1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 <2016> 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 2015 <2016> 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 |
<== Date ==> | <== Thread ==> |
---|
Subject: | motor: rval/lrvl double or long ? |
From: | Torsten Bögershausen <[email protected]> |
To: | "[email protected]" <[email protected]>, Torsten Bögershausen <[email protected]> |
Date: | Tue, 7 Jun 2016 12:10:17 +0200 |
The rval and lrvl fields are declared as DBF_LONG in motorRecord.dbd. In opposite to what is explained in documentation/motorRecord.html, they are double here. Does it make sense to turn them into double ? This would ease the usage of servo motors and/or controllers that talk engineering units on the line. And at the same time, add the "set point dead band" ? http://www.aps.anl.gov/epics/tech-talk/2015/msg01485.php http://www.aps.anl.gov/epics/tech-talk/2013/msg01051.php What are the pros and cons for long vs double ?