73
« on: December 10, 2019, 03:52:15 PM »
OK,
Take my reply with a grain of salt as I have never attempted to convert a Swiss machine to Mach 4.
Mach 4 offers a single motion planner with up to 6 coordinated axes. There a also 6 out of band axes that can be used for uncoordinated motion (basic spindle, ATC, etc.)
Your swiss machine would require 2 motion planners, one for the front spindle and one for the rear since they act independently. Your spindles would also each consume a standard axis since they will be used as a C axis. The out of band axes would work great for live tooling spindles (unless you need rigid tapping, most motion controllers cannot support tapping).
So you have two options. You can forego the simultaneous front and back work and fit the machine into the capabilities/limitations of Mach 4. You might still be able to integrate the back spindle, but the front couldn't cut at the same time.
Second option would be to run 2 computers with two separate instances of Mach 4. One would control the main spindle and associated tools, and the other would control the back spindle and associated tools. Syncs would need to be realized with custom macros and likely hardware signals between the two copies of Mach 4 to handle the hand off. Hardware encoder signals could be passed between the two spindles to allow them to sync.
Either way, you have a complicated machine and a lot of work to get it under the control of Mach 4. There is no standard configuration that will work out of the box. I would prepare to get very intimate with LUA scripting to accomplish what you want. With all those disclaimers, I don't see any immediate reason you wouldn't be able to get this working. It would be an awesome project and there is a great community here to support you along the way. I think you will capture the respect of those in this community as you work your way through this.
Best of Luck,
Mike