Re: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] Re: Black Box - UMCI spec for API posted
Posted by
Jon Elson
on 2001-06-27 22:48:35 UTC
Steve Stallings wrote:
indexed by the DDS counter. If you are broadening the term to include
generation of pulses, then the thing I have prototyped is also a DDS, but
a specialized one. It has some extra logic in it to make sure that setup
and hold times between direction changes and step pulses are always
observed. It also stretches the step pulse to a fixed width (300 ns to 25.5
uS).
code to binary conversion is best done in a HDL. Xilinx FPGAs are just
incredible, I'm still getting a feel for how much you can do in one, and
how much faster it will be than a bunch of MSI 74xx chips.
I didn't see the reason to move that work out of the CPU. With the 'DDS'
only in the hardware, the system looks much like a servo system to the
CNC control. The only difference is that in my 'DDS', the velocity value is
non-linear. But, that is no problem, the CPU can easily compute the correct
value to put in the velocity register to get linear velocity response out of
the
'DDS'.
Jon
> Alan,DDS usually is associated with generation of Sine waves through a table
>
> The credit for the API document goes to Bob Shaver who works
> with me. He is also behind the software and getting our algorithm
> ideas into the Xilinx chips. My role is mostly hardware and design
> for manufacturing, and of course understanding the machine tool
> related aspects.
>
> A DDS is a rather simple concept, just a value that gets repetitively
> added to a register. The overflow of the register becomes the step
> output.
indexed by the DDS counter. If you are broadening the term to include
generation of pulses, then the thing I have prototyped is also a DDS, but
a specialized one. It has some extra logic in it to make sure that setup
and hold times between direction changes and step pulses are always
observed. It also stretches the step pulse to a fixed width (300 ns to 25.5
uS).
> We have been working with DDS's and precision frequency control forWell, I still find a schematic more concise, but some things like Gray
> over a decade. Nowadays we end up describing them in Verilog which
> gets compiled into a Xilinx pattern.
code to binary conversion is best done in a HDL. Xilinx FPGAs are just
incredible, I'm still getting a feel for how much you can do in one, and
how much faster it will be than a bunch of MSI 74xx chips.
> Things do get quite a bit moreSince EMC (and other CNC programs) already do such a good job of this,
> complicated when you throw in hardware management of acceleration
> and we are still fiddling with that part. Likewise, circular motion
> is a whole different problem and at present we intended to rely on
> the application program or the API to convert to short linear moves
> that get sent to the hardware.
I didn't see the reason to move that work out of the CPU. With the 'DDS'
only in the hardware, the system looks much like a servo system to the
CNC control. The only difference is that in my 'DDS', the velocity value is
non-linear. But, that is no problem, the CPU can easily compute the correct
value to put in the velocity register to get linear velocity response out of
the
'DDS'.
Jon
Discussion Thread
Steve Stallings
2001-06-27 17:50:06 UTC
Re: Black Box - UMCI spec for API posted
Alan Marconett KM6VV
2001-06-27 19:12:10 UTC
Re: Black Box - UMCI spec for API posted
Steve Stallings
2001-06-27 20:32:12 UTC
Re: Black Box - UMCI spec for API posted
Jon Elson
2001-06-27 22:48:35 UTC
Re: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] Re: Black Box - UMCI spec for API posted
Alan Marconett KM6VV
2001-06-27 23:09:45 UTC
Re: Black Box - UMCI spec for API posted