3 ms·
I'd probably prefer 0.5-0.5cos(pit/T) to a function which has a nonzero derivative at the start at the end.
by static_noise 11y ago
I'd probably prefer
0.5-0.5cos(pit/T)
to a function which has a nonzero derivative at the start at the end.
- SapphireSun 11y agoHmm, that does work nicely. The major problem with it though is that I don't see an easy way to configure the steepness. I suppose you can force it to 0 and 1 before and after the first rise. Not a terrible solution, a bit less elegant though, but as you said it does have a nice zero velocity at the starts and ends.
- static_noise 11y agoInstead of cos(...) you could use pow( cos(...), a ) where a can be used to adjust the steepness. I can't plot it right now and I think I'm missing something, but you get the general idea of using the power of a function which goes form 0 to 1 to adjust steepness. Another solution would be a 2-piece function kind of 0.5*pow( 2*t/T, a ) for t < T/2 and 1-0.5*pow( 2*(1-t/T), a ) for t > T/2 which makes a similar slope as the cosine but is easier to calculate.