This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been
fully edited. Content may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI 10.1109/TMECH.2018.2853764,
IEEE/ASME Transactions on Mechatronics
> REPLACE THIS LINE WITH YOUR PAPER IDENTIFICATION NUMBER (DOUBLE-CLICK HERE TO EDIT) <
Continuous Friction Feedforward Sliding Mode
Controller for a TriMule Hybrid Robot
Xu Yang, Member, IEEE, Haitao Liu, Juliang Xiao, Wule Zhu, Qi Liu, Guofang Gong, and Tian
Huang
Abstract—This paper presents a continuous friction
feedforward sliding mode controller (CFSMC) for a TriMule
hybrid robot to improve its trajectory-tracking performance.
Dynamic model depicts that TriMule robot is a multivariable
system with nonlinearity and strong coupling, which poses
significant challenges in controller design. Hence, a novel CFSMC
that consists of a friction feedforward control loop and a
continuous sliding mode feedback control loop is specially
developed. The feedforward control item calculated with a speed
related function is used to handle discontinuous friction
disturbance and achieve good transient performance. The
feedback control item designed with a continuous sliding mode
algorithm is applied to cope with other nonlinear dynamics and
assure zero steady-state error. The robustness of proposed hybrid
control scheme is validated in the sense of Lyapunov. Comparative
experimental studies with double closed-loop controller, sliding
mode controller and continuous sliding mode controller are
conducted, confirming that the CFSMC with the superior control
accuracy is an effective and practical robust control scheme for
TriMule hybrid robot. Taking advantages of the CFSMC, a high-
precision circular motion is achieved by the TriMule hybrid robot.
Index Terms—TriMule hybrid robot; friction feedforward;
continuous sliding mode feedback; robustness
I. INTRODUCTION
H YBRID robot has drawn much attention for the past few
years due to the growing demand for the fast and high-
precision forming of large-scale complex component such as
aircraft structure drilling [1], [2]. Compared with traditional
machine tools, hybrid robot is more reconfigurable which
enables it to deal with large and complex structures in a fast
way. To meet specific machining demand, hybrid robot can be
mounted at any necessary base (fixed base or moving base) with
any attitude [2]. The hybrid robot is usually constructed by
integrating a parallel mechanism and a serial mechanism.
Parallel mechanism is used to provide a high accuracy and high
dynamics motion, while serial mechanism is designed to
cooperate with parallel mechanism to allow additional motions.
Manuscript received November 7, 2017; revised February 21, 2018, May 19,
2018; accepted July 4, 2018. This work is supported by Research Project of
State Key Laboratory of Mechanical System and Vibration under Grant
MSV201806, National Natural Science Foundation of China under Grant
51622508, Grant 91648202.
X. Yang, H. T. Liu, J. L. Xiao, Q. Liu, and T. Huang are with the Key
Laboratory of Mechanism Theory and Equipment Design of Ministry of
Education, Tianjin University, Tianjin 300072, China (e-mail:
1083-4435 (c) 2018 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission. See http://www.ieee.org/publications_standards/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
1
Hybrid robot hence possesses the advantages of both serial
robot and parallel robot such as large workspace, high speed,
high precision, high stiffness and compact structure [3].
As a new way to perform machining, the hybrid robot needs
to be meticulously designed. Many hybrid robots with different
structures have been developed in the past. In 1985, Clavel
invented a Delta parallel robot which could achieve a fast
movement with a light structure [4], [5]. Inspired by this type
of robot, Liu et al put forward a 6-DOF Delta-RST hybrid
industrial robot, which is built up with a 3-DoF Delta parallel
mechanism and a 3-DoF serial robotic wrist [6]. Through
adding a 2-DOF serial structure to the Delta parallel robot, Wu
et al designed a 5-DOF hybrid robot [7], [8]. Nevertheless, due
to small payload, the Delta hybrid robot is not suitable for
machining which needs a high-stiffness motion [9]. By
integrating a high-stiffness parallel mechanism and a flexible
griping mechanism, Neumann and Sweden invented a Tricept
hybrid robot which turns out to be a very successful scheme
[10]. On the basis of this robot, many commercial Tricept
hybrid robots are specially developed like the Tricept T605,
Tricept T805 and Tricept T9000[1]. According to Olazagoitia
et al. [1], more than 300 units of ‘Tricept’ hybrid robots have
been applied in aerospace structural parts machining, railroad
structural parts machining, engine parts machining, etc.
Through reducing the number of passive joints and unactuated
freedoms, Neumann proposed an Exechon hybrid robot which
is constructed with a 2UPR&1SPR parallel structure and a 2R
serial structure [11]-[13]. With improved performance, the
Exechon hybrid robot has been commercialized in machine-tool
manufacturers and integrators [14]. Besides, some other hybrid
robots are also proposed and demonstrated through primary
experiments in recent years, such as TriVariant hybrid robot
[15], Georg V hybrid robot [16] and 5-Axis hybrid machine tool
[17]. In spite of many available hybrid structures, it is still a
challenging work to machine large-scale complex components
especially the high-hardness structural parts. Motivated by this
demand, a 5-DOF hybrid robot, named TriMule, has been
invented, which comprises a 3-DOF parallel mechanism and a
xu_yang@tju.edu.cn, liuhaitao_tju@126.com, tianjinxjl@163.com,
qi_liu@tju.edu.cn, tianhuang@tju.edu.cn).
W. L. Zhu is with the Department of Micro-engineering, Kyoto University,
Kyoto, Japan (e-mail: wule5033@gmail.com)
G. F. Gong is with the State Key Laboratory of Fluid Power and Mechatronic
Systems, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou 310027, China (e-mail:
gfgong@zju.edu.cn).
This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI 10.1109/TMECH.2018.2853764,
IEEE/ASME Transactions on Mechatronics

> REPLACE THIS LINE WITH YOUR PAPER IDENTIFICATION NUMBER (DOUBLE-CLICK HERE TO EDIT) < 2

2-DOF wrist [18]. Compared to the established Tricept and
Exechon hybrid robots, it has a less number of revolute joints
which means that higher stiffness can be potentially achieved,
leading to a better machining accuracy for difficult-to-cut
materials. Besides the structure scheme, the motion
performance of active joints can also influence its machining
quality. Therefore, the high-precision motion control of active
joints is of great importance to TriMule hybrid robot.
Regarding the control strategy for hybrid robot, some
research work has been reported in literatures. Neumann et al
proposed to control Tricept robot by combining a position
control loop and a feedback control strategy [19]. The position
control loop is designed to position the terminal head in
cartesian coordinate system, while the feedback control strategy
is employed to correct the location error caused by force,
temperature, etc. For managing the interaction between Tricept
and environment, Fabrizio Caccavale et al proposed a model-
based impedance control strategy [20]. To solve the direct
kinematics of the Tricept along a desired trajectory, Siciliano
designed a jacobian-based closed-loop direct kinematics
algorithm [21]. Even a number of work has been done, little
effort has been made to improve the motion accuracy of the
active joints of hybrid robot, which provides the basis for the
high-precision position and attitude of terminal head. As the
active joints suffer from discontinuous friction, gravity
variation, inertia variation and other negative factors, this paper
focuses on developing an effective robust control method for it.
Sliding mode controller (SMC) is a kind of variable structure
control method whose operation can be divided into reaching
phase and sliding phase [22]. In reaching phase, SMC drives the
system to a desired sliding surface. The reaching dynamic can
be shaped by designing a specific switching control [23]. Once
the system reaches the sliding surface, tracking error reduces to
be zero along a designed trajectory in spite of model uncertain.
With this good feature of robustness, SMC is firstly employed
to control TriMule hybrid robot. However, when a large model
uncertain appears, large switching control is needed to
guarantee a stable reaching phase, which can also cause system
chattering [24]. To avoid this undesirable chattering and retain
the good robustness of SMC, a continuous friction feedforward
sliding mode controller (CFSMC) is specially designed, which
can converge TriMule robot to sliding surfaces with continuous
control effort. With a friction feedforward loop, CFSMC can
also achieve a nice transient response while facing a
discontinuous friction disturbance. Therefore, CFSMC is
expected to assure the TriMule hybrid robot an excellent
trajectory-tracking performance.
The rest of this paper is organized as follows. Section II
presents the layout of TriMule hybrid robot. Section III
describes the model employed in this study. Section IV covers
the design procedures of proposed robust control methods
including SMC and CFSMC. Section V evaluates the robust
controllers by experiments. Finally, the conclusions are drawn
in Section VI.
II. LAYOUT OF TRIMULE HYBRID ROBOT
Fig. 1. shows one modularized TriMule robot, which can be
mounted on either moving platform or fixed base according to
specific machining demand. As can be seen, a 3-DOF parallel
mechanism is designed to execute translational motions with
three active UPS limbs and one passive UP limb. Here, U, P
and S represent universal joint, prismatic joint and spherical
joint, respectively. Servomotors with lead-screws are employed
to drive the active prismatic joints. A 2-DOF wrist is designed
to achieve two rotational motions with two active revolute
joints. Servomotors with reducers are used to drive the active
revolute joints. At the terminal of serial rotating head, special
device can be mounted such as milling tool, support unit.
For measurement and control, all the parallel limbs motors
and serial joints motors are equipped with absolute rotary
encoders. Based on the encoder data, the position and
orientation of terminal device can be real-timely calculated with
direct kinematic model. Through forcing the motors to track
inverse kinematic solution, desired position and orientation of
end-effector can be achieved.
Fig. 1. Modularized TriMule hybrid robot
III. DYNAMIC MODEL OF TRIMULE HYBRID ROBOT
Dynamic model of TriMule hybrid robot reflects the
relationship between active joints torque control input and
active joints position. In consideration of the fast response of
torque control loop, the motors with servo drivers can be treated
as proportional systems. Through incorporating the dynamics
of motors and rigid body, a full dynamic model expressed in
joint-space coordinates is obtained as
τ = A(q)q + Bq + F(q, q ) + V(q, q ) + G (q) + D (1)
where 𝛕 is the active joints torque control vector defined by 𝛕 =
[𝜏 𝜏 𝜏 𝜏 𝜏 ] (𝜏 , 𝜏 , 𝜏 , 𝜏 , 𝜏 are the torque control
input respectively for 1th active joint, 2th active joint, 3th active
joint, 4th active joint and 5th active joint), 𝒒 is the active joints
position vector defined by 𝒒 = [𝑞 𝑞 𝑞 𝑞 𝑞 ]
(𝑞 , 𝑞 , 𝑞 , 𝑞 , 𝑞 are respectively the position of 1th active joint,
2th active joint, 3th active joint, 4th active joint and 5th active
joint), 𝒒 is the active joints velocity vector, 𝒒 is the active joints

1083-4435 (c) 2018 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission. See http://www.ieee.org/publications_standards/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI 10.1109/TMECH.2018.2853764,
IEEE/ASME Transactions on Mechatronics

> REPLACE THIS LINE WITH YOUR PAPER IDENTIFICATION NUMBER (DOUBLE-CLICK HERE TO EDIT) < 3

acceleration vector, 𝐀(𝐪) ∈ 𝕽𝟓×𝟓 is the generalized inertia mode controller (SMC) is firstly designed and analyzed in this
matrix, 𝐁 ∈ 𝕽𝟓×𝟓 is the damping coefficient matrix defined by section.
𝐁 = diag(𝐵 , 𝐵 , 𝐵 , 𝐵 , 𝐵 ) (𝐵 , 𝐵 , 𝐵 , 𝐵 , 𝐵 are respectively Both SMC and CFSMC adopt the control framework
the equivalent damping coefficient of 1th active joint, 2th active illustrated in Fig. 2. As shown, inverse kinematics algorithm is
joint, 3th active joint, 4th active joint, 5th active used to calculate the command of five active joints (𝐪𝐫𝐞𝐟 =
joint), 𝐕(𝐪, 𝐪) ∈ 𝕽𝟓 is the Coriolis and centrifugal load [𝑞 ,𝑞 ,𝑞 ,𝑞 ,𝑞 ] ) according to the desired
vector, 𝐆(𝐪) ∈ 𝕽𝟓 is the gravitational load vector, 𝐅(𝐪, 𝐪) ∈ position (𝑥, 𝑦, z) and orientation (α, β) of terminal device. For
𝕽𝟓 is the active joints friction torque vector which can be each active joint, a position control loop (SMC or CFSMC) is
modelled as (2) [25] [26], 𝐃 = [𝑑 𝑑 𝑑 𝑑 𝑑 ] is the specially designed. Through forcing the active joints to follow
disturbing load vector arising from machining operation , etc. their command, the terminal device is desired to move along its
F (q, q ) = [ F1 F2 F3 F4 F5 ] reference trajectory.
ε 2
(2)
Fi = F C i (q ) ⋅ sgn( qi ) + ( F S i (q ) − F C i (q )) ⋅ e − ( qi / q i ) ⋅ sgn( qi )
where 𝐹 (𝐪) is the coulomb friction torque of ith active joint,
𝐹 (𝐪) is the stiction torque of ith active joint, 𝑞 is the
stribeck velocity of ith active joint.
For the simplicity of (1), the inertia matrix 𝐀(𝐪) is replaced
by a constant diagonal matrix 𝐀 , which means uncoupled
Fig. 2. Schematic diagram of CFSMC
constant gains inertia torques. Equation (1) can then be
rearranged as A. Sliding mode controller
=A
q  −1 τ − A
 −1Bq − A
 −1F(q, q ) + E Considering the dynamics in (3), a sliding surfaces vector is
A =diag ( J J J J J ) defined as follows:
1 2 3 4 5

 −1D = [ E sSMC = e + λ SMC e

E5 ]
T
E=EA +EV + EG − A E2 E3 E4 (6)
1
(3) e = q ref − q
EA = q  −1 A(q)q
 − A  where 𝝀𝑺𝑴𝑪 is a positive constant diagonal matrix defined by
 V (q, q )
EV = − A −1
𝝀𝑺𝑴𝑪 = diag(𝜆 ,𝜆 ,𝜆 ,𝜆 ,𝜆 ) , 𝒆 ∈ 𝕽𝟓 is
 −1G (q)
EG = − A the active joints position error vector, 𝐪𝒓𝒆𝒇 ∈ 𝕽𝟓 is the active
joints position command vector.
where 𝐽 , 𝐽 , 𝐽 , 𝐽 , 𝐽 are respectively the equivalent inertia
An equivalent control vector 𝝉𝑺𝑴𝑪 can be derived through
of 1th active joint, 2th active joint, 3th active joint, 4th active
letting 𝑺𝑺𝑴𝑪 = 𝑭(𝐪, 𝐪) = 𝑬 = [0, 0, 0, 0, 0] .
joint, 5th active joint, which should be measured at typical
 ref + Bq + Aλ
τ SMC = Aq  SMC (q ref − q ) (7)
TriMule configuration, 𝐄 ∈ 𝕽𝟓 is the total model uncertain
vector, 𝐄𝐀 ∈ 𝕽𝟓 is the model uncertain caused by the To suppress the neglected dynamics and guarantee the
estimation error of 𝐀(𝐪) , 𝐄𝐕 ∈ 𝕽𝟓 is the model uncertain existence of sliding modes, a switching control vector is
caused by Coriolis and centrifugal load, 𝐄𝐆 ∈ 𝕽𝟓 is the model designed as
uncertain caused by gravitational load. τˆ SMC = k sgn(s SMC )
Assumption: The extents of model uncertain and friction = k[sgn( s SMC1 ), sgn( s SMC 2 ), sgn( s SMC 3 ), sgn( s SMC 4 ), sgn( s SMC 5 )]T
(8)
torque are known, i.e. where 𝑠 is the ith element of the sliding surfaces vector
𝐄 ∈ 𝛀𝐄 ≜ 𝐄: 𝐄 < 𝐄𝐦𝐚𝐱 & (−𝐄) < 𝐄𝐦𝐚𝐱
𝒔𝑺𝑴𝑪 , 𝒌 is a positive constant diagonal matrix defined by 𝒌 =
𝐄 ∈ 𝛀𝐄 ≜ 𝐄: 𝐄 < 𝐄𝐦𝐚𝐱 & −𝐄 < 𝐄𝐦𝐚𝐱 diag(𝑘 , 𝑘 , 𝑘 , 𝑘 , 𝑘 ) .
(4)
𝐅 ∈ 𝛀𝐅 ≜ 𝐅: 𝐅 < 𝐅𝐦𝐚𝐱 & (−𝐅) < 𝐅𝐦𝐚𝐱 Accordingly, the proposed SMC law take the form
𝐅 ∈ 𝛀𝐅 ≜ 𝐅: 𝐅 < 𝐅𝐦𝐚𝐱 & −𝐅 < 𝐅𝐦𝐚𝐱 τSMC = τ SMC + τˆ SMC (9)
where the comparation is operated between the corresponding Under the control law in (9), the overall system stability is
elements of vectors, the maximum value can be expressed by analyzed as follows. Define a Lyapunov candidate vector
𝐄𝐦𝐚𝐱 = [𝐸 ,𝐸 ,𝐸 ,𝐸 ,𝐸 ]𝑻 𝟏
𝐕 𝑺𝑴𝑪 = 𝚽𝑺𝑴𝑪 (𝒔𝑺𝑴𝑪 ), whose derivative is
𝟐
𝐄𝐦𝐚𝐱 = [𝐸 ,𝐸 ,𝐸 ,𝐸 ,𝐸 ]𝑻  SMC = ΦSMCsSMC = ΦSMC (e + λSMCe)
(5) V
𝐅𝐦𝐚𝐱 = [𝐹 ,𝐹 ,𝐹 ,𝐹 ,𝐹 ]𝑻
𝐅𝐦𝐚𝐱 = [𝐹 ,𝐹 ,𝐹 ,𝐹 ,𝐹 ]𝑻 = ΦSMC (q +λ SMCq ref − λSMCq )
ref − q
= ΦSMC (q
ref − (A −1τSMC − A  −1Bq − A −1F(q, q ) + E) (10)
IV. ROBUST CONTROLLER DESIGN FOR TRIMULE HYBRID SMC ref
(q − q ))
+λ
ROBOT
= Φ (− A  −1k sgn(sSMC )+A
SMC  −1F(q, q ) − E)
With the established dynamic model, a continuous friction
feedforward sliding mode controller (CFSMC) is specially where 𝚽𝑺𝑴𝑪 is a diagonal matrix defined by 𝚽𝑺𝑴𝑪 =
developed for the TriMule hybrid robot. As a contrast, a sliding diag(𝑠 ,𝑠 ,𝑠 ,𝑠 ,𝑠 ).

1083-4435 (c) 2018 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission. See http://www.ieee.org/publications_standards/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI 10.1109/TMECH.2018.2853764,
IEEE/ASME Transactions on Mechatronics

> REPLACE THIS LINE WITH YOUR PAPER IDENTIFICATION NUMBER (DOUBLE-CLICK HERE TO EDIT) < 4

From (10), following sufficient condition for the reachability diagonal matrix defined by 𝐋 = diag(𝐿 , 𝐿 , 𝐿 , 𝐿 , 𝐿 ).
of sliding surfaces can be obtained. Substituting (14) and (15) into (16) and assuming 𝝉𝑭 −
kΗ > F + AE  (11) 𝐅(𝐪, 𝐪) = 𝐄 = [0, 0, 0, 0, 0] , differential of the feedback
max max

where 𝐇 = [1,1,1,1,1] , the comparation is operated between control vector needed for ensuring the exponential reaching law
the corresponding elements of vectors. in (16) can be driven as:
Equation (10) and equation (11) indicate that the switching τ B = A 
q ref + Bq
 + A 2λ CFSMC (q
ref − q)

(17)
control vector 𝐤sgn(𝐬𝐒𝐌𝐂 ) plays a key role in the sufficient +A λ CFSMC CFSMC
λ ref
(q − q) 
 + A Ws CFSMC  sgn(sCFSMC )
+ AL
condition for system stability 𝐤𝐇 > 𝐅𝐦𝐚𝐱 + 𝐀𝐄𝐦𝐚𝐱 . As long as Through integral operation, we can further get the feedback
the switching gain 𝑘 is large than model uncertain 𝐹 +𝐽 ∙ control effort, which can be described as:
𝐸 , the ith active joint will converge to the sliding surface q  2 λ CFSMC (q ref − q)
τB = A ref + B q + A 
and then accurately sliding to the desired state. Consequently,
   L sgn(sCFSMC )dt

CFSMC CFSMC ref CFSMC
SMC can handle the model uncertain with a switching control +A λ λ (q − q) + A W s +A
vector. Yet large switching gain 𝑘 is needed if large 𝐹 +𝐽∙ (18)
𝐸 exists. Because the switching control signal is Accordingly, the control law of CFSMC can be obtained as
discontinuous, large switching gain 𝑘 can also cause q  2 λ CFSMC (q ref − q)
τ CFSMC = ProjτF (Γq ref )+A ref + Bq + A 
a ’chattering’ problem. Therefore, it needs to make a choice
 λ CFSMC λ CFSMC (qref − q) + A
between control accuracy and system stability while designing   Ws  L sgn(sCFSMC )dt
CFSMC
+A +A
the SMC.
(19)
B. Continuous friction feedforward sliding mode controller For rationalizing and establishing the stability of CFSMC,
According to the definition of stribeck friction torque in (2), following Lyapunov function candidates vector is defined.
𝟏
while the active joints are changing their motion direction, they 𝐕 𝑪𝑭𝑺𝑴𝑪 = 𝚽 𝑪𝑭𝑺𝑴𝑪 (𝒔𝑪𝑭𝑺𝑴𝑪 )
𝟐 (20)
will encounter discontinuous friction which could unavoidably 𝚽 𝑪𝑭𝑺𝑴𝑪 = diag(𝑠 ,𝑠 ,𝑠 ,𝑠 ,𝑠 )
affect their motion performance. To cope with this nonlinear where 𝑠 is the ith element of the sliding surface vector
friction load and assure smooth transient response, a friction 𝒔𝑪𝑭𝑺𝑴𝑪 .
feedforward control loop is specially designed as (12), which The first-order derivative of 𝐕 𝑪𝑭𝑺𝑴𝑪 is
can provide active friction compensation.  CFSMC = Φ CFSMC s CFSMC
V
τ F = ProjτF (Γq ref ) (12) = Φ CFSMC (
e + 2λ CFSMC
e + λ CFSMC λ CFSMC e )
where 𝚪 is a positive constant diagonal matrix defined by 𝚪 = =Φ CFSMC
(ref 
q − ( A τ −1 CFSMC
−A  −1Bq
 − A −1F (q, q ) + E
)
diag(𝛤 , 𝛤 , 𝛤 , 𝛤 , 𝛤 ) , the projection mapping Proj𝝉𝑭 (∎) = +2λ CSMC (q ) + λ CFSMC λ CFSMC (q ref − q ))
 ref − q
[Proj𝝉𝑭 (∎ ), ⋯ , Proj𝝉𝑭 ∎ ] is defined as = Φ CFSMC ( − W sCFSMC − L sgn(sCFSMC ) − ( A  −1 τ F − A −1F (q, q ) + E ))
= −Φ CFSMC
Ws CFSMC
−Φ CFSMC
(L sgn(s CFSMC   −1F (q, q ) + E ))
) + ( A −1 τ F − A
τ F i max if ■i > τ F i max
 (21)
Projτ F (■i ) = τ F i min if ■i < τ F i min (13)
i
 ■ From (21), following sufficient condition for the existence of
 i otherwise the sliding motions can be obtained
Furthermore, to establish the stability of overall control  −1Γq
LH > A  −1F + E
ref + A (22)
max max
system and avoid undesirable system chattering, a continuous
where 𝐇 = [1,1,1,1,1] , the comparation is operated between
sliding mode feedback control loop is designed to cooperate
the corresponding elements of vectors.
with the feedforward loop. Different from the traditional SMC,
Equation (21) and (22) indicate that the integral of switching
continuous sliding mode feedback control loop is designed
based on extended system [27] [28]. The nonlinear differential control vector 𝐀𝐋sgn(𝐬𝐂𝐅𝐒𝐌𝐂 )𝑑𝑡 plays a key role in the
equation governing TriMule extended system can be described sufficient condition for system stability 𝐋𝐇 > 𝐀 𝟏 𝚪𝒒𝐫𝐞𝐟 +
as 𝐀 𝟏 𝐅𝐦𝐚𝐱 + 𝐄𝐦𝐚𝐱 . As long as the gain 𝐿 is large than 𝐹 +

q =A  −1 τ B − A
 −1Bq + A −1 ( τ F − F (q, q )) + E
 (14) 𝛤𝑞 +𝐸 , the ith active joint will reach its sliding
With regard to the system described by (14), a sliding
surface within the time (23) [31], and then its position tracking
surfaces vector is defined as [29]:
error will converge to be zero. Consequently, CFSMC can
sCFSMC = e + 2λ CFSMCe + λ CFSMC λ CFSMCe (15) handle the model uncertain with an integral of switching control
𝐂𝐅𝐒𝐌𝐂
where 𝛌 is a positive constant diagonal matrix defined by vector.
𝛌𝐂𝐅𝐒𝐌𝐂 = diag(𝜆 ,𝜆 ,𝜆 ,𝜆 ,𝜆 ). 1 1
For finite-time stability in reaching phase, following Wi sCFSMC i (0) + Li − Γi qref i max − Fi max − Ei max
1 Ji Ji
exponential reaching law is adopted [30]. ti = ln (23)
Wi 1 1
s CFSMC = − W s CFSMC − L sgn(sCFSMC ) (16) Li − Γi qref i max − Fi max − Ei max
Ji Ji
where 𝐖 is a positive constant diagonal matrix defined by
𝐖 = diag(𝑊 , 𝑊 , 𝑊 , 𝑊 , 𝑊 ) , 𝐋 is a positive constant

1083-4435 (c) 2018 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission. See http://www.ieee.org/publications_standards/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI 10.1109/TMECH.2018.2853764,
IEEE/ASME Transactions on Mechatronics

> REPLACE THIS LINE WITH YOUR PAPER IDENTIFICATION NUMBER (DOUBLE-CLICK HERE TO EDIT) < 5

V. EXPERIMENTAL VALIDATION Fig. 4. displays the control behavior of SMC. As can be seen
Fig. 3 shows the experimental mirror-milling machine, from Fig. 4 (a), the SMC can enable the closed-loop system to
which is set up with two 5-DoF TriMule hybrid robots. One effectively track the sinusoidal position reference. But Fig. 4(b)
robot is response for milling the thin-walled workpiece. The indicates that SMC also leads to a high frequency and large
other robot is used to support the workpiece, which can control amplitude speed oscillation. According to the sliding variable
the workpiece deformation caused by milling force. Through in Fig. 4 (c), this speed oscillation is caused by the system
the high-precision mirror position control of two robots, large chattering that occurs around the sliding surface. As the control
thin-walled workpiece can be well shaped. law of SMC is non-continuous, system chattering cannot be
In this setup, Panasonic minas-a5Ⅱmotors with servo drives avoided even with well-tuned SMC parameters. Fig. 4 (d)
reveals the discontinuous control signal of SMC. Therefore,
are used to drive the active joints. For terminal position and
SMC cannot assure a stable trajectory tracking.
orientation calculation, each motor is equipped with an absolute
rotary encoder, whose position resolution is 10000 pulses/rev. 0.06 0.20

PMAC PCI card is employed to perform the servo-control 0.05 0.15 Desired Velocity
CFSMC
algorithm with a cycle period of 0.442708ms. 0.04
0.10

Velocity(rad/s)
Position(rad)
0.05
0.03
0.00
0.02
-0.05
0.01
Desired Position -0.10
CFSMC
0.00 -0.15
(a) (b)
-0.01 -0.20
0.25 0.50 0.75 1.00 1.25 0.25 0.50 0.75 1.00 1.25
t(s)
t(s)
15000
8000 Total output
10000 Feedforward portion
6000

4000
5000
Slding variable

Control Signal
2000
0
0

-5000 -2000

Fig. 3. Experimental platform photograph -4000

-10000
-6000
A. Control behavior analysis -15000
(c)
-8000
(d)
0.25 0.50 0.75 1.00 1.25 0.25 0.50 0.75 1.00 1.25
To investigate the control behavior of SMC and CFSMC, t(s) t(s)

experiments are carried out on the 4-th joint of support robot

Fig. 5. Behavior of CFSMC for the sinusoidal position reference with T=1s and
(S-4th joint), which is driven by a 750W servomotor and a A=π/119 (a) Position tracking curves; (b) Velocity tracking curves; (c) Sliding
planetary gearbox (reduction ratio 119). A sinusoidal signal mode variable 𝑠 curve; (d) Controller signal curve
with cycle T=1s and amplitude A=π/119 is used to be the
In comparison, the control behavior of CFSMC is described
reference trajectory.
in Fig. 5. While ensuring a good tracking performance, CFSMC
0.06
Desired Position
0.20
Desired Velocity
also shows speed oscillation, as presented in Fig. 5 (a) and Fig.
0.05 SMC 0.15 SMC
(b). But this speed oscillation is much smaller than the speed
0.04
0.10
oscillation caused by SMC. This is because the control signal
Velocity(rad/s)
Position(rad)

0.03
0.05
of CFSMC is much smoother than the control signal of SMC,
0.02
0.00
as shown in Fig. 5 (d). To illustrate the role of friction
-0.05
0.01
feedforward control loop, the feedforward control input is also
-0.10
0.00
plotted in Fig. 5 (d). Therefore, chattering problem can be well
-0.15
(a) (b) avoided under the continuous control law of CFSMC.
-0.01 -0.20
0.25 0.50 0.75 1.00 1.25 0.25 0.50 0.75 1.00 1.25
t(s)
t(s)
15
8000 Total Output
B. Tracking performance analysis
10 6000 On the 4-th joint of support robot, sinusoidal motion
5
4000 experiments with different frequency are carried out to test the
Slding variable

Control Signal

2000
performance of proposed CFSMC. For comparison, the
0
0
performance of traditional double closed-loop controller (TDC),
-2000
-5
SMC, as well as the CFSMC without feedforward control loop
-4000
-10
-6000
which is termed as CSMC, are also evaluated. TDC is a widely
-15
(c)
-8000
(d) used AC servomotor position controller which consists of an
0.25 0.50 0.75 1.00 1.25 0.25 0.50 0.75 1.00 1.25
t(s) t(s) outer position closed loop and an inner speed closed loop [32],
[33]. The position controller is designed with PD algorithm,
Fig. 4. Behavior of SMC for the sinusoidal position reference with T=1s and whereas the speed controller is constructed by PI equation.
A=π/119 (a) Position tracking curves; (b) Velocity tracking curves; (c) Sliding
mode variable 𝑠 curve; (d) Controller signal curve

1083-4435 (c) 2018 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission. See http://www.ieee.org/publications_standards/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI 10.1109/TMECH.2018.2853764,
IEEE/ASME Transactions on Mechatronics

> REPLACE THIS LINE WITH YOUR PAPER IDENTIFICATION NUMBER (DOUBLE-CLICK HERE TO EDIT) < 6

Fig. 6. displays the tracking results with respect to a A=π/119 is presented in Fig. 8. Hence, CFSMC can enable
sinusoidal position command with cycle T=10s and amplitude closed-loop system to well tack the sinusoidal position
A=π/119. As seen in Fig. 6 (a), four controllers can all enable command with cycle T=1s and amplitude A=π/119, the
closed-loop system to effectively track the command signal. sinusoidal position command with cycle T=0.5s and amplitude
However, the tracking error data in Fig. 6 (b) and Fig. 6 (c) A=π/119.
reveal that the SMC perform the worst with both large control Command Position TDC SMC
0.06 CSMC CFSMC (a)
error and severe chattering. According to (10), large switching 0.05
gain can help SMC to achieve small tracking error but also

Position(rad)
0.04

tends to give rise to system chattering. Different from SMC, the 0.03
0.02
CSMC and CFSMC do not have discontinuous control item and 0.01
hence can avoid the undesirable chattering, as shown in Fig. 6 0.00

(c). Further analysis shows, CSMC and CFSMC can assure a -0.01
2 4 6 8 10 12 14
similar tracking accuracy which is better than that of TDC and t(s)
0.0004 TDC SMC
SMC. As the motion speed is very low when the active joint is

Tracking Error (rad)

(b)
changing direction, the effect of discontinuous friction is not 0.0002

obvious. Therefore, under CSMC and CFSMC, closed-loop 0.0000

system can tack the sinusoidal position command with cycle
-0.0002
T=10s and amplitude A=π/119 well.
Command Position TDC SMC -0.0004
(a) 2 4 6 8 10 12 14
0.06 CSMC CFSMC t(s)
0.05
Position(rad)

0.04
0.00004 CSMC CFSMC (c)
Tracking Error (rad)

0.03
0.02 0.00002

0.01 0.00000
0.00
-0.00002
-0.01
5 10 15 20 25 30
-0.00004
t(s)
0.0002 2 4 6 8 10 12 14
SMC t(s)
Tracking Error (rad)

(b)
0.0001
Fig. 7. Tracking of a sinusoidal position signal with T=1s and A=π/119 (a)
0.0000 Position tracking curves; (b) Position tracking error curves (TDC & SMC); (c)
Position tracking error curves (CSMC & CFSMC)
-0.0001 Command Position TDC SMC
0.06 CSMC CFSMC (a)
-0.0002 0.05
5 10 15 20 25 30
Position(rad)

t(s) 0.04

0.00004 0.03
TDC CSMC CFSMC (c) 0.02
Tracking Error (rad)

0.00002 0.01
0.00
0.00000
-0.01
1 2 3 4 5
-0.00002 t(s)
0.0006
TDC SMC
Tracking Error (rad)

-0.00004
5 10 15 20 25 30
(b)
0.0003
t(s)
0.0000
Fig. 6. Tracking of a sinusoidal position reference with T=10s and A=π/119 (a)
Position tracking curves; (b) Position tracking error curves (SMC); (c) Position -0.0003
tracking error curves (TDC, CSMC & CFSMC)
-0.0006
Fig. 7. shows the tracking results with respect to a sinusoidal 1 2
t(s)
3 4 5

position command with T=1s and amplitude A=π/119. As it can 0.00006

CSMC CFSMC (c)
be observed in Fig. 7 (a), four controllers are all effective while
Tracking Error (rad)

0.00003
facing the command signal. Tracking error data in Fig. 7 (b) and
Fig. 7 (c) indicate that TDC will lead to the largest tracking 0.00000

error and SMC will cause the most severe system chattering. In -0.00003
comparison, CSMC and CFSMC can achieve both good control
-0.00006
accuracy and good system stability. Further contrastive analysis 1 2 3 4 5
t(s)
between CSMC and CFSMC indicates that CFSMC can
effectively eliminate the overlarge tracking error (relative to Fig. 8. Tracking of a sinusoidal position signal with T=0.5s and A=π/119 (a)
regular tracking error) caused by the friction variation while Position tracking curves; (b) Position tracking error curves (TDC & SMC); (c)
Position tracking error curves (CSMC & CFSMC)
active joint is reversing. Similarly, tracking results for a Fig. 9 plots the tracking results of a sinusoidal position
sinusoidal position command with cycle T=0.5s and amplitude reference with cycle T=0.1s and amplitude A=π/119. Among

1083-4435 (c) 2018 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission. See http://www.ieee.org/publications_standards/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI 10.1109/TMECH.2018.2853764,
IEEE/ASME Transactions on Mechatronics

> REPLACE THIS LINE WITH YOUR PAPER IDENTIFICATION NUMBER (DOUBLE-CLICK HERE TO EDIT) < 7

the four effective controllers, TDC perform the worst with the
largest control error. As the position command is a fast-
changing signal, the system under SMC does not show a
chattering problem. Compared to SMC, CSMC and CFSMC
can achieve smaller control error, which, however, are much
greater than their control error in Fig. 6, Fig. 7 and Fig. 8.
Benefit from both fast-changing reference and continuous
control signal, CSMC and CFSMC successfully avoid the
undesirable system chattering. As the acceleration is very high
while active joint is reversing, the tracking error caused by the
discontinuous friction is not obvious relative to the regular
tracking error. As a result, CFSMC does not show an advantage
compared with CSMC. Hence, both CSMC and CFSMC can
enable closed-loop system to well tack the command signal
with cycle T=0.1s and amplitude A=π/119.
Command Position
0.06 CSMC
of control system. To verify that proposed CFSMC has good
robustness to these load variations, further robustness test is
carried out. Because the position of S-5th joint determines the
mass load distribution of S-4th joint, the inertia load of S-4th
joint changes while S-5th joint is working. In addition, Coriolis
and centrifugal load, friction load of S-4th joint are also
influenced by the position of S-5th joint. Hence, a multiple
joints coupling motion experiment is carried out as shown in
Fig. 11. As can be seen from the figure, even while the S-5th
joint is moving along a triangular path, CFSMC can still
guarantee S-4th joint a satisfactory tracking accuracy, which is
as good as the results in Fig. 10. Hence, CFSMC also has strong
robustness to inertia variation, friction load variation, Coriolis
and centrifugal load variation.
Command Position TDC SMC
TDC SMC 7 CSMC CFSMC (a)
CFSMC (a) 6

Position(rad)
0.05 5
Position(rad)

0.04 4
0.03 3
0.02 2
1
0.01
0
0.00
-1
-0.01 5 10 15 20 25 30
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 t(s)
t(s)
0.0006
TDC SMC TDC SMC
0.003 (b)
Tracking Error (rad)
Tracking Error (rad)

0.0004
0.002
(b)
0.0002
0.001
0.0000
0.000
-0.0002
-0.001
-0.0004
-0.002
-0.0006
-0.003 5 10 15 20 25 30
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 t(s)
t(s)
CSMC CFSMC (c)
0.00004
Tracking Error (rad)

0.0009 CSMC CFSMC (c)

Tracking Error (rad)

0.0006 0.00002

0.0003 0.00000
0.0000
-0.00002
-0.0003
-0.00004
-0.0006
5 10 15 20 25 30
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 t(s)
t(s)
Fig. 10. Single active joint motion with sinusoidal position reference (T=12s
Fig. 9. Tracking of a sinusoidal position signal with T=0.1s and A=π/119 (a) and A=π) (a) Position tracking curves; (b) Position tracking error curves (TDC
Position tracking curves; (b) Position tracking error curves (TDC & SMC); (c) & SMC); (c) Position tracking error curves (CSMC & CFSMC)
Position tracking error curves (CSMC & CFSMC)

C. Robustness analysis 7 S-4th Desired Position S-4th Actual Position 0.00008

S-5th Actual Position
While TriMule robot is working (either self-moving or base- 6 0.00006
moving), the gravitational load changes with TriMule
configuration. To demonstrate that proposed CFSMC has good 5 0.00004
robustness to the changing gravitational load, a full stroke
Tracking Error(rad)

4 0.00002
Position(rad)

experiment is carried out on the S-4th joint (a sinusoidal

position reference with cycle T=12s and amplitude A=π). As 3 0.00000
can be seen from Fig. 10, under TDC and SMC, the trajectory
2 -0.00002
tracking error is seriously affected by position variation. Yet the
control accuracy of CSMC and CFSMC is much better, which 1 -0.00004
is not sensitive to the change of position. Therefore, CFSMC is
0 -0.00006
with great robustness to changing gravitational load.
S-4th Tracking Error
Apart from the uncertain gravitational load, TriMule robot -1 -0.00008
5 10 15 20 25 30 35
also faces inertia load variation, friction load variation, Coriolis t(s)
and centrifugal load variation, etc. These nonlinear load Fig. 11. Multiple joints coupling motion with sinusoidal position reference
perturbations also pose significant challenges for the stability (T=12s and A=π)

1083-4435 (c) 2018 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission. See http://www.ieee.org/publications_standards/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI 10.1109/TMECH.2018.2853764,
IEEE/ASME Transactions on Mechatronics

> REPLACE THIS LINE WITH YOUR PAPER IDENTIFICATION NUMBER (DOUBLE-CLICK HERE TO EDIT) < 8

D. Application for TriMule circular motion motion caused nonlinear dynamics. As a result, the position and
With the designed CFSMC, the support TriMule robot is orientation of support unit can be precisely controlled.
applied to perform a circular motion which needs a coordinated 900 0.02

S 1-th position error (mm)

movement of five active joints [34],[35]. A circular trajectory
300
(a) 0.04 (f) S 1-th position error

S 1-th position (mm)

0.01

X error (mm)
0.02
(radius:150mm, center: x=150mm, y=0mm, z=0mm, feed rate: 200 850

X (mm)
0.00 0.00
3000mm/min) in the XY plane is used to guide the support unit 100
-0.02 800
Desired X
(terminal device of support TriMule robot) position, as shown Actual X
-0.04
Desired S 1-th position
-0.01

0 X tracking error Actual S 1-th position

in Fig. 12. And the support unit orientation trajectory is two 5 10 15 20
750
5 10
t(s) 15 20
-0.02

zero value curves (α=0, β=0), which means the support unit is 200
t(s)
800 Desired S 2-th position 0.02

S 2-th position error (mm)

normal to XY plane all the time. (b) 0.04 Actual S 2-th position

S 2-th position (mm)

100 Y tracking error S 2-th position error 0.01

Y error (mm)
0.02 750

Y (mm)
0 0.00 0.00

-0.02 700
-100 -0.01
Desired Y
Actual Y -0.04 (g)
-200 650 -0.02
5 10 15 20 5 10 15 20
t(s) t(s)
1.0 750 0.02

S 3-th position error (mm)

Desired S 3-th position
Desired Z 0.04
Z tracking error Actual S 3-th position

S 3-th position (mm)

Actual Z 0.01
S 3-th position error

Z error (mm)
0.5 0.02 700

Z (mm)
0.00 0.00

0.0 -0.02 650

-0.01
(c) -0.04 (h)
-0.5 600 -0.02
5 10 15 20 5 10 15 20
t(s) t(s)
0.10 0.5 0.0002
0.0001
Fig. 12. A circular motion trajectory for the support TriMule robot (a) Desired α Desired S 4-th position

S 4-th position error (rad)

α tracking error

S 4-th position (rad)

Actual α 0.0 Actual S 4-th position
Definition of coordinate system (right-handed cartesian coordinate), (b) S 4-th position error

α error (rad)
0.05
Circular motion trajectory
α (rad)

-0.5
0 0
-1.0
0.00
-1.5
(d) (i)
-0.05 -2.0 -0.0002
5 10 15 20 -0.0001 5 10 15 20
t(s)
t(s)
0.10 0.0001 Desired S 5-th position 0.0002
0.2

S 5-th position error (rad)

Actual S 5-th position
Desired β β tracking error

S 5-th position (rad)

0.1 S 5-th position error
0.05 Actual β β error (rad)
β (rad)

0.0
0 0
0.00 -0.1

(e) -0.2
(j)
-0.05 -0.0001 -0.3 -0.0002
5 10 15 20 5 10 15 20
t(s) t(s)

Fig. 14. Circular motion of the support TriMule robot under CFSMC. (a)-(e)
motion of support unit, (f)-(j) motion of five active joints
0.00006

0.00003 VI. CONCLUSION

This paper proposed a novel continuous friction feedforward
β error (rad)

0.00000 sliding mode controller (CFSMC) for the control of TriMule

-0.00003
-0.00006
-0.00006 -0.00003 0.00000 0.00003
α error (rad)
(b)
Fig. 13. Trajectory tracking error of the support TriMule robot under CFSMC
(a) support unit position control error (b) support unit orientation control error
Fig. 13 shows the trajectory tracking error of the support
TriMule robot under CFSMC. According to the results, it can
be seen that the support unit position error in X\Y\Z direction
can all be restrained within ± 0.03mm and support unit
orientation error in α\β direction can all be restrained within ±
0.00006rad. Fig. 14 details the circular motion of the support
TriMule robot under CFSMC. As shown, five active joints
motion can all be precisely controlled with the help of CFSMC,
despite the discontinuous friction disturbance and coupled
hybrid robot. The CFSMC can handle nonlinear friction load
and achieve a nice transient response with a friction
feedforward control loop. The CFSMC can cope with other
nonlinear dynamics and assure zero steady-state error with a
0.00006
continuous sliding mode feedback control loop. Experiments
are conducted to verify the effectiveness of proposed hybrid
control scheme, which shows that CFSMC can achieve an
excellent transient/steady tracking performance. Compared to
sliding mode controller, CFSMC can guarantee stability with a
continuous control signal, which will not cause undesirable
chattering. Benefit from the friction feedforward loop, CFSMC
can avoid the overlarge tracking error (relative to regular
tracking error) caused by discontinuous friction. CFSMC also
has strong robustness to the parameter variation caused by
position change, orientation change and coupling motion.
Therefore, CFSMC is an effective and practical robust control
scheme for the TriMule hybrid robot.

1083-4435 (c) 2018 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission. See http://www.ieee.org/publications_standards/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI 10.1109/TMECH.2018.2853764,
IEEE/ASME Transactions on Mechatronics
> REPLACE THIS LINE WITH YOUR PAPER IDENTIFICATION NUMBER (DOUBLE-CLICK HERE TO EDIT) <
In this paper, the dynamical model of TriMule hybrid robot
is simplified by approximating inertia matrix 𝐀(𝐪) with a
constant diagonal matrix 𝐀 , and ignoring Coriolis and
centrifugal load 𝐕(𝐪, 𝐪), gravitational load 𝐆(𝐪), disturbing
load 𝐃. In our future work, we will reveal the exact value of
𝐀(𝐪), 𝐕(𝐪, 𝐪), 𝐆(𝐪) and 𝐃. And we will apply TriMule robot
in the mirror milling of thin-walled component.
REFERENCES
[1] J. L. Olazagoitia and S. Wyatt, "New PKM Tricept T9000 and its
application to flexible manufacturing at Aerospace Industry," SAE
Technical Paper, Sept. 2007.
[2] M. Milutinović, N. Slavković and D. Milutinović, "Kinematic Modelling
of Hybrid Parallel-Serial Five-Axis Machine Tool," Fme Transactions,
vol. 41, no. 1, pp. 1–10, Jan. 2013.
[3] Q. C. Li, L. M. Xu, Q. H. Chen and W. Ye, "New Family of RPR-
Equivalent Parallel Mechanisms: Design and Application," Chinese
Journal of Mechanical Engineering, vol.30, no. 2, pp. 217–221, Mar.
2017.
[4] R. Clavel, "Device for the displacement and the positioning of an element
in space," Swiss patent, no. 672089 A5, 1985.
[5] A. Codourey, R. Clavel and C. W. Burckhardt, " Control Algorithm and
Controller for the Direct Drive Delta Robot," IFAC Proceedings Volumes,
vol. 24, no. 9, pp. 543-549, Sept. 1991.
[6] N. Liu and J. J. Wu, "Kinematics and Application of a Hybrid Industrial
Robot-Delta-RST," Sensors & Transducers, vol. 169, no. 4, pp. 186-192,
Apr. 2014.
[7] Y. Wu, Z. Fu, J. N. Xu, W. X. Yan, W. H. Liu and Y. Z. Zhao, "Dynamics
Analysis of Hybrid Parallel Robot," in International Conference on Fluid
Power and Mechatronics, pp. 1272-1275, Aug. 2015.
[8] Y. Wu, Z. Fu, J. N. Xu, W. X. Yan, W. H. Liu and Y. Z. Zhao, " Kinematic
Analysis of 5-DOF Hybrid Parallel Robot," in International Conference
on Intelligent Robotics and Applications, pp. 153-163, 2015.
[9] M. Petko, G. Karpiel, K. Gac, G. Góra, K. Kobus, and J. Ochoński,
"Trajectory tracking controller of the hybrid robot for milling,"
Mechatronics, vol. 37, pp. 100-111, Aug. 2016.
[10] K. E. Neumann, "Robot," United States Patent, no. 4732525, Mar. 1988.
[11] K. E. Neumann, " Adaptive In-Jig High Load Exechon Machining
Technology & Assembly," SAE Technical Paper, Sept. 2008.
[12] J. Zhang, Y. Q. Zhao and Y. Jin, "Elastodynamic Modeling and Analysis
for an Exechon Parallel Kinematic Machine," Journal of Manufacturing
Science and Engineering, vol. 138, no. 3, 031011, Mar. 2016.
[13] Y. Jin, Z. M. Bi, H. T. Liu, C. Higgins, M. Price, W. H. Chen et al.,
"Kinematic Analysis and Dimensional Synthesis of Exechon Parallel
Kinematic Machine for Large Volume Machining," Journal of
Mechanisms and Robotics, vol. 7, no. 4, 041004, Nov. 2015.
[14] Z. M. Bi and Y. Jin, "Kinematic modeling of Exechon parallel kinematic
machine," Robotics and Computer-Integrated Manufacturing, vol. 27, no.
1, pp. 186-193, Feb. 2011.
[15] T. Huang, Z. Y. Hong, J. P. Mei and D. G. Chetwynd, "Kinematic
Calibration of the 3-DOF Module of a 5-DOF Reconfigurable Hybrid
Robot using a Double-Ball-Bar System," in Proceedings of the 2006
IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems,
pp.508-512, Oct. 2006.
[16] H. K. Tonshoff, H. Grendel and R. Kaak, “Structure and characteristics of
the hybrid manipulator Georg V,” Parallel Kinematic Machines, pp. 365-
376, 1999.
[17] X. J. Liu, X. Q. Tang and J. S. Wang, "A Novel 2-DOF Parallel
Mechanism Based Design of a New 5-Axis Hybrid Machine Tool," in
Proceedings of the 2003 IEEE International Conference on Robotics &
Automation, Sept. 2003.
[18] T. Huang, C. L. Dong, H. T. Liu, X. D. Qin, J. P. Mei, Q. Liu et al., "a 5-
DOF hybrid robot with multi-axis rotating support," Chinese Patent, no.
201510401279.9, Oct. 2015.
[19] K. E. Neumann, " System and method for controlling a robot," United
States Patent, no. 6301525 B1, Oct. 2001.
[20] F. Caccavale, B. Siciliano and L. Villani, "The Tricept robot: dynamics
and impedance control," IEEE/ASME Transactions on Mechatronics, vol.
8, no. 2, pp. 263-268, Jun. 2003.
1083-4435 (c) 2018 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission. See http://www.ieee.org/publications_standards/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
9
[21] B. Siciliano, “The Tricept robot: Inverse kinematics, manipulability
analysis and closed-loop direct kinematics algorithm” Robotica, vol. 17,
no. 4, pp. 437-445, Jul. 1999.
[22] W. Zhao, X. Ren and S. Wang, "Parameter Estimation-Based Time-
Varying Sliding Mode Control for Multimotor Driving Servo Systems,"
IEEE/ASME Transactions on Mechatronics, vol. 22, no. 5, pp. 2330-2341,
Oct. 2017.
[23] C. L. Xia, G. K. Jiang, W. Chen, and T. N. Shi, "Switching-Gain
Adaptation Current Control for Brushless DC Motors," IEEE
Transactions on Industrial Electronics, vol. 63, no. 4, pp. 2044-2052, Apr.
2016.
[24] Q. Xu, "Continuous Integral Terminal Third-Order Sliding Mode Motion
Control for Piezoelectric Nanopositioning System," IEEE/ASME
Transactions on Mechatronics, vol. 22, no. 4, pp. 1828-1838, Aug. 2017.
[25] X. C. Xi, A. N. Poo and G. S. Hong, "Tracking error-based static friction
compensation for a bi-axial CNC machine," Precision Engineering, vol.
34, no. 3, pp. 480-488, Jul. 2010.
[26] C. C. de Wit, H. Olsson, K. J. Astrom and P. Lischinsky, "A New Model
for Control of Systems with Friction," IEEE Transactions on Automatic
Control, vol. 40, no. 3, pp. 419-425, Mar. 1995.
[27] H. T. Yau, "Design of adaptive sliding mode controller for chaos
synchronization with uncertainties," Chaos, Solitons & Fractals, vol. 22,
no. 2, pp. 341-347, Oct. 2004.
[28] N. S. Pai and H. T. Yau, "Generalized Projective Synchronization for the
Horizontal Platform Systems via an Integral-type Sliding Mode Control,"
Journal of Vibration and Control, vol. 17, no. 1, pp. 11-17, Jan. 2011.
[29] J. J. Slotine and W. P. Li, Applied nonlinear control, United States:
Prentice Hall, 1991.
[30] F. Wang, C. Liang, Y. Tian, X. Zhao, and D. Zhang, “Design and control
of a compliant microgripper with a large amplification ratio for high-
speed micro manipulation,” IEEE/ASME Transactions on Mechatronics,
vol. 21, no. 3, pp. 1262–1271, Jun. 2016.
[31] S. M. Mozayan, M. Saad, H. Vahedi, H. Fortin-Blanchette, and M. Soltani,
"Sliding Mode Control of PMSG Wind Turbine Based on Enhanced
Exponential Reaching Law," IEEE Transactions on Industrial Electronics,
vol. 63, no.10, pp. 6148-6159, Oct. 2016.
[32] R. J. Wai, "Development of New Training Algorithms for Neuro-Wavelet
Systems on the Robust Control of Induction Servo Motor Drive," IEEE
Transactions on Industrial Electronics, vol. 49, no. 6, pp. 1323-1341, Dec.
2002.
[33] J. Koivumaki, and J. Mattila, “Stability-guaranteed impedance control of
hydraulic robotic manipulators,” IEEE/ASME Transactions on
Mechatronics, vol. 22, no.2, pp. 601–612, Apr. 2017.
[34] R. Sato, “Generation Mechanism of Quadrant Glitches and Xompensation
for it in Feed Drive Systems of NC Machine Tools,” International Journal
of Automation Technology, vol.6, No.2, pp.154-162, Mar. 2012.
[35] R. Sato, M. Maegawa, G. Tashiro, and K. Shirase, “Influence of Servo
Characteristics on Motion Accuracy of Parallel Kinematic Mechanism,”
Key Engineering Materials, vol. 523-524, pp.762-767, Nov.2012.
Xu Yang received B.S. degree in mechanical
engineering and automation from China
University of Mining and Technology,
Xuzhou, China, in 2011, and Ph.D. degree in
mechatronic engineering from Zhejiang
University, Hangzhou, China, in 2017.
He is currently a postdoctoral fellow in the
school of mechanical engineering, Tianjin
University, China. His current research interests include
adaptive robust control, robotics, electrohydraulic system.
Haitao Liu received B.S., M.S., and Ph.D. in
mechanical engineering from Tianjin
University, Tianjin, China in 2004, 2007 and
2010, respectively. Currently he is a
professor in Tianjin University. His research
interests include mechanisms and robotics.
This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI 10.1109/TMECH.2018.2853764,
IEEE/ASME Transactions on Mechatronics

> REPLACE THIS LINE WITH YOUR PAPER IDENTIFICATION NUMBER (DOUBLE-CLICK HERE TO EDIT) < 10

Juliang Xiao received Ph.D. degree from

the school of mechanical engineering,
Tianjin University, Tianjin, China, in 2006.
He is currently an Associate Professor in
Tianjin University, Tianjin, China.
His research interests include
mechanical, electrical and hydraulic
integration.

Wule Zhu received his B.E. degree in

mechanical design manufacturing and its
automation from Hefei University of
Technology, China, in 2011; and Ph.D.
degree in mechatronic engineering from
Zhejiang University, Hangzhou, China, in
2016.
From 2014 to 2016, he was a visiting
pre-doctoral research fellow with Northwestern University,
USA. His research interests include design, modeling and
control of mechatronic systems, ultra-precision diamond
machining of freeform surfaces.

Qi Liu received B.S degree in mechanical

engineering from Tianjin University, Tianjin,
China in 2013. He is currently working
toward the Ph.D. degree at Tianjin
University. His research interests include
feedforward control, iterative tuning and
hybrid robots.

Guofang Gong received Ph.D. degree in

mechanical engineering from China
University of Mining and Technology,
Beijing, China, in 2000.
Prof. Gong is a doctoral tutor at the
institute of mechatronics and control
engineering, Zhejiang University. His
current research interests include integration
of electro-hydraulic control systems and analysis of their
performance, tribological characteristics of materials.

Tian Huang received his B.E., M.E. and

Ph.D. degree in mechanical engineering
from Tianjin University, China in 1981,
1984 and 1990. He is a full professor in
Tianjin University. He is a fellow of CIRP, a
vice president of IFToMM and a subject
editor of Mechanism and Machine Theory.
His research areas include kinematics and
dynamics of machine tools and robotics.

1083-4435 (c) 2018 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission. See http://www.ieee.org/publications_standards/publications/rights/index.html for more information.