On Mon, Jan 23, 2017, at 12:18 PM, Robert Ellenberg wrote: > John, you raise a good point here. The general assumption is that the S > word is a reasonable prediction of spindle speed. What do you think of > having a check at both interp time and runtime?
I kinda think you're going to want that anyway. It is always better to spot a problem during preview rather than after the part is half machined. The preview check should use the current value of the S-word as a predictor of what the spindle speed will be during the real run. If you run a program with G33 moves in it and the spindle isn't turning, the program will silently hang waiting for index. So there must be some special "preview only" code already in place to avoid the hang. (Likewise for G95 "feed per rev" mode.) The run-time check sould of course use the actual spindle speed from the encoder. If you don't have an encoder you can't do G33 anyway. > That would cover all cases. > For machines like yours, we could suppress the interp-time error. I wouldn't suppress it. If I program an appropriate S-word (even though I know that it doesn't directly control the spindle), I can benefit from the preview-time check. > Is there > an INI or HAL setting to tell LinuxCNC that the spindle is manually > controlled? Not that I'm aware of. Nitpick - you wrote "spindle is manually controlled" where I think you meant "spindle SPEED is manually controlled". Spindle on/off is under LinuxCNC control using M3/M5 (I don't have reversing, so M4 doesn't work). > -- John Kasunich [email protected] ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most engaging tech sites, SlashDot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot _______________________________________________ Emc-developers mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-developers
