Вы находитесь на странице: 1из 28

Antenna Azimuth

Position Control System


Presented by:

1. Siti Amyrah bt Abdullah FB14016


2. Foong Kah Keat FB14051
3. Lin Kah Keat FB14062
4. Chin Kuo Hao FB14071
5. Farah Nabilah Bt Abd.Razak FA15068
INTRODUCTION

– Commonly, antenna azimuth position control system is currently available together with some
control methods, some of which are fuzzy logic and PID controllers
– In this project, PID controller in MATLAB/Simulink environment is used for controlling the position
of an antenna in a spherical coordinate system called azimuth. The system architecture is as shown
below:
INTRODUCTION

– The sequence of this project is shown below:

Similar to that, on the


output angle rotations Signal and gain are
The potentiometer When mistake will be
are turning into voltage increasing the difference
converts the angular zero, the motor will not
of potentiometer, which between the input and
rotating in voltage start
is connected to the output
feedback
INTRODUCTION

– The position command of the antenna is entered manually with the help of a potentiometer to adjust the angle of it
– A second potentiometer is used to get feedback knowledge of the system
– Orientation of the antenna to the desired angle, an armature controlled dc servo motor is used
– Motor is connected to the antenna with the help of a gear system
– The figure below shows the schematic illustration of this project.
OBJECTIVES

i) To illustrate the application of all control system knowledge units to the


same physical system.

ii) To implement the design and control of antenna azimuth position.

iii) To analyse an open-loop and closed loop of the PID control system
project by using MATLAB Simulink toolbox function block
PROJECT BACKGROUND

The comprehensive block diagram of the system Closed loop transfer function of the
for controlling the position of antenna. system after reduction of the
subsystem.

Controlling the position of telescope antenna comprises of two


potentiometers one is utilized at input and one at output as transducer, a
power amplifier, a preamplifier, a load and a motor
BILL OF MATERIALS

Component Quantity

Arduino Uno 1

Potentiometer 10k 2
SPG 30 120k DC gear motor with encoder 1

Cytron Motor Shield 1

Gears (Dia. 20mm and 30mm) 2


DESIGN METHODOLOGY

Circuit Diagram Mechanical Design (Isometric View)


REAL PRODUCT OF MINI AZIMUTH
ANTENNA
CODING
Without PID Controller Coding
i) Setup Coding ii) Main loop coding iii) Interrupt Coding
CODING
With PID Controller Coding
i) Define PID Parameter ii) PID Calculation Loop
PID DESIGN
Calculation Results

Gear ratio 𝑁1 1
𝐾𝑔 = = = 0.0083
𝑁2 120
Motor Inertia 𝐽 = 𝐽𝑎 + 𝐽𝐿 (𝐾𝑔 )2 = 0.02 + 1(0.0083)2 = 0.02

Damping 𝐷𝑚 = 𝐷𝑎 + 𝐷𝐿 (𝐾𝑔 )2 = 0.01 + 1(0.0083)2 = 0.01


Components
Motor resistance 𝑉 12
𝑅𝑎 = = = 18.46 Ω
𝐼 0.65
Voltage of back 𝑉𝑖 = 12 − 0.16 × 18.46 = 9.05𝑉
emf,
The back emf 38 × 2𝜋
𝑟𝑎𝑑𝑠 −1 60 = 0.44
constant 𝐾𝑏 = =
𝑉𝑖 9.05
The torque constant 0.5
𝐾𝑡 = = 3.125
0.16
The motor and load 𝐷𝑚 𝑅𝑎 + 𝐾𝑏 𝐾𝑡 0.01 18.46 + 0.44 3.125
𝑎𝑚 = = = 4.22
block’s pole and 𝐽𝑅𝑎 0.02 18.46
zeroes

𝐾𝑡 3.125
𝐾𝑚 = = = 8.46
𝐽𝑅𝑎 0.02 × 18.46
PID DESIGN

Calculation Results

Transfer function of the input V𝑖 (𝑠) 1


= = 0.318
and the output potentiometer Ɵ𝑖 (𝑠) 𝜋

The transfer function of V𝑝 (𝑠)


=𝐾
preamplifier 𝑉𝑒 (𝑠)

The transfer function of power E𝑎 (𝑠) K1 100


= =
amplifier 𝑉𝑝 (𝑠) 𝑠 + 𝑎 𝑠 + 100

The transfer function of motor Φ𝑚 (𝑠) 𝐾𝑚 8.46


= =
and load 𝐸𝑎 (𝑠) 𝑠(𝑠 + 𝑎𝑚 ) 𝑠(𝑠 + 4.22)
PID DESIGN

Parameter of reduction of closed loop function Time response of system without PID controller using the
parameter of reduction closed loop function

𝑇𝑟 = 7281 𝑚𝑠
𝑇𝑠 = 6342 𝑚𝑠
𝑇𝑝 = 10383 𝑚𝑠
PID DESIGN

4
𝑇𝑠 =
ζ𝜔𝑛 𝐶(𝑠) 𝜔𝑛 2
=
4 𝑅(𝑠) 𝑠 2 + 2ζ𝜔𝑛 𝑠 + 𝜔𝑛 2
6342 × 10−3 =
ζ𝜔𝑛
4 2ζ𝜔𝑛 = 2 0.9016 0.6995 = 1.2614
ζ=
6342 × 10−3 𝜔𝑛 𝜔𝑛 2 = 0.69952 = 0.4894
ζ = 0.63𝜔𝑛

From the graph and calculation we obtain;


𝜋
𝑇𝑝 =
𝜔𝑛 1 − ζ2 0.4894
𝜋 2 𝑇 𝑠 =
𝑠2 + 1.2614𝑠 + 0.4894
10383 × 10−3 =
𝜔𝑛 1 − (0.63𝜔𝑛 )2
Where:
𝜋2
107.81 = 2
𝜔𝑛 (1 − 0.40𝜔𝑛 2 ) 𝑟𝑎𝑑
𝜔𝑛 = 0.6995
𝑠
𝜔𝑛 2 = 0.69952 = 0.4894
𝜔𝑛 = 0.6995 𝑟𝑎𝑑/𝑠 2ζ𝜔𝑛 = 2 0.9016 0.6995 = 1.2614
ζ = 0.9016 𝑈𝑛𝑑𝑒𝑟𝑑𝑎𝑚𝑝
PID DESIGN
Therefore, the poles are calculated as follow:

−6307 ± 63072 − 4(5000)(2447)


In order to test the stability of the transfer function, the 𝑃𝑜𝑙𝑒 =
2(5000)
Routh-Hurwitz method is used where T(s) is equivalent = −0.6307 ± 𝑗0.3027
to:

2447
𝑇 𝑠 =
5000𝑠 2 + 6307𝑠 + 2447
Routh Table:
There is no sign change, thus, no right-hand plan pole.
The system is stable.
PID DESIGN
For the steady state error determination. The system is
converted into unity feedback system The input is step response, therefore,

1
𝑅 𝑠 =
𝑠
1
𝑒 ∞ 𝑠𝑡𝑒𝑝 =
1 + lim 𝐺 𝑠
𝑠→0
Figure 17 Unity feedback system lim 𝐺(𝑠) = ∞
𝑠→0
𝑒 ∞ 𝑠𝑡𝑒𝑝 =0
𝐺(𝑠)
𝑇 𝑠 =
1 + 𝐺(𝑠)
𝑇 𝑠 + 𝐺 𝑠 𝑇 𝑠 = 𝐺(𝑠)
It is a Type 1 system and the steady state error towards infinity is 0.
𝐺 𝑠 𝑇 𝑠 − 𝐺 𝑠 = −𝑇(𝑠)
𝐺 𝑠 𝑇 𝑠 − 1 = −𝑇(𝑠)
−𝑇 𝑠 𝑇 𝑠
𝐺 𝑠 = =
𝑇 𝑠 −1 1−𝑇 𝑠
2447
𝐺 𝑠 =
5000𝑠 2 + 6307𝑠
2447
𝐺 𝑠 =
𝑠(5000𝑠 + 6307)
RESULTS AND
DISCUSSION
- This block diagram is drawn to determine
the critical gain and the periodic of the control
loop

- The Ziegler-Nichols rule is used to design the


PID controller for the antenna azimuth.
The simulated reference step input values and the real values from PID output are shown below. The
same PID constants are used in the real system.
Effects of PID parameters toward step response
• As increase the value of Kp, the steady state error can be repaired but the
percent overshoot might rise.

• While increasing Ki, the zero-steady state error can be achieved, however,
it might increase the percent overshoot and settling time.

• If Kd is increased, it might not be giving any impact to the steady state


error, but it helps to reduce both percent overshoot and settling time.
PID Case 1 (Reference)
Kp 0.6 Kcirtical 2.2040
Ki TP / 2 0.0001226
Kd TP / 8 0.000003065

– The effects of overshoot and steady state error are minimised compared
to without PID controller.
– However, the settling time is increased compare with the system without
PID.
– This results successfully show the how the PID controller improve the
system and it can be further improve through trial and error method.
PID Case 2 (Double Kp)
Kp 2.2040*2 = 4.408
Ki 0.0001226
Kd 0.000003065

– The PID constant used in the real system for second PID version.
– The values of Kp is doubled.
– There is no significant change between PID version 1 and version 2 as the
increase of Kp only gives minimal impact towards the settling time of the
system.
PID Case 3 (Double Ki)
Kp 2.2040
Ki 0.0001226*2 = 0.0002452
Kd 0.000003065
– The PID constant used in the real system for third PID version.
– The values of Ki are doubled.
– As stated in the table, increasing Ki causes rising of %OS and Ts while the steady
state error might turn down to zero.
– By observing the time response below, the Ts is slightly increased compare to the
results from version 1 and version 2.
– The result is not significant might be due to the very small values of the constant Ki.
PID Case 4 (Double Kd)
Kp 2.2040
Ki 0.0001226
Kd 0.000003065*2 = 0.000006130

– The PID constant used in the real system for fourth PID version. The values of Kd is
doubled.
– As stated in the table, increasing Kd causes decreasing of %OS and Ts while there is
no effect towards steady state error.
– By observing the time response below, the Ts is reduced significantly compare to the
previous results.
– Therefore, we concluded that the PID version 4 has the optimum output response
compared to the other version as it has shortest Ts, with zero steady state error and
very small overshot.
Case 1 Case 2
400 400

350 350

Angle (°) 300 300

250 250

Angle (°)
200 200
Input Input
150 Output 150 Output

100 100

50 50

0
0
0 100 200 300
0 100 200 300
Step Response Step Response

Case 3 Case 4
400 400

350 350

300 300

250 250

Angle (°)
Angle (°)

200 200
Input Input
150 output 150 output

100 100

50 50

0
0
0 100 200 300 400
0 50 100 150 200 250
Step Response Step Response
CONCLUSION
– Firstly, we have found the response without using any controller and notice that the
response is not good.
– After that, we have implemented our response by using PID controller
– Then identified that the response is much better than the response without controller.
– There are many devices that can be further improved by the used of PID to eliminate
unwanted noises and disturbance which reduces the overshoot percentage in the same
time.
– It is proved that the response of the system with PID controller is better than the
system without PID controller which is shown from the results that we obtained.
Thank You