Design of a low-bandwidth position controller based on system identification for an electro-hydrostatic actuator

Abstract

In order to design a controller, mathematical model is usually derived first, either from physical laws or by employing a system identification technique. Physical laws may not fully define the system because of the existing uncertainties and/or difficulty to accurately model certain phenomenon. Therefore, the resulting controller may be too conservative. In this article, we design a low-bandwidth controller for an electro-hydrostatic actuator positioning system based on a system identification technique. The designed controller is also linear, fixed-gain and robust to system uncertainties. A set of offline parametric linear identifications are performed under different conditions, including various environmental stiffnesses, levels of actuator internal leakage, viscous dampings and load masses. The obtained family of identified models is then used to design a quantitative feedback theory controller that satisfies given tracking and stability specifications. In addition, the performance of the controller is examined against another quantitative feedback theory controller that is designed for the same system using physical laws. The performances of two controllers are examined on a test rig. Experimental results show that both quantitative feedback theory controllers are capable of maintaining actuator position within acceptable response envelope. However, the controller designed based on physical laws has higher bandwidth and therefore is more conservative.

Keywords

Electro-hydrostatic actuator low bandwidth position control quantitative feedback theory system identification

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Choi

Robust position control of electro-hydrostatic actuator systems with radial basis function neural networks. J Adv Mech Des Syst 2013; 7(2): 257–267.

Jensen

Jenney

Dawson

. Flight test experience with an electromechanical actuator on the F-18 systems research aircraft. In: Proceedings of IEEE digital avionics systems conference, Philadelphia, PA, 7–13 October 2000, p.1. New York: IEEE.

Miller

TB.

Preliminary investigation on battery sizing investigation for thrust vector control on ares I and ares V launch vehicles. Technical Report, Report no: NASA/TM—2011-216899, NASA Glenn Research Center, Cleveland, OH, 2011.

Kaminaga

Amari

Katayama

et al . Backdrivability analysis of electro-hydrostatic actuator and series dissipative actuation model. In: Proceedings of IEEE international conference on robotics and automation, Anchorage, Alaska, 3–7 May 2010, pp.4204–4211. New York: IEEE.

Houpis

Rasmussen

SJ.

Quantitative feedback theory: fundamentals and applications. New York, NY: Marcel Dekker, 1999.

Yaniv

Quantitative feedback design of linear and nonlinear control systems. Norwell, MA: Kluwer, 1999.

Borghesani

Chait

Yaniv

The QFT frequency domain control design toolbox for use with MATLAB. 3rd ed.San Diego, CA: Terasoft, Inc, 2003.

Hong

Mitchell

Chen

et al . Model selection approaches for non-linear system identification: a review. Int J Syst Sci 2008; 39(10): 925–946.

Keesman

KJ.

System identification: an introduction. New York, NY: Springer, 2011.

10.

Bai

EW.

Non-parametric nonlinear system identification: an asymptotic minimum mean squared error estimator. IEEE T Automat Contr 2010; 55(7): 1615–1626.

11.

Yassin

Taib

Adnan

Recent advancements & methodologies in system identification: a review. Sci Res J 2013; 1(1): 14–33.

12.

Novak

Simon

Kadlec

et al . Nonlinear system identification using exponential swept-sine signal. IEEE T Instrum Meas 2010; 59(8): 2220–2229.

13.

Bobrow

Lum

. Adaptive, high bandwidth control of a hydraulic actuator. In: Proceedings of IEEE American Control Conference, Seattle, WA, 21–23 June 1995, pp.71–75. New York: IEEE.

14.

Mohanty

Yao

Indirect adaptive robust control of hydraulic manipulators with accurate parameter estimates. IEEE T Contr Syst T 2011; 19(3): 567–575.

15.

Ziaei

Sepehri

Modeling and identification of electrohydraulic servos. Mechatronics 2000; 10(10): 761–772.

16.

Sepehri

. Modeling and prediction of hydraulic servo actuators with neural networks. In: Proceedings of IEEE American control conference, San Diego, CA, 2–4 June 1999, pp.3708–3712. New York: IEEE.

17.

Plummer

Vaughan

ND.

Robust adaptive control for hydraulic servosystems. J Dyn Syst T 1996; 118(2): 237–244.

18.

Plummer

Vaughan

ND.

Decoupling pole-placement control, with application to a multi-channel electro-hydraulic servosystem. Control Eng Pract 1997; 5(3): 313–323.

19.

Yousefi

Handroos

Soleymani

Application of differential evolution in system identification of a servo-hydraulic system with a flexible load. Mechatronics 2008; 18(9): 513–528.

20.

Sohl

Bobrow

JE.

Experiments and simulations on the nonlinear control of a hydraulic servosystem. IEEE T Contr Syst T 1999; 7(2): 238–247.

21.

Rahmat

Rozali

Wahab

et al . Modeling and controller design of an electro-hydraulic actuator system. Am J Appl Sci 2010; 7(8): 1100–1108.

22.

Kaddissi

Kenne

Saad

Identification and real-time control of an electrohydraulic servo system based on nonlinear backstepping. IEEE/ASME T Mech 2007; 12(1): 12–22.

23.

Liao

Roelle

Chen

et al . Implementation and analysis of a repetitive controller for an electro-hydraulic engine valve system. IEEE T Contr Syst T 2011; 19(5): 1102–1113.

24.

Ahn

Dinh

QT.

Self-tuning of quantitative feedback theory for force control of an electro-hydraulic test machine. Control Eng Pract 2009; 17(11): 1291–1306.

25.

Truong

Ahn

KK.

Self-tuning quantitative feedback theory for parallel force/position control of electro-hydrostatic actuators. Proc IMechE, Part I: J Systems and Control Engineering 2009; 223(4): 537–556.

26.

Kilic

Dolen

Koku

et al . Accurate pressure prediction of a servo-valve controlled hydraulic system. Mechatronics 2012; 22(7): 997–1014.

27.

Tischler

Remple

RK.

Aircraft and rotorcraft system identification: engineering methods with flight test examples. Reston, VA: AIAA, 2006.

28.

Adiprawita

Ahmad

Sembiring

Automated flight test and system identification for rotary wing small aerial platform using frequency responses analysis. J Bionic Eng 2007; 4(4): 237–244.

29.

Niño

Mitrache

Cosyn

et al . Model identification of a micro air vehicle. J Bionic Eng 2007; 4(4): 227–236.

30.

Banazadeh

Ghorbani

MT.

Frequency domain identification of the nomoto model to facilitate Kalman filter estimation and PID heading control of a patrol vessel. Ocean Eng 2013; 72(4): 344–355.

31.

Ren

Song

Sepehri

Fault-tolerant actuating pressure controller design for an electrohydrostatic actuator experiencing a leaky piston seal. J Dyn Syst T 2017; 139(6): 061004.

32.

Gutman

PO.

Robust and adaptive control: fidelity or an open relationship?

Syst Control Lett 2003; 49(1): 9–19.

33.

Rezai

Shirazi

KH.

Robust handling enhancement on a slippery road using quantitative feedback theory. Proc IMechE, Part D: J Automobile Engineering 2014; 228(4): 426–442.

34.

Ren

Esfandiari

Song

et al . Position control of an electrohydrostatic actuator with tolerance to internal leakage. IEEE T Contr Syst T 2016; 24(6): 2224–2232.

35.

Habibi

Goldenberg

Design of a new high-performance electrohydraulic actuator. IEEE/ASME T Mech 2000; 5(2): 158–164.