View Single Post
  #4   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 18-04-2012, 00:07
ahartnet's Avatar
ahartnet ahartnet is offline
Registered User
AKA: Andrew Hartnett
FRC #5414 (Pearadox)
Team Role: Mentor
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Rookie Year: 2005
Location: Houston, Texas
Posts: 206
ahartnet has a reputation beyond reputeahartnet has a reputation beyond reputeahartnet has a reputation beyond reputeahartnet has a reputation beyond reputeahartnet has a reputation beyond reputeahartnet has a reputation beyond reputeahartnet has a reputation beyond reputeahartnet has a reputation beyond reputeahartnet has a reputation beyond reputeahartnet has a reputation beyond reputeahartnet has a reputation beyond repute
Re: periodic tasks behaving differently in autonomous vs teleop (labview)

Thanks for the fast replies! And all with good questions that have answers I should have included in my first post.

@Chris - that was essentially our first thought as well. We have both loops set to run once every 40 ms, but it might be worth putting in the vi and measuring the actual time it takes to run as well. I'd be surprised though if 25 Hz is too fast. We are using a shared global variable - and it's only written to in a handful of places, but it's definitely worth probing and ensuring that the set variable is constant, and what we expect it to be.

@Peck - (from one guy with minimal labview knowledge to another...) we collect our angular velocity from a hall effect sensor and a magnet on our wheel. It's in a global shared variable and it's assigned (from the sensor to a variable) in the same periodic tasks function (though perhaps at a different frequency - something to check out and perhaps change!) We haven't tried setting the "desired speed" to zero in autonomous or any other speeds - but the fact that it handles that desired speed in teleop fine, but not in autonomous is predominately what concerns me.

When the motor overshoots, it just coasts back to a slower speed (both in autonomous and teleop) and is NEVER put in reverse. We have worked with mechanical, but I am convinced it's in software. The same code acts differently in autonomous rather than in tele-op. That is a strong indication that it's software.