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.

DRV8889-Q1: is there any specific parameter setting requirements for the stall detection feature?

Part Number: DRV8889-Q1

Hi Team,

The customer would like to know if stall detection feature is being used, is there any requirements for the stepper motor? Is motor matching required? Thanks.

Best Regards,

Cherry

  • Hi Cherry,

    As long as the stepper motor is rated used within the recommended operating conditions specified on the datasheet, there should be no issue. Stall detection uses the back-emf and motor current to detect stall so no specific motor matching is required for stall detection. 

    More information on stall detection configurability can be found in section 7.3.11.5 of the datasheet, however the following settings must be set first:

    Smart Tune Ripple Control decay mode must be enabled, and EN_STL bit in CTRL5 register has to be '1' to enable stall detection.

    Best,

    David

  • Hi David,

    Thank you for the support.

    As the response from the link, "The resistance of your motor, 215 ohms, is very high.  This means IR losses are high over load and it is difficult for the DRV8889-Q1 to properly regulate current."

    So the customer would like to make sure if stall detection is not available for high resistance motors. Will stall detection have additional requirements for the motor? 

    Thanks and regards,

    Cherry

  • Hi Cherry,

    Yes, the customer is correct. If the motor resistance is to high, the coil current waveform will become distorted and will result in unreliable torque count and stall detection. 

    215 ohms does seem to be high and could cause problems in stall detection. 

    More information on stall detection and motor resistance for the DRV8889 can be found in the following app note:

    https://www.ti.com/lit/an/slvaei3/slvaei3.pdf 

    Best,

    David