This article investigates the problem of using jerk (the rate-of-change of acceleration) motion control to move a given distance without overshoot. Distance, velocity, and acceleration are all brought to zero simultaneously. Although this problem has been identified in suspension control, it may also be of interest in mechatronics. In this research, particular controls were found that solved this problem. An algorithm was developed which is stable when used in a discretized form, as in a microprocessor continually updated with current state estimations. The control was found serendipitously. A wider range of controls is conjectured to provide the solution to the general minimum-time control problem under distance and jerk constraints. To describe these controls, they are here referred to as ‘skim’ controls. Also, a ‘bang-off-bang’ variant was developed and this was used in a simple test rig. The test developed in this research supports the utility and robustness of the control method.
ChangB-HHoriY. Trajectory design considering derivative of jerk for head-positioning of disk drive system with mechanical vibration. IEEE/ASME Trans on Mechatron2006; 11: 273–279.
2.
DongJFerreiraaPMStoribJA. Feed-rate optimization with jerk constraints for generating minimum-time trajectories. Int J Mach Tools Manuf2007; 47: 1941–1955.
3.
GasparettoAZanottoV. A technique for time-jerk optimal planning of robot trajectories. Rob Comput Integra Manuf2007; 24: 415–426.
4.
Kröger T, Tomiczek A and Wahl FM. Towards on-line trajectory computation. In: Proceedings of the IEEE/RSJ international conference on intelligent robots and systems, Beijing, China, 9–15 October 2006, pp.736–741.
5.
ConstantinescuDCroftEA. Smooth and time-optimal trajectory planning for industrial manipulators along specified paths. J Rob Syst2000; 17: 233–249.
6.
Peters RD. Ideal lift kinematics: complete equations for plotting optimum motion. In: Elevator Technology 6, Proceedings of ELEVCON 1995 (The International Association of Elevator Engineers), Hong Kong, 13–16 March 1995, pp.175–184.
7.
Zadeh HS. Multivariable optimisation of fuzzy logic control in nonlinear aerospace systems. School of aerospace, mechanical and manufacturing engineering in the science, engineering and technology portfolio. Thesis/Dissertation, RMIT University, Melbourne, Australia, 2004, p. 227.
8.
KrügerW. Design and simulation of semi-active landing gears for transport aircraft. Mech Struct Mach2002; 30: 493–526.
9.
Reichert BA. Application of magnetorheological dampers for vehicle seat suspensions. Mechanical engineering. Thesis, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Blacksburg, Virginia, 1997.
10.
AhmadianMVahdatiN. Transient dynamics of semiactive suspensions with hybrid control. J Intell Mater Syst Struct2006; 17: 145–153.
11.
HarrisCM. Exploring smoothness and discontinuities in human motor behaviour with Fourier analysis. Math Biosci2004; 188: 99–116.
12.
Chang S-L, Wu C-l and Lee DT. A muscular-like compliance control for active vehicle suspension. In: Proceedings of the 1999 IEEE international conference on robotics and automation, Detroit, Michigan, 10–15 May 1999, pp.3275–3280.
Paddison JE, Macleod C and Goodall RM. State variable constraints on the performance of optimal Maglev suspension controllers. In: Proceedings of the third IEEE conference on control applications, 24–26 August 1994, pp.599–604, vol.1.
15.
Hashiyama T, Furuhashi T and Uchikawa Y. Design of fuzzy controllers for semi-active suspension generated through the genetic algorithm. In: Proceedings of the 1995 second new zealand international two-stream conference on artificial neural networks and expert systems, Dunedin, New Zealand, 20–23 November 1995, pp.166–169.
16.
Ahmadian M and Vahdati N. An analytical evaluation of the transient dynamics of semiactive dampers. In: Proceedings of the ASME international mechanical engineers conference, Washington, D.C., 16–21 November 2003.
17.
AhmadianMSongXSouthwardSC. No-jerk skyhook control methods for semiactive suspensions. J Vib Acoust2004; 126: 580–584.
18.
Yamakado M and Abe M. Examination of voluntary driving operational timing by using information obtained with the developed jerk sensor. In Proceedings of the world automotive conference Fisita 2006, Yokohama, Japan, 22–27 October 2006, paper no. F2006V137.
19.
Deb K and Saxena V. Car suspension design for comfort using genetic algorithm. In: Proceedings of the 7th international conference on genetic algorithms (ed A Thomas), Morgan Kaufmann, East Lansing, MI, USA, 19–23 July 1997, pp.553–560.
20.
Koh KC, Aum HS and Cho HS. A minimum-time motion planning method based on phase space analysis. In: Proceedings of the IEEE international conference on control applications, Hawaii, USA, 22–27 August 1999, pp.273–278.
21.
Kyriakopoulos KJ and Saridis GN. Minimum jerk path generation. In: Proceedings of the IEEE international conference on robotics and automation, Philadelphia, PA, USA, 24–29 April 1988, pp.364–369.
22.
Ben-ItzhakSKarnielA. Minimum acceleration criterion with constraints implies bang-bang control as an underlying principle for optimal trajectories of arm reaching movements. Neural Comput2008; 20: 779–812.
23.
Cao B, Dodds GI and Irwin GW. Constrained time-efficient and smooth cubic spline trajectory generation for industrial robots. In: IEE Proceedings of the control theory and applications, September 1997, pp.467–475.
24.
MacfarlaneSCroftEA. Jerk-bounded manipulator trajectory planning: design for real-time applications. IEEE Trans Rob Autom2003; 19: 42–52.
25.
MacCluerCR. Calculus of variations: mechanics, control, and other applications. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall, 2005, pp. 254–254.
26.
SmithDR. Variational methods in optimization. Toronto, Canada: General Publishing Company, Ltd., 1998, pp. 394–394.
27.
PontryaginLSBoltyanskiiVGGamkrelidzeRVMishchenkoEF. The mathematical theory of optimal processes. New York, NY: Gordon and Breach Science Publishers, 1986.
28.
Ross IM. A primer on Pontryagin's principle in optimal control. Carmel, CA: Collegiate Publishers, 2009.
29.
KostyukovaOKostinaE. Analysis of properties of the solutions to parametric time-optimal problems. Comput Optim Appl2003; 26: 285–326.
30.
Storey I, Bourmistrova A and Subic A. Control over limited-stroke suspensions using jerk. In: Proceedings of the 18th World IMACS/MODSIM Congress. Cairns, Australia, 13–17 July 2009, pp.838–843.
31.
SimonD. Optimal state estimation: Kalman, H-infinity, and nonlinear approaches. Hoboken, New Jersey, NJ: Wiley, 2006, pp. 552–552.
32.
Ashari AE. Sliding-mode control of active suspension systems: unit vector approach. In: Proceedings of the IEEE international conference on control applications, Taipei, Taiwan, 2–4 September 2004, pp.370–375.
33.
DixitRKBucknerGD. Sliding mode observation and control for semiactive vehicle suspensions. Veh Syst Dyn2005; 43: 83–105.
34.
LiuHNonamiKHagiwaraT. Semi-active fuzzy sliding mode control of full vehicle and suspensions. J Vib Contr2005; 11: 1025–1142.
35.
Yokoyama M, Hedrick JK and Toyama S. A model following sliding mode controller for semi-active suspension systems with MR dampers. In: Proceedings of the 2001 American control conference, Arlington, VA, USA, 25–27 June 2001, pp.2652–2657, vol.4.
36.
MuenchhofMSinghT. Jerk limited time optimal control of flexible structures. J Dyn Syst Meas Contr2003; 125: 139–144.
37.
HermesHLaSalleJP. Functional analysis and time optimal control. New York, NY: Academic Press, 1969.
38.
Goncalves FD and Ahmadian M. In search of a suitable control policy for intelligent vehicle suspensions. In: Proceedings of the ASME IMECE 2002: intelligent systems - III, New Orleans, LA, USA, November 2002, pp. 281–288.
39.
Gordon TJ and Best MC. Dynamic optimization of nonlinear semi-active suspension controllers. In: Proceedings of the international conference on control 1994, Coventry, UK, 21–24 March 1994, pp.332–337.
GiorgettiNBemporadATsengHE. Hybrid model predictive control application towards optimal semi-active suspension. Int J Contr2006; 79: 521–533.
42.
Savaresi SM, Silani E, Bittanli S, et al. On performance evaluation methods and control strategies for semi-active suspension systems. In: Proceedings of the 42nd IEEE conference on decision and control, Maui, Hawaii, USA, 9–12 December 2003, pp.2264–2269.
43.
JaliliN. A comparative study and analysis of semi-active vibration-control systems. J Vib Acoust2002; 124: 593–605.
44.
Hyvärinen J-P. The improvement of full vehicle semi-active suspension through kinematical model. Dissertation, Oulu, Finland: Faculty of Technology, Department of Mechanical Engineering, University of Oulu, Finland, 2004, p.159.
45.
Stamatov S, Yost S and Krishnan M. Low jerk predictive force modulation for semi-active suspension control. SAE world congress & exhibition, SAE Technical Paper no. 2008-01-0904, Detroit, MI, USA, 2008.
