I have been making a labview program for kids to moniter energy production from various types of power sources. I have a condition where if they are underproducing a warning will fire, and if they are overproducing by a certian threshold, another warning will fire.
I would like to time how long throughout the activity, each type of warning is fired so each group will have a score at the end. This is just to simulate how the eventual program will behave.
Currently I have a timer which can derrive the amount of time the warning is true, but it will overwrite itself each time the warning goes off and on again.
So basically I need to to sum up the total time that the value has been true, even when it has flitted between true and false.
One method of tabulating the total time spent "True" would be exporting the Warning indicator from the While-loop using an indexed tunnel. If you also export from the loop a millisecond counter value of when the indicator was triggered, you can post process what will be an array of True/False values with the corresponding time at which the value transitioned.
The post processing could be a for-loop that keeps a running total of time spent true.
P.s. if you export your code as a VI snippet, others will be able to directly examine and modify the code without needing to remake it from scratch. See the NI webpage on the subject:
http://www.ni.com/white-paper/9330/en/
I would suggest going another way. Personally, I found the code you used confusing, since you subtract the tick count from the value in the shift register, which may work, but doesn't make any logical sense.
Instead, I would suggest turning this into a subVI which does the following:
Keep the current boolean value, the running total and the last reset time in shift registers.
Initialize these SRs on the first call using the first call primitive and a case structure.
If the value changes from F to T (compare the input to the SR), update the start time.
If it changes from T to F, subtract the start time from the current time and add that to the total.
I didn't actually code this now, so there may be holes there, but I'm leaving that as an exercise. Also, I would suggest making the VI reentrant. That way, you can simply call it a second time to get the same functionality for the second timer.
Related
I'm trying to implement a function that ensures that a minimum time on before turning off and a minimum time off before turning on.
I tried to do this, but I saw that it doesn't work xd
LEDOn();//I turn on the LED
timeLEDOn = GetSec(); // I took the time when the LED turned on.GetSec() is a function that returns the time in seconds since the microcontroller was turned on.
if (GetSec() - timeLEDOn >= MIN_TIME_ON) // I check if the current time minus the time the LED was turned on is greater than the minimum on time.
{LEDOff();}
But when doing this I realized that because the value of GetSec() is always changing, timeLEDOn also changes, so the subtraction would always be 0.
How can I store the value of GetSec() in a variable, at a given time without the value of the variable changing with GetSec()?
Hope you can guide me. :)
I am trying to understand how the auto rescheduling logic is supposed to work.
The recommended values in nagios.cfg are:
auto_reschedule_checks=1
auto_rescheduling_interval=30
auto_rescheduling_window=45
Supposedly this is after they realized the default values (same as above but with window=180) had the potential to have checks that never actually get executed (See https://support.nagios.com/kb/print-19.html).
But.. How are these new values any different?
How I understand it, every 30sec, it takes the next 45sec of checks, finds checks that overlap, and reschedules those evenly across the 45sec.
Isnt it possible for a check to indefinitely get rescheduled into that last 15 seconds of the 45sec window?
Am I missing something? Do rescheduled checks get an elevated priority so they arent rescheduled again? Reading through the code, it doesnt appear they are given any special treatment.
Seems to me that the only way to prevent that is for the interval and window to be the same.
Which means maybe a couple checks occurring right at each 30sec transition may go unnoticed,
but Id rather that than what I am presuming the behavior is with the "recommended" interval=30sec , window=45sec.
Any insights would be helpful!
The documentation suggests I use nm-device-wifi-request-scan-async, but I don't understand how to understand when it's has finished scanning. What's the correct second parameter I should pass, how is it constructed and what do I pass to nm-device-wifi-request-scan-finish?
I've tried using nm-device-wifi-get-last-scan and determining whether the scan has just happened or the last scan was a long time ago, but it doesn't seem to update the time of the scan - i.e., after requesting the scan and printing out the time between nm-utils-get-timestamp-msec and the last scan, it only increases and and decreases only if I restart the whole program, for some reason...
All I really need is to request a scan every x seconds and understand whether it has happened or not. The deprecated synchronous functions seem to have allowed this with callback functions, but I don't understand async :(
nm_device_wifi_request_scan_async() starts the scan, it will take a while until the result is ready.
You will know when the result is ready when the nm_device_wifi_get_last_scan() timestamp gets bumped.
it only increases and and decreases only if I restart the whole program, for some reason...
last-scan should be in clock_gettime(CLOCK_BOOTTIME) scale. That is supposed to never decrease (unless reboot). See man clock_gettime.
but I don't understand async
The sync method does not differ from the async method in this regard. They both only kick off a new scan, and when they compete, NetworkManager will be about to scan (or start shortly). The sync method is deprecated for other reasons (https://smcv.pseudorandom.co.uk/2008/11/nonblocking/).
I'm creating a card game in pygame for my college project, and a large aspect of the game is how the game's AI reacts to the current situation. I have a function to randomly generate a number within 2 parameters, and this is how long I want the program to wait.
All of the code on my ai is contained within an if statement, and once called I want the program to wait generated amount of time, and then make it's decision on what to do.
Originally I had:
pygame.time.delay(calcAISpeed(AIspeed))
This would work well, if it didn't pause the rest of the program whilst the AI is waiting, stopping the user from interacting with the program. This means I cannot use while loops to create my timer either.
What is the best way to work around this without going into multi-threading or other complex solutions? My project is due in soon and I don't want to make massive changes. I've tried using pygame.time.Clock functions to compare the current time to the generated one, but resetting the clock once the operation has been performed has proved troublesome.
Thanks for the help and I look forward to your input.
The easiest way around this would be to have a variable within your AI called something like "wait" and set it to a random number (of course it will have to be tweaked to your program speed... I'll explain in the code below.). Then in your update function have a conditional that waits to see if that wait number is zero or below, and if not subtract a certain amount of time from it. Below is a basic set of code to explain this...
class AI(object):
def __init__(self):
#put the stuff you want in your ai in here
self.currentwait = 100
#^^^ All you need is this variable defined somewhere
#If you want a static number as your wait time add this variable
self.wait = 100 #Your number here
def updateAI(self):
#If the wait number is less than zero then do stuff
if self.currentwait <= 0:
#Do your AI stuff here
else:
#Based on your game's tick speed and how long you want
#your AI to wait you can change the amount removed from
#your "current wait" variable
self.currentwait -= 100 #Your number here
To give you an idea of what is going on above, you have a variable called currentwait. This variable describes the time left the program has to wait. If this number is greater than 0, there is still time to wait, so nothing will get executed. However, time will be subtracted from this variable so every tick there is less time to wait. You can control this rate by using the clock tick rate. For example, if you clock rate is set to 60, then you can make the program wait 1 second by setting currentwait to 60 and taking 1 off every tick until the number reaches zero.
Like I said this is very basic so you will probably have to change it to fit your program slightly, but it should do the trick. Hope this helps you and good luck with your project :)
The other option is to create a timer event on the event queue and listen for it in the event loop: How can I detect if the user has double-clicked in pygame?
I'm looking for a way to disable the PID.vi from running in Labview when the event case container is false.
The program controls motor position to maintain constant tension on a cable using target force and actual force as the input parameters. The output is motor position. Note that reinitialize is set to false since it needs previous instances to spool the motor.
Currently, when the event case is true the motor spools as expected and maintains the cable tension. But when the event case state is toggled the PID.vi seems to be running in the background when false causing the motor spool sporatically.
Is there a way to freeze the PID controls so that it continues from where it left off?
The PID VI does not run in the background. It only executes when you call it. That said, PID is a time-based calculation. It calculates the difference from the last time you called the VI and uses that to calculate the new values. If a lot of time passed, it will just try to fix it using that data.
If you want to freeze the value and then resume fixing smoothly, you can use the limits input on the top and set the max and min to your desired output. This will cause the PID VI to always output that value. You will probably need a feedback node or shift register to remember the last value output by the PID.
What Yair said is not entirely true - the integral and derivative terms are indeed time dependent, but the proportional is not. A great reference for understanding PIDs and how they are implemented in LabVIEW can be found here (not sure why it is archived). Also, the PID VIs are coded in G so you can simply open them to see how they operate.
If you take a closer look at the PID VI, you can see what is happening and why you might not get the response you expect. In the VI itself, dt will be either 1) what you set it to, or 2) an accumulation of time based on a tick count stored in the VI (the default). Since you have not specified a dt, the PID algorithm uses the accumulated time between calls. If you have "paused" calculation for some time, this will have an impact on the integral and derivative output.
The derivative output will kick in when there is a change in the process variable (use of the process variable prevents derivative kick). The effect of a large accumulated time between calls will be to reduce the response of this term. The time that you have paused will have a more significant impact on the integral term. Since the response of the integral portion of the controller is the proportional to the integral of the error over dt, the longer you pause the larger the response simply because because the the algorithm is performing a trapezoidal integration over dt.
My first suggestion is don't pause the controller - let the PID do what it is supposed to do. If you are using it properly, then you should not have to stop the controller action. But, if you must pause the controller action, consider re-initializing the controller. This will force the controller to reset the accumulated time term and the response in the first iteration will be purely proportional.
Hope this helps.