MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2096799782 · doi:10.1115/1.2807181

Tracking Control of Hydraulic Actuators Using a LuGre Friction Model Compensation

2008· article· en· W2096799782 on OpenAlexaff
Hairong Zeng, Nariman Sepehri

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Dynamic Systems Measurement and Control · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicHydraulic and Pneumatic Systems
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsControl theory (sociology)Hydraulic cylinderActuatorController (irrigation)Compensation (psychology)Hydraulic machineryNonlinear systemControl engineeringElectro-hydraulic actuatorObserver (physics)Parametric statisticsAccelerationHydraulic motorDisplacement (psychology)EngineeringComputer scienceControl (management)MathematicsMechanical engineeringPhysicsArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper addresses the tracking control of hydraulic actuators commonly used in many hydraulically actuated robotic systems. Dynamic model of the entire actuator incorporating highly nonlinear hydraulic functions and the LuGre dynamic friction model is used to arrive at a suitable controller. The controller is augmented with adaptation laws to compensate for parametric uncertainties in the actuator dynamics, hydraulic functions as well as friction with nonuniform force variations. Furthermore, an adaptive observer is used in the controller to avoid the use of acceleration measurement. Therefore, only measurements of displacement, velocity, and hydraulic line pressures are required for the implementation of the proposed controller. Stability and convergence of the control system are theoretically studied. Experimental results are presented verifying the effectiveness of the developed controller.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.033
GPT teacher head0.213
Teacher spread0.180 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations51
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Dynamic Systems Measurement and ControlSame topicHydraulic and Pneumatic SystemsFrench-language works237,207