Advanced Search

Hi grandixximo,
Nicely laid out plan.
There is one more nuance for a motion planner that should be considered when looking at a complete re-write for linuxcnc motion planner internals.
For operating robots, some moves are given in joint space and some are given in cartesian space.
For most commercial robots, MOVJ and MOVL/MOVC are separate commands for joint space v/s cartesian space commands.
The MOV* commands also have a sync parameter which chooses if all the axes should start and finish at the same time (rapid move) OR should the motion start and finish at the same time.

When switching between MOVJ and MOVL there is no need to specify the a Kinematics switch. I am guessing they use 2 separate planners and the switch is made at stand still i.e., zero vel and accel for all joints and axes.

Having this ability for multiple on-the-fly switchable planners will make Linuxcnc much more useful for operating robots.

The only reason to bring this up in the conversation regarding jerk limiting is the planner re-write could consider these types of use cases from ground up.
-automata

New PR github.com/LinuxCNC/linuxcnc/pull/3744
Should be able to get new build artifacts, not sure, or you can build my fork
Need some help with testing, thanks!

giaviv wrote:

However I’m a bit limited by the low ram (8GB), low disk space and etc.


 

LinuxCNC uses minimal RAM, but I could see needing lots of RAM if you were running CAD/CAM software on the machine and working with larger files. If that is the case you might want the kind of computing power you're talking about.

I am running a GMKtec M5 Plus mini-pc with a Ryzen 7 5825U cpu and 32GB RAM on Debian 13 and it works well. It is my only pc that also has Windows on it. It runs a lot cooler on linux and its little fan is quiet. Every time I boot Win11 on it I am reminded it has a noisy little fan that can really blow hot air. I never tried LinuxCNC or the realtime kernel on it. I left it at work today. Tomorrow evening I'll bring it home and post some latency tests from a LinuxCNC live boot.

Hi all,I’m building a large vertical machine for laser cleaning and automated spray painting of heavy equipment (excavators, cranes, large fabricated parts and enclosures).Motion concept is a raster-based process:

• Z axis performs the working stroke (up/down) where laser cleaning or spray painting is applied
• Y axis is used only for slow stand-off distance control (surface following)
• X axis is used only between strokes for step-over / overlap indexing, then the next Z stroke starts
  
  For painting, we use automatic air spray guns (not airless / not AAA), since painting is done in a general workshop area without a dedicated spray booth. Typical overlap is around 60–70% between strokes.Current and planned hardware:
  • Mesa 7i96S (Ethernet, step/dir drives)
  • THCAD-2 for isolated analog-to-frequency input
  • Keyence distance sensor (starting with IL-1000, possibly upgrading to LK-G3000 series later)
  • Current: manual air spray gun 
  • Planned: automatic air spray gun 
  • Typical speeds:
    • Z working stroke: ~15–40 mm/s
    • X step-over between strokes: index only (no distance control)
    • Y axis: slow stand-off correction only
      
      Environment is electrically noisy (industrial equipment, welding, laser), so isolation is important.My questions:
      1. For this type of slow stand-off control on Y, is using THCAD-2 into the 7i96S encoder input a reasonable approach (non-plasma use)?
      2. If I upgrade to a faster sensor (LK-G3000), does THCAD-2 become a bottleneck for meaningful improvement?
      3. If I want proper fast isolated analog input, which Mesa hardware would you recommend to add ADC capability to a 7i96S-based system?
      4. Any practical tips for filtering, deadband, and loop rates for a ~10 Hz sensor like the IL-1000 in this application?
         
         Thanks in advance for any advice.

I've had good success with generic fanless industrial mini-pc's in aluminum housings. One had a Celeron N5105, another had the J1900 CPU, both seemed performant for my applications. I was not running anything graphics intensive.

I tried a $90 USD UXX and a $110 MinsForum, with intel N4020 celeron CPUs, gave up on both of those. The one couldn't be configured to boot automatically when the power is switched on, both had insurmountable ethernet power-save features that interfered with ethercat.

I was asking  about:

From here there is only "board not found"

What program printed that message?

As Unknown mentioned, posting your hal and ini files would help diagnosis.

Note that pncconf cannot currently make configuration files for the 7I97/7I97T
so the options are to use MesaCT or start with a sample 7I97 configuration
and modify it to suit your hardware:

 
 

.3 is from the starting poin. If you're .15 from the edge it's only going to move .15 past the edge. Step off should be adjusted until you comfortably clear the edges.

If you're still having issues you can check your car file to see if your are correctly updating.

Yes, I have the probe tip dia set

My start position was well inside of the .3, it’s pretty small stock. All the outside corners behave the same, I didn’t check the inside.

.3 pretty small unless you have it real close to the corner when you start. Do you have the probe tip diameter set in the tool table?

Do the other corners behave the same?

pretty sure i have all the setting correct as that was my first suspicion. I have already calibrated the probe and used it to find the center and z height of the stock.. I don't think that would have been possible with bad values? Or am i wrong? I will check again tomorrow. I used the original PB for several years so I am pretty familiar.  Also, the pictures are confusing; the second pic the probe had already completed the x measurement and moved into position for the Y.  the probe did step off the correct .3" in the x direction.

I'm interested in trying this out. Where can I get the Arduino source code?

Step off width.

Read the probe help on the probing page for explanations on how probing settings works.

Thank you I got it working. Today I attempted to probe a top left outside corner and noticed that when the routine went to probe the "Y" side the probe does not move over enough to the positive X to probe the material.  It does like it should when it probes the X.  It does the same on all outside corners.  It probes the center position just fine.  I attached a pic of the probe start position and where it fails to move over enough. Any ides on what to look for?

Aciera wrote:

I'll try to have a look at the '9D' branch later. Thanks.

which I got not much feedback..


Just as a word of caution from my own experience:
You mustn't expect to much from a forum thread like this. Few people will even read a post that long, fewer still look at the code and hardly anybody will even try to understand it. I know of at least one long time contributor, since retired, who got quite bitter about trying to get sustained and involved feedback here. Even from the very people asking for the specific feature.

I will do it because I want to, don't need cheering up much, although it is nice, it is more about doing something that I can share with everyone, and we are all roughly on the same page, as to what has to be done, but I will do it regardless, and then it can stay in a fork, or merged, we will see...