SPRUHJ0C April   2013  – October 2021 TMS320F28068M , TMS320F28069-Q1 , TMS320F28069M , TMS320F28069M-Q1

 

  1. 1Read This First
    1. 1.1 About This Manual
    2. 1.1 Glossary
    3. 1.1 Support Resources
    4.     Trademarks
  2. 1 F2806xM InstaSPIN-MOTION Enabled MCUs
  3. 2InstaSPIN-MOTION Key Capabilities and Benefits
    1. 2.1 Overview
    2. 2.2 FAST Unified Observer
    3. 2.3 SpinTAC Motion Control Suite
      1.      IDENTIFY
      2.      CONTROL
      3.      MOVE
      4.      PLAN
    4. 2.4 Additional InstaSPIN-MOTION Features
  4. 3InstaSPIN-MOTION Block Diagrams
    1.     Scenario 1: InstaSPIN-MOTION Speed Control with FAST Software Encoder
    2.     Scenario 2: InstaSPIN-MOTION Speed Control with a Mechanical Sensor
    3.     Scenario 3: InstaSPIN-MOTION Position Control with Mechanical Sensor and Redundant FAST Software Sensor
  5. 4Application Examples
    1. 4.1 Treadmill Conveyor: Smooth Motion Across Varying Speeds and Loads
    2. 4.2 Video Camera: Smooth Motion and Position Accuracy at Low Speeds
    3. 4.3 Washing Machine: Smooth Motion and Position Accuracy at Low Speeds
      1.      Agitation Cycle
      2.      Spin Cycles
    4. 4.4 InstaSPIN-MOTION Works Over the Entire Operating Range
  6. 5Evaluating InstaSPIN-MOTION Performance
    1. 5.1 Overview
    2. 5.2 Velocity Control Performance: SpinTAC vs PI
      1. 5.2.1 Disturbance Rejection
      2. 5.2.2 Reference Tracking
      3. 5.2.3 Step Response
    3. 5.3 Position Control Performance: SpinTAC vs PI
      1. 5.3.1 Disturbance Rejection
      2. 5.3.2 Reference Tracking
      3. 5.3.3 Step Response
      4. 5.3.4 Inertia Estimation Repeatability
  7. 6Microcontroller Resources
    1. 6.1 CPU Utilization
    2. 6.2 Memory Utilization
    3. 6.3 Pin Utilization
      1.      A Resources
        1.       B Definition of Terms and Acronyms
          1.        C Revision History

5.2 Velocity Control Performance: SpinTAC vs PI

For Velocity control, the performance of the SpinTAC controller was compared to a PI controller. Both controllers used the FAST software observer.

Each controller was tuned using the same method. For the Estun motor these controllers were tuned experimentally by injecting 25% rated torque (45 oz-in) disturbances while running the motor at 100% rated speed (3000 rpm). This resulted in the following gains:

  • PI Speed Controller
    • Kp = 20
    • Ki = 0.098
  • SpinTAC Speed Controller
    • Bandwidth = 35 radians/s

The inertia used by the SpinTAC speed controller was estimated with the dyne coupled with the motor. The value was found to be 0.483 A / (krpm/s).

For the Teknic motor these controllers were tuned experimentally by injecting 50% rated torque (19.4 oz-in) disturbances while running the motor at 50% rated speed (2000 rpm). This resulted in the following gains:

  • PI Speed Controller
    • Kp = 9
    • Ki = 0.03
  • SpinTAC Speed Controller
    • Bandwidth = 16 radians/s

The inertia used by the SpinTAC speed controller was estimated with the dyne coupled with the motor. The value was found to be 4.23 A / (krpm/s).

These gains were held constant throughout all of the tests. This was done purposefully in order to highlight the wide operating range of the SpinTAC speed controller.