• State TI Thinks Resolved
  • +1 person also asked this people also asked this
  • Locked Locked
  • Replies 4 replies
  • Answers 1 answer
  • Subscribers 83 subscribers
  • Views 332 views
  • Users 0 members are here
Support feedback
Options
Options
Related

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.

TMS320F28379D: Endat2.2

Steve Rizk
Prodigy 50 points

Part Number: TMS320F28379D
Other Parts Discussed in Thread: TMDXIDDK379D, C2000WARE

Hello,

I'm using an endat2.2 encoder for speed and position control of a PMSM motor, and in my application I'm using ePWM1,ePWM2, ePWM3 for the voltage I'm injecting to the motor, but there is problem with the endat2.2 library that I'm think there are conflict with ePWMs that I'm using.

I want to see how I can changed the ePWM that are used in the endat2.2 library by other ePWM?

Thanks,

Regards,

Steve Rizk

  • 0
    TI__Guru* 93800 points

    Hello, unfortunately changing the ePWM pin would require modification of the library source code. The source code for EnDat has not been release to our SDK. 

    Best regards

    Lori

  • 0 in reply to Lori Heustess
    Prodigy 240 points

    Hi Lori,

    To follow up on this, based on the "tmdxiddk379d" hardware design with the root given below, which has EnDAT and Biss-C interfaces built-in in a single interface, it's using ePWM1, ePWM2, and ePWM3 for the inverter part, so if ePWM3 is consumed by EnDAT, how could this hardware design be functional?

    C:\ti\c2000\C2000Ware_MotorControl_SDK_4_01_00_00\solutions\tmdxiddk379d\hardware\IDDK_HwDevPkg_r2.2.1

    Thanks

    John

  • 0 in reply to John
    TI__Guru* 93800 points

    John,

    We have only released the T-format running with an IDDK project. There may indeed be conflicts with BiSS-C or EnDAT communication demos.

    I took a quick look at the EnDat and from the code it is using ePWM4, not ePWM3.

    Regards

    Lori

  • 0
    TI__Guru* 93800 points

    Steve, I took a quick look at the code and the solution is using ePWM4. I don't think ePWM1-3 should be in conflict.