New Speed Controller Announced

[Greg Needel]

Pictures are up.....OMG that thing is HUGE




HUUUUUUGGGGEEEE Rochester HUUUUUGGGGE (anyone from upstate NY will get that reference)

[Lowfategg]

If you flip them on there sides and then stack them horizontally, it might not be that bad.

They do sort of dwarf the victors.

[Dave Flowerday]

Why is it that every single piece of the new control system seems to be twice the size (or more) of the old stuff? IFI's stuff was more-or-less 10 years old - you'd think that the advance in technology would make things smaller, or at least the same size considering there's more powerful stuff inside.

How much functionality are teams going to have to sacrifice to make room for all the extra space needed by the new stuff? I know several of the robots we have made in the past would simply not be possible now (2001 for example).

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.

[Joe Ross]

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).

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.

[MikeDubreuil]

Originally Posted by Joe Ross

I can't name all the times we've had a software logic error which rendered limit switches or another safety device ineffective.

That's Dave's point... what process is in place to qualify the software? Will the software pass a safety board?
With IFI's system and the Victor I feel comfortable putting my finger in a pinch point if the system is in the disabled state. I will not for a couple years with the Jaguars.
... the million dollar question for me is why Luminary Micro would like to step into the motor control business? What do they have to gain given their current product line? I don't understand.

[EricVanWyk]

Originally Posted by MikeDubreuil

... the million dollar question for me is why Luminary Micro would like to step into the motor control business? What do they have to gain given their current product line? I don't understand.

Luminary is not getting into the motor control business. They are in the motion control controller business. The Jaguar is essentially a reference design that shows professional EEs how easy it is to create a strong motor control algorithm using their processors.

I'm an electrical engineer, which means I have sales reps and vendors trying to sell me on their product lines all the time. Usually this involves them bringing in food in exchange for an hour of our listening time. Invariably, they bring in demo boards - power points just don't cut mustard. I'll bet you lunch that their sales reps will be have these in their demo boxes by February.

I doubt very much they are doing this for the money. They are doing this for the same reasons NI is:
1) They get the FIRST message.
2) They get targeted effective advertising to their core market.
3) They know they'd be stupid not to.

[Adam Y.]

Originally Posted by EricVanWyk

Luminary is not getting into the motor control business. They are in the motion control controller business. The Jaguar is essentially a reference design that shows professional EEs how easy it is to create a strong motor control algorithm using their processors.

I agree. If you look at their demonstration boards the only motor application that is missing is a regular DC motor application which is generally the most trivial. I don't know if they plan on making money with the Jaguar. Some companies adopt a loss leader approach to these products while others tend to price their products to correspond to the cost of manufacturing.

As far as I know the current plan is to distribute them via Digikey, for any controllers needed on top of what's included in the kit

That is not good. Digikey tends to mark up the prices from the manufacturers prices. Not by that much but it is a little irritating to pay ten dollars more.

[dtengineering]

Originally Posted by Adam Y.

Digikey tends to mark up the prices from the manufacturers prices. Not by that much but it is a little irritating to pay ten dollars more.

I can't comment on Digikey's markup, but do want to point out that for Canadian customers Digikey ships from within Canada, meaning that each order saves about $35 in brokerage fees relative to companies that ship UPS from the states. (Yes, pretty much EVERY order of robot parts out of the USA goes through a brokerage firm, and you can end up paying a $35 brokerage fee on a $10 part.) They also bill in Canadian dollars, which makes some of the book-keeping a bit easier. Their delivery time is much faster for Canadian customers than USA-only suppliers, unless you feel like spending $50-$100 on international express shipments.

I would be delighted to see Digikey as part of the FIRST supply chain... so long as they keep these controllers in stock north of the border as well!

Jason

P.S. And a big "thank you" to Andy Mark for shipping from within Canada and eliminating brokerage fees.

[=Martin=Taylor=]

Originally Posted by Greg Needel

Pictures are up.....OMG that thing is HUGE

Yeah, its almost Pizzone sized

So are PWM's optional now? LAN cables wouldn't fall out as much. Thats a major plus IMO.

[Travis Hoffman]

Originally Posted by Hachiban VIII

Yeah, its almost Pizzone sized

So are PWM's optional now? LAN cables wouldn't fall out as much. Thats a major plus IMO.

LAN cables weigh a lot more and take up more space (I sense....a theme).

Plus you'd still have the problem of coiling the extra cabling if you didn't have a DIY RJ45 kit.

Dab o' hot glue for the win.

[Richard McClellan]

Originally Posted by Hachiban VIII

Yeah, its almost Pizzone sized

So are PWM's optional now? LAN cables wouldn't fall out as much. Thats a major plus IMO.

For 2009, you have to use the PWM ports. The can bus (with the RJ-45 connectors) will not be available until "future years" which probably means 2010 because the CAN module that they have for the cRIO won't be in the kit for 2009.

[tdlrali]

Wow, judging by the pics, that thing is bigger yet than I imagined. Besides, what's with the round edges? We're not going for looks here, and square things just stack much better.

[lynca]

Here is the video from the Demo NItro robot at NI week 2008 and jaguar components on the MentorSearch Channel.

http://www.youtube.com/user/mentorsearch

[MikeDubreuil]

Originally Posted by lynca

Here is the video from the Demo NItro robot at NI week 2008 and jaguar components on the MentorSearch Channel.

http://www.youtube.com/user/mentorsearch

I didn't realize the Victor supported SPI. WoW!

... cool video anyway. Thanks.

NI is spending a lot of money promoting the Jaguar if it's not definite it will be included in the KOP

[lynca]

Originally Posted by MikeDubreuil

NI is spending a lot of money promoting the Jaguar if it's not definite it will be included in the KOP

If you dig around the MentorSearch Channel you can find a few more interesting videos about the Jaguar and VXworks