Advanced Search

As Peter said,

PCW wrote:

The output hardware does not limit the complexity of the created shapes just the maximum speed.

I suspect however you will find limitations due to the part geometry on any machine.

for my 4x A6 Ethercat servoswith 1kw each. and a ethercat catio module, and a mesa card.

I'm aware. I just was wondering, based upon your knowledge, if it will affect me making that part.

Hello rodw,

Thank you very much for your input, i feel more relieved knowing that about ball screws.

Regarding EtherCAT, i feel like it'd be better if i just get a servo drive (it seems to support CIA402) and cheap IO module to get familiar and maybe use it in the future projects.

For the home switches, yes, i initially plan to install limit switches and later on deal with homing through absolute position from drive and displacing the home switches as E-Stops.

Hello Tommy, haven't seen you for quite some time so definitely ill visit you!

Answer 0: Yes, thats what i had in mind.
Answer 1: Thank you very much for the offer!
Answer 2: Seems like the drives are CIA402 compatible and they provide the XML file for it so ill maybe get one drive for experimentation and getting familiar with it.
Answer 3: Most of boards seems to be out of stock, and i am gravitating towards 7i95T, having 6 encoder i can use it for feedback and use it for pendant as well, so ill reduce the need IO pins by some.
Answer 4: I wasnt considerint it for real time application, just a method to avoid homing by searching limit switches and reading the position from the drives.
Replly 5: I'll see what i can do...

Hi Guys. I have used RIOcore on a Tang Nano 9k (TangBOB board) a couple of times. I am now wanting to try out Ethercat. I was wondering what my options are for doing this. I want to use a RP5 with the Tang connected via an SPI connection to the GPIO pins on the RP5. My first question is where do I connect my Ethercat Drives? from the RP5 or from the Wiznet module connected to the Tang. I would dearly love it if all my configurations for Ethercat can be done within RIOcore.

Cheers
Andrew

Logthor wrote:

 

File Attachment:

File Name: BBU_part_V...sion.zip
File Size:19 KB

My only concern regarding using my parallel port computer with a breakout board is the delay (hence why I was considering the mesa card). Hypothetically, let's say my jitter isn't a problem. Will my experience making chips be the same as with a mesa card? I want to make some pretty complex parts and am concerned that any amount of jitter could make that impossible. I've attached an STL file of a part that I want to make for a friend. Could this be possible using a parallel port, or should I just spring for the more expensive card?
 

The main difference between a parallel port based system and a system with external Step/Dir generation
hardware is the maximum step rate, This speed will be limited by the real time jitter on the parallel port system.

The output hardware does not limit the complexity of the created shapes just the maximum speed.

 

So I should probably start with my Dell first and then get a Mesa card once I feel up to it? Just to confirm, you are saying that you don't think it'll be an issue for making that part (assuming the jitter is not a problem)?

leexi wrote:

Please share your comments and experience.
 

1. This card is not clone. This is original chinese design. 
2. Never upload any firmware. The proper firmware is loaded by manufacturer.
3 You have to do "mesaflash --device 7i92 --addr 10.10.10.10  --readhmid". This shows card configuration.
4. There is in your hal file line like "loadrt hm2_eth board_ip="10.10.10.10" config="num_encoders=1 num_pwmgens=3 num_stepgens=5"". Functions ommited in this line are unavailable, but you can use it's pins as regular I/O. Of course you are limited by card design. If manufacturer designed some pin as output you cannot use this as input (and vice versa) because output circuit is one way.
5. As mentioned above dkms driver may help. Also other version of kernel may help. The "error finishing read" means the break of connections caused by driver/kernel bug rather than hardware problems, however check cable.  I experienced this problem even after a few hours of proper work. The good idea is leave opened LinuxCNC for as many time as you can (no matter you do something with, or not ).
6. I tried use PnCConf two times (the first and the last) and not recommend this to anybody. Better option is to find config similar to your needs and change something in text editor.

IIRC the original parallel port could switch up to 1,000,000 times a second. Assuming two switches per pulse, 8000 pulses per rotation, that's 3750 RPM, which is way more resolution than you need (steppers are 200 steps/rot, or 3200 with microstepping), and way faster than big steppers can probably run anyway.
When I was using steppers and a breakout, it was the steppers that were the limitataion.

  My only concern regarding using my parallel port computer with a breakout board is the delay (hence why I was considering the mesa card). Hypothetically, let's say my jitter isn't a problem. Will my experience making chips be the same as with a mesa card? I want to make some pretty complex parts and am concerned that any amount of jitter could make that impossible. I've attached an STL file of a part that I want to make for a friend. Could this be possible using a parallel port, or should I just spring for the more expensive card?

i will try it.. what i found in my ini... ich have - sign on some scales and outputs... i wired all up + to + and - to -.... but if you look into the pum560 sim file.. you will see that the TCP is upside down.. or is something wrong on my sim file??? thanks

Not sure but it seems a bit odd to me that you have a negative 'D-5' value and asymmetric angles for ALPHA-{3,4,5}:

When the example 'puma560_dh.hal' has:

and the melfa example has:

linuxcnc.org/docs/stable/html/motion/dh-parameters.html

After posting that image of the g code I believe I see it now. The % symbol is on line 5. So that would explain everything being off set considering the line is starting at 1...
I knew it had to have been something silly.

Update: That was it.... 

This is it.