Escolar Documentos
Profissional Documentos
Cultura Documentos
org
ISSN 1751-8644
Abstract: The decoupling control of a twin rotor multi-input multi-output (MIMO) system is studied and
proposed to apply robust deadbeat control technique to this nonlinear system. First, the nonlinear problem is
identied and system model is developed. Then, it is shown that the system is able to be decoupled into two
single-input single-output (SISO) systems, and the cross couplings can be considered as disturbances to each
other. Finally, a robust deadbeat control scheme is applied to the two SISO systems and a controller is
designed for each of them. This design is evaluated in simulations, and the nal result is tested in a twin
rotor MIMO system. Comparing with a traditional system with two proportional, integral and derivative (PID)
controllers, this method is easy to follow, and the results show that the proposed scheme has less overshoot,
shorter settling time and is more robust to cross-coupling disturbances.
IET Control Theory Appl., 2008, Vol. 2, No. 11, pp. 999 1007 999
doi: 10.1049/iet-cta:20070335 & The Institution of Engineering and Technology 2008
www.ietdl.org
networks with well-known orthogonal least square algorithm a helicopter. It can be well perceived as a static test rig for
to model a twin rotor multi-input multi-output (MIMO) an air vehicle with formidable control challenges [2].
system (TRMS).
This TRMS consists of a beam pivoted on its base in such
This study addresses the decoupling and robust deadbeat a way that it can rotate freely in both its horizontal and
control of a TRMS based on the available models and vertical planes. There are two rotors (the main and tail
techniques. First, the system model is identied. It is rotors), driven by DC motors, at each end of the beam. If
shown, that the identied system is able to be decoupled necessary, either or both axes of rotation can be locked by
into two single-input single-output (SISO) systems, and means of two locking screws provided for physically
the crossing couplings can be considered as disturbances to restricting the horizontal or vertical plane rotation. Thus,
each of the SISO systems. Then, a PID-based robust the system permits both 1 and 2 degree-of-freedom (DOF)
deadbeat control scheme is applied to the SISO systems, experiments. The two rotors are controlled by variable
and a deadbeat controller is designed for each of them. speed electric motors enabling the helicopter to rotate in a
These robust deadbeat controllers can tolerate system vertical and horizontal plane (pitch and yaw). The tail rotor
parameter changes for up to 50% [16]. This feature is used could be rotated in either direction, allowing the helicopter
to surpass the cross-coupling effects between the main and to yaw right or left. The motion of the helicopter was
tail rotors. This design is investigated in simulations using damped by a pendulum, which hung from a central pivot
Simulink, and compared with a system with two point. In a typical helicopter, the aerodynamic force is
independent PID controllers. The results show that the controlled by changing the angle of attack of the blades.
proposed scheme has less overshoot, shorter settling time The laboratory setup is constructed such that the angle of
and is more robust to cross-coupling disturbances. The attack of the blades is xed. The aerodynamic force is
nal result is tested in a TRMS in the lab. controlled by varying the speed of the motors.
The paper is organised as follows. The TRMS is introduced The mathematical model of the TRMS is developed under
and described in the system and modelling section. The following assumptions.
system model is then presented. This is followed by the
robust deadbeat control method and procedure section, The dynamics of the propeller subsystem can be described
where the details of the robust deadbeat control scheme and by rst-order differential equations.
our design are addressed. The system is then simulated
using simulink in the simulation and experiment section. In The friction in the system is of the viscous type.
this section, we also analysed and compared the simulated
results. Finally, the proposed method is tested in a TRMS The propeller air subsystem could be described in
and the main ndings of this study are summarised in the accordance with the postulates of the ow theory.
conclusion.
The mechanical system of TRMS is simplied using a four
point-mass system shown in Fig. 2, includes main rotor, tail
2 System and modelling rotor, balance-weight and counter-weight. Based on
Lagranges equations, we can classify the mechanical system
Similar to most ight vehicles, the helicopter consists of into two parts, the forces around the horizontal axis and
several elastic parts such as rotor, engine and control the forces around the vertical axis.
surfaces. The nonlinear aerodynamic forces and gravity act
on the vehicle, and exible structures increase complexity
and make a realistic analysis difcult. For control purpose,
it is necessary to nd a representative model that shows the
same dynamic characteristics as the real aircraft. The twin
rotor MIMO system or TRMS is a laboratory setup
designed for ight control experiments. The schematic
diagram of the laboratory setup is shown in Fig. 1. The
behaviour of the TRMS in certain aspects resembles that of
1000 IET Control Theory Appl., 2008, Vol. 2, No. 11, pp. 999 1007
& The Institution of Engineering and Technology 2008 doi: 10.1049/iet-cta:20070335
www.ietdl.org
The parameters in the simplied four point-mass system are The tail rotor model
da v J v vm Pv (uvv ) (8)
Vv Sv tr t (2)
dt Jv
duhh 1
( uhh uh ) (9)
dt Ttr
dSv
Mv (3) vt Ph (uhh ) (10)
dt
Similarly, we can describe the motion of the beam in the where Tmr is the time constant of the main rotor propeller
horizontal plane (around the vertical axis) as shown in system and Ttr is the time constant of the tail motor
Fig. 3. The driving torques are produced by the rotors and propeller system.
that the moment of inertia depends on the pitch angle of
the beam. The static characteristics of the propellers are measured
using a proper electronic balance with voltage output [7].
Thus, we can identify the following nonlinear functions:
two nonlinear input characteristics determining the
dependence of DC-motor rotational speed on input voltage
vm Pv (uvv ) (11)
vt Ph (uhh ) (12)
F h F h (v t ) (13)
F v F v (v m ) (14)
IET Control Theory Appl., 2008, Vol. 2, No. 11, pp. 999 1007 1001
doi: 10.1049/iet-cta:20070335 & The Institution of Engineering and Technology 2008
www.ietdl.org
3 Robust deadbeat control First, normalising the system by dividing the numerator and
method and procedure denominator by v4n
To show the design procedure of a PID-based robust Equation (17) is the normalised, fourth-order and closed-
deadbeat control, we take the following fourth-order system loop transfer function. For a higher-order system, the same
method is used to derive the normalised equation. The
coefcients of the equation a, b and g are selected from
Table 1. Taking the above fourth order system as an
example, with a required settling time of 0.95 s, we can
nd the normalised settling time from Table 1
vn Ts 4:81
1002 IET Control Theory Appl., 2008, Vol. 2, No. 11, pp. 999 1007
& The Institution of Engineering and Technology 2008 doi: 10.1049/iet-cta:20070335
www.ietdl.org
T (s)
657:1 K [K3 (s2 Xs Y )]
s4 11:1386s3 89:71889s2 363:397s 657:1 G1 (s) Gc (s)
s
(18)
15:02
G2 (s)
To apply the above technique to our TRMS, rst the s3
3:458s2 2:225s
decouple techniques are required to separate the system 15:02
G(s)
into two SISO systems. Without angular momentum and s(s 2:603)(s 0:8547)
reaction turning moment, the TRMS system is modelled
into two 1-DOF systems: vertical part (main rotor) and H1 (s) (1 Kb s)
horizontal part (tail rotor) shown in Figs. 6 and 7.
H2 (s) Ka
Ts0 4:81
vn 3:00625
Ts 80% 1:6
{7 Kb K3 } 11:1386
{14 K3 Kb K3 X } 89:71889
{8 Ka K3 X Kb K3 Y } 363:397
IET Control Theory Appl., 2008, Vol. 2, No. 11, pp. 999 1007 1003
doi: 10.1049/iet-cta:20070335 & The Institution of Engineering and Technology 2008
www.ietdl.org
Hence we have
K [K3 (s2 Xs Y )] For 1-DOF vertical control, the settling time is desired to
G1 (s) Gc (s)
s be 2 s. At K 10, we obtained the desired response. The
system response is shown in Fig. 10.
1:519
G2 (s)
s3
0:748s2
1:533s 1:046 For 1-DOF horizontal control, we also choose a settling
1:519 time of 2 s. We obtain the desired performance at K 7,
2
G(s)
(s 0:6982)(s 0:04983s 1:498) which is shown in Fig. 11.
H1 (s) (1 Kb s); H2 (s) Ka For the 2-DOF system shown in Fig. 12, we choose the
settling time of both tail and main rotors as 4 s. By tuning
The closed-loop transfer function can be written as each K both in horizontal and vertical control, we obtain
the desired system response which is shown in Fig. 13.
K [K3 (s2 Xs Y )]
0 1
s4 (0:748 1:519KK3 Kb )s3 Figs. 10, 11 and 13 illustrate the responses of the TRMS
B (1:533 0:1549KK3 )s2 l C system in three different situations. It can be seen that all the
B C
@ (1:046 1:519K 0:1549KK K Y )s A responses settle within a given time frame. In the 2-DOF
a 3 b
1:519KK3 Y case with the introduction of cross-coupling disturbances,
both tail and main rotors reach the desired positions within
The characteristic equation of the closed-loop transfer given time frames. Although there are overshot, the system
function is equal to responses still meet all the specications. This is evident
that the scheme is robust against the cross-coupling.
s4 avn s3 bv2n s2 gv3n s v4n
Ts0 4:81
Ts 2 s; vn 3:00625
Ts 80% 1:6
Therefore
Comparing the characteristic equation and let K equal to 1, Figure 9 robust deadbeat control MIMO system
1004 IET Control Theory Appl., 2008, Vol. 2, No. 11, pp. 999 1007
& The Institution of Engineering and Technology 2008 doi: 10.1049/iet-cta:20070335
www.ietdl.org
Figure 10 Vertical response of the main rotor (K 10) Figure 13 Two-DOF robust deadbeat control response
Notes: The input and output of the main rotor are shifted down to
avoid the overlaps in plot
IET Control Theory Appl., 2008, Vol. 2, No. 11, pp. 999 1007 1005
doi: 10.1049/iet-cta:20070335 & The Institution of Engineering and Technology 2008
www.ietdl.org
For the two SISO systems: The settling time has been reduced
to about 6 and 12 s in tail and main rotors, respectively; the
amount of overshoot has been reduced about 20%.
For the 2-DOF system: The settling time has been reduced
to 20 s; the amount of overshoot has also been reduced as well.
Comparing the system responses obtained using individual [6] BUSKEY G. , ROBERTS J., WYETH G. : Online learning of
PID controllers, the proposed robust deadbeat control autonomous helicopter ontrol. Australasian Conf.
scheme is simpler and the performance is better. In PID Robotics and Automation, Auckland, New Zealand,
control design in a 2-DOF case, it has six parameters to December 2002, pp. 19 24
tune. However, we have reduced them to two in our robust
deadbeat control scheme. In addition, this control scheme [7] GAVRILETS V., METTLER B., FERON E.: Nonlinear model for a
does not include any complicated math and calculation small-size acrobatic helicopter. AIAA Guidance, Navigation
except the normalisation and look-up table. It is easily and Control Conf., Montreal, Canada, August 2001,
accepted by industrial designers. In system performance, pp. 1593 1600
1006 IET Control Theory Appl., 2008, Vol. 2, No. 11, pp. 999 1007
& The Institution of Engineering and Technology 2008 doi: 10.1049/iet-cta:20070335
www.ietdl.org
[8] BLYTHE P.W., CHAMITOFF G.: Estimation of aircrafts [13] BRUCE P.D., KELLET M.G.: Modelling and identication of
aerodynamic coefcients using recurrent neural non-linear aerodynamic functions using b-splines, Proc.
networks. Proc. 2nd Pacic Int. Conf. Aerospace Science Instn. Mech. Eng. G, 2000, 214, pp. 27 40
and Technology, Australia, 1995
[14] SHAHEED M.H., TOKHI M.O.: Dynamic modeling of a single-
[9] CHON K.H., COHEN R.J.: Linear and non-linear ARMA model link exible manipulator: parametric and non-parametric
parameter estimation using an articial neural network, IEEE approaches, Robotics, 2002, 20, pp. 93 109
Trans. Biomed. Eng., 1997, 44, (3), pp. 168 174
[15] AHMAD S.M., SHAHEED M.H., CHIPPERFIELD A.J., TOKHI M.O.: Non-
[10] KIM B.S., CALISE A.J.: Non-linear ight control using neural linear modeling of a one-degree-freedom of twin-rotor
networks, J. Guid. Control Dyn., 1998, 20, (1), pp. 26 33 multi-input multi-output system using radial basis
function networks, Proc. Instn. Mech. Eng. G, 2002, 216,
[11] TALEBI H.A., PATEL R.V., ASMER H.: Dynamic modelling of pp. 197 208
exible-link manipulators using neural networks with
application to the SSRMS. Proc. IEEE Int. Conf. Intelligent [16] DAWES J., NG L., DORF R.C., TAM C.: Design of deadbeat
Robots and Systems, Victoria, Canada, 1998 robust systems. Proc. 28th Annual Asilomar Conf. Signals,
Systems, and Computers, 1994, pp. 1597 1598
[12] LYSHEVSKI S.E. : Identication of non-linear ight
dynamics: theory and practice, IEEE Trans. Aerosp. [17] Twin Rotor MIMO System Manual, Feedback
Electron. Syst., 2000, 36, (2), pp. 383 392 Instruments Ltd., UK, 2002
IET Control Theory Appl., 2008, Vol. 2, No. 11, pp. 999 1007 1007
doi: 10.1049/iet-cta:20070335 & The Institution of Engineering and Technology 2008