New Trajectory Planner - Testers/programs wanted

I have only been testing it virtually so far.. I have a router that I need to play with soon..

This program I have attached would probably be a good program for testing your non-tangent arc work... (if I have not posted it already...) Lots of arc-line for sure..

rellenberg wrote: This is good news! Is that config for a real machine?

I just pushed a few tweaks that should eliminate some acceleration hiccups. It wasn't handling the tail end of parabolic blends quite right, so there was a subtle stutter. Also, blend radii are a bit larger now to soften the acceleration pulses. When planning a blend arc, it checks what the equivalent-size parabolic blend would be, then allows the arc to be up to that size. Often the equivalent parabolic blend is longer, which means a larger-than-necessary blend radius, and lower accelerations. Of course, everything still obeys assigned tolerances, but hopefully this will be a bit gentler on the machine.

Todd Zuercher wrote: Yes, I'm using 10.04.
Are there any instal instructions for the less than gifted at using Linux? (much much less in my case)

just for others:

On that page look for the two libmodbus debs.
click on one and open/run it - it should ask about installing the deb - go ahead and install it.
Do the same for the other cause I'm not sure if you require both - it won't hurt.

Then try linuxcnc compiling again

Chris M

Hi Todd,

Can you post the code and config you're using? There are a few things I can think of that would case a slowdown in general:

1. Arcs have lower acceleration, because there were some blending cases that would allow acceleration overages. Right now I just cut the acceleration in half (this is the worst case solution), but there may be room for improvement here.
2. I changed Naive CAM to be disabled by default, which may make programs run slower with the same setting. Specifically, G64 P0.005 in the original TP defaults to Q0.005 as well. However, this can in some cases lead to tolerances of up to 0.010", since Naive CAM and blending are both applied. It seemed more logical to make the tolerances be specified explicitly, so that the user knows exactly what they're getting.

Finally, are you running the beta branch or the experimental branch? I have made a bunch of minor improvements in the experimental branch, so you may see more improvement there.

Thanks for trying it out!
-Rob

I would assum the Beta branch (I just followed the instructions at the top of this topic).
What do I have to do different to try the Experimental branch?

Here is the code I was running (I don't think it has any arc segments)
And the machine config. (it is a large 3 axis gang router with 8 spindles, the modbus mess is for the spindle controls)

I did a quick test with your program. I just set my config to 7in/sec^2 (my max velocity is set to 500ipm vs I think your 600ipm) There is a lot of shuttling time between letters - that is really going to make the two tp's run closer as long strait runs are going to run close to the same between the two. Still - I think that is quite an improvement.. Did you put the needed lines in the ini?

ARC_BLEND_ENABLE = 1
ARC_BLEND_FALLBACK_ENABLE = 1
ARC_BLEND_OPTIMIZATION_DEPTH = 50
ARC_BLEND_SMOOTHING_THRESHOLD = 0.4

Old TP - 25min - 16sec


New TP - 18min - 30sec

BTW - you can really see the improvement in the O in YOU. On the old TP and 7in/s^2 acc you barely got to 40ipm (programmed feed is 100ipm). With the new tp - it accelerates up to 100ipm and keeps it all the way around.

Cool beans!
sam