Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
This manuscript has been reproduced from the microfilm master. UMI films the
text directly from the original or copy submitted.
dissertation copies are in typewriter face, while others may be from any type of
computer printer.
The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy
submitted. Broken or indistinct print, colored or poor quality illustrations and
photographs, print bleedthrough, substandard margins, and improper alignment
EW
In the unlikely event that the author did not send UMI a complete manuscript and
there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if unauthorized copyright
EV
I
PR
UMI
800-521-0600
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
W
EV
IE
PR
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
PURDUE UNIVERSITY
GRADUATE SCHOOL
Thesis Acceptance
This is to certify that the thesis prepared
By
Cornel Sultan_________________________________________________________
Entitled
Modeling, Design, and Control of Tensegrity Structures With Applications
Complies with University regulations and meets the standards of the Graduate School for originality
and quality
Doctor of Philosophy
IE
W
. chair
PR
EV
Signed'
Approved by:
This thesis
Department Head
is
is not to be regarded as confidential.
Major Professor
or
Examining Committee
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
W
EV
IE
PR
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
M O D E L IN G . D E SIG N . A N D C O N T R O L O F T E N S E G R IT Y S T R C ( TE R E S
W IT H A P P L IC A T IO N S
A Thesis
S u bm itted to the Faculty
of
IE
Purdue L niversity
by
EV
Cornel Sultan
PR
of
D o ctor o f Philosophy
M ay 1999
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
PR
EV
IE
UMI
UMI Microform9952040
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
PR
EV
IE
To my parents
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
has been a source o f great encouragement and in sp ira tio n . I would also like to thank
Professor Longuski and Professor Farris for accepting to serve on m y com m ittee and
for being outstanding teachers.
A stronautics at Purdue.
IE
I would like to thank the entire Dynamics and C ontrol faculty in Aeronautics and
They set an example of excellence at every stage o f un
EV
PR
stu d y in U.S. and for being an extraordinary friend. The tim e we have spent together
has enriched m y life tremendously.
I am also grateful to a ll my friends in Purdue who made m y life in West Lafayette
more enjoyable.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
IV
TA BLE OF C O N T E N T S
Page
LIST OF T A B L E S .....................................................................................................
viii
LIST OF F I G U R E S .................................................................................................
ix
..............................................................................................................
xii
1. I N T R O D U C T IO N ..............................................................................................
1.1
1.2
IE
1.3
A B ST R A C T
2.2
2.3
2.1
3.
In tr o d u c tio n ........................................................................................................
M ath em a tical M odeling A s s u m p tio n s .........................................................
D erivation o f the Prestressability C o n d itio n s ...........................................
C o n c lu s io n s ........................................................................................................
PR
2.1
EV
2. G E N E R A L P R E S T R E S S A B IL IT Y C O N D IT IO N S OF T E N S E G
R IT Y S T R U C T U R E S ....................................................................................
P R E S T R E S S A B IL IT Y OF TW O STAGE SV D A N D SD T E N SE G
R IT Y S T R U C T U R E S ....................................................................................
3.1
3.2
3.3
3.4
3.5
3.6
In tr o d u c tio n ........................................................................................................
Tw o Stage SV D Tensegrity Structures .....................................................
3.2.1
M a th em a tical M odeling A s s u m p tio n s ...........................................
3.2.2
C oordinate Systems and Generalized C o o rd in a te s ...................
3.2.3
G e o m e tr y .............................................................................................
3.2.4
P restressability C o n d itio n s ...............................................................
3.2.5
S ym m etrica l Prestressable C onfigurations .................................
Tw o Stage SD Tensegrity Structures ........................................................
3.3.1
S ym m etrical Prestressable C onfigurations .................................
Prestressable E q u ilib riu m S u rfa c e ...............................................................
S tatic Design ....................................................................................................
C o n c lu s io n s .......................................................................................................
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
1
3
7
8
8
!)
9
II
12
12
13
14
14
15
16
17
26
26
28
33
36
Page
P R E S T R E S S A B IL IT Y O F T W O S T A G E S V D B A N D S D B T E N S E G
R IT Y S T R U C T U R E S
47
4.1
4.2
4.4
4.4
4.5
5.
In tr o d u c tio n .........................................................................................................
Tw o Stage S V D B Tensegrity S tru c tu re s ......................................................
S ym m etrical Prestressable C o n fig u ra tio n s ...................................................
Tw o Stage SDB Tensegrity Structures: S ym m etrical Prestressable Con
figurations ............................................................................................................
C o n c lu s io n s .........................................................................................................
47
47
4!)
48
50
P R E S T R E S S A B IL IT Y O F T W O S T A G E S D F T E N S E G R IT Y
S T R U C T U R E S .........................................................................................................
52
In tr o d u c tio n .........................................................................................................
Tw o Stage SDF Tensegrity S tru c tu re s ..........................................................
Prestressability C o n d itio n s ..............................................................................
Sym m etrical Prestressable C o n fig u ra tio n s ...................................................
C o n c lu s io n s .........................................................................................................
52
52
54
54
61
o .l
0.2
IE
o.4
o. l
o.o
4.
6 . A M E T H O D O L O G Y T O I N V E S T I G A T E T H E P R E S T R E S S A B IL
7.
In tr o d u c tio n .........................................................................................................
M ethodology ......................................................................................................
Tensegrity T o w e rs ...............................................................................................
M odeling Assum ptions. Generalized C o o rd in a te s ......................................
G e o m e t r y ............................................................................................................
6.6 C y lin d ric a l S ym m etrical C o n fig u ra tio n s ......................................................
6.7 Exam ple: Three Stage Tensegrity T o w e rs ...................................................
6 .5 Exam ple: Four Stage Tensegrity Towers ...................................................
6.9 G eneralization to M u lti-S ta g e Tensegrity T o w e rs ......................................
6.10 C o n c lu s io n s .........................................................................................................
6.11 A p p e n d ix ............................................................................................................
69
72
75
78
80
81
N O N L IN E A R M A T H E M A T IC A L M O D E L S F O R T E N S E G R IT Y
S T R U C T U R E S D Y N A M I C S ..........................................................................
84
7.1
7.2
7.3
7.4
84
84
85
87
PR
6.1
6.2
6.4
6.4
6 .0
EV
I T Y C O N D I T I O N S ; A P P L I C A T I O N T O T E N S E G R I T Y T O W E R S 62
In tr o d u c tio n .........................................................................................................
M ath em a tical M odeling A s s u m p tio n s ..........................................................
N onlinear Equations o f M o tio n D e r iv a t io n ................................................
C o n c lu s io n s .........................................................................................................
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
62
62
65
66
6S
vi
Pago
8.
N O N L IN E A R D Y N A M IC S O F TW O STAGE SV D T E N S E G
R IT Y S T R U C T U R E S ........................................................................................
8.1
8.2
8.3
8.-1
In tr o d u c tio n ........................................................................................................
M odeling A s s u m p tio n s ...................................................................................
G eom etry and K in e m a tic s .............................................................................
K in e tic Energy and Potential E n e r g y ........................................................
Nonconservative Generalized F o rc e s ............................................................
90
91
93
93
94
97
99
101
105
105
L IN E A R D Y N A M IC A L M O DELS OF TW O STAGE S V D A N D
SD T E N S E G R IT Y S T R U C T U R E S ..........................................................
110
9.1
9.2
9.3
9.4
9.5
9.6
9.7
9.8
9.9
9.10
9.11
110
I ll
112
113
114
115
117
118
120
122
122
8.0
IE
8.6
8.7
8.8
EV
In tr o d u c tio n ........................................................................................................
Linear M o d e ls ....................................................................................................
Mass M a t r ix .......................................................................................................
Dam ping M a trix .............................................................................................
Disturbance M a t r i x ..........................................................................................
Stiffness M a t r i x ................................................................................................
C ontrol and Measurement M a t r ic e s ...........................................................
Linearized Dynam ics versus N onlinear D y n a m ic s ....................................
S ta b ility and Stiffness Properties ...............................................................
C o n c lu s io n s .......................................................................................................
A p p e n d ix ...........................................................................................................
PR
9.
88
88
88
1 0 .T E N D O N C O N TR O L D E P L O Y M E N T OF T E N S E G R IT Y ST R U C
T U R E S ..................................................................................................................... 130
10.1
10.2
10.3
10.4
10.5
In tr o d u c tio n .......................................................................................................
Equations o f M o tio n and S ym m etric Prestressable C onfigurations . .
Tendon C ontrol Deploym ent S tr a te g y ........................................................
M athem atical Statem ent and N um erical Solution ................................
E x a m p le s ..........................................................................................................
10.5.1 Deploym ent T i m e .................................................................................
10.5.2 C ontrol E n e r g y ....................................................................................
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
130
131
134
140
142
144
144
VI I
Page
10.6 C o n c lu s io n s ........................................................................................................
149
11. F O R C E A N D T O R Q U E T E N S E G R I T Y S E N S O R ...........................
150
11.1
11.2
11.6
11.4
In tr o d u c tio n ........................................................................................................
Tensegrity Sensor D e s c r ip tio n .......................................................................
S ta tic C h a ra c te ris tic s .......................................................................................
D ynam ic C h a ra c te ris tic s ................................................................................
160
161
164
168
161
164
168
12.8
12.9
IE
EV
12.6
12.6
12.7
In tr o d u c tio n ........................................................................................................
H isto ry o f M otion Sim ulators .......................................................................
A Tensegrity M otion S im u la t o r ...................................................................
Dynam ics and Statics of the Tensegrity S im u la t o r ..................................
12.4.1 N onlinear Equations o f M otion ......................................................
12.4.2 Feasible E q u ilib riu m C o n fig u ra tio n s ...............................................
A Robust Tracking C o n t r o lle r .......................................................................
S im u la tin g Longitudinal M otions o f a S ym m etric A ir c r a f t ....................
Evaluation of the Tensegrity S im u la t o r ......................................................
12.7.1 Elevator C o m m a n d .............................................................................
12.7.2 Flap C o m m a n d ....................................................................................
12.7.3 T h ro ttle C o m m a n d .............................................................................
C o n c lu s io n s ........................................................................................................
A p pend ix ...........................................................................................................
PR
12.1
12.2
12.3
12.4
1 2 .N O N L I N E A R R O B U S T T R A C K I N G C O N T R O L O F A T E N S E G
R I T Y M O T I O N S I M U L A T O R ....................................................................... 170
L IS T O F R E F E R E N C E S
170
171
173
174
174
176
178
182
184
186
188
189
190
191
.......................................................................................
192
V I T A ...................................................................................................................................
197
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
v iii
LIST OF TA BLES
Table
O verlap (h) vs N u m be r o f Stages ( n ) ...............................................................
78
Ill
10.2
Mo
C ontrol E n e r g y ........................................................................................................
PR
EV
I
EW
6.1
Page
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
IX
LIST OF FIG U R E S
Figure
Page
1.2
Tensegrity L a y e r ......................................................................................................
3.1
13
3.2
IS
3.3
3.4
...................
30
3.3
31
3.6
31
3.7
........................................................................
32
3.5
32
3.9
o .l
.....................................
57
5.2
57
5.3
59
5.4
59
5.5
.................................................................................
60
5.6
60
6.1
67
6.2
72
.....................................
PR
EV
IE
1.1
= 0 ........................................
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
30
35
Figure*
Page*
6.3
73
8.1
8.2
96
8.3
103
8 .1
8.5
101
8.6
101
9.2
EW
9.1
...............................................................
10.2
EV
I
10.1
PR
10.5
139
1 17
. . . .
10.6
....................................
10.7
149
11.1
151
11.2
157
11.3
157
11.4
160
11.5
..........................................
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
103
116
10.3 E rror Between the Deployment path and the E q u ilib riu m Path
10.4
96
117
1 18
118
160
XI
Figure
Page
11.6
11.7
166
11.8
166
11.9
......................................................................
......................................................................
12.2
V a riation o f
12.3
12.4
187
12.5
188
12.6
18!)
12.7
12.8
PR
EV
I
EW
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
167
168
12.1
and
16")
173
179
. . . .
. . . .
l !)0
187
1!)()
A B ST R A C T
Sultan. Cornel. P h.D .. Purdue University. May l?M)9. M odeling. Design, and C ontrol
of Tensegrity S tructures w ith Applications. M a jo r Professor: M a rtin J. Corless.
Classical flexible structures dynamics and control suffer from several m a jo r de
ficiencies. F irst, reliable m athem atical models involve partial differential equations
which are d iffic u lt to deal w ith a n a lytica lly as well as num erically. A pa rtia l differen
tia l equations m a th em a tical model of a system's dynam ics is not practical for control
system design, since most o f the modern control systems design methodologies as
sume a state space representation. Second, from a practical perspective, the control
IE
of classical truss structures involves the use of expensive and short life mechanisms
T h ird , the control o f classical truss structures involves high
Fourth, classical controllable structures have
EV
many, com plicated, bar to bar jo in ts, which make the control task d iffic u lt.
This thesis proposes a class o f lightw eight, space structures, called tensegrity stru c
PR
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
discovery of a connected e q u ilib riu m m anifold to which the deployed anel undeployed
configurations belong. The deploym ent is conducted such th a t, in the state space,
IE
the deploym ent path is close enough to the e q u ilib riu m m anifold.
A force and torque sensor based on a tensegrity stru ctu re is proposed, enabling
EV
the simultaneous measurement o f six quantities, three orthogonal forces and three
orthogonal moments. A n o p tim a l estim ator is designed, based on the linearized model
of the structure.
PR
Finally, a m otion sim u la to r which exploits the in trin sic advantages of a tensegrity
structure, is proposed. The a ctu a tin g functions are carried out by the tendons, e lim
in a tin g the telescopic actuators. A nonlinear robust tracking controller is designed to
assure exponential convergence o f the tracking erro r to a ball o f prespecified radius,
w ith a prespecified rate o f convergence.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
1. IN T R O D U C T IO N
1.1
getics - E xplorations in the G eom etry o f T h in k in g " - a book which lias been referred
to as a source o f endless inspiration ami stim u lu s" (A X '. Clarke) - R. B uckm inster
Fuller defines tensegrity as a stru ctu ra l relationship principle in which stru ctu ra l
IE
understood, from the solar system to the atom , are tensegrity structures."
Tensegrity structures are lattices th a t form fin ite networks depending on the a r
EV
Fig. 1. 1.
PR
(fo r exam ple bars). A perspective view of a two stage tensegrity structure is given in
A lth o u g h the origins o f tensegrity structures can be pin-pointed to 1927 (S n e lso n [l]).
the m ain investigations have been carried out d u rin g the last fo rty years, w ith artists
work as the s ta rtin g point (Snelson. 1948). Tensegrity structures were looked upon
from an engineering perspective for the first tim e by R. B. Fuller[2] (see also Sadao['J]).
w hile D. G. Emmerich[4] can be considered the first experim entalist.
G eom etrical investigations followed, most o f them being reported in Fuller's[2]
and Pughs[5] publications. Chassagnoux[6 ] introduced a com plete geom etrical char
acterization o f sim plex, one stage tensegrity m odules w ith a regular polygonal base
and axial sym m etry. G rip[7] proposed a classification system o f certain tensegrity
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
Tendon
IE
EV
Approaches using mechanics have been developed recently. A t the beginning, they
PR
problem).
As a consequence, research in tensegrity structures turned in to a m ore system atic
and engineering oriented one. aim ed at establishing the theoretical fram ew ork for
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
those structures analysis and design. Am ong the researchers in tensegrity structures,
Pellegrino[9. 10]. M otro[S, 11], and H a n a o r[l 2 ] stand out as those who have made
im p o rta n t co n trib u tio n s towards fu rth e r knowledge o f these structures statics. Linear
dynam ic analysis results have been published by M o tro fl I] and Furuyafi-'lj. .Nonlinear
dynam ics and control design studies have been reported by S ke lton]! 1] and Sultan]I-*).
16. 17. 18].
In d u stria l projects and proposals are beginning, most o f them being focused on
tensegrity double layer systems (tensegrity domes) (Hanaor[12], Wang] 10]). It, is in
teresting to note th a t, very recently, tensegrity structures have been proposed to
explain how various types o f cells (e.g. nerve cells, smooth muscle, etc.) resist shape
distorsion (Ingber[20]. Ingber[21|). T his is due to the many s im ila ritie s between the
F irst, in suspended
(round) cells, the cytoskeleton ((.SK) forms a self-equilibrated system. Second, cells
IE
are in itia lly tense ( prestressed"). T h ird , the more tensed cells e x h ib it higher s tiff
ness. Fourth. liv in g cells e x h ib it stiffening. A ll these properties are also common in
EV
tensegrity structures. Q u a lita tive and q u a n tita tiv e results using a tw o stage tenseg
r ity stru ctu re to m odel a cells static properties have been reported, in agreement
w ith biological experim ental results (Stainenovic[ 22 ]. Coughlin[2-'}]).
M otivation
PR
1.2
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
rem ark here the analogy w ith Fuller's view on the solar system and the atom , when
he classified them as tensegrity systems.
The im portance o f this fact cannot he overstated.
layer in Fig. 1.2. obtained through the bidirection al expansion o f the two stage m od
ule in Fig. 1.1. constitutes a flexible structure in w h irh hard (bars) and soft (tendons)
members interact to yie ld the desired behavior. For a certain range of loads, we can
assume th a t the bars are rigid bodies and the tendons are mass less, linear elastic ele
ments. Hence we conclude th a t a model composed of a finite set o f ordinary differen-
tial equations would be appropriate for tensegrity structures m athem atical m odeling.
If instead of the tensegrity layer we consider a continuous elastic m edium (flexible
structure), its statics and dynam ics are described by partial differential equations.
S im ila r comparisons can be made between a tensegrity tower (im agine expanding the
PR
EV
IE
two stage m odule in Fig. 1.1 ve rtica lly) and a classical Euler B ernoulli beam.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
applied in some cases (e.g. for linear pa rtia l differential equations w ith linear bound
ary conditions) to get an in fin ite set of ord in a ry differential equations (g ivin g the
modes am plitudes) and a set o f p a rtia l differential equations w ith boundary values
(providing the eigenvalues and eigenfunctions). I sually. for control design, a fin ite set
o f ordinary differential equations is generated discarding some modes. Thus, qualita
tive as well as quantitative a lte ra tio n o f the pa rtia l differential equat ions m athem atical
model is performed through th is process.
Another m ajor advantage th a t many (b u t not a ll) tensegrity structures offer for
m athem atical m odeling purposes, is th a t, at e q u ilib riu m , all its bars and tendons can
be considered axially loaded (assum ing compressive loads are well below the buckling
loads). Thus the bars are not subjected to composed excitations (e.g. bending w ith
axial loading, bending w ith shear, etc.). This is very im p o rta n t, since it is a known fact
th a t composed excitations models are not as reliable as those for sim ple stretching or
IE
compression (e.g. there are several more assumptions made in the bending phenomena
m odeling). YVe note th a t th is advantage is lost for different rigid bodies (e.g. plates)
EV
which are part of a tensegrity stru ctu re and also for those bars which are rig id ly
attached to rigid bodies, as this dissertation w ill show.
The advantages m entioned so far call for a strong support for analytical studies of
PR
tensegrity structures. These studies are expected to be more reliable and successful
than those for other classes o f structures, leading to the expectation o f highly reliable
m athem atical models and therefore sig nifica ntly
system.
better
From the technological point o f view, tensegrity structures offer several im p o rta n t
advantages. F irst, as m entioned by one o f th e ir first inventors. Emmerich[-1]. many
tensegrity structures do not have bar to bar connections. Thus com plicated jo in ts are
elim inated.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
Second, tensegrity structures offer excellent o p p ortun ities for physically integrated
stru ctu re and controller design since th e ir members can serve sim ultaneously as sen
sors, actuators, and load carrying elements. H aving incorporated sensors and actua
tors. tensegrity structures have considerable prom ise as sm art structures (S kelton [l 1].
S u lta n [lo ]. Sultan[17|).
T h ird , a tensegrity structure resembles the m olecular structure o f the dragline silk
o f the golden orb-weaver spider, the strongest natural fiber as measured by its stiffness
to mass ratio, in the sense th a t hard and soft members interact to yield a structure
o f great fle x ib ility and strength, its aggregate properties differing from those o f the
components. Connection o f these hard and soft parts in different (non-orthogonal)
directions allows this arrangement to reinforce the fiber in different directions, giving
it great fle x ib ility . A man made fiber w ith these properties could make stronger bridge
cables, construction m aterials, im pact structures, a rtific ia l tendons, and a rtific ia l skin.
IE
EV
lots o f tensile members (of negligible mass com pared to the mass of the bars, as this
PR
dissertation w ill show) and few compressive members. Hence a tensegrity structure
is a lightweight structure w ith a high stiffness to mass ratio and high strength to
mass ratio. Most o f the in d u stria l applications proposed by previous researchers (for
exam ple tensegrity domes) exp lo it this m a jo r advantage.
Last but not least, in order to make fu n d a m e n ta l contributions in structures,
one m ust re-examine the basic philosophy o f structures design. H istorically, man has
designed structures using rectilinear th in k in g . For exam ple, a ircra ft wings (and almost
a ll structures b u ilt by man) begin w ith re ctilin e a r members (orthogonal longerons
and spars) designed to specified stiffness properties for the overall system. Tensegrity
structures d is trib u te mass and stiffness in skewed directions rather than rectilinear.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.