Messages

101

General Mach Discussion / Re: Rotary table dividing calculator

« on: January 28, 2012, 08:02:19 PM »

Thanks John:

I'll give it a try. Could be useful even for manual CNC usage.

Sage

102

General Mach Discussion / Re: Mach 3 Win2k server

« on: December 28, 2011, 05:38:03 PM »

Not sure about the Server version but mine runs fine on Win 2000.

Sage

103

General Mach Discussion / Re: Beeps in middle of code execution

« on: November 26, 2011, 11:50:26 AM »

I didn't really want to turn it off. It doesn't bother me and it's useful to have it get my attention as a confirmation that something happened. I was just wondering why it beeps in the middle of code. Just curious more than anything.
 I notice the "abnormal condition" indicator flashing. Not sure when it started. Perhaps on that condition it beeps??
 I've forgotten what "abnormal condition" is anyway.

Dave

104

General Mach Discussion / Beeps in middle of code execution

« on: November 25, 2011, 09:01:36 PM »

Why does Mach beep,clink or clank whatever you call the alert tone, while in the middle of running a program? It makes the sound on manual tool changes, I understand that to get your attention, but why in the middle of the code when nothing out of the ordinary appears to be going on?

 
Sage

105

General Mach Discussion / Re: Switch to Smooth Stepper

« on: October 30, 2011, 06:29:56 PM »

Well !! That was easy. Just plugged it in and away it went. Can't notice any difference from the old parallel port connection. Good stuff.

Sage

106

General Mach Discussion / Re: Switch to Smooth Stepper

« on: October 29, 2011, 12:30:57 PM »

No spindle control here, so no problem.
The original XML is safe from my my original computer and I'll save the Smooth Stepper xml from the laptop as well.
I'm sort of procrastinating on what I'm supposed to be doing today so maybe I'll give it a try.

Thanks

Sage

107

General Mach Discussion / Switch to Smooth Stepper

« on: October 29, 2011, 12:06:55 PM »

My mill has been working fine on a parallel port for years and I have no particular reason to change to a smooth stepper, but I purchased the smooth stepper a few years ago and it's been sitting on the shelf since. Perhaps waiting to apply it to another milling setup or just in case my mother board goes bad and I can't get one with a parallel port.
 Now I'm curious to see how it works.
 I have a PMDX breakout board in my driver box so it has the ability to accept the ribbon cables from the smooth stepper.

For the heck of it I installed Mach on an old laptop, copied my XML from my working machine and installed the smooth stepper. It seems to be happy.
Since the XML was copied, the ports and pins are set up the same between my working machine and the laptop with the smooth stepper.
 So, before I dig into my driver box, is this going to be a simple plug and play from the smooth stepper to the PMDX to achieve a machine working like my parallel port set up, or am I looking at a whole bunch of trouble?
 (understanding that I may have to tune some smooth stepper parameters of course)


Sage

108

General Mach Discussion / Re: SIGNALS REALLY MIXED UP??? Please help

« on: August 25, 2011, 09:08:07 PM »

Try checking the stepper motor power supply voltage.

Sage

109

General Mach Discussion / Re: Is backlash compensation broken?

« on: August 11, 2011, 07:56:43 PM »

Got to wonder why they take on the task when it seems so simple and effective to let Mach take care of it directly. Especially considering (apparently in the case of SS) they screw it up and leave you high and dry with nothing that works.
 Of course, the best (and only reasonable) solution is to not have any backlash in the first place. I've found the compensation to be marginal at best anyway.

Sage

110

General Mach Discussion / Re: Is backlash compensation broken?

« on: August 11, 2011, 05:10:34 PM »

Excuse me if I'm missing something here but what difference does using the PP or SS have in backlash compensation. My understanding is that Mach simply issues additional ordinary steps in a particular direction to complensate just before sending out the regular steps - NO?
 Why would it need to be handled any different through the SS. OR why would SS choose to handle it any different if it is handled already by mach when directly connected by the parallel port?

Sage