A comparative study of H∞ and PID control for indirect deformable object manipulation

Manipulation of deformable objects is a field of research that has a variety of applications, including medical procedures, food industry, and manufacturing. This paper compares the performance of a standard PID controller and a robust H∞ controller, both of which are designed to perform the task of indirect deformable object manipulation. The H∞ controller is generated using methods outlined by Doyle et al., and the PID controller is tuned in a conventional trial and error approach. Unmodelled dynamics of the deformable object system are considered disturbance inputs and compensated by both controllers. Loop shaping is used to model the robotic actuators and position feedback system limitations within the process of generating the H∞ controller. The H∞ proved to be superior to the PID in both simulations and experiments. Maximal steady state error of the H∞ controller was 0.5mm; PID maximal error was 1 mm at steady state. The key benefit of the H∞ approach is that the controller generated using the numerical model of the deformable object performed well in simulations and experiments; the parameters of the PID controller required retuning between simulation and the experimental setting.

[1]  Shinichi Hirai,et al.  Soft object manipulation by simultaneous control of motion and deformation , 2006, Proceedings 2006 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation, 2006. ICRA 2006..

[2]  Alexandru Patriciu,et al.  Model based deformable object manipulation using linear robust output regulation , 2010, 2010 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems.

[3]  Chao Liu,et al.  Force Control for Robotic-Assisted Surgery Based on Viscoelastic Tissue Model , 2011 .

[4]  Alexandru Patriciu,et al.  Deformation Planning for Robotic Soft Tissue Manipulation , 2009, 2009 Second International Conferences on Advances in Computer-Human Interactions.

[5]  Jiankun Hu,et al.  Systematic H∞ weighting function selection and its application to the real-time control of a vertical take-off aircraft , 2000 .

[6]  D. Sorensen,et al.  A Survey of Model Reduction Methods for Large-Scale Systems , 2000 .

[7]  M. Bro-Nielsen,et al.  Finite element modeling in surgery simulation , 1998, Proc. IEEE.

[8]  Jadav Das,et al.  Autonomous Shape Control of a Deformable Object by Multiple Manipulators , 2011, J. Intell. Robotic Syst..

[9]  Shinichi Hirai,et al.  Indirect simultaneous positioning operations of extensionally deformable objects , 1998, Proceedings. 1998 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems. Innovations in Theory, Practice and Applications (Cat. No.98CH36190).

[10]  M. Safonov,et al.  A Schur method for balanced-truncation model reduction , 1989 .

[11]  J. G. Ziegler,et al.  Optimum Settings for Automatic Controllers , 1942, Journal of Fluids Engineering.

[12]  Shinichi Hirai,et al.  Indirect simultaneous positioning of deformable objects with multi-pinching fingers based on an uncertain model , 2000, Robotica.

[13]  Humberto Breves Coda,et al.  A simple Kelvin and Boltzmann viscoelastic analysis of three-dimensional solids by the boundary element method , 2003 .

[14]  Shinichi Hirai,et al.  Robust manipulation of deformable objects by a simple PID feedback , 2001, Proceedings 2001 ICRA. IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (Cat. No.01CH37164).

[15]  J. Doyle,et al.  Essentials of Robust Control , 1997 .

[16]  M.S. Netto,et al.  H/sub /spl infin//, adaptive, PID and fuzzy control: a comparison of controllers for vehicle lane keeping , 2004, IEEE Intelligent Vehicles Symposium, 2004.

[17]  P. Khargonekar,et al.  State-space solutions to standard H2 and H∞ control problems , 1988, 1988 American Control Conference.

[18]  Bruno Siciliano,et al.  Modeling and Control of Robot Manipulators , 1995 .