The efficiency of the inference system knowledge

IJRET: International Journal of Research in Engineering and Technology eISSN: 2319-1163 | pISSN: 2321-7308
__________________________________________________________________________________________
Volume: 02 Issue: 07 | Jul-2013, Available @ http://www.ijret.org 138
THE EFFICIENCY OF THE INFERENCE SYSTEM KNOWLEDGE
STRATEGY FOR THE POSITION CONTROL OF A ROBOT
MANIPULATOR WITH TWO DEGREE OF FREEDOM
Fatima Zahra Baghli1
, Larbi El bakkali2
, Yassine Lakhal3
, Abdelfatah Nasri4
, Brahim Gasbaoui5
2, 3
Team Modeling and Simulation of Mechanical Systems Laboratory, Abdelmalek Essaadi, Faculty of Sciences, BP.2121,
M’hannech, 93002, Tetouan, Morocco,baghli.fatimazahra@gmail.com, larbi_elbakkali_20@hotmail.com
4, 5
Bechar University, B.P 417 Bechar, 08000, Algeria,nasriab1978@yahoo.fr, z.gasbaoui@yahoo.com
1
baghli.fatimazahra@gmail.com
Abstract
The robot manipulator is a mechanical system multi-articulated, in which each articulation is driven individually by an electric
actuator is the most robot used in industry, this system need an efficient control strategy.
In this present work we present a new approach for a robot manipulator with two degrees of freedom based on the Fuzzy Logic
Controller (FLC) to ensure the position robot control strategy, the proposed control scheme is based on nonlinear dynamic model
derived using Lagrange-Euler formulation.
Our robot manipulator fuzzy inference system control’s simulated in Matlab Simulink environment, the results obtained present the
efficiency and the robustness of the proposed control with good performances compared with the classical PID.
Keywords: Robot manipulator, Fuzzy Logic, PID.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------***-----------------------------------------------------------------------
1. INTRODUCTION
Research on the dynamic modeling and control of the arms
manipulators has received increased attention since the last
years due to their advantages.
A robot manipulator is a high-speed process that is highly
nonlinear, dynamically coupled and often it is not adequate to
use linear servo control, if accurate performance in high
bandwidth operations is desired. Many efforts have been made
in developing control scheme to achieve the precise tracking
control of robot manipulators [1]-[2]-[3].
Knowledge based control, expert control and intelligent
control are somewhat synonymous and fuzzy control is a
particular type of intelligent control. Fuzzy logic control has a
great potential since it is able to compensate for the un1certain
nonlinear dynamics using the programming capability of
human control behavior. The main features of fuzzy control is
that a control knowledge base is available within the controller
and control actions are generated by applying existing
conditions or data to the knowledge base, making us of
inference mechanism[4]-[2]. Also, the knowledge base and
inference mechanism can handle no crisp, incomplete
information; the knowledge itself will improve and evolve
through learning and past experience [2].
Fuzzy logic control does not require a conventional model of
the process, whereas most conventional techniques require
either an analytical model or an experimental model. Fuzzy
logic control is particularly suitable for complex and ill-
defined process in which analytical modeling is difficult due
to the fact that the process is not completely known and
experimental model identification is not feasible because the
required inputs and output of the process may not be
measurable [4].
In this work after the system modeling, simulation and control
robot manipulator using two articulations for motion using
MatLab/Simulink software were carried, when the proposed
Fuzzy Logic controlled is used to improve the articulation
robot stability. Two types of control PID and FLC were
studied and analysed and comparative studies were made.
The reminder paper was structured as follow : the robot
modeling is presented in second part of this paper , in the
third part of this paper the Fuzzy logic is detailed , the results
discussion are presented in the last part of this paper and
finally conclusion was given .

__________________________________________________________________________________________
Nomenclatures
, ,q q q& &&
( )M q
Position, speed and acceleration of each articulations
The inertial matrix ,rad, rad/s, rad/s2
( , )C q q&
( )G q
ia
im
g
pik
Matrix of all Coriolis and Centrifugal forces
Vector of all gravitational forces
Length for link i (i=1,2), m
Mass for link i (i=1,2), Kg
Gravity (g = 9.81m/s2
)
The proportional term
dik
iik
*
iq
iq
( )e t
( )de t
*
u
( )Au z
ek
dek
uk
U
The derivative term
The integral term
The input reference signal
The output signal
Error position, rad
Velocity error, rad/s
The crisp output
The aggregated output membership function
Gain of the error
Gain of the speed error
Gain of the speed error difference
Torque current variety output control
Greek Symbols
iε
iτ
The main position errors of each articulation
The torque applied on actuators for each articulations,
Nm
Abbreviations
NB
NM
NS
PB
PM
PS
ZE
PID
FL
C
Negative Big
Negative Medium
Negative Small
Positive Big
Positive Medium
Positive Small
Zero
Proportional Integral Derivative
Fuzzy Logic Controller
2. ROBOT DYNAMIC MODELLING
The dynamical equation of manipulator robot of n solids
articulated between us is given by the following Lagrange
method [13]:
( ) ( , ) ( )M q q C q q G qτ = + +&& & (1)
Where:
τ is array of ( 1)n× of all efforts applied on actuators,
( )M q is the inertial matrix of ( )n n× , ( , )C q q& present the
array of ( 1)n× of all Coriolis and centrifugal forces, ( )G q
is the array of ( 1)n× of all gravitational references and
, ,q q q& && are : position, speed and acceleration of each
articulations , as it shown on figure.1.
In this figure (Fig1) a schema of a two degree of freedom of
arm manipulator is given.
Figure.1. Structure of manipulator robot of two degree of
freedom
The robot dynamics is defined as:
11 12
21 22
( )
M M
M q
M M
 
= 
 
(2)
11
21
( , )
C
C q q
C
 
=  
 
& (3)
11
21
( )
G
G q
G
 
=  
 
(4)
1a
2q
1q
2a
0y
0x
1x
1y
g

__________________________________________________________________________________________
1
2
τ
τ
τ
 
=  
 
(5)
With:
2 2
11 1 2 1 2 2 2 1 2 2
2
12 2 2 2 1 2 2
2
21 2 2 2 1 2 2
2
22 2 2
( ) 2M m m a m a m a a c
M m a m a a c
M m a m a a c
M m a
= + + +
= +
= +
= (2.1)
2
11 2 1 2 1 2 1 2
2
21 2 1 2 1 2
(2 )C m a a q q q s
C m a a q s
= − +
=
& & &
& (3.1)
11 1 2 1 1 2 2 12
21 2 2 12
( )G m m ga c m ga c
G m ga c
= + +
= (4.1)
And
1 1cos( )c q= , 2 2cos( )c q=
1 1sin( )s q= 2 2sin( )s q= 12 1 2cos( )c q q= +
12 1 2sin( )s q q= +
The table 1 presents the used robot manipulator simulation
parameters
Table-1: The used Robot Parameters
Phyical system parameter Value
Mass of link 1 (m1) 0.432 Kg
Mass of link 2 (m2) 0.432 Kg
Lenght of link 1 (a1) 1.5 m
Lenght of link 2 (a2) 1.2 m
3. CONTROL LAW USED
3.1. Classical PID Controller
Generally, a classical PID controller of each articulation
controlled independently is given with the main following
formula [6, 7, 8, 10]:
The classical PID control law of first articulation is given by:
1
1 1 1 1 1
1
( ) 1
( ) ( ) ( )p d
i
d t
t K t K t dt
dt K
ε
τ ε ε= + + ∫ (6)
When the classical PID control law of second articulation is
given by:
2
2 2 2 2 2
2
( ) 1
( ) ( ) ( )p d
i
d t
t K t K t dt
dt K
ε
τ ε ε= + + ∫ (7)
Where:
*
( 1,2)i i iq q iε = − = is the main position errors of
each articulation controlled independently,
*
iq
is the input
reference signal and the terms piK
, iiK and diK define:
* The proportional term: providing an overall control action
proportional to the error signal through the all pass gain factor
[8, 9, 10].
* The integral term: reducing steady state errors through low
frequency compensation by an integrator.
* The derivative term: improving transient response through
high frequency compensation by a differentiator.
So, the general equation of the manipulator arm by
introducing parameters PID controller would be:
[ ]
*
1 1 1 1 1 1 11 1
*
2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
( ) ( )
( ) ( , ) ( )
( ) ( )
p i d
p i d
K q q K q dt Kq
M q C q q G q
q K q q K q dt K
ε ε
ε ε
−
 − + ∫ − 
= − − +  
− + ∫ −    
&&&
&
&& &
(8)
The figure.2 shows the structure of arm manipulator robot
classical PID Control.
3.2. Fuzzy Logic Position Control Strategy
The principal design elements in a general fuzzy logic control
system shown in Figure. 3 are as follows: Fuzzification,
Control rule base establishment and Deffuzification [4].
The figure.3 shows the Fuzzy logic controller structure

__________________________________________________________________________________________
Fig-2: Arm manipulator robot classical PID Control
Fig-3: Fuzzy logic controller structure
Where: FUZZIFICA is the Fuzzification process and
DEFFUZIFF is the Deffuzification process.
This fuzzy controller is to be designed to automate how a
human expert who is successful at this task would control the
system. First, the expert tells us (the designers of the fuzzy
controller) what information she or he will use as inputs to the
decision-making process.
For the robot arm manipulator we will use
*
( ) ( 1,2)i ie k q q i= − = (9)
( ) ( ) ( )
t
keke
ke
∆
−−
=
1 (10)
Where t∆ is sample cycle, iq is the output signal and
*
iq is
the input reference position, (9) and (10) determine the input
variables on which to base decisions. Certainly, there are
many other choices [4] (e.g., the integral of the error e could
also be used) but this choice makes good intuitive sense.
Clearly, Output variable is also determined by fuzzy logic
speed regulator. Because of no particular theory in designing a
best rule-base on terms, fuzzy inference based on rule base is
artificial from the designer's experiences and experts'
knowledge. More terms, and more rules will result in more
complicated fuzzy inference.
3.2.1 Fuzzy Inference System
The fuzzy inference system has been considered the min-max
method (Mamdani), where the implication has been assumed
to min and the aggregation has been considered to max. In
addition, the Deffuzification method has been considered to
the centroid method.
3.2.2 Input and Output Variables
The position control of the robot arm manipulator requires
two FLC controllers (FLC1 applied to the first joint and FLC2
applied to the second joint). Where two inputs and one output
have been considered for the FLC1, same thing for FLC2
The two inputs are
*
1q (reference position),
*
1q&
(angular speed)
for the first controller and
*
2q ,
*
2q&
for the second controller. The
output is 1( )tτ (torque) for FLC1 and 2 ( )tτ for FLC2.
The fiigur.4 shows the structure of control.
A r m
M a n i p u la t o r
1( )tτ
2 ( )tτ
*
2q
*
1q 1q
2qPID2
PID1
1 ( )tε
2 ( )tε
dt
d
dek
ek
e e
∆
e
∆en
en
Inference
Mechanism's
Rule Basis
nu∆
uk ∫
u∆u
D
E
F
F
U
Z
I
F
F
F
U
Z
Z
I
F
I
C
A

__________________________________________________________________________________________
3.2.3 Membership Function
In the proposed fuzzy logic control (FLC1or FLC2), a five-
term set {negative big (NB), negative small (NS), zero (ZE),
positive small
Fig-4: Arm manipulator robot Fuzzy logic control structure
(PS), positive big (PB) is applied to defining input and output
linguistic variable.
This present fuzzy logic control is showed in Fig. 5. In this
figure, ke, kde, and ku are gains of the speed error e, speed
error difference and torque current variety output control U
here U means the torque estimed.
A fuzzy set can convert fuzzy input-out term into quantitative
description, which is called fuzzification.
Meanwhile, membership function and its discretization are
first. to be qualified. The corresponding quantitative input
field is defined as {-4, -2, 0, 2, 4} and {-4, -2, 0, 2, 4} as it
shown in figures 5, 6.
-4 -2 0 2 4
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
Position error [err]
Degreeofmembership
NS Z PSNB PB
Fig-5: Position error membership functions
-4 -2 0 2 4
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
Velocity error [derr]
Degreeofmembership NS Z PSNB PB
Fig-6: Velocity error membership functions
And the output field is selected as {-4, -2, 0, 2, 4}. The
proposed membership function is figured as Fig. 7.
-4 -2 0 2 4
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
Output contol [u]
Degreeofmembership
NS Z PSNB PB
Fig-7: Output control membership functions
A r m
M a n i p u la t o r
1( )tτ
2 ( )tτ
*
2q
*
1q 1q
2qFLC2
FLC1

__________________________________________________________________________________________
3.2.4 Fuzzy Rule- Base
Building fuzzy logic rule is the key step in the improvement of
system performance, which is a set of Statements as {IF . . . ,
THEN . . .}. For instance, IF input1 is NB and input2 is NB,
THEN output is PB. These rules can be produced by rule
base. By off-line calculation and regulation, this fuzzy logic
inference rules is showed in the Table 1. However, one can
easily design a good fuzzy logic by MATLAB tools.
Table.1. Fuzzy inference rules
)(tu
)(te
NB NS Z PS PB
( )de t
NB NB NB NS NS Z
NS NB NS NS Z PS
Z NS NS Z PS PS
PS NS Z PS PS PB
PB Z PS PS PB PB
Where: e (t) and de (t) are the position error and the velocity
error variation respectively.
Surface plot depicted in Figure.8 shows the relationship
between error [err] and Derivative of Error [deer] on the input
side, and controller output [u] on the output side. The plot
results from a rule base with Twenty five rules and the surface
is more or less bumpy. The horizontal plateaus are due to flat
peaks in the input sets. The plateau around the origin implies a
low sensitivity towards changes in either Error or Derivative
of error near the reference. This is an advantage if the noise
sensitivity must be low when the process is near the reference.
-4
-2
0
2
4
-4
-2
0
2
4
-4
-2
0
2
4
[err][derr]
[u]
Fig-8: Control surface
3.2.5 Deffuzification
The Deffuzification is required to transform fuzzy control
signal into exact control output. The weighted centroid method
is applied to deffuzzify the fuzzy control signal. This method
can be expressed as:
*
( ).
( )
A
z
A
z
u z zdz
u
u z dz
=
∫
∫
(11)
Where,
( )Au z is the aggregated output membership function
and
*
u is the crisp output.
4. SIMULATION
SISO control based on classical PID model and intelligent
control based on FLC model were tested to sinus response
trajectory. This simulation applied to two degrees of freedom
robot arm was implemented in Matlab/Simulink. Trajectory
performance and position error are compared in these
controllers.
• The trajectory performances:
Figures (9, 10, 11, and 12) are show tracking performance for
first and second arm (link) with PID and FLC for sinus
trajectories.
By comparing sinus trajectory with PID and FLC:
For the first link (joint) controlled by PID, the output does not
coincide with the reference (Fig.9) but by the FLC they
coincident as shown in (Fig.10), the overshoot PID’s higher
than FLC1
0 2 4 6 8 10
-2
-1.5
-1
-0.5
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
Time [sec]
Input/Outputresponse
PID 1- First Link
ref
Output
Fig-9: PID (First link trajectory)

__________________________________________________________________________________________
0 2 4 6 8 10
-1.5
-1
-0.5
0
0.5
1
1.5
Time[sec]
FLC1-First Link
ref
Output
Fig-10: FLC (First link trajectory)
For the second link controlled by PID, the output does not
attaint the reference signal (Fig.11) but by the FLC they
coincident as shown in (Fig.12).
0 2 4 6 8 10
-2
-1.5
-1
-0.5
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
Time [sec]
PID2-Second Link
Output
ref
Fig-11: PID –Second link trajectory
0 2 4 6 8 10
-1.5
-1
-0.5
0
0.5
1
1.5
Time [sec]
FLC2- Second Link
data1
Output
Fig-12: FLC (Second link trajectory)
-data1: ref
Error computation compare :
Figures (13, 14, 15, and 16) are shown error performance, by
comparing position error for the first and second link. The
FLC Control ensure the robot manipulator’s stability by
maintaining the error position equal to zero ( 1 1 0ε ε= =
) so
PID (i)’s error position is respectively higher than FLC (i)
where (i=1, 2).
0 2 4 6 8 10
-1
-0.5
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
Time [sec]
Position1error[rad]
PID 1- Position error of joint 1
Position 1 error
Fig-13: PID 1 for the first link position error
0 2 4 6 8 10
-0.5
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
Time [sec]
Position1error[rad]
FLC1-Position erroe of joint 1
Position 1 error
Figure.14. FLC 1 for the first link position error
0 2 4 6 8 10
-0.6
-0.4
-0.2
0
0.2
0.4
Time [sec]
Position2error[rad]
PID2- Position error of joint 2
Position 2 error
Figure.15. PID 2 for the second link position error

__________________________________________________________________________________________
0 2 4 6 8 10
-0.6
-0.5
-0.4
-0.3
-0.2
-0.1
0
0.1
Time [sec]
Position2error[rad]
FLC2- Position error of joint 2
Position 2 error
Fig-16: FLC 2 for the first link position error
We can summaries all the obtained results in the table 2:
Table-3: PID and FLC Results
Controller PID1 PID2 FLC 1 FLC2
Links Link1 Link2 Link1 Link2
Position
error[rad] 0.445 0.159 0.003 0.001
overshoot [%] 5% - 0% 0%
Torque [Nm] 185.9 1034 117.1 288.2
Rise time [s] 0 0 0 0
CONCLUSIONS
In this present work an arm manipulator robot using two
degree of freedom was controlled using two types of controls
strategies , SISO control based on classical PID model and
intelligent control based on Fuzzy logic (FLC) , this last one
present maximum control structure of our control model and
give more and more efficiency for the robot model with more
position stability and good dynamical performances with no
overshoot so industrials would take into account the
efficiency of the developing control model for the futures
two freedom robot design considerations
REFERENCES
[1]. H.Asada & J.J.Slotine, “Robot analysis and Control”, New
york:Wiley, 1986.
[2]. P.Sumathi,”Precise tracking control of robot manipulator
using fuzzy logic”, DARH2005 conference, session4.1
[3]. F.L. Lewis,C.T. Abdallah, and D.M. Dawson, “Control of
Robot manipulators”, New York: Macmillan, 1993.
[4]. M.Kevin, Passino and Stephan yurkovich,” Fuzzy logic”,
Addison Wesley longman 1998
[5]. Atef A.ata, “Optimal trajectory planning of manipulator:
review”, Journal of Engineering Science and Technology, 2(1)
2007,32-54.
[6]. Ang K.H., Chang G., Yun Li, PID control system analysis,
design and Technology, IEEE Transaction on Control System
Technology, 2005, 13(4), p. 559-577.
[7]. Astrom K.J., Hagglund T., PID controllers: theory, design,
and tuning, 2nd ed.Instrument society of America, 1995.
[8]. Wang J.S., Zhang Y., Wang W., Optimal design of PI/PD
controller for non- Minimum phase system,Transactions of
the Institute of Measurement and Control, 2006, 28(1),27-35.
[9]. Bingul Z., “A new PID tuning technique using differential
evolution for unstable and integrating processes with time
delay”, ICONIP, Proceedings Lecture Notes in Computer
Science, 2004, 3316, p. 254-260.
[10]. Boumediène Allaoua, Abdellah Laoufi and Brahim
Gasbaoui ,” Multi-Drive Paper System Control Based on
Multi-Input Multi-Output PID Controller” Leonardo Journal
of Sciences, Issue 16, January-June 2010, p. 59-70.
[11]. Muna H. Saleh, Arif Al-Qassar, Mazin Z. Othman,
Abdulkarem Sh. Mahdi,” Devloppement of the Cross-
Coupling phenomena of MimoFlight system using fuzzy logic
controller”,
[12]. David I, Robles G, PID control dynamics of a Robotic
arm manipulator with two degrees of Freedom, Control of
Processos Robotica, August 17, 2012.
[13]. F.Baghli, Y.Lakhal, L.El bakkali, Contrôle dynamique
d’un bras manipulateur à deux dégrées de liberté par un
contrôleur PID, 11ème Congrès International de Mécanique,
Agadir 23 ,26 avril 2013.
[14]. C.Ham, Z.Qu and R.Johnson,“Robust fuzzy control for
robot manipulators”. IEE proceedings on Control Theory
Applications, Vol.147.No.2, March 2000
[15]. J.J spong and M.Vidyasagar, “Robot dynamics and
Control”, New york: Wiley, 1989

The efficiency of the inference system knowledge

More Related Content

What's hot (17)

Viewers also liked (20)

Similar to The efficiency of the inference system knowledge (20)

More from eSAT Publishing House (20)

Recently uploaded (20)

The efficiency of the inference system knowledge