Commenced in January 2007
Frequency: Monthly
Edition: International
Paper Count: 31097
Performance Comparisons between PID and Adaptive PID Controllers for Travel Angle Control of a Bench-Top Helicopter

Authors: H. Mansor, S. B. Mohd-Noor, T. S. Gunawan, S. Khan, N. I. Othman, N. Tazali, R. B. Islam

Abstract:

This paper provides a comparative study on the performances of standard PID and adaptive PID controllers tested on travel angle of a 3-Degree-of-Freedom (3-DOF) Quanser bench-top helicopter. Quanser, a well-known manufacturer of educational bench-top helicopter has developed Proportional Integration Derivative (PID) controller with Linear Quadratic Regulator (LQR) for all travel, pitch and yaw angle of the bench-top helicopter. The performance of the PID controller is relatively good; however, its performance could also be improved if the controller is combined with adaptive element. The objective of this research is to design adaptive PID controller and then compare the performances of the adaptive PID with the standard PID. The controller design and test is focused on travel angle control only. Adaptive method used in this project is self-tuning controller, which controller’s parameters are updated online. Two adaptive algorithms those are pole-placement and deadbeat have been chosen as the method to achieve optimal controller’s parameters. Performance comparisons have shown that the adaptive (deadbeat) PID controller has produced more desirable performance compared to standard PID and adaptive (poleplacement). The adaptive (deadbeat) PID controller attained very fast settling time (5 seconds) and very small percentage of overshoot (5% to 7.5%) for 10° to 30° step change of travel angle.

Keywords: Adaptive Control, bench-top helicopter, self-tuning control, deadbeat, pole-placement

Digital Object Identifier (DOI): doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.1338022

Procedia APA BibTeX Chicago EndNote Harvard JSON MLA RIS XML ISO 690 PDF Downloads 2787

References:


[1] Zhai Y., Mohamad Nounou, Hazem Nounou, Yasser Al-Hamidi, “Model predictive control of a 3-DOF helicopter system using successive linearization”,Journal of Engineering, Science and Technology, vol. 2(10), pp 9-19, 2010.
[2] Mansor, H., Amzaeri, A. H., Noor, S. B. M., Ahmad, R. K. R., and Taip, F. S. , “Design of QFT controller for a bench-top helicopter”, Special Issue on Active Control of Vehicle Systems, International Journal of Simulation: System, Science and Technology, vol. 11(4), pp. 9-17, 2010.
[3] P. –O. Gutman, “Robust and adaptive control: fidelity or an open relationship”, Systems & Control Letters, vol. 49, pp. 9-19, 2003.
[4] H. Mansor and S. B. Mohd Noor, “Design of QFT-Based Self-Tuning Deadbeat Controller”, World Academy of Science, Engineering and Technology, vol. 79, July 2013.
[5] F. C. Silva Junior, J. B. Oliveira, and A. D. Araujo, "Design and stability analysis of a variable structure adaptive pole placement controller for first order systems", Proceedings of the 9th IEEE International Conference on Control and Automation (ICCA), 2011, pp. 895-900, 2011.
[6] R. Lasri, I. Rojas, H. Pomares, and O. Valenzuela, “Innovative strategy to improve precision and to save power of a real-time control process using an online adaptive fuzzy logic controller”, Advances in Fuzzy Systems, 2013, article ID 658145.
[7] H. Mansor, S. B. M. Noor, R. K. R. Ahmad and F. S. Taip, “Online Quantitative Feedback Theory (QFT)-based self-tuning controller for grain drying process”, Scientific Research and Essays, vol. 6 (30), pp. 6530-6534, 2011.
[8] S. Bdran, M. Shuyuan, S. Saifullah and H. Jie, “Comparison of PID, Pole placement and LQR controllers for speed ratio control of control variable transmission (CVT)”, Proceedings of the International Innovation Scientific & Research Organization, 2013.
[9] 3D Helicopter Experiment Manual, Quanser 3-DOF Helicopter Reference Manual 644 (2.1).
[10] V. Bobal and P. Chalupa, “Self-tuning controllers Simulink library,” Zlin: Thomas Bata University, 2008.