[JerryFlyGuy]

Hey all.. I've finally sat down a scratched together a wiring diagram for my system. I'd really like other's imput on how this is put together. I know the drawing is VERY .. poorly drawn.. but its my first wiring diagram so .. go easy on me

Am I doing anything horribly wrong?
Is there a better way[s]?

I've said it before.. and I'll say it again.. I'm not well
versed in "Electrical anything" so.. looking at this may
make you laugh..

For those looking for a "how to", I'm not sure this is it.. until I get some feed back.. I don't recommend using this..

If you do end up using it.. know that it was drawn by a someone with NO electrical wiring experiance or knowledge..


DISCLAIMER
USE AT YOUR OWN RISK, by downloading this file.. you absolve me of any resposibility for bodily harm,damage to person's,property and/or equipment.


Jerry [ don't you just love all these disclaimer's we have to post to cover our butt's on a public forum! ]

[Al_The_Man]

AS a few pointers as I mentioned in another post, it pays to draw a schematic in ladder form, I have included a fairly complex one as an example of a Cincinnati mill I retrofitted.
It is a bit more work, but it is easier to spot mistakes and to really be able to design the system properly.
In North American and UK the way is to draw the power lines vertically on the right and left hand side of the page, and progress from left to right.
In Continental Europe they draw the power bus top and bottom and progress top down.
With a simple drawing you can get away with physical layout as you have done, but once you start marrying different systems together it can get messy and very hard to follow & prone to error.
(I think the pdf came out ok)
Al.

[JerryFlyGuy]

Oh geepers.. ok well I've got lots more to learn about wiring diagrams..

Is there anything on this one that seem's to be a big no-no Al? or are you saying maybe I should re-draw it before you even attempt to wade in on this one

Jerry

[NC Cams]

Jerry: you've made a very nicely done layout/routing diagram for the wire as it will have to go into the cabinet form machine to machine.

However it is NOT a schematic per se thus not easy to follow unless you research every connection to every pin on every subcomponent.

Yes, it is not possible for a person who is not intimately familiar with the circuit as you are to "see" if anything is wrong. In reality, come back a week or month from now and you'll look at it the same way - like DUH, what does that mean/do???

Schematics help you follow the control activation logic. They use simple boxes and circles for the hardware as the CONNECTIONS are what need to be defined for the circuit to work, not exact pictures of the machine. Might want to get a schematic book or do some web searching.

A "free" electronics schematic capture can be d/l'd from ExpressPCB.com. You can make custom chips with custom pin numbers. Sadly, it doesn't do the multi-colored wires like you did.

Of note in a complex or simple circuit is a numbering of each and every wire with a circuit number. When 6 wires of the same color are in a harness, it is impossible to keep them straight. IF the wires are numbered at each and every connection, you simply look at for the number to make sure it is connected to the right pin. Makes it easy to do continuity checks too.

Can you do that with your drawing??? if not, maybe you might want to make it so you could. PITA now, godsend when you wire the cabinet and go to troubleshoot.

Al's schematic is a classic machine tool control layout. Fits a standard and is easy for an experienced or newbie to follow the control circuit logic - this is especially critical to be able to do if something in a control chain isn't working.

A redraw would help you better understand what's going on. After 3 or 4 redraws, you'd be amazed at how clear things become and the dumb mistakes you catch on your own.

[JerryFlyGuy]

Thanks for taking the time to reply NC, I'm definatly new at drawing anything electrical related. I took some more time and looked over Al's PDF but have to say, it just made me more confused I don' follow all the symbology so alot of it is over my head, and really.. thats ok. I'm not doing this for anything more than my own system, I'm just hoping that someone will notice any mistakes I've made and help me correct them. I realise thats a tall order due to the complexity, in addition to the poor way its drawn. However, if I get one correction out of it, if it possibly could save me a blown drive or something which would be fairly costly, esp a blown G100, it was worth it. Anyway, I could start to redraw it, however I don't think it would come out any better than it currently is. Like you say, I could do it several times.. but in the end.. its all just for one system, I'm not sure its worth doing..

If I was building and producing these.. it would definatly be worth it..however.. being as it's more of just a 'guideline' for me.. probably not..

Thanks for your comments

Jerry

[NC Cams]

You are missing the point.

Each and every item in a DC circuit is hooked between + and -. Some are directly hooked (indicator lite) and some go thru swithes, diodes, whatever to achieve circuit continuity. Currently flows from + to - ( or the other way for the traditionalists).

To get from the transformer, you go from 2 terminals, thru a diode bridge then to a cap then whereever. Some stuff in the circuit thereafter is in series and other is in parallel.

A simple circle with an M in it is a motor. A simple circle with an L in it and "rays" around it a light. The ladder schematic that Al drew uses standard symbols to do this or something at least close. It could be a box but as long as you know, that's fine.

In Al's drawing, you can wire the system wire by wire in a "flow" and check them off as you go. Checking and trouble shooting much easier.

Your drawing is essentially a page in a book. You read a book LINE BY LINE to get the data out of it. Everything is coming at you - it is hard to focus. Simply to verify polarity is impossible.

In Al's schematic, you can see how the transformer turns AC into DC. As you go down the page, you see how the first circuit works, right to left, then the second.

In "reading" from L to R you see the daisy chain of stuff that has to be on or off for something to work.

Learning to read relay logic ladders is hard IF you try to absorb the whole page all at once. Look at it line by line, item by item, L to R, Top to Bottom and learn to comprehend them that way.

WHen you do, you'll see why Al's schematic is VERY easy for a person to read, comprehend and trouble shoot. As hard is it may be for you do do, it is as hard for a person trained/experienced in ladder diagram reading to read/evaluate something NOT in that format.

At one time, Forrest Mims wrote some books that were real helpful in drawing circuits:

http://www.forrestmims.com
or
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/pro...lance&n=283155

If you're going to get involved with CNC, it doesn't hurt to learn the lingo.

Besides, if you catch the mistake in the drawing phase, why toast a drive or motor un-necessarily.

I encourag, no, urge you to learn some rudimetary wiring diagram reading/construction skills. It will do you wonders in building and fixing DIY CNC's. Keep you from toasting expensive parts, too.

[Geof]

Am I allowed to make a comment without getting tromped on? My advice is go with the advice so far. Find a key for the symbols in Al's schematic, maybe Al can point you someplace, and puzzzle it through. You will only need to puzzle for a few hours and things will start to fall into place; it is an accelerating process. This side of your project is no less important than the mechanical stuff and you spent a lot of time bending your brain and researching that. You also need to look to the future. It is clear your project is ambititious and sort of opened ended. Probably someday you will be employing people to run and maintain your equipment and when that day comes you will be so thankful you did things conventionally.

[Mariss Freimanis]

Jerry,

I can read it OK.:-) It's late, I'm calling it a day and I will look it over more closely tomorrow; 3 things jump out though:

1) You'll bust your 'OK' LED if you don't put a current limit resistor in series with it. Use a 1K resistor.

2) No need for 1K pull-ups on you proximity sensors. They're already built into the G100.

3) The GP outputs on the G100 are open-collector, current sinking. Have your coolant SSR LED cathode go to the G100 output, not the anode.

A general comment about drawing schematics:

The purpose of a schematic diagram is to give a clear and easily readable visual presentation of how things are to be wired up. A schematic has important signal lines (outputs to inputs and visa versa) as well as obvious power supply and ground connections.

The 'obvious' connections shouldn't visually clutter-up the important connections so a kind of "shorthand" convention is used: Use a an "out arrow" (-->) from a supply connection source and label it "+5VDC". Use an "in arrow" (>--) and label it "+5VDC" everywhere +5VDC must be supplied. Do the same for ground (GND).

Where it is important how supply and ground must be routed such as a "starred" power distribution to the motor drives, by all means show it just like you have. Otherwise, using the shorthand version implies it doesn't matter if it's daisy-chainied or star distribution. This is true for all the +5VDC and GND connections to the G100.

Second, pull the schematic together; avoid unnecessarily long connection lines between components. The eye has difficulty following long parallel lines when following a signal line of interest. Decrease the spacing between individual components to avoid this.

Third, avoid crossing signal lines in a schematic as much as possible. This is accomplished by keeping closely associated components spatially together. Example, I would have had the motors near the drives and dropped the encoder connections going to the G100 below.

Drawing a clear and visually easily readable schematic is an art. Done well it should require as little effort as possible from the viewer to discern the meaning of the connections between components. A well drawn schematic is natural and easy to follow.

If this is your first drawing then you have done a very good first try. Try it a second time using the above rules and see if that result isn't much clearer.

I spend a lot of time drawing schematics only I will ever see. Why? Because in 6 months a poorly drawn scematic is just as unclear to me as it would be if stranger had drawn it. To me, the intent of the schematic has to leap off of the page.

Mariss

[Mariss Freimanis]

Al the Man, NC Cams,

Al, a very neat and clear schematic. Easily readable and logical.

That can be a problem though; please take the following as no criticism of your good advice: Ladder logic is a type of programming language. As such it follows a well organized sequential flow description in writing as well as reading.

I design electronic circuits. My tool of choice as a descriptor of what I do is the scematic diagram. That is because what I do is essentially parallel and only secondarily sequential. An electronic schematic diagram serves me best as the tool to understand what's going on.

Look a Jerry's diagram. There are no sequential interactions between the components that I can see. To me that means the best tool is the electronic schematic diagram to depict the relationships between the components.

The 'problem' as I see it is to use the wrong tool for the job. Ladder logic overlaps into schematics just like verbose programming languages overlap into ladder logic. Physics overlaps into biology just as philosophy overlaps into physics. Point is you can use a claw-hammer as a screwdriver or a screwdriver as a hammer. Doing so though is not using the best tool for the job at hand.

You could draw a ladder logic diagram for what Jerry came up with. Question is would it be as clear as his schematic? Use the right tool for the right job is what I'm saying.:-)

Mariss

[JerryFlyGuy]

I appreciate all your input, it all been duly noted and I know it was ment with best intentions.

I started this project w/ the intent of learning some, being creative, and doing something w/ my hands. However the bottom line was to build something which would translate into a company doing something that is enjoyable and challenging to me.

This being said, it has to be more than a meandering, learning experience. I have a budget and a time-line which I must follow and adhere to as best I can. I've worked on this project for nearly 1 yr, over 1/2 of which was spend on reading and reseach. I entered into this venture, knowing that the electronic portion would be my biggest hurdle, but knowing that if I could get past it, all would be well. I do plan to try and learn some more about the electronic's symbology, simply to assist in getting this wiring project completed.

However w/ deadline's looming and the need to keep moving on this project, you can understand my reluctance to sit down and study several, hundred++ pg books, and teach myself the fine art [and yes it's an art] of circuitry design.

The reason my schematic looks the way it does is simply because that's the way that I've seen them done on here and else where. [Including ones for our Accu-press equipment at work] I realize my rendition has something to be desired, but at the same time, it is possible to trace what is happening, and by simply looking at components its clear what they are.

The help I was looking for wasn't "your drawing sucks, go learn to do a better one". It was the simple stuff as Mariss has helpfully pointed out, "don't need this here.. put a resistor there".. etc. I realise that w/out some basic ciruit symbols, everything gets confusing, but there has to be some "happy meduim" doesn't there?

I will do some re-work on the drawing and try to clean it up as best I can, along w/ some added symbology [here I thought I was doing ok in that dept ] and hopefully we can reach a level where it's workable, even if it isn't a Van Gogh or a Picasso..

Again guys, I DO appreciate all your effort's in trying to get me going down the right path, just please realize too, that I'm not going to get perfect at this fast enough to get the project completed in a reasonable amount of time. Some level of "ok-ness" is going to be required.

Jerry [ I'm tired and I appoligise it any of that sounds like I'm pissed off.. I'm not.. just a bit discouraged..but mainly tired...:tired:]

[HillBilly]

The difference between Al's and Jerry's is Al's is a schematic and Jerry's is a wiring diagram. Al shows where the electricity is and Jerry shows how the wires interconnect everything. Appliances used to have both on the back of them.

As another note Al's schematic is typical to what all commercial machine tool builders supply with there machines. With this layout it is easy to refer a contact on a rung to another page and line number from where it originates.

Darek

[JerryFlyGuy]

Thanks Darek, your exactly correct in that it's not a schematic, but rather a wiring diagram. Do to my level of understanding [ of electrical stuff] I see everything as piping and things of that nature, hence.. I want a wire from the output term, to the relay, and from the relay back to ground.. thats literaly all I was thinking as I was drawing it.. line by line..

Anyway.. I've started to clean it up, and I'm actually trying the ladder part.. I'm not sure how successfull I'll be but.. I expect things will be jumping from page to page and there will be several legends to clarify labels and wire codes. I've got some holiday's coming up so.. this is what I'll most likely be doing while we travel..

Jerry

[Al_The_Man]

I don't want to be-labour the point as I think everyone is on the same page, But the best type of Machine drawing and schematics include both methods in their documentation.
The first step in any design is to come up with a concept first , and this should be able to be read easily for design flaws by anyone.
After the design looks OK on paper, then you go to the next step which is to make a physical layout drawing based on how the first concept is going to be implemented.
By going straight to the second step is not the best idea, just because of being able to assess the viability of the project.
I also design not only systems, but my own limited run printed boards, so it would be like me asking Mariss on his opinion of a design by just looking at the printed circuit board layout. I bet he would much rather have the schematic.
The thing is I guess, that it is one extra chore that gets in the way of getting the machine actually running, but it is worth it in the long run.
Jerry, Imagine someone looking at your printout in black & white, it would be a nightmare to check.
This is all constructive criticism so don't take it to heart.
Al.

[NC Cams]

Darek's post suggests that this may be a toMAYtoe versus toMAHtoe sort of deal.

Jerry's drawing is surely legible for he himself to read and understand.

Al's is a like sort of deal.

The problem comes when people from different levels of training or training disciplines try to talk to each other via looking at the other persons's drawings. This can evolve into what is essentially a never ending imperial versus metric debate.

Having first learned industrial relay logic diagram reading for a very early service engineernig job, I gravitated to Al's method when doing wiring. That was until I got invovled with electronics as a hobby.

At that point, you have to learn the idiosyncracies of EE's and their "language" of "schematics" as oppose to those of "relay logic" derived ladders that prevail in the machine tool industry.

I'd contend that Mariss' experience as an EE has given him the background to work well in either style of circuity "diagramery". I simply find it easier to look at machine control circuits Al's way and then as an EE would do a circuit diagram when I'm studying a PCB.

When I talk with a client, I ask them if they work in inches or mm - I do both. I do that so as to speak to them in a language that they are comfortable with and understand. When I talk to my partner (he's electronics illiterate), I have to use stick diagrams and simple knife swithces to explain how a transistor works.

Yet when I work/talk with the neighbor who's an EE who does sophisticated testing/callibration machinery, I try to talk at his level as I know he's a stickler for using the right terms because, at his level, you simply can't be sloppy.

In the end, we're all trying to make electrons (which can't be seen and therefore NOT trusted) go and do what we want them to do.

BTW: in my earlier days, I had my share of "this is garbage" thrown back at me when I served up a drawing to a senior engineer who wanted things done HIS way. I hope I didn't give the opinion that I was trying to do that in this case. However, those experiences led me to be very self demanding when I do a diagram so that the next guy can understand it WITHOUT a decoder ring.

I was only trying to point out the method behind the madness in learning "multi-discipline" wiring diagramming methods... And why it may not be easy for some of us to help critique the control logic as it may be for others.

BTW-2: some of the late 70's Fanuc "circuit" diagrams use neither ladder nor electronic circuit diagram conventions - they use a hodge podge of both.

And they change formats from page to page for the local portion of the circuit that's on that page. And then they go from that page using an arrow with a number that is hiroglyphics for (go to page whatever, area 3A on the page) but it isn't easy to figure that out. Then to make it interesting, there is Japanese Kangi intermixed in as well for good measure.

No wonder Fanuc charged so much for service and only wants to replace not service 5T motherboards....

[Geof]

....This is all constructive criticism so don't take it to heart.
Al.

Jerry listen to the Man He only has one mistake in his entire post; the 'don't' above - I think it should read '...do take it to heart but don't be offended.'

[JerryFlyGuy]

Al, Nc, Geof... and Mariss, I want to appoligise if I sounded ticked off last night.. I awoke this morning feeling much more "friendly".. than I went to bed last night..

Nc, you'll be glad to know I've bought several books and I've also tracked down a couple electronic layout programs to test out.. one of which I'll probably end up purchasing. I'm determined to get this licked

I appreciate the constructive critisism, I've taken it as such [well this Am anyway.. ]

I'll get back to you all, once I've got a better grasp of this ellusive art, with some more schematic's for your review.

One question I do have in regards to a ladder type schematic, is it normal to be jumping from one page to the next while threading your way through a schematic? Should I be using lots of wire and terminal labeling which is ref'd to a master BOM of sorts? Or.. should this really all fit on one page?[if yes.. then I'm back to "lost" ]

Jerry[preping for a crash/correspondence course in electrical schematic's ]

[Al_The_Man]

There is really no hard and fast rules per se, anything that makes the whole design easy to understand, there are several methods used as to page/conductor continuation, lets say the design needs a few pages, one page could be the drives, for e.g. and in this instance it may be clear to show in the form of a box with the terminations on one edge,say, the terminals would be labled with the OEM function and the print would show conductors (maybe numbered) attached to the terminals, these could have an arrow on the end of the conductor with ref. to a page and even line number if you want to get fancy, and could display the function like STEP, DIR, +5v etc..
Thats why you see prints with a numbered grid down one side.
The CAD programs that are aimed at schematics give you all the symbols, usually.
There used to be one called the JIC symbols , (Joint Industrial Council) standard, but it is hard to get a software copy of these on their own.
I have set up AutoCad with a library of symbols etc, so I can whip up a schematic pretty fast.
There are alot of helpfull sites which show layouts, without having to buy anything.
Al.

[NC Cams]

Jerry: NO, the thing doesn' have to fit on one page.

Send me your fax number via PM and I'll send a 4or 5 page ladder diagram for a relay output boad for my Fanuc 5T. Sorry, dont have way to scan or to make PDF's.

With 5 or 6 inputs, the board interactively protects, drives and reads the condition of the machine. It also gives machine feedback and/or user control input to the controller. All done with a simple on or off of 6 or 8 M( ) something commands from the 5T.

Even though it is 5-6 pages long, you can tape them together into one long page to see the whole picture. The schematic is 2-3 times larger than the PCP and relay board itself. BUT the amount of control logic contained therein is HUGE, yet simple to understand.

All you need to do is know how to energize a relay (easy) and then read the attached N/O (normally open) or N/C (normally closed) contact.

[BobWarfield]

I have no comment on the aesthetics of electrical drawings. I have a dual comp sci/EE major, and I've seen far worse and some better. This should be fine for your purposes, but if it helps you to get advice from others and you feel it would be interesting to learn ladder logic style drawings go for it. Do keep Mariss' advice in mind that this is a particular sub-genre and not well suited to every application. It works out real nice for simple circuits involving lots of point-to-point, so may be appropriate here.

OTOH, Mariss' "magic boxes" remind me a lot more of complex integrated circuits than relay ladders, so I would be less prone to draw them up as such. Providing appropriate physical details (such as pinouts) may make this "less schematic" but it also makes the drawing more useful.

The fans may be overkill for the Geckos, but no harm done if you have room for them or have the current needs to cool the Geckos. Now don't you want some spindle control as well as CNC control panel functions involved here as well? Seems like you'll want more than just the basic servo/stepper wiring.

It's a complicated task to wire these buggers up, isn't it? Still working on my own version as well for a lathe conversion

Best,

BW

[JerryFlyGuy]

All good info, I've started moving things around and trying to simplify things. I think what my diagram is going to end up being is kind of a hybrid between the two. I like having the actual item's in there for pinouts [ like the G100 and the G202's, the limit switch's aren't totally nesc.] It still keep's things "visual" for a layman like myself. I will however be using wire codes and page ref's to get from point A to B on alot of the circuit's, maybe this is totally wrong but it seem's to be the only way to get things fairly clean and clear. I work 5 day's a week as a draftsman/ mech tech ish.. level designer, all of which is self taught. I'm sure I've learned some bad habit's in my 6 yr's of doing it but.. I usually can get the job done . We'll see if I can teach myself this...

Bob, thanks for adding to an already informative discussion, I've chosen to add the fan's for two reasons, I got em' cheap.. and if I ever need to expand or increase power to the steppers, they'll already be there and I won't need to go back and modify my box to fit them in.

I am going to be using a 0-10v spindle control for a VFD, but that will come later.. now that I've got some more direction I'll most likely be adding all that I can into the drawings to get it all completed at once.

There's lots more that I plan to add, some of it isn't nesc but some of it should be useful. I'm going to add bi-metal temp switch's all over the place, they will all be tied into a couple series circuit's, one for the motor's, one for the drives and one for the other electronic comp's [ bridge, toriod etc..] this will then set off an alarm or LED in Mach 3 and stop the machine. I've got a few other idea's on niffty little item's to add but can't remember them all now

Wiring these unit's up is anything but simple, esp for someone as inexperienced as I am. However I do have some time [ not lots but hopefully enough] to get the job done properly and learn a bit more about this stuff also. My mech component's are coming together pretty well and soon all that will be left is the wiring, this is why I've started to get the ball rolling. Now I wish I'd started the ball rolling a bit sooner.

Anyway.. Thanks again guy's.. I'll be in touch..

Jerry