View Single Post
  #3   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 11-17-2016, 05:14 PM
Oblarg Oblarg is offline
Registered User
AKA: Eli Barnett
FRC #0449 (The Blair Robot Project)
Team Role: Mentor
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Rookie Year: 2008
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Posts: 1,047
Oblarg has a reputation beyond reputeOblarg has a reputation beyond reputeOblarg has a reputation beyond reputeOblarg has a reputation beyond reputeOblarg has a reputation beyond reputeOblarg has a reputation beyond reputeOblarg has a reputation beyond reputeOblarg has a reputation beyond reputeOblarg has a reputation beyond reputeOblarg has a reputation beyond reputeOblarg has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Velocity PID(F) Best Practices - To Integrate, or Not To Integrate?

Quote:
Originally Posted by ozrien View Post
Just curious, did your team attempt a velocity servo and wasn't successful?
Not yet. We made our first foray into velocity control last year, and wrote our own integrator to slap onto WPILib's PIDcontroller object (WPIlib had not yet implemented the integrator they have now) because that was the solution that made the most conceptual sense to us. This past summer, when WPIlib did implement that, we added a feedforward term, but still tuned largely around the 'p' term of the integrated loop ('i' term of a non-integrated loop).

This preseason we are experimenting with doing PID control on the talons, and so the main question is whether we should tune around 'p' or 'i'. We're also still wrestling with technical issues, so we haven't experimented with either on the Talon quite yet.
__________________
"Mmmmm, chain grease and aluminum shavings..."
"The breakfast of champions!"

Member, FRC Team 449: 2007-2010
Drive Mechanics Lead, FRC Team 449: 2009-2010
Alumnus/Technical Mentor, FRC Team 449: 2010-Present
Lead Technical Mentor, FRC Team 4464: 2012-2015
Technical Mentor, FRC Team 5830: 2015-2016
Reply With Quote