sumblk doesnt exists for connection in matlab compatibility module #493

Activity

1. sawyerbfuller commented on Dec 31, 2020

   

   sawyerbfuller

   on Dec 31, 2020

   Contributor

   More actions

   Hi siddarth, that feature did not have an asterisk (*) next to it, indicating that it wasn’t yet implemented.

   I agree it would be a very nice feature to have and have I have used it myself, created as follows:

   sumblk = control.ss([[0,0.],[0,0]], [[0,0.],[0,0]], [[0,0.],[0,0]], [[1, 0],[1, 1]])
2. bnavigator

   added this to the 0.9.x milestone on Dec 31, 2020
3. bnavigator

   added

   enhancement

   on Dec 31, 2020
4. murrayrm commented on Jan 9, 2021

   

   murrayrm

   on Jan 9, 2021

   Member

   More actions

   A few comments on this:

   • A less "stateful" version of @sawyerbfuller's subblk function would be sumblk = control.ss([], [], [], [[1, 0], [1, 1]]) which avoids the creation of any additional states. Note that this creates an "unnamed" system, since StateSpace systems do not have signal names associated with that.

   • For systems with named signals (InputOutputSystem's), this functionality is also available in the interconnect function "for free" by simply interconnecting multiple signals to the input of another block (they are automatically summed together and can also have optional gains assigned to them). For example, the following code will create a feedback loop (without creating an explicit summing block for creating of the error term):

   P = ct.LinearIOSystem(ct.tf2ss(ct.tf([1], [1, 1])), name='P')
   C = ct.LinearIOSystem(ct.tf2ss(ct.tf([2], [1, 0])), name='C')
   S = ct.interconnect([P, C],
       connections = [ ['P.u[0]', 'C.y[0]'], ['C.u[0]', '-P.y[0]'] ],
       inplist=['C.u[0]'], outlist=['P.y[0]'])
   

   It would be possible to create a function that looks more like the MATLAB sumblk function, but if the only usage is for InputOutputSystem's, then I am not sure whether it is needed (?).

   👍React with 👍1Reacted by Siddharth Kaul
5. k10blogger commented on Jan 10, 2021

   

   k10blogger

   on Jan 10, 2021

   Author

   More actions

   For named system, usage of sumblk as below is something that i feel is better readable:

    S1.InputName = 'r'
    S1.OutputName = 'ug1'
    S2.InputName = 'e'
    S2.OutputName = 'ug2'
    S3.InputName = 'ym'
    S3.OutputName = 'y'
    S4.InputName = 'u'
    S4.OutputName = 'ym'
   
    sum1 = sumblk('e','r','y','+-') % e = r - y
    sum2 = sumblk('u','ug1','ug2') % u = ug1 + ug2
   
   connect(S1,S2,S4,S3,sum1,sum2,'r','ym')
   

   It clarifies which systems shares input and which systems outputs is summed with what.

   If it is possible to create a look alike sumblk with InputOutputSystems internal, that would work on provided named input formula then it would ease up the code a lot(?).
   Or if there is some other alternative where a formula can be used to depict system IO would be great to know as well.
6. murrayrm commented on Jan 10, 2021

   

   murrayrm

   on Jan 10, 2021

   Last edited by murrayrm

   Member

   More actions

   It's definitely possible to create a lookalike function for sumblk and would probably only take a few lines of code. If you'd like to take a crack at it and submit a PR, I would encourage you to do so. Rather than naming the function sumblk, we should probably call summing_junction to be more Pythonic about naming. Then in the matlab module, we could set up an alias for sumblk.

   An additional requirement (and interesting idea) would be to add an option in interconnect that automatically connects all signals that have the same name. Combined with summing junction it could accomplish what you are describing.
7. murrayrm

   linked a pull request that will close this issueadd summing junction + implicit signal interconnection #517on Jan 23, 2021
8. murrayrm

   closed this as completedin #517on Jan 26, 2021