A new method is proposed to design a feedforward controller for electromechanical servo systems. The settling time is minimized by iteratively solving a linear programming problem. A bound on the amplitude of the feedforward control signal can be imposed and the McMillan degree of the controller can be fixed a priori. We choose Laguerre basis functions for the feedforward filter. Since finding the optimal pole location is very difficult, we present a computationally cheap method to determine the pole location that works well in practice. Furthermore, we show how the method can account for plant and/or reference signal uncertainty. Uncertainty in servo systems can usually be modeled by additive norm-bounded dynamic uncertainty. We will show that, because the feedforward controller is designed for a finite-time interval, we can replace the dynamic uncertainty set by a parametric one. This allows us to design a robust feedforward controller by solving an LMI problem, under the assumption that the transfer functions of the plant, sensitivity, and process sensitivity depend affinely on the uncertainty. If the uncertainty set is a finite set, which is usually the case for uncertainty in the reference profiles, the feedforward design problem reduces to a linear program. These classes of uncertainty sets are well suited to describe variations in the plant and in the reference profile of a wafer stage, which is important for the practical application of the filter. Experimental results for a wafer stage demonstrate the performance improvement compared to a standard inertia feedforward filter.

1.
Pernebo
,
L.
, 1981, “
An Algebraic Theory for the Design of Controllers for Linear Multivariable Systems
,”
IEEE Trans. Autom. Control
0018-9286,
26
(
1
), pp.
171
193
.
2.
Christen
,
U.
,
Weilenmann
,
F.
, and
Geering
,
H. P.
, 1994, “
Design of H2 and H∞ Controllers with Two Degrees of Freedom
,” in
Proceedings of the 1994 American Control Conference
,
Baltimore
, MD, June 1994, pp.
2391
2395
.
3.
Skogestad
,
S.
, and
Postlethwaite
,
I.
, 1996,
Multivariable Feedback Control: Analysis and Design
,
Wiley
, Chichester, UK.
4.
van de Wal
,
M.
,
van Baars
,
G.
,
Sperling
,
F.
, and
Bosgra
,
O.
, 2002, “
Multivariable H∞/μ Feedback Control Design for High-Precision Wafer Stage Motion
,”
Control Eng. Pract.
0967-0661,
10
(
7
), pp.
739
755
.
5.
Silverman
,
L. M.
, 1969, “
Inversion of Multivariable Linear Systems
,”
IEEE Trans. Autom. Control
0018-9286,
14
(
3
), pp.
270
276
.
6.
Guarino Lo Bianco
,
C.
, and
Piazzi
,
A.
, 2002, “
A Servo Control System Design Using Dynamic Inversion
,”
Control Eng. Pract.
0967-0661,
10
(
8
), pp.
847
855
.
7.
Tomizuka
,
M.
, 1987, “
Zero-Phase Error Tracking Algorithm for Digital Control
,”
ASME J. Dyn. Syst., Meas., Control
0022-0434,
109
(
1
), pp.
65
69
.
8.
Zou
,
Q.
, and
Devasia
,
S.
, 1999, “
Preview-Based Stable Inversion for Output Tracking of Linear Systems
,”
ASME J. Dyn. Syst., Meas., Control
0022-0434,
121
(
4
), pp.
625
630
.
9.
Devasia
,
S.
, 2002, “
Should Model-Based Inverse Inputs be Used as Feedforward Under Plant Uncertainty?
,”
IEEE Trans. Autom. Control
0018-9286,
47
(
11
), pp.
1865
1871
.
10.
Cerone
,
V.
,
Milanese
,
M.
, and
Regruto
,
D.
, 2002, “
Robust Feedforward Design from Data via Approximate Inverse SM Identification
,” in
Proceedings of the 41st IEEE Conference on Decision and Control
,
Las Vegas
, NV, pp.
4664
4669
.
11.
Boerlage
,
M.
,
Tousain
,
R.
, and
Steinbuch
,
M.
, 2004, “
Jerk Derivative Feedforward Control for Motion Systems
,” in
Proceedings of the 2004 American Control Conference
,
Boston
, MA, pp.
4843
4848
.
12.
Singer
,
N. C.
, and
Seering
,
W. P.
, 1990, “
Preshaping Command Inputs to Reduce System Vibration
,”
ASME J. Dyn. Syst., Meas., Control
0022-0434,
112
(
1
), pp.
76
82
.
13.
Singer
,
N. C.
,
Singhose
,
W.
, and
Seering
,
W. P.
, 1999, “
Comparison of Filtering Methods for Reducing Residual Vibration
,”
Eur. J. Control
0947-3580,
5
(
2
), pp.
208
218
.
14.
Meckl
,
P. H.
, 1999, “
Discussion on Comparison of Filtering Methods for Reducing Residual Vibration
,”
Eur. J. Control
0947-3580,
5
(
2
), pp.
219
221
.
15.
Singh
,
T.
, and
Singhose
,
W.
, 2002, “
Tutorial on Input Shaping/Time Delay Control of Maneuvering Flexible Structures
,” in
Proceedings of the 2002 American Control Conference
,
Anchorage
, AK, pp.
1717
1731
.
16.
Stix
,
G.
, 1995, “
Trends in Semiconductor Manufacturing: Toward `Point One
,' ”
Sci. Am.
0036-8733,
272
(
2
), pp.
72
77
.
17.
Brewer
,
J. W.
, 1978, “
Kronecker Products and Matrix Calculus in System Theory
,”
IEEE Trans. Circuits Syst.
0098-4094,
25
(
9
), pp.
772
781
.
18.
Mittelmann
,
H. D.
, 1999, “
Benchmarking Interior Point LP/QP Solvers
,”
Optim. Methods Software
1055-6788,
12
, pp.
655
670
.
19.
Fu
,
Y.
, and
Dumont
,
G. A.
, 1993, “
An Optimal Time Scale for Discrete Laguerre Network
,”
IEEE Trans. Autom. Control
0018-9286,
38
(
6
), pp.
934
938
.
20.
Iwasaki
,
T.
, and
Shibata
,
G.
, 2001, “
LPV System Analysis Via Quadratic Separator for Uncertain Implicit Systems
,”
IEEE Trans. Autom. Control
0018-9286,
46
(
8
), pp.
1195
1208
.
21.
Scherer
,
C. W.
, 2001, “
LPV Control and Full Block Multipliers
,”
Automatica
0005-1098,
37
(
3
), pp.
361
375
.
22.
Poolla
,
K.
,
Khargonekar
,
P.
,
Tikku
,
A.
,
Krause
,
J.
, and
Nagpal
,
K.
, 1994, “
A Time-Domain Approach to Model Validation
,”
IEEE Trans. Autom. Control
0018-9286,
39
(
5
), pp.
951
959
.
23.
Ben-Tal
,
A.
, and
Nemerovski
,
A.
, 2001, “
Lectures on Modern Convex Optimization: Analysis, Algorithms, and Engineering Applications
,” in MPS-SIAM Series on Optimization. Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics.
You do not currently have access to this content.