Quote:
Originally Posted by Jon236
Here's a good demo of the Jaguar. While it's clear from this that we won't use the CAN in 2009, no mention is given of the sensor support (Hall and encoders) mentioned in the press release.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2ikgguMKqBk |
It wouldn't make sense to have the sensor inputs active, without a way to do anything with them (ie send them over the CAN bus).
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dave Flowerday
Another thought: with the increase in functionality offered in the new controllers I hope they're getting a very serious and thorough testing. Adding that much complexity and software to something that's as safety-critical as a speed controller definitely increases the risks of bugs. Having a bug in something that's supposed to turn OFF the motor when the robot is disabled would be scary... I think a lot of people have taken for granted that with IFI, when you disable the robot with a disable switch it is OFF. Personally, I'm not going near a robot w/ the new control system unless it is physically powered-off until I gain enough confidence that it works the way it's supposed to. As a software guy I know all too well that trusting software for my safety can be a dicey proposition.
|
If done correctly, moving the limit switch handling to the speed controller will increase safety, as that functionality is small, easy to test, and (hopefully) unable to be overridden. I would be much more scared if all of this was built into the core operating software.
I can't name all the times we've had a software logic error which rendered limit switches or another safety device ineffective.