Keyboard Shortcuts
ctrl + shift + ? :
Show all keyboard shortcuts
ctrl + g :
Navigate to a group
ctrl + shift + f :
Find
ctrl + / :
Quick actions
esc to dismiss
Likes
- CAD-CAM-EDM-DRO
- Messages
Search
|
Re: Conversational Programming and NAMES- very long!
Jon wrote:
[snipsnipsnip] (The only problem is that while you are insounds like a "slide hold" button is needed there! I haven't looked into the code yet but wouldn't dropping the feed override to zero in response to an external signal do this? Brian |
|
Re: the mc3479p ic?
James Cullins
Check out if you haven't already.
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
They have some 5 amp motor translator PCBs. They don't use the mc3479p though. James ----- Original Message -----
From: Derek Barger <hightechsystems@...> To: <CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO@...> Sent: Wednesday, May 03, 2000 8:34 AM Subject: Re: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] the mc3479p ic? James:is discussion of shop built systems, for CAD, CAM, EDM, and DRO.only good for discussion of shop built systems, for CAD, CAM, EDM, and DRO.------------------------------------------------------------------------
|
|
Re: CPNC and the BOX
Carlos Guillermo
Carlos, well our first missionary died quickly(Hoyt),Yeah, I remember. Until I find a CAD_CAM_INDEXER.LPT_DRO group, I'll keep following on CAD_CAM_EMC_DRO...) By the way, thanks for reminding me about Hoyt. I believe Hoyt's program is effectively CPNC for DOS, using Indexer as the "box". His website used to have more info, but seems to be scaled back. Not much to look at. Carlos Guillermo VERVE Engineering & Design |
|
Re: CPNC and the BOX
Steve Carlisle
Carlos, well our first missionary died quickly(Hoyt),
but heck , give it a try. I do not see anybody in this group using IndexerLPT, probably because you have to program your own GUI. Steve ---------- From: Carlos Guillermo <carlos@...> To: CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO@... Subject: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] RE: CPNC and the BOX Date: Wednesday, May 03, 2000 11:20 AM Ron Ginger wrote: The only way to make a decent CPNC system with a windows GUI is to use a FlashCut has a nice one, and its cheap enough to be widely used. BUT-First of all, hats off to guys like Ron Ginger and Kelly (of KCAM - is he on the list? ) who are spending what I imagine to be countless hours on WINDOWS-based cnc control software for guys like us. Secondly, I 100% agree that the realtime control of the motors should be handled by a separate "box". So, my question is, how much are we willing to PAY for this separate "box"? And, how much would you expect for Flashcut to charge for their box alone? They sell the box WITH their software for $1100. Would we pay $550 for the box? Or maybe $350?... And finally, (I'm trying to pick my words carefully, and no, I honestly don't have a financial interest in them)... what can the Flashcut box do that the IndexerLPT () driver software "box" can't do better? --- They claim "realtime" control (since it's a driver at the DOS level?) --- They blow the pants off of Flashcut as far as steprate output (7300 Hz vs. 100,000+ Hz) --- They are a purely software solution...upgradeable & non-fryable --- They are already have an open protocol and programming interface My point is, we'll have to pay SOMETHING for the "box". Will it be less than the $275 cost of IndexerLPT, AND, will it be any better? I know I've harped on about IndexerLPT quite a bit on this list. So I've kept pretty quiet about it for a while. I couldn't help myself this time. Funny, I almost feel like I've become a missionary for Indexer. Carlos Guillermo VERVE Engineering & Design ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Get your money connected @ OnMoney.com - the first Web site that lets you see and manage all of your finances all in one place. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Welcome to CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO@...,an unmoderated list for the discussion of shop built systems, for CAD, CAM, EDM, and DRO. Addresses: Post message: CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO@... Subscribe: CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO-subscribe@... Unsubscribe: CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO-unsubscribe@... List owner: CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO-owner@..., wanliker@... Moderator: jmelson@... [Moderator] URL to this page: FAQ: bill, List Manager |
|
Re: Conversational Programming
Paul Corner
Hi Ron
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
I was going to suggest tcl - but you beat me to it.... With tcl, it should be possible to interface to emc running under Linux - and if it gets ported to windoze and Mac's, there won't be much call for Flashcut. Just a thought.... Regards, Paul. On Wed, 03 May 2000, you wrote:
Looks like Ive stirred up some interest. 4) Development Environment. I just found vtcl. Its a gui development |
|
Re: Conversational Programming and NAMES- very long!
Pete Jarman
Ron wrote:
<The only way to make a decent CPNC system with a windows GUI is to use a <separate motion controller box to handle the real time stuff. We had <some discussions here a few weeks ago about developing such a box, but <that died. Is there any way that the motion controller box could be an outdated x86 PC with an interface card running a real time programme under either DOS or linux? The software would handle incoming commands and report status through the serial port to the controlling PC running the GUI and the conversational programming software. Pete Jarman North of Bedford, England |
|
Hexapod Info
Hi
Most people who saw the hexapod asked the following questions? 1) Why did you take the hexapod to NAMES? The hexapod in the NAMES PHOTOS is a six axis milling platform that is used to debug and demonstarate the EMC software that NIST has developed. We took the hexapod to NAMES to illustrate the strong technical foundation of EMC. We feel that gathering a strong user base is important to the future of EMC. To this end the six axis capability is rarley found in low end let alone free software. We wanted to demonstrate that EMC is not a "Toy". 2) What can it do? The hexapod at names can only move in cartesian (X,Y,Z) coordinates. This is due to current EMC software limitations at the g-code interpreter level. So it mimics a 3 axis mill with the tool moving (the triangular platform) and the work fixed (resting on the floor). The platform is suspended by cables and is quite rigid in the x,y and Theta plane. The rigidity is poor in the +z direction (up against gravity). So cutting is limited to low force applications. They have sucessfully cut blue strofoam with a dremel tool. At NAMES we just let the table move and amaze people since it looks like it is floating in air when hung from the thin cables. 3) How does it work? Well that is a bit tough, but I will try and describe it. The easiest motion to identify is +z and -Z they are intuitively produced by running all 6 motors at the same rate up or down. This yields +z and -Z motion. Note that a constant feed rate on the motors though will not produce a constant +z or -Z velocity. This is due to the changing angle of the cables as the platform rises or falls. So you need math to convert the cable length into z axis position. EMC has a customized driver for the hexapod style machine that computes cable length from the desired Z axis ( or x,y,z cartesian coord) position given in the gcode. It uses this "inverse kinematics" to determine the actual moves the cables (joints) must make to get to a desired xyz position. You tell it the XYZ and it computes cable lengths for the 6 axes. So the lowest levels of the EMC hexapod software run in the "joint domain" which equates to cable length in the hexapod case. The machine just runs from one set of cable lengths to another set as movement is commanded. This is similar to the 3 axis mill except that there X=X and Y=Y and Z=Z. Is this a "special" version of emc? 3) not really. The march 15th release with a somewhat specialized .ini file. If you want to try running it in a stand alone mode with no hardware, contact me off list and I can set you up. dave |
|
Re: NAMES 2000 PICS
A lot of interest in cnc. I can't begin to count the number of people who have
or know of someone who has a cnc machine (working or not). I thought we were the "crazy" ones who dabled in this "black art". Not true. We are just more organized through this list!!! Almost everyone was interested in EMC being free, but about half were turned off by linux. Most said they were "too old" or "too busy" to learn it. I think i'll have a linux/EMC install class next year. I'll get 4 pc's and run 30 minute classes to do the install. Then when the user is done the install, we will connect up to a mini mill and cut a small wax part that says "I installed EMC!! Comercial people are still the leaders. Remember this is a hobbyist based show, so they are still the "cadillacs" for people with the money, who go and buy the commercial stuff. It will get you going faster. IF you want to save money and have time to learn, EMC is a great way to gain experience. The commercial people arn't worried until we get a 5 minute brain dead install. They know that EMC is still and infant. I'll bet many of them will be packaging their own versions within 5 years!! Look at Corel... They now sell their own flavor of linux, sprinkled with their office suite!! We need to get a machine "cutting" next year. It is a pain but I think that will get more attention. Wax or plastic is the only reasonable thing to cut. No sharp chips and less public safety issues. one kid suggested that we load the hexapod up with sand filtering down through a funnel. Then draw designs on the floor. Not a bad idea!!! When done, sweep it up and place the sand back in the funnel and run it again!! dave Dan wrote: I'm sure you generated alot of interest in it and EMC. What kind of comments did you hear about the machine? Was there any interest in the free CNC software? Did any of the commercial vendors check out Ron's or Ray's stuff? Are they worried now? : ) Thanks, Dan |
|
Re: Conversational Programming
Ron Ginger
Looks like Ive stirred up some interest.
1) What is Conversational Programming? Its a system that lets you do the cad and cam in a simple interactive way. In my program you simply select buttons for certain objects, like lines or circles, or holes, then fill in the blanks on a screen with the needed dimensions. The system figures out how to move the motors to run the part. Everything is in one program. Look at for some screen shots. 2) The BOX I would not expect FlashCut to change anything- let them sell their package exactly as now. CPNC would be just another add-on program a user could run. This gives most flexibility- for complicated parts use a CAM package and run the FlashCut driver program, for simple work just run CPNC with the FlashCut hardware. Now if FLashCut wanted to offer a hardware only system that would be even nicer, but I would be willing to buy their whole package. I do have some use for g-code. Remember, I dont claim CPNC 'saves' the whole world, just part of it. 3) INDEXER.LPT There is no free lunch. Indexer.lpt does NOT make windows into a real time system. It does drive motors, but you cannot abort a move once started, and you cannot get back position info to update a screen while a move is occuring. When windows runs on your system it alone holds the control. Remember, Gates wants to rule the world! 4) Development Environment. I just found vtcl. Its a gui development tool that works just like VB, but does tcl. tcl runs on windows, unix even Macs. If we do this right the single tcl package can run on any of these, and use the flashcut drivers on windows and macs and use EMC on Linux. And we should be able to switch it to any other box of hardware (like Roland Ferstands controller, or Ahha or the PicServo), or even to drive INDEXER.LPT for those so inclined, by simply writing one driver module. 5)Subroutines and gcode. It would seem logical that the storage format of CPNCs files should be gcode. So it could be used as a form of code generator. Many of its higher level objects are much like gcode subroutines- in my program you enter just a couple dimensions fotr a bolt cirlce, and it gets expanded by the program just like a gcode subroutine. This may die off here on the list, but I'm going to do it, and Im going to do it the 'open source' way. Ill see if I can get a page started under the linuxcnc.org site. ron |
|
Re: Conversational Programming
mgrady
ron
do you think that ah-ha would be better choice for your program? their level 2 program with card is about half the price of flashcut which can make a lot of difference as most are scrounging parts to build cnc stuff plus ah-ha might be willing to work with you whatever you do I think it is great just my 2 cents mike |
|
Re: Conversational Programming and NAMES- very long!
Paul Devey
Ron,
You have given us lots to think about. Here are some random babblings to chew on: 1. CAD/CAM tools: agreed, most of us hobbyists do not have the time or requirements for these tools. CPNC will suffice for 90% of what we do. 2. Use of FlashCut HW: An lpt interface would still be nice. Can you describe your Win performance problems? 3. GPL release: Ron, thank you for your generosity. 4. QUESTION: Should we carry on this discussion here on this list or start a new list devoted to CPNC: I suggest we make it a separate forum for development. Support and could be handled here at CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO. 5, The only way to make a decent CPNC system with a windows GUI is to use a separate motion controller box: Too bad. Their are a lot of CNC-parallel port controllers out there. Using FlashCut HW may slow down the adoption of this fine product. Maybe when Hans returns he might take on designing a new controller with a PIC to perform IRQ functions. Paul Devey |
|
Re: CPNC and the BOX
Carlos Guillermo
Ron Ginger wrote:
The only way to make a decent CPNC system with a windows GUI is to use a FlashCut has a nice one, and its cheap enough to be widely used. BUT-First of all, hats off to guys like Ron Ginger and Kelly (of KCAM - is he on the list? ) who are spending what I imagine to be countless hours on WINDOWS-based cnc control software for guys like us. Secondly, I 100% agree that the realtime control of the motors should be handled by a separate "box". So, my question is, how much are we willing to PAY for this separate "box"? And, how much would you expect for Flashcut to charge for their box alone? They sell the box WITH their software for $1100. Would we pay $550 for the box? Or maybe $350?... And finally, (I'm trying to pick my words carefully, and no, I honestly don't have a financial interest in them)... what can the Flashcut box do that the IndexerLPT () driver software "box" can't do better? --- They claim "realtime" control (since it's a driver at the DOS level?) --- They blow the pants off of Flashcut as far as steprate output (7300 Hz vs. 100,000+ Hz) --- They are a purely software solution...upgradeable & non-fryable --- They are already have an open protocol and programming interface My point is, we'll have to pay SOMETHING for the "box". Will it be less than the $275 cost of IndexerLPT, AND, will it be any better? I know I've harped on about IndexerLPT quite a bit on this list. So I've kept pretty quiet about it for a while. I couldn't help myself this time. Funny, I almost feel like I've become a missionary for Indexer. Carlos Guillermo VERVE Engineering & Design |
|
Re: Conversational Programming and NAMES- very long!
I do belive that a good name for it CPNC. (do I owe you a fee for
using this name?) My son uses both a mill and lathe that can be programed in that fashon I would love to have a machine that I could program from the machine to do repeted things. Or bolt circles or tapers or what ever. Scott C. |
|
Re: Conversational Programming and Subroutines
Hi there,
I'm a lurker. If a conversational language is developed it should come with a tools to allow conversion to and from Gcodes. I think that would allow for more support in the long run and also allow for testing against known working code. As far as subroutines go.. although I can imagine some difficulties in integrating them into a system that was not originally designed to have them, it makes alot of sense to make subroutines available to the gcode programmer(even if one had to preprocess the Gcode file to put the subroutines inline). If you went to the effort to preprocess subroutines, it might make sense to add the capability to put in count controlled loops and other sundry flow control structures. Just some thoughts... I'll go back to lurking now. don |
|
Re: Help: CNC mini-mill comparison
Darrell
If you are going to spend $5000.00, why not get a Bridgeport BOSS CNC. They
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
often sell for $2000 - $2500 and for another $2000 you can put a new control on it and have a real mill. Darrell ----- Original Message -----
From: Eugene Neigoff <mfgguru@...> To: <CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO@...> Sent: Tuesday, May 02, 2000 9:32 PM Subject: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] Re: Help: CNC mini-mill comparison I would like to suggest that you look at the following link:discussion of shop built systems, for CAD, CAM, EDM, and DRO.
|
|
Re: Conversational Programming and NAMES- very long!
james owens
Ron,
I, for one, am right behind what you say here but I fear that this is another project that will die on the list. It can only lead to more choice, and possibly confusion, in the CNC forum. I hope that you keep this discussion on this list regardless of how technical it becomes. Most of the post will not be understood by a lot of its members but there is always the hope that some will rub off. The distaste you have for the Windows Operating System, I sure, is shared by all that use computers for more than writing letters. The reality is that most of the computers that sit in homes around the world use this system. We need a program that is easy to use and will not take weeks of study, with little backup, to get to grips with it. After all it is about cutting material. To this end why is not possible for you to release the programming you have already written while the next generation is in gestation. My workshop is still in the conversion stage with the hardware incomplete. Being an ACAD user the CAD/CAM option is the one that will be used even for one-offs. Even the cut-off saw will be controlled, probably via a stepper and PIC micro. However the facility to machine a figment of my imagination without a drawing does appeal, this was the way that things used to be manufactured in my workshop. I have forwarded the body of your posting to FLASHCUT without including your email address. Terry. |
|
Re: Conversational Programming and NAMES- very long!
Mike Mueller
I give up, what exactly is the difference between Conversationaly Programmed
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
Numeric Control and regular CNC ? Sorry, I just had to ask. Mike Mueller First, a new acronym- CPNC- Conversationaly Programmed Numeric Control. |
to navigate to use esc to dismiss