Serin usage?

[champion]

> if you are having trouble with the decoder, get rid of it. IF you can make a PIC do the work of this optical encoder

Um, what are you talking about? How should I measure angular position with the very high accuracy I need without an encoder? How am I gonna have the PIC do the work of the encoder? Youre lost.

[skimask]

Um, what are you talking about? How should I measure angular position with the very high accuracy I need without an encoder? How am I gonna have the PIC do the work of the encoder? Youre lost.

Yep, you're right, I am completely lost...After reading through the datasheet linked above and for teh 2122-5 itself, I found that what you're trying to do is physically impossible without a decoder/counter chip in between the PIC and the encoder. After all, who would've ever thought of using a couple of the interrupts and registers on a PIC to detect level changes on the outputs of an optical encoder. 'cause that would just be silly.

NOT! There are loads of 'google-able' references out there for directly connecting a quad-encoder to a PIC, with very high resolution/accuracy (which is obviously dependant upon the encoder itself), AND easily complete other tasks at the same time, all without missing pulses from multiple encoders...but I give up. Sometimes ya just can't tell a person anything.

[champion]

Yep, you're right, I am completely lost...After reading through the datasheet linked above and for teh 2122-5 itself, I found that what you're trying to do is physically impossible without a decoder/counter chip in between the PIC and the encoder. After all, who would've ever thought of using a couple of the interrupts and registers on a PIC to detect level changes on the outputs of an optical encoder. 'cause that would just be silly.

NOT! There are loads of 'google-able' references out there for directly connecting a quad-encoder to a PIC, with very high resolution/accuracy (which is obviously dependant upon the encoder itself), AND easily complete other tasks at the same time, all without missing pulses from multiple encoders...but I give up. Sometimes ya just can't tell a person anything.

Skimask, I don't think that you have read about my problem. I believe I said before that I need a resolution of at least 360*60=21600 pulses per revolution. Okay, try and find an encoder that has more than 8192 ppr for less than $100. You can't. Then I guess you could use a quadrature decoder along with the encoder to increase the resolution. There you have 8192*4=32768 ppr. That's enough resolution. So what is it that you think that is physically impossible? Didn't you read above that I was using a decoder? And why do you keep talking about missing pulses or any need for a higher frequency oscillator? I think you're probably a smart guy so that's why I must assume that you are simply not reading the entire thread carefully. Go back and read through all of the posts before you make any more comments. k?

PS. I now have the entire system up and running right now, so thanks for all of your help. You rock!!!

[skimask]

Skimask, I don't think that you have read about my problem. I believe I said before that I need a resolution of at least 360*60=21600 pulses per revolution. Okay, try and find an encoder that has more than 8192 ppr for less than $100. You can't. Then I guess you could use a quadrature decoder along with the encoder to increase the resolution. There you have 8192*4=32768 ppr. That's enough resolution. So what is it that you think that is physically impossible? Didn't you read above that I was using a decoder? And why do you keep talking about missing pulses or any need for a higher frequency oscillator? I think you're probably a smart guy so that's why I must assume that you are simply not reading the entire thread carefully. Go back and read through all of the posts before you make any more comments. k?

Somebody's sarcasm detector is broken...
I get it, got it, bought the movie...
1 minute of resolution - gear reduction works too, depending on the physical application of course
How do you increase the resolution from an encoder which only puts out X ppr?
Missing pulses? higher oscillator? what?
Read thru it -
You said you have an encoder All I said was that you could save some headache, not to mention PCB space, by using a PIC with some creative programming and still have loads of accuracy at high rpm, instead of relying on a dedicated decoder/counter/shift register and probably save a couple bucks on top of it. Not only that, but you never did say what the end product might be (crank trigger, star follower, gps guided egg cracker, etc).

[Archangel]

Somebody's sarcasm detector is broken...

You think so? Look again at his avatar!

[skimask]

You think so? Look again at his avatar!

I saw that...
I'll give 10 points for originality on that...but...
subtract 100 points for not using a PIC where a PIC could be used...