Messages

1

Third party software and hardware support forums. / Re: Vibration and Feedback Problems - C10 BOB with KL4030 Drivers and KL23H motors

« on: January 23, 2010, 01:53:21 AM »

start by making a slowwwww short move and measure the distance traveled to the distance commanded. If that is accurate, what is the jog speed that you are trying to achieve when you hear the noise?

What does it feel like when you turn the drive by hand?

2

General Mach Discussion / Re: Stepper Speed on XYZ Router

« on: January 14, 2010, 07:17:27 PM »

So I really think this could be a resonance problem, especially after reading the chronicles of information on this site. I need to try several things here:
1. Determine if micro or 1/8 stepping etc. is being applied
2. Provide damping from either a better coupling, or motor flywheel

In dissecting the problem, what relationship has anyone seen between the resonant frequency of the motor uncoupled, to the resonance coupled? I may try some testing tonight and compare the stall point coupled and uncoupled. In theory it should be much lower when coupled. I would expect it should reach at least 500RPM uncoupled.

Thank you,

3

General Mach Discussion / Re: Stepper Speed on XYZ Router

« on: January 14, 2010, 12:30:10 PM »

True enough regarding dis-assembly, but i had no choice (well, could have used the repair shop). Even though the motors had never been used in the 5-7 years it had sat...the Y axis was internally damaged, restricting rotation. When I opened it, there was a single laminate on the end that had come loose from the alignment pins. I carefully secured the laminate back on the guide pins.

The torque of this motor appears consistent with the X Axis (same motor size) so I doubt there is much measurable reduction in torque.

My question is, for a gantry router of this size with the 6.5Nm motors, what velocities have people been experiencing before stall? I don't know what the max RPM of this motor is (500? 1000?), but it only reaches about 200RPM before stalling. The motors are directly coupled to the ball screws and the spec's are in my first post in this thread. I would think it would move at near twice the velocity that it is, but I haven't ran any loading calculations. I could estimate the weight....friction would be tough?

I'm hoping that one of the DIP switches is not set to micro-step etc....and that changing it will improve....but I can't read chinese...LOL

I attached a picture of the gantry for size reference.

4

General Mach Discussion / Stepper Speed on XYZ Router

« on: January 14, 2010, 04:21:56 AM »

The router table, steppers and drives were provided by foundertop, but a long time ago. I don't have any information on the drives, but I've reversed engineered a lot.

Motors do say 4A, 6.5 Nm. Ball screw pitch is approximately 0.175". In general, the fastest velocity I can get is about 35 ipm using a 10 accel. This is with 2000 to 2200 steps per inch.....I just got it close enough for now (less that 0.060" error out of 1"). I don't know what the 4 dip switches on the drives control, as it's written in chinese. The motor appears to be a hybrid stepper (i took it apart).

The router table is approximately 4'x4'. I haven't been able to find out much as to the voltage of the motors.

Speeds above the 35ipm cause the motor to resonate unstably. I changed the pulse duration on both the step and dir to 5uS, but it didn't improve. I've tried running Mach3 at 25KHz up to 65KHz, didn't improve it either.

Thank you,

5

General Mach Discussion / Re: Lazy Cam/ Mach 3 error question

« on: January 12, 2010, 01:55:21 AM »

Here is the crash file that was generated when I tried to launch Lazy Cam. I had installed Mach3 on this machine multiple times until the 035 fix the other day worked for me. Could there be a remnant from a previous install causing the conflict?

I thought I had Lazy Cam working on this machine (with this V-Card) at one time.....but it may have been the other computer i have.....hard to believe that an ATI 9700 pro with the latest drivers isn't compatible.

Looking for help.

6

General Mach Discussion / Re: Lazy Cam/ Mach 3 error question

« on: January 11, 2010, 01:22:51 AM »

My computer gave me the same error tonight. I'm running Mach3 3.042.035 on a ABIT BH7 1.8GHz, 2GB Ram, ATI All in Wonder 9700 Pro 128MB, with the latest video drivers. I tried to launch lazy cam from my desktop and from Mach 3 and both ways received the Gl error.

Well, in my case, Lazy Cam won't even start.....it just returns the error. I saved the crash report and will upload it tomorrow, if it will help.

Thank you,

7

General Mach Discussion / Re: Driver Test Not What Expected

« on: January 09, 2010, 02:26:58 AM »

I installed the latest .035 version on both machines. One the #1 machine, everything is running fine. On the #2 machine, I ran the Special Driver script as that PC is configured as a Standard Computer, and in the BIOS the APIC is disabled. There are two things that causes the driver test application to freeze, and occasionally cause a re-boot.
1. setting the frequency at 100KHz
2. changing the frequency setting while the application is taking control

Next while running Mach3 and monitoring the frequency on the diagnostics screen, the frequency will sometimes go into single digits. For example, while configured for 25KHz, it will display 2, 48, 24950, 1, 88, 24337, etc.....

Odd. I'll be doing some testing this weekend, so we'll see how it works with the steppers.

Is there really a .036 nearing release, as previously referenced?

Thank you again....

8

General Mach Discussion / Re: Driver Test Not What Expected

« on: January 08, 2010, 11:02:04 PM »

Well, Kudos so far....downloaded the latest .035 and it runs the driver test as expected.....and Mach3 launches. That's a great start. I look forward to moving forward with this build.

So, the big question.....does the fixes to the driver test have any bearing on the performance of the Mach3 program. I know there is much behind the scenes, but were the problems with the driver program also affecting the Mach3 performance? I would love a 30 second explanation of the changes that cause the driver test to more accurately reflect the testing frequency, and what bearing that code has on the performance of Mach3, given that the diagnostic screen of Mach3 always displayed the accurate PPS configured.

Thanks for all the work.

9

General Mach Discussion / Re: Driver Test Not What Expected

« on: January 08, 2010, 10:00:46 PM »

Are revisions really being made without indexing the minor Rev. number.....ie two releases of 3.042.035 with different driver packages etc.......and I don't see any reflection of this modification in the change log?

Just curious before I chase my tail with install/uninstall.

My last download of 035 was really early this morning (depending on time zone), but I can give it another try.

Thank you,

10

General Mach Discussion / Re: Driver Test Not What Expected

« on: January 08, 2010, 08:16:24 PM »

Thanks guys,

I uninstalled the 035, did a manual un-install of the driver through device manager. Re-booted the system then installed 033 again. re-booted the system and Mach3 will run....but the driver test does not work again (as expected).

I don't see a copy of 034 on the FTP site, nor do I see it elsewhere; but, I think I will wait a couple of days for 036 to release anyway. I'm in a bit of a hurry, but this is on a new-to-me startup, so I have lots of items to work on. These stepper motors have never been turned nor have the stepper drives been used.....should be fun.

Is there a chance that 035 would run on my machine that has APIC disabled, if I run the appropriate driver, via the .bat? to clarify the question, is Mach3.noapic used on machines configured as Standard Computer with the APIC disabled?

Thank you,