Jan-Erik Soderholm wrote:
> Note that there is no need to have all servos "in sync". It might often b=
e
> easer to take care of one 1-2 ms puls at the time and at the end sum it u=
p
> to (aprox) 20 ms before starting over again. It might be more "work" for
> the processor to keep track of a number of pulses active at the same time=
..
> And the servios doesn't care if one servo gets its pulse first, then the
> second servo and so on.

Furthermore, depending on the sophistication of the servo's internal drive
electronics, the current pulse that the servo draws from the battery to
move the motor may be synchronous with the control pulse -- so staggering
the control pulses will also tend to even out the load on the battery.

Note that this is how standard (non-computerized) R/C transmitters and
receivers work. The pulses for the different channels are transmitted
sequentially, and the receiver simply demultiplexes them and applies them
to the servos with essentially the same timing.

-- Dave Tweed
--=20
http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist
.