Timeline for Transfer function with blackbox modelling is too slow compared to real expectation
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
13 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 3, 2021 at 3:01 | history | tweeted | twitter.com/StackSignals/status/1366946711285948427 | ||
| Feb 27, 2021 at 17:37 | vote | accept | Carl | ||
| Feb 27, 2021 at 16:33 | comment | added | Matt L. | Ok, good idea. Note that $T_s$ needs to be $0.003$ instead of $0.03$. | |
| Feb 27, 2021 at 16:33 | answer | added | Matt L. | timeline score: 6 | |
| Feb 27, 2021 at 16:02 | comment | added | Carl | @MattL. By the way, if you want to make an answer with your comment I would be more than happy to accept it. | |
| Feb 26, 2021 at 15:02 | history | edited | Carl | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 159 characters in body
|
| Feb 26, 2021 at 15:00 | comment | added | Carl | @MattL. Thank you! Yeah that really did reduce the time for it to reach the actual value. However, it still takes the step response 1s to reach 0.3m/s, is there anything I can do to make the fit better, or is that the best I can do, do you think? | |
| Feb 26, 2021 at 12:32 | comment | added | Matt L. |
It looks like your sampling interval is $0.003$, but you specify Ts=0.05 in your call to iddata. That would explain the time stretch in the step response.
|
|
| Feb 26, 2021 at 12:19 | comment | added | Carl | @MattL. I edited the question adding my code and my data, which was contained in a text file. Unfortunately I can't post the file here, so I just copied and pasted the numbers. | |
| Feb 26, 2021 at 12:18 | history | edited | Carl | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 24838 characters in body
|
| Feb 26, 2021 at 12:05 | comment | added | Matt L. |
How did you create data? I'm asking because it looks like tfest doesn't get the correct information concerning the sampling instants.
|
|
| Feb 26, 2021 at 9:57 | review | First posts | |||
| Feb 26, 2021 at 11:57 | |||||
| Feb 26, 2021 at 9:51 | history | asked | Carl | CC BY-SA 4.0 |