[wmgeorge]

Some aluminum extrusion makers offer milling the surfaces true as an option for where the linear rails mount. I would just contact CNCRP and show them those pictures.

[GME]

Have you gotten the situation with your X axis profile rails/gantry extrusion figured out?

Gary

[cowanrg]

It was been cold here in Chicago. -26 with wind chill down to -58. My 4000 watt heater was hopelessly under-gunned. So, taking a little break from wiring up the electronics.

Also, I just did not want to use mach3 with the bull**** parallel interface. I bought the Centroid Acorn and used a modern computer. Bought a touchscreen as well to use with the Acorn. Any thoughts or experiences with this?

Acorn CNC controller, Step and Direction 4 axis CNC Control board with ethernet communication.DIY CNC kit

I am planning a Pro4848 build, and was looking at the Acorn, but apparently it doesn't work well with CNC routers, as it can't slave two axes together, which is necessary for a router. It also doesn't have the tools to align both sides of the Y axis. I could be wrong though, but that's what I found when researching. For that reason, I was going to do UCCNC with one of their own controllers.

[blitzer]

I am planning a Pro4848 build, and was looking at the Acorn, but apparently it doesn't work well with CNC routers, as it can't slave two axes together, which is necessary for a router. It also doesn't have the tools to align both sides of the Y axis. I could be wrong though, but that's what I found when researching. For that reason, I was going to do UCCNC with one of their own controllers.

I have since bought the Centroid Acorn and it works perfectly so far. I have just completed a bench test and am currently installing the Fuchs limit sensors. Of course it can slave two axes together. Out of the box the 4th axis is configured for rotary, but 2 seconds to switch that to slaved. As far as aligning both sides of the Y axis, I have not figured that out yet, but I have seen it in some of the configurations. I will let you know.

Support with the Acorn is great as well. Centroid is very responsive to questions. The Acorn has a report functionality so they can see how it is configured when they are helping debug your issues.

[blitzer]

I have figured out the issue with the movement of the gantry. Gary was right above - the drop lock of the extrusion was uneven and the rails are not wide enough to pull them flush. So, I ended up putting 7 layers of aluminum foil on the bottoms of the top linear bearing to fill in the gap in the picture from above. Now the gantry slides much better. Thank you Gary for the great reply!!

[OlfCNC]

UCCNC can do master slave configuration and it supports up to 6 axis. A and B and C can be slaved to X or Y or Z in any combination. The controller also do gantry squaring automatically.
You might want to take a look at their new controller which is a motion controller + BOB all in one: CNCdrive - motion controls

[GME]

I have figured out the issue with the movement of the gantry. Gary was right above - the drop lock of the extrusion was uneven and the rails are not wide enough to pull them flush. So, I ended up putting 7 layers of aluminum foil on the bottoms of the top linear bearing to fill in the gap in the picture from above. Now the gantry slides much better. Thank you Gary for the great reply!!

Glad to be of assistance.

FWIW, it's considered bad practice shim between the bearing blocks and mounting/interface plate. If you get the rails perfectly centered over the extrusion slots, you will have a better, and more accurate installation. That's why I spoke to the rail setting jig in my earlier post. If the jig locates the rails even a little off center along the extrusion slots . . . well, you know how it comes out. If the linear rails are centered along the extrusion slots, it doesn't matter if the drop lock feature is engaged. They will come out in the same plane, as they should - and as mine did.

Gary

[blitzer]

UCCNC can do master slave configuration and it supports up to 6 axis. A and B and C can be slaved to X or Y or Z in any combination. The controller also do gantry squaring automatically.
You might want to take a look at their new controller which is a motion controller + BOB all in one: CNCdrive - motion controls

Acorn has Independent Axis Squaring as well. From what I have seen, Acorn seems to be much more industrial grade, refined and mature because they are trickling down technology and UI interface from high level machines. The same UI on the Acorn is used on large professional machines. Centroid sells 2 other other boards that support more complicated feature sets (with the same UI). I would have gotten one of those if I needed more. I have read so much about strange problems with various DIY/hobby boards/controllers which I did not encounter with Centroid.

I'm sure UCCNC would have worked as well.

[blitzer]

Glad to be of assistance.

FWIW, it's considered bad practice shim between the bearing blocks and mounting/interface plate. If you get the rails perfectly centered over the extrusion slots, you will have a better, and more accurate installation. That's why I spoke to the rail setting jig in my earlier post. If the jig locates the rails even a little off center along the extrusion slots . . . well, you know how it comes out. If the linear rails are centered along the extrusion slots, it doesn't matter if the drop lock feature is engaged. They will come out in the same plane, as they should - and as mine did.

Gary

Can one expect the drop lock to be uniformly bent in along the length of the extrusion? Just from looking at the profile the drop lock seems bent in from the top and bottom unevenly. The aluminum shims did end up freeing up the gantry carriage and it moves uniformly across the gantry. At this point, I may continue with the shims and rework with your suggestions if the machine has unacceptable accuracy.

[ger21]

Not unless it was damaged. Since it's an extrusion, it should be very consistent the entire length.

[GME]

Can one expect the drop lock to be uniformly bent in along the length of the extrusion? Just from looking at the profile the drop lock seems bent in from the top and bottom unevenly. The aluminum shims did end up freeing up the gantry carriage and it moves uniformly across the gantry. At this point, I may continue with the shims and rework with your suggestions if the machine has unacceptable accuracy.

Not unless it was damaged. Since it's an extrusion, it should be very consistent the entire length.

The drop lock feature was not formed by bending. It was part of the extrusion forming process. As Gerry pointed out, it should be uniform over the length, unless damaged. As I indicated, mine was uniform. If you can see unevenness, something is very wrong with the extrusion. I wouldn't be surprised to learn that there is some sort of minimal tolerance for uniformity, but not so much that you could see it. I suppose you could remove the rails, fashion a jig to accept a dial indicator (I'd use my precision straight edge as a base for a magnetic base), get it accurately positioned, and measure for uniformity. I'm sure it would be a very fussy and time consuming process.

From looking at the photos you posted, I still suspect one or both of the linear rails was not centered over the slot. That would account for the rails not being coplanar. It could be that the setting jig didn't properly locate the top rail, or it could be that the "gantry plate" had the holes for the bearing blocks drilled slightly off, so that the bottom rail wasn't properly located. Just my 2 cents.

I encourage you to get in touch with CNCRP, show them your photos, and get their input. Clearly, you have a problem. I am confident they will want to do what they can to make it right. After giving it some more thought, I doubt this is the first time this has come up, so they may have a ready solution for you. I understand how tedious it can be trying work out a problem, and there is a temptation to just do something quick and dirty and call it a day. I've been there. Nevertheless, CNCRP is known for excellent service and wanting their machines to be right. Why not take advantage of it?

Gary

[cowanrg]

Acorn has Independent Axis Squaring as well. From what I have seen, Acorn seems to be much more industrial grade, refined and mature because they are trickling down technology and UI interface from high level machines. The same UI on the Acorn is used on large professional machines. Centroid sells 2 other other boards that support more complicated feature sets (with the same UI). I would have gotten one of those if I needed more. I have read so much about strange problems with various DIY/hobby boards/controllers which I did not encounter with Centroid.

I'm sure UCCNC would have worked as well.

Good to know. Can you explain why you feel it's more industrial grade? I've ruled out Mach3/4 as I've used it in the past and unless it's changed a LOT (which it doesn't look like it has), I will probably choose something else. The UI seems good, but not all that different than UCCNC or some of the others. Just curious about your impressions.

[blitzer]

Good to know. Can you explain why you feel it's more industrial grade? I've ruled out Mach3/4 as I've used it in the past and unless it's changed a LOT (which it doesn't look like it has), I will probably choose something else. The UI seems good, but not all that different than UCCNC or some of the others. Just curious about your impressions.

So, first off. I am a noob and this is a hobby for me so don't have anything but about 8 months of learning and observation behind me.

I have been in the computer business for 30 years have have learned that software works best when controlling specific hardware. If you have software that works with a variety of devices, there are always issues and it is less stable. Compound this with those devices upgrading and the software needing to be upgraded as well. This is one reason why Acorn was appealing - the software is built to work specifically with their own controller(s). Updates to the CNC software automatically update firmware on the controller to support new functionality. There are no 3rd party drivers you have to deal with. All this adds up to stability and reliability without having to know 10+ caveots on how to get everything to work together. It is a single system from a single vendor.

I also like the fact that this same UI interface is used in high level professional machines.

The Acorn has a powerful processor onboard - I did not want a simple breakout board and be more dependent on the computer for control. I found it interesting that the Acorn has a DB25 so you can just plug it in where you used to have mach3 plugged into your computer. The pinouts are completely customizable.

One of the main aims for the other more powerful boards from Centroid(as well as the Acorn) is to retrofit manual mills to CNC. So you know they are serious about these boards controlling serious machines in a professional environment vs a lot of the other software/boards that are aimed at the hobbiest.

I did buy Mach3 with the intent of using a Smooth stepper, but after research - killed that idea - anyone need a cheap copy of Mach3? I also tried a Raspberry Pi based controller. I got that working, but geeze there were issues where you need to be a electrical engineer to debug. The Acorn just worked. There is a lot to be said of something that comes out of the box working - so to speak.

The shear amount of wiring diagrams provided by Centroid is amazing. Whatever your CNC/divers/electronic needs - there is a wiring diagram for you.

I can't speak to functionality comparison between Centroid and others. I do know that the fact that a board/software has a feature does NOT mean it is a usable and reliable feature. I can shoot a basketball, but it does not go in as much as an NBA player.

I certainly can't get into an discussion with people that are fans of other setups and I have not done exhaustive comparisons, but so far Acorn has not disappointed in any way.

Some of the benefits I like summed up here: https://www.bing.com/videos/search?q...8C8C&FORM=VIRE

[cowanrg]

So, first off. I am a noob and this is a hobby for me so don't have anything but about 8 months of learning and observation behind me.

I have been in the computer business for 30 years have have learned that software works best when controlling specific hardware. If you have software that works with a variety of devices, there are always issues and it is less stable. Compound this with those devices upgrading and the software needing to be upgraded as well. This is one reason why Acorn was appealing - the software is built to work specifically with their own controller(s). Updates to the CNC software automatically update firmware on the controller to support new functionality. There are no 3rd party drivers you have to deal with. All this adds up to stability and reliability without having to know 10+ caveots on how to get everything to work together. It is a single system from a single vendor.

I also like the fact that this same UI interface is used in high level professional machines.

The Acorn has a powerful processor onboard - I did not want a simple breakout board and be more dependent on the computer for control. I found it interesting that the Acorn has a DB25 so you can just plug it in where you used to have mach3 plugged into your computer. The pinouts are completely customizable.

One of the main aims for the other more powerful boards from Centroid(as well as the Acorn) is to retrofit manual mills to CNC. So you know they are serious about these boards controlling serious machines in a professional environment vs a lot of the other software/boards that are aimed at the hobbiest.

I did buy Mach3 with the intent of using a Smooth stepper, but after research - killed that idea - anyone need a cheap copy of Mach3? I also tried a Raspberry Pi based controller. I got that working, but geeze there were issues where you need to be a electrical engineer to debug. The Acorn just worked. There is a lot to be said of something that comes out of the box working - so to speak.

The shear amount of wiring diagrams provided by Centroid is amazing. Whatever your CNC/divers/electronic needs - there is a wiring diagram for you.

I can't speak to functionality comparison between Centroid and others. I do know that the fact that a board/software has a feature does NOT mean it is a usable and reliable feature. I can shoot a basketball, but it does not go in as much as an NBA player.

I certainly can't get into an discussion with people that are fans of other setups and I have not done exhaustive comparisons, but so far Acorn has not disappointed in any way.

Some of the benefits I like summed up here: https://www.bing.com/videos/search?q...8C8C&FORM=VIRE

Noted. Thanks for the info.

[OlfCNC]

So, first off. I am a noob and this is a hobby for me so don't have anything but about 8 months of learning and observation behind me.

I have been in the computer business for 30 years have have learned that software works best when controlling specific hardware. If you have software that works with a variety of devices, there are always issues and it is less stable. Compound this with those devices upgrading and the software needing to be upgraded as well. This is one reason why Acorn was appealing - the software is built to work specifically with their own controller(s). Updates to the CNC software automatically update firmware on the controller to support new functionality. There are no 3rd party drivers you have to deal with. All this adds up to stability and reliability without having to know 10+ caveots on how to get everything to work together. It is a single system from a single vendor.

I also like the fact that this same UI interface is used in high level professional machines.

The Acorn has a powerful processor onboard - I did not want a simple breakout board and be more dependent on the computer for control. I found it interesting that the Acorn has a DB25 so you can just plug it in where you used to have mach3 plugged into your computer. The pinouts are completely customizable.

One of the main aims for the other more powerful boards from Centroid(as well as the Acorn) is to retrofit manual mills to CNC. So you know they are serious about these boards controlling serious machines in a professional environment vs a lot of the other software/boards that are aimed at the hobbiest.

I did buy Mach3 with the intent of using a Smooth stepper, but after research - killed that idea - anyone need a cheap copy of Mach3? I also tried a Raspberry Pi based controller. I got that working, but geeze there were issues where you need to be a electrical engineer to debug. The Acorn just worked. There is a lot to be said of something that comes out of the box working - so to speak.

The shear amount of wiring diagrams provided by Centroid is amazing. Whatever your CNC/divers/electronic needs - there is a wiring diagram for you.

I can't speak to functionality comparison between Centroid and others. I do know that the fact that a board/software has a feature does NOT mean it is a usable and reliable feature. I can shoot a basketball, but it does not go in as much as an NBA player.

I certainly can't get into an discussion with people that are fans of other setups and I have not done exhaustive comparisons, but so far Acorn has not disappointed in any way.

Some of the benefits I like summed up here: https://www.bing.com/videos/search?q...8C8C&FORM=VIRE

There is nothing new about this. UCCNC works the same. When new function arrives then the software automatically updates the firmware in the controller board to support it and then it just works, no need for any electric engineer to debug anything.
Don't think that Mach3/4 or UCCNC or LinuxCNC do not run serious machines.

[cowanrg]

There is nothing new about this. UCCNC works the same. When new function arrives then the software automatically updates the firmware in the controller board to support it and then it just works, no need for any electric engineer to debug anything.
Don't think that Mach3/4 or UCCNC or LinuxCNC do not run serious machines.

Agreed. UCCNC does this, using an external motion controller with Mach3 does this, and many others have moved away from a parallel port interface. I do like the look of the Centroid Acorn, but I'm not seeing how it's really any different than many of the other offerings. The video you posted about the Acorn is really how many others are doing it, and I'm not seeing how it's THAT unique. It may well be a more seasoned software, but of course it's better than Mach3 + parallel port, or some homebrew raspberry pi solution.

EDIT:

One of the things that makes me really nervous about the Acorn is the fact they use a BeagleBoard as the brains. It's a shortcut, and shows that they did't spend the time to sit down and develop their own hardware solution. The platform is pretty old and outdated at this point and it's a really clunky board too. I'm sure it works just fine, but at the end of the day, it's MORE a breakout board than anyone else's offering. It's not all that different from a custom-programmed raspberry pi.

[blitzer]

Agreed. UCCNC does this, using an external motion controller with Mach3 does this, and many others have moved away from a parallel port interface. I do like the look of the Centroid Acorn, but I'm not seeing how it's really any different than many of the other offerings. The video you posted about the Acorn is really how many others are doing it, and I'm not seeing how it's THAT unique. It may well be a more seasoned software, but of course it's better than Mach3 + parallel port, or some homebrew raspberry pi solution.

EDIT:

One of the things that makes me really nervous about the Acorn is the fact they use a BeagleBoard as the brains. It's a shortcut, and shows that they did't spend the time to sit down and develop their own hardware solution. The platform is pretty old and outdated at this point and it's a really clunky board too. I'm sure it works just fine, but at the end of the day, it's MORE a breakout board than anyone else's offering. It's not all that different from a custom-programmed raspberry pi.

I'm sure we could all speculate for days. It's a Ford vs Chevy thing. There are many people out there claiming that UCCNC is better than the Acorn and many people claiming that Acorn is better than UCCNC. In my search I have heard UCCNC is a bit quirky and has a number of bugs and has many updates to address issues. Everything I have read and experienced with the Acorn point to it being a solid platform - and that's what I needed for my first rodeo.

This guy has been building machines for years and has built machines with all the controllers and ended up a huge Acorn fan: https://www.youtube.com/user/Islaww1/videos

Like I said, I'm sure UCCNC would have worked great as well. I would suggest opening up a UCCNC vs Acorn thread so that more experience people could weight in.