On 23 October 2012 12:34, Bence Kovács <[email protected]> wrote:
> What is the advantage of using axis C in scarakins? Typically the C axis is the rotational axis that rotates about Z, so from a conventional naming point of view it makes some sense. The scarakins file is a bit strange, though, as that takes the unusual step of mapping Axis C to Joint 3. There is a general (and wrong/annoying) assumption in other parts of LinuxCNC that there is a 1:1 mapping from joints to axes. > I am new to LinuxCNC source, I am just investigating the code > structure. If you have idea where can be the problem, I can make > further investments. Don’t you think we should just modify scarakins > to use axis X Y Z A? I haven't looked at this in any detail, but it would possibly make more sense to leave scarakins as an XYZC kinematics, but to map axis C to joint 5. However I think that might leave us with spare axes in the display. -- atp If you can't fix it, you don't own it. http://www.ifixit.com/Manifesto ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Everyone hates slow websites. So do we. Make your web apps faster with AppDynamics Download AppDynamics Lite for free today: http://p.sf.net/sfu/appdyn_sfd2d_oct _______________________________________________ Emc-developers mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-developers
