doc222 wrote:Why do you need this resolution?
I use these encoders for the odometry of my robot witch participate to the french robot cup. In the same axes than my two propulsion wheels i have two wheels with only the encoders. With this system I want to increase the accuracy of my odometry as the wheels with encoders has no play, don’t slip and have higher resolution.
aswin0 wrote:In this case you could gear rotations down, if only for the sensor. Or you could apply a correction mechanism or algorithm.
I can adjust the resolution of AMT-102V. Due to lost of counts I use resolution of 400count/turn but even in this resolution near than lego motors resolution in suspect a loss about 1% but partially compensate by the software. But in this configuration I don’t know if I compensate lost of counts or the diameter difference between my two wheels. Measures of the first post are done using the two encoders at 2048count/turn connected on the same axis than a lego motor.
doc222 wrote:another thought is, if you need a rotation sensor that "they " claim is higher resolution. I heard that Hytecknic's new stand alone is rated at over 1000rpm, i thought i remember them saying the limit is frictional heat in side it if pushed to hard. I was thinking one day to try one on some LPE's i have that can easy run at 1500 rpm depending on psi of the air.
For the hitechnic angle sensor, bad for me I bought NXTMMX and encoders before they became available

So I try to use my encoders with a higher resolution than the hitechnic sensor just for principle.
mattallen37 wrote:If all you need, is the ability to read an encoder, maybe a dedicated U-processor would be better (and way cheaper).
What do you know by "U-processor" ? I search for quadradute encoder inferface using i2C without sucess. My choise of the NXTMMX was motivate because it was the solution with less homemade electronic (before the come of Hitechnic angle sensor).