Advanced Search

Thanks for your analysis. If you feel so inclined, feel free to add this to the issue tracker: github.com/LinuxCNC/linuxcnc/issues

It would be even better if you could work out a fix

TripleM wrote:

I adapted it for myself, but I just wanted to ask if there was a specific reason why the order was chosen that way.

 

I just hadn't noticed as I don't have a tool-changer. It's that simple. No considered policy decision. 

It's hard to say without testing. There may be improvements to be made with isolcpus and other tweaks too.
If the board you get matches the one have with 25k latency then you should be able to step at about 5kHz (theoretical is max is 40kHz with a 25k base thread, but the differences in motor speed between every 5th cycle and every 4th and so on are more than the motor will follow)
With 4x microstepping 5kHz is about 375rpm at the motor shaft. Or 1800mm/min with a 5mm pitch screw..
You might want to start with software stepping / parport to get going, but it's not the best solution. If you are using a paralle port already then a Mesa 7i90 can be used to massively increase step rate and smoothness, and it adds a lot more IO too. There are other options from Mesa too, as well as from Pico systems and you can also look at the alternative firmwares like Remora for alternative hardware.

The release notes say that Ubuntu 24.04 is supported, and the issue you had looks
like a problem with  the XML project file, so I'm not sure whats going on.

Did you apply the latest patch?

If I get a chance, I can post a 7I96S Efinity 2025.1  project file
( I'll change something so the IDE re-writes the file )

Does this version leave existing configurations using scarakins unaffected? ie, is the new behaviour a strict superset of the area of correct behaviour of the existing kinematics?
If so, then can you raise a pull-request to update the current scarakins at github.com/LinuxCNC/linuxcnc

If the behaviour is different, then please raise a pull-request to add the new kins alongside the existing (scarkins2 for example)

The reason for this is that we try not t break existing configs through our updates. Anything that is currently working has to work at least as well after the update.

Hello,
I am working on a CNC mill with 4x Lichuan LC10E 23 bit absolute 1000W Servos. Setting up worked quite well following the tutorials and using the Marco Reps EL8 config and working from that. The machine is running and even the gantry is working. Now I am trying to tune the servos which turns out to be troublesome. After trying to get the following error down for a few hours I am left with a rather big F-Error during moves. The Error is scaling with speed. With 10000mm/ min I can't get it below a Value of 4.5mm. With 5000mm / min I can't get it below 2.25mm and so on. I tried changing almost every setting on the drive but can't get the F-Error any lower. So my last guess is that there is something wrong with the Ethercat timings or configs. Is it possible that this is a delay in ethercat between sending the position command and receiving the position feedback? Any help is appreciated
Best regards
Alex

Thanks. I'm looking to buy Asus Prime n100. How do you think will it have nice software step generation?

Did you say yes to the pop up dialog?