Timeline for Determining transfer function of a PTU for visual tracking
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
15 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sep 12, 2015 at 10:27 | vote | accept | Carlton Banks | ||
| May 2, 2015 at 12:41 | history | edited | Ugo Pattacini | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 1193 characters in body
|
| May 2, 2015 at 10:44 | history | edited | Ugo Pattacini | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 4 characters in body
|
| May 2, 2015 at 10:38 | history | edited | Ugo Pattacini | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 2969 characters in body
|
| May 2, 2015 at 10:32 | history | edited | Ugo Pattacini | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 2969 characters in body
|
| May 1, 2015 at 19:04 | comment | added | Carlton Banks | And for values in the middle i use that formula.. | |
| May 1, 2015 at 18:57 | comment | added | Carlton Banks | Its just my control consist of some if statement that kinda make is say.. like if the velocity calculated becomes above something.. then use max speed, and if its below something its 0.. there isn't some actual "science" behind its just made using common sense and some good luck i guess.. thats irritating me a bit.. | |
| May 1, 2015 at 18:46 | comment | added | Carlton Banks | I am tracking faces and convert pixel displacement into angular displacement.. which i then multiple with a factor (kp).. The position and velocity (kp) are both different... I update My velocity with a higher freq then my position such that overshoot is minimized, which i also thereby somehow think i have a Cascade close loop.. But My solution is purely math based i mean.. Its a bit a of miracle that the pixel to angular conversion fits that well.. | |
| May 1, 2015 at 18:31 | comment | added | Carlton Banks | Well.. that what i am actually doing.. which actually works fine enough.. i mean it doesn't overshoot that much but it react too slowly. I mean The displacement has be pretty big before it react.. and when it react it i know it is deemed to overshoot.. | |
| May 1, 2015 at 18:09 | comment | added | Ugo Pattacini | The task has now become how to control your device... There are too few information you have provided and the goal is somewhat broad. Start off with $v=K_p \cdot \left( \theta_d - \theta \right)$. | |
| May 1, 2015 at 16:26 | comment | added | Carlton Banks | I am thinking creating a cascade control (since i want it to react quickly), such that i only provide velocity to the Plant, and the controller will be given the where it should go, and where it is.. But how should i do it for the velocity.. ? | |
| May 1, 2015 at 14:58 | comment | added | Ugo Pattacini | Of course, you could consider identifying commanded velocity to joint position in velocity mode, but that's a different plant. | |
| May 1, 2015 at 14:56 | comment | added | Ugo Pattacini | The transfer function you should aim to get would be commanded position to joint position. It's normal that the velocity is not kept constant since the device will be going through an initial acceleration phase, a steady-state phase wherein the speed will be pretty much the one given, and a final deceleration phase while approaching the target position. That's the usual trapezoidal shape of the speed profile (or whatever profile it is) we are not interested in. What does matter is the final position profile generated along the way. | |
| May 1, 2015 at 14:27 | comment | added | Carlton Banks | I am not quite sure i understand what kind of test you want me to perform.. the problem with the system is that if i give a velocity and position, it goes toward the position with a given velocity but at some point i begins to decrease due to an onboard controller. response. the last part isn't confirmed yet, since the feedback says the speed is the same even though it's not.. I am at the moment trying run it in velocity mode, such that i don't give it position but just a velocity.. and then input a velocity => wait fixed time interval => output displacement and then repeat.. | |
| May 1, 2015 at 12:39 | history | answered | Ugo Pattacini | CC BY-SA 3.0 |