slide1
Download
Skip this Video
Download Presentation
CLEMSON U N I V E R S I T Y

Loading in 2 Seconds...

play fullscreen
1 / 26

Automotive Research Center Robotics and Mechatronics - PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 298 Views
  • Uploaded on

A Nonlinear Tracking Controller for a Haptic Interface Steer-by-Wire Systems P. Setlur, D. Dawson, J. Chen, and J. Wagner Departments of Mechanical and Electrical/Computer Engineering Conference on Decision and Control, December 2002, Las Vegas. CLEMSON U N I V E R S I T Y.

loader
I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.
capcha
Download Presentation

PowerPoint Slideshow about 'Automotive Research Center Robotics and Mechatronics' - DoraAna


An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript
slide1

A Nonlinear Tracking Controller for a Haptic Interface Steer-by-Wire SystemsP. Setlur, D. Dawson, J. Chen, and J. WagnerDepartments of Mechanical and Electrical/Computer EngineeringConference on Decision and Control, December 2002, Las Vegas

CLEMSON

U N I V E R S I T Y

presentation outline
Presentation Outline
  • Introduction
    • System Description and Problem Statement
    • Problem Motivation
    • Past Research
  • Model Development
    • System model
    • Reference model concepts
  • Adaptive Control Design
    • Error Definitions
    • Control Design
    • Stability Proof
  • Extension to Eliminate Torque Measurements
  • Numerical Simulation Results
  • Experimental Results
    • Setup
    • Preliminary Results
  • Conclusion
slide3

q1, t1

Driver input torque

qa, t1

T1

Feedback Motor

Drive Motor

T2

qa, t2

Tire/Road interface forces

q2, t2

System Description

Steer-by-wire system with haptic interface

Conventional system

Primary Subsystem

Secondary Subsystem

problem motivation
Problem Motivation
  • Advent of Hybrid Vehicles is due to scarcity in fossil fuel and environmental concerns
    • engine may be cycled on/off : Hydraulic steering systems not feasible
    • power limitations: mandate efficient technologies
  • Steer-by-wire systems provide
    • improved vehicle response ( electrical systems are faster)
    • ability to use additional driver input devices ( joystick)
  • Varied preferences in amount of feedback and feel
    • most important feedback to the driver, after vision
  • Flexibility in vehicle design
haptic interface goals
Haptic Interface - Goals
  • Accurate reproduction of driver commands at the wheel
  • Provide force feedback to the driver
    • Use feedback motor in steer-by-wire systems
    • Ability to scale inputs
  • Displacement of the driver input device should be governed by a set of target dynamics
    • Tunable dynamics that permit various choices of “road feel”
    • Adaptive techniques to compensate for unknown system parameters
  • Elimination of force measurement
    • Identification of tire/road interface forces
past research
Past Research
  • Liu et al. - worked on estimating the effect of force feedback in a driving simulator

(1995)

  • Gillespie et al. - proposed use of force reflecting joysticks to cancel “feedthrough”

dynamics in aircrafts (1999)

  • Qu et al. - showed how a “dynamic robust-learning control” scheme can compensate

for disturbances that are bounded and sufficiently smooth (2002)

  • Lewis et al. - detailed description of the “impedance control” technique (1993)
  • Setlur et al. - controller to achieve trajectory tracking for steer-by-wire systems (2002)
  • Mills et al. - developed detailed models for steer-by-wire systems (2001)
system model

q1, t1

T1

Feedback Motor

Drive Motor

,

- Scaling factors (gear ratios)

T2

q2, t2

System Model

Primary Subsystem

I1,I2- Lumped inertia of Primary

and Secondary subsystems

Damping and Friction effects

Secondary Subsystem

reference model concept
Reference Model - Concept

User feels no difference between these two cases

“Impedance Control Technique”

reference model

q1, t1

qd, t1

T1

qd, t2

Reference Model

Primary Subsystem

Target Conventional system

  • If follows , then the driver feels as if he were driving a conventional

vehicle with inertia , damping and friction function .

  • Target system parameters are chosen so that the reference trajectories remain bounded

at all times (reference system dynamics are BIBO stable).

slide10

Adaptive Control

  • To quantify the control objective, the following error signals are defined
  • After taking the time derivatives of the filtered tracking errors, the open-loop error system can be rewritten as
  • To achieve the control objectives outlined, the control torques are designed as

Filtered Tracking Errors

Driver Experience Tracking error

Locked Tracking error

Parameter Update Laws

slide11

Adaptive Control

  • After substituting the control in the open-loop error system, the closed-loop error system can be written as
  • A non-negative function is defined as
  • After differentiating the above function with respect to time, and substituting the closed-loop error systems, we obtain

Parameter estimation errors

slide12

Elimination of Torque Measurements

  • For this extension, all system parameters are assumed to be known. The target dynamics are generated using estimated torques. The tracking error signals are defined as before
  • After taking second derivative with respect to time and using the system and reference dynamics, we obtain the open-loop error system
  • The control torques, T1 and T2 are designed as

Torque Observers

(to be designed)

slide13

.

.

.

.

.

.

Elimination of Torque Measurements

  • After substituting the control design in the open-loop error system, the closed-loop error system can be written as
  • Clearly, if e1 = e2 = 0 then t1 = t1 and t2 = t2 (Identification of tire road forces).
  • The filtered tracking errors are redefined for this problem as

^

^

.

s1 0 e1, e1, e10

Analysis will be presented only for the Primary System.

The analysis for the secondary system is based on similar arguments

slide14

Unmeasurable Disturbance

Elimination of Torque Measurements

  • After taking the first time derivative and using the system and reference dynamics, we obtain the open-loop error system
  • Based on the above structure, the torque observer is designed as
  • After substituting the observer in the open-loop error system, the closed-loop error system can be written as

Add and subtract (s1(t) is NOT measurable)

Standard Signum function (sign function in matlab)

Robust control like term

Feedback term

slide15

Elimination of Torque Measurements

  • A non-negative function Va1(t) is defined as
  • After differentiating the above function with respect to time, and substituting the closed-loop error system, we obtain
  • After integrating both sides and performing some manipulations, we obtain
  • So, . Similarly, we can show . From Babalat’s Lemma,

and

simulation results

q1, t1

I1 = 6.8 X 10-2 Kg-m2

B1 = 1 X 10-5 Kg-m2/s

K1 = 1 X 10-7 N-m

= 1

t1 = 5t exp(-0.005t)

.

Nx(.) = Bxqx + Kxqx

T1

T2

I2 = 54.2 Kg-m2

B2 = 1 X 10-2 Kg-m2/s

K2 = 1 X 10-4 N-m

= 1

t2 = -200 tanh(q2)

q2, t2

Simulation Results
  • Simulated system was assumed to have the following parameters
simulation results17

qd, t1

qd, t2

Simulation Results
  • The target dynamics were generated using
  • Further to evaluate performance, a conventional system was simulated

IT = 2 Kg-m2

BT = 1 Kg-m2/s

KT = 1 N-m

aT1 = 1

aT2 = 0.1

Ia = I1 + I2 = 54.268 Kg-m2

Ba = B1 + B2 = 1.001 X 10-2 Kg-m2/s

Ka = K1 + K2 = 1.001 X 10-4 N-m

a1 = 1

a2 = 1

simulation results adaptive control

(N-m)

1

t

Simulation Results - Adaptive Control

40

20

0

0.4

q

d1

0.3

0.2

Angular Displacement (rad)

0.1

q

a

0

-0.05

0

50

100

150

200

time (s)

slide19

-3

x 10

Simulation Results - Adaptive Control

6

4

e

2

0

e

1

-4

Tracking Error (rad)

-8

-12

-14

70

60

T

2

40

Control Torques (N-m)

20

T

1

0

-10

0

50

100

150

200

time (s)

slide20

Simulation Results - EMK Extension

70

60

40

T

2

Control Torques (N-m)

20

T

1

0

-10

0.08

~

t

2

0.04

~

t

Torque

Observation Errors (N-m)

1

0

-0.04

-0.06

0

50

100

150

200

time (s)

slide21

Experimental Results - EMK Extension

Drive Motor

Steering Wheel

Torque Sensors

Feedback Motor

Rack

LVDT

Hydraulic Damper

Current Sensors

Preamplifiers

slide22

Experimental Results - EMK Extension

  • Tests were performed to identify the parameters of the system. The following results were obtained
  • The target system was chosen to have the following parameters
  • The control gains were chosen to be

I1 = 0.0725 Kg-m2

B1 = 0.3 Kg-m2/s

K1 = 0 N-m

I2 = 2.5 X 10-3 Kg-m2

B2 = 2 X 10-3 Kg-m2/s

K2 = 0 N-m

IT = 2 Kg-m2

BT = 0.3 Kg-m2/s

KT = 0 N-m

aT1 = 10

aT2 = 1

b1 = 500 Ks = 700 r1 = 1 r2 = 10

slide23

2

0.4

1

0.2

qd ,q1, q2 (rad)

0

0

e1, e2 (rad)

-0.2

-1

-0.4

-2

0

10

20

30

40

50

0

10

20

30

40

50

time (s)

time (s)

3

2

1

T1 , T2

0

-1

-2

-3

0

10

20

30

40

50

time (s)

Experimental Results - EMK Extension

slide24

4

3

2

1

t1 ,t1(N-m)

^

0

5

-1

4

-2

3

-3

2

-4

1

t2 ,t2(N-m)

^

0

-1

-2

-3

Experimental Results - EMK Extension

0

10

20

30

40

50

time (s)

slide25

Experimental Results - EMK Extension

  • Torque sensor measurements
    • Noisy
    • Drift
    • Low resolution
  • Target system dynamics involves twice integrating the torque signals for Adaptive control
  • Gearing factor a1 and a2
  • Torque capacity of the Feedback motor
  • Repeatability of driver input - Choice of r
    • larger value control torques have to change quickly (motors are

inductive systems)

concluding remarks
Concluding Remarks
  • PresentedVehicle Steering System Model for the Steer-by-wire configuration.
  • Presented the Adaptive tracking control algorithmto ensure that
    • vehicle follows driver commands
    • driver is provided a haptic feedback
  • Proposed an EMK extension that eliminates the need for torque sensor measurements
    • identified tire/road interface forces
  • Simulation Results verify the efficacy of the proposed control laws
  • Preliminary Experimental Results were presented to discuss practical issues
  • Future work would involve
    • Control algorithm to compensation of parametric uncertainties without measurement of torque
    • Incorporation of visual feedback for driver-in-loop tests
ad