Windows embedded (7) - repurposing a thin client PC

[Voicecoil]

Had a quick look at the UCCNC website. They sell some little single board computers on there, presumably all compatible stuff with instructions.
Kit

I see them, thanks for the suggestion. They look good, but they're not exactly cheap, likely £200 is by the time you've included carriage and an OS. My suggestion of the thin client was because there's loads of them available secondhand for between £20 and £60, if some way could be found to easily convert to a more friendly OS they might be a good solution for lots of us.

[Kitwn]

I know you didn't want to play with Linux but the cheapest option is to do a clean install of LinuxCNC and follow the instructions for updating to the beta version 2.8 (it's been a beta for years and is pretty solid by now) that allows seperate homing of two motors for one axis. You don't need to play with the OS and the setup is straight forward if a bit fidly. See the link below.

I'm not well up on using anything other than parallel ports for this, that may be the downfall for using a modern thin client though legacy machines may have one and you can get PCI cards with them on. Might not be quite so 'thin' once you've fitted it though

I'm no expert but is a low power, possibly low speed Windows machine going to have timing issues? Neither Windows or Linux are real time OSs and pulse timing isn't entirely accurate even on a full power board using LinuxCNC or MACH3. Other people will know more about this issue than I do.


http://www.mycncuk.com/threads/12687...LinuxCNC-v-2-8

Kit

[m_c]

Surely you could just wipe the embedded install, and install a full version of windows?
I'd guess that if it's capable of running windows embedded, it'll run the full version provided you're sensible about what options you install, and use a reasonably specced unit. A basic Win10 install doesn't need that much space, and performs well even low power machines.


Kit, provided you're using an external motion control, timing issues in windows are very unlikely to be a problem. As soon as you use an external motion controller, all motion is buffered, so provided the computer is capable of keeping the buffer topped up, it's not a problem. Those who do experience problems are normally pushing things to the limit, like a computer that meets the absolute bare minimum of specs, or using the same computer to do something processor intensive. There is also the potential issue of windows updates if you leave the computer connected to the outside world (I'd actually suggest win 10 pro, as it gives you much better control over updates if you do plan to have the computer online)

It's also worth mentioning that even in generic LinuxCNC there is a motion buffer, much to the chagrin of the zealots who brandish the whole 'real time' nugget without actually understanding what it means, or how it applies to the whole control process. Every CNC has buffers, it's just that some implementations are not exactly that robust or reactive (Mach3 with an external motion controller is probably one of the worst examples!).

[Doddy]

Much depends on the target platform. For the el-cheapo thin clients, for which their price is a major differentiator, then these /tend/ to be the older, less capable platforms. I've been looking for parallel port support and these often come in with 1-2GB of flash storage, maybe 4GB at a push. MS advertise a 16GB/20GB install for 32/64 flavours of Win10. Going motion controller tends to kick the low-cost solution into the long grass unless you already own such a controller. I've been looking at the thin clients for very much the same reasons as Voicecoil, for a lathe install. Because UCCNC is not particularly lathe-friendly I'm now looking to avoid the whole mess of windows and trial LinuxCNC for the first time, but for that I think I need a machine with a parallel interface. I've got a couple of old desktops - not an ideal form-factor to bolt onto the side of a myford cabinet, but it's starting to look like the best, cheap solution for me.

We need to petition CNCDrive to port UCCNC to Linux :-)

[Clive S]

Doddy: If you need help with this I have my Myford s7 running on linuxcnc but through a mesa card with 2 mpg's so I can use it manually.

I am also setting a lathe up for a forum member with a PP running linuxcnc with an encoder (just A + Z) for threading you need 2 pins on the PP for this so three left for homing switches if you need them (I don't bother)

[Doddy]

Clive, much appreciated, I might well bend your ear. Encoder = shaft encoder I take it?, that was my plan, with one limit switch to avoid crunching the stepper on the cross slide (I foolishly went for a low profile stepper on the rear of a mount plate instead of the jefree front mount and it will impact the handle for the split nut engage lever

[Clive S]

Clive, much appreciated, I might well bend your ear. Encoder = shaft encoder I take it?, that was my plan, with one limit switch to avoid crunching the stepper on the cross slide (I foolishly went for a low profile stepper on the rear of a mount plate instead of the jefree front mount and it will impact the handle for the split nut engage lever

I actually made a 64 slot disc with slot opto sensors. https://photos.app.goo.gl/66KmdtD7TzUziNih7 you have to be able to move the sensors around to get the correct sync

edit: if I was to do it again I might have used a rotary encoder (it would have to be low count with a PP) But its been working for at least 3 - 4 years

https://photos.app.goo.gl/JH1GWVQbhxe6Z6Yo7 This is it simulating an arc that I needed to put on a roller for my belt sander

[Voicecoil]

We need to petition CNCDrive to port UCCNC to Linux :-)

+1 - If that happened I'd likely bite the bullet and go Linux - after my recent experiences with Windoze 10 I'm kind of over all things Microsoft. As I have Balazs from CNCdrive's email I might just suggest it ;-) - maybe others can do the same?

[Voicecoil]

Much depends on the target platform. For the el-cheapo thin clients, for which their price is a major differentiator, then these /tend/ to be the older, less capable platforms. I've been looking for parallel port support and these often come in with 1-2GB of flash storage, maybe 4GB at a push. MS advertise a 16GB/20GB install for 32/64 flavours of Win10. Going motion controller tends to kick the low-cost solution into the long grass unless you already own such a controller. I've been looking at the thin clients for very much the same reasons as Voicecoil, for a lathe install. Because UCCNC is not particularly lathe-friendly I'm now looking to avoid the whole mess of windows and trial LinuxCNC for the first time, but for that I think I need a machine with a parallel interface. I've got a couple of old desktops - not an ideal form-factor to bolt onto the side of a myford cabinet, but it's starting to look like the best, cheap solution for me.

Check out the HP T510 thin client. It has a parallel port, has a dual core CPU that benchmarks twice as fast as my old XP machine, can be found with 16GB flash and according to parkytowers takes Linux well. There were one or two on the bay of fleas for £50 ish last time I looked.

[Voicecoil]

We need to petition CNCDrive to port UCCNC to Linux :-)

Well I did just that, and Balazs said he'd canvassed opinion on making it OS independent a year or so back, but didn't have much in the way of a response, and hence dropped the idea as it promised to be a lot of work.

I have the SAS on standby to recapture my hijacked thread (lol) - and did find this which could be a solution:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R3g8VtJUdb4