Performance Comparisons between PID and Adaptive PID Controllers for Travel Angle Control of a Bench-Top Helicopter

This paper provides a comparative study on the
performances of standard PID and adaptive PID controllers tested on
travel angle of a 3-Degree-of-Freedom (3-DOF) Quanser bench-top
helicopter. Quanser, a well-known manufacturer of educational
bench-top helicopter has developed Proportional Integration
Derivative (PID) controller with Linear Quadratic Regulator (LQR)
for all travel, pitch and yaw angle of the bench-top helicopter. The
performance of the PID controller is relatively good; however, its
performance could also be improved if the controller is combined
with adaptive element. The objective of this research is to design
adaptive PID controller and then compare the performances of the
adaptive PID with the standard PID. The controller design and test is
focused on travel angle control only. Adaptive method used in this
project is self-tuning controller, which controller’s parameters are
updated online. Two adaptive algorithms those are pole-placement
and deadbeat have been chosen as the method to achieve optimal
controller’s parameters. Performance comparisons have shown that
the adaptive (deadbeat) PID controller has produced more desirable
performance compared to standard PID and adaptive (poleplacement).
The adaptive (deadbeat) PID controller attained very fast
settling time (5 seconds) and very small percentage of overshoot (5%
to 7.5%) for 10° to 30° step change of travel angle.





References:
[1] Zhai Y., Mohamad Nounou, Hazem Nounou, Yasser Al-Hamidi, “Model
predictive control of a 3-DOF helicopter system using successive
linearization”,Journal of Engineering, Science and Technology, vol.
2(10), pp 9-19, 2010.
[2] Mansor, H., Amzaeri, A. H., Noor, S. B. M., Ahmad, R. K. R., and Taip,
F. S. , “Design of QFT controller for a bench-top helicopter”, Special
Issue on Active Control of Vehicle Systems, International Journal of
Simulation: System, Science and Technology, vol. 11(4), pp. 9-17, 2010.
[3] P. –O. Gutman, “Robust and adaptive control: fidelity or an open
relationship”, Systems & Control Letters, vol. 49, pp. 9-19, 2003.
[4] H. Mansor and S. B. Mohd Noor, “Design of QFT-Based Self-Tuning
Deadbeat Controller”, World Academy of Science, Engineering and
Technology, vol. 79, July 2013.
[5] F. C. Silva Junior, J. B. Oliveira, and A. D. Araujo, "Design and stability
analysis of a variable structure adaptive pole placement controller for
first order systems", Proceedings of the 9th IEEE International
Conference on Control and Automation (ICCA), 2011, pp. 895-900,
2011.
[6] R. Lasri, I. Rojas, H. Pomares, and O. Valenzuela, “Innovative strategy
to improve precision and to save power of a real-time control process
using an online adaptive fuzzy logic controller”, Advances in Fuzzy
Systems, 2013, article ID 658145.
[7] H. Mansor, S. B. M. Noor, R. K. R. Ahmad and F. S. Taip, “Online
Quantitative Feedback Theory (QFT)-based self-tuning controller for
grain drying process”, Scientific Research and Essays, vol. 6 (30), pp.
6530-6534, 2011.
[8] S. Bdran, M. Shuyuan, S. Saifullah and H. Jie, “Comparison of PID,
Pole placement and LQR controllers for speed ratio control of control
variable transmission (CVT)”, Proceedings of the International
Innovation Scientific & Research Organization, 2013.
[9] 3D Helicopter Experiment Manual, Quanser 3-DOF Helicopter
Reference Manual 644 (2.1).
[10] V. Bobal and P. Chalupa, “Self-tuning controllers Simulink library,”
Zlin: Thomas Bata University, 2008.