On Thu, 2008-10-23 at 10:14 -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
... snip
> Actually, I think I had a concern about the fact that the modbus library
> was LGPL3 instead of LGPL2. I'm also not sure if we want to include the
> modbus library in the EMC2 source tree (though it's pretty small).
Do you have
Kirk Wallace wrote:
> That's one of my problems. I only know enough to create a component that
> fits in a realtime thread. (Dangerous is my middle name.)
User components are actually easier. You create pins and parameters
exactly the same as for a realtime component, but then you skip the
fun
On Thu, 2008-10-23 at 12:42 -0400, John Kasunich wrote:
... snip
> I think some confusion is because of your use of the term "thread". EMC
> and HAL use the term "thread" to specifically refer to a _realtime_
> thread with a specific period, but you seem to be using "thread" while
> talking abo
Dave,
Not even the slightest offense was taken. Sorry for giving you that
impression. In analyzing your message, it prompted me to think that I
might have introduced some confusion into the topic.
I myself, would rather have what I say challenged than hear nothing, so
please don't spare the abus
Kirk Wallace wrote:
> I agree that Modbus should only be used for non-reatime functions, but I
> didn't see anyone suggest to the contrary in the recent posts. I did try
> to imply that whatever HAL component is written needs to do what it
> needs to do within the time available in the thread that
Sorry Kirk, I wasn't referring to recent postI should have specified
that. A while back the discussion started out with digital I/O but if I
remember correctly it went to issues of timing and servos. I believe it
was dropped because it was thought to be unsafe. The only point I was
trying to ma
On Thu, 2008-10-23 at 10:36 -0400, Dave Keeton wrote:
> I think that using Modbus to operate a vfd for spindle control is ok,
> but again the discussion is going back to issues of timing critical
> functions such as motor and drive control.
... snip
> Dave
I agree that Modbus should only be used f
I think that using Modbus to operate a vfd for spindle control is ok,
but again the discussion is going back to issues of timing critical
functions such as motor and drive control. Simple digital I/O functions
would be a much better use for modbus. In my view functions such as home
and overtravel s
> Steven demonstrated a working ModBus spindle control running from EMC2
> to an AutomationDirect VFD at fest this last summer. We didn't try
> anything like threading but it did forward, reverse, and speed. I'm
> only guessing but I don't think the code got into the repository yet as
> it was pr
Steven demonstrated a working ModBus spindle control running from EMC2
to an AutomationDirect VFD at fest this last summer. We didn't try
anything like threading but it did forward, reverse, and speed. I'm
only guessing but I don't think the code got into the repository yet as
it was pretty spec
On Thu, 2008-10-23 at 13:12 +1000, Peter Homann wrote:
... snip
> There are 2 parts here. The Modbus interface basically transfers registers
> or discretes between a Master (EMC) and Slaves(ModIO). You can almost
... snip
> appropriate to the output, say 5Hz, 25Hz, etc. Then if EMC set the value
>
11 matches
Mail list logo