Messages

1

General Mach Discussion / Re: Compatability with Anilam

« on: July 13, 2006, 05:40:12 PM »

You will have to change out the PLC because there are no doc's on how to talk with it

Well, I have the equipment to capture and evaluate the PLC protocol. Would you recommend against that approach?

2

General Mach Discussion / Re: Compatability with Anilam

« on: July 13, 2006, 12:00:44 PM »

I just did an Anilam Mill... I took the motors off and every wire out of the control I put on 1KW motors and got the mill doing 500IPM You could keep the motors but the drives are going to have to go...


Hope that helps
Brian

I have a 3-axis bed mill with Anilam 1100 controls on it currently and the older it gets the more little things I don't really like about it.  I have no G-code flexibility since it is a conversational control and is limited in some ways regarding how much I can do to vary feeds during programming.

What are my options with your product?  I have never utilized the machine to its fullest extent as a 3 axis machine as I perform mostly drilling and profile milling functions on it.

Rick

I'll add my question: an engineer at Gecko recommended ArtSoft to me, when I asked if there was a driver that would allow me to integrate an stepper-driven Hoffman rotary axis into my Anilam 1400 series pc-based control. He suggested replacing the control, instead. The control now has two motion control boards (two axes each) and an I/O board for the front panel on the pendant, and communicates via RS-232 to a PLC for M-code control functions. The three axes now attached are older-style tach servo motors, driven by Westamp boards, with positioning feedback from 1000-line encoders driven off the motors. I would like to keep the encoders on the three axes, use the stepper on the fourth, keep the PLC for M functions, and maybe even use the auxiliary I/O of the pendant. Possible, from you experience, with appropriate work on my part?