Subject:
|
Re: Motor Speeds
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.robotics.handyboard
|
Date:
|
Sun, 23 Feb 1997 23:42:01 GMT
|
Original-From:
|
Richard Vannoy <richardv@abac.[SayNoToSpam]com>
|
Reply-To:
|
richardv@STOPSPAMabac.com
|
Viewed:
|
1436 times
|
| |
|
|
lylehaze wrote:
>
> I had considered doing -100 to 100 PWM in hardware.
>
> In response to the last posting.. As I understand it.. the -100 to 100
> control number is then "divided down" to the nearest of the 7 speeds
> available.. If I have this wrong, PLEASE let me know!
Now this is starting to make sense. We use -100 to +100, but it does
seem silly to have a resolution of 201. Much more logical that the
routine converts to steps of lesser resolution, and 7 speeds certainly
seem reasonable.
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: Motor Speeds
|
| (...) When I built the PWM controller out of a PIC I gave it 100 speeds representing 0 - 100% width. So a speed of 50 is a 50% duty cycle signaal. The disadvantage of the Handiboard scheme is granularity. In particular I have found that for really (...) (28 years ago, 25-Feb-97, to lugnet.robotics.handyboard)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | (no subject)
|
| I had considered doing -100 to 100 PWM in hardware. I even went so far as to draw up the schematics for it... Then I read the HC11 manual, and realized that instead of my "little" circuit, I could just use another HC11.. The internal timer/counters (...) (28 years ago, 23-Feb-97, to lugnet.robotics.handyboard)
|
3 Messages in This Thread:
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
