Should model-based inverse inputs be used as feedforward under plant uncertainty?

By Santosh Devasia. IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control, 2002

317 citations recorded by the source corpus.

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

A New Method for Robust Damping and Tracking Control of Scanning Probe Microscope Positioning Stages (2010, background): “Such wide variations in resonance frequency would result in unacceptable modeling error and detrimental feedforward performance [27].”
Nanopositioning System With Force Feedback for High-Performance Tracking and Vibration Control (2010, background): “Furthermore, if a nanopositioner can experience significant changes in resonance frequency, feedforward control may not be feasible [31].”
A Survey of Control Issues in Nanopositioning (2007, background): “precision [33], [160], [161], exploit actuator redundancy when using multiple actuators [81], enable robust inversion of the actuator dynamics [162]–[164], enable online implementation of the inversion approach [165], and reduce the computational”
Feedback-Linearized Inverse Feedforward for Creep, Hysteresis, and Vibration Compensation in AFM Piezoactuators (2007, methodology): “For a discussion on tradeoffs and design related issues using this technique see, for example, [17].”
Feedforward control of piezoactuators in atomic force microscope systems (2009, methodology): “An alternative approach is to use the robust inversion feedforward control method for tracking the desired trajectories online with finite preview [43], [44].”
Feedback for physicists: A tutorial essay on control (2005, unknown): “See Devasia 2002 and Sec.”