Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Hmm, motion control board is getting real smooth - that worries me!

Expand Messages
  • lcdpublishing
    Well, I probably have 30~40 hours into the software for the motion translator board I am working on. I have probably been down 20 different paths along the
    Message 1 of 4 , Apr 1, 2006
    • 0 Attachment
      Well,

      I probably have 30~40 hours into the software for the motion
      translator board I am working on. I have probably been down 20
      different paths along the way trying various routines and such for
      the velocity control, accel, decel, etc.

      This morning I worked out the homing routines and then did some
      clean up in the code to remove a bunch of testing flags and such.

      The latest test run really ran smooth - much better than anything
      prior. The sad part is I don't know why it is running so smoothly
      as I don't recall fixing the "problem" areas.

      A bit more testing on the single axis board, then I will be moving
      onto the multi-axis board with controls 4 axes and coordinates all
      their motions. I suspect at that point, everything is going to get
      about 20 times more complex. But, atleast with the software
      problems I don't have to pester you guys constantly :-)!

      Off to see "Ice Age Meltdown" with the granddaughter - should be a
      HOOT!

      Chris
    • Robert Hedan
      I remember reading that one critical element of CNC on a PC was the code itself. How many CPU cycles the code used was a determining factor in how well things
      Message 2 of 4 , Apr 1, 2006
      • 0 Attachment
        I remember reading that one critical element of CNC on a PC was the code
        itself. How many CPU cycles the code used was a determining factor in how
        well things ran.

        Try putting back extra stuff into the code; unimportant stuff like setting
        variables on and off.

        It's possible you've removed problem areas. If you're about to add much
        more complex code, I'd do a small exercise just to be sure your processor
        can handle such extra burden.

        Robert
        :)



        -----Message d'origine-----
        De : Electronics_101@yahoogroups.com
        [mailto:Electronics_101@yahoogroups.com] De la part de lcdpublishing
        Envoyé : avril 1 2006 13:01
        À : Electronics_101@yahoogroups.com
        Objet : [Electronics_101] Hmm, motion control board is getting real smooth -
        that worries me!


        Well,

        I probably have 30~40 hours into the software for the motion
        translator board I am working on. I have probably been down 20
        different paths along the way trying various routines and such for
        the velocity control, accel, decel, etc.

        This morning I worked out the homing routines and then did some
        clean up in the code to remove a bunch of testing flags and such.

        The latest test run really ran smooth - much better than anything
        prior. The sad part is I don't know why it is running so smoothly
        as I don't recall fixing the "problem" areas.

        A bit more testing on the single axis board, then I will be moving
        onto the multi-axis board with controls 4 axes and coordinates all
        their motions. I suspect at that point, everything is going to get
        about 20 times more complex. But, atleast with the software
        problems I don't have to pester you guys constantly :-)!

        Off to see "Ice Age Meltdown" with the granddaughter - should be a
        HOOT!

        Chris







        Yahoo! Groups Links
      • lcdpublishing
        Hi Robert, you are right about the PC part, however, in my case that won t matter. I am not using the Parallel port for output to signal the steppers.
        Message 3 of 4 , Apr 1, 2006
        • 0 Attachment
          Hi Robert, you are right about the PC part, however, in my case that
          won't matter. I am not using the Parallel port for output to signal
          the steppers. Rather, I am using a serial interface to send the
          motion commands into an AVR. From inside the AVR, I translate that
          into step & direction signals and handle all the details in there.
          That's why I need such tight code in the AVR. Hell, the PC software
          could easily run on anything that can run Windows 95 or even ME.
          That portion of the software which I wrote years back had plenty of
          performance for realtime plotting and such.

          So, for me and performance it all about getting data into the AVRs
          from the PC (115,200 baud) and about processsing those motion
          commands into consistant pulse streams to the stepper (servo)
          drivers. The AVR is handling a LOT of work making sure things
          accel, decel, don't over travel, find home switches, buffer
          commands, perform error checking for the communications, and a
          handful of other tasks. So, those little AVRs are the real work
          horses in this project.

          Gotta run

          Chris





          --- In Electronics_101@yahoogroups.com, Robert Hedan
          <robert.hedan@...> wrote:
          >
          > I remember reading that one critical element of CNC on a PC was
          the code
          > itself. How many CPU cycles the code used was a determining
          factor in how
          > well things ran.
          >
          > Try putting back extra stuff into the code; unimportant stuff like
          setting
          > variables on and off.
          >
          > It's possible you've removed problem areas. If you're about to
          add much
          > more complex code, I'd do a small exercise just to be sure your
          processor
          > can handle such extra burden.
          >
          > Robert
          > :)
          >
          >
          >
          > -----Message d'origine-----
          > De : Electronics_101@yahoogroups.com
          > [mailto:Electronics_101@yahoogroups.com] De la part de
          lcdpublishing
          > Envoyé : avril 1 2006 13:01
          > À : Electronics_101@yahoogroups.com
          > Objet : [Electronics_101] Hmm, motion control board is getting
          real smooth -
          > that worries me!
          >
          >
          > Well,
          >
          > I probably have 30~40 hours into the software for the motion
          > translator board I am working on. I have probably been down 20
          > different paths along the way trying various routines and such for
          > the velocity control, accel, decel, etc.
          >
          > This morning I worked out the homing routines and then did some
          > clean up in the code to remove a bunch of testing flags and such.
          >
          > The latest test run really ran smooth - much better than anything
          > prior. The sad part is I don't know why it is running so smoothly
          > as I don't recall fixing the "problem" areas.
          >
          > A bit more testing on the single axis board, then I will be moving
          > onto the multi-axis board with controls 4 axes and coordinates all
          > their motions. I suspect at that point, everything is going to
          get
          > about 20 times more complex. But, atleast with the software
          > problems I don't have to pester you guys constantly :-)!
          >
          > Off to see "Ice Age Meltdown" with the granddaughter - should be a
          > HOOT!
          >
          > Chris
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          > Yahoo! Groups Links
          >
        • Dave Mucha
          ... Stepper smoothness is often the smoothness and regularity of the pulses. PC s have a horrible output as far as timing goes. PC s have a lot of overhead
          Message 4 of 4 , Apr 1, 2006
          • 0 Attachment
            --- In Electronics_101@yahoogroups.com, "lcdpublishing"
            <lcdpublishing@...> wrote:
            >
            > Well,
            >
            > I probably have 30~40 hours into the software for the motion
            > translator board I am working on. I have probably been down 20
            > different paths along the way trying various routines and such for
            > the velocity control, accel, decel, etc.
            >
            > This morning I worked out the homing routines and then did some
            > clean up in the code to remove a bunch of testing flags and such.
            >
            > The latest test run really ran smooth - much better than anything
            > prior. The sad part is I don't know why it is running so smoothly
            > as I don't recall fixing the "problem" areas.
            >
            >

            Stepper smoothness is often the smoothness and regularity of the
            pulses. PC's have a horrible output as far as timing goes. PC's have
            a lot of overhead so the pulse streams are horrible. But, in the low
            speed realm of most of out motion control, that is not all that important.

            Dave
          Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.