This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?

P.C. Yang

1

, K.M. Yeh

2

, B.S. Lee

3

, Y.C. Wei

4

, C.C Chen

5

Team One

Department of Aerospace Engineering

Tamkang University

Tamsui 251, Taiwan, Republic of China

Abstract

The Inverted Pendulum is the classic problem in dynamics and control theory.

It’s a good way to test control algorithms. According to the design requirement,

system response settling time and maximum overshoot cannot be over 10 second

and 30 percent. Using the linearization method and PID control method to make

the unstable system turned into stable.

1. Introduction

1.1 Motivation

The Inverted Pendulum is the classic problem in dynamics and control theory. It’s a

good way to test control algorithms, such as PID control, fuzzy control and genetic

algorithms. We will be very interested in the control of pendulum. Because of the

technique in these kind of problem can be only apply the S.I.S.O. (Single-input Single

output) system. The applications of the inverted pendulum are widely used in the

vehicle technology, such as the “Toyota Winglet” (as shown as Fig. 1.1) and two legs

walk able humanlike robot “Honda Asimo” (as shown as Fig. 1.2), etc. In this report,

we use the state feed-back control algorithms to deal this problem.

______________________________

1

Pin-Chi, Yang ID#497430073; kcy.chinesepower@gmail.com

2

Keng-Ming, Yeh ID#497430917; good790309@kimo.com

3

Bo-Siou,Lee ID#497430511; aeghio1019@hotmail.com

4

Yu-Chen,Wei ID#497430859; forever410303@hotmail.com

5

Chun-Chi,Chen ID#497430636; h410123@hotmail.com

Figure 1.1: Toyota Winglet

Figure 1.2: Honda Asimo

1.2 Literatures Review

The document [3] is application of fuzzy sliding mode controller. Compared with

our system, we found difference about that they are munity input munity output and

our system is single input single output.

Reference [4] is design and implementation of fuzzy controller by using DSP chips

and its application to inverted pendulum car and they have a most difference is use

DSP (Digital Signal Processor) to control system.

1.3 Designing Process

According to the design requirement, step-input system response settling time and

maximum overshoot cannot be over 10 second and 30 percent.

The first thing to do is to modeling the inverted pendulum’s equation of motion into

state space form by using the linearization method. To make sure if the system is

controllable, we have to seek the controllability matrix. If the system is controllable,

we could do further more.

Set the gained stable system poles to figure out the state feed-back gain value, the

K matrix of the system.

Testing the gained system stability then confirm the disturbance rejection of the

system response. If there exist a constant disturbance, adding the outer control loop to

fix the problem made the system back to the original position. Finally, compare with

the nonlinear system and the linear controlled system.

1.4 Brief Results

The controllability of the system is fully controllable. Such that, we could get gain

K matrix and we use state feed-back control then let the system become a stable

system, but we found only the position could be observed. According to our testing,

we found this system don’t have the disturbance rejection. We also compared result of

linear with nonlinear system response. The system would returns to original and

similar. For linear system would returns to original among 5 seconds. For nonlinear

system would returns to original approximation 10 seconds.

2. Linearization

Designing a control system and consider a cart with inverted pendulum as show in

Fig. 2.1. The equation of motion about the position of the cart and the angle of the

pendulum are given as (2.1) and (2.2).

2

( ) cos sin m M x ml ml u u u u u + + ÷ = (2.1)

2

( ) cos sin 0 I ml mlx mgl u u u + + ÷ = (2.2)

Figure 2.1: cart with inverted pendulum

Because of the equation of motion are nonlinear, so need to be linearity and as

show as following:

Let

1

2

3

4

x x

x

x x

x

u

u

= ¦

¦

=

¦

´

=

¦

¦

=

¹

¬

1 3

2 4

x x

x x

= ¦

´

=

¹

By using the linearization method, we consider 0 u ~ and

2

0 u ~ , so that

cos 1 u ~ and sinu u ~ . Therefore, (2.1) and (2.2) can be simplified as show as (2.3)

and (2.4).

( ) m M x ml u u + + = (2.3)

2

( ) mlx I ml mgl u u + + = (2.4)

Or (2.5) and (2.6).

3 4

( ) m M x mlx u + + = (2.5)

2

3 4 2

( ) mlx I ml x mglx + + = (2.6)

First we take (2.6) multiply ( )

m M

ml

+

2

3 4 2

( ) ( )( ) ( )

m M

m M x I ml x gx m M

ml

+

+ + + = + (2.7)

Then take (2.7) minus (2.5)

2

4 2

( )( ) ( )

m M

I ml ml x gx m M u

ml

+

+ ÷ = + ÷

(2.8)

Or

2

4

2

( )

( )( )

gx m M u

x

m M

I ml ml

ml

+ ÷

=

+

+ ÷

(2.9)

Second we take (2.6) multiply

2

( )

ml

I ml +

2

3 4 2 2 2

( )

( )

ml ml

x mlx mglx

I ml I ml

+ =

+ +

(2.10)

Then take (2.10) minus (2.5)

2

3 2 2 2

( )

( ) ( )

ml ml

m M x mglx u

I ml I ml

÷ + = ÷

+ +

(2.11)

Or

2 2

3 2

2

( )

( )

( )

ml

mglx u

I ml

x

ml

m M

I ml

÷

+

=

÷ +

+

(2.12)

Therefore, we can get all derivative terms as show as following:

1 3

2 4

2 2

3 2

2

2

4

2

( )

( )

( )

( )

( )( )

x x

x x

ml

mglx u

I ml

x

ml

m M

I ml

gx m M u

x

m M

I ml ml

ml

= ¦

¦

=

¦

¦

÷

¦

+

¦ =

´

÷ +

¦

+

¦

+ ÷

¦

=

¦

+

+ ÷

¦

¹

Then, we can get A matrix and B matrix as show as (2.13) and (2.14).

2

2

2

2

0 0 1 0

0 0 0 1

( )

0 0 0

( )

( )

( )

0 0 0

( )( )

ml

mgl

I ml

A

ml

m M

I ml

g m M

m M

I ml ml

ml

+

=

÷ +

+

+

+

+ ÷

(2.13)

2

2

2

0

0

1

( )

( )

1

( )( )

ml

B

m M

I ml

m M

I ml ml

ml

÷

=

÷ +

+

÷

+

+ ÷

(2.14)

We also can write as state space form as below:

x Ax Bu

y cx

= + ¦

´

=

¹

So,

1 1

2

2

2 2

2

2

3 3

2

4 4

2

2

0 0 1 0

0

0 0 0 1

0

1 ( )

0 0 0

( )

( ) ( )

( )

1

( )

0 0 0

( )( )

( )( )

ml x u

mgl

I ml

x u

ml

x

ml m M

x u

m M

I ml

I ml

x u

g m M

m M

m M I ml ml

I ml ml

ml

ml

÷

+

= +

÷ +

÷ +

+

+

+ ÷

+

+ + ÷

+ ÷

Or

| | | |

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

0 0 1 0

0

0 0 0 1

0

1 ( )

0 0 0

( )

( ) ( )

( )

1

( )

0 0 0

( )( )

( )( )

ml

mgl

I ml

ml

x x u

ml m M

m M

I ml

I ml

g m M

m M

m M I ml ml

I ml ml

ml

ml

÷

+

= +

÷ +

÷ +

+

+

+ ÷

+

+ + ÷

+ ÷

In our designing, the cart mass 10 M = and pendulum mass 1 m = , pendulum

half-length 1 l = and moment of the inertia of the pendulum

2

4

(2 ) / 3

3

I m l = = so

that, we can get A matrix and B matrix as show as (2.15) and (2.16).

0 0 1 0

0 0 0 1

0 0.3853 0 0

0 8.7495 0 0

A

=

÷

(2.15)

0

0

0.0916

0.0811

B

=

÷

(2.16)

3. Stability, Controllability and Observability Analysis

3.1 Original system stability analysis

Analyzed the original system’s poles locations, the poles are at 0, 0, 2.9579 and

-2.9579. There is one pole at the right half plane at s-plane, so we can know that the

system is an unstable system. Using Matlab program to show the step input

response as the Fig. 3.1. Confirm it’s an unstable system.

Figure3.1: Original system step input response

3.2 Controllability analysis

To know if the system is fully controllable, we must need to define a controllability

matrix U.

2 3

[ ] U B AB A B A B =

(3.1)

In our designing, we find U matrix and if rank(U)=4 ,the system is controllable.

0 0.0916 0 0.0312

0 0.0811 0 0.7094

0.0916 0 0.0312 0

0.0811 0 0.7094 0

U

÷ ÷

=

÷ ÷

(3.2)

3.2 Observablility Analysis

To know if the system observable, must need to define an observability matrix V.

By definition

2

3

C

CA

V

CA

CA

=

To seek x , when

| | 1 0 0 0 C = , we find V matrix and if rank(V)=4,the system is

observability.

1 0 0 0

0 0 1 0

0 0.3853 0 0

0 0 0 0.3853

V

=

÷

÷

(3.3)

To seek u , when

| | 0 1 0 0 C = , we find V matrix as shown and if rank(V)=2,

the system is unobservability.

0 1 0 0

0 0 0 1

0 8.7495 0 0

0 0 0 8.7495

V

=

(3.4)

To seek x , when

| | 0 0 1 0 C = , we find V matrix as shown and if rank(V)=3,the

system is unobservability.

0 0 1 0

0 0.3853 0 0

0 0 0 0.3853

0 3.3712 0 0

V

÷

=

÷

÷

(3.5)

To seek u , when

| | 0 0 0 1 C = , we find V the matrix as shown and the

rank(V)=2,the system is unobservability.

0 0 0 1

0 8.7495 0 0

0 0 0 8.7495

0 76.5530 0 0

V

=

(3.6)

4. Control Law Design

4.1 System Specification

The desire unit step percentage maximum overshoot can’t be larger than 30% and

settling times less than 10 second.

4.2 Gained System Poles Selection

To reach the goal, known that the maximum overshoot and the settling time

s

t are

the function of damping ratio . and function of time constant t as the (4.1) and

(4.2) shows.

2

1

. ( ) Max Overshoot f e

.t

.

.

÷

÷

= = (4.1)

4

s

t t ~ (4.2)

The maximum overshoot usually occurs at short period mode of the system

response. To reach the P.O.(Percentage Overshoot) < 30%,

s

. at least larger than

0.358. The settling time usually occurs at phugoid mode of the system response.

The

s

t requirement is less than 10 second. So we can know that the time constant

must be smaller than 2.5s. By the equation (4.3), can see that time constant is

( , )

n

f e . .

1

n

t

.e

= (4.3)

Knowing that

p n

. e > 4 and

s

. >0.358, we select the poles location at -3+j, -3-j,

-1+j and -1-j. By using state feedback method, the gain K matrix could be found like

(4.4).

| |

25.9539 433.2451 41.5263 145.6029 K = ÷ ÷ ÷ ÷ (4.4)

Than the system matrix A now comes to ( ) A BK ÷ , the step input response as

shown as the Figure 4.1. We could clearly see the system comes stable.

Figure 4.1: new system step input response

5. Observer Building

According to observer designing idea, observer system response need to converge

faster than linear system, so we put the pole at 4 i ÷ ± , 1 i ÷ ± so we could get a L

matrix

0.01

0.3569

0.0437

1.0817

L

÷

=

÷

6. Simulation

6.1 Linear System response

The purpose of simulation is to confirm linear and nonlinear system response is

similar and confirm the control law is correct. Such that, we found the linear system

response would returns to original among 1 to 2 seconds as show as Fig.6.1.

Figure 6.1: linear system response

6.2 Nonlinear System response

The nonlinear system response would returns to original approximation 10 seconds

as show as Fig.6.2.Because this system converges is similar to linear system.

Figure 6.2: nonlinear system response

We can compare linear with nonlinear system response as show as Fig.6.3.

Figure 6.3: nonlinear & linear system response

6.3 Observer & Linear & Nonlinear System response

By the observerbility analysis, we know that only position (x) could be observed.

The observer & linear & nonlinear system response as shown as Fig 6.4.The

observer starting at the original position at 1

Fig 6.4: observer & linear & nonlinear system response

7. Conclusion

By this project, we could obtain that the linear system and nonlinear system

response are a little bit different. But the settling time and the maximum overshoot are

very close and likely. The observer we built could successfully follow the linear

system response.

8. Problem & Discussion

When we doing step input, we found a problem in “Why the system response goes

to zero but not 1?” We make the system to be a transfer function by using (8.1)

| |

1

. T F C SI A B

÷

= ÷ (8.1)

We can get 4 transfer functions by applying 4 different C matrixes. When

| |

1 0 0 0 C = , we could get (8.2).

2 16

1 4 3 2

0.09164 2.442 10 0.7706

.

8 24 32 20

s s

T F

s s s s

÷

+ × ÷

=

+ + + +

(8.2)

When | |

0 1 0 0 C = , we could get (8.3).

2 17 17

2 4 3 2

0.08108 6.751 10 5.452 10

.

8 24 32 20

s s

T F

s s s s

÷ ÷

÷ ÷ × + ×

=

+ + + +

(8.3)

When | |

0 0 1 0 C = , we could get (8.4).

3 18 2 17

3 4 3 2

0.09164 9.178 10 0.7706 7.717 10

.

8 24 32 20

s s s

T F

s s s s

÷ ÷

+ × ÷ + ×

=

+ + + +

(8.4)

When

| |

0 0 0 1 C = , we could get (8.5).

3 17 2 17

4 4 3 2

0.09108 8.383 10 6.684 10

.

8 24 32 20

s s s

T F

s s s s

÷ ÷

÷ × ÷ ×

=

+ + + +

(8.5)

By applying a step input to each transfer functions we could finally get the final

value (8.6).

0.0385

0

0

0

t

t

t

t

x

x

u

u

÷·

÷·

÷·

÷·

÷

=

(8.6)

So we can know that our step input response is correct.

9. Acknowledgement

In this project, first we thanks for Dr. Fu-yuen Hsiao offer advice in the simulation

of the system; Gratitude Dr. Der-Ming Ma and Dr.Chao-Kang Feng guiding for

linearization.

10. References

[1]林群超,自動控制系統設計與MATLAB 語言,機械工業出版社,西元1997 年8 月

[2]余政光,自動控制分析與設計,國立編譯館,中華民國80 年8 月

[3]Sheng-Hsiung Lin & Tzuu-Hseng S.Li, “Design and Implementation of Fuzzy

Controller by Using DSP Chips and Its Application to Inverted Pendulum Car “,

National Cheng Kung University,Department of Electrical Engineering,p7-P8,June

2002

[4]林泓濱、鍾鴻源,“ Application of Fuzzy Sliding Mode Controller Via

Adaptive Method in Inverted Pendulum Systems”,National Central University,

Department of Electrical Engineering,P5-P6,June 2005

[5]施慶隆,‘控制系統分析與設計’,全華科技圖書股份有限公司,01/2003

Sign up to vote on this title

UsefulNot usefulAll rights reserved.

All rights reserved.

- Direct Adaptive Control for Nonlinear Uncertain Systems With Exogenous Disturbancesby hmalikn7581
- Weiwen Dissertationby Pedro Orellana Rueda
- s1-ln11853597-522165808-1939656818Hwf379566958IdV44027503211853597PDF_HI0001by Muhammad Abid
- Nonlinear disturbance observer based robust control with with mismatch disturbances/uncertaintiesby Hazal Demir

- Inverted Pendulum
- AIAA-6689-891
- Overview of Non-linear Control Methods
- Leitura10
- Direct Adaptive Control for Nonlinear Uncertain Systems With Exogenous Disturbances
- Weiwen Dissertation
- s1-ln11853597-522165808-1939656818Hwf379566958IdV44027503211853597PDF_HI0001
- Nonlinear disturbance observer based robust control with with mismatch disturbances/uncertainties
- analisis-dinamico-operabilidad.pdf
- cce98k
- Lec_6_N10
- Nonlinear Control
- sco98
- Permissible Control of General Constrained Mechanical Systems
- Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers, Part I- Journal of Systems and Control Engineering
- sysid
- Poster Presentation
- nl041217
- 5763-3
- SSM for Design of Nonlinear Control Systems
- 672
- ACC03 IEEE0505 Submitted
- Adaptive Control of a Hysteretic Structural System
- observer based nonlinear control
- Application of Fdi to a Nonlinear Boeing 747 Aircraft
- 10.1.1.126.9410.pdf
- J Huang - Evolution of The Internal Model Principle From Linear to Nonlinear
- Linear Control of Nonlinear Processes
- Nonlinear Internal Model Control With Automotive Applications
- auto11
- State Feedback Control of Inverted Pendulum

Are you sure?

This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?

We've moved you to where you read on your other device.

Get the full title to continue

Get the full title to continue reading from where you left off, or restart the preview.

scribd