Scribd
Upload
175 views

Spring Mass System

This document describes the optimal control of a spring-mass system to reach a target position. The system consists of a movable ceiling, spring, and masspoint connected by flanges. The control variable is the acceleration of the ceiling, which induces vibrations to build up the amplitude of vibration. The goal is to minimize the time required for the masspoint to reach a position of -0.5, subject to constraints on the ceiling position and acceleration. Figures 2 and 3 show an example feasible solution trajectory.

Uploaded by

sgorchis
Copyright
© Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
175 views

Spring Mass System

This document describes the optimal control of a spring-mass system to reach a target position. The system consists of a movable ceiling, spring, and masspoint connected by flanges. The control variable is the acceleration of the ceiling, which induces vibrations to build up the amplitude of vibration. The goal is to minimize the time required for the masspoint to reach a position of -0.5, subject to constraints on the ceiling position and acceleration. Figures 2 and 3 show an example feasible solution trajectory.

Uploaded by

sgorchis
Copyright
© Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 4

Optimal control of a spring-mass system

March 26, 2009

1 Problem statement

Given is a spring-mass system attached to a movable ceiling. The masspoint has to reach the
target. This can be achieved by controlling the acceleration of the movable ceiling such that
vibrations are induced and the amplitude of the vibration is built up.

Figure 1: spring-mass system

The mass-spring system consists of three subsystems: the ceiling, the spring and a masspoint.
Each subsystem contains at least one connector of type flange.

connector flange
Real y; // y-position
flow Real F; // force
end flange;

The ceiling is given by

1
model ceiling
flange down;
Real y( start=1);
Real v( start=0);
parameter Real u; // acceleration == control variable

equation
down.y = y;
der(y)=v;
der(v)=u;
end ceiling;

We have the masspoint

model masspoint
flange top;
parameter Real m = 1;
Real y (start=0);
Real v (start=0);
Real F;
parameter Real g=9.81;
equation
y=top.y;
F=-top.F-m*g;
der(y)=v;
m*der(v)=F;
end masspoint;

and the spring

model spring
flange top;
flange down;
parameter Real l0=1;
parameter Real k=100;
Real l;
equation
l = top.y - down.y;
top.F = k*(l-l0);
down.F = top.F;
end spring;

The spring-mass system aggregates these three models:

model spring_mass_system
ceiling ceil;
masspoint mass;
spring sp;

2
Real timevar(start=0);
equation
connect(ceil.down,sp.top);
connect(sp.down, mass.top);
der(timevar)=1;
end spring_mass_system;

For the optimization an additional variable for the elapsed time is introduced. The flat model
with no model structure is given by

model spring_mass_system

parameter Real ceil.u = 0;


parameter Real mass.m = 1;
parameter Real mass.g = 9.81;
parameter Real sp.l0 = 1;
parameter Real sp.k = 100;

Real ceil.down.y;
Real ceil.down.F;
Real ceil.y(start = 1);
Real ceil.v(start = 0);
Real mass.top.y;
Real mass.top.F;
Real mass.y;
Real mass.v;
Real mass.F;
Real sp.top.y;
Real sp.top.F;
Real sp.down.y;
Real sp.down.F;
Real sp.l;
Real timevar(start = 0);

equation
ceil.down.y = ceil.y;
der(ceil.y) = ceil.v;
der(ceil.v) = ceil.u;
mass.y = mass.top.y;
mass.F = -(mass.top.F+mass.m*mass.g);
der(mass.y) = mass.v;
mass.m*der(mass.v) = mass.F;
sp.l = sp.top.y-sp.down.y;
sp.top.F = sp.k*(sp.l-sp.l0);
sp.down.F = sp.top.F;
der(timevar) = 1;
ceil.down.F+sp.top.F = 0;
sp.top.y = ceil.down.y;

3
mass.top.F+sp.down.F = 0;
sp.down.y = mass.top.y;

end spring_mass_system;

resulting into a DAE with 17 scalar unknowns and 17 scalar equations. The optimization problem
is given by

min timevar(T )
ceil.u(t),T
s.t. model equations,
− 2 ≤ ceil.u(t) ≤ 2,
0.9 ≤ ceil.y(t) ≤ 1.1,
mass.y(T ) = −0.5.

The Figures 2 and 3 show trajectories of a feasible solution of the optimization problem.

2 1.1
PEND.CEIL.U PEND.CEIL.Y
1.5
1.05
1

0.5
1

0.95
−0.5

−1
0.9
−1.5

−2 0.85
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5

Figure 2: acceleration (left) and position (right) ot the ceiling

0.2 0.4
PEND.MASS.Y PEND.CEIL.V
0.3
0.1
0.2
0
0.1
−0.1
0

−0.2 −0.1

−0.2
−0.3
−0.3
−0.4
−0.4
−0.5
−0.5

−0.6 −0.6
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5

Figure 3: position of mass point (left) and velocity of ceiling (right)

You might also like