On Sunday 16 March 2014 02:46:15 Peter C. Wallace did opine:
> On Sat, 15 Mar 2014, Philipp Burch wrote:
> > Date: Sat, 15 Mar 2014 22:27:27 +0100
> > From: Philipp Burch
> > Reply-To: "Enhanced Machine Controller (EMC)"
> >
> >
> >
> > To: emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net
> > Subject: Re:
On 03/15/2014 04:44 PM, Peter Homann wrote:
> Hi,
>
> If you are after closed loop spindle control for a KBIC style treadmill
> controller a 5Hz PWM signal driving a PWM to analog converter is unlikely to
> provide a satisfying result. Most close loop control systems use a 1KHz update
> rate. You m
On 16 March 2014 00:35, Gene Heskett wrote:
> That is an interesting idea Andy, but with 3 uptodate LCNC installs here
> that DO include the docs, I find it puzzling that there is not now, an
> installed man page for lincurve on either of these 3 machines.
Lincurve is currently only present in M
On Saturday 15 March 2014 20:28:31 andy pugh did opine:
> On 16 March 2014 00:06, Gene Heskett wrote:
> >> Alternatively, why not run closed-loop spindle speed, then it doesn't
> >> matter if the control is non linear.
> >
> > Because of the positive gain, enough Pgain to make it work fairly
> >
Hi Peter!
On 03/15/2014 09:34 PM, Peter C. Wallace wrote:
> On Sat, 15 Mar 2014, Philipp Burch wrote:
>
>> Date: Sat, 15 Mar 2014 20:45:18 +0100
>> From: Philipp Burch
>> Reply-To: "Enhanced Machine Controller (EMC)"
>>
>> To: emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net
>> Subject: Re: [Emc-users] I&$@
On 16 March 2014 00:06, Gene Heskett wrote:
>> Alternatively, why not run closed-loop spindle speed, then it doesn't
>> matter if the control is non linear.
>
> Because of the positive gain, enough Pgain to make it work fairly stiff
> at 300 rpm, is enough to make it obviously oscillate at 800 rpm
On Saturday 15 March 2014 19:37:55 andy pugh did opine:
> On 14 March 2014 20:23, Gene Heskett wrote:
> > So it looks like I need another, but it seems to me there ought to be
> > another choice besides this non-linear POS, and the PMDX-106.
>
> Why are you so obsessed by linearity? I thought yo
Hi,
If you are after closed loop spindle control for a KBIC style treadmill
controller a 5Hz PWM signal driving a PWM to analog converter is unlikely to
provide a satisfying result. Most close loop control systems use a 1KHz update
rate. You may get adequate results with a 100Hz update but 5Hz
On 14 March 2014 20:23, Gene Heskett wrote:
> So it looks like I need another, but it seems to me there ought to be
> another choice besides this non-linear POS, and the PMDX-106.
Why are you so obsessed by linearity? I thought you had already
managed to linearise in software?
Alternatively, why
On Saturday 15 March 2014 17:49:19 Philipp Burch did opine:
> Hi Peter!
>
> On 03/15/2014 09:34 PM, Peter C. Wallace wrote:
> > On Sat, 15 Mar 2014, Philipp Burch wrote:
> >> Date: Sat, 15 Mar 2014 20:45:18 +0100
> >> From: Philipp Burch
> >> Reply-To: "Enhanced Machine Controller (EMC)"
> >>
>
On Saturday 15 March 2014 17:51:10 Peter C. Wallace did opine:
> On Sat, 15 Mar 2014, Philipp Burch wrote:
> > Date: Sat, 15 Mar 2014 22:27:27 +0100
> > From: Philipp Burch
> > Reply-To: "Enhanced Machine Controller (EMC)"
> >
> >
> >
> > To: emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net
> > Subject: Re
On Sat, 15 Mar 2014, Philipp Burch wrote:
> Date: Sat, 15 Mar 2014 22:27:27 +0100
> From: Philipp Burch
> Reply-To: "Enhanced Machine Controller (EMC)"
>
> To: emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net
> Subject: Re: [Emc-users] I&$@)^ another C41 gone to hell.
>
> Hi Peter!
>
> On 03/15/2014 09:34 P
On Saturday 15 March 2014 16:53:05 Peter C. Wallace did opine:
> On Sat, 15 Mar 2014, Philipp Burch wrote:
> > Date: Sat, 15 Mar 2014 20:45:18 +0100
> > From: Philipp Burch
> > Reply-To: "Enhanced Machine Controller (EMC)"
> >
> >
> >
> > To: emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net
> > Subject: Re
On Sat, 15 Mar 2014, Philipp Burch wrote:
> Date: Sat, 15 Mar 2014 20:45:18 +0100
> From: Philipp Burch
> Reply-To: "Enhanced Machine Controller (EMC)"
>
> To: emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net
> Subject: Re: [Emc-users] I&$@)^ another C41 gone to hell.
>
> Hi Gene!
>
> On 03/14/2014 09:23 PM
On Saturday 15 March 2014 15:57:25 Philipp Burch did opine:
> Hi Gene!
>
> On 03/14/2014 09:23 PM, Gene Heskett wrote:
> > Greetings again;
> >
> > After putting in a diode, that part seemed to work, but this C41 seems
> > to have gone south again. (and again (and again)), and its looking
> > li
Hi Gene!
On 03/14/2014 09:23 PM, Gene Heskett wrote:
> Greetings again;
>
> After putting in a diode, that part seemed to work, but this C41 seems to
> have gone south again. (and again (and again)), and its looking like a 4th
> one has failed. Symptoms seem to be an output impedance in the 10
On Saturday 15 March 2014 14:33:33 Gene Heskett did opine:
> On Saturday 15 March 2014 06:42:37 Steve Blackmore did opine:
> > On Fri, 14 Mar 2014 16:23:33 -0400, you wrote:
> > >Greetings again;
> > >
> > >After putting in a diode, that part seemed to work, but this C41
> > >seems to have gone so
On Saturday 15 March 2014 06:42:37 Steve Blackmore did opine:
> On Fri, 14 Mar 2014 16:23:33 -0400, you wrote:
> >Greetings again;
> >
> >After putting in a diode, that part seemed to work, but this C41 seems
> >to have gone south again. (and again (and again)), and its looking
> >like a 4th one h
On Fri, 14 Mar 2014 16:23:33 -0400, you wrote:
>Greetings again;
>
>After putting in a diode, that part seemed to work, but this C41 seems to
>have gone south again. (and again (and again)), and its looking like a 4th
>one has failed. Symptoms seem to be an output impedance in the 100k
>region
19 matches
Mail list logo
