Jump to content
OMRON Forums

Gaggstatter

Members
  • Posts

    7
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Gaggstatter's Achievements

Rookie

Rookie (2/14)

  • First Post
  • Week One Done
  • One Month Later
  • One Year In
  • Conversation Starter

Recent Badges

0

Reputation

  1. Thanks for your answers Steve, but the one about #2 I'm not sure to have understood it. What did you mean about having a "check"? If user servo is disabled this would be dangerous so do you mean apart from the UserServo modification, another PLC that checks that Ixx59 is active and if not doesn't allows to move? I wanted to implement something like this in the user written servo code section: Tracking is the slow high precision movement, and slewing the faster one. If (MTRNUM = 2) ;Checks if a slewing period starts If (isTracking = 1) And(current_velocity > min_slew_velocity) isTracking = 0 I211 = 0 EndIf ;Checks if a tracking period starts If(isTracking=0) And(current_velocity < min_slew_velocity) isTracking = 1 I211 = tracking_fatal_following_error_limit EndIf ;Stops the movement if higher following error exceeded If (following_error > slewing_fatal_following_error_limit) COMMAND"#2k” RETURN(0) ;Break execution and return zero current demand EndIf ;Here new current demand depending on current and demanded position is calculated with PID ... RETURN(DAC) EndIf Here is our current ECT setup, we are only using motor #2 as a real motor, feedback is obtained from encoder on motor#1, and motor #3 is for synchronization purposes, if you need any more info please don't hesitate to ask us for it: I8000=$F60460 I8001=$218000 I8002=$78000 I8003=$78008 I8004=$78010 I8005=$78018 I8006=$E00203 I8007=$E00405 I8008=$E00607 I8009=$2810FE I8010=$18000 I8011=$E20A08 I8012=$EC000B I8013=$D03509 I8014=$7FFF I8015=$A I8016=$2F8430 I8017=$18000 I8018=$2F8434 I8019=$18000 I8020=$2F8438 I8021=$18000 I8022=$2F843C I8023=$18000
  2. Sorry for the interruption, we were working on other higher priority projects. Giving some time to this again. Two questions have arisen: 1. When I reduce the gear ratio from the feedback, lets say I would divide it by 32, isn't there a loss of resolution? 2. Would an alternative where I just disable the internal limit and use a variable for checking in our user written servo be a valid approach? Or could this somehow be dangerous? I mean this is the only known part of the code where a new demand to our servo drives is calculated, this is why I came up with this place being the apparently optimal, as here is where the following error is used to produce a new demand.
  3. From what I understand from your explanation, the way to reduce the count density would be inside the ECT, could you be more specific how could I achieve this? And which other parameters would be affected due to this scaling? I think it's not needed to re-scale the feedback on the fly, once this new reduced ECT configuration is established I can change the fatal following error limit forever, this seems easier and less error prone to me, or am I wrong? Do you need any variables information or configuration? Please let me know and I can post it here or send it to you by email.
  4. Thanks for your answer Steve. This are not very high values in our system configuration, although they are higher than the usual ones. It's just when the telescope slews (1.0 deg/s) to the target we don't mind about the following error, as long as it's kept inside a safety range. The current following error is low enough to stabilise the telescope when being on tracking and doing acquisitions, in this case the telescope moves at a much slower rate (often around 0.01 deg/s). So we want to have a kind of dynamic fatal following error limit, depending on type/speed of the current movement. Could you please explain the procedure to re-scale the feedback? I see that Ixx08=1 and Ixx09=1 on our current application.
  5. We currently have this limit (I211) set to: 7,060,411. We need to have it 5 times higher for some specific types of movement, but this variable only allows: 8,388,607 units. What is the simplest way to scale this limit?
  6. Dear DT support, I have a Motion Program stopped unexpectedly once every 100-200 hours of operation. I'm reading information from the PMAC DPRAM periodically and saving it to persistent registers on a host. I haven't seen any error on this conditions that could cause a Motion Program to stop: - ITFatalError - FatalFollowingError - AmplifierFault - Limits - UserAbort Could you please tell me which other signals could bring a motion program to suddendly stop, all suggestions are welcome.
  7. Dear Sirs, I would like to know if it is possible to recover the source code from a compiled PLC program that is running on a PMAC. Is there some kind of reverse compiling? Best regards, Tim D. G.
×
×
  • Create New...