Indian Institute of Technology, Bombay

Department of Aerospace Engineering

AE427 - Control Systems Laboratory
Experiment Report

Torsional Disk
Ammar Barbhaiwala - 200010010
Muskan Bhutra - 200040085
Praharsh Agrawal - 20D110014
Rucha Aghera - 200010064
Snehal Shangari - 200010079
Vishal Singh - 200010087

Supervised by
Professor Hemendra Arya
Professor
Department of Aerospace Engineering

January 31, 2023

Contents
1 Objective 2

2 System Description 2

3 System Identification 2
3.1 Aim . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
3.2 Procedure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
3.3 Observations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
3.4 Calculations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
3.4.1 Formulas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
3.4.2 Values . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
3.4.3 Calculations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
3.5 Hardware Gain . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
3.5.1 Procedure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
3.5.2 Observations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
3.5.3 Calculations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8

4 P, D, PD and PID Control Implementation 8

4.1 Aim . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
4.2 Procedure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
4.3 Observations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11

5 Simulink and Simulink Modelling 14

5.1 Plots . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
5.1.1 Case-1a: P Control with Impulse Input with kp = 0.024266 . . . . . 15
5.1.2 Case-1a: P Control with Impulse Input with kp = 0.048532 . . . . . 16
5.1.3 Case-2: D Control with Step Input with kd = 0.006005 . . . . . . . 16
5.1.4 Case-3: PD Control with Step Input with ζ = 0.2 . . . . . . . . . . 17
5.1.5 Case-4: PD Control with Step Input with ζ = 1 . . . . . . . . . . . 17
5.1.6 Case-5: PD Control with Step Input with ζ = 2 . . . . . . . . . . . 18
5.1.7 Case-6: PID Control with Step Input . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18

1
1 Objective
To identify the system and to define and the constants that build the mathematical model
of the system like hardware gain and to investigate the effects of proportional, derivative
and integral control on system performance.

2 System Description
The Torsion Disc experiment consists of an electromechanical plant and a full complement
of control hardware and software. The Model 205a torsional mechanism represents many
such physical plants, including rigid bodies, flexibility in drive shafts, gearing, and belts,
and coupled discrete vibration with an actuator at the drive input and a sensor collocated
or at a flexibly coupled output (noncollocated). The experiments described in this journal
are carried out exclusively on the Torsional Control System Plant, which is represented
by the Model 205. The system utilizes two steel shafts, which have varying stiffness (K1,
K2), as ”springs”. By clamping the center disk on the body of the model, either of the
two shafts can be employed by utilizing either the upper or lower disk.

3 System Identification
3.1 Aim
The objective of this experiment is to leverage the Model to derive outcomes pertaining
to key characteristics of lightly damped second-order systems, including but not limited
to, inertia, damping coefficients, and spring constants.

3.2 Procedure
1. The central disk was clamped using a 1/4” bolt square nut and clamp spacer to put
the mechanism in the suggested configuration. A light torqueing on the bolt was
applied.

2. Four 500g masses were secured on the upper and lower disk, each at a center distance
of 9.0cm from the shaft center-line. It was ensured that the masses were secured
properly.

3. The controller was powered up, and the Control Algorithm box was entered via
the Set-up menu. Ts was set to 0.00442, and the Trajectory was selected from the
Command menu. Step, Setup was chosen, and Open Loop Step was input with a
step size of zero, a duration of 4000ms, and 1 repetition. The user could specify
whether the units should be in counts, degrees, or radians. Counts were used as the
unit.

4. The Data Acquisition was set up in the Data menu. Encoder 1 and Encoder 3 were
selected as data to acquire, and data sampling was specified every 2 (two) servo
cycles, i.e., every 2 Ts’s. Zero Position was selected from the Utility menu to zero
the encoder positions.

2
 5. Execute was selected from the Command menu, and the upper disk was manually
displaced approximately 20 degrees. Run was selected from the Execute box, and
the disk was released approximately 1 second later. The disk oscillated and slowly
attenuated while encoder data was collected to record this response.
6. Set-up Plot was selected from the Plotting menu. Encoder 3 position was chosen,
and Plot Data was selected from the Plotting menu. The upper disk time response
was seen.
7. Several consecutive cycles were chosen in the amplitude range between 100 and
1000 counts, and the number of cycles was divided by the time taken to complete
them. The resulting frequency in Hz was converted to radians/sec. This damped
frequency, ωd , approximates the natural frequency, ωn , of the oscillating disk.
8. Steps 5 through 7 were repeated with the four masses removed from the third (upper)
disk.
9. The reduction from the initial cycle amplitude X0 to the last cycle amplitude Xn
was measured for the n cycles measured in Step 8. The damping ratio ζd32 was
found.
10. Steps 5 through 9 were repeated for the lower disk, disk 1. Hence, ωnd11 , ωnd12 , and
damping ratio, ζd were obtained.
11. Calculated the portion of each disk’s inertia attributable to the four masses for the
d31 and d11 cases.
12. The inertia Jm (i.e., that associated with the four masses combined) was used to
solve for the unloaded disk inertia Jd3 and upper torsional shaft spring kd3 . The
damping coefficient Cd3 was found.
13. The same process was repeated for the lower unloaded disk inertia (this includes
the reflected inertia’s of the motor, belt, and pulleys), spring and damping, Jd , Cd1 ,
and kd1 , respectively.

3.3 Observations

Figure 1: Disk 1 Trial 1 - Encoder 1 position with masses on lower disk

3
Figure 2: Disk 1 Trial 2 - Encoder 1 position with no masses on lower disk

Figure 3: Disk 3 Trial 1 - Encoder 3 position with masses on upper disk

Figure 4: Disk 3 Trial 2 - Encoder 3 position with no masses on upper disk

4
3.4 Calculations
3.4.1 Formulas
n
f= (1)
t2 − t1
ωd
ωn = p (2)
1 − ζ2
ζ 1 X0
p = ln (3)
1 − ζ2 2πn Xn
For unloaded disk inertias,
2
Jm ωnd31
Jd3 = 2 2
(4)
ωnd32 − ωnd31
2
Jm ωnd11
Jd1 = 2 2
(5)
ωnd12 − ωnd11
C K
s2 + 2ζωn s + ωn2 = s2 + + (6)
Js J

3.4.2 Values
Mass ( including bolt nut ) = 500g
Diameter = 5 cm

3.4.3 Calculations
1. Disk 1 loaded

t1 = 2.833 s

t2 = 3.599 s

n=4

n
Frequency, f = t2 −t1
= 5.5096 Hz

ωdd11 = 34.6181

√ ζd112 = 1
2π∗4
ln −275
−60
= 0.06057
1−ζd11

ζd11 = 0.06046

ωnd11 = √ωdd112 = 34.6815

1−ζdd11

2. Disk 1 unloaded

t1 = 3.037 s

5
 t2 = 5.162 s

n=4

n
Frequency, f = t2 −t1
= 1.8823 Hz

ωdd12 = 11.8271

√ ζd122 = 1
2π∗4
ln 702
252
= 0.04076
1−ζd12

ζd12 = 0.04072

ωnd12 = √ωdd122 = 11.8369

1−ζdd12

3. Disk 3 loaded

t1 = 2.639 s

t2 = 3.32 s

n=4

n
Frequency, f = t2 −t1
= 5.8737 Hz

ωdd31 = 36.9056

√ ζd312 = 1
2π∗4
ln 335
262
= 0.009779
1−ζd31

ζd31 = 0.009778

ωnd31 = √ωdd312 = 36.9073

1−ζdd31

4. Disk 3 unloaded

t1 = 2.098 s

t2 = 4.232 s

n=4

n
Frequency, f = t2 −t1
= 1.874 Hz

ωdd32 = 11.7772

√ ζd322 = 1
2π∗4
ln 600
413
= 0.01486
1−ζd32

6
 ζd32 = 0.01485

ωnd32 = √ωdd322 = 11.7785

1−ζdd32

3.5 Hardware Gain

3.5.1 Procedure
1. The upper disk was taken off, and the mid-shaft disk and clamp were unfastened
to allow for the placement of four masses on the lower disk at a distance of 9.0cm
from the center. The masses were secured to ensure free rotation of the disk, and
the drive power was connected to the mechanism.

2. The Trajectory window was configured to enable bidirectional inputs by deselect-

ing Unidirectional moves. The Step Set-up was selected, and an Open Loop Step
input with 1.00 Volts, 500ms, and 2 reps was executed through the Execute menu.
However, if the open loop voltage is too high, the move may activate a software
speed limit that disables the controller. The Controller Status box on the desktop
will indicate ”Limit Exceeded,” and to reset, Execute must be re selected from the
Execute menu. The Encoder 1 velocity was chosen for plotting in the Set-up within
the Plot Data menu.

3. The plotted data revealed four velocity profile segments, characterized by linear
increase (constant acceleration), constant velocity (zero acceleration), and linear
decrease (deceleration). To obtain the acceleration (counts/s), the velocity difference
was measured accurately, and the time difference (500ms) was divided through the
positive-sloped linear segment. This process was repeated for the negative-sloped
segment. The average magnitude of the positive and negative accelerations was
calculated to obtain Khw below.

3.5.2 Observations

7
3.5.3 Calculations
kc: DAC gain = 10V/32,768 DAC counts
ka: Servo AMP gain = approximately 2 (amp/V)
kt: Servo Motor Torque constant = approximately 0.1 (N-m/amp)
kp: Drive Pulley ratio = 3
ke: The Encoder gain = 16,000 pulses / 2π radians
ks: The controller Software gain = 32 (controller counts / encoder or ref input counts)
ka, kp, kt are subject to change and hence the following method is used to find hardware
gain.
The average acceleration considering the major linear increase and linear decrease in
velocity = 83000+102857
2
= 92928m/sec2 The applied torque is given by:

T = J1 θ1e ke (7)

Where J1 is the total moment of inertia, θ1e is the angular displacement, and ke is the
gear ratio. The applied torque can also be expressed in terms of voltage:

T = V ka kt kp (8)

Where V is the applied voltage, ka is the armature constant, kt is the torque constant,
and kp is the power constant.
We can calculate J1 as:

J1 = Jm + Jd1 = 0.0162 + 0.0021359 = 0.0183359 (9)

Using the given values of ke, we can find ka, kt, and kp as:
0.0183359 ∗ 92928 ∗ 2π
ka kt kp = = 0.668 (10)
16000
Finally, Khw (Hardware Gain) is given by:

32 ∗ ka kt kp ∗ 16000 ∗ 10
Khw = = 16.6527 (11)
32768 ∗ 2π

4 P, D, PD and PID Control Implementation

In this experiment we use the same dynamic parameters (Jm , Jd1 , Jd3 , cd1 , cd3 , Kd1 , Kd3 , andKhw )
that were determined in the last Section.

4.1 Aim
To subject the plant to proportional, derivative and integral control and show the effect
of change in constants on the performance. The frequency response characteristics are
also studied in this section.

8
 Figure 5: PID

Figure 6: PI Control with Velocity Feedback

The transfer functions for the case when PID is in forward path and when PI in
forward path and D in return path are as given below.
θ(s) (khw /J) (kd s2 + kp s + ki )
c(s) = = 3
r(s) s + (khw /J) (kd s2 + kp s + ki )
θ(s) (khw /J) (kp s + ki )
c(s) = = 3
r(s) s + (khw /J) (kd s2 + kp s + ki )

9
For the first portion of this exercise we shall consider PD control only (ki=0). For the
case of kd in the return path the transfer function reduces to:

kp khw /J
c(s) =
s2 + (khw /J) (kd s + kp )

By defining, r
kp khw
ωn =
J
kd khw kdkhw
ζ= = p
2Jωn 2 Jkp khw

4.2 Procedure
Proportional and Derivative controls

1. Using the results of previous section construct a model of the plant with two mass
pieces at 9.0cm radial center distance on the bottom disk both other disks removed.
You may neglect friction.

2. Set-up the plant in the configuration described in Step 1.

3. From Equation 13 determine the value of kp (kd = 0) so that the system behaves
like a 1Hz spring-inertia oscillator.

4. Set-up to collect Encoder 1 and Commanded Position information via the Set-up
Data Acquisition box in the Data menu. Set up a closed-loop step of 0 (zero) counts,
dwell time = 5000ms, and 1 (one) repetition (Trajectory in the Command menu).

5. Enter the Control Algorithm box under Set-up and set Ts = 0.00442s and select
Continuous Time Control. Select PI + Velocity Feedback and Set-up Algorithm.
Enter the kp value determined above for 1Hz oscillation (kd & ki = 0, do not input
values greater than kp = 0.081) and select OK. Select Implement Algorithm, then
OK.

6. NOTE: In this and all future work, be sure to stay clear of the mechanism before
doing the next step. Selecting Implement Algorithm immediately implements the
specified controller; if there is an instability or large control signal2, the plant may
react violently. If the system appears stable after implementing the controller, first
displace the disk with a light, non sharp object (e.g. a plastic ruler) to verify stability
prior to touching plant.

7. Select Execute under Command. Prepare to manually rotate the lower disk roughly
60◦ . Select Run, rotate about 60◦ and release disk. Do not hold the rotated disk
position for longer than 1 - 2 seconds as this may cause the motor drive thermal
protection to open the control loop.

8. Plot encoder 1 output. Determine the frequency of oscillation. What will happen
when proportional gain, kp , is doubled? Repeat Steps 56 and verify your prediction.
(Again, for system stability, do not input values greater than kp = 0.08).

10
 9. Determine the value of the derivative gain, kd , to achieve kd * khw = 0.1 N-m/(rad-
s). Repeat Step 5.

PD Control Design
1. From Equations 13 and 14 design controllers (i.e. find kp &kd ) for a system natural
frequency f = 1Hz, and three damping cases:
i) ζ = 0.2 (under - damped)
ii) ζ = 1.0 (critically damped)
iii) ζ = 2.0 (over - damped)
2. Implement the under damped controller (via PI + Velocity Feedback) and set up a
trajectory for a 2500 count closed-loop Step with 2000 ms dwell time and 1 rep.
3. Execute this trajectory and plot the commanded position and encoder position.
4. Repeat for the critically damped and over-damped cases. Save your plots for later
comparison.
Adding Integral Action
1. Now compute ki such that ki khw = 3 N-m/(rad-s). Implement a controller with
this value of ki and the critically damped kp &kd parameters from Step 11. (Do not
input ki ¿ 0.4). Be certain that the following error seen in the background window is
within 20 counts prior to implementing.(if not chose Zero Position from the Utility
menu). Execute a 2500 count closed-loop step of 4000ms duration (1 rep). Plot the
encoder 1 response and commanded position.
2. Increase ki by a factor of two, implement your controller (do not input ki ¿ 0.4) and
plot its step response. Manually displace the disk by roughly 5o. Try with different
multiplicative values of ki and note the observations.

4.3 Observations
1. P Control:

Figure 7: Response for P-Controller with kp = 0.024266

11
 Figure 8: Response for P-Controller with kp = 0.048532

2. D Control:

Figure 9: Response for D-Controller with kd = 0.006005

Figure 10: Response for D-Controller with kd = 0.024020

12
3. PD Control:

Figure 11: Response for PD Controller with ζ = 0.2

Figure 12: Response for PD Controller with ζ = 1

Figure 13: Response for PD Controller with ζ = 2

13
 4. PID Control:

Figure 14: Response with added integral action

Figure 15: Response with integral action doubled

5 Simulink and Simulink Modelling

In the simulations performed on Simulink. The first simulation was focused on the step
response of the controller to perform simulations for P, D, PD, and PID control.

Figure 16: Simulink Model

14
 The Simulink Model for PI in Forward path and D in Return Path is as follows

Figure 17: Simulink Model for PI Forward and D Return

5.1 Plots
5.1.1 Case-1a: P Control with Impulse Input with kp = 0.024266

Figure 18: Response for P-Controller with kp = 0.024266

Note-Here Impulse Disturbance is simulated by step input for a short duration of time.

15
5.1.2 Case-1a: P Control with Impulse Input with kp = 0.048532

Figure 19: Response for P-Controller with kp = 0.048532

5.1.3 Case-2: D Control with Step Input with kd = 0.006005

Figure 20: Response for D-Controller with kd = 0.006005

16
5.1.4 Case-3: PD Control with Step Input with ζ = 0.2

Figure 21: Response for PD Controller with ζ = 0.2

5.1.5 Case-4: PD Control with Step Input with ζ = 1

Figure 22: Response for PD Controller with ζ = 1

17
5.1.6 Case-5: PD Control with Step Input with ζ = 2

Figure 23: Response for PD Controller with ζ = 2

5.1.7 Case-6: PID Control with Step Input

Figure 24: Response for PD Controller with ζ = 2

18