On 04-Dec-13 8:22 PM, Gregg Eshelman wrote:
On 12/4/2013 6:53 AM, bigengineer wrote:
Hi,
I am interested in this too. I have been silent here for a long time,
(and was never really active either). But this is something where I
might, semi-intelligently, help. :-)
Long ago I tried what
On 5 December 2013 10:40, Dirk bigengin...@gmail.com wrote:
But showing and moving machine and vises is a minor thing compared to
material removal I think. Although I don't think it is trivial.
I wonder if a voxel-based approach is simpler, but it rather depends
on the required precision.
If
On 12/05/2013 11:52 AM, andy pugh wrote:
But showing and moving machine and vises is a minor thing compared to
material removal I think. Although I don't think it is trivial.
I wonder if a voxel-based approach is simpler, but it rather depends
on the required precision.
If 1mm voxels on a
On 12/05/2013 12:05 PM, Bertho Stultiens wrote:
The voxel approach is a valid one. You can reduce the data-set size by
merging voxels in a plane and volume. There are tree-algorithms to
handle such cases and there is an advantage that you only need to split,
never merge. However, using trees
Well I tried like Andy said increasing the ferror and I can work a lot
better. Also my acceleration was too much so I decreased it and now I have
a error of 0.2 mm without fine tunning and with the motor moving air for
now, I guess that when it's attached to the screw this will be a lot
better.
On 12/05/2013 07:44 AM, Leonardo Marsaglia wrote:
Well I tried like Andy said increasing the ferror and I can work a lot
better. Also my acceleration was too much so I decreased it and now I have
a error of 0.2 mm without fine tunning and with the motor moving air for
now, I guess that when
BTW, the splitting is usually done with the octtree approach (which was
mentioned before).
It can still generate a huge amount of data. If you want a block of 10
split down to 1mil (0.001), or 4 orders of magnitude, then you need a
tree-depth of 14. That would be worst case 10^12 leaf nodes,
2013/12/4 Charles Steinkuehler char...@steinkuehler.net
Please try the following. At a command prompt run:
sudo aptitude install lightdm
When prompted to pick a default display manager, choose lightdm instead
of xdm. Once everything is installed, reboot and see if your USB issue
is
On 12/05/13 13:16, Andrew wrote:
First I tried the solution from the thread
http://linux.derkeiler.com/Mailing-Lists/Debian/2011-10/msg01232.html
No good for USB, though shutdown has been working.
Now I tried lightdm, no success either.
Hmm...lightdm fixes the shutdown and reboot GUI
Hi All,
As some of you know already, I'm working on an improvement to the linuxcnc
trajectory planner that will allow much faster movement for engraving-type
programs with lots of short segments. As part of this effort, I need test
cases, both to find rare errors, and to estimate performance
On 12/06/2013 01:46 AM, Robert Ellenberg wrote:
As some of you know already, I'm working on an improvement to the linuxcnc
trajectory planner that will allow much faster movement for engraving-type
programs with lots of short segments. As part of this effort, I need test
cases, both to find
On Thu, Dec 5, 2013 at 8:20 PM, Bertho Stultiens ber...@vagrearg.orgwrote:
You could use the wheels.gcmc example from gcmc (contributed by Alan
Battersby). It creates a lot of small segments of 10..100um. You can
even increase the number of segments by decreasing the angle-interval of
the
On 12/06/2013 02:37 AM, Robert Ellenberg wrote:
You could use the wheels.gcmc example from gcmc (contributed by Alan
Battersby). It creates a lot of small segments of 10..100um. You can
even increase the number of segments by decreasing the angle-interval of
the calculation (currently at 0.01
On Dec 5, 2013 8:52 PM, Bertho Stultiens ber...@vagrearg.org wrote:
On 12/06/2013 02:37 AM, Robert Ellenberg wrote:
You could use the wheels.gcmc example from gcmc (contributed by Alan
Battersby). It creates a lot of small segments of 10..100um. You can
even increase the number of segments
On 12/05/2013 09:44 AM, Leonardo Marsaglia wrote:
Well I tried like Andy said increasing the ferror and I can work a lot
better. Also my acceleration was too much so I decreased it and now I have
a error of 0.2 mm without fine tunning and with the motor moving air for
now, I guess that when
2013/12/5 Kirk Wallace kwall...@wallacecompany.com
There often is a difference between the feedback resolution and the
motor resolution. For instance, if your motor can be moved to within a
degree of position, but your encoder feed back can report in tenths of a
degree. When you command a
2013/12/5 Jon Elson el...@pico-systems.com
Is this a flux vector drive, or a standard VFD? A
flux-vector drive can
perform the computations to keep the rotor excited without
moving
it. A standard VFD cannot, it has to move the motor to
excite the
induced field in the rotor. So, it will
On 12/05/2013 09:35 PM, Leonardo Marsaglia wrote:
2013/12/5 Jon Elson el...@pico-systems.com
Is this a flux vector drive, or a standard VFD? A
flux-vector drive can
perform the computations to keep the rotor excited without
moving
it. A standard VFD cannot, it has to move the motor to
Robert has been working very hard on the new TP.
Here is an example
This program I found on the internet. (small line segments)
http://electronicsam.com/images/KandT/testing/internet.ngc
533228 line program running G64P.005
Old TP 2:37:42
New TP 1:38:49
Quite an improvement!!
The
I will try it with load tomorrow or next monday, because I'm finishing with
the encoder coupling for the screw. I never tried the autotunning but it is
supposed to tune all the motor parameters to get better torque. I hope that
helps to improve the positioning. Anyway as I told before I don't need
Glad to hear your making progress. Might your modifications work with more
than XYZ axis. (I need to run it on 4 axis xyzw.)
Would it be ok to send the sample g-code directly to your email? If so I'll
try to dig up some extra slow stuff tomorrow at work.
- Original Message -
From:
On Thu, Dec 5, 2013 at 11:57 PM, Todd Zuercher zuerc...@embarqmail.comwrote:
Glad to hear your making progress. Might your modifications work with
more than XYZ axis. (I need to run it on 4 axis xyzw.)
It will be compatible with 4+ axes, but most of the improvement will be for
XYZ moves
22 matches
Mail list logo
