Messages

81

General Mach Discussion / Re: IF you wanted to UPGRADE to MACH4 ??

« on: July 22, 2015, 12:17:54 AM »

Thanks for that input Gerry.

Never knew that about the scripting manuals. I never fail to get confused why developers create a paid-for product yet don't write user manuals that explain fully how to use the products features. I'm glad passenger aircraft don't rely on pilots learning bits and pieces from each other on forums, or relying on another pilot to write a cockpit manual. Bit of an extreme example but you get where I'm flying from.

I'll no doubt keep an eye on Mach4 as time passes and see if it gets to the stage where I'd be happy to start with it.

Keith.

82

General Mach Discussion / Re: IF you wanted to UPGRADE to MACH4 ??

« on: July 21, 2015, 09:45:42 PM »

Thanks a great deal to Terry Parker, I've got a lot more into CB scripting and screen making.

Now that I seen Mach3 will be taken away from us at some point (not for sale), I thought it's time to have a look at Mach4. Straight away I noticed there's no scripting manuals equivalent to what we have for Mach3.

I didn't even look further after that but is there any screenmaking facilities like we have for Mach3 ?

In the manual, all I seen was a title for Modbus, nothing else. A project I'm working on now uses Modbus in Mach3. Someone asked in a forum post about Modbus, and was simply wanting some info on how it worked. The reply he got was something about not offering free support, so he responded saying he wasn't asking for support, only instructions on how it works.

Then of course, all I ever hear is Mach4 is only half made and still very buggy, yet is being charged for. I thought software in this stage is normally classed as Beta and is given out free for users to play with and give feedback. Once it's good enough for production, it gets charged for.

So far I see/hear:

Half developed.
Buggy
Lack of instructional information / tutorials.
Being charged for before ready for use.

Nothing much of incentive for me to "upgrade" at this point. Sadly I've already printed about 800 pages of Linuxcnc manuals, I feel like I have nowhere else to turn, and do not like the learning curve ahead of me.

83

VB and the development of wizards / Re: short pulse output with macro

« on: July 21, 2015, 05:39:18 PM »

I am sending pulses to arduino from Mach with coding similar to this

activatesignal(output1)
sleep(110)
deactivatesignal(output1)

If I reduce the delay below 100 then most of the time arduino doesn't pick the deactivate signal. Is there a workaround for this. I need to output a pulse of 50 ms.

Zafar

I was using that exact same code for my plasma torch to do hole centre marking. Once I started going under 100 the torch would not even fire. It would be good to have been able to check if there was even a signal being generated at the output pin but don't have such instrumentation.

I ended up designing an Arduino circuit board to give me the pulse duration I needed (plus a few other features, good old Ardy).

Keith.

84

General Mach Discussion / Re: Mach3 not for sale in a year or so ???

« on: July 16, 2015, 07:45:18 PM »

The $200 version is for hobby use only, no profit making.

That's not true. I brought this up to Brian a few weeks back, asking for clarification on the wording on the website.
He said the license for Mach4Hobby is basically the same as the Mach3 license, and you can do anything with Mach4Hobby that you can do with Mach3.

He also felt that the website was clear enough???

You can find the posts on the Yahoo group, but I think I re-posted it here somewhere as well.

You only need to buy Mach4 Industrial if you need the extended support that will come with it.

Here's the wording on the website:

Mach4 Hobby – A full featured software version to be marketed toward those interested in using CNC machinery for their own personal /non-business use. End-user support is limited to e-mail and online forums. Add-ons, expandability, and updates will be available. This version is the direct replacement for Mach3. The price is $200.

Hmmm, that seems to very clearly state non-business use. What am I missing.

Keith.

85

General Mach Discussion / Re: Mach3 not for sale in a year or so ???

« on: July 16, 2015, 10:28:53 AM »

The $200 version is for hobby use only, no profit making.

I'm a bit gobsmacked too at their business "plan". Manufacturers are already abandoning Mach and moving to Linux. Artsoft is announcing they will at some point make Mach3 unavailable, and the only replacement is a half working Mach4 at up to $2k per PC. I really don't understand such a marketing attack, it's a great way to scare customers away, and have them looking for safe alternatives for the future. Am I correct in saying there is not even a Mach4 specific scripting manual available for Lua, like we have with Mach3 and Cypress Enable.

Based on what I've heard about Mach4 I haven't looked at the forum much. From what I have read, Mach4 seems like a completely different beast to Mach3, so it's not even like moving to an upgraded version of Mach3. Where's the incentive ?

I don't relish the thought of having to migrate to Linuxcnc. I've heard it's MUCH harder to customise but at least it works and costs $2k less than $2k.

86

General Mach Discussion / Mach3 not for sale in a year or so ???

« on: July 15, 2015, 11:58:37 PM »

Copied these words from the Mach4 page:

Mach3 will continue to be sold for a year or more, while the number of compatible hardware devices is expanded through plug-in development.

Does this mean that when it is felt Mach4 is ready for "production", you won't even be able to buy Mach3 anymore. And Mach4 will have a price tag of $1000-$2000 per PC if it's going to produce profit.

Just trying to decide on my cnc future with Mach3/4.

Keith.

87

General Mach Discussion / Re: Future of Mach3 ??

« on: July 13, 2015, 06:19:10 AM »

I wonder if the UC100 can handle the M10/11 commands.

Yes it can. At least according to the manual.

Checked out the manual and it also has torch height control inputs, to my surprise. The big test will be seeing how it actually handles the M10/11 commands and if it can process those commands as fast as a standard parallel port setup.

88

General Mach Discussion / Re: Future of Mach3 ??

« on: July 11, 2015, 08:39:12 PM »

I'm running a UC-100 and the UCCNC motion control software on a slaved axis router with no issues. My problems are more of a work flow mach vs UCCNC. UCCNC has a conversion program that takes your mach config file and writes the settings to the UCCNC config. That saves a ton of time.

At least with the UCCNC software the spindle turns on every time:)

Good to know Derek (slaved axis),

I think a router is easy with an external motion controller, but with plasma you have torch height control. Mach3 built in THC takes THC UP and THC DOWN signals via the PARALLEL PORT, so an external motion controller won't work. The only possibility would be to have a completely independent external THC like the Candcnc system, but then that still leaves the issue with turning the torch off during motion. I wonder if the UC100 can handle the M10/11 commands.

Keith.

89

General Mach Discussion / Re: Future of Mach3 ??

« on: July 11, 2015, 08:31:45 PM »

I'm a bit wary of the external motion controller boards.

That's a Mach3 issue, and not the fault of the motion controllers. Every other alternative software control uses external motion controllers, or signal generators. The difference is that they were designed this way from the start, where with Mach3, external motion controllers were added several years after Mach3 was written.

Hi Gerry,

I was relating external motion controllers to Mach3 when I said I'm wary of them, not other software. It was suggested to use the UC100 as a way of keeping Mach3.

With a normal Mach3 parallel port setup you can use the M10/11 commands to switch the torch off DURING motion and it works good. The latest Candcnc sytem is using an external motion controller and you cannot do the same thing. At this point in time there has not been a fix for this, and it looks like one may not be coming.

In any case I don't class it as a "fault", simply one system doesn't work together with another system to give a particular result.

Keith

90

General Mach Discussion / Re: Future of Mach3 ??

« on: July 11, 2015, 05:22:19 PM »

Thanks everyone.

Terry has told me about Eding CNC, but I haven't heard of the other ones. I'll check them out too.

As I've came to know Mach3 more and more, it's a pity having to consider moving. I'm a bit wary of the external motion controller boards. I do plasma cutting and an external motion controller card can introduce latency/timing issues when you want to have perfect torch firing/extinguishing timing relative to XY motion. The latest Candcnc system has had this issue and at this point in time it seems there isn't a fix. They've even announced they are developing a Linuxcnc system. I could be wrong but I think I also heard the UC100 doesn't work with a slaved axis ??

Keith.