I think it is entirely up to the integrator how to implement your machine. LCNC gives you all you need to setup the machine you want.
I have implemented a few machines that run just with start stop and estop button as UI. The g-code comes from SD-Cards and is written in some office. On machines where I do my parts, I like to have the entire desktop with access to apps. Also the LCNC features, or how it is called yet, is a great stuff going toward DMG machines. DMG machines have macros with UI's where you give some parameters and the macro generates the g-code from it, that you can include in your existing program. Production machines, where an Operator produces just parts in series without a need of any programming of course is better to have the simplest UI you can get to accomplish the task. That you can do with LCNC, not with any commercial CNC control. Ju > ------------------------------ > > Message: 7 > Date: Fri, 25 Dec 2015 04:22:39 -0800 > From: Neil Whelchel <neilwhelc...@gmail.com> > Subject: Re: [Emc-developers] Moving closer to embedded > To: EMC developers <emc-developers@lists.sourceforge.net> > Message-ID: > <CAMfRM+u_QwjwbXtUGYxvE=RoFAO-Hi=7nhjatvxs7v1yigg...@mail.gmail.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 > > Hello Dave, > I simply can not afford to have a machine idle while I use an "app" on it. > If it is not running, it is not making money. If I am editing a program, > someone else is using the machine to make things. There are plenty of small > shops and "one man bands" that use a desktop computer for CAD/CAM, and > editing, then they upload the program to a machine to make the part. I, for > one do not like to be sitting in the middle of a workshop in an awkward > position to see a small display mounted to the side of a 5,000 pound > machine to write G-code, when I can do it from the comfort of my desk in my > office. > Also, we are right back to if I am running something like an "app" on the > machine, a keyboard and such is required, and I am not about to put a > keyboard on a machine, the coolant and chips would kill it before there is > time to use it for anything. > I can understand why some hobbyists would want to use the computer on their > machine to do other things than run the machine, but that is not the scope > I am talking about here. Most of the people I have running machines, just > want to load up the fixtures with stock, push the "go" button, and take a > part out. The only time that they end up doing anything else is when they > break something, or change to another part. > By adding "apps" to the machine, it is detracting from its simplicity of > use to the machine operator. More moving parts, more to break. > The big problem I see with the Linuxcnc project is that its maturation into > the real world is limited (more like blocked) by steering from hobbyists. > Under the hood Linuxcnc is a marvel of fantastic software engineering that > is far superior to many professional controllers, and if it was treated as > such would give the mega bucks commercial controllers a big challenge in > the marketplace. All it is going to take is a "big" machine company to > adopt it... This will NOT happen in its current state because it is still > dressed like a toy. There is nothing wrong with this either. If you look at > my original post, what I am getting at is that Linuxcnc needs both. It > needs a toy wrapper for hobbyists, and it needs a tool wrapper for people > that want to use it as a tool. What I am saying is that there seems to be a > push for it to be a toy when under the hood it is far better than most > tools. I am wondering why there is not much (any) push from within to make > a tool out of it while not detracting from its ability to be a toy. > -Neil- > > > On Fri, Dec 25, 2015 at 3:30 AM, Dave Caroline <dave.thearchiv...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > My main "app" is an editor I sit on the machine and edit the code to > > make the item, others use things such as dxf2gcode. > > > > I am one of many who are one man bands making stuff in various ways on > > various machines, three of mine are Linuxcnc, the hobbing machine has > > a screen to set up gear cutting, the mill has edited gcode which is > > designed at the same time as the fixture is set up, and a lathe > > usually used in mdi mode. > > > > This kind of flexibility is missing on machines made for "operators". > > > > Dave Caroline > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > _______________________________________________ > > Emc-developers mailing list > > Emc-developers@lists.sourceforge.net > > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-developers > > > > > ------------------------------ > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > > ------------------------------ > > _______________________________________________ > Emc-developers mailing list > Emc-developers@lists.sourceforge.net > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-developers > > > End of Emc-developers Digest, Vol 116, Issue 17 > *********************************************** ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ _______________________________________________ Emc-developers mailing list Emc-developers@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-developers
