Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Energy-saving trajectory planning by using Fourier sine series and tracking control for a mechatronic elevator system

  • Published:
International Journal of Dynamics and Control Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

In this paper, Lagrangian method is proposed to formulate dynamic model for a mechatronic elevator system, which includes mechanical and electrical parts. Lagrange equations, i.e. the torque balance equation and voltage balance equation, are derived from the kinetic energy, potential energy and virtual work of the mechatronic system. From the dynamic equations, the energy balance equation is obtained including electromagnetic energy, electrical dissipation energy, mechanical kinetic energy, mechanical dissipation energy, and the mechanical potential energy. The minimum-energy trajectory by using Fourier sine series (FSS) and power series are found by real-coded genetic algorithm. From simulation results, it is found that FSS with less order can find the minimum input energy more quickly than the power series. The four-degree (4-D) FSS trajectory is given as a reference one for the adaptive tracking control. It is found that the proposed adaptive controller has good tracking performance for the 4-D FSS angular displacement and velocity.

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
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. De Wit CC, Seleme SI Jr (1997) Robust torque control design for induction motors: the minimum energy approach. Automatica 33(1):63–79

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Yoram H, Emanuele C, Giuseppe M (2014) Minimum energy control of redundant linear manipulators. Trans ASME J Dyn Syst Meas Control 136(5):1–8

    Google Scholar 

  3. Dhanakorn I, Santosh D (2009) Minimum-time/energy, output transitions for dual-stage systems. Trans ASME J Dyn Syst Meas Control 131(2):1–8

    Google Scholar 

  4. Hongjun K, Byung KK (2014) Online minimum-energy trajectory planning and control on a straight-line path for three-wheeled omnidirectional mobile robots. IEEE Trans Ind Electr 61(9):4771–4779

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Murphey YL, Park J, Kilaris L, Kuang ML, Masrur MA, Phillips AM, Wang Q (2013) Intelligent hybrid vehicle power control-part II: online intelligent energy management. IEEE Trans Veh Technol 62(1):69–79

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Ebrahim OS, Badr MA, Elgendy AS, Jain PK (2010) ANN-based optimal energy control of induction motor drive in pumping applications. IEEE Trans Energy Convers 25(3):652–660

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Huang MS, Hsu YL, Fung RF (2012) Minimum-energy point-to-point trajectory planning for a motor-toggle servomechanism. IEEE/ASME Trans Mechatron 17(2):337–344

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Chen KY, Huang MS, Fung RF (2011) The comparisons of minimum-energy control of the mass-spring-damper system. In Proceedings of the 8th World Congress on Intelligent Control and Automation, June 21–25, Taipei, Taiwan, pp 666–671

  9. Chen KY, Huang MS, Fung RF (2012) Adaptive tracking control for a motor-table system. In The IEEE/ASME international conference on advanced intelligent mechatronics, Kaohsiung, Taiwan, pp 1054–1059

  10. Chen KY, Fung RF (2015) Adaptive tracking control the minimum-energy trajectory for a mechatronic motor-table system. IEEE/ASME Trans Mechatron 20(6):2795–2804

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Chen KY, Fung RF (2017) A Mechatronic motor-table system identification based on an energetics fitness function. IEEE/ASME Trans Mechatron 22(5):2288–2295

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Chen KY, Huang MS, Fung RF (2017) Adaptive minimum-energy tracking control for the mechatronic elevator system. IEEE Trans Control Syst Technol 25(5):1790–1799

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Chen KY, Huang MS, Fung RF (2014) Dynamic modelling and input-energy comparison for the mechatronic elevator system. Appl Math Model 38:2037–2050

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  14. Chen KY, Fung RF (2015) Energy comparisons of the adaptive tracking control for a linear drive system. Appl Mech Mater 764–765:602–606

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Chen KY, Fung RF (2013) Minimum input energy trajectory design of the mechatronic elevator system. Adv Mater Res 740:68–73

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Haupt RL, Haupt SE (1997) Practical genetic algorithms. Interscience, New York

    MATH  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Rong-Fong Fung.

Appendices

Appendix A

In this appendix, we derive the potential energy of the mechatronic elevator system. The cable height of the elevator system is measured from the position of mass center of the cable to the ground.

The initial height and length of the cable for the car are

$$ l_{c} = \left( {x_{c} + \frac{{h_{0} }}{{2}}{ + }\frac{{l_{1} }}{2}} \right),\quad l_{1} = H - x_{c} - \frac{{h_{0} }}{2}{,}\;{\text{and}}\;\int_{0}^{s} {dS} = \int_{0}^{\theta } {Rd\theta } . $$
(A1a-c)

The differential potential energy \(U_{c}\) of the car is

$$ dU_{c} = \rho g\left( {l_{1} - dS} \right)\left( {l_{c} + \frac{dS}{2}} \right) - \rho gl_{1} l_{c} = \rho g\left[ {l_{1} \frac{dS}{2} - l_{c} dS - \frac{{\left( {dS} \right)^{2} }}{2}} \right]. $$
(A2a)

Integrating Eq. (A2a), one can find that

$$ U_{c} = \rho g\left( {\frac{{l_{1} }}{2} - l_{c} } \right)R\theta . $$
(A2b)

Substituting \(l_{c}\) in Eq. (A1a) into Eq. (A1b), we have

$$ U_{c} = \rho g\left[ {\left( {\frac{{l_{1} }}{2} - \left( {\frac{{l_{1} }}{2} + x_{c} + \frac{{h_{0} }}{{2}}} \right)} \right)R\theta } \right] = \rho gR\theta \left( { - x_{c} - \frac{{h_{0} }}{2}} \right). $$
(A3)

The initial height and length of the cable for the counterweight are

$$ l_{w} = \left( {x_{w} + \frac{{h_{2} }}{2}{ + }\frac{{l_{2} }}{2}} \right),\quad {\text{and}}\quad l_{2} = H - \frac{{h_{2} }}{2} - x_{w} - h_{1} . $$
(A4a,b)

The differential potential energy \(U_{w}\) of the counterweight can be found

$$ dU_{w} = \rho \left( {l_{2} + dS} \right)g\left( {l_{w} - \frac{dS}{2}} \right) - \rho l_{2} gl_{w} = \rho g\left[ { - l_{2} \frac{dS}{2} + l_{w} dS - \frac{{\left( {dS} \right)^{2} }}{2}} \right]. $$
(A5a)

Integrating Eq. (A5a), one can find that

$$ U_{w} = \rho g\left[ {\left( {l_{w} - \frac{{l_{2} }}{2}} \right)R\theta } \right]. $$
(A5b)

Substituting \(l_{w}\) in Eq. (A4a) into Eq. (A5b), one can obtain

$$ U_{w} = \rho g\left[ {\left( {\frac{{l_{2} }}{2} + x_{w} + \frac{{h_{2} }}{2}} \right) - \left( {\frac{{l_{2} }}{2}} \right)R\theta } \right] = \rho gR\theta \left( {x_{w} { + }\frac{{h_{2} }}{2}} \right). $$
(A6)

Finally, the total potential energy \(U_{b}\) of the cable can be obtained as follows

$$ U_{b} = U_{c} { + }U_{w} = \rho gR\theta \left[ {\left( {x_{w} { + }\frac{{h_{2} }}{2}} \right) - \left( {x_{c} { + }\frac{{h_{0} }}{2}} \right)} \right], $$
(A7)

where \(U_{b}\) is the total potential energy of cable.

Appendix B

The general Fourier series with sine–cosine form is shown as follows:

$$ \theta (t) = \sum\limits_{n = 0}^{\infty } {\left( {a_{n} \cos \frac{n\pi t}{{2}} + b_{n} \sin \frac{n\pi t}{{2}}} \right)} , $$
(B1)

where \(a_{n}\) and \(b_{n}\) are Fourier coefficients, and \(n = 0,1,2,\ldots ,\infty .\)

The trajectory of angular displacement \( \, \theta (t)\), angular velocity \(\omega (t)\) and angular acceleration \(\alpha (t)\) by using Fourier series with \(n = 2\) are described as follows:

$$ \theta (t) = a_{0} + a_{1} \cos \frac{\pi t}{{2}} + b_{1} \sin \frac{\pi t}{{2}} + a_{2} \cos \pi t + b_{2} \sin \pi t, $$
(B2a)
$$ \omega (t) = - a_{1} \frac{\pi }{{2}}\sin \frac{\pi t}{{2}} + b_{1} \frac{\pi }{{2}}\cos \frac{\pi t}{{2}} - a_{2} \pi \sin \pi t + b_{2} \pi \cos \pi t, $$
(B2b)
$$ \alpha (t) = - a_{1} \frac{{\pi^{{2}} }}{{4}}\cos \frac{\pi }{{2}}t - b_{1} \frac{{\pi^{{2}} }}{{4}}\sin \frac{\pi t}{{2}} - a_{2} \pi^{2} \cos \pi^{2} t - b_{2} \pi^{2} \sin \pi t, $$
(B2c)

where \(a_{0} ,\) \(a_{1} ,\) \(a_{2} ,\) \(b_{1} ,\) and \(b_{2}\) are the unknown coefficients to be determined by initial- and final-time conditions. When the initial- and final-time conditions are \(\theta (0) = 0,\) \(\theta (1) = 1,\) \(\omega (0) = 0,\) \(\omega (1) = 0,\) \(\alpha (0) = 0,\) and \(\alpha (1) = 0,\) the coefficient equations can be obtained as follows:

$$ \begin{aligned} & \theta (0) = a_{0} + a_{1} + a_{2} = 0,\quad \theta (1) = a_{0} - a_{2} + b_{1} = 1,\quad \omega (0) = b_{1} - 2b_{2} = 0, \\ & \omega (1) = a_{1} + 2b_{2} = 0,\quad \alpha (0) = a_{1} + 4a_{2} = 0,\quad {\text{and}}\;\alpha (1) = 4a_{2} - b_{1} = 0. \\ \end{aligned} $$

Because there are six initial- and final-time conditions, and only five unknown coefficients (\(a_{0} ,\) \(a_{1} ,\) \(a_{2} ,\) \(b_{1} ,\) and \( \, b_{2}\)), therefore, one can not exactly solve the five unknown coefficients by using Fourier series with sine–cosine form.

Moreover, Fourier series with cosine form is shown as follows:

$$ \theta (t) = \sum\limits_{n = 0}^{\infty } {a_{n} \cos \frac{n\pi t}{{2}}} , $$
(B3)

where \(a_{n}\) is Fourier coefficients with \(n = 0,1,2\ldots ,\infty .\)

The trajectory of angular displacement \( \, \theta (t)\), angular velocity \(\omega (t)\) and angular acceleration \(\alpha (t)\) by using Fourier series with \(n = 5\) are described as follows:

$$ \theta (t) = a_{0} + a_{1} \cos \frac{\pi t}{{2}} + a_{2} \cos \pi t + a_{3} \cos \frac{{{3}\pi t}}{{2}} + a_{4} \cos {2}\pi t + a_{5} \cos \frac{{{5}\pi t}}{{2}}, $$
(B4a)
$$ \omega (t) = - a_{1} \frac{\pi }{{2}}\sin \frac{\pi t}{{2}} - a_{2} \pi \sin \pi t - a_{3} \frac{{{3}\pi }}{{2}}\sin \frac{{{3}\pi t}}{{2}} - a_{4} {2}\pi \sin {2}\pi t - a_{5} \frac{{{5}\pi }}{{2}}\sin \frac{{{5}\pi }}{{2}}t, $$
(B4b)
$$ \alpha (t) = - a_{1} \frac{{\pi^{{2}} }}{{4}}\cos \frac{\pi t}{{2}} - a_{2} \pi^{2} \cos \pi t - a_{3} \frac{{{9}\pi^{{2}} }}{{4}}\cos \frac{{{3}\pi t}}{{2}} - a_{{4}} {4}\pi^{2} \cos {2}\pi t - a_{5} \frac{{{25}\pi^{{2}} }}{{4}}\cos \frac{{{5}\pi t}}{{2}}, $$
(B4c)

where \(a_{0} ,\) \(a_{1} ,\) \(a_{2} ,\) \(a_{3} ,\) \(a_{4} ,\) and \(a_{5}\) are the unknown coefficients to be determined by initial- and final-time conditions. When the initial- and final-time conditions are \(\theta (0) = 0,\) \(\theta (1) = 1,\) \(\omega (0) = 0,\) \(\omega (1) = 0,\) \(\alpha (0) = 0,\) and \(\alpha (1) = 0,\) the coefficients can be solved as follows:

$$ \begin{aligned} & \theta (0) = a_{0} + a_{1} + a_{2} + a_{3} + a_{4} + a_{5} = 0,\quad \theta (1) = - a_{2} + a_{4} = 1, \\ & \omega (0) = 0,\quad \omega (1) = - a_{1} + 3a_{3} - 5a_{5} = 0, \\ & \alpha (0) = a_{1} + 4a_{2} + 9a_{3} + 16a_{4} + 25a_{5} = 0,\quad {\text{and}}\;\alpha (1) = a_{2} - 4a_{4} = 0. \\ \end{aligned} $$

It is seen that there are five initial- and final-time conditions, and six unknown coefficients (\(a_{0} ,\) \(a_{1} ,\) \(a_{2} ,\) \(a_{3} ,\) \(a_{4} ,\) and \( \, a_{5}\)), one also can not exactly solve the six unknown coefficients by using the cosine form of Fourier series.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Chen, KY., Huang, MS. & Fung, RF. Energy-saving trajectory planning by using Fourier sine series and tracking control for a mechatronic elevator system. Int. J. Dynam. Control 9, 1545–1558 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40435-021-00768-6

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40435-021-00768-6

Keywords

Navigation