You are on page 1of 13

ZZ'Y

sets and systems
ELSEVIER

Fuzzy Sets and Systems 78 (1996) 23-35

PID type fuzzy controller and parameters adaptive method
Wu Zhi Qiao*, Masaharu Mizumoto
Department of Management Engineering, Osaka Electro-Communication Universi~, Neyagawa, Osaka 572. Japan

Received October 1994; revised January 1995

Abstract
The authors of this paper try to analyze the dynamic behavior of the product-sum crisp type fuzzy controller, revealing
that this type of fuzzy controller behaves approximately like a PD controller that may yield steady-state error for the
control system. By relating to the conventional PID control theory, we propose a new fuzzy controller structure, namely
PID type fuzzy controller which retains the characteristics similar to the conventional PID controller. In order to
improve further the performance of the fuzzy controller, we work out a method to tune the parameters of the PID type
fuzzy controller on line, producing a parameter adaptive fuzzy controller. Simulation experiments are made to
demonstrate the fine performance of these novel fuzzy controller structures.
Keywords: Fuzzy controller; PID control; Adaptive control

1. Introduction
Among various inference methods used in the fuzzy controller found in literatures [5-8, 13, 14], the most
widely used ones in practice are the M a m d a n i method proposed by M a m d a n i and his associates [5] who
adopted the Min-max compositional rule of inference based on an interpretation of a control rule as
a conjunction of the antecedent and consequent, and the product-sum method proposed by Mizumoto [6, 7]
who suggested to introduce the product and arithmetic mean aggregation operators to replace the logical
A N D (minimum) and O R (maximum) calculations in the Min-max compositional rule of inference. In the
algorithm of a fuzzy controller, the defuzzyfication calculation is also a complicated and time consuming
task. Tagagi and Sugeno proposed a crisp type model in which the consequent parts of the fuzzy control rules
are crisp functional representation or crisp real numbers in the simplified case instead of fuzzy sets [13, 14].
With this model of crisp real number output, the fuzzy set of the inference consequence will be a discrete fuzzy
set with a finite number of points, this can greatly simplify the defuzzification algorithm. Both the Min-max
method and the product-sum method are often applied with the crisp output model in a mixed manner.
Especially the mixed product-sum crisp model has a fine performance and the simplest algorithm that is very

* Corresponding author. Presently at the Department of ECS, University of Southampton. UK. E-mail: zqw@ecs.soton.ac.uk.
0165-0114/96/$15.00 © 1996 - Elsevier Science B.V. All rights reserved
SSDI 0165-01 14(95)001 15-8

16].m .. Analysis of a product-sum crisp type fuzzy controller Before we conduct the analysis.. namely P I D type fuzzy controller which retains the characteristics similar to the conventional PID controller.1. Suppose that the fuzzy controller in consideration is a two-input and one-output one. Suppose that the membership functions of Ai and B~ are Ai(e) and Bj(d). . Mizumoto / Fuzzy Sets and Systems 78 (1996) 23 35 24 easy to be implemented in hardware system and converted into a fuzzy neural network model.n . m]) and Bj (j ~ J = [ .2.. .2. and the output of the fuzzy controller (that is the input to the controlled process) is u. the truth value of the antecedent part of a fuzzy control rule will be f j = Ai(e)Bj(k) (ieI. we work out a method to tune the parameters of the PID type fuzzy controller on line. C will be a discrete fuzzy subset with finite number of points. 1. In a certain control time t.1. where uij E U(i e I. It is natural for the researchers to apply the conventional theory. producing a parameter adaptive fuzzy controller. the authors will make effort to analyze the behavior of the product-sum crisp type fuzzy controller. jeJ). We denote the linguistic values of e and ~ as A ~(i ~ I = [ . The fuzzy controller with such kind of control rules is called crisp type fuzzy controller [13. 1. 14]. 2 . the real output of the controller u is given by ~i.. We denote the cores of fuzzy set Ai as el and those of Bj as ./~ c R and U c R. 14]. applying the center of gravity method to defuzzify the fuzzy set C. 0 and u are E ~ R. 2 . . The universes of discourses of e. Using the product-sum inference method. . In this paper.j ~ J) is a crisp value instead of a fuzzy subset. In this paper. mostly linear system theory to solve the nonlinear problem of fuzzy controller and many works have been done in this direction [1.Z i. The two inputs to the fuzzy controller are error e and change rate of error ~. by relating the fuzzy controller to the conventional PID controller. If the number of control rules are equal to I x J.. In the following discussion.2. 0. we have the observation values e and ~ for error and the change rate of error respectively. we assume that the fuzzy control rule base is complete. the fuzzy control rule base is said to be complete [16]. respectively. There has not been sounded theoretical method available to analyze a fuzzy controller in literature. C = { f j / u u l i ~ I . 1..4. we will take account of the product-sum crisp type fuzzy controller.. M. j fij Uij u = . . while the conventional control theory is highly developed. . (2) In our study we will employ the triangular membership functions for each fuzzy linguistic value of the error e and the change rate of error 0 as shown in Fig. .. 0. j f/j . In order to improve further the performance of the fuzzy controller. . 13. we briefly describe the crisp type fuzzy controller model mixed with product-sum inference method as follows [6.VI(Z Qiao. we propose a new fuzzy controller structures.. The fuzzy control rules are given as in the form of if e is Ai and ~ is Bj then u is u d. . j ~ J). j ~ J }.. 2. then the truth values of Ai and Bj are A~(e) and Bj(k). Having the aid of the well-known classical designing method of PID controller. (1) The reasoning from the antecedent part to the consequent part will generate a conclusion fuzzy subset which we denote as C. . (i ~ I. The proposed methods promise to improve the performance of the fuzzy controller considerably. The uijs are not necessarily different from each other. n]) respectively.

.j+ l) Obviously. ej+ 1]. Under the above condition of the membership functions.dj+ On the e N O D E of the Combining ej+l -. The N E T is illustrated in Fig. and Bj(O) + B j+ 1(0)= 1(0 ~ [dj.(e))Ukt Zk. by definition of the membership function. A i ( e ) + A i + l ( e ) = l ( e ~ [ e i . the support sets of Bj are equal to [dj_ 1. by definition.(d) = Ai(e)B~(d) + Ai+ l(e)Bj(d) + Ai(e)Bj+ l(d) + Ai+ l (e)Bj+ l(d) I) 1) = (Ai(e) + Ai+ l(e))(e~(d) + Bj+ l(d)) =1.dj + I .dj Bj+I(e ) - Bt(O) = 0 (t # ( j . i ~ I .e i for e e [ei./+ Ak(e)B. as illustrated in Fig.d _ _ . i + l ) (Ak(e)Bt(d)) t-(i.ej .e j d -. For instance. We design the membership functions as so. dj+ 1]). Fig. j + 1) e J). We have Ai(e) = 1 e - - .. if the inputs of the fuzzy controller are located in the N E T lattice area S = [el. at most two neighborhood membership functions have non-zero degrees for e or d. 2.. T h e ej. Eq.e j l for . e i + l ] ) . (1). plane• equal to [e~_ 1. (2) can be rewritten a N E T [16] and the points (ei. 1. we have Ak(e) = 0 (k # (i.j+l) Z k = ( i . ei+ 1 . and Bj(e) = d -. Eq.. ei - ei+ 1 --c i ei+ 1 - e --e i Ai+l(e)- e - - ei A i are NET o n t h e e .dj 1]..~. ei+ 1] and those of Ak(e) = 0 (k # (i.i+ 1) (Ak(c)Bt(e))Ukt t=(j.Z. j + 1) e J). i + l) ~ I). only those terms in which both Ak(e) and Bt(d) are non-zero will be non-zero. dj + 1 . Qiao.W. Oj+l] of the e . at any time. at most only 4 terms in the above equation are left. 0 plane. t (Ak(c) B. Mizumoto / Fuzzy Sets and Systems 78 (1996) 23 35 Ai-1 Ai 25 di-1 di Ai+l e/+l I I ! ei-1 ei ei+l Bj-1 Bj Bj+I el-1 uij ei ei+l ei-1 dj di+l 1 Fig. That is to say.d plane. . The membership functions of A~and Bj.i + 1)c I).ei+t]. Ak(e) Bt (0) In the above equation. j e J } N E T ..d[e = el.e~+t] x [dj. 2. at most only 4 rules are fired one time. and Bt(O) = O(t # ( j .. we call the set {e. ~ [~j. Therefore. So the above equation become H -~- ~a--'k=(i. e j+ 1 -..- ei + 1 .i+ t=(j. M.di) the Zg. With these relations it is easy to check that the denominator of the right-hand side of the above equation is E k=(i. d = ej. 1.

as can be seen from Eqs. There is no known analytical solutions available to deal with such kind of nonlinearity. we only consider the case of the first quadrant where 5e/> 0 and 8~ ~> 0. (el + ~e.k plane. M.~ plane. From (3). . t) = uij. 8d = d -.+ 1)u+ 1~ - ----I[__---_lUij+ \ei+l -. the output of the fuzzy controller is a non-linear function of the arguments of e and d. Nevertheless. e i + 1 ]. Eq.W . t).3 5 26 Therefore. in the following non-linear model: u = f ( e . . ~jj \ei+l -. d and u can be defined by ~e = e .el. j + l) = Ai(e)Bj(d)uij + Ai+ l(e)Bj(~)u../\ej+l "~ + ke. as the nominal solution of (4). Mizumoto / F u z z y Sets and Systems 78 (1996) 2 3 . and for d ¢ [dj.-ei/kdj+7-~-~.i + l) t = ( j . The difference between these nominal values and some slightly perturbed functions e. (5) Therefore. 8 U = bl .d j . We denote the input-output relation of the fuzzy controller. we have (e~. (5) at the NODE(el. it follows from Eq.. d.~j + ~d)e [el.e-J~. . (4) can be approximated by the following linear equations: 8u= ~e ~e+ n ~-~ 8~ (6) n A neighborhood of each N O D E (or nominal point) will be divided into 4 different quadrants by the two N E T lines that cross at the NODE.l l i j . u"+ ' ) ° + " (3) for e ¢ [ e i . that is (3). . el+l] x [~j..__l--e'~[/ ~ .+ .)j+-~l----~jJ u " j + '' + u. . . (3) that the output of the product-sum crisp type fuzzy controller is u = u u._. For simplicity.(d))ukt k=(i.dj) ei+ 1 . For sufficiently small Be. that is to say. ~j+ 1].")(_ d_--~j ) el+._. that is u = f ( e i .e i / k e j + l -.+ l~j + Ai(e)Bj+ l(d)uiu+ 1~ + Ai+ l(e)Bj+ l(~)u. 8~ and 8u perturbations. At an arbitrary point on the e . that is at the NODE(el.ei . the output of the fuzzy controller can be simplified as u = ~ (Ak(e) B. A complete treatment of this non-linearity is impossible. ~. dj+l]. we can adopt the linearization method and carry on an analysis of small deviations from nominal just like the conventional or modern control theory usually do. Z Qiao.ei.. . kj) of the e .+l)j (es-_e_i ..e j / (ei+.dj. d~) of the N E T . (4) When e = ei and d = dj. So we can conduct a linearization analysis in a neighborhood of the N O D E of the e . we can take the result of Eq. (3).~ plane.

ei ei ) + u i ( j + 1) .d. .3 5 IOf l 27 __ Ri(j+ 1) .0 plane as illustrated by Eq.Uij J el+ 1 ..blij 7---.ei e~ U i ( j + 1) . the integral control law can eliminate the steady-state error of the control system. : ej = u o ej + 1 .l -- Uij -- R ( i + 1 ) j .-- e j + 1 -. the stability of the system may be adversely affected.Uij . we can regard such kind of fuzzy controller as a parameter time-varying P D controller. and the derivative control law can increase the damping of the system thus reduce the overshoot and oscillating times of the system response. Since the PDfc behaves approximately like a parameters time-varying P D controller.W.I = Uij ei+ l -.Uij (e.Z. M.e j -1 | [A(I+ 1 ) j . definitely it will yield a steady-state error when used to control a type 0 plant (see Fig. where A = Rij U(i+ l)j . el+ 1 -. Therefore b / ( i + 1 ) j . Qiao.Uij el+ 1 .ej -- Oj)..ej ' then. (7). The proportional control law can guarantee the fast response of the control system. where the equivalent proportional and derivative control components are P and D respectively.ej (7) = A + P e + DO. p _ U ( i + l ) j -. A P or P D controller will yield a steady-state error for the system step response if the controlled plant is a type 0 system.~ e. The steady-state error is inversely proportional to Kp.. 7). 8u= ~e Be+ ~ 80- n n Ui(j+ -U~JSe+ ei +1 -- 1) Uij ~O.. integral parameter K~ and derivative parameter KD.. Actually.. We will call this type of fuzzy controller as a P D type fuzzy controller (PDfc).Uij Oj+ ~ -.:Igij .~ij ei + 1 .e i Oj + e+ U i ( j + 1) ej+l -- -u'~o -..0 plane..) ej+ 1 -.ei D - bli(J+ 1) .IAij I I. Just like a conventional P D controller. the P D parameters switch from one set to another.ej ei that is l..ej Pei - - De j.. if Kp is too large. from one neighborhood of a N O D E to another.ei ei Ui(j+ 1) ...Uij (e -- el+ 1 -. Thus a PID controller when designed properly could yield a system with fast rise time and small overshoot and non-steady-state error.. -- e j+ 1 -. Mizumoto / F u z ~ Sets and Systems 78 (1996) 2 3 . When the error and the change rate of error changes along the e .. The result of (7) enables us to predict the behaviors of the fuzzy controller according to the conventional PID control theory. Recall that the performance of a conventional PID controller is determined by its proportional parameter Kp.Oj As we can see that the product-sum crisp type fuzzy controller behaves approximately like a P D controller in the neighborhood of the N O D E point of the N E T of e .

it follows from (7) that the control input to the plant can be approximated by NODE u~=flfudt:j3 f(A+PKle+DK2~)dt= flAt+ flK2De+flKiP fedt.4 A0 0 Bo 0 (8) A1 0. Usually fuzzy control rules are constructed by summarizing the manual control experience of an operator who has been controlling the industrial process skillfully and successfully. because the derivative control can reduce the overshoot of the system's response so as to improve the control performance. One way is to have an integrator serially connected to the output of the fuzzy controller as shown in Fig. 3. error. . 3. 3. 4. and fl is the integral constant. Of course this can be realized by designing a fuzzy controller with three inputs. 3. This will result the fuzzy controller behaving like a parameter time-varying PI controller. obviously there would exist an steady-state error if they are controlled by this kind of fuzzy controller. Hence we may want to design a fuzzy controller that possesses the fine characteristics of the PID controller by using only the error and the change rate of error as its inputs. However. In this direction. PID type fuzzy controller structure As illustrated in previous sections.4 B-1 -0. This characteristic has been stated in the brief review of the PID controller in the previous section. the change rate of error and the integration of error. It is not the practice for the operator to observe the integration of error. Since the mathematical models of most industrial process systems are of type 0. A-2 -1 B_~ -1 Fig. we did not consider the scaling factors.4 A2 1 B2 1 Fig.28 ~Z Qiao. adding one input variable will greatly increase the number of control rules. when we look at the neighborhood of point in the e . Sets and Systems 78 (1996) 23-35 the control performance cannot be satisfied. The PI type fuzzy control system. we can incorporate the integral control law into the fuzzy controller to improve the performance of the fuzzy controller. 4. In the proceeding text. thus the steady-state error is expelled by the integration action.~ plane. M. for convenience. In Fig.4 B1 0. these methods will be hard to implement in practice because of the difficulty in constructing fuzzy control rules. The membership functions of Ai and By for simulation. we will present some methods to overcome the shortcomings of PDfc in the following sections. So there may be the time when one wants to introduce not only the integration control but the derivative control to the fuzzy control system. a PI type fuzzy controller will have a slow rise time if the P parameters are chosen small. and have a large overshoot if the P or I parameters are chosen large. However. Moreover. the PDfc approximately behaves like a parameter time-varying P D controller. the constructing of fuzzy control rules are even more difficult task and it needs more computation efforts. However. The operator intuitively regulates the executor to control the process by watching the error and the change rate of the error between the system's output and the set-point value. Here in Fig. Mizumoto / Fuzz. If we want to eliminate the steady-state error of the control system. K1 and K 2 a r e scaling factors for e and ~ respectively. we can imagine to substitute the input ~ (the change rate of error or the derivative of error) of the fuzzy controller with the integration of error. A-l -0.

the steady-state error becomes zero. Their cores are ~ei} = {e 2 .4.4 0. 6. 4.3 0 0. 1}. the fuzzy subsets of e and d are defined as shown in Fig.02} = { -- The fuzzy control rules are represented as Table 1.0.0.7 1 Hence the fuzzy controller becomes a parameter time-varying PI controller. .1 s. 1. In the fuzzy control system shown in Fig.5. Therefore. We can hope that in a PI type fuzzy control system. We call this fuzzy controller as the PI type fuzzy controller (PIfc). {£.2 0.1}. e 1. Fig. we carry out some simulation experiments.4. 3. The sampling time of the system is set to be 0. the larger a/fi means more emphasis on the derivative control and less emphasis on the integration control. M.7 -0.3 0 e. its equivalent proportional control and integral control components are BK2D and ilK1 P respectively.7 --0. We propose a controller structure that simply connects the P D type and the PI type fuzzy controller together in parallel.60. there is a high overshoot and serious oscillation.l -0. and T2 = 0. the plant model is a second-order and type 0 system with the following transfer function: Gts~ = K ( T 1 S + I)(TzS + 1)' where K = 16.el. We have the equivalent structure of that by connecting a PI device with the basic fuzzy controller serially as shown in Fig. e o . 5 demonstrates the simulation result of step response of the fuzzy control system with a Plfc. For the fuzzy controller. It follows from (7) that the output of the fuzzy controller is IIc = ~u + fi f u d t = . we give a description of the simulation model.4. e l . and when it is too large.0.5 --0. To verify the property of the PI type fuzzy controller.5 0. but when the integration factor fl is small. 0 0. we use the discrete simulation method.i --0. the system's response is slow. .2 0. .4 -0.. In our simulation experiments. e 2 } = { - 1 .Z Qiao. Where ~ is the weight on P D type fuzzy controller and fi is that on PI type fuzzy controller.4.2 0 0.0.5 -0. (9) . we may want to introduce the derivative control law into the fuzzy controller to overcome the overshoot and instability. and vice versa.j} = I t e _ 2 . We can see that the steady-state error of the control system becomes zero. the results would be slightly different from that of a continuous system.5 ~. T1 = 1.3 00 -0. Before presenting the simulation.0. e .0.W.-2 e-e e 2 eo el ee I --0.7 0_.~(A + P K l e + DKzO) + fl f ( A + P K le + D K 2 d ) d t = aA + fiAt + ( g K I P + flKzD) e + f l K 1 P f e d t 2 + gK2DO. Mizumoto / Fuzzy Sets and Systems 78 (1996) 23 35 29 Table 1 The fuzzy control rules e.3 0.2 0 0.

Figs. there exist a steady-state error (see Fig.13.. T.4 0. its equivalent proportional control.5 3 3.W.3. Fig.0.1 PI type: K1. meaning that the fuzzy controller behaves like PDfc.6 0. T=0. Mizumoto / Fuzzy Sets and Systems 78 (1996) 23-35 30 1. The parameter adaptive method The PIDfc structure proposed in the previous section has substantially improved the performance of the crisp type fuzzy controller. The PID type fuzzycontrol system.0. 6.1 • O 1. meaning that the fuzzy controller behaves like a Plfc.13 =0.3. The step response of PI type fuzzycontrol system.8 0.12.12.31. 8).5 Fig. 7 and 8 are the simulation results of the system's step response of such control system.3.5 1 1. Also we find that the integration component of the PIDfc has an important role . When ~ > 0 and/3 = 0.5 2 2. The influence of ~ and fl to the system performance is illustrated. When ~ = 0 and fl > 0.12. 7 and 8). When ~ > 0 and 13 > 0 the fuzzy controller becomes a PIDfc.0. 5. M.Z Qiao.4 1.8 I I 1. K2-1.13=I. integral control and derivative control components are ~Kt P + flK2D. T. K2=1. It is possible to get a comparatively good performance by carefully choosing the value of ~ and ft.1 o PI type: K1-0.l !=0. flK1P and ~K2D respectively. 4. 7). Thus the fuzzy controller behaves like a time-varying PID controller. We call this new controller structure a PID type fuzzy controller (PIDfc). the steady-state error of the system is eliminated but there is a large overshoot and serious oscillation (see Fig.2 0 0. K2=1.2 1 0. the overshoot is substantially reduced (see both Figs..6 I I I I I Pl type: K1-0.

O. K2=l.8 0. [~=1.o. the system will become unstable.5 2 2. K2=l. on the performance of the fuzzy control system.8 0.8 .5 3 3. 1.8 I I 1. and .I PlO type: K1=1. T.4 1.6 0..6 / .5 Fig. o 4.=l.0. I K2=l.Z Qiao.~=0.1 PID type: K1=0. PI type: K1=0.1 o + 1. Mizumoto / Fuzzy Sets and Systems 78 (1996) 23-35 I 1.6 0. We can imagine that let the equivalent integration c o m p o n e n t of the fuzzy controller vary with time. . and if the integration c o m p o n e n t is too strong. 1. T=0. the response is slow. At the early stage of response.1.2 0 0 0.1.r~=O. M.1 ~ . 1 T-0.4 0. K2=1. If the integration c o m p o n e n t is too weak.1.5 Fig. p. 1.6 | I PD type:Kl=l.5 2 2.2 1 0.5 3 3. 7. Comparison of PI and PID type fuzzy control system. i .a =1.5 I I 1 I I I 1 1. 8.=I. .2 0 I I I I I I I 0. we let it take a larger value.4 0. T=0. So it is still desirable to m a k e further i m p r o v e m e n t on it.4 0.5 1 1.31 W. Comparison of PD and PID type fuzzy control system. ~=0.1.

the error of the system cover the whole universe of discourse. F r o m the start time 0 to the time tl when the first peak value occurs.6 1 0. M. Fig.61 ]. By this way. derivative. 9 shows the step response of a control system. thus the reaction of the control system against the error will be slowed down.62. Notice that the proportional component includes the term of the production of/3 and Kz. These equivalent control components are repeated as follows: proportional: aK1P +/3K2 D. While decreasing the value of/3 will decrease the proportional control component. F r o m time tl on. integral control and derivative control components of a PIDfc from (9). the integral control component is decreased so that the damping of the system is increased and the system is more stable. the error of the system's response will no longer go beyond the belt area of interval [ . Different phases of the step response of a control system. integral: /3K 1P.32].6 0 o tl t2 t Fig. And so on. Mizumoto / Fuzzy Sets and Systems 78 (1996) 23-35 32 I I I I I I l I I I f 1. As can be seen that if we decrease the parameter/3 gradually. the equivalent derivative control component will be increased at the same time. We can consider to decrease the integral control component at each peak value time according to the absolute value of each peak. And at t2. Also we can see that when K2 is increased. 9.61. this would do no harm to the system's performance. where 61 is the absolute peak value at time t l.W. If in the meanwhile of decreasing/3 we increase Kz in the same rate as/3 is decreased. we can hope to have a fast rise and a short settling time for the system's response. reduce it gradually with time so as to increase the damping of the system and make the system more stable. another peak value occurs. The response process can be divided into different phases by the peak value times. Let us examine the equivalent proportional control.Z Qiao. the error of the system's response will never go beyond the belt area of interval [ . . ~K2D. because derivative control law can increase the resistance against the overshoot and oscillation of the system. F r o m t2 on. the equivalent proportional control strength will remain unchanged and the system can always keep quick reaction against the error.

1 Non-adaptive 1.8 0.0.5 1 1. 11..2. ]3. 11 when the adaptive mechanism does not ..0. 1.. 10 is the block diagram of the PAPIDfc.3 . Fig.1.4 1. 6k is the absolute peak value at the peak time tk(k = 1. Comparison of fuzzy control system with and without adaptive mechanism (I). The parameter regulator tunes the controllers parameters Ka and/~ simultaneously at each peak time signal and according to the peak value at that time. a peak observer and a parameter regulator. 10. Motivated by this idea. In Fig.5.33 V~Z. we design a parameter adaptive PID type fuzzy controller (PAPIDfc). K2. 11 and 12 present some simulation results of the fuzzy control system with a PAPIDfc under different initial values of the scaling parameters and output gains. ).6 0. The algorithm of tuning the scaling constants and the integral gain is as follows: Kzs w h e r e K2s and/~s are the initial values of Kz and/~ respectively.4 0. The parameter adaptive fuzzy controller is composed of a PIDfc. Figs.5 Fig.8 i i t i' i i i Kt. The peak observer keeps watching on the system's output and transmits a signal at each peak time and measures the absolute peak value.2 1 0...5 3 3.5 2 2. Mizumoto / Fuzzy Sets and Systems 78 (1996) 23-35 Fig. T.. Qiao.. The basic PIDfc is as described in the previous section.2 0 0 I I I I I I I 0.a . Block diagram of the parameter adaptive fuzzy controller.0.2. M..6 o 1.1.

the analysis and designing of a fuzzy control system can take advantage of the conventional PID control theory. the system oscillates seriously. In Fig.4 1. integral control and the derivative control components.1 Non-adaptive Adaptive o ÷ 1.5 Fig. the authors designed a parameter adaptive fuzzy controller. 12. According to the coventional PID control theory. M. Conclusions We have studied the input-output behavior of the product-sum crisp type fuzzy controller. Generally speaking. T-0.5 1 I 1. Therefore.8 i i ) I I K1-1.2 0 0 0. 12. It can greatly reduce the oscillating times and shorten the settling time of the system. so as to increase the damping of the system when the system . and when the adaptive mechanism comes into action. The PID type fuzzy controller can be decomposed into the equivalent proportional control. revealing that this type of fuzzy controller behaves approximately like a parameter time-varying PD controller. Comparison of fuzzy control system with and without adaptive mechanism (II). We proposed a controller structure that combine the features of both PD type and PI type fuzzy controller. The proposed parameter adaptive fuzzy controller decreases the equivalent integral control component of the fuzzy controller gradually with the system response process time.6 I I ~-0.5 I 3 3. and the parameter adaptive control yield a non-oscillating system. 1. obtaining a PID type fuzzy controller which allows the control system to have a fast rise and a small overshoot as well as a short settling time. It has been illustrated that the PD type fuzzy controller yields a steady-state error for the type 0 system. So in practice it is possible to choose a large initial value for fl to let a fast rising of response but not result in instability. the PI type fuzzy controller can eliminate the steady-state error.4 0. come into action. To improve further the performance of the proposed PID type fuzzy controller.Z Qiao.6 0. the oscillations are strongly resisted.5 2 2.1.8 0. the simulation results demonstrate that the PAPIDfc substantially improves the performance of the control system.W. 5. the system without adaptive has a slight oscillation.2 I 0.a-1. we have been able to propose some improvement methods for the crisp type fuzzy controller. K2-1. Mizumoto / Fuzzy Sets and Systems 78 (1996) 23-35 34 |.

Fuzzy identification of fuzzy systems and its application to modelling and control. Fuzzy adaptive control of a first order process. Sugeno. J. Mamdani. Buckley. the oscillation of the system is strongly restrained a n d the settling time is shortened considerably. Automatica 15 (1979) 15-30. Systems Man Cybernet. Fuzzy Sets and Systems 38 (1990) 27--42. Mizumoto and H.. Internat. m e a n w h i l e keeps the p r o p o r t i o n a l c o n t r o l c o m p o n e n t u n c h a n g e d so as to g u a r a n t e e quick reaction against the system's error. Pad-analysis of stability of fuzzy control systems. Fuzzy Sets and Systems 31 (1989) 47 65. Derivation of fuzzy control rules from human operator's control actions. T. Kosko. on Fuzz). on Fuzzy Systems. Sugeno type controllers are universal controllers. IV IFSA Congress. E.sum-gravity method for fuzzy controls. Shao. Vol. z Qiao.H. Takagi and M. Proc. Fuzzy Sets and Systems 8(3) (1982) 253 283. M. Hu Jia Yao. Fuzzy controllers: further limit theorems for linear control rules. Realization of PID controls by fuzzy control methods. Fuzzy Sets and Systems 30 (1989) 135 153. of Beijing Light Industry College (in Chinese) (2) (1988) 12-18. of the IFAC Conll on Fuzzy InJbrmation. Ollero and A. Mizumoto. B. Proe. Fuzzy systems as universal approximators. Brussels. M. Procyk and E. Conf. S. Takagi and M. We have presented the s i m u l a t i o n results to d e m o n s t r a t e the fine performance of the proposed P I D type fuzzy c o n t r o l l e r a n d the p a r a m e t e r adaptive fuzzy controller structure.H. Static analysis of fuzzy controllers. J. Wu Zhi Qiao and Soon Shuo Shang. 1 Marseille. Proc.J. San Diego (1992) 709 715.J. T. Garcia-Cerezo.B. Graham and R. A. M. IEEE Trans. IEEE lnternat. Zimmermann. Fuzzy Sets and Systems 53 (1993) 299-303. IEEE lnternat. Proc. auto-turning and supervision using fuzzy logic. Fuzzy Sets and Systems 36 (1990) 225-233. Systems. Min-max-gravity method versus product. Assilian.w . Part E (1991) 127-130. France (1983) 55 60. An experiment in linguistic synthesis with a fuzzy logic controller. Sugeno.J. M. Man-Machine Studies 7 (1975) 1 13. T. Zhang Hong Min and Xu Wei. J. Wu Zhi Qiao et al. A linguistic self-organizingprocess controller.J. Fuzzy Sets and Systems 47(1) (1992) 13-21. References [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] J. Fuzzy self-organizingcontroller and its application for dynamic processes. Newell. Mizumoto / Fuzzy Sets and Systems 78 (1996) 23-35 35 is a b o u t to settle down. San Diego (1992) 1153-1162. Fuzzy Sets and Systems 26 (1988) 151-164. Mamdani and S. Direct digital control. . 15 (1985) 116 132. Conf. W i t h the p a r a m e t e r adaptive fuzzy controller. B. A rules self regulating fuzzy controller. Wang Pei Zhuang. Mizumoto.J. Comparison of fuzzy reasoning methods.P. Buckley.