The present invention pertains to a method of control implemented in a variable speed drive for controlling a lifting load such as an elevator. The invention also relates to a variable speed drive suitable for implementing said method.
As a general rule, the control profile for a lifting load such as an elevator which moves between floors comprises the following main steps:
Depending on the duration required to reach the first speed subsequent to the acceleration and the duration required to reach the second speed subsequent to the first deceleration, the profile may also comprise a step of maintaining the speed of the elevator at the first speed before the first deceleration and a step of maintaining at the second speed before the second deceleration.
The first speed is set so as to be the maximum speed to be reached by the elevator during a run between two floors separated by several levels. Now, when the elevator has to perform a shorter run, for example between two floors separated by a single level, this maximum speed is often never reached. In such a situation the elevator is nevertheless controlled according to the control profile defined hereinabove. The elevator therefore receives the deceleration order before having reached its maximum speed and therefore starts the first deceleration earlier according to one and the same speed profile as if the maximum speed had been reached. Now, at the moment of receipt of the deceleration order, the elevator has traveled only a small distance. Throughout the remaining distance before receipt of the stopping order, the elevator therefore moves at low speed. The duration spent by the elevator at the low speed is therefore very long.
Patent GB1560348 describes a solution making it possible to alleviate this problem. This document describes the application of a first speed profile to an elevator, this profile comprising an acceleration until a maximum speed is reached, followed by a first deceleration down to a low-speed plateau before a new deceleration until stopping. When the braking order which controls the first deceleration occurs while the maximum speed has not been reached, this document proposes the introduction of a second speed profile making it possible to shift the start of the first deceleration. The new instant of braking occurs at the intersection between the two speed profiles. In this prior art document, the aim is thus to recover the distance lost because of the overly premature intervention of the deceleration order by continuing the acceleration up to a new speed in accordance with the initial acceleration ramp. However, by preserving the initial acceleration ramp to reach the new speed, the remaining distance to be traveled will be complied with but not the duration.
Document EP0826621 describes for its part a scheme for adjusting the low speed of an elevator cabin by applying a compensation frequency in the control.
The aim of the invention is to propose a method of control making it possible to minimize the time spent at low speed when the elevator performs a run such that it receives the deceleration order before having reached its maximum speed.
This aim is achieved by a method of control implemented in a variable speed drive for controlling a lifting load, the control of the load being carried out according to a first control profile which comprises the following main steps:
According to one feature of the invention, the second control profile can comprise a step of maintaining the speed of the load at the second speed for a determined duration.
According to another feature, between the deceleration step and the stopping step, the second control profile comprises a step of maintaining the speed of the load at a third speed below the second speed.
According to another feature, on completion of the deceleration step, the second control profile comprises a step of receiving a stopping order.
According to another feature, after receipt of the stopping order, the second control profile comprises a step of deceleration until stopping.
According to another feature, the deceleration order or the stopping order is dispatched by an external sensor able to detect the passage of the lifting load or may be dispatched by an automaton connected to the variable speed drive.
The invention also relates to a variable speed drive making it possible to control the lifting load, the control of the load being carried out according to a first control profile which comprises the following steps:
According to one feature of the invention, the variable drive comprises means for maintaining the speed of the load at the second speed for a determined duration.
According to another feature, the variable speed drive comprises means for maintaining the speed of the load at a third speed below the second speed.
According to another feature, the second control profile comprises a receipt of a stopping order.
According to another feature, the second control profile comprises a deceleration until stopping subsequent to the receipt of the stopping order.
According to another feature, the variable drive is connected to an external sensor able to dispatch the deceleration order or the stopping order when it detects the passage of the lifting load. As a variant, the variable drive may be connected to a programmable automaton able to dispatch the deceleration order or the stopping order.
Other characteristics and advantages will be apparent in the detailed description which follows while referring to an embodiment given by way of example and represented by the appended drawings in which:
As already described previously, with reference to
Each external sensor is stationed on the elevator's run at a certain distance before the desired arrival floor so as to comply with the deceleration and stopping distances.
This type of control profile is implemented by taking account of constraints related to the user's comfort. Indeed, this control profile must be applied in a manner which is comfortable for the user, thereby involving the application of non-linear ramps. For this purpose, two principles are generally applied:
The control profile defined hereinabove is ideal when the elevator moves several levels since the elevator then has sufficient time to reach its maximum speed ωR before receipt of the deceleration order (FLG1). On the other hand, when the elevator performs a short run between two floors, for example separated by a single level, the deceleration order (FLG1) may be received before the elevator has had time to reach its maximum speed ωR. In this case, if the elevator continues to accelerate after receipt of the deceleration order (FLG1), the stopping distances for the desired floor will not be able to be complied with or if the elevator is controlled in deceleration according to the control profile defined hereinabove, the low speed ωL will be reached very early and the elevator will therefore be induced to move very slowly at this low speed ωL to reach the desired floor as represented in
According to the invention, when the variable speed drive receives the deceleration order (FLG1) while the elevator is at a current speed below its maximum speed ωR, the variable drive determines a second speed ωRopt below the maximum speed ωR and above its current speed, this second speed being an optimal speed up to which the elevator can continue to accelerate so as to minimize the travel time until stopping while complying with the stopping distances (see
in which ω is designated as the current speed of the load, θ the current position of the load, γ represents the acceleration of the load and j represents the impulse (“jerk”) of the load.
This function f will have to comply with the following constraints
(ω0, γ0) represents the trajectory point at the moment of receipt of the deceleration order, (ωL, 0) represents the point to be reached of the trajectory and θDd the distance to be traveled during the deceleration motion, between the maximum speed and the low speed. tD represents for its part the deceleration time.
The pair (ω0, γ0) is obtained through the current position of the trajectory.
The distance θDd is known since it is the distance traveled during the first deceleration. If this distance θDd is complied with by the control profile, so also will the stopping distance constraints.
If we add a known time parameter TR corresponding to a plateau time at the maximum speed reached by the elevator, the solution procedure consists, on the basis of all the known data (ω0, γ0, θDd, TR), in calculating an optimal maximum speed ωRopt to be reached which minimizes the total time of the motion.
By definition, the optimal maximum speed is defined by ωRopt=f′(tR)) where tR is such that f″(tR)=0.
Two examples are treated hereinafter to model the function f defined hereinabove.
The first example consists in determining the optimal speed ωRopt, by considering for example the following control profile, piecewise linear in acceleration (see
The calculation of the optimal speed ωRopt is done in compliance with the magnitudes of accelerations and impulses so as to maintain a level of comfort. It may happen that the calculation of the optimal speed modifies the magnitudes of acceleration and impulse as compared with the initial trajectory.
In this first example, we consider that the acceleration ramp for reaching the calculated optimal speed ωRopt is the acceleration ramp RA of the initially provided control profile and that the deceleration ramp applied after having reached the optimal speed ωRopt is also the deceleration ramp RD of the initially provided control profile.
On the basis of the control profile defined hereinabove in conjunction with
Between 0 and Ta (acceleration phase), we have:
This giving at Ta:
i.e. with
We then obtain:
Between Ta and Ta+Tp, the speed being constant, we have:
ω=ωR
θ=θR+ωR·t
This giving at Ta+Tp:
θP=θR+ωR·TP
Between Ta+Tp and Ta+Tp+Td (deceleration phase), we have:
This giving at Ta+Tp+Td:
We then obtain:
Next between Ta+Tp+Td and TR=Ta+Tp+Td+TL, we have:
ω=ωL
θ=θD+ωL·t
This giving at TR:
under the condition that TL>0, it follows that:
We then obtain:
With:
We therefore obtain the result that the travel time is a function of the speed ωR.
If TL<0, this signifies that the end-of-acceleration and deceleration motions have used up too much distance. Consequently, the time TL must be positive, thus inducing us to write the following relations:
and to study the constraint:
We then obtain the following relation:
To fulfill the condition TL≧0, it is therefore necessary that ωRθ
By solving this second-degree equation, we obtain the optimal speed ωRopt to be reached taking account of the constraint:
ωRopt=−ωRγ+√{square root over (ωRγ
To confirm that the speed ωRopt is indeed the optimal speed making it possible to minimize the travel time, it suffices to study the following function and its evolution as a function of ωR:
The variation of TR is determined on the basis of its derivative:
By definition ωR is greater than ωL; it therefore follows that the function TR is monotonic decreasing on its definition space, that is to say ωR in [ωL, ωRopt].
We therefore note that the time TR is a minimum when ωR is a maximum making it possible to justify the choice of ωRopt=−ωRγ+√{square root over (ωRγ
In the second example, the speed ramps are calculated on the basis of a time-dependent polynomial of order 6. By construction, the speed follows a continuous and non-linear profile. We also consider that the acceleration ramp for reaching the calculated optimal speed ωRopt is also the acceleration ramp RA of the initially provided control profile and that the deceleration ramp applied after having reached the optimal speed ωRopt is also the deceleration ramp RD of the initially provided control profile. Let us consider the following polynomial P of order 6:
P=a6·X6+a5·X5+a4·X4+a3·X3+a2·X2+a1·X+a0
Let us define the function of time f such that:
By definition, we can express the position θ, the speed ω, the acceleration γ, and the impulse j on the basis of the function f and its derivatives.
with the constraints
(ω0, γ0) represents the trajectory point at the moment of receipt of the deceleration order, (ωL, 0) represents the point to be reached of the trajectory, and θDd the distance to be traveled during the deceleration motion, between the maximum speed and the low speed. tD represents for its part the deceleration time.
The pair (ω0, γ0) is obtained through the current position of the trajectory.
The distance θDd is known since it is the distance traveled during the first deceleration. If this distance θDd is complied with by the control profile, so also will the stopping distance constraints.
We therefore have to find the coefficients of the polynomial P satisfying the constraints:
It follows that:
By definition, the optimal speed reached during the motion is then defined by ωRopt·tD=P′(x), where x is such that P″(x)=0.
The optimal speed calculated by virtue of the first or second example is inserted into a new control profile determined by the variable drive when the deceleration order (FLG1) is received while the maximum speed ωR provided in the initial control profile has not been reached. This second control profile is determined by taking account of the new calculated optimal speed ωRopt, while complying with the two principles previously defined relating to the accelerations and impulses to be applied so as to guarantee optimal comfort for the user and by taking account of the remaining distance to be traveled.
This new control profile therefore comprises, after receipt of the deceleration order (FLG1), the following steps:
The new ramps RAopt, RDopt calculated are of course non-linear so as to comply with the comfort constraints.
According to the invention, in certain cases, the initial ramps RA and RD can no longer be complied with and it is necessary to determine new ramps making it possible to comply with the imposed distance. For example, if the distance to be traveled is too large to reach the optimal speed ωRopt when the initial acceleration ramp RA is applied, it is necessary to determine a new ramp which will be steeper.
This new control profile can in particular comprise a step of maintaining the speed of the load at the optimal speed ωRopt so as to create a plateau at this speed for a determined duration, lying between zero and several seconds, and a step of maintaining the speed of the load at the low speed ωL for a certain duration that can go from zero to several seconds, before receipt of the stopping order (FLG2).
It is of course possible, without departing from the scope of the invention, to contemplate other variants and refinements of detail and likewise envisage the use of equivalent means.
Number | Date | Country | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
08 57167 | Oct 2008 | FR | national |
Filing Document | Filing Date | Country | Kind | 371c Date |
---|---|---|---|---|
PCT/EP2009/063334 | 10/13/2009 | WO | 00 | 3/9/2011 |
Publishing Document | Publishing Date | Country | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
WO2010/046275 | 4/29/2010 | WO | A |
Number | Name | Date | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
4751984 | Williams et al. | Jun 1988 | A |
5035301 | Skalski | Jul 1991 | A |
5325036 | Diethert et al. | Jun 1994 | A |
6311802 | Choi et al. | Nov 2001 | B1 |
7533763 | Kattainen et al. | May 2009 | B2 |
8459415 | Kwon et al. | Jun 2013 | B2 |
20070227828 | Kinpara et al. | Oct 2007 | A1 |
20100126809 | Foschini et al. | May 2010 | A1 |
20120111670 | Fargo et al. | May 2012 | A1 |
Number | Date | Country |
---|---|---|
11 00 898 | Mar 1961 | DE |
102 96 269 | Mar 2004 | DE |
1 560 348 | Feb 1980 | GB |
Entry |
---|
International Search Report issued Dec. 1, 2009 in PCT/EP09/063334 filed Oct. 13, 2009. |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
20110166697 A1 | Jul 2011 | US |