Skip to content

Step info improve jpp #583

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Closed

Conversation

juanodecc
Copy link
Contributor

WIP: @bnavigator check this new feature... I tested it with a mimo system from matlab help online. This new version improve the undershoot calculus. The undershoot ocurr when the value have diferent sign respect the y_final... the system must have inverse response

For discusions:

  1. In the test for MIMO systems, I had to modifie the result of SettlingTimeMin for pass the test, because I think Matlab result is wrong. (the script take max and min after rise time, and this orcurr at Tr = 0)
  2. The Tr calculs have an error of one DT when compute the Tr for digital systems (like mimo system used for testing) because the script compute the Tr with the two points far. (this is easy to implement)

TODO (WIP): make a new function to compute step_info for data from external simulations or stimulations: step_info_data(t,y,y_final)

Now can compute the step response characteristics for MIMO systems.
Fix undershoot caculus for sistems with negative response.
and add a working example too, finaly I corrected
 the see also to referring to functions of this library
@bnavigator
Copy link
Contributor

Your commits have a date from 2 days ago and they are based on an older commit. Please check #577, which is already merged. We essentially did very similar changes. Could you have a look and make further improvements such as the undershoot calculation based on current master please?

You can discard your unit tests and just change the existing references for the undershoot value, if necessary.

@bnavigator bnavigator added the needs rebase The PR needs a rebase to current master branch label Mar 20, 2021
@juanodecc
Copy link
Contributor Author

ok, Ill try to solve this problem

@juanodecc juanodecc closed this Mar 22, 2021
@bnavigator bnavigator removed the needs rebase The PR needs a rebase to current master branch label Mar 22, 2021
@murrayrm murrayrm added this to the 0.9.1 milestone Dec 30, 2021
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants