Files
allwpilib/wpilibjIntegrationTests/src/main/java/edu/wpi/first/wpilibj/PIDTest.java

183 lines
5.8 KiB
Java
Raw Normal View History

/*----------------------------------------------------------------------------*/
Add replacement PIDController class (#1300) Originally, PIDController used PIDSource with its "PIDSourceType" to determine whether a class should return position or velocity to the controller. However, the supported languages have changed a lot over 10 years and now support lambdas. Instead of using PIDSource and PIDOutput, users can pass in doubles to the Calculate() function synchronously. This makes the controller much more flexible for team's needs as they no longer have to make a separate PIDSource-inheriting class just to provide a custom input. The built-in feedforward was removed. Since PIDController is synchronous now, they can add their own feedforward on top of what Calculate() returns. To facilitate running the controller asynchronously, there is a PIDControllerRunner class that handles that. By separating the loop from the control law, PIDController can now be composed with others and be used to control a drivetrain (a multiple input, multiple output system that requires summing the results from two controllers) much easier. Also, motion profiling can be used to set the reference over time. All the classes related to the old PIDController are now deprecated. The new classes are in an experimental namespace to avoid name conflicts. While this is a large change, I think it is a necessary one for growth. The old PIDController design was created in a time when languages only supported OOP, and we have more tools at our disposal now to solve problems. This more versatile implementation can be used in more places like as a replacement for Pathfinder's "EncoderFollower" class. There has been hesitation to add lambda support to WPILib for a while now out of concerns for requiring teams to learn more features of C++ or Java. In my opinion, this change makes PIDController easier to use, not harder. The concept of a function is a building block of OOP and should be learned before classes. The ability to store functions as first-class objects and invoke them just like variables is rather natural. Note that PID constants for the new controller will be different from the old one. The original controller didn't take the discretization period into account. To fix this, teams should just have to divide their Ki gain by 0.05 and multiply their Kd gain by 0.05 where 0.05 is the original default period.
2019-07-07 15:37:13 -07:00
/* Copyright (c) 2008-2019 FIRST. All Rights Reserved. */
/* Open Source Software - may be modified and shared by FRC teams. The code */
/* must be accompanied by the FIRST BSD license file in the root directory of */
/* the project. */
/*----------------------------------------------------------------------------*/
package edu.wpi.first.wpilibj;
import java.util.ArrayList;
import java.util.Arrays;
import java.util.Collection;
import java.util.logging.Logger;
import org.junit.After;
import org.junit.AfterClass;
import org.junit.Before;
import org.junit.BeforeClass;
import org.junit.Test;
import org.junit.runner.RunWith;
import org.junit.runners.Parameterized;
import org.junit.runners.Parameterized.Parameters;
import edu.wpi.first.networktables.NetworkTable;
import edu.wpi.first.networktables.NetworkTableInstance;
Add replacement PIDController class (#1300) Originally, PIDController used PIDSource with its "PIDSourceType" to determine whether a class should return position or velocity to the controller. However, the supported languages have changed a lot over 10 years and now support lambdas. Instead of using PIDSource and PIDOutput, users can pass in doubles to the Calculate() function synchronously. This makes the controller much more flexible for team's needs as they no longer have to make a separate PIDSource-inheriting class just to provide a custom input. The built-in feedforward was removed. Since PIDController is synchronous now, they can add their own feedforward on top of what Calculate() returns. To facilitate running the controller asynchronously, there is a PIDControllerRunner class that handles that. By separating the loop from the control law, PIDController can now be composed with others and be used to control a drivetrain (a multiple input, multiple output system that requires summing the results from two controllers) much easier. Also, motion profiling can be used to set the reference over time. All the classes related to the old PIDController are now deprecated. The new classes are in an experimental namespace to avoid name conflicts. While this is a large change, I think it is a necessary one for growth. The old PIDController design was created in a time when languages only supported OOP, and we have more tools at our disposal now to solve problems. This more versatile implementation can be used in more places like as a replacement for Pathfinder's "EncoderFollower" class. There has been hesitation to add lambda support to WPILib for a while now out of concerns for requiring teams to learn more features of C++ or Java. In my opinion, this change makes PIDController easier to use, not harder. The concept of a function is a building block of OOP and should be learned before classes. The ability to store functions as first-class objects and invoke them just like variables is rather natural. Note that PID constants for the new controller will be different from the old one. The original controller didn't take the discretization period into account. To fix this, teams should just have to divide their Ki gain by 0.05 and multiply their Kd gain by 0.05 where 0.05 is the original default period.
2019-07-07 15:37:13 -07:00
import edu.wpi.first.wpilibj.controller.PIDController;
import edu.wpi.first.wpilibj.fixtures.MotorEncoderFixture;
import edu.wpi.first.wpilibj.smartdashboard.SendableBuilderImpl;
import edu.wpi.first.wpilibj.test.AbstractComsSetup;
import edu.wpi.first.wpilibj.test.TestBench;
import static org.junit.Assert.assertEquals;
import static org.junit.Assert.assertFalse;
import static org.junit.Assert.assertTrue;
/**
* Test that covers the {@link PIDController}.
*/
@RunWith(Parameterized.class)
public class PIDTest extends AbstractComsSetup {
private static final Logger logger = Logger.getLogger(PIDTest.class.getName());
private NetworkTable m_table;
private SendableBuilderImpl m_builder;
private static final double absoluteTolerance = 50;
private static final double outputRange = 0.25;
private PIDController m_controller = null;
private static MotorEncoderFixture me = null;
@SuppressWarnings({"MemberName", "EmptyLineSeparator", "MultipleVariableDeclarations"})
private final Double k_p, k_i, k_d;
@Override
protected Logger getClassLogger() {
return logger;
}
@SuppressWarnings({"ParameterName", "JavadocMethod"})
public PIDTest(Double p, Double i, Double d, MotorEncoderFixture mef) {
logger.fine("Constructor with: " + mef.getType());
if (PIDTest.me != null && !PIDTest.me.equals(mef)) {
PIDTest.me.teardown();
}
PIDTest.me = mef;
this.k_p = p;
this.k_i = i;
this.k_d = d;
}
@Parameters
public static Collection<Object[]> generateData() {
// logger.fine("Loading the MotorList");
Collection<Object[]> data = new ArrayList<Object[]>();
double kp = 0.001;
double ki = 0.0005;
double kd = 0.0;
for (int i = 0; i < 1; i++) {
data.addAll(Arrays.asList(new Object[][]{{kp, ki, kd, TestBench.getInstance().getTalonPair()},
{kp, ki, kd, TestBench.getInstance().getVictorPair()},
{kp, ki, kd, TestBench.getInstance().getJaguarPair()}}));
}
return data;
}
@BeforeClass
public static void setUpBeforeClass() {
}
@AfterClass
public static void tearDownAfterClass() {
logger.fine("TearDownAfterClass: " + me.getType());
me.teardown();
me = null;
}
@Before
public void setUp() {
logger.fine("Setup: " + me.getType());
me.setup();
m_table = NetworkTableInstance.getDefault().getTable("TEST_PID");
m_builder = new SendableBuilderImpl();
m_builder.setTable(m_table);
Add replacement PIDController class (#1300) Originally, PIDController used PIDSource with its "PIDSourceType" to determine whether a class should return position or velocity to the controller. However, the supported languages have changed a lot over 10 years and now support lambdas. Instead of using PIDSource and PIDOutput, users can pass in doubles to the Calculate() function synchronously. This makes the controller much more flexible for team's needs as they no longer have to make a separate PIDSource-inheriting class just to provide a custom input. The built-in feedforward was removed. Since PIDController is synchronous now, they can add their own feedforward on top of what Calculate() returns. To facilitate running the controller asynchronously, there is a PIDControllerRunner class that handles that. By separating the loop from the control law, PIDController can now be composed with others and be used to control a drivetrain (a multiple input, multiple output system that requires summing the results from two controllers) much easier. Also, motion profiling can be used to set the reference over time. All the classes related to the old PIDController are now deprecated. The new classes are in an experimental namespace to avoid name conflicts. While this is a large change, I think it is a necessary one for growth. The old PIDController design was created in a time when languages only supported OOP, and we have more tools at our disposal now to solve problems. This more versatile implementation can be used in more places like as a replacement for Pathfinder's "EncoderFollower" class. There has been hesitation to add lambda support to WPILib for a while now out of concerns for requiring teams to learn more features of C++ or Java. In my opinion, this change makes PIDController easier to use, not harder. The concept of a function is a building block of OOP and should be learned before classes. The ability to store functions as first-class objects and invoke them just like variables is rather natural. Note that PID constants for the new controller will be different from the old one. The original controller didn't take the discretization period into account. To fix this, teams should just have to divide their Ki gain by 0.05 and multiply their Kd gain by 0.05 where 0.05 is the original default period.
2019-07-07 15:37:13 -07:00
m_controller = new PIDController(k_p, k_i, k_d);
m_controller.initSendable(m_builder);
}
@After
public void tearDown() {
logger.fine("Teardown: " + me.getType());
m_controller.close();
m_controller = null;
me.reset();
}
private void setupAbsoluteTolerance() {
m_controller.setAbsoluteTolerance(absoluteTolerance);
}
private void setupOutputRange() {
m_controller.setOutputRange(-outputRange, outputRange);
}
@Test
public void testInitialSettings() {
setupAbsoluteTolerance();
setupOutputRange();
Add replacement PIDController class (#1300) Originally, PIDController used PIDSource with its "PIDSourceType" to determine whether a class should return position or velocity to the controller. However, the supported languages have changed a lot over 10 years and now support lambdas. Instead of using PIDSource and PIDOutput, users can pass in doubles to the Calculate() function synchronously. This makes the controller much more flexible for team's needs as they no longer have to make a separate PIDSource-inheriting class just to provide a custom input. The built-in feedforward was removed. Since PIDController is synchronous now, they can add their own feedforward on top of what Calculate() returns. To facilitate running the controller asynchronously, there is a PIDControllerRunner class that handles that. By separating the loop from the control law, PIDController can now be composed with others and be used to control a drivetrain (a multiple input, multiple output system that requires summing the results from two controllers) much easier. Also, motion profiling can be used to set the reference over time. All the classes related to the old PIDController are now deprecated. The new classes are in an experimental namespace to avoid name conflicts. While this is a large change, I think it is a necessary one for growth. The old PIDController design was created in a time when languages only supported OOP, and we have more tools at our disposal now to solve problems. This more versatile implementation can be used in more places like as a replacement for Pathfinder's "EncoderFollower" class. There has been hesitation to add lambda support to WPILib for a while now out of concerns for requiring teams to learn more features of C++ or Java. In my opinion, this change makes PIDController easier to use, not harder. The concept of a function is a building block of OOP and should be learned before classes. The ability to store functions as first-class objects and invoke them just like variables is rather natural. Note that PID constants for the new controller will be different from the old one. The original controller didn't take the discretization period into account. To fix this, teams should just have to divide their Ki gain by 0.05 and multiply their Kd gain by 0.05 where 0.05 is the original default period.
2019-07-07 15:37:13 -07:00
double reference = 2500.0;
m_controller.setSetpoint(reference);
assertEquals("PID.getPositionError() did not start at " + reference,
reference, m_controller.getPositionError(), 0);
m_builder.updateTable();
Add replacement PIDController class (#1300) Originally, PIDController used PIDSource with its "PIDSourceType" to determine whether a class should return position or velocity to the controller. However, the supported languages have changed a lot over 10 years and now support lambdas. Instead of using PIDSource and PIDOutput, users can pass in doubles to the Calculate() function synchronously. This makes the controller much more flexible for team's needs as they no longer have to make a separate PIDSource-inheriting class just to provide a custom input. The built-in feedforward was removed. Since PIDController is synchronous now, they can add their own feedforward on top of what Calculate() returns. To facilitate running the controller asynchronously, there is a PIDControllerRunner class that handles that. By separating the loop from the control law, PIDController can now be composed with others and be used to control a drivetrain (a multiple input, multiple output system that requires summing the results from two controllers) much easier. Also, motion profiling can be used to set the reference over time. All the classes related to the old PIDController are now deprecated. The new classes are in an experimental namespace to avoid name conflicts. While this is a large change, I think it is a necessary one for growth. The old PIDController design was created in a time when languages only supported OOP, and we have more tools at our disposal now to solve problems. This more versatile implementation can be used in more places like as a replacement for Pathfinder's "EncoderFollower" class. There has been hesitation to add lambda support to WPILib for a while now out of concerns for requiring teams to learn more features of C++ or Java. In my opinion, this change makes PIDController easier to use, not harder. The concept of a function is a building block of OOP and should be learned before classes. The ability to store functions as first-class objects and invoke them just like variables is rather natural. Note that PID constants for the new controller will be different from the old one. The original controller didn't take the discretization period into account. To fix this, teams should just have to divide their Ki gain by 0.05 and multiply their Kd gain by 0.05 where 0.05 is the original default period.
2019-07-07 15:37:13 -07:00
assertEquals(k_p, m_table.getEntry("Kp").getDouble(9999999), 0);
assertEquals(k_i, m_table.getEntry("Ki").getDouble(9999999), 0);
assertEquals(k_d, m_table.getEntry("Kd").getDouble(9999999), 0);
assertEquals(reference, m_table.getEntry("reference").getDouble(9999999), 0);
assertFalse(m_table.getEntry("enabled").getBoolean(true));
}
@Test
public void testSetSetpoint() {
setupAbsoluteTolerance();
setupOutputRange();
double reference = 2500.0;
Add replacement PIDController class (#1300) Originally, PIDController used PIDSource with its "PIDSourceType" to determine whether a class should return position or velocity to the controller. However, the supported languages have changed a lot over 10 years and now support lambdas. Instead of using PIDSource and PIDOutput, users can pass in doubles to the Calculate() function synchronously. This makes the controller much more flexible for team's needs as they no longer have to make a separate PIDSource-inheriting class just to provide a custom input. The built-in feedforward was removed. Since PIDController is synchronous now, they can add their own feedforward on top of what Calculate() returns. To facilitate running the controller asynchronously, there is a PIDControllerRunner class that handles that. By separating the loop from the control law, PIDController can now be composed with others and be used to control a drivetrain (a multiple input, multiple output system that requires summing the results from two controllers) much easier. Also, motion profiling can be used to set the reference over time. All the classes related to the old PIDController are now deprecated. The new classes are in an experimental namespace to avoid name conflicts. While this is a large change, I think it is a necessary one for growth. The old PIDController design was created in a time when languages only supported OOP, and we have more tools at our disposal now to solve problems. This more versatile implementation can be used in more places like as a replacement for Pathfinder's "EncoderFollower" class. There has been hesitation to add lambda support to WPILib for a while now out of concerns for requiring teams to learn more features of C++ or Java. In my opinion, this change makes PIDController easier to use, not harder. The concept of a function is a building block of OOP and should be learned before classes. The ability to store functions as first-class objects and invoke them just like variables is rather natural. Note that PID constants for the new controller will be different from the old one. The original controller didn't take the discretization period into account. To fix this, teams should just have to divide their Ki gain by 0.05 and multiply their Kd gain by 0.05 where 0.05 is the original default period.
2019-07-07 15:37:13 -07:00
m_controller.setSetpoint(reference);
assertEquals("Did not correctly set reference", reference, m_controller.getSetpoint(), 1e-3);
}
@Test(timeout = 10000)
public void testRotateToTarget() {
setupAbsoluteTolerance();
setupOutputRange();
Add replacement PIDController class (#1300) Originally, PIDController used PIDSource with its "PIDSourceType" to determine whether a class should return position or velocity to the controller. However, the supported languages have changed a lot over 10 years and now support lambdas. Instead of using PIDSource and PIDOutput, users can pass in doubles to the Calculate() function synchronously. This makes the controller much more flexible for team's needs as they no longer have to make a separate PIDSource-inheriting class just to provide a custom input. The built-in feedforward was removed. Since PIDController is synchronous now, they can add their own feedforward on top of what Calculate() returns. To facilitate running the controller asynchronously, there is a PIDControllerRunner class that handles that. By separating the loop from the control law, PIDController can now be composed with others and be used to control a drivetrain (a multiple input, multiple output system that requires summing the results from two controllers) much easier. Also, motion profiling can be used to set the reference over time. All the classes related to the old PIDController are now deprecated. The new classes are in an experimental namespace to avoid name conflicts. While this is a large change, I think it is a necessary one for growth. The old PIDController design was created in a time when languages only supported OOP, and we have more tools at our disposal now to solve problems. This more versatile implementation can be used in more places like as a replacement for Pathfinder's "EncoderFollower" class. There has been hesitation to add lambda support to WPILib for a while now out of concerns for requiring teams to learn more features of C++ or Java. In my opinion, this change makes PIDController easier to use, not harder. The concept of a function is a building block of OOP and should be learned before classes. The ability to store functions as first-class objects and invoke them just like variables is rather natural. Note that PID constants for the new controller will be different from the old one. The original controller didn't take the discretization period into account. To fix this, teams should just have to divide their Ki gain by 0.05 and multiply their Kd gain by 0.05 where 0.05 is the original default period.
2019-07-07 15:37:13 -07:00
double reference = 1000.0;
assertEquals(pidData() + "did not start at 0", 0, me.getMotor().get(), 0);
Add replacement PIDController class (#1300) Originally, PIDController used PIDSource with its "PIDSourceType" to determine whether a class should return position or velocity to the controller. However, the supported languages have changed a lot over 10 years and now support lambdas. Instead of using PIDSource and PIDOutput, users can pass in doubles to the Calculate() function synchronously. This makes the controller much more flexible for team's needs as they no longer have to make a separate PIDSource-inheriting class just to provide a custom input. The built-in feedforward was removed. Since PIDController is synchronous now, they can add their own feedforward on top of what Calculate() returns. To facilitate running the controller asynchronously, there is a PIDControllerRunner class that handles that. By separating the loop from the control law, PIDController can now be composed with others and be used to control a drivetrain (a multiple input, multiple output system that requires summing the results from two controllers) much easier. Also, motion profiling can be used to set the reference over time. All the classes related to the old PIDController are now deprecated. The new classes are in an experimental namespace to avoid name conflicts. While this is a large change, I think it is a necessary one for growth. The old PIDController design was created in a time when languages only supported OOP, and we have more tools at our disposal now to solve problems. This more versatile implementation can be used in more places like as a replacement for Pathfinder's "EncoderFollower" class. There has been hesitation to add lambda support to WPILib for a while now out of concerns for requiring teams to learn more features of C++ or Java. In my opinion, this change makes PIDController easier to use, not harder. The concept of a function is a building block of OOP and should be learned before classes. The ability to store functions as first-class objects and invoke them just like variables is rather natural. Note that PID constants for the new controller will be different from the old one. The original controller didn't take the discretization period into account. To fix this, teams should just have to divide their Ki gain by 0.05 and multiply their Kd gain by 0.05 where 0.05 is the original default period.
2019-07-07 15:37:13 -07:00
m_controller.setSetpoint(reference);
assertEquals(pidData() + "did not have an error of " + reference, reference,
m_controller.getPositionError(), 0);
Notifier pidRunner = new Notifier(
() -> me.getMotor().set(m_controller.calculate(me.getEncoder().getDistance())));
pidRunner.startPeriodic(m_controller.getPeriod());
Timer.delay(5);
pidRunner.stop();
assertTrue(pidData() + "Was not on Target. Controller Error: "
+ m_controller.getPositionError(), m_controller.atSetpoint());
}
private String pidData() {
return me.getType() + " PID {P:" + m_controller.getP() + " I:" + m_controller.getI() + " D:"
+ m_controller.getD() + "} ";
}
@Test(expected = RuntimeException.class)
public void testOnTargetNoToleranceSet() {
setupOutputRange();
Add replacement PIDController class (#1300) Originally, PIDController used PIDSource with its "PIDSourceType" to determine whether a class should return position or velocity to the controller. However, the supported languages have changed a lot over 10 years and now support lambdas. Instead of using PIDSource and PIDOutput, users can pass in doubles to the Calculate() function synchronously. This makes the controller much more flexible for team's needs as they no longer have to make a separate PIDSource-inheriting class just to provide a custom input. The built-in feedforward was removed. Since PIDController is synchronous now, they can add their own feedforward on top of what Calculate() returns. To facilitate running the controller asynchronously, there is a PIDControllerRunner class that handles that. By separating the loop from the control law, PIDController can now be composed with others and be used to control a drivetrain (a multiple input, multiple output system that requires summing the results from two controllers) much easier. Also, motion profiling can be used to set the reference over time. All the classes related to the old PIDController are now deprecated. The new classes are in an experimental namespace to avoid name conflicts. While this is a large change, I think it is a necessary one for growth. The old PIDController design was created in a time when languages only supported OOP, and we have more tools at our disposal now to solve problems. This more versatile implementation can be used in more places like as a replacement for Pathfinder's "EncoderFollower" class. There has been hesitation to add lambda support to WPILib for a while now out of concerns for requiring teams to learn more features of C++ or Java. In my opinion, this change makes PIDController easier to use, not harder. The concept of a function is a building block of OOP and should be learned before classes. The ability to store functions as first-class objects and invoke them just like variables is rather natural. Note that PID constants for the new controller will be different from the old one. The original controller didn't take the discretization period into account. To fix this, teams should just have to divide their Ki gain by 0.05 and multiply their Kd gain by 0.05 where 0.05 is the original default period.
2019-07-07 15:37:13 -07:00
m_controller.atSetpoint();
}
}