New computer ?

[Peter Howell 1Participant @peterhowell1]

My old desktop computer – Windows XP, running Mach3 has finally expired. Advice on a new machine and getting Mach3 to run, my mill is connected to the parallel printer port.

Any advice gratefully received.

Peter

[EmgeeParticipant @emgee]

I bought an older Dell from eBay that had WinXP loaded with the port to run Mach3 and serial port for my Emco machines, runs other programs without trouble, clearly best not to have it connected to the net but for a workshop computer it works fine.

Cost I believe was around £60 which included a wired mouse and keyboard + flat screen monitor.

Emgee

 

[Harry WilkesParticipant @harrywilkes58467]

Peter where I live we have a couple of computer shop that sell pre-owned machine it’s a bit safer than ebay you can see them working before purchase.

H

[JasonBModerator @jasonb]

I also got a reconditioned XP machine from ebay , about £50 and just use that for the CNC Though I can use a USB for Mach3

[JasonB]

On JasonB Said:

I also got a reconditioned XP machine from ebay , about £50 and just use that for the CNC Though I can use a USB for Mach3

How do you connect through USB?

[JasonBModerator @jasonb]

The Breakout board on the CNC has a USB Socket rather than a parallel.

 

[Roderick JenkinsParticipant @roderickjenkins93242]

 

I use one of these to control Mach 3 from a Vista laptop.  In principle, I think any windows PC can run a CNC machine with a parallel port input using Mach 3 and a suitable motion controller.

https://www.cnc4you.co.uk/UC100-USB-Motion-Controller

Rod

[John HaineParticipant @johnhaine32865]

If you use the uc100 for motion control the demands on the PC are minimal.  I replaced my old XP machine with a Dell mini about the size of a cd case but thicker and it works perfectly fine.  I’m running Win10 with no issues.  Not a good idea to scrabble round for an old xp machine with parallel port, you’ll only have to replace again.  I found I needed only minimal reconfiguration of Mach 3 with the uc100, mainly to increase the pulse rate.  Machine also has WiFi and serves as a general purpose workshop computer.

[mike TParticipant @miket56243]

Please be aware; the uc100 is compatible with a Mach3/4 system. Unfortunately it is NOT compatible with LinuxCNC systems. For LinuxCNC users, a used XP machine with a parallel port (typically £50 to £60) is the way to go.

[John HaineParticipant @johnhaine32865]

I believe there are other motion controllers compatible with LinuxCNC.  But frankly if LCNC depends on old PC hardware it will die – a port to the latest Pi5 or similar would be more future proof surely?  But the OP was specifically asking about Mach 3.

[Robert Atkinson 2Participant @robertatkinson2]

Peter,

If you are near Cambridge I can sort you out with a suitable PC at nominal cost.

Robert.

[Ian Johnson 1Participant @ianjohnson1]

I run my KX1 on a dell laptop, windows 7 professional, with the mach3 program running in XP compatibility (service pack 2) mode, no problems at all.  But it is connected like Jason’s KX3 via a USB.

Not sure how it will work with a parallel port, might be worth giving the compatibility mode a try with  a newer computer if you have one.

IanJ

[DMRParticipant @dmr]

From answers so far, you are at a tipping point of updated/updating tech and all that involves.

Another angle is to fix what you have already got which may or may not be easy. Can you describe the fault that you see with the old XP machine which often emanates from electrolytic capacitors.

Dennis

[Martin ConnellyParticipant @martinconnelly55370]

A few years back I just replaced my old laptop running XP with a refurbed Win10 laptop with a touch screen from Ebay. Copied the Mach3 folder to the new machine and carried on as before but now with a touch screen. I use a USB Smoothstepper for driving the CNC. Just remember if you are using a laptop to set it to run like a desktop and to not go into sleep mode when externally powered.

Martin C

[John HaineParticipant @johnhaine32865]

AFAIK most Mach3 compatible motion controllers have parallel port outputs “just like” an old PC to they can connect directly to the BoB of an existing installation.  I think from Win 10 onwards the parallel port stopped being supported and modern PC hardware doesn’t have one at all.  Actually my old Win7 machine didn’t have one either.  Trying to keep old XP machines going when all you want to do is cut metal makes no sense to me.  Also keeping on with Mach3 isn’t a great idea either, though I still use it, as it hasn’t been supported since at least 2016.  That doesn’t just mean bug fixes but also compatibility with Windows releases, which only get fixed thanks to support from the user community.  Sooner or later MS will change something that stops it working completely and is unfixable.

[Robert Atkinson 2]

On Robert Atkinson 2 Said:

Peter,

If you are near Cambridge I can sort you out with a suitable PC at nominal cost.

Robert.

Regret –  Devon.

[Peter Howell 1Participant @peterhowell1]

If as John Haine suggests I ditch Mach3, what  should I look at? Might be a good time to change. I’m using a Sieg mill, originally came from Arc Euro Trade, bundled with Mach3 and all set up for it.

[John Haine]

On John Haine Said:

AFAIK most Mach3 compatible motion controllers have parallel port outputs “just like” an old PC to they can connect directly to the BoB of an existing installation.  I think from Win 10 onwards the parallel port stopped being supported and modern PC hardware doesn’t have one at all.  Actually my old Win7 machine didn’t have one either.  Trying to keep old XP machines going when all you want to do is cut metal makes no sense to me.  Also keeping on with Mach3 isn’t a great idea either, though I still use it, as it hasn’t been supported since at least 2016.  That doesn’t just mean bug fixes but also compatibility with Windows releases, which only get fixed thanks to support from the user community.  Sooner or later MS will change something that stops it working completely and is unfixable.

DMR made much the same point when he said “From answers so far, you are at a tipping point of updated/updating tech and all that involves.”   He’s right!

Peter has been happily running Mach3 on an old machine, presumably using old software, and an old motion controller.  Now the evil day has arrived because his old computer has failed, and he finds the whole shebang is out of date!  The easy answer is to raid the bank and upgrade the computer, operating system, Mach, and motion controller together.  No problem, apart from the cost.

The alternative can get complicated.    I think the cheapest answer is to find a replacement computer of similar vintage, and hope that it lasts another 5 years!

The problems are:

• Parallel printing was the de facto method for nearly 30 years, and every computer came with a parallel port.  They’re easy to program for devices other than printers, and straightforward to connect to external electronics. All smiles before the millennium.
• Parallel printing went rapidly out of fashion after USB2.0 arrived in 2000.  Parallel is too slow, and can’t support the range of different devices that USB can.  For a while new computers still came with parallel sockets, then, as customers didn’t use them, they weren’t fitted.
• Even though parallel sockets weren’t installed, motherboards still had the wherewithal, even today.
  • If a computer has a PCI interface, it’s still possible to buy plug-in parallel boards; not for laptops though.  Unfortunately, PCI came to an end in 2007, making it unlikely that a new computer bought in 2024 will support it.
  • My computer has a non-standard parallel socket tucked away on the motherboard.  To use it I would have to wire it up myself.   Worryingly, the motherboard manual warns that the electronics are delicate; in other words, meant to be buffered, not connected directly to the outside world.  Get it wrong, and the motherboard is toast!
  • Whether or not the operating system connects to the port as it did in the past is moot.  Before Windows7 the Operating System exposed a 16bit read/write variable.   Since then, operating systems tend to abstract Input/Output away from application programmers, and the operating system may not support direct access to the parallel port at all.   For a long time the device LPT1: was a direct connection, not now.  Instead LPT1: is abstracted such that writing to it connects to the USB sub-system, which knows what, if any devices, are plugged in.  These days the programmer can’t simply write to LPT1:
• USB2 isn’t fast enough for a motion controller, they need USB3.  There are USB3 to parallel converters, see Roderick’s example. But though these probably work with a new computer, they probably won’t work with old software on a new machine.  Well worth trying though, only £112…
• The above assumes old software will install and run correctly on a new computer.  Trouble is, there’s been an endless list of small and large changes between XP and Windows 11.  The gap is now enormous.  John notes Mach3 is out of support since 2016…

The CNC / Parallel method started to tip from easy to difficult over 10 years ago.  Now it’s “challenging” and maybe parallel should be avoided.   If money is no object, the answer is easy – just upgrade everything!   Otherwise, apart from replacing a clapped out computer with a working equivalent, there doesn’t seem to be a straightforward simple answer.   Necessary to chop and change both hardware and software to get it to work.   Much depends on exactly what the set up is.  Lucky chaps might get parallel working without fuss, whilst unlucky wights might fail miserably  after wasting a lot of time and money.   The devil is in the details.

Seven years ago I dithered about trying CNC.  It was apparent then that the cheapest option was Mach or LinuxCNC  running on an old-school computer with a parallel port connected to a basic motion controller.   Also apparent that the parallel way in was far from future proof.  USB motion controllers were taking over, and parallel ports on computers were disappearing rapidly, at least in easy to use form.  An option that looked good then was a second-hand Industrial PC.   These are solidly made to provide process control in rough environments, and are often rack-mounted.  They are weak on graphics, have no screen or keyboard, bit slow, and run older stable versions of Windows. Though they make poor desktop computers, they come with loads of interfaces and are built to last. Worth checking out, though a quick look on ebay this morning shows even conservative Industrial PCs seem to have dumped parallel ports.  Why is nothing ever easy?

Dave

 

[SillyOldDuffer]

On SillyOldDuffer Said:

 

• USB2 isn’t fast enough for a motion controller, they need USB3.  There are USB3 to parallel converters, see Roderick’s example. But though these probably work with a new computer, they probably won’t work with old software on a new machine.  Well worth trying though, only £112…

 

 

Normal USB2 is plenty fast enough to drive the UC100, it is only sending high-level commands to it which the UC100 translates into fast pulses to drive the steppers.  It isn’t actually a “USB to parallel” converter – it won’t drive a Centronics printer!  When I first got a UC100 I just loaded the driver on the old XP machine that originally used a parallel port and I was away, ditching the thick cables and changeover switch with great relief!  As I noted above, later I ditched the XP PC too.  (Actually it went to a LinuxCNC enthusiast for a spare.)

One possible answer for Peter would be to carry on with Mach3 for the moment on a new computer but use a UC100.  Only a low spec Win10 PC is needed (can be a laptop).  The UC100 just plugs into the parallel port connector on the BoB, with a USB cable to the PC.  Download the UC100 driver from CNCDrive, install it and restart Mach3, and you’re away – I found only minimal re-config was needed, I just kept a copy of the old XML file and put it in the appropriate folder for the new installation.  Also transfer across the licence file.

It’s worth trying to keep the USB cable as short as possible and use a high quality one – some people have experienced EMI issues, though I never have.

If he then wants to move away from Mach3 the obvious choice is Mach4, but UCCNC is also possible, also available from CNCDrive.

[Peter Howell 1Participant @peterhowell1]

Thanks for all the advice.

I’ve just ordered a refurbished DEL Windows 10 computer off Ebay and will use it with a UC100 along with UC’s own UCCNC software. I’ll let you know how it goes.

[John HaineParticipant @johnhaine32865]

Uccnc is possible upgrade path for me Peter so it will be good to hear your experience.  You probably know this but there are cline uc100s around to avoid.  I got mine from  CNC4YOU in Milton Keynes,  good to deal with, official UK distributor.

[BazyleParticipant @bazyle]

I’m assuming use of Mach / UCCNC / LinuxCNC on a PC apart from preferences on the User Interface and special features is faster an ?? more accurate ?? than GBRL.

Just come across this possible successor to GBRL, FluidNC at http://wiki.fluidnc.com/ 
which runs on a newer faster type of processor so might meet some needs?

[John HaineParticipant @johnhaine32865]

Using separate motion controller means the PC speed is really irrelevant, it’s more for the UI.  On something like a suitable spec ARM based processor grbl or its descendants could probably work as well as a motion controller but I don’t think there are any front ends as capable as Mach etc.  Would be interesting to reverse engineer the Mach3 API and make a plugin for it to drive grbl as a motion controller perhaps…

[Peter Howell 1Participant @peterhowell1]

I’m finally back up and running.

New (refurb) Windows 10 computer. UC100 motion controller and Mach 3. Yes Mach 3. I bought a licence for UCCNC but couldn’t get it working with my mill. As the UC100 came from CNC4U I spoke to a very helpful chap and he convinced me to stay with Mach 3. A few phone call to him got everything sorted. He says that they use Mach 3 for all their application and whilst it’s not been update for years it doesn’t need to be. Certainly I’m running it quite happily on Windows 10.

[OldironParticipant @oldiron]

Glad you are up and running again Peter. Always a relief when something works as it should.

[Author]

Posts