On 22 April 2010 17:19, Jon Elson <el...@pico-systems.com> wrote: > > Andy Pugh wrote: >> Thing is, once you are doing that HAL-fiddling you might as well just >> be running closed loop on the spindle speed
> I've had a tach on my Bridgeport for some time. I have noticed a drop > of about 3 RPM under heavy load. So, I really don't think closed loop > is very important in this machine. I seem to be failing to express myself clearly. What I am saying is that with closed-loop spindle control you will automatically get the spindle speed you ask for in the G-code regardless of which pulley and back-gear combination you have selected, as long as the speed requested is inside the range of the current gear. And this was only ever meant to be a throwaway comment aimed at the earlier statement that an encoder with no index is no use at all. ie that you can still use such an encoder to control and measure spindle speed. That's the trouble when I try to be a Wit, I get half way there. -- atp ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ _______________________________________________ Emc-users mailing list Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users
