0 evaluări0% au considerat acest document util (0 voturi)
21 vizualizări5 pagini
This paper considers desigll of a discrete-time robust tracking control system. It consists of a state space disturbance observer, a state estimator, and a state feedback controller. The proposed method is very effective to compensate variety of disturbances.
This paper considers desigll of a discrete-time robust tracking control system. It consists of a state space disturbance observer, a state estimator, and a state feedback controller. The proposed method is very effective to compensate variety of disturbances.
This paper considers desigll of a discrete-time robust tracking control system. It consists of a state space disturbance observer, a state estimator, and a state feedback controller. The proposed method is very effective to compensate variety of disturbances.
Discrete-Time Robust Tracking Control Using A State Space Disturbance Observer Seung-Hi Lee, Young-Hoon Kim, Sang-Eun Baek Electro-mechanics Lab. Samsung Advanced Institute of Technology P.O.Box 111, Suwon 440-600, KOREA shl , younghoon, sebaek@sait.samsung.co.kr Abstract for high frequency sensor noise rejection. Thus, the Q filter can be interpreted as a complementary sensitivity function of the feedback loop. For further information, the interested readers are referred to [3][4] and refer- ences therein. This paper considers desigll of a discrete-time robust tracking control system which consists of a state space disturbance observer, a state estimator, and a state feedback controller. A new discrete-time state space disturbance observer is proposed not requiring model- ing of disturbances. Through the results of applica- tions, i t is shown that the proposed method is very effective to compensate variety of disturbances and to improve the performance of a tracking control system in the existence of external disturbances. I t is also ob- served that the proposed state space disturbance ob- server allows more accurate state estimation in the ex- istence of modeling error and disturbances. 1 Introduction External disturbances have significant impact on the performance of a tracking controller. Accordingly, there has been much work on the problem of reject- ing the disturbances effectively. Modeling errors in th design of control systems can also cause tracking error. Modeling errors include unmodeled dynamics, which represent high order flexible modes, as well as plant parameter uncertainties/variations during oper- ation. The difference between the output of the plant and the output of the nominal model is regarded as an equivalent disturbance applied to the nominal model. Disturbance observers are used to estimate the equiva- lent disturbances. Thus, a disturbance observer can be used to make the plant behave like the nominal model in the existence of the equivalent disturbances. In [3], the idea of a disturbance observer was pro- posed. In [4], the disturbance observer theory was re- fined based on the design of two degrees of freedom sevo controllers and the factorization approach. The design of a disturbance observer is dependent on the design of so called the Q filter, which determines robustness and disturbance rejection performance. In the design of the Q filter, unit low frequency gain is required for distur- bance rejection, while high frequency roll-off is required 0-7803-551 9-9/00 $1 0.00 0 2000 AACC 41 94 Conventional approach in the design of state space dis- turbance observers is to model disturbances and to aug- ment it into the estimator model (e.g. bias and period- ical disturbance [l]). However, it is in general impossi- ble to build models for arbitrary disturbances. There- fore, state space disturbance observers are hardly used except for simple disturbances which can be modeled easily. This paper considers design of a discrete-time robust tracking control system which consists of a state space disturbance observer, a state estimator, and a state feedback controller. In this paper, we propose a new discrete-time state space disturbance observer not re- quiring modeling of disturbances. An application ex- ample is presented to show applicability and effective- ness of the proposed disturbance observation method. Throughout the paper, a transfer matrix in terms of state-space is denoted by p ( M) denotes the spectral radius of a matrix M. I t is assumed that all the vectors and matrices have appro- priate dimensions. 2 Problem Statement To begin with, consider a continuous-time model of a plant described by (1) x =A,x+B,u+w y =C, x+n where w is the disturbance and n is the measurement noise, A, , B, and C, are matrices with appropriate dimensions. I t is assumed that ( Ap, Bp, C,) is stabiliz- able and detectable. In addition, we assume the dis- turbance w is bounded. However, no time/frequency characteristics of w are assumed. Performance of a control system is significantly affected by disturbances. Thus, it is very important to reject the disturbance effectively. As mentioned before, the transfer function approach has many drawbacks. It requires filtering of output measurements. Thus, the performance of the disturbance observer is determined by the Q filter. In addition, the transfer function ap- proach can not be used in the multi-input-multi-output (MIMO) cases, while the state space approach can be. In the state space approach, specific disturbance models are augmented in the estimator model to esti- mate the disturbances. The models are developed from the timelfrequency characteristics of disturbances (for example, constant bias and periodic disturbance) [l]. When the time/frequency characteristics of the dis- turbance are unknown, the assumption of piece-wise constant bias is used with sufficiently fast eigenvalue assignment to the states associated the disturbance. However, fast varying disturbances can not be observed effectively by this approach. In addition, performance of a state estimator can be affected. It should be noted that even a well designed distur- bance observer can not compensate disturbances per- fectly. In this paper, the remaining disturbance is re- garded as a residual disturbance. This residual distur- bance is considered as an exogenous signal in the design of a controller. Thus, the disturbance observer is to be designed to suppress the equivalent disturbance, while the controller is to be designed such that the feedback loop is less sensitive to the residual disturbance. 3 Control System Design In this section, wedesign a discrete-time control system which consists of a state space disturbance observer, a current state estimator, and a state feedback controller. Firstly, the concept of the new state space disturbance observer is introduced. Subsequently, assuming that the disturbance observer is working properly, wedesign a state estimator and a state feedback controller for the system with the residual disturbance. Finally, we design a disturbance observer to compensate equivalent disturbances and to make the closed loop system stable. 3.1 Di screte Time Model TO begin with, consider a discrete-time model described bY Gm =[*] 41 95 where and T, is the sampling period. Here, (@,I',C) is as- sumed to be stabilizable and detectable. For the sim- plicity of formulation weassume no computation time delay. However, the time delay can be handled eas- ily by augmenting the delayed control as an additional state [I]. 3.2 New State Space Di sturbance Observer The basic structure of the proposed state space distur- bance observer (shown in Figure 1) is expressed by where % is the state of the model, z is the state of the plant, Kdist is the disturbance observer gain to be determined. If all the state measurements are not avail- able, we use the estimated states ?. In this case, we use udist(k) =Kdzst(e(k) - ?(k)). (4) Udi st Plant Fi gure 1: Disturbance observer scheme The disturbance observer gain Kdist determines the convergence rate to the disturbance w and affects the stability of the feedback loop. A condition for proper gain &ist will be addressed in Disturbance Observer Design subsection. Not like the transfer function a p proach in the s domain, there is nothing like the Q fil- ter. Thus, there is no additional dynamics associated with the disturbance observer itself. Given the states 3 and 2, no additional dynamics com- putation is required to observe the disturbance. The states 3 and 2 are to be obtained froma state esti- mator which is to be addressed in the next subsection. The disturbance observation zLdist ( k ) is injected into the feedback control loop (as shown in Figure 2) to compensate disturbances. As a result, wehave a ficti- tious system in which only the residual disturbance is acting on (as shown in Figure 3). Wedesign a state es- timator and a state feedback controller for this system in the following subsections. W n Figure 2: Control system with disturbance observer d n Figure 3: System for controller design 3.3 State Estimator Design The current state estimator [l] is expressed by ( 5.) i ( k ) =f ( k ) +L,(y(k) - Cz ( k) ) q k +1) =dri ( l c) +rzL(Ic) where y is the output measurement, 2 and f are the, state update and the state prediction, respectively. Although the time/frequency characteristics of the residual disturbance is unknown, it is reasonable to as- sume that the residual disturbance is bounded. Con- sidering this fact, wedesign a current state estimator in the 'H2 point of view. The current estimator gain L, that minimizes the estimation error in the 'H2 sense with given weightings can be obtained by solving the discrete algebraic Riccati equation (DARE) Y - drYV +drYCT(DIDT +CYCT)-'CYdrT -rlrT =o. (6) The estimator gain L, is computed by L, =YCT(CYCT +DIDT)-' (7) where Y >0 is the solution of ( 6) . Then, from (5) we obtain the transfer function of the state estimator Gt l =[ F] c CL, which is used as a target loop transfer function 3.4 State Feedback Design To begin with, consider a system described in Figure 3. Here, d =w - U&t , the residual disturbance. State feedback control law is described by u ( k ) =K C( ZT( k ) - W) ) (9) where K, is the feedback gain to be determined such that both tracking performance and disturbance rejec- tion are satisfactory. In order to attain sufficient ro- bustness, the loop transfer recovery (LTR) design tech- nique is applied in the design of state feedback gain K,. Given the target loop transfer function Gtl, the state feedback gain K, is determined using the LTR method- ology at the plant output such that the loop transfer function approaches to the target loop transfer func- tion. By solving the DARE, with control weighting R2 and state weighting R1 =qCTC for recovery, x - G ~ x ~ , +aTxr (1-2~ +rTxr)-'rTxdr -RI =O (10) one can determine the state feedback gain from K, =(rTxr +R2)-*rTx+ (11) where X 2 0 is the solution of (10). 3.5 Analysis of Feedback Loop The sensitivity transfer function is expressed by where 1 dr - rK,L,C r ( K, - KAC) -(a - rK,)L,C dr - r K, - (dr - rK,)L,C ' The complementary sensitivity transfer function is G c s = [ * I where 1 dr - rK,L,C r (Kc - K&C) - (6, - rK,) L,C 6, - I'K, - (6, - TK,) L,C ' a,, = It should be noted that the complementary sensitivity function is the Q filter equivalent in the design of state space disturbance observer based control systems. 3.6 Disturbance Observer Design Using (5) we can rewrite the disturbance observer model (4) shown in Figure 4-(a) as Ud i s t ( k ) =K d i s t L c (-Y(k) -t Cz ( k ) ) (14) which is depicted in Figure 4-(b). The disturbance ob- servation u d i s t ( k ) is represented in terms of the esti- mation error y ( k ) - Cf(lc). So far, we have assumed that an appropriate disturbance observer gain Kdist is 41 96 given. To complete design we need to determine the gain Kdzst. In general, larger gain Kdzst results in more accurate disturbance observation. However, it also af- fects stability of the closed loop system. Thus, the performance of disturbance observation as well as the stability of closed loop should be considered in the de- termination of the gain Kdzst. The following theorem provides a condition for the disturbance observation gain Kdzst. Theorem 1 Suppose that p (a - (aL,C) < 1 and p (a - FK,) <1. Then, there always exist some Kdist such that p ( ( a - @L,C - rKdiStL,C) <1, i.e. the feedback loop i s stable. Moreover, in this case, there exist b (Ts, Kdist) >0 and ks (Ts, Kdist) >0 such that ( ( W - Udi s t ( k) l l <6 (T~, Kdi st ) for >ks (T.,Kdist). Proof: Not presented due to space limitation w I 3 U Model Model 4 Y Udi s t (b) Figure 4: Current state estimator and disturbance ob- server ((a) and (b) represent the disturbance observer models (4) and (14), respectively.) The performance of a disturbance observer is highly dependent on the sampling frequency. As the sam- pling frequency becomes higher, the disturbance ob- server can reject higher frequency disturbances. I n the case of limited sampling frequency, multi-rate imple- mentation of the proposed disturbance observer is ef- fective. 4 Example A continuous time system described by 0 1 0 0 -128.59 ] z-t [ 2.1484e4 ] x = [ y = [ 1 O l z f n is considered. Here, n denotes measurement noise and w denotes unknown but bounded disturbance of the system. 4.1 Control System Design For a sampling time of 300 psec, a discrete model de- scribed by [ 1 2. 9429e-41 , 0 9.6216e-1 [ 9. 5445e-41 6.3224 r= a = is obtained. We first determine a state estimator gain L, =[ 0.75 0.5 I T and a state feedback gain K, =[ 107.42 0.3 ] such that the sensitivity and complementary sensitivity of the control system are satisfactory. The state estimator has p((a - (aL,C) = 0.25, 0.96, and the state feedback controller has p ((a - FK,) =0.895, 0.93. For sufficient compensation of the equivalent disturbance wechoose a disturbance observer gain Kdzst =[ 18 3.75 1. Then, we have p ((a - @L,c - rKdistLcC) =0.28, 0.92. As stated in Theorem 1, the closed loop is stable and the distur- bance observer is convergent. Figure 5 shows sensitiv- ity and complementary sensitivity of the feedback loop. Figure 5: Sensitivity and complementary sensitivity 4.2 Simulation Results Disturbances of 0.2 sin(8nt) and 0.2 sin(8nt) + O. l si n(24nt ) are injected into the plant input in the simulations of step command tracking and sinusoidal command tracking, respectively. For more realistic simulations, we also introduce a control saturation of Iul 5 umax =0.7 amp, the quantization effect of ADC and DAC, and measurement noises. Figure 6 shows time response of the plant for a step position command. Comparisons of the model out- put with the plant output are shown. It is shown that the plant output is very close to the model output fol- lowing the step command with disturbance compensa- tion. Figure 7 shows that the disturbance observer ef- fectively compensates the sinusoidal disturbance. Fig- ure 8 shows time response of the plant for a sinusoidal 41 97 position command. Comparisons of the model output with the plant output are shown. It is shown that the plant output is very close to the model output and to the sinusoidal command with disturbance compensa- tion. Figure 9 shows very good compensation of the sinusoidal disturbances by the disturbance observer. 1 ~ " " " " ' ~ 0 0 1 02 03 0 4 0 5 06 0 7 08 09 I 2 1 , I I 0 01 02 03 0 4 O S 08 07 0 8 09 1 lime [SRI Figure 6: Step position command tracking 0 0 1 02 03 0 4 0 5 08 0 7 0 8 0 9 1 - 08 niM iw Figure 7: Disturbance and disturbance observation in step position command tracking 5 Conclusions This paper has presented a new discrete-time state space disturbance observer not requiring modeling of disturbances. A discrete-time robust tracking control system is proposed, which consists of the state space disturbance observer, a state estimator, and a state feedback controller. Through the results of simulations, it is shown that the proposed method is very effective to improve the tracking accuracy of control systems in the existence of external disturbances. I t is observed that the proposed disturbance observer effectively esti- mate and compensate any disturbances if the sampling 0 0 1 0 2 03 0 4 0 5 0 6 07 0 6 09 1 Ti m ( 5 8 ~ 1 Figure 8: Sinusoidal position command tracking 06t 1 0 4 - P I 0 0 1 02 03 0 4 0 5 08 0 7 08 09 1 l i me [%cl - 08 Figure 9: Disturbance and disturbance observation in si- nusoidal position command tracking frequency is fast enough. In addition, accurate state estimation was attained even in the existence of mod- eling uncertainties as well as external disturbances. References [I] G.F. Franklin, J .D. Powell, and M.L. Workman, Digital Control of Dynamic Systems, Addison Wesley, 1990. [2] T. Murakami and K. Ohnishi, Observer-based Motion Control: Application t o Robust Control and parameter Identification, Proc. of the IEEE Indus- trial Electronics Society: Asia-Pacific Workshop on Ad- vances in Motion Control, J uly 15-16, 1993, pp. 1-6. [3] K. Ohnishi, A New Servo Method in Mechatron- zcs, Trans. of J apanese Society of Electrical Engineers, Vol. 107-D, 1987, pp. 83-86. [4] T. Umeno and Y. Hori, Robust Speed Con- trol of DC Servomotors using Modern Two Degrees-of- Freedom Controller Design, IEEE Trans. on Industrial Electronics, Vol. 38, No. 5, 1990, pp. 363-368. 41 98