New Trajectory Planner - Testers/programs wanted

More
03 Feb 2014 02:18 #43459 by skunkworks
I noticed that your screenshots have offsets displayed in the preview pane.. If you turn them off in the view menu - it then displays the velocity. (it is a bug - there is a bug tracker on it)

ie


wow - rob, as aways, very impressive. (I am someone that keeps checking you experimental branch to see if you have added any commits.. :) )


:) Glad to hear it! It's been a little quiet lately because I've got a few features in development, but they aren't quite ready for testing. I'm trying to get at least one out today, and also push the stable fixes to the beta branch.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
03 Feb 2014 02:53 - 03 Feb 2014 02:53 #43461 by rellenberg
Thanks for the tip! That certainly cleans up the screen a bit.

In other news, I think I've found a fix for the slowdown problem on the experimental branch. Here's how it works:
  1. If we get within two segments of the end, force the last segment to be "finalized", i.e. we can't change it's length
  2. Re-run the optimization over the last 2 segments
  3. If we're not actually at the end (queue starvation), then the next blend arc will fall back to parabolic, so we won't have acceleration violations
There are a few other under-the-hood changes in the experimental branch, but nothing that should have a huge effect on performance yet.
Last edit: 03 Feb 2014 02:53 by rellenberg. Reason: formatting

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
03 Feb 2014 03:24 #43463 by skunkworks
I just pulled the experimental branch. The last segment now runs smooth.

just goofing around - I ran steve.ngc - it had huge acceleration constraint viloations. Maybe part of your arc-line work?


Thanks for the tip! That certainly cleans up the screen a bit.

In other news, I think I've found a fix for the slowdown problem on the experimental branch. Here's how it works:
  1. If we get within two segments of the end, force the last segment to be "finalized", i.e. we can't change it's length
  2. Re-run the optimization over the last 2 segments
  3. If we're not actually at the end (queue starvation), then the next blend arc will fall back to parabolic, so we won't have acceleration violations
There are a few other under-the-hood changes in the experimental branch, but nothing that should have a huge effect on performance yet.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
03 Feb 2014 07:47 #43471 by rellenberg
That's strange, steve.ngc seems to run fine in my simulation and RT builds. However, I ran a big batch of tests and found a small overage on arc-parabolic-blend.ngc (attached). Is it consistently going over at a particular spot?
Attachments:

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
03 Feb 2014 07:54 #43472 by skunkworks
This is v2.5.3-2611-g9ea88c1

I get this running steve.ngc

sam

That's strange, steve.ngc seems to run fine in my simulation and RT builds. However, I ran a big batch of tests and found a small overage on arc-parabolic-blend.ngc (attached). Is it consistently going over at a particular spot?

Attachments:

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
03 Feb 2014 10:30 #43475 by skunkworks
here is the x axis - first at around line 25-27 and 27-28...

That is with steve.ngc strait G64

sam
Attachments:

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
03 Feb 2014 17:24 #43485 by Rick G
Rob,

I'm working on an update to push out to the beta branch that will fix this and a few other minor issues.


I will update what I am testing this week. I did notice that end moves might be treated differently in certain circumstances.
Again I may not have the latest but here is the current TP vs the new with straight G64.





Rick G
Attachments:

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
03 Feb 2014 21:11 #43492 by skunkworks
Rob - I added your program to the bug tracker here..

sourceforge.net/p/emc/bugs/344/

although - I don't know if it will get fixed before your branch would get added.. (as no one has come forward with having issues with the current TP. - that I know of anyway)

sam

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
04 Feb 2014 03:00 #43508 by rellenberg
Hi Rick,

Thanks for finding that missing blend in your test run. I figured out why it's doing that. I made a dumb optimization about a month ago that led to some parabolic blends not being detected correctly. I wanted to pre-calculate the peak velocity for each segment, but this meant every time something changed about the segment length, the calculation would have to be redone. I'm reverting to the original behavior because it's a big headache for too little gain.

Another mistake: I scaled back acceleration by 0.5 if the current or previous segment has a parabolic blend. However, the check for this in some cases happened before blend arcs were created, which meant some segments were accelerating too slowly. I'll have a fix for both of these issues out by the end of the day on the experimental branch.

Sam, I'm still trying to reproduce that overage on my configs, but if I can't, I'll download your config again and try it out.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
04 Feb 2014 03:06 #43509 by skunkworks
Hmm - that is odd. I could try it on a different computer. That was a sim build on my laptop.

sam

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

Time to create page: 0.300 seconds
Powered by Kunena Forum