A Non-linear Optimal Control Design using Narrowband Perturbation Feedback for Magnetostrictive Actuators

Abstract

Non-linear optimal and narrowband feedback control designs are developed and experimentally implemented on a magnetostrictive Terfenol-D actuator. The non-linear optimal control design incorporates a non-linear and hysteretic ferromagnetic homogenized energy model within an optimal control formulation to reduce displacement tracking errors and increase bandwidth. Improvements in robustness in the steady-state regime are achieved by utilizing narrowband feedback. A narrowband filter is implemented by treating the nonlinear and hysteretic magnetostrictive constitutive behavior as higher-order harmonic disturbances which are mitigated by tuning the narrowband filter to penalize these harmonics for displacement tracking control problems. The control designs are then combined into a hybrid optimal controller with perturbation narrowband feedback. Both transient and steady-state tracking control is assessed to illustrate performance attributes in different operating regimes. Narrowband perturbation feedback is shown to mitigate errors in the steady-state operating regime, while non-linear optimal control provides enhanced tracking control in the transient regime. The hybrid control design is relevant to a broad number of smart material actuators that exhibit non-linear and hysteretic field-coupled constitutive behavior.

Keywords

magnetostrictive narrowband control hysteresis non-linear optimal control.

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Bashash, B. and Jalili, N. 2009. ‘‘Robust Adaptive Control of Coupled Parallel Piezo-Flexural Nano-Positioning Stages,’’ IEEE/ASME Trans. Mechatron., 14:11-20.

Bay, J. 1999. Fundamentals of Linear State Space Systems, WCB McGraw-Hill, Boston, MA.

Cheng, R. , Tischler, M. and Celi, R. 2006. ‘‘A High-Order, Linear Time-Invariant Model for Application to Higher Harmonic Control and Flilght Control System Interaction’’ , NASA Technical Report, vol. NASA/TP-2002006-213460: pp. 1-175.

Clarke, D. , Mohtadi, C. and Tuffs, P. 1987. ‘‘Generalized Predictive Control-Part I. The Basic Algorithm,’’ Automatica, 23:137-148.

Croft, D. , Shed, G. and Devasia, S. 2001. ‘‘Creep, Hysteresis, and Vibration Compensation for Piezoactuators: Atomic Force Microscopy Application,’’ J. Dyn. Syst. Meas. Contr. ASME, 123:35-43.

Ge, P. and Jouaneh, M. 1996. ‘‘Tracking Control of a Piezoceramic Actuator,’’ IEEE Trans. Contr. Syst. Technol., 4:209-216.

Hall, S. and Wereley, N. 1992. ‘‘Performance of Higher Harmonic Control Algorithms for Helicopter Vibration Reduction,’’ J. Guid. Contr. Dynam., 16:793-797.

Henson, M. 1998. ‘‘Nonlinear Model Predictive Control: Current Status and Future Directions,’’ Comput. Chem. Eng., 23:187-202.

Ikhouane, F. and Rodeller, J. 2007. Systems with Hysteresis: Analysis, Identification and Control Using the Bouc-Wen Model, Wiley, West Sussex, England.

10.

Iyer, R. and Tan, X. 2009. ‘‘Control of Hysteretic Systems through Inverse Compensation: Inversion Algorithms, Adaptation, and Embedded Implementation,’’ IEEE Control Syst. Mag., 29:83-99.

11.

Iyer, R. , Tan, X. and Krishnaprasad, P. 2005. ‘‘Approximate Inversion of the Preisach Hysteresis Operator with Application to Control of Smart Actuators,’’ IEEE Trans. Autom. Control., 50:798-810.

12.

Janocha, H. and Kuhnen, K. 2000. ‘‘Real-time Compensation of Hysteresis and Creep in Piezoelectric Actuators,’’ Sens. Actuators , 79:83-89.

13.

Kirkpatrick, S. , Gelatt, C. and Vecchi, M. 1983. ‘‘Optimization by Simulated Annealing, ’’ Science, 220:671-680.

14.

Lewis, F. and Syrmos, V. 1995. Optimal Control, Wiley-Interscience , New York, NY.

15.

Lovera, M. , Colaneri, P. and Celi, R. 2003. ‘‘Periodic Analysis of Higher Harmonic Control Techniques for Helicopter Vibration Attenuation,’’ In: Proceedings of American Control Conference, 4-6 June, Denver, CO, pp. 999-1004.

16.

Mracek, C. and Cloutier, J. 1998. ‘‘Control Designs for the Nonlinear Benchmark Problem via the State-dependent Ricatti Equation Method,’’ Int. J. Robust Nonlinear Control, 8:401-433.

17.

Natale, C. , Velardi, F. and Visone, C. 2001. ‘‘Modelling and Compensation of Hysteresis for Magnetostrictive Actuators,’’ In: 2001 IEEE/ASME International Conference on Advanced Intelligent Mechatronics, 8-12 July, Como, Italy, pp. 444-479.

18.

Oates, W. , Evans, P. , Smith, R. and Dapino, M. 2009. ‘‘Experimental Implementation of a Hybrid Nonlinear Control Design for Magnetostrictive Transducers,’’ J. Dyn. Syst. Meas. Contr. ASME, 131:041004-041015.

19.

Oates, W. and Smith, R. 2009. ‘‘Optimal Tracking using Magnetostrictive Actuators Operating in the Nonlinear and Hysteretic Regime,’’ J. Dyn. Syst. Meas. Contr.ASME, 131:031001-031012.

20.

Sievers, L. and von Flotow, A. 1992. ‘‘Comparison and Extensions of Control Methods for Narrow-Band Distrubance Rejection,’’ IEEE Trans. Signal Process., 40:2377-2391.

21.

Smith, R. 2005. Smart Material Systems: Model Development, SIAM, Philadelphia.

22.

Smith, R. , Seelecke, S. , Dapino, M. and Ounaies, A. 2006. ‘‘A Unified Framework for Modeling Hysteresis in Ferroic Materials,’’ J. Mech. Phys. Solids , 54:46-85.

23.

Tan, X. and Baras, J. 2004. ‘‘Modeling and Control of Hysteresis in Magnetostrictive Actuators,’’ Automatica, 40:1469-1480.

24.

Tao, G. and Kokotovic, P. 1995. ‘‘Adaptive Control of Plants with Unknown Hysteresis,’’ IEEE Trans. Autom. Control, 40:200-212.

25.

Tian, Y. , Song, Q. and Cattafesta, L. 2006. ‘‘Adaptive Feedback Control of Flow Separation,’’ In: 3rd AIAA Flow Control Conference, 5-8 June, San Fracisco, CA, Vol. AIAA2006-3016, pp. 1-11.