On 12/17/2013 12:23 PM, Gene Heskett wrote: >> I wonder if this is anything like that? >> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2SozZ7af3wg >> > No, no resemblance to my idea, and TBT that driver would be dangerous > unless its feedback does go into LCNC so LCNC knows it is not where LCNC > told it to be. Cute demo yes but could you trust 9 of them to stay within > a thou of the programmed path? Scary.
But that is the point; if you do not have feedback, then you will never be able to ensure that you are anywhere on the programmed path. No matter what driver you use. If one axis is slowed down externally, then all others need to be adjusted too. The real problem is, if the slowing force is reduced, who is controlling the axis' (re-)acceleration? If the HW driver is (partly) autonomous, then your controlling SW will always lag behind and create a larger path deviation than if the SW has full control. I.e. reactionary vs. actionary control. -- Greetings Bertho (disclaimers are disclaimed) ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Rapidly troubleshoot problems before they affect your business. Most IT organizations don't have a clear picture of how application performance affects their revenue. With AppDynamics, you get 100% visibility into your Java,.NET, & PHP application. Start your 15-day FREE TRIAL of AppDynamics Pro! http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=84349831&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk _______________________________________________ Emc-users mailing list Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users
