Acceleration decoupling control of 6 degrees of freedom electro-hydraulic shaking table

Abstract

Electro-hydraulic shaking tables are widely used for vibration testing where high force and displacement amplitudes are required. In particular, they are a vital tool in seismic testing, enabling the development of buildings and other structures which are earthquake resistant. Three-variable-control (TVC) is commonly used for the control of multi-degrees of freedom (DOFs) electro-hydraulic shaking tables. However, the coupling between the DOFs is often significant and is not compensated by TVC. In this paper, an acceleration decoupling control (ADC) method is presented for a 6 DOFs electro-hydraulic shaking table system to improve the acceleration tracking performance and decouple the motion in task space. The gravitational, Coriolis, and centripetal forces are compensated for in joint space based on a dynamic model of the shaking table. Modal control is used to transform the coupled dynamics into six independent systems. Inverse dynamics models are used to cancel the differences in actuator dynamics. The proportional gains in modal space are tuned heuristically to give sufficient stability margins to provide robustness in the presence of modeling errors. The input filter and feedforward controller in TVC are added to improve the acceleration tracking performance of each independent system. Experimental acceleration frequency responses are used to demonstrate the effectiveness of ADC, and in particular these show a consistent reduction in cross-axis coupling compared to TVC. Moreover, only four parameters need to be tuned, as opposed to 36 for TVC, and the method provides a viable route to improving the accuracy of seismic testing in the future.

Keywords

Electro-hydraulic shaking table three-variable-control modal control acceleration control seismic testing

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Clark AJ (1992) Dynamic characteristics of large multiple degree of freedom shaking tables. In: Proceedings of Earthquake Engineering, 10th World Conference, Rotterdam, The Netherlands, 19–24 July 1992. Amsterdam: A.A. Balkema, pp.2823–2828.

Codourey

(1998) Dynamic modeling of parallel robots for computed-torque control implementation. The International Journal of Robotics Research 17(12): 1325–1336.

Dasgupta

Mruthyunjaya

(1998) A Newton–Euler formulation for the inverse dynamics of the Stewart platform manipulator. Mechanism and Machine Theory 33(8): 1135–1152.

Dozono

Horiuchi

Katsumata

, et al.(2004) Shaking-table control by real-time compensation of the reaction force caused by a nonlinear specimen. Journal of Pressure Vessel Technology 126(1): 122–127.

Guan

Xiong

Wang

(2016) Adaptive random control of a two-axis redundantly actuated electro-hydraulic shaking table. Journal of Vibration and Control 22(16): 3455–3469.

Jiang

Tong

(2017) Modal control of a hydraulically driven redundant actuated fully parallel mechanism. Journal of Vibration and Control 23(10): 1585–1592.

Horiuchi T and Konno T (2001) Shaking table and method of controlling the same. US Patent No. 6189385. Washington, DC: US Patent and Trademark Office.

Iwasaki M, Ito K, Kawafuku M, et al. (2005) Disturbance observer-based practical control of shaking tables with nonlinear specimen. In: Proceedings of the 16th IFAC World Congress on Automatic Control, Prague, Czech Republic, 3–8 July 2005. Rotterdam, Elsevier, pp.251–256.

Jelali

Kroll

(2012) Hydraulic Servo-Systems: Modelling, Identification and Control, Berlin: Springer Science & Business Media.

10.

Jiang

Tong

(2012) Modal space control for a hydraulically driven Stewart platform. Journal of Control Engineering and Technology 2(3): 106–115.

11.

Koekebakker SH (2001) Model based control of a flight simulator motion system. PhD Thesis, Delft University of Technology, Netherlands.

12.

Kusner DA, Rood JD and Burton GW (1992) Signal reproduction fidelity of servo hydraulic testing equipment. In: Proceedings of Earthquake Engineering, 10th World Conference, Rotterdam, the Netherlands, 19–24 July 1992. Amsterdam: A.A. Balkema, pp.2683–2688.

13.

Luco

Ozcelik

Conte

(2010) Acceleration tracking performance of the UCSD-NEES shake table. Journal of Structural Engineering 136(5): 481–490.

14.

Merlet

(2006) Parallel Robots, Berlin: Springer Science & Business Media.

15.

Plummer AR (2004) Modal control for a class of multi-axis vibration table. 2004 Mini Symposia UKACC Control, Bath, UK, 8 September 2004. Piscataway, NJ: Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, pp.111–115.

16.

Plummer

(2007a) Control techniques for structural testing: a review. Proceedings of the Institute of Mechanical Engineers, Part I: Journal of Systems and Control Engineering 221(2): 139–169.

17.

Plummer

(2007b) A general co-ordinate transformation framework for multi-axis motion control with applications in the testing industry. Control Engineering Practice 18(6): 598–607.

18.

Plummer

(2016) Model-based motion control for multi-axis servohydraulic shaking tables. Control Engineering Practice 53: 109–122.

19.

Plummer AR and Guinzio PS (2009) Modal control of an electrohydrostatic flight simulator motion system. ASME 2009 Dynamic Systems and Control Conference, Hollywood, California, USA, 12–14 October 2009. New York: American Society of Mechanical Engineers, pp.345–352.

20.

Zhang S, Han J and Zhao H (2004) RCP and RT control of 6-DOF parallel robot. In: Proceedings of 4th International Workshop on Robot Motion and Control, Puszczykowo, Poland, 20 June 2004. Piscataway, NJ: Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, pp.133–137.

21.

Shen

Zhu

Zhang

, et al.(2013) Adaptive feed-forward compensation for hybrid control with acceleration time waveform replication on electro-hydraulic shaking table. Control Engineering Practice 21(8): 1128–1142.

22.

Soderling S, Sharp M and Leser C (1999) Servo controller compensation methods selection of the correct technique for test applications. SAE Technical Paper 1999-01-3000. Available at: http://www.theoryinpracticeengineering.com/resources/7-post/1999-01-3000V001.PDF (accessed 20 July 2018).

23.

Stoten

Shimizu

(2007) The feedforward minimal control synthesis algorithm and its application to the control of shaking-tables. Proceedings of the Institute of Mechanical Engineers, Part I: Journal of Systems and Control Engineering 221(3): 423–444.

24.

Tagawa

Kajiwara

(2007) Controller development for the E-Defense shaking table. Proceedings of the Institute of Mechanical Engineers, Part I: Journal of Systems and Control Engineering 221(2): 171–181.

25.

The MathWorks Inc (2003) xPC Target User's Guide, version 2. Available at: https://edulab.unitn.it/nfs/Manualistica/Software/MathWorksGuide/xpc/xpc_target_ug.pdf (accessed 10 June 2015).

26.

Underwood

Keller

(2006) Applying coordinate transformations to multi-DOF shaker control. Sound and Vibration 40(1): 14–27.

27.

Yang

Huang

Han

(2012) Computed force and velocity control for spatial multi-DOF electro-hydraulic parallel manipulator. Mechatronics 22(6): 715–722.