See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/317612157

Real Time Trajectory Tracking Controller based on Lyapunov Function for

Mobile Robot

Article  in  International Journal of Computer Applications · June 2017

DOI: 10.5120/ijca2017914540

CITATIONS READS

2 1,015

4 authors:

Mohamed Elsayed Abdallah Hammad

Benha University Benha University
3 PUBLICATIONS   2 CITATIONS    13 PUBLICATIONS   43 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Ashraf Mohammed Hafez Hala Mansour

Benha University Benha University
6 PUBLICATIONS   24 CITATIONS    48 PUBLICATIONS   336 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

super resolution View project

infrared processing View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Mohamed Elsayed on 16 June 2017.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.


Real Time Trajectory Tracking Controller based on
Lyapunov Function for Mobile Robot
Mohammed Elsayed
Faculty of Engineering at Shoubra, Benha University, Egypt
108 Shoubra, Cairo Governorate, Egypt
Ashraf Hafez
Faculty of Engineering at Shoubra, Benha University, Egypt
108 Shoubra, Cairo Governorate, Egypt
ABSTRACT
An important issue in robotics research is path tracking control
where the robot is required to follow a certain path. The error be-
tween the desired path and the actual path is to converge to zero.
This problem is more complicated when the robot dynamics is con-
sidered. This paper proposes a real time trajectory tracking con-
trol for a differential drive wheeled mobile robot (DDWMR) in
obstacle-free environment. The robot is guided to follow certain
reference path with a pre-calculated velocity profile. The controller
design and analysis of the system stability are guaranteed using
Lyapunov stability theory. The dynamic model of real DDWMR
is derived and used in the LabVIEW simulation environment for
testing the validity of designed controller. The obtained simulation
results illustrate the success of the proposed controller. Also to Test
the effectiveness of proposed controller, a comparison study with a
widely used backstepping based controller is performed.
Keywords
Trajectory tracking, nonholonomic robots, dynamic Modeling, dif-
ferential drive, Lyapunov stability, mobile robot
1. INTRODUCTION
The problem of Real-time trajectory tracking control of a mobile
robot is essential in the public arena today. Autonomous mobile
robots have different applications in the military field, industry and
in all areas of life. The issue of autonomous trajectory tracking
control of wheeled mobile robots have occupied a huge part of
research interest in the robotics field.
The path tracking problem of any mobile robot is mainly
how to generate the required linear and angular velocity that en-
ables the robot to follow a predefined path, i.e., the error between
the desired path and the actual path is to converge to zero. In recent
years there have been many researches on tracking control of a
mobile robot. Mostly include the kinematic model of DDWMR
while very few include dynamic model due to the complexity of
the model and high non-linearity degree.
Mainly the trajectory tracking control algorithms can be classified
International Journal of Computer Applications (0975 - 8887)
Volume 168 - No.11, June 2017
Abdallah Hammad
Faculty of Engineering at Shoubra, Benha University, Egypt
108 Shoubra, Cairo Governorate, Egypt
Hala Mansour
Faculty of Engineering at Shoubra, Benha University, Egypt
108 Shoubra, Cairo Governorate, Egypt
into on of six categories [1]: (1) backstepping [2], [3]; (2) lin-
earization [4]; (3) sliding mode [5]; (4) fuzzy systems [6], [7]; (5)
neural networks [8]; and (6) neurofuzzy systems [9].
In this paper, the kinematics and the dynamic model of a
differential drive wheeled mobile robot (DDWMR) is presented.
This model itself is used as a motion controller in a closed loop
control scheme. In the absence of workspace obstacles, the basic
motion tasks assigned to the mobile robots may be reduced
to moving between two robot postures and following a given
trajectory. Also at the end of the paper a brief comparison with the
backstepping controller will be introduced.
This paper is organized as follows: in section II the basic
structure, kinematic and dynamic modeling of differential drive
wheeled mobile robot (DDWMR) are exposed. The proposed
control architecture is introduced in Section III. Simulation results
are shown in section IV. In section V we will compare our obtained
results with backstepping based controller. Finally, we conclude
the paper in Section VI.
2. KINEMATIC AND DYNAMIC MODELING OF
DDWMR
In this section the kinematic and dynamic models of a real
DDWMR are derived. The dynamic model is based on lagrange
approach.
2.1 Coordinate System
A top view of the DDWMR used in this work, is shown in Fig. 1.
The robot configuration consists of the main frame with two wheels
fixed on one axis with two identical motors and a front free wheel
(castor). The mobile robot motion is controlled by changing the
relative angular speed of the driving wheels.
In order to describe the state of the robot we will define two co-
ordinate systems, the reference frame {xr , yr } and vehicle frame
{xv , yv }. The state of the robot in a reference frame is represented
by the position of point b which is located at the center of the wheel
axle and the robot heading angle θ. The robot configuration in the
1
 International Journal of Computer Applications (0975 - 8887)
Volume 168 - No.11, June 2017

yr Equations 7 - 9 can be written in matrix form

yv
ẋ
 
 
φ
xv − sin θ cos θ 0 0 0  ẏ 
 cos θ sin θ L −R 0    θ̇  = 0,

(10)
a c cos θ sin θ −L 0 −R  ϕ̇ R

y θ ϕ̇L
b
2L or

2R
A(p)ṗ = 0 , (11)
where Ap is the constraints matrix and it will be used in the deriva-
tion of the dynamic model.
x
xr
2.3 Kinematic Model
Fig. 1. Differential Drive wheeled Mobile Robot For the DDWMR, the primary motivation behind kinematic is to
obtain the robot speeds as a function of the driving wheels speeds.
reference frame is symbolized as
The linear and angular speeds of the DDWMR in the vehicle frame
 T can be calculated as
pr = x y θ , (1)
vR + vL (ϕ̇R + ϕ̇L )
and in vehicle frame as v= =R , (12)
 T 2 2
pv = xv yv θv . (2)
and
The transformation of robot configuration from vehicle frame to vR − vL (ϕ̇R − ϕ̇L )
reference frame can be done through the following transformation ω= =R . (13)
2L 2L
pr = R(θ)pv , (3) Then the linear and the angular speeds of the DDWMR in the ref-
where: erence frame can be calculated as follows
 
cos θ − sin θ 0 (ϕ̇R + ϕ̇L )
ẋ = v cos θ = R cos θ , (14)
R(θ) =  sin θ cos θ 0  . (4) 2
0 0 1
(ϕ̇R + ϕ̇L )
2.2 Nonholonomic Constraints ẏ = vsinθ = R sin θ , (15)
2
Some assumptions and constraints must be declared Before pro-
ceeding with kinematic and dynamic model of DDWMR (ϕ̇R − ϕ̇L )
θ̇ = ω = R . (16)
(1) The robot motion is on a flat surface, meaning zero potential 2L
energy, Now consider a DDWMR at certain position (x, y, θ) which has a
(2) No lateral slip movement: This means that the robot center non-zero distance with the desired position (xd , yd , δ) as shown in
point velocity will be in the direction of the x-axis of vehicle Fig.2.
frame and that the motion in the y-axis of vehicle frame will
be zero. Since the motion in the y-axis of vehicle frame will be yr
zero, then
ẏv = 0 . (5) б
yd
Using the transformation matrix to represent this constraints in
the reference frame, so Desired position
ℓ
     ẋ
ẋv cos θ sin θ 0
 ẏ  
 v  = − sin θ cos θ 0   ẏ  . (6)
 

θ̇v 0 0 1 θ̇ 䪽

y θ
So we can represent this constraint in reference frame as fol-
lowing
Current position
−ẋ sin θ + ẏ cos θ = 0 . (7)
x xd xr
(3) The second constraint is pure rolling without slipping, then
each wheel touches the ground in single point. The pure rolling
Fig. 2. Current and Goal Positions of robot
constraint is formulated as [10]
ẋ cos θ + ẏ sin θ + Lθ̇ = RωR , (8) The robot can be represented in polar coordinates involving error
distance
q
ẋ cos θ + ẏ sin θ − Lθ̇ = RωL . (9) ` = (xd − x)2 + (yd − y)2 , (17)

2
 International Journal of Computer Applications (0975 - 8887)
Volume 168 - No.11, June 2017

and heading angle error

ψ = δ −θ, (18) mÿ + mf a(θ̈ cos θ − θ̇2 sin θ) = C2 , (30)
as in the following equation
`˙
    I θ̈ + mf a(ÿ cos θ − ẍ sin θ) = C3 , (31)
− cos(ψ) 0  
 ψ̇  =  sin(ψ)/` −1  v (19)
ω
δ̇ sin(ψ)/` 0 Iw ϕ̈R = τR + C4 , (32)
2.4 Dynamic Modeling
The dynamic model of the DDWMR is very important for simu- Iw ϕ̈L = τL + C5 . (33)
lation of different control algorithms. In this work the lagrangian These equations can be written in form of the general equations of
approach is used to drive the equations of motion of DDWMR. The motion [11]
Lagrangian equation in general is
M (p)p̈ + V (p, ṗ)ṗ = B(p)τ − AT (p)λ , (34)
d ∂L ∂L
( )+( ) = F − AT (p)λ , (20) where M (p) is the symmetric positive definite inertia matrix,
dt ∂ ṗi ∂pi
V (p, ṗ) is thecentripetal
 and coriolis matrix, B(p) is the input
where the Lagrangian function L is the difference between the ki- matrix, τ T = τR τL is the input vector, AT (p) is the matrix
netic energy and the potential energy of the robot. According to the associated with the kinematic constraints, and λ is the Lagrange
above assumptions the potential energy equals zero, then the La- multipliers vector. We can see that
grangian function equals the the kinetic energy only. F is the force
−mf a sin θ 0 0
 
vector, Ap is the constraints matrix and λ is the Lagrange multipli- m 0
ers for the robot constraints. The total robot kinetic energy is the  0 m mf a cos θ 0 0 
M (p) =  −mf a sin θ mf a cos θ I 0 0 ,
 
summation of robot frame kinetic energy and the wheels kinetic
energy. Then
 0 0 0 Iw 0 
0 0 0 0 Iw
L = T = Tf + Tw , (21) (35)
where
0 −mf aθ̇ cos θ
 
1 1 0 0 0
Tf = mf vc2 + Ic θ̇2 , (22)
2 2 0 0 −mf aθ̇ sin θ 0 0
V (p, ṗ) =  0 0, (36)
 
0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
 
1 2 2 1
Tw = mw (vR + vL ) + Im θ̇2 + Iw (ϕ̇2R + ϕ̇2L ) . (23) 0 0 0 0 0
2 2
Where mf is the robot mass excluding motors and wheels, mw is  
0 0
the mass of motors and wheels together. Ic is the inertial moment 0 0
of the robot about the vertical axis passes through the center of
B(p) =  0 0, (37)
 
mass, Im and Iw are the inertial moments of the motors and wheels 1 0
about the vertical axis passes through the center of mass and the
0 1
wheel axis respectively. Representing the velocities as function of
reference coordinates using the relation vi2 = ẋ2i + ẏi2 , we get  
λ1
2 2 2 2 2  λ2
vR + vL = 2(ẋ + ẏ + 2(Lθ̇) ) , (24) 
λ =  λ3 . (38)
 
λ 
4
vc2 = ẋ2 + ẏ 2 + 2aθ̇(ẏ cos θ − ẋ sin θ) + (aθ̇)2 , (25) λ5
where a is the distance between the center of mass c and mid-point Back to the kinematic model, the model can be written in the fol-
on the axis between the two wheels b. Then lowing form
1 
ẋ
 
R cos θ R cos θ

L = m(ẋ2 + ẏ 2 ) + mf aθ̇(ẏ cos θ − ẋ sin θ)
2 (26)  ẏ  1  R sin θ R sin θ   ϕ̇ 
R
1 1  θ̇  =  R/L
   −R/  , (39)
+ Iw (ϕ̇2R + ϕ̇2L ) + I θ̇2 ,  ϕ̇  2  L  ϕ̇L
2 2 R 2 0
where ϕ̇L 0 2
m = mf + 2mw , (27) or
ṗ = Q(p)η . (40)
2
I = Ic + mf a + 2mw L + 2Im . 2
(28) It is Straightforward to show that QT (p)AT (p) = 0. Differentiat-
ing Equation 40, substituting the expression for ṗ and p̈ into 34,
Applying the lagrangian equation 20 on the obtained lagrangian and premultiplying by QT (p) to convert the motion equation to the
function, easily we can see that unconstrained form, then we have
mẍ − mf a(θ̈ sin θ + θ̇2 cos θ) = C1 , (29) M̄ (p)η̇ + V̄ (p, ṗ)η = B̄(p)τ , (41)

3
 International Journal of Computer Applications (0975 - 8887)
Volume 168 - No.11, June 2017

where: ℓ υ τR υ
trajectory
T Path
Pd Error Dynamic Kinematic
tracking
M̄ (p) = Q (p)M (p)Q(p) (42) generator
calculator
䪽 controller ω
PID τ
L
model model
" # Eq. 18, 19 Eq. 45, 46 ω Eq. 14 - 16
R2 2 R2 2 Eq. 50 , 51
Iw + 4L2 (mL + I) 4L2
(mL − I)
= R2 2 R2
,
4L2
(mL − I) Iw + 4L2
(mL2 + I)
P
T T
V̄ (p, ṗ) = Q (p)M (p)Q̇(p) + Q (P )V (p, ṗ)Q(p) (43)
" # Fig. 3. Tracking controller system architecture.
R2
0 2L
m f aθ̇
= 2 ,
−R
2L
mf aθ̇ 0 It is clear that V > 0 and that V = 0 only if there is no error in
robot posture, then V is appositive definite function. By taking the
time derivative of Lyapunov function, we have
B̄(p) = QT (p)B(p) (44)
  V̇ = ``˙ + ψ ψ̇ (48)
1 0
= .
0 1 If we substitute for `˙ and ψ̇ from model equation (19)
Or we can write the equation in terms of v and ω as in the following v sin(ψ)
form V̇ = `(−v cos(ψ)) + ψ( − ω) (49)
`
2 (τR + τL ) Then we can choose the driving velocities to be
(m + Iw )v̇ − amf ω 2 = , (45)
R2 R
v = k` ` cos(ψ) (50)

2L2 L(τR − τL )
(I + Iw )ω̇ + amf vω = . (46)
R2 R ω = k` sin(ψ) cos(ψ) + kψ tanh(kψ ψ) (51)
Equations 45 and 46 are used to simulate our real robot whose dy- Where k` and kψ are positive numbers, then the derivative of the
namic parameters are listed in Table 1. Lyapunov function will be in the form of

Table 1. Robot dynamic model parameters V̇ = −k` `2 cos2 (ψ) − kψ ψ tanh(kψ ψ) (52)
Parameter Value (unit) Description It is clear that the derivative of the Lyapunov function V is a nega-
L 10 cm The distance between the drive wheel tive function, then the point eP = 0 is asymptotically stable.
and the axis of symmetry.
R 7.5 cm Wheel radius. 4. SIMULATION RESULTS
a 5 cm The distance between the center of mass
In this section the performance of proposed controller is tested us-
and drive wheel axis.
ing NI-LabVIEW control design and simulation toolkit. In the fol-
m 6 kg Total robot weigh with onboard load.
lowing subsections we will show some of the results that prove the
mf 4 kg Robot frame weigh.
stability and convergence of used controller. The controller param-
I 5 kg.m2 Mass moment of inertia about the center
eters are chosen as: k` = 2, kψ = 3. The sampling time is set to
of mass c.
0.001 second.
Iw 0.005 kg.m2 Inertial moment of the motors and wheels
about the wheel axis. 4.1 Go to Goal
The desired goal for the robot is described as xd = 3 and xd = 4.
Goal point is sent to controller which directs the vehicle towards
3. TRACKING PROBLEM AND CONTROL the goal. The robot starts at (-1, 0, 0). Then the error at t = 0 is
T
ALGORITHM eP = 4 4 π/4 . Fig. 4 shows the result of go to goal simula-


In this section the control algorithm that we will use in this pa- tion. Fig. 4.A shows the tracking performance of the robot in xy-
per is derived. The role of the control algorithm is to enable the plan. Fig. 4.B shows the tracking errors in x, y directions and in
robot to go to the desired goal and follow the target trajectory. orientation. Fig. 4.C shows the controller output (linear and angu-
That is achieved by using the posture error to provide the robot lar velocities).
with the reference linear and angular velocities. The description of
tracking problem can be described as follows. Given the desired
4.2 Path Tracking
 T
robot posture pd = xd yd δ while the robot currently is at 4.2.1 Circular Path Tracking. The desired goal for the robot is

x y θ
T to follow the path described as xd = 1 + sin t and yd = 1 − cos t,
p= and the controller must generate the linear and
or in general (xd − 1)2 + (yd − 1)2 = 1 . The robot starts at (-1,
the angular velocities such that lim p = pd . A general structure for  T
t→∞ -1, 0) with initial error eP = 2 1 0 . Fig. 5 shows the result
the tracking control system is presented in Fig. 3. of circular path tracking simulation. Fig. 5.A shows the tracking
To grantee the convergence and the stability of our controller, a performance of the robot in xy-plan. Fig. 5.B shows the controller
Lyapunov function candidate is chosen as output (linear and angular velocities). Fig. 5.C shows the desired
`2 ψ2 and the actual values of x. Fig. 5.D shows the desired and the actual
V = V1 + V2 = + (47) values of y.
2 2

4
 International Journal of Computer Applications (0975 - 8887)
Volume 168 - No.11, June 2017

5 3.5
8
A Goal A Actual path B υ
3
4 Target path

Controller output
6 ω
2.5

y (meter)
3

(meter)
2 4
2 1.5
2

y
1 1

0.5 0
0
start point 0
-1 -2
-2 -1 0 1 2 3 4 5 -0.5
x (meter) -1 -4
-1 -0.5 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 13
5
xd - x 0.5 x (meter) Time (sec)
B C υ
4 yd - y 0.4 ω 3 3
Controller output C xd D yd
б- θ x
3 y

y (meter)
x (meter)
0.3 2 2
Error

2 0.2
1 1
1 0.1
0 0
0 0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14
Time (sec) Time (sec) -1 -1
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 13 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 13
Time (sec) Time (sec)
Fig. 4. Go to goal. A: The tracking performance; B: The tracking errors in
x and y directions, and in orientation; C: The linear and angular velocities. Fig. 6. Simulation tracking for Figure eight path. A: The tracking per-
formance; B: The linear and angular velocities; C, D: The desired and the
3
Actual path 7
actual values of x and y respectively.
A υ
B
2.5 Target path 6
Controller output

ω 3
2 Actual path 7
y (meter)

A B υ
1.5 4 2.5 Target path 6
ω

Controller output
2
1
2 y (meter) 1.5
4
0.5
1
0 2
0
0.5
-0.5
0 0
-1 -2
-1 -0.5 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
-0.5
x (meter) Time (sec)
-1 -2
3 3 -1 -0.5 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3
xd yd 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
C D x (meter) Time (sec)
x y
y (meter)
x (meter)

2 2
3 3
C xd D yd
1 1
x y
2 2

y (meter)
x (meter)

0 0 1 1

-1 -1 0 0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Time (sec) Time (sec)
-1 -1
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

Fig. 5. Simulation tracking for circular path. A: The tracking performance; Time (sec) Time (sec)
B: The linear and angular velocities; C, D: The desired and the actual values
of x and y respectively. Fig. 7. Simulation tracking for ellipsoidal path. A: The tracking perfor-
mance; B: The linear and angular velocities; C, D: The desired and the
actual values of x and y respectively.
4.2.2 Figure-eight Path Tracking. The desired goal for the
robot is to follow the path described as xd = 1 + sin 2t and 5. COMPARISON TO BACKSTEPPING BASED
yd = 1 − cos t. The robot starts at (-1, -1, 0) with initial error
 T CONTROLLER
eP = 2 1 0 . Fig. 6 shows the result of Figure-eight path
tracking simulation. Fig. 6.A shows the tracking performance of In this section, the backstepping algorithm based control is com-
the robot in xy-plan. Fig. 6.B shows the controller output (linear pared to our Lyapunov based tracking controller proposed in this
and angular velocities). Fig. 6.C shows the desired and the actual work. The backstepping based tracking control technique used
values of x. Fig. 6.D shows the desired and the actual values of y. infig:Circle-sim [12] is given by the following equations
4.2.3 Ellipsoidal Path Tracking. The desired goal for the v = vd cos eθ + kx ex , (53)
robot is to follow the path described as xd = 1 + sin t and and
yd = 1 − cos(t + π/4), Where f = 2πHz. The robot starts at (-
 T
1, -1, 0) with initial error eP = 2 1.29 0.576 . Fig. 7 shows ω = ωd + ky vd ey + kθ vd sin eθ , (54)
the result of ellipsoidal path tracking simulation. Fig. 7.A shows where kx , ky , and kθ are the controller parameters, and
the tracking performance of the robot in xy-plan. Fig. 7.B shows     
the controller output (linear and angular velocities). Fig. 7.C shows ex cos θ sin θ 0 xd − x
the desired and the actual values of x. Fig. 7.D shows the desired  ey  =  − sin θ cos θ 0   yd − y  . (55)
and the actual values of y. eθ 0 0 1 θd − θ

5
 International Journal of Computer Applications (0975 - 8887)
Volume 168 - No.11, June 2017

The backstepping tracking control defined in equation (53) and 7. REFERENCES

(54) is simulated here under the same conditions as the proposed
controller. The Fig. 8 Shows the tracking performance of both [1] G. Yuan, S. Yang, and G. Mittal, Tracking control of a mo-
controller for a circular path. As we can see that the proposed bile robot using a neural dynamics based approach, Proceed-
controller is more faster in reaching the reference trajectory than ings 2001 ICRA. IEEE International Conference on Robotics
the backstepping based controller. and Automation (Cat. No.01CH37164).
[2] T. Dierks and S. Jagannathan, Control of Nonholonomic Mo-
3 bile Robot Formations: Backstepping Kinematics into Dynam-
Target path ics, 2007 IEEE International Conference on Control Applica-
2.5
Actual bath -Backstepping tions, 2007.
2 Actual bath -Proposed controller [3] I. Benaoumeur, B. Laredj, H. E. A. Reda, and A.-F. Zoubir,
y (meter)

1.5 Backstepping Approach for Autonomous Mobile Robot Tra-

1 jectory Tracking, Indonesian Journal of Electrical Engineering
and Computer Science, vol. 2, no. 3, p. 478, Jan. 2016.
0.5
[4] D.-H. Kim and J.-H. Oh, Tracking control of a two-wheeled
0 mobile robot using inputoutput linearization, Control Engi-
-0.5 neering Practice, vol. 7, no. 3, pp. 369373, 1999.
-1 [5] J.-M. Yang and J.-H. Kim, Sliding mode control for trajec-
-1 -0.5 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 tory tracking of nonholonomic wheeled mobile robots, IEEE
x (meter) Transactions on Robotics and Automation, vol. 15, no. 3, pp.
578587, 1999.
Fig. 8. Tracking performance comparison between backstepping con-
troller and proposed controller.
[6] A. Ollero, A. G. Cerezo, and J. V. Martinez, Fuzzy supervisory
path tracking of mobile robots, Control Engineering Practice,
vol. 2, no. 1, p. 160, 1994.
[7] A. Pandey and D. R. Parhi, Optimum path planning of mo-
Also, we can see in Fig. 9 the large difference between the bile robot in unknown static and dynamic environments using
startup linear and angular velocities in both controller. The Fuzzy-Wind Driven Optimization algorithm, Defence Technol-
proposed controller velocity profile is more practical than that ogy, vol. 13, no. 1, pp. 4758, 2017.
produced from back stepping controller.
[8] J. Velagic, N. Osmic, and B. Lacevic, Design of Neural Net-
work Mobile Robot Motion Controller, New Trends in Tech-
5
nologies, Jan. 2010.
Proposed controller

4
3
[9] M. K. Singh and D. R. Parhi, Intelligent neuro-controller for
2
navigation of mobile robot, Proceedings of the International
Conference on Advances in Computing, Communication and
1
Control - ICAC3 09, 2009. Vol. 4 No. 1 2012 ISSN: 0975-
0
3176 pp. 19-26
-1
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 [10] Y. Tian and N. Sarkar, Control of a Mobile Robot Subject to
Time (sec) Wheel Slip, Journal of Intelligent and Robotic Systems, vol.
25 25 74, no. 3-4, pp. 915929, Sep. 2013.
Backstepping controller

υ
20 ω 20 [11] N. Sarkar, X. Yun, and V. Kumar, Control of Mechanical Sys-
15 15
tems With Rolling Constraints, The International Journal of
10
Robotics Research, vol. 13, no. 1, pp. 5569, 1994.
10
5
[12] R. Fierro and F. Lewis, Control of a nonholonomic mobile
5
robot: backstepping kinematics into dynamics, Proceedings of
-1 -1 1995 34th IEEE Conference on Decision and Control.
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 0 0.5
Time (sec) Time (sec)

Fig. 9. Controller output for backstepping controller and proposed con-

troller.

6. CONCLUSION
In this paper, the kinematic and dynamic models of DDWMR are
introduced. Non-linear dynamics based tracking controller is sug-
gested, which is capable of producing continuous and smooth ve-
locity commands. The tracking controller simulation shows that the
system is asymptotically stable, and that the tracking errors are en-
sured to move toward to zeros. Also we compared the results ob-
tained using the proposed controller to the result of backstepping
based controller.

View publication stats