2017 IEEE International Conference on Advanced Intelligent Mechatronics (AIM)
Sheraton Arabella Park Hotel, Munich, Germany, July 3-7, 2017
RLS Model Identification-Based Robust Control
for Gimbal Axis of Control Moment Gyroscope
Sangdeok Lee and Seul Jung
Abstract—Control moment gyroscope(CMG) is an indirect
actuator used for the attitude control tasks where actuators
cannot be directly applied. Control of the gimbal position
becomes important to maximize the induced torque. As a torque
amplifier, the gimbal axis of CMG should be controlled to
produce fine and regulated torque. Since the torque
performance is dependent upon the return performance of the
gimbal axis, both the magnitude and direction of gyroscopic
torque should be controlled to achieve agility and regulation. In
this paper, a robust current controller is designed with an angle
restriction property by the current compensation designed
through the model identification by real-time recursive least
square(RLS) algorithm. Firstly, the configuration and
mechanism of designed CMG is presented and the angle
restriction problem is stated. Secondly, RLS algorithm is
designed for online identification, implemented, and validated.
Thirdly, the proposed current control scheme of gimbal axis is
verified by experiments.
Index Terms— System identification, recursive least square,
robust current/torque control, CMG, gimbal axis control
I. INTRODUCTION
C ONTROL moment gyroscope(CMG) has been
developed and verified as an indirect torque actuators for
attitude control tasks in various systems [1,2]. Compared to
the maneuver of the general motor-actuated system, its
manipulation requires more advanced motion control
techniques due to the complexity of the torque generation
mechanism such as a single wheel robot.
In the single wheel robot, balancing is controlled by the
torque induced from CMG [2]. Since the induced torque is
indirectly controlled by the magnitude and direction of two
momentums of a flywheel and a gimbal, ultimate control of
the balancing angle should be sophisticated [3]. One of
critical control issues for CMGs is to avoid singularity where
null motion of zero torque occurs.
Therefore, the return to the origin of the gimbal axis of
GMGs is important and should be guaranteed in some
_____________________________________________
*This work was supported by the basic research funds through the
contract of National Research Foundation of Korea
(NRF-2014R1A21A11049503 and NRF-2016R1A2B2012031).
S. D. Lee and S. Jung are with Department of Mechatronics Engineering,
Chungnam National University, Daejeon, Korea 305-764.
(e-mail: jungs@cnu.ac.kr).
978-1-5090-6000-9/17/$31.00 ©2017 IEEE
degrees. Although the position control method can solve the
problem with ease, the controller cannot confirm the
regulated magnitude of the torque. Moreover, it is not feasible
for the agile motion requirement of CMG, so to speak it is too
slow.
In the meanwhile, the current or torque control with the
appropriate angle position restriction can be an effective
approach to the problem. In this paper, a current controller is
designed to achieve both agility and robustness for the gimbal
to return to its origin without help of adding the position
controller. This leads to the necessity of identifying the
relationship between the motion and the torque for advanced
motion controls.
System identification of unknown systems has been used in
a variety of applications [4,5]. System identification of linear
modeling has been proposed both in the frequency-domain
and in the time-domain [5].
Recursive least square (RLS) method is one of frequently
used methods for the identification of unknown systems in
the time-domain. An electrical modeling for the dc
point-to-plane corona discharges is contributed. A variable
resistor and capacitor are parameterized by RLS [6]. Through
the comparison between the measured discharge current and
the calculated discharge current, the model performance of
RLS is validated. Variable constraint method has been
presented [7]. Original RLS cannot have constraints for each
parameter. However, in the real system, some physical
quantities have constraints. Therefore, their method can be
effective when the estimated parameters should be
constrained for the consideration of the real quantities.
Similar to the concept, they proposed constrained RLS
method to track the large disturbance conditions [8]. Also,
RLS is proposed for the low-frequency oscillation estimation
[9]. For the electrical model of double-star IPM machine,
RLS is proposed in [10]. Other examples of RLS applications
can be found [11-15].
Therefore, in this paper, RLS algorithm is used for the
gimbal modeling of CMG. RLS is aimed to find the
relationship between the torque and the motion of the
flywheel under the current controller. Through the
identification process, the inverse dynamic equation can be
derived for the angle restriction of the gimbal axis. The
inverse dynamic equation is used to cancel disturbance.
584
 II. CONTROL MOMENT GYROSCOPE III. SYSTEM IDENTIFICATION
A miniature single CMG is designed and developed as General motion dynamics for the gimbal system can be
shown in Fig. 1. The CMG has a flywheel and a gimbal described as follow.
system. The CMG is aimed to generate a regulated torque in a
desired direction [16]. The torque of the system can be τ ( t )  Iθ( t )  B θ ( t )  K θ ( t ) (2)
generated as a gyroscopic effect of cross-product of two
physical qualities of an angular momentum by the highly where τ ( t ) is the torque, I is the inertia, B is the damping, K
rotating flywheel and the direction change by the gimbal
system. The gimbal angle θ ( rad ) is the main control variable is the stiffness constant, and θ ( t ) is the gimbal angle.
that leads to the successful CMG. The induced torque is In the frequency-domain, (2) can be written as follow.
described as
2
T ( s )  s IΘ ( s )  sB Θ ( s )  K Θ ( s ) (3)
τH  Ω (1)
The transfer function of (3) can be
where τ( Nm ) is the gyroscopic torque, H( Nms / rad ) is the
angular momentum of the flywheel, and Ω( rad / s ) is the Θ (s ) 1

2
(4)
T (s ) s I  sB  K
directional motion of the gimbal.

In the digital system, (4) can be considered as follow.

1 2
Θ(z) a1  a 2 Z  a 3Z

1 2
(5)
T(z) 1 a 4Z  a5Z

Equation (5) is the second order proper function where it

can be constructed with an IIR-filter.
Conventionally, a recursive least square has been utilized
as an adaptive filter for estimating the coefficients of (5). As
an adaptive filter, (5) can be shown in the discrete
time-domain as follows.

θ ( n )  a 1 τ ( n )  a 2 τ ( n  1)  a 3 τ ( n  2 )  a 4 θ ( n  1)  a 5 θ ( n  2 )
Fig. 1 Photograph of CMG
(6)
T
In both (1) and Fig. 1, the direction of angular momentum θ[ n ]  ψ [ n ] φ[ n ] (7)
can be changed by the motion of gimbal axis. To achieve the ψ[ n ]  τ[ n ] τ[ n  1] τ[ n  2 ] θ[ n  1] θ[ n  2 ] 
T
(8)
directed torque generation, both the rate and the angle of the
φ[ n ]  a 1 [ n ]  a 5 [ n ]
T
gimbal axis should be regulated. On the while, the rate control a 2 [n ] a 3[n ]  a 4 [n ] (9)
of gimbal axis can be performed through the current control
of the gimbal axis. However, the current controller cannot where (8) is the input vector and (9) is the parameter vector.
confirm the angle returning property. As times goes, the When (9) can be estimated, (7) can be rewritten as follow.
direction of angular momentum can be easily changed under
the current control scheme, and this leads to gimbal angle T
θ[ n ]  ψ [ n ] φ̂ [ n ]  eˆ [ n ] (10)
drift.
This phenomenon can be easily fixed by adding the
position controller as an outer loop of the current controller. where eˆ [ n ] is the estimation error.
However, such a position control scheme cannot confirm the The resultant parameters by RLS algorithm can be
exact manipulation and agility of the gimbal axis. By the estimated through the updates of gain, covariance, and
effect of the position controller, the rate can be changed and parameters recursively. The gain update equation becomes
the resultant torque cannot be formulated as regulated format.
Therefore, the sophisticated current control scheme for CMG 1
C[ n  1] ψ[ n ]
to prohibit from drifting away is proposed with an RLS λ
G[ n ]  (11)
identification based-control method. . 1 T
1 ψ [ n ] C[ n  1] ψ[ n ]
λ

585
 Cn[j][1]= 1/f*(Cn-1[0][1])- 1/f* (Gn[j]*P[0]* Cn-1[0][1]+
The covariance and parameter update equations become Gn[j]*P[1]
* Cn-1[1][1]+ Gn[j]*P[2]* Cn-1[2][1] + Gn[j]*P[3]* Cn-1[3][1]
+ Gn[j]*P[4]* Cn-1[4][1]);
C[ n ] 
1
C[ n  1]  G[ n ] ψ T
[ n ] C[ n  1]  (12) Cn[j][2]= 1/f*(Cn-1[0][2])- 1/f* (Gn[j]*P[0]* Cn-1[0][2]+
λ Gn[j]*P[1]

θˆ [ n ]  θˆ [ n  1]  G[ n ] θ[ n ]  ψ [ n ]θˆ [ n  1]
T
 (13) * Cn-1[1][2]+ Gn[j]*P[2]* Cn-1[2][2] + Gn[j]*P[3]* Cn-1[3][2]
+ Gn[j]*P[4]* Cn-1[4][2]);
Cn[j][3]= 1/f*(Cn-1[0][3])- 1/f* (Gn[j]*P[0]* Cn-1[0][3]+
where λ is the forgetting factor. Gn[j]*P[1]
RLS algorithm can be implanted in the VC++ Software. * Cn-1[1][3]+ Gn[j]*P[2]* Cn-1[2][3] + Gn[j]*P[3]* Cn-1[3][3]
The overall characteristics of implemented algorithm can be + Gn[j]*P[4]* Cn-1[4][3]);
summarized in Table I Cn[j][4]= 1/f*(Cn-1[0][4])- 1/f* (Gn[j]*P[0]* Cn-1[0][4]+
Gn[j]*P[1]
Table I RLS algorithm realized in VC++ * Cn-1[1][4]+ Gn[j]*P[2]* Cn-1[2][4] + Gn[j]*P[3]* Cn-1[3][4]
+ Gn[j]*P[4]* Cn-1[4][4]);
Step I: Initialization
Step IV: Parameter update
Gain: G[5]={0,0,0,0,0};
Covariance: C[5][5]={{10,0,0,0,0}, Pn[k]= Pn-1[k]+ Gn[k]*( On[0]- (In[0]*Pn-1[0]+ In[1]*Pn-1[1] +
In[2]*Pn-1[2] + In[3]*Pn-1[3] + In[4]*Pn-1[4];
{0,10,0,0,0},
{0,0,10,0,0},
Step V: Output estimation
{0,0,0,10,0},
{0,0,0,0,10}}; EO=Pn[0]In[0]+ Pn[1]In[1]+ Pn[2]In[2]+ Pn[3]In[3]
Estimated parameters: P[5]={0,0,0,0,0}; +Pn[4]In[4];
Forgetting factor: f=0.999;
Input vector: I[5]={0,0,0,0,0}; The realized algorithm is validated through the comparison
Measured output: O =0; between the measured and the estimated output. In Fig. 2 (a),
Estimated output: EO=0; the measured angle and estimated angle are plotted together
Where, sub notation ‘n’ is the current data and ‘n-1’ for comparison. The overall error is gradually minimized as
designates for the previous data shown in Fig. 2 (b). Modeling performance is investigated in
the frequency-domain. Fig. 2 (c) shows the corresponding
Step II: Gain update estimated model with real plant.

Gn[i]= 1/f*( Cn-1[i][0]*P[0]+ Cn-1[i][1]*P[1] + Cn-1 0.2

[i][2]*P[2] meaured angle
estimated angle
+ Cn-1 [i][3]*P[3]+ Cn-1 [i][4]*P[4])/ 0.1

(1+ 1/f* (( P[0]* Cn-1 [0][0]+ P[1]* Cn-1 [1][0]+ P[2]* Cn-1
0
angle(rad)

[2][0]
+ P[3]* Cn-1 [3][0]+ P[4]* Cn-1 [4][0])*P[0] -0.1
+( P[0]* Cn-1 [0][1]+ P[1]* Cn-1 [1][1]+ P[2]* Cn-1 [2][1] +
P[3] -0.2

*Cn-1 [3][1]+ P[4]* Cn-1 [4][1])*P[1]

-0.3
+( P[0]* Cn-1 [0][2]+ P[1]* Cn-1 [1][2]+ P[2]* Cn-1 [2][2] + 0 0.5 1 1.5
time(sec)
2 2.5 3

P[3] (a) The validation for the implemented data

* Cn-1 [3][2]+ P[4]* Cn-1 [4][2])*P[2] 0.15
+( P[0]* Cn-1 [0][3]+ P[1]* Cn-1 [1][3]+ P[2]* Cn-1 [2][3] +
P[3] 0.1
* Cn-1 [3][3]+ P[4]* Cn-1 [4][3])*P[3]
angle(rad)

+( P[0]* Cn-1 [0][4]+ P[1]* Cn-1 [1][4]+ P[2]* Cn-1 [2][4] + 0.05
P[3]
* Cn-1 [3][4]+ P[4]* Cn-1 [4][4])*P[4]))); 0

Step III: Covariance update -0.05

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22
time(sec)
(b) Estimation error
Cn[j][0]= 1/f*(Cn-1[0][0])- 1/f* (Gn[j]*P[0]* Cn-1[0][0]+
Gn[j]*P[1]
* Cn-1[1][0]+ Gn[j]*P[2]* Cn-1[2][0] + Gn[j]*P[3]* Cn-1[3][0]
+ Gn[j]*P[4]* Cn-1[4][0]);

586
 0.8
plant estimated current ˆi d ( t ) and the torque gain is amplified. The
model
0.6 resultant torque error becomes
angle(rad)

0.4
 e (n )  K ( ie (n )  iˆd (n )) (16)
0.2

0
where τ e ( t ) is the torque error and K is the torque gain.
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Freq(Hz)
(c) Modeling performance
Fig. 2 Model estimation
V. EXPERIMENTAL VERIFICATION
A. Experimental setup
IV. CONTROL SCHEME The proposed control method is verified through the
The control scheme is similar to disturbance observer. By experiment. The experimental setup is shown in Fig. 4. When
use of identified model, the disturbance can be cancelled. The the unexpected torque is applied in the gimbal axis, the angle
RLS algorithm can be directly adopted in the current returning performances are investigated.
controller. The estimated angle is used to derive the inverse
dynamics of the gimbal system. The inverse dynamic
equation can be described as follows.

a 2 τˆ ( n  1)  a 3 τˆ ( n  2 )  θ ( n )  a 4 θ ( n  1)  a 5 θ ( n  2 )
τˆ ( n )  (14)
a1

When the measured parameters are estimated by RLS, the

torque can be estimated from the angle data of (14). This is
the inverse dynamic equation for the estimation of an applied
torque from the motional data.
Therefore, a robust current controller is formed in Fig. 3. Fig. 4 Experimental setup

B. System identification
Through the RLS algorithm, the inverse dynamic equation
can be obtained. Then the stability of the inverse model can
be checked and guaranteed by means of the parameter
transformation method through the specific algorithm
suggested in [17].
-4
x 10
0

-0.5
unitless

-1
Fig. 3 Proposed control scheme
before
-1.5 after
In Fig. 3, τ d ( t ) is the disturbed torque, control block I.D is
the inverse dynamic block such as (14), P n ( t ) is the estimated -2
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22
times(sec)
parameters of RLS, and O n ( t ) is the measured angle data. (a) a1 and the transformation of a1
-5
x 10
The current input is compared with the feedback current 4

which is available from the hall sensors of the gimbal axis. In 2

the discrete time, the current error is defined as 0

-2
unitless

i e (n )  i d (n )  i f (n ) (15) -4
before
-6 after

-8
where i d ( t ) is desired current and i f ( t ) is the current feedback -10
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22
from gimbal axis. times(sec)
(b) a2 and the transformation of a2
And then, the current error can be compensated with the

587
 denominator polynomial of the estimated model are both
-5
x 10
5

unstable by the Jury’s Test. Then the suggested transform

0
parameter method is applied to make both models stable as
shown in Fig. 7. We see that parameters change after 9
unitless

-5

before
seconds in Fig. 5.
-10 after

-15
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 2
times(sec)
(c) a3 and the transformation of a3
0

a0
1.5

1 -2
unitless

0.5 -4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 4
a1
before
0 after (a) Stability check for the numerator of the transformed model

-0.5
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 2
times(sec)
(d) a4 and the transformation of a4
0

a0
0.4

0.2

-2
0
unitless

-0.2 -4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 4
a1
-0.4 (b) Stability check for the denominator of the transformed model
Fig. 7 Stability of the transformed model
-0.6
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22
times(sec)
(e) a5 and the transformation of a5
Fig. 5 Estimated and transformed parameters C. Angle returning under disturbance
To confirm the performance by the proposed control
scheme, disturbance rejection is tested as shown in Fig. 8.
Two intentional interrupts are applied to the CMG while
2 CMG is controlled. Two interrupts are applied in the opposite
direction to each other to see the returning performance.
0 When two interrupts are applied, the resulting angle return
a0

performances are plotted in Fig. 9.

-2

-4 -3 -2 0 -1 1 2 3 4
a1
(a) Stability check for the numerator of the estimated model

0
a0

-2

-4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 4
a1
(b) Stability check for the denominator of the estimated model
Fig. 6 Stability of the estimated model

The estimated parameters and stability confirmed

transformations of the parameters are investigated as follows. (a) Interrupt 1 (b) Angle recovery
Fig. 8 Demonstration of the angle recovery
RLS cannot guarantee the stability of both the estimated
model and its inverse model. In Fig. 6, the numerator and

588
 [7] V. H. Naschimento and Y. V. Zakharov, “RLS adaptive filter with
0.4
inequality constraints”, IEEE Signal Processing Letters, vol. 23, no. 5,
pp. 752-756, 2016.
0.2 [8] D. Rai, R. Gokaraju, and S. O. Faried, “Adaptive control using
Interrupt 1 Returned motion 1
constrained RLS and dynamic pole-shift technique for TCSCs”, IEEE
0 Transactions on Power Delivery, vol. 29, no. 1, pp. 224-234, 2014.
anlge(rad)

[9] M. Beza and M. Bongiorno, “A modified RLS algorithm for online

-0.2 Interrupt 2
-0.4
-0.6
0 2 4 6 8 10 12
time(sec)
Fig. 9 Angle returning performance
The first interrupt is applied at around 8 seconds and the
second at around 15.5 seconds. CMG returned successfully in
both cases with less than 0.5 seconds. Tables II lists the
corresponding returning angle errors of both cases.
Table II Returning angle errors
Items Returning errors(rad)
Interrupt 1 0.0022
Interrupt 2 0.0033
VI. CONCLUSIONS
In the paper, a robust current control scheme for the gimbal
axis of CMG has been proposed to prevent the gimbal axis
from drifting away from the origin. Recursive least square
algorithm has been used to estimate linear model and its
inverse has been used to reject the disturbance in the control
loop. Although a linear model was considered, the returning
performance of the gimbal axis under the disturbance was
successful. In addition, the proposed control scheme can be
easily implementable in PC or a microprocessor as real-time
fashion. Experimental studies verify that the proposed
method can be used for other control systems as well.
Returned motion 2 estimation of low-frequency oscillations in power systems”, IEEE
Transactions on Power Systems, vol. 31, no. 3, pp. 1703-1714, 2016.
[10] S. Kallio, J. Karttunen, P. Peltoniemi, P. Silventoinen, and O. Pyrhonen,
“Online estimation of double-star IPM machine parameters using RLS
algorithm”, IEEE Transaction on Industrial Electronics, vol. 61, no. 9,
14 16 18 20 22 pp. 4519-4530, 2014.
[11] S. Farahmand and G. B. Giannakis, “Robust RLS in the presence of
correlated noise using outlier sparsity”, IEEE Transaction on Signal
Processing, vol. 60, no. 6, pp. 3308-3313, 2012.
[12] B. Dumitrescu, A. Onose, P. Helin, and I. Tabus, “Greedy sparse RLS”,
IEEE Transaction on Signal Processing, vol. 60, no. 5, pp. 2194-2207,
2012.
[13] M. I. Marei, E. F. EI-Saadany, and M. M. A. Salama, “A flexible DG
interface based on a new RLS algorithm for power quality
improvement”, IEEE Systems Journal, vol. 6, no. 1, pp. 68-75, 2012.
[14] A. Bertrand, M. Moonen, and A. H. Sayed, “Diffusion
bias-compensated RLS estimation over adaptive networks”, IEEE
Transactions on Signal Processing, vol. 59, no. 11, pp. 5212-5224,
2011.
[15] R. Arablouei and K. Dogancay, “Modified RLS algorithm with
enhanced tracking capability for MIMO channel estimation”,
Electronics Letters, vol. 47, no. 19, pp. 1101-1103, 2011.
[16] E. Mumm, K. Davis, M. Mahin, D. Neal, and R. Hayes, “Miniature
control moment gyroscope development”, Aerospace Conference, pp.
1-8, 2014.
[17] S. D. Lee and S. Jung, “An Identification Technique for Non-Minimum
Phase Systems by a Recursive Least Square Method”, Proceedings of
the SICE Annual Conference 2016, pp. 624-626, 2016.

REFERENCES
[1] R. H. Bishop, S. J. Paynter, and J. W. Sunkel, “Adaptive control of
space station with control moment gyros”, IEEE Control Systems, pp.
23–28, 1992.
[2] J. H. Park and S. Jung, “Development and control of a single-wheel
robot: practical mechatronics approach”, Mechatronics, vol. 23, pp.
594-606, 2013.
[3] S. D. Lee and S. Jung, “Experimental Studies on Q filter Design of a
Disturbance Observer for a One-wheel Robot”, IEEE Conference on
AIM, pp. 751-756, 2016.
[4] Jr. Cannon, H. Robert, and E. Schmitz, “Initial experiments on the
end-point control of a flexible one-link robot”, The International
Journal of Robotics Research, vol. 3, no. 3, pp. 62-75, 1984.
[5] L. Ljung, “System identification”, John Wieley & Sons, Inc., 1999.
[6] D. Raouti, S. Flazi, and D. Benyoucef, “Modeling and identification of
electrical parameters of positive dc point-to-plane corona discharge in
dry air using RLS method”, IEEE Transactions on Plasma Science, vol.
44, no. 7, pp. 1144-1149, 2016.

589