[battwell]

nice videos acamera!
you can see by the lettering how much more accurate uccnc is

i had my machine cutting up to 25m/minute on the weekend- and still getting perfect corners etc!
i have my xy acceleration set at 750m/s/s z at 400 (as my z axis is extremely heavy)

the crash your getting must be due to data transfer to the plugin. (on my biesse with mach3/galil i can sustain 50m/minute- although not accurately!)

[A_Camera]

nice videos acamera!
you can see by the lettering how much more accurate uccnc is

Thanks. Yes, I know that the nicer lettering and more accurate corners are due to UCCNC being more accurate.

[A_Camera]

the crash your getting must be due to data transfer to the plugin. (on my biesse with mach3/galil i can sustain 50m/minute- although not accurately!)

No, the crash I am getting is a bug/weakness in Mach3, which I will be writing about later on.
The speed and acceleration you are getting is irrelevant since your machine is not using direct driven 1605 ball nuts/screws. Comparing two different machines is completely pointless. For me it is also not relevant what the maximum speed and acceleration is unless it is accurate moves we are talking about.

[A_Camera]

Initially I had the impression that the motion with UCCNC is smoother than with Mach3, but that was false make-believe. Now that the Mach3 plugin is available and the UC300ETH can be compared with exactly the same code and same hardware it is clear the both are equal in terms of smoothness. If you are interested you can read this post.

Adapting Camera: Is CNC stepper motion really smoother with UCCNC than with Mach3?

My conclusion is that with the same G-code and same machine there is no difference between Mach3 and UCCNC. What has a major impact on smoothness is the motion controller. Using parallel port will always result in less smooth moves than with using a good quality external motion controller.

[ger21]

What about your video that shows better results with UCCNC?

[A_Camera]

What about your video that shows better results with UCCNC?

That has nothing to do with the smoothness, it is connected to trajectory planning and calculations and the acceleration handling differences in Mach3 compared to UCCNC. No doubt that the results out of UCCNC are better, but actually only if CV is used. In exact stop mode they are both equal. I am working on a presentation of that as well, but it will take some more time, since I have to gather the presentations as well.

[ger21]

Almost nobody runs in exact stop mode.

[A_Camera]

Almost nobody runs in exact stop mode.

Yes, I know but with Mach3 you have to if you need high accuracy. Anyway, it is not connected to smothness.

[battwell]

your not a machinist then. exact stop mode is a pain as it will show stop marks if machining wood or soft metals. same with plasma.
that is why uccnc will take over the hobby market- and probably the commercial market shortly !
ive used mach3 for years. its fine if you have a slug slow machine- but for those that need speed- plasma for example- its only JUST good enough

[A_Camera]

your not a machinist then. exact stop mode is a pain as it will show stop marks if machining wood or soft metals. same with plasma.
that is why uccnc will take over the hobby market- and probably the commercial market shortly !
ive used mach3 for years. its fine if you have a slug slow machine- but for those that need speed- plasma for example- its only JUST good enough

I know that CV is better and that exact stop mode is a PITA and I also know that this is the great advantage of UCCNC over Mach3, so what is your problem? What exactly was in my post that you did not understand? What makes you believe you need to fight every word I write? I told you it is not a pissing contest, at least not for me, but for you, it seems to be. It was YOU who wrote that you "can sustain 50m/minute- although not accurately", so what kind of machinist are YOU if that is acceptable, or even important, for you? I meant, "not accurately" for me means crap, totally useless. I am not even interested in the area of "not accurately", which is why I am interested in UCCNC. It can MORE accurately maintain constant velocity than Mach3.

[ger21]

That has nothing to do with the smoothness, it is connected to trajectory planning and calculations and the acceleration handling differences in Mach3 compared to UCCNC

Smoothness (or perception of smoothness) is 100% dictated by the trajectory planner. Changes to any of the CV parameters in Mach3 can have an adverse effect on smoothness of motion.

[A_Camera]

Smoothness (or perception of smoothness) is 100% dictated by the trajectory planner. Changes to any of the CV parameters in Mach3 can have an adverse effect on smoothness of motion.

OK. Than we have to agree that we disagree.