View Single Post
  #17   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 21-03-2012, 15:48
Ether's Avatar
Ether Ether is offline
systems engineer (retired)
no team
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Rookie Year: 1969
Location: US
Posts: 8,034
Ether has a reputation beyond reputeEther has a reputation beyond reputeEther has a reputation beyond reputeEther has a reputation beyond reputeEther has a reputation beyond reputeEther has a reputation beyond reputeEther has a reputation beyond reputeEther has a reputation beyond reputeEther has a reputation beyond reputeEther has a reputation beyond reputeEther has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Alternative to PID speed control

Quote:
Originally Posted by mommazzboy View Post
A couple of questions:
1. How often were you asking the Jag for the speed?
2. How quickly were you running the control loop?
3. Were you able to compensate for the load that the ball puts on the motors quickly enough as to keep them at the correct speed?
I'm not Martin, but until he reads your post and replies, here's a preliminary response:

Questions 1 & 2:
I'm guessing this controller would work fine in TeleOp. If that is the case, the answer to both questions 1 & 2 would be 20ms1.

Question 3:
For this application, no other control scheme provides faster spin-up or recovery time than the controller Martin described2. So if Martin's controller approach doesn't respond quickly enough, you won't be able to improve things by using PID.


1 if the CAN cannot respond that fast, the encoder could be moved to the cRIO and read by the FPGA.
2 we used to call this a "bang-bang" control (for obvious reasons) when I was working aerospace back in the '80s.
. see this: http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/sh....php?p=1146748
. @Martin: what was your criterion for selecting the voltage ramp rate? did you try this with a much faster ramp?



Last edited by Ether : 21-03-2012 at 16:37.
Reply With Quote