New answers tagged

1

What you have implemented is a sort of proportional velocity controller. In turn, this controller can be seen as a pure integral position unit. The presence of the integral explains why you're able to reach for the setpoint with no steady-state error. I can argue that it is somehow expected that the tilt joint responds slightly worse than the pan joint with ...


0

I can calculate u without knowing a˙. Is it the right way to do it? Sure! Moreover, the control system contains other modules such as the plant dynamics x=Gu and feedback control ub=Ky, where u=uf+ub. Can I discrete these modules one by one and then synthesize them? Usually, we tend to first synthesize the controller in the s-domain and then discretize ...


3

To the principal question, "can Zeno behavior exist in real systems?" the answer is no. Real systems don't do any infinite anything. The Quantum Zeno Effect, a.k.a. Turing paradox, is a purely quantum phenomenon. In this robotics forum, real systems are macroscopic, and macroscopic systems don't do any quantum anything. Hence, there are no examples ...


1

What a great idea! Here are some things I'd look out for, based on my experience tuning the pianos I have had over the years. (Not that I'm a pro, just trying to postpone calling in the pro.) The tuning pins stick in place (obviously, otherwise they would immediately untwist!). A tuner must apply some torque to a pin, just to get it unstuck, before actually ...


2

While matching up your code against the Stanford paper I did some rewriting, which I pasted below. The handling of ref and arr were pretty confusing, so I introduced somewhat more transparent terms. Also I tried to follow the paper's nomenclature although I chose names for some anonymous quantities. It's generally a "code smell" when you find ...


2

Took some time but this right here might be the solution to the problem. I did this by hand so I hope the handwriting is not a problem. Thanks to Chuck for the help! :)


Top 50 recent answers are included