• State TI Thinks Resolved
  • Locked Locked
  • Replies 1 reply
  • Answers 1 answer
  • Subscribers 81 subscribers
  • Views 118 views
  • Users 0 members are here
Support feedback
Options
Options
Similar topics

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.

TMS320F28378D: Support for Hiperface, HDSL, Biss-C and Endat encoders

Aitor Amonarriz
Prodigy 10 points
Part Number: TMS320F28378D
Other Parts Discussed in Thread: CONTROLSUITE

Hi,

I have been researching the implementation of different absolute encoders (Endat, Biss-C, Hiperface and Hiperface DSL) on the TMS320F28378D. While I've found some support for Endat and Biss-C in older versions of ControlSuite using the CLB, it appears that this support has been removed in newer versions, so after reviewing the CLB programming documentation, I've come across several examples, but I'm struggling to understand how to implement these interfaces based on the available information. Is there any additional documentation that is more focused on absolute encoders?

Furthermore, in Biss-C interface documentation in ControlSuite, it is mentioned that using CLB blocks eliminates the need for additional peripherals appart from SPI and XBARs. However, I'm curious as to why HDSL requires more resources, as discussed in this thread.

Thanks for your time,

Aitor

  • 0
    TI__Guru* 89465 points

    Hello Aitor,

    Our MotorControl SDK has an implementation for T-Format that is fully documented (https://www.ti.com/tool/TIDM-1011)

    The T-Format documentation can give you an idea of what role the CLB and the SPI have along with what is left to the CPU software. The BiSS-C and EnDat2.2 demos follow a similar resource allocation. Unfortunately we don't have any additional documentation on the BiSS-C and EnDat2.2 to offer. 

    I was recently made aware of this article (not by TI employees), which you may find interesting. 

    https://www.mdpi.com/2079-9292/12/4/886

    For HDSL our finding was implementation of the interface required more of the CPU processing bandwidth.

    Regards,

    Lori