24.08.2013 Views

NONLINEAR CONTROLLER COMPARISON ON A BENCHMARK ...

NONLINEAR CONTROLLER COMPARISON ON A BENCHMARK ...

NONLINEAR CONTROLLER COMPARISON ON A BENCHMARK ...

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

Figure 2.2: Mechanical Model of Flexible Beam System,<br />

The exible beam is treated as capable only of motion in the plane of the diagram.<br />

If perturbed the free end of the beam will oscillate according to the classical beam<br />

equation:<br />

A(x) @2 w(x t)<br />

@t 2<br />

+ @2<br />

@x 2 [EI(x)@2 w(x t)<br />

@x 2 ]=f(x t) (2.1)<br />

where f(x t) is the applied force on the beam in the y direction,and w(x t) is the<br />

de ection of a point a distance x from the xed end at time = t. Unfortunately, the<br />

partial derivatives in this equation are not suitable for the state-space model that we<br />

seek, something of the form:<br />

where x 2 IR n .<br />

_x = f(x)+g(x)u(x) (2.2)<br />

A simpler idea would be to model the exible beam as a rigid beam with a<br />

single torsional spring at the xed end (see Figure 2.3). A state-space equation can<br />

be obtained for this model using the Euler-Lagrange (EL) equations:<br />

d<br />

dt (@Lp(qp qp) _<br />

) ;<br />

@qp _<br />

@Lp(qp qp) _<br />

= Mup<br />

@qp<br />

9<br />

(2.3)

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!