[From Rick Marken (2014.03.31.1010)]
Adam Matic (2014.3.31.1620 cet)--
Hi Rick,
I see the testing post, but not the post from March 28. I think I have the
same problem with a post from March 29.
Hi Adam (and everyone else on CSGNet).
It turns out that the listserve software at the U of Illinois that
support CSGet was changed on March 28. This was supposed to have no
impact and to a large extent it didn't. But It apparently did change
some settings on individual accounts. For example, I had set up my
connection so that I got sent an acknowledgment from the list server
that it had distributed my posts when I posted them. Apparently this
setting was changed to "no acknowledgment", apparently the default
setting, when the software was changed.
Also, the address to which posts are to be made was changed from
csgnet@listserv.illinois.edu
to
csgnet@lists.illinois.edu
If you post to csgnet@listserv.illinois.edu it still works because it
is automatically forwarded to csgnet@lists.illinois.edu. But to be
completely up to date we should be posting to
csgnet@lists.illinois.edu, as I'm doing with this post.
But I'm wondering if we shouldn't think of moving this whole operation
to a more easily accessible forum, like a social media site. I don't
use social media much but maybe we should think about bringing CSGNet
into the 21st century. What little experience I have had with
discussions on social media has been rather disappointing-- I prefer
writing in email format -- but maybe some of you young people out
there, who are the future of PCT, have some helpful ideas about this.
Best
Rick
···
Adam
On Mon, Mar 31, 2014 at 3:25 AM, Richard Marken <rsmarken@gmail.com> wrote:
[From Rick Marken (2014.03.30.0625)}
Just testing to see if the list is still working. They made some
changes to it, apparently, onMarch 28 and I posted something earlier
and go no acknowledgement.On Fri, Mar 28, 2014 at 6:24 AM, Adam Matic <adam.matic@gmail.com> wrote:
> [From Adam Matic (2014.03.28 1430 cet)]
>>
>> BA: That's an excellent start. Is the simulation supposed to run in
>> real
>> time? I only see movement when changing a parameter value or dragging
>> the
>> "playerindex" slider.
>
>
> AM:
> No real time simulation yet, only fast time. Changing any of the
> parameters
> on the GUI recalculates the whole simulation, and the 'playerIndex' just
> goes over it.
>
> I considered adding a real-time 'live' mode, that would be fun. To be
> able
> to set reference and disturbance values in real time, and have them
> graphed,
> like in the Live Block Demo
>
>
>>
>> BA: The Javascript syntax looks like an object-oriented version of the
>> C
>> language, (as does Processing). I didn't have any trouble following
>> what
>> the code in basics.js does, but I've had plenty of exposure to
>> object-oriented programming.
>
>
> AM:
> Yeah, looks like OOP. Watch out for pointers to functions, those are
> weird
> at first, but very useful.
>
>>
>> BA: Have you seen Vensim? It allows you to create a diagram with
>> components representing flows (of variables and signals), quantities,
>> etc.
>> And the run it as a simulation. A definite plus is that it includes
>> sophisticated procedures for doing integration, etc. accurately.
>> Apparently
>> there is now a free version available online "for evaluation and
>> educational
>> use," see https://www.shodor.org/tutorials/vensim/pre.php .
>
>
> AM:
> I've downloaded several of the analog circuit simulators of the SPICE
> variety, and there are online tools like the Circuit lab. There is also
> "DESIRE" by Granino A. Korn, author of Electronic Analog Computers book
> that
> Bill mentioned. There is the modern, free and open source SciLab
> recommend
> by control engineers.
>
> I can't say I'm a fan. They are certainly useful to some people, but for
> me,
> there's too many options and elements to choose from, they are big and
> cluttered. The biggest pain is that they lack connection to some kind of
> a
> 'world'. If you want to simulate something with realistic physics, you
> really need to understand the physics of it. That is one reason I like
> robotics - the physics part takes care of it self, I just program the
> control part.
>
> In recent years there was some amazing work on physics engines, mostly
> driven by game developers, and I'm hoping to find a way way of
> connecting
> control systems design with 2D and 3D environments with relatively
> realistic
> physics, and all that in the browser, so people could see it and feel
> what
> happens instantly.
>
> There are great tools to do that naively on a desktop, such as the free
> Microsoft Robotics Simulator or V-Rep studio:
> http://www.coppeliarobotics.com/ Wonderful thing, very fun, but also too
> many options and models and scripts and ways to control the robot. I
> made an
> inverse pendulum in V-Rep, it kinda worked, but never as stable as I
> wanted
> it.
>
>
> Adam--
Richard S. Marken PhD
www.mindreadings.comIt is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary
depends upon his not understanding it. -- Upton Sinclair
--
Richard S. Marken PhD
www.mindreadings.com
It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary
depends upon his not understanding it. -- Upton Sinclair