EDAboard.com | EDAboard.eu | EDAboard.de | EDAboard.co.uk | RTV forum PL | NewsGroups PL

New Video: Parametric Oscillations

Ask a question - edaboard.com

elektroda.net NewsGroups Forum Index - Electronics Design - New Video: Parametric Oscillations

Goto page Previous  1, 2

LM
Guest

Mon Jan 09, 2017 5:13 am   



On Sat, 07 Jan 2017 13:39:36 -0600, Tim Wescott <tim_at_seemywebsite.com>
wrote:

Quote:
On Sat, 07 Jan 2017 00:14:42 -0800, Robert Baer wrote:

Tim Wescott wrote:
On Fri, 06 Jan 2017 00:22:28 -0500, ehsjr wrote:

On 1/4/2017 3:10 PM, Tim Wescott wrote:
It's a bit off-topic from the channel, but hopefully fun.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gY3ymZC6t9M




Wonderful!
Ed

Thanks! I thought it was shitty.

That's not a comment on your opinion -- I often finish a talk or a book
or whatever thinking "gawd, why am I not covered in rotten
vegetables?",
only to be accosted by people wanting to _thank_ me for my work.

OTOH, I can finish something up, think "hey, this is pretty good!",
inflict it on an unsuspecting world, and find out that no, in fact, it
was a steaming pile of crap (very powerful! Makes things grow!).

I've decided that I'm not a very good critic of my own work.

Well, i thought that the editing done was implemented very nicely.
The resulting "jumps" or "gas" were rather smooth and only a very
professional system could improve it, along with multiple time-consuming
re-enactments for more accurate body placement and hand-motion merging.
In a word, this ain't Hollywood and we are not seasoned or
professional actors.
WELL DONE!

I read somewhere, on the blog of some YouTube biggie, that if you're
doing a "talking head" video then the quality of the sound is far more
important than getting the video perfect. I also noticed that quite a
few of the "talking head" video channels that I watch will have even more
sudden visual jumps than I use, and I just don't notice them unless I
concentrate.

Everything is recorded on a Samsung Galaxy S5 cell phone, and edited
using kdenlive open-source video software. I'm pretty amazing that I can
do so well on stuff that I could get for free, or had lying around.

I have no work for you unfortunately, but I was trying to send a
comment about "Implementing the PID Controller in Software" when Gmail
complained about your email address. Probably a space in the address
is too much for Gmail.

By the way, this was my comment or question.
Hi

I read about your PID videos on the newsgroup and watched some. In
"Implementing the PID Controller in Software" you talk about
integrator wind up. I thought when I watched the video, that in one
moment the error is 0/zero. So how about resetting the integrator to
zero when the error is zero, what ever it means physically.

By the way, years ago opamp integrators had this problem because of
opamp bias current and offset.

Tim Wescott
Guest

Mon Jan 09, 2017 8:30 am   



On Mon, 09 Jan 2017 00:13:24 +0200, LM wrote:

Quote:
On Sat, 07 Jan 2017 13:39:36 -0600, Tim Wescott <tim_at_seemywebsite.com
wrote:

On Sat, 07 Jan 2017 00:14:42 -0800, Robert Baer wrote:

Tim Wescott wrote:
On Fri, 06 Jan 2017 00:22:28 -0500, ehsjr wrote:

On 1/4/2017 3:10 PM, Tim Wescott wrote:
It's a bit off-topic from the channel, but hopefully fun.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gY3ymZC6t9M




Wonderful!
Ed

Thanks! I thought it was shitty.

That's not a comment on your opinion -- I often finish a talk or a
book or whatever thinking "gawd, why am I not covered in rotten
vegetables?",
only to be accosted by people wanting to _thank_ me for my work.

OTOH, I can finish something up, think "hey, this is pretty good!",
inflict it on an unsuspecting world, and find out that no, in fact,
it was a steaming pile of crap (very powerful! Makes things grow!).

I've decided that I'm not a very good critic of my own work.

Well, i thought that the editing done was implemented very nicely.
The resulting "jumps" or "gas" were rather smooth and only a very
professional system could improve it, along with multiple
time-consuming re-enactments for more accurate body placement and
hand-motion merging.
In a word, this ain't Hollywood and we are not seasoned or
professional actors.
WELL DONE!

I read somewhere, on the blog of some YouTube biggie, that if you're
doing a "talking head" video then the quality of the sound is far more
important than getting the video perfect. I also noticed that quite a
few of the "talking head" video channels that I watch will have even
more sudden visual jumps than I use, and I just don't notice them unless
I concentrate.

Everything is recorded on a Samsung Galaxy S5 cell phone, and edited
using kdenlive open-source video software. I'm pretty amazing that I
can do so well on stuff that I could get for free, or had lying around.
I have no work for you unfortunately, but I was trying to send a comment
about "Implementing the PID Controller in Software" when Gmail
complained about your email address. Probably a space in the address is
too much for Gmail.

By the way, this was my comment or question.
Hi

I read about your PID videos on the newsgroup and watched some. In
"Implementing the PID Controller in Software" you talk about integrator
wind up. I thought when I watched the video, that in one moment the
error is 0/zero. So how about resetting the integrator to zero when the
error is zero, what ever it means physically.


That would be bad, because you'd be resetting the integrator just when
it'd finally achieved its goal.

A much more effective integrator anti-windup measure is to hold the
integrator at zero when the error is _high_, the theory being that the
integrator's job is to clean up residual messes, not to help you get to
the target more quickly. Another method, which works when your system
has discrete jumps in the command (i.e., when the machine is at point A
and you want to command a move to point B) is to change the target point,
then suppress integrator action for some fixed period of time.

I haven't used either of these methods, but I know they're out there.

Quote:
By the way, years ago opamp integrators had this problem because of
opamp bias current and offset.


Opamp offset is a different problem altogether -- in that case, if you're
using an opamp as an integrator, the various offsets mean that you servo
to somewhere close to, but not exactly on, the right target. You have
the same problem with digital systems, because no matter how fancy you
get you'll always measure the position wrong somehow, and then drive
until your (unavoidably erroneous) position measurement is dead on to the
target value.

--

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

I'm looking for work -- see my website!


Guest

Tue Jan 10, 2017 6:12 am   



On Sat, 07 Jan 2017 13:39:36 -0600, Tim Wescott <tim_at_seemywebsite.com>
wrote:

Quote:
On Sat, 07 Jan 2017 00:14:42 -0800, Robert Baer wrote:

Tim Wescott wrote:
On Fri, 06 Jan 2017 00:22:28 -0500, ehsjr wrote:

On 1/4/2017 3:10 PM, Tim Wescott wrote:
It's a bit off-topic from the channel, but hopefully fun.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gY3ymZC6t9M




Wonderful!
Ed

Thanks! I thought it was shitty.

That's not a comment on your opinion -- I often finish a talk or a book
or whatever thinking "gawd, why am I not covered in rotten
vegetables?",
only to be accosted by people wanting to _thank_ me for my work.

OTOH, I can finish something up, think "hey, this is pretty good!",
inflict it on an unsuspecting world, and find out that no, in fact, it
was a steaming pile of crap (very powerful! Makes things grow!).

I've decided that I'm not a very good critic of my own work.

Well, i thought that the editing done was implemented very nicely.
The resulting "jumps" or "gas" were rather smooth and only a very
professional system could improve it, along with multiple time-consuming
re-enactments for more accurate body placement and hand-motion merging.
In a word, this ain't Hollywood and we are not seasoned or
professional actors.
WELL DONE!

I read somewhere, on the blog of some YouTube biggie, that if you're
doing a "talking head" video then the quality of the sound is far more
important than getting the video perfect. I also noticed that quite a
few of the "talking head" video channels that I watch will have even more
sudden visual jumps than I use, and I just don't notice them unless I
concentrate.


Yeah, the few I've done on my own had crap for sound, which did,
indeed, make them horrid.

Quote:
Everything is recorded on a Samsung Galaxy S5 cell phone, and edited
using kdenlive open-source video software. I'm pretty amazing that I can
do so well on stuff that I could get for free, or had lying around.


Agreed yours look quite good.



---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

Tim Wescott
Guest

Tue Jan 10, 2017 8:30 am   



On Mon, 09 Jan 2017 23:12:04 +0000, eric.jacobsen wrote:

Quote:
On Sat, 07 Jan 2017 13:39:36 -0600, Tim Wescott <tim_at_seemywebsite.com
wrote:

On Sat, 07 Jan 2017 00:14:42 -0800, Robert Baer wrote:

Tim Wescott wrote:
On Fri, 06 Jan 2017 00:22:28 -0500, ehsjr wrote:

On 1/4/2017 3:10 PM, Tim Wescott wrote:
It's a bit off-topic from the channel, but hopefully fun.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gY3ymZC6t9M




Wonderful!
Ed

Thanks! I thought it was shitty.

That's not a comment on your opinion -- I often finish a talk or a
book or whatever thinking "gawd, why am I not covered in rotten
vegetables?",
only to be accosted by people wanting to _thank_ me for my work.

OTOH, I can finish something up, think "hey, this is pretty good!",
inflict it on an unsuspecting world, and find out that no, in fact,
it was a steaming pile of crap (very powerful! Makes things grow!).

I've decided that I'm not a very good critic of my own work.

Well, i thought that the editing done was implemented very nicely.
The resulting "jumps" or "gas" were rather smooth and only a very
professional system could improve it, along with multiple
time-consuming re-enactments for more accurate body placement and
hand-motion merging.
In a word, this ain't Hollywood and we are not seasoned or
professional actors.
WELL DONE!

I read somewhere, on the blog of some YouTube biggie, that if you're
doing a "talking head" video then the quality of the sound is far more
important than getting the video perfect. I also noticed that quite a
few of the "talking head" video channels that I watch will have even
more sudden visual jumps than I use, and I just don't notice them unless
I concentrate.

Yeah, the few I've done on my own had crap for sound, which did, indeed,
make them horrid.


I actually had to discard about 1/3 of a video's worth of footage on this
one and re-do it. I had the lapel mic contacting my chin, and even with
a smooth shave every time I moved my head the damned thing scratched.

Fortunately I did a spot check that 1/3 of the way in, or I would have
had to re-record everything.

--
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

Clive Arthur
Guest

Tue Jan 10, 2017 6:55 pm   



On 04/01/2017 20:10, Tim Wescott wrote:
Quote:
It's a bit off-topic from the channel, but hopefully fun.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gY3ymZC6t9M


Thanks.

Would working a yo-yo be an example of PO? As the yo-yo descends and
unwinds, you pull up on the string to speed it up, adding energy.

Cheers
--
Clive


Guest

Wed Jan 11, 2017 2:38 am   



Quote:
Would working a yo-yo be an example of PO?  As the yo-yo descends and
unwinds, you pull up on the string to speed it up, adding energy.

The whole term is kind of a funny one -- it's bound up in 20th-century
science wanting to make all differential equations linear and time
invariant (because then you can solve them on paper, before you die of
old age).


Linear systems theory is so powerful and intuitive that it's worth trading away quite a lot of accuracy to keep it. It can usually be patched up afterwards.

Being able to go back and forth between time and frequency domains is one of the main benefits. One formula contains a lot more knowledge than a huge stack of simulations.

We've managed to breed a whole generation of SPICE monkeys whose engineering methods are basically those of the pyramids.

Cheers

Phil Hobbs

Tim Wescott
Guest

Wed Jan 11, 2017 6:49 am   



On Tue, 10 Jan 2017 11:55:39 +0000, Clive Arthur wrote:

Quote:
On 04/01/2017 20:10, Tim Wescott wrote:
It's a bit off-topic from the channel, but hopefully fun.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gY3ymZC6t9M

Thanks.

Would working a yo-yo be an example of PO? As the yo-yo descends and
unwinds, you pull up on the string to speed it up, adding energy.


The whole term is kind of a funny one -- it's bound up in 20th-century
science wanting to make all differential equations linear and time
invariant (because then you can solve them on paper, before you die of
old age).

As for your questions: find three or four college physics professors.
Get a couple of pints of beer down each one, then pose your question.
Stand back.

--

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

I'm looking for work -- see my website!

Christian Gollwitzer
Guest

Wed Jan 11, 2017 8:30 am   



Am 11.01.17 um 00:49 schrieb Tim Wescott:
Quote:
On Tue, 10 Jan 2017 11:55:39 +0000, Clive Arthur wrote:
Would working a yo-yo be an example of PO? As the yo-yo descends and
unwinds, you pull up on the string to speed it up, adding energy.


As for your questions: find three or four college physics professors.
Get a couple of pints of beer down each one, then pose your question.
Stand back.


ROFL. Reminds me of https://xkcd.com/356/

Christian

Tim Wescott
Guest

Thu Jan 12, 2017 8:30 am   



On Tue, 10 Jan 2017 16:38:08 -0800, pcdhobbs wrote:

Quote:
Would working a yo-yo be an example of PO?  As the yo-yo descends and
unwinds, you pull up on the string to speed it up, adding energy.

The whole term is kind of a funny one -- it's bound up in 20th-century
science wanting to make all differential equations linear and time
invariant (because then you can solve them on paper, before you die of
old age).

Linear systems theory is so powerful and intuitive that it's worth
trading away quite a lot of accuracy to keep it. It can usually be
patched up afterwards.


As long as you understand that you're making a linear approximation, so
you can do the patching up correctly going back. Lots of guys my age
manage to avoid being SPICE monkeys, but still don't understand what
they're doing when they're using frequency-domain stuff.

Quote:
Being able to go back and forth between time and frequency domains is
one of the main benefits. One formula contains a lot more knowledge than
a huge stack of simulations.


+1!!!

Quote:
We've managed to breed a whole generation of SPICE monkeys whose
engineering methods are basically those of the pyramids.


Yes, unfortunately.

--

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

I'm looking for work -- see my website!

Goto page Previous  1, 2

elektroda.net NewsGroups Forum Index - Electronics Design - New Video: Parametric Oscillations

Ask a question - edaboard.com

Arabic versionBulgarian versionCatalan versionCzech versionDanish versionGerman versionGreek versionEnglish versionSpanish versionFinnish versionFrench versionHindi versionCroatian versionIndonesian versionItalian versionHebrew versionJapanese versionKorean versionLithuanian versionLatvian versionDutch versionNorwegian versionPolish versionPortuguese versionRomanian versionRussian versionSlovak versionSlovenian versionSerbian versionSwedish versionTagalog versionUkrainian versionVietnamese versionChinese version
RTV map EDAboard.com map News map EDAboard.eu map EDAboard.de map EDAboard.co.uk map