Survey
* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
Robust track-following control for dual-stage servo systems in HDDs Ryozo Nagamune Division of Optimization & Systems Theory Royal Institute of Technology, Sweden (Joint work with R. Horowitz and his students at UC Berkeley) Seminar at Department of Mechanical Engineering, University of British Columbia February 3rd, 2006 Outline • Track following control in HDDs • Worst-case H2 performance minimization • Design techniques – Multirate control – Robust control (Mixed H2/H1, Mixed H2/m, Robust H2) • Examples • Conclusions Track following control Goal: Control the R/W head to follow the data track in a highly accurate manner Data track Servo sector Inputs : Voice Coil Motor (VCM) + mini/micro-actuator Measurements : Position Error Signal (PES) + other sensor signals Dual-stage & multi-sensing system VCM Read/Write head www.westerndigital.com Dual-stage multi-sensing control Variations VCM Microactuator Fixed sampling rate Dual-stage multisensing system PES : Sensor signals (PZT-sensor etc) Disturbances (track runout, windage, measurement noise, etc.) Control features 1. Multivariable control 2. Possibly multirate control 3. Robust control 4. Optimal control Conventional methods • PQ method • Sensitivity decoupling Robust control theory Outline • Track following control in HDDs • Worst-case H2 performance minimization • Design techniques – Multirate control – Robust control (Mixed H2/H1, Mixed H2/m, Robust H2) • Examples • Conclusions Worst-case H2 minimization Uncertainty Parametric uncertainties in Dynamic uncertainty : PES etc. Dual-stage multi-sens. system Measurements : Disturbances (runout, windage, noise) Control inputs Design K s.t. Controller K Optimality Multirate Multivariable S : Multirate sampler, H : Multirate hold Robustness : map from w to z : robustly stabilizing controller set Outline • Track following control in HDDs • Worst-case H2 performance minimization • Design techniques Control for LTI systems – Multirate control – Robust control (Mixed H2/H1, Mixed H2/m, Robust H2) • Examples • Conclusions Outline • Track following control in HDDs • Worst-case H2 performance minimization • Design techniques – Multirate control – Robust control (Mixed H2/H1, Mixed H2/m, Robust H2) • Examples • Conclusions Mixed H2/H1 synthesis (Scherer, Oliveira, etc) Dynamic uncertainty Original formulation Performance : Nominal Stability : Dynamic uncertainty Nominal We solve a convex optimization problem. K Advantage : Computationally inexpensive Disadvantage : Insufficient robustness conditions Mixed H2/m synthesis (Packard, Doyle, Young, etc) Dynamic & parametric uncertainties Original formulation Performance : Nominal Stability : Dynamic & parametric Nominal K We combine a mixed H2/H1 technique with D-K iterations. Advantage : Guaranteed robust stability Disadvantage : No robust performance Robust H2 synthesis (Kanev, Scherer, Paganini, etc) Original formulation Parametric uncertainties Performance : Robust Stability : Parametric uncertainties Nominal K We solve a series of convex optimization problems. Advantage : Robust performance Disadvantage : Computationally expensive No dynamic uncertainty Outline • Track following control in HDDs • Worst-case H2 performance minimization • Design techniques – Multirate control – Robust control (Mixed H2/H1, Mixed H2/m, Robust H2) • Examples • Conclusions Example 1: Setting Position Error Signal (PES) Noise Read/write head Airflow Track runout Microactuator (MA) Slider Vibration signal Noise Two inputs Relative position error signal VCM Noise Three outputs Sampling/hold rates twice faster than that of PES Example 1 : Block diagram Dynamic uncertainty Parametric uncertainty VCM dynamics Gvcm Gc Gma Input Output Disturbance Microactuator dynamics Runout model Example 1 : Simulation result 200 enumerations of parametric variations Design method RMS value of PES (nm) degK (before Nominal reduction) Worst PQ method 7.75 10.00 6 Sensitivity decoupling 7.11 8.35 6 Mixed H2/H1 6.57 7.82 8 (13) Mixed H2/m 5.31 5.88 8 (13) Robust H2 5.93 6.47 9 (11) Example 2 : Setting (with R. de Callafon at UC San Diego) PZT-actuated suspension Frequency responses for 36 dual-stage systems 10 Inputs : uV (VCM) uPZT (PZT-actuator) Measurement : yLDV (Head position) magnitude 10 5 0 uV to yLDV 10 2 10 3 10 4 4 10 2 uPZT to yLDV 10 0 10 2 10 3 10 frequency [Hz] 4 10 Example2 : Modeling d1 10 uV uPZT 10 d3I magnitude d2I E-block Suspension modes PZT-driver yLDV 5 0 uV to yLDV 10 2 10 3 10 4 4 10 2 10 uPZT to yLDV 0 10 2 10 3 10 frequency [Hz] Experiment Sampled models uV to yLDV Experiment Sampled models uPZT to yLDV 4 10 Example 2 : Controller design runout Robust H2 synthesis + Single-rate controller deg K = 13 K - uV uPZT plant yLDV PES Amplitude plots of sensitivity functions (from runout to PES) Simulation Experiment Outline • Track following control in HDDs • Worst-case H2 performance minimization • Design techniques – Multirate control – Robust control (Mixed H2/H1, Mixed H2/m, Robust H2) • Examples • Conclusions Conclusions A multirate multivariable robust optimal track-following control in HDDs Worst-case H2 minimization problem Design methods via convex optimization Mixed H2/H1 Mixed H2/m Robust H2 General dual-stage multi-sensing systems Future research topics Sampled-data control • Inter-sampling behavior Performance analysis tool • Degradation of track-following property Multiple controller / Adaptive controller • Improvement of tracking precision Probabilistic approach • More accurate uncertainty description User-friendly software