Advanced Search

Thanks to each for reply's...Going to get back to that in a day or so so will likely struggle a bit...but that is the way it works!

LinuxCNC can do all that, and much more, but it is much better to use a micro controller for that task, usually PLC, but you can make your own PLC just search for "arduino PLC" or "ESP32 PLC" .

@LangdonS,
what are you replying to ?
And might i add: why?
Edit,
OK i found it.

There's an example of an electronic gearbox for a lathe, no gcode, just a custom GUI and some HAL connections.

Probably not a lot that you can use, but an example of what you can do.

My guess would be as long as you can get the data into linuxcnc and output any control values based on the input you should be fine. This would probably require some custom HAL written components to operate on the data and apply the output required. Oh yeah and maybe a gui.

The absolute simplest example I can think of is the parallel port tester, doesn't have any kinematics, but does allow you to control outputs and read the state of inputs.

Just throwing this out there.
MRO is another example. Maybe this could be a starting point, just start be reading data and displaying it, once you have that nailed, you could start with some simple HAL components to manipulate your data.
linuxcnc.org/docs/html/gui/mdro.html

Not an exact implementation but kind a simple example of what is achievable.

No doubt Andy will have a better idea and contradict everything Ive said, as he's way way more knowledgeable.

2.9.4 and Wheezy now accessible via:
www3.langdonstaab.ca/LinuxCNC/
www3.langdonstaab.ca/LinuxCNC/iso/
and
www3.langdonstaab.ca/iso/

Random Ubuntu Server question:
Why does the du command show the symbolic link (created via ln) as occupying space and not the actual file?
Really strange.

I deleted all other files.

(And fixed the directory structure!)

Now it's just wheezy and 2.9.4.

As long as the axis is only controlled by gcode (with no direct display/control from the GUI)
it should work.

You will have to do some hand editing of the hal file to add
the additional joints/axis and kinematics specifier.

Here is a suggestion:

forum.linuxcnc.org/plasmac/55286-servo-d...ofit?start=10#331245


( pncconf has more built-in QTPlasmaC/THCAD support  so may be an easier path)

If I hadn't already occupied all 5 axes I wouldn't have a problem.
Is it possible that my 7i85s card can't control any motors? Does this only work with the 7i85 (without S)? I can't find a clear answer online. Thanks.

Are your switches wired as normally open or normally closed?

For a normally open switch, you can just disconnect it.

For a normally open switch, just somehow short the connection so it never trips.

Though that could be pretty dangerous.

Disable a limit switch at your own risk!

A picture and a description of the scope and size of the machine would be helpful.

Hydraulic machines can be very powerful, be careful!

At the moment i am testing with hal pins, because of the option 'start from current position' . To have the correct preview, it only worked with hal. The loaded file is just a translation file to call the subroutine. (The subroutine can be used standalone, in gcode or like here from the ui) It is working, i just have to rmember to reload, when parameter changed. Still pending, set a parameter eg  #<_RUNONCE> , which allows the routine to run only once, then have to start from  the panel with known parameter for further use. What i have done so far is mostly working as desired. The sidepanel is a stacked widget with 16 layers when completed

 
 

I'm sure QtDragon has ATC funtionality, perhaps it's separate from the max number of axes?

A single parallel port can control 6 axes, so this is possible even with really old-school tech.

There has to be a solution; this can't be a new problem.

I would use AXIS at first; it's simple stable, and generally bug-free (except for the occasional regression).

AXIS is the best GUI for beginners IMO.

Try it out!

If you don't like it, then switch to QtPlasmaC.

Limit switches probably can't and shouldn't be disabled.

Do you need a limit switch there?

So long as the machine is homed, it won't exceed the soft limits unless the computer goes completely rogue.

Hard limits are preferable, but not always 100% necessary.