This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.
Both sides previous revision Previous revision | |||
ballandbeam_modelling [2016/07/13 14:59] joaomatos |
ballandbeam_modelling [2016/07/13 15:02] (current) joaomatos |
||
---|---|---|---|
Line 119: | Line 119: | ||
{{::comparison.jpg?direct|}} | {{::comparison.jpg?direct|}} | ||
- | It's difficult to make a comparison between the PID and LQR control methods , both can be adjusted by hand after the initial guess and can show satisfactory results.However , the main advantage of using LQR on this case is that the energy input can be controlled (at the [R] matrix ). Both methods requires a hand tuning after the initial guess to achieve the desired response. | + | It's difficult to make a comparison between the PID and LQR control methods on this ball and beam case , both can be adjusted by hand after the initial guess and can show satisfactory results.However , the main advantage of using LQR on this case is that the energy input can be controlled (at the [R] matrix ). Both methods requires a hand tuning after the initial guess to achieve the desired response. |
+ | |||
+ | Usually you will want to use Full State feedback using LQR insted of PID - PID can be limited in some situations. On the Rotary Inverted Pendulum for example , using only PID Control is not enough to get a good pendulum balance. | ||