Control of a 3-dimensional Overhead

Crane

MECN4029 - Mechatronics II
Group 20

Bongumusa Qwabe 674889

Thabang Lebea 539592
Neo Khanya 367176

A project report submitted to the Faculty of Engineering and the Built Environment, University of the Wit-
watersrand, Johannesburg, in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Bachelor of Science in
Engineering.

Johannesburg, April 2016

 University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg
School of Mechanical, Industrial & Aeronautical Engineering

GROUP DECLARATION WITH JOINT TASK SUBMITTED FOR ASSESSMENT

We, the undersigned, are registered for the course MECN4029 - Mechatronics II in the year 2016. We here-
with submit the following task Control of a 3-dimensional Overhead Crane in partial fulfilment of the
requirements of the above course.

We hereby declare the following:

We are aware that plagiarism (the use of someone elses work without their permission and / or without
acknowledging the original source) is wrong;

We confirm that the work submitted herewith for assessment in the above course is our own unaided work
except where we have explicitly stated otherwise;

This task has not been submitted before. either individually or jointly, for any course requirement, exami-
nation or degree at this or any other tertiary educational institution;

We have followed the required conventions in referencing the thoughts and ideas of others;

We understand that the University of the Witwatersrand may take disciplinary action against us if it can
be shown that this task is not our own unaided work or that we have failed to acknowledge the sources of
the ideas or words in our writing in this task.

Signed this 18th day of April 2016

Name Signature Student No. % Contribution

Bongumusa Qwabe 674889 25%

Thabang Lebea 539592 25%

Neo Khanya 367176 25%

i
Abstract

Most of research has conducted has focused on the modelling and control of two dimensional overhead cranes,
the analysis allows hoisting and travelling motions but in reality warehouses use mostly three-dimensional cranes,
this assignment seeks to provide an analysis for three dimensional cranes with 5 DOF.

ii
Contents

Declaration i

Abstract ii

Contents iii

1 Introduction 1

2 Performance Specifications 1

3 Modelling 3

3.1 Mathematical Modelling . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3

3.2 Simulation parameters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5

3.3 Physical Modelling . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7

3.4 Linearization Procedure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8

4 Uncontrolled Time and Frequency Domain Analysis 10

4.1 Time domain analysis: Non-Linear model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10

4.1.1 Unit step input . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10

4.1.2 Unit impulse input . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11

4.1.3 Sinusoidal input . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12

4.1.4 Ramp input . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13

4.2 Time domain analysis:Linear model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14

4.2.1 Step Response of the linear model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15

4.2.2 Sinusiodal Response of the linear model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16

iii
 4.3 Can control be made unnecessary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16

4.4 Frequency domain analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17

5 Stability Analysis 18

5.1 Routh-Hurwitz criterion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18

5.2 Nyquist plot . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20

6 Control 21

6.1 PID controller . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21

6.2 PDF controller . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23

6.3 Root Locus Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24

7 Discussion of Results 25

iv
1 Introduction

Literature Review
The crane system has been used across a myriad of industrial fields. Swing suppression of payloads and position
control are necessary for the control of a crane. A crane system is an under actuated system in the sense
that the number of variables to be controlled i.e. the swing angle and the payload position is by nature less
than that of control inputs i.e. the forces driving the trolley and the girder. Researchers have focused on the
control of two-dimensional overhead cranes that allow only the traveling and hoisting motions; in most factories
and warehouses three dimensional overhead cranes are normally used. Moustafa and Ebeid (1998) derived a
dynamic model of a three dimensional overhead crane based on the spherical coordinates (Meirovitch, 1970 and
Greenwood, 1988), and then designed a trajectory-dependent control based on the dynamic model linearized along
a desired trajectory. Their linearized model is coupled and its parameters are dependent on crane trajectories;
this complicates the related control designs and applications. Their control addresses only the suppression of
load swing; consequently, their control results in considerable position errors in crane motion and load hoisting.

2 Performance Specifications

An EKKE single-girder overhead travelling crane from DEMAG has been chosen as a model crane. The perfor-
mance specifications given below are for both the Time(s) and Frequency() Domain of these particular crane.
Figure 2.1 below shows the DEMAG overhead crane in service while Table 2.1 shows its specifications.

The cranes maximum percent overshoot when carrying any load should no be more than 20% of the steady
state value.

The cranes payload settling time after perturbation to steady state should be as low as possible preferably
within 5 seconds from disturbance.

The payloads decay ratio is required to be at most 0.3.

The systems steady state error should not be more than 5% of the steady state value.

The systems peak amplitude ratio should be in between {1.1-1.5}.

The system is to be robust, their a small bandwidth is required in order to achieve robustness(maximizing
disturbance and noise rejection).

Settling time of no more than 5seconds.

Peak time of 2.5 seconds.

Maximum overshoot of 10%.

1
 Table 2.1: EKKE single-girder overhead travelling crane

Parameter Specification
Load Capacity Up to 12.5 tonnes.
Crane span Up to 30m
Travelling speed Up to 40m/min
Traversing speed Up to 30m/min
Lifting speed Up to 40m/min
Travelling acceleration 2m/s2
Traversing acceleration 1.5m/s2
Lifting acceleration 1.5m/s2

Figure 2.1: Combined x and y respone due to unit step input

The crane has 3 motors for each of the direction. 3 motors which will meet the specifications on Table 2.1 above
where chosen and their specifications are given in Table 2.2 below.

Table 2.2: Motor specifications

Parameter Travelling Traversing Lifting

Power (kW) 23.5. 5.5 30
Moment of inertia, J (kg.m2 ) 0.01 3.87e 03 3.6
Damping of the mechanical system, b (Nms) 0.1 4.0e 3 0.1
Electromotive force constant, K (Nm/A) 0.01 7.7.0e 3 0.069
Electric resistance, R () 1 2.0 0.153
Electric Iductance , L (H) 0.5 0.081 0.36

2
3 Modelling

3.1 Mathematical Modelling

Developing the dynamic model of the 3D Overhead crane can be done using both Newtons or Lagranges Method,
governing dynamic equations can be derived in a simpler way using generalized coordinates using Lagranges
equations for n-degree of freedom systems. Figure 3.1 below shows the Coordinate system of an overhead 3D
system used in deiriving the governing mathematical equations.

Figure 3.1: Coordinate system of an overhead 3D system

d T T R V
( ) + + = Fi , where i = 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 (3.1)
dt xi xi xi xi
The generalised coordinates to describe the motion are {x1 = x, x2 = y, x3 = l, x4 = x , x5 = y ,}.

The following definitions need to be considered:

XYZ is the fixed coordinate system and XT , YT , ZT is the trolley coordinate system which moves with the
trolley.

The origin of the trolley coordinate system is (x,y,z ) in the fixed coordinate system

Each axis of the trolley coordinate system is parallel to the counterpart of the fixed coordinate system.

YT is defined along the girder which is not shown in the figure.

The trolley moves on the girder in the YT (traverse direction) and the girder and YT axis move in the XT
(travel) direction

The position of the cart mass(load) at any point is defined by the position vectors {x, y, z} and {xm , ym , zm }
respectively, where:

xm = x + l sin x cos y (3.2)

ym = y + l sin y (3.3)
zm = l cos x sin y (3.4)

3
 Table 3.1: Parameter definitions

Parameter Definition
XT , YT , ZT traverse, travel and hoist direction
x , y swing angles projected and measured from the XT , YT , ZT plane respectively
Dx , Dy , Dl Viscous damping associated with x, y, l motions
Mx , My , Ml masses associated with x, y, l motions
fx , fy , fl driving forces for the x, y, l motions
m Pay load mass
l Rope length

The velocity of the cart and mass(load) are given by the first derivatives of their position vectors {x, y, z} and
{xm , ym , zm
} where;

d
xm = (x + l sin x cos y ) = x + l sin x cos y + lx cos x cos y + ly sin x sin (3.5)
dt
d
ym = (y + l sin y ) = y + l sin y + ly cos y (3.6)
dt
d
= (l cos x sin y ) = l cos x cos y + lx sin x cos y + ly cos x sin y
zm (3.7)
dt

The carts movement is limited to translation in the x and y direction therefore the mass of the cart will not
feature in the Potential Energy term but only the load mass will feature as seen in Equation:

V = mgl mgl cos x cos y (3.8)

The kinetic energy of the system features both cart and load masses and is given by Equation :
1 + 1 (mvm 2 )
T = (Mx x + My y + Ml l) (3.9)
2 2
where: vm 2 =

The Rayleighs dissipation function for the system is

1 1 1
R= cx x + cy y + cl l (3.10)
2 2 2

The forcing function is from the motors that applying forces in the x, y and l direction and is

F = {fx , fy , fl } (3.11)

In the derivation of the equations of motion, the following syntex was used to simplify the analysis:

1. sin y = Sy

2. cos y = Cy

3. sin x = Sx

4. cos x = Cx

4
For x1 = x
d T T R V
( ) + + = F1 ,
dt x1 x1 x1 x1

(Mx + m)x + mlCx Cy x mlSx Sy y + mSx Cy l + cx x
2 2
(3.12)
+2mCx Cy lx 2mSx Sy ly mlSx Cy x 2mlCx Sy x y mlSx Cy y = fx

For x2 = y
2
(My + m)y + mlCy y + mSy l + Cy y + 2mCy ly mlSy y = fy (3.13)
For x3 = l
2
(Ml + m)l + mSx Cy x + mSy y + cl l mlCy2 x mly mgCx Cy = fl (3.14)

For x4 = y
2
ml2 y + mlCy y mlSx Sy x + 2mlly + ml2 Cy Sy x + mglCx Sy = 0 (3.15)

For x5 = x
ml2 Cy2 x + mlCx Cy x + 2mlCy2 lx 2ml2 Sy Cy x y + mglSx Cy = 0 (3.16)

3.2 Simulation parameters

The simulation parameters for the traverse and travelling directions were taken from previous works done by
Ho-Hoon Lee and the ones for the hoisting direction were take from other literature and were scaled to match
the model we under cosideration. Table 3.2 below shows the simulation parameters used in Matlab Simulink.

Table 3.2: Simulation Parameters

Parameter value
Dx (N s/m) 480
Dy (N s/m) 40
Dl (N s/m) 500
Mx (kg) 1440
My (kg) 110
Ml (kg) 100
m(kg) 200
l(m) 0.5 to 2

Using the specifications from Table 2.2, and the matlab script given below, the transfer functions of the motor/s
to be used as the driving forces were computed.

aux =tf(K,conv([L R], [J b]))

Gv = feedback(aux,K);
Ga= tf(1,[1 0])*Gv;

5
The transfer functions for travelling, traversing and hoisting are as folllows:

0.01
0.005s2 + 0.06s + 0.1

0.0077
0.0003135s2 + 0.008064s + 0.008

0.069
1.296s2 + 0.5868s + 0.0153

6
3.3 Physical Modelling
The 3D overhead crane model was developed using MATLAB Simulink and it is shown below, Figure 3.2.

Figure 3.2: Simulink model

Equations 3.12 through 3.16 were used to model the physical model in Simulink. The equations were too long
and first try in modeling them seemed to be too messy, a decision was reached to represent each equation with
summer block with equation 3.12 being in the middle. All the other equations, were represented in summers
around equation 3.12. the signals were linked according to how the equations couple. The inputs were the transfer
functions obtained in section 3.2 above. the five outputs were each outputed a scope for results visualization.
to compare the results, the Mux block which combines its inputs into a single vector output was used. The
outputs from the swing angles where each inputted to the Mux block which had a single output to the scope
which displayed two signals on the same set of axes on the scope.

7
3.4 Linearization Procedure
There are 10 state variables

T
x y l

X= x y x y l x y (3.17)

And there are three control variables:

 T
U = ux uy ul (3.18)
Let
 T
U0 = ux0 uy0 ul0 (3.19)

be the constant inputs that forces the system X = f (x, u) to settle into a constant equilibrium state,
 T
X0 = x1 0 x2 0 , ......, xn 0 (3.20)

such that U (x0 , U0 ) = 0 holds true

Pertub the equilibrium state by allowing: X = X0 + X and U = U0 + f . Taylor series expansion yields:
dX f f
= f (X = X0 + X, U = U0 + U ) = f (x, u) + ((x0 , u0 )X + ((x0 , u0 + ....
dt x x
f f
Differentiating a vector with respect to a vector will give rise to a matrix, thus x and u are matrices where:

f1 f1 f1
x1 x2 .... xn
f2 f2
.... f1
x1 x2 xn
f .

. .

A= (x0 , x0 ) = (3.21)

x . . .



. . .
fn fn fn
x1 x2 .... xm x0 ,u0

Where A is the jacobian matrix of f with respect to X at X = X0 and U = U0 .

f1 f1 f1
u1 u2 .... un
f2 f2
.... f1
u1 u2 un
f .

. .

B= (x0 , u0 ) = (3.22)

u . . .



. . .
fn fn fn
u1 u2 .... um x0 ,u0

Where A is the jacobian matrix of f with respect to U at X = X0 and U = U0 .

since X = x0 + X
dX0 dX d(X)
x = + =
dt dt dt

neglecting the higher order terms, we arrive at the linear approximation:

d(X)
= Ax + Bu
dt
Which is the linearization of the original non linear system at (x0 , y0 ). This will give the behaviour of non linear
system around the the equilibrium point.

8
 The outputs of the non linear system are of the form:
 T
y= x y x y l (3.23)

which can be written in vector form as y = h(x, u).f we let y = y0 + y then we obtain:

y = Cx + Du

where

h h
C= u (x0 , u0 ) and D = u (x0 , u0 )

C and D are Jacobian matrices of h with respect to x and u respectively at (x0 , u0 )

These procedure was all performed in matlab and the transfer functions were outputted. The following script
was used:
1 clc
2 s y s = linmod ( BlockD5 )
3

4 tss = ss ( sys . a , sys . b , sys . c , sys . d)

5 [ num , den ] = t f d a t a ( t s s , v )
6 T = t f (num , den )

The script returns the A,B,C and D matrices and the transfer functions for all the outputs y (equation 3.23)

x 0.006944s2 + 1.362e 18s + 0.001736

=
fx s4 + 0.333s3 + 2.616s2 + 0.833s

x 0.000177s 2.173e 20
== 3
fx s + 0.3333s2 + 2.616s + 0.8333

y 0.009091s2 7.174e 17s + 0.02273

= 4
fy s + 0.3636s3 + 4.015s2 + 0.9091s

y 0.002317s 1.286e 19
= 3
fy s + 0.3636s2 + 4.015s + 0.9091

l 0.003333
= 2
fl s + 1.667s

9
4 Uncontrolled Time and Frequency Domain Analysis

4.1 Time domain analysis: Non-Linear model

The time domain analysis of the non-linear model was evaluated by viewing the response of the system to different
input types: an impulse, step, ramp, sinusoidal and random input.

4.1.1 Unit step input

(a) x response to a step input (b) y response to a step input

Figure 4.1: Response to unit step input

Figure 4.2: Combined x and y respone due to unit step input

10
 Figure 4.3: Combined x, y and l respones due to unit step input

4.1.2 Unit impulse input

(b) y response to an impulse input

(a) x response to an impulse input

Figure 4.4: Response to an impulse input

(b) y response to an impulse input

(a) x response to an impulse input

Figure 4.5: Response to an impulse input

11
 Figure 4.6: l respone due to an impulse input

4.1.3 Sinusoidal input

Figure 4.7: Combined x and y respone due to a sinusoidal input

12
 (a) x response to a Sinusoidal input (b) y response to a Sinusoidal input

Figure 4.8: Response to a Sinusoidal input

4.1.4 Ramp input

Figure 4.9: Combined x and y respone due to a Ramp input

13
 Figure 4.10: Combined x,y and l respone due to a Ramp input

4.2 Time domain analysis:Linear model

Unit Impulse of the linear model

(b) y and x response to a step input

(a) x,y,l response to a unit impulse input

Figure 4.11: Linear Model Response

Ramp of the linear model

14
 (b) y and x response to a ramp input
(a) x,y,l response to a ramp input

Figure 4.12: Linear Model Response to a ramp

4.2.1 Step Response of the linear model

(a) x,y,l response to a step input (b) y and x response to a step input

Figure 4.13: Linear Model Response to a step

15
4.2.2 Sinusiodal Response of the linear model

(a) x,y,l response to a sinusoidal input (b) y and x response to a sinusoidal input

Figure 4.14: Linear Model Response to a sinusoidal input

4.3 Can control be made unnecessary

Before the simulation was carried out, different performance parameters where tried out until the ones in Table
3.2 were selected. In that time,the effects of increasing and decreasing the parameters were observed. Damping
is an influence within or upon an oscillatory system that has the effect of reducing, restricting or preventing
its oscillations. In physical systems, damping is produced by processes that dissipate the energy stored in the
oscillation.Increasing the damping in the travelling direction (Dx ) decreases the amount of oscillations in the
travelling direction and also decreases the swing angel projected in the XT YT ZT . It was also observed that the
more oscillations were in the y and x direction. Thus control can be made unnecessary by doing the following:

Increasing the viscous damping associated with x and l so a to increase the respose to decay more quickly.

Increasing the mass associated with the y direction will decrease the paylod overshoot.

Reducing the viscous damping associated with the l motion will decrease the payload oscillation amplitudes.

System compensation in the form of feed forward path gain adjustment to obtain the desired system
response. Also introduces poles and zeros in the system thereby causes changes in the transfer function of
the system. Due to this, performance specifications of the system change.

16
4.4 Frequency domain analysis
To move from the time analysis to frequency analysis, in the transfer function was replaced by i. The bode
plots (Gain and phase margin)are plotted below for all the out signals. The absence of a positive or zero phase
margin indicates an unstable system. Figures 4.11 through 4.13 illustrate the bode plots of the transfer functions.
Therefore the bode plots are found from the following equations and have been included in the following section:

m() = |T (i)|

() = arg(T (i))

(a) (b)

fx
Figure 4.15: Bode plots for (a) fxx and (b) x

fy
Figure 4.16: Bode plots for y

17
 fy
Figure 4.17: Bode plots for y

fl
Figure 4.18: Bode plots for l

5 Stability Analysis

5.1 Routh-Hurwitz criterion

The stability analysis of the overhead crane was perfrmed for all outputs [y] as outlined by equation 3.23 using
the Routh-Hurwitz criterion. The transfer functions were determined from matlab and are given in section 3.4
(Linearization procedure). Tables 5.1 to 5.5 represent the analysis for all the output signals.

18
Table 5.1: Routh Array X/Fx

S4 1 2.616 0
S3 0.3333 0.8333 0
S2 0.1158 0 0
S1 0.8333 0 0
S0 0 0 0

Table 5.2: Routh Array x /Fx

S3 1 2.616 0
S2 0.3333 0.8333 0
S1 0.1158 0 0
S0 0.8333 0 0

Table 5.3: Routh Array y /Fy

S3 1 4.015 0
S2 0.3636 0.9091 0
S1 0.1158 0 0
S0 0.9091 0 0

Table 5.4: Routh Array Y /Fy

S4 1 4.015 0
S3 0.3636 0.9091 0
S2 0.1514 0 0
S1 0.9091 0 0
S0 0 0 0

Table 5.5: Routh Array l/Fl

S2 1 0
S1 1.667 0
S0 0 0

19
Necessry and sufficient condition of stability is given by the requirements that all terms of the first column of
the Rouths array are positive. The number of sign changes in the first column equals the number of roots of the
characteristic equation which lie on the right half plane of the s-plane. From the above Routh-Hurwitz criterion
it can be concluded that the system is stable, as there are no sign changes in the first column and the coefficients
of the polynomial are positive.

5.2 Nyquist plot

Application of Nyquist stability criterion requires a polar plot of the open-loop transfer function Go (s), which is
ussually reffered to as Nyquist plot. It determines the number of roots of the charecteristic equation that have
positive real parts from a polar plot of the open-loop transfer function, Go (i).

(a) (b)

fy
Figure 5.1: Nyquist plots for (a) fxx and (b) y

(a) (b)

f fx
Figure 5.2: Nyquist plots for (a) yy and (b) x

The polar plot of Go (i) is stable because it does not encircle point (1, i0) while frequency increases from zero
to +. For adequate reasonable stability it is reasonable that the curve should not come too close to (1, i0).

20
For the system to be stable, the curve needs to follow a counterclockwise encirclement. |Go | is less than 1 at the
frequency where phase angle equals 180o . i.e |G(180 ).

6 Control

Contained in these section are the plots of the proportional integral derivative controler, pseudo-derivative feed-
back controller and the root locus. Motions in the x and y were chosen to be controlled as they have shown to
affect the response of the swing angles.

6.1 PID controller

The PID controller consists of the proportional, integral and the derivative terms. The proportional term, which
makes the current error signal multiplied with gain Kp , its output signal is Kp e(t) where e(t) is the Error Signal.
The integral term makes the current error signal value and duration multiplied with gain Ki , its output signal
Rt
is Ki 0 e( )d( ) where e( ) is the error signal and t is the instantaneous time. This term, when added to the
proportional term, accelerates the movement of the process towards setpoint and eliminates the residual steady-
state error that occurs with proportional only controller. The last term is the derivative term, which makes the
d
rate of change of the error signal multiplied with gain Kd . The output signal is Kd dt e(t). This term slows the
rate of change of the controller output and this effect is most noticeable close to the controller setpoint.

Our approach was to first set the Ki and Kd terms at zero and vary the Kp term by increments of 1 and observe
the response. It was observed that as the value of Kp was increased, the system time response became faster,
with an increase in overshoot and a decrease in rise time. The integral term was then also given a value with
equal increments of Ki starting from 1. It was noticed that the integral term was removing the steady-state
error and improving the transient response. Increasing the gain will lowers the settling times which increases
bandwidth and will also decrease the stability margin.

The next step we set the integral term to be zero and varied the proportional and derivative terms Kp e(t) +
d
Kd dt e(t), this is the PD mode. We noticed that the magnitude of the overshoot was decreasing as we increased
the gains and the stability was also improving. The system setting time decreased considerably but the steady-
state error, in the absence of the integral term. To control the steady state-error, Kd had to be very high, however
this decreased the response times and increased the bandwidth of the system. This is not desired as it may make
the system to make noise. Finally all terms were now made to be non-zero and were varied to produce a desired
d
Rt
response, = Kp e(t) + Kd dt e(t) + Ki 0 e( )d( ). The response time and transient behaviour were tuned in order
to best achieve the desired performance specifications, without causing closed loop instability. Figures 6.2 and
6.3 below show the responses and the parameters obtined by tuning.

21
 Figure 6.1: Schematic for the PID control

Figure 6.2: Tuned response for x response using a PID controller

Figure 6.3: Tuned response for y response using a PID controller

22
6.2 PDF controller
The benefit of the PDF control algorithm is that it removes the differentiator from the feed forward path and
placing it in the feedback loop. This is based on the principle of one master, where there should not be more than
one control operation in the forward path, as this leads to conflicting signals which makes tuning the controller
difficult.The best control to place in the forward path is the integral control due to its physical realizability with
the transfer function and the steady state error reduction and disturbance rejection. Consequently this implies
that the derivative and proportional control must be placed in the feedback loop. if the plant is given as G( s)
then the transfer function becomes with zero disturbance:
C(s) s
T (s) = =
R(s) Ks (s)KD2 s2 + [K1 (s)KD1 s] + K1 (s)s

and the disturbance transfer function is:

C(s) s
Td (s) = =
R(s) Ks (s)KD2 s2 + [K1 (s)KD1 s] + K1 (s)

Since there are no numerator dynamics in the plant transfer function G(s) and the above transfer functions have
no numerator dynamics, there will be no numerator dynamics when G(s) is substituted in.The most important
result from this is that as per final value theory the disturbance reduces down to zero:

s D(s)
CD (s) = lim sTD sD(s) = lim =0
s0 s0 Ks (s)KD2 s2 + [K1 (s)KD1 s] + K1 (s) s

Hence the disturbance input is rejected completely. The PDF control technique was thus set up and used to
analyse the values of the PID controls.

The PDF control was designed for the unit step inputs for x and y, the simulink model is illustrated in Figure
6.4 which shows the obtained Kp and Ki values for each input. The response for x and y are illustrated in Figure
6.5 (a) and (b).

Figure 6.4: PDF simulink model

23
 (a) (b)

Figure 6.5: PDF response for x and y

6.3 Root Locus Analysis

Feedback control systems are difficult to comprehend from a qualitative point of view, and hence they rely heavily
upon mathematics [5, 6]. The root locus can be used to describe qualitatively the performance of a system as
various parameters are changed. For example, the effect of varying gain upon percent overshoot, settling time,
and peak time can be vividly displayed. For example, in designing gain to meet a percent overshoot requirement,
root locus requires the search of a radial line for the point where the open-loop transfer function yields an angle
of 180. To evaluate the range of gain for stability, root locus requires a search of the /w-axis for 180 [6]. It is this
representation of the paths of the closed-loop poles as the gain is varied that we call a root locus. The properties
of the root locus can be derived from the characteristic equation of the closed loop system:

KG(s)
s=
1 + KG(s)H(s)

The characteristic equation of the closed-loop system is 1 + KG(s)H(s) = 0. Thus a pole s exists when the CE
becomes zero at this point. Where (1) is represented in polar form 1 < (2k + 1). Alternately, a value of s is a
closed loop pole if:
|K(s)H(s)| = 1and < KG(s)H(s) = (2k + 1)
The root locus design was obtained using the Single Input, Single Output Tool in MATLAB which helps cotroller
design using interactive root locus and Bode plots for evaluating the gains for the required output.The objetctive
of the root locus control is to obtain the gains according to the Figure 6.6, response and gains for x and y are
illustrated in Figure 6.7 and 6.8 .

Figure 6.6: Root locus diagram [5]

24
 Figure 6.7: Root Locus plot for x response

Figure 6.8: Root Locus plot for y response

7 Discussion of Results

The response of the non linear system in the time domain analysis was different from that of the linear system
particularly when using impulse inputs, therefor the controller designs was done for the non linear model whereby
x and y were the variables being controlled.
Using PDF control decreasing values of Ki resulted in increased lag or delayed system response and icreasing Ki
resulted resulted in a much quicker response with overshoots. Low Kp values resulted in the system responses
being unstable thus to reach stability the Kp values had to be set much higher than the Ki values. The SISOTOOL
gave out responses for transfer functions that were controlled, each transfer function resulted in its own root locus
plot and response as illustrared in the previous section resulting in gains of 126 and 4.43 for Fxx and Fyy respectively

25
References

[1] T. Mita and T. Kanai, Optimal Control of the Crane System using the Maximum speed of the Trolley( in
Japanese with English abstracts),Trans. SOC.Instrument, Control Eng. (Japan), Vol 15, p.833-838, (1979).

[2] L .Meirovitch, Methods of Analytical Dynamics, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, (1970).

[3] S.H. Lee, Experiment 3: Modeling, Identification, and Control of a DC-Servomotor, Polytechnic Institute of
New York University, (2008).

[4] Heinrich Bock, http://www.demagcranes.co.za/ [ Accessed 01/04/2016],

[5] William Palm III, System Dynamics Edition: 2nd, ISBN-13:978-0073529271,

[6] Richard C. Dorf and Robert H. Bishop, Control Systems: Eleventh edition, Pearson Education Inc, (2008).

[7] Norman S. Nise, CONTROL SYSTEMS ENGINEERING: Sixth Edition, John Wiley & Sons Inc,

[8] James H. Taylor & Cheney Chan, MATLAB Tools for Linear and Nonlinear System Stability Theorem
Implementation,

26