Re: [Emc-users] What does "CNC" really mean?

[Gene Heskett]

On Saturday 03 September 2016 06:31:21 Gregg Eshelman wrote:

> That joke is 16 years old. :P
>
>
Precisely Gregg. ;-)

>   From: Gene Heskett <ghesk...@shentel.net>
>  To: emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net
>  Sent: Friday, September 2, 2016 3:57 PM
>  Subject: Re: [Emc-users] What does "CNC" really mean?
>
> On Friday 02 September 2016 13:42:09 Dave Cole wrote:
> > And what about hanging chads??  ;-)
>
> Chuckle, there is a law, if someone mentions chad, somebody else has
> to ask if its hanging. :)
>
> Cheers, Gene Heskett
>
>
> --
> ___
> Emc-users mailing list
> Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users


Cheers, Gene Heskett
-- 
"There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty:
 soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order."
-Ed Howdershelt (Author)
Genes Web page <http://geneslinuxbox.net:6309/gene>

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

Re: [Emc-users] What does "CNC" really mean?

[Gregg Eshelman]

That joke is 16 years old. :P

 
  From: Gene Heskett <ghesk...@shentel.net>
 To: emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net 
 Sent: Friday, September 2, 2016 3:57 PM
 Subject: Re: [Emc-users] What does "CNC" really mean?
   
On Friday 02 September 2016 13:42:09 Dave Cole wrote:

> And what about hanging chads??  ;-)
>
Chuckle, there is a law, if someone mentions chad, somebody else has to 
ask if its hanging. :)

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

Re: [Emc-users] What does "CNC" really mean?

[Jon Elson]

On 09/02/2016 12:34 PM, Ken Strauss wrote:
> Is that using paper or Mylar tape? Did you account for the weight reduction
> due to chad removed?
>
>
How could he, unless he knew the data?  Lots of ones makes 
the tape lighter, lots of zeroes keeps it heavy.

Jon

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

Re: [Emc-users] What does "CNC" really mean?

[Jon Elson]

On 09/02/2016 12:13 PM, John Kasunich wrote:
>
> On Fri, Sep 2, 2016, at 07:29 AM, Bruce Layne wrote:
>>
>> On 08/31/2016 10:22 PM, Gregg Eshelman wrote:
>>> Surprising that just for the fun of doing it, someone hasn't built a 
>>> punched tape reader for a 3D printer.
>>
>> Have you SEEN 10MB of paper tape?!?  :-o
>>
>> The bits on paper tape are about .1" in diameter.  That's a lot of paper
>> tape.
> 15.8 miles of paper actually.
>
> The spool would be over 35 inches in diameter and weigh 115 lbs.
>
>
Wow!  You actually calculated it!  But, of course, the stuff 
comes on little rolls about 10" diameter, so unless you 
wanted to splice hundred of rolls together, you couldn't get 
it in a single piece. Hmm, let's see, a teletype would take 
2 weeks to punch that (little known constant, 1 million 
seconds is very close to 2 weeks - In the VAX operating 
system, there was some system variable that was shown in 
units of uFortnights, being very close to one second).

Jon

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

Re: [Emc-users] What does "CNC" really mean?

[Gene Heskett]

On Friday 02 September 2016 13:42:09 Dave Cole wrote:

> And what about hanging chads??  ;-)
>
Chuckle, there is a law, if someone mentions chad, somebody else has to 
ask if its hanging. :)

Cheers, Gene Heskett
-- 
"There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty:
 soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order."
-Ed Howdershelt (Author)
Genes Web page 

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

Re: [Emc-users] What does "CNC" really mean?

[John Kasunich]

Just buy the insurance...
Only 1.6 million anyway (I saw 512GB microSD advertised for $60 each)
Actually, ought to be less than that - you should be able to negotiate a 
quantity discount.



On Fri, Sep 2, 2016, at 02:24 PM, Andy Pugh wrote:
> 
> 
> > On 2 Sep 2016, at 21:14, John Kasunich  wrote:
> > 
> > A shoebox (4" x 6" x 12") can hold 27,000 microSD cards
> 
> If you trust Fedex to not lose your $10,000,000
> 
> 
> --
> ___
> Emc-users mailing list
> Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users


-- 
  John Kasunich
  jmkasun...@fastmail.fm

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

Re: [Emc-users] What does "CNC" really mean?

[Andy Pugh]

> On 2 Sep 2016, at 21:14, John Kasunich  wrote:
> 
> A shoebox (4" x 6" x 12") can hold 27,000 microSD cards

If you trust Fedex to not lose your $10,000,000


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

Re: [Emc-users] What does "CNC" really mean?

[John Kasunich]

On Fri, Sep 2, 2016, at 01:32 PM, Dave Cole wrote:

> Yet it is hardly a blip on an $8 -  32 gig stick drive.  The old 
> days of 360K floppies and those newfangled hi-capacity 720 K and 1.44 
> meg floppies seem so long ago You could stick a 1.44 meg floppy 
> in your pocket!   That was crazy!  

Reminds me of an old saying.  "Never underestimate the bandwidth
of a station wagon full of tapes rolling down the highway at 60MPH."

The modern version would be a shoebox full of microSD cards in a
FedEx plane.

You can buy 512GB microSD cards.

They are 11x15x1mm.

A shoebox (4" x 6" x 12") can hold 27,000 microSD cards.

That is 13.8 petabytes (peta = 10^15).

FedEx can deliver it just about anywhere in 24 hours.

That works out to 160 giga-bytes per second, or about 1200 channels
of gigabit Ethernet

Of course there is the small problem of reading the data off the cards
when it arrives.


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

Re: [Emc-users] What does "CNC" really mean?

[dannym]

 Dave Cole  wrote: 
> On 9/2/2016 1:13 PM, John Kasunich wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, Sep 2, 2016, at 07:29 AM, Bruce Layne wrote:
> >>
> >> On 08/31/2016 10:22 PM, Gregg Eshelman wrote:
> >>> Surprising that just for the fun of doing it, someone hasn't built a 
> >>> punched tape reader for a 3D printer.
> >>
> >> Have you SEEN 10MB of paper tape?!?  :-o
> >>
> >> The bits on paper tape are about .1" in diameter.  That's a lot of paper
> >> tape.
> > 15.8 miles of paper actually.
> >
> > The spool would be over 35 inches in diameter and weigh 115 lbs.
> >
> Yet it is hardly a blip on an $8 -  32 gig stick drive.  The old 
> days of 360K floppies and those newfangled hi-capacity 720 K and 1.44 
> meg floppies seem so long ago You could stick a 1.44 meg floppy 
> in your pocket!   That was crazy!  
> 
> Dave

I seem to recall "the Library of Congress" was the measuring stick for data, 
just like "Olympic swimming pool" is for volume.  Of course scanned pages vs 
ASCII vs compressed ASCII make that vary a lot- and the LoC catalog was notably 
smaller in earlier decades.

Danny

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

Re: [Emc-users] What does "CNC" really mean?

[Ken Strauss]

To calculate the weight of the tape you have to know the number of "1" bits.
The contribution from hanging chad is a second order correction.

> -Original Message-
> From: Dave Cole [mailto:linuxcncro...@gmail.com]
> Sent: Friday, September 02, 2016 1:42 PM
> To: emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net
> Subject: Re: [Emc-users] What does "CNC" really mean?
>
> And what about hanging chads??  ;-)
>
> On 9/2/2016 1:34 PM, Ken Strauss wrote:
> > Is that using paper or Mylar tape? Did you account for the weight
> > reduction due to chad removed?
> >
> >> -Original Message-
> >> From: John Kasunich [mailto:jmkasun...@fastmail.fm]
> >> Sent: Friday, September 02, 2016 1:13 PM
> >> To: emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net
> >> Subject: Re: [Emc-users] What does "CNC" really mean?
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> On Fri, Sep 2, 2016, at 07:29 AM, Bruce Layne wrote:
> >>>
> >>> On 08/31/2016 10:22 PM, Gregg Eshelman wrote:
> >>>> Surprising that just for the fun of doing it, someone hasn't built
> >>>> a
> > punched
> >> tape reader for a 3D printer.
> >>>
> >>> Have you SEEN 10MB of paper tape?!?  :-o
> >>>
> >>> The bits on paper tape are about .1" in diameter.  That's a lot of
> >>> paper tape.
> >> 15.8 miles of paper actually.
> >>
> >> The spool would be over 35 inches in diameter and weigh 115 lbs.
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >>John Kasunich
> >>jmkasun...@fastmail.fm
> >>
> >>
> > --
> > --
> > --
> >> ___
> >> 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] What does "CNC" really mean?

[Dave Cole]

And what about hanging chads??  ;-)

On 9/2/2016 1:34 PM, Ken Strauss wrote:
> Is that using paper or Mylar tape? Did you account for the weight reduction
> due to chad removed?
>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: John Kasunich [mailto:jmkasun...@fastmail.fm]
>> Sent: Friday, September 02, 2016 1:13 PM
>> To: emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net
>> Subject: Re: [Emc-users] What does "CNC" really mean?
>>
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Sep 2, 2016, at 07:29 AM, Bruce Layne wrote:
>>>
>>> On 08/31/2016 10:22 PM, Gregg Eshelman wrote:
>>>> Surprising that just for the fun of doing it, someone hasn't built a
> punched
>> tape reader for a 3D printer.
>>>
>>> Have you SEEN 10MB of paper tape?!?  :-o
>>>
>>> The bits on paper tape are about .1" in diameter.  That's a lot of
>>> paper tape.
>> 15.8 miles of paper actually.
>>
>> The spool would be over 35 inches in diameter and weigh 115 lbs.
>>
>>
>> --
>>John Kasunich
>>jmkasun...@fastmail.fm
>>
>>
> 
> --
>> ___
>> 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] What does "CNC" really mean?

[John Kasunich]

On Fri, Sep 2, 2016, at 01:34 PM, Ken Strauss wrote:
> Is that using paper or Mylar tape? Did you account for the weight reduction
> due to chad removed?

Paper, and no :-)


  John Kasunich
  jmkasun...@fastmail.fm

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

Re: [Emc-users] What does "CNC" really mean?

[Ken Strauss]

Is that using paper or Mylar tape? Did you account for the weight reduction
due to chad removed?

> -Original Message-
> From: John Kasunich [mailto:jmkasun...@fastmail.fm]
> Sent: Friday, September 02, 2016 1:13 PM
> To: emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net
> Subject: Re: [Emc-users] What does "CNC" really mean?
>
>
>
> On Fri, Sep 2, 2016, at 07:29 AM, Bruce Layne wrote:
> >
> >
> > On 08/31/2016 10:22 PM, Gregg Eshelman wrote:
> > > Surprising that just for the fun of doing it, someone hasn't built a
punched
> tape reader for a 3D printer.
> >
> >
> > Have you SEEN 10MB of paper tape?!?  :-o
> >
> > The bits on paper tape are about .1" in diameter.  That's a lot of
> > paper tape.
>
> 15.8 miles of paper actually.
>
> The spool would be over 35 inches in diameter and weigh 115 lbs.
>
>
> --
>   John Kasunich
>   jmkasun...@fastmail.fm
>
>

--
> ___
> 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] What does "CNC" really mean?

[Dave Cole]

On 9/2/2016 1:13 PM, John Kasunich wrote:
>
> On Fri, Sep 2, 2016, at 07:29 AM, Bruce Layne wrote:
>>
>> On 08/31/2016 10:22 PM, Gregg Eshelman wrote:
>>> Surprising that just for the fun of doing it, someone hasn't built a 
>>> punched tape reader for a 3D printer.
>>
>> Have you SEEN 10MB of paper tape?!?  :-o
>>
>> The bits on paper tape are about .1" in diameter.  That's a lot of paper
>> tape.
> 15.8 miles of paper actually.
>
> The spool would be over 35 inches in diameter and weigh 115 lbs.
>
Yet it is hardly a blip on an $8 -  32 gig stick drive.  The old 
days of 360K floppies and those newfangled hi-capacity 720 K and 1.44 
meg floppies seem so long ago You could stick a 1.44 meg floppy 
in your pocket!   That was crazy!  

Dave

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

Re: [Emc-users] What does "CNC" really mean?

[John Kasunich]

On Fri, Sep 2, 2016, at 07:29 AM, Bruce Layne wrote:
> 
> 
> On 08/31/2016 10:22 PM, Gregg Eshelman wrote:
> > Surprising that just for the fun of doing it, someone hasn't built a 
> > punched tape reader for a 3D printer.
> 
> 
> Have you SEEN 10MB of paper tape?!?  :-o
> 
> The bits on paper tape are about .1" in diameter.  That's a lot of paper 
> tape.

15.8 miles of paper actually.

The spool would be over 35 inches in diameter and weigh 115 lbs.


-- 
  John Kasunich
  jmkasun...@fastmail.fm

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

Re: [Emc-users] What does "CNC" really mean?

[Bruce Layne]

On 08/31/2016 10:22 PM, Gregg Eshelman wrote:
> Surprising that just for the fun of doing it, someone hasn't built a punched 
> tape reader for a 3D printer.


Have you SEEN 10MB of paper tape?!?  :-o

The bits on paper tape are about .1" in diameter.  That's a lot of paper 
tape.

Trivius Maximus:  In college, I made a huge kite and used an entire box 
of surplus paper tape as the tail.  I enjoyed projects that I loosely 
categorized as the art of engineering.  I flew it next to the busy road 
leading out of the university at rush hour and nearly caused a few 
wrecks.  That paper tape dancing above the road was distracting.  If 
some kid did that today, he'd probably be arrested as a domestic 
terrorist or something.






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

Re: [Emc-users] What does "CNC" really mean?

[Dave Cole]

Turret lathes were all the rage back in WWII.   Do a Google search for 
Turret lathe WWII and you will see what I mean.
I have a old Gisholt turret lathe which is 1940's vintage and there were 
an incredible number of attachments and tooling made for that lathe for 
various jobs.   The lathes used in a production environment were setup 
to do certain specific tasks/operations. And if you needed a number of 
different operations you just got more lathes and moved the parts 
between the lathes. Setup properly, a Turret lathe can be sort of a 
semi automatic machine.If lathes were setup next to each other I 
think that one operator could run two or more lathes, depending on what 
they were doing.   My lathe has a number of adjustable stops that can be 
used to kick out the feed at different travel points.I think they 
also had hydraulic tracers for lathes back in the 40's as well.

Dave


On 8/31/2016 11:42 PM, Chris Albertson wrote:
> In the 40's I wonder how many of the parts were done on automated
> tools.  They would not be "CNC" but they might have been build on
> specialized tools that only make one kind of part.I think this is
> a lost technology. I worked a little bit on aircraft and what I
> saw was a huge dependance on jigs, fixtures and purpose built tools
> that made just one part, over and over.   I was just an intern doing
> production drawings on a computer plotter but got to walk around and
> look at the manufacturing now and then
>
> On Wed, Aug 31, 2016 at 11:33 AM, R.L. Wurdack <di...@nwlink.com> wrote:
>> When we were refurbishing the B-17 I was often amazed with the thought of
>> all those precision parts produced mainly by hand.
>> 20,000 B-17s X 4 engines X 18 pistons  + spares = one huge chunk of machine
>> time. A person could wear out several pairs of boots standing in front of a
>> lathe for that long.
>>
>> Dick
>>
>>
>> - Original Message -
>> From: "Chris Albertson" <albertson.ch...@gmail.com>
>> To: "Enhanced Machine Controller (EMC)" <emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net>
>> Sent: Wednesday, August 31, 2016 11:17 AM
>> Subject: Re: [Emc-users] What does "CNC" really mean?
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> ___
>> 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] What does "CNC" really mean?

[Andy Pugh]

> On 1 Sep 2016, at 06:42, Chris Albertson  wrote:
> 
> In the 40's I wonder how many of the parts were done on automated
> tools.

See, for example this manual copy-miller. 
http://www.lathes.co.uk/wade-bench-profiler/

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

Re: [Emc-users] What does "CNC" really mean?

[Chris Albertson]

In the 40's I wonder how many of the parts were done on automated
tools.  They would not be "CNC" but they might have been build on
specialized tools that only make one kind of part.I think this is
a lost technology. I worked a little bit on aircraft and what I
saw was a huge dependance on jigs, fixtures and purpose built tools
that made just one part, over and over.   I was just an intern doing
production drawings on a computer plotter but got to walk around and
look at the manufacturing now and then

On Wed, Aug 31, 2016 at 11:33 AM, R.L. Wurdack <di...@nwlink.com> wrote:
> When we were refurbishing the B-17 I was often amazed with the thought of
> all those precision parts produced mainly by hand.
> 20,000 B-17s X 4 engines X 18 pistons  + spares = one huge chunk of machine
> time. A person could wear out several pairs of boots standing in front of a
> lathe for that long.
>
> Dick
>
>
> - Original Message -
> From: "Chris Albertson" <albertson.ch...@gmail.com>
> To: "Enhanced Machine Controller (EMC)" <emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net>
> Sent: Wednesday, August 31, 2016 11:17 AM
> Subject: Re: [Emc-users] What does "CNC" really mean?
>
>
>>
>
>
>
> --
> ___
> Emc-users mailing list
> Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users



-- 

Chris Albertson
Redondo Beach, California

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

Re: [Emc-users] What does "CNC" really mean?

[Gregg Eshelman]

Surprising that just for the fun of doing it, someone hasn't built a punched 
tape reader for a 3D printer. Would be much less complicated that the old 
machines, just encode G-code to hole patterns and have a reader for the tape 
send the code to an Arduino with a RAMPS board.

 
  From: Dave Cole <linuxcncro...@gmail.com>
 To: emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net 
 Sent: Wednesday, August 31, 2016 11:19 AM
 Subject: Re: [Emc-users] What does "CNC" really mean?
   
I'm probably dating myself, but back in 1976 I ran an NC mill for a 
while at a shop in Detroit.  I was pretty young back then.
It was definitely not a CNC.  You loaded it with paper tapes and hoped 
that the guy punching the tape in the front office did his job.
The guy in the front office read the paper prints and typed the codes 
into the paper tape punch machine line by line.
He was pretty good.  The tapes they were using back then were 
definitely paper and they were fairly easy to tear.  No mylar in those 
tapes.
   
 
--
___
Emc-users mailing list
Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users

Re: [Emc-users] What does "CNC" really mean?

[Jon Elson]

On 08/31/2016 12:05 PM, sam sokolik wrote:
> We resurrected a MilwaukeeMatic IIIb.
>
> http://electronicsam.com/images/KandT/oldkandt.JPG
> http://electronicsam.com/images/KandT/DSCCurrent.JPG
> http://electronicsam.com/images/KandT/conversion/frntcontroller.JPG (we
> used a 386 as a tape emulator)
Oh, that's a GE 500 control, I think.
> The original control was used well into the 2000's and finally died.  We
> then converted to linuxcnc (obviously ;) )
>
> It was all discrete components - no IC's.  It did circular and linear
> interpolation (all be it - we never got it perfect - you could see the
> faceting..)  But worked quite well.  Very limited GCODE
>
> http://electronicsam.com/images/KandT/conversion/cheatsheet.JPG
>
> I don't know how many  cards it had - but it was a bunch...
> http://electronicsam.com/images/KandT/conversion/card1.JPG
> http://electronicsam.com/images/KandT/conversion/rearcontrller.JPG
> (that was only the lower half of the control)
I count 190 cards in the picture, seems like it needed a lot 
more for the model with circular interpolation.

Jon

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

Re: [Emc-users] What does "CNC" really mean?

[R.L. Wurdack]

When we were refurbishing the B-17 I was often amazed with the thought of 
all those precision parts produced mainly by hand.
20,000 B-17s X 4 engines X 18 pistons  + spares = one huge chunk of machine 
time. A person could wear out several pairs of boots standing in front of a 
lathe for that long.

Dick


- Original Message - 
From: "Chris Albertson" <albertson.ch...@gmail.com>
To: "Enhanced Machine Controller (EMC)" <emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net>
Sent: Wednesday, August 31, 2016 11:17 AM
Subject: Re: [Emc-users] What does "CNC" really mean?


> 



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

Re: [Emc-users] What does "CNC" really mean?

[Chris Albertson]

Back when the term "CNC" was coined there where other non-numeric
methods of controlling machines. and there where non-computer methods
of machine controls.   It was possible to do numeric control with no
computer (using punched paper tape) and you could do non-numeric
control using mechanical linkages. Machine control goes back to at
least the 1940's.

So at the time it was important to say you were using BOTH "numeric
control" as opposed to using cams and levers and that you were using a
computer rather then punch tape or cards.

Today it seem odd because what other reasonable method would anyone
use?  We have forgotten about the old technology, well except for hand
wheels.



On Tue, Aug 30, 2016 at 11:42 PM,   wrote:
> Got into a bizarre argument... so of course it was initially "Computer 
> Numeric Control".  I was noting people breaking it down to explain it to 
> people as "which means it's 'computer numeric controlled'" but that seems to 
> add nothing to the meaning.  In fact it's confusing.
>
> It's computer-controlled, sure.  I say "computer controlled" for people who 
> don't know the term "CNC".  But what is the "numeric" adding?  I presume that 
> meant something in like the 80's, but it's not used anymore.  Computers use 
> numbers... and bits... and memory... and code... and electricity.  It doesn't 
> seem to convey anything now but implies there's some special number thing 
> going on, which is why I always just say "CNC" or "computer controlled".
>
> Thing is, people occasionally become confused how a laser cutter or 3D 
> printer is NOT "computer numeric control", we never call those CNC.  Well, 
> they ARE all computer-controlled, equally so, really.  And numbers are 
> involved.  But the term "CNC" seems limited to mills, routers, and plasma.  A 
> waterjet or wire EDM, I just hear those without the "CNC" in front, because 
> there's no manual waterjets around.  There are handheld plasma cutters 
> through.
>
> It seems like expanding it to "computer NUMERIC control" implies that 
> something entirely different in its core concept than laser cutters or 3D 
> printers... or, like, a paper printer, and people ask what that is.
>
> I was arguing the best answer is "CNC just means CNC, and specifically 
> cutters and plasma".
>
> Danny
>
> --
> ___
> Emc-users mailing list
> Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users



-- 

Chris Albertson
Redondo Beach, California

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

Re: [Emc-users] What does "CNC" really mean?

[Ken Strauss]

I thought that was "hanging chad" rather than "shard".
See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chad_(paper)


> -Original Message-
> From: Greg Bentzinger [mailto:skullwo...@yahoo.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, August 31, 2016 1:21 PM
> To: emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net
> Subject: Re: [Emc-users] What does "CNC" really mean?
>
> CNC is one of those acronyms that we are stuck with.
>
> The more things chance the more they stay the same.
>
> The term "Horseless Carriage' has mostly died out except here in Colorado
> where they still issue legacy "Horseless Carriage" license plates for
extremely
> old vehicles. But today they still call the 4 wheelers a CAR (riage) and
Auto-
> mobile.
>
> Note that in G-Code we still use M2 to indicate the end of a program and
many
> machines still use M30 which was the original M-Code to start the rewind
of
> the NC paper tape back to the leader section. The % sign was used to
indicate
> the end of the feed leader and beginning of the actual program. At the
tail end
> the % told the teltype to punch the trailing leader (3' to 7' different
machine
> readers had different needs).
>
>
> A good way to describe the differences between CNC and NC would be that
you
> could not edit an NC program. If there were changes you could load a tape,
line
> by line, via teletype with tape reader, add or remove commands by typing
them
> in as a new tape was made. Another legacy factor that still haunts us is
that NC
> code did not support cutter compensation and was all spindle center. Most
> CAD/CAM systems still program this way only using G41/G42 for very minor
> wear corrections. ( hang the lazy b@$tards )
>
>
> An NC tape reading control - that would read a single line of code and
execute
> it, then advance the tape reading the next line and execute etc. BTW this
is also
> where the history of the term Single block came from, not allowing the
tape
> reader to read the next line until you pressed the start button. A 2 axis
control
> unit was the size of a US family home refrigerator, or 1m x 1m x 2m for
those
> elsewhere in the world.
>
> I still have a few coffee cans full of the Aluminum 35mm film cans with
many of
> the punched tapes I had to make in College to earn the title of CNC
Machinist
> and programmer.
>
> Anyone remember Florida and the issue of "Dangling shards". That is the
horror
> story of paper tape. Once you made a good part. Cut and passed QC
inspection
> you ran the paper tape back through and punched good quality mylar tape
that
> was dependable.
>
> Now, slowly we might see CNC fade out. I see 3D printer and pick and place
> machines that have just a 2 line display and loads program via USB or SDHC
> card and just runs, no provisions for editing at the machine itself.
>
> In the very high end manufacturing machines I could see a single control
> terminal running an entire flexible machining cell, or even multiple
cells. Likely
> it would use a tablet device as a slave to allow remote access when
setting up a
> specific machine.
>
> Automation doesn't really put too many people out of work, it just shifts
job
> titles and responsibilities. Switching over to robots to load and unload
> machines caused a huge improvement in quality since the part to part time
> interval was consistent, as well as less dropped parts and a cleaner work
> environment for operators. It provided time for operators to do actual
> measurements vs depending on simple go/nogo gages.
>
> Greg, Out yonder in Colorado
>
>

--
> ___
> 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] What does "CNC" really mean?

[Dave Cole]

I'm probably dating myself, but back in 1976 I ran an NC mill for a 
while at a shop in Detroit.   I was pretty young back then.
It was definitely not a CNC.  You loaded it with paper tapes and hoped 
that the guy punching the tape in the front office did his job.
The guy in the front office read the paper prints and typed the codes 
into the paper tape punch machine line by line.
He was pretty good.   The tapes they were using back then were 
definitely paper and they were fairly easy to tear.   No mylar in those 
tapes.

Dave

On 8/31/2016 1:05 PM, sam sokolik wrote:
> We resurrected a MilwaukeeMatic IIIb.
>
> http://electronicsam.com/images/KandT/oldkandt.JPG
> http://electronicsam.com/images/KandT/DSCCurrent.JPG
> http://electronicsam.com/images/KandT/conversion/frntcontroller.JPG (we
> used a 386 as a tape emulator)
>
> The original control was used well into the 2000's and finally died.  We
> then converted to linuxcnc (obviously ;) )
>
> It was all discrete components - no IC's.  It did circular and linear
> interpolation (all be it - we never got it perfect - you could see the
> faceting..)  But worked quite well.  Very limited GCODE
>
> http://electronicsam.com/images/KandT/conversion/cheatsheet.JPG
>
> I don't know how many  cards it had - but it was a bunch...
> http://electronicsam.com/images/KandT/conversion/card1.JPG
> http://electronicsam.com/images/KandT/conversion/rearcontrller.JPG
> (that was only the lower half of the control)
>
> This was a 2.5 axis + table index machine with hydraulic servos. The X,
> Z and B axis all shared the same hydraulic servo.  (they are all
> separate now)  We are still using most of the axis drive train - the Z
> axis being the most convoluted.  It runs through atleast 5 sets of zero
> backlash gears + zero backlash linear spline.  We have the backlash of
> that axis down to a few tenths.  The rest are zero.
>
> The drawings are dated 62ish and the machine was delivered to a local
> manufacturer in the late 60s.
>
> We still use the beast daily and linuxcnc has given it a new life. It
> does things now the designers only dreamed of back then. The machine is
> a tank.
>
> sam
>
>
>
> On 8/31/2016 11:37 AM, Jon Elson wrote:
>>> On 31 August 2016 at 07:42,   wrote:
 Got into a bizarre argument... so of course it was initially "Computer 
 Numeric Control".  I was noting people breaking it down to explain it to 
 people as "which means it's 'computer numeric controlled'" but that seems 
 to add nothing to the meaning.  In fact it's confusing.
>> Before CNC, there was NC (or tape-NC).  No computer.  The
>> Moog Hydra-point control read a wide tape which had the
>> positions coded on it with air nozzles, similar to a player
>> piano.  The position encoders on the machine slides also
>> used many holes and air nozzles to encode position.  The
>> control was entirely pneumatic.  The comparison between
>> commanded position and encoder position controlled Moog
>> hydraulic servo valves to move the machine by hydraulic
>> motor and leadscrew.  That was an example of "extreme" NC.
>>
>> GE made controls that were electronic and digital, and used
>> traditional (but very limited and concise) G-code.
>> These had hundreds of boards full of discrete Germanium
>> transistors.  It was all functional logic, no computer.
>> The basic control did positioning only.  If you wanted
>> linear interpolation, you had to add a couple hundred more
>> boards.  if you wanted circular interpolation, add another
>> couple hundred boards. There was no CRT, just an LED
>> position display and paper tape.
>>
>> Bridgeport and others had early CNC systems that worked
>> about the same way, no CRT, just an LCD display with very
>> terse information.
>>
>> Finally, in the late 60's or early 70's CNC with CRT
>> displays came out.
>>
>> So, the term "CNC" was used to distinguish the advanced
>> capabilities of having a computer IN the machine control, as
>> opposed to the limitations of the earlier NC systems.
>>
>> Jon
>>
>> --
>> ___
>> 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] What does "CNC" really mean?

[Greg Bentzinger]

CNC is one of those acronyms that we are stuck with.

The more things chance the more they stay the same.

The term "Horseless Carriage' has mostly died out except here in Colorado where 
they still issue legacy "Horseless Carriage" license plates for extremely old 
vehicles. But today they still call the 4 wheelers a CAR (riage) and 
Auto-mobile.

Note that in G-Code we still use M2 to indicate the end of a program and many 
machines still use M30 which was the original M-Code to start the rewind of the 
NC paper tape back to the leader section. The % sign was used to indicate the 
end of the feed leader and beginning of the actual program. At the tail end the 
% told the teltype to punch the trailing leader (3' to 7' different machine 
readers had different needs).


A good way to describe the differences between CNC and NC would be that you 
could not edit an NC program. If there were changes you could load a tape, line 
by line, via teletype with tape reader, add or remove commands by typing them 
in as a new tape was made. Another legacy factor that still haunts us is that 
NC code did not support cutter compensation and was all spindle center. Most 
CAD/CAM systems still program this way only using G41/G42 for very minor wear 
corrections. ( hang the lazy b@$tards )


An NC tape reading control - that would read a single line of code and execute 
it, then advance the tape reading the next line and execute etc. BTW this is 
also where the history of the term Single block came from, not allowing the 
tape reader to read the next line until you pressed the start button. A 2 axis 
control unit was the size of a US family home refrigerator, or 1m x 1m x 2m for 
those elsewhere in the world.

I still have a few coffee cans full of the Aluminum 35mm film cans with many of 
the punched tapes I had to make in College to earn the title of CNC Machinist 
and programmer.

Anyone remember Florida and the issue of "Dangling shards". That is the horror 
story of paper tape. Once you made a good part. Cut and passed QC inspection 
you ran the paper tape back through and punched good quality mylar tape that 
was dependable.

Now, slowly we might see CNC fade out. I see 3D printer and pick and place 
machines that have just a 2 line display and loads program via USB or SDHC card 
and just runs, no provisions for editing at the machine itself.

In the very high end manufacturing machines I could see a single control 
terminal running an entire flexible machining cell, or even multiple cells. 
Likely it would use a tablet device as a slave to allow remote access when 
setting up a specific machine.

Automation doesn't really put too many people out of work, it just shifts job 
titles and responsibilities. Switching over to robots to load and unload 
machines caused a huge improvement in quality since the part to part time 
interval was consistent, as well as less dropped parts and a cleaner work 
environment for operators. It provided time for operators to do actual 
measurements vs depending on simple go/nogo gages.

Greg, Out yonder in Colorado

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

Re: [Emc-users] What does "CNC" really mean?

[sam sokolik]

We resurrected a MilwaukeeMatic IIIb.

http://electronicsam.com/images/KandT/oldkandt.JPG
http://electronicsam.com/images/KandT/DSCCurrent.JPG
http://electronicsam.com/images/KandT/conversion/frntcontroller.JPG (we 
used a 386 as a tape emulator)

The original control was used well into the 2000's and finally died.  We 
then converted to linuxcnc (obviously ;) )

It was all discrete components - no IC's.  It did circular and linear 
interpolation (all be it - we never got it perfect - you could see the 
faceting..)  But worked quite well.  Very limited GCODE

http://electronicsam.com/images/KandT/conversion/cheatsheet.JPG

I don't know how many  cards it had - but it was a bunch...
http://electronicsam.com/images/KandT/conversion/card1.JPG
http://electronicsam.com/images/KandT/conversion/rearcontrller.JPG
(that was only the lower half of the control)

This was a 2.5 axis + table index machine with hydraulic servos. The X, 
Z and B axis all shared the same hydraulic servo.  (they are all 
separate now)  We are still using most of the axis drive train - the Z 
axis being the most convoluted.  It runs through atleast 5 sets of zero 
backlash gears + zero backlash linear spline.  We have the backlash of 
that axis down to a few tenths.  The rest are zero.

The drawings are dated 62ish and the machine was delivered to a local 
manufacturer in the late 60s.

We still use the beast daily and linuxcnc has given it a new life. It 
does things now the designers only dreamed of back then. The machine is 
a tank.

sam



On 8/31/2016 11:37 AM, Jon Elson wrote:
>> On 31 August 2016 at 07:42,   wrote:
>>> Got into a bizarre argument... so of course it was initially "Computer 
>>> Numeric Control".  I was noting people breaking it down to explain it to 
>>> people as "which means it's 'computer numeric controlled'" but that seems 
>>> to add nothing to the meaning.  In fact it's confusing.
> Before CNC, there was NC (or tape-NC).  No computer.  The
> Moog Hydra-point control read a wide tape which had the
> positions coded on it with air nozzles, similar to a player
> piano.  The position encoders on the machine slides also
> used many holes and air nozzles to encode position.  The
> control was entirely pneumatic.  The comparison between
> commanded position and encoder position controlled Moog
> hydraulic servo valves to move the machine by hydraulic
> motor and leadscrew.  That was an example of "extreme" NC.
>
> GE made controls that were electronic and digital, and used
> traditional (but very limited and concise) G-code.
> These had hundreds of boards full of discrete Germanium
> transistors.  It was all functional logic, no computer.
> The basic control did positioning only.  If you wanted
> linear interpolation, you had to add a couple hundred more
> boards.  if you wanted circular interpolation, add another
> couple hundred boards. There was no CRT, just an LED
> position display and paper tape.
>
> Bridgeport and others had early CNC systems that worked
> about the same way, no CRT, just an LCD display with very
> terse information.
>
> Finally, in the late 60's or early 70's CNC with CRT
> displays came out.
>
> So, the term "CNC" was used to distinguish the advanced
> capabilities of having a computer IN the machine control, as
> opposed to the limitations of the earlier NC systems.
>
> Jon
>
> --
> ___
> 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] What does "CNC" really mean?

[Jon Elson]

> On 31 August 2016 at 07:42,   wrote:
>> Got into a bizarre argument... so of course it was initially "Computer 
>> Numeric Control".  I was noting people breaking it down to explain it to 
>> people as "which means it's 'computer numeric controlled'" but that seems to 
>> add nothing to the meaning.  In fact it's confusing.
Before CNC, there was NC (or tape-NC).  No computer.  The 
Moog Hydra-point control read a wide tape which had the 
positions coded on it with air nozzles, similar to a player 
piano.  The position encoders on the machine slides also 
used many holes and air nozzles to encode position.  The 
control was entirely pneumatic.  The comparison between 
commanded position and encoder position controlled Moog 
hydraulic servo valves to move the machine by hydraulic 
motor and leadscrew.  That was an example of "extreme" NC.

GE made controls that were electronic and digital, and used 
traditional (but very limited and concise) G-code.
These had hundreds of boards full of discrete Germanium 
transistors.  It was all functional logic, no computer.
The basic control did positioning only.  If you wanted 
linear interpolation, you had to add a couple hundred more 
boards.  if you wanted circular interpolation, add another 
couple hundred boards. There was no CRT, just an LED 
position display and paper tape.

Bridgeport and others had early CNC systems that worked 
about the same way, no CRT, just an LCD display with very 
terse information.

Finally, in the late 60's or early 70's CNC with CRT 
displays came out.

So, the term "CNC" was used to distinguish the advanced 
capabilities of having a computer IN the machine control, as 
opposed to the limitations of the earlier NC systems.

Jon

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

Re: [Emc-users] What does "CNC" really mean?

[Jack Coats]

I remember my dad going to take an NC course at Sundstrand.  The
concept of NC (Numeric Control) vs manual control was a big step in
industry (think of looms vs Jacquard looms - a lot of manual labor
between these technologies).  The makers of big mills that milled
parts for Bell Helicopters back in the '60's (and others, this is just
where my Dad worked).  They used paper (actually mylar  backed paper
to let the tapes last longer) tape ASCII codes on a Friden Flexowriter
(a Teletype style machine mainly used to punch holes in tape for
communications or equipment control).

The N in Numeric Control was a nod to the fact that numbers were used
versus analog signals.  Today we might use the term Digital Control
instead of Numerical Control.  --  When I was in college there were
still Analog Computers being used (a waning technology even then) and
the difference between analog and digital were pronounced.  Today the
lines blur, but even today there are some occasions where analog
outshines digital in given applications.

The 'controller' that read the tapes and controlled the machine was
the size of a large refrigerator at the time, and the only computer at
the company was a new IBM 360 used in the accounting department.

Over the years the paper tape readers and controllers have been
replaced by computers with various types of input (from paper tape,
magnetic tape, to networking of various flavors).

It was a big step in industry to go from G-codes punched into paper
tape to computer controlled (still with basically the same G-codes,
just in file format instead of paper tape).

Any more, CNC vs NC is just a historical moniker (like use of
cell-phone or mobile-phone versus just telephone).  Today with
computers being so pervasive in our lives (inside light bulbs,
multiple in your car, and replacing simple analog circuits just about
everywhere) even noting that a computer is involved is less important
than the function it enables.

If CNC bothers you, deal with it.  It is a historical thingie that our
society uses.

Just enjoy the technology and its uses, or don't.  Your life is up to you.

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

Re: [Emc-users] What does "CNC" really mean?

[Valerio Bellizzomi]

On Wed, 2016-08-31 at 06:42 +, dan...@austin.rr.com wrote:
> Got into a bizarre argument... so of course it was initially "Computer 
> Numeric Control".  I was noting people breaking it down to explain it to 
> people as "which means it's 'computer numeric controlled'" but that seems to 
> add nothing to the meaning.  In fact it's confusing.
> 
> It's computer-controlled, sure.  I say "computer controlled" for people who 
> don't know the term "CNC".  But what is the "numeric" adding?  I presume that 
> meant something in like the 80's, but it's not used anymore.  Computers use 
> numbers... and bits... and memory... and code... and electricity.  It doesn't 
> seem to convey anything now but implies there's some special number thing 
> going on, which is why I always just say "CNC" or "computer controlled".
> 
> Thing is, people occasionally become confused how a laser cutter or 3D 
> printer is NOT "computer numeric control", we never call those CNC.  Well, 
> they ARE all computer-controlled, equally so, really.  And numbers are 
> involved.  But the term "CNC" seems limited to mills, routers, and plasma.  A 
> waterjet or wire EDM, I just hear those without the "CNC" in front, because 
> there's no manual waterjets around.  There are handheld plasma cutters 
> through.
> 
> It seems like expanding it to "computer NUMERIC control" implies that 
> something entirely different in its core concept than laser cutters or 3D 
> printers... or, like, a paper printer, and people ask what that is. 
> 
> I was arguing the best answer is "CNC just means CNC, and specifically 
> cutters and plasma".  
> 
> Danny


I always think the term CNC is associated with the method of control and
not with the method of material removal/addition.



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

Re: [Emc-users] What does "CNC" really mean?

[Andy Pugh]

> On 31 Aug 2016, at 09:42,   wrote:
> 
> I was noting people breaking it down to explain it to people as "which means 
> it's 'computer numeric controlled'" but that seems to add nothing to the 
> meaning.  In fact it's confusing.

Before there was CNC there was NC. 
An intermediate stage between hydraulic copying and CNC had machines moving to 
coordinates stored on paper tape or punched cards. No computers were involved, 
it was just raw numbers on the cards. 
An example might be the Hardinge HNC Lathes. 

Then computers were added that parsed G-code to calculate the positions, and 
those were a Computer version of NC. So CNC was born. See the Hardinge HCNC for 
an example of the distinction. 

Really CAM for "computer aided machining" would be a better acronym, using CAM 
to mean "converting a model to g-code" is something of a misnomer. 
--
___
Emc-users mailing list
Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users

Re: [Emc-users] What does "CNC" really mean?

[Marcus Bowman]

On 31 Aug 2016, at 07:42,  wrote:

> Got into a bizarre argument... so of course it was initially "Computer 
> Numeric Control".  I was noting people breaking it down to explain it to 
> people as "which means it's 'computer numeric controlled'" but that seems to 
> add nothing to the meaning.  In fact it's confusing.

unless you know the history, which most "consumers" don't; and that makes it 
difficult to explain to the lay person.
Ssome notes that might help:
"Early industrial automation systems were
mechanical, and were based on cams which
moved parts of a machine in specific ways,
and the cam-auto lathe was common in factories.

The next step was Numerical Control (NC), in
which servo motors controlled by electronics
moved machine slides to positions specified
by holes punched in paper tape. (That's where the N part comes from)

Finally, as computer systems became more
widely available, Computer Numerical
Control (CNC) allowed more flexible control
of slide movement by cutting the time
required to create punched paper tape and,
latterly, adding many user-friendly features
to the process of programming and control.
(You could say the word Computer was added on at that stage simply to 
distinguish between the existing Numerical controls using paper tape, and this 
new variation which added the flexibility associated with the computer).

A lot of the early development work for NC
and CNC systems was done by universities
and military research and development
teams, and there were early moves to standardize
the way the systems worked, leading
to the RS274 standard for commands to control
these machines. This led on to the Next
Generation Controller (NGC) project by the
American National Institute for Standards
and Technology (NIST) which resulted in a
set of standards for the RS274/NGC control
language interpreter and produced a core
set of software for controlling the movements
of the axes of a machine tool. That
core software lies at the heart of much of the
CNC control software currently in use industrially,
as well as in the home workshop. Any
specially written custom control systems
should conform to the RS274/NGC standards
so that all CNC systems should respond
in a similar way to a set of standard commands.
There is room, though, for systems
to add facilities or to interpret unassigned
commands in a specific way, and commercial
systems inevitably differ in detail as
manufacturers attempt to sell systems with
added bells and whistles."

That's a short extract from an introduction you can download free at:
http://www.cncintheworkshop.com/Part_1.html
by taking the link at the top right of the page where it says "Download the 
article here".
The notes were written for entrants to CNC machining, so they would be more 
comfortable with all this than a lay person.
> 
> It's computer-controlled, sure.  I say "computer controlled" for people who 
> don't know the term "CNC".  But what is the "numeric" adding?  I presume that 
> meant something in like the 80's, but it's not used anymore.  Computers use 
> numbers... and bits... and memory... and code... and electricity.  It doesn't 
> seem to convey anything now but implies there's some special number thing 
> going on, which is why I always just say "CNC" or "computer controlled".
> 
> Thing is, people occasionally become confused how a laser cutter or 3D 
> printer is NOT "computer numeric control", we never call those CNC.  Well, 
> they ARE all computer-controlled, equally so, really.  

Yes. But the way they have been marketed avoids pointing that out. They are a 
"new" technology for lay persons who are keen on "new" technology and computers 
and stuff, and who often have no background at all in manufacturing technology 
and often would not appreciate the links between metal-cutting machines and 
plastic printing machines. They might understand that link better once they 
have played with their printer, of course.
So in one sense they have no knowledge of the background history, and are 
comping at computer control a different way around.

> And numbers are involved.  But the term "CNC" seems limited to mills, 
> routers, and plasma.  A waterjet or wire EDM, I just hear those without the 
> "CNC" in front, because there's no manual waterjets around.  There are 
> handheld plasma cutters through.
> 
And older oxy-acetyline burners mounted on a pantograph arm whose motion is 
controlled by a simple optical sensor following a line drawn on paper. These 
used to be common. and they involved minimal electronics and no computer at 
all. In fact they were quite crude, but also reasonably effective. Our local 
steel merchant used one for years, until very recently.

> It seems like expanding it to "computer NUMERIC control" implies that 
> something entirely different in its core concept than laser cutters or 3D 
> printers... or, like, a paper printer, and people ask what that is. 
> 
> I was arguing the best answer is "CNC just means 

Re: [Emc-users] What does "CNC" really mean?

[Andrew Back]

On 31 August 2016 at 07:42,   wrote:
> Got into a bizarre argument... so of course it was initially "Computer 
> Numeric Control".  I was noting people breaking it down to explain it to 
> people as "which means it's 'computer numeric controlled'" but that seems to 
> add nothing to the meaning.  In fact it's confusing.

At the weekend I picked up an interesting little introductory book
from the 1960s, which talks about using uniselectors and relays (think
Strowger electromechanical telephone exchange) as the store and logic
of the "computer", with codes on paper tape and everything done in a
way that would seem very little like a computer to us today.

> It's computer-controlled, sure.  I say "computer controlled" for people who 
> don't know the term "CNC".  But what is the "numeric" adding?  I presume that 
> meant something in like the 80's, but it's not used anymore.  Computers use 
> numbers... and bits... and memory... and code... and electricity.  It doesn't 
> seem to convey anything now but implies there's some special number thing 
> going on, which is why I always just say "CNC" or "computer controlled".
>
> Thing is, people occasionally become confused how a laser cutter or 3D 
> printer is NOT "computer numeric control", we never call those CNC.  Well, 
> they ARE all computer-controlled, equally so, really.  And numbers are 
> involved.  But the term "CNC" seems limited to mills, routers, and plasma.  A 
> waterjet or wire EDM, I just hear those without the "CNC" in front, because 
> there's no manual waterjets around.  There are handheld plasma cutters 
> through.
>
> It seems like expanding it to "computer NUMERIC control" implies that 
> something entirely different in its core concept than laser cutters or 3D 
> printers... or, like, a paper printer, and people ask what that is.

I don't think CNC implies something different to a laser cutter or 3D
printer, and rather instead the term is less likely to be associated
with these as they pass into more general use — i.e. outside
specialist shops. With a 3D printer you also arguably have more
advanced processes going on, so the CNC bit becomes less interesting.
Similar to how these days it would be odd if you started qualifying
forms of motor vehicle transportation by noting the use of an internal
combustion engine.

Andrew

-- 
Andrew Back
http://carrierdetect.com

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

[Emc-users] What does "CNC" really mean?

[dannym]

Got into a bizarre argument... so of course it was initially "Computer Numeric 
Control".  I was noting people breaking it down to explain it to people as 
"which means it's 'computer numeric controlled'" but that seems to add nothing 
to the meaning.  In fact it's confusing.

It's computer-controlled, sure.  I say "computer controlled" for people who 
don't know the term "CNC".  But what is the "numeric" adding?  I presume that 
meant something in like the 80's, but it's not used anymore.  Computers use 
numbers... and bits... and memory... and code... and electricity.  It doesn't 
seem to convey anything now but implies there's some special number thing going 
on, which is why I always just say "CNC" or "computer controlled".

Thing is, people occasionally become confused how a laser cutter or 3D printer 
is NOT "computer numeric control", we never call those CNC.  Well, they ARE all 
computer-controlled, equally so, really.  And numbers are involved.  But the 
term "CNC" seems limited to mills, routers, and plasma.  A waterjet or wire 
EDM, I just hear those without the "CNC" in front, because there's no manual 
waterjets around.  There are handheld plasma cutters through.

It seems like expanding it to "computer NUMERIC control" implies that something 
entirely different in its core concept than laser cutters or 3D printers... or, 
like, a paper printer, and people ask what that is. 

I was arguing the best answer is "CNC just means CNC, and specifically cutters 
and plasma".  

Danny

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