Hi, Jun 9, 2020, 22:25 by juha.hei...@gmail.com: > Hmm out of curiosity why would you require 2 separate EtherCat ports or is it > just for a ring topology? > > If you can settle for just one, you could run the igh EtherCat master stack > on the BBB and use available LAN port. So if one is enough, no need to mixup > the cape with the EtherCat stuff. > > ”Ideally” for an industrial approach you could do ”minimal” setup on the cape > and then (I think someone suggested this in the past) make a bunch of > EtherCat slaves. Using a microchip LAN9252 coupled with a microcontoller is > relatively simple to make and somewhat cheap. From the top of my head ill say > the 9252 requires some 50 components around it and most just resistors and > capacitors. The EtherCat slave license ”comes with” the LAN9252 so no issues > > If you pair the slave controller with a popular mcu I think the community > could do a lot in the EtherCat slave world. > There actually already is a similar project: https://github.com/DieBieEngineering/DieBieSlave - problem is, it's not exactly community DIY friendly, it has 6 layers PCB.
Then there is the XMC4800 MCU from Infineon which has Ethercat integrated. Cern. > > Just my 2 cents. > > tiistai 9. kesäkuuta 2020 Stephen Bell <> bell.stephe...@gmail.com> > > kirjoitti: > >> Agreed on the massive requirements disparity. In my view, given how >> saturated the market is for stepper-motor based control boards (particularly >> the Duet 3, which can be controlled by a BBB/RPi) I'd prefer a more >> Break-out-Board style cape to make industrial-level control more accessible. >> >> My ideal cape would have dual etherCAT RJ45 ports, an RS422 or 485 header >> with voltage selection for PLC/spindle vfd control, UART headers, dual CAN >> headers and a small array of optoisloators for the other GPIO. Biggest >> problem for this is the ethercat license, which is somewhat of a pain... >> >> I also prefer the web-based GUIs locally hosted on the device, which can be >> accessed across the network and use less resources than a driven display and >> a native GUI, so I'd prefer a cape NOT be limited by a desire to have a >> screen/monitor from the BBB. >> >> just my 2C >> >> On Sunday, June 7, 2020 at 12:46:01 AM UTC-4, Malte Schmidt wrote: >> >>> I think the issue is always that the requirements with these machines are >>> very different and that you never quite get what is needed. >>> >>> >>> When I build the cape I use on my lathe I sort of used a modular design. I >>> based this on a prototype cape and used those small optocoupler and level >>> shift modules that you get from China for the maker scene. It looks quite >>> like a hack but you might see the three opto modules in the back and the >>> two level shifters here: >>> https://forum.zerspanungsbude.>>> net/download/file.php?id=18836>>> >>> 6&mode=view >>> There is an external pwm-> 0-10V module as well (not shown) for spindle >>> control >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> I always thought about making this nicer. I would have done it this way: >>> A cape that: >>> - Make PRU and GPIO Pins available in sets of 4? pins on standardized PIN >>> headers + power. >>> - Makes the terminals for connecting the cables available >>> >>> >>> >>> PLUS >>> >>> >>> >>> Small modules for level shift, opto isolation , spindle control (as >>> desired). These would use the standardized connectors on the cape. >>> For this I would actually rely on stuff that is already available (if so). >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >> >> >> >> -- >> website: >> http://www.machinekit.io>> blog: >> >> http://blog.machinekit.io>> github: >> https://github.com/machinekit >> --- >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >> "Machinekit" group. >> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an >> email to >> machinekit+unsubscribe@googleg>> roups.com>> . >> To view this discussion on the web visit >> >> https://groups.google.com/d/ms>> gid/machinekit/4e75a7ba-b13f-4>> >> 579-a7f1-09211ff4cbd7o%40googl>> egroups.com >> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/machinekit/4e75a7ba-b13f-4579-a7f1-09211ff4cbd7o%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>>> >> . >> > > > > -- > website: > http://www.machinekit.io> blog: > http://blog.machinekit.io> > github: > https://github.com/machinekit > --- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Machinekit" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to > machinekit+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com> . > To view this discussion on the web visit > > https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/machinekit/CAMNBL%3Dzu%3D395LLiXHc1CYucpGdTKZ3QMLmeLSnj4Peo1GMB6Sw%40mail.gmail.com > > <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/machinekit/CAMNBL%3Dzu%3D395LLiXHc1CYucpGdTKZ3QMLmeLSnj4Peo1GMB6Sw%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>> > . > -- website: http://www.machinekit.io blog: http://blog.machinekit.io github: https://github.com/machinekit --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Machinekit" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to machinekit+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/machinekit/M9Pt_mQ--3-2%40tuta.io.
