2008 第六屆全國精密製造研討會論文集
中華民國九十七年十一月八日
A Dual Linear Motor Servo System for Injection Molding
1 2
M. F. Hsieh , W. S. Yao and S. H. Wang
1
Department of Systems and Naval Mechatronic Engineering
2
Department of Mechanical Engineering
National Cheng Kung University
Abstract
This paper presents a system identification
technique and control scheme for dual parallel linear
motors applied to the injector of injection molding
machines. The dual motors are mechanically coupled to
provide a joint thrust that is approximately twice of that
of a single motor for injection in order to reduce the
demand for large thrust linear motors. The proposed
synchronous control scheme is designed to satisfy an
injection cycle involving a number of mode switchings
(e.g., velocity-to-force control for filling-to-packing). In
the control scheme, a synchronous controller is
designed to reduce the synchronization error between
the dual motors. A disturbance observer is also
developed to estimate the mold cavity pressure, based
on which, the filling-to-packing switchover control can
be performed. Experimental studies conducted on an
injection load simulator validate the effectiveness and
feasibility of the proposed system.
Keywords: Linear motor, Synchronous control,
Injection molding, Filling-to-packing, Observer
1. Introduction
In recent years, due to the surging environment
protection sense and development of high-tech industry,
low-pollution and high-precision electric injection
molding machines have become the main stream of the
industry. However, most of these machines employ
rotary servo motors with ball screws as the injectors.
Their features of low velocity and acceleration are the
major drawbacks for manufacture of high-precision,
micro or thin plastic products, which require high-speed
operation to ensure quality. Linear motors, with their
high-speed and high-precision nature, are recognized as
a suitable option for such an application [1].
This paper applies linear motors to the injector of
injection molding machines. Despite the advantages of
high speed, high accuracy and direct drive, thrust
insufficiency would be the major concern to operation
of injection for linear motors. Hence, two linear motors
are constructed in parallel to provide a joint thrust for
injection and to reduce the demand for single large
thrust linear motors. As shown in Fig. 1, this
configuration requires a strong mechanical coupling
that bridges the two motors, via which a joint thrust can
be produced. However, this implies that the control of
synchronization between the two motors becomes the
key technique under condition of high speed and high
acceleration. A synchronous control scheme is thus
崑山科技大學 台南、永康
論文編號：A09-37
1
required to ensure the synchronization. Moreover,
modeling of such a coupled system is critical for good
control performance.
With the mechanical coupling (Fig. 1), common
control schemes for multiple feed drive axes may be
inappropriate since they are achieved by decoupling the
commands to each of the feed drives. This relies on an
assumption that each feed drive will accurately track the
command inputs [2]. Also, the effect of the mechanical
coupling is not considered. Master-slave control is a
potential solution [3]. Lorenz and Schmidt [4] classify
the synchronous control techniques into three categories.
However, the configurations with mechanical coupling
have not been discussed despite the compensation is
considered for errors occurring between the master and
slave motors to achieve synchronization. FANUC Ltd.
propose the “tandem control” [5] technique for jointly
driving a single axis of motion with two motors.
SIEMENS [6] develop a master-slave control technique
based on speed/torque coupling. Hsieh et al. [2] present
a position/thrust hybrid synchronous control that has
been successfully applied to electric discharge machine
(EDM) tools with a pair of parallel linear motors.
For modeling of such a coupled system, the effect of
the mechanical coupling should be taken into account
when performing system identification. Hsieh et al [2]
present a modeling technique for synchronous control
of two mechanically coupled linear motors. Differing
from the method in [2], a new modeling technique is
developed to determine the system model in this paper.
For control of electric injection molding, some
literatures [1,7-8] can be found, where linear motors are
applied for injectors. However, only a single motor is
used to drive the injectors for low duty operation.
The synchronous control developed is based on
master-slave control for injection, which involves
switching of different control modes (i.e., velocity,
thrust and position). To reduce the synchronization
error between the motors, a synchronous controller is
added to the synchronous control system. Moreover, for
filling-to-packing switchover, the mold cavity pressure
is estimated with a disturbance observer. Since this
paper focuses on feasibility evaluation for the proposed
system and control applied to injection molding, a load
simulator is used to act as the load condition in the
injection cycle so that the system performance can be
experimentally evaluated. The experiments are
conducted with a digital signal processor.
2008 第六屆全國精密製造研討會論文集 崑山科技大學 台南、永康
中華民國九十七年十一月八日 論文編號：A09-37

It is noted that nonlinear property is not considered From (9)-(12) and Fig. 4, the following relationships
here. For clarification, the term “synchronization error” can be obtained:
is herein defined as the position or velocity differences 1 + G2* G1*
between the dual parallel linear motors. v1 = u1G1 + u G (13)
1 + G1* + G2* 1 + G1* + G2*
2 2

2. System modeling G2* 1 + G1*

2.1 Modeling v2 = u1G1 + u 2 G2 (14)
As shown in Fig. 1, the mechanical coupling 1 + G1 + G2
* *
1 + G1* + G2*
strongly links the dual motors. For this configuration, To determine the parameters of the model, a unique
the master-slave control can be applied, where the slave identification process is proposed. By in-turn applying
motor is compliant to the master, and the position errors u1=0 and u2=0, a series of equations can be obtained and
between them can be reduced by proper compensation. solved to acquire the transfer functions, as those given
This compliance can also prevent the system from in the following:
potential hazards compared to the case where position 2787.79
G1 = (15)
control is applied to both motors. s + 5.96
It is assumed that the condition of pulling and 3098.04
dragging due to the mechanical coupling is shown in G2 = (16)
Fig. 2. The net thrust for individual motors (motor 1 and s + 4.90
motor 2) can be respectively expressed as: 210.54s + 601852.31
G1∗ = (17)
Fˆ1 = F1 + Fcoupling1 (1) s 2 + 5.96s
211.88s + 681724.68
Fˆ2 = F2 + Fcoupling 2 (2) G2∗ = (18)
s 2 + 4.90s
where F1/F2 are the thrust produced by individual
motors, and Fcoupling1/Fcoupling2 are the force acting on the 2.2 System model verification
motors due to the mechanical coupling. The For verification of the constructed mathematic
synchronization errors of position and velocity can be model, as shown in Fig. 5, a swept-sine force command
respectively defined as: is sequentially fed to motor 1 and motor 2. The same
∆x = x2 − x1 (3) command is then simultaneously given to both motors.
∆v = v2 − v1 (4) The responses for the above tests are all compared with
the simulations with MATLAB program, as the results
where x1/x2 are the positions of individual motors, and presented in Figs. 6 to 8. It can be seen that the
v1/v2 are the velocities. From (3), (4) and Fig. 2, experiments and simulations agree well. This verifies
Fcoupling1/Fcoupling2 can be defined as: the accuracy of the obtained mathematic model and the
Fcoupling1 = k1∆x + c1∆v (5) feasibility of the system identification method.
Fcoupling 2 = −(k 2 ∆x + c2 ∆v) (6) 3. Synchronous control design
where k1/k2 are the equivalent spring constants on the The control scheme for the investigated system is
two sides of the coupling, and c1/c2 are the equivalent shown in Fig. 9, including velocity control for filling,
damping coefficients. Therefore, the net thrust on each filling-to-packing switchover, force control for
motor becomes packing/holding/cooling, and position control for
Fˆ1 = F1 + (k1∆x + c1∆v) (7) returning to the origin. Thus, the master motor (motor 1)
is required to satisfy the above control functions while
Fˆ = F − (k ∆x +c ∆v)
2 2 2 2 (8) the slave motor (motor 2) is to provide equivalent
From the above analysis, the complete model for the accessory thrust. In order to achieve better
coupled dual motor system can be constructed as the synchronization, the output response of the slave motor
block diagram shown in Fig. 3, where u1 and u2 are the can be regulated by tuning the force command regulator
force commands to the individual motors, Kt1 and Kt2 Kc. In addition, a disturbance observer is designed to
are the force constants of the linear motors. The model estimate the reaction force on the injector from the
in Fig. 3 can be further simplified as that shown in Fig. cavity for the injection cycle. This is used as the basis
4 by defining the following parameters: K1=Kt1/m1, for filling-to-packing switchover control from velocity
K2=Kt2/m2, p1=B1/m1, p2=B2/m2, a=c1/m1, b=k1/m1, to force control mode.
c=c2/m2 and d=k2/m2. Thus, the transfer functions for the 3.1 Control loop design
model in Fig. 4 can be given as: For the above-mentioned control loop design, as
K1 shown in Fig. 9, the PDFF control [9] is adopted in the
G1 = (9)
s + p1 velocity loop, where the proportional controller Kpv, the
integration controller Kiv, and the feedforward controller
K2
G2 = (10) Kfv are properly designed to meet the performance
s + p2 requirement. The position proportional controller Kpp
as + b and the velocity feed forward controller Kfp are
G1* = (11) designed for the external position loop. It is noted that
s 2 + p1 s
the detail for the control loop design is not provided
cs + d here due to the paper space limit. The designed results
G2* = (12)
s 2 + p2 s are: Kpv=0.15, Kiv=211.6, Kfv=0.8, Kpp=36 and Kfp=0.93.
2008 第六屆全國精密製造研討會論文集
中華民國九十七年十一月八日
3.2 Design of synchronous controller
To prevent the damage caused by the asynchronous
motion of the two motors, a synchronous controller
containing a velocity controller Kv_syn and a
synchronous position controller Kx_syn is employed. The
output of the synchronous controller is expressed as:
usyn = K x _ syn ∆ x + K v _ syn ∆v (19)
The controller enables the force command to be
dynamically tuned according to the synchronization
errors of both velocity and position to reduce the risk on
damage of the system. The designed controller
Kx_syn=99.73 and Kv_syn=0.06.
3.3 Force command regulator
As shown in Fig. 9, ideally, the following equation
should be satisfied to achieve an identical output
response of the two motors (in order to improve the
synchronization ability):
u2G2 = u1G1 (20)
Thus,
K2 K1
K c u1 = u1 (21)
s + p2 s + p1
K1 s + p2
Kc = (22)
K 2 s + p1
From (22), the controller can be tuned based on the
characteristics of the two motors.
3.4 Design of Observer
The disturbance observer combines the low
acceleration estimator (LAE) and the Luenberger
observer [10], as shown in Fig. 10. The closed-loop
transfer function for the LAE part is compared to a
standard second order system, thus:
ωn
2
K o1
= (23)
s 2 + K o 2 s + K1o s 2 + 2ζω n s + ω n
2
Thus,
 K o1 = ω n
2
 (24)
 K o 2 = 2ζω n
The parameters of the LAE can be obtained after
determining the damping ratio and the close-loop
bandwidth (Ko1=8882.6, Ko2=133.3). A test is conducted
to verify the designed observer. As shown in Fig. 11,
the comparison between the observer and the
measurement verifies the performance of the observer.
Finally, a decision maker is designed for control
mode switching during the injection process.
4. Experimental Studies
The typical pressure curve in a mold cavity is shown
in Fig. 12. To generate such a load behavior, a load
simulator containing a two-phase spring and a damper
is adopted, as shown in Fig. 1. The load condition for
filling can be realized when the dual motor unit makes a
contact with the spring solely (i.e., spring constant 1)
while that for packing through holding/cooling is
performed after contacting the damper (i.e., spring
constant 2, combining the spring constants of the spring
and damper). The damper also provides a resistant force
with respect to the speed of the injector. By the
measured spring constants and damping, the load curve
can be presented in Fig.13, which is similar to the
崑山科技大學 台南、永康
論文編號：A09-37
typical pressure curve in the mold cavity shown in Fig.
12. Therefore, this load simulator can be used for
injection control experiments. The spring constants for
the spring and damper are KSpring=0.8468 N/mm and
KDamper=3.45 N/mm, respectively. The damping
constant of the damper is CDamper=4.46 N/m/s.
The specification of the linear motors is given in
Table 1, and the experimental setup is shown in Fig. 1.
The origin is defined as the initial position to each
injection process so that the injector operates on the
negative side to the origin. During the entire injection
process, there are a number of control switchovers
based on position of the injector. Three velocity control
phases are arranged in the filling stage, and force
control is employed in the packing/holding/cooling
stage. The filling-to-packing switchover is based on the
estimation of the designed observer. On completion of
cooling, the motor will be switched to position control
for returning to initial position for next injection cycle.
It is noted that control for melting material and feeding
into the barrel through a hopper is not the target of this
study, and the position control here is only for the
injector returning to the initial position.
The entire stroke is 120 mm (0 mm to -120 mm).
The velocity is arranged to be -300mm/s for the position
of 0 mm to -20mm, -900mm/s for -20 mm to -80mm,
and -600mm/s for beyond -80 mm. As shown in Fig. 14,
the red dotted line is the command and the blue solid
line is the output response of motor 1. The velocities
required for filling are successfully achieved (before
0.23 s). The motor is then switched to force control
based on the observed load force that represents the
prescribed cavity pressure. In this condition, the
observed load force dramatically rises due to the contact
with the damper and the spring, as shown in Fig. 15.
The durations for packing/holding and cooling are set to
be 1 s and 0.5 s, respectively. The injectors are then
moved back to the initial position by position control, as
the position response shown in Fig. 14. This will
complete an injection cycle. The estimated load curve in
Fig. 15 is similar to the typical mold cavity pressure
curve (Fig. 12), which again verifies the effectiveness
of the load simulator and the observer.
The synchronization error of position between the
two linear motors is shown in Fig. 16, where the results
with and without the synchronous controller are
compared. As can be seen, the maximum
synchronization error is reduced by 86%, from -10~70
μm to -7.5~10μm with the synchronous controller,
whose effectiveness is thus verified.
5. Conclusion
The application of dual linear motors and their
synchronous control to electric injection molding
machine has been successfully implemented in this
paper. A system identification method was proposed for
modeling the two mechanically coupled parallel motors
and verified to be accurate by experiment. A load
simulator consisting of a set of springs and a damper
was used to realize the load condition of the injection
process. A disturbance observer was designed to
estimate the thrust of the injector through an injection
2008 第六屆全國精密製造研討會論文集 崑山科技大學 台南、永康
中華民國九十七年十一月八日 論文編號：A09-37

cycle. This estimation has been successfully applied to F̂2

filling-to-packing switchover control. For precisely
controlling the injector, a synchronous control scheme
with a force command regulator and a synchronous
controller was designed. The experimental results have
demonstrated the performance and presented the
feasibility of the proposed control system applied to
electric injection molding machines. Consequently, the
demand for large thrust linear motors can be reduced
when applying the proposed system to practical F̂1
machines.
6. References Fig. 2 Model of the mechanical coupling
1. Y. B. Bang and S. Ito, “Linear motor drive u2 F2 1 v2
Kt2
ultrahigh-speed injection moulding machine”, +- m2 s + B2
Proceedings of the I MECH E Part B Journal of
Engineering Manufacture, vol. 216, no. 5, pp. 773-781, c2s+k2
2002 1 +

2. M. F. Hsieh, C. J. Tung, W. S. Yao, and M. C. s -

Wu, ”Servo design of a vertical axis drive using dual c1s+k1
linear motors for high speed electric discharge
machining”, International Journal of Machine Tools and u1 F1 + 1 v1
Manufacture, vol. 47, no. 3-4, pp. 546-554, 2007 Kt1
+ m1 s + B1

3. P. Sarachik, J. R. Ragazzini, “A 2-dimensional Fig. 3 Block diagram for the coupled dual motor system
feedback control system,” Transaction of the AIEE vol.
K2
76(2), pp. 55-61, 1957 s + p2
4. R. D. Lorenz and P. B. Schmidt, “Synchronized G2 cs + d
motion control for process automation”, Proceedings of s 2 + p2 s
G2*
the 1989 IEEE Industry Applications Annual
5. FANUC, Parameter manual of a-series AC servo
as + b
motor, FANUC, 1994 G*
s 2 + p1 s 1
6. SIEMENS, 840D/FM-NC Description of functions,
special functions (Part 3), SIEMENS, 1999 K1
s + p1
7. Y. B. Bang and K. M. Lee, “Large thrust linear
G1
motors for low-duty-cycle operation”, Mechatronics,
Fig. 4 Simplified diagram for the coupled system
vol. 14, pp. 891-906, 2004
8. Y. B. Bang and K. M. Lee, “Linear motor for ejector
mechanism,” International Journal of Advanced
Manufacturing Technology, vol. 24, pp. 582-589, 2004
9. G. Ellis, “PDFF: An evaluation of a velocity loop
control method”, PCIM-Europe, 1999.
10. K. S. Wu, Design and realization of differential and
power-assisted control for power chairs, Master Thesis,
National Cheng Kung University, 2005.
7. Chart arrangement Fig. 5 Process for verification of system model

Fig. 1 Investigated system with load simulator Fig. 6 Response for command fed to motor 1
2008 第六屆全國精密製造研討會論文集 崑山科技大學 台南、永康
中華民國九十七年十一月八日 論文編號：A09-37

Fig. 7 Response for command fed to motor 2 Fig. 8 Response for command fed to both motors

1
s

1
s

F̂d

1
s
v̂1

1
s

Fig. 9 Proposed complete control system

TMotor

TˆDisturbance
1
Ĵ Ĵ

θ α̂ 1 ω̂ 1 θˆ
Ko1
s s

Ko2
Time (sec)

Fig. 10 Disturbance observer Fig. 11 Comparison of measurement and observer

2008 第六屆全國精密製造研討會論文集 崑山科技大學 台南、永康
中華民國九十七年十一月八日
CAVITY PRESSURE 論文編號：A09-37

Fig. 12 Typical mold cavity pressure

Fig. 16 Synchronous error with and without
synchronous controller

Table 1 Specification of Linear Motors

Num. Unit
Continuous Stall Force 80 N
Peak Force 240 N
Stall Current Continuous 3.6 Amp.
Peak Current 10.8 Amp
Voltage Constant 25.6 Volts/m/s
Force Constant 22.17 N/Amp Peak

雙線型馬達伺服系統於射出成型機
Fig. 13 The load curve of load simulator
之應用
1 2 3
謝旻甫 、姚武松 、王盛篁
1
國立成功大學系統及船舶機電系副教授
2
國立成功大學機械系博士後研究
3
國立成功大學系統及船舶機電系研究生

摘要
本文主要目的在於應用一雙平行線型馬達系統
於射出成型機之射出單元，針對其發展一系統鑑別方
法以及同動控制技術。該雙平行馬達以一耦合機構使
Fig. 14 Motor 1 output response in an injection cycle 兩者得以共同出力，做為射出所需之力。因此，可比
單線型馬達多出約一倍之射出力，亦可降低對於大推
力馬達之需求。本文所發展之同動控制架構可滿足射
出過程中之多段控制切換，例如從充填到保壓過程須
由速度控制切換為力量控制。在本控制架構使用一同
Load force (N)

動控制器以降低雙馬達之間之同動誤差，另有一外擾
估測器用以估測模穴壓力，作為充填切換為保壓之依
據。在實驗驗證中，本文以一負載模擬器來實現模穴
在射出過程中之壓力變化情形，並經實驗驗證其可行
性。藉由實驗結果可驗證本控制架構以及雙馬達伺服
系統應用於射出成型機之可行性。

Fig. 15 The observed load curve for an injection cycle 關鍵字 : 線型馬達，同動控制，射出成型，保壓切
換，估測器