• State
  • Locked Locked
  • Replies 2 replies
  • Subscribers 83 subscribers
  • Views 545 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.

Original question:

LAUNCHXL-F280049C: Adapting the Motor Control SDK Universal Project and Lab (sysconfig version) to the LAUNCHXL-F280049C

LAUNCHXL-F280049C: Adapting the Motor Control SDK Universal Project

Martin Blocher
Prodigy 85 points

Part Number: LAUNCHXL-F280049C
Other Parts Discussed in Thread: SYSCONFIG

Tool/software:

Hello,

Hello TI Team,

I'm trying to adapt the Motor Control SDK Universal Project and Lab to the LAUNCHXL-F280049C, for this I'm following the following guide: Universal Motor Control Project and Lab User’s Guide (Rev. A).

Due to my previous post LAUNCHXL-F280049C: Adapting the Motor Control SDK Universal Project and Lab (sysconfig version) to the LAUNCHXL-F280049C - C2000 microcontrollers forum - C2000Tm︎ microcontrollers - TI E2E support forums, I decided to go with the non sysconfig version, and simply using the tool as a validation tool.

 I'm using the following HW:

  • Encoder: Absolute angle through SPI;
  • Smart Gate Driver - DRV8353S.
  • ADC Feedback (4 channels):
    • 3 currents (Ia, Ib, Ic);
    • 1 Voltage (Vdc)

I managed to get the Smart Gate Driver going, still working on the encoder. But this should go smoothly as I can have a dedicated SPI bus for each HW part. Given this, I decided to follow the following strategy: QEP encoder based sensored-FOC (Table 3-1) (obviously I need to get rid of the QEP module, and implement encoder functionality through SPI).

Notice how the number of voltage phase sensors present in the hardware is 0. This was a design choice, I have to work with it. When changing the USER_M1_NUM_VOLTAGE_SENSORS to 0. I get a compilation error, which is expected when reading the description of the parameter. My question to you is the following: Does this prevent me from using this example given the HW? My initial analysis when reading through the document is a sensored solution without voltage feedback of the phase voltage would have been possible when using this example, by simply not using the FAST Libraries. (I also get a compilation error when removing the FAST symbols from the compiler).

The development time so far won't go to waste as a lot the initialization and configuration has been achieved, but I need to know ASAP if it is feasible to keep using this example, or if I should follow a different strategy. 

Thanks,

Martin Blocher