Re: Black box heaven or the real BDI

Hi Fred. (comments mixed in)

>    From: "imserv1" <imserv@...>
>
> I'm going to go on a little slant from a couple of threads, so I
> started a different thread to avoid muddying those others.
>
> I'd like a black box that has EMC running on RTlinux.  I just don't
> want to SEE it.  I want to SEE Windows.

This is exactly what was predicted a year or so ago by a Linux watcher.
"Linux will disappear." He meant that even on your main machine, you would
never need to see or deal with the Linux that was running in the background.
All of the programs that you would normally deal with like vector will stand
alone and use those portions of Linux that they need.

In fact, with the machine that I am working at now, I rarely see anything of
linux or even X-windows. I see Kde, my window manager of choice. I see
widgets in which I can edit files, read and work with excel, doc, pdf, etc.
I can download files, view websites, copy and delete dead versions of the emc
all at the same time. I know that Linux is back there working as a
multitasking system but <shrug>. There are commands that I can execute, or
icons on the desktop that I can use to see how Linux is doing but I don't
need to. Oh, and I can even run Kde as my window manager for MSWindows now.
<grin>

The only thing that I would clarify in your post is that you want to see
MSWindows or MacWindows rather than Xwindows. I don't have any problem with
your desire to use an os that you are familiar with.

> My ideal configuration would have EMC on a PC without a monitor or
> keyboard(maybe a pendant).  It would have step and direction output
> from the parallel port, and possibly encoder feedback.  It would also
> have a network connection to my PC running any flavor of 32 bit
> Windows I choose(maybe MAC even).
>
> Can I get a $50 Pentium 100 with an NIC card, use a real BDI(Brain
> Dead Install) that makes this box into a dumb but networked
> controller, and then run my machine over a LAN from a comfortable
> Windows box? (better yet plug in a ROM, or boot from a floppy, but I
> won't get my hopes up)
>
> I know it takes 2 computers.  One costs $50.  The other probably
> costs under $1000 but it likes me.
>
> If I wanted to set this up what would be the required components
> hardware wise, and how about software.  Is this setup a violation of
> the RT-linux patent license?  Is any media sale of this kind of setup
> prohibited? (Paul bring me one at NAMES.  ;-), you really could pay
> for your trip.)

In this case no worries. The rt is only running below the Linux OS. And
Linus T has already established that the RTLinux patent sits on rather shakey
premises.

> What is the minimum hardware required to run EMC.  A board that puts
> out Step & Direction or can it run the parallel port direct, with
> encoder feedback?  How much is it?  Can EMC put out Step & Direction
> to the parallel port like MS-DOS?

It does run steppers directly from the parport and there are many
installations that run stepper powered machine tools with the parport right
now. These range from simple xy tables to hexapods and robots.

> Ray, do you already have a tcl script that does this?

The motion control code is all written in C and C++. It is there and ready
to work for you in your two box solution. So is the network server/socket
needed to connect the EMC back together across a network.

We would have to compile at least one c program for your favorite box, move
one Tcl/Tk file from the emc, and add a free download of Tcl/Tk from
Scriptics.com.

What I'd like to see Tcl/Tk do in the case of the EMC and vector is provide a
link between the two programs. We could add a menu item in vector called
"run it" or "EMC." That button would start a sidebar with the essential
widgets like position, cycle start, feedhold, estop, and such and would
connect to the existing virtual Vector machine and it's gcode. It would also
link into the EMC interpreter using some kind of temp file. When run was
pressed in the TK widget I'd want to see vector highlight the g-code line
that is being executed and the CAD lines from which the specific code was
created.

If these Vector things, the run it button and the highlights were made
standard io codes, they could be used by any number of future CNC's.

The Tcl/Tk widget could be a narrow bar that sat alongside or below the
Vector screen. Now that would be an awesome combination. I'm ready when you
are! Want to show it at NAMES?

Ray

BTW Roland Friestad showed me a system that worked just like this with an
older version of AutoCad and one of his controls. AutoCad pointed to the
entity that was being executed.