Three development alternatives

There are three development constellations that impact the cooperation with Control Design. These constellations differ in the interface complexity between Control Design and the control device hardware and operating system development. The complexity rises from alternative 1) to 3). In alternative 3) the points of contact are quite high within system integration and demand a thoroughly done planning of the development steps already during requirement specification, before delivering the proposal.


1) Making a feasibility check

  • You decide, which measurements (e.g. currents, voltages, position) are provided for the
    closed loop control and which actuator you want to use (hardware interface).
     
  • You provide parameters and any other available information (e.g. plots) about the desired
    application (load).
     
  • You define the acceptance test.
     
  • Control Design develops a model of the application load on the Matlab/Simulink simulator.
     
  • Control Design develops the application specific closed loop control on the simulator.
     
  • Control Design makes a documented acceptance test on the simulator.
 

2) Development of a closed loop control for an already field proven control device
     and operating system

  • Control Design makes a feasibility check, like already described above.
     
  • Control Design programs the closed loop control code in C and tests it on the
    Matlab/Simulink simulator.
     
  • You adjust the control C code to the operating system and integrate it into the control
    hardware resp. the operating system. Doing so, you become able to handle your new solution independently from Control Design.
     
  • Assuming, that the control device hardware and operating system have no bugs anymore,
    it should be quite easy for you, to find possible control implementation bugs without
    Control Designís further help.
 

3) Development of closed loop control for a parallel developed control device
     and operating system

  • Control Design makes the obove decribed feasibility check and provides for the control
    hardware design crucial information like the needed sensors, sensor resolution, program storage
     size, the minimal calculation power resp. the minimal sample frequency.
     
  • You develop parallely the control hardware together with its operating system software.
     
  • Because hardware and software are new during system integration, it is normal, that control
    specific and operating system specific implementation bugs occur simultanously with hardware
    bugs. It takes normally a lot of system integration experience to find out, which bug caused
    what effect. To keep your tight time schedule, it is recommended, you draw from Control Designís experience and order the programming of the control code and additionally hire Control Design
    for the system integration at the test bench together with your hardware designer.