1 s2.0 S0016003215003968 Main

Available online at www.sciencedirect.
com
Journal of the Franklin Institute 353 (2016) 160–179

www.elsevier.com/locate/jfranklin
Mobile robots in singular time-delay form – Modeling

and control
Fotis N. Koumboulisn, Nikolaos D. Kouvakas
Department of Automation Engineering, Sterea Ellada Institute of Technology, Psahna Evias 34400, Greece
Received 23 January 2015; received in revised form 9 September 2015; accepted 27 October 2015
Available online 30 November 2015
Abstract
Modeling and control of a mobile robotic manipulator having a wheeled platform, with passive and active
suspension, and a manipulator carrying an inertia load, is studied. The overall model is developed in a
nonlinear singular neutral time delay system form. The special case of flat road and single joint manipulator
is studied and the linear approximant of its model is derived. Using a dynamic controller involving delays, I/
O decoupling between the vertical position of the load and the velocity of the wheeled platform under the
constraint of norm bounded load contact forces, is derived.
& 2015 The Franklin Institute. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
1. Introduction
Mobile robotic manipulator systems, i.e. robotic manipulators mounted on a mobile platform, have
attracted considerable attention due the wide range of their applications. Several studies deal with
modeling and control of such configurations. In [1], the equations of motion for a system of multiple
mobile manipulators used in agricultural projects including kinematic constraints into the dynamics are
developed. At the same time sufficient conditions for avoiding tipping over of the robots are provided.
In [2], the dynamic model of mobile manipulators grasping rigid objects in contact with deformable
working surfaces is developed. In [3], nonholonomic mobile manipulators are studied and an adaptive
neural control scheme is developed for motion/force control. In [4], the problem of robust adaptive
n
Corresponding author. Tel.: þ30 22280 99674; fax: þ30 22280 99527.
E-mail addresses: koumboulis@teiste.gr (F.N. Koumboulis), kouvakas@teiste.gr (N.D. Kouvakas).
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jfranklin.2015.10.016
0016-0032/& 2015 The Franklin Institute. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
F.N. Koumboulis, N.D. Kouvakas / Journal of the Franklin Institute 353 (2016) 160–179 161
control of multiple manipulators carrying a common object considering unknown inertia parameters
and disturbances is studied. In [5], the dynamic model of a mobile manipulator with non-holonomic
constraints is produced and near-optimal trajectories for the mobile platform and the manipulator joints
are obtained. In [6], adaptive controllers based on reduced dynamic models of mobile manipulators
subject to holonomic and non-holonomic constraints for trajectory and force tracking control are
proposed. In [7], the problem of modeling and tracking control of two robotic arms mounted on a
wheeled mobile platform subject to non-holonomic constraints is studied and a backstepping nonlinear
controller for ground path tracking is developed.
As already mentioned the configuration of robotic arms mounted on wheeled platforms has a wide
range of applications. To attenuate road disturbances, wheeled platforms are usually equipped with
active resonators. Active resonators with delayed feedback of the acceleration are quite efficient (see
[9–12] and the references therein). In [10] a mobile robot system with zero nominal speed (initially still)
is studied. The results in [9–11] has not as yet been extended to wheeled platforms with robotic arms
gripping inertial loads. The carrying load task is of particular interest from the practical point of view.
From the control point of view the robotic manipulators gripping inertial loads may have impulsive
response (see [8] and the references therein). The results in [8] and the references therein concern
robotic manipulators with robotic base anchored in the inertial frame of the workspace.
In the present paper the problem of modeling and control of a mobile manipulator mounted on a
wheeled platform is considered. The mobile robot platform is similar to that in [9–11]. The platform is
equipped with active and passive suspension systems. The active vibration absorbers utilize
acceleration feedback with controlled delay that removes oscillation energy delivered at a specific
frequency. Upon the platform, a conventional robotic manipulator carrying an inertial mass is placed.
Initially, the mathematical model of each component of the mobile robot (platform with passive and
active suspension, manipulator and inertia mass) is developed. These models are combined in an
overall nonlinear state space model belonging to the general class of singular neutral time delay
systems. The class of singular neutral time delay systems appears to be of increasing interest,
particularly the last few years (see [13,14] and the references therein). It is mentioned that the
controllers in [13,14] are limited to be of the static type involving delays. A characteristic of this class of
systems is the presence of repeating impulses in the system response.
The case of a mobile robot that carries a single link manipulator on a flat road is studied here
separately. Using the overall nonlinear model, the respective linear approximant is derived in state
space form. The nonlinear model and the linear approximant are in singular neutral time delay system
form. Based on the linear approximant, a dynamic controller involving delays is proposed. I/O
decoupling between the vertical position of the load and the velocity of the wheeled platform is
achieved. Furthermore, the dynamic controller achieves another design requirement. The requirement is
to preserve sufficiently bounded contact forces between the inertial load and the gripper. The
performance of the proposed design scheme is demonstrated through computational experiments upon
the nonlinear model and its linear approximant, where the robustness of the scheme with respect to
passive absorption uncertainties has been illustrated.
With regard to the contribution of the paper it is mentioned that the dynamic models
developed and the controller designed are presented here for the first time.
2. Mathematical model of a mobile robotic manipulator carrying an inertial mass
In this section, the cart’s dynamic model is developed. The cart is equipped with passive and
active suspension. Upon the cart a robotic manipulator carrying an inertial mass, is mounted.
Each part of the system, i.e. the cart, the passive and active suspensions, the robot and the inertial
162 F.N. Koumboulis, N.D. Kouvakas / Journal of the Franklin Institute 353 (2016) 160–179
mass, will be modeled separately and the algebraic equations expressing the inter-connections
among the system’s parts will be presented.
2.1. Mathematical model of a cart with passive and active suspension
Consider the cart with passive and active suspensions in Fig. 1. The cart is considered to be a
homogeneous platform moving on the 2D plane. The vibrations of the vehicle are absorbed by
four absorbers, two of which are active and the rest are passive. The passive absorbers are two
identical conventional spring–damper structures that connect the platform with the front and the
rear wheels, respectively. The active vibration absorbers are two identical mass–spring–damper
trios that utilize acceleration feedback with controlled delay and are placed on the upper surface
of the platform and at the positions of thefront and the rear wheels, respectively.
Consider the inertial coordinate system o0 ; x0 ; y0 ; z0 in Fig. 1. With respect to the platform
(vehicle), lv , d v and mv denote the length, the width and the mass, respectively, while M v denotes
the moment of inertia with respect to the center of mass of the platform. Let θv be the rotation of
the platform
with respect
T to z0 . R is the wheel radius and g~ is the gravitational
acceleration
vector
(g~ ¼ g 0 0 ) . Assume that the road profile with respect to o 0 ; x 0 ; y 0 ; z 0 is h ð z 0 Þ. The
inclination (angle) of the road profile is φðz0 Þ ¼ tan 1 dh=dz0 . Let zf and zr be the horizontal
distances
of the front and rear wheel contact points from the x0 y0 plane, respectively. Clearly,
φ zf and φðzr Þ are the angles of the road contact points at the front and rear wheels,
respectively. With respect to the passive suspensions, k p and μp are the spring constant and
damping factor respectively and ψ p is the free length of the spring. Let qf and qr be the total
lengths of the front and rear passive springs, respectively. With respect to the active suspensions,
mres , μres , k res , ψ res , gres and τ are the absorber mass, damping factor, spring constant, spring free
length, corrective acceleration feedback gain and acceleration feedback delay. The gain gres and
the delay τ are pre-selected by the resonator designer so that the active absorbers perform as
perfect resonators at a desired natural frequency removing the entire oscillation energy delivered
at the vehicle at the specific frequency. Let xa and xb be the front and rear active suspension
spring lengths, respectively.
Fig. 1. Sketch of a cart with passive and active suspensions.

The nonlinear model of the present mobile robot application will be developed using the Euler
Lagrange formulation. An external force, as well as an external torque is considered to be applied
to the upper surface of the platform at a contact point. The point is at a distance lc in the left of
the center of the mass of the platform. The external force and torque with respect to the fixed
h iT h iT
coordinate system are of the form f c ¼ f c;x0 0 f c;z0 and ηc ¼ 0 ηc;y0 0 . The forces
of the passive and active springs are external forces to the platform. Let f f , ηf and f r , ηr be the
forces and moments exerted by the front active and passive suspensions and the rear active and
passive suspensions, respectively. Let f w and ηw be the force and moment exerted by the front
wheel motor. Let f R be the road reaction/friction forces. The mathematical model of the cart takes
on the form
" # " # " # " #
fw ff fr fc
_ ζ€ ¼ J
ξ ζ; ζ; T
þ Jf
T
þ Jr T
þ JcT
þ fR ð1Þ
w η
w ηf ηr ηc
h iT h iT h i
_ ζ€ ¼ d ∂L ∂L A ℝ31 ði ¼ 1; 2; 3Þ, Jw A ℝ63 ,
where ζ ¼ ζ 1 ζ 2 ζ 3 ¼ zf qf θv ,ξ ζ; ζ; dt ∂ζ_ ∂ζ i i
Jf A ℝ63 , Jr A ℝ63 and are Jacobian matrices and L is the Lagrangian of the mechanism. The
nonzero elements of the Jacobian matrices are

jw 1;1 ¼ dhðz0 Þ=dz0 jz0 ¼ zf ; jw 3;1 ¼ 1; jf 1;1 ¼ dhðz0 Þ=dz0 jz0 ¼ zf Rsφðzf Þ dφðz0 Þ=dz0 jz0 ¼ zf ;

jf 1;2 ¼ 0:5 dv þ 2qf sθ ; jf 1;3 ¼ cθ ; jf 3;1 ¼ 1 Rcφðzf Þ dφðz0 Þ=dz0 ;
z0 ¼ zf

jf 3;2 ¼ lv sθ 0:5cθ dv þ 2qf ; jf 3;3 ¼ sθ ; jf 5;2 ¼ 1;

jr 1;1 ¼ dhðz0 Þ=dz0 Rsφðzf Þ dφðz0 Þ=dz0 jz0 ¼ zf ; jr 1;2
z0 ¼ zf

¼ lv cθ 0:5 dv þ 2qf sθ ; jr 1;3 ¼ cθ ;

jr 3;1 ¼ 1 Rcφðzf Þ dφðz0 Þ=dz0 ; jr 3;2 ¼ lv sθ 0:5cθ dv þ 2qf ;
z0 ¼ zf

jr 3;3 ¼ sθ ; jr 5;2 ¼ 1;

jc 1;1 ¼ dhðz0 Þ=dz0 Rsφðzf Þ dφðz0 Þ=dz0 jz0 ¼ zf ;
z0 ¼ zf

jc 1;2 ¼ 0:5ðlv þ 2lc Þcθ dv þ qf sθ ;

jc 1;3 ¼ cθ ; jc 3;1 ¼ 1 Rcφðzf Þ dφðz0 Þ=dz0 ; jc 5;2 ¼ 1;
z0 ¼ zf

jc ¼ 0:5ðlv þ 2lc Þsθ cθ d v þ qf ;
3;2
jc 3;3 ¼ sθ

and where jw i;j , jf i;j , jr i;j and jc i;j are the i; j elements of Jw , Jf , Jr and Jc respectively.
The Lagrangian of the platform mechanism is computed to be

L ¼ gmv 0:5dv cθ þ Rc φðzf Þ þ h zf þ cθ qf 0:5lv sθ

n 2
þ0:5M v θ_ ðt Þ2 þ 0:125mv 2_zf Rφ_ zf cφðzf Þ 1 þ θ_ dv þ 2qf Þcθ lv sθ þ 2_qf sθ
8 92
<
=
þ0:5mv z_ f h_ zf Rφ_ zf sφðzf Þ 0:5θ_ dv þ 2qf sθ þ lv cθ þ q_ f cθ g
: ;
Model (1) is subject to geometric constraints for the position of the front and rear wheels
formulated in the following nonlinear algebraic equations:

R cφðzf Þ cφðzr Þ þ h zf hðzr Þ þ cθ qf qr lv sθ ¼ 0 ð2aÞ

zf zr þ sθ qr qf þ R sφðzr Þ sφðzf Þ lv cθ ¼ 0 ð2bÞ
To complete the nonlinear model (1), (2) the formulae of the motor and suspension external
forces and torques will be presented. These forces and torques are of the form
h iT T
f w ¼ f m sφðzf Þ 0 f m cφðzf Þ ; ηw ¼ 0 0 0 ;
h iT h iT
f f ¼ f f ;1 0 f f ;3 ; ηf ¼ 0 ηf ;2 0 ;
h iT h iT
f r ¼ f r;1 0 f r;3 ; ηr ¼ 0 ηr;2 0
where f m is a force parallel to the road produced by the motor (actuatable input) and applied to
the center of the front wheel. Similarly to [9–11] it holds that

f f ;1 ¼ cθ kres xa ψ res qf þ μres x_ a q_ f þ gres ∇τ x€ a þ cθ k p ψ p qf μp q_ f

f f ;3 ¼ sθ kres ψ res þ qf xa μres x_ a q_ f gres ∇τ x€ a þ sθ kp qf ψ p þ μp qf

f r;1 ¼ cθ kres xb ψ res qr þ cres x_ b q_ r þ gres ∇τ x€ b þ cθ kp ψ p qr μp q_ r

f r;3 ¼ sθ k res ψ res þ qr xb μres x_ b q_ r gres ∇τ x€ b þ sθ kp qr ψ p þ μp q_ r

1 1
ηf ;2 ¼ mres gsθ xa qf dv ; ηr;2 ¼ mres gsθ xb qr d v
2 2
where ∇τ denotes the delay τ operator.
2.2. Mathematical model of a robotic manipulator with end effector gripping an inertial load
Consider that an n-link robotic manipulator is placed upon the platform. The base of the
robotic manipulator will be considered to move and rotate in the 2D plane (see Fig. 2).
Let q0;1 be the distance between the center of revolution of the base of the robot and o0 . Let
q0;2 be the rotation angle of the base of the robotic manipulator and q0;3 be the distance between
the base of the robotic manipulator and the center of revolution. Let qj (j ¼ 1; …; n) be the
variables of the robotic manipulator joints. Note that qj are the only directly actuatable variables
Fig. 2. Motion variables of the robotic manipulator base.

while q0;1 , q0;2 , and q0;3 are driven by contact forces between the robotic manipulator and the
platform. Based upon the Euler–Lagrange formulation, the equations of motion of the n-link T
manipulator are of the form MR ðqÞq€ ¼zR ðq; q; _ f; f B Þ where zR ðq; q; _ f; f B Þ ¼ 013 τTR þ
JTR ðqÞf þ JTR;B ðqÞf B gR ðq; q_ Þ γR ðqÞ, q ¼ q0;1 q0;2 q0;3 q1 ⋯ qn T A ℝðnþ3Þ1 is the
ðnþ3Þðnþ3Þ
vector of robot base variables and joint angles, MR ðqÞA ℝ is the inertia matrix of the
manipulator, gR ðq; q_ ÞA ℝðnþ3Þ1 is the vector of Coriolis and centrifugal forces, γR ðqÞA ℝðnþ3Þ1
is the vector of gravity forces, JR ðqÞA ℝ3ðnþ3Þ is the Jacobian matrix,
T
τR ¼ τ1 ⋯ τn A ℝn1 is the vector of generalized forces applied at each joint, f A ℝ31
is the vector of contact forces and f B A ℝ61 is the vector of forces and moments exerted to the
robot base from the platform while JR;B ðqÞA ℝ6ðnþ3Þ is the respective Jacobian matrix. The
equation of motion of the pure inertial load, taking into account the contact and gravitational
forces is mI p€ ¼ f mI g, ~ where mI is the mass of the load and p A ℝ31 is the position vector of
the load in a fixed coordinate system. Assuming that the load is rigidly gripped by the robot end
effector, the additional constraint p ¼ πðqÞ must also be satisfied, where πðqÞ is the vector
function representing the direct kinematic relations of the manipulator. Using the above, the
mathematical model of a robotic manipulator with moving and rotating base that grips an inertial
mass is derived to be
2 32 3 2 3
MR ðqÞ 0ðnþ3Þ3 0ðnþ3Þ3 q€ _ f; f B Þ
zR ðq; q;
60 033 7 6 7 6 7
4 3ðnþ3Þ m I I3 54 p€ 5 ¼ 4 f mI g~ 5 ð3Þ
03ðnþ3Þ 033 033 f_ πðqÞ p
The equation in (8) reduces to the model in [8] for the special case where the base of the robot
is fixed.
2.3. Overall dynamic model of the mobile robot gripping an inertial mass
In order to produce the overall dynamic model of the mobile robotic manipulator, the algebraic
constraints upon the generalized coordinates d f , θ, qf and q0;1 , q0;2 , q0;3 as well as the contact
forces and moments will be presented. In particular, the generalized coordinates of the cart and
the robot base are related as follows:
q0;1 ¼ ðlc þ 0:5lv Þcθ þ zf þ Rcφðzf Þ sθ cθ 1

þh zf sθ cθ 1 ðlc þ 0:5lv Þs2θ cθ 1 ; q0;2 ¼ θ ð4aÞ

q0;3 ¼ qf þ Rcφðzf Þ cθ 1 þ h df cθ 1 ðlc þ 0:5lv Þsθ cθ ð4bÞ
Assuming that the base of the robotic manipulator is firmly attached to the platform, the
contact forces between the platform and the robot base are related as follows:
h iT
f B ¼ f c ηTc
T
ð5Þ
Taking into account that the system moves on the 2D plane, the algebraic constraints (2), (4),
(5) and the dynamic Eqs. (1) and (3), the overall nonlinear model for the mobile robotic system is
produced. In the produced model, the contact forces between the cart and the base of the robotic
manipulator have been substituted by formulae involving the rest of the variables of the system.
The state vector and the input vector of the overall model are
h iT h
χ ¼ χ1 ⋯ χ 2nþ20 ¼ zf qf zr qr θ xa xb q1 ⋯ qn px pz fx fz z_f q_ f z_r q_ r ┆
T h iT
┆θ_ x_ a x_ b q_ 1 ⋯ q_ n p_ x p_ z
T
; r ¼ r1 r2 ⋯ r nþ1 ¼ fm τ1 ⋯ τn
Thus, the overall nonlinear model is of the form

_ ∇τ χ_ Þ ¼ βðχ; rÞ
αðχ; χ; ð6Þ
where αð U; U; U Þ and βð U ; U Þ are nonlinear functions determined by (1)–(4). The model in (6)
includes the delay operator in the derivative of the state vector. It belongs to the general class of
nonlinear singular neutral time delay systems.
3. A mobile telescopic manipulator on flat road the carries an inertial mass
3.1. Nonlinear model of the mobile telescopic manipulator on flat road
In order to demonstrate the results presented in the previous section, consider that the mobile
platform is equipped with a single link telescopic manipulator carrying an inertial mass (see
Fig. 3). The road profile is considered to be flat. Clearly, the nonlinear model of the process is of
the form (6) with n ¼ 1. The masses of the telescopic manipulator link and base are denoted by
mL and mB respectively, and the moments of inertia M L and M B respectively. The center of mass
of the manipulator’s base is considered to be at a height lB form the platform’s level while the
center of mass of the robot’s link is located at a distance lL from the end effector.
The state vector of the present mobile robot configuration is
T h
χ ¼ χ 1 ⋯ χ 22 ¼ zf qf zr qr θ xa xb q1 px ┆
θ_
T
pz fx fz z_f q_ f z_ r q_ r x_ a x_ b q_ 1 p_ x p_ z
T h iT
r ¼ r1 r2 ¼ fm τR ; τR A ℝ
In the present case, the nonlinear model in (6) is specified to αðχ; χ; ^ 1 ðχÞχ_ ðt Þ þ
_ ∇τ χ_ Þ ¼ E
Ê2 ðχÞ∇τ χ_ ðt Þ f^ ðχÞ and βðχ; rÞ ¼ Br,
^ i.e. it is specified to the following nonlinear singular
Fig. 3. Sketch of a cart with passive and active suspensions on a flat road carrying a single link robotic arm.
neutral time delay system:

E _ f^ ðχÞ ¼ Br
^ 1 ðχÞχ_ þ E^ 2 ðχÞ∇τ χ ^ ð7Þ
^ ^ ^ ^
where the nonzero elements of E1 ðχÞ, E2 ðχÞ, f ðχÞ and B are presented in the Appendix A. Note
that the system matrices E ^ 1 ðχÞ and E^ 2 ðχÞ are not invertible.
3.2. Towards the derivation of a linear approximant
It is observed that the robot joint variable is unstable. To overcome this situation an inner loop
controller will be applied. The controller is chosen to be of the form

r 2 ¼ ðmL þ mI Þg þ ðmL þ mI Þ xc;4 þ λP xc;1 χ 8 þ λD xc;2 χ 20 ð8aÞ
T T
Ec x_ c;1 x_ c;2 x_ c;3 x_ c;4 ¼ Ac xc;1 xc;2 xc;3 xc;4 þ bc qd ð8bÞ
where λP and λD A ℝ,qd is the inner loop external command, while
2 3 2 3 2 3
1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0
60 0 0 7 6 7 6 7
6 07 6 1 0 0 0 7 617
Ec ¼ 6 7; Ac ¼ 6 7; bc ¼ 6 7
40 0 1 05 4 0 0 0 15 405
0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0
It is remarked that the present controller satisfies command following in the case where the
manipulator’s base is anchored in the inertial frame of the workspace. This is plausible since in
most practical cases a standard inverse dynamics controller is preinstalled to the manipulators.
In order to produce the inner closed loop system, define the augmented state vector and the
new input vector
T h iT
x ¼ x1 ⋯ x26 ¼ χ 1 ⋯ χ 22 xc;1 xc;2 xc;3 xc;4 ;
T h iT
u ¼ u1 u2 ¼ f m qd
Applying elementary computations, it can be observed that the inner closed loop nonlinear
system takes on the form
E~ 1 ðxÞ_x þ E~ 2 ðxÞ∇τ x_ ¼ f~ ðxÞ þ Bu~ ð9aÞ
" # " #
^ 1 ðxÞ 0224
E ^ 2 ðxÞ 0224
E
E~ 1 ðxÞ ¼ ; E~ 2 ðxÞ ¼ ;
0422 Ec 0422 044
h iT
f ðx~ Þ ¼ f ðxÞ x24 x23 x26 x24 x25
T
ð9bÞ
where the nonzero elements of B~ A ℝ262 are b~ 11;1 ¼ 1 and b~ 24;2 ¼ 1. The elements of f ðxÞ are
equal to those of f^ ðχÞ except the 14th element where f 14 ðxÞ ¼ f^ 14 ðxÞ þ ðmL þ mI Þgþ ðmL þ mI Þ
½x26 þ λP ðx23 x8 Þ þ λD ðx24 x20 Þ. In what follows, the dynamic model in Eq. (9) will be used
in order to generate a linear approximant.
Following, a linear approximant of the inner closed loop system (9) will be produced assuming
that the vehicle moves at constant horizontal velocity vn . Let xi be the nominal points of xi for
i ¼ 2; 4; :::; 9; 11; 12; 14; 16; …; 20; 22; …; 26, where x13 ¼ vn , x15 ¼ vn and x21 ¼ vn . So the
nominal trajectories for the horizontal positions of the wheels and the inertial load
1
are x1 ðt Þ ¼ tvn ,
x3 ðt Þ ¼ vn t lv cx5 1 and x
10 ð t Þ ¼ v n t 0:5c ðl
x5 v þ 2l c Þþ0:25k p s c 1
x5 x5 1 þ c2x5 gmt
2kp lv sx5 þ 2cx5 hv þ x8 þ ψ 0 g, where mt ¼ mB þ mv þ mI þ mL þ 2mres . Let xðt Þ and u be
the nominal trajectories of the state T and input h i
vectors of the model (9). It holds that
T
x_ ¼ vn 0 vn 016 vn 0112 . Let u ¼ 0 x8 , where x8 is the nominal value for the
inner loop controller external command. Using the above assumptions, the elements of x are
evaluated to be
h
i
x1 ðt Þ ¼ vn t; x2 ¼ 0:5k p 1 cx5 k p cx5 1 lv sx5 cx5 1 þ 2ψ p gmt ;

x3 ðt Þ ¼ vn t lv cx5 1 ; x4 ¼ 0:5 2ψ p lv sx5 cx5 1 0:5kp 1 gcx5 mt

h i g0:5k m þ k m c
1 res t p res x5
x6 ¼ 0:5 2 ψ p þ ψ res þ lv sx5 cx5 ;
kp k res

1
x7 ¼ ψ p þ ψ res 0:5gcx5 2mres kres þ kp 1 mt 0:5lv sx5 cx5 1

x8 ¼ λP 1 g 1 cx5 þ x8 ; x9 ¼ lc sx5 0:25 c2x5 þ 1 kp 1 mt g cx5 d v þ ψ p þ x8 R;
x10 ðt Þ ¼ vn t lc cx5 0:5lv cx5 1

sx5 d v þ ψ p þ λP 1 g 1 cx5 þ x8 þ 0:25kp 1 gs2x5 mt ; x11 ¼ mI g;
x12 ¼ 0; x13 ¼ vn ; x14 ¼ 0; x15 ¼ vn ; x16 ¼ 0; x17 ¼ 0;
x18 ¼ 0; x19 ¼ 0; x20 ¼ 0; x21 ¼ 0; x22 ¼ vn ; x23 ¼ x8 ; x24 ¼ 0; x25 ¼ 0; x26 ¼ 0
while the nominal value of the platform’s angle is the solution of the algebraic equation
γ 1 sx5 cx5 1 þ γ 2 s3x5 cx5 1 þ γ 3 s2x5 cx5 1 þ γ 4 c2x5 cx5 1 þ γ 5 cx5 1 ¼ 0
where
1 2
γ 1 ¼ 0:5g2 kres mres þ 0:125g2 k p 1 ðmt 2mres Þmt
h i
1 2
þ0:5kp l2v ; γ 2 ¼ 0:125g2 4kres mres þ kp 1 ðmt 2mres Þmt
γ 5 ¼ 0:25g½lv ðmt 2mres Þ þ 2lc ðmB þ mI þ mL Þ;
1
γ 3 ¼ gðd v ½mB þ mv þ 2ðmI þ mL mres Þ þ 2flB mB lL mL
4
þψ p ðmt 2mres Þ þ λP 1 g 1 cx5 þ x8 ðmI þ mL Þ þ 2mres ψ res Þ;
γ 4 ¼ 0:25g½lv ðmt 2mres Þ 2lc ðmB þ mI þ mL Þ
The deviations around the nominal values of the inputs and state variables are Δw ¼ u u and
Δx ¼ x x respectively. Based on the evaluation of the operating trajectories the following
remark can be proven:
Remark 3.1. : The matrices E1 ¼ E~ 1 ðxÞA ℝ2626 , E2 ¼ E~ 2 ðxÞ A ℝ2626 , B1 ¼ B~ A ℝ262 and

∂ f~ ðxÞ E~ 1 ðxÞ_x E~ 2 ðxÞ∇τ x_
A1 ¼
∂x x ¼ xðtÞ; x_ ¼ x_
∇τ x_ ¼ x_
are independent oftand the linear approximant of the nonlinear model(9)is derived to be in the
followinglinear time invariant singular time delay system form
E1 δ_xðt Þ þ E2 δ_xðt τÞ ¼ A1 δxðt Þ þ B1 δuðt Þ ð10Þ
where δu ¼ Δu and δx is the response of the linear approximant, approximating the deviation Δx.
The nonzero elements ofA1 are presented in the Appendix A.□
3.3. Accuracy of the Linear Approximant
In what follows the accuracy of the linear approximant (10) will be tested via series of
computational experiments. Assume that the model (9) operates on certain operating conditions.
In particular, let u1 and u2 be the nominal values of the inputs for the inner closed loop system
resulting to the respective operating trajectories of the state variables, denoted by x1 ðt Þ, x3 ðt Þ,
x10 ðt Þ and xj for j ¼ 2; 4; …; 9; 11; …; 26. For the computational experiments, the external
commands are chosen to be of the form
ui ðt Þ ¼ ui þ u^ i ρðt; τ1 ; τ2 ; T 1 ; T 2 ; T 3 Þ; i ¼ 1; 2 ð11Þ

where u^ i A ðu^ i Þmin ; ðu^ i Þmax and where
ρðt; τ1 ; τ2 ; T 1 ; T 2 ; T 3 Þ ¼ sðt; τ1 Þ sðt; τ2 Þ
τ1 t τ1 t τ1 t
e T1
T 21 ðT 2 T 3 Þ e T 2 T 22 ðT 1 T 3 Þ þ e T 3 T 23 ðT 1 T 2 Þ
sðt; τ1 Þ
ðT 1 T 2 ÞðT 1 T 3 ÞðT 2 T 3 Þ
τ2 t τ2 t τ2 t
e T 21 ðT 2 T 3 Þ e T 2 T 22 ðT 1 T 3 Þ þ e T 3 T 23 ðT 1 T 2 Þ
T1
þ sðt; τ2 Þ;
( ðT 1 T 2 ÞðT 1 T 3 ÞðT 2 T 3 Þ
0 toτi
sðt; τi Þ ¼ ; i ¼ 1; 2
1 t Z τi
is a smooth pulse, with τ1 oτ2 . T 1 , T 2 and T 3 are positive constants being different among
themselves. The form of ρ is such that its 1st and 2nd derivative with respect to time are smooth.
After applying the above input changes to the nonlinear model (9), the system response for the
state variables xj (j ¼ 1; …; 26) are computed. The responses of the linear approximant are
compared to those of the nonlinear model using a Euclidian type norm the form [15]

J % xj ; δxj ¼ 100% ‖xj δxj xj ‖2 =‖xj xj ‖2 ð12Þ
R 2
0:5
τmax þ
where ‖xj ðt Þ‖2 ¼ 0 xj ðt Þ dt and τmax A ℝ where τmax represents a time instance, greater
than the relaxation time of the argument response. To evaluate the cost criterion in (12), consider
the test case

vn ¼ 1 m=s ; g ¼ 9:81 m=s2 ; gres ¼ 0:01833½kg; mres ¼ 0:177½kg;

kres ¼ 3490000 N=m ; μres ¼ 81:8 kg=s ;

τ ¼ 0:000387487½s; ψ res ¼ 0:1½m; kp ¼ 62000 N=m ; μp ¼ 2500 kg=s ;

ψ p ¼ 0:3½m; lv ¼ 0:5½m; lc ¼ 0:2½m; dv ¼ 0:01½m; M v ¼ 0:329967 kg Um2 ;

mv ¼ 15:2½kg; lL ¼ 0:25½m; mL ¼ 0:4241½kg; M L ¼ 0:0088 kgU m2 ;

mB ¼ 0:5301½kg; M B ¼ 0:0111 kgU m2 ; R ¼ 0:05½m; mI ¼ 0:2½kg; λP ¼ 2 s 2 ;

λD ¼ 3 s 1 ; T 1 ¼ 0:01½s; T 2 ¼ 0:02½s; T 3 ¼ 0:03½s
Choosing x8 ¼ 0:75½m and applying elementary computations, the operating curves are
evaluated to be
u1 ¼ 0½N; u2 ¼ 0:75½m; x1 ¼ t ½m; x2 ¼ 0:298752½m;
x3 ¼ t 0:50000002½m; x4 ¼ 0:298605½m;
x5 ¼ 0:000294262½rad; x6 ¼ 0:398751½m; x7 ¼ 0:398604½m;

x8 ¼ 0:75½m; x9 ¼ 1:10862½m;

x10 ¼ t 0:450312½m; x11 ¼ 1:962½N; x12 ¼ 0½N; x13 ¼ 1 m=s ;

x14 ¼ 0 m=s ; x15 ¼ 1 m=s ; x16 ¼ 0 m=s ;

x17 ¼ 0 rad=s ; x18 ¼ 0 m=s ; x19 ¼ 0 m=s ; x20 ¼ 0 m=s ;

x21 ¼ 0 m=s ; x22 ¼ 0 m=s ; x23 ¼ 0:75½m;

x24 ¼ 0 m=s ; x25 ¼ 0 m=s ; x26 ¼ 0 m=s
Using the above presented data and applying series ofcomputations
it can be observed that the
maximum value of the cost criterion (12), i.e. max J % xj ; δxj , is below 10% for 5½N
j ¼ 1;…;26
r u^ 1 r 5½N and 0:1½mr u^ 2 r 0:1½m. Hence, the linear approximant is a satisfactory
approximation of the nonlinear model for a wide range of inputs. Thus a controller can be
designed on the basis of the linear approximant.
3.4. Stability properties of the linear approximant
With regard to the linear approximant it is important to mention that, in accordance to the
nonlinear model, the variations of the horizontal positions of the wheels and the inertial load
have unstable forced and free response. After taking into account that the platform is driven by a
horizontal force it is expected that variations of the horizontal velocities of the wheels and the
inertial load should have a weakly stable forced response. It is also important to mention that in
the linear approximant the variation of the horizontal positions of the rear wheel and the inertial
load can be expressed as linear algebraic mapping of the rest of the state position variables.
In order to study the asymptotic stability of the linear approximant (10) it is observed that the
characteristic polynomial of the linear approximant is of the form pðs; zÞ ¼ s2 pðs; zÞ where
z ¼ e sτ . The double pole at zero has already been interpreted by the response of the variations
of the horizontal positions and the respective velocities. With regard to pðs; zÞ it is observed that
after applying the stability criterion in [17] to the test case presented in Section 3.3 it is observed
that pðs; zÞ is Hurwitz independently from the delay. In particular, it holds that

pðs; zÞ ¼ 1 þ α1;10 z þ α2;10 z2 s10 þ α0;9 þ α1;9 z þ α2;9 z2 s9 þ α0;8 þ α1;8 z þ α2;8 z2 s8

þ α0;7 þ α1;7 z þ α2;7 z2 s7 þ α0;6 þ α1;6 z þ α2;6 z2 s6



þ α0;1 þ α1;1 z þ α2;1 z2 s þ α0;0 þ α1;0 z þ α2;0 z2
where
α1;10 ¼ 0:207119; α2;10 ¼ 0:0107245; α0;9 ¼ 1784:77; α1;9 ¼ 271:128; α2;9 ¼ 8:93696;
α0;8 ¼ 4:1787 107 ; α1;8 ¼ 4:32324 106 ; α2;8 ¼ 1993:42;

α0;7 ¼ 5:29942 1010 ; α1;7 ¼ 3:47019 109 ;
α2;7 ¼ 92484:2; α0;6 ¼ 4:34947 1014 ; α1;6 ¼ 7:61245 1011 ;
α2;6 ¼ 1:33668 106 ; α0;5 ¼ 3:36748 1017 ;
α1;5 ¼ 3:52333 1013 ; α2;5 ¼ 3:39239 106 ; α0;4 ¼ 7:26755 1019 ;
Fig. 4. Spectral radius of M α ðjωÞ.
α1;4 ¼ 5:09034 1014 ;

α2;4 ¼ 2:1462 106 ; α0;3 ¼ 3:35566 1021 ; α1;3 ¼ 1:29183 1015 ;
α2;3 ¼ 0; α0;2 ¼ 4:84627 1022 ; α1;2 ¼ 8:17266 1014 ; α2;2 ¼ 0;
α0;1 ¼ 1:22983 1023 ; α1;1 ¼ 0; α2;1 ¼ 0;
α0;0 ¼ 7:7803 1022 ; α1;0 ¼ 0; α2;0 ¼ 0
Using results in [17], it is observed that pðs; zÞ is Hurwitz independently from the delay if and
only if
(i) the polynomial bðzÞ ¼ z2 þ α1;10 z þ α2;10 is Schur stable,

P
9
(ii) the polynomial α0 ðsÞ ¼ s10 þ α0;j sj is stable,
j¼0
P
10 P
10
(iii) the polynomial λðsÞ ¼ α0 ðsÞ þ α1;j sj þ α2;j sj is stable, and
j¼0 j¼0
2 3
X
10 X
10
6 α1;j s j
α2;j s j
7
6 7
(iv) ρðM α ðjωÞÞo1, 8ω40 where M α ðsÞ ¼ 6 j ¼ 0 j¼0 7 and where ρðÞ is the
4 α0 ðsÞ α 0 ðs Þ 5
1 0
spectral radius of the argument matrix.
It can easily be verified that conditions (i)–(iii) hold true. With respect to condition (iv), it is
observed that the maximum value of the spectral radius M α ðjωÞ for ω40 is equal to 0.971 (see
Fig. 4). Thus the condition (iv) is satisfied. Hence, the polynomial pðs; zÞ is Hurwitz
independently from the delay.
From the above analysis it is observed that even though the “core” of the linear approximant is
stable the position of the front wheel as well as other variables have unstable forced response.
This position of the front wheel is of particular importance for the evaluation of the performance
of the mobile robotic system. Furthermore, from the linear approximant (10) and using the test
case presented in Section 3.3 it is observed that the position of the load is inherently dependent
upon many other the variables and thus it is not controlled independently. Clearly, the position of
the load is also of particular importance for the evaluation of the performance of the mobile
robotic system and the accomplishment of complex tasks regarding the motion of the carried
load. For these reasons an outer controller will be developed in the next section.
4. Outer loop linear controller design
In the present section a dynamic I/O Decoupling controller will be developed in order to
regulate the performance outputs of the system. For the system at hand, two main performance
variables will be considered, i.e. the vertical position of the inertial mass and the forward velocity
of the front wheel of the cart, i.e. it holds that ym ðt Þ ¼ Cm xðt Þ, where Cm A ℝ226 and where its
nonzero elements are ðcm Þ1;9 ¼ 1 and ðcm Þ2;13 ¼ 1. The performance variable vector will be
augmented to include secondary performance variables, i.e. the contact forces between the
inertial mass and the gripper. i.e. ys ðt Þ ¼ Cs xðt Þ, where Cs A ℝ226 and where its nonzero
elements are ðcs Þ1;11 ¼ 1 and ðcs Þ2;12 ¼ 1. Hence, the overall performance vector takes on the
h i
T T T
form yðt Þ ¼ Cm Cs xðt Þ. Clearly, main and secondary performance variables cannot be
controlled independently. Consequently, the design goal will be that of I/O decoupling for the
main variables while simultaneously preserving the secondary performance variables to be
appropriately bounded. The measurable variables of the system are consider to be the robot joint
variable x8 and the velocity of the front wheel of the cart x13 . Hence, the vector of measurable
variables is, let ψðt Þ, is evaluated through ψðt Þ ¼ Cf xðt Þ, where Cf A ℝ226 and where its

nonzero elements are cf 1;8 ¼ 1 and cf 2;13 ¼ 1. The system in (10) can be described in the
frequency domain by the following set of algebraic equations:

sðE1 þ zE2 Þℑ δxðt Þ ¼ A1 ℑ δxðt Þ þ B1 ℑ δuðt Þ ð13aÞ
h T iT
ℑ δyðt Þ ¼ Cm CTs ℑ δxðt Þ ; ℑ δψðt Þ ¼ Cf ℑ δxðt Þ ð13bÞ
whereℑfgdenotes the Laplace transform of the argument signal. Similarly to the results
presented in [15] for I/O decoupling of normal linear neutral time delay systems, the controller is
chosen to be

ℑ δuðt Þ ¼ Kðs; zÞℑ δψðt Þ þ Gðs; zÞℑ δwðt Þ ð14Þ
T
where δwðt Þ ¼ δw1 ðt Þ δw2 ðt Þ is the vector of external commands and where Kðs; zÞ ¼

κ i;j ðs; zÞ and Gðs; zÞ ¼ gi;j ðs; zÞ (i; jA f1; 2g) with gi;j ðs; zÞ and κi;j ðs; zÞ being rational functions
ofswith coefficients being rational functions of z. Applying elementary computations upon (13a)
and (14), the closed loop system in the frequency domain takes on the form

ℑ δxðt Þ ¼ Hc ðs; zÞℑ δwðt Þ ð15Þ
where Hc ðs; zÞ ¼ ½sðE1 þ zE2 Þ A1 B1 Kðs; zÞCf 1 B1 Gðs; zÞ.

As already mentioned, the first design requirement is to control independently the main
performance variables of the system. This translates to a diagonal transfer matrix mapping the
external commands to the main performance variables, i.e.

Cm Hc ðs; zÞ ¼ diag hm;j ðs; zÞ ð16Þ
j ¼ 1;2
where hm;j ðs; zÞ are different than zero stable realizable rational functions of s with coefficients
being rational functions of z. With regard to the main performance variables, command following
is desired. Hence, it must further hold that hm;1 ð0; 1Þ ¼ hm;2 ð0; 1Þ ¼ 1. Similarly to [16], the
elements of Gðs; zÞ are selected to be

g1;1 ðs; zÞ ¼ H m;1 ðs; zÞ h13;2 ðs; zÞ þ h13;1 ðs; zÞh8;2 ðs; zÞ h13;2 ðs; zÞh8;1 ðs; zÞ κ 1;1 ðs; zÞ =

h13;2 ðs; zÞh9;1 ðs; zÞ h13;1 ðs; zÞh9;2 ðs; zÞ ð17aÞ

g1;2 ðs; zÞ ¼ H m;2 ðs; zÞ h9;2 ðs; zÞ þ ðh8;2 ðs; zÞh9;1 ðs; zÞ

h8;1 ðs; zÞh9;2 ðs; zÞÞ κ 1;1 ðs; zÞðh13;1 ðs; zÞh9;2 ðs; zÞþ

h13;2 ðs; zÞh9;1 ðs; zÞÞ 1 κ1;2 ðs; zÞ ð17bÞ

g2;1 ðs; zÞ ¼ H m;1 ðs; zÞ h13;1 ðs; zÞ þ h13;2 ðs; zÞh8;1 ðs; zÞ h13;1 ðs; zÞh8;2 ðs; zÞ κ 2;1 ðs; zÞ =

h13;1 ðs; zÞh9;2 ðs; zÞ h13;2 ðs; zÞh9;1 ðs; zÞ ð17cÞ

g2;2 ðs; zÞ ¼ H m;2 ðs; zÞ h9;1 ðs; zÞ þ ðh8;1 ðs; zÞh9;2 ðs; zÞ

h8;2 ðs; zÞh9;1 ðs; zÞÞ κ 2;1 ðs; zÞðh13;2 ðs; zÞh9;1 ðs; zÞþ

h13;1 ðs; zÞh9;2 ðs; zÞÞ 1 κ2;2 ðs; zÞ ð17dÞ
where hi;j ðs; zÞ is the fi; jg element of the inner closed loop transfer matrix mapping the inputs to
the state vector. Clearly, using Eq. (17) the first design requirement is satisfied. The rational
functions κ i;j ðs; zÞare arbitrary under the constraint to preserve closed loop stability and
solvability [16]. It is mentioned that if κi;j ðs; zÞ are selected static, i.e. independent of s and z, they
do not influence the denominators of gi;j ðs; zÞ. Nevertheless, they affect the numerators and thus
they may affect the stability of the precompensator.
With respect to the secondary performance variables it can be observed that the transfer matrix
mapping the external commands to them is of the form

Cs Hc ðs; zÞ ¼ diag hm;j ðs; zÞ H ~ ðs; zÞ ð18Þ
j ¼ 1;2
~ ðs; zÞ are computed to be

where the elements of H

h~ 1;1 ðs; zÞ ¼ h11;2 ðs; zÞh13;1 ðs; zÞ h11;1 ðs; zÞh13;2 ðs; zÞ = h13;1 ðs; zÞh9;2 ðs; zÞ h13;2 ðs; zÞh9;1 ðs; zÞ ð19aÞ

h~ 2;1 ðs; zÞ ¼ h11;2 ðs; zÞh9;1 ðs; zÞ h11;1 ðs; zÞh9;2 ðs; zÞ = h13;2 ðs; zÞh9;1 ðs; zÞ h13;1 ðs; zÞh9;2 ðs; zÞ ð19bÞ

h~ 1;2 ðs; zÞ ¼ h12;2 ðs; zÞh13;1 ðs; zÞ h12;1 ðs; zÞh13;2 ðs; zÞ = h13;1 ðs; zÞh9;2 ðs; zÞ h13;2 ðs; zÞh9;1 ðs; zÞ ð19cÞ

h~ 2;2 ðs; zÞ ¼ h12;2 ðs; zÞh9;1 ðs; zÞ h12;1 ðs; zÞh9;2 ðs; zÞ = h13;2 ðs; zÞh9;1 ðs; zÞ h13;1 ðs; zÞh9;2 ðs; zÞ ð19dÞ
As already mentioned, it is desired for the secondary performance variables to be appropriately
bounded. This design goal is translated to ‖Cs Hc ðs; zÞ‖1 r ε, where ε A ℝþ . For the infinity
norm of the transfer matrix mapping the external commands to the secondary performance

~ ðs; zÞ‖1 . From Eq. (19) it can be
variables it holds that ‖Cs Hc ðs; zÞ‖1 r ‖ diag hm;j ðs; zÞ ‖1 ‖H
j ¼ 1;2
~ ðs; zÞ depends only upon the open loop system. It can be observed that the design
observed that H
Fig. 5. Closed loop response of the nonlinear model and the linear approximant for the main performance variables
(visually identical).
Fig. 6. Closed loop response of the nonlinear model for the secondary performance variables.
Fig. 7. Closed loop response of the nonlinear model for the actuator forces.
goal for the secondary performance variables is achieved if hm;1 ðs; zÞ and hm;2 ðs; zÞ are chosen

such that ‖ diag hm;j ðs; zÞ ‖1 r ε=‖H~ ðs; zÞ‖1 . Considering that hm;1 ð0; 1Þ ¼ hm;2 ð0; 1Þ ¼ 1 it can
j ¼ 1;2

be observed that ‖ diag hm;j ðs; zÞ ‖1 Z 1. Hence, the upper bound ε is constrained to be greater
j ¼ 1;2

~ ðs; zÞ‖1 . Anyway, in what follows we will minimize ‖ diag hm;j ðs; zÞ ‖1 .
than or equal to ‖H
j ¼ 1;2
1
Towards this end, the choice hm;i ðs; zÞ ¼ ∏νj i¼ 1 τi;j s þ 1 (i ¼ 1; 2), where τi;j 40, guarantees
stability for the transfer matrix mapping the external commands to the main performance outputs.
Fot the precompensator
Gðs; zÞ to be proper, choose v1 Z 2 and v2 Z 1.This choice leads to the
minimization J 1 hm;1 ; hm;2 ¼ 1.
5. Performance of the closed loop system
5.1. Controller selection
In order to demonstrate the performance of the closed loop system, the controller presented in
Eq. (14) will be evaluated using the numerical data presented in Section 3. Furthermore, the
closed loop transfer functions mapping the external commands to the main performance variables
are selected to be v1 ¼ v2 ¼ 2, τi;1 ¼ 1:00, τi;2 ¼ 1:25 (i ¼ 1; 2). The elements of the static
feedback matrix is κ 1;1 ¼ 7:1418, κ1;2 ¼ 14:9239, κ2;1 ¼ 5:0193 and κ 2;2 ¼ 2:2679. From
the above selection, a stability margin of 1 is derived thus stabilizing the forward velocity
of the

vehicle. The external commands are selected to be δw1 ðt Þ ¼ 0:1½m and δw2 ðt Þ ¼ 0:05 m=sec .
So, the precompensator matrix can be evaluated using Eq. (17). In what follows, the closed loop
response for the proposed control scheme is presented.
5.2. Simulations of the nonlinear closed loop system
In Figs. 5 and 6 the nonlinear responses for the primary and the secondary performance
variables are presented while in Fig. 7 the actuator forces are presented.
With respect to the main performance variables (see Fig. 5) it can be observed that the
performance variables responses are visually identical to the response signals resulting from the
linear approximant. In particular, with respect to the load vertical position, the maximum error
between the nonlinear response and respective response resulting from the linear approximant is
5
less than 5:465 U10
5
½m , while for the forward velocity of the cart the respective error is less
than 1:207 U10 m=s . With respect to the secondary performance variables, i.e. the contact
forces acting upon the inertial mass (see Fig. 6), they remain small, certainly within acceptable
limits. Similar conclusions can be drawn for the actuatable inputs (see Fig. 7). They are smooth
and their peak values are small, thus guaranteeing ease of implementation by standard force
actuators.
5.3. Sensitivity analysis of the nonlinear closed loop system
With respect to the above proposed control scheme, it is important to mention that its
performance remains satisfactory even for drastic changes of the uncertain parameters of the
system. Indicatively, assume that the passive suspension parameters k p and μp are not accurately
known and in order to produce the controller the designer uses their nominal values. Applying
series of computational experiments and assuming that nominal values for the above parameters
are equal to the values presented in Section 3, it can be observed that the responses for the main
performance variables remain visually identical (with a norm error not exceeding 0:01%) for
deviations of both parameters exceeding 99%.
6. Conclusions
The problem of modeling and control for a class of mobile robots including a conventional
robot manipulator carrying inertial load is studied. The mobile platform of the configuration is
equipped with passive and active suspension systems. The active vibration absorbers utilize
acceleration feedback with controlled delay. The mathematical model of each component of the
mobile robot has analytically been produced. The overall nonlinear state space model of the
configuration has been derived to be in the form of a singular neutral time delay system. The
special case where the mobile robot carries a single joint telescopic and moves on flat road is
studied separately. For this case, the nonlinear model and its linear approximant have been
evaluated. Based on the linear approximant and using a dynamic and controller involving delays,
I/O decoupling between the vertical position of the load and the forward velocity of the cart has
been accomplished under the constraint of norm bounded load contact forces. The performance
of the proposed control scheme has been investigated through computational experiments upon
the nonlinear model and its linear approximant. Satisfactory performance of the closed loop
system has been demonstrated even for drastic deviations of the passive vibration uncertainties.
Appendix A
A.1. The nonzero elements of E^ 1 ðχÞ, E^ 2 ðχÞ, f^ ðχÞ and B

^
ðe^ 1 Þ1;1 ðχÞ ¼ 1; ðe^ 1 Þ2;2 ðχÞ ¼ 1; ðe^ 1 Þ3;3 ðχÞ ¼ 1; ðe^ 1 Þ4;4 ðχÞ ¼ 1;
ðe^ 1 Þ5;5 ðχÞ ¼ 1; ðe^ 1 Þ6;6 ðχÞ ¼ 1; ðe^ 1 Þ7;7 ðχÞ ¼ 1; ðe^ 1 Þ8;8 ðχÞ ¼ 1;
ðe^ 1 Þ9;9 ðχÞ ¼ 1; ðe^ 1 Þ10;10 ðχÞ ¼ 1; ðe^ 1 Þ11;13 ðχÞ ¼ m ~ B;

ðe^ 1 Þ12;13 ðχÞ ¼ 0:5 sχ 5 ½lv m ~ B þ 2ðmB þ mL Þd v þ

cχ 5 2lB mB 2lL mL þ dv ðm~ B þ mL Þ þ 2m~ B χ 2 þ 2mL χ 8 ;
ðe^ 1 Þ13;13 ðχÞ ¼ m~ B sχ 5 ; ðe^ 1 Þ14;13 ðχÞ ¼ mL sχ 5 ;
ðe^ 1 Þ11;14 ðχÞ ¼ m~ B sχ 5 ; ðe^ 1 Þ12;14 ðχÞ ¼ 0:5lv m ~ B ðmB þ mL Þlc ;
~ B ; ðe^ 1 Þ14;14 ðχÞ ¼ mL ;
ðe^ 1 Þ13;14 ðχÞ ¼ m

ðe^ 1 Þ11;17 ðχÞ ¼ 0:5 cχ 5 2 lL mL lB mB m~ B χ 2 dv ðm~ B þ mL Þ 2mL χ 8

þsχ 5 ½lv m~ B þ 2ð m ~ B þ mL Þlc

ðe^ 1 Þ12;17 ðχÞ ¼ l2B mB þ l2L mL þ 0:125 l2v m~ B þ h2v ðm~ B þ 3mL Þ þ d v ðlB mB 2lL mL Þ
þχ 2 ½2ðlB mB lL mL Þ þ dv ðm ~ B þ mL Þ

þm ~ B χ 2 þ 2mL dv lL þ χ 2 χ 8 þ mL χ 28 þ lv ðmB þ mL Þlc
þðmB þ mL Þl2c þ M B þ M v þ M L
ðe^ 1 Þ13;17 ðχÞ ¼ 0:5lv m ~ B ðmB þ mL Þlc ; ðe^ 1 Þ14;17 ðχÞ ¼ 0:5mL ðlv þ 2lc Þ;
ðe^ 1 Þ11;20 ðχÞ ¼ mL sχ 5 ; ðe^ 1 Þ12;20 ðχÞ ¼ 0:5mL ðlv þ 2lc Þ; ðe^ 1 Þ13;20 ðχÞ ¼ mL ;
ðe^ 1 Þ14;20 ðχÞ ¼ mL ; ðe^ 1 Þ15;18 ðχÞ ¼ 1; ðe^ 1 Þ16;19 ðχÞ ¼ 1;
ðe^ 1 Þ21;21 ðχÞ ¼ 1; ðe^ 1 Þ22;22 ðχÞ ¼ 1; ðe^ 2 Þ11;18 ðχÞ ¼ gres sχ 5 ;
1
ðe^ 2 Þ13;18 ðχÞ ¼ gres ; ðe^ 2 Þ15;18 ðχÞ ¼ gres mres ;
ðe^ 2 Þ11;19 ðχÞ ¼ gres sχ 5 ; ðe^ 2 Þ12;19 ðχÞ ¼ gres lv ; ðe^ 2 Þ13;19 ðχÞ ¼ gres ;
1 ^
ðe^ 2 Þ16;19 ðχÞ ¼ gres mres ; f 1;1 ðχÞ ¼ χ 13 ;
f^ 2;1 ðχÞ ¼ χ 14 ; f^ 3;1 ðχÞ ¼ χ 15 ; f^ 4;1 ðχÞ ¼ χ 16 ; f^ 5;1 ðχÞ ¼ χ 17 ;
^ ðχÞ ¼ χ 18 ; f^ 7;1 ðχÞ ¼ χ 19 ; f^ 8;1 ðχÞ ¼ χ 20 ;
f 6;1
f^ 9;1 ðχÞ ¼ χ 21 ; f^ 10;1 ðχÞ ¼ χ 22 ;

f^ 11;1 ðχÞ ¼ 0:5 gðmt 2mres Þs2χ 5 2χ 12

cχ 5 χ 17 4mB χ 14 4mL χ 20 þ χ 17 ½lv m ~ B þ 2ðmB þ mL Þlc

þsχ 5 2 μp þ μres χ 14 þ χ 16 þ ½2ðlB mB lL mL Þ

þdv ðm ~ þ m L Þ þ 2m ~ B χ 2 þ 2mL χ 8 χ 217 þ 2 kp þ k res χ 2 þ
B
kp þ k res χ 4 þ kres χ 6 þ χ 7 þ μres χ 18 þ χ 19 þ 2 k p ψ p kres ψ res g

f^ 12;1 ðχÞ ¼ 0:5 cχ 5 glv m~ B þ 2 dv þ χ 2 þ χ 8 χ 12 þ 2gðmB þ mL Þlc þ χ 11 ðlv þ 2lc Þ

þsχ 5 g 2lB mB 2lL mL þ dv ðm ~ B þ mL 2mres Þ

þ2 ðm~ B mres Þχ 2 þ mres χ 6 þ χ 7 χ 4 þ mL χ 8

þ2 dv þ χ 2 þ χ 8 χ 11 χ 12 ðlv þ 2lc Þ 2 μp þ μres lv χ 16

þχ 17 ½2lB mB 2lL mL þ dv ðm~ B þ mL Þ

þ2m ~ B χ 2 þ 2mL χ 8 χ 14 þ 2mL dv lL þ χ 2 þ χ 8 χ 20 g

þlv kp þ kres χ 4 þ kres χ 7 þ μres χ 19 þ kp ψ p kres ψ res

f^ 13;1 ðχÞ ¼ gcχ 5 m~ B kp þ kres χ 2 þ χ 4 þ kres χ 6 þ χ 7 cχ 5 χ 11

þsχ 5 χ 12 μp þ μres χ 14 þ χ 16

þ0:5 2lB mB 2lL mL þ hv ðm ~ B þ m L Þ þ 2m~ B χ 2 þ 2mL χ 8 χ 217

þμres χ 18 þ χ 19 þ 2kp ψ p 2kres ψ res

f^ 14;1 ðχÞ ¼ sχ 5 χ 12 cx5 gmL þ χ 11

þmL d v lL þ χ 2 þ χ 8 χ 217 ; f^ 15;1 ðχÞ ¼ k res mres1
χ 2 χ 6 þ ψ res

þgcχ 5 þ μres mres 1
χ 14 χ 18 ; f^ 16;1 ðχÞ ¼ μres mres
1
χ 16 χ 19
1

þkres mres χ 4 χ 7 þ ψ res gcχ 5

f^ 17;1 ðχÞ ¼ lv sχ 5 cχ 5 χ 2 χ 4 ; f^ 18;1 ðχÞ ¼ cχ 5 lv χ 1 þ χ 3 þ sχ 5 χ 2 χ 4

f^ 19;1 ðχÞ ¼ 0:5sχ 5 ðlv þ 2lc Þ R cχ 5 dv þ χ 2 þ χ 8 þ χ 9 ;

f^ 20;1 ðχÞ ¼ 0:5cχ 5 ðlv þ 2lc Þ χ 1 þ sχ 5 dv þ χ 2 þ χ 8 þ χ 10 ;
f^ 21;1 ðχÞ ¼ g þ χ 11 m 1 ; f^ 22;1 ðχÞ ¼ χ 12 m 1 ;
I I
b^ 11;1 ¼ 1; b^ 14;2 ¼ 1; m ~ B ¼ mB þ mv þ mL
^ ^ 1 ðχÞ, E^ 2 ðχÞ, f^ ðχÞ and B.
where ðe^ 1 Þi;j ðχÞ, ðe^ 2 Þi;j ðχÞ, f i;j ðχÞ and b^ i;j are the ði; jÞ elements of E ^
A.2. The nonzero elements of A1

ða1 Þ18;1 ¼ 1; ða1 Þ20;1 ¼ 1; ða1 Þ11;2 ¼ k p þ kres sx5 ;

ða1 Þ12;2 ¼ gðmt 2mres Þsx5 ; ða1 Þ13;2 ¼ k p þ kres ;
1
ða1 Þ15;2 ¼ k res mres ; ða1 Þ17;2 ¼ cx5 ; ða1 Þ18;2 ¼ sx5 ;
ða1 Þ19;2 ¼ cx5 ; ða1 Þ20;2 ¼ sx5 ; ða1 Þ18;3 ¼ 1;

ða1 Þ11;4 ¼ k p þ kres sx5 ; ða1 Þ12;4 ¼ kp þ k res lv gmres sx5 ;
1
ða1 Þ13;4 ¼ kp þ k res ; ða1 Þ16;4 ¼ k res mres ;
ða1 Þ17;4 ¼ cx5 ; ða1 Þ18;4 ¼ sx5 ; ða1 Þ11;5 ¼ gðmt 2mres Þc2x5 ;

ða1 Þ12;5 ¼ 0:125k p 1 k res
1
g 8gc2x5 kp m2res þ k res g 1 þ c2x5 ðmt 2mres Þmt

þ4kp ðmB þ mI þ mL Þsx5 lc

2cx5 kp kres d v ½mB þ mv þ 2ðmI þ mL mres Þ

þ2 lB mB lL mL þ ðmB þ mv Þψ p þ ðmI þ mL Þ x8 þ ψ p þ 2mres ψ res Þ
ða1 Þ13;5 ¼ gðmt 2mres Þsx5 ; ða1 Þ14;5 ¼ gðmI þ mL Þsx5 ; ða1 Þ15;5 ¼ gsx5 ;
ða1 Þ16;5 ¼ gsx5 ; ða1 Þ17;5 ¼ lv cx5 1

ða1 Þ19;5 ¼ 0:25sx5 cx5 1 kp 1 2k p lv sx5 g 1 þ c2x5 mt þ cx5 ð0:5lv þ lc Þ

þsx5 dv þ x8 þ ψ p ;

ða1 Þ20;5 ¼ cx5 dv þ x8 þ ψ p sx5 lc 0:25kp 1 g 1 þ c2x5 mt ;
ða1 Þ11;6 ¼ kres sx5 ; ða1 Þ12;6 ¼ gmres sx5 ;
1
ða1 Þ13;6 ¼ k res ; ða1 Þ15;6 ¼ k res mres ; ða1 Þ11;7 ¼ k res sx5 ; ða1 Þ19;9 ¼ 1;
ða1 Þ12;7 ¼ kres lv þ gmres sx5 ;
1
ða1 Þ13;7 ¼ k res ; ða1 Þ20;10 ¼ 1; ða1 Þ16;7 ¼ k res mres ; ða1 Þ12;8 ¼ gðmI þ mL Þsx5 ;
ða1 Þ14;8 ¼ λP ðmI þ mL Þ; ða1 Þ19;8 ¼ cx5 ; ða1 Þ20;8 ¼ sx5 ;

ða1 Þ12;11 ¼ 0:25k p 1 sx5 cx5 1 2k p lv sx5 g 1 þ c2x5 mt

þcx5 ð0:5lv þ lc Þ þ sx5 dv þ x8 þ ψ p ; ða1 Þ13;11 ¼ cx5 ;

ða1 Þ14;11 ¼ cx5 ; ða1 Þ21;11 ¼ mI 1 ; ða1 Þ11;12 ¼ 1; ða1 Þ12;12 ¼ cx5 dv þ x8 þ ψ p

sx5 lc 0:25k p 1 g 1 þ c2x5 mt ;
ða1 Þ13;12 ¼ sx5 ; ða1 Þ14;12 ¼ sx5 ; ða1 Þ22;12 ¼ mI 1 ; ða1 Þ1;13 ¼ 1;

ða1 Þ2;14 ¼ 1; ða1 Þ11;14 ¼ μp þ μres sx5 ;
1
ða1 Þ13;14 ¼ μp þ μres ; ða1 Þ15;14 ¼ μres mres ; ða1 Þ3;15 ¼ 1;

ða1 Þ4;16 ¼ 1; ða1 Þ11;16 ¼ μp þ μres sx5 ;
1
ða1 Þ12;16 ¼ μp þ μres lv ; ða1 Þ13;16 ¼ μp þ μres ; ða1 Þ16;16 ¼ μres mres ;
ða1 Þ5;17 ¼ 1; ða1 Þ6;18 ¼ 1; ða1 Þ11;18 ¼ μres sx5 ; ða1 Þ13;18 ¼ μres ;
1
ða1 Þ15;18 ¼ μres mres ; ða1 Þ7;19 ¼ 1; ða1 Þ11;19 ¼ μres sx5 ;
1
ða1 Þ12;19 ¼ μres lv ; ða1 Þ13;19 ¼ μres ; ða1 Þ16;19 ¼ μres mres ;
ða1 Þ8;20 ¼ 1; ða1 Þ14;20 ¼ λD ðmI þ mL Þ;
ða1 Þ9;21 ¼ 1; ða1 Þ10;22 ¼ 1; ða1 Þ14;23 ¼ λP ðmI þ mL Þ;
ða1 Þ14;24 ¼ λD ðmI þ mL Þ; ða1 Þ14;26 ¼ mI þ mL ;

ða1 Þ23;24 ¼ 1; ða1 Þ24;23 ¼ 1; ða1 Þ25;26 ¼ 1; ða1 Þ26;24 ¼ 1; ða1 Þ26;25 ¼ 1
References
[1] H. Tanner, K. Kyriakopoulos, N. Krikelis, Advanced agricultural robots: kinematics and dynamics of multiple
mobile manipulators handling non-rigid material, Comput. Electron. Agric. 31 (2001) 91–105.
[2] Z. Li, S.S. Ge, Z. Wang, Robust adaptive control of coordinated multiple mobile manipulators, Mechatronics 18
(2008) 239–250.
[3] Z. Wang, S. Ge, T. Lee, Motion/force control of uncertain constrained nonholonomic mobile manipulator using
neural network approximation, in: Proceedings of the 2006 IEEE International Symposium on Intelligent Control,
Munich, Germany, 2006, pp. 2343–2348.
[4] Z. Li, W. Chen, J. Luo, Adaptive compliant force–motion control of coordinated non-holonomic mobile
manipulators interacting with unknown non-rigid environments, Neurocomputing 71 (2008) 1330–1344.
[5] M. Chen, A. Zalzala, Dynamic modelling and genetic-based trajectory generation for non-holonomic mobile
manipulators, Control Eng. Pract. 5 (1997) 39–48.
[6] W. Dong, On trajectory and force tracking control of constrained mobile manipulators with parameter uncertainty,
Automatica 38 (2002) 1475–1484.
[7] M.-P. Cheng, C.-C. Tsai, Dynamic modeling and tracking control of a nonholonomic wheeled mobile manipulator
with two robotic arms, in: Proceedings of the 42nd IEEE conference on decision and control (CDC), Maui, HI,
USA, 2003, pp. 2932–2937.
[8] K.G. Tzierakis, F.N. Koumboulis, Independent force and position control for cooperating manipulators, J. Frankl.
Inst. 340 (2003) 435–460.
[9] F.N. Koumboulis, N.D. Kouvakas, P.N. Paraskevopoulos, Velocity control and vibration attenuation for a cart-
pendulum system with delayed resonators, in: Proceedings of the 3rd IEEE Multi-Conference on Systems and
Control (MSC), Saint Petersburg, Russian Federation, 2009, pp. 1180–1187.
[10] N.D. Kouvakas, F.N. Koumboulis, A disturbance rejection controller for an anti-mine mobile robotic manipulator,
in: Proceedings of the 22nd Mediterranean Conference on Control and Automation (MED), Palermo, Italy, 2014,
pp. 1316–1322.
[11] F.N. Koumboulis, N.D. Kouvakas, A control scheme towards accurate firing while moving for a mobile robotic
weapon system with delayed resonators, Appl. Math. Inform. Sci. Eng. Springer Optim. Appl. 91 (2014) 303–320.
[12] M.E. Renzulli, R. Ghosh-Roy, N. Olgac, Robust control of the delayed resonator vibration absorber, IEEE Trans.
Control. Syst. Technol. 7 (1999) 683–691.
[13] F.N. Koumboulis, Exact model matching and disturbance rejection of linear singular multi-delay systems via
measurement output feedback, in: Proceedings of the 22nd Mediterranean Conference on Control and Automation
(MED), Palermo, Italy, 2014, pp. 299–304.
[14] A.M. Perdon, M. Anderlucci, Disturbance decoupling problem for a class of descriptor systems with delay via
systems over rings, IMA J. Math. Control Inf. 27 (2010) 405–418.
[15] F.N. Koumboulis, N.D. Kouvakas, P.N. Paraskevopoulos, Linear approximant-based metaheuristic proportional-
integral-derivative controller for a neutral time delay central heating system, Proc. Inst. Mech. Eng. Part I: J. Syst.
Control Eng. 223 (2009) 605–618.
[16] F.N. Koumboulis, N.D. Kouvakas, I/O decoupling with simultaneous disturbance rejection of general neutral time
delay systems via a measurement output feedback dynamic controller, in: Proceedings of the 21st Mediterranean
Conference on Control & Automation (MED), Chania, Greece, 2013, pp. 890–895.
[17] K. Gu, V.L. Kharitonov, J. Chen, Stability of Time Delay Systems, Birkhäuser, Basel, 2003.

1 s2.0 S0016003215003968 Main

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

1 s2.0 S0016003215003968 Main

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Available online at www.sciencedirect.

Journal of the Franklin Institute 353 (2016) 160–179

Mobile robots in singular time-delay form – Modeling

2. Mathematical model of a mobile robotic manipulator carrying an inertial mass

2.1. Mathematical model of a cart with passive and active suspension

Fig. 1. Sketch of a cart with passive and active suspensions.

L ¼ gmv 0:5dv cθ þ Rc φðzf Þ þ h zf þ cθ qf 0:5lv sθ

zf zr þ sθ qr qf þ R sφðzr Þ sφðzf Þ lv cθ ¼ 0 ð2bÞ

Fig. 2. Motion variables of the robotic manipulator base.

Thus, the overall nonlinear model is of the form

3. A mobile telescopic manipulator on ﬂat road the carries an inertial mass

3.1. Nonlinear model of the mobile telescopic manipulator on ﬂat road

neutral time delay system:

3.2. Towards the derivation of a linear approximant

x3 ðt Þ ¼ vn t lv cx5 1 ; x4 ¼ 0:5 2ψ p lv sx5 cx5 1 0:5kp 1 gcx5 mt

3.3. Accuracy of the Linear Approximant

x5 ¼ 0:000294262½rad; x6 ¼ 0:398751½m; x7 ¼ 0:398604½m;

3.4. Stability properties of the linear approximant

α0;8 ¼ 4:1787 107 ; α1;8 ¼ 4:32324 106 ; α2;8 ¼ 1993:42;

Fig. 4. Spectral radius of M α ðjωÞ.

α1;4 ¼ 5:09034 1014 ;

(i) the polynomial bðzÞ ¼ z2 þ α1;10 z þ α2;10 is Schur stable,

4. Outer loop linear controller design

where Hc ðs; zÞ ¼ ½sðE1 þ zE2 Þ A1 B1 Kðs; zÞCf 1 B1 Gðs; zÞ.

external commands to the main performance variables, i.e.

~ ðs; zÞ are computed to be

5. Performance of the closed loop system

5.1. Controller selection

5.2. Simulations of the nonlinear closed loop system

5.3. Sensitivity analysis of the nonlinear closed loop system

A.1. The nonzero elements of E^ 1 ðχÞ, E^ 2 ðχÞ, f^ ðχÞ and B

A.2. The nonzero elements of A1

ða1 Þ14;24 ¼ λD ðmI þ mL Þ; ða1 Þ14;26 ¼ mI þ mL ;

You might also like