Advanced Search

  With some things a boycott is still possible.. The big problem I have seen is more times then not
they are either all doing the same B.S. and or buying up the logical alternatives so
you have no real choice. Plus they are usually heavily subsidized enough that they get a
bailout instead of collapsing. And to add insult to injury most people are stretched so thin
financially and or mentally that they just can't.

   I know with me I had to stop watching certain YouTube channels because I was taking too 
much of a mental hit from the never ending tsunami of doom and gloom that is never ending
and honestly just getting worse.


 

As someone else said that gouge at the end is from the retract (when the endmill was coming up). Usually you'd want to add a line to move the endmill off the part before coming up. Not being the right size isn't a big issue as long as there is no taper. Can you measure the hex across the flats at the top and at the bottom of the part? How far out is it? Could it be the endmill is not the size you thought it was or that in whatever software you used you left material for a finishing pass?

Hello all, I picked up a machine from someone else with axis 2.7.15 and am trying to make a countersink by ramping down in a spiral. For clarity, I am using an end mill and going in a CCW helical spiral. Sample code is as follows:

G03 R0.168 X0.168 Y0.000 Z0.0043
G03 R0.168 X0.000 Y0.168 Z0.0035
G03 R0.168 X-0.168 Y0.000 Z0.0028
G03 R0.168 X0.000 Y-0.168 Z0.0020...

The issue is as follows. The first arc will look correct, the second arc will drive more left before driver down so the arc will be incorrect (it's almost as if the Y is lagging), the third arc will be correct, the fourth arc will drive in the x first and the y seems to drive late like it's lagging. I've used halscope to look at some outputs and these are them: ibb.co/b5WTfCH3

The secondary issue is that the machine stops or slows between arcs and I don't want that to happen.

For the life of me I can't figure out why it's happening. 
Previously I changed the .ini file to increase the lookahead and the arc blending because the segments were stopping between every arc and I wanted a more continuous motion. I get the R is slightly off if the Z is included BUT then I would expect all four arcs to have the issue not just two of them.

(I don't need any help with the gcode as that is not the problem I am having - also I am well aware that *technically* ramping down each line will produce a slight inaccuracy in the machined dim - but that is within the req tolerance of the feature I am machining) 

Thanks for your help

There is no need for base-thread on ethercat machines
base-thread should be set to 0, which will disable it, you can hook up everything to servo-thread, also the "no floating point" situation is completely stripped out form 2.10 master, and disabled on next 2.9 release, 2.9.9 whenever that ships...

OP solved this issue by finding conflicting gcode preamble in his .ini file.

I read through this whole thread and agree with OP. The first guy to reply was ridiculous.

Mem is an industry standard term. By default LinuxCNC is always in 'mem'. On regular machines (ie. Every CNC machine with a controller that isn't homebuilt MEM refers to when the program is loaded to be run and no longer in EDIT. It basically locks out the open program so it cannot be modified by any inputs. You usually go into MEM when you are ready to run the program. EDIT when you are making changes, MDI when you are jogging etc.)

Hi eraserhd, 

Can't wait to see your working PIO. On my side I managed to move a Tmc5160 stepper driver in full Spi mode in Remora, so no step generation needed for this specific driver (could, in theory, run 6 axis or more from a Tiny2040  ). I didn't go further than a PoC test. (Moved to a CANopen test with LCNC)

Cheers

I just added the ability to clear the display and shutdown the screen with HAL pins to hal_bridge.

It's a start.

andrax wrote:

Note 2:I would ask you to investigate whether Debian, the base thread and the servo thread can each be assigned to a single CPU core.This would further improve stability.This is also done by Beckhoff and Codesys.It makes their runtime independent of the operating system and guarantees real-time capability. 

Yes, I believe this is the correct approach but I've never run a base thread or looked at the thread instantiation code in detail.
With a single isolated core (normal case) both threads should end up there.

Ethercat and Mesa configs should not need a base thread

my1987toyota wrote:

Could this become the snowball that starts the avalanche?

I really hope so.

my1987toyota wrote:

Do I dare hope for a world NOT overrun by big corporate subscriptions ? 

This is happening, no matter what, they are paying huge amounts of money to shove anything and everything down our throats, and we are just taking it.
Until humans learn to control themself and boycott any such stupidity, we are screwed.

For the door, it is better to use feed-inhibit or motion-is-enabled or machine-is-on, of the top of my head, as those do not require homing but should stop the machine.
E-stop should definitely not be used for it.

Was this deleted by you?

I have an XHC-WHB04B pendant set up and everything works pretty well, except that when I turn the wheel in continuous mode it moves in jerks/jumps, while in step mode it moves smoothly. Is there any way to avoid the jumps in continuous mode?

isnt backwards.

Bit 0 (port 0) is 0x0001 and bit 15 (port 15) is 0x8000, because the "first" bit is on the right.
 

Thank you very much for all your hard work. I’ve been following this thread the whole time, and now that the changes are being incorporated into the official repository, I’ll update my repositories and test the new EtherCAT HAL driver.Note 1:From what I’ve read, there does appear to be a dependency between the software and hardware.Note 2:I would ask you to investigate whether Debian, the base thread and the servo thread can each be assigned to a single CPU core.This would further improve stability.This is also done by Beckhoff and Codesys.It makes their runtime independent of the operating system and guarantees real-time capability. 

A quick update from my end: I replaced the two components on the encoder board, but unfortunately, the encoder signal is still not being processed. Without a schematic, I really don't know where else to look.

I'm still waiting for the optocoupler so I can get the second board back up and running.