Electronics > Projects, Designs, and Technical Stuff

Measuring Revolutions: Analog to digital conversion (Comparators?)

<< < (5/6) > >>

jpanhalt:
I have used the AMS AS5048A to measure angles on equipment.  It is very similar to what you have, but is not what I would choose if all I wanted was precise RPM velocity and acceleration.  Something that gives distinct pulses per revolution (say, 8
 ) would be simpler.  I have not checked whether such is available in a magnetic version.  Magnetic coupling is convenient, so long as you have a radially magnetized disk or mount a small bar magnetic appropriately.

Kleinstein:
Reading the I2C bus should not be so much work for the µC, at least if the µC has hardware to support I2C directly. Something like 1 reading every 1-10 ms is not that much time needed.

It looks like the digital data that can be read via I2C are the primary data and the way via internal DAC + comparator can only make things worse. Especially at lower speed (e.g. up to some 100 RPM) the comparator solution would not give much information. There is essentially no way the analog + comparator solution would give a better result than directly reading the I2C data - it is more like to expect some 10x higher noise with the indirect way.

The real alternative would be a different sensor, like an optical quadrature encoder with more like 32 to 1024 steps per revolution, if the µC include an encoder interface.

langwadt:

--- Quote from: paeion on May 15, 2022, 05:14:49 am ---
--- Quote from: langwadt on May 15, 2022, 01:16:45 am ---
if you are only calculating acceleration to get torque du you really need direction?

anyway, maybe some ideas here https://www.esp32.com/viewtopic.php?t=4983


--- End quote ---

Acceleration is a vector quantity just like velocity, so I will need the direction to give me the sign on top of the magnitude :D

--- End quote ---

if the end goal is power you are either accelerating or decelerating, doesn't matter which direction

paeion:

--- Quote from: langwadt on May 15, 2022, 12:50:27 pm ---
if the end goal is power you are either accelerating or decelerating, doesn't matter which direction


--- End quote ---

It took me a bit to realise but you are correct sir. The changes in velocity will provide the sign in the acceleration, so for all that matters, the shaft can spin whichever direction it likes.

eugene:
Do I understand correctly that what you want, in the end, is a measure of acceleration? Be warned that measuring acceleration in this way is conceptually simple, but fraught with problems of unstable, noisy results. The basic idea is to measure position at two different times. The change in position divided by the change in time is velocity, right? Yes, but a small error in your measurement of time results in a larger error in your velocity calculation. And we're not done. We want to know acceleration, so we have to calculate velocity at two different times then calculate change in velocity divided by change in time to get acceleration. And again, a small error in time results in a large error in calculated acceleration. Combine that with the already large error in velocity, and it's easy to end up with a number for acceleration that is of little value. (Note that this method requires three position data points. It's easy to calculate acceleration directly from those three points, without calculating velocities, but this does not improve the quality of the result.)

The way to reduce the error is to use more than three data points to calculate acceleration. There are lots of ways to perform the calculations, but in the end, you can get arbitrarily clean results by combining an arbitrarily long string of data points in the calculation. The cost is that the calculation becomes more complicated with larger datasets and thus takes more clock cycles to perform.  You have not told us the details of your requirements, but I'm thinking you'll need more than one data point per revolution of the motor.

So, my suggestion is to record data more frequently. You need both the position (angle) and the precise time that the measurement was made. I can think of two ways to do that:

1. Use the PWM output on the AS5600 and the RMT module in the ESP32. The RMT module will directly measure the duty cycle of the incoming PWM and dump the results in a memory block (aka buffer.) This is done entirely in hardware, so no attention is required by your code. There are a couple of things about this method that I would need to work out. One of them is deciding when to pull data from the buffer and calculate acceleration. The problem is that the only interrupt that the module can trigger in receive mode is when the end of the message is reached (basically, a time out.) But the pulse train from the AS5600 never stops, so the RMT never detects an end to the incoming message. I suppose you could use a periodic interrupt to stop the RMT, pull data from the buffer, then start the RMT again. The memory block can be configured as a ring buffer, and there is likely information in one of the RMT registers telling where the tail is; where the most recent sample is buffer. That way you could be sure of using only data that was acquired at consecutive time intervals. The other problem is determining precisely the time of each measurement. Really, we only need the time between samples, and that's determined by the rate that the pulses are coming in. Unfortunately, that rate is not well controlled by the AS5600. Maybe use the ESP32 to first measure the frequency of pulses, then collect a bunch of data? I don't know.

2. The other method that I can think of is using the analog output on the AS5600 and the ADC on the ESP32. This way the time between samples is controlled by the ESP32. Assuming you're using a stable clock, the time base can be controlled precisely. So, the basic routine would be to setup an ADC to convert continuously at some configurable rate, and then put a configurable number of samples into a global buffer. I'm not super familiar with ESP32, but I know that it's possible to configure an ADC to write directly to memory using DMA. In this way, all the work is done with hardware so that the processor is free to do other things while data is being collected. I'd have to figure out how, but it must be possible to have the ADC acquire a fixed number of samples, put them in a global array, and then trigger an interrupt. (Look for sample code somewhere.) I would expect this method to give more accurate time values, but less accurate angle values than method (1) above.

So how do you use the data to calculate acceleration? There are a number of ways. The easiest to understand might be to go through the array of position (angle) data and calculate another array of velocity values, one for each pair of angles. Then go through the velocity data and calculate another array of accelerations. Maybe then average all of the accelerations into one number. You might want to go through the position and velocity arrays and perform some kind of smoothing. That might help if the data is really noisy, but my intuition is that it wouldn't be very useful.

Another way that is a little more complicated conceptually, but would give better results, is to fit a straight line to the velocity data. The least squares line fit returns two numbers: slope and offset. The slope (of velocity vs time) is acceleration.  Least squares fitting sounds scary, but there are libraries that could be used.

Or, we can eliminate the intermediate velocity calculations and fit a second order polynomial to the raw position data. For a second order fit, the least squares routine returns three numbers. The third one is the acceleration (really 1/2 the acceleration.) This can be computationally expensive, and the expense goes up fast with the number of data points involved. But this method will make the best possible use of the data. In fact, this the go-to method for analyzing noisy data. Doing it in real time may or may not be crazy depending on your processor, the number of data points in each set, and how often you need to perform the calculation. I think it could be made to work in your application with your hardware.

Let me know if you're interested in trying what I've just suggested. If you need help setting up the RMT module or the ADC, then a ESP32 forum would probably be the best place to go. If you want help performing least squares analysis on the raw data, then I can help with that.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page

There was an error while thanking
Thanking...
Go to full version