DDSCV1.1 3 and 4 axis offline motion controller

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by John S

Having had dealing with a few UK main model engineering suppliers I can't see any wanting to carry these units.
For one the sale would be very low and for every sale make in the UK 3 would buy direct from China to escape the markup, taxes and VAT etc so there would be no reason to even look for a supplier in China.

---

Exactly my findings, though i stubbornly looked for the supplier. But as i said i looked with the idea to make them change this and that so it fits better to our needs. For the price they wholesale it, it has to be sold sth like 250 euro to be worth the effort. Even so it will be a great deal. But with the said changes and updated manuals, plus direct contact with the programmer so if bugs found to be immediately removed and software updated.

The way it is now, its better bought directly from China for 160 euros shipping included.

Ok got one of these on it's way I'll torcher it to death then jump in with my two penny's worth.!!!

We have not stopped selling ballscrews, but we are discontinuing the C7 range and this is not because we cant compete, its more to do with stocking both C7 and C5 is a logistical nightmare and requires a lot of stock holding.
There is big difference in the ballscrews we offer and what you find on the Chinese market, all of the dirt cheap Chinese ball screws are the rejects from TBI or other manufactures (Not meeting C7 lead accuracy, non complaint root diameter and a number of other issues) and are dumped onto the chinese market at near scrap value. We stopped selling the Chinese ballscrews and nuts due to these problems.

The ballnuts are made in china and that is why they fit them to the screws and if you need a new nut two years later, good luck, because you may need to reball it to fit correctly.

Regarding importing and selling the low cost controllers, i have absolutely no intention, till they are CE, have real documentation and some form of technical support.
Also what is important is that there is some money to be made from selling them and at the moment, we would only be able to sell them at a loss.
Adding them on a machine is another matter though.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by John S

Pete, Very grey area but controllers fall into the exempt area for lead free as they are controlling critical equipment unlike say a washing machine or radio.

However I know what you are saying.

Having had dealing with a few UK main model engineering suppliers I can't see any wanting to carry these units.
For one the sale would be very low and for every sale make in the UK 3 would buy direct from China to escape the markup, taxes and VAT etc so there would be no reason to even look for a supplier in China.

Both Zapp and Arceurotade have stopped selling ball screws as everyone is going direct and it won't end there.
Arc is to stop selling drivers and steppers when the current stock has run out for the same reason.

---

Real life scenario today. Electricity stopped for a sec today, something with the fuse box or whatever. Flipped back the main interrupter at home, went to machine, hit "all go to 0" and after 3 min it was operational. It had not lost exact machine position .I had just to check if Z height is there correctly to be sure, as i have loaded 60 euro tool, All was there as it should be on place.

Went back to my PC to brag here about that. Mehh. 15 days in a raw , windows 10 attempts and fails to install updates. Read in internet, fixed registry, attempted manual update, fixed once, repeats with next updates without being able to fix. So in fact had to wait 10 min to update and 15 min to repair itself from inability to update. So half an hour later was operational. And have in mind that it does that twice a day and does not let me postpone or disable automatic update.On my pc. The one who invented that feature is N1 in my bad person list

Meanwhile machine was working at least half an hour doing steadily its job. For that time it made 6 parts . You tell me now what are you conclusions. I am not trying to convince anybody here.




Some people ask me on Youtube about macros. I dont know anything but lets see what the controller has in its memory. There is a file called "probe"

here is what "probe" is made of:

Quote:

---

G04P0;ÔÝÍ£0s£¬ÎªºóÐø³ÌÐòÕýÈ·¶ÁÈ¡µ±Ç°»úе×ø±êλÖÃM5 ;¹Ø±ÕÖ÷Öá
(¶ÁÈ¡µ±Ç°µ¶¾ß»úе×ø±êλÖÃ)
#20=#864
#21=#865
#22=#866
IF#571EQ0GOTO1;Åбðϵͳ²ÉÓù̶¨Î»ÖöԵ¶Ä£Ê½»¹Êǵ±Ç °Î»ÖöԵ¶Ä£Ê½
(¹Ì¶¨¶Ôµ¶Ä£Ê½Ï£¬Çó³öX¡¢Y¡¢ZµÄ½ø¸øÁ¿)
#1=#572-#20
#2=#573-#21
#3=#574-#22
GOTO2
(µ±Ç°¶Ôµ¶Ä£Ê½Ï£¬X¡¢Y¡¢Z½ø¸øÁ¿ÇåÁã)
N1#1=0
#2=0
#3=0
(Òƶ¯µ½¶Ôµ¶³õʼλÖÃ)
N2G91G00Z#3
G91G00X#1Y#2
(ÒÔ100ËÙ¶ÈÏÂ̽100mm¼ì²â¶Ôµ¶ÐźÅ)
N1M101
G91G01Z-100F100
M102
G04P0;ÔÝÍ£0s
#402=#400;±£´æ×ø±êϵZÖáÁãµãÆ«ÖÃ
#403=1;ÉèÖÃ×Ô¶¯ÐÞÕý×ø±êϵ±êÖ¾
#404=-#870;±£´æ¶Ôµ¶¿éºñ¶È£¬Èç¹û֮ǰ¶Ôµ¶¿éºñ¶È²ÎÊýΪ0£¬Ïµ ͳ½«²ÉÓøñäÁ¿ÐÞÕý¶Ôµ¶¿éºñ¶È²ÎÊý£¬ÒÔÍê³ÉµÚÒ»´Î¶Ôµ¶
G91G01Z#575F#578;¶Ôµ¶Íê³É£¬ZÖá»ØÍË

---

I think that is Chinese, thats why the strange characters. So obviously things could be done



Also there is a file called "eng" which contains the specific machine settings, which could be altered on PC, loaded to say 100 controllers, if you a fitting it on a same machine. Which is great, so you don't have to program by clicking 100 controllers


inside its something like that:

Quote:

---

&&#5 -t1 -s1"minimum log radius of 4axis machining" -s2"mm" -m0 -min=0.000 -max=999.999
#6 -t2 -s1"A axis rotate reference axis" -m0 -min=0.000 -max=3.000 -i0"X axis" -i1"Y axis" -i2"Z axis" -i3"not rotate"


#104 -t2 -s1"A axis optimal path when G0 run" -m0 -min=0.000 -max=1.000 -i0"No" -i1"Yes"


#34 -t1 -s1"X axis pulse equivalency" -s2"pulse/mm" -m2 -min=50.000 -max=99999.000
#35 -t1 -s1"Y axis pulse equivalency" -s2"pulse/mm" -m2 -min=50.000 -max=99999.000
#36 -t1 -s1"Z axis pulse equivalency" -s2"pulse/mm" -m2 -min=50.000 -max=99999.000
#37 -m0
#38=1280 -t1 -s1"A axis pulse equivalency" -s2"" -m0 -min=50.000 -max=999999.000
#39=0 -t2 -s1"A axis pulse unit" -m0 -min=0.000 -max=1.000 -i0"pulse/deg" -i1"pulse/circle"
#40=0 -t2 -s1"AB axis Selection" -m0 -min=0.000 -max=1.000 -i0"A axis" -i1"B axis"


#390 -t2 -s1"X axis DIR signal Electric Level" -m2 -min=0.000 -max=1.000 -i0"Low" -i1"High"
#391 -t2 -s1"Y axis DIR signal Electric Level" -m2 -min=0.000 -max=1.000 -i0"Low" -i1"High"
#392 -t2 -s1"Z axis DIR signal Electric Level" -m2 -min=0.000 -max=1.000 -i0"Low" -i1"High"
#393 -t2 -s1"A axis DIR signal Electric Level" -m0 -min=0.000 -max=1.000 -i0"Low" -i1"High"


#418 -t2 -s1"X axis Pulse signal Electric Level" -m2 -min=0.000 -max=1.000 -i0"Low" -i1"High"
#419 -t2 -s1"Y axis Pulse signal Electric Level" -m2 -min=0.000 -max=1.000 -i0"Low" -i1"High"
#420 -t2 -s1"Z axis Pulse signal Electric Level" -m2 -min=0.000 -max=1.000 -i0"Low" -i1"High"
#421 -t2 -s1"A axis Pulse signal Electric Level" -m0 -min=0.000 -max=1.000 -i0"Low" -i1"High"

---

My CNC PC is W7, you'd need your bumps felt to think W10 is a good idea, I'd use Windows 10 if my intention was to develop an unreliable system to prove a negative, ditto unproven external controllers :-)
My CNC System mains supply is via a huge UPS, I bought it with no batteries for £40 and it now runs off a couple of external car batteries ;-)
I haven't had a job stop unexpectedly for 6 to 8 months, the last issue was a broken limit switch wire :D

I believe these boxes offer the huge advantages of not needing a PC/OS/CNC Software, new users will be able to buy one, connect it and simply use it - that's great! It will enable the "Maker Generation" without requiring them to read around the subject and understand their system before they use it.

Reliability improvements will be realised by the unwise and unwary who don't already follow best practice with existing PC/OS/CNC Software/Hardware solutions, all the required information is in the manuals and on the support forum sites, just waiting to be read,

- Nick

My CNC computer is win7 32bit. I was talking about my main PC.

I had before 2x 1500W HP UPS, one here at home, other in the garage. Well, i payed extra 30-35 euro per month on top of my bill . Sold them for good price / new one was 500euro/ and 2 years without UPS. 24 months x 30 euro =700 euro less money wasted last 2 years.


As i said i am proving nothing Nick, just telling you the story as it is. I live in year 2016, so i have win10 on all my PCs including the laptops, my phone is Edge7 and if i had the money i would have been driving Tesla. What i am saying is i like latest stuff. That's one of the reasons i hated Mach3. It made me keep that nasty winXP.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Boyan Silyavski

Real life scenario today. Electricity stopped for a sec today, something with the fuse box or whatever. Flipped back the main interrupter at home, went to machine, hit "all go to 0" and after 3 min it was operational. It had not lost exact machine position .I had just to check if Z height is there correctly to be sure, as i have loaded 60 euro tool, All was there as it should be on place.

---

Boyan don't get me wrong here I'm not trying to put you or the controller down here but this needs to be said and made clear for sake of others reading what you wrote and thinking it will work same for them when chances are it won't and here's why.?

What speed was the machine traveling when power failed.? The law of physics dictates that inertia will make the axis continue on for some unknown distance if travleing at resonable velocity. So unless you have absolute encoders or Glass linear scales on the axis you will have lost position.

Now in your case you have Servo's which more than likely will have incremental encoders which don't retain there position when power is lost so they have not had any affect on keeping position. These controllers Also don't have positional feed back so equally it has no Clue to where the axis was when power failed.

So the fact you got back into position as nothing to do with the controller and everything to do with the fact your using servos which can accurately home. Probably using the encoder if using index pulse for homing.?
Steppers or Servo if traveling at any resonable feedrate position will be lost if poiwer fails. The function of getting back into Exact position as nothing to do with controller and everything thing to do with the HOME sensing type, be that encoder index or Home Switch.

This is no different to any other Controller be that PC based or Stand alone. The only exception is if your Encoders are absolute type or have Glass linear scales in which case the Servo drives are doing the work not the controller.

I must get some of these encoders as I get lost on the way back from the crapper ?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Boyan Silyavski

My CNC computer is win7 32bit. I was talking about my main PC.

I had before 2x 1500W HP UPS, one here at home, other in the garage. Well, i payed extra 30-35 euro per month on top of my bill

---

My home UPS is in my hallway so the "waste energy" will only be wasted when the weather is warm enough to require no heating in the house, my workshop UPS will be similarly helping to keep the chill off.
I only worry about quiescent and standby energy usage once the area where the appliances reside is warm enough not to require heating ;-)

- Nick

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by John S

I must get some of these encoders as I get lost on the way back from the crapper ?

---

Well when you find your way back go from crapper check your emails I need your expertise.!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JAZZCNC

Boyan don't get me wrong here I'm not trying to put you or the controller down here but this needs to be said and made clear for sake of others reading what you wrote and thinking it will work same for them when chances are it won't and here's why.?

What speed was the machine traveling when power failed.? The law of physics dictates that inertia will make the axis continue on for some unknown distance if traveling at reasonable velocity. So unless you have absolute encoders or Glass linear scales on the axis you will have lost position.

Now in your case you have Servo's which more than likely will have incremental encoders which don't retain there position when power is lost so they have not had any affect on keeping position. These controllers Also don't have positional feed back so equally it has no Clue to where the axis was when power failed.

So the fact you got back into position as nothing to do with the controller and everything to do with the fact your using servos which can accurately home. Probably using the encoder if using index pulse for homing.?
Steppers or Servo if traveling at any reasonable feedrate position will be lost if power fails. The function of getting back into Exact position as nothing to do with controller and everything thing to do with the HOME sensing type, be that encoder index or Home Switch.

This is no different to any other Controller be that PC based or Stand alone. The only exception is if your Encoders are absolute type or have Glass linear scales in which case the Servo drives are doing the work not the controller.

---

Dean, you are untiring my friend in your criticism, the way i am in my optimism. Ok,as you say- for the sake of others reading that:

1. First of all if electricity stops mach3 goes to nowhere and when you restart it you see a couple of rows of Zeros, hence the machine does not know where it is initially. Not so with the offline controller. It knows exactly where it is, even if its a though further as you say because of inertia, though i measured exactly the difference and it was 0.1mm on Z, on my machine only the Z is prone to inertia, all else locks into place when stopped suddenly, of course not if i am moving at 20 000mm/min

2. My experience shows that proximity limit switches/ Chinese at least/ have an error of approximately 0.4mm or i could call that hysteresis / imagine a backslash/ even if you home repeatedly again and again. Always first time off 0.4mm. Then right correctly. I tested aluminum, brass and steel. First i thought / on yellow machine/ that my error was a design error, cause not sensing perpendicular to them. Now on this machine sensors are NC, perpendicular steel/ best material for sensing/ as far as i remember when reading documentation
What i am saying is that even if you home in mach3, if you are machining steel or aluminum,not wood you would be way off 0.1-0.4, so let's not brag about continuing the job correctly, cause i have been there, done that with aluminum and its not ok. In short, if power stops in a middle of metal job you are f%%d up and can not depend on home switches but instead of that have to use Zero Z axis DTI setter or touch probe.So its absolutely useless speaking how PC will recover from power failure.

3. Show me a PC controller that does not lose position due to delay between the time you hit reset/ pause and the time the command is executed by the machine. Not so with offline controllers. Its i could call it- an exact stop controller.


So in short: PC or Offline controller it will go out of position by small negligible amount which in both cases must be corrected if milling steel or aluminum. If working wood the offline controller has the edge, as you just hit continue and that's it. The PC controller needs to home, find X, Z zero additionally due to proximity limit switch error which is not so negligible at ~.4mm. Plus maybe you need to fix Windows because of the sudden loss of power and in most of the cases you need to fix Mach3 by checking if the screen works correctly or you need in most of the cases to reinstall it again to make sure all is as it must be. As i had many problems after sudden stop of power. That's why i say it again i love the offline controller.

I wonder, can't you just see it- its cheaper and simpler. More reliable and easier to exchange in case of fault. I wonder when you Dean as a maker of CNC machines will accept the fact that the controller responds better to your KISS principle.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Boyan Silyavski

More reliable and easier to exchange in case of fault.

---

Reliability is to be determined by what it's doing in 2-3 years time, stability is probably what it's demonstrating at the moment.

So far I've had 3 years out of my current CNC PC, to replace it will cost me around £40 and the time to image a drive, in fact that's so cheap that I keep a spare on the shelf.

I'm looking at an open source virtualisation platform and external ethernet connected motion controllers for the future.

- Nick

Horses for courses.

I have two small 'CNC' machines here that diamond drag engrave.
One is converted from a £20 Roland throw out from a school but it works and earns money.
The other is a custom made 'machine' with travels of 100mm in X by 30mm in Z and an A axis. It's also a drag engraver.

Both machines are in production, The Roland does 4 different jobs, the rotary machine does 7.

In both cases the computer and monitor needed is twice as big as the machines. In fact both machines are in drawers as there is no need to take up valuable worktop space and I just pull a drawer open, swap the job, press start and close the drawer.

The Roland is slated to have the cheap plastic blue and green £115 nasty controller and the rotary is slated to have a DSCV1.1 both to be mounted inside the drawer with the machines.

That gets rid of two computers, two monitors, two keyboards and two mice plus all the rats nest of cables.

I can see the convenience of integrated compact controllers, I'd buy one today if I knew I wouldn't have to replace it for a few years but if my CNC dies it stops me doing things which I need to do, and I can't wait for global postage for a replacement and certainly don't want to buy "a spare" of something which may not be reliable enough; Just in case the first one isn't reliable enough ;-)

If I was building or converting CNC machines and planned to have a stream of these type of things moving through stock the picture would be different, I'd be doing it now, but as an "Olde Fashioned" Mach3 system currently runs a 4-axis system faultlessly for me I'm not seeing any drive to change to something that isn't proven at least as reliable and durable.


- Nick

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Boyan Silyavski

2. My experience shows that proximity limit switches/ Chinese at least/ have an error of approximately 0.4mm or i could call that hysteresis / imagine a backslash/ even if you home repeatedly again and again. Always first time off 0.4mm. Then right correctly. I tested aluminum, brass and steel. First i thought / on yellow machine/ that my error was a design error, cause not sensing perpendicular to them. Now on this machine sensors are NC, perpendicular steel/ best material for sensing/ as far as i remember when reading documentation
What i am saying is that even if you home in mach3, if you are machining steel or aluminum,not wood you would be way off 0.1-0.4, so let's not brag about continuing the job correctly, cause i have been there, done that with aluminum and its not ok. In short, if power stops in a middle of metal job you are f%%d up and can not depend on home switches but instead of that have to use Zero Z axis DTI setter or touch probe.So its absolutely useless speaking how PC will recover from power failure.

---

Simple solution there, buy better switches for homing.
A machine is only as good as it's weakest link, and if you need accurate homing, then you shouldn't cut corners on homing switches/sensors.
.
IIRC on my old lathe, the slot sensor was about £30, and it had no measurable hysteresis. It would home to within 0.01mm every time, regardless of temperature. I know you had to make sure it was kept clean and a bit swarf hadn't landed in the slot, but it guaranteed accurate homing every time.
I would expect better than 0.1mm from a good quality mechanical switch, and I see no advantage using proximity sensors, given how variable they can be.

Quote:

---

on my machine only the Z is prone to inertia, all else locks into place when stopped suddenly, of course not if i am moving at 20 000mm/min

---

So, your X and Y axis operate independently of the laws of physics? That makes everything a lot easier. :)

Dean is 100% correct. If the power goes out, the machine loses position.

Quote:

---

I wonder, can't you just see it- its cheaper and simpler. More reliable and easier to exchange in case of fault. I wonder when you Dean as a maker of CNC machines will accept the fact that the controller responds better to your KISS principle.

---

How is it more reliable? My Mach3 machine has been running for about 8 years, with zero reliability issues. I turn it on, and make parts, whenever I want. It always works.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Boyan Silyavski

Dean, you are untiring my friend in your criticism, the way i am in my optimism. Ok,as you say- for the sake of others reading that:

---

Only when I see Crap being spoken like whats below.!!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Boyan Silyavski

1. First of all if electricity stops mach3 goes to nowhere and when you restart it you see a couple of rows of Zeros, hence the machine does not know where it is initially. Not so with the offline controller. It knows exactly where it is, even if its a though further as you say because of inertia,

---

You are talking total Bollocks if you think your machine and this controller defy the laws of pyhsics..:thumbdown:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Boyan Silyavski

2. My experience shows that proximity limit switches/ Chinese at least/ have an error of approximately 0.4mm or i could call that hysteresis / imagine a backslash/ even if you home repeatedly again and again. Always first time off 0.4mm.

---

Well my findings are some what different.!! . . .Thou I will admit I would use higher quality type on Milling machine which required very high repeatabilty. For wood router they are more than good enough.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A11Zvi3nAFE

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Boyan Silyavski

What i am saying is that even if you home in mach3, if you are machining steel or aluminum,not wood you would be way off 0.1-0.4, so let's not brag about continuing the job correctly, cause i have been there, done that with aluminum and its not ok. In short, if power stops in a middle of metal job you are f%%d up and can not depend on home switches but instead of that have to use Zero Z axis DTI setter or touch probe.So its absolutely useless speaking how PC will recover from power failure.

3. Show me a PC controller that does not lose position due to delay between the time you hit reset/ pause and the time the command is executed by the machine. Not so with offline controllers. Its i could call it- an exact stop controller.
[B]

---

Again your talking load of Crap.!! . . . The Controller only knows the last position it commanded and CANNOT possibly now where the axis actually came to rest.

Know to answer your " Show me PC Controller that does not lose position" then that is easy. There are several Cslabs IP-A, Dynamotion Kanalog and several other that can handle Analog or have Encoder feedback.!!! . . . PROVIDED and this why your talking total bollocks. They have servos with Absolute Encoders or Glass linear scales to feed the TRUE position back.

This controller DOESNT have any feedback which means it's NO DIFFERENT TO ANY OTHER CONTROL SOFTWARE be that PC or OFFLINE. . . .Or is yours Special and uses the !!!FORCE.!!!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Boyan Silyavski

I wonder, can't you just see it- its cheaper and simpler. More reliable and easier to exchange in case of fault. I wonder when you Dean as a maker of CNC machines will accept the fact that the controller responds better to your KISS principle.

---

I see it perfectly clearly, I was looking at these and other more expensive ones long before you found them Boyan.
Two yrs ago I realised PC based controllers are falling behind and OS getting more and more restrictive. After doing lots of researching and looking I also realsied that there is NO Cheap way to do this and have controller which is Reliable with Continuity and good back up.
There are Many OFFLINE controllers which have reliabilty and backup and also found in EU but they are not cheap and for good reason like any other quality product.

The Cheap Chinese controllers are Untested and Lack ANY backup or support which doesn't appeal to me and wouldn't to many of my Customers.

So if you think I'm Picking on this Controller and saying it's No Good then I'm NOT.!! . . Because I haven't tested one so couldn't and wouldn't say this!!

BUT If think I'm having a POP at you then YES in this CASE I am picking on YOU for talking CRAP and Miss leading people by claiming it does things it CANNOT POSSIBLY DO.!! . . . . IT CANNOT DEFY THE LAWS OF PYHSICS.!! and to suggest otherwise is Massive stupidity.

Now Crack on with your cutting before the lights go out again.!:encouragement:

At least he's not having to use crappy US 110v.
I'm sure that Capricorn One is real, because if they can't get three wires across America then how did they get to the moon ? ?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by magicniner

If I was building or converting CNC machines and planned to have a stream of these type of things moving through stock the picture would be different, I'd be doing it now,

---

But you wouldn't Nick and let me tell you why.?

At the weekend I delivered machine to Kent. This was 500mile round trip with 4.5hr's each way none stop driving. If I had to go back that would be 9hrs unpaid driving Plus another 1hr unpaid repair time. Then throw in £80 of diesil and the fact Customer is so pissed off don't even get offered Cuppa Tea and this wonderful controller starts to lose it's shine quickly.! . . . . . Oh and just to sweeten the deal I can't Even send it back for repair or replacement.

Like most things in life there's more to it than seems.!!!

That's very true Jazz but you and me are in it for different reasons.
The punter who doing his own machine and is prepared to take a chance doesn't have these expenses.


I have now got the go-ahead to do 15 machines down at Oxford in one lot. They are putting me up at the University dorms for 3 or 4 days, free grub and I shall leave them one spare unit which if one goes pear shaped they will swap over.

To be honest without these I would not have got the job as they don't want PC's and Monitors and the 990 series are too expensive for old training machines.

Good thing is it puts a load into use to soak test in one batch.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by John S

That's very true Jazz but you and me are in it for different reasons.
The punter who doing his own machine and is prepared to take a chance doesn't have these expenses.

---

100% Agree John and like been said horse for courses. People I deal with come to me because they are not technical and just want the machine to work then keep working.
They'd rather pay little extra for the luxury of not having break downs and to be honest I'd rather make little less money than have to go back to fix. Also and More importantly to me I don't have unhappy users.

Like I've repeatedly said and contrary to what Boyan probably thinks I'm not calling these controllers rubbish or unfit for purpose. Neither am I saying to anyone don't buy one.
What I am saying is be fully aware of what your buying into and in this last little head butt session with Boyan stop Bull shitting people with false claims which cannot be true.

I'll have one soon and then the like we say in MotoX "When the Gate drops the Bullshit stops" so lets see what happens. .:yahoo:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Boyan Silyavski

My CNC computer is win7 32bit. I was talking about my main PC.

I had before 2x 1500W HP UPS, one here at home, other in the garage. Well, i payed extra 30-35 euro per month on top of my bill . Sold them for good price / new one was 500euro/ and 2 years without UPS. 24 months x 30 euro =700 euro less money wasted last 2 years.


As i said i am proving nothing Nick, just telling you the story as it is. I live in year 2016, so i have win10 on all my PCs including the laptops, my phone is Edge7 and if i had the money i would have been driving Tesla. What i am saying is i like latest stuff. That's one of the reasons i hated Mach3. It made me keep that nasty winXP.

---

No, Mach3 does not force you to keep the old WinXP, using UCCNC controllers you can actually run it on both W7 64 and also W10 64. I gave up on XP a long time ago and with W7 I always used 64 bits versions. Now I am using W10 and UC300ETH with Mach3, as well as with UCCNC.

Re. the UPS, why would you need to pay €30-35 per month for it? Mine is a one time cost when I am buying and when I need to replace the battery. Otherwise it is just the charging, but that is certainly not that expensive.

BTW, charging a Tesla takes too long time... Not yet suitable for holiday trips (demands strict and careful planning and short trips or long "petrol station" stops) and is a bit too expensive for work commuting.

Ok my 4 axis controller V2.1 as arrived and straight off the bat just reading manual I can see limitation. The 4th axis can only be set to Pulse/Degree not Pulse/MM so limited to 3 axis Linear movement.

Also I'm struggling to see anyway settings or references to how it can change tools.! There are Tool offset parameters so I'm summising there must be way but it's not obvious.
Even got into the setup files and translated the Chinese. I can just about workout what the files are doing but can't see anything relating to changing tools so I'm little concerned it can't do it.!! . . . Well not in the conventional sense ie: M6 macro. Without full list of controller internal parameters can't see if one could be assigned to the job.?

Oh and can't believe how small this thing is it's Tiny.!!

This below works for changing tools / generated by ESTLCAM/, cant remember if it stopped the spindle?



(No. 2: Part 1)
M05
M00 (Change tool: End mill 6mm 2 flute)
M03
G00 X-26.2834 Y7.9139 Z5.0000
G00 X-25.5448 Y7.7836 Z0.5250
G01 X-25.6339 Y7.5389 Z0.5000 F1200 S18000
G01 X-25.7089 Y7.4318 Z0.4750
G01 X-25.8013 Y7.3393 Z0.4433
G01 X-25.9084 Y7.2644 Z0.4000



Unfortunately it seems its unaware of the M06 command. Bellow the code is generated from Aspire / G code ATC/ . What it does is Stop but does not stop spindle. I stop it manually, Zero new tool and switch spindle on/ not sure if necessary/ and continue.


X-22.665Y0.653
X-22.656Y0.325
X-22.653Y0.000
G0Z5.000
M0
M06T2
G43H2
S16000M03
G0X-26.500Y-25.000Z5.000
G1Z-1.000F762.0
G1Y25.000F1524.0
X-26.497Y25.098
X-26.487Y25.197
X-26.470Y25.298
X-26.446Y25.400
X-26.414Y25.502




If you can not find a way to switch that A axis to pulse per mm, then that must be the reality then. Not slaving. 2 motors per axis hardware wired, the way you don't like it. As it works it's not a problem for me.


Anyway, that's one of the reasons i gave up with this board. Can not find the programmer to do what i want and fix stuff like this? Then sell you board 1 by 1 from China. I am not interested in more than using it.




But FIY the macros and other stuff is defined in the slib file / nand folder. Unfortunately in Chinese and unfortunately it does not show like Chinese but rfunny greek characters, so i was not able to translate it.


part from that file:



(G12 I)
O9012
G91 G01 X#494
G02 X0 I-#494
G01 X-#494
M99


(G13 I)
O9013
G91 G01 X#494
G03 X0 I-#494
G01 X-#494
M99


(G81 X Y Z R K)
O9081
(#1-#3¼Ç¼ָÁʼʱµ¶¾ß¹¤¼þ×ø±ê)
#1=#451
#2=#452
#3=#453
IF #450LT0 GOTO1;Åбð¾ø¶Ô×ø±ê±à³Ìģʽ»¹ÊÇÔöÁ¿×ø±ê·½Ê½
(Çó³öRƽÃæZ×ø±ê#4ºÍ¿×µ×Z×ø±ê#5£¬ÒÔ¼°X¡¢YÑ*»·µÝÔö¾à Àë#6,#7)
#4=#497
#5=#490
#6=#488-#1
#7=#489-#2
GOTO2
N1 #4=#3+#497
#5=#3+#490
#6=#488
#7=#489
(ÒÀ¾Ý¹Ì¶¨Ñ*»·Í˵¶Ö¸ÁîÒÔ¼°#3Óë#4µÄλÖùØϵÇó³öÍ˵¶µ ãZ×ø±ê#8)
N2 IF [#449LT0]*[#4LT#3] GOTO3
#8=#4
GOTO4
N3 #8=#3
(#11¼Ç¼Ñ*»·´ÎÊýK)
N4 #11=#496
IF #11>0 GOTO6
#11=1
(ZÖá¿ìËÙ½ø¸øµ½Rµã)
N6 IF #4LT#3 GOTO5
G90G00Z#4
(Ñ*»·´¦Àí)
N5 WHILE#11>0DO13
G91G00X#6Y#7;XY¿ìËÙ½ø¸øµ½¿×λ´¦
G90G00Z#4;Z¿ìËÙ½ø¸øµ½Rµã
G90G01Z#5;ZÒÔÇÐÏ÷ËÙ¶È×êÖÁ¿×µ×λÖÃ
G90G00Z#4;Z¿ìËÙ̧Éýµ½RλÖÃ
#11=#11-1;Ñ*»·´ÎÊýµÝ¼õ
END13
G90G00Z#8;Z¿ìËÙ̧Éýµ½#8λÖÃ
M99


(G82 X Y Z R K P)
O9082
#9=#484
IF #9>0 GOTO6
#9=1
(#1-#3¼Ç¼ָÁʼʱµ¶¾ß¹¤¼þ×ø±ê)
N6#1=#451
#2=#452
#3=#453
IF #450LT0 GOTO1;Åбð¾ø¶Ô×ø±ê±à³Ìģʽ»¹ÊÇÔöÁ¿×ø±ê·½Ê½
(Çó³öRƽÃæZ×ø±ê#4ºÍ¿×µ×Z×ø±ê#5£¬ÒÔ¼°X¡¢YÑ*»·µÝÔö¾à Àë#6,#7)
#4=#497
#5=#490

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Boyan Silyavski

This below works for changing tools / generated by ESTLCAM/, cant remember if it stopped the spindle?



(No. 2: Part 1)
M05
M00 (Change tool: End mill 6mm 2 flute)
M03

---

Not really tool change that it's just stopping the code. There must be way to do this correctly thru macros and/or controller parameters so can call offsets etc without having to mess around writing Cam post processors just for this controller. If not then it's Doomed to the box under bench straight away.!!

I've been thru all the files and translated them and can't see any param's or Code relating to tool changing. Here's the files translated.

The way a macro for probe is written, same should be done for a tool change. Nobody has done it. I don't know if it can be cross figured what all the numbers mean, without any additional documentation.




Apart from that I have from manufacturer latest install with what i believe to be the latest firmware separately. Now i need somebody who knows FPGA and ARM, maybe programming also.



As i said manual tool change works without a problem. But real tool change? I believe its possible but not without rewriting some portions of controllers software. ATC-could be done by triggering one of the outputs and then separate PLC programmed to do the job.




If they were not so secretive who they are, i would have already made them to correct these things.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Boyan Silyavski

The way a macro for probe is written, same should be done for a tool change. Nobody has done it. I don't know if it can be cross figured what all the numbers mean, without any additional documentation.

---

Those numbers are parameter variables/constants and It would be relatively easy if they provided the full parameter list for the controller.
However it looks like doesn't recognise the M6 command which is commonly used for toolchange so would need dedicated post processor writing this controller.

Regards the ATC and PLC well why not go one further and just do away with this controller and use PLC Motion Controller.? It defeats the point and no longer cheap controller.
Also still need some way to call and wait for the PLC to do it's work then return to main. M6 would still be used for this. The PLC just handles all the I/O and timing critical stuff but still at some point needs stop hand back to G-code so it's not simple just turning On an Output Boyan.!

If these controllers are to be usable they need to follow standards correctly and they clearly don't. States it follows Fanuc standard so why doesn't M6 work.?
Should not have to be writing dedicated Post processor's if it follows Fanuc.?

I'll dig deep and see what turns up but to be fair I'm not getting that nice warm fuzzy feeling I like with new hardware.!!!

Regards the 4th axis then Yes no option to select pulse/mm only pulse/degree or pulse/circle what ever that means.?
And I'd rather stick my Johnson in the mains socket before run machine with two signals sticking into one Motor Output.!! . . . . . Just because it appears to be working doesn't mean it's working correctly.!

Taking this to ridiculous extreams using your method would suggest I could run several identical machines, say 6 machines with just one 3 axis controller each pulling signal from same Motor Output.!! . . . . . Wonder why industry haven't figured this out yet.?

To my limited understanding and very over-full grey matter, the actual running of G-Code for cutting using DIY CNC often involves all of the following with the potential for incompatibilities and failure-points:

• PC,
• Windows/Linux,
• Mach3,
• Cabling whether Ethernet or EPP or USB,
• Bob,
• External Motion Controller


Just the thought of being able to simplify and replace all this with an offline motion controller and a USB stick is extremely appealing to this novice. So I'm following all the discussion on this thread with massive interest, many thanks to all of you from down under!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JAZZCNC

And I'd rather stick my Johnson in the mains socket before run machine with two signals sticking into one Motor Output.!! . . . . . Just because it appears to be working doesn't mean it's working correctly.!

Taking this to ridiculous extreams using your method would suggest I could run several identical machines, say 6 machines with just one 3 axis controller each pulling signal from same Motor Output.!! . . . . . Wonder why industry haven't figured this out yet.?

---

IMO I don't see a problem driving two or more motors from one output, providing the output is capable of providing the milliamps required, I have done this several times without any problems. Most drivers have opto inputs and are isolated from each other, have even used two driver inputs in series on occasion. Since these controllers are digital, they process things sequentially so two seperate outputs are likely to be seperated in time (admittedly very short) which is not the case with using a common output for two motors.

I see videos of multiple headed machines carving many identical models simultaneously, it would not surprise me if they were driven from common outputs.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by johnsattuk

IMO I don't see a problem driving two or more motors from one output, providing the output is capable of providing the milliamps required, I have done this several times without any problems.

---

Did you ever bother to put scope on them and check the timings.? Most that are using the setup just presume it's working correctly because cycle times are relatively short and they don't see any obvious error but that doesn't mean it's not there. Try this with large 3D job that runs for 20+hrs and these tiny timing errors start to show.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by johnsattuk

I see videos of multiple headed machines carving many identical models simultaneously, it would not surprise me if they were driven from common outputs.

---

Most of these don't have independent heads they are just one large Z axis and often numatics come into play as well. Those that do will have dedicated outputs, or at least those I've seen have had.
I look after large Italian stone profiling/polishing machine used for counter tops which has 8 heads. 4 each side running on there own dedicated outputs. Each running on servos with Bespoke controller with built in PLC for controlling 86 I/O used for numatic claps etc.

While it can do different job each side mostly it Basicly just mirrors the other and would be perfect candicate for the sharing approach but they don't.! . . . . Sure if sharing outputs didn't have any affect they would take this approach.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JAZZCNC

Did you ever bother to put scope on them and check the timings.?

---

Not sure what you would check with a scope, if driving from one output, each driver would be getting the same signal at the same time, where could any cumulation of errors arise.

As most on here, me included, are only talking about driving two steppers for one axis, much of your comments are superflous

What about homing? if you have multiple motors running off one output and you need to home and you have a switch on each axis, how does it handle that?
If you have a gantry and have a motor on each side connected to one output and have one home switch, how will it be able to home both sides accurately?
Also the more load you put on the output the more likely it is going to be susceptible to electrical noise and then you may have one axis loosing a step or two and over time this will add up to a big error.

Homing is obviously a bit more tricky but is quite possible, the controller output goes to two drivers so it is possible to switch each driver input individually with a bit of logic.

As long as you do not overload the controller output I do not see a problem, if you end up taking a few more milliamps from the controller (within it's ratings) any electrical noise will be a less percentage of the signal and will apply equally to both drivers, so do not see why one axis would lose steps without the other.

Dean,
Like all devices there will be limitations and I'm thinking that these cheap controllers are for simple one shot machines like a Sieg or Warco X3, WM series mill or simple home built 3 axis router that just reply on 3 + 1 axis and a single spindle, often with ER collet fitting that doesn't allow pre-set tools.

You want more features, you pay your money and move up market to the 990 series controllers.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by John S

Dean,
Like all devices there will be limitations and I'm thinking that these cheap controllers are for simple one shot machines like a Sieg or Warco X3, WM series mill or simple home built 3 axis router that just reply on 3 + 1 axis and a single spindle, often with ER collet fitting that doesn't allow pre-set tools.

You want more features, you pay your money and move up market to the 990 series controllers.

---

John I agree with you 100% on most of this but lets be honest and realistic here. Not asking for more features would just like it to do what SHOULD and allow PROPER Tool changes without resorting to messing with writing/modding post processors Etc. It states follows Fanuc standard so it should do it.

This not following standards is what concerns me. What else does it not do.? ie: Canned cycles etc.
It's still on bench without motors etc but I quickly run some code thru it and seemed it didn't like G53 either but without seeing what actually happens when motors connected can't say for sure. Not really good or confidence inspiring start is it.!!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by johnsattuk

Not sure what you would check with a scope, if driving from one output, each driver would be getting the same signal at the same time, where could any cumulation of errors arise.

As most on here, me included, are only talking about driving two steppers for one axis, much of your comments are superflous

---

John we will have to agree to disagree then otherwise we'll just go round in circles.!

Cheers :beer:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JAZZCNC

John we will have to agree to disagree then otherwise we'll just go round in circles.!

---

Quick reply is not seeing my space bar! ????

What I was trying to post was, what if you used a high impedance input buffer circuit on all controller outputs to isolate them from the motor driver inputs with twin buffers on one output to run two drivers?

- Nick

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gary

What about homing? if you have multiple motors running off one output and you need to home and you have a switch on each axis, how does it handle that?
If you have a gantry and have a motor on each side connected to one output and have one home switch, how will it be able to home both sides accurately?
Also the more load you put on the output the more likely it is going to be susceptible to electrical noise and then you may have one axis loosing a step or two and over time this will add up to a big error.

---

At the moment i move gantry to the end and hit limit switch. back off till LED lights. Then via PC and servo control software jog other motor to same position. 1 min job, if i dont count starting the PC .


Till now no problem with driving 2 motors from one output even on long, fast and generally quite serious jobs. But now i agree here- that i can be sure only and if i test 100 controllers and they show same consistency. Soon will know as another one is on the way. tHhis time the 4 axis one.

Another thing is that i have not seen a single person use its 4rth axis so its still a mystery there.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by magicniner

Quick reply is not seeing my space bar! ????

What I was trying to post was, what if you used a high impedance input buffer circuit on all controller outputs to isolate them from the motor driver inputs with twin buffers on one output to run two drivers?

- Nick

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Boyan Silyavski

At the moment i move gantry to the end and hit limit switch. back off till LED lights. Then via PC and servo control software jog other motor to same position. 1 min job, if i dont count starting the PC .

---

WTF!!! . . . Who wants to feck about with all this shite when all you have to do is buy real controller that works and provides enough motor outputs to do the job correctly.! . . . Cum-on lets keep it real.!

This particular controller lacks 4 Axis linear movement and shouldn't be bought for machine which requires it simple as that. If folks want to force into something it's not then more fool them.

The rest of it's short cummings are yet to be found and may well be trivial who knows. But in my eyes not following strict protocols like Fanuc standard is putting it on very dodgy ground straight off the bat.!

Surely the whole point offline controller is to limit hassle not introduce new ones which there is NO assitance or help from the only people who can fix the problem.!

And Boyan you can't take out of the equation starting the PC because without the PC your bonkers method can not home.! . . So yes it's very much part the equation if the PC's not on when need to home and if you need it on to use the machine WTF the point of using Offline Controller.?
(Please don't give me "reliabilty" has the reason because I've built more than my fair share of PC based systems that run without any issues and have been running perfectly fine for several years with thousands of hours cutting time under there belts.!)