On Dec 28 2015 12:58 PM, Jon Elson wrote: > On 12/27/2015 11:37 PM, EBo wrote: >> I was unaware that the AMT encoders had any lag problem. I >> will need to look into that. _ > I did a comparison of them, it should be searchable on the > forums. I have some Halscope shots online comparing them to > standard HEDS optical encoders.
thanks for the pointer. I see the writeup. Very good to know! >> I also did not assume that it was an encode issue, thought >> if you could bump it up then you might be able to eek out >> a little more res from your machine. That would likely be >> at the expense of speed. I thought this was on a machine >> you had code for, but I stand corrected on that, and as >> mentioned in my comments that a rebuild was most likely >> needed (meaning ball screws, rails, etc.) _ > No, this is a stock commercial machine. It can do 4000 - > 6000 components/hour, and is the size of an old VW bug. I > don't think it was really ever meant to do .5mm or finer > lead pitch components. It is totally fine for SOIC chips, > and does OK for things down to 0.65mm lead pitch. But, some > of my boards have 0.5mm lead pitch FPGAs, and the placement > accuracy is marginal on those. So, I inspect with a > magnifier and nudge the chips if the alignment is off. > Since there's only one of these hi-density chips/board, that > isn't too bad a limitation. Fair enough. I originally thought that maybe playing a little with either the encoders or leadscrew/bearings, you could get it to maybe 0.4mm, but with a closed source machine without docs on how to tweak things at that level (even if they allow it), would be nearly impossible. Oh well... Best of luck! EBo -- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ _______________________________________________ Emc-developers mailing list Emc-developers@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-developers
