Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > sci.engr.control > #6 > unrolled thread

Video: What is a PID Controller?

Back to article view | Back to sci.engr.control

Contents

  Video: What is a PID Controller? Tim Wescott <seemywebsite@myfooter.really> - 2016-05-04 16:48 -0500
    Re: Video: What is a PID Controller? eric.jacobsen@ieee.org (Eric Jacobsen) - 2016-05-04 21:58 +0000
    Re: Video: What is a PID Controller? Les Cargill <lcargill99@comcast.com> - 2016-05-04 18:30 -0500
    Re: Video: What is a PID Controller? Martin Riddle <martin_ridd@verizon.net> - 2016-05-04 19:43 -0400
      Re: Video: What is a PID Controller? Tim Wescott <seemywebsite@myfooter.really> - 2016-05-04 18:57 -0500
        Re: Video: What is a PID Controller? Clifford Heath <no.spam@please.net> - 2016-05-05 09:07 +1000
          Re: Video: What is a PID Controller? Tim Wescott <seemywebsite@myfooter.really> - 2016-05-04 19:52 -0500
            Re: Video: What is a PID Controller? Tim Wescott <seemywebsite@myfooter.really> - 2016-05-04 20:08 -0500
    Re: Video: What is a PID Controller? Randy Yates <yates@digitalsignallabs.com> - 2016-05-04 23:44 -0400
    Re: Video: What is a PID Controller? Jeff Liebermann <jeffl@cruzio.com> - 2016-05-04 23:21 -0700
      Re: Video: What is a PID Controller? Tim Wescott <tim@seemywebsite.com> - 2016-05-05 01:49 -0500
        Re: Video: What is a PID Controller? Jeff Liebermann <jeffl@cruzio.com> - 2016-05-05 00:58 -0700
          Re: Video: What is a PID Controller? Jeff Liebermann <jeffl@cruzio.com> - 2016-05-05 18:14 -0700
    Re: Video: What is a PID Controller? Bob Penoyer <bob@NOSPAMbobpenoyer.com> - 2016-05-05 10:07 -0700
    Re: Video: What is a PID Controller? OG <freenews@freenewsspam.net> - 2016-05-05 11:01 -0700
    Re: Video: What is a PID Controller? Baron <baron@linuxmaniac.net> - 2016-05-05 20:55 +0100
    Re: Video: What is a PID Controller? eric.jacobsen@ieee.org (Eric Jacobsen) - 2016-05-05 20:37 +0000
    Re: Video: What is a PID Controller? piglet <erichpwagner@hotmail.com> - 2016-05-06 11:02 +0100
      Re: Video: What is a PID Controller? Randy Yates <yates@digitalsignallabs.com> - 2016-05-06 12:21 -0400
      Re: Video: What is a PID Controller? Tim Wescott <seemywebsite@myfooter.really> - 2016-05-06 12:52 -0500
    Re: Video: What is a PID Controller? ChesterW <iamsnoozin@yahoo.com> - 2016-05-06 20:51 -0500

Page 1 of 2  [1] 2  Next page →

#6 — Video: What is a PID Controller?

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

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#7

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

At first glance it looks a lot better than the vids I've made!
Kudos.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#8

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.
>


Nicely done.

-- 
Les Cargill

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#9

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.  Your well spoken, I heard just one heavy sigh before you
add the I.  14min seemed to go by quickly.

The demo is nice, maybe a Tach display and a angle display.

And better lighting, maybe you can shrink your self into a PIP and
just show the demo.


Cheers

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#10

On Wed, 04 May 2016 19:43:26 -0400, Martin Riddle wrote:

> 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.  Your well spoken, I heard just one heavy sigh before you add
> the I.  14min seemed to go by quickly.
> 
> The demo is nice, maybe a Tach display and a angle display.
> 
> And better lighting, maybe you can shrink your self into a PIP and just
> show the demo.

I've been fiddle-farting around with this for ages, starting about a year 
ago with "what would it take to make professional quality video".  Not 
having infinite money, I didn't go that route.  I finally managed to 
whittle my expectations down to something I could actually _do_.

I am partially trying to sell myself here, but better lighting would 
certainly be a Good Thing -- there's some known cheap ways of doing 
these, which I'll probably employ next time.

-- 

Tim Wescott
Wescott Design Services
http://www.wescottdesign.com

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#11

On 05/05/16 09:57, Tim Wescott wrote:
> On Wed, 04 May 2016 19:43:26 -0400, Martin Riddle wrote:
>> And better lighting, maybe you can shrink your self into a PIP and just
>> show the demo.
> I've been fiddle-farting around with this for ages, starting about a year
> ago with "what would it take to make professional quality video".  Not
> having infinite money, I didn't go that route

If you have (access to) a Mac, I can highly recommend "ScreenFlow".
It can record multiple screens, multiple cameras and audio at the same 
time, and provides a really good post editor for mixing down the video,
with slo-mo replays, transitions and many other effects, PIP, etc.

All for $100. Excellent value, even just for the post facilities (i.e. 
even if you never make a recording).

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#12

On Thu, 05 May 2016 09:07:58 +1000, Clifford Heath wrote:

> On 05/05/16 09:57, Tim Wescott wrote:
>> On Wed, 04 May 2016 19:43:26 -0400, Martin Riddle wrote:
>>> And better lighting, maybe you can shrink your self into a PIP and
>>> just show the demo.
>> I've been fiddle-farting around with this for ages, starting about a
>> year ago with "what would it take to make professional quality video". 
>> Not having infinite money, I didn't go that route
> 
> If you have (access to) a Mac, I can highly recommend "ScreenFlow".
> It can record multiple screens, multiple cameras and audio at the same
> time, and provides a really good post editor for mixing down the video,
> with slo-mo replays, transitions and many other effects, PIP, etc.
> 
> All for $100. Excellent value, even just for the post facilities (i.e.
> even if you never make a recording).

I'm using KdenLive for editing, and it's pretty good -- at least, its 
capabilities are well beyond mine.  And at $0, its price is infinitely 
better.

The muy-expensivo camera is my cell phone.  It was realizing that I had 
something ON HAND that would take adequate video that really pushed me 
over the edge.

As for simple recording and editing mistakes, the points that will be 
different next time are:

1: I'm working off of (essentially) a bunch of slides, and you can see me 
looking at them as I talk.  I certainly don't like the looks of it.

2: There's a number of places where swear words, tongue-twists, and nose-
scratching was edited out on-the-fly, causing jumps in the video.  Again, 
they detract from the video.

Instead of trying to do the whole video in one take (and failing), I'm 
going to study _one_ slide, _hide it_, turn the camera on, do _that one 
slide's worth_ while _looking at the camera_, turn the camera off, repeat 
until _that slide_ is good enough, turn to the next slide, and repeat 
until done.  Then I'll edit them together with suitable transitions.

This presentation had ten slides, so if I do 90 seconds and flub it, I 
can just stop the camera, take a few deep breaths, and try again.

3: The lighting could be improved.  Just a few lamps off screen would 
have made it better, but I was in "dammit, just get 'er done" mode -- 
which is why it got done.

Not really on the "immediate" list, but room for incremental improvements:

4: The filming spot could be better.  That's my very own desk and 
workbench, just cleaned up for filming.  I'll probably stay here for now, 
possibly with incremental improvements, but if I should happen to get a 
really strong response I'll make a better spot.

5: I'm doing this entirely on my own.  If I can get a camera-wrangler and 
general coach in here while I'm filming that would help.  Fortunately, I 
have under-employed family members.

6: Editing and closed-captioning, ditto.  Unfortunately my general 
attitude toward new things is "dive in and keep screwing up until you get 
it right", while my wife and kids' attitude is "no, won't try unless I'll 
get it perfect".  Maybe I can get one or more of them to take classes...

-- 

Tim Wescott
Wescott Design Services
http://www.wescottdesign.com

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#13

On Wed, 04 May 2016 19:52:57 -0500, Tim Wescott wrote:

> On Thu, 05 May 2016 09:07:58 +1000, Clifford Heath wrote:
> 
>> On 05/05/16 09:57, Tim Wescott wrote:
>>> On Wed, 04 May 2016 19:43:26 -0400, Martin Riddle wrote:
>>>> And better lighting, maybe you can shrink your self into a PIP and
>>>> just show the demo.
>>> I've been fiddle-farting around with this for ages, starting about a
>>> year ago with "what would it take to make professional quality video".
>>> Not having infinite money, I didn't go that route
>> 
>> If you have (access to) a Mac, I can highly recommend "ScreenFlow".
>> It can record multiple screens, multiple cameras and audio at the same
>> time, and provides a really good post editor for mixing down the video,
>> with slo-mo replays, transitions and many other effects, PIP, etc.
>> 
>> All for $100. Excellent value, even just for the post facilities (i.e.
>> even if you never make a recording).
> 
> I'm using KdenLive for editing, and it's pretty good -- at least, its
> capabilities are well beyond mine.  And at $0, its price is infinitely
> better.
> 
> The muy-expensivo camera is my cell phone.  It was realizing that I had
> something ON HAND that would take adequate video that really pushed me
> over the edge.
> 
> As for simple recording and editing mistakes, the points that will be
> different next time are:
> 
> 1: I'm working off of (essentially) a bunch of slides, and you can see
> me looking at them as I talk.  I certainly don't like the looks of it.
> 
> 2: There's a number of places where swear words, tongue-twists, and
> nose- scratching was edited out on-the-fly, causing jumps in the video. 
> Again, they detract from the video.
> 
> Instead of trying to do the whole video in one take (and failing), I'm
> going to study _one_ slide, _hide it_, turn the camera on, do _that one
> slide's worth_ while _looking at the camera_, turn the camera off,
> repeat until _that slide_ is good enough, turn to the next slide, and
> repeat until done.  Then I'll edit them together with suitable
> transitions.
> 
> This presentation had ten slides, so if I do 90 seconds and flub it, I
> can just stop the camera, take a few deep breaths, and try again.
> 
> 3: The lighting could be improved.  Just a few lamps off screen would
> have made it better, but I was in "dammit, just get 'er done" mode --
> which is why it got done.
> 
> Not really on the "immediate" list, but room for incremental
> improvements:
> 
> 4: The filming spot could be better.  That's my very own desk and
> workbench, just cleaned up for filming.  I'll probably stay here for
> now, possibly with incremental improvements, but if I should happen to
> get a really strong response I'll make a better spot.
> 
> 5: I'm doing this entirely on my own.  If I can get a camera-wrangler
> and general coach in here while I'm filming that would help. 
> Fortunately, I have under-employed family members.
> 
> 6: Editing and closed-captioning, ditto.  Unfortunately my general
> attitude toward new things is "dive in and keep screwing up until you
> get it right", while my wife and kids' attitude is "no, won't try unless
> I'll get it perfect".  Maybe I can get one or more of them to take
> classes...

Oh, and a quieter @#$% chair.

-- 

Tim Wescott
Wescott Design Services
http://www.wescottdesign.com

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#14

Tim Wescott <seemywebsite@myfooter.really> writes:

> 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

You're just as bald as I am!

(Oh, and nice video! :)
-- 
Randy Yates, DSP/Embedded Firmware Developer
Digital Signal Labs
http://www.digitalsignallabs.com

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#15

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

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#16

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

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#17

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

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#22

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

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#18

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.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#19

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 ---

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#20

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.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#21

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

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#23

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

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#24

piglet <erichpwagner@hotmail.com> writes:

> 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.

Yes! I had the same questions.

> piglet

--Eeyore

-- 
Randy Yates, DSP/Embedded Firmware Developer
Digital Signal Labs
http://www.digitalsignallabs.com

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#25

On Fri, 06 May 2016 11:02:53 +0100, piglet wrote:

> 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.

I'm not sure if I'll do self-tuning, but yes, the other two need to go 
into a video -- or two, to fit into YouTube's time limits.

-- 

Tim Wescott
Wescott Design Services
http://www.wescottdesign.com

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

Page 1 of 2  [1] 2  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | sci.engr.control

csiph-web