Skip to content

Commit f7dbeca

Browse files
author
Auralius Manurung
committed
merge branch 'master' of https://github.com/jasonnicholson/LuGre into jasonnicholson-master
2 parents 0f7e908 + f062011 commit f7dbeca

File tree

13 files changed

+119
-378
lines changed

13 files changed

+119
-378
lines changed

README.md

Lines changed: 26 additions & 20 deletions
Original file line numberDiff line numberDiff line change
@@ -9,10 +9,6 @@ Link to the paper: https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/376053
99

1010
There are 2 m-files:
1111

12-
1. demo1.m
13-
14-
This is the first attempt at reconstructing the paper. I use the basic Euler method here to perform the integration. It takes more time to complete the simulation since a high sampling rate is necessary to mantain stability. The system itself is a very stiff ODE.
15-
1612
2. demo2.m
1713

1814
This is the second attempt at reconstructing the paper. Here, I use the built-in MATLAB solver: ode23s, which is designed for a stiff system. Thus, it takes less time to complete the simulation. In order to use MATLAB built-in solver, the problem must be first formalized. Plese see the PDF file [here](./problem_formalization.pdf).
@@ -21,50 +17,60 @@ This is the second attempt at reconstructing the paper. Here, I use the built-in
2117

2218
This is an additional simulation to demonstrate the friction observer. This is not shown in the paper. Basically, this is a numerical simulation of section V.B, for position control with a unit-step input.
2319

20+
4. demo4.m
21+
22+
This shows optimally tuned PI and velocity gain without the friction observer. The performance is superior to the friction observer with poorly tuned PI and velocity gains.
23+
24+
-------------------------------
25+
26+
Not shown in the paper. Run demo2.
27+
28+
![fig1](fig1.png)
29+
2430
-------------------------------
2531

26-
Not shown in the paper
32+
Not shown in the paper. Run demo2.
2733

28-
![fig1](https://github.com/auralius/LuGre/blob/master/fig1.png)
34+
![fig2](fig2.png)
2935

3036
-------------------------------
3137

32-
Not shown in the paper
38+
Fig. 3 of the paper. Run demo2.
3339

34-
![fig2](https://github.com/auralius/LuGre/blob/master/fig2.png)
40+
![fig3](fig3.png)
3541

3642
-------------------------------
3743

38-
Fig. 3 of the paper
44+
Fig. 2 of the paper. Run demo2.
3945

40-
![fig3](https://github.com/auralius/LuGre/blob/master/fig3.png)
46+
![fig4](fig4.png)
4147

4248
-------------------------------
4349

44-
Fig. 2 of the paper
50+
Fig. 6 of the paper. Run demo2.
4551

46-
![fig4](https://github.com/auralius/LuGre/blob/master/fig4.png)
52+
![fig5](fig5.png)
4753

4854
-------------------------------
4955

50-
Fig. 6 of the paper
56+
Fig. 4 of the paper. Run demo2.
5157

52-
![fig5](https://github.com/auralius/LuGre/blob/master/fig5.png)
58+
![fig6](fig6.png)
5359

5460
-------------------------------
5561

56-
Fig. 4 of the paper
62+
Fig. 8 of the paper. Run demo2.
5763

58-
![fig6](https://github.com/auralius/LuGre/blob/master/fig6.png)
64+
![fig6](fig7.png)
5965

6066
-------------------------------
6167

62-
Fig. 8 of the paper
68+
Not shown in the paper. Run demo3.
6369

64-
![fig6](https://github.com/auralius/LuGre/blob/master/fig7.png)
70+
![fig6](fig8.png)
6571

6672
-------------------------------
6773

68-
Not shown in the paper
74+
Note that if the PI and velocity gains are optimally tuned, then the performance is better than the friction observer. Rise time is smaller and overshoot is smaller. This model is generally easier to tune. Run demo4.
6975

70-
![fig6](https://github.com/auralius/LuGre/blob/master/fig8.png)
76+
![fig6](fig9.png)

0 commit comments

Comments
 (0)