-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 169
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Change to NoInit in ClockedWithDiscretizedContinuousController #4465
Change to NoInit in ClockedWithDiscretizedContinuousController #4465
Conversation
Modelica/Clocked/Examples/SimpleControlledDrive/ClockedWithDiscretizedContinuousController.mo
Show resolved
Hide resolved
Co-authored-by: Hans Olsson <[email protected]>
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
With @HansOlsson's suggestion this looks good to me, also for MSL 4.1.0
@Esther-Devakirubai, please back-port this to maint/4.1.x as soon as it is merged in. Thanks! |
initType=Modelica.Blocks.Types.Init.InitialOutput, | ||
y_start=0, | ||
initType=Modelica.Blocks.Types.Init.NoInit, | ||
x(fixed=true), |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Isn't x(fixed = true)
a violation of this rule from https://specification.modelica.org/master/synchronous-language-elements.html#initialization-of-clocked-partitions?
Attribute
fixed
cannot be applied to variables in clocked partitions. The attributefixed
is true for variables to whichprevious
is applied, otherwise false.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Ouch. So, how are initial conditions specified for such clocked partitions?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
That's a valid question, but more work on the specification side is needed to answer it. Until then, I would just find it best to avoid breaking one of the few simple rules we have.
By the way, System Modeler also warns about underdetermined initialization where PI.x
was automatically selected to be initialized from start
, so it is not only in Dymola that this example will not run as cleanly as we'd ideally want it to.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I should also mention that System Modeler is lacking a check for
Attribute
fixed
cannot be applied to variables in clocked partitions.
so I can't tell how close the rest of the MSL is to complying with the rule.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
After some more thinking I think the specification got a bit messed up when trying to clarify.
Basically I don't see how we can get this to work as desired for MSL with the current specification:
- All examples in MSL should have fully defined initial conditions.
- Clocked components should have neither initial equations, nor fixed; https://specification.modelica.org/master/synchronous-language-elements.html#initialization-of-clocked-partitions
However, going back to 3.5 the rule for initial equations and fixed only applied to "clocked discrete-time partitions", which are now called "discrete-time sub-partitions". That should be restored, and we can see that example in https://specification.modelica.org/master/synchronous-language-elements.html#solver-methods has fixed=true.
Obviously we will later clarify initialization for "discrete-time sub-partitions".
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
The "having fully defined initial conditions" is a strong requirement for tool-independent behaviour. If this is not possible with the current specification, I agree at relaxing/changing it. @HansOlsson would the proposed changes to the code OK with your proposed change to the MLS?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
With the proposed change to the specification there is no need to update this model at all, as the restrictions apply equally to initial equations and fixed=true.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
As indicated I believe there's a slight error in the specification that should be corrected instead. Thus this one will not be needed.
@casella @HansOlsson Will Backport this as per Casella's comment #4465 (comment) |
No, we first need to clear up if it is needed or not (and if needed exactly how). My current interpretation is that it isn't needed and the specification should be updated instead. |
Should not be needed after modelica/ModelicaSpecification#3577 is merged. |
@HansOlssonn, I'm closing this PR accordingly. |
Fixes #4458.
As discussed in today's MAP-Lib monthly meeting.
There appears to be no need to update the reference result.