Discover MakerZone

MATLAB and Simulink resources for Arduino, LEGO, and Raspberry Pi

Learn more

Discover what MATLAB® can do for your career.

Opportunities for recent engineering grads.

Apply Today

Thread Subject:
xPC Target versus dSPACE

Subject: xPC Target versus dSPACE

From: Neil Sims

Date: 5 Oct, 2000 16:02:24

Message: 1 of 3

Hi
Does anyone have any experience of using xPC Target for data acquisition and
control?
How does it compare to dSPACE, and is it easy to configure different i/o
boards?
Thanks for your help
Neil

Subject: xPC Target versus dSPACE

From: Wayne S. Hill

Date: 5 Oct, 2000 18:32:05

Message: 2 of 3

Neil Sims wrote:
>
> Does anyone have any experience of using xPC Target for data
> acquisition and control?
> How does it compare to dSPACE, and is it easy to configure different
> i/o boards?

I'm also interested in this question. I was exposed to the use of
dSpace on one project a year-and-a-half ago. A fellow working on the
project wrote a C-language S-file, then had to modify it painstakingly
to work with the dSpace compiler (because the compiler didn't support
all of the M** constructs, particularly wrt memory management). He had
an awful time, because there were essentially no debugging tools. He
had to debug the code via conditional exits, with each compile-and-run
cycle taking ~15 minutes. That was hideous.

Hopefully, both dSpace and xPC Target are better than this now, but I'd
like to know for sure.

-Wayne

Subject: xPC Target versus dSPACE

From: joe_mazur@my-deja.com

Date: 9 Oct, 2000 13:20:10

Message: 3 of 3

In article <39DD0165.F022681F@nospam.world.std.com>,
  "Wayne S. Hill" <wshill@nospam.world.std.com> wrote:
> Neil Sims wrote:
> >
> > Does anyone have any experience of using xPC Target for data
> > acquisition and control?
> > How does it compare to dSPACE, and is it easy to configure different
> > i/o boards?
>
> I'm also interested in this question. I was exposed to the use of
> dSpace on one project a year-and-a-half ago. A fellow working on the
> project wrote a C-language S-file, then had to modify it painstakingly
> to work with the dSpace compiler (because the compiler didn't support
> all of the M** constructs, particularly wrt memory management). He had
> an awful time, because there were essentially no debugging tools. He
> had to debug the code via conditional exits, with each compile-and-run
> cycle taking ~15 minutes. That was hideous.
>
> Hopefully, both dSpace and xPC Target are better than this now, but I'd
> like to know for sure.
>
> -Wayne
>

I have been using xPC for about two years on data acquisition and control.
We also have many copies of dSPACE here. I have found xPC very easy to use
and customize. I have built up two large hardware-in-the-loop vehicle
driveline simulators using xpc. The system uses a desktop PC as the target
with A/D, CAN, D/A, DIO, T/C, RS232 (lots of I/O). I originally intended to
use dSPACE, but found the extra cost too much to bear. Also dSPACE would
not respond to my requests for CAN (J1939) support. I got all the support
that I needed from Mathworks on xPC. We have also built up several xPC
systems that use PC/104 hardware. One system uses a lot of I/O (4 CAN
channels, 16 A/D, 8 D/A, DIO, Timer/Counters, etc). The I/O library was
included with xPC and is very easy to configure! I have easily written
special s-functions for use with xPC. The use of Watcom and Visual C++ makes
this easy.

Joe


Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.

Tags for this Thread

No tags are associated with this thread.

What are tags?

A tag is like a keyword or category label associated with each thread. Tags make it easier for you to find threads of interest.

Anyone can tag a thread. Tags are public and visible to everyone.

Contact us