Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Let the param opt change the timestep #102

Merged
merged 13 commits into from
Nov 26, 2019
Merged

Let the param opt change the timestep #102

merged 13 commits into from
Nov 26, 2019

Conversation

avikde
Copy link
Owner

@avikde avikde commented Nov 24, 2019

This is needed for W2D if leaving the stiffnesses fixed and scaling since inertial terms get higher

image

Identified the problem in #101

  • currently directly have Hk*pt
  • this will have many side-effects: need to modify the fixeddt idea and use the one from params
  • what if it tries to set it too low or too high? shouldn't since i+s cancelling is a good way to minimize torque
  • on the plus side, with the various non-dimensional templates, usually there is some time normalization, and this may be needed in general

Conclusions of this PR

@avikde
Copy link
Owner Author

avikde commented Nov 24, 2019

Affine test previous commit: f729b6c

 0.0815238  0.320188  0.45894   0.453797  0.346806  0.175307  …  0.751371  0.417824  0.152845  -0.141091  -0.258705  -0.127218
 1.19676    0.85242   0.657917  0.517529  0.359011  0.172148     0.35619   0.243886  0.382706   0.963683   1.45447    1.58034

affine test after the dt split

 0.0815238  0.320188  0.45894   0.453797  0.346806  0.175307  …  0.751371  0.417824  0.152845  -0.141091  -0.258705  -0.127218
 1.19676    0.85242   0.657917  0.517529  0.359011  0.172148     0.35619   0.243886  0.382706   0.963683   1.45447    1.58034

i.e. the dt split is good. (These are both bad because this is from the truncated sim without fix)

@avikde
Copy link
Owner Author

avikde commented Nov 24, 2019

Opt ran with the dt in the optimization: Opt minal=1.0, τ2/1 lim=2.0 => [3.499 17.501 0.565 6.184 3.929 15.432 0.132]

image

Slightly different params than the last of #101

@avikde
Copy link
Owner Author

avikde commented Nov 24, 2019

Just need to make sure this helps alleviate the issue of needing to change stiffness. Scale params for lift and let it change dt, and check that i+s is small in each case.

Debug components results at different minal; letting it opt freq

0.6: Opt minal=0.6, τ2/1 lim=2.0 => [2.096 16.95 0.335 2.307 2.418 33.134 0.076], fHz=290.7
image

0.8: Opt minal=0.8, τ2/1 lim=2.0 => [2.795 17.62 0.447 4.294 3.659 10.752 0.091], fHz=243.3
image

1.0: Opt minal=1.0, τ2/1 lim=2.0 => [3.493 17.942 0.559 7.208 5.11 0.001 0.103], fHz=216.4
image

@avikde
Copy link
Owner Author

avikde commented Nov 24, 2019

Scale params for lift

This is for minal = 0.6:0.2:1.6

image

  • Unfortunately T2 goes to 0 again.

Debugging components

  • Components @ 1.6
Initial traj δt=0.135, opt.fixedδt=0.135
Avg lift initial [mN]=0.916, in [mg]=93.4
Opt minal=1.6, τ2/1 lim=2.0 => [5.59 17.942 0.894 24.701 12.744 0.0 0.11], fHz=202.8, al[mg]=165.1, u∞=96.5

image

  • i+s is quite large. looks like stiffness terms should be a lot higher
  • Increase stiffnesses to ko=0.55, ka=200
Initial traj δt=0.135, opt.fixedδt=0.135
Avg lift initial [mN]=0.635, in [mg]=64.7
Opt minal=1.6, τ2/1 lim=2.0 => [8.063 14.529 1.29 78.51 32.985 0.0 0.093], fHz=238.3, al[mg]=164.7, u∞=100.2

image

  • increasing cbar?? and increasing freq?? but i+s remaining large

Concrete fixes to make

@avikde

This comment has been minimized.

@avikde

This comment has been minimized.

@avikde
Copy link
Owner Author

avikde commented Nov 25, 2019

Unfortunately now I'm not getting the same results as in #102 (comment)

Opt minal=0.6, τ2/1 lim=2.0 => [2.158 18.88 0.345 2.493 2.719 0.001 0.076], fHz=293.5, al[mg]=61.1, u∞=14.9
image

With lower gains to createInitialTraj
Opt minal=0.6, τ2/1 lim=2.0 => [2.078 17.039 0.333 2.224 2.402 33.128 0.076], fHz=294.1, al[mg]=61.0, u∞=16.4
image

Need to think about:

  • why does this change with gain?
  • makes more sense to use an input sine to generate the output traj?

Use open-loop force input to generate initial traj

image

Opt minal=0.6, τ2/1 lim=2.0 => [2.029 17.657 0.325 2.064 2.372 34.147 0.075], fHz=297.2, al[mg]=60.1, u∞=15.1
image

Opt minal=1.0, τ2/1 lim=2.0 => [3.382 18.681 0.541 6.695 4.889 0.001 0.101], fHz=220.0, al[mg]=101.7, u∞=39.7
image

Opt minal=1.6, τ2/1 lim=2.0 => [5.411 18.681 0.866 22.633 12.037 0.0 0.109], fHz=203.8, al[mg]=165.5, u∞=93.1
image

@avikde
Copy link
Owner Author

avikde commented Nov 26, 2019

Scale params for lift with new traj - almost identical results as before.

image

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

1 participant