Optimizing the feedback control of Galvo scanners for laser manufacturing systems
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper summarizes the factors that limit the performance of moving-magnet galvo scanners driven by closed-loop digital servo amplifiers: torsional resonances, drifts, nonlinearities, feedback noise and friction. Then it describes a detailed Simulink® simulator that takes into account these factors and can be used to automatically tune the controller for best results with given galvo type and trajectory patterns. It allows for rapid testing of different control schemes, for instance combined position/velocity PID loops and displays the corresponding output in terms of torque, angular position and feedback sensor signal. The tool is configurable and can either use a dynamical state-space model of galvo's open-loop response, or can import the experimentally measured frequency domain transfer function. Next a drive signal digital pre-filtering technique is discussed. By performing a real-time Fourier analysis of the raw command signal it can be pre-warped to minimize all harmonics around the torsional resonances while boosting other non-resonant high frequencies. The optimized waveform results in much smaller overshoot and better settling time. Similar performance gain cannot be extracted from the servo controller alone.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".