Yes you are correct this only works if the motor slippage issues are addressed.
As long as the motor is at the same "locked in" speed it will work. A pulse
counter is far superior in mtbf to a pot. Also hermetically sealed.
Scott
N1CX
Salty's
www.radios-online.com
> On Apr 3, 2014, at 10:17 PM, "Zivney, Terry" <00tlzivney@bsu.edu> wrote:
>
> I seem to recall K1TTT said the earliest rings used a pulse counter instead
> of the pot. The implication being that the pulse counter approach had
> problems and was upgraded to the pot.
>
> A basic problem with putting the whirling magnet on the motor shaft is that
> it only counts how many times the motor shaft turns. But, many of he rings
> appear to skip or slip or miss a beat (whatever you want to call it). So, the
> ring location is computed by counting the number of rotations of the motor,
> not the rotations of the ring.
>
> In my case, the pot reliably follows the motor and the spur gear that is
> supposed to drive the ring. The problem with inaccurate readout is not
> caused in these cases by the pot but rather by the spur gear and ring
> gear losing contact from time to time.
>
> It seems that is also the case with the ring in the recently posted YouTube
> video of a TIC ring problem.
>
> A pulse counting technique that is counts motor revolutions is not inherently
> superior to a precision potentiometer geared to that same motor. The
> selected pot is a ten-turn pot which has lots of resolution potential (sic).
>
>
> Terry N4TZ
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> TowerTalk mailing list
> TowerTalk@contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk
>
_______________________________________________
_______________________________________________
TowerTalk mailing list
TowerTalk@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk
|