Hello Guest it is September 23, 2019, 12:16:33 AM

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 - smurph

441
Mach4 General Discussion / Re: Mach4 5-axis
« on: August 19, 2016, 04:07:00 PM »
We do not do kinematics (yet), so a gimble head is not possible.  But 5 axes with a trunion table setup is.

Steve

442
Mach4 General Discussion / Re: CNC movements not smooth
« on: August 19, 2016, 01:37:15 PM »
Just to be clear, the S word separating the G01 moves IS the problem here.  If you take out all of the S words, you will see it run very gracefully in CV mode. 

Steve

443
Mach4 General Discussion / Re: CNC movements not smooth
« on: August 18, 2016, 02:54:18 PM »
It is M62/M63 in Mach 4.  And the motion controller you are using has to support it.  They are special M codes that are an exception to the rule of M codes breaking the CV chain.  I'm not sure if ESS supports them yet or not.  :(  And they also only operate outputs, not some analog value.  So you would have to vary the PWM output based on which output was selected.  maybe 10 outputs to span the range of the PWM?

There is a LUA instance that runs the PLC script.  It basically gets executed at a predefined interval.  That is where I would do any code like what you are talking about. 

Steve

444
Mach4 General Discussion / Re: Modbus and Sim
« on: August 18, 2016, 11:12:10 AM »
No, Brett is not normal at all.  But then again... neither am I.  :)  Anyone that plays with this stuff can't be normal.  Anyway, have fun with the modbus stuff. 

Steve

445
Mach4 General Discussion / Re: CNC movements not smooth
« on: August 18, 2016, 12:12:48 AM »
The issue is all of the G01 lines are separated with S lines.  S breaks the CV chain.  In fact, M, S, and T will all break the CV chain.  In a Fanuc control, they refer to it as MST.

If you think about it, the look ahead would basically set S to the last value it read even when the machine is actually running the FIRST line of G01 code.  So we MUST break the CV chain and WAIT on that G01 line to run before advancing to the next S line.  Then, you will have spindle speed ramp times in there too.  You can probably set them to zero and alleviate that.  But nothing will keep it from going into exact stop mode for the S word.

Steve

446
BL is implemented in the motion controller.  And not all of them do it.  :(

447
Mach4 General Discussion / Re: Mach4 Tangential
« on: August 17, 2016, 11:57:29 PM »
Brian is working on the tangential stuff right now.  CV is working.  I don't know the status of the rest of it.  But it may do what you need.  Try it out and see.  It should work with Ethernet Smooth Stepper fine.  Or any other motion device that Mach 4 supports.

Steve

448
Mach4 General Discussion / Re: Mach4 5-axis
« on: August 17, 2016, 11:53:29 PM »
ESS and HiCON Integra are two that come to mind. 

Steve

449
Post up some code that fails.  I was running some cutter comp stuff the other day and all was fine.  So it may just be the way your post processor is outputting the code. 

Steve

450
Mach4 General Discussion / Re: Modbus and Sim
« on: August 17, 2016, 11:48:11 PM »
Well...  it is funny.  I have never gotten so many complaints about doing something right in my life!!!!  :)  To me, it is the way it is supposed to be, coming from an industrial manufacturing background (we used a lot of modbus devices).  So I had to look a bit cross-eyed to get Mach 3 modbus working.  But Mach 3 people are so used to doing it the wrong way, I guess.  Anyway, funny how we can get used to something.  We could all probably get used to putting our right shoe on our left foot, given enough time!  :)

If you will look at the modbus connection page, you will see a checkbox to use zero based register addressing.  I put that in there because the right way was giving so many so much grief.  But the bits are still numbered backwards.  I don't think I thought about changing that around.  But the correct modbus way should be easier for us to support in the long run.  At least I hope so!

I'm glad you got it all worked out.  I think I did mention that it was base 1 way back when we first did that plugin.  But it is probably buried in annuls of this forum by now.  And for what it is worth, Brian STILL trips up on it!  :)

Steve