Guest
Show Posts
1
Galil / Re: Galil HELP DMC-1842
« on: July 22, 2009, 09:03:28 AM »
Steve,
I agree with what you have just stated. Thank you for the input. First I think I want to get new controller software into the machine before we mess with the back end of the machine.
Why pins 8-13? I was told by Pacific Scientific to use pins 8,9,10,11,12, & 16. Believe it or not pins 8-10 are wired on the PC800 J2 pin connector BUT the wires dead end next to the ICM2900. They are simply cut. Obviously someone wanted to go another route but chose the simplest for some unknown reason. As they have achieved the lowest possible resolution that the machine is capable of. I'm told that by using 8-11 I can emulate an optical encoder. Providing around 1900ppr of resolution......with the Galil doubling that. Plus more accuracy and speed as well.
We were actually wrong that the machine was running an early version of Camsoft. It was an educated guess based on screen shot comparisons. However since my first post we managed to hack the password and the machine is running a private label or privately designed controller software. It works but is very primitive to say the least.
I have no comparisons between Mach and the newest release from Camsoft. Like the earlier posting from MOTU I don't seem to get any feedback on one vs the other. Like a real world comparison. Just rants on how kick butt one is vs the other. I tend to like less bias in my reviews of products. However when I ask for details it seems like all I hear are crickets. Even if the person supposedly has experience with both. I do know that Camsoft offers support if I run into problems. The old software gives us access to some of the machine perimeters but there are several files in the set up that we can not read or copy.
We do have a wine styled tool changer rack. I like the idea of a rotary rack slaved to the X access and being able to change tools while the X moves but the price vs. complexity just does not pay off. Perhaps if my machine was running 8 hours a day 5 days a week there would be a gain in production but this is not the case. Spindle is a 10HP HSD and the machine has a true 12' X 6' cutting area. The Y axis actually has 8 ' of travel and the X 14'. The Y is able to park the spindle to the left or right side of the spoil board completely. The X has 14' of travel as the wine rack is located at approx 13' and the X axis has a park mode at 14' to allow the gantry to fully be out of the way for clearing the spoilboard or for set up of the next project.
Yes, the current set up is using the resolver as a simple positioning device.
How much more flexible is Mach over Camsoft? Camsoft actually does include a lot more than whats written on their website. They do have files, plug ins and so on available if needed. Do you have first hand experience with Camsoft as well?
Thank you once again! You have been a big help for this specific project. Both adding to our knowledge base and confirming many things we thought to be true.
I agree with what you have just stated. Thank you for the input. First I think I want to get new controller software into the machine before we mess with the back end of the machine.
Why pins 8-13? I was told by Pacific Scientific to use pins 8,9,10,11,12, & 16. Believe it or not pins 8-10 are wired on the PC800 J2 pin connector BUT the wires dead end next to the ICM2900. They are simply cut. Obviously someone wanted to go another route but chose the simplest for some unknown reason. As they have achieved the lowest possible resolution that the machine is capable of. I'm told that by using 8-11 I can emulate an optical encoder. Providing around 1900ppr of resolution......with the Galil doubling that. Plus more accuracy and speed as well.
We were actually wrong that the machine was running an early version of Camsoft. It was an educated guess based on screen shot comparisons. However since my first post we managed to hack the password and the machine is running a private label or privately designed controller software. It works but is very primitive to say the least.
I have no comparisons between Mach and the newest release from Camsoft. Like the earlier posting from MOTU I don't seem to get any feedback on one vs the other. Like a real world comparison. Just rants on how kick butt one is vs the other. I tend to like less bias in my reviews of products. However when I ask for details it seems like all I hear are crickets. Even if the person supposedly has experience with both. I do know that Camsoft offers support if I run into problems. The old software gives us access to some of the machine perimeters but there are several files in the set up that we can not read or copy.
We do have a wine styled tool changer rack. I like the idea of a rotary rack slaved to the X access and being able to change tools while the X moves but the price vs. complexity just does not pay off. Perhaps if my machine was running 8 hours a day 5 days a week there would be a gain in production but this is not the case. Spindle is a 10HP HSD and the machine has a true 12' X 6' cutting area. The Y axis actually has 8 ' of travel and the X 14'. The Y is able to park the spindle to the left or right side of the spoil board completely. The X has 14' of travel as the wine rack is located at approx 13' and the X axis has a park mode at 14' to allow the gantry to fully be out of the way for clearing the spoilboard or for set up of the next project.
Yes, the current set up is using the resolver as a simple positioning device.
How much more flexible is Mach over Camsoft? Camsoft actually does include a lot more than whats written on their website. They do have files, plug ins and so on available if needed. Do you have first hand experience with Camsoft as well?
Thank you once again! You have been a big help for this specific project. Both adding to our knowledge base and confirming many things we thought to be true.
