There was an article that was published by someone many years ago that is circulating the internet, that is commonly misinterpreted. It was actually about accuracy at higher microsteps, not torque loss due to microstepping. It gets regurgitated just about everywhere.
I'm not really smart with all of the electronics that drive stepper motors, but what I've come to understand is that with a good driver, you won't loose much (if any) torque while microstepping. But you shouldn't expect that using a really high number of microsteps will increase your accuracy proportionately.
I don't think many people on these forums use Nema 17's. Are these available for Nema 23's or 34's?
Really interesting.
So the dev's of this are saying that these aren't closed loop steppers.....that instead they've converted a stepper motor into a true servo motor.
So it's a closed loop system that has no rotary encoder. It still uses a stepper driver, the A4954 as a component on the board...they should have used a trinamic driver.
How is this a servo and not a closed loop stepper? It would be interesting to see a before and after torque chart for a motor with one of these on it!
The encoder without adding any additional rotating parts is really cool.
https://www.kickstarter.com/projects...strial-servo-m
https://tropical-labs.com/mechaduino/
Is this this the same thing? It still has the salmon skin on 3d prints common with the Allegro drivers.Originally Posted by Tropic Labs