There are 3 sections labeled “Terminal explanation:” and they are:
There was the one with the POT on LPS-IN and TTL on LPS-L or LPS-H
There was the one with the PWM or POT on LPS-IN and TTL on LPS-L
There was the one with the PWM or POT on LPS-IN and TTL on LPS-H and switch on LPS-L
The PWM on LPS-IN was always referenced with “(RF Laser)pulser”.
Are you thinking the “(RF laser)pulser: PWM” is the defined situation we have when the Ruida controller is controlling the LPS of these Chinese CO2 machines?
You can call it what you will but the manufacturer’s instructions show 3 descriptions of connecting the LPS and none of them look like how Ruida recommends connecting.
[quote]The L/H inputs ares laser enable.
[/quote]
That is what you see it as yet the manufacturer does not label it as such… I wish they did but they only label it as a TTL signal. And everyone but Ruida uses that input to modulate the power of the laser into the material to get variations in burning from engraving to cutting. ONE TTL INPUT TO CONTROL ENGRAVING AND CUTTING… Somehow I just don’t see these as the same modes of operation and it now looks like the LPS manufacturer describes what everyone but Ruida does.
What am I missing that makes this seem like the Ruida is doing the same thing as all the other 1-wire control boards are doing?
Having watched many machines evolve, it may be more of the history of development…
It could also be tied to how the actual lps is designed to operate…
I do know you can make a lower cost controller if you remove one of the controls the controller has to deal with and dump the responsibility of that signal on the user.
Unfortunately I don’t have a crystal ball … or the insight to answer some of this… I know they don’t build it this way to save money.
OMG, you found a Ruida clone, all bets are off and the solution is found!
Just not going to get into knit picking. Some have no experience with other systems and their lord is their master. Got it.
Right, Ruida hitched their horse to $10K-$15K machines back in 2012 but 3 years later the K40 hit the market with these cheap power supplies…
That’s what I’ve been trying to say. These cheap LPS’s were designed for use with M2Nano controllers with 1 control wiggling and the other control was a fixed voltage POT you manually changed per layer of your design.
But along came Smoothie, GRBL, Marlin, etc and they found they could wiggle one line too and get power variations out of these cheap LPSs and that’s what GRBL, Marlin, Smoothie and others do. ie they only wiggle one TTL output fed to the LPS-L input and LPS-IN is set to either 5V or a fixed voltage set to max power via a POT and the controller handles varying power with 0-100% setting of GCode spindle commands. Because these controllers spit out GCode which used to control CNC machines and the Spindle was TTL varied control.
I don’t use a crystal ball, I research and look at what was and experienced what is and I use GCode based controllers on a CNC, 3D printers and many of my laser engraver/cutter machines. I’ve used Ruida machines and own a Ruida controller, it’s just not installed on any machine.
When I was a kid in California, we had a party line… any of your neighbors could pick up the phone and listen to your conversation. Each house had a different ring pattern…
As I got old … all of the phones were wired to the wall… your ‘roaming’ was limited by the length of the cord…
Tesla knew that 240V at 60Hz was the most efficient… Did we do that?.. No, we built the US infrastructure on the couple miles of existing 120V lines… used by Tesla and Edison…
Now we run 120V @ 60Hz while the EU runs at the prescribed 240V but went to 50Hz… visible flicker range?
We use existing structure to build on, good or bad… pretty common.
If they put 240VAC on those 120VAC lines then it might be analogous to the discussion at hand.
My point in all of this has been that putting a pulse train at some frequencies on LPS-IN AND putting a pulse train on LPS-L wasn’t likely to be the intended design use and capacitance and inductive crosstalk might be causing false triggering. Testing a LPS displaying sparkles driving it as originally intended might be a handy test. And at the very least it could mean the LPS could be sold to anyone not using Ruida’s dual control method can still use the LPS.
IN of the lps is irrespective of a dc analog voltage or a pwm control signal … both are filtered to drive the hv oscillator controlled by this dc voltage.
there is no ‘pulse’ train from the Ruida to lps. The Ruida only enables the laser when the laser to lase.
So I don’t follow your use of pulse train… The only place that could be considered that is the pwm which is constant period for the entire layer as explained above.
If the L input is a pulse train, then that view would cover all digital equipment.
Every device you mentioned is really a new product… It wasn’t easy at the turn of the century to generate a pwm like we do with 20 cent micros today… The Ruida is about 20 years old, at least the company…
Find a laser from the mid 80’s, they are tough to find… But they use a variable dc voltage to control it’s current (IN) and a laser enable (L/H) causing it to lase at that set current.
In the end, it’s relatively moot, it’s they way they are working and we could all be ‘wet’ about the actual history/development of these things. We are making assumptions about many things.
I’ll have limited communications with this site … at least until I figure out a fix for my browser…
I upgraded to 22.04 and the browser is a real pain on this site… Anytime I click on something it wants to download up to 4 pdf files of I don’t know what to my machine … I’ll check in but it’s awfully frustrating …
I have a couple of things I still need to that one of the moderators suggested.
