.
It hurts my head to compare micoseconds to nanoseconds to kilohertz.
:)
Chris M
Date: Mon, 6 Feb 2012 21:42:08 -0600
From: sa...@empirescreen.com
To: emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net
Subject: Re: [Emc-users] Classic ladder questions and comments
Thanks for looking. (I am
here is a show...
5 float OUT 0 axis.0.motor-pos-cmd == Xpos-cmd
5 float IN 0 axis.0.motor-pos-fb == Xpos-fb
5 bit OUT FALSE axis.0.neg-hard-limit
5 bit IN FALSE axis.0.neg-lim-sw-in
5 bit OUT FALSE
On Fri, 03 Feb 2012 13:05:02 -0600
sam sokolik sa...@empirescreen.com wrote:
All this talk of lowering the servo thread had me thinking back to when
I was setting up the KT. I wanted to try to lower the servo thread for
testing. I could not go much slower the the 1ms default
Thanks for looking. (I am not that technical though..) The bit of
ladder I have seems to be taking longer than 1ms though. (on this
atom330 board)
sam
On 02/06/2012 06:02 PM, Chris Morley wrote:
On Fri, 03 Feb 2012 13:05:02 -0600
sam sokoliksa...@empirescreen.com wrote:
All this
is easier.
It hurts my head to compare micoseconds to nanoseconds to kilohertz.
:)
Chris M
Date: Mon, 6 Feb 2012 21:42:08 -0600
From: sa...@empirescreen.com
To: emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net
Subject: Re: [Emc-users] Classic ladder questions and comments
Thanks for looking. (I am
All this talk of lowering the servo thread had me thinking back to when
I was setting up the KT. I wanted to try to lower the servo thread for
testing. I could not go much slower the the 1ms default or I would get
real time delays. After some consultation on irc - it was decided that
the
