Active Disturbance Rejection Control Using a Phase Optimized Extended State Observer for a Nanopositioner

Wei Wei; Pengfei Xia; Min Zuo

doi:10.53941/ijamm.2024.100012

Abstract

A piezoelectric actuator is commonly utilized in nanopositioning for its stiffness, fast response, and ultrahigh precision. However, hysteresis in piezoelectric materials dramatically degrades system performance. By introducing a straightforward and effective modification to a classical extended state observer, a phase-optimized extended state observer is proposed to provide a phase-leading estimation of the generalized disturbance. Accordingly, a phase-optimized active disturbance rejection control is designed, and much more satisfied performance can be guaranteed. Convergence of the phase-optimized extended state observer and closed-loop stability of the phase-optimized active disturbance rejection control have been analyzed. Moreover, steady-state estimation error and phase-leading property have been proved. Advantages of the phase optimized active disturbance rejection control over the PI and the active disturbance rejection control are confirmed. Experimental results show that the phase-optimized active disturbance rejection control can achieve more desired disturbance rejection and motion tracking.

References

1.
Devasia, S.; Eleftheriou, E.; Moheimani, S.O.R. A survey of control issues in nanopositioning. IEEE Trans. Control Syst. Technol. 2007, 15, 802–823.
2.
Gu, G.; Zhu, L.; Su, C.; Ding, H.; Fatikow, S. Modeling and control of piezo-actuated nanopositioning stages: A survey. IEEE Trans. Autom. Sci. Eng. 2016, 13, 313–332.
3.
Mishra, J.P.; Xu, Q.; Yu, X.; Jalili, M. Precision position tracking for piezoelectric-driven motion system using continuous third-order sliding mode control. IEEE/ASME Trans. Mechatron. 2018, 23, 1521–1531.
4.
Shan, L.; Yang, X.; Yao, L.; Ning, L. Research on modelling of piezoelectric micro-positioning stage based on pi hysteresis model. J. Eng. 2019, 2019, 437–441.
5.
Gu, G.; Li, C.; Zhu, L.; Su, C. Modeling and identification of piezoelectric-actuated stages cascading hysteresis nonlinearity with linear dynamics. IEEE/ASME Trans. Mechatron. 2016, 21, 1792–1797.
6.
Li, Z.; Shan, J.; Gabbert, U. Dynamics modeling and inversion-based synchronized model predictive control for a fabry-perot spectrometer. IEEE/ASME Trans. on Mechatron. 2019, 24, 1818–1828.
7.
Liu, X.; Huang, M.; Xiong, R.; Shan, J.; Mao, X. Adaptive inverse control of piezoelectric actuators based on segment similarity. IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron. 2018, 66, 5403–5411.
8.
Jian, Y.; Huang, D.; Liu, J.; Min, D. High-precision tracking of piezoelectric actuator using iterative learning control and direct inverse compensation of hysteresis. IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron. 2018, 66, 368–377.
9.
Rakotondrabe, M. Bouc-wen modeling and inverse multiplicative structure to compensate hysteresis nonlinearity in piezoelectric actuators. IEEE Trans. Autom. Sci. Eng. 2010, 8, 428–431.
10.
Lin, C.J.; Lin, P. Tracking control of a biaxial piezo-actuated positioning stage using generalized duhem model. Comput. Math. Appl. 2012, 64, 766–787.
11.
Piao, M.; Wang, Y.; Sun, M.; Zhang, X.; Chen, Z.; Yan, Y. Fixed-time-convergent generalized extended state observer based motor control subject to multiple disturbances. IEEE Trans. Ind. Inf. 2021, 17, 8066–8079.
12.
Na, J.; Jing, B.; Huang, Y.; Gao, G.; Zhang, C. Unknown system dynamics estimator for motion control of nonlinear robotic systems. IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron. 2020, 67, 3850–3859.
13.
Sun, J.L.; He, H.B.; Yi, J.Q.; Pu, Z.Q. Finite-time command-filtered composite adaptive neural control of uncertain nonlinear systems. IEEE Trans. Cybern. 2020, 52, 6809–6821. https://doi.org/10.1109/TCYB.2020.3032096.
14.
de Rozario, R.; Fleming, A.; Oomen, T. Finite-time learning control using frequency response data with application to a nanopositioning stage. IEEE/ASME Trans. Mech. 2019, 5, 2085–2096.
15.
Liu, J.B.; Wang, J.R.; Zou, Q.Z. Decomposition-learning-based output tracking to simultaneous hysteresis and dynamics control: High-speed large-range nanopositioning example. IEEE Trans. Control Syst. Technol. 2021, 29, 1775–1782.
16.
Kong, L.H.; Li, D.; Zou, J.X.; He, W. Neural networks based learning control for a piezoelectric nanopositioning system. IEEE/ASME Trans. Mech. 2020, 25, 2904–2914.
17.
Han, J. From pid to active disturbance rejection control. IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron. 2009, 56, 900–906.
18.
Zhang, Y.L.; Zhu, M.; Li, D.H.; Wang, J. Adrc dynamic stabilization of an unstable heat equation. IEEE Trans. Autom. Control 2020, 65, 4424–4429.
19.
Gao, H.; Chen, Z.; Sun, M.; Huang, J.; Wang, Z.; Chen, Z. An efficient fast altitude control for hypersonic vehicle. Control Eng. Pract. 2020, 100, 10442601–10442613.
20.
Tao, J.; Sun, Q.; Tan, P.; Chen, Z.; He, Y. Active disturbance rejection control (adrc)-based autonomous homing control of powered parafoils. Nonlinear Dyn. 2016, 86, 1461–1476.
21.
Jiang, Y.; Sun, Q.; Zhang, X.; Chen, Z. Pressure regulation for oxygen mask based on active disturbance rejection control. IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron. 2017, 64, 6402–6411.
22.
Cheng, Y.; Chen, Z.; Sun, M.; Sun, Q. Cascade active disturbance rejection control of a high-purity distillation column with measurement noise. Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 2018, 57, 4623–4631.
23.
Zarif Mansour, S.; Seethaler, R.J.; Teo, Y.R.; Yong, Y.K.; Fleming, A.J. Piezoelectric bimorph actuator with integrated strain sensing electrodes. IEEE Sens. J. 2018, 18, 5812–5817.
24.
Wang, G.; Xu, Q. Sliding mode control with disturbance rejection for piezoelectric nanopositioning control. In Proceedings of the 2018 Annual American Control Conference (ACC), Milwaukee, WI, USA, 27–29 June 2018; pp. 6144–6149.
25.
Tan, K.K.; Lee, T.H.; Zhou, H.X. Micro-positioning of linear- piezoelectric motors based on a learning nonlinear pid controller. IEEE/ASME Trans. Mechatron. 2001, 6, 428–436.
26.
Madonski, R.; Herman, P. Survey on methods of increasing the efficiency of extended state disturbance observers. ISA Trans. 2015, 56, 18–27.
27.
Madonski, R.; Łakomy, K.; Stankovic, M.; Shao, S.; Yang, J.; Li, S. Robust converter-fed motor control based on active rejection of multiple disturbances. Control Eng. Pract. 2021, 107, 104696.
28.
Stanković, M.R.; Madonski, R.; Shao, S.; Mikluc, D. On dealing with harmonic uncertainties in the class of active disturbance rejection controllers. Int. J. Control 2021, 94, 2795–2810.
29.
Pu, Z.; Yuan, R.; Yi, J.; Tan, X. A class of adaptive extended state observers for nonlinear disturbed systems. IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron. 2015, 62, 5858–5869.
30.
Wei, W.; Zhang, Z.; Zuo, M. Phase leading active disturbance rejection control for a nanopositioning stage. ISA Trans. 2021, 116, 218–231.
31.
Gao, Z. Scaling and bandwidth-parameterization based controller tuning. In Proceedings of the 2003 American Control Conference, Denver, CO, USA, 4–6 June 2003; Volume 6; pp. 4989–4996.
32.
Zheng, Q.; Chen, Z.; Gao, Z. A practical approach to disturbance decoupling control. Control Eng. Pract. 2009, 17, 1016–1025.
33.
Chen, S.; Xue, W.; Huang, Y. On active disturbance rejection control for nonlinear systems with multiple uncertainties and nonlinear measurement. Int. J. Robust Nonlinear Control 2020, 30, 3411–3435.
34.
Clayton, G.; Tien, S.; Leang, K.; Zou, Q.; Devasia, S. A review of feedforward control approaches in nanopositioning for high-speed SPM. J. Dyn. Syst. Meas. Control 2009, 131, 061101–061119.

Scilight Press

Author Information

Abstract

Keywords

References

About Scilight

Journals

Publishing Policies

Contact Us