Slavko Kocjancic пишет:
> Alexey Starikovskiy pravi:
>   
>> As a matter of fact, I already see a big stopper in your board usefulness.
>> You put optical isolation between logic and parallel port, I see 2
>> drawbacks of it:
>> 1. parallel ports are quite weak these days (3.3v/~5mA), so driving LED
>> from it directly is not bullet proof.
>>   
>>     
> All EPP ports are 5V tolerant and I didn't see the EPP port diferrent as 
> open colector with pullups. LED are arranged to be driven low with 
> external 5V supply. And optocoupler is happy with anithing from 5mA up 
> to 20mA. So I see no problem.
>   
Parallel port can take 5v as input, it can't output 5v, only 3.3v. And
it's ability to
supply current is near 5mA, so your design is at the edge.
>> 2. on both sides you have logic levels _always_.
>>   
>>     
There is little sence to put isolation _here_.
>> 3. machine equipment on the other side of your logic has very different
>> set of voltages,
>> 12, 24 volts are common, and sometimes you could find 48, your board
>> does not allow to
>> connect this equipment without yet another layer of optical isolation.
>>   
>>     
> I'm setup machines without problems on that. The board need 12V 
> unregulated for relays only If you have no relay then anithing betwen 8V 
> to 30V is good.
>   
I'm talking about inputs, are they capable of accepting 24v?
>> 4. now you have common ground between all your logic and all 48 inputs
>> and outputs
>> (and your schematics can be stretched to 160)... I doubt that you could
>> keep such ground
>> clear of the machine noise.
>>   
>>     
> The bad design has big ground loop noise. If somewhere is that problem 
> then just put normal optocoupler just here.
>   
you get 160 signals returning to the same ground, I call it bad design
by definition...
And yes, your optocouplers are needed here, not between parallel port
and the logic.
>> In general, your design seem to be very close to UBOB board here:
>> http://www.candcnc.com/UBOB.htm
>>   
>>     
> Seems similar. But my board rely on EPP interface to not stall computer. 
> One cycle LPT port take near 1uS! And I need only 1 per byte. UBOB needs 
> at least 3.  And price is way overpriced. All thing for my plate is 
> under 25Eur. (with homemade pcb)
>   
>> The problem with the above seems to be it's price, for about same money
>> its possible to
>> get much more capable board from MESA -- 7i43.
>>   
>>     
> Yes MESA is good ... .. but without isolation at all!
>   
So put your isolation after the MESA, properly done it will have much
more value,
than your current board. Only it's size makes it prohibitive.
> Any time I have problem with ground loop problem the relation PC <--> 
> Machine is the worst one.
>
> Anyway I don't want to argue is it good or is it bad. Just want simple 
> solution for simple benchtop machine.
>   
I thought you were thinking of the board, which might be useful to someone
beside you and your simple benchtop machine.

Regards,
Alex.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Download Intel&#174; Parallel Studio Eval
Try the new software tools for yourself. Speed compiling, find bugs
proactively, and fine-tune applications for parallel performance.
See why Intel Parallel Studio got high marks during beta.
http://p.sf.net/sfu/intel-sw-dev
_______________________________________________
Emc-developers mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-developers

Reply via email to