Approaches of Discrete Feedforward Control for Vibration Cancellation in Multimode Single-Link Flexible Manipulators

Emiliano Pereira, Ivan M. Diaz, Pedro Roncero and Vicente Feliu Escuela Tecnica Superior de Ingenieros Industriales Universidad de Castilla-La Mancha Campus Universitario, 13071, Ciudad Real Spain emiliano.pereira@uclm.es, ivan.munoz@uclm.es, pedro.roncero@uclm.es, vicente.feliu@uclm.es
Abstract - This paper presents a new approach to the feedforward control of flexible arms. The objective is the endpoint position control and vibration suppression in a singlelink flexible manipulator with several vibration modes. The
feedfoward controller is designed based on the so-called dynamic model inversion technique derived from a

discretization of its dynamic model. By modifying the system dynamics with a feedback of the torque at the base of the arm, this technique can be applied in a very simple way. The proposed method is general in the sense that it removes remaining oscillations in the steady state under any number of significant vibration modes. A numerical example of the
application of the method on an experimental robot arm is carried out and finally, some preliminary experimental results are presented.

are two basic approaches to their open-loop control: inverting the arm dynamics and pre-shaping the command usually called the command pre-shaping input, which is pre-sh techich is Severallmethodsoband technique (CPT). Several methods based on the first approach can be found. For example, the optimal input is obtained through an iteration procedure in the frequency domain [4], or minimizing the integral squared error between the command signal and the tip position [5]. Since [6] proposed the pre-shaping of the command input, which generates inputs that do not excite the vibration modes, many references can be found [7], [8], [9], [10], amongst
others.

A discrete feedforward control (DFC) based

on

the

INTRODUCTION Flexible robots have become a research area of increasing interest in engineering in the last years. New robotics applications demand lighter robots that can be driven with smaller amounts of energy. An example of this is the aerospace industry, where weights have to be minimized in very large manipulators. It is well-known that the use of a relatively long flexible link incurs a penalty due to elastic deformation and vibration associated with the structural flexibility and the high-speed motion of these manipulators. To attain the tip position accuracy, a control mechanism that takes into account both the rigid body and flexural motions of the system is required. Some strategies to cancel vibrations are based on feedforward (open-loop) control schemes and others on feedback (closed-loop) control schemes. An approach to control dynamic systems to controldynamicsystemsistheso-c An approach is the so-called dynamic model inversion technique. Compensators obtained by this method may be used in open-loop or closed-loop schemes [1], [2]. The method is conceptually simple but often requires a large amount of computation. Dynamic model inversion may be used in a closed-loop control in two ways: as a part of the closed-loop controller or as a feedforward compensator. In [3], it can be seen that the performance of these two closed-loop schemes are similar, however, the feedforward control scheme is more stable. Most of the research carried out on flexible manipulators has been focused on the control of single-link arms. There
I

from previous method in the fact that the controller is obtained from a discretization of the dynamic model. It can be proved that the controllers designed with CPT can also obtained with DFC and both of them can be generalized to cancel several modes simultaneously. There are two different ways to achieve this purpose. The first one is based on designing one prefilter for each considered mode. The resulting feedforward controller, which is the result of the convolution of each one, is designed for each vibration mode. This technique is usually utilized in CPT references [9]. Another approach is based on designing one controller able to cancel all the considered modes simultaneously. An example can be found in [11], where the sampling period of the DFC is chosen to cancel more than one vibration mode using the controller with the least order. In addition different ways to design robust feedforward controllers are exposed in the literature [6, 8, 9 and 10], amongst others. As a summary, several ways of dealing with the problem of vibration cancellation and robust design can be found but with an important increase in the complexity of the control law.

dynamic model inversion is proposed in [10]. It differs

In this work a method to modify easily the system dynamics of a multimode flexible arm is presented. This method alters the dynamics by Introducing a loop to modify the relation between the system frequencies. This loop involves the feedback of the coupling torque between the motor and the arm. Once the modification is achieved, the residual vibrations produced by several modes can be suppressed effectively using a very simple DFC controller. The paper is organized as follows. In Section lI the general approach to DFC to cancel vibrations is described and the *motivations to modify the dynamics of flexible
49

1-4244-9713-4/06/$20.OO 2006 IEEE

ICM 2006 * IEEE 3rd International Conference on Mechatronics

manipulators are exposed. Section III introduces a procedure to modify the dynamics of the system in order to apply the method proposed in Section II. Section IV presents an example of application to a single-link flexible manipulator, including simulation and experimental results. Finally, some conclusions are given in Section VI.
DISCRETE FEEDFORWARD CONTROLLER Dynamics of single-link flexible arms is approximated in literature by linear systems of finite dimension. The output of these systems is the tip position and the input is either the current/torque of the motor or the angular position Of of tmotor, aslwell. the motor, as well. The next analysis involving DFC has been carried out based on [10]. The control scheme represented in Fig. 1 is assumed. Fig. 1 shows a feedforward scheme where G(s) is the transfer function of the arm, y(t) is the output signal, u(t) is
II

The solution adopted in [10] was to design a DFC based on finding a compensator that inverts the arm dynamics approximately. Hence, a simplified prefilter was defined
as:

C(z)

Gd (z)

I)' G()zn

(3)

This controller exactly cancels vibrations (at sampling

rnin oin oevr tcnb proved by applying the modified z-transform that the oscillations of the arm in the continuous time are also removed with a maximum delay of ndT seconds after the reference has reached its steady state. Next, let us consider the following undamped system with m natural frequencies

itracking trcigdrn

X during transient motion. Moreover it can be

the input signal, C(z) is the discrete transfer function of the prefilter, r(t) is the command signal (the desired trajectory for the tip), T is the sampling period of r(t) and y(t), r(k) and y(k) are the corresponding sampled sequences; and G0h(s) is the transfer function of the zero-order hold of period T that transforms the control sequence u(k) generated by the computer into the analog control signal u(t). u(t). The prefilter, C(z), that makes the output, y(k), follows exactly the sampled reference, r(k), at the sampling instants, may be obtained by inversion of the discretized system dynamics

G(s)=
71

Gn(s)

(S

+ w1

22

(4)

~~~~~~~~~~~If

where oi represent the natural frequencies of the system and the fundamental one. particularly coo is adprlual Stefnaetloe the z-transform iis (2) applied to (4), G(z) has the following form

G(z)=(1-z ')L2 1

'

1 +1-etzi j (5)

C(z) = G-1 (z) ,(1

where G(z) = Z [Goh (s)G(s)] and is given by

and the controller (3) obtained from the system (5) after some calculations is:

G(z) nG (Z) = (I - zl)- residues of 1-e T( z- I , (2) Gd (Z)

C(z)

rI I_e i= te1 ~

) ((I -e2)

(6)

where p are the poles of G(s)ls, Gn(z) and Gd(z) are At this point, a particular case defined by the following polynomials in z with orders nn and nd, respectively. assumption is made: The differences between y(t) and r(t) in between the All frequencies fulfil the next relation: sampling instants may be made arbitrarily small by using a 2c1 = oo and o, 1 = k1wo, i > 1, T small enough. This method is quite simple but it can not (7) be applied in practice because not every system can be inverted. It is due to the next two reasons: where k1 is an arbitrary integer and coo is named the basic 1) The order of the denominator nd may be larger frequency. Assumption (7) can be simplified as follows: than the order of the numerator nn in G(z) leading to a non-causal filter C(z). (8) co, = (2k + 1) co, = 2) G(z) may be a non-minimum phase system leading to an unstable prefilter C(z).whrc,ianodntg.

cwo,

r(-0(k0()

u()

yt)9

yk

From (7) we can choose the sampling period as:

G(z)T2z/0z/w(9
Figure 1 comuter Open-loop

controlassumption (7), then expression (5) iS reduced to:

50

If we consider a strictly proper system C(s) and

E. Pereira, I. M. Diaz, P Roncero, V Feliu v Approaches of Discrete Feedforward Control for Vibration Cancellation

...

G(z)=

G()(1+zl)

(10)
(

the

(C(s)). Let us define Fc1p as the coupling torque; Or(s) as

tip angle of the beam to be controlled,

et (s) the

tip

where a is a constant. And the prefilter (6) that cancels the dynamics of (9) is
(1 QZ
(1+ ~-l
a

(z11

1 in (4), which means a system with unity gain, then cc 2.. In Fig. 1, the reference r(t) is sampled before passing through the prefilter C(z) which implies some loss of information. This may be avoided by using a very small sampling period T. An alternative that allows the use of the full shape of r(t) and avoids large control signals (that might appear when T is very small) is the use of a continuous version of the prefilter (11), which is obtained by substituting z by esT
= =

Moreover, if G(O)

position reference and t(s) the filtered reference; Em(S) as the angle of the motor and 6m (s) the motor position reference; and finally, H(s) is a transfer function between the coupling torque and the tip angle, and Q(s) is the transfer function that is added to modify the dynamic of the arm to be like (10). Let us define urn as the control input, according to [5], the inner control loop showed in Fig. 3 is designed to achieve a robust solution to motor friction. The control law is:
u

co

( + e )sT C 2

This coincides exactly with the result given by CPT, which is called zero vibration (ZV) input shaper, for the case of one vibration mode. But it is important to notice that, provided the verification of assumption (7), it is able to cancel m modes simultaneously. A robust version of filter (12) can be obtained by making the higher derivatives of the frequency response of C(s) equal zero at oi [10]. This may be achieved with filters with the following transfer function:
Cq (S) C (s)
(13)

K , andKa 'w that compensates the servocontroller plus a term (F effect of the link dynamics in the motor position control. Due to the fact that the coupling torque co is not constant, it can be treated as a disturbance in the control position problem. Therefore, if the parameter K is chosen so that the control input, un, compensates co the control of the motor is reduced to a motor with no load. Moreover, the tuning of the controller parameters (Kp and Kv) must achieve a critically damped system faster than the link dynamics (being a the constant time of the servocontrolled system). With the control law (15), the following transfer function between the motor position and the motorposition reference is obtained:

(15)

0p1/K)

2 ( + as)2)

1I

(16)
m

(13)

where the first q-derivatives are zero at ci. The settling time of the output depends on the fundamental frequency co and the q-order of the feedforward controller. This time can be calculated as follows:

The additional transfer function Q(s) (See Fig. 2) is included in order to modify the natural frequencies of the arm in such way that they become approximately odd multiples of the fundamental frequency co. Taking into account that usually only the first two vibration modes are the most significant in the dynamic response of flexible arms, we have assumed this transfer function as a feedback

tset = qT + tr

q;Tl ci + tr

(14)

gain:

where tr is the time that the tip position reference spends on reaching the steady state.
FREQUENCIES Let us consider an arm composed of an actuator at the base with total inertia JO (rotor and hub), a flexible beam with uniform mass density p, length Lb and a payload of mass Mp. The structure of the global control system is depicted in Fig. 2. The transfer function Rm(5) is obtained as a result of using DC motor with a position servocontroller and a coupling torque feedback, which iS proportional to the bending strain at the base Of the beam and iS used to decouple the link dynamics, while Cq(5) is the feedforward controller used to cancel vibrations of the flexible arm
51

Q(s) = A

(17)

III FEEDBACK LooP TUNING TO ATTAIN MULTIPLE

which is the simplest one that allows us to modify the dynamic of the arm. Next, we describe briefly the process of obtaining the optimal value of the gain u. Firstly, the root locus technique is applied to the closed loop system of Fig. 2. The roots of the system depend on the gain ,u as follows:
I +,u

(1l+ s)2

~~~~~~~~~~~G(s)H(s)=0O.

(18)

Acrigt 5,GsHs,wihi h rnfrfnto bewe th F a ~n m xiissm rpris

ICM 2006 * IEEE 3rd International Conference on Mechatronics

+

1FeI
(s) F}

Gs

Q(s) H(s)

Figure 2 Global control scheme

+ 4(s)+ PI*Q-*.

Fco., (s)/K
K~Q-

Fco., (s)
+

(s)
KL

Motor

Q (s)
X

Figure 3 Servocontroller inner loop. PD controller

are of the same order. 2) Numerator and denominator have only terms corresponding to even powers of s. 3) There are two zeros in the origin. 4) The roots are located on the imaginary axis and are alternated. Taking into account the latter properties, the root locus (18) will exhibit the following features: 1) The m branches corresponding to the m modes start in the poles and end in the corresponding zeroes of G(s)H(s). 2) These branches are always in the negative real half-plane, but they remain quite close to the imaginary axis (very little damping). 3) There are two branches, which go to infinite with asymptotic directions of 90. These branches show the variation of the secondary poles associated to the term (1+as)2 of (18). Secondly, the aim is to obtain the optimal value of u that achieves odd multiplicity Of c2 =2cu)/a1(y) (See (8)). To this end, the following equation must be solved:
m j(,u)

We next present an example of application of the method proposed in Sections II and III to a single-link flexible manipulator. Thus, the mechanical system consists of a DC motor (Maxon Motor EC-60) with a Harmonic Drive reduction gear 1:50 (HFUC-32-50-20H); a slender arm which is made of aluminium flexible beam with rectangular section and is attached to the motor hub in such way that it rotates only in the horizontal plane, so that the effect of gravity can be ignored; and a mass at the end of the arm. In addition, two sensors are used: an encoder is mounted at the joint of the manipulator for measurement of the hub angle, and a strain-gauge bridge is placed at the base of the beam for measurement of the coupling torque. The physical characteristics of the system are shown in
Table I.

SIMULATION AND EXPERIMENTAL RESULTS

1) Numerator and denominator

A Simulation Results The continuous model has been approximated by a lumped mass model which is truncated for the first two vibration modes [5]. The corresponding frequencies are ai1=4.46rad/s and to1=30.59rad/s, and the transfer functions (G(s) and G(s)H(s), see Fig 2) are the following: 0,(s) ( m

-38.15 (s2 - 488.41)

2

(20)

Fcoup(s)
0 (s) m

13.73s2 (s2 +443.7) (s2 +19.92 (s2 +935.6

(21)

J/ U)

(2 c (A) - C2

-0

(19)

There are infinite values of u that are solutions of (19). The minimum one is the optimal solution due to the fact that increasing values of u imply (as the branches of interest of the root locus go toward the origin) that the fundamental frequency oi(,u) diminishes and the settling time of the system becomes longer (14). Finally, once the modified system is obtained, the next step is to design the DFC to cancel the first vibration mode and automatically the second one will be cancelled. Notice that the modified system is slightly slower that the original one but able to cancel two vibration modes simultaneously with only one DFC. If we were dealing with a flexible arm (17) with more than two significant vibration modes, , should be a transfer function depending on more
parameters.

and the constant time of the servocontroller (16) is 0.01s. As the dynamics of Rm(s) is much faster than the vibration modes and is critically damped, the design of controller (3) is carried out only by inversion of the arm dynamics. Following the method proposed in Section III, the optimal value of the gain u which enables us to achieve a system with odd multiple frequencies can be obtained. Consequently a simple feedfoward controller (1) can be utilized. Fig. 4 shows the root locus corresponding to (18), which present the aforementioned features. In order to achieve odd multiplicity of frequencies, (19) has been used. Fig. 5 shows J(,y), in which the first solution corresponds to the optimal value of u, being equal to 0.0472. The vibration modes of the modified system are col=3.91rad/s and co2=27.40rad/s with a multiplicity of

o1/02=7.

PARAMETER OFTABLE FLEXIBLE ARM 0.72. 10"1 Elastic Modulus (N/rn2) 3.33. 10o-l I Area moment of inertia (in4) 1 10-4 Area of the section (in2) A h Width(in) 0.05 b 0.002 Thickness (in) Length (in) Lb 1.30 P 2590 density (kg/in3) Jo Inertia~~~~Mass of the rotor and hub (kgm2) 0.63 0.075 Mass of the payload (kg) Mp
Electromechanical constant (N/A)
K 0.158

52

E. Pereira, I. M. Diaz, P Roncero, V Feliu v Approaches of Discrete Feedforward Control for Vibration Cancellation
Root Locus
1

...

30

089

20
10

0.7

06

R-0

E
-20

(SY)~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

-40RealAxis

F~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~qy(~~~~~Rsdual

0.9~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~L

04501

01

02

02

.3

-301

-20

Mo

Tim (s%)

10

15

Figure 4 0.2 functiona positive RolouofThe for/6 s)fr h = value-SZIOl (1tase ) = 0 5 (1+E 0.4) Optimal
0.3
0

vausoahan,
s

04 12

Figure 6 doiagram Bode of theeec and uigc s C(s-() ) (s

s

Real ~ ~ -~~~~p 0.5~

~ ~ Inti
Th

ecin

realtim Frpequen5101 taio ofradsopse

of Ch ra cotrla(-)an

0.1

02

Roo ((t+ehe locu of trasfe fucto

60s+ (se16 F,2

for 803sitive3 th

Bodaeters

are tuedtsahiv

The fllunn fr ptiosletis

vant o remain

ta in

beawriattensn as:
T )/2 -0.5 efacs) , C(2) 0e 0.05ve 0.1t 0.15 0.25) 0.2 0.3ochfle o0.3 0.4 Fig. 6 shows the Bode dia~~~Fguram of bohionroles.Itca

statondteselingTie 0s6is t

ased-onthe(Seee(14)

C(s) (+4

Bg Exeim t Results .5 p=1.3,K 0

.1(4

tefrt danerivaective, cnhewritateon: Follwceingaexpraession(1)the feedforwarde congtfrolerqcanc

C(s) 0.125 Cange for (i + +e)/2)2

in whi weave 0esidup s-isresente. Experim are sanegligiblh hoTherxermainint siltos einjctr steadyi Tespaaet ofthe c o w ) t o h

0.2 5(12

0625s + 0.35

(.2

Section,e temfentatinc ofmh rposedto aqS) re-ime implw ande followina(3)lte robiustvebrstion of Cs)t, consirderqing th contrlin schemes osignputein tracin anpitdevibratio w prboli rjcoy egnritted hc a with steaated and thesettingfimed isrequenc6iess (Sete(Istem. Th th 6 ewmarkthai fnordall tod multiplhe Itsiimporants t pnoposed andfowarncentr freueny vritio gofait.or C2(s) isdeermned I of Fi. asumea assumed thde, rsameciey paamter cas osimulations in ing are S prCmotie in moe produce ighat f requey Te experimentas resumewitssignFig.n8. same trajo ani inaccsuacies tes alloabl resdua viratin o 5O an th inensiiviy virtonthesysemshown condce tedyai of the mo dified syte s90parabtimation,re s. the irsteoeisasdon the schemeo vnsariationsed also,enceipthe Fig. 2 with D dicntrller (Fig3bt presentalinm d1aming voalbuethese ofaCtsim waito fnamibreedfonra constheatriCn sutpp not e dualevbaions, controller an(s) Fig.enshow therequen s cmoe isthe of l se ore aer Nx,tepooe edoadcnrle the goodnessaga of Fin. thowtst htocanl thbpophosedrontrollers can sdsge written:
DC applie asd That exermeta feqenie are forq =~ 0.9rad/s motoer,e isa refreenoc filer is, theK=3.51K the a2vibtration (s). can (13) tofecncel effectl under prdefned residual vibration 1.1pan oenm te fistiand 2an athe unshape od referpensnu of itthes imotortn is ar90marktabolicn ~ 747irds withucnstanht accelueratio Fig. prcmman allowable inac1raseoind 5006and the insensitivity resiul viraioo 2(hal tmoel respnsen thde exeimhtentaledynamictr thmes carl Two 10priandt1 siganific are inuted to vibarameteiofdrepc damicve of the anditheootherdhalfo time wihmonestatdclrto ofohesytefotanedwthPDcotrllrmndth te rspnsco ysem ranerorC()ssem012iHiadlorCdsmpsd3056Hz the teipuapositinratinds isamet abslue voanclue).fig.c7ishow eefrwr 10 shows thethe Fig.signa controlle s. FFTunc aomplituest of ti the orderoqt ind theedcoupling Once anbalowueablue) reidua virto iho sst tonrque beingow amplTudesitdeofth i thO efrnce 0naloalfrtesda conrtroller Wet canobserve the residualgvibrationiofatheeouplingetorquetsignal. Bot tocanel he rdeie ibrtios)udr. (13 ffetivly apiueofteresidual vibration.an03N aore rheducetad toh000 frqunc vritonisdeenied I Fg.6 w asue n seon mde rsecivly I anbeobere hwh53is

is not ble to ancel ffectivly the esidIn thiston

025(I

ICM 2006 * IEEE 3rd International Conference on Mechatronics

0.015

0.004Nm

0.012Nm

Wflexb seiing linik

.

0.018

......lil

........li 1111111111111111

|||||||||I

Figure 8 Experimental platform

llil z) lllllllllFrequency

Figure 10 ERCES FFT of

0.2

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~0.20

strain~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~T~ gages)9/ E 0 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~16

....q ~yH~)0
5
10
4 1 15

\
8
2

2 10 4 68

12

14

16

18

20~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~1.

1~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Fgr 11

syrste

respnse s ightly slower Fig.

So.

325-344i 1989.

position Ot and the reference for the controller C2(s). We

in steady state, the settling time is

[2] W. Yim, and S. N. Ulivi, "Non linear inverse and predictive end point . . control of flexible macro-micro manipulators," .. ~~~~~~~trajectory can observe how the remaining oscillations are negligible Transactions of the ASME Journal of Dynamic Systems,

the residual vibration is similar to that obtained in siultinslmulat1on.

V CONCLUSION CONCLUSION

tset=2.6 i s (See

(14)) and

Measurement, and Control, vol. 119, no. 3, pp. 412-420, 1997.

In this work a prefilter based on the inversion of a dynamic

transfer function of the arm has been developed. An outer loop based on the measurement of the torque at the base of the arm is added to the system in order to modify slightly
multiple
its Tis alows s toaeh1ve toachive a yste ltS dnamis. dnam1s. T1salows

~~~~~[4] ~~~~~~~controller

[3] P. K. Khosla, and T. Kanade, "Experimental evaluation of nonlinear feedback and feedforward control schemes for manipulators," Journal ofRobotics Research, vol. 7, no. 1, 1986. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~International B. Fardanesh, and manipulators J. Rastegar, using "A new model-based for robot trajectory pattern tracking inverse

modelobtaied fom th disretiztionof th coninuou

the feedforward controller designed considering only such

firequencies

of the fundamental one. Therefore,

wit wlt odd

[6] N. C. Singer, W. P. Seering, "Preshaping command inputs to reduce system and vibration", ASME Journal of Dynamics, Systems,

[5]V. Feliu, K. S. Rattan, and H. B. Brown, "Modeling and control of single-link flexible arms with lumped masses,": ASME Journal of Dynamics, Systems, Measurements, and Control, vol. 114, no. 1, pp. 59-69, 1992.
Measurements, and Control, vol. 112, no. 1, pp. 76-82, 1990.

dynamnics," IEEE Transactions Robotics and Automation, vol. 8, no.

fundamental mode of vibration is able to cancel simultaneously all the significant modes of the arm. Some
of the advantages of the proposed control are: the structure

[7] B. R. Murphy, and I. Watanabe, "Digital shaping filters for reducing

of the controller is very simple, several modes of vibration can be cancelled and the tuning rules are simple.

this work in order to show the goodness of the proposed

method.
VI VI ACKNOWLEDGMENT ACKNOWLEDGMENT

Finally, some experimental results have been reported in

IEEE Transactions on Control Systems Technology, vol. 1, no. 2, 1993. [9] Z. Mohamed, J. M. Martins, M. 0. Tokhi, J. Sai da Costa, M. A. Botto, "Vibration control of a very flexible manipulator system",

[8] A. Tzes, and S. Yurkovich, "An adaptive input shaping control scheme for vibration suppression in slewing flexible structures,"

Automations, vol. 8, no. 2,1992.

machine vibration," IEEE Transactions on Robotics and

This work has been supported by the Spanish Government Research Programme with the project DPI2003-03326 (MCyT)

~ ~ ~p . Feliu, and K. S. Rattan, "Feedforward control of single-link ~~~~[1]V. flexible manipulators by discrete model inversion", Journal of
Dynamic Systems, Measurement, and Control, vol. 121, December, .713-721, 1999

[lO]J. Shan, H. Liu, D. Sun, "Modified input shaping for a rotating singlelink flexible manipulator", Journal of Sound and Vibration, vol. 285, 187-207, 2005.

Control Engineering Practice, vol. 13, pp. 267-277, 2005.

54