 | | zener diodes
|
|
Bad idea. A small difference in ref voltage will drive most of the current through one of the two. That's also why I believe that putting l293D in parallele is also a bad idea. In practice it seems that sometimes it works. It is just a bad design. (...) (29 years ago, 22-Mar-96, to lugnet.robotics.handyboard)
|
| |
| | zener diodes
|
|
I'm trying to use zener diodes to regulate the voltage being supplied to some motors I'm using with the handy board. I'm curious, though, can zener diodes be placed in parallel to handle more current? My understanding of their properties isn't (...) (29 years ago, 21-Mar-96, to lugnet.robotics.handyboard)
|
| |
| | add to mailing list
|
|
LS ``Please add me to the Handy Board mailing list'' Greetings, jluijk@xs4all.nl (29 years ago, 21-Mar-96, to lugnet.robotics.handyboard)
|
| |
| | Resets
|
|
I traced my reset problem down to the fact that there is a ton of electrical noise in the chip power (+5V). The noise is there only when motors are running. After a minute or so of running the motors, I'll get a runtime error or the board will just (...) (29 years ago, 21-Mar-96, to lugnet.robotics.handyboard)
|
| |
| | RE: Motor control
|
|
I would rather have use of the 0 to 8 range because many of the values in the 0 to 100 range simply fall into groups which give only 9 speeds. However, I do not support rewriting the IC code. Tom's suggestion, motor(1,value*14), is simple and meets (...) (29 years ago, 18-Mar-96, to lugnet.robotics.handyboard)
|
| |
| | Re: Servos w/ the handyboard?
|
|
(...) Yes. Just use the "servo.icb" and "servo.c" libraries that are distributed with Interactive C. This will convert the Handy Board's digital input 9 sensor (which is really a bidirectional counter/timer pin) into a stable servo control line. You (...) (29 years ago, 18-Mar-96, to lugnet.robotics.handyboard)
|
| |
| | address for RWI
|
|
Try "jadietsch@activmedia.com" or "bkennedy@activmedia.com" -- Randy (...) (29 years ago, 18-Mar-96, to lugnet.robotics.handyboard)
|
| |
| | Re: Motor control
|
|
(...) <snip> (...) It would make more sense to just use motor(1,speed*14) This would give you the following: Value --> Speed 0 --> 0 1 --> 14 2 --> 28 3 --> 42 4 --> 56 5 --> 70 6 --> 84 7 --> 98 I wouldn't bother rewriting the routine. Tom (29 years ago, 18-Mar-96, to lugnet.robotics.handyboard)
|
| |
| | Re: Motor control
|
|
(...) Depends on how far you wish IC to go. Someday there could be another controller that allows 100 disrete levels. On the other hand that could be handled well by allowing the value to go to 100, and the code written to go to 8 would be kinda (...) (29 years ago, 18-Mar-96, to lugnet.robotics.handyboard)
|
| |
| | Re: Motor control
|
|
I like 0 to 8 better. Also is there any way to control the frequency at which the PWM works? I find that some of my motors deliver too much at step 1. How about if there was something like: motor( motornum, cycles_on, total_cyles); if you feed (...) (29 years ago, 18-Mar-96, to lugnet.robotics.handyboard)
|
