Michael,

I just tried to give you what was asked for.  You can reexpress it 
however seems most clear to you or your users.  What I was getting at is 
that the answer depends on your give setup, but if you give me a couple 
of specs of your hardware then I can give you some guidance.  I picked 
the g540 because it is a give piece of equiptment that some people use.  
You could just as well write up the same ting for the Mesa hardware, 
etc.  Expressing it in terms of % or raw numbers is fundamentally the 
same -- for a given spec and use you need a jitter no worse than JERR.  
You can generate such a table give the original specs.

On May 6 2013 12:24 PM, Michael Haberler wrote:
> EBo,
>
>
> Am 06.05.2013 um 19:44 schrieb EBo <[email protected]>:
>
>> On May 6 2013 8:06 AM, Kent A. Reed wrote:
>>> On 5/6/2013 9:16 AM, Lars Segerlund wrote:
>>>>  check the data on osadl.org ... with RT-Preempt you should be 
>>>> able
>>>> to
>>>> get worstcase jitters of less than 50 us ... or you have a 'bad'
>>>> system / bad drivers.
>>>>
>>>>  With a 'good' RT-Preempt system you get < 20 us  as worstcase.
>>>>
>>>>  osadl  is good since they are really hammering the systems while
>>>> measuring.
>>>>
>>>>  / regards, Lars Segerlund.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Lars:
>>>
>>> I'm not looking to open a discussion about the definition of jitter
>>> and
>>> the appropriate methodology for measuring it (we've had some of 
>>> those
>>> in
>>> the past on this list, and some of us are quite familiar with 
>>> OSADL).
>>>
>>> What I'm looking for is better guidance to our CNC users, most of
>>> whom
>>> find the details about latency as understandable as details about 
>>> the
>>> fuel-injection algorithm used in their car's computer. What we have
>>> seen
>>> in the time I've been reading the emc2- lists amounts to constant
>>> schoolyard taunting, "my latency is better than your latency." Look
>>> how
>>> excited we get when the latest Atom board yields 1us lower or 
>>> higher
>>> jitter results than another. If the better guidance includes 
>>> pointing
>>> to
>>> the OSADL as another source of data (along with suggestions on how 
>>> to
>>> interpret those data) so much the better for the folks who wish to
>>> use
>>> RT-PREEMPT enabled kernels (and my thanks to those on this list who
>>> have
>>> been making it possible for the average user to even consider using
>>> them).
>>
>> Kent,
>>
>> What I would like to see, and will help generate as my limited time
>> allows, generate some basic formulas to help guide people.  This is 
>> off
>> the top of my head, and is likely wrong given that I am spacey as 
>> hell
>> with allergies...
>>
>> max_pulse_rate (in Hz) = 1.0 /(maxjitter * Const)
>
> from a user perspective I think measures like latency or perceived
> maximum pulse rates are useless as guidance, for the simple reason
> that they do not express what a user might be interested in, but
> happen to be some low-level number which happens to be measurable
> easily
>
> what _I_ would be interested in isnt what happens to be easily
> measurable, but what a given setup can do for me
>
> for example:
>
> given a configuration, what is the quality of tracking the commanded
> path, and the speed/speed deviation at which that can be done
>
> tracking quality (I just made that term up) might translate into
> either a maximum path deviation (hard limit), or a distribution with
> percentiles plus a boundary
>
> this probably has both a spatial and a temporal dimension
>
> example for spacial accuracy: for test path X, results are within A
> uM 95% of the time with a maximum deviation of B uM
>
> I admit this probably cant be expressed as easily - I'm lacking
> theory and literature know how here but I would bet there is actually
> work in the area (or in related weapons or rocket research ;)
>
> maybe even there is a way to compute such values on the fly and
> mirror them in (a) pin(s); again that is blue sky and pure 
> speculation
>
>
> from that perspective, messages like 'unexpected realtime delay' are
> about as useful as dashboard message in my car saying 'cylinder #3
> took 0.7mS too long to fire':
>
> very interesting detail, now what bearing has that on my goals - do I
> need to stop, can I continue driving or will I bump into another car?
>
> ---
>
> at times it might be useful to lean back and ask yourself: does this
> make sense or can we do better than that
>
> - Michael
>
>
>>
>> where Const is probably something from 3 to 10 and denotes some
>> fraction of base time period that you can put up with the jitter.
>> Knowing how fast you can run the stepgen thread (assuming stepgen) 
>> will
>> then allow you to calculate your max speed using a given piece of
>> mechanics/electronics/etc.  For example, if you are using something 
>> like
>> the Gecko G540, and motors that can do just over 300RPM, and 
>> typically
>> have 200 steps/rev.  We know that the G540 is hard-wired to 10
>> microsteps/step.  So, we have 300*200*10 maximum steps/rev that the
>> motors can do, and 10KHz for the step/sec.  So if we back calculate
>> that, we are talking 100us for the max step rate, and you want your
>> jitter to be a very small portion of that (for argument lets say 1/5 
>> or
>> <20%).  So, if we have a latency of <20us we can easily keep up with 
>> the
>> G540.  If I am not mistaken, the latest RT_PREEMPT is able to do 
>> that on
>> all my hardware.  Not sure about yours.
>>
>> Sometime back I remember reading a paper that looked at the %jitter 
>> to
>> duty-cycle and the overall effect on power loss.  I do not have an
>> intuitive feel for that or what implies for the current discussion 
>> but
>> this is a start.  I am sure that others will tare this apart but so 
>> be
>> it.  This is intended to start a reasoned discussion on spec'ing the 
>> max
>> speed of a setup given the jitter and other considerations.
>>
>>   EBo --
>>
>> 
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> Introducing AppDynamics Lite, a free troubleshooting tool for 
>> Java/.NET
>> Get 100% visibility into your production application - at no cost.
>> Code-level diagnostics for performance bottlenecks with <2% overhead
>> Download for free and get started troubleshooting in minutes.
>> http://p.sf.net/sfu/appdyn_d2d_ap1
>> _______________________________________________
>> Emc-developers mailing list
>> [email protected]
>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-developers
>
>
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Learn Graph Databases - Download FREE O'Reilly Book
> "Graph Databases" is the definitive new guide to graph databases and
> their applications. This 200-page book is written by three acclaimed
> leaders in the field. The early access version is available now.
> Download your free book today! http://p.sf.net/sfu/neotech_d2d_may
> _______________________________________________
> Emc-developers mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-developers


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Learn Graph Databases - Download FREE O'Reilly Book
"Graph Databases" is the definitive new guide to graph databases and 
their applications. This 200-page book is written by three acclaimed 
leaders in the field. The early access version is available now. 
Download your free book today! http://p.sf.net/sfu/neotech_d2d_may
_______________________________________________
Emc-developers mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-developers

Reply via email to