Hello Guest it is April 25, 2019, 04:29:31 AM

Author Topic: USB and Mach  (Read 14429 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Hood

*
  •  25,785 25,785
  • Carnoustie, Scotland
    • View Profile
Re: USB and Mach
« Reply #40 on: January 15, 2010, 08:13:31 PM »
Well that screws that theory, give me a few mins and I will concoct another ;D

Hood

Offline simpson36

*
  •  1,374 1,374
    • View Profile
Re: USB and Mach
« Reply #41 on: January 17, 2010, 05:50:04 AM »
I am one who needs the swap axis function. If Mach had the ability to run an axis continuously, there would not be a need, and hopefully that may find its way into Mach4.

My objective is to implement some of the capabilities of a machining center and thereby add a great deal of versatility and capability to a standard milling machine. Without the swapaxis function in mach, I know of no other way to get at this functionality.

Selecting a differnet plane is not a trivial task either is there are circular moves involved. I have not had to do this very much and so far I have simply 'messaged' the G-code rather than explore the application of swapaxis to this issue, but it seems like swapaxis would be a good, if not the best solution there if there was a larger program or the need to make a lot of smaller programs run on a different plane than XY. 

I don't understand why smoothstepper would eliminate this important feature of Mach, but that's the reality at the moment. Hopefully Mach4 will implement some more sophisticated interface options so that a single product with buggy firmware and drivers is not the only available choice. How long does a product need to stay in beta and have holes in it's functionality? I keep reading that 99% of SS users are happy campers to the point where it starts to look as if that is justification for the remaining bugs and limitations  . . . .  just my impression.
Re: USB and Mach
« Reply #42 on: January 17, 2010, 11:31:09 AM »
I am one who needs the swap axis function. If Mach had the ability to run an axis continuously, there would not be a need, and hopefully that may find its way into Mach4.

My objective is to implement some of the capabilities of a machining center and thereby add a great deal of versatility and capability to a standard milling machine. Without the swapaxis function in mach, I know of no other way to get at this functionality.

Selecting a differnet plane is not a trivial task either is there are circular moves involved. I have not had to do this very much and so far I have simply 'messaged' the G-code rather than explore the application of swapaxis to this issue, but it seems like swapaxis would be a good, if not the best solution there if there was a larger program or the need to make a lot of smaller programs run on a different plane than XY. 

I don't understand why smoothstepper would eliminate this important feature of Mach, but that's the reality at the moment. Hopefully Mach4 will implement some more sophisticated interface options so that a single product with buggy firmware and drivers is not the only available choice. How long does a product need to stay in beta and have holes in it's functionality? I keep reading that 99% of SS users are happy campers to the point where it starts to look as if that is justification for the remaining bugs and limitations  . . . .  just my impression.

The thing is that not everyone cuts the same kind of parts and therefore don't see the same bugs.  This happens a surprising amount here, many people refuse to see a problem because it doesn't show up in their setups with the kind of code they run.  A lot of folks run simple code generated by simple CAM programs, or 2D hand code as it's cheap to produce.  It's also not very taxing on the system. 
But because it "works fine for them" you must be doing something wrong, and it's not a problem. 
I like the product, and I respect the difficulties in bringing the software to completion, especially in light of the tremendous variation in workflow and skill level of the folks reporting problems with the code.  I continue to be hopeful that these issues will be ironed out.  But it certainly isn't done yet.

Offline RICH

*
  • *
  •  7,313 7,313
    • View Profile
Re: USB and Mach
« Reply #43 on: January 17, 2010, 12:46:52 PM »
Koko76,
Yep, said a different way, is that the use of the software varies and as the use gets more complex you find shortcomings, bugs, or whatever you wish to explain it as. At a high level you end up doing work arounds that may not be the ideal. 

I wouldn't take a reply as "your doing something wrong" but rather think in terms of why does something work for another and what are the differences. Sounds easy, but at times it can be something simple or very complex.
Many times, transparent to the user,  someone is spending time to replicate the problem and look into.
One thing for sure, nothing is standing still. May not be moving at the pace to suit us, and certainly something will creep in no matter what.
I see the USB  use as a transition away  PP and the system evolution just has to take it's course over time

RICH


Re: USB and Mach
« Reply #44 on: January 17, 2010, 03:15:45 PM »


I wouldn't take a reply as "your doing something wrong" but rather think in terms of why does something work for another and what are the differences. Sounds easy, but at times it can be something simple or very complex.
Many times, transparent to the user,  someone is spending time to replicate the problem and look into.
One thing for sure, nothing is standing still. May not be moving at the pace to suit us, and certainly something will creep in no matter what.
I see the USB  use as a transition away  PP and the system evolution just has to take it's course over time

RICH



This becomes difficult to do when the reply states that I'm doing something wrong.  There are a lot of very well meaning individuals out there who like to provide help, but are misguided in their information.  This does not move the ball forward. 
Being defensive about a particular product's shortcomings also does not move the ball forward.  It does not improve the product, or provide valid feedback to the developer of said product in order to fix problems with it. 

Offline RICH

*
  • *
  •  7,313 7,313
    • View Profile
Re: USB and Mach
« Reply #45 on: January 17, 2010, 05:05:53 PM »
koko76,
Fortunately there are enough replies, that over the course of the thread, it all sorts out.
RICH
Re: USB and Mach
« Reply #46 on: February 17, 2010, 06:05:14 PM »
Just a question that I either over looked or isnt in here... The smooth Stepper, is that just for stepper motors? Or will it work with servos 2?
Hey THANKS 4 all the help in advance. I'll need more than you'll ever expect!!!


www.cravenpottery.com

Offline Jeff_Birt

*
  •  1,107 1,107
    • View Profile
    • Soigeneris
Re: USB and Mach
« Reply #47 on: February 17, 2010, 06:53:25 PM »
It will work with either steppers or servos drives that take step/direction input signals. It will NOT drive an analog servo amp.
Happy machining , Jeff Birt
 

Offline simpson36

*
  •  1,374 1,374
    • View Profile
Re: USB and Mach
« Reply #48 on: February 18, 2010, 07:13:01 AM »
Does the smoothstepper support swapaxis yet?

Offline Hood

*
  •  25,785 25,785
  • Carnoustie, Scotland
    • View Profile
Re: USB and Mach
« Reply #49 on: February 18, 2010, 07:34:06 AM »
No.

Hood