Research Papers

Controller Design and Stability Analysis of Output Pressure Regulation in Electrohydrostatic Actuators

[+] Author and Article Information
Masoumeh Esfandiari

Department of Mechanical Engineering,
University of Manitoba,
75A Chancellors Circle,
Winnipeg, MB R3T 5V6, Canada

Nariman Sepehri

Fellow ASME,
Department of Mechanical Engineering,
University of Manitoba,
75A Chancellors Circle,
Winnipeg, MB R3T 5V6, Canada,
e-mail: Nariman.Sepehri@umanitoba.ca

Contributed by the Dynamic Systems Division of ASME for publication in the JOURNAL OF DYNAMIC SYSTEMS, MEASUREMENT,AND CONTROL. Manuscript received September 18, 2017; final manuscript received November 10, 2018; published online December 19, 2018. Assoc. Editor: Zongxuan Sun.

J. Dyn. Sys., Meas., Control 141(4), 041008 (Dec 19, 2018) (10 pages) Paper No: DS-17-1476; doi: 10.1115/1.4042028 History: Received September 18, 2017; Revised November 10, 2018

In this paper, a robust fixed-gain linear output pressure controller is designed for a double-rod electrohydrostatic actuator using quantitative feedback theory (QFT). First, the family of frequency responses of the system is identified by applying an advanced form of fast Fourier transform on the open-loop input–output experimental data. This approach results in realistic frequency responses of the system, which prevents the generation of unnecessary large QFT templates, and consequently contributes to the design of a low-order QFT controller. The designed controller provides desired transient responses, desired tracking bandwidth, robust stability, and disturbance rejection for the closed-loop system. Experimental results confirm the desired performance met by the QFT controller. Then, the nonlinear stability of the closed-loop system is analyzed considering the friction and leakage, and in the presence of parametric uncertainties. For this analysis, Takagi–Sugeno (T–S) fuzzy modeling and its stability theory are employed. The T–S fuzzy model is derived for the closed-loop system and the stability conditions are presented as linear matrix inequalities (LMIs). LMIs are found feasible and thus the stability of the closed-loop system is proven for a wide range of parametric uncertainties and in the presence of friction and leakages.

Copyright © 2019 by ASME
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.


Habibi, S. , and Goldenburg, A. , 1999, “ Design of a New High Performance Electrohydraulic Actuator,” IEEE/ASME Trans. Mechatronics, 5(2), pp. 227–232.
Manring, N. , and Luecke, G. , 1998, “ Modeling and Designing a Hydrostatic Transmission With a Fixed-Displacement Motor,” ASME J. Dyn. Syst., Meas. Control, 120(1), pp. 45–50. [CrossRef]
Lovrec, D. , and Kastrevc, M. , 2011, “ Modelling and Simulating a Controlled Press-Brake Supply System,” Int. J. Simul. Modell., 10(3), pp. 133–144. [CrossRef]
Racklebe, S. , and Helduser, S. , 2007, “ Electric Hydrostatic Drive—A Concept for the Clamping Unit of a High-Speed Injection Moulding Machine,” Bath Workshop of Power Transmission and Motion Control, Bath, UK, pp. 246–253.
Lovrec, D. , and Ulaga, S. , 2007, “ Pressure Control in Hydraulic Systems With Variable or Constant Pumps?,” J. Exp. Tech., 31(2), pp. 33–41. [CrossRef]
Helbig, A. , 2002, “ Injection Moulding Machine With Electric-Hydrostatic Drives,” Third International Fluid Power Conference, Aachen, Germany, pp. 67–82.
Lovrec, D. , Kastrevc, M. , and Ulaga, S. , 2009, “ Electro-Hydraulic Load Sensing With a Speed-Controlled Hydraulic Supply System on Forming-Machines,” Int. J. Adv. Manuf. Technol., 41(11–12), pp. 1066–1075. [CrossRef]
Yao, B. , Bu, F. , Reedy, J. , and Chiu, G. , 2000, “ Adaptive Robust Motion Control of Single-Rod Hydraulic Actuators: Theory and Experiments,” Mechatronics, 5(1), pp. 79–91.
Chinniah, Y. , 2004, “ Fault Detection in the Electro Hydraulic Actuator Using Extended Kalman Filter,” Ph.D. thesis, University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, SK, Canada.
Turolla, 2013, “ Hydraulic Fluids & Lubricant,” Turolla, Frankfurt am Main, Germany, Technical Information. L1021414 (Rev C).
Horowitz, I. , 1993, Quantitative Feedback Design Theory, QFT Publications, Boulder, CO.
Niksefat, N. , and Sepehri, N. , 2001, “ Designing Robust Force Control of Hydraulic Actuators Despite System and Environmental Uncertainties,” IEEE Control Syst. Mag., 21(2), pp. 66–77. [CrossRef]
Karpenko, M. , and Sepehri, N. , 2008, “ Equivalem Time-Invariant Modeling of Electro Hydraulic Actuators With Application to Robust Control Synthesis,” Int. J. Fluid Power, 9(3), pp. 7–18. [CrossRef]
Golubev, B. , and Horowitz, I. , 1982, “ Plant Rational Transfer Approximation From Input-Output Data,” Int. J. Control, 36(4), pp. 711–723. [CrossRef]
Tischler, B. , and Remple, K. , 2012, Aircraft and Rotorcraft System Identification, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Reston, VA.
Tanaka, K. , and Wang, H. , 2001, Fuzzy Control Systems Design and Analysis, Wiley, Hoboken, NJ.
Banos, A. , Barreiro, A. , Gordillo, F. , and Aracil, J. , 2002, “ A QFT Framework for Nonlinear Robust Stability,” Int. J. Robust Nonlinear Control, (Isaac Horowitz Spec. Issue), 12(12), pp. 357–372. [CrossRef]
Boyd, S. , El Ghaoui, L. , Feron, E. , and Balakrishnan, V. , 1994, Linear Matrix Inequalities in System and Control Theory, Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics, Philadelphia, PA.
Gahinet, P. , Nemirovski, A. , Laub, A. , and Chilali, M. , 1995, “LMI Control Toolbox,” The Math Works, Natick, MA.
Karpenko, M. , and Sepehri, N. , 2009, “ Hardware-in-the-Loop Simulator for Research on Fault Tolerant Control of Electrohydraulic Actuators in a Flight Control Application,” Mechatronics, 19(7), pp. 1067–1077. [CrossRef]
Karpenko, M. , and Sepehri, N. , 2012, “ Electrohydraulic Force Control Design of a Hardware-in-the-Loop Load Emulator Using a Nonlinear QFT Technique,” Control Eng. Pract., 20(6), pp. 598–609. [CrossRef]
Ren, G. , Song, J. , and Sepehri, N. , 2017, “ Fault-Tolerant Actuating Pressure Controller Design for an Electrohydrostatic Actuator Experiencing a Leaky Piston Seal,” ASME J. Dyn. Syst., Meas., Control, 139(6), p. 061004. [CrossRef]
Ren, G. , Esfandiari, M. , Song, J. , and Sepehri, N. , 2016, “ Position Control of an Electrohydrostatic Actuator With Tolerance to Internal Leakage,” IEEE Trans. Control Syst. Technol., 24(6), pp. 2224–2232. [CrossRef]
Tran, X. , Hafizah, N. , and Yanada, H. , 2012, “ Modeling of Dynamic Friction Behaviors of Hydraulic Cylinders,” Mechatronics, 22(1), pp. 65–75. [CrossRef]
Annus, P. , Land, R. , Min, M. , and Ojarand, J. , 2012, Simple Signals for System Identification (Fourier Transform—Signal Processing), Intech, London.
Rupnik, B. , 2005, “ CIFER-MATLAB Interfaces, Development and Application,” Master thesis, California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo, CA.
D'Azzo, J. , and Houpis, C. , 1988, Linear Control System Analysis and Design, McGraw-Hill, New York.
Yaniv, O. , 1999, Quantitative Feedback Design of Linear and Nonlinear Control Systems, Kluwer, South Holland, The Netherlands.
Robinson, D. , 2000, “ Design and Analysis of Series Elasticity in Closed-loop Actuator Force Control,” Ph.D. thesis, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA.
Esfandiari, M. , and Sepehri, N. , 2016, “ A Solution for Nonlinear Stability Analysis of QFT Controllers Designed for Hydraulically Actuated Systems,” Trans. Can. Soc. Mech. Eng., 40(3), pp. 265–287. [CrossRef]
Takagi, T. , and Sugeno, M. , 1985, “ Fuzzy Identication of Systems and Its Applications to Modeling and Control,” IEEE Trans. Syst., Man, Cybern., 15(1), pp. 116–132. [CrossRef]
Wang, H. , Tanaka, K. , and Griffin, M. , 1998, “ Parallel Distributed Compensation of Nonlinear Systems by Takagi-Sugeno Fuzzy Model,” IEEE International Conference on Fuzzy System, Yokohama, Japan, Mar. 20–24, pp. 531–538.
Ohtake, H. , Tanaka, K. , and Wang, H. , 2003, “ Fuzzy Modeling Via Sector Nonlinearity Concept,” Integr. Comput. Aided Eng., 10(4), pp. 333–341. [CrossRef]
Rowell, D. , 2002, Analysis and Design of Feedback Control Systems, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA.
Sala, A. , and Arino, C. , 2007, “ Relaxed Stability and Performance Conditions for Takagi–Sugeno Fuzzy Systems With Knowledge on Membership Function Overlap,” IEEE Trans. Syst., Man, Cybern., Part B (Cybern.), 37(3), pp. 727–732. [CrossRef]
Du, H. , and Zhang, N. , 2009, “ Static Output Feedback Control for Electrohydraulic Active Suspensions Via T-S Fuzzy Model Approach,” ASME J. Dyn. Syst., Meas. Control, 131(5), pp. 1004–1015. [CrossRef]
Du, H. , and Zhang, N. , 2010, “ Takagi-Sugeno Fuzzy Control Scheme for Electrohydraulic Active Suspensions,” Control Cybern., 39(4), pp. 1096–1115. https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/535f/e3c2df4dd4dc5c586ce037a7f362b45ac08a.pdf


Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 1

Experimental setup: (a) photograph of experimental test-bench and (b) electrohydrostatic actuator interacting with environment

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 6

Plant templates at design frequencies, ω (rad/s) for electrohydrostatic actuator. The parameter uncertainties are load mass (12.3, 13.4, and 14.5 kg) and environment stiffnesses (82 and 125 kN/m). Circles represent frequency response of nominal plant.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 5

Two degrees-of-freedom QFT control system

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 4

Family of frequency responses of experimental electrohydrostatic actuator with output pressure, PL, and input voltage, u, for different masses (12.3, 13.4, and 14.5 kg) and different spring stiffnesses (82 and 125 kN/m): (a) magnitude (dB), (b) phase (deg), and (c) coherence coefficient. Acceptable frequency response range is shown between arrows.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 3

(a) Typical linear swept-frequency input signal, u, (b) corresponding output pressure, PL. Hydraulic actuator is operating against a spring having stiffness of 82 kN/m, and carrying a 12.3 kg mass.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 2

Output pressure of the experimental setup (solid line) and simulation model using the dynamics given in Eqs. (1)(9) (dashed line): (a) open-loop response to input signal of u = 0.15 V and (b) open-loop response to input signal of u = 0.1 V.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 8

Frequency responses of closed-loop system using controller (15): (a) response before adding prefilter and (b) response after adding prefilter (16)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 9

(a) Normalized output pressure responses using springs having 82 and 125 kN/m stiffnesses, and carrying 12.3 or 14.5 kg loads—desired inputs are within 1–3 MPa; the gray region covers acceptable responses within upper and lower bounds in Eq. (14), (b) corresponding control signals, and (c) corresponding error signals between desired and actual output pressures.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 10

(a) 3 Hz sinusoidal output pressure tracking, interacting with 82 kN/m spring—the desired peak values are shown by horizontal dashed lines, (b) corresponding control signal, and (c) corresponding piston displacement. Solid lines represent the results of experimental setup. Dashed lines are the simulation results using the nonlinear model given in Eqs. (1)(9).

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 11

(a) 5 Hz sinusoidal output pressure tracking, interacting with 125 kN/m spring—the desired peak values are shown by dashed lines, (b) the corresponding control signal, and (c) the corresponding piston displacement. Solid lines represent the results of experimental setup. Dashed lines are the simulation results using the nonlinear model given in Eqs. (1)(9).



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