Looking good Gerry now get into there ribs and tell them to give us 24V I/O and 24V powered and I'll be onboard.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ger21
Printable View
Looking good Gerry now get into there ribs and tell them to give us 24V I/O and 24V powered and I'll be onboard.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ger21
And multi line encoder threading. <g>
They go hand in hand don't they?, if it's true a 24v based system is less susceptible to noise problems, then it's more professional to use 24v, no ?Quote:
Originally Posted by magicniner
I new that was coming, professional industrial grade cnc or professional hobby level cnc?Quote:
Originally Posted by JAZZCNC
Yeah but to keep a perspective on things, what other areas of CNC are standardized?
Maybe they havn't had the feedback for those things yet, like i was trying to suggest before, who knows what is to come. Given their rep for support offered, i'm sure they are listening, we just need to let them know maybe?
Not sure i'm bothered about them wanting to sell BOB's, I'm sure there will be benefits to using physically separate units, the option of using your own and the features that you may get with one but dont get with another, for instance...
HANG ON A MO?
The IP-M come's with separate BOB's/cable's anyway so what's the biggy?
Attachment 19598
Sure the isolation, handy little relay and what ever else they bundle is all nicely tucked away in that pretty little grey box they call the IP-M, but you still have to access that lot with a bob/boc....
SO....WHAT'S YOUR BEEF FAM?....
with having separate units in a UCCNC based system?
How coincidental, just last week I read through the thread where you asked them on the forum what the status of that unit was, i'm pretty sure they said they would get back to it eventually, or words to that effect...Quote:
Originally Posted by Ger21
Oooo is that an exclusive lol, looking good so far :thumsup:Quote:
Originally Posted by Ger21
The cables you mention are just terminal blocks to make connection easier and not like BOB at all.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lee Roberts
Stabilty is all about Layers or more specificly removing layers. BOB's or to be more specific Cheap ones are just Weak Layer which cause trouble.
Don't understand why folks will buy Motion controller for the higher cleaner pulse rates then strangle them by connecting to Cheap BOB with Slow Optos etc.?
It's this and other electrical incompatabilty's that come into play which make multi mixed hardware systems less reliable than one that's been designed and tested to play nice together.
Unfortunatly often this Stabilty comes at premium cost and it really shouldn't because wouldn't cost them much more to add it.!!
Try Specsavers, they are connector boards, DB25 to screw terminals and at least they supply the bloody things and don't just do a half heated job of fitting IDE sockets and leaving you to it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lee Roberts
Fine but it is normal to use 5V for logic internally. All digital chips run on 5V and/or 3.3V. Nobody is saying that that's what it must use on the inputs and you must directly connect switches and everything, connect a BOB with 24V inputs and than you are just fine.Quote:
Originally Posted by JAZZCNC
Nobody prevents you from buying a super expensive BOB and use that if you want to and believe it can do better. The BOB I have can pulse fast enough. Besides, the problem is NOT the optos on the inputs but the optos in the stepper driver. If you have crappy driver you have problems, yes, but the pulsing from the motion controller or the cheap BOB is not the problem, the problem is your driver in that case.Quote:
Originally Posted by JAZZCNC
Here is a video I just made. My CNC is using the cheap BOBs and the UCCNC with the UC300ETH in this one.
https://youtu.be/_cJf9ZBYqo8
I have also made a similar test with Mach3 and I can't run Mach3 as fast as I can run UCCNC with otherwise everything being the same. Mach3 can't keep up with the acceleration/deceleration, and that's not the fault of the optos in the BOB but Mach3.
If only it was that easy. Don't know how experienced you are with BOB's/Cnc but let me tell you Bob's are pain in the back side and the biggest cause of troubles on CNC machines. That £5 BOB will cost more like £100 with all the trouble that will come it over time.Quote:
Originally Posted by A_Camera
If the machine is being used to make money and lets be honest most router type machines even at DIY level are made with the intention of making little money with. Then why anyone would want to take this route is beyond me.!! . . . It's like playing russian roulet with 5 bullets in six gun.!!
...and at what price? Five times the price of UC300ETH with less inputs/outputs? Sure, it is in a fancy box equipped with opto coplers but hey, for that much money... :)Quote:
Originally Posted by John S
I have already made more than enough money with my CNC using the cheap BOB and the UC300USB. Never once I had any issue with that BOB, that's why I bought another. It's the worlds simplest thing, so it beats me what can go wrong with them. I am an electronics engineer and have checked out everything possible, and I don't think they will cause any issues. You make it sound like rocket science. They are just a few opto couplers, buffers and a relay. I may not have a lot of experience in machining but have about 40 years in electronics, so I am really not worried about such simple things.Quote:
Originally Posted by JAZZCNC
Of course, if my daily bread was depending on my CNC I would not use the cheap BOBs, but for a hobby they are just right.
Quote:
Originally Posted by A_Camera
I think we are getting cross connected here. What I mean is why don't UC supply connectors ? Pokeys had exactly the same problem as they use IDE's and people were asking for cable kits and Pokeys asked why ?
Simple reason is anyone working in electronics has all these cables, they buy the ends in by the 100's and cable by the 50M reel but they don't understand that the end user has more chance of having a 100 spare M6 nuts and bolts that he does electronic parts.
End result is they put a cabling kit up and I think it costs 19 Euro, or thereabouts.
A piddling amount for the grief that users had to get it.
Don't get me wrong that I'm knocking the product because I'm not. I'm knocking the presentation knowing they could do so much better with hardly any more work.
At the moment the CNC controller world is wide open. We have many looking to upgrade from Mach3 which has been an awesome piece of software. If it wasn't for Art Fenarty on his own then 1,000's of users would not be into CNC at this point. The baton should have been passed to Mach 4 but Brian dropped it big time as evidenced by some of the long time users like Ger21 and Terry Parker switching camps to other controllers.
We are now split between Bert Eddings, Planet CNC, UCCNC and the stand alone Chinese controllers that are showing up.
Thee is not much to choose between the fisrt three although Bert and Planet do have lathe threading up to a point.
However all of them lack this last works out the box scenerio that will put them in front.
Once one of these three does that they will be the new mach3 as controller of choice as regards easy setting up foe beginners and semi- skilled.
Forget the software and electronic guys, they can get anything working if you throw enough time at it.
Your market is the same market that flooded to Art's door.
Well I do and I'm telling you in my expereince they are cause of most troubles on CNC machine.(After broken/lose wires)Quote:
Originally Posted by A_Camera
It's like the USB argument I've had so many times with people like you.! . . . People who have insisted there's nothing wrong with USB for CNC it works fine, they never have any troubles with it.!! . . . . Total Bollocks. Compared to Ethernet it sucks.
Anyone who works and maintains CNC equipment will tell you it's pain in the arse and can't be trusted not to lockup. Well the Same goes with Cheap Bob's they can't be trusted and will fail or cause issues at some point, often sooner rather than later.
If they are working for you then great but that doesn't change the fact they are potential trouble causers best avoided.
I'll back Jazz on this and throw a bit of history into the ring.
I started off converting standard bench top Mills into CNC and bought what we could get hold of.
At that time Arturo Duncan over at CNC4PC was doing opto isolated cards but when fitted to the drivers of the day, also opto isolated they crawled, big time and we got him to bring a non isolated card out on just the motor outputs so you only had one opto, the one in the drive.
This was called the C11G board, G standing for Gecko. we bought many but they were not reliable and what sealed it was we had to pay about
£16 to £19 in import duty, handling and VAT for each card. Not a problem until cards went back for repair and we got hit for anout £16 - £19 because he was too idle to mark it returned unit - FOC.
We paid for one card 3 times and I kid you not, that was the end of it and we also got Sieg over in China to swap to a Chinese sourced card that in 500 ? unit only ever failed once when a heat sink fell off the 7805 chip and shorted something out.
At the same time looking for something cheaper we tried the System 3 cards from DIYCNC. Even though we had Roy down at our place to show him cards not working correctly we still covered a few thousand miles sorting his problems out at our expense. We even took cards and computers back to his place to show they wouldn't work together.
At this time Sieg got into the turnkey CNC market and we flew to China to do a deal with them. WE built the first KX1 in my workshop and it was sent to China with all the drawings. It did actually get returned at one point which I never expected and it's still up in my hayloft. Very similar to what they turned out in production but for some reason it's opposite handed as regards motors on the X and the cabinet, not that it matters.
We didn't make a KX3, they scaled the KX1 up.
I do know how many have been produced as we do world wide web support on them, correction, world wide except Asia and Russia.
However I can't disclose that figure but it is in the tens of thousands.
It's always the little problems as Jazz says that trip you up, silly things that with a bit of fore sight would not happen.
As well as building machines I also deliver some and train users. Up to a few years ago we also used to attend shows with a KX1 and a KX3 in cabinets so they could run under power cutting steel, always steel at shows.
It's because of probably this unique situation in the UK that I know a lot of what people want and expect from a machine or attendant software.
Jazz is unique in that he works on routers, I work on lathes and mills, believe it or not, totally different animals. A mill can work fine on a USB card as the speeds are very much slower than the kernel speed the computer is able to reach. On a mill or lathe the controller is always waiting for the machine unlike a router which can easily outrun the controller, especially if servo's are used.
I watched the video and frankly I wasn't impressed. You quote 10,000mm /min speed but on a machine such as yours you don't have the room and I'll bet it never gets over 2500mm / min
I'm certain that a standard mill running a standard copy of M3 could do this file the same.
Perhaps UCCNC is capable of more but it will take it to be installed on a larger machine than that. I feel the file doesn't do justice to the software
Once one of these three does that they will be the new mach3 as controller of choice as regards easy setting up foe beginners and semi- skilled.
I think that UCCNC has a big advantage here.
1) UCCNC was designed to "feel" very much like Mach3. They both have very similar controls, and the setup is very similar.
While the macro language is different (C#), it's very similar to Mach3. The terminology is very similar, with buttons, LED's, and DRO's.
UCCNC also has an integrated screen designer that's far superior to Mach3's, (Screen4) if you like to customize the interface.
2) Mach3's success had a lot to do with the users, pushing Art to add features and make it better and better.
While Terry and I don't often agree on things, we are both trying to get all of Mach3's capabilities into UCCNC, without any of the bugs. There have been new releases every few weeks, with both new features and minor bug fixes.
I don't have any experience with PlanetCNC, but I've heard that it works well.
I seriously considered Eding CNC, but it just seemed a little too "non standard" for me. Bert seemed to be very helpful and accommodating, though.
On the subject of hardware.
The UC300ETH is really no different than a Smoothstepper, which is hands down the most popular Mach3 motion controller. Both need similar breakout boards, and with the M44 motherboard, some breakout boards designed for the SS can be used with the UC300ETH.
The difference, though, is that I've seen years of poor plugin development from Warp9, while CNC Drive provides fully functional firmware right out of the gate. With bug fixes in days, rather than years.
I forgot, there is a 24V motherboard for the UC300 from Hungary:
https://www.cncpart.hu/uc300-5441
I need to ask some questions about it to CNC Drive.
Your servos and VFDs may have optoisolated inputs, but what happens if the wire shorts out to a high voltage source?Quote:
Originally Posted by 1Jumper10
The main reason for optoisolated BOBs, is so that if a fault develops in the wiring resulting in high voltage where it shouldn't be, the opto on the BOB gets fried, and not the controller.
Looks interesting but at £350 for the breakout board plus the UCCNC it's over the cost of the high end Chinese stand alone controllers.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ger21
Then you are again involving two companies.
It puts you in the price range of the CS Labs stuff.Quote:
Looks interesting but at £350 for the breakout board plus the UCCNC it's over the cost of the high end Chinese stand alone controllers.
Then you are again involving two companies.
I don't see the two companies as being an issue. They are just providing a board, so there aren't software issues like you see with Mach3/Mach4, where the motion controller developers have to write their own plugins.
CNC Drive will always develop their own motion controllers and write all of the software/firmware, so you don't have compatibility issues.
Looking in the manual, it does appear that they support multiline encoder threading.Quote:
Originally Posted by John S
Encoder PPR: This is a numeric value and defines the pulse per revolution of the incremental
encoder which is used to feedback the spindle position in synchronous thread cutting applications.
They just don't have a lathe screenset yet.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_PVYLCoFoK8
CNC Drive provides one connector, it is a cable with IDC26 on one end and DB25 on the other. Additional cables are sold for €3.50 each. They don't sell any screw terminal blocks like these:Quote:
Originally Posted by John S
Attachment 19599
...but is that really an issue? I mean, eBay is full of those. CNC Drive don't have any BOBs which they have received some criticism for, but again, eBay is full of them, you can buy any cheap or expensive one or use the one you already have if it is an upgrade from a parallel port driven to USB or Ethernet. So, at least for me, it doesn't really matter that the motion controller is not boxed in a fancy box and that CNC Drive does not have any BOBs or connection kits for sale or included in the product. In fact, I think that it is better NOT to include such trivialities because it gives the user the flexibility others don't provide. I don't want to pay for things I don't need and I think flexible solutions it is a good idea. Never the less, yes, they should have BOB's and connection kits as option, I have no problems with that.
Like I said, I agree that they should have a connection kit in the shop but without losing the possibility and the flexibility of only buying the motion controller without the kit. I would not welcome to be forced to buy that kit, even if it would only cost €19.Quote:
Originally Posted by John S
It's a company making machines in the weight magnitude of tonnes. The hobby market is fairly new to them, they are making their way up and have very good products. The only reason I bought the UC300ETH is the experience I have with their UC300USB, and the many positive feedbacks I read about their products, the most sold is the UC100, which is very well received and have good reputation. It is a simple and easy plug-and-play product, which the UC300 or the UC400 is not, these are not even boxed, so I guess they assumed that people who buy these products know why and what to do with it. The experience I have with the UC300USB, which I have used for over a year, is very positive, and I believe the UC300ETH experience will be even better. But... it is a new product as far as the Ethernet interface is concerned.Quote:
Originally Posted by John S
What is definitely better than other companies I have heard about, is their communication and the support they provide. Send a mail and you receive answers worth reading. They listen (maybe some times too much) to their customers and provide help. If someone finds a bug it gets fixed pretty fast, if someone has some special issue they help solving it. That in my opinion is worth more than a well written manual, because regardless how well a manual is written there will always be people who need help. Never the less, there is room for improvements, and hopefully the next product will be even better.
Maybe you are right, I don't know. It is though true that people like me, one of "the software and electronic guys" can make anything working, so yes, a kit and instructions how to connect their product would boost their sales but to be honest, boosting sales is not always a goal, some times "just enough" is better because when you boost too much you may not have time and energy to continue providing the good valuable support to so many. Keeping sales at lower level can actually also mean higher income per invested $$$, as well as higher "reputation value", easier support and better/more functional company organisation. Also, maybe their target group is more like the "software and electronic guys" and the machinists with interests in those areas than the traditional machinists who often start threads with sentences like "Help - I am a total idiot in terms electronics and cabling, currently building a CNC from scratch and nothing works." People like those often build a very nice machine in terms of mechanical design, but can't handle the simplest connections, never mind more complex electrical problems. It's a risky business to try help those people if you run a business and I don't think support can ever be enough for those. So I don't think boosting sales to high volumes is always a good idea. Some times you better let a customer group go somewhere else.Quote:
Originally Posted by John S
Now that looks good, if they sort out the screenset I can see me spending some money with them ;-)Quote:
Originally Posted by Ger21
- Nick
And support the relevant Gcode like G76 (linuxcnc) or what ever flavour is used.Quote:
Now that looks good,
Fine, but still, the thing is that if you want to use a super expensive BOB you can do that with the UC300ETH, nothing prevents you from duing that. The cheap ones I have are good enough for me at the moment, and until I really see problems which I can't fix I'll continue using them.Quote:
Originally Posted by JAZZCNC
I don't think we ever had a fight about USB. Of course Ethernet is better, MUCH better, no question about that. Also, I never made any secret about my USB experience, you can also read about them on my blog, and it has been there since over a year now:Quote:
Originally Posted by JAZZCNC
http://adapting-camera.blogspot.se/2...ry-part-5.html
http://adapting-camera.blogspot.se/2...ry-part-6.html
Both describing problems, the second is a serious warning. Since that second post you can no longer buy that USB motion controller at all, it was simply removed from the market. It was after that I bought the UC300USB, which I was very happy with and which never gave me similar EXTREMELY serious issues. Yes, it lost contact with Mach3 2-3 times, but that's all, and when it happened it just stopped, unlike the other, which literally run away and continued sending pulses to the stepper, there was no stopping it except through power off emergency stop.
I have also made a video a while ago:
https://youtu.be/L3jwsjl_mq8
I don't know if that stop and connection loss was caused by the fact that I was recording the screen and at the same time I also had a backup task running, probably the backup caused it because screen recording I have done many times before, but I have not kept that a secret.
Never the less, USB works if it is a good motion controller, like the ones CNC Drive is making, but "never" is a long time. I can tell you that I have not had any issues with my UC300USB more than 2-3 times, and one of those is the video and NONE were serious problems. Sure, Ethernet is definitely better I will be the last to deny that, but until recently it was pretty expensive to venture into Ethernet motion control, and for an amateur if would have meant a significant cost, so yes, USB is a very good alternative, and if I'd have money issues I'd still be happily using the UC300USB and we would not have this discussion because I KNOW it worked well for me.
Of course, if there is a better alternative why not use that? If I would disagree and would claim USB is as good as Ethernet I would have not bothered buying the UC300ETH at all. I also know the benefits of Ethernet vs. USB, and if the UC300ETH plus the Mach3 plugin was available a year and a half ago I would have definitely NOT bought a USB controller at all because Ethernet is definitely better. But at that time I found no better alternative which I could motivate the costs for.Quote:
Originally Posted by JAZZCNC
Also, like I said before, it is different if you need a machine to be running H24 reliably because your daily bread is depending on it, but in my case, and I believe in many others case as well, this is just a hobby, so in that perspective, USB is just fine. Of course, the rules of the game have changed with the arrival of UC400 and UC300ETH, since with those two available there is no reason to buy a USB controller at all, which probably will show up on CNC Drives sales figures also, since I believe that these two Ethernet controllers will seriously knock on the sales of UC100 and UC300USB.
BOB's and features are always a compromise.
.
The question came up on the Dynomotion Yahoo Group recently, as Tom was thinking about a more universal kind of BOB, and was wondering what type of features users would like.
Things like Step/Dir outputs to screw terminals, analogue outputs/inputs, voltage of general inputs/outputs. Off course opinions varied.
.
One thing that surprises me, is that there are not more people using the KFlop+KStep combination. 4 reasonable stepper drivers, 16 12-24V inputs, 2 relay drivers, along with a fully isolated analogue output. I used one for a probing machine, and to me it seems like an almost ideal setup for smaller stepper driven machines. I suspect the problems are you need a small C Program to make use of them (A basic C program is included to get up and running with no alterations), and the fact you have to use above 5V to make use of the inputs.
The combination costs $450, yet people are happy to spend $155-180 on a SS, $300 on G540, and then bodge it all together with questionable wiring or a cnc4pc BOB (Been there had one, biggest heap of CNC related junk I've ever owned!), and finally buy a Mach license.
.
I can understand hobbyists wanting to keep costs down, but there seems to be plenty who'll spend far more just to go with the flock.
I can tell you exactly why.Quote:
One thing that surprises me, is that there are not more people using the KFlop+KStep combination
1) The lack of a good, easy to connect breakout board.
2) Having to write C programs.
It's too complex for the average person to use, when there are simpler options that work just as well.
I have a friend that was fed up with Mach3's bugs, which constantly caused ruined parts for him.
He bought a KFlop, but didn't have time to install it.
I had him buy a UC100, which he could switch to by just plugging in the parallel cable, and he started using UCCNC until he had time to switch.
He also bought a second machine for his business, which already had a KFlop installed.
With the updates that UCCNC have made to their software over the last year, he now sees no reason to switch to the KFlop, and will be selling bioth of them and moving the second machine to UCCNC.
I didn't post that video to impress you or anyone. Never the less, I don't think there are many DIY machines which run at that speed with only direct stepper motor driven single 1605 ball screws on each axis. Most people when they want speed in this range use belt and gearbox, dual screws, higher pitch, servo drive and so on. I seriously doubt that there are many Chinese moving gantry machines which reach more than half of this speed. Never the less, this is not a pissing contest, so I don't care if you are impressed or not.Quote:
Originally Posted by John S
As for the maximum REAL speed of my machine, again I think you are wrong, but I still have to measure that using real instruments, which I don't think I will ever do because as I said, it is not a contest and is not my goal to impress anyone.
Anyway, just for the sake of discussion and for answering your claim, UCCNC and Mach3 both display the speeds, in this video at least once, at the 40 second mark you can see it reaches 10,000mm/min. If my calculations are right then with 700mm/s/s acceleration I am up at 10,000mm/min after 19.8mm. Watching that video frame by frame shows 33mm for the Y to move from 170mm down towards Y0 before it reaches 10,000 (you can see it in the FACT message box) and deceleration starts at the Y 19.18 mark, which is almost like my calculation.
Attachment 19604
Remember that the frame rate of the video is not high enough for accurate measurements, but I am pretty sure it is correct as far as the top speed is indeed reached at some point, probably long before the 33mm travel of Y. Also, the settings used was constant speed, which probably affects the distance needed as well, but never the less, I am sure that I actually reach 10,000mm/min. Also remember that this drawing is only 170mm Y movement, and my table is almost twice that size if I need it to be.
The 2500mm/min is the feed rate for the pen when the pen is down, not the rapids, which is obvious from the video as well.
I am aware that my machine is tiny by your standards but again, it does not matter. It is large enough for me, weights over 80kg and it takes up more than enough space as well. Lastly, it definitely beats most, if not all the kits which can be bought with similar table size, in terms of speed and real accuracy, but regardless, it is NOT a competition against anyone else.
I believe that almost all board makers are ignorant people that live in their dreams and refuse to make and sell what we really need. I may write it down somewhere or open a new thread for the people to say what is really needed in a board.
How hard could be to design a FPGA chip like most of the new boards use and put that chip on a tiny board . Then make that tiny board fit in the middle of and connect directly to a bigger board which has high speed opto isolation, differential inputs and outputs, 24VDC or 5VDC by our choice. Come on guys, go to Galil web site, download a manual of their boards and see how its done. Swap of cheap resistor block changes board from 5VDC to 24VDC, swap of IC direction, or even better from software changes board active high or low and so on.
What year we live in? i find strange that a new board will not output 4mhz at least signal and still talking about khz. How much more expensive could be for manufacturer, 10$? I am sure its not more than 20-30$ to make a perfect board. Now that we have ARM chips so low priced.
And how hard it's to put that board in some kind of shield box?
I agree with Dean though. in my limited experience problem was either the board or the cables. And the problems that board can give , there is no other part in the machine that can frustrate me as the BOB can
People don't use Dinomotion for the same reason i don't use Linuxcnc with Mesa boards. For that same reason Apple became a big player in the PC game. Its called "ease of use"
With a KStep, all you need is a basic 26 pin IDC breakout board. You could say the same about some of the UCNC headers.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ger21
Only if you want to do something non-standard.Quote:
2) Having to write C programs.
As I said in my post, if all you want to use is the basic features, there is a C file you just need to link to, either via the Mach plugin, or via the KMotionCNC config page. In Mach3, all the inputs/outputs are configured like any other controller. KMotionCNC it depends on what you're wanting to do, but the new screen editor lets you assign inputs/outputs to buttons/leds, along with little C snippets to do what you want.
I'll agree that the KFlop can be complex, as ultimately it is a pretty high end controller with lots of capability that lots of users will never use, but it's only as complex as you want to make it.Quote:
It's too complex for the average person to use, when there are simpler options that work just as well.
I have a friend that was fed up with Mach3's bugs, which constantly caused ruined parts for him.
He bought a KFlop, but didn't have time to install it.
I had him buy a UC100, which he could switch to by just plugging in the parallel cable, and he started using UCCNC until he had time to switch.
He also bought a second machine for his business, which already had a KFlop installed.
With the updates that UCCNC have made to their software over the last year, he now sees no reason to switch to the KFlop, and will be selling bioth of them and moving the second machine to UCCNC.
.
I do find the programming thing a bit of strange argument, considering plenty people doing anything non-standard with Mach and even UCNC, are usually happy enough to learn enough of the required language to write Macros, but mention C, and they break out in a cold sweat!
And if you don't want to use the Kstep?
Like Homing?Quote:
Only if you want to do something non-standard.
And my perception is that to do the same things that I can do in Mach3 and UCCNC, that the KFlop is much more complex.Quote:
I'll agree that the KFlop can be complex, as ultimately it is a pretty high end controller with lots of capability that lots of users will never use, but it's only as complex as you want to make it.
Dynomotion needs to change that perception to get more people to use it.
I've had this discussion with my friend with the 2 KFlops. We both feel that it would be much more popular if it were easier to use.
It's not unlike Mach4. Mach4 is incredibly powerful, and at some point may well be the best software control available. But it's incredibly complex, if you want to do anything "non-standard".
My take is that all of the available software controls are designed for a wide range of application.
For serious users, they all require a fair amount of customization for specific applications. This is where the complexity comes in.
Ger, I'm not going to disagree with you, but it has proven a point.
Users complain when a controller can't do something how they want it, yet when they're given the option to do it however they want, they complain it's too complex.
Controller designers just can't win.
Thanks John I was hoping you would jump in because know you have had same BOB issues, As do many Cnc Engineers.Quote:
Originally Posted by John S
You also hit the nail on the Head with routers being different animals. Routers are always pushing the edge on Torque and Pulse rates because of the speeds they work at. In my experience the only way to avoid issues is by building using quality components and with performance to spare so they are running well below there maximum.
Even then It's fine line between working correctly and not. Even with experience this can catch you out as I found today. (by the way this as nothing to do with Bob's or Electrics just high lighting the differences in machines.)
Deliverd machine to Kent few week ago, 500mile round trip for me. On Friday Customer informed me was having issues with loss of position.
This is twin screw machine connected with belts so after talking with customer I suspected we had slipping pulley or some mechaincal issue, which to me is totally unacceptable and very hard to swallow or believe.!
So in the car this morning at 5am on the way to Kent to find issue. Thankfully and to relief of my pride all mechanical was fine and was just case of motors being overtuned. Bummer for me because was long trip just for bit of motor tuning, but still needed to happen for customers happiness and my own piece of mind.
But this highlights that the line between working fine and not on router with steppers is so very close. If this was Mill/lathe then wouldn't have happened (without being ridiculously overtuned which it wasn't) because motors are running no where near there maximum.
The thread been totally hijacked. You people don't get it. It was meant to be information for those who might be interested. That's all. Not about marketing, how to improve, bashing, advertising other products, impressing (or not) anyone, USB vs. ETH, Mach3 vs. UCCNC, threading and so on...
Why don't we start bringing in Windows vs. Linux and when we do that we can also start mentioning Apple products, spindles, aluminium vs. steel design, moving gantry vs. fixed and all that.
Why don't you start your own threads about your design ideas, how incompetent motion control designers are and how much better YOU know what is sellable and what not and how simple it is to make it in 2016?
There is a missing tool among "Thread Tools". I wish there was a "Delete this thread" option. I'd definitely use it if there was one.
Threads on forums wander off topic all the time.
If you can't handle that, then don't post.
Don't think so else they'd be offering 24V I/O and other things retro fit engineers want. To me they are very much into DIY users who are not so demanding or with less knowledge.Quote:
Originally Posted by A_Camera
Eiher way they are doing a good Job IMO. However they are spoiling the soup for Pinch of salt.
Guess your aiming this at Me.? If so then Don't really give shit what you think, if don't like it then tuff Shit.!!Quote:
Originally Posted by A_Camera
People also need to be informed of all aspects of what's involved and other peoples experiences views on a product. Lots of what's been posted is very relavent to others thinking about this product and company. Which if you look you'll see I've only got praise for the Company. I would never comment on performance of product I've not used.
However I will always argue to the last word when Some PRAT insists Cheap BOB's are perfectly fine and won't or don't cause issues just because of there own limited experience in using just one or two boards. This is very relevant to this Post and product which comes with NO Isolation and requires BOB to work safely.
Don't like it then either go away or learn to handle it because I'll always do it.!!
2 SHORT QUESTIONS:
- the 24vdc hungarian board. Manual in English, price in Euro?, why i don't see ICs on the board but just some connectors?
- which other 24VDC board will serve the purpose? I remember somebody,maybe even in Uk was selling good looking 24vdc breakout board, but can not seem to find it now.
extra question for the knowledgeable :yahoo::
-if not 24VDc, then any good 12VDC Breakout board?
Now that looks interesting but can't work out the price because when I put 126.999Ft in to currency converter it comes out at £0.35 which I'm sure isn't correct.Quote:
Originally Posted by Boyan Silyavski
I'll send them message and hopefully they will understand english.!
If this works out at sensible money I'll order one and put it thru it's paces and report back.
126999.00 = 350
Get a grip, get used to it, or get a life, or a sense of humour ;-)Quote:
Originally Posted by A_Camera
Jazz, no it's the full figure 126999ft which is about £350, I did post earlier which for a breakout board is stupid.
But then another company, in another country, in another language etc,
I feel this thread has been very good just the odd person a bit thin skinned. Basically people have been able to ask question on things the company don't deem worth putting into print.
From my perspecive I wasn't interested after reading the absolute crap manual, I have seen better VFD manuals and everyone knows that have an annual contest to see who can write the most technical and obtuse manual out [ Siemens won it last year hands down because I had to ring Siemens in London and they didn't know, it too 2 days for Germany to find an answer. And the problem ? How do you wire it for 3 wire operation ]
So for now, for me as we all have different agenda's, I find it can thread from the You tube video with the felt tip pen. OK not all the world but it does pull out at the same point every time and tracks OK.
Negative points, no lathe screens and therefore no conversational and no instructions but if it's work in progress it might be worth following.
That could be partly overcome if it can use the Mach3 plug in but then this opens up another can of worms. EVERY Mach3 plug in for threading and this includes K-Flop and CSCMIO has to pause at the end of the thread whilst it hands back to Mach causing a run off groove which is not acceptable for many parts.
Is the plug in for the UC300ETH the same ?
Even if I decided to take a chance and add another paper weight to the shelf it wouldn't do much good as I have no idea how to wire the Channel A+, A-, B+, B- and index pulse up to the 156 available pins and in what combination.
Or even what resolution encoder to buy.
But I say it is worth keeping in mind.
On the video, sorry but nothing you have shown me impresses me. My girlfriend can shop quicker than that.
Look at this very old video of Mach 3 cutting alloy, not running a pen around.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ifMn6pHXLMM
You need to fast forward to the 12 minute mark or you will fall asleep.
Not saying UCCNC can't do better just you are not showing it.
Well, I wasn't too impressed when you told me to read the manual, and that I (also, as it happens, an electronic engineer for the last 40 years) was stupid to ask for + and - symbols on the pins on the analogue port. Actually, although I mentioned the analogue port, you referred to the digital pins. I reread the manual. It did not mention that the analogue pins were ground-referenced (seemed reasonable that they could have been isolated as each exists as two pins). However, the problem was that when this part of the manual was copied from the UC300USB manual, the important bits in red text were omitted. You have worked with the USB version so probably didn't notice or need to see that. I'm sure that they will put that right in a future version of the manual to avoid confusing any stupid electronic engineers like me again. Still sounds like a nice bit of kit, just underlines the fact that manuals need proof-reading before issuing. I'm also grateful that you have given some news about this bit of hardware as it's something that I might consider when I do my vertical mill CNC conversion. Once the router is finished...Quote:
Originally Posted by A_Camera