[Read Desc] Why motor has to be over a control box?!, sdac?

JOELwindows7 - Custom level - from Android
PlayEdit3 players liked this.Log in to like this level.

I am not a person who usually does expressing complains. But you guys who build things using something like advanced motors, knows how tedious it was to set this up.
Now look. We have 2 of these motors. Left is simple and right is advanced DC motor.
The question is, why the advanced one need this interface box?
In real life, it is for basically, to operate it. By how?
Some motor requires even more complex procedures as a drawback behind those advantages above usual motor, such as to grasp the shaft to magnet A, then magnet B, then Magnet C, back again and repeat.
Why has to be like that?
Because that motor is brushless. Of course, everything is brushed digitally using transistors as you can see on our PC fan e.g.

Why I mostly saw only 2 leads on my PC fan?
That's because its digital brush (factors the speed) has been fixed.

I have my fan has more than 2 leads!
That mean your fan speed can be tuned to be slow or fast based on something.

Back to topic!!!

Is there is any simpler way without making a hassle, and decrease space usage?

I mean to have a motor that has 3 input:
- Power
- Speed
- Reverse, that's it. No CT needed
- Torque control!
That these allows space usage to be reduced!

Also output debug/feedback signals as well such as:
- Speed
- Force
- Error, What is this?!

Another yet, why DC motor has to be connected over interface? Most DC motor I saw in real life are two leads, plus and minus only!
Are you reffering to a BLDC motor?! An advanced motor for drones, skateboard, etc. that has digital brush, and feedbacking like this Principia DC motor.
sdac, your naming is wrong. It should have been named BLDC motor, not DC motor.

Please!!!! Where is the frikin SOURCE CODE!!!???
We want to add this DC motor and interface emmerge into one!!!

Update:
Add CT feedback and its deployment examples. Let the request fully adequate and sufficient enough.

Views: 178 Downloads: 65 Unique objects: 1 Total objects: 30

Discuss this level

Log in to comment on this level.
  • JOELwindows7: @wokstation: oh ok, thx! Useful information!!
  • wokstation22: @JOELwindows7: USB communicates using voltage variance, whereas a servo, like an ESC, talks in millisecond pulses. Totally different protocols.
    "Error" feedback tells you how far away from it's instructed point it currently is - eg, a servo set to go to 0.25 when there's a wall in the way preventing it will respond with the size of the disparity,
  • JOELwindows7: I have another thought.
    Look at these Arduino hobby kits. Have you ever seen, that the lead has emerged into thick one cable? I don't think so. These servo motors, BLDC, etc, has those cable glued. But when we stretch it out, the rubber tear and reveals GND, 5V, and Signal with each respective leads.
    Anyone ever saw a servo motor connects to a breadboard over USB-C then to Arduino over USB-C?!
  • JOELwindows7: @sdac: thanks for reading Description. I forgot to say that it should also has 3 output according to that CT Feedback (Speed, Force, hmmm...)
  • JOELwindows7: @mrsimb: everyday's DC will look's like this on e.g. YouTube. 2 lead, fixed brush. Voltage depends on speed. And yes, more voltage, more wear potential.
  • JOELwindows7: @mrsimb: I would like for him to pay attention to this. Sadly, you're right that he won't be here anymore.
    That's because he has named this motor unspecific. You guys all see that this kind of motor look's like a Brush Less Direct Current motor, BLDC motor for short.
    Some electrical expert who just arrived here will confuse and also complain for the wrong naming.
    They will say that "DC motor" is presumably is the fixed mechanical brushed motor. While supposed name "BLDC motor" is known as a no brush motor but "digitally brushed" over some algorithmic electronic component, like that CT Mini, CT Servo, CT Feedback.
  • mrsimb: @JOELwindows7: i mean like he will read it... (he wouldn't)
  • JOELwindows7: Suspectedly*
  • JOELwindows7: @mrsimb: in what mean? Assumming from username design, I have no idea why. Suspetedly, it was the cryptic from his real name.
    Assuming on this case... Uhhh, that was the case.
  • mrsimb: @JOELwindows7: am i missing something? why do people call sdac?
  • JOELwindows7: @dOUBLEbAD: you bet, buddy.
  • dOUBLEbAD: @JOELwindows7: I agree with the motor with 3 possible inputs. It eliminates the need for the basic motor altogether as you could leave speed and reverse empty and bam! It would still be a basic motor. Basically, we would have a need for fewer components both in the builds as well as the menu. Source code or renewed developer support is what I'd like to see.
  • JOELwindows7: @blackghost: yeah! I just knew you also thought the same thing.
  • JOELwindows7: @blackghost: that is right!
    Is anyone else the same as we both?
  • blackghost:
    do you know i was thinking long time ago about this too

    I mean to have a motor that has 3 input:
    - Power
    - Speed
    - Reverse, that's it. No CT needed
    That these allows space usage to be reduced!
  • JOELwindows7: @sdac: this DC motor should've been named as BLDC motor. That's more make sense.
    Servo motor naming is still correct.

LEVEL ID: 27578