• State
  • Locked Locked
  • Replies 3 replies
  • Subscribers 84 subscribers
  • Views 1196 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.

Motorware Lab11 vs Lab11a vs Lab20

James Smith99534
Intellectual 335 points
Other Parts Discussed in Thread: MOTORWARE

Hi,

We are bringing up a new project and getting ready to settle on a version of Motorware to start developing our application code on for a production product.

However, I am trying to determine which lab to base our software on and move forward with.  I was wondering if there is a recommended solution after the board bring up process has been completed.

Lab11 looks to be the simplest most basic motor control lab.  Nothing fancy, no motor ID, no rs online, just FAST with a software FOC.  This could work, but I think Rs Online might help us as the motors are pretty small high current motors.  I think it would be wise to have it.

Lab11a Adds the 'InstaSpin' features.  This looks like it is only Rs Online and the trajectory calculation?  With the trajectory basically just being a simple ramp (using the 027F, so no Motion).

Lab20 I am not entirely sure why this exists and could use some clarification, because I feel like there is something I am missing.  It looks like this lab should really fall somewhere before Lab 11.  Its still using the control object, but it is only using the PI controllers.  Are the ROM PI controllers better/more capable than the code based ones provided?  Am I missing something else?  Lab21 could have been implemented using Lab11+ as a base rather than Lab20, right (not that Lab21 is applicable to me)? Does this include Rs Online or motor ID?

Thanks for the clarification!

Jim

  • 0
    TI__Genius 15935 points

    Hi James,

    Thank you for your question. Your thread has been assigned to a C2000 expert and should get replied soon.

    Best regards,
    Chen

  • 0 in reply to Chen Jiang ti
    TI__Guru** 116090 points
    As the description in lab guide, lab11, lab11a and lab11b don't use controller object (ctrl and ctrlHandle), but other lab project include lab20 and lab21 use the controller object. The controller object is defined by rom code if using F2806x, but it is defined in user RAM/FLASH if using F2802x and F2805x, more detail can be found in lab02a and lab02b.
    You'd better to use the controller object as lab02a/b/c if you want to use the identification function.
  • 0 in reply to Yanming Luo
    Intellectual 335 points

    We should not need motor ID while in production.  It might be useful to the customer when they want to use new motors without our involvement, but that will be a second firmware to simplify the production code.

    In the lab11 description, TI explicitly states that production code should use as few ROM functions as possible.  That is something I agree with, but apparently not relevant for the 027F processor, as it is running open source code anyway.

    The end customer has some other requirements which might make using the full ctrl object a hassle, but from what I could tell the small ctrl object in lab20 would have been fine. 

    I just find the documentation/messaging a bit odd, where in lab11 TI completely removes the ctrl object and states ROM functions are not recommended for production code, then re-introduces the ctrl object later in lab20 as 'simplified' then continues to build off the simplified ctrl object.  I will likely stick to Lab11a as it should allow the most flexibility in customizing this software.

    Jim