Microprocessor-Based Robust Control of a DC Servo Motor

Kenji Tamaki, Kiyoshi Ohishi, Kouhei Ohnishi, and Kunio Miyachi

ABSTRACT: A multiloop feedback control system supplemented by a complementarq. controller is used to improve the drive performance of a DC servo motor and reduce sensitivity to parameter variations, nonlinear effects, and other disturbances. Experimental results based on 8086 microprocessor implementation are presented to illustrate improved response and reduced sensitivity.

Introduction
DC servo motors have been widely used for applications such as industrial robot manipulators. These DC servo motors have changing dynamics caused by parameter variations such as inertia changes due to grasping objects. The changing dynamics and other nonlinear effects can be suppressed by the use of high gear ratios. However. the high gear ratios have the disadvantages of higher friction. deflection. and backlash. Therefore, the ability to design DC servomotor controllers with fast drive performance and reduced sensitivity to parameter variations that do not rely on high gear ratios is desired. The proposed control system consists of two controllers: a complementary controller used to reduce system sensitivity, and a position controller used to specify the system transfer function. The advantage of this approach is that both system sensitivity and system response can be designed and realized independently [ l]-[4]. Much research on adaptive control is being conducted in the area of DC servo-motor control. In particular, model reference adaptive control (MRAC) systems are capable of adjusting to DC servo-motor parameter variations such as inertia change. However, MRAC systems generally require extensive computations, and sometimes have difficulty compensating for large disturbance effects

[ 5 ] , [ 6 ] . On the contrary. in this paper. a linear multiloop feedback control system is adopted with a simple and stable structure and with reasonable computational requirements. The proposed system can reduce the state error and compensate for parameter variations and disturbances. Experimental results show that the proposed method is robust for the tmnsient response in the presence of reasonable parameter variations and disturbances.

pensator H(s) is chosen to be a gain times the inverse of the modeled nominal dynamics. the transfer function between output Y(s) and input U(s) is as follows:

Design of the Control System

The control system proposed herein is shown in Fig. 1. where the complementary controller determines the sensitivity to parameter variations and the position controller determines such overall characteristics as response speed. damping characteristics. and steady-state error. The merit of this design method is that any type of controller can be adopted as aposition controller because there is no interference between the two controllers. This system also can be interpreted as a two-degree-of-freedom control system [3]. [41. In order to outline the characteristics of the complementary controller. it is convenient to assume that the position controller has been disconnected and the modified transfer function of the system is being examined. In such case, the form of the complementary controller is that shown in Fig. 2. where P(s) represents the plant dynamics. P J s ) represents the modeled nominal plant dynamics. which are assumed to be minimum phase. and H ( s ) is the compensator. When the comFor high gain 0, the transfer function of E q . (2) reduces to the transfer function of the nominal plant dynamics. A similar function can be derived for the disturbance D ( s ) , which shows that for high gain /3 the disturbance effect is multiplied by the inverse of 3 . as shown in E q . (3). In a DC servo motor. the transfer function between armature voltage e,(s) and motor speed w,(s) is generally represented as a second-order system. as shown in Eq. (4).

Kt (Ls + R)(Js D)

+ KtKe

(4)

However, the model for the DC servo motor can be approximated as the first-order system in Eq. ( 5 ) . where armature inductance L is disregarded because the electrical time constant is usually small compared to the mechanical time constant. and the effect of RD

Presented at the 1985 International Conference on IndustrialElectronics,Control. and Instrumentation, San Francisco, CAI November 18-22. 1985. Kenji Tamaki, Kouhei Ohnishi, and Kunio Miyachiare w i t h Keio University, 3-14-1 Hiyoshi. Kohoku, Yokohama 223, Japan, and Kiyoshi Ohishi is with Osaka Institute of Technology. 516-1 Omiya, Asahi. Osaka 535, Japan.

Fig. 1. Simplified structure of a robust control system

0272-1708'86~1000-0030 $0100 Q 1986 IEEE

30

F E E Control Systems Magazlne

.
I I

of this compiementary control system is represented as follows:

Fig. 2. Basic structure of complementary controller.

A(s) = s2

JL KtKe*

L B DR +s + KtKe* KtKe*

The signal eomof Eq. (6) differs from en as shown in Fig. 3. Equation (6) shows that the complementary controller reduces the sensitivity of the system to terms (7) and (8) by the factor 1/(1 /3). The transfer function for the load torque distbrbance is represented as follows, where (ur/eam) is given by Q. (6).

( 3 ,- - (ur/enm)(sL Toad

+ R)

(1

+ P)Kt

(11)

in Eq. (4) is included as part of Fig. 3.

Toad in
B(s) =

(E-

JR

J*R*

Pm(s) =

Km [ 1/Ke*] fins + 1 [J*R*/Kt*Ke*]s

+1
(5)

+(g-s)
The parameters of the model, taken from Eq. ( 3 , are as follows:
J *R* Tm = Kt*Ke*

Here, the parameters having asterisks as upper suffixes represent nominal values. When both P(s) in Eq. (4)and P,(s) in Eq. ( 5 ) are inserted into the complementary control system in Fig. 2 , the transfer function

The above equations show that the complementary controller reduces the sensitivity not only for the parameter variations but also for the load torque disturbance. These characteristics are preferable for robustness and stiffness. Ideally, the compensator H(s) is chosen to be a gain 0 times the inverse of the plant dynamics, but the inverse system of Eq. (5) is unrealizable because it needs a perfect differentiator. Moreover, it is desirable to avoid high gain in the high-frequency band, be-

Complementary controller
l

I
I
I I 1

I
I

Tms+l
Km
(7s

I
I
I

1)

I
I

r---------I

-1

I
I
I

I
I

I
I

October I986

31

cause the system tends to become uncontrollable. Thus, H ( s ) is represented as a polezero transfer function whose time constant T is chosen arbitrarily. although restricted by the noise frequency band.

H(s) =

B(Tms
(7s

1)

1)Km

The position controller determines the feedback gain of each state variable by optimal control theory or by the pole assignment method. This controller is required to have an integral element because the complementary controller has a more or less steady-state error according to the disturbances [I]. The total block diagram of the robust control system is shown in Fig. 3.

I 4

100 msec

Experimental Examples of HybridType Robust Control System

The control system proposed in Fig. 3 is implemented as shown in Fig. 4. The nominal parameters of the DC servo motor tested are shown in the table. In Fig. 4, the com-

Table Nominal Parameters and Rated Values of Tested DC Servo Motor

Rated output Rated current Rated speed Ke Kt L R J

0.8 k\V
11 A 1750 rpm 0.48 V-seclrad 0.48 Nm/A 1.8 mH 0.66 fl 9.8 X IO-' kg-m'

4 k -

100 msec

Fig. 5 . Experimental examples of rotor position response to the change of position reference in hybrid-type tested system: (a). (c)-without complementan. controller: (b). (d)--with complementar); controller: (a). (b)-no parameter variation: (c). (dl-armature resistance R : 10 times increasing. B = 10. T = 10 msec.

PWM
circult

4-Quadran: chopper

Fig. 4. Schematic diagram of tested hybrid robust control system.

plementary controller is realized by an analog circuit. and the position controller is implemented by a microprocessor. This tested system brings quick recovery of state errors due to parameter variations and precise position regulation. The remaining small state errors due to the parameter variations are completely compensated by theouter-loop integrator. This hybrid system can be called a robust control sxstetn because of the transient response with the time constant T determined as 10 msec in this tested system. The experimental examples of position response to the change of position reference are shown in Fig. 5. In Fig. 5. the response (a) only with the position controller is dif-

32

Tload,

+50% - 50%

8, 0.1 rad
*r,

bance are shown in Fig. 6. The fluctuations of rotor position are also reduced by the complementary controller, and its response is stable even in the case when load torque is imposed simultaneously with parameter variations.

5 r/s
0 r/s

+5 A la, -5 A

Realization of Discrete Version of a Robust Control System

4 l
100 msec

8, 0.1 rad

Rapid progress in microelectronics technology has made possible the application of the digital control algorithm to drive applications. When digital control is applied to the position control of a DC servomotor, the plant system can be treated as a discrete linear system. There are several methods available to transform from the continuous to the discrete system. Here, for simplicity, the backward first difference algorithm is employed because it maintains the stability of the total system in the case that the system in Fig. 3 is stable in thecontinuoustime domain. The quantization error of the transformation can be considered as a parameter variation in this control system. The backward algorithm is

Wr,

5 r/s 0 r/s
+5 A -5 A
.

l a

H
100 msec

Fig. 6. Experimental examples of rotor position response to the change of load torque disturbance in hybrid-type tested system: (e), &)--without complementary controller: (f), (h)-with complementary controller; (e), (f)-no parameter variation: (g). (h)-armature resistance R : 10 times increasing. p = 10. T = 10 msec.

It must be noted that a digital implementation of the complementary controller may become unstable due to load torque disturbance, as there can be an unstable pole on the real axis out of the unit circle in the z plane. When the sampling delay due to calculation time is taken into consideration, the unstable pole is separated. Therefore, if gain is sufficiently large, the transfer function from load torque to the motor speed is represented as follows, where only the complementarycontroller is applied and the outer loop of the position controller is not taken into account.

ferent from the response (b) in the absence of parameter variations, because the plant system has parasitic elements, including static friction torque, initial parameter mismatchings, etc. When the plant system has the 10 times armature resistance, the result (d) shows that the proposed system recovers from transient error rapidly. Therefore, the response of the robust control system becomes nearly equal to that of the model plant system notwithstanding the parameter variations. The experimental examples of position response to the change of load torque distur-

I m

Re

Fig. 7. Unstable pole of complementary controller due to one sampling delay.

Ociober I986

33

Ttoad

(Jr

- P m ( s ) (RIKt)I

eref, 30 rad

-.

, , .
I

.
. .
.

. .

Here, the unstable pole as shown in Fig. 7 exists as follows:

=

-0

(15)

In order to move this unstable pole into the unit circle. the time constant T of the inverse system in Eq. (12) should be sufficientl) large for stabilization of the total discrete system. By taking this into consideration. the transfer function (14) becomes
( Jr . -

- P,,(s) ( R I W

Toad

'

+ P z - ' / ( T ~+

1)

s=,l-z-l),T

(16)

From Eq. (17), the stabilizing condition is satisfied if

7

> (0 - 1)T/2

(18)

The above condition shows that the sampling time T must be small enough for sensitivity reduction.

... ,.

. . . . . .

Experimental Examples of Discrete Version of a Robust Control System

The block diagram for the discrete version of the control system is the same as shown in Fig. 4, except that the Op-amp circuit has been eliminated. The sampling time T is 4 msec. and the time constant 7 is 80 msec. In this example. the response speed to change of position reference is not as fast as with the hybrid version. However. the response speed of the complete discrete version can be improved with new microelectronics technology. The experimental examples of position response to the change of position reference are shown in Fig. 8. In Fig. 8. the response of the complete discrete version of the robust control system becomes nearly equal to that of the model plant system notwithstanding the parameter variations. The experimental examples of position response to the change of load torque disturbance are shown in Fig. 9. The fluctuations of rotor position are also reduced by the discrete complementary controller, and its response is stable even when the load torque is imposed simultaneously with the parameter variations. Therefore, these experimental results show that the complete discrete version of the robust control system is realistic and can have characteristics similar to the hybrid version.

8. 30 rad
100 r/s
W,,

0 r/s

10 A

la,

OA

Fig. 8. Experimental examples of rotor position response to the change of position reference in discrete-type tested system: (i), (k)-without complementary controller: (j). (1)-with complementary controller: (i), (j)-no parameter variation; (k), (Warmature resistance R : 10 times increasing. 8 = 10. 7 = 80 msec.

Conclusion
The robust control system allows independent control of the sensitivity and transfer functions in the DC servo-motor control sys-

tem. This proposed control system can be treated asa two-degree-of-freedom control system consisting of the complementary controller and a position controller, which are both realized and designed indepen-

34

\E Control Systems Magazine

~~~

~~

References
[ I ] E. J. Davison and A. Goldenberg, "Robust Control of a General Servomechanism Problem; The Servo Compensator," Automnrica, vol. 1 1 , pp. 4 6 1 4 7 1 , 1975. [2] E. J. Davison and I. J. Ferguson, "The Design of Controllers for the Multivariable Robust Servomechanism Problem Using Parameter Optimization Method," IEEE Trans. on Autoinat. Contr.. vol. AC-26, pp. 93110. 1981. 131 I. M. Horowitz, "Synthesis of Feedback Systems," New, York and London: Academic Press. pp. 246-362, 1963. [4] T. Sugie and T. Yoshikawa. "Basic Structure of Two-Degree-of-Freedom Control Systems with Its Application to Servo Problems." SICE Trans.. vol. 22. pp. 156-161, 1986. [5] B. Courtiol and I.D. Landau, "High Speed Adaptation System for Controlled Electrical Drives." Auromatica, vol. 1 1 , pp. 119-127, 1975. [6] S. D. Kraft and E. T. Wall. "Experimental Microprocessor-Based Adaptive Control System," IEEE Control Systems Magazine, vol. 6, pp. 35-39, 1986.

Tloadt

1 rad

10 rls
0 rls

10 A

OA

Fig. 9. Experimental examples of rotor position response to the change of load torque disturbance in discrete-type tested system: (m), (0)-without complementary controller; (n), (p)-with complementary controller; (m), (n)-no parameter variation; (o), (p)-armature resistance R : 10 times increasing. 0 = 10, r = 80 msec.

dently. Experimental examples of both the hybrid version and the completediscrete version show that the proposed control is valid for suppression of parameter variations and

load torque disturbance. The complete disCrete version of the proposed robust control system exhibits characteristics similar to those of the hybrid version.

Kenji Tamaki received B.E. the and M.E. degrees in electrical engineering from Keio University,Yokohama,Japan, in 1984 and 1986, respectively. Since 1986, he has been with Hitachi Ltd.

October 1986

35

received the B.E.. M.E.. and Ph.D. degrees all in electrical engineering fmm Keio University. Yokohama. Japan. in 1981. 1983. and 1986. respectively. Since 1986. he has been with Osaka Institute of Technology. Osaka. Japan, and isnowan Assistant Professor. His research interests include electric machines. motor contml. and micmcomputer applications. Dr. Ohishi is a member of the Institute of Electrical Engineers of Japan (IEEJ).

Ohishi Kiyoshi

Ohnishi Kouhei

received the B.E.. M.E., and Ph.D. degrees all in electrical engineering from the University of Tokyo, Tokyo. Japan. in 1975. 1977. and 1980. respectively. Since 1980. he has been with Keio University. Yokohama. Japan. and is noan Assistant Professor. Dr. Ohnishi is a member of IEEJ.

received the B.E. and Ph.D. degrees in electrical engineering from Keio University. Yokohama, Japan. in 1947 and 3965. respectively. Since 1947. he has been with Keio University and isnow a Professor and alsoaChairman of the Department of Electrical Enoineering. His main research interests include commutation phenomena of DC motors. electrical contact phenomena. and microcomputer applications. Dr. Miqachi is a member of I E H .

Mivachi Kunio

Out of Control

This is not what I had in mind when I said to program the robot for bang-bang control!

36