Advanced Search

PCW wrote:

Sounds like you want something more like Mach, that buffers motion commands in an external controller

 

Just contacted them...Thanks 

LXQt is most likely going to be pulled out in the next release as I'm currently having major problems with it. XFCE 4.20 pre-release is actually quite stable though so that's a no-brainer

edit: LXQt problem is fixed for now, will be included in the image.

Analog control drives need some tuning also (to match the load inertia)
This is basically true of all servo drives (though of course some have much
better tuning software or even good autotune capability)

I never used steperonline, but from what i read here, they are always high impedance types, hence me not using them.
Programing wise, it is a 2 axis machine with the automated 3'rd axis, uses Inkscape in 2D to produce gcode.

Did you try pinning the Ethernet IRQ?

As a test you can run this script:

 

chmod +x pinirq.txt then:

sudo ./pinirq.txt enp2s0

And then retry LinuxCNC or the ping test

LinuxCNC is the  (real time)  motion controller that takes gcode or manual commands
an converts them to constrained (velocity, acceleration. position) per joint motion data.
LinuxCNC also gets real time feedback from motion hardware to allow for spindle synchronized
motion for things like threading and rigid tapping.

 
How this data is conveyed to/from motion hardware depends on the actual motion hardware
(analog,step/dir,EtherCAT, modbus,pwm, quad encoder, absolute encoder, resolver etc etc)

Sounds like you want something more like Mach, that buffers motion commands in an external controller
 

Okay I will do that, Thank you! How does this sound?

Would you be able to give me any more information on the pipe cutter? Programming wise, design wise, issues, and all? Please, and thank you.

Yes and no...LOL.

For decades now, my servo drives are configured for torque commands, aka "transconductance"
I develop my own motion controllers that handle PID VFF, AFF, dual-loop feedback, etc., etc.
My latest is using the $10 RPi Pico. Using the PIO state machines, I decode the quadrature with zero impact on the two MCU cores.
Ideally, I'd like LinuxCNC to be the G-Code processor, etc. and take care of the time critical stuff in the Picos.

the command return to me :

Tinine wrote:

Yeah I understand this but I want to use my own controllers and my own PID, etc. 

That is all good as explained (i tried) above.

Tinine wrote:

I don't want to rely on an OS for the motion control. Is this even an option with LinuxCNC?

This makes no sense as LinuxCNC is a Motion Controller that runs inside an OS, Linux in this case.
I think i might be on the right track as to what you are looking for, but first some stuff to get out of the way
-you have drives with PID loop in them, they are not motion controllers
-motion controller in this context implies opening gcode, parsing it, planing the trajectory for the axis/joints, sending understandable signals to drives/outside world.
-
You can use separate parts of LinuxCNC on their own, mostly, so you can probably use the gcode parser and trajectory planner, but you would also need the sending signals to drives part, so......
any closer?

Yeah I understand this but I want to use my own controllers and my own PID, etc. 

I don't want to rely on an OS for the motion control. Is this even an option with LinuxCNC?

So looks like the DKMS driver (I think the default driver with latency issues "8169")

So not sure whats going on.

What does your kernel command line look like?

cat /proc/cmdline



 

I played with PID myself some, and moving away from P250 I0 D0 just made things worse for me, the deadband was what I needed, but I was also hunting for a 4rth digit of following accuracy. Glad things are working better!

What kind of set up do you have? Do you have Stepper Motors with Feedback, without feedback or Servo Motors?
I am running Steppers without Feedback. I wonder how the PID works in that case. If you don't have feedback, how can the PID work. My theory, the Position is commanded and the Steppgenerator reports the "theoretical" position back. Not knowing it the motor made the step or not.

When I played around with it, I lowered the values quite a bit and got a following error. Seems like to confirm my theory above. I did not notice a change from the default PID P 300 to like 30, but the following error came with P 5 or less.

I was hoping that the way my motors stall would be an overrun of the P Max value, but increasing that did not help either. I have to do more testing. It still might not be a problem of RIO, since my other motors are running just fine.

Thanks again.

Should not affect work/use, LinuxCNC is very good at reporting issues, so if LinuxCNC is not complaining, move on, all is good.