• State
  • Replies 2 replies
  • Subscribers 30 subscribers
  • Views 63 views
  • Users 0 members are here
Support feedback
Options
Options
Related

DRV8317HEVM: Source code example for DRV8317HEVM + LAUNCHXL-F280049C

Tran Thai
Prodigy 65 points
Part Number: DRV8317HEVM
Other Parts Discussed in Thread: LAUNCHXL-F280049C, DRV8320, DRV8317

Tool/software: 

Hi all,
I am working with 2 development boards DRV8317HEVM and LAUNCHXL-F280049C. 
I have followed the instructions in the document here https://www.ti.com/lit/ug/slvucl3/slvucl3.pdf
And I have successfully tested the sensorless FOC control with BLDC motor via GUI
 
As mentioned in GUI it is using example is05_motor_id for deployment.
but I checked in this example only DRV8301 and DRV8320 ​​driver is supported.


I found that drv8320 is quite similar to drv8317 so I continued to build and download this program to LAUNCHXL-F280049C. And follow this guide (https://dev.ti.com/tirex/content/C2000Ware_MotorControl_SDK_5_04_00_00/solutions/common/sensorless_foc/docs/labs/MotorControl%20SDK%20InstaSPIN%20Lab%20Guide.pdf) to implement it . However, it cannot run BLDC motor as I did with GUI.

So I have some questions:
1. Did I find correct example code? 

2. If #1 is right, Why I loaded this program but it doesn't run. Do I need to edit anything else?

Thanks all of you!

  • 0
    TI__Expert 4515 points

    Hello,

    This should be the right code in order to operate. Maybe the issue is that the GUI mentions SDK version 3.01.00 and you are using the 5.04.00 version. Can you try using the older 3.01.00 SDK version and see if the program runs correctly?

    Also, you made sure to follow all the instructions in the GUIDE?

    Since you were able to operate using the GUI, is it missing functionality that is causing you to switch to the SDK instead?

    Thanks,

    Joseph

  • 0 in reply to Joseph Ferri
    Prodigy 65 points

    Hi,
    I have tried both of version sdk 3.01.00 and 5.04.00 before. I have followed guide at chapter "is05_motor_id – Motor Parameters Identification" .
    And it gives the same issue.
    Do you have any suggestions onwork may have to edit somethings in this source code?