New Speed Controller Announced

[AllenGregoryIV]

http://www.itnewsonline.com/showprnstory.php?storyid=4972

This article covers the new speed controller that will be in the 2009 Kit of Parts it looks really interesting features include current and voltage sensing.

[neoshaakti]

ah man, no Victors next year ?

[vivek16]

Freaking awesome! This means we won't end up ripping victors off of old robots.

thanks, Vivek

[AllenGregoryIV]

We may still be able to use Victors next year.

Q. Can we use existing components (like speed controllers) with the system?
A The plan is to allow teams to use existing Victors (884), Spikes, and pneumatic solenoids. A few
new options are also in the process of being tested with pricing at or below the current costs
teams incur for these items.
From the FIRST Technical Q&A (http://first.wpi.edu/Images/CMS/First/2009FRC_CS_FAQ_Technical_Rev4.pdf)

[Travis Hoffman]

I really like the feature set of these, but my primary questions are....

....how many do we get in the kit, and how much will additional units cost? ;)

[Tom I]

Wait sorry, are you SURE there's no VIC's any more? that would be good news for us, having two years ago named our robot Sparky after it successfully blew up 4, yes four, VIC's through out the season! large amounts of flying sparks and magic smoke!

[Travis Hoffman]

Wait sorry, are you SURE there's no VIC's any more? that would be good news for us, having two years ago named our robot Sparky after it successfully blew up 4, yes four, VIC's through out the season! large amounts of flying sparks and magic smoke!

I wouldn't necessarily blame the HARDWARE for your magic smoke, as IFI's Victors have proven resilient for us time and time again, but per the article, the new controller does apparently offer a design that is more resistant to metal chips and such getting into the fan/MOSFET area. It also has color coded terminals to make wiring more straightforward and less susceptible to error.

The built in support for limit switch inputs is interesting.

[Tom I]

I wouldn't necessarily blame the HARDWARE for your magic smoke, as IFI's Victors have proven resilient for us time and time again,

No it was not the VIC's themselves. We thought metal filings were getting into them and frying them, but when the two replacement VIC's we put in blew as well, we discovered that two of the four drive motors both had a shorting problem, which caused a surge, which was why the VIC's sparked. unfortunatly it was too late to swap motors, so we had two CIMs per side but only one was powered.

[Greg Needel]

Here is the Luminary Micro FIRST robotics site. http://www.luminarymicro.com/jaguar

[Booksy]

There's a website for it: http://www.luminarymicro.com/jaguar.
Seems like a prettied up vic with a few extras.

oops, what are the chances of that?

[Lowfategg]

These look cool! They also look expensive.

[Travis Hoffman]

These look cool! They also look expensive.

They also look like they might take up more mounting space than an 884 array. We'll have to wait to get the dimensional info.

It's like old Pontiacs with the plastic body cladding (think Aztek) - I'd gladly do away with the gee whiz turbo look for a cleaner, more compact exterior.

The feature set still looks very promising, though.

[tdlrali]

Are those black holes RJ45 ports?

[Richard McClellan]

Are those black holes RJ45 ports?

Yes, RJ-45 is the new connector style that will connect everything to the cRIO, via CAN communication.

[artdutra04]

This is interesting news.

I am curious to see how they stack up against the Victor 884s, especially in the price, weight, size, and reliability/durability departments. Since the preliminary indications seem to note that both these and the Victor 884s will be legal this coming year, it would be nice if Luminary Micro began selling them before the kickoff date, so we could test them out first hand on previous/prototype robots.

Also, it's hard to tell from their CAD model, but where will the fan intake be? The top doesn't appear to be open, so does it draw from an opening in the back? Or are those little rib-like things in the front of the sides the air intakes? Depending on their airflow patterns, they may be easier to "stack" together to save space...

And for us mechanical nerds, it would also be nice if Luminary Micro posted CAD drawings of these online. Or at the very least, drawings of the mounting hole diameter and locations, as well as information on the counterbored area around these holes. :cool:

[dyanoshak]

Also, it's hard to tell from their CAD model, but where will the fan intake be? The top doesn't appear to be open, so does it draw from an opening in the back? Or are those little rib-like things in the front of the sides the air intakes?


Air intake is on the top; the rendering doesn't show it very well. There are exhaust ports on the sides and back of the plastics. The things on the front are for cable retention.

[Greg Needel]

Air intake is on the top; the rendering doesn't show it very well. There are exhaust ports on the sides and back of the plastics. The things on the front are for cable retention.

you seem to know alot about these. Judging from your location what is your relationship with these controllers? do you have any pictures you can post? especially ones with a size comparison to a victor would be helpful.

Do you know the cost or when they will be available?

[Dowjonesbotics]

those are awesome

[pogenwurst]

This sounds awesome -- however:

The Jaguar also includes features that will be utilized in FIRST Robotics Competitions after 2009. In addition to the powerful 32-bit computing and signal processing capabilities of the Stellaris MCU, Jaguar includes an industry-standard Controller Area Network (CAN) interface for real-time networking, a three-pin quadrature interface enabling precise position and speed control, and an analog input for an alternative method of servo operation.

Why would we not be allowed to use the quadrature interface until "...Competitions after 2009"? It seems a bit silly to buy speed controllers with 32-bit ARM chips, and then choose not to utilize the advanced features enabled by the use of such a chip.

[Cory]

Freaking awesome! This means we won't end up ripping victors off of old robots.

thanks, Vivek

It won't be so awesome for the teams who will have thousands of dollars in effectively useless Victors once FIRST transitions fully into the new control system.

I'm extremely concerned with the size of all the components of the new control system. All these pieces together are absolutely massive compared to what we've been using.

[sgreco]

It won't be so awesome for the teams who will have thousands of dollars in effectively useless Victors once FIRST transitions fully into the new control system.

I'm extremely concerned with the size of all the components of the new control system. All these pieces together are absolutely massive compared to what we've been using.

I saw the new control system, but how big is the new speed controller?

[Tomasz Bania]

It won't be so awesome for the teams who will have thousands of dollars in effectively useless Victors once FIRST transitions fully into the new control system.

I'm extremely concerned with the size of all the components of the new control system. All these pieces together are absolutely massive compared to what we've been using.

On the other hand, that may mean they will offer larger dimensions to fit all the new components in.

[acdcfan259]

It won't be so awesome for the teams who will have thousands of dollars in effectively useless Victors once FIRST transitions fully into the new control system.

I imagine there's ways to recycle some of the components.

[psyco_klown]

On the other hand, that may mean they will offer larger dimensions to fit all the new components in.

i doubt they would allow the size length and width to change do it still has to go through a doorway, but the height could change.

[Cory]

On the other hand, that may mean they will offer larger dimensions to fit all the new components in.

One can dream...doubt it though.

I'd rather get a weight allowance than a size allowance.

I saw the new control system, but how big is the new speed controller?
It looks significantly bigger, based on the fact that there would be no room for an RJ-45 connector on the 884's, but the new controllers have the jack plus room to spare.

[Richard McClellan]

I'd rather get a weight allowance than a size allowance.

Getting more weight allowance is not likely. It has been 148lbs the last few years (with battery and bumpers) because by OSHA standards, two people cannot safely lift more than 150lbs. If they increased the weight limit, you'd have to get 3 people to carry each robot.

[Nate Smith]

It's possible that the speed controller people and the control system people didn't get together in time to make it happen for 2009, and rather than throw more variables into what I can only assume is a somewhat already tested control system, they are only going to have basic use of the speed controllers for 09, and add in new features for the 2010 hardware. It may also just be a case of "the features are there, but the control system only supports v883 style control out of the box...experiment at your own risk." I'm sure we will find out more as things get closer...

[Travis Covington]

They also look like they might take up more mounting space than an 884 array. We'll have to wait to get the dimensional info.

It's like old Pontiacs with the plastic body cladding (think Aztek) - I'd gladly do away with the gee whiz turbo look for a cleaner, more compact exterior.


My concern, too.

[Qbranch]

When they announced the '09 controller, I didn't mind letting somebody else fiddle with it.

But these motor controllers... if they do everything they say they do well, they should be a knock out. I've been working with/around CANbus for about three years now and it's always been very stable and VERY robust (you can, afterall, short the bus completely out and nothing will smoke).

They have this unit at the NI Week convention in texas. I asked my remote observation unit (aka my dad) to go take a look at this new speed controller and see what he could find... it ended up he handed the phone to the guy from luminary so, just two minutes after I first read about it here, here I was talking to the guy who makes em! :ahh: Funny ol' world, isn't it.

Anyhow, they don't have all the specs nailed down yet, but so far they do know the speed controllers take an input of up to FOUR MEGAHERTZ (meaning, if you put a 1024 count encoder on a CIM motor's shaft, it could run at it's free speed and the processor wouldn't bat an eyelash) on the quadrature encoder input.

Also, the chop rate on the drive's output is 16KHz so no more angry buzzing first robots, now we'll have a nice whine that's way up at the top of we human's audible range (could be annoying, but probably will be barely detectable. 32-bit resolution over the duty cycle range from full on to full off, linear accross the entire range with 1-bit resolution (meaning minimum throttle is 0.00000002% instead of 10%).

Oh how I wish we had these speed controllers this year! Our autonomous would have been SO much smoother!

-q

[RyanN]

When I was at the Championship, I talked with the people extensively about the new control system. They said that there was a very good chance that we will still be able to use Victors on our robot.

[artdutra04]

It won't be so awesome for the teams who will have thousands of dollars in effectively useless Victors once FIRST transitions fully into the new control system.eBay! Just because Victor 884s might not be allowed in FRC in future seasons would not mean they've lost all use. They are really good speed controllers, and there are always other people (especially Battlebots community) who would buy them.

I'm extremely concerned with the size of all the components of the new control system. All these pieces together are absolutely massive compared to what we've been using.Gone are the days of giving the electrical and controls people a cubic foot of space and telling them to make it work... :rolleyes:

[ChrisH]

Gone are the days of giving the electrical and controls people a cubic foot of space and telling them to make it work... :rolleyes:

Obviously your mechanical people have been spoiling you. They have been giving you far too much volume ;)

[dpraedan]

I would be inclined to say that these controllers use the standard R/C PWM wiring scheme the Victors employ, seeing as a) the digital sidecar for the new system has standard PWM outputs and b) the PDF explicitly states it uses the standard R/C PWM servo interface.

[tdlrali]

Since when is big the new small? First the radios, then the maxi breaker panels & distribution blocks, then the new control system, and now the speed controllers...

[Al Skierkiewicz]

I have been estimating 6 lbs and about 1/2 cubic ft. for the control system alone. You can back into the size from the picture knowing that the pin spacing on the header is 0.1 inch or judging the two RJ 45 jacks. I am guessing that it is at least 1/2" wider and 1" longer than Victors.
16kHz is still audible to students and I can tell you from experience that 15,734 Hz is annoying to anyone under 50 and some over 50. I question the choice of switching frequency vs. the inductance of the motor windings though. Testing will confirm this.

[R.C.]

Maybe more teams will use the old Victors, they are still available.

[Joe Johnson]

16kHz is still audible to students and I can tell you from experience that 15,734 Hz is annoying to anyone under 50 and some over 50. I question the choice of switching frequency vs. the inductance of the motor windings though. Testing will confirm this.

The flyer (pdf) (http://stats.manticoretechnology.com/Data/285/2995/06B73A07-CA0D-4496-96C8-6B950DD9B0F3/mtcLogData.asp?ID=2995&Key=06B73A07-CA0D-4496-96C8-6B950DD9B0F3&ra=1196373670260&pn=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.luminarymicro.com%2Findex.php% 3Foption%3Dcom_remository%26func%3Ddownload%26id%3 D1081%26chk%3Df0898d38a4148609c91047defd272d25%26I temid%3D591%23nologin&rp=&sr=&cd=&tz=&ci=1&je=1&cc=&sg=&ip=&pc=&pt=NL+Download+Jaguar+One+Page+Flyer&af=&jsv=1.7&on=&ii=&ea=&cp=&epci=&vd=L3%3A&o_pce=30&o_pcsl=0&ml=&rd=1) I read said 20kHz. Am I mistaken?

As to claims of linearity, that depends on what you mean. The output may actually be very linear, but the system need not respond in a linear way.

My experience in automotive systems is that when you go from low PWM freq (100-400Hz) to higher PWM freq (10-20kHz), the motors do not respond the same, especially at low duty cycles.

For example, if, in order to get a system moving, we needed say 20% duty cycle at 100Hz, we would need to bump the duty cycle up to 30-40% at 10kHz PWM freq.

This was very puzzling but we eventually attributed this our mechanical system's time constant. At 100Hz, the mechanical system's time constant was such that the system had time to react during a single PWM pulse -- These "full on" pulses provided a kick to get the motors and gears turning. At 10kHz, the system can only react to the average not the individual pulses, so it required more on time to get things rolling.

It does not say in the flyer but I hope that the H-bridge is configurable in ways that are feedback loop friendly. What I mean is that you can drive motors via an H bridge in several ways.

ON = 12V, OFF = Open Circuit
ON = 12V, OFF = MOTOR LEADS SHORTED
ON = 12V, OFF = -12V #2 is very nice for feedback control of large arms for example.
#3 sounds very strange at first, but it can provide some very nice control features as well (thought it can be tough on the electronics) in this case
"OFF" for the motor is accomplished by outputting 50% 12V & 50% -12V.
"50% Forward" is accomplished by outputting 75% 12V & 25% -12V.
"25% Reverse" is accomplished by outputting 38% 12V & 42% -12V.As I said, it seems strange but it has some very nice behaviors. This type of control is called locked anti-phase motor control and I discuss this issue at length here (http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/showpost.php?p=427262&postcount=12)

Once they implement CAN, I hope that they also consider some other control friendly strategies:
using current messurements to allow for velocity (and even position) control without the use of encoders or other sensors. I discuss this here: What Dr Joe Wants for Christmas... (http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/showthread.php?t=38332) (Man, I love referencing myself ;-).
implementing PID control onboard the speed controller (send it your gains and from then on just give it a desired position -- let IT figure out what the PWM outputs should be)
Diagnostics, diagnostics, diagnostics. At a minimum teams will know if a speed controller has become unplugged -- I guess that feature alone would have changed the outcome of about 20% of the FIRST tournaments ever held. But open your mind a bit and you can imagine diagnostics that tell you if your motor is overheating, if your mechanism is binding up, if your wheel treads need to be replaced, etc. etc. The mind reels at the possibilities.It is only August, but it is looking more and more like Christmas to me...

Joe J.

[dlavery]

I notice that this press release comes from Luminary Micro, and not from FIRST. They are bold enough to announce that they "will be included in the FIRST Robotics Competition's (FRC) official Kit of Parts (KoP) and distributed to over 1,700 teams in the upcoming 2009 international FRC." This "announcement" has not yet been acknowledged or confirmed by FIRST. But I have heard rumors that the content for the 2009 KOP, and the associated rules about what is legal to use on the robots, have not yet been finalized. Therefore, I would surmise that this announcement may be a bit premature.

I have heard tales of some members of the GDC that are devious enough to pull an item out of the KOP specifically because the community got unauthorized advance knowledge of a part, and started to do pre-design and pre-build work before the season officially started. After all, wouldn't it be interesting if the entire community got all spun up about a rumored new "capability" that was then never actually included in the KOP? That would be an excellent way to divert their attention away from what was actually going to happen.

Nah, something like that would never happen. :rolleyes:

-dave



.

[AdamHeard]

I weary of the new system just because it is new, but a lot of these features are very interesting to me. I'm really interested to know more about the sensor feedback.

I notice that this press release comes from Luminary Micro, and not from FIRST. They are bold enough to announce that they "will be included in the FIRST Robotics Competition's (FRC) official Kit of Parts (KoP) and distributed to over 1,700 teams in the upcoming 2009 international FRC." This "announcement" has not yet been acknowledged or confirmed by FIRST. But I have heard rumors that the content for the 2009 KOP, and the associated rules about what is legal to use on the robots, have not yet been finalized. Therefore, I would surmise that this announcement may be a bit premature.

I have heard tales of some members of the GDC that are devious enough to pull an item out of the KOP specifically because the community got unauthorized advance knowledge of a part, and started to do pre-design and pre-build work before the season officially started. After all, wouldn't it be interesting if the entire community got all spun up about a rumored new "capability" that was then never actually included in the KOP? That would be an excellent way to divert their attention away from what was actually going to happen.

Nah, something like that would never happen. :rolleyes:

-dave



.


Brandon, can you ban his account? Please....?

[Klake]

One thing that I noticed (and do not like) is that there is no ventilation for the drive MOSFETs or etc inside. Driving 20amp motors will get them warmed up and those look like they will be nice and toasty.

[Al Skierkiewicz]

Joe,
I was referencing a previous post with the 16 kHz. At this and higher frequencies, the combined inductance and series resistance will produce a low pass filter that will serve to limit rise times and produce triangle waves instead of the the expected square waves. Glad to see you back on the forum.
Perhaps Richard, if you are reading this, can give us a handle on motor winding inductnce. I would think it would be pretty high, on the order of 100 mH. I won't be able to do any measurements for several days.

[sanddrag]

While the new control system (including these speed controls) is more capable than the old one, the increase in physical size is a lot. We would not be able to comfortably fit these components on any of our previous four robots.

[Alan Anderson]

One thing that I noticed (and do not like) is that there is no ventilation for the drive MOSFETs or etc inside.

Where did you "notice" this? It's contradicted by the Jaguar's reference sheet, and the ventilation grille on the top is recognizable as such in the posted image.

[ajlapp]

Once they implement CAN, I hope that they also consider some other control friendly strategies:
using current messurements to allow for velocity (and even position) control without the use of encoders or other sensors. I discuss this here: What Dr Joe Wants for Christmas... (Man, I love referencing myself ;-).
implementing PID control onboard the speed controller (send it your gains and from then on just give it a desired position -- let IT figure out what the PWM outputs should be)


From the tech at the Luminary booth here at NI Week.....

-full current sensing and feedback for position control, when they unlock the feature in '010
-onboard PID, you tell it the constants and it goes to work

The unit has a cool limit switch feature also built in. you can wire a limit switch directly to the esc for both directions of operation as a built-in software stop.

The standard pwm connection still applies for now. the CAN interface is either disabled or now allowed for our use, though the demo unit they were running was linked up via ethernet cable. looked pretty slick.

Woody said we'd be able to use victors this season to carry us through the transition. The most exciting news, is that both the FIRST rep and the NI rep said the price point for the Jaguar was going to be significantly less than the victor....."we'll be happy" were his exact words!

[Greg Needel]

From the tech at the Luminary booth here at NI Week.....


Any chance you can post some real photos of it with something for scale (a dollar bill)

[ajlapp]

I'll try to get some tomorrow.

It is slightly larger than the victor. The demo unit they used at Nationals had an NI protype of the device.

Compared to the cRIO the jaguar is only slightly different. They mentioned many times during their presentation that the new larger size was part of the game challenge.

Also interesting, everything here is Solidworks. they've given many impressive demos of labview directly interacting with Solidworks models. I'm not sure how this will play out in the future, since Autodesk is such a major FIRST supplier.

[Al Skierkiewicz]

Working from the picture on the flyer, (and by no means a scientific measurement) I get 3.6 x 2.4 inches. The Victor is 2.7 x 2.2 inches for comparison.

[ajlapp]

I scored a few comparison pics of the Jaguar next to a Victor....I uploaded them. I'll link them over as soon as they're approved.

[Travis Hoffman]

They mentioned many times during their presentation that the new larger size was part of the game challenge.



Was anyone dressed up in a purple suit saying, "It's all part of the plaaaaaaaaan", followed by some derisive cackling?


Working from the picture on the flyer, (and by no means a scientific measurement) I get 3.6 x 2.4 inches. The Victor is 2.7 x 2.2 inches for comparison.

"Yes, I'd like to Super Size my speed controller combo and add a jumbo distribution block, please."

"You want fries with that?"

[Greg Needel]

Pictures are up.....OMG that thing is HUGE




HUUUUUUGGGGEEEE Rochester HUUUUUGGGGE (anyone from upstate NY will get that reference)

[Lowfategg]

If you flip them on there sides and then stack them horizontally, it might not be that bad.

They do sort of dwarf the victors.

[Dave Flowerday]

Why is it that every single piece of the new control system seems to be twice the size (or more) of the old stuff? IFI's stuff was more-or-less 10 years old - you'd think that the advance in technology would make things smaller, or at least the same size considering there's more powerful stuff inside.

How much functionality are teams going to have to sacrifice to make room for all the extra space needed by the new stuff? I know several of the robots we have made in the past would simply not be possible now (2001 for example).

Another thought: with the increase in functionality offered in the new controllers I hope they're getting a very serious and thorough testing. Adding that much complexity and software to something that's as safety-critical as a speed controller definitely increases the risks of bugs. Having a bug in something that's supposed to turn OFF the motor when the robot is disabled would be scary... I think a lot of people have taken for granted that with IFI, when you disable the robot with a disable switch it is OFF. Personally, I'm not going near a robot w/ the new control system unless it is physically powered-off until I gain enough confidence that it works the way it's supposed to. As a software guy I know all too well that trusting software for my safety can be a dicey proposition.

[=Martin=Taylor=]

Pictures are up.....OMG that thing is HUGE

Yeah, its almost Pizzone sized (http://pizzone.ytmnd.com/) :D

So are PWM's optional now? LAN cables wouldn't fall out as much. Thats a major plus IMO.

[Travis Hoffman]

Yeah, its almost Pizzone sized (http://pizzone.ytmnd.com/) :D

So are PWM's optional now? LAN cables wouldn't fall out as much. Thats a major plus IMO.

LAN cables weigh a lot more and take up more space (I sense....a theme).

Plus you'd still have the problem of coiling the extra cabling if you didn't have a DIY RJ45 kit.

Dab o' hot glue for the win.

[Richard McClellan]

Yeah, its almost Pizzone sized (http://pizzone.ytmnd.com/) :D

So are PWM's optional now? LAN cables wouldn't fall out as much. Thats a major plus IMO.

For 2009, you have to use the PWM ports. The can bus (with the RJ-45 connectors) will not be available until "future years" which probably means 2010 because the CAN module that they have for the cRIO won't be in the kit for 2009.

[tdlrali]

Wow, judging by the pics, that thing is bigger yet than I imagined. Besides, what's with the round edges? We're not going for looks here, and square things just stack much better.

[lynca]

Here is the video from the Demo NItro robot at NI week 2008 and jaguar components on the MentorSearch Channel.

http://www.youtube.com/user/mentorsearch

[MikeDubreuil]

Here is the video from the Demo NItro robot at NI week 2008 and jaguar components on the MentorSearch Channel.

http://www.youtube.com/user/mentorsearch
I didn't realize the Victor supported SPI. WoW! :rolleyes:

... cool video anyway. Thanks.

NI is spending a lot of money promoting the Jaguar if it's not definite it will be included in the KOP :eek:

[lynca]

NI is spending a lot of money promoting the Jaguar if it's not definite it will be included in the KOP :eek:

If you dig around the MentorSearch Channel (http://www.youtube.com/user/mentorsearch) you can find a few more interesting videos about the Jaguar and VXworks

[MikeDubreuil]

If you dig around the MentorSearch Channel (http://www.youtube.com/user/mentorsearch) you can find a few more interesting videos about the Jaguar and VXworks
This (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2ikgguMKqBk)is a great video. Things I noticed:
It would be nice if the Brake/Coast feature was a switch and not a jumper. (People lose jumpers)
CAN looks very powerful. I love how you can daisy chain Jaguars together. This will keep wiring simple.
The Jaguars run on 12V (from the literature). Can you assume they know the robots electrical system will be 12V in 2009 with some sort of 24V transformer for the cRio?

[Richard McClellan]

This (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2ikgguMKqBk)is a great video. Things I noticed:
It would be nice if the Brake/Coast feature was a switch and not a jumper. (People lose jumpers)

The advantage of making it a jumper is so that you can connect it to one of your digital output ports and control it on the fly. Sometimes teams will use brake mode in autonomous and coast in user control, if that is what the drivers prefer.

CAN looks very powerful. I love how you can daisy chain Jaguars together. This will keep wiring simple.

I agree, this will be very slick. Unfortunately it won't be available the first year.

The Jaguars run on 12V (from the literature). Can you assume they know the robots electrical system will be 12V in 2009 with some sort of 24V transformer for the cRio?
They are aware of all the features of the new control system, and since all the motors are going to be 12V (I guess I can't say that with certainty, actually) it would make sense for the speed controllers to have 12V input.

[Greg Needel]

I wonder if teams will be able to use the CAN network even if it isn't supported. All you would need is to buy the CAN module for the rio and hook them up, unless they are hardware disabled this year. I wonder who the first team to do this will be. My money is on 111, or 330.

[Jon236]

Here's a good demo of the Jaguar. While it's clear from this that we won't use the CAN in 2009, no mention is given of the sensor support (Hall and encoders) mentioned in the press release.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2ikgguMKqBk

[Richard McClellan]

I wonder if teams will be able to use the CAN network even if it isn't supported. All you would need is to buy the CAN module for the rio and hook them up, unless they are hardware disabled this year. I wonder who the first team to do this will be. My money is on 111, or 330.

I asked about this at NI Week yesterday and they said that the FPGA image will not support the CAN module, and since you aren't legally allowed to change the image for 2009, so I guess you could do it, but it wouldn't be worth the effort since you'd have to get rid of it for competition anyways.

[Lowfategg]

I asked about this at NI Week yesterday and they said that the FPGA image will not support the CAN module, and since you aren't legally allowed to change the image for 2009, so I guess you could do it, but it wouldn't be worth the effort since you'd have to get rid of it for competition anyways.

I still can't think of a good reason for disabling it. If we can't use CAN then all these really end up being is really large Victors.

Also, since I am new to FRC, I am guessing it would be illegal to strip off the silly plastic case on these. Might help weight and size (as well as cooling!).

[Richard McClellan]

I still can't think of a good reason for disabling it. If we can't use CAN then all these really end up being is really large Victors.

The only reason for disabling it is to reduce complexity since getting the new system is a huge change on its own. They wanted to finalize the FPGA image early to allow ample time for testing, and didn't have time to include support for CAN.

So, yes, they are really large Victors, but there's still four advantages that will apply for 2009 -
1. lower cost than the victors
2. better protection from metal shavings getting inside
3. higher frequency output to eliminate the "whine" that all FIRST robots with Victors have, usually most noticable at low speed.
4. built-in limit switch control to stop motor from going one direction or another

Also, since I am new to FRC, I am guessing it would be illegal to strip off the silly plastic case on these. Might help weight and size (as well as cooling!).
Yes it probably will be illegal to do that. I agree it would help weight and size because the PCB inside is at least 1/4", maybe 3/8" smaller than the plastic housing on all sides. That would add up to a lot of space savings. But it really isn't worth the risk of getting metal shavings in because there's no protection.

I do know they did extensive thermal testing to make sure the fan and ventilation was adequate and ran the controller well above its designed limits, and didn't fry anything. It is designed to automatically shut off if it reaches 60A or above for more than 2 seconds. It takes a second or two to cool down, and then will turn back on.

[AdamHeard]

So, yes, they are really large Victors, but there's still four advantages that will apply for 2009 -
1. lower cost than the victors
2. better protection from metal shavings getting inside
3. higher frequency output to eliminate the "whine" that all FIRST robots with Victors have, usually most noticable at low speed.
4. built-in limit switch control to stop motor from going one direction or another

Eh, even with that, my team will be using victors in place of these for 2009 (as far as it is allowed). I can already see the size and weight savings being beneficial.

[Richard McClellan]

Eh, even with that, my team will be using victors in place of these for 2009 (as far as it is allowed). I can already see the size and weight savings being beneficial.

That seems logical, assuming you already have a supply of Victors lying around. For the teams that don't have a supply, it would be more difficult because the KOP will come with Jaguars, not Victors. They haven't said how many, but I would guess 4 since that's the usually number of motor controllers included. So that's an extra $460 for 4 Victors.

[Greg Needel]

That seems logical, assuming you already have a supply of Victors lying around. For the teams that don't have a supply, it would be more difficult because the KOP will come with Jaguars, not Victors. They haven't said how many, but I would guess 4 since that's the usually number of motor controllers included. So that's an extra $460 for 4 Victors.

I am going to wait for kickoff to make this decision to see if they are actually in the kit also how much they are each. With a ton of untested hardware this year it may be worth the extra money for victors just to know you have something that is bulletproof.

I think I must reiterate what Dave said, that FIRST hasn't said anything about these yet. While I am sure that there is some relationship don't get to excited or bent out of shape till you see them in your tote. Considering that they are hyping these things up without having the production cases on them yet doesn't instill much confidence.

[Joe Ross]

Here's a good demo of the Jaguar. While it's clear from this that we won't use the CAN in 2009, no mention is given of the sensor support (Hall and encoders) mentioned in the press release.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2ikgguMKqBk

It wouldn't make sense to have the sensor inputs active, without a way to do anything with them (ie send them over the CAN bus).


Another thought: with the increase in functionality offered in the new controllers I hope they're getting a very serious and thorough testing. Adding that much complexity and software to something that's as safety-critical as a speed controller definitely increases the risks of bugs. Having a bug in something that's supposed to turn OFF the motor when the robot is disabled would be scary... I think a lot of people have taken for granted that with IFI, when you disable the robot with a disable switch it is OFF. Personally, I'm not going near a robot w/ the new control system unless it is physically powered-off until I gain enough confidence that it works the way it's supposed to. As a software guy I know all too well that trusting software for my safety can be a dicey proposition.

If done correctly, moving the limit switch handling to the speed controller will increase safety, as that functionality is small, easy to test, and (hopefully) unable to be overridden. I would be much more scared if all of this was built into the core operating software.

I can't name all the times we've had a software logic error which rendered limit switches or another safety device ineffective.

[MikeDubreuil]

I asked about this at NI Week yesterday and they said that the FPGA image will not support the CAN module,
They better have a free upgrade service for the new software. I don't want devices in the KOP that require me to purchase something (in this case at least an emulator) to upgrade their functionality.

[MikeDubreuil]

I can't name all the times we've had a software logic error which rendered limit switches or another safety device ineffective.
That's Dave's point... what process is in place to qualify the software? Will the software pass a safety board?
With IFI's system and the Victor I feel comfortable putting my finger in a pinch point if the system is in the disabled state. I will not for a couple years with the Jaguars.
... the million dollar question for me is why Luminary Micro would like to step into the motor control business? What do they have to gain given their current product line? I don't understand.

[Billfred]

-full current sensing and feedback for position control, when they unlock the feature in '010
Perhaps someone can find this out: If we go wild on speed controllers for 2009, will we be able to enable these features in 2010 when it's the night before ship day and we need just that one extra speed controller?

[EricVanWyk]

... the million dollar question for me is why Luminary Micro would like to step into the motor control business? What do they have to gain given their current product line? I don't understand.

Luminary is not getting into the motor control business. They are in the motion control controller business. The Jaguar is essentially a reference design that shows professional EEs how easy it is to create a strong motor control algorithm using their processors.

I'm an electrical engineer, which means I have sales reps and vendors trying to sell me on their product lines all the time. Usually this involves them bringing in food in exchange for an hour of our listening time. Invariably, they bring in demo boards - power points just don't cut mustard. I'll bet you lunch that their sales reps will be have these in their demo boxes by February.

I doubt very much they are doing this for the money. They are doing this for the same reasons NI is:
1) They get the FIRST message.
2) They get targeted effective advertising to their core market.
3) They know they'd be stupid not to.

[Richard McClellan]

Perhaps someone can find this out: If we go wild on speed controllers for 2009, will we be able to enable these features in 2010 when it's the night before ship day and we need just that one extra speed controller?

I'm not exactly sure I understand the question, are you asking about availability of the Jaguars? As far as I know the current plan is to distribute them via Digikey, for any controllers needed on top of what's included in the kit

[Al Skierkiewicz]

The Jaguars run on 12V (from the literature). Can you assume they know the robots electrical system will be 12V in 2009 with some sort of 24V transformer for the cRio?[/LIST]

Mike,
The power distro has a 12 to 24 volt convertor built into it to run the CRIO.

[Greg McKaskle]

Perhaps someone can find this out: If we go wild on speed controllers for 2009, will we be able to enable these features in 2010 when it's the night before ship day and we need just that one extra speed controller?

The speed controller FW will upgradable via CAN. So any features currently disabled because of missing SW/FW are field fixable.

In response to another posted question. FPGA updates on the cRIO are done via a PC based tool, which is free.

[Adam Y.]

Luminary is not getting into the motor control business. They are in the motion control controller business. The Jaguar is essentially a reference design that shows professional EEs how easy it is to create a strong motor control algorithm using their processors.


I agree. If you look at their demonstration boards the only motor application that is missing is a regular DC motor application which is generally the most trivial. I don't know if they plan on making money with the Jaguar. Some companies adopt a loss leader approach to these products while others tend to price their products to correspond to the cost of manufacturing.
As far as I know the current plan is to distribute them via Digikey, for any controllers needed on top of what's included in the kit
That is not good. Digikey tends to mark up the prices from the manufacturers prices. Not by that much but it is a little irritating to pay ten dollars more.

[dtengineering]

Digikey tends to mark up the prices from the manufacturers prices. Not by that much but it is a little irritating to pay ten dollars more.

I can't comment on Digikey's markup, but do want to point out that for Canadian customers Digikey ships from within Canada, meaning that each order saves about $35 in brokerage fees relative to companies that ship UPS from the states. (Yes, pretty much EVERY order of robot parts out of the USA goes through a brokerage firm, and you can end up paying a $35 brokerage fee on a $10 part.) They also bill in Canadian dollars, which makes some of the book-keeping a bit easier. Their delivery time is much faster for Canadian customers than USA-only suppliers, unless you feel like spending $50-$100 on international express shipments.

I would be delighted to see Digikey as part of the FIRST supply chain... so long as they keep these controllers in stock north of the border as well!

Jason

P.S. And a big "thank you" to Andy Mark for shipping from within Canada and eliminating brokerage fees.

[yodameister]

Not cool. Not cool at all!:p

Pictures are up.....OMG that thing is HUGE




HUUUUUUGGGGEEEE Rochester HUUUUUGGGGE (anyone from upstate NY will get that reference)

[Tom Line]

Being a controls guy who was converted from Mechanical, can someone explain what "CAN" is and why it is so beneficial?

[Kingofl337]

Intelitek Uses CAN on our industrial line of CNC products.

Short Version: CAN is basically a serial communication standard that allows devices to be daisy chained.

Controller -> Device -> Device -> Device -> Device -> Terminator

Long Version: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Controller_Area_Network

[Kevin Sevcik]

CAN == Controller Area Network. It's a multicast serial network protocol and bus specification. In this case CAN 2.0A/B, which is a little more flexible and faster. The Jaguar flyer declares a 1Mbit/s rate, but doesn't bother us with piddling details like what application protocol they're planning on using.

In practical terms, it's a 3-6 wire bus that you'd connect all of your speed controllers and other CAN devices to, either daisy chaining through devices or branching out from hubs, but avoiding loops. Then the cRIO would talk to EVERY device on the bus, sending it commands and receiving data back at a reasonably good data rate. It's all digital, so you worry much less about noise mucking with your analog signals or interrupts or speed controller frequency drift mucking with your commands to the motors. Plus, you could get feedback from the speed controllers if they're equipped to sense current, etc.

Primary downside would be that you're now running (probably) 5 wires to each speed controller, sensor, etc. Plus every new device on the network reduces the speed you can talk to the others. And finally, bus termination, addressing, and a host of other details become pretty important to keeping communication fast and stable.

If you want a slightly technical description in more MechE terms, a CAN bus is something like if you had an intercom system in your house, where your only option was to talk to all the stations at once. Since it's a multicast bus, you have to announce just who your messages and replies are intended for so a conversation would go something like: "Hey Tom, I need your credit card info to pay for this spiffy new FRC controller." To which you might reply, "Hey Kevin, I'm still broke from the last FRC gadget you had me pay for!" And so on.

Also, since it's a multicast bus, you might get two people trying to talk at once. This could obviously cause confusion, which CAN solves in a few different ways, depending on the physical implementation. The simplest is that some messages have a higher priority than others and basically talk over the other messages. If a speaker hears someone talking over them, they wait till the end of that message then try again. There's various other methods, but the upshot is that everyone gets their say eventually, but some people have a higher priority than others.

The downsides I listed above equate to problems like trying to talk to two people with the same name, throughput problems if 40 people are all trying to talk at once, and physical problems like someone falling asleep with his finger on the Speak button and snoring over everyone. Of course, it's still better than the tin-can phones and telegraphs we're currently using.

Response to Adam:
Short Version: CAN is basically a serial communication standard that allows devices to be daisy chained.

Controller -> Device -> Device -> Device -> Device -> Terminator Other network topologies are possible if you're using repeaters. Industrial versions can admittedly get a little pricey, but if FIRST is making us a bunch of other stuff anyways it'd make some things a little easier.

[Qbranch]

CAN is why it takes so long to feel comfortable driving a hybrid electric vehicle.

Nothing is connected to what it controls! :ahh:

-q

(oh yeah and it carries control signals about airplanes and farm equipment, along with the occasional power plant, generator set, etc... the company I've worked for for the past three summers makes (among other things) CAN enabled industrial control modules)

[Joe Ross]

As to claims of linearity, that depends on what you mean. The output may actually be very linear, but the system need not respond in a linear way.

My experience in automotive systems is that when you go from low PWM freq (100-400Hz) to higher PWM freq (10-20kHz), the motors do not respond the same, especially at low duty cycles.

For example, if, in order to get a system moving, we needed say 20% duty cycle at 100Hz, we would need to bump the duty cycle up to 30-40% at 10kHz PWM freq.

This was very puzzling but we eventually attributed this our mechanical system's time constant. At 100Hz, the mechanical system's time constant was such that the system had time to react during a single PWM pulse -- These "full on" pulses provided a kick to get the motors and gears turning. At 10kHz, the system can only react to the average not the individual pulses, so it required more on time to get things rolling.

Through the private beta test channels, I asked these types of questions. They just released some test data publicly, which show a very nice linear response without any slow starting when driving a CIM motor. http://forums.usfirst.org/showthread.php?t=10182

[The Lucas]

I'm bumping this thread to link to the Luminary Micro's Jaguar Motor Controller Characterization thread (http://forums.usfirst.org/showthread.php?p=18429) on the First Forums and attaching a copy of the excel sheet (for those who are not FIRST Forum members). This is obviously very important data for everyone to consider when controlling their robot and I am glad they can provide it to us so early in the process (thanks Joe Hershberger ).

EDIT: I started writing this post before Joe Ross posted (beating me to it) but got side tracked. I guess we think alike for where to post this data in this older thread.

A few comments: I am impressed with the linearity of the CIM Speed vs Pulse Width. However, I am not sure (and not qualified to speculate not a ME) how well this will linearity will translate to speed of a motor under load (normal 4 motor drive of 130 lb bot). In my experience, at lower powers on the victors the drive motors just hum so will the jaguars just hum (depending on gearing obviously) for a the lower portion of these graphs. Maybe a fast rise like the victors is better in this case?

[rwood359]

A few comments: I am impressed with the linearity of the CIM Speed vs Pulse Width. However, I am not sure (and not qualified to speculate not a ME) how well this will linearity will translate to speed of a motor under load (normal 4 motor drive of 130 lb bot). In my experience, at lower powers on the victors the drive motors just hum so will the jaguars just hum (depending on gearing obviously) for a the lower portion of these graphs. Maybe a fast rise like the victors is better in this case?

The linearity (assuming that it holds under load) makes it easier to build a table replacement for a custom response curve. Define the dead zone, fast rise to first motion, low slope at low speed for precise control, steeper slope to get to full speed.

[Al Skierkiewicz]

Brian, Joe and Dr. Joe,
These functions are more attributable to the segment spacing of the commutator vs motor speed vs PWM switching frequency. Each motor type will respond differently and the overall inductance of the windings will play a part as well. Often linearity is affected as much by the mechanical frictions within the motor and the load at low RPM as with any of the other variables. The "hum" in motors controlled by Victor controllers, I believe, is directly attributable to the low PWM frequency and short pulse duration. I have often observed teams who failed to calibrate the controllers and were supplying minimum pulse widths to their motor at rest. These short pulses were sufficient to bump the motor armature but could not supply enough current to overcome the friction in the drive train. One of the advantages to using 12 volt PWM is to get the motor moving while giving some speed control at low RPM. I expect the higher switching frequency to produce less hum in future systems. The upcoming season will give us some data on linearity under real world loads, stress on the motor in forms of heating, brush and commutator arcing, RF interference, etc. It will be interesting.

[Doc Wu]

HUUUUUUGGGGEEEE Rochester HUUUUUGGGGE (anyone from upstate NY will get that reference)

Hey, he was a sponsor of team 1507 for two years...

:)

[jskene]

According to an NI video on the RIO, its dimensions are: 11.3" x 3.5" x 2.3", and it weighs 2.2 lb.

It will also withstand a 50g impact, so it sounds like it could do double duty as a bumper.:)

[Russ Beavis]

As the Chief Inspector, I feel obligated to point out that bumpers (per the 2008 robot rules) are only allowed to weigh up to 3 ounces per inch of length. Unfortunately, the cRIO weighs 3.12 ounces per inch.

Sorry. You can't use the cRIO as a bumper. ;)

Russ

[Sam N.]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2ikgguMKqBk

I'm very distressed because they're very large. Victors were tall but didn't have a very large footprint.

Jaguar footprints seem to be more than twice that of Victors'.

[billbo911]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2ikgguMKqBk

I'm very distressed because they're very large. Victors were tall but didn't have a very large footprint.

Jaguar footprints seem to be more than twice that of Victors'.

Here is the key to relieving your stress. Consider the size of the Jaguar as just another design constraint. :rolleyes:

[Joe Ross]

Just for the heck of it, I found the specs for the speed controller that was used before the Victor, the Tekin Rebel. It is 1.8x1.4x1.1 inches. That makes the Victor (2.7x2.2x2.1 in) approximately twice the size of the Tekin Rebel.

I then searched the 1999 and 2000 forums of chiefdelphi, and didn't see a single person complaining about the size of the Victor.

The Victors were so much better then the Tekins that no one cared that they were bigger. Based on the data and specs of the Jaguars, I think they will be so much better that in 2 years, no one will care that they are bigger then the Victors.

[Aren_Hill]

from what i can tell (i'm mostly mech) the pro's of this new controller should be a big enough improvement for the extra space to be worth it to design around. The response and smoothness that apparently is there will be really nice for drivers as it should smooth out the low speed precision maneuvers that are often required.

(i still love victors though)

[Kingofl337]

The jump to from the Victors to the Jaguars is small compared to the change from the Tekin to the Victors. The Tekin's used to constantly suffer from spontaneous combustion, it was extremely frustrating how often they would go.

The Victors have been very solid throughout their tenure. For non PID related control I don't think we really need much more. But, for control loops the Jaguars sound like a godsend. Allot will also depend on the cost of one vs the other.

[AustinSchuh]

But, for control loops the Jaguars sound like a godsend.

Ok. Now you have me interested. Could you explain your logic?

[EricVanWyk]

Ok. Now you have me interested. Could you explain your logic?

The Jaguar has several interesting features aimed at tighter control loops. Unfortunately, only some of these will be useable this year.

1) The speed vs input command is linear. The Victor is highly non-linear, which prompted many teams to wrap a linearizing function around it.

2) The update rate is faster.

3) The chop rate is much faster.

* Features not yet accesible to teams *

4) The processor in the Jaguar is about an order of magnitude more powerful than the entirety of the old control system in terms of raw math throughput.

5) Direct quadrature encoder input

6) Analog input - for POTs?

7) True voltage control - This translates to direct speed control.

8) True current control - This translates to direct torque control.

9) High speed serial (CAN) communication to the cRIO which will allow you to send higher level commands

10) On-board PID loops.

http://www.reuters.com/article/pressRelease/idUS144446+05-Aug-2008+PRN20080805

I'm excited.

[jskene]

Not to mention:

- integrated limit switch inputs
- instantaneous current monitoring (this feature would have saved our team several $100 Victors)
- instantaneous temperature monitoring

[samir13k]

I really like the feature set of these, but my primary questions are....

....how many do we get in the kit, and how much will additional units cost? ;)

It looks like we are going to get 4 jaguar's in the kit, and their cost is 92.50 before the FIRST discount.

[samir13k]

can anyone email me a inventor file of the new jaguar?

samir13k@hotmail.com

I cant seem to find any inventor models of the new parts. I am currently working on a model of the cRio, but it will probably take me up to 2 more days.

[utlinebacker]

Hello,

This is my first post to Chief Delphi, but it is certainly an important one!

My name is Scott Emley, and I am the product marketing manager at Luminary Micro. This seems to be the highest concentration of FRC teams and mentors, so this is where I am starting on getting the word out:

Luminary Micro has partnered with Digi-Key to make available the new Jaguar (MDL-BDC) speed controller to all FRC teams! Of course, you will receive a predetermined number of Jaguar speed controllers in your KoP distribution, and this program is designed to provide FRC teams exclusive access to additional speed controllers for a >30% discount to the normal resale price. The Jaguar discount program is only available to FRC teams and only through Digi-Key by visiting: http://sales.digikey.com/dkes/FirstRoboticsCompetition.asp
(http://sales.digikey.com/dkes/FirstRoboticsCompetition.asp)

To qualify for the discount, you must enter in your team information, a shipping address within the general geographical location (state/country) of your team, and you must enter a valid phone number so the FRC Order Team at Digi-Key can validate your identity and thus honor your discount request.

It is important you remember to use the Digi-Key link above – or you will be like the rest of the world and have to pay full price. Don’t be distracted because Luminary Micro has several worldwide distributors (including Digi-Key) that will be carrying the Jaguar at full price.

By the way, Luminary Micro has unveiled the Jaguar to the rest of the world as a reference design, and now is a good time to remind teams that, while you might read or realize the full potential of the Jaguar on Luminary Micro’s website, the official FRC 2009 game rules (or restrictions for that matter) have not been announced. More explicitly, I discourage you from monkeying with the firmware on the Jaguar ---- even though you might be tempted. (I'm an engineer... I understand this temptation.) :)

As far as documentation is concerned, I've just uploaded the first revision of the Jaguar Getting Started Guide on the Jaguar microsite at http://www.luminarymicro.com/jaguar. I'll keep referring to this site for the latest documentation regarding the Jaguar, so I encourage you to bookmark the link.

Looking forward to supporting you guys this year.

Best Regards,
Scott

P.S. I see #47 all over the place on this forum... and I love it!

[utlinebacker]

can anyone email me a inventor file of the new jaguar?

samir13k@hotmail.com

I cant seem to find any inventor models of the new parts. I am currently working on a model of the cRio, but it will probably take me up to 2 more days.

I forgot to mention: I went ahead and uploaded the Jaguar's IGES file on the Jaguar microsite at http://www.luminarymicro.com/jaguar.

Regards,
Scott

[Tristan Lall]

Scott, I've quoted your post on the FIRST Forums (http://forums.usfirst.org/showthread.php?t=10418), so that teams who miss this thread will have another shot at finding the appropriate Jaguar information.

FIRST has been asking the control system beta test teams to aggregate their own information there, so it would be worth duplicating future postings on the subject to that forum as well.

[Qbranch]

I forgot to mention: I went ahead and uploaded the Jaguar's IGES file on the Jaguar microsite at http://www.luminarymicro.com/jaguar.

Regards,
Scott

Scott/utLB,

Thanks for your efforts in helping out FIRST kids worldwide!

I have a question about your company. Do you guys manufacture/fab your own parts or do you guys do the design and somebody else does the fab?

I'm a hardcore microchip lover so I don't think I'll ever stop (in the forseeable future) using them, but for high performance motion control applications, your products are very interesting... especially the ability to get parts that are both communications powerful and still incorporate a good assortment of motion control components.

I don't want to get this thread too off topic, so I'll make my last question short... do your parts come in a QFN or other itty bitty surface mount package?

Thanks,

q

[EricVanWyk]

I'm a hardcore microchip lover so I don't think I'll ever stop (in the forseeable future) using them, but for high performance motion control applications, your products are very interesting... especially the ability to get parts that are both communications powerful and still incorporate a good assortment of motion control components.


Q - I was a hardcore microchip fan, as I used them nearly exclusively through college. After playing with a few Luminaries, I am converted. My microcontroller heart is split between Luminary and Cypress.



I don't want to get this thread too off topic, so I'll make my last question short... do your parts come in a QFN or other itty bitty surface mount package?


http://www.luminarymicro.com/products/product_selector_guide.html
They list SOIC-28 LQFP-48/64/100 BGA-108. LQFP is about as small as I can solder by hand.

[Qbranch]

Thanks Eric.

Still not sure I'll be an instant convert or whatever, but I am interested in playing with some of these micros.

-q

[Tom Line]

Will this discount be season-long or will it end soon? Important to know for teams who want to purchase some!

[ajlapp]

I forgot to mention: I went ahead and uploaded the Jaguar's IGES file on the Jaguar microsite at http://www.luminarymicro.com/jaguar.

Any chance you can supply a complete solid model of the housing? The iges file imports as a shell which can be troublesome to work with.

Is Luminary aware that it is common for teams to purchase many of these during a season? Teams that construct 2 complete robots may purchase 10-15 of these in a single season!

If these are purchased for non-FIRST applications will their full potential be available?

Thanks.

[Richard McClellan]

According to the Getting Started guide, it is recommended to have 1/2" of empty space on the left and right side of each Jaguar speed controller. If you were to mount two Jaguars with their sides adjacent to each other, can this 1/2" space overlap, or would you need a total of 1" of space in between the two?

[Gdeaver]

One thing teams will have to be aware of is that according to the manual, if there is an over current or temperature condition, the motor controller will shut down. The PWM input will have to go to neutral for the motor controller to go active again. For 2009 we will not have any feed back from the motor controller to know that it is in shut down. Teams will have to decide how to detect and reset the motor controller. For the drive this will probably be the responsibility of the driver. For arms and other uses a controller reset button may be useful. Going forward in 2010 with the CAN control method this condition can be handled in software and the user can be alerted that a shut down occurred. Also with proper monitoring code, the controller could implement strategies to stop the controller from going into hard shut down. First team are used to using total open loop controllers and have only been protected from faults by the circuit breakers. How to deal with intelligent controllers is something teams will have to work on in the future. This year without 2 way communication with the motor controller, the victors may be a better choice for uses other than drive motors.

[EricVanWyk]

This year without 2 way communication with the motor controller, the victors may be a better choice for uses other than drive motors.

...provided teams are willing to pay ~40$ more and put up with a highly non-linear drive characteristic in favor of footprint and a lack of a latching over-current protection.

IMHO, the only advantage the victor has is size. The cost advantage and the linearity advantage leads me to believe that the Jaguar will see a lot of play this year.

[Tom Bottiglieri]

IMHO, the only advantage the victor has is size. The cost advantage and the linearity advantage leads me to believe that the Jaguar will see a lot of play this year.
Any extra motor controllers we buy will be Jaguars. It is a cheaper component and is more future proof for this competition. Seems like a no brainer to me.

[s1900ahon]

Scott/utLB,
I have a question about your company. Do you guys manufacture/fab your own parts or do you guys do the design and somebody else does the fab?
.....
I don't want to get this thread too off topic, so I'll make my last question short... do your parts come in a QFN or other itty bitty surface mount package?


Luminary Micro is a fabless semiconductor company, so we contract the fab to a foundry. We license the ARM Cortex-M3 core and integrate it into our SoC devices, like the LM3S2616 which is at the heart of the Jaguar motor controller.

The QFN package is not part of the portfolio at the moment.

[s1900ahon]

One thing teams will have to be aware of is that according to the manual, if there is an over current or temperature condition, the motor controller will shut down. The PWM input will have to go to neutral for the motor controller to go active again.

I'll have to check on whether this is still true. It was the case for the firmware for the Rev0 versions, but after discussions with FIRST I thought the decision was made to change this so that it would start back up again after the fault period. I will check on this and update the documentation if in error.

Thanks for pointing this out.

UPDATE: Not true anymore. The manual is out of date and is being updated. The PWM input does not have to return to neutral before the motor controller goes active again. This was the behaviour of the original prototype, but was soon changed.

[Dave Flowerday]

IMHO, the only advantage the victor has is size. The cost advantage and the linearity advantage leads me to believe that the Jaguar will see a lot of play this year.
There's only a cost advantage if you're comparing buying new Victors to buying new Jaguars... most teams have plenty of Victors already from prior seasons. Free is a lot cheaper than $75...

[AdamHeard]

...provided teams are willing to pay ~40$ more and put up with a highly non-linear drive characteristic in favor of footprint and a lack of a latching over-current protection.

IMHO, the only advantage the victor has is size. The cost advantage and the linearity advantage leads me to believe that the Jaguar will see a lot of play this year.

Wait... so your telling me that for this season, a victor's only advantage is size? The fact that a an overcurrent on a jaguar causes it to shutdown until a neutral signal is given scares me. Do you know how hectic it is for a driver in a match? How is he immediately supposed to diagnose an overcurrented controller and stop? The alternative being building some some sort of electronic monitering also doesn't appeal to me. Even if could be entirely done in code, the fact we have to send a nuetral signal upsets me.

With the victors, I've never seen one overcurrent in recent times. Heck, I've never had a 40 amp breaker pop during a match on any team I've been on in recent times.

You just made my team's decision for us. I had even got over my dislike of the new system, I had no unfair bias against it. Even if the jaguar doesn't overcurrent often, we'll be using victors. I feel IFI deserves it (2 robots with 6-10 motor controllers each is a lot of business for IFI, we don't have many spares), as for some reason it became cool for some at FIRST to hate them and make snide remarks whenever possible. I love IFI for what they did, and I hope oneday I'll learn to love NI, Luminary Micro, and the other companies for their new system (that love has to be earned with proven reliability and results, so I'm not bashing the new system).

We were seriously considering using all Jaguars for the "better performance".... but IFI is good people.

[Richard McClellan]

The specifications table states that the Fan On temperature is 42 degrees Celcius and the Fan Off temperature is 38 degrees Celcius

The last Q&A question states:
Jaguar (MDL-BDC) turns the fan on when it is running a motor. By default, Jaguar (MDL-BDC) does not turn the fan on until you start to drive. Jaguar (MDL-BDC) will turn the fan off when the module is not driving
a motor and the internal temperature is safe.

So my question is, does the fan come on when you start running a motor, or when the temperature hits 42 degrees, or both?

[utlinebacker]

Scott/utLB,
Thanks for your efforts in helping out FIRST kids worldwide!

I have a question about your company. Do you guys manufacture/fab your own parts or do you guys do the design and somebody else does the fab?

I'm a hardcore microchip lover so I don't think I'll ever stop (in the forseeable future) using them, but for high performance motion control applications, your products are very interesting... especially the ability to get parts that are both communications powerful and still incorporate a good assortment of motion control components.

I don't want to get this thread too off topic, so I'll make my last question short... do your parts come in a QFN or other itty bitty surface mount package?
q

Hi q,

>>Do you guys manufacture/fab your own parts or do you guys do the design and somebody else does the fab?

[Emley] We use an external foundry, which provides economical and technical advantages for us. (For instance, we take advantage of automotive-grade Flash memory)

>>I'm a hardcore microchip lover so I don't think I'll ever stop (in the forseeable future) using them, but for high performance motion control applications, your products are very interesting... especially the ability to get parts that are both communications powerful and still incorporate a good assortment of motion control components.

[Emley] I hear from lots of folks that were just like you - that then got experience with ARM Cortex-M3, and then never looked back. But, out of genuine respect of all the great things that Microchip has done for the FIRST community over the past years, I will try not use my posts to explicity (or purposely) evangelize you. If you catch me "being a marketer", hold me accountable. ;)

>>I don't want to get this thread too off topic, so I'll make my last question short... do your parts come in a QFN or other itty bitty surface mount package?

[Emley] We currently offer Stellaris ARM Cortex-M3 microcontroller solutions in 28-SOIC, 48-LQFP, 64-LQFP, 100-LQFP, and 108-BGA. Our beat-rate of products is unprecedented, so if you don't see what you need, don't forget to look back every few months.

Regards,
Scott

[utlinebacker]

Will this discount be season-long or will it end soon? Important to know for teams who want to purchase some!

Great question: The FRC discount is not a promotion, but rather a season-long way for us to contribute to your success as an FRC teammate or mentor.

The FRC discount is planned to last (at least) throughout the FRC2009 competition season - so don't panic.

Regards,
Scott

[utlinebacker]

Any chance you can supply a complete solid model of the housing? The iges file imports as a shell which can be troublesome to work with.

Is Luminary aware that it is common for teams to purchase many of these during a season? Teams that construct 2 complete robots may purchase 10-15 of these in a single season!

If these are purchased for non-FIRST applications will their full potential be available?

Thanks.

Unfortunately, I cannot supply a complete solid model at this time.

As for non-FRC apps, the full "raw potential" of the Jaguar is available. The short version of the story: you need CAN to enable Jaguar's non-FRC2009 features and we purposely stunted the Jaguar's CAN API development until after FRC2009 (for the purpose of FRC2009). So, the full potential is available, but the method to unleash these features (CAN) is purposely not yet so easy to use that a marketer like me could do it.

(Did I just cut myself down?)

Regards,
Scott

[s1900ahon]

The specifications table states that the Fan On temperature is 42 degrees Celcius and the Fan Off temperature is 38 degrees Celcius

The last Q&A question states:

So my question is, does the fan come on when you start running a motor, or when the temperature hits 42 degrees, or both?

The fan turns on when you start running the motor.

The fan turns off when you stop the motor, 10 seconds pass, and the temperature is 38 degrees C or less.

The intent of this is to avoid wasting your battery at the start of a match. The fan (ebmpapst 412 FH) is spec'd at 0.8 W (66 mA 12 V). By extension, the fans of 8 motor controllers draw more than half an amp waiting for the match to start. Yeah, nothing compared to what the motors draw during the match, but little bit helps, and it was simple enough to implement (a MOSFET and some software).

[s1900ahon]

According to the Getting Started guide, it is recommended to have 1/2" of empty space on the left and right side of each Jaguar speed controller. If you were to mount two Jaguars with their sides adjacent to each other, can this 1/2" space overlap, or would you need a total of 1" of space in between the two?

Yes, the 1/2" space can overlap.

[s1900ahon]

The fact that a an overcurrent on a jaguar causes it to shutdown until a neutral signal is given scares me.


I've checked on this and the Jaguar does not require a neutral signal following a fault (anymore). The original prototype firmware of Jaguar did, but it was fixed a long time ago. The documentation is incorrect and will be changed shortly.


With the victors, I've never seen one overcurrent in recent times. Heck, I've never had a 40 amp breaker pop during a match on any team I've been on in recent times.


Not surprising. A presentation at the 2008 FIRST Robotics Conference by Al Skierkiewicz says the breakers can function for a few seconds with up to 600% over current and almost 10 seconds up to 200% over current. See http://first.wpi.edu/Images/CMS/First/2008FRC_Electrical_Design_Skierkiewicz.ppt

In testing at Luminary Micro, we drove a 150 lb robot rather mercilessly and didn't experience an over current fault. The only time an over current fault was generated was when the wheel of the robot was locked.

[utlinebacker]

Please note that we have just updated the Getting Started Guide (rev JAGUAR-GSG-02) at http://www.luminarymicro.com/jaguar.

Regards,
Scott

[Dave Flowerday]

I've checked on this and the Jaguar does not require a neutral signal following a fault (anymore). The original prototype firmware of Jaguar did, but it was fixed a long time ago. The documentation is incorrect and will be changed shortly.
Please note that we have just updated the Getting Started Guide (rev JAGUAR-GSG-02) at http://www.luminarymicro.com/jaguar.
Maybe this isn't the same thing that you were talking about, but the just-posted Getting Started guide says that when the Jaguar is reset (because of a tripped breaker), you need to return it to neutral before it will accept incoming PWM signals. This seems like AdamHeard's comment is therefore still valid.

[s1900ahon]

Maybe this isn't the same thing that you were talking about, but the just-posted Getting Started guide says that when the Jaguar is reset (because of a tripped breaker), you need to return it to neutral before it will accept incoming PWM signals. This seems like AdamHeard's comment is therefore still valid.

The FAQ is (still) wrong and will be updated shortly.

[waialua359]

Can someone confirm that the jaguar sold by Digikey is in fact the ones we can order already in advance for this year's game? I couldnt find the post of the vendors, if I recall, that either offered them or had them at a discount.
Sorry, dont want to read 100+ posts to maybe find the info here.

[billbo911]

Can someone confirm that the jaguar sold by Digikey is in fact the ones we can order already in advance for this year's game? I couldnt find the post of the vendors, if I recall, that either offered them or had them at a discount.
Sorry, dont want to read 100+ posts to maybe find the info here.

Here you go. http://sales.digikey.com/dkes/FirstRoboticsCompetition.asp

From post #102. It took me two minutes to find it.

[utlinebacker]

The FAQ is (still) wrong and will be updated shortly.

Please note that we have just updated the Getting Started Guide (rev JAGUAR-GSG-04) at http://www.luminarymicro.com/jaguar to reflect this change.

Sorry for any confusion.

Regards,
Scott

[waialua359]

Here you go. http://sales.digikey.com/dkes/FirstRoboticsCompetition.asp

From post #102. It took me two minutes to find it.

thanks for saving me the trouble.
:D :D

[billbo911]

thanks for saving me the trouble.
:D :D

You are quite welcome;)
Mahalo

[Clinton Bolinger]

Does any one know if there is a way to monitor the state of the limit switches for debugging purposes? Maybe by adding a LED in series with the Limit switches or something?

-Oris-

[jskene]

This information is available on the data sheet available from Luminary:

http://www.luminarymicro.com/products/rdk-bdc.html

[Kevin Sevcik]

Does any one know if there is a way to monitor the state of the limit switches for debugging purposes? Maybe by adding a LED in series with the Limit switches or something?

-Oris-
Your best bet is to get some double pole microswitches and wire one pole into the Jag, and the second pole into a digital sidecar or something else. When we have access to the CAN interface, the state will be monitored from there, but that's not happening this year.

[billbo911]

Your best bet is to get some double pole microswitches and wire one pole into the Jag, and the second pole into a digital sidecar or something else. When we have access to the CAN interface, the state will be monitored from there, but that's not happening this year.

The limit switch input for the Jag are normally closed. So, it would be possible to build a simple LED driver board that would turn on an LED if it saw the ground go away.
This, of course, is subject to the rules.

[Kevin Sevcik]

The limit switch input for the Jag are normally closed. So, it would be possible to build a simple LED driver board that would turn on an LED if it saw the ground go away.
This, of course, is subject to the rules.
It occurs to me that you could use the NO side of the micro switch to drive your LED to the ground of the Jaguar. You'd want to grab your source voltage from some safe 5V supply, possibly on the Jag itself. Though this only tells you the position of your limit switch, not necessarily what the Jag is reading.

Reading the actual pin on the Jag would be trickier, as you'd need to make very certain you're no accidentally pulling the input high or low with your circuit.

[cicib99]

does anyone know exactly how big this is?

or has anyone found or made and inventor version yet? :D

[lynca]

Luminary Micro has CAD files posted
http://www.luminarymicro.com/products/mdl_bdc.html

[cicib99]

I couldnt find the CAD files. I downloaded one thing but it was only documents talking about it

[vivek16]

Here's a direct link to the download: http://www.luminarymicro.com/index.php?option=com_remository&func=download&id=1128&chk=c27017c2f321baef455d73a74eaf5125&Itemid=591

www.luminarymicro.com/jaguar