 | | Re: "Servo" Driver for NQC
|
|
Rebel Transcanner wrote: > (...) I take it you are really doing on...float...on...float cycles with your motor instead of using "off", which actually performs active braking (on/off cycles are almost guaranteed to give serious mechanical jitters). (...) (22 years ago, 29-Jan-02, to lugnet.robotics)
|
| |
| | Re: "Servo" Driver for NQC
|
|
(...) I have to disagree with your approach. Even at low speeds, alternating between pushing on the gas and stamping on the brake isn't the way to drive smoothly. Perhaps you need to gear the machine differently and use less power during the ON (...) (22 years ago, 29-Jan-02, to lugnet.robotics)
|
| |
| | Re: "Servo" Driver for NQC
|
|
"Stephen Edwards" <lego-robotics@crynwr.com> wrote in message news:3C56AA4F.409050....vt.edu... (...) wait (...) Nope, I'm using Off, because I need to brake the motor to pulse it. Floating it does almost nothing - the inertia of the motor carries (...) (22 years ago, 29-Jan-02, to lugnet.robotics)
|
| |
| | Re: "Servo" Driver for NQC
|
|
"Steve Baker" <lego-robotics@crynwr.com> wrote in message news:3C56E677.33FD99...ail.net... (...) Floating (...) if (...) I cannot gear it differently - the geartrain is optimized for the correct speed I must achieve. Float doesn't work because of (...) (22 years ago, 30-Jan-02, to lugnet.robotics)
|
| |
| | Re: "Servo" Driver for NQC
|
|
The ON/OFF bang-bang control you are trying has some problems that proportional control does not. While it is true that if the update rate is high enough, or the controlled plant damped enough, that switching a drive ON and OFF can simulate (...) (22 years ago, 30-Jan-02, to lugnet.robotics)
|
