paparazzi-devel
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Paparazzi-devel] Control loops in simulink


From: Hector Garcia de Marina
Subject: Re: [Paparazzi-devel] Control loops in simulink
Date: Wed, 29 Jun 2011 17:20:15 +0200

Hello Antoine,

Matlab (I have a hate-love relation with this program :P) allows a fast prototyping using simulink or its script language, this is why I use it, it is very easy to perform montecarlo simulations, stadistical analysis, etc.

Actually, my hardware does not interact with Matlab in anyway, just to test and prototype xD. But many thanks for your help offer.

I know there is many people interested in autocoding from Matlab/Simulink algorithms to final hardware, but this is not my case. Personally, I try to avoid this kind of situations.

Cheers,
Héctor.


On Wed, Jun 29, 2011 at 2:49 PM, antoine drouin <address@hidden> wrote:
Hey Guys

Do you know that the paparazzi simulator is able to use JSBsim (
http://jsbsim.sourceforge.net/ ) as its flight dynamic model ? This
simulator allows you to specify an arbitrary accurate ( and complex )
flight dynamic.
The advantage I see of using the paparazzi sim instead of simulink is
that you're testing the real implementation, not just a more or less
accurate re-implementation ( think numerical accuracy, sampling time,
latencies, etc...  all the funny sides effect that _do_ play a
significant role in the final result ).
At the moment, the simulator is running against the full autopilot
code ( that includes the logic, the communications, etc...), so you
need to interact with it just like you would do with a real aircraft.
I could show you how to bypass some of these if you're only interested
in control and need to run batch simulations.

Regards

Poine


On Wed, Jun 29, 2011 at 11:19 AM, Jesus Martin Sanchez
<address@hidden> wrote:
>   Yes I´m Spanish, Are you?  I use the CEASIOM in order to obtain de
> coeficients, I use the xfrl5 and the avl too, but this last one, when I used
> for the piccolo, in my opinion, it´s not really precise.
>   Thanks
>   Jesús
> _______________________________________________
> Paparazzi-devel mailing list
> address@hidden
> https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/paparazzi-devel
>
>

_______________________________________________
Paparazzi-devel mailing list
address@hidden
https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/paparazzi-devel



--
Héctor



reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]