Hi Scott, which plasma machine model would you like to fit to your machine? There is a difference between the Powermax range and the high end systems like the Hydef, the HSD, the HT2000 etc. You might want to take a look at the website
www.hypertherm.com. there is a wealth of information as to the models and their capabilities. The Powermax machines is straight forward, you need a contact to start the plasma, and there is a contact available for arc transfer. If you configure Mach3 for plasma and you have the THC enabled (Torch on input pin enabled), Mach3 will wait for the arc transfer signal before the controller will move. It also stops if the arc transfer signal is lost, due to off plate etc. Integration with the Powermax's is easy.
I have attached 3 files, they are pages from the HPR manual on system integration. They describe the input and output requirements and the one page is the interface. The interface is accessed via a 37pin D type connector on the inside of the machine. The page describe the interface options.
If you would have a look at the pages, we can discuss what you need to know if some items isn't clear.
Fernando, it might be best to consider a LCD display for the controller. All the cables supplied from Hypertherm is screened, and if you follow the rules you won't have a problem. As far as stability is concerned, I am speaking from my own experience, and it is possible that I might be doing something wrong.
The interpolation from Mach3 is not as smooth as realtime generic controllers. The reason for this is not so much Mach3, as for Win XP which is a multitasking OS. The Mach3 pulse engine cannot force realtime, so the times in interupt is inconsistent. This is been my finding on Intel Celeron, Intel P4 @3.2 GHZ, AMD Athlon 64 @ 3.2 GHZ and Intel Dual processor @ 2 GHZ. All these systems tested had in excess of 2 GByte ram. We tested various chipset motherboards, from Intel to foxconn etc. and the result is the same. Linear interpolation in angular movement is not 100% on blended velocity either, which definitely shows in the end result. The COMMAND THC from Hypertherm is very much a stand alone unit with it's own pendant control and will integrate with Mach3. It is of high quality and has various modes of plate sensing. Using the THC from Hypertherm will thus have less dependency on the Mach3 interface and will release resources. It also integrates the ARC VOLT HEIGHT control with the HPR130/260 and other mechanised Hypertherm plasma systems so the system integrator do not need to be concerned about High Voltages and HF interference. But obviously comes at a price. I don't think the Campbell or Cullins height controls have been used to control the height on HPR systems although I stand to be corrected.
As far as our own control, we use it on the HPR and other systems, but it integrates with our own CNC system and have not been developed as a stand alone system. It would be possible to do so in the future.
The RS422 serial communication you see on the interface .pdf page could be a real headache interfacing to Mach3. This is one of the areas we are have a major problem with the Mach3 interface. You cannot implement a modbus serial link, so you have to use the native serial port facility in Mach3. This is unstable at present, and it seems there could be a bug in Mach3. The Mach3 controller looses control over the serial port and crashes, it is an inter-mittend fault and we are currently working on maybe a plug in or a background process to overcome this.
For any plasma application, the highest acceleration parameter is always the best, because during acceleration and deceleration the arc height must be disabled and the CV speed is compromised, changing the cut quality and the kerf.
I cannot speak for the Campbell or the Cullins height controls, as I have not encountered any of them or evaluated/compared them. I have heard good reports of them being used on the Powermax range but have not heard or seen them being used on HPR systems.
So lets move on from here.
Whacko
Guest
Show Posts
