ME 452 Course Project II

Rotary Inverted Pendulum

(Full Version)

Project Instructor: Xiumin Diao

Advisor: Dr. Ou Ma

Department of Mechanical Engineering

New Mexico State University

July 2006
1. Objectives
Control of an inverted pendulum is one of the most interesting and classical problems for control
engineering. The objective of this project is to design a controller which is capable of driving the pendulum
from its “hanging-down” position to upright position and then holding it there. The experiment system, as
shown in Fig. 1, consists of a vertical pendulum, a horizontal arm, a gear chain, and a servomotor which
drives the pendulum through the gear transmission system. The rotating arm is mounted on the output gear
of the gear chain. An encoder is attached to the arm shaft to measure the rotating angle of the arm. At the
end of the rotating arm there is a hinge instrumented with an encoder. The pendulum is attached to the
hinge.

Fig. 1 Rotary inverted pendulum system

On the project, you are asked to do the following:

Derive a nonlinear model of the rotary inverted pendulum system.

Derive a linearized model of the same system in the neighborhood of the upright position.

Verify the linear and non-linear models to see if they are indeed true models of the physical
system over a specific operating range.

Design, implement, and simulate a stabilizing controller which maintains the pendulum in the
upright position with some robustness for small disturbance to the pendulum.

Design and implement a mode controller which activates the stabilizing controller when the
pendulum is placed in a small neighborhood of the upright position.

Design and implement a destabilizing controller which swings up the pendulum to near upright
position, so that the stabilizing controller can be activated to stabilize the pendulum.

2. System requirements
To complete this project, the following hardware and software are required:
1) A Quanser UPM 1503 universal power module
2) A Quanser Q4 data acquisition card
3) A Quanser terminal card
3) A Quanser SRV02-ET servomotor and the geared driving unit
4) A Quanser rotary inverted pendulum

2
 5) A PC
6) Quanser’s WinCon 5.0 software
7) Matlab/Simulink and control system toolbox
All of the above-mentioned hardware and software are provided in the Robotics lab (JH608).

3. Modeling of the inverted pendulum system

The inverted pendulum (mechanical part only) is sketched in Fig. 2, α and θ are employed as the
generalized coordinates to describe the inverted pendulum system. The pendulum is displaced with a given
α while the arm rotates an angle of θ . In this project, we assume that θ ≡ θ l where the latter has been
used in Project I. We assume the pendulum to be a lump mass at point B which is located at the geometric
center of the pendulum. The xyz frame is fixed to the arm at point A . For a complete listing of the symbols
used in the math formulation, please refer to Appendix A.

Pendulum
α L

y
α&
x
arm A
z r
θ
O θ&

Fig. 2 Simplified model of the rotary inverted pendulum system

3.1 Using Free Body Diagram method

The Free Body Diagram of the inverted pendulum (mechanical part only) system is shown in Fig. 3.
Note that the arm rotates in the horizontal plane (xz plane) only and the pendulum rotates in the vertical
plane (xy plane) only, we can draw the forces in these two planes only to simplify the drawing.
Referring back to Fig. 2, we notice that the velocity of point B on the pendulum relative to that of point
A on the arm is
x& BA = − L cos(α )α&
(1)
y& BA = − L sin(α )α&
We also know that the pendulum is also moving with the rotating arm at a rate of rθ& . Thus, the absolute
velocity of the point B on the pendulum can be expressed as
x& B = rθ& − L cos(α )α&
(2)
y& B = − L sin(α )α&

3
 Ax x
A B Pendulum
z
θ Arm
y
mg
θ& α
Beqθ& Ox
Tl O
α&

Oz Ax A x
Ay
(a) F.B.D. of Arm (b) F.B.D. of Pendulum
Fig. 3 Free Body Diagram of the rotary inverted pendulum system

Differentiating (2) with respect to time, we will get the acceleration of the point B

&x&B = rθ&& + L sin(α )α& 2 − L cos(α )α&&

(3)
&y&B = − L cos(α )α& 2 − L sin(α )α&&

Applying Newton’s 2nd Law to the pendulum in x direction, we obtain

m&x&B = ∑ Fx ⇒ mrθ&& + mL sin(α )α& 2 − mL cos(α )α&& = Ax (4)

Applying Newton’s 2nd Law to the pendulum in y direction, we obtain

m&y&B = ∑ Fy ⇒ −mL cos(α )α& 2 − mL sin(α )α&& = Ay − mg

(5)
⇒ mg − mL cos(α )α& 2 − mL sin(α )α&& = Ay

Applying Euler’s Equation to the rotational motion of the pendulum about point B , we obtain
1
J Bα&& = ∑ M B ⇒ m(2 L) 2 α&& = Ax L cos(α ) + Ay L sin(α )
12 (6)
1
⇒ mL2α&& = Ax L cos(α ) + Ay L sin(α )
3
Applying the Euler’s Equation to the rotational motion of the arm about point O , we obtain

J Oθ&& = ∑ M O ⇒ J eqθ&& = Tl − Beqθ& − Ax r (7)

Substituting (4) and (5) into (6), we are left

1 2
mL α&& = (mrθ&& + mL sin(α )α& 2 − mL cos(α )α&&) L cos(α )
3
+ (mg − mL cos(α )α& 2 − mL sin(α )α&&) L sin(α )
1
⇒ mL2α&& = (mLr cos(α )θ&& + mL2 sin(α ) cos(α )α& 2 − mL2 cos 2 (α )α&&) (8)
3
+ (mgL sin(α ) − mL2 sin(α ) cos(α )α& 2 − mL2 sin 2 (α )α&&)
4
⇒ −mLr cos(α )θ&& + mL2α&& − mgL sin(α ) = 0
3

Substituting (4) into (7), we are left

4
 J eqθ&& = Tl − Beqθ& − (mrθ&& + mL sin(α )α& 2 − mL cos(α )α&&)r
⇒ J eqθ&& = Tl − Beqθ& − (mr 2θ&& + mLr sin(α )α& 2 − mLr cos(α )α&&) (9)
⇒ ( J eq + mr 2 )θ&& − mLr cos(α )α&& + mLr sin(α )α& 2 = Tl − Beqθ&

Combining (8) and (9), we obtain the motion of equation of the system
( J eq + mr 2 )θ&& − mLr cos(α )α&& + mLr sin(α )α& 2 = Tl − Beqθ&
4 (10)
− mLr cos(α )θ&& + mL2α&& − mgL sin(α ) = 0
3

3.2 Using Lagranian Formulation

The kinetic energy of the mechanical system arising from the rotating arm and pendulum is

1 1 1
J eqθ& 2 + m( x& B + y& B ) + J Bα& 2
2 2
T=
2 2 2
1 1 1
= J eqθ& 2 + m[(rθ& − L cos(α )α& ) 2 + (− L sin(α )α& ) 2 ] + J Bα& 2 (11)
2 2 2
1 2
= ( J eq + mr 2 )θ& 2 + mL2α& 2 − mLr cos(α )θ&α&
2 3

1 1
where J B = m(2 L) 2 = mL2 is the moment of inertia of the pendulum about its center of mass. Taking
12 3
the horizontal plane where the arm lies as the datum plane, the only potential energy in the mechanical
system is gravity, i.e.,
V = mgL cos(α ) (12)
Since we have two generalized coordinates, θ and α , we therefore have two equations according to
Lagrangian Formulation
d ∂T ∂T ∂V
( )− + = Tl − Beqθ&
dt ∂θ& ∂θ ∂θ
(13)
d ∂T ∂T ∂V
( )− + =0
dt ∂α& ∂α ∂α
Substituting (11) and (12) into (13), we obtain the motion of equation of the system (10) as expected.
From Project I, we have known that the output torque of the driving unit on the load shaft is

Tl = η g K g (Tm − J mθ&&m )
= η g K g (η m K t I m − J m K g θ&&)
Vm − K m K g θ&
= η mη g K t K g − η g K g2 J mθ&& (14)
Rm
η mη g K t K g η mη g K t K g2 K m &
= Vm − θ − η g K g2 J mθ&&
Rm Rm

Substituting (14) into (10), we obtain the nonlinear model of the system as follows:

aθ&& − b cos(α )α&& + b sin(α )α& 2 + eθ& = fVm

(15)
− b cos(α )θ&& + cα&& − d sin(α ) = 0

where

5
 a = J eq + mr 2 + η g K g2 J m
b = mLr
4 2
c= mL
3
d = mgL (16)
2
η mη g K t K K mg
e = Beq +
Rm
η mη g K t K g
f =
Rm
Linearizing (15) under the assumption that α ≈ 0 and α& ≈ 0 , we get the linearized model as follows:
aθ&& − bα&& + eθ& = fVm
(17)
− bθ&& + cα&& − dα = 0
Solving (15) for the two accelerations α&& and θ&& , we obtain the solution from the nonlinear model below:
1 − b sin(α )α& 2 − eθ& + fVm − b cos(α )
θ&& = 2 2
ac − b cos (α ) d sin(α ) c
1
= (−bc sin(α )α& 2 + bd sin(α ) cos(α ) − ceθ& + cfVm )
ac − b cos2 (α )
2
(18)
1 a − b sin(α )α& 2 − eθ& + fV m
α&& =
ac − b 2 cos2 (α ) − b cos(α ) d sin(α )
1
= (ad sin(α ) − b 2 sin(α ) cos(α )α& 2 − be cos(α )θ& + bf cos(α )Vm )
ac − b 2 cos2 (α )
Solving (17) for the two accelerations α&& and θ&& , we find the solution from the linearized model as follows:

1 − eθ& + fVm −b 1
θ&& = 2
= (bdα − ceθ& + cfVm )
ac − b dα c ac − b 2
(19)
1 a − eθ& + fVm 1
α&& = 2
= (adα − beθ& + bfVm )
ac − b − b dα ac − b 2

To obtain the transfer function of the linearized system equations (17) analytically, we need to take the
Laplace transformation of it, namely,

aΘ( s) s 2 − bΑ(s) s 2 + eΘ(s )s = fVm ( s)

(20)
− bΘ( s)s 2 + cΑ( s)s 2 − dΑ(s) = 0

In the above the initial conditions have been assumed zero. The transfer function relates the variation from
the desired position of the pendulum to the input voltage of the motor. Since we are interested in the angle
α , we want to eliminate Θ( s ) from (20)
Α( s) bfs 2
= (21)
Vm (s) (ac − b 2 )s 4 + ces 3 − ads 2 − des
From the above transfer function, it can be seen that there is a pole and a zero at the origin. They can be
canceled from each other and the resulting transfer function becomes
Α( s ) bfs
= (22)
Vm ( s) (ac − b 2 ) s 3 + ces 2 − ads − de
This is our final model of the inverted pendulum system for designing the controller. Note that this transfer
function represents the linearized model only.

6
4. Verification of the mathematical model

4.1 Verification of the linear model against the nonlinear model

In order to get some sense about how well the linearized model represents the original nonlinear system,
we are going to simulate the dynamics of the system using both the linear and non-linear models and then
compare their simulation outputs. The simulation will not only verify the linear model, but also establish a
threshold for us to know the threshold (on α ) of the linear model.
The main Simulink diagram of comparing the linear model with the nonlinear model is shown in Fig. 4.
The nonlinear and linear models are shown in Figs. 5 and 6, respectively. α is given an initial condition
( 0.00001 (rad ) ) and thus the pendulum is allowed to fall. As one can see from the simulation results shown
in Fig. 7, the linear model correctly depicts the motion of the pendulum for the first 1.4 seconds and then
begin to break down. Zooming in the plots around 1.4 seconds, we saw that the linear model quite
accurately described the system for the first 15 degrees and then began to diverge from the actual motion.

Fig. 4 Main diagram of verifying the linear model

Fig. 5 Diagram of the nonlinear model

7
 Fig. 6 Diagram of the linear model

60
Linear
40 Nonlinear
θ (deg)

20

-20
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8
Time (s)

250
Linear
200
Nonlinear
150
α (deg)

100

50

0
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8
Time (s)
Fig. 7 Overlapped plots of the simulation outputs from the linear and nonlinear models

4.2 Verification of both linear and nonlinear models against hardware

In order to get some sense about how well the dynamics models represent the real hardware system, we
are going to compare the outputs of both the linear model and the nonlinear model with hardware data. To
simplify the verification, we do the experiment near the “hanging-down” position. Replacing α with
α + π in (18), we obtain the nonlinear model of the pendulum system at the “hanging-down” position:
1
θ&& = (bc sin(α )α& 2 + bd sin(α ) cos(α ) − ceθ& + cfVm )
ac − b 2 cos2 (α )
(23)
1
α&& = (−ad sin(α ) − b 2 sin(α ) cos(α )α& 2 + be cos(α )θ& − bf cos(α )Vm )
ac − b 2 cos2 (α )
Linearizing (23) under the assumption that α ≈ 0 and α& ≈ 0 , we get the corresponding linearized model

8
 1
θ&& = (bdα − ceθ& + cfVm )
ac − b 2 (24)
1
α&& = (−adα + beθ& − bfVm )
ac − b 2

The main Simulink diagram of comparing both the linear and nonlinear models with the data measured
from the physical system is shown in Fig. 8. The interface to the inverted pendulum system is shown in Fig.
9. The linear model and the nonlinear model, as shown in Figs. 10 and 11, are created according to (23) and
(24) respectively.

Fig. 8 Main diagram of verifying both the linear model and the nonlinear model

Fig. 9 Interface to the inverted pendulum system

9
 Fig. 10 Liner model of the inverted pendulum system

Fig. 11 Nonliner model of the inverted pendulum system

In the experiment, a ramp signal with a slope of 2, as shown in Fig. 12, is used as the input voltage of
the system. From the plots of θ and α , as shown in Fig. 13, we can see that the responses of the models
are similar to these of the physical system. They have almost the same shape. The responses of the physical
system have some delay due to the friction in the physical system as explained in project I.

10
 2.5

Input Voltage (V) 1.5

0.5

0
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2
Time (s)

Fig. 12 Input voltage of the experiment

80
Linear model
Nonlinear model
60
Physical system
θ (deg)

40

20

0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9
Time (s)

0
Linear model
Nonlinear model
-2
Physical system
α (deg)

-4

-6

-8
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9
Time (s)
Fig. 13 Plots of the verifying both the linear model and the nonlinear model with the physical system

5. Destabilizing controller
The controller of the whole system consists of three parts: destabilizing controller, stabilizing
controller, and mode controller. The destabilizing controller, as the name implies, oscillates the arm until it
has built up enough energy to break the initial stable (hanging-down) state and get the pendulum into an
almost upright but unstable state. Then the stabilizing controller is turned on to stabilize the pendulum in its

11
upright sate. The mode controller determines when to switch between the destabilizing controller and
stabilizing controller. We will discuss the design and implementation of the destabilizing controller in this
section. The mode controller and the stabilizing controller will be discussed in the next two sections.
Destabilizing controller will essentially drive the position of the arm in order to get away from the
stable “hanging-down” position of the pendulum. It simply makes sense that, by moving the arm back and
forth strongly enough, it can eventually swing up the pendulum. Hence, the first thing we need to do is to
design a position controller which can swing the arm to achieve the destabilizing goal.

5.1 Position controller

5.1.1 Design of the position controller

The pendulum in the system has a length of 2 L = 0.335 (m) and its center of mass is located at its
geometric center. Thus the natural frequency for small oscillations of the pendulum is given by

mgL 3g
ωp = = = 6.628 (rad/s ) (25)
IA 4L

where I A is the mass moment of inertia of the pendulum about point A . We want the arm to react to these
movements. Therefore the closed-loop response of the arm should be considerably faster than the natural
frequency of the pendulum. It would then be reasonable to design a closed-loop controller for the arm
position which has the following specifications

ω n = 4ω p , %OS = 2% or ω n = 26.512 (rad/s), ζ = 0.780 (26)

where %OS is the maximum overshoot of the response for a step input.
For the arm to track the desired position, we design a PD control law

Vm = K p (θ d − θ ) − K vθ& (27)

This is a position control loop that controls the voltage applied to the motor so that θ tracks θ d with zero

desired velocity. Now we need to determine K p and K v according the above defined specifications (26).

The closed-loop transfer function of the input and output is

θ η gη m K g K t K p
= (28)
θ d J eq R m s 2 + ( Beq R m + η g η m K m K t K g2 + η gη m K g K t K v ) s + η g η m K g K t K p

Comparing it with the standard transfer function of a second order system (see Section 5-3 of the textbook)
we have

Beq Rm + η gη m K m K t K g2 + η gη m K g K t K v
= 2ω n ζ
J eq Rm
(29)
η gη m K g K t K p 2
=ω n
J eq Rm

Solving (29), we obtain

12
 2ω n ζJ eq Rm − Beq Rm − η gη m K m K t K g2
Kv = = 0.585
η gη m K g K t
(30)
ω n2 J eq Rm
Kp = = 19.612
η gη m K g K t

With these values of the control grains, we expect the arm tracks the desired position and velocity with the
required specifications.

5.1.2 Simulation of the position controller

The main Simulink diagram of the simulation of the position controller is shown in Fig. 14 and the
Simulink diagram of the servomotor and gear transmission system is shown in Fig. 15. Given the required
specifications ω n = 26.512 (rad/s), %OS = 2% , the step response of the closed-loop system is shown in Fig.
17. We can see that the response has a maximum overshoot of 2% and the first peak at 0.189 second. So the
position controller meets the required specifications.

Fig. 14 Main diagram for simulation of the position controller

Fig. 15 Model of the servomotor and gear transmission system

6
Control signal (V)

-2
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1
Time (s)
Fig. 16 Control signal of the system

13
 25
System reponse

Load shaft position (deg)

20 Input command

15

10

0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1
Time (s)

Fig. 17 System response due to a step input

5.1.3 Implementation of the position controller

The main Simulink diagram of the implementation of the position controller is shown in Fig. 18 and the
interface to the servomotor and gear transmission system is shown in Fig. 19. The model of the servomotor
and gear transmission system is shown in Fig. 15. An example step response of the system is shown in Fig.
21. In this example, the desired angular position of the arm is set to 20 degrees.

Fig. 18 Main diagram for implementation of the position controller

Fig. 19 Interface to the servomotor and gear transmission system

14
 8
Simulated control signal
6 Measured control signal

Control signal (V)

4

-2
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5
Time (s)
Fig. 20 Simulated and real control signals for the position control experiment

25
Load shaft position (deg)

20

15

10
Input command
5 Simulated position
Measured position
0
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5
Time (s)
Fig. 21 Simulated and real dynamic responses of the system to a step input

5.2 Destabilizing controller

Many schemes can be devised to gradually swing up the pendulum. In this project we will design a
positive feedback controller to destabilize the pendulum and eventually swing up it. Notice that we have a
useful application of positive feedback here. Assume the arm position can be commanded via θ d . Then the
feedback
θ d = Pα + Dα& (31)
can be made to destabilize the system with the proper choice of the gains P and D . This means that we
want to command the arm based on the position and velocity of the pendulum. Moreover, by limiting θ d ,
we can ensure that the arm does not reach a position that will cause a collision with the nearby hardware
(e.g., the table). The gains P and D are crucial in bring up the pendulum smoothly. Based on the
experiment, we choose P = 0.5 (deg/deg) and D = 0.00001 deg/(deg/s) . One can tune the value of D to
adjust the “damping” in the system.
The main Simulink diagram of the destabilizing controller using positive feedback is shown in Fig. 22.
The diagram of the rotary inverted pendulum is shown in Fig. 23. From the plot of alpha in Fig. 24, we can
see that the pendulum is brought up (the curve passing through the α = 0 line) in about 1.25 seconds.

15
 Fig. 22 Main diagram of the Destabilizing controller using positive feedback

Fig. 23 Interface to the rotary inverted pendulum system

200

100
α (deg)

-100

-200
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5
Time (s)
Fig. 24 Plot of alpha during the pendulum swing-up motion under the destabilizing control

30

20

10
θ (deg)

-10

-20

-30
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5
Time (s)
Fig. 25 Plot of theta during the pendulum swing-up motion under the destabilizing control

16
6. Mode controller
The purpose of the mode controller is to track the pendulum angle α and facilitate switching between
the destabilizing controller and stabilizing controller. This controller is to be enabled when α is in the
neighborhood of zero, within the threshold of α (currently set to 10 degrees).
The Simulink diagram of the simulation of the mode controller is shown in Fig. 26. From the
simulation results shown in Fig. 27 we can see that the mode controller works very well. It output 1 when

α ≤ 10 degrees and 0 when α > 10 degrees .

Fig. 26 Simulink diagram of the mode controller

15
Mode signal
10 Input signal
5

-5

-10

-15
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5
Time (s)
Fig. 27 Plots of the input signal and the mode signal

7. Stabilizing controller by feeding back both θ and α

If we can feed back both θ and α angles, we can calculate the control signal using both of them.
Assuming the pendulum is almost upright, two PD controllers can be implemented to maintain it at the
upright position (capable of rejecting disturbances up to a certain extent). The PD controller for θ is

theta _ u = theta _ K p (θ d − θ ) + theta _ K d θ& (32)

where θ d is the desired position of the rotating arm after balancing. The PD controller for α is

alpha _ u = alpha _ K p (α d − α ) + alpha _ K d α& (33)

where α d ≡ 0 . The control signal (i.e., the input voltage of the motor) is then given by
u = alpha _ u − theta _ u (34)
Based on the experiment, we choose

17
 theta _ K p = 2.2; theta _ K d = 2.0; alpha _ K p = 21.1; alpha _ K d = 2.9 (35)

One can adjust these four parameters to obtain a better stabilizing controller.
To simulate the stabilizing controller, the Simulink diagram shown in Fig. 28 is created. The rotary
inverted pendulum model is shown in Fig. 6. An impulse disturbance with amplitude of 5 degrees and
period of 5 seconds is added to the measured alpha in Fig. 29. We can see that the stabilizing controller is
good enough to maintain the pendulum in the upright position and keep it there stably. The same impulse
disturbance is added to the measured theta in Fig. 30. The stabilizing controller can also maintain the
pendulum in the upright position and keep it stable.

Fig. 28 Diagram of the simulation of the stabilizing controller

18
 50

Control signal (V)

0

-50

-100
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20

40

20
θ (deg)

-20

-40
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20

10

0
α (deg)

-10

-20

-30
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20
Time (s)

Fig. 29 Plots of control signal, theta, and alpha when alpha has an impulse disturbance

20
Control signal (V)

-20

-40

-60
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20
Time (s)

50
θ (deg)

-50
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20
Time (s)

10

0
α (deg)

-10

-20

-30
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20
Time (s)

Fig. 30 Plots of control signal, theta, and alpha when theta has an impulse disturbance

19
8. Implementation of the whole system by feeding back both θ and α

The main Simulink diagram of the implementation of the rotary inverted pendulum system is shown in
Fig. 31. The diagrams of the three sub-controllers, namely, the destabilizing controller, the mode controller
and the stabilizing controller are shown in Figs. 32-34, respectively. The implementation of the sevomotor
and gear transmission system is shown in Fig. 23. From the experiment, we can see that the pendulum is
destabilized in the “hanging-down” position, brought upright and maintained in the inverted position. Note
that the pendulum has some small oscillations (see Fig. 35) in the inverted position due to the errors in the
mathematical model and the controller, the friction in the hardware, the vibration of the experiment table,
etc.

Fig. 31 Main diagram of the rotary inverted pendulum system

Fig. 32 Diagram of the destabilizing controller

Fig. 33 Diagram of the mode controller

20
 Fig. 34 Diagram of the stabilizing controller

0.5
α (deg)

-0.5

-1
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Time (s)

Fig. 35 Plot of the alpha angle after balancing in the upright position

0
θ (deg)

-2

-4

-6
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Time (s)

Fig. 36 Plot of the theta angle after balancing in the upright position

9. Stabilizing controller by feeding back α only

The rotary inverted pendulum system has two degrees of freedom. In general, we cannot maintain the
pendulum in the upright position if we feed back α only. Using the SISO Design Tool in the Control
System Toolbox, we can design a stabilizing (PID) controller for the system described by the transfer
function in (22). As shown in Fig. 37, the controller can be
( s + 20)(s + 10) s 2 + 30s + 200
C (s) = 2 × = 2× (36)
s s
Comparing to the standard PID controller

21
 Kd s2 + K p s + Ki
C (s) = K c × (37)
s
we get

K c = 2, K p = 30, K i = 200, K d = 1 (38)

To simulate the stabilizing controller by feeding back α only, the main Simulink diagram shown in
Fig. 38 was created. The rotary inverted pendulum model is shown in Fig. 6. From the simulation results
shown in Figs. 39 and 40, we can see that the pendulum can reject a pulse disturbance, but the rotating arm
will rotate crazily if we feed back α only.

Fig. 37 Design of the PID controller using SISO Design Tool

22
 Fig. 38 Simulink diagram for simulating the stabilizing controller

0
α (deg)

-5

Feedback α only
Feedback α and θ
-10
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Time (s)

Fig. 39 Plot of alpha when there is a pulse disturbance in alpha

200
Feedback α only
150 Feedback α and θ

100
θ (deg)

50

-50
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Time (s)

Fig. 40 Plot of theta when there is a pulse disturbance in alpha

23
Appendix A: Nomenclature of the System
Nominal
MATLAB
Symbol Description Value
Variable
(SI Units)
X component of the action force exerted on the pendulum at
Ax --- ---
point A by the arm
Y component of the action force exerted on the pendulum at
Ay --- ---
point A by the arm
α Pendulum position --- ---
α& Pendulum velocity --- ---
α&& Pendulum acceleration --- ---

Beq Equivalent viscous damping coefficient Beq 0.004

g Gravity acceleration g 9.81

Im Current in the armature circuit --- ---
JB Moment of inertia of the pendulum about its center of mass --- ---

J eq Moment of inertia of the arm and pendulum about the axis of θ Jeq 0.0035842

Jl Moment of inertia of the arm and pendulum about the axis of θ l --- ---
Jm Moment of inertia of the rotor of the motor Jm 3.87e-7

Kg SRV02 system gear ratio (motor -> load) Kg 70 ( 14 × 5 )

Km Back-emf constant Km 0.00767

Kt Motor-torque constant Kt 0.00767
L Half length of the pendlum L 0.1675
Lm Armature inductance --- ---
m Mass of pendulum m 0.125
X component of the action force exerted on the arm at point
Ox --- ---
O by the base of the motor
Z component of the action force exerted on the arm at point
Oz --- ---
O by the base of the motor
r Rotating arm length r 0.215
Rm Armature resistance Rm 2.6
Tl Torque applied to the load --- ---
Tm Torque generated by the motor --- ---
θ Load shaft position --- ---
θ& Load shaft velocity --- ---
θ&& Load shaft acceleration --- ---
θl Angular position of the arm --- ---

θ&l Load shaft velocity --- ---

24
 θ&&l Load shaft acceleration --- ---

θm Motor shaft position --- ---

θ&m Motor shaft velocity --- ---

θ&&m Motor shaft acceleration --- ---

V emf Motor back-emf voltage --- ---

Vm Input voltage of the armature circuit --- ---

X component of the velocity of point B on the pendulum
x& BA --- ---
relative to point A on the arm
Y component of the velocity of point B on the pendulum
y& BA --- ---
relative to point A on the arm
x& B Velocity of pendulum center of mass in X direction --- ---
y& B Velocity of pendulum center of mass in Y direction --- ---
&x&B Acceleration of pendulum center of mass in X direction --- ---
&y&B Acceleration of pendulum center of mass in Y direction --- ---

ηg Gearbox efficiency Eff_G 0.9

ηm Motor efficiency Eff_M 0.69

25