2011/5/13 Viesturs Lācis <[email protected]>:
> 2011/5/13 andy pugh <[email protected]>:
>>
>> Was that a different issue to the spurious conversion of linear units
>> from degrees to radians inside genserkins?
>>
>
> No it is the same thing, I remember that You pointed it out, when I
> brought this up in the thread, where I described my findings. I looked
> at that thread a minute ago and found that already that time I
> indicated - line 444 in genserkins converts in one direction, but line
> 521 converts them back, so it _should_ be the same.
I wrote it the following way:
for (link = 0; link < genser->link_num; link++) {
// for angular joints jest, and the rest of joint related calcs are in
radians
if(TYPE(link) == 1) {
jest[link] = joints[link] * (PM_PI / 180);
} else {
jest[link] = joints[link];
}
}
if (smalls == genser->link_num) {
/* converged, copy jest[] out */
for (link = 0; link < genser->link_num; link++) {
// convert angular joints from radians back to angles
if(TYPE(link) == 1) {
joints[link] = jest[link] * 180 / PM_PI;
} else {
joints[link] = jest[link];
}
}
I compiled it and tested.
The difference is still there:
Joint[0] = 0; Y=0
Joint[0] = 500; Y = ~8,75
Viesturs
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Achieve unprecedented app performance and reliability
What every C/C++ and Fortran developer should know.
Learn how Intel has extended the reach of its next-generation tools
to help boost performance applications - inlcuding clusters.
http://p.sf.net/sfu/intel-dev2devmay
_______________________________________________
Emc-users mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users
