Messages

1611

G-Code, CAD, and CAM discussions / Re: Mach3 reads in cm and not in mm in Gcode file...

« on: March 15, 2018, 06:25:23 AM »

I have no idea what is best, I just use WinXP on a 32 bit PC.

That Dell Optiplex looks just fine to me (but I have never used one so cannot say one way or the other).
 
Tweakie.

1612

G-Code, CAD, and CAM discussions / Re: Mach3 reads in cm and not in mm in Gcode file...

« on: March 15, 2018, 05:27:52 AM »

Yes, I run WinXP but on a 32 bit PC and not connected to the net. I transfer all Gcode files (created using win10) with a memory stick.

Tweakie.

1613

General Mach Discussion / Re: Losing offsets

« on: March 15, 2018, 04:11:09 AM »

Try; Operator / Restore Settings and select a backup from a date before the problem occurred. That should retrieve your lost offsets.

Tweakie.

(The PC you use with Mach3 and your CNC should be dedicated to the task and not connected to the net. , etc.)

1614

Show"N"Tell ( Your Machines) / Re: The Laser Project.

« on: March 15, 2018, 02:51:32 AM »

Wow that is quick.

Nice work Art  (I notice that the beam is not turning off during the rapids  ).

Tweakie.

1615

G-Code, CAD, and CAM discussions / Re: Mach3 reads in cm and not in mm in Gcode file...

« on: March 15, 2018, 02:44:51 AM »

Sorry to hear that it didn't work.

I don't use win7 so can't really suggest anything other than Mach3 may need to be installed and run as Administrator and given the required privileges within any antivirus software etc.

Tweakie.

1616

General Mach Discussion / Re: Scripter Compile Error bites again :(

« on: March 14, 2018, 07:37:13 AM »

Since most Mach3 users don't appear to want to move to Mach4, it's highly unlikely.
By the time Mach4 is 100% complete, it will probably have taken 7+ years of development. As a ground up new program, this was their chance to make the best Mach that they could.
Maybe that's what they did, but it's not the Mach4 that many wanted.

I should not be crytical because I could certainly not do anything better myself but  +1 to Gerry for summing up the situation regarding the original, long-term, Mach3 users.

Ah well, there is always UCCNC and so on.

Ohh Roger, what are you thinking

Tweakie.

1617

General Mach Discussion / Re: New people welcome !! Come in here and introduce your self!

« on: March 14, 2018, 06:05:45 AM »

Hi Plasmashine,

Welcome 

Tweakie.

1618

G-Code, CAD, and CAM discussions / Re: Mach3 reads in cm and not in mm in Gcode file...

« on: March 14, 2018, 05:59:03 AM »

Just an idea...

I would make a secure backup copy of my Mach3 folder.
Delete the existing Mach3 folder from drive C: then re-install Mach3 (version 0.62).
Copy my old <profile> .xml file from the backup to the new install. (if you have any special screens or macro's then copy them over as well).

Tweakie.

1619

Mach4 General Discussion / Re: XHC Mach4 USB motion board warning and info

« on: March 13, 2018, 07:55:41 AM »

The other issue is with Mill Wizard.  Purchased last ~August, but unusable because it will not accept the key supplied.  I've given up trying to get a new key or advice on what to do.

Hi Louis,

Mill Wizard is a supported product - please contact Mach Support to get this issue resolved. http://www.machsupport.com/support/

Tweakie.


EDIT: Link edited following information provided by Mach Support.

1620

Show"N"Tell ( Your Machines) / Re: The Laser Project.

« on: March 13, 2018, 05:28:55 AM »

Hi Spandex,

I think Dan13 has summed it up well.

The first one was created from a ‘dithered’ image (which creates the illusion of shade by varying the density of individual dots) and this is the most common form of laser image reproduction. It is easy to do and it is quick.
Generally a specialist software (such as PhotoGrav) is used to create the 1 bit  ‘dithered’ image which is then sized and adjusted to match the d.p.i resolution of the particular laser being used. I used 200 d.p.i. here as it is usual to limit the image resolution to 200 or 300 d.p.i  (there is little point in specifying a smaller pixel size than the laser is actually capable of reproducing).

There are a few of us who are interested in producing true 8 bit gray-scale images (as the second picture) but it is not so easy to do as different materials react to the laser in different ways and the production time is much longer.

As he previously mentioned, Art is currently building a galvo scanning system which can work at much higher axis feed-rates than standard linear systems such as mine and I am eagerly awaiting the results of his initial tests before I start on building something similar.

The third image is very much ‘work in progress’ as it is probably the best of the three but it needs far more contrast - who knows, perhaps one day I will succeed.

Tweakie.