Re: Tripod
Posted by
Graham Stabler
on 2007-10-17 14:15:20 UTC
--- In CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO@yahoogroups.com, "Michael Fagan"
<woodworker88@...> wrote:
this is totally sensible because it allows very generalized maths but
not always needed. Check out my pager here:
http://www.indoor.flyer.co.uk/kinematics.htm
My bottom lines are this:
1. You don't need matrices, you can use Pythagoras for most slide
based machines or variable length strut machines and trig for deltas.
2. Consider starting with lower DOFs.
3. You can use Mach3 to drive the machine using equations.
Graham
<woodworker88@...> wrote:
>which
> You should try finding some information about programming a Hexapod,
> is like what you describe except 6DOF (well, at least 6 motors, notsure if
> that would count as 6DOF in this case).What tends to happen is you find a lot of really confusing matrices,
> Michael
>
this is totally sensible because it allows very generalized maths but
not always needed. Check out my pager here:
http://www.indoor.flyer.co.uk/kinematics.htm
My bottom lines are this:
1. You don't need matrices, you can use Pythagoras for most slide
based machines or variable length strut machines and trig for deltas.
2. Consider starting with lower DOFs.
3. You can use Mach3 to drive the machine using equations.
Graham
Discussion Thread
andrew777j2002
2007-10-17 12:24:02 UTC
Tripod
Michael Fagan
2007-10-17 12:31:27 UTC
Re: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] Tripod
Graham Stabler
2007-10-17 14:15:20 UTC
Re: Tripod
andrew777j2002
2007-10-17 14:21:10 UTC
Re: Tripod
Graham Stabler
2007-10-17 14:27:03 UTC
Re: Tripod
andrew777j2002
2007-10-17 14:39:08 UTC
Re: Tripod
Stephen Wille Padnos
2007-10-17 14:46:47 UTC
Re: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] Re: Tripod
Graham Stabler
2007-10-17 15:04:40 UTC
Re: Tripod
Stephen Wille Padnos
2007-10-17 15:25:12 UTC
Re: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] Re: Tripod
Graham Stabler
2007-10-17 15:36:15 UTC
Re: Tripod
Stephen Wille Padnos
2007-10-17 15:41:51 UTC
Re: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] Re: Tripod