Академический Документы
Профессиональный Документы
Культура Документы
NAVAL
POSTGRADUATE
SCHOOL
MONTEREY, CALIFORNIA
Leonard A. Ferrari
Provost
___________________
Dojong Kim
Visiting Scholar of MAE Department
Agency for Defense Development, RoK
___________________
Duane Frist
LCDR, USN
MAE Department
___________________
Jae Jun Kim
Research Assistant Professor,
MAE Department
___________________
Brij Agrawal
Distinguished Professor
MAE Department
Reviewed by:
Released by:
__________________
Knox Millsaps
Chair, MAE Department
____________________
Karl A. Van Bibber
Vice President and
Dean of Research
Public reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 1 hour per response, including
the time for reviewing instruction, searching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and
completing and reviewing the collection of information. Send comments regarding this burden estimate or any
other aspect of this collection of information, including suggestions for reducing this burden, to Washington
headquarters Services, Directorate for Information Operations and Reports, 1215 Jefferson Davis Highway, Suite
1204, Arlington, VA 22202-4302, and to the Office of Management and Budget, Paperwork Reduction Project
(0704-0188) Washington DC 20503.
1. AGENCY USE ONLY (Leave blank)
2. REPORT DATE
3. REPORT TYPE AND DATES COVERED
July 2009
Technical Report
4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE: Title (Mix case letters)
5. FUNDING NUMBERS
A HEL Testbed for High Accuracy Beam Pointing and Control
6. AUTHOR(S) Dojong Kim, Duane Frist, Jae Jun. Kim, Brij Agrawal
7. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME(S) AND ADDRESS(ES)
8. PERFORMING
Naval Postgraduate School
ORGANIZATION REPORT
Monterey, CA 93943-5000
NUMBER
9. SPONSORING /MONITORING AGENCY NAME(S) AND ADDRESS(ES)
10. SPONSORING/MONITORING
N/A
AGENCY REPORT NUMBER
11. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES The views expressed in this report are those of the author and do not reflect the official
policy or position of the Department of Defense or the U.S. Government.
12a. DISTRIBUTION / AVAILABILITY STATEMENT
12b. DISTRIBUTION CODE
Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited
A
13. ABSTRACT (maximum 200 words)
High energy laser (HEL) weapons are some of most challenging military applications in the future battle fields since the
speed of light delivery enables the war fighter to engage very distant targets immediately. The issues of the technology on
the HEL system include various types of high energy laser devices, beam control systems, atmospheric propagation, and
target lethality. Among them, precision pointing of laser beam and high-bandwidth rejection of jitters produced by platform
vibrations are one of the key technologies for the emerging fields of laser communications and HEL systems.
HEL testbed has been developed to support the research environments on the precision beam control technology
including acquisition, tracking, and pointing. The testbed incorporates optical table, two axis gimbal, high speed computers,
and a variety of servo components, sensors, optical components, and software. In this report, system configuration and
operation modes of the testbed are briefly introduced. The results of the experiments and integrated modeling from
component to system level are described and discussed. Based on these results, new control algorithms are designed and it is
shown that the algorithm can improve the pointing performance of the system.
18. SECURITY
CLASSIFICATION OF THIS
PAGE
Unclassified
NSN 7540-01-280-5500
15. NUMBER OF
PAGES
78
16. PRICE CODE
19. SECURITY
20. LIMITATION
CLASSIFICATION OF
OF ABSTRACT
ABSTRACT
Unclassified
UU
Standard Form 298 (Rev. 2-89)
ii
ABSTRACT
High energy laser (HEL) weapons are some of most challenging military applications
in the future battle fields since the speed of light delivery enables the war fighter to
engage very distant targets immediately. The issues of the technology on the HEL system
include various types of high energy laser devices, beam control systems, atmospheric
propagation, and target lethality. Among them, precision pointing of laser beam and highbandwidth rejection of jitters produced by platform vibrations are one of the key
technologies for the emerging fields of laser communications and HEL systems.
HEL testbed has been developed to support the research environments on the
precision beam control technology including acquisition, tracking, and pointing. The
testbed incorporates optical table, two axis gimbal, high speed computers, and a variety
of servo components, sensors, optical components, and software. In this report, system
configuration and operation modes of the testbed are briefly introduced. The results of the
experiments and integrated modeling from component to system level are described and
discussed. Based on these results, new control algorithms are designed and it is shown
that the algorithm can improve the pointing performance of the system.
iii
iv
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.
INTRODUCTION .........................................................................................................1
2.
CONFIGURATION...........................................................................................3
2.1.1. Host computer........................................................................................4
2.1.2. Target computer .....................................................................................5
2.1.3. Beam control system..............................................................................7
2.2.
3.
EXPERIMENTS ..........................................................................................................17
3.1.
3.2.
4.
4.2.
5.
6.
4.3.
4.4.
5.2.
vi
LIST OF FIGURES
LIST OF TABLES
xi
xii
1. INTRODUCTION
High energy laser (HEL) weapons are ready for some of the most challenging
military applications in future battle fields since speed of light delivery enables the war
fighter to engage very distant targets immediately. The issues of the technology on HEL
systems include various types of high energy laser devices, beam control systems,
atmospheric propagation, and target lethality issues. Among them, precision pointing of
laser beam and high-bandwidth rejection of jitters produced by platform vibrations are
among the key technologies in the emerging fields of laser communications and HEL
systems.
Optical beam control describes the centroid shifting of a laser on the target, and is a
concern of engineers and scientists working with lasers and electro optical systems.
Platform motion and optical component motion causes optical jitter, resulting in poor
pointing accuracy, and blurred images. Even small level relative motion between mirrors
and lenses can degrade the performance of precision pointing systems. Sources
contributing to optical jitter include thermal effects, mechanical vibration, acoustics,
static and dynamic loading, and heating and cooling systems.
The NPS HEL testbed has been developed to support research environments on the
precision beam control technology including acquisition, tracking, and pointing. The
testbed incorporates an optical table, two axis gimbal, high speed computers, and a
variety of servo components, sensors, optical components, and software. In this report,
overall configuration and operation modes of the testbed are briefly introduced. Results
of experiments and integrated modeling from component to system level are described
and discussed. Based on these results, new control algorithms are designed and it is
shown that these algorithms can improve pointing performance of the system.
Section 2 describes major components of the HEL testbed including host computer,
target computer, and beam control system. A hardware architecture, interfaces, and
system operation are represented in detail for each component. Section 3 describes
experiments used for system identification of dynamics and transfer functions required
1
for further modeling and control system improvement. In section 4, modeling from the
major servo component to WFOV and NFOV control system are presented and
simulation results are discussed. Section 5 describes the design results of the new
controller, which consists of feed forward control and adaptive filter. Experimental
results and conclusions are summarized in Section 6.
2. HEL TESTBED
The objective of the HEL testbed is to provide a research environment for the
development of new technologies related with acquisition, pointing, tracking, and jitter
control. A picture of the HEL testbed is shown in Figure 1.
The Host computer manages system operation modes and all sub-systems through
user interfaces. A target computer executes real time codes and directly controls the beam
control system. The main control loop consists of three feedback loops: two position
control loops and one rate control loop as shown in Figure 3. Besides these main
components, a moving target with illuminated light source also played an important role
in evaluation of system performance.
L (s)
Ki
Ki
N3
N2
N1
&L ( s)
L (s)
system status to the Host computer. An IO Pack carrier board has a PMC module which
is connected to gyros by synchronous interface to control and receive angular rate data.
The multifunction board is a precision CompactPCI board with the capability to monitor
analog input signals. In addition, eight 16-bit analog voltage output channels and 16
digital input/output channels are provided and are connected to motor control command,
FSM control command and various discrete signals. Lastly, rotary encoders providing
relative positions are connected to the Counter Timer board. An External interface
diagram of the target computer is presented in Figure 5 and characteristics of each board
are summarized in Table 1.
IMP2A
( PowerPC
CompactPCI
Processor
Board )
Joystick
PCI I/F
PMC
IP1K110
IO Board
EL Gyro
ACPC8630
( IO Pack
Carrier
Board )
Brushless DC Motor
EL Motor
PCI I/F
AZ Motor
AZ Gyro
Position x
Position y
SW 1
SW 2
Ethernet
Camera
Link
PMC
(Frame
Grabber)
Host Computer
Camera
Link
WFOV
CCD
NFOV
CCD
Target Computer
BW Camera (IPX-VGA210)
Terminal Board
Ch 0-1
12 Ch
Analog Input
Ch 2-3
Ch 0-11
16 Bit
ADC
16 Bit
DAC
BL 10-80-A
Linear Power AMP
Ch 4
EL FSM Command
FSM Controller
FSM
Ch 5
Gimbal Limit SW
AZ+
AZ-
EL+
EL-
Limit SW 1
Limit SW 2
Limit SW 3
Limit SW 4
Ch 1
Ch 2
Ch 3
Ch 4
ACPC730
( Multifunction
CompactPCI
Board )
Ch 6-7
Ch 0
AZ
EL
Phase A/B/C
Phase A/B/C
Ch 5-7
Digital
Input
(12Ch)
Digital
Output
(24Ch)
Terminal Board
Video
Trackers
Ch 9-11
Hall Sensor
LASER
PCI I/F
AZ
Encoder
EL
Encoder
ACPC484
(Counter Timer
Board)
D/O
Rotary Encoder
BL 10-80-A
Power AMP
Model
PowerPC board
IMP2A
Characteristic
1.4GHz PowerPC 7448, 3U CompactPCI SBC
256 Mb SDRAM, 1Mb on-chip cache, 128Mb flash
2 Ethernet, 2 serial ports, 4 bits GPIO
PCI-x capable PMC slot
ACPC8630
Multifunction board
ACPC730
ACPC484
HEL Laser
(690 nm)
Disturbance FSM
NFOV Camera
Lens
PSD
Beam
Splitter
Auto-alignment
FSM
AZ Gimbal
Mirror
AZ Rate Gyro
EL Gimbal
Optical Table
Reference Laser
(780 nm)
10" T
elesc
ope
Incoming
Target Light
EL Rate Gyro
WFOV Camera
To Target
Incoming
Target Light
Video
Tracker
NOFV
Camera
Tracking
Algorithm
2 Axis
Gimbal
Optics
Telescope, mirror
NFOV
Camera
Servo
Component
Fine Track
FSM
Control
Algorithm
Tracking
Algorithm
Reference
Laser
Gimbal
Mechanism
Beam
Control
System
Binary Centroid,
Intensity Centroid
Optical
Table
Interface
Optics
Alignment
Loop
Auto-alignment FSM,
AMP, PSD, Controller
Ki
N3
N2
N1
&L ( s )
L ( s)
controlled in rate command. During the Normal Control Mode, proper menu selection
on the host computer changes the system from WFOV Track Mode to NFOV Track
Mode. In order to protect the system from an abrupt motion due to abnormal operation
or malfunction, over current is monitored in the power amplifier which automatically
switches the changes system to Emergency Mode. Whole system operation mode and
transition diagram are shown in Figure 10.
Init State = 0
Init Mode
Power
ON
Reboot
Over Current
Detection
Emergency
Mode
Init State = 0
Init State = 1
Normal
Control
Mode
WFOV Track
State = 2
WFOV
Track
Mode
NFOV Track
State = 2
Over Current
Detection
WFOV Track
State = 1
Over Current
Detection
NFOV Track
State = 1
NFOV
Track
Mode
Internal State
SW1
(AZ+)
SW2
(AZ-)
SW3
(EL+)
SW4
(EL-)
AZ init
cmd
EL init
cmd
Out1
Out2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
1
1
1
0
0
1
1
0
0
1
1
0
1
0
1
0
1
0
1
0.375
0.375
0.375
0.375
0.375
0.375
0.375
0.375
0.375
0.375
-0.375
0
0.375
0.375
-0.375
0
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
3
2
2
2
3
11
Output
(Init
state)
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Mode
Init
Mode
S8
S9
S10
S11
S12
S13
S14
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
0
0
0
0
1
1
1
0
0
1
1
0
0
1
0
1
0
1
0
1
0
-0.375
-0.375
-0.375
-0.375
0
0
0
0.375
0.375
-0.375
0
0.375
0.375
-0.375
2
2
2
2
3
3
3
2
2
2
3
2
2
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
S15
Normal
mode
AZ
Encoder
120 Phase
Offset
Sine
Modulation
Sine
Modulation
AZ Motor Phase A
AZ Motor Phase B
Multiplier
AZ cmd
EL cmd
Multiplier
120 Phase
Offset
EL
Encoder
Sine
Modulation
Sine
Modulation
EL Motor Phase A
A
EL Motor Phase B
B
EL Encoder
Offset
Joystick
SW2
0
0
0
0
1
1
1
1
Input
WFOV track
acqValid
0
0
1
1
0
0
1
1
WFOV track
Mode
0
1
0
1
0
1
0
1
WFOV
Track state
Normal
Control
Mode
WFOV Track
State = 1
WFOV Track
State = 2
WFOV
Track
Mode
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
Joystick
SW1
0
0
0
0
1
1
1
1
Input
NFOV track
acqValid
0
0
1
1
0
0
1
1
15
NFOV
Track
state
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
Joystick
SW1
NFOV
Track
acqValid
NFOV
Track
Mode
3 Input/ 1 Output
combinational Logic
Commnad=0
Target
Location
Track State
S7
PWR
AMP
Gpc
Track State
== S7
Position
Compensation
NFOV
Video
Tracker
16
3. EXPERIMENTS
Several types of experiments were performed to determine characteristics of the
HEL testbed, and the results of the tests were utilized for system modeling. The
experiments included resonant frequency test, rate loop servo bandwidth and stabilization
test, FSM test, and NFOV bandwidth test. Test configuration is shown in Figure 19. The
target computer has an external terminal board which interfaces all the signals between
the beam control system and target computer, and provides input/output test points. Test
equipments such as dynamic signal analyzer, data acquisition system, and oscilloscope
are used for signal generation, data storage, and observation of test signals.
&L ( s)
L ( s)
function from the data. Malfunctions can also produce errors in measured values,
called outliers. Such outliers might be caused by signal spikes or measurement
malfunctions. If the outliers are not removed, this can adversely affect the
estimated models. An example of outliers in gyro data is shown in Figure 22.
Gyro Output
(Raw Data)
10
8
Magnitude
4
2
0
-2
-4
-6
-8
-10
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
Seconds
S (e jw ) =
1 n
| xk e jwk |2
n k =1
Input
(Vpeak)
Output
Data
Time
Length (sec)
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
2.0
2.0
Gyro
Gyro
Encoder
Encoder
Gyro
Gyro
Encoder
Encoder
8
4
8
4
8
4
8
4
EL
AZ
0.8
4
0.6
2
0.2
Magnitude
Magnitude
0.4
0
-0.2
-0.4
-2
-4
-0.6
-6
-0.8
-1
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
-8
0
Seconds
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
Seconds
20
160
2.6 Hz
X: 2.563
Y: 0.9496
0.9
0.8
Magnitude
0.7
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
80
90
100
Frequency(Hz)
8.3 Hz
0.035
0.03
Magnitude
0.025
0.02
0.015
0.01
11.4 Hz
69.5 Hz
36.6 Hz
15.9 Hz
0.005
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
Frequency(Hz)
0.8
4
0.6
0.2
Magnitude
Magnitude
0.4
0
-0.2
-2
-0.4
-0.6
-4
-0.8
-1
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
-6
Seconds
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
Seconds
80
2.7 Hz
0.3
101 Hz
Magnitude
0.25
0.2
0.15
0.1
0.05
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
180
200
180
200
Frequency(Hz)
-3
x 10
4.5
147.7 Hz
68.4 Hz
Magnitude
3.5
134 Hz
11.7 Hz
2.5
2
1.5
36.1 Hz
1
0.5
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
Frequency(Hz)
1.5
1.5
0.5
0.5
Magnitude
Magnitude
0
-0.5
0
-0.5
-1
-1
-1.5
-1.5
-2
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
-2
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
Seconds
Seconds
160
2.6 Hz
0.16
Magnitude
0.14
0.12
0.1
0.08
0.06
0.04
0.02
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
80
90
100
Frequency(Hz)
-3
x 10
0.9
8.2 Hz
0.8
Magnitude
0.7
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
11.35 Hz
0.2
0.1
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
Frequency(Hz)
1.5
0.5
Magnitude
Magnitude
0
-0.5
0
-1
-1
-2
-1.5
-3
-2
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
-4
Seconds
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
Seconds
80
2.4 Hz
0.7
0.6
Magnitude
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
180
200
160
180
200
Frequency(Hz)
-3
x 10
8.3 Hz
2.5
Magnitude
1.5
101.1 Hz
11.7 Hz
0.5
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
Frequency(Hz)
0.8
6
0.6
4
0.2
Magnitude
Magnitude
0.4
0
-0.2
-0.4
-2
-0.6
-4
-0.8
-1
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
-6
0
Seconds
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
Seconds
160
3.8 Hz
1.6
1.4
Magnitude
1.2
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
90
100
Frequency(Hz)
0.025
74.5 Hz
Magnitude
0.02
61.4 Hz
0.015
0.01
43.3 Hz
0.005
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
Frequency(Hz)
0.8
4
0.6
2
Magnitude
Magnitude
0.4
0.2
0
-0.2
-2
-0.4
-4
-0.6
-0.8
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
-6
Seconds
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
Seconds
80
3.6 Hz
1.2
Magnitude
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
180
200
Frequency(Hz)
10 Hz
101.8 Hz
0.018
0.016
Magnitude
0.014
0.012
60.8 Hz
0.01
74.2 Hz
14.9 Hz
0.008
145.8 Hz
0.006
195.1 Hz
43.5 Hz
0.004
0.002
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
180
200
Frequency(Hz)
0.8
0.6
2
0.2
Magnitude
Magnitude
0.4
0
-0.2
1
0
-1
-0.4
-2
-0.6
-3
-0.8
-1
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
-4
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
Seconds
Seconds
160
3.8 Hz
0.35
X: 3.784
Y: 0.3515
0.3
Magnitude
0.25
0.2
0.15
0.1
0.05
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
80
90
100
Frequency(Hz)
-4
x 10
4.5
11.6 Hz
Magnitude
3.5
3
2.5
61.4 Hz
2
1.5
1
0.5
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
Frequency(Hz)
0.8
0.6
1.5
0.4
0.2
0.5
Magnitude
Magnitude
0
-0.2
0
-0.5
-0.4
-1
-0.6
-1.5
-0.8
-2
-1
-2.5
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
Seconds
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
Seconds
80
3.2 Hz
0.18
0.16
Magnitude
0.14
0.12
0.1
0.08
0.06
0.04
0.02
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
180
200
Frequency(Hz)
-4
x 10
12.7 Hz
Magnitude
14.4 Hz
16.1 Hz
61 Hz
102.5
0
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
Frequency(Hz)
160
180
200
Output signal
Gyro
AZ
Encoder
Gyro
EL
Encoder
&L ( s )
L ( s)
Correlation analysis
The cross-correlation sequence is defined as
R xy ( m ) = n = 0
R * ( m )
yx
m0
m < 0
G xy G xy *
G xx G yy
*
Where, Gxy is the cross spectrum and Gxy is complex conjugate of Gxy , Gxx is
Transfer function
Frequency response, often called the Transfer function is calculated as the
ratio of the cross spectrum to the input power spectrum.
Gxy
H( f ) =
Gxx
3.1.2.1. Test scenario
Sweep sine signals were applied to the rate command input with peak input
voltage of 0.02V for EL axis, and 0.05V for AZ axis. Sweep frequency was 1 Hz
to 50Hz and output signals were taken from the respective gyro. Test schemes are
shown in Table 7.
Table 7. Scenario for servo bandwidth test
Measured Data Analysis
Freq. Range
Output
(Hz)
Position
Direction
Input
(Vpk)
Input Type
EL
0.02
Sweep sine
1-50
EL Gyro
AZ
0.05
Sweep sine
1-50
AZ Gyro
5
4
3
Magnitude(V/100)
Magnitude(V/100)
-2
2
1
0
-1
-2
-3
-4
-4
-6
50
100
150
200
250
300
-5
Time(Sec)
50
100
150
200
250
Time(Sec)
300
Transfer function
10
-3dB@5.9Hz
0
-10
7.6Hz
10.7Hz
15.2Hz
Magnitude
-20
-30
-40
-50
-60
42.3Hz
-70
-80
0
10
10
Frequency(Hz)
2.5
1.5
1.5
Magnitude(V/100)
0.5
0
-0.5
-1
0.5
0
-0.5
-1
-1.5
-1.5
-2
-2.5
50
100
150
200
250
-2
300
50
Time(Sec)
100
150
200
250
Time(Sec)
10
-3dB@7.0Hz
0
-10
-20
Magnitude
Magnitude(V/100)
1
1
-30
-40
-50
-60
-70
0
10
10
Frequency(Hz)
300
Ki
N3
N2
N1
&L ( s )
L ( s)
Torque
Voltage
Disturbance
Freq. Range
Output
(Vpk)
Input Type
(Hz)
Position
EL
0.5
Sweep sine
1-100
EL Error
AZ
0.5
Sweep sine
1-100
AZ Error
Dir.
33
AZ axis
Input signal (Sweep Sine)
8
6
Magnitude(V/10)
-2
0
-2
-4
-6
-4
-8
-6
50
100
150
200
250
-10
300
50
100
Time(Sec)
150
200
Time(Sec)
15.6Hz
-5
Magnitude
Magnitude(V/10)
11.2Hz
-10
8.1Hz
-15
-20
2.3Hz
-25
-30
0
10
10
10
Frequency(Hz)
34
250
300
EL axis
Input signal (Sweep Sine)
8
6
Magnitude(V/10)
Magnitude(V/10)
4
2
-2
2
0
-2
-4
-4
-6
-6
50
100
150
200
250
-8
300
50
Time(Sec)
100
150
200
250
300
Time(Sec)
10
data 1
Magnitude
-5
-10
-15
3.1Hz
-20
0
10
10
10
Frequency(Hz)
35
&L ( s )
L (s)
Voltage
Magnitude of
Input (Vpk)
0.5
0.5
Input Type
Sweep sine
Sweep sine
Frequency response test results are shown in Figures 71and 72. The transfer
function of each axis is nearly identical and both have a -3dB bandwidth of 360Hz.
36
Frequency Response(x-Direction)
Frequency Response(y-Direction)
5
5
0
0
-3dB@360Hz
-5
M a g n itu d e (d B )
M a g n itu d e (d B )
-5
-10
-10
-15
-15
-20
-20
-25
0
10
10
10
10
-3dB@360Hz
-25
0
10
Frequency(Hz)
10
10
10
Frequency(Hz)
&L ( s)
L ( s)
Position
Output
HEL Laser
(690 nm)
Disturbance FSM
Sweep Sine
Input
NFOV Camera
Beam
Splitter
Auto-alignment
FSM
Magnitudes of the test signals were 0.5V, and 1.0V while sweeping range of
the frequency was 0.1-100Hz, as shown in Table 10.
Frequency
0.1~100 Hz
0.1~100 Hz
0.1~100 Hz
0.1~100 Hz
Regardless of input magnitude, transfer function for each axis was almost the
same and -3dB frequency was measured as 13Hz. The results are shown in Figures 75-76.
38
-5
13Hz@-3dB
Magnitude(dB)
-10
-15
-20
-25
-30
-35
-1
10
10
10
10
Frequency(Hz)
-5
13Hz@-3dB
Magnitude(dB)
-10
-15
-20
-25
-30
-35
-1
10
10
10
Frequency(Hz)
10
Rating
Remark
375/sec
-1000 ppm, 1 of full scale for 375/sec 1 LSB
-500 ppm, 1 of full scale for 150/sec = 60/s
-500 ppm, 1
-1500 ppm, 1
40
Bias
-Offset(room temp)
-Stability(room temp)
-Temperature Sensitivity
20/hr
1/hr, 1
6/hr, 1
Bandwidth(3 dB)
> 400Hz
Update Rate
1000/sec
4/hr/Hz
0.0667/hr
Initialization Time
< 5 sec
Electrical
-Input Voltage
-Power consumption
+5Vdc 10%
3 watts Max.
Output
-Type
-Format(selectable)
Physical
-Dimensions
-Weight
Environmental
-Operating Temperature
-Storage Temperature
-Shock(Functional)
-Random Vibration
-MTBF
-40 to +75
-50 to +85
Functional Sawtooth 40g, 6-10ms
20 to 2000Hz, 8g rms, Operational
> 55,000 hr, ground mobile
One of the important items for a dynamic control system is bandwidth. Since
the -3dB bandwidth is greater than 400Hz, a mathematical model of the gyro is
expressed as follows:
GPower AMP
wn 2
= 2
, wn = 2* * f , f = 400, = 0.707
s + 2 wn s + wn 2
differential dual phase command mode. In the HEL testbed, dual phase command mode
is used. The dual phase inputs are sinusoidal and are 120 out of phase from each other.
The third phase is internally generated by the amplifier. The advantage of this
configuration is that it provides the smoothest possible motion and also minimizes motor
torque ripple for maximum accuracy. Major characteristics of the power amplifier are
summarized as following:
General
-Manufacturer : Aerotech Inc.
-Model : BL10-80-A
-Amplifier option : CM1-PK100-CC50
Specifications
Attribute
Rating
Unit
Output
-Power Amp Voltage
-Command Voltage
-Peak Output Current
-Continuous Output Current
-Peak Output Power
-Continous Output Power
Input
-Voltage
-Current
Power Amp Gain
160
10
10 ( Sustain for 1 sec, Load dependent)
5 ( Continuous sinewave, Load dependent)
1,350
675
Vdc
Vdc
A
A
Watts
Watts
Vac
A
A/V
KHz
0.5
8.5
Ohms
Kg
42
Options
-CM1
-PK100
-CC50
wn 2
, wn = 2* * f , f = 2000, = 0.707
s 2 + 2 wn s + wn 2
Rating
+/- 1.5
<2
>850
1%
<5
Unit
Degrees
uRads
Hz
% FS
ms
Pyrex
1 * 0.25
Protected Aluminum
43
Electrical
-Peak power
30
Watts
Mechanical
-Mirror head size
-Controller size
Inches
Inches
wn 2
= 2
, wn = 2* * f , f = 360, = 0.707
s + 2 wn s + wn 2
4.1.4. ALAR
The ALAR which is direct drive rotary stage, provides superior angular
positioning and velocity control with large aperture. With the combination of a large
aperture and direct drive motor, the rotary stage has no backlash, and no gears or gear
vibrations. Applications of the ALAR include single and multi-axis electro optical sensor
testing, missile seeker testing, antenna testing, inertial navigation device testing, photonic
component alignment, and high accuracy laser testing.
General
-Manufacturer : Aerotech Inc.
-Model : ALAR-100-SP-ES16286
- Incorporate BLDC Motor and High performance Rotary Encoder
Specifications
44
Attribute
-Model
-Continuous Current
.Apk
.Arms
-Peak Current
-Torque Constants
.Continuous
.Peak
-Peak Torque
-Number of poles
-Cold Resistance
-Inductance
-Rotor Inertia
-Resolution
-Max. Limited Travel
-Max. Velocity
-Max. Acceleration
-Max. Torque
-Continuous Torque
-Shaft Inertial
-Position Accuracy
.Repeatability
.Accuracy
.Wobble
Motor
Encoder
ALAR
Rating
Unit
S-180-44-A
2.7
1.9
10.7
A
A
A
2.77
3.92
30.0
18
12.8
3.4
0.0074
199.6
170
300
1364
23.9
6.0
0.022
N-m/A
N-m/A
N-m
Ohms
mH
Kg-m2
uRad
Deg
RPM
Rad/s2
N-m
N-m
Kg-m2
uRad
uRad
uRad
4.1.5. Limit
The HEL testbed is a digital/analog mixed electro-mechanical control system
which has several limit sources: voltage limit due to the electronic devices and
current/torque/angular velocity limits due to the servo components such as power
amplifier, ALAR, and gyro. Limit function and items are described in Figure 77 and
Table 11.
45
Limit value
Unit
Voltage Limit
10
Vdc
Current Limit
10
Torque Limit
23.9
N-m
Gyro Limit
375
/sec
, 0.25 f 50 Hz
Hz
(1 + 4 f 2 )3/2
camera feedback, is an angular position control loop that automatically maintains LOS to
the center of the target.
Bode Diagram
0.9
Magnitude (dB)
-5
0.8
-15
0.6
-20
0.5
-25
0
0.4
0.3
Phase (deg)
Amplitude
0.7
6Hz@-3dB
-10
0.2
-45
0.1
0
-90
0
0.02
0.04
0.06
0.08
0.1
0.12
0.14
0.16
0.18
0.2
-1
10
Time (sec)
10
10
Frequency (Hz)
EL axis
47
10
Step Response
Bode Diagram
0.9
Magnitude (dB)
-10
0.8
0.7
0.5
-30
-40
0
0.4
0.3
Phase (deg)
Amplitude
0.6
7Hz@-3dB
-20
0.2
-45
0.1
0
-90
0
0.02
0.04
0.06
0.08
0.1
0.12
0.14
0.16
0.18
0.2
-1
10
Time (sec)
10
10
10
Frequency (Hz)
48
10
Bode Diagram
1.2
0
Magnitude (dB)
1.4
Amplitude
5.4Hz@-3dB
-20
-40
0.8
-60
0
0.6
Phase (deg)
-45
0.4
0.2
-90
-135
-180
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.2
1.4
1.6
1.8
-1
10
10
Time (sec)
10
10
Frequency (Hz)
EL axis
Step Response
Bode Diagram
1.2
0
Magnitude (dB)
1.4
Amplitude
5.9Hz@-dB
-20
-40
0.8
-60
0
0.6
Phase (deg)
-45
0.4
0.2
-90
-135
-180
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.2
1.4
1.6
1.8
-1
10
10
Time (sec)
10
10
Frequency (Hz)
EL axis
260 in-oz
28.8 ( P-controller )
7Hz
0.006918 s + 0.02173
s
loop
-3dB BW
5.4Hz
5.9Hz
Bode Diagram
0.9
-10
Magnitude (dB)
0.8
0.7
Amplitude
0.6
13Hz@-3dB
-30
-40
-50
0.5
-60
0
0.4
-45
Phase (deg)
0.3
0.2
0.1
0
-20
-90
-135
-180
-225
-270
0.01
0.02
0.03
0.04
0.05
0.06
0.07
0.08
0.09
0.1
-1
10
Time (sec)
10
10
10
Frequency (Hz)
AZ axis
1.2388
s
13Hz
50
EL axis
1.2388
s
13Hz
10
Target Motion
Angular Rate
0.15
1.5
0.1
Gyro out(rad/sec)
0.05
Degree
0.5
0
-0.5
-0.05
-0.1
-1
-0.15
-1.5
-2
10
-0.2
Time(sec)
10
Time(sec)
The first test is on the target tracking performance as shown in Figures 91-94. Test
input signal of the target motion is sinusoidal with 2 degree peak and frequency of 0.5Hz.
In the steady state, peak tracking error of the WFOV tracker is around 2.5 mrads and
error of the NOFV is decreased to less than 0.1 mrads.
WFOV Track Error
-3
x 10
500
Error (Micro-radian)
Error (Radian)
2
1
0
-1
400
300
200
100
-2
-3
-100
-4
-200
10
Time(sec)
10
Time(sec)
Angular Rate
-3
300
x 10
0.8
200
0.4
Gyro out(rad/sec)
0.6
100
-100
0.2
0
-0.2
-0.4
-200
-0.6
-300
-0.8
-400
10
-1
Time(sec)
10
Time(sec)
-5
x 10
4
3
10
Error (Micro-radian)
Error (Radian)
2
1
0
-1
-2
-3
-5
-4
-5
0
10
-10
Time(sec)
Time(sec)
53
10
5. COMPENSATOR DESIGN
Undesired fluctuations in the pointing of a laser beam reduce the accuracy of the
beam pointing at the target due to a target motion and external disturbances. The accurate
pointing of laser beam is necessary for the application of laser communication and
defense systems. For example 100 mrads of jitter at 10Km will results in 1m movement of
the beam center. Furthermore, disturbance characteristics often change with time and
environment, therefore optimal performance of a beam steering system requires an
adaptive control system.
5.1. Feed forward control
In some cases, the major input to a process may be measured and utilized to provide
feed forward control. The advantage of feed forward control is that corrective action is
taken for a change in input before it affects the control parameter. Feed forward control is
used in conjunction with feedback control to provide multiple input single output control.
In the HEL integrated control model, WFOV track error is taken and applied to the
control input of the NFOV track loop. Test results for the feed forward control are shown
in Figures 99-102. Peak of the NOFV track error for the target motion input is reduced
from 80 mrads to 0.3 mrads and error with an external disturbance present is reduced from
10 mrads to 0.025 mrads.
WFOV Track Error
-3
x 10
0.6
Error (Micro-radian)
Error (Radian)
2
1
0
-1
-2
0.2
0
-0.2
-0.4
-0.6
-3
-4
0.4
-0.8
10
-1
Time(sec)
10
Time(sec)
-5
x 10
0.2
0.15
Error (Micro-radian)
Error (Radian)
2
1
0
-1
-2
-3
0.1
0.05
0
-0.05
-0.1
-0.15
-4
-0.2
-5
0
-0.25
10
Time(sec)
10
Time(sec)
(1)
e( n) = d ( n) y ( n)
(2)
w(n + 1) = w( n) + u (n) e( n)
(3)
Equations (1) and (2) define the estimation error e( n) , the computation of which is
based on the current estimate of the tap weight vector w( n) . The second term,
u (n) e(n) , on the right-hand side of Equation (3) represents the adjustment that is
applied to the current estimate of the tap weight vector w( n) . The parameter is step
size and the iterative procedure is started with an initial guess, w(0) .
56
In the control model, input data of the adaptive filter comes from the error output of
the WFOV track loop as described in Figure 111. Number of taps is M=20 and step size
parameter is determined empirically. Test results for the target motion input are shown
in Figures 105-110.
WFOV Track Error
-3
x 10
0.15
Error (Micro-radian)
0.1
1
0
-1
0
-0.05
-0.15
-3
-4
0.05
-0.1
-2
-0.2
10
Time(sec)
Filter Coefficient
x 10
-0.1
-0.2
-0.3
-0.4
-0.5
-0.6
-0.7
-0.8
-0.9
-1
0
10
-5
Time(sec)
Amplitude
Error (Radian)
Time(sec)
10
Figure 107 shows experimental plots of the convergence curves of the 21 tap
weights for the step size parameter =2. Initial values are 0 and all weights converge
after 10 seconds. As the weights converge, tracking error of the NOFV loop is reduced as
shown in Figure 106. When the step size parameter is increased, the rate of
convergence of the LMS algorithm is correspondingly increased, i.e. the tracking error of
the NFOV loop is quickly decreased as shown in Figure 108.
0.4
0.3
Error (Micro-radian)
0.2
0.1
-0.1
-0.2
-0.3
-0.4
-0.5
10
Time(sec)
Figure 108. Learning curve of tracking errors for varying step size parameter
Figures 109-110 plot the error signals of the video tracking loop and show that
error in the NFOV loop is not decreased as much as with compared to the F/F control
58
results. The reason is the adaptive LMS algorithm only decreases narrow band
disturbance that is below the control bandwidth. In other words, Adaptive LMS is not
effective for the rejection of the broad band disturbances.
-5
x 10
0.2
0.15
Error (Micro-radian)
Error (Radian)
2
1
0
-1
-2
-3
0.1
0.05
0
-0.05
-0.1
-0.15
-4
-0.2
-5
0
-0.25
10
Time(sec)
10
Time(sec)
For the case of target motion along with external disturbance input, error of the
NFOV loop is shown in Figure 112.
HEL Pointing Error
1.6
1.4
1.2
Error (Micro-radian)
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
-0.2
-0.4
0
Time(sec)
60
10
F/F controller
Track error
<80 mrad
Disturbance rejection
<10 mrad
A number of areas for future study. First is reserarching adaptive feed forward
algorithms which manage broadband target motion and external disturbances. Secondly,
control bandwidth of the WFOV and NFOV track loops need to be improved. Finally,
developed algorithms should be implemented into the real testbed and subsequently
verified. Although there may be still a little difference between the mathematical model
and the real system, the control model is a good baseline to predict system performance
when developing new algorithms. This report will be also helpful for basic understanding
of the hardware and software of the HEL testbed.
61
62
2.
3.
4.
63