DDSCV1.1 3 and 4 axis offline motion controller

[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

[magicniner]

I don't think that Brian really knows what his customers needs are.

It's a classic case of buying a company that could make you a fortune and killing support for your best product before you have anything new, that isn't broken, to sell.

He could make a really good start with a fully functional 4-axis product in exchange for a license fee rather than his current Subscription Vapourware Beta Testing Scheme :D

Brian has lost my custom, I bought Mach3 but won't be buying Mach4.

The price for a commercial Mach4 license plus a good motion controller gets close enough to a commercial grade stand-alone controller from China that the only thing keeping New Fangled Solutions going is the ignorance of their potential customers to the options available!

- Nick

[Ger21]

the only thing keeping New Fangled Solutions going is the ignorance of their potential customers to the options available!

Yes, Imo, most people using (or attempting to use) Mach4 are not Mach3 users, but people that know Mach3 was used by everyone, and think that Mach4 must be better.

[m_c]

The price for a commercial Mach4 license plus a good motion controller gets close enough to a commercial grade stand-alone controller from China that the only thing keeping New Fangled Solutions going is the ignorance of their potential customers to the options available!

But what support do you get with the Chinese controller?
.
I can kind of understand the direction Brian has taken NFS/Mach4.
Mach3 was ultimately developed by a hobbyist, for hobbyists, but it grew far bigger than anybody imagined, and was used for things Art has even admitted, he never even thought it would.
Brian on the other hand knows the potential of the industrial market, and he is providing that market what they want. A highly customisable solution with full support. In doing so I think it's fair to say he hasn't given the hobbyist market as much support as he could have.
Mach 4 is a better product than Mach 3, however it doesn't have anywhere near the same community or vendor support, and there are lots of other options available now that simply weren't when Mach 3 was the defacto hobbyist option.
Certainly now that KMotionCNC has a screen editor, I don't see me switching to Mach 4, but I'll still keep running my little probing machine on Mach 3, just for the Probe-It probing plugin.

[John S]

The price for a commercial Mach4 license plus a good motion controller gets close enough to a commercial grade stand-alone controller from China that the only thing keeping New Fangled Solutions going is the ignorance of their potential customers to the options available!

- Nick

I still follow the Mach support forums on their web site and the Yahoo groups and there are still plenty of posts about erratic behavior with Smooth stepper and also Pokeys.

Mach 4, unlike mach 3 is no longer a self contained program as the parallel port operation in Mach 4 is very limited and mach 4 needs an external controller to run.
This means Brian no longer has any control over a full system and so far Mach and any of the external controller manufacturers has bothered to bundle the two products up for an easy install.

Being interested in Lathe I have been following Dan Maulch's journey to get mach4 working with the Pokeys57CNC board.
It looks like he has finally got it working after 6 months or so with a lot of help from Pokeys and seemingly none from Mach 4 but why has he had to do this ? He's not being paid by Pokeys or Brian ?

Last year at the CNC conference near Detroit Ron Ginger set a workshop up to convert 10 or 12 Hi-torque lathes to run off Mach 4 and pokeys with a box built by Arturo Duncan at CNC4PC, I believe the box cost around $900.
According to Ron everyone left the workshop with a working lathe but only one person has posted since then about their machine and that was to say that due to issues with Mach 4 he couldn't get his machine running and so far it still isn't running.

Not one person posted a video? and Ron will not show a finished thread?

But using the plug ins that were available at the Workshop Dan Maulch could not get a lathe to thread, It took quite a few upgrades to the plug in before Dan's machine could work.

Personally i can't get mach 4 to run on my desktop machine, it won't run code generated by Mach3 even though a Chinese Fanuc clone will run the same file with no problem. It comes up with error messages saying it's running in the wrong plane even though G18 is in the startup line and others have reported the same and still no answer from Mach 4 support.

2 / 3 weeks ago Dan finally got his pendant working with Pokeys and posted how to do it. Quite a long convoluted post, to set this up.
I decided to see if the supplied pendant would work with the NEW990TD-b controller so took the pendant, plugged it into the back by it's 25 pin plug and what do you know, ? it worked.

Art when he handled Mach 3 had a whole different ball game. He listened to what people had to say, wasn't afraid to admit mistakes and go back to rectify them and mainly he was able to work smart,

Since retiring he's written Gearotic V1.0, V2.0 and is now on V3.0. He has written Auggie which is a 3 D printer and laser motion controller, a lot like M3 and Brain still hasn't managed to get mach4 reasonably stable.

Sorry for me, far too little and far too late.