> > I can see this to be super useful when there is an external encoder - so > > linuxcnc is in full control. > > But what's the benefit with e.g. Servos and Closed Loop Stepper that have > > their internal encoder and control loop? > > Sending out position instead of velocity also work.
You mean LinuxCNC can be set up to send either - but Mesa has chosen to use velocity for their integration? > Use encoder sending position using external feed back loop for position, > following error and display also work as usual. > Could you expand on that? I assume with "external feedback loop" you mean the feedback loop of the servo or CL stepper. But this feedback loop decouples the real position from the meant-to-be position. (expressed in the following error) And I don't see how the real position could be reported back to LinuxCNC so it's still in full control of the movement. ...unless you connect the encoder directly to the Mesa instead of the Closed Loop Stepper driver. > > (Another crazy(?) thought I had was to have an acceleration sensor as > > incoming feedback. To help with servo parameterization.) > > Should help at least then there is elasticity in between motor and > position feed back. > Yes, there would be some lag for sure. But this isn't possible right now, is it? Could this be added as a component? Either to feed into the motion control loop - or just to monitor it? > ... > > It feels like sending the velocity commands over ethernet also means some > > kind of buffering, but I guess the 1kHz feedback loop is the big > difference > > here. > > NML is for the non real time stuff so no 1kHz feedback loop there. > I thought Mesa is reporting back the position in a 1kHz feedback loop - no? _______________________________________________ Emc-developers mailing list Emc-developers@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-developers
