Agreed. You don't need to make any effort to ramp them at the same rate, because there's a system in place to make the winder follow the line. And...if it needs to make a correction, it needs to be able to do so quick. You might want to oversize the drive so you have plenty of current available.
I've also fed the dancer position directly to the following motor, so not trying to control dancer position per se, just synching the speeds of the two drives. In essence, you end up with a P-only controller (In your case, you'd still need to divide by roll diameter, my follower axes were nips so I didn't need to worry about that) Now when I did this, I wasn't really trying to control tension, just synch the follower to the master; there really was no tension per se, just enough to take up slack and make sure the web didn't unthread itself.
Now you're going to want to control wind tension, so if you do the P-only thing, you'll need to decouple tension from dancer position, if it's not that way already. Sounds like it isn't. You could put weights on the dancer, or even better would be to apply the tension with a cylinder fed by a relieving high-flow precision regulator, because then you avoid the inertia associated with the physical weights. You could even use an I/P controlling a volume booster, which is essentially the same as the precision regulator, but with a fluid pressure setpoint instead of a screw and a spring. Then you can still programmatically control the tension without worrying about dancer position.
