I have a relatively basic Simulink block Model in which there is a Gaussian Noise Generator & an Error rate calculator. I want to get data on how changing the "variance" property of the Gaussian noise generator affects the result from the error rate calculator.
The most obvious way to do this is to manually run the simulation, record the results, change the variance of the Gaussian Noise Generator, rerun etc.
However, is there a way of getting the Simulink model to run the model, increase the Gaussian Noise variance by an amount, and rerun automatically for x number of iterations, and then to store the results in a list or array?
I am damn sure there is, but being new to Matlab & Simulink I have no idea of how to go about doing it? Somehow I imagine it would involve setting the "variance" as an input, and collecting the figure from the error rate calculator as an output - but again, I don't really know.
You want to use a for loop, and within the loop use the functions set_param and sim.
Look at the doc for more on how to use those functions.
There are also a couple of examples of using set_param here and using sim here.
Related
I'm new to Simulink and am working on a project.
The bigger picture is that I want to gather different sensor data, pick out an interval of that, and in my Matlab functions analyze it, a kind of adaption. It feels like I have a fundamental misconception since I thought my Matlab scripts could work directly in Simulink. I have a couple of Matlab function blocks which in Matlab takes vectors as inputs, but when I use a source such as "from workspace" I get the error that it cannot handle more than one value at the same time: Index expression out of bounds. Attempted to access element 2. The valid range is 1-1.
So I wonder if there is any neat way of collecting a given interval of a continuous flow of sensor data (as a beginning, the raw input will just be a vector which will represent sensor data) so that it could be analyzed by some Matlab functions?
I would like to make a discrete filter, where the sampling rate can be controlled by an input. I am trying to understand how the discrete filter block looks, "under its own mask." Is there anyway to retrieve the code behind this block so it can be modified for my use?
You can use an user-defined function as a filter, pick the filter transfer function, translate it into a difference equation (the discrete-time equivalant to the diferrential equation), implement that difference equation in a function and feed the sampling rate as an input (the sampling rate will appear as a constant in your difference equation).
The block is too complex and has too many options to simply be able to look under the mask. Your best option is to have a look at the documentation, which does show some detailed implementation of the block in some articular cases to get an idea and then try to recreate the discrete filter you want from basic building blocks, using a constant sample time at first, until you can validate your own implementation against the Simulink library block. Only then, start considering how you will change the sample time. Your main problem though is that the filter coefficients will change with the sample time, so you need to be able to re-calculate them on the fly. It's not an easy problem, I don't even know if it's possible.
Hopefully, I will be able to explain my question well.
I am working on Nonlinear model predictive control implementation.
I have got 3 files:
1). a simulink slx file which is basically a nonlinear pendulum model.
2). A function file, to get the cost function from the simulink model.
3). MPC code.
code snippet of cost function
**simOut=sim('NonlinearPendulum','StopTime', num2str(Np*Ts));**
%Linearly interpolates X to obtain sampled output states at time instants.
T=simOut.get('Tsim');
X=simOut.get('xsim');
xt=interp1(T,X,linspace(0,Np*Ts,Np+1))';
U=U(1:Nu);
%Quadratic cost function
R=0.01;
J=sum(sum((xt-repmat(r,[1 Np+1])).*(xt-repmat(r,[1 Np+1]))))+R*(U-ur)*...
(U-ur)';
Now I take this cost function and optimize it using fmincon to generate a sequence of inputs to be applied to the model, using my MPC code.
A code snippet of my MPC code.
%Constraints -1<=u(t)<=1;
Acons=[eye(Nu,Nu);-eye(Nu,Nu)];
Bcons=[ones(Nu,1);ones(Nu,1)];
options = optimoptions(#fmincon,'Algorithm','active-set','MaxIter',100);
warning off
for a1=1:nf
X=[]; %Prediction output
T=[]; %Prediction time
Xsam=[];
Tsam=[];
%Nonlinear MPC controller
Ubreak=linspace(0,(Np-1)*Ts,Np); %Break points for 1D lookup, used to avoid
% several calls/compilations of simulink model in fmincon.
**J=#(v) pendulumCostFunction(v,x0,ur,r(:,a1),Np,Nu,Ts);**
U=fmincon(J,U0,Acons,Bcons,[],[],[],[],[],options);
%U=fmincon(J,U0,Acons,Bcons);
U0=U;
UUsam=[UUsam;U(1)];%Apply only the first selected input
%Apply the selected input to plant.
Ubreak=[0 Ts]; %Break points for 1D lookup
U=[UUsam(end) UUsam(end)];
**simOut=sim('NonlinearPendulum','StopTime', num2str(Ts));**
In both the codes, I have marked the times we call our simulink model. Now, issue is that to run this whole simulation for just 5 seconds it takes around 7-8 minutes on my windows machine, MATLAB R2014B.
Is there a way to optimize this? As, I am planning to extend this algorithm to 9th order system unlike 2nd order pendulum model.
If, anyone has suggestion on using simulink coder to generate C code:
I have tried that, and the problem I face is that I don't know what to do with the several files generated. Please be as detailed as possible.
From the code snippets, it appears that you are solving a linear time invariant model with a quadratic objective. Here is some MATLAB (and Python) code for an overhead crane pendulum and inverted pendulum, both with state space linear models and quadratic objectives.
One of the ways to make it run faster is to avoid a Simulink interface and a shooting method for solving the MPC. A simultaneous method with orthogonal collocation on finite elements is faster and also enables higher index DAE model forms if you'd like to use a nonlinear model.
I believe I am doing something fundamentally wrong when trying to import and test a transfer function in Simulink which was created within the System Identification Toolbox (SIT).
To give a simple example of what I am doing.
I have an input which is an offset sinusoidal wave from 12 seconds to 25 seconds with an amplitude of 1 and a frequency of 1.5rad/s which gives a measured output.
I have used SIT to create a simple 2 pole 1 zero transfer function which gives the following agreement:
I have then tried to import this transfer function into Simulink for investigation in the following configuration which has a sinusoidal input of frequency 1.5rad/s and a starting t=12. The LTI system block refers to the transfer function variable within the workspace:
When I run this simulation for 13 seconds the input to the block is as expected but the post transfer function signal shows little agreement with what would be expected and is an order of magnitude out.
pre:
post:
Could someone give any insight into where I am going wrong and why the output from the tf in simulink shows little resemblance to the model output displayed in the SIT. I have a basic grasp of control theory but I am struggling to make sense of this.
This could be due to different initial conditions used in SimuLink and the SI Toolbox, the latter should estimate initial conditions with the model, while Simulink does nothing special with initial conditions unless you specify them yourself.
To me it seems that your original signals are in periodic regime, since your output looks almost like a sine wave as well. In periodic regime, initial conditions have little effect. You can verify my assumption by simulating your model for a longer amount of time: if at the end, your signal reaches the right amplitude and phase lag as in your data, you will know that the initial conditions were wrong.
In any case, you can get the estimated initial state from the toolbox, I think using the InitialState property of the resulting object.
Another thing that might go wrong, is the time discretization that you use in Simulink in case you estimated a continuous time model (one in the Laplace variable s, not in z or q).
edit: In that case I would recommend you check what Simulink uses to discretize your CT model, by using c2d in MATLAB and a setup like the one below in Simulink. In MATLAB you can also "simulate" the response to a CT model using lsim, where you have to specify a discretization method.
This set-up allows you to load in a CT model and a discretized variant (in this case a state-space representation). By comparing the signals, you can see whether the discretization method you use is the same one that SimuLink uses (this depends on the integration method you set in the settings).
I'm running a SimEvents simulation using Variable-step discrete solver. I save a signal data using a 'to Workspace' block, but the plot that I obtain is different from the one shown in the 'Scope' block inside the model.
The original signal remains constant between t=64[h] and t=65.4[h] (and this seems to be correctly done also in the matlab plot), while elsewhere it is like the plot command and the 'scope' block are working with different "sample times".
I'd like to obtain a plot showing the typical "step shape" of a discrete signal rather than a "nearly continuous" signal.
I've used the Scope 'save data to workspace' as well, but I didn't solve the problem.
I would have attached some screenshots in order to make the question more complete, but this is my first question so I have not enough reputation to post images. If you need, I can send them to you via e-mail.
Thank you in advance!
There are no screenshots to look at, but my guess would be that the signal is discrete, and the Simulink scope block, knowing this, is only changing at the discrete time points.
However, if you are plotting the data dumped to MATLAB using the standard plot function then it treats the data as continuous and joins successive points with a (non-constant) line.
If that's the case, you most likely want to be using the stairs function to do your MATLAB plottig.