PLC Killer

MrPLC Member
  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

About PLC Killer

  • Rank

Profile Information

  • Country Canada
  1. Ah I see. Actually I have couple of timing pulley belts driven by 3 different servos and all are inline, so I thought GearIn is a way to go. (It is not a X,Y application) Because , initially in the process I want to servo 1 to be master and then at the end servo 3 to be master. I thought using a virtual axis is great will cut down all this back and forth crap. And I believe it will fine. Thanks  
  2. @Michael Walsh I found from the above motioned thread that this was your idea of using one virtual axis to run other 2 real axes using GearIn FB. I was wondering if I could get little advice from you. No doubt, I have heard people using this method before in Rockwell but somehow it doesn't make much sense to me. Let's say, the virtual axis is just gonna move to 1000mm position with ideal velocity and other parameters given to it but real axes(using GearIn func) may not reach to that position due to different mechanical factors. So, how can we make sure that the real axes gets to 1000mm every time. Thanks in advance!!!
  3. Thats my backup plan. But in the thread I mentioned, someone explained the limitations doing this way. Here it is: This way(using virtual axis) both physical axes are treated equally and programmed the same.  Neither is the master.  Also, with the _mcLatestCommand option, the servos have to be in the proper order (node number-wise) on EtherCAT.  The master would need to be a lower EtherCAT node number.  Doing it this way just removes any chance of getting that wrong.   It used to be that the performance would be better with this option due to the fact that if both servos were tuned the same, the following error to the master axis would be the same and the axes would achieve closer synchronization.  However with the _mcLatestCommand option, both servos would get the exact same command if you geared them together without a virtual axis.   I was looking if it can be done in a better way.
  4. Hi there I was reading this thread: And trying to create 3 axes. 1 virtual axis and 2 real axis, I would like to use MC_GearIn for each real axes so both real ones follow  the virtual axis (so both can move in sync motion). But my question is: If I give Move cmd(Absolute or relative)to master virtual axis and since it's virtual, it is not going to move then how can the other real ones follow the master(assuming that it's literally electronic gearing).  Any help will be appreciated!
  5. That makes lot of sense. Thanks for the help @Crossbow Much appreciated!!!!!
  6. Hi there This attached pic I got from Omron motion control manual. I am trying to wrap my head around it. Does it mean that the slave servo axis is gonna follow master encoder axis using GearIn FB?? If so, then Can we executive Move FB on encoder axis? Looking forward to your responses.  
  7. Using External encoder with Omron Servo

    That's very smart approach, never thought about that before. Well, the only reason to get an external encoder was to overcome any mechanical slippage in the system (it is a belt mechanism driven by servo which pushes the part forward by friction). I better get the design changed and get G5 series drive for full closed loop. Thanks everyone for your support!!!!!!!
  8. Using External encoder with Omron Servo

    @Crossbow  Hmm.... But I think I'll limited to only Jog commands. won't be able to use Move commands with this setup.
  9. Using External encoder with Omron Servo

    Actually, I have 1S series drive.
  10. Hi there I am working on a project where Omron servo drags a part to a certain position using belt mechanism, But to avoid any slippage we decided to put an external encoder directly on the part. I was wondering what is the best to approach to drive the servo using the position of this external encoder. Is there any way that it can be configured directly with the servo? I am fairly new to coordinated motions, any help will be appreciated. Thanks