Messages

101

General Mach Discussion / Re: Improving resolution on C axis

« on: November 26, 2012, 05:54:15 PM »

Where are you getting the 27 from?
Hood

In the setup motor screen that's the steps per unit setting I had to set to get it close to 360 when I command 360 from mach. Granted the math should be 22.22 per degree but I stopped messing with it because it was cogging so much at low speeds and because that number was so much lower than I'm used to for linear settings. Normally I'm used to settings of 8000 or more.
If numbers that low are normal then I'll look elsewhere for my problems. As you and Terry have pointed out it's probably tuning so I'll look at that.

Thanks
Derek

102

General Mach Discussion / Re: Improving resolution on C axis

« on: November 26, 2012, 04:54:06 PM »

It seems to me 27 steps per base unit is going to be a problem regardless. If I could scale the A axis in rotational then I could theoretically use a .25 factor then set my steps at 2000 per unit. I didn't see any way to scale the A axis but then it may be hidden.
Or I can order new pulleys at 1:1 or even 2:1 I was just trying to save some time and expense.

Derek

103

General Mach Discussion / Re: Improving resolution on C axis

« on: November 26, 2012, 02:42:38 PM »

Hi
My Mistake.
It's a 500 count encoder. Too much going on right now!
It's a rutex 990 drive. If I set the steps per inch to 2000 which is one revolution it's smooth as can be. If I had it belted at 1:1 it would be fine.

Derek

104

General Mach Discussion / Improving resolution on C axis

« on: November 26, 2012, 02:23:49 PM »

Hi
I'm using my C axis as the drive for my tool change carousel. I'm using an extra servo motor I had with a 250 count encoder. I have a 4:1 belt reduction. Consequently I have to set the steps per inch at 27 (or so) to calibrate it at 360 degrees rotation. It's not too smooth and cogs like crazy. I put this together with parts I had on the shelf so before I order new pulleys is there a way to improve this in Mach?

Thanks
Derek

105

PoKeys / Re: Pokeys and M39 relay board weirdness

« on: November 26, 2012, 01:03:31 PM »

Hi Neoto
I'm only running a single board.
I did some more testing this morning.
It has to do with what I'm switching. I'm using it to switch 24Vdc air valves. I did some tests and It will switch small (case) fans at 24V and 12V. I hooked up a 12V air valve and it has the same problem.
It seems the coils are creating a ton of noise and causing the relay board or pokeys to go bananas.

Derek

106

PoKeys / Pokeys and M39 relay board weirdness

« on: November 25, 2012, 07:30:30 AM »

Hi
I have a pokeys 56U and a CNC4PC m39 relay board. With nothing connected to the relays everything operates perfectly. The relays turn on and off properly. As soon as I put any kind of load on the relays when I switch on a relay it turns on some or all of the other relays randomly.

Any ideas on this one?
Thanks
Derek

107

General Mach Discussion / Re: Using a spindle sensor for Mach and VFD

« on: November 18, 2012, 02:56:29 PM »

Thanks for the help.
This gives me some food for thought.

Derek

108

General Mach Discussion / Re: Using a spindle sensor for Mach and VFD

« on: November 18, 2012, 12:47:31 PM »

I'm using a parallel port. So if I run a wire from the parallel port to the input pin on the VFD are there any issues I should be aware of?
I'm worried my ignorance could be costly this time!

Thanks
Derek

109

General Mach Discussion / Re: Using a spindle sensor for Mach and VFD

« on: November 18, 2012, 12:04:10 PM »

I have a pokeys to run the ATC if that would make things easier

110

General Mach Discussion / Re: Using a spindle sensor for Mach and VFD

« on: November 18, 2012, 11:30:59 AM »

Actually I'm trying to go the other way. I need the optical sensor to signal the VFD so it can index.
It has a simple indexing function. The vfd shuts down then turns slowly till the sensor triggers. It pulls an input on the VFD low. It then turns to a programmed angle. I'm curious if I can just run the signal wire to the VFD and share it between the two
Thanks
Derek