Connecting encoders

Look at how the head is moved by band positioners in floppy drives. If physical sizes are not too far off, tearing apart an old floppy drive is a very good start.

And at the same time remember that floppy drives (with much much coarser stepper motors) have roughly 0.001 inch spacing (96 or 135 or

192 TPI). They have to hold this positioning to a fraction of the track spacing so for 0.0001 inch resolution the principle ought to be OK if not the implementation.

Tim.

Thanks Tim. That indeed might work. And I have seen the band positioners in 'em. Eric

Wouldn't it be easier and better to just get new encoder disks? Anyway, it's not at all clear what you're trying to. It sounds like you want more resolution out of the encoder on a screw.

But note that I misplaced a decimal place at least once in my math! Of course if I did it twice and the errors cancel out, then it's not so bad :-).

Tim.

My hunch is you're asking for more precision than the mechanism itself can maintain. Timing belts are surprisingly free of backlash, but 0.0001 is not reasonable. The stretch alone would exceed that. Same for metal bands. Assuming you have inches or more of motion involved here.

That's what I said above. I ordered the encoder with 2500 lines. But that doesn't address the whole problem. I will not be beasuring screw rotations. Because there is backlash in the screw that cannot be removed easily. So, the thing to do is to actually measure the linear travel. This is then translated into rotary motion by a belt or similar wrapped around the encoder shaft. What I want to avoid is slipping belts, backlash in cogged belts, and errors from temperature. I hope that explains better what I want. Cheers, Eric

Why not the obvious solution - a linear encoder? I think you'll have a very tough time getting your encoder to repeat anywhere near to .0001 with any of the suggestions to date, unless the stroke is very short, and I can't think of anything better. How long is the linear travel?

Ned Simmons

Look at the tooth to tooth accuracy spec on the belts. It accumulates over distances to a sizable number in not very much distance. I think that ten thousandths of an inch accuracy would not be doable with timing belts. The teethmarks in my hindquarters from this problem have long since healed, but I still remember it pretty well.

Bob

Actually...1 tenth is reasonable. Many "C axis"cnc lathes use a timing belt.

Gunner

"Pax Americana is a philosophy. Hardly an empire. Making sure other people play nice and dont kill each other (and us) off in job lots is hardly empire building, particularly when you give them self determination under "play nice" rules.

Think of it as having your older brother knock the shit out of you for torturing the cat." Gunner

Greetings Ned, The travel in one axis is only about 1.5 inches. But the other is just over 8 inches. Also, I have not found any linear encoders that have .0001 resolution that I can afford. The rotary encoders from US Digital, which have a Hewlett Packard HEDS reader at the heart, are indeed accurate enough. I had to replace an encoder on a machine tool and it moves .0001 at a time and repeats within the .0001. I don't see why, if the proper cable, metal strip, or belt is used, won't be accurate enough. If the drum is within diametral tolerance is OK, and the belt doesn't slip, and the encoder is accurate enough, why won't the system be accurate enough? If I sound like a wise ass please know I don't mean to. If it won't work, I want to know why. I know that temperature will affect the accuracy. So the measurement would only be relative, not absolute. So when moving the axis I expect at the time of movement the display will show .0001 when the axis moves .0001. Thanks, Eric R Snow

On Mon, 26 Sep 2005 23:14:02 -0700, "william_b_noble" wrote: Can I use you method to measure long travels? If so, tell us more. Eric

Bob, My CNC lathes and mill all use timing belts to position within .0001. And these belts have been in the machines a long time. And the encoders are on the motors, not the screws. Of course, the positioning accuracy is not accurate to .0001. Just the repeatability. So the machine is programmed to cut 1.0000, but cuts 1.0003, so an offset of

-.0003 is used to make the cut on size. And this is what I'm looking to do. Get close, measure, then correct. So the system has to be really accurate only for a short distance. I should have put this in my original post. Eric Eric

No way. The tool position may be 0.0001", but the belt is before the gearing and is not that precise.

Way dude. Not all..but many

Gunner

"Pax Americana is a philosophy. Hardly an empire. Making sure other people play nice and dont kill each other (and us) off in job lots is hardly empire building, particularly when you give them self determination under "play nice" rules.

Think of it as having your older brother knock the shit out of you for torturing the cat." Gunner