Re: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] black box specs was Re: interpolation and algorithms of multiple axes

I prefer parallel ports...preferably the "pass thru" type. If all the
controllers and other hardware in a separate box, all you'd need is one
simple connection to the PC. A pass thru port would also let you send data
directly to a printer instead of the machine in the event you wanted to
investigate the actual G-code prior to machining a part.
All things being equal, a parallel port will pass data faster than any
serial port. The problem is, designers in the PC industry are bypassing
parallel ports for the so so called "faster" serial ports.

Smoke

-----Original Message-----
From: ballendo@... <ballendo@...>
To: CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO@egroups.com <CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO@egroups.com>
Date: Wednesday, December 06, 2000 10:55 PM
Subject: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] black box specs was Re: interpolation and
algorithms of multiple axes

>ron wrote:
>>Good to hear this discussion. We have had this before, but it has ?
>>never quite turned into reality.
>
>Ron,
>
>Thanks for joining in with some good thoughts. You're right, let's
>get this to the next level!
>
>Towards that end:
>
>P-ports are familiar and easy. And disappearing??!!
>Serial ports are a pain, and familiar. And being replaced???
>USB seems to be gaining steam as the NEXT "desktop" std...
>Firewire seems to be a good choice ?? (evolving as an industrial std)
>
>Comments, anyone?
>
>>I would be thrilled to pay a couple hundred dollars to have a box
>>like flashcut sells, with an open protocol. I would finish up my VB
>>Conversational program very quick to run on it.
>
>The "flashcut box" is a std. microcontroller serial-type board. Has a
>processor and oscillator, a max232, and some "update able" ROM. I
>believe it is a proprietary "motion system on a chip". I would not
>want this!! I really would want to keep the interp algorithms and
>trajectory planning on the pc.
>
>But I do like the idea of a multi-axis pulse gen that I have
>to "update" periodically... And I'd like some I/O "out there in the
>box" as well... How many I/O bits do you think we NEED? And how many
>do we Want? :-)
>
>>I am not interested in boards to be plugged into the PC that need
>>drivers to run them. PCs have well know ports- serial and parallel,
>>either of which is far faster than needed to control an intelligent
>>box from VB. Don't need to open the PC box.
>
>Agreed. NO "plug-in" boards! So, again I ask, Which protocol?
>
>>And, keep the drive board separate from the 'signal generator' Then I
>>can use a simple 1.2 amp chip, or Dans 5 amp board, or Marris
>>Step/dir Servo board, whatever I need, with the same signal box.
>
>Yes, definitely. Mariss, What do you think the "form factor" of this
>circuit is/ will be. Since the posted circuit is old, will you be
>using ASIC or FPGA or ...? Will it be "geckodrive" size? Where will
>the power come from? Details. Details.
>
>>I like SimpleStep, and the PicServo, but they have different command
>>sets. Id like one box to support.
>
>Yes. Again agreed. And let's keep Jeff Bs' advice in mind. Figure out
>the LEAST BIT that NEEDS hardware! This is a product/ project/
>situation which will scream for feature-itis, IMO! Let's keep the box
>really simple.
>
>>Sounds like Marris has the interest and ability to design and build
>>the box, who's going to write the code?
>>ron ginger
>
>I'm VERY interested in this project. But I'd like to see some answers
>from the list to my questions/opinions above first...
>
>Hope this helps.
>
>Ballendo
>
>
>
>
>
>Welcome to CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO@...,an unmoderated list for the

discussion of shop built systems, for CAD, CAM, EDM, and DRO.

>
>Addresses:
>Post message: CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO@egroups.com
>Subscribe: CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO-subscribe@egroups.com
>Unsubscribe: CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO-unsubscribe@egroups.com
>List owner: CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO-owner@egroups.com, wanliker@...
>Moderator: jmelson@... [Moderator]
>URL to this page: http://www.egroups.com/group/CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO
>FAQ: http://www.ktmarketing.com/faq.html
>bill,
>List Manager
>
>
>