View Single Post
  #2   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 03-05-2011, 18:41
PhilBot's Avatar
PhilBot PhilBot is offline
Get a life? This IS my life!
AKA: Phil Malone
FRC #1629 (GaCo: The Garrett Coalition)
Team Role: Mentor
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Rookie Year: 2006
Location: Maryland
Posts: 747
PhilBot has a reputation beyond reputePhilBot has a reputation beyond reputePhilBot has a reputation beyond reputePhilBot has a reputation beyond reputePhilBot has a reputation beyond reputePhilBot has a reputation beyond reputePhilBot has a reputation beyond reputePhilBot has a reputation beyond reputePhilBot has a reputation beyond reputePhilBot has a reputation beyond reputePhilBot has a reputation beyond repute
Re: [FTC]: [FTC]: Reason found why robot runs slower in Auto

Quote:
Originally Posted by John_1102 View Post
I believe your problem is that the LabVIEW based code move fixed distance command uses PID.
Why do you say that? Did you read the paper?

Are you saying that 1) the LabVIEW code is implementing it's own PID to control the speed, or that 2) it is using a PID control function in the DC Motor Controller?

If you are saying the former then you are dead wrong. LabVIEW is NOT doing PID in either instance.

If you are saying the latter, then I don't see your point..

"Constant Speed", and "Run to Position" BOTH use a closed loop control function (possibly PID) to regulate the motor speed, but why should one run all the way up to 100% while the other is limited to 65% of full speed? Makes no sense.

It's completely logical that Robot C will see the same speed decrease if it's also using the DC Motor Controller's Encoder based moves. Have you studied C's low level Motor Controller calls to see what commands are being sent via the I2C bus? Do you know what commands are being sent?

Phil.
__________________
Phil Malone
Garrett Engineering And Robotics Society (GEARS) founder.
http://www.GEARSinc.org

FRC1629 Mentor, FTC2818 Coach, FTC4240 Mentor, FLL NeXTGEN Mentor
Reply With Quote