LaserWeb4
LaserWeb4 copied to clipboard
LaserWeb
Touch screen optimisation / Mach4
Hi all,
We use a Pipo X9s to run the interface for the FabKit, however i think there are many users looking to run tablet devices.
Looking at laserweb 4 a few of the features i can see being really hard to use on a touch screen device. However Laserweb 4 is more complex in terms of features and operations so running the whole program on a touchscreen will not really the best solution.
Perhaps it would be possible to create a "mach3/pronterface" version of laserweb just to load gcode and send to the machine have options to adjust speed and power meanwhile after your laptop or desktop has sent the gcode to the "host" is free to disconnect or do somthing else and is not tethered to the laser. etc
From a development point of view it may help too as the separation of G code generation and coms means less potential conflict. (i would guess)
looking at it currently many users are already using lw3 to run the gcode made in lw4 so perhaps this is the way to go?
LaserWeb (3 & 4) uses a node server for the communication with the machine. The only thing that needs to stay connected to the machine (after a job is started) is this node server.
If you install the node server on a Raspberry Pi, you can disconnect you client (tablet) after starting the job, and the node server will finish it. You can also reconnect the client to pause or stop the running job. However, I don't know if a Raspi is fast enough.
@cprezzi thats cool, we have the X9 bascily because the pi is a little slow at times. we also think its important to have an interface on the machine, and from a saftey point of view you should not be able to operate your machine remotely/without someone there.
@tbfleming thats a good idea, Would it be possible to have the jogging and general control buttons and maybe a local safe and load for past gcodes so you dont have to always set it up agian if its a frequent job.
On the computer side of things there is a simple push to nodesever/X9 on the computer running laserweb 3/4
I'll drop my +1 in this issue - fingering the small buttons are quite hard (:
@openhardwarecoza would it be possible to just make a Laserweb driver. Optimised for touch screens just simple jogging command line and load g code. remove the preview aswell. make it super light?
Two comments:
- maybe we should make a "mobile" interface for phones and tablets?
- I'm running lw3 on a pi3 and I have yet to notice how it's slower than running from my laptop. Although, I don't use rasters much.
Sent from a something something...
On Mar 7, 2017, at 6:46 AM, FabCreator [email protected] wrote:
@openhardwarecoza would it be possible to just make a Laserweb driver. Optimised for touch screens just simple jogging command line and load g code. remove the preview aswell. make it super light?
— You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub, or mute the thread.
Hmm I think is a bit overkill to do some computations on tablets. At the end, its running JavaScript, not an optimized c piece of software.
Anyways light ui will be a whole subproject. The responsive css is not a real mobile UI
El 7 mar. 2017 2:08 p. m., "Richard Betel" [email protected] escribió:
Two comments:
- maybe we should make a "mobile" interface for phones and tablets?
- I'm running lw3 on a pi3 and I have yet to notice how it's slower than running from my laptop. Although, I don't use rasters much.
Sent from a something something...
On Mar 7, 2017, at 6:46 AM, FabCreator [email protected] wrote:
@openhardwarecoza would it be possible to just make a Laserweb driver. Optimised for touch screens just simple jogging command line and load g code. remove the preview aswell. make it super light?
— You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub, or mute the thread.
— You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/LaserWeb/LaserWeb4/issues/114#issuecomment-284716443, or mute the thread https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ABoIYFGKw4Xa4laFtr_ENOx5i9MBMQRZks5rjVbCgaJpZM4LZsA1 .
See the lw.comm-server project. Already planned and communicated
On Mar 7, 2017 1:47 PM, "FabCreator" [email protected] wrote:
@openhardwarecoza https://github.com/openhardwarecoza would it be possible to just make a Laserweb driver. Optimised for touch screens just simple jogging command line and load g code. remove the preview aswell. make it super light?
— You are receiving this because you were mentioned. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/LaserWeb/LaserWeb4/issues/114#issuecomment-284699850, or mute the thread https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AHVr2y83NUW0YHdMWbvtvWGKkpx94-84ks5rjUOzgaJpZM4LZsA1 .
@openhardwarecoza so a separate sender (laserweb pronterface for example) just needs a UI and could tie into the coms from @cprezzi ?
No, lw.comm-server will have a minimal interface built in. Its in the works
On Mar 7, 2017 3:48 PM, "FabCreator" [email protected] wrote:
@openhardwarecoza https://github.com/openhardwarecoza so a separate sender (laserweb pronterface for example) just needs a UI and could tie into the coms from @cprezzi https://github.com/cprezzi ?
— You are receiving this because you were mentioned. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/LaserWeb/LaserWeb4/issues/114#issuecomment-284725533, or mute the thread https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AHVr2_S7unuNLIZ26tZs9Y2YyvUkM6dBks5rjWAQgaJpZM4LZsA1 .
@FabCreator
See https://github.com/LaserWeb/lw.comm-server/issues/6#issuecomment-282105618 - it states: "I also planned to convert the lw3 testpage later to a responsive mini control panel, so users can additionally connect with a mobile or tablet to see how far the job is and pause or stop it." - from Claudio
And aa couple other places where I dont have the links right away
@FabCreator Yes, lw.comm-server can be used from other frontends too. They just need to implement our API. I tried to hide all interface or firmware specific stuff in the server and created a universal API.
Additionally, I have planned to integrate a slim web frontend for remote control from a mobile or tablet, as Peter told.