A microcontroller with suitable peripherals for power conversion is cheap and do the work much better. I know about: stm32f334, Infineon xmc4xxx something, maybe texas instruments and Microchip.
I am working with stm32f334. It have a high resolution timer equal to about 4GHz clock frequency with a lot of triggering options, DAC, fast comparators and cost maybe a few dollars. There are also cheap development boards available. I guess spindle off/on signal may be useful to turn off/on generator and some m-code is useful for the parameters? Regards Nicklas Karlsson On Tue, 8 Mar 2016 16:47:42 +0000 (UTC) Pete_Gruendeman <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi Nicklas: > I am writing with a request for what might be speculation on your part. > Given what others have said about pulse frequency, and what is written in the > Poco tech manuals (frequencies of approximately 8.33- 50kHz, derived from > varying on and off times), would it be reasonable to produce the pulse timing > from and at the same time that the PC is directing motion control? Erosion > pulse generation could be treated as another axis-- maybe? I am concerned > that the standard parport provides rather coarse granularity (increments) > between one size and another size of pulse, especially as the pulse durations > get down to 10 micro seconds on a finishing burn. The Mesa 5i20 will create > about 200kHz pulses with L-cnc input and maybe one of the two parports on it > could be repurposed as a pulse generator? Maybe it's unrealistic to generate > pulses from the motion control PC because computing power isn't sufficient? > Your thoughts? > > Pete Gruendeman > > -------------------------------------------- > On Sun, 3/6/16, Nicklas Karlsson <[email protected]> wrote: > > Subject: Re: [Emc-developers] EDM gap control (Control parameters) > To: "EMC developers" <[email protected]> > Date: Sunday, March 6, 2016, 10:22 PM > > On Mon, 7 Mar 2016 > 10:23:31 +0800 > TJoseph Powderly <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > off time is > really dpendant on flushing conditions > > > on time causes rougher finer surface finish > > I guess this explain it all > and it also make perfect sense. More powder behind remove > more material and longer time in between leave more time for > debri to remove debri. > > > Regards Nicklas Karlsson > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Transform Data into Opportunity. > Accelerate data analysis in your applications > with > Intel Data Analytics Acceleration > Library. > Click to learn more. > http://makebettercode.com/inteldaal-eval > _______________________________________________ > Emc-developers mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-developers > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Transform Data into Opportunity. > Accelerate data analysis in your applications with > Intel Data Analytics Acceleration Library. > Click to learn more. > http://makebettercode.com/inteldaal-eval > _______________________________________________ > Emc-developers mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-developers ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Transform Data into Opportunity. Accelerate data analysis in your applications with Intel Data Analytics Acceleration Library. Click to learn more. http://makebettercode.com/inteldaal-eval _______________________________________________ Emc-developers mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-developers
