Machsupport Forum
Mach Discussion => Mach4 General Discussion => Topic started by: TOTALLYRC on November 20, 2016, 08:35:27 PM
-
Does anybody have any suggestions for a mini itx motherboard for use with Mach4.
Preferably something that has been verified to work with Mach 4.
P-Port not required. I will be using it with my Ethernet DSPMC and Hiconn.
If it takes SODIMM memory even better.
Mike
-
Anybody???? (Sounds of crickets)
Mike
-
Hi,
I bought a Mini ITX board from Unigens UMB-D255E1. I've been running Mach3 on two PP's for a couple
of years without trouble. Used 32 bit Windows 7 Embedded (Standard) as OS. Based on a dual core
Atom processor which has a GPU on chip albeit sharing main RAM. As a computing solution its a pretty
modest platform but never had cause to think about upping the processor grunt.
The main point of buying it was to increase reliability compared to my old XP machine and it has
achieved that easily. Fitted with a 64G mSATA SSHD, just brilliant.
I've recently bought a licence for Mach4 and have been running it in simulation mode without
difficulty. I have an ESS but have not hooked it up yet, I've got so many little jobs that need
doing and Mach3 handles them I just can't bring myself to take my mill out of service while I
shagg around with M4.
My early impressions of Mach4 is that it runs with fewer hiccups and quirks than Mach3 largely due to
the modular design and a modern 'engineered' software approach. I think any modern platform
will run Mach4 just fine, indeed that is one of the selling points of Mach4 is its (comparative) independence of
the platform it runs on.
Try searching mini-itx.com, they have got dozens of offerings. I got my board from a local (New Zealand)
supplier and paid a big premium for it but the same supplier was able to supply Windows Embedded which
was my choice of OS so I took the hardware price hit to get the OS.
Craig
-
Hi TOTALLYRC,
have an update....
Tried running M4 on my machine, Atom based miniITX mentioned above. M4 runs fine in sim mode no problems.
When I hook up the ESS I come unstuck. The Ethernet adaptor shows it supports UDP but I'm not sure the Atom is.
Depending on the transmission protocol used by your motion controllers the Atom may not work.
The Atom and the cutdown Windows7 Embedded OS has done really well with M3 and PP and I think would
do equally well M4 and Darwin PP but maybe not ESS. Haven't given up hope on it yet, but hang on to your bucks
at the moment.
Craig
-
Thanks for the update.
Try deleting the Sim plugin and any others that you are not using. See if that clears up the problems.
Mike
-
Hi Mike,
M4 is not the problem, its establishing a UDP Ethernet link to the ESS.
Given that I had a cutdown OS I had hoped that a fullhouse OS would do the trick. I reformatted and installed
near the complete version of Windows Embedded Standard 7, which behaves almost identically to Windows 7 Personal.
It did not change the Ethernet situation tho. I have an oldish laptop installed from the same disc ie Windows Embedded 7
and it runs the ESS and M4 just fine.
At this stage I'm thinking that the Atom just wont run UDP Ethernet.
Still, its been a doozy little platform for M3 and PP, I was hoping to get some more use out of it.
Since the reformat the computer ID has changed so its copy of M4 is unlicensed as is the copy on the old laptop. I don't have
many to spare so am going to hang fire until I have a clear plan. My main 'inside' laptop is licensed and am using that on my mill.
Don't mind admitting that using a PC as cluttered as my laptop as a machine controller gives me chills after so assiduously
keeping the wee Atom so clean and lean.
Craig
-
Can you install a network card into the open slot if it has one, just to see if it is the onboard Ethernet port?
Of course this assumes that you are using the onboard Ethernet port in the first place.
-
Hi Mike,
that's a great idea.
What I know about networks I could write on the back of a envelope, a small envelope. The last couple of day I've trawled the net for
tutorials, videos, articles. Slowly building up the knowledge and tools to tackle it.
Lets face it there are millions of Atom based netbooks and similar out there. They can't communicate via Ethernet....Rubbish!. It means I'm
doing something wrong, familiar ground for me.
I don't have at home any known good network capable devices. I might take it to work and while the boss is not looking plug it in and see what
happens. I need to test the onboard ports, there are two of them. Trying a known good port on a plugin card is a good idea along the same lines.
As is trying to establish a link between my own computers with a twisted pair cable. That relies on me correctly setting up the link and given
infancy in matters of networking failure could be me rather than the device at each end.
There may yet be a specific reason that the Atom can't communicate to the ESS, throughput, inability to sustain UDP or similar but I refuse
to believe that it can't manage TCP/IP.
CNC has been one long learning experience for me and so it continues.
Craig
-
The other thing to check is to see if you need a crossover cable or not. Some ports do it automagically but some require a crossover cable when talking directly to a device. I think it is called auto negotiation or something like that.
Mike.
P.S. I occasionally have a good idea but usually they die of loneliness. ROFLMAO
-
If you have a router at home for your broadband then perhaps plug it in there and disable the wireles, if your ethernet port is working then you will be able to get the cheeky miss google or something, if its not working then check what protocals you have installed.
DazTheGas
-
Hi DTG,
don't have a router at home, I have a Tstick which plugs into USB.
Will try to cobble something up over next few days.
Craig
-
Hi All,
bit of an update. Been getting really good support from Andy at Warp9 and based on his input and my own research I can now ping
the ESS from the Atom.
Still can't run M4/ESS, my guess at the moment is lack of bandwidth but still working on that....
Craig
-
Hi All,
another update...SUCCESS!!!
Turns out to be faulty firewall settings. I didn't have notification active and consequently didn't know that the
firewall was blocking ops.
All in all I've had great support from Andy and Jeff at Warp9, our very own Smurph and interest and suggestions from you guys. Makes a huge
difference when on several occasions I've wanted to throw the whole bloody lot out the window!
On to the next issue....probing.
Craig
-
I used a Gigabyte GA-J1800N-D2H but just testing out, never ran a machine with it though I can't see that being a problem. I now have it on the plasma so it is running Mach3.
-
Hi Hood,
the only real problem I've had is trying to get the SmoothStepper to run. The Warp9 setup utility for whatever reason did not work
and so I had to do it manually. I don't know s....t (that's 'squat' I assure you..) about computer networking.
I persevered and got there on the back of forum support, both professional and private.
Craig
-
Nice to see that you got it sorted Joe.
Hood,
My concern is that I have some SFF Dells with a 2GHz+ processor and 2Gig ram but the onboard video seems to kill me. They run Mach3 very well. They run Mach4 but not as well as I would like. This is why I am looking for actual real world examples of working computers. Part numbers and the like.
Mike
-
Hi Mike,
I learned along time ago with M3: Don't fiddle with the toolpath display when a job is running.
Haven't tried breaking the rule with either this platform or with M4, it is after all my own rule, why would I do such a thing?.
Don't answer that, I can hear you from here! LOL
I have a workaround for the Autoleveller utility that I use which is being cranky under M4. The toolpath takes about 4 hour to run
just one side of the circuit board so I won't be breaking my little rule today.
Craig
-
Hi All,
had an interesting PM conversation with Smurph. He has used Atom platforms but needed to massage the settinsg to get good results.
I have tried a few of the settings but they are on the limit of my knowledge at this time and more often than not break the Ethernet connection
rather than improving it. Hopefully as my knowledge grows so will my accuracy at determining the optimal settings.
He did have one comment that I should share for any other folk looking to go the 'bare bones' single board computer direction. He said that
when Atoms were popular they used Realtek Ethernet chips which were optimised for receive rather than transmit. Given their intended use
as netbooks and thin client net boxes it makes sense. He recommended searching for a board which uses Intel Ethernet chips as they could
handle more transmit without offloading processing to the CPU. He did give an example chip number which I've forgotten offhand but I think
that referred to a PCIe plugin card. Will come back when I learn more.
All I can say is that M4 and ESS is going great guns on the Atom albeit with the Realtek Ethernet chip.
Craig
-
Smurph is the man when it comes to all things Mach4. If only he had time to come outof his cave once in awhile. (grin)
I have been doing some research and so far have not come up with anything promising. Hopefully I iwll have time this weekend to do some more in depth searching. Hopefully some else has some info. At this point I would even like some info on MATX boards since I have several empty cases and might wind up going that route.
-
Hi,
he certainly is that. Rereading the PM he mentioned 'Intel on board Ehternet' rather than a specific chip.
If you can install a slot based card, I would suggest an Intel Pro-1000e. This is a server style Ethernet card that is setup to handle lots of transmitting with minimal processor use.
Craig
-
Hi TOTALLYRC,
saw this with the latest gen Ethernet chip;
https://youtu.be/XNFl7HpKRyU (https://youtu.be/XNFl7HpKRyU)
Fully configured with 8G RAM and 60G mSATA SSHD less OS for about 300 GBpound. Quite a step up in grunt than the Atom. If it wont
run M4 and controllers I'm giving up CNC and taking up knitting!
Craig
-
Cause i read this yesterday i had to try to set everything up on an intel NUC. Works like a charm! Upside is being able to fit the pc inside the controller but since i have a lot of space under my machine I wont stick with it but instead use the old bigtower machine i have been using...
-
Hi Bx3mE,
glad you've had some success. I am coming to the opinion and only restating what Jeff Birt wrote that Mach4 like Mach3 are not processor
hungry applications but they are time sensitive, you can't just stop midstream because of some other application, device or service.
The only time I've found the Atom to be wanting is when I run a software utility which processes G code files, for a 5Meg file it can take several
minutes whereas my laptop (Intel i7,2ghz, hardly a world beater) takes 15-30 sec to do the same job. As a straight machine controller I think
the Atom is going to give tons more service yet.
Craig
-
For those that may be interested, the Atom board that I am using is the D2700MUD. Affectionately called the "mud" board. Windows 7/32bit. Mach 4 runs fine on it and it does have the Intel NIC on-board. Even so, the default setup for the NIC was tiny transmit buffers. At least the Intel Ethernet driver would let you bump them up though (and I had to).
So the little Atom board is well... diminutive as compared to modern day (this week LOL) desktop boards. But it is light years faster than the 4MHz 68020 processor in the original YASNAC control my machine had on it. It was a 1980s tape reader. The Atom board will run FAR larger programs than that tape real could ever hold. But... it might not be a good choice for a board to run huge 3D files like router guy do with plaques and the like. So pick your system boards carefully with the desired use of the machine kept in mind. I would NEVER suggest an Atom board for a router where the user wishes to run HUGE 3D files on it. Loading G code files is definitely a function of the processor and disk I/O speeds.
But for metal milling jobs (relatively small G code files as compared to 3D router files), the Atom is plenty powerful. Just make sure the NIC is a good one.
Steve