Duet Controller or ebay spesh???

[AndyGuid]

Hi Ravi,

If you could squeeze it into your budget which I guess is very limited, there has been plenty of discussion on this forum about the AXBB-E Ethernet Motion Controller, which you should find with the appropriate forum search.

Good luck, Andy

[dazp1976]

Hi Ravi,
If you could squeeze it into your budget which I guess is very limited, there has been plenty of discussion on this forum about the AXBB-E Ethernet Motion Controller, which you should find with the appropriate forum search.

Indeed:
https://www.stoneycnc.com/axbb-e-eth...r/a4753?c=3479
JAZZCNC may have one available too.

Or another option a UC400 with a couple of cheap bobs:
https://www.cnc4you.co.uk/Motion-Control/UC400ETH

CNCDrive website has all the plugins and manuals you'd need.


You may end up paying an equal amount in the end on a 'punt'.

[JAZZCNC]

Indeed:
https://www.stoneycnc.com/axbb-e-eth...r/a4753?c=3479
JAZZCNC may have one available too.

Indeed I do, and cheaper.!

Regards the AXBB-E and UCCNC then it's far more versatile and without a shadow of a doubt, the motion is far superior to any offline motion controller I've ever used or seen. In my opinion, they don't come close to any of the Cncdrive controllers with UCCNC. If they did I would be using and fitting them to machines we build.!!

[ravihotwok]

Would this be able to work with planet cnc software?

Still not even fired this workbee up yet so really need to get it up and running

[JAZZCNC]

Would this be able to work with planet cnc software?

Still not even fired this workbee up yet so really need to get it up and running

No, it works with UCCNC or Mach3 or 4.

[ravihotwok]

No, it works with UCCNC or Mach3 or 4.

Morning Jazz, thanks for replying, what is UCCNC like? I have seen mach3 on youtube but I thought it looked a bit primitive at first glance but I have never used it. Any comments/advice on both would be most appreciated mate

[dazp1976]

Morning Jazz, thanks for replying, what is UCCNC like? I have seen mach3 on youtube but I thought it looked a bit primitive at first glance but I have never used it. Any comments/advice on both would be most appreciated mate

I've used Mach3 for years (on winXP). If you get mach and the pc setuup right it gives little to no problems. However it hasn't been developed or updated for at least 10 years. Support is limited to user based.

I've now been setting up UCCNC on my mill last week after updating my hardware.
So far it's proving a huge improvment over Mach3. You get support (I haven't needed any so far) and is constantly under development.
It's highly likely I won't go back to Mach.

[JAZZCNC]

Morning Jazz, thanks for replying, what is UCCNC like? I have seen mach3 on youtube but I thought it looked a bit primitive at first glance but I have never used it. Any comments/advice on both would be most appreciated mate

Well firstly before answering this you need to understand exactly what Mach3 or UCCNC or any machine controller for that matter does exactly.? It's common for new users to believe they do more than they actually do.

The function of the machine controller, any of them, can be broken down into 4 basic parts, this is a very basic explanation of some complex actions but should help you understand. #1 trajectory planner #2 Pulse engine #3 Input signals #4 output signals.

#1 Takes the G-code file which you create in CAM software and plans out the path and trajectory it's going to take.
#2 This is the part that talks to the motor drives so they move the correct distances.
#3 These are watched to monitor things like sensors or buttons etc so the controller can then do something in response.
#4 These are the opposite of Inputs, they send signals OUT to control other things like starting the spindle, etc.

So as you can see while visually they may appear primitive behind the scenes they are very complex creatures, that said this doesn't mean they are complex to use. Setting them up, entering parameters, etc is a little more involved but still not rocket science.

From a typical user's point, they are actually quite basic, so in a nutshell, you simply load the G-code file, set Zero for each axis, and push the go button. So it's easy for them to appear primitive but rest assured behind the scenes there is complex stuff going on.

Obviously, there is a little more to them but basically, all controllers do the same job it's just that some like UCCNC are more refined and have fewer bugs but there are other factors to consider like support.
UCCNC is fully supported unlike mach3, it's also made by the same people who manufacture the controller so there are no hardware/software conflicts where the software people don't or won't play nice with each other which is another common issue with mach3 or mach4 and other separate hardware-software suppliers that can cripple a controllers usability.

So getting down to brass tacks as a user you don't actually do very much with the control software other than load code and set it off, from then on you are just watching a few areas of the screen and pushing a few buttons if you want to pause it running or when changing tools, etc. So in some ways they are actually primitive or can appear primitive and that goes pretty much for all of them, yes some look better than others but they do the same job.

Don't confuse Mach3 or UCCNC with Cam software which creates the G-code file you need to cut the job.

Hope this helps.