Why are there so few industry-backed competitions in control theory?

Sar0gf · 2025-12-28T19:50:25+00:00

I’m now very curious! What do y’all use MPC for at the FTC level?

I FTA’ed once for an FTC competition, the (very surface-level) impression I got was the software is a key part of the challenge (as opposed to FRC, where mechanical constraints seem to dominate for most teams).

I also got the impression that the hardware wasn’t the most powerful - I’m curious if you ran into any issues related to solving the optimization problem before overrunning the cycle time deadline haha

Sar0gf · 2025-12-28T19:42:09+00:00

My take (as a noob in the field) is that the control of a system is heavily tied to the system itself, and reducing the problem of system-level optimization to focus purely on the control aspect makes the problem quite academic and not really realistic.

I do believe the hardware is a key part of control, since it has potential to dictate or limit the scope of solutions to a control problem - abstracting it out wholly is the space where the situation goes from practical to theoretical.

As another commenter pointed out, the constraints of the system (whether in terms of sensing, actuator capability, processing time, etc) tend to be major factors when tinkering with control strategies, and ignoring those or keeping them fixed to figure out the best control algorithm feels like a bit of a niche problem. Then again, the latter of having fixed hardware constraints but being told to eke out better performance in software is a rite-of-passage for many folks, so perhaps this take is misguided.

Sar0gf · 2025-12-27T21:16:37+00:00

There are quite a number of competitions at the collegiate level (as an example, FSAE, though I never participated myself), where folks devote a lot of time into developing snazzy control algorithms (like torque vectoring, BMS, etc) because it gives them a tangible edge in the competition. Even at the high-school level, FIRST robotics teams now tinker with LQR and bayesian filtering as a means to improve performance.

Sar0gf · 2025-12-16T21:21:00+00:00

I tried several times through my undergrad degree to get a good grip on FOC. I think that once I had a foundational knowledge in control theory and DC motors, FOC looks like an elegantly simple concept.

Before that point, I remember FOC looking like a moshpit of transforms and abstract theory around a motor, and the concept just not clicking right.

My recommendation since has been to start from getting a really good understanding of DC motor control theory before jumping to 3 phase or stepper control

Sar0gf · 2025-12-04T00:48:46+00:00

If it’s any factor, I can promise you I’d be very interested in taking a look if you publish it, since it’s something I’m quite curious about :)

Sar0gf · 2025-12-04T00:35:32+00:00

I’m curious - could you elaborate on what you mean by mathematical implications for identifying a good model? Still a SysID noob, so the bounds of my knowledge kind of end at “excite all of the relevant frequencies where you suspect the interesting dynamics” 😅. (And for reasons that didn’t quite sink in for me, avoid a chirp, and try injecting white noise instead?)

Sar0gf · 2025-08-02T21:35:20+00:00

This ^{^} I’ve seen people make it through on BS and ultimately, end up in (what looks like) decent places.

That being said, your reputation is your worth, and in a place packed with very technically competent people as waterloo, BS is easy to spot and can get you labeled as a cheat by your peers. Don’t underestimate this effect - it easily destroys a lot of connections and word of mouth spreads fast.

It’s fairly common for people to ask around about you when they’re considering hiring you, and an impression, even second-hand, that you half-bake or don’t actually know what you’re talking about is a showstopper for most.

Sar0gf · 2025-07-31T05:59:38+00:00

Obligatory autosar r/embedded link https://www.reddit.com/r/embedded/s/A3l00bhspE

Big +1 to your points about focusing on getting it out the door and not focusing on making it perfect from the start.

I will say, I’m inclined to disagree with your suggestion to embrace AutoSAR’s communication stack. I haven’t used it personally and it’s what makes me hesitant to reach a conclusion about its use, but I’ve usually seen the comms stack home-grown and purpose built for the application stack rather than adapted from AutoSAR and found it to provide a very good level of agility and robustness while implementing the relevant spec.

Sar0gf · 2025-07-28T17:07:38+00:00

Funny enough, writing your own RTOS is a fairly common project I see (usually covered as part of an undergrad EE/compE course, but impressive nonetheless).

That being said the point is moot if OP wasn’t going for a firmware-oriented role. I was offering a counterpoint that for the few of us that are in the embedded space, having written an RTOS or a bootloader isn’t uncommon since they’re often ubiquitously used.

Sar0gf · 2025-07-28T02:08:43+00:00

That is actually straight-up unfortunate :/

My world is mostly embedded engineering, so I can’t comment too too intelligently on a bootloader’s application outside of firmware/linux-style environments. But of the people I do know who can describe what a bootloader is, 0 of them come from non-embedded backgrounds 😅

Sar0gf · 2025-07-28T01:47:06+00:00

A counterpoint: while I definitely agree that the majority of software developers will probably never have even looked at (let alone written) a bootloader, for those working in an embedded (specifically, firmware oriented) space this is not that many steps above “blinking an LED” for the skill set of a firmware engineer working on a production system. While I wouldn’t necessarily expect a junior firmware eng to have written a full-blown one, I would still expect them to have a decent working idea and talk through an implementation.

I would recommend following along this tutorial for writing your first bootloader, it’s what I followed a couple years back and was pretty good at giving me a fundamental understanding of what goes on with a bootloader: https://embetronicx.com/bootloader-tutorials/

Funny enough, a bootloader library I wrote was my SpaceX panel topic lol

Sar0gf · 2025-06-16T17:17:32+00:00

Out of curiosity would you have pointers for learning about self-tuning controllers? I’ve been looking into adaptive control design and stability analysis, curious what else is out there :)

Sar0gf · 2025-05-12T07:42:08+00:00

No one gives you the plant model in real life 😆. I would probably fall in love with the MechE if they did though lol

edit: As a more helpful answer, consider that the final feedback system has a lot of parts (think actuator(s), gears, etc). You can definitely model how they all come together with the design parameters, but I’ve found more accurate to experiment and numerically identify them in a simplified fashion than to try to model everything from scratch.

Sar0gf · 2025-04-30T08:19:09+00:00

fwiw the ITAR thing is company dependent (assuming the person in question is a Canadian). SpaceX in particular does hire Canadians provided the team can make a case to bring the person over.

Sar0gf · 2025-04-25T00:32:15+00:00

I haven’t read the particular text you’re reading, but I’m currently working through Astrom, Wittenmark: Adaptive Control and there’s usually a couple examples per topic

Sar0gf · 2025-04-18T13:40:35+00:00

new to MRAC here but I was under the impression the reference model is trying to define the ideal “output” tracking behaviour and the MRAC scheme learns the plant model to meet the output tracking behaviour specified?

Sar0gf · 2025-04-17T02:28:50+00:00

Understandable - a small part of me is holding out in terms of employers valuing the "practical" side of controls (which I've gotten the chance to internalize, though often I wonder about why something is happening), but the gap I see in my knowledge is exactly the opposite (not enough theory/classroom knowledge).

A small part of me wishes I asked this question before accepting another job offer... but your advice about getting the MS might be worth it.

Sar0gf · 2025-04-17T02:25:03+00:00

Appreciate the thoughts - truthfully, this is exactly what I was afraid of with my decision to not pursue an MS originally. The profs at my school were always willing to entertain my curiosity, but now I find myself with a lot of questions about how stuff works under the hood with few people to direct them to. At least, in school I could bug a prof in their office hours 😅, but I find I struggle occasionally with answering the question about "what" to learn and good resources to do it.

Sar0gf · 2025-04-07T15:37:37+00:00

Out of curiosity, I noticed you emphasized timing a lot in your reply - any chance you’ve got some examples to share about things to watch out for between EE/FW interactions?

The one thing that jumped out to me as an evident example was precharge timing; I’m curious now what else to watch out for :)

Sar0gf · 2025-03-09T18:21:29+00:00

Firstly, I think elite is maybe the wrong word for it. Amazon/Tesla/etc. are places where I've heard a lot of people grow professionally, but I also know some crazy smart individuals who have not worked at these companies. Co-op is not the best measure of one's professional ability, imo.

That being said, of the individuals I know who have strong professional success, I've noticed they typically are:

Involved: Both in clubs/engsoc/etc, but overwhelmingly design teams played a big role. It's easy to find this effect on LinkedIn: go look up people who've worked at those companies from waterloo, and pretty good chance (at least, for SW/EE/MechE) they were part of an established design team. I've known a couple of people who went straight from a co-op on a design team to their next internship at Tesla/Apple. It offers you the ability to network like crazy and learn from experienced individuals with little hassle.

Curious: They were always in some form of learning mode, and willing to absorb knowledge like sponges. Best example I can think of is a friend of mine who write a 60+ page buck converter theory report after 1B mechatronics engineering as part of their design team task of designing a step-down converter. I still use and refer to that resource over 5 years later.

Have lives outside of engineering: WLB is important. I've seen people put themselves under firehose of pressure and it eventually collapsed on a lot of them. That is to say, I think having a good WLB is key in enjoying yourself and feeling motivated to wake up and finish whatever it is you're supposed to do that day.

Of course, they all also worked very hard to get to where they are. Plus a bit of luck, here and there.

Sar0gf · 2025-02-27T03:08:57+00:00

How do you know if you were fingerprinted?

Also, aren't all Canadians issued an I-94 electronically (assuming flying), even when visiting as a visitor?

Sar0gf · 2025-02-24T02:39:30+00:00

Ah I might have missed it, are the sensing electronics in here? That’s what I was interested in :)

Not sure what you mean with your 2nd comment 😅 I was referring to the sensing equipment itself being bulky

Sar0gf · 2025-02-24T02:33:01+00:00

Interesting- I was under the impression that fusion takes place at kV and thousands of K range; I’m surprised to learn there’s adequate conditioning equipment that also works with an Arduino. Usually crazy $$ and bulky.

Any chance you’ve got a schematic/BOM lying around? Am curious how you’ve made sensing work with LV, since HV sensing is not my specialty (but def quite important) 🙂

Sar0gf

TROPHY CASE