Printable View
Hi Bert,
Sounds like it is working for you, fantastic. What laser and camera are you using? Are you sure of the units, i.e. did you set the um per pixel?
I'm assuming you moved the machine frame to meet the laser plane to get the corners so close, adjustable feet?
My 6 inch concrete slab also looks like jelly with this system.
Joe
Today i got to some measuring again.Quote:
Originally Posted by devmonkey
About my setup.
I have a cheap bosch crosshair laser which I now know is not up to this task.
The webcam is a 1920x1080 6.2 ish by 3mm sensor... so +/- 3um.
Yes i have m12 adjustable bolts in the feet.
10 deg of turning on the feet is clearly visible in the software.
About the units i am sure it is still on defaults so 1um, need to check.
Yes my measurements in the earlier post are off by factor 3.
Not yet that important since i was testing the setup and finding out the sop.
### about The laser.
The selflevelling seems to be spot on.
The optics are not.
I found out today.
Moving towards and from the laser the light is straight (light travels in a straight line) moving along the projected line gives false readings. +/- 60 um / 80 cm at about 3meters distance so only a few degrees
Now i know this, it is okay the way it is.
Just make sure you move in a straight line from and to the lightsource.
I have to put the laser a bit further away to get into the better sensitivity range of the camera. It all helps.
Actionplan:
* Input the correct units in the software
* Use a tripod laserplatform
* Put the tabel diagonals in plum.
* Check the 2 long axis.
* Check the short axis for horizontal variations.
* Check the short axis at lowest point and highest point to check top and bottom rail for allignment.
I have not thought of a way to check the spindle for misalignment by webcam/laser without trusting the optics.
But maybe a conventional plumbline and a light source (is that the right English word?) can do the job.
Grtz Bert.
Verstuurd vanaf mijn SM-A320FL met Tapatalk
Really useful details, thanks Bert.
When you see the error from moving along the projected line, is it random noise or is it like the line is bent up or down in the middle, like your gantry measurement ?
I think I have seen the line bent like this. I did a little experiment with a dot laser and a glass cylinder (wine glass stem). When the laser passes through the cylinder at 90 degrees you get a straight line projected, when you angle the glass a lot you get a visibly bent line either up or down depending which way to hold the angle.
Maybe this is a common problem with the line optics, and maybe we could calibrate it out by taking two sets of measurements along a straight edge with the laser flipped 180 axially for each set. Will have to think on this, any thoughts welcome...
Although it would not be easy to flip your laser as it is on a pendulum.
Hi devmonkey,Quote:
Originally Posted by devmonkey
Yes it was like you described with the laser vs wineglass stem.
The noise was within 5 orso units.
when measure is pushed several times in 60 sec... maybe +/- 1 or 2 units.
Grtz Bert.
Verstuurd vanaf mijn SM-A320FL met Tapatalk
Hi Bert,
I have had an idea of how to create a tool to check whether the rails are planar that doesn't matter if the laser line is bent.
It is effectively a large scale repeat-o-meter using the laser rather than DTI and thereby avoiding a very long infinitely stiff top bar:
Attachment 27444
The setup would consist of 4 spherical feet arranged in a square. 3 of these feet would be rigidly mounted on a triangular frame, the fourth foot would float on an arm that can pivot up and down on a hinge at the centre of the square. The camera would be fixed above this forth foot and the laser fixed to the triangular frame diagonally opposite. None of this would need to be high precision, the only requirement is that the triangle be stiff.
To calibrate the tool you could use any reasonably flat surface, it doesn't have to be a perfect plane but shouldn't be pitted.
Lay the tool on the surface and mark where the 4 feet touch as accurately as you can. Take a height reading of the laser on the sensor. Now lift the tool and rotate it 90 degrees such that the feet sit back on the 4 marks made and take another height reading. I think that the middle of the two height readings will be the point where all 4 feet are in plane, so we zero the tool to this mid point.
If this is a new machine then you would level the master rail bed in isolation using the laser projecting along it.
Now place the new calibrated tool on the machine frame such that two feet of the triangle rest on the master rail bed and the other two on the slave rail bed. Now adjust the slave rail bed under the floating foot until you read zero. These four points on the machine are now in plane. You can check the tool is still calibrated by rotating it 90 degrees on the machine frame and checking for zero.
We now have two points on the slave rail bed that are planar with the master so the slave rail bed can now be levelled in isolation to a line passing through these two points.
Attachment 27445
I think this a similar approach to using two crossed wires between 4 points to check for plane when the wires just touch, but this should be much more accurate.
If you had a machine where the two rail beams are adjustable at the ends then this would be an extremely simple way to bring them into plane.
Cheers, Joe
Hi Joe,Quote:
Originally Posted by devmonkey
I am not sure i understand correctly.
Does this device need to be at the exact centre of diagonals?
Doesnt the mentioned reference flat surface have to be in the same paralel plane as the rails then?
Grtz Bert.
Verstuurd vanaf mijn SM-A320FL met Tapatalk
Hi Bert,
No nothing needs to be centred on the diagonals, the only restriction is that the device can only check a square not a rectangle, but this doesn't matter as we can always define a square ontop of the rectangle formed by our pair of rail beds.
The reference surface doesn't really exist. What we are doing is defining a square as four points on the device, call them A, B, C, and X:
AB
XC
With [A,B,C] fixed in relation to each other and X able to move up and down. Since [A,B,C] are fixed relatively to each other (in a triangle) they form a plane. The laser is fixed to this plane on the device near B pointing towards X. The camera is fixed to X.
Now define a square the same size on a table top or the machine frame or whatever, label the corners of this square 1, 2, 3, 4:
12
43
Place the device over this square such that A==1, B==2, C==3, X==4. Measure the laser height on the sensor at X. Now rotate the device 90 degrees so that say A==2, B==3, C==4 and X==1 and measure the new laser height at X which will have changed because your surface defined by [1,2,3,4] you drew on your table is not a perfect plane.
Now if you were to move X up or down so that the laser measured height is half way between the two heights measured then I think that X will be planar with A,B,C. So zero the software at the mid height between the two X heights measured and you now have a calibrated device which will read zero when placed on a true plane and a signed error when placed on an untrue plane. In other words [A,B,C,X] will be planar when the newly zero'd X is at zero. You can use this to check a machine is in plane and adjust the machine as required until it reads zero.
I haven't tested this only thought about it, I might be missing something, will draw it in CAD and check the theory is correct.
Cheers, Joe
Hi Bert and everyone,
Here are some renderings of the laser-plano-meter I've been trying to describe.
Attachment 27468 Attachment 27469
It consists of a square device sat on 4 spherical feet at the corners. 3 corners of the square are rigidly connected to form a triangle (orange part) with laser attached. The forth corner is attached by the green arms to the triangle with flexures that allow it to pivot up and down with respect to the triangular plane, effectively the square is allowed to fold along its diagonal. The camera sensor is attached to the forth corner.
Attachment 27470
The laser will project a line on the sensor, the height of this line is related to the angle of the fold. The goal is to find the sensor reading where ALL 4 feet are in the same plane thereby providing a method of measuring the error of any surface from a plane. We will call this sensor reading ZERO.
To find ZERO we place the device on any surface, doesn't need to be a plane. We then take the laser height measurement H1 in this position. Now rotate the device 90 degrees about the Z axis and replace it on to the same surface so that each foot is in the same place as its predecessor was in the first position. Now measure laser height H2.
With both H1 and H2 we can calibrate the device. ZERO is the mid point between H1 and H2.
Now place the device on the surface to be measured, e.g. the pair of X rail beds of the CNC frame. The deviation from ZERO will tell you how much to adjust the frame under the 4th foot in order to bring the surface into plane.
An alternative way to think of it is if you just placed the non-zero'd device on the machine frame and take the laser height measurement, then rotate 90 degrees and repeat, if the heights are different you need to adjust the frame. Make the adjustment, rotate the device back to its original position and repeat until the height readings match.
EDIT
Should be noted that this device could be constructed with a DTI instead of a laser as per a normal repeat-o-meter. In this case you would have just the orange triangle and replace the laser with a long arm with the DTI on the end. The problem of course would be that the error due to the long arm flexing due to its own weight and the pressure from the DTI spring would far exceed the resolution of the DTI. This is not a problem with the laser beam as it wont bend no matter how long it is.
Cheers, Joe
Yes, that really helped.Quote:
Originally Posted by devmonkey
This is a clever design.
I will try this later. I think a simple laserpointer will do i guess in this scenario.
Thnx Grtz Bert.
Verstuurd vanaf mijn SM-A320FL met Tapatalk
Afternoon all.
I've finally got back to my machine project. I gave up with trying to create a planar surface in one shot and as the weather had warmed up I poured epoxy, this looks like it has worked well and made a very close surface for final levelling using the laser and shimming if required.
Anyway the purpose of this post is to describe a new app I put together today for laying the master rail straight. I decided it would be easier to use a taut wire rather than the laser for this and a cheap USB microscope.
So armed with some 0.28mm black fishing line I found in the garage and a club hammer I tensioned a wire parallel to where the master rail will sit. I used some white insulation tape on the machine frame below the wire to provide good contrast for the software and the wire runs over a couple of bolts that run through angle iron supports clamped to the ends of the machine frame. The wire is anchored at one end and the club hammer suspended from the other, the fishing line stretches out quite a bit and you can see the nylon flowing under the microscope, I waited for it to stop flowing before doing anything else.
The microscope is attached to a hiwin carriage and the new app accurately locates the wire allowing you to zero the tool then reports the error as you slide the carriage back and forth. A 3D printed clamp allows the microscope to the rigidly attached to the magnetic base.
Nothing new in the process that other people have performed other than the app that lets you achieve excellent accuracy with little effort. The resolution is roughly 3um per pixel repeatable down to less than 1um (relative to the straightness of the taut wire obviously).
The wire locating algo is quite different from the laser gausian model and seems extremely robust. For those interested it locates the two edges of the wire using a median gradient threshold down each column of pixels, regresses lines down these edges and auto tunes the threshold until it has exactly two lines that completely cross the image from left->right. It then bisects the two edge lines to locate the wire centre. This removes any error from tapering of the wire due to stretching under tension. You hit zero then the app will will show you the relative error to this point as you move the rail and/or carriage about.
Anyway I captured this video showing the app working on the machine frame:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=us2mTcvHHOw
I will use this tool to set the master rail over the next day or so.
Cheers, Joe
Gret stuff Joe!
Having just found out how effective taut wires can be for machine alignment I can really appreciate the value of the new software. Do fishing shops sell stainless steel leader in the UK? It's what I used and may be more stable than nylon.
One measurement I was completely unable to make on my machine was the straightness of the fixed rails. That may have now changed. I just need to work out a carriage arrangement for the round supported rails.
Kit
Hi Kit,Quote:
Originally Posted by Kitwn
Yes they do sell steel leader, music wire is also an option. These axis are only 1300mm long so normal lightweight fishing line seems to be perfect, very uniform and black meaning it is easy to resolve in the software. It only flows for around 30s after tension is applied and under the microscope you can see when it stops. The length I put on the machine yesterday hasn't stretched at all over night.
Some things I noticed that maybe useful:
1. The microscope (£20) must be focused once at the beginning and then not touched. Turning the focus winder shifts the optical axis which would throw off any measurement. The focus winder is solid enough not to move on its own.
2. The microscope cable must be tied to the carriage to avoid any force being applied to the back of the scope pushing it off axis.
3. M6 bolts make perfect wire guides for 0.28mm wire, the wire locks into the V of the thread.
The depth of field (variation in objective distance where object remains in focus) of the microscope is probably <1mm so you need to get the wire guides to the same height so the wire is not sloped, I set mine level with the top of the epoxy bed using a ruler. The wire is then suspended a few mm outside the epoxy bed.
If there is enough interest I will share the app, needs a bit of a cleanup first as it was a quick hack.
Cheers, Joe
Joe,
I think it would be well worth sharing the app. I know Johm McNamara shared a lot of very useful info regarding the use of electrical sensing of a wire during the earlier pages of this thread. I was inspired by his work to do my tramming with taut wires alignment a couple of weeks ago which proved very sucessful. But the simplicity and low cost of your solution (who hasn't got a laptop these days?) makes it accessible to everyone. I will have to think about how to make the most use of it AFTER I've spent the next couple of weeks tarting my house up to make it more saleable but I suspect another round of alignment could be on the cards in the future thanks to your efforts.
Fitting shims is cheap and easy. Working out WHERE to fit the shims is the trick!
Keep up the good work!
Kit
Hi Joe
You just made my day.
Gee using a microscope with your software is a huge step, 3 um = 0.00011811 about a ten thousandth of an inch imperial. accuracy.
Using wire or fishing line allows the measured line to be accurately positioned. By anchoring each end of the wire to the machine frame precisely you can place the linear rail exactly where you want it. A lot easier than pointing a laser from one end. It also allows you to easily place two rails parallel to each other, by simply measuring the space between the ends.
I would really like to try your new software. In fact I am quite excited.
While tweaking it You mentioned that you used black fishing line piano wire is bright and I guess would require a dark background instead of the light background you used to enhance the contrast of the line you used in your experiments.
Maybe the ability to invert the pixel colour in the contrast discrimination code would be a useful addition.
Wire or mono filament fishing line? I can think of a number of applications where the the measuring system will need to be left in place for days or weeks when say a large machine installation or While a DIY machine is being built, All plastics will keep creeping and possibly break. Music wire will retain its elasticity indefinitely if it is not loaded above its elastic limit. I use Roslau music wire with great success. Size 0 is .009 Inches in diameter. I never reuse it (From the coil it is perfectly straight you do not want any kinks) a small coil will last for years of hobby use.
There is another use for this system! A non contact plumb line sensing system or maybe even a pair of plumb lines!!
Two suspended plumb lines will always remain parallel and perfectly vertical in relation to each other (Ignoring the curvature of the earth that is only measurable at great distances.)
The two wires define the edges of a rectangular flat plane that in this case is measurable to .0001 inches using wire and your software. I am going to think some more on this....... I have an idea.
Regards
John
Hi John,
I've put up the first version of the wire app here:
https://github.com/betzuka/laserleve...uilds/wire.zip
Extract and run wire.bat, needs java installed as per the laser app. The wire needs to be crossing the rectangular field of view of the sensor in the short dimension, e.g. if your sensor is 640 wide by 480 tall wire should be crossing the sensor from top to bottom.
It doesn't care whether it is looking at a bright wire on a dark background or vice versa, just needs a decent contrast and the microscope focused so that the wire edges appear reasonably crisp. My fishing line is just black mono filament, super cheap kids stuff that I already had. The main reason for the different algo from the laser is that the objective is lit from the front rather than behind, so it isn't acting like a shadow camera, this means you get lots of reflection off of the surface of the wire which would misslead anything searching for a gaussian, or indeed searching for anything other than the wire edges.
Your idea of using it to check for planar surfaces is brilliant ! I could stand my machine on end, drop two plumb lines and measure the relative error between the two lines from each respective rail.
At some point I will integrate it into the laser app so all the other error plotting stuff works. Do you have a microscope to test it with? If not this is the one I'm using, it is also very handy for SMD soldering etc.
https://www.amazon.co.uk/Microscope-.../dp/B07BF86SRP
Cheers, Joe
Hi Joe
I do have an optical microscope, A cheap student version I used to align my lathe in 2011 using wire. The is a longish post here that discusses lathe alignment and wire, https://www.model-engineer.co.uk/for....asp?th=136771 In this case I lashed up a measuring stage that allowed me to position the wire centrally in a slot by eye using my bio computer then measure off the error using a micrometer. It worked! Page down the thread to see photos.
In particular note the simple wire positioning stages clamped to the lathe bed made from scrap steel, rock solid.
Using a USB webcam or microscope with your software is clearly a better solution. It eliminates a number of sources of error.
I don't have a working USB microscope I will order one! I cant wait to test the software.
In many ways two cameras will be even more useful, for XY measurement, Ideally using one computer, although old PC's are easy to source for nothing or next to nothing, if two instances of the software could interface to two USB ports on one computer it would be more convenient.
Regards
John
PS stretched wire plumb lines are used to this day by heavy machinery installers, for instance passenger lifts and giant boring mills to align the column. Normally the bob weight is suspended in a container of thick oil to damp out any tendency to sway like a pendulum.
Quick update,
I've managed to set the master rail reasonably straight with the setup. It is within +/-5um along the entire length. It was not easy for a few reasons I will outline:
1. The microscope axis is offset in both X+Y from the centre of the carriage, I did this because obviously it has to be offset in Y as you can't 'see through' the carriage but also in X since I couldn't fit the microscope next to the carriage and remain over the frame. This arrangement is highly non-optimal as you are measuring an offset AND an angle. Eventually you get used to how much adjustment to make, however there must be a better arrangement that avoids this coupling.
2. Twisting the carriage hard on the rail can induce a few um of error.
3. Pressing hard on the machine frame and deflect the entire frame a few um.
The conclusion is that with a machine constructed like mine from 80x80x3 box section over a long dimension of 1300mm aligning to an accuracy of +/-5um is probably the absolute limit and it isn't sensible to try to achieve any greater. Also the frame is unlikely to hold this in actual use due to the deflection under force measured. Still it is good to be able to measure these things to get an idea where the limits are.
So in conclusion I've managed to align to ~1/2 a thou with a setup that cost a few quid. It is all entirely dependent on the taut wire actually being straight, however if we assume it is then this setup is equivalent to a DIN 874/00 spec straight edge, one of those 1500mm long will cost £2k then you still have to actually align the rail with it.
Here is a snippet from the alignment:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NbPxeObG100
Quite pleased, time to get the gantry on now!
To me this says a lot about the quality of your rails and carriages. It also makes the case for a well aligned frame if you want smooth movement without binding.Quote:
Originally Posted by devmonkey
I would say it says that standard hiwin rails and carriages are pretty good, would you agree? This is an artificial setup as carriages wouldn't be used singly in a machine. The related interesting fact is that with these 20mm hiwin rails, with a section bolted down hard, moving the microscope 60mm to the next unbolted hole, finger pressure is sufficient to deflect the rail +/-3um although a small contribution will be from frame deflection. As said before everything looks like jelly when you look closely enough.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kitwn
Also torquing up the mounting bolts with light pressure on an allen key moves the rail 1-2um, I set the rail at -2um with the bolt snugged down, then tightened it with the allen key that brought it to zero. I've just redone the straightening procedure this way and I'm now +/-2um along the entire length, job done!
The rail I chose as the master had two 'bends' in it, it was 'S' shaped, with the two ends zero'd there were two intermediate points along the rail which were roughly +/-70um respectively. I verified this wasn't some artifact of the taut wire or the software algo by changing the wire twice, moving the wire guides and changing the end that had the hammer hanging on it.
This shows that you definitely need to straighten the rail, it is not sufficient to use it out of the box.
Rails are never straight out of the box they always need to be bolted down. The bolting should be done with a torque wrench for uniformity. If you can get hold of this book or find it at the local library you will see a large section on mounting rails and other components.
https://www.amazon.com/Precision-Mac.../dp/0872634922
I got my copy at Foyles many years ago for a lot more, A great book if you build machinery.
In it he explains the way the rail distorts when tightening it down. Chasing microns is great fun to me! they hide in every corner of your design.
I would not be concerned about a small amount of movement when you rotate the carriage axially on the rail. If it is a brand name rail you should find the type number engraved on the rail and the bearing blocks. By looking up the manufacturers website you should be able to determine the bearing clearance or preload and accuracy for the particular combination you have. typically around 3 clearance levels may be offered in addition to different accuracy levels. If you are ordering a new rail and bearing set for a project it is tempting to order the maximum preload, this is not necessarily a good idea at all. maximum preloaded bearings are often rated for a shorter life span and more importantly they require more accurate mounting surfaces, using the wrong clearance type can seriously reduce the bearing life and greatly increase the force required to move the bearing placing a high load on the drive system. Fortunately all the bearing manufacturers offer excellent manuals available for free download.
I ran this Google search today and it yielded some interesting results.
precision machine design slocomb mounting linear rails
Or use the link below.
https://www.google.com/search?rlz=1C...4dUDCAw&uact=5
Regards
John
Mine are medium preload (ZA) mate not high preload, rail is now straight enough for me, although huge fun (not!) there is no point chasing down +/-2um when I can deflect 300mm of 80mm box section that the rail is mounted on between uprights by 5um just by leaning on it. I listed all those example measurements to show what the system is capable of, e.g. obviously the carriage will twist on the rail when twisted, if it didn't then it wouldn't move, but in reality this is only a problem if you have a microscope bolted to the carriage as in actual use two carriages would be used mounted to a rigid plate, I was highlighting this as a source of error with how I mounted the microscope not a criticism of the hiwin system. Possibly a better (although more work) microscope fixture would be to register to the reference edge machined on the hiwin rail rather than use a carriage at all, couldn't be bothered though...Quote:
Originally Posted by John McNamara
Hi Joe
I agree medium preload is a good choice, and when the carriage is installed there will be 4 bearing blocks distributing the load, as they are spaced apart any axial twist will be much reduced. I suspect that if you ran the test with the microscope mounted in the carriage running on your already precision aligned rails You may get even better numbers due to some of the residual errors in the rail alignments averaging out.
Hi Kitwin
You mentioned that you were working with round rails, Maybe if you first fit both rails with the mounting screws just tight enough to allow them to move sideways then after sliding on the bearing pairs onto each rail you fit the carriage plate on the bearings in the same manner just tight enough to move you will be able to align one as a master rail using wire alignment and the microscope before setting up the other.
It may take a couple of cycles of this procedure but it will iron out any errors.
This worked for me when building a small All laser cut CNC router with a mate for a Men's shed in Bright Victoria in 2012 It is still in use daily apart from the Covid shut down.
It uses round rails, and yes timing belt drives apart from the Z axis which is a ball screw. Remarkably the accuracy is a lot better than you would think. After wearing out 2 Makita routers due to the high usage It now has a Chinese 2.2kw high speed spindle.
https://www.google.com/search?q=Brig...%3Apinterest.*
Regards
John
Attachment 28205 Attachment 28206
Will use gantry to space slave rail correctly, progress on this particular machine will continue in my build thread:
http://www.mycncuk.com/threads/13178...-started/page8
That was my meaning, ' a few um' detected by the microscope is not much movement at the carriage. These rails are known to be intollerant of poor alignment, non-straight frames etc. and that's what you'd expect where there is so little play. When I decided to go for fully suported round rails on my machine part of the decision was that I was unsure I coud make the frame accurately enough for the more expensive Hi-Wins not to bind.Quote:
Originally Posted by devmonkey
John,Quote:
Originally Posted by John McNamara
My main concern with the round rails was that a single carriage will rotate around the rail so some form of 'gantry' going accross both will be required to mount the microscope. Probably not a real problem in fact, especially if the slave rail is quite losely mounted. Nearly all the error seen will be from the nearest rail and a few iterations should sort things out as you say.
I'm not sure you can fully adjust round rails in practice. The steel rail must be far more rigid than the aluminium support and whilst shims may well sort out vertical errors, I suspect any attempt to nudge the thing sideways will more likely distort the support than the rail. I don't speak from experience however.
One day I might decide to do a serious upgrade and build a mostly-new machine in which case I will be using all the wisdom gathered from you and Joe to chase down every micron I can. Alternatively somebody with better coding skills than I will come up with a method that can detect all the errors on my machine and writes a dedicated post-processor to take them out in software. Oh No! Not another rabbit hole to head down!!!
Very amused by your last comments, my version reads "After wearing out 2 Makita routers due to the owner being being stupid it now has a Chinese 2.2kw high speed spindle"
Kit
When we built the router in 2012 it was for a community men's shed. we were on a parts budget, My mate and I put our time in for nothing so there was no cost there. A Makita router was available, from memory it was donated.
The Chinese spindle. Is much quieter than the Routers with their brush type motors. I guess I should of put this in a separate thread, it is a bit off topic. This thread is about Alignment and software.
.Quote:
Originally Posted by devmonkey
With apologies for absence ... it's been a while since I was here :
That sounds like a great development, Joe
I obviously need to read the next couple of pages, but please let me join those requesting that you share the App
MichaelG.
.
Edit: Just off to grab that code :encouragement:
Hi Michael,Quote:
Originally Posted by Michael Gilligan
I actually wrote a different app for the taut wire method, I don't think I uploaded it anywhere. It has been a while but I think it made use of the wire not crossing the sensor exactly parallel to the pixel rows to gain excellent sub-pixel resolution and it also took a bisector of the line edges as the line shadow is not gaussian when lit from above by a microscope. This also takes care of the converging or diverging wire edges which you can see under high magnification and are caused by the wire stretching more in the centre of the span than at the edges as it flows.
Unfortunately I wont have access to the machine with the code on for a few weeks. Thanks for the offer of some wire but I don't really need it, I found that black fishing line worked perfectly since the app is tolerant of an imperfect wire as described above.
Edit:
Actually it turns out I did upload the code, fill ya boots!
https://github.com/betzuka/laserleve...uilds/wire.zip
Cheers, Joe
Thanks, Joe
Yes, that’s the one I found
Opened it on the old MacBook Pro [just using the built-in camera] and it appears to run fine
... But it wouldn’t close
Then I remembered that I had the same problem with your laser App, and fixed it
Java had done another update today, so : Once again, I deleted Java completely and re-installed.
... All seems fine now
MichaelG.
.
P.S. __ The wire is a bit special, but if you’re happy that’s fine.
@ John McNamara ... I will send some to you.
.
Hi All
The past couple of months have been pretty busy around our place, Time to get back to the workbench! Glad to see your input Micheal and thanks Joe I just grabbed the updated software. I am moving the workshop so soon I will have more room :)
Regards
John
Hi Joe
Tried the link but am unable to download it. I get to Github OK and am able to click on the builds/wire zip but nothing happens, also there is a note (binary file not shown)
Do i have to be signed in for the app to be available.
Kindest Regards
Mike
Mike,
May I suggest you try it again ... it was probably just a glitch
I have just successfully downloaded the zip file to my iPad
[not that it’s much use there]
MichaelG.
Hi MichaelQuote:
Originally Posted by Michael Gilligan
managed to download the file and unzip it, i get wire.bat and wire.jar. when i try and run wire.bat i get no default application found. tried to run wire.jar and get java file "wire.jar" could not be launched.
I am currently running a very old iMac G5 with the tenfourfox browser and seem to recall that for security reasons Java is disabled. as you have probably gathered i am IT challenged but would really like to get this application working if possible, i do have another PC running Windows 7 so will try with that machine later.
Thanks for your help.
Regards
Mike
There are some helpful notes on the java.com website, Mike
https://www.java.com/en/download/faq/java_mac.xml
... Not sure how you will get on with G5 compatibility though
Best of luck
I’m no expert, but happy to discuss any issues; within my very limited ability !
MichaelG.
Hi Michael
I might take you up on your offer, i do have a more recent recent iMac that was given by my Daughter but have not got round to using it yet, which is a bit stupid as that will be approaching the no update stage soon. I have been following this thread from the start and the application looks to be very usefull. if i can get the app running i will purchase the camera that Joe linked too and add it to the come in handy box.
Regards
Mike
No problem, Mike ... Let me know which OS is on the iMac
I have one which I have ‘frozen’ on Snow Leopard, so we may be able to work in parallel if you are struggling with it.
MichaelG.
Disappointing news, Mike
wire.jar did not open in Java on Snow Leopard [OS X 10.6.8]
... it presumably needs a recent version of Java, and these are not available for Snow Leopard
ref. https://www.java.com/en/download/mac_sysreq-sm.jsp
MichaelG.
Hi Michael
Thanks for the update, i think the other iMac i have is El Capitain and also have the Windows 7 PC so all is not lost, have you had wire.jar running on another PC ?
Regards
Mike
It seems to be fine on el Capitan, Mike
Haven’t yet tried it on any version of MS Windows
MichaelG.
.
Edit: I may have 'spoken too soon'
Both applications are failing to shut-down, and I need to 'Force Quit'
... and their CPU usage, according to 'Activity Monitor' is over 150%
I will try them on a Windows machine
Update: [mostly for Mike]
I have just installed the latest java 8 on a little NetBook running Windows 7
laser.jar and wire.jar both load and run
The NetBook is so excruciatingly slow that this proved futile; but I’m sure that Win 7 on a better PC should be fine.
MichaelG.
.
Incidentally; I consulted a ‘learned friend’ on Sunday, regarding the CPU load on the Mac
When he saw what was being done, and how speedily, he was very impressed ... and not at all surprised that this required 150%