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

Reply via email to