|
|
|
![]() |
|
|||||||
|
||||||||
![]() |
|
|
Thread Tools | Rate Thread | Display Modes |
|
|
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
|
What constants are u using for high velocity PID
What constants for P I and D? I got it to somewhat work but its velocity was always too high... i know i could further test more values but i tried all day and now i am at home and have no access to the robot, i desparately need some values that i can try out... our custom PID code is totally screwed up and i might port over watsons but i need a start point well...... this turning into a rant...
thanks for any help |
|
#2
|
||||||
|
||||||
|
Re: What constants are u using for high velocity PID
Try tuning it without I. A PD loop will be fine for high speed velocity. You are, more than likely, getting fast Integration error build up. We are not using I and we are right on target for both wheels. At high speed, the P gain is very sensitive so you will need to really play with D a lot more than if you were tuning a drive train.
|
|
#3
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: What constants are u using for high velocity PID
Also make sure that your terms are sensible - I had problems when my P term overflowed when the error was large enough. If the signs are wrong, then you'll find all kinds of problems...
|
|
#4
|
|||||
|
|||||
|
Re: What constants are u using for high velocity PID
I had a P of 70, a D of 30, and an I of 3, all divided by a divisor of 10. That's with a 16 CPR encoder on the shaft.
Snaps right to the setpoint. |
![]() |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | Rate This Thread |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| Concept of PID explained | ConKbot of Doom | Technical Discussion | 11 | 27-01-2008 00:11 |
| Problems Using PID for Velocity | Astronouth7303 | Programming | 6 | 10-02-2006 09:00 |
| Manual Velocity PID, anyone successful? | Chris_Elston | Programming | 20 | 31-01-2006 20:51 |
| PID Control | Chris Bright | Programming | 9 | 26-03-2005 19:44 |
| PID cmd_drive can't drive straight? | gnormhurst | Programming | 4 | 18-02-2005 01:54 |