1
General Mach Discussion / Re: Another THC Hickup I have noticed...Axis acceleration
« on: March 04, 2010, 10:34:56 AM »
It is DEFINITELY Mach 3 ignoring acceleration values when the THC UP/DOWN are used...
I swapped the pins to my y axis that is rack and pinion, about 2080 steps per inch on a Gecko 540(10 microsteps) and a 387OzIn motor, capable of over 1700IPM and accelerating well over 100IPS/S I can't run it that hard or it will shake the machine to pieces... but it still managed to stall a couple of times.
I agree when I make a more permanent Z-axis at a lower step count it "might" work better, but the fact of the mater is the acceleration rules are not being applied... if that's the case then why do we bother tuning the motors for top performance in the first place???
As for EMC... (the PC I'm using can't run faster than 25KHz In Mach3 = 800IPM Max) yes the pulse train is way faster / more stable... but its running in Linux and isn't exactly easy to configure past a very basic setup(they are improving the configuration utility but it's not quite there yet). It can be customized, but you have to spend some time reading up on how the hardware abstraction layers and .INI files are configured. I think I read, but forgot to bookmark that there is a routine someone wrote to slave and properly home a two motor axis... In Mach you click a radio button and a checkbox... DONE...
EMC though...lol
I really like the look and functionality of Mach3, but if I figure out how to Modify one of their sample THC setups to my machine before I can get Mach3 to work for me, I'll be using EMC instead. Maybe Mach4 will work properly??
I swapped the pins to my y axis that is rack and pinion, about 2080 steps per inch on a Gecko 540(10 microsteps) and a 387OzIn motor, capable of over 1700IPM and accelerating well over 100IPS/S I can't run it that hard or it will shake the machine to pieces... but it still managed to stall a couple of times.
I agree when I make a more permanent Z-axis at a lower step count it "might" work better, but the fact of the mater is the acceleration rules are not being applied... if that's the case then why do we bother tuning the motors for top performance in the first place???
As for EMC... (the PC I'm using can't run faster than 25KHz In Mach3 = 800IPM Max) yes the pulse train is way faster / more stable... but its running in Linux and isn't exactly easy to configure past a very basic setup(they are improving the configuration utility but it's not quite there yet). It can be customized, but you have to spend some time reading up on how the hardware abstraction layers and .INI files are configured. I think I read, but forgot to bookmark that there is a routine someone wrote to slave and properly home a two motor axis... In Mach you click a radio button and a checkbox... DONE...
EMC though...lol
I really like the look and functionality of Mach3, but if I figure out how to Modify one of their sample THC setups to my machine before I can get Mach3 to work for me, I'll be using EMC instead. Maybe Mach4 will work properly??