mx/smargopolo
0
0
Fork 0
Code Issues Pull Requests Actions Packages Projects Releases Wiki Activity
Files
master
smargopolo/prigo-master/IDL/log.txt
ROS Station 3e3da793c8 Added prigo-master.
2019-07-31 17:58:05 +02:00

369 lines
14 KiB
Plaintext
Raw Permalink Blame History

Filename: log.txt
Purpose: Add background information to the recorded data sets of chimeto, gometo
and phimeto scans.
Author: Andreas Isenegger, Bitcontrol GmbH, CH-5305 Unterendingen, 2015
Remark: Read file from bottom to top (not top to bottom as usual).
Note: On the MX lab unit, all recordings were performed at tip position
SHZ = 20mm, OZ = 275mm (as opposed to the X06DA BL unit, where these values
roughly are SHZ = 18mm, OZ = 254mm)
SoC Chi at MX lab
=================
2015-08-14_09 As 2015-08-14_08, check if Chi active correction still works
--> It does.
SoC Omega at MX lab
===================
2015-08-14_09 coorTransfBL2Prigo.h replaced by coordTransBL2SH.h in Calibration.cpp,
check if Omega active correction still works
--> It does.
2015-08-14_08 Parameter P_ENABLED reactivated in Calibration.cpp, check if Omega
active correction still works
--> It does.
2015-08-14_07 Conversion to int removed, wrong negative Omega angle correction
by Marco reinserted (same conditions as 2015-08-14_02)
--> Same result as for 2015-08-14_02 (half working)!
2015-08-14_06 Compiler option -march reverted to -march=i686, conversion to int
added to Omega angle correction
--> No improvement, plot looks very similar to previous one
2015-08-14_05 As below, compiler option -march=i686 changed to -march=native
--> No improvement, plot looks very similar to previous one
2015-08-14_04 Active correction on with 1st param set based on 2015-08-14_01_*.txt,
negative Omega angle correction removed altogether, since sin() is a
periodic function symmetric around 0deg
--> Correction fails for all Omega! Plot looks very similar to
2015-08-14_03
2015-08-14_03 Active correction on with 1st param set based on 2015-08-14_01_*.txt,
negative Omega angle correction fixed (tested in separate C++ project)
--> Correction fails for all Omega!
2015-08-14_02 Active correction on with 1st param set based on 2015-08-14_01_*.txt,
negative Omega angle correction wrong (bug in Marco's code)
--> Correction succeeds for Omega > 0, fails for Omega < 0
2015-08-14_01 Active correction off
SoC Chi at MX lab
=================
2015-08-14_08 Active correction on with 2nd param set based on 2015-08-14_07_*.txt
2015-08-14_07 Active correction on with 1st param set based on 2015-08-14_06_*.txt
2015-08-14_06 Data collection for determining 1st parameter set.
Executed phimeto (EFAC=2000) and gometo (EFAC=500) for alignment (no data collection).
Resulting SH and O positions:
SHX = -0.073, SHY = 0.576, SHZ = 20.0, OX = 0.05, OY = 0.019, OZ = 275
The Chi active correction parameters were were for these positions.
Running out of time here, thus leaving IK parameters at these values (summary):
l44 = 109.9mm, offsetS1 = offsetS2 = offsetS3 = -34.6mm, l11 = 11.2mm
2015-08-14_05 l11 changed from 11.2mm to 11.3mm
--> Deviation BL Y got better, BL Z got worse --> l11 = 11.2mm seems
best value
2015-08-14_04 l11 changed from 11.1mm to 11.2mm
--> Deviation got even better for BL X and Y axes
2015-08-14_03 l11 changed from 11.0mm to 11.1mm
--> Deviation got reduced by 60um for BL X and Y axes
2015-08-14_02 l41, l42, l43 set back to default value (l41 = l42 = l43 = 47.0mm),
instead offsetS1, offsetS2, offsetS3 changed from -34.5mm to -34.6mm,
l44 stayed 109.9mm. (The l41, l42, l43 values should not be changed,
according to calibration instructions. Change offsetSxx values instead.)
--> Almost identical to previous scan --> Expectation confirmed. Very good.
2015-08-14_01 Check if results are reproducible and system is still in same state
--> Almost identical to 2015-08-12_07 --> Very good.
Chi active correction switched off
NOT TRUE ANYMORE (as stated below):
Before every Chi scan phimeto and gometo were executed for alignment (no data collection).
SoC Chi at MX lab
=================
2015-08-13_02 As below, but SHY changed to SHY=-0.5
--> The SoC radius gets huge (like 1mm)
2015-08-13_01 As 2015-08-12_11, but prigoTCP and prigoCONTROL restarted, no phimeto and gometo
execution before the scan
SHX=-0.066, SHY=0.577, SHZ=20, OX=0.049, OY=0.017, OZ=275
--> Very similar to 2015-08-12_11
2015-08-12_12 Changed OZ = 273, SHZ = 18, but the resulting SoC was far too large for the
capacitive distance sensor system; had to change it back to OZ = 275, SHZ = 20
and recorded this data set; is almost identical with previous one
2015-08-12_11 Active correction on with 2nd param set, params from 2015-08-12_10_1.txt
2015-08-12_10 Active correction on with 1st param set, params from 2015-08-12_07_1.txt
Compare PRIGO_main.adl with snapshot of PRIGO_main.adl: no difference
2015-08-12_09 Didn't run phimeto and gometo beforehand, 1 scan, peak got worse
Compare PRIGO_main.adl with snapshot of PRIGO_main.adl: no difference
2015-08-12_08 Run phimeto and gometo beforehand, then snapshot PRIGO_main.adl, then 1 scan
Investigate peak around 0deg of BL X and BL Y samples
2015-08-12_07 As 2015-08-12_04, l41 = l42 = l43 = 46.9mm, l44 = 109.9mm
2015-08-12_06 As below, offsetR4 = -10.83mm
--> Prigo Y and Z got worse than 2015-08-12_04
2015-08-12_05 l41 = l42 = l43 = 47mm (default), l44 = 110mm (default), offsetR4 = -11.03mm
--> Prigo Y and Z got worse than 2015-08-12_04
2015-08-12_04 l41 = l42 = l43 = 46.9mm (still l44 = 109.9mm)
--> Prigo Z got better than 2015-08-12_03
2015-08-12_03 As below, just 2 more measurements
2015-08-12_02 As below
Chi active correction switched off
2015-08-12_01 Steel cylinder grounded to CPL290 card 2 by 0.5mm2 braid
Before every Chi scan phimeto and gometo were executed for alignment (no data collection).
SoC Omega at MX lab
===================
2015-08-12_01 Steel cylinder grounded to CPL290 card 2 by 0.5mm2 braid
SoC Phi at MX lab
=================
2015-08-12_03 Steel cylinder not grounded, but braid stayed attached to cylinder
2015-08-12_02 Steel cylinder grounded to CPL290 card 2 by 0.5mm2 braid
2015-08-12_01 Steel cylinder grounded to CPL290 card 1 by 0.5mm2 braid
All measurements with l44 = 109.9mm (default = 110.0mm)
================================================================================
Accuracy measurement sequence at X06DA at 2015-08-07
- Set magnet voltage to 14VDC; at 12VDC the steel cylinder doesn't hold well
- Steel cylinder grounded to Phi rotation motor
- Capacitive distance sensor sensitivity: 62500nm/V
- Active correction on
- BL setup:
- GMX[0]: X06DA-ES-DF1:GMX-SETP = 192, X06DA-ES-DF1:GMX-OFF = -210
X06DA-ES-DF1:GMX-RBV = -18
- Initialize Prigo
- Run phimeto using alignment and datacollection; EFAC = 1000nm
- Run gometo alignment and datacollection; EFAC = 500nm
- Run chimeto and record SoC
SoC Chi at X06DA beamline
=========================
2015-08-07_02 Magnet voltage increased to 16VDC
--> Recorded data still contains large steps
2015-08-07_01 --> Recorded data contains large steps
SoC Omega at X06DA beamline
===========================
2015-08-07_01 --> Measurement ok.
SoC Phi at X06DA beamline
=========================
2015-08-07_01 Measurement goes from 0deg to 360deg, 'safety' angle = 0deg
because Phi motion is limited inside Orchestra to 0deg to
360deg
--> Measurement ok.
================================================================================
SoC Chi at X06DA beamline
=========================
2015-08-06_08 As below, just 1 data set
--> As below
2015-08-06_07 As below, limitation at 40deg removed (increased to 90deg),
steel cylinder grounded
--> Very large excitation and steps in the signal --> Run gometo, then
chimeto again
2015-08-06_06 As below, 2nd try
--> Both iterations show large steps
2015-08-06_05 Active correction on, scan limited to 40deg
--> 2nd iteration shows strange signals
SoC Omega at X06DA beamline
===========================
2015-08-06_04 As below, cables fixed on goniometer, rotating from 0 to 720deg
--> Confirming asymmetricity at 0deg
2015-08-06_03 As below, Vincent was holding the magnet cables
--> Less noise
2015-08-06_02 As below, extending the rotation from -360deg to +360deg
--> High noise towards the end of the measurement
2015-08-06_01 Active correction on
SoC Chi at MX lab
=================
2015-08-06_04 Active correction on with 1st param set, params from 2015-08-06_03
2015-08-06_03 Active correction off, l44 = 109.9mm, Y-sensor moved down to -5V start value
for more headroom on Y-axis
2015-08-06_02 Active correction off, l44 = 109.9mm
Y-values got limited above 75deg, measurement unusable
2015-08-06_01 As 2015-08-05_05, l44 changed from 110mm to 109.9mm
--> SoC got larger, but peaks went away --> Promising!
From now on, the steel cylinder is grounded.
SoC Chi at MX lab
=================
2015-08-05_08 As below, Omega = -90
2015-08-05_07 As below, and steel cylinder grounded
2015-08-05_06 As below
2015-08-05_05 Active correction on with 1st and 2nd param set, params from 2015-08-05_02 and 2015-08-05_04,
division by 1000000 instead of 1250000
--> Works! SoC got smaller
2015-08-05_04 Active correction on with 1st param set, params from 2015-08-05_02,
division by 1000000 instead of 1250000
--> Works! SoC got smaller
2015-08-05_03 Active correction on with 1st param set, params from 2015-08-05_02
--> Works! SoC got smaller
2015-08-05_02 Active correction off
SoC Omega at MX lab
===================
2015-08-05_09 Active correction on with 1st and 2nd and 3rd param set for BL X, Y, Z, using Marco's
Calibration.cpp, calibration parameters from 2015-08-04_11, 2015-08-05_07, 2015-08-05_08
--> Works! SoC got smaller compared to previous step.
2015-08-05_08 Active correction on with 1st and 2nd param set for BL X, Y, Z, using Marco's
Calibration.cpp, calibration parameters from 2015-08-04_11 and 2015-08-05_07
--> Works! SoC not smaller, just different shape.
2015-08-05_07 Active correction on with 1st param set for BL X, Y, Z, using Marco's Calibration.cpp,
calibration parameters from 2015-08-04_11
--> Works!
2015-08-05_06 Active correction on using Andy's original Calibration.cpp with modified
'double OMEGA = abs(fmod(I_OMEGA, 360.0));' line
--> Doesn't work!
2015-08-05_05 Active correction on with 1st param set for BL X, Y, Z, using Marco's modified
Calibration.cpp (only Omega angle is calculated differently), calibration parameters from
2015-08-04_11
--> Doesn't work!
2015-08-05_04 Active correction on with 1st param set for BL X, Y, Z, using Marco's Calibration.cpp,
calibration parameters from 2015-08-04_11
--> Works!
2015-08-05_03 Active correction on with 1st param set for BL X, Y, Z, using Marco's modified
Calibration.cpp, calibration parameters from 2015-08-04_11
--> Doesn't work!
2015-08-05_02 As below, additionally 'OUTPUT(9,0) = O_err;' set in Calibration.cpp
--> Doesn't work!
2015-08-05_01 Active correction on with 1st param set for BL X, Y, Z, using Andy's modified
Calibration.cpp, calibration parameters from 2015-08-04_11
--> Doesn't work!
SoC Omega at MX lab
===================
2015-08-04_14 Active correction on with 1st param set for BL X, Y, Z, using Marco's Calibration.cpp,
calibration parameters from 2015-08-04_11
--> Problem fixed! Hurra!
2015-08-04_13 Active correction on with 2nd param set for BL Y, Z
2015-08-04_12 Active correction on with 1st param set for BL X, Y, Z
2015-08-04_11 Restart: Active correction switched off, sensor ch3 (BL Z) sign inversion removed in
gometo.pro (negation is performed in Matlab script evaluate.m)
2015-08-04_10 Active correction switched on with 2nd param set for BL Y, Z
2015-08-04_09 Active correction switched on with 1st param set for BL X, Y, Z
2015-08-04_08 Restart: Active correction switched off
2015-08-04_07 As below, but Omega BL Y correction inverted
2015-08-04_06 As below, but Omega BL Y correction swapped with Z correction, not inverted
2015-08-04_05 Restart: Chi corr set to 0, only Omega BL Y correction active, inverted
2015-08-04_04 As below, but SH Y and Z correction swapped
--> The SH Y correction is visible in the SH Z (= BL X) plot
2015-08-04_03 As below, but sign of SH Y correction inverted too
--> BL Z got better between 0 and 250deg, BL Y got worse by 1um
2015-08-04_02 As below, but sign of SH Z correction (which should be 0) inverted
--> no difference --> ok
2015-08-04_01 Chi correction set to 0, only Omega BL Y correction active
SoC Omega at MX lab
===================
2015-08-03_05 Only BL X and Y axes corrected, Z-axis not corrected (coeff = 0)
2015-08-03_04 Active correction switched off
2015-08-03_03
2015-08-03_02 As below, cylinder rotated by ~90deg
2015-08-03_01 Active correction switched on with parameters from July
Reference in New Issue View Git Blame Copy Permalink