Re: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] Re: Was Chopper circuit - Now ver 3.2, G298
Posted by
Paul R. Hvidston
on 2002-04-09 13:06:51 UTC
Hi Alan,
Why bother with a PIC for a L297 replacement, unless you wanted to add some
rudimentary microstep capability? Would a PIC be cheaper? The L297 can do
half-step and full-step, but adding microstepping would require a DAC and
control logic. I guess a PIC could replace the L297 and microstep control
logic. I see the "G298" as a wonderful way to easily get a powerful
half-step driver going very economically. If you want max performance at a
great price, the G210 is still the way to go. How 'bout developing a
double-sided PC board for the L297 circuitry?
Now since the H-Bridge is essentially the same on a stepper- and on a
servo-driver, I would love to play with a PIC as a servo controller feeding
half a "G298". Still, not as much bang-for-the-buck as compared to the G320,
but still, the bare "G298" fills a market need.
Let's see, could I up the switching frequency and use the "G298" as the
power stage for a class-D stereo audio amp? Probably not, but I'm having
lots of fun just thinking of ways to use a "G298" ;-)
Regards,
Paul R. Hvidston, N6MGN
ACKSYS Engineering
Upland, CA
Why bother with a PIC for a L297 replacement, unless you wanted to add some
rudimentary microstep capability? Would a PIC be cheaper? The L297 can do
half-step and full-step, but adding microstepping would require a DAC and
control logic. I guess a PIC could replace the L297 and microstep control
logic. I see the "G298" as a wonderful way to easily get a powerful
half-step driver going very economically. If you want max performance at a
great price, the G210 is still the way to go. How 'bout developing a
double-sided PC board for the L297 circuitry?
Now since the H-Bridge is essentially the same on a stepper- and on a
servo-driver, I would love to play with a PIC as a servo controller feeding
half a "G298". Still, not as much bang-for-the-buck as compared to the G320,
but still, the bare "G298" fills a market need.
Let's see, could I up the switching frequency and use the "G298" as the
power stage for a class-D stereo audio amp? Probably not, but I'm having
lots of fun just thinking of ways to use a "G298" ;-)
Regards,
Paul R. Hvidston, N6MGN
ACKSYS Engineering
Upland, CA
----- Original Message -----
From: "Alan Marconett KM6VV" <KM6VV@...>
To: <CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Tuesday, April 09, 2002 11:47 AM
Subject: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] Re: Was Chopper circuit - Now ver 3.2, G298
> Hi Mariss, Paul,
>
> Yes! It does sound like an interesting project. Now all we have to do
> is "publish" a simple plan (and code) for a PIC or PAL replacement for
> the '97.
>
> Alan KM6VV
>
>
> mariss92705 wrote:
> >
> > Paul,
> >
> > We just got back to California an hour ago from the "clinic"
> > (Princeville, north shore on Kauai, a week of R&R on the beach).
> >
> > Yeah, I know, I got it mixed up. It will in fact be called the G298.
> >
> > While I was there, I worked out the layout and will have gerber files
> > late this week after I clean them up. Prototype PCBs perhaps late
> > next week. Should be a cool new product.
> >
> > Mariss
> >
> > --- In CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO@y..., "Paul R. Hvidston" <paulh@u...> wrote:
> > > And call it a G298 ;-)
> > > I'm hip man. Count me in.
> > >
> > > Paul R. Hvidston, N6MGN
> > > ACKSYS Engineering
> > > Upland, CA
Discussion Thread
Alan Marconett KM6VV
2002-04-09 12:03:31 UTC
Re: Was Chopper circuit - Now ver 3.2, G298
Paul R. Hvidston
2002-04-09 13:06:51 UTC
Re: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] Re: Was Chopper circuit - Now ver 3.2, G298
Alan Marconett KM6VV
2002-04-09 14:58:04 UTC
Re: Was Chopper circuit - Now ver 3.2, G298
Paul R. Hvidston
2002-04-09 15:13:44 UTC
Re: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] Re: Was Chopper circuit - Now ver 3.2, G298
Tony Jeffree
2002-04-09 17:42:32 UTC
Re: Was Chopper circuit - Now ver 3.2, G298
Alan Rothenbush
2002-04-09 18:05:08 UTC
Re: Re: Re: Was Chopper circuit - Now ver 3.2, G298
Alan Marconett KM6VV
2002-04-09 19:05:27 UTC
Re: Was Chopper circuit - Now ver 3.2, G298
Larry Edington
2002-04-09 19:35:00 UTC
Re: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] Re: Was Chopper circuit - Now ver 3.2, G298
Peter Homann
2002-04-09 22:38:32 UTC
RE: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] Re: Was Chopper circuit - Now ver 3.2, G298
tonyjeffree
2002-04-09 23:25:48 UTC
Re: Was Chopper circuit - Now ver 3.2, G298
Paul R. Hvidston
2002-04-12 06:56:43 UTC
Re: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] Re: Re: Re: Was Chopper circuit - Now ver 3.2, G298
ballendo
2002-04-14 03:51:26 UTC
next, replace the 297 was Re: Was Chopper circuit - Now ver 3.2, G298
mariss92705
2002-04-14 09:15:24 UTC
next, replace the 297 was Re: Was Chopper circuit - Now ver 3.2, G298
tonyjeffree
2002-04-14 20:12:22 UTC
Indexer
scottdbtnet
2002-04-26 15:06:36 UTC
Re: Re: Was Chopper circuit - Now ver 3.2, G298
Paul R. Hvidston
2002-04-26 16:00:05 UTC
Re: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] Re: Re: Was Chopper circuit - Now ver 3.2, G298
scottdbtnet
2002-04-26 21:50:49 UTC
Re: Was Chopper circuit - Now ver 3.2, G298
scottdbtnet
2002-04-26 21:53:18 UTC
next, replace the 297 was Re: Was Chopper circuit - Now ver 3.2, G298
Alan Rothenbush
2002-04-27 09:35:45 UTC
Was Chopper circuit - Now ver 3.2, G298
Steven J. Owen
2003-05-09 14:40:04 UTC
Indexer
Keith Bowers
2003-05-09 16:40:08 UTC
Re: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] Indexer
CL
2003-05-09 18:07:33 UTC
Re: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] Indexer
Harvey White
2003-05-09 19:23:06 UTC
Re: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] Indexer
stevenson_engineers
2003-05-10 02:06:20 UTC
Re: Indexer
David A. Frantz
2003-05-10 11:35:15 UTC
Re: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] Indexer