T.-J.

Yeh
e-mail: tyeh@pme.nthu.edu.tw

Modeling and Identication of Hysteresis in Piezoelectric Actuators

In this paper, a model and the associated identication procedure are proposed to precisely portray the hysteresis behavior in piezoelectric actuators. The model consists of basic physical elements and utilizes a Maxwell-slip structure to describe hysteresis. By analyzing the model, the inuence of initial strain/charges on the hysteresis behavior is revealed. It is also found that if all the spring elements in the model are linear, the resultant hysteresis loop is anti-symmetric and does not match the experimental behavior. To account for this mismatch, a nonlinear spring element is included into the model. The constitutive relation of the nonlinear spring and the parameters of the basic elements in the model are identied from experimental data by linear programming. Simulations of the identied model indicate that the model can reproduce the major as well as the minor hysteresis loops. An inverse control is further implemented to validate the accuracy of the identied model. Experiments show that hysteresis is effectively canceled and accurate tracking of a reference trajectory is achieved. DOI: 10.1115/1.2192819 Keywords: piezoelectric actuators, programming, inverse control hysteresis, modeling, identication, linear

Shin-Wen Lu Ting-Ying Wu
Department of Power Mechanical Engineering, National Tsing-Hua University, Hsinchu, Taiwan 30043, R. O. C.

Introduction

Piezoelectric actuators PEAs are electrically controllable positioning elements which can generate displacements with a resolution on the order of 1 nm. Such characteristics, together with the fact that they also have fast response, high stiffness, no backlash, and no friction, make the PEA an essential component in ultraprecision machines such as scanning tunneling microscopes and atomic force microscopes. However, piezoelectric actuators also exhibit undesirable effects. These effects could limit the system performance and frequently require some form of compensation to remove the induced inaccuracies. Among the undesirable effects, hysteresis is a rate-independent nonlinearity that the output displacement depends on the present input voltage as well as on how the inputs were applied previously, but not on the rate of input voltage in the past. The hysteresis behavior, if not considered carefully in the control system design, may cause limit cycles or even instability 1 . One effective way to cancel hysteresis is to construct a model which can describe its behavior and then preshape the input voltage based on the inverse of the model. Similar to the inverse dynamics control in the literature, the effectiveness of such an approach strongly relies on the accuracy of the system model. Motivated by canceling hysteresis using model inverse, extensive research has been devoted to developing hysteresis models. For example, one can use a nonlinear differential equation, or so-called Duhem-Madelungs model, to describe hysteresis 2 . Hysteresis models formed by a weighed superposition of many/ innite elementary hysteresis operators have also been reported. Depending on the hysteresis operator chosen, the model can be Preisach type 3 , Krasnoselskii-Pokrovkii type and Ishlinskii type 4,5 . These hysteresis models are mathematically combined with the PEAs linear dynamics to form the overall system model. Such models do not emphasize the physical aspect of the system characteristics. In comparison, the PEA model proposed by Goldfarb and Celanovic 6 is completely based on physical principles.
Contributed by the Dynamic Systems Division of ASME for publication in the JOURNAL OF DYNAMIC SYSTEMS, MEASUREMENT, AND CONTROL. Manuscript received June 18, 2004; nal manuscript received May 2, 2005. Assoc. Editor: George Chiu.

Their model consists of an electric and a mechanical domain, as well as the energy transfer between the two domains. Hysteresis therein is modeled via Generalized Maxwell slip 7 as a nonlinear resistive-capacitive element in the electrical domain. The complete parametrization of the model is obtained by tting the model behavior with the initial ascending part of the experimental curve. The modeling and identication approaches in the aforementioned literature present some limitations. First of all, these approaches either ignore the impact of PEAs initial charges/strain 3,4 or assume that the PEA is in a relaxed state before the voltage is applied 6 . In practice, because the initial charges/ strain do inuence the hysteresis behavior and complete relaxation may not be easy to achieve, blindly applying the identied models to predict hysteresis could lead to erroneous results. Secondly, hysteresis loops produced by the models in Refs. 3,4,6 are restricted in the sense that they are mainly anti-symmetric. Such anti-symmetry, as will be shown later, does not match the experimental behavior of the PEA in current study. Although the authors in Ref. 3 claim that a generalized Preisach model can produce more diversied hysteresis behaviors, they also point out that identifying the model requires more complicated experimental procedures and numerical computation. Finally, the procedures to identify the hysteresis models either are very tedious or inaccurate. For example, when identifying the Preisach model in Ref. 3 , several rst-order curves in the hysteresis loop have to be created and a complicated numerical interpolation procedure has to be performed. In Ref. 6 , although the model parameters can be computed analytically using only specic data points in the initial ascending part of the experimental curve, there is no guarantee that the resultant model behavior can accurately reproduce the whole major hysteresis loop as well other minor loops. The model parameters in Ref. 4 are obtained by nonlinear steepestdescent-based optimization procedures, which may suffer convergence problems and does not guarantee that the optimum achieved is global. In this paper, we adopt the same modeling approach as in Ref. 6 but intend to remove these three limitations. The rst limitation is relieved by considering initial conditions in the modeling and identication process. The limitation on anti-symmetry is eliminated by adding to the model a nonlinear spring element. JUNE 2006, Vol. 128 / 189

Journal of Dynamic Systems, Measurement, and Control Copyright 2006 by ASME

age is applied slowly so that the inertia and the damping effects, which induce the dynamics, are ignored in the model. In the ith hysteresis element, ki and the cart are connected in series, so the associated spring force FHi, which is referred to as the hysteresis force, should obey fi ki fi ki xi t , if xi = and xi t = 0 ki fi f i sgn xi t , if xi = and xi t ki ki xi t , if xi

FHi t =

1 0

where xi denotes the deformation of the hysteresis spring ki. It should be noted that if xi f i / ki, the hysteresis force is not large enough to overcome the breakaway friction so the cart remains motionless, or xbi = 0 where xbi is the position of the cart. Moreover, xi can never exceed f i / ki. Otherwise, the hysteresis spring force will also exceed the breakaway friction and cause innite acceleration to the massless cart. Denoting the deformation of the series spring ke and km by x, the force equilibrium of the system gives
Fig. 1 The mechanical schematic of the PEA model
N

F=
i=1

FHi + keqx + g x

Finally, the constitutive relation for this spring and other model parameters are identied from linear programming in which the experimental data from not only the major hysteresis loop but also the minor loops can be incorporated in the optimization. The paper is organized as follows: in Sec. 2, the model for the PEA is presented. Section 3 discusses the characteristics of the model under a slowly varying periodical input. The results obtained are used to develop an experimental identication procedure in Sec. 4. Also in the same section, using the model identied, an inverse control is implemented to cancel hysteresis. Finally, conclusions are given in Sec. 5.

where keq = kekm / ke + km is the equivalent spring constant of the series spring and g is the constitutive relation of the nonlinear spring. Equations 1 and 2 together form the force equilibrium equations for the system. Moreover from the geometry in Fig. 1, x t , xbi t , and xi t are related by xi t = x t xbi t 3 It should be noted that hysteresis in the proposed PEA model is represented by a collection of physical elements. On the other hand, the Preisach model can be constructed as an analog of a system of parallel connected two-position relays 3 . From this perspective, readers may speculate that the proposed model is a paraphrase of the Preisach model in the physical domain. However, it can be shown using block diagrams that fundamental differences exist between the two models. Using Eqs. 1 and 2 , one can represent the proposed model in the block diagram of Fig. 2 a . Contrarily, in the Preisach model, x t , is the characteristic =/ v t d d in which , is function of the relay with switching values , , and the associated weighting function. If the double integral is approximated by a summation, the Preisach model can be represented by the block diagram in Fig. 2 b .1 In Fig. 2 a , the input to the hysteresis elements is the displacement x, but in Fig. 2 b the input is the electrical voltage v. Because of the nonlinearities involved, it is not possible to perform block-diagram algebra to convert one into the other. Moreover, the summation in the proposed model comes from the force equilibrium and the associated relay elements are a series connection of a spring and a massless cart subjected to Coulomb friction. The summation in Fig. 2 b is purely mathematical and its sole purpose is to add a set of characteristic functions together to form the hysteresis displacement. The motivation for considering a physical model in this paper is that hysteresis is a physical phenomenon, so it should be able to be modeled by physical elements interconnected energetically. By doing so, one can use simple physical elements to describe the complicated phenomenon and, as will be shown subsequently, develop a simple and direct identication scheme. The Preisach model does not emphasize the physical aspect of the system characteristics and is basically a mathematical mapping. Although
1 The model presented in Ref. 4 can also be represented by a block diagram similar to Fig. 2 b .

The Model for the PEA

When a voltage is applied across the electrodes of a PEA, the actuator is deformed. The electromechanical interaction of the PEA can be characterized using a bond graph model presented in Ref. 8 . In this model, basic physical elements including generalized capacitances, generalized resistances, and a transformer are used to model various physical effects inside the PEA. Particularly, hysteresis is modeled by a series connection of N basic Maxwell slip elements 6,9 with each of the basic elements formed by connecting in parallel a linear capacitance and a nonlinear resistance whose constitutive relation is the electrical version of Coulomb friction. To investigate the mechanical behavior of the PEA, the bond-graph model is reected into mechanical domain. The mechanical schematic of the reected model is shown in Fig. 1. In this schematic, while km is the actual mechanical stiffness of the actuator, ke is the effective mechanical stiffness due to the electrical capacitance. Indeed, ke = T2 / Ce, where T is the electromechanical transformation ratio and Ce is PEAs capacitance. Each of the hysteresis elements becomes a combination of a linear spring ki and a massless cart whose motion is subject to Coulomb friction with breakaway static friction equal to f i i = 1 , 2 , . . . , N . The voltage applied to the PEA, which is denoted by v, is transformed to a mechanical force F with F = T v. Since all the spring elements in the reected model are linear, to account for other nonlinearities which are rate-independent but non-hysteresisrelated, we add a nonlinear spring g in parallel with the series spring composed by ke and km. Notice that because the main interest in the investigation is to model and identify the rateindependent hysteresis nonlinearity, we assume that the input volt190 / Vol. 128, JUNE 2006

Transactions of the ASME

Fig. 2 The block diagrams of the physical model and the Preisach model: a the physical model, b the Preisach model

each individual hysteresis element can be represented by an electrical relay, there is no simple physical correspondence to the overall model.

Ft =

2 F0 F0 cos t 2 2 T0

3 Characteristics of the Model Under a Periodical Input

Under a slowly varying periodical input, a PEA exhibits a hysteresis loop similar to Fig. 3. Here we are particularly interested in devising an experimental procedure to identify the system parameters associated with kis, f is, and g. To do so, we rst assume that the input force used in the identication is a positive sinusoidal

whose frequency 2 / T0 is much smaller than the natural frequency of the PEA so that the system can be treated as quasistatic. Next we make the following assumptions: Assumption I: The spring force keqx + g x is a monotonically increasing function of x. From this assumption and the force equilibrium in Eqs. 1 and 2 , it is intuitive to infer that if F is increasing decreasing , then x is increasing decreasing . In the rst half period or 0 t T0 / 2, F increases monotonically, so does x. If all the springs keq and kis do not have initial deformation, namely x 0 = xi 0 = 0, then Eq. 3 implies that

Fig. 3 A typical hysteresis curve for a PEA

Journal of Dynamic Systems, Measurement, and Control

JUNE 2006, Vol. 128 / 191

xbi 0 = 0, or all the massless carts reside at the origin initially. In this time period whenever x exceeds f i / ki, the maximum elongation of ith spring, the corresponding massless cart begins sliding to the right. Assume that the hysteresis components are indexed in a way that f 1 / k1 f 2 / k2 f N / kN. Then for 0 t T0 / 2, the carts will slide sequentially at an increasing order; or equivalently, the ith cart will slide before the i + 1th cart. In reality, the PEA may contain residual strain or residual charges from previous excitations, so x 0 or xi 0 may not equal zero. The impact of initial conditions to the order of sliding is analyzed in the appendix. According to the appendix, if initial conditions exist, the ith massless cart begins sliding to the right whenever x exceeds xbi 0 + f i / ki. In other words, the sliding order actually depends on the relative magnitude of xbi 0 + f i / ki. The next assumption assures that at t = T0 / 2, the positions of the massless carts are independent of the initial conditions. Assumption II: At t = T0 / 2, all the hysteresis springs are in maximum elongation of f i / ki. The reason for imposing Assumption II is purely technical: it allows the simplication of notations in the subsequent analysis. In fact, if at t = T0 / 2 when the peak force F0 occurs, if a certain number of hysteresis springs kis still have not reached their maximum elongation, then because the spring force is not sufcient to overcome Coulomb friction, the corresponding massless carts remain at their initial positions. These carts will not move at all during the entire course of input excitation. As a result, these hysteresis springs can be considered as xed springs and can be combined with keq, the equivalent spring formed by the series connection of km and ke. From Assumption II, at t = T0 / 2, all the hysteresis springs are in maximum elongation, we should have xbi T0 / 2 = x T0 / 2 f i / ki. This indicates that the positions of all the N carts, which no longer depend on the initial conditions xbi 0 , are solely determined by x T0 / 2 . Moreover, because the ith spring now exerts a force equal to Coulomb friction f i, it is straightforward to verify using Eqs. 1 and 2 that the peak force
N

Fig. 4 Anti-symmetry in the hysteresis loop

Fi = keq x xbm = keq x

T0 T0 fi fi fm + km x 2 2 2 2 ki ki m=1 m=i+1 T0 2 +g x fi T0 2 2 ki
i N

T0 fi fi 2keq fm + f m 2km + gi 2 ki m=1 ki m=i+1 5

In this equation the relation xbm T0 / 2 = x T0 / 2 f m / km is substituted to achieve the second equality and gi is a simplied notation for g x T0 / 2 2 f i / ki . Equation 5 can be further simplied by using Eq. 4 to eliminate the keqx T0 / 2 term: fi f m g0 2keq fm Fi = F0 ki m=1 m=1
N N i

F0 =
i=1

f i + keq x

T0 T0 +g x 2 2

When T0 / 2 t T0, F decreases monotonically, so does x. The motion of the massless carts during this period is summarized in the lemma below: Lemma 1: If Assumptions I and II are satised, regardless of the initial conditions in x and xi, for T0 / 2 t T0, the carts will slide to the left sequentially at an increasing order; or equivalently, the ith cart will slide before the i + 1th cart. Furthermore, the motion after t = T0 / 2 no longer depends on the initial conditions. Proof: See the appendix. This lemma indicates that the massless carts move in a deterministic order when T0 / 2 t T0 regardless of initial strain/ charges. In comparison, when 0 t T0 / 2, the moving order, depending on the xbi 0 + f i / ki, is uncertain if initial conditions xbi 0 s are unknown. It is also intuitive to see that between T0 / 2 and T0, the ith massless cart starts to break its static friction and move to left when x t = x T0 / 2 2 f i / ki . At such position, which is referred to as ith break point, the corresponding hysteresis spring goes from maximum elongation of f i / ki at t = T0 / 2 to maximum compression of the same magnitude. From Lemma 1, if the ith cart is just about to move, then the rst, second,. . . , i 1th carts should have already moved but i + 1th, . . . , Nth still maintain their positions at t = T0 / 2. When considering the force equilibrium equation in Eq. 2 , the hysteresis force FHm should be replaced by the breakaway frictions f m for m = 1 , 2 , . . . , i, and by the linear spring relationship for m = i + 1 , . . . , N. Consequently, the applied force Fi, at the ith break point is given by 192 / Vol. 128, JUNE 2006

+
m=i+1 i

f m 2km

fi + gi ki
N

= F0 2
m=1

f m 2 keq +
m=i+1

km

fi + gi g0 ki

in which g0 = g x T0 / 2 . Assume that totally carts slide for T0 / 2 t T0, in which N, so there are break points in this upper part of hysteresis loop. By similar reasoning, it can be shown that for the lower part massless carts of hysteresis loop when T0 t 3T0 / 2, these move to the right also at the increasing order and the corresponding break force Fi at the break point x T0 + 2 f i / ki is given by
i N

Fi = 2
m=1

f m + 2 keq +
m=i+1

km

fi +g ki

At t = 3T0 / 2, x resumes its position at t = T0 / 2 and the subsequent motion repeats itself periodically. If the nonlinear spring g of the model in Fig. 1 does not exist, the break force expressions in 6 and 7 lead to a specic structure in the hysteresis loop. Lemma 2: If the nonlinear spring g does not exist, then the hysteresis loop created by the model of Fig. 1 is anti-symmetric about the point F0 / 2 , 1 / 2 x T0 / 2 + x T0 . Proof: From Fig. 4, the ith break points for the upper and the lower parts of the hysteresis loop are, respectively, Fi , x T0 / 2 Transactions of the ASME

 2 f i / ki and Fi , x T0 + 2 f i / ki . If g x 0, we have Fi + Fi = F0 according to Eqs. 6 and 7 . Therefore the midpoint of the line segment connecting the two ith break points is at a xed point of F0 / 2 , 1 / 2 x T0 / 2 + x T0 for all is. Since the input-output curve for the model without the nonlinear spring is always piecewise-linear, the resultant hysteresis loop is anti-symmetric with respect to its center point at F0 / 2 , 1 / 2 x T0 / 2 + x T0 . From the experimental hysteresis curve in Fig. 3, it is clear that such an anti-symmetric characteristic may not exist in the actual PEA. This indicates that the original Maxwell-slip model with linear spring elements as proposed in Ref. 6 is not appropriate for modeling the actual hysteresis behavior. For this reason, we add the nonlinear spring g x to account for the non-antisymmetry of the actual hysteresis loop. The constitutive relationship of this nonlinear spring is obtained through identifying gis at the break points. Finally, for the purpose of devising a systematic parameter identication procedure, it is assumed that the hysteresis springs and breakaway frictions are chosen so that they obey f i / ki = i , where is a xed distance. Equivalently, the break points are assumed to be equally spaced by an interval of 2 . Then Eqs. 6 and 7 are respectively turned into
i N

Fig. 5 Denitions of variables used in the identication procedure

Fi = F0 2
m=1

m km 2i

keq +
m=i+1

km + gi g0

and
i N

Fi = 2
m=1

m km + 2i

keq +
m=i+1

km + g

equally-spaced segments,2 where N corresponds to the number of hysteresis components. Identify the break voltage vi from the plot as shown in Fig. 5. Using the relation that the length of the equally-spaced segments is equal to 2 keq / km , compute the xed distance . 3 Identify the parameters ki (or f i, since f i / ki = i ) and gi by solving the constrained-minimization problem
N1

Min

4 Experimental Identication Procedure and Inverse Control

Before stating the procedure, it is worth mentioning that during the experiments, the displacement sensor used measures the mechanical displacement relative to the length of the actuator at t = 0. Denoting such a relative displacement by y, then it is easy to derive that keq keq x x0 . y= km km In terms of the y coordinate, the sliding of the ith massless cart during T0 / 2 t T0 now occurs at y = Y i, where Yi = keq fi keq T0 x 2 x0 2 km ki km F0 =
N f i=1 i

k1,kN,g1,gN i=1

Tvi Fi k1, . . . ,kN,g1, . . . ,gN + Tvi

Fi k1, . . . ,kN,g1, . . . ,gN subjected to (i) k1 , . . . kN 0 (ii) Eqs. (8) and (9) with F0 = Tv0 and i = 1 , 2 , . . . , N where vi vi is the experimental voltage at Y i Y Ni for the upper (lower) part of the hysteresis loop. Remarks: 1. The cost function in the optimization problem represents the 1-norm error between the model output and the experimental data. The rst constraint, composed by linear inequalities in kis, assures that hysteresis springs are always positive so that instability does not occur during the subsequent model validation and inverse control.3 The second constraint comes from the denitions of Fi and Fi in Eqs. 8 and 9 . According to these two equations, both forces are linear functions of ki s and gi s. With the 1-norm structure in the cost function and the linear constraints, the optimization problem can be solved by linear programming 10 . 2. The nonlinear spring g x is for relaxing the anti-symmetric characteristic in the original Maxwell-slip model. Its constitutive relation is obtained by interpolating the functional values gis. If the experimental hysteresis loop indeed is anti-symmetric, one only needs to use either the upper or the lower part of the hysteresis loop to solve for ki s and f i s and an analytic solution exists. For example, by ignoring gi s and letting Fi = T vi, it can be easily shown using Eq. 8 that ki = T vi1 + vi+1 2vi / 2 . 3. In Ref. 6 , the PEA is assumed to be relaxed initially and the input-output curve for t T0 / 2 is used to identify the spring constants and breakaway frictions. In practice, complete relaxation is
2

g0 2

km

keq i km

keq x0 km

10

Equation 10 reveals the inuence of initial conditions to the PEAs input-output behavior. The existence of x 0 causes the to shift by a xed amount of break point Y i i = 1 , 2 , . . . , keq / km x 0 . Since according to Eq. 8 and 9 the break force Fi Fi , consequently the break voltage vi vi where vi vi = Fi Fi / T, is independent of x 0 , it can be expected that the residual strain or charges cause hysteresis loop in the v y plot to shift vertically as a whole by keq / km x 0 . 4.1 The Identication Procedure. The procedure is composed of three steps. 1 Excite the PEA with a slowly varying positive sinusoidal voltage v = v0 / 2 v0 / 2 cos 2 / T0 t. Plot the v y curve. 2 Divide the interval between y T0 / 2 and y T0 into N Journal of Dynamic Systems, Measurement, and Control

Therefore, in the procedure , the total number of break points, is assumed to be 0, the associated deformation xi will go unbounded during

N. For example if ki model simulation.

3

JUNE 2006, Vol. 128 / 193

Table 1 Hysteresis parameters identied

Fig. 6 Hysteresis curves corresponding to different initial states

Fig. 7 The hysteresis loops v-y curves from simulation and experiment

difcult to achieve and the massless carts do not slide orderly as for the case with no initial strain/charges. The identication procedure therein, although by construction can match the experimental curve for t T0 / 2, cannot predict the subsequent hysteresis loop if residual strain/charges exist. The procedure proposed here does not assume completely relaxation and thus is more practical. 4. Because of the compromising nature of the optimization procedure, one can also incorporate the experimental data from other minor hysteresis loops into the cost function. By doing so the resultant model can more accurately portray the hysteresis behavior. 5. After identication, one can easily examine whether Assumption I is satised by plotting the keqx + g x versus x curve. Regarding Assumption II, because the identied model ignores the initial ascending part of the hysteresis curve and intends to reproduce the hysteresis behavior only for t T0 / 2, at t = T0 / 2 the ith massless cart is deliberately placed at x T0 / 2 f i / ki. This makes all the N hysteresis springs in maximum elongation. 4.2 Experiments. An E-280.10 PEA manufactured by Physik

Instrumente PI company with km = 1.4 106 N / m, T = 0.042 N / V, and ke = 8.82 104 N / m is used for experimental validations.4 The actuator is xed on a stage and the displacement of the actuator is measured by a capacitive sensor. We rst examine the inuence of initial strain/charges to the system behavior. During the experiment, the PEA is pre-energized with 100 V. Then the voltage is removed quickly. Afterwards the actuator is excited by a positive sinusoidal voltage with frequency of 0.01 Hz and peak amplitude of 200 V. In Fig. 6, the v y curves corresponding to this initial state are compared with that from a relaxed case in which the PEA has been set aside for more than 24 h. It is clear that the initial condition indeed causes the hysteresis loop to shift vertically as a whole. The PEA is then excited by 0.01 Hz positive sinusoidals of three different peak amplitudes to generate one major and two minor hysteresis loops shown in Fig. 7. While the data from the major and the small minor loops are used in the optimization problem to solve for the model parameters, the data from the medium minor loop is used for model validation. In the model, N = 10 and the spacing along the y axis is chosen as 1.615 m. The identied spring constant ki and breakaway friction f i are listed in Table 1.5 Using the gis identied, the force-displacement relationship for the parallel spring keqx + g x is plotted in Fig. 8. From this gure, one can conclude that Assumption I is indeed satised. Also in Fig. 7, the input-output response of the associated model is simulated and is found to closely match experimental curve after t = T0 / 2. For the major loop, the maximum error is about 0.2% of the motion range. For the medium and the small loops, the maximum errors are more signicant and are about 1% and 1.25%, respectively. Notice that the maximum error of the minor loops occurs where the input sinusoidals are reaching their extremes and the associated hysteresis curves are detaching from that of the major loop. See Fig. 9 for a magnication of the region near the right extreme of one minor loop. One possible explanation is that the inertial effect, which is proportional to the acceleration thus is in-phase with the input sinusoidal, is also reaching maximum and becomes non-negligible at the extremes of the hysteresis curve. 4.3 Inverse Control. The identied model can be used to derive an inverse control law to cancel the hysteresis nonlinearity. Given a desired trajectory y d t to follow, the inverse control law is given by
4 While the mechanical stiffness km can be directly found in the technical data, T and ke can be computed from the nominal voltage-displacement ratio =T / km and the electrical capacitance =T2 / ke provided by the manufacturer. 5 In Table 1, k10 is much larger than the other spring constants. During the course of input excitation, the tenth massless cart stays motionless except that it is about to slide at the extremes of input, so it can be considered as a xed spring. The linear programming automatically generates this large spring constant to compensate for the error in estimating km and ke.

194 / Vol. 128, JUNE 2006

Transactions of the ASME

Fig. 10 The control voltage responses Fig. 8 The constitutive relation of the spring keqx + gx

5
vt =

Conclusions

1 1 km km FHi t + g yd t yd t + T T i=1 T keq km y d t xbi t keq fi ki

11

where FHi satises FHi t = ki km y d t xbi t keq else 12 In the experiment, the trajectory y d t is chosen to be a positive sinusoidal trajectory with frequency of 0.01 Hz and peak amplitude of 16.152 m. Figure 10 shows the voltage computed by the inverse control law as well as the sinusoidal voltage computed based on the nominal voltage-displacement ratio. In Fig. 11 the displacement responses corresponding to the two cases are compared. According to the error responses in Fig. 12, the maximum tracking error achieved by the inverse control is about 0.76%, as opposed to 13.63% in the sinusoidal input case. if

f i sgn y d

In this paper, a model and the associated identication procedure to characterize the hysteresis behavior in the PEA are proposed. By introducing a nonlinear spring, the model is able to exhibit a non-anti-symmetric hysteresis loop which more precisely describes the experimental curves. The identication procedure does not assume that the PEA is relaxed initially and can employ the experimental data from the major as well as the minor hysteresis loops to solve for the model parameters. The model presented does not account for PEAs creep dynamics which causes an unwanted drift in displacement over time. Research efforts are currently conducted to incorporate creep into the model and the identication procedure.

Acknowledgment
The authors gratefully appreciate the support provided by National Science Council and Industrial Technology Research Institute in Taiwan.

Fig. 9 A magnication of the minor hsyteresis loop near the right extreme

Fig. 11 The desired trajectory ydt and displacement responses yt

Journal of Dynamic Systems, Measurement, and Control

JUNE 2006, Vol. 128 / 195

spring reaches f i / ki, the corresponding massless cart, which was initially at xbi 0 , begins to slide to the right. Using the geometric relation in Eq. 3 , it can be shown that the ith cart slides when x xbi 0 + f i / ki. A.2 Proof of Lemma 1. This lemma is proved by contradiction. Assume that at the moment t the i + 1th cart has already slid, but the ith cart still remains its position at t = T0 / 2, or xb i+1 t = x T0 / 2 f i / ki. The deformation of the ith spring at this instant equals x t x T0 / 2 + f i / ki and should have its magnitude less than or equal to f i / ki. Consequently, we have x T0/2 xt x T0/2 2f i/ki A2 Since the i + 1th cart has already slid to the left, the hysteresis spring has a compression of f i+1 / ki+1. Consequently, the cart position xb,i+1 t = x t + f i+1 / ki+1 is less than xb,i+1 T0 / 2 = x T0 / 2 f i+1 / ki+1. Substituting this relation leads to xt
Fig. 12 The error responses

x T0/2 2f i+1/ki+1

A3

Comparing Eqs. A2 and A3 , a contraction is achieved because the index is ordered in the manner that f i / ki f i+1ki+1.

Appendix
A.1 Impact of Initial Conditions. At t = 0, F 0 = 0, and the PEA is in an equilibrium state with x 0 = 0. By substituting such input and initial velocity, Eqs. 1 and 2 are reduced to
N

References
1 Adriaens, H., de Koning, W. L., and Banning, R., 2000, Modeling Piezoelectric Actuators, Mechatronics, 5, pp. 331341. 2 Stepanenko, Y., and Su, C.-Y., 1998, Intelligent Control of Piezoelectric Actuators, Proceedings of the 37th IEEE Conference on Decision and Control, Vol. 4, pp. 42344239. 3 Song, D., and Li, C. J., 1999, Modeling of Piezo Actuators Nonlinear and Frequency Dependent Dynamics, Mechatronics, 9 4 , pp. 391410. 4 Kuhnen, K., and Janocha, H., 2000, Real-time Compensation of Hysteresis and Creep in Piezoelectric Actuators, Sens. Actuators, A, 79, pp. 8389. 5 Krasnoselskii, M. A., and Pokrovskii, A. V., 1983, Systems with Hysteresis, Nauka, Moscow. 6 Goldfarb, M., and Celanovic, N., 1997, Modeling Piezoelectric Stack Actuators for Control of Micromanipulation, IEEE Control Syst. Mag., 17, pp. 6979. 7 Lazan, B. J., 1968, Damping of Materials and Members in Structural Mechanics, Pergamon, London. 8 Yeh, T.-J., Lu, S.-W., and Wu, T.-Y., 2004, Modeling and Identication of Hysteresis in Piezoelectric Actuators, 2004 ASME International Mechanical Engineering Congress, November 1319, 2004, Anaheim, CA, IMECE200461431. 9 Karnopp, D., 1983, Computer Models of Hysteresis in Mechanical and Magnetic Components, J. Franklin Inst., 316 5 , pp. 405415. 10 Dahleh, M. A., and Diaz-Bobillo, I. J., 1995, Control of Uncertain Systems: A Linear Programming Approach, Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, N.J.

keq x 0 +
i=1

ki x 0 xbi 0 + g x 0 = 0 fi ki i = 1,2,. . ., N

with

x 0 xbi 0

A1

In this equation, xi 0 , the initial deformation of the ith hysteresis spring, has already been replaced by x 0 xbi 0 . When the initial conditions x 0 , xbi 0 s, and g x 0 are treated as unknown, this equation forms a standard problem in linear programming. There are innite solutions to the problem and the acceptable initial conditions are in a convex polytope. Practically, the nonuniqueness in initial conditions is caused by different residual strain/charges from different input excitation prior to t = 0. In the rst half period or 0 t T0 / 2, F increases monotonically, so does x. In this time period, when the elongation of ith

196 / Vol. 128, JUNE 2006

Transactions of the ASME