Week5 All 11 20 2017

Video 5.
1
Vijay Kumar and Ani Hsieh
Robo3x-1.1 1
Property of Penn Engineering, Vijay Kumar and Ani Hsieh
The Purpose of Control
Input/Stimulus/ System or Output/

Disturbance Response
Plant
• Understand the “Black Box”
• Evaluate the Performance
• Change the Behavior
Robo3x-1.1 2
Anatomy of a Feedback Control System
Disturbance
Input + Actuator + + Output

Desired - Controller Gas Pedal Vehicle
Speed Speed
Sensor
Robo3x-1.1 3
Twin Objectives of Control
• Performance
• Disturbance
Rejection
Robo3x-1.1 4
Learning Objectives for this Week
• Linear Control
• Modeling in the frequency domain
• Transfer Functions
• Feedback and Feedforward Control
Robo3x-1.1 5
Frequency Domain Modeling
• Algebraic vs Differential Equations

• Laplace Transforms
• Diagrams
Robo3x-1.1 6
Laplace Transforms
Integral Transform that maps functions from
the time domain to the frequency domain
with
Robo3x-1.1 7
Example
Let , compute
Robo3x-1.1 8
Inverse Laplace Transforms
Integral Transform that maps functions from
the frequency domain to the time domain
Robo3x-1.1 9
Example
Let , compute
Robo3x-1.1 10
Laplace Transform Tables
Robo3x-1.1 11
http://integral-table.com/downloads/LaplaceTable.pdf
Video 5.2
Robo3x-1.1 12
Generalizing
Given
How do we obtain ?
Robo3x-1.1 13
Partial Fraction Expansion
Case 1: Roots of D(s) are Real & Distinct

Case 2: Roots of D(s) are Real & Repeated
Case 3: Roots of D(s) are Complex or
Imaginary
Robo3x-1.1 14
Case 1: Roots of D(s) are Real & Distinct
Compute the Inverse Laplace of
Robo3x-1.1 15
Case 2: Roots of D(s) are Real & Repeated
Robo3x-1.1 16
Case 3: Roots of D(s) are Complex
Robo3x-1.1 17
Video 5.3
Robo3x-1.1 18
Using Laplace Transforms
Given
➢ Solving for x(t)

1. Convert to frequency domain
2. Solve algebraic equation
3. Convert back to time domain
Robo3x-1.1 19
Properties of Laplace Transforms
Robo3x-1.1 20
Summary
Laplace Transforms
• time domain <-> frequency domain
• differential equation <-> algebraic equation
• Partial Fraction Expansion factorizes
“complicated” expressions to
simplify computation of inverse Laplace
Transforms
Robo3x-1.1 21
Example: Solving an ODE (1)
Given with
, and .
Solve for .
Robo3x-1.1 22
Example: Solving an ODE (2)
Robo3x-1.1 23
Video 5.4
Robo3x-1.1 24
Controller Design
Disturbance
Input + Input + + Output

Controller
-
Robo3x-1.1 25
Controller Design
Disturbance
Input + + + Output
-
Controller
Robo3x-1.1 26
Controller Design
Disturbance
System Output
Input + + +
Controller
-
Robo3x-1.1 27
Controller Design
Disturbance
System Output
Input + Controller + +
-
Robo3x-1.1 28
Transfer Function
Relate a system’s output to its input
1.Easy separation of INPUT, OUTPUT,
SYSTEM (PLANT)
2.Algebraic relationships (vs. differential)
3.Easy interconnection of subsystems in a
MATHEMATICAL framework
Robo3x-1.1 29
In General
A General N-Order Linear, Time Invariant ODE
G(s) =Transfer Function = output/input

Furthermore, if we know G(s), then
output = G(s)*input
Solution given by
Robo3x-1.1 30
General Procedure
Given and desired

performance criteria
1. Convert
2. Analyze
3. Design using
4. Validate using
5. Iterate
Robo3x-1.1 31
Underlying Assumptions
Linearity
1. Superposition
System
B/c the
2. Homogeneity Laplace
Transform is
Linear!
System
Robo3x-1.1 32
Video 5.5
Robo3x-1.1 33
Characterizing System Response
Given
How do we characterize the performance of

a system?
• Special Case 1: 1st Order Systems
• Special Case 2: 2nd Order Systems
Robo3x-1.1 34
Poles and Zeros
Given
Poles
Zeros
Example:
Robo3x-1.1 35
First Order Systems
In general
Let U(s) = 1/s, then
As such,
Therefore,
Robo3x-1.1 36
Characterizing First Order Systems
Given with U(s) = 1/s
Robo3x-1.1 37
Characterizing First Order Systems
Time Constant –
Rise Time –
Settling Time –
Robo3x-1.1 38
Second Order Systems
Given, and U(s) = 1/s
Possible Cases
1. r1 & r2 are real & distinct
2. r1 & r2 are real & repeated
3. r1 & r2 are both imaginary
4. r1 & r2 are complex conjugates
Robo3x-1.1 39
Case 1: Real & Distinct Roots
Overdamped
response
Robo3x-1.1 40
Video 5.6
Robo3x-1.1 41
Case 2: Real & Repeated Roots
Critically
damped
response
Robo3x-1.1 42
Case 3: All Imaginary Roots
Undamped
response
Robo3x-1.1 43
Case 4: Roots Are Complex
Underdamped
response
Robo3x-1.1 44
A Closer Look at Case 4
Exponential Decay
(Real Part)
Sinusoidal Oscillations
(Imaginary Part)
Robo3x-1.1 45
Summary of 2nd Order Systems
Given, and U(s) = 1/s
Solution is one of the following:
1. Overdamped: r1 & r2 are real & distinct
2. Critically Damped: r1 & r2 are real &
repeated
3. Undamped: r1 & r2 are both imaginary
4. Underdamped: r1 & r2 are complex
conjugates
Robo3x-1.1 46
2nd Order System Parameters
Given and U(s) = 1/s
• Natural Frequency – n
System’s frequency of oscillation with no damping
• Damping Ratio –
Robo3x-1.1 47
General 2nd Order System
Given and U(s) = 1/s
• When b = 0
• For an underdamped system
Robo3x-1.1 48
General 2nd Order Systems
Second-order system transfer functions have
the form
with poles of the form
Example: For
Compute , n, and s1,2?
Robo3x-1.1 49
Video 5.7
Robo3x-1.1 50
Characterizing Underdamped Systems
Robo3x-1.1 51
Peak Time
3
Same Envelope 2
1 Motion
3
of
2
poles
1
1
2
3
Robo3x-1.1 52
Settling Time
2 2 1
Same Frequency
1 Motion
of
poles
2 1
Robo3x-1.1 53
Overshoot
3 Same Overshoot
3
2
1 Motion
2 of
1 poles
1
2
3
Robo3x-1.1 54
In Summary
s-plane
Robo3x-1.1 55
Video 5.8
Robo3x-1.1 56
Independent Joint Control
In general,
n-Link Robot Arm generally has ≥ n
actuators
Single Input Single Output (SISO)
Single joint control
Robo3x-1.1 57
Permanent Magnet DC Motor
• Picture Here
Basic Principle
Source: Wikimedia Commons
Robo3x-1.1 58
Electrical Part
Armature Current
Back EMF
Motor Torque
Torque Constant
Robo3x-1.1 59
Mechanical Part
Actuator Dynamics
Gear ratio
Robo3x-1.1 60
Combining the Two
Correction: the Kb terms should be Km

Robo3x-1.1 61
Two SISO Outcomes
Input Voltage – Motor Shaft Position
Load Torque – Motor Shaft Position
Robo3x-1.1 62
Video 5.9
Robo3x-1.1 63
Two SISO Outcomes
Input Voltage – Motor Shaft Position
Load Torque – Motor Shaft Position
Assumption: L/R << Jm/Bm

Robo3x-1.1 64
2nd Order Approximation
Divide by R and set L/R = 0
In the time domain
Robo3x-1.1 65
Open-Loop System
Actuator Dynamics
• Set-point tracking (feedback)

• Trajectory tracking (feedforward)
Robo3x-1.1 66
Our Control Objectives
• Motion sequence of end-effector
positions and orientations (EE poses)
• EE poses Joint Angles Motor
Commands
• Transfer function
• Three primary linear controller designs:

• P (proportional)
• PD (proportional-derivative)
• PID (proportional-integral-derivative)
Robo3x-1.1 67
Set-Point Tracking
The Basic PID Controller
Robo3x-1.1 68
Proportional (P) Control
• Control input proportional to error
• KP – controller gain
• Error is amplified by KP to obtain the desired
output signal
Robo3x-1.1 69
P Control of Vehicle Speed
Example: Cruise Control X v
Desired linear speed q
vehicle wheel speed
Control input proportional to error
Robo3x-1.1 70
Performance of P Controller
KP = 10 KP = 50
• Increases the controller

gain decreases rise
KP = 100 time
• Excessive gain can
result in overshoot
Robo3x-1.1 71
Video 5.10
Robo3x-1.1 72
Proportional-Derivative (PD) Control
• Control input proportional to error AND 1st
derivative of error
• Including rate of change of error helps

mitigates oscillations
Robo3x-1.1 73
Performance of PD Controller
KP = 10 Decreases
KP = 10 rise time
KD = 1 KD = 3
Reduces
overshoot
KP = 500 KP = 500 & Settling
KD = 10 KD = 50 Time
Robo3x-1.1 74
PD Control of a Joint
Closed loop system given by
w/
Robo3x-1.1 75
PD Compensated Closed Loop Response (1)
Robo3x-1.1 76
PD Compensated Closed Loop Response (2)
Robo3x-1.1 77
Picking KP and KD
Closed loop system

w/
Design Guidelines
• Critically damped w/
• Pick and
Robo3x-1.1 78
Performance of the PD Controller
Assuming and
Tracking error is given by
At steady-state
Robo3x-1.1 79
Video 5.11
Robo3x-1.1 80
Proportional-Integral-Derivative (PID)
Controller
• Control input proportional to error, 1st
derivative AND an integral of the error
• The integral term offsets any steady-state

errors in the system
Robo3x-1.1 81
Performance of PID Controller
KP = 10
KP = 10 KD = 3
KD = 3 KI = 1
KP = 10 • Eliminates SS-Error
KD = 3 • Increases overshoot &
KI = 50 settling time
Robo3x-1.1 82
PID Control of a Joint
Closed-loop system is given by
w/
Robo3x-1.1 83
PID Compensated Closed Loop Response (1)
Robo3x-1.1 84
PID Compensated Closed Loop Response (2)
Robo3x-1.1 85
Picking KP, KD, and KI
Closed loop system

w/
Design Guidelines
• System stable if KP, KD, and KI >0
•
• Set KI = 0 and pick KP, KD, then go back to pick
KI w/ in mind
Robo3x-1.1 86
Summary of PID Characteristics
CL Rise % Settling S-S

Response Time Overshoot Time Error
Small
KP Decrease Increase Decrease
Change
Small Small
KD Decrease Decrease
Change Change
KI Decrease Increase Increase Eliminate
Robo3x-1.1 87
Tuning Gains
• Appropriate gain selection is crucial for
optimal controller performance
• Analytically (R-Locus, Frequency Design, Ziegler
Nichols, etc)
• Empirically
• The case for experimental validation
• Model fidelity
• Optimize for specific hardware
• Saturation and flexibility
Robo3x-1.1 88
Feedforward Control
• Motion sequence of end-effector
positions and orientations (EE poses)
• What if instead of , we want
?
Robo3x-1.1 89
Video 5.12
Robo3x-1.1 90
Closed Loop Transfer Function (1)
Robo3x-1.1 91
Robo3x-1.1 92
Robo3x-1.1 93
Picking F(s)
Closed loop transfer function given by
Behavior of closed loop response, given by

roots of
H(s) and F(s) be chosen so that
Robo3x-1.1 94
Will This Work?
Let F(s) = 1/G(s), i.e., a(s) = p(s) and b(s) = q(s),
then
System will track any

reference trajectory!
Robo3x-1.1 95
Caveats – Minimum Phase Systems
Picking F(s) = 1/G(s), leads to
• Assume system w/o FF loop is stable
• By picking F(s) = 1/G(s), we require
numerator of G(s) to be Hurwitz (or
)
• Systems whose numerators have roots with
negative real parts are called Minimum Phase
Robo3x-1.1 96
Feedforward Control w/ Disturbance
Assume: D(s) = constant w/

Pick F(s) = 1/G(s) =
Note the following:
Robo3x-1.1 97
Tracking Error
Control law in time domain
System dynamics w/ control + disturbance
Robo3x-1.1 98
Overall Performance
Robo3x-1.1 99

Week5 All 11 20 2017

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Week5 All 11 20 2017

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Video 5.

Input/Stimulus/ System or Output/

Input + Actuator + + Output

• Algebraic vs Differential Equations

Case 1: Roots of D(s) are Real & Distinct

➢ Solving for x(t)

Input + Input + + Output

G(s) =Transfer Function = output/input

Given and desired

How do we characterize the performance of

• For an underdamped system

with poles of the form

Source: Wikimedia Commons

Correction: the Kb terms should be Km

Load Torque – Motor Shaft Position

Load Torque – Motor Shaft Position

Assumption: L/R << Jm/Bm

Divide by R and set L/R = 0

In the time domain

• Set-point tracking (feedback)

• Three primary linear controller designs:

Desired linear speed q

vehicle wheel speed

Control input proportional to error

• Increases the controller

• Including rate of change of error helps

Closed loop system given by

Closed loop system

Tracking error is given by

• The integral term offsets any steady-state

Closed-loop system is given by

Closed loop system

CL Rise % Settling S-S

KI Decrease Increase Increase Eliminate

Behavior of closed loop response, given by

H(s) and F(s) be chosen so that

System will track any

Assume: D(s) = constant w/

Control law in time domain

System dynamics w/ control + disturbance

You might also like