2.7.15
- PCW
- Away
- Moderator
Less
More
- Posts: 17991
- Thank you received: 4838
27 Feb 2020 15:45 - 27 Feb 2020 15:51 #158644
by PCW
Replied by PCW on topic 2.7.15
It has been fixed but hal files created before the fix will need to be updated
Last edit: 27 Feb 2020 15:51 by PCW.
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
- andypugh
- Offline
- Moderator
Less
More
- Posts: 23178
- Thank you received: 4861
27 Feb 2020 23:35 #158698
by andypugh
Replied by andypugh on topic 2.7.15
Only faulty HAL files, though it is possible that pncconf wasn't making them correctly and nobody noticed.
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
- cmorley
- Offline
- Moderator
Less
More
- Posts: 7780
- Thank you received: 2075
28 Feb 2020 06:15 #158727
by cmorley
Replied by cmorley on topic 2.7.15
They were not faulty when Pncconf built them originally.
PID behavior was changed (I guess nobody thought to check how the configuration programs used them)
PID behavior was changed (I guess nobody thought to check how the configuration programs used them)
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
- andypugh
- Offline
- Moderator
Less
More
- Posts: 23178
- Thank you received: 4861
28 Feb 2020 10:30 #158737
by andypugh
The HAL shown earlier had a signal connected to pid.N.command-deriv, but there was no driver for that signal.
While command-deriv was broken and ignored, that didn't matter, but I don't think it was correct.
It's curious that the command-vel output from motion (which I think is the correct signal to drive command-deriv) lives in the "debugging pins, might be removed" section.
Replied by andypugh on topic 2.7.15
They were not faulty when Pncconf built them originally.
The HAL shown earlier had a signal connected to pid.N.command-deriv, but there was no driver for that signal.
While command-deriv was broken and ignored, that didn't matter, but I don't think it was correct.
It's curious that the command-vel output from motion (which I think is the correct signal to drive command-deriv) lives in the "debugging pins, might be removed" section.
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
- cmorley
- Offline
- Moderator
Less
More
- Posts: 7780
- Thank you received: 2075
28 Feb 2020 16:53 #158764
by cmorley
Replied by cmorley on topic 2.7.15
Yes that was a bad choice for the PID component. but when pncconf originally was built that was fine - in fact there are lots of pins that pncconf adds signals to but not driving pins. It does so so that added HAL code files could be more consistent.
Breaking a system because you added a signal to a pin is not user friendly.
Breaking a system because you added a signal to a pin is not user friendly.
The following user(s) said Thank You: tommylight
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
- PCW
- Away
- Moderator
Less
More
- Posts: 17991
- Thank you received: 4838
28 Feb 2020 19:39 #158779
by PCW
Replied by PCW on topic 2.7.15
The problem was that the PID component had a bug (it ignored the command-deriv pin)
The fix implemented simply made the PID component match its long standing manual page description, that is, make the PID component calculate the command derivative internally if the command-deriv pin was unconnected but use the command-deriv pin value if connected.
This matches the feedback-deriv pin behaviour, and any other fix (mode pins etc) would likely have much broader impact.
The fix implemented simply made the PID component match its long standing manual page description, that is, make the PID component calculate the command derivative internally if the command-deriv pin was unconnected but use the command-deriv pin value if connected.
This matches the feedback-deriv pin behaviour, and any other fix (mode pins etc) would likely have much broader impact.
The following user(s) said Thank You: tommylight
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
- cmorley
- Offline
- Moderator
Less
More
- Posts: 7780
- Thank you received: 2075
28 Feb 2020 20:33 #158782
by cmorley
Replied by cmorley on topic 2.7.15
yes but breaking peoples systems on a released version is not helpful.
Especially since it's very difficult to find the problem, if you don't know about the special behavior.
Adding the fix to master would have been ok (Though I still disagree with the black magic)
I realize nobody did this on purpose - but telling people that adding a signal to a pin that is not connected to another driving pin is incorrect - is wrong - other then for the PID component.
Chris
Especially since it's very difficult to find the problem, if you don't know about the special behavior.
Adding the fix to master would have been ok (Though I still disagree with the black magic)
I realize nobody did this on purpose - but telling people that adding a signal to a pin that is not connected to another driving pin is incorrect - is wrong - other then for the PID component.
Chris
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
- PCW
- Away
- Moderator
Less
More
- Posts: 17991
- Thank you received: 4838
28 Feb 2020 20:49 #158785
by PCW
Replied by PCW on topic 2.7.15
I agree that this should have been left in 2.8 and later.
I do think that making command-deriv match the manual page and
feedback-deriv behaviour has the least impact on existing hal files
while fixing a even more mystifying bug (command-deriv having no effect)
I do think that making command-deriv match the manual page and
feedback-deriv behaviour has the least impact on existing hal files
while fixing a even more mystifying bug (command-deriv having no effect)
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
- jazial
- Offline
- Junior Member
Less
More
- Posts: 21
- Thank you received: 1
04 Mar 2020 09:14 #159173
by jazial
Replied by jazial on topic 2.7.15
Hello,
some time today to try to update the machine
I've added :
# --- added for 2.7.15
net x-vel-cmd <= axis.0.joint−vel−cmd
but halfile is not interpreted after this line (all signals after this one are ignored)
In Hal viewer, net x-vel-cmd is only connected to pid.x.command-deriv
some time today to try to update the machine
I've added :
# --- added for 2.7.15
net x-vel-cmd <= axis.0.joint−vel−cmd
but halfile is not interpreted after this line (all signals after this one are ignored)
In Hal viewer, net x-vel-cmd is only connected to pid.x.command-deriv
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
- jazial
- Offline
- Junior Member
Less
More
- Posts: 21
- Thank you received: 1
04 Mar 2020 12:05 #159186
by jazial
Replied by jazial on topic 2.7.15
Here is the error
what I don't understand is the lineis working, so the axis.0.xxx pins are available
twopass: Error in file ./my_LinuxCNC_machine.hal:
Pin 'axis.0.joint−vel−cmd' does not exist
what I don't understand is the line
net x-pos-fb => axis.0.motor-pos-fb
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
Time to create page: 0.076 seconds