Chapter 13

Designing Control Strategies in Physical Domains

13.1 Introduction

The design and analysis of control systems has been an area of immense interest to
many mathematicians, engineers and systems designers. Many a product and
systems in use today deploy control systems for precise and automated execution of
programmed activities. These systems use different algorithms and implement
electronic hardware or software wherein the controller interacts with physical
systems (plants). Many implementations have the controller and the plant in
different physical domains, i.e., either they are in multi-energetic domains or quite
often the controller is a software system interfaced to the real plant using sensors and
transducers. Although a variety of mathematical tools are available to design and
analyse these systems, the designer often looses sight of the original paradigm in the
process or the control strategy arrived at does not have such a physical appeal, which
brings intuition to its full avail.

In this chapter we present an approach to design control systems in physical domain

exploiting the power of bond graph language. It is physics based approach to design
controllers along with transducers, sensors, feedback and feedforward paths without
taking recourse to abstract mathematical descriptions of subsystem models.

Initially we describe the correspondence between several common control strategies

and physical equivalents. These equivalents in the bond graph language are
presented such that they can be used as parts of a control system design toolbox. We
term this approach to design control systems as design of control systems in the
physical domain.

In this chapter we do not attempt to describe control system analysis. The elements of
constructing transfer functions and state space descriptions required to perform
mathematical analysis, as available in many control system textbooks, is treated in
Chapter - 12 wherein the bond graph based representation and derivation is
highlighted.

13.2 Physical equivalents

Many feedback control system implementations have physical equivalents. Take for
instance the example of a proportional control system for the system shown in
Fig. 13.1.
 DESIGNING CONTROL STRATEGIES IN PHYSICAL DOMAINS 358

Fig. 13.2

Fig. 13.1 Fig. 13.3

The bond graph model of the system is shown in Fig. 13.2. By a well judged intuition
we can also draw the equivalent bond graph of the same system as shown in
Fig. 13.3, extracting the equivalence of a resistance to an activated gyrator. In
Fig. 13.2, with the gyrator, effort e4 =  f3, which is also the same in the resistance of
Fig. 13.3 (e3 = – f3).

If we consider the two bond graph as shown in Fig. 13.2 and Fig. 13.3 we can see two
distinct views of the system. In Fig. 13.2 the graph is topologically similar to the
control system used. For instance, the gyrator models a voltage-to-current amplifier
(transconductance amplifier) that would perhaps be actually used in the controller. It
is assumed that the velocity pickup gives a voltage proportional to velocity and the
force exciter is a current driven device. In this case, to design the value of the
transconductance gain (), one would need to consider the open loop transfer
function G(s) between output (flow in bond 3) and input (effort in bond 4). From the
signal flow graph of the system shown in Fig. 13.4

1
f  s m1s s
G s   2   .
e4  s  1  k2  1
(13.1)
2
m1s  k 2
s m1s

In a block diagrammatic form the system is represented as shown in Fig. 13.5.

359 MODELING AND SIMULATION OF ENGINEERING SYSTEMS THROUGH BOND GRAPHS

Fig. 13.4 Fig. 13.5

Note that the feed back gain is . The

sign (negative) is used with the negative
feedback. The design of  can now be
made from regular control theoretical
tools viz, root locus, nyquist, bode plots
etc. which are essentially mathematical
tools to analyse the stable conditions for
Fig. 13.6
feedback gain .

However, if we look at Fig. 13.3 the physical implication of the system is immediately
evident. With the bond graph in mind, one can draw the equivalent physical system
as an extension to the basic system in Fig. 13.1.

The system in Fig. 13.6 is none other than a 2nd order one degree of freedom mass-
spring-damper system. The characteristics of this elementary system are well known
to all physical system designers and engineers. From the very basic laws of physics,
engineers can correlate the physical parameters of the system to basic engineering
terms like natural frequency, damping factor, critical damping, time constant, etc.

For the given system it is possible to determine the value of the feedback gain, ,
which is equivalent to a physical damper with resistance R, on the basis of the
following physical system parameters.

k2 R
n  and   . (13.2)
m1 2m1n

where n is the undamped natural frequency and ς is the damping factor.

One can also draw similar equivalences considering integral and derivative
feedbacks. If the measured variable is velocity (a flow variable) as shown in Fig. 13.1,
and the control system is to be designed based on this measurement, one can write
the following equivalent relations for integral and derivative feedback.
 DESIGNING CONTROL STRATEGIES IN PHYSICAL DOMAINS 360
t
Integral feedback effort, e t  
 K I f   d ,
0
(13.3)

Where KI is the integral feedback gain.

Constitutive relation for a storage C element is

t
e t  
 0
K1 f   d , (13.4)

where K is the stiffness of the mechanical spring or an electrical capacitance for a

derivative control system.

Derivative feedback effort

d
e t   K D f t , (13.5)
dt

where KD is the derivative feedback gain. The constitutive relation for an I element in
differential causality is

d
e t   m f t , (13.6)
dt

where m is the inertia of a mechanical mass or the inductance of an electrical

inductor.

In the previous examples the control variable was chosen to be a flow variable.
However, in reality one encounters other variables like position (from positions
measuring devices like encoders, potentiometers etc.) or force (from force sensors).
The force variables map to the bond graph based effort variables. These equivalences
are given in Table 13.1 and Table 13.2. Table 13.1 is a summary of the cases when the
control variable is effort and Table 13.2 represents the cases when the control variable
is flow.

Table 13.1
Bond graph Element Control Equation Constitutive Equation

Resistance R e(t )  K p f (t ) e(t )  Rf (t )

(resistive causality)
Inertance I d d
(in differential causality)
e(t )  K D f (t ) e(t )  m f (t )
dt dt
361 MODELING AND SIMULATION OF ENGINEERING SYSTEMS THROUGH BOND GRAPHS

Compliance C t t

(in integral causality)

e(t ) 
 0
K I f ( ) d e(t ) 
 0
Kf ( ) d

Table 13.1
Bond graph Element Control Equation Constitutive Equation
Resistance R e(t )  K p e(t ) 1
(in conductance causality) f (t )  e(t )
R
Inertance I t t
1
f (t ) 
 0
K I e ( ) df (t ) 
0 me( ) d

Compliance C d 1 d
(in differential causality)
f (t )  K D e (t ) f (t )  e(t )
dt K dt

In case of position measurements represented in bond graphs by Q, one can choose

the appropriate form of expression from derivative of state Q  (t )  f (t ) . Hence C
can be used to represent differential feedback when an effort variable is used as the
feedback variable. However, we need to keep in mind that the interpretation of the
feedback variables will be different and dependant on the choice of the feedback
control variable, when using variables other than effort and flow.

For instance in case of the integral feedback of position error

t
gt   K I
 0
Qe   d , (13.7)

where Qe ( ) is position error, it is difficult to find a equivalent physical concept.

The use of mathematical tools to analyse such situation is approached.

In control system applications such situations are handled with care as they are often
besotted with problems of stability, resetting of integrator variables (positions, etc.).
From physical stand point these cases may be termed unnatural methods of control as
they often have weak or no physical equivalences in nature.

Hence in this chapter we keep aside such types of control scenarios. We would
therefore address the physically feasible systems and look at issues of control from
this physical stand point.

One other important observation

may be noted in all the previous
examples. The control laws were
formulated using effort or flow as
feedback measurement variable
and the feedback is carried out
 DESIGNING CONTROL STRATEGIES IN PHYSICAL DOMAINS 362
with the complementary power
Fig. 13.7 variable flow or effort as the case
may be. Schematically the control law can be
shown as in Fig. 13.7.

It is not necessary, however, to confine to such

complementary use of variables. One can
transform efforts to flows and flows to efforts
Fig. 13.8 using transconductance amplifiers represented
by GY in Fig. 13.8 to achieve any other combin-
ations like effort measurement to effort feedback and flow measurement to flow
feedback. However, for such systems it is difficult to find equivalences that can be
readily exploited for comparison from the physical universe so that control engineers
can easily visualize them.

One would therefore look at the set of system power variables which are compatible
to the bond graphic representation of single port I, C and R elements. Each of these
uses either effort or flow as input variable and the complementary power variable for
output.

Further, with such a standpoint we are also confining our attention to driving point
feedback control. These physical equivalences carry meaning when used in the
driving point feedback control mode.

We now can formulate some control schemes with this standpoint exploiting
physical system equivalences. The attention is once again on realizable systems with
natural or physical equivalences which are more friendly to a system designer from a
physical standpoint.

13.3 Control system design from physical standpoint as an inverse

problem

As discussed in the previous section one can see the relationships between various
physical system elements and the control variables (effort or flow) for broad classes
of physically realizable system elements I, C and R. Also using expressions and
physical concepts (Table 13.1) one can now assign gain values to control elements
without taking recourse to numerically and computationally intensive control
theoretical tools of Nyquist, Bode, Root locus plots etc.

For instance in the problem given in Fig. 13.1 the choice of parameter R (= μ) can be
made from damping considerations. From control theoretical standpoint one would
arrive at μ by placing the pole inside the left hand side of the s - plane. The more we
move into the left half plane the more is the damping factor.
363 MODELING AND SIMULATION OF ENGINEERING SYSTEMS THROUGH BOND GRAPHS

However, the concept of critical damping is more physically relevant and would
make the design judgement of an engineer more sound. It would be desirable to first
locate the system's critical damping condition in the parameter space. In our physical
standpoint we would therefore arrive at parameters for natural frequencies (decided
by mass and stiffness values) and damping factors (decided from mass, stiffness and
damping ratios). These parameters would then be used to decide the control law
gains.

We, therefore, categorise this activity as an inverse problem solution wherein we find
the control law gains from equivalent physical systems desired (as a result of the
feedback). This is in contrast to obtaining an end physical system after designing the
control gains. In the former, physical concepts are used first and the design evolves,
whereas in the latter the design is validated for physical equivalence performance
after the control law gains are obtained from control theoretical analysis.

It can be stated that the control theoretical tools for analysis of such systems are still
valid and can be used for optimal control, robust control and adaptive control of
those systems. The design from a physical standpoint may be considered as a
paradigm in evolving the control scheme for physically realizable systems. This
design paradigm is feasible due to the physical presentation of the bond graph
structure. Iconization of simple yet physically important concepts and the algebra of
these icons in bond graphs keep those physical concepts in the foreground in the
entire design phase.

13.4 Robust overwhelming control scheme

There are several problems in solving the inverse dynamics of plants when
developing control strategies. Typical plants have certain characteristics like
unmodelled inertias, friction, backlash, compliances arising out of coupled coriolis
forces which are difficult to estimate and are not constant. These make the
determination if control inputs on the basis of inverse dynamics solution very
difficult.

One takes recourse to robust control schemes which make sensitivity to disturbances
in the parameter space the minimum. The designs of such control schemes are often
based on PID controllers and use high-gain theory. In this section we show how we
can propose a design from a physical standpoint that gives rise to a similar control
scheme.

Consider a system as shown in Fig. 13.9 where  m  m  is a simple plant with

nominal inertance of m and a time and state dependant variation m .
 DESIGNING CONTROL STRATEGIES IN PHYSICAL DOMAINS 364

Fig. 13.9 Fig. 13.10

If this plant were to describe a trajectory x(t) what would be the force to be applied
on the plant? The force on the mass  m  m  required to obtain the desired
trajectory would be

Fm  t    m  m  x t  . (13.8)

Clearly, with an uncertainty and variation of m the determination of the force

Fm (t ) is difficult.

Consider a case Fig. 13.10 where we rigidly attach the nominal mass m with m
variations to a very large mass M which is known.

M   m  m  .

We prescribe the desired trajectory x(t) to the M. Therefore, given the condition of the
equation above, force needed to obtain the trajectory would be

F  t   M x t  . (13.9)


The force, f m t , needed to drag along the nominal mass will be automatically
decided by the reaction force at the rigid link between the large mass M and the
nominal mass m. Bond graphs of the system is shown in Fig. 13.11.

Fig. 13.11(a) Fig. 13.11(b)

365 MODELING AND SIMULATION OF ENGINEERING SYSTEMS THROUGH BOND GRAPHS

We see in Fig. 13.11(a) the inertance element for the mass  m  m  is differentially
causalled. This implies that the two inertances M and  m  m  are algebraically
related.

In the bond graph model we can also introduce a scale for the magnitudes of the
masses as shown in Fig. 13.12.

Fig. 13.12

In the above graph the mass M* and the mass  m  m  are algebraically linked by
the transformer with modulus   1 such that the system is equivalent to that in
Fig. 13.11(b).

Let us compare the systems in Figs. 13.11 and 13.12 from their system equations. For
the system in Fig. 13.11(b) the system equation is

M
p 1   p 1  f  t 
m  m

1
 1  1  
M
or p  f t . (13.10)
 m  m 

Similarly the system equation for the system in Fig. 13.12 is

2 M *
p 1   p 1   f  t  ,
m  m

1
  2 M * 
 1  1 
or p  f t . (13.11)
 m  m 
 

One can see that the inertance M and M* are related by the transformer modulus μ.
The transformer is used to provide the scaling. If  1 one can achieve the
condition similar to M   m  m  .

Conceptually one can visualize the physical implication with Fig. 13.13.
 DESIGNING CONTROL STRATEGIES IN PHYSICAL DOMAINS 366

Fig. 13.13

The transformer represents a lever with the lever ratio,   b a ,  being large due
to a long effort arm b a .

When viewing the system in Fig. 13.13 one can see that the consequence of the large
modulus is that one needs to apply large force F(t) to achieve a desired trajectory of
mass point  m  m  . It may be difficult to generate such inputs in any real system.

Let us now view the transformer in the system as given in Fig. 13.14(a).

Fig. 13.14(a) Fig. 13.14(b)

In the Fig. 13.14(b) the transformer is resolved into two separate transformers with an
effort and a flow activated path for each. One can easily show that the two bond
graphs in Fig. 13.14(a) and Fig. 13.14(b) are equivalent when the flow activated and
effort activated transformers have the same modulus. Now if we propose to use split
transformer model in Fig. 13.12. We also propose a modification by which we break
the symmetry wherein the effort activated transformer path has a modulus of unity
as shown in Fig. 13.15. The implication of this assymmetry is discussed at the end of
this chapter.
367 MODELING AND SIMULATION OF ENGINEERING SYSTEMS THROUGH BOND GRAPHS

Fig. 13.15

Fig. 13.16

We can obtain the equation of this system as follows.

p 1
p 1   M *  H  f  H F t
m  m

1
  f M* 
 1  1  H
or p  H F t  (13.12)
 m  m 
 

where F  1 and  F  1

1
  M* 
 1  1  H
p  H F t  . (13.13)
 m  m 
 

Now let us see the same system from the transfer function stand point. The signal
flow graph of the system in Fig. 13.15 is shown in Fig. 13.16.

From the signal flow graph of Fig. 13.16 we can derive the following transfer
function.
 DESIGNING CONTROL STRATEGIES IN PHYSICAL DOMAINS 368
1
H
f1  s  M *s 1 1
  .
e8  s   m  m    f  H M *  m  m   M *s (13.14)
 f 
  H M *  

Where f1 ( s ) and e8 ( s ) are the Laplace transforms of output flow and input
force.

In the above equation when  H 1 and  f  1

 m  m  0,
H M *
which leads to
f1  s  1
 *
e8  s  M s
.

(13.15)

The above equation implies that the dynamics of the feedback system now depends
only on the mass, M*. The variation and the presence of the plant mass, ( m  m) ,
does not effect the dynamics significantly when  H  1 and  f  1 . We thus
say that under the high gain,  H  1 , the controller mass, M*, overwhelms the
plant mass, ( m  m) , dynamics. In other words, the dynamics of the plant mass,
( m  m) becomes a small perturbation on the controller mass, M*, dynamics. We
 
could use the above equation to obtain input force to the controller, e8 s , for a
 
given trajectory, f1 s , through an inverse dynamics solution solely on the basis of
the controller mass, M*.

The controller mass, M*, drags along the plant mass, ( m  m) , with appropriate
force. The motions are linked by the feedback factor,  f  1 , which ensures the
similarity of motion. In other words, the plant mass, ( m  m) , tracks the
trajectory of control mass, M*, exactly.

We could call the control mass, M*, as a ghost mass which is the spirit that moves the
plant, ( m  m) , by an appropriately determined force Fm t  correctly. Any
variations in the plant inertance, m , is also overwhelmed by the presence of the
ghost mass.
369 MODELING AND SIMULATION OF ENGINEERING SYSTEMS THROUGH BOND GRAPHS

We can immediately extend the concept to other characteristics as well. Figure 13.17
shows the bond graph of a second order plant and a second order ghost controller
with compliance and damping considered as well.

Fig. 13.17

Fig. 13.18

For the system in Fig. 13.17 the signal flow graph can be obtained as shown in
Fig. 13.18.

The transfer function of the system is

 s 
H  
f1  s   m p s 2  rp s  k p 
  
e12  s 
. (13.16)
 s  M s 2  R s  K 
1 H  f   c c c

 m p s 2  r p s  k p   s 
 

When  H  1 and  f  1 ,
 DESIGNING CONTROL STRATEGIES IN PHYSICAL DOMAINS 370
f1  s  s

e12  s  M c s  Rc s  K c
2 . (13.17)

The above equation implies that the high gain based overwhelming concept can also
be used for higher order system involving compliances and dampers as well. In our
example the plant inertance, mp, compliance kp, and the damping, rp are all
overwhelmed by the ghost mass, Mc, ghost spring, Kc, ghost damper, Rc, respectively.
We can see the implications of the above concept. Systems with nonlinear and
weakly determinable plant characteristics can be brought under the purview of
robust control using the overwhelming strategy. A control system designer needs,
therefore, to concentrate on the ghost parameters, Mc, Kc and Rc, to work out desired
plant performance criteria.

This overwhelming control scheme has been applied successfully in multi-degree of

freedom robotic system with high degrees of nonlinearities and coupled state
behavior. The reader may refer to Ghosh [17], Mukherjee[18] and Kumar [35].

13.5 Impedance control

In the previous sections we presented control systems with the control variables as
either effort or flow, the factors of power. These control systems are typically
designed from the point of view of the control variable being a physical signal (force,
velocity, current or voltage etc.). These signals are either effort or flow variable and
represent certain behavioral aspects of the system and are external parameters for the
system.

One proposition in control systems has been the case of impedance control by Hogan
[28]. In a land mark paper Neville Hogan suggested a control scheme for robotic
systems wherein the impedance, the ratio of the effort and flow variables, is adjusted
to a desired value to perform certain tasks which need either effort control or flow
control. The concept of impedance control may be considered as a system based
control where a system's intrinsic characteristic parameter is the variable of the
control scheme. This is in contrast to the signal based control where the control
parameter is a signal that is an extrinsic parameter for the system.

Bond graph can be used very effectively to describe and design such control
schemes. In this section the impedance control perspective is presented as a physical
system parameter based control scheme. Bond graph provides the capability to
describe the controller entirely in physical system terms itself without having to take
recourse to a signal based approach and mathematical rigor.
371 MODELING AND SIMULATION OF ENGINEERING SYSTEMS THROUGH BOND GRAPHS

The approach taken in the design of the overwhelming control strategy in the physical
domain can be extended to the design of an impedance control strategy using bond
graphs. Consider the system bond graph in Fig. 13.17. The controller, a mass--spring
—damper based system overwhelmingly controls the plant at the driving point using
a high feed forward gain  H .

Let us consider that the plant has an appended degree of freedom, say a passive
foundation that is not controlled by the controller as in Fig. 13.19. The bond graph of
the system is shown in Fig. 13.20.

Fig. 13.19

Fig. 13.20

The transfer function between the reference input, e4, and the output flow, f12 can be
obtained as

f12  s   H R s 

e4  s  1  R  s  C  s    H C  s  * F  s 
, (13.18)

where,

R(s) = Transfer function of the robot between its driving effort and output flow
1
= ’
mr s
 DESIGNING CONTROL STRATEGIES IN PHYSICAL DOMAINS 372
C(s) = Transfer junction of the controller between the command input and output

effort =
1
s

M c s 2  Rc s  K c , 
F(s) = Transfer function of the foundation between the force input at bond 14 and the
s
flow at bond 14 =  M s 2  R s  K  .
 f f f 
 

The effect of the foundation can be compensated by the use of a feedback

compensation as shown in Fig. 13.21.

Fig. 13.21

The feedback compensation is shown by an effort activated transformer TF between

the bonds 18 and 19 with a modulus  . The effort activated transformer serves to
compensate the disturbance flow due to the presence of the foundation. One can
intuitively see that if   1 the compensation will be exact and the effect of the
foundation can be nullified. This can be verified by obtaining the transfer function as
done for the system in Fig. 13.20.

f12  s   H R s 

e4  s  1  R  s  C  s    H C  s   F  s 
. (13.19)

The descriptions of R(s), C(s)and F(s) are same as before. The above equation
validates that when   1 the term containing the foundation transfer function
vanishes.

It should be noted that this simple physical compensation scheme is visualized from
the bond graph model description itself.
373 MODELING AND SIMULATION OF ENGINEERING SYSTEMS THROUGH BOND GRAPHS

On the same lines of description of the bond graph model based compensator design
one can also see the driving point impedance of the robot at the environment
interface. Intuitively one can state that the driving point impedance of the robot will
be related to that of the foundation and will be modulated by the compensator gain
.

In the case of the system shown in Fig. 13.21 the driving point input at the end-
effector is an effort and the output will be the flow of the robot. Hence, the input-
output transfer description will be that of an admittance.

f rob  s  f12  s 
Yrob  s   
eenv  s  e13  s 
.

One can derive the transfer function from the usual signal flow graph and the
Mason's rule as

f12  s  R s  1   H 1    C  s  F  s  
Yrob  s   
e4  s  1   H R s  C  s    H 1    C  s  F  s 
, (13.20)

where R(s), C(s)and F(s) are the same as defined in eqn. 13.18.

Let us examine the implications of the foundation and the modulation gain  in
eqn. (13.20) in more detail.

For the given admittance we can obtain the stiffness characteristics in the following
manner.


Let eenv t  E , a constant driving force

E
eenv  s  
s

 R s  1   H 1    C  s  F  s   E
f rob  s    
1   H R s  C  s    H 1    C  s  F  s   s
therefore, .

(13.21)


The displacement, xrob t , can be obtained as the time integral of the velocity,
f rob  t  .
 DESIGNING CONTROL STRATEGIES IN PHYSICAL DOMAINS 374
 R s  1   H 1    C  s  F  s   E
xrob  s     2
1   H R s  C  s    H 1    C  s  F  s   s
Thus . (13.22)

The steady state response (displacement) of the robot from the eqn. (13.22) can be
obtained using the final value theorem.

xrob  s  1 1 1   
lim    . (13.23)
s 0 E k rob  H K c Kf

The term E / xrob ( s ) is the stiffness, k rob , of the robotic system as seen at the
environment interface and hence may be termed as the driving point stiffness. One
can see the implications of  on the driving point stiffness as follows.

When  H  1 (overwhelming control) and   1 ,

Kf
k rob     . (13.24)
1
When   1 (full foundation compensation) and  H  1 (overwhelming
control),

k rob     1   H K c . (13.25)

We can see that for the overwhelming control strategy, under full foundation
compensation, the driving point stiffness is very high and when the foundation
compensation is partial the driving point stiffness or compliance is modulated by the
compensation gain  .

One can similarly carry out the exercise for damping and inertance and see the effects
of the compensation gain. The outcome of equation (13.24) and eqn. (13.25) validate
the intuitive statement on driving point impedance modulation by the compensator
gain  .

The concept of impedance or admittance is immensely physical and pertains to an

intrinsic property of the system. The design of physical systems is often carried out
on the basis of impedances at the point of interaction with other systems. Several
design problems are carried out as network synthesis problems wherein the network
is a passive electrical circuit consisting of resistances, capacitances and inductances.
In the context of bond graphs these are the R, C and I elements. In a pioneering work
Colgate [11] has shown the relevancies of a network synthesis approach to design of
impedance controllers.
375 MODELING AND SIMULATION OF ENGINEERING SYSTEMS THROUGH BOND GRAPHS

In the example presented in Fig. 13.19 we have seen how we can relate the concept of
a modulation gain to that of impedance control. The foundation compensation
concept as well as the subsequent impedance modulation concept has evolved from
the bond graph description of the system. These concepts have evolved due to the
ease of associations with physical system concepts carried out in the bond graph
domains.

13.6 Physical system transpositioning in the bond graph space

The design or description of the control concept for the system in Fig. 13.19 has been
shown to be in the bond graph domain itself. We can use the power of the bond
graph description to transposition the foundation in the system.

The foundation of Fig. 13.19 is a physical foundation and bond 14 of Fig. 13.20
connects the foundation to the physical robot. Let us map the effect of the foundation
(as seen by the controller) to a structure as shown in Fig. 13.22.

Fig. 13.22

With this the physical foundation is mapped to an equivalent virtual foundation

within the controller. The equivalence is obtained by using the split transformer
 DESIGNING CONTROL STRATEGIES IN PHYSICAL DOMAINS 376
structure shown in Fig. 13.22. The bond graph algebra can be seen in the equivalences
of structures shown in Fig. 13.23(a) and Fig. 13.23(b).

Fig. 13.23(a) Fig. 13.23(b)

The two structures will be physically equivalent if  H   H .

Considering the system in Fig. 13.22 one can obtain the driving point admittance as
f rob  s  f12  s 
Yrob  s,    
erob  s  e4  s 

R s  1   H 1    C  s  F  s  

1   H R  s  C  s    H 1    C  s  F  s 
, (13.26)

and the driving point stiffness as

1 1  1   
  H
k rob  
. (13.27)
H Kc H K f

For  H   H  1 and   1
Kf
k rob     , (13.28)
1

and for   1 and  H   H ,

k rob    1
 H Kc . (13.29)

Equations (13.28) and eqn. (13.29) correspond to the same in equations (13.24) and
eqn. (13.25) respectively.
377 MODELING AND SIMULATION OF ENGINEERING SYSTEMS THROUGH BOND GRAPHS

The virtual foundation in Fig. 13.22 is entirely a bond graph creation. The design of this
controller has been from the bond graph concepts and drawn from equivalences
which can easily be constructed in the bond graph domain. Simple transpositioning
can be carried out from physical systems concepts. Such controllers are realized
either in active electronic circuits, made from operational amplifiers, or from digital
control system implementations. The virtual foundation in the controller domain need
not be actual physical circuits or devices but can rather be “digital” equations
representing the state of the control system equivalent and can still have the effects
or properties of the real system due to the equivalences established in the manner
described.

As is evident in the case of design of controllers described in sections 13.2 to 13.5 the
impedance controller can also be described in physical terms which are workshop
friendly. In the following example we consider the case of an impedance controller
designed for a robotic system.

Example: Impedance controller design for a robotic system

If a robotic system were to interact with another system energetically there will be an
exchange of power between the systems as shown in Fig. 13.24.

Fig. 13.24 Fig. 13.25

As described in section 13.5 the system in Fig. 13.19 depicts the interaction as shown
in Fig. 13.25.

For a given interaction between the robotic system and the environment it may so be
desired that a particular impedance characteristic is required at the interaction point.
This may be realized by appropriately designing the elements of the foundation in
the physical domain. Once this is carried out, one can implement the controller by
considering the virtual foundation in the design.

Consider a physical system as shown in Fig. 13.26. The single degree of freedom
robot has its passive degree of freedom internal to the controller. The bond graph of
the system is the same as in Fig. 13.22. Suppose we want the system to behave as a
linear impedance as shown in Fig. 13.27 with a prescribed admittance given by
 DESIGNING CONTROL STRATEGIES IN PHYSICAL DOMAINS 378
f  s s
Y  s  
F  s  Ms  Rs  K
2 (13.30)

Fig. 13.26. Fig. 13.27.

Say, we desire a system having characteristic equivalent impedance at the driving

point with M = 1kg, K = 80 N/m and R = 30 Ns/m. We would need to see how to obtain
the same from the physical system based design of impedance controller. The
characteristic frequency response of the linear system is shown in the Bode plot
(Fig. 13.28).
379 MODELING AND SIMULATION OF ENGINEERING SYSTEMS THROUGH BOND GRAPHS

Fig. 13.28

Now we need to determine the parameters of the foundation (an additional passive
degree of freedom) from the principles mentioned so far. This can be done by
equating the expressions for the admittances in equation (13.26) and equation (13.30)
given by

R s  1   H 1    C  s  F  s   s

1   H R s  C  s    H 1    C  s  F  s  Ms  Rs  K
2 (13.31)

Using controller parameters, M c  1, K c  100, Rc  14,  H   H  200 , gain

  –9 , robot inertance mr  0.5 and comparing the like terms of s in equation
(13.31), we get foundation parameters M f  5, K f  100 , and R f  30 that will
produce the desired result. This can be verified by the bode plot of the transfer
function Yrob (s ) in equation (13.26) with the above parameters. This plot will be
 DESIGNING CONTROL STRATEGIES IN PHYSICAL DOMAINS 380
almost identical to the one in Fig. 13.28. Small variation, not so perceptible, would be
due to the robot inertance.

The above impedance controller with virtual dissipative foundation has been used
with success in cooperative manipulation of compliant object even in the presence of
motion dependant forces [36].

This chapter thus shows how the power of bond graph language can be used to
develop control strategies from physical paradigm giving the designer the fullest
advantage of using his intuition and innovative ideas.

13.7 Implication of asymmetric transformation

The two activated transformer structure shown in Fig. 13.15 with unequal moduli are
used in several realization of control strategies in this chapter. This structure has very
significant physical implications. The effort activated transformer with modulus
unity is in fact a flow sensor with no power associated with it. The flow activated
transformer with so called high gain is an effort to effort amplifier. The actuation
power at the output port of this amplifier comes from a tank system sustaining it.