Professional Documents
Culture Documents
GluckKK PDF
GluckKK PDF
Abstract: The design of a feedforward controller that facilitates soft landing and time
optimality of a fast-switching electromagnetic valve is presented. In particular, a mathematical
model of the considered pneumatic switching valve is developed and parametrized by means
of nonlinear parameter identification. Based on this model, the input constrained point-to-
point quasi-time-optimal control problem is formulated and the resulting two-point boundary
value problem is numerically solved. Due to the input constraints, the quasi-time-optimal
control trajectories show bang-bang behavior. The performance of the numerically determined
trajectories are demonstrated by means of measurement results on an experimental test bench.
Φf c
plunger
cc,u dc,u
su
Rf c (Φf c ) Rg (s) sl
fc
Rl cc,l dc,l
mv
Rf p fm
cv dv s, w
Θ
cushioned
Φl Φf p limit stops
11533
18th IFAC World Congress (IFAC'11)
Milano (Italy) August 28 - September 2, 2011
αl
identification of the mechanical parameters from the mass
balance (9) by applying again nonlinear dynamic least-
squares identification fails. In fact, the spring constant cv
as well as the preloading force cv lc0 were obtained from
measurements in stationary conditions. The parameters
of the contact model and the viscous damping coefficient
dv were adjusted in order to approximately reproduce the
αu contact behavior with the sealing. Based on the developed
model, the optimal control problem is formulated in the
sl su next section.
position s
4. OPTIMAL CONTROL PROBLEM
Fig. 3. Static contact force model.
smoothed contact characteristics (11) for the parameters The mathematical model (5) and (9) with the state vector
T
βu = βl = 0 and ηu = ηl = 106 1/m. x = [s, w, ψ] ∈ R3 with the constrained affine input
u = v ∈ R can be written in the form
3. PARAMETER IDENTIFICATION AND MODEL d
VALIDATION x = f (x) + bu, x(0) = x0 , (16)
dt
3
with the initial condition x0 ∈ R . The control objective
Several parameters of the mathematical model cannot is to find an optimal control u∗ ∈ U = u− , u+ that
be directly determined from data sheets. Therefore, a guarantees a minimal transition time Tf for a set-point
parameter identification of the overall model is performed change
in order to fit the derived model to measurement results.
(u0 , x0 ) → (uf , xf ), t ∈ (0, Tf ), (17)
First the electromagnetic subsystem is parametrized. For
this, the reluctance (4) is reformulated in the structural with
equivalent form u(0) = u0 , 0 = f (x0 ) + bu0 ,
(18)
p4 (p5 s + p6 ) u(Tf ) = uf , 0 = f (xf ) + buf
R(s, ψ) = p1 |ψ|ep2 |ψ| + p3 + , (13)
p4 + p5 s + p6 and the terminal condition x(Tf ) = xf ∈ R3 . Therefore,
with the parameters the input-constrained point-to-point optimal control prob-
k1 lf c k2 k3 lf c lem
p1 = 2 , p2 = , p3 = , Z Tf
µ0 N Af c N Af c µ0 Af c min J(u) = ϕ(Tf ) + l(u)dt
(14) u∈ U 0
2
p4 = Rl , p5 = , p6 = Rf p . d (19)
µ0 Ag s.t. x = f (x) + bu, x(0) = x0 , x(Tf ) = xf ,
dt
The unknown parameters θ ∈ {R, p1 , p2 , p3 , p4 , p5 , p6 }, u ∈ U = u− , u+
with the electric resistance R from (5), are found from
the nonlinear dynamic least-squares identification task has to be solved. The summand ϕ(Tf ) = Tf of the cost
functional J(u) represents the time optimality, whereas
1 T
Z
min
2
(i − im ) dt the integral term l(u) = ru2 /2, with r > 0, serves
θ T 0 as a regularization in order to avoid singular arcs in
d (15) the quasi-time-optimal control problem. Introducing the
s.t. ψ =v − R i, ψ(0) = ψ0
dt Hamiltonian (Bryson and Ho, 1975)
R(sm , ψ) H(x, u, λ) = l(u) + λT (f (x) + bu) , (20)
i= ψ.
N2 3
with the adjoint states λ ∈ R , and applying a time
Here, im and sm are the measurements of the current and transformation t = Tf τ that maps the time interval
the plunger position, respectively. The measurements were t ∈ (0, Tf ) onto τ ∈ (0, 1), the optimal control problem
carried out during the time interval t ∈ (0, T ) for different can be reformulated by means of Pontryagin’s maximum
steps in the input voltage v. principle (Athans and Falb, 1966) in form of a two-point
Figure 4 shows results of the parametrized model for two boundary value problem, i.e.
different voltage steps v. The results confirm that the d ∗
reluctance model (4) is capable of approximating the real x = Tf (f (x∗ ) + bu∗ ) (21a)
dτ
electromagnetic behavior of the valve in an excellent way. T
d ∗ ∂
The effect of saturation is negligible for small current λ = −Tf f (x) λ∗ (21b)
values, cf. Figure 4(a). However, for large currents, Fig- dτ ∂x ∗
x=x
ure 4(b) clearly demonstrates the necessity of modeling u∗ = arg min H(x∗ , u, λ∗ ) (21c)
the nonlinear saturation phenomena. In addition, the in- u∈U
ductance L = R(s, ψ)/N 2 is shown in Figure 4.
with boundary conditions
The magnetic force fm is calculated from the identified x∗ (0) = x0 and x∗ (1) = xf (22)
reluctance model according to (8). Due to temperature
and the transversality condition
dependency and the presence of hysteresis of the viscoelas-
tic material, the proposed force model (11) is only an H(x∗ , u∗ , λ∗ )|τ =1 = −1 (23)
11534
18th IFAC World Congress (IFAC'11)
Milano (Italy) August 28 - September 2, 2011
ψ in mVs sm in µm
ψ in mVs sm in µm
200 200
150 150
100
100 50
50 0
12 20
6 10
0 0
0.4 2
i in A
i in A
0.2 1
0 0
36
L in H
L in H
28 28
24 20
20 12
3 12
v in V
v in v
2 8
1 4
0 0
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0
normalized time normalized time
Simulation
(a) Set-point change of v = 2.5 V. Measurement (b) Set-point change of v = 12 V.
Fig. 4. Identification results for different voltage set-point changes. Measured air gap sm , simulated flux linkage ψ,
measured and simulated current im and i, and simulated inductance L.
100 20
s∗ in µm
v ∗ in V
200 50
λ∗1
150 0 0
100 −50 −20
×10−3
3 1.2
w∗ in m/s
0
i∗ in A
0 0.8
λ∗2
−0.1
0.4
−3
−0.2 0
×10−2
4
ψ ∗ in mVs
18 8
f ∗ in N
12 0
4
λ∗3
6 −4 0
0 −8 −4
0 0.5 1.0 0 0.5 1.0 0 0.5 1.0
normalized time τ normalized time τ normalized time τ
(a) Optimal state trajectories. (b) Optimal adjoint state trajectories. (c) Optimal voltage v∗ , current i∗ ,
magnetic force fm∗ ( ),
contact force fc (
∗ ) and
sum force fsum
∗ ( ).
Fig. 5. Numerical results of the time optimal control problem for the opening motion (su → sl ).
resulting from the free end time Tf . The superscript ∗ Note that λT b = λ3 . In the limit case for r → 0 each
refers to optimal variables. Owing to the input affine sys- time λ3 crosses zero, u∗ switches between the limits u−
tem representation (16), the minimization problem (21c) and u+ . Then, the solution of the optimal control problem
can be explicitly solved resulting in an optimal control (19) is a bang-bang control, except for λ3 = 0. Also
function − note that for r = 0 the optimal control problem (19) is
u for u0 ≤ u− singular (Bryson, 1999) since u can neither be derived
u∗ = ξ(λ) = u0 for u0 ∈ u− , u+ from the minimization problem (21c) nor from the related
(24)
+
u for u0 ≥ u+ , first-order necessary condition ∂H/∂u = 0. Then, the
optimal control input may be deduced from some total
with time derivatives of ∂H/∂u = 0, cf. Kelley et al. (1967).
1
u0 = − (λ∗ )T b. (25)
r
11535
18th IFAC World Congress (IFAC'11)
Milano (Italy) August 28 - September 2, 2011
−6 20
s∗ in µm
v ∗ in V
200
λ∗1
150 −8 0
100 −10 −20
×10−3
6 0.8
w∗ in m/s
0.15
i∗ in A
0.10 3 0.4
λ∗2
0.05 0
0 −3 0
×10−2
6
ψ ∗ in mVs
f ∗ in N
12 3
2
λ∗3
6 0 0
0 −3 −2
0 0.5 1.0 0 0.5 1.0 0 0.5 1.0
normalized time τ normalized time τ normalized time τ
(a) Optimal state trajectories. (b) Optimal adjoint state trajectories. (c) Optimal voltage v∗ , current i∗ ,
magnetic force fm ∗ ( ),
contact force fc∗ ( ) and
sum force fsum
∗ ( ).
Fig. 6. Numerical results of the time optimal control problem for the closing motion (sl → su ).
5. NUMERICAL RESULTS OF THE OPTIMAL the plunger. For confirming the numerical results of the
CONTROL PROBLEM two-point boundary value problem, the optimal control
problem was additionally solved by full discretization with
Numerical solutions of the two-point boundary value prob- SNOPT, see Gill et al. (2006), resulting in the same
lem (21)-(23) can be obtained using the Matlab function optimal control trajectories.
bvp4c(), cf. Shampine et al. (2003). Figures 5 and 6
show numerical results of the time-optimal point-to-point 6. IMPLEMENTATION AND EXPERIMENTAL
transition for the opening RESULTS
T T
(u0 = 0, x0 = [su , 0, 0] ) → (uf = vl , xf = [sl , 0, ψl ] )
and for the closing The obtained numerical results were verified on an exper-
T T imental test bench. The power electronics used for driving
(u0 = vl , x0 = [sl , 0, ψl ] ) → (uf = vu , xf = [su , 0, ψu ] ) the magnetic valve allows the accurate measurement of the
of the fast-switching valve within the normalized transition current and the voltage. The position and velocity of the
time τ ∈ (0, 1). Here, vl and ψl denote the resulting plunger were obtained from a laser vibrometer (Polytec)
set-point voltage and flux linkage, respectively, cf. (18), and the measuring and control system dSPACE 1005 was
at the upper limit, and vu and ψu the set-point voltage utilized for data processing.
and flux linkage at the lower limit. Note that for all
numerical solutions outside the vertical dashed lines the The experimental results revealed small model inaccura-
initial and final values are held constant for illustration cies, which may be attributed to temperature dependency
purposes only. The optimal state trajectories for opening of the coil resistance and of the contact behavior of the
the valve are given in Figure 5(a). Figure 5(c) shows the limit stops and to stick-slip effects. However, by slightly
corresponding optimal voltage v ∗ , which is nearly bang- moving the switching-points of the input voltage, it is
bang because r in the penalty term is chosen very small possible to open and close the valve in minimal time and
r = 10−8 1/V2 . Moreover, Figure 5(c) contains the optimal with almost zero velocity at the limit positions. Figure 7
current i∗ , the magnetic force fm ∗
, the contact force fc∗ shows the measurement results for the opening and the
∗
and the sum of the forces fsum acting on the plunger. closing of the magnetic valve. For the opening scenario
The optimal adjoint states are shown in Figure 5(b). They in Figure 7(a), in contrast to the numerical results, the
exhibit oscillations at the beginning of the considered normalized opening time of τm = 0.87τ was needed. It is
time interval. Although the incorporation of the contact evident, that by applying the structural equivalent input
model (11) results in a locally numerical stiff model, the trajectory it is possible to minimize the impact velocity
oscillation is not a numerical artifact but inherent to the at the seals. The same applies to the valve closing in
model. Numerical results for different contact stiffnesses Figure 7(b). A normalized time ratio of τm = 0.84τ was
cci , i ∈ {u, l}, of the contact model confirm this statement. needed for the set-point change within minimal time.
Figure 6 shows analogous numerical results for closing the
valve with r = 10−8 1/V2 . It is worth noting that in this 7. CONCLUSION AND FUTURE WORK
case the solution of the optimal control problem is not
purely bang-bang. Whenever λ∗3 vanishes (approximately In this work, time-optimal feedforward trajectories for
for τ ∈ [0.4, 0.6]), u∗ does so as well. This happens if fm ∗
fast-switching valves are presented. Nonlinear dynamic
vanishes, implying that only the spring force accelerates least-squares identification was performed to parametrize
11536
18th IFAC World Congress (IFAC'11)
Milano (Italy) August 28 - September 2, 2011
sm in µm
sm in µm
200 200
150 150
100 100
wm in m/s
wm in m/s
0 0.2
−0.1 0.1
−0.2 0
0.8
im in A
im in A
0.8
0.4
0.4
0 0
20 20
v in V
v in V
0 0
−20 −20
0 0.5 1.0 0 0.5 1.0
normalized time τm normalized time τm
the developed mathematical model. The point-to-point Gill, P.E., Murray, W., and Sauders, M.A. (2006). User’s
quasi-time-optimal control problem was reformulated by Guide for SNOPT Version 7: Software for Large-
means of Pontryagin’s maximum principle and numerically Scale Nonlinear Programming. URL http://www.
solved by a direct approach. In the last part, the applicabil- sbsi-sol-optimize.com.
ity of the time-optimal feedforward trajectories is demon- Hoffmann, W., Peterson, K., and Stefanopoulou, A.G.
strated by means of measurement results. Future work (2003). Iterative learning control for soft landing of elec-
addresses the cycle-based adaption of the time-optimal tromechanical valve actuator in camless engines. IEEE
feedforward trajectory in order to account for time-varying Transactions on Control System Technology, 11(2), 174–
parameters and model mismatches. 184.
Kelley, H., Kopp, R., and Moyer, H. (1967). Singular
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS extremals, chapter 3, 63–101. Academic Press.
Koch, C.R., Lynch, A., and Chladny, R. (2002). Modeling
We thank Prof. Dr.-Ing Knut Graichen for his helpful and control of solenoid valves for internal combustion
discussion on formulating and solving the optimal control engines. In Proceedings of the IFAC Symposium on
problem. Mechatronic Systems, 197–201. California, USA.
REFERENCES Peterson, K.S., Grizzle, J.W., and Stefanopoulou, A.G.
(2006). Nonlinear control for magnetic levitation of au-
Athans, M. and Falb, P. (1966). Optimal Control: An In- tomotive engine valves. IEEE Transactions on Control
troduction to the Theory and Its Applications. McGraw- System Technology, 14(2), 346–354.
Hill, New York. Peterson, K.S. and Stefanopoulou, A.G. (2004). Ex-
Bryson, A. (1999). Dynamic optimization. Addison- tremum seeking control for soft landing of an electrome-
Wesley. chanical valve actuator. Automatica, 40, 1063–1069.
Bryson, A. and Ho, Y. (1975). Applied optimal control. Petit, N., Milam, M.B., and Murray, R.M. (2001). In-
John Wiley & Sons, New York. version based constrained trajectory optimization. In
Chladny, R.R. and Koch, C.R. (2008). Flatness-based Proceedings of the 5th IFAC Symposium on Nonlinear
tracking of an electromechanical variable valve timing Control Systems. St. Petersburg, Russia.
actuator with disturbance observer feedforward com- Shampine, L., Gladwell, I., and Thompson, S. (2003).
pensation. IEEE Transactions on Control System Tech- Solving ODEs with MATLAB. Cambridge University
nology, 16(4), 652–663. Press.
Chung, S.K., Koch, C.R., and Lynch, A.F. (2007). Tai, C., Stubbs, A., and Tsao, T. (2001). Control of
Flatness-based feedback control of an automotive an electromechanical actuator for camless engines. In
solenoid valve. IEEE Transactions on Control System Proceedings of the American Control Conference, 3113–
Technology, 15(2), 394–401. 3118.
Eyabi, P. and Washington, G. (2006). Modeling and
sensorless control of an electromagnetic valve actuator.
Mechatronics, 16, 159–175.
11537