Hello Guest it is November 30, 2021, 04:11:11 PM

Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - Rimmel

Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 »
21
Hi Rimmel, I know it's a long time since you posted this but I have a question please?

Maybe a silly question, but what do you mean by "execute"  I tried the first (which I called M205 like you) from the MDI but nothing happened, so I opened it in the script editor and ran it there and it did - an exported my tooltable, result!  Is that the right way to do it?

But executing like this from the VB editor does seem to work well, just what I need.

Honestly I cant even remember doing these... I would guess you have to use the VB editor because it ises the createobject call. I will try it on mine. What OS are you using?

Cheers

22
General Mach Discussion / Re: Switching from Mach3 to Mach4
« on: April 22, 2018, 06:38:43 AM »
Wow - with that business model no wonder they have lost so much ground to other products with Mach4.

I would have thought every customer was important...

Totally gobsmacked
Rimmel

23
General Mach Discussion / Re: Switching from Mach3 to Mach4
« on: April 21, 2018, 09:55:18 AM »
I disagree with 90% of what you posted - especially the GUI programming, that is the easy part. If they are making screen creators etc instead of producing working screens then they are definitely concentrating in the wrong area.

The other providers like UCCNC provide a pefectly good set of screens with worring about screen editors. Also 99% of people use the standard screens as default.

Regards
Rimmel

24
General Mach Discussion / Re: Switching from Mach3 to Mach4
« on: April 21, 2018, 06:46:36 AM »
I will reply inline:

Quote
Hi Rimmel,
I think your criticism is unfair.

Differing opinions are always welcome.

Quote
You pointed out a screen where a small fraction of a control was truncated by virtue of the screen size. Screens written by NFS are usually pretty good, they fit most screens and/or scale to most screens but not all.
Because a screen set does not fit perfectly with your PC screen without you having to do a few screen editing tweaks you are claiming incompetence by NFS?  Of the other CNC software you have mentioned how many
have as able screen editing and GUI functions as Mach4? The screen editing and GUI functions represent a very much larger chunk of code than Machs core and very much harder to achieve and are a major step up
over its competeition.

But NFS are SELLING this software and as such you would think that the first screen that greeted anyone would be in good visual order ESPECIALLY when you have been working on it for 3 - 4 years. So I must disagree and say that first impressions are paramount. Also I am a professional computer programmer (since 1997) and to say the GUI carries more code than the actual core Mach4 operations is frankly absurd, epsecially considering GUI driven development suites that are available today (point and click and 90% of the GUI code is written for you). My actual initial reaction to starting mach4 up was "Oh jesus... really?". Then click more or less any button and get the message that you can't do this in the demo... my reaction was "well why release a demo if you can't actualy do anything with it?"

More to the point, PlanetCNC, UCCNC, Masso and a few others have managed to do just that in a fraction of the time - from scratch.

Quote
Additionally, does it matter that much....I mean this is software for controlling a mill, router, lathe or whatever, is an imperfection in the screen set going to change how the machine works? What really important here?

Again, confidence in the product e.g. if you cannot fix simple glitches in the GUI in 3 - 4 years it does not give someone the confidence to spend $200 - £1,400, especially when the DEMO is restricted in such a manner you cannot realistic do ANYTHING with it.

Quote
A number of machining functions/features have to be enacted by the motion controller not Mach, backlash compensation, lathe threading and THC are some examples. They must be done in realtime
which absolutely precludes them being enacted within Mach, Mach is not realtime. At this time the external motion controllers have some but not all features implemented. You mention the ESS, you may
have been following the Warp9 forum but Backlash compensation is in Beta testing now and the majority of the code for lathe threading is already written. Warp9 have decided to 'up the ante' by having mulitpulse
spindle feedback and this has caused a delay to the release of lathe threading. The PMDX-422 on the other hand does support lathe threading but not backlash compensation.

Granted - but why has it taken so long? The Mach3 Warp9 software has been table and not changed for a while, so it's not as if they are working on that. Many feel the information dribbling out of NFS is a factor.

Quote
As I have Mach4Hobby without MacroB I don't make that claim but certainly ANYTHING I could do in Mach3 I can do in Mach4
EXCLUDING only those 'hardware only' features.

OK that's good - however how do I test this for myself?  well apart from spending $200 for the privilage...

Quote
The main reason for me to migrate from Mach3 (three years use with two parallel ports) to Mach4 (18 moths with ESS and two BoBs) was because VB, or more  accurately CE, the cutdown version of VB that
ships with Mach3 as its scripting language was and is riddled with inconsistentencies. Look up a recent thread in Mach3 about 'Scripter Complie Errors". Lua has proven to be absolutely consistent, not easy to
use to start with to be sure, but superbly consistent when it does. I have likewise found Mach4 to be much more stable. There are oddities certainly but few bugs.

Again, I would love to find that out, but recoil at spending $200 to do so.

You suggest my criticism is unfair and if the software was free or sub $50 then I would whole heartedly agree, but when you load the demo and the initial screen looks like a childs finger painting with near zero functionality I would sincerely argue with you.


At this point I am sticking with Mach3 and giving Masso a year to mature, I think their system is the future, dedicated hardware and software at a reasonable price - when you consider you need a decent motion controller, the licence and PC to make Mach4 work.

Regards
Rimmel




25
General Mach Discussion / Re: Homing switches - optical?
« on: April 20, 2018, 07:38:09 AM »
For anyone interested I found the same Inductive Prioximity switches in 5v avaiable here: https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/M12-LJ12A3-4-Z-BX-5V-DC-5V-NPN-NO-300mA-Inductive-Proximity-Sensor-Switch-4mm/352165249518?ssPageName=STRK%3AMEBIDX%3AIT&_trksid=p2057872.m2749.l2649

Ebay number 352165249518 if the link does not work: Just past number into ebay search box and press enter.

Ordered from China on 13th April and arrived on the 19th April (I am in the UK - land of the liberal idiot) - they work brilliantly and no faffing about with resistors and/or extra power supplies.

Result!
Rim

26
General Mach Discussion / Re: Switching from Mach3 to Mach4
« on: April 20, 2018, 07:31:46 AM »
How is Mach 4?

Can it do everything Mach 3 could?

Is Mach 4 complete?

Is Mach 4 stable?

Thanks

No

No

and NO.

27
General Mach Discussion / Re: Switching from Mach3 to Mach4
« on: April 20, 2018, 07:27:57 AM »
Whether you're an established Mach3 user or you're just starting out and all of your machine instructions are for Mach3, it can be daunting to make the switch to Mach4. Some of the buttons are gone or in a different spot than you're used to and even the configuration menus aren't quite the same. Whatever your level of experience is, there is going to be a learning curve when you start using Mach4. The worksheet attached is meant to ease the transition by helping you collect and organize your settings. Fill it out with with the settings you use in Mach3 and you will be able to use it as a reference when you make your profile in Mach4. It is meant to be used alongside the setup guide for your motion controller--as that will dictate which settings are configured in their plugin and which are configured in Mach4--and with the Mach4 configuration manual. It is written with the language and terminology used in Mach4 so you will know what you are looking for when you start applying your settings.

The worksheet should open in both Excel and Open Office. The first page is an introduction and the Worksheet tab on the bottom is where you'll actually fill out your settings.  Please PM me or submit a ticket at support.machsupport.com with any questions or for more information.

Happy CNCing!
-Bryanna

For me the switch isn't about screens and options/buttons moving, it is about functionality. After many years waiting for Mach4 I downloaded the demo and to be honest can't get any feel for the program at all. The demo is far too restrictive to risk spending money on it. After about a minute of looking through a feature I get a message saying demo timed out. Just looking at the Mach4 screen doesn't inspire confidence either e.g. how long has it been in development? 3 - 4 years? Yet as soon as you start it up you are shown this lovely screen (lathe). Last pic is fullscreen



3 - 4 years and the main interface still looks like Linux script kiddy wrote it?

It also doesn't help that Warp9 are still way behind with their plugin for it - yet the rest of the CNC World have moved on and have made massive strides: UCCNC, Masso, PlanetCNC, with LinuxCNC still being as reliable as ever. The problem with Linux however is the people who program it seem to have absolutely no idea at all of how to create an interface that looks good and works.

Honestly looking at Mach4 I think the Masso is the way to go, however it is young yet and far too restrictive in it's options. They seem to have concentrated on hardware and are now playing catchup with the software.

I dunno, I wanted to upgrade fro Mach3 to Mach4 and found that after all this time that I cannot see a single advantage of doing so - but many disadvantages.


Rimmel  :-[



28
Hi,
the Ethernet SmoothStepper does not support lathe threading at this time. If you follow the Warp9 forum you will see that it is being worked on and is very close
but its not ready yet. What code is there supports one pulse per rev like Mach3 but there is rumour that multi-pulse per rev will be supported and it is that which is taking
the extra time.

Craig

Great - thanks for the reply. Very informative.

Cheers

29
I have a Warp9td Ethernet Smoothstepper.

I am using mach3 at present, but I also have a 60 pulse per rev proper spindle encoder with 3 outputs, 1 pulse index and 2 x 60 pulse outputs at a 90 degree offset. I was hoping Mach4 would be able to utilize these elements. With Mach3 I am only using the single pulse index.

Thanks

30
As per post title.

Thanks

Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 »