Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Articulo 2 Vavulas
Articulo 2 Vavulas
DSCC2010
September 12-15, 2010, Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA
DSCC2010-
Yi Wang Hao Su
Mechanical Engineering Mechanical Engineering
Worcester Polytechnic Institute Worcester Polytechnic Institute
Worcester, MA 01609 Worcester, MA 01609
wangy@wpi.edu haosu@wpi.edu
m 45
40
command 45
40
command
35 35
pressure(psi)
pressure(psi)
Assume no external load is applied to the cylinder. We have 30
25
30
25
20 20
1 1 1 15 15
x v x c sign( x ) u
(6) 10 10
m m m 5
0
5
0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80
time(ms) time(ms)
where u is the control input and obviously u Fpres . Setting (a) (b)
the control input u kx , where k is the effective spring
constant of the pneumatic cylinder holding it at set point t 0 , FIGURE 4. STEP RESPONSES OF THE PIEZOELECTRIC
the pneumatic cylinder is a second order system. PRESSURE REGULATOR VALVES
60 60
position(mm)
position(mm)
50 50
30
40
30
0 0
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4
test, we change the mass of the system mmod and compare the time(s) time(s)
Tracking result of control scheme 3 Result of control scheme 3 with modified mass
results. Noted that all control signals add 2 V offset. 80
Reference input
Trajectory
80
Reference input
Trajectory
70 70
60 60
position(mm)
position(mm)
50 50
40 40
Parameter 30 30
20 20
m mmod 2.2
10 10
0.3kg 0.5kg 0
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4
0
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4
time(s) time(s)
c 0.285 1 100 k1 2
(b) STEP FUNTION ROBUSTNESS TEST WITH m and mmod
d1 0.05 2 50 k2 3
FIGURE 5. MATLAB SIMULATION RESULTS COMPARING
SMC SCHEMES FOR BOTH SINE AND STEP INPUTS
d2 0.001 a 0.1 3 50
k3 2.8 d3 0.005 All three algorithms attained the desired accuracy 0.1 mm.
When tracking the sine function, the SSEs of Scheme 1, 2 and
Tracking result of control scheme 1 Control signal of control scheme 1
3 are 0.092 mm, 0.058 mm and 0.079 mm. The time when
cylinder achieves 0.1 mm position tracking error is 0.22 s, 0.40
10
40 Reference input Valve 1 control signal
Trajectory 8 Valve 2 control signal
30
20
6
4
s and 0.31 s respectively. In terms of tracking the step function,
position(mm)
the time is 0.77 s, 0.75 s and 0.54s for m and 0.98 s, 0.72 s
U-valve(V)
10 2
0 0
-10 -2
and 0.95 s for mmod . As for the control signal, Scheme 1 and
-4
-6
-30
8
Control signal of control scheme 2
Valve 1 control signal
function respectively. The performance of Scheme 2 is better
than Scheme 1 and Scheme 3 with respect to position tracking
Trajectory Valve 2 control signal
30
6
20
U-valve(V)
10 2
-10
0 0
-2
the most suitable control algorithm.
-20 -4
-6
-30
VI. CONCLUSION
-8
-40
-10
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4
time(s) time(s)
Pneumatics is a preferable method for MRI compatible
40
Tracking result of control scheme 3
Reference input
10
Control signal of control scheme 3
Valve 1 control signal
actuation. A test system has been built to evaluate control
algorithms. Due to fast response and MRI compatibility, a
Trajectory 8 Valve 2 control signal
30
6
U-valve(V)
10 2
-10
0 0
-2
approximated system model was established with regards to
-20
-4 dead time induced by valve response and model uncertainty.
SMC was adopted for testing tracking accuracy and response
-6
-30
-8
-40
0 0.5 1 1.5 2
time(s)
2.5 3 3.5 4
-10
0 0.5 1 1.5 2
time(s)
2.5 3 3.5 4
time. Three SMC schemes were proposed and the performances
were evaluated by Matlab simulation. Considering position
(a) TRACKING RESULT OF SINE FUNCTION AND CONTROL SIGNAL
tracking accuracy, converging time, amount of chattering in
Tracking result of control scheme 1 Result of control scheme 1 with modified mass
80
Reference input
Trajectory
80
Reference input
Trajectory
control signal and robustness, Scheme 2 is regarded as the best
algorithm. Despite the assumption that only one valve operates
70 70
60 60
50 50
40
30
40
30
might overlap for less than 3 ms. The influence is yet to be
20 20 determined. The future work is to carry out comparison of the
10 10
algorithms on the physical system to validate the simulation
results. The calculation complexity of the three schemes varies.
0 0
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4
time(s) time(s)