Hello,

Are people still staying interested in an add-on Cape for the BBB/BBAI with 
many input/output channels for Servos/Steppers? I have not put anything 
together myself. I like the idea of Open Source being relevant now and in 
the future for people like me who tend to not know everything but that is a 
person that still likes to make. 

Realistically, there are many advantages to this idea. Not only can a Cape 
be useful on such a SiP device or SoC device, it can also pave the way for 
other future endeavors to take place for machines.

For instance, I am by far an expert as many of you already know but I have 
learned many things in my time dealing with 3.3v, BBB.io boards. 

Now, although I cannot write a full on script to produce everything needed 
from the gpio.h and gpio.c files in the kernel, I can use 
specific-already-made libraries w/ ease.

Machinekit seems to be one of these feature-rich libraries that has its own 
shtick and I want to use it w/ new/old ideas of machine workings. 

Seth

P.S. For the ongoing effort by the beagleboard.org group and speaking for 
myself, I would like to finalize working w/ more powerful servos outside of 
5v tech. So, if people are starting to give in on this effort, please do 
not. I can use it and once the word gets out on a specified Cape for the 
BBB/BBAI that deals w/ heavier motors, I am sure people would flock towards 
a powerful alternative. Esp. for the beagleboard.org related hardware and 
Open Source efforts of anyone still involved and that will be involved in 
the future, learning is mostly part of what we do daily. Without the Open 
Source community, people do not learn of new alternatives to older ideas 
unless directly associated with these ideas in business or work. Also, to 
anyone still building Capes out there in Open Source land, there are some 
Cape diagrams on KiCAD. It is not easy to mfg. a Cape and produce source in 
combination for novices like me but there are many people out there who can 
compensate for my lack of knowledge. "Just a refresher!" I am trying to 
keep this effort ongoing and not dead in the water. I know it is not up to 
me but I want my "two-cents" to be heard for any bored receivers/believers.
On Friday, June 26, 2020 at 10:14:01 PM UTC-5 [email protected] wrote:

> EtherCAT is used extensively in industry, a signification number of the 
>> CNC controllers now only support EtherCAT servos and IO. 
>>
>> The cost of using EtherCAT for CNCs has dropped significantly in the 
>> last 5 years with a number of smaller suppliers of servo hardware 
>> producing products. 
>>
>> Companies like LNC (www.lnc.com.tw) and Moon Industries 
>> (https://www.moonsindustries.com). 
>>
>> My family business has been using EtherCAT hardware on our wool sampling 
>> machines for the last 7 years. Its totally changed how we think about 
>> our machines and the way forward. I can say with 100% certainly that we 
>> would not be making our machines any more if I had not found EtherCAT 
>> eight years ago. 
>>
>> Now for the purposes of making a BBB MachineKit board which make the job 
>> of controlling my DIY / semi-commercial CNC. 
>>
>> I'm not sure. It would be cool. 
>>
>> But do not dismiss the idea out of hand. The ASIC's are not that 
>> expensive and there are other suppliers out there who are interested in 
>> having there chips/products used by DIY. 
>>
>> One of these is 
>> https://www.bausano.net/en/hardware/ethercat-e-arduino/easycat.html or 
>>
>> https://www.bausano.net/en/hardware/ethercat-e-arduino/ethercat-and-raspberry.html
>>  
>>
>> Cheers All 
>>
>> Mike 
>>
>>
> Maybe Ethercat is more prevalent than what I see, I still see alot of 
> Modbus in use even on higher end drives.
>
> Well the bus can be mastered now, using hal drivers at the cost of only 
> the BB ethernet port AFAIK. The slave is the hardware concern, albeit 
> dedicating some PRU resources from the BBAI or an on board ASIC. What's 
> that do to the seeed board if the seed board is looking to support both the 
> BBB which can't do ethercat on the PRU (AFAIK) and the BBAI that supposedly 
> can. Would it be worth the complication on a board like this? Is Mesa SS a 
> good concession considering the concerns above about extra IO that can 
> easily be added on a SS channel, and I'm sure work for both BB's 
> universally?
>
>
>

-- 
website: http://www.machinekit.io blog: http://blog.machinekit.io github: 
https://github.com/machinekit
--- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Machinekit" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/machinekit/703603de-0821-40cd-b5bc-7c754cb1d5e1n%40googlegroups.com.

Reply via email to