On 11 January 2011 08:57, Erik Christiansen <dva...@internode.on.net> wrote:
> Feeding the output of a physical encoder to a software encoder leaves > the signal double encoded, and me thoroughly confused. The physical angle is encoded by the encoder into a swquence of quadrature pulses The HAL encoder encodes that series of quadrature pulses into a pattern of bits according to the codec known as IEEE 754. > I agree with Kirk, and believe that "double encoder" thinking is muddled > and confused. Saying what we mean would be a useful step toward clarity, > and reduce the steepness of the EMC2 learning curve for all. I agree with the first part of this statement. I do not think that the second part follows from the first. In the context of CNC an "encoder" tends to have a rather specific understanding (I put "meaning" first but changed my mind). There is no such understanding of the meaning of "decoder". "counter" would work. However, do we _really_ want to break every single HAL file over a point of pedantry? -- atp "Torque wrenches are for the obedience of fools and the guidance of wise men" ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Gaining the trust of online customers is vital for the success of any company that requires sensitive data to be transmitted over the Web. Learn how to best implement a security strategy that keeps consumers' information secure and instills the confidence they need to proceed with transactions. http://p.sf.net/sfu/oracle-sfdevnl _______________________________________________ Emc-users mailing list Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users