This thread has been locked.

If you have a related question, please click the "Ask a related question" button in the top right corner. The newly created question will be automatically linked to this question.

DRV2624: Diagnostics and Auto calibration modes both fail

Part Number: DRV2624

Hello,

I'm trying to use the DRV2624 to drive a Mini Disc Vibrating Motor 1027(https://drive.google.com/file/d/1oxdAw6sSTIJld3jplucBFAFzRFhsW3CE/view)

I've adjusted the Rated and Overdrive voltages (3Vrms and 5V) as well as the resonance frequency (175Hz).

But both "diagnostic" and "auto calibration" modes now flag an error (Register 0x01: 0x88).

Our configuration before doing diagnostic and "auto calibration":

reg:0x7 0x48 
reg:0x8 0x08
reg:0x1f 0x7d   //Rated voltages: 3V
reg:0x20 0xf3   //Overdrive voltages: 5V
reg:0x23 0x36   //FB_BRAKE_FACTOR[6:4]: 3,    LOOP_GAIN[3:2]: 2
reg:0x27 0x10   //DRIVE_TIME[4:0]: 16
reg:0x28 0x11   //BLANKING_TIME[7:4]:1,            IDISS_TIME[3:0]: 1
reg:0x29 0x0c   //SAMPLE_TIME[3:2]:3,                ZC_DET_TIME[1:0]: 0
reg:0x2a 0x02   //AUTO_CAL_TIME[1:0]: 2

Motor 1027 is a ERM actuator, right? Does DRV2624 support to drive this Motor?

Thank you!

Regards,

Xu Yaoyang

  • Hi, Xu!

    Welcome to E2E and thank you for your interest in our products!

    Based on the datasheet, the motor is an ERM actuator as you mentioned. There shouldn't be any issue to handle this load. Is your actuator fixed to a solid mass during the auto-calibration and the diagnostics process? If you run the auto-calibration with the rest of registers in default state, do you have the same results?

    Best regards,
    Luis Fernando Rodríguez S.

  • Hi Luis,

    Thanks for your confirmation.

    No, I've been pressing the motor against the table to run the calibration.

    The following reg&&value are the result after diagnostic and calibration. It seems that DIAG_Z_RESULT, BEMF_GAIN, A_CAL_COMP and A_CAL_BEMF have been already configured during the process, but not the correct result.

    reg:0x0 0x3
    reg:0x1 0x88 
    reg:0x2 0x1f
    reg:0x3 0x3b
    reg:0x4 0xe9
    reg:0x5 0x0
    reg:0x6 0x50
    reg:0x7 0x4b
    reg:0x8 0x18
    reg:0x9 0x0
    reg:0xa 0x92
    reg:0xb 0x8d
    reg:0xc 0x0
    reg:0xd 0x0
    reg:0xe 0x7f

    reg:0x1f 0x7d
    reg:0x20 0xf3
    reg:0x21 0x4c
    reg:0x22 0x11
    reg:0x23 0x37
    reg:0x24 0x64
    reg:0x25 0x80
    reg:0x26 0x0
    reg:0x27 0x10
    reg:0x28 0x11
    reg:0x29 0xc
    reg:0x2a 0x2

    BTW, I found that the output voltage of REG port is the same as the supply VDD and the resistance between VDD and REG is the same too.

    Is this normal or the chip is damaged? (maybe shorted when welding)

    Is the abnormality of the REG port the cause of the diagnostic and calibration failure?

    Best regards,

    Xu Yaoyang

  • Hi, Xu,

    Than you for providing the additional information. Could you also provide your circuit schematic for more details, please? This is to have a better approach to the issue. As you mentioned, it is not normal to have the REG pin with the same voltage as VDD. It should throw a 1.8V level.

    Best regards,
    Luis Fernando Rodríguez S.

  • Hi Luis,

    I am using the schematic in the reference documentation. Maybe there's some problem about the REG port. I will check it after we get the new chip.

    It’s strange that calibration and diagnostics execute successfully when using the LRA default configuration.

    Best regards,

    Xu Yaoyang

  • Hi, Xu,

    Curiously, the actuator specifications are related to an ERM, but the actuator seems to be an LRA. Probably you get good results because the actuator behaves like an LRA.

    Please let me know if you have additional observations.

    Best regards,

    Luis Fernando Rodríguez S.

  • Hi Luis,

    It should be what you think.

    Since this actuator is not the one we use on official project, we have decided to implement the driver code first, and then debug the calibration and diagnosis in the subsequent official use.

     The driver must be OK now. I will close this issue.

    Thank you very much!

    Best regards,

    Xu Yaoyang