Mechanical Systems and Signal Processing 166 (2022) 108431

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Mechanical Systems and Signal Processing

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/ymssp

Control of magnetically levitated rotors using stabilizing effects of

gyroscopes
Markus Hutterer ∗, Dominik Wimmer, Manfred Schrödl
Institute of Energy Systems and Electrical Drives, TU Wien, Gußhausstraße 25, 1040 Vienna, Austria

ARTICLE INFO ABSTRACT

Communicated by P. Pennacchi Stable control of magnetically levitated rotors with a high gyroscopic effect is an important
subject in the field of rotating machinery. This paper describes a method to address this problem
Keywords:
using a cross-coupled control approach. In the low and middle speed range a constant diagonal
Magnetic bearing
Gyroscope
controller and a speed dependent cross-coupled controller is used. In the high speed range the
Cross-coupled control controller takes advantage of the stabilizing effect of gyroscopes. Hence, no positive diagonal
stiffness is required in the high speed range in the tilting control path. The damping of the
nutation and precession mode is provided only by the cross-coupled control paths. Thus, no
diagonal controller is required for the stabilization of the tilting modes. This circumstance
reduces the gain and the bandwidth of the control structure, and therefore decreases the impact
of sensor noise and the possibility of destabilizing high frequency flexible modes. In this study
the stabilizing effect of magnetically stabilized gyroscopes is derived analytically. Furthermore,
the damping effects of the cross-coupled controllers are explained, using the eigenvalues of
a simplified system. Simulation results show the output sensitivity of the control structures.
Based on this knowledge, the optimal switching point between the control structures can be
derived. Finally, experimental results on a turbo-molecular pump validate the effectiveness of
the proposed control method.

1. Introduction

Active magnetic bearings are used if an almost frictionless or wearless suspension of a rotor is required. Especially the absence of
lubricants is a big advantage in semiconductor industry. Thus, the magnetic levitation technology finds its usage in many application
fields. There are two major kinds of active magnetic bearings. The first type is the electromagnetic bearing, which generates the
force totally by electromagnets. The other type is the hybrid magnetic bearing, where permanent magnets are used to generate the
bias flux and electromagnets to generate the stabilization forces [1–5]. Therefore, hybrid magnetic bearings have the advantage of a
lower power consumption. Active magnetic bearings are unstable for an open loop operation and stabilizing controllers are required
for their usage. A straightforward controller design is the decentralized control [6]. The main drawback of this simple method is the
remaining coupling of the tilting and translation movements. In later works, decoupled controllers are used for rotor stabilization,
which are extended with a reduction of the gyroscopic effect in [7–10]. In [11] a stability criterion of cross-coupled controllers was
derived. In [12] a cross-coupled controller was developed using polarization filters for splitting up forward and backward modes.
These decoupling approaches are mostly used for the rigid body dynamics. The flexible behavior can be stabilized by phase or
by gain compensation [13]. The gain compensation has the advantage that the phase is not important in the range of the flexible

∗ Corresponding author.
E-mail address: markus.hutterer@tuwien.ac.at (M. Hutterer).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ymssp.2021.108431
Received 16 December 2020; Received in revised form 8 April 2021; Accepted 6 September 2021
Available online 22 September 2021
0888-3270/© 2021 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
M. Hutterer et al. Mechanical Systems and Signal Processing 166 (2022) 108431

Fig. 1. Illustration of a magnetically suspended gyroscope.

modes. Thus, this method is very robust against parameter variation. However, the gain of the control structure has to be sufficient
low in the required frequency range.
Alternative control methods like optimal feedback controllers were developed in [14–19].
For commonly used controllers the actuated stiffness is positive in the range of the rigid body dynamics, what often requires a
high bandwidth for stabilizing the nutation mode for high rotor speeds.
Thus, the focus of this paper lies in the usage of stabilizing effects of gyroscopes for high speeds. It will be shown that for high
rotor speeds a positive stiffness is only required for the translation movement and not for the tilting subsystem. Additionally, only
the cross-coupled controller provides the damping action of the tilting movement. Thus, no diagonal control path is required for the
tilting controller for high speeds. The proposed cross-coupled controller has the advantage that the precession and the nutation mode
can be stabilized with independent parameters and no differentiating action is needed for the tilting controller. This circumstance
decreases the gain of the control structure again significantly for higher frequencies.

2. Stability of magnetically suspended gyroscopes

To explain and motivate the stabilizing effects of magnetically stabilized gyroscopes, a simplified model is used. The aim is to
derive a stability criterion of the tilting part of a magnetic levitated rotor, where the center of gravity (COG) is assumed to be fixed
in space. Fig. 1 shows an illustration of the proposed problem. For such a system a stability criterion can be derived analytically.
The assumption of a fixed COG is of course not sufficient for many applications in rotating machinery. However, if a decoupling
control procedure is used the translation and the tilting movement are independent of each other and therefore the solution of the
derived stability criterion can be used for this case. Another advantage of the assumption above is that the derivation of the stability
margin has a close relation to the well-known derivation of the stability margin of a heavy gyroscope. In Fig. 1 𝑘𝑥𝐴 and 𝑘𝑥𝐵 defines
the negative stiffness and 𝑟𝐴 and 𝑟𝐵 the displacement at the actuator A and B. This is the case if the position controller is switched
off and the force is created by the bias flux only.
For the parameterization of the rotation of the rigid body the Euler angles (𝜑, 𝛿, 𝜓) are used. The transformation from the
spatially fixed coordinate system 𝐾1 into the body fixed coordinate system 𝐾4 is executed by three sequential rotations.
𝜑(𝑧1 ) 𝛿(𝑥2 ) 𝜓(𝑧3 )
𝐾1 ←←←←←←←←←→
← 𝐾2 ←←←←←←←←←→
← 𝐾3 ←←←←←←←←←←→
← 𝐾4 (1)
⏟⏟⏟ ⏟⏟⏟ ⏟⏟⏟ ⏟⏟⏟
(𝑥1 ,𝑦1 ,𝑧1 ) (𝑥2 ,𝑦2 ,𝑧2 ) (𝑥3 ,𝑦3 ,𝑧3 ) (𝑥4 ,𝑦4 ,𝑧4 )

The rotor is assumed to be rotational symmetric. Hence, the inertia tensor is constant by using the coordinate system 𝐾3 or
𝐾4 as reference frame. The advantage of using 𝐾3 as reference frame is an easier description of the angular velocities. For the
reason of clarity, the coordinates of 𝐾3 are redefined as 𝑥, 𝑦, 𝑧. In this reference frame, the angular velocity of the frame itself is
[ ]𝑇 [ ]𝑇
𝝎𝐹 = 𝛿̇ 𝜑̇ sin(𝛿) 𝜑̇ cos(𝛿) and the angular velocity of the rotor is 𝝎𝑆 = 𝛿̇ 𝜑̇ sin(𝛿) 𝜑̇ cos(𝛿) + 𝜓̇ . Applying 𝝎𝐹 and 𝝎𝑆 on
the Euler equation yields

𝐈𝑇 𝝎̇ 𝑆 + 𝝎𝐹 × 𝐈𝑇 𝝎𝑆 = 𝐌 (2)

2
M. Hutterer et al. Mechanical Systems and Signal Processing 166 (2022) 108431

or in a component-wise representation
( )
𝐼𝑟 𝛿̈ − 𝜑̇ 2 sin(𝛿) cos(𝛿) + 𝐼𝑝 𝜑̇ sin(𝛿) (𝜑̇ cos(𝛿) + 𝜓)
̇ = 𝑀𝑥
( )
𝐼𝑟 𝜑̈ sin(𝛿) + 2𝜑̇ 𝛿̇ cos(𝛿) − 𝐼𝑝 𝛿̇ (𝜑̇ cos(𝛿) + 𝜓)
̇ = 𝑀𝑦
( )
𝐼𝑝 𝜓̈ + 𝜑̈ cos(𝛿) − 𝜑̇ 𝛿̇ sin(𝛿) = 𝑀𝑧 (3)
with the inertia tensor 𝐈𝑇 , the torque vector 𝐌, the polar moment of inertia 𝐼𝑝 and the transverse moment of inertia 𝐼𝑟 . The moments
of inertia are referred to the COG.
Because of the choice of the Euler angles as independent coordinates the torque created by the negative stiffness of the bearings
appears only about the 𝑥-axes (𝑀𝑦 = 0). The Euler angles under the assumption of 𝑀𝑧 = 0 applied on Eq. (3) yield the torques of
the magnetically levitated gyroscope.
( )
𝑀𝑥 = 𝑘𝑥𝐴 𝑎2 + 𝑘𝑥𝐵 𝑏2 tan(𝛿) 𝑀𝑦 = 0 𝑀𝑧 = 0 (4)
The applied external torque is zero when considered the 𝑧-axis in 𝐾3 as well as considered the spatially fixes 𝑧-axis. The first
condition leads to (5) and the second gives (6)

𝜔𝑧 = 𝜑̇ cos(𝛿) + 𝜓̇ = 𝜔0 = 𝑐𝑜𝑛𝑠𝑡. (5)

𝐿(𝐶𝑂𝐺)
𝑧 = 𝐼𝑟 𝜑̇ sin2 (𝛿) + 𝐼𝑝 𝜔0 cos(𝛿) = 𝐿0 = 𝑐𝑜𝑛𝑠𝑡. (6)

with the angular momentum 𝐿(𝐶𝑂𝐺)

𝑧 around the center of gravity. The standing gyroscope in the upper equilibrium condition presents
the angular momentum 𝐿0 = 𝐼𝑝 𝜔0 . After the elimination of 𝜑 and 𝜓 by using (5) and (6) the equation of motion for one degree of
freedom is
( )
𝑘𝑥𝐴 𝑎2 + 𝑘𝑥𝐵 𝑏2 𝐼𝑝2 𝜔20 ( sin(𝛿)
)
𝛿̈ = tan(𝛿) − (7)
𝐼𝑟 𝐼𝑟2 2
(1 + cos(𝛿))
By linearizing (7) and calculating the eigenvalues of the dynamic matrix yields
√ ( )
4 𝑎2 𝑘𝑥𝐴 + 𝑏2 𝑘𝑥𝐵 𝐼𝑟 − 𝜔20 𝐼𝑝2
𝜆𝑔𝑦𝑟𝑜,1,2 = ± . (8)
2𝐼𝑟
Hence, the system turns unstable if the term below the square root in (8) is positive. Thus, the system is unstable if
( )
4𝐼𝑟 𝑎2 𝑘𝑥𝐴 + 𝑏2 𝑘𝑥𝐵
𝜔20 < (9)
𝐼𝑝2
However, if the gyroscopic stiffness is greater than the magnetic one, the eigenvalues are conjugate complex, and therefore it is
not possible to conclude the stability of the nonlinear system using the eigenvalues of the linearized system (8). Hence, Lyapunov’s
second method is used to analyze the stability of the nonlinear system with the Lyapunov function
( )2
𝐼 𝛿̇ 2 𝐿0 − 𝐼𝑝 𝜔0 cos(𝛿)
̇ = 𝑟 +
𝑉 (𝛿, 𝛿) −
2 2 𝐼𝑟 sin(𝛿)2 (10)
𝛿( )
𝑘𝑥𝐴 𝑎2 + 𝑘𝑥𝐵 𝑏2 tan(𝛿 ∗ ) 𝑑𝛿 ∗ .
∫0
It can be shown that
𝑑𝑉 𝑑𝑉 ̇ 𝑑𝑉 ̈
= 𝛿+ 𝛿=0 (11)
𝑑𝑡 𝑑𝛿 𝑑 𝛿̇
is fulfilled, what correlates with the fact that the system has no energy dissipation. Thus, the system is stable in the sense of Lyapunov
in a open set containing the origin  ⊆ R if the function 𝑉 (𝛿, 𝛿) ̇ is positive definite in .
The first subfunction of Eq. (10), which only depends on 𝛿,̇ is always positive definite. Thus, the complete function 𝑉 (𝛿, 𝛿) ̇ is
positive definite, if the subfunction 𝑉 (𝛿, 𝛿̇ = 0) = 𝑉1 (𝛿) is positive definite. It is even sufficient if 𝑉1 (𝛿) has a minimum at the operating
point, because the function 𝑉1 (𝛿) can then be transformed in a positive definite function. This transformation is only a constant shift
by the value of the minimum and therefore 𝑑𝑉 𝑑𝑡
is not changed. If the operating point at 𝛿 = 0 is tested the first derivation 𝑑𝑉 𝑑𝛿
is
zero at 𝛿 = 0. Thus, 𝑉1 (𝛿) has a minimum at 𝛿 = 0, if the second derivation is positive at 𝛿 = 0. With
( )
𝑑 2 𝑉 || 4𝐼𝑟 𝑎2 𝑘𝑥𝐴 + 𝑏2 𝑘𝑥𝐵 − 𝐼𝑝2 𝜔20
=− (12)
𝑑 2 𝛿 ||𝛿=0 4𝐼𝑟
the system is stable for the operating point 𝛿 = 0 if the condition
( )
2
4𝐼𝑟 𝑎2 𝑘𝑥𝐴 + 𝑏2 𝑘𝑥𝐵
𝜔0 > (13)
𝐼𝑝2
is satisfied. Thus, the nonlinear tilting subsystem is stable, above a certain speed without the need of an external stabilization force.
The result (13) implies an opportunity to design a controller for the tilting movement of an AMB-system without the need of a
diagonal controller for high rotor speeds.

3
M. Hutterer et al. Mechanical Systems and Signal Processing 166 (2022) 108431

Fig. 2. 5-DOF AMB system.

3. Control of magnetically levitated rotors for high speeds

The previous section demonstrates a stabilizing effect of rotating magnetically levitated gyroscopes. These results can also be used
for higher rotor displacements. However, the assumption of 𝑀𝑦 = 0 cannot be fulfilled for many magnetic bearing systems. Therefore,
this restriction is not been used in the following sections anymore. Magnetic bearing systems have the characteristics of small rotor
displacements. Thus, the Euler angles are not beneficial, because of the singularity at 𝛿 = 0 of the coordinate transformation [20].
Therefore, the Cardan angles (𝛼, 𝛽, 𝛾) are used instead for the description of the magnetic bearing system. A schematic illustration
of a 5-DOF magnetic bearing system is shown in Fig. 2. Because of the small displacements compared to the length of the rotor and
the often negligible angular acceleration 𝜓̈ = 𝛺̇ the following angle approximation according to [13] of a 4-DOF magnetic bearing
system can be used:

𝐌𝐱̈ + 𝐆(𝛺)𝐱̇ − 𝐁𝐊𝑥 𝐁𝑇 𝐱 = 𝐁𝐊𝑖 𝐢

𝐲 = 𝐂𝐱 (14)

with
⎡𝐼𝑟 0 0 0⎤ ⎡𝛽 ⎤ ⎡𝑎 𝑏 0 0⎤
⎢ ⎥ ⎢ ⎥ ⎢ ⎥
0 𝑚 0 0⎥ 𝑥 1 1 0 0⎥
𝐌=⎢ 𝐱 = ⎢ 𝑠⎥ 𝐁 = ⎢
⎢0 0 𝐼𝑟 0⎥ ⎢𝛼⎥ ⎢0 0 −𝑎 −𝑏⎥
⎢0 0 0 𝑚⎥⎦ ⎢𝑦 ⎥ ⎢0 0 1 1 ⎥⎦
⎣ ⎣ 𝑠⎦ ⎣

⎡ 0 0 −𝐼𝑝 𝛺 0⎤ ⎡𝑘𝑥𝐴 0 0 0 ⎤
⎢ ⎥ ⎢ ⎥
0 0 0 0⎥ 0 𝑘𝑥𝐵 0 0
𝐆(𝛺) = ⎢ 𝐊𝑥 = ⎢ ⎥
⎢𝐼𝑝 𝛺 0 0 0⎥ ⎢ 0 0 𝑘𝑥𝐴 0 ⎥
⎢ 0 0 0 0⎥⎦ ⎢ 0 0 0 𝑘𝑥𝐵 ⎥
⎣ ⎣ ⎦

⎡𝑖𝑥𝐴 ⎤ ⎡𝑘𝑖𝐴 0 0 0 ⎤
⎢ ⎥ ⎢ ⎥
𝑖 0 𝑘𝑖𝐵 0 0
𝐢 = ⎢ 𝑥𝐵 ⎥ 𝐊𝑖 = ⎢ ⎥ (15)
⎢𝑖𝑦𝐴 ⎥ ⎢ 0 0 𝑘𝑖𝐴 0 ⎥
⎢𝑖 ⎥ ⎢ 0 0 0 𝑘𝑖𝐵 ⎥
⎣ 𝑦𝐵 ⎦ ⎣ ⎦

⎡𝑥𝑠𝑒𝐴 ⎤ ⎡𝑐 1 0 0⎤
⎢ ⎥ ⎢ ⎥
𝑥 𝑑 1 0 0⎥
𝐲 = ⎢ 𝑠𝑒𝐵 ⎥ 𝐂 = ⎢ (16)
⎢ 𝑦𝑠𝑒𝐴 ⎥ ⎢0 0 −𝑐 1⎥
⎢𝑦 ⎥ ⎢0 0 −𝑑 1⎥⎦
⎣ 𝑠𝑒𝐵 ⎦ ⎣
with the mass of the rotor 𝑚, the degrees of freedom 𝐱, the input matrix 𝐁, the matrix of the gyroscopic effect 𝐆(𝛺), the negative
stiffness matrix 𝐊𝑥 , the current vector 𝐢, the force to current matrix 𝐊𝑖 , the sensor coordinates 𝐲, the output matrix 𝐂 and the
distances 𝑎, 𝑏, 𝑐, 𝑑. The distances are signed quantities and they are positive if the described position is on the right hand side of
the COG and negative if the position is on the left hand side of the COG.

4
M. Hutterer et al. Mechanical Systems and Signal Processing 166 (2022) 108431

Fig. 3. Areas of possible solutions of the complex root of 𝑀 𝑒𝑗𝜑 if criterion (13) is fulfilled or not.

3.1. Control of the tilting movement using cross-coupled stiffnesses

In a next step the effects of cross-coupled control for the tilting movements is analyzed. The tilting movements are assumed to be
decoupled from the translation movement for the theoretical study of the damping effects of the cross-couplings. This assumption is
of course not valid for most of the magnetic bearing systems. But, as it can be seen in the next sections a decoupling procedure is used,
which justifies the assumption of a decoupled behavior of the tilting and translation movement. However, for the numerical study in
the next section this simplification is not used anymore for the system. The dynamic matrix 𝐀𝑡 with the state vector 𝐱𝑡𝑖𝑙𝑡 = [𝛽 𝛼 𝛽̇ 𝛼]
̇ 𝑇
using only cross-feedback control

𝐼𝑟 𝛽̈ − 𝐼𝑝 𝛺𝛼̇ − 𝑘𝑥𝑡 𝛽 = −𝑘𝑞 𝛼

𝐼𝑟 𝛼̈ + 𝐼𝑝 𝛺𝛽̇ − 𝑘𝑥𝑡 𝛼 = 𝑘𝑞 𝛽 (17)

with the negative rotational stiffness 𝑘𝑥𝑡 and the cross-coupled stiffness 𝑘𝑞 is

⎡ 0 0 1 0 ⎤
⎢ 0 0 0 1 ⎥
⎢ 𝑘𝑞 𝐼𝑝 𝛺 ⎥
𝑘
𝐀𝑡 = ⎢ 𝑥𝑡 − 0 ⎥. (18)
⎢ 𝐼𝑟 𝐼𝑟 𝐼𝑟 ⎥
⎢ 𝑘𝑞 𝑘𝑥𝑡 𝐼𝑝 𝛺 ⎥
⎢ − 0 ⎥
⎣ 𝐼𝑟 𝐼𝑟 𝐼𝑟 ⎦
For the decoupled case the rotational stiffness is

𝑘𝑥𝑡 = 𝑘𝑥𝐴 𝑎2 + 𝑘𝑥𝐵 𝑏2 , (19)

which is given by the linearized form of 𝑀𝑥 from (4). The eigenvalues 𝐴𝑡 are
√
√ 2 2
𝑗𝐼𝑝 𝛺 √√ −𝐼𝑝 𝛺 + 4 𝐼𝑟 𝑘𝑥𝑡 𝑗𝑘𝑞
𝜆1,2 = ±√
√ − (20)
2 𝐼𝑟 √ 4 𝐼𝑟2 𝐼𝑟
√⏟⏞⏞⏞⏞⏞⏞⏞⏞⏞⏞⏞⏞⏞⏞⏞⏟⏞⏞⏞⏞⏞⏞⏞⏞⏞⏞⏞⏞⏞⏞⏞⏟
𝑀 𝑒𝑗𝜑

𝜆3,4 = 𝜆̄ 1,2 (21)

with the conjugate complex eigenvalues 𝜆̄ 1,2 , the magnitude 𝑀 and the phase 𝜑 of the complex value below the square-root.
Generally, a complex square-root is not unique, and has two possible solutions. However, because of the sign reversal in Eq. (20)
the eigenvalues are the same for both possibilities of the square root.
𝑗𝐼𝑝 𝛺 √ 𝑗𝜑
𝜆1,2 = ± 𝑀 𝑒( 2 ) (22)
2 𝐼𝑟
A negative real part of 𝑀 𝑒𝑗𝜑 is analog to criterion (13). Fig. 3a shows the areas of possible solutions of the square root if 𝑀 𝑒𝑗𝜑
has a positive real part and Fig. 3b if 𝑀 𝑒𝑗𝜑 has a negative real part.
It can be seen that the arguments of the complex solution are 0 and 𝜋 for 𝑘𝑞 = 0 and can be changed by an angle of ±𝜋∕4
depended on 𝑘𝑞 if (13) is not fulfilled. If (13) is fulfilled the complex solutions begin at 𝜋∕2 and −𝜋∕2 for 𝑘𝑞 = 0 and can be changed

5
M. Hutterer et al. Mechanical Systems and Signal Processing 166 (2022) 108431

Fig. 4. Visualization of the eigenvalues depended on 𝑘𝑞 if criterion (13) is fulfilled or not.

Fig. 5. Block diagram of the NP-control 𝐶𝑁𝑃 (𝑠).

by an angle of ±𝜋∕4. This circumstance has an important effect on the stabilizability of cross-coupled controlled magnetic bearing
systems.
Figs. 4a and 4b show an illustration of two eigenvalues depended on 𝑘𝑞 if criterion (13) is fulfilled and not.
For ℛ(𝑀 𝑒𝑗𝜑 ) > 0 it is not possible to find a 𝑘𝑞 ∈ R that ℛ(𝜆2 ) < 0 and therefore it is not possible to stabilize the tilting part of
the system by cross-coupled stiffnesses only. In contrast for ℛ(𝑀 𝑒𝑗𝜑 ) < 0 it is possible to find a 𝑘𝑞 ∈ R that ℛ(𝜆1 ) < 0 or ℛ(𝜆2 ) < 0.
However, by using only a constant 𝑘𝑞 it is not possible that all eigenvalues have a negative real part.
From now on it is assumed that ℛ(𝑀 𝑒𝑗𝜑 ) < 0. For a positive 𝑘𝑞 the eigenvalues with a 𝛺-dependent increasing magnitude have
a negative real part and the eigenvalues with a decreasing magnitude have a positive real part. The eigenvalues with increasing
magnitude (𝜆1 ) describe the nutation mode and the decreasing ones (𝜆2 ) the precession mode. Thus, a positive 𝑘𝑞 has damping
effects on the nutation mode, but destabilizes the precession mode. For a negative 𝑘𝑞 a converse behavior can be observed. Hence,
it is possible to get damping effects, without the need of a differentiating (D-) part in the tilting control structure. However, in
contrast to the D-part of the controller the stabilization effects require different signs for the nutation and the precession mode.
Thus, a frequency depended 𝑘𝑞 (𝑗𝜔) has to be used for stabilization. However, such a frequency depended 𝑘𝑞 (𝑗𝜔) is only useful, if
the nutation mode has a certain frequency margin to the precession mode, what is equivalent to a minimum angular velocity.
Fig. 5 shows a block diagram of a possible cross-feedback controller (nutation–precession controller) for the stabilization of the
nutation and the precession mode. The lowpass filter 𝐺𝑝𝑟 (𝑠) and the high-pass filter 𝐺𝑛𝑢 (𝑠) of the NP-controller have the task to split
the control structure in a path for stabilizing the precession mode and a path for stabilizing the nutation mode. The lowpass filter
𝐺𝑓 (𝑠) reduces the gain for higher frequencies.
The filter 𝐺𝑓 (𝑠) is not used for the simulations in this section. The parameters of the AMB-system are given in Table 1, with the
maximum rotational frequency 𝛺𝑚𝑎𝑥 . For the simulation of the simplified system the tilting stiffness 𝑘𝑥𝑡 = 2264 N m/rad is used.
Fig. 6 shows a root locus of the stabilized system for a varying 𝑘𝑞 using the NP controller transfer-function

⎛ 10𝑠 ⎞
⎜ 2𝜋 ⋅ 300 rad/s 1 ⎟
𝐶𝑁𝑃 (𝑠) = 𝑘𝑞 ⎜ 𝑠 − 𝑠 ⎟. (23)
⎜1 + 1+ ⎟
⎝ 2𝜋 ⋅ 300 rad/s 2𝜋 ⋅ 60 rad/s ⎠
Generally, it is more beneficial to use different proportional parts 𝑘𝑞 for the high-pass and the lowpass filter. However, for the
calculation of the root locus only one common gain is used, therefore 𝑘𝑛𝑢𝑡 = 10 𝑘𝑝𝑟 = 10 𝑘𝑞 . Gaining the factor 𝑘𝑞 results in an
increasing damping ratio of the nutation and the precession mode. However, a too high 𝑘𝑞 can also result in a decreasing damping
ratio, what can even destabilize the system. This destabilization can be explained by the increasing eigen-frequency of the precession
mode in combination with the phase shift of 𝐶𝑁𝑃 (𝑠) for higher frequencies, where the effect of the high-pass filter 𝐺𝑛𝑢 (𝑠) increases.

6
M. Hutterer et al. Mechanical Systems and Signal Processing 166 (2022) 108431

Table 1
Parameter of the AMB-system.
Description Symbol Value Unit
Mass of the rotor 𝑚 11 kg
Polar moment of inertia 𝐼𝑝 0.05 kg m2
Transverse moment of inertia 𝐼𝑟 0.07 kg m2
Force current factor bearing A 𝑘𝑖𝐴 82.9 N/A
Force current factor bearing B 𝑘𝑖𝐵 105 N/A
Negative stiffness bearing A 𝑘𝑥𝐴 92.4 N/mm
Negative stiffness bearing B 𝑘𝑥𝐵 140.2 N/mm
Distance from COG to bearing A 𝑎 −119.2 mm
Distance from COG to bearing B 𝑏 −29.7 mm
Distance from COG to Sensor A 𝑐 −144.3 mm
Distance from COG to Sensor B 𝑑 −4.1 mm
Rated speed of the AMB system 𝛺𝑚𝑎𝑥 2 𝜋 ⋅ 400 rad/s

Fig. 6. Root locus of the tilting part of the AMB-system using NP-control only for 𝛺 = 2 𝜋 ⋅ 400 rad/s.

Fig. 7. Block diagram of the complete control structure.

Summarizing it can be stated, that it is possible to design a controller for high speeds without the need of a diagonal controller
for the tilting subsystem. The minimum angular velocity (13) which was derived in Section 2 is also present as basic assumption
for the tilting system with cross-coupled control only.

3.2. Controller design and stability analysis of the radial AMB system

In contrast to the previous section the system equation (14) is used without any simplification for the following analysis. Fig. 7
illustrates the complete control structure of the radial system, with the torques around the COG 𝑀𝛽 , 𝑀𝛼 and the forces acting on
the COG 𝑓𝑥𝑠 , 𝑓𝑦𝑠 . The tilting and translation paths are calculated using input and output transformations
( )−1
𝐓𝑖𝑛 = 𝐂−1 𝐓𝑜𝑢𝑡 = 𝐁𝐊𝑖 (24)
according to [8]. Thus, the tilting and translation movement are almost decoupled, except the coupling of 𝐁𝐊𝑥 𝐁𝑇 𝐱 is left. Because
of the decoupling procedure, the translation subsystem is not or just weakly rotor speed dependent. Hence, a diagonal PID controller

7
M. Hutterer et al. Mechanical Systems and Signal Processing 166 (2022) 108431

Fig. 8. Block diagram of the tilting control path.

is sufficient for stabilization of the translation subsystem. The control of the axial subsystem is not described in this paper, because
it is a straightforward process to design a controller for an one dimensional magnetic bearing.
Fig. 8 illustrates the block diagram of the tilting path of the controller. The switches (𝑆1 ) and (𝑆2 ) are synchronized. For low
speeds (𝑆1 ) and (𝑆2 ) are at position 2. The filter 𝐺𝑓 𝐿 is used to decrease the impact of the sensor noise and the influence on possible
flexible body modes. The filters have the following transfer function for the tilting movements.
1
𝐺𝑓 𝐿 (𝑠) = 𝐺𝑓 (𝑠) = (25)
𝑠2 2 ⋅ 0.2𝑠
+ +1
(2𝜋 ⋅ 320 rad/s)2 (2𝜋 ⋅ 320 rad/s)
If the rotor speed is high enough and the performance of the NP-controller alone is sufficient, the switch (𝑆1 ) and (𝑆2 ) are at
position 1. In this case, the PI-controller is only used to eliminate constant disturbances. Therefore, the bandwidth 𝐺𝑓 𝐻 is quite low
compared to 𝐺𝑓 𝐿 (For the considered structure only 20 Hz). This approach reduces the noise of the control path and can prevent
flexible modes from destabilization. The speed dependent transfer function of the NP-controller according to Fig. 5 is
⎛ 𝑘 𝛺𝑠 ⎞
⎜ 𝑛𝑢𝑡 ⎟
⎜ 𝑘𝑓 𝑛 𝛺 1 ⎟ 𝑘𝑝𝑟 𝛺
𝐶𝑁𝑃 (𝑠) = ⎜ 𝑠 ⋅ ⎟− 𝑠 (26)
⎜ 1 + 2𝜉𝑓 𝑑 𝑠 𝑠2 ⎟ 1 +
⎜ 𝑘𝑓 𝑛 𝛺 1 + +
2 ⎟ 𝜔𝑝𝑟
⎝ 𝜔 𝑓 𝑑 𝜔 ⎠
𝑓𝑑

with the constant factor 𝑘𝑓 𝑛 for calculating the speed dependent bandwidth of the highpass filter, the eigenfrequency 𝜔𝑓 𝑑 and the
damping factor 𝜉𝑓 𝑑 of the filter for stabilizing the flexible modes and the bandwidth of the lowpass filter to decouple the precession
mode 𝜔𝑝𝑟 .
The ISO 14839-3 [21] introduced the highest magnitude 𝑆𝑚𝑎𝑥,𝑑 of the diagonal terms of the output sensitivity matrix 𝐒(𝑗𝜔)
as performance measure of the control structure. The value 𝑆𝑚𝑎𝑥,𝑑 should be below three for newly commissioned systems. AMB
systems with a high gyroscopic effect have a high coupling between both tilting movements. Thus, the consideration of the diagonal
terms of 𝐒(𝑗𝜔) only, is not sufficient for such systems. Hence, in this publication the highest value 𝑆𝑚𝑎𝑥 of the complete matrix 𝐒(𝑗𝜔)
is used as sensitivity measure of the stabilized system. Fig. 9 illustrates 𝑆𝑚𝑎𝑥 and the minimum damping ratio 𝜉𝑚𝑖𝑛 depended on the
speed 𝑓𝛺 . The boundary line presents the limit according to ISO 14839-3. The LS-line presents the control structure, if (𝑆1 ) and (𝑆2 )
according to Fig. 8 are at position 2. 𝑆𝑚𝑎𝑥 of the LS controller is sufficient low in the speed range from standstill to about 300 Hz. For
higher speeds the second order lowpass filter 𝐺𝑓 𝐿 limits the bandwidth and therefore the performance of the system. The HS-line
presents the control structure for high speeds with the switches at position 1. This structure takes advantage of the stabilizing effect
of rotating gyroscopes and uses the diagonal control path of the tilting motion only to suppress constant disturbances. This control
structure shows a sufficient performance for rotor speeds above 200 Hz. The reason for this good performance lies in the vanishing
effect of the diagonal path of the tilting motion for higher frequencies. In contrast to a PID controller the damping effects of the
NP controller do not require differentiating actions and therefore the gain is significant smaller. This smaller gain in the frequency
range of the nutation mode decreases the related natural frequency and increases the separating margin between the rigid body
modes and possible flexible modes. Although the HS-system shows a low value of 𝑆𝑚𝑎𝑥 for low rotor speeds, the system is unstable
due to the negative damping factor.
If the switching point is chosen at a speed of 230 Hz the ISO 14839-3 standard is fulfilled for the required operating range.

4. Experimental results

To validate the functionality and effectiveness of the proposed control structure, experimental tests were performed on a
magnetically stabilized turbomolecular pump. The parameters of the pump are given in Table 1. The control system was implemented

8
M. Hutterer et al. Mechanical Systems and Signal Processing 166 (2022) 108431

Fig. 9. 𝑆𝑚𝑎𝑥 and minimum damping ratio 𝜉𝑚𝑖𝑛 depended on the speed 𝑓𝛺 for the low speed (LS) optimized controller and the high speed (HS) optimized
controller.

Fig. 10. Experimental setup.

on a digital signal processor (TMS320F28335). For the position measurement, inductive sensors were used. The actuators are
heteropolar active magnetic bearings using the differential driving mode for operation. The magnetic bearing controller and the
motor controller communicate with a personal computer using a serial peripheral interface (SPI) (Fig. 10). The angle information
of the rotor is not required for the motor controller, because a selfsensing method (INFORM method according to [22]) is used to
control the motor.
For the reason of comparison, the maximum value of the output sensitivity 𝑆𝑚𝑎𝑥 is given for the translation and tilting subsystem
separately. Fig. 11 shows the peak values 𝑆𝑚𝑎𝑥 of the tilting and translation output sensitivity functions depended on the rotor
speed 𝑓𝛺 . The performance of the LS controller is sufficient for speeds up to 230 Hz. For higher speeds the sensitivity peak of the
tilting subsystems increases rapidly. The reason for this bad sensitivity for high speeds is a low damping action of the nutation
mode caused by a limited bandwidth of the system. The HS-controller has a insufficient performance or is unstable at low speeds.
However, for higher speed the HS-controller shows a suitable behavior. At speeds over 200 Hz the translation movement mainly
defines the maximum output sensitivity. Thus, the switching to the HS-controller at 230 Hz is obviously sufficient. By using the self
stabilizing effect of gyroscopes the eigenfrequency of the nutation mode is lower and therefore the performance limit caused by the
bandwidth of the system is shifted to higher speeds.
The translation controller shows an overall constant performance in the defined speed range. Therefore, a good decoupling
between the tilting and translation movements can be concluded. Summarizing, it can be stated that the ISO 14839-3 is fulfilled for
the required speed range.
To investigate the behavior at the switching point between both control structures Fig. 12 shows the response of the current and
the position of the actuator and sensor B in the x direction at a rotor speed of 𝑓𝛺 = 230 Hz. The effect of the switching action on

9
M. Hutterer et al. Mechanical Systems and Signal Processing 166 (2022) 108431

Fig. 11. Sensitivity peaks 𝑆𝑚𝑎𝑥 depended on the rotor speed 𝑓𝛺 for the low speed (LS) optimized controller, the high speed (HS) optimized controller and the
translation movement.

Fig. 12. Response of the system during the switching between the control structures at 𝑓𝛺 = 230 Hz; (𝑆1 , 𝑆2 ) = 1 defines the HS-controller, (𝑆1 , 𝑆2 ) = 2 defines
the LS controller.

the rotor position is negligible. In the response of the current a small peak can be observed caused by the switching of the control
structures. However, this small peak has an insignificant effect on the stability and the performance of the explored AMB system.

5. Conclusion

This paper presents a control method for stabilizing a rotor for high speeds using stabilizing effects of gyroscopes. First, a
stability condition for a magnetically stabilized gyroscope without a controller was derived. The stability condition is given by a
minimum angular velocity. Then, damping effects of cross-coupled proportional controllers were analyzed. Based on the knowledge
of this cross-coupled proportional controller a control structure was designed, where no positive stiffness for the tilting controller

10
M. Hutterer et al. Mechanical Systems and Signal Processing 166 (2022) 108431

is necessary for high rotor speeds. Because of the lower possible gain, the elimination of the differentiating controller part and the
effect of the cross-coupled paths of the control structure, the performance of the control structure can be increased for high speeds.
It is almost possible to run the rotor for high speeds without the requirement of a diagonal path of the tilting controller. Only for
the elimination of constant disturbances a PI-controller is used in the tilting path. The proposed control structure has also been
validated by experimental tests.

CRediT authorship contribution statement

Markus Hutterer: Conceptualization, Methodology, Software, Formal analysis, Investigation, Writing – original draft, Writing –
review & editing, Visualization. Dominik Wimmer: Software, Writing – review & editing. Manfred Schrödl: Supervision, Writing
– review & editing.

Declaration of competing interest

The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared
to influence the work reported in this paper.

References

[1] W. Tong, F. Jianchengg, A feedback linearization control for the nonlinear 5-DOF flywheel suspended by the permanent magnet biased hybrid magnetic
bearings, Acta Astronaut. 79 (2012).
[2] J. Fang, C. Wang, T. Wen, Design and optimization of a radial hybrid magnetic bearing with separate poles for magnetically suspended inertially stabilized
platform, IEEE Trans. Magn. 50 (2014).
[3] B. Hahn, S. Zheng, Y. Le, S. Xu, Modeling and analysis of coupling performance between passive magnetic bearing and hybrid magnetic radial bearing
for magnetically suspended flywheel, IEEE Trans. Magn. 49 (2013).
[4] X. Liu, J. Dong, Y. Du, K. Shi, L. Mo, Design and static performance analysis of a novel axial hybrid magnetic bearing, IEEE Trans. Magn. 50 (2014).
[5] H. Eryong, L. Kun, A novel structure for low-loss radial hybrid magnetic bearing, IEEE Trans. Magn. 47 (2011).
[6] Decentralized Control of Magnetic Rotor Bearing systems (Ph.D. thesis), ETH Zürich, 1984.
[7] M. Ahrens, L. Kucera, R. Larsonneur, Performance of a magnetically suspended flywheel energy storage device, IEEE Trans. Control Syst. Technol. 4 (1996).
[8] M. Hutterer, M. Schrödl, Control of a flexible magnetic levitated rotor using the computed torque method in combination with stabilizing fiilters, in: IEEE
International Conference on Advanced Intelligent Mechatronics, Banff, 2016.
[9] M. Hutterer, M. Hofer, M. Schrödl, Decoupled Control of an Active Magnetic Bearing System for a High Gyroscopic Rotor, in: IEEE International Conference
on Mechatronics, Nagoya, 2015.
[10] M. Hutterer, M. Schrödl, Control of active magnetic bearings in turbomolecular pumps for rotors with low resonance frequencies of the blade wheel,
Lubricants 5 (26) (2017).
[11] J. Fang, Y. Ren, Y. Fan, Nutation and precession stability criterion of magnetically suspended rigid rotors with gyroscopic effects based on positive and
negative frequency characteristics, IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron. 4 (2014).
[12] P. Bühler, R. Larsonneur, Method and apparatus for controlling a magnetic bearing device, 2009.
[13] G. Schweitzer, E. Maslen, Magnetic Bearings: Theory, Design, and Applications to Rotating Machinery, Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg, 2009.
[14] M. Hutterer, M. Hofer, T. Nenning, M. Schrödl, LQG control of an active magnetic bearing with a special method to consider the gyroscopic effect, in:
IEEE International Symposium on Magnetics Bearings, Linz, 2014.
[15] Y.N. Zhuravlyov, On LQ-control of magnetic bearing, IEEE Trans. Control Syst. Technol. 8 (2000).
[16] S.E. Mushi, Z. Lin, P.E. Allaire, Design, construction, and modeling of a flexible rotor active magnetic bearing test rig, IEEE/ASME Trans. Mechatronics
17 (2012).
[17] S. Zheng, B. Hahn, Y. Wang, Optimization of damping compensation for a flexible rotor system with active magnetic bearing considering gyroscopic effect,
IEEE/ASME Trans. Mechatronics 20 (2015).
[18] T. Baumgartner, J.W. Kolar, Multivariable state feedback control of a 500 000-r/min self-bearing permanent-magnet motor, IEEE/ASME Trans. Mechatronics
20 (2015).
[19] A. Sahinkaya, J.T. Sawicki, Computationally efficient implementation of robust controllers in active magnetic bearing systems, Mech. Syst. Signal Process.
144 (2020).
[20] K. Magnus, CISM International Centre for Mechanical Sciences-Gyrodynamics, Springer-Verlag Wien, 1974.
[21] Mechanical Vibration-Vibration of Rotating Machinery Equipped with Active Magnetic Bearings - Part 3: Evaluation of Stability Margin, International
Organization for Standardization ISO, 2007.
[22] M. Schrödl, Sensorless control of AC machines at low speed and standstill based on the ‘‘inform’’ method, in: Conference Record of the 1996 IEEE Industry
Applications Conference Thirty-First IAS Annual Meeting, 1996.

Markus Hutterer was born in Austria in 1989. He received the B.Sc degree from the University of Applied Sciences Wiener Neustadt
in Mechatronics, Austria, in 2012 and the Dipl.-Ing. and Dr. degrees from Vienna University of Technology, Austria, in 2014 and
2018.
He is currently a postdoctoral researcher with the Institute of Energy Systems and Electrical Drives, Vienna University of
Technology. His main research interests include modeling of dynamic system, controller design for magnetic bearing applications
for rotating machinery, design of magnetic bearings and selfsensing techniques for electro-mechanical drives and actuators.

11
M. Hutterer et al. Mechanical Systems and Signal Processing 166 (2022) 108431

Dominik Wimmer was born in Austria in 1991. He received his B.Sc degree and his Dipl.-Ing. degree for Energy Systems and
Automation Technology from the Vienna University of Technology (TU Wien), Austria in 2015 and 2017. Since 2017, he has been
employed at the Institute of Energy Systems and Electrical Drives, TU Wien. His scientific interests are in the field of magnetic
bearings including the appropriate power electronics. The focus of his work is on AMB design, digital controller design and system
identification in context of self-sensing control.

Manfred Schrödl was born in Austria in 1958. He received the Dipl.-Ing., Dr., and habilitation degrees from Vienna University of
Technology, Austria, in 1982, 1987, and 1992, respectively.
Between 1992 and 1996, he was Head of the Development Department of ELIN Traction, Vienna, Austria. Between 1996 and
1998, he was Head of the Central Technical Division of Austria Antriebstechnik Bauknecht AG, Spielberg, Austria. Since 1998, he
has been a Full Professor of electrical drives and machines at Vienna University of Technology, where he is also currently the Head
of the Institute of Electrical Drives and Machines.
He has authored about 100 publications and is the holder of several patents, mainly in the fields of sensorless control of ac
machines (e.g., the INFORM method) and special motors. His main research fields are sensorless-controlled ac machines, high-speed
drives, and electrical drives for automotive applications.

12