Provide easy-to-use, extensible software for modeling, simulating, controlling, and analyzing the neuromusculoskeletal system.
-
Sina Porsa
- Posts: 99
- Joined: Thu Feb 03, 2011 7:21 pm
Post
by Sina Porsa » Thu Jun 27, 2013 11:19 pm
Hi everyone.
I just noticed some wired results from tugofwar API example. I reckon there is a bug in excitaion-activation dynamics. In the default API example, I changed the linear prescribed excitation with a constant excitation, see below:
Code: Select all
PrescribedController *muscleController= new PrescribedController();
muscleController->setActuators(OsimModel.updActuators());
Constant * cte0 = new Constant(0.1);
Constant * cte1 = new Constant(0.1);
muscleController->prescribeControlForActuator("muscle1" , cte0);
muscleController->prescribeControlForActuator("muscle2" , cte1);
OsimModel.addController(muscleController); //Add the controller
I ran the FD tool for 1 sec (which is much bigger than activation and deactivation time constants) and I expected the activation of both muscle to make a plateau at 0.1 (which is equal to the constant excitation). Surprisingly the activations made the plateau at a different level (0.11 please see the attached graph)
I do believe the same problem makes the error that I mentioned in one of my previous posts. Please see my last reply on this post:
https://simtk.org/forums/viewtopic.php?f=91&t=4157
I am pretty sure that OpenSim2.4 did not have this problem.
Any ideas if this is a bug or am I missing sth in my scripts?
Thanks
Sina
-
Attachments
-
- activationPlateau.png (11.72 KiB) Viewed 839 times
-
Michael Sherman
- Posts: 807
- Joined: Fri Apr 01, 2005 6:05 pm
Post
by Michael Sherman » Fri Jun 28, 2013 8:31 am
Is it possible that you added a new controller without removing the previous one so that they are both active and their outputs combined?
-
Sina Porsa
- Posts: 99
- Joined: Thu Feb 03, 2011 7:21 pm
Post
by Sina Porsa » Sun Jun 30, 2013 5:55 pm
sherm wrote:Is it possible that you added a new controller without removing the previous one so that they are both active and their outputs combined?
Hi Sherm,
I just double checked everything and the answer is no. The model has just one controller. I printed the model into HDD and this is the controller tag in the osim file after adding the controller:
Code: Select all
<ControllerSet name="Controllers">
<objects>
<PrescribedController>
<actuator_list>muscle1 muscle2</actuator_list>
<FunctionSet name="ControlFunctions">
<objects>
<Constant>
<value>0.1</value>
</Constant>
<Constant>
<value>0.1</value>
</Constant>
</objects>
<groups />
</FunctionSet>
</PrescribedController>
</objects>
<groups />
</ControllerSet>
As you can see, each muscle has just one constant controller.
-
Ayman Habib
- Posts: 2248
- Joined: Fri Apr 01, 2005 12:24 pm
Post
by Ayman Habib » Tue Jul 02, 2013 12:54 pm
Hi Sina,
Please post the full code or the osim file if it reproduces the unexpected behavior and we'll take a look.
Thanks,
-Ayman
-
Sina Porsa
- Posts: 99
- Joined: Thu Feb 03, 2011 7:21 pm
Post
by Sina Porsa » Thu Jul 04, 2013 5:55 pm
Hi Ayman
I have attached the osim file and a simple cpp file which has the unexpected results. It seems that the muscle activations in the result.sto file do not follow the constant muscle excitations. I used a constant 0.1 function for the excitation but the activation makes a plateau at 0.11
thanks.
-
Attachments
-
- tugOfWar1.xml
- Rename to tugOfWar1.osim
- (25.61 KiB) Downloaded 30 times
-
- TugOfWar1_CreateModel.cpp
- (1.57 KiB) Downloaded 38 times
-
Sina Porsa
- Posts: 99
- Joined: Thu Feb 03, 2011 7:21 pm
Post
by Sina Porsa » Tue Jul 09, 2013 8:55 pm
Hi Ayman,
I am still struggling with this problem and was wondering if you could understand what the source of error is?
Thanks
Sina
-
Ajay Seth
- Posts: 136
- Joined: Thu Mar 15, 2007 10:39 am
Post
by Ajay Seth » Tue Jul 16, 2013 12:06 pm
In 3.0 the activation dynamics model was reimplemented to guarantee smooth asymptotic settling to a minimum activation level as described by eqns 1-3 in Millard et al. "Flexing Computational Muscle: Modeling and Simulation of Musculotendon Dynamics." Journal of biomechanical engineering 135.2 (2013): 021005-021005. In the Thelen2003Muscle, whose fiber dynamics can become singular at zero activation, the minimum is set to amin = 0.01. That means for a constant control x=0.1 the steady state (adot = 0) activation a = x*(1-amin)+amin = 0.1*(1-0.01)+0.01 = 0.099+0.01 = 0.109, which is exactly what your plot shows. We agree that this is non-intuitive behavior and we have updated the equations so that continuity to amin is assured whilst still capable of reaching a steady state of a = x. This fix will be in the next release of OpenSim. Thank you for bringing this to our attention.