Bridgeport/Romi EZPath S Retrofit Planning

#*******************
# AXIS Z JOINT 1
#*******************

# ---PWM Generator signals/setup---

setp [HMOT](CARD0).pwmgen.01.output-type 1
setp [HMOT](CARD0).pwmgen.00.offset-mode 1 <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
setp [HMOT](CARD0).pwmgen.01.scale [JOINT_1]OUTPUT_SCALE

PCW wrote:

#*******************
# AXIS Z JOINT 1
#*******************

# ---PWM Generator signals/setup---

setp [HMOT](CARD0).pwmgen.01.output-type 1
setp [HMOT](CARD0).pwmgen.00.offset-mode 1 <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
setp [HMOT](CARD0).pwmgen.01.scale [JOINT_1]OUTPUT_SCALE

DOH! Would ya look at that!

Thank you! 

Sometimes i feel like after looking at this code for so long i get crosseyed!

Verified, Z Axis rests at 0V!

Also switched card to 10.10.10.10 as i would like to get a wifi connection to the machine for transferring files through my home network.

Well, i think next step is to attempt a machine test when i have the needed connections ready.

I have the Yaskawa servopak connectors, so i just need to wire up the encoder and control pins to the connector and connect to the Mesa card.

I think im going to attempt to power the machine on with the control connectors unplugged from the drives and the mesa card plugged into the drives. All the accessory power should be where it needs to go in other parts of the machine, but control of the servos will be under the control of linuxcnc. I can do some testing and then power the machine off and reconnect the original control.

Looking at the diagrams, i would use all of the machine power and grounds, so i don't think i need to worry about a ground loop, or difference of ground levels as if i was using a different power supply.

Hello, Ive had some time to work on this again, and ive actually successfully interfaced LinuxCNC with one of my Servo Drives and have controlled motion of a spare servo motor. Ive verified encoder functionality and turning the motor with the servo disabled, shows a change on the screen, and seems to align with the linear motion to rotation ratio.

Im working on playing with the PID tuning, and i was just curious to hear some opinions on how this seems.

Things to keep in mind, This is just a bare servo motor, its not moving any of the machine. So i know its not exactly accurate, but im just playing around trying to get the hang of how this works.

Ive attached my INI file with the configuration data, and it seems like the servo P value is up around 250, and i still have error in the "cruise" phase of the motion. Ive also attached a log from HALSCOPE.

So good news, i figured some more things out.

Sometimes i think about things too much and totally miss important pieces of information.

I hooked up the machine drive so i could power the actual axis. I had a deadman switch for E-Stop so if anything began moving in a way i didnt like, i just let go of the button and everything loses power.

I verified my encoder scale. Which i was super happy about.

Upon moving the axis around i still had strange error in Halscope. So i played with the P gain, and the FF2, but it just didnt seem right. I had P gain up to 120 and still seemed like it was just lagging and not happy.

Then it happened, a big realization i came to was setting my output scale. I had my output scale set to "35".

I came to 35, because my Yaskawa servo drive was set to a scale of 210/Volt.

So i did 210 * 10 volts = 2100, 2100/60seconds, 35inch/sec.

However, i completely disregarded the fact that the drive only knows SPEED, and not linear motion.

SO its 210RPM/volt * 10volts, 2100RPM. 2100RPM, is equal to 661inches/min based upon the gear ratio and leadscrew pitch. 661/60seconds = 11.01 inches/second.

This was the Ah HA! that i needed. Upon setting the scale properly, the drive tracks sub 0.001 error.

I just dont know how perfect this should be so im posting images of the setup and the halscope plot.

I do see some oscilation in the "cruise phase", so i belive i need to lower my P gain, but i figured i would post it here to get some more experienced opinions.

I've seen that mentioned before. Is there a pro and con to having that in the HAL file?

Is there a reason it isn't there by default?

Does my error look acceptable? Its peak is about 0.0005 inch.

The halscope trace was made by doing a G1 X-1.0 F50 from X0.0 position.

Hmm ill have to add that to the HAL file and see what kind of difference it makes.

What do you mean by along the path, rather then perpendicular to the path?