Subject:
|
Re: Motor Speeds
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.robotics.handyboard
|
Date:
|
Tue, 25 Feb 1997 07:21:12 GMT
|
Original-From:
|
Chuck McManis <cmcmanis@netcom=saynotospam=.com>
|
Reply-To:
|
CMCMANIS@NETCOM.spamlessCOM
|
Viewed:
|
2205 times
|
| |
|
|
Richard Vannoy wrote:
> 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.
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 high
performance motors, such as the ones on some of the RC platforms
I've converted, you have to use a feedback system to control the
speed, and the feedback system can't work reliably with just
7 speeds (it is too jerky) for highly geared motors it works
great.
But this isn't a complaint, simply a note of one of the limitations
of 7 speeds.
--
--Chuck McManis http://www.professionals.com/~cmcmanis/index.html
All opinions in this message are those of the author. No warranty as to
the suitability or accuracy is stated or implied. Use at your own risk.
cmcmanis@netcom.com +1.408.524.4805
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: Motor Speeds
|
| (...) 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. (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
|
|
|
|
