View Single Post
  #14   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 03-10-2012, 14:05
Tom Bottiglieri Tom Bottiglieri is offline
Registered User
FRC #0254 (The Cheesy Poofs)
Team Role: Engineer
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Rookie Year: 2003
Location: San Francisco, CA
Posts: 3,186
Tom Bottiglieri has a reputation beyond reputeTom Bottiglieri has a reputation beyond reputeTom Bottiglieri has a reputation beyond reputeTom Bottiglieri has a reputation beyond reputeTom Bottiglieri has a reputation beyond reputeTom Bottiglieri has a reputation beyond reputeTom Bottiglieri has a reputation beyond reputeTom Bottiglieri has a reputation beyond reputeTom Bottiglieri has a reputation beyond reputeTom Bottiglieri has a reputation beyond reputeTom Bottiglieri has a reputation beyond repute
Re: FRC Blogged: - Motor Controllers

Quote:
Originally Posted by andreboos View Post
I'm somewhat worried about this change from a control perspective - last year there were reports of Jaguars losing their state when they lost power, so any CAN configuration commands (PID, voltage ramping, e.g.) had to be re-sent. This will become much more common if overcurrent results in tripping breakers and resetting Jaguars rather than just disabled motors.

I am hoping that this can be solved by enabling the overcurrent protection by default, but allowing it to be disabled via CAN if a team knows what they are doing, or they do not care if the Jaguar resets. This way, if it does reset, the overcurrent protection will be reenabled when it does.
There are plenty of teams who know what they are doing and elect to not use the CAN bus, ourselves included. The current limit seemed to be a bit too "safe" and was pretty annoying.
Reply With Quote