On Sep 15 2013 11:47 AM, Chris Morley wrote: >> >> Well yes. Not really an argument - just pointing out that if you >> want to test line-arc vs line-line blends (test by comparing the >> resulting speeds) you need to use segments with similar lengths. >> Otherwise you are not testing what you want and you can draw >> incorrect conclusions. > > Argument is less typing then 'your point in this discussion' :) > I didn't mean it as a fight word. > >> >> > With the g64 p.125 setting , aren't the corners rounded so the >> > straight line would be shortened to aprox. the same length or the >> > round corner example? meaning the acceleration time should be >> > aprox. the same. meaning the max speed should be aprox. the same. >> >> Yeah I can see it's counterintuitive. The accels happen during the >> blend - in fact they are what make the blend. >> > > Ok I think I got it. > With the blended corners the blends are part of the same segment > profile as > the line. > With round corners the straight line is one segment and the corner is > a segment, > and linuxcnc must come to a stop between. > > If we had look ahead then the profiles would be expected to give > aprox the same > speed. > > yes?
I would think so. But a test is worth a thousand arguments ;-) Seriously though, I think lookahead profiling should be added to LCNC-3.0 (or maybe 2.7, but I expect that this will be a significant rewrite). EBo -- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ LIMITED TIME SALE - Full Year of Microsoft Training For Just $49.99! 1,500+ hours of tutorials including VisualStudio 2012, Windows 8, SharePoint 2013, SQL 2012, MVC 4, more. BEST VALUE: New Multi-Library Power Pack includes Mobile, Cloud, Java, and UX Design. Lowest price ever! Ends 9/22/13. http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=64545871&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk _______________________________________________ Emc-developers mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-developers
