Open Source Controller with internal THC

Thank you .... you still didn't understand me. What I described is just one of the options, of course. For 10 years I have made all possible options without a MESA card, but with FPGA from other manufacturers.
You are not right about the capabilities of the FPGA - the Fanuc controller, for example, is a PLC / FPGA in one and can control the interpolation of 9 axes (standard, up to 12 in modification) and up to 32 in general, using a direct connection to the drivers, Ethercat, CanOpen, Mechatrolink, RS485 and so on.
In other words, if we set the interpolation to 5 axes, for example, to 5 separate cheap FPGAs - they will execute them absolutely accurately, not to mention the feed rate or surface speed. These are specialized circuits that perform the critical role for the PC, to clock the pulses in the case of the motors super smooth, regardless of their speed and complexity of movement.
So the whole problem is whether you can create a task for them properly. They can perform it with precision with a built-in PLC algorithm such as PID for example or whatever we decide there.
I give an example, on one of my machines - a metal mill, I have had such a controller XC609M for almost 2 years. Of course it works on Linux and inside it is made like this - the main controller is STM32 (from $ 5) and as FPGA for interpolations on each axis use another STM32 (from $ 2). One on each axis!
It works great, I can't say a bad word, except for one thing - the planning toll road, they have a problem with the CV. That is abrupt interrupted uneven movement when performing small curves.
Yes, but I have one DM800 , also with Linux. It is a bit simpler, but there is no problem with CV. Inside, it is again made in the same way - with STM32 in the role of FPGA
Think about it !

What is the benefit of what you are suggesting?

Also with your HDMI problem, why not use a HDMI over Ethernet converter, CAT6 is good for up to 50 meters. If the home cinema guys can get 4K quality out of it, it should be fine for a simple display for a machine.

One more thing, I assume your idea is similar to what 3d printers use,a STM32 that controls everything. Have you looked at Octoprint? The main thing that makes Octoprint so successful is its ability to have all the complex calculations done on the more powerful raspberry pi and sending basic commands to the printers processor to have the actions carried out.

I personally believe that EtherCAT or something similar will become more popular in the future. With a host PC sending out command and the EtherCAT drives handling the instructions.

I went back and read all of stivemaster's comments and I sense a bit of frustration as he looks for a cost effective CNC solution.

I too think Linuxcnc would benefit from a premade controller, particularly for plasma. But there is no ability for the linuxcnc project to do this as its 100% maintained by volunteers and has no bank account. This makes it an unusual open source project.

But its 100% open source and Mesa also follows an open source model. They even went as far to say recently

A functional THC A-D could be made for $2.00 with a
555 Timer VCO and an optoisolater.

But the problem you have is that Linuxcnc does not need a THC, it just needs to know the voltage and it can do the THC function internally and do it better than external THC ever can because it knows everything at the motion control level. Its a shame you have chosen UCNC as you will end up with an inferior system as the integration with the motion controller is just not possible in the way it can be done in Linuxcnc.

So one way forward for you would be to spend $2.00 building a THC AD-C card similar to the Mesa THCAD. You could use this with a parallel port system until you built your own FGPA similar to the Mesa 7i96 and leverage off the existing linuxcnc hostmot2 driver.

thefabricator03 wrote: ... why not use a HDMI over Ethernet converter, CAT6 is good for up to 50 meters...

CAT6 will work over greater distance, but at reduced performance (i.e. that of CAT5e). Either would work well and a 1000ft box of plenum-rated is inexpensive. The converter is a good idea too.

@stivemaster13 I have never understood why some folks feel the urge to go onto a decent forum and try to take a dump all over the main forum subject matter (like going to a Jeep forum and telling everyone there they should've bought a Yugo).

Linuxcnc forum is an awesome support system for the software namesake, I know if I call "support" elsewhere I won't get multiple people helping me from all over the world like they have repeatedly done for me and so many others here.

Now I may go onto another forum and tell all of them they're wrong, just to see what the thrill might be. Ok, not really...just making a point of an observation or two.

@rodw

I told you mate.
He's just want to sell those. And fruatrated to not make controllers like premade expensive stuff( though being expancive does not mean superior).

@thefabricator03
have you used octoprint?
how much faster is with new 32bit 3d printer boards. Does it have any opportunity in cnc?

Yes, maybe you're right. Although I'm hardly the first to say - guys, if you go out of style Cosa Nostra, it will bring you success!
Regarding UCCNC, I did not choose this system, it just works. It is set in graphic mode and behaves well.
Here I do not see anyone who is able to understand that LinuxCNC like any normal CPC should be set up entirely in graphical mode or as it has recently become popular (so in professional CPCs) with parameters from 1 to as needed for example 999.

thefabricator03, I'm sorry to deviate from the topic - my goal was to find out if there is already a compiled Linux CNC for small computers with a low price - Intel X5-Z8350. Nobody answered me. There are not so ordinary such computers here .It has a built-in clock, which is perhaps better for real time.
This is also interesting but there is no clock.
If there are, I have Chinese ones, I also ordered a Mesa 7I96 and I'm thinking of trying again to release what I haven't been able to do so far.

stivemaster13 wrote: Yes, maybe you're right. Although I'm hardly the first to say - guys, if you go out of style Cosa Nostra, it will bring you success!
Regarding UCCNC, I did not choose this system, it just works. It is set in graphic mode and behaves well.
Here I do not see anyone who is able to understand that LinuxCNC like any normal CPC should be set up entirely in graphical mode or as it has recently become popular (so in professional CPCs) with parameters from 1 to as needed for example 999.

thefabricator03, I'm sorry to deviate from the topic - my goal was to find out if there is already a compiled Linux CNC for small computers with a low price - Intel X5-Z8350. Nobody answered me. There are not so ordinary such computers here .
If there are, I have Chinese ones, I also ordered a Mesa 7I96 and I'm thinking of trying again to release what I haven't been able to do so far.

My friend,
There are more cheaper boards than intel x5
RPI4 is 35$

orange pi pc is 20$ and work without parallel and ethernet boards. directly through pins on boards(its cheapest) thanks to russian brother mx_master

D525 board is only 10-15$ avilable everwhere as thin clients.

For plasma fast hardware is not that much essential as in other stuff.

That's right, buddy - it's up to installation and setup and how you understand this problem.
I no longer know how to explain to you that if you sell the latest phone model, but it does not have an OS, the fact that you have uploaded to several different places on the Internet, fragments from different Android, will not help you sell any phone.
Now you will say our goal is not to sell phones. Well even if you don't want to sell them there must be another purpose right? What is the goal - a few people to take such a phone, just to prove to themselves that they can do it - to install their own Android and add whatever they want as an extra?