View Single Post
  #6   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 15-01-2007, 09:54
Mike Copioli's Avatar
Mike Copioli Mike Copioli is offline
You make it pretty We make it dance
no team (Retired(3539, 217))
Team Role: Engineer
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Rookie Year: 2001
Location: Romeo
Posts: 454
Mike Copioli has a reputation beyond reputeMike Copioli has a reputation beyond reputeMike Copioli has a reputation beyond reputeMike Copioli has a reputation beyond reputeMike Copioli has a reputation beyond reputeMike Copioli has a reputation beyond reputeMike Copioli has a reputation beyond reputeMike Copioli has a reputation beyond reputeMike Copioli has a reputation beyond reputeMike Copioli has a reputation beyond reputeMike Copioli has a reputation beyond repute
Re: PWM 13-16 Replacement Code Beta Test

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kevin Watson View Post
Like Generate_Pwms(), my code only generates one pulse on each of the four outputs each time it's called. If called from Process_Data_From_Master_uP(), the update rate is ~38 Hz. Typical servos won't handle a rate much higher than this, but the Victors are okay to at least 100 Hz.

-Kevin
Ok, so does that mean you can not call it in the fast loop? If this is the case, is there an advantage to using PWM's 13-16? If the outputs can only be updated every 26.2 ms (38Hz) For example if I wanted to use 13 and 14 for camera servo control, to move 200 steps would take over 5 seconds if it moved in one step increments (200 * .0262s). I really would like to see the camera "snap" to a position. It seems that nasty little 26.2ms loop time keeps getting in the way.
__________________
Mike Copioli
CTRE Hardware Engineer
http://www.ctr-electronics.com

Team 3539 The Byting Bull Dogs
2013 Michigan State Champions
Team 217 The Thunder Chickens
2006 World Champions
2008 World Champions
2009 Michigan State Champions