You seem to be confused about what you want. If you want to decrease the motor speed, but you still want maximum torque, then you must apply full rated electrical power to the motor, and put a mechanical brake on the motor until it slows to the speed you desire. Or, you must somehow make your motor less efficient. I don't think that's what you want.
Think of it this way: electrical power is the product of current \$I\$ and voltage \$E\$:
$$ P = I E $$
Mechanical power is the product of torque (\$\tau\$, in newton-meters) in and angular velocity (\$\omega\$, in radians per second):
$$ P = \tau \omega $$
A motor is an electrical to mechanical power converter. The mechanical power always equals the electrical power after losses.
Furthermore, current is proportional to torque, because the more current you apply, the stronger the magnetic field inside the motor, and the attraction between the motor's poles becomes greater.
If the mechanical and electrical powers are correlated, as are the current and torque, then voltage and speed must be, also. And they are, because the faster the rotor spins through the stator field, the greater back-emf it will generate. This is Faraday's law of induction.
So, if you want to decrease speed, decrease voltage. If you want to decrease torque, decrease current. If you increase torque (say by putting a brake on the motor), you are increasing motor torque. But if you don't change the supply of electrical power, then the mechanical power also won't change. If torque increased, the only way to keep mechanical power constant is to decrease speed, so the motor slows down.
There is one kink here: as torque goes up, current goes up. The resistive losses in the motor also go up, because the windings have some resistance, and those resistive losses are proportional to the square of the current:
$$ P = R I^2 $$
So, as current goes up, the resistive losses increase, making the motor a less efficient converter of electrical energy to mechanical energy, because some of that electrical energy is now creating heat. If you stall the motor, then the motor reaches 0% efficiency: speed is zero, so mechanical power must be zero, but the motor is drawing a ton of current, and there is a voltage drop over the winding resistance, so electrical power is very high.
Interesting fact: if you can make a motor with no winding resistance (or other losses), and you connect it to a perfect voltage source, then the speed regulation (how much speed changes with torque) is perfect. That is, the motor won't slow down if you try to stop it: it will just draw exactly enough more current from your battery to keep spinning at the same speed, no matter what.
PWM is all irrelevant to this. PWM motor control is just a way to efficiently apply less than the full battery voltage to the motor. It works because a PWM driven motor is equivalent to a buck converter. Changing your PWM duty cycle is equivalent to changing your supply voltage:
The maximum torque you could have (which you will get when the motor is stalled) is limited by the current your power supply can supply and the losses in the motor, just as it is without PWM. Your PWM driver might add a bit of resistance to the circuit, reducing the current and torque a bit, but usually this isn't significant compared to the resistance of the motor windings.
A constant current means, for an ideal motor, a constant torque. This is approximately true for real motors. It doesn't matter what you attach to the motor, or how fast it's turning.
What you seem to be missing is Newton's second law of motion. It states that force is the product of mass and acceleration:
$$ F = ma $$
The constant current you supply to the motor is one force. The weight opposes that force. The difference is the net force, \$F\$ in this equation, and \$m\$ is the mass of the weight, plus the mass of the rotor and the string and everything else the motor must move.
You set current to be sent to the motor so that the torque applied is 10 in-lbs without any load.
Not possible. There is nothing for the motor to "torque against". This is the mechanical equivalent of trying to develop 10 volts across a dead short. The motor will rapidly spin at its maximum speed, and the back-EMF will rise to the driving voltage such that your driving electronics are unable to supply enough voltage above the back-EMF to make enough current to have that much torque.
Let's just say you determine how much current is required for 10 in-lbs of torque, and you drive your motor with a constant-current supply set to that.
What happens when the torque from the weight/load is 5 in-lbs?
Assuming that the rotor and the string are massless and frictionless, the weight will be accelerated upwards by the net 5 in-lbs of torque (motor's 10 in-lbs, less 5 in-lbs from the weight). The rate of the acceleration is determined by the mass of the weight and Newton's law above.
As the speed of the motor changes (the weight is accelerating), the back-EMF also changes. Your constant-current supply to the motor will have to apply an increasing voltage to maintain the same current. Electrical power thus goes up, as does mechanical power.
What happens when the torque from the weight/load is 10 in-lbs?
Motor torque balances weight torque. However fast the weight is moving (if at all), it keeps doing that. Newton's first law applies.
What happens when the torque from the weight/load is 15 in-lbs?
The weight will accelerate downward, overpowering the motor. However, it won't be a free-fall. The motor cancels some of the force of the weight, resulting in a slower acceleration downwards.
If the weight overpowers the motor, then eventually it can get the motor to run backwards, relative to the way it would run if there were no load. When this happens, the back-EMF now adds (instead of subtracts) from the voltage you apply to the motor. At some point, your controller, which is attempting to maintain a constant current, must apply a negative voltage to maintain that current. In other words, the back-EMF is sufficient to create the necessary torque on its own: your controller must oppose it.
This is perfectly symmetrical with the first case, where the motor was overpowering the weight. In that case, electrical and mechanical power went up (without bound, if you let them). In this case, electrical and mechanical power go down (negative, if you let them). Energy is conserved because you are changing the gravitational potential of the weight.
The need to resist the back-EMF usually means storing electrical energy in a capacitor or battery, or using it to heat a resistor. If you can't do this fast enough, then the motor will create more torque than your desired 10 in-lbs, and you have hit the limits of your "constant current" driver.
Further reading:
Best Answer
DC motor specifications are actually a mixed bag of numbers which do not correlate to each other directly quite the way you think and the boilerplate numbers can be very confusing.
In your case it states continues torque 3 N.m. and a speed of 90RPM. Whether that implies it will run at 90RPM with a 3Nm load is open to interpretation. 90RPM could equally well be a no shaft load speed at 12V applied voltage. Torque and current at that speed would be negligible.
12A is the max current you are allowed to drive it with without burning out the coil wire.
Continues torque 3 N.m is really more of an indication of the power rating of the motor. That is it should not overheat when run continuously at that current.
When designing with motors it is prudent to ignore most of those marketing numbers and look at the published rating curves instead. Those will, once you understand how to read them, tell you far more about how the motor will perform and how to drive it.