On 2015-01-12 16:42, andy pugh wrote: > On 12 January 2015 at 14:33, Marius Liebenberg <[email protected]> wrote: >> he general consensus is that you dont use servos on the Z axis of a plasma. > I am not part of that consensus. I see absolutely no reason to prefer > any motor type over another in this application. > Its not the motor type that is problematic but rather the control. I am in agreement that one could control the servo just as well if not better, it has just not been done on LCNC at his time. Most of the THC hardware out there is done for steppers or in the case of a standalone controller also a dc motor option. It is on my long list of things to do as I am moving my preference towards servos as they get more affordable all the time. :)
What makes it problematic ids that one has to use Gcode and once the system is running you reference (the job zero) changes. This is opposite to normal behaviour and breaks the rules. Now one has to start creating cnc controller situations that are not realistic and is not catered for in the normal running of things. The most successful systems are indeed the standalone controllers that get simple signals from the motion controller and does its own thing from there onward. I am of the opinion that one can do the standalone controller in LCNC but just not part of the motion loop. -- Regards /Groete Marius D. Liebenberg +27 82 698 3251 +27 12 743 6064 QQ 1767394877 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ New Year. New Location. New Benefits. New Data Center in Ashburn, VA. GigeNET is offering a free month of service with a new server in Ashburn. Choose from 2 high performing configs, both with 100TB of bandwidth. Higher redundancy.Lower latency.Increased capacity.Completely compliant. vanity: www.gigenet.com _______________________________________________ Emc-users mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users
