DDSCV1.1 3 and 4 axis offline motion controller

[Gary]

So you need a PC to home both sides? are you having laugh????
If you are doing this just to home, then you may as well set the servo driver up to have second mode to jog in a direction from an input.
Its quite simple if the servo driver supports it.

However you are stuffed if you are using steppers, that most people will be on this controller.
When i home my machine, i tell it to home and it homes, it homes using the index pulse, so i know it is very accurate, the way you are doing it is not accurate. So if your time does not cost you any money, and you dont mind the hassle or dont need accuracy, then fill your boots.
However if i told a customer that is how he should home, the gantry, he would laugh at me.

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.

[JAZZCNC]

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.!

[johnsattuk]

Cheers

[magicniner]

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

[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

My reason for posting this technical query was not to suggest that it was a solution to anything but to see if it obviated the issues to which you alluded, but which you were unwilling to define in a clear enough way that anyone reading the thread might glean or address their actual nature ;-)

I was really hoping for an answer such as "that would work" or "that wouldn't work because...." but I'm feeling my way in the dark here due to the lack of technical background to the "timing differences" problem description, I mean I'm not daft but give us a clue! :D

- Nick

[John S]

I can see these controllers filling a niche market.
They are going to appeal to the home build user with one of a couple of machines. Probably smaller machines that don't need the bumph of having a PC and monitor connected.

As Jazz says you will still need a PC for doing programming but that doesn't have to be in the workshop.
The PC could even be a Mac running Fusion 360 and in this case that computer won't run the machine anyway.

As long as all you need is 3 + 1 axis, no slaved axis or provision for tool change then these will run fine. Especially if all you want to do is produce parts.

Anything else then at the moment the PC is king but this will change as does most things. Speaking with Art Fenerty the other week he mentioned that there have been issues with Mach 3 running on later computers not being able to read some of the system files as late machines don't use these files and they don't bundle them with them.
Not an insurmountable problem at the moment but it could be later on.

Mach 4 is a work in progress and it makes me wonder if it will ever be a plug and play program given that it can't stand on it's own and requires a 3rd party controller to run and Brian has no control over these.

Because my current area of interest is lathes and threading at the moment I have done a lot of research. With mach 3 CS Labs can thread, it's the only one that can but the thread always has a big run off groove which on small threads is not acceptable. They say Mach 4 if they do a plug in will be the same.

Mach 4 can now thread with the Pokeys 57CNC and Dan Maulch over in the States has literally spent 6 months of his life getting it to run. Why ?

Why hasn't this been done by Mach4 working with Pokeys and released by them?

This was one reason I went with the NEW990TD-b because it can thread straight out the box and was the best option for me.

Note the ME bit because we all have different agenda's.

There isn't one controller option out there be it PC or stand alone that ticks all the boxes. Eaach has it's own niche market and you have to look and see what you want and what's available.

These DSCV controller are cheap and they will fill a gap in the cheap end of the market, it's that simple but they won't do everything and if you can accept that and live with it then I can't see any problems.

[Ger21]

Mach 4 can now thread with the Pokeys 57CNC and Dan Mauch over in the States has literally spent 6 months of his life getting it to run. Why ?

Why hasn't this been done by Mach4 working with Pokeys and released by them?

I seriously doubt that Mach4 will be anywhere nearly as successful as Mach3 was. I don't think that Brian really knows what his customers needs are.
I bought a license two years ago, but haven't downloaded any updates in over a year. I've given up on it, after waiting over 5 years.
It's still far from finished, riddled with bugs, and dependent on 3rd parties, some of which don't exactly have a good track record.
Brian likes to say that he's been making parts with Mach4 for years, but the reality is that it's not usable for most, even after all this time.
It's also incredibly complex to setup and customize, which imo will be a support nightmare for them.
As of right now, it seems like most of their customers are beginners, who have never used Mach3, but by Mach4 because it's Mach3's replacement, so it must be better, right ?

Yes, I agree, that these controllers are great for people with low budgets, and basic needs.

But sorely lacking if you want to do any type of customization.

My eggs are now all in the UCCNC basket.
Developers that listen to their users.
Constant updates, quick bug fixes.
Nearly as flexible as Mach3, and getting better all the time.
Better motion than Mach3, especially at higher speeds.
The downsides?
No lathe support at this time.
No "Industrial" controllers, but is that really necessary? They were working on one a while ago, but put it on hold due to time constraints. Hopefully it will re-appear at some time.
http://www.forum.cncdrive.com/viewto...=2&t=169#p1039