-
Honest Appraisal of UCCNC
Trying to workout if I stick with UCCNC or buy a new controller card and go to Mach4...
I did a few basic cutting comparisons between Mach3 and UCCNC and Mach3 seems to cut rounder holes and generally work better. As I am new CNCing I was wondering what others thought of UCCNC in a direct comparison to Mach3.
Looking for perceived or measurable differences between the two, and if one is favoured over the other based on performance rather than bias.
-
Re: Honest Appraisal of UCCNC
don't know about the uccnc control but M4 is way better than M3, things in M4 happen when they are meant too
-
Re: Honest Appraisal of UCCNC
Do you find M4 cuts better than M3?
-
Re: Honest Appraisal of UCCNC
I haven't got that far yet but will next week on a big router running a ESS.
what I can say is its faster and smother than M3 I ran a air test for 4 hours where it started it stopped on all axis, the speed change on the spindle was instant no lag using the speed over ride.
the machine I tested on ran a G540 and a superpid for speed control.
I have now converted it over to a laser running M4 and Darwin with a arduino as the laser control it works like a dream no laser on it yet I had it connected to a scope to test the laser output it was very fast changing laser power.
I ran a half arise test last week on a not properly set up laptop (what I new would not work well) to test a aerier ridden test on M3 and M4, M3 was out by a mile (1.24 mm on Z axis) M4 was just out (.42 mm on Z axis) turned the wireless internet off and antivirus the error when to .24 on Z in M3 and .04 in M4.
so next week when I run it on a correctly set up laptop I think I will have it to .00 something the test I do is a 1000 line Z axis movements at different speeds its done at 1000 line so if i run it and its out by the same amount each time I know how far it will be out in more Z movements.
if it out by a round about number like +0.02 then -0.04 then 0.00 its all good
-
Re: Honest Appraisal of UCCNC
Will be interesting to hear your thoughts once you have it running properly.
-
Re: Honest Appraisal of UCCNC
I've considered giving uncnc a try but while running it in demo mode I've noticed that it doesn't support g18/19 . Most of what I do is surfacing so the software is useless . I emailed to ask about this and they told me it was in the plans , I also asked when it would be implemented and they never bothered to reply back . I like their hardware but the software isn't complete which is probably why it's being sold at 1/2 price
I've got mach3 tweaked fairly nicely and I haven't had much issue with it . My mills get a lot of hoursput on them each week . But , there are a few slight performance issues that I'd like to see improvements on , which is the only reason why i would change anything
-
Re: Honest Appraisal of UCCNC
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Bad Wolf
Trying to workout if I stick with UCCNC or buy a new controller card and go to Mach4...
I did a few basic cutting comparisons between Mach3 and UCCNC and Mach3 seems to cut rounder holes and generally work better. As I am new CNCing I was wondering what others thought of UCCNC in a direct comparison to Mach3.
Looking for perceived or measurable differences between the two, and if one is favoured over the other based on performance rather than bias.
.................
....if you use the 4th axis (A-axis), then UCCNC is not for you. Contacted support and was told that to render it equal to Mach3's 4th axis support (speed) it was complicated and too time consuming. Bottom line observation was that there was no serious intention of correcting the speed issue and as such the 4th axis is not usable practically speaking - imho.
hope this helps...
-
Re: Honest Appraisal of UCCNC
Ok some really good feed back, since I am new to the whole CNC gig, I should probably spend some more money on a new PMDX 422 breakout board and PMDX 407 for spindle control and go Mach4 as I do plan to use a 4th axis at a later date.
-
Re: Honest Appraisal of UCCNC
I've been eyeballing pmdx and their products possibly look like a good fit but I have seen much feedback on their stuff . Prices aren't too bad
-
Re: Honest Appraisal of UCCNC
Have just flicked them off an email to see if those two items are what they recommend for my configuration.
-
Re: Honest Appraisal of UCCNC
the pdmx 422 has been built for M4 so it should do what you wont
-
Re: Honest Appraisal of UCCNC
There is no speed issue on the 4th axis, but the UCCNC does not support the radius based surface speed control for the 4th axis.
In other words this is not something to be corrected in the software, but to support this will be a further development and a new option to select...
-
Re: Honest Appraisal of UCCNC
Basicly CAM softwares are capable to not generate G18 and G19 but to generate G1's instead. Since the UCCNC has a nice look ahead function that will work about the same as if the arcs on XZ and YZ was defined with G18/G19.
And as said the G18/G19 is on the todo list, but I can't tell you at the moment when it will be implemented.
-
Re: Honest Appraisal of UCCNC
Quote:
Originally Posted by
dubble
Since the UCCNC has a nice look ahead function that will work about the same as if the arcs on XZ and YZ was defined with G18/G19.
.
It wouldn't have the same results on the finished product , short line segmented codes are extremely noticeable on metal . It might be fine on wood but certainly not on metal .
Besides the amount of code needed to create a clean arc with the use of line segments would be quite large vs a single line or two of code , I can't see how it would be near as efficient .
-
Re: Honest Appraisal of UCCNC
Quote:
Originally Posted by
dertsap
It wouldn't have the same results on the finished product , short line segmented codes are extremely noticeable on metal . It might be fine on wood but certainly not on metal .
Besides the amount of code needed to create a clean arc with the use of line segments would be quite large vs a single line or two of code , I can't see how it would be near as efficient .
the code for a line segments to do arc`s is massive and is very ugly I tried it ounces never again you can still see it in wood and you can hear it (it was not done with a UCCNC)
-
Re: Honest Appraisal of UCCNC
Quote:
Originally Posted by
daniellyall
the pdmx 422 has been built for M4 so it should do what you wont
Yeah I know it will work with M4 as that was my original reason for looking them up, but since this is my first CNC I want to make sure I am covering all the bases when it comes to functionality. I don't want to assume it will do everything I want and find it doesn't, so I told them what I need and asked them to confirm it will do what am expecting. The DB25-1205 I bought in the original kit doesn't support spindle control, this is one of the things I want to work properly, start / stop, speed control, direction etc.
-
Re: Honest Appraisal of UCCNC
How do you think a software generates an arc code? (Mach3, UCCNC etc.)
I tell you: It cuts the arc to small line segments for precalculation, then it creates time frames and speed informations and from this it generates the step signals.
The working like this is nessessary because the software works and have to work with external motion controllers and the trajectory planning in all these software are on the PC side...
The UCCNC has an advanced trajectory planner, so if there are enough line segments which shapes an arc then the result will be the same as if an arc is programmed.
The only difference will be that the G-code will be longer.
-
Re: Honest Appraisal of UCCNC
This does not makes sense, except if you fragmented the arc with low resolution.
-
Re: Honest Appraisal of UCCNC
Quote:
Originally Posted by
dubble
This does not makes sense, except if you fragmented the arc with low resolution.
was years ago with what was meant to be a top of the line cad program what put out lots of not so tiny lines, what i use now put out a small code that use`s arc`s yes it`s tiny lines but it has bugger all code so its faster, cleaner and very time saving.
dubble I am not saying anything about your controller never used it just saying about what I have used and use now so nothing on you.
-
Re: Honest Appraisal of UCCNC
daniellyall,
That's ok, I did not think you told anything about our controller. I was just telling my opinion on your comment based on my knowledge in this theme.
And yes, you are right about that the code is then much longer and more calculations are needed, but today's computers can handle it, they are fast enough to deal with the task.
The original post I was replying to was about that the UCCNC currently does not understand the G18/G19 codes which is true and I thought to share with your the workaround...
-
Re: Honest Appraisal of UCCNC
I am having problems with a few bugs in the UCCNC, so I might buy some new hardware and Mach 4 anyway.
-
Re: Honest Appraisal of UCCNC
OK, good luck with your machine!
-
Re: Honest Appraisal of UCCNC
dubble why bother doing your own software when you could just do a plug for M4 what has not change for quite sometime just add in`s so it stable, that`s up to you to do it but with thing that are happening over your way cant blame ya for doing your own cam.
but if you do get it working as good as M4 it just keeps mach on there toe`s so keep it up. also half the problem I found with M3 it`s that some computers just don't work with it it may be the same with your program I now that by one computer I was running was having a lot of problem getting mach to run good all the time, changed computer and all problem`s when`t away had that argument with some of the tormach blocks but the computer that was a dude for me was the NZ version of the computers on those machines what had problems and the make of computer`s my computer guy said they are the worsted computers you can get.
dont give up on bad wolf ask him whats wrong
-
Re: Honest Appraisal of UCCNC
Do you know when the new UCCNC version will be released?
Thanks,
Enzo
-
Re: Honest Appraisal of UCCNC
Haha, youre too funny.
We bother with developing our own software the same reason why Artsoft bothering developing Mach4, because it's fun. :)
The new 1.1 version of the UCCNC will be released soon which will have some nice new features, like:
- Plugin-ability
- Builtin 2.5d CAM module with DXF import (with internal, external, online contour, pocket, simple and spiral drills calcualtions)
- Rigid tapping
- Precise syncronous thread cutting with encoder feedback
- Support for the UC300-5LPT motion controller
- Advanced hotkeys mapping
- Input and Outputs triggers mapping
- Stopless countinous backlash compensation
- Fast laser outputs
- Laser scan type engraving plugin
Just to name some of the new features coming soon...
Bad wolf can e-mail us if they have any problems with the UCCNC, we always help if customers having any problems.
-
Re: Honest Appraisal of UCCNC
What may not work or correctly on some computers in Mach3 is the LPT port driver of Mach3.
That works with hardware interrupts of the computer and as Windows is not a realtime OS the timing depends on how the motherboard handles these.
But as soon as the control goes with motion controllers the situation changes, because then the step/dir signals are generated externally, the timing is done by the external DSP, CPU, FPGA or whatever processing unit the motion controller has.
When using a motion controller Mach3's LPT port driver does not even has to be installed.
Another problem may be if the PC has too low resources to run the software itself, like the GUI and the code which interprets the G-code, makes the calculations etc.
But with Mach3 it is clear that the adviced minimum is 1.6GHz and 1Gbyte, so above these values any PC should work if using an external motion controller...
-
Re: Honest Appraisal of UCCNC
We have basicly finished everything except the laser plugin which I have mentioned, we working on this now.
Also there is a version which was released to our testers who helping us pretesting the software prior to the official release, if you want to check that please e-mail me and I'll send you the download link.
-
Re: Honest Appraisal of UCCNC
Quote:
Originally Posted by
dubble
What may not work or correctly on some computers in Mach3 is the LPT port driver of Mach3.
That works with hardware interrupts of the computer and as Windows is not a realtime OS the timing depends on how the motherboard handles these.
But as soon as the control goes with motion controllers the situation changes, because then the step/dir signals are generated externally, the timing is done by the external DSP, CPU, FPGA or whatever processing unit the motion controller has.
When using a motion controller Mach3's LPT port driver does not even has to be installed.
Another problem may be if the PC has too low resources to run the software itself, like the GUI and the code which interprets the G-code, makes the calculations etc.
But with Mach3 it is clear that the adviced minimum is 1.6GHz and 1Gbyte, so above these values any PC should work if using an external motion controller...
the computer was more than what was needed but it could not run M3 very well at all it was connected to a ESS the computer I changed it to was less than 1.6GHz with 1 gig of ram but it runs M3 like a dream
-
Re: Honest Appraisal of UCCNC
Hi,
I sent you a PM with my email address, please could you share me the link for dowload?
thanks,
Enzo
-
Re: Honest Appraisal of UCCNC
Hi,
I sent 2 messages, but it seems no one reached you, I can't see the messages in my outbox...
please could you provide me your email?
Are you Balazs?
Thanks,
Enzo
-
Re: Honest Appraisal of UCCNC
So, what is your conclusion about this story?
-
Re: Honest Appraisal of UCCNC
Enzo,
Yes, it's me. :)
I've just sent you a PM with the download link.
-
Re: Honest Appraisal of UCCNC
OK dubble if you are Balazs, then you already have my emails and you know my problems. The software is not bad just lacking a bit of maturity (which of course takes time) but considering my lack of experience with CNC software I am going to probably go with the one that has more YouTube demos and a greater knowledge base. Since I already have the UC100 and have paid for the UCCNC software I'm not about to throw it out, but I might come back to it at a later date.
If you have read my latest email do you have any ideas on why I cant zero the home position? Unfortunately I am spending way too many hours on trying to get the software to work, and not enough time making parts.
-
Re: Honest Appraisal of UCCNC
I guess you are Paul, because nobody else reported any bugs for a few weeks now. (I'm talking about the 1.0xxx version, the 1.1xxx version is still under heavy testings and development and that may still contain a few bugs, but it is officially not released yet.)
I replied to the e-mail you sent me yesterday, but the description on the issue was not exactly correct, so I missunderstood that.
I'm preparing a reply to the new e-mail you sent today, because now I understood what you ment...
-
Re: Honest Appraisal of UCCNC
Quote:
Originally Posted by
dubble
Enzo,
Yes, it's me. :)
I've just sent you a PM with the download link.
Thank you so much,
Enzo
-
Re: Honest Appraisal of UCCNC
Cool, see how we go with that, if still not on the same page I can make a video showing exactly what is going on. I sometimes find it hard to put things in words properly. I also found a typo after I sent the email I said ZERO ALL when I actually meant HOME ALL. I tried both but neither seems to reset it.
-
Re: Honest Appraisal of UCCNC
Quote:
Originally Posted by
dubble
How do you think a software generates an arc code? (Mach3, UCCNC etc.)
I tell you: It cuts the arc to small line segments for precalculation, then it creates time frames and speed informations and from this it generates the step signals.
The working like this is nessessary because the software works and have to work with external motion controllers and the trajectory planning in all these software are on the PC side...
The UCCNC has an advanced trajectory planner, so if there are enough line segments which shapes an arc then the result will be the same as if an arc is programmed.
The only difference will be that the G-code will be longer.
I get that the software breaks it down to pulses !!!!
for me to have to create code that breaks my arcs to .0001" just to suite your software would be a bit ridiculous , and not very resource friendly for any cam software . Besides there is no way that I want to go thru 100's of programs and redo perfectly running programs . I understand that your software is new and that your making it because its fun , but for me this is business . Besides , when I feel the need to hand edit and enter code , how do i break that down to line segments without a million trig calculations
Mach and emc are the closest that I have seen yet to true profession controls and I've worked on nearly all of them .
I liked a lot of aspects to your software and i do like your hardware , I had hoped that you'd understand the importance of having these arc codes because it's a big step back in cnc technology without them , unfortunately you seem to rather validate not having them , just as you had tried to validate not having cutter comp g41-42
-
Re: Honest Appraisal of UCCNC
As said it is on the todo list.
How do you hand edit a code that contains many line segments?
Most of real-life codes are like that, there are only a minor number of real life codes which contains perfect arcs.
-
Re: Honest Appraisal of UCCNC
the bulk of my programs are arcs .
Try hand coding a xz arc into line segments , you'll probably find that its not so easy to do , especially if you want a clean looking arc . It's rare that I need to do some hand editing but it does happen .
Sorry if I come across as argumentative but I've been in the machining industry for a long time and there are certain standards that I and all other machinist have come accustomed to , mach and emc both did a good job of meeting these standards . Do they need improving , sure , but anyone that has been in the industry long enough can pick up these softwares and run old or new programs painlessly
Everything has its growing pains and your software has potential , good luck !
-
Re: Honest Appraisal of UCCNC
Thank you, I'm happy to hear you see the potential. :)
Some videos for those who did not see the software yet in action:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sa-_CoJV9Bw