Skip to main content
Jolof.1
Associate
April 28, 2020
Solved

ST Motor Control workbench serial interface specification?

  • April 28, 2020
  • 5 replies
  • 3854 views

Where can i find the serial port communication protocol specification, so i can control a motor over the uart, without using ST Motor control workbench?

This topic has been closed for replies.
Best answer by Jolof.1

I got the specification from another person at ST by email, not from this forum..

https://www.st.com/resource/en/user_manual/cd00298474-stm32f-pmsm-singledual-foc-sdk-v43-stmicroelectronics.pdf

5 replies

Claire O.
Technical Moderator
May 11, 2020

Dear Jolof.1,

this specification is indeed missing.

Do you have any particular question on this topic we can try to answer?

Thanks,

Claire

Lmazz.1
Visitor II
July 9, 2020

Hi Claire,

I am interested in the same topic - any follow up or news on this?

many thanks in advance

Lorenzo

Jolof.1
Jolof.1AuthorAnswer
Associate
July 9, 2020

I got the specification from another person at ST by email, not from this forum..

https://www.st.com/resource/en/user_manual/cd00298474-stm32f-pmsm-singledual-foc-sdk-v43-stmicroelectronics.pdf

Lmazz.1
Visitor II
July 9, 2020

​thank you! have you implemented / tried already?

Jolof.1
Jolof.1Author
Associate
July 9, 2020

You are welcome Claire =)

Lmazz.1 : Yes i have implemented "motor control protocol (MCP)". In controller that controls two motors. Works fine, a hint is top read out the fault flags, in case a fault occurs the motors stops and the flags needs to be cleared before you can continue running the motor.

Lmazz.1
Visitor II
July 9, 2020

​Awesome - are you using any of c library to handle the communication protocol or you just coded your own?

Jolof.1
Jolof.1Author
Associate
July 9, 2020

Made my own, could not find any library for it.

Lmazz.1
Visitor II
July 9, 2020

what about this? do you think is possible to use?

Lmazz.1
Visitor II
July 9, 2020

0693W000001sYtMQAU.jpg

Jolof.1
Jolof.1Author
Associate
July 9, 2020

Yes, not sure. Could be that it's only the Slave-end support for the protocol. Not the controlling master end?

I never dived deep into that code..