DSPRelated.com
Forums

Video: What is a PID Controller?

Started by Tim Wescott May 4, 2016
On Wed, 04 May 2016 16:48:13 -0500, Tim Wescott
<seemywebsite@myfooter.really> wrote:

>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2elEXcv0AV8
Nicely done. May I suggest that future videos be done in something other than Flash, such as HTML5: <https://www.wired.com/2015/07/adobe-flash-player-die/> <http://youtube-eng.blogspot.jp/2015/01/youtube-now-defaults-to-html5_27.html> <https://www.youtube.com/html5> For now, there are some Flash to HTML5 converters available. I have no idea which is best or how well they might work: <https://www.google.com/#q=flash+to+html5+converter> Suggestion: Take a clue from Dave Jones and fill the background with an impressive collection of test equipment: <https://www.youtube.com/user/EEVblog> That adds credibility to your video. (Perception is everything). -- Jeff Liebermann jeffl@cruzio.com 150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558
On Wed, 04 May 2016 23:21:08 -0700, Jeff Liebermann wrote:

> On Wed, 04 May 2016 16:48:13 -0500, Tim Wescott > <seemywebsite@myfooter.really> wrote: > >>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2elEXcv0AV8 > > Nicely done. > > May I suggest that future videos be done in something other than Flash, > such as HTML5: > <https://www.wired.com/2015/07/adobe-flash-player-die/> > <http://youtube-eng.blogspot.jp/2015/01/youtube-now-defaults-to-
html5_27.html>
> <https://www.youtube.com/html5> > For now, there are some Flash to HTML5 converters available. I have no > idea which is best or how well they might work: > <https://www.google.com/#q=flash+to+html5+converter>
YouTube takes my mp4 files and does what it wills with them. I know it reduces the resolution for most people -- at least I assume that you're not seeing all 1920 x 1080 that I uploaded. Maybe there's an option for one of us to ask for flash vs. HTML5 -- I'll see if I can figure out if that's my option.
> Suggestion: Take a clue from Dave Jones and fill the background with an > impressive collection of test equipment: > <https://www.youtube.com/user/EEVblog> > That adds credibility to your video. (Perception is everything).
I have a pretty sparse set of test equipment, actually. A nice Agilent mixed-signal scope and a Rigol spectrum analyzer are the highlights; it goes downhill from there all the way to a 1950's-era Heathkit RF signal generator complete with crinkle-coat paint. Besides, the most important test equipment in the room is my brain -- the rest is just for convenience. One of the videos I plan will show the test equipment that's built into nearly any closed-loop control project I build: there's a swept-sine analyzer in that software that lets me analyze both the arm position loop and the motor speed loop. I can take the resulting data and use it to tune the system. -- Tim Wescott Control systems, embedded software and circuit design I'm looking for work! See my website if you're interested http://www.wescottdesign.com
On Thu, 05 May 2016 01:49:17 -0500, Tim Wescott <tim@seemywebsite.com>
wrote:

>On Wed, 04 May 2016 23:21:08 -0700, Jeff Liebermann wrote: > >> On Wed, 04 May 2016 16:48:13 -0500, Tim Wescott >> <seemywebsite@myfooter.really> wrote: >> >>>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2elEXcv0AV8 >> >> Nicely done. >> >> May I suggest that future videos be done in something other than Flash, >> such as HTML5: >> <https://www.wired.com/2015/07/adobe-flash-player-die/> >> <http://youtube-eng.blogspot.jp/2015/01/youtube-now-defaults-to- >html5_27.html> >> <https://www.youtube.com/html5> >> For now, there are some Flash to HTML5 converters available. I have no >> idea which is best or how well they might work: >> <https://www.google.com/#q=flash+to+html5+converter>
>YouTube takes my mp4 files and does what it wills with them. I know it >reduces the resolution for most people -- at least I assume that you're >not seeing all 1920 x 1080 that I uploaded. Maybe there's an option for >one of us to ask for flash vs. HTML5 -- I'll see if I can figure out if >that's my option.
YouTube adjusts the video to correspond to what the internet connection and computah can handle. I'm bandwidth limited by a 1.5Mbit/sec DSL connection which shows your video as 360p. I'll try it again tomorrow on my office cable modem connection, which can do 25mbits/sec and should show at least 720p. However, even at the lowest resolution of 144p, the video looks acceptable but blurry on my 24" 1680x1050 monitor. I don't know why it ended up as Flash instead of HTML5. YouTube recommends uploading in MP4 (H.264) which should have been transcoded to HTML5: <https://support.google.com/youtube/answer/1722171> Check the list of recommended settings and see if there's anything different.
>> Suggestion: Take a clue from Dave Jones and fill the background with an >> impressive collection of test equipment: >> <https://www.youtube.com/user/EEVblog> >> That adds credibility to your video. (Perception is everything).
>I have a pretty sparse set of test equipment, actually. A nice Agilent >mixed-signal scope and a Rigol spectrum analyzer are the highlights; it >goes downhill from there all the way to a 1950's-era Heathkit RF signal >generator complete with crinkle-coat paint.
Vintage doesn't matter. It's just a collection of props that add authenticity to your presentation and makes it appear that you actually work with the things that you are discussing. It's much like a mad scientist movie always features a sparking Jacobs ladder, a sci-fi space program has a wall full of flashing lights and an oscilloscope displaying a Lissajous pattern, or until fairly recently TV news programs had the sound of a teletype machines clattering in the background. Viewers expect electronic presentations to have a wall of electronics. Don't disappoint them.
>Besides, the most important test equipment in the room is my brain -- the >rest is just for convenience.
True, especially since your presentation is almost an infomercial advertising your services. Ever notice that law offices always feature a wall full of legal books behind the photo of the attorney? <https://www.google.com/search?q=law+office&tbm=isch> The books are for show. Today, attorneys do their reading online with dedicated programs, LexisNexis, Shepard's, Westlaw, Fastcase, etc. The books are purely for show. If you look at them carefully, many are probably seriously out of date. Same with test equipment. If you look carefully at the equipment behind Dave Jones, you'll notice that there are few test leads plugged into the equipment, none of it is powered on, and there's little in the way of the usual boxes, attenuators, isolators, adapters, clip leads, and related trivia necessary to make the test equipment do something useful. Yet another suggestion. Try not to put yourself between what you're presenting and the audience. Sitting to one side, as in your video, is acceptable. However, if you're showing something larger or more complicated, you may want to put it on a table between you and the camera. One more and I'll quit (It's 1am here). If you look at the various Dave Jones videos: <https://www.youtube.com/user/EEVblog> You might notice that the camera is well above Dave's head and looking down at Dave and everything else. That's intentional. There's lots of psychology involved, but basically it gives the viewer a slight feeling of superiority, which generally a better view of what's on the table. Your video puts the viewer slightly above your eye level, which makes them an equal to you. If you're trying to present something to other engineers who are competent in their areas of expertise, that's perfect. However, if you're trying to attract a general audience, who knows nothing about control systems, I suggest that you make them feel a bit superior by positioning them above eye level. If you want to intimidate the viewer, set yourself up as the leading authority on the topic, and probably chase your audience away, put the camera below your eye level.
>One of the videos I plan will show the test equipment that's built into >nearly any closed-loop control project I build: there's a swept-sine >analyzer in that software that lets me analyze both the arm position loop >and the motor speed loop. I can take the resulting data and use it to >tune the system.
I know next to nothing about PID controllers and would be very interested in seeing how it's really done. You mentioned cruise control. Practical examples are what interest me. -- Jeff Liebermann jeffl@cruzio.com 150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558
On Wed, 04 May 2016 16:48:13 -0500, Tim Wescott
<seemywebsite@myfooter.really> wrote:

>Just posted a video. It's my first real effort and, as videos go, rough >as a cob -- but I think the information is solid. > >I have a 15-minute time limit -- trying to fit an informative video into >that is kind of like explaining General Relativity with a book of haiku. > >https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2elEXcv0AV8 > >YouTube time limit >complex subject, 15 minutes >very hard.
Well done! The use of the fan for illustration was a great idea.
Really good if you somewhat understand it.

But ...
1) beginning:  explain the hardware.
    Motor with reversible fan
    What sensor(s) in base?  Position etc
    What is the static balance point and how does that affect all.

2) Show what overshoot is.  e.g. manually move the arm back indicating 
that is the overshoot.

A little light on integration and differentiation explanation.  A little 
more would be extremely helpful.  These are important concepts as you 
well know.

I give you a 98.   (lol)


--- news://freenews.netfront.net/ - complaints: news@netfront.net ---
Tim Wescott prodded the keyboard with:

> Just posted a video. It's my first real effort and, as videos go, > rough as a cob -- but I think the information is solid. > > I have a 15-minute time limit -- trying to fit an informative video > into that is kind of like explaining General Relativity with a book > of haiku. > > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2elEXcv0AV8 > > YouTube time limit > complex subject, 15 minutes > very hard. >
Thank Tim, Just watched the video. Reminds me of Uni. :-) -- Best Regards: Baron.
After finally watching the whole thing, it's great!   I think you
already captured appropriate changes to make it better, so nothing to
add here.   It's always good to see somebody provide an intuitive
explanation for things instead of focusing on the math (which is also
important, but the math usually gets explained to death).


On Wed, 04 May 2016 16:48:13 -0500, Tim Wescott
<seemywebsite@myfooter.really> wrote:

>Just posted a video. It's my first real effort and, as videos go, rough >as a cob -- but I think the information is solid. > >I have a 15-minute time limit -- trying to fit an informative video into >that is kind of like explaining General Relativity with a book of haiku. > >https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2elEXcv0AV8 > >YouTube time limit >complex subject, 15 minutes >very hard. > >-- > >Tim Wescott >Wescott Design Services >http://www.wescottdesign.com
On Thu, 05 May 2016 00:58:35 -0700, Jeff Liebermann <jeffl@cruzio.com>
wrote:

>>>>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2elEXcv0AV8
>YouTube adjusts the video to correspond to what the internet >connection and computah can handle. I'm bandwidth limited by a >1.5Mbit/sec DSL connection which shows your video as 360p. I'll try >it again tomorrow on my office cable modem connection, which can do >25mbits/sec and should show at least 720p.
Yet another another day in computah hell. I run Firefox 46.0.1 on Windoze XP in my palatial office at cable modem speeds and still get Flash as 360p. I would have expected higher resolution and HTML5. However, when I switch to Chrome Version 49.0.2623.112m (last version for XP), your video auto plays in HTML5 at 480p. I can also force it to 720p and 1080p and it plays without buffering. I also tried both the Firefox and Chrome browsers on Win 7 and Win 10. Here's the table of results for what appeared as the default player and screen resolution: Firefox Chrome Win XP Flash 360p HTML5 480p Win 7 HTML5 360p HTML5 480p Win 10 HTML5 360p HTML5 480p So, in Chrome, everything is working normally and correctly, but in Firefox, I have a problem only on my XP machine. Oddly, both Chrome and Firefox on XP show that HTML5 is supported and is the default: <https://www.youtube.com/html5> I still don't know why my Firefox default to Flash, but I think you can safely ignore this oddity as it seems to be a problem with my XP machine. -- Jeff Liebermann jeffl@cruzio.com 150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558
On 04/05/2016 22:48, Tim Wescott wrote:
> Just posted a video. It's my first real effort and, as videos go, rough > as a cob -- but I think the information is solid. > > I have a 15-minute time limit -- trying to fit an informative video into > that is kind of like explaining General Relativity with a book of haiku. > > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2elEXcv0AV8 > > YouTube time limit > complex subject, 15 minutes > very hard. >
Thank you Tim, really nice to hear the fan working harder/softer - an inspired choice of actuator! Good clear demonstration, I now can't wait to see a demo of the effects of too much D or too much I and not enough D / I etc and then an introduction on how to tune these or even explain how self-tuning works. piglet
On 05/05/2016 05:48 AM, Tim Wescott wrote:
> Just posted a video. It's my first real effort and, as videos go, rough > as a cob -- but I think the information is solid. > > I have a 15-minute time limit -- trying to fit an informative video into > that is kind of like explaining General Relativity with a book of haiku. > > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2elEXcv0AV8 > > YouTube time limit > complex subject, 15 minutes > very hard.
To convey one's mood In seventeen syllables Is very diffic (John Cooper Clarke)