DECENTRALIZED NEURAL CONTROLLER DESIGN

FOR SPACE STRUCTURAL PLATFORMS

Gary G. Yen
USAF Phillips Laboratory
Structures and Controls Division
Kirthnd AFB, New Mexico 8711 7
ABSTRACT
A decentralized neural control system is advocated for
flexible multibody structures. The proposed neural
controller is designed to achieve trajectory maneuvering of
structural member as well as vibration suppression for
precision pointing capability. The motivation to support
such an innovation is to pursue a real-rime implementation
of robust and fault tolerant structural controller. The
proposed decentralized control architecture which takes
advantage of the geometric distribution of PZT sensors and
actuators has provided a tremendous freedom from
computational complexity. In the spirit of model reference
adaptive control, we utilize adaptive time-delay radial basis
function networks as a building block to allow the neural
network to function as an indirect closed-loop controller.
The horizon-of-one predictive controller regulates the
dynamics of the nonlinear structure to follow a prespecified
reference model asymptotically. The proposed control
strategy is validated in the experimental facility, called the
Planar Articulating Controls Experiment which consists of
a two-link flexible planar structure constrained to move
over a granite table. This paper addresses the theoretical
foundation of the architecture and demonstrates its
applicability via a realistic structural test bed.
1. INTRODUCTION
Modern space structures, which are likely to be highly
nonlinear with time-varying structural parameters and
poorly modeled dynamics, pose serious difficulties for all
currently advocated methodologies (e.g., robust, adaptive,
and optimal controls) as summarized i n [ l ] and [2]. These
control systemdesign difficulties arise i n a broad spectrum
of aerospace applications, e.g., surveillance satellites,
military robots or space vehicles. Current control
techniques often rely on the assumption of a high fidelity
dynamic model containing identified system
parameters.Furthermore, these synthesis algorithms require
a priori fixed design constraints, where the loading and
material properties need to be specified i n advance.
Consequently, synthesis procedures to achieve the desired
stability, robustness, and dynamic response for highly
nonlinear structures with unknown parameters are
incomplete. Literature surveys have justified that there is no
systematic modeling technique for space structures which
can effectively capture all of the spatiotemporal interactions
among the structure members.
The ultimate autonomous control, intended to sever the
dependence of the space structures on a prior programming,
perfect communication and flawless operation while
maintaining acceptable performance over an extended
operating range, can be especially difficult to accomplish
due to factors such as high dimensionality, multiple inputs
and outputs, complex performance criteria, operational
constraints, imperfect measurements, as well as the
unavoidable failures of various actuators, sensors, or other
components. Therefore, the controller needs either to be
exceptionally robust or adaptable after deployment [3]. In
the present paper, wepropose to design and to validate a
decentralized neural control systemwhich is capable of
withstanding structural failures, component deviation, and
unpredictable perturbations. The innovative use of adaptive
time-delay radial basis function networks in a distributive
manner is proposed to fulfill critical needs in various
operating envelopes on a real-time basis.
Neural networks which employ the well known back-
propagation learning algorithm are capable of
approximating any continuous functions (e.g., nonlinear
plant dynamics and complex control laws) with an arbitrary
degree of accuracy [ 4] . Similarly, radial basis function
networks [ 5] are also shown to be universal approximators
[6]. These model-free neural network paradigms are more
effective at memory usage in solving control problems than
conventional learning control approaches. A typical
0-7803-2129-4/94 $3.00 0 1994 IEEE
example is the BOXES algorithm, a memory intensive
approach, which partitions the control law in the form of a
look-up table [7]. Neural network control systemoffers the
capability of real-time adaptation and generalization while
a look-up table approach would only provide discrete
controller solutions in a lengthy and sequential search.
Our goal is to approach structural autonomy by
extending the control system's operating envelope, which
has traditionally required vast memory usage.
Connectionist systems, on the other hand, deliver less
memory intensive solutions to control problems and yet
provide a sufficiently generalized solution space. In
vibration suppression problems, we utilize the adaptive
time-delay radial basis function network (to be discussed i n
Section 3) as a building block to allow the connectionist
system to function as an indirect closed-loop controller.
Decentralized nature of control system provides a
tremendous computation power to suppress the vibration
modes which can be identified by the experimental modal
testing. Prior to training the compensator, a neural
identifier based on an ARMA model is utilized to identify
the open-loop system. The horizon-of-one predictive
controllers then cooperatively regulates the dynamics of the
nonlinear structure to follow a prespecified reference
system asymptotically as depicted in Figure 1 (i.e., the
model reference adaptive control architecture) [PI. The
reference model, which can be easily specified through an
input-output relationship, described all desired feature
associated with the control task, e.g., a linear and highly
damped model to suppress the vibration.
R
-
1 I
Figure 1. Decentralized model reference adaptive control
with adaptive time-delay radial basis function networks
Each control subsystem, which were designed
dedicatedly for one set of PZT actuator and sensor, is
utilized to suppress a specified vibration mode, so that the
control task can be executed on a real-time basis. The
function of the neural control system is to map the system
states into corresponding control actions in order to force
the plant dynamics to match an output behavior which is
specified by the reference model. However, wecannot apply
the energy minimization procedure (e.g., gradient descent,
conjugate gradient or Newton-Raphson method) to adjust
the interconnection weights of the neural controllers
because the desired outputs of the neural controllers are not
available. In [9], a specialized learning algorithm which
treats the plant as an additional unmodifiable layer of
network is proposed. However, the authors fail to suggest
an effective way to approach the approximation. In [lo],
the inverse J acobian of the plant needs to be evaluated at
each weight adjustment, which results i n a complicated and
computationally expensive learning procedure. Moreover,
since the plant is often not well-modeled because of
modeling uncertainties, the exact partial derivatives cannot
be determined. In [ I 11, a dynamic sign approximation is
utilized assuming the qualitative knowledge of the plant.
This is not necessarily the case i n space structure
applications.
To achieve the true gradient descent of the square of
the error, we use dynamic buck propagation [12] to
accurately approximate the required partial derivatives. An
adaptive time-delay radial basis function network is first
trained to identify the open-loop system. The resulting
neural identifier then serves as extended unmodifiable
layers to train a set of neural controllers. If the structural
dynamics are to change as a function of time, the neural
identifier would require the learning algorithm to
periodically update the network parameters accordingly.
The proposed efforts address several issues to achieve a
decentralized fault tolerant control system i n space
structures. In Section 2, adaptive time-delay back-
propagation network is covered, providing an underlying
issue pertaining to the learning algorithm. Based on the
results developed in Section 2, the interconnecting topology
and learning algorithm of adaptive time-delay radial basis
function network are discussed i n Section 3. The proposed
control strategy was validated i n the experimental facility,
called the Planar Articulating Controls Experiment (i.e.,
PACE) which consists of a two-link flexible planar
structure constrained to move over a granite table i n
Section 4. The test article is well equipped with distributed
piezoceramic sensors and actuators, such as torque motors
for providing slew torque, encoders to measure angular
velocities. The paper is concluded with a few pertinent
observations in Section 5.
2. ADAPTIVE TIME-DELAY
BACK-PROPAGATION NETWORK
Biological studies have shown that variable time-
delays do occur along mons due to different conduction
21 27
time and different lengths of axonal fibers. In addition,
temporal properties such as temporal decays and
integration occur frequently at synapses. Inspired by this
observation, the time-delay back-propagation network was
proposed by Waibel er al. for solving the phoneme
recognition problem [ 131. In this architecture, each neuron
takes into account not only the current information from all
the neurons of the previous layer, but also a certain amount
of past information from those neurons due to delay on the
interconnections. However, a fixed amount of timedelay
throughout the training process has limited the usage
mainly due to the mismatch of the temporal location in the
input patterns. To overcome this limitation, Lin er al. [14]
has developed an adaptive time-delay back-propagation
network to better accommodate the varying temporal
sequences, and to provide more flexibility for optimization
tasks.
Figure 2. Adaptive time-delay back-propagation network
A given adaptive time-delay back-propagation network
can be completely described by its interconnecting
topology, neuronic characteristics, temporal delays, and
learning rule (see Figure 2). The individual processing unit
performs its computations based only on local information.
The output of the j th sigmoidal neuron at time t,, in the kth
layer of the network is defined by
1=1 / = I
vi" ( t , ) =g: (u: ( t , ) ) , j =1, .. ., N' , k =2,.. . , N, (lb)
where g:: (-m,=)+(-l,l) is a sigmoidal function (i.e.,
continuously differentiable, monotonically increasing, and
g(O)=O), Nk-' is the number of neurons in the (k-l)st
layer, and w,;;' is an adjustable weight representing the
strength of the connection between the output of the ith
neuron of the (k-1)th layer to the input of the j th neuron of
the kth layer with an independent time-delay z" ,I, L:;'
denotes the number of delay connections from the ith
neuron of the (k-1)th layer to the jth neuron of the kth
layer, v,!-'(r,, -ziJ ') is the activation level of ith neuron i n
the (k-1)th layer at t , -ziy. The adaptation of the weights
and delays are derived based on the gradient descent
method and error backpropagation to minimize the cost
function,
where N, denotes the output layer and dj (r,,) indicates the
desired value of the jth output neuron at time t,,. The
weights and time-delays are updated step by step
proportional to the opposite direction of the error gradient
respectively:
where q1 and q2 are the learning rates. The derivation of
this learning algorithm was addressed explicitly in [ 141.
We summarize the learning rule given as follows.
If i is an output neuron, we have
while if i is a hidden neuron, we have
21 28
3. ADAPTIVE TIME-DELAY
RADIAL BASIS FUNCTION NETWORK
A radial basis function network (RBF) is a two layer
neural network whose outputs forma linear combination of
the basis functions derived from the hidden neurons. The
basis function i n the hidden layer produces a localized
response to input stimulus as do locally-tuned receptive
fields i n our nervous systems. The Gaussian function
network, a realization of the RBF network using Gaussian
kernels, is widely used i n pattern classification and function
approximation. The output of a Gaussian neuron in the
hidden layer is defined by
(7)
where U: is the output of thejth neuron in the hidden layer,
x is the input vector, wi : denotes the weighting vector for
thejth neuron i n the hidden layer (i.e., the center of the jth
Gaussian kernel), 0: is the normalization parameter of the
j th neuron (i.e., the width of thejth Gaussian kernel), and
N' is the number of neurons i n the hidden layer. Equation
(7) produces a radially symmetric output with a unique
maximum at the center dropping off rapidly to zero at large
radii. That is, i t produces a significant nonzero response
only when the input falls within a small localized region of
the input space. Inspired by the adaptive time-delay back-
propagation network, the output equation of ATDRBF
networks is described by
i =l L=l
where wl , , denotes the connection between the output of
the ith neuron of the hidden layer and the input of thejth
neuron of the output layer with an independent time-delay
zi , , , u: ( f , -T;.,) is the output vector from the hidden layer
at time f, -T;.,. Li, denotes the number of delay
connections from the ith neuron of the hidden layer to the
jth neuron of the output neuron.
Shared with generic radial basis function networks,
adaptive time-delay Gaussian function networks have the
property of undergoing Local changes during training,
unlike adaptive time-delay back-propagation networks
which experience global weighting adjustments due to the
characteristics of sigmoidal functions. The localized
influence of each Gaussian neuron allows the learning
system to refine its functional approximation i n a
successive and efficient manner. The hybrid learning
algorithm [ 5] which employs the K-means clustering for
the hidden layer and the least mean square (LMS)
algorithm for the output layer further ensures a faster
convergence and often leads to better performance and
generalization. The combination of locality of
representation and linearity of learning offers tremendous
computational efficiency in real-time adaptive control. K-
means algorithm is perhaps the most widely known
clustering algorithm because of its simplicity and its ability
to produce good results. The normalization parameters, o:,
are obtained once the clustering algorithm is complete.
They represent a measure of the spread of the data
associated with each cluster. The cluster widths are then
determined by the average distance between the cluster
centers and the training samples,
(9)
where 0, is the set of training patterns belonging to jth
cluster and Mj is the number of samples in 0,. This is
followed by applying a LMS algorithm to adapt the time-
delays and interconnecting weights in output layer. The
training set consists of input/output pairs, but now the input
patterns are pre-processed by the hidden layer before being
presented to the output layer. The adaptation of the output
weights and time delays are derived based on error back-
propagation to minimize the cost function,
where dj(ra) indicates the desired value of the jth output
neuron at time t n . The weights and time-delays are updated
step by step proportional to the opposite direction of the
error gradient respectively,
2129
where q and q2 are the learning rates. The mathematical
derivation of this learning algorithm is straightforward. We
summarize the learning rule given as follows.
30
1st
1.875
4. PACE SIMULATION STUDY
154 420 827 1374
4.695 7.855 10.996 14.137
2nd 3rd 4th
The autonomous control of precision space structures
requires a distributed computational architecture that
provides the ability to perform system identification and
dynamic control after orbital deployment. Neural network
based decentralized control system provides an alternative
way to reduce the need for a priori knowledge of structural
qualitative behavior. USAF Phillips Laboratory's Planar
Articulating Controls Experiments (i.e., PACE) arm (see
Figure 3) offers a feasibility test bed for validating the
proposed control strategy.
Figure 3. The PACE test article
Researcher has previously conducted classical control
experiment on the PACE test article [14], [15]. The
experiments were limited to only one mode of vibration. In
this study, we consider five vibration modes identified by
the simple modal testing with reasonable accuracy. Each
subsystem consists of one set of PZT actuator and sensor
(see Figure 4). This decentralized control is essential for
precision space structure having a large array of actuators
and sensors so that the control task can be achieved in a
timely fashion.
2 3
Figure 4. A decentralized decomposition of PACE arm
The plant model (i.e., motion equation) is derived by
using the Hamilton principle and the assumed mode
method [16]. Three dynamic systems are integrated in the
model : DC motor, armdynamics and vibration. The model
has 12 states, including arm angle, ann angular velocity,
five strain terms (for five modes) and five strain rate terms
(for five modes). The state vector is converted to five output
signals; including armangle, arm angular velocity, and the
outputs from three PZT sensors.
The five modes of the simulated PACE test article are
listed in Table 1. The educational experience indicates that
if we want to suppress the 5th mode (i.e. 219 Hz), the
sampling frequency should be set above 2 KHz to achieve
reasonable accuracy in system identification of the plant
dynamics. Due to equipment constraints at the Laboratory,
we have limited the sampling frequency to 1 KHz.
Table 1. The first five modes of the PACE arm
11 frequency )I 5 I 25 I 67 I 132 1 219 I]
Because this plant is stiff and of high dimension,
integration of the model using adaptive 4th order Runge-
Kutta method results i n a computationally expensive
procedure. The flexible arm is divided into 3 identical
subsystems for vibration control. The states consists of one
measured state (v,) and one control input (v,).
System identification is simulated by a single-layer
adaptive time-delay Gaussian function network with I00
hidden neurons, while vibration suppression is performed
by three single-layer adaptive time-delay Gaussian function
networks with 50 hidden neurons each. The number of
tapped delays needs to be experimentally determined by the
approximation power and computational time. Ten tapped
delays are chosen for both the neural identifier and neural
controllers. Prior to training the compensators, a neural
identifier based on an ARMA model is utilized to identify
the open-loop system. The horizon-of-one neural
controllers then cooperatively regulate the dynamics of the
nonlinear plant to follow a prespecified reference system
asymptotically (i.e., the model reference adaptive control
architecture). To train the neural controllers, wegenerated
20 data sets with 1000 data points at each sequence. Three
quarters of the data points are used for training while one
quarter of the data are used for cross validation. We achieve
a cross validation error of 7.6% after 500 epochs of
training. The accuracy of the three neural controllers on
21 30
cross validation are shown i n Table 2. They are computed
as a percentage error with respect to the average magnitude
of the states in the training set.
Subsystem
cross validation
error (%)
Table 2. Cross validation errors of the neural controllers
vibration 1 vibration 2 vibration 3
7.2 7.7 7.9
The 7.6% error of the vibration subsystems is
adequately accurate, but i t will bedifficult to achieve a high
controller performance for specific missions. There is a
potential to improve the accuracy of the neural network
model for the vibration systemby utilizing the recurrent
type of neural network. This will be pursued in our future
research.
5. CONCLUSIONS
The architecture proposed for decentralized neural
control system successfully demonstrates the feasibility and
flexibility of our proposed solution for precision space
structural platforms. The salient features associated with
the proposed learning control are discussed. In a similar
spirit, the proposed architecture can be extended to the
dynamic control of aeropropulsion engines, underwater
vehicles, chemical processes, power plants, and
manufacturing scheduling. The applicability of the present
methodology to large realistic CSI structural test beds will
be
I .
2.
3.
4.
5.
pursued in our future research.
6. REFERENCES
D. A. White and D. A. Sofge, Handbook of Intelligent
Control- Neural, Fuzzy, and Adaptive Approaches, Van
Nostrand Reinhold, New York, NY, 1992.
P. J. Antsaklis and K. M. Passino, An Introduction to
Intelligent and Autonomous Control, Kluwer Academic,
Hingham, MA, 1992.
G. G. Yen, Reconfigurable Learning Control in Large
Space Structures, IEEE Transactions on Control
Systems Technology, to appear; also Proceedings of
IEEE Conference on Decision and Control, pp. 744-
749, December 1993.
K. Hornik, M. Stinchcombe and H. White, Multilayer
Feedforward Networks are Universal Approximators,
Neural Networks, Vol. 2, No. 5, pp. 359-366, 1989.
J. Moody and C. J . Darken, Fast Learning in Networks
of Locally-tuned Processing Units, Neural
Computation, Vol. 1, No. 2, pp. 28 1-294, Summer
1989.
6. E. J . Hartman, J . D. Keeler and J . M. Kowalski,
Layered Neural Networks with Gaussian Hidden Units
as Universal Approximations, Neural Computation,
Vol. 2, No. 2, pp. 210-215, Summer 1990.
7. D. Michie and R. A. Chambers, BOXES: An
Experiment i n Adaptive Control, In: Machine
Intelligence, (E. Dale and D. Michie, Editors), pp. 137-
152, 1968.
8. K. J . Astrom and B. Wittenmark, Adaptive Control,
Addison-Wesley, New York, NY, 1989.
9. D. Psaltis, A. Sideris and A. A. Yamamura, A
Multilayered Neural Network Controller, IEEE
Control Systems Magazine, Vol. 8, No. 3, pp. 17-21,
April 1988.
10.R. Elsey, A Learning Architecture for Control Based
on Back-propagation Neural Netwock, Proceedings of
IEEE International Conference on Neural Networks, pp.
l l .M. Saerens and A. Soquet, A Neural Controller,
Proceedings of IEE International Conference on
Artificial Neural Networks, pp. 21 1-215, October 1989.
12.K. S. Narendra and K. Parthasarthy, Identification and
Control of Dynamical Systems Using Neural Network,
IEEE Transactions on Neural Networks, Vol. 1, No. 1,
13.A. Waibel, T. Hanazawa, G. Hinton, K. Shikano and K.
Lang, Phoneme Recognition: Neural Networks Versus
Hidden Markov Models, Proceedings of IEEE
Conference on Acoustics, Speech and Signal
Processing, pp. 107-1 10, April 1988.
14.D. T. Lin, J . E. Dayhoff and P. A. Ligomenides,
Adaptive Time-delay Neural Network for Temporal
Correlation and Prediction, Proceedings of SPIE
Conference on Biological, Neural Net, and 3-0
Methods, pp. 170- 18 1, November 1992.
15.M. K. Kwak, M. J . Smith and A. Das, PACE: A Test
Bed for the Dynamics and Control of Flexible Multibody
Systems. Proceedings of NASA/NSF/DoD Workshop on
Aerospace Computational Control, pp. 100- 105, August
1992.
16.K. K. Denoyer and M. K. Kwak, Dynamic Modeling
and Vibration Suppression of a Slewing Active
Structure Utilizing Piezoelectric Sensors and
Actuators, Proceedings of SPIE Conference on Smart
Structures and Intelligent Systenis, pp. 882-894,
February 1993.
17.M. K. Kwak, K. K. Denoyer and D. Sciulli, Dynamics
and Control of a Slewing Active Beam, Proceedings of
9th VPI&SU Symposium on Dynamics and Control of
Large Structures. pp. 34-4 1, May 1993,
587-594, J uly 1988.
pp. 4-27, March 1990.
21 31