Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Abstract: This paper presents real time control of the Twin Rotor MIMO System
laboratory model. The objective laboratory model is a multivariable nonlinear unstable
system of high order. It is not possible to stabilize the system and satisfactorily track
reference signals using classical controllers with fixedly set parameters. Two methods
based on self tuning control utilizing adaptive approach are discussed. Both designed
methods are based on polynomial approach. In first case an algorithm taking into account
internal interactions among input and output variables was used. The second method
utilizes the principle of decentralized control with an additional logical supervisor for
switching of the recursive identification in particular loops. In both cases stability of
closed loop system was ensured and after an adaptation phase the asymptotic tracking of
reference signals was achieved. Quality of control achieved by particular methods is
compared and discussed. Copyright 2005 IFAC
892
characteristic polynomial) is for SISO control loops 300
a lot more easier than for MIMO control loops. On 250
the other hand, the control courses of decentralized
200
control system are suboptimal because the controllers
do not use information from the other subsystems. 150
Disadvantageous is also a limited applicability of the
y1 - vertical axis
100
decentralized control only for symmetric systems 50
(systems with an equal number of inputs and
outputs). 0
-50 u2 = -0.25
2. TWIN ROTOR MIMO SYSTEM -100 u2 = 0.05
-150
The real-time laboratory model Twin Rotor MIMO
System (producer Feedback Instruments, LTD -200
-0.25 -0.2 -0.15 -0.1 -0.05 0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25
United Kingdom) is shown in Fig 1. This system u1 - small propeller
provides a high-order, non-linear system with Fig. 2. Static characteristics of the first subsystem
significant cross-coupling. The main parts of the showing hysteresis
system are the pedestal, the jib connected to pedestal
and two propellers at the ends of the jib. The system 3. DECENTRALIZED CONTROL USING LOGIC
jib can freely rotate around vertical axes by about SUPERVISOR
330 degrees (process output y1 ( t ) ) and horizontal
Each output of multivariable controlled system can
axis by about 100 degrees (process output y2 ( t ) . be affected by each system input. The measure of the
affection is determined not only by cross - coupling
The system inputs u1 ( t ) , u2 ( t ) are the voltages used
of the MIMO system but also by the course of the
to drive motors of the propellers and outputs are system input signals. When the decentralized
angular rotations with respect to horizontal and approach is used to control such a system then, from
vertical axes.. the point of view of controller in particular
subsystem, the transfer function varies in time even if
1 2 3 4 5 the MIMO system is linear and stable.
893
system has a hierarchical structure of control (Bobl,
et al. 2004).
u_in(k)
The inclusion of supervisory logic into control circuit y(k) u(k)
w(k)
brings the problem of defining a strategy for id_cntrl R1 u1 y1
switching the identification of individual subsystems Reference adaptive
controller 1 y1
signal 1
on and off i.e. moving the token between subsystems.
Three basic approaches can be used in deciding when E1 R1
to suspend identification of particular subsystem and E2 R2
u2 y2
move token to the other one: Logic supervisor y2
y on base of elapsed time,
u_in(k) u(k)
y on base of values from the currently identified y(k) Controlled
w(k)
subsystem, id_cntrl R2 process
y on base of values from the other subsystems. Reference adaptive
signal 2 controller 2
It is also possible to combine these approaches. The
basic ideas of these approaches are discussed in
Fig. 3. Simulink control circuit with TITO controlled
(Chalupa, 2003).
system
A logic supervisor has been proposed to utilize and Y ( z) B( z 1 )
GW ( z ) = = (1)
simplify the design of supervisory logic. This W ( z ) A( z ) P( z ) + B( z 1 )[Q( z 1 ) + ]
1 1
w e 1 u ( )
B z 1 y where the dominant poles are given by the desired
( )
P z 1 A( z )
1 damping factor and the natural frequency n of the
closed-loop. Then the controller algorithm, so called
Q(z-1) PP2B-1, is given by following equation (Bobl and
Chalupa, 2002)
u ( k ) = ( q0 + ) y ( k ) + ( q0 + q2 ) y ( k 1)
(7)
Fig. 4. Control loop with SISO controller q2 y ( k 2 ) ( 1) u ( k 1) + u ( k 2 ) + w ( k )
894
4. MULTIVARIABLE CONTROL y 1 (k ) = a1 y1 (k 1) a 2 y1 (k 2 ) a 3 y 2 (k 1)
a 4 y 2 (k 2 ) + b1 u 1 (k 1) + b2 u 1 (k 2 ) +
4.1. Mathematical Model of the Twin Rotor MIMO
System + b3 u 2 (k 1) + b 4 u 2 (k 2)
The transfer matrix of the system is defined as Fig. 6. Block diagram of 2DOF configuration
Generally, the vector W (z ) of input reference signals
G (z ) G12 (z )
Y (z ) = G (z )U (z ) = 11 U (z ) (8) is specified as
G 21 (z ) G 22 (z )
W (z ) = F w
1
(z )h(z )
1 1
(14)
where
Here, the reference signals are considered as a class
U (z ) = [u 1 (z ), u 2 (z )]
T of step functions. In this case h(z 1 ) is a vector of
(9)
is the vector of manipulated variables and constants and Fw (z 1 ) is expressed as
Y (z ) = [ y1 (z ), y 2 (z )] 1 z 1 0
T
(10)
Fw (z 1 ) = (15)
0 1 z 1
is the output vector.
The compensator F (z 1 ) is a component formally
It is possible to assume that the dynamic behaviour of separated from the controller. It has to be included in
the system can be described in the neighbourhood of the controller to fulfil the requirement on the
steady state by the discrete linear model in the form asymptotic tracking. If the reference signals are of
of the matrix fraction (Kuera, 1991) the same class as the step functions are, then F (z 1 )
G (z ) = A 1 (z 1 )B(z 1 ) = B1 (z 1 )A11 (z 1 ) (11) is an integrator.
Where polynomial matrices AR22[z-1], BR22[z-1] It is possible to derive the following equation for the
are the left coprime factorization of matrix G(z-1) and system output (operator z-1 will be omitted from some
matrices A1R22[z-1], B1R22[z-1] are the right operations for the purpose of simplification)
coprime factorization of G(z-1). Y = A 1 BU = A 1 BF 1 P 1U 1 (16)
follows as
b z 1 + b z 2 b3 z 1 + b4 z 2
B (z 1 ) = 1 1 2 2 U = F 1 P 1U 1 (18)
b5 z + b6 z b7 z 1 + b8 z 2
The substitution of U1 and Y results in
This model proved to be effective. Expression (12)
can be transcribed to the difference equations of the U = F 1 P 1 [ (W A1BU ) QFA1BU ] (19)
model
895
The equation (19) can be modified using the right u 2 (k ) = 3 e1 (k ) + 4 e 2 (k ) q 5 y1 (k )
matrix fraction of the controlled system into the form (q 6 q 5 ) y1 (k 1) + q 6 y1 (k 2 ) q 7 y 2 (k )
U = A1 [PFA1 + ( + FQ)B1 ]W (20) (q 8 q 7 ) y 2 (k 1) + q 8 y 2 (k 2 )
The closed loop system is stable when the following ( p 4 1)u 2 (k 1) + p 4 u 2 (k 2 ) p 3 u1 (k 1) +
diophantine equation is satisfied + p 3 u1 (k 2 )
PFA 1 + ( + FQ )B1 = M (21)
5. EXPERIMENTAL RESULTS
Where R22 z [ ] is a stable diagonal polynomial
1
The Twin Rotor MIMO System is a nonlinear system
matrix
with variable parameters that is practically too
1 + m1 z 1 + m2 z 2 + complex to be controlled using controllers with fixed
0 parameters. The nonlinear dynamics was in the
+ m3 z 3 + m 4 z 4
M (z 1 ) = (22) neighbourhood of a steady state described by the
1 + m1 z + m2 z 2
1
+
0 linear models given in previous sections. Adaptive
+ m3 z 3 + m 4 z 4 control was performed using the designed controllers.
and the structure of the matrices P, Q and was The sampling period was chosen in both cases
chosen as follows T0 = 0.5s . The other parameters for the decentralized
1 + p1 z 1 p2 z 1 control - damping factor = 10 and natural
P (z 1 ) = (23)
p3 z
1
1 + p4 z 1 frequency n = 1 were chosen in virtue of several
q + q 2 z 1
q3 + q 4 z 1
realized experiments. The matrix M (the pole
Q (z 1 ) = 1 placement of the multivariable controller) was also
q 5 + q 6 z q 7 + q 8 z 1
1
0
set of sixteen algebraic equations with unknown 0,009 z 3 0,002 z 4
controller parameters. Using matrix notation the
algebraic equations are expressed in the following The initial parameter estimates were chosen without
form any previous information in both cases.
The control courses of twin rotor MIMO system
1 0 b9 0 b13 0 b9 b13 p1 m1 a 9 + 1
b14 p 2 m 2 + a 9 a10
using both controllers are presented in Fig. 7, Fig. 8,
a9 1 a13 b10 b9 b9 b14 b13 b13 b10
a10 a 9 a14 a13 b10 b10 b9 b14 b14 b13 0 0 q1 m3 + a10 Fig. 9 and Fig. 10. These figures demonstrate that
a10 a14 0 b10 0 b14 0 0 q2
=
m4 the strong nonlinear, unstable and high order system
0 1 b11 0 b15 0 b11 b15 q 3 a11
0 b9 0 b13 0 b9
Table 1 contains the values of the control quality
a9 1 a13 b10 b9 b9 b14 b13 b13 b10 b14 p 4 a13 a14
a10 a9 a14 a13 b10 b10 b9 b14 b14 b13 0 0 q5 a14 criterions. A criterion is a sum of powers of tracking
errors and a sum of increments of manipulated
a10 a14 0 b10 0 b14 0 0 q6
=
0
0 1 b11 0 b15 0 b11 b15 q 7 m5 a15 + 1 variables. The table contains the values after 50 s
a11 a15 1 b12 b11 b11 b16 b15 b15 b12 b16 q8 m6 + a15 a16
a a when the identified parameters became steady.
a a b12 b12 b11 b16 b16 b15 0 0 3 m7 + a16
12 11 16 15
a12 a16 0 b12 0 b16 0 0 4 m8
(24)
The controller parameters are derived by solving
these equations. The control law apparent from the
block diagram is defined as
FPU = E FQY (25)
896
6. CONCLUSIONS
REFERENCES
897