-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 105
Add three new anti-windup techniques and a Saturation feature #298
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
base: ros2-master
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Conversation
This pull request is in conflict. Could you fix it @ViktorCVS? |
d0feb10
to
bd7c8f0
Compare
@christophfroehlich, it appears that no reviewers have been assigned to this PR. Could you please help with that? If you have time, I'd appreciate it if you could also take a look at the changes. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Thx for this thorough PR, but it will need some time to properly review it
Codecov ReportAttention: Patch coverage is
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## ros2-master #298 +/- ##
===============================================
+ Coverage 77.24% 79.92% +2.68%
===============================================
Files 29 29
Lines 1336 1659 +323
Branches 93 100 +7
===============================================
+ Hits 1032 1326 +294
- Misses 252 275 +23
- Partials 52 58 +6
Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.
🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
|
@ViktorCVS could you please resolve the current conflicts? |
done |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Thanks a lot for the nice work including tests etc. Please fix the pre-commit errors, and only some minor comments in the code
control_toolbox/src/pid.cpp
Outdated
} | ||
|
||
if (gains.antiwindup_strat_ == "back_calculation" && gains.i_gain_ != 0) { | ||
if (gains.trk_tc_ == 0.0 && gains.d_gain_ != 0.0) { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
better to use something like
std::abs(val) < std::numeric_limits<double>::epsilon()
instead of comparing a double to 0.0
applies to every occurrence here, you can create a helper method for that.
template<typename T>
bool is_zero(T value, T tolerance = std::numeric_limits<T>::epsilon()) {
return std::abs(value) <= tolerance;
}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Nice! I added "inline" tag and putted it in pid.hpp. I also created a "is_not_zero(x)" to adress !=0.0 instead of use !is_zero(x). If it isn't ok, I can keep only is_zero. Adressed in commit 4c1fc9b.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Personally I prefer !is_zero
, but as you like
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I agree. Change it to use only is_zero() in commit 5513ff0.
control_toolbox/src/pid.cpp
Outdated
if (gains.antiwindup_strat_ == "back_calculation" && gains.i_gain_ != 0) { | ||
if (gains.trk_tc_ == 0.0 && gains.d_gain_ != 0.0) { | ||
// Default value for tracking time constant for back calculation technique | ||
gains.trk_tc_ = std::sqrt(gains.d_gain_/gains.i_gain_); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
shouldn't this go in the set_gains method, instead of calculating this at every update step?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I agree with @christophfroehlich
Please add a deprecation notice to the code, as well as a warning on |
*/ | ||
Pid(double p, double i, double d, double i_max, double i_min, | ||
double u_max, double u_min, double trk_tc, bool saturation, | ||
bool antiwindup, std::string antiwindup_strat); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
thinking once again, maybe we shouldn't use std::string here in the base class, but an enum instead?
the pid_ros can have the string parameter, and maybe do the conversion manually there, or use a pattern like here.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
control_toolbox/src/pid.cpp
Outdated
if (gains.antiwindup_strat_ == "back_calculation" && gains.i_gain_ != 0) { | ||
if (gains.trk_tc_ == 0.0 && gains.d_gain_ != 0.0) { | ||
// Default value for tracking time constant for back calculation technique | ||
gains.trk_tc_ = std::sqrt(gains.d_gain_/gains.i_gain_); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I agree with @christophfroehlich
Add 3 unit tests for saturation feature.
Add 7 unit tests for saturation and anti-windup feature.
Add new parameters to the existing unit tests in the package.
The i_bounds and u_bounds conditions were combined using an 'or' operator. I have updated them to use separate if else statements.
Delete comments related to dynamic reconfigure and ROS, and update several other comments.
The i_bounds and u_bounds conditions were combined using an 'or' operator. I have updated them to use separate if else statements.
This commit adds a helper function for comparing values to zero, improving the readability of the code.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
For the future: Please don't force push to PRs because it makes it harder for reviewers to check the changes since the last review ;) The history does not have to be linear, because we squash that anyways.
We get closer to the finish line, but some of our comments haven't been addressed yet.
control_toolbox/src/pid.cpp
Outdated
} | ||
|
||
if (gains.antiwindup_strat_ == "back_calculation" && gains.i_gain_ != 0) { | ||
if (gains.trk_tc_ == 0.0 && gains.d_gain_ != 0.0) { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Personally I prefer !is_zero
, but as you like
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
The tests are failing now, can you have a look please?
} | ||
else | ||
{ | ||
// Qualquer valor desconhecido agora cai em NONE |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
// Qualquer valor desconhecido agora cai em NONE |
not everyone will understand Portuguese ;)
}; | ||
|
||
constexpr AntiwindupStrategy() : value_(NONE) {} | ||
explicit constexpr AntiwindupStrategy(Value v) : value_(v) {} |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
explicit constexpr AntiwindupStrategy(Value v) : value_(v) {} | |
constexpr AntiwindupStrategy(Value v) : value_(v) {} // NOLINT(runtime/explicit) |
And then the constructor can be omitted and this just works
Pid pid(
0.0, 1.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 5.0, -5.0, 1.0, true, false,
AntiwindupStrategy::BACK_CALCULATION);
What do you think? This can be simplified in the tests then
Overview
This PR adds three new anti-windup techniques: back‑calculation, the conditioning technique, and conditional integration. It also adds a saturation feature for the PID output. New parameters have been introduced, and additional overloads have been implemented to ensure compatibility.
What was added/changed in this PR
About compatibility
The packages compile correctly and have passed the pre‑commit and colcon tests (packages with dependencies continue to show the same number of failures before and after my modifications). If the new parameters are not used, the package retains its old behavior.
About the older anti-windup technique
My plan, either by the end of this PR or in a subsequent one, is to completely remove the older anti‑windup technique that has been used so far. This method, which is a form of conditional integration, has several disadvantages:
Additionally, regardless of whether the 'antiwindup' parameter is set to true or false, the anti-windup technique is applied (using the same method with a different approach), so the user does not have the option to disable it.
About unit tests
I've added 10 new unit tests for the new features and updated the existing ones to accommodate the new parameters.
Related PR's
Important notes
These three techniques are common anti‑windup strategies used to mitigate the windup effect and are widely employed in control applications: back‑calculation [1], the conditioning technique [1,2], and conditional integration [1,3].
The default values for the tracking time constant are defined in [3,4] for back‑calculation and in [1] for the conditioning technique.
Both back‑calculation and the conditioning technique use forward Euler discretization; this may change before merging this PR.
Graphs
I tested it on ros2_control_demos to better illustrate this feature and test it on simulation to valide the equations. The tests were conducted using a modified version of Example 1: RRBot, which uses a PID controller instead of the default forward position controller. It was tested on Docker, Ubuntu Noble, and Jazzy.
PID values: p = 4.0, i = 25.0, d = 0.5; u_max = 13, u_min = -13; and the tracking time constant was left at its default value.
The standard response with a settling time (ts) of 5.2 seconds, the response affected by saturation, resulting in a settling time (ts_sat) of 8.6 seconds (+65.4% increase) and the response using the back-calculation technique, which improves performance with a settling time (ts_back) of 4.1 seconds (–21.2% decrease), even lower than the standard response.
Those figures compares three anti-windup methods applied to the step response, a zoomed-in view of the step response is provided here to clearly distinguish between the three anti-windup strategies. They are all very similar due to the system and PID values, but they may vary significantly between applications.
The standard control output, the control output affected by saturation, with a recovery time from saturation of 6.8s and the control output using the back-calculation technique, with a recovery time from saturation of 2s (-70.6%).
Those figures compares three control outputs using anti-windup methods, a zoomed-in view of the control output is provided here to clearly distinguish between the three anti-windup strategies. They are all very similar due to the system and PID values, but they may vary significantly between applications.
All the equations have been validated with these simulations, providing a feature with three techniques to address windup.
Final notes
I'm very open to any recommendations to improve this code.
References
[1] VISIOLI, A. Pratical PID Control. London: Springer-Verlag London Limited, 2006. 476 p.
[2] VRANCIC, D. Some Aspects and Design of Anti-Windup and Conditioned Transfer.
Thesis (Master in Electrical Engineering) — University of Ljubljana, Faculty of
Electrical Engeneering, 1995.
[3] BOHN, C.; ATHERTON, D. An analysis package comparing pid anti-windup strategies.
IEEE Control Systems Magazine, p. 34–40, 1995.
[4] ASTRöM, K.; HäGGLUND, T. PID Controllers: Theory, Design and Tuning. ISA Press.
Research Triangle Park, USA: Springer-Verlag London Limited, 1995. 343 p.