Re: Digest Number 56

> From: "Fox, Dan" <dfox@...>
> I gotta ask an ugly question: Does Uncle Sugar have 2 FTE's or thereabouts
> cranking on an open-architecture CNC software system/product just so that 3
> dozen galoots can have lots of fun in their garages? From what I can tell,
> there's 2-maybe-3 of us that are using EMC to make a profit. The NIST site
> mentions some GM involvement, and it does seem reasonable to think that this
> stuff would enhance American competitiveness etc., but ......? What does
> this EMC project do that makes it worth $1/4M/yr +/- to you and me?
> Enquiring minds want to know.

well, sometimes you do research and development projects not truly knowing
where they will lead. Apparently, much of the heart of EMC is in the
motion control and motion planning sections, and the interpreter that takes
RS-274D (G-code) and converts it into the planned motion. These pieces
were originally created for robotic applications, and may be the heart of
some other projects.

Another factor that pushed this development was the OMAC committee,
which was originally composed of large users of robots and machine tools,
who were interested in bringing down the cost (both purchase and maintenance)
of these machines. I think the OMAC is dead, nothing new has shown up
on their web pages in years.

I believe it was originally hoped that EMC would lead to machine tool
manufacturers basing their controls on open systems, and delivering a
much cheaper product to the workplace. That certainly hasn't happened
(yet). And, there's no obvious rush to do so, either. Small shops
may well be willing to pay extra to get the conversational features
that many proprietary controls offer.

So, I don't know if there are projects in the private sector that are
using EMC, or some of the components, and paying back to the
economy. I think there are some small projects at NIST or other
labs that are using EMC or some of the components in reasearch
or facilities. I know that NIST is setting up a mill in their own
machine shop to use EMC. That's because it is there, and it gives
NIST some local, machinist-type feedback on what is good, and
what needs to be made better.

It is hard to know where this is all going. EMC may be one of those
blind alleys that never really provide much payback for all the work
that went into it. On the other hand, the guys who wrote the original
RS-274 standard in the 1960's would be STUNNED to see how
widely and broadly their little design has become integrated into
manufacturing. Not only mills and lathes, but robots, pick-and-place
machines for circuit board assembly, CNC drilling of printed circuit
boards, laser photoplotting of master artwork for PCB photoetching
and the making of micromachined components, etc. all use some
version, variant or dialect of RS-274! There are entire industrial
sectors dedicated to turning RS-274 commands into precise
motion. We wrote the book (in the US) and it is used all over the
world, now in its' fourth decade.

Jon