Messages

1661

Mach4 General Discussion / Re: Machine thinks plate is off table. Confused. Please help

« on: March 06, 2020, 02:53:13 PM »

Hi,
I would start by stripping the program down to its basics and adding lines until the fault occurs.
For example:

Code: [Select]

G20 (Units: Inches)
G90
G91.1
M1100
M1111
G00 X5.8502 Y2.2120
(Part: 1056.nc)
(Layer: Holes Pierce#: 1)
(Run From Here Start Point)
M1115
M14 A0 B30 C1
G01 X5.8880 Y2.0980
G01 X5.9005 Y2.0601
G03 X5.9005 Y2.0601 I0.1205 J0.2399
G01 X5.9641 Y2.0680
M15 A0 B30 C1
M01
G00 X2.8502 Y2.2120

m30


I have stripped the code down to the one operation.
What do M1100, M1111 and M115 do? Are you sure that one of these macros is not causing an overlimit excursion?

By the way, the Mach4 Gcode interpreter converts all Gcode to lowercase, strips out leading zeros and whitespace so
the interpreter is looking for m1100, m1111 etc. In most cases because Windows is case insensitive it will provide the
correct macro but you should get into the habit of writing ALL Gcode in lowercase. There are occasions when Mach will not
get the correct code because of the uppercase/lowercase thing and its a devilishly hard fault to pick.

The next issue is that I see your post has inserted a G91.1 line to ensure incremental arc mode. Is your machine set up that way?
If there is a clash of arc mode interpretation between the Gcode and the machine overlimit excursions are not unlikely.
Having said that the tool path display usually shows an errant tool path. Does in fact the tool path display show the
overlimit excursion?

You might test this theory by commenting out the 'G03 X5.9005 Y2.0601 I0.1205 J0.2399' line and running the program fragment
without it.

Craig

1662

Mach4 General Discussion / Re: Machine thinks plate is off table. Confused. Please help

« on: March 06, 2020, 01:51:34 PM »

Hi,
can you post an excerpt of the Gcode, the first 50 or so lines?

Craig

1663

Mach4 General Discussion / Re: Lathe Canned Cycles Wizard problem (reverse cut)

« on: March 06, 2020, 01:47:41 PM »

Hi,
thanks Steve, yes that makes sense....our manual lathe has two tool posts on the one cross slide for that purpose.

When I was experimenting with the lathe cycles I found I could generate good tool paths
for a 'rear' tool by specifying the start position of X_i=-nnn. The gcode generated
has all its X cords as negative numbers but otherwise OK.

Do you suppose that is what OP was concerned about....the need to go through the generated code and
reverse (un-negate) all the X coordinates?

If that is the case it would be a simple matter to have a Lua script that automated that procedure.

I have a similar script on my mill where I wish a percentage correction applied to the Gcode and so I have a
script, m100, that reads the Gcode file line by line, decomposes the line, applies the correction to the x coord
then recomposes the line and adds it to a new 'corrected file'. It applies a percentage correction to the x coord
and does a complete Gcode file of 10,000 lines in a couple of seconds.

Craig

1664

Mach4 General Discussion / Re: Lathe Canned Cycles Wizard problem (reverse cut)

« on: March 06, 2020, 11:15:02 AM »

Hi,
I am not familiar with the term...what exactly do you mean?

Craig

1665

Mach4 General Discussion / Re: Lathe Canned Cycles Wizard problem (reverse cut)

« on: March 06, 2020, 07:52:52 AM »

Hi,

How to do this is mach4? Is it possible to import mach3 wizard to mach4?

No, Mach3 and Mach4 are sufficiently different internally that a Mach3 wizard will not operate in Mach4.

NFS did not write the Mach4 Lathe Wizard or canned cycles. They were contributed by Mach Motion and the intellectual
property rights remain with Mach Motion. The source code of the wizard/canned cycles is not available, unless you approach
Mach Motion.

Craig

1666

General Mach Discussion / Re: Possible configuration problem on new Mach3 installation

« on: March 06, 2020, 02:55:16 AM »

Hi,

Is there something else I should be overwriting as well?  How would I go about checking what the old assignments were?

Yes, you need to put the pin assignments into the UC100 plugin.

It has been some time  (five years) since I've used Mach3, I have been using Mach4 so the details of Mach3 are becoming hazy.
You can deduce from the .xml what the pin assignments were originally and could therefore be used to populate the UC100
plugin. Trying to decipher the raw .xml file is a real mission. Maybe a current Mach3 expert will chime in and help.

I have never used a UC100, I have used an Ethernet SmoothStepper motion control board, consequently I'm not familiar
with the UC100 plugin. There are many Mach3 users whom do use a UC100 however.

Craig

1667

General Mach Discussion / Re: Mach3 ESS and Endurance 10W Laser

« on: March 06, 2020, 02:32:01 AM »

Hi,
if you bought two MB02's, or equivalently two C10's, with port 1 bidirectional pins set as outputs and port 2
bidirectional pins as inputs you would have a total of:

12 (port 1) + 4 (port 2)= 16 outputs
4 (port 1) + 13 (port 2)=17 inputs

With 16 outputs, counting two for each axis, 5 axes for 10 outputs, plus two/three for a spindle or laser, still leaves
you with at least three outputs to spare.

If you had one input per limit switch and one input per home switch you can have all nine switches on their own input
without having to combine them onto fewer pins.

This is the advantage of an ESS.....plenty of IO....so use it!

In Mach4 you can have up to six axes, each one with up to four slaves.

The scheme you have proposed makes sense for Mach3 (X,Y,Z,A and B as a slave) but in Mach 4 you would have
X,Y plus slave,Z and A axes. In addition you can have up to six out-of-band axes which can be jogged or moved independently
of the coordinated axes and of each other. Mach4 offers a great deal more flexibility when it comes to axis arrangements
and assignments.

Craig

1668

General Mach Discussion / Re: Mach3 ESS and Endurance 10W Laser

« on: March 06, 2020, 02:14:19 AM »

Hi,
for cryin' out loud mate......you're in Aussie.....so buy Aussie made.....Peter Homann is a good bugger.

Craig

1669

General Mach Discussion / Re: Mach3 ESS and Endurance 10W Laser

« on: March 05, 2020, 11:10:47 PM »

Hi,
that is the downside of using a 'fully featured' BoB like a C62, you are now constrained to use the architecture that
the manufacturer has determined as being most suitable for their prospective customers. In your circumstance you require
a slightly different architecture.

The other extreme is the very simple bi-directional C10 ($23 each).  It has the equivalent of one ports worth of IO where pins 2-9
can be used as either inputs OR outputs. The downside is that there is no opto-isolation, nor relays, nor PWM to analogue. If you
require any or all of those features you have to add the few electronic components to enact it. This allows maximum flexibility but
demands that you add the 'frilly bits'.

I use two MB02's from Homann Designs in Austrailia (not to be confused with the MB03 series of products by CNCRoom in Malaysia)
which are almost indentical to the C10's. Electronics is my thing, so if I decide a particular inpput would benefit by opto-isolation, i add it.
Likewise if I require 24V outputs I add the required level translation transistor.

You maybe required to adopt the same strategy.

Craig

1670

General Mach Discussion / Re: Possible configuration problem on new Mach3 installation

« on: March 05, 2020, 01:22:18 PM »

Hi,
the original breakout board will have wires attached, say output pin2 to the X axis step input say, and output pin3 to the X axis
dir input. Have you replicated those assignments in the UC100 plugin?

Craig