I'm currently in the process of turning my HF 93212 7X14 over to computer
control.
I'm currently controlling the Lead Screw & Cross Slide & may include the
compund rest and/or milling attachment.
Has anybody tried it or would like info on where I'm at?

Using:
Arduino UNO
2 Easy Driver Stepper Motor Drivers
2 17PM-K210-G1VT Stepper Motors
Various .080 timing pulleys & belts

wrote:

I'm currently in the process of turning my HF 93212 7X14 over to computer
control.
I'm currently controlling the Lead Screw & Cross Slide & may include the
compund rest and/or milling attachment.
Has anybody tried it or would like info on where I'm at?

Using:
Arduino UNO
2 Easy Driver Stepper Motor Drivers
2 17PM-K210-G1VT Stepper Motors
Various .080 timing pulleys & belts
Why re-invent the wheel? The motion control software is the hard part.
Have you seen Mach-3 or LinuxCNC? They do the hard part, getting
G-code into smooth motion. LinuxCNC even does rigid tapping, although
you need the spindle controlled in both directions by the control
program for that. I do a lot of tapping on the mill, so this was
a big development for me.

There's no need to control the compound rest, in fact most CNC
lathes take that off, it is not needed when the control can do
all the non-orthogonal motions you need.

Jon

I agree programming is the hard part. I'm re-learning C after about 15
years...
I'll look the suggestions up and see what's practical. Total cost so far is
$100 so it's minor compared to some other accessories I've purchased.
Thanks!

wrote:

I agree programming is the hard part. I'm re-learning C after about 15
years...
I'll look the suggestions up and see what's practical. Total cost so far is
$100 so it's minor compared to some other accessories I've purchased.
Thanks!

LinuxCNC is free, Mach3 isn't free, but it's cheap (free if you can use
the code size limited demo version). Neither require any programming,
just configuration of appropriate I/O, limits, scaling, accel/decel
rates, etc. You need to look at G code since essentially all CNC
controls work from G code.

wrote in message
...
I'm currently in the process of turning my HF 93212 7X14 over to computer
control.
I'm currently controlling the Lead Screw & Cross Slide & may include the

CNCing my 7x10-14 is on my todo list. I do not see any good reason to CNC
the compound or even keep it. I can cut any angles I need just by
programming them.

Mach 3 does have a basic lathe setup, and there are definitely lathe setups
for LinuxCNC.

After getting some feedback here, and watching some videos on YouTube I
think I can setup gang tooling to do 90% of any work I want to do on it
without ever changing anything but inserts.

On Jul 19, 1:26*pm, "Pete C." wrote:


LinuxCNC is free, Mach3 isn't free, but it's cheap (free if you can use
the code size limited demo version). Neither require any programming,
just configuration of appropriate I/O, limits, scaling, accel/decel
rates, etc. You need to look at G code since essentially all CNC
controls work from G code.

I recently found that one can get almost any component for CNC at
very reasonable prices. And decided that I ought to get up to speed
on CNC and build a couple of little projects. So far about all I have
done is buy a break out board for the printer port of a PC and some
PIC module boards. The PIC boards are
shown at ebay item 320917531143 You can also get the bare boards on
ebay .
In fact at this time the only boards listed on ebay are the bare
board. But looking at this item number you can get a better idea of
what the board is .

Anyway I am at the point of getting either LinuxCNC or Mach3. In your
opinion is it worth the money for Mach3. I am already using Ubuntu so
Linux or Windows no big deal.

Dan

"Bob La Londe" wrote in message ...
wrote in message
...
I'm currently in the process of turning my HF 93212 7X14 over to computer
control.
I'm currently controlling the Lead Screw & Cross Slide & may include the

CNCing my 7x10-14 is on my todo list. I do not see any good reason to CNC
the compound or even keep it. I can cut any angles I need just by
programming them.


Leaving the compound in place is only going to make the machine less rigid.

--suggest pull it off and mount a sturdy tool post or a slot type gang slide directly to the cross slide.


Mach 3 does have a basic lathe setup, and there are definitely lathe setups
for LinuxCNC.

After getting some feedback here, and watching some videos on YouTube I
think I can setup gang tooling to do 90% of any work I want to do on it
without ever changing anything but inserts.

On 2012-07-19, wrote:
On Jul 19, 1:26*pm, "Pete C." wrote:


LinuxCNC is free, Mach3 isn't free, but it's cheap (free if you can use
the code size limited demo version). Neither require any programming,
just configuration of appropriate I/O, limits, scaling, accel/decel
rates, etc. You need to look at G code since essentially all CNC
controls work from G code.

[ ... ]

Anyway I am at the point of getting either LinuxCNC or Mach3. In your
opinion is it worth the money for Mach3. I am already using Ubuntu so
Linux or Windows no big deal.

If you're already familiar with linux, go for LinuxCNC for sure.
If you want to do some things not provided for by the planners (Say a
16-axis machine or something of the sort)j, LinuxCNC is easy to modify --
with the full source code supplied with it, and a variety of languages
to write special features in. Mach3 I believe to be proprietary code,
so getting the source to modify things.

Also -- if you opt to use servo motors instead of steppers.
Servos give smoother operation and potentially much faster "rapid" moves
(non cutting positioning moves). There are lots of places where you
want the rapid moves -- things like positioning the cutter for the next
pass on threading -- where you never even explicitly ask for the rapid
move -- it is simply a part of the "canned cycle" which does the
threading. But those positioning moves can eat up a lot of time on a
slower machine. My stepper based Emco-Maier Compact-5/CNC certainly
suffers from the limited stepper speed during the rapid moves. Some of
these days, I'll replace the steppers with servos, and make a linux
based controller for it.

Enjoy,
DoN.

--
Remove oil spill source from e-mail
Email: | Voice (all times): (703) 938-4564
(too) near Washington D.C. | http://www.d-and-d.com/dnichols/DoN.html
--- Black Holes are where God is dividing by zero ---

"DoN. Nichols" wrote:

On 2012-07-19, wrote:
On Jul 19, 1:26 pm, "Pete C." wrote:


LinuxCNC is free, Mach3 isn't free, but it's cheap (free if you can use
the code size limited demo version). Neither require any programming,
just configuration of appropriate I/O, limits, scaling, accel/decel
rates, etc. You need to look at G code since essentially all CNC
controls work from G code.

[ ... ]

Anyway I am at the point of getting either LinuxCNC or Mach3. In your
opinion is it worth the money for Mach3. I am already using Ubuntu so
Linux or Windows no big deal.

If you're already familiar with linux, go for LinuxCNC for sure.
If you want to do some things not provided for by the planners (Say a
16-axis machine or something of the sort)j, LinuxCNC is easy to modify --
with the full source code supplied with it, and a variety of languages
to write special features in. Mach3 I believe to be proprietary code,
so getting the source to modify things.

Mach3 is proprietary though based on the original EMC. It does have a
substantial amount of customizability and background scripting
capabilities if you need them. It is also free for the demo version
which is complete with only a 2000 line g-code limitation, and Art is on
record saying if you can live with that limitation enjoy at no charge.
Mach3 will be easier to configure and maintain than LinuxCNC if you are
not already familiar with Linux.


Also -- if you opt to use servo motors instead of steppers.
Servos give smoother operation and potentially much faster "rapid" moves
(non cutting positioning moves). There are lots of places where you
want the rapid moves -- things like positioning the cutter for the next
pass on threading -- where you never even explicitly ask for the rapid
move -- it is simply a part of the "canned cycle" which does the
threading. But those positioning moves can eat up a lot of time on a
slower machine. My stepper based Emco-Maier Compact-5/CNC certainly
suffers from the limited stepper speed during the rapid moves. Some of
these days, I'll replace the steppers with servos, and make a linux
based controller for it.

Mach3 can run servos using one of the step/dir servo drives. They give
you most of the benefits of servos at a lower cost than a
closed-to-the-control-loop servo setup.

On Thu, 19 Jul 2012 13:46:18 -0700, "Bob La Londe"
wrote:

wrote in message
...
I'm currently in the process of turning my HF 93212 7X14 over to computer
control.
I'm currently controlling the Lead Screw & Cross Slide & may include the

CNCing my 7x10-14 is on my todo list. I do not see any good reason to CNC
the compound or even keep it. I can cut any angles I need just by
programming them.

Mach 3 does have a basic lathe setup, and there are definitely lathe setups
for LinuxCNC.

After getting some feedback here, and watching some videos on YouTube I
think I can setup gang tooling to do 90% of any work I want to do on it
without ever changing anything but inserts.



Gretings Bob,
Gang tooling is a great way to get the most productivity from a lathe.
Many CNC machinists I know get locked into using only the turret
positions for tools. The time it takes for the turret to move away
from the work, index, and return to the work, can be huge compared to
the time it takes to actually cut the part. If standard insert tools
are used and the tool positions fixed then changing one tool for
another is fast and programming is easy because you know where the
tool tips are.
Eric

wrote in message
...
On Thu, 19 Jul 2012 13:46:18 -0700, "Bob La Londe"
wrote:

wrote in message
...
I'm currently in the process of turning my HF 93212 7X14 over to
computer
control.
I'm currently controlling the Lead Screw & Cross Slide & may include the

CNCing my 7x10-14 is on my todo list. I do not see any good reason to CNC
the compound or even keep it. I can cut any angles I need just by
programming them.

Mach 3 does have a basic lathe setup, and there are definitely lathe
setups
for LinuxCNC.

After getting some feedback here, and watching some videos on YouTube I
think I can setup gang tooling to do 90% of any work I want to do on it
without ever changing anything but inserts.



Gretings Bob,
Gang tooling is a great way to get the most productivity from a lathe.
Many CNC machinists I know get locked into using only the turret
positions for tools. The time it takes for the turret to move away
from the work, index, and return to the work, can be huge compared to
the time it takes to actually cut the part. If standard insert tools
are used and the tool positions fixed then changing one tool for
another is fast and programming is easy because you know where the
tool tips are.
Eric


Gang tools are nice but oftentimes (especially with swiss type machines )
you can also use holders in the turret that hold several tools at each
position (depending on chuck diameter, distance between tools and so
forth )...

wrote:



Anyway I am at the point of getting either LinuxCNC or Mach3. In your
opinion is it worth the money for Mach3. I am already using Ubuntu so
Linux or Windows no big deal.

Dan
If you already know your way around Linux, then go with LinuxCNC.
It is more flexible and configurable that Mach. The only thing that
Mach has is their "screensets" which allow you to configure your screen
so it looks like a pinball machine. I have never understood the
point of this. Totally baffled. The Axis screen does all I need,
makes perfect sense, and all I have added is a spindle RPM display to the
side.

Mach has a slight advantage to higher step pulse rates with software
step generation, which I don't really like, anyway, it is putting a
horrible burden on the CPU when there are much better ways to make
step pulses. LinuxCNC has the ability to use servos in a number of ways,
rigid tapping and non-cartesian machines.

Jon

Jon Elson wrote:

wrote:


Anyway I am at the point of getting either LinuxCNC or Mach3. In your
opinion is it worth the money for Mach3. I am already using Ubuntu so
Linux or Windows no big deal.

Dan
If you already know your way around Linux, then go with LinuxCNC.
It is more flexible and configurable that Mach. The only thing that
Mach has is their "screensets" which allow you to configure your screen
so it looks like a pinball machine. I have never understood the
point of this. Totally baffled. The Axis screen does all I need,
makes perfect sense, and all I have added is a spindle RPM display to the
side.

Mach3 has plenty of flexibility and scripting capability to handle such
custom things as ATCs and most anything else you can think of. Mach3 is
also free to try out and free to use if you can live with the 2,000
lines of G code at a time which is the only limitation in the demo
version.


Mach has a slight advantage to higher step pulse rates with software
step generation, which I don't really like, anyway, it is putting a
horrible burden on the CPU when there are much better ways to make
step pulses.

With today's multi-core CPUs and microwave level clock rates, the burden
is pretty negligible.

LinuxCNC has the ability to use servos in a number of ways,
rigid tapping and non-cartesian machines.

Yep. Rigid tapping is nice, and I believe people have successfully used
it in Mach3 (I've not tried) as well since the key requirement for rigid
tapping is a spindle encoder, not servos. Non-cartesian machines are
neat to read about, but few people actually build or use them.

On 2012-07-20, Jon Elson wrote:
wrote:



Anyway I am at the point of getting either LinuxCNC or Mach3. In your
opinion is it worth the money for Mach3. I am already using Ubuntu so
Linux or Windows no big deal.

Dan
If you already know your way around Linux, then go with LinuxCNC.

Amen!

[ ... ]

Mach has a slight advantage to higher step pulse rates with software
step generation, which I don't really like, anyway, it is putting a
horrible burden on the CPU when there are much better ways to make
step pulses.

Assuming that you really must use stepper motors. My preference
is for servo motors and servo amps.

LinuxCNC has the ability to use servos in a number of ways,
rigid tapping and non-cartesian machines.

Non-Cartesian? -- You mean like the hexapod? I believe that was
one of the early experiments built around EMC (what LinuxCNC used to be
called.)

Enjoy,
DoN.

--
Remove oil spill source from e-mail
Email: | Voice (all times): (703) 938-4564
(too) near Washington D.C. | http://www.d-and-d.com/dnichols/DoN.html
--- Black Holes are where God is dividing by zero ---

DoN. Nichols wrote:



Non-Cartesian? -- You mean like the hexapod? I believe that was
one of the early experiments built around EMC (what LinuxCNC used to be
called.)
There's hexapods (Stewart platforms) and hexaglides, and 4- and 5-axis
machines, as well as robots and SCARA arms. There are also other schemes
that can be assembled from a combination of rotary and linear axes.

LinuxCNC can control all of these, although the more unusual ones
require writing some code. Also, this flexibility allows you to
correct for inaccuracies in the machine construction, as Stuart Stevenson
at MPM demonstrated with a 5-axis Cincinnatti mill in his shop.

The big difference between Mach and LinuxCNC in this are is LinuxCNC
can control all of these machines in Cartesian space, with standard
XYZ G-code, and let the kinematics routines figure out what crazy
angles the joints need to be in to reach each position. So, you can
even JOG a robot in Cartesian coords. Mach just treats all axes
as numbers, so you'd have to program all axes of a robot numerically.

Jon

Jon Elson wrote:

DoN. Nichols wrote:


Non-Cartesian? -- You mean like the hexapod? I believe that was
one of the early experiments built around EMC (what LinuxCNC used to be
called.)
There's hexapods (Stewart platforms) and hexaglides, and 4- and 5-axis
machines, as well as robots and SCARA arms. There are also other schemes
that can be assembled from a combination of rotary and linear axes.

LinuxCNC can control all of these, although the more unusual ones
require writing some code. Also, this flexibility allows you to
correct for inaccuracies in the machine construction, as Stuart Stevenson
at MPM demonstrated with a 5-axis Cincinnatti mill in his shop.

Mach3 supports traditional 4th-6th axes just fine. No hexapods though.


The big difference between Mach and LinuxCNC in this are is LinuxCNC
can control all of these machines in Cartesian space, with standard
XYZ G-code, and let the kinematics routines figure out what crazy
angles the joints need to be in to reach each position. So, you can
even JOG a robot in Cartesian coords. Mach just treats all axes
as numbers, so you'd have to program all axes of a robot numerically.

Jon

Yes. I'll worry about that when I try to run a hexapod. Not holding my
breath on that one though, I expect I'll remain in the traditional
cartesian space for the foreseeable future.

On Fri, 20 Jul 2012 10:38:55 -0700, "PrecisionmachinisT"
wrote:


wrote in message
.. .
On Thu, 19 Jul 2012 13:46:18 -0700, "Bob La Londe"
wrote:

wrote in message
...
I'm currently in the process of turning my HF 93212 7X14 over to
computer
control.
I'm currently controlling the Lead Screw & Cross Slide & may include the

CNCing my 7x10-14 is on my todo list. I do not see any good reason to CNC
the compound or even keep it. I can cut any angles I need just by
programming them.

Mach 3 does have a basic lathe setup, and there are definitely lathe
setups
for LinuxCNC.

After getting some feedback here, and watching some videos on YouTube I
think I can setup gang tooling to do 90% of any work I want to do on it
without ever changing anything but inserts.



Gretings Bob,
Gang tooling is a great way to get the most productivity from a lathe.
Many CNC machinists I know get locked into using only the turret
positions for tools. The time it takes for the turret to move away
from the work, index, and return to the work, can be huge compared to
the time it takes to actually cut the part. If standard insert tools
are used and the tool positions fixed then changing one tool for
another is fast and programming is easy because you know where the
tool tips are.
Eric


Gang tools are nice but oftentimes (especially with swiss type machines )
you can also use holders in the turret that hold several tools at each
position (depending on chuck diameter, distance between tools and so
forth )...



That's correct. In fact, I'm going to be making soon some gang
toolholders for drills and boring bars because the stock toolholders
only hold two tools.
Eric

Polar ?
Martin

On 7/21/2012 7:14 AM, Pete C. wrote:

Jon Elson wrote:

DoN. Nichols wrote:


Non-Cartesian? -- You mean like the hexapod? I believe that was
one of the early experiments built around EMC (what LinuxCNC used to be
called.)
There's hexapods (Stewart platforms) and hexaglides, and 4- and 5-axis
machines, as well as robots and SCARA arms. There are also other schemes
that can be assembled from a combination of rotary and linear axes.

LinuxCNC can control all of these, although the more unusual ones
require writing some code. Also, this flexibility allows you to
correct for inaccuracies in the machine construction, as Stuart Stevenson
at MPM demonstrated with a 5-axis Cincinnatti mill in his shop.

Mach3 supports traditional 4th-6th axes just fine. No hexapods though.


The big difference between Mach and LinuxCNC in this are is LinuxCNC
can control all of these machines in Cartesian space, with standard
XYZ G-code, and let the kinematics routines figure out what crazy
angles the joints need to be in to reach each position. So, you can
even JOG a robot in Cartesian coords. Mach just treats all axes
as numbers, so you'd have to program all axes of a robot numerically.

Jon

Yes. I'll worry about that when I try to run a hexapod. Not holding my
breath on that one though, I expect I'll remain in the traditional
cartesian space for the foreseeable future.

Martin Eastburn wrote:

Polar ?
Martin

Axes 4,5,6 are typically rotary axes. I've only used a 4th axis a few
times and when I did I cheated and configured it as a linear axis based
on the circumference of what I was machining to simplify the CAD/CAM
work.



On 7/21/2012 7:14 AM, Pete C. wrote:

Jon Elson wrote:

DoN. Nichols wrote:


Non-Cartesian? -- You mean like the hexapod? I believe that was
one of the early experiments built around EMC (what LinuxCNC used to be
called.)
There's hexapods (Stewart platforms) and hexaglides, and 4- and 5-axis
machines, as well as robots and SCARA arms. There are also other schemes
that can be assembled from a combination of rotary and linear axes.

LinuxCNC can control all of these, although the more unusual ones
require writing some code. Also, this flexibility allows you to
correct for inaccuracies in the machine construction, as Stuart Stevenson
at MPM demonstrated with a 5-axis Cincinnatti mill in his shop.

Mach3 supports traditional 4th-6th axes just fine. No hexapods though.


The big difference between Mach and LinuxCNC in this are is LinuxCNC
can control all of these machines in Cartesian space, with standard
XYZ G-code, and let the kinematics routines figure out what crazy
angles the joints need to be in to reach each position. So, you can
even JOG a robot in Cartesian coords. Mach just treats all axes
as numbers, so you'd have to program all axes of a robot numerically.

Jon

Yes. I'll worry about that when I try to run a hexapod. Not holding my
breath on that one though, I expect I'll remain in the traditional
cartesian space for the foreseeable future.

"PrecisionmachinisT" wrote in message
newspGdnYSmYbKKDJXNnZ2dnUVZ_gednZ2d@scnresearch. com...

"Bob La Londe" wrote in message
...
wrote in message
...
I'm currently in the process of turning my HF 93212 7X14 over to
computer
control.
I'm currently controlling the Lead Screw & Cross Slide & may include the

CNCing my 7x10-14 is on my todo list. I do not see any good reason to
CNC
the compound or even keep it. I can cut any angles I need just by
programming them.


Leaving the compound in place is only going to make the machine less
rigid.

--suggest pull it off and mount a sturdy tool post or a slot type gang
slide directly to the cross slide.

I was thinking of milling a keying slot directly into the cross slide, and
then making all other components to drop into it and bolt solidly to the
slide.





Mach 3 does have a basic lathe setup, and there are definitely lathe
setups
for LinuxCNC.

After getting some feedback here, and watching some videos on YouTube I
think I can setup gang tooling to do 90% of any work I want to do on it
without ever changing anything but inserts.

"Bob La Londe" wrote in message news
"PrecisionmachinisT" wrote in message
newspGdnYSmYbKKDJXNnZ2dnUVZ_gednZ2d@scnresearch. com...

"Bob La Londe" wrote in message
...
wrote in message
...
I'm currently in the process of turning my HF 93212 7X14 over to
computer
control.
I'm currently controlling the Lead Screw & Cross Slide & may include the

CNCing my 7x10-14 is on my todo list. I do not see any good reason to
CNC
the compound or even keep it. I can cut any angles I need just by
programming them.


Leaving the compound in place is only going to make the machine less
rigid.

--suggest pull it off and mount a sturdy tool post or a slot type gang
slide directly to the cross slide.

I was thinking of milling a keying slot directly into the cross slide, and
then making all other components to drop into it and bolt solidly to the
slide.




Or make a new one, that has more -X- travel...