Breaking bits

[bergerud]

I have wondered on this as well. Why not monitor the rpm sensor?

[DJKnutsen]

It seems like it would save a lot of heart ache if there was a check for RPM's before a "Z axis down" was initiated... No RPM's equals an "Check Motor" error, and a stopped process..? It sounds simple... if you say it fast..!

[bergerud]

I think the software does the rpm check before a vector cut starts. I have had the check cut motor halt before vector cuts. It just needs to also do it before raster cuts.

(It would be even better if the rpm could be continuously monitored.)

[DJKnutsen]

I had to resort to buying 1/8" cutting bits from eBay because CarveWright was out of stock, and couldn't even forecast when they'd be getting more in... Fortunately I had already procured an ER-11 collet chuck, so the bit's 1/4" shaft was no problem.... So, armed with cutting bits, I ran the MPC that had given me problems, and as I had surmised previously, it all worked just fine!! YaHOO!! I also noticed the the little tabs that actuate to two cover switches are different... the right hand (Motor) switch is much more sensitive the the left hand cover detection switch, so that accounts for why the computer didn't detect the 'not fully closed' cover.... stick that in the food for thought folder... Cheers!

[RMarkey]

motor interlock is hard wired into the motor control circuit, and not monitored by the program

It is a gov't safety requirement that the cutmotor has a physical override.

(It would be even better if the rpm could be continuously monitored.)

The software continuously monitors the cutmotor rpm. The problem is we have a threshold for failure, and we can only read the rpm sensor so many times per second.

[bergerud]

The software continuously monitors the cutmotor rpm. The problem is we have a threshold for failure, and we can only read the rpm sensor so many times per second.

Monitoring the rpm is not enough. It needs to halt the operation if the cut motor is not spinning.

[RMarkey]

Even if we get a reading glitch? Nah. You're just opening up a different issue.

[bergerud]

I see your point. It would be just another reason why someone's machine stops working.

[bergerud]

How about if it was one time only. Zero rpm fault stops operation. Abort or Continue? If continue is selected, further rpm faults are ignored (until reboot).

[RMarkey]

How about if it was one time only.

Latency kills that thought... it could be more than 1/2 second before the abort.

If continue is selected, further rpm faults are ignored

that's what we already do.