JP5334985B2 - Elevator control device - Google Patents

Description

  The present invention relates to an elevator control apparatus, and more particularly to an elevator control apparatus that calculates inertia to be controlled in speed control having a model calculation unit.

  FIG. 9 is a diagram showing an outline of a conventional general elevator. In FIG. 9, a commercial power source 310, a car 350 for raising and lowering people and luggage, a counterweight 360 that weighs the weight of the car and the transported object, an inverter 330 that supplies electric power for driving the power unit, A converter 320 for supplying power to the inverter from a commercial power source, an inverter 330, a converter 320, an elevator control device 340 for controlling the power unit 301, and the like are provided.

  As described in Patent Document 1, a conventional elevator control device that calculates inertia of a control target includes a speed command input unit, a model calculation unit, a speed detector, a compensation calculation unit, a torque command calculation unit, And a torque controller and an inertia calculator. Then, the inertia to be controlled is calculated from the following equation (A) during the acceleration operation of the car.

(J _M : inertia to be controlled, Tα: torque required for acceleration of elevator car, D: sheave coefficient, KL: roping coefficient)
That is, in Patent Document 1, the inertia of the controlled object is calculated at the time of acceleration and constant speed of the car by using the force balance expression of the expression (A), and the result is reflected in the model calculation unit and the compensation calculation unit. . Thereby, it is said that control with good followability is possible.
JP 2003-128352 A

  In the elevator control device of Patent Document 1, the correct inertia can be calculated in a steady state where the acceleration of the car is constant and the above-described equation (A) is satisfied. However, since the acceleration time is short, the feedback does not converge, and the acceleration is not constant, an accurate inertia cannot be calculated in a transient state where the force balance equation (A) is not satisfied. Therefore, when trying to calculate the inertia with an elevator with a low speed, there is a problem that the identification must be performed many times to reduce the error, or the acceleration time must be lengthened to converge the acceleration.

  Further, in the elevator control device of Patent Document 1, the correct inertia can be calculated in a steady state where the acceleration of the car is constant and the above formula (A) is satisfied. However, when there is almost no constant acceleration time, for example, the inertia error is too large and the control system diverges and stops during addition or addition, or the speed is very slow and constant acceleration to constant acceleration or deceleration pattern In the case of manual operation that becomes difficult, there is a problem that the inertia cannot be calculated.

  In the present invention, even during a transient response before the acceleration of the car converges, by calculating the convergence rate of the inertia error, a more accurate inertia can be quickly calculated, and the calculated accurate inertia is used for normal operation. An object of the present invention is to provide an elevator control device with good followability. Another object of the present invention is to provide an elevator control device with good follow-up that calculates the inertia of a control target even in a situation where constant acceleration cannot be performed, and uses the calculated accurate inertia for normal operation. To do.

  That is, in Patent Document 1, when the acceleration time is short (that is, when the constant speed is slow), the feedback does not converge and the inertia error does not converge, so that correct inertia cannot be obtained. For this reason, compared with the case where an accurate inertia is used for a control parameter, there exists a subject that control performance deteriorates and followable | trackability worsens. Accordingly, an object of the present invention is to provide an elevator control device that can obtain a more accurate inertia even when the acceleration time is short.

The elevator control device of the present invention is
In an elevator control device that controls an elevator as a control object,
A speed command for an electric motor provided in the elevator is input, and the model speed follows the speed command by using a preset inertia value for a model speed and a model torque assumed for the control target. A model calculation unit that is calculated and calculated to
A speed detector for detecting an actual speed which is an actual rotational speed of the electric motor;
A compensation computing unit for computing an error compensation torque using a speed deviation between the model speed calculated by the model computing unit and the actual speed detected by the speed detector and a plurality of predetermined parameters;
A torque command calculation unit that calculates a torque command from the model torque calculated by the model calculation unit and the error compensation torque calculated by the compensation calculation unit;
A torque controller that controls and drives the motor so that the generated torque of the motor matches the torque command calculated by the torque command calculation unit;
An error of the set inertia value with respect to an actual inertia value based on a speed deviation between the model speed calculated by the model calculation unit and the actual speed detected by the speed detector, and converges to a convergence value An inertia value prediction unit that calculates an intermediate value indicating an inertia error before performing, and predicts an inertia error after convergence that is the convergence value based on the calculated intermediate value;
And a parameter correction unit that corrects the preset inertia value used by the model calculation unit using the inertia error after convergence predicted by the inertia error prediction unit. .

The inertia error prediction unit
A first calculation unit that calculates the intermediate value based on an integral calculation of the speed deviation in a period in which the acceleration state and the constant acceleration state of the elevator car are continuous;
And a second calculation unit that predicts the inertia error after convergence based on the intermediate value calculated by the first calculation unit.

The second calculation unit includes:
By using inverse Laplace transform, a ratio equivalent value calculated by the first calculation unit for the inertia error value to be converged and corresponding to the ratio of the intermediate value is calculated, and based on the intermediate value and the ratio equivalent value Then, the inertia error after the convergence is predicted.

The elevator control device of the present invention is
In an elevator control device that controls an elevator as a control object,
A speed command for an electric motor provided in the elevator is input, and the model speed follows the speed command by using a preset inertia value for a model speed and a model torque assumed for the control target. A model calculation unit that is calculated and calculated to
A speed detector for detecting an actual speed which is an actual rotational speed of the electric motor;
A compensation computing unit for computing an error compensation torque using a speed deviation between the model speed calculated by the model computing unit and the actual speed detected by the speed detector and a plurality of predetermined parameters;
A torque command calculation unit that calculates a torque command from the model torque calculated by the model calculation unit and the error compensation torque calculated by the compensation calculation unit;
A torque controller that controls and drives the motor so that the generated torque of the motor matches the torque command calculated by the torque command calculation unit;
Based on the speed deviation between the model speed calculated by the model calculation unit and the actual speed detected by the speed detector and based on the speed deviation during the acceleration state of the elevator car, An inertia error prediction unit that predicts an inertia error that is an error of the set inertia value with respect to the inertia value and converges to a convergence value;
And a parameter correction unit that corrects the preset inertia value used by the model calculation unit using the inertia error after convergence predicted by the inertia error prediction unit. .

The inertia error prediction unit
By applying the final value theorem to the velocity deviation of the period of the pressurized accelerating state, characterized by predicting Inashi catcher error after convergence to convergence value.

The inertia error prediction unit
By applying inverse Laplace transform to the velocity deviation of the period of the pressurized accelerating state, characterized by predicting Inashi catcher error after convergence to convergence value.

  According to the present invention, an elevator control device having a good follow-up property that calculates an accurate inertia during a transient response before the acceleration of the car converges or in a situation where the car cannot perform a constant acceleration, and uses the calculated inertia. Can be provided.

BEST MODE FOR CARRYING OUT THE INVENTION

Embodiment 1 FIG.
The elevator control device 110 according to the first embodiment will be described with reference to FIGS. In the first embodiment, even during the transient response before the acceleration of the car converges, the convergence rate (E _S (t) described later) is calculated, so that more accurate inertia can be quickly calculated, and the followability can be improved. The present invention relates to an elevator control apparatus 110 that frequently operates an elevator car. A feature of the elevator control device 110 of the first embodiment is an inertia error prediction unit 80A. In particular, the second calculation unit 82a of the inertia error prediction unit 80A is characteristic. The second calculation unit 82a has a function of receiving an intermediate inertia error before convergence from the first calculation unit 81a and predicting the inertia error after convergence. In the first embodiment, “during transient response” or “transient state” means that the feedback is not converged not only during acceleration but also during constant acceleration.

  FIG. 1 is a block diagram showing the configuration of the elevator control apparatus 110 according to the first embodiment. FIG. 2 is a diagram illustrating a detailed configuration of the elevator control device 110 according to the first embodiment.

As shown in FIG. 1, the elevator control device 110 includes a speed command input unit 10, a parameter setting unit 20, a model calculation unit 30, a speed detector 40, a compensation calculation unit 50, a torque command calculation unit 60, a torque controller 70, an inertia An error prediction unit 80A and a parameter setting unit 90 are provided. The inertia error prediction unit 80A includes a first calculation unit 81a and a second calculation unit 82a. The torque controller 70 controls the power unit 95, and the speed detector 40 detects the actual speed ω _M of the power unit 95.

  FIG. 2 will be described. In FIG. 2, the parameter setting unit 20 shown in FIG. 1 is not shown.

In FIG. 2, a control target 200 includes a power unit 95, a torque controller 70 for controlling the torque of the power unit, a speed detector 40 for detecting the speed of the power unit, and a mechanical system 201 serving as a load. And disturbance torque τ _L 202 applied to the controlled object.
(1) The speed command input unit 10 inputs a speed command for a power unit (electric motor) provided in an elevator to be controlled.
(2) The parameter setting unit 20 sets parameters used for calculation based on an inertia value assumed in advance in the model calculation unit.
(3) Based on the assumed inertia value J _A , the model calculation unit 30 provides a torque q _A (which may be referred to as a model torque q _A ) necessary for the control target 200 to follow the speed command ω _ref , its torque q _a is) also) operation and outputs a case that the control target 200 to the speed envisaged omega _{a (model} speed omega _a when it is entered. That is, the model calculation unit 30 calculates the model speed ω _A and the model torque q _A that are assumed for the control target so that the model speed ω _A follows the speed command ω _ref .
(4) The speed detector 40 detects the actual speed that is the rotational speed of the power unit (electric motor).
(5) The compensation calculation unit 50 calculates the error compensation torque q _c based on the difference between the model speed ω _A and the actual speed ω _M. That is, the compensation calculation unit 50 multiplies the set velocity gain E between the assumed speed ω _A and the actual speed ω _M and the integral value thereof by the set proportional gain K _sp2 and integral gain K _si2 to obtain a compensation value. (Error compensation torque q _c ) is output.
(6) the torque command calculating section 60 calculates a torque command _{q r} from the model torque _{q A} and error compensation torque _{q c.} That is, the torque command calculator 60 inputs the torque q _A from the model calculation unit 52 receives the error compensation torque q _c from the compensation arithmetic unit 53 determines the command torque q _r to be input to the controlled object.
(7) The torque controller 70 drives the power unit 95 by controlling the generated torque of the power unit 95 (electric motor) so as to coincide with the torque command _qr .
(8) The first calculation unit 81a of the inertia error prediction unit 80A determines the assumed inertia J _A and the actual inertia from the integrated value of the deviation E between the assumed speed ω _A and the actual speed ω _M of the control target 200. and it outputs an error (.DELTA.J _M below) with J _M. The second calculation unit 82a receives the data before converging from the first calculation unit 81a, and calculates the convergence prediction value of the inertia error .DELTA.J _M.
(9) The parameter correction unit 90 corrects the assumed inertia J _A used by the model calculation unit 30 and the gains K _sp2 and K _si2 of the compensation calculation unit 50 based on the output of the second calculation unit 82a.

(Overview of operation)
An outline of the operation will be described with reference to FIG. First, the torque command _qr is input to the control target, and the torque of the electric motor is controlled by the torque controller 70 so as to match the input torque command _qr . Thus, the mechanical system comprising an electric motor and the load is driven, also the actual speed omega _M of the motor is detected by the speed detector 40 is output to the outside. That is, the transfer characteristic from the torque command q _r to the actual speed ω _M may be described as G (s).
(1) First, the parameter setting unit 20 sends parameters (J _A , K _SP1, etc.) used for calculation to the model calculation unit 30 based on the assumed inertia value J _A in advance. Set to 50.
(2) The speed command input unit 10 inputs a speed command ω _ref for the power unit 95 (electric motor) provided in the elevator to be controlled to the model calculation unit 30.
(3) When the speed command ω _ref is input from the speed command input unit 10, the model calculation unit 30 calculates the model speed ω _A and the model torque q _A that are assumed for the controlled object, and the model speed ω _A Calculation is performed so as to follow the speed command ω _ref , and model torque q _A and model speed ω _A are output.
(4) The speed detector 40 detects and outputs the actual speed ω _M of the power unit 95.
(5) The compensation calculation unit 50 receives the model speed ω _A from the model calculation unit 30 and the actual speed ω _M from the speed detector 40, and is based on the deviation E between the model speed ω _A and the actual speed ω _M. Te, it calculates the error compensation torque q _c, and outputs. Specifically, the proportional controller 51 outputs a signal obtained by multiplying the deviation E between the model speed ω _A and the actual speed ω _M by a preset proportional gain K _sp2 , and the integral controller 52 outputs the model speed. _A signal obtained by integrating the deviation E between ω _A and the actual speed ω _M by a preset integral gain K _si2 is output. The output of the proportional controller 51, the sum of the output of the integral controller 52 and the error compensation torque q _c. That is, PI (proportional integration) calculation is executed.
(6) The torque command calculation unit 60 inputs the model torque q _A from the model calculation unit 30, receives the error compensation torque q _c from the compensation calculation unit 50, and generates torque from the model torque q _A and the error compensation torque q _c. Command _qr is calculated and output. That is, the torque command calculation unit 60 inputs the sum of the model torque q _A and the error compensation torque q _c calculated by the model calculation unit 102 as a torque command q _r to the control target. The mechanical system of the controlled object 101 is driven by the torque command _qr .
(7) the torque controller 70 inputs the torque instruction qr from the torque command calculator 60, the generated torque of the power unit 95 drives the control to the power device 95 to match the torque command q _r.
(8) The first calculation unit 81a receives the model speed ω _A calculated by the model calculation unit 30, and also inputs the actual speed ω _M detected by the speed detector 40, and the model speed ω _A and the actual speed based on the speed deviation E velocity omega _M, calculates an intermediate value that indicates the inertia error .DELTA.J _M before converging to the convergence value a error of the set inertia value J _a to the actual inertia value J _M. The second calculation unit 82 predicts an inertia error after convergence, which is a convergence value, based on the calculated intermediate value. Detailed operations of the first calculation unit 81a and the second calculation unit 82a will be described later.
(9) The parameter correction unit uses the inertia error after convergence predicted by the second calculation unit 82a, a plurality of parameters including the set inertia value used by the model calculation unit 30, and a compensation calculation unit. The predetermined parameters used by 50 are modified.

(Processing by the first calculation unit 81a: transfer function from speed input to speed deviation)
Next, the operation of the first calculation unit 81a will be described. The first calculation unit 81a receives the actual speed ω _M from the speed detector 40, receives the model speed ω _A from the model calculation unit 30, and calculates using the actual speed ω _M and the model speed ω _A. In FIG. 2, the transfer function from the speed command ω _ref to be followed by the elevator to the assumed model speed ω _A and actual speed ω _M of the hoist (power unit 95) is expressed by the following equation (1). Show it. The assumed model speed ω _A is expressed by equation (1).

Further, the actual speed ω _M is expressed by Equation (2).

Here, when model inertia J _A (assumed inertia) and error ΔJ _M of actual inertia J _M are introduced, these relations can be expressed by the following equation (3).

_A speed deviation E between the model speed ω _A and the actual speed ω _M is expressed by the following equation (4).

(Inertia error identification method by the first calculation unit 81a)
When the input is a constant speed input (ω _ref = v [m / s]), the integral value of the speed deviation E is expressed by the following equation (5) from the final value theorem.

From equation (5), when the disturbance τ _L is a constant value K _L , the integral value of the speed deviation E converges to K _L / K _Si2 by “τ _L → K _L / s”. From this, the value of the disturbance τ _L can be identified by observing the speed deviation E during a constant speed. Then, when a constant acceleration input (ω _ref = αt [m / s ² ]) is added, the integral of the steady deviation is expressed by the following equation (6) from the final value theorem.

According to the equation (6), when the disturbance τ _L is a constant value K _L , the final value of the integral of the speed deviation E converges to a constant value, and the value becomes the following equation (B).

The disturbance value τ _L can be identified in the middle of the equation (5), and the other parameters (integration gain K _si2 , command speed α) are known. As described above, the first calculation unit 81a observes the model speed ω _A of the model calculation unit 30 and the speed deviation E of the actual speed ω _M detected by the speed detector 40 during acceleration of the elevator car, and integrates the integration. The inertia error ΔJ _M can be identified by calculating the value. Then, the value of the constant disturbance τ _L can be fixed by observing the speed deviation E during the constant speed.

(Prediction method of convergence value of inertia error by second calculation unit 82a)
Up to this point, it has been described that the inertia error ΔJ _M calculated by the first calculation unit 81a finally converges to a certain value. Next, a method for predicting the convergence value of inertia from the transient response before convergence by the second arithmetic unit 82a will be described.

If ω _ref is a constant acceleration input (additional acceleration such that the acceleration at t = t ₁ is α), the integral value of the speed deviation E is expressed by the following equation (7).

If each coefficient of the above equation (7) is b _{1 to} b ₅ , when the disturbance τ _L is a constant value, the time response of the integral value of the speed deviation E is obtained by inverse Laplace transform of equation (7): (8).

In order to use it in the formula described later, the right side of formula (8) is set to f (t). In Expression (8), s ₁ , s ₂ , and s ₃ are the roots of the transfer function from the speed command input ω _ref to the speed deviation E. When calculating this root, the inertia J _M of the actual control target is required, but there is no significant difference in the convergence rate even when the preset inertia J _A is used. Therefore, it is possible calculated using J _A in place of J _M. Here, the Laplace transform from constant acceleration to constant acceleration input used in the elevator is given by the following equation (9).

  As described above, the time response of integration of the speed deviation E when a constant acceleration to a constant acceleration input is applied can be expressed by the following equation (10).

From the equation (10), it can be seen that the integrated value of the speed deviation E converges with time, and the value is b ₄ t ₁ . Of course, b ₄ t ₁ in equation (10) is equal to the convergence value in equation (6) (the following equation (C)) if calculated.

As described above, it is possible to calculate the transient response of inertia error at an arbitrary time when adding "acceleration to acceleration input" of the elevator, so it is possible to converge by observing the integrated value of the speed deviation before convergence. It can be seen that it is possible to determine the value of the subsequent inertia error. Specifically Lee, second arithmetic unit 82a, the following equation (11), calculates the inertia _{J M} of the elevator (prediction). The integral value of the speed deviation calculated at the time of “acceleration to constant acceleration” calculated by the first calculation unit 81a is Es (t), and the disturbance value measured during the constant speed calculated by the first calculation unit 81a is τ. Assuming _L , the actual inertia J _M is given by the following equation (11).

With reference to FIG. 3, operations of the first calculation unit 81a and the second calculation unit 82a will be described. FIG. 3A is a diagram illustrating a convergence state of the inertia error. In FIG. 3A, the horizontal axis indicates time, and the vertical axis indicates inertia error. FIG. 3B shows a velocity diagram. In FIG.3 (b), a horizontal axis is time and a vertical axis | shaft is the speed of an elevator. As shown in FIG. 3A, the inertia error converges to a certain value as time elapses, but the first calculation unit 81a calculates an intermediate inertia error ΔJ _M (before convergence) before convergence. In this case, the intermediate inertia error ΔJ _M (before convergence) before convergence is the integral value E _S (t) of the speed deviation during acceleration to constant acceleration. The first calculator 81a calculates “inertia error ΔJ _M (before convergence) = integral value E _S (t)” in FIG. The second calculation unit 82a calculates an f corresponding to the ratio of the inertia error to converge ".DELTA.J M _(after convergence)" intermediate inertia error ".DELTA.J M _{(pre-convergent)"} to (s) (ratio equivalent value) . Here, f (s) is an expression on the right side of Expression (10). By using the result of the equation (10), the second arithmetic unit 82a, as shown in the equation (11), “the integral value E _{S of the} speed deviation corresponding to the intermediate value of the intermediate inertia error before convergence” the t) ", the intermediate value (E S _(t)) the inertia error to converge .DELTA.J M _(by dividing by the ratio f (s) for convergence after), the inertia error .DELTA.J M _(after convergence the convergence value) Is calculated (predicted).

As described above, the second arithmetic unit 82a uses inverse Laplace transform to obtain a ratio corresponding to the ratio of the intermediate value to the value of the inertia error ΔJ _M (after convergence) to be converged as shown in Expression (10). The value f (s) is calculated according to a predetermined calculation procedure (formula (10)), and the post-convergence value is calculated based on the intermediate value ΔJ _M (before convergence) and the ratio equivalent value f (s) according to formula (11). Inertia error ΔJ _M (after convergence) is calculated (predicted).

(Procedure for calculating inertia of control target)
With reference to FIG. 4, the procedure for calculating the inertia of the controlled object will be described. FIG. 4 is a graph showing the speed command value 4. The horizontal axis is time t, and the vertical axis is speed V. As shown in FIG. 3, the speed command value has a region 1 that is a period of acceleration, a region 2 that is a constant acceleration period, and a region 3 that is a constant speed period.
(1) When the car is operated according to the speed command shown in FIG. 4, the inertia to be controlled can be obtained from the calculation results by the first calculation unit 81a and the second calculation unit 82a. That is, first, with the parameters set in advance by the parameter setting unit 20, the “car” is caused to travel at the time and speed as shown in FIG. At this time, the inertia to be controlled can be obtained from the calculation results of the first calculation unit 81a and the second calculation unit 82a.
(2) The second calculation unit 82a calculates an inertia error including a disturbance from the integral value of the speed deviation received from the first calculation unit 81a in "constant jerk region 1 to constant acceleration region 2".
(3) The first calculation unit 81a calculates a disturbance equivalent amount in the region 3 during constant traveling. Thereafter, the inertia value including the disturbance is excluded from the disturbance equivalent, and the inertia value to be controlled is obtained.

  As described above, the elevator control apparatus 110 according to the first embodiment includes the inertia error prediction unit 80A that predicts the converged inertia error after the convergence from the intermediate inertia error. An accurate inertia error can be calculated even in a transient state in which is not satisfied. Thereby, the elevator control apparatus 110 with good followability can be provided.

As described above, the elevator control device 110 according to the first embodiment performs an intermediate inertia error (corresponding to an inertia error) from the first calculation unit 81a that calculates an intermediate inertia error before convergence based on the integral calculation of the speed deviation. E _s (t)) and the second arithmetic unit 82a for predicting the inertia error after convergence is provided, so that the accurate inertia error can be obtained even in a transient state where the formula (A) of the background art does not hold. It can be calculated. Thereby, the elevator control apparatus 110 with good followability can be provided.

Embodiment 2. FIG.
The elevator control device 120 according to the second embodiment will be described with reference to FIGS. 5 and 6. In contrast to the elevator control device 110 of the first embodiment, the elevator control device 120 of the second embodiment has an inertia error prediction unit 80B having only one first calculation unit 81b, and the first calculation unit 81b In the acceleration region 1 (FIG. 4), the difference is that the inertia error is predicted. FIG. 5 is a block diagram illustrating a configuration of the elevator control device 120, and corresponds to FIG. FIG. 5 differs from FIG. 1 in that the inertia error prediction unit 80B includes only the first calculation unit 81b. FIG. 6 is a diagram showing a detailed configuration of the elevator control device 120, and corresponds to FIG. 6 differs from FIG. 2 in that the inertia error prediction unit 80B includes only the first calculation unit 81b. The first calculation unit 81b calculates an error between the assumed inertia J _A and the actual inertia J _M based on the model speed ω _A and the actual speed ω _M, and calculates the inertia identification value during the constant acceleration period. End the calculation.

(Transfer function from input of speed command ω _ref to speed deviation E)
The operation of the first calculation unit 81b will be described. The first calculation unit 81b receives the actual speed ω _M from the speed detector 40 and the model speed ω _A from the model calculation unit 30 to calculate an inertia error. In FIG. 6, the transfer function from the speed command ω _ref to be followed by the elevator to the assumed model speed ω _A and actual speed ω _M of the hoist (power unit 95) is as follows. That is, the assumed speed ω _A is the same as the formula (1) in the first embodiment. The actual speed ω _M is the same as the expression (2) in the first embodiment. In addition, when an error ΔJ _M between the model inertia J _A and the actual inertia J _M is introduced, the relational expression between them is the same as the expression (3) in the first embodiment. Further, the speed deviation E is the same as the expression (4) in the first embodiment.

  Next, the above equation (4) becomes the following equation (21) from the final value theorem.

According to equation (21), if the disturbance τ _L is a constant value, the speed deviation converges to a certain value, and the value becomes the following equation (22).

From this equation (22), the inertia error ΔJ _M can be identified by observing the speed deviation during constant acceleration.

As described above, the inertia error prediction unit 80B, by applying the final value theorem to the velocity deviation E of the period of the pressurized acceleration state, to predict Inashi catcher error after convergence to convergence value.

(Inertia calculation procedure for controlled object)
Next, a procedure for calculating the inertia to be controlled in the second embodiment will be described. The inertia to be controlled is first calculated as an inertia error in the constant acceleration region 1 when the car is run at the speed and time as shown in FIG. 4 (speed command diagram) with the parameters set in advance by the parameter setting unit. The inertia value to be controlled is obtained from the speed deviation received by the unit. At this time, even if the vehicle cannot actually travel after the constant acceleration region 2, the inertia error calculation unit has already completed the calculation and has identified the actual inertia value. Inertia identification is possible even in such a case. This “control target inertia calculation procedure” is the same as in the third embodiment described below.

  As described above, the elevator control device 120 according to the second embodiment includes the first calculation unit 81b that identifies the inertia value in the acceleration acceleration state, and thus can calculate an accurate inertia error. Thereby, the elevator control apparatus 120 with good followability can be provided.

Embodiment 3 FIG.
The elevator control device 130 according to the third embodiment will be described with reference to FIGS. In the elevator control device 120 of the second embodiment, it has been described that the inertia error in the acceleration / acceleration region 1 can be identified by using the final value of the speed deviation E. However, there may be a case where the inertia error does not converge sufficiently, for example, the vehicle stops in the middle of traveling. In this case, the second operation unit 82c that predicts the convergence value of the inertia error is separately provided to enable inertia identification.

  FIG. 7 is a block diagram showing the configuration of the elevator control device 130. The configuration is the same as that in FIG. 1, but the elevator control device 110 and the elevator control device 130 have a first calculation unit 81a and a second calculation unit 82a. Since the processing contents of the first calculation unit 81c and the second calculation unit 82c are different, they are shown separately from FIG. FIG. 8 corresponds to FIG. 2, but is shown separately from FIG. 2 for the same reason as FIG.

  FIG. 7 is a configuration in which FIG. 8 is obtained by adding a second arithmetic unit to the elevator control device 120 of FIGS. 5 and 6.

This will be described with reference to FIG. 8, the first operation unit 81c, from the speed deviation E between the model velocity omega _A and actual velocity omega _M of the control target, and outputs the difference .DELTA.J _M real inertia J _M and was assumed inertia J _A. Further, the second calculation unit 82c receives an output before convergence from the first calculation unit 81c, and calculates a convergence predicted value of inertia error. The parameter setting unit 90 corrects the assumed inertia J _A of the model calculation unit 30 and the gain of the compensation calculation unit 50 based on the output of the second calculation unit 82c.

(Transient response of speed deviation)
The operation will be described below. From the equation (4) shown in the first embodiment, the transient response of the speed deviation E at the time of constant jerk input (jerk = α / t1 [m / s ^ 3]) is expressed by the following equation (31): become that way.

However, s _{1 to} s ₃ are the poles of the control system.
The following equation (32) shows s ₁ to s ₃ .

  When the equation (31) is subjected to inverse Laplace transform to be converted into a time domain equation, the following equation (33) is obtained.

In Equation (33), a _{1 to} a ₄ and b _{1 to} b ₂ are coefficients of Equation (31), and u (t) is a unit step function.

In order to obtain s _{1 to} s ₃ , an actual inertia value J _M is required. However, since the time for obtaining the convergence rate does not appear significant difference also with the inertia value J _A contemplated, can calculate the convergence rate of equation (33) using a J _A in place of J _M It is. Further, a _{1 to} a ₄ are known, and if the influence of the disturbance _TL is a constant value, it converges to 0 with almost the same convergence rate. Therefore, the time response of the speed deviation E is expressed using Equation (33). It is possible to calculate the convergence rate ζ.
The convergence value is the following equation (34).

  From this, if the speed deviation at a certain time is E (t) and the convergence rate is ζ (t), the inertia error can be calculated by the following equation (35).

As described above, the inertia error prediction unit 80C by applying the inverse Laplace transform to the velocity deviation of the period of the pressurized acceleration state, to predict Inashi catcher error after convergence.

FIG. 2 is a block diagram showing a configuration of an elevator control device 110 in the first embodiment. The figure which shows the detailed structure of the elevator control apparatus 110 in Embodiment 1. FIG. FIG. 6 is a diagram illustrating operations of the first calculation unit 81a and the second calculation unit 82a in the first embodiment. The figure which shows the speed command value of the elevator in Embodiment 1. FIG. FIG. 4 is a block diagram showing a configuration of an elevator control device 120 in a second embodiment. The figure which shows the detailed structure of the elevator control apparatus 120 in Embodiment 2. FIG. FIG. 4 is a block diagram showing a configuration of an elevator control device 130 in a third embodiment. The figure which shows the detailed structure of the elevator control apparatus 130 in Embodiment 3. FIG. The figure which shows a prior art.

Explanation of symbols

E Speed deviation, ω _M actual speed, ω _A model speed, τ _L disturbance torque, q _A model torque, q _c error compensation torque, q _r torque command, 1 acceleration, 2 acceleration, 3 constant speed, 4 speed command value 10, speed command input unit, 20 parameter setting unit, 30 model calculation unit, 40 speed detector, 50 compensation calculation unit, 60 torque command calculation unit, 70 torque controller, 80 inertia error prediction unit 80, 81 first calculation unit 82, second calculation unit, 90 parameter correction unit, 95 power unit, 110, 120, 130 elevator control device, 200 controlled object, 301 hoisting machine, 302 speed detector, 303 actual speed, 310 commercial power supply, 320 converter, 330 inverter, 340 controller, 350 cage, 360 counterweight.

Claims (6)

In an elevator control device that controls an elevator as a control object,
A speed command for an electric motor provided in the elevator is input, and the model speed follows the speed command by using a preset inertia value for a model speed and a model torque assumed for the control target. A model calculation unit that is calculated and calculated to
A speed detector for detecting an actual speed which is an actual rotational speed of the electric motor;
A compensation computing unit for computing an error compensation torque using a speed deviation between the model speed calculated by the model computing unit and the actual speed detected by the speed detector and a plurality of predetermined parameters;
A torque command calculation unit that calculates a torque command from the model torque calculated by the model calculation unit and the error compensation torque calculated by the compensation calculation unit;
A torque controller that controls and drives the motor so that the generated torque of the motor matches the torque command calculated by the torque command calculation unit;
An error of the set inertia value with respect to an actual inertia value based on a speed deviation between the model speed calculated by the model calculation unit and the actual speed detected by the speed detector, and converges to a convergence value An inertia value prediction unit that calculates an intermediate value indicating an inertia error before performing, and predicts an inertia error after convergence that is the convergence value based on the calculated intermediate value;
And a parameter correction unit that corrects the preset inertia value used by the model calculation unit using the inertia error after convergence predicted by the inertia error prediction unit. Elevator control device. The inertia error prediction unit
A first calculation unit that calculates the intermediate value based on an integral calculation of the speed deviation in a period in which the acceleration state and the constant acceleration state of the elevator car are continuous;
The elevator control device according to claim 1, further comprising: a second calculation unit that predicts the inertia error after the convergence based on the intermediate value calculated by the first calculation unit. The second calculation unit includes:
By using inverse Laplace transform, a ratio equivalent value calculated by the first calculation unit for the inertia error value to be converged and corresponding to the ratio of the intermediate value is calculated, and based on the intermediate value and the ratio equivalent value The elevator control apparatus according to claim 2, wherein the inertia error after the convergence is predicted. In an elevator control device that controls an elevator as a control object,
A speed command for an electric motor provided in the elevator is input, and the model speed follows the speed command by using a preset inertia value for a model speed and a model torque assumed for the control target. A model calculation unit that is calculated and calculated to
A speed detector for detecting an actual speed which is an actual rotational speed of the electric motor;
A compensation computing unit for computing an error compensation torque using a speed deviation between the model speed calculated by the model computing unit and the actual speed detected by the speed detector and a plurality of predetermined parameters;
A torque command calculation unit that calculates a torque command from the model torque calculated by the model calculation unit and the error compensation torque calculated by the compensation calculation unit;
A torque controller that controls and drives the motor so that the generated torque of the motor matches the torque command calculated by the torque command calculation unit;
Based on the speed deviation between the model speed calculated by the model calculation unit and the actual speed detected by the speed detector and based on the speed deviation during the acceleration state of the elevator car, the inertia error prediction unit which predicts a Inashi catcher error after convergence into convergent value a error of the set inertia value for the inertia value,
And a parameter correction unit that corrects the preset inertia value used by the model calculation unit using the inertia error after convergence predicted by the inertia error prediction unit. Elevator control device. The inertia error prediction unit
By applying the final value theorem to the velocity deviation of the period of the pressurization acceleration state, the elevator control apparatus according to claim 4, wherein the predicting Inashi catcher error after convergence to convergence value. The inertia error prediction unit
By applying inverse Laplace transform to the velocity deviation of the period of the pressurization acceleration state, the elevator control apparatus according to claim 4, wherein the predicting Inashi catcher error after convergence to convergence value.

Images