MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2152640207 · doi:10.1109/tcst.2002.1014682

A QFT fault-tolerant control for electrohydraulic positioning systems

2002· article· en· W2152640207 on OpenAlexaff
N. Niksefat, Nariman Sepehri

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Control Systems Technology · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicHydraulic and Pneumatic Systems
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsControl theory (sociology)Quantitative feedback theoryActuatorControl engineeringController (irrigation)EngineeringFault toleranceFault (geology)Robust controlControl systemHydraulic cylinderHydraulic machineryComputer scienceControl (management)Reliability engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper describes the design and experimental evaluation of a fault-tolerant controller (FTC) for an electrohydraulic servo positioning system. The controller is required to retain the stability of the system under sensor failure or, in the presence of faults in servovalve and supply pump. A mathematical model describing the hydraulic actuator is derived in which sensor failures and component faults are captured as uncertainties in the model parameters. A robust controller is designed, using quantitative feedback theory (QFT), to maintain key properties of the closed-loop system, i.e., stability and disturbance rejection. The designed controller is easy to implement and no online tuning or adaptation is necessary. The feasibility of the controller was evaluated by implementing it on an experimental test rig. Experimental results demonstrate the effectiveness of the controller under abrupt sensor failures or incorrect supply pump pressures.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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 science0.0010.000
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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.197
Teacher spread0.188 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations63
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Control Systems TechnologySame topicHydraulic and Pneumatic SystemsFrench-language works237,207