ControlEng. Practice, Vol. 4. No. 5, pp.

645-653, 1996
Copyright 0 1996 Elsevier Science Ltd
Printed in Great Britain. All tights reserved
0967~0661/96 $15.00 + 0.00
PII:SO967-0661(96)00046-9

CONTROLLER DESIGN FOR AN OVERHEAD CRANE SYSTEM

WITH UNCERTAINTY
Chi-Cheng Cheng and Cheng-Yi Chen
Department of Mechanical Engineering, National Sun Yat-Sen Universiry, Kaohsiung, 80424 Taiwan, Republic qf China
(chengcc@cc.nsysu.edu.tw)

(Received January 1995; infinalfotm December 1995)

Abstract: Overhead crane systems are widely used for material transportation in many industrial
fields. However, undesired oscillation can always be found during the moving process, especially at
the end location of the transport. The swing may extend the carrying time and cause safety
problems. In order to achieve small swing angles, and also to incorporate the potential uncertainty
property of the system, a robust controller has to be developed. Here, a controller, which combines a
feedback linearization approach and a time delay control scheme, is chosen. The time delay control
is applied to complete the feedback linearization for a nonlinear system under the influence of
uncertainty. By suitable definition of system outputs, input/output de-coupling presents a direct
relationship between the system outputs and inputs. Thus, robust cancellation of the uncertainty,
and insertion of the designated dynamics can be accomplished. Encouraging control performance is
shown in the results of a computer simulation.

Keywords: Feedback linearization; nonlinear control; time delay; transportation control;

uncertainty.

1. INTRODUCTION
Overhead crane systems have been widely used for
material transportation in many industrial fields, due
to their low cost, easy assembly and maintenance.
However, severely nonlinear properties bring about
undesired swings, especially at take-off and arrival.
Most overhead crane systems belong to the category
of incomplete control systems, which only allow a
limited number of inputs to control more outputs.
Such uncontrolled oscillations cause both stability
and safety problems. This drawback strongly
constrains the operational efficiency and the
application domain. Besides, an overhead crane
system may experience a range of parameter
variations. Different loading is the most common
condition. Therefore, a robust and delicate
controller, which is able to diminish these
unfavorable swing phenomena and manage
uncertainty problems, needs to be developed. A good
control strategy will not only enhance both efficiency
and safety, but will also make the system more
applicable to other engineering scopes.
Recently, anti-swing control for overhead crane
systems has become one of the most popular research
topics. Basically, two control schemes, open-loop
control and closed-loop control, have been
investigated. The open-loop control method only
suggests how the cart should move in order not to
induce oscillations at the termination point (e.g.,
(Aspinwall, 1980; Starr, 1985; Strip, 1988; Meckel
and Seering, 1985; Karnopp, et al., 1992)).
However, some differences exist between the ideal
model and the actual system, and an overhead crane
system has to encounter disturbances from its
environment in the real world. Inaccurate modeling
always induces practical control problems.
Therefore, satisfactory performance may not be
achieved by applying these open-loop control
strategies to an actual system. The closed-loop
methods, given the control criteria, e.g., loading

64.5
646 Chi-Cheng Cheng and Cheng-Yi Chen

conditions, position requirement, and swing angles, hoisting d r u m ~

use feedback techniques to implement different
crab ~-~_ ! !_~_ _ ~
control strategies. Several control structures have
been studied. Sakawa and Nakazumi (1985), and
Sato and Sakawa (1988) presented hybrid control
algorithms for rotary crane systems. A completely
controllable state feedback method was developed for
an overhead crane with a fixed cable length by
Moustefa and Ebeid (1988). Auernig and Troger
(1987), and Hara, et al. (1989) looked at this hook
problem from the optimal control point of view. All tong~ ) steel coil
the control methods mentioned above ignore possible
uncertainty problems. An adaptive control scheme / / / / / / / / / Ground
using feedback linearization and parameter
estimation was presented by Boustany and Fig. 1. Overhead crane system for a factory.
D'Andre'a-Novel (1992). However, control perform-
ance was greatly limited by the convergent speed of
the estimation algorithm. Furthermore, reversed Xp
behavior was usually observed at the beginning stage
u~ FA u lwinch
of control. ~ - - - - - ~ ' - -

In order to overcome the strongly nonlinear
properties and possible uncertainty problems in the
system, feedback linearization with a time delay
control algorithm is chosen in this paper. The
feedback linearization transforms complicated
nonlinear systems into simplified equivalent systems
through coordinate transformation. Controller
design is thus based on familiar linear control
strategies by cancelling undesired nonlinear parts.
Although the method is potentially applicable to
most nonlinear systems, poor control performance
ahvays results from uncertainties or unmodeled
dynamics. The time delay control utilizes state
information with a small time delay, to estimate the
unknown dynamics. It has been shown (Youcef-
Toumi and Ito, 1990) that this control scheme
produces good disturbance rejection characteristics.
The combination of feedback linearization and time
delay control will be developed for an overhead
crane system to achieve a swing-free response under
the influence of uncertainty.
2. DERIVATION OF THE DYNAMIC MODEL
A two-dimensional overhead crane system, which
has the capabilities of both traversing and hoisting,
is considered in this research. Most crane systems
used for loading and unloading at a dock or for
assembly in a factory have similar structures.(Fig. 1)
This kind of crane system has two actuators,
responsible for horizontal and vertical motions,
respectively. Nevertheless, three controlled
/ / / / / / / ~\/ / / / / / /
G ~mg
Fig. 2. Cart-pendulum model with a variable
pendulum length.
system because it has a smaller number of actuators
than the number of controlled variables.
In order to simplify the modeling complexity, several
assumptions have first to be made: (1) Plastic
deformation in the system is ignored. (2) The cable
is treated as a weightless rigid body. (3) The
moment of inertia of the load is ignored and the load
becomes a point mass. Therefore, the overhead
crane system can be simplified to a cart-pendulum
model with a variable pendulum length, as shown in
Fig. 2. Ul is the force exerted by the horizontal
actuator and u2 is the applied torque from a
rotational actuator acting on a winch with a radius R.
The masses of the cart and the load are denoted by M
and m. xp is the horizontal displacement and 0
indicates the inclination swing angle. L represents
the cable length and J stands for the moment of
inertia of the winch. The kinetic energy and the
potential energy can easily be obtained as follows:
T = 1~MYCp
"2 +~-m[(x
1 "r +/~sinO+LOcos 0) 2

variables, horizontal and vertical displacements as +(Lcos 0 - LOsin 0) 2 + ~ J ( Z / R ) 2 ] (1)

well as the swing angle, need to be equally
considered. This system is an incomplete control V = - m g L . cos 0. (2)
 Controller Design for an Overhead Crane System 647

The dynamic equations can therefore be derived by Time delay control (TDC), presented by Youcef-
applying the Lagrangian approach and are described Toumi and his colleagues (Youcef-Toumi and Ito,
by 1990; Youcef-Toumi and Wu, 1992), is designed for
the control of systems with unknown dynamics and
J s i n O ~ _ u . sinO disturbances. This approach uses past observation of
M P R2 - 1+ 7 u2
the system state and control input to calculate the
current control action that can quickly cancel the
msin 0J?p + (m +-~T)L = m(L0~+ gcos 0) - 1 us (3) unknown dynamics and the unexpected disturbance,
simultaneously. Although the time delay control
cos 0p + L 0 = -2/~b - g . s i n 0. sacrifices a little gain margin caused by the inserted
time delay, this method gains good immunity to
uncertainties and disturbances. Hence, the time
Define the state vector x as [xp L 0 fp L ~T and delay control technique can be used to achieve
the input vector u as [u] U2] T. The dynamic input/output linearization without knowing the exact
equations can be converted to a nonlinear state-space model dynamics. The proposed method combines
representation, i.e., systematic design of feedback linearization for
nonlinear systems with the fast convergent property
(4) of the time delay control for unmodeled dynamics.
"~61 = f 6 l +G6lU2xl
where
Consider a square nonlinear system (number of
p control inputs equal to the outputs) described by the
L following nonlinear differential equations
0
mJ.sin0(L b2+g cos &=f(x)+G(x)u
f= Q y=h(x), (5)
mMR 2( LO ~+gcos 0)
Q where x is an n 1 state vector, u=[u~ u2 ... u,,]T is
-mdsinOcos O(LO2+gcos 0) 2LO+gsinO an m x 1 control input, y is an mx 1 output of
QL L interest, and G=[g~ g2 "" g,~],f h are, nm, nl,
0 0 ml nonlinear functions of states in a smooth vector
0 0 field, respectively. Now, the system output can be
0 0 differentiated until control inputs appear.
mR 2 + J mR sin O
Q Q m
G= v (') = L~h, + ~~=l~gy
' I . I n - l h uj (6)
- m R 2 sin 0 - ( m R sin 2 0+ MR) ~i ~ f "~
Q Q
-(mR 2 + J)Lcos 0 -LRmsinOcos O Equation (6) can thus be rewritten in a matrix form
Q Q as

Q = M ( m R 2 + J ) + m J s i n 2 @.

3. CONTROL LAW L
The feedback linearization technique has been = a(x)+B(x)u. (7)
described in detail in many books on nonlinear
control (e.g. (Isidori, 1989; Slotine and Li, 1991)). It is considered that the value of a(x) in equation (7)
The central idea of feedback linearization is to at the present time t is very close to that at time t-2
algebraically transform an original nonlinear system in the past for a small time delay L,
into an equivalent model of a simpler form, and
cancel existing nonlinearities into a fully or partially - . (r)
a ( x , t ) = a ( x , t _ A) = t-.~-B(x't)t-2"ut-x. (8)
linear one, so that linear control techniques can be
applied. Although the method has systematic design Thus, the time delay control law of the input/output
procedures, an exact model of a nonlinear system is linearization can be obtained as follows
not always available, and the measurement of states
is sometimes difficult, As the result, feedback
/4 t ~. n - I t[ - Y'(r)t
- 3. + j~ "/dr - ~ + vr ] , (9)
linearization faces limitations in actual applications.
648 Chi-Cheng Cheng and Cheng-Yi Chen

where /~ is an m x m constant matrix to be linearization is straightforward. The process is

~,(r)
determined, J,-~ is the rth derivative ofy at time t-2,
and u, and u,.x indicate the control input at time t
and t-2, respectively, v, is the reference input at
time t. Since L is a small time delay, it can be
assumed to be just one sampling interval. The above
equation can be rewritten as a discrete form:
described below.
The relative degree of the system is defined by
differentiating the system output till the control input
appears. After differentiating the system outputs
twice, the following equation can be obtained.

l/(k) -----/~-1 [ _ y ( r ) ( k - 1) +/~. u ( k - 1) + v(k)] ,(10) F Jsin2O - M R sin01

-T (12)
where k denotes the time at the kth sampling instant. JSiQ__COSO -- OSO /'/2

Therefore, by suitable selection of /~ and with a

sufficiently small time delay, the nonlinear system
(5) can be input/output linearized. The stabilization
condition has also been investigated by the same
researchers. They found that the choice o f / ~ for
stability has to satisfy III - B ( k ) B -1 II-< a _<1, where
k is less than a positive integer N.
Hence, the relative degree of the system is 4.
Because the rank of the control distribution matrix is
one, the control inputs u~ and u2 will emerge
dependently. Therefore, a new control input needsto
be determined. Let U2 be the new control input of
the system. Equation (12) then reduces to

4. CONTROLLER DESIGN

In this section, the control law derived above will be

LL}h2(x)J-L2]u= (13)

used to solve the control problems of the overhead U 2 = - J sinOul

where +U 2
crane system. By a suitable definition of system MR
outputs, input/output de-coupling presents the direct
relationship between the system outputs and inputs. bl _ M R sin_____0and b2 - _h//Rcos 0
Thus, robust cancellation of the system uncertainty O O
and insertion of the designated dynamics can be
accomplished. At the same time, a control goal that A little cancellation is conducted to simplify the
accurately moves an object from one point to above representation by letting Y2 =w~ because of
another, but without extending the carrying time by
doing another process, can be achieved. complexity of the L ~ h ( x ) . The equation (12) can
thus easily be formulated as the following equation:

4.1 Input/output linearization controller design F 1 F- gsinol Fsinl

] =/ . (14)
The control inputs of the overhead crane system L "i)2 L 0 J L 1 3
shown in Fig. 2 are the force and the torque applied
to the platform and the winch, respectively. The The equation above appears as the standard form of
control goals concerned are positioning the dynamic extension. It will be differentiated twice by
suspended object along the horizontal and vertical defining w~, w 2 = ~ig, and ~i,2 as the states and
directions, and suppressing its swing angle during control inputs of dynamic extension. The system
the process of moving. Thus, the overhead crane dynamics can then be decoupled into the following
system can be viewed as an MIMO system. In representation:
general, the input/output linearization method can be
directly applied to decouple square systems into a
direct relationship between system inputs and
outputs. Examining the actual system, two output
y~4) I [a'(x'] w)l+0B(x'w)Fu'
3 Lff 2 (15)

functions are defined by absolute horizontal position

and vertical position of the load given by where
I-(wl - g ) sinO]

Y=
y,]=h(x)=Fxp
Y2
+Lsin01
L L cost~ ] (11)
a(x, w) = / cos o J

L 0 1

Since the output functions of the system have been If B(x,w), the decoupling matrix, is nonsingular,
selected, controller design using input/output then equation (15) is the standard form for
 Controller Design for an Overhead Crane System
input/output linearization. However, conditions
exist for B(x,w) becoming invertible. They are
L 0, 0 ~ x]2, and w~g. Fortunately, these
conditions are always relevant to actual overhead
cranes. The length of the rope, or the distance
between the winch and center of the load, can never
be zero. The swing angle of load is not expected to
sway to 90 , and the value of w,, the vertical
acceleration, is much smaller than gravity g. As a
result of the above analysis, the original system has
relative degree 4, and 6 states. By undergoing
dynamic extensions twice, one has relative degree 8,
and 8 states, where the relative degree of the system
is equal to the number of the states. Therefore, the
system can be input/output linearized and decoupled
to a completely controllable form of linear system,
i.e., the zero dynamics is never presented with the
system.
In controller design for an overhead crane system,
the type of controller for asymptotic output tracking
is adopted such that the suspended object can be
controlled into a desired smooth trajectory. Now, let
the desired trajectory for tracking be [Xd, Zd ]~, and
define
tldd-----[XdZd d Xd Zd Zd Zd Z'd]T.
The tracking error, 9 , is defined as the difference
between the desired trajectory Pa and the output,
i.e., p-/ad. The controller for input/output
linearization can be designed by letting equation (I 5)
be equal to [v, v2 ]v. Therefore,
where
V , = X ~ ' ) - k , ( 2 - 2 ~ ) - k A 2 - 2 ,)-k~(2-~)--k,(x-. G )
]75=~d~')--k I (2"-G)-k~ (2-2~)-k3(2-2~)-k, (Z-Z~)
Combining equation (17) with the system dynamic
equation (4), gives a stable system with the de-
coupled tracking error described by
.."
/~l = 95 /~2 = 93 /~3 = 94
~. = v, ~ ~. +k,9. +k293 +k395 +k.9, = 0
- - Z (18)
~/5 ~--"9 6 l"/6 = 97 ]"/7 ~-- 98
,,1."
~8 = v5 ~ ~8 +k,98 +k29, +k396 +k49~ = 0
649
4.2 Input/output linearization with time delay
controller
Since system nonlinearities mainly appear in
equations (13) and (17), the time delay technique is
then applied to them. To estimate the control
distribution b5 in equation (13), the swing angle of
the load is assumed to be small so that it can be
simplified to b2 =-R/(mR 2+ j ) , which is only related
to the mass of the load. Thus, considering that the
overheadcrane operates in known loading ranges,
and the constraint of input/output linearization using
time delay control is /~ >_b2/2, /~ can easily be
selected. Moreover, the constraint of input/output
linearization using time delay control in MIMO is
IIBi~-~-lll<a<l. B(x) in equation (15) is
estimated by supposing that the swing angle of the
load is very small and the maximum length of the
rope is known. Hence, /~ can be chosen as a
constant diagonal matrix, and its diagonal elements
are expressed as (/~11, /~22) to satisfy the above
criterion. Thus the controller for input/output
linearization using time delay control can be
concluded as follows, and its block diagram is
depicted in Fig. 3.
(16)
u, (k) = u, ( k - 1) +/~' x [v, - y l 4~( k - l ) ]
~b2(k)= *b2( k - l ) +/~;) [v 2 -y24)( k - l ) ]
~i'I (k) = w2(k) (19)
U2(k ) = U 2( k - 1)+/~ -1 x [-J)2 (k-1)+w, (k)]
u: (k )=U2 ( k )+ flu~
where fl= ( X - x p ) J / ( M R Z ) .
(17)
~ overhead
Id~vativeestimate
~y,...,y'y
Fig. 3. Block diagram for an overhead crane control
system using linearization and time delay
control.
4.3 Trajectory design
To maintain small swing angles during transport,
the desired trajectory should be selected to be as
smooth as possible. Thus, the overhead crane can
650 Chi-Cheng Cheng and Cheng-Yi Chen
30
move smoothly to minimize the swing angle
especially on departure and arrival. A desired
trajectory using the time function can be established.
The desired trajectory is defined as ( X d , Z d ) , such
that the boundary conditions, "~'d=J(d=)(d = Z
(m)
X~4~=0, 2'a =Za =2"~=Z<a4~=0, have to be fulfilled. In
accordance with these conditions, Newton's
interpolation method can be used to generate the 10 [ ---Am_
ed
.near~zedtim
e _ -dalY J
difference table to find the desired time functions:
0 10 20 30
time (sec)
=1"(
126ts/ 420t6 540/7 315ts 70/9 (a)
Xa(t) - - ~ - - - - ~ )D O<_t<T
ID T~ Ts T7 TS T~ 0.06
t>_T
Za(t)=r(126t~j 420t6 540t 7 315t s 70t 9 0,04
--~-- --~
.... )L O<t<T
IL T~ T6 T7 T9 TS 0,02
t>T
(20) O 0.00 t
(rad)
where T is the final time when the overhead crane
-0.02
has reached the target point, and D and L are the
-- - - linearlzed
total distances moved in horizontal and vertical -0.04 ---,dkr---- I~ne arlz4~l ad Ikp IivQ
directions, respectively.
-0.06 "l t J
10 20 30
time (sec)
(b)
5. SIMULATION STUDIES
Fig. 4. Control performance with an actual loading
Three types of the controller, namely input/output
of 8000kg: (a) vertical trajectory of the load,
linearization, adaptive control using feedback
(b) the response of the swing angle.
linearization and estimation design (developed by
Boustany and D'Andre'a-Novel (1992)), and the
input/output linearization using time delay control the dynamics of [ and 0 experience constant
disturbances of 1 rnds z and 0.1 rad/s 2, respectively,
proposed in this paper, were applied to an overhead
crane using computer simulation. The simulation when the simulation time was between 5 and 10
basically corresponds to a medium-sized crane that seconds.
can be found in industry, and which is characterized
by All three controllers achieved good trajectory-
following performance in the X-direction for the first
M = 5000 kg m = 0-10000 kg two cases. This is not surprising, because of the
perpendicular relationship between the horizontal
J = 50 kg.m z R = 0.4 m
motion and the load weight. However, the feedback
g = 9.81 m . s -2 L = 0.5-20 m linearization approach due to the inexact
cancellation of system uncertainty corrupted and
In the third controller, the control distribution moved the suspended objected to the wrong positions
parameters were estimated as /~ = 0.0017, (Figs 4a and 5a). Although the adaptive control
/~, = 5x10 -~, /~22= 1.25. The controller design was using feedback linearization and parameter
based on the expected loading, 5000 kg. The desired estimation could correctly accomplish the task, its
trajectory moving from the starting position, (0, 0, efficiency was limited by bounded convergent rates.
10 m) to the target point, (50 m, 0, 20 m), was given Nevertheless, the feedback linearization using time
by two ninth-order time functions. During the delay control perceived the outputs and the inputs of
simulation, the Runge-Kutta method was used to the system at one time step in the past, and
solve the model equations, and a uniform step size of determined the control action that should be
0.01 second was chosen. commanded at the present time. This control
technique appeared to be superior to the other two
In order to verify the robust properties of the methods. As to the responses of the swing angle, the
controller, three cases of system uncertainty were three controllers behaved similarly, as shown in
examined. They are (1) actual loading is 8000 kg Figs 4b and 5b. It seemed that the pure input-output
which is heavier than the rated value (Fig. 4), (2) linearization in Fig. 5b achieved better results,
actual loading is 8000 kg and parameters o f f in despite the failure of the trajectory control in the Z-
equation (4) are increased by 100%, (Fig. 5), and (3) direction. Since the vibration angles were kept small
enough through the transport process, cancellation of
 Controller Design for an Overhead Crane System 651

80 50
.
P

4O
60

30
X~
( mZ) 40 ~ ...,,i=.~
~nllrized+ldeptive 1 (m)
gnellrized *lime dqllmy 2o

lO
20_

o
I
0 10 20 30 lO 20 30
time (sec) time (see)

(a) (a)
0.03 2.0

- - - bne~rized
0.02 I ~ne=,,zed=daptJve
~eaflZed +~ 8 d~y

0.01 ~-
1.0
0 X-X d

(red) -0.010'0 " "'"l ,,' (m) O.S

* -- -- -- Itflelrize d
-- * ~ linelrized+adlplive 0.0,
-0.02 + tlnelrized+um ii de~ay

I -05 ~
-0.03 11 20 310 o
1
lO
time
2"
(sec)
3~
time (see)
(b)
Fig. 5. Control performance with an actual loading
of 8000kg and parameters o f f in equation (4)
increased by lOON: (a) vertical trajectory of I 0
,' ,i ~me l f ~zecl*=d&plive
f~' knel~,zed+time detay

the load, (b) the response of the swing angle.

the nonlinearities was almost achieved. The

(m) o.o. : "~
estimation algorithms of the other two control
methods, trying to determine these unknown
-0.5
uncertainties and dynamics, degraded the angle
responses due to coupling effects, and produced -1.0 J .d , 1
1 20 30
larger vibration amplitudes. Therefore, pleasing time (see)
performance can be expected in the swing angle. (c)
In the third case, shown in Fig. 6, constant 0.15 - -

?
7
disturbances were directly embedded in the system - - - I,ne=r,zea i

within a specific time interval. The first two 0.10

knesrlzed a dapt Ne
Kneel;zeal+time delay
/
methods failed to maintain the overhead crane on the
track when the system encountered such unknown 0.05

disturbances. However, those unknown amounts 0

(red) O.OOA
could be quickly estimated by the time delay
controller and exact nonlinearity cancellation was
-0.05
generally achieved. Hence, satisfactory control
performance was found in both directions. Despite -O10 I 1
2O 3O
not adjusting the controller gains or identifying the time (sec)
system parameters, performance of this controller (d)
was almost independent of the unmodeled dynamics.
Besides, equation (19) indicates simple structure of
Fig. 6. Control performance with a constant
this controller, and the computational load appears
extremely economical. Nevertheless, there was disturbance within 5 and 10 seconds: (a)
always a startup period where the error was desired horizontal trajectory, (b) horizontal
tracking error, (c) vertical tracking error, (d)
relatively large. This is because the system adopted
a backward difference estimator, and was initially at the response of the swing angle.
rest, such that the derivatives of the outputs changed
rapidly when motion commenced.
652 Chi-Cheng Cheng and Cheng-Yi Chen
0.01
process and overcome possible loading uncertainty.
This control scheme combines the systematic design
of feedback linearization for nonlinear systems, and
the fast convergent property of time delay control for
unknown dynamics.
(m)X'b.oo
X-

Simulation results indicate promising and robust

control performance, even for different loading
conditions and uncertain parameter problems.
Compared with a pure feedback linearization method
and feedback linearization with self-tuning control,
-0.01 L I , I t 1
0 10 20 30 the proposed approach also showed satisfactory
time (see)
(a) transient responses and excellent steady-state
properties. However, two limitations to using this
0.2 approach exist. The first is that the decoupling
matrix in feedback linearization has to satisfy the
constraints of a finite, known relative degree of the
system, and stable internal dynamics. The second is
0.1
that measurement of state derivatives, which may be
Z-Z d
difficult in practice, will be a major obstacle to its
(m) use in the real world.
O0

REFERENCES

-0.1 , [ , [ b I Aspinwall, D.M. (1980). Acceleration profiles for

0 10 20 30
time (sec)
Co)
Fig. 7. Control performance with a measurement
noise: (a) horizontal tracking error, Co) vertical
tracking error.
Measurement noises usually exist in realistic
applications. White Gaussian noises with a standard
deviation or= 0.1 were added to the measurements of
2, X, and 2". Therefore, the noise in the estimation
of the differential terms would be enlarged 100 times
by the backward difference algorithm. Simulations
were conducted by adding a low-pass filter,
300/(s+300), immediately after the measurements.
Results shown in Fig. 7 still demonstrate a stable
system, and maintain good control performance.
The input/output linearization using time delay
control successfully demonstrated a promising
control technique for an overhead crane system with
uncertainties.
6. CONCLUSIONS
Most overhead crane systems belong to the group of
the incomplete control systems. Undesired
oscillatory behavior may occur during the control
process, due to a smaller number of control efforts
than the number of specifications. A control
algorithm using feedback linearization with time
delay was applied to an overhead crane system, to
reduce swing phenomena during the transport
minimizing residual response. Journal of
Dynamic Systems, Measurement, and Control,
102, 3-6.
Auernig, J.W. and H. Troger (1987). The optimal
control of overhead cranes with hoisting of the
load. Automatica, 23, 437-447.
Boustany, F. and B. D'Andre'a-Novel (1992).
Adaptive control of non-completely controlled
mechanical system using dynamic feedback
linearization and estimation design. Interna-
tional Journal of Adaptive Control and Signal
Processing, 6, 589-610.
Hara, K., T. Yamamoto, A. Kobayashi and M.
Okamoto (1989). Jib crane control to suppress
load swing. International Journal of Systems
Science, 20, 715-731.
Isidori, A., (1989). Nonlinear Control Systems. 2nd
edition, Springer-Verlag.
Karnopp, B.H., F.E. Fisher and B.O. Yoon (1992).
A strategy for moving a mass from one point to
another. Journal of the Franklin Institute, 329,
881-892.
Meckel, P.H. and W.P. Seering (1985).
Minimizing residual vibration for point-to-
point motion. Journal of Dynamic Systems,
Measurement, and Control, 107, 378-382.
Moustefa, K.A.F. and A.M. Ebeid (1988).
Nonlinear modeling and control of overhead
crane load sway. Journal of Dynamic Systems,
Measurement, and Control, 110, 266-271.
Sakawa, Y. and A. Nakazumi (1985). Modeling
and control of rotary crane. Journal of Dynamic
 Controller Design for an Overhead Crane System
Systems, Measurement, and Control, 107, 200-
206.
Sato, K. and Y. Sakawa (1988). Modelling and
control of a flexible rotary crane. International
Journal of Control, 48, 2085-2105.
Slotine, J-J.E. and W. Li (1991). Applied
Nonlinear Control, 207-275. Prentice-Hall,
Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey.
Starr, G.P. (1985). Swing-free transport of suspended
objects with a path-controlled robot
manipulator. Journal of Dynamic Systems,
Measurement, and Control, 107, 97-107.
653
Strip, D.R. (1988). Swing-free transport of
suspended objects: a general treatment. IEEE
Transactions on Robotics and Automation, 5,
234-236.
Youcef-Toumi, K. and O. Ito (1990). A time delay
controller for systems with unknown dynamics.
Journal of Dynamic Systems, Measurement,
and Control, 112, 112-133.
Youcef-Toumi, K. and S.T. Wu (1992).
Input/output linearization using time delay
control. Journal of Dynamic Systems,
Measurement, and Control, 114, 10-19.