EPICS Controls Argonne National Laboratory

Experimental Physics and
Industrial Control System

1994  1995  1996  1997  1998  1999  2000  2001  2002  2003  2004  2005  2006  2007  2008  2009  2010  2011  2012  2013  2014  <20152016  2017  2018  2019  2020  2021  2022  2023  2024  Index 1994  1995  1996  1997  1998  1999  2000  2001  2002  2003  2004  2005  2006  2007  2008  2009  2010  2011  2012  2013  2014  <20152016  2017  2018  2019  2020  2021  2022  2023  2024 
<== Date ==> <== Thread ==>

Subject: Re: Stepper Motor Controllers
From: Torsten Bögershausen <[email protected]>
To: "[email protected]" <[email protected]>, "[email protected]" <[email protected]>
Date: Wed, 15 Jul 2015 09:25:12 +0200
Thanks for the info.
What is your overall time frame: 2015, 2016 ?
And some more questions/comments inline.

On 2015-07-14 17.20, Mark Davis wrote:
> Hi Mark,
> 
> As is probably true with most labs, we do indeed have some VME stuff, but for
> the main control system we have been slowly eliminating VME when we can.  The
> hardware is just so much more expensive than using fairly generic rack-mount PCs
> running Linux and using Ethernet (directly or via
> Ethernet-to-serial/GPIB/whatever adapters) to talk to stand-alone devices.
> 
> So far the list of requirements I have compiled from searching through the mass
> of documents regarding the new FRIB infrastructure has not turned up anything
> particularly demanding, but of course many details are still in flux so I am
> trying to be "generous" in terms of reading between the lines and extrapolating
> a bit regarding what is likely to be required once the details start firming
> up.  As long as some particular feature doesn't result in a drastic increase in
> price, a solution that does a bit more than meet the minimum requirements will
> undoubtedly save us money in the long run.
> 
> This is what I have come up with so far that is related to the choice of
> controller:
> 
>    - Complex coordinated motion (2 axes minimum for insuring smooth movement of
> things like pairs of jaws)
>    - Fault outputs (so an external PLCs can manage the state of a group of
> related devices)
(I'm just curious to collect and steel ideas from other people),
What should the PLC do exactly?
Some kind of supervision, machine protection, personal protection ?
>    - Support for 3 limit switches (min, max, and home/reference positions)
OK
>    - Support for on-the-fly scans:
>         - At minimum, the ability to generate pulses for each axis based on
> current position of each axis
>         - Ability to capture/buffer the data itself would be a plus
>    - Support for a variety of analog or digital encoders. Currently specified
> types include:
>         - Linear motion potentiometers
Do you mean an "analog input", which is converted into a position ?
>         - Rotary Sine/Cosine potentiometers
>         - Digital (optical, rotary, relative, absolute?)
Any more ideas about the encoders as such ?
>    - Support for local control box (i.e. continue to track/report position,
> disable movement if limit switch activated, etc)
What should the "control box" do ?
Is it an EPICS IOC ?

Doesn't the motion controller stop the motion, when a limit switch is hit ?
Do you want support for soft limits ?
>    - Prefer models that do not require external motor drivers
>    - Ethernet interface
>    - Firmware version readable by control system
Which control system ?
EPICS ? Something else ?
>    - Ability to update firmware remotely
That should be OK for all Ethernet based controllers
(Please correct me if that is wrong)
Do you have anything special in mind ?
> 
> Regarding closed loop mode:  While I can imagine circumstances where you might
> want to disable it, I would think that any controller that supports an encoder
> would also provide a closed loop mode.  Is that not so?  I would think there
> would be little advantage to supporting an encoder if it couldn't be used
> directly by the controller during movements (i.e. isn't this question the SAME
> as "Does it support a position encoder"?)
I think so.
Some controllers should be able to make "smooth movements" towards the
target position.
> 
> Regarding price/axis:  I haven been given a specific $ amount on this yet, but
> we have been using the Parker GT6K single-axis controllers which are around
> $3000 each, and I have been assuming that most newer multi-axis solutions will
> be significantly less expensive.
How many axes in total are you thinking of ?
How much man hours for SW development are you willing to spent ?
> 
> Mark
Before going into too many details, what is your idea about controlling the
axes via EPICS ?
[snip]

Replies:
Re: Stepper Motor Controllers Pearson, Matthew R.
References:
Stepper Motor Controllers Mark Davis
RE: Stepper Motor Controllers Mark Rivers
Re: Stepper Motor Controllers Mark Davis

Navigate by Date:
Prev: Re: Stepper Motor Controllers Pete Jemian
Next: using motor / steppermotor record for Trinamic TMCM-351 controller Christian Pauly
Index: 1994  1995  1996  1997  1998  1999  2000  2001  2002  2003  2004  2005  2006  2007  2008  2009  2010  2011  2012  2013  2014  <20152016  2017  2018  2019  2020  2021  2022  2023  2024 
Navigate by Thread:
Prev: Re: Linux vs. RTOS: cost and security; was: Stepper Motor Controllers Benjamin Franksen
Next: Re: Stepper Motor Controllers Pearson, Matthew R.
Index: 1994  1995  1996  1997  1998  1999  2000  2001  2002  2003  2004  2005  2006  2007  2008  2009  2010  2011  2012  2013  2014  <20152016  2017  2018  2019  2020  2021  2022  2023  2024 
ANJ, 16 Dec 2015 Valid HTML 4.01! · Home · News · About · Base · Modules · Extensions · Distributions · Download ·
· Search · EPICS V4 · IRMIS · Talk · Bugs · Documents · Links · Licensing ·