Graphics Reference
In-Depth Information
Measured and Simulated Output
370
365
360
355
Simulated output
Measured output
350
345
0
1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
6000
Frame
Ve rtex Count (Input)
×10 4
4.25
4.2
4.15
4.1
0
1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
6000
Frame
FIGURE 3.14
Measured and simulated rendering system output in Experiment 3.
TABLE 3.5
Parameters of ARX Model in Experiment 3
Parameter
Calculation
A(q)
1 - 4.159 q -1 + 5.814 q -2 - 1.659 q -3 - 3.322 q -4 + 3.158 q -5 - 0.8321 q -6
B(q)
1.007 × 10 -5 q -1 - 5.033 × 10 -5 q -2 + 0.0001007 q -3 - 0.0001008 q -4
+ 5.045 × 10 -5 q -5 - 1.011 × 10 -5 q -6
Operating point
u = 4.1809 × 10 4 , y = 356.7121
was derived, we compared the output of the model with the actual measured data
as shown in Figure  3.14. Similar to the comparison of the outputs in Figure 3.12,
it can be observed that the simulated model produced an error rate less than 5 FPS
throughout the simulated range. Table 3.5 illustrates model parameters.
Subsequently, we imported this model into Simulink and constructed a PID-based
controller system as shown in Figure 3.15. We present the performance of this con-
trol system based on its tracking a pre-defined output level as shown in Figure 3.16.
Note that the rendering system output follows the user-defined reference very closely
at steady state and within a very short time without overshoot or oscillation.
To further validate our control framework, we replaced the system model with the
actual rendering process in a separate test. The PID controller block was executed
 
Search WWH ::




Custom Search