Messages

31

General Mach Discussion / Re: External E stop

« on: December 04, 2011, 05:52:03 AM »

Just make a copy and rename it - most people add their name or some identifier to it, Doesn't really matter, it just has to be unique.

32

General Mach Discussion / Re: Normal condition ? and a few other questions

« on: December 04, 2011, 05:47:52 AM »

Maybe you're misunderstanding how the DRO's are interrelated? Just to clarify, the G54 work offset will never be zero unless the work origin is the same as the machine home. It is expected for it to change when you zero your work offsets. G54 holds the offset from machine home to your work origin.

What is curious is that the method you are describing should set everything to zero. Verify that the on the Offsets page that the Machine Coordinates LED is flashing and that it reads 0,0,0 after homing. Now set G54 work offset to 0,0,0. Now click the Machine Coordinates button (the one that should now be flashing) and it will give you your current work coordinate. This should read 0,0,0 without having to change anything.

Verify that under homing/limits in the config menu, you should have auto-zero checked fr each axis, correct?

33

General Mach Discussion / Re: Nesting troubles

« on: December 02, 2011, 11:05:14 PM »

Hood is correct. I have my own advanced nesting wizard that we use on a regular basis. The reason is that the nesting wizard (both mine and the built in one) offsets the parts using G92 (or G52, same result), which changes the location of part home (0,0). Fixture offsets would also have the same result. Mach3 displays the locations on the screen correctly when it is generating the toolpath on screen, but when running it does not take the offsets into account. The same is true if you nest different parts - the display quickly looks messed up as the cuts in this case won't line up at all with the original lines in the display. I don't know of any way to correct this, and after investigating it seems impossible short of having the wizard rewrite the file and avoid using offsets entirely. Too much work for me, since it's only a display issue. One of Mach3's few bugs that can't be worked around, but I haven't mentioned it as I'm hoping Mach4 might correct it. I didn't want to bug Brian with such a trivial matter - I want him to focus on Mach4 because I'm just dying to have all the power and control he keeps teasing us with!

Hope this clears things up.

Chris

34

General Mach Discussion / Re: Steppers are too slow

« on: November 30, 2011, 05:43:36 AM »

I'm not an expert in stepper motors; others here have much more experience than I, but I can try to clarify a few things for you.

24V is generally considered to be low for driving steppers - higher voltage will help "punch through" the inductance of the motors (in layman's terms) to allow for higher speeds and better acceleration without stalling. That being said 24V should normally be sufficient to drive them, just not optimal (you will not even come close to the rated torque value). Our lab product that we manufacture uses 24V (actually, it's 28V now, but used to be 24V) and runs just fine, but our CNC machines use 48V for better torque.

Could you provide the motor inductance? That will help in figuring out the problem. My best guess at this point is the 380oz-in motors may be high inductance, limiting the speed. You said your 180oz-in steppers are being driven fine with the same setup - this points to some difference in the motors - must be inductance, I think. Best to check it first, in any case.

Microstepping is always a good thing - higher setting should help increase max velocity and acceleration as it reduces the affects of resonance which reduces the torque of the motor. More steps = smoother current flow = increased torque = increased speed = better motion.

If anything I've posted here is incorrect or incomplete, other more experienced users will likely jump in. In the meantime, please find out what the inductance of those motors are. That would be the best place to start as your other motors seem to be fine in the same setup. 50rpm would definitely be very slow for a stepper.

35

G-Code, CAD, and CAM discussions / Re: New project: Sound sure working fast implement CAM Software using VB

« on: November 29, 2011, 05:16:31 AM »

My company is always willing to test new ideas and methods. We use routers, lathes and mills. When you have a beta I would be happy to help with testing.

Keep us updated!

Chris

36

VB and the development of wizards / Re: Multidimensional arrays in Cypress Basic?

« on: November 17, 2011, 06:34:20 AM »

Correction:

Dim DimSize1 As Integer, DimSize2 As Integer

Sub Main
   Dim MultiArray() As Integer
   Dim I As Integer, J As Integer
   
   DimSize1 = 3
   DimSize2 = 3
   
   Call ReDimArray(MultiArray(), DimSize1, DimSize2)

   'insert dummy data
   For I = 0 To 8
      MultiArray(I) = I
   Next I
   
   For I = 0 To 2
      For J = 0 To 2
'         Call SetArray(MultiArray, I, J, I + J)
         Print GetArray(MultiArray, I, J)
      Next J
   Next I
End Sub


Function ReDimArray(ByRef MultiArray() As Integer, loc1 As Integer, loc2 As Integer)
   ReDim MultiArray(loc1 * loc2)
End Function

Function SetArray(ByRef MultiArray() As Integer, loc1 As Integer, loc2 As Integer, value As Integer)
   MultiArray(loc1 + loc2 * DimSize1) = value
End Function

Function GetArray(ByRef MultiArray() As Integer, loc1 As Integer, loc2 As Integer) As Integer
   GetArray = MultiArray(loc1 + loc2 * DimSize2)
End Function

37

VB and the development of wizards / Re: Multidimensional arrays in Cypress Basic?

« on: November 17, 2011, 06:18:59 AM »

AFAIK you cannot initialize an empty multi-dimensional array. and you cannot ReDim it either as ReDim only accepts 1 parameter.

You could use a single array to do the same job though. You just have to manage the array yourself.

e.g.

Sub Main
   Dim MultiArray() As Integer
   Dim I As Integer, J As Integer
   Dim Dim1 As Integer, Dim2 As Integer
   
   Dim1 = 3
   Dim2 = 3
   
   Call ReDimArray(MultiArray(), Dim1, Dim2)

   For I = 0 To 3
      For J = 0 To 3
         Call SetArray(MultiArray, I, J, I + J)
         Print GetArray(MultiArray, I, J)
      Next J
   Next I
End Sub


Function ReDimArray(ByRef MultiArray() As Integer, dim1 As Integer, dim2 As Integer)
   ReDim MultiArray(dim1 * dim2)
End Function

Function SetArray(ByRef MultiArray() As Integer, dim1 As Integer, dim2 As Integer, value As Integer)
   MultiArray(dim1 * dim2) = value
End Function

Function GetArray(ByRef MultiArray() As Integer, dim1 As Integer, dim2 As Integer) As Integer
   GetArray = MultiArray(dim1 * dim2)
End Function

38

General Mach Discussion / Re: Double check when measuring tool

« on: September 29, 2011, 05:58:40 AM »

For "greater than or equal to" the correct syntax is

">="

not

"= >"

39

Machscreen Screen Designer / Re: DRO setup question

« on: September 29, 2011, 05:53:38 AM »

What DRO# did you assign it? If it's an OEM DRO it may be that you are trying to change a DRO output, which it won't allow you to do. Check that you are using a valid DRO #.

40

General Mach Discussion / Re: Could this be done with Mach

« on: September 13, 2011, 08:23:03 PM »

I heard that Mach4 will be able to run 2 planners. This could resolve the problem completely if it does. Just a thought.

Linking two computers would be difficult as the pulse frequency would not be synced, and thus the feed rate would likely differ noticeably. Perhaps not impossible, but I think it would be opening a can of worms.

Just my 2 cents.

Chris