On Wed, Mar 3, 2010 at 5:57 AM, Sven Wesley <[email protected]> wrote:

> 2010/3/3 Erik Christiansen <[email protected]>
> >
> >
> > Hmmm ... I think you could be right - I think too much.
> > (But it used to save me weeks of work, and help keep my hair, when I was
> > a programmer. ;-)
> >
> > Given that testimonial, I might buy a few extra, since they have to come
> so
> > far.
> >
> > Many thanks for sharing your know-how, Sven.
> >
> > Erik
> >
> >
> If you really want to read some experienced info on the AMT's, look up my
> killer thread in the mail archive. Search for "Engrave.py cuts deeper and
> deeper". Enjoy.
> Conclusion: The AMT's do the work when other encoders fail.
>
> To give you another data point, I've been using an AMT on the
recommendation of people on the mailing list for the last week and it seems
to do a great job.  Have them set for 2048ppr which ends up at 8192 counts
per rev in an encoder in EMC2.  I ordered just one to test it since I was a
little unsure about using a capacitive encoder instead of an optical
encoder, and now that I've been using it for a little while, I am ordering a
few more for other axises and even one to do spindle encoding on a lathe.

Lawrence
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Download Intel&#174; Parallel Studio Eval
Try the new software tools for yourself. Speed compiling, find bugs
proactively, and fine-tune applications for parallel performance.
See why Intel Parallel Studio got high marks during beta.
http://p.sf.net/sfu/intel-sw-dev
_______________________________________________
Emc-users mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users

Reply via email to