The mechanical engineer in SLAC mentioned that the CCS should not need to command the rotator directly on the summit. However, it is needed in the SLAC for the test. However, there is one important use case that the cable wrap rotator of camera needs to synchronize with the rotator. This use case might need the TCS to coordinate or the CCS commands the rotator directly. If the latter is the case, need to check how to work with the pointing component.
From the comment of mechanical engineer:
We need CCS to command the camera rotator only because we need to have synchronized control of our cable wrap rotator (very different design and control than the T&S CCW). It might be, however, that the same OCS bridge could be used for both the SLAC synchronized control and the T&S synchronized control.
CCW: camera cable wrapper.
Reply from Tony:
HI, yes I think it is correct that the only reason we need to use CCS to control the rotator is to synchronize its movements with the camera cable wrap rotator, otherwise we could simply use the engineering UI (and we would not even need the SAL interface).
Our plan currently is that the camera cable wrap rotator will use a motor control system for which we already have a CCS driver, so for us the simplest route appears to be
- Direct CCS control of the camera cable wrap rotator
- CCS control of the rotator via a CCS->OCS/SAL bridge (which mostly already exists since we need such a bridge for the camera/comcam/auxtel).
I am not entirely sure I understand what you mean by "It might be, however, that the same OCS bridge could be used for both the SLAC synchronized control and the T&S synchronized control." If you mean that TCS could control the camera cable wrap rotator, then that is theoretically possible, but it would seem that it would require a whole new TCS system to control the camera cable wrap rotator which does not currently exist. We also do not currently run any OCS/SAL at SLAC except for inside the rotator, so doing so would require setting up and learning a new system.
Reply from Travis:
That comment was from me. I'm not knowledgeable on the software differences between CCS, TCS and OCS. But what I was suggesting is that there may be some commonality in the software we need at SLAC and that which is needed by T&S. I was just suggesting that we may save some time by not duplicating effort for the two systems (since they're very similar).
It appears that you're suggesting that (partially) by having the camera rotator controlled with a CCS->OCS bridge.