Messages

431

General Mach Discussion / Re: ModIO vs PoKeys

« on: March 01, 2011, 08:09:47 AM »

Didn't know that.  I've never used ModIO either, but have also been using modbus through a PLC and it's worked flawlessly.  I thought PoKeys was a USB device.  Never had much luck with anything with a USB connection...Not with plasma anyway.

432

General Mach Discussion / Re: ModIO vs PoKeys

« on: March 01, 2011, 12:15:35 AM »

I've never ude the PoKeys device but I have used other keyboard emulators and I think the modbus is more reliable.

433

General Mach Discussion / Re: Grease pump

« on: February 28, 2011, 09:13:30 AM »

Persistent DRO's has to be checked on the general config screen.

434

General Mach Discussion / Re: Grease pump

« on: February 26, 2011, 05:23:50 PM »

Probably not.  You can count the pulses in a brain and update a DRO then use the macropump for the logic to execute the grease pump routine.  If you're dead set on doing this inside Mach3, there will be some limitations you'll have to work around.  Even then, you'll have a better functioning system if you do it outside of mach.  You can buy a CLICK PLC for about $80.  That and some sort of sensor and you have your grease system.  If you need something with high speed IO for counting pulses (not sure if the CLICK inputs will be fast enough) you're looking at about $100.

435

VB and the development of wizards / Re: VB and modIO + macropump.ms1

« on: February 25, 2011, 06:40:47 PM »

Just because you have one macropump.ms1 doesn't mean it has to be limited to only one function.  Write the code to update your MPG then following that write the code for the LCD.  It will all execute when Mach runs macropump.ms1 (usually 10 times per second). If you want to keep your code separate you can put each function in a macro...Like the LCD can be M1200 and the MPG can be M1201, then in macropump.ms1 just put...

code "M1200"
code "M1201"

It's probably faster to just combine it all in macropump.ms1 though.

436

General Mach Discussion / Re: Grease pump

« on: February 25, 2011, 12:47:45 PM »

I don't know anything about that controller, but assuming it accepts a 24V input signal, you would just map a Mach pin to that input, then write a macropump to count and total pulses from the sensor. 

437

General Mach Discussion / Re: Analogue Inputs

« on: February 25, 2011, 09:35:43 AM »

How fast do you need?  Serial modbus isn't bad.  Ethernet modbus is faster, but as Hood said, it's only going to be as fast as the Mach3 scan time. 

438

General Mach Discussion / Re: pulse frequency (motors slow and jerky)

« on: February 24, 2011, 10:44:48 PM »

Have you tried the Mach special driver?  I've never had to use it, but I think it's supposed to fix issues like this.  You could also try removing mach and the driver and reinstalling.

You should be seeing around a 25K pulse frequency on the diagnostics page. It will fluctuate a little, but if you're seeing numbers less than 2000, that's why it's running slow.
 

439

General Mach Discussion / Re: Grease pump

« on: February 24, 2011, 04:39:34 PM »

Depends on the inductive sensor.  The ones I've used didn't act as a on/off switch so there had to be some other electronics with some logic to look at the sensor output and a transistor to switch 5V to a PP pin.  Look for a sensor that acts as a switch, mount it and check it's output with a meter to make sure the gear tooth has enough mass to trigger it.  If it does, use it to switch 5V to a PP pin, then in a brain, monitor that pin.

If you want to also compare the value against you set value and run the oiling procedure, then a macropump would probably work better.  Just read the pulses, convert them to linear distance and store it in a DRO then compare the DRO to the set point.

440

General Mach Discussion / Re: Mach's Future?

« on: February 23, 2011, 06:49:43 PM »

Interesting.  It downloaded fine with Internet Explorer.  Never even thought to try IE.