Original Paper

Measurement and Control

2020, Vol. 53(1-2) 141–150
Modeling and energy-based sway Ó The Author(s) 2019
Article reuse guidelines:
reduction control for tower crane sagepub.com/journals-permissions
DOI: 10.1177/0020294019877492

systems with double-pendulum and journals.sagepub.com/home/mac

spherical-pendulum effects

Menghua Zhang1 , Yongfeng Zhang1, Bing Ji2, Changhui Ma3 and

Xingong Cheng1

Abstract
As typical underactuated systems, tower crane systems present complicated nonlinear dynamics. For simplicity, the pay-
load swing is traditionally modeled as a single-pendulum in existing works. Actually, when the hook mass is close to the
payload mass, or the size of the payload is large, a tower crane may exhibit double-pendulum effects. In addition, existing
control methods assume that the hook and the payload only swing in a plane. To tackle the aforementioned practical
problems, we establish the dynamical model of the tower cranes with double-pendulum and spherical-pendulum effects.
Then, on this basis, an energy-based controller is designed and analyzed using the established dynamic model. To further
obtain rapid hook and payload swing suppression and elimination, the swing part is introduced to the energy-based con-
troller. Lyapunov techniques and LaSalle’s invariance theorem are provided to demonstrate the asymptotic stability of
the closed-loop system and the convergence of the system states. Simulation results are illustrated to verify the correct-
ness and effectiveness of the designed controller.

Keywords
Modeling, spherical-pendulum effect, double-pendulum effect, energy-based control, convergence

Date received: 8 June 2019; accepted: 31 July 2019

Introduction scheduling feedback control,11 laser-based path track-

To transfer heavy payloads to the desired location,
tower cranes have been widely used in many fields, such
as construction sites. Compared with other cranes,
tower cranes have the advantage of having a small
footprint-to-workspace ratio, and the disadvantage of
complicated nonlinear dynamics due to the rational
characteristics of the cranes. Like other cranes, tower
cranes are typically underactuated nonlinear systems,
positioning and sway suppression/elimination are the
preliminary task.1–6 Till now, the control issues of tower
cranes are still open and challenging.
During the past several decades, many researchers
have kept a watchful eye on dealing with the control
problem of tower crane systems, and a lot of works
have been reported. Two common open-loop control-
lers are input shaping7–9 and optimal velocity control,10
which are simple and, hence, easy to be implemented in
practical applications. However, their control perfor-
mance might be influenced by external disturbances
and parametric uncertainties. To improve the robust-
ness, some closed-loop control methods including gain
ing control,12 model predictive control,13 recurrent
neural network-based control,14 energy-based control,15
and adaptive sliding mode control (SMC) method16 are
designed for tower crane systems.
However, the abovementioned control methods
completely neglect the hook mass and the distance
between the hook’s CoG (center of gravity) and the
payload’s CoG, and on this basis, treat the payload
swing as that of a single-pendulum. In some situations,
the payload mass cannot be neglected, and the payload
size is usually large. On this occasion, the payload will
rotate around the hook, that is, double-pendulum
1
School of Electrical Engineering, University of Jinan, Jinan, China
2
School of Control Science and Engineering, Shandong University, Jinan,
China
3
State Grid Shandong Electric Power Research Institute, Jinan, China
Corresponding author:
Menghua Zhang, School of Electrical Engineering, University of Jinan, The
Western campus, No. 336, Nanxinzhuang West Road, Shizhong District,
Jinan 250022, China
Email: zhangmenghua@mail.sdu.edu.cn

Creative Commons CC BY: This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License
(http://www.creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) which permits any use, reproduction and distribution of the work without
further permission provided the original work is attributed as specified on the SAGE and Open Access pages (https://us.sagepub.com/en-us/nam/
open-access-at-sage).
142 Measurement and Control 53(1-2)

effects. Compared with the single-pendulum model, the

double-pendulum model is much closer to the actual
condition. Therefore, although the double-pendulum
tower cranes present more complicated dynamics, the
study of their control problem is of both theoretical
and applied interest. Vaughan et al.17 and Zhang
et al.18 using the simplified model, an input shaping
controller is proposed to eliminate the residual swing.
However, the input shaping method belongs to the
open-loop control method, and it is sensitive to exter-
nal disturbances. Moreover, it needs to assume that the
hook and the payload only swing in a plane. In fact,
the swing of the hook and the payload is not con-
strained in a plane, but will deviate from the original
Figure 1. Schematic diagram of tower crane systems with
swing plane to a sphere, that is, the spherical pendu-
double-pendulum and spherical-pendulum effects.
lum. Therefore, we establish the dynamic model for
tower cranes with double-pendulum and spherical-
pendulum effects first. Then, an energy-based control
systems with double-pendulum effects. As can be seen
method with hook and payload sway reduction is pro-
from Figure 1, the position vectors of the trolley, the
posed. After that, Lyapunov techniques and LaSalle’s
hook, and the payload can be obtained as
invariance theorem are utilized to demonstrate the sta-
bility of the closed-loop system and the convergence pM = ½ x 0 0 T ð1Þ
the states. Finally, simulation results are provided to T
show the correctness and effectiveness of the designed ph = ½x + l1 S1 C2 l1 S2 l1 C1 C2  ð2Þ
energy-based controller with hook and payload sway pm = ½x + l1 S1 C2 + l2 S3 C4 l1 S2 + l2 S4 l1 C1 C2 + l2 C3 C4 T
reduction. ð3Þ
The main contribution of this paper is concluded as
follows. where x represents the trolley displacement; l1 and l2
denote the distance between the trolley and the hook,
1. The dynamic model of the tower crane system and the distance between the hook and the payload,
with double-pendulum and spherical-pendulum respectively; and S1 , S2 , S3 , S4 , C1 , C2 , C3 , and C4
effects is established, which provides a model stand for the abbreviations of sin u1 , sin u2 , sin u3 ,
for realizing positioning and sway reduction sin u3 , sin u4 , cos u1 , cos u2 , cos u3 , and cos u4 ,
control. respectively.
2. The proposed controller is simple; therefore, it is The angular velocity vector of the tower systems
easy to be implemented in practical applications. with double-pendulum effects is denoted as
 T
v = 0 0 f_ ð4Þ
This paper is organized as follows. The dynamics of
tower crane systems with double-pendulum and where f represents the jib slew angle.
spherical-pendulum effects are described in section The velocity vectors of the trolley, the hook, and the
‘‘Dynamic model of tower crane systems with double- payload are as follows
pendulum and spherical-pendulum effects.’’ In section
‘‘Energy-based controller with hook and payload sway dpM
vM = + v3pM
reduction,’’ energy-based controller with hook/payload dt
 T ð5Þ
swing suppression and elimination is designed. In sec- = ½x_ 0 0T + 0 0 f_ 3½x 0 0T
tion ‘‘Stability analysis,’’ stability analysis is provided.  T
Simulation results are given to show the superior con- = x_ xf_ 0
trol performance of the proposed controller in section dph
vh = + v3ph
‘‘Simulation results and analysis.’’ Section
2dt 3
‘‘Conclusion’’ gives some concluding remarks. x_ + l1 u_ 1 C1 C2  l1 u_ 2 S1 S2
6 7
= 4 l1 u_ 2 C2 5
Dynamic model of tower crane systems lu_ 1 S1 C2  lu_ 2 C1 S2 ð6Þ
 T
with double-pendulum and spherical- + 0 0 f_ 3½x + l1 S1 C2 l1 S2 l1 C1 C2 T
pendulum effects 2 3
_ 2
x_ + l1 u_ 1 C1 C2  l1 u_ 2 S1 S2  l1 fS
6 7
In this section, the dynamic model of the tower crane = 4 l1 u_ 2 C2 + f_ ðx + l1 S1 C2 Þ 5
system with double-pendulum effects is established. l1 u_ 1 S1 C2  l1 u_ 2 C1 S2
Figure 1 gives the schematic diagram of tower crane
Zhang et al. 143

dpm
vm = + v3pm
dt
2 3 2 3
x_ + l1 u_ 1 C1 C2  l1 u_ 2 S1 S2 + l2 u_ 3 C3 C4  l2 u_ 4 S3 S4 x + l1 S1 C2 + l2 S3 C4
6 7   6 7
=6 _ _ 7 + 0 0 f_ T 36 l1 S2 + l2 S4 7
4 l1 u2 C2 + l2 u4 C4 5 4 5
_ _ _ _ l1 C1 C2 + l2 C3 C4 ð7Þ
l1 u1 S1 C2  l1 u2 C1 S2  l2 u3 S3 C4  l2 u4 C3 S4
2 3
x_ + l1 u_ 1 C1 C2  l1 u_ 2 S1 S2 + l2 u_ 3 C3 C4  l2 u_ 4 S3 S4  f_ ðl1 S2 + l2 S4 Þ
6 7
=6 _ _ _
4 l1 u2 C2 + l2 u4 C4 + fðx + l1 S1 C2 + l2 S3 C4 Þ
7
5
_ _ _ _
l1 u1 S1 C2  l1 u2 C1 S2  l2 u3 S3 C4  l2 u4 C3 S4

The kinematic energy of the tower crane systems

with double-pendulum effects is given as follows
1 1 1 1 2
T= Mt v2M + m1 v2h + m2 v2m + Jf_
2 2 2 2
0 2 2
1
l21 u_ 21 C22 + l21 u_ 22 + l21 f_ S22 + l21 f_ S21 C22
B C
B C
1 1 1 B + 2l _
x _
u C C  2l _
x _
u S S  2l _
x _
fS C 1 2
2 B 1 1 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 C
= ðMt + m1 Þx_ 2 + ðMt + m1 Þx2 f_ + m1 B C + Jf_
2 2 2 B 2l2 f_ u_ C S C + 2l2 f_ u_ S + 2l xf_ u_ C C 2
B 1 1 1 2 2 1 2 1 1 2 2C
@ A
2
+ 2l1 xf_ S1 C2
0 1
2 2 2
x_ 2 + x2 f_ + l21 u_ 21 C21 C22 + l21 u_ 22 S21 S22 + l22 u_ 23 C23 C24 + l22 u_ 24 S23 S24 + l21 f_ S22 + l22 f_ S24
B C
B C
B 2
_ 4C
B + 2l1 l2 f_ S2 S4 + 2l1 x_ u_ 1 C1 C2  2l1 x_ u_ 2 S1 S2 + 2l2 x_ u_ 3 C3 C4  2l2 x_ u_ 4 S3 S4  2l1 x_ fS _ 2  2l2 x_ fS C
B C
B C ð8Þ
B 2l21 u_ 1 u_ 2 S1 C1 S2 C2 + 2l1 l2 u_ 1 u_ 3 C1 C2 C3 C4  2l1 l2 u_ 1 u_ 4 C1 C2 S3 S4  2l21 f_ u_ 1 C1 C2 S2 C
B C
B C
B 2l l f_ u_ C C S  2l l u_ u_ S S C C + 2l l u_ u_ S S S S + 2l2 f_ u_ S S2 + 2l l f_ u_ S S S C
B 1 2 1 1 2 4 1 2 2 3 1 2 3 4 1 2 2 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 1 2 1 2 2 1 2 4 C
B C
B C
1 B B 2l 2_ _
u u C C S S  2l l f_ u_ S C C  2l 2_ _
f u C S C + 2l l _
f u_ S S S C
2 3 4 3 4 3 4 1 2 3 2 3 4 2 3 3 4 4 1 2 4 2 3 4 C
+ m2 B C
2 B + 2l2 f_ u_ S S2 l2 u_ 2 S2 C2 + l2 u_ 2 C2 S2 + l2 u_ 2 S2 C2 + l2 u_ 2 C2 S2 + 2l2 u_ u_ S C C S C
B 2 4 3 4 1 1 1 2 1 2 1 2 2 3 3 4 2 4 3 4 1 1 2 1 1 2 2 C
B C
B C
B + 2l1 l2 u_ 1 u_ 3 S1 C2 S3 C4 + 2l1 l2 u_ 1 u_ 4 S1 C2 C3 S4 + 2l1 l2 u_ 2 u_ 3 C1 S2 S3 C4 + 2l1 l2 u_ 2 u_ 4 C1 S2 C3 S4 C
B C
B C
B 2 2 2 C
B + 2l22 u_ 3 u_ 4 S3 C3 S4 C4 + l21 u_ 22 C22 + l22 u_ 24 C24 + l21 f_ S21 C22 + l22 f_ S23 C24 + 2l1 xf_ S1 C2 C
B C
B C
B 2 2 C
B + 2l2 xf_ S3 C4 + 2l1 l2 f_ S1 C2 S3 C4 + 2l1 l2 u_ 2 u_ 4 C2 C4 + 2xl1 f_ u_ 2 C2 + 2l21 f_ u_ 2 C2 S1 C2 C
@ A
_ _ _ _ _ _
+ 2l1 l2 fu2 C2 S3 C4 + 2l2 fxu4 C4 + 2l1 l2 fu4 S1 C2 C4 + 2l2 fu4 S3 C4 2_ _ 2

with J being the moment of inertia of the jib, E stand-

ing for the kinematic energy of the system, Mt repre- The Lagrangian E is defined as
senting the trolley mass, and m1 and m2 denoting for
hook mass and the payload mass, respectively. E=T  P ð10Þ
The potential energy of tower crane systems with
double-pendulum effects is given by It follows from equations (8)–(10) that
P = ðm1 + m2 Þgl1 ð1  C1 C2 Þ + m2 gl2 ð1  C3 C4 Þ ð9Þ ∂E
=0 ð11Þ
where g stands for the gravitational acceleration and P ∂f
denotes the potential of the energy.

∂E    
_ 1 C2
= x2 f_ + l21 f_ S22 + S21 C22 + l22 f_ S24 + S23 C24 + 2l1 l2 f_ ðS2 S4 + S1 C2 S3 C4 Þ + 2l1 xfS
∂f_
_ 3 C4 + xl1 u_ 2 C2 + 2l2 xf_ u_ 4 C4  l1 xS ð12Þ
+ 2l2 xfS _ 2  l2 xS _ 4  l21 u_ 1 C1 S2 C2  l1 l2 u_ 1 C1 C2 S4 + l21 u_ 2 S1
+ l1 l2 u_ 2 ðS1 S2 S4 + C2 S3 C4 Þ  l1 l2 u_ 3 S2 C3 C4  l2 u_ 3 C3 S4 C4 + l1 l2 u_ 4 ðS2 S3 S4 + S1 C2 C4 Þ + l2 u_ 4 S3
2 2
144 Measurement and Control 53(1-2)

   2 
d ∂E x + l21 S22 + l21 S21 C22 + l22 S24 + l22 S23 C24 + 2l1 l2 S2 S4 €
= m2 f
dt ∂f_ + 2l1 l2 S1 C2 S3 C4 + 2l1 xS1 C2 + 2l2 xS3 C4 + 2l2 xu_ 4 C4
 
+ 2m2 l1 C1 C2 u_ 1  l1 S1 S2 u_ 2 + l2 C3 C4 u_ 3  l2 S3 S4 u_ 4 xf_  m2 ðl1 S2 + l2 S4 Þ€
x
!
  2l 2 2
C S2 C2
_ 2 + 2l2 S1 C1 C2 u_ 1
u
+ 2m2 x + l1 S1 C2 + l2 S3 C4 + l2 C4 u_ 4 x_ f_ + m2 1 1 1 2
f_
+ 2l22 C23 S4 C4 u_ 4 + 2l22 S3 C3 C24 u_ 3
 
l1 S1 + l2 S1 S2 S4
 m2 l1 C1 C2 ðl2 S4 + l1 S2 Þ€ u1  m2 l2 C3 C4 ðl1 S2 + l2 S4 Þ€u3 + m2 l1 €u2 ð13Þ
+ l2 C2 S3 C4 + xC2
 
+ m2 l2 l2 S3 + l1 S2 S3 S4 + l1 S1 C2 C4 + 2xfC _ 4 €u4 + m2 l1 S1 C2 ðl1 S2 + l2 S4 Þu_ 2
1
 
+ m2 l2 S3 C4 ðl1 S2 + l2 S4 Þu_ 23 + m2 l2 l1 S2 S3 C4  l1 S1 C2 S4  2xfS _ 4 u_ 2
4
 
+ 2m2 l1 C1 l1 C22 + l2 S2 S4 u_ 1 u_ 2  m2 l2 x_ u_ 4 C4 + 2m2 l2 C3 S4 ðl1 S2  l2 S4 Þu_ 3 u_ 4
+ 2m2 l1 l2 f_ u_ 1 C1 C2 S3 C4 + 2m2 l1 l2 f_ u_ 2 ðC2 S4  S1 S2 S3 C4 Þ + 2m2 l1 l2 f_ u_ 3 S1 C2 C3 C4
+ 2m2 l1 l2 f_ u_ 4 ðS2 C4  S1 C2 S3 S4 Þ

Using the following Lagrange equation

 
d ∂E ∂E
 = M  Mf ð14Þ
dt ∂f_ ∂f

it can be obtained that

     !
ðMt + m1 + m2 Þx2 + m2 l21 + m1 l21 S22 + S21 C22 + J + m2 l22 S24 + S23 C24
€
f
+ 2m2 l1 l2 ðS2 S4 + S1 C2 S3 C4 Þ + 2ðm1 + m2 Þl1 xS1 C2 + 2m2 l2 xS3 C4 + 2m2 l2 xu_ 4 C4
    
x + 2 l1 ðm2 + m1 Þ u_ 1 C1 C2  u_ 2 S1 S2 + m2 l2 u_ 3 C3 C4  u_ 4 S3 S4 xf_
 ðm1 l1 S2 + m2 l1 S2 + m2 l2 S4 Þ€
  
+ 2 ðMt + m1 + m2 Þx + ðm2 + m1 Þl1 S1 C2 + m2 l2 S3 C4 + l2 u_ 4 C4 x_ f_
    
+ 2 ðm1 + m2 Þl2 u_ 2 C2 S2 C2 + u_ 1 S1 C1 C2 + m2 l2 C4 u_ 4 C2 S4 + u_ 3 S3 C3 C4 f_
1 1 2 2 3
 l1 C1 C2 ðm2 l2 S4 + ðm1 + m2 Þl1 S2 Þ€u1 + l1 ððm1 + m2 Þðl1 S1 + xC2 Þ + m2 l2 ðS1 S2 S4 + C2 S3 C4 ÞÞ€u2
  ð15Þ
_ 4 u€4
€3 + m2 l2 l2 S3 + l1 ðS2 S3 S4 + S1 C2 C4 Þ + 2xfC
 m2 l2 C3 C4 ðl1 S2 + l2 S4 Þu
+ l1 S1 C2 ððm1 + m2 Þl1 S2 + m2 l2 S4 Þu_ 21 + l1 ðm2 l2 ðS1 C2 S4  S2 S3 C4 Þ  ðm1 + m2 ÞxS2 Þu_ 22
 
+ m2 l2 S3 C4 ðl1 S2 + l2 S4 Þu_ 23 + m2 l2 l1 ðS2 S3 C4  S1 C2 S4 Þ  2xfS _ 4 u_ 2
4
 
2 _
+ 2l1 C1 ðm1 + m2 Þl1 S2 + m2 l2 S2 S4 u1 u2 + 2m2 l2 C3 S4 ðl1 S2  l2 S4 Þu3 u_ 4  m2 l2 x_ u_ 4 C4
_ _
+ 2m2 l1 l2 f_ u_ 1 C1 C2 S3 C4 + 2m2 l1 l2 f_ u_ 2 ðC2 S4  S1 S2 S3 C4 Þ + 2m2 l1 l2 f_ u_ 3 S1 C2 C3 C4
+ 2m2 l1 l2 f_ u_ 4 ðS2 C4  S1 C2 S3 S4 Þ = M  Mf

where M denotes the slew control torque and Mf represents the friction torque.
In a similar way, the following results are obtained as follows

€ + ðMt + m1 + m2 Þ€
 ðm1 l1 S2 + m2 l1 S2 + m2 l2 S4 Þf x + ðm1 + m2 Þl1 €u1 C1 C2  ðm1 + m2 Þl1 €u2 S1 S2
+ m2 l2 €
u3 C3 C4  m2 l2 €
u4 S3 S4  ðm1 + m2 Þl1 u_ 2 S1 C2  ðm1 + m2 Þl1 u_ 2 S1 C2  m2 l2 u_ 2 S3 C4
1 2 3
2 ð16Þ
 m2 l2 u_ 24 S3 C4  2ðm1 + m2 Þl1 u_ 1 u_ 2 C1 S2  ððMt + m1 + m2 Þx + ðm1 + m2 Þl1 S1 C2 + m2 l2 S3 C4 Þf_
 2m2 l2 u_ 3 u_ 4 C3 S4  2ðm1 + m2 Þl1 f_ u_ 2 C2  2m2 l2 f_ u_ 4 C4 = F  Ff

 l1 C1 C2 ððm1 + m2 Þl1 S2 + m2 l2 S4 Þf€ + ðm1 + m2 Þl1 x€C1 C2  l1 ððm1 + m2 Þðx + l1 S1 C2 Þ + m2 l2 S3 C4 ÞC1 C2 f_ 2

+ ðm1 + m2 Þl2 u€1 C2 + m2 l1 l2 u
€3 C13 C2 C4 + m2 l1 l2 u€4 S13 C2 S4 + m2 l1 l2 u_ 2 S13 C2 C4 + m2 l1 l2 u_ 2 S13 C2 C4
1 2 3 4
 2ðm1 + m2 Þl21 u_ 1 u_ 2 S2 C2  2m2 l1 l2 u_ 3 u_ 4 C13 C2 S4  2ðm1 + m2 Þl21 f_ u_ 2 C1 S22  2m2 l1 l2 f_ u_ 4 C1 C2 C4
+ ðm1 + m2 Þgl1 S1 C2 = df1 l2 C2 u_ 11 2
ð17Þ
Zhang et al. 145

l1 ððm1 + m2 ÞðxC2 + l1 S1 Þ + m2 l2 ðS1 S2 S4 + C2 S3 C4 ÞÞf €  ðm1 + m2 Þl1 x€S1 S2 + ðm1 + m2 Þl2 €u2
1
€3 S13 S2 C4 + m2 l1 l2 €
 m2 l1 l2 u u4 ðC13 S2 S4 + C2 C4 Þ + 2ðm1 + m2 Þl1 x_ fC _ 2
2   
+ l1 f_ ðm1 + m2 Þ xS1 S2  l1 C21 S2 C2  m2 l2 ðC2 S4  S1 S2 S3 C4 Þ + ðm1 + m2 Þl21 u_ 21 S2 C2
ð18Þ
+ m2 l1 l2 u_ 2 C13 S2 C4 + m2 l1 l2 u_ 2 ðC13 S2 C4  C2 S4 Þ  m2 l1 l2 u_ 1 u_ 3 C13 S2 C4 + 2m2 l1 l2 u_ 3 u_ 4 S13 S2 S4
3 4
+ 2ðm1 + m2 Þl21 f_ u_ 1 C1 C22 + 2m2 l1 l2 f_ u_ 3 C2 C3 C4 + 2m2 l1 l2 f_ u_ 4 ðS1 S2 C4  C2 S3 S4 Þ + ðm1 + m2 Þgl1 C1 S2
= df1 l2 u_ 2
1

€ + m2 l2 C3 C4 x€ + m2 l1 l2 €u1 C13 C2 C4  m2 l1 l2 €u2 S13 S2 C4 + m2 l2 €u3 C2

 m2 C3 C4 ðl1 S2 + l2 S4 Þf 2 4
2
 2m2 l22 u_ 3 S4 C4 + m2 l2 x_ u_ 4 C3 S4  m2 l2 C3 C4 ðl2 S3 C4 + l1 S1 C2 + xÞf_  m2 l1 l2 u_ 21 S13 C2 C4
ð19Þ
 m2 l1 l2 u_ 2 S13 C2 C4  2m2 l1 l2 u_ 1 u_ 2 C13 S2 C4  2m2 l1 l2 f_ u_ 2 C2 C3 C4  2m2 l2 f_ u_ 4 C3 S2 + m2 gl2 S3 C4
2 2 4
= df2 l22 C24 u_ 3

€ ðxC4 + l1 S2 S3 S4 + l1 S1 C2 C4 + l2 S3 Þ  m2 l2 x€S3 S4 + m2 l1 l2 €
m2 l2 f u1 S13 C2 S4 + m2 l1 l2 € u2 ðC13 S2 S4 + C2 C4 Þ
2  
+ m2 l22 €u4 + m2 l2 f_ xS3 S4  l1 S2 C4 + l1 S1 C2 S3 S4  l2 C23 S4 C4 + m2 l1 l2 u_ 21 C13 C2 S4
ð20Þ
_ 4  2m2 l1 l2 u_ 1 u_ 2 S13 S2 S4
+ m2 l1 l2 u_ 2 ðC13 C2 S4  S2 C4 Þ + m2 l2 u_ 2 S4 C4 + 2m2 l2 x_ fC
2 2 3
+ 2m2 l1 l2 f_ u_ 1 C1 C2 C4 + 2m2 l1 l2 f_ u_ 2 ðC2 S3 S4  S1 S2 C4 Þ + 2m2 l22 f_ u_ 3 C3 S24 + m2 gl2 C3 S4 = df2 l22 u_ 4

with F represents the translation control force; Ff

denotes the friction force; S13 and C13 stand for the
abbreviations of sin (u1  u3 ) and cos (u1  u3 ), respec- Energy-based controller with hook and
tively; and df1 and df2 are air friction-related coeffi- payload sway reduction
cients. The detailed expressions of Mf and Ff are
defined as follows19–21 In this section, an energy-based controller with payload
sway reduction is developed.
!
f_   The total energy of the system V is obtained as
Mf = frof tanh  krf f_ f_ ð21Þ
ef 1 T
  V= q_ MðqÞq_ + ðm1 + m2 Þgl1 ð1  C1 C2 Þ
x_ 2 ð24Þ
Ff = frox tanh  krx jx_ jx_ ð22Þ + m2 gl2 ð1  C3 C4 Þ
ex

with frof , krf , frox , and krx are friction-related where q denotes the state vector and MðqÞ stands for
parameters. the inertia matrix, which are defined as follows
In practical applications, the payload is always
beneath the jib. Therefore, the following assumption is q = ½f x u1 u2 u3 u4 T
reasonable. 2 3
M11 M12 M13 M14 M15 M16
6 M12 Mt + m1 + m2 M23 M24 M25 M26 7
6 7
Assumption 1: The payload swing angles satisfy22–24 6 M13 M23 M33 0 M35 M36 7
Mð qÞ = 6
6 M14
7
6 M24 0 M44 M45 M46 7 7
4 M15 M25 M35 M45 m2 l22 C24 0 5
p p M16 M26 M36 M46 0 m2 l22
 \ u1 , u2 , u3 , u4 \  ð23Þ
2 2
with

0    1
ðMt + m1 + m2 Þx2 + m2 l21 + m1 l21 S22 + S21 C22 + J
B   C
M11 = @ + m2 l22 S24 + S23 C24 + 2m2 l1 l2 ðS2 S4 + S1 C2 S3 C4 Þ A, M12 = ðm1 l1 S2 + m2 l1 S2 + m2 l2 S4 Þ,
+ 2ðm1 + m2 Þl1 xS1 C2 + 2m2 l2 xS3 C4 + 2m2 l2 xu_ 4 C4
M13 = l1 C1 C2 ðm2 l2 S4 + ðm1 + m2 Þl1 S2 Þ, M14 = l1 ððm1 + m2 Þðl1 S1 + xC2 Þ + m2 l2 ðS1 S2 S4 + C2 S3 C4 ÞÞ,
 
_ 4 ,
M15 = m2 l2 C3 C4 ðl1 S2 + l2 S4 Þ, M16 = m2 l2 l2 S3 + l1 ðS2 S3 S4 + S1 C2 C4 Þ + 2xfC
M23 = ðm1 + m2 Þl1 C1 C2 , M24 = ðm1 + m2 Þl1 S1 S2 , M25 = m2 l2 C3 C4 , M26 = m2 l2 S3 S4 ,
M33 = ðm1 + m2 Þl21 C22 , M35 = m2 l1 l2 C13 C2 C4 , M36 = m2 l1 l2 S13 C2 S4 , M44 = ðm1 + m2 Þl21 ,
M45 = m2 l1 l2 S13 S2 C4 , M46 = m2 l1 l2 ðC13 S2 S4 + C2 C4 Þ
146 Measurement and Control 53(1-2)

 
Taking the time derivative of equation (24) and sub- M = kpf ef  kdf f_  khf u_ 21 + u_ 22 + u_ 23 + u_ 24 f_ + Mf
stituting equations (15)–(20) into the resulting equation ð30Þ
yields  
F = kpx ex  kdx x_  khx u_ 21 + u_ 22 + u_ 23 + u_ 24 x_ + Ff
1 _ ðqÞq_ + ðm1 + m2 Þgl1 S1 C2 u_ 1 ð31Þ
V_ = q_ T MðqÞ€
q + q_ T M
2
+ ðm1 + m2 Þgl1 C1 S2 u_ 2
+ m2 gl2 S3 C4 u_ 3 + m2 gl2 C3 S4 u_ 4 Stability analysis
T
q + Cðq, q_ Þq_ Þ + ðm1 + m2 Þgl1 S1 C2 u_ 1
= q_ ðMðqÞ€ In this section, the stability of the closed-loop system
+ ðm1 + m2 Þgl1 C1 S2 u_ 2 and the convergence of the states are provided. The fol-
lowing theorem summarizes the main results of this
+ m2 gl2 S3 C4 u_ 3 + m2 gl2 C3 S4 u_ 4 paper.
= q_ T ðU  GðqÞÞ + ðm1 + m2 Þgl1 S1 C2 u_ 1
Theorem 1: The proposed method in equations (30)
+ ðm1 + m2 Þgl1 C1 S2 u_ 2
and (31) can drive the jib to desired angular position
+ m2 gl2 S3 C4 u_ 3 + m2 gl2 C3 S4 u_ 4 and the trolley to the desired position, respectively,
   
= M  Mf f_ + F  Ff x_  df1 l2 C2 u_ 2 1 2 1
and at the same time, it can suppress and eliminate
the hook and the payload swing, in the following
 df1 l21 u_ 22  df2 l22 C24 u_ 23  df2 l22 u_ 24
sense
ð25Þ  T
lim f x f_ x_ = ½fd xd 0 0T ,
where Cðq, q_ Þ denotes the centripetal-Coriolis matrix, t!‘
U stands for the control vector, and GðqÞ represents the lim ½u1 u2 u3 u4 T = ½0 0 0 0T , ð32Þ
_ (q) t!‘
gravity vector, and the property jT ½(1=2)M  T
_ = 0, 8j 2 R6 25,26 is used. The detail expres-
C(q, q)j lim u_ 1 u_ 2 u_ 3 u_ 4 = ½0 0 0 0T
t!‘
sions of U and GðqÞ are given as follows
2 3 2 3 Proof: The following Lyapunov candidate function
M 0 is introduced
6F 7 60 7
6 7 6 7
60 7 6 ðm1 + m2 Þgl1 S1 C2 7 1 1
6 7
U = 6 7 , G ð qÞ = 66 7 Vall ðtÞ = V + kpf e2f + kpx e2x ð33Þ
7 2 2
60 7 6 ðm1 + m2 Þgl1 C1 S2 7
40 5 4 m2 gl2 S3 C4 5
0 m2 gl2 C3 S4 Differentiating equation (33) with respect to time,
It follows from equation (25) that the tower crane and substituting the results of equations (25)–(27) into
system with M and F as the inputs, f_ and x_ as the out- the resulting equation, one has
puts, is passive and dissipative.    2
V_ all ðtÞ = kdf + khf u_ 21 + u_ 22 + u_ 23 + u_ 24 f_
According to the structure of equation (25), an   
energy-based controller is proposed as  kdx + khx u_ 21 + u_ 22 + u_ 23 + u_ 24 x_ 2
 df1 l2 C2 u_ 2  df1 l2 u_ 2  df2 l2 C2 u_ 2  df2 l2 u_ 2
M = kpf ef  kdf f_ + Mf ð26Þ 1 2 1 1 2 2 4 3 2 4
40 ð34Þ
F = kpx ex  kdx x_ + Ff ð27Þ
It follows from equations (33) and (34) that the
where ef and ex stand for the error signals, the first closed-loop system is Lyapunov stable at the desired
terms are used to guarantee accurate positioning, which equilibrium point,27–29 and it is obtained that
will be discussed in the subsequent section. They are
defined as _ x,
Vall ðtÞ 2 L‘ ) f, _ u_ 1 , u_ 2 , u_ 3 , u_ 4 , ef , ex , f, x, M, F 2 L‘
ð35Þ
ef = f  fd ð28Þ
27–29
Then, using LaSalle’s invariance theorem,
e x = x  xd ð29Þ
Theorem 1 can be proven.
where fd and xd stand for the jib target angular posi-
tion and the trolley target position, respectively.
Simulation results and analysis
To obtain rapid hook/payload sway suppression
and elimination, the hook and the payload swing- In this section, some simulation results are provided to
related information is added to the designed controller, validate the correctness and effectiveness of the pro-
and by doing so, equations (26) and (27) are improved posed energy-based controller. To this end, two groups
as follows of numerical simulation tests are given. In the first
Zhang et al. 147

(a) (b)

Figure 2. Group 1: simulation results of the PD controller (a): the jib slew angle, the trolley displacement, the slew control torque,
and the translation control force; (b): the hook swing angles, and the payload swig angles.

(a) (b)

Figure 3. Group 1: simulation results of the proposed controller (a): the jib slew angle, the trolley displacement, the slew control
torque, and the translation control force; (b): the hook swing angles, and the payload swig angles.

group, the proposed controller is compared with the
proportional-derivative (PD) controller. Then, the
robustness of the proposed controller with respect to
sudden changes of payload mass, cable length, and ini-
tial payload swings, and external disturbances is veri-
fied in the second group.
The parameters of the tower crane system with
double-pendulum and spherical-pendulum effects are
set as follows
Mt = 3:5 kg, m1 = 0:5 kg, l2 = 0:5 m,
J = 6:8 kg  m2 , g = 9:8 m=s2 , frof = 5:2,
krf = 1, ef = 0:01, frox = 5:4,
krx = 1:5, ex = 0:01, df1 = 0:3, df1 = 0:3
Unless otherwise mentioned, m2 , l1 , u1 ð0Þ, u2 ð0Þ,
u3 ð0Þ, and u4 ð0Þ are set as m1 = 1 kg,l2 =1 m, u1 ð0Þ =
0 deg,u2 ð0Þ=0 deg,u3 ð0Þ= 0 deg,u4 ð0Þ =0 deg, respec-
tively. The target jib slew angle and the desired trolley
translation position are set as fd = 45 deg,fd =1 m,
respectively.
Table1. Control gains.
Controllers Control gains
PD controller kpf = 10:5, kdf = 18, kpx = 12, kdx = 15
Proposed kpf = 13, kdf = 25, khf = 10,
controller kpx = 6:5, kdx = 12, khx = 10
PD: proportional derivative.
The initial jib slew angle, trolley translation position,
hook swing angles, and payload swing angles are set as
fð0Þ = 0 deg, xð0Þ = 0 m, respectively.
Simulation group 1: In this group, to better show the
control performance of the proposed energy-based
control method with hook and payload sway reduc-
tion, we compare it with the PD controller.
By trial and error method, the control gains of the
proposed control method and the PD control method
are chosen as shown in Table 1.
148 Measurement and Control 53(1-2)

(a) (b)

Figure 4. Group 2: simulation results of the proposed controller of Case 1. (a): the jib slew angle, the trolley displacement, the
slew control torque, and the translation control force; (b): the hook swing angles, and the payload swig angles.

(a) (b)

Figure 5. Group 2: simulation results of the proposed controller of Case 2. (a): the jib slew angle, the trolley displacement, the
slew control torque, and the translation control force; (b): the hook swing angles, and the payload swig angles.

The simulation results are shown in Figures 2 and 3.
It is seen that with similar transportation time for posi-
tioning (both within 5 s), the proposed energy-based
control method with hook and payload sway reduction
shows better swing suppression and elimination effects.
More precisely, the hook/payload swing angles are sup-
pressed and eliminated within a smaller range by the
designed controller (u1 max = 3:1 deg, u2 max = 1:9 deg,
u3 max = 4 deg, u4 max = 1:9 deg, u1res = 0:01 deg,
u2res = 0:01 deg, u3res = 0:3 deg, u4res = 0:1 deg) than
by the PD control method (u1 max = 9:5 deg, u2 max =
4:9 deg, u3 max = 10 deg, u4 max = 5 deg, u1res = 2:2 deg,
u2res = 3:8 deg, u3res = 2:5 deg, u4res = 4:1 deg). ui max ,
uires , i = 1, 2, 3, 4, represent the maximum swing angles
and the residual swing angles.
Simulation group 2: In this group, to further verify
the robustness of the designed controller, the follow-
ing four cases are taken into consideration.
Case 1: Sudden change of the payload mass m2 . The
payload mass m2 is changed from 0.5 to 1 kg at
t = 3 s, while its nominal value is still kept the same
as it in simulation group 1.
Case 2: Sudden change of the cable length l1 . The
cable length is changed from 1 to 1.5 m at t = 2 s,
while its nominal value is still kept the same as it in
simulation group 1.
Case 3: Initial hook/payload swings. The initial pay-
load swing angles are set as u1 (0) = 5 deg,
u2 (0) = 4 deg, u3 (0) = 6 deg, and u4 (0) = 8 deg,
respectively.
Case 4: External disturbances. To emulate external
disturbances, such as winds, various external distur-
bances are added to the hook/payload swing angles.
More precisely, impulsive disturbances with an ampli-
tude of 5 deg are added to u1 between 2 and 3 s,
impulsive disturbances with an amplitude of 5 deg are
added to u2 between 7 and 8 s, impulsive disturbances
with an amplitude of 10 deg are added to u3 between
9 and 10 s, and impulsive disturbances with an ampli-
tude of 6 deg are added to u4 between 3 and 4 s.
The simulation results for the above four cases are
shown in Figures 4–7 in order. By comparing Figures 4
and 5 with Figure 3, it is seen that the overall control
performance of the proposed control method, including
Zhang et al. 149

(a) (b)

Figure 6. Group 2: simulation results of the proposed controller of Case 3. (a): the jib slew angle, the trolley displacement, the
slew control torque, and the translation control force; (b): the hook swing angles, and the payload swig angles.

(a) (b)

Figure 7. Group 2: simulation results of the proposed controller of Case 4. (a): the jib slew angle, the trolley displacement, the
slew control torque, and the translation control force; (b): the hook swing angles, and the payload swig angles.

positioning and swing suppression and elimination, is
not affected much by sudden change of the payload
mass and the cable length, implying that it is robust
with respect to system parameters. It is noted from
Figures 6 and 7 that the initial payload swing angles
and the unexpected external disturbances are attenu-
ated and damped out by the suggested control method.
It can be concluded from the above analysis that the
proposed controller shows strong robustness.
Conclusion
In this paper, using Lagrange’s method, we model the
tower cranes with double-pendulum and spherical-
pendulum effects. On this basis, the energy-based con-
troller with hook and payload reduction is proposed.
We use Lyapunov techniques and LaSalle’s invariance
theorem to validate the stability. Numerical results are
provided to validate the superior control performance
of the designed energy-based sway reduction controller.
To the best of our knowledge, it is the first closed-loop
method for tower cranes with double-pendulum and
spherical-pendulum effects. In our future work, the
experimental results will be provided to prove the prac-
tical control performance of the designed controller.
Declaration of conflicting interests
The author(s) declared no potential conflict of interests with
respect to the research, authorship and/or publication of this
article.
Funding
The author(s) disclosed receipt of the following financial sup-
port for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this
article: This work was supported by the National Key R&D
Program of China under Grant No. 2018YFB1305400, the
Key Research and Development (Special Public-Funded
Projects) of Shandong Province under Grant No.
2019GGX104058, the National Natural Science Foundation
for Young Scientists of China under Grant No. 61903155,
and the Natural Science Foundation of Shandong Province
under Grant No. ZR2019QEE019.
ORCID iD
Menghua Zhang https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8588-3612
150 Measurement and Control 53(1-2)

References three-dimensional tower crane. Automat Constr 2012; 23:

1. Zhang M. Finite-time model-free trajectory tracking con- 55–63.
trol for overhead cranes subject to model uncertainties, 15. Sun N, Wu Y, Chen H, et al. Antiswing cargo transpor-
parameter variations and external disturbances. T I Meas tation of underactuated tower crane systems by a non-
Control 2019; 41(12): 3516–3525. linear controller embedded with an integral term. IEEE
2. Zhang M, Zhang Y and Cheng X. An enhanced coupling T Autom Sci Eng 2019; 16(3): 1387–1398.
PD with sliding mode control method for underactuated 16. Wu Y, Sun N, Fang Y, et al. An increased nonlinear cou-
double-pendulum overhead crane systems. Int J Control pling motion controller for underactuated multi-TORA
systems: theoretical design and hardware experimenta-
Autom Syst 2019; 17(6): 1579–1588.
3. Sun W, Su S, Xia J, et al. Adaptive fuzzy tracking con- tion. IEEE T Syst Man Cy-S 2019; 49(6): 1186–1193.
17. Vaughan J, Kim D and Singhose W. Control of tower
trol of flexible-joint robots with full-state constraints.
cranes with double-pendulum payload dynamics. IEEE T
IEEE T Syst Man Cy-S. Epub ahead of print 4 October
Contr Syst T 2010; 18(6): 1345–1358.
2018. DOI: 10.1109/TSMC.2018.2870642.
18. Zhang Z, Wu Y and Huang J. Differential-flatness-based
4. Sun W, Su S, Xia J, et al. Adaptive tracking control of
finite-time anti-swing control of underactuated crane sys-
wheeled inverted pendulums with periodic disturbances.
tems. Nonlinear Dynam 2017; 87(3): 1749–1761.
IEEE T Cybernetics. Epub ahead of print 20 December
19. Sun N, Yang T, Fang Y, et al. Nonlinear motion control
2018. DOI: 10.1109/TCYB.2018.2884707.
of underactuated three-dimensional boom cranes with
5. Li S, Li J and Mo Y. Piezoelectric multimode vibration
hardware experiments. IEEE T Ind Inform 2018; 14(3):
control for stiffened plate using ADRC-based accelera-
887–897.
tion compensation. IEEE T Ind Electron 2014; 61(12):
20. Pan H, Jing X, Sun W, et al. A bioinspired dynamics-
6892–6902.
based control adaptive tracking control for nonlinear sus-
6. Maghsoudi MJ, Ramli L, Sudin S, et al. Improved unity
pension systems. IEEE T Contr Syst T 2018; 26(3): 903–
magnitude input shaping scheme for sway control of an
914.
underactuated 3D overhead crane with hoisting. Mech
21. Sun N, Yang T, Fang Y, et al. Transportation control of
Syst Signal Pr 2019; 123: 466–482.
double-pendulum cranes with a nonlinear quasi-PID
7. Yang T, Sun N, Chen H, et al. Neural network-based
scheme: design and experiments. IEEE T Syst Man Cy-S
adaptive antiswing control of an underactuated ship-
2019; 49(7): 1408–1418.
mounted crane with roll motions and input dead zones.
22. Le AT and Lee SG. 3D cooperative control of tower
IEEE Trans Neural Netw Learn Syst. Epub ahead of
cranes using robust adaptive techniques. J Frankl Inst
print 6 May. DOI: 10.1109/TNNLS.2019.2910580.
2017; 354(18): 8333–8357.
8. Jaafar HI, Mohamed Z, Shamsudin MA, et al. Model
23. Sun N, Wu Y, Chen H, et al. An energy-optimal solution
reference command shaping for vibration control of mul-
for transportation control of cranes with double pendu-
timode flexible systems with application to a double-
lum dynamics: design and experiments. Mech Syst Signal
pendulum overhead crane. Mech Syst Signal Pr 2019;
Pr 2018; 102: 87–101.
115: 677–695.
24. Li C, Yi J, Wang H, et al. Interval data driven construc-
9. Ouyang H, Hu J, Zhang G, et al. Decoupled linear
tion of shadowed sets with application to linguistic word
model and s-shaped curve motion trajectory for load
modeling. Inf Sci. Epub ahead of print 12 November
sway suppression control in overhead cranes with
2018. DOI: 10.1016/j.ins.2018.11.018.
double-pendulum effect. P I Mech Eng C-J Mec 2019;
25. Sun N, Liang D, Wu Y, et al. Adaptive control for pneu-
233: 3678–3689.
matic artificial muscle systems with parametric uncertain-
10. Devesse W, Ramteen M, Feng L, et al. A real-time opti-
ties and unidirectional input constraints. IEEE T Ind
mal control method for swing-free tower crane motions.
Inform. Epub ahead of print 19 June. DOI: 10.1109/
In: Proceedings of IEEE international conference on auto-
TII.2019.2923715.
mation science and engineering, Madison, WI, 17–20
26. Wu Z, Xia X and Zhu B. Model predictive control for
August 2013, pp. 336–341. New York: IEEE.
improving operational efficiency of overhead cranes.
11. Omar HM and Nayfeh AH. Gain scheduling feedback
Nonlinear Dynam 2015; 79(4): 2639–2657.
control of tower cranes with friction compensation. J Vib
27. Lee DH, Kim TW, Ji SW, et al. A study on load position
Control 2004; 10(2): 269–289.
control and vibration attenuation in crane operation
12. Lee G, Kim HH, Lee CJ, et al. A laser-technology-based
using sub-actuator. Meas Control. Epub ahead of print
lifting-path tracking system for a robotic tower crane.
16 May. DOI: 10.1177/0020294019847703.
Automat Constr 2009; 18(7): 865–874.
28. Zhang M, Zhang Y, Chen H, et al. Model-independent
13. Böck M and Kugi A. Real-time nonlinear model predic-
PD-SMC method with payload swing suppression for 3D
tive path following control of a laboratory tower crane.
overhead crane systems. Mech Syst Signal Pr 2019; 129:
IEEE T Contr Syst T 2014; 22(4): 1461–1473.
381–393.
14. Duong SC, Uezato E, Kinjo H, et al. A hybrid evolution-
29. Khalil HK. Nonlinear systems. 3rd ed. Englewood Cliffs,
ary algorithm for recurrent neural network control of a
NJ: Prentice-Hall, 2002.