ON 20050808@11:22:09 AM at page:
http://www.piclist.com/io/stepper/linistep/smoother.htm#38571.6970486111
James Newton[JMN-EFP-786] removed post 38571.6970486111
|Delete '
Ik vind het zeer frustrerend dat nederlanders steeds minder nederlandse sites maken.
Ik heb er zeer veel mooite mee de engels taal te begrijpen en toe te passen in de exacte kant van mijn hersenen.
Mijn technisch inzicht is hoog maar mijn taalontwikkeling is laag namelijk.
'
ON 20050816 at page:
http://www.massmind.org/techref/io/stepper/linistep/halfstep.htm
someone[--] edited the page. Difference:
"R:\bak\H\techref\io\stepper\linistep\halfstep.htm.20050816.dif"
ON 20050816 at page:
http://www.massmind.org/techref/io/stepper/linistep/index.htm
someone[--] edited the page. Difference:
"R:\bak\H\techref\io\stepper\linistep\index.htm.20050816.dif"
ON 20050817@12:22:14 PM at page:
http://www.piclist.com/io/stepper/linistep/halfstep.htm#38580.9956018519
James Newton[JMN-EFP-786] Published and replied to post 38580.9956018519 by ajay_281083
|Insert 'Just turn TWO coils on at the same time between the steps where you turn only one coil on. This creates a new set of positions half way between the standard, full step, positions and doubles the total positions in the system.' at: ''
ajay_281083@yahoo.com asks:
actualy how we get half step. I want the procedure of half step. which type of program you write to step down form 1.8degree to 1.4degree ie full step to half step.
|Delete 'P-' before: '' but after: 'amroe@tpg.com.au asks:
Great, useful site (and probably useful kits and concepts too). Perhaps it's my failing memory, but my recollection is that all the old disc drive stepper drives used "one coil on" for full steps, and "both coils on" for the half-steps when needed (rather than the other way 'round). The fact that 60%+60% typically yields similar torque to 100%+0% indicates that the "one coil on" positions are more efficient for motor geometry (ie, torque vs total current), although the "both coils on" positions" still win in overall efficiency because of the reduction in copper losses. I've looked into the +/-100%, +/-40% drive method, and it does seem to offer the smoothest possible operation, although I can't yet see how it would yield a 28% torque improvement for the same power input. That said, there is no down side, so I'm prepared to try it out, and once I digest the rest of the website I expect to contact you again for a parts order.
|Delete 'P-' before: '' but after: 'dirkderose@aol.com asks:
Bought it, built it, and then realized that my bi-polar motors (painstakingly chosen) will not work on it. The Linistepper seems perfect for my prototype if only it came in a bi-polar version! I need to buy it in a heartbeat.
|Delete 'P-' before: '' but after: ''
atul@essar.com asks: "
HI..
James i would like to have same controller using 89c51 micro controller. pls reply me about the same."
|Delete 'P-' before: '' but after: '