Advanced Search

Where did you read about Ethernet compromising performance?
Mesa has no such issues, they can do easily MHz range pulses, KHz servo rates (i have tested at 4 KHz 5i25, 6i25 and 7i92).
I have several industrial machines using Mesa, in use daily for many years. Retrofit and build logs are on this forum and youtube, but my videos are cr@p compared to RotarySMP's.

Ah, i´ve been watching your stuff for a while to get a sense for what i am getting into, nice content!
You are using a pretty elaborate control interface on your Schaublin. I am not sure if i want to go down that route though. All i need is some jogging control to set offsets, tool measurements, start stop and feed override. My idea is using a USB pendant, a footswitch for my chuck and everything else on a touchscreen.
For years i have done nothing but adjust tool offsets on the control itself, everything else is straight from cam. And for jogging a pendant doesn´t need to be real time control via the FPGA in my mind.
Or am i totally wrong about LinuxCNCs control interface?

Regarding max step rate: that potential bottleneck is eliminated with Ethercat, there are no pulse/direction signals. Instead a new target position is give over EtherCAT to the driver.
I think the two technologies complement each other. If you have/want to use traditional drives with pulse/direction or analog voltage control you go with Mesa. If you want to invest in a field bus system with drives and other units, you go with EtherCAT.

Hi
In Qt Designer, how can I edit an entered g code using the qt widgets??