SHAVO control: the combination of the adjusted command shaping and feedback control for vibration suppression
- 54 Downloads
The fast and precise positioning of flexible mechanical structures is often corrupted by the unwanted dynamics in the form of a residual vibration. Therefore, we would like to find an appropriate control strategy that is capable to suppress this effect. The control strategies can be basically divided into two main groups: feedback control and feedforward control. The feedback control with the information from integrated sensors is capable to ensure the stability and robustness, but it may require large actuator effort, and it may be difficult to design satisfactory controllers for rapid movements. The feedforward methods including command/input shaping are based on the model of the system and usually require no additional sensors. They can significantly eliminate residual vibration, but feedforward methods cannot deal with disturbances, and the quality of their performance is strongly determined by the precision of the used model on which they are based. This paper proposes the novel solution to these problems, the so-called SHAVO (SHAper \(+\) serVO control) strategy that combines advantages of both approaches. Compared to other methods combining command shaping and feedback controller, the SHAVO approach differs in two key features. Firstly, it uses a different structure, the model of the system is used not only for shaper synthesis but also for predicting system outputs and states. Secondly, the shaper itself is highly optimized with arbitrary adjustable time length, not an impulse series, not limited by the system’s natural frequency.
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
The work has been supported by the Czech Science Foundation, Project GAP101/11/2110 “Advanced input shaping control for precise positioning of mechanisms” and Project GA16-21961S “Mechatronic structures with heavily distributed actuators and sensors”.
- 1.Valášek, M.: Position and velocity control of gantry crane. Mechatronics 96(1), 203–208 (1996)Google Scholar
- 4.Beneš, P., Marek, O., Valášek, M.: Input shaping control of electronic cams with adjusted input profile. Bull. Appl. Mech. 7(29), 114–118 (2011)Google Scholar
- 6.Sugiyama, S., Uchino, K.: Pulse Driving Method of Piezoelectric Motors. In: Sixth IEEE International Symposium on Applications of Ferroelectrics, pp. 637–640 (1986). https://doi.org/10.1109/ISAF.1986.201223
- 9.Vyhlídal, T., Kučera, V., Hromčík, M.: Input shapers with uniformly distributed delays. In: Proceedings of 10th IFAC Workshop on Time Delay Systems, vol. 1, pp. 91–96 (2012)Google Scholar
- 13.Beneš, P.: Input shaping control with generalised conditions, Ph.D. Thesis. ČVUT v Praze, Praha (2012) (in Czech) Google Scholar
- 15.Singhose, W., Seering, W.: Generating vibration reducing inputs with vector diagrams. In: Proceedings of 8th IFToMM World Congress, pp. 315–318 (1991)Google Scholar
- 16.Singhose, W.: Command Generation for Flexible Systems. Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge (1997)Google Scholar
- 18.Wiederrich, J., Roth, B.: Design of low vibration cam profiles. In: Conference on Cams and Cam Mechanisms, Liverpool (1974)Google Scholar
- 20.Staehlin, U., Singh, T.: Design of closed-loop input shaping controllers. In: American Control Conference, pp. 5167–5172 (2003)Google Scholar
- 22.Huey, J.: The intelligent combination of input shaping and PID feedback control, Ph.D. Thesis. Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta (2006)Google Scholar
- 23.Schroedter, R., Roth, M., Janschek, K., Sandner, T.: Flatness-based open-loop and closed-loop control for electrostatic quasi-static microscanners using jerk-limited trajectory design. Mechatronics 56, 318–331 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mechatronics.2017.03.005 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 26.O’Connor, W.J.: Wave-echo position control of flexible systems: towards an explanation and theory. In: American Control Conference: Proceedings of the 2004, pp. 4837–4842. IEEE (2004)Google Scholar
- 27.Marek, O.: Servo control using wave-based method. In: Advances in Mechanisms Design: Proceedings of TMM 2012, pp. 531–536. Springer (2012)Google Scholar
- 29.Beneš, P., Valášek, M.: Optimized re-entry input shapers. J. Theor. Appl. Mech. 54(2), 353–368 (2016)Google Scholar
- 31.Miu, D.: Mechatronics, Electromechanics and Contromechanics. Springer, New York (1993)Google Scholar