584,837 active members*
5,590 visitors online*
Register for free
Login
Results 1 to 20 of 20
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    311

    Another pendant question

    So the pendant available for the M and MX doesn't say much about it but I wonder if there is any reason it wouldn't work with a regular 1100 running path pilot.... Can't see it listed separately anyway and I would imagine it's pretty spendy if it was.

    Anyone using it?
    M

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    3063

    Re: Another pendant question

    Looks like it is an $1800 add-on for the M and MX mills and includes the controller, offsetting what would be the $800 cost for the standard controller. Looks pretty nifty but it's a bit too spendy for me as an 1100 Series 3 add-on even if it were available.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    1788

    Re: Another pendant question

    See file:///C:/Users/ken/Downloads/TD10715_PathPilot_Operator_Console_770_1019A.pdf for the manual on the controller.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    159

    Re: Another pendant question

    Quote Originally Posted by kstrauss View Post
    See file:///C:/Users/ken/Downloads/TD10715_PathPilot_Operator_Console_770_1019A.pdf for the manual on the controller.
    That's a link to your computer. Here's the link on Tormach's site
    https://www.tormach.com/support/wpdm...for-770m-m-mx/

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by kstrauss View Post
    See file:///C:/Users/ken/Downloads/TD10715_PathPilot_Operator_Console_770_1019A.pdf for the manual on the controller.
    That's a link to your computer. Here's the link on Tormach's site
    https://www.tormach.com/support/wpdm...for-770m-m-mx/
    "You can't teach stuff in a school that you would learn in real life unless the real life people are in charge of the school." - Gene Sherman

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    311

    Re: Another pendant question

    I was just wondering if the pendant alone (p/n 50363 according to that doc) was going to be available and if it would work with any version of the control and PP and not just the M / MX mills
    M

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    1788

    Re: Another pendant question

    My excuse is that someone was ringing my doorbell and I just pressed SEND without checking anything. My bad!

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    670

    Re: Another pendant question

    Why not just order one of the Ninja Pendants? Much more control than the Tormach one. I've got three of them, one for the Slant Pro and two for the 1100Ms. Absolutely love them!

    Moonlight Prototype
    The Body Armor Dude - Andrew

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    189

    Re: Another pendant question

    It would be nice if/when Tormach releases just the pendant. A MPG you could count on it working when pathpilot updates would be nice. Looks like Moonlight is trying to keep up with patches at least. VistaCNC just flat gave up. It wouldn't surprise me, or offend me if Tormach was actively making pathpilot only work with their hardware either. Hopefully they will have the new control panel available for the slant pro as well.
    -Jon

  9. #9

    Re: Another pendant question

    The a shame about the VistaCNC pendants not getting updates. I use one with UCCNC and it's ungodly good.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    591

    Re: Another pendant question

    It should be possible to make a patch that works "for almost all new versions."
    The trick would be to get some user-installed code to run on start-up, and that code can check whether the patch is installed, and if not, re-apply it, using context patching.
    If the patch fails to apply cleanly, because exactly the bit that needs updating has changed, the patch could disable itself and display a message to the user before continuing with an un-patched start.
    This all has to happen before the linuxcnc process itself stats up, though, so that the Python code it loads is the patched version after an update.
    Just dropping a .desktop file in the startup folder is not sufficient, though, because there's a race condition between which starts sooner, the patcher or the PathPilot.

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    670

    Re: Another pendant question

    Quote Originally Posted by jwatte View Post
    It should be possible to make a patch that works "for almost all new versions."
    The trick would be to get some user-installed code to run on start-up, and that code can check whether the patch is installed, and if not, re-apply it, using context patching.
    If the patch fails to apply cleanly, because exactly the bit that needs updating has changed, the patch could disable itself and display a message to the user before continuing with an un-patched start.
    This all has to happen before the linuxcnc process itself stats up, though, so that the Python code it loads is the patched version after an update.
    Just dropping a .desktop file in the startup folder is not sufficient, though, because there's a race condition between which starts sooner, the patcher or the PathPilot.
    Pete has that with his pendant. He sends out an update patch to run each time that PathPilot has an update. Or at least he has to check and make sure it's compatible.
    The Body Armor Dude - Andrew

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    311

    Re: Another pendant question

    Quote Originally Posted by smokediver576 View Post
    Pete has that with his pendant. He sends out an update patch to run each time that PathPilot has an update. Or at least he has to check and make sure it's compatible.
    That's what I'm worried about now. Tormach changes something and all of a sudden my aftermarket peripheral no longer works unless the company updates their end. (as was the case with Vista) I can't imagine the Tormach one being cost effective but at least it'll probably stay supported
    M

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    591

    Re: Another pendant question

    He sends out an update patch to run each time that PathPilot has an update
    My point is that it's highly unlikely that the nitty gritty of integrating the pendant actually changes much, other than it has to be re-applied in the right place. The re-application in the right place can be automated using tools used in software development to maintain patched versions of standard products.

    Thus, someone should be able to ship a patch to apply, install it on the PathPilot, and arrange for the patch-applyer to run each time on start-up. If it finds the patch has already been applied, it does nothing. If it finds that the patch needs re-application, it re-applies it, then carries on to launch PathPilot proper, in its patched state.

    The convenience here is that, 19 times out of 20, the previously version's patch is likely to just "slide in" to the new version software, assuming the patch can be developed to be reasonably localized.

    It would be even better if PathPilot loaded patches from a "modules" directory in start-up, perhaps with some key-hold-down to prevent it from doing so in some kind of safe-mode start-up if some module breaks a newer version.

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    670

    Re: Another pendant question

    Quote Originally Posted by Mooser View Post
    That's what I'm worried about now. Tormach changes something and all of a sudden my aftermarket peripheral no longer works unless the company updates their end. (as was the case with Vista) I can't imagine the Tormach one being cost effective but at least it'll probably stay supported
    M
    From my understanding, Tormach is using Linux CNC as it's foundation, which, is open source by design.....
    The Body Armor Dude - Andrew

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    1788

    Re: Another pendant question

    Yes, LinuxCNC is the foundation for PathPilot and is open source but Tormach has no obligation to include special code for devices such as the Vista pendant. If you have the time and the skills YOU can write whatever is needed for a particular device and then adjust things as required with each update to PP. For a supported device Tormach tests everything on each PP release. You may differ but I prefer to be making parts rather than writing and updating Python code.

  16. #16
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    670

    Re: Another pendant question

    Quote Originally Posted by kstrauss View Post
    Yes, LinuxCNC is the foundation for PathPilot and is open source but Tormach has no obligation to include special code for devices such as the Vista pendant. If you have the time and the skills YOU can write whatever is needed for a particular device and then adjust things as required with each update to PP. For a supported device Tormach tests everything on each PP release. You may differ but I prefer to be making parts rather than writing and updating Python code.
    That's why I purchased it from Pete. He makes the patch whenever Tormach pushes out an update. All I do is apply the patch file and it auto does everything. Takes me less than 5 minutes to execute.
    The Body Armor Dude - Andrew

  17. #17
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    740

    Re: Another pendant question

    Quote Originally Posted by Mooser View Post
    I was just wondering if the pendant alone (p/n 50363 according to that doc) was going to be available and if it would work with any version of the control and PP and not just the M / MX mills
    M
    If you check Figure 2-17 of the operator console installation guide you'll see that the pendant connector appears to be something like a SUB-D type. The PathPilot code appears to communicate over a single USB interface with not only the pendant but also the feed/speed overrides, buttons and LEDs. This gives me the impression that the console contains a controller board with most, if not all logic, which connects to the PP controller (PC) via USB. If I'm not mistaken the pendant probably has little or no logic inside. In which case it's unlikely that it could be connected to a PP controller directly.
    Step

  18. #18
    Join Date
    Nov 2016
    Posts
    109

    Re: Another pendant question

    Quote Originally Posted by jwatte View Post
    My point is that it's highly unlikely that the nitty gritty of integrating the pendant actually changes much, other than it has to be re-applied in the right place. The re-application in the right place can be automated using tools used in software development to maintain patched versions of standard products.

    Thus, someone should be able to ship a patch to apply, install it on the PathPilot, and arrange for the patch-applyer to run each time on start-up. If it finds the patch has already been applied, it does nothing. If it finds that the patch needs re-application, it re-applies it, then carries on to launch PathPilot proper, in its patched state.

    The convenience here is that, 19 times out of 20, the previously version's patch is likely to just "slide in" to the new version software, assuming the patch can be developed to be reasonably localized.

    It would be even better if PathPilot loaded patches from a "modules" directory in start-up, perhaps with some key-hold-down to prevent it from doing so in some kind of safe-mode start-up if some module breaks a newer version.
    Yep, it doesn't take too much to run Ninjapendant. Most patches "slide-in" for several version updates unless they have done some big changes in certain places. Most times you just re-run the patch, it does what it does, and your good to go. If the patch detects too much of a change and can't find its way, it bails out. This is where I manually create a new patch to get the ball rolling again. I got the latest version ready to go and just need to post it to the site.

    Pete

  19. #19
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    1788

    Re: Another pendant question

    I've done a quick but unsuccessful search. What module(s) interfaces with the console unit?

  20. #20
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    38

    Re: Another pendant question

    I just looked at the MX at Fabtech, the pendant is hooked up via a parallel port. I also did notice they were running PP version 2.4...

Similar Threads

  1. vickers 2100 pendant question
    By relaxed1 in forum Controller & Computer Solutions
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 01-03-2011, 09:23 PM
  2. Pendant question
    By nelZ in forum CamSoft Products
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 08-16-2008, 12:27 AM
  3. DIY Mach-3 pendant question
    By Ferny in forum Mach Software (ArtSoft software)
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 03-02-2008, 06:00 AM
  4. pendant question
    By yukonho in forum Mach Mill
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 11-24-2005, 02:27 AM
  5. Pendant?
    By cncadmin in forum CNC (Mill / Lathe) Control Software (NC)
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 05-07-2004, 03:10 PM

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •