2022-12-04 03:39 AM
Is there any chance that STM32CUBEIDE will have support for STEVAL-ESC002V1?
If not - what is the fastest way to do development for this eval board using the IDE?
Generally - as a new user of STM products, the overall impression I get is once of chaos. There is an over abundance of hardware but confusion about what are the mainstream strategic products. The software support seems patchy - some products, which I am guessing are the strategic solutions are in STM32CUBEIDE, others are not.
Trying to figure this out is expensive, slow and frustrating.
I just want a simple BLDC motor controller!
What is the fastest, simplest way to make this happen?
2022-12-26 04:05 AM
After repeating profiling tests with both the 5.4.8 and 5.Y.4 mcwb's (no luck with 6.1.0 since there is no board support that I can tell) I believe the associated profilers behave the same way and have similar issues (at least when trying to profile my motor).
The 5.4.8 wb reports:
MCSDK_v5.4.8
WB_to_Mx version "1.5.1"
WB_to_Mx.template version "21-11-15"
[Device]
Device not connected
[Modules]
MMICalc DLL - Version 1.0.4.0
Basic Motor Control Serial Protocolo Library - Version 3.3.0.0
TL_003 Frame Transport Layer - Version 1, 0, 0, 0
PL_001 Dynamic Link Library - Version 1, 1, 10, 0
and the 5.Y.4
MCSDK_v5.Y.4-Full
WB_to_Mx version "1.6.0"
WB_to_Mx.template version "22-01-11"
[Device]
[Modules]
MMICalc DLL - Version 1.0.4.0
Despite setting extremely high (eg 100000) Max Speed values in the ui (and setting 2 amp, 12.3v, in the ui; with a 5 amp psu providing 12.4v) ) the motor will (after pulsing with 2amps and reporting back values in the range .58-.8 amp, 0.02-.0.05 mH) never exceed 32490 rpm despite being rated at 4800 kva. Once reaching this speed the motor reverses, and reaches 4800 and then throws a warning prompt: The measurement is taking too time
If I set the max speed rpm to 10 times the max rpm max value for a value below 32490 e.g. 160000 it reaches the corresponding speed by a lower factor of 10 i.e. 16000.
The test behaves the same way repeatedly.
Are these defects in the profiler code?