18/3/2014

Advances in Electronic Control of Hydraulic Servo Systems Part 2

print | close

Advances in Electronic Control of Hydraulic Servo Systems

Part 2
Peter Nachtwey, Delta Computer Systems Inc.
Tue, 2013-10-08 11:22

Manual tuning of electrohydraulic systems is best left to the experts. But auto tuning can adjust machine
controls to not only get a machine up and running quickly, but also optimize its operation.
Part one of Advances in
Electronic Control of Hydraulic
Servo Systems, published in the
July 2013 issue of Hydraulics &
Pneumatics, covered how to
optimize control of servo
hydraulic systems: design,
challenges, and, ultimately, a
solution. The solution used a
model to estimate the velocity
and acceleration as a function of
the control output. This second
part continues by showing how
to generate first- and secondorder models.
Figures 1 and 2 contain two
graphs showing how you can use the measured
velocity and control output to generate a firstand second-order model, respectively. The
feedback velocity in red is calculated using a
simple method. The resolution of the feedback
device is 0.001 in., but the velocity is calculated
over a time span of 2 msec, so the resolution of
the feedback velocity is 0.5 in./sec. You can see
that the estimated velocity is much smoother
because its generated by the model, whereas the
feedback velocity from a first-order model
doesnt follow the changes in the actual model
very well. On the other hand, the estimated
velocity for the second-order model follows the feedback velocity much more closely than the first-order
model and best represents how the actual system is moving. This indicates that the system is a secondorder system, behaving like a mass between two springs.
http://hydraulicspneumatics.com/print/controls-amp-instrumentation/advances-electronic-control-hydraulic-servo-systems-part-2

1/4

18/3/2014

Advances in Electronic Control of Hydraulic Servo Systems Part 2

So where does the model that estimates the velocity and acceleration come from?

Auto
tuning
Auto
tuning
is a
feature

supported by some electronic motion-control systems

and is necessary when using advanced features such as
the second-derivative gain and the jerk feed forward because few hydraulic-control-system designers
have experience tuning them manually. The two parameters can be determined roughly by trial and error,
but having a method of determining the gain, damping factor, and natural frequency quickly is important
to reduce start-up time and shorten the time it may take to retune a system as the mechanics change.
Auto tuning is a way of estimating the model of the actuator and load using the control output to the
actuator and the position and velocity response, as in Figures 1 and 2. Models can be complex, but usually
you can achieve 95% of the benefit with 5% of the effort if the model is kept relatively simple. A hydraulic
actuator and load can be modeled simply as a mass between two springs. Therefore, the model would
consist of a gain, damping factor, and natural frequency. You can estimate the gain and natural frequency
at design time using the VCCM equation and the formula for natural frequency (see box on page 40).
The damping factor is more difficult to estimate, but a typical damping factor ranges from 0.3 to 0.4. Even
a rough estimate of the damping factor can allow entering these parameters into the motion controllers
built-in simulator. This lets you get started before the machinery is built. A controls person in the field can
perform auto tuning to find the actual gain, damping factor, and natural frequency.
Auto tuning isnt totally automatic. A procedure is conducted to move the actuator in a specific way,
usually via open-loop control. The relationship between the control output and the position or velocity
data is estimated by trying a value for each of the three parameters (gain, damping factor, and natural
frequency) and then checking to see how closely the estimated position or velocity follows actual the
recorded position or velocity. An evaluation can be done by summing the square of all the errors between
the estimated and actual position or velocity. The three parameters mentioned above are changed in an
effort to minimize the sum of the squared errors. This is a trial-and-error process, but a computer can do so
quickly that it seems instantaneous. When the computer is done, it has found the best values of the gain,
damping factor, and natural frequency.

The results
A true test is to move the actuator using a sine-wave motion profile. The actual or true velocity and
acceleration will smoothly go through a range of values, and the goal is to estimate the velocity and
acceleration accurately so the actuator can follow the target accurately. Low-resolution feedback will make
the quantizing effect obvious because the velocity calculated directly from the feedback will change in
steps. The goal of the model-based control is to estimate smooth velocities as shown below.
The graph in Figure 3 shows how an actuator with a gain of 3
in./sec, damping factor of 0.4, and a natural frequency of 10
http://hydraulicspneumatics.com/print/controls-amp-instrumentation/advances-electronic-control-hydraulic-servo-systems-part-2

2/4

18/3/2014

Advances in Electronic Control of Hydraulic Servo Systems Part 2

Hz can be controlled using a PID with a second derivative gain. The VCCM equation
The feedback is truncated to 0.001 in. to simulate a start-stop
magnetostrictive linear-displacement transducer rod with a
position feedback of 0.001 in. As noted, the resolution of the
measured velocity would be 1 in./sec, and the resolution of the
acceleration would be 1,000 in./sec 2 . Figure 3 shows that the
estimated position is so close to the actual position that they
look like one line. The estimated velocity is relatively smooth
compared to what could be achieved doing simple velocity
calculations, where the resolution would be 1 in./sec. The
control output is essentially tracing a 1-V peak-to-peak sine
wave to control the actuator. A little noise occurs in the control
output from errors in estimating the velocity and acceleration,
but it isnt as bad as what would occur without estimating the
velocity and acceleration with the model.
If the model wasnt used, the control output would simply be
changing from 10 to 10 V because of the inability to estimate
the velocity and acceleration. Without the model-based
velocity and accelerations, the PID and second-derivative
gains would need to be drastically reduced to keep the control
output from swinging 10 V peak to peak.

where:
Fl = load force that must be overcome,
P S = supply pressure,
Ape = cylinder size,
v = speed of cylinder propulsion,
Kvpl = degree to which the valve is open,
v = symmetry of the valve, and
c = cylinder area ratio (cap end of piston
area/rod end area).

Figure 4 shows the actual and estimated velocities. The plot

actually contains two lines, but the estimated velocity is almost
identical to the actual velocity, so the estimated velocity line is Natural frequency:
on top of the actual velocity line. Again, notice that there is no
1-in./sec quantizing.
As

where:
= bulk modulus of fluid,
A = surface area of the piston,
V = volume of the cylinder, and
expected, the estimated acceleration, shown in Figure 5, shows m= mass of the load.
the effects of feedback quantizing, but spikes of 4 or 5 in./sec 2
are a lot better than errors of 1,000 in./sec 2 . The estimated acceleration curve still does a good job of
following the actual acceleration.
Now compare the model-based control from Figure 5 to control without the model shown in Figure 6. The
same gains are used as in Figures 3, 4, and 5. The control output isnt shown because it changes from 10 to
http://hydraulicspneumatics.com/print/controls-amp-instrumentation/advances-electronic-control-hydraulic-servo-systems-part-2

3/4

18/3/2014

Advances in Electronic Control of Hydraulic Servo Systems Part 2

10 V from the effects that the quantized velocity

and acceleration have on the control output.
Because the control output is often saturated,
the actuator is being controlled as if the valve is a
simple on-off directional-control valve.

Conclusion
You can control systems that would otherwise be
uncontrollable by implementing model-based
control with an electrohydraulic motion
controller that can run second-order algorithms.
The alternative would be to design systems with
a high damping factor and natural frequency, but
this would increase the system cost.
Peter Nachtwey is president of Delta Computer
Systems, Battle Ground, Wash. For more
information, call (360) 254-8688, or visit
www.deltamotion.com.

Source URL: http://hydraulicspneumatics.com/controls-amp-instrumentation/advances-electroniccontrol-hydraulic-servo-systems-part-2

http://hydraulicspneumatics.com/print/controls-amp-instrumentation/advances-electronic-control-hydraulic-servo-systems-part-2

4/4