quad blink vs rmc
@all
first the two methods were designed for completely different goals in mind. My desire to be able to control the speed of the motor for power generation is what lead me to this design and then that expanded to be able to create a test platform that would be able to dial back the amount of duty cycle that is being given to the motor.
To apply a more scientific comparison you must first start with a method that simulates the same events.
quad blink has four power periods for a 4 brush pair motor and 2 power periods for a 2 brush pair motor. in each of these the rotation is divided by four in the first and 2 in the second and the pulse given to that brush pair in the motor is full on for the entire time period that is allotted to that brush.
to accomplish a similar result with the rmc simply type 255 into the parameter that I have been showing everyone and you should get the exact same statistics that the quad blink program is getting both on mode 3 and mode 5, now why is this so. Because during the entire time period the pwm will not modulate the signal it will be at 5 volts throughout all off the time slices of the period. If you would check that you will I think see the exact same results. What we gain here is the ability to change that parameter and see if it is possible to have a more efficient use of the energy by reducing that number and retesting. Then we could examine mode 3 against mode 5 in a side by side comparison to see which is actually a more efficient use of the energy. None of us can know until real scientific method is applied as to which method will produce better results. If we start comparing apples to oranges it will not help us. To compare a single apple that is 2 inches in diameter to a single orange that is 4 inches in diameter and make the conclusion that all oranges are bigger than all apples is a huge mistake. Only by comparing thousands of apples to thousands of oranges can we come to a conclusion. Now I think that oranges may be larger than apples but I do not know for sure.
The multipulse method may prove to be inferior or superior to the single pulse method but at 255 they both will yield exactly the same results. Try it and you will see that that is the case. It cannot be otherwise for the pulse is 5 volts for the full duration of the period in both cases. So there will be no advantage to either method. When we reduce it to 128 there may or may not be a significant advantage but try to compare them to each other and the quad blink program which cannot dial down the amount of pulse and see what the difference to both are then. The idea here is to control the motor and the amount of electricity being consumed. I think that 90 volts is an unreasonable amount of voltage to try to spin this motor up to 3600 rpm.
Secondly this method at this point has a target of 3600 rpm. Although with only one parameter change you could easily target 5000. For a large motor which I would categorize the imperial as, that is plenty for the gold mine not nearly enough.
I totally agree with John Stone in this, We should test the single pulse method to see what we have. In order to pick and choose we need to test it side by side with the multi pulse method. That is possible because the rmc does exactly that. mode 3 should have the same exact result with the duty cycle set to 255 as the quad blink does. at 128 difference will be apparent both in amp and voltage consumption. the mode 5 will have advantages and disadvantages what we are looking for is the sweet spot for both methods. Changing the parameters allows this. I am working on a method that will allow us to change the duty cycle more easily from the serial monitor and will post that within the next couple of hours.
@all
first the two methods were designed for completely different goals in mind. My desire to be able to control the speed of the motor for power generation is what lead me to this design and then that expanded to be able to create a test platform that would be able to dial back the amount of duty cycle that is being given to the motor.
To apply a more scientific comparison you must first start with a method that simulates the same events.
quad blink has four power periods for a 4 brush pair motor and 2 power periods for a 2 brush pair motor. in each of these the rotation is divided by four in the first and 2 in the second and the pulse given to that brush pair in the motor is full on for the entire time period that is allotted to that brush.
to accomplish a similar result with the rmc simply type 255 into the parameter that I have been showing everyone and you should get the exact same statistics that the quad blink program is getting both on mode 3 and mode 5, now why is this so. Because during the entire time period the pwm will not modulate the signal it will be at 5 volts throughout all off the time slices of the period. If you would check that you will I think see the exact same results. What we gain here is the ability to change that parameter and see if it is possible to have a more efficient use of the energy by reducing that number and retesting. Then we could examine mode 3 against mode 5 in a side by side comparison to see which is actually a more efficient use of the energy. None of us can know until real scientific method is applied as to which method will produce better results. If we start comparing apples to oranges it will not help us. To compare a single apple that is 2 inches in diameter to a single orange that is 4 inches in diameter and make the conclusion that all oranges are bigger than all apples is a huge mistake. Only by comparing thousands of apples to thousands of oranges can we come to a conclusion. Now I think that oranges may be larger than apples but I do not know for sure.
The multipulse method may prove to be inferior or superior to the single pulse method but at 255 they both will yield exactly the same results. Try it and you will see that that is the case. It cannot be otherwise for the pulse is 5 volts for the full duration of the period in both cases. So there will be no advantage to either method. When we reduce it to 128 there may or may not be a significant advantage but try to compare them to each other and the quad blink program which cannot dial down the amount of pulse and see what the difference to both are then. The idea here is to control the motor and the amount of electricity being consumed. I think that 90 volts is an unreasonable amount of voltage to try to spin this motor up to 3600 rpm.
Secondly this method at this point has a target of 3600 rpm. Although with only one parameter change you could easily target 5000. For a large motor which I would categorize the imperial as, that is plenty for the gold mine not nearly enough.
I totally agree with John Stone in this, We should test the single pulse method to see what we have. In order to pick and choose we need to test it side by side with the multi pulse method. That is possible because the rmc does exactly that. mode 3 should have the same exact result with the duty cycle set to 255 as the quad blink does. at 128 difference will be apparent both in amp and voltage consumption. the mode 5 will have advantages and disadvantages what we are looking for is the sweet spot for both methods. Changing the parameters allows this. I am working on a method that will allow us to change the duty cycle more easily from the serial monitor and will post that within the next couple of hours.
Comment