ME 4053 MECHANICAL SYSTEMS LABORATORY

Controller Parameter Formulas

In the System Identification portion of the controls experiment, a linear, first-order approximation of the motor/amplifier system was obtained. This model is completely characterized by two constants: The motor constant, Km, and the motor time constant, Tm. In this exercise, you are to design three types of classical controllers for the motor: Proportional (P), Proportional plus Derivative (PD), and Proportional plus Integral plus Derivative (PID) controllers. Formulas for the gains in the various controller types considered here are presented in any reasonably complete text on control theory. These formulas will be explained further in the second lecture that accompanies this experiment. To prepare for the second week of the experiment, merely compute the required gains according to the formulas presented below. In the calculations, use the time constant and motor constant obtained in Week 1. In addition to a system model, control design is based upon control specifications. In this lab, we will use two primary control specs: Maximum percent overshoot, Mp, and settling time, ts. Each laboratory section will be assigned these values prior to the closed-loop control experiment. Proportional Controller. For the proportional controller regulating a second order system with a step input, the proportional gain can be specified to meet a maximum overshoot specification. The time domain solution shows that the required damping ratio, , can be determined from the fractional overshoot, Mp, from the relationship (1) Thus equation (1) can be solved for the damping ratio, , given the control spec Mp. Once is determined, the gain of the proportional controller can be found from the following formula:

(2)

Use Equation (2) to compute the proportional controller gain and enter this value into Table 1. Note that there is no way to independently specify the settling time of the closed-loop system because the P-controller has only a single control gain. Proportional plus Derivative Controller. For the PD-controller regulating a second order system with a step input, the two control system gains can be specified to at least approximately meet both a maximum overshoot specification and a maximum settling time specification. The time domain solution shows that the desired damping ratio, , can still be determined from the fractional overshoot, Mp, by Equation (1). Further analysis shows that the appropriate natural frequency can be determined from the desired settling time, tds by (3)

The required proportional gain and derivative gain can then be determined from the following formulas (4) and (5)

ME 4053 MECHANICAL SYSTEMS LABORATORY

Calculate these gains for your assigned values of Mp and ts and record your computed gains in Table 1. PID Controller. When regulating a second order plant, PID control results in an overall third-order system. For the typical underdamped or oscillating system, two poles will be complex, and the third will be real. The proportional plus integral plus derivative controller has three free design parameters. The third degree of freedom can be used to ensure that the third system pole, which is at s3 = , will be far to the left in the s plane of the two complex poles. The two complex poles will then tend to dominate the dynamics of the system, and the system will have approximately second order behavior. As before, Equations (1) and (3) are used to find the required damping ratio and natural frequency, respectively. A multiplier parameter, n, is introduced to represent the added degree of freedom. Each lab section will be assigned three values for the multiplier: n1, n2, and n3. Corresponding to each value of n, a PID controller will be designed and tested. The location of the third closed-loop system pole is given by the relation: (6) Then, the desired gains can be computed with the following formulas:

(7) (8)

(9)

Calculate these gains for the assigned values of Mp, ts, and ni, i =1,2,3, and record the results in Table 1.

Calculations and Simulations to be Completed as Homework

For each control strategy, the appropriate gains should be computed and entered into a table such as Table 1. This table should be written or pasted into your research notebook to document the work for this week. As an expedient, the tables may be taped into the research notebook. It is never acceptable to staple exhibits into a research notebook. Next create a SIMULINK model as illustrated in Figure 1.Refer to the Appendix for suggestions and instructions on completing the simulation assignment. Use the model to simulate P and PD controllers with the calculated gains. Paste or tape the plots of these simulation results into your notebook. In the case of the PID controller of the non-linear model, simulate the response with gains computed for n equal to n1, n2, and n3. Select the gain setting with the best response for minimizing the following controller score, Score = settling time (sec) max overshoot (percent) After selecting the best value of n as a starting point, adjust or tweak the controller by altering the values of the gains to further minimize the controller score. Be prepared to run the actual physical experiment with the adjusted controller parameters during the second week.

ME 4053 MECHANICAL SYSTEMS LABORATORY

Please begin the homework assignment in the lab and at least build and test the simulation model in the lab. Be sure to insert the following results into your research notebook: o o o o o o Completed Table 1 with comments Completed Table 2 Plot of simulation of proportional controller with calculated gains for both linear and non-linear model (Refer to the Appendix) Plot of simulation of PD controller with calculated gains for both linear and non-linear model Plot of simulation of all three PID controllers with calculated gains for both linear and non-linear model Plot of simulation of PID controller with adjusted gains for non-linear model

Submit the notebook for inspection and grading at the start of the second lab week. Table 1. Calculated Control Parameters and Simulated Response for Linear Model (Deadbands Set to Zero) Description Proportional Integral Derivative Max Settling Controller gain gain gain Overshoot Time score Ki Kp Kd (%) (sec) volts/(rev% sec volts/rev volts/(rev/sec) sec) P PD PID PID PID Table 2. Calculated Control Parameters and Simulated Response for Non-Linear Model (Deadbands Set to Observed Values) Description Proportional Integral Derivative Max Settling Controller gain gain gain Overshoot Time score Kp Ki Kd (sec) % sec volts/rev volts/(rev- volts/(rev/sec) (%) sec) P PD PID PID PID PID adjusted Note that the gains in Table 2 are exactly identical to the gains in Table 1.

ME 4053 MECHANICAL SYSTEMS LABORATORY

Figure 1. SIMULINK/Quanser System to Implement Parameter Identification Experiment

Figure 2. Location and Parameters for the Blocks Used in Parameter Identification

ME 4053 MECHANICAL SYSTEMS LABORATORY

Figure 3. SIMULINK Model Used to Verify Parameter Identification

Figure 4. Location and Parameters for the Blocks Used in Parameter Verification

ME 4053 MECHANICAL SYSTEMS LABORATORY

Figure 5. Simulation Model for P, PD, and PID Controllers Including Dead Band and Saturation

ME 4053 MECHANICAL SYSTEMS LABORATORY

Appendix A. Guidelines and Examples for Control Experiment Homework Figure 5 above shows a model for the brushless DC motor system used in the ME4053 controls lab. The model includes an amplifier dead-zone and input saturation. Two sets of simulation are to be performed as part of the homework. For the first set, the amplifier deadzone is set to zero to simulate a linear system. The second set of simulations include the non-linearities of the system as determined by the limits of the dead-zone measured during the first week. The response from this simulation should mimic the response of the actual motor system as tested in the second week of the controls lab. First construct the SIMULINK block diagram needed for the simulation of the P, PD, and PID control of the DC motor system. Now prepare the run the simulations by entering the following motor and controller parameters: Motor parameters: K m, T m Dead zone parameters: Simulation Set 1 (Linear System): Start of dead zone = 0 End of dead zone = 0 Simulation Set 2 (Non-linear System): Start of dead zone =D1 = negative limit End of dead zone =D2 = positive limit Saturation parameters: Simulation Set 1 (Linear System): Upper limit = 1e6 Lower limit = -1e6 Simulation Set 2 (Non-linear System): Upper limit = 10 Lower limit = -10 Controller parameters: Set the following calculated or adjusted control parameters: K p , K i, K d Simulate the closed-loop response of the system for a particular reference signal. The reference signal is a plot of the desired flywheel angle (rev) vs time. Each semester, the exact description of this desired angle will be specified. Note that when executing the simulations, Kd and Ki are set zero for the case of the proportional controller. Similarly Ki is set to zero for the case of the proportional plus derivative controller. Before actually executing the simulations, select a convenient and efficient simulation method using the following settings: Select Simulation drop-down menu Select Parameters Set Stop Time to the assigned value Set Solver options Type: Variable-step, ode23s (stiff/Mod. Rosenbrock) or ode45 (Dormand-Prince) Finally select OK and run your simulations as described and practiced before.

ME 4053 MECHANICAL SYSTEMS LABORATORY

For each of the required simulations, the output to DESPOS will be the time sequence recording the desired signal the motor is commanded to follow, and the output to POS will be recorded as the actual response of the motor. If it is necessary to lengthen the simulation to get a more complete picture of the response, increase the stop time of the simulation. To set the stop time, use the Simulation drop down menu and the Parameters option. This change will simulate more response cycles. The arrays containing the data for DESPOS and POS will be automatically sent as outputs to the MATLAB workspace. Use the commands learned in the MATLAB tutorial to plot these responses. Plot the simulation results using the following commands in the MATLAB workspace: >>plot(Time,DesPos,r,Time,Pos,b),grid on,hold on, >>Title(PID simulation of a brushless DC motor) >>xlabel(Time (sec)),ylabel(Position (rev)) These plots are the records and documentation of the required simulations. For the position control of the motor, the optimal response is to have zero steady state error (within measurement precision), the smallest feasible maximum overshoot, and the smallest feasible settling time. Inspect each plot by zooming in to evaluate the following controller score that is used as the figure of merit of the design of the controller: Score = settling time (sec) max overshoot (percent) In practice, a control designer typically tweaks the calculated controller gains to achieve the optimal response of the actual system, which may have second order features that cannot be anticipated precisely. Consequently, prepare for the actual controller development next week by tweaking the PID controller gains for the simulation of the system with dead band to obtain a response with zero steady state error and a minimum product of the maximum overshoot and settling time. Figure A.1 below shows typical simulation results for the non-linear model. Figures A.2 and A.3 show simulation results and experimental results for the proportional and PID controllers respectively. The simulation results should be prepared as part of the homework assignment. The experimental results will be obtained during the second week of the experiment.

Figure A.1. Simulation Results for PID Control of Non-Linear Model With the following quantitative results:

ME 4053 MECHANICAL SYSTEMS LABORATORY

Maximum percent overshoot: Settling Time: ts = 6.93 s (Settling time is determined based on the 2% criteria. Therefore, the settling time is the last time the error is larger than 2%)

Controller Score = 14.7 % 6.93 s = 102 % s

(Record the controller scores of the linear model simulation in table 2 and those of the non-liner model simulation in table 3 above)

Figure A.2. Comparison of Simulation and Experimental results for PID Control of Non-Linear Model

Figure A.3. Comparison of Simulation and Experimental Results for Proportional Control of Non-Linear Model