[morfic]

Our company is considering to retrofit our Daewoo machines ( 1 Lathe and 1 4 Axis mill first) with what we would like to consider "open controls" where we can do what we want, instead of paying several thousand dollars per option to be turned on in the Fanuc control.

We would like to be able to replace as many parts as possible "with parts from Radioshack" (basically as many off the shelf pc parts as possible (i would have said Fry's, but it's my boss' quote )

As the quoting with Camsoft goes forward and we get more info from Power Automation's dealer in Texas, i am left wondering, if all solutions depend on motion control boards (not something typically found in your avg PC), then what do we gain with such commercial packages over something like EMC2?

Is linux CNC/EMC2 not something you would want to use in an industrial environment?
Is a commercial package still "open" (once you buy it, it's *ALL* yours) when you have to requote with add-on option after add-on option? To me that does not allow us to have a "one package let's us do everything, even if we come up with new ideas down the road" (that thought is what got looking into all packages started).

And is MDSI's slow responses to even sales inquires typical? OpenCNC is pretty much off the table due to a lack of responses.

Has anyone out there used EMC2 and then realized they needed to go the CamSoft/OpenCNC/Power Automation route in the end?
Or have you done a retrofit with one of those packages, just to find out your second retrofit with EMC2 did just the same?

Thanks in advance for any replies,

Daniel

[mactec54]

Hi morfic

Take a look at Softservo systems, they have many options for industrial machines & can run from a PC with no proprietary parts needed, just there software

[morfic]

Hi morfic

Take a look at Softservo systems, they have many options for industrial machines & can run from a PC with no proprietary parts needed, just there software

Thanks, i will look into it. Any ideas on the questions i had?

[mactec54]

morfic

You were asking about motion control boards & was there other options I gave you that option, with Softservo systems, all the other things you asked are on there web site, the other question are industrial systems better, on industrial machines like what you are talking about yes thay are better, do the searching it takes along time to find out everything you need to know

[morfic]

morfic

You were asking about motion control boards & was there other options I gave you that option, with Softservo systems, all the other things you asked are on there web site, the other question are industrial systems better, on industrial machines like what you are talking about yes thay are better, do the searching it takes along time to find out everything you need to know

Yes, Soft Servo gave us another option (Thanks again for the suggestion), i suppose i was not able to convey my questions' intend.

I mostly wanted to hear from people who have used any of the options on larger machines and what their experiences were, mostly though, if anyone had a hands on experience of multiple such pc based on controllers, be it in the same shop testing them all before a massive change over, or just being plain lucky to get to be involved in controller switches in more than one company they worked at.

I still have trouble seeing what the extra cost for a commercial product gets us over EMC2. (on paper/the web, they are all more than capable)


While i can compare feature lists on websites and read sales people talk of "yeah ours is the best" all day long, it does not address the questions i asked in the OP

While i appreciate your input, i do not see how "yes industrial systems are better on industrial machines" answers all of them.

I hope my clarification above is good enough to convey my intend more accurately.

Thanks,

Daniel

[Al_The_Man]

we would like to consider "open controls" where we can do what we want, instead of paying several thousand dollars per option to be turned on in the Fanuc control.

There are other industrial control packages that do not pile on the $$ for options, Mitsubishi, Fagor etc.

If all solutions depend on motion control boards (not something typically found in your avg PC), then what do we gain with such commercial packages over something like EMC2?
Daniel

Motion Cards such as used by Camsoft, i.e. Galil Motion, close the loop in the
controller, this allows features such as electronic gearing and Electronic Cam, which lends itself to synchronize axis for threading and helical milling etc.
among other features.
EMC2 is capable of some motion card useage.

Often where the present servo drives and servo motors cannot be reused with a PC based open system, it can be cost effective to use a commercial package that includes matching drives and motors, including industry standard G code functions that work out of the box.
The only thing that takes some integration is the machine dependant PLC program, for which an internal PLC is included.
An open system may give more flexibility, but generally can take a longer time to integrate, especially for the first time retro-fitter.
Al.

[Andre' B]

I still have trouble seeing what the extra cost for a commercial product gets us over EMC2. (on paper/the web, they are all more than capable)

EMC2 is great for what it is.

Last I checked.

For production use the START, PAUSE, STEP, stuff is clumsy for someone who has been running Fanuc, Mits, etc. with CYCLE START, FEED HOLD, AND A toggle switch for single step or auto mode.

You cannot change offsets while the program is running or even paused, this makes replacing dull tools, or just adjusting a size slower then on a commercial control.
On a Fanuc I can hit the single block switch, wait for the machine to complete the current move, change to Edit mode and move the cursor anyplace I want in the program, change back to run, turn off the single block and hit the Cycle start and the machine starts running from the point I moved the cursor to. Just the thing for rerunning a boring head.

Implementation of macro B type programming is very incomplete and very non standard. For example there is no access to the variables holding the tool offset data so you can not write a macro to position the tool at the start of a cut based on its size.

It is all in what you need and want that determines which is better.

[morfic]

EMC2 is great for what it is.

Last I checked.

For production use the START, PAUSE, STEP, stuff is clumsy for someone who has been running Fanuc, Mits, etc. with CYCLE START, FEED HOLD, AND A toggle switch for single step or auto mode.

You cannot change offsets while the program is running or even paused, this makes replacing dull tools, or just adjusting a size slower then on a commercial control.
On a Fanuc I can hit the single block switch, wait for the machine to complete the current move, change to Edit mode and move the cursor anyplace I want in the program, change back to run, turn off the single block and hit the Cycle start and the machine starts running from the point I moved the cursor to. Just the thing for rerunning a boring head.

Implementation of macro B type programming is very incomplete and very non standard. For example there is no access to the variables holding the tool offset data so you can not write a macro to position the tool at the start of a cut based on its size.

It is all in what you need and want that determines which is better.

Thanks, that is very useful info, we single block from beginning of op to G43 line, then jump down to continue where tool broke/rerun finish pass only quite often, we would miss that. Going to focus on that area in EMC2.