Re: Freqmod.o vs Stepper.o

[rehenry <rehenry-at-up.net>]

Antonio

On Wednesday 20 March 2002 05:01 pm, antonio_ximenez wrote:

<snip>
>My Reasoning.

>Let suppose Parallel port is able to give up 12000 Hz/s or 12000 
>steps/s, if my machine has 3 axis
>
>12000 Hz/s / 3 =3D 4000 Hz/s per axis.

The top frequency is not divided by the number of axes used.  All are 
capable of max at the same time.  It has to do with the nature of the 
code that computes the motion loop.

<snip>

>1 ) Is it possible dont get ragged pulses at this feed rate ?
>
>The ragged pulses are a produce of the method used to produce them 
>rather than any specific feedrate.  At max, they should be the smoothest.
>
>2) I have read that a 486/66 MHZ is able to give up 28800Hz/s

That is true but not when it is running the EMC pulse generator loop.

>3) Is there any parameter in order to define the spacing between pulses =
>? For example 50 microseconds.

I think that this would be an interesting approach but it isn't in there 
currently.

>4)Could I get the same rate than above with a microstep drive. For =
>example a G201 in resolution mode =3D 10.
>
>I think no. We will need a hardware step pulse generator or an advanced =
>driver as G210.

Right.  I use the 210 here in half step mode.  I like the ability to 
adjust the number of steps produced for each pulse.  The microstepping 
drivers are very nice.  There are no resonant frequencies.

Hope this helps.

Ray