Sensor selection via closed-loop control objectives

The ability to stabilize a system and achieve performance objectives using active feedback control is highly dependent on the location, quality, type, and number of control actuators and sensors. One role of a control engineer is to interact with the system designer to locate, size, and determine the quality of actuators and sensors required for effective control. This paper addresses one of these issues: location of sensors based on closed-loop objectives. A systematic approach, based on H/sub 2/ optimal control design techniques, is developed for sensor selection which achieves desired performance objectives and includes system constraints. This approach is applied to the selection of sensors for active vibration attenuation on the NASA Langley Mini-Mast experimental structure.

[1]  K. Glover,et al.  State-space formulae for all stabilizing controllers that satisfy and H ∞ norm bound and relations to risk sensitivity , 1988 .

[2]  Gary J. Balas,et al.  The Process of Control Design for the NASA Langley Minimast Structure , 1991, 1991 American Control Conference.

[3]  Suresh M. Joshi,et al.  Sensor/actuator placement for flexible space structures , 1993 .

[4]  Robert E. Skelton,et al.  Space structure control design by variance assignment , 1985 .

[5]  W. Gawronski,et al.  Balanced actuator and sensor placement for flexible structures , 1996 .

[6]  J. H. Kim,et al.  Closed Loop Lab Tests of NASA's Mini-Mast , 1990, 1990 American Control Conference.

[7]  B. Anderson,et al.  Optimal Filtering , 1979, IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics.

[8]  John L. Junkins,et al.  Measure of controllability for actuator placement , 1991 .

[9]  P. Khargonekar,et al.  STATESPACE SOLUTIONS TO STANDARD 2 H AND H? CONTROL PROBLEMS , 1989 .

[10]  K B Lim.  A Disturbance Rejection Approach to Actuator and Sensor Placement , 1997 .

[11]  R. Skelton,et al.  Selection of Dynamic Sensors and Actuators in the Control of Linear Systems , 1989 .

[12]  K. Lim.  Method for Optimal Actuator and Sensor Placement for Large Flexible Structures , 1992 .

[13]  Gary J. Balas,et al.  Robustness and performance tradeoffs in control design for flexible structures , 1990, 29th IEEE Conference on Decision and Control.

[14]  J. Seinfeld,et al.  Optimal location of process measurements , 1975 .

[15]  G.A. Norris,et al.  Sensor and Actuator Selection for Optimal Closed-Loop Performance in the Presence of Correlated Noise , 1987, 1987 American Control Conference.

[16]  P. Khargonekar,et al.  State-space solutions to standard H/sub 2/ and H/sub infinity / control problems , 1989 .

[17]  K. Lim.  A Disturbance Rejection Approach to Actuator and Sensor Placement , 1997 .

[18]  Gary J. Balas,et al.  Control of lightly damped, flexible modes in the controller crossover region , 1994 .

[19]  J.-N. Juang,et al.  Formulations and applications of large structure actuator and sensor placements , 1979 .

[20]  Gary J. Balas,et al.  Control Design for Variations in Structural Natural Frequencies , 1995 .

[21]  J. Doyle,et al.  Linear, Multivariable Robust Control With a μ Perspective , 1993 .

[22]  Emmanuel G. Collins,et al.  High performance, accelerometer-based control of the Mini-MAST structure at Langley Research Center , 1991 .

[23]  J. Doyle,et al.  Robust and optimal control , 1995, Proceedings of 35th IEEE Conference on Decision and Control.

[24]  S. M. Joshi,et al.  Sensor-Actuator Placement for Flexible Structures with Actuator Dynamics , 1993 .