Advanced Search

Just to substantiate that I am a "knowitall" (if that is the right word) NEMA means National Electrics Manufacturers Association. It is not a company, so no product piracy possible there.
The NEMA 23, 32 etc. solely refer to flange dimensions and bolt mounting patterns. Nothing to do with manufacturer, torque, voltage etc.

The only take is that usually bigger flange motors have bigger shafts, draw more current and have more torque.
There are exeptions, so a long high torque NEMA23 motor can have more torque than a "pancake" NEMA32.

As for a DIY router built. More bigger motor more better..... 

p.s. after looking at the pictures. They look like NEMA17. "Possibly pathetic", just get bigger ones that can move some machinery. For routing or milling you will not get anywhere with this. If you want to engrave some nameplates or want to drill some tiny holes, you might get away with it.



pps.: does not matter so much, you can figure out where the coils are at (my guess is 1st pin & 3rd pin for coil 1.... 4th pin & 6th pin for coil 2),
You will find lots of instructions how to figure out the pins on youtube. (tip someone gave me: just connect pin 1 & 3  and try to spin the motor by hand, if that is difficult you  found a coil)
Connect them to your motor driver. Set driver to one amp amp current, if they overheat reduce current. If they are cool enough to touch after running a while you can increase current. If they burn down, buy new ones.
That is what I always did with 2nd hand steppers and so far no fire, no damaged motor.

 

How self-righteous must one be to ask the component creator for help, only to turn around and explain why he's wrong? You’re always quick to highlight your own contributions; maybe it's worth pausing to genuinely consider the input provided.

In addition to what Phill said, when I looked at the config, I noticed that JOINT_3 STEPGEN_MAXVEL is not set to the recommended value of 25% larger than MAX_VELOCITY. Instead it's set only 4.16% greater than MAX_VELOCITY.

For Joints 0, 1, 2, STEPGEN_MAXACCEL is 50% greater than MAX_ACCELERATION (recommended is 25%).
For Joint 3 STEPGEN_MAXACCEL is 87.5% greater than MAX_ACCELERATION (recommended is 25%).

To highlight Joint 3 (the joint associated with the axis you're having trouble with) inconsistencies:

• STEPGEN_MAXVEL is only ~4% greater than MAX_VELOCITY
• STEPGEN_MAXACCEL is 87.5% greater than MAX_ACCELERATION

These inconsistencies stand out, and regardless of how long you’ve been using these settings, the values for both the axes and joints are still not aligned with best practices/recommendations. It's difficult to predict the exact repercussions because, generally speaking, most configurations follow these minimum recommendations. Yours is definitely the outlier.

Hi All. 

I apologise for posting this.  I'm sure the solution is out there somewhere but all the stuff I can find seems not to work.   

I want to run  a pci card as a second parallel port for my DIY cnc.   I want more inputs and some more outputs also. I am using a Generic breakout board that is identical to primary one I am using on Port 0. My board has a Parallel port on 0x378 This Port 0 in linux and works fine if I do in my hal file.

loadrt hal_parport cfg="0 out” or loadrt hal_parport cfg="0x378 out” 

The PCI Card is some sort of generic MOSCHIP based card and it is detected as Port 1 in linux.  It has two addressed associated with it 0xe480 & 0xe800I have tried the following in my Hal file

loadrt hal_parport cfg="0 out 1 out”  (port 0 works port 1 nothing)
loadrt hal_parport cfg="0 1 out”  (cant remember what this one did probably same as the rest)
loadrt hal_parport cfg="0x378 0xe480 0xe800 out “ (port 0 works port 1 nothing)
loadrt hal_parport cfg=”0x378 0xe480 out” (port 0 works port 1 nothing)
loadrt hal_parport cfg=”0x378 0xe800 out” (port 0 works port 1 nothing)
loadrt hal_parport cfg=”0x378 out  0xe480 out  0xe800 out “ (port 0 works port 1 nothing)
loadrt hal_parport cfg=”0x378 out 0xe480 out “ (port 0 works port 1 nothing)
loadrt hal_parport cfg=”0x378 out 0xe800 out “ (port 0 works port 1 nothing)

I have tried every variation I can think of but still get no output. I am testing using a multi-meter on two outputs on the port 1 breakout board had had set them to be amplifier enable and one output is inverted from the other just for the sake of testing.

I have also tried probing the cable it shows no changes when I press enable in linuxcnc. On port0 it works and hitting enable locks up the motors.

Can anyone point me the correct direction!  I feel like I’m going in circles.

Hi,

For information.
Here is a patch manual. It's included in the repository now.
patch manual

I apologize, but I ask you for help.
At this point if I used 2.9.x I have to perform a procedure, while for 2.10, I have to perform another procedure.
I installed debian 12 with uspace, from the iso image downloaded from the lunuxcnc download.
The next procedure to correctly install Ethercat and linux cnc to compile, where can I find it?

Many thanks

So here are some pics of the used hardware I bought.
As I did not get any exact match, this might have been a quite stupid action on my side.
Anyways, do you think it's worth a try with some of the mentioned TB6600 driver boards? Or should I drop it an start with some nema17 steppers and the mentioned TB6600 driver boards?
Plus (as I want to somewhat keep in mind the setup of the big machine) I'd like to start using a mesa board directly. Would that work with the mesa 7192 type of boards?

...except, a friend will lend me a hand-held oscilloscope, where I could establish by moving the jog buttons on the controller's keyboard what the signals are.

For the tangential knife application, at the moment there is only a rotational value output available, wich
can be used in hal to connect to a motor or device.
There is no additional logic in the planner for the tangential knife.

I understand the concerns off DauntlessA regarding the use of the tangential knife when there is no additional
logic included.

I see basicly 2 solutions at the moment.

Solution 1 Basic :
Use the hal rotational value from the planner, connect the tangential motor in hal.
Then be sure your gcode uses ramp in path's so that the direction vector is always in the right direction.
In my perspective it's better to avoid straight z moves, but always a z move containing some xy changes, wich will
direct the tangential rotation in the path direction.

Solution 2 Advanched :
The planner has at the moment 4 build-in, you can call it "post processors". overview link
These are used to verify the planners behaviour at runtime. And they are used as fallback option and as a template layout.

We can easely add more post processors for special applications.

That's why the infrastructure in the planner is build up this way.
You just need to copy one off the current post processor .h header files, and edit it your way.

Then for example, we copy the "file_path_clothoid" to a new path algo: "file_path_clothoid_tangential_knife".

Then when doing the tpAddLine or tpAddCircle, we can add rotational start-, end values for a-axis, wich can be used for the
tangential knife device.

From the moment the a-axis has rotational tangential knife values.
It's part of the motion control system.

During the tpAddline & tpAddCircle we also look if a-axis has only motion, and xyz has motion or xyza has motion.
This makes difference in calculating speeds & trajectory length's.

So in fact a lot can be customized here. The planner has a clean modular infrastructure. And the oversight is not that hard to
follow.

I have build a cnc with tangential knife device years ago. It was sold to a shoe company to cut shoes from leather.