The present invention generally relates to limited rotation motor systems, and relates in particular to systems and methods for designing and adjusting limited rotation motor systems.
Limited rotation motors generally include stepper motors and constant velocity motors. Certain stepper motors are well suited for applications requiring high speed and high duty cycle sawtooth scanning at large scan angles. For example, U.S. Pat. No. 6,275,319 discloses an optical scanning device for raster scanning applications.
Limited rotation motors for certain applications, however, require the rotor to move between two positions with a precise and constant velocity rather than by stepping and settling in a sawtooth fashion. Such applications require that the time needed to reach the constant velocity be as short as possible and that the amount of error in the achieved velocity be as small as possible. Constant velocity motors generally provide a higher torque constant and typically include a rotor and drive circuitry for causing the rotor to rotate about a central axis, as well as a position transducer, e.g., a tachometer or a position sensor, and a feedback circuit coupled to the transducer that permits the rotor to be driven by the drive circuitry responsive to an input signal and a feedback signal. For example, U.S. Pat. No. 5,424,632 discloses a conventional two-pole limited rotation motor.
A requirement of a desired limited rotation motor for certain applications is a system that is capable of changing the angular position of a load such as a mirror from angle A to angle B, with angles A and B both within the range of angular motion of the scanner, and both defined arbitrarily precisely, in an arbitrarily short time while maintaining a desired linearity of velocity within an arbitrarily small error. Both the minimum time of response of this system and the minimum velocity error are dominated by the effective bandwidth of the system. The effective bandwidth of the system, however, is governed by many factors, including the open loop gain of the system.
A limited rotation torque motor may be modeled or represented by a double-integrator model plus several flexible modes and low frequency non-linear effects. A typical closed-loop servo system for a galvanometer includes integral actions for low frequency uncertainties and a notch filter for high frequency resonant modes. System operation is chosen at the mid-frequency range where the system is well modeled by the rigid body. For a double integrator rigid body model, there is a direct relationship between the open-loop gain and the cross-over frequency on the frequency response plot. For example, an automatic tuning system for a servowriter head positioning system is disclosed in Autotuning of a servowriter head positioning system with minimum positioning error, Y. H. Huang, S. Weerasooriya and T. S. Low, J. Applied Physics, v. 79 pp. 5674–5676 (1996).
In the limited rotation motor actuator, the open-loop gain is determined by the torque constant of the motor, the inertia of the mirror and rotor structure, and the gain characteristics of the power amplifier. The torque constant may change with the operation temperature. For example, the magnetic material used in the motor may have temperature coefficients of between about 0.1% C and 1% C. With a temperature change of 20 C, the resulting change in torque constant may be non-negligible. The torque constant also changes with the angle of operations. There are other factors that may affect the torque constant as well as the imperfect coil winding, which causes changes in the field density (see for example, U.S. Pat. No. 5,225,770).
The change of head from one size to another size may also cause significant changes in total inertia, and consequently the open-loop gain. Adaptive filter adjustment of open-loop gain variations due to change in mirrors is more desirable when human intervention is not required at initial set up. Other factors that may contribute to open-loop gain variations are temperature dependence of the power amplifier and changes in power amplifier circuits due to aging.
Such limited rotation motors may be used, for example, in a variety of laser scanning applications, such as high speed surface metrology. Further laser processing applications include laser welding (for example high speed spot welding), surface treatment, cutting, drilling, marking, trimming, laser repair, rapid prototyping, forming microstructures, or forming dense arrays of nanostructures on various materials.
The processing speeds of such systems are typically limited by one of more of mirror speed, X-Y stage speed, material interaction and material thermal time constants, the layout of target material and regions to be processed, and software performance. Generally, in applications where one or more of mirror speed, position accuracy, and settling time are factors that limit performance, any significant improvement in scanning system open loop gain may translate into immediate throughput improvements.
There is a need, therefore, for an improved limited rotation motor system, and more particularly, there is a need for a rotor for a limited rotation motor system that provides maximum performance.
In accordance with an embodiment, the invention provides an adjustment system for adjusting a proportional, integral, derivative controller in a limited rotation motor system. The adjustment system includes a first transform unit, a second transform unit, a model identification unit, and a PID adjustment unit. The first transform unit is for receiving a first digital signal that is representative of a motor control signal, and is for providing a first frequency domain sequence that is representative of a frequency domain representation of the motor control signal. The second transform unit is for receiving a second digital signal that is representative of a position detection signal, and is for providing a second frequency domain sequence that is representative of a frequency domain representation of the position detection signal. The model identification unit is for identifying a representation of a ratio of the first and second frequency domain sequences. The PID adjustment unit is for identifying appropriate values for the coefficient kp of a proportional unit of the system, for the coefficient ki of an integral unit for the system, and for the coefficient kd of a derivative unit for the system.
The following description may be further understood with reference to the accompanying drawings in which:
The drawings are shown for illustrative purposes only.
In accordance with various embodiments of the invention, limited rotation motor performance data is captured from a motor system. A pseudo random binary signal is input to the system. The signal that is input to the motor (the motor input signal) is recorded, and the position signal that is received from the position detector (the PD signal) is also recorded. A Fast Fourier Transform (FFT) is performed on each signal, and a frequency response representation for the PD signal is compared to the frequency response representation for the motor input signal by taking the ratio of these two representations. The ratio provides a sequence (the ratio sequence) that represents the open loop frequency response for the system. The open loop frequency response may be provided in a Bode plot of the magnitude versus frequency. A mathematical system model may then be generated that represents the transfer function of the motor system. Knowing the mathematical model for a motor system permits the system to be designed to provide optimal output, e.g., by adjusting the PID coefficients to achieve optimal performance, or by designing a controller that best complements the motor system transfer function to achieve optimal performance.
The system provides that the identification of the open loop cross over frequency variations in the motor system may be identified automatically (even via a remote digital network) as a result of changes in mirror inertia, operating temperature and operation angle. The automatic identification may be performed closed-loop so that system stability is not affected during the procedure. A data collection procedure may be performed in milliseconds.
An automatic identification system in accordance with an embodiment of the invention may involve system excitation using a pseudo random binary sequence (PRBS), then conducting a Fast Fourier Transform (FFT) on the captured time responses. The system identification is then modeled using the FFT data.
In particular, a pseudo random binary sequence is input to the system either as the input command 34 or is provided as a perturbation to the output of the controller 32. The data points for the PRBS excitation signal may be powers of twos.
As shown in
Having determined the open loop frequency responses, the system may then identify a model for the system (using identification unit 70), then interpolate the open loop gain from the identified model (at interpolation unit 72) and then adjust the controller gain accordingly using the proportional adjust unit 74, the integral adjust unit 76 and the derivative adjust unit 78. The outputs of the adjust units 74, 76 and 78 may be provided to D/A converters 80, 82 and 84 respectively, and these analog PID outputs 52a, 52b and 52c may be provided to the PID units 44, 46 and 48 of the controller 32.
The system model may be identified in a variety of ways, including for example, frequency matching using stored information regarding a plurality of frequency curves for known systems. For example,
Using a best fit analysis, the closest matching frequency curve (from 100) may be chosen, and the controller P, I and D values may be adjusted accordingly. For example,
The system, therefore, first provides a higher order controller that meets the design specifications, and then identifies a PID controller that matches the frequency response of the high order controller. Examples of matching criteria include (1) identifying the PID parameters so that the differences between magnitudes of the frequency responses of the optimal controller and that of the PID controller is minimized in the least mean square (LMS) sense, and (2) identifying the PID parameters so that the distance on the s-plane between magnitudes of the frequency responses of the optimal controller and that of the PID controller is minimized in the LMS sense. Frequency weighting functions may be used for each of the above. In further embodiments, other identification methods may involve linear least square with weighting, non-linear search with weighting, and linear least square followed by non-linear search, each with weighting.
The objective, therefore, of frequency matching is to select the appropriate controller coefficients for a given controller architecture so that the difference between the frequency responses C(w) and D(w) is minimized, where C(w) is the controller to be designed, D(w) is the desired controller and w is the frequency variable in radians/sec. For optimization methods employing LMS, this is equivalent to minimizing the following
where real( ) and image( ) represent the real and imaginary part of the frequency responses respectively. For a linear time-invariant minimal phase system, the phase of the frequency response is uniquely defined by the magnitude of the frequency response. The equivalent function may be defined as
where mag( ) and ang( ) represent the magnitude and phase angle of the frequency responses respectively. When the frequency responses at certain frequencies are more significant than at other frequencies, the desired frequency response D(w) may be replaced by D(w)*W(w) in the above functions where W(w) is the weighting function. For example, if the weighting of all other frequencies are 1 in the weighting function W(w), the value of 10 may be assigned to frequencies that are more critical. This provides a weighted LMS method.
For a PID controller as shown in
C(w)=(kd*jw+ki−kp*w2)/jw
where kp, ki and kd are the gains of the proportional, integral and derivative of the error respectively. These three coefficients fully define the PID controller and may be designed by substituting the above equation for C(w) into the functions discussed above for Q.
As shown in
Instead of feeding back the derivative of the error signal as with the PID controller discussed above, the PI plus D controller provides feedback of the derivative of the velocity signal only. The frequency response of the PI plus D controller therefore is
C(w)=(kp*jw+ki)/jw*(1+kd*jw*P(w))
where P(w) is the frequency response of the system to be controlled. Again, the controller coefficients kp, ki, kd may be designed using frequency matching by substituting the above equation for C(w) into the functions for Q discussed above.
As shown in
The error proportional term in the PI plus D controller is therefore replaced with the position proportional term. The frequency response of the P plus I plus D controller therefore is
C(w)=(ki)/jw*(1+(kd*jw+kp)*P(w))
where P(w) is the frequency response of the system to be controlled. Again, the controller coefficients kp, ki, kd may be designed using frequency matching by substituting the above equation for C(w) into the functions for Q discussed above.
The invention provides, therefore, that a PID controlled limited rotation motor system may be adjusted to provide improved performance by adjusting the coefficients for the proportional, integral and derivative elements of the PID controller.
Those skilled in the art will appreciate that numerous modifications and variations may be made to the above disclosed embodiments without departing from the spirit and scope of the invention.
The present application claims priority to U.S. Provisional Patent Application Ser. No. 60/538,842 filed Jan. 23, 2004, and claims priority to U.S. Provisional Patent Application Ser. No. 60/575,255 filed May 28, 2004, and claims priority to U.S. Provisional Patent Application Ser. No. 60/613,962 filed Sep. 28, 2004.
Number | Name | Date | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
3932794 | Iwako | Jan 1976 | A |
3999043 | Reiss et al. | Dec 1976 | A |
4151567 | Dorsemagen et al. | Apr 1979 | A |
4282468 | Barker et al. | Aug 1981 | A |
4398241 | Baker et al. | Aug 1983 | A |
4514671 | Louth | Apr 1985 | A |
4532402 | Overbeck | Jul 1985 | A |
4536906 | Varndell et al. | Aug 1985 | A |
4624368 | Satake | Nov 1986 | A |
4631605 | O'Gwynn | Dec 1986 | A |
4646280 | Toyosawa | Feb 1987 | A |
4670653 | McConkle et al. | Jun 1987 | A |
4809253 | Baas et al. | Feb 1989 | A |
4845698 | Baas | Jul 1989 | A |
4855674 | Murate et al. | Aug 1989 | A |
4864295 | Rohr | Sep 1989 | A |
4870631 | Stoddard | Sep 1989 | A |
4893068 | Evans, Jr. | Jan 1990 | A |
4903131 | Lingemann et al. | Feb 1990 | A |
4930027 | Steele et al. | May 1990 | A |
4956831 | Sarraf et al. | Sep 1990 | A |
4961117 | Rumley | Oct 1990 | A |
4965513 | Haynes et al. | Oct 1990 | A |
4972344 | Stoddard et al. | Nov 1990 | A |
5075875 | Love et al. | Dec 1991 | A |
5093608 | Kono et al. | Mar 1992 | A |
5119213 | Graves et al. | Jun 1992 | A |
5122720 | Martinson et al. | Jun 1992 | A |
5167002 | Fridhandler | Nov 1992 | A |
5185676 | Nishiberi | Feb 1993 | A |
5187364 | Blais | Feb 1993 | A |
5225770 | Montagu | Jul 1993 | A |
5229574 | Stone | Jul 1993 | A |
5245528 | Saito et al. | Sep 1993 | A |
5257041 | Kresock et al. | Oct 1993 | A |
5275041 | Poulsen | Jan 1994 | A |
5280377 | Chandler et al. | Jan 1994 | A |
5285378 | Matsumoto | Feb 1994 | A |
5293102 | Martinson et al. | Mar 1994 | A |
5313147 | Yoneda et al. | May 1994 | A |
5331264 | Cheng et al. | Jul 1994 | A |
5375186 | Schuettpelz | Dec 1994 | A |
5406496 | Quinn | Apr 1995 | A |
5424526 | Leonhardt et al. | Jun 1995 | A |
5424632 | Montagu | Jun 1995 | A |
5452285 | Monen | Sep 1995 | A |
5453618 | Sutton et al. | Sep 1995 | A |
5534071 | Varshney et al. | Jul 1996 | A |
5537109 | Dowd | Jul 1996 | A |
5541486 | Zoller et al. | Jul 1996 | A |
5568377 | Seem et al. | Oct 1996 | A |
5585976 | Pham | Dec 1996 | A |
5589870 | Curry et al. | Dec 1996 | A |
5600121 | Kahn et al. | Feb 1997 | A |
5604516 | Herrod et al. | Feb 1997 | A |
5610487 | Hutsell | Mar 1997 | A |
5646765 | Laakmann et al. | Jul 1997 | A |
5653900 | Clement et al. | Aug 1997 | A |
5656908 | Rehm | Aug 1997 | A |
5699494 | Colbert et al. | Dec 1997 | A |
5726883 | Levine et al. | Mar 1998 | A |
5742503 | Yu | Apr 1998 | A |
5767494 | Matsueda et al. | Jun 1998 | A |
5801371 | Kahn et al. | Sep 1998 | A |
5805448 | Lindsay et al. | Sep 1998 | A |
5808725 | Moberg et al. | Sep 1998 | A |
5859774 | Kuzuya et al. | Jan 1999 | A |
5869945 | Ha et al. | Feb 1999 | A |
5886335 | Matsueda | Mar 1999 | A |
5886422 | Mills | Mar 1999 | A |
5912541 | Bigler et al. | Jun 1999 | A |
5914924 | Takagi et al. | Jun 1999 | A |
5986989 | Takagi et al. | Nov 1999 | A |
6054828 | Hill | Apr 2000 | A |
6072653 | Goker | Jun 2000 | A |
6081751 | Luo et al. | Jun 2000 | A |
6107600 | Kurosawa | Aug 2000 | A |
6144011 | Moss et al. | Nov 2000 | A |
6198176 | Gillette | Mar 2001 | B1 |
6198246 | Yutkowitz | Mar 2001 | B1 |
6211484 | Kaplan et al. | Apr 2001 | B1 |
6211639 | Meister et al. | Apr 2001 | B1 |
6211640 | Fujisaki et al. | Apr 2001 | B1 |
6243350 | Knight et al. | Jun 2001 | B1 |
6256121 | Lizotte et al. | Jul 2001 | B1 |
6275319 | Gadhok | Aug 2001 | B1 |
6304359 | Gadhok | Oct 2001 | B1 |
6317637 | Limroth | Nov 2001 | B1 |
6350239 | Ohad et al. | Feb 2002 | B1 |
6353766 | Weinzierl | Mar 2002 | B1 |
6424873 | Przybylski | Jul 2002 | B1 |
6442444 | Matsubara et al. | Aug 2002 | B2 |
6445962 | Blevins et al. | Sep 2002 | B1 |
6449564 | Kliman et al. | Sep 2002 | B1 |
6453722 | Liu et al. | Sep 2002 | B1 |
6463352 | Tadokoro et al. | Oct 2002 | B1 |
6510353 | Gudaz et al. | Jan 2003 | B1 |
6577907 | Czyszczewski et al. | Jun 2003 | B1 |
6622099 | Cohen et al. | Sep 2003 | B2 |
6643080 | Goodner, III et al. | Nov 2003 | B1 |
6646397 | Discenzo | Nov 2003 | B1 |
6697685 | Caldwell | Feb 2004 | B1 |
6721445 | Azencott | Apr 2004 | B1 |
6774601 | Schwartz et al. | Aug 2004 | B2 |
6782296 | Hoche | Aug 2004 | B2 |
6812668 | Akiyama | Nov 2004 | B2 |
6822415 | Komiya et al. | Nov 2004 | B1 |
6826519 | Fujino | Nov 2004 | B1 |
6853951 | Jarrell et al. | Feb 2005 | B2 |
6876167 | Jones | Apr 2005 | B1 |
6885972 | Samata et al. | Apr 2005 | B2 |
6895352 | Josselson et al. | May 2005 | B2 |
6937908 | Chang et al. | Aug 2005 | B2 |
7039557 | Mayer et al. | May 2006 | B2 |
20010011550 | Zheng | Aug 2001 | A1 |
20020049513 | Nussbaum et al. | Apr 2002 | A1 |
20030097193 | Makino et al. | May 2003 | A1 |
20030128240 | Martinez et al. | Jul 2003 | A1 |
20030163296 | Richards | Aug 2003 | A1 |
20040135534 | Cullen | Jul 2004 | A1 |
20050174124 | Huang | Aug 2005 | A1 |
20050228512 | Chen et al. | Oct 2005 | A1 |
20050251271 | Cutler | Nov 2005 | A1 |
Number | Date | Country |
---|---|---|
2359739 | Apr 2003 | CA |
2629473 | Apr 1979 | DE |
3505681 | Aug 1985 | DE |
3520189 | Dec 1986 | DE |
4211213 | Oct 1993 | DE |
0260138 | Mar 1988 | EP |
0378093 | Jul 1990 | EP |
0339402 | Jun 1993 | EP |
896265 | Jul 1998 | EP |
1283593 | Feb 2003 | EP |
1298511 | Apr 2003 | EP |
2600789 | Dec 1987 | FR |
951785 | Mar 1964 | GB |
63190584 | Aug 1988 | JP |
01224189 | Sep 1989 | JP |
04229088 | Aug 1992 | JP |
05036851 | Feb 1993 | JP |
07114402 | May 1995 | JP |
2000028955 | Jan 2000 | JP |
2000-330641 | Nov 2000 | JP |
2001142917 | May 2001 | JP |
2001-245488 | Sep 2001 | JP |
2002199147 | Jul 2002 | JP |
2003044111 | Feb 2003 | JP |
WO9318525 | Sep 1993 | WO |
WO09917282 | Apr 1999 | WO |
WO0133303 | May 2001 | WO |
WO0164591 | Sep 2001 | WO |
WO03097290 | Nov 2003 | WO |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
20050162174 A1 | Jul 2005 | US |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
60538842 | Jan 2004 | US | |
60575255 | May 2004 | US | |
60613962 | Sep 2004 | US |