Another plasma component...

More
04 Apr 2019 13:22 #130282 by rodw
Replied by rodw on topic Another plasma component...

but I was wondering if it would not be better if the line was:
net p_comp:axis-position        axis.z.pos-cmd              =>  plasmac.axis-z-position
my brief check in hal config told me that these should be equivalent but I dont have enough Linuxcnc experience to be sure...
Glenn


I kinda think that is more correct for the 2.8 master branch Plasmac is based on. The reason for this is that one significant change from V 2.7 to V 2.8 was separating the dependence between axes and joints. In the case of an axis with 2 motors, the axis don't really exist until the machine is homed. I wondered if external offsets might make the joint vs axis be different but I don't think so.

You can't assume a given joint represents a specific axis anymore

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
04 Apr 2019 21:56 #130315 by phillc54

Zultan wrote:
but I was wondering if it would not be better if the line was:
net p_comp:axis-position axis.z.pos-cmd => plasmac.axis-z-position

rodw wrote:
I kinda think that is more correct for the 2.8 master branch Plasmac is based on

Thanks guys, I will have a look at this.

Zultan wrote:
Do you still want to see my config I should be able to upload it later today (machine computer doesn't have internet)?

I don't think I have actually tried with a machine rename, I will give that a try and let you know.


Cheers, Phill.
The following user(s) said Thank You: Zultan

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
04 Apr 2019 22:22 #130318 by Zultan
Replied by Zultan on topic Another plasma component...
Phil

Ok, I'm dumb, saving works fine you just have to hit enter after changing a value. Saving works on both renamed and original named machine. Sorry for wasting time.

Glenn
The following user(s) said Thank You: phillc54

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
04 Apr 2019 22:39 #130319 by phillc54
Thanks Glenn,

Yes, that seems to be a GladeVCP thing, it does work OK if you use up/down arrows.
I had just finished testing with a renamed machine...


Cheers, Phill.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
04 Apr 2019 23:18 #130320 by islander261
Phill

I managed to do a few (9) line tests today. The results were mixed. But first here is the test program:
O<xline_test> sub
G91
G0 X0 Y0
M3 S100
G01 X6.0 F220
M5
G90
(G01 Z 1.0)
O<xline_test> endsub

M2
This was launched as a MDI button from the bottom of the MDI screen.

I had a bunch of trouble using the dry run button (something I will never use in production work). It needs to show a change of state when it is active. Things got very confusing when trying to use it, most likely operator error. I had to shut down and restart gmoccapy to re establish predicable behavior.

While the probing test worked reliably on clean dry sheet things didn't go so well on a dirty wet one. Problems with the torch going down to the sheet surface with the Ohmic Probe LED coming on and then the torch just moving +/- .005" up and down by the DRO. The Ohmic Probe LED would sometimes briefly change state. It would do this until 30 second timer had timed out and then raise the torch.

The line tests proved less than reliable, the best I did was three in a row without a problem. Most of the problems involved some sort of probing failure. Sometimes the failure was as above but with a twist. Because there is no timer to force a time out the only way to stop the torch bouncing was hit the program stop button. At this point retries resulted in the same failure even after cleaning of the torch and material. The only way to recover correct operation was to shut down gmoccapy and restart it. On several tries the torch would move part way down and stop and fire well above the sheet surface. Stopping the program sometimes fixed the problem and sometimes didn't. Twice at the end of the cut the torch dove into the work piece only to raise up again. Once to the starting position and once into the upper limit switch. I expected the torch to raise to the safe height between cuts, some times it did and sometimes it didn't.

The good news is that THC appeared to work very well, I got the pgain up to 40 and the deadband at .1v and had no sign of oscillation and the height control was solid at the set point. The Z axis did not appear "nervous" at all. Halscope plots showed no sign of hunting or overshoot. The corner hold LED came on at the end of the cut as it should. I am very happy with how the THC works with the straight lines given the terrible time I have had previously with the EO branch. I now need to get a PP working for the plasmac branch so I can test with one of my normal pieces.

I don't know what I did but the configuration and materials files are now working correctly!

I need some guidance on what information I need to collect for you. I just don't have a good enough understanding of the plasmac component to do more than start looking a random signals.

John
Attachments:
The following user(s) said Thank You: tommylight, rodw

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
05 Apr 2019 01:04 - 05 Apr 2019 01:28 #130322 by phillc54

islander261 wrote:
I need some guidance on what information I need to collect for you. I just don't have a good enough understanding of the plasmac component to do more than start looking a random signals.

And conversely I don't know enough about plasma cutting to know what questions to ask...


John, thanks for all your testing it is at least steering me in the right direction.
Could you increase the debounce.0.delay to 2 in plasmac.hal to see if that makes any difference to probing, you may need to slow the probe speed down a little to compensate for the extra overshoot.
EDIT: Actually if you have a floating head it may be worthwhile trying something like 10...

Cheers, Phill.
Last edit: 05 Apr 2019 01:28 by phillc54.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
05 Apr 2019 03:02 #130328 by islander261
Phill

I was really impressed with how well the THC worked, right now I am sure it is the best I have seen with any equipment I have owned.

Ok, I will increase the debounce time and try it. I actually went as high as 5 yesterday when chasing my tail. My floating head has nearly .25" in compliance so slowing down the response isn't a problem. My table is in rough shape right now because I don't have the couple of days to remove,repair, replace and re-level all the slats right now. So this is a good real world test in poor conditions.

My present system when probing rapids the torch down , this maybe from safe Z or from G53 Z0, to just above the thickest plate I can cut (i have no idea how I will get it on the table) .650" then proceeds at slow speed until contact is made. Then I move it down another .005" just make sure the contact is good. I then slow the speed down by 16 and raise the torch until contact is broken.

I have used several systems that used the no Z start the THC with M3 and end with M5, and all suffered from horrible IHS because of poor probing. Please look at the Gcode I posted a while ago about for probing. I didn't get to that point by accident. I can post an example of the Gcode my present production system uses if you want. Probing is easy if you only ever use 6-8mm and thicker plate (so is cutting in general).

Questions now. At what height is the torch supposed to go at the end of the cut? When cutting a file we want the torch to go to safe Z between cuts and at the end of the file we want the torch to go to G53 Z0, the same as error conditions. Even the commercial systems that use external THCs re synchronize the work piece top surface (G54 Z offset) at each probing, some at the probing and some at the end of the cut.

I am going to have to hack you plasmac_monitor code, my old eyes can't deal with the low contrast/low brightness arc voltage display! Actually once this is working well and stable I will most likely move all indicators to the plasmac_monitor code and put both Gladevpc tabs behind the preview tab.

John

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
05 Apr 2019 03:22 #130329 by phillc54
Thanks John, I am sure we will get there eventually.

My present system when probing rapids the torch down , this maybe from safe Z or from G53 Z0, to just above the thickest plate I can cut (i have no idea how I will get it on the table) .650" then proceeds at slow speed until contact is made. Then I move it down another .005" just make sure the contact is good. I then slow the speed down by 16 and raise the torch until contact is broken.

I was just about to ask the sequence of your ohmic probing, I see now that I need to make it different than the float switch...
This exposes my total inexperience with cutting.

I have used several systems that used the no Z start the THC with M3 and end with M5, and all suffered from horrible IHS because of poor probing. Please look at the Gcode I posted a while ago about for probing. I didn't get to that point by accident. I can post an example of the Gcode my present production system uses if you want. Probing is easy if you only ever use 6-8mm and thicker plate (so is cutting in general).

I shall take a peek.

Questions now. At what height is the torch supposed to go at the end of the cut? When cutting a file we want the torch to go to safe Z between cuts and at the end of the file we want the torch to go to G53 Z0, the same as error conditions. Even the commercial systems that use external THCs re synchronize the work piece top surface (G54 Z offset) at each probing, some at the probing and some at the end of the cut.

Between cuts the torch goes to safe height (in the config tab) above the highest point encountered on the cut.
At the end of the job the torch goes to the original Z start height.( the height Z was when it received the spindle on signal)

I am going to have to hack you plasmac_monitor code, my old eyes can't deal with the low contrast/low brightness arc voltage display! Actually once this is working well and stable I will most likely move all indicators to the plasmac_monitor code and put both Gladevpc tabs behind the preview tab.

When you finish hacking the Gmoccapy config I would be happy to use that as the sample config if you agree. I have never used Gmoccapy before and actually find it a bit daunting...


Cheers, Phill.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
05 Apr 2019 10:48 #130332 by phillc54
John,
After reading your probing code I have some changes to try in the plasmac component.
I hope to have a preliminary version ready for testing tomorrow morning.
Would you prefer that I post the component on this thread or that I just push to github.

Cheers, Phill.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
05 Apr 2019 15:07 #130343 by islander261
Phill

Thank you for the operation instruction, what I am seeing makes much more sense now.

I know how to update the whole branch from git, haven't tried individual files yet. If you are only making changes to one file I should be able to manually deal with that if I get a path to it. So do what is best for your work flow and configuration management sanity.

I may have to ask for help when I go to split up the handler file for the Gladevpc panel. I can copy and imitate python code but get lost quickly when starting from scratch.

Gmoccapy is really easy to change the screen and access tabs behind the preview screen. You have all ready put modified screen bits in your present config and tabs behind the preview screen are exactly the same. For tabs behind the preview screen you want the EMBED_TAB_LOCATION = ntb_preview. each of your current Glade files and handlers will need to be broken into separate files for the tabs to be at the top level or for easy testing you can just use the the as is files and end up with a top level tab that brings of the glade file and its tabs will become visible as sub tabs. I will attach an example of my playing with the later approach, this is not finished work only an example. Running Gmoccapy is like operating a CNC milling machine without all the assumptions many plasma and router table controls make. I find that I rather like the work flow because it it very similar to that of my mill.

I have a lot of production work today so I may not get any more line testing in till tomorrow.

John
Attachments:

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

Moderators: snowgoer540
Time to create page: 0.229 seconds
Powered by Kunena Forum