This paper examines common Stateflow® design constructs. It explores the performance of fundamental architectural decisions such as state actions versus transition actions, events versus transition conditions, and MATLAB® versus C as the action language. The paper outlines the behavior within the Simulink® model as well as the C code derived from Stateflow via Embedded Coder®. Each construct is vetted for consistency with existing Stateflow modeling standards such as the MathWorks Automotive Advisory Board Model Style Guide and the NASA Orion GN&C MATLAB and Simulink Standards.
This paper was presented at the 36th Annual AAS Guidance and Control Conference.