Limits...
Energy-efficient control of a screw-drive pipe robot with consideration of actuator's characteristics.

Li P, Ma S, Lyu C, Jiang X, Liu Y - Robotics Biomim (2016)

Bottom Line: Nevertheless, the energy is limited for the whole inspection task and cannot keep the inspection time too long.We also propose a velocity selection strategy that includes the actual velocity capacity of the motor, according to the velocity ratio [Formula: see text], to keep the robot working in safe region and decrease the energy dissipation.This selection strategy considers three situations of the velocity ratio [Formula: see text] and has a wide range of application.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: School of Mechanical Engineering and Automation, Harbin Institute of Technology Shenzhen Graduate School, ShenZhen, 518055 China ; Department of Mechanical and Automation Engineering, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Shatin, Hong Kong China.

ABSTRACT

Pipe robots can perform inspection tasks to alleviate the damage caused by the pipe problems. Usually, the pipe robots carry batteries or use a power cable draining power from a vehicle that has many equipments for exploration. Nevertheless, the energy is limited for the whole inspection task and cannot keep the inspection time too long. In this paper, we use the total input energy as the cost function and a more accurate DC motor model to generate an optimal energy-efficient velocity control for a screw-drive pipe robot to make use of the limited energy in field environment. We also propose a velocity selection strategy that includes the actual velocity capacity of the motor, according to the velocity ratio [Formula: see text], to keep the robot working in safe region and decrease the energy dissipation. This selection strategy considers three situations of the velocity ratio [Formula: see text] and has a wide range of application. Simulations are conducted to compare the proposed method with the sinusoidal control and loss minimization control (minimization of copper losses of the motor), and results are discussed in this paper.

No MeSH data available.


Related in: MedlinePlus

Results of the total energy consumption. a Results considering  and , b results of  (only considering )
© Copyright Policy - OpenAccess
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4940445&req=5

Fig10: Results of the total energy consumption. a Results considering and , b results of (only considering )

Mentions: Figure 10a shows the energy dissipation of location mode in Fig. 9. The sinusoidal control causes the highest energy, while the loss minimization cost is the lowest. This is because in minimum energy control method, we have considered the armature resistance and the equivalent resistance of the power loss due to the air resistance of the rotor and power loss due to friction between the mechanical parts as shown in Fig. 3. Thus, the armature current is larger than that of only considering , when the robot works at the same combination of torque and velocity, which causes more electrical energy. Figure 10b is the condition that , and the result shows the minimum energy control cost is the lowest energy. Therefore, when we consider , the total input energy will increase and may possibly greater than loss minimization control, but it gives a more accurate model and numerical results than that of only considering the armature resistance (see Table 2).Fig. 10


Energy-efficient control of a screw-drive pipe robot with consideration of actuator's characteristics.

Li P, Ma S, Lyu C, Jiang X, Liu Y - Robotics Biomim (2016)

Results of the total energy consumption. a Results considering  and , b results of  (only considering )
© Copyright Policy - OpenAccess
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
Show All Figures
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4940445&req=5

Fig10: Results of the total energy consumption. a Results considering and , b results of (only considering )
Mentions: Figure 10a shows the energy dissipation of location mode in Fig. 9. The sinusoidal control causes the highest energy, while the loss minimization cost is the lowest. This is because in minimum energy control method, we have considered the armature resistance and the equivalent resistance of the power loss due to the air resistance of the rotor and power loss due to friction between the mechanical parts as shown in Fig. 3. Thus, the armature current is larger than that of only considering , when the robot works at the same combination of torque and velocity, which causes more electrical energy. Figure 10b is the condition that , and the result shows the minimum energy control cost is the lowest energy. Therefore, when we consider , the total input energy will increase and may possibly greater than loss minimization control, but it gives a more accurate model and numerical results than that of only considering the armature resistance (see Table 2).Fig. 10

Bottom Line: Nevertheless, the energy is limited for the whole inspection task and cannot keep the inspection time too long.We also propose a velocity selection strategy that includes the actual velocity capacity of the motor, according to the velocity ratio [Formula: see text], to keep the robot working in safe region and decrease the energy dissipation.This selection strategy considers three situations of the velocity ratio [Formula: see text] and has a wide range of application.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: School of Mechanical Engineering and Automation, Harbin Institute of Technology Shenzhen Graduate School, ShenZhen, 518055 China ; Department of Mechanical and Automation Engineering, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Shatin, Hong Kong China.

ABSTRACT

Pipe robots can perform inspection tasks to alleviate the damage caused by the pipe problems. Usually, the pipe robots carry batteries or use a power cable draining power from a vehicle that has many equipments for exploration. Nevertheless, the energy is limited for the whole inspection task and cannot keep the inspection time too long. In this paper, we use the total input energy as the cost function and a more accurate DC motor model to generate an optimal energy-efficient velocity control for a screw-drive pipe robot to make use of the limited energy in field environment. We also propose a velocity selection strategy that includes the actual velocity capacity of the motor, according to the velocity ratio [Formula: see text], to keep the robot working in safe region and decrease the energy dissipation. This selection strategy considers three situations of the velocity ratio [Formula: see text] and has a wide range of application. Simulations are conducted to compare the proposed method with the sinusoidal control and loss minimization control (minimization of copper losses of the motor), and results are discussed in this paper.

No MeSH data available.


Related in: MedlinePlus