2020
DOI: 10.1016/j.conengprac.2019.104260
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Generalized iterative learning control with mixed system constraints: A gantry robot based verification

Abstract: Iterative learning control (ILC) aims at improving the tracking performance of repetitive tasks based on information learnt from past attempts (trials). Modern practical applications demand more flexibility than current frameworks can deliver, in both how the task is specified and how system constraints are applied. To provide these features, an ILC framework is formulated in this paper for a generalized design objective with mixed system constraints, which includes intermediate position and sub-interval track… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

0
12
0

Year Published

2020
2020
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
7
1

Relationship

3
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 23 publications
(13 citation statements)
references
References 51 publications
0
12
0
Order By: Relevance
“…As normal practice, the pre-planned trajectory is defined by a fixed transition time [0.4, 0.8, 1.2, 1.6] ⊤ and the moving speed of the end-effector along each line segments is considered as a constant value. The final case implemented is to solve optimization problem (31) offline using the nominal plant model (61), yielding the solution plan [0.50, 0.84, 1.17, 1.50] ⊤ , and then to use this as a fixed reference in the standard successive projection ILC algorithm of [30]. The corresponding results of classical ILC and successive projection ILC are plotted in the same figures.…”
Section: Experimental Performance Of Algorithmmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…As normal practice, the pre-planned trajectory is defined by a fixed transition time [0.4, 0.8, 1.2, 1.6] ⊤ and the moving speed of the end-effector along each line segments is considered as a constant value. The final case implemented is to solve optimization problem (31) offline using the nominal plant model (61), yielding the solution plan [0.50, 0.84, 1.17, 1.50] ⊤ , and then to use this as a fixed reference in the standard successive projection ILC algorithm of [30]. The corresponding results of classical ILC and successive projection ILC are plotted in the same figures.…”
Section: Experimental Performance Of Algorithmmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…With the assumptions made in the theorem, the path following design objective of the problem (34) is within the range of the ILC problem discussed in [30]. Therefore, the ILC algorithm proposed in that paper can be applied with minor modifications to achieve the design objective with desirable convergence properties by setting the appropriate parameters, which give rise to the ILC update law (41)-(42).…”
Section: B Proof Of Theoremmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Such a notion led to the design of numerous laws that constructed the control input in iteration (k + 1) based directly on the control input and error signal in iteration k. This eventually developed into a contraction-mapping (CM), operator-theoretic framework for ILC [2]. Many popular ILC strategies were designed based on this framework [3][4][5][6][7][8], and it continues to be popular, with numerous applications in large-scale industrial manufacturing [9,10], chemical batch processes [11,12] and robotics [13][14][15]. This framework has also been extensively analyzed, with established convergence and robustness results [16][17][18][19].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…It merely requires some knowledge of dynamic characteristics and online calculation. Therefore, this technology has been widely used in the robot, power electronics, and chemical industries [3][4][5][6].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%