[Emc-users] multiple gcode streams in parallel

[Roland Jollivet]

Have you looked at this? ;

http://www.jrkerr.com/

Regards
Roland


On 24 September 2015 at 17:05, Jerry Scharf  wrote:

> Hi,
>
> These are two completely independent machines with no coordination. Many
> times only 1 will be operating. I am trying to work out what happens when
> both are operating at the same time. It would be simpler to have two
> separate controller, but that's not where we are at right now.
>
> jerry
>
> On Thu, Sep 24, 2015 at 6:23 AM, TJoseph Powderly 
> wrote:
>
> > It doesnt sound like the task is well defined here on mail list.
> >
> > If the 2 independent(?) systems do not require interpolation _between_
> > them, then M65 thru M66 could provide the 'handshaking'.
> > Each would have a 'busy' and a 'fin' signal.
> > This is extremely sequential.
> >
> > Else please explain more,
> > and what did you see happen when
> > ~"it didnt seem ready to accept commands" ?
> >
> > TomP tjtr33
> >
> > On 09/24/2015 03:00 AM, Gregg Eshelman wrote:
> > > On 9/24/2015 12:57 AM, Dave Caroline wrote:
> > >> might be better to let the two talk to each other in some way so move
> > >> starts/runs are really synchronised properly rather than rely on
> > >> buffers.
> > >> eg classic ladder or some clocking or whatever
> > >>
> > >> Dave Caroline
> > >
> > > That sounds good. What you Do Not Want is a race condition where you
> > > have two or more independent parallel processes with nothing to ensure
> > > they always complete in the correct order.
> > >
> > > For an example of what can happen, google Therac 25
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> --
> > Monitor Your Dynamic Infrastructure at Any Scale With Datadog!
> > Get real-time metrics from all of your servers, apps and tools
> > in one place.
> > SourceForge users - Click here to start your Free Trial of Datadog now!
> > http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=241902991=/4140
> > ___
> > Emc-users mailing list
> > Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net
> > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Jerry Scharf
> FINsix IT
> 650.285.6361 w
> 650.279.7017 m
>
> --
> Monitor Your Dynamic Infrastructure at Any Scale With Datadog!
> Get real-time metrics from all of your servers, apps and tools
> in one place.
> SourceForge users - Click here to start your Free Trial of Datadog now!
> http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=241902991=/4140
> ___
> 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] multiple gcode streams in parallel

[Ron Ginger]

Mach4 Industrial allows multiple instances of the full system including 
gcode interpretation. It is only being supported with 6 instances but 
the design is not limited. Lua scripts can start with

inst = mc.mcGetInstance()

if (inst == 0) then

so full coordination between instances and scripts is possible.

I talked to Brian Barker about this and he said it was one of the base 
design considerations on Mach4 and not likely to be something that could 
be added under existing code.

ron ginger


> On 24 September 2015 at 17:05, Jerry Scharf  wrote:
>
>> >Hi,
>> >
>> >These are two completely independent machines with no coordination. Many
>> >times only 1 will be operating. I am trying to work out what happens when
>> >both are operating at the same time. It would be simpler to have two
>> >separate controller, but that's not where we are at right now.
>> >
>> >jerry


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

Re: [Emc-users] multiple gcode streams in parallel

[Dave Cole]

On 9/25/2015 4:31 PM, Ron Ginger wrote:
> Mach4 Industrial allows multiple instances of the full system including
> gcode interpretation. It is only being supported with 6 instances but
> the design is not limited.

That's really nice!  :-)

Dave

---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus


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

Re: [Emc-users] multiple gcode streams in parallel

[Karlsson & Wang]

> ..
> What would be useful in such a setup is an ability to pass information 
> directly from one LCNC host to another to coordinate functions such as 
> transferring a pallet with work on it to another machine for additional 
> operations.
> 
> One example would be two machines doing an operation that takes 30 
> minutes, both feeding to a 3rd machine doing an operation that takes 
> less than 30 minutes. With all three communicating, the 3rd machine 
> could report when it's free and whichever feeder is farthest along on 
> its job would be prioritized to transfer its pallet next.

General purpose IO, M62 to M65 turn on a digital output and M66 wait on input. 
I guess a synchonization primitive might be useful so that two controllers wait 
until both of them have reached the same numbered synchronization point.

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

Re: [Emc-users] multiple gcode streams in parallel

[Dave Caroline]

Actually this problem touches the independent axes problem that I
foresee in my sliding head lathe where an axis that will be cutting
later needs to start part way though another's coordinated move in
order to save time.

Dave Caroline

On 24/09/2015, andy pugh  wrote:
> On 24 September 2015 at 02:18, Jerry Scharf  wrote:
>> I now need to extend it to run two separate robots off the same linuxcnc
>> controller and receiver program
>
> If you need the robots to synch then I think you need to be a bit cleverer.
>
> If you imagine one robot moving in XYZ space and another moving in UVW
> space I think you need a pre-processor that "interleaves" the G-code.
> This will include breaking up an XYZ move to start a UVW move and
> vice-versa.
>
> All the axes of a G-code line reach the end point at the same time. So
> to coordinate two robots you need to combine the moves onto one line,
> otherwise you can't have both moving.
>
> --
> atp
> If you can't fix it, you don't own it.
> http://www.ifixit.com/Manifesto
>
> --
> Monitor Your Dynamic Infrastructure at Any Scale With Datadog!
> Get real-time metrics from all of your servers, apps and tools
> in one place.
> SourceForge users - Click here to start your Free Trial of Datadog now!
> http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=241902991=/4140
> ___
> Emc-users mailing list
> Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users
>

--
Monitor Your Dynamic Infrastructure at Any Scale With Datadog!
Get real-time metrics from all of your servers, apps and tools
in one place.
SourceForge users - Click here to start your Free Trial of Datadog now!
http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=241902991=/4140
___
Emc-users mailing list
Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users

Re: [Emc-users] multiple gcode streams in parallel

[andy pugh]

On 24 September 2015 at 02:18, Jerry Scharf  wrote:
> I now need to extend it to run two separate robots off the same linuxcnc
> controller and receiver program

If you need the robots to synch then I think you need to be a bit cleverer.

If you imagine one robot moving in XYZ space and another moving in UVW
space I think you need a pre-processor that "interleaves" the G-code.
This will include breaking up an XYZ move to start a UVW move and
vice-versa.

All the axes of a G-code line reach the end point at the same time. So
to coordinate two robots you need to combine the moves onto one line,
otherwise you can't have both moving.

-- 
atp
If you can't fix it, you don't own it.
http://www.ifixit.com/Manifesto

--
Monitor Your Dynamic Infrastructure at Any Scale With Datadog!
Get real-time metrics from all of your servers, apps and tools
in one place.
SourceForge users - Click here to start your Free Trial of Datadog now!
http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=241902991=/4140
___
Emc-users mailing list
Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users

Re: [Emc-users] multiple gcode streams in parallel

[Stuart Stevenson]

Sounds to me like one 5 axis machine. You should be able to issue one line
of code. All 5 axes should move coordinated in relation to each axis home
position no matter the distance or orientation of the components.

On Thu, Sep 24, 2015 at 5:21 AM, andy pugh  wrote:

> On 24 September 2015 at 02:18, Jerry Scharf  wrote:
> > I now need to extend it to run two separate robots off the same linuxcnc
> > controller and receiver program
>
> If you need the robots to synch then I think you need to be a bit cleverer.
>
> If you imagine one robot moving in XYZ space and another moving in UVW
> space I think you need a pre-processor that "interleaves" the G-code.
> This will include breaking up an XYZ move to start a UVW move and
> vice-versa.
>
> All the axes of a G-code line reach the end point at the same time. So
> to coordinate two robots you need to combine the moves onto one line,
> otherwise you can't have both moving.
>
> --
> atp
> If you can't fix it, you don't own it.
> http://www.ifixit.com/Manifesto
>
>
> --
> Monitor Your Dynamic Infrastructure at Any Scale With Datadog!
> Get real-time metrics from all of your servers, apps and tools
> in one place.
> SourceForge users - Click here to start your Free Trial of Datadog now!
> http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=241902991=/4140
> ___
> Emc-users mailing list
> Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users
>



-- 
Addressee is the intended audience.
If you are not the addressee then my consent is not given for you to read
this email furthermore it is my wish you would close this without saving or
reading, and cease and desist from saving or opening my private
correspondence.
Thank you for honoring my wish.
--
Monitor Your Dynamic Infrastructure at Any Scale With Datadog!
Get real-time metrics from all of your servers, apps and tools
in one place.
SourceForge users - Click here to start your Free Trial of Datadog now!
http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=241902991=/4140
___
Emc-users mailing list
Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users

Re: [Emc-users] multiple gcode streams in parallel

[andy pugh]

On 24 September 2015 at 12:44, Dave Caroline
 wrote:
> Actually this problem touches the independent axes problem that I
> foresee in my sliding head lathe where an axis that will be cutting
> later needs to start part way though another's coordinated move in
> order to save time.

I think this needs you to split moves. Maybe it is something that a
preprocessor could do.

If you are doing an X-move from 0 to 50 and want to start U when X is
at 25 then

G1 X50

becomes

G1 X25
G1 X50 U50

I think that that means that the X has to stop, though, or the moves
are not coordinated. (even though you don't necessarily care)

-- 
atp
If you can't fix it, you don't own it.
http://www.ifixit.com/Manifesto

--
Monitor Your Dynamic Infrastructure at Any Scale With Datadog!
Get real-time metrics from all of your servers, apps and tools
in one place.
SourceForge users - Click here to start your Free Trial of Datadog now!
http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=241902991=/4140
___
Emc-users mailing list
Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users

Re: [Emc-users] multiple gcode streams in parallel

[Dave Caroline]

might be better to let the two talk to each other in some way so move
starts/runs are really synchronised properly rather than rely on
buffers.
eg classic ladder or some clocking or whatever

Dave Caroline

On 24/09/2015, Jerry Scharf  wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I have hacked up a simple program to allow a client to connect up to the
> linuxcnc system and issue g code commands. It's fairly stupid, just enough
> to get what we needed done.
>
> I now need to extend it to run two separate robots off the same linuxcnc
> controller and receiver program. This brought up a question about the
> python interface.
>
> Can I issue two separate motion commands for different axes at the same
> time? One bot is a single axis on b and the other uses a,x,y,z. The motion
> for each is serialized by the nature of the network buffers, but I am
> trying to understand whether I need to serialize the commands between the
> different streams. It seems right now like if I move the machine manually
> from the GUI, the program then thinks the controller is not ready to accept
> mdi commands.
>
> I have an allocation command that is being extended to have you tell it
> which axes this client wants to move. This prevents two programs from
> fighting over a given stepper...
>
> It's really minimal code but I will share it if people are interested.
>
> jerry
>
> --
> Jerry Scharf
> FINsix IT
> 650.285.6361 w
> 650.279.7017 m
> --
> Monitor Your Dynamic Infrastructure at Any Scale With Datadog!
> Get real-time metrics from all of your servers, apps and tools
> in one place.
> SourceForge users - Click here to start your Free Trial of Datadog now!
> http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=241902991=/4140
> ___
> Emc-users mailing list
> Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users
>

--
Monitor Your Dynamic Infrastructure at Any Scale With Datadog!
Get real-time metrics from all of your servers, apps and tools
in one place.
SourceForge users - Click here to start your Free Trial of Datadog now!
http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=241902991=/4140
___
Emc-users mailing list
Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users

Re: [Emc-users] multiple gcode streams in parallel

[Gregg Eshelman]

On 9/24/2015 12:57 AM, Dave Caroline wrote:
> might be better to let the two talk to each other in some way so move
> starts/runs are really synchronised properly rather than rely on
> buffers.
> eg classic ladder or some clocking or whatever
>
> Dave Caroline

That sounds good. What you Do Not Want is a race condition where you 
have two or more independent parallel processes with nothing to ensure 
they always complete in the correct order.

For an example of what can happen, google Therac 25


---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus


--
Monitor Your Dynamic Infrastructure at Any Scale With Datadog!
Get real-time metrics from all of your servers, apps and tools
in one place.
SourceForge users - Click here to start your Free Trial of Datadog now!
http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=241902991=/4140
___
Emc-users mailing list
Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users

Re: [Emc-users] multiple gcode streams in parallel

[TJoseph Powderly]

It doesnt sound like the task is well defined here on mail list.

If the 2 independent(?) systems do not require interpolation _between_ 
them, then M65 thru M66 could provide the 'handshaking'.
Each would have a 'busy' and a 'fin' signal.
This is extremely sequential.

Else please explain more,
and what did you see happen when
~"it didnt seem ready to accept commands" ?

TomP tjtr33

On 09/24/2015 03:00 AM, Gregg Eshelman wrote:
> On 9/24/2015 12:57 AM, Dave Caroline wrote:
>> might be better to let the two talk to each other in some way so move
>> starts/runs are really synchronised properly rather than rely on
>> buffers.
>> eg classic ladder or some clocking or whatever
>>
>> Dave Caroline
>
> That sounds good. What you Do Not Want is a race condition where you
> have two or more independent parallel processes with nothing to ensure
> they always complete in the correct order.
>
> For an example of what can happen, google Therac 25
>


--
Monitor Your Dynamic Infrastructure at Any Scale With Datadog!
Get real-time metrics from all of your servers, apps and tools
in one place.
SourceForge users - Click here to start your Free Trial of Datadog now!
http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=241902991=/4140
___
Emc-users mailing list
Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users

Re: [Emc-users] multiple gcode streams in parallel

[Jerry Scharf]

Hi,

These are two completely independent machines with no coordination. Many
times only 1 will be operating. I am trying to work out what happens when
both are operating at the same time. It would be simpler to have two
separate controller, but that's not where we are at right now.

jerry

On Thu, Sep 24, 2015 at 6:23 AM, TJoseph Powderly  wrote:

> It doesnt sound like the task is well defined here on mail list.
>
> If the 2 independent(?) systems do not require interpolation _between_
> them, then M65 thru M66 could provide the 'handshaking'.
> Each would have a 'busy' and a 'fin' signal.
> This is extremely sequential.
>
> Else please explain more,
> and what did you see happen when
> ~"it didnt seem ready to accept commands" ?
>
> TomP tjtr33
>
> On 09/24/2015 03:00 AM, Gregg Eshelman wrote:
> > On 9/24/2015 12:57 AM, Dave Caroline wrote:
> >> might be better to let the two talk to each other in some way so move
> >> starts/runs are really synchronised properly rather than rely on
> >> buffers.
> >> eg classic ladder or some clocking or whatever
> >>
> >> Dave Caroline
> >
> > That sounds good. What you Do Not Want is a race condition where you
> > have two or more independent parallel processes with nothing to ensure
> > they always complete in the correct order.
> >
> > For an example of what can happen, google Therac 25
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Monitor Your Dynamic Infrastructure at Any Scale With Datadog!
> Get real-time metrics from all of your servers, apps and tools
> in one place.
> SourceForge users - Click here to start your Free Trial of Datadog now!
> http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=241902991=/4140
> ___
> Emc-users mailing list
> Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users
>



-- 
Jerry Scharf
FINsix IT
650.285.6361 w
650.279.7017 m
--
Monitor Your Dynamic Infrastructure at Any Scale With Datadog!
Get real-time metrics from all of your servers, apps and tools
in one place.
SourceForge users - Click here to start your Free Trial of Datadog now!
http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=241902991=/4140
___
Emc-users mailing list
Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users

Re: [Emc-users] multiple gcode streams in parallel

[Dave Cole]

FWIW,

The Modbus TCP interface in Classic Ladder supports both a client and a 
server, so peer to peer networking with connections to Hal and Gcode 
interlocks would be possible with the standard software.

Dave

On 9/24/2015 7:44 AM, Dave Caroline wrote:
> Actually this problem touches the independent axes problem that I
> foresee in my sliding head lathe where an axis that will be cutting
> later needs to start part way though another's coordinated move in
> order to save time.
>
> Dave Caroline
>
> On 24/09/2015, andy pugh  wrote:
>> On 24 September 2015 at 02:18, Jerry Scharf  wrote:
>>> I now need to extend it to run two separate robots off the same linuxcnc
>>> controller and receiver program
>> If you need the robots to synch then I think you need to be a bit cleverer.
>>
>> If you imagine one robot moving in XYZ space and another moving in UVW
>> space I think you need a pre-processor that "interleaves" the G-code.
>> This will include breaking up an XYZ move to start a UVW move and
>> vice-versa.
>>
>> All the axes of a G-code line reach the end point at the same time. So
>> to coordinate two robots you need to combine the moves onto one line,
>> otherwise you can't have both moving.
>>
>> --
>> atp
>> If you can't fix it, you don't own it.
>> http://www.ifixit.com/Manifesto
>>
>> --
>> Monitor Your Dynamic Infrastructure at Any Scale With Datadog!
>> Get real-time metrics from all of your servers, apps and tools
>> in one place.
>> SourceForge users - Click here to start your Free Trial of Datadog now!
>> http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=241902991=/4140
>> ___
>> Emc-users mailing list
>> Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net
>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users
>>
> --
> Monitor Your Dynamic Infrastructure at Any Scale With Datadog!
> Get real-time metrics from all of your servers, apps and tools
> in one place.
> SourceForge users - Click here to start your Free Trial of Datadog now!
> http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=241902991=/4140
> ___
> Emc-users mailing list
> Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users

---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus


--
Monitor Your Dynamic Infrastructure at Any Scale With Datadog!
Get real-time metrics from all of your servers, apps and tools
in one place.
SourceForge users - Click here to start your Free Trial of Datadog now!
http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=241902991=/4140
___
Emc-users mailing list
Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users

Re: [Emc-users] multiple gcode streams in parallel

[Ralph Stirling]

I believe the Machinekit fork of LinuxCNC is designed to allow multiple
G-code interpreters and multiple motion modules.  I'm not sure how much
has been implemented and tested along those lines yet, but you might
check in with the machinekit email list.

-- Ralph

From: Jerry Scharf [jsch...@finsix.com]
Sent: Thursday, September 24, 2015 8:05 AM
To: Enhanced Machine Controller (EMC)
Subject: Re: [Emc-users] multiple gcode streams in parallel

Hi,

These are two completely independent machines with no coordination. Many
times only 1 will be operating. I am trying to work out what happens when
both are operating at the same time. It would be simpler to have two
separate controller, but that's not where we are at right now.

jerry

On Thu, Sep 24, 2015 at 6:23 AM, TJoseph Powderly <tjt...@gmail.com> wrote:

> It doesnt sound like the task is well defined here on mail list.
>
> If the 2 independent(?) systems do not require interpolation _between_
> them, then M65 thru M66 could provide the 'handshaking'.
> Each would have a 'busy' and a 'fin' signal.
> This is extremely sequential.
>
> Else please explain more,
> and what did you see happen when
> ~"it didnt seem ready to accept commands" ?
>
> TomP tjtr33
>
> On 09/24/2015 03:00 AM, Gregg Eshelman wrote:
> > On 9/24/2015 12:57 AM, Dave Caroline wrote:
> >> might be better to let the two talk to each other in some way so move
> >> starts/runs are really synchronised properly rather than rely on
> >> buffers.
> >> eg classic ladder or some clocking or whatever
> >>
> >> Dave Caroline
> >
> > That sounds good. What you Do Not Want is a race condition where you
> > have two or more independent parallel processes with nothing to ensure
> > they always complete in the correct order.
> >
> > For an example of what can happen, google Therac 25
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Monitor Your Dynamic Infrastructure at Any Scale With Datadog!
> Get real-time metrics from all of your servers, apps and tools
> in one place.
> SourceForge users - Click here to start your Free Trial of Datadog now!
> http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=241902991=/4140
> ___
> Emc-users mailing list
> Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users
>



--
Jerry Scharf
FINsix IT
650.285.6361 w
650.279.7017 m
--
Monitor Your Dynamic Infrastructure at Any Scale With Datadog!
Get real-time metrics from all of your servers, apps and tools
in one place.
SourceForge users - Click here to start your Free Trial of Datadog now!
http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=241902991=/4140
___
Emc-users mailing list
Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users

--
Monitor Your Dynamic Infrastructure at Any Scale With Datadog!
Get real-time metrics from all of your servers, apps and tools
in one place.
SourceForge users - Click here to start your Free Trial of Datadog now!
http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=241902991=/4140
___
Emc-users mailing list
Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users

Re: [Emc-users] multiple gcode streams in parallel

[Dave Cole]

>>It would be simpler to have two
separate controller, but that's not where we are at right now.

Simple is good.

For another $200 you can get a second PC.

If this is a one-off project I'd strongly consider throwing more 
hardware at the project.

I don't know what your labor rates are, but $200 doesn't buy much these 
days.

Are you guys making a machine to assemble/process your laptop charger 
product?   That looks nice.

Dave


On 9/24/2015 11:05 AM, Jerry Scharf wrote:
> Hi,
>
> These are two completely independent machines with no coordination. Many
> times only 1 will be operating. I am trying to work out what happens when
> both are operating at the same time. It would be simpler to have two
> separate controller, but that's not where we are at right now.
>
> jerry
>
> On Thu, Sep 24, 2015 at 6:23 AM, TJoseph Powderly  wrote:
>
>> It doesnt sound like the task is well defined here on mail list.
>>
>> If the 2 independent(?) systems do not require interpolation _between_
>> them, then M65 thru M66 could provide the 'handshaking'.
>> Each would have a 'busy' and a 'fin' signal.
>> This is extremely sequential.
>>
>> Else please explain more,
>> and what did you see happen when
>> ~"it didnt seem ready to accept commands" ?
>>
>> TomP tjtr33
>>
>> On 09/24/2015 03:00 AM, Gregg Eshelman wrote:
>>> On 9/24/2015 12:57 AM, Dave Caroline wrote:
 might be better to let the two talk to each other in some way so move
 starts/runs are really synchronised properly rather than rely on
 buffers.
 eg classic ladder or some clocking or whatever

 Dave Caroline
>>> That sounds good. What you Do Not Want is a race condition where you
>>> have two or more independent parallel processes with nothing to ensure
>>> they always complete in the correct order.
>>>
>>> For an example of what can happen, google Therac 25
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Monitor Your Dynamic Infrastructure at Any Scale With Datadog!
>> Get real-time metrics from all of your servers, apps and tools
>> in one place.
>> SourceForge users - Click here to start your Free Trial of Datadog now!
>> http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=241902991=/4140
>> ___
>> Emc-users mailing list
>> Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net
>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users
>>
>
>

---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus


--
Monitor Your Dynamic Infrastructure at Any Scale With Datadog!
Get real-time metrics from all of your servers, apps and tools
in one place.
SourceForge users - Click here to start your Free Trial of Datadog now!
http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=241902991=/4140
___
Emc-users mailing list
Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users

Re: [Emc-users] multiple gcode streams in parallel

[andy pugh]

On 24 September 2015 at 19:24, Jerry Scharf  wrote:
> There is an axis for the second robot and the hal files are all set up.
> This is about the python interface and running two separate motion commands
> at the same time.

The Python interface sends MDI, MDI commands run in strict sequence.

Depending on the application the limit3 component might be a perfectly
adequate motion controller for a single axis at a time.
(You can just set the speed and target position and it will send out a
position command to a stepgen or PID)

-- 
atp
If you can't fix it, you don't own it.
http://www.ifixit.com/Manifesto

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

Re: [Emc-users] multiple gcode streams in parallel

[Gene Heskett]

On Thursday 24 September 2015 04:00:46 Gregg Eshelman wrote:

> On 9/24/2015 12:57 AM, Dave Caroline wrote:
> > might be better to let the two talk to each other in some way so
> > move starts/runs are really synchronised properly rather than rely
> > on buffers.
> > eg classic ladder or some clocking or whatever
> >
> > Dave Caroline
>
> That sounds good. What you Do Not Want is a race condition where you
> have two or more independent parallel processes with nothing to ensure
> they always complete in the correct order.

Well, the epic hairball that is NFS has been retired here, in favor of 
sshfs.

I have nuked all the fstab entries related to NFS mounts.

First, I installed sshfs on all machines.

Then on each machine I have created an /sshnet/machine_name directory for 
all the other machines.  That then was "sudo chown -R gene:gene /sshnet"
If left as owned by root, then the mounting must be done using a root pw, 
which doesn't exist on our LCNC installs.

Then on each machine (logged into the others with an ssh -Y login)
do
sshfs user@somehost:/just/the/path /where/i/want/it

and to unmount:

fusermount -u /where/i/want/it

Now any file manager like mc, can cd /sshnet/machine_alias and look at 
those directories accessable by gene.

>From any machine to any machine EXCEPT from "lathe" to "shop", that gets 
a "connection reset by peer" return.  So the machine named shop is still 
being a spoilt brat, but thats a hell of a lot closer to having a 
transparent file sharing local network wide than I had at 4:00 this 
morning.

The only fly is that when the sshfs link is mounted, those directories I 
made owned by me so I wasn't asked for a root pw that does not exist, 
have been chowned back to root:root.  If they stay that way, it will be 
more tap dancing to reset that before re-initializing the share after a 
reboot.

And it didn't take but 2 folks on the TDE list to make me aware of sshfs, 
and to show the example syntax pasted above.

Now, out to fix and add the new tool code to blanket-chest3.ngc that I 
wrote about way too early this morning.

> For an example of what can happen, google Therac 25

I think I did that once before.  I guess that was an instant legend in 
its own time. ;-)

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] multiple gcode streams in parallel

[Jerry Scharf]

There is an axis for the second robot and the hal files are all set up.
This is about the python interface and running two separate motion commands
at the same time. If I can do that, then a simple threading system works,
otherwise it needs to be fancier...

jerry

On Thu, Sep 24, 2015 at 10:47 AM, Karlsson & Wang <
nicklas.karls...@karlssonwang.se> wrote:

> > ...
> > I now need to extend it to run two separate robots off the same linuxcnc
> > controller and receiver program. This brought up a question about the
> > python interface.
>
> Add an extra axis ?
>
>
> --
> ___
> Emc-users mailing list
> Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users
>



-- 
Jerry Scharf
FINsix IT
650.285.6361 w
650.279.7017 m
--
___
Emc-users mailing list
Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users

Re: [Emc-users] multiple gcode streams in parallel

[Jerry Scharf]

Dave,

This is what I thought and after talking to the person, we can wait the few
days to get a separate system in for him. Everyone will be happy this way.
It's a small system so I am going the BBB/cape/machinekit way (I hate it
when the controller is larger than the machine.).

Sounds like there is little interest in the remote gcode stuff, which is
fine.

jerry

On Thu, Sep 24, 2015 at 12:20 PM, Dave Cole  wrote:

> I think everyone is trying to find a way to do what you want with the
> existing software.
>
> In order to run two different Gcode programs at the same time, you would
> need two gcode interpreters and two planners running at the same time.
>
> That is not possible with the existing software that I am aware of:
> LinuxCNC or Machinekit.
>
> If someone tells me I am wrong, I would be happy to test it.  :-)
>
> That would be very nice to have for custom machines.   As in the case of
> gantry machines that need to transfer parts to another a joining gantry
> machine where they could physically collide.
>
> The ability to plug in different interpreters and planners has been
> discussed on the Machinekit email list but I don't know how far that has
> progressed.
> Keep in mind that the ability to run different interpreters and planners
> as plug in's is much different than running multiple instances of
> interpreters and planners which is what you would like.
>
> Dave
>
>
>
> On 9/24/2015 2:24 PM, Jerry Scharf wrote:
> > There is an axis for the second robot and the hal files are all set up.
> > This is about the python interface and running two separate motion
> commands
> > at the same time. If I can do that, then a simple threading system works,
> > otherwise it needs to be fancier...
> >
> > jerry
> >
> > On Thu, Sep 24, 2015 at 10:47 AM, Karlsson & Wang <
> > nicklas.karls...@karlssonwang.se> wrote:
> >
> >>> ...
> >>> I now need to extend it to run two separate robots off the same
> linuxcnc
> >>> controller and receiver program. This brought up a question about the
> >>> python interface.
> >> Add an extra axis ?
> >>
> >>
> >>
> --
> >> ___
> >> Emc-users mailing list
> >> Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net
> >> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users
> >>
> >
> >
>
> ---
> This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
> https://www.avast.com/antivirus
>
>
>
> --
> ___
> Emc-users mailing list
> Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users
>



-- 
Jerry Scharf
FINsix IT
650.285.6361 w
650.279.7017 m
--
___
Emc-users mailing list
Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users

Re: [Emc-users] multiple gcode streams in parallel

[Jerry Scharf]

thanks for the input so far.

I know a second controller would be a better solution, but I need something
this week... I will look at some hardware for the next couple weeks. A
couple hours of programming now would save us time, which is our critical
resource.

I know about machinekit, but had trouble getting it running on the system
in question.

I was really hoping that someone would just answer the simple question of
whether having two different command streams could have motion commands
operating simultaneously on different axes of the same linuxcnc controller.

They don't let me near the production assembly systems. :) I just build
things for engineering and test. Yes, a small 65W laptop adapter is a
really cool thing.

jerry


On Thu, Sep 24, 2015 at 8:32 AM, Dave Cole  wrote:

> >>It would be simpler to have two
> separate controller, but that's not where we are at right now.
>
> Simple is good.
>
> For another $200 you can get a second PC.
>
> If this is a one-off project I'd strongly consider throwing more
> hardware at the project.
>
> I don't know what your labor rates are, but $200 doesn't buy much these
> days.
>
> Are you guys making a machine to assemble/process your laptop charger
> product?   That looks nice.
>
> Dave
>
>
> On 9/24/2015 11:05 AM, Jerry Scharf wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > These are two completely independent machines with no coordination. Many
> > times only 1 will be operating. I am trying to work out what happens when
> > both are operating at the same time. It would be simpler to have two
> > separate controller, but that's not where we are at right now.
> >
> > jerry
> >
> > On Thu, Sep 24, 2015 at 6:23 AM, TJoseph Powderly 
> wrote:
> >
> >> It doesnt sound like the task is well defined here on mail list.
> >>
> >> If the 2 independent(?) systems do not require interpolation _between_
> >> them, then M65 thru M66 could provide the 'handshaking'.
> >> Each would have a 'busy' and a 'fin' signal.
> >> This is extremely sequential.
> >>
> >> Else please explain more,
> >> and what did you see happen when
> >> ~"it didnt seem ready to accept commands" ?
> >>
> >> TomP tjtr33
> >>
> >> On 09/24/2015 03:00 AM, Gregg Eshelman wrote:
> >>> On 9/24/2015 12:57 AM, Dave Caroline wrote:
>  might be better to let the two talk to each other in some way so move
>  starts/runs are really synchronised properly rather than rely on
>  buffers.
>  eg classic ladder or some clocking or whatever
> 
>  Dave Caroline
> >>> That sounds good. What you Do Not Want is a race condition where you
> >>> have two or more independent parallel processes with nothing to ensure
> >>> they always complete in the correct order.
> >>>
> >>> For an example of what can happen, google Therac 25
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> --
> >> Monitor Your Dynamic Infrastructure at Any Scale With Datadog!
> >> Get real-time metrics from all of your servers, apps and tools
> >> in one place.
> >> SourceForge users - Click here to start your Free Trial of Datadog now!
> >> http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=241902991=/4140
> >> ___
> >> Emc-users mailing list
> >> Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net
> >> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users
> >>
> >
> >
>
> ---
> This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
> https://www.avast.com/antivirus
>
>
>
> --
> Monitor Your Dynamic Infrastructure at Any Scale With Datadog!
> Get real-time metrics from all of your servers, apps and tools
> in one place.
> SourceForge users - Click here to start your Free Trial of Datadog now!
> http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=241902991=/4140
> ___
> Emc-users mailing list
> Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users
>



-- 
Jerry Scharf
FINsix IT
650.285.6361 w
650.279.7017 m
--
___
Emc-users mailing list
Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users

Re: [Emc-users] multiple gcode streams in parallel

[Dave Cole]

I suspect there is actually a lot of interest in being able to run 
multiple paths at the same time, but I also think it is likely a lot of 
development work to make it happen.

Dave

On 9/24/2015 4:05 PM, Jerry Scharf wrote:
> Dave,
>
> This is what I thought and after talking to the person, we can wait the few
> days to get a separate system in for him. Everyone will be happy this way.
> It's a small system so I am going the BBB/cape/machinekit way (I hate it
> when the controller is larger than the machine.).
>
> Sounds like there is little interest in the remote gcode stuff, which is
> fine.
>
> jerry
>
> On Thu, Sep 24, 2015 at 12:20 PM, Dave Cole  wrote:
>
>> I think everyone is trying to find a way to do what you want with the
>> existing software.
>>
>> In order to run two different Gcode programs at the same time, you would
>> need two gcode interpreters and two planners running at the same time.
>>
>> That is not possible with the existing software that I am aware of:
>> LinuxCNC or Machinekit.
>>
>> If someone tells me I am wrong, I would be happy to test it.  :-)
>>
>> That would be very nice to have for custom machines.   As in the case of
>> gantry machines that need to transfer parts to another a joining gantry
>> machine where they could physically collide.
>>
>> The ability to plug in different interpreters and planners has been
>> discussed on the Machinekit email list but I don't know how far that has
>> progressed.
>> Keep in mind that the ability to run different interpreters and planners
>> as plug in's is much different than running multiple instances of
>> interpreters and planners which is what you would like.
>>
>> Dave
>>
>>
>>
>> On 9/24/2015 2:24 PM, Jerry Scharf wrote:
>>> There is an axis for the second robot and the hal files are all set up.
>>> This is about the python interface and running two separate motion
>> commands
>>> at the same time. If I can do that, then a simple threading system works,
>>> otherwise it needs to be fancier...
>>>
>>> jerry
>>>
>>> On Thu, Sep 24, 2015 at 10:47 AM, Karlsson & Wang <
>>> nicklas.karls...@karlssonwang.se> wrote:
>>>
> ...
> I now need to extend it to run two separate robots off the same
>> linuxcnc
> controller and receiver program. This brought up a question about the
> python interface.
 Add an extra axis ?



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

>>>
>> ---
>> This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
>> https://www.avast.com/antivirus
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> ___
>> Emc-users mailing list
>> Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net
>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users
>>
>
>

---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus


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

Re: [Emc-users] multiple gcode streams in parallel

[robert - Innovative-RC]

On 24/09/2015 12:44, Dave Caroline wrote:
> Actually this problem touches the independent axes problem that I
> foresee in my sliding head lathe where an axis that will be cutting
> later needs to start part way though another's coordinated move in
> order to save time.
>
> Dave Caroline
>
yep i have the same problem and not just with sliding heads, with a dual 
turret lathe where dual path control is much needed also.

one machine had two controls linked but it seems abit of a old school 
way todo things now days realy. where my sliding head has dual path 
control. i know newer controls can have much more than 2 program paths 
running.

  we just issue !L as a wait code when we want one program to wait for 
the other to get to a point, other wise they run at there own pase, we 
use !Ln also works and easyer to keep track off in a program, is the 
only way when more than 2 programs are running at once. (i know fanuc 
use M codes todo this,  above is from a Mitsubishi)

everything is in one program file so no loosing one half of the program, 
and 1 file to send to the machine.

here is a quick sample progam for reff if any one is intrested , from  
lathe with subspindle , power tooling,
http://pastebin.com/rcbu8mVa

here is a 3 path control machine in action
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C5YovD99rNM


-- 
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.


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

Re: [Emc-users] multiple gcode streams in parallel

[Gregg Eshelman]

On 9/24/2015 1:20 PM, Dave Cole wrote:
> I think everyone is trying to find a way to do what you want with the
> existing software.
>
> In order to run two different Gcode programs at the same time, you would
> need two gcode interpreters and two planners running at the same time.
>
> That is not possible with the existing software that I am aware of:
> LinuxCNC or Machinekit.
>
> If someone tells me I am wrong, I would be happy to test it.  :-)
>
> That would be very nice to have for custom machines.   As in the case of
> gantry machines that need to transfer parts to another a joining gantry
> machine where they could physically collide.

What would be useful in such a setup is an ability to pass information 
directly from one LCNC host to another to coordinate functions such as 
transferring a pallet with work on it to another machine for additional 
operations.

One example would be two machines doing an operation that takes 30 
minutes, both feeding to a 3rd machine doing an operation that takes 
less than 30 minutes. With all three communicating, the 3rd machine 
could report when it's free and whichever feeder is farthest along on 
its job would be prioritized to transfer its pallet next.


---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus


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

Re: [Emc-users] multiple gcode streams in parallel

[Karlsson & Wang]

> ...
> I now need to extend it to run two separate robots off the same linuxcnc
> controller and receiver program. This brought up a question about the
> python interface.

Add an extra axis ?

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

Re: [Emc-users] multiple gcode streams in parallel

[Dave Cole]

I think everyone is trying to find a way to do what you want with the 
existing software.

In order to run two different Gcode programs at the same time, you would 
need two gcode interpreters and two planners running at the same time.

That is not possible with the existing software that I am aware of: 
LinuxCNC or Machinekit.

If someone tells me I am wrong, I would be happy to test it.  :-)

That would be very nice to have for custom machines.   As in the case of 
gantry machines that need to transfer parts to another a joining gantry 
machine where they could physically collide.

The ability to plug in different interpreters and planners has been 
discussed on the Machinekit email list but I don't know how far that has 
progressed.
Keep in mind that the ability to run different interpreters and planners 
as plug in's is much different than running multiple instances of 
interpreters and planners which is what you would like.

Dave



On 9/24/2015 2:24 PM, Jerry Scharf wrote:
> There is an axis for the second robot and the hal files are all set up.
> This is about the python interface and running two separate motion commands
> at the same time. If I can do that, then a simple threading system works,
> otherwise it needs to be fancier...
>
> jerry
>
> On Thu, Sep 24, 2015 at 10:47 AM, Karlsson & Wang <
> nicklas.karls...@karlssonwang.se> wrote:
>
>>> ...
>>> I now need to extend it to run two separate robots off the same linuxcnc
>>> controller and receiver program. This brought up a question about the
>>> python interface.
>> Add an extra axis ?
>>
>>
>> --
>> ___
>> Emc-users mailing list
>> Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net
>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users
>>
>
>

---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus


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

[Emc-users] multiple gcode streams in parallel

[Jerry Scharf]

Hi,

I have hacked up a simple program to allow a client to connect up to the
linuxcnc system and issue g code commands. It's fairly stupid, just enough
to get what we needed done.

I now need to extend it to run two separate robots off the same linuxcnc
controller and receiver program. This brought up a question about the
python interface.

Can I issue two separate motion commands for different axes at the same
time? One bot is a single axis on b and the other uses a,x,y,z. The motion
for each is serialized by the nature of the network buffers, but I am
trying to understand whether I need to serialize the commands between the
different streams. It seems right now like if I move the machine manually
from the GUI, the program then thinks the controller is not ready to accept
mdi commands.

I have an allocation command that is being extended to have you tell it
which axes this client wants to move. This prevents two programs from
fighting over a given stepper...

It's really minimal code but I will share it if people are interested.

jerry

-- 
Jerry Scharf
FINsix IT
650.285.6361 w
650.279.7017 m
--
Monitor Your Dynamic Infrastructure at Any Scale With Datadog!
Get real-time metrics from all of your servers, apps and tools
in one place.
SourceForge users - Click here to start your Free Trial of Datadog now!
http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=241902991=/4140
___
Emc-users mailing list
Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users