0
TECHNICAL BRIEFS

Comparison of EKBF-based and Classical Friction Compensation

[+] Author and Article Information
Ashok Ramasubramanian1

Thayer School of Engineering, Dartmouth College, Hanover, NH 03755ashokr@alum.dartmouth.org

Laura R. Ray

Thayer School of Engineering, Dartmouth College, Hanover, NH 03755Laura.Ray@dartmouth.edu

Note that the wk are not injected into the system in the manner persistent excitation is injected in some adaptive methods (e.g., (4)).

1

Corresponding author.

J. Dyn. Sys., Meas., Control 129(2), 236-242 (Jun 23, 2006) (7 pages) doi:10.1115/1.2431817 History: Received October 18, 2005; Revised June 23, 2006

In servo control, traditionally, models that attempt to capture the friction-velocity curve and interactions at contacting surfaces have been used to compensate for friction-introduced tracking errors. Recently, however, extended Kalman-Bucy filter (EKBF)-based approaches that do not use a phenomenological or structured model for friction have been proposed. In addition to being cast as a friction estimator, the EKBF can also be used to provide parameter adaptation for simple friction models. In this paper, a traditional motor-driven inertia experiment is used to demonstrate the usefulness of EKBF in friction compensation. In addition, a numerical simulation is used to test the robustness of the new methods to normal force variations. Using root mean square position tracking error as the performance metric, comparisons to traditional model-based approaches are provided.

FIGURES IN THIS ARTICLE
<>
Copyright © 2007 by American Society of Mechanical Engineers
Topics: Friction
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 1

Block diagram of a position control system with friction compensation

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 2

Schematic of experimental and simulation apparatus (not to scale): The experimental apparatus (a) consists of a motor driven disk under an optional normal load, which contacts the disk through an aluminum rider mounted at the end of an I-beam. The simulation apparatus (b) features two linked gear wheels. Friction-velocity curve for the experimental apparatus (a′) and the simulated apparatus (b′) are also shown.

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 3

Results from the experimental study: rms error data points from three trials for each of the four compensators tested. The first column of plots (a)-(c) contain data from the unloaded condition and the second column of plots (a′)‐(c′) contain data from the loaded condition. The following abbreviations are used: PID=baseline PID compensator (no friction compensation), DM=nonadaptive Dahl model, ADM=adaptive Dahl model, KF=Kalman filter estimator.

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 4

Results from the simulation study: Actual friction torque (solid line) and estimated friction torque (dotted line): (a) Adaptive LuGre model, (b) Adaptive Dahl model. Arrows in (a) indicate high-frequency content in the friction estimate.

Tables

Errata

Discussions

Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging and repositioning the boxes below.

Related Journal Articles
Related eBook Content
Topic Collections

Sorry! You do not have access to this content. For assistance or to subscribe, please contact us:

  • TELEPHONE: 1-800-843-2763 (Toll-free in the USA)
  • EMAIL: asmedigitalcollection@asme.org
Sign In