A well-tuned PID with feedforward is capable of controlling a machine tool without any issues. Sure there are better ways to implement a control, but the results are not going to be significantly different on something as simple as a machine tool. After the academic controls community played around with robust control for 15 years, it's really difficult to get funding to do any more work in that field. I'm not sure what it would take to revive it. Eric Keller Boalsburg, Pennsylvania
On Sun, May 2, 2021 at 4:38 PM Jon Elson <el...@pico-systems.com> wrote: > On 05/02/2021 01:00 PM, Chris Albertson wrote: > > The below is exactly true. The problem is that PID is widely used and > PID > > is only "reactive" it can only deal with what has already happened and > the > > time lag is the source of oscillations. In the past, PID was the only > > control option because we had limited computing power. > True for classic PID. The PID calculation in LinuxCNC also > has feedforwards (FF0 - FF2) which > are quite useful, as they give an approximation of the > required drive to the motor without the output, move, sample > delay. > > Jon > > > _______________________________________________ > Emc-users mailing list > Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users > _______________________________________________ Emc-users mailing list Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users
