Documente Academic
Documente Profesional
Documente Cultură
Abstract- This paper studies a restricted control moment technique via both numerical simulations and experimental
gyroscope (CMG), which constitutes a remarkable example of results.
a nonholonomic system that arises as a consequence of its
symmetry properties. A nonholonomic control system formula- II. MATHEMATICAL MODEL
tion is first introduced for the restricted CMG dynamics. The We first briefly describe the control moment gyroscope
geometric phase technique is then used to design a feedback
control algorithm for the control of the CMG system to a (CMG) unit, by Educational Control Products (ECP) [16],
desired equilibrium. The effectiveness of the feedback control shown in Figure 1. The unit consists of a high inertia brass
algorithm is illustrated through both numerical simulations and rotor suspended in an assembly with four angular degrees of
experimental results. freedom. The rotor spin torque is provided by a dc motor
I. INTRODUCTION (motor 1) whose angular position is measured by an optical
In the last few decades, there has been considerable
encoder (encoder 1). The first transverse gimbal assembly
attention paid to control problems for nonholonomic systems. (body C) is driven by another dc motor (motor 2) to affect
motion about axis 2. Another optical encoder (encoder 2)
Numerous examples have been studied in the context of robot
provides feedback of the relative position of bodies C and
manipulation, mobile robots, wheeled vehicles, and space
B. Body B rotates with respect to body A about axis 3.
robotics. An excellent reference that provides a geometric
and control theoretical view of nonholonomic systems is There is no active torque applied about this axis. A brake,
which is actuated via a toggle switch on the Controller box,
the book by Bloch [3]. A few representative control works
may be used to lock the relative position of A and B and
include the study of controllability and stabilizability in [4],
hence reduce the system degrees of freedom. The relative
motion planning in [13], [14], [17], and feedback stabiliza-
tion and tracking in [2], [7]-[10], [19]-[21].
angle between A and B is measured by encoder 3. Finally,
In this paper, we consider a restricted control moment body A rotates without actively applied torque relative to the
gyroscope (CMG) which constitutes a remarkable example
base frame (inertial ground) about axis 4. The axis 4 brake is
of a nonholonomic system that arises as a consequence of controlled similarly to the axis 3 brake and an optical encoder
its symmetry properties. It is well known that if the motion (encoder 4) provides position feedback. Inertial switches are
of a mechanical system exhibits certain symmetry properties, installed on bodies A, B, and C to sense any overspeed.
there exist conserved quantities. If these conserved quantities
are not integrable, then a class of nonholonomic systems
is thereby obtained. The restricted CMG system has a
cyclic rotation coordinate that gives rise to a nonintegrable
generalized angular momentum conservation expression and,
therefore, belongs to this class. Other examples of this class
of nonholonomic systems include internally actuated multi-
body spacecraft ([18], [22]), underactuated rigid spacecraft
([11], [12]), and space robotics systems [6].
This paper uses the geometric phase technique to design a
feedback control algorithm for the rest-to-rest maneuvering
of the CMG system. The key steps in the design of the
control algorithm can also be found in [4]. Our contributions
in this paper are (i) the formulation of the restricted CMG
dynamics as a nonholonomic control system and (ii) the
demonstration of the effectiveness of the geometric phase
This work was supported in part by Embry-Riddle Aeronautical Univer-
sity
M. Reyhanoglu is with the Department of Physical Sciences,
Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University, Daytona Beach, Florida, USA
reyhanom@erau.edu Fig. 1. Control Moment Gyroscope (CMG) by ECP [16].
J. van de Loo is with the Department of Mechanical Engineering,
Eindhoven University of Technology, 5600 MB Eindhoven, The Netherlands
j.v.d.loo@student.tue.edu We now present the equations of motion for the CMG
1-4244-0497-5/06/$20.00 © 2006 IEEE 160
in a form suitable to the subsequent controls design and the Lagrangian L:
analysis. Figure 2 is a schematic representation of the 4
DOF gyroscope. We follow the notation used in [16]. As L =2 (Ic +ID)q2 + 2(J2 + J1 sin2 q2)4
shown in Figure 2, dextral sets of orthogonal unit vectors + JD 1 4 sin q2,
ai, bi, ci,and di, (i = 1,2,3) are fixed in A, B, C,
and D, respectively. An inertial (or Newtonian) reference where
frame is defined as N, in which a dextral set of orthogonal J1 = JC + JD -ID -KC,
unit vectors Ni, (i = 1, 2, 3) are fixed. Four angles specify J2 = ID + KA + KB + KC.
the configuration of the system. The angular travel of D
(rotor) in C in the direction d2 is defined as ql. Angle The Lagrangian is not dependent on the angular positions
q2 is defined as the rotation about c1 of C relative to B. qi and q4. This is explained by inspection of Figure 2,
Similarly, angle q3 is defined as the angular rotation about where it is seen that the dynamic description of the system
b2 of B relative to A. Finally, q4 is defined as the angular would be identical for any arbitrarily assigned positions of
rotation about a3 of A relative to N. The angular speeds are the rotor and base. Clearly, q4 is an unactuated cyclic rotation
wi = qj, (i = 1, , 4). The configuration shown in Figure coordinate and thus the generalized momentum conjugate to
2 reflects qi 0 (i = 1, , 4). For this system, the mass this coordinate is conserved, i.e.
centers of all the bodies comprising the system are at the
center of the disk (D), which is also the center of all the . (JD sin q2>h1 + (J2 + J1 sin2 q2) 4 = C,
gimbal axes. Thus, only rotational dynamics are considered where c is a constant. In this paper, the constant c is set equal
in the following analysis and the effects of gravity are to zero in order to study rest-to-rest motions. Consequently,
neglected. The scalar moments of inertia about the ith (i using the Lagrangian method, the reduced equations of
1, 2, 3) direction respectively in bodies A, B, C, and D are motion can be written as
given by I, JX, Kx, (x = A, B, C, D). Note that only
moments of inertia are considered while products of inertia JDy1 + (JD sin q2)q4 + q2q4 JD cos q2 = T1, (1)
are set to zero. The CMG unit is such that this simplification (Ic + ID)q2-(JD 4l + Jlj4sinq2>)u4cosq2 =T2, (2)
is valid for most dynamic and control modeling purposes.
Two inputs are considered for this system. The first is a (JD sin q2)ql + (J2 + J1 sin2 q2)q4 = 0- (3)
torque, T1, applied to D by C (via the rotor spin motor). The first two equations represent the directly actuated de-
The second input is a torque, T2, applied to C by B (via grees of freedom and the last equation corresponds to the
a gimbal motor/capstan drive). The equations of motion for unactuated degree of freedom. Note that the equation asso-
the four degree of freedom CMG can be found in [16]. ciated with the locked degree of freedom is discarded.
The equations of motion for the system can be further
A. Reduced Equations of Motion simplified by applying a partial feedback linearization. Let
j = q4 denote the unactuated degree of freedom. Then
equations of motion can be written as
1 = Ui, (4)
f. q2 = U2, (5)
JD sin q2
(6)
0 J2 + J1 sin q2
7T NTZ where
T1 .
q4sinq2 -q4COS q2,
F"-. .. 6 1 .. .
ul =
JD-Q (7)
JD
Axis Ic (N m) |, (N m slrad) F-
-0.1
1 0.035 0.0
-0.2
2 0.017 0.0 0 10 15 20 25
4 0.005 0.1
0.2
0.1
E
O-0
(IC + ID)q2- (JD 41 + Jl 14sin q2> j4 cos q2 = T2 + f2,
sin2 q2)q4 + Jl2j4 sin 2q2
-0.1 _
(JD sin q2) 1 + (J2 + Ji 0 10
time [s]
15 20 25
+JDjl12 cosq2 = 4,
Fig. 5. Input torques Ti and T2 (simulation).
where fi = -p,usign(tQ) -,uVA4 ,ci > 0, ,vi > 0,
denotes the Coulomb plus viscous friction torque acting on 501
the ith axis (i = 1, 2, 4). Here pci and ,vi are Coulomb and
viscous friction coefficients, respectively. For the CMG unit,
these friction coefficients are experimentally determined as -50
10 15 20 25
in Table I. o
-1 J
Remark: Here we consider the simplest model of friction. -2
10 15 20 25
A considerably more sophisticated friction model developed
by Dahl [5] includes "stiction", the increased friction found 7~3 _-
01
-02 L
-50 0 10 15 20 25
0 10 15 20 25
E
z 0.1
-J
0.05-
-2
0 10 15 20 25
4- 005
01
v 3 0 5 10 15 20 25
2 time [s]
0 10 15 20 25
time [s] Fig. 7. Input torques T1 and T2 (experiment).
163
TABLE II 20
-20
0 5 10 5 20 25 30 35 40
a (rad) b (rad)l
-yl -23.117 -F7/4 -A-F-V
-72 - 13.825
-7.667
-/4
-/4
-1[--
-M -2
I
0
problem is to repeat the five steps described in the previous -0.05
u 0 u
section until r1 reaches its desired value. This process is -0
5
LJ
10 15
LJ
20
Lu
time [s]
Ll
25
LJ
30 35 40
was executed by driving first the base variable q2 and then 5'
:z 2
qi to zero. Clearly, during this step, the fiber variable r1
remains constant. Figures 11 and 12 show the results of 0
0 5 10 15 20
time [s
25 30 35 40
02y Y Y Y Y? i
-5
0
-0.2-
-0.4-
-1 .2
-25 -20 -15 -10 -5
qt [rad]
0 5 10 15 20 V. CONCLUSIONS
In this paper, a restricted control moment gyroscope
Fig. 8. Motion in base space (simulation). (CMG) has been studied in the context of nonholonomic
control systems. The geometric phase technique has been
164
used to design a feedback algorithm for the rest-to-rest [10] I. Kolmanovsky, M. Reyhanoglu, and N.H. McClamroch,"Switched
control of the system. The effectiveness of the algorithm Mode Feedback Control Laws for Nonholonomic Systems in Extended
Power Form," Systems and Control Letters, vol. 27, no. 1, 1996, pp.
has been illustrated through both numerical simulations and 29-36.
experimental results. Our current research includes design of [11] H. Krishnan, M. Reyhanoglu, and N.H. McClamroch,"Attitude Stabi-
state feedback and output feedback tracking algorithms for lization of a Rigid Spacecraft Using two Control Torques: A Nonlinear
Control Approach Based on the Spacecraft Attitude Dynamics," Au-
the CMG unit. tomatica, vol. 30, no. 6, 1994, pp. 1023-1027.
[12] H. Krishnan, M. Reyhanoglu, and N.H. McClamroch,"Attitude Stabi-
VI. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS lization of a Rigid Spacecraft Using Two Momentum Wheel Actua-
M. Reyhanoglu wishes to acknowledge the support pro- tors," AIAA Journal of Guidance, Control and Dynamics, vol. 18, no.
2, 1995, pp. 256-263.
vided by Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University. J. van de [13] R.M. Murray and S.S. Sastry,"Nonholonomic Motion Planning: Steer-
Loo acknowledges the support provided by Eindhoven Uni- ing Using Sinusoids," IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control, vol.
versity of Technology. 38, no. 5, 1993, pp. 700-716.
[14] Y. Nakamura and R. Mukherjee,"Nonholonomic Motion Planning of
Space Robots via a Bi-directional Approach," IEEE Transactions on
REFERENCES Robotics and Automation, vol. 7, no. 4, 1991, pp. 500-514.
[1] B. Armstrong-Helouvry, P. Dupont, and C.C. de Wit,"A Survey of [15] H. Olsson, K.J. Astrom, C.C. de Wit, M. Gafvert, and P. Lischinsky,
Models, Analysis Tools and Compensation Methods for the Control "Friction Models and Friction Compensation," European Journal of
of Machines with Friction," Automatica, vol. 30, no. 7, 1994, pp.1083- Control, vol. 4, no. 3, 1998, pp.176-195.
1138. [16] T. R. Parks, Manual For Model 750 Control Moment Gyroscope,
[2] A. Astolfi,"Discontinuous Control of Nonholonomic Systems," Sys- Educational Control Products, Bell Canyon, CA; 1999.
tems and Control Letters, vol. 27, 1996, pp. 37-45. [17] M. Reyhanoglu and E. Al-Regib,"Nonholonomic Motion Planning for
[3] A. M. Bloch, Nonholonomic Mechanics and Control, Springer, New Wheeled Mobile Systems Using Geometric Phase," Proceedings of
York, NY; 2003. IEEE International Symposium on Intelligent Control, 1994, pp.135-
[4] A. M. Bloch, M. Reyhanoglu, and N. Harris McClamroch," Control 140.
and Stabilization of Nonholonomic Dynamic Systems," IEEE Trans- [18] M. Reyhanoglu and N.H. McClamroch,"Planar Reorientation Maneu-
actions on Automatic Control, vol. 37, no. 11, 1992, pp.1746-1757. vers of Space Multibody Spacecraft Using Internal Controls," AIAA
[5] P. Dahl,"A Solid Friction Model," The Aerospace Corporation, CA, Journal of Guidance, Control and Dynamics, vol. 15, no. 6, 1992, pp.
Tech. Rep. TOR-0158(3107-18), 1968. 1475-1480.
[6] S. Dubowsky and E. Papadopoulos,"The Kinematics, Dynamics and [19] O.J. Sordalen and 0. Egeland,"Exponential Stabilization of Nonholo-
Control of Free-flying and Free-floating Space Robotic Systems," nomic Chained Systems," IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control,
IEEE Transactions on Robotics and Automation, vol. 9, no. 5, 1993, vol. 40, no. 1, 1995, pp. 35-49.
pp. 531-543. [20] G.C. Walsh, D. Tillbnry, S. Sastry, R. Murray, and J.P. Laumond,
[7] J.M. Godhavn and 0. Egeland,"A Lyapunov Approach to Exponential "Stabilization of Trajectories for Systems with Nonholonomic Con-
Stabilization of Nonholonomic Systems in Power Form," IEEE Trans- straints," IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control, vol. 39, no. 1,
actions on Automatic Control, vol. 42, no. 7, 1997, pp. 1028-1032. 1994, pp. 216-222.
[8] Z.P. Jiang and H. Nijmeijer,"A Recursive Technique for Tracking Con- [21] G.C. Walsh and L.G. Bushnell,"Stabilization of Multiple Input
trol of Nonholonomic Systems in Chained Form," IEEE Transactions Chained Form Control Systems," Systems and Control Letters, vol.
on Automatic Control, vol. 44, no. 2, 1999, pp. 265-279. 25, 1995, pp. 227-234.
[9] Z.P. Jiang and H. Nijmeijer, "Tracking Control of Mobile Robots: A [22] G.C. Walsh and S.S. Sastry,"On Reorienting Linked Rigid Bodies Us-
Case Study in Backstepping,", Automatica, vol. 33, no. 7, 1997, pp. ing Internal Motions," IEEE Transactions on Robotics and Automation,
1393-1399. vol. 11, no. 1, 1995, pp. 139-145.
165