RE: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] How to choose?; was "parallel port finally obsolete?"

Getting to the point of making chips with a CNC machines involves several
pieces of software and hardware. How integrated or plug-and-play all of
these different parts are depends on what you're after. It is important to
know that no matter what there are many different parts to any system and
many steps involved in going from concept to a finished part.



For example you can go for a complete 'canned' system from ShopBot or
CarveWright and have a fairly easy route. With a 'canned' system you have
the assurance that everything is made to work together and will 'just work',
in other words the manufactures have gone through the engineering process to
find all the right parts that work well together. The hardware and software
of this type of system is made to work together. The down side is that these
types of systems are more limited. (Let's call this option A.)



BTW, CarveWright is the only CAD/CAM system I am aware of that has a version
for Mac; although it is limited to the CarveWright machine for the most
part. I do know some Mac folks have been using the various Windows
emulation/VM packages to run some CAM/CAM software as well.



The next step form a 'canned' system would be to get a packaged system. A
packaged system will usually include all the miscellaneous components
already assembled and sized/designed for your target machine. There are a
few places offing these types of systems as well. This route has the
advantage that you can work with the manufacturer and get the system
customized to your needs. (i.e. you get to take advantage of their
experience.) The packaged system may or may not be offered with software
such for CNC control, CAD/CAM, etc. Many of the systems in this class will
be optimized for a certain type of CNC control program, i.e. Mach 3 or EMC2.
(Let's call this option B.)



The final method is to buy all the individual components yourself and build
a system from scratch. This option requires the most effort and knowledge in
order to get all the right parts and assemble things properly. (Option C)



So, the first question one should ask is which of these types of
systems/categories am I after. If you have machinery you want to convert to
CNC then that narrows it down to option B or C. The next question is how
much of the conversion do you want to do yourself? This is dependent upon
knowledge, mechanical/electrical aptitude and time, etc. There is no one
solution to every CNC need so there will not be one 'black box'.



I've built controls that used everything from the parallel port to PCs with
various external motion controllers to non-PC based controls. The right
hardware/software depend on the machinery and what you needing it to do.
NOTE: 'external motion controller' implies a piece of hardware that is
deigned to work in conjunction with a PC to provide motion control. It makes
no difference if it is a board that plugs into the PC internally or through
an USB/Ethernet cable.



My suggestion is to first determine what it is you're trying to accomplish
and then start narrowing down which path you want to take to get there. For
example converting a small desktop mill to CNC will have different
ramifications than building a CNC router table.



Jeff Birt

Soigeneris.com



From: CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of scyvt
Sent: Sunday, February 26, 2012 3:07 PM
To: CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] How to choose?; was "parallel port finally
obsolete?"

Dave

Your comments are perceptive and appreciated. Thanks also to the many other
posters who offered useful info.

I changed the subject line, as I think that the way I originally framed my
question was off the mark of what I really wanted to know, which is by what
means can I sort out the numerous offerings to make an intelligent decision
on what hardware and software will best suit my needs.

My mention of USB input and "plug-and-play" was based on the goals that
Marriss' black box project aimed to achieve, as best I understood them.
Although that project was abandoned about the time that I stopped closely
reading this forum, I imagined that they represented the way of the future,
and that by now, several years later, someone else would have succeeded
where Mariss had failed, and might be dominating an otherwise fractured
market.

Also my reference to my Mac preference was meant to convey that I was not as
conversant with PC hardware as most of the group seems to be, and also that,
never having owned a machine with a parallel port and never having missed
having one, they didn't seem to me worth hanging onto forever. The
difference between serial and parallel is not lost on me, however, and I am
broadly technically and mechanically saavy.

So, my real question is how anyone can manage to sort thru all the numerous
offerings of DIY motion control software and hardware, absent some sort of
Consumers Report that provides reliable testing and separates claims from
demonstrable performance? If I was shopping for a dust collector, for
example, there are probably a half dozen magazines articles with spreadsheet
analysis based on actual testing that i could consult. Plainly there are a
great many on this list who have managed not to get hung up on this point,
so there must be an answer.

If it is personal recommendation, the only one that I know who has built a
machine swears by FlashCut, which is out of my price range, and also seems
suspect in ways that I can't quite put my finger on.

If it is by brand loyalty, perhaps that is why I was disappointed when
Marriss dropped his black box, as that offered an "all Gecko" solution.

If it is by masterful prose, Tom is pretty good, but then so is Jon.

If it is by the offering of handholding, there is Bob, Dan, Fred, etc, all
with outstretched hands.

There are 5 or 6 machines here awaiting CNC conversion. Every time I think
that I may have a handle on product selection, some new offering comes
along, muddies the waters, and I postpone the project, supposing that
clarity will surely come along when I discover the elusive key.

What am I missing, when so many others manage to achieve enough certainty to
proceed in spite of the lack of hard comparative data?

TIA

Steve

--- In CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO@yahoogroups.com
<mailto:CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO%40yahoogroups.com> , "turbulatordude"
<dave_mucha@...> wrote:

>
> I think there is a different delineation than what most of offered.
>
> you can get plug and play. A HASS mini-mill or lathe.
> Roland makes table top units, T-Tech makes circuit board etchers, etc
>
> but, the hobby market is based on assembling bits and pieces in order to

save costs in exchange for time.

>
> many of us think a BOB, power supply, drivers and motors are just a few

nights work to assemble so see that as an easy part (albeit costly) part of
the project.

>
> also, many of us find that the horrible timing pulses from windoz units

are actually more than acceptable for the work we do.

>
> There really has not been a need for a plug and play package.
>
> a simple desktop dremel unit with assembled pipe has entirely different

requirements than does a chinese micro-mill or a 4x8 table top router or
even a plasma table.

>
> There are people who offer the entire electronics package as plug and

play, but these are guys who know how simple it is to assemble a power
supply and drivers that match a motor or machine.

> And, you still fall back on the software of your choosing.
>
> I stepped out of the main-stream for a while. once I had a few machines

built for the work I was doing, I was more into production than making a CNC
machine. the market is a little wider, the knowledge is WAY easier to get.
but there has been little advancement.

>
> I bet my great grandfather would be able to drive my car with only a

handful of instructions.

>
> Dave
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> --- In CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO@yahoogroups.com

<mailto:CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO%40yahoogroups.com> , "scyvt" <scy@> wrote:

> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > --- In CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO@yahoogroups.com

<mailto:CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO%40yahoogroups.com> , "Tom" <thom@> wrote:

> >
> > > There are lots of solutions. (unlike 8 years ago) In some ways it just

confuses the market.

> >
> >
> > Well, that may be my answer right there. Perhaps I was caught up in the

excitement a few years ago when Marriss was developing what looked to be a
be-all, end-all black box, that in its simplest form promised to be
plug-and-play. Unfortunately, that particular approach proved to be
unachievable. However, it for a while held out the prospect of being a
market dominator like Geckodrives, eliminating the head-spinning difficulty
of sorting out the pros & cons of all the other competing hardware &
software.

> >
> > Being a Mac person (sissy?), I have been holding out for a Mac-like (not

necessarily Mac-based, although that would be nice) integrated
hardware/software solution that was a stand-out choice. Perhaps FlashCut
comes closest, but is not in my budget range.

> >
> > Those of you who are up to your elbows in CNC may not recognize that

Art's solution to the limitations of Windows looks to an outsider like a
temporary kludge, surely to be superseded anytime now. EMC/Linux is great if
you have the time and inclination to overcome the learning curve. DOS-based
approaches look prehistoric.

> >
> > On the hardware front, as Tom observed, the variety of offerings can

present a dilemma, as much as opportunity. Is there somewhere a matrix
(spreadsheet?) that organizes the field into some kind of discernible order?
You might think that Digital Machinist mag would have undertaken such a
project, but they may be wary of offending advertisers, or it maybe simply
outside their capabilities.

> >
> > Lacking the time or depth of knowledge to sort out all the options, as I

referenced earlier, I have been waiting and hoping for the field to coalesce
around a consensus approach. For better or worse, the opposite seems to have
happened.

> >
> > I could go on, but either you get my point now, or you just feel that I

am stupid and hopeless. Probably Tom was closest to the mark in inferring
that the problem for people like me is too many choices, no clear best
approach, and no way to get a comprehensive grip on the pros & cons of the
alternatives. All compounded with a lingering suspicion that surely a
breakthru must surely be around just the corner.

> >
> > Steve
> >
>

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]