Skip to main content
Log in

Simultaneous stabilization and trajectory tracking of underactuated mechanical systems with included actuators dynamics

  • Published:
Multibody System Dynamics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The paper deals with a novel control algorithm for simultaneous stabilization and trajectory tracking of underactuated nonlinear mechanical systems (UNMS) with included actuators dynamics. Simultaneous stabilization and trajectory tracking refer to arbitrary chosen actuated and unactuated degrees of freedom (DOF) of the system. The proposed control approach can be applied both to the second-order nonholonomic systems and the systems with input coupling, while a general model of actuators dynamics includes electrical, pneumatic, and hydraulic drives. Control law is based on linear combination of two control signals, where the first signal is designed to separately control only actuated DOF, and second to separately control only unactuated DOF. Simulation example of rotational inverted pendulum driven by electrical DC motor is presented, showing the effectiveness of the proposed approach.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. There are some specific examples of UNMS that can be asymptotically stabilized around equilibrium point using a continuous linear-time invariant feedback control law, but this is not possible for a general class.

  2. Arbitrary DOF means arbitrarily chosen DOF, and can be any actuated or any unactuated DOF.

  3. A dimension of a configuration space for fully-actuated systems is the same as a control input space dimension.

  4. These two classes of UNMS are distinguished because of their often usage in different research fields. For instance, nonholonomic systems are the most used in robotics, while UNMS with input coupling are the most used in aerospace and naval research fields.

  5. The expression \(\mathbf{H}_{u}(\mathbf{q})\not\equiv\mathbf{0}\) means that every row of the matrix H u (q) has at least one nonzero element, for all q.

  6. In general, the system described as affine in control variable u has the form \(\dot{\mathbf {x}}=\mathbf{f}(\mathbf{x})+\mathbf{B}(\mathbf{x})\mathbf{u}\). Vector function f(x) represents the drift of the system. If f(x)=0, then system is driftless.

  7. For convenience, in the remainder the vector function γ ac (x ac ,x qa1,x qa2) will be used in shorter forms γ ac (x ac ,x q ) or γ ac , to reduce the length of further expressions.

  8. This is due to a rigid connection (with a transmission ratio N) between actuators and UNMS. More precisely, this means that the state variables of the actuators, which connect the actuators with the UNMS, are identified with some state variables of the mechanical system. For instance, if DC electric motor drives kth generalized coordinate with a transmission ratio N, then a relation between rotor’s angular velocity ω and generalized velocity \(\mathbf{x}_{qa2}^{k}\) of UMNS is \(\mathbf{x}_{qa2}^{k}=\frac {1}{N}\omega\).

  9. For the right Moore–Penrose pseudoinversion of the matrix Φ 4 it holds: , \(\mathbf{I} \in\mathbb{R}^{n_{u}\times n_{u}}\) identity matrix, .

  10. m 1=0.83 kg, L 1=0.6 m, J 1=0.00208 kg⋅m−2, m 2=0.1 kg, L 2=0.3 m, J 2=0.001 kg⋅m−2, g=9.81 m⋅s−2, l 1=0.3 m, l 2=0.1 m.

  11. Numerical values of DC motor parameters are: K t =1.68 N⋅m⋅A−1, K v =0.168 V⋅s, R a =28.6 Ω, L a =0.01 H.

  12. Sliding variable: λ a1=40, λ u1=10, λ a2=10, λ u2=10, Initial conditions: x qa1(0)=0.5 rad, x qu1(0)=0.8 rad, Control law: φ a =−0.4, φ u =1.4, α 1=250, α 2=250, χ(s a )=α 1tanh(s a ), χ(s u )=α 2tanh(s u ), Viscous friction: C 1=0 N⋅m⋅s, C 2=0 N⋅m⋅s, Reference trajectory: (x qa1) d =0 rad, (x qu1) d =0 rad.

  13. Same as in footnote 12, except: Sliding variable: λ a1=5, λ u1=10, λ a2=5, λ u2=20, Control law: α 1=250, α 2=200, Reference trajectory: (x qa1) d =sin(t)+0.5sin(1.5t) rad, (x qu1) d =0 rad.

  14. Same as in footnote 12, except: Sliding variable: λ a1=3, λ u1=10, λ a2=5, λ u2=10, Control law: α 1=250, α 2=250, Reference trajectory: (x qa1) d =0 rad, (x qu1) d =0.2sin(t)+0.4sin(1.5t) rad.

References

  1. Alleyne, A.G., Liu, R.: Systematic control of a class of nonlinear systems with application to electrohydraulic cylinder pressure control. IEEE Trans. Control Syst. Technol. 8(4), 623–634 (2000)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Aneke, N.: Control of underactuated mechanical systems. Ph.D. thesis, University of Technology Eindhoven (2003)

  3. Aoustin, Y., Formal’skii, A., Martynenko, Y.: Pendubot: combining of energy and intuitive approaches to swing up, stabilization in erected pose. Multibody Syst. Dyn. 25(1), 60–85 (2011)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  4. Astolfi, A.: Discontinuous control of nonholonomic systems. Syst. Control Lett. 27(1), 37–46 (1996)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  5. Banavar, R.N., Sankaranarayanan, V.: Switched Finite Time Control of a Class of Underactuated Systems. Lecture Notes in Control and Information Sciences, vol. 333. Springer, Berlin (2006)

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  6. Beater, P.: Pneumatic Drives—System Design, Modelling and Control, 1st edn., vol. 18, pp. 247–268. Springer, Berlin (2007)

    Google Scholar 

  7. Blajer, W., Dziewiecki, K., Kołodziejczyk, K., Mazur, Z.: Inverse dynamics of underactuated mechanical systems: a simple case study and experimental verification. Commun. Nonlinear Sci. Numer. Simul. 16(5), 2265–2272 (2011)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  8. Blajer, W., Kołodziejczyk, K.: Control of underactuated mechanical systems with servo-constraints. Nonlinear Dyn. 50, 781–791 (2007)

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  9. Blajer, W., Kołodziejczyk, K.: Improved DAE formulation for inverse dynamics simulation of cranes. Multibody Syst. Dyn. 25(2), 131–143 (2011)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Brockett, R.W.: Asymptotic stability and feedback stabilization. In: Differential Geometric Control Theory, pp. 181–191 (1983)

    Google Scholar 

  11. Chwa, D., Choi, J.Y., Seo, J.H.: Compensation of actuator dynamics in nonlinear missile control. IEEE Trans. Control Syst. Technol. 12(4), 620–626 (2004)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Dong, W., Guo, Y.: Global time-varying stabilization of underactuated surface vessel. IEEE Trans. Autom. Control 50(6), 859–864 (2005)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  13. Hernandez-Guzman, V., Santibanez, V., Campa, R.: PID control of robot manipulators equipped with brushless dc motor. Robotica 27(2), 225–233 (2008)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Hongrui, W., Yantao, T., Siyan, F., Zhen, S.: Nonlinear control for output regulation of ball and plate system. In: Proceedings of the 27th Chinese Control Conference, Kunming, Yunnan, China (2008)

    Google Scholar 

  15. Jaspen, P.: A direct Lyapunov approach to stabilization and tracking of underactuated mechanical systems. Ph.D. thesis, Kansas State University (2008)

  16. Ma, B., Tso, S.: Unified controller for both trajectory tracking and point regulation of second-order nonholonomic chained systems. Robot. Auton. Syst. 56(4), 317–323 (2008)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Minf, F.: Vss control for a class of underactuated mechanical systems. International Journal of Computational. Cognition 3(2), 14–18 (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  18. Olfati-Saber, R.: Nonlinear control of underactuated mechanical systems with application to robotics and aerospace vehicles. Ph.D. thesis, MIT (2001)

  19. Olfati-Saber, R.: Normal forms for underactuated mechanical systems with symmetry. IEEE Trans. Autom. Control 47(2), 305–308 (2002)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  20. Oriolo, G., Nakamura, Y.: Control of mechanical systems with second-order nonholonomic constraints: Underactuated manipulators. In: Proceedings of the 30th IEEE Conference on Decision and Control, Brighton, UK, vol. 3, pp. 2398–2403 (1991)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  21. Richer, E., Hurmuzlu, Y.: A high performance pneumatic force actuator system, part 1—nonlinear mathematical model. J. Dyn. Syst. Meas. Control 122(3), 416–425 (2000)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Seifried, R.: Two approaches for feedforward control and optimal design of underactuated multibody systems. In: Multibody System Dynamics, pp. 1–19 (2011)

    Google Scholar 

  23. Shkolnik, A., Tedrake, R.: High-dimensional underactuated motion planning via task space control. In: IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems, Nice, France, pp. 3762–3768 (2008)

    Google Scholar 

  24. Situm, Z., Petric, J., Crnekovic, M.: Sliding mode control applied to pneumatic servo drive. In: Proceedings of the 11th Mediterranean Conference on Control and Automation, Rhodos, Greece (2003)

    Google Scholar 

  25. Spong, M.W.: Partial feedback linearization of underactuated mechanical systems. In: Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems, Munich, Germany, vol. 1, pp. 314–321 (1994)

    Google Scholar 

  26. Sukontanakarn, V., Parnichkun, M.: Real-time optimal control for rotary inverted pendulum. Am. J. Appl. Sci. 6, 1106–1115 (2009)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Tanner, H., Kyriakopoulos, K.: Stabilization and output tracking for underactuated mechanical systems with inequality state constraints. In: Proceedings of the IEEE/ASME International Conference on Advanced Intelligent Mechatronics, Como, Italy, pp. 862–867 (2001)

    Google Scholar 

  28. Tarn, T.J., Bejczy, A., Yun, X., Li, Z.: Effect of motor dynamics on nonlinear feedback robot arm control. IEEE Trans. Robot. Autom. 7(1), 114–122 (1991)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Toussaint, G.J., Başar, T., Bullo, F.: Tracking for nonlinear underactuated surface vessels with generalized forces. In: IEEE Conf. on Control Applications, Anchorage, AK, pp. 355–360 (2000). http://motion.me.ucsb.edu/pdf/2000c-tbb.pdf

    Google Scholar 

  30. Van Damme, M., Vanderborght, B., Beyl, P., Versluys, R., Vanderniepen, I., Van Ham, R., Cherelle, P., Daerden, F., Lefeber, D.: Sliding mode control of a “soft” 2-DOF planar pneumatic manipulator. Int. Appl. Mech. 44(10), 135–144 (2008)

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  31. Wichlund, K.Y., Sordalen, O.J., Egeland, O.: Control of vehicles with second-order nonholonomic constraints: Underactuated vehicles. In: Proceedings of the European Control Conference, Rome, Italy, pp. 3086–3091 (1995)

    Google Scholar 

  32. Xu, W.L., Ma, B.L.: Stabilization of second-order nonholonomic systems in canonical chained form. Robot. Auton. Syst. 34(4), 223–233 (2001)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  33. Zilic, T., Essert, M., Situm, Z.: Tracking and stabilization of pneumatically actuated cart-inverted pendulum. In: Proceedings of the 20th International DAAAM Symposium, Vienna, Austria, pp. 1377–1379 (2009)

    Google Scholar 

  34. Zilic, T., Pavkovic, D., Zorc, D.: Modeling and control of a pneumatically actuated inverted pendulum. J. Sci. Eng. Meas. Autom., ISA Trans. 48(3), 327–335 (2009)

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Tihomir Zilic.

Appendices

Appendix A

A proof of the matrix inversion for matrix \(\tilde{\mathbf {M}}_{a1}(\mathbf{q})\), is derived in the similar way as given in [25], and is given by the following expression:

(32)

where \(\mathbf{I}_{n_{a}\times n_{a}} \in\mathbb{R}^{n_{a}\times n_{a}}\) is identity matrix, and \(\mathbf{0}_{n_{u}\times n_{a}} \in\mathbb {R}^{n_{u}\times n_{a}}\) is zero matrix. Since the matrix M(q) is positive definite matrix, and matrix

$$\begin{bmatrix} \mathbf{I}_{n_a\times n_a} \\ -\mathbf {M}_{u2}^{-1}(\mathbf{q})\mathbf{M}_{u1}(\mathbf{q})\end{bmatrix} $$

has full column rank n a , it follows that matrix \(\tilde{\mathbf {M}}_{a1}(\mathbf{q})\) has full rank n a , i.e. it is invertible.

A proof of matrix inversion for matrix \(\tilde{\mathbf{M}}_{u2}(\mathbf {q})\), is derived in the similar way as given in [25], and is given by the following expression:

(33)

Since the inertia matrix M(q) is positive definite matrix, and matrix

$$\begin{bmatrix} -\mathbf{M}_{a1}^{-1}(\mathbf{q})\mathbf{M}_{a2}(\mathbf {q}) \\ \mathbf{I}_{n_u\times n_u}\end{bmatrix} $$

has full column rank n u , it follows that matrix \(\tilde{\mathbf {M}}_{u2}(\mathbf{q})\) has full rank n u , i.e., it is invertible.

Appendix B

Relation between the function and the input vector u using expressions from (9) and (12) is given by

(34)

where is a vector function, at k=n a , while \(\gamma_{ac}^{k}(\mathbf{x}_{ac},\mathbf{x}_{q})\) is a scalar function. The matrix of partial derivatives is defined by the following expression:

(35)

where, for instance, the matrix element in (35) is in position (1,2) defined as shown:

$$ \frac{\partial\gamma_{ac}^1(\mathbf{x}_{ac},\mathbf{x}_q)}{\partial \mathbf{x}_{ac}^2}= \frac{\partial\gamma_{ac}^1(\mathbf{x}_{ac},\mathbf{x}_q)}{\partial x_{ac1}^2}+ \frac{\partial\gamma_{ac}^1(\mathbf{x}_{ac},\mathbf{x}_q)}{\partial x_{ac2}^2}+\cdots+ \frac{\partial\gamma_{ac}^1(\mathbf{x}_{ac},\mathbf{x}_q)}{\partial x_{acj}^2}$$
(36)

Here, \(j=n_{ac}^{2}\), i.e. j represents a number of the state space variables of the actuator 2, while the number 2 from \(j=n_{ac}^{2}\) denotes a mark for actuator and does not mean squaring of n ac .

Appendix C

A pneumatic actuator with proportional spool valve consists of a pneumatic cylinder with piston and a proportional spool valve, as shown in Fig. 5. A mathematical model of the pneumatic actuator [6, 21] consists of model of the piston dynamics, model of the fluid pressure dynamics and model of the proportional valve spool dynamics, while for kth actuator is a vector of the state space variables defined as follows:

$$ \mathbf{x}_{ac}^k= \left [\begin{array}{c}x_{ac1}^k \\x_{ac2}^k \\x_{ac3}^k \\x_{ac4}^k\end{array} \right ]= \left [ \begin{array}{c}p_1 \\p_2 \\x_s \\\dot{x}_s\end{array}\right ]$$
(37)

where state variables represent: p 1—air pressure in the left cylinder chamber, p 2—air pressure in the right cylinder chamber, x s —spool displacement and \(\dot{x}_{s}\)—spool velocity. In modeling, this actuator has two additional state variables, x c —cylinder piston displacement, and \(\dot{x}_{c}\)—cylinder piston velocity, but these variables are replaced by the state variables (\(\mathbf{x}_{qa1}^{k},\mathbf{x}_{qa2}^{k}\)) of the mechanical system. This replacement is a consequence of an assumption of the rigid connection between the actuator and mechanical system, as explained in Sect. 2.3. For that case, variables x c i \(\dot{x}_{c}\) do not belong to the vector \(\mathbf{x}_{ac}^{k}\).

Fig. 5
figure 5

Schematic representation of the pneumatic cylinder-valve system

3.1 C.1 Cylinder piston dynamics

A cylinder piston dynamics is described by ordinary second-order differential equation, as shown by the following expression:

$$ F^k=\underbrace{A_1p_1-A_2p_2}_{ \gamma_{ac}^k(\mathbf {x}_{ac}^k,\mathbf{x}_{qa1}^k,\mathbf{x}_{qa2}^k)}-\underbrace {M_c}_{M_{ac}^k} \underbrace{\ddot{q}_a^k}_{\dot{x}_{qa2}^k}-\underbrace{F_{\mathrm{dis}_{ac1}}\bigl(q_a^k,\dot{q}_a^k\bigr)}_{F_{\mathrm{dis}_{ac1}}^k(\mathbf {x}_{qa1}^k,\mathbf{x}_{qa2}^k)}$$
(38)

where M c , A 1, A 2 are positive constants, representing mass of the piston, active surface area of the piston for chambers 1 and 2, respectively. The expression \(F_{\mathrm{dis}_{ac1}}(x_{c},\dot{x}_{c})\) represents friction force (which is in Fig. 5 denoted as F dis) dependent on the state variables of the cylinder. The expression A 1 p 1A 2 p 2 represents a force acting on the piston and caused by air pressures p 1 and p 2, while F k is a force produced by a kth pneumatic actuator. A rigid connection between state variables of the actuator and mechanical system is described by expressions \(x_{c}=q_{a}^{k}\) and \(\dot{x}_{c}=\dot{q}_{a}^{k}\). For this case, a transmission ratio is N=1. An underlined representation in the equation (38) is a state space form, where state variables are x ac1=p 1 and x ac2=p 2.

3.2 C.2 Fluid pressure dynamics

Air pressures in cylinders’ chambers are defined as follows:

$$ \begin{aligned} &\overbrace{\dot{p}_1}^{\dot{x}_{ac1}}=\overbrace{\frac{\kappa RT}{V_D+V_0+A_1q_a^k}\dot{m}_1(x_s,p_1)-\frac{\kappa A_1}{V_D+V_0+A_1q_a^k}p_1\dot{q}_a^k}^{f_{ac1}^k(\mathbf {x}_{ac}^k,\mathbf{x}_{qa1}^k,\mathbf{x}_{qa2}^k)}\\&\underbrace{\dot{p}_2}_{\dot{x}_{ac2}}=\underbrace{\frac{\kappa RT}{V_D+V_0-A_1q_a^k}\dot{m}_2(x_s,p_2)+\frac{\kappa A_2}{V_D+V_0-A_2q_a^k}p_2\dot{q}_a^k}_{f_{ac2}^k(\mathbf {x}_{ac}^k,\mathbf{x}_{qa1}^k,\mathbf{x}_{qa2}^k)}\end{aligned} $$
(39)

where index 1 refers to the left chamber and index 2 refers to the right chamber of the cylinder.

Parameters κ, R, T, V D , V 0, A 1, A 2 are constants greater the zero, representing the specific heat ratio, ideal gas constant, temperature, inactive cylinder volume at the and of stroke and admission port, half of the active cylinder volume, and the piston effective area, respectively. Variables p i and \(\dot{m}_{i}\), for i∈{1,2} represent air pressures and mass flow rates in cylinder chambers. Mass flows \(\dot{m}_{i}\), for i∈{1,2} are expressed as functions of pressures and spool displacement x s (see Fig. 6), and described by following equations:

(40)
(41)

where: C f , C 1 and C 2 are constants greater the zero, A v (x s ) is the valve effective area for input/exhaust paths which depends on spool displacement, p s is the pressure in the air reservoir, p e is the exhaust pressure, p cr is critical pressure value.

Fig. 6
figure 6

Schematic representation of valve spool dynamics

3.3 C.3 Valve spool dynamics

$$ M_s\ddot{x}_s+c_s\dot{x}_s+F_{\mathrm{dis}_{ac3}}(x_s,\dot{x}_s)+2k_sx_s=F_c$$
(42)

where M s , k s , c s are constants greater the zero, representing the spool coil assembly mass, the spool springs constant, and the viscous friction coefficient, respectively. The expression \(F_{\mathrm{dis}_{ac3}}(x_{s},\dot{x}_{s})\) represents the friction force (which is in Fig. 6 denoted as F dis) dependent on the valve’s state variables. The input F c represents the force produced by the coil, and it can be linearly described as a function of electric current F c =K fc i c or voltage. The equation (42) can be expressed in a state space form as follows:

(43)
(44)

where state variables are x ac3=x s and \(x_{ac4}=\dot{x}_{s}\).

The whole model of the pneumatic actuator (39), (43), (44), and (38), with general form presented in Sect. 2.3, is given by the following expressions:

(45)

Note: A relative degree of this pneumatic actuator, according to the output F k, is r=3. A first time derivation of \(\gamma_{ac}^{k}\) contains x s , a second time derivative of \(\gamma_{ac}^{k}\) contains \(\dot{x}_{s}\), while a third time derivative of \(\gamma_{ac}^{k}\) contains \(\ddot{x}_{s}\) and it contains the input u k according to (44).

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Zilic, T., Kasac, J., Situm, Z. et al. Simultaneous stabilization and trajectory tracking of underactuated mechanical systems with included actuators dynamics. Multibody Syst Dyn 29, 1–19 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11044-012-9303-1

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11044-012-9303-1

Keywords

Navigation