Académique Documents
Professionnel Documents
Culture Documents
1.1 Introduction
Fuzzy logic controllers have been very successfully applied to many industrial
applications over the past few decades [2-5]. However, the traditionally trained
control engineer may be in need of a tutorial-like introduction to the comparison of
classical control techniques and fuzzy logic control techniques in order either to
transition to fuzzy logic control techniques, or to be convinced that fuzzy logic
control techniques can be successfully applied to typical control problem well
handled by classical control techniques.
It is the objective of this chapter to provide such a tutorial introduction. In this
chapter, two standard and established classical control techniques, ProportionalIntegral-Derivative (PID) control and sliding mode control, and fuzzy logic
control, will be applied to a typical industrial control application motor control.
Each control technology will be applied to the control task at hand in the most
equitable manner possible, so that resulting robustness performance can be
compared.
The success of fuzzy logic controllers has prompted much comparison to
classical control techniques, with detractors and supporters on both sides [6-ll].
The ensuing arguments have often occurred over the similarities and synergies of
classical and fuzzy logic approaches to control. Indeed, the practicing control
engineer usually has little interest in ideological debates. It is in his or her interest
to produce a working controller, with efficacy, making use of any and all
techniques available.
It should be apparent by the end of this chapter that classical control techniques
and fuzzy logic techniques can coexist and together bring great benefits to the
practicing engineer by expanding the repertoire of available control techniques
[12,13]. The following chapters in this edited volume will indeed clearly
demonstrate that fuzzy logic control can provide great benefit to advanced
industrial applications.
In the following sections we introduce the control problem. Then we synthesize
robust controllers using two classical control techniques PID and sliding mode
control. Finally we synthesize a robust fuzzy logic controller for comparison.
From the modeled performance of each of the controllers it will be apparent that
classical and fuzzy logic control techniques can be applied to a typical industrial
control application with similar performance results.
5
s ( s 1)( s 2)
(1.1)
15
s ( s 1)( s 2)
5
G3 ( s ) = 2
s ( s 2)
G2 ( s) =
(1.2)
(1.3)
Ki
s
(1.4)
Kd s
K
i
(Ws 1)
s
(1.5)
To have a fair comparison, we use a small value for K i = 0.001 , just enough to
keep steady state error zero. We use a small value for W = 0.01 , so that its effect on
the dynamics is minimal, but the derivative controller is still realizable.
The selection of K p and K d is based on the root locus of C ( s )G1 ( s ) . The root
locus gives us the locations of closed loop poles. The proportional and derivative
gain values are chosen such that the closed loop pole locations are in the left half
complex plain for all three plants. Another criterion for selection of these gains is
the step response of the closed loop system.
We select the following gains: K p = 2 , K d = 5 . With these gains, the closed
loop system is stable for the open loop gain up to 51. Thus, in particular, the above
PID controller stabilizes the systems given by the transfer functions in Equations
(1.1) and (1.2). For the model given in Equation (1.3) we have closed loop stability
for the open loop gain up to 30. The step responses have no overshoot and are
critically damped as shown in Figures 1.2, 1.3 and 1.4.
x = 0 0
1 x 0u
0 2 3
5
(1.6)
y = >1 0 0@x
We consider the following sliding surface for this design (See [16] for details):
S = ( y yd ) O1 ( y y d ) O 2 ( y y d )
(1.7)
x
If the information is not available, or as in this case, y d (t ) being unit step, is nondifferentiable, then we can assume y d and yd to be zero and let the robustness
property of the sliding mode controller take care of the mismatch.
With the definition of sliding surface as above, we have reduced the design
requirement from tracking y d (t ) to being on the surface S = 0 . Once on the
sliding surface, the dynamics (Equation (1.7)) are exponentially stable and
asymptotic trajectory tracking is achieved. The control u is designed to make the
surface S = 0 attractive and to reach the surface in finite time.
Consider the following Lyapunov function:
V =
1 2
S
2
(1.8)
(1.9)
As the system has relative degree 1 with S as output, we can solve for u from
the equation
S = K sgn( S )
(1.10)
(1.11)
(1.12)
The u obtained from this equation will be used for the control.
This controller needs access to all three states, whereas the fuzzy logic
controller of [l, 14] makes use of only x1 and x 2 . To have a fair comparison, we
will construct an observer to get an estimate of the state variable x 3 .
A standard Luenburger observer is designed to get an estimate of x 3 . We use
the state space model of the plant given in Equation (1.6) to design the observer as
follows:
x = Ax bu L( y y )
y = cx
(1.13)
where, the matrices A , b and c correspond to the plant model in Equation (1.6).
The matrix L is chosen such that the eigenvalues of observer error dynamics
( A LC ) are in the left half plane and the error dynamics is faster than the
dynamics on the sliding surface.
The closed loop step responses with this sliding mode controller are shown in
Figures 1.2, 1.3 and 1.4. The responses have no overshoot and are critical. The
controller is robust to input gain changes as well as to the changes in system
dynamics while keeping the input magnitude small.
Note: With the use of Equation (1.11), the controller is essentially a linear state
feedback controller. It results in closed loop eigenvalues of
With this controller, the trajectory is not guaranteed to reach the sliding surface in finite
time.
^ 1.3392,4.33 r 1.91 j` for the plant model in Equation (1.1). The same
controller, when applied to other plants, will give the following closed loop
eigenvalue locations: for the perturbed model given by Equation (1.2)
^ 1.32,3.55,19.12` , and for the perturbed model given by Equation (1.3)
^ 1.4,3.79 r 2.62 j` . Thus, by design, the increase in gain makes the closed loop
system more stable.
1.6 Analysis and Reconstruction of a Fuzzy Robust Controller
We implement the robust fuzzy controller given in [l,14]. The inputs to the fuzzy
controller are e and Z c . The output of the fuzzy controller is u. The universes of
discourse of e , Z c , and u are partitioned into seven fuzzy sets:
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
NB - negative big
NM - negative medium
NS - negative small
ZE - zero
PS - positive small
PM - positive medium
PB - positive big
ZC
PB
PM
PS
ZE
NS
NM
NB
NB
NB
NB
NB
NB
NM
NS
ZE
NM
NB
NB
NB
NM
NS
ZE
PS
NS
NB
NB
NM
NS
ZE
PS
PM
ZE
NB
NM
NS
ZE
PS
PM
PB
PS
NM
NS
ZE
PS
PM
PB
PB
PM
NS
ZE
PS
PM
PB
PB
PB
PB
ZE
PS
PM
PB
PB
PB
PB
The step response of this fuzzy logic controller applied to the nominal and
perturbed plants is shown in Figures 1.2, 1.3 and 1.4. The step responses for all
three plants have short rise times and no overshoot. Thus, they meet the specified
robust performance criteria. The control effort generated by the fuzzy logic
controller is also shown in the Appendix to this chapter, as are the control efforts
for the PID and sliding mode controllers (Figures 1.5, 1.6 and 1.7).
1.7 Conclusions
1.7.1 Comments on Controller Designs
The control engineer proficient in PID and sliding mode control techniques can
readily synthesize robust controllers to perform the benchmark control task
presented in this chapter. As demonstrated in [l] and verified in this chapter, the
control engineer utilizing fuzzy control techniques can readily achieve the same
goal. Thus, we have shown that classical and fuzzy logic control tools are available
to the control engineer for use in synthesizing an acceptable robust controller, a
typical motor control problem.
Fuzzy logic control software tools are readily available and so the developing
of a controller for the benchmark motor control problem in this chapter for this
problem was relatively simple to implement and it provided satisfactory results.
Software tools are also readily available for the design and simulation of the PID
and sliding mode controllers for these problems, and so these two controllers were
also easy to implement.
1.7.2 From Classical Controls to Fuzzy Logic Controls
Hopefully, this introductory tutorial of PID, sliding mode control, and fuzzy logic
control of motor speed clearly demonstrates that fuzzy logic control should have a
place in the industrial control engineer's toolbox alongside classical control
techniques. Classical control should not be abandoned but, as other chapters in this
volume demonstrate, the control engineer should take advantage of the power of
fuzzy logic control where he or she can in advanced industrial control applications.
We encourage the continued development of fuzzy logic control techniques and its
integration and synergistic development with classical control techniques in the
future.
10
Figure 1.3. Closed loop step response of the perturbed model G2(s)
Figure 1.4. Closed loop step response of the perturbed model G3(s)
11
12
13
14
15
References
[1]
[2]
[3]
[4]
[5]
[6]
[7]
[8]
[9]
[10]
[11]
[12]
[13]
[14]
[15]
[16]