Розібрав мотора з попередньої теми. На роторі є дірка в ламінації. Все інше наче ок: підшипники крутяться, опір нормальний. Ця дірка може якось пояснити те, що мотор не видає більше 3 об/с і зупиняється легким дотиком зовсім без зусиль?
<посваритись> Я просто в шоці які вестернські саби ВСРАТІ! В одному не можна питати, в іншому не можна відео, не можна кроспостити... енівей. Маю питання: </посваритись>
Маю два ось такі NEMA17. Використовував їх кілька тижнів разом з TMC2209. Зазвичай на 12В 1.5А, але останні рази пробував і 24В. В якийсь момент невідомо коли мотор почав поводитись як на відео: пропускає кроки або зовсім клинить на відносно невеликій швидкості 2 об/с. До цього працював ОК і на більших швидкостях. Проблема відтворюється і на інших TMC2209 драйверах, тобто причина саме в моторі. Ще один ідентичний мотор має схожі проблеми і був в тій же збірці. Того разу я спалив кілька драйверів, можливо через відсутність конденсаторів. Але мотори тоді або все ж вижили, або я просто не помітив. Вони пошкоджені? Вмерли? Їх можна якось полагодити?
Many years ago while trying to make my own programming language I faced an issue. In short, parsers didn't parse specific inputs as expected, due to some implicit rules.
For instance, let's consider EBNF grammar for a sequence of expressions a=aaaa, where a on the right can repeat arbitrary number of times.
This will look something like this:
symbol = "a"
params = symbol params | symbol
Line = symbol "=" params
lines = Line lines | Line
I designed it without + and * notation on purpose, to narrow down the root cause to the most basic rules: terminals, and and or expressions, and recursion.
Using this grammar I expect the text a=aaa=a to be parsed as (a=aa)(a=a): as two separate Line.
But typically parser generators will not produce parser that can handle such case.
Instead, the parser will (typically) fail.
The root cause is of course the nature of such parsers: they don't scan for all possible combinations.
Instead, in case of collisions (like in this case a at the end of a=aa and a at the beginning of next a=a) it is expected that user will insert negation or something to "fail" a specific route fast, eliminating the collision.
But doesn't this challenge the whole purpose of grammars as "simple" description of language rules?
It might get very difficult to predict all possible such collisions for a large grammar, like for Python or C++.
Are there any generators that don't have such limitation and can pass (a=aa)(a=a) test?
В мене горить.
Мало того що світ не ненавидить цих гнид, так ще й за згадки про війну можуть забанити. Бо "розпалювання ворожнечі".
>!От суки! Я не те що ворожнечу, я зараз блядь ЗСУ задоначу і склад їм розпалю!!<
При цьому в англомовних сабах русня може вільно писати на своєму нахрюку і всім пофіг. Несіть вогнегасник!
First of all, I'm not an engineer. This part is meant to be 3D printed from plastic, but I really want to know how this is done for metal parts.
I have a lead screw turned by a pulley. In order to lock the screw axially, I sandwich the pulley between two thrust bearings. But if spacing between the top and bottom walls is just a bit too big, the lead screw will experience a backlash. If it is too small - the friction in bearings will jam the pulley.
My idea was to add another screw, that will be inserted into the wall and push one of the bearings. The hexagonal hole in this screw will make it possible to adjust the force and let the lead screw pass through.
But something tells me this is an overengineering. Also, I'm pretty sure that over time vibration and rotation of the bearings will unscrew the screw. What do You think?
I'm trying to model retaining ring and have troubles reading this drawing.
The symbol looks like t but I can't figure out what it shows.
I also couldn't find any use for D4 circle: it looks disconnected from everything else.
Any thoughts?
Thanks in advance.
What is this? Looks like a way to exploit root permissions to h@ck machine from any game. Is this safe?
What is the easiest way to create convex hull around a set of parametric circles? I cannot do this manually, because the model is parametric. Under some configurations the circles that were previously inside become outside, which brakes lines and arcs that form the boundary. How to approach this?
Disclaimer: this is NOT "individual support case". This is criticism of your site design/functionality.
I know that madein is not available in my market. That`s totally OK: I use reshipping in such cases. What is NOT OK is that this page permanently locks me in without ANY actual option to go "back to main site". I cannot browse products, i cannot login and see stuff that I already ordered, I cannot select other location. Please, fix this! Instead of redirecting me to that page you can just show a warning banner on the site. It is very annoying to use VPS in order to just browse the products.
With all its values I`m surprised framework is an american company, not an European one. Or at least Canadian. Can we have it in EU with localized manufacturing and investment opportunities?
Is there a way to add position or mate connector as dependency to configuration panel? I know it is possible in feature studio, but asking specifically for part studio.