Instaspin-BLDC on LAUNCHPADXL-F28027 + BOOSTXL-DRV8301

I don't know if anyone has exactly. The BOOSTXL-DRV8301 wouldn't support the full InstaSPIN-BLDC solution as there isn't a total shunt current return value so you can't close the current loop. You could run just the IS-BLDC commutation though.

I know that TI is about to release a TI Design example that is very similar to BOOSTXL-DRV8301, just increases voltage and current and uses DRV8303. For this one they changed the current sampling circuit so Ibus is available. I know they are testing this with IS-BLDC.

Thank you very much for your answer. I do understand that not all of the example functionality can be implemented on the booster board. I would be happy with just a basic PWM duty cycle control example using the flux integration technique. Just wanted to save myself some time porting it myself.

I am curious when the new booster board with the ibus capability will be out. Probably by then I have already graduated to my own hardware anyways. :)

"I am curious when the new booster board with the ibus capability will be out. "

To be clear, this will be a reference design. The HW will not be for sale. Might be helpful in creating your own hardware, but it won't have the proper current sensing for InstaSPIN-FOC (it just has a bus current).

I see, thanks for the explanation.

I am still waiting for my DRV8312-C2-KIT to arrive. (waiting for over a month now for it to ship :/ ) I will hopefully be able to test the provided example soon. Maybe I will also get a control card with instasipin support for that evaluation kit so that I can test both approaches with the same power stage.

It would just be nice if both algorithms could be tested side by side with a bit less expensive and better available evaluation kit. :)

my understanding is that the DRV8312 kits are on backorder because of the motor availability. Apparently there is a strike with the dock workers so the package is stuck at a port!

"It would just be nice if both algorithms could be tested side by side with a bit less expensive and better available evaluation kit. :)"
Yes, I can see how that would be nice. While they both share the InstaSPIN name they are quite different and since we introduced InstaSPIN-FOC we always recommend it for higher performance and much quicker time to getting a properly tuned sensorless system.

"my understanding is that the DRV8312 kits are on backorder because of the motor availability. Apparently there is a strike with the dock workers so the package is stuck at a port!"

I actually meant the DRV8301-C2-KIT but thanks for letting me know about the shipping issues. I have to wait patiently for my kit to arrive. It would just be nice if the ti store was bit more verbose about the reasons for delays. It is easier to wait if one knows better what is going on. :)

"Yes, I can see how that would be nice. While they both share the InstaSPIN name they are quite different and since we introduced InstaSPIN-FOC we always recommend it for higher performance and much quicker time to getting a properly tuned sensorless system."
The fact that the two are so different is exactly the reason why I want to test them against each other. The problem with the InstaSPIN-FOC is that it needs to go through the tuning phase (even though the motor identification is mostly automatic) for every new motor you throw at it. If your application requires the controller to be able to cope with semi random motors this might be an issue. Also the need for more current sensors increases the cost of the hardware. I do understand the theoretical benefits of the FOC approach vs trapezoidal. I just want to see what the real benefit (not just as promotional materials) of the two approaches put side by side on my own bench and see how I can harness either one or both for the application at hand.

You are saying that you recommend the "quicker time to getting a properly tuned sensorless system" does that mean that there is more than just one flux coupling threshold parameter to tune in the BLDC approach, as claimed by the promotional materials? (besides the rpm and current outer loops) Is that a more complicated process than the motor identification (at least 4 parameters) and I/Q PID loop parameters (another 2 to 6 parameters) needed for a well tuned FOC approach? (again ignoring the rpm outer control loop)

I'll check on the DRV8301.  I think the manufacturer is waiting on some out of stock components.

user4301368 said:

You are saying that you recommend the "quicker time to getting a properly tuned sensorless system" does that mean that there is more than just one flux coupling threshold parameter to tune in the BLDC approach, as claimed by the promotional materials? (besides the rpm and current outer loops) Is that a more complicated process than the motor identification (at least 4 parameters) and I/Q PID loop parameters (another 2 to 6 parameters) needed for a well tuned FOC approach? (again ignoring the rpm outer control loop

InstaSPIN-BLDC makes it reasonably easy to choose a flux threshold for proper 6-step commutation. But tuning the inner current loops, and if your application requires - tuning the outer speed loop can be challenging if you don't have any experience.  Also, the commutation itself is inherently less stable than the FAST observer used in InstaSPIN-FOC. It has a much smaller area of operation. FAST works at much lower speeds, highest speeds, and most dynamic use.

Also, a sensorless BLDC approach can be achieved by very, very low cost micros (as stated we run a simplified version of InstaSPIN-BLDC on MSP430) so it's hard to justify a Piccolo class/cost device.

unfortunately the lowest end device with InstaSPIN-FOC and CAN is the 80 pin F28052FPNT
in the future I'm sure this will be addressed on new Piccolo variants.

Sorry for the duplicate post title, I tried replying to the original, but the reply button isn't available anymore.. 

e2e.ti.com/.../410032

I know that TI is about to release a TI Design example that is very similar to BOOSTXL-DRV8301, just increases voltage and current and uses DRV8303

I was wondering what higher voltage the reference design targets?  I have a high voltage application (260V) but thought the DRV8303 is only 60V, just like the DRV8301.   Also not familiar with ' IS-BLDC'..  is this something related to measuring the bus current for purposes of detecting motor fault?

Finally regarding implementing the BLDC Trapezoidal commutation on the MSP430 (DRV8312-430FR-KIT), that comes in the form of a binary blob correct? i.e. it's not open source?    Incidentally, someone did do an open source version but not sure how it compares with TI's offering:

dangerousprototypes.com/.../viewtopic.php

the only "high" voltage design we have is the TMDSHVMTRINSPIN EVM. This supports 350Vdc and about 10A. People have used this with different IPMs to achieve up to 30-40A.

IS-BLDC = InstaSPIN-BLDC you can read about it here: www.ti.com/instaspin-bldc

Yes, the 430FR kit includes InstaSPIN-BLDC binary only. The MSP430 team isn't supporting this code for development purposes. You might be better off using the open source version.