[ger21]

Ger you seriously trying to tell me that software dictates hardware?

Yes, I am.
But I'm not talking about a stepper drive, like the G540. Stepper drives have absolutely nothing to do with software. Gecko created an all in one stepper drive/breakout board combo, and added a parallel port interface so that 99% of their customers could just plug it in and use it.

In your other post, you talked about modern software working with antiquated peripherals. The fact of the matter is that it doesn't.

UCCNC doesn't use a parallel port, and was not designed to. Mach3 does, because it was the only option when it was written. Mach3 is far from modern, having been written over 10 years ago.
Mach4 was designed to NOT use a parallel port, but a parallel port plugin was written by the author of Mach3

UC100 is a modern solution forced to use antiquated db25 plug to interface with other antiquated controllers still using parallel port for communication.

There's really zero difference between a DB25 plug and screw terminals. They chose a more compact system, which is easier to use for 95% of their customers. If you don't like the parallel port interface, then buy a UC300. Exactly the same technology, but with a different connector.

You're confusing a parallel port interface for a parallel port. These are two very different things.

And fwiw, Gecko makes many stepper drives, and only the G540 uses a parallel connector. The reason? Because that's what works best for the market that the G540 is targeted to.

USB dongle what in heavens name are you talking about?

That was a reply to someone else's post.

[derek]

The UC-100 Has a parallel port PLUG so it will retrofit easily into existing systems. Remove parallel port cable, install UC-100 in it's place.

The UC-300 requires some sort of daughter card to get access to the ports.

[vmax549]

YES the software CAN dictate the hardware. AND vise versa as well. So it depends on which side of the coin you are looking at.

The original Mach3 was LPT port ONLY. Then Art figured out a way to allow an interpetor fo what Mach3 put out to be used by another Motion devise. BUT that motion device had to be made in a way that it understood what Mach3 was saying.

The UC100 device can run with Mach3 AND the UCcnc software as well. BUT when the UC100 is run under Mach3 it is NO better than what MAch3 can output as code. IF the UCcnc software does a better job of creating the Code THEN IT will be the better combination. The UC300 is a very powerfull platform that is being made even better as we speak. It has a TON of built in I/O both digital and analog. Its limit now is the software that can drive it. THAT part is being worked on as well.

The DIY CNC solutions are at a turning point in design. They need to be powerfull, fully functional to a CNC standard of gcode operations and Reliable. The software needs to be user friendly as far as user to machine configurations. It will not matter how GOOD it is IF the user cannot get it working with basic computer skills AND there is NO REASON it can not be that way. Long gone are the days when a DIY user will spend 100's of hours experiementing and trying to figure out how to get his machine running. They want their hobby to be USING the machine not getting it working. AND AGAIN there is not a good reason that it cannot be that way. SOme OEMs are making their part that way BUT that idea HAS to come down from teh Software Creaters as well you cannot create a situation where teh USER / OEMs have to handle all the needed support load such as having to crate custom Scipts to do standard CNC functions THAT is the software side's responcibility. NOW IF you are creating an off the wall CNC function that is NOT a normal CNC function THAT is a different story.

The software side should HELP but the burden of creating the speciall function is born by the USER/OEM.

The UCcnc product has a good set of bones and it will be interesting to see where it goes and what it's functions will be. You can have a part in that process just like the last generation did with things like Mach3. BUT you have to be willing to participate and give input AND test beta versions to get it all working correctly. Otherwise there will NOT be any Control softwareware that the average DIY CNC ers can afford to own. The new MAch4 will be much more costly than the old Mach3 was when it is all said and done. AND free help will be hard to come by. The setup/scripting or features is MUCH more complicated to the point the average JOE may have to PAY someone to make it work on their machine. The Software side may PUSH the user support or the product over to the OEM side. AND SOMEONE will have to pay for that. THe OEMs cannot work for free.

So we are at the point where you either Help keep the cost down OR pay someone to do the work for you. I prefere to help test that way I understand the Software/controllers better and can do a large part of my OWN hardware/software support. Besides it is great fun helping someone overcome the LARGE learning curve that CNC has and getting their machine to cut their first ever CNC chip and SEE the final part they created. PRICELESS

Come be a part of that.

(;-) TP

Part of the function of keeping developement cost down is the willingness of users to TEST and give " constructive" feedback. That is what helped MACH3 get to where it did in the DIY CNC world. Notice the word CONSTRUCTIVE (;-).

[battwell]

an interesting topic- and nice to see a few long term names on it ger and terry
im just fitting uc300 to a 7 ton router- with a 2 ton gantry- just for the fun of it!
ive been using galil/mach3 for last 4 years thought it was time to try something different.
im going to do all my testing with uccnc own software.
i chose this setup due to trajectory planner promises. time will tell how good it is.
first moves yesterday- delighted with smoothness.
im using mitsubishi j2s servos . 32768 encoder steps/rev.
i was pleased that at the end of a program run my drives were displaying exactly the same number they started with. - perfect!
i would have liked to see a few more things added, like g41/42. however these days i only use them rarely- unlike on the old controls.
z arcs would have also been nice- as i do use these on rotary axis .
but- to get a scrap machine back up and running for £150 control- it looks very promising so far.
ive purchased mach4 licence- but at this time it is of no use to me. due to plugins required not being released.

[curiosity22]

A question for those that are more knowledgeable.

In Mach 3 you pump the + sign and things move quicker, in UCCNC I pump the + sign and things move along at the same speed now I've been looking but I can't work out why its locked in at one speed.

I thought maybe if when I create the gcode Ill just double the feed rate and it will move along quicker "nope" so a little stumped.

Reason why I wanted to do this is just to speed up a little 10-20%.

One other difference I noticed between UCCNC and Mach3 - Im sure its a setting but which I dont know.

When I was trying to speed up UCCNC I thought bugger this I dont have time to frig around and I switched to Mach.

I had only just started the finishing pass on a nice piece of redwood I had been saving. Mach the + speed up working fine as intended watching the machine do its thing for 2/3 minutes and noticed well bugger its not leaving detail where detail was before it was erasing some branches on a tree where branches were being carved. I see Z moving but naught there.

So switched back to UCCNC had to lower my Z by a couple mm to make sure I wasnt seeing things and sure enough detail was comming back. Back to Mach it was scrubbing my detail ran at the same speed so buggered if I know what was going on there.

Neways - how do I have UCCNC move a little quicker using the + key please anyone.

Much appreciate any assist.

As for the other if anyone has a clue why that is happening drop a line as well - I dont know if its a difference between the software I cant say as I dont know for the moment just imagine it as novice user lack of understanding.

Regards,
Steve

[BanduraMaker]

Can't tell for sure but, could it be that you're already at the max velocity specified in the Axis configuration tabs? It won't go any faster than what's allowed there.

[Bad Wolf]

A question for those that are more knowledgeable.

In Mach 3 you pump the + sign and things move quicker, in UCCNC I pump the + sign and things move along at the same speed now I've been looking but I can't work out why its locked in at one speed.

I thought maybe if when I create the gcode Ill just double the feed rate and it will move along quicker "nope" so a little stumped.

Reason why I wanted to do this is just to speed up a little 10-20%.

One other difference I noticed between UCCNC and Mach3 - Im sure its a setting but which I dont know.

When I was trying to speed up UCCNC I thought bugger this I dont have time to frig around and I switched to Mach.

I had only just started the finishing pass on a nice piece of redwood I had been saving. Mach the + speed up working fine as intended watching the machine do its thing for 2/3 minutes and noticed well bugger its not leaving detail where detail was before it was erasing some branches on a tree where branches were being carved. I see Z moving but naught there.

So switched back to UCCNC had to lower my Z by a couple mm to make sure I wasnt seeing things and sure enough detail was comming back. Back to Mach it was scrubbing my detail ran at the same speed so buggered if I know what was going on there.

Neways - how do I have UCCNC move a little quicker using the + key please anyone.

Much appreciate any assist.

As for the other if anyone has a clue why that is happening drop a line as well - I dont know if its a difference between the software I cant say as I dont know for the moment just imagine it as novice user lack of understanding.

Regards,
Steve

Steve I use these two buttons all the time. You can increase the base rate set in you G Code by up to 300% and down to as little as 10%

[Bad Wolf]

I think perhaps some are splitting hairs and perhaps missing the point of the topic which was to do a grass roots appraisal of UCCNC against other software. Granted every piece of software is going to have it's strengths and weaknesses but the real question is how does UCCNC stack up against modern counterparts like Mach 4. No real point in comparing it to Mach 3 because that is yesterdays news and there is a new kid on the block. I have found "features" in UCCNC I would definitely call bugs, but the point is not to bash or berate UCCNC the point is to get an idea of where it sits in the market against its competitors.

So far I don't think anyone who has offered an opinion has actual run both Mach 4 and UCCNC to offer a real comparison.

[ger21]

Very few people are using Mach4, because most current Mach3 users don't feel that Mach4 is ready for use.
Yesterday, Artsoft announced a new release of Mach4 that they feel is finally ready for "hobby" use.
However, mach4 still does not have any control over CV mode, which means that UCCNC's trajectory planner should still be far superior to Mach4's.
(I haven't looked at the new version to be sure that they haven't added CV controls, but there was no mention of it inthe release note.)

[Bad Wolf]

Was just trying to reread through the whole thread and to be honest I think it was a bit of a dumb question to ask on my behalf, because most people are incapable of giving an unbiased opinion without getting caught up in side topics / tangents / justification. I was originally looking for a M4 does this better, UCCNC does that better without going down too many different rabbit holes. I gleaned some good information from it but nothing really conclusive. Since the trajectory planner seems to be one of the bigger selling points / criteria, as does G Code support for various features there seems to be a mixed bag of answers.

The Aussie dollar has gone to pot since I started this thread and there is insufficient reason to move away from UCCNC at this time, so I am just going to persevere with UCCNC until I need a feature it doesn't have like pedant support (for my device) or 4th axis machining.

In conclusion majority of the issues I had with the software were configuration issues due to my own lack of experience. Yes there are a few little niggly bugs but nothing that is a show stopper.

[ger21]

Since you can't use a UC100 or UC300 with Mach4, I doubt that you can find anyone that's used both UCCNC and Mach4.

[Bad Wolf]

I wasn't even necessarily looking for a direct comparison, any combo of controller / card would have done, and some people with multiple machines at work may have come across it, but as I say I think I have as much information as it was possible to get from an ill conceived question. I shouldn't have asked for an honest appraisal, I should have asked for something like the features you do or don't like in x software, as no two people are ever going to agree on "a best" software. Can probably close this thread if that possible.

[Signal9]

Don't forget the major price point difference between uccnc and mach3/4.

$60.00 for uccnc.

[mactec54]

Don't forget the major price point difference between uccnc and mach3/4.

$60.00 for uccnc.

You can not run anything with the $60 uccnc software by itself, there hardware costs of the other parts add up to about the same as other packages, it also depends on how much output you want also, UC100 has a max of 100Hz which will do for most hobby users

Smoothstepper has up to 4Mhz output there is no comparison, I don't think there is a best package, it is all about what your needs are, as to what package you should get

There are a lot of good packages software and hardware that you can buy now, everyone must remember Mach3, was the start of an evolution, in that anybody could afford and have a cnc control

[curiosity22]

Bad Wolf hey g'day,

Thanks for the reply, I ended up writing to the owners of uccnc. The reason for my + not working the minus was ok. As I understand it the + will not work if you exceed the velocity setting of the axis. My velocity settings were set too low. So when I ran my code it was over max already and no room to move.

Cheers,
Steve

[Bad Wolf]

I really don't want to get into a price debate because it really has no bearing on comparing the software features / performance. The difference between $60 and $200 is negligible when I have about $6,000 tied up in the CNC itself. Yes I did buy UCCNC because it was cheap enough to try, but the price alone is not enough to make me continue to use it. However I have yet to hear a compelling enough reason to outlay a lot of money to change all the hardware to go to Mach 4. So for now I will stick with UCCNC.

Glad to hear you got it sorted Steve, I figured it would be something like that.

[curiosity22]

I really don't want to get into a price debate because it really has no bearing on comparing the software features / performance. The difference between $60 and $200 is negligible when I have about $6,000 tied up in the CNC itself. Yes I did buy UCCNC because it was cheap enough to try, but the price alone is not enough to make me continue to use it. However I have yet to hear a compelling enough reason to outlay a lot of money to change all the hardware to go to Mach 4. So for now I will stick with UCCNC.

Glad to hear you got it sorted Steve, I figured it would be something like that.

Hey Bad Wolf g'day,

I won't be outlaying money for Mach4 I see no reason to not continue using UCCNC and I won't be switching on Mach3.
I'm not emotionally tied to one piece of software or the other, it has been a bit of a learning curve understanding UCCNC and its controls how they are placed why and named. The English literal translation of some controls left me stumped but then that's to be expected.

Two main reasons I won't switch over now that I have purchased UCCNC. Forgetting all other things 1st my motors sound different, they are quieter and have a sort of whistle when they move I don't know why but having watched other videos where people are using UCCNC it seems to be something that UCCNC does. The quiet none growling love it - it has to be better for the steppers.

The second, the last job I was doing I was frustrated because I couldn't work out my UCCNC issue with the + key (now resolved) and switching back and forth between M3 and UCCNC was that the details on a carving I was doing was being cut perfectly even though the detail was thin and just visible, 1/2 to 1mm it was there. Mach3 ignored the detail it wasn't there. Both software were set the same (I believe them to be set the same) but it seemed that Mach ignored the finer detail.

Imagine if you would vascular arms on a character, UCCNC was carving the veins and they were visible. Mach3 was carving the arm ok minus the veins. Now is this changed with Mach4 I don't know but I'm not prepared to pay what is it now 5 times the price of UCCNC to find out. The Aussie dollar to US dollar conversion atm is horrendous. I was lucky and bought most of everything I needed while the dollar was on parity and better than the US dollar.

Now as to whether or not mach or uccnc cut a curve better or more accurately to be honest not a concern to me as I don't need to cut many curved things with what I do - what is important for me is detail. Because of what I discovered I will now redo some earlier carvings I have done and see exactly how much of a difference there is.

[ger21]

....switching back and forth between M3 and UCCNC was that the details on a carving I was doing was being cut perfectly even though the detail was thin and just visible, 1/2 to 1mm it was there. Mach3 ignored the detail it wasn't there. Both software were set the same (I believe them to be set the same) but it seemed that Mach ignored the finer detail.

Imagine if you would vascular arms on a character, UCCNC was carving the veins and they were visible. Mach3 was carving the arm ok minus the veins. Now is this changed with Mach4 I don't know but I'm not prepared to pay what is it now 5 times the price of UCCNC to find out.

The issue you're seeing with Mach3 is due to CV mode settings. Mach3 has numerous settings to control CV mode, but, bottom line, UCCNC provides better control than Mach3 is capable of.
At this time, Mach4 has no CV control at all - it hasn't been implemented yet. Which, imo, makes it unusable for a router at this time.

[curiosity22]

Gerry G'day,

Thank you for that info, would you know if I may ask why when using UCCNC my steppers make a different sound almost like a chirping whistling sound? I've noticed in videos anyone using UCCNC has the same effect, it doesn't bother me more curious as to the cause how the software is affecting the audible running of steppers?

Cheers,.

Steve

[mactec54]

would you know if I may ask why when using UCCNC my steppers make a different sound almost like a chirping whistling sound? I've noticed in videos anyone using UCCNC has the same effect, it doesn't bother me more curious as to the cause how the software is affecting the audible running of steppers?

Cheers,.

Steve

You can hear a different sound because the uccnc system is running at100Hz, before most were not running over 60Hz, unless they had a smoothstepper which can run up to 4Mhz, other Breakout Boards also have their own CPU, that have a range of different frequencies, which help with how the motors run