 
small code size but you did get it yesterday instead of two months from now.

And so on...

When the volunteers write LinuxCNC code their world is that of a Linux expert 
and so likely never look up the syntax for the basic file find at the command 
line.  And if they add the --help or is it -help or is it -? Or --? Well 
eventually the amateur stumbles on the help screen that quickly scrolls by.  
Luckily they can usually use the slider to look at the previous 4 pages that 
scrolled by way too fast.  Hang on... wasn't there a 'more'  or something like 
that.  After 20 minutes on the internet they've found the example... and have 
forgotten why they wanted it.

Me, I type the file I want into the search box on the GUI interface.   And with 
respect to coding you will generally find that the 12 core processor means you 
can use an interpreted language that runs as fast as the compiled one on the 
older 1 core processor. So technology, if you wait long enough allows that 
quick development with Python and blazing fast speed of compiled C or machine 
language, which are usually mutually exclusive.

Anyway,  something to think about.  If we set up a rule for LinuxCNC that 
stated a program isn't complete until it can be understood without external 
help files, documents and web pages that are out of date the moment joints are 
added to axis in the HAL file we might see better code?  Probably not but it's 
on my I wish list...

Have a happy and safe New Year.
John



> Stuart



___
Emc-users mailing list
Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users

Re: [Emc-users] Choice of CNC conversions

[Stuart Stevenson]

Heh - this has been a fun read!

My first experience on a retrofit was on the little sister to the Blue
Cinci I put LinuxCNC on. Around 1998/99 I put OpenCNC on the Cinci's I had.
When I had the first one up and running we had a Fanuc tech in the shop
working on one of the machines. In conversation he wanted to see the
OpenCNC control. Of course I was more than happy to show him. As he watched
the screens booting up his jaw dropped. He said the screens looked just
like a Fanuc control booting up (prior to what the user sees when starting
a machine). The underlying operating system was QNX. Then OpenCNC
transitioned to a Windows based Venturecom RTOS.
No matter the preferred OS everyone is just manipulating 1's and 0's to
reach a personal goal. Unix, QNX, MSDOS, BSD, ...  There happens to be a
few more than a couple flavors of Linux to provide paths to a goal.
Don't forget Android! It sounds like the exact goal of many people and it
happens to be! Buy it, turn it on, use it.
Almost like a printer no? And Windows for a machine to surf the internet
and check email.
My point is this whole thread talks about various goals and the paths to
achieve said goals. When someone asks for help reaching a goal and their
answer to the suggestion to use the command line is "What is a command
line?" you know their skill level to delve into the bowels of software is
limited. Someone put a lot of effort and money into Android to create the
ultimate turn on and play Linux platform and I thank them for doing that.
Virtually every software solution is almost closed if not completely
closed. Linux is open and you can do with it whatever you have the personal
capability to make it do. I originally thought OpenCNC was open. Heh, not
on your life. The software was completely closed. They had a VERY SHORT
list of computer hardware to choose from and a short list of connecting
components to choose from. You were not tied to a certain brand but they
had closed drivers for a few brands. Not very open.
Then I found EMC/EMC2/LinuxCNC! Now that is OPEN! Just as with
anything, the more capability inside the longer the learning curve. This is
the only stumbling block of LinuxCNC. It will do anything but it is not
automatic.
NCL by NCCS is the CAM software I choose to use. A NCL guru friend of mine
says he has an IFM button on the bottom of his keyboard. When someone using
any other CAM systems asks how he programs a particularly difficult part
his response is the IFM button. What is IFM you ask? It's F-in Magic. NCL
is not open source but the writer gives the operator access to all math
functions and macros/do loop et al and C language capabilities that allows
you manipulate the outcome in any fashion "you are able to". The full
capability of NCL is by using the command line. It is possible to use point
and click in NCL (like many other CAM software packages) to program parts.
This method is limited by what functions are available in icons. When the
icon limitation is reached the programmer is done or needs to enter the
command line mode. NCL gives you that option but it comes at the cost of
the learning curve. LinuxCNC is like that. Unlimited but not free and easy.
LinuxCNC is not Staples. There is no Big Red easy button.
A lot of words to say this. The LinuxCNC developers (past and present) give
their time and effort to this project. I offer a hearty THANK YOU and
appreciate the base I have with which to help achieve my goals.
Since I retired I have been busier than a one armed paper hanger. I thought
this was going to ease up a couple months ago. I was wrong. I am busier
than ever. Hopefully, this will ease in a couple more months as I have a
number of projects to work on including a couple in LinuxCNC.
thanks for reading this wall of text
Stuart


On Mon, Dec 27, 2021 at 5:55 AM Gregg Eshelman via Emc-users <
emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net> wrote:

> I used to want a Denford ORAC but I found a forum thread where someone
> took one apart to refurbish it and it's just a modified clone of the EMCO
> 8x20, which has also been widely cloned as the common 9x20 with a 1/2"
> increase in center height. For the ORAC the back end of the cross slide is
> cut off so the back of the enclosure doesn't have to be back so far, but
> that limits how far back the slide can be moved.
>
> What would be nifty in an ORAC is to replace the car stereo with one of
> those DIN1 sized MP3 players and fit it with a waterproof shield made for
> use in a boat. Yes, the Denford ORAC is the only metal lathe to be equipped
> with a car stereo and speakers. The reason for it was to play the
> instructional cassette tapes that came with the lathe. No reason one
> couldn't play their favorite tunes while the lathe is running.
>
> The EMCO Compact 5 is limited by it's 75 step per rotation stepper motors.
> Many owners toss them and all the electronics then retrofit with 180 step
> motors. There was a company that made an add-on circuit board called the
> WELTURN (and 

Re: [Emc-users] Choice of CNC conversions

[John Dammeyer]

> From: Mark [mailto:wendt.m...@gmail.com]
> > The excuses that will be made for no documentation will be the same ones 
> > given for command line operation of Linux and LCNC.
> It's much better than windows or it's self documenting. You just have to 
> learn a few commands and you can do so much more than
> with windows
> 
> You'll get no arguments from me on the documentation.  I waded through
> all that stuff thinking I was in way over my head.  Thank god for the
> IRC at the time and the knowledgeable and very helpful folks that seemed
> like they lived there and helped me get my machine set up and running.
> Self documentation is nonsense.  It's just laziness when someone doesn't
> want to take the time to document their work.  Been there, had to create
> documentation where none existed before in my last job as a sysadmin for
> DoD. My predecessor was a firm believer in self documenting.  Whether or
> not Linux or Unix is better than Windows?  After sysadmining both
> systems for close to 30 years, it's hands down Linux and Unix are a much
> better, more secure and more robust OS than Windows could ever be.  Why
> do you think Apple went to BSD Unix for it's back end?
> 
> Mark

The point of this thread is not to get into a discussion which (invisible to 
the end user) OS is better or whether say Linux on LCNC is better as the 
underlying OS than say FreeRTOS.  I don't care that Apple uses BSD Unix or my 
Samsung tablet and Phone use Linux.  My wife has yet to, or even know how to 
use the command line on her MacBook.  I've not had to use the command line on 
my tablet or phone either.

The point I'd like to stress is MACH3 is used on a lot of machines with an 
older OS that still supports parallel ports, be they plug in the bus or on the 
Motherboard.  And for the simple machines are easy to set up and run.  I know 
one user who doesn't even have limit or home switches and LCNC can be set up 
exactly the same way.Or install a USB or Ethernet Smooth Stepper (I have 
the USB one for the CNC router) and get higher step rates etc than the parallel 
ports.

So one buys a cheap Break-out Board from China, used PC that runs WIN-XP, 
changes the call home for registration parameter and sets up with dialog boxes 
their machine and is running code quickly.  No one cares that it's running 
windows really other than for getting at the G-Code files.

Now to add a touch plate with a dialog that reminds one to remove the clip lead 
from the CNC Bosch Colt router bit (mine does that) is VBasic.  So even with 
that machine I went outside the box.  But one screen already has center and 
edge finding applications ready to go.  And if you need to talk to ModBus there 
are provisions for easily adding it as well as various Pendants.

So I'll admit.  I have a CNC Router set up with MACH3, USB Smooth Stepper, 
Older PMDX-125 Break out board with custom headers specifically for the USB  or 
Ethernet Smooth Stepper and a box with stepper drivers along with a SSR box 
with an AC socket for the Router Power.  Only the Z axis has Home switch at the 
highest point and Limit switch with an adjustable trip point for the bottom 
closest to the table.  The XY have only a home switch also set up as a limit on 
one end.  None on the other end.

When I use my CNC Router I'm in the Windows world.  When I use my Mill I'm in 
the LCNC world.  When I use my South Bend I'm using my ELS with only once axis 
controlled so it's mostly manual but I can cut metric threads and bore to 
non-visible depths without worrying about a crash.

Because the source code isn't available for MACH3 or Windows the environment is 
set up so one doesn't need to use an editor to try and figure out how it works. 
 I suspect the same will be with the ACORN software that runs apparently only 
on windows.

However, power up the system and run the CNC Software,  I plug in a USB stick 
with the G-Code, drag and drop the files into a specific folder on the machine, 
load the G-Code into the CNC program and then first Home the hardware and do 
whatever touch off is needed to set the point where I will run the G-Code.  

For the job at hand what the OS is doesn't matter.  In fact, what the CNC 
software is doesn't matter.  

As an example of the design and build process to reuse LED lights:
http://www.autoartisans.com/GardenLights/BollardSimulation1.jpg
The reflector is designed to redirect the LED light out in a 3' radius from the 
installed height while keeping the lamp in the more water resistance position.  
This was done on the CNC router with MACH3.
http://www.autoartisans.com/GardenLights/ReflectorReadyForFinishing.jpg
And then painted.
http://www.autoartisans.com/GardenLights/ReflectorPainted1.jpg
and some testing with the lamp set for Halloween Pumpkin Orange.
http://www.autoartisans.com/GardenLights/BollardLightHalloween2.jpg

I have cast just one out of Aluminium so far with some clean up machining done 
on the mill with LCNC.  I'm thinking to 

Re: [Emc-users] Choice of CNC conversions

[Gregg Eshelman via Emc-users]

I used to want a Denford ORAC but I found a forum thread where someone took one 
apart to refurbish it and it's just a modified clone of the EMCO 8x20, which 
has also been widely cloned as the common 9x20 with a 1/2" increase in center 
height. For the ORAC the back end of the cross slide is cut off so the back of 
the enclosure doesn't have to be back so far, but that limits how far back the 
slide can be moved.

What would be nifty in an ORAC is to replace the car stereo with one of those 
DIN1 sized MP3 players and fit it with a waterproof shield made for use in a 
boat. Yes, the Denford ORAC is the only metal lathe to be equipped with a car 
stereo and speakers. The reason for it was to play the instructional cassette 
tapes that came with the lathe. No reason one couldn't play their favorite 
tunes while the lathe is running.

The EMCO Compact 5 is limited by it's 75 step per rotation stepper motors. Many 
owners toss them and all the electronics then retrofit with 180 step motors. 
There was a company that made an add-on circuit board called the WELTURN (and 
WELMILL for EMCO's CNC milling machines). I assume one would be nice if you 
wanted to retain the original hardware and improve it, but try finding a 
WELTURN or WELMILL board. Even if you can, how likely is it to work with LCNC 
or other modern CNC software?
If you're intending to work with the original electronics, the EMCO Compact 5 
came in a standalone version that went through several revisions, with the last 
being the best. Then there was the Compact 5 PC which connected to a PC for 
controlling it. In any case the Compact 5 is a *very light* lathe though much 
"beefier" than the tiny aluminum ones, the name of which currently eludes me. 
The bed is made from an aluminum extrusion and the parts and pieces have been 
used by many companies to make tiny "instructional" CNC machines after 
companies like ProLight, Intellitek, Denford, Emco etc bowed out of that 
market, went out of business, or discontinued their quite capable benctop CNC 
machines to build wee ones from that company's parts bin.

   On Sunday, December 26, 2021, 08:24:15 AM MST, Andy Pugh 
 wrote:  
> On 26 Dec 2021, at 13:44, Mark  wrote:
> 
>> stallation or do a number of standard operations.
> 
> Sure.  As long as you can guarantee that every single machine manufactured, 
> designed, built in someones garage or basement will be identical to each and 
> every other machine out there.

To get back to the original subject if this thread:

I think that could be done for some hardware. 
Emco Compact 5
Denford Orac
Maho MH500?
Any other suggestions? 

ie, reasonably common machines with reasonably fixed hardware.  
___
Emc-users mailing list
Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users

Re: [Emc-users] Choice of CNC conversions

[Mark]

On 12/26/21 1:30 PM, John Dammeyer wrote:


Hi Mark,
I'll summarize your basic premise here that all machines are different.   
That's true!

And MACH2/3/4 has a huge user base without ever needing a command line editor.  
So if it can be done for Windows then certainly it can be done for LCNC.

And I thought Mach used VB to get certain things done certain ways?


Having said that I'm also not suggesting we do away with the underbelly of what 
is LCNC.   Please recall my original post in this subject.   The ACORN based 
system cannot run an old iron system with existing servo drives.  It's likely 
it can't even run a system with a STMBL drive that faults on low power supply 
voltage which mine does because I have a soft start delay on mine so ENABLE 
shows up before the Voltage is there.  Doesn't look like it can even do 
step/dir for the spindle (which MACH3 can).  So there is a place for the 'raw' 
LinuxCNC install and HAL/INI file model.

But that user I mentioned wasn't interested in learning a new OS and the ACORN 
was a one stop shop for the Ethernet controlled step/dir/VFD/IO board and 
windows CNC software.  He went with Clearpath Servos so he wasn't adverse to 
spending money.  He could just as easily have installed LCNC 2.8.2 and the MESA 
board with terminal strips and used the config screens in AXIS and I suspect 
for less money.  But the LinuxOS itself appeared to also scare him away so he 
likely would never be a user.

Did he look at Pathpilot?


I think everyone who likes using an editor for configuration and issuing 
multiple commands with a command line interface has already been brought over 
to the dark side so to speak.   They aren't the market for expanding the LCNC 
user base.

I've attached a screen shot of something I've been playing with.  Took about an 
hour to write using a modern GUI based software development tool; in this case 
Lazarus Free Pascal.  The TCanvas Property has all sorts of drawing tools so I 
thought I'd take a quick look at the Axis source code.  To see how easy it 
would be to port over the Preview screen to Pascal.

I was immediately reminded of something I written many years ago by Nicholas Wirth the 
author of Pascal.  "Those who learn Fortran as their first language are brain 
damaged for life". Rather harsh actually and taken out of context appears elitist .  
OTOH, 4195 lines of essentially undocumented python code does look like a lot of the 
Fortran code the Electrical Engineers were writing in University while we in the Comp 
Sci. stream were writing in structured languages Algol-68.  And those were not for GUI 
type interfaces which add to complexity.

For example:
if o.canon:
 x = (o.canon.min_extents[0] + o.canon.max_extents[0])/2
 y = (o.canon.min_extents[1] + o.canon.max_extents[1])/2
 z = (o.canon.min_extents[2] + o.canon.max_extents[2])/2
 o.set_centerpoint(x, y, z)

If you go searching for o.cannon you find:
   o.canon = canon = AxisCanon(o, widgets.text, i, progress, arcdivision)

Search for AxisCAnon and we find the object definition:
class AxisCanon(GLCanon, StatMixin):

Now we're into the include side of things where the rs274 library is needed:
from rs274.interpret import StatMixin
from rs274.glcanon import GLCanon, GlCanonDraw

which takes us to here:
https://github.com/LinuxCNC/linuxcnc/blob/master/lib/python/rs274/glcanon.py
which is another 1886 lines of undocumented code.

The excuses that will be made for no documentation will be the same ones given 
for command line operation of Linux and LCNC.   It's much better than windows 
or it's self documenting. You just have to learn a few commands and you can do 
so much more than with windows


You'll get no arguments from me on the documentation.  I waded through 
all that stuff thinking I was in way over my head.  Thank god for the 
IRC at the time and the knowledgeable and very helpful folks that seemed 
like they lived there and helped me get my machine set up and running.  
Self documentation is nonsense.  It's just laziness when someone doesn't 
want to take the time to document their work.  Been there, had to create 
documentation where none existed before in my last job as a sysadmin for 
DoD. My predecessor was a firm believer in self documenting.  Whether or 
not Linux or Unix is better than Windows?  After sysadmining both 
systems for close to 30 years, it's hands down Linux and Unix are a much 
better, more secure and more robust OS than Windows could ever be.  Why 
do you think Apple went to BSD Unix for it's back end?


Mark



___
Emc-users mailing list
Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users

Re: [Emc-users] Choice of CNC conversions

[Bari]

Just fill in more blanks for them.


We could use a technical editor in charge of new users.


On 12/26/21 17:02, John Dammeyer wrote:

As is this one:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8LVX380iDIk
which includes how to do some python programming calculations.
Again for those who want to dive that deep, they are already using LCNC.

John



-Original Message-
From: Bari [mailto:bari00...@gmail.com]
Sent: December-26-21 2:28 PM
To: emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net
Subject: Re: [Emc-users] Choice of CNC conversions

On 12/26/21 09:22, Andy Pugh wrote:


To get back to the original subject if this thread:

I think that could be done for some hardware.
Emco Compact 5
Denford Orac
Maho MH500?
Any other suggestions?

ie, reasonably common machines with reasonably fixed hardware.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_8YSwfjLWLU


A good example of filling in the blanks for beginners.



___
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



___
Emc-users mailing list
Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users

Re: [Emc-users] Choice of CNC conversions

[John Dammeyer]

As is this one:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8LVX380iDIk
which includes how to do some python programming calculations.  
Again for those who want to dive that deep, they are already using LCNC.

John


> -Original Message-
> From: Bari [mailto:bari00...@gmail.com]
> Sent: December-26-21 2:28 PM
> To: emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net
> Subject: Re: [Emc-users] Choice of CNC conversions
> 
> On 12/26/21 09:22, Andy Pugh wrote:
> 
> >
> > To get back to the original subject if this thread:
> >
> > I think that could be done for some hardware.
> > Emco Compact 5
> > Denford Orac
> > Maho MH500?
> > Any other suggestions?
> >
> > ie, reasonably common machines with reasonably fixed hardware.
> >
> 
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_8YSwfjLWLU
> 
> 
> A good example of filling in the blanks for beginners.
> 
> 
> 
> ___
> 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] Choice of CNC conversions

[Bari]

On 12/26/21 09:22, Andy Pugh wrote:



To get back to the original subject if this thread:

I think that could be done for some hardware.
Emco Compact 5
Denford Orac
Maho MH500?
Any other suggestions?

ie, reasonably common machines with reasonably fixed hardware.



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_8YSwfjLWLU


A good example of filling in the blanks for beginners.



___
Emc-users mailing list
Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users

Re: [Emc-users] Choice of CNC conversions

[Bari]

Have you considered adding to the LCNC wiki or adding your Youtube links 
to help those just starting out in CNC?



___
Emc-users mailing list
Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users

Re: [Emc-users] Choice of CNC conversions

[John Dammeyer]

From: Mark [mailto:wendt.m...@gmail.com]
> Sent: December-26-21 5:41 AM
> To: emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net
> Subject: Re: [Emc-users] Choice of CNC conversions
> 
> On 12/25/21 12:59 PM, John Dammeyer wrote
> 
> > LinuxCNC is a GNU user space component until you add the Real Time side of 
> > things to provide determinism which then makes it
> again a combination of GNU/Linux with a user space component that is LCNC 
> with a variety of user interfaces.
> >
> > And my point of starting this discussion thread was to point out that the 
> > LCNC that we work with could be on a lot more hobby
> systems if the user interface and installation was upgraded to
> _Never_ever_have_to_use_the_command_line_or_text_editors_to_handle_or_modify_installation
>  or do a number of standard
> operations.
> Sure.� As long as you can guarantee that every single machine
> manufactured, designed, built in someones garage or basement will be
> identical to each and every other machine out there.
> > And before someone else brings it up I totally agree that entering G-Codes;
> > http://linuxcnc.org/docs/html/gui/axis.html#_mdi
> > or working with G-Code programs requires a text editor.  That�s true of any 
> > proper CNC system at some level.
> 
> A lot of us prefer to set up and maintain computing systems via the
> system's config files.� I've been around Unix and Linux long enough I
> prefer vi most of the time.� Other's prefer emacs.� Why even discuss a
> tool that comes standard with the OS?
> 
> 
> >
> > The best example I can think of is my new touch probe.  It has a light.  I 
> > can use the jog/mpg method to move the axis and watch
> the LED in the probe come on and then set 0.  Jog to the other side and touch 
> off.  Then use the calculator to determine the
> midpoint, jog to that and set zero position.  Been doing that with my DRO-350 
> for years other than it has a FCN button that
> automatically sets the zero for me when it reaches the second touch point and 
> is electrically connected to the probe input on the
> DRO-350 hardware.
> 
> John, I've been using a DRO-350 and a DRO-550 for years on my other
> machines in the shop that are not CNC.� Can't compare them though.� They
> are not motion controllers.� They're digital readout systems that have
> some nice mathematical capabilities.� Now you are talking about a touch
> off widget/program.� Someone had to write the code for that either for
> LCNC or any other motion controller and make it compatible with whatever
> controller it's being used on.
> 
> > But with this screen
> > https://github.com/verser-git/probe_screen_v2
> > most of what is needed is done automatically.  Unfortunately it still 
> > requires editing the INI and HAL files and somethings don't
> automatically work correctly.
> Aren't you glad you have a text editor to do that?� Better than compile,
> run till break, debug, recompile, run till break, wash rinse repeat,
> especially for a large executable.
> >
> >
> > Contrast that with the much less powerful MACH3 system where you select 
> > from the menu "Config/Ports and Pins/Input
> Signals/Probe".  And then there is simple touch off operations under 
> "Offsets(Alt-5)"  Other MACH3 screens are possibly more
> sophisticated.
> >
> > And perhaps the best example of all is the Tormach LCNC interface which 
> > also simplifies things because in this case the*_hardware
> is known._*
> Underlining and bolding is mine� The three key words.� Like I mentioned
> above, all is possible if all machines in the world run the same
> identical electronics, same identical mechanicals and are known to the
> manufacturer from the get go.� How much you want to bet the programmers
> that developed PathPilot around their machines, with known hardware,
> still had to do a bit of editing of Hal and ini files to get the final
> product running and ready for production? And that's because like you
> said, the hardware is known.� But it was unknown until the developers
> put the Pathpilot package together.
> >
> > So if you are content with command line/editor operations great.  I'm happy 
> > it's working for you.  But if we want more users
> involved in the LCNC community something has to change.
> 
> Not really.� If you want something changed, do it, get it to work, and
> if the head developers think it's worthwhile, they'll include it in the
> distribution.� But expecting a large software project such as this to
> come hard to port just to satisfy the whims of a few users is nonsense.
> 
> IMNSHO.
> 
> Mark
> 
> >
> > IMHO.
> >
> > John Dammeyer
> >
> >
> &

Re: [Emc-users] Choice of CNC conversions

[Robin Szemeti via Emc-users]

The Bridgeport "Interact" series? Readily available on Fleabay and not
stupid money either.

On Sun, 26 Dec 2021 at 15:22, Andy Pugh  wrote:

>
>
> > On 26 Dec 2021, at 13:44, Mark  wrote:
> >
> >> stallation or do a number of standard operations.
> >
> > Sure.  As long as you can guarantee that every single machine
> manufactured, designed, built in someones garage or basement will be
> identical to each and every other machine out there.
>
> To get back to the original subject if this thread:
>
> I think that could be done for some hardware.
> Emco Compact 5
> Denford Orac
> Maho MH500?
> Any other suggestions?
>
> ie, reasonably common machines with reasonably fixed hardware.
>
>
>
> ___
> 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] Choice of CNC conversions

[Andy Pugh]

> On 26 Dec 2021, at 13:44, Mark  wrote:
> 
>> stallation or do a number of standard operations.
> 
> Sure.  As long as you can guarantee that every single machine manufactured, 
> designed, built in someones garage or basement will be identical to each and 
> every other machine out there.

To get back to the original subject if this thread:

I think that could be done for some hardware. 
Emco Compact 5
Denford Orac
Maho MH500?
Any other suggestions? 

ie, reasonably common machines with reasonably fixed hardware. 



___
Emc-users mailing list
Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users

Re: [Emc-users] Choice of CNC conversions

[Mark]

On 12/25/21 12:59 PM, John Dammeyer wrote


LinuxCNC is a GNU user space component until you add the Real Time side of 
things to provide determinism which then makes it again a combination of 
GNU/Linux with a user space component that is LCNC with a variety of user 
interfaces.

And my point of starting this discussion thread was to point out that the LCNC 
that we work with could be on a lot more hobby systems if the user interface 
and installation was upgraded to 
_Never_ever_have_to_use_the_command_line_or_text_editors_to_handle_or_modify_installation
 or do a number of standard operations.
Sure.  As long as you can guarantee that every single machine 
manufactured, designed, built in someones garage or basement will be 
identical to each and every other machine out there.

And before someone else brings it up I totally agree that entering G-Codes;
http://linuxcnc.org/docs/html/gui/axis.html#_mdi
or working with G-Code programs requires a text editor.  That’s true of any 
proper CNC system at some level.


A lot of us prefer to set up and maintain computing systems via the 
system's config files.  I've been around Unix and Linux long enough I 
prefer vi most of the time.  Other's prefer emacs.  Why even discuss a 
tool that comes standard with the OS?





The best example I can think of is my new touch probe.  It has a light.  I can 
use the jog/mpg method to move the axis and watch the LED in the probe come on 
and then set 0.  Jog to the other side and touch off.  Then use the calculator 
to determine the midpoint, jog to that and set zero position.  Been doing that 
with my DRO-350 for years other than it has a FCN button that automatically 
sets the zero for me when it reaches the second touch point and is electrically 
connected to the probe input on the DRO-350 hardware.


John, I've been using a DRO-350 and a DRO-550 for years on my other 
machines in the shop that are not CNC.  Can't compare them though.  They 
are not motion controllers.  They're digital readout systems that have 
some nice mathematical capabilities.  Now you are talking about a touch 
off widget/program.  Someone had to write the code for that either for 
LCNC or any other motion controller and make it compatible with whatever 
controller it's being used on.



But with this screen
https://github.com/verser-git/probe_screen_v2
most of what is needed is done automatically.  Unfortunately it still requires 
editing the INI and HAL files and somethings don't automatically work correctly.
Aren't you glad you have a text editor to do that?  Better than compile, 
run till break, debug, recompile, run till break, wash rinse repeat, 
especially for a large executable.
  


Contrast that with the much less powerful MACH3 system where you select from the menu 
"Config/Ports and Pins/Input Signals/Probe".  And then there is simple touch off 
operations under "Offsets(Alt-5)"  Other MACH3 screens are possibly more sophisticated.

And perhaps the best example of all is the Tormach LCNC interface which also 
simplifies things because in this case the*_hardware is known._*
Underlining and bolding is mine  The three key words.  Like I mentioned 
above, all is possible if all machines in the world run the same 
identical electronics, same identical mechanicals and are known to the 
manufacturer from the get go.  How much you want to bet the programmers 
that developed PathPilot around their machines, with known hardware, 
still had to do a bit of editing of Hal and ini files to get the final 
product running and ready for production? And that's because like you 
said, the hardware is known.  But it was unknown until the developers 
put the Pathpilot package together.


So if you are content with command line/editor operations great.  I'm happy 
it's working for you.  But if we want more users involved in the LCNC community 
something has to change.


Not really.  If you want something changed, do it, get it to work, and 
if the head developers think it's worthwhile, they'll include it in the 
distribution.  But expecting a large software project such as this to 
come hard to port just to satisfy the whims of a few users is nonsense.


IMNSHO.

Mark



IMHO.

John Dammeyer






___
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] Choice of CNC conversions

[gene heskett]

On Saturday, December 25, 2021 1:01:03 PM EST dave engvall wrote:
> I'd be lost w/o a command line editor. vi may be vile but vim can be
> surprising useful. My feeble brain still can't get configurations that
> work with a gui type  configure.  I'll gladly take a framework and
> modifiy it to suit my needs. Wish list: smoother motion probably via
> sine wave, moderate look a head and a screaming fast rt in a dedicated
> rt chip. Properly done the motion module doesn't change much but a lot
> of task stuff wrapped around it does and that allow improvements as the
> focus of the programmers changes. Just my tuppence devalued by inflation.
> 
> Dave

Good to see you survived Christmas dinner. I'm considering a piece of WV 
backstrap given about an hour at 30% in the microwave. Goodies to go with, 
looks like road stew, pull open the freezer door and pull out whatever's in 
the road.

I see where Mike Galbraith gave a recent version of the preempt-rt kernal a 
thumbs up on arms so I've marked that msg and recipe list, and I'll be 
collecting the pieces to build it on my rpi4 in the next few days. I need to 
see about upgrading my own rpi4 install to bullseye myself. Raspian bullseye 
installed on your cards already.  But big computer problems here, my main 
drive in this machine puked all over itself on the 2nd and I'm still digging 
around  in a bullseye install on a raid10 using SSD's which is lightning fast 
but the new KDE is still not quite ready for prime time. And my new glasses 
aren't ready yet either.

So you nd Barb take care till I've got some news on your front.

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, 1940)
If we desire respect for the law, we must first make the law respectable.
 - Louis D. Brandeis
Genes Web page 





___
Emc-users mailing list
Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users

Re: [Emc-users] Choice of CNC conversions

[dave engvall]

I'd be lost w/o a command line editor. vi may be vile but vim can be 
surprising useful. My feeble brain still can't get configurations that 
work with a gui type  configure.  I'll gladly take a framework and 
modifiy it to suit my needs. Wish list: smoother motion probably via 
sine wave, moderate look a head and a screaming fast rt in a dedicated 
rt chip. Properly done the motion module doesn't change much but a lot 
of task stuff wrapped around it does and that allow improvements as the 
focus of the programmers changes. Just my tuppence devalued by inflation.


Dave


On 12/25/21 1:40 AM, gene heskett wrote:

On Friday, December 24, 2021 6:47:33 PM EST John Dammeyer wrote:

I think we perhaps need to take a step back before this turns into a series
of unworkable positions.

[...]

The basic setup screens for LinuxCNC for either parallel port or Peter's
MESA stuff is amazing and simple until you need to step outside the box.
And I think, if I were to summarize this I'd say software needs to be
designed so the command line editor is never ever used.  Those two sets of
config screen sets are what have allowed most people to set up LinuxCNC.
Take those away, tell them they have to write the HAL and INI file from
scratch and watch them run, quickly, to alternate systems.

What am I?  Cat food? John, that box your are complaining about is one heck of
a big box. I might run  the config ONCE when bringing a new machine to life,
from then on anything I do to that machine is done with geany, the text
editor.  The ONLY problem I've had is a reticence on the part of the
developers to add a pin or 9 to allow me to fully use a feature I built into
the pi controller on that Sheldon, in a fool proof 100% automatic way.

For instance, I put a pair of $20 mpja encoder dials, 100 ppr quadrature
output gizmos, so I can drive that Sheldon by hand just as if it still had
hand cranks. And they are many many times more convenient to setup a touch off
point than any keyboard or mouse driven method, unlike the keyboard or mice
they seem to talk directly to the hardware, with no lags like the keyboard or
mouse imposes on the accuracy as I can directly dial up a touchoff to within .
0001" or .001mm in metric mode. The machine is not that accurate but the
electronics is.

But one huge usability problem. Using the mouse or keyboard the active
touchoff gets automaticly applied to the last axis you moved. But there were
NO input pins to effect that from my dials. I had the signals available, but
it took me 3 years of intermittent fussing about it because when I'm doing
touchoff's that way, I had to hunt up the mouse, find that teeny little button
in the gui, and manually change it to the axis I ws abut to touch off. If my
touch off was applied to he wrong axis I broke tooling and muttered a lot. And
started all over with the setup. Old habits die, or kill you. I was given the
pins a couple months ago and its many times more useful now, no more messed up
touchoffs. There is a slight lag though, it seems to be activated on the
falling edge of my signal. I can speed that up, just haven't found my round
tuit.

The one size fits all approach you are touting as superior is not, its a very
small box limiting what you can do.

Merry Christmas to all.

Enough rambling for now.
John

  I agree

Cheers, Gene Heskett.




___
Emc-users mailing list
Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users

Re: [Emc-users] Choice of CNC conversions

[John Dammeyer]

Merry Christmas everyone!

I was probably dumb to start this topic because it's turning into a "Linux is 
wonderful and why doesn't everyone see that?" stream of comments.

Maybe start with some definitions of what exactly an OS (Operating System) is?
1. Serves as an interface between computer programs and the hardware.   A 
reasonable reference is:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operating_system

So although the wiki does state this about the Linux name: 
"It was soon merged with the GNU user space components and system software to 
form a complete operating system. Since then, the combination of the two major 
components has usually been referred to as simply "Linux" by the software 
industry, a naming convention that Stallman and the Free Software Foundation 
remain opposed to, preferring the name GNU/Linux."

LinuxCNC is a GNU user space component until you add the Real Time side of 
things to provide determinism which then makes it again a combination of 
GNU/Linux with a user space component that is LCNC with a variety of user 
interfaces.

And my point of starting this discussion thread was to point out that the LCNC 
that we work with could be on a lot more hobby systems if the user interface 
and installation was upgraded to 
_Never_ever_have_to_use_the_command_line_or_text_editors_to_handle_or_modify_installation
 or do a number of standard operations.

And before someone else brings it up I totally agree that entering G-Codes;
http://linuxcnc.org/docs/html/gui/axis.html#_mdi
or working with G-Code programs requires a text editor.  That’s true of any 
proper CNC system at some level.  

The best example I can think of is my new touch probe.  It has a light.  I can 
use the jog/mpg method to move the axis and watch the LED in the probe come on 
and then set 0.  Jog to the other side and touch off.  Then use the calculator 
to determine the midpoint, jog to that and set zero position.  Been doing that 
with my DRO-350 for years other than it has a FCN button that automatically 
sets the zero for me when it reaches the second touch point and is electrically 
connected to the probe input on the DRO-350 hardware.

But with this screen
https://github.com/verser-git/probe_screen_v2
most of what is needed is done automatically.  Unfortunately it still requires 
editing the INI and HAL files and somethings don't automatically work 
correctly.  

Contrast that with the much less powerful MACH3 system where you select from 
the menu "Config/Ports and Pins/Input Signals/Probe".  And then there is simple 
touch off operations under "Offsets(Alt-5)"  Other MACH3 screens are possibly 
more sophisticated.

And perhaps the best example of all is the Tormach LCNC interface which also 
simplifies things because in this case the hardware is known.

So if you are content with command line/editor operations great.  I'm happy 
it's working for you.  But if we want more users involved in the LCNC community 
something has to change.

IMHO.

John Dammeyer






___
Emc-users mailing list
Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users

Re: [Emc-users] Choice of CNC conversions

[andy pugh]

On Sat, 25 Dec 2021 at 10:39, andrew beck  wrote:

> It needs a few things (mainly a jerk control algorithm). And tool
> Management stuff.  More work offsets etc.

You might have missed:
http://linuxcnc.org/docs/devel/html/tooldatabase/tooldatabase.html

-- 
atp
"A motorcycle is a bicycle with a pandemonium attachment and is
designed for the especial use of mechanical geniuses, daredevils and
lunatics."
— George Fitch, Atlanta Constitution Newspaper, 1912


___
Emc-users mailing list
Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users

Re: [Emc-users] Choice of CNC conversions

[Mark]

On 12/24/21 6:10 PM, Chris Albertson wrote:

No, RT patches are not a waste of time.  But using something as big as  a
Linux based PC to drive a machine is not  going to be popular today and
will be even less so in 10 years.  40 years ago the PC is the only
affordable computer that had enough compute power.  This is not longer
true.  we now have 32-bit microcontrollers and FPGAs. al for under $20.

Look at a typical hobby R/C servo.  The cheapest one on Amazon is $5 (The
MG996).  Inside there is a digital motor controller that measures the input
pulse with in microseconds and reads an analog voltage from the position
encoder.  It uses a PID control loop to adjust the motor's current via an
H-bridge to keep the output shaft at the commanded set point.  The entire
device, computer. motor, gears and all, sells for $5 on Amazon.   That $5
servo Is reliably measuring at the sub uSec level.  Something a PC can't
do.  In the 80's these servos were analog because you would need something
like an IBM PC to implement a PID loop.
I flew R/C aerobatics/pattern for years.  You would not find one of 
those $5 POS servos in any of my aircraft.


Nothing wrong with using LCNC, I use it.  But we were talking about why a
person starting out would pass on it.  It is just not what people would do
today.   Today, I buy something, I expect to turn it on and then maybe
download the phone app that let's me control it.I don't expect to edit
text files to make by video doorbell work
That's probably good if you want to run a toy plastic printer.  Not my 
cuppa tea.


I'm not suggesting anyone do anything, just explaining why LCNC is not
taking over the world.  People will go for the $300 box that is plug and
play 80% of the time.  People want support and a warenty.


Fine.  Let them.  We're not out to conquer the world.  We're pretty 
happy with what we have, at least I am.  I'm not going to introduce 
something like a web server between the motion controller and the 
motion.  I much prefer to keep all my stuff under one hood.  I do not 
like tablets.  I do not like iPhones or Android phones to do much of 
anything more the talk or text.  I don't like typing on either a pad or 
a phone.  Much rather have a regular sized keyboard where I can usually 
type close to 60 words a minute.


I've been using LCNC now for over 20 years.  There is no plug and play 
solution for the type of machine I run, my saw beveler.  It took some 
help from the kind folks who developed and who have implemented complex 
setups on machines to get mine to do what I required it to do.  No way a 
plug and play is ever going to figure out something like that.  Sure as 
hell don't want phones or tablets out in my shop.


You want something different?  Fine.  Take the bones and go for it.  
Make what you envision happen.


Mark



___
Emc-users mailing list
Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users

Re: [Emc-users] Choice of CNC conversions

[andrew beck]

And before I go to sleep I just want to say merry Christmas!



On Sat, 25 Dec 2021, 23:36 andrew beck,  wrote:

> Peter I agree on the semiens control using Linux
>
> I had to laugh awhile ago.
>
> I booted up a brand new semiens control and saw the Linux boot up on the
> screen.  Those boys are using Linuxcnc pretty much under the hood.
>
> And I also know that haas next gen control is built from Linuxcnc.  They
> improved it and built a fancy ui.  But it's Linux under the hood.
>
> I think haas control is written on java I saw someone talking about it
> once who was familiar with under the hood in the code.
>
> Chris has many valid points.  But for those of us that retrofit big old
> cnc machines Linuxcnc is pretty awesome and perfect.
>
> It needs a few things (mainly a jerk control algorithm). And tool
> Management stuff.  More work offsets etc.
>
> But all you developers thank you so much!!
>
> I love Linuxcnc and my whole business is built around it.  And I make lots
> of parts as a machine shop.
>
> Biggest machine is a 6.5m travel cnc router.
>
> And I have 2 VMCs.  2 routers. And 1 cnc lathe.
>
> Everything runs Linuxcnc.  And at 25 years old there is no way I could
> ever afford all these machines without Linuxcnc.
>
> On Sat, 25 Dec 2021, 11:33 Peter C. Wallace,  wrote:
>
>> On Fri, 24 Dec 2021, Chris Albertson wrote:
>>
>> > Date: Fri, 24 Dec 2021 10:51:24 -0800
>> > From: Chris Albertson 
>> > Reply-To: "Enhanced Machine Controller (EMC)"
>> > 
>> > To: "Enhanced Machine Controller (EMC)" <
>> emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net>
>> > Subject: Re: [Emc-users] Choice of CNC conversions
>> >
>> > The problem that is limiting LCNC's wider use is that it is a very old
>> design.  It is definitely not what anyone would design today.   And it is
>> not what moderned users expect or want.   Documentation i=will not change
>> what it is.
>>
>>
>> Hey, maybe you should tell Siemens to drop real time Linux
>> as the basis for their industrial OS since its such an old design...
>>
>>
>> Peter Wallace
>> Mesa Electronics
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ___
>> 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] Choice of CNC conversions

[andrew beck]

Peter I agree on the semiens control using Linux

I had to laugh awhile ago.

I booted up a brand new semiens control and saw the Linux boot up on the
screen.  Those boys are using Linuxcnc pretty much under the hood.

And I also know that haas next gen control is built from Linuxcnc.  They
improved it and built a fancy ui.  But it's Linux under the hood.

I think haas control is written on java I saw someone talking about it once
who was familiar with under the hood in the code.

Chris has many valid points.  But for those of us that retrofit big old cnc
machines Linuxcnc is pretty awesome and perfect.

It needs a few things (mainly a jerk control algorithm). And tool
Management stuff.  More work offsets etc.

But all you developers thank you so much!!

I love Linuxcnc and my whole business is built around it.  And I make lots
of parts as a machine shop.

Biggest machine is a 6.5m travel cnc router.

And I have 2 VMCs.  2 routers. And 1 cnc lathe.

Everything runs Linuxcnc.  And at 25 years old there is no way I could ever
afford all these machines without Linuxcnc.

On Sat, 25 Dec 2021, 11:33 Peter C. Wallace,  wrote:

> On Fri, 24 Dec 2021, Chris Albertson wrote:
>
> > Date: Fri, 24 Dec 2021 10:51:24 -0800
> > From: Chris Albertson 
> > Reply-To: "Enhanced Machine Controller (EMC)"
> > 
> > To: "Enhanced Machine Controller (EMC)"  >
> > Subject: Re: [Emc-users] Choice of CNC conversions
> >
> > The problem that is limiting LCNC's wider use is that it is a very old
> design.  It is definitely not what anyone would design today.   And it is
> not what moderned users expect or want.   Documentation i=will not change
> what it is.
>
>
> Hey, maybe you should tell Siemens to drop real time Linux
> as the basis for their industrial OS since its such an old design...
>
>
> Peter Wallace
> Mesa Electronics
>
>
>
>
> ___
> 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] Choice of CNC conversions

[gene heskett]

On Friday, December 24, 2021 6:47:33 PM EST John Dammeyer wrote:
> I think we perhaps need to take a step back before this turns into a series
> of unworkable positions.
[...]
> The basic setup screens for LinuxCNC for either parallel port or Peter's
> MESA stuff is amazing and simple until you need to step outside the box. 
> And I think, if I were to summarize this I'd say software needs to be
> designed so the command line editor is never ever used.  Those two sets of
> config screen sets are what have allowed most people to set up LinuxCNC. 
> Take those away, tell them they have to write the HAL and INI file from
> scratch and watch them run, quickly, to alternate systems.

What am I?  Cat food? John, that box your are complaining about is one heck of 
a big box. I might run  the config ONCE when bringing a new machine to life, 
from then on anything I do to that machine is done with geany, the text 
editor.  The ONLY problem I've had is a reticence on the part of the 
developers to add a pin or 9 to allow me to fully use a feature I built into 
the pi controller on that Sheldon, in a fool proof 100% automatic way.

For instance, I put a pair of $20 mpja encoder dials, 100 ppr quadrature 
output gizmos, so I can drive that Sheldon by hand just as if it still had 
hand cranks. And they are many many times more convenient to setup a touch off 
point than any keyboard or mouse driven method, unlike the keyboard or mice 
they seem to talk directly to the hardware, with no lags like the keyboard or 
mouse imposes on the accuracy as I can directly dial up a touchoff to within .
0001" or .001mm in metric mode. The machine is not that accurate but the 
electronics is.

But one huge usability problem. Using the mouse or keyboard the active 
touchoff gets automaticly applied to the last axis you moved. But there were 
NO input pins to effect that from my dials. I had the signals available, but 
it took me 3 years of intermittent fussing about it because when I'm doing 
touchoff's that way, I had to hunt up the mouse, find that teeny little button 
in the gui, and manually change it to the axis I ws abut to touch off. If my 
touch off was applied to he wrong axis I broke tooling and muttered a lot. And 
started all over with the setup. Old habits die, or kill you. I was given the 
pins a couple months ago and its many times more useful now, no more messed up 
touchoffs. There is a slight lag though, it seems to be activated on the 
falling edge of my signal. I can speed that up, just haven't found my round 
tuit.

The one size fits all approach you are touting as superior is not, its a very 
small box limiting what you can do.

Merry Christmas to all. 
> Enough rambling for now.
> John
 I agree

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, 1940)
If we desire respect for the law, we must first make the law respectable.
 - Louis D. Brandeis
Genes Web page 





___
Emc-users mailing list
Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users

Re: [Emc-users] Choice of CNC conversions

[John Dammeyer]

I think we perhaps need to take a step back before this turns into a series of 
unworkable positions.

The 3D printers with Arduino based controllers work because they are dedicated 
to what they do.  For the same reason my ELS project using only an 8 bit PIC 
controller is very good at what it does but it will never be able to do G-Code 
or trajectory planning because it was designed with a specific behaviour in 
mind but it's a simple 1PPR sensor on the spindle which has limitations but 
also advantages.

Similarly the Electronic Gearing Systems (often called an ELS) use spindle 
encoder pulses divided or multiplied to generate step pulses.  The desire to 
rotate a chuck to simulate gears is very dear to many even though it will snap 
a carbide insert in a heartbeat if there is backlash in the lead screw.  But 
that manual approach is considered important.  And discounted very quickly as 
not important is anything above about 2500 RPM because at that point the 
Arduino can't keep up.

The Beagle is interesting because it has the two hardware co-processors but the 
Beagle OS has a lifetime of 1 to 2 years before something dramatically is 
changed and all existing software is broken.   Might well be open source but 
whatever is built for it should probably not use Linux and instead a standard 
RTOS (Real Time Operating System)

So why are the dedicated systems popular?  Simple.  Once you buy them you don't 
get upgrades.  They just work.  You don't have to learn a new user interface.  
But they also only run on that hardware.  If you wanted MODBUS or CANbus 
control it's unlikely that feature is available.  If you have 2 spindles, one 
vertical, one horizontal it's possible you also can't use it.  

But more than anything the good thing, and at the same time the really really 
bad thing, is the concept of the hardware abstraction layer; the HAL.  The 
dedicated boxes set/clear a bit in port_X to enable the coolant pump.  The 
Linux systems open a file, write to the file, close the file and under the 
covers thousands of instructions later somewhere way deep down the code 
sets/clears a bit in port_X if it's on the motherboard.  Otherwise it 
sets/clears a bit in a UDP packet which, on the next 'tick' is sent out 
serially over Ethernet at, granted, high speeds to the control board which 
pulls apart the packet and sets/clears a bit in port_X.  Or it's in a CAN bus 
message or it's in a USB message. 

And the current electronics now, compared to 40 years ago, can easily do this 
because the basic mechanics hasn't really changed that much. 

The problem is that companies like Apple and Microsoft have blurred the lines 
between what the OS is and what the device is/does.  As I understand it Apple 
uses Linux under the covers.   Certainly Android does.  And I've heard that 
Microsoft is heading in that direction.  But what they are using is the pseudo 
RTOS (not quite real time).

Now we have a number of different RTOS systems from the FREE RTOS to 
subscription and even the real time Linux variant which is free but understood 
by few.  And again that's where the very useful HAL comes in.  Any RTOS, any 
Controller, any Network, any text or Graphical User Interface (GUI) and any 
kind of hardware.  

The basic setup screens for LinuxCNC for either parallel port or Peter's MESA 
stuff is amazing and simple until you need to step outside the box.  And I 
think, if I were to summarize this I'd say software needs to be designed so the 
command line editor is never ever used.  Those two sets of config screen sets 
are what have allowed most people to set up LinuxCNC.  Take those away, tell 
them they have to write the HAL and INI file from scratch and watch them run, 
quickly, to alternate systems.

Enough rambling for now.
John



> -Original Message-
> From: Chris Albertson [mailto:albertson.ch...@gmail.com]
> Sent: December-24-21 3:10 PM
> To: Enhanced Machine Controller (EMC)
> Subject: Re: [Emc-users] Choice of CNC conversions
> 
> No, RT patches are not a waste of time.  But using something as big as  a
> Linux based PC to drive a machine is not  going to be popular today and
> will be even less so in 10 years.  40 years ago the PC is the only
> affordable computer that had enough compute power.  This is not longer
> true.  we now have 32-bit microcontrollers and FPGAs. al for under $20.
> 
> Look at a typical hobby R/C servo.  The cheapest one on Amazon is $5 (The
> MG996).  Inside there is a digital motor controller that measures the input
> pulse with in microseconds and reads an analog voltage from the position
> encoder.  It uses a PID control loop to adjust the motor's current via an
> H-bridge to keep the output shaft at the commanded set point.  The entire
> device, computer. motor, gears and all, sells for $5 on Amazon.   That $5
> servo Is reliably measuring at the sub uSec level.  Something a PC can't
> do.  In the 80's thes

Re: [Emc-users] Choice of CNC conversions

[Chris Albertson]

No, RT patches are not a waste of time.  But using something as big as  a
Linux based PC to drive a machine is not  going to be popular today and
will be even less so in 10 years.  40 years ago the PC is the only
affordable computer that had enough compute power.  This is not longer
true.  we now have 32-bit microcontrollers and FPGAs. al for under $20.

Look at a typical hobby R/C servo.  The cheapest one on Amazon is $5 (The
MG996).  Inside there is a digital motor controller that measures the input
pulse with in microseconds and reads an analog voltage from the position
encoder.  It uses a PID control loop to adjust the motor's current via an
H-bridge to keep the output shaft at the commanded set point.  The entire
device, computer. motor, gears and all, sells for $5 on Amazon.   That $5
servo Is reliably measuring at the sub uSec level.  Something a PC can't
do.  In the 80's these servos were analog because you would need something
like an IBM PC to implement a PID loop.

Nothing wrong with using LCNC, I use it.  But we were talking about why a
person starting out would pass on it.  It is just not what people would do
today.   Today, I buy something, I expect to turn it on and then maybe
download the phone app that let's me control it.I don't expect to edit
text files to make by video doorbell work

I'm not suggesting anyone do anything, just explaining why LCNC is not
taking over the world.  People will go for the $300 box that is plug and
play 80% of the time.  People want support and a warenty.

On Fri, Dec 24, 2021 at 11:07 AM Sam Sokolik  wrote:

> Hmm..  so the realtime patches being integrated into Linux kernel is
> worthless old technology?  They are waisting their time?  (This is
> unrelated to LinuxCNC)
>
> Currently LinuxCNC is being added to debian testing.  It will soon be part
> of the debian repository.
>
> On Fri, Dec 24, 2021, 12:54 PM Chris Albertson 
> wrote:
>
> > The problem that is limiting LCNC's wider use is that it is a very old
> > design.  It is definitely not what anyone would design today.   And it is
> > not what moderned users expect or want.   Documentation i=will not change
> > what it is.
> >
> > Today, if this were being built again from scratch it would
> >
> > Run on any computer and not require some special real-time version of
> > Linux.  The user interface would be written in some portable way so it
> > could be accessed even on a iPad or Andriod tablet or from macOS or
> > Windows. This is possible.   I proved it to myself just a few days
> > ago.   I have a 12 DOF robot here that is being driven by a Raspberry Pi
> > and the user interface is web-based or X11 based and in theory, should
> work
> > on other platforms.
> >
> > Should not need a real-time OS on the computer.  The real-time stuff (al
> > of it) goes in hardware,   Leaving only not-t=real-time tasks to the
> > PC/Mac/iPhone
> >
> > It would configure 100% with no need to edit a single file by hand.
> >
> > It would have a conversational system so that a user could do simple
> things
> > with no need to write g-code.
> >
> > People care less about if it is free then if it acts like the above.
> >
> > What I would do is design some kind of real-time module.  Perhaps that
> > would be made of Mesa cards with different firmware or of
> microcontrollers
> > like "Teensy" and each of these could handle some number of axies.  Maybe
> > four.  Then you use multiple of these to drive a larger machine of a
> > robot.
> >
> > The 1980's was 40 years ago.  Yes it really has been that long.  LCNC is
> > using 1980s software technology and people today are expecting the 21st
> > century and mostly getting what they expect.   Think of a basic 3D
> > printer.  It is no different from a milling machine just mechanically
> > lighter weight.  The whole thing, g_code interpreter and all is a cheap
> > package with a self-contained controller  One does not need to hunt
> > dumpsters for antique desktop PCs and then install specialist OSes on
> > them.  The controller is built-in and pre-programmed.
> >
> > That said.  I use LCNC because it does what I want and uses the 40 years
> > old (maybe 50 years old now) technology I'm familiar with.   Yes it is
> that
> > Old.  I was a computer science student back when this wascutting edge and
> > I'm retired now.
> >
> > Big goals for any new system should be
> > 1) cross platform, especially mobile device friendly
> > 2) zero file editing (zero, not just a small number)
> > 3) modular, you can swap out parts and add parts as requirements change.
> > 4) today we have "The Cloud"  It could live at Amazon or in your own
> shop.
> > Some prefer to let a big company manage things, others like to buy their
> > own equipment is mess with it themselves.   Either way should work.
>  But a
> > modern CNC system would run any number of mills and lathes and laser
> > cutters and have any number of user interface screens and pendants.  Jobs
> > are moved and assigned to available 

Re: [Emc-users] Choice of CNC conversions

[Feral Engineer]

I kinda want to help with development for free, I'm just lost on where to
start in the millions of lines of code 

Phil T.
The Feral Engineer

Check out my LinuxCNC tutorials, machine builds and other antics at
www.youtube.com/c/theferalengineer

Help support my channel efforts and coffee addiction:
www.patreon.com/theferalengineer

On Fri, Dec 24, 2021, 5:33 PM Peter C. Wallace  wrote:

> On Fri, 24 Dec 2021, Chris Albertson wrote:
>
> > Date: Fri, 24 Dec 2021 10:51:24 -0800
> > From: Chris Albertson 
> > Reply-To: "Enhanced Machine Controller (EMC)"
> > 
> > To: "Enhanced Machine Controller (EMC)"  >
> > Subject: Re: [Emc-users] Choice of CNC conversions
> >
> > The problem that is limiting LCNC's wider use is that it is a very old
> design.  It is definitely not what anyone would design today.   And it is
> not what moderned users expect or want.   Documentation i=will not change
> what it is.
>
>
> Hey, maybe you should tell Siemens to drop real time Linux
> as the basis for their industrial OS since its such an old design...
>
>
> Peter Wallace
> Mesa Electronics
>
>
>
>
> ___
> 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] Choice of CNC conversions

[Peter C. Wallace]

On Fri, 24 Dec 2021, Chris Albertson wrote:


Date: Fri, 24 Dec 2021 10:51:24 -0800
From: Chris Albertson 
Reply-To: "Enhanced Machine Controller (EMC)"

To: "Enhanced Machine Controller (EMC)" 
Subject: Re: [Emc-users] Choice of CNC conversions

The problem that is limiting LCNC's wider use is that it is a very old

design.  It is definitely not what anyone would design today.   And it is
not what moderned users expect or want.   Documentation i=will not change
what it is.


Hey, maybe you should tell Siemens to drop real time Linux
as the basis for their industrial OS since its such an old design...


Peter Wallace
Mesa Electronics




___
Emc-users mailing list
Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users

Re: [Emc-users] Choice of CNC conversions

[Stuart Stevenson]

My first experience with NC/CNC was in 1978 on a 1958 Cleereman VMC with a
GE Mark Century 100 control. That makes the technology over 61 years old.
The control enclosure sitting beside the machine was 6 X 6 X 5 feet. The
cooling unit was a LARGE household AC window unit. There were 100's of 4 X
6 inch PCB's (with large components) stuck in racks of slots. The machine
looked like a current turret punch press with a large diameter disk
carrying the tools. The quill retracted up and out of the disk to deposit
the tool in three spring loaded balls to hold the tool. The disk would
rotate the next tool under the quill for the quill to pick up on its way
back down toward the work. The disk was unidirectional, there were no tool
length offsets (each tool had to be length adjusted to match the programmed
length) and there were thumb wheels to adjust the workpiece offset values
(only 1 set of WPC registers). Progress has been slow and steady since 1958
but we are getting there.

I remember the first vestiges of IGES in the early 80's and STEP somewhere
around 1990. Neither of these works trouble free.

STEP-NC has been in development since the middle 90's with the goal of
automatic tool path generation - not working yet.

All of this with the ultimate goal of removing the human from the
production process. In 1980 NC programmers were predicted to be unnecessary
by 1990. The goal has not quite been reached yet.

The task of printing an image on a piece of paper is very much simpler than
machining a part. The current cutting technology (mills and drills) has
progressed very little from the early 1900's. A current printer doesn't use
a pencil or a pen to print a symbol on a piece of paper. 3D printing is
something like a current printer but the result has some disadvantages
compared to machining.

If you want to print something on a piece of paper you can generate the
symbol you want to print and then purchase the already assembled and
programmed device to do the printing for you. You can do something like
that in the machining world by contracting with a turnkey process provider.
It just takes money (sometimes lots of it).

When your project is finished and you need to change the process you can
contract again to have a new process provided.

When you want to print another symbol you are still using the same process
(printing).

When you want to manufacture another part you may or may not be using the
same process.

I don't see much to compare between printing and machining.

The goal of LinuxCNC is not the production of parts. The goal of LinuxCNC
is to facilitate the use of assets - hopefully in a very cheap but quality
fashion. The cheap and quality is totally up to the person doing the
integration.

There is a web server called rockhopper that will give you something of
what you want. One of the developers attended a LinucCNC meeting to show
the application. It looked very slick and well done. It didn't match my
goals with LinuxCNC so I didn't pursue it further.

It wrote a kinematics module to give my machine geometry compensation and 5
axis tool length offsets. The machine became THE most accurate machine in
the shop. It was an OLD worn out 5 axis machine. The ram (Y axis) weighed
30,000 lbs. It was not very fast but it was very flexible and would make
good parts. I have the calculations developed to give my machine 5 axis
tool diameter compensation. I just don't have the machine to implement it
on.

My goal was to make the machine run well.

If the goal is making parts then there are several machine makers to
purchase from just as there are choices of printer manufacturers to choose
from.

My memory of MachineKit is that Michael Haberler wanted to use LinuxCNC as
a starting point to develop an everything control. I like that idea but I
didn't follow it closely as I had other fish to fry (life gets in the way).
It seems as if quite a bit of progress was made and then alas 'life gets in
the way' and MH wasn't able to finish to the level originally intended.
Very understandable and acceptable. All progress is good progress and gives
someone else a higher base to build upon.

HTH
Just Sayin
Stuart

On Fri, Dec 24, 2021 at 1:07 PM Sam Sokolik  wrote:

> Hmm..  so the realtime patches being integrated into Linux kernel is
> worthless old technology?  They are waisting their time?  (This is
> unrelated to LinuxCNC)
>
> Currently LinuxCNC is being added to debian testing.  It will soon be part
> of the debian repository.
>
> On Fri, Dec 24, 2021, 12:54 PM Chris Albertson 
> wrote:
>
> > The problem that is limiting LCNC's wider use is that it is a very old
> > design.  It is definitely not what anyone would design today.   And it is
> > not what moderned users expect or want.   Documentation i=will not change
> > what it is.
> >
> > Today, if this were being built again from scratch it would
> >
> > Run on any computer and not require some special real-time version of
> > Linux.  The user interface would be written 

Re: [Emc-users] Choice of CNC conversions

[Murray Lindeblom]

I agree that an iPad or tablet appears to be an excellent user interface.

The motion controlling portion is the only portion of the code that needs
to be synchronised.
Real-time operating systems can be used or the playback approach
are alternatives.

The advantage this group has is assisting people solve machine problems
(i.e. a 3HP mill is not a 3D printer).

The machinekit fork I believe tried to clean up the underlying technology.


On Fri, 24 Dec 2021 at 12:54, Chris Albertson 
wrote:

> The problem that is limiting LCNC's wider use is that it is a very old
> design.  It is definitely not what anyone would design today.   And it is
> not what moderned users expect or want.   Documentation i=will not change
> what it is.
>
> Today, if this were being built again from scratch it would
>
> Run on any computer and not require some special real-time version of
> Linux.  The user interface would be written in some portable way so it
> could be accessed even on a iPad or Andriod tablet or from macOS or
> Windows. This is possible.   I proved it to myself just a few days
> ago.   I have a 12 DOF robot here that is being driven by a Raspberry Pi
> and the user interface is web-based or X11 based and in theory, should work
> on other platforms.
>
> Should not need a real-time OS on the computer.  The real-time stuff (al
> of it) goes in hardware,   Leaving only not-t=real-time tasks to the
> PC/Mac/iPhone
>
> It would configure 100% with no need to edit a single file by hand.
>
> It would have a conversational system so that a user could do simple things
> with no need to write g-code.
>
> People care less about if it is free then if it acts like the above.
>
> What I would do is design some kind of real-time module.  Perhaps that
> would be made of Mesa cards with different firmware or of microcontrollers
> like "Teensy" and each of these could handle some number of axies.  Maybe
> four.  Then you use multiple of these to drive a larger machine of a
> robot.
>
> The 1980's was 40 years ago.  Yes it really has been that long.  LCNC is
> using 1980s software technology and people today are expecting the 21st
> century and mostly getting what they expect.   Think of a basic 3D
> printer.  It is no different from a milling machine just mechanically
> lighter weight.  The whole thing, g_code interpreter and all is a cheap
> package with a self-contained controller  One does not need to hunt
> dumpsters for antique desktop PCs and then install specialist OSes on
> them.  The controller is built-in and pre-programmed.
>
> That said.  I use LCNC because it does what I want and uses the 40 years
> old (maybe 50 years old now) technology I'm familiar with.   Yes it is that
> Old.  I was a computer science student back when this wascutting edge and
> I'm retired now.
>
> Big goals for any new system should be
> 1) cross platform, especially mobile device friendly
> 2) zero file editing (zero, not just a small number)
> 3) modular, you can swap out parts and add parts as requirements change.
> 4) today we have "The Cloud"  It could live at Amazon or in your own shop.
> Some prefer to let a big company manage things, others like to buy their
> own equipment is mess with it themselves.   Either way should work.   But a
> modern CNC system would run any number of mills and lathes and laser
> cutters and have any number of user interface screens and pendants.  Jobs
> are moved and assigned to available shop equipment as needed.  The cloud
> (local or remote, acts as a kind of NxM switch with storage and computation
> while the local controller talks to motors.   Today, I expect "job
> persistence" as I move between screens that are on my Phone or in the
> office of the shop. The cloud connects running processes that are on a
> milling machine with the design files and operator screens while the
> microsecond-level real-time jobs are handled by any number of little
> controllers.   TodayI'd add cameras to the system too.   I decent model is
> "Octoprint".  I can control or monitor prints from any screen.Any
> screen in the building or in my pocket could control any screen with no
> handoff required.  Just sign-on and your work is there.
>
> The problem is that all of the above would take many man-years of
> development and there is no motivation to work on this for free.  There
> needs to be some kind of business model.  Some conly has to design they
> will develop this andthen make a living by consulting and hosts cloud
> processes.
>
> But without an changes LCNC will be using 60 year old tech inanother 10
> years, then 70 and so on.  It is already a non-starter in the eyes of many
> people.   it will just get more and more that way.
>
> The market for this is huge. Some one could make millions but the up front
> effort and the existing big players will prevent that.
>
>
> On Fri, Dec 24, 2021 at 2:46 AM Jérémie Tarot  wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > Le jeu. 23 déc. 2021 à 20:05, John Dammeyer  a
> > écrit :
> >
> > > ...

Re: [Emc-users] Choice of CNC conversions

[Sam Sokolik]

Hmm..  so the realtime patches being integrated into Linux kernel is
worthless old technology?  They are waisting their time?  (This is
unrelated to LinuxCNC)

Currently LinuxCNC is being added to debian testing.  It will soon be part
of the debian repository.

On Fri, Dec 24, 2021, 12:54 PM Chris Albertson 
wrote:

> The problem that is limiting LCNC's wider use is that it is a very old
> design.  It is definitely not what anyone would design today.   And it is
> not what moderned users expect or want.   Documentation i=will not change
> what it is.
>
> Today, if this were being built again from scratch it would
>
> Run on any computer and not require some special real-time version of
> Linux.  The user interface would be written in some portable way so it
> could be accessed even on a iPad or Andriod tablet or from macOS or
> Windows. This is possible.   I proved it to myself just a few days
> ago.   I have a 12 DOF robot here that is being driven by a Raspberry Pi
> and the user interface is web-based or X11 based and in theory, should work
> on other platforms.
>
> Should not need a real-time OS on the computer.  The real-time stuff (al
> of it) goes in hardware,   Leaving only not-t=real-time tasks to the
> PC/Mac/iPhone
>
> It would configure 100% with no need to edit a single file by hand.
>
> It would have a conversational system so that a user could do simple things
> with no need to write g-code.
>
> People care less about if it is free then if it acts like the above.
>
> What I would do is design some kind of real-time module.  Perhaps that
> would be made of Mesa cards with different firmware or of microcontrollers
> like "Teensy" and each of these could handle some number of axies.  Maybe
> four.  Then you use multiple of these to drive a larger machine of a
> robot.
>
> The 1980's was 40 years ago.  Yes it really has been that long.  LCNC is
> using 1980s software technology and people today are expecting the 21st
> century and mostly getting what they expect.   Think of a basic 3D
> printer.  It is no different from a milling machine just mechanically
> lighter weight.  The whole thing, g_code interpreter and all is a cheap
> package with a self-contained controller  One does not need to hunt
> dumpsters for antique desktop PCs and then install specialist OSes on
> them.  The controller is built-in and pre-programmed.
>
> That said.  I use LCNC because it does what I want and uses the 40 years
> old (maybe 50 years old now) technology I'm familiar with.   Yes it is that
> Old.  I was a computer science student back when this wascutting edge and
> I'm retired now.
>
> Big goals for any new system should be
> 1) cross platform, especially mobile device friendly
> 2) zero file editing (zero, not just a small number)
> 3) modular, you can swap out parts and add parts as requirements change.
> 4) today we have "The Cloud"  It could live at Amazon or in your own shop.
> Some prefer to let a big company manage things, others like to buy their
> own equipment is mess with it themselves.   Either way should work.   But a
> modern CNC system would run any number of mills and lathes and laser
> cutters and have any number of user interface screens and pendants.  Jobs
> are moved and assigned to available shop equipment as needed.  The cloud
> (local or remote, acts as a kind of NxM switch with storage and computation
> while the local controller talks to motors.   Today, I expect "job
> persistence" as I move between screens that are on my Phone or in the
> office of the shop. The cloud connects running processes that are on a
> milling machine with the design files and operator screens while the
> microsecond-level real-time jobs are handled by any number of little
> controllers.   TodayI'd add cameras to the system too.   I decent model is
> "Octoprint".  I can control or monitor prints from any screen.Any
> screen in the building or in my pocket could control any screen with no
> handoff required.  Just sign-on and your work is there.
>
> The problem is that all of the above would take many man-years of
> development and there is no motivation to work on this for free.  There
> needs to be some kind of business model.  Some conly has to design they
> will develop this andthen make a living by consulting and hosts cloud
> processes.
>
> But without an changes LCNC will be using 60 year old tech inanother 10
> years, then 70 and so on.  It is already a non-starter in the eyes of many
> people.   it will just get more and more that way.
>
> The market for this is huge. Some one could make millions but the up front
> effort and the existing big players will prevent that.
>
>
> On Fri, Dec 24, 2021 at 2:46 AM Jérémie Tarot  wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > Le jeu. 23 déc. 2021 à 20:05, John Dammeyer  a
> > écrit :
> >
> > > ...
> >
> > But I wonder if it wouldn't be a good idea in the new year to develop a
> > > build thread that takes a beginner through conversion of a mill to LCNC
> > so
> > > it 

Re: [Emc-users] Choice of CNC conversions

[Chris Albertson]

The problem that is limiting LCNC's wider use is that it is a very old
design.  It is definitely not what anyone would design today.   And it is
not what moderned users expect or want.   Documentation i=will not change
what it is.

Today, if this were being built again from scratch it would

Run on any computer and not require some special real-time version of
Linux.  The user interface would be written in some portable way so it
could be accessed even on a iPad or Andriod tablet or from macOS or
Windows. This is possible.   I proved it to myself just a few days
ago.   I have a 12 DOF robot here that is being driven by a Raspberry Pi
and the user interface is web-based or X11 based and in theory, should work
on other platforms.

Should not need a real-time OS on the computer.  The real-time stuff (al
of it) goes in hardware,   Leaving only not-t=real-time tasks to the
PC/Mac/iPhone

It would configure 100% with no need to edit a single file by hand.

It would have a conversational system so that a user could do simple things
with no need to write g-code.

People care less about if it is free then if it acts like the above.

What I would do is design some kind of real-time module.  Perhaps that
would be made of Mesa cards with different firmware or of microcontrollers
like "Teensy" and each of these could handle some number of axies.  Maybe
four.  Then you use multiple of these to drive a larger machine of a
robot.

The 1980's was 40 years ago.  Yes it really has been that long.  LCNC is
using 1980s software technology and people today are expecting the 21st
century and mostly getting what they expect.   Think of a basic 3D
printer.  It is no different from a milling machine just mechanically
lighter weight.  The whole thing, g_code interpreter and all is a cheap
package with a self-contained controller  One does not need to hunt
dumpsters for antique desktop PCs and then install specialist OSes on
them.  The controller is built-in and pre-programmed.

That said.  I use LCNC because it does what I want and uses the 40 years
old (maybe 50 years old now) technology I'm familiar with.   Yes it is that
Old.  I was a computer science student back when this wascutting edge and
I'm retired now.

Big goals for any new system should be
1) cross platform, especially mobile device friendly
2) zero file editing (zero, not just a small number)
3) modular, you can swap out parts and add parts as requirements change.
4) today we have "The Cloud"  It could live at Amazon or in your own shop.
Some prefer to let a big company manage things, others like to buy their
own equipment is mess with it themselves.   Either way should work.   But a
modern CNC system would run any number of mills and lathes and laser
cutters and have any number of user interface screens and pendants.  Jobs
are moved and assigned to available shop equipment as needed.  The cloud
(local or remote, acts as a kind of NxM switch with storage and computation
while the local controller talks to motors.   Today, I expect "job
persistence" as I move between screens that are on my Phone or in the
office of the shop. The cloud connects running processes that are on a
milling machine with the design files and operator screens while the
microsecond-level real-time jobs are handled by any number of little
controllers.   TodayI'd add cameras to the system too.   I decent model is
"Octoprint".  I can control or monitor prints from any screen.Any
screen in the building or in my pocket could control any screen with no
handoff required.  Just sign-on and your work is there.

The problem is that all of the above would take many man-years of
development and there is no motivation to work on this for free.  There
needs to be some kind of business model.  Some conly has to design they
will develop this andthen make a living by consulting and hosts cloud
processes.

But without an changes LCNC will be using 60 year old tech inanother 10
years, then 70 and so on.  It is already a non-starter in the eyes of many
people.   it will just get more and more that way.

The market for this is huge. Some one could make millions but the up front
effort and the existing big players will prevent that.


On Fri, Dec 24, 2021 at 2:46 AM Jérémie Tarot  wrote:

> Hi,
>
> Le jeu. 23 déc. 2021 à 20:05, John Dammeyer  a
> écrit :
>
> > ...
>
> But I wonder if it wouldn't be a good idea in the new year to develop a
> > build thread that takes a beginner through conversion of a mill to LCNC
> so
> > it appears to be turnkey like the perhaps the ACORN CNC approach.
> >
> > Comments?
> >
>
>
> While working on docs translations migration and thinking about future
> documentation work, "my" idea along this line would be to develop/document
> a set of "reference implementations" to be used as plug and play recipes or
> basis for adaptation.
>
> These would cover all the usual suspects of DIY CNC projects like router,
> laser, plasma, mill, lathe builds/conversion/retrofits.
> These docs may 

Re: [Emc-users] Choice of CNC conversions

[John Dammeyer]

> From: Andy Pugh [mailto:bodge...@gmail.com]
> > On 24 Dec 2021, at 10:46, J�r�mie Tarot  wrote:
> >
> > "my" idea along this line would be to develop/document
> > a set of "reference implementations"
> 
> There are some case studies in the Wiki. However these are probably rather 
> out of date and are probably not at the level you
> envisage.
> 
> http://wiki.linuxcnc.org/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?Case_Studies

The links I clicked on in the mill and mini mill list are all 404 so someone 
new thinking about the various options will run away screaming noo.

John




___
Emc-users mailing list
Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users

Re: [Emc-users] Choice of CNC conversions

[Murray Lindeblom]

That's great information!

Is there a tabulation of data such as your HAL scope results comparing the
merits of commonly used CNC control programs.


Murray

On Thu, 23 Dec 2021 at 15:51, Sam Sokolik  wrote:

> Because linuxcnc is so flexible - I actually did some testing between mach3
> and linuxcnc when the new trajectory planner was being developed..
>
> http://wiki.linuxcnc.org/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?NewTrajectoryControl
>
> This is using linuxcnc to sample the step/direction signals from mach and
> linuxcnc to plot and graph acc/vel and also visualize path following.
>
> I also did it with grbl...
>
>
> https://www.cnczone.com/forums/opensource-software/271966-grbl-logging-linuxcnc.html
>
> sam
>
> On Thu, Dec 23, 2021 at 3:34 PM Murray Lindeblom <
> murray.lindeb...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > I think there is more fear of the unknown rather than any technical
> > challenge in using a Linux based solution.  It's a new TV remote with
> > different colored buttons.
> >
> > My concern is the precision of the resulting work using a solution that
> > does not have real-time response to the control devices (i.e. how round
> are
> > your circular holes).
> >
> > Is anyone aware of measured results that are documented comparing the
> > various styles of CNC conversion?
> >
> > Murray
> >
> > On Thu, 23 Dec 2021 at 13:05, John Dammeyer 
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Everyone is probably partying or drinking egg nog this close to
> Christmas
> > > but on one of the local metal groups a new member posted that he was
> > > converting his mill to CNC.
> > >
> > > His first posting:
> > > "Just doing a cnc conversion to my Craftex knee mill, using the Acorn
> cnc
> > > board and Clearpath Nema 34 servo's, direct drive. Motor has been
> > converted
> > > to VFD, and just installed a rotor encoder to measure RPM accurately.
> > Post
> > > some pic's when I'm done. Now I just have to learn g-code."
> > >
> > > Here's my question to him:
> > > "May I ask why you chose Acorn over say a MESA Solution <
> > >
> http://store.mesanet.com/index.php?route=product/search=7I76E%20>
> > > and LinuxCNC running on a PC or Pi4. Granted Pi4 4GB is hard to find at
> > the
> > > moment but PCs can be had for next to nothing as well as LinuxCNC is
> > free."
> > >
> > > And his answer:
> > > "Did my research, liked that it was Windows compatible (sorry been at
> > > computers too long and don't need to learn another set of headaches).
> > > Additionally it is plug and play using the add on board from CNC4PC for
> > the
> > > Clearpath SDSK. Clearpath was to only choice based on the torque and
> > built
> > > in encoding and processing. Based on the basic encoder 0.000125 is
> > possible
> > > if all works as designed and the winds in the right direction."
> > >
> > > I checked and Clearpath motors are not cheap so I don't think money was
> > an
> > > obstacle.  And I understand being a Windows type about not wanting to
> > learn
> > > a new OS.  I've had a love/hate relationship with Unix/Linux since a
> > PDP-10
> > > in university.  No choice but to learn it for Beaglebone or Pi and now
> of
> > > course LCNC.
> > >
> > > But I wonder if it wouldn't be a good idea in the new year to develop a
> > > build thread that takes a beginner through conversion of a mill to LCNC
> > so
> > > it appears to be turnkey like the perhaps the ACORN CNC approach.
> > >
> > > Comments?
> > > John
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > "ELS! Nothing else works as well for your Lathe"
> > > Automation Artisans Inc.
> > > www dot autoartisans dot 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
> >
>
> ___
> 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] Choice of CNC conversions

[Peter Hodgson]

Yes, I definitely think the more ‘Plug & Playable’ LCNC options there are the 
more it will be adopted and the more the community will develop and be 
supported as some PnP users get more interested/confident  and delve deeper 
into LCNC.

My own LCNC journey started from zero. Not knowing what a stepper motor was but 
excited about making stuff with CNC. I bought a converted lathe but the PC was 
lost so I had to setup LCNC again to get it going. I only chose LCNC as that is 
what had been used previously so I guessed it should work.

It was a steep and difficult learning curve and I wouldn’t have been able to do 
it without the magnificent support of the LCNC community via this email group 
and the forum. I needed help with ATC coding, PID tuning, spindle encoder noise 
suppression, etc. The historical forum posts are also invaluable. I now have a 
working lathe helping me to earn a living (2 years later!)

Is their a way for my Hal/ini files, (v. basic) schematics and parts list to be 
offered to someone else thinking of using LCNC to retrofit an Emcoturn 220? 
Could we build a library of ‘how to’ manuals and files for various machines 
already successfully converted?

> On 24 Dec 2021, at 10:44, Jérémie Tarot  wrote:
> 
> Hi,
> 
>> Le jeu. 23 déc. 2021 à 20:05, John Dammeyer  a
>> écrit :
>> 
>> ...
> 
> But I wonder if it wouldn't be a good idea in the new year to develop a
>> build thread that takes a beginner through conversion of a mill to LCNC so
>> it appears to be turnkey like the perhaps the ACORN CNC approach.
>> 
>> Comments?
>> 
> 
> 
> While working on docs translations migration and thinking about future
> documentation work, "my" idea along this line would be to develop/document
> a set of "reference implementations" to be used as plug and play recipes or
> basis for adaptation.
> 
> These would cover all the usual suspects of DIY CNC projects like router,
> laser, plasma, mill, lathe builds/conversion/retrofits.
> These docs may provide infos for the size sensitive components for the
> reader to adapt.
> 
> Another (complementary) approach would be to add to the docs a library of
> well crafted howtos about the setup of the various subsystems like motion,
> spindle/torch, coolant, limits, e-stop... Some kind of decision tree could
> be provided to lead the implementor who'd find the appropriate support doc
> for each choice he'd make.
> 
> For those of us that like to tinker with machines anyway, LinuxCNC is
> already just great... For the rest of the world that'd better have a
> machine that they can use to make stuff, we need to provide setups that
> "just work" in a way or another.
> 
> Willing to work on this after docs migration and french translation is
> done. I'm all in to bring LinuxCNC goodness to the masses without putting
> the burden on the devs who I'd rather have working on fancier things for
> the future...
> 
> As I may be unable to build an actual machine for the foreseable future. I
> plan to start building docs using vismach, then move to tabletop/lab setups
> with small real components, etc...
> 
> All these reference docs could have a category and a dedicated thread in
> the forum to hold discussions, requests and criticisms.
> 
> TY
> Jérémie
> 
> ___
> 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] Choice of CNC conversions

[Andy Pugh]

> On 24 Dec 2021, at 10:46, Jérémie Tarot  wrote:
> 
> "my" idea along this line would be to develop/document
> a set of "reference implementations"

There are some case studies in the Wiki. However these are probably rather out 
of date and are probably not at the level you envisage. 

http://wiki.linuxcnc.org/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?Case_Studies


___
Emc-users mailing list
Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users

Re: [Emc-users] Choice of CNC conversions

[Jérémie Tarot]

Hi,

Le jeu. 23 déc. 2021 à 20:05, John Dammeyer  a
écrit :

> ...

But I wonder if it wouldn't be a good idea in the new year to develop a
> build thread that takes a beginner through conversion of a mill to LCNC so
> it appears to be turnkey like the perhaps the ACORN CNC approach.
>
> Comments?
>


While working on docs translations migration and thinking about future
documentation work, "my" idea along this line would be to develop/document
a set of "reference implementations" to be used as plug and play recipes or
basis for adaptation.

These would cover all the usual suspects of DIY CNC projects like router,
laser, plasma, mill, lathe builds/conversion/retrofits.
These docs may provide infos for the size sensitive components for the
reader to adapt.

Another (complementary) approach would be to add to the docs a library of
well crafted howtos about the setup of the various subsystems like motion,
spindle/torch, coolant, limits, e-stop... Some kind of decision tree could
be provided to lead the implementor who'd find the appropriate support doc
for each choice he'd make.

For those of us that like to tinker with machines anyway, LinuxCNC is
already just great... For the rest of the world that'd better have a
machine that they can use to make stuff, we need to provide setups that
"just work" in a way or another.

Willing to work on this after docs migration and french translation is
done. I'm all in to bring LinuxCNC goodness to the masses without putting
the burden on the devs who I'd rather have working on fancier things for
the future...

As I may be unable to build an actual machine for the foreseable future. I
plan to start building docs using vismach, then move to tabletop/lab setups
with small real components, etc...

All these reference docs could have a category and a dedicated thread in
the forum to hold discussions, requests and criticisms.

TY
Jérémie

___
Emc-users mailing list
Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users

Re: [Emc-users] Choice of CNC conversions

[Sam Sokolik]

Because linuxcnc is so flexible - I actually did some testing between mach3
and linuxcnc when the new trajectory planner was being developed..

http://wiki.linuxcnc.org/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?NewTrajectoryControl

This is using linuxcnc to sample the step/direction signals from mach and
linuxcnc to plot and graph acc/vel and also visualize path following.

I also did it with grbl...

https://www.cnczone.com/forums/opensource-software/271966-grbl-logging-linuxcnc.html

sam

On Thu, Dec 23, 2021 at 3:34 PM Murray Lindeblom 
wrote:

> I think there is more fear of the unknown rather than any technical
> challenge in using a Linux based solution.  It's a new TV remote with
> different colored buttons.
>
> My concern is the precision of the resulting work using a solution that
> does not have real-time response to the control devices (i.e. how round are
> your circular holes).
>
> Is anyone aware of measured results that are documented comparing the
> various styles of CNC conversion?
>
> Murray
>
> On Thu, 23 Dec 2021 at 13:05, John Dammeyer 
> wrote:
>
> > Everyone is probably partying or drinking egg nog this close to Christmas
> > but on one of the local metal groups a new member posted that he was
> > converting his mill to CNC.
> >
> > His first posting:
> > "Just doing a cnc conversion to my Craftex knee mill, using the Acorn cnc
> > board and Clearpath Nema 34 servo's, direct drive. Motor has been
> converted
> > to VFD, and just installed a rotor encoder to measure RPM accurately.
> Post
> > some pic's when I'm done. Now I just have to learn g-code."
> >
> > Here's my question to him:
> > "May I ask why you chose Acorn over say a MESA Solution <
> > http://store.mesanet.com/index.php?route=product/search=7I76E%20>
> > and LinuxCNC running on a PC or Pi4. Granted Pi4 4GB is hard to find at
> the
> > moment but PCs can be had for next to nothing as well as LinuxCNC is
> free."
> >
> > And his answer:
> > "Did my research, liked that it was Windows compatible (sorry been at
> > computers too long and don't need to learn another set of headaches).
> > Additionally it is plug and play using the add on board from CNC4PC for
> the
> > Clearpath SDSK. Clearpath was to only choice based on the torque and
> built
> > in encoding and processing. Based on the basic encoder 0.000125 is
> possible
> > if all works as designed and the winds in the right direction."
> >
> > I checked and Clearpath motors are not cheap so I don't think money was
> an
> > obstacle.  And I understand being a Windows type about not wanting to
> learn
> > a new OS.  I've had a love/hate relationship with Unix/Linux since a
> PDP-10
> > in university.  No choice but to learn it for Beaglebone or Pi and now of
> > course LCNC.
> >
> > But I wonder if it wouldn't be a good idea in the new year to develop a
> > build thread that takes a beginner through conversion of a mill to LCNC
> so
> > it appears to be turnkey like the perhaps the ACORN CNC approach.
> >
> > Comments?
> > John
> >
> >
> >
> > "ELS! Nothing else works as well for your Lathe"
> > Automation Artisans Inc.
> > www dot autoartisans dot 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
>

___
Emc-users mailing list
Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users

Re: [Emc-users] Choice of CNC conversions

[Murray Lindeblom]

I think there is more fear of the unknown rather than any technical
challenge in using a Linux based solution.  It's a new TV remote with
different colored buttons.

My concern is the precision of the resulting work using a solution that
does not have real-time response to the control devices (i.e. how round are
your circular holes).

Is anyone aware of measured results that are documented comparing the
various styles of CNC conversion?

Murray

On Thu, 23 Dec 2021 at 13:05, John Dammeyer  wrote:

> Everyone is probably partying or drinking egg nog this close to Christmas
> but on one of the local metal groups a new member posted that he was
> converting his mill to CNC.
>
> His first posting:
> "Just doing a cnc conversion to my Craftex knee mill, using the Acorn cnc
> board and Clearpath Nema 34 servo's, direct drive. Motor has been converted
> to VFD, and just installed a rotor encoder to measure RPM accurately. Post
> some pic's when I'm done. Now I just have to learn g-code."
>
> Here's my question to him:
> "May I ask why you chose Acorn over say a MESA Solution <
> http://store.mesanet.com/index.php?route=product/search=7I76E%20>
> and LinuxCNC running on a PC or Pi4. Granted Pi4 4GB is hard to find at the
> moment but PCs can be had for next to nothing as well as LinuxCNC is free."
>
> And his answer:
> "Did my research, liked that it was Windows compatible (sorry been at
> computers too long and don't need to learn another set of headaches).
> Additionally it is plug and play using the add on board from CNC4PC for the
> Clearpath SDSK. Clearpath was to only choice based on the torque and built
> in encoding and processing. Based on the basic encoder 0.000125 is possible
> if all works as designed and the winds in the right direction."
>
> I checked and Clearpath motors are not cheap so I don't think money was an
> obstacle.  And I understand being a Windows type about not wanting to learn
> a new OS.  I've had a love/hate relationship with Unix/Linux since a PDP-10
> in university.  No choice but to learn it for Beaglebone or Pi and now of
> course LCNC.
>
> But I wonder if it wouldn't be a good idea in the new year to develop a
> build thread that takes a beginner through conversion of a mill to LCNC so
> it appears to be turnkey like the perhaps the ACORN CNC approach.
>
> Comments?
> John
>
>
>
> "ELS! Nothing else works as well for your Lathe"
> Automation Artisans Inc.
> www dot autoartisans dot 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] Choice of CNC conversions

[Bruce Layne]

I love that LinuxCNC is hacker friendly and can be customized as needed, 
but I also think it'd be great if there was a simple generic 
plug-and-play solution for a 3 axis mill or router and another for a 
lathe.  It's all some people would need and it'd go a long way toward 
lowering the initial learning curve for those destined to greater 
things.  Buy a list of commonly available hardware, plug it together, 
install a pre-configured ISO and change the travel limits in the setup.  
Bob's your uncle.  Now, it could be a Pi4.  There is still a lot of 
customizing that could be done by selecting the appropriate motors 
depending on the size of the machine, the user interface, etc.  Whenever 
I suggested that, I'd get:


1) LinuxCNC is developed by hackers, for hackers.  We don't want all of 
the support that rank amateurs would entail.  It's a net negative for 
the people who develop LinuxCNC.


2) Great idea.  Why don't YOU do that?





On 12/23/21 2:25 PM, Matthew Herd wrote:

I think it's a great idea, I've had a lot of the same thoughts in the
past.  Mach3 was traditionally the "go to" solution instead of the Acorn
CNC unit due to ease of implementation.  I haven't tried either, but agree
that LinuxCNC has a steep learning curve.  And that comes as a prior
hobbyist Linux user.  Once you are familiar, it is remarkably flexible and
powerful.  But that requires the learning stage.

In order to actually do it, it might be nice if we could get someone doing
a conversion or new build to walk through each step on the forum.  It's
been done here and there, but another one might not hurt.

As to the clearpath servos, I think "clear choice" is a bit of an
overstatement.  They're good, but a true AC servo seems miles ahead.  And
the various Chinese ones seem quite good for the price.

Matt

On Thu, Dec 23, 2021 at 2:05 PM John Dammeyer 
wrote:


Everyone is probably partying or drinking egg nog this close to Christmas
but on one of the local metal groups a new member posted that he was
converting his mill to CNC.

His first posting:
"Just doing a cnc conversion to my Craftex knee mill, using the Acorn cnc
board and Clearpath Nema 34 servo's, direct drive. Motor has been converted
to VFD, and just installed a rotor encoder to measure RPM accurately. Post
some pic's when I'm done. Now I just have to learn g-code."

Here's my question to him:
"May I ask why you chose Acorn over say a MESA Solution <
http://store.mesanet.com/index.php?route=product/search=7I76E%20>
and LinuxCNC running on a PC or Pi4. Granted Pi4 4GB is hard to find at the
moment but PCs can be had for next to nothing as well as LinuxCNC is free."

And his answer:
"Did my research, liked that it was Windows compatible (sorry been at
computers too long and don't need to learn another set of headaches).
Additionally it is plug and play using the add on board from CNC4PC for the
Clearpath SDSK. Clearpath was to only choice based on the torque and built
in encoding and processing. Based on the basic encoder 0.000125 is possible
if all works as designed and the winds in the right direction."

I checked and Clearpath motors are not cheap so I don't think money was an
obstacle.  And I understand being a Windows type about not wanting to learn
a new OS.  I've had a love/hate relationship with Unix/Linux since a PDP-10
in university.  No choice but to learn it for Beaglebone or Pi and now of
course LCNC.

But I wonder if it wouldn't be a good idea in the new year to develop a
build thread that takes a beginner through conversion of a mill to LCNC so
it appears to be turnkey like the perhaps the ACORN CNC approach.

Comments?
John



"ELS! Nothing else works as well for your Lathe"
Automation Artisans Inc.
www dot autoartisans dot 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] Choice of CNC conversions

[Matthew Herd]

I think it's a great idea, I've had a lot of the same thoughts in the
past.  Mach3 was traditionally the "go to" solution instead of the Acorn
CNC unit due to ease of implementation.  I haven't tried either, but agree
that LinuxCNC has a steep learning curve.  And that comes as a prior
hobbyist Linux user.  Once you are familiar, it is remarkably flexible and
powerful.  But that requires the learning stage.

In order to actually do it, it might be nice if we could get someone doing
a conversion or new build to walk through each step on the forum.  It's
been done here and there, but another one might not hurt.

As to the clearpath servos, I think "clear choice" is a bit of an
overstatement.  They're good, but a true AC servo seems miles ahead.  And
the various Chinese ones seem quite good for the price.

Matt

On Thu, Dec 23, 2021 at 2:05 PM John Dammeyer 
wrote:

> Everyone is probably partying or drinking egg nog this close to Christmas
> but on one of the local metal groups a new member posted that he was
> converting his mill to CNC.
>
> His first posting:
> "Just doing a cnc conversion to my Craftex knee mill, using the Acorn cnc
> board and Clearpath Nema 34 servo's, direct drive. Motor has been converted
> to VFD, and just installed a rotor encoder to measure RPM accurately. Post
> some pic's when I'm done. Now I just have to learn g-code."
>
> Here's my question to him:
> "May I ask why you chose Acorn over say a MESA Solution <
> http://store.mesanet.com/index.php?route=product/search=7I76E%20>
> and LinuxCNC running on a PC or Pi4. Granted Pi4 4GB is hard to find at the
> moment but PCs can be had for next to nothing as well as LinuxCNC is free."
>
> And his answer:
> "Did my research, liked that it was Windows compatible (sorry been at
> computers too long and don't need to learn another set of headaches).
> Additionally it is plug and play using the add on board from CNC4PC for the
> Clearpath SDSK. Clearpath was to only choice based on the torque and built
> in encoding and processing. Based on the basic encoder 0.000125 is possible
> if all works as designed and the winds in the right direction."
>
> I checked and Clearpath motors are not cheap so I don't think money was an
> obstacle.  And I understand being a Windows type about not wanting to learn
> a new OS.  I've had a love/hate relationship with Unix/Linux since a PDP-10
> in university.  No choice but to learn it for Beaglebone or Pi and now of
> course LCNC.
>
> But I wonder if it wouldn't be a good idea in the new year to develop a
> build thread that takes a beginner through conversion of a mill to LCNC so
> it appears to be turnkey like the perhaps the ACORN CNC approach.
>
> Comments?
> John
>
>
>
> "ELS! Nothing else works as well for your Lathe"
> Automation Artisans Inc.
> www dot autoartisans dot com
>
>
> ___
> Emc-users mailing list
> Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users
>


-- 
Matthew Herd
Email:  herd.m...@gmail.com
Cell:  610-608-8930

___
Emc-users mailing list
Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users

[Emc-users] Choice of CNC conversions

[John Dammeyer]

Everyone is probably partying or drinking egg nog this close to Christmas but 
on one of the local metal groups a new member posted that he was converting his 
mill to CNC. 
 
His first posting:
"Just doing a cnc conversion to my Craftex knee mill, using the Acorn cnc board 
and Clearpath Nema 34 servo's, direct drive. Motor has been converted to VFD, 
and just installed a rotor encoder to measure RPM accurately. Post some pic's 
when I'm done. Now I just have to learn g-code."
 
Here's my question to him:
"May I ask why you chose Acorn over say a MESA Solution 
  and 
LinuxCNC running on a PC or Pi4. Granted Pi4 4GB is hard to find at the moment 
but PCs can be had for next to nothing as well as LinuxCNC is free."
 
And his answer:
"Did my research, liked that it was Windows compatible (sorry been at computers 
too long and don't need to learn another set of headaches). Additionally it is 
plug and play using the add on board from CNC4PC for the Clearpath SDSK. 
Clearpath was to only choice based on the torque and built in encoding and 
processing. Based on the basic encoder 0.000125 is possible if all works as 
designed and the winds in the right direction."
 
I checked and Clearpath motors are not cheap so I don't think money was an 
obstacle.  And I understand being a Windows type about not wanting to learn a 
new OS.  I've had a love/hate relationship with Unix/Linux since a PDP-10 in 
university.  No choice but to learn it for Beaglebone or Pi and now of course 
LCNC.
 
But I wonder if it wouldn't be a good idea in the new year to develop a build 
thread that takes a beginner through conversion of a mill to LCNC so it appears 
to be turnkey like the perhaps the ACORN CNC approach.
 
Comments?
John
 
 
 
"ELS! Nothing else works as well for your Lathe"
Automation Artisans Inc.
www dot autoartisans dot com 
 

___
Emc-users mailing list
Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users