View Single Post
  #15   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 21-01-2011, 11:50
MikeE's Avatar
MikeE MikeE is offline
Wrecking nice beaches since 1990
no team (Volunteer)
Team Role: Engineer
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Rookie Year: 2008
Location: New England -> Alaska
Posts: 381
MikeE has a reputation beyond reputeMikeE has a reputation beyond reputeMikeE has a reputation beyond reputeMikeE has a reputation beyond reputeMikeE has a reputation beyond reputeMikeE has a reputation beyond reputeMikeE has a reputation beyond reputeMikeE has a reputation beyond reputeMikeE has a reputation beyond reputeMikeE has a reputation beyond reputeMikeE has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Legality of Jaguar closed-loop control modes

Quote:
Originally Posted by jtechau View Post
Personally I'm fine with that decision (strange as that decision may seem). It's one thing to use closed-loop control. It's another to implement it in your own code, especially if you're using PID control. I'd much rather have my team know how the stuff works, than just be able to hook it up and see it do its magic.

After all, that's pretty much what FIRST is all about.
I don't understand this argument. Even if you are using the Jaguar closed-loop control the PID values still have to be tuned, and you can't reasonably perform that tuning unless you understand the control algorithm. If the PID controller is implemented on the cRio there are some code structural issues to deal with but otherwise it's the same tuning problem, requiring the same level of algorithmic understanding.

The first programming language I learned was Z80 assembly, but I don't believe that I understood more when myopically concerned with register use than I do now when using WPIlib and can concentrate on higher-level design.
Reply With Quote