View Single Post
  #187   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 12-01-2008, 16:07
Guy Davidson Guy Davidson is offline
Registered User
AKA: formerly sumadin
FRC #0008 (Paly Robotics)
Team Role: Alumni
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Rookie Year: 2005
Location: Ra'anana, Israel
Posts: 660
Guy Davidson is a splendid one to beholdGuy Davidson is a splendid one to beholdGuy Davidson is a splendid one to beholdGuy Davidson is a splendid one to beholdGuy Davidson is a splendid one to beholdGuy Davidson is a splendid one to beholdGuy Davidson is a splendid one to beholdGuy Davidson is a splendid one to behold
Send a message via ICQ to Guy Davidson Send a message via AIM to Guy Davidson Send a message via MSN to Guy Davidson
Re: New C18 3.0+ Compatible FRC Code

I am planning on using the custom pwm.c/h code to generate the two pwm signals at 100Hz. I realized that unless I am also providing command and mointoring the system at 100Hz, it won't gain me anything (i.e. if I were to generate pwm commands in the 38Hz loop and update the commands at 100Hz, I don't think I'd gain anything). Hence I am also planning to update encoder-based pid loops at a rate of 100Hz. Not only this will give me a constant interval between updates, making my velocity estimates more reliable, it should make use of the faster update rate by generating commands at that rate.

Will doing something like that impact the performance of the the pwm functions? My PID loop code is not much more than a bunch of logical tests and integer multiplications. I am wondering if I should be okay if I call the PID code from within the Timer ISR that generates the pwm signal, or am I risking a significant drop in performance.

Thanks (and I hope my question is worded clearly enough - if not, please let me know, and I'll try to reword it)