Re: Windows timing subroutines, how do they work?

What is probably needed? One Timing generator running at a obscene
speed, smaller processors that get a bluetooth into buffer dump for
distance or usb, or? Each processor handles one axis, reading the
encoder to adjust it's own loop-feedback, running pulse ratio per main
engine. All interpolated, All with a error out line back to main
source to err-out. Each axis dedicated to itself. Then here-we-go..
Look ahead software that processes speed changes per gcode line and
pid's it all to that frequency to make desired end of line directional
changes without losing it's interpolation between axis. Ramp up, Ramp
down each line is not a good way to machine, but the only thing I have
saw on my machine.

Will it happen, probably not.

--- In CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO@yahoogroups.com, "caudlet" <thom@t...> wrote:
> --- In CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO@yahoogroups.com, "Mariss Freimanis"
> <mariss92705@y...> wrote:
> > In my opinion it should not be the task of a PC to do the 'donkey
> > work' of generating step pulses be it Linux, DOS or Windows. That is
> > a task that belongs to dumb dedicated hardware.
> >
> > A PC is an 'intelligence engine'. It's task is to do a lot of math
> > and make decisions. Its output product should go to a 'pulse engine',
> > hardware finely tuned to the task of generating of producing pure and
> > clean frequencies on demand from the PC.
> >
> > These are tasks are so diametrically opposed it's like using a claw
> > hammer for a screwdriver. In a pinch you can do it but it's not
> > pretty.
> >
> > That also pretty much surmises what I have seen from most PC based
> > CNC programs. The step pulse phase jitter is horrible even from the
> > most popular out there. The motors sound like a barrel of agitated
> > monkeys and I have the scope pixs to prove it.
> >
> > If things are going to be done right, the PC has to interface to some
> > kind of step pulse engine.
> >
> > The 'agitated monkey' part. Motors that sound like that are being
> > robbed of their potential torque especially at high speeds. Phase
> > modulation imposes unnecessary torque demands (infinite impulse
> > functions) on the motors. Said more simply, you pay for all that
> > noise in performance.
> >
> > Mariss
> >
> >
> The problem in the past and currently in the present, is that there is
> no "standard" for an external pulse generator so you end up having to
> buy a "system" that is composed of software and matching hardware.
> Your options start to dwindle and if you want/need/desire to change
> the software you have to throw away the entire system. It would be
> like every car manufacturer deciding to use non-standard tires that
> only they provided or each TV network broadcating in a different
> format so you had to buy a set specifically for their signal format.
> From a pure engineering standpoint it might make sense to hand off
> signal processing to another circuit like a DSP card, but it needs to
> have an open set of standards that ANY software company could write
> to. If it's going to end up as a PC perhipheral then it needs to have
> drivers or open standards that make it useful with different
> programs. Show me a pulser card that is not single source, has open
> standards and is supported by multiple vendors (especially MACH) and
> I'll get in line to buy one.