FORCE FEEDBACK HYDRAULIC SERVO

FOR ADVANCED ASSEMBLY MACHINES

by

Mian Arshad Jilani

B. S., University of Peshawar

(1971)

SU LiMITTiEr)D IN PARTIAL FJILLF114 4 M I.NT

OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR TIIF
DEGREE OF

MASTER OF SCIENCE

at the

MASSACHUSETTS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY

22 NOVEMBER 1974

Signature Redacted
Signature of Author.......-.-... ........... --. -------------------
Department of Mechanical Engineering, November 22, 1974

Signature Redacted
Certified by .. ... ......................... . --.
-

Thesis pupervisor
Signature Redacted
Accepted by ......................................
Chairman, Departiet Committee on Graduate NbLiedilm
ARCHIVES

MAR 3 1975
15sRAMIE0
 77 Massachusetts Avenue
Cambridge, MA 02139
MITLibraries http://Iibraries.mit.edu/ask

DISCLAIMER NOTICE
Due to the condition of the original material, there are unavoidable
flaws in this reproduction. We have made every effort possible to
provide you with the best copy available.

Thank you.

The images contained in this document are of the

best quality available.
 0

7
kcq\
0

)
 FORCE FEEDBACK HYDRAULIC SERVO
FOR ADVANCED ASSEMBLY MACHINES

by

MIAN ARSHAD JILANI

Submitted to the Department of Mechanical Engineering on

November 22, 1974, in partial fulfillment of the requirements for
the degree of Master of Science.

ABSTRACT

Control strategies have been studied for an advanced assembly

manipulator being designed at the Charles Stark Draper Laboratory,
Inc., Cambridge, Mass. This manipulator will be programmable
through a digital computer and will be powered by hydraulic actuators.
A hardware model of one of the actuators and its control instrumentation
including the hydraulic components, viz., pump, servovalve, actuator,
load inertia, etc., was used to study the various control schemes.
Performance of this system was carefully analyzed by a
mathematical model, simulation and experiment. The analysis was
made for both gross and fine motions and a real time, on-line, digital
minicomputer was used in the control loop. Signal quantization due to
the D/A and A/D interfaces with the computer caused some problems
which were analyzed and overcome. Fine motion analysis involved the
use of force feedback for which a sensor was designed and used.
Some conclusions for both gross and fine motion were arrived at
and are presented.

Thesis Supervisor: Daniel E. Whitney

Title: Associate Professor of Mechanical
Engineering

2
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

I would like to thank my thesis supervisor, Daniel E. Whitney,

for introducing me to the science of manipulators and helping me
choose and understand the topic of this research.

I am deeply indebted to Paul M. Lynch whose able guidance and

'mid-course corrections' taught me the value of systematic problem
solving through analysis and verification of results.

I am grateful to Samuel H. Drake and Donald S. Seltzer for

their advice on the force sensor design and construction and for their
help in keeping the hardware running. Also I am grateful to I)aniel it.
Killoran and Richard W. Metzinger for their advice in programming
and to Mark Spencer for his help with experiments.

I would like to thank E. Albert Woodin for his advice and help in
having this thesis typed by the Draper Publications Section. I would
also like to thank Susan Ryan and Draper Publications for the
preparation of the final document.

This Research was funded in part by NSF Grant No.

ATA 74-18173 A01.
 TABLE OF CONTENTS

Section Page

INTRODUCTION.................................... 6
1.1 Preamble................................... 6
1.2 Definitions................................ 7
1.2.1 Gross Motion........................ 7
1.2.2 Fine Motion......................... 9
1.2.3 Rate Control........................ 9
1.2.4 The Six Degrees of Freedom............ 9
1.2.5 Resolved Motion Rate Control........ .11
1.3 Outlines of Sections ....................... 11

2 POPEYE.......................................... 13

2.1 Concept.................................... 13
2.2 Specifications............................. 17
2.2.1 Dexterity........................... 17
2.2.2 Size................................ 17
2.2.3 Sensors............................. 17
2.2.4 Strength and Speed ..................... 17
2.3 Apparatus Used for Present Study .... .......22

3 GROSS MOTION................... .......... . .. . . . . . .. 25

3.1 Model.......... . . ........... .................. .25

3.2 Analysis................................... 28
3.2.1 Determination of Hydraulic
Resonance and Gain Factor K ........ 32
H
3.2.2 Servovalve Model..... .... . ......... 34
3.2.3 The Rate Lead/Lag Filter and System
Performance......................... ...34

4
 TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued)

Section Page

3.2.4 Determination of Rate Feedback

Gain, TG.

.
3.2.5 Determination of Position Feed-
back Gain, PG, by the Root
Locus Method....................... 37
3.2.6 Simulation........................ 38
3.3 Experiment............................... 38
3.4 Comparison of Simulation and Experi-
mental................................... 45
3.5 Conclusions.............................. 45

4 FINE MOTION

4.1 Model...................................... 47
4.2 Analysis................................. 47
4.2.1 Discussion of Control Scheme...... 47
4.2.2 Determination of Pole Locations
with Force Sensor in Contact with
Barrier and Selection of a Value
forFG.......................... .. 50
4.2.3 Determination of Gain, FG .......... 53
4.2.4 Simulation ......................... 53
4.3 Experiments ............... .............. .... 61
4.4 Conclusions ....................... ..... ... 66

5 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS FOR FUTURE

WORK. ............................................ 7
5.1 Conclusions.... .......... - .-.. ........ o 78
5.2 Recommendations for Future Work............ 79

APPENDIX
A DESIGN OF THE ONE DEGREE-OF-FREEDOM FORCE
SENSOR..........................................

A.1 Design Criteria.......................... 81

A.2 Description,................................ 81
B COMPUTER PROGRAM "FEEL"..............,,,,,.....

LIST OF REFERENCES............................................. 8

5
 SECTION 1

INTRODUCTION

1.1 Preamble
Present day assembly automation is predominantly "fixed
automation", which means that a machine is designed to per-
form one specific task repetitively, e.g., putting lids on
bottles, picking up a part from one point and placing it at
-inother, etc. Many of these machines, viz., the transfer
machines, require elaborate jigging and transfer-line systems
to be integral parts of the machine. They are expensive and
their use can be economically justified only for large pro-
duction runs of a particular product. In case the product is
changed, new specific task machines have to be installed; or,
if the production quantity of the new product is not suffi-
cient to justify the cost, the new machines are not installed
and the product may be redesigned to less optimal specificd-
tions, so that the existing machinery can be used. This
causes an enormous resistance to technological advancement
in product design, which in turn reduces productivity on the
whole. Another reason why such machines have not been able
to advance productivity as much as expected, is due to their
inability to be used for anything but the simplest assembly
tasks, such as mentioned above.
In order to solve some of these problems, there is need
for more versatile machines which can cope with varying assem-
bly tasks for different products, especially for lower volume
production runs.

6
 Some mechanisms which may be considered a step towards
advanced assembly machines have been in use for a number of
years now, viz., the UNIMATE*. Unfortunately, these have not
been designed for advanced assembly work involving strategic
"decision making" for complex manipulation of parts. They are
versatile in the sense that they can be reprogrammed by
"teaching" new sequences of maneuvers each time a product is
changed, but have found greatest use in pick-and-place type
assembly or automated welding.

A manipulator that will incorporate many of the attri-

butes required for advanced assembly is being developed at
The Charles Stark Draper Laboratory, Inc. in Cambridge,
Massachusetts. POPEYE, as this machine is referred to, will
be used as an experimental tool for verifying some of the
theory developed for advanced assembly. The purpose of this
thesis work is to verify some of the concepts involved in the
design of POPEYE, by modeling, analysis, simulation and ex-
periment. Figure l-l shows a mockup of this manipulator
and Chapter 2 describes it in some detail.

1.2 Definitions

Some of the terminology used in this thesis is defined

here to eliminate ambiguity.

1.2.1 Gross Motion

This involves the class of motions of the manipulator
that does not involve contact of the hand with an object or the
"docking" of a hand-held part with another part. These motions
are relatively large and generally involve positioning of the
hand or gripper to within a certain "rendezvous" region, after
which the command sequence for actual "docking" or contact of
the hand with the object may be initiated.
*

A programmable pick-and-place machine manufactured by

UNIMATION, INC., of Danbury, Conn.

7
 Figure 1- 1
Wooden mockup of POPEYE mounted
in actual base structure

8
1.2.2 Fine Motion

This is the class of motions which involve actual con-

tact of the hand with an object or the "docking" of a hand-
held part with another part. It is here that use of force
feedback has been made to control the amount of force or
pressure developed at any point on the surfaces of the docking
bjects. In this way, "feel" can be simulated and very com-
plicated tasks may be achieved, e.g.:

(1) Inserting pegs into hole's with tight clearances

or high length-to-diameter ratios.

(2) Assembly of parts with complicated mating surfaces

such as gear trains.

(3) Threading nuts onto bolts and so on.

1.2.3 Rate Control

Some manipulators e.g., the GE manipulator booms at the

Nuclear Rocket Development Station in Nevada(2), use this type
of control. In the GE manipulator, each joint is powered by
a separate electric motor which is switched on for a length of
time proportional to the required displacement, enabling it to
turn with a fixed rate until switched off. This technique is
referred to as Unilateral Rate or simply Rate Control. If the
motors have their rate varied during operation they are said
to be in a "variable rate" mode otherwise the mode is called
"fixed rate".

1.2.4 The Six Degrees of Freedom

In order to position and orient an object within a work
space,a minimum of six degrees of freedom are required.
Figure 1-2 shows these degrees of freedom labeled in "hand"
coordinates. The Reach, Lift and Sweep coordinates corre-
spond to the Cartesian X, Y, and Z and the Twist, Turn and
Tilt refer to the respective angular displacements about these
coordinates. The translatory motions position the object and

9
 LIFT

::>TURN

MANIPULATOR
HAND

REACH
TILT

SWEEP

FIGURE 1- 2 Manipulator hand with hand oriented

coordinate system

10
the -otational ones orient it. A minimum of six joints would
be required to achieve motion along all these coordinates. To
position a hand mounted at the end of a manipulator with six
joints with rate control is quite an awesome task. Even with
exparience, not more than three of the joints are run at the
same time and besides, the motion of even one joint displaces
the hand along all other hand coordinates. So what is gen-
erally done is that one or more of the joints are turned a
little, corrective movements for the rest of the joints are
made, the previous joints are turned some more and so on until
the hand reaches the required position with the intended orien-
tation. This takes a longer time than doing the task by hand
or with position controlled devices.

1.2.5 Resolved Motion Rate Control(3)

D.E. Whitney of M.I.T. has devised a control scheme that

can effect faster and more natural motions of such multi-
jointed manipulators. The scheme involves the use of a
digital computer in the control loop. The operator simply
generates a motion of the gripper to a desired position and
orientation with a hand controller; the computer calculates
and generates the required rate commands to each individual
jo nt so that the arm moves in much the same way as a human
arm might, for the same task.

1.3 Outlines of Sections

Section 2. POPEYE-The concept and design considerations

for the advanced manipulator being developed
at CSDL are briefly reviewed and its in-
tended performance specifications are pre-
sented. The apparatus used to model the
shoulder-joint actuator performance and
control is described and compared with the
equipment intended to be used on POPEYE.

11
Section 3. GROSS MOTIONS--The mathematical model for
the above apparatus is presented. Analysis
to determine suitable feedback gains for gross
motion operation and simulation to determine
performance with these gains are shown. Ex-
periments using these gains are described
and compared with simulation studies.
Finally, conclusions based on these obser-
vations are presented.

Section 4. FINE MOTION--The mathematical model is ex-

tended to include the force sensor apparatus.
Analysis with rate commands and integrated
force feedback modification of this rate
through a real-time, on-line minicomputer,
is discussed. The necessity of damper-like
behavior in the case of accidental collision
with the environment is shown. Simulations
of various operating conditions are pre-
sented with predetermined feedback gains.
Experimental verification of this behavior
and conclusions are made.

Section 5. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

FOR FURTHER WORK

Appendix A--The design of the single degrep.-

of-freedom force sensor is discussed.

Appendix B-The computer control algorithm,

flow chart and program are described.

12
 SECTION 2

POPEYE

2.1 Concept(4,5)

The Draper Laboratory mechanism is intended to be a

programmable remote manipulator, designed as a research
tool for automatic assembly. While designing the arm, the
following dual attributes of a good pick-and-place arm and
an assembler were kept in mind:

For Pick-and-Place
" Speed
" Accuracy
" High load capacity
" Large work volume

For Assembly
e Accuracy (good positional accuracy)
e Accurate control of small motions
(good rate control and high damping)
* Accurate control of forces at the stand (accurate,
wide dynamic range, low drift wrist force sensor)
e Versatile set of articulations (at least six degrees-
of-freedom with the ability to reach around objects)

Figure 2-1 shows the basic assembler concept. Keeping the

above criteria in mind, the arm is to have six degrees-of-
freedom which will be effected by strong rotatory hydraulic
actuators. It will be hung from a rigid gallows structure
that will be bolted to a work table (see Figure 2-2 (5)
The computer control scheme is intended to be at several
levels (see Figure 2-3 4) : the lowest one to keep a tight
servo loop around the hardware dynamics and the others to
carry out computation in order to effect resolved motion

13
 Positional
Servo

PositionalI Rate
Servo
Positionall Rate
Servo

Macro Force Vector

Processing
Force
Measurement
.I Ij
Commands
Force Vector List
Files
Error Signals
-

Arm Joint Angle Matrix I

_ __ _ ___ _ ___ _ _

Processing
CONTROL PROCESSOR

Figure 2 -1
Basic Assembler System
 Variable Height
Support Structure

Shoulder
Azimuth
Actuator

-. Shoulder
Shoulder Azimuth
Elevation Bearings
Actuator

Upper arm
Structure

Elbow Wrist Roll

Actuator Actuator

Wrist Roll
Bearings

Wrist Pitch
Actuator
Wrist Yaw
Actuator

6 DOF Wrist Quick

Force Sensor Disconnect
End
Workpiece Effector

meters
I I I I I
0 0.5 1.0

Figure ..4*
Side View of Draper Arm, Work Surface, and Support Structure

15
LEVEL 6 SUBGOAL GENERATOR
DATA
STRUCTURES

LEVEL 4
-I SUBGOAL
PROCESSOR

LEVEL 3 STEERING LAW SELECTION

'I,

DIRECT RESOLVED-RATE OTHER

LEVEL 2 DRIVE DRIVE DRIVES
(0-SPACE)

X
I

V Elt OCITY
STATE
517 IVO OF 'p OSITION
LEVEL 1 CONTROLLER SYSTEM
SENSORS
V ALVE
TOSITION

PRESSU R E (torqcue)

N.B. "State of System" is available to all levels.

Figure 2 - 3.

16
rate control and higher level strategic decisions based' on
arce and torque information.

2.2 Specifications(4 ,5

)
2.2.1 Dexterity

This comprises extent of mobility and freedom of

the arm. Figure 2-4 (4 shows the configuration of the arm.
All six degrees-of-freedom are mounted on a single arm to
ensure its compatibility with present day assembly proce-
dures. This excludes extra degrees-of-freedom which may
be added on by "hands" or end effectors. Six hydraulic
actuators will be used to provide the mobility: two at the
"shoulder" joint for azimuth and elevation, one at the "el-
bow" and three at the "wrist" to accomplish roll, pitch,
and yaw. A movable base to enhance mobility and an appro-
priate end effector could add on several redundant degrees-
of-freedom. The above configuration will be good for both
gross and fine motion.

2.2.2 Size
Figure 2-5 (4 shows arm dimensions in inches along
with angular excursions of the joints. The diagram does
not include wrist-mounted force sensors or end effectors as
these will depend upon fine motion study which is underway
at this time.
2.2.3 Sensors
Joint angle measurements will be made by pancake
resolvers read by phase lock loops which also will yield
rate data. In order to minimize structural vibration and
deflection errors, the mounting of these instruments will
be integral with the actuators. Alternative force feed-
back devices and their specifications are shown in Table 2-1

2.2.4 Strength and Speed

The specifications for these are also ahown on the

specifications lists. The "task", mentioned in "Gross-motion
'task' time", is to move the fully extended (highest iner-
tia) ,unloaded arm in a vertical sweeping motion 900 stop to stop.

17
 Table 2-1. List of POPEYE Specifications.

Dexterity Six degrees-of-freedom

Angular excursions:
Shoulder Azimuth: 150* Wrist Roll: t1500
Shoulder Elevation: 1200 Wrist Pitch: 11350
Elbow Elevation: 1350 Wrist Yaw: 1000

Size
Max radius - min radius = 676 mm (26.6 in.)
Max radius at wristpoint = 914 mm (36 in.)
Min radius at wristpoint = 24 mm (9.4 in.)

Accuracy
Basic Resolver Error ( LSB):

Elevation* = .132 mm ( .0052 in.)

AZimuth = .089 mm ( .0035 in.)

Repeatability ( 1/4 LSB):

Elevation* = .033 mm ( .0013 in.)

Azimuth = t.022 mm ( .0009 in.)

Structural Error (RMS) = i.26 mm ( .0104 in.)

Vertical Droop (unloaded) = .16 mm (.0062 in.)

*

Two resolvers in tandem)

18
 Tjanblo 2-1. List of POPM.YH SpocificationR. (ConLtnued)

Actuators
Rated Actuator Torques:

Shoulder Azimuth and Elevation 691 Nt-M(510ft-#)

Elbow 350 Nt-M(258ft-#)
All Wrist 82 Nt-M(61ft-#)

Speed (at rated torque): 6 rad/s

Valve pressure drop at speed: < 3.5 MPa (<500 lb/in. 2

Type: Hydraulic, single vane, direct acting

Seals: No internal, shaft seals only
System
Press: 17.2 MPa (2500 lb/in.2

Displacement:
Shoulder - 20.0 cc/rad (3.12 in. 3/rad)
Elbow - 10.0 cc/rad (1.56 in. 3 /rad)
Wrist - 2.44 cc/rad (0.38 in. 3 /rad)

Leakage:
-15% of full flow @ rated speed and. nominal 100*F

Ile r f orma nco

Fine-motion operating bandwidth: 10 Hz
Gross-motion "task" time: 0.5 s
Stiffness (referred to wristpoint):
Arm extended = 1050 Nt/mm (6000 lb/in.)
Elbow @ 900 = 1230 Nt/mm (7000 lb/in.)
Lowest structural natural frequency = 30 Hz
Weight of arm (exclusive of shoulder actuators) 356 Nt(80#)
2
Inertia @ shoulder with 10 Kg load 2 22-1/2 Kg-M
2
(200 in.-#-s
)

19
 AZIMUTH

ELEVATION

er

E LBOW e,3.fr

ROLL A A

PITCH

Fig. 2 .. 4 Arm kinematic configuration.

20
 3 0 0 ()

Ijiji
Iliji,

I
240 0 -6

)
I

wj IY
1

cc

-L
2700

)
z
-A

"WRIST-POINT"

Iigtire 2-5 Arm Dimensions.

2]
2.3 Apparatus Used for Presont Study
The one degree-of-freedom apparatus used for the present
research was intended to be a model of the POPEYE shoulder
actuators and was used to determine control strategies,
suitable feedback gains,and gross and fine motion performance
with force feedback. Figure 2-6 shows the hardware arrange-
.ent.
(1) The motor used was a ROTAC Model RN-32-lV,
single vane, roller bearing type hydraulic
actuator. This actuator has the following rated
specifications:
Maximum operating pressure = 1000(lb/in.2
Displacement = 1.88 cu.in./rad
2
Torque @ 1000(lb/in. ) = 1680 in.-#
(2) A variable displacement pump was used as the
power supply with FYRQUEL 220, Phosphate Ester,
fire-resistant hydraulic fluid. The fluid was
specified to have:
Bulk modulus = 378 x 10 3 (lb/in. 2
Viscosity = 53.95 centipoise @ 100OF
(3) The servovalve was a MOOG Standard Series 34, Model
34 S 020. The following performance specifications
were obtained from test curves provided by the
manufacturer:

Resonance frequency - 502.0 rad/s

Damping Ratio = 0.5

(4) A 48 in. x 6 in. x 1 in. steel bar was used as the

load on the actuator; it had an inertia of 40.9
#-in.-s2 about the rotation axis.
(5) The force sensorwhose details are in Appendix 1,
was made of 6061-T6 aluminum alloy. It was design-
ed for the following specifications:
Stiffness = 48165.37 #/rad @ 30 in.from actuatorC.

22-
N,

Figure 2- 4 Hydraulic Servo Force Feedback Sensor

Experimental Hardware
 Inertia at actuator shaft axis
16.2 lb-in. -s
Stain on Stain-guages at 100 lbs force =
1000l in./in.
Full scale force = 110 lbs.
Factor of safety = 3.0.

A "non-compliant" breakaway barrier dexcribed in Appendix A

was designed for "collision" tests. The breakaway load was
set by a spring. The force required to disengage the barrier
was equal to the static frictional force between the barrier
and its support. The concept of Coulomb PIrLetion was used
to approximate a non-compliant environment with a safe break-
away load.
(6) There were two major differences between this
and the POPEYE system:
(a) The model actuator had a seal between
the vane and the actuator body which
was a cause for striction and fric-
tional damping; also a certain amount
of backlash was caused due to seal
flexion.
(b) A film-type potentiometer instead of
pancake resolvers was used for position
feedback and a dc motor was used for
rate feedback as opposed to the PLL
rate sensor for POPEYE.

24
 SECTION 3

GROSS MOTION

3.1 Model

Figure 3-l(5) shows a schematic for the hydraulics.

Table 3-1 defines the symbols and values for variables and
constants used in the analysis of gross and fine motion.
While formulating the system equations, the following effects
were included.

(1) Fluid compliance in the chambers on both sides

of the hydraulic actuator vane.

(2) Fluid viscosity in the actuator leakage from one

side to the other.

(3) Servovalve dynamics between the input electric cur-

rent and the valve opening size.

(4) Inertial load on the actuator.

Among the effects not included were:

(1) Non-linear valve characteristics. Close correlation

between simulation and experimentation was observed
for low amplitude inputs, therefore, for ease of
designing the control loop a linearized model was
used.

(2) Inertial effects of fluid between valve and actuator.

The relevant fluid mass was small since the valve
was mounted on the actuator.

(3) Friction in the actuator. The rubbing contact due

to the seal between the vane and the outer wall of
the actuator was considered very small.

25
 Table 3-1, List of Symbols.

C Capacitanco of hydraulic fluid -5 3 2

in actuator volume - 8.02 x 10- in. /(lb/in.

)
D = Displacement of actuator vane 3
rotation 1.88 in. /rad

AP= Differential pressure on

actuator vane, psi
F = Force feedback gain through
Gi computer = 0.0099 rad

F = Direct force feedback gain = 0.00167 mA/#

i = Output of computer lag

F filter,
#

iL Output of tach lag filter, mA

i = Integral of modified rate
signal, rad

i = Output of tach lead-lag

V filter, mA
KC = Stiffness of force sensor = 48165.37 #/rad

K = Actuator rate gain 2.3 rad/s

mA
n
3
KS = Servovalve orifice gain 4.324 in.mA /s

( = Lead frequency of tach lead-

D lag filter = 29.53 rad/s
= 490.0 rad/s
wF = Tach lag filter frequency
G = Lag frequency of tach lead-
lag filter = 628.3 rad/s

H = Hydraulic resonance fre-

quency - 39.286 rad/s

UP= Computer program update

rate = 200.0 updates/s

S = Servovalve resonance
= frequency = 502.0 rad/s

p, =Position feedback gain = 14.6 mA/rad

26
 Table 3-1. List of Symbols (Continued)
- Hate feedback qain - O.i mA/rAd/s
G
= Arm position, rad

= Rate of travel of arm, rad/s

0 = Barrier position, rad
B

ec Commanded position, rad

C
= Commanded rate, rad/s
T = Torque on actuator vane
shaft, lb-in.
= Hydraulic damping ratio = 0.5
= Servovalve damping ratio = 0.5
Servovalve spool "dis-
placement", mA
= Servovalve spool
"acceleration", mA/s
Arm acceleration, rad/s2
I = Inertia of arm and hand = 57.1 lb-in-s 2
RL = Leakage resistance of 2 3
seals w 634.7 (lb/in. (in. /s)

27
 (4) Dynamic effect of the angle reading potentiometer
and the tachomoter. Due to noise problems from the
tachometer caused by structural vibration and shaft
windup, a lag filter was placed on the rate feedback
signal. This acted as a buffer amplifier which
made the dynamic effect of the tachometer negligible
but added dynamics of its own.

3.2 Analysis
The hydraulics were approximated by a linear second
order transfer function. The derivation of these equations
and reduction to the second-order linear system are shown
in Reference 5. The state-space representation of these equa-
tions is as follows:

AP
2
-2- 2

0
S [RC 0
+
+
[C

0 S

Figure 3-2(5) shows these equations in block diagram form. For

gross motion analysis the frequency domain equivalent (see
Figure 3-3) of these equations was used.
Four types of control strategies were tested in simulations.
(1) Pure position feedback.
(2) Position feedback with rate feedback.
(3) Position feedback with load filter on rate feed-
back.
(4) Position feedback, rate feedback, and actuator load
pressure feedback.
For a detailed discussion of these simulations see
Reference 5. It was observed during experiments with pressure

28
Supply
Pressure, Ps Exhaust
or Pressure P
Exhaust Pu PD or
Press ,PEJ
Pair of Supply
Presmare pS
Variable
Orifices

Hydraulic Vav

Rotary Hydrvi tic

Actuator

q,

Pressure P
2
in
$ Volume V 2
in
Volume V

Vane osplacement
Leakas Fow, qv
Fow qL

It al Load I
Rigdly Attadhwd
to Vane

Figure 3-1
Hydraulic System Schematic

29
Xs 2! + M

RLC

M,

xs ~ 2KsD/(IC)2
$2 2 2D2
RLC I

Figure 3-2
Linear Simplified Hydraulic Load Model

30
 MW qW qW 1W v

2
xS 2KSD/IC Xs K6

2 2 2D 2 S + 2Ce S + WK
L

(-~3
-a
where

EH R1C

KHD

Figure 3-3.
Physical Hydraulic System Transfer Function
Compared with Frequency Domain Transfer Function
tra qducers that a slight droop was caused in the arm position
due to the differential pressure accross the actuator vane.
Besides, the pressure transducers required separate wells in
the actuator and additional electronic circuitry; also there
w&e aways the danger of inadvertantly damaging them by a
pressure or voltage overload.

Due to these disadvantages it was decided to use a lead/

lag compensator on the rate feedback signal. Section 3.2.3
gives a brief explanation of how this type of compensation
improves system performance.

Figure 3-4 shows a block diagram of the servo-system

in the gross-motion mode. It shows the servovalve, hydraulics,
position feedback loop, rate signal lag filter and rate lead/
lag filter.

3.2.1 Determination of Hydraulic Resonance and Gain Factor KH

These were determined by observing the response of the

hydraulics to an impulse input. All electronic feedback cir-
cuits were disconnected and the load inertia mounted on the
actuator shaft was subjected to an impact load. This caused
an impulse input to the hydraulics through the actuator
vano. The displacement of the vane was measured via the posi-
tion feedback potentiometer on a strip-chart recorder. Com-
parison with standard response curves for second-order sys-
tems, showed the following:

Hydraulic damping ratio, EH = 0.5

Hydraulic resonance frequency, wH = 39.286 rad/s

The hydraulic gain factor KH was determined by observing

the rate caused by an input of 1 mA of current to the servo-
valve. All feedback circuits were again disconnected. A
rate. of 2.3 rad/s was observed.

* KH 23 rad
mA-s

32
 POSITION FEEDBACK GAIN

LEAD/LAG LAG FILTER

) OF
S WG (S+

- S KH
wf2 P4 - 2
2E+e s + v S+ 2-HS
(A)

HYDRAULICS

V11 2 2KSD/IC
2
52 + HwHS + WH S2 + 2 S
C

+
Figure 3-4.
Hydraulic Servosystem for Gross Motion Analysis
3.2.2 Servovalve Model
The servovalve was modeled as a second-order system with
resonant frequency and damping ratio specifications provided
by the manufacturer. The values used were:
Valve Resonance Frequency, WV = 502.0 rad/s
Valve Damping Ratio, &V W 0.5

3.2.3 The Rate Lead/Lag Filter and System Performance

At the resonant frequency of the hydraulic poles 0 lags
XS by a phase angle of 900. 6 gets integrated to 6 through the
actuator vane and so a further 900 phase lag occurs, thus
causing a total of 180* of lag between the output e and input
X to the actuator. The tachometer feedback signal reduces
this lag to 900 but this is not enough to eliminate ringing
caused by the resonating hydraulics. The lead/lag filter
causes 9 to be fed back which induces dampinq (by reducing feed-
back phase lag) which eliminates the ringing. At frequencies
below the lead frequency the filter produces a dc gain on
the rate signal but at frequencies between those of the lead
and lag resonances we get a phase lead and after the lag fre-
quency we have a roll-off which attenuates noise, etc.

3.2.4 Determination of Rate Feedback Gain, TG, by the Root

Locus Method
Figure 3-5 shows a block diagram and characteristic
equations of the servosystem with only the rate feedback loop
closed. Figure 3-6 shows the root locus for varying gain, TG'
The value of the lead zero was selected in order to get
the widest possible bandwidth (with the position feedback loop
closed) which could be realized on the physical system. Due
to noisy tachometer feedback, the frequency of the tachometer
lag filter had to be set at 490.0 rad/s. This also became the
value of the effective lag frequency on the rate feedback. In
order to obtain a higher bandwidth with the position loop
closed, it was necessary to start out the open loop poles for

34
 AW w

RATE LEAD/LAG FILTER TACH. LAG FILTER

TwG (S + uY
TG uD(S + S + o
(a)

SERVOVALVE HYDRAULICS
C 2 - 22 K HH2
S+ 2&' S+S + 2(HH + 2

(b) Characteristic Equation:

(S +W D)
2
(S2 + y, S + u2)(S2 + 2 EH tHS + 64)(S + G(S + F

2 2
T
where G - H ___
wwH G =V.'.
_"FGTG TD
TG U w =
0 ma/rad
.

H V FFGTG at pt. shown

in Figure III. 6.

Figure 3-5.
Calculation of Rate Feedback Gain, TG, from Root Locus
'qW WO w~ wwW W

Servo
Valve

S-plane plot of servosystem with

only rate-feedback loop closed. 300
(6th order)
X = Open Loop Poles
o = Zero 9ijW
= Closed Loop Root Locus
W/
200
Selected TG 0.5
GS
mafrad

100

Hydraulics
Lag of Lag
L/L Filter
aim i 4 i
-600 -500 -400 -300 -200--0 Lead
of LIL
Position of Hlyd. 'nafrad
Figure 3-6. Poles for G d.5 s
Root Locus of Closed Loop Poles for Incre asing TG
posit z.n feedback with the hydraulic poles as far away as
possitle from the imaginary axis. This point was where the
two poles met on the real axis. For this reason, it was not
possible to set the lead zero further away from the imaginary
axie :.han shown, because then the tack lag filter pole ap-
proacied the zero and the hydraulic poles would turn back
'-owards the imaginary axis, thus reducing the maximum possible
bandwidth obtainable with the position loop closed and a
suitable value of position gain.
For this reasonthe lead resonance was selected at
29.5 rad/s. The rate feedback gain, TG, was selected at
0.5(mA-s)/rad so that the hydraulic poles were at 83.2 rad/s
left of the imaginary axis, on the real one.

Summary of values of open loop poles and zero used to

deter"ine rate feedback gain, TG:

Hydraulics: -19.6 t 34.Oj rad/s (2 Poles)

Servovalve: -251 435j rad/s (2 Poles)

Tach. Lag -490.0 + 0.Oj rad/s (I Pole)
Filter:
I'eid of Rate -29.5 + 0.0) rad/a (1 Zero)
Lead/haq
Filter:
Lag of Rate -628.0 + 0.Oj rad/s (1 Pole)
Lead/Lag
Fitler:
Order of System = 6

3.2.5 Determination of Position Feedback Gain, PGr by the

iot Locus Method
The open loop poles for the servosystem with position
closed around the rate feedback loop consisted of the poles
and z:ros obtained from the rate loop with TG = 0.5 (mA-s)/rad
plus one pole at the origin due to the position feedback po-
tentioVeter. The zeros were due to the lag frequency of the

37
rate lead/lag filter and lag filter on the tachometer. Figure
3-7 shows a block diagram and characteristic equation for the
position feedback loop closed over the servosystem with rate
feedback. Figure 3-8 shows the root locus for varying gain PG.

A gain of PG, such that a predominant damping ratio of

between 0.7 and 0.8 could be obtained, was selected at 14.6
mA/rad and the following theretical performance for the
hydraulics was obtained:

= 0.746
wn = 29.62 rad/s

T = 0.05 s
= 22.1 rad/s = 3.52 Hz

The bandwidth of this sys-.;em could be increased by having

a much larger value of the tachometer lag pole frequency which
would be possible with a good tachometer. This would enable
the lead zero of the rate lead/lag filter to be placed further
away from the imaginary axis and still allow the hydraulic poles
to meet at the real axis but much further away from the imag-
inary axis than they did in this analysis.

3.2.6 Simulation

Figure 3-9 shows the state space representation for the

servosystem in the gross-motion mode. A simulation of the
response of this system to a step position input command was
run (see Figure 3-10). This was done by a fourth-order
Runge-Kutta iterative integration to solve each of the dif-
ferential equations for the value of the respective state
variable, at specific time intervals. Figures 3-11 and 3-12
show frequency response plots obtained by analysis.

3.3 Experiment

The gains TG and PG determined by this analysis were set

in the hardware. Frequency response of the system was deter-
mined by supplying a sinusoidal rate command to the servovalve

38
 Mr w ~W IL A

POSITION FEEDBACK GAIN

(a)

TTN
R T

where TR = Transfer Function for servosystem with only rate feedback loop closed.

(b) Characteristic Equation:

1 + G 2 G+ + wF2
wG)(S

wV)(S+ +G)(S +WF) + K FTGG(S + D 22

(S + 2 2~ C1H 2 Wy 2
S+ )(S +

whereG = PG p G = 14.6 ma/rad.

KHwH'V at pt. shown in Figure 111.8.

Figure 3-7.

Calculation of Position Feedback Gain, PG, from Root Locus

 Servo
Vaive 40C

1~
S-plane plot of servosysten with rate

Itj
and position feedback loops closed.

X = Open Loop Poles -300

0 = Zeros
-4 = Closed Loop Root Locus

Selected PG = 14.6 ma/rad

-20009
0t'

100

Posi tion of Hyd. Poles

for P 46 ma
PG 14.6
Lag Lag Lag
of L/L Filter Filter
0:
-600 -500
LAG POLE POSITION DUE TO 0.5 a TG -
-400
-706.0 rad/s
300 -200 -100
~100) IFeedb. bo.

Double Poles Pot.

'=ES TOWARDS LAG ZERO OF L/L WITH INCREASING PG- for Hydraulics
Figure 3-8,
Root Locus of Closed Loop Poles for constant TG and increasing PG.
 e 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 8 0

0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0

0 0 0 0 0 0 0

~1 S xs 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 xS 0 * eC

w2
is -PGV 0 0 0 v2 -2yw, -22 0 xS GV

iv 0 0 0 0 -wG TGwG(1---) lv 0

iL 0 F 0 0 0 0 -WF L 0

Figure 3-9.

State Space Representation of Hydraulic

Servosystem for Gross Motion Analysis
1w MW 1w 1w 1w

1.2

1.01

0.8

-
M

LSJ

0.6

CD,
0.4 6 = 1.047 rad
0

0.2

0.0 - - - S I
0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5
TIME (s)

-
Figure 3-10.
Simulated Step Response of Hydraulic
Servosystem (Gross Motion Mode)
w ww ww
w w . w w w w w w

'~~~1

1.0
0.9-

a~e
.?
S a
- *ee. 2
0
0.6-

OA-
- = ANALYSIS
4(13 jG 0.3-
0

= EXPERIMENT S

0.1 I.

0.2 0.3 04 0o.5.'50'7'id&9' 2.O 3.0 4.0 5.0 6. 7.0'.0'.01 20

0.1 1.0 10.0

Fiqure 3-11.
Amplitude Ratio from Analysis and Experiment
 IMF mw
1w

j i A m

0e

-504

-100

- = ANALYSIS
1501

es a EXPERIMENT

,
-200
-

0.2 03 0. os oW0.e 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 6.0 7.O.O0 10.0
0.1

Figure 3-12.
Phase Diaqram from Analysis and ExDeriment
which, when differenced with the position feedback, generated
position increments. The experimental data obtained by using
an oscilloscope has been superimposed on the analytical curves
for comparison. Both in analysis and experiment the response
plots were made for responded position of the actuator vane
to input position commands.

3.4 Comparison of Simulation and Experiment

The following figures for frequency response were ob-

tained from analysis and experiment:

Analysis Experiment
Bandwidth 4.3 Hz 5.2 liz

-900 Phase Shift 3.6 Hz 4.5 11z

Gain Roll-off Rate -20 dB/decade -20 dB/decade

Error 17.3%

3.5 Conclusions

(1) The performance of the physical system shows that it

is faster than predicted in simulation, but the error
is well within accepted correlation limits. The
higher speed may be due to:

(a) The servovalve. Its specifications were not

checked by experiment.

(b) Hydraulic performance. A slight visual error

may have been made in estimation of the hydrau-
lic resonance frequency and damping ratio while
comparing strip-chart recordings of the im-
pulse response curve with standard curves.

(2) The bandwidth of the system was 5.2 Hz. This was
the best possible with the tachometer lag filter at
490 rad/s. If the tachometer had been of a higher
quality, less noisy, then the lag filter frequency
could be higher, enabling location of the lead zero

45
 of the rate lead/lag filter at a point more to the
left of the imaginary axis in the s-plane while
determining the value of TG (Figure 3-6). In this
way the open loop hydraulic poles for position
gain could start out at a higher bandwidth and a

PG with suitable damping and 10 Hz bandwidth could

be obtained.

(3) It was observed that with use, the seal between the
actuator vane and the actuator surface would wear
due to friction. This would increase leakage
across the vane and increase the hydraulic damping
ratio.

46
 SECTION 4

FINE MOTION

4.1 Model

Figure 4-1 shows the block diagram of the servosystem

with the force feedback loops closed. The non-linear function
shows that the force loops are activated only when a displace-
ment of the force sensor is caused. The derived second order
linear model of the hydraulics is used in order to include the
torque on the actuator shaft caused by a load exerted at the
force sensor. This loop is not a control loop; it just repre-
sents the physical reality of the effect of a load on the force
sensor regardless of whether the electronic force feedback con-
trol loops are closed or not. Since this opposes the actuator
torque it is subtracted from it.

The first force-feedback control loop is a direct feed-

back of the force with a gain FGl to the servovalve input cur-
rent summing junction.
The second force-feedback control loop goes through a
real-time, on line, PDP 9 minicomputer and is differenced with
a rate command after which a now position input is given to the
servosystem by integrating this difference.
The reason why this particular scheme was used is ex-
plained in the next section.

4.2 Analysis

4.2.1 Discussion of Control Scheme(4

)

A simple model of the one degree-of-freedom servosyntem of

Seotion 3 with a force sensor mounted on the end of the inertia
may bp shown thus:

47
 T M

KI
C

Let the barrier have infinite stiffness, then we only have to

consider the compliance of the force sensor. Assume that c
causes the arm to move with a constant rate. The describ.ing
equation would be:

ML e = T - K 1 (0-0 C)

Force balance occurs when Kc z (0-0 c) = T where the value of T

at this point would be the maximum possible that could be gen-
erated by the actuator. This may be termed "passive" accomodation.
In order to cause "active" accomodation it would be necessary
to control the cause of the torque. This would best be accom-
plished by modifying the hydraulic flow rate which causes
pressure on the vane and displaces it. Assume a rate command
B
cemodified to 0
.

0e = 0c - G
F Kc (0-0
c
)

Where GF is a feedback gain. This may also be accomplished in

the following two ways:

(1) Difference the force with the position command. In

this case the arm behaves like a spring when the
force sensor is deflected while the system is in
steady state. The force keeps increasing with dis-
placement which does not serve the purpose of
accommodation. The increasing force is caused due to
servo opposition to arm displacement.
(2) Difference the integral of the force from the position
command. This causes active accommodation by
modifying the position command without an opposing
force developing in the servosystem. The arm
.

48
 POSITIONd FEEDBACK GAIN

-A PG LAG FILTER
LE ADILAG FOR TACH FOR TACH SIGNAL

r-C-~~T s+
;-G - F -.

cOPPUTER 2-

iu SERVOVALVE

LL)
C
+WD

FGFG1

OF Reftas

-
PROGRA ruu... EDEGREE OF FRE E;IM8
CYCLE TnmE FOACE-ZENSOR

** MJPFORCE
jsTInFFftEEjSg
OSNO
Figure 4-1.
Hydraulic Servosystem in Fine Motion Mode with Force
Feedback and Computer in the Loop.
actii -ly accommodates to a force on the sensor and settles in the
new position caused by the modified 6c; thus making the arm behave
like a damper. The problem with this scheme is that a 900 phase
lag in caused in the force feedback loop.
A technique by which damper like behavior can be obtain-
ed without the 90* phase lag is required.

This behavior can be achieved by commanding rates to the

servosystem instead of positions. The rate command 0c can be
direcnly fed back and differenced from the rate command causing
an updated rate to be integrated into a new position command.
This preserves the damper-like behavior without the 900 phase
lag.
This was the control strategy used for the present study.
The gain FG in Figure 4-1 is the force feedback gain. In addition
to thss loop, the force was also fed back to the position command
via gain FGl for proportional control. This loop was used in
simulation, but the gain FGl was too low to be practically imple-
mented in the hardware. Hence, in the actual experiment only the
The rate 0 gen-
FG loop, through the
Fl minicomputer was used.
c was
erated in the computer, differenced with the force feedback and
integrated in software and finally output as a position command
via a D/A converter.

4.2.2 Determination of Pole Locations with Force Sensor in

Contact with Barrier and Selection of a Value for FGl

Figure 4-2 shows the state space representation of the

system equation with all control and feedback loops closed. The
open loop poles for starting root locus determination of FG1 were
found by setting rows 8 and 9, and columns 8 and 9 of the system
matrix to zero. Also FGl was set to zero. The eigenvalues of
this matrix were then the required open-loop pole locations.
Figu 4-3 shows the modified block diagram of Figure 4-] for
root locus determination of FGl*

U~
 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 KCR

0
KCR
I 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
2KS
0 2D 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
xP

xs 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 xS 0 0
~1
0 K0F
S 0 0 2 0 0 2PG +- o wVKCFGI
- (pG+KcFGI) 0 -wv v vw -Wv xS
2C B
-

0 TG G F 0 0 0 -wG TGwG(1- ;') 10 0 iv 0 0

iv GIG GI

0 WF 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

1
F 0 0 .0 0 0 0 P 0 FR 0 -UPKC
WupKC

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -FG 0 iUR 1
iUR
0 j
Figure 4-2.
State Space Representation of Hydraulic
Servosystem in Fine Motion Mode
 -B (H + H2

)
C G T PR

F. (>2TLC SS FG KC
+1
0
+ B

Gi CS
where H = K C(Radius)
G1G WVD/
+2L
2Ecj
2+
H2 1

FG1G = 0.00167 ma/#

V H2KC

where G is the gain at the desired closed loop pole location. and TPR is the transfer
function of C to 0 with the position and rate loops closed.

Figure 4-3.
Calculation of Force Feedback Gain, Fei, from Root Locus
 The poles due to the stiffness of the force sensor are
4s follows:
Lag of Rate L/L Filter: -704.0 + Oj rad/s
servo, ve: -292.0 t 418.4j rad/s
hydraulics: -18.4 192.7j rad/s

L.g of Rate Filter -292.7 + Oj rad/s

Lead of Rate L/L Filter: -40.27 + Oj rad/s

As these poles indicate, contact of the force sensor

with the barrier causes a natural frequency of 193.58 rad/s in
the hydraulics with very low damping. Actually this frequency
is much higher than the bandwidth of the hydraulic system and so
it will have very low amplitude. Figure 4-4 shows the root locus
of the dominant poles, for increasing gain FGl. A very low value
of FGl "ad to be used to keep the hydraulic poles from being
driven unstable.

4.2.3 Determination of Gain Fc1

Figure 4-5 shows the block diagram for root locus deter-
mination of FG. Figure 4-6 shows the root locus of the dominant
poles for varying FG' The system is 9th order because two more
poles, one for the lag caused by computer program cycle time
(Wu= 200 updates/s) and the other a pole at the origin repre-
senting the integrator on command ec. The dominant poles in this
case are the hydraulics, the lead frequency of lead lag and the
computer integrator on the rate.

4.2.4 Simulation

The following situations were simulated:

(1) Collision with Barrier without Active Accommodation

A rate of 0.25 rad/s was commanded witt FG and

0fir 0< 8B. This way FG1 set of zero. Also Kc .
force developed at the force sensor would

53
9W MW 1W qq wW I,w,
WW wV W W v

S-Dlane plot of system root Hydraulics - 20C

locus for increasing FG1.
(Only dominant poles
are shown.)

ORDER OF SYSTEM = 7.
FGl selected = 0.00167 ma/#.

tjW

L,
100

17 -100 L/L Filter

Lead Pole
Figure 4-4.
Root Locus of Closed Loop Poles with constant TG and PG and increasing Fql.
 mv vw q W

- (H I + H 2)S + H 3

C pG + WN T PRFDo

Gf I
+ OUP
GS i
E) + 08

where H1 and H2 are the same as in Figure IV.3.

9 TF *Transfer Function between 6C and 6 with position, and H ;

KCGFGOUP rate and FG1 Loops closed.

F G " 0.0099 rad/s

G PGHwUP"H
#

Figure 4-5.
Calculation of Force Feedback Gain, FG, from Root Locus.
S-plane plot for dominant poles 6. Hydraulics
entire servosystem with all loops
closed; to determine FG'

FG selected = 0.0099 rad/s

ORDER OF SYSTEM - 9.

- 100

Computer
Program
a9
200 -- 100 Lead of Rate !-tegrater
L/L Filter a' Rate
Figure 4-6.
Root Locus of Closed Loop Poles for Constant
TG, PG. and FG1 and increasing FG.
 resist the actuator torque only when the arm was in
contact with the barrier. Due to a programming
oversight the simulated actuator pressure was not
limited to 1200 (lb/in. 2) which is the maximum for
the hardware actuator, hence, at contact, force
kept building up even after force balance should
have occured. This was due to the theoretical
ability of the actuator to produce infinite torque.
Figure 4-7 shows a plot of this simulation. No-
tice the 30 Hz ringing of the force sensor, which
is highly attenuated by the arm. It can be seen
that forces developed at this speed due to initial
contact between force sensor and barrier are with-
in safe limits of the sensor.

(2) Collision with Barrier with Force Feedback

Figure 4-8 shows this simulation. The barrier

was at 0.05 rad from the initial position of the
arm. The high frequency ringing is again apparent,
but the hydraulics do not "see" much of it. 0c
0.25 rad/s. Maximum force developed on contact
= 76.6 lb. and steady-state force = 24.0 lb.

(3) Application of Load to Force Sensor while Arm is

in Steady State

Figure 4-9 shows a plot of this simulation.

The arm was initially at steady state and a con-
stant force of 50 lbs was applied to the force
sensor. It can be seen that the arm moves away
with a constant velocity due to a constant force
and remains in the position at which the force
sensor was removed. The rate developed due to the
50 lb load was 0.39 rad/s.

57
ww w IR m

0.18

0.16 FG 0.0 rad/sF

G V- FORCE
0.14 FGl ' 0.0 ma/#

AJ~
0.12 K= 48165.37 #/rad

0.10
LU C.,

W, 0.08
0)c
I- C)
m4 U-

0.06

0.04
POSITION
0.02

0.00
0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5

TIME (s)

Figure 4-7.
 0. 081

0.07 FG 0.0099
FORCE

#
0.061 FGI = 0.00167 ma/#

0.05 4 K = 48165.37 #/rad

C) POSITION
0 .041+
w
Cn >
0
a-
Lfl 0.03-
U.'

x
0
I-
0.02
I,)
0 Q
U.
0.01
-

A flA
10 _ 0Q.
0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5

TIME (s)

Fiqure 4-8.
 0.06
10

0.04
FORCE

0.02--

1 10 10
0.00
0
(/~1
LUJ
-0.02.-
x POSITION
C,

R C-0.04

-0.06

1
-0.08
0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5

TIME (s)

Figure 4-9.
4.3 Experiments
At the time experiments were to be performed it was ob-
served that leakage of hydraulic fluid across the acuator vane
Hoal had increased by a large amount. This caused the value of
lcakaqe rosistance RL to change which in turn increased the
hydraulic damping ratio ;H (see Figure 3-3 for relationship
between RL and CH). For this reason the position feedback
gain, PG and rate feedback gain, TG had to be increased.
When these gains were set to satisfactory values, the force
feedback gain, FG also required readjustment. FG1 was too low
to implement in hardware, so it was not used.

(1) The system responses were'siiulated with this new

set of values for damping and gains. Figure 4-10
corresponds to the simulation of Section 4.2.4
item (2) and Figure 4-11 ;orresponds to that of
Section 4.2.4 item (3). The gains and speeds
associated with these are mentioned in the fig-
ures.
(2) During experimentation it was observed that upon
contacting the barrier the system went into a low
amplitude limit cycle. This was due to quantiza-
tion of the force sensor output signal by the
computer A/D converter. The following is an ex-
planation of how this happens:

Suppose the arm is positioned with the force

sensor exactly at 0B with a zero force. Let a
rate 6C be commanded as a binary word in the com-
puter. This goes through the software integrator
and is output as a voltage from the D/A converter
register. Let this word be called 'P. This is
output as a voltage from the D/A -converter and
goes 'to the servovalve as a current via a voltage
to current converter. Due to the position feed-
back, this current causes a position increment of
the arm, A0, into the barrier. The deflection of

6E1
 20E-3 r I p

Barrier 6
Position
ARM POSITION
1.4

-
1.2

-
1.0 0.0 ma
- LO
.8
-

-ma
30.1 rad
CA
0 C .6 FORCE 2.5 ma-s
o- U .4. 0.9

.2- 30000.0 #/r ad

OE-2
-

0 .05 .10 .15 .20 .25 .30 .35 .40 .45 .50
TIME (s)
Figure 4-10.
Collision of Arm with Barrier with gains readjusted for
change in Hyd-aulic System Damping Ratio (5C = 0.0324)
 2E-3 N i i
10 FORCE
1

-1 F 0.0
S -
FG = 0.0024 rad
CD -2 G S
P = 30.1 ma
G a
po -3 TG = 2.5 m
WUI
c 0 ARM POSITION
C) x
UJ K = 30000.0 #/rad
c: -5
C. U- = 0.0299 rad/s
-6

-7E-3
0 .05 .10 .15 .20 .25 .30 .35 .40 .45 .50
TIME (s)
Fiqure 4-11.
Application of Load to Force Sensor shile Arm is in steady state.
System Gains readjusted for new Hydraulic System Damping Ratio.

- is positive, negative or zero.
the force sensor outputs a voltage to the com-
puter A/D converter which reads this into the A/D
converter register as a binary word. This word
is then multiplied by FG to give another word.
Let this word be called eF9 F is subtracted
from 0 thus generating an updated rate to the
c
software integrator and the arm position is
incremented, decremented or re'ained depending on
whether F
c F
position increment occurs
If 0 is less than 0
c a
and F is increased due to further deflection of
the force sensor. A limit cycle will not occur if
a change of 12 in output P causes a change of less
than 22 in 6F because then at some value of P, 6F
will actually equal 6c. In case the change in 6F
is 22 or more due to a change of 12 in P, a limit
cycle may occur because 6F may be, at least, 12 more
or 12 less than 0c.
Consider what happens when the arm is not
actually at 6B at the end of a previous increment.
Let the increment in the arm position due to out-
put word P = 12 be AG 1. Let the arm be at some
fraction of AO away from the barrier at the end
of a previous position increment. Call this posi-
tion 6.Now it can be seen that even if a 0 F of 22
or more is caused due to P = 12 while the arm is
already in the barrier, it is possible that a
position increment in 8 due an increase of 12 in P
will cause a smaller force and therefore will not
result in a limit cycle. This is because, at the
end of this increment in 6, the arm may not have
gone for enough into the barrier to cause a 0F of 22
or more; thus satisfying the condition for no limit
cycle.
E14
 In order to prevent the possibility of a
limit cycle the gain FG must be set in a way that
an arm position increment A0 1 into the barrier
causes a change of less than 22 in AF'
(3) Barrier collision and steady-state loading experi-
ments were performed with various rate commands
and loads. Figures 4-12 to 4-22 are chart record-
ings of these experiments. The following are the
values used:

Collision

Figure 6(-)
c s rad
G F lb-s Comments

4-12 0.0324 0.0012 No limit cycle

4-13 0.0324 0.0024 Compare with Figure 4-10
4-14 0.0324 0.0048 limit cycle
4-15 0.0324 0.0096 limit cycle
4-16 0.0135 0.0096 limit cycle
4-17 0.0135 0.0096 limit cycle
4-18 0.0135 0.0048 limit cycle
4-19 0.0135 0.0024 No limit cycle
4-20 0.0068 0.0048 No limit cycle

Steady-State Loading

Figure Load (lb.)

4-21 13.0 ').0324 Compare with
4-22 36.0 0.0806 Figure 4-11

Figure 4-13 corresponds to the simulation of

Figure 4-10 and Figure 4-21 corresponds to the
simulation of Figure 4-11. It can be seen that FG
causes limit
lb-s or more,
for values of 0.0048 rad
cycles. In the case of Figure 4-20, a limit cycle was
not caused due FG 0.0048. This was because 0c

_E5_
 was a binary 1. The update rate for all of the
experiments was 2000 updates/s.

4.4 Conclusions
(1) Careful analysis can bring about close correlation
between simulation and experiment.

(2) Some of the chart recordings show the generation of

a slight force pulse as soon as the arm collided with
the barrier. This was due to a very slight jolt in
the barrier before it became rigid.

(3) Digital computer control involves quantization prob-

lems which may cause instability even if suitable
gains are used. These problems must be studied very
carefully and overcome in order to obtain any mean-
ingful experimental results.

(4) The high frequency pole location of the hydraulics

due to the stiffness of the force sensor can be re-
duced by having a more compliant sensor.

(5) Without proportional force feedback via gain FGl

the arm response to collision is more damped than with

this feedback in the loop. However higher steady-state
forces occur. Hence, an optimal value for FGl would
have to be used.

(6) Damper-like behavior of the arm is desired in order to

ensure safe operation in the case of collision with
the environment.

(7) A 60 Hz noise signal modulated by what appeared to be

the natural frequency of the large ;upport structure
for POPEYE was detected in the force sensor output sig-
nal. Upon inspection it was determined that the
structure was picking up 60 Hz hum from the laboratory
building. Since the manipulator will have such an
environment almost anywhere it is used, the above
cause of structural vibration should be considered
during the design stage.

67
 e(1 mm = 0.162 rad)
(u= 0.0162 rad) FORCE (1 mm = 1.62 lb)

~4j~
I

C3
U

-- 3 3 !

IA1 *

--
II II
 E)(1 mm = 0.0162 rad/s)
FORCE (1 mm = 1.62 lb)
C ( I mm = 0.0162 rad/s)

-II|IIIi I I II. -
am
i flU i e

I.zJ
I
I.i. 14J
'Q a
ti
0
ebb 'I
I I-'
0
ro

U
-4-

F
iI
 6(1 mm = 0.0162 rad)
6C (1 mm = 0.0162 rad) FORCE (1 mm 1.62 lb)

. E ..
C 0O

U -
 6(1 nun = 0.0162 rad)
e (1 un = 0.0162 rad) FORCE (1 mm =0.65 lb)
N Ii _4
~~T
I.

S.'
1-4
I
0

p
0U
I fl
I-'
Ut g-a

0
U

I
= &m.mam

' I=TIE
___= t I
U I I
 0(1 mm = 0.0135 rad)
6 (-mm= 0.0135 rad) FORCE (1 mm = 0.4 lb)

-
H E

*IU
N. N

(D
.- i
Bob, ME
IIN
I---...
N.
I- i-i" -

c
ii INV

..........
ZZ: :.

.. . . . ... . . .
 6 (1 mm = 0.0135 rad)
FORCE (1 mm= 0.4 lb)
5C (1 mm = 0.0135 rad)

I-,
'xi
I.'.
0
II
CD I
'I
I-'
-4
0
U

I
II I I
 0 (1 mm = 0.0135 rad)
eC (1 mm = 0.135 rad) FORCE (1 mm = 0.33 lb)
1~

ii

'.3
H
I
LI
El
id. I~I

~Q 0
(A) ti
(D
I~

I-a I-a

0
U
Eth
Ti ~ji~
EEE
Effi
Hih

11 I
F::
I.

I
 e( mm = 0.0135 rad)
5C (1 mm = 0.0135 rad) FORCE (1 mm = 0.33 lb)
-ff A -

1~
-I-

U
-u
(D
0
fr-I

II
I-a
{
Iii
 e(1 mm = 0.0135 rad)
8 (1 mm= 0.0135 rad)
Cr FORCE (1 mm - 0.15 lb)
=
.4-

I +

I' I I 1
-I - -- -
I I........
II I I
I
I-.'
0
ebb

0
'I
I-.'
I
0
m

I
 0 (1 mm = 0.0130 rad)
6 (1 mm = 0.0130 rad) FORCE (1 mn. = 0.67 lb)

-r
.4-

I
I-I
~!J t!j r.
I-'. i i F il i - 14 1 4i- q I !F-HW

0)
It
I II
I-' I-'
0
U

E
 0(1 mm = 0.0130 rad)
C (1 mm rad) FORCE (1 mm = 1.33 lb)
I . - = 0.0130

t -H-
-IU ..i.III U
U'

(D
,b O

1% I-

I =*=== i;;;;m i
I. I
 SECTION 5

CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS FOR FUTURE WORK

5.1 Conclusions

(1) A large amount of time and effort was spent in re-

peating analyses for gross and fine motion due to
variations in the hydraulic system damping ratio,
EH. This was due to increased leakage of fluid
across the actuator vane caused by wear in the
seal between the vane and the actuator body. This
seal should be replaced by one which is more wear-
resistant.

(2) Lead compensation on the rate feedback signal gives

performance comparable to pressure feedback with-
out the disadvantage of the latter.

(3) Rate commands modified by force feedback effect

good active accommodation by the manipulator in
case of fine motions or accidental collision with
the environment. This has been do:ne without having
to modify the position feedback gain thus elimina-
ting the chance of manipulator droop due to gravity.

(4) Force feedback transducers are extremely sensitive

to vibration, preamplifier drift and line noise.
High-quality filters and high signal to noise
ratio, low drift amplifiers should be used with
force sensors.

(5) Quantization problems inherent in digital computer

control can cause limit cycles under certain con-
ditions. These problems can be overcomL by careful
analysis of the D/A and A/D conversion processes.

78
 (6) High-force sensor stiffness can cause highly oscil-
latory hydraulic system response. An optimal sensor
compliance should be used.

5.2 Recommendatiors for Future Work

(1) The proportional force feedback control loop was

not used dae to hardware limitations. This parti-
cular loop should be tried in software.

(2) Experiments should be carried out in order to

determine manipulator performance when it is com-
manded to touch an object with a certain desired
force.

(3) Proportional, square and square root force feedback

laws should be tried experimentally. (6)

(4) Stability analysis with varying computer update

rates should be carried out.

(5) All control loops should be tried in software; this

would save considerable hardware requirements and
costs. Also "safe failure" methods for the manipu-
lator system in case of computer malfunction
should be studied.

79--
 LIST OF REFERENCES

1. Boothroyd, G., "Mechanized Assembl", University of

Massachusetts, a background paper for the Automation
Research Coun.Ll lst Technology Workshop, Purdue
University, Oct. 3-6, 1973.

2. Mullen, D. P., "An Evaluation of Resolved Motion Rate

Control for Remote Manipulators", M.I.T. Mech. Eng.
Dept. M.S. Thesis, Jan. 1973.

3. Whitney, D. E., "Resolved Motion Rate Control of

Manipulator & Human Prostheses", IEEE Transactions on
Man Machine Systems, Vol. MMS-10, No. 2, June 1969,
pp. 47-53.

4. Nevins, J. L., et. al., Exploratory Research in

Industrial Modular Assembly, C. S. Draper Laboratory
Report No. R-800, March 1974.

5 Nevins, J. L., et. al., A Scientific Approach to the

Design of Computer Controlled Manipulators, C. S.
Draper Laboratory Report No. R-837, August 1974.

6. Doherty, H., Fine Motion Stability of a Manipulator,

M.I.T., Mech. Eng. Dept. M.S. Thesis, May 1974.

80
 APPENDIX A

DESIGN OF THE ONE DEGREE-OF-FREEDOM FORCE SENSOR

A.l Design Criteria

The following criteria were used while designing the

sensor:

(1) Simple design.

(2) Ability to be installed on the present hardware

without having to machine any portion of the latter.

(3) Easy machinability.

For this reason it was decided to use the arrangement

shown in Figure A.1-l.

A.2 Description

"A" is the cantilever arrangement upon which the strain

gauges "F" are mounted. This cantilever is held onto the
inertia bar "D" by brackets "B" and "C". "B" and "C" are
fastened by bolts onto "D" by way of the four bolt holes
shown. "A" is held rigidly in position by the frictional
force of a 150 wedge shape between the surfaces of "A" which
are in contact with "B" and "C". Two safety bolts "E" pre-
vent the force sensor from being damaged due to excessive
deflection.

BLH semiconductor strain gauges were used for the sensor.

The material used for parts "A", "B" and "C" of the
force sensor was 6061 T6 aluminum alloy. Bending moment,
shear force and deflection calculations determined that a
load of 110 lbs at 'L" would cause a strain of 0.001 in. on the
surfaces where the strain gauges were located. The dimensions

81
L

Figure A.1-1. One Degree-of-Freedom

Force Sensor
of the cantilever used were:

Length = 6.0 in. (Unheld Portion)

Cross-section = 5/8 in x 5/8 in. (Unheld Portion)
Factor of safety = 3.0

Other specificationn are given in Section 2.

Figure A.l-2 shows the breakaway barrier designed for

collision tests. This works on the principle of Coulomb
friction. The "OBJECT" is spring loaded against the barrier
shaft support. The load is supported between the "Breakaway-
Load Adjustment Nut" and the pin "P". The spring load develops
a force between the column "C" and the "OBJECT". The canti-
lever "A" of the force sensor lands on the "OBJECT" at "F".
The "OBJECT" remains in the horizontal position until the
static friction due to the load between it and "C" is over-
come; it then rotates slightly on the axis of the shaft,
aligning -pin "P" with the slot shown in SECTION BB. This
causes the shaft to get pulled towards the left, thus causing
the spring force to be released and the barrier to fall away.
This method ensures a rigid barrier with constant compliance
until a certain load is felt at "F". This load can be set by
adjusting the position of the "Breakaway-Load Adjustment Nut".
In this manner we can prevent excessively high loads from
damaging the strain gauges.

83
 "o&rtc;r"
AG 4 y - "0ABRASIVE
A7vUsrfwr Ator If RTr# A L

SECTjONAA

AfjM'~IVd

A Fr A
-1 7,-
4;
w~-z1jj

-
0
T

C
r

Figure A 4 .1-2. Breakaway Barrier

84
 APPENDIX B

COMPUTER PROGRAM "FEEL"

95
B.l Pages 87 to are a listing of the program "FEEL",
used for the experiments described in Section 4. The main
features of the program are explained on page 86 . The
program has been annotated and a cross-referenced index
follows the listing. The code in PDP 9 MACRO-15 ASSEMBLER
LANGUAGE.

B.2 Figure B-1 is a schematic for subroutine "UPDATE"

which modifies the rate command by using force feedback
information. The dead-bands were included in order to
ensure that drift and negligible error would not result in
changes of arm position. During experiments the gain FG
was adjusted by right shifting the "FORCE" and right shift-
ing "COMPOS". This way smaller position increments could
be obtained until the correct amount of rate was being
generated by the force being read. "FEDBND" and "DEDBND"
were not used for the final experiments as F G was small
enough to eliminate drift and small errors.

FLIMIT and RLIMIT were used to limit the arm rate to

render it safe for experiments in which the force sensor was
subjected to constant loads while the system was initially
in steady-state (no rate commands). CLIMIT constrained arm
excursions within safe limits.
 FEDBND SIAS FORCE SIC-MAL

I YES Li PCR NF + RSSFRE 0

0A/M
CHAN,

NO
DEDOND

NTGRLPMOVE R M T

COMRAT+ 10TA I EIEE M'S ACAT i NO LRS NCD

YES

EITEEN -0
COMPOS -0

o UPCOM

D/A CHAN. 3 o D/A CHAN. 2

TO TO
OSCILLOSCOPE HARDWARE

Figure B-1.
Schematic for Subroutine "Update"
 *XDV@03 33Oi AQ / 0;
09I4A1ow 36 11lIM oNvwwo3 3 vb / 6
3H 'NOIS161103 WSV i0 19YONt / 9
239VO 3AO9V 3W)4 0 I4OWi N0i I W,
/

;3MO 1)4 ONIOV01 N314 ONV

obaz 0 oldve ONY * Vmw02j/ot
/

SN?L13 A@ ORNZV.LOO 20 AVW

MA0IAVNBV 2X11wH3dWVO/ t
131Y AOVIIS NI / Ot
91 W212S N314M WMV ONZOV01 't 1 61
~iniVA Og33w, 1)4 01 f~
GNV * YbiWO~o 36 01 NAt4 StL
INV.9. INIANOO 0 3fleINt031 I ff
/

SNissno10 OIWVNA0 2'4 ONISfl

As 03NIWIC 31 AVW S?)4 tf
IONVWWO20 31VM INWL3N03 It Of
6?
OONYWW03 NOZAiSOd /92
01106VMud V 01 GILVV31NI It1
fi 3 W401)4M '02 VWI30 It q29
$I OOWOW0 ONVWW0O 111d I Se
ovingiNVI~i V 23MIVA 1,OWLiflS ly
01 ill INV #3NIo CNV *ldVe NIHM /f
120NVWW03 NOIIIO04 31OSWvoi $I it
19100W 132N op0
Ni OIafl is Avw 3wwv~e0Wd 3)4 1 61
91
It
0ONIWWOO 1 91
114 AAJIOW 01 N3VO033.d 1O ONtInf / St
Ag iN3WN0U1AN2 3)4 HAIM NOISI1102 / foIl
WMV A0 ISVO NZ NOILV0OWWOOOV 3AZIOV / cl
9133Jj3 QNY moomiov~ flxflviaA1 v0 / el
SONVWWOO 31V6 S2LYTl3NAS WVVO0bd 6114 / I
01
6
a33NVAOV 0 IVOIVfl OV NI0r t
d0 ONIOAli32 NOllOW INtA ONY eso009 /
US& 122 I39O 9O
PAGE 2 FEEL SRC
54
55 00000 00088 A COMRAT 0 /COMMANDED VELOCITY
56 00001 A INTRAT 8 /COMRAT a RFORCE
37 00083 A UPRATE 8 IUPDATED RATE
so 8s5e3 A UPCOM 8 /UPDATED POSITION
NJ599 /COMMAND
60 00004 000001 A INTCO2 8 /RSHIFTtD COMPOS
61 00805 A EITEEN 8 /INTEGRiiTQR VALUE
bit 00006 A COMPOS 8 /COMMAN(,EO POSITION
63 0007 A FORCE 0 /FORC9 READ FROM SENSUR
64 08a10 A RFORCE 8 /RATE CAUSED BY FORCE
b5 8o11 090000 A INTFOR 8 IINTERMEDIATE FORCE
66 00012 A CHAN 0 /A/D INPUT CHANNEL
67 00013 A APL 8 /AMPLITUDE OF COMRAT
68 00014 A INC 8 /COMRAT INCREMENT SIZE
088088
0000 A CNT /PROGRAM DELAY COUNT
69 08615 0007?7
888008 A
0
78 08816 TIMER 777 /18 VOLT PULSE TO
71 ITIME PROGRAM
72 00017 A VMAX 8 /MAX VALUE OF COMRAT
73 00010 000000 A VMIN 8 iMIN VALUE OF COMRAT
74 00821 000000 A TINC 8 /NExT VALUE OF COMRAT
'5 08812 A BIAS 8 /FORC9 BIAS
76 06023 A AOREL 8 IADDRESS OF VARIABLE
77 /TO SI OUTPUT TO
76 /RELAY BUFFER
79 00024 R 000000 A RATCNT 0 /PRESENT VALUE OF
s0 /DECREMENTED RATOLY
S1 00015 R 000001 A RATOLY 1 /RATE DELAY COUNT
82 00026 R 000000 A UPDCNT 0 /PRESENT VALUE OF
a3 /DECREMENTED UPDDLY
84 00027 R 000081 A UPOOLY 1 /UPDATE DELAY COUNT
85 00030 R 01000 A LIMITR 108e /VALUE OF RATE LIMIT
a6 00031 R 010888 A LIMITF 18880 /VALUE OF FORCE LIMIT
67 00032 R 000777 A LIMITC 777 /LIMIT OF ARM FXCURTION
so 00033 R 0000 A DEDOND0 11 IVALUE OF DEADBAND ON
.9 ICOMRATeRFORCE
90 00034 R 000000 A FEDIND I /VALUE OF DEADBAND ON
91 IFORCE FEEDBACK
92
93 00087 A SMIFTP07 /RSHJFT FOR CONPOS
94 70510 A L0ADIS?5103 /OUTPUT TO D/A DEVICE
95 701183 A ADSMs701183 / POP 9 A/D
96 701301 A ADSIF701301 I DEVICE CODES
97 701312 A ADRBU70131a
98 701185 A RzBUF!781105 /OUTPUT TO RELAY BUFFER
99 70as A 10PF700001 /INTERUPT OFF
100 700041 A 10N*700084 /INTERUPT ON
101
10 00035 R 140001 R START DZM COMRAT
103 00036 R 14005 R DZM EITEEN
104 00037 R 260514 R LAC (1
103 00040 R 880024 R DAC RATCNT
106 00041 R 048026 R DAC UPDCNT

88
PAGE 3 FEEL SRC
10? 00042 R 777777 A STP LAW 01 /START POSITIVE SLOPE
108 00043 R 340024 A TAD RATCNT /FOR COMRAT
109 00044 R 040024 R DAC RATCNT
110 00045 R 740100 A SZA
11 00046 R 600054 R JP COMRP
00047 P 100000 R LAC COMRAT
13 00050 R 340014 R TAD INC
415 00051 R 040000 R DAC COMRA
00052 R 200025 R LAC RATOLY
Ilib 00053 R 040024 R DAC RATCNT
11 00054 R 100000 R COMRP LAC COMRAT
116 00055 R 660601 A LLSS a
119 00056 R 100200 R JMS SCALCM
12 00057 R 705103 A LDAD / D/A CHANNEL 0
00060 R 100246 R JMS READ
122 00061 R 100262 R JmS UPDATE
123 00062 R 400016 R LAC TIMER /GENERATE TIMING PULSE
124 00063 R 660602 A LL$$ 2
00064 R 100200 R JMS SCALCH
12b 00065 R 300525 R ADD (40000 / O/A CHANNEL 4
127 00066 R 705103 A LOAD
lag 00067 R 750000 A CLA
129 00070 R 100100 R JM8 SCALCM
30 00071 R 300525 R ADD C40000 / D/A CKANNEL 4
31 00072 R 705103 A LOAD
32 00073 R 100362 R JMs RELAY
133 00074 R 200015 A LAC CNT
134 00075 R 740200 A SZA
135 00076 R 10034? R JMS COUNT /DELAY
136 00077 R 200000 R LAC COMRAT /TEST FOR COMRAT
137 00100 R 340014 R TAD INC /AMPLITUDE
138 00101 R 040021 R DAC TINC
139 00102 R 200013 R LAC APL
140 00103 R 100356 R JMS NOTIV9
141 00104 R 340021 R TAD TINC
142 00105 R 740100 A SMA
143 00106 R 741000 A 3SP
144 00107 R 60004a R JmP STP
145 00110 R 200013 R LAC APL
146 00111 R 040000 R DAC COMRAT
147 00112 R 660602 A LLSS a
148 00113 R 10000 R JMS SCALCM
149 00114 R 705103 A LOAD / D/A CHANNEL 0
150 00115 R 200000 R LAC COMRAT
151 00116 R 040017 R DAC VMAX
152 00117 R 777777 A STN LAW at /START NEGATIVE SLOPE
153 00120 A 340024 R TAD RATCNT /FOR COMRAT
154 00121 A 040024 R DAC RATCNT
155 00122 R 740108 A SZA
15b 00123 R 600132 R JMP COMRN
15? 00124 R 200014 R LAC INC
00125 R 160356 R Jms NOTIVE
159 00126 R 340000 R TAD COMRAT

89
PAGE 4 FEEL SRC
160 00127 R 040000 DAC COMRAT
IbI
161 00130 R 20001R LAC RATOLY
162 00131 R 040014 DAC RATCNT
163 00131 R 200000 COMRN LAC COMMAT
164 00133 R 660601 LLS3 a
0013 " R 100100 JMS 3CALCH
166 00135 R 705103 LOAD / 0/A CHANNEL 0
167 0013b R 100a46 JMs READ
168 00137 R 100e6a JMS UPDATE
169 00140 R 100016 LAC TIMKP /GENERATE TIMING PULSE
170 00141 Nt 100356 JMS NGTIVE
171 00148 R 660601 LLSS a
172 00143 R 19000 JMS SCALCM
173 00144 R 300515 ADD C40000 / 0/A CHANNEL 4
174 00145 R 705103 LOAD
175 00146 R 100356 JMS NGTIVE
176 00147 R 750000 CLA
177 00150 Rf 10000 JMS SCA6CH
178 00151 R 30051 ADD (40000 / O/A CHANNEL 4
179 00152 R 705103 LOAD
180 00153 R 100362 JMS RELAY
11 00154 R 100013 LAC CNT
l aa 00155 R 740100 SZA
183 00156 R 100347 JMS COUNT /DELAY
184 00157 R 00014 LAC INC /TEST FOR COMRkT
185 00160 R 100356 JMs NGTIVE /AMPLITUDE
186 00161 R 340000 TAD COMRAT
17 00161 R 340013 TAD AP
188 00163 R 100356 JMS NGTIVE
189 00164 R 740100 SMA
190 00165 R 741000 SKP
191 00166 R 600111 JMP STN
191 00167 R 100013 LAC APL
193 00170 R 100356 JMS NGTIVI
194 00171 R 040000 DAC COMRAT
195 00171 R 660601a LLSS a
196 00173 R 100100 JMS SCALCH
197 00174 R 703103 LOAD / Q/A CHANNEL 0
198 00175 R 200000 LAC COMRAT
199 00176 R 0400120 DAC VMIN
asia 00177 R 600841 JmP STP
201
202 00200 R 000000 A SCALC1 0 / SCALES ACCUMULATOR
203 00201 R 340526 R TAD (3774 / FOR D/A REGISTER
204 00202 R 580517 R AND (7774
205 00203 R 620200 R JMPS SCALCH
206
207
208 00204 R 000000 A INTGRL 0 / INTEGRATES VELOCITY
209 00205 R 2003b5s R LAC EITEEN / Akd DOES NOT WRAP
210 00206 R 741100 A SPA / ARcUND.
211 00207 R 6001225 Rf JMP IMINUS
ea 00210 R 200001 R LAC UPRATE

910
PAGE 5 FEEL SRC
215 owall 741100 A SPA
214 00212 600242 R JMP ADO
al, 00213 340005 R TAO KITEEN
216 00214 741100 A $PA
!1? 00215 600821 R JMP OVRPLO
ate 0021 040005 R DAC KITEEN
219 00217 040006 R DAC COMPOS
220 00220 620204 R JMP* INTGRL
221 00221 200530 R OVRrLO LAC (377777
222 00222 040005 R DAC EITEEN
223 00223 040006 R DAC COMPOS
224 00224 620104 R JMP* INTORL
225 00225 200002 R IMINUS LAC UPRATE
226 00226 740100 A SMA
221 00227 600242 R JMP ADD
228 00230 340005 R TAD EITIEN
229 00231 740100 A SMA
230 00232 600236 R JMP UNOFLO
231 00233 040005 R DAC KITEEN
232 00234 040006 R1 DAC COMPOS
233 00235 620204 R JMp* JNTGRL
234 00236 200531 R UNDFLO LAC (400060
235 00a37 040005 R DAC 9IT99N
23b 00240 040006 R DAC COMPOS
237 00241 620204 R JMP* INTGRL
238 00242 340005 R ADD TAD LITIEN
239 00243 040005 R QAC EITEEN
9140 00244 040006 R DAC COMPOS
241 0024 S 620204 R JMP* INTGRL
242
243 00246 000000 A READ 0 / READS IN 'FORCE'
244 00247 700002 A lop / FROM A/D INPUT
245 00250 200012 R LAC CHAN / CHANNEL #CHAN'
246 00251 701103 A ADSM
247 00252 701301 A ADSF
248 00253 600252 R JMP lot
249 00254 701312 A ADRs
250 00255 100356 R JMS NGTIVE
251 00256 660506 A LRSS 6 / RATE COMMANDS
252 00257 q40007 R OAC FORCE
253 00260 700042 A ION
254 00261 620246 R JMP* READ
255
256 00262 000000 A UPDATE 0 / CALCULATES ERROR AND
257 00263 200007 R LAC FORC9 / GENERATES UPDATED
258 00264 660506 A LRSS 6
259 00265 340022 R TAO $I:A
260 00266 040011 R DAC INTFOR
0027 100200 R1 JMS SCA6CH
00270 30J32 R ADD (30000 /D/& CHANNEL 3
263 00271 705103 A LOAD
264 00272 777777 A LAW *I
265 00273 340026 R1 TAD UPDCNT

91
PASI 6 FEEL SRC
266 00174 R 040826 R DAC UPOGNT
b? 0027S R 740200 A SIA
266 00276 R 600331 R JMP COMP
169 00177 Rf10001 R LAC UPODLY
270 00300 R 040026 R DAC UPDCNT
71 00301 r 100011 R LAC 7NTFOR
272 00302 R 664000 A sSM
273 00303 R 100356 R JMS NGTIVE
274 00304 R 340034 R TAD MIDOND
275 00305 R 741100 A SPA
176 00306 R 600312 R JMP DOP
17? 00307 R 750000 A CLA
a76 00310 R 040010 R DAC RFORCE
279 00311 R 600313 R JMP DONTF
280 00312 R 100375 R DOP JM8 PLIMIT
281 00313 R 200010 R DONTF LAC RPORCI
Z6e 00314 R 100356 R JMS NGTIVE
J83 00315 R 340000 R TAD COMRAT
284 00316 R 040001 R DAC INTRAT
285 00311 R 664000 A asM
26 00310 R 1003S6 R JM$ NGTIVI
287 00321 R 340033 R TAD DIO5NO
288 00322 R 741100 A SPA
289 00323 R 606321 R JmP 00
29 00314 R 750000 A CLA
291 00315 R 040002 R DAC UPRATE
292 00316 R 600330 R JMP DONT
193 00327 R 100434 R 00 JMS RLIMIT
a94 00330 R 100204 R ONT JM INTGRL
295 00331 R 750004 A COMP LAS
196 00332 R 740100 A SMA
297 00333 R 600337 R JMP s#4
298 00334 R 730000 A CLA
299 00335 R 040005 R DAC ECTEEN
300 00336 R 040006 R DAC COMPOS
301 00337 Rf100006 R LAC COMP0S
30a 00340 R 660507 A PMOVE LRSS SHP TP
303 00341 Rf040004 R DAC INTCO2
04 00342 R 100473 At JMS CLIMIT
305 00343 R 100100 R JMS SCALCM
306 00344 R 30033 R ADD (0100 / 0/A CHANNEL 2
30? 00345 R 705103 A LOAD
308 00346 R 610162 R JmPo* UPDATE
309
310 00347 R
000000 A COUNT 0 / CAUSES DELAY PROPOR-
311 00350 200013 R
R LAC CNT / TIONAL TO 'CNT*
312 00351 100356 R
R JMS NGTIVI
313 00352 340524 R
R LooP TAD c1
314 00353 Rf740200 A SIA
315 00354 R 600332 R JmP LOOP
316 00355 R 620347 R JiP* COUNT
31?
318 00356 R 000000 A NOTIVE 0 / NEGATES THE
PABL r FEEL SRC
319 00357 740001 A CMA / ACCUMULATOR
310 00360 348514 R TAD (1
3411 003b1 620356 R JMP* NGT Vl
311
3M3
3a4
315 00362 80000e A RV.AY 0 /O1S"LAYS ADRtL
326 00363 750004 A LAS /CONTENTS ON RELAY
3SI 00364 500534 R AND (?77 /BUFFER
3R8 00365 348535 R TAD (COMRAT
39 00366 04013 R DAC ADRgL
330 00367 H10023 R LAC* ADREL
331 00370 664008 A caM
332 00371 741400 A SEL
333 00372 340531 R TAD (400000
334 00373 7015 A RELSUF
335 00374 618361 R JMP* RELAY
336
337 00375 000000 kLZMIT 0 /SETS LIMIT ON RFORCE
338 00376 100011 LAC INTFOR
339 00377 741100 SPA
340 00400 600417 JMP FMINUS
341 00401 100034 LAC FE 0$N
342 00402 100356 JMs NGTIVE
343 00483 340011 TAD INTFOR
344 00404 040011 DAC INTFOR
345 00405 160356 JMS NGTIVI
346 00406 340031 TAD LIMITF
347 00407 741100 SPA
348 00410 600414 JMP 51TPF
349 00411 100011 LAC INTFOR
350 00411 040010 DAC RFORC4
351 00413 636375 JMP* FLMI T
352 00414 10031 5TPF LAC LEMITF
353 00415 040010 DAC RFORCE
354 00416 686375 JMP* FLEMIT
355 00417 306011 FMINWS LAC INTFOR
356 00420 340034 TAD MIOND
15? 00421 040011 DAC INTFOR
356 00422 34!03 1 TAD LIMIT11
359 00423 741100 SPA
360 00424 600430 JMP SITNF
361 00425 200011 LAC INTFOR
362 00426 040010 DAC RFORCE
363 0042? 620375 JMP* FLIMT
364 00430 200031 SITNF LAC LIMITF
65 00431 100356 JM$ N6TEVE
366 00432 040010 DAC RPORCE
367 00433 620375 J MP FL:MIT
*

366
369 00434 ft 000000 A RLIMIT 0 /SETS LIMIT ON UPRATE
370 00435 R 201001 R LAC INTRAT
371 00436 R 741100 A SPA
PAGE 8 FEEL SRC
372 00437 600456 R JMP RMINUS
373 00440 a00033 R LAC DIDSNO
374 00441 100356 Rf JMS NGTIVI
375 0044a 340001 At TAD INTRAT
376 00443 040001 R DAC INTRAT
371 00444 100356 R JMs NOTIVI
378 00445 340030 R TAD LIMITR
379 00446 741100 A SPA
380 00447 600453 R JMP fZTPR
361 00450 R00001 Rf LAC INTRAT
362 0045$ 04000a R DAC UPRATI
363 0045 610434 R JMP* PLIMIT
384 00453 200030 R StTPR LAC LIMITR
365 00454 040001 R DAC UPRATE
366 00455 610434 R JMP* RLIMIT
347 00456 200001 R RMINU8 LAC INTRAT
388 00457 340033 R TAO D9OSNO
389 00460 200001 R LAC INTRAT
390 00461 340030 R TAD LIMITR
391 00462 741100 A SPA
392 00463 600467 R JMP SETNR
393 00464 200001 R LAC INTRAT
394 004b5 040001 R DAC UPRATI
395 0046b 610434 R JMP* RLIMIT
396 00467 200030 R SETNR LAC LIMITR
397 00470 100356 R JMS NOTIVE
396 00471 040002 R DAC UPRATE
399 00472 610434 R JMP* RLIMIT
400
401 00473 000000 A CLIMIT 0 /ETS LIMIT ON UPCOM
402 00474 100004 R LAC INTCOa
403 00475 741100 A SPA
404 00476 690511 R JMP CMINUS
415 00477 190356 R JMS NOTIVI
406 00500 340031 R TAO LIMITC
401 00501 741100 A SPA
406 0050 600506 R JMP SETPC
409 00503 100004 R LAC INTCOR
410 00504 040003 R DAC UPCOM
411 00505 680473 R JMP* CLIMIT
411 00506 100031 R SITPC LAC LIMITC
413 00507 040003 R DAC UPCOM
414 00510 610473 R JMP* C6IMIT
415 00511 100004 R CMINUS LAC INTCOR
416 00512 340031 R TAD LIMITC
417 00513 741100 A SPA
418 00514 600510 R JMP SITNC
419 00515 200004 R LAC INTCOI
420 00516 040003 R DAC UPCOM
421 0051 6a@473 R JMP* CLIMIT
422 00520 R0003 R SCTNC LAC LIMITC
423 0051 100356 R JMs NGTIVE
4a4 00522 040003 R DAC UPCOM

94
PAGE 9 FEEL SRC
DOMlS R 620473 R JMP* CLIMIT
4ab
4a7
428 06635 R 1ENO START
60524 R 00000 A *L
00535 R 60166 A *L
a5b R 003774 A *L
00537 R 607774 A *L
00530 R 377777 A *L
00531 R 40000 A *L
6653a R 636000 A *L
806933 R 6a6e@@ A *L
00534 R 000777 A *L
06535 R 066m R *L
SIZE869936 NO ERROR LINES

95
PAGE 10 FEEL CROSS REFERENCE

ADD 00241 12b 130 173 178 214 227 238* 262 306
AORS 701312 97* 249
ADREL 00023 76* 3a9 330
ADSF 701301 96* 247
ADSM 101103 95* 246
APL 00013 67* 139 145 167 192
BIAS 00022 75* 199
CHAN 06012 66* 245
CLIMIT 00473 304 401* 411 414 421 425
CMINUS 00511 404 4150
CNT 00015 69* 133 181 311
COMP W0331 068 295*
COMPOS 00006 62* 219 23 232 236 240 386 301
COMRAT 00000 55* 103 112 114 117 136 146 150 159
166 163 186 194 196 263 328
COMRN 08132 156 163*
COMRP 003S4 111 117*
COUNT 00347 135 163 310* 316
DEDSND 00033 8* 267 373 388
DO 00327 289 293*
DOF 00312 276 260*
DONT 00330 292 294*
DONTF 00313 279 251*
EITEEN 00005 61* 103 209 215 216 222 226 231 235
238 239 a99
FEOSNO 00034 90. 274 341 356
FLIMIT 0037S 280 337* 351 354 363 367
FMINUS 00417 340 355*
FORCE 00007 63* 252 257
IMINUS 00225 211 225*
INC 00014 66* 113 137 157 164
INTC02 00004 60* 303 402 409 415 419
INTFOR 00011 b5* 260 271 336 343 344 349 35S 357
361
INTORL 00304 208* 220 224 833 237 241 494
INTRAT 00001 56* 2.4 370 375 376 361 367 369 393
ZOF 1000I2 99* 244
ION 100042 100* 253
LOAD 705103 94* 120 127 131 149 166 174 179 197
2b3 307
LIMITC 00032 67* 406 412 416 422
LIMITF 00031 86* 346 352 3SI 364
LIMITR 00030 85* 378 384 390 396
LOOP 00352 313* 315
NGTIVE 00356 140 158 170 175 15 too 191 250 273
282 286 312 316* 321 342 345 365 374
377 397 405 423
OVRFLO 00281 217 221*
PMOVE 00340 302*
RATCNT 000a4 79* 105 108 109 116 153 154 162
RATOLY 00025 a1* 115 161
READ 00246 121 167 243* 254
RELAY 00362 132 160 325* 335
RELBUF 702105 98* 334

96
PAGE 11 PEEL CROSS REFERENCI
RFORCE 00010 b4* 278 a1l 350 353 361 366
RLIMIT 00434 293 3690 383 366 39S 399
RMINUS 00456 372 387*
SCALCH 00200 119 125 129 146 165 172 177 196 102*
105 261 305
8ETNC 00520 416 412*
SETNF 00430 360 364*
SETNR 0046? 392 396*
SETPC 00506 408 411*
SETPF 00414 348 352*
SETPR 00453 380 364*
SMIFTP 000007 93* 392
START 00035 102* 428
STN 00117 152* 191
STP 00042 107* 144 200
TIMER 00016 70* 113 169
TINC 00021 74* 138 141
UNUPLO 00236 230 234*
UPCOM 00003 58* 410 413 410 424
UPDATE 00262 122 168 256* 306
UPDCNT 00026 62* 106 265 266 Rio
UPOOLY 00027 84* 269
UPHATE 00002 57* 212 225 191 362 365 394 398
VMAX 00017 72* 151
VMIN 00020 73* 199

97