- Posts: 1029
- Thank you received: 286
Brother TC-225 / TC-229 adventure!
- ihavenofish
- Offline
- Platinum Member
-
So... noisy analogue then?
Stock cable is ribbon no shield as it turns out. Maybe I should untwist that analogue wires.
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
- ihavenofish
- Offline
- Platinum Member
-
- Posts: 1029
- Thank you received: 286
Hmm
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
- ihavenofish
- Offline
- Platinum Member
-
- Posts: 1029
- Thank you received: 286
76ipm jog. Lower is encoder velocity. It looks a lot more controlled. The resonance looks like tuning vs random. During stable parts of the move it's tracking to a tenth or so.
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
- ihavenofish
- Offline
- Platinum Member
-
- Posts: 1029
- Thank you received: 286
At very low speeds it's more lumpy.
It's much better than it was. But think we must be able to clean up the acceleration error a bit..... or maybe with no jerk control it's going to be limited.
I'm shorten the remaining cables tomorrow and see where we end up.
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
- Todd Zuercher
- Offline
- Platinum Member
-
- Posts: 4793
- Thank you received: 1480
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
- Todd Zuercher
- Offline
- Platinum Member
-
- Posts: 4793
- Thank you received: 1480
ihavenofish wrote: Heres where we ended up on the x. A short over / under shoot then smooth tracking within a few encoder counts.
At very low speeds it's more lumpy.
It's much better than it was. But think we must be able to clean up the acceleration error a bit..... or maybe with no jerk control it's going to be limited.
I'm shorten the remaining cables tomorrow and see where we end up.
If the old control had jerk limiting, I don't think you will be able to use acceleration rates as high as the old control used. (My guess, probably about 1/2-2/3 as much.)
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.