#linuxcnc-devel | Logs for 2014-12-02

[10:27:40] <seb_kuzminsky> huh, the wj200_vfd manpage is in linuxcnc.deb, but not on the docs webpage
[10:30:12] <jthornton> I just noticed that too
[10:32:37] <seb_kuzminsky> oh, it's because the wj200 driver is written in .comp, and lives in a place the build system doesnt know to look for it
[10:33:41] <jthornton> any other .comps in there that don't have a man page?
[10:34:05] <seb_kuzminsky> i dont think so
[10:34:30] <seb_kuzminsky> the other .comps all live in src/hal/components and src/hal/drivers, which is the two dirs the build system looks in
[10:34:50] <seb_kuzminsky> wj200 is conditional on libmodbus, and needs special compile & link flags...
[11:06:37] <mozmck> is a jog-while-paused solution likely to make it into 2.7?
[11:07:01] <mozmck> I presume dgarr's moveoff is the best/only one?
[11:07:02] <cradek> yes seb asked dgarr to put his changes there when he's ready
[11:07:08] <mozmck> ok
[11:07:27] <mozmck> any potential timeframe for the release of 2.7?
[11:08:36] <cradek> I don't know the answer to that, sorry
[11:16:14] <skunkworks> looks like he is building in some sort of reverse run..
[11:17:49] <pcw_home> Maybe the sort of thing the EDM crowd want?
[11:19:18] <pcw_home> "Scratching"
[11:24:19] <pcw_home> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ju5FEnAgKgA
[11:33:08] <seb_kuzminsky> nice
[11:36:49] <seb_kuzminsky> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ThiuKgg7Y3s
[11:37:51] <seb_kuzminsky> "Pole took his name from a Waldorf 4-Pole filter,[1] which he accidentally dropped and broke in 1996."
[11:47:21] <skunkworks> no - just the moveoff reverse run.. Not the actual trajectory...
[11:54:29] <seb_kuzminsky> skunkworks: makes sense
[12:08:38] <jthornton> dgarr mentioned to me that he used a couple of commits that are not in 2.7 854fc23 and 46998fa
[13:14:29] <skunkworks> so because the Mod funtion isn't mod[var1, var2] it is var1 mod var2 - it is wrong?
[13:19:58] <jepler_> READ => g0 x[7 mod 3]
[13:19:58] <jepler_> 6 N..... STRAIGHT_TRAVERSE(1.0000, 0.0000, 0.0000, 0.0000, 0.0000, 0.0000)
[13:20:04] <jepler_> yup, mod is an operator, not a function
[13:20:13] <jepler_> which means it goes between like + or *
[13:23:04] <cradek> I don't understand what gene thinks is wrong
[13:23:23] <jepler_> .. I didn't read the thread, I was just responding to what skunkworks said
[13:23:45] <cradek> I think gene didn't ask the real question
[14:26:57] <seb_kuzminsky> jthornton: well that's a bummer
[14:28:08] <skunkworks> pretty big chagnes?
[14:31:00] <seb_kuzminsky> no, pretty small
[14:31:33] <seb_kuzminsky> we should maybe backport them from master to 2.7, i'll have to look closer (when i'm not at work...)
[14:36:10] <seb_kuzminsky> i think i have a fix for the "wj200 manpage missing from html docs" problem
[17:20:46] <seb_kuzminsky> ok, this branch makes the wj200 manpage be included in the html docs (and i think in the "manpage" pdf, but i didnt check that):
[17:21:23] <KGB-linuxcnc> 03Sebastian Kuzminsky 05seb/2.6/wj200-manpage d2cd0f9 06linuxcnc 10src/hal/components/Submakefile 10src/hal/user_comps/wj200_vfd/Submakefile docs: include the WJ200 VFD manpage in the html docs * 14http://git.linuxcnc.org/?p=linuxcnc.git;a=commitdiff;h=d2cd0f9
[17:21:46] <seb_kuzminsky> i'd appreciate more eyeballs on it
[17:22:11] <seb_kuzminsky> in docs/src/Submakefile, the variable MAN_SRCS gets built up from (among other things) COMP_MANPAGES
[17:22:52] <seb_kuzminsky> COMP_MANPAGES gets set in src/hal/components/Submakefile from all the .comp files in that dir, which conspicuously does not include the wj200 driver
[17:23:05] <seb_kuzminsky> because it's in src/hal/user_comps/wj200_vfd/
[17:23:19] <seb_kuzminsky> since it needs special handling of CFLAGS and LDLIBS
[17:25:05] <seb_kuzminsky> so its not... clean... exactly
[17:25:17] <seb_kuzminsky> but it works and i dont know how to do it better
[17:46:59] <PCW> hm2_eth 4KHz for 2 weeks+ on 7I76E
[17:49:13] <micges> on what mb?
[17:50:19] <Connor> PCW your going to make me wish I got the 7i76E huh? :)
[17:51:15] <PCW> Gigabyte H81-D3 Pentium G3258
[17:51:30] <Connor> If I had one of them.. I could move my PC into a enclosure mounted on the back of my monitor..
[17:51:41] <Connor> and free up more room in the PC case.
[17:51:55] <PCW> I suspect any of the H/Z chipsets and any I3/5/7 would do as well or better
[17:52:11] <Connor> http://www.ivdc.com/cnc/mill_11_21_14_02.jpg
[22:41:07] <skunkworks> Connor: wow - that is packed in there..
[22:41:12] <skunkworks> neat
[22:50:38] <skunkworks> zlog
[22:56:24] <skunkworks> PCW; how does it work if something is not in stock? does it let you order?
[22:57:19] <skunkworks> the gigabyte motherboard is a larger form factor?
[22:57:34] <skunkworks> (not atom size?)
[22:57:47] <skunkworks> do I have any other questions?
[22:59:15] <skunkworks> oh yah - so No issues running the 7i48+7i44 on the 7i80hd?
[23:32:00] <pcw_home> Not sure about the store, you can always call stuff in thats not in stock
[23:32:43] <pcw_home> 7I48 +7i44 shoud be a standard config (SVSS6_8XXXX)
[23:33:24] <skunkworks> great!
[23:33:57] <skunkworks> right
[23:34:32] <pcw_home> The gigabyte is a ATX MB (there are equivalent Mini-ITX ones but I wanted PCI slots)
[23:35:46] <skunkworks> do they make a small form factor with 2 nics?
[23:37:26] <pcw_home> I havent noticed any
[23:39:51] <skunkworks> I will probably just play with the j1900.. It is a quad core with 2 nics. I won't need to push it above 1khz - we will be using velocity drives
[23:40:12] <pcw_home> http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813138404&cm_re=miniitx_dual_lan-_-13-138-404-_-Product
[23:40:13] <pcw_home> is one (unknown though)
[23:44:11] <pcw_home> http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813128721&cm_re=miniitx_dual_lan-_-13-128-721-_-Product
[23:44:13] <pcw_home> is another more expensive one (intel + Atheros MAC, strange combo)
[23:45:24] <skunkworks> interesting
[23:45:43] <pcw_home> lots of new MBs seem to use the Intel I210 MAC (amazing ly cheap chip for a Intel 1G MAC/PHY with built in switchingsupply for the LV)
[23:47:25] <pcw_home> But the RTK 8111s seem flawless despite RTKs reputation for flakyness
[23:48:29] <skunkworks> we will most likely be using the simulated tach (encoder velocity) for the amc drives.
[23:48:52] <skunkworks> we have some 5000 count encoders (I think that is what they are)
[23:51:02] <skunkworks> hmm - how fast will the 7i48 count?
[23:51:15] <pcw_home> Ahh, there may be some advantage to going a bit faster than 1 KHz if you are simulating tachs
[23:51:46] <pcw_home> its muxed so not as fast as non muxed counters
[23:52:33] <pcw_home> a couple MHz at least (5000 line is 2 MHz at 6000 RPM so probably OK)
[23:53:37] <pcw_home> you can also bump the default mux rate up if you keep the cable from the 7I80 to the 7I48 short (or tweak the skew setting)
[23:54:47] <skunkworks> actually they are 5000X4
[23:55:00] <pcw_home> I was assuming that
[23:55:09] <skunkworks> oh good..
[23:55:30] <skunkworks> phew
[23:55:54] <pcw_home> 20000 counts/turn *100 (6000 RPM is 100 RPS) = 2 MHz
[23:55:58] <skunkworks> 6000 is more than enoough...
[23:56:34] <skunkworks> they are mounted on the leadscrew which is around 4tpi or so..
[23:57:07] <pcw_home> 6000 is probably into whipping territory
[23:57:12] <skunkworks> I bet.
[23:58:09] <pcw_home> I still need to add the DPLL sampling option to the encoder module
[23:58:27] <skunkworks> I don't know if I trust the j1900 at 2khz.. it ran for a few weeks - but I did get a overrun after a long weekend.
[23:59:44] <skunkworks> pcw_home: would that help the 1khz + simulaed tach issue?