6 views

Uploaded by Mosher Jovan

Control de Helicoptero

- ANN Based pH Control Report
- Boiler.pdf
- Adaptive Sliding Mode Control of Chaos in Permanent
- Sensorless Control of Induction Motors
- Modern Sliding Mode Control Theory
- The International Journal of Applied Control, Electrical and Electronics Engineering (IJACEEE)
- IJACEEE
- Jiang-Jian Wang - Research of Cascade Control With an Application to Central Air-conditioning System
- MEMS.pptx
- A Generalized Proportional Integral Output Feedback Controller for the Robust Perturbation Rejection in a Mechanical System
- IJACEEE
- PID Control Loops 3.1
- Sliding Mode Control Handout
- Uav Predictive Control
- upravljanje
- Module 1[1]
- 1558Industrial Process THEIS
- Comparative Analysis of Pso-Pid and Hu-Pid
- arducopter perameters
- Aircraft Stability Main

You are on page 1of 6

Jovan Merida-Rubio and Luis T. Aguilar

Instituto Politecnico Nacional

Centro de Investigacion y Desarrollo de Tecnologa Digital

Avenida del Parque 1310 Mesa de Otay, Tijuana 22510 Mexico

e-mail: merida@citedi.mx; luis.aguilar@ieee.org

AbstractThis paper presents the solution to the tracking simulations will be carried out for a full model.

control problem for an underactuated scaled autonomous heli- The paper is organized as follows. In Section II is given the

copter using variable structure control via output measurements.

First, it is designed a state-feedback second order sliding mode dynamic model and problem formulation. The state feedback

controller to stabilize height and rotation positions. Controller is design is presented in Section III complemented with Lyapu-

designed from a reduced model of the helicopter and the resulting nov stability prove. The velocity observer and output feedback

control law is tested in its full model thus showing the robustness design is provided in Section IV. Performance of the proposed

against unmodelled dynamics. Simulation results illustrate the results are given in Section IV through simulations. Section V

performance the effectiveness of the controller.

presents some conclusions.

I. I NTRODUCTION

Among unmanned Aerial Vehicle configurations available

today, helicopters are one the most maneuverable and versatile II. DYNAMIC M ODEL AND P ROBLEM S TATEMENT

platforms. Helicopters can perform forward flight, side flight,

climb, hover and any combination of these maneuvers. These The full mathematical model of the 3-DOF helicopter,

capabilities have brought about the use of autonomous mi- depicted in Fig. 1, can be described as follows [1]:

niature helicopters. For these reasons, there is currently great

interest in using these platforms in a wide range of applications c0 z = c8 2 u1 + c9 + c10 c7 + wz (1)

that include exploration of places inaccessible, surveillance, 2

m() = c4 [c12 + c13 ] u1 + c5 c11 u2

security purposes and other. For performing safely many types

of these tasks, high maneuverability and robustness of the c6 [2c5 + c4 ] sin(2c3 )

controllers with respect to disturbances and modeling errors c4 c14 2 + c15 + w (2)

are required. This has generated considerable interest in the 2 2

m() = c1 + c2 cos (c3 ) [c12 + c13 ]u1 c4 c11 u2

robust flight control design.

+ c6 c1 + c2 cos2 (c3 ) + 2c4 sin(2c3 )

Many efforts for the analysis and control of helicopter

prototypes have gone in many directions. Avila-Vilchis et al. + c1 + c2 cos2 (c3 ) [c14 2 + c15 ] (3)

[1] developed a nonlinear model and design a nonlinear control

strategy for a VARIO scale model helicopter. Garca-Sanz et where m() = c1 c5 c24 + c2 c5 cos2 (c3 ). In the above

al. [2] addressed the pitch control using linear controllers for equations, z R is the height, R is the yaw angle, R

a 3-DOF helicopter prototype from Quanser. Starkov et al. [3] is the main rotor azimuth angle and ci (i = 0, . . . , 15) are the

designed an output feedback sliding mode controller using a physical constants, given in Table I, representing the inertial,

high-gain observer while Orlov et al. [4] developed a sliding gravitational and aerodynamical effects. The yaw angle is

mode observer for the same Quanser prototype. Isidori et al. the rotation of the body around the vertical axis z, u1 , and

[5] solved the problem of controlling the vertical motion of a u2 are voltage applied to the engines main and tail rotor,

helicopter while stabilizing the lateral and horizontal position respectively; c0 is the mass of the helicopter; c1 to c6 are the

by using a continuous nonlinear controller. An adaptive output inertia parameters, c7 is the weight of the body, c8 and c9 are

feedback control tested on a laboratory model helicopter was the main rotor thrust, c10 is the vertical drag force produced by

presented by Kutay et al. [6]. the main rotor; c11 , c12 , c14 , and c15 are constant components

In this paper we will design a second order sliding mode that comprise drag torque of main rotor; and c13 is constant

controller to solve the trajectory tracking control problem for Kmot the engine.

a helicopter assuming that a simplified model of the system For simplicity, we rewrite the open-loop system (1)(3) in

is available. The stability analysis of closed-loop system was terms of the error z = z zd , = d where zd and d

carried out in the frame of non-smooth Lyapunov function [7]. are continuously differentiable functions denoting the desired

The main contribution of the paper is that the controllers are trajectory of motion of height and yaw angle, respectively.

derived from a reduced model while the stability analysis and , ,

Then, setting q = (z1 , z2 , 1 , 2 , 1 , 2 ) = (z, z, , ),

TABLE I

3-DOF HELICOPTER MODEL PARAMETERS .

ci Numerical value units

c0 7.5 kg

c1 0.4305 kg m2

c2 3 104 kg m2

c3 4.413

c4 0.108 kg m2

c5 0.4993 kg m2

c6 6.214 104 kg m2

c7 73.58 N

c8 3.411 kg

c9 0.6004 kg m/s

c10 3.769 N

c11 0.1525 kg m

c12 12.01 kg m/s

c13 1 105 N

c14 1.206 104 kg m2

c15 2.642 N

Fig. 1. Helicopter mounted on a platform. in the system. Then, the dynamic equation (12)(14) can be

reduced to the following form [1]

z1 = z2

and

z2 = k1 (q)u1 + g zd + w1 (16)

k1 (q) = c1 2

0 c8 2 , (4) 1 = 2

k2 (q) = m(q) 1

c4 (c12 2 + c13 ), (5) 2 = b

k2 (q)u1 + b

k3 (q)(u2 kg (2 + d ))

k3 (q) = m(q)1 c5 c11 22 , (6) b

+ h2 (q) d + w2 . (17)

k4 (q) = m(q)1 [c1 + c2 cos2 (c3 1 )](c12 2 + c13 ) (7)

Here, the term kg comes from an angular velocity feedback

k5 (q) = m(q)1 c4 c11 22 (8)

of the gyro control system for the tail of helicopter and

h1 (q) = c1

0 (c9 2 + c10 c7 ), (9)

h2 (q) = m(q) 1

c6 [2c5 2 + c4 (2 + d )][2 + d ] b

k2 (q) = c4 mb 1 (c12 2 + c13 ) (18)

sin(2c3 1 ) m(q) 1

c4 [c14 22 + c15 ] (10) b

k3 (q) = c5 c11 22 m

b 1 (19)

h3 (q) = 2c4 c6 sin(2c3 1 )2 (2 + d )

b

h2 (q) = c4 mb 1 c14 22 + c15 , (20)

+ [c6 sin(2c3 1 )(2 + d )2 + c14 22 + c15 ]

c1 + c2 cos2 (c3 1 ) (11) where m b = (c1 c5 c24 ) and g = 9.8 is the gravitational

constant. It is assumed throughout the paper that the speed

the error equation takes the form: of the blades can not escape to infinity, i.e.,

z1 = z2 k2 k 2 . (21)

z2 = k1 (q)u1 + h1 (q) zd + w1 (12)

Our objective is to find a control law (u1 , u2 ) such that

1 = 2 asymptotically stabilize the origin zi , i , i = 0, i = 1, 2

2 = k2 (q)u1 + k3 (q)u2 + h2 (q) d + w2 (13) while also attenuating the effect of the external disturbances.

1 = 2 It should be pointed out that the controller, derived from (16)

(17), will be analyzed and tested in (12)(14).

2 = k4 (q)u1 + k5 (q)u2 + m(q)1 h3 (q). (14)

0 wz and w2 = m(q) w . It is assumed that

1

In this section we will design a stabilization controller for

the vertical and rotational motion. It should be pointed out

sup |wi (t)| Wi , i = 1, 2. (15) that controller are derived from (16)(20) while the stability

t

proof, made by means of the Lyapunov function framework,

Since the helicopter is installed in a laboratory environment, will be done by considering the full model (12)(14).

A. Stabilization of the Vertical Motion of (23) results in

V (z) = (v + v )z1 z1 + z1 z2 + z1 z2 + z2 z2

+ av sgn(z1 )z1

= (v + v )z1 z2 + z22 + av sgn(z1 )z2

(z1 + z2 )(av sgn(z1 ) + bv sgn(z2 ) + v z1 + v z2 )

In order to globally asymptotically stabilize (12) the follo- + (z1 + z2 )h

wing control law = v z12 (v )z22 av |z1 | bv |z2 |

bv z1 sgn(z2 ) + hz1 + hz2

u1 = k1 (q)1

v z12 (v )z22 (av bv kh )|z1 |

[av sgn(z1 ) + bv sgn(z2 ) + v z1 + v z2 + g zd ] (22)

(bv kh )|z2 |.

is chosen provided that only model and parameters from (16)

are available where av , bv , v , and v are positive constants. Notice that V (z) is negative definite for any vector (z1 , z2 )T 6=

It is assumed that the main rotor is rotating for all time (i.e., 0 if inequalities (25) and v > holds. Thus, concluding that

2 6= 0) thus avoiding that k1 (q)1 be singular. the origin of (23) is globally asymptotically stable. Moreover,

one can concludes that z = 0 is reached in finite-time (cf. [8,

Th. 4.4]).

By substituting (22) into (12), the closed-loop system takes

the form B. Stabilization of the Rotational Motion

The following control law, found from (17), is proposed to

z1 = z2 globally asymptotically stabilize (13)

(23)

z2 = av sgn(z1 )bv sgn(z2 )v z1 v z2 +h(q)

u2 = b

k3 (q)1 [ar sgn(1 ) br sgn(2 ) r 1 r 2

where b3 (q)(2 + d ) b

+ kg k k2 (q)u1 bh2 (q) + d ] (27)

h(q) = h1 (q) g + w1 .

where ar , br , r , and r are positive constants; and b

k3 (q) is

We need to show that h(q) is bounded for all q R6 . To do nonsingular for all q R6 .

this, we have from (9) and (15) that By substituting (27) into (13) and using the fact that

k3 (q)b

k3 (q) 1, the closed-loop system takes the form

kh(q)k c1

0 c9 k2 k + c0 (c10 c7 ) g kw1 k

1

1 = 2

c1 1

0 c9 2 + c0 (c10 c7 ) g + W1 (24)

2 = ar sgn(1 ) br sgn(2 ) r 1 r 2 + l(q, t)

= kh .

(28)

Having proved the boundedness of h(q), we establish the

where

following result.

k2 (q)]u1 + h2 (q) b

l(q, t) = [k2 (q) b h2 (q)

| {z } | {z }

Theorem 1: Consider the closed-loop system (23) with the a(q) b(q)

parameters chosen as + kg b

k3 (q)[2 + d ] +w2 .

| {z }

v , v 0, av kh > bv > kh > 0. (25) c(q,t)

Then the origin of the closed-loop system (23) is finite-time

the above equation. Regarding the term a(q), first note that

stable.

1

km(q)1 k = 0 (29)

Proof: Consider the Lyapunov function candidate c1 c5 c24

1 1 and

V (z) = [v +v ]z12 +z1 z2 + z22 +av |z1 |, > 0. (26)

2 2

km

b 1 m(q)1 k

Note that V (z) will be positive definite and radially unbounded c2 c5

= 1 (30)

if v +v > 2 . The time derivative of (26) along the solution (c1 c5 c4 )(c1 c5 c24

2 + c2 c5 )

where 0 > 0, 1 0 for all q R6 . Taking this into account date

and from (5), (22), and (18), we obtain

1 1

V () = [r + r ]21 + 1 2 + 22 + ar |1 |,

> 0.

a(q) |a(q)| = k[k2 (q) b

k2 (q)]u1 k 2 2

(32)

= k(m

b m(q) )c4 (c12 2 + c13 )kku1 k

1 1

which is similar to (26). The time derivative of the Lyapunov

c4 (c12 k2 k + c13 ) km

b 1 m(q)1 kku1k function is

c4 (c12 2 + c13 ) 1 kk11 (q)k (kzdk g) V () = (r + r )1 1 + 22 + 1 2 + 2 2

c4 (c12 2 + c13 ) 1 c0 c1 2

8 k2 k (kzd k g) . + av sgn(1 ) 1 .

Next, regarding the term b(q) we obtain, from (10) and (20), A lengthy but straightforward calculation yields

that

V r 21 (r )22

b(q) kb(q)k = kh2 (q) b h2 (q)k

(ar br kl kr |2 | km |2 |2 )|1 |

c6 km(q)1 k (2c5 k2 k + c4 k2 + d k) k2 + d k

(br kl kr |2 | km |2 |2 )|2 |.

+c4 kmb 1 m(q)1 k c14 k22 k + c15

2c6 0 [c5 2 + c4 kd k]k2 k + 20 c5 c6 2 kd k For V be negative definite the cubic term |2 |3 must be

+0 c4 c6 k22 k + 0 c4 c6 k2d k + c4 1 [c14 22 + c15 ]. dominated by the constants ar and br .

A future paper work is still in progress where will be stressed

Finally, regarding the term c(q, t) we get, from (19), that the robustness properties and possible improvement of the

controller previously introduced.

c(q, t) kc(q, t)k = kkg b

k3 (q)[2 + d ]k

b

kg kk3 (q)kk2 + d k

C. Zero Dynamics Analysis

b 1 k22 k (k2 k + kd k)

kg c5 c11 m

b 1 22 (k2 k + kd k) .

kg c5 c11 m We focus our effort on proving boundedness of 2 . Under

(22) and (27) the system (12)(14) has the following zero

Finally dynamics [9]

1 + k5 (q)u2 + m

1

(q)h3 (q) (33)

kl + (kr + km k2 k)k2 k

where

where

ueq

1 = k1 (q)

1

(zd g) (34)

kl = 1 c0 c4 c1 + c13 ) k22 k (kzd k g)

8 (c12 2 eq b3 (q) [b

u =k

2

1

k2 (q)u1 b

h2 (q) + d ]. (35)

+ 20 c5 c6 2 kd k + 0 c4 c6 k2d k + c4 1 [c14 22 + c15 ]

b 1 22 kd k + W2 ,

+ kg c5 c11 m are the equivalent control. Substituting the above equations

kr = 20 c6 [c5 2 + c4 kd k] + kg c5 c11 m b 1 22 , into (33) and if the desired trajectories and initial conditions

are chosen in such a way that the terms including zd , d , 22 ,

km = 0 c4 c6 .

and 2 can be neglected we have the following simplification:

We can now prove the following. a3 a4

2 = a1 22 + a2 + + = a1 24 + a2 22 + a3 2 + a4 (36)

2 22

Theorem 2: Consider the closed-loop system (28) where the

parameters of the controller (27) are chosen such that where a1 = c1 , a2 = c1

5 c14 = 2.415 10 5 c15 =

4

1

r , r 0, (c5 c8 )1 (c0 c13 g) = 432 104 (see Table I).

ar kl kh |2 | km |2 |2 > br , (31) The solutions of (36) when 2 = 0 are: 1 = 355.03 [rad/s],

br > kl kh |2 | km |2 |2 > 0. 2 = 4 380.99i [rad/s], 3 = 347.02 [rad/s]. Only the

Then the origin of the closed-loop system (28) is finite-time (see Fig. 1 for the rotation sense of main rotor). To analyze

stable. the stability of the zero dynamics, define

whose time derivative is are obtained if the corresponding observer variables qb are

substituted into the state feedback law (22) and (27).

2 = a1 22 + a2 + a3 21 + a4 22

(38) V. S IMULATION R ESULTS

= a1 22 + a2 |a3 |21 |a4 |22 .

In this section we demonstrate through numerical simula-

Rewriting the above expression in terms of velocity error 2 = tions the effectiveness of the control (22) and (27) applied

2 + 3 we have to the system (1)(3). Defining toff = 50 [s], the desired

trajectory is

2 = a1 (2 + 3 )2 + a2 |a3 |(2 + 3 )1 |a4 |(2 + 3 )2 .

(39)

0.2 0 t toff

0.3[e(ttoff )2 /350 ] 0.2

The equilibrium points of the above equation are 1 = 702.05 toff < t 130

[rad/s], 2 = 343.02 468.2i [rad/s], 3 = 0 [rad/s]. The zd =

0.1 cos [0.1(t 130)] 0.6 130 < t < 20 + 130

dynamics of (39) linearized around the equilibrium point 3 :

0.5 t 20 + 130,

0 0 t toff

2 = f (2 ) f (2 ) 2 ,

2 2 =0

off 2

1 e(tt ) /350 toff < t 120

d = 2

/350

= 2a1 3 + |a3 |(3 )2 + 2|a4 |(3 )3 2

e (t120)

120 t < 180

(t180)2 /350

= 0.37012. 1 + e t 180

Then, the origin, i.e., the equilibrium point 2 = 0 is locally subject to z1 (0) = zb1 (0) = 0.2, z2 (0) = zb2 (0) = 0, 1 (0) =

asymptotically stable. b1 (0) = , 2 (0) =

b2 (0) = 0, 1 (0) =

b1 (0) = , and

2 (0) = 99.5.

IV. O UTPUT F EEDBACK D ESIGN In the simulations, the controller gains in (42) and (42),

This section addresses the issue of control for helicopter were set to av = 67, bv = 10, v = 8, v = 20, ar = 24,

given in Section II, where now it is assumed that only vertical br = 10, r = 8, and r = 10. The parameters of the observer

and rotational positions are only available for measurement. It are z = 4, = 4, z = 15, and = 6.6.

should be pointed out that scaled helicopters are provided with Figure 2 shows motion around the desired trajectory for the

an internal loop which allows us to measure the main rotor altitude and yaw angle according to the full system equations,

velocity 2 . By using a second order sliding mode observer the control inputs, the errors, and input control. This figure

[10], we will estimate the velocity of the system. demonstrate the performance and robustness of the second

To estimate the state vector q R6 , the following observer order sliding mode controllers against unmodelled dynamics.

is proposed VI. C ONCLUSIONS

1/2 In this paper we considered the output feedback control of

zb1 = zb2 + z |z1 zb1 | sgn(z1 zb1 )

a scaled helicopter model mounted on a platform, addressing

zb2 = k1 (b

q )u1 + g + z sgn(z1 zb1 ) (40) the trajectory tracking control problem by using second order

1/2 sliding mode control. We design a control law which solves

b1 =

b2 + |1 b1 | sgn(1 b1 )

the problem of elevation and rotation. This control law was

b = k

b2 (b

q )u1 + b

k3 (b b2 ) + b

q )(u2 kg h2 (b

q)

2 obtained from a reduced model and implemented on the full

+ sgn(1

b1 ) (41) helicopter model thus demonstrating the robustness of sliding

mode against unmodelled dynamics and unknown disturban-

where qb R6 are the estimated states and z , z , , and ces. Finite time stability was concluded for vertical and angular

are the observer gains. The initial conditions qbi (0) = qi (0) motion of the helicopter. The stability analysis was performed

and qbi+1 (0) = 0 where i = 1, 3, ensure the convergence of the by using the Lyapunov stability theory. Effectiveness and ro-

observer. Choosing the parameters of the observer (40)(41) bustness of controllers were demonstrated through simulations.

according to [10] then its states converge in finite time to the

states of system (16)(17). R EFERENCES

The output feedback controller u1 and u2 : [1] J. Avila-Vilchis, B. Brogliato, A. Dzul, and R. Lozano, Nonlinear

modelling and control of helicopters, Automatica, vol. 39, pp. 1583

1596, 2003.

u1 = b

k1 (b

q )(av sgn(z1 ) bv sgn(bz2 zd ) [2] M. Garca-Sanz, J. Elso, and I. Egana, Control de angulo de cabeceo

de un helicoptero como benchmark de diseno de controladores, Revista

v z1 v (bz2 zd ) g) (42) Iberoamericana de Automatica e Informatica Industrial, vol. 3, no. 2,

b3 (b

u2 = k q )1 [ar sgn(1 ) br sgn(b2 d ) r 1 pp. 111116, 2006.

[3] K. Starkov, L. Aguilar, and Y. Orlov, Sliding mode control synthesis

kg b

k3 (b

q )( b2 d ) b

b2 + d ) r ( q )u1 b

k2 (b h2 (b

q )] of a 3-DOF helicopter prototype using position feedback, in 10th

International Workshop on Variable Structure System, Antalya, Turkey,

(43) June 2008, pp. 233237.

0 [4] Y. Orlov, M. Meza, and L. Aguilar, Sliding mode velocity-observer-

z [m] based stabilization of a 3-DOF helicopter prototype, in IFAC Sympo-

0.2 sium Robust Control Design, Haifa, Israel, 2009, pp. 179184.

0.4

[5] A. Isidori, L. Marconi, and A. Serrabi, Robust nonlinear motion control

of a helicopter, IEEE Trans. on Automatic Control, vol. 48, no. 3, pp.

0.6 413426, March 2003.

0.8

[6] A. Kutay, A. J. Calise, M. Idan, and N. Hovakimyan, Experimental

0 50 100 150 200 250 results on adaptive output feedback control using a laboratory model

helicopter, IEEE Trans. on Control Systems Technology, vol. 13, no. 2,

2 pp. 196202, March 2005.

[rad]

0 theory. Berlin: Springer, 2005.

[8] Y. Orlov, Discontinuous systems - Lyapunov analysis and robust synt-

2 hesis under uncertainty condition. London: Springer-Verlag, 2009.

[9] C. Byrnes and A. Isidori, Limit sets, zero dynamics, and internal

4 models in the problem of nonlinear output regulation, IEEE Trans. on

0 50 100 150 200 250

Automatic Control, vol. 48, no. 10, pp. 17121723, Oct. 2003.

[10] A. Davila, L. Fridman, and A. Levant, Second-order sliding-mode

3

1

x 10 observer for mechanical systems, IEEE Trans. on Automatic Control,

vol. 50, no. 11, pp. 17851789, Nov. 2005.

u1 [m]

4

0 10 20 30 40 50 60

0.1

u2 [m]

0.05

0.05

0.1

0 10 20 30 40 50 60

0.01

z [m]

0.005

0

0.005

0.01

0.015

0 50 100 150 200 250

1

[rad]

4

0 50 100 150 200 250

70

Tm [N]

80

90

100

0 50 100 150 200 250

2 [rad/s]

90

100

110

120

130

0 50 100 150 200 250

Time

- ANN Based pH Control ReportUploaded bySumit Gupta
- Boiler.pdfUploaded byKalai Yarasi
- Adaptive Sliding Mode Control of Chaos in PermanentUploaded byhieuhuech
- Sensorless Control of Induction MotorsUploaded bychandramoulyjntu
- Modern Sliding Mode Control TheoryUploaded bymehmet
- The International Journal of Applied Control, Electrical and Electronics Engineering (IJACEEE)Uploaded byijaceee
- IJACEEEUploaded byijaceee
- Jiang-Jian Wang - Research of Cascade Control With an Application to Central Air-conditioning SystemUploaded byCarlos Bellatin
- MEMS.pptxUploaded byyogeshsingh15
- A Generalized Proportional Integral Output Feedback Controller for the Robust Perturbation Rejection in a Mechanical SystemUploaded byWalidAdrar
- IJACEEEUploaded byijaceee
- PID Control Loops 3.1Uploaded byAbdelnasir
- Sliding Mode Control HandoutUploaded byGabriel Mejia
- Uav Predictive ControlUploaded byMaTias Silves
- upravljanjeUploaded byFatih Salihovic
- Module 1[1]Uploaded byOnuogu Charles
- 1558Industrial Process THEISUploaded byssuthaa
- Comparative Analysis of Pso-Pid and Hu-PidUploaded byAnonymous 7VPPkWS8O
- arducopter perametersUploaded bysammy
- Aircraft Stability MainUploaded bytjburtch
- 14__ISSN_1392-1215_Power Factor Correction based on Fuzzy Logic Controller with Fixed Switching Frequency.pdfUploaded byyogesh
- Sanuji Kalhan (MS12950478) - Control Engineering Assignment 2Uploaded bysanuji2100
- Testing of Concrete Under Closed-Loop ControlUploaded byAgustin Gana
- Ypf Advanced Control of Fluid Catalytic Cracking Unit VisualmesaUploaded byvaradu
- Chapter 7 Process Control Part 1Uploaded byanon_501297660
- Transient Control of Electro-hydraulic Fully FlexibleUploaded byadamzue
- 07162520Uploaded byhabbythomasa
- Planar Running RobotUploaded bynarumugai29
- Control Systems Course Notes Bruce Francis UofTUploaded byCameron
- PDPIPIDCompUploaded byG Murali Krishna

- FIDE2017-1Uploaded byMosher Jovan
- FIDE2017-1Uploaded byMosher Jovan
- Dibujo Mecánico Asistido Por ComputadoraUploaded byMosher Jovan
- Nagoor Kani Control SystemsUploaded byAnonymous eWMnRr70q
- Los Valores en La IngenieríaUploaded byMosher Jovan
- Wind TurbineUploaded byMosher Jovan
- vss2010Uploaded byMosher Jovan
- Cuadro ComparativoUploaded byMosher Jovan
- Captivate 9.0 Read MeUploaded byFitri Handayani
- Control de un pendulo invertido rotacionalUploaded byMosher Jovan
- Paper30Uploaded byMosher Jovan
- Some WordsUploaded byMosher Jovan
- Entregables Perfil 2019F(1)Uploaded byMosher Jovan
- 2 Modelos 2007Uploaded byMosher Jovan
- Manual Tutorias CITECUploaded byMosher Jovan
- CLCA 2014Uploaded byMosher Jovan
- Quan DeviceUploaded byMosher Jovan
- Automatics i CalculaUploaded byMosher Jovan
- Tutorial for Sit 2.0Uploaded bymarebara84
- DIFU100ci@2012.Uploaded byMosher Jovan
- ENINVIE2008.Uploaded byMosher Jovan
- CLCA 2014.2 RobotsUploaded byMosher Jovan
- ERA2009.pdfUploaded byMosher Jovan
- Automatic Control and Computer Science_2011Uploaded byMosher Jovan
- CurricularUploaded byArmando Corral Blanco
- CurricularUploaded byArmando Corral Blanco
- Era 2010bUploaded byMosher Jovan
- Estrategias de Ensenanza y AprendizajeUploaded byPam Gutierrez
- Vertice 2012Uploaded byMosher Jovan

- ch0-mathUploaded bySophie Soete
- CH6.pdfUploaded byAnonymous Ateic1qX
- AppendixUploaded byMohammad Adnan
- Forecasting alan [Compatibility Mode]Uploaded byMuhammad Alfan
- Download File-2.pdfUploaded byWylie
- Deep Nets for Local Manifold LearningUploaded byJan Hula
- Horde Size AnalysisUploaded byAudi D. Abas
- 1954- Application of the Rayleigh Ritz Method to Variational Problem by IndritzUploaded bycustomerx
- Practice MidtermUploaded byAnonymous 9qJCv5mC0
- Cross Cultural Research4Uploaded byPrajesh Muthiyal
- 112106186Uploaded by23mh283991
- 32-linearization.pdfUploaded byVinicius Gonçalves
- Analytical Method ValidationUploaded byRambabu komati - QA
- m-bankingUploaded byathiraman
- Stability and Convergence theorems for Newmark's methodUploaded byFumihiro Chiba
- 027-032_for_webUploaded byMohamed Mansour
- What is Nonlinear RegressionUploaded bySiti Julpah Hartati
- 2015 Maths Methods Midyear Exam 2Uploaded byrichard langley
- High Order 1Uploaded byChatchai Manathamsombat
- Challenges Faced by PhD Students While Analyzing Their Quantitative DataUploaded byStats Work Statswork
- diff eqn Differential equationsUploaded byMinu Mathew
- FA-SPSSUploaded byMohd Zaini Abdullah
- Uncertainty Measurement ProcedureUploaded byBulkholderia Gladioli
- cs229-2Uploaded byAndi Geng
- Regression AnalysisUploaded byAnkur Sharma
- Fourier TransformsZUploaded bygaurav_juneja_4
- CalcI Complete AssignmentsUploaded byAbdulaiAbubakar
- IFEM.Ch10Uploaded byShubhankar Bhowmick
- Concept of Hypothesis Testing 2Uploaded byArijey Sura
- IB Mathematics HL Internal AssessmentUploaded byZinzan Gurney