Clicks are clicks... was Re: OK, I've got a detent encoder... What now?

Marcus,

I WOULDN'T spend three times as much<G>... I'm "all about" finding
ways to do what I need to do less expensively, so I'd either wait
until a 25,50 or 100 ppr unit became available, OR do "without".

But not really "without", because I don't agree about the keyboard. A
pc based control, with decent logic to its jog system, will work
almost exactly as the handwheel.

Decent logic means it has the ability to "cycle" through some short
list of jog increments, with a rapid and slow setting for the jog
button(s). Pressing a "cycle jog step size" key a few times is pretty
quick.

Anyway, with this I work much the same as with the jogwheel of a
commercial control: I eyeball at rapid jog to near where I want to
be; then switch to slow and use ever finer settings of the jog
increment to get "there". Clicks are clicks.

The only real differences are that I am pushing a button/key to get
my "clicks", instead of rotating a wheel. And that the "rotation-
training" of my hand(s) from manual machines is wasted...

Hope this helps.

Ballendo

P.S. On a "keyboard-based" jog system, you want at least one larger
increment than on the jogwheel. I prefer two. One of my earlier posts
showed this when I listed 1.,.1,.01,.001,.0001or single step, as a
jog sequence. Responding posts said that .1 was too coarse, which is
true for a commercial handwheel, but not for a keypress, IMO.

--- In CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO@y..., "Marcus & Eva" <implmex@a...> wrote:
> Very true Ballendo.
> I hadn't considered that.
> But would it make you spend 3 times as much for your encoder on a
homebrew rig?
> Or would lack of availability of a 100 slot encoder make you leave
that feature off altogether?
> A jog wheel is such a big improvement over a keyboard command for
setting up, that I'd really miss it.
> (one of the few things I found tedious with Flashcut)
> Cheers
>
> Marcus
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "ballendo" <ballendo@y...>
> To: <CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO@y...>
> Sent: Sunday, February 17, 2002 11:41 PM
> Subject: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] Re: OK, I've got a detent encoder...
What now?
>
>
> > Marcus,
> >
> > This is a good post. You make good points, but I'm with Fred on
this
> > one. Here's why.
> >
> > Many machinists HAVE learned or worked extensively with manual
> > machines. To the point that their hands are "trained" to expect a
> > certain movement from a certain rotation of a wheel... There are
many
> > who can "dial" VERY close to the "number" they want BEFORE
looking at
> > the wheel to get the "final" count (much as you describe doing
with
> > your 5.00 O.C. holes).
> >
> > The handwheels on manual machines typically have 50, 100, or 200
> > units per rev. Having detents that relate to this will help these
> > machinists avoid mistakes. It will ALSO help newbies, when/if they
> > eventually use handwheels on manual machines, as their
fingers/hands
> > will be trained also...
> >
> > Hope this helps.
> >
> > Ballendo
> >
> > --- In CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO@y..., "Marcus & Eva" <implmex@a...> wrote:
> > > Hi Fred:
> > > Are you SURE it has to be a number like 100 detents per
turn??
> > > I've used commercial controls with manual pulse generators for a
> > while now,
> > > and I can't ever remember counting either turns or clicks of the
> > handwheel.
> > > What I care about, is that each click gives me an even decimal
> > increment
> > > that I can control.
> > > The reason for this is as follows:
> > > When I am jogging up to the edge of a job, I eyeball it at 0.01"
> > per click<snip>
> >
> >
> > Addresses:
> > FAQ: http://www.ktmarketing.com/faq.html
> > FILES: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO/files/
> >
> > Post messages: CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO@y...
> > Subscribe: CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO-subscribe@y...
> > Unsubscribe: CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO-unsubscribe@y...
> > List owner: CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO-owner@y..., wanliker@a...
> > Moderator: jmelson@a... timg@k... [Moderator]
> > URL to this page: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO
> > bill,
> > List Manager
> >
> >
> >
> > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
> >