Re: M57-102 < - - - - > PC
Posted by
m0nkey0ne
on 2003-08-27 19:58:15 UTC
Jon,
I started a new thread before I found this post from you. By tying
the + to the game port +5V, and switching the - from high to low,
will the combination have enough difference to actually make the
thing move. And would this be from the serial port? It sounds
logical, but just making sure. Thanks, Randy
I started a new thread before I found this post from you. By tying
the + to the game port +5V, and switching the - from high to low,
will the combination have enough difference to actually make the
thing move. And would this be from the serial port? It sounds
logical, but just making sure. Thanks, Randy
--- In CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO@yahoogroups.com, Jon Elson <elson@p...> wrote:
>
>
> m0nkey0ne wrote:
>
> >I worked at getting the motor turnig today, but to no avail. The
> >problem you indicate here. I had visions of making the parallel
port
> >control a more powerful source. I have only about 1.5 volts with
the
> >step port high. Looks like I should search for the buffer...
> >
> >
> Since this driver gives you access to both terminals of each opto-
coupler,
> you should tie the + input to the +5 V from the computer (game port
pin
> or hard drive power connector) and the - input to the parallel port
pin.
> These chips generally have much more drive capability in the current
> sinking mode.
>
> Jon
Discussion Thread
m0nkey0ne
2003-08-15 22:38:04 UTC
M57-102 < - - - - > PC
turbulatordude
2003-08-16 09:11:59 UTC
Re: M57-102 < - - - - > PC
Mon Wan
2003-08-16 19:28:22 UTC
Re: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] Re: M57-102 < - - - - > PC
Jon Elson
2003-08-16 22:34:10 UTC
Re: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] Re: M57-102 < - - - - > PC
m0nkey0ne
2003-08-17 10:57:56 UTC
Re: M57-102 < - - - - > PC
Jon Elson
2003-08-17 14:42:29 UTC
Re: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] Re: M57-102 < - - - - > PC
Bob McIlvaine
2003-08-17 17:09:55 UTC
Lindows?
David A. Frantz
2003-08-17 20:20:12 UTC
Re: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] Lindows?
Matt Shaver
2003-08-17 21:12:55 UTC
Re: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] Lindows?
Lloyd Leung
2003-08-17 21:27:30 UTC
RE: Lindows?
Tim Goldstein
2003-08-17 21:28:22 UTC
RE: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] Lindows?
Tim Goldstein
2003-08-17 21:32:00 UTC
Off list: RE: Lindows?
Paul
2003-08-18 11:33:52 UTC
Re: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] RE: Lindows?
m0nkey0ne
2003-08-19 09:25:04 UTC
Re: M57-102 < - - - - > PC
Jon Elson
2003-08-19 10:38:15 UTC
Re: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] Re: M57-102 < - - - - > PC
m0nkey0ne
2003-08-20 09:21:11 UTC
Re: M57-102 < - - - - > PC
Steven Ciciora
2003-08-20 09:35:40 UTC
Re: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] Re: M57-102 < - - - - > PC
William Scalione
2003-08-20 17:40:00 UTC
Re: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] Re: M57-102 < - - - - > PC
m0nkey0ne
2003-08-22 22:10:10 UTC
Re: M57-102 < - - - - > PC
m0nkey0ne
2003-08-23 00:58:41 UTC
Re: M57-102 < - - - - > PC
Jon Elson
2003-08-23 12:22:18 UTC
Re: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] Re: M57-102 < - - - - > PC
m0nkey0ne
2003-08-27 19:58:15 UTC
Re: M57-102 < - - - - > PC
Jon Elson
2003-08-27 22:37:59 UTC
Re: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] Re: M57-102 < - - - - > PC