[joeavaerage]

Hi,

Or is this not a concern because its a 'real-time' machine?

EXTEREMLY important, Linux CNC MUST run on a realtime machine,otherwise it fails.

I don't have the need for 5 axis encoders, only one right now. but as you mentioned maybe down the road i could upgrade to all servo.

You can use Linuxcnc to be a servo controller, but all modern AC servos the encoder is feed back to the servo drive, and not the Mesa board. You have the choice.
There are some whom believe that the controller must close the loop, but that belief is a fallacy. Servos work every bit as well, and in some cases better when the encoder feedback
loop is closed by the servo drive NOT the controller.

If you are thinking that in the future you may use servos and if you plan to use Step/Direction input servos then you have no need of multiple encoder inputs on the Mesa board. If
you plan on using older analog servos, or modern servos in velocity or torque modes, then you would need those encoder inputs.

For the computer setup i was thinking about a RP4 or an Orange Pi or even one of those NUC machines. How does one determine how powerful this machine should be, is it all processor speed ?

I am not of the opinion that LinuxCNC is a power hungry application, its really more important the the PC not be burdened wit any extraneous software or services that it may run as realtime with the least possible jitter. 4usec jitter
is considered normal and acceptable. I would suggest you make enquiry of the LinuxCNC users group.....my knowledge of LinuxCNC is very basic. I have run a simple machine with it using an el-cheapo parallel port BoB,
but that is a far as my knowledge extends.

Craig

[joeavaerage]

Hi,
I ran LinuxCNC on an old laptop, and I used it to run my then mini-mill which was running Mach3 and two parallel port BoBs. NFS had declared that all development had ceased on Mach3
so I was looking at some alternatives. I tried LinuxCNC and was impressed.

What I did find with LinuxCNC that once you go past the basic features and need to code something a bit special...it got very much harder very quickly. I am a fair programmer normally, and if I had persevered
I think I would have gotten to grips with LinuxCNC, but it represented a hell of a learning curve.

I decided to try Mach4, initially with the legacy Mach4 parallel port, and found that while it was new and had a learning curve I got good results fairly easily. Then I got an Ethernet SmoothStepper, and Mach4
really came into its own. There was another fairly steep learning curve associated with Lua, the API and the structure of Mach4 for writing your own scripts, but distinctly less of a learning curve of LinuxCNC
for the same result. I stuck with Mach4. I've been using it for eight years and it does every thing and more than I need....and has become so familiar.

I am days away from finishing a trunnion fifth axis, I just picked up the last batch of laser cut steel this morning.

Mach4 runs five axis code no trouble but does not have kinematics to handle random work offset relative to the centre of rotation. There is at least one user whom has written his own kinematic module for Mach4,
and some time in the future I may have to consider that too. In the first instance I deliberately built my fifth axis such that I can touch off the the centre of rotation, and set my workpiece relative to that. It might be considered a limitation,
but for many years five axis machines were all like that, so I'll get familiar with that before making any rash decisions.

I have no reason to believe that NFS would deny me use of their source code (with appropriate Non Disclosure Agreement), but if not then I would reconsider the choice of LinuxCNC. It is open source and plenty of enthusiastic
users share code all the time. Still some months in the future yet.

Craig

[samco]

Hi,
I ran LinuxCNC on an old laptop, and I used it to run my then mini-mill which was running Mach3 and two parallel port BoBs. NFS had declared that all development had ceased on Mach3
so I was looking at some alternatives. I tried LinuxCNC and was impressed.

What I did find with LinuxCNC that once you go past the basic features and need to code something a bit special...it got very much harder very quickly. I am a fair programmer normally, and if I had persevered
I think I would have gotten to grips with LinuxCNC, but it represented a hell of a learning curve.

I decided to try Mach4, initially with the legacy Mach4 parallel port, and found that while it was new and had a learning curve I got good results fairly easily. Then I got an Ethernet SmoothStepper, and Mach4
really came into its own. There was another fairly steep learning curve associated with Lua, the API and the structure of Mach4 for writing your own scripts, but distinctly less of a learning curve of LinuxCNC
for the same result. I stuck with Mach4. I've been using it for eight years and it does every thing and more than I need....and has become so familiar.

I am days away from finishing a trunnion fifth axis, I just picked up the last batch of laser cut steel this morning.

Mach4 runs five axis code no trouble but does not have kinematics to handle random work offset relative to the centre of rotation. There is at least one user whom has written his own kinematic module for Mach4,
and some time in the future I may have to consider that too. In the first instance I deliberately built my fifth axis such that I can touch off the the centre of rotation, and set my workpiece relative to that. It might be considered a limitation,
but for many years five axis machines were all like that, so I'll get familiar with that before making any rash decisions.

I have no reason to believe that NFS would deny me use of their source code (with appropriate Non Disclosure Agreement), but if not then I would reconsider the choice of LinuxCNC. It is open source and plenty of enthusiastic
users share code all the time. Still some months in the future yet.

Craig

Can you remember what you were wanting to accomplish in linuxcnc?

Yes.. Kins is one of linuxcnc's strong points - but certainly isn't for the faint of heart..

[joeavaerage]

Hi samco,

I was building a wire winding machine. I needed to have a constant torque motor for the winding spindle, and then to use an encoder on the spindle to synchronize two other axes.
It was sort of 'jumping in the deep end', and probably not a good place to start, perfectly doable but I had bitten off more than I could chew at that moment. My C and C++ has improved
markedly over the intervening nine years.

I already had Mach4Hobby on the go and the ESS board on its way to New Zealand....and I once I went down the Mcah4 track I've never looked back.

Kins is one of linuxcnc's strong points - but certainly isn't for the faint of heart..

Kinetics and Reverse Kinetics are eminently possible in Mach4 also, but as you say not for the faint hearted.

I intend to finish my fifth axis over the next week or two, and then start using it. I already have Fusion Machining Extensions and so already have quite some use of simultaneous four axis tool paths.
Initially I'll concentrate on 3+2 toolpaths, 4+1 toolpaths, followed by simultaneous 5 axis using the centre of rotation as reference. The Fusion Mach4 post is simultaneous four axis only, so I' m already up for writing a Mach4 5 axis simultaneous
post.

Then, and I imagine that could six to twelve months from now, I'll have to decide whether I want to make the plunge for ToolCenterControl in either Mach4 or LinuxCNC. It is not a bridge that I have to cross just yet, so I shan't.
I anticipate using my fifth axis will inform the choices I make down the line.....not right now.

Craig

[samco]

Cool - One of the linuxcnc developers fixes watches. He is the only person I know that can re-wind accutron coils - amoung other coils.. (he fixed my accutrons) These are tuning fork watches from the 60's

You can see some of his work here...

https://timeguy.com/cradek/

he is amazing working with wire that is smaller than a hair,,,

Hi samco,

I was building a wire winding machine. I needed to have a constant torque motor for the winding spindle, and then to use an encoder on the spindle to synchronize two other axes.
It was sort of 'jumping in the deep end', and probably not a good place to start, perfectly doable but I had bitten off more than I could chew at that moment. My C and C++ has improved
markedly over the intervening nine years.

I already had Mach4Hobby on the go and the ESS board on its way to New Zealand....and I once I went down the Mcah4 track I've never looked back.



Kinetics and Reverse Kinetics are eminently possible in Mach4 also, but as you say not for the faint hearted.

I intend to finish my fifth axis over the next week or two, and then start using it. I already have Fusion Machining Extensions and so already have quite some use of simultaneous four axis tool paths.
Initially I'll concentrate on 3+2 toolpaths, 4+1 toolpaths, followed by simultaneous 5 axis using the centre of rotation as reference. The Fusion Mach4 post is simultaneous four axis only, so I' m already up for writing a Mach4 5 axis simultaneous
post.

Then, and I imagine that could six to twelve months from now, I'll have to decide whether I want to make the plunge for ToolCenterControl in either Mach4 or LinuxCNC. It is not a bridge that I have to cross just yet, so I shan't.
I anticipate using my fifth axis will inform the choices I make down the line.....not right now.

Craig

[joeavaerage]

Hi,
I was trying to wind wire of about the same size...its not easy. I was trying to make an LDVT.
I had already made several LDVT's using 0.2mm wire and they had a sensitivity of about 2um and a stroke of 10mm. I was trying to do better.....but the very fine wire defeated me in the end.

Craig