On 28 July 2015 at 00:19, EBo wrote:
> I am not so
> sure about the tool-offsets, but then again you mention that it doesn't
> necessarily obey axis limits of length, velocity and accel, so a revisit
> might be in order.
My statement was about the HAL "offset" component, not about the tool offset
On Jul 27 2015 1:07 PM, andy pugh wrote:
> On 27 July 2015 at 19:57, Chris Morley
> wrote:
>
>> How about adding two pins to motion for each axis.
>> forward comp and reverse comp.
>> These would be summed with the compensation that
>> already comes from the comp file.
>
> This ties in with somet
On Mon, Jul 27, 2015 at 2:57 PM, Chris Morley
wrote:
>
>
> > From: bodge...@gmail.com
> > Date: Mon, 27 Jul 2015 17:48:47 +0200
> > To: emc-developers@lists.sourceforge.net
>
> > I think that in this case the backlash feature is where it belongs.
> >
> > motion is a loadable HAL module. It is ent
On 27 July 2015 at 19:57, Chris Morley wrote:
> How about adding two pins to motion for each axis.
> forward comp and reverse comp.
> These would be summed with the compensation that
> already comes from the comp file.
This ties in with something that I have been thinking of for quite a
while, t
> From: bodge...@gmail.com
> Date: Mon, 27 Jul 2015 17:48:47 +0200
> To: emc-developers@lists.sourceforge.net
> I think that in this case the backlash feature is where it belongs.
>
> motion is a loadable HAL module. It is entirely possible to have
> configurations that don't use it (I sometime
On Jul 27 2015 10:35 AM, Brian wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 27, 2015 at 12:29 PM, John Kasunich
>
> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Jul 27, 2015, at 12:25 PM, EBo wrote:
>>
>> >
>> > Doesn't HAL have a way to load drivers and other data? I have not
>> > mucked with things at this level for awhile.
>> >
>>
>>
On Mon, Jul 27, 2015 at 1:26 PM, Sebastian Kuzminsky
wrote:
> On 7/27/15 11:16 AM, Brian wrote:
> > Does Classic Ladder run in HAL? I'm sure it has a large config, if it
> runs
> > as a HAL component, how does it do it?
>
> ClassicLadder runs in HAL and has a large config, and it manages this by
On 7/27/15 11:16 AM, Brian wrote:
> Does Classic Ladder run in HAL? I'm sure it has a large config, if it runs
> as a HAL component, how does it do it?
ClassicLadder runs in HAL and has a large config, and it manages this by
having part of it run in Realtime (which doesn't have filesystem access
Does Classic Ladder run in HAL? I'm sure it has a large config, if it runs
as a HAL component, how does it do it?
Brian
--
___
Emc-developers mailing list
Emc-developers@lists.s
On Mon, Jul 27, 2015 at 11:48 AM, andy pugh wrote:
> On 27 July 2015 at 17:29, Brian wrote:
> > Regardless, the point I would like to address right now is whether it
> would
> > be a welcome change or not. Its technical feasibility can be determined
> > during its implementation. Obviously we
On Mon, Jul 27, 2015 at 12:29 PM, John Kasunich
wrote:
>
>
> On Mon, Jul 27, 2015, at 12:25 PM, EBo wrote:
>
> >
> > Doesn't HAL have a way to load drivers and other data? I have not
> > mucked with things at this level for awhile.
> >
>
> Loading the code of drivers (or any other realtime compo
On Jul 27 2015 10:29 AM, John Kasunich wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 27, 2015, at 12:25 PM, EBo wrote:
>
>>
>> Doesn't HAL have a way to load drivers and other data? I have not
>> mucked with things at this level for awhile.
>>
>
> Loading the code of drivers (or any other realtime component), yes.
>
> Loa
On Mon, Jul 27, 2015, at 12:25 PM, EBo wrote:
>
> Doesn't HAL have a way to load drivers and other data? I have not
> mucked with things at this level for awhile.
>
Loading the code of drivers (or any other realtime component), yes.
Loading configuration specific data into a driver or othe
On Mon, Jul 27, 2015, at 12:08 PM, Brian wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 27, 2015 at 11:54 AM, John Kasunich
> wrote:
>
> > Another implementation detail is how to get the screw comp data to the
> > compensation component. Realtime HAL components don't have a clean
> > way to access files (such as a fil
On Jul 27 2015 10:08 AM, Brian wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 27, 2015 at 11:54 AM, John Kasunich
>
> wrote:
> ...
>> Another implementation detail is how to get the screw comp data to
>> the
>> compensation component. Realtime HAL components don't have a clean
>> way to access files (such as a file that
On Mon, Jul 27, 2015 at 11:54 AM, John Kasunich
wrote:
>
> In principle, making things more modular is always good and welcome.
> But in practice, the technical feasibilty does come into play. If the only
> way to pull screw comp out of motion is to add several more HAL pins
> to motion so that t
On Mon, Jul 27, 2015, at 11:29 AM, Brian wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 27, 2015 at 10:34 AM, Sebastian Kuzminsky
> wrote:
>
> > I agree with Andy, backlash compensation belongs in Motion, since that's
> > where the trajectory is planned.
> >
> > Motion can insert a backlash compensation "move" when a jo
On 27 July 2015 at 17:29, Brian wrote:
> Regardless, the point I would like to address right now is whether it would
> be a welcome change or not. Its technical feasibility can be determined
> during its implementation. Obviously we want everything to work correctly
> and logically.
I think tha
On Mon, Jul 27, 2015 at 10:34 AM, Sebastian Kuzminsky
wrote:
> I agree with Andy, backlash compensation belongs in Motion, since that's
> where the trajectory is planned.
>
> Motion can insert a backlash compensation "move" when a joint changes
> direction, and compensate for the time that the ba
>
> I think that motion knows things about the required path that are
> unavailable to HAL. For one, it knows the direction of travel whereas
> HAL would need to compare subsequent position commands, introducing
> lag at best and possibly worse problems at very low speed.
>
> This may be true, and
I also use hal to do temp compensation using the offset component.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h-CdFd2Zakc
sam
On 7/27/2015 9:34 AM, Sebastian Kuzminsky wrote:
> On 07/26/2015 09:31 PM, Brian wrote:
>> I have had an idea lingering in my head for quite some time now. How about
>> moving the
On 07/26/2015 09:31 PM, Brian wrote:
> I have had an idea lingering in my head for quite some time now. How about
> moving the screw/backlash comp out of motion and implement it with a HAL
> module. The purpose would be for two goals. One it would make it more
> logical to implement more soph
On 27 July 2015 at 05:31, Brian wrote:
> I have had an idea lingering in my head for quite some time now. How about
> moving the screw/backlash comp out of motion and implement it with a HAL
> module.
I think that motion knows things about the required path that are
unavailable to HAL. For one
Just listening.
IMO, this the way to go if one wants a general way to deal with backlash in
general setups.
In some scenarios having access to the kinematics from the module could be
interesting, for example in parallel machines you can have backlash in a
given joint, and the way it plays can be
On Sunday 26 July 2015 23:31:32 Brian wrote:
> I have had an idea lingering in my head for quite some time now. How
> about moving the screw/backlash comp out of motion and implement it
> with a HAL module. The purpose would be for two goals. One it would
> make it more logical to implement mo
25 matches
Mail list logo