Here is a typical example what I don’t want to see: (bCNC) The software is made available “AS IS”. It seems quite stable, but it is in an early stage of development.
Along with everything else on GutHub…Gah-Bage…IMO.
I would gladly purchase a controller, that has a nice detailed easy to use installer/manual/Tech Support, and my research says that nothing like this exists. (non-Carbide3D) for GRBL
bCNC has been available for a number of years now — when I last looked at it it worked well and it seems to still be under development.
Well, pretty much everything on GitHub is opensource, so you can either dig into the code, or create your own project, or hire someone to make exactly what you want.
Note that Grbl and Super Gerbil are on GitHub: https://github.com/gnea/grbl / https://github.com/paulusjacobus/SuperGerbil so since everything on GitHub is garbage I guess you should give up on it and use something else.
One way to foster development for an opensource project is to put up some money on a site such as Bountysource:
All of the commercial software for controlling Grbl I’m aware of is listed at:
https://wiki.shapeoko.com/index.php/Commercial_Software#Communication.2FControl.2FG-Code_Interpreter
Why do you need to stick with grbl? There’s plenty controllers that are well documented and support 4th axis machining. For example UCCNC - cheap, easy to use, reliable, supports 4th axis and tool changes.
Well, here was (is) my thinking. I run two controllers. Carbide3D AND SuoerGerbil, and my thinking was to make a machine that was switchable between the two, and I have succeeded. While I was hoping for a single button switch to change between the two…but that hasn’t happened yet (baby steps), now it is a 15 min changeover; so thought that by staying with GRBL would make this easier…but now I am thinking that might not have been the best choice (since SuperGerbil and USG are not living up to my expectations.
Think you reached the point when it’s time to let grbl go. Switching between controllers makes little sense imho, just to be able to use Carbide motion (when not using 4th axis), when there’s so many great options available. If I were you I’d seriously look into UCCNC - because it’s really easy to set up and not expensive. Linux CNC is another option although has a steeper learning curve. If the funds permit you can get Masso CNC or Centroid Acorn. Just my two cents.
I’ve been following your 4th axis adventures and really looking forward to seeing write up on how to improve that Chinese 4th axis. 
I moved on from grbl some time ago.first to linuxcnc with a gecko 540 - a a controller driven through a parallel cable with 4x 3.5A drivers (perfect for 3 axis shapeoko, one driver short for 4 axis) worked great for 2-3 years, but I struggled getting touch plate and tool setter to work how I wanted it.
I’ve just bought a cncdrive UC300 and a license for UCCNC, this will drive my gecko g540 through an ethernet cable but also let me add drivers and axis as I see fit. Also gives heaps of flexibility for creating macros, building your own interface, I believe it even does conversational programming
Putting it all together now, I’ll start a thread once I’ve got it set up
It all makes sense but leads me to one question, and the same question I have been pondering. Why UCCNC and not Mach4 (Price?)
For me it was Price vs Features.
UCCNC came out around US$60, mach 4 is US$200… The feature set is fairly similar, but I liked that UCCNC is very touch screen friendly, and VERY easy to modify the user interface. Also the official support and online community leaves Mach4 dead in the water in my opinion.
As far as power/features I think LinuxCNC has them both beat and costs nothing, but getting the user interface to look and work how I wanted (i.e. to build my own) was just a bit out of my tech reach
This topic was automatically closed after 30 days. New replies are no longer allowed.