DDSCV1.1 3 and 4 axis offline motion controller

[foto-boss]

All clear. In any case, I already ordered ddscv1.1 4 axis for the experiment.
Editing in the CAD program is not suitable for a variety of reasons, so this function is in all serious machine control programs, even in an amateur like a mach3. Precise adjustment of the axes perpendicularly incommensurably faster and more accurately done programmatically, especially in those cases where it is already very difficult to do mechanically.
Of course, not everyone needs this function.

[magicniner]

this function is in all serious machine control programs.

You widened the discussion to "all serious machine control programs" and thus made industrial products part of the discussion

I have a strong suspicion that these machines were made not by you, but by the factory.

You made industrial products part of the discussion so that doesn't matter ;-)

[foto-boss]

I agree. You're right.

[foto-boss]

Here on this machine I have a problem with the perpendicularity of the x and y axes. On some tasks this did not suit me. I solved the question in a minute, in the mach3. And with the utmost precision. I do not imagine how much time I would have spent on the alteration in order to achieve the desired perpendicularity of the x and y axes.

[cropwell]

Any software to correct the dynamic variable geometry of the commercially made (in Devon) machine that I have ? My machine just does not cut the mustard. At least not accurately !

[Neale]

Does the controller in question handle master and slave drives on a single axis? Can it use a homing switch on each of these with defined offsets to allow the gantry to be re-squared each time you home it? That seems like a better approach which allows for the possibility that the perpendicularity is not built-in when you have a moving gantry with separately-driven ends. I agree that the ideal, and certainly in the case of milling machines rather than routers you would expect X and Y axes (and Z, of course) to be built perpendicular.

I'm following this discussion because I'm interested in where these cheap dedicated controllers are going. At the moment I'm happy with Mach3/PC/motion controller but I can see a day when a standalone box might be the way to go.

[Neale]

Any software to correct the dynamic variable geometry of the commercially made (in Devon) machine that I have ? My machine just does not cut the mustard. At least not accurately !

It was made in Devon - designed to cut the cream for cream teas but barely capable of cutting the scone...

[Boyan Silyavski]

I prefer an extra day to solve the perpendicularity of my machine, that to mess with the software. After all i spent 1 week mounting the 3m long square rails on my machine and had to dismount them a couple of times to correct parallelism. Not to speak of the 3 times pouring epoxy until i learned to control 100% the process . Each pour was around 150euros in epoxy.
That was solving the parallelism. But perpendicularity? i would say all i mount is less than 0.01mm in perpendicularity. Facts speak that i did not have to tram spindle at all when i finished my machine, no need for dial indicator after mounting all just using some thinking, straight edge and 2 precision squares.


I have to check the manuals of the expensive chinese controllers. But i doubt that, as any would expect from a milling machine to be build 0.000 not 0.00 straight

[cropwell]

I must admit a little confusion from this thread.

It all stems from the definition of perpendicularity. I thought perpendicular meant 'at right angles to a plane' i.e. the XY plane, so the thread was referring to the Z axis.

Reading it again it seems more about XY squaring, which makes a lot more sense. I do no see how any software could compensate for a cutter out of tram moving up and down at any angle other than vertical unless the cutter head was spherical and the shaft small enough to allow it to miss the sides of the cut.