See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/3961400

Fuzzy PI control of an industrial weigh belt feeder

Conference Paper  in  Proceedings of the American Control Conference · February 2002

DOI: 10.1109/ACC.2002.1024476 · Source: IEEE Xplore

CITATIONS READS

8 45

2 authors, including:

Emmanuel G. Collins

261 PUBLICATIONS   2,743 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Motion Planning for Legged Robots View project

Rough-Terrain Navigation View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Emmanuel G. Collins on 23 May 2014.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Fuzzy PI Control of an Industrial
Weigh Belt Feeder

Yanan Zhao and Emmanuel G. Collins, Jr.

Department of Mechanical Engineering
FAMU-FSU College of Engineering

August 2001

Department of Mechanical Engineering

Florida State University
Contents
ƒ Introduction
ƒ PI-like Fuzzy Logic Controller
ƒ PI Fuzzy Logic Controller
ƒ Conclusions

Department of Mechanical Engineering

Florida State University
Introduction
ƒ IIndustrial
d t i l weigh
i h belt
b lt
feeder from Merrick
I d ti
Industries, Inc.
I
ƒ Transports solid materials
i t a manufacturing
into f t i
process at a constant rate.
ƒ In current practice
practice, the PI
tuning is performed
manually.
ƒ An automated tuning
process is desired.
p
Department of Mechanical Engineering
Florida State University
Introduction (cont
(cont’d)
d)
ƒ The nonlinearities of the weigh belt feeder are:
ƒ motor saturation (control signal with [0,10] volt
ƒ motor friction
friction,
ƒ significant sensor quantization.
ƒ M
Model-based
d l b d friction
f i ti compensation
ti methods
th d have
h
limitations:
ƒ characteristics of friction are difficult to analyze
ƒ Fuzzy logic control (FLC) is a solution.

Department of Mechanical Engineering

Florida State University
Introduction (cont
(cont’d)
d)
Fuzzy logic controller

Defuuzzification
Inference

fuzzzification
mechanism control plant
reference
signal performance
Plant
Rule-base

ƒ FLC is p
particularlyy useful when the plant
p model
is unknown or difficult to develop.
ƒ FLC has four main parts: fuzzification,
fuzzification the rule
rule-
base, the inference engine, and defuzzification.
ƒ Fuzzy PID control has been widely studied
studied.
Department of Mechanical Engineering
Florida State University
 Introduction (cont
(cont’d)
d)
ƒ PID-like
PID like ffuzzy logic cont
controller
olle (FLC)
(FLC):
Δu = F(e, Δe), u = F(e, Δe), Δu = F(e, Δe, Δ2e)
ƒ The
h structure is analogous
l to that
h off the
h
conventional PID controller.
ƒ PID FLC
FLC:
z
u (k ) = (K + K + K )e(k )
z −1
p i d

ƒ The gains are tuned on-line with fuzzy reasoning.

ƒ This requires more experience with the system.
ƒ Both PI-like and PI FLCs are designed and
implemented.
Department of Mechanical Engineering
Florida State University
 PI-like
PI like Fuzzy Logic Control
+ e Δu u y
r Ge PI like
PI-like
Δe GΔu + plant
FLC +
- GΔe 1/z

e(k) \ Δe(k)
NB NM NS NE PS PM PB
NB NB NB NB NM NS NS ZE
NM NB NM NM NM NS ZE PS
NS NB NM NS NS ZE PS PM
ZE NB NM NS ZE PS PM PB
PS NM NS ZE PS PS PM PB
PM NS ZE PS PM PM PM PB
PB ZE PS PS PM PB PB PB
Fuzzy Rules for Computation of Δu
MFs of e, Δe, and Δu

Department of Mechanical Engineering

Florida State University
PI-like
PI like FLC(cont
FLC(cont’d)
d)
ƒ Scaling
g factors (SFs)
( ) appear
pp as follows:
eN = Gee, ΔeN = GΔeΔe, Δu = Gu ΔuN
ƒ The SFs play a role similar to that of the
gains of a conventional controller.
ƒ Selection
S l ti off the
th SFs
SF are b basedd on expertt
knowledge and adjustment rules
d
developed
l d by
b evaluating
l ti the th control
t l
results.

Department of Mechanical Engineering

Florida State University
 PI-like
PI like FLC(cont
FLC(cont’d)
d)
ƒ For the weigh
g belt feeder,, controllers were
designed for setpoints of 1, 2, …, 5 volts.
ƒ Constant scaling factors were used.

ƒ The output SF needs to be tuned due to its

strong influence on the performance and stability.
Department of Mechanical Engineering
Florida State University
Gain Scheduling of PI
PI-like
like FLC(cont
FLC(cont’d)
d)
Gain
scheduling

+ e Δu u y
r Ge PI-like
Δe GΔu + plant
FLC +
- GΔe 1/z

ƒ Adjust
djust tthe
e output sca
scaling
g factor
acto us
using
g
1
G Δu ,sp = G Δu , 0 ⋅ γ, γ =
1 + 0.1 ⋅ sp
ƒ The control effort is decreased with the
increasing of the setpoint.

Department of Mechanical Engineering

Florida State University
Self-tuning
Self tuning of PI
PI-like
like FLC(cont
FLC(cont’d)
d)
Fuzzy α
reasoning

+ e Δu u y
r Ge PI-like
Δe GΔu + plant
FLC +
- GΔe 1/z

ƒ Adjust
djust tthe
e output sca
scaling g factor
acto as
Δu = (α ⋅ G u ) ⋅ Δu N
ƒ The updating factor α is tuned online
based on fuzzy reasoning using the error
and change of error at each sampling
time.
Department of Mechanical Engineering
Florida State University
Self-tuning of PI-like FLC(cont
FLC(cont’d)
d)

MFss for
o MFs for
e(k) \ Δe(k)
ƒ Rule-bases for N ZE P
N B M S
computation of ZE M S M
P S M B
 The domain of the updating factor is also

tuned. Department of Mechanical Engineering

Florida State University
Comparison of the gain scheduled
and the self-tuning FLCs
Setpoint Type of FLC IAE ISE ITAE ITSE

1 GS 523 8
523.8 372 2
372.2 3251 4
3251.4 811 6
811.6

ST 456.0 303.2 3114.4 585.3

2 GS 755.1 1032.0 4200.5 1625.4

ST 689.6 883.6 4161.0 1241.6

3 GS 1071.1 2192.9 5172.5 3132.6

ST 948.5 1952.1 4223.3 2440.7

C
Comparison
i Using
U i Different
Diff t Performance
P f Indices
I di
 The self-tuning PI-like FLC yields better performance.
Department of Mechanical Engineering
Florida State University
Comparison of the gain scheduled
and the self-tuning FLCs(cont’d)

Comparison of the Performance at Setpoints of 1, 2 and 3 Volts

Department of Mechanical Engineering
Florida State University
 Comparison of the gain scheduled
and the self-tuning FLCs(cont’d)

Gain scheduled FLC

changes only the range
of the output
p surface.

Self tuning FLC changes

Self-tuning
both the range and the
shape of the output surface.
Department of Mechanical Engineering
Florida State University
PI Fuzzy Logic Control
Fuzzy Ti
reasoning

+ e u y
r Ge Fuzzy Kp PI plant
Δe reasoning
- GΔe Controller

ƒ PI controller:
z 1 z
H(z) = K p + K i = K p (1 + )
z −1 Ti z − 1

ƒ The proportional gain K p and integral

time constant T i are adjusted on-line
by fuzzy reasoning.

Department of Mechanical Engineering

Florida State University
 PI FLC (cont
(cont’d)
d)

MFs of e(k) and Δe(k) MFs of Kp MFs of Ti

Department of Mechanical Engineering

Florida State University
PI FLC (cont
(cont’d)
d)
e(k) \ Δe(k)
ƒ Fuzzyy rules for
N ZE P
N B B B
computation of Kp: ZE S
P B B
B S
B

e(k) \ Δe(k)
N ZE P
ƒ Fuzzy rules for N S S S
ZE B M B
computation of Ti: P S S S

ƒ For different setpoints the range of Kp is

adjusted. K = ρ ⋅ K ρ=
p , max
ma
1
1 + 0.2 ⋅ sp
p , max
ma 0 ,

ƒ MFs of Ti for different setpoints are also

adjusted.
Department of Mechanical Engineering
Florida State University
PI FLC (cont
(cont’d)
d)

ƒ Experimental results at Setpoints of 1

1, 2
2, 3:

Department of Mechanical Engineering

Florida State University
Comparison of the self
self-tuning
tuning PI
PI-
like FLC and PI FLC
S e tp o in t T y p e o f IA E IS E IT A E IT S E
FLC
1 PI 3 1 7 .6 1 4 9 .8 2 6 1 9 .8 2 3 9 .4

ST 4 5 6 .0 3 0 3 .2 3 1 1 4 .4 5 8 5 .3

2 PI 5 0 1 .6 5 9 0 .6 2 9 4 3 .5 5 9 1 .0

ST 6 8 9 .6 8 8 3 .6 4 1 6 1 .0 1 2 4 1 .6

3 PI 7 5 9 .6 1 5 2 2 .1 3 7 9 8 .5 1 5 9 2 .1

ST 9 4 8 .5 1 9 5 2 .1 4 2 2 3 .3 2 4 4 0 .7

ƒ The PI FLC performed better.

Department of Mechanical Engineering

Florida State University
 Co c us o s
Conclusions

ƒ T
Two categories
t i off ffuzzy PI controllers
t ll were
designed:
ƒ gain-scheduled PI-like FLC, self-tuning PI-like FLC
ƒ PI FLC with g
gains tuned byy fuzzyy reasoning
g
ƒ The self-tuning PI-like FLC performed better than
the gain scheduled PI-like FLC
FLC.
ƒ The PI FLC performed better than the two PI-like
FLCs.

Department of Mechanical Engineering

Florida State University
View publication stats

Conclusions(cont d)
Conclusions(cont’d)

ƒ As more user knowledge is incorporated into

the controller design, the performance of the
FLC improved.
i d
ƒ All of the rules p
proposed
p are quite
q simple,
p
making the methods suitable for
implementation in an industrial environment.

Department of Mechanical Engineering

Florida State University