Slaving the second gantry motor (7i92)
11 Nov 2015 10:35 #65110
by dannym
Replied by dannym on topic Slaving the second gantry motor (7i92)
I included the .ini and .hal files a bit earlier, I've tinkered a bit but didn't touch the PID parameters, I don't even understand them.
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
11 Nov 2015 10:54 - 11 Nov 2015 10:55 #65114
by dannym
Well, I really really wish I wasn't trying to deal with the extra complexity of a PID. It's super-unfortunate that it's there, but I literally had no other options for figuring out a 7i92 config. I mean, I don't know enough yet to remove it and it's not otherwise working so hard to tell if you're breaking something. Trying to hack it out now would only make the task more complex. Once the system's working fine, well, I wouldn't be so concerned about the PID code being there, even though that would be a better point to try to remove it.
Replied by dannym on topic Slaving the second gantry motor (7i92)
It may be that the PID is maxing out. What are the PID limits set to?
Running a step/dir drive in velocity mode with a PID can have some significant advantages, but it does mean that you need PID tuning, just like any other pid-controlled system.
Well, I really really wish I wasn't trying to deal with the extra complexity of a PID. It's super-unfortunate that it's there, but I literally had no other options for figuring out a 7i92 config. I mean, I don't know enough yet to remove it and it's not otherwise working so hard to tell if you're breaking something. Trying to hack it out now would only make the task more complex. Once the system's working fine, well, I wouldn't be so concerned about the PID code being there, even though that would be a better point to try to remove it.
Last edit: 11 Nov 2015 10:55 by dannym.
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
11 Nov 2015 11:52 #65118
by andypugh
Replied by andypugh on topic Slaving the second gantry motor (7i92)
hm2_stepper is quite likely to "just work" with 3 motors, but it isn't set up for a gantry.
git.linuxcnc.org/gitweb?p=linuxcnc.git;a...ca2d40bb1de299885a9f
Alternatively you can bypass the PID in the your existing HAL file, set the stepgens to "p" not "v", connect stepgen,N.position-command to axis.N.motor-position-cmd and so on.
You probably need to learn to understand HAL files at some point anyway.
Or.. Tune the PID.
git.linuxcnc.org/gitweb?p=linuxcnc.git;a...ca2d40bb1de299885a9f
Alternatively you can bypass the PID in the your existing HAL file, set the stepgens to "p" not "v", connect stepgen,N.position-command to axis.N.motor-position-cmd and so on.
You probably need to learn to understand HAL files at some point anyway.
Or.. Tune the PID.
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
11 Nov 2015 21:06 #65139
by dannym
Replied by dannym on topic Slaving the second gantry motor (7i92)
So you've given a .HAL file there. The .INI file contains a lot of PID-specific stuff. Is the .INI PID stuff totally ignored if the .HAL doesn't use it?
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
11 Nov 2015 21:25 #65141
by andypugh
Yes, the HAL file looks for things in the INI file, things it doesn't look for don't get found, but do no harm.
Replied by andypugh on topic Slaving the second gantry motor (7i92)
The .INI file contains a lot of PID-specific stuff. Is the .INI PID stuff totally ignored if the .HAL doesn't use it?
Yes, the HAL file looks for things in the INI file, things it doesn't look for don't get found, but do no harm.
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
11 Nov 2015 21:36 #65144
by dannym
Replied by dannym on topic Slaving the second gantry motor (7i92)
OK, good to know.
Your file used trivkins, not gantrykins. In truth all I need is this to act as a gantry and support independent homing of each side to ensure it will run squared. Is trivkins sufficient?
Your file used trivkins, not gantrykins. In truth all I need is this to act as a gantry and support independent homing of each side to ensure it will run squared. Is trivkins sufficient?
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
11 Nov 2015 21:39 #65145
by andypugh
Yes, I did say that it was for a three-motor system rather than a gantry. But it isn't much to change to make it into a gantry.
Replied by andypugh on topic Slaving the second gantry motor (7i92)
Your file used trivkins, not gantrykins.
Yes, I did say that it was for a three-motor system rather than a gantry. But it isn't much to change to make it into a gantry.
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
- blacksmith
- Offline
- New Member
Less
More
- Posts: 19
- Thank you received: 0
27 Nov 2015 23:33 #65895
by blacksmith
In this post:
Dual axis homing
Charles Steinkuehler appears to have gotten it working with Trivikins.
Replied by blacksmith on topic Slaving the second gantry motor (7i92)
One thing to be aware of is that LinuxCNC doesn't wait for the second axis to finish homing, so you need to configure so that the final rapid to home is as short as possible or you can have one axis doing a rapid one way while the other is doing a slow search in the other.
This is, admittedly, not ideal.
In this post:
Dual axis homing
Charles Steinkuehler appears to have gotten it working with Trivikins.
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
28 Nov 2015 11:24 #65928
by cncbasher
Replied by cncbasher on topic Slaving the second gantry motor (7i92)
also be aware the changes from Charles involve a beaglebone and Machinekit , not Linuxcnc
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
- blacksmith
- Offline
- New Member
Less
More
- Posts: 19
- Thank you received: 0
28 Nov 2015 17:27 - 28 Nov 2015 21:52 #65961
by blacksmith
Yes important. I've been trying to wrap my head around gantrykins and join_axis configurations and then I noticed Charles did not use either. In his video, it clearly works as one would hope, both home and the early side/axis waits on the late side/slaved axis.
The Machinekit element may make the configuration files nonportable but to my untrained eye they are still share much of the linuxcnc config syntax so I suspect they could be merged into the linuxcnc world by a kindhearted config expert. The cnc machines are just getting bigger and this approach appears to be going in the right direction - ie no new kinematics code needed.
Replied by blacksmith on topic Slaving the second gantry motor (7i92)
also be aware the changes from Charles involve a beaglebone and Machinekit , not Linuxcnc
Yes important. I've been trying to wrap my head around gantrykins and join_axis configurations and then I noticed Charles did not use either. In his video, it clearly works as one would hope, both home and the early side/axis waits on the late side/slaved axis.
if I understand Andy's comment, this approach appears to solve it with existing well established kinematics."... LinuxCNC doesn't wait for the second axis..."
The Machinekit element may make the configuration files nonportable but to my untrained eye they are still share much of the linuxcnc config syntax so I suspect they could be merged into the linuxcnc world by a kindhearted config expert. The cnc machines are just getting bigger and this approach appears to be going in the right direction - ie no new kinematics code needed.
Last edit: 28 Nov 2015 21:52 by blacksmith. Reason: typo
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
Time to create page: 0.093 seconds