Enpm808J Rehabilitation Robotics Lecture #3 Anindo Roy, PHD

34
ENPM808J
Rehabilitation Robotics
Lecture #3
Anindo Roy, PhD

Suggested reading(s)
• Control Systems
 Position Control Systems (Lectures 2-4)

 Any undergraduate feedback control textbook would do (but not really needed)
31
Controller Design
33
Controller
“Device that gives the system the

sort of dynamic response that we
want it to have, rather than the
dynamic response that it naturally
has…”
34
Improving Transient Response

• To increase flexibility in the design of a desired response, we
desire a means to explore responses not naturally occurring
• For example: desired transient
response (%OS, Ts) represented by B
• If gain K is the only “knob” then we
can obtain at best the settling time at
closed-loop pole A
• Goal: speed up the response at A to
that of B without affecting the %OS
So…how to do we accomplish this goal?

36
Improving Steady-State Error

• Both transient response specifications and steady-state
errors are affected by choice of gain K
• We have seen that higher the gain K, smaller the SSE but
larger the %OS
37

38

• Both transient response specifications and steady-state
errors are affected by choice of gain K
• We have seen that higher the gain K, smaller the SSE but
larger the %OS
• In general:
 Transient response improved by adding an open-loop zero
at or near the origin (derivative compensation)
 SS error improved by adding an open-loop pole at or near
the origin (integral compensation)
• Integral compensation increases the system type and

drives associated SSE to zero
45
Ideal Integral Compensation (PI)

• Representative PI controller
• Compensating network precedes the plant and is defined as

an ideal compensator according to the transfer function:
46
Example
• Demonstrate that the addition of an ideal integral

compensator (PI controller) reduces the SSE to zero for a
step input, without appreciably affecting transient response
• Requirement: maintain the damping ratio of 0.174
47
• Transient response of the system is similar since close-loop poles

and gain K remain roughly unchanged
• However, now Kp = infinity and the steady state error is now
zero as the system is Type 1
48
Improving Transient Response

• Proportional-plus-integral (PI) compensators are used to
improve the steady state response of a system without
affecting its transient response
• We now focus on improving the transient response of a
system, again using cascade compensation
• Objective: design a transient response with required %OS
and shorter Ts (or Tp) than uncompensated system
 Ideal derivative compensation
49
Ideal Derivative Compensation (PD)

• Proportional-plus-derivative (PD) controller
• Places an open-loop zero in the forward path to speed up
the response over the uncompensated system
 Location depends on required response
• Note that differentiation may yield large unwanted signal

due to amplification of noise
50
• Implementing ideal derivative compensation shortened

the response of each case while keeping the same %OS
51
Ideal Derivative Compensation (PD)

Derivative (D)
• Representative PD controller
Proportional (P) Plant
• Compensating network precedes the plant and is defined as an

ideal compensator according to the transfer function:
Chosen to equal the negative
of the compensator zero
Chosen to contribute to the

required loop gain
54
Example
%OS differs by 3%
Ts improved by factor of 3
55
Improving SSE & Transient Response

• Combine the techniques of PI and PD compensation to
improve SS error and transient response, independently
• Design may use either active or passive compensator
components
56
PID Controller Design

• Proportional-plus-integral-plus-derivative (PID) controller
• Adds two zeros, and a pole at the origin
 One zero and the pole at the origin as ideal integral compensator (PI)
 One zero as ideal derivative compensator (PD)
• One of the most popular control methods

• Position controlled rehab robots
• The proportional, integral, and derivative gains (i.e. pole and

zero locations) are tuned to produce desired performance
57
PID Controller Design

Derivative (D)
• Representative PID controller
Integral (I)
Proportional (P) Plant
• Compensating network precedes the plant and is defined

as an ideal compensator according to:
58
Example
• Compensated system
• Reduced peak time
• Reduced SSE
• Slightly slower
transient response
than PD controller
60
Summary of Controller Performance
Controller Effect on Effect on

Type Transient Response Steady State Error
Proportional Limited improvement None
PD Improved None
PI Degraded Improved
PID Improved Improved
33
Was this all worth it? Human

body as inverted pendulum
34
Open-loop system
35
Closed-loop with Position controller

36
Closed-loop with PI Control

37
Closed-loop with PID Control

30
Control Law Partioning in

Robotic Applications
Physical System: With Control
Underdamped (ζ = 0.1) Overdamped (ζ = 2)
SEffness dominates Damping dominates

More oscillatory Slow convergence
We desire:
Fastest possible transi:on of the system
to its res:ng state (or steady-‐state) value
How?

Cri:cal Damping
(b + kv)2 = 4m(k + kp)
FricEon and damping are in “balance”
CriEcally damped (ζ = 1)

Is the problem solved?
Cri:cal Damping
(b + kv)2 = 4m(k + kp)
Choice of controller parameters

depends on mass (or inerEa)!!
Cri:cal Damping
(b + kv)2 = 4m(k + kp)
Problem:
Make the controller parameters independent
of system proper3es (e.g. mass)
Cri:cal Damping
(b + kv)2 = 4m(k + kp)
Problem:
Make the controller parameters independent
of system proper3es (e.g. mass)
SoluEon:
Control-‐Law Par>>oning
Robot Control Systems
•  Closed-‐loop control system

Illustra>on using damped
•  Control-‐law par>>oning spring mass system
•  Trajectory-‐following control
•  Force control Illustra>on using damped

spring mass system
•  Impedance control Both robot manipulator and

damped spring mass systems
Control-‐law Par>>oning
Control law parEEoning: widely used in robo>cs

Incorporates a mathema3cal model of the
physical system (to be controlled) into the control
system itself

Benefit:
System control is much more robust and easy to
manage – controller parameters do not depend
on system proper>es! MulEple DOF Robots!!
Key concept: Servomechanism (“Servo”)
Servomechanism: Error sensing nega3ve feedback to

correct the performance of the physical system and is
defined by its func3on

Error (e) Control signal (u)

+
Ref Controller Physical System Output
-‐
If Ref = 0 (zero set-‐point)

e = -‐Output, u = f(e)

Error (e) Control signal (u)

+
-‐
PD Control:
kp( ) + kvd/dt( )
e = -‐x, u = kpx + kvdx/dt
Servo (Error, Control signals) does not depend on system constants,
only closed-‐loop error i.e. system output variable(s)
Control law parEEoning (be[er understood now)

Par33on the controller into its servo por:on
(separate from system constants) and its model-‐
based por:on (model of the physical system)
Control system
Control system
Servo porEon
Control system
Model-‐based
Servo porEon
porEon
Control system
Choose control
Model-‐based
Servo porEon
porEon
Through the control law, we want to achieve the following:

Choose α and β such that the system, considering only f ’ as
input, behaves like a unit mass, governed by the equa:on
Control system
Choose control
Model-‐based
Servo porEon
porEon
Through the control law, we want to achieve the following:

Choose α and β such that the system, considering only f ’ as
input, behaves like a unit mass, governed by the equa:on
Unit mass Input

,
Mass
“Everything else”
Choose control
Note we can influence the system directly through f’

Thus, think of f ’ as the “new” input, and express it as per
the “previous control law”
Thus, think of f ’ as the “new” input, and express it as per
the “previous control law”
“New input”
“Previous control law”
“New system form”
“New input”
“New system form”
“New input”
“New” equation of motion

Control system
Model-‐based
Servo porEon
porEon

Remember cri>cal damping?
Cri:cal Damping occurs when
b2 = 4mk
“Effective damping”: “Effective stiffness”:
Coefficient of the Coefficient of the
velocity component in position component in
the equation of motion the equation of motion
(b + kv)2 = 4m(k + kp) kv2 = 4kp

Controller depends on mass Controller independent of mass
Control system
Model-‐based
Servo porEon
porEon

Model-‐based
Servo porEon
porEon
Servo
Model
Control-‐law Par>>oning: The Impact
Assume a mul:-‐dimensional system (e.g. mul>ple DOF robot).

To see how control law par>>oning is really useful, consider
the equa>on of mo>on:
M, B, K: matrices

x: vector
f: vector
Kv, Kp: matrices
Mul:-‐dimensional linear differen:al equa:on: Makes determina>on

of controller gains to achieve cri>cal damping a nightmare!
Now we use control law par::oning for the same system:
Now we use control law par>>oning for the same system:
Now we use control law par>>oning for the same system:
Choose Kp and Kv as diagonal matrices, so that:

Choose Kp and Kv as diagonal matrices, so that:

The cri:cal damping is then given by:
kvi2 = 4kpi
Apply rule to controller gain pair

(kp, kv) for each dimension/DOF…
The cri:cal damping is then given by:
kvi2 = 4kpi
Apply rule to controller gain pair

(kp, kv) for each dimension/DOF…
…Don’t have to worry about complexity or dimension

of system mass, damping, and stiffness matrices: they
are decoupled from controller gains matrices!!
Problem 1
Compute the motion of the system shown in the figure below if parameter values
are m = 1 kg, b = 2 Ns/m, and k = 2 N/m and the block (initially at rest) is
released from the position x = 1 m.
Solu>on 1: “Unforced” system
k = 4 N/m, b = 2 Ns/m, m = 1 kg, x0 = 1 m, v0 = 0 m/s (initially at rest)
= 2 rad/s = 0.5 < 1 (underdamped)
x(t) =
x(t) = 2e-t(0.5cos1.73t + 0.29sin1.73t)

Problem 2
If the parameters of the system shown in the figure below are m = 1 kg, b = 1 Ns/
m, and k = 1 N/m, find gains kp and kv for a position-regulated control law that
results in the system’s being critically damped with closed-loop stiffness of 16.0
N/m.
Closed-‐loop Control System
§  Damped spring mass with actuaEon
Choose control
What is controlled here?

Posi>on

Steady state ?
x = 0
Solu>on 2: Remember cri>cal damping?
b2 = 4mk
Closed-loop damping: Closed-loop stiffness:
Velocity coefficient in the Position coefficient in the
closed-loop equation of motion closed-loop equation of motion
Closed-loop EoM
(b + kv)2 = 4m(k + kp), k + kp = 16
kp = 15, kv = 7
Problem 3
m, and k = 1 N/m, find α, β, and the gains kp and kv for a position-regulated
control law that results in the system’s being critically damped with closed-loop
stiffness of 16.0 N/m.
Solu>on 3: Use Control-‐law Par>>oning
Control system
Model-‐based
Servo porEon
porEon
Closed-loop EoM
Solu>on 3: Use Control-‐Law Par>>oning
kv2 = 4kp
Closed-loop EoM
kp = 16, kv2 = 4kp
kp = 16, kv = 8, -16 -8
31
Trajectory-Following Control
32
The Lokomat Robot

33
The Pelvis Robot (PAM)

34
The ReWalk
Robot Control Systems
•  Closed-‐loop control system

Illustra>on using damped
•  Control-‐law par>>oning spring mass system
•  Trajectory-‐following control
•  Force control Illustra>on using damped

spring mass system
•  Impedance control Both robot manipulator and

damped spring mass systems
Trajectory-‐following Control
Goal: Not just cri3cal damping, but carry out a certain

(desired) trajectory e.g. end-‐effector trajectory
xd Error (e) Control signal (u) x

+
-‐
e = xd – x

Requirement: xd must be twice con>nuously differen>able
xd Error (e) Control signal (u) x

+
-‐
PD Control:
kp( ) + kvd/dt( )
e = xd – x
Choose control
(Instead of )
e = xd – x
Choose control
(Instead of )
Control Law
ParEEon
Servo
Model
What’s the benefit?

Error (e) now behaves like a mass-‐spring system i.e. we
can achieve cri:cal damping of error through
appropriate choice of controller parameters, ensuring
fastest possible convergence of error toward zero
Problem 1
Compute the motion of the system shown in the figure below if parameter values
are m = 1 kg, b = 2 Ns/m, and k = 2 N/m and the block (initially at rest) is
released from the position x = 1 m.
Solu>on 1: “Unforced” system
k = 4 N/m, b = 2 Ns/m, m = 1 kg, x0 = 1 m, v0 = 0 m/s (initially at rest)
= 2 rad/s = 0.5 < 1 (underdamped)
x(t) =
x(t) = 2e-t(0.5cos1.73t + 0.29sin1.73t)

Problem 2
m, and k = 1 N/m, find gains kp and kv for a position-regulated control law that
results in the system’s being critically damped with closed-loop stiffness of 16.0
N/m.
Closed-‐loop Control System
§  Damped spring mass with actuaEon
Choose control
What is controlled here?

Posi>on

Steady state ?
x = 0
Solu>on 2: Remember cri>cal damping?
b2 = 4mk
Closed-loop EoM
(b + kv)2 = 4m(k + kp), k + kp = 16
kp = 15, kv = 7
Problem 3
m, and k = 1 N/m, find α, β, and the gains kp and kv for a position-regulated
control law that results in the system’s being critically damped with closed-loop
stiffness of 16.0 N/m.
Solu>on 3: Use Control-‐law Par>>oning
Control system
Model-‐based
Servo porEon
porEon
Closed-loop EoM
Solu>on 3: Use Control-‐Law Par>>oning
kv2 = 4kp
Closed-loop EoM
kp = 16, kv2 = 4kp
kp = 16, kv = 8, -16 -8
32
Prelude to Interaction Control:
Drawing from limitations of

position (or force) control
33
Let’s get back to rehab robots…

34
The Pelvis Robot (PAM)

35
Why did position control fail?

36
It should have worked…

• Claim: Lokomat & PAM controllers will render zero steady-state error in
response to a pre-programmed gait trajectory (can we prove this?)
 We will show that a robot exoskeleton leg using a trajectory following controller (e.g.
PID) is closed-loop stable and with zero SSE.
37

Develop model
• Model dynamics of this leg as a simple pendulum with total mass, M (robot
plus human leg) concentrated at the foot and leg length from the point of
pelvic rotation to the foot, L.
• The variable of interest is 𝜃𝜃, the pendulum angle measured from vertical.
• Assume that the system is driven by external torque, T (motor torque) with
zero initial conditions.
38

Steps
• The Laplace transform of the linearized equation of motion will yield the
transfer function of the physical system, or the “plant” (𝐺𝐺𝑝𝑝 ) i.e. 𝐺𝐺𝑝𝑝 (𝑠𝑠) =
𝜃𝜃(𝑠𝑠)/𝑇𝑇(𝑠𝑠).
• For a PID controller, the relationship between closed-loop error (e) and
𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑
controller output (u) is given by: 𝑢𝑢 = 𝐾𝐾𝑝𝑝 𝑒𝑒 + 𝐾𝐾𝑑𝑑 + 𝐾𝐾𝐼𝐼 ∫𝑒𝑒 𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑. The Laplace
𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑
transform of this equation will yield the controller transfer function (𝐺𝐺𝑐𝑐 ) i.e.
𝐺𝐺𝑐𝑐 (𝑠𝑠) = 𝑈𝑈(𝑠𝑠)/𝐸𝐸(𝑠𝑠).
• Having computed physical system and controller transfer functions, compute

the closed-loop transfer function (𝐺𝐺𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶 ) i.e. 𝐺𝐺𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶 𝑠𝑠 = {𝐺𝐺𝑝𝑝 𝑠𝑠 𝐺𝐺𝑐𝑐 𝑠𝑠 }/{1 +
𝐺𝐺𝑝𝑝 𝑠𝑠 𝐺𝐺𝑐𝑐 𝑠𝑠 }.
• Use sinusoidal input for reference (why?) and compute SSE

39
“Plant” TF
40
Controller TF
41
Closed Loop TF
42
Steady-State Error
• Joint angles during walking are cyclical
 May be modeled as sinusoids
• What is SSE of Lokomat + Human?

 In response to cyclical “healthy” gait trajectory
• If SSE = 0 with PID control…

 Why did Lokomat fail?
 Why did PAM destabilize?
43
The MIT-MANUS Robot

44
The MIT-MANUS Robot

45
The MIT-MANUS Robot

46
MIT-MANUS
47
Why did the MANUS succeed?

• Like the Lokomat (albeit for arm rehabilitation), state-of-art robot
• Unlike the Lokomat, it showed efficacy
• Possibilities: design (unlikely), hardware (perhaps)
• Controller (likely)
 Control strategy – right type of controller with respect to application
 Controller settings – right type of controller and appropriately tuned
• To understand, we will understand interaction control (in sufficient

detail)
 What’s the best way for coupled systems to interact?
 Qualitative understanding, followed by quantitative (some rigor)
 Focus on Impedance Control: most common way for interaction control
 Be prepared: easy math, steep learning curve conceptually

Enpm808J Rehabilitation Robotics Lecture #3 Anindo Roy, PHD

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Enpm808J Rehabilitation Robotics Lecture #3 Anindo Roy, PHD

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

34

Anindo Roy, PhD

 Position Control Systems (Lectures 2-4)

“Device that gives the system the

Improving Transient Response

So…how to do we accomplish this goal?

Improving Steady-State Error

Improving Steady-State Error

Improving Steady-State Error

• Integral compensation increases the system type and

Ideal Integral Compensation (PI)

• Compensating network precedes the plant and is defined as

• Demonstrate that the addition of an ideal integral

• Transient response of the system is similar since close-loop poles

Improving Transient Response

Ideal Derivative Compensation (PD)

• Note that differentiation may yield large unwanted signal

• Implementing ideal derivative compensation shortened

Ideal Derivative Compensation (PD)

Proportional (P) Plant

• Compensating network precedes the plant and is defined as an

Chosen to contribute to the

Improving SSE & Transient Response

PID Controller Design

• One of the most popular control methods

• The proportional, integral, and derivative gains (i.e. pole and

PID Controller Design

Proportional (P) Plant

• Compensating network precedes the plant and is defined

Summary of Controller Performance

Controller Effect on Effect on

Was this all worth it? Human

Closed-loop with Position controller

Closed-loop with PI Control

Closed-loop with PID Control

Control Law Partioning in

SEﬀness dominates Damping dominates

SEﬀness dominates Damping dominates

CriEcally damped (ζ = 1)

Choice of controller parameters

• Closed-­‐loop control system

• Force control Illustra>on using damped

• Impedance control Both robot manipulator and

Control law parEEoning: widely used in robo>cs

Servomechanism: Error sensing nega3ve feedback to

Servomechanism: Error sensing nega3ve feedback to

Error (e) Control signal (u)

If Ref = 0 (zero set-­‐point)

Servomechanism: Error sensing nega3ve feedback to

Error (e) Control signal (u)

e = -­‐x, u = kpx + kvdx/dt

Control law parEEoning (be[er understood now)

Unit mass Input

Note we can inﬂuence the system directly through f’

“New system form”

“New system form”

“New” equation of motion

“New” equation of motion

Cri:cal Damping occurs when

(b + kv)2 = 4m(k + kp) kv2 = 4kp

“New” equation of motion

Assume a mul:-­‐dimensional system (e.g. mul>ple DOF robot).

M, B, K: matrices

•  Closed-‐loop control system

•  Force control Illustra>on using damped

•  Impedance control Both robot manipulator and

If Ref = 0 (zero set-‐point)

e = -‐x, u = kpx + kvdx/dt

Assume a mul:-‐dimensional system (e.g. mul>ple DOF robot).

Mul:-‐dimensional linear diﬀeren:al equa:on: Makes determina>on

§  Damped spring mass with actuaEon

•  Closed-‐loop control system

•  Force control Illustra>on using damped

•  Impedance control Both robot manipulator and

§  Damped spring mass with actuaEon