Thanks. I think I will have to go down that route because ClassicLadder
is being a real CPU hog. Without the CL GUI loaded my average CPU load
with Axis running is 20%. With Modbus enabled and the ClassicLadder GUI
running, CPU load averages 80%.
Les
On 28/03/11 06:16, Kirk Wallace wrote:
>
>
HI Kim,
Yup, that's it.
Les
On 28/03/11 00:09, Kim Kirwan wrote:
> Hi Les,
>
> Thanks very much for submitting this bug fix.
> I have entered your fix, please take a look and
> let us know if this is what you wanted:
>
> Here's the git commit& diff:
> http://git.linuxcnc.org/gitweb?p=emc2.git;a
On Sun, 2011-03-27 at 18:12 +0100, Les Newell wrote:
> Hi Kirk,
>
> > I made up a comp .c file for each of the Modbus devices I have been
> > playing with. It's not difficult if one knows C. I suppose using Classic
> > Ladder is another option but I don't know ladder.
> I might look into doing tha
John,
Thanks for the update.
JRC
On Sun, Mar 27, 2011 at 6:02 AM, John Thornton wrote:
> I can't find my drawings atm, so I'm recreating them from scratch and
> will post them as soon as done. Just wanted to let you know I did not
> forget although sometimes I do.
>
> John
>
> John Crane wrote
Hi Les,
Thanks very much for submitting this bug fix.
I have entered your fix, please take a look and
let us know if this is what you wanted:
Here's the git commit & diff:
http://git.linuxcnc.org/gitweb?p=emc2.git;a=commitdiff;h=4f08abc4f36c3bfdb25faacc5167745b751cec37
Here's the raw file (
I'm glad you found that bug. I saw that problem last year during an
installation, but thought it was due to the controller it was linked to.
I ended up not using the first bit a few times.
Good catch!
Thanks,
Dave
On 3/27/2011 11:44 AM, Les Newell wrote:
> ClassicLadder had a bug in it's Mo
On Sun, 2011-03-27 at 13:40 -0700, Michael Jones wrote:
... snip
> I went back and looked compared my wiring to the above text diagram from
> Kirk and found I had things wired pin 7 and 9 reversed - fortunately I
> didn't fry the G540 because of it.
>
> Thanks Kirk for the clue!!!
> Michael
I c
On Sun, Mar 27, 2011 at 2:19 PM, David Keeton wrote:
> To all,
> I ran into a problem where a part was scrapped on a Emc
> controlled machine running the axis interface on a mill.
>
> This is the line of the program in question
>
> G0G90G54T1
>
> The next line is the M6 comman
On 03/27/2011 09:55 AM, Igor Chudov wrote:
> My son wants some fancy remote controlled tank project.
>
> Here's what I thought about.
>
> 1. Buy a regular RC tank with a radio control.
> 2. Mount a camera on the tank
> 3. Connect the remote control to a PC, so that not a person, but a PC will
> be
>-Original Message-
>From: Kirk Wallace [mailto:kwall...@wallacecompany.com]
>Sent: Wednesday, March 16, 2011 3:35 PM
>To: Enhanced Machine Controller (EMC)
>Subject: Re: [Emc-users] Spindle speed control through G540 VFD output
>
>On Wed, 2011-03-16 at 21:05 +, andy pugh wrote:
>> On
>-Original Message-
>From: andy pugh [mailto:bodge...@gmail.com]
>Sent: Saturday, March 26, 2011 4:25 AM
>To: Enhanced Machine Controller (EMC)
>Subject: Re: [Emc-users] RPM with PWM/VFD/G540 to KBIC type controller.
>Not working? Help?
>
>On 26 March 2011 01:02, Michael Jones
>wrote:
>
To all,
I ran into a problem where a part was scrapped on a Emc controlled
machine running the axis interface on a mill.
This is the line of the program in question
G0G90G54T1
The next line is the M6 command.
The machine incorrectly positioned on the Z move. Tool #1 offse
Stephen Wille Padnos wrote:
>
> Sure, maybe the message could be changed to "Unexpectedly high jitter in
> realtime thread", but I don't know if that makes any more sense to anyone.
>
What REALLY matters, is that the system is not running dangerously close
to running out of "headroom",
where t
On Thu, 2011-03-24 at 21:01 -0500, Igor Chudov wrote:
> I would like to know if I can do rigid tapping with a bottoming tap?
I avoid making any design that has blind holes. One option I have done
with aluminum parts is to put screws or bolts into the hole and weld the
back of the hole shut, then r
On 3/27/2011 10:47 AM, Stephen Wille Padnos wrote:
> Wouldn't these still leave a few threads at the bottom that aren't fully
> formed? Do you find that bolts can be threaded further into the hole
> than with a cutting tap?
A bottoming roll form tap will get you very close to the bottom. If you
On Sun, 2011-03-27 at 18:12 +0100, Les Newell wrote:
> Hi Kirk,
>
> > I made up a comp .c file for each of the Modbus devices I have been
> > playing with. It's not difficult if one knows C. I suppose using Classic
> > Ladder is another option but I don't know ladder.
> I might look into doing tha
Steve Blackmore wrote:
> [snip]
> Roll form taps - no chips to clear :) You can tap much nearer the bottom
> of a blind hole, the only thing to be careful of is using the correct
> tapping drill and some lube/coolant.
>
Hmm.
Wouldn't these still leave a few threads at the bottom that aren't fu
Joel Jacobs wrote:
> Ok, found something interesting. I left the isolcpus=1 in grub and
> re-enabled hyper-threading and latency topped out around 11.2us with
> acceptable performance. I thought it should be fixed so ran EMC2 and
> after a few hours the error tripped again. Here is the details f
On Sun, 2011-03-27 at 12:55 -0400, Colin K wrote:
> On Mar 27, 2011, at 12:25 PM, Kirk Wallace
> wrote:
> > Frankly, I don't see the Arduino as being well suited to CNC
> > applications
>
> Why not? I found it to be a great fit for HMIs, and fearsomely easy.
> Granted, if you already hack pics an
Roland Jollivet wrote:
> Hi Jon
>
> My 2c here on the Z;
>
> I think using paper, or other material is a common method to get the Z, but
> it's not precise.
>
Well, I understand your concerns, but I have used this method for some
time, and it works for
the type of work I do. But, even if using
Joel Jacobs wrote:
> Ok, found something interesting. I left the isolcpus=1 in grub and
> re-enabled hyper-threading and latency topped out around 11.2us with
> acceptable performance. I thought it should be fixed so ran EMC2 and
> after a few hours the error tripped again. Here is the details f
Hi Kirk,
> I made up a comp .c file for each of the Modbus devices I have been
> playing with. It's not difficult if one knows C. I suppose using Classic
> Ladder is another option but I don't know ladder.
I might look into doing that. If you use Modbus in ClassicLadder you
have to have the GUI r
My son wants some fancy remote controlled tank project.
Here's what I thought about.
1. Buy a regular RC tank with a radio control.
2. Mount a camera on the tank
3. Connect the remote control to a PC, so that not a person, but a PC will
be "pushing" the buttons. Of course, buttons will be replace
On Mar 27, 2011, at 12:25 PM, Kirk Wallace wrote:
> Frankly, I don't see the Arduino as being well suited to CNC
> applications
Why not? I found it to be a great fit for HMIs, and fearsomely easy. Granted,
if you already hack pics and avrs in your sleep, it probably has little to
offer, but for
ClassicLadder had a bug in it's Modbus implementation if you read more
than 8 inputs or coils. The first input bit is not read correctly and
ends up with strange values.
I don't know the correct way to submit a fix using Git but the fix is
simple. In protocol_modbus_master.c, a break; needs to b
I can't find my drawings atm, so I'm recreating them from scratch and
will post them as soon as done. Just wanted to let you know I did not
forget although sometimes I do.
John
John Crane wrote:
> Thanks,
>
> John R. Crane
>
> On Mon, Mar 21, 2011 at 7:27 AM, John Thornton wrote:
>
>
>> Jo
On 3/26/2011 4:04 PM, Kirk Wallace wrote:
>>> Or, you can get the whole bloomin' pendant for $179...
>>>
>>> http://www.kelinginc.net/BreakoutBoards.html
>>>
>>>
>> Yeah, I JUST can't do that! After much eBay and web surfing, I couldn't
>> do any better than the $56 MPG, but no WAY I will pay $17
On 3/26/2011 3:56 PM, Kirk Wallace wrote:
>> Or, you can get the whole bloomin' pendant for $179...
>>
>> http://www.kelinginc.net/BreakoutBoards.html
>>
>> Scroll about halfway down.
>>
>> Mark
>
> Don't forget, I just got the Homann ModIO working with EMC2. One of the
> applications is a pendant
On 3/26/2011 3:39 PM, Jon Elson wrote:
>>
>> Or, you can get the whole bloomin' pendant for $179...
>>
>> http://www.kelinginc.net/BreakoutBoards.html
>>
>>
> Yeah, I JUST can't do that! After much eBay and web surfing, I couldn't
> do any better than the $56 MPG, but no WAY I will pay $179 for a
> Retracting to touch off, if you have backlash, is more error prone.
I was wondering about that, but did'nt want to delve into backlash because
it's a long seperate topic, but;
Surely, it's even worse to set Z on approach on a vertical mill if you have
backlash, because during or at the end of m
When I retrofitted my Colchester Trumph 2000 lathe I left the original
control panel in place though it wasn't connected up. Yesterday I
knocked up an Arduino based adapter so I now have a panel with 39
buttons (most with an LED indicator) that can talk to EMC through
Modbus. It appears to Clas
On Sun, 27 Mar 2011 10:03:07 +0200, you wrote:
>Use a say, 1/4in ground dowel. Bring the z down to about 3/16th and then
>gently try to roll the dowel under the bit as you RETRACT the Z. Because of
>the curve, you get a good idea as to when to the last few steps are. Even if
>you overshoot upward
I am a great believer in having 1 MPG per axis. I use high resolution
encoders (500 lines upwards) and proper hand wheels so the machine can
be operated as a manual. The hand wheels have friction but no indents,
just like a manual machine. With a bit of practice you can turn out
one-offs or sho
Hi Jon
My 2c here on the Z;
I think using paper, or other material is a common method to get the Z, but
it's not precise.
Rather set the Z on retract than approach.
Use a say, 1/4in ground dowel. Bring the z down to about 3/16th and then
gently try to roll the dowel under the bit as you RETRACT
34 matches
Mail list logo
