Mach 3 software or another program?

[hanermo2]

Who else has 1 ms feedhold ?
4 Mhz threading ?
Glass scale feedback at 4 Mhz ?
4 Mhz homing ?
Hw MPGs with instant feedback, due to 1 ms update loop ?
High-speed servo spindles, with differential signalling, for rigid tapping on mill and lathe ?
24V industrial IO ?

Please, let me know ...

To be honest, a bit less is fine...
but the real point is no-one else is near to Mach4/Mach3 in terms of commercial, running, working installations in scale, at good commercial quality.

I am/was a big commercial user of linux in a major, major $$$ way, for 20+ years.
And appreciate all the benefits, and know very well the $$/tech drawbacks.

And yes...
A top-end csmio setup is quite expensive, in hobby terms.

But a top-end csmio setup is for an industrial machine, where the lift alone is 600€ per end, to get it in place, electricity is 1000€ or so, and work for the techs is 2-5k€ per install.
And a commercial/industrial/production machine, has a huge nr of IO lines, most of which are critical.
My IO is about 130 lines now, and will be 200+ in the end.
And I do not have servo errors, resets, in-pos hooked up yet, x 2 x 5.

Any std industrial machine is 200 IO points plus..
Toolchangers, air/oil/pressure, interlocks, it all adds up.

But the competition has passed it by.

[Clive S]

Who else has 1 ms feedhold ?
4 Mhz threading ?
Glass scale feedback at 4 Mhz ?
4 Mhz homing ?
Hw MPGs with instant feedback, due to 1 ms update loop ?
High-speed servo spindles, with differential signalling, for rigid tapping on mill and lathe ?
24V industrial IO ?

Please, let me know ...

I am not getting into this debate but I believe Linuxcnc Master Branch can now do homing with slaved axis and the standard install can do all of the above with Mesa cards

[Ger21]

Imo, you're requirements are very different from the average Mach3/LinuxCNC/UCCNC user. 95% or more of the user base has no need for the specs you're spouting.
Neither Mach3, nor UCCNC, is a replacement for a true industrial control. And they don't claim to be.

I don't really care how many ms feedhold takes. UCCNC stops as soon as you it the button. Whether it's 1ms, or 100ms, you still have to reach for the button, and wait for the machine to decelerate, both of which take a lot longer than your 1ms response.

UCCNC has it´s own set of issues, which I cannot properly debate since I do no use it, but are quite well documented by many users.

You could at least mention what you're talking about. Bugs reported to CNC Drive are typically fixed in a few days, usually as fast as 1-2 days.
There are no "issues" that I'm aware of, unless you're talking about missing features.

I don't use a lathe, so I don't care about any of those features.

The machine homes to the nearest step, whether it's at 100Khz or 4Mhz, the machine still homes to the nearest step.

Who else has 1 ms feedhold ?
4 Mhz threading ?
Glass scale feedback at 4 Mhz ?
4 Mhz homing ?
Hw MPGs with instant feedback, due to 1 ms update loop ?
High-speed servo spindles, with differential signalling, for rigid tapping on mill and lathe ?
24V industrial IO ?

All of these are CS Labs features, not Mach3 features. Mach3 is an open loop control, so glass scale feedback is not even used by Mach3.

With UCCNC and the MB2 breakout board I'm using, I have instant feedhold. Instant FRO and SO using analog inputs. Instant MPG feedback. Rigid tapping. Differential step/direction, and 24V I/O. For about 1/3 the price of Mach3 and a CS Labs controller.

And with it's superior trajectory planner, I've seen UCCNC run 30% faster, while making more accurate parts than Mach3. At the end of the day, that's what matters to me. Not if the feedhold response is 1ms.

[hanermo2]

We partially agree .. as usual .. and I try hard to never be belligerent.
A good top end machx setup is perfectly equal, in many ways better, to an industrial control like haas or the chinese fanuc copies, but with caveats and specific drawbacks.

The speed you quote, I think, is erroneous.
My max speed, at 0.2 microns step size, is 12 metres / minute.

You are perfectly correct that 95% of users can run (quite/very) well with a(uccnc or..) chinese 200$ hw control box +/-, running a fanuc copy of some kind.
This means no bob, and is (often, slightly) cheaper then the uccnc setup. Immaterial in truth.
A SS can also run 90%+ of stuff very well ... but there is a reason I binned mine many years ago. As did () others.

I have no idea about the instant feedhold/fro/so you get, and the mpgs response, but if they are in fact fast then they are great. Good for You.

I pointed out 5 exact hw features that work extremely well today,
mostly not supported all-together by most competitive setups I know of,
as good as or better than current industrial controllers,
that are extremely important,
for all users in general,
after You seemed to disparage, for some reason, my factual, objective, technical, comments regarding different cnc controllers, in my humble opinion.
As I see it.

A variable 10-1000 ms, or 0.01 - 1 s delay, in feedhold, is critical and very bad (like the very old first USB mach3 plugins, generally).
Etc..
Slow probing is very bad ... as it makes probing either slow or inaccurate - Way It Is.
Etc..

Ger21 .. You did not make any factual statements re:speed, response, delay, jitter, or technical capacities of UCCNC, as far as I can see.

Please try to be polite and respond to technical posts with technical data.
I am sure I make mistakes ... and am perfectly willing to learn and adjust my POV etc.

Imo, you're requirements are very different from the average Mach3/LinuxCNC/UCCNC user. 95% or more of the user base has no need for the specs you're spouting.
Neither Mach3, nor UCCNC, is a replacement for a true industrial control. And they don't claim to be.


The machine homes to the nearest step, whether it's at 100Khz or 4Mhz, the machine still homes to the nearest step.

All of these are CS Labs features, not Mach3 features. Mach3 is an open loop control, so glass scale feedback is not even used by Mach3.

With UCCNC and the MB2 breakout board I'm using, I have instant feedhold. Instant FRO and SO using analog inputs. Instant MPG feedback. Rigid tapping. Differential step/direction, and 24V I/O. For about 1/3 the price of Mach3 and a CS Labs controller.

And with it's superior trajectory planner, I've seen UCCNC run 30% faster, while making more accurate parts than Mach3. At the end of the day, that's what matters to me. Not if the feedhold response is 1ms.

[John S]

Hanermo.

We have been waiting literally years for a sneak preview of this lathe.

It now sounds you have it all running to quote such accurate figures so why not give up preview, or even a short video?

You know the old adage on the Internet - pictures or it doesn't exist

[hanermo2]

Somewhat true .. and correct to an extent.
I could share video from 2 days ago, but not publicly.

Cutting 3.09 mm DOC, 55 mm WOC, with an ISO30 facemill head held in the chuck.
550 rpm.
350 mm feed iirc,
and yes the speed was too much.
.. but that is how it worked.

Hanermo.
We have been waiting literally years for a sneak preview of this lathe.

It now sounds you have it all running to quote such accurate figures so why not give up preview, or even a short video?

You know the old adage on the Internet - pictures or it doesn't exist

[A_Camera]

I could share video from 2 days ago, but not publicly.

Why not?

[Ger21]

I never said a 1 second feedhold was acceptable. It's not. But if there's no perceivable delay, it doesn't matter what the response speed is.

Imo, all of these technical specs are meaningless to the average user.

I've been using Mach3 for over 10 years, and I think I know it pretty well. And I know it well enough to know that there are better performing options, even if they lack some of the features that Mach3 has.

Remember, Mach3 had a huge head start, but development stopped years ago. It's competition is still adding features, and getting better and better as time goes on.

[phill05]

I've been using Mach3 for over 10 years, and I think I know it pretty well. And I know it well enough to know that there are better performing options, even if they lack some of the features that Mach3 has.

Gerry, I have been looking into UCCNC myself and would like your input if you think it would be better to move to it.

I have been using Mach3 for a good amount of years with little problems but I am in the process of rebuilding a new controller for more powerful system I do a lot of 2 1/2-3d so thinking might be ideal time to change to a more up to date controller what do you think.

Phill

[A_Camera]

Gerry, I have been looking into UCCNC myself and would like your input if you think it would be better to move to it.

I have been using Mach3 for a good amount of years with little problems but I am in the process of rebuilding a new controller for more powerful system I do a lot of 2 1/2-3d so thinking might be ideal time to change to a more up to date controller what do you think.

Phill

Be careful. UCCNC lacks some of the features Mach3 has, so if you need or frequently use those features then you sould be prepared for some extra work to work around those features. Cutter radius compensation is one such feature which I find useful but is not in UCCNC. On the other hand, UCCCNC is cheap enough to buy, and since it requires a CNC Drive motion controller anyway, if you don't like or can't use UCCNC you can always continue using Mach3 since they have Mach3 plugins for all their motion controllers.