tdehaeze/nass-report-2020
1
0
Fork 0
Code Issues Pull Requests Releases Wiki Activity

Minor changes

Browse Source
This commit is contained in:
Thomas Dehaeze 2020-05-12 14:11:24 +02:00
parent 887a8631c1
commit e098639e25
2 changed files with 585 additions and 590 deletions
Show Stats Download Patch File Download Diff File Expand all files Collapse all files

1158
index.html
View File

File diff suppressed because it is too large Load Diff

17
index.org
View File

@ -501,6 +501,7 @@ These FRF will be used to compare the dynamics of the multi-body model with the
In this section, all the disturbances affecting the system are identified and quantified. In this section, all the disturbances affecting the system are identified and quantified.
Note that the low frequency disturbances such as static guiding errors and thermal effects are not much of interest here, because the frequency content of these errors will be located way inside the controller bandwidth and thus will be easily compensated by the nano-hexapod. Note that the low frequency disturbances such as static guiding errors and thermal effects are not much of interest here, because the frequency content of these errors will be located way inside the controller bandwidth and thus will be easily compensated by the nano-hexapod.
These are however very important for the evaluation of the required nano-hexapod mobility and will be identified separately.
The main challenge is to reduce the disturbances containing high frequencies, and thus efforts are made to identify these high frequency disturbances such as: The main challenge is to reduce the disturbances containing high frequencies, and thus efforts are made to identify these high frequency disturbances such as:
- Ground motion (Section [[sec:ground_motion]]) - Ground motion (Section [[sec:ground_motion]])
@ -1787,15 +1788,13 @@ The differences of a control in the leg space and in the task space are summariz
#+name: tab:hac_lac_control_L_X_comp #+name: tab:hac_lac_control_L_X_comp
#+caption: Comparison of a control in the leg space and in the task space #+caption: Comparison of a control in the leg space and in the task space
| | Control in the *leg space* | Control in the *task space* | | | Control in the *leg space* | Control in the *task space* |
|---------------------------+-----------------------------------+----------------------------------------------------------------| |---------------------------+-----------------------------------+------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| *Plant Meaning* | $\delta\mathcal{L}_i/\tau_i$ | $\delta\mathcal{X}_i/\mathcal{F}_i$ | | *Plant Meaning* | $\delta\mathcal{L}_i/\tau_i$ | $\delta\mathcal{X}_i/\mathcal{F}_i$ |
| *Obtained Decoupling* | Decoupled at DC | Dynamical decoupling except few terms | | *Obtained Decoupling* | Decoupled at DC | Dynamical decoupling except few terms |
| *Diagonal Elements* | Identical with all the Resonances | Different, resonances are cancel out | | *Diagonal Elements* | Identical with all the Resonances | Different, resonances are cancel out |
| *Mechanical Architecture* | Architecture Independent | Better with Cubic Architecture | | *Mechanical Architecture* | Architecture Independent | Better with Cubic Architecture |
|---------------------------+-----------------------------------+----------------------------------------------------------------| | *Advantages* | One controller to be designed | Possible to have different controllers in different directions as some may be more |
| *Advantages* | One controller to be designed | Possible to have different controllers in different directions |
| | | as some may be more |
Both control architecture have been applied and the control in the *leg space* appears to be simpler to apply and have good robustness properties. Both control architecture have been applied and the control in the *leg space* appears to be simpler to apply and have good robustness properties.