RE: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] Re: USB or Ethernet machine control

It's interesting that, in one breath, we talk about not wanting to go back
to the expensive proprietary boxes that some of the commercial equipment
uses. Then, we talk about a 'smart' peripheral box which, when you examine
its contents, is nothing more than a proprietary box aimed at the hobbiest
market which is driven by a PC aimed at the office/home market. What I'd
suggest is that folks take a good look at what is left of the "single board
computer" market and find a good SBC with sufficient I/O to do the job. This
would mean, IMHO, several different I/O ports such that you could assign
each axis to its own (thus the same port functions either to drive the
bridge transistors directly or provides step/direction to drive something
like a Gecko) plus enough additional points to allow any auxiliary controls
such as air, coolant, etc.

It would also mean coming up with a protocol to transfer the control program
(as opposed to the G-Code to be interpreted) to that 'peripheral.'

Perhaps, we're coming to a point where the 'free ride' on the back of the
office computer is over and that we'll have to find a different pony to
ride.

-- Carol & Jerry Jankura
Strongsville, Ohio
So many toys, so little time....


|It has been my assumption when we talk about 'smart' peripheral
|control boxes that these things run off of drip-fed g-code, possibly
|preinterpreted into something easier to digest, but basically without
|tight timing constraints. The tight timing is all inside the box,
|between the motion planner, servo loops, and output to the drives.