applied

sciences
Article
Levitating Control System of Maglev Ruler Based on Active
Disturbance Rejection Controller
Jiyuan Sun 1,2 , Gengyun Tian 1,† , Pin Li 1 , Chunlin Tian 1,3,4, * and Zhenxiong Zhou 2, *,†

1 College of Mechanical and Electrical Engineering, Changchun University of Science and Technology,
Changchun 130022, China; [email protected] (J.S.); [email protected] (G.T.);
[email protected] (P.L.)
2 College of Electrical and Information Engineering, Beihua University, Jilin 132001, China
3 Chongqing Research Institute, Changchun University of Science and Technology, Chongqing 401135, China
4 Guangdong Guangji Hi Tech Co., Ltd., Foshan 528000, China
* Correspondence: [email protected] (C.T.); [email protected] (Z.Z.)
† These authors contributed equally to this work.

Abstract: The autonomous displacement and displacement measurement functions of the maglev
ruler are performed by the mover core. The magnetic levitation ruler can serve as a viable alter-
native to the linear measurement system of a coordinate measuring machine. The stability of the
four magnetic fields in air gaps and the levitation position of the maglev ruler is one of the key factors
for the stability of the thrust force on the power core, and it is also one of the key factors for ensuring
the precision of the maglev ruler. There is cross-coupling between the two ends of the mover core of
the maglev ruler, resulting in a strongly coupled, nonlinear, multi-input and multi-output system
for the levitating system of the maglev ruler. This paper establishes a mathematical model for the
levitating system of the maglev ruler and designs a levitating control system for the maglev ruler
based on an active disturbance rejection control algorithm to achieve decoupling and disturbance
suppression. Through simulation analysis and experimental testing of the levitating system with
starting and disturbance, it is proved that the levitating control system of the maglev ruler has good
dynamic characteristics, static characteristics, and robustness.

Citation: Sun, J.; Tian, G.; Li, P.; Tian,

Keywords: maglev; levitating control; active disturbance rejection control; precision detection
C.; Zhou, Z. Levitating Control
System of Maglev Ruler Based on
Active Disturbance Rejection
Controller. Appl. Sci. 2024, 14, 8069.
https://doi.org/10.3390/app14178069
1. Introduction
A coordinate measuring machine (CMM) is capable of measuring free-form surface
Academic Editors: Sylvain Bertrand,
components, and its linear measurement system comprises a grating scale, servo motor,
Ricardo Simões Santos and
Francisco Rego
and linear motion mechanism. The magnetic levitation ruler can streamline the linear
measurement system of the CMM. The two functions of the maglev ruler (MR), autonomous
Received: 30 July 2024 displacement and displacement measurement, are completed by its mover core (MC) [1].
Revised: 28 August 2024 This MC adopts a step-by-step autonomous displacement. Each step length is the scale of
Accepted: 3 September 2024 the MR. While performing autonomous displacement, the displacement is converted into a
Published: 9 September 2024 pulse quantity, which is sent to the microcontroller to complete displacement measurement.
Obviously, the stability of the step length improves the precision of the maglev rule.
According to Newton’s second law of motion, the stability of the thrust force applied to
the MC determines the stability of the step length. The stability of the magnetic field in
Copyright: © 2024 by the authors.
air gaps and the current of the horizontal control coil determine the stability of the thrust
Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland.
This article is an open access article
force [1,2]. The four air-gap magnetic fields of the MR exhibit coupling and are susceptible
distributed under the terms and
to external interference, being regulated by four levitating control coils. Additionally,
conditions of the Creative Commons these magnetic fields play a pivotal role in determining the levitating height of the MC.
Attribution (CC BY) license (https:// Consequently, the levitating control system of the MR can be characterized as a coupled
creativecommons.org/licenses/by/ four-input, two-output system [1]. This paper mainly studies how to improve the stability
4.0/). of the magnetic field in air gaps through the levitating control system of the MR.

Appl. Sci. 2024, 14, 8069. https://doi.org/10.3390/app14178069 https://www.mdpi.com/journal/applsci

Appl. Sci. 2024, 14, 8069 2 of 24

The maglev ball system can be used as an experimental device to verify the maglev
control method. Its working principle is to generate magnetic force through electromagnets
to balance the gravity of the ball. Therefore, the ball is stably levitated at the equilibrium
point. The coil current of the electromagnet determines the levitating position of the ball [3].
Victor [4] et al. discussed the role of direct-current to direct-current (DC/DC) converters
in magnetic suspension systems and verified the feasibility of a magnetic suspension po-
sitioning system that included a proportional, integral, differential (PID) algorithm for a
maglev ball as the research object. Debdoot Sain [5] proposed a maglev positioning system
based on a 2-DOF PID controller, which was used for the positioning of maglev balls [5].
Aysen [6] et al. proposed an opposing artificial electric field algorithm (OBAEFA), which
was used in the adjustment of fractional order PID (FOPID) control systems [6]. FOPID was
used in the maglev ball positioning system [6]. The OBAEFA is an upgraded version of the
artificial electric field algorithm (AEFA), using an opposing learning strategy to enhance
the search capabilities of the AEFA algorithm [6]. The experimental results verified the
superiority of OBAEFA [6]. In the maglev ball positioning system, the OBAEFA was used
to debug FOPID, which optimized the transient response of the positioning system by
minimizing an optimization objective function with a simple structure [7]. T. Deepa [8]
compared and analyzed the control performance of PID controller and linear quadratic
regulator (LQR) controller [8]. It proved that the use of LQR controllers improved the
performance of maglev systems [8]. S. Pandey [9–11] studied how to apply the fractional-
order sliding mode controllers in maglev ball positioning systems [9–11]. Rahul Sanmugam
Gopi et al. [12] proposed a new adaptive control method for ball position controllers to
improve maglev systems. The method included proportional integral speed plus feedfor-
ward in the control structure and used a modified version of the standard tuning rule as the
adaptive mechanism [12]. The control method was applied to the maglev ball positioning
system. Kim S. K. et al. [13] studied a sensorless nonlinear controller for maglev ball
positioning systems [13]. Massive studies have revealed the characteristics of the magnetic
field in the air gap of the maglev ball and the control method for the levitating position of
the maglev ball, providing a reference for the study of the levitating system of the MC of
the MR in this paper. However, the maglev ball only has one air gap. The levitating control
method of the maglev ball cannot be applied to the MR.
Zhou Zhenxiong et al. [14] studied the levitating system of the TU-type maglev
platform [14]. The four basic levitation magnetic loops of the TU-type maglev platform are
the same as those of the MR [14]. The T-shaped mover of the TU-type maglev platform
has three ends [14]. There are two air gaps between each end and the stator yoke, an
upper air gap and a lower air gap [14]. The magnetic flux in the upper and lower air
gaps determines the force on the ends where they are located, controlling the levitation
height of the ends [14]. The magnetic flux in the air gap can also be divided into two parts,
one from the permanent magnet and the other from the levitating control coil [14]. The
magnetic flux emitted by the levitating control coil is related to the current of the levitating
control coil [14]. Therefore, the magnetic flux emitted by the levitating coil can adjust
the size of the air gap flux, thus achieving stable levitation of the T-shaped mover [14].
However, the TU-type maglev platform uses one coil to control the upper and lower air
gap fluxes at one end, which cannot solve the simultaneous asynchronous interference
in the two air gap fluxes [14]. In addition, due to the use of one control coil to adjust the
magnetic flux in the upper and lower air gaps, there is a commutation problem in the
current of the control coil [14]. The control coil is an inductance and an energy storage
element [14]. During current commutation, there is a transition process, causing the current
in the control coil to have a turning point at the commutation point [14]. Therefore, the
TU-type maglev platform is equipped with only two levitating control magnetic circuits,
making it incapable of independently regulating four air gaps. Furthermore, the current
flowing through the levitating control coil of the TU-type maglev platform does not exhibit
a linear relationship with time. The MR establishes four levitating control magnetic loops.
The magnetic flux of each magnetic loop can be independently controlled, eliminating
Appl. Sci. 2024, 14, 8069 3 of 24

the need for current commutation of the levitating coil, eliminating the inflection point,
and allowing independent control of the magnetic flux in each air gap. The working
principle of the levitating system of the MR is analyzed, and a mathematical model of
the levitating system is established in this paper. The levitating system uses an active
disturbance rejection control (ADRC) control algorithm to stabilize the levitation position
of the MC while also stabilizing the magnetic field in air gaps.
The structure of this paper is as follows: In the second part, this paper analyzes the
characteristics of the maglev system of the MR and establishes a mathematical model. In
the third part, this paper designs a maglev control system based on ADRC according to the
characteristics of the maglev system of the MR and conducts simulation analysis on the
maglev control system. In every fourth part, this paper conducts experimental testing on
the maglev control system. The organization of this paper is as follows. In Section 2, the
characteristics of the maglev system of the MR are analyzed, and a mathematical model is
established. In Section 3, according to the characteristics of the maglev system, a levitating
control system based on ADRC was designed, and a simulation analysis of the levitating
control system was conducted. In Section 4, an experimental test was conducted on the
levitating control system. Finally, conclusions are presented in Section 5.

2. Analysis Model of Levitating Force

Changes in the horizontal position of the mover core result in variations in the length
of the magnetic circuit, subsequently altering the air gap magnetic field and ultimately
affecting the levitating force [1]. Evidently, there exists a correlation between the levitating
force and the planar position of the mover core. Given the intricate coupling among the
levitating heights at both ends of the mover core and its planar position [1], a simplistic
modeling approach that treats these three parts as mutually independent systems fails
to capture the intricate working principle of internal coupling within the system. Conse-
quently, such a model diverges significantly from the actual object, rendering it challenging
to achieve high-performance control.
This article establishes a relatively precise mathematical model by conducting a thor-
ough analysis of the magnetic circuit and forces involved in the MR. This model effectively
uncovers the intricate coupling relationships between the levitating heights at both ends
of the mover core, as well as the intricate coupling between the levitating height and the
plane position. Notably, this model is well suited for the application of the ADRC control
method.

2.1. Magnetic Potential Calculation and Leakage Coefficient

The MR uses four permanent magnets to provide bias magnetic fields for the six air
gaps of the system. The magnetic field strength of the four permanent magnets was
analyzed using finite element analysis, and their average values were:
Average magnetic field intensity: HBM = 265 × 103 A/m.
The average magnetic potential of permanent magnets: Vm = HBM · lBM = 2650 A.
The MR system chooses four permanent magnets of the same size, so the magnetic
field strength of the four permanent magnets can also be considered to be the same.
There are two types of magnetic levitating loops: the first is a basic levitating loop
based on permanent magnets, which produces bias magnetic fields in the air gap; the second
is a control levitating loop based on levitating coils, which produces control magnetic
fluxes. During the operation of the MR, its MC is in a magnetic saturation state. Therefore,
there must be significant magnetic losses and magnetic leakage in the magnetic loop, and
two types of leakage coefficients need to be introduced to compensate for the air gap
reluctance model.
The two magnetic leakage coefficients are:
σBM is the leakage factor of the basic levitating loop;
σCM is the leakage factor of the control levitating loop.
 The two magnetic leakage coefficients are:
σBM is the leakage factor of the basic levitating loop;
Appl. Sci. 2024, 14, 8069 σCM is the leakage factor of the control levitating loop. 4 of 24

2.2. Analysis Model of Buoyancy Force

2.2. Analysis ModelThe
of Buoyancy
levitatingForce
force of the MC comes from three parts: the electromagnetic suc
force on the left support,
The levitating force of the MC comes the right
fromsupport, and the electromagnetic
three parts: center point. Thesuction
schematic diag
of the
force on the left electromagnetic
support, suctionand
the right support, force
theoncenter
the magnetic loop
point. The and thediagram
schematic MC is shown
of in Fig
1.
the electromagnetic suction force on the magnetic loop and the MC is shown in Figure 1.

(a) (b)
Figure 1.loops
Figure 1. (a) Magnetic (a) Magnetic loops
of MR. (b) Theofelectromagnetic
MR. (b) The electromagnetic suction
suction force on force on the MC.
the MC.

The MR
The MR is divided is divided
into three parts,intothe
three
left,parts,
right,the left,
and right, and
middle, middle,
as shown in as shown
Figure 1b.in Figur
The levitating force
The in the middle
levitating force inistheaffected
middlebyisthe levitating
affected by the forces on theforces
levitating left andonright,
the left and r
and these levitating
and theseforces are similar.
levitating Therefore,
forces this paper
are similar. first studies
Therefore, the levitating
this paper forcethe levita
first studies
using the leftforce
levitating
usingforce as an
the left example.
levitating force as an example.
Figure 1b also indicates
Figure 1b also the electromagnetic
indicates suction force
the electromagnetic acting
suction on acting
force the MC. onThe
the MC. Th
resultant force of the upper and lower electromagnetic suction forces
sultant force of the upper and lower electromagnetic suction forces on theon the MC is the leftMC is the
levitating force:
levitating force:
Fle f t = Fl_air_up − Fl_air_down (1)
Fleft = Fl _ air _ up − Fl _ air _ down
where Fleft is the levitating force on the left end of MC, Fl_air_up is the upward electromagnetic
suction force where
on the left
Fleft end
is the MC, and Fforce
oflevitating is the
on the
l_air_down downward
left electromagnetic
end of MC, suction electrom
Fl_air_up is the upward
force on the left end
netic of MC.force on the left end of MC, and Fl_air_down is the downward electromagn
suction
According to theforce
suction electromagnetic suction
on the left end of MC. force calculation equation [15]:
According to the electromagnetic suction force calculation equation [15]:
1 ϕ2
FR = − (2)
2 µ0 · A 1 φ 2
FR = −
where µ0 is the permeability of the air gap; A is the area 2 μof0 the
⋅ A pole surface, which is the
vertical intersection of the U-shaped conductor and the MC, i.e., the black area on the MC
where μ0 is the permeability of the air gap; A is the area of the pole surface, which is
in Figure 1b. Therefore, the electromagnetic suction force FR is proportional to the square
vertical intersection of the U-shaped conductor and the MC, i.e., the black area on the
of the magnetic flux ϕ [1].
in Figure 1b. Therefore, the electromagnetic suction force FR is proportional to the sq
There are eight magnetic loops on the MR, which are numbered as shown in Figure 1a.
of the magnetic flux φ [1].
The magnetic fluxes of the loop 1 to loop 8 magnetic loops are respectively: ϕ1, ϕ2, ϕ3, ϕ4,
ϕ5, ϕ6, ϕ7, and ϕ8.There are eight
Among them,magnetic
ϕ1, ϕ2, ϕ3,loops
andonϕ4the
areMR, which arefluxes
the magnetic numbered
of theasbasic
shown in Fig
1a. ϕ5,
levitating loop; Theϕ6,
magnetic
ϕ7, andfluxes
ϕ8 areof
thethe loop 1 to
magnetic loop of
fluxes 8 magnetic loops
the control are respectively:
levitating loop. φ 1,
As shownφ 3, φ 4, φ 5,
in Figure 1a, φthe φ 7, and flux
6, magnetic φ 8.inAmong
the upper
them, φ 1,on
air gap φ the
2, φleft and φ 4 isare
3, support thethe magn
sum of the magnetic
fluxes offlux
the of the levitating
basic base levitating
loop; loop
φ 5, and
φ 6, the
φ 7,control
and φ levitating loop, andfluxes of
8 are the magnetic
both directions are downward. Therefore, the calculation equation for the magnetic flux in
control levitating loop.
the upper air gap on the left support is [16]:
As shown in Figure 1a, the magnetic flux in the upper air gap on the left suppo
the sum of the magnetic flux of=the
ϕl_up_air ϕ1 +base
ϕ5 levitating loop and the control levitating
(3) l
and both directions are downward. Therefore, the calculation equation for the magn
flux
Similarly, theinmagnetic
the upperfluxair gap onlower
in the the left
airsupport
gap of is [16]:
the left support is also the sum
of the magnetic flux of the base levitating loop and the control levitating loop, and both
directions are upward. Therefore, the calculation equation for the magnetic flux in the
lower air gap of the left support is [16]:

ϕl_down_air = ϕ3 + ϕ7 (4)
Appl. Sci. 2024, 14, 8069 5 of 24

The total magnetic flux of the air gap in the upper part of the left support starts
from the left upper permanent magnet and the left upper levitating coil. According to
Hopkinson’s law [16]:
V
ϕ= (5)
R
where V represents the magnetic potential and R represents the magnetic reluctance.
As can be seen from Figure 1, the structures of the eight levitation magnetic loops are
similar, consisting of permanent magnets or levitating coils and six magnetic conductors.
For ease of calculation, a label is assigned to the magnetic reluctance of each magnetic
conductor, as shown in Figure 1a.
As shown in Figure 1a, the MR has 28 magnetic resistors, including R11 , R12 , R21 , R22 ,
R31 , R32 , R41 , R42 , R51 , R52 , R61 , R62 , R71 , R72 , R81 , R82 , RM_U , RM_D , RF_U , RF_D , RB_U , RB_D ,
RL_M , RR_M , RL_U_A , RL_D_A , RR_U_A , RR_D_A . The air gap length of the MR can also be
divided into two parts: the nominal air gap length and the coil air gap length occupied by
the coil. In addition, due to the different leakage coefficients of the basic levitating loop
and the control levitating loop, RM_U , RM_D , RL_U_A , RL_D_A , RR_U_A , RR_D_A can also be
decomposed into RM_U_B , RM_U_C , RM_D_B , RM_D_C , RL_U_A_B , RL_U_A_C , RLCU_U , RL_D_A_B ,
RL_D_A_C , RLCU_D .
The known equation for calculating the magnetic reluctance is as follows [17]:

l
R= (6)
µA

According to the dimensions of the components of the MR [1], combined with the
magnetic reluctance calculation Equation (6) and the finite element analysis results, the
following magnetic reluctance calculation equations can be obtained:

lh
R11 = R21 = R31 = R41 = (7)
µh_ f A

lh
R51 = R61 = R71 = R81 = (8)
µh_b A
lh
R L_M = R R_M = (9)
µh_m A
ls_y0 − y
R12 = R22 = R32 = R42 = (10)
µb_s A
ls_y0 + y
R52 = R62 = R72 = R82 = (11)
µc_s A
lm_y0 − y
R F_D = R F_U = (12)
µ f _m A
lm_y0 + y
R B_D = R B_U = (13)
µb_m A
(l A − zl )
R L_U_A_B = (14)
µ air AσBM
(l A + zl )
R L_D_A_B = (15)
µ air AσBM
( l A − zr )
R R_U_A_B = (16)
µ air AσBM
( l A + zr )
R R_D_A_B = (17)
µ air AσBM
Appl. Sci. 2024, 14, 8069 6 of 24

(l A − zl )
R L_U_A_C = (18)
µ air AσCM
(l A + zl )
R L_D_A_C = (19)
µ air AσCM
( l A − zr )
R R_U_A_C = (20)
µ air AσCM
( l A + zr )
R R_D_A_C = (21)
µ air AσCM
(2l A − zl − zr )
R M_U_B = (22)
2µ air AσBM
(2l A − zl − zr )
R M_U_C = (23)
2µ air AσCM
(2l A + zl + zr )σBM
R M_D_B = (24)
2µ air A
(2l A + zl + zr )σCM
R M_D_C = (25)
2µ air A
lCU
R LCU_U_B = R LCU_D_B = R RCU_U_B = R RCU_D_B = (26)
µCU AσBM
lCU
R LCU_U_C = R LCU_D_C = R RCU_U_C = R RCU_D_C = (27)
µCU AσCM
where lh is the length of loops 1, 2, 3, and 4 on the T-shaped conductor arm and the length of
loops 5, 6, 7, and 8 on the bottom of the U-shaped conductor. ls_y0 is the length of the eight
magnetic loops on the U-shaped conductor side arm when the MC is in its center position.
lm_y0 is the length of the eight magnetic loops on the T-shaped conductor vertical arm. lA
is the length of each air gap when the MC is in the center position. lCU is the diameter of
copper wire. y is the offset of the MC on the y-axis. zl is the upward offset of the left end of
the MC. zr is the upward offset of the left support of the MC [1].
After setting the magnetic leakage coefficients σBM = 6 and σCM = 3, the equation
calculates the magnetic flux of eight magnetic loops from Equations (7)–(27). The results of
Equations (7)–(27) are presented in Table 1.
This paper takes magnetic loop 1 and magnetic loop 5 as examples to analyze the
calculation method of the magnetic flux of each magnetic loop [1].
As shown in Figure 1a, the magnetic flux of loop 1 starts from the permanent magnet,
travels along the left arm of the U-shaped magnetic conductor, the MC, the vertical arm of
the T-shaped magnetic conductor, and then returns to the permanent magnet. According to
Equation (5), the magnetic flux of the 1 magnetic loop is the ratio of the average magnetic
potential of the permanent magnet to the total magnetic reluctance of loop 1. Let the total
magnetic reluctance of the loop 1 be R1C . The equation for calculating the total magnetic
reluctance is as follows:

R1C = R11 + R12 + R L_U_A_B + R LCU_U_B + R L_M + R M_U_B + R F_U (28)

Substituting the average magnetic potential Vm and R1C into Equation (5), we can
obtain the magnetic flux of the loop 1 ϕ1 :

Vm 1
ϕ1 = = (29)
R1C 3.81 × 103 − 3.35 × 103 × y − 1.89 × 105 × zl − 6.23 × 104 × zr
Appl. Sci. 2024, 14, 8069 7 of 24

Table 1. The result of magnetic reluctance.

Result (H−1 ) Result (H−1 )

R11 R12
R21 R22 0.07−y
R31 5.06 × 106 R32 2.96 × 107
R41 R42
R51 R52
R61 R62 0.07+y
R71 1.67 × 106 R72 2.39 × 107
R81 R82
RL_M RF_U 0.09−y
RR_M 3.76 × 106 RF_D 1.82 × 107

RB_U RL_U_A_B (6.2×10−4 −zl )

0.09+y
× 107 5.03×σBM × 1010
2.14
RB_D RL_U_A_C (6.2×10−4 −zl )
5.03×σCM × 1010

RL_D_A_B (6.2×10−4 +zl ) RL_D_A_C (6.2×10−4 +zl )

5.03×σBM × 1010 5.03×σCM × 1010
− 4 − 4
RR_U_A_B (6.2×10 −zr ) RR_U_A_C (6.2×10 −zr )
5.03×σBM × 1010 5.03×σCM × 1010
− 4 − 4
RR_D_A_B (6.2×10 +zr ) RR_D_A_C (6.2×10 +zr )
5.03×σBM × 1010 5.03×σCM × 1010
RM_U_B (1.24×10−3 −zl −zr ) RM_U_C (1.24×10−3 −zl −zr )
1.01×σBM × 109 1.01×σCM × 109
RM_D_B (1.24×10−3 +zl +zr )·σBM RM_D_C (1.24×10−3 +zl +zr )·σCM
1.01 × 109 1.01 × 109
RLCU_U_B RLCU_U_C
RLCU_D_B 9.55×105 RLCU_D_C 9.55×105
RRCU_U_B σBM RRCU_U_C σCM
RRCU_D_B RRCU_D_C

The magnetic flux of loop 5 starts from the levitating coil, follows the left arm of
the U-shaped magnetic conductor, the MC, the vertical arm of the T-shaped magnetic
conductor, and then reaches the bottom of the U-shaped magnetic conductor and finally
returns to the levitating coil. According to Equation (5), the magnetic flux of loop 5 is the
ratio of the magnetic potential of the levitating coil to the total magnetic reluctance of the
loop 5. Let the total magnetic reluctance of loop 5 be R5C . The calculation equation for total
magnetic reluctance is as follows:

R5C = R51 + R52 + R L_U_A_C + R LCU_U_C + R L_M + R M_U_C + R B_U (30)

Substituting the magnetic potential of the levitating coil and R5C into Equation (5), we
can obtain the magnetic flux of loop 5 ϕ5 :

Ni1 i1
ϕ5 = = (31)
R5C 2.26 × 10 + 2.78 × 10 × y − 3.07 × 106 × zl − 1.02 × 106 × zr
4 4

where N is the number of windings of the upper left levitating coil, which is 47 [1]. Where
i1 is the current of the upper left levitating coil. Substituting Equations (29) and (31) into
Equation (3), the magnetic flux in the air gap on the upper left side of the MC can be
calculated as follows:
1
ϕl_up_air = ϕ1 + ϕ5 = 3.81×103 −3.35×103 ×y−1.89×105 ×zl −6.23×104 ×zr
i1 (32)
+ 2.26×104 +2.78×104 ×y−3.07 ×106 ×zl −1.02×106 ×zr

It can be seen from Equation (32) that the upper left magnetic flux in the air gap is
controlled by the levitating coil current of loop 5. At the same time, the horizontal position
and upward offset of the MC also affect the magnetic flux in the air gap, which can be seen
as external interference.
Appl. Sci. 2024, 14, 8069 8 of 24

According to the above calculation method, the magnetic fluxes ϕ3 and ϕ7 of loop 3
and loop 7 can be obtained. Then, according to Equation (4), ϕl_down_air can be calculated.
Finally, combining Equations (1) and (2), the equation of the left levitating force of the MC
can be obtained:
( ϕ2 − ϕ2 )
Fle f t = − l_air_up2µ0 · Al_air_down = −9.95 × 108
1
[( 3.81×103 −3.35×103 ×y−1.89 ×105 ×z −6.23×104 ×z
l r
i1
+ 2.26×104 +2.78×104 ×y−3.07 ×106 ×z −1.02×106 ×z
)2 (33)
l r
1
−( 3.81×103 −3.35×103 ×y+1.89 ×105 ×zl +6.23×104 ×zr
i3
+ 2.26×104 +2.78×104 ×y+3.07×106 ×z +1.02×106 ×z )2 ]
l r

Similarly, the equation of the levitating force of the right side of the MC can be
obtained:
( ϕ2 − ϕ2 )
Fright = − r_air_up2µ0 · Ar_air_down = −9.95 × 108
1
[( 3.81×103 −3.35×103 ×y−6.23 ×104 ×z −1.89×105 ×z
l r
i2
+ 2.26×104 +2.78×104 ×y−1.02 ×106 ×z −3.07×106 ×z
)2 (34)
l r
1
−( 3.81×103 −3.35×103 ×y+6.23 ×104 ×zl +1.89×105 ×zr
i4
+ 2.26×104 +2.78×104 ×y+1.02×106 ×z +3.07×106 ×z )2 ]
l r

As can be seen from Equations (33) and (34), the levitating forces on both sides of the
MC are related to the MC plane position y and the upward offset of the MC. Next, this
paper will discuss these characteristics.

2.3. The Correlation between the Levitating Force and the Levitating Position of the MC
From Equations (33) and (34), it can be seen that the levitating force is related to both
the upward offset of the MC and the planar position of the MC.
Let the current of the levitating coil be zero and the plane position y = 0, then
Equations (33) and (34) can be transformed into:
2 2
1 1
Fle f t = −( ) +( ) (35)
0.1206 − 5.981 × zl − 1.9715 × zr 0.1206 + 5.981 × zl + 1.9715 × zr
2 2
1 1
Fright = −( ) +( ) (36)
0.1206 − 1.9715 × zl − 5.981 × zr 0.1206 + 1.9715 × zl + 5.981 × zr
From Equations (34) and (35), it can be seen that there is a cross-coupling between the
levitating force on both sides of the MC and its upward offset.
When the left side of the MC moves upward, its left upward offset zl increases, and
the length of the upper left air gap decreases, which also decreases the length of the middle
upper air gap, but the decrease is less than that of the left upper air gap. The decrease in two
air gaps results in a decrease in two magnetic reluctance. Since the magnetic potentials of
each magnetic loop remain unchanged, the magnetic fluxes of both loops increase, which is
the increase in magnetic flux of loop 1 and loop 2, resulting in an increase in electromagnetic
suction force on the upper left side. The decrease in the upper left air gap and the increase
in the length of the lower left air gap result in an increase in the magnetic reluctance of
the lower left air gap, which reduces the magnetic flux of loop 3, resulting in a decrease in
electromagnetic suction force on the lower left side. Since the left levitating force is the sum
of the upper electromagnetic suction force and the lower electromagnetic suction force on
the left MC, an increase in zl on the left side will result in an increase in levitating force on
the left side. At the same time, an increase in magnetic flux of loop 2 results in an increase
in electromagnetic suction force on the upper right side, while at this time, the length of
the middle lower air gap and the left lower air gap increases, and magnetic flux of loop
3 decreases, resulting in a decrease in electromagnetic suction force on the lower right side.
Therefore, the levitating force on the right side also increases upward. Since the upward
offset zr of the MC is less than that of the left side, zl has a greater impact on the levitating
 Appl.
Appl. Sci.
Sci. 2024, 14,14,
2024, 8069 PEER REVIEW
x FOR 10 of9 of
2624

force on the left side than on the right side. Similarly, zr also has an impact on the levitating
that there is a strong coupling between the levitating forces on both sides of the MC and
force on both sides of the MC. The influence of zr on the right side levitating force is greater
their upward offsets.
than that on the left side. Therefore, it can be seen that there is a strong coupling between
From Equations (32) and (33), it can be seen that the levitating forces on both sides of
the levitating forces on both sides of the MC and their upward offsets.
the MC are affected by the planar position y of the MC. From Equations (10)–(13), it can
From Equations (32) and (33), it can be seen that the levitating forces on both sides of
be seen that changes in the planar position y of the MC cause some changes in magnetic
the MC are affected by the planar position y of the MC. From Equations (10)–(13), it can
reluctance, resulting in changes in the magnetic flux of the eight magnetic loops, which
be seen that changes in the planar position y of the MC cause some changes in magnetic
ultimately lead to changes in the levitating forces on both sides of the MC.
reluctance, resulting in changes in the magnetic flux of the eight magnetic loops, which
The instantaneous upward offset and plane position changes of the MC can cause
ultimately lead to changes in the levitating forces on both sides of the MC.
changes in relative magnetic permeability, but this is not included in the analytical model.
The instantaneous upward offset and plane position changes of the MC can cause
Tochanges
increaseinthe precision
relative of thepermeability,
magnetic model, it is necessary
but this is to
notuse the actual
included curve
in the insteadmodel.
analytical of a
linear approximation curve. However, this also increases the complexity of the
To increase the precision of the model, it is necessary to use the actual curve instead of a analytical
model
linearand introduces more
approximation uncertainties.
curve. However, this also increases the complexity of the analytical
The permanent magnet in the MR causes the magnetic loop to be in a magnetic satu-
model and introduces more uncertainties.
ration The
state,permanent
so that the magnet
magnetization pointcauses
in the MR is onlythe
slightly affected
magnetic loopbytothe
be upward shift
in a magnetic
and plane position changes of the MC. Therefore, the change in the relative
saturation state, so that the magnetization point is only slightly affected by the upward magnetic per-
meability of the MR is also very small and can be almost ignored in engineering.
shift and plane position changes of the MC. Therefore, the change in the relative magnetic
permeability of the MR is also very small and can be almost ignored in engineering.
2.4. Verification of the Levitating Force Model and Magnetic Flux Leakage Parameters
2.4.ItVerification
can be seen of the
fromLevitating Force Model
the experiment thatand
theMagnetic
change inFlux
theLeakage
planar Parameters
position of the MC
will cause
It canchanges
be seeninfrom
the air
the gap flux [1]. that
experiment FromtheEquation (32),
change in theitplanar
can beposition
seen thatofthe
theair
MC
gap
willflux is the
cause sum of
changes inthe
the base
air gaplevitating
flux [1].loop
Fromflux and the(32),
Equation control
it canlevitating loopthe
be seen that flux.
air In
gap
order to the
flux is study
sumthe
of relationship between
the base levitating loopthe planar
flux position
and the of levitating
control the MC and loopthe magnetic
flux. In order
to study
flux the relationship
in air gaps, we can set between
i1 = 0 A, zthe
l = zrplanar
= 0 m, position of the it
and substitute MC and
into the magnetic
Equation flux in
(32), which
airbe
can gaps, we can as
calculated i1 = 0 A, zl = zr = 0 m, and substitute it into Equation (32), which can be
setfollows:
calculated as follows:
1
φl _ up _ air = 1 (37)
52 × 10 − 24.85 × y × 104
ϕl_up_air1.=
4
(37)
1.52 × 10 − 2.85 × y × 104
By testing a corresponding set of air gap flux density values from y = −0.05 m to y =
0.05 m,By testing a corresponding
a relationship curve betweensetthe
ofplane
air gap flux density
position values
y and the from
air gap flux = −0.05was
y density m to
y = 0.05 m, a relationship curve between the plane position y and the air gap flux density
plotted, as shown in Figure 2.
was plotted, as shown in Figure 2.

Figure
Figure 2. 2.
TheThe relationship
relationship between
between y and
y and the
the airair gap
gap flux.
flux.

Whenpassing
When currenti1 i=1 0~2
passinga acurrent = 0~2
AA through
through thethe upper
upper left
left levitating
levitating coil,
coil, a set
a set ofof upper
upper
left air gap flux density values was measured, and the relationship between
left air gap flux density values was measured, and the relationship between the i1 and the i1 and the
the
magnetic flux in the upper left air gap was plotted, as shown in
magnetic flux in the upper left air gap was plotted, as shown in Figure 3a. Figure 3a.
 Appl. Sci. 2024, 14, x FOR PEER REVIEW 11 of 26

14, x FOR PEER REVIEW 11 of 26

Appl. Sci. 2024, 14, 8069 10 of 24

(a) (b)
Figure 3. The relationship between i3 and the air gap flux: (a) in upper left air gap; (b) in upper right
(a) (b)
air gap.
Figure 3. The relationship between
Figure 3. i3 and thebetween
The relationship air gapi3flux: (a) in
and the airupper left(a)air
gap flux: ingap;
upper(b) inair
left upper right
gap; (b) in upper right
air gap. When passing a current i3 = 0~2 A through the upper right levitating coil, a set of
air gap.
upper right air gap flux density values were measured, and the relationship between the
When passing a current i3 = 0~2
theAright through the levitating
upper rightcoil,
When passing a current
i3 and the magnetic i3 = 0~2 A in
flux through
the upper upper airright
gap was plotted,levitating
asashown coil, a set of
set of in Figure 3b.
upper
upper right air gap flux right
densityair gap flux
values density
were values
measured, were measured,
and the and the
relationship relationship
between between
the the i3
The three colored lines in Figure 3, M, Z, and P, are data measured at the negative
and the magnetic flux in the upper right air gap was plotted, as shown in Figure 3b.
i3 and the magnetic flux
limit in the upper
position, right airand
zero position, gap was plotted, as shownof inthe
Figure 3b. position.
The three colored lines in Figurepositive
3, M, Z, limit
and P,position
are data measured MCat plane
the negative limit
The three colored lines
The MC
position, in Figure
zeroisposition, 3,
temporarily M, Z, and
fixed to
and positive P, are data
theposition
limit measured
z-direction
of the at
micro-motion the negative
platform, and adjust the
MC plane position.
limit position, zero position,
height The theand
of MC MC. positive limit
The resolution
is temporarily position
fixed toofthe ofz-direction
the MC micro-motion
thez-direction plane position.
micro-motion platform
platform, and is 5 μm. The
adjust
The MC is temporarily
relationship fixed
the height ofbetween to the
the MC. The z-direction
the height micro-motion
change
resolution of theofz-directionplatform,
the MC and and adjust
the air gap
micro-motion the
flux density
platform is 5 µm.can be
height of the MC. Therelationship
The
detected. resolution
The detectionof the conditions
between z-direction micro-motion
the height change
are thatofthe MCplatform
the current
and of airishorizontal
thethe 5 μm.
gap flux The
density
thrustcan be i = 0 A
coil
relationship betweendetected.
the The
height detection
change conditions
of the MCare that
and
and zl = zr. The detection results are shown in Figure 4. the
the current
air gapof the
flux horizontal
density thrust
can be coil i = 0 A
and z l = zr . The detection results are shown in Figure 4.
detected. The detection conditions are that the current of the horizontal thrust coil i = 0 A
and zl = zr. The detection results are shown in Figure 4.

The relationship
Figure4.4.The
Figure relationship between
betweenz and φ l_up_air
ϕl_up_air
z and andand φ R_up_air.
ϕR_up_air .

The BLU curve in Figure 4 is the relationship between the magnetic flux in the upper
Figure 4. The relationship
left air between
The BLU
gap z and
andcurve
the inφ Figure
l_up_air and φ R_up_air.
levitation 4 is the
position relationship
of the between
MC; the BRU curve isthe
themagnetic flux
relationship in the upper
between
left
theair gap and
magnetic fluxthe levitation
in the upper rightposition of and
air gap the the
MC;levitation
the BRUposition
curve ofis the
the MC.
relationship
From be-
The BLU curvetween in Figure
Figure the 4 be
is the
4, itmagnetic
can seen relationship
thatinchanges
flux the upperbetween air the
in theright airmagnetic
gap on theand
gap flux
upper
the in of
part thethe
levitationupper
MC will lead
position of to
the MC.
left air gap and Fromchanges
the in air4,position
levitation
Figure gap fluxbe
it can density.
ofseen
the that
MC;changes
the BRUincurvethe airisgapthe on
relationship
the upper be-part of the MC will
tween the magnetic leadfluxStatic force
in the upper
to changes detection
in air right still
gap flux requires
air gap and the levitation position platform,
density. a z-direction micro-motion of the MC. with the MC
temporarily
From Figure 4, it can Static
be seen fixed on
thatdetectionthe
changes in platform.
the A force
air gapaon sensor is added
the uppermicro-motionbetween
part of the MC the MC and the
will
force still requires z-direction platform, with the MC
platform to detect the force applied to the MC.
lead to changes in air gap fluxfixed
temporarily density.
on the platform. A force sensor is added between the MC and the plat-
During the detection process, the MC is first placed at the center of the plane, that
Static force detection
form
is, atto
still
thedetect
requires
planethe
a z-direction
forceyapplied
position
micro-motion
to the uniformity
= 0, to ensure MC. platform, with the MC
of detection. Secondly, the levitating
temporarily fixed on the platform.
During A force process,
the detection sensor isthe added
MC between the MC
is first placed andcenter
at the the plat-
of the plane, that is,
form to detect the force applied to the MC.
at the plane position y = 0, to ensure uniformity of detection. Secondly, the levitating po-
During the detection
sitions of theprocess,
left andtheright
MC is endsfirstofplaced
the MC at are
theensured
center oftothebeplane, thatthat
the same, is, is, zl = zr. Under
at the plane position y = 0, to ensure uniformity of detection. Secondly, the levitating po-
sitions of the left and right ends of the MC are ensured to be the same, that is, zl = zr. Under
Appl. Sci. 2024, 14, x FOR PEER REVIEW 12 of 26
Appl. Sci. 2024, 14, 8069 11 of 24

positions
the of the
action of the magnetic
left and right ends
field, of the
if the MC are ensured
levitation positionsto of
bethe
the left
same,
and that is, zends
right l = zr .of the
MC are not the same, the levitating forces on the left and right ends of the MC ends
Under the action of the magnetic field, if the levitation positions of the left and right will cross-
of the MC are not the same, the levitating forces on the left and right ends of the MC will
couple and affect each other seriously.
cross-couple and affect each other seriously.
Figure 5 shows the relationship between z and Fleft, as well as ia and Fleft. ia = i3 − i1.
Figure 5 shows the relationship between z and Fleft , as well as ia and Fleft . ia = i3 − i1 .

(a) (b)
Figure
Figure5.5.(a)
(a)The
Therelationship betweenz zand
relationship between and Fleft
Fleft . (b)
. (b) The
The relationship
relationship between
between ia andia Fand
left .
Fleft.

Next,the
Next, the estimated
estimatedvalues of the
values magnetic
of the flux leakage
magnetic system and
flux leakage the levitating
system and theforce
levitating
model are verified.
force model are verified.
Equation (33) is obtained after substituting the leakage factor σBM = 6 of the basic levi-
Equation (33) is obtained after substituting the leakage factor σBM = 6 of the basic lev-
tation magnetic loop and controlling the leakage factor σCM = 3 of the levitation magnetic
itation magnetic loop and controlling the leakage factor σCM = 3 of the levitation magnetic
loop. The equation before substitution is as follows:
loop. The equation before substitution is as follows:
( ϕ2 − ϕ2 )
(φ 2Fl le_ air −φ 2l _l_air_up l_air_down
up −
f t _= 2µ)0 · =
air _ down =8 −9.95 × 108
Fleft =− A −9.95 × 10
[( 2μ0 ⋅ A 6
2650
2.98×109 ×z 9 × zr
9.56×106 + 3.42 ×10 6
σBM −(8.87×10 × y +
l + 0.99× 10
)
2650 σBM σBM
[( + 3.42 × 106 Ni1
9 9)2
3.42×106 +8.94×10 2.98
2.98 ×10×910
×zl ×0.99 zr × 10 × zr
z ×1009 ×.99 (38)
9.56 × 106 +6.14×106 + σ−CM(8.87 × 106 ×6 ×yy+− σCM − l σ+CM )
−( σ BM 2650 σ BM
9
2.98×10 ×zl
σ BM
×106 109 ×zr
9.56×106 + 3.42
σBM −8.87×Ni 106 ×y+ + 0.99×
+ )2
1 σBM σBM
Ni
+6
6
3.42 × 103.42 6
3
2. 98 × 910
9
× z 0 .99 )210
× ] 9 × zr
6.14 × 10 +6.14×106 + σ +×108.94
6
× 10
+8.94 ×10×6 ×
y y−+ σ
2.98 × 10 × z l
l + 0.99×− 9
10 ×zr
(38)
σ CM CM σ
CM
CM
σ CM σ CM
In Equation
−( (38), y = 0, i1 = i3 = 0, and z2650
l =zr = z. Then, Equation (38) can be seen as Fleft
= f(z, σBM ). Combining 6 3with 106
.42 ×Figure 2.98 × 109method
6a, the6 least squares × zl 0.99 × 10
can
9
be × zr to estimate
used
9.56 × 10 + − 8.87 × 10 × y + +
σBM = 6.1326. In addition, σthe BM leakage factor of the base σ BMlevitation magnetic
σ BM loop can also
be estimated by using Figure 2 and the calculation Ni3 equation for the magnetic flux ϕ1 of
+
the No. 1 magnetic loop. The estimated
6 values obtained 9by the two methods
9
) 2are
] basically
3.42 × 10 2.98 × 10 × zl 0.99 × 10 × zr
equal. 6.14 × 106 + + 8.94 × 106 × y + +
σ CM σ CM σ CM
Then, substitute σBM = 6.1326 into Equation (38), set y = 0, zl = zr = 0, and set ia = i3 −
i1 . Equation
In Equation(38) (38),
can bey seen 1 =Fileft
= 0, ias 3 ==0,f(ia , σBM
and zl ),=zand then
r = z. combined
Then, with(38)
Equation Figure
can5b,
be using
seen as Fleft
the least squares method, it can be estimated that σ = 2.8765.
= f(z, σBM). Combining with Figure 6a, the least squares method can be used to estimate
CM
Substituting the estimated leakage factor of the base levitating loop and the control
σBM = 6.1326. In addition, the leakage factor of the base levitation magnetic loop can also
levitating loop into Equation (38), the relationship between z and Fleft can be obtained, as
in Figure 6a, as well as the relationship between ia and Fleft , as shown in Figure 6b. φ
beshown
estimated by using Figure 2 and the calculation equation for the magnetic flux 1 of
the No. 1 magnetic loop. The estimated values obtained by the two methods are basically
equal.
Then, substitute σBM = 6.1326 into Equation (38), set y = 0, zl = zr = 0, and set ia = i3 − i1.
Equation (38) can be seen as Fleft = f(ia, σBM), and then combined with Figure 5b, using the
least squares method, it can be estimated that σCM = 2.8765.
 Appl. Sci. 2024, 14, x FOR PEER REVIEW 13 of 26

Appl. Sci. 2024, 14, x FOR PEER REVIEW 13 of 2

Appl. Sci. 2024, 14, 8069 12 of 24

(a) (b)
Figure 6. (a) The calculation relationship between z and Fleft. (b) The calculation relationship between
ia and Fleft.

(a)Substituting the estimated leakage factor of the base (b)levitating loop and the control
levitating loop into Equation (38), the relationship between z and Fleft can be obtained, as
Figure 6. (a)
Figure
shown
The
(a)
6. in Thecalculation
calculation
Figure
relationship
relationship
6a, as well
between
between
as the relationship
zbetween
z and and
Fleft . F(b)
left.The
(b)calculation
The
ia and
calculation relationship
relationship
Fleft, as shown between
in Figure 6b.
betwee
ia and Fleft.Fleft .
ia and
2.5. Dynamic Model of Levitating System
2.5. Dynamic Model of Levitating System
Substituting
Accordingto the
totheestimated
the analysisof leakage
of factor ofsuction
electromagnetic the base forcelevitating
inFigure
Figure1, looptheand
1,the MChasthe
has contro
According analysis electromagnetic suction force in MC
levitating loop
twodegrees
degrees ofinto Equation
of freedom
freedom in (38), the relationship between z and F can be obtained, a
in the
the levitating
levitatingsystem:
system:(1)
(1)vertical
verticalmotion in in
thethe
z-direction; (2)
left
two motion z-direction;
shown
(2) in Figure
rotation
rotationaround 6a,
around asy-axis
the
thewell
y-axisas thethe
with
with relationship
thecenter between
centerofofmass
mass of
of the ia and
the MC
MC as Fleft,center
the
as the as shown
center in Figure 6b
of rotation,
of rotation,
denoted by ψ. This paper uses Newton’s second law of motion to describe
denoted by ψ. This paper uses Newton’s second law of motion to describe the vertical the vertical
motion
2.5.motion
Dynamic ofthe
of theMC
MCof
Model and
and usesthe
thetorque
Levitating
uses torqueequation
System equationtotodescribe
describethe therotational
rotationalmotionmotionof ofthe
the
MC [18].
MC [18].
According to the analysis of electromagnetic 2 suction force in Figure 1, the MC ha
two degrees of freedom in the levitating F = m ∂·2 ∂za z a (1) vertical motion in the z-direction;
system: (39) (2
F = m ⋅ 2∂t2 (39)
∂ t
rotation around the y-axis with the center of2 mass of the MC as the center of rotation
∂ α
denoted by ψ. This paper uses Newton’s Mα = Jαsecond
· law of motion to describe (40) the vertica
∂ 2α∂t2
motion of the MC and uses the torque M α = equation
Jα ⋅ 2 to describe the rotational (40) of th
motion
In Equation (39), F is the sum of all forces ∂on t the MC in the z-direction, m is the mass
MCof[18].
the MC, and za is the displacement of the mass center of the MC in the z-direction. In
In Equation (39), F is the sum of all forces on the MC in the z-direction, m is the mass
Equation (40), Mαzaisisthe
thetorque of the resultant force of F, J is the moment of inertia, and α
of the MC, and displacement ∂ 2 za centerα of the MC in the z-direction. In
of the mass
= m ⋅ force
is the rotation angle. Figure 7 shows theFposition
Equation (40), Mα is the torque of the resultant of
2
the
ofmass
F, Jα center, the force points of the
is the moment of inertia, and (39
∂ t
levitating forces on the left and right ends of the MC, and the length of the arm of force.
α is the rotation angle. Figure 7 shows the position of the mass center, the force points of
the levitating forces on the left and right Jα =ends
mh r∂2of
2 the MC, and the length of the arm of
α (41)
force. M α = Jα ⋅ (40
∂t 2
In Equation (39), F is the sum of all forces on the MC in the z-direction, m is the mas
of the MC, and za is the displacement of the mass center of the MC in the z-direction. I
Equation (40), Mα is the torque of the resultant force of F, Jα is the moment of inertia, an
α is the rotation angle. Figure 7 shows the position of the mass center, the force points o
the levitating forces on the left and right ends of the MC, and the length of the arm o
Figure7.7.Force
Figure Forceanalysis
analysisofofthe
theMC.
MC.
force.
In Equation (41), mh is the mass of the mass2 center of the MC to the end, and r is the
J α =ofmaction
distance from the mass center to the point hr (41)
of the levitating force. From this, Jα can
− 2 2
be calculated: Jα = 1.49 × 10 kg·m . Ignoring other disturbances, such as base vibration
In Equation (41), mh is the mass of the mass center of the MC to the end, and r is the
and horizontal thrust, the sum of all forces on the MC in the z-direction is:
distance from the mass center to the point of action of the levitating force. From this, Jα
F = − Fg + Fle f t + Fright (42)

Figure 7. Force analysis of the MC.

J α = mh r 2 (41

In Equation (41), mh is the mass of the mass center of the MC to the end, and r is th
Appl. Sci. 2024, 14, 8069 13 of 24

In Equation (42), Fg = mg = 17.93 N is the gravity force on the MC. From the dimensions
indicated in Figure 7, the moment equation around the y-axis is as follows:

Mα = −0.1275 × Fle f t + 0.1275 × Fright (43)

According to Equation (40), a new equation can be obtained:

∂2 ψ
−0.1275 × Fle f t + 0.1275 × Fright = Jα · (44)
∂t2
From Equations (39) and (42), a new equation can be obtained:

∂2 z a
Fle f t + Fright − Fg = m · (45)
∂t2
Thus, the rigid body dynamics equation of the MC is obtained:
        " ∂2 z a #
1 1 F 17.93 1.83 0
· le f t + = ∂t2
∂2 ψ
(46)
−0.1275 0.1275 Fright 0 0 0.0273
∂t2

From Equations (33) and (34), it can be seen that Fleft and Fright are related to zl and
zr , which are in the [zl , zr ] coordinate system with the air gap length as the research
point. However, Equation (45) is in the [za , ψ] coordinate system with the mass center as
the research point. A coordinate transformation is needed to convert the air gap length
coordinate system to the mass center coordinate system.
As shown in Figure 1b, when the MC rotates around the y-axis, there is a relationship
between zl and zr , the displacement of the mass center za , and the rotation angle ψ as
follows:
zl = z a − 0.1275 × tan ψ (47)
zr = z a + 0.1275 × tan ψ (48)
Due to the very small length of the air gap, the rotation angle ψ is also very small, so
tanψ≈ψ. Therefore, Equations (47) and (48) can be written as:
    
zl 1 −0.1275 za
= (49)
zr 1 0.1275 ψ

The above equation can be used to convert the air gap length coordinate system into
the centroid coordinate system. Since the left and right side levitating forces are two
multivariable, nonlinear functions, the formula is very complex and requires approximate
conversion. The conversion method is: (1) Assuming that the MC is at the zero point of
the plane; (2) At the zero point of the levitation position, namely [zl , zr ] = [0, 0], Taylor
expansion is performed, and the high-order terms after the first term are truncated, resulting
in simplified equations for the left and right end levitating forces of the MC as follows:

Fle f t = 23.11 × ia − 13600 × zl − 4483 × zr (50)

Fright = 23.11 × ib − 4483 × zl − 13600 × zr (51)

In Equations (50) and (51), ia = i3 − i1 , and ib = i4 − i2 . i1 , i2 , i3 , and i4 are the currents
of the four levitating coils, respectively.
(3) Perform coordinate system transformation, and the transformation result is as
follows:
Fle f t = 23.11 × ia − 18083 × z a + 1162.42 × ψ (52)
Fright = 23.11 × ib − 18083 × z a − 1162.42 × ψ (53)
 Fleft = 23.11 × ia − 18083 × za + 1162.42 ×ψ (52)

Fright = 23.11× ib − 18083 × za − 1162.42 ×ψ (53)

Appl. Sci. 2024, 14, 8069 14 of 24
Substituting Equations (52) and (53) into Equation (46), the analysis model of the lev-
itating system of the MR is obtained after sorting out:
Substituting Equations (52) and (53) into Equation (46), the analysis model of the
levitating system of the MR is obtained after sorting out:  ∂ 2 za 
− 36166 0   za   23.11 23.11  ia  17.93 1.83 0   ∂t 2 
    +     +   =   "2 ∂2 z # (54)
0  zψa  − 23.11 0   ∂ ψ∂t2a
0    2.9465 2.9465i   0  0
296
−36166 23.11  iba   17.93  1.830.0273


0.0273 ∂t ∂ ψ2
+ + = 22 (54)
0 296 ψ −2.9465 2.9465 ib 0 0
∂t
From Equation (54), it can be seen that the levitating system is a nonlinear system
withFrom Equation
two inputs and(54),
twoitoutputs.
can be seen that the
Moreover, levitating
the system
system has is acoupling.
strong nonlinearConven-
system
with two inputs and two outputs. Moreover, the system has strong coupling. Conventional
tional linear algorithms cannot achieve effective control of the system. For the levitating
linear
system,algorithms
ADRC is cannot
a more achieve
suitableeffective control of the system. For the levitating system,
controller.
ADRC is a more suitable controller.
3. A Levitating Control System Based on Active Disturbance Rejection
3. A Levitating Control System Based on Active Disturbance Rejection
3.1. Design
3.1. Design of
of Active
Active Disturbance
Disturbance Rejection
Rejection Controller
Controller for
for Levitating
Levitating Control
Control System
System
Based on
Based on anan in-depth
in-depth analysis
analysis ofof the
the PID
PID control
control algorithms,
algorithms, Han Han Jingqing
Jingqing proposed
proposed
the auto-disturbance
the auto-disturbance rejection
rejection control
control technology
technology [19].
[19]. This
This control
control technology
technology doesdoes not
not
require high precision in the mathematical model and can estimate
require high precision in the mathematical model and can estimate and compensate for and compensate for
“internal disturbances” and “external disturbances” in the system in real
“internal disturbances” and “external disturbances” in the system in real time, with strong time, with strong
adaptability and
adaptability and good
good anti-interference
anti-interference performance
performance [19,20].
[19,20].
Due to
Due to the
the susceptibility
susceptibility ofof the
the levitating
levitating system
system to to working
working magnetic
magnetic field,
field, current,
current,
and load disturbances
and disturbances of the levitating coil, an active disturbance rejection control strategy
is an
is an effective
effectivesolution
solutiontotorestrain
restrainthethe disturbances
disturbances [19].
[19]. Because
Because active
active disturbance
disturbance rejec-
rejection
tion control
control not requires
not only only requires
lowerlower modeling
modeling precision
precision but alsobutcan
also can observe
observe and compen-
and compensate for
sate for coupling disturbances between different degrees of freedom
coupling disturbances between different degrees of freedom (za and ψ) through an extended (z a and ψ) through
an extended
state observer, state observer,
thereby thereby
solving solving theand
the decoupling decoupling
disturbance andsuppression
disturbance problems
suppression in
problems control
levitating in levitating
[19]. control [19].
ADRC controller
The ADRC controller of
of the
the levitating
levitating system
system is is shown
shown in in Figure
Figure 8.8. It mainly consists
of aa tracking
tracking differentiator
differentiator (TD),
(TD), anan extended
extended state
state observer
observer (ESO),
(ESO), and
and aa nonlinear
nonlinear state
state
error
error feedback
feedback control
control law
law (NLSEF)
(NLSEF) [20].
[20].

Figure 8.
Figure 8. Structural
Structural diagram
diagram of
of levitating
levitating system.
system.

Han Jingqing proposed the concept of the nonlinear tracking differentiator, whose
discrete tracking differentiator has the following form [2]:
1. Tracking differentiator (TD)
When the MR system is started, the given position will undergo a sudden change.
However, due to inertia, the position of the MC will not immediately reach the given
position, but there will be a relatively slow change process. This leads to the emergence of
a transition process. When using the classical PID control algorithm for position control, if
the za needs to track the vz0 as soon as possible, the control quantity should be increased.
However, after increasing the control quantity, the za will have an overshoot. The transition
process of the za is an objective existence. Therefore, the best way to eliminate the overshoot
is to arrange a transition process for the vz0 [2].
Appl. Sci. 2024, 14, 8069 15 of 24

The TD in the ADRC can be used to arrange a reasonable transition process for the
given position. Equation (55) is a discretized second-order tracking differentiator [2].

vz1 (n + 1) = vz1 (n) + hvz2 (n)
(55)
vz2 (n + 1) = vz2 (n) + h f han[vz1 (n) − vz0 (n), vz2 (n), r, h]

In the equation:

−rsign(α) |α| > δ
f han =
−r αδ |α| ≤ δ
 α0 − δ
vz2 (n) + 2 sign(yz (n)) |yz (n)| > δ0
α=
vz2 (n) + hyz (n) |yz (n)| ≤ δ0
p
2
α0 = α + 8r |yz (n)|
δ = rh0
δ0 = δh0
yz (n) = vz1 (n) − vz0 (n) + h0 vz2 (n)

In the equation, vz0 (n) is the za initial signal, vz1 (n) traces the signal of vz0 (n), vz2 (n) is
the differential signal of vz0 (n); h is the integration size of step, tracing speed is determined
by r, and h0 controls the effect of the noise filtering. r and h0 should be coordinated to get a
suitable transition process.
2. Extended State Observer (ESO)
According to the active disturbance rejection control law [21], Equation (53) is changed
to:  2
 ∂ z2a = bz i a + wz (t)
∂t
(56)
 ∂2 Ψ = b i + w ( t )
∂t2 p b p

In the equation, wz (t) and wp (t) are the equivalent disturbances of the system, which
include coupling and disturbance. ia and ib are control variables. bz and bp in Equation (55)
are the control parameters of control variables ia and ib . ia = i3 − i1 , ib = i4 − i2 . i1 , i2 , i3 ,
i4 are the currents of the four levitating coils. Let ∆ia and ∆ib be the changes of ia and ib ,
respectively, then:
i a + ∆i a = (i3 + ∆i2 a ) − (i1 − ∆i2 a )
(
(57)
ib + ∆ib = (i4 + ∆i2b ) − (i2 − ∆i2b )
After compensation, Equation (55) can be rewritten as:
 2
 ∂ z2a = i∗
∂t a
(58)
∂2 Ψ

∂t2
= ib∗

After compensation, za and ψ are decoupled and controllable. Taking za as an example,

it can be seen from Equation (53) that the system controls za through ia . However, changes
in ia also cause changes in ψ, resulting in coupling. In Equation (55), after parameter
adjustment, ia becomes part of the equivalent disturbance of wp (t), which is then observed
and compensated by ESO. Similarly, controlling the other degree of freedom, ib , also
causes changes in za . In Equation (55), after parameter adjustment, ib becomes part of the
equivalent disturbance of wz (t), and then ESO observes and compensates it. The ESO of the
levitating system is as follows [2]:

e ( n ) = z1 ( n ) − y z ( n )



 z1 (n + 1) = z1 (n) + h[z2 (n) − β e1 e(n)]


z2 (n + 1) = z2 (n) + h{z3 (n) − β e2 f al [e(n), a1 , δ]+ (59)
b0 uz (n)}




z3 (n + 1) = z3 (n) − hβ e3 f al [e(n), a2 , δ]

Appl. Sci. 2024, 14, 8069 16 of 24

In the equation:
|e| a j sign(e) |e| > δ
(
f al (e, a j , δ) = e
|e| ≤ δ
1− a j
δ

In the equation: z1 (n), z2 (n), and z3 (n) are the state variables of the ESO, z1 (n) and z2 (n)
are used to trace the state variables of the levitating system, and z3 (n) is used to trace the
state variables of the total disturbance; βe1 , βe2 , and βe3 are the gains of the ESO. a1 and δ
are undetermined parameters. If aj is less than 1, the function has nonlinear characteristics;
δ represents the linear range, aiming to avoid oscillation caused by large gain with minimal
error.
3. Nonlinear error feedback control law (NLSEF)
In this paper, the levitating control system adopts the following form of NLSEF [2]:

e1 ( n + 1 ) = w1 ( n + 1 ) − z 1 ( n + 1 )



 e ( n + 1) = w ( n + 1) − z ( n + 1)
2 2 2
(60)

 u 0 ( n + 1 ) = β f 1 f al [ e 1 ( n + 1), a3 , δ f 1 ]+
β f 2 f al [e2 (n + 1), a4 , δ f 1 ]


In the equation, e1 (n) and e2 (n) are the deviations and derivatives between the expected
transition process and the estimated value of the system output; a2 , a3 , and δf1 are the
relevant parameters of fal; u0 is the output of NLSEF; b0 is the compensation coefficient.
4. Interference compensation [2]
Use ESO to track the variable z3 (n) expanded from the original system. Use the control
variable to compensate for the disturbance. The control variable is:

u0 ( n + 1) − z3 ( n + 1)
u ( n + 1) = (61)
b0

After a large number of simulation experiments and prototype testing experiments [2],
this paper summarizes the parameter tuning method for the levitating control system:
1. Parameter tuning of TD.
There are three parameters in TD that need to be tuned, namely r, h0 , and h.
r is the tracking factor. The tracking factor determines the speed at which w1 (n) and
w2 (n) track the za given signal. The larger the tracking factor, the faster the tracing speed
and the steeper the tracking curve. The smaller the tracking factor, the slower the tracing
speed and the slower the tracking curve. However, it is also necessary to set a suitable
tracking factor value based on the inertia of the MC to ensure the tracing effect of w1 (n)
and w2 (n). h0 is the filtering factor. The effect of TD is determined by the h0 . h0 is related to
the execution frequency of the controller [2]. h is the integration step size [2]. The shorter
the integration step size, the higher the precision of the integral value, but the stronger
the lag. An overly short integration step size can cause system oscillations. However, an
overly long integration step size can reduce the precision of the integral value. In this paper,
h = h0 .
2. Parameter tuning of ESO.
By analyzing the inherent laws of ESO parameters and referring to the bandwidth
method [22], this section proposes an ESO parameter tuning method for the levitation
control system.
Suppose:
f al (e, a j , δ)
f al (e, a j , δ) = e = ζ i (e)e (62)
e
 method [22], this section proposes an ESO parameter tuning method for the levitation
control system.
Suppose:
Appl. Sci. 2024, 14, 8069 fal (e, a j , δ )
fal (e, a j , δ ) = e = ζ i ( e) e 17 of 24
(62)
e
where i = 1, 2. Substituting Equation (62) into Equation (59):
where i = 1, 2. Substituting Equation (62) into Equation (59):
e = z1 − y z
 ze =
.1 = z1 + h( z2 − β e1e )
z1 − y z



 z1 = z1 + h(z2 − β e1 e)

(63)
h[z3 − β e 2ζ 1 (e)e + b0u z ]
 zz. 22==z2z+2 + (63)
h[z3 − β e2 ζ 1 (e)e + b0 uz ]

 z3 = z3 − hβ e3ζ 1 (e)e


.


z3 = z3 − hβ e3 ζ 1 (e)e
In order to analyze the characteristics of the function ζi(e) and compare the changes
In order to analyze the characteristics of the function ζ (e) and compare the changes
in the output of the function ζi(e) corresponding to differenti aj values, this article selects aj
in the output of the function ζ i (e) corresponding to different aj values, this article selects
= 0.2, aj = 0.4, aj = 0.8, and δ = 0.1, resulting in the output curve of the function ζi(e) shown
aj = 0.2, aj = 0.4, aj = 0.8, and δ = 0.1, resulting in the output curve of the function ζ i (e) shown
in Figure 9.
in Figure 9.

Figure 9. Comparison of the output of

Figure 9. of function different aajj..
function ζζii(e) corresponding to different

From
From Figure
Figure 9,9, itit can
can be
be seen
seen that
that as the aajj decreases,
as the decreases, the the nonlinearity
nonlinearity of of function
function ζζii(e) (e)
increases,
increases, and the maximum gain increases. It can be seen that too small ajj may lead to
and the maximum gain increases. It can be seen that too small a may lead to
high-frequency
high-frequency oscillations
oscillations in in the
the observed
observed values,
values, while larger aajj may
while aa larger may make
make it it difficult
difficult
for
for ESO
ESO toto leverage
leverage its its advantages
advantages of of fast
fast error
error attenuation
attenuation and and strong
strong anti-interference
anti-interference
capabilities. That is to say, aj can significantly affect the performance
capabilities. That is to say, aj can significantly affect the performance of ESO. of ESO. InIn addition,
addition, if
a ja−−11
the error
if the e isewithin
error thethe
is within range
range[−δ,[−δ, thethe
δ], δ], function
functionζ i (e)ζiis
(e)aisconstant, andand
a constant, (ζ i (e()) (e ))max== δδ ..
ζ i max j

Additionally, an excessively large linear interval δ can cause the nonlinear gain to fail, while
Additionally, an excessively large linear interval δ can cause the nonlinear gain to fail,
a δ that is too small can render the observer unstable. Typically, δ should fall within the
while a δ that is too small can render the observer unstable. Typically, δ should fall within
range of [0.001, 0.1], with δ = h being suitable in this context; aj must satisfy the condition
that a1 > a2 . According to the empirical values, a1 = 0.5 and a2 = 0.25.
In ESO, there are three additional parameters that require adjustment, namely βe1 , βe2 ,
and βe3 . βe3 is the most important of the three parameters. When tuning the parameters,
first select the parameter βe3 . If βe3 is too small, it will cause insufficient observation
precision of z3 (n), and z1 (n) and z2 (n) will lag behind w1 (n) and w2 (n). If βe3 is too large, it
will cause increased system fluctuations and even system oscillations. Therefore, adjust
βe3 first to ensure the precision of ESO, and then adjust βe1 and βe2 from small to large to
reduce the oscillation of ESO output. Due to the coupling of the levitating system, these
two parameter values should be as small as possible while ensuring stable ESO output.
This paper employs the bandwidth method and experimental approach to tune the
parameters of ESO. Therefore, based on the optimal parameter settings obtained through
simulation in reference [2,23], the tuning formulas for βe1 , βe2 , and βe3 proposed in this
paper can be expressed as follows:

7ω02 ω03
β e1 = 2ω0 , β e2 = , β e3 = (64)
50 1000
Appl. Sci. 2024, 14, 8069 18 of 24

Consequently, the performance of ESO is influenced by ω 0 . Performing the Laplace

transform on Equation (63) yields:


 e = z1 − y z
sz1 = z1 + h(z2 − β e1 e)

(65)
sz = z2 + h[z3 − β e2 ζ 1 (e)e + b0 uz ]
 2


sz3 = z3 − hβ e3 ζ 1 (e)e

According to Equation (65), the transfer function model is obtained as:

( β e2 h2 b0 uz + β e2 h2 yz ζ 1 (e))(s − 1) + β e3 h3 yz ζ 2 (e) + β e1 hyz (s − 1)2

z1 = (66)
s3 + ( β e1 h − 3)s2 + ( β e2 h2 ζ 1 (e) + 3 − 2β e1 h)s + β e1 h − 1 + β e3 ζ 2 (e)h3 − β e2 ζ 1 (e)h2
((b0 β e2 huz + β e2 hyz ζ 1 (e))(s−1)+ β e3 h2 ζ 2 (e)yz )(s+ β e1 h−1)
z2 = s3 +( β e1 h−3)s2 +( β e2 h2 ζ 1 (e)+3−2β e1 h)s+ β e1 h−1+ β e3 ζ 2 (e)h3 − β e2 ζ 1 (e)h2
−
2 (67)
β 1 hyz ( β 3 h ζ 2 (e)+ β 2 hζ 1 (e)(s−1))
s3 +( β e1 h−3)s2 +( β e2 h2 ζ 1 (e)+3−2β e1 h)s+ β e1 h−1+ β e3 ζ 2 (e)h3 − β e2 ζ 1 (e)h2

( β e3 hζ 2 (e)yz ( β e2 h2 ζ 1 (e)+ β e1 h(s−1)+(s−1)2 ))

z3 = s3 +( β e1 h−3)s2 +( β e2 h2 ζ 1 (e)+3−2β e1 h)s+ β e1 h−1+ β e3 ζ 2 (e)h3 − β e2 ζ 1 (e)h2
−
2
β e3 h ζ 2 (e)(b0 β e2 huz + β e2 hζ 1 (e)yz )
− (68)
s3 +( β e1 h−3)s2 +( β e2 h2 ζ 1 (e)+3−2β e1 h)s+ β e1 h−1+ β e3 ζ 2 (e)h3 − β e2 ζ 1 (e)h2
2
β e1 β e3 h ζ 2 (e)yz (s−1)
s3 +( β e1 h−3)s2 +( β e2 h2 ζ 1 (e)+3−2β e1 h)s+ β e1 h−1+ β e3 ζ 2 (e)h3 − β e2 ζ 1 (e)h2

According to Equation (66), ESO exhibits superior suppression of disturbances to uz .

However, the effectiveness in suppressing disturbances introduced by yz requires further
analysis. Hence, the effects of uz interference and nonlinear factors can be disregarded to
simplify the analysis; setting uz = 0, ζ 1 (e) = ζ 2 (e) = 1, and then substituting Equation (64)
into (66) yields:

z1 2ω0 s2 + (0.14 × 10−3 ω02 − 4ω0 )s + 10−6 ω03 − 0.14 × 10−3 ω02 + 2ω0
= (69)
yz 1000s3 + (2ω0 − 3)s2 + (0.14 × 10−3 ω02 − 4ω0 + 3)s + 10−6 ω03 − 0.14 × 10−3 ω02 + 2ω0 − 1000
With the increase in ω 0 , the ESO exhibits better dynamic performance, evidenced by
more precise disturbance estimation, reduced phase lag in disturbance observation, and
accelerated convergence of estimation error. However, the influence of a broad bandwidth
on high-frequency noise is significant and cannot be overlooked, potentially resulting in
a decline in the suspension control system’s performance. Therefore, in practical applica-
tions, it is advisable to adjust ω 0 gradually until the disturbance observation satisfies the
requirements of system.
3. Parameter tuning of NLSEF.
Three parameters of NLSEF needed to be tuned, namely βf1 , βf2 , and b0 . b0 is the
coefficient of the control variable u. The adjustment methods for βf1 and βf2 are similar to
those for PD parameters.

3.2. Simulation Analysis of the Levitating Control System

In order to facilitate the simulation analysis of the feasibility of the levitating control
system, a simulation model of the levitating control system was built using Simulink, as
shown in Figure 10.
The parameters of the MC are: Jα = 1.49 × 10−2 kg·m2 , r = 0.1275 m, and mass
m = 1.83 kg. The parameters of ADRC are shown in Table 2.

Table 2. Main parameters of ADRC.

Parameter Value Parameter Value Parameter Value

r 900 βe2 1398 βf2 0.01
h 0.001 βe3 1015 a2 0.25
βe1 200 βf1 30 a3 0.5
 ficient of the control variable u. The adjustment methods for βf1 and βf2 are similar to those
for PD parameters.

3.2. Simulation Analysis of the Levitating Control System

Appl. Sci. 2024, 14, 8069 In order to facilitate the simulation analysis of the feasibility of the levitating control
19 of 24
system, a simulation model of the levitating control system was built using Simulink, as
shown in Figure 10.

Figure 10.
Figure 10.Simulation
Simulationdiagram of levitating
diagram control
of levitating system.
control system.

The
Whenparameters of thethe
t = 0 s and MCy-direction
are: Jα = 1.49 coordinate
× 10−2 kg∙m2, value
r = 0.1275 m, and
of the MCmass
is 0,m a= given
1.83 value
kg. The parameters of ADRC are shown in Table 2.
z* = 0.1 mm is suddenly applied with ψ* = 0 rad/s to detect the response characteristics of
a
the levitating system during system startup.
Table 2. Main parameters of ADRC.
In addition, when the MC moves along the y-axis, the magnetic field in air gaps will
Parameter
fluctuate, causing Value
changes in Parameter Value [1]. Parameter
the levitating position Therefore, at t =Value
2.5 s, a position
r 900 β e2 1398 β f2 0.01
disturbance with za = 0.008 mm is used to replace the fluctuation of the magnetic field in air
Appl. Sci. 2024, 14, x FOR PEER REVIEW 21 of 26
gaps to hsimulate the0.001
disturbance toβe3the levitating
1015
system. The asimulation
2 0.25 are shown
results
βe1 11.
in Figure 200 βf1 30 a3 0.5

When t = 0 s and the y-direction coordinate value of the MC is 0, a given value z*a =
0.1 mm is suddenly applied with ψ* = 0 rad/s to detect the response characteristics of the
levitating system during system startup.
In addition, when the MC moves along the y-axis, the magnetic field in air gaps will
fluctuate, causing changes in the levitating position [1]. Therefore, at t = 2.5 s, a position
disturbance with za = 0.008 mm is used to replace the fluctuation of the magnetic field in
air gaps to simulate the disturbance to the levitating system. The simulation results are
shown in Figure 11.

(a)

(b)
Figure
Figure11.
11.Simulation
Simulationdiagram
diagramofoflevitating
levitatingcontrol
controlsystem.
system.(a)
(a)Position
Positionvariation
variationcurve.
curve.(b)
(b)Angle
Angle
variation curve.
variation curve.

As
Asshown
shownininFigure
Figure11,
11,when
whenthethesystem
systemstarted,
started,the
themover
movercore
corereached
reachedthetheequilib-
equilib-
rium
riumposition
positionwithin
within1 1second without
s without overshooting.
overshooting. The The
angleangle change
change in mover
in the the mover
corecore
was
was
alsoalso
veryvery small.
small. TheThe disturbance
disturbance thatoccurred
that occurredatat2.5
2.5sshad
had little
little effect on
on the
thelevitation
levitation
position
positionofofthe
themover
movercore.
core.The
Theposition
positionchange
changewas
wasless
lessthan
than0.008
0.008mm.
mm.TheThedisturbance
disturbance
also
alsohad
hadlittle
littleeffect
effecton
onthe
theangle
angleof
ofthe
themover
movercore.
core.
Next, the levitating control system was subjected to a system stability test by adding
white noise with an amplitude of 0.5 at t = 2.5 s to simulate external interference. The
simulation results are shown in Figure 12.
 variation curve.

As shown in Figure 11, when the system started, the mover core reached the equilib-
rium position within 1 second without overshooting. The angle change in the mover core
Appl. Sci. 2024, 14, 8069 was also very small. The disturbance that occurred at 2.5 s had little effect on the levitation20 of 24
position of the mover core. The position change was less than 0.008 mm. The disturbance
also had little effect on the angle of the mover core.
Next,the
Next, thelevitating
levitatingcontrol
controlsystem
systemwaswassubjected
subjectedtotoa asystem
systemstability
stabilitytest
testby
byadding
adding
whitenoise
white noisewith
withan anamplitude 0.5atattt==2.5
amplitudeofof0.5 2.5ssto
to simulate
simulateexternal
externalinterference.
interference.TheThe
simulation results are shown in Figure
simulation results are shown in Figure 12. 12.

(a)

(b)
Figure
Figure12.
12.Simulation diagram
Simulation of external
diagram interference.
of external (a) Position
interference. variation
(a) Position curve.curve.
variation (b) Angle
(b) vari-
Angle
Appl. Sci. 2024, 14, x FOR PEER REVIEW 22 of 26
ation curve.curve.
variation

As Ascan
canbebeseen
seenfrom
fromFigure
Figure12,12,the
thewhite
whitenoise
noisethat
thatappears
appearsatat2.5
2.5s is
s isa high-frequency
a high-frequency
had little effect
interference
interference on the
signal
signal that angle
thathad of
hadlittlethe mover
effect
little effectononcore.
the The levitation
thelevitation
levitation system
position
position ofofthecan
the overcome
mover
mover core the
coreand
and
high-frequency
had little effectinterference
on the angle simulated in thecore.
of the mover experiment.
The levitation system can overcome the
Finally, at t interference
high-frequency = 2.5 s, the system
simulated setting was
in the suddenly changed from 0.1 mm to 0.08
experiment.
mm, and thenata tstability
Finally, testsystem
= 2.5 s, the was conducted.
setting wasThe simulation
suddenly results
changed fromare0.1shown
mm toin0.08
Figure
mm,
and
13. then a stability test was conducted. The simulation results are shown in Figure 13.

(a)

(b)
Figure
Figure13.
13.Simulation
Simulationdiagram
diagramofofsudden
suddenchange.
change.(a)
(a)Position
Positionvariation
variationcurve.
curve.(b)
(b)Angle
Anglevariation
variation
curve.
curve.

As shown in Figure 13, there was a sudden change in the set point of the system at
2.5 seconds. The mover core stabilized at a new position within 0.5 s. Although there was
an overshoot during the process, the magnitude of the overshoot was less than 0.005 mm,
which met the system requirements.
As can be seen from Figures 11–13, the response curve of the levitating control system
is relatively smooth, with a relatively small fluctuation amplitude.
 (b)
Appl. Sci. 2024, 14, 8069 21 of 24
Figure 13. Simulation diagram of sudden change. (a) Position variation curve. (b) Angle variation
curve.

As shown in Figure 13, there was a sudden change in the set point of the system at
As shown in Figure 13, there was a sudden change in the set point of the system at
2.5 s. The mover core stabilized at a new position within 0.5 s. Although there was an
2.5 seconds. The mover core stabilized at a new position within 0.5 s. Although there was
overshoot
an overshootduring the
during process,
the process,the
themagnitude
magnitude of ofthe
theovershoot
overshoot was
was less
less than
than 0.005
0.005 mm,mm,
which met the system requirements.
which met the system requirements.
As
As can be seen
can be seen from
fromFigures
Figures11–13,
11–13,the
theresponse
response curve
curve of the
of the levitating
levitating control
control system
system
isisrelatively smooth, with a relatively small fluctuation amplitude.
relatively smooth, with a relatively small fluctuation amplitude.
4.4. Experimental Testing of
Experimental Testing of the
theLevitating
LevitatingControl
ControlSystem
System
To
To confirm
confirm the effectivenessofofthe
the effectiveness theMR’s
MR’slevitating
levitating control
control system,
system, thisthis paper
paper con-con-
ducted
ducted experimental testing of the levitating control using the hardware platform shown in
experimental testing of the levitating control using the hardware platform shown
Figure 14.14.
in Figure

Appl. Sci. 2024, 14, x FOR PEER REVIEW 23 of 26

Figure 14.
Figure 14. The
The measurement
measurementplatform
platformofofthe
thelevitating system.
levitating system.
The hardware platform comprised an MR [1], levitating control coil, DC/DC con-
verter,The
sensors, and aplatform
hardware data collector. The levitating
comprised an MR [1],height sensor
levitating was securely
control mounted
coil, DC/DC converter,
on the stator
sensors, andyoke andcollector.
a data utilized aThe
clamping mechanism.
levitating za in the
height sensor Figure
was 15 was
securely captured
mounted on the
by levitating
stator yokeheight sensor. The
and utilized angle sensor
a clamping is affixed tozthe
mechanism. a inmover
the core
Figure using
15 an
was adhesive.
captured by
ψlevitating
in Figure height
15 was sensor.
captured by an angle sensor. The gathered data was transmitted to
The angle sensor is affixed to the mover core using an adhesive. ψ the
data collector
in Figure 15 via
wasthe bus. Theby
captured data
an collector employed
angle sensor. the Kalman
The gathered filtering
data technique toto the
was transmitted
eliminate invalid data.
data collector via the bus. The data collector employed the Kalman filtering technique to
Figureinvalid
eliminate 15 is thedata.
measured start-up response curve of the MC.

(a)

(b)
Figure
Figure15.
15.System
Systemresponse curve
response during
curve startup.
during (a) Position
startup. variation
(a) Position curve.
variation (b) Angle
curve. variation
(b) Angle variation
curve.
curve.

As shown in Figure 15a, the levitating position setting value of the MC was adjusted
to increase by 0.1 mm upward at t = 1 s. The levitating position of the MC reached the set
value within 0.75 s, with no significant overshoot. After 0.75 s, the levitating position of
the MC stabilizes at the set levitating position value; the error is within ±2 μm. It can be
Appl. Sci. 2024, 14, 8069 22 of 24

Figure 15 is the measured start-up response curve of the MC.

As shown in Figure 15a, the levitating position setting value of the MC was adjusted
to increase by 0.1 mm upward at t = 1 s. The levitating position of the MC reached the set
value within 0.75 s, with no significant overshoot. After 0.75 s, the levitating position of the
MC stabilizes at the set levitating position value; the error is within ±2 µm. It can be seen
that the independent control of the four air gap magnetic fields makes the levitating control
system of the MR have characteristics of small overshoot, fast following of the given value,
good stability, and few oscillation times, with good dynamic and static characteristics.
As shown in Figure 15b, the angle of the MC deflected at t = 1 s. At this moment, the
set value of the levitating position of the MC also underwent a sudden change, and the
levitating control system began to adjust the levitating position of the MC. At t = 1.5 s, the
deflection angle attained its maximum, and during the interval from t = 1 s to t = 1.5 s, the
slope of the curve depicting the levitating position of the MC exhibited its steepest incline.
After t = 1.5 s, the levitating position of the MC approached and reached the set levitating
position, and the deflection angle also continuously decreased. Before t = 2.5 s, the deflection
angle returned to zero degrees, and the transition process of the levitating position was also
completed, with the MC stabilized at the new levitating position. It is evident that there
exists a strong coupling in controlling the levitating positions of the left and right ends
of the MC. The transitional process of the levitating position introduces disturbances to
the angle of the MC. Nevertheless, the levitating control system promptly mitigates these
disturbances. Consequently, the levitating control system effectively achieves decoupling
control and possesses excellent robustness.

5. Discussion
The levitating system of the MR is characterized as a nonlinear, strongly coupled, and
inherently unstable system. This paper establishes a mathematical model of the levitating
system through magnetic circuit analysis and force analysis, revealing the relationship
between the current of the levitating control coil and the air gap magnetic field, as well
as the levitating height (za ) and angle (ψ) of the MR. It also reveals the principle of strong
coupling of the levitating system and converts the levitating system from a four-input, two-
output system to a two-input, two-output system, proposing a levitating control system
based on ADRC.
In the literature [1], the selection of magnetic circuit components and parameter
settings for the MR were designed, and a large number of experiments were conducted to
demonstrate that the four air gap magnetic fields can be independently controlled, as well
as the fluctuation range of the levitating force of the MC at different positions. Based on
the literature [1], this paper establishes a mathematical model of the suspension system
through magnetic circuit analysis and force analysis. From Equations (50) to (54), it can be
seen that there is a coupling between the suspension heights at both ends of the mover core,
and the suspension system is a second-order system, not a typical linear system. These are
not proposed in the literature [1].
The standard ADRC controller is capable of controlling second-order systems and
decoupling effectively [2,12,19–21]. However, the levitating system of the MR is a four-input
two-output system, which is different from the system in the literature. This paper simplifies
the levitating system into a two-input two-output system using Equations (50) and (51).
And improvements have been made to the ESO of ADRC, as shown in Equation (57). The
improved ADRC can be applied to the suspension system of magnetic levitation rulers.
Through simulation and experiments, it has been proven that the suspension control system
of the magnetic levitation ruler can quickly follow the set value, effectively suppress sudden
interference and white noise, have small overshoot, and have good dynamic and static
characteristics as well as robustness.
In addition, classical PID controllers cannot achieve decoupling control and cannot be
applied in four-input, two-output systems.
Appl. Sci. 2024, 14, 8069 23 of 24

6. Conclusions
This paper first establishes a mathematical model of the levitating system of the MR,
theoretically revealing the relationship between the current of the levitating control coil
and the position and rotation angle of the MC and the suspension height between the
two ends of the mover iron core. It further elucidates the coupling relationship between the
levitating heights at both ends of the MC. In addition, the levitating system is simplified to a
dual-input, dual-output system. The levitating system is a nonlinear and strongly coupled
system. Classical PID control methods cannot achieve decoupling control. Therefore, a
levitating controller based on ADRC is proposed. The ESO of ADRC has been improved to
adapt to the simplified levitating system.
Simulation analysis and experimental testing through system startup, interference
addition, white noise addition, and given sudden changes indicate that the levitating
control system can quickly track changes in the setpoint, effectively suppress interference,
have a small overshoot, and exhibit good dynamic and static characteristics as well as
robustness. The levitating control system can ensure the stability of the levitating position
of the MC, thereby ensuring the stability of the four air gap magnetic fields.

Author Contributions: Conceptualization, J.S., G.T., C.T. and Z.Z.; methodology, J.S., C.T. and Z.Z.;
software, G.T.; validation, J.S. and G.T.; formal analysis, J.S. and P.L.; investigation, J.S.; resources, J.S.;
data curation, J.S. and G.T.; writing—original draft preparation, J.S.; writing—review and editing,
G.T. and P.L.; supervision, C.T. and Z.Z.; funding acquisition, C.T. and Z.Z. All authors have read and
agreed to the published version of the manuscript.
Funding: This research was funded by General Program of Chongqing Natural Science Foundation,
grant number CSTB2022NSCQ-MSX1350, and National Key Research and Development Project,
grant number 2019YFB1707505, and Jilin Provincial Science and Technology Department Project,
grant number YDZJ202303CGZH001, and Youth Fund of Changchun University of Technology, grant
number XQNJJ-2019-02, and Jilin Provincial Science and Technology Development Plan Project, grant
number 20200404211YY.
Institutional Review Board Statement: Not applicable.
Informed Consent Statement: Not applicable.
Data Availability Statement: The data used to support the findings of this study are available from
the corresponding author upon request.
Acknowledgments: The authors would like to thank the students from the Power Electronics and
Electric Drive Innovation Base of the School of Electrical and Information Engineering at Beihua
University, and help from Zhaofeng Chen from the Jinlin Dongguang Aowei Automobile Brake
System Co., Ltd.
Conflicts of Interest: Author Chunlin Tian was employed by the company Guangdong Guangji Hi
Tech Co., Ltd. The remaining authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any
commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

References
1. Sun, J.-Y.; Li, P.; Zheng, Y.; Tian, C.-L.; Zhou, Z.-Z. A novel magnetic circuit and structure for magnetic levitation ruler. Meas.
Control 2023, 56, 1545–1561. [CrossRef]
2. Zhou, Z.-Z.; Wang, H.-X.; Liu, B.-S. Levitation position control of a precise 6-DOF Planar magnetic Levitation stage. Mach. Tool
Hydraul. 2018, 46, 125–131. [CrossRef]
3. Liu, L.-L.; Zhou, J.-H. Parameter Self-adjusting Control Method of Fuzzy PID for Magnetic Levitation Ball System. Control Eng.
China 2021, 28, 354–359. [CrossRef]
4. Hernández-Guzmán, V.M.; Silva-Ortigoza, R.; Marciano-Melchor, M. Position Control of a Maglev System Fed by a DC/DC Buck
Power Electronic Converter. Complexity 2020, 2020, 8236060. [CrossRef]
5. Debdoot, S. Real-Time implementation and performance analysis of robust 2-DOF PID controller for Maglev system using pole
search technique. J. Ind. Inf. Integr. 2019, 15, 183–190. [CrossRef]
6. Aysen, D.; Serdar, E.; Baran, H.; Davut, I. Opposition-based artificial electric field algorithm and its application to FOPID controller
design for unstable magnetic ball levitating system. Eng. Sci. Technol. Int. J. 2021, 24, 469–479. [CrossRef]
Appl. Sci. 2024, 14, 8069 24 of 24

7. Chauhan, D.; Yadav, A. Stability and agent dynamics of artificial electric field algorithm. J. Supercomput. 2024, 80, 835–864.
[CrossRef]
8. Deepa, T.; Subbulekshmi, D.; Lakshmi, P.; Maheedhar, M.; Kishore, E.; Vinodharanai, M.; Chockalingam, T. Comparative Study of
Different Controllers for Levitating Ferromagnetic Material. Adv. Mater. Sci. Eng. 2022, 2022, 4344083. [CrossRef]
9. Pandey, S.; Dourla, V.; Dwivedi, P.; Junghare, A. Introduction and realization of four fractional-order sliding mode controllers for
nonlinear open-loop unstable system: A magnetic levitation study case. Nonlinear Dyn. 2019, 98, 601–621. [CrossRef]
10. Yaseen, H.M.S.; Siffat, S.A.; Ahmad, I.; Malik, A.S. Nonlinear adaptive control of magnetic levitation system using terminal
sliding mode and integral backstepping sliding mode controllers. ISA Trans. 2022, 126, 121–133. [CrossRef]
11. Acharya, D.S.; Swain, S.K.; Mishra, S.K. Real-Time Implementation of a Stable 2 DOF PID Controller for Unstable Second-Order
Magnetic Levitation System with Time Delay. Arab. J. Sci. Eng. 2020, 45, 6311–6329. [CrossRef]
12. Gopi, R.S.; Srinivasan, S.; Panneerselvam, K.; Teekaraman, Y.; Kuppusamy, R.; Urooj, S. Enhanced Model Reference Adaptive
Control Scheme for Tracking Control of Magnetic Levitation System. Energies 2021, 14, 1455. [CrossRef]
13. Kim, S.K.; Ahn, C.K. Sensorless non-linear position-stabilising control for magnetic levitation systems. IET Control. Theory Appl.
2020, 14, 2682–2687. [CrossRef]
14. Zhu, H.; Teo, T.J.; Pang, C.K. Magnetically Levitated Parallel Actuated Dual-Stage (Maglev-PAD) System for Six-Axis Precision
Positioning. IEEE/ASME Trans. Mechatron. 2019, 24, 1829–1838. [CrossRef]
15. Trbusic, M.; Jesenik, M.; Trlep, M.; Hamler, A. Energy Based Calculation of the Second-Order Levitation in Magnetic Fluid.
Mathematics 2021, 9, 2507. [CrossRef]
16. Li, Y.-Q.; Feng, G.-S.; Wang, X.-F.; Wu, J.-Z.; Ma, J.; Xiao, L.-T.; Jia, S.-T. Reduction of characteristic RL time for fast, efficient
magnetic levitation. AIP Adv. 2017, 7, 095016. [CrossRef]
17. Wu, C.; Li, S.-S. Modeling, Design and Suspension Force Analysis of a Novel AC Six-Pole Heteropolar Hybrid Magnetic Bearing.
Appl. Sci. 2023, 13, 1643. [CrossRef]
18. Chen, W.; Tong, J.-Q.; Yang, H.-H.; Liu, F.-L.; Qin, Z.; Ren, Z.-Y. Modeling and Vibration Analysis of a 3-UPU Parallel Vibration
Isolation Platform with Linear Motors Based on MS-DT-TMM. Shock. Vibation 2021, 2021, 9918097. [CrossRef]
19. Yu, T.-T.; Zhang, Z.-Z.; Li, Y.; Zhao, W.-L.; Zhang, J.-C. Improved active disturbance rejection controller for rotor system of
magnetic levitation turbomachinery. Electron. Res. Arch. 2023, 31, 1570–1586. [CrossRef]
20. Tan, L.-L.; Chen, Z.-X.; Gao, Q.-H.; Liu, J.-F. Performance recovery of uncertain nonaffine systems by active disturbance rejection
control. Meas. Control 2024, 57, 3–15. [CrossRef]
21. Sun, X.-D.; Jin, Z.-J.; Chen, L.; Yang, Z.-B. Disturbance rejection based on iterative learning control with extended state observer
for a four-degree-of-freedom hybrid magnetic bearing system. Mech. Syst. Signal Process. 2021, 153, 107465. [CrossRef]
22. Wei, Z.-X.; Huang, Z.-W.; Zhu, J.-M. Position Control of Magnetic Levitation Ball Based on an Improved Adagrad Algorithm and
Deep Neural Network Feedforward Compensation Control. Math. Probl. Eng. 2020, 2020, 8935423. [CrossRef]
23. He, H.-C.; Si, T.-T.; Sun, L.; Liu, B.-T.; Li, Z.-B. Linear Active Disturbance Rejection Control for Three-Phase Voltage-Source PWM
Rectifier. IEEE Access 2020, 8, 45050–45060. [CrossRef]

Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual
author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to
people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.