The invention set forth in this patent application was made as a result by or on behalf of Oklahoma State University, an institute of higher education of the State of Oklahoma, and Fife Corporation, a corporation duly organized under the laws of the State of Delaware and having a principal place of business at 222 West Memorial Road, Oklahoma City, Okla. 73114, who are parties to a joint research agreement that was in effect on or before the date the claimed invention was made. The claimed invention was made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of the joint research agreement.
This disclosure relates to web handling systems in general and, more specifically, to web guide systems.
The term “web” is used to describe materials having a length considerably larger than a width, and a width considerably larger than a thickness. Webs are materials manufactured and processed in a continuous, flexible strip form. Webs consist of a broad spectrum of materials that are used extensively in everyday life such as plastics, paper, textile, metals and composites. Web materials may be manufactured into rolls since it is easy to transport and process the materials in the rolled form.
Web handling is a term that is used to refer to the study of the behavior of the web while it is transported and controlled through the processing machinery from an unwind roll to a rewind roll. A typical operation involves transporting a web in rolled, unfinished form from an unwind roll to a rewind roll through processing machinery where the required processing operations are performed. An example of such a process is commonly seen in the metals industries. The web (metal strip) to be processed is transported on rollers to various sections where different operations like coating, painting, drying, slitting, etc., are performed. The process line generally has unwind and rewind rolls, many idle rollers and one or more intermediate driven rollers.
The invention of the present disclosure, in one embodiment thereof comprises a method of adaptive guiding of a web on a roller. The method includes utilizing a model equation, said model equation at least approximately representing a position of the web on the roller, said model equation being characterized by a plurality of parameters including a regressor vector, a filtered regressor vector, and a controller parameter vector, and setting at least a portion of said plurality of parameters of the model equation equal to initial values. The initial values may be zero.
The method includes measuring an actual position of the web on the roller, and calculating a difference e1 between an output of the model equation and the actual position of the web. The method includes computing a new value for said regressor vector using at least said actual position of the web on the roller, a control input value on the roller, and a desired web position, and computing a value for said filtered regressor vector from said regressor vector. A value for a controller parameter vector derivative is calculated using at least e1 and said filtered regressor.
When e1 is greater than a predetermined constant or the controller parameter vector derivative is different from zero by more than a predetermined amount, the method includes updating the control parameters by integrating the controller parameter vector derivative. A new control input is provided to the roller based on the control parameters.
In some embodiments, the plurality of parameters further comprises a filtered regressor vector. The control parameters may be frozen when e1 is less than a predetermined constant and the controller parameter vector derivative is different from zero by less than a predetermined amount.
The measured actual position of the web on the roller may comprise the actual position of the web on an end pivot guide roller, a center pivot guide roller, an offset pivot guide roller, and/or a remotely pivoted guide roller.
The longitudinal dynamics of the web is the behavior of the web in the direction of transport of the web. Web transport velocity and web tension are two key variables of interest that affect the longitudinal behavior of the web. The lateral dynamics of the web is the behavior of the web perpendicular to the direction of transport of the web and in the plane of web. Several parameters affecting the lateral web dynamics include web material, tension, transport velocity, and web geometry, etc. The quality of the finished web depends on how well the web is handled on the rollers during transport. The longitudinal and lateral control of the web on rollers plays a critical role in the quality of the finished product.
One focus of the embodiments described in this disclosure is control of lateral dynamics of a web. Adaptive control strategies capable of providing the required performance in the presence of the variations in the process and web parameters are disclosed. The suitability of these control strategies and their ability to provide the required performance are described, both from theoretical and experimental perspectives.
Web guiding (also called lateral control) involves controlling web fluctuations in the plane of the web and perpendicular to web travel. Web guiding is important because rollers in any web handling machinery tend to have misalignment problems that may cause the web to move laterally on the rollers. Lateral movement of the web on the rollers may produce wrinkles or slackness in the web or the web may completely fall off the rollers. A number of web processes such as printing, coating and winding may be affected by web lateral motion. Web guides may be used to maintain the lateral position of the web on rollers during transport.
Referring now to
The sensor 110 can be any suitable type of sensor capable of determining the position of the web 108. For example, the sensor 110 can be an edge sensor positioned adjacent to the edge of the web 108, or a line sensor sensing the location of a predetermined pattern printed on or formed in the web 108. The sensor 110 can use a variety of different types of sensing media depending upon the type of web 108 or the environment in which the web 108 is to be sensed. Exemplary sensing media include light, sound, air, electrical properties (proximity sensor) or the like. It should be understood that the sensor(s) 110 is shown by way of example as an edge sensor positioned downstream of a roller. However, this can be varied depending upon the circumstances. For example, the sensor 110 can be a line sensor sensing the position of the web 108 as it passes across a roller.
Web guides may be positioned at different locations in an industrial process line where guiding is required. Guides located at either ends in a process line are usually called terminal guides. An unwind guide maintains the lateral position of the web which is fed into the processing line, whereas a rewind guide maintains the lateral position of the processed web wound onto a roll in the rewind section. Apart from terminal guiding, web guides are extensively used in the intermediate process sections and they are referred to as intermediate guides.
Intermediate web guides are classified based on the way in which the axis of rotation of the guide roller is changed.
Referring now to
Referring now to
Lateral Dynamics
Lateral and longitudinal dynamics of a moving web are dependent on various process parameters like transport velocity, web tension, web material, and the geometry of the web material, etc. Two of the types of intermediate guides that are considered in this disclosure are remotely pivoted guides (steering guides) and offset-pivot guides (displacement guides). The web span lateral dynamics for the two guides are similar and hence the same controller design may be implemented on both the guides. Even though the present disclosure focuses on these two intermediate guides, the methods and systems disclosed can be adapted to other guides and to unwind/rewind guiding.
Lateral Control
Lateral control involves the design of a closed-loop control system for regulating the lateral position of the web in a process line using a web guide mechanism. As described above, the guide mechanism includes an actuator, which provides the input to the system and a feedback sensor, which is used to measure the lateral position of the web.
The following symbols used herein are defined as follows:
Cm transmission ratio
e error
e1 tracking error
E modulus of elasticity of web
Q1 estimation error
F friction force
Fc Coulomb friction coefficient
Fs static friction coefficient
Fv viscous friction coefficient
γ gain
Γ gain matrix
i current
I moment of inertia
J rotor inertia
km motor parameter or high frequency gain for a reference model
kp, high frequency gain for a plant model
web span parameter
Ke back electromotive force constant
Kt torque constant/sensitivity
L inductance or length of span
L1 distance from the guide roller to instant center
£ Laplace operator
£−1 inverse Laplace operator
μ mean
n* relative degree
ω regressor vector
ωn natural frequency
Wm(s) reference model transfer function
φ filtered regressor vector
r reference command
R resistance
Rm(s) denominator polynomial of reference model
Rp(s) denominator polynomial of plant model
R set of all real numbers
sgn(.) signum function
σ standard deviation
σ2 variance
T torque or Tension
τ time constant
θ controller parameter vector
θ* true parameter vector
θ0 roller misalignment
u, Up input to a plant
v velocity
vs Stribeck velocity constant
x state variable
x1 distance from the guide roller to the instant center
y output of a plant
ŷ estimator output
Y0 initial lateral position misalignment
yL, YL lateral edge position
ym output of a reference model
ζ damping ratio
Z guide position
Zm(s) numerator polynomial of reference model
Zp(s) numerator polynomial of plant model
Herein, the derivation of lateral dynamics of a web guided by different kinds of guides, and for the most general boundary conditions, is discussed. The transfer functions for the remotely pivoted guide (RPG) and the offset pivot guide (OPG), which have been used to demonstrate the adaptive method, have been derived and implemented. These transfer functions will also be useful in finding out the estimates of the controller parameters. The model derivation is based on the beam theory, as described by J. J. Shelton in “Lateral dynamics of a moving web,” Ph.D. dissertation, Oklahoma State University, Stillwater, 1968, hereby incorporated by reference.
The web elastic curve between two rollers can be described using the following fourth order differential equation.
where the parameter K is defined as
with
Equation (1) can be derived from the beam theory assuming that the web mass is negligible. At any given time, the general solution to the equation can be written as:
y=C1 sin hKx+C2 cos hKx+C3x+C4 (3)
where the constant coefficients C1, C2, C3, and C4 are obtained using the boundary conditions. To obtain these coefficients, we need four boundary conditions. Considering the most general case, which combines the effects of translation and rotation of the web, the boundary conditions are given as follows (see G. E. Young and K. N. Reid, “Lateral and Longitudinal Dynamic Behavior and Control of Moving Webs,” Journal of Dynamic Systems, Measurement, and Control, vol. 115, pp. 309-317, June 1993, hereby incorporated by reference):
The coefficients C1, C2, C3, and C4 under the above boundary conditions are
To derive the lateral dynamics of the web guide the following equations, based on the fact that a moving free web aligns itself perpendicularly to a given roller in steady state condition, were introduced by Shelton.
where yi is the displacement of the web at the ith roller, zi is the roller displacement, θi is the roller angle and v is the longitudinal velocity of the web. For any web span, i=0 for an upstream roller and i=L for the downstream roller. Note that (7) is not merely a derivative of (6) because of the assumption that the shear deformation is negligible.
Differentiating (3) twice and substituting the values of the coefficients (5), we get
Using the boundary conditions (4) and the Equation (6), we get
Now using the above equations, (9) and (8) in (7), the lateral web acceleration at the roller yL can be written as
Applying Laplace transform to both sides a second-order transfer function of a real moving web under general boundary conditions can be obtained.
Lateral dynamics for different types of situations are given below.
Fixed Rollers
A schematic diagram of the boundary conditions between two fixed rollers is shown in
Center/End Pivoted Guide
Remotely Pivoted Steering Guide
with x1 as the distance from the roller to the instantaneous center of the roller's rotation. Using this condition, the transfer function can be given by,
The variables θ0(s) and Y0(s) are considered as the disturbances, and the objective of the web guide 400 is to reject these disturbances to maintain the lateral position downstream of the web guide 400. Thus the effect of the input guide displacement, Z(s), to the lateral position of the web 108, YL(s), is given by
Offset Pivot Guide
Notice that the denominator of the transfer function (18) is a polynomial of degree 4. The increase in the order is because of the dynamics of the extra web span between the two guide rollers B and C. Also, the two rollers A and B are parallel when viewed perpendicularly to the centerline of the web, throughout the motion of B. Hence, θ0 can be taken as zero.
Note that when L=L1 and Y0=0, the transfer function for the OPG can be given by
which is a second order equation with relative degree zero.
Response at a Downstream Roller Due to Input at the Steering Guide Roller
Considering the RPG, the displacement of the guide z, causes the web displacement of at that roller. This, in turn, affects the web lateral position at the downstream roller yL+1. Hence, the two transfer functions can be cascaded to get the net effect of z on yL+1.
Hence, we have
Here, τ is the time constant of the guide roller's entering span and τg is the time constant for the guide roller's exiting span.
Unwind Guiding
Referring now to
Referring now to
where yL represents the lateral displacement of the web 108 at the roller downstream of the idler roller 904 (
To consider the complete dynamic model of the unwind guide 900, that is, to find the transfer function of the unwind guide 900 with force acting on it as an input and the displacement of the web 108 at the downstream roller as output, we have to consider the change in mass of the unwind roller 902 as it releases the web 108 over time.
Let the force acting on the roller be given by
where m is the mass of the whole unwind guide setup which is moving, Ż0 is the velocity with which it moves and b is the friction coefficient. Simplifying, we get
where z0 is the displacement of the unwind guide 900. The mass m of the whole guide setup can be given by
m=m0+mr, (26)
where mr gives the changing mass of the roll of web material 905 on the unwind roll 902 and m0 is the mass of the setup without the unwind roll 902, which is constant. Further, the mass of the unwind roll 902 can be written as
mr=ρbwπ(R02−Rc2) (27)
where bw is the web width, ρ is the density of the web material, Rc is the radius of the empty core mounted on the unwind roll-shaft, and R0 is the radius of the material roll. The time derivative of mr is given by,
The rate of change of the radius of the material roll is related to the longitudinal velocity v0 and the web thickness, tw, and can be given as follows:
Note that this relation is only approximate as the radius of the roll of web material 905 changes only after one complete rotation. The continuity can be assumed, as the thickness is usually very small compared the radius of the roll of web material 905. Using this relation, the rate of change of mass m of the whole guide setup can be given by,
Now, using (30) in the equation (25) and taking the Laplace transforms, we can write the transfer function of the guide setup, with force acting on the unwind setup as input and the displacement of the unwind guide roller 902 as output, as
where b1=(b−ρbwtwv0), and m can be estimated at each sampling time using the equation (30). This is derived under the assumption that the mass supported by the unwind roll 902 is varying slowly. If this is not true, we cannot take Laplace transforms since the coefficients of the governing differential equation are time-varying. Thus using the relations (31) and (23), the transfer function of the unwind guide roll 902 with force acting on it as input and displacement of the web 108 at the downstream roller as output can be given as,
Referring now to
As the sensor 110 is attached to the rewind guide 1104 and is placed before the idler roller 904, the output of the sensor 110 gives the displacement of the guide 1104 relative to the web position before the idler roller 904. Hence, we can transform this to the case where the rewind roller 1102 is stationary with respect to the ground and the web edge before the idler roller 904 is moving (see
When force is applied on the rewind roller 1102 to displace it laterally in one direction, this causes a relative displacement of the web edge before the idler roller 904 in the opposite direction. In other words, if żL(t) is the velocity of the rewind guide 1100 with respect to ground, then y0 (t)=żL(t).
The total force acting on the rewind guide 1100 can be given by,
where F is the force acting on the rewind guide setup, m is the mass of the whole rewind guide setup, which is moving, b is the friction coefficient, and żL is the velocity of the rewind guide setup. As {dot over (y)}0 (t)=żL(t), we can write the above equation as
Using a similar argument as that given for the unwind roller case, we have
where b1=(b+ρbwtwv0), bw is the web width, ρ is the density of the web material, v0 is the longitudinal velocity, tw is the web thickness, and m can be estimated at each sampling time using
Now, the web dynamics for the span between the idler roller 904 and the rewind roller 1102 can be given using equation (12), with θL=θ0=ZL=Z0=0. Again, this is because we can consider this as the case where the rewind roller 102 is stationary with respect to the ground and the web edge before the idler roller 904 is moving.
Thus, in
Lateral Control with Remotely Pivoted Guide (Steering Guide)
The lateral behavior of the web 108 while the web 108 is transported over the rollers is dependent on various physical parameters such as web tension, web material type, web geometry, and type of the web guide. The web lateral position with the remotely pivoted guide 400 can be modeled by the following transfer function
where YL(s) is the Laplace transform of the web lateral position and Z(s) is the input to the guide 400 in the lateral direction. The coefficients β0, β1 and β2 depend on the physical parameters such as the length of the entering web span, transport velocity, web tension, modulus of the web material, web geometry, etc, as described previously. Some of these parameters may vary with the process and some may not be known precisely. A controller that is designed based on nominal plant parameters (the coefficients β0, β1 and β2) may not work efficiently when the actual plant parameters are different from the nominal plant parameters. Hence, a controller that adapts to changes in the plant parameters is desired. A controller called the guide adaptive controller that can adapt to the changes in the physical web process parameters is presented in the following section.
Guide Adaptive Controller
One industrial controller for web guiding is in the form shown in
One objective of the GAC is to ensure that the lateral web position YL, maintains the given desired position r. The GAC is designed so that the response of the closed-loop system matches the response of a desired reference model. Therefore, whenever the plant parameters vary the controller parameters of the GAC adapt to ensure that the actual web position is same as the desired web position. The GAC parameters are adapted based on observation of web position YL, measured by a sensor, the desired web position r and output of the reference model YM. The variable YM is generated within the GAC block as an output of the given reference model whose input is r.
The mathematical model of the web dynamics along with the web guide dynamics (electro-mechanical actuator+transmission system) is given by
where Km and a are motor parameters and Cm is the transmission ratio between the motor angle and the guide position. Another feature of the GAC controller is that it does not assume that the actuator parameters are known.
GAC Design
A second-order reference model of the form
is chosen. The choice of the reference model parameters (ζ and ωn) is based on common performance characteristics such as the settling time and percentage overshoot. Typically, a well damped reference model is chosen.
The control law for the GAC is given by
The adaptive law used to estimate the controller parameters is given by
{dot over (θ)}i=−e1γtφi (42)
where e1=YL−YM, γi>0 are adaptation gains and φi is a filtered version of a function wi:
The functions ωi are given by
where
The design parameter a0 is chosen so that the bandwidth of the filter Gfil(s) is more than the bandwidth of the actuator and less than the sensor noise bandwidth. The parameter p0 is chosen based on the condition that 0<p0<2ζωn. Large values of p0 will reduce the adaptation rate and small values of p0 will result in faster adaptation. If p0 is very small, then the adaptation may be sensitive to disturbances. So, there is a trade-off between the rate of adaptation and sensitivity of the estimated controller parameters to disturbances.
The adaptation gains γi are all chosen as same values initially. As the adaptation gain in increased rate of adaptation is increased and vice-versa. Large adaptation gains result in rapid changes in the controller parameters and hence may lead to un-desirable transient performance while small adaptation gains may lead to inadequate performance. A proper set of adaptation gain values can be determined based on set point regulation experiments. The first six controller parameters θ1−θ6 may have large adaptation gains compared to the last two i.e., θ7−θ8 since the filter Gfil(s) allows for higher gain values.
The adaptation will continue as long as the error e1 is non-zero. To increase the robustness of the GAC a bound for the controller parameters θi may be set based on observation of the evolution of the controller parameters. A bounding algorithm which would limit the controller parameters to stay within a lower and an upper bound may be employed.
In a preferred embodiment the GAC assumes no initial knowledge of the controller parameters i.e., all the estimated controller parameters θi are initially assumed to be zero.
Freezing of Estimated Controller Parameters
The estimated controller parameters reach a steady-state value after some time. How fast the controller parameters reach the steady-state value depends on the adaptation gains. Once the steady-state value is reached in a preferred embodiment there is no significant change in the controller parameters. Therefore, adaptation can be stopped or the estimated controller parameters can be frozen. When the controller parameters are frozen, the controller behaves like a fixed gain controller with optimum value of gains for that operating condition.
When changes in the process parameters occur, adaptation can be resumed. This can be implemented by continuously monitoring the error between the actual and desired web position. Once the error exceeds a predefined limit the adaptation of the parameters can be resumed.
The decision on when to stop the adaptation can be made based on the adaptive law. Recall the adaptive law is given in equation (5). When the controller parameters reach a steady-state value θi's would be zero. Whenever all θi's are close to zero, then the adaptation can be stopped. In order to avoid the hypothetical conditions when steady state error is observed after the controller parameters reach a steady-state value, two conditions need to be met before stopping the adaptation. First, the error has to be below a predefined limit (small value) and second all the controller parameters should reach steady-state values.
Parameter Resetting
The GAC can be designed in such a way that the initial controller parameter estimates is not necessary. The GAC can be initialized with all the controller parameters as zero. This provides an added benefit of starting the adaptation at any time during the operation of a guide. If any of the estimated controller parameters exceed a chosen bound, then all the estimated controller parameters can be reset to zero. This resetting strategy does not affect the overall performance of the GAC.
GAC Process
Referring now to
1701. Start
1702. Initialize φi=0, ωi=0 and θi=0 for i=1 to 8.
1703. Read sensor: The sensor reading provides the measurement for the actual position of the web.
1704. Compute the reference model output YM: Given the desired web lateral position r compute the output of the reference model based on the mathematical model given in equation (3).
1705. Compute error: Calculate the difference between the reference model output YM and the sensor measurement YL, i.e., e1=YL−YM.
1706. Compute ωi: The function ωi is a filtered version of the measurement YL, control input Up, and the desired web position r. Calculate ωi based on equation (7).
1707. Compute φi: φi is the filtered output of ωi as per equation (6).
1708. Compute {dot over (θ)}i. Compute the rate of change of the controller parameters based on the adaptive law given in equation (5).
1709A-B. Parameter Freezing Check:
1710. Resetting Check: Check if the updated controller parameters are within their corresponding bounds. If any one of the controller parameters is outside the bound, reset all the controller parameters to zero. If all the parameters are within their corresponding bounds accept the controller update made in 1709B.
1711. Compute Control: Compute the control effort based on equation (4). Check if the computed control is within the actuator limits. If not, bound the control based on the actuator limits.
1712. Send the computed control to the guide actuator.
1713. Check to see if GAC has to be continued. If yes, go to step 3 else go to step 14.
1714. Stop.
Uniform Guide Adaptive Controller
The GAC disclosure presented thus far was developed based on the mathematical model for the remotely pivoted guide given in equation (2). None of the parameters in that model are assumed to be known but the GAC is capable of adapting to the unknown parameters. The mathematical model for the offset-pivot guide (displacement guide) is given by
where the model parameters, β's, are not known. A GAC similar to the remotely pivoted guide can be developed for the offset-pivot guide as well. The difference between the two GAC's would be the number of estimated controller parameters.
In a commercially developed offset-pivot guide, the distance from the guide roller to the pivot axis, L1, is very close to the span length of the guide. Therefore, taking L1=L, the model given in equation (8) reduces to
Notice that the structure of this model is the same as that of the remotely pivoted guide; only the model parameters are different. Since knowledge of the model parameters is not required to implement the GAC developed earlier, the same GAC can be used for the offset-pivot guide. Therefore, a uniform controller can be used for both the remotely pivoted guide and offset-pivot guide.
Simplified Guide Adaptive Controller
The mathematical model can be approximated as
The GAC for the simplified model has four controller parameters (i=1, . . . , 4) and the parameters are updated based on the same adaptive law given by equation (5). The control update is calculated based on the same control law given in equation (4) and the φi's are computed based on equation (6). The function ωi is given by
Selection of the design parameters is similar to the design presented previously. The simplified GAC can be implemented for both the guides. The GAC based on simplified mathematical model reduces the number of floating point operations performed in each sampling period.
It should be understood that the processes described above can be performed by the controller using suitable hardware, such as a processor accessing and executing computer executable instructions adapted to perform the functions described above. Such computer executable instructions embodying the logic of the processes described herein, as well as the resulting data are stored on one or more computer readable mediums accessible by the hardware of the controller. Examples of a computer readable medium include an optical storage device, a magnetic storage device, an electronic storage device or the like. The term “processor” as used herein means a system or systems that are able to embody and/or execute the logic of the processes described herein. The logic embodied in the form of software instructions or firmware may be executed on any appropriate hardware which may be a dedicated system or systems, or a general purpose computer system, or distributed processing computer system, all of which are well understood in the art, and a detailed description of how to make or use such computers is not deemed necessary herein. When the computer system is used to execute the logic of the processes described herein, such computer(s) and/or execution can be conducted at a same geographic location or multiple different geographic locations. Furthermore, the execution of the logic can be conducted continuously or at multiple discrete times. Further, such logic is preferably performed about simultaneously with the receipt of data so that the controller guides the web 108 in real-time. However, some of the steps of the processes can prior to or after the guiding of the web 108, such as the step of initializing the controller with the controller parameters.
Thus, the present invention is well adapted to carry out the objectives and attain the ends and advantages mentioned above as well as those inherent therein. While presently preferred embodiments have been described for purposes of this disclosure, numerous changes and modifications will be apparent to those of ordinary skill in the art. Such changes and modifications are encompassed within the spirit of this invention as defined by the claims.
This application claims the priority of U.S. Provisional Patent Application No. 61/303,878 entitled “METHOD FOR ADAPTIVE GUIDING OF WEBS,” filed Feb. 11, 2010, the contents of which are hereby incorporated by reference.
Number | Name | Date | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
3610546 | McGorry | Oct 1971 | A |
3724732 | Bonner | Apr 1973 | A |
4269140 | Burns et al. | May 1981 | A |
4350276 | Kreder et al. | Sep 1982 | A |
4477006 | Sharp | Oct 1984 | A |
4488687 | Andreasson | Dec 1984 | A |
4507073 | Shelton | Mar 1985 | A |
4574194 | Coats et al. | Mar 1986 | A |
5685955 | Leigraf et al. | Nov 1997 | A |
5767686 | Kespohl | Jun 1998 | A |
5769298 | Plumb | Jun 1998 | A |
6289729 | Haque et al. | Sep 2001 | B1 |
6323948 | Haque et al. | Nov 2001 | B2 |
6635895 | Haque et al. | Oct 2003 | B2 |
6985789 | Carlson et al. | Jan 2006 | B2 |
7055726 | Satoh et al. | Jun 2006 | B2 |
7296717 | Swanson et al. | Nov 2007 | B2 |
7415881 | Haque et al. | Aug 2008 | B2 |
20020177918 | Pierel et al. | Nov 2002 | A1 |
20030183356 | Satoh et al. | Oct 2003 | A1 |
20100038468 | Hein | Feb 2010 | A1 |
Entry |
---|
Vandoren, V. , “Adaptive Controllers: Commercially available controllers can adapt to conditions they haven't experienced previously, gaining knowledge on the fly to make your process behave better”, “Control Engineering”, 2002, pp. 22-30, Publisher: www.controleng.com. |
“Adaptive Control.” (n.d.) In Wikipedia, Retrieved Mar. 4, 2009, from http://en.widipedia.org/wiki/Adaptive—control. |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
61303878 | Feb 2010 | US |