On 26 Mar 2017, at 21:15, Ken Strauss wrote:
> Yes but for small angles sin() and tan() are almost identical. Sin(7)=0.1219
> and tan(7)=0.1228
Yes; that's true. Is it not the half-angle anyway; so Tan 3.5 deg ?
Or did I misinterpret the taper?
Marcus
>
>> -Original Message-
>> From:
On Sunday 26 March 2017 16:15:33 Ken Strauss wrote:
> Yes but for small angles sin() and tan() are almost identical.
> Sin(7)=0.1219 and tan(7)=0.1228
>
I knew it was close, Ken but thats enough to let it wobble a bit, so I'll
use the tan(7). But is 7 the correct factor? It should be fairly
On 26.03.17 18:53, Gene Heskett wrote:
> But is 7 the correct factor? It should be fairly easy to jack it back
> out.
Gene, I've never made one of them, but looking here:
> On 26 Mar 2017, at 21:15, Ken Strauss wrote:
>
> es but for small angles sin() and tan() are almost identical. Sin(7)=0.1219
> and tan(7)=0.1228
I recently discovered that I have been cutting BR30 specials wrong.
Taper of all that type is 7/24.
I have been using
On Sunday 26 March 2017 15:53:03 Marcus Bowman wrote:
> Is the tangent of the angle not more useful? That uses the straight
> length instead of the hypotenuse (along the tapered face). Opposite
> over adjacent, rather than opposite over hypotenuse.
>
> Marcus
You're right I believe Marcus, makes
On Sunday 26 March 2017 17:15:13 Marcus Bowman wrote:
> On 26 Mar 2017, at 21:15, Ken Strauss wrote:
> > Yes but for small angles sin() and tan() are almost identical.
> > Sin(7)=0.1219 and tan(7)=0.1228
>
> Yes; that's true. Is it not the half-angle anyway; so Tan 3.5 deg ?
> Or did I
Never ground a shield at both ends. If you do current can flow in the
shield.
Also every conductor that does cary current should have a conductors that
caries the opposite current very close and running in parallel, preferably
the two are twisted together. So, the power supply's return is
Greetings everybody;
As I read the machinists hand book, tapers such as this mean
the "included" angle, not the angle of just one side of a cone.
So, I've read, where I don't recall, that a taper lock hub is 7 degrees
of taper. It doesn't self eject, but also does not need a lot of jacking
Is the tangent of the angle not more useful? That uses the straight length
instead of the hypotenuse (along the tapered face).
Opposite over adjacent, rather than opposite over hypotenuse.
Marcus
On 26 Mar 2017, at 19:48, Gene Heskett wrote:
> Greetings everybody;
>
> As I read the
On 03/26/2017 04:23 AM, Dave Caroline wrote:
> I have tried a SFH213 Photodiode with a comparator but it is a bit
> fiddly and not that sensitive, will try a QSE159 when it arrives.
>
>
I don't know exactly what they are doing, the data sheet is
pretty sparse on details, but it seems they must
Yes but for small angles sin() and tan() are almost identical. Sin(7)=0.1219
and tan(7)=0.1228
> -Original Message-
> From: Marcus Bowman [mailto:marcus.bow...@visible.eclipse.co.uk]
> Sent: Sunday, March 26, 2017 3:53 PM
> To: Enhanced Machine Controller (EMC)
> Subject: Re: [Emc-users]
On Sunday 26 March 2017 03:01:17 linden wrote:
> Hello All
>
> Should I ground both ends of the shield for shielded pair?
No, only one end. Actually I think best practice is a single #10 bolt in
the middle of it all, to which all grounds and all cable shields are
connected, with the grounds
Hello All
Should I ground both ends of the shield for shielded pair? I am not sure
what the best practice is see pdf attached for what I have now in black
and the chunk in red I am not sure about.
The only other connections I have are:
- 24 volt supply for the mesa board going into TB3
2017-03-26 7:12 GMT+03:00 hubert:
>
> > You might ask Copley Controls if Xenus supports that encoder type.
> Thanks for bringing this up.
>I will report back here how this works out. Reading the user guide
> for the REL and its software I found some references to Copley, The
> data sheets
On 26.03.17 00:01, linden wrote:
> Hello All
>
> Should I ground both ends of the shield for shielded pair? I am not sure
> what the best practice is see pdf attached for what I have now in black and
> the chunk in red I am not sure about.
Grounding the shield at both ends will create a ground
I have tried a SFH213 Photodiode with a comparator but it is a bit
fiddly and not that sensitive, will try a QSE159 when it arrives.
Dave Caroline
--
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
thanks Erik
I don't have any formal electronics back ground and have been
struggling to get my head rapped around driving this servo with the mesa
card. The documentation for both seems pretty good but it is all in a
language I don't fully understand. It is very helpful having a second
An other question for the Electronics experts on here;
Is there a simple elegant way to drive the digital input 15 of the servo
drive high to enable the servo using a digital output from the mesa
7i76e. I have attached a drawing using a relay and the examples from the
dmm manual. Any ideas or
18 matches
Mail list logo