Re: [Emc-developers] spindle brake

2008-10-30 Thread Chris Morley
> I am not advocating against a "spindle stopped" pin as input > to the main body of EMC code, only against embedding code > in the main body that prevents the machine implementer from > having control over the delay between forward and reverse > by means of HAL or Classic Ladder. > > Indeed a

Re: [Emc-developers] spindle brake

2008-10-30 Thread Steve Stallings
> -Original Message- > From: Chris Morley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Thursday, October 30, 2008 12:59 PM > To: EMC developers > Subject: Re: [Emc-developers] spindle brake > > > > >> But really when ever could you change directions with out stoppin

Re: [Emc-developers] spindle brake

2008-10-30 Thread Chris Morley
> >> But really when ever could you change directions with out stopping >> first? The way I'm talking gives the integrator the all choices >> > > The only example that comes to mind is rigid tapping in a mill Actually not true. The spindle must stop but only for an instant. There is no reason

Re: [Emc-developers] spindle brake

2008-10-30 Thread Steve Stallings
> But really when ever could you change directions with out stopping > first? The way I'm talking gives the integrator the all choices > The only example that comes to mind is rigid tapping in a mill, however the goal should be to not hard code the behavior into EMC's main code. Adding additional

Re: [Emc-developers] spindle brake

2008-10-30 Thread Chris Morley
> I see what you're talking about now - and I agree that an at-speed > input which EMC checks at the "right" times would be a nice addition. > > I think possibly the "right" times are: > > 1) before the first feed move after each spindle start, AND > 2) before the first feed move after each spi

Re: [Emc-developers] spindle brake

2008-10-30 Thread Chris Morley
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > To: emc-developers@lists.sourceforge.net > Date: Thu, 30 Oct 2008 09:16:21 -0500 > Subject: Re: [Emc-developers] spindle brake > > Regarding pause when reversing spindle (direct M3 to M4 transition), > th

Re: [Emc-developers] spindle brake

2008-10-30 Thread Chris Radek
On Thu, Oct 30, 2008 at 07:28:16AM +, Chris Morley wrote: > > What I am saying is that while using CSS , before STARTING a feed line > EMC should know that the spindle is up_to_speed . I suggest that a HAL > bit pin (say spindle_up_to_speed) would suffice. Then an integrator could > connect

Re: [Emc-developers] spindle brake

2008-10-30 Thread Steve Stallings
ctober 30, 2008 2:28 AM > To: EMC developers > Subject: Re: [Emc-developers] spindle brake > > > > First off let me apologize for being unclear with my thoughts and If > my wording seemed overly strong. > > >> IMHO -CSS should always wait > >> for an up

Re: [Emc-developers] spindle brake

2008-10-30 Thread Jeff Epler
There is already a pin called 'motion.feed-hold'. An integrator can use this today as the way to implement "hold until the spindle is at (or close to) speed". The integrator is free to write whatever logic is desired, and hook it to motion.feed-hold. One slightly odd idea that crossed my mind la

Re: [Emc-developers] spindle brake

2008-10-30 Thread Chris Morley
First off let me apologize for being unclear with my thoughts and If my wording seemed overly strong. >> IMHO -CSS should always wait >> for an up to speed signal before STARTING feed otherwise the surface >> feed might not be even close. > > Are you talking about constant surface speed or fe

Re: [Emc-developers] spindle brake

2008-10-29 Thread Chris Radek
On Wed, Oct 29, 2008 at 11:55:22PM +, Chris Morley wrote: > IMHO -CSS should always wait > for an up to speed signal before STARTING feed otherwise the surface > feed might not be even close. Are you talking about constant surface speed or feed per rev? I am not entirely sure which thing you

Re: [Emc-developers] spindle brake

2008-10-29 Thread Chris Morley
> Date: Wed, 29 Oct 2008 19:25:33 -0400 > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > To: emc-developers@lists.sourceforge.net > Subject: Re: [Emc-developers] spindle brake > > [snip] > >>Thanks Chris. >>Maybe we could get John or Ale

Re: [Emc-developers] spindle brake

2008-10-29 Thread Stephen Wille Padnos
[snip] >Thanks Chris. >Maybe we could get John or Alex to mention this behavior in the docs please. >I would think that a pause for up to speed would be very important for >constant surface feed. > > You can do this with HAL. You can compare the spindle speed to the expected speed, and activ

Re: [Emc-developers] spindle brake

2008-10-29 Thread Chris Morley
> Date: Wed, 29 Oct 2008 17:21:46 -0500 > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > To: emc-developers@lists.sourceforge.net > Subject: Re: [Emc-developers] spindle brake > > On Wed, Oct 29, 2008 at 10:09:23PM +, Chris Morley wrote: >> &g

Re: [Emc-developers] spindle brake

2008-10-29 Thread Chris Radek
On Wed, Oct 29, 2008 at 10:09:23PM +, Chris Morley wrote: > > if some one programs m3 then m4 does EMC put the brake on for a > certain amount of time, error, or just change directions of the > spindle. Just changes direction. This is also how rigid tapping works. > On a related question wh

[Emc-developers] spindle brake

2008-10-29 Thread Chris Morley
if some one programs m3 then m4 does EMC put the brake on for a certain amount of time, error, or just change directions of the spindle. On a related question when using constant surface feed does Emc wait till the spindle is up to speed or just assume that the spindle is up to speed. A guy want