Re: Best solution to count RPM
- From: AZ Nomad <aznomad.3@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 04 Aug 2008 17:14:57 -0500
On Tue, 05 Aug 2008 00:09:12 +0200, Nils <n.pipenbrinck@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
AZ Nomad wrote:
Counting pulses can lead to very long sample times at low rpms if more than a
digit or two of precision is desired.
I know. But tell me how a Frequency to Voltage converter can increase
the precision?
if you measure the pulse width instead, you don't run into long sample
times at low rpms.
Another solution I've seen is to use a PLL frequency multiplier. :-)
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Best solution to count RPM
- From: Tim Wescott
- Re: Best solution to count RPM
- From: Robert Adsett
- Re: Best solution to count RPM
- References:
- Best solution to count RPM
- From: N1
- Re: Best solution to count RPM
- From: Nils
- Re: Best solution to count RPM
- From: AZ Nomad
- Re: Best solution to count RPM
- From: Nils
- Best solution to count RPM
- Prev by Date: Re: Best solution to count RPM
- Next by Date: Re: Best solution to count RPM
- Previous by thread: Re: Best solution to count RPM
- Next by thread: Re: Best solution to count RPM
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|