From: "Dmitry A. Kazakov" <mailbox@dmitry-kazakov.de>
Subject: Re: embedded programming for unreliable hardware
Date: Wed, 15 Feb 2006 10:17:16 +0100
Date: 2006-02-15T10:17:17+01:00 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1ndy2tjefyddo.1a02jjir70zm4.dlg@40tude.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: nmzIf.1839$JR6.201@newsread3.news.pas.earthlink.net
On Wed, 15 Feb 2006 05:54:27 GMT, Jeffrey R. Carter wrote:
> For actuators, it depends on whether you command to an absolute value or not. If
> you command to an absolute value ("turn on") then issuing the command twice
> should ensure that it's performed. If you command a relative change ("toggle
> power") then you'd need to issue the command, check the result through a sensor,
> and reissue if it didn't take. Issuing twice will work 99.75% of the time.
Somewhat complementary technique is safe actuators design. Some actuators
have a safe-state command, they perform it automatically if no new command
comes. For example, a lift truck holds on the load by default. If you want
to lift it up, you have to permanently repeat "up", "up", "up"... Should
one command not arrive, no problem.
--
Regards,
Dmitry A. Kazakov
http://www.dmitry-kazakov.de
prev parent reply other threads:[~2006-02-15 9:17 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2006-02-14 22:03 embedded programming for unreliable hardware tmoran
2006-02-15 5:54 ` Jeffrey R. Carter
2006-02-15 9:17 ` Dmitry A. Kazakov [this message]
replies disabled
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox