Simpson, I could live with the shipping charge.  It's not crazy out of line when you consider they're probably trying to recoup whatever it costs them to pack a box, label it, and so forth.  There's usually more than just a UPS charge there is what I'm getting at.

After having been through a GRex and a Smoothstepper, I think the best answer on these boards is for Mach3 to publish a standard API for step generators.  The problem always seems to be with software.  If it could be written once, and reused across all the hardware, and if it didn't require custom plug-ins, then I think there would be more hope. 

I have to believe the Mach developers are tired of writing new interfaces anyway.  By now, there have been enough I would think they understand what's needed and could publish such an API.  Then it would be up to the board members to follow the API.  Maybe we could finally get one finished and well supported then.

It's not the $20, it is the ethics it represents to me. If they really need to make that extra $10, it should be added 'in broad daylight' to the price of the product and not 'slipped in', especially since they don't reveal the method of shipping, and give no options, only the price . . . .  I don;t like sneaky . . .  the entire pre-sale process, including greasing the bottom line by overcharging for shipping says something to me about a company.  Just a pet peeve of mine, perhaps, but I get that 'bad taste' in my mouth when I see stuff like that. I routinely ship world wide and I know what the costs are.

I agree about the API. I can't get comfy with smoothstepper for obvious reasons, but I read that there are 'several' motion controllers out there that work with Mach. Now that I have the swapaxis problem solved, I have started to snoop around a bit for a fast pulse generator so that I can get rid of the step multipliers, which cause a variety of ills.  It would be my preference to get something that will outlive Mach3.  Kflop is only one example, and at that it carries a price which may be fair considering it's capabilities . .  if it actually works . .  but I would not be using most of those capabilities, so it is not a particularly good value. Still, I was about to buy it to get on with my projects . . .  except for that taste.

I read up on this product and was about to purchase the Kflop board . . until I saw $20 shipping for a board that 'fits in the palm of your hand' from California to Texas. In my experience, a company that blatantly overcharges for shipping also mistreats their customers in other ways as well. I'll keep looking . . . .

Can't agree more on that, Steve!

Dan

Yep, I understand about the shipping.  Just be aware there may be no malice aforethought.  Having worked with a number of small businesses, they will more often think in terms of wanting to cover costs than outsmarting their customers with clever marketing.

Cheers,

BW

Yep, I understand about the shipping.  Just be aware there may be no malice aforethought.  Having worked with a number of small businesses, they will more often think in terms of wanting to cover costs than outsmarting their customers with clever marketing.

Perhaps, but I also e-mailed them about the shipping cost and got no response. There is a saying; "Don't expect to be treated better after the wedding than you were during the courtship".  Whatever hardware and software that I end up using might well be provided as part of the 4th axis package, so the vendor's attitude towards customers is particularly important. The shipping is just indicative, there are other red flags there. Having worked with small business, I'm sure you have seen the result of getting in bed with the wrong vendor.

Did you make that gizmo in your avatar? Amazing piece . . . sort of like metal scripshaw.

I did make the Turner's Cube, though I did it without turning, LOL.

The holes are interpolated:  http://www.cnccookbook.com/CCTurnersCube.html

Cheers,

BW

Wow, amazing site, you have there, Bob. I shall make a pont to peruse when I have more time.


Note to Smoothstepper owners: The SwapAxis board has been tested and works with the Smoothstepper.

Note to Smoothstepper owners: The SwapAxis board has been tested and works with the Smoothstepper.

What is the SwapAxis board?

Hi Gerry,

It is a simple board that Steve has designed to accomplish in hardware the same effect of using the SwapAxis() command in Mach3. Two pairs of Step/Dir signals are in and two pairs are out. A triggering signal from Mach3 swaps the output signals between the two pairs.

Daniel

Bob,

You mentioned that you have 'been thru' a G100 and a smoothstepper. I took that to mean you were not using either, but on second thought . . . .

Are you currently using the smoothstepper in a working machine? If so, would you say that known issues can be avoided and the product used with success, or is it still something of a crap shoot?

I am still using a Smoothstepper. 

I think it is a reasonable device as offered today.  If a parallel breakout board won't work for you for some reason, it may be the best possible choice.

If it were well supported and being actively updated, I would view it as an excellent device.  My next CNC project I will likely revert to a parallel board unless I see some major progress here.

There are some known issues that I find annoying--the lack of backlash compensation is one.  If stuff like that is promised for years and not delivered, it starts to seem like it may not ever be delivered.

There is also the fear of unknown issues.  For example, it has odd behavior surrounding loss of position depending on how you stop an executing program.  Personally, I am not sure it can be trusted without re-homing the machine if you do have to stop.  This makes me wonder whether there are other edge cases where it may be a little bit wrong.  Others may be completely confident in the board's behavior, I have just seen some odd things here and there.

Ray Livingston has one too, and has mentioned a number of problems he has had, including problems around probing.  He indicated he thought most of these problems were being fixed near term though.

Without prompt and current support, it is very hard to know what's really happening with these cases.  Are they Smoothstepper problems?  Mach3 problems?  Operator errors?

This is the difficulty of a relatively unsupported device where finger pointing is possible, and one side that can be pointed to basically does not speak up very often.  I don't think the board is far from being done, so I'm puzzled why it doesn't just get done.

Lastly, there is a fear of being orphaned.  I blew up one Smoothstepper due to a power surge that killed a fair number of things in the house.  OK, I bought another one.  But if the one man operation is not interested in finishing the software, how long before they're not interested in manufacturing the hardware?  And then what do I do?

I proposed one time on CNCZone that Greg should sell his design to Mariss F. at Gecko, and Mariss should hire him full time to make sure the software was kept up to date.  That would totally rock and be a good thing for the Mach3 non-parallel community.  I have to believe enough people would buy a well supported board from a name brand that it would be profitable.

Alternatively, I'm back to wishing Mach3 would standardize its API for these things and release an open souce plug-in so that there would be multiple suppliers.

Cheers,

BW