On 8/7/2012 7:03 PM, Kent A. Reed wrote: > On 8/7/2012 3:38 PM, Viesturs Lācis wrote: >> 2012/8/7 Kent A. Reed <kentallanr...@gmail.com>: >>> The bigger picture is still very fuzzy and hence harder to answer. What >>> does it mean "to synchronize them, so that they work all together"? >>> >> Yes. I still do not know for sure the answer to this question. >> Because I have never seen any system like that, so I have no idea, how >> exactly do they work and I do not want to reinvent the wheel. Can >> anyone share some information or screenshots, what do those existing >> solutions have? What are they capable of? >> >> I guess that in my case requirements could be limited down to this >> list (actually second point alone would do): >> 1) load a separate g-code file for each separate LinuxCNC station and >> separately execute them - this would actually be a remote control with >> several machine being controlled from one GUI; >> 2) upon pressing some button/changing a tab or whatever, make all the >> stations execute one g-code file - this would require modified >> interpreter and non-standard g-code to exceed current number of axis >> words and some additional commands in the middle of the code that >> would put each station on pause and then resume, when all stations >> have reached this "pause" command. I guess that non-standard code is >> not biggest issue, because those machines either run one code for a >> long time (so it is worth spending some time to prepare code) or they >> receive the commands "almost on the fly" from another application; >> >> > I'll have to think about this a bit before I can respond. > > Regards, > Kent > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Live Security Virtual Conference > Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's security and > threat landscape has changed and how IT managers can respond. Discussions > will include endpoint security, mobile security and the latest in malware > threats. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfrnl04242012/114/50122263/ > _______________________________________________ > Emc-developers mailing list > Emc-developers@lists.sourceforge.net > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-developers Think of the following as a stream of thought. (That means that the mouth is going without much thought.)
I think I would add a new optional feature to the language. The first character of a line would tell which machines the line related to. So, if it was a 1, machine 1 would execute it. If it was a 2, machine 2 would execute it. If it is a zero, all machines execute it. The I would add an Mcode that provided synchronization. It would have an argument telling which machines to sync with. The machine (or all machines if machine 0 is specified) for which this line was executed would wait for all of the machines listed in the argument to reach the line. It would then continue. Generating this code might require a special processor to interleave the components. (Actually, since the interpreter doesn't take any time, all of the commands for a hunk of work for a particular machine could be consecutive.) -- Drat. Now that I've bottom posted, I'll have to skim over all of the stuff above before I get to the next person's bottom post. :-) Regards, Ken ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Live Security Virtual Conference Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's security and threat landscape has changed and how IT managers can respond. Discussions will include endpoint security, mobile security and the latest in malware threats. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfrnl04242012/114/50122263/ _______________________________________________ Emc-developers mailing list Emc-developers@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-developers
