Perhaps you missed it, John L, but John D stated that his software is also open source. IIRC, so is the hardware. He sells kits, but some folks have made their own. Some of the hardware is no longer available, so the few kits left are all there are. He's working on an updated version, and sharing that info, too. I believe you owe him an apology.
I've been a member of his group for over a decade, and never seen a hint of him pushing his system over others.?
Bill in OKC
On Tuesday, October 20, 2020, 06:08:27 AM CDT, John Lindo <bechetboat@...> wrote:
On Tue, Oct 20, 2020 at 09:58 AM, Gene Pavlovsky wrote:
Well done Gene
You can read it?, use Google Translate. To summarize, the project is indeed open source, you're free to do whatever you want with the source code, as long as you don't try to make any profit from it.?
Worthy of note.
John
?
--
John
|
On Tue, Oct 20, 2020 at 09:58 AM, Gene Pavlovsky wrote:
Well done Gene
You can read it?, use Google Translate. To summarize, the project is indeed open source, you're free to do whatever you want with the source code, as long as you don't try to make any profit from it.?
Worthy of note.
John
?
--
John
|
GitHub/GitLab etc for open source collaboration
#MISC
Hello everyone.
In my daily life I'm a (non-embedded) software developer, and use (and sometimes contribute to) many open-source projects (tools, libraries, etc).
I would say 99% of these open source are hosted on GitHub.
I was therefore surprised, when I found out that it's not as prevalent among open source hardware-related projects. I've seen multiple digital hobbyist projects which, while open source, don't seem to use any form of source version control systems (or, if they do, it's only privately). Releases are shared on the forums/boards as zip files, there is no well-defined process for submitting contributions.
I would like to know what the others think about the topic. Now I saw in another thread John D mention he really doesn't like GitHub, it's the first time I hear a person say that, and would be very interested to listen to the reasons.
For people familiar with programming but not used to source version control or platforms such as GitHub/GitLab/etc, I will give a brief overview below. People that are already familiar with the matter may skip to the last paragraph.
Source version control systems (VCS) are used to track changes in source code. As you (and any collaborators) work on a piece of software, VCS records the history of your changes. Later in time, you can find out when was some line of code added and by whom (with a comment left by the author that is supposed to shed light on the reason for the change). It's easy to revert changes that turned out to be not such a good idea. It's easy to create a new "branch" to experiment with things, then quickly switch back to the stable branch to make an urgent bugfix. Collaboration is improved as contributions from multiple authors (even to the same file) can be merged together with convenient tools. VCS are also quite efficient, because every time only the changes are stored, not full versions of your files.
Git, a software version control system (VCS), had originally been developed by Linus Torvalds for use in Linux kernel development. It is now the most commonly used VCS, used by most developers. Other well-known VCS are: RCS (very old), CVS (old), Subversion (svn), Mercurial (hg). I would guess no one uses RCS or CVS anymore, svn and hg has their followers, but they are in the minority.
A great thing about git is that it can function in a decentralized and server-less way (there is also a server). If you want, you can use all the features git provides without needing an internet connection. The entire history is stored locally. You could just backup your repo as a zip file, give a copy to your friend, then exchange contributions as patch files over e-mail. You can also set up your own git server locally or remotely, which is pretty easy. Or you can use a free git hosting provider, such as GitHub or GitLab, which is what most people do these days. There is no worry about one of these providers suddenly deciding to drop their free services, as you always have the full local copy (clone) of the repository including all the history, this can be easily moved to another provider if the need arises.
Services like GitHub or GitLab offer other useful tools besides git itself. These allow developers to conveniently manage things which are quite awkward and ad hoc when done via e-mails, forums and boards.
Issue tracker: users (or developers themselves) can create bug reports or feature requests. Those are handled similar to threads on a forum. When writing code to resolve an issue, a comment is put linking the code changes with the issue number. This way it's easy to see later how some issue was fixed, or which issue a given piece of code relates to.
Releases: it's easy to create a version of your software and make a release? (zip or tar.gz file). Releases are finished pieces of software (compiled, if applicable) to be distributed to end users who are not interested in the source code itself. These regular users (non-developers) just click the "Releases" link on your project page, and download the latest version, or an older one if needed. It's also easy to download a full copy of the repository as a zip file.
Collaboration: if you're a developer and you would like to try to make some modifications to the project, it's easy. I will use GitHub as an example, GitLab is almost the same. Register/login on GitHub, and open the project's page. Click "fork". This creates a fork (exact copy at the moment) of the project in your own account. Then, in your version of the project, click "clone", get the provided URL. For the next step you need to have git installed, or one of the GUI front-ends if you don't like command-line-only tools. Then you run "git clone URL" on the command line (or do the equivalent in your GUI front-end), with the URL being the clone link from earlier. Now you then have the project on your computer. Create a new branch (git branch) for your bugfix/feature, give it a meaningful name (e.g. "bugfix/10-wrong-button-color", where 10 is the number of the issue in the project's issue tracker). Make your changes, try them out. Let's say you're satisfied and want to contribute the changes back. Next step is committing the changes to your branch (git commit), this actually records the changes in the history. Each commit needs a message, usually mentioning the issue number and a short description of the changes, plus optionally a longer description. After that you push (git push) the branch to GitHub, this actually sends your changes to GitHub server. Open the project (your fork) webpage, and you should see your branch shown there. Click "pull request" and write a meaningful description. This will request the original project's developer to review/incorporate your changes. They can see the list of changes you've made (which files were modified, which lines removed and which lines added). They can leave comments on your code, if they find a mistake or something to improve. In that case you make more changes, commit and push again (no need to do anything else, the existing pull request is updated automatically). If the author is satisfied with the pull request, he merges your pull request, meaning your changes get incorporated in the original project.
When the original project has any changes of it's own, you incorporate it in your version yourself, by doing a git pull from the project's page (for that you have to add the original project's clone URL as a remote).
For me, this is the way to got for any open-source software. Collaboration usually makes software better, and it's great to have tools to make it easy to keep track of all the changes, bug reports and feature requests, without having to, for example, look for mentions of a topic on hundreds-pages-long forum threads where everything is mixed together.
Cheers
--Gene
|
On Mon, Oct 19, 2020 at 10:39 PM, John Lindo wrote:
A question was asked by Ralph about? 4 months ago," is the ELS open source".?
apparently not, as to be safe ELS code files were pulled from this forum.
I as the owner of this group have never had any correspondence from Oleg, to either join us
and or any clams or litigation processes to cease and desist in the use of his base codes.
Who is Oleg, ' where does he live, ?, it?s a mystery similat to who is Banksy ?
Any help in contacting him would benefit us all.
John, I don't know that much about Oleg, apparently he's from Riga and he speaks Russian. He has a (currently) for discussing his ELS on a Russian-speaking machinist forum chipmaker.ru. Don't blame Google Translate for poor command of Russian, it's actually pretty accurate. The project is indeed called "yet another Arduino-based electronic guitar" (the zip files with the source code are named DigitalFeed_version.zip). A metalworking machine's "guitar" refers to the change gear mechanism, according to a dictionary the term was coined because the gearbox housing was shaped similar to a guitar's body. I had in fact asked him recently about the open source status of the project, and got some replies. You can read it , use Google Translate. To summarize, the project is indeed open source, you're free to do whatever you want with the source code, as long as you don't try to make any profit from it. Oleg tried to spend some hours reading about the various open source licenses, but found them hard to understand without a lawyer, and it seems to me he wants to be sure of the non-profit aspect, which is AFAIK not prohibited by common open source licenses. : Oleg: Any modifications for personal use and free distribution, not for sale - I won't have any complaints. As for the license... probably later, for the next version.
The initial object of creating this digitalhobbyist forum was the sharing of ideas on any digital based hobbies, but it seems
to me that there is slowly a wedge being driven between members. This must stop please, lets stay friendly.
I do not want to come down with the heavy hand of moderating posts, lets all work together and enjoy our hobbies.?
I must have missed something as I didn't notice anything besides a friendly discussion? Take care everyone --Gene
|
On Mon, Oct 19, 2020 at 01:22 PM, Ralph Hulslander wrote:
Hi Bruce, yes sometimes I can just hit the download as a zip file but sometimes I cannot find a download
when I "think" there should be one and then there are times ...
?
Ralph, It depends on whether the maintainers actually create releases. If they do, there will be a "Releases" link listing all the versions with corresponding zip / tar.gz files to download. Some projects don't make releases as such, you're supposed to build the code yourself (hopefully there some instructions for that). In this case you have to clone the repo using git, or there is also an option to download a zip of the repo's current state. But I'll start a new topic where we can discuss all the details :) --Gene
|
On Mon, Oct 19, 2020 at 01:24 PM, John Dammeyer wrote:
Don't get me started on why I dislike GitHub with a passion.? Really needs a different subject line.
I'll start a new thread, John :) --Gene
|
Gene Interesting post and may I thank you for your past contributions. A question was asked by Ralph about? 4 months ago," is the ELS open source".? apparently not, as to be safe ELS code files were pulled from this forum. I as the owner of this group have never had any correspondence from Oleg, to either join us and or any clams or litigation processes to cease and desist in the use of his base codes. Who is Oleg, ' where does he live, ?, it?s a mystery similat to who is Banksy ? Any help in contacting him would benefit us all. The initial object of creating this digitalhobbyist forum was the sharing of ideas on any digital based hobbies, but it seems to me that there is slowly a wedge being driven between members. This must stop please, lets stay friendly. I do not want to come down with the heavy hand of moderating posts, lets all work together and enjoy our hobbies.? John D, I ask you please to resist in the use of advertising your own .io groups agenda and business on my forum, this is not what I intended, I have let you get away with it for over a year, but it must stop now.? if you feel you need to discuss issues with me then please do , via personal email to?? bechetboat@...? All members, please be safe, stay vigilant, as we are all walking into uncharted times, the worst is yet to come I feel. and possibly more than 2-3 years for a proven vaccine, and availabilty for over 50 years of age people maybe longer. Just be happy and enjoy what we all have now. Thanks all members for your past contributions. John Lindo Owner. -- John
|
You might like it when you get to know it better. Example: 1. You clone the repository. This results in you obtaining a mirror copy of the project, including all source code. 2. If some one makes a mod, they can push it to GitHub 3. You can get their mod by performing a git pull.
Git was developed by Linus Torvald when he was working on Linux. It's a great way of having someone make a code modification available to a whole group of people who can then download and test it and decide if they wan to keep it.
GitHub will scale to a bunch of folk working on a single software system on their own platform very well.
Jonathan
On Monday, October 19, 2020, 12:59:24 PM PDT, Ralph Hulslander <rhulslander@...> wrote:
GitHUb for me is complicated (as in I have never looked at how to use it).?
I like having a source with download.
Ralph
John,
I wonder why neither you nor Oleg, both creators of widely used and open-source ELS systems, don't use GitHub (or similar) service to publish source code.
I feel that publishing code on , internet forums or personal websites is more or less one-way affair (creator shares his content for other to copy / replicate).
Meanwhile a platform such as GitHub is very convenient for collaboration, it's very easy for anyone to fork the project, make some improvements, and then submit a pull request to the original author. They also have built-in issue tracker allowing users (or maintainers) to report bugs / ask for features. Consider this for your next version, please :)
Cheers,
--Gene
--
Clausing 8520, Craftsman 12x36 Lathe, 4x12 mini lathe, 14" Delta drill press, 40 watt laser, Consew brushless DC motors and a non working 3D printer
|
Don't get me started on why I dislike GitHub with a passion.? Really needs a different subject line. ? John Dammeyer ? ?
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Gene Pavlovsky
Sent: October-19-20 12:35 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [digitalhobbyist] No compound? John,
I wonder why neither you nor Oleg, both creators of widely used and open-source ELS systems, don't use GitHub (or similar) service to publish source code.
I feel that publishing code on groups.io, internet forums or personal websites is more or less one-way affair (creator shares his content for other to copy / replicate).
Meanwhile a platform such as GitHub is very convenient for collaboration, it's very easy for anyone to fork the project, make some improvements, and then submit a pull request to the original author. They also have built-in issue tracker allowing users (or maintainers) to report bugs / ask for features. Consider this for your next version, please :)
Cheers,
--Gene
|
Hi Bruce, yes sometimes I can just hit the download as a zip file but sometimes I cannot find a download when I "think" there should be one and then there are times ...
Ralph
You can simply download the source at GitHub. All the complicated stuff is for when you¡¯re collaborating on or publishing software, or using it as a source control system for multiple servers and users.
GitHUb for me is complicated (as in I have never looked at how to use it).?
I like having a source with download.
Ralph John,
I wonder why neither you nor Oleg, both creators of widely used and open-source ELS systems, don't use GitHub (or similar) service to publish source code.
I feel that publishing code on , internet forums or personal websites is more or less one-way affair (creator shares his content for other to copy / replicate).
Meanwhile a platform such as GitHub is very convenient for collaboration, it's very easy for anyone to fork the project, make some improvements, and then submit a pull request to the original author. They also have built-in issue tracker allowing users (or maintainers) to report bugs / ask for features. Consider this for your next version, please :)
Cheers,
--Gene
-- Clausing 8520, Craftsman 12x36 Lathe, 4x12 mini lathe, 14" Delta drill press, 40 watt laser, Consew brushless DC motors and a non working 3D printer
--
Clausing 8520, Craftsman 12x36 Lathe, 4x12 mini lathe, 14" Delta drill press, 40 watt laser, Consew brushless DC motors and a non working 3D printer
|
You can simply download the source at GitHub. All the complicated stuff is for when you¡¯re collaborating on or publishing software, or using it as a source control system for multiple servers and users.
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
GitHUb for me is complicated (as in I have never looked at how to use it).?
I like having a source with download.
Ralph John,
I wonder why neither you nor Oleg, both creators of widely used and open-source ELS systems, don't use GitHub (or similar) service to publish source code.
I feel that publishing code on , internet forums or personal websites is more or less one-way affair (creator shares his content for other to copy / replicate).
Meanwhile a platform such as GitHub is very convenient for collaboration, it's very easy for anyone to fork the project, make some improvements, and then submit a pull request to the original author. They also have built-in issue tracker allowing users (or maintainers) to report bugs / ask for features. Consider this for your next version, please :)
Cheers,
--Gene
-- Clausing 8520, Craftsman 12x36 Lathe, 4x12 mini lathe, 14" Delta drill press, 40 watt laser, Consew brushless DC motors and a non working 3D printer
|
GitHUb for me is complicated (as in I have never looked at how to use it).?
I like having a source with download.
Ralph
John,
I wonder why neither you nor Oleg, both creators of widely used and open-source ELS systems, don't use GitHub (or similar) service to publish source code.
I feel that publishing code on , internet forums or personal websites is more or less one-way affair (creator shares his content for other to copy / replicate).
Meanwhile a platform such as GitHub is very convenient for collaboration, it's very easy for anyone to fork the project, make some improvements, and then submit a pull request to the original author. They also have built-in issue tracker allowing users (or maintainers) to report bugs / ask for features. Consider this for your next version, please :)
Cheers,
--Gene
--
Clausing 8520, Craftsman 12x36 Lathe, 4x12 mini lathe, 14" Delta drill press, 40 watt laser, Consew brushless DC motors and a non working 3D printer
|
John,
I wonder why neither you nor Oleg, both creators of widely used and open-source ELS systems, don't use GitHub (or similar) service to publish source code.
I feel that publishing code on groups.io, internet forums or personal websites is more or less one-way affair (creator shares his content for other to copy / replicate).
Meanwhile a platform such as GitHub is very convenient for collaboration, it's very easy for anyone to fork the project, make some improvements, and then submit a pull request to the original author. They also have built-in issue tracker allowing users (or maintainers) to report bugs / ask for features. Consider this for your next version, please :)
Cheers,
--Gene
|
Mine also has the equivalent of a feed hold.? Press the stop button and it finishes what it was doing.? So if it's threading it stops at the end of the thread pass.? If it's retracting it stops at the end of the retraction etc. ? Once stopped you can move the tool anywhere you want to inspect, remove from between centers and replace if you are using a drive dog or camlock chuck.? Then press start and it moves back to the correct location and continues with the next threading pass. ?Really no different than if you were using the lathe with gears manually and watching the threading indicator for the next pass and using the compound to follow the flank at 29.5 degrees. ? BTW, if you are interested, the source code for my ELS has been posted first on Yahoo and now groups.io at /g/E-Leadscrew/files/ELS%201.00 as far back as 2008.? There have only been minor changes in the code over the 12 year period.? There is new stuff in the works.? The source code for that will also be posted. ? My web site has the schematics too.? Plus the first concept was an article published in Circuit Cellar Magazine back in 2006. ? John ? ? "ELS! Nothing else works as well for your Lathe" Automation Artisans Inc. www dot autoartisans dot com ? ? ? ?
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Richard
Sent: October-19-20 10:30 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [digitalhobbyist] No compound? The half nut must stay closed through an automatic sequence. I felt a constant cut area seemed more sensible and machine friendly. If further passes are needed to achieve the required size or fit the operator can set these. He (or she) also has the option of a rapid move in X to clear the thread area for test. A further rapid move takes the tool back to the Null position.
Richard On 19/10/2020 17:08, John Dammeyer wrote: Ah.? So you do exactly the same thing mine does for following the flank.? The only difference is mine doesn't do the extra move in the Z threading direction before it waits for the index and does the pass. ? ? Mine returns to that new calculated Z position and then waits for the index to start the next one.? Given how fast the spindle turns it's not a big deal to wait one extra revolution. ? I was under the impression you still closed the half nut to start each threading pass.? Maybe that's a different Arduino based system. ? And mine lets the operator decide how deep to make the first pas and then how deep for each of the subsequent main threading passes plus the number of spring passes.? Or, given the pitch can calculate how deep to make each pass and therefore the number of passes.? First pass and spring passes are still up to the operator. John ? ? ? My X infeed per pass is based on a constant area calculation where obviously the depth of the very first pass dictates the area of the first cut and therefore subsequent cuts.
When commencing an Auto Thread sequence the operator either accepts the default first pass depth for that pitch of thread or adjusts it to a value appropriate to the material and tool. When the cycle runs each subsequent pass depth increment reduces (by calculation) to ensure the constant area. Limits have previously been set for Z. A cutting pass will end at the Z end limit and after X is retracted the carriage will then return to the Z start limit.
If the system is set to cut on the flank, having calculated the required total depth for a pass a Z increment is calculated by multiplying that pass depth by 0.566. At the start of a pass Z is moved by this amount and X is moved into depth. Once these moves finish the Z axis then starts its threading move on the zero count of the encoder.
I did not think it was "clever" but maybe I am missing something?
Richard
On 19/10/2020 09:10, John Dammeyer wrote: Well if you are following the hypotenuse of the 28.5 degree triangle then for each pass X is a bit deeper and Z is closer to the headstock if the thread is cut towards the headstock.? Simple trig. ? But if you keep the Z starting position the same then to start the cut a bit further along the thread the spindle has to rotate a different amount while the Z axis motor is accelerating so the tool enters the work over by that Z amount. ? So I'm curious how your system tracks the flank of the thread. ? John ? ? Wow John you have got me worried now! I did not think that it was "clever math" so I had better go back and check what I did.
Richard On 18/10/2020 17:30, John Dammeyer wrote: Hi Ralph, So you have written the 'clever math' to do this.? Super.? Looking forward to a detailed explanation on how you've done that. John ? ? ? Actually John I think that Ralph was directing the question to John Lindo!
Further to the comment you made that I repeat below, sorry John you are incorrect. I am using the Russian ELS on on Arduino Mega and I have "modified" the software. I have constant area cutting and the operator can pick plunge or flank cutting. After reaching the calculated depth for the Metric or Imperial thread further passes are possible at increments chosen by the operator. I also have the capability of clearing the tool away from the job? in X for testing then subsequently moving it back to the original position if further cuts are needed. As the system is encoder controlled the speed can vary whilst cutting.
Richard On 17/10/2020 23:31, John Dammeyer wrote: ? Unless the math is really clever on the Arduino based electronic gearing systems they can't do it either. ? ? ?
?
?
?
|
My system is based on Oleg's with a number of changes. I certainly
would not have a system without that excellent base code. The
original software did not offer flank cutting or additional passes.
Richard
On 19/10/2020 17:30, Ralph Hulslander
wrote:
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
Richard is that Oleg's method or did you eliminate
his code and add yours?
Ralph
On Mon, Oct 19, 2020 at 12:08
PM John Dammeyer < johnd@...> wrote:
Ah.? So
you do exactly the same thing mine does for following
the flank.? The only difference is mine
doesn't do the extra move in the Z threading direction
before it waits for the index and does the pass.?
?
Mine returns to
that new calculated Z position and then waits for the
index to start the next one.? Given how
fast the spindle turns it's not a big deal to wait one
extra revolution.
?
I was under the
impression you still closed the half nut to start each
threading pass.? Maybe that's a
different Arduino based system.
?
And mine lets the
operator decide how deep to make the first pas and
then how deep for each of the subsequent main
threading passes plus the number of spring passes.?
Or, given the pitch can calculate how deep to
make each pass and therefore the number of passes.?
First pass and spring passes are still up to
the operator.
John
?
?
?
My X
infeed per pass is based on a constant area
calculation where obviously the depth of the very
first pass dictates the area of the first cut and
therefore subsequent cuts.
When commencing an Auto Thread sequence the operator
either accepts the default first pass depth for that
pitch of thread or adjusts it to a value appropriate
to the material and tool. When the cycle runs each
subsequent pass depth increment reduces (by
calculation) to ensure the constant area. Limits have
previously been set for Z. A cutting pass will end at
the Z end limit and after X is retracted the carriage
will then return to the Z start limit.
If the system is set to cut on the flank, having
calculated the required total depth for a pass a Z
increment is calculated by multiplying that pass depth
by 0.566. At the start of a pass Z is moved by this
amount and X is moved into depth. Once these moves
finish the Z axis then starts its threading move on
the zero count of the encoder.
I did not think it was "clever" but maybe I am missing
something?
Richard
On 19/10/2020 09:10, John
Dammeyer wrote:
Well if you
are following the hypotenuse of the 28.5 degree
triangle then for each pass X is a bit deeper and Z
is closer to the headstock if the thread is cut
towards the headstock.? Simple trig.
?
But if you
keep the Z starting position the same then to start
the cut a bit further along the thread the spindle
has to rotate a different amount while the Z axis
motor is accelerating so the tool enters the work
over by that Z amount.
?
So I'm
curious how your system tracks the flank of the
thread.
?
John
?
?
Wow
John you have got me worried now! I did not think
that it was "clever math" so I had better go back
and check what I did.
Richard
On 18/10/2020 17:30, John
Dammeyer wrote:
Hi
Ralph,
So
you have written the 'clever math' to do this.?
Super.? Looking forward to a
detailed explanation on how you've done that.
John
?
?
?
Actually
John I think that Ralph was directing the question
to John Lindo!
Further to the comment you made that I repeat
below, sorry John you are incorrect. I am using
the Russian ELS on on Arduino Mega and I have
"modified" the software. I have constant area
cutting and the operator can pick plunge or flank
cutting. After reaching the calculated depth for
the Metric or Imperial thread further passes are
possible at increments chosen by the operator. I
also have the capability of clearing the tool away
from the job? in X for testing then subsequently
moving it back to the original position if further
cuts are needed. As the system is encoder
controlled the speed can vary whilst cutting.
Richard
On 17/10/2020 23:31, John
Dammeyer wrote:
?
Unless
the math is really clever on the Arduino based
electronic gearing systems they can't do it
either.
?
?
?
?
?
--
Clausing 8520, Craftsman 12x36 Lathe, 4x12 mini lathe, 14" Delta
drill press, 40 watt laser, Consew brushless DC motors and a non
working 3D printer
|
The half nut must stay closed through an automatic sequence. I felt
a constant cut area seemed more sensible and machine friendly. If
further passes are needed to achieve the required size or fit the
operator can set these. He (or she) also has the option of a rapid
move in X to clear the thread area for test. A further rapid move
takes the tool back to the Null position.
Richard
On 19/10/2020 17:08, John Dammeyer
wrote:
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
Ah.? So you do exactly the
same thing mine does for following the flank.? The only difference is
mine doesn't do the extra move in the Z threading direction
before it waits for the index and does the pass.?
?
Mine
returns to that new calculated Z position and then waits for
the index to start the next one.? Given how fast the
spindle turns it's not a big deal to wait one extra
revolution.
?
I
was under the impression you still closed the half nut to
start each threading pass.? Maybe
that's a different Arduino based system.
?
And
mine lets the operator decide how deep to make the first pas
and then how deep for each of the subsequent main threading
passes plus the number of spring passes.? Or, given the pitch can
calculate how deep to make each pass and therefore the
number of passes.? First
pass and spring passes are still up to the operator.
John
?
?
?
My
X infeed per pass is based on a constant area calculation
where obviously the depth of the very first pass dictates
the area of the first cut and therefore subsequent cuts.
When commencing an Auto Thread sequence the operator either
accepts the default first pass depth for that pitch of
thread or adjusts it to a value appropriate to the material
and tool. When the cycle runs each subsequent pass depth
increment reduces (by calculation) to ensure the constant
area. Limits have previously been set for Z. A cutting pass
will end at the Z end limit and after X is retracted the
carriage will then return to the Z start limit.
If the system is set to cut on the flank, having calculated
the required total depth for a pass a Z increment is
calculated by multiplying that pass depth by 0.566. At the
start of a pass Z is moved by this amount and X is moved
into depth. Once these moves finish the Z axis then starts
its threading move on the zero count of the encoder.
I did not think it was "clever" but maybe I am missing
something?
Richard
On 19/10/2020 09:10, John Dammeyer wrote:
Well if you are
following the hypotenuse of the 28.5 degree triangle then
for each pass X is a bit deeper and Z is closer to the
headstock if the thread is cut towards the headstock.? Simple trig.
?
But if you keep the
Z starting position the same then to start the cut a bit
further along the thread the spindle has to rotate a
different amount while the Z axis motor is accelerating so
the tool enters the work over by that Z amount.
?
So I'm curious how
your system tracks the flank of the thread.
?
John
?
?
Wow John you have got me worried now! I did
not think that it was "clever math" so I had better go
back and check what I did.
Richard
On 18/10/2020 17:30, John Dammeyer wrote:
Hi Ralph,
So you have
written the 'clever math' to do this.? Super.? Looking forward to
a detailed explanation on how you've done that.
John
?
?
?
Actually John I think that Ralph was
directing the question to John Lindo!
Further to the comment you made that I repeat below,
sorry John you are incorrect. I am using the Russian ELS
on on Arduino Mega and I have "modified" the software. I
have constant area cutting and the operator can pick
plunge or flank cutting. After reaching the calculated
depth for the Metric or Imperial thread further passes
are possible at increments chosen by the operator. I
also have the capability of clearing the tool away from
the job? in X for testing then subsequently moving it
back to the original position if further cuts are
needed. As the system is encoder controlled the speed
can vary whilst cutting.
Richard
On 17/10/2020 23:31, John Dammeyer wrote:
?
Unless the math
is really clever on the Arduino based electronic
gearing systems they can't do it either.
?
?
?
?
?
|
Richard is that Oleg's method or did you eliminate his code and add yours?
Ralph
On Mon, Oct 19, 2020 at 12:08 PM John Dammeyer < johnd@...> wrote: Ah.? So you do exactly the same thing mine does for following the flank.? The only difference is mine doesn't do the extra move in the Z threading direction before it waits for the index and does the pass.? ? Mine returns to that new calculated Z position and then waits for the index to start the next one.? Given how fast the spindle turns it's not a big deal to wait one extra revolution. ? I was under the impression you still closed the half nut to start each threading pass.? Maybe that's a different Arduino based system. ? And mine lets the operator decide how deep to make the first pas and then how deep for each of the subsequent main threading passes plus the number of spring passes.? Or, given the pitch can calculate how deep to make each pass and therefore the number of passes.? First pass and spring passes are still up to the operator. John ? ? ? My X infeed per pass is based on a constant area calculation where obviously the depth of the very first pass dictates the area of the first cut and therefore subsequent cuts.
When commencing an Auto Thread sequence the operator either accepts the default first pass depth for that pitch of thread or adjusts it to a value appropriate to the material and tool. When the cycle runs each subsequent pass depth increment reduces (by calculation) to ensure the constant area. Limits have previously been set for Z. A cutting pass will end at the Z end limit and after X is retracted the carriage will then return to the Z start limit.
If the system is set to cut on the flank, having calculated the required total depth for a pass a Z increment is calculated by multiplying that pass depth by 0.566. At the start of a pass Z is moved by this amount and X is moved into depth. Once these moves finish the Z axis then starts its threading move on the zero count of the encoder.
I did not think it was "clever" but maybe I am missing something?
Richard
On 19/10/2020 09:10, John Dammeyer wrote: Well if you are following the hypotenuse of the 28.5 degree triangle then for each pass X is a bit deeper and Z is closer to the headstock if the thread is cut towards the headstock.? Simple trig. ? But if you keep the Z starting position the same then to start the cut a bit further along the thread the spindle has to rotate a different amount while the Z axis motor is accelerating so the tool enters the work over by that Z amount. ? So I'm curious how your system tracks the flank of the thread. ? John ? ? Wow John you have got me worried now! I did not think that it was "clever math" so I had better go back and check what I did.
Richard On 18/10/2020 17:30, John Dammeyer wrote: Hi Ralph, So you have written the 'clever math' to do this.? Super.? Looking forward to a detailed explanation on how you've done that. John ? ? ? Actually John I think that Ralph was directing the question to John Lindo!
Further to the comment you made that I repeat below, sorry John you are incorrect. I am using the Russian ELS on on Arduino Mega and I have "modified" the software. I have constant area cutting and the operator can pick plunge or flank cutting. After reaching the calculated depth for the Metric or Imperial thread further passes are possible at increments chosen by the operator. I also have the capability of clearing the tool away from the job? in X for testing then subsequently moving it back to the original position if further cuts are needed. As the system is encoder controlled the speed can vary whilst cutting.
Richard On 17/10/2020 23:31, John Dammeyer wrote: ? Unless the math is really clever on the Arduino based electronic gearing systems they can't do it either. ? ? ?
?
?
--
Clausing 8520, Craftsman 12x36 Lathe, 4x12 mini lathe, 14" Delta drill press, 40 watt laser, Consew brushless DC motors and a non working 3D printer
|
Ah.? So you do exactly the same thing mine does for following the flank.? The only difference is mine doesn't do the extra move in the Z threading direction before it waits for the index and does the pass.? ? Mine returns to that new calculated Z position and then waits for the index to start the next one.? Given how fast the spindle turns it's not a big deal to wait one extra revolution. ? I was under the impression you still closed the half nut to start each threading pass.? Maybe that's a different Arduino based system. ? And mine lets the operator decide how deep to make the first pas and then how deep for each of the subsequent main threading passes plus the number of spring passes.? Or, given the pitch can calculate how deep to make each pass and therefore the number of passes.? First pass and spring passes are still up to the operator. John ? ?
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Richard
Sent: October-19-20 4:55 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [digitalhobbyist] No compound? My X infeed per pass is based on a constant area calculation where obviously the depth of the very first pass dictates the area of the first cut and therefore subsequent cuts.
When commencing an Auto Thread sequence the operator either accepts the default first pass depth for that pitch of thread or adjusts it to a value appropriate to the material and tool. When the cycle runs each subsequent pass depth increment reduces (by calculation) to ensure the constant area. Limits have previously been set for Z. A cutting pass will end at the Z end limit and after X is retracted the carriage will then return to the Z start limit.
If the system is set to cut on the flank, having calculated the required total depth for a pass a Z increment is calculated by multiplying that pass depth by 0.566. At the start of a pass Z is moved by this amount and X is moved into depth. Once these moves finish the Z axis then starts its threading move on the zero count of the encoder.
I did not think it was "clever" but maybe I am missing something?
Richard
On 19/10/2020 09:10, John Dammeyer wrote: Well if you are following the hypotenuse of the 28.5 degree triangle then for each pass X is a bit deeper and Z is closer to the headstock if the thread is cut towards the headstock.? Simple trig. ? But if you keep the Z starting position the same then to start the cut a bit further along the thread the spindle has to rotate a different amount while the Z axis motor is accelerating so the tool enters the work over by that Z amount. ? So I'm curious how your system tracks the flank of the thread. ? John ? ? Wow John you have got me worried now! I did not think that it was "clever math" so I had better go back and check what I did.
Richard On 18/10/2020 17:30, John Dammeyer wrote: Hi Ralph, So you have written the 'clever math' to do this.? Super.? Looking forward to a detailed explanation on how you've done that. John ? ? ? Actually John I think that Ralph was directing the question to John Lindo!
Further to the comment you made that I repeat below, sorry John you are incorrect. I am using the Russian ELS on on Arduino Mega and I have "modified" the software. I have constant area cutting and the operator can pick plunge or flank cutting. After reaching the calculated depth for the Metric or Imperial thread further passes are possible at increments chosen by the operator. I also have the capability of clearing the tool away from the job? in X for testing then subsequently moving it back to the original position if further cuts are needed. As the system is encoder controlled the speed can vary whilst cutting.
Richard On 17/10/2020 23:31, John Dammeyer wrote: ? Unless the math is really clever on the Arduino based electronic gearing systems they can't do it either. ? ? ?
?
?
|
Hello, All, Like John Lindo, I have also used Richard's system to cut both plunge and 29.5¡ã "compound simulation" threads, and can confirm that both work well. Unlike John, I have only had my compound off for about a year, and haven't needed it once since. -- Regards, Charlie New Jersey, USA
?
ANTHONY¡¯S LAW OF THE WORKSHOP: Any tool, when dropped, will roll into the least accessible corner of the workshop.
THE LINDO COROLLARY: If you have cats, they will promptly hide the tool.
|
My X infeed per pass is based on a constant area calculation where
obviously the depth of the very first pass dictates the area of the
first cut and therefore subsequent cuts.
When commencing an Auto Thread sequence the operator either accepts
the default first pass depth for that pitch of thread or adjusts it
to a value appropriate to the material and tool. When the cycle runs
each subsequent pass depth increment reduces (by calculation) to
ensure the constant area. Limits have previously been set for Z. A
cutting pass will end at the Z end limit and after X is retracted
the carriage will then return to the Z start limit.
If the system is set to cut on the flank, having calculated the
required total depth for a pass a Z increment is calculated by
multiplying that pass depth by 0.566. At the start of a pass Z is
moved by this amount and X is moved into depth. Once these moves
finish the Z axis then starts its threading move on the zero count
of the encoder.
I did not think it was "clever" but maybe I am missing something?
Richard
On 19/10/2020 09:10, John Dammeyer
wrote:
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
Well
if you are following the hypotenuse of the 28.5 degree
triangle then for each pass X is a bit deeper and Z is
closer to the headstock if the thread is cut towards the
headstock.? Simple
trig.
?
But
if you keep the Z starting position the same then to start
the cut a bit further along the thread the spindle has to
rotate a different amount while the Z axis motor is
accelerating so the tool enters the work over by that Z
amount.
?
So
I'm curious how your system tracks the flank of the thread.
?
John
?
?
Wow
John you have got me worried now! I did not think that it
was "clever math" so I had better go back and check what I
did.
Richard
On 18/10/2020 17:30, John Dammeyer wrote:
Hi Ralph,
So you have written
the 'clever math' to do this.? Super.? Looking forward to a
detailed explanation on how you've done that.
John
?
?
?
Actually John I think that Ralph was
directing the question to John Lindo!
Further to the comment you made that I repeat below, sorry
John you are incorrect. I am using the Russian ELS on on
Arduino Mega and I have "modified" the software. I have
constant area cutting and the operator can pick plunge or
flank cutting. After reaching the calculated depth for the
Metric or Imperial thread further passes are possible at
increments chosen by the operator. I also have the
capability of clearing the tool away from the job? in X
for testing then subsequently moving it back to the
original position if further cuts are needed. As the
system is encoder controlled the speed can vary whilst
cutting.
Richard
On 17/10/2020 23:31, John Dammeyer wrote:
?
Unless the math
is really clever on the Arduino based electronic gearing
systems they can't do it either.
?
?
?
?
|
Bill in OKC too
John Lindo