Advanced Search

I have a sim working based off the Melfa robot sim. Now I'm in the process of building the machine starting with MesaCT generated files then hand editing a 6th axis etc.

I'm getting various error at almost every turn.  Would it be better to take the sim INI and HAL files and create the machine from those?

 

cmorley wrote:

What version of linuxcnc are you using?

 

version 2.9.2.

Try this, by far the best belt drive system

So I added your custom files to my sim:

I see two external pins:

696 bit IN FALSE qtdragon.external-pause
696 bit IN FALSE qtdragon.external-pause-2

I can't see what is different in qtdragon_hd.ui or qtdragon_hd_handler.py in your qtvcp/screens/qtdragon_hd folder. They see to be the same as the most current.

If that is true then I don't think you need the pause_pin.py file anymore.

We need to get to one version of external pausing.

So can you confirm my understanding - the qtdragon_hd.ui and qtdragon_hd_handler.py are are just copies of the most current?

I figured out the problem of this error. Maybe this information will help you:
When I installed the previous EtherCat-Master driver, I first used the compilation from source method, which installed the compiled driver 1.5.2 with the "make install" command, the installation ended with some error and I left everything as it was, after this installed the DKMS driver and everything worked. When reinstalling the DKMS 1.6.1 driver, it removes the 1.5.2 DKMS driver, but does not remove the remains of the 1.5.2 driver that was compiled with "make install". And you are left with the executable files of version 1.5.2 with the 1.6.1 driver installed.
You need to go to the folder with the source codes from where you compiled the driver and do "make uninstall", after which everything will be fine.

If you have a combined C axis/spindle, I think the position does really need to be
reset when going back into C mode (Ideally by homing to index or absolute position)
because if you simply do math on the accumulated spindle mode position, you will
eventually lose  position resolution as the position gets huge.

The EK1828 *should* work with recent versions of LinuxCNC-Ethercat. I have one of the other EK18xx models in a test system, and I'm petty sure it works.

Hello, I have a Beckhoff module that seems to be unsupported (EK1828)
I'm struggling to make this xml file and cannot figure out how it should be.
Is it possible to debug it? (It seems like I can write error in the file and LinuxCNC still open without any failures...)

Maybe some of you could look at my xml file, I have attached that and the other config files. I have also taken a output of ethercat slaves -v and ethercat pdos (I didn't get anything with the ethercat sdos)

Aciera wrote:

That line is fine as he is setting a signal not a pin:
 

thank you
sorry
i learned something new for me

i call it a game pad, its a touch mouse pad, mouse click, mini keyboard. same thing i assume.

For a gamepad you may want to have a look at the 'hal_input' component. Here is a little how to for keyboard. For a gamepad you would only need to modify the keyword in the 'loadusr' command line:
forum.linuxcnc.org/38-general-linuxcnc-q...s-in-gmoccapy#309096

You can then connect the gamepad pins to gmoccapy pins in the POSTGUI_HALFILE:
linuxcnc.org/docs/html/gui/gmoccapy.html#_jog_hal_pins

That line is fine as he is setting a signal not a pin:
linuxcnc.org/docs/stable/html/hal/basic-hal.html#sub:hal-setp

Yeah, I'm just using a cheap stepper drive but it does have an encoder built in so it dosent loose steps, I ran it yesterday for hours running in the gear teeth drive. And the gear engage command would do the g10 l20, so it should be accurate. I'll be testing this next week.
The bit that has me currently is converting 8.5674 etc to eight point five six seven four revolutions, and getting rid of the eight.

Certainly works for me:
github.com/Sigma1912/LinuxCNC_Demo_Confi...ort_no_twp_reset.ngc

with this in the [RS247NGC] section of the ini:

So i have been looking at a lot of belt drive idea's after doing this build. i have been playing around with a open ended reduction idea's and think i have something that would work and get a lot more from a smaller width belt. the down side to belts when you have some forces at play are what i believe to be minor flexing of the belt engagement into the drive pulley, belts just are not rigid like a ball screw in this respect so you either have to go to a wider belt or figure out a way to get more surface contact with the smaller belt.

Tommy i know how you do your reductions and i have looked at your designs quite a bit. The omega configuration on the open-ended side is a good way to get a few extra teeth engaged and is the basic configuration on my build minus the reduction. what i have built works mostly because the motors are oversized for the size of the machine. Keeping the design simple was a good base line to see what works and spot the tiny issues. for me it's surface finish between step downs
the idea i want to test is something like a serpentine belt reduction for open ended belts that would do away with the closed loop belt reduction on the drive shaft of the omega configuration that i see you using. my thoughts with a serpentine configuration is you end up with a lot more surface area in contact with the toothed pulley's which i would think would translate to a stiffer drive system.
I did some rough sketches to see what kind of footprint it would have and it seemed pretty compact  doing a 3 to 1 reduction with 3mm pitch belt. roughly 4.5 inched by 7.5 inches.