An experimental investigation of the

effects of the compliant joint method on

feedback compensation of
pre-sliding/pre-rolling friction Xin Dong
& Chinedum E. Okwudire
Visit to download the full and correct content document:
https://ebookmass.com/product/an-experimental-investigation-of-the-effects-of-the-co
mpliant-joint-method-on-feedback-compensation-of-pre-sliding-pre-rolling-friction-xin-
dong-chinedum-e-okwudire/
More products digital (pdf, epub, mobi) instant
download maybe you interests ...

Effects of brain-derived mitochondria on the function

of neuron and vascular endothelial cell after traumatic
brain injury. Baoliang Zhang & Yalong Gao & Qifeng Li &
Dongdong Sun & Xinlong Dong & Xiaotian Li & Wenqiang
Xin & Jianning Zhang
https://ebookmass.com/product/effects-of-brain-derived-
mitochondria-on-the-function-of-neuron-and-vascular-endothelial-
cell-after-traumatic-brain-injury-baoliang-zhang-yalong-gao-
qifeng-li-dongdong-sun-xinlong-dong-xiao/

Classification of mesoscopic tribological properties

under dry sliding friction for microforming operation
Tetsuhide Shimizu & Ming Yang & Ken-Ichi Manabe

https://ebookmass.com/product/classification-of-mesoscopic-
tribological-properties-under-dry-sliding-friction-for-
microforming-operation-tetsuhide-shimizu-ming-yang-ken-ichi-
manabe/

Effects of competitive anion adsorption (Br− or Cl−)

and semiconducting properties of the passive films on
the corrosion behavior of the additively manufactured
Ti–6Al–4V alloys Dong-Il Seo & Jae-Bong Lee
https://ebookmass.com/product/effects-of-competitive-anion-
adsorption-br%e2%88%92-or-cl%e2%88%92-and-semiconducting-
properties-of-the-passive-films-on-the-corrosion-behavior-of-the-
additively-manufactured-ti-6al/

Effects of Sand Compaction on Liquefaction During the

Tokachioki Earthquake Yorihiko Ohsaki

https://ebookmass.com/product/effects-of-sand-compaction-on-
liquefaction-during-the-tokachioki-earthquake-yorihiko-ohsaki/
The Testament of Lazarus: The Pre-Christian Gospel of
John Janet Tyson

https://ebookmass.com/product/the-testament-of-lazarus-the-pre-
christian-gospel-of-john-janet-tyson/

Offshore Compliant Platforms: Analysis, Design, and

Experimental Studies 1. Edition Srinivasan
Chandrasekaran

https://ebookmass.com/product/offshore-compliant-platforms-
analysis-design-and-experimental-studies-1-edition-srinivasan-
chandrasekaran/

Method, Substance, and the Future of African Philosophy

1st Edition Edwin E. Etieyibo (Eds.)

https://ebookmass.com/product/method-substance-and-the-future-of-
african-philosophy-1st-edition-edwin-e-etieyibo-eds/

Wittgenstein On Logic As The Method Of Philosophy: Re-

Examining The Roots And Development Of Analytic
Philosophy Oskari Kuusela

https://ebookmass.com/product/wittgenstein-on-logic-as-the-
method-of-philosophy-re-examining-the-roots-and-development-of-
analytic-philosophy-oskari-kuusela/

The Oxford Handbook of Experimental Syntax Jon Sprouse

https://ebookmass.com/product/the-oxford-handbook-of-
experimental-syntax-jon-sprouse/
 Precision Engineering 54 (2018) 81–90

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Precision Engineering
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/precision

An experimental investigation of the effects of the compliant joint method T

on feedback compensation of pre-sliding/pre-rolling friction
Xin Dong, Chinedum E. Okwudire∗
Department of Mechanical Engineering, University of Michigan, 2350 Hayward Street, Ann Arbor, MI 48109, USA

A R T I C LE I N FO A B S T R A C T

Keywords: Mechanical bearings (i.e., sliding and rolling bearings) are widely used for motion guidance in precision posi-
Pre-sliding/pre-rolling friction tioning stages due to their low cost, large motion range and high off-axis stiffness. They are also finding in-
Bearing creasing use in ultra-precision positioning, e.g., for low-cost and long-range nanopositioning in vacuum en-
Point-to-point positioning vironments. However, mechanical-bearing-guided motion stages suffer from nonlinear pre-motion (i.e., pre-
Disturbance observer
sliding/pre-rolling) friction which adversely affects their precision and motion speed in both tracking and point-
to-point positioning applications. A compliant joint method has recently been proposed for simple, accurate and
robust feedforward compensation of pre-motion friction in tracking motions, with excellent results. This paper
experimentally investigates the influence of the compliant joint method on feedback compensation of pre-motion
friction, which is critical to achieving fast settling in point-to-point positioning. It shows using a model-free (PID)
controller that, for the same feedback gains, the mechanical-bearing-guided motion stage equipped with com-
pliant joints exhibits much more linear closed loop dynamics and higher bandwidth compared to the traditional
motion stage without compliant joints. The compliant-joint-equipped stage also has much faster settling time in
point-to-point positioning experiments for most step motions tested, except for one particular step size where it
settles slower than the traditional mechanical-bearing-guided motion stage due to the compliant joint dynamics.
With the addition of an inverse-model-based disturbance observer to the PID controller, the settling time of the
stage with compliant joints becomes uniformly much faster than the traditional mechanical-bearing-guided
motion stage; its robustness and stability margins are also shown to be superior to those of the traditional
mechanical-bearing-guided motion stage.

1. Introduction
Mechanical bearings (i.e., sliding, and especially, rolling bearings)
are the most cost-effective bearing types used in motion stages [1,2].
Accordingly, mechanical-bearing-guided motion stages are widely used
in precision applications due to their large motion range, high off-axis
stiffness and excellent in-position stability [1,2]. Mechanical-bearing-
guided motion stages are also very attractive as low-cost alternatives to
air bearing stages for a wide range of ultra-precision applications. For
instance, they are currently the only commercially viable option for a
growing number of long-range nanopositioning applications that re-
quire vacuum compatibility [2,3].
However, mechanical-bearing-guided motion stages experience
nonlinear pre-motion (i.e., pre-sliding/pre-rolling) friction which ad-
versely affects their positioning precision and speed [2,4–13]. In the
pre-motion regime, friction behaves as a nonlinear spring due to elas-
toplastic deformations and micro-slip of their inherent rolling elements,
end seals and wipers [2,4,5,10–12]. PID-type feedback controllers (e.g.,
PID, P-PI, PI-P, etc.), widely used in practice, often encounter difficul-
ties when trying to overcome the highly varying stiffness of pre-motion
friction [2,4,5,13–16]. For example, during point-to-point positioning,
the stage is commanded to travel to and settle within a pre-specified
vicinity (window) of a target position as fast as possible. Pre-motion
friction dominates as the stage approaches its target position, leading to
very sluggish settling performance [2,4,10,11,13]. Such long settling
times severely hamper motion speed. Similarly, during tracking appli-
cations (e.g., circular tracking or triangular scanning), large position
errors (glitches) often occur as the feedback controller tries to overcome
pre-motion friction at motion reversals, jeopardizing motion precision
[8,9,12].
To deal with these problems, PID-type controllers must have high
gains (i.e., high-gain feedback) in order to quickly overcome the large
stiffness of pre-motion friction (during settling or motion reversals)
[4,14,15]. However, such high-gain controllers could easily lead to
large overshoots, limit cycles and instabilities due to the rapid and
nonlinear changes of pre-motion frictional stiffness during transient

∗
Corresponding author.
E-mail address: okwudire@umich.edu (C.E. Okwudire).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.precisioneng.2018.05.004
Received 31 October 2017; Received in revised form 9 May 2018; Accepted 17 May 2018
Available online 22 May 2018
0141-6359/ © 2018 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
X. Dong, C.E. Okwudire
motions [2,5,16]. Therefore, model-based friction compensation
methods are often used to mitigate the undesirable effects of pre-motion
friction beyond what is achievable using model-free (e.g., PID-type)
controllers; they can be executed in feedforward or feedback
[5,8–12,17–21]. Feedforward friction compensation can significantly
improve the tracking performance of mechanical-bearing-guided mo-
tion stages when the friction model employed is sufficiently accurate
[8,12]. However, it is not effective in solving the slow settling problem
caused by pre-motion friction during point-to-point positioning, be-
cause feedforward friction compensation depends on the desired velo-
city to predict and preemptively cancel out friction [2,10]. When a
stage is trying to settle to a target position, the desired velocity is often
zero, even though the actual velocity is not. Model-based feedback
friction compensation approaches make use of the actual states (e.g.,
position and velocity) of the system to improve disturbance rejection,
using disturbance observer [8,19,20], gain scheduling controllers
[4,21], friction observers [17], etc. Because pre-motion friction is ex-
tremely nonlinear and variable (i.e., difficult to model accurately),
stability and robustness issues often occur when using feedback friction
compensation methods, thus limiting their practicality [2,5]. Adaptive
control can enable a model-based feedback friction compensation
controller to handle varying friction dynamics [18,19]. However, such
approaches often suffer from convergence issues related to poor per-
sistence of excitation from smooth reference commands commonly used
in precision applications [5].
Apart from the abovementioned control-based friction compensa-
tion approaches, the undesirable effects of pre-motion friction can also
be mitigated through design-based methods. This often involves me-
chanical modification of the traditional mechanical-bearing-guided
motion stages. For example, a coarse-fine arrangement, where a “fine”
flexure-bearing-guided motion stage is mounted on a “coarse” me-
chanical-bearing-guided motion stage, is sometimes used to improve
the precision and speed of mechanical-bearing-guided motion stages
[22–24]. However, this arrangement makes the system more complex,
bulky and expensive due to the additional physical components (e.g.,
extra sensors, actuators and control hardware) [25,26]. Alternatively,
Dong et al. [2] have proposed an approach, called vibration assisted
nanopositioning (VAN), to mitigate the slow settling problem of me-
chanical-bearing-guided motion stage using high frequency vibration
(aka dither). Unlike traditional dithering techniques which could jeo-
pardize the stage's precision by directly vibrating the stage or guideway
[27,28], VAN is able to improve the settling performance of mechan-
ical-bearing-guided motion stage without vibrating the stage, thus
maintaining high precision. However, the need for additional costly
actuators (e.g., piezo actuators and voltage amplifiers) to induce vi-
brations could limit the practicality of the VAN approach. A recent
paper [29] by the present authors has proposed a new design-based
Fig. 1. (a) Schematic of a mechanical-bearing-guided motion stage with the bearing: (a) rigidly attached to the table (i.e., rigid stage), and (c) attached to the table
using the compliant joint (i.e., compliant stage); (b) and (d) are equivalent spring models of (a) and (c), respectively.
82
Precision Engineering 54 (2018) 81–90
approach, called the compliant joint method, which is simpler (and
more cost-effective) compared to coarse-fine arrangements and VAN.
The paper [29] shows that pre-motion friction can be accurately and
robustly compensated in feedforward using simple friction models by
attaching the bearing to the moving table using a joint that is very
compliant in the motion direction. Superior performance and robust-
ness of a simple feedforward friction compensation scheme combined
with the compliant joint method has been experimentally demonstrated
through circular tracking motions with different radii and velocities
[29,30]. However, the influence of the compliant joint method on
feedback compensation of pre-motion friction of mechanical-bearing-
guided motion stage, which is critical to improving settling perfor-
mance in point-to-point positioning, has not been explored.
The key contribution of this paper is in carrying out a rigorous ex-
perimental investigation into the effects of the compliant joint method
on feedback compensation of pre-motion friction, hence its ability to
improve settling performance of mechanical-bearing-guided motion
stage in point-to-point positioning. Specifically, after a brief overview
of the compliant joint method and description of the experimental set-
up in Section 2, the paper:
1) Shows in Section 3 using a PID controller that, for the same feedback
gains, a mechanical-bearing-guided motion stage equipped with
compliant joints (i.e., compliant stage) exhibits much more linear
closed loop dynamics and higher bandwidth compared to a tradi-
tional mechanical-bearing-guided motion stage without compliant
joints (i.e., rigid stage). Moreover, the compliant stage settles much
faster in point-to-point positioning for most step motions tested,
except for one particular step size during which it settles much
slower than the rigid stage due to the dynamics of the compliant
joints.
2) Demonstrates in Section 4 that with the addition of an inverse-
model-based disturbance observer (DOB) to the PID controller, the
compliant stage achieves uniformly much faster settling time than
the rigid stage; its robustness and stability margins are also shown to
be superior to those of the rigid stage.
This is followed by conclusions and future work in Section 5.
2. Overview of compliant joint method and experimental set-up
2.1. Compliant joint method
Friction behavior can be divided into two regimes: macro- and
micro-displacement regimes [2,4–7,10–12,29,30]. They are sometimes
also referred to as the gross motion and pre-motion friction regimes,
respectively, where “motion” implies sliding and/or rolling [10–12]. In
the gross motion regime, friction is mainly a function of the relative
X. Dong, C.E. Okwudire
velocity between the two objects moving against each other [5,7]. On
the other hand, in the pre-motion regime, friction is primarily a func-
tion of displacement rather than velocity, hence could be represented as
a nonlinear spring [2,4–7,10–12,29]. Fig. 1 shows the schematic of a
traditional mechanical-bearing-guided motion stage (i.e., rigid stage) in
which pre-motion friction is modeled as an equivalent spring of stiffness
kf connecting the table to ground [29]. At the start of motion or motion
reversal, kf is very large; but as more driving force is applied to coun-
teract friction, kf rapidly reduces and eventually becomes zero, allowing
gross motion of the stage [4–7,10–12]. This leads to a highly nonlinear
time-varying system which is very hard to control [2,4,5,13–16]. In
particular, the high initial stiffness of pre-motion friction leads to large
position errors (e.g., quadrant glitches) and slow settling behavior of
mechanical-bearing-guided motion stage, as discussed in Section 1.
Fig. 1 (c) shows the concept of the compliant joint method (pro-
posed by authors in Ref. [29]). Rather than being rigidly attached to the
moving table, the bearing of a mechanical-bearing-guided motion stage
is attached using a joint of stiffness kj in the motion direction. Ac-
cordingly, the stage with the compliant joint (i.e., compliant stage) can
be modeled as a series combination of kf and kj, with combined stiffness
kc = kfkj/(kf + kj). Note that the bearing mass is neglected in the spring
model for the following quasi-static stiffness analysis. A very small kj
dominates the combined stiffness felt by the stage when kf is very large
in the pre-motion regime (i.e. kc ⟶ kj even when kf ⟶ ∞). As a result,
the sensitivity of the combined stiffness kc to variations in kf is given by
2
∂kc η ⎞ kj
= ⎛⎜ ⎟ ; where η=
∂kf ⎝ 1 + η⎠ kf (1)
Note that if kj ≪ kf, η → 0, and the sensitivity of kc to variations in kf
becomes very small. This indicates that if model-based friction com-
pensation is performed using kc instead of kf, the adverse effects of
errors in kf (due to low-fidelity friction modeling or variations of fric-
tion) are diminished. In the context of feedforward compensation of
pre-motion friction, we experimentally demonstrated the compliant
joint method's ability to deliver large reductions of tracking errors,
using low-fidelity friction models, with remarkable robustness in the
presence of up to 50% variations in kf [29,30].
In this paper, we seek to experimentally test the hypothesis that the
compliant joint method also improves the performance and robustness
of feedback friction compensation, hence helps to reduce settling times
in point-to-point positioning. The rationale for this hypothesis is that
the compliant joint method replaces the very stiff and variable kf with
the much softer and less variable kc, making it much easier for a
feedback controller with conservatively-tuned gains to deliver high
performance and robustness.
2.2. Experimental set-up: an ultra-precision mechanical-bearing-guided
motion stage with compliant joints
For the purposes of experimentally testing the above-discussed hy-
pothesis, an in-house-built ultra-precision mechanical-bearing-guided
motion stage equipped with compliant joint prototypes, shown in Fig. 2
(a), is utilized. The stage has 1.4 kg moving mass and 40 mm travel
range. It is guided by a pair of high-rigidity pre-loaded linear ball
bearings with end seals (THK, SR-15SB), riding on a super-precision
grade rail, lubricated using grease (THK, AFB-LF). An air core linear
motor (Aerotech, BLMUC-95), powered by a linear amplifier (Trust
Automation, TA-310), is employed to drive the stage. The table position
is measured using a linear encoder system (Renishaw, T1000 read head
and RGSZ20 scale) with post interpolation resolution of 4.88 nm. A
model of the friction dynamics of the stage is not required for the ex-
perimental study presented in this paper. However, to give the reader
some sense of the friction behavior, Fig. 3 shows the nonlinear stiffness
characteristics of pre-motion friction measured using the ultra-precision
motion stage shown in Fig. 2. The friction dynamics have also been
83
Precision Engineering 54 (2018) 81–90
experimentally identified using the two popular pre-motion friction
models, the Dahl and generalized Maxwell-slip (GMS) models, and the
results have been reported in Ref. [29].
A compliant joint prototype designed in Ref. [29] is used to attach
each bearing of the mechanical-bearing-guided motion stage to the
table. Based on the requirement that kj is very small (see Section 2.1),
the compliant joint must have orders of magnitude less stiffness (in x
direction) than the initial large stiffness of pre-motion friction experi-
enced by the bearing. Moreover, it must also maintain the same order of
magnitude of off-axis stiffness as the bearing so as not to unduly com-
promise rigidity of the stage in the non-motion (i.e., y and z) directions.
A flexure is adopted for the design due to its non-contact and friction-
free nature. To reduce the stiffness in the motion direction, the positive-
stiffness flexure is combined in parallel with a negative-stiffness me-
chanism composed of repelling permanent magnets (PMs) to keep the
net stiffness positive but smaller than that of the flexure alone (see
Fig. 2 (b)). Fig. 2 (c) shows the manufactured compliant joint prototype.
Details of the compliant joint design and manufacture can be found in
Ref. [29]. Note that the particular design of the compliant joint pro-
totype shown in Fig. 2 may introduce Abbe errors to the ultra-precision
mechanical-bearing-guided motion stage. These issues are not ad-
dressed in this paper since they are not relevant to evaluating the
performance of the proposed method. However, they can be resolved by
standard precision engineering approaches, such as embedding the
compliant joint into a pocket in the moving table to reduce the overall
profile of the stage.
3. Effects of compliant joint method on model-free (PID)
controlled mechanical-bearing-guided motion stage
3.1. Frequency-domain evaluation
Fig. 4 (a) shows the measured frequency response functions (FRFs)
of the plant dynamics for rigid and compliant stages (i.e., from input
force to output displacement). Each FRF is obtained by applying con-
stant-amplitude sinusoidal motor current commands with varying fre-
quencies to the linear motor and recording the corresponding output
displacement magnitudes of the table position using the linear encoder.
The motor currents are scaled by a force constant of 11 N/A to convert
them to equivalent motor forces. It is well known that, in the presence
of pre-motion friction, FRFs of the system can vary significantly, de-
pending on excitation amplitudes [6,10–12,31]. Therefore, to demon-
strate the effects of pre-motion friction on rigid and compliant stages,
the FRFs are generated using input force amplitudes ranging from
0.11 N to 16.5 N (via motor current amplitudes varying from 0.01 A to
1.5 A, respectively). When the input amplitude is very small, motion of
the rigid stage is also very small due to the initial large stiffness of pre-
motion friction after each motion reversal. As a result, the measured
plant dynamics behaves as a standard spring-mass system (as shown in
Fig. 1 (b)) with one dominant low-frequency resonance induced by the
large frictional stiffness. As the input amplitude increases, the frictional
stiffness gradually decreases, causing the friction-induced resonance to
shift to lower frequencies [6,10–12], indicating a gradual transition
from pre-motion to gross motion friction. In the meantime, the motion
of the rigid stage also increases as indicated by larger DC (low-fre-
quency) gains of the FRF. Eventually, at the highest input amplitudes,
the rigid stage experiences pure gross motion and the friction-induced
low-frequency resonance disappears from the measured FRFs. Notice
that the high-frequency dynamics of the rigid stage are also greatly
affected by the variations of pre-motion friction. For example, the
magnitude/phase and resonance frequency of the mode around 400 Hz
vary significantly due to its proximity to, and interactions with, the
friction-induced resonance of the stage. Therefore, in agreement with
the literature [6,10–12], the plant dynamics of the rigid stage show
large variations (nonlinearity) in both low and high frequency regions
with changing input force magnitudes, posing significant challenges for
X. Dong, C.E. Okwudire Precision Engineering 54 (2018) 81–90

Fig. 2. (a) An in-house built ultra-precision mechanical-bearing-guided motion stage equipped with compliant joints, (b) CAD schematic of the compliant joint and
(c) manufactured compliant joint. (Note: the linear encoder is mounted on the distal side of the table and the fixtures can be used to deactivate compliant joints).

Fig. 3. Nonlinear stiffness behavior of pre-motion friction measured on the
ultra-precision stage in Fig. 2.
feedback control [2,4,5,13–16].
Since the compliant joint stiffness is designed to be two orders of
magnitude smaller than the initial large stiffness of pre-motion friction
[29], the combined spring stiffness (in series) experienced by the
compliant stage at very small input amplitudes is dominated by the
compliant joint. This can be seen from Fig. 4 (a); with the same input
amplitudes applied to the stage, the friction-induced resonance fre-
quencies of the compliant stage are much lower, and its DC gains are
much higher, compared to those of the rigid stage. As the input force
amplitude increases, the FRFs of the compliant stage experience similar
transitions as the rigid stage, however, with less variations (of the
magnitude/phase and friction-induced resonance frequencies). More-
over, the higher-frequency dynamics of the compliant stage (e.g., the
mode at 400 Hz) are virtually unaffected by the changing frictional
stiffness, since the friction-induced resonance of the compliant stage
occurs at much lower frequencies. As a result, the compliant stage
shows smaller net stiffness and variations (nonlinearity) in the mea-
sured plant FRFs, and the variations mainly occur at low frequencies
(i.e., less than 100 Hz).
An industry-standard linear-time-invariant (LTI) PID controller is
used to control the stage, as an example of the model-free feedback
controller. It is implemented using a real-time control board (dSPACE,
DS1007) running at 10 kHz sampling frequency. The PID controller is
tuned to 180 Hz closed loop bandwidth using loop shaping, based on an
FRF of the rigid stage in the gross motion regime (i.e., using the 1.5A-
input FRF of the rigid stage in Fig. 4 (a)). The resultant P, I and D gains
are 0.72 N/μm, 138 N/(μm·s) and 8.86 × 10−4 N s/μm, respectively.
The exact same PID gains are used for controlling the compliant stage. Fig. 4
(b) shows the measured closed loop dynamics (from desired to actual
position) of the rigid and compliant stages using the PID controller.
Because the controller is tuned based on the gross-motion-regime plant
dynamics, it encounters difficulties in overcoming the large frictional
stiffness of the rigid stage in the pre-motion regime. This leads to sig-
nificant drops of the closed loop FRF magnitudes (below 0 dB) at low
frequency regions when the input amplitude is small (and pre-motion

Fig. 4. Frequency response functions (FRFs) of: (a) plant, and (b) closed loop dynamics for rigid and compliant stages using different input amplitudes. The rigid
stage exhibits large stiffness, and variations (nonlinearity) in FRF's magnitude/phase and resonance frequencies compared to the compliant stage.

84
X. Dong, C.E. Okwudire
Fig. 5. Calculated (a) closed loop bandwidth (based on −3 dB criterion), (b) gain and (c) phase margins of rigid and compliant stages with the same PID controller.
friction dominates). As a result, the −3 dB closed loop bandwidth of the
rigid stage is reduced from its original value of 180 Hz in the gross
motion regime to less than 10 Hz in the pre-motion regime as shown in
Fig. 5 (a). In other words, when the stage starts from rest, e.g., during
motion reversals in tracking motions, or after overshoots in the vicinity
of a target position in point-to-point positioning, the closed loop
bandwidth is reduced to less than 10 Hz. This causes large position
errors and sluggish settling performance, as discussed in Section 1. To
overcome this shortcoming, PID gains must be increased to improve the
closed loop bandwidth in the pre-motion regime [2,4,14,15]. However,
such high-gain controller makes the rigid stage to be prone to in-
stability, sensitivity to sensor noise, integrator wind-up, chattering and
limit cycles, all of which are very detrimental to its performance [5,16].
Compared to the rigid stage, the same PID controller applied to the
compliant stage experiences much less difficulties and performance
variations between the pre-motion and gross motion regimes of friction
(see Fig. 4 (b)). This is because the nonlinearity in the plant dynamics of
the compliant stage mainly occurs at low frequency regions; in the
presence of the feedback controller, the nonlinearity is effectively
suppressed through a phenomenon known as “feedback linearization”
[32]. In other words, since the equivalent frictional stiffness experi-
enced by the compliant stage is much smaller and less variable, the
feedback controller can better overcome and regulate the disturbance
force originating from it. Therefore, a conservatively-tuned PID con-
troller (from the stand-point of the rigid stage) acts as a “high-gain”
feedback controller for the compliant stage, leading to more-consistent
and improved closed loop bandwidth for both pre-motion and gross
motion regimes of friction, as shown in Fig. 5 (a).
Fig. 5 also shows the calculated gain and phase margins of the rigid
and compliant stages with different input amplitudes. It is assumed that
each measured FRF of the stage (at a given input amplitude) represents
an LTI system. This is essentially equivalent to linearizing the nonlinear
plant at different operating points (i.e., different pre-motion frictional
stiffness values). Although local stability of the linearized systems does
not guarantee the global stability of the nonlinear system, the stability
of the individual LTI systems can be used as an indicator of the stability
of rigid and compliant stages at various operating points. For example,
it is observed that stability margins of both stages are always positive,
showing that each individual LTI system is indeed stable. Moreover, the
compliant stage maintains similar or even slightly better stability
margins (robustness) while achieving much higher closed loop band-
width, compared to the rigid stage. This is mainly due to less interaction
between the friction-induced resonance and the higher-frequency dy-
namics of the compliant stage compared to the rigid stage (see Fig. 4
(a)).
3.2. Time-domain evaluation using point-to-point positioning tests
It is of interest to evaluate whether the improvements in bandwidth
and robustness brought by the compliant joint to the PID controlled
mechanical-bearing-guided motion stage, as described in Section 3.1,
improve motion quality. Note that the quality of tracking motions is
85
Precision Engineering 54 (2018) 81–90
most often improved using feedforward friction compensation, for
which the benefits of the compliant joint have already been demon-
strated [29,30]. Therefore, it is of particular interest here to evaluate
settling times in point-to-point positioning, for which feedback control
is critical. To this end, point-to-point motion profiles consisting of 16
consecutive steps (8 steps forward and 8 steps backward), of various
step sizes ranging from 50 nm to 5 mm are tested on rigid and com-
pliant stages. Each profile of 16 steps is repeated thrice and, in each
trial, the time taken for each step to settle into a ± 25 nm window is
evaluated. The maximum acceleration/velocity and duration of each
step size command are summarized in Table 1.
Fig. 6 summarizes the mean settling times, together with the cor-
responding one-standard-deviation band, of rigid and compliant stages
into a ± 25 nm window during point-to-point motions of different step
sizes (48 instances for each step size). For all but one of the step sizes
evaluated, the compliant stage exhibits much faster and robust settling
than the rigid stage. The exception is the 50 μm step size for which the
compliant stage settles much slower and is much less robust than the
rigid stage.
To illustrate the reason behind this discrepancy, Fig. 7 compares the
typical settling performance of rigid and compliant stages during point-
to-point motions with the 5 μm and 50 μm step sizes. During the first
step of the 5 μm case (as highlighted in the subplot), the rigid stage
takes 47.8 ms to settle, which is very long relative to the duration of the
step command (i.e., 17.7 ms); however, the compliant stage settles
within 10.5 ms (i.e., 78% faster). Similarly, during the eighth step, the
compliant stage takes 10.2 ms to settle, i.e., 88% faster than the rigid
stage (which takes 85 ms to settle). Similar improvements in settling
time are seen for all 16 steps (8 steps forward and 8 steps backward)
such that the mean settling time of the compliant stage (i.e., 10.3 ms) is
85.1% faster than that of the rigid stage (i.e., 69.1 ms). Fig. 7 (b)
compares the settling response of rigid and compliant stages for the
problematic 50 μm step size. During the first step, the rigid stage takes
237 ms to settle, while the compliant stage only takes 43.6 ms to settle,
leading to 81.6% reduction in settling time. However, it is observed that
the settling time of the compliant stage gradually increases as the stage
steps in the same direction. By the eighth step (as highlighted in the
subplot), the settling time of the compliant stage has increased to
453 ms, which is even longer than that of the rigid stage (i.e., 214 ms).
This drastic change in settling performance leads to the overall longer
mean settling time and larger one-standard-deviation band during the
Table 1
Maximum acceleration/velocity and duration of each step size command.
Step size Max. acceleration Max. velocity Duration per step
5 mm 2000 mm/s 2
80 mm/s 125 ms
500 μm 1000 mm/s2 17.8 mm/s 56 ms
50 μm 1000 mm/s2 5.6 mm/s 17.7 ms
5 μm 100 mm/s2 560 μm/s 17.7 ms
500 nm 10 mm/s2 56 μm/s 17.7 ms
50 nm 1 mm/s2 5.6 μm/s 17.7 ms
X. Dong, C.E. Okwudire
Fig. 6. Settling times of rigid and compliant stages into a ± 25 nm window
during point-to-point motions of varying step sizes. Each motion profile, con-
sisting of 16 equal-sized steps, is repeated thrice. The lines represent mean
settling time values of the 48 instances of each step size and the shaded bands
indicate ± 1σ (standard deviation).
50 μm step size for the compliant stage, compared to the rigid stage.
In addition to the position measurement of the table (from the linear
encoder), a laser displacement sensor (Keyence, LA-G10) is used to
measure the absolute position of one of the bearings of the compliant
stage. As shown in Fig. 7, the bearing is assumed to be at the same
position as the table at the start of each point-to-point motion such that
the compliant joint does not experience any tension/compression. It is
observed that the motion of the bearing always lags behind that of the
table for both the 5 μm and 50 μm step sizes. Observe that, during all the
5 μm steps, the bearing is more or less stationary during settling.
However, with the problematic 50 μm steps, the bearing is almost sta-
tionary during settling for steps 1 and 2, but it begins to move sig-
nificantly during settling for subsequent steps. A similar pattern is re-
peated during the backward motion. To illustrate how the motion of the
bearing during settling affects the settling performance of the compliant
stage, Fig. 8 shows a schematic of its table and bearing motions during
settling. As is typical (see inset of Fig. 7), the table of position xt
overshoots its target position (xr), indicating that the control command
u, is larger than the tension force Fj from the compliant joint (of stiffness
kj). In order to bring the table back to the target position, the PID
controller works on reducing u to a similar or smaller level as Fj. If the
velocity (dxb/dt) of the bearing is close to zero, Fj remains almost
86
Precision Engineering 54 (2018) 81–90
Fig. 8. Schematic of table and bearing motions of the compliant stage during
settling, explaining the reason for long settling time when dxb/dt > 0 com-
pared to when dxb/dt ≈ 0.
unchanged as the PID controller reduces u (where t represents time).
However, if the bearing is moving towards the table (i.e., dxb/dt > 0),
Fj decreases as the PID controller is reducing u, i.e., Fj becomes a
moving target. Consequently, the task of the PID controller to bring u to
similar or smaller levels as Fj becomes more difficult with dxb/dt > 0
compared to dxb/dt ≈ 0, resulting in elongated settling time.
4. Experimental evaluation of compliant joint method on PID
controller combined with disturbance observer
4.1. Inverse-model-based disturbance observer
From our experiments in Section 3, we understand that the rela-
tively poor settling performance of the 50 μm steps using the PID con-
troller alone on the compliant stage is due to the disturbance force
created by the bearing motion. Consequently, we hypothesize that
adding a disturbance observer (DOB) to the PID controller will improve
the performance of the compliant stage compared to the rigid stage,
including the 50 μm case. The rationale is that the DOB makes the PID
controller aware of the disturbance forces created by the bearing mo-
tion; therefore, it enables the PID controller to counteract the dis-
turbance faster, thus resulting quicker settling.
Fig. 9 shows the block diagram of the control scheme with an in-
verse-model-based disturbance observer [8,33–36], where C and G re-
presents the PID controller and measured plant dynamics, respectively.
The DOB estimates the disturbance forces by subtracting the control
command from the estimated input command obtained by the inverse
of a nominal plant model, Gn. A low pass filter, known as the Q filter, is
added to guarantee stability [8,33–36].
The nominal plant model of the rigid and compliant stages is chosen
as a standard second-order model [8,34,36], describing the low-fre-
quency characteristics of most positioning stages which is dominated by
Fig. 7. Typical positioning performance of rigid and
compliant stages into a ± 25 nm window during point-to-
point motions with (a) 5 μm and (b) 50 μm step sizes. The
first and eighth steps in the forward direction are high-
lighted in the subplots. The bearing motion of the com-
pliant stage is also plotted in addition to its table motion.
The bearing and table motions of the rigid stage are
identical.
X. Dong, C.E. Okwudire Precision Engineering 54 (2018) 81–90

whose gain is dominated by fQ. A larger fQ leads to higher bandwidth of

the DOB; however, fQ is often limited in practice by the unmodeled
dynamics of the nominal model Gn, compared to the actual plant dy-
namics G, especially at high frequencies.
To analyze the tradeoff between performance and stability when
designing the Q filter, the augmented plant dynamics (i.e., closed loop
dynamics of the inner loop shown using dashed lines in Figs. 9 and 10)
can be obtained as
Fig. 9. Block diagram of the PID controller (C) combined with an inverse-
model-based disturbance observer (DOB). G (s ) Gn (s )
Gaug (s ) =
Gn (s ) + (G (s ) − Gn (s )) Q (s ) (6)
Table 2
Identified parameters of the nominal plant models of rigid and compliant Fig. 11 shows the measured FRFs of the augmented plant and closed
stages. loop dynamics for different input amplitudes (using the DOB together
with the PID controller discussed in Section 3.1) for both the rigid and
Rigid Compliant
compliant stages. At frequencies below the Q filter's cutoff frequency,
A [1/s] 120 244 the effects of the friction-induced resonance become less dominant for
B [N/(A·kg)] 7.9 13.8 the rigid stage. This is because the augmented plant dynamics ap-
proaches to the nominal model (which only experiences gross motion
friction) below the Q filter's cutoff frequency of 200 Hz (i.e., Gaug(s) →
rigid body dynamics: Gn(s) as |Q(s)| → 1). As a result, the closed loop bandwidth at medium-
B to-low input amplitudes is improved as shown in Fig. 12 (a). However,
Gn (s ) =
s (s + A) (2) the friction-induced resonance of the rigid stage at very small input
amplitudes remains largely unchanged in the augmented plant dy-
where s is the Laplace variable. The parameters A and B of the nominal namics because its frequency is higher than the bandwidth of the Q
models are obtained through least-squares-fitting of the low-frequency filter (i.e., Gaug(s) → G (s) as |Q(s)| → 0). This eventually leads to sig-
portion of the measured plant dynamics in the gross motion regime. nificant drops (below 0 dB) of the closed loop FRF magnitudes when the
Specifically, frequencies below 100 Hz of the 1.5A-input FRFs of rigid input amplitude is very small (less than 0.1 A) and pre-motion friction
and compliant stages are used to obtain A and B, as summarized in dominates. As a result, the −3 dB closed loop bandwidth of the rigid
Table 2. Due to the dynamics of the compliant joints, the low frequency stage is reduced from its original value of 200 Hz in the gross motion
portion of the measured FRF of the compliant stage has some differ- regime to less than 50 Hz in the pre-motion regime as shown in Fig. 12
ences compared to that of the rigid stage. Therefore, different para- (a). To further improve the bandwidth, the cutoff frequency of the Q
meters are obtained for rigid and compliant stages; however, they both filter must be increased such that the friction-induced resonance at very
represent the best fit under the same nominal plant structure given by small input amplitudes can be effectively attenuated. However, such a
Eq. (2). A second-order low-pass filter is adopted for Q; it is given by high-bandwidth Q filter could easily cause stability issues due to the
(2πfQ )2 fact that non-rigid-body dynamics (at high frequencies) are not in-
Q (s ) = cluded in the nominal model; hence the modeling errors at high fre-
(s + 2πfQ )2 (3)
quencies are large [8].
with its cutoff frequency (i.e., bandwidth) tuned to fQ = 200 Hz for both For the compliant stage, the friction-induced resonance is effectively
rigid and compliant stages. mitigated for all input amplitudes, since its frequency is always well
below the 200 Hz cutoff frequency of the Q filter. As a result, the
4.2. Frequency-domain evaluation augmented plant's FRFs exhibit much less variations (nonlinearity) as
shown in Fig. 11 (b). This makes it very easy for the PID controller to
To understand the effects of DOB on the feedback system, an control the compliant stage's augmented plant, leading to much more
equivalent block diagram of it is often adopted [34,35]. As shown in linear closed loop dynamics and uniformly higher bandwidth, com-
Fig. 10, the equivalent controller form of the DOB is given by, pared to the rigid stage.
To compare the stability of rigid and compliant stages in the pre-
CDOB (s ) = (1 − Q)−1QGn−1 (4) sence of DOB, Fig. 12 shows the calculated gain and phase margins of
Substituting Eqs. (2) and (3) into Eq. (4), both stages with different input amplitudes. When the DOB is im-
plemented with a cutoff frequency of 200 Hz, the stability margins of
(2πfQ )2 ⎛ s + A ⎞ the rigid stage at gross motion regime become very small, indicating
CDOB (s ) = ⋅⎜
B s + 4πfQ ⎟ (5) that the closed loop system is very sensitive to any unmodeled dy-
⎝ ⎠
namics or variations in parameters (i.e., poor robustness). Moreover, as
The resulting feedback controller form of the DOB is equivalent to a the input amplitude reduces (and pre-motion friction becomes more
lead compensator (since A ≪ 4πfQ for both rigid and compliant stages) dominant), the stability margins of the rigid stage drop significantly
and eventually become less than zero. This leads to an unstable LTI
system when the rigid stage operates in the pre-motion regime, im-
plying that the original nonlinear system also suffers from stability is-
sues. However, the stability margins of the compliant stage are uni-
formly larger than that of the rigid stage and always stay above zero,
showing that the closed loop system is much more robust. Moreover,
the gain margin remains almost unchanged as the input amplitude
varies, thanks to the reduced nonlinearity and more-consistent aug-
mented plant dynamics of the compliant stage for both pre-motion and
Fig. 10. Block diagram of the PID controller (C) combined with the equivalent gross motion regimes of friction.
form of DOB.

87
X. Dong, C.E. Okwudire Precision Engineering 54 (2018) 81–90

Fig. 11. Frequency response functions (FRFs) of (a) augmented plant and (b) closed loop dynamics for rigid and compliant stages with PID controller combined with
DOB (of 200 Hz cutoff frequency) using different input amplitudes. The rigid stage exhibits large stiffness, and variations (nonlinearity) in FRF's magnitude/phase
and resonance frequencies compared to the compliant stage; the bandwidth of the rigid stage's DOB is reduced to 100 Hz to guarantee stability (as discussed in
Section 4.3).

Fig. 12. Calculated (a) closed loop bandwidth (based on −3 dB criterion), (b) gain and (c) phase margins of rigid and compliant stages with PID controller combined
with DOB. The DOB of 200 Hz bandwidth is stable on the compliant stage but unstable on the rigid stage; the bandwidth of the rigid stage's DOB is reduced to 100 Hz
to guarantee stability (as discussed in Section 4.3).

4.3. Time-domain evaluation using point-to-point positioning tests 3.2. The same PID controller as in Section 3 is used on both stages.
However, while the DOB tuned in Section 4.1 works for the compliant
Point-to-point positioning tests are carried out on the rigid and stage, it leads to instability when used on the rigid stage, as predicted
compliant stages using the same motion profiles introduced in Section by the stability margin plots of Fig. 12. Fig. 13 shows an example of the

88
X. Dong, C.E. Okwudire
Fig. 13. Typical positioning performance of the rigid stage with DOB during
point-to-point motions with the 5 mm step size. The stage suffers from severe
oscillations during settling when the cutoff frequency of the DOB is set to
150 Hz and 200 Hz.
instability of the rigid stage during point-to-point motions with the
5 mm step size using 200 Hz bandwidth DOB. During settling, the stage
suffers from severe oscillations such that it is not able to settle within
the desired ± 25 nm window. Reducing the bandwidth of the Q filter to
150 Hz reduces but does not fully mitigate the oscillations. Therefore,
the cutoff frequency of the Q filter is further reduced to 100 Hz, which is
stable from the frequency-domain standpoint (see Fig. 12), as well as in
time-domain (for all the step sizes tested). Therefore, for all the point-
to-point positioning tests conducted in the rest of this section, a 100 Hz
bandwidth DOB is used for the rigid stage, while a 200 Hz bandwidth
DOB is used for the compliant stage (because it is stable for all the step
sizes tested).
Fig. 14 summarizes the mean settling times, together with the cor-
responding one-standard-deviation band, of rigid and compliant stages
into a ± 25 nm window during point-to-point motions of different step
sizes (48 instances for each step size). It is observed that the settling
performance of the rigid stage varies a lot within the same step size, and
as the step size changes. The performance variations within the same
step size are due to the changes in friction dynamics from position to
position along the travel range of the stage. On the other hand, the
compliant stage achieves uniformly much better settling performance
with superior robustness compared to the rigid stage, resulting no less
than 48% and up to 98% reductions of the mean settling time compared
to the rigid stage. Moreover, the much slower and less robust settling
performance of the compliant stage during point-to-point motions with
the 50 μm step size is eliminated.
Fig. 15 compares the typical settling performance of rigid and
compliant stages with DOB during point-to-point motions with the 5 μm
and 50 μm step sizes. During the 5 μm case, the rigid stage takes 30.5 ms
Fig. 14. Settling times of rigid and compliant stages with DOB into a ± 25 nm
window during point-to-point motions of varying step sizes. Each motion pro-
file consisting of 16 equal-sized steps is repeated thrice. The lines represent
mean settling time values of the 48 instances of each step size and the shaded
bands indicate ± 1σ (standard deviation).
89
Precision Engineering 54 (2018) 81–90
and 29.5 ms to settle in the first and eighth steps while the compliant
stage settles within 7 ms and 6.7 ms, respectively. During point-to-point
motions with the 50 μm step size, the rigid stage takes 39.5 ms and 56.1
ms to settle in the first and eighth steps, respectively, while the com-
pliant stage takes 13.5 ms and 13.3 ms to settle in the first and eight
steps. This shows that the undesirable effects of the bearing motion
during settling is effectively attenuated when the DOB is implemented
in the control scheme. Although the bearing still moves significantly
during settling for the 50 μm case, the DOB is able to effectively esti-
mate and cancel out the disturbance force originating from its motion.
This significantly reduces the workload of the PID controller such that it
can quickly move the compliant stage to the target position.
5. Conclusions and future work
This paper carries out an experimental investigation of the effects of
the compliant joint method on feedback compensation of pre-motion
friction, and hence its effectiveness in improving the settling perfor-
mance of mechanical-bearing-guided motion stages during point-to-
point positioning applications. It is shown using a model-free (PID)
controller that for the same feedback gains, the mechanical-bearing-
guided motion stage equipped with compliant joints (i.e., compliant
stage) demonstrates much less variations (nonlinearity) in closed loop
dynamics and higher bandwidth compared to the traditional mechan-
ical-bearing-guided motion stage without compliant joints (i.e., rigid
stage). This is because with the compliant joint, the very stiff and
variable frictional stiffness is replaced with a much softer and less
variable stiffness, making it much easier for a feedback controller with
conservatively-tuned gains to deliver high performance and robustness
through feedback linearization. The compliant stage also achieves
much faster and robust settling than the rigid stage for most step mo-
tions tested. However, during point-to-point motions with the 50 μm
step size, it settles much slower than the rigid stage with significantly
increased variations in settling time. By measuring both the table and
bearing displacements, it is observed that the sluggish settling behavior
of the compliant stage is due to the bearing motion during settling,
which poses significant difficulties for the PID controller to compensate
the resultant disturbance force from the bearing motion.
An inverse-model-based disturbance observer (DOB) combined with
the PID controller is proposed as a possible approach to address the
effects of bearing motion on the settling performance of the compliant
stage. It is experimentally demonstrated that with the addition of the
DOB to the PID controller, the bandwidth and robustness of the com-
pliant stage relative to the rigid stage is further improved. Moreover, it
is able to mitigate the undesirable effects of the bearing motion during
point-to-point motions with the 50 μm step size, because of the ability
of the DOB to observe and cancel out the disturbances emanating from
the motion of the bearing. As a result, the compliant stage outperforms
the rigid stage (also controlled using a PID controller plus DOB), and
settles within the desired ± 25 nm window in less than 20 ms for all the
step sizes tested.
Future work will complement the experimental study presented in
this paper with theoretical analysis using models of mechanical-
bearing-guided motion stage with pre-motion frictional dynamics, to
gain deeper insights into the dynamics of the compliant joint as it in-
teracts with friction. This will, for instance, help explain why the
bearing motion was significant for the 50 μm step sizes compared to
other step sizes evaluated in our experiments. Such theoretical analysis
will also give useful insights on how to best select the parameters – e.g.,
stiffness and damping – of the compliant joint. On the practical side,
future work will also explore new compliant joint designs which have
tunable stiffness and damping properties. Introducing tunable stiffness
and damping into the compliant joint will enable it to have low stiffness
during motion of the stage, and high stiffness once it gets into position –
in order to have better in-position stability.
X. Dong, C.E. Okwudire
Fig. 15. Typical positioning performance of rigid and compliant stages with DOB into a ± 25 nm window during point-to-point motions with (a) 5 μm and (b) 50 μm
step sizes. The first and eighth steps in the forward direction are highlighted in the subplots.
Acknowledgements
The authors are grateful to Aerotech Inc. for donating some of the
key components used in building the experimental set-up. This work is
funded by National Science Foundation Award CMMI #1562297:
Vibration Assisted Nanopositioning: An Enabler of Low-cost, High-
throughput Nanotech Processes.
References
[1] Altintas Y, Verl A, Brecher C, Uriarte L, Pritschow G. Machine tool feed drives. CIRP
Ann - Manuf Technol 2011;60(2):779–96.
[2] Dong X, Yoon D, Okwudire C. A novel approach for mitigating the effects of pre-
rolling/pre-sliding friction on the settling time of rolling bearing nanopositioning
stages using high frequency vibration. Precis Eng 2017;47:375–88.
[3] Sitti M. Survey of nanomanipulation systems. Proceeding of the 1st IEEE conference
on nanotechnology. 2001. p. 75–80.
[4] Futami S, Furutani A, Yoshida S. Nanometer positioning and its micro-dynamics.
Nanotechnology 1990;1(1):31–7.
[5] Armstrong-Hélouvry B, Dupont P, Canudas de Wit C. A survey of models, analysis
tools and compensation methods for the control of machines with friction.
Automatica 1994;30(7):1083–138.
[6] Otsuka J, Masuda T. The influence of nonlinear spring behavior of rolling elements
on ultraprecision positioning control systems. Nanotechnology 1998;9(2):85–92.
[7] Al-Bender F, Swevers J. Characterization of friction force dynamics. IEEE Contr Syst
Mag 2008;28(6):64–81.
[8] Jamaludin Z, Van Brussel H, Pipeleers G, Swevers J. Accurate motion control of xy
high-speed linear drives using friction model feedforward and cutting forces esti-
mation. CIRP Ann - Manuf Technol 2008;57(1):403–6.
[9] Fukada S, Fang B, Shigeno A. Experimental analysis and simulation of nonlinear
microscopic behavior of ball screw mechanism for ultra-precision positioning.
Precis Eng 2011;35(4):650–68.
[10] Bucci B, Vipperman J, Cole D, Ludwick S. Evaluation of a servo settling algorithm.
Precis Eng 2013;37(1):10–22.
[11] Maeda Y, Iwasaki M. Rolling friction model-based analyses and compensation for
slow settling response in precise positioning. IEEE Trans Ind Electron
2013;60(12):5841–53.
[12] Yoon J, Trumper D. Friction modeling, identification, and compensation based on
friction hysteresis and Dahl resonance. Mechatronics 2014;24(6):734–41.
[13] Ruderman M, Iwasaki M. Analysis of linear feedback position control in presence of
presliding friction. IEEJ J Ind Appl 2016;5(2):61–8.
[14] Chang S, Wu S, Hu Y. Submicrometer overshoot control of rapid and precise posi-
tioning. Precis Eng 1997;20(3):161–70.
[15] Lin T, Pan Y, Hsieh C. Precision-limit positioning of direct drive systems with the
existence of friction. Contr Eng Pract 2003;11(3):233–44.
[16] Sato K, Nakamoto K, Shimokohbe A. Practical control of precision positioning
mechanism with friction. Precis Eng 2004;28(4):426–34.
90
Precision Engineering 54 (2018) 81–90
[17] Canudas de Wit C, Olsson H, Åström K, Lischinsky P. A new model for control of
systems with friction. IEEE Trans Automat Contr 1995;40(3):419–25.
[18] Canudas de Wit C, Lischinsky P. Adaptive friction compensation with partially
known dynamic friction model. Int J Adapt Contr Signal Process 1997;11(1):65–80.
[19] Olsson H, Åström K, Canudas de Wit C, Gäfvert M, Lischinsky P. Friction models and
friction compensation. Eur J Contr 1998;4(3):176–95.
[20] Ishikawa J, Tomizuka M. Pivot friction compensation using an accelerometer and a
disturbance observer for hard disk drives. IEEE ASME Trans Mechatron
1998;3(3):194–201.
[21] Cheng G, Hu J. An observer-based mode switching control scheme for improved
position regulation in servomotors. IEEE Trans Contr Syst Technol
2014;22(5):1883–91.
[22] Numasato H, Tomizuka M. Settling control and performance of a dual-actuator
system for hard disk drives. IEEE ASME Trans Mechatron 2003;8(4):431–8.
[23] Elfizy A, Bone G, Elbestawi M. Design and control of a dual-stage feed drive. Int J
Mach Tool Manufact 2005;45(2):153–65.
[24] Fung R, Hsu Y, Huang M. System identification of a dual-stage xy precision posi-
tioning table. Precis Eng 2009;33(1):71–80.
[25] Hao G, Kong X. Novel xy compliant parallel manipulators for large displacement.
Proceedings of the ASME international design engineering technical conference &
computers and information in engineering conference, vol. 44. 2010. p. 1–11.
[26] Awtar S, Parmar G. Design of a large range xy nanopositioning system. J Mech
Robot 2013;5(2). 021008–1 to 021008–10.
[27] Engel T, Lechler A, Verl A. Sliding bearing with adjustable friction properties. CIRP
Ann - Manuf Technol 2016;65(1):353–6.
[28] Tanaka T, Oiwa T, Syamsul H. Positioning behavior resulting from the application
of ultrasonic oscillation to a linear motion ball bearing during step motion. Precis
Eng 2018;51:362–72.
[29] Dong X, Liu X, Yoon D, Okwudire C. Simple and robust feedforward compensation
of quadrant glitches using a compliant joint. CIRP Ann - Manuf Technol
2017;66(1):353–6.
[30] Dong X, Okwudire C. Detailed experimental evaluation of the compliant joint
method for feedforward compensation of pre-motion friction. 32th annual meeting
of the American society for precision engineering. 2017.
[31] Helmick D, Messner W. Describing function analysis of dahl model friction.
Proceedings of the American control conference. vol. 0(5). 2009. p. 814–9.
[32] Leang K, Devasia S. Feedback-linearized inverse feedforward for creep, hysteresis,
and vibration compensation in AFM piezoactuators. IEEE Trans Contr Syst Technol
2007;15(5):927–35.
[33] Umeno T, Hori Y. Robust speed control of DC servomotors using modern two de-
grees-of-freedom controller design. IEEE Trans Ind Electron 1991;38(5):363–8.
[34] Kempf C, Kobayashi S. Disturbance observer and feedforward design for a high-
speed direct-drive positioning table. IEEE Trans Contr Syst Technol
1999;7(5):513–26.
[35] Schrijver E, van Dijk J. Disturbance observers for rigid mechanical systems:
equivalence, stability, and design. J Dyn Syst Meas Contr 2002;124(4):539.
[36] Jamaludin Z, Van Brussel H, Swevers J. Friction compensation of a XY feed table
using friction model-based feedforward and an inverse-model-based disturbance
observer. IEEE Trans Ind Electron 2009;56(10):2–6.
Another random document with
no related content on Scribd:
mountains are so high that the
stars [42]appear on them, and
there are very few people living
on it. The owner of the land is
Namakaokahai, a chiefess, and
she has four brothers: Kanemoe,
Kaneikaapua, Leapua and
Kahaumana. She has two
servants, Upoho and
Haapuainanea. Those who
guard and watch over the land
are Moela, a dog, and three
birds, Manuea, Kiwaha and
Halulu. These are all the people
who live on the land; there are
not many, because the people
are devoured by the ghosts.”
At the end of the remarks of the
lizard to Aukelenuiaiku, she
made a box to hold the god of
Aukelenuiaiku. After the box was
built she put the god into it, who
was Lonoikoualii, 10 and said to
Aukelenuiaiku: “With this god
you will conquer and become
possessed of the land that I have
just described. Here is your food
and meat; it is a laukahi. This
leaf is wholesome; as soon as
you touch it to your lips your
hunger is satisfied; and when
satisfied you can go without
mea nona ua aina la, o
Namakaokahai, he ’lii wahine, a
he mau kaikunane kona eha, o
Kanemoe, o Kaneikaapua, o
Leapua, a me Kahaumana. Elua
kauwa, o Upoho, a me
Haapuainanea. O ke kiai o ka
aina, o Moela, he ilio. Ekolu
manu, o Manuea, o Kiwaha, a
me Halulu. Oia na kanaka o ia
aina, aohe nui, no ka mea, he
pau i ka ai ia e ke ’kua.”
A pau ka olelo ana a ka moo ia
Aukelenuiaiku, alaila, kapili iho la
ia i pahu no ke ’kua o
Aukelenuiaiku, a paa ka pahu,
hoo iho la ia i ke ’kua i loko, oia
o Lonoikoualii. A olelo mai la ia
Aukelenuiaiku: “O ko akua no
nei puni ko aina ia oe; eia ko ai a
me ko ia, o Laukahi. He lau
maona, pa no i ka lehelehe
maona; o ka manawa e maona
ai, eha malama e noho ai, alaila,
ai hou.” Lalau iho la ua
kupunawahine nei i ke koi, a me
ka pahi, a hahao iho la i loko o
eating for a period of four
months.” The grandmother then
took up an axe and a knife and
put them into the box. The lizard
next cut off its tail and gave it to
the grandson, saying: “This is my
real body, which you must take
with you. Here are also my pau
of feathers and my feather kahili
which shall act as your preserver
when you meet your cousin.
With these things in your
possession—that is, by wearing
the pau and holding this kahili
you will cause your enemies to
fall and turn into ashes.” The
lizard then explained the uses of
all the different things to her
grandson, and she also taught
him how to preserve these things
of magic; but she did not tell him
the name of the cousin. She was
Namakaokahai.
When Aukelenuiaiku
disappeared their father showed
great grief for him and he
mourned for his son for many
days. Because of his great grief
he refused to take food. After
suffering for days he expressed
a wish to die. But the mother of
Aukelenuiaiku did not think that
ka pahu, a ooki iho la i kona
huelo, a haawi aku la i ka
moopuna, i aku la: “O kuu kino
maoli keia, oia ka ia oe, a o kuu
pau ai kaua, a me kuu kahili ai
kaua no ko kaikuahine ia. O ke
ano o keia, ina e pau i kuu pau,
a kahili i kuu kahili ai kaua, haule
i lalo, lilo na kanaka i lehu.” Ma
keia mau mea a pau loa, ua hai
aku ua moo nei ia
Aukelenuiaiku, a ua ao aku i na
mea mana a pau loa, a koe nae
ka inoa o ke kaikuahine o
Aukelenuiaiku, aole i hai aku ua
moo la. Eia ka auanei o
Namakaokahai no.
Ma keia nalowale ana o
Aukelenuiaiku, ua nui ke aloha o
ko lakou makuakane nona, a ua
kanikau ia me ke aloha i na la a
pau loa, a ua hookeai a ua
hoohiki iho oia aole e ai i ka ai a
make ia, no ka minamina ia
Aukelenuiaiku. Aka, o ka
makuahine o Aukelenuiaiku,
her son was dead, and she
refused to listen to her husband,
to fast and to mourn for their
son. She was certain that
Aukelenuiaiku was not dead, and
that her lizard mother,
Kamooinanea, had not devoured
him. In discussing with her
husband as to the prospects of
their son being eaten up by the
lizard she said: “If she has eaten
him, who is my own issue, then
she should have eaten me up
first, and after that, my son. I tell
you now that Aukelenuiaiku is
there down below being
educated by his grandmother in
all things, and he is not dead. He
will yet return to us here above.”
These words of the wife all came
true.
CHAPTER III.
The Return of
Aukelenuiaiku and the
Benefits Received by
Him in Facing Death.
aole ona manao ua make, aole
ona ae i ka olelo a kana kane, e
hookeai, a e kanikau, no ka
mea, ua ike no ia, aole i make,
aole no hoi i ai kona makuahine
moo, oia o Kamooinanea. Ma
kana olelo i mua o kana kane:
“Ina hoi ha ia e ai i ka’u ponoi,
alaila, mamua ia e ai mai ai ia’u,
a mahope i ka’u ponoi. Ke olelo
aku nei au ia oe, aia no o
Aukelenuiaiku i lalo kahi i ao ai
me ke kupunawahine i na mea a
pau loa, aole i make, he hoi mai
koe i luna nei.” Ma keia mau
olelo a ka wahine, ua ko no.
MOKUNA III.
No ka Hoi ana o
Aukelenuiaiku, a me ka
Pomaikai i Loaa ia ia ma

After all the various things had
been mastered by Aukelenuiaiku
he then climbed onto the back of
the lizard and was lifted up out of
the pit; and the lizard again
disappeared down the pit.
Aukelenuiaiku then took up the
box that contained his god
together with his club and carried
them as he returned to the
house. When Aukelenuiaiku
reached the house his father and
all the chiefs wept for joy. [44]
We will here see how correct
were the predictions of
Kapapaiakea to her husband Iku,
relating to Aukelenuiaiku’s
preservation by the lizard. While
Aukelenuiaiku was weeping with
his parents, his brothers, who
were out surf riding, heard the
wailing and so asked: “For whom
is this wailing going on?” “It is
Aukelenuiaiku.” When the
brothers heard that the wailing
was because of the return of
Aukelenuiaiku they were so
keia hele ana i loko o
ka Make.
A pau na mea a pau loa i ka loaa
ia Aukelenuiaiku, ia wa, kau ae
la o Aukelenuiaiku i luna o ka
moo, hapai ae la ia ia
Aukelenuiaiku a kau i luna o ka
lua, a hoi aku la ka moo i lalo o
ka lua. A hoi aku la o
Aukelenuiaiku, lalau iho la ia i ka
pahu o ke ’kua ona, a me ka
laau, a hii ae la, a hoi aku la i ka
hale. Ia Aukelenuiaiku i hiki ai i
ka hale, uwe mai la kona
makuakane a me na ’lii a pau
loa. [45]
Maanei e ike ai kakou ua pololei
na olelo a Kapapaiakea i kana
kane ia Iku, no ka make ole o
Aukelenuiaiku i ka moo. Ia
Aukelenuiaiku e uwe ana me na
makua, lohe aku la na kaikuaana
o Aukelenuiaiku e heenalu ana, i
keia pihe e uwe ana, ninau ae la:
“Nowai la keia pihe e uwe nei?”
“No Aukelenuiaiku.” A lohe na
kaikuaana no Aukelenuiaiku keia
pihe e uwe nei, hilahila loa
lakou, i ke ola hou ana o ko
lakou pokii, o Aukelenuiaiku. A
ashamed that they concluded
they would build them a ship and
go to some foreign land. They
then rode in on the surf and
proceeded direct to the forest.
After they had been in the forest
for over two months,
Aukelenuiaiku one day went up
into the forest to catch him some
birds. After he had caught and
cleaned several birds he started
a fire and then put them on the
coals to roast. After the birds
were cooked he sat down to his
meal, and, while he was eating,
his brothers came upon him and
took away all the birds, leaving
him nothing. After this the oldest
brother, he with the violent
temper, ordered Aukelenuiaiku to
go and bring them some water.
While Aukelenuiaiku was on his
way for water he got up and
followed him. While
Aukelenuiaiku was busy filling
the calabash with water the
angry brother arrived and
replaced the rock on the mouth
of the water hole, shutting in
Aukelenuiaiku and left him there
to die.
After Aukelenuiaiku’s
no ko lakou hilahila, manao iho
la lakou e hana i moku a holo i
ka aina e. Pae aku la lakou mai
ka heenalu aku a uka, pii aku la i
ke kuahiwi. Ma keia noho ana a
lakou i ke kuahiwi, elua mahina i
hala. Mahope o laila, pii aku la o
Aukelenuiaiku. O ke kumu o
Aukelenuiaiku o ka pii ana, o ke
kapili manu. A loaa ka manu ia
ia, pulehu iho la ia a moa; a ia ia
e ai ana, hiki mai la kona mau
kaikuaana, hao ae la i ka manu,
a pau ia lakou, nele iho la o
Aukelenuiaiku. Iloko o ia wa,
kena aku la ke kaikuaana huhu
ia Aukelenuiaiku, e hele i wai. Ia
Aukelenuiaiku i hele ai, ku ae la
ua kaikuaana huhu nei a hahai
mahope o Aukelenuiaiku. Ia
Aukelenuiaiku e ukuhi ana i ka
wai, hiki aku la ua kaikuaana
huhu la, a papani iho la i ka
waha o ka punawai, a paa iho la
o Aukelenuiaiku i lalo o ka lua
wai, a make iho la.
A make o Aukelenuiaiku, hoi aku
disappearance the brother
returned to where the others
were. When the brother who
entertained some love for
Aukelenuiaiku saw their oldest
brother coming back, he asked:
“Where is our brother?” The
oldest brother replied: “I have not
seen him, and he was not at the
place where I went to.” After this
the brother who wished to save
Aukelenuiaiku got up and went
out in search of him. In this
search he went to their home,
where he learned that
Aukelenuiaiku had not returned.
He then took up the loin cloth of
his brother, and wore it round his
neck 11 and wept. While he was
weeping their father Iku heard it,
and so he inquired: “Who is this
weeping?” “I, Ikumailani.” “What
are you weeping for?” “I am
weeping for Aukelenuiaiku; he is
dead.” When their father heard
this he also wept.
After this weeping Ikumailani
again proceeded up the forest in
search of his brother. Before
starting upon his mission their
father said to him: “In case you
should find your brother, bring
la ua kaikuaana la, a hiki i kahi a
na kaikaina e noho ana. Ninau
mai la ke kaikuaana aloha ia ia:
“Auhea ko kakou pokii?” I aku la
ia: “Aole au i ike ia ia, aole i
launa, aole no hoi ma ka’u wahi i
hele aku nei.” Mahope o ia olelo
ana, ku ae la ke kaikuaana aloha
o Aukelenuiaiku, a huli aku la.
Ma keia huli ana, hiki aku la ia i
ka hale, aole i hoi o
Aukelenuiaiku. Lalau aku la ia i
ka malo a lei ae la i kona ai, a
uwe iho la. Ia ia e uwe ana, lohe
aku la ko lakou makuakane o
Iku, ninau ae la: “Owai keia e
uwe nei?” “Owau no, o
Ikumailani.” “E uwe ana oe i ke
aha?” “E uwe ana au ia
Aukelenuiaiku, ua make.” A lohe
ka makuakane, uwe iho la ia.
A mahope o keia uwe ana, pii
aku la o Ikumailani e huli.
Mamua ae o kona pii ana, olelo
aku ko lakou makuakane ia ia: “I
pii oe a loaa ko kaikaina, e
hoihoi mai oe a hiki i ka hale
him home here.” Before
Ikumailani set out he said to their
father: “I am going up; if you look
and see a fire, remember I have
found your son; but in case you
don’t see a fire, then I have not
found him.” After saying this,
Ikumailani started out on his
search. When he came up to the
water hole he looked and saw
that the mouth had been covered
with a large rock. He then rolled
away the rock and looked down
into the hole, and saw
Aukelenuiaiku standing there,
thin and weak, having only
enough strength left to be able to
stand. Ikumailani then reached
down for his brother and lifted
him up; they then kissed each
other and wept. After their
weeping, Ikumailani started a
fire, which was seen by their
father, and he knew that
Aukelenuiaiku had been found
and that he was not dead.
After Aukelenuiaiku was found
he was brought home to their
father who fell on his son and
wept for joy, as did all the others,
for he had been lost for about
eight [46]days. Before
nei.” Mamua ae o ka pii ana o
Ikumailani, olelo aku ia i ko lakou
makuakane: “E! ke pii nei au, i
nana ae oe a i a ke ahi, ua loaa
ko keiki, a i a ole mai, aole i loaa
ia’u.” A pau kana kamailio ana,
pii aku la o Ikumailani e huli. A
hiki ia i ka punawai, nana iho la
ia, ua paa o luna i ke pani ia i ka
pohaku. Wehe ae la ia i ka
pohaku, a nana iho la i lalo o ka
punawai, e ku ana o
Aukelenuiaiku, ua hele a wiwi, a
ua koe iki kahi hanu. Lalau iho la
o Ikumailani, a huki ae la i luna,
honi iho la laua, a uwe iho la. A
pau ko laua uwe ana, ho-a ae la
o Ikumailani i ke ahi, a ike mai la
ko lakou makuakane, manao iho
la ia, ua loaa o Aukelenuiaiku,
aole i make.
A loaa o Aukelenuiaiku, hoi mai
la laua a hiki i ka hale kahi o ko
laua makuakane e noho ana,
lele mai la ko laua makuakane
uwe, a me na mea a pau loa. O
ka [47]nui o na la o keia kaawale
Aukelenuiaiku was found, the
ship of the brothers was
completed and preparations
were made for departure, as it
had been launched. When the
oldest brother saw that
Aukelenuiaiku was again back
safe and well, and that the
wailing that he had heard was
because of the return of
Aukelenuiaiku, he immediately
gave orders that the final
preparations be completed; that
the food be cooked, and after
that everybody was to go
aboard.
ana ewalu la. Mamua ae o ka
loaa ana o Aukelenuiaiku, ua
paa ka moku o na kaikuaana i ke
kapili, a ua makaukau e holo, ua
lana i loko o ke kai. Ma keia ola
hou ana o Aukelenuiaiku, ua
lohe ua kaikuaana huhu lokoino
nei, ua hoi mai o Aukelenuiaiku,
a nona keia makena e uwe ia
mai nei. Nolaila, kena ae la ia e
hoomakaukau ka holo, e kahu
ke o, a e ee i luna o ka moku.

CHAPTER IV. MOKUNA IV.

How Aukelenuiaiku Ka Holo ana o

Sailed with His Aukelenuiaiku me Kona
Brothers in Search of poe Kaikuaana maluna
Land for Them to o ka Moku e Imi i Aina
Conquer. ma ko Lakou Ikaika.

After all the preparations for the A makaukau ka holo o ka moku,

sailing had been completed, ninau aku la o Aukelenuiaiku i
Aukelenuiaiku asked of
Ikumailani, the brother who had
shown him some love: “Where is
your ship sailing for?” “In search
of land.” Aukelenuiaiku again
asked: “And what is the matter
with this land?” Ikumailani
replied: “Our oldest brother is
ashamed, because of your
return. That is the reason why
the ship is about to sail off in
search of some land. After a
[new] land is conquered through
our strength, that will be our
place to dwell.”
When Aukelenuiaiku heard the
object of the sailing of the ship,
he begged that he too be
allowed to sail with them. His
brother Ikumailani then said to
him: “You cannot go with us,
because we have no other
reason of going away except on
your own account. If you had
died we would not be leaving
Kuaihelani.” By this refusal on
the part of his brother,
Aukelenuiaiku said in kindly
reply: “Say, don’t you know that it
is a sad thing to go off to some
strange land and die there. Your
bones will be put away by a
kona kaikuaana oluolu ia
Ikumailani: “E holo ana ko oukou
moku i hea?” “I ka imi aina.”
Wahi a Aukelenuiaiku: “A i aha ia
no ka hoi keia aina?” I mai o
Ikumailani: “Ua hilahila ke
kaikuaana o kakou i ko ola hou
ana mai nei, nolaila keia holo o
ka moku e imi aina. A loaa ka
aina ia makou, maloko o ka
ikaika, alaila, o ko makou aina ia
e noho ai.”
A lohe o Aukelenuiaiku i ko
lakou holo, nonoi aku la ia;
“Owau kekahi e holo me oukou.”
Olelo mai kona kaikuaana o
Ikumailani: “Aole oe e holo me
makou, no ka mea, aohe o
makou kumu e ae o ka holo, o
oe wale no. Ina oe e make aku
nei, aole makou e haalele ia
Kuaihelani nei.” Ma keia olelo
hoole a kona kaikuaana,
hoopuka aku o Aukelenuiaiku i
kana mau olelo aloha: “E, powa
wale ka hele aku a ko hai aina
make. Moe ia ka iwi aoao e ke
kanaka e, e ke aikane, aole hoi o
ka pokii, o ka hoa i hanau pu ia
stranger, perhaps even by a
friend, but not by a younger
brother, one who has been born
with you and who was from the
same womb. I therefore beg of
you that I too be allowed to sail
with you, so that in case you my
older brothers should die, then I
will die with you. Then our
names will come back in fame in
the saying, ‘So-and-so have died
with their younger brother.’ Then
your names will not be spoken in
disrespect.”
By these remarks we see how
determined Aukelenuiaiku was in
trying to follow his brothers,
when he knew that all his
troubles had come from these
same men. With all this he still
wished and insisted on going
with them. If this is so, then we
cannot blame the older brothers
if they should kill him. In this
request, that he be allowed to
accompany them, however, we
will see how he for a time
managed to save his brothers
from death, and how he came to
have all the benefits foretold him
by his lizard grandmother; and
how all the advice she gave
mai ai, mai loko mai o ka aa
hookahi. Nolaila, ke nonoi aku
nei au, owau kekahi e holo me
oukou, i make oukou ko’u poe
kaikuaana, alaila, make pu aku
wau. Alaila, kaulana ka inoa i
hope nei, ‘O mea ma, make pu
no me ko lakou pokii.’ Nolaila,
aole e waia ka inoa mahope
nei.”
Ma keia mau olelo a kakou e
lohe nei, he mea e ko
Aukelenuiaiku imi hala, a,
hilahila ole no hoi, me kona ike
pono iho no, na kona mau
kaikuaana kona pilikia. O ka
mea aiwa loa aku ka ia i ka
hahai e hoomano ai. Nolaila, ina
he oiaio na ko Aukelenuiaiku
waha ponoi keia, ua ae ia kona
mau poino, a ua pono no ia ke
make. Aka, ma keia koi ana a
Aukelenuiaiku, ua loaa i kona
poe kaikuaana ka pono a me ke
ola, a ua loaa hoi ka pomaikai i
olelo ia e ke kupunawahine moo
ia Aukelenuiaiku. A ua hooko ia
hoi kana mau olelo wanana no
Aukelenuiaiku was faithfully kept
to his salvation.
After Aukelenuiaiku had spoken
to his kind brother, Ikumailani,
this brother said to him: “You
cannot gain your point from me.
You must go to our nephew and
tell him of your wish. If he gives
his consent, then you will be able
to go.” Aukelenuiaiku [48]then
asked him: “How am I to get him
to listen to me?” “You go and call
him by his name in this way:
‘Say, Kaumailunaoholaniku, ask
me to come up on the ship with
you so that we may play
together. You cannot enjoy
yourself with those old men. I am
the proper companion that will
be suited to you, because you
are young and so am I.’ ” After
these instructions had been
imparted by his older brother,
their father who was listening
said: “My boy, don’t go with
them, for you will be killed. When
you are not safe living with me,
what chance will you have when
you accompany them? If you
insist on going you will surely get
killed, and your mother and I will
not see you again.”
Aukelenuiaiku, ma keia holo ana
o ka moku.
A pau ka Aukelenuiaiku olelo
ana, i mai kona kaikuaana
oluolu, o Ikumailani: “Aole oe e
holo ia’u, aka, e hele oe a ke
keiki a kakou olelo aku, a i ae
mai, alaila oe holo.” I aku o
Aukelenuiaiku: “Pehea auanei
au e olelo aku ai e hoolohe mai
ai kela [49]ia’u?” “E hele oe a
kahea aku ma kona inoa ponoi,
penei: ‘E Kaumailunaoh olaniku
e! e kahea mai oe ia’u e pii aku
kaua i luna o ka moku, e lealea
ai kaua, e paani ai, aole oe e
kohu me keia poe elemakule,
owau kou hoa e kohu ai, he
kamalii, he kamalii.’ ” A pau ke
aoao ana a kona kaikuaana ia
ia, olelo mai ko lakou
makuakane ia ia: “E kuu keiki,
mai hele oe, o make hou oe. No
ka mea, aole oe i pakele i ko
kakou wa e noho pu nei? Aiwa
loa aku oe a hele, o kou make
ana no ia aole maua e ike ia oe.”
I aku o Aukelenuiaiku: “Aole au e
noho me olua, e hele ana au e
makaikai, a e nana i na aina o
loko o ke kai; nolaila, e hele ana
au.”
Aukelenuiaiku answered: “I will
not remain with you two. I am
going sightseeing and to visit
other lands in the sea; therefore I
am going.”
After the above conversation,
Aukelenuiaiku proceeded to the
ship with Ikumailani his brother.
When they arrived at the ship,
his brother went aboard, leaving
Aukelenuiaiku below on the
landing. Aukelenuiaiku then
called out to his nephew, and
after telling him what he wanted,
he was invited by the nephew to
come aboard in the following
words: “My uncle, come aboard
of the vessel.” Upon receiving
this invitation, Aukelenuiaiku
climbed aboard, while his older
brothers looked on, for they
dared not deny their nephew his
wish. The boy was their great
favorite; whatever he said was
law with them, and all the uncles
obeyed his every word. This boy
was raised under a very strict
kapu; and if he ordered that a
person be killed, that person is
killed; if he ordered that a person
be allowed to go free, that
person goes off free. Therefore
Mahope o keia olelo ana, iho
aku la o Aukelenuiaiku, me kona
kaikuaana me Ikumailani, a hiki i
ka moku, pii aku la kona
kaikuaana i luna o ka moku,
noho iho la o Aukelenuiaiku i
lalo, maluna o ka uwapo. Alaila,
kahea aku la o Aukelenuiaiku i
ke keiki. A pau ke kahea ana a
Aukelenuiaiku, kahea mai la ke
keiki: “Pii mai e kuu makuakane i
luna nei o ka moku.” Ma keia
kahea ana o ke keiki, pii aku la o
Aukelenuiaiku i luna o ka moku,
a o na kaikuaana ona, aohe a
lakou olelo no Aukelenuiaiku, no
ka mea, o ke keiki, oia ka lakou
mea nui, ma kana mea e olelo
ai, malaila na makua ona a pau
loa. No ke keiki, he kapu ikaika
loa kona, ina e olelo e make,
make no, ina olelo e moe, moe
no, ina olelo e hele, hele no.
Nolaila, he kapu kona kino a me
kana olelo, aole e hoole, aole hoi
he leo hiki mamua ona. Oia wale
no ka leo oi.
this boy’s person was sacred,
and whatever he said was law;
nothing was denied him, and no
one dared say nay to him. They
all obeyed him.
After Aukelenuiaiku had climbed
aboard, he asked the boy to
send someone for his club and
box. When the boy heard this, he
sent a couple of men after these
things. After the men had
returned with these things, the
ship started off on its voyage
from Kuaihelani. In the first four
months of the voyage their food,
meat and water, were exhausted
and the men began to die of
hunger and thirst, and the
brothers were in great distress.
When the brothers found that all
their food was exhausted, they
went down into the body of the
ship and stayed there, while
Aukelenuiaiku and the boy
stayed above. After several days
had gone by, the boy began to
wonder at the disappearance of
his father and uncles, so he went
down into the ship to look for
them. When he got to the bottom
of the vessel he found his father
and uncles lying weak from
Ia Aukelenuiaiku i luna o ka
moku, olelo aku la ia i ke keiki, e
kii i ka laau a laua. A lohe ke
keiki, kena ae la ia i na kanaka,
e kii i ka laau a laua. A hiki mai
la ka laau a laua i luna o ka
moku, ia manawa, holo ka moku
mai ka aina aku o Kuaihelani.
Ma keia holo ana, eha o lakou
malama i ka moana, pau ka ai,
ka ia, ka wai, pau na kanaka i ka
make i ka pololi, a pilikia loa iho
la na makuakane i ka pololi. A
loaa na makuakane i ka pololi,
noho iho la lakou i lalo o ka
moku. O Aukelenuiaiku a me ke
keiki i luna, a loihi na la i hala,
haohao iho la ke keiki, iho aku la
ia i lalo e nana ai. Aia hoi, e
waiho ana kona mau makua i ka
pololi a me ka nawaliwali, no ka
ai ole. Pii ae la ua keiki la a luna
o ka umauma o
Kekamakahinuiaiku, kona
makuakane ponoi, ke kaikuaana
inoino huhu o Aukelenuiaiku.
Nana ae la kona mau maka i ke
hunger. The boy then climbed
onto the breast of his father,
Kekamakahinuiaiku, the one with
the violent temper, and who
hated Aukelenuiaiku most of all.
As the boy sat on his father’s
chest, the father looked up and
when he saw his son he said:
“Yes, how pitiful! I have no
regrets as far as we are
concerned, for we have spent
many days in this world; but it is
you that I pity, for all the food,
the meat and water are gone,
and all that is left is two joints of
sugar-cane.” The boy replied: “I
am not distressed, for I am not in
need of food, for my uncle has a
certain leaf which we touch to
our lips and our hunger is
satisfied, and we stay without
wanting any food for four
months.” After talking with his
father for a while, he returned to
his uncle, Aukelenuiaiku, [50]with
tears in his eyes. When the
uncle saw that the boy was
crying, he asked him: “What are
you weeping for? Why these
tears that you are shedding?”
The boy replied: “I am weeping
for my father,
Kekamakahinuiaiku, who is
keiki, a olelo ae la: “U, aloha!
Aole o makou, ua nui na la i hala
o ka noho ana i ke ao, o oe ka
hoi; ua pau ka ai a me ka ia, ka
wai, a koe elua puna ko wale
no.” I aku ke keiki: “Aohe o’u
pilikia i ka ai, no ka mea, he ai
no ka kuu makuakane, he lau,
hoopa wale mai no i ka lehelehe,
o ka maona no ia, eha malama e
noho ai me ka maona.” A pau ka
laua olelo ana, hoi aku la ia me
na waimaka e helelei ana a hiki i
mua o Aukelenuiaiku. Ninau mai
la kona makuakane: [51]“E uwe
ana oe i ke aha, a he waimaka
aha nei e helelei mai nei?” I aku
ke keiki: “E uwe ana au no
Kekamakahinuiaiku, ua kokoke e
make i ka pololi, hele aku nei au
e mauliawa ana.” Olelo aku o
Aukelenuiaiku: “E kuu keiki, a,
mai make oe a me ou
makuakane i ka moana nei, ina
aole au e holo pu mai me oukou,
no ka mea, he enemi au no ko
makuakane, aka, ma ka hanau
ana mai a na makua, aole au e
hana e like me ko lakou manao
ino ia’u. Nolaila, e kuu keiki, eia
ka ai a me ka ia, i loko o ka laau
a kaua.” O ka inoa o ua laau nei,
o Kaiwakaapu. “E kii oe a hemo,
almost dead of hunger. When I na ka ai, na ka ia, na ke kapa, a
reached him he was gasping for me na mea a pau loa, e hele mai
breath.” i waho nei.” A hana aku la ua
keiki la e like me na olelo a
Aukelenuiaiku then said to the Aukelenuiaiku, loaa iho la na
boy: “My boy, you too would mea a pau loa. Ai iho la na
have died with your father and makuakane a pau, na ohua ee
uncles in this ocean if I had not moku a me ka poe lawelawe, a
come along with you. I am hated ola ae la, pau aku la ka poniuniu
by your father as his most bitter pololi, a me ka nawaliwali ana. A
enemy, but according to our birth ola lakou i keia make ana i ka
by our parents, I will not act as pololi, holo hou lakou eha
they have toward me. Therefore, malama hou i ka moana, uhauha
my boy, here is the food, the lakou i ka ai a me ka ia, ka wai,
meat, and the water in this club a me na pono a pau loa, i loaa ia
of ours (the name of this club lakou mai loko mai o ka laau
was Kaiwakaapu); take it and mana a Aukelenuiaiku.
open one end of the club, and
the food, the meat, the kapa and
everything else will come out of
their own accord.” The boy then
followed the direction of his
uncle, Aukelenuiaiku, and all the
things necessary for their
comfort were furnished them.
The father and uncles and those
of the ship ate and were saved.
Their faintness from hunger
disappeared as well as their
weakness.

After they were saved from A pau na malama eha ma keia

death, the ship sailed on for holo ana i ka moana, hoomaka
another four months; but the
food and water were so plentiful
that they wasted a lot. But other
things were also furnished them
by the club of Aukelenuiaiku. At
the end of the second four
months and they had entered
into the first day of the fifth
month, Aukelenuiaiku told his
older brothers as well as to the
other men on board the ship,
saying: “Tomorrow we will see
land and shall go ashore the
same day. The name of the land
is Holaniku. The land contains
many things that are good to eat:
food, awa, sugar cane, bananas,
coconuts and various other
things.”
At the end of the first day and on
the approach of the second, the
day on which he had said they
were going to arrive at Holaniku,
very early that morning they first
saw the peaks of the mountains,
and by noon of that same day
they reached the land. As soon
as the ship touched land the
men went ashore where they
found food, water, meat, awa
and various other things. They
stayed on the land for four days
ka la mua o ka lima o ka
malama. Ia wa, hai aku o
Aukelenuiaiku i kona ike i na
kaikuaana, a me na kanaka a
pau o luna o ka moku: “Apopo
ike kakou i ka aina, a ku no ia la,
o ka inoa o ua aina ala o
Holaniku. He nui na me ai o ia
aina, ka ai, ka awa, ke ko, ka
maia, ka niu, a me na mea a pau
loa.”
A hala ka la ana i hoakaka ai,
hiki mai ka lua o ka la, o ia kana
la i olelo ai e ku i ka aina o
Holaniku. I ke kakahiaka nui, ike
mua ia mai la ke kuahiwi o ka
aina, a awakea, ku lakou i ka
aina. Ma keia ku ana, lele aku la
na kanaka i uka, loaa ka ai, ka
wai, ka ia, ka awa a me na mea
e ae, o ka nui o ko lakou
manawa i laila, eha po, eha ao.
Kau lakou i ka moku a holo aku
la.
and four nights, when they again
boarded their ship and set sail.
After sailing for four months,
Aukelenuiaiku said to his
brothers: “Tomorrow we will
reach land.” When his brothers
heard this, they said: “You are
deceiving us.” But there was
none of them who could deny
the fact, for Aukelenuiaiku
showed that he knew what he
was talking about; so the sailing
masters all admitted that
Aukelenuiaiku was correct. But
the brothers being bitter against
Aukelenuiaiku, refused to believe
him.
On the approach of the next day,
the day Aukelenuiaiku had
predicted they would see land,
the voyagers saw land, the land
of Kalakeenuiakane; and it took
all that day and night until the
morning of the next day before
they reached shore. The land
was ruled by a queen, called
Namakaokahai.
When they touched land
Aukelenuiaiku said to his
brothers: “Let me have charge of
the ship?” The brothers said:
Ma keia holo ana, eha o lakou
malama i ka moana, a pau ia
mau malama eha, hai aku o
Aukelenuiaiku ia lakou: “Apopo
kakou ku i ka aina.” A lohe na
kaikuaana, olelo mai lakou,
“wahahee oe;” aka, aohe mea
nana e hoole mai o
Aukelenuiaiku ma kona mau ano
ike a me ke akamai, ua ae no ka
poe holo moku a pau loa, a o na
kaikuaana wale no ka poe hoole,
no ko lakou opu inoino ia
Aukelenuiaiku.
A kokoke mai la ka la a
Aukelenuiaiku i olelo ai, ike aku
la lakou i ka aina o
Kalakeenuiakane. Ma ia la a po,
a ao, a kakahiaka ku lakou i ka
aina. O ke ’lii o ua aina ala he
wahine, o Namakaokahai ka
inoa.
I aku o Aukelenuiaiku i na
kaikuaana: “Ia’u ka olelo o ka
moku o kakou.” I mai na
kaikuaana: “Aole no hoi e kapili i
“Why don’t you build yourself a
ship, then you can have all the
say.” Aukelenuiaiku replied: “If I
have charge of the ship we will
all be saved, but if you insist on
taking charge of it yourself we
will all be killed, [52]none will be
saved.” The brothers replied to
Aukelenuiaiku, saying: “Where
did you learn to be strong and
brave, so that you could have
the right to tell us to hold our
peace while you take charge of
everything.” Aukelenuiaiku
replied: “It would be quite right if
it were to be a hand to hand
fight, where you could meet your
enemy face to face. There would
be no doubt then, for you would
surely win, but if the fight is to be
otherwise, you will not win. This
is the reason why I said that we
will all be killed.” The brothers
said: “You have nothing to say in
the matter, anyhow. It is going to
be as we wish it, and you must
keep quiet.” When the brothers
said this, Aukelenuiaiku did not
make any reply.
As they were nearing the land,
the queen, Namakaokahai,
looked and saw a ship
moku nou, alaila no hoi olelo.” I
aku o Aukelenuiaiku: “Ina ia’u ka
olelo o ka moku, ola kakou, ina
ia oukou, make kakou, [53]aole e
ola.” Olelo mai na kaikuaana ia
Aukelenuiaiku: “Ihea la kau ao
ana i neia mea he ikaika a me ke
koa, i olelo ai oe maluna o
makou e noho malie, a o oe ka
waha olelo.” “He oiaio ia, ina he
kaua ma ka lima, a ma ke alo,
alaila, na oukou ka eha a me ka
make; aka, ina he kaua poipu,
aole e loaa ia oukou, nolaila au i
olelo ai, e make ana kakou.” I
mai na kaikuaana: “Aole no au
olelo no keia mau mea a pau
loa, aia no i ko makou manao, e
noho malie no oe.” Ma kea mau
olelo a kona mau kaikuaana,
noho malie iho la o
Aukelenuiaiku, aohe olelo aku.
A kokoke lakou i ka aina, nana
mai la ke ’lii wahine, o
Namakaokahai, a ike i ka moku
approaching the harbor. She
then sent her brothers, the four
birds, to fly to the ship and
inquire the object of its coming.
The names of these brothers of
Namakaokahai, were Kanemoe,
Kaneapua, Leapua and
Kahaumana. The brothers then
flew in their bird form and lit on
the yards and asked: “What is
the object of this ship coming
here?” The brothers answered:
“It is a ship to make war.” When
the birds heard this they returned
to Namakaokahai. When they
arrived they were asked: “What
is that ship here for?” “It is a ship
to make war.” When
Namakaokahai heard this, she
came and stood on the outside
of the house, and girded on her
war pau while she held her war
kahili in her hand.
Before Namakaokahai received
her brothers’ report,
Aukelenuiaiku said to them:
“Say, where are you all? The
birds are coming back and will
again inquire of the object of our
coming. When they arrive, you
tell them that the ship is only on
a voyage of sightseeing, and not
e ku ana i ke awa, kena ae la ia i
kona mau kaikunane manu eha,
e lele e ninau i ka moku i ka
hana i holo mai ai. O ka inoa o
na kaikunane o Namakaokahai,
o Kanemoe, Kaneapua, Leapua,
Kahaumana.
Lele aku la lakou ma na kino
manu, a kau i luna o na ia o ka
moku, ninau iho la lakou: “Heaha
ka hana a ka moku o ka holo
ana mai ianei?” I aku na
kaikuaana, “He moku kaua.” A
lohe ua mau manu la, hoi aku la
lakou a hiki i o Namakaokahai,
ninau mai la: “He moku aha kela
moku?” “He moku kaua.” A lohe
o Namakaokahai, puka mai la a
ku i waho, me ka pau ai kaua, a
me ke kahili kaua ona.
Aka, mamua ae o ka lohe ana o
Namakaokahai i na kaikunane
manu ona, olelo aku o
Aukelenuiaiku i na kaikuaana
ona: “E! auhea oukou, i hele hou
mai na manu e ninau i ka moku
nei, e hai aku oukou, he moku
makaikai keia, aohe moku kaua.”
Ia Aukelenuiaiku e olelo ana, hiki
a ship to make war.” While
Aukelenuiaiku was still talking
the birds arrived on the ship and
again asked: “What is the object
of the coming of this ship?” The
brothers of Aukelenuiaiku
replied: “It is a ship to make war.”
CHAPTER V.
The Battle Fought by
the Brothers of
Aukelenuiaiku and
Their Death.
As soon as the brothers of
Namakaokahai left the ship,
Aukelenuiaiku took up his
wooden box and threw it into the
sea, for he knew that his
brothers and the ship would be
destroyed by Namakaokahai. As
the box struck the water,
Aukelenuiaiku jumped in after it
and taking hold of it he swam
away from the ship. While
mai la na manu i ka moku, a
ninau hou mai la: “Heaha ka
hana a keia moku o ka holo ana
mai i anei?” I aku na kaikuaana
o Aukelenuiaiku: “He moku
kaua.”
MOKUNA V.
Ke Kaua ana o na
Kaikuaana o
Aukelenuiaiku me
Namakaokahai: ko
Lakou Make ana.
A hoi na kaikunane manu o
Namakaokahai mai ka moku
aku, alaila, lalau iho la o
Aukelenuiaiku i ka pahu laau
ana, a kiola i loko o ke kai, no ka
mea, ua maopopo ia ia, e make
ana na kaikuaana a me ka moku
ia Namakaokahai. A haule ka
laau i loko o ke kai, lele aku la o
Aukelenuiaiku mahope, a au aku
la i loko o ke kai. Ia