Hello Guest it is May 27, 2024, 12:24:03 AM

Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - dmoore

Pages: 1 2 3 4 »
I really hate to say this but give it a break.
You can clearly see in the graphs the time it takes to accelerate, followed by a max feed followed by a decelerate.
The times are all there.
Who cares if the overall time is 1 sec or 5 sec?

I care. I never got the the point of tuning since I assumed the times were clearly wrong (that the ramp up and down would happen over a 4 second period).  It might be debatable if it is a "bug" but don't put information in place if it is known to be wrong. 

There are two types of companies - those that beg their customers to tell them what is wrong or how to improve their products and then they take those suggestions to heart and then there are companies that think every time a customer "complains" they should dismiss the feedback because only they know best.

I run a company in which we actively reach out to customers, asking for feedback and complaints - even our CS person sends an email after every order asking if there were any problems to be 100% sure there isn't a problem we could solve.  Thank God our competitors don't do that.  Maybe we shouldn't decide for Newfangled which company they want to be.

The speed vs time graph does not include any limitation due to finite axis length, nor is it required IMO.

If the graph only provides an "overview" of the rise and fall of velocity, why wouldn't they just have removed the time reference? 

I've put in a ticket with support and we'll see if we can determine if this is something I am doing or it is actually a "bug".

I have experimented with changing the speeds and it seems that the display is restricted to 4sec.

Thanks for your help!  So would you call this a "bug" since it doesn't actually represent the actual value even though the underlying value is actually changing?

Is anyone else able to get their motor velocity chart to show correctly as it shows correctly in mach 3?

Additional examples:

Thanks for the reply.  While I don't know what the exact numbers for "drastically" are, I tried a number of combinations shown below and never could get a number (time frame) less than 4.0 seconds.  Can you possibly provide any specific numbers to get it closer to 1 second?

I am attempting to switch 4 CNC router tables from Mach3 over to Mach4 but one area I'm stuck on is the "Time in Seconds" period of an axis in which the velocity is applied.

Here in Mach3 you can see the period of time is 1 second (which works perfectly fine).

Here in Mach4 you can see the period of time is 4 seconds (which coasts too long after jogging).

How do I adjust the "Time in Seconds" period from 4 seconds to 1 second?

Thanks in advance!

Here are the working and non-working chip photos.

I thought I'd post this in case someone else runs into this issue.  The problem is that Mach3 when combined with the newest ShuttlePRO hardware, Mach3 will "stick" when the outside ring is turned and the axis will continue to move even after the ring returns to the center.  I'm awaiting a possible solution from Contour and I'll post it here.

Here is a photo of the "good" and "bad" boards.  Externally they look identical.

Mach4 General Discussion / Re: Unknown word where unary operation could be
« on: September 03, 2017, 04:31:23 PM »
I too have almost the exact same issue - 3,000 hours of run time on this machine without issue and all the sudden the spindle has stopped working.  Here is the text of my complete error:

Unknown word where unary operation could be , Block = DOSPINCW()

The PC doesn't have windows updates on, problem happened after running another job just fine and the second job the spindle refused to start.  Ripped apart all the hardware thinking it was physical but it appears to be in Mach3 as I never found any hardware issues.

Pages: 1 2 3 4 »