798 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON CONTROL SYSTEMS TECHNOLOGY, VOL. 18, NO.
4, JULY 2010
Adaptive Sliding Mode Control With Perturbation
Estimation and PID Sliding Surface for Motion
Tracking of a Piezo-Driven Micromanipulator
Yangmin Li, Senior Member, IEEE, and Qingsong Xu, Member, IEEE
Abstract—This paper proposes an improved sliding mode con-
trol with perturbation estimation (SMCPE) featuring a PID-type
sliding surface and adaptive gains for the motion tracking control
of a micromanipulator system with piezoelectric actuation. One
advantage of the proposed controller lies in that its implementa-
tion only requires the online estimation of perturbation and con-
trol gains without acquiring the knowledge of bounds on system
uncertainties. The dynamic model of the system with Bouc–Wen
hysteresis is established and identified through particle swarm op-
timization (PSO) approach, and the controller is designed based
on Lyapunov stability analysis. A high-gain observer is adopted
to estimate the full state from the only measurable position infor-
mation. Experimental results demonstrate that the performance of
proposed controller is superior to that of conventional SMCPE in
both set-point regulation and motion tracking control. Moreover,
a submicron accuracy tracking and contouring is achieved by the
micromanipulator with dominant hysteresis compensated for a low
magnitude level, which validates the feasibility of the proposed con-
troller in the field of micro/nano scale manipulation as well.
Index Terms—Flexure mechanism, hysteresis, micromanipu-
lator, nonlinear system, piezoelectric actuation, robust control.
I. INTRODUCTION
M ICROPOSITIONING stages with piezoelectric actua-
tion are widely used in a variety of applications where
an ultrahigh precision motion over a micro scale workspace is
required [1]. Piezoelectric actuators (PZTs) are capable of de-
livering nanometer positioning resolution, large blocking force,
high stiffness, and fast response and are hence commonly uti-
lized to meet the specific requirements. Nevertheless, the major
problem of piezo-driven stages comes from the nonlinearities
in the PZT attributed to hysteresis, creep, and drift over ex-
tended periods of time. The hysteresis is a nonlinear relation-
ship between the applied voltage and output displacement of the
PZT and induces a severe open-loop positioning error as high as
Manuscript received May 22, 2009; revised July 05, 2009; accepted July 14,
2009. Manuscript received in final form July 25, 2009. First published October
09, 2009; current version published June 23, 2010. Recommended by Associate
Editor S. Devasia. This work was supported in part by the research committee of
the University of Macau under Grant UL016/08-Y2/EME/LYM01/FST and the
Macao Science and Technology Development Fund under Grant 016/2008/A1.
The authors are with the Department of Electromechanical Engineering,
Faculty of Science and Technology, University of Macau, Macao SAR, China
(e-mail: ymli@umac.mo; qsxu@umac.mo).
Color versions of one or more of the figures in this paper are available online
at http://ieeexplore.ieee.org.
Digital Object Identifier 10.1109/TCST.2009.2028878
1063-6536/$26.00 © 2009 IEEE
Authorized licensed use limited to: Universidade de Macau. Downloaded on June 24,2010 at 11:43:16 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
10%–15% of the stage travel range. Therefore, the hysteresis has
to be suppressed in order to suit for high-precision applications.
The successful compensation for hysteresis relies on the
design of suitable control strategies [2]. Typically, the hys-
teresis is compensated by feedforward control resorting to an
inverse of the hysteresis model such as the Preisach model,
Duhem model, Maxwell model, and Bouc–Wen model, etc. [3].
Considering that most hysteresis models are only applicable
with some particular input signal frequencies, a feedforward
combined with feedback control is usually adopted for a preci-
sion motion tracking [4], [5]. Additionally, taking into account
that modeling the hysteresis is a complicated procedure, some
approaches based on plant model identification without the
consideration of hysteresis have been exploited in terms of
PID (proportional-integral-derivative) control [6], robust
control [7]–[10], and inversion-based technique [11], [12],
etc. Furthermore, model-reference and model-free intelligent
controllers have been implemented as well [13], [14]. Besides,
by considering the hysteresis as a disturbance or an uncer-
tainty, sliding mode control (SMC) has been employed in the
piezo-driven stage [15], [16] since SMC is an effective and
simple way to deal with model imperfection and uncertainties
for nonlinear systems [17].
SMC is a nonlinear control approach that drives the system’s
state trajectory onto a specified sliding surface and maintains
the trajectory on this surface for the subsequent time. However,
in conventional SMC design, a priori knowledge of the bounds
on system uncertainties has to be acquired. As a result, the con-
troller based on the above knowledge trends to be overconserva-
tive, which may induce poor tracking performance and undesir-
able oscillations in control signal. To overcome this drawback,
sliding mode control with perturbation estimation (SMCPE) is
proposed in [18] as an enhanced version of the conventional
SMC. It has been shown that the need to know the uncertainty
bounds is removed in the SMCPE and is replaced with a strategy
of online estimation of the perturbations [18]. In the literature,
SMCPE has been implemented for a number of applications
[19]–[21].
The existing SMCPE is featured with a PD-type sliding sur-
face and constant control gains. However, the commonly used
PD sliding surface produces a slow response speed. In the liter-
ature, an integral term is first introduced in the sliding variable
definition in [22]. Then, it has been reported in [23] that the
traditional SMC with PID sliding surface offers a faster tran-
sient response with less steady-state error. Hence, SMC with
PID sliding surface has been adopted in various situations [24],
LI AND XU: ADAPTIVE SLIDING MODE CONTROL WITH PERTURBATION ESTIMATION AND PID SLIDING SURFACE
Fig. 1. Schematic diagram of the decoupled XY parallel micromanipulator.
[25]. In this paper, a PID-type sliding surface is introduced into
the conventional SMCPE to establish a new SMCPE-PID con-
troller with faster transient response. On the other hand, the fixed
high control gains may amplify the oscillations in control signal
and excite high-frequency unmodeled dynamics of the system,
which are undesirable phenomena as well [17], [26]. To over-
come this limitation, adaptive control methodology with control
parameters updated online is a promising approach [27]–[29].
Hence, variable gains with adaptive rules are introduced to fur-
ther develop an adaptive SMCPE-PID controller to change the
values of both PID and switching gains online without changing
the sliding surface. Moreover, the stability of the proposed con-
troller is proved using the Lyapunov analysis and the tracking
performance of the resulting control system as compared to that
of a conventional SMCPE is demonstrated by experimental in-
vestigations on a piezo-driven micromanipulator system.
In the rest of the paper, the experimental setup of an XY mi-
cromanipulator system is described in Section II, which serves
as a testbed for the controller performance evaluation. Then,
a dynamic model of the system with Bouc–Wen hysteresis is
identified through particle swarm optimization (PSO) approach
in Section III. Based on the established model, a conventional
SMCPE controller design is outlined in Section IV, and the de-
sign of the improved SMCPE controller based on Lyapunov
stability analysis is presented in Section V. Afterward, exper-
imental studies with the designed controllers are carried out in
Section VI, where a high-gain observer is employed to estimate
the full state of the system. Finally, Section VII concludes this
research.
II. EXPERIMENTAL TEST BED DESCRIPTION
A. Mechanical Architecture of the XY Stage
As illustrated in Fig. 1, the XY parallel micromanipulator is
constructed with four identical prismatic-prismatic limbs and
actuated by two PZTs through integrated displacement ampli-
fiers. It is known that PZT cannot bear transverse loads due to
the risk of damage. The embedded displacement amplifier acts
as an ideal prismatic joint and possesses larger ratio of stiffness
Authorized licensed use limited to: Universidade de Macau. Downloaded on June 24,2010 at 11:43:16 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
799
in the transverse direction than that in working direction. Thus,
the amplifier also acts as a decoupler with the roles of trans-
mitting axial force of the actuator and preventing the actuator
from suffering undesirable transverse motion and loads as well.
Hence, the two actuators are well isolated and protected. More-
over, the ideal translation provided by compound parallelogram
flexures allows the generation of decoupled output motion for
the stage. Different from a common decoupled XY parallel stage
with output motion decoupling, the presented one has both input
and output decoupling in virtue of actuation isolation and decou-
pled output motion. This total decoupling property is necessary
for the situations where the manipulator is underactuated and
sensory feedback of end-effector positions is not allowed. More
details about the working principle of the micromanipulator can
be found in previous works of the authors [30].
B. Experimental Setup
The experimental setup of the XY micromanipulator proto-
type is graphically shown in Fig. 2(a). The monolithic stage is
fabricated from a piece of light material Al 7075-T651. Two
20- m-stroke PZTs (model PAS020 produced by Thorlabs,
Inc.) are adopted to drive the XY stage, and the PZT is actuated
with a voltage of 0–75 V through a two-axis piezo amplifier and
driver (BPC002 from the Thorlabs). The displacements of the
output platform are measured by two laser displacement sensors
(Microtrak II, head model: LTC-025-02, from MTI Instrument,
Inc.). The analog voltage outputs (within the range of 5 V) of
the two sensors are connected to a PCI-based data acquisition
(DAQ) board (PCI-6143 with 16-bit A/D convectors, from
NI Corp.) through a shielded I/O connector block (SCB-68
from NI) with noise rejection. The digital outputs of the DAQ
board are then read by a host computer simultaneously, and the
connection between the instruments is illustrated in Fig. 2(b).
Since the sensitivity of the laser sensor is 2.5 mm/10 V and
the maximum value of 16-bit digital signal corresponds to 10 V,
the resolution of the displacement detecting system can be cal-
culated as
(1)
The resolution level step size of the sensor output can be iden-
tified from the home position data plotted in Fig. 3. However,
due to a considerable level of noise, the resolution of the sensor
is claimed as 0.1 m by the manufacturer.
A preliminary open-loop test shows that the XY stage has a
workspace around the area of m m with the max-
imum cross-talk of 1.5% between the two axes, which verifies
the well-decoupled property of the micromanipulator. It should
be noted that the decoupling in the real stage is also determined
by the machining accuracy of the parallel mechanism. The pres-
ence of the cross-talk between the two axes motion will be elim-
inated by resorting to a proper control design carried out in the
subsequent sections.
III. DYNAMIC MODELING AND IDENTIFICATION
In view of the fact that the smaller the system uncertainty, the
better the motion tracking performance, the hysteresis is mod-
eled in this research even though a sliding mode-based con-
800 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON CONTROL SYSTEMS TECHNOLOGY, VOL. 18, NO. 4, JULY 2010

where the parameters , , , and represent the mass, damping

coefficient, stiffness, and -axis displacement of the XY micro-
manipulator, respectively; is the piezoelectric coefficient,
denotes the input voltage, and indicates the hysteretic loop in
terms of displacement whose magnitude and shape are deter-
mined by parameters , , , and the order , where governs
the smoothness of the transition from elastic to plastic response.
For the elastic structure and material, is assigned in (3)
as usual. In addition, denotes the overall perturbation of the
system arising from model parameter uncertainties, unmodeled
dynamics, and other unknown terms.

B. Model Identification With PSO

Fig. 2. Experimental setup. (a) Photograph of the XY micromanipulator
system. (b) Scheme of hardware connection.
Due to the nonlinearity introduced by the hysteresis effect ,
it is not easy to effectively identify the parameters of the dy-
namic model through conventional approaches. In this research,
the seven parameters , , , , , , and are identified si-
multaneously based on particle swarm optimization (PSO). The
PSO is adopted in the current problem due to its superiority of
performance over other methods such as the direct search ap-
proach and genetic algorithm (GA) [32], [33].
It has been shown that the selection of the fitness function
has a great effect on the identification results [34]. In the current
research, the fitness function is chosen as follows:

(4)

with

(5)

where denotes the total number of samples and is the

Fig. 3. Zero position of the micromanipulator in x-axis direction measured by
laser displacement sensor.
troller can be designed without modeling the hysteresis. The
Bouc–Wen model is considered in this work since it has fewer
parameters and is easier to integrate with the rest of the model.
It has already been verified that the Bouc–Wen model is suit-
able to describe the hysteresis loop of PZT [31]. Additionally,
since the stage is well decoupled, the two axial motions can
be treated independently. Thus, two single-input–single-output
(SISO) controllers can be employed for the - and -axes of the
micromanipulator, respectively. For the sake of brevity, only the
treatment of -axis motion is presented in this paper.
A. Dynamic Modeling
The entire dynamic model of the micromanipulator system
with nonlinear hysteresis can be established as follows:
(2)
(3)
error of the th sample, which is calculated as the deviation of
Bouc–Wen model output from experimental result .
The model identification process is carried out offline as fol-
lows:
1) Data Collection: With a full-range input voltage signal
(0–75 V) applied to the PZT, the output displacement of
the stage is measured and recorded.
2) Model Implementation: The dynamic model with
Bouc–Wen hysteresis is implemented with Matlab/
Simulink as shown in Fig. 4. The dynamic model output
is generated by the simulation.
3) Model Identification: The PSO algorithm is performed for
optimizing the model parameters to match the simulation
result to experimental data.
The optimization is carried out with a PSO toolbox [35] run-
ning in Matlab environment, and the identified model parame-
ters are shown in Table I. With the obtained model, the com-
parison of model output and experimental result is illustrated in
Fig. 5. Since the Bouc–Wen model cannot represent nonsym-
metric hysteresis exactly, there exists an error between the iden-
tified model and the experimental result. It can be observed that
the maximum deviation with respect to the travel range of the
stage is as large as 6.6%, which occurs at the lower turning point
of 4, 8, and 12 s as shown in Fig. 5(a).

Authorized licensed use limited to: Universidade de Macau. Downloaded on June 24,2010 at 11:43:16 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
LI AND XU: ADAPTIVE SLIDING MODE CONTROL WITH PERTURBATION ESTIMATION AND PID SLIDING SURFACE 801

Fig. 4. Dynamics simulation model implemented with Matlab/Simulink;

(a) The entire dynamic model for calculating the output displacement x
from the input voltage u, (b) Bouc–Wen model for calculating the hysteresis
term h from the input voltage u.

TABLE I
IDENTIFIED DYNAMIC MODEL PARAMETERS OF THE MICROMANIPULATOR
WITH BOUC–WEN HYSTERESIS

Fig. 5. (a) A 0.25-Hz input voltage signal applied to the PZT. (b) Hysteresis
loop obtained by experiment and dynamic model.

The bounded perturbations in the system (6) can be combined

together to form a perturbation vector:

To compensate for the model errors and other uncertainties,

a sliding mode controller is considered in this work since it of- (7)
fers robustness performance in the presence of model imperfec-
tion and uncertainties. In the following section, the conventional The estimation for the perturbation is approximated as
SMCPE strategy is designed first to control the micromanipu-
lator system. (8)

where denotes a calculated state vector since the measure-

IV. CONVENTIONAL SMCPE DESIGN
A. Perturbation Estimation Technique
A brief review of perturbation estimation strategy for the on-
line estimation of model perturbations is outlined here since
more details can be found in the literature [18], [19]. Consider
a general nonlinear system given by
ment of higher order states of the system (e.g., acceleration)
cannot always be realized, is the sampling time interval, and
represents the control input in the previous time-step.
In practice, the sampling frequency is selected high enough to
ensure that .
Traditionally, the state vector is computed based on a back-
ward difference equation

(6)
(9)

where the vector with

In spite of its simplicity, the above calculation has inherent lim-
, the global state vector itations due to the accuracy and quantization noise, which re-
with the state subvector stricts the achievable bandwidth of the feedback controller as
and de- stated in [36]. Alternatively, a closed-loop high-gain observer
noting independent coordinates. Besides, the superscript in [37] without the above limitations is employed and implemented
refers to the th order time derivative. in Section VI in this paper.

Authorized licensed use limited to: Universidade de Macau. Downloaded on June 24,2010 at 11:43:16 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
802 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON CONTROL SYSTEMS TECHNOLOGY, VOL. 18, NO. 4, JULY 2010

By taking the time derivative of both sides of (14), the fol-

lowing sliding dynamics can be generated:

(17)

Fig. 6. Block diagram of the proposed adaptive SMCPE-PID robust controller. Then, substituting (17) into (16) with the consideration of
(15) yields

B. Conventional SMCPE Design

Given the system model (2), the perturbation is given by

(10)
(18)
Based on the perturbation estimation strategy reviewed
above, can be estimated as follows: If the gain is designed to meet the condition

(11) (19)

Then, the system model (2) becomes where is an arbitrary constant, then it follows that for

(12)
(20)
where represents an error between the
system’s real perturbation and its estimation.
(21)
To design a SMCPE controller, an error coordinate is defined
as (22)
(23)
(13)
Hence, considering (18) and (23), one can derive that
where represents the desired position trajectory, and de-
notes the time variable that will be omitted in the rest of this (24)
section to have a concise manner of representation.
In view of the linear second-order dynamic system, a first which allows the conclusion that the states can reach the
order PD-type sliding surface or switching function is selected switching surface in finite time [38]. Besides, (24) also
as follows: ensures that the states will be confined to the surface
for all future time since leaving the surface requires to be
(14) positive, which is impossible as implied by the inequality.
Thus, the switching variable as . According to
where is a design parameter. the definition of in (14), we can conclude that the tracking
Theorem 1: For the system (12) with the sliding surface (14), error satisfies and and that
the tracking error defined by (13) satisfies if the and as . Therefore, the SMCPE controller
control law is given by guarantees a zero steady-state tracking error.
Remark 1: Due to the discontinuity of the signum function
, chattering may occur in the control input. To alleviate
the chattering phenomenon, the boundary layer technique is
(15) adopted by replacing the signum function in (15) with satura-
tion function with the notation
where represents the signum function and is a positive
switching gain. for
Proof: Considering a positive definite Lyapunov function (25)
for
candidate , its first derivative can be obtained as
where the positive constant represents the boundary layer
(16) thickness, which ensures that is always bounded by . In the

Authorized licensed use limited to: Universidade de Macau. Downloaded on June 24,2010 at 11:43:16 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
LI AND XU: ADAPTIVE SLIDING MODE CONTROL WITH PERTURBATION ESTIMATION AND PID SLIDING SURFACE 803

Fig. 7. Inverse dynamic model implemented with Matlab/Simulink for the calculation of the hysteresis term h from the given position x .

TABLE II Theorem 2: For the system (12) with the sliding surface (26),
PARAMETERS OF THE IMPLEMENTED CONTROLLERS the tracking error defined by (13) satisfies if the
control law is given by

(27)

where represents the signum function and is a positive

switching gain.
Proof: Defining a positive definite Lyapunov function can-
didate , the first derivative can be expressed by

selection of parameter , a tradeoff between the chattering and (28)

tracking error should be taken.
From (19), it can be observed that the selection of the control Taking the time derivative of the sliding variable in (26), re-
gain depends on the upper bound of the perturbation estima- sults in
tion error . In the classical SMC, this term is the upper bound
of the actual perturbation instead. Generally, since the pertur-
bation estimation error is much smaller than the actual pertur-
bation, a much smaller control gain can be achieved when
compared to the corresponding classical SMC. This is the major (29)
advantage of the SMCPE over SMC [19]. In practice, the gain
value is usually tuned by the trial and error approach since no where the time variable is omitted for the clarity of representa-
universal method is available yet. tion.
Substituting (29) into (28) with the consideration of the con-
V. IMPROVED SMCPE CONTROLLER DESIGN trol law (27), leads to
In this section, the scheme of SMCPE with PID-type sliding
surface is designed for the micromanipulation system.

A. SMCPE With PID Sliding Surface

In order to design an improved SMCPE controller, a sliding (30)
surface of PID type is defined as follows:
Similarly, if the gain is chosen to satisfy the condition:
(26)
(31)

where the error coordinate is described by (13), and and where is an arbitrary constant, then it can be deduced
are positive design parameters. As far as the guideline for the se- from (30) that, for , the derivative of the positive definite
lection of control gains and is concerned, the gains should Lyapunov candidate . Based on the same idea as
be chosen such that the characteristic polynomial conducted in the proof of Theorem 1, it can be concluded that the
( denotes a complex variable here) is strictly Hurwitz, sliding variable as . According to the definition of
i.e., a polynomial with roots locating strictly in the open left half in (26), we can further conclude that the tracking error satisfies
of the complex plane. and and that and

Authorized licensed use limited to: Universidade de Macau. Downloaded on June 24,2010 at 11:43:16 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
804 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON CONTROL SYSTEMS TECHNOLOGY, VOL. 18, NO. 4, JULY 2010

process. However, the constant gains may increase the oscil-

lations in the control signal and induce the excitation of high
frequency unmodeled dynamics of the system [17], [26], which
are undesirable phenomena. To overcome this drawback, vari-
able gains with adaptive rules are introduced into the SMCPE
controller in this subsection to change the values of both PID
gains and switching gains online.
Theorem 3: For the system (12) with the sliding surface given
below

(33)

the tracking error defined by (13) satisfies if the

control law is given by

Fig. 8. Set-point regulation control results of the designed controllers.

(34)
TABLE III
CONTROLLER PERFORMANCE FOR CONTROL TYPE (a) SET-POINT REGULATION
AND (b) SINUSOIDAL MOTION TRACKING where represents the signum function and the variable
control gains , , and are estimated online according to
the adaptive rules

(35)

(36)

(37)

Proof: To evaluate the stability of the closed-loop system,

as . Therefore, the proposed SMCPE-PID controller an estimation error for the desired control parameter is intro-
ensures a zero steady-state tracking error. duced below
As stated in Remark 1, the chattering is alleviated by re-
placing the signum function in (27) with the saturation function (38)
described by (25).
Moreover, substituting (25) and (11) into the control law (27), In addition, a positive definite Lyapunov function candidate
allows the generation is considered as

(39)

Differentiating (39) with respect to time, gives

(40)

Taking the time derivative of the sliding variable defined in

(33) results in

(32)

B. SMCPE With PID Sliding Surface and Adaptive Gains

In above designed SMCPE-PID controller, the control gains (41)
, , and are assigned as constants during the control

Authorized licensed use limited to: Universidade de Macau. Downloaded on June 24,2010 at 11:43:16 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
LI AND XU: ADAPTIVE SLIDING MODE CONTROL WITH PERTURBATION ESTIMATION AND PID SLIDING SURFACE 805

Fig. 9. Sinusoidal motion tracking results of (a)–(b) PID, (c)–(d) SMCPE, and (e)–(f) the proposed controller with 0.2-Hz input rate.

where the time variable is omitted for the clarity of representa- As stated in (19) and (31), if the desired switching gain
tion. satisfies the condition
Substituting the control law (34) into (41) gives
(44)
(42)
where is an arbitrary constant, then we can conclude that
from (43) for . In view of the same idea as
Then, taking into account and substituting (35)–(37) conducted in the proof of Theorem 1, one can deduce that the
and (42) into (40), a necessary calculation produces switching variable as . According to the definition
of in (33), we can conclude that the tracking error satisfies
and and that and
as . Therefore, the proposed adaptive SMCPE-PID
controller guarantees a zero steady-state tracking error.
As described in Remark 1, the chattering is alleviated by re-
(43) placing the signum function in (34) with the saturation function
(25).

Authorized licensed use limited to: Universidade de Macau. Downloaded on June 24,2010 at 11:43:16 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
806
Fig. 10. Velocity and acceleration calculated by (a)–(b) traditional method in (9) and (c)–(d) high-gain observer in (47) with  = 22,  = 8,  = 10, and
 = 02 : .
Besides, substituting (11) and (25) into (34) allows the deriva-
tion of the control input
Remark 2: Although the parameter is restricted by the
condition (44), it is not obviously associated with the controller
(34). Actually, it can be considered as an approximate initial
value for the control gain , which is associated with the con-
troller. Hence, the parameter corresponds to the controller
indirectly. The implementation of the control law (45) does not
require any bounds on the unknown parameters of the system.
The control gains , , and are estimated online using the
adaptive rules (35)–(37) with initial values. The gains vary with
time until the tracking error ( and ) as well as the sliding vari-
able reach zero. In theory, after the sliding surface is reached,
the trajectory will remain on the surface thereafter, which guar-
antees that the gain varying with respect to the absolute value
of the sliding variable will not tend to infinity as time evolves.
However, in practice, a small deviation from the sliding surface
may cause the increase of value [39], which may bring insta-
bility to the closed-loop system. To overcome this problem, the
adaptive law for is modified as follows:
for
for
where is an assigned positive constant.
Authorized licensed use limited to: Universidade de Macau. Downloaded on June 24,2010 at 11:43:16 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON CONTROL SYSTEMS TECHNOLOGY, VOL. 18, NO. 4, JULY 2010
The performance of the controllers designed above is verified
by experimental studies conducted in the subsequent section.
VI. EXPERIMENTAL STUDIES AND DISCUSSIONS
A. Controller Implementation Issues
(45)
An insight into (45) reveals that both full-state feedback and
full-state trajectory are required to implement the proposed
SMCPE-PID controller. Although the full-state trajectory can
be generated by differentiating the desired position trajectory
in advance, the velocity and acceleration feedbacks have to
be estimated since only the position can be measured by the
available displacement sensors.
Generally, the full state can be estimated by resorting to the
measured position using a backward difference equation (9).
However, its limitations arise from the accuracy and quanti-
zation noise, which restricts the achievable bandwidth of the
feedback controller in consequence. Alternatively, a closed-loop
high-gain observer can be employed without the above limita-
tions [36], [37]. Thus, a one-input three-output high-gain ob-
server is realized to estimate the full state as follows:
(47a)
(47b)
with
(46)
(48)
LI AND XU: ADAPTIVE SLIDING MODE CONTROL WITH PERTURBATION ESTIMATION AND PID SLIDING SURFACE
Fig. 11. Multifrequency motion tracking results of the proposed controller. (a) Desired and actual position trajectories. (b) Actual versus desired position.
(c) Sliding surface variable. (d) Control effort of the controller.
where the measured position is the input to the observer, and
the observer output is the full-state feedback, i.e.,
. The bandwidth of the observer depends on the design
gains , , and , and the accuracy of the estimated state
relies on the design parameter since the estimation becomes
exact as approaches zero.
Therefore, the robust controller is constructed by the above
two components of the proposed SMCPE-PID controller and the
high-gain observer. The block diagram of the control scheme is
illustrated in Fig. 6. It can be observed that the input to the robust
controller is the desired position trajectory, hysteresis term, and
measured position, while the output is the voltage that will be
applied to PZT actuator. Specifically, once the desired position
trajectory is given, the velocity and acceleration trajectories
( and ) are obtained offline, and the hysteresis term is
calculated in advance based on the inverse dynamic model im-
plemented by Matlab/Simulink as shown in Fig. 7, where the
details about the Bouc–Wen model are depicted in Fig. 4(b).
Besides, for the purpose of comparison, an incremental-type
PID controller is also implemented in the discrete-time form as
follows:
(49a)
(49b)
where denotes the sampling time interval.
Authorized licensed use limited to: Universidade de Macau. Downloaded on June 24,2010 at 11:43:16 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
807
The performance of the constructed model-free PID and
model-based sliding mode controllers is tested by experiments
carried out below with a sampling time of 0.02 s.
B. Set-Point Regulation
First, the set-point regulation capabilities of the controllers
are examined by experiments. The designed controller parame-
ters are tabulated in Table II. By commanding the end-effector
from the home position (0, 0) to the position (55 m, 0) in
the workspace, the regulation results are depicted in Fig. 8 and
quantitatively tabulated in Table III for a clear comparison. It is
observed that the traditional PID controller can produce a regu-
lation result with the lowest overshoot magnitude and quickest
transient response. Although the proposed controller gives the
moderate response speed with about 10% overshoot, the re-
sponse is over 2.5 times quicker than that of the conventional
SMCPE. It is also found that much quicker response can be ob-
tained by the conventional SMCPE controller with larger gain
values. However, it is at the expense of clear chattering.
Moreover, from the steady-state regulation results as magni-
fied inside Fig. 8 and compared in Table III, we can observe that
the deviations of the set-point regulation are maintained around
m by the three types of feedback controllers, which are
worse than the noise level of m as shown in Fig. 3, and
the proposed controller gives a slight worse result than the other
types of controllers. This displacement variation causes a devia-
tion around 2.4 mV in the input voltage. The reason lies in the
relatively high gains adopted in the controllers. The high feed-
back gains are chosen to improve the tracking accuracy, whereas
808
Fig. 12. Linear contouring result along a 45 line with a feed rate of 20 m/s. (a) Tracking errors in the two axes. (b) Linear contouring error.
the noises from the displacement sensor are amplified simulta-
neously as an expense.
C. Sinusoidal Motion Tracking
In addition, a sinusoidal motion trajectory with 0.2 Hz fre-
quency and 20 m peak-to-peak (p-p) amplitude is tracked with
the three types of controllers, and the results are compared in
Fig. 9. From the magnitude of the tracking errors as shown in
Fig. 9(b), (d), and (f) and described in Table III, we can see that
the performance of the proposed controller is superior to that of
both conventional SMCPE and PID controllers in terms of p-p
tracking errors. Compared with the PID controller which pro-
duces a p-p error of m, the SMCPE controller can only
suppress the error within m. Whereas the proposed
controller substantially reduces the p-p error to m in
contrast.
Besides, with the proposed controller, the higher order
states (velocity and acceleration) estimated by both traditional
method (9) and using the high-gain observer (47) are illustrated
in Fig. 10. It is obvious to see that the traditional method cannot
predict the higher order states, especially the acceleration
[see Fig. 10(b)] due to the noise present in the position data
provided by the displacement sensor. On the contrary, the
high-gain controller can be used to estimate the full state more
precisely owing to its filtering effect. This explains the reason
why the high-gain observer is recommended for the proposed
controller alternatively.
D. Multifrequency Motion Tracking
With the proposed controller, the tracking of a multifrequency
sinusoidal motion trajectory as shown in Fig. 11(a) is under-
taken as well. The planned multifrequency motion covers the
whole range (0–110 m) of the manipulator workspace. From
the plot of the actual position versus desired position as depicted
in Fig. 11(b), we can observe that the hysteresis effect has been
compensated significantly since the width of the hysteresis loop
has been reduced to a low level of 1.5% with comparison to
13.5% obtained by the open-loop test with the same input rate.
In addition, the sliding variable plotted in Fig. 11(c) implies that
the sliding surface is maintained within the boundary layer
Authorized licensed use limited to: Universidade de Macau. Downloaded on June 24,2010 at 11:43:16 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON CONTROL SYSTEMS TECHNOLOGY, VOL. 18, NO. 4, JULY 2010
Fig. 13. Linear contouring error bound versus feed rate. The square markers
represent the mean errors.
(i.e., 18), which is an assigned value for the controller. More-
over, the control effort described in Fig. 11(d) indicates that the
chattering is eliminated by the designed controller.
E. Contour Tracking
Other than the single-axis motion tracking tested above, the
biaxial contour tracking can reflect the two-axis cooperative
tracking performance for two-dimensional motion [9], [40].
Different from the trajectory tracking error, i.e., the difference
between the desired position and the actual position, contouring
error is defined as the minimum distance between the actual
position and the desired trajectory along an orthogonal direction
to the trajectory.
By driving the two axes simultaneously, a linear contour
along a 45 line is adopted to verify the contouring capability
of the XY micromanipulator in this work. The manipulator
is commanded to move from the home position (0, 0) to the
workspace center point (55 m, 55 m) and then return to
the home. For a feed rate of 20 m/s, the two axial tracking
errors and contouring errors are shown in Fig. 12(a) and (b),
respectively. It is observed that the tracking errors (with the
maximum value of 2.458 m) of the two axes cancel each other
and result in much lower magnitude of the contouring errors
(with the maximum value of 0.773 m). This implies that the
two axes of the decoupled XY micromanipulator have similar
tracking capabilities.
LI AND XU: ADAPTIVE SLIDING MODE CONTROL WITH PERTURBATION ESTIMATION AND PID SLIDING SURFACE
Moreover, as the increasing of the feed rate from 10 to
100 m/s, the linear contours are tested as well and the results
are plotted in Fig. 13. It can be seen that the contouring error
increases as the rising of the feed rate. In order to constrain the
maximum contouring error below 1 m, the feed rate should
be restricted within 30 m/s.
F. Discussions on Controller Performance
From above experimental results obtained by the three types
of controllers, we can conclude that the PID controller is more
suitable for set-point control since it enables a quick response
without much overshoot regulation. On the other hand, the pro-
posed adaptive SMCPE-PID controller is the most suitable con-
troller for motion tracking due to its lowest peak-to-peak error.
In particular, the proposed controller is superior to the con-
ventional SMCPE scheme in both set-point regulation with a
quicker response speed and trajectory tracking with a smaller
tracking error.
Concerning the implementation of the proposed controller, it
is remarkable here that the initial values of the three estimated
gains defined in (35), (36), and (46) can be assigned to any
values (e.g., zero [39]) in theory since the gain values will be
self-updated in accordance with the tracking error subsequently.
Actually, in order to obtain a rapid transient response, instead of
arbitrary selection, the three initial values are tuned manually by
trial and error through experiments. As a result, the positive con-
stant in (46) deserves a larger value ( in this case) so
as to avoid unnecessary update of control gain in the presence
of small deviations of the sliding surface from zero.
It is also noticeable that the tracking performance of the de-
signed controllers is limited by the resolution of the displace-
ment sensors. The sensors are the bottle-neck in ultra-precision
positioning applications. Using sensors with a higher resolution,
more accurate motion tracking can be achieved even with the
same controller proposed in this work.
VII. CONCLUSION
In this paper, a new SMCPE controller with PID-type sliding
surface and adaptive gains is proposed for the motion tracking
of a piezoelectrically actuated micromanipulator system. The
set-point regulation experimental results show that the proposed
controller can substantially speed up the transient response
as compared to conventional SMCPE controller. Further si-
nusoidal motion tracking experiments demonstrate that the
proposed controller can improve the tracking performance
with the smallest peak-to-peak error in comparison to both
PID and SMCPE controllers. With the proposed controller, a
submicron accuracy single-axis motion tracking and biaxial
linear contouring have been achieved by the micromanipulator
system and the hysteresis has been significantly compensated
to a low level of magnitude, which validates the effectiveness
of the designed controller as well. Since the implementation of
the controller does not require any bounds on uncertainties and
unknown parameters of the system while only the estimated
initial values of the controller gains are needed, the proposed
control can be widely used in the field of micro/nano scale
manipulation.
Authorized licensed use limited to: Universidade de Macau. Downloaded on June 24,2010 at 11:43:16 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
809
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
The authors would like to thank the the Associate Editor and
the anonymous reviewers for their valuable comments and kind
suggestions to improve the quality of this paper.
REFERENCES
[1] J. J. Abbott, Z. Nagy, F. Beyeler, and B. J. Nelson, “Robotics in the
small, part I: Microrobotics,” IEEE Robot. Autom. Mag., vol. 14, no. 2,
pp. 92–103, Jun. 2007.
[2] S. Devasia, E. Eleftheriou, and S. O. R. Moheimani, “A survey of con-
trol issues in nanopositioning,” IEEE Trans. Control Syst. Technol., vol.
15, no. 5, pp. 802–823, Sep. 2007.
[3] Y.-C. Huang and D.-Y. Lin, “Ultra-fine tracking control on piezoelec-
tric actuated motion stage using piezoelectric hysteretic model,” Asian
J. Contr., vol. 6, no. 2, pp. 208–216, 2004.
[4] G. Song, J. Zhao, X. Zhou, and J. De Abreu-Garcia, “Tracking control
of a piezoceramic actuator with hysteresis compensation using inverse
Preisach model,” IEEE/ASME Trans. Mechatronics, vol. 10, no. 2, pp.
198–209, Apr. 2005.
[5] C.-J. Lin and S.-R. Yang, “Precise positioning of piezo-actuated stages
using hysteresis-observer based control,” Mechatronics, vol. 16, no. 7,
pp. 417–426, Sep. 2006.
[6] H. G. Xu, T. Ono, and M. Esashi, “Precise motion control of a nanopo-
sitioning PZT microstage using integrated capacitive displacement sen-
sors,” J. Micromech. Microeng., vol. 16, no. 12, pp. 2747–2754, Dec.
2006.
[7] A. Sebastian and S. M. Salapaka, “Design methodologies for robust
nano-positioning,” IEEE Trans. Control Syst. Technol., vol. 13, no. 6,
pp. 868–876, Nov. 2005.
[8] M. Boukhnifer and A. Ferreira, “ H loop shaping bilateral controller
for a two-fingered tele-micromanipulation system,” IEEE Trans. Con-
trol Syst. Technol., vol. 15, no. 5, pp. 891–905, Sep. 2007.
[9] J. Dong, S. M. Salapaka, and P. M. Ferreira, “Robust control of a par-
allel-kinematic nanopositioner,” J. Dyn. Sys., Meas., Control, vol. 130,
no. 4, pp. 041007-1–041007-15, 2008.
[10] T. W. Seo, H. S. Kim, D. S. Kang, and J. Kim, “Gain-scheduled robust
control of a novel 3-DOF micro parallel positioning platform via a dual
stage servo system,” Mechatronics, vol. 18, no. 9, pp. 495–505, Nov.
2008.
[11] S. S. Aphale, S. Devasia, and S. O. R. Moheimani, “High-band-
width control of a piezoelectric nanopositioning stage in the pres-
ence of plant uncertainties,” Nanotechnology, vol. 19, no. 12, pp.
125503-1–125503-9, Mar. 2008.
[12] Y. Wu and Q. Zou, “Iterative control approach to compensate for both
the hysteresis and the dynamics effects of piezo actuators,” IEEE Trans.
Control Syst. Technol., vol. 15, no. 5, pp. 936–944, Sep. 2007.
[13] K. Santa and S. Fatikow, “Control system for motion control of a
piezoelectric micromanipulation robot,” Adv. Robot., vol. 13, no. 6,
pp. 577–589, 2000.
[14] F.-J. Lin, R.-J. Wai, K.-K. Shyu, and T.-M. Liu, “Recurrent fuzzy
neural network control for piezoelectric ceramic linear ultrasonic
motor drive,” IEEE Trans. Ultrason., Ferroelectr., Freq. Control, vol.
48, no. 4, pp. 900–913, Jul. 2001.
[15] H. C. Liaw, B. Shirinzadeh, and J. Smith, “Sliding-mode enhanced
adaptive motion tracking control of piezoelectric actuation systems for
micro/nano manipulation,” IEEE Trans. Control Syst. Technol., vol. 16,
no. 4, pp. 826–833, Jul. 2008.
[16] J.-C. Shen, W.-Y. Jywe, C.-H. Liu, Y.-T. Jian, and J. Yang, “Sliding-
mode control of a three-degrees-of-freedom nanopositioner,” Asian J.
Contr., vol. 10, no. 3, pp. 267–276, May 2008.
[17] T.-C. Kuo, Y.-J. Huang, and S.-H. Chang, “Sliding mode control with
self-tuning law for uncertain nonlinear systems,” ISA Trans., vol. 47,
no. 2, pp. 171–178, Apr. 2008.
[18] H. Elmali and N. Olgac, “Sliding mode control with perturbation
estimation (SMCPE): A new approach,” Int. J. Control, vol. 56, pp.
923–941, 1992.
[19] H. Elmali and N. Olgac, “Implementation of sliding mode control
with perturbation estimation (SMCPE),” IEEE Trans. Control Syst.
Technol., vol. 4, no. 1, pp. 79–85, Jan. 1996.
[20] N.-I. Kim, C.-W. Lee, and P.-H. Chang, “Sliding mode control with
perturbation estimation: Application to motion control of parallel ma-
nipulator,” Control Eng. Practice, vol. 6, no. 11, pp. 1321–1330, Nov.
1998.
810 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON CONTROL SYSTEMS TECHNOLOGY, VOL. 18, NO. 4, JULY 2010
[21] S. Bashash and N. Jalili, “Robust multiple frequency trajectory
tracking control of piezoelectrically driven micro/nanopositioning
systems,” IEEE Trans. Control Syst. Technol., vol. 15, no. 5, pp.
867–878, Sep. 2007.
[22] J. J. E. Slotine and M. W. Spong, “Robust robot control with bounded
input torques,” J. Robot. Syst., vol. 2, no. 5, pp. 329–352, 1985.
[23] Y. Stepanenko, Y. Cao, and C.-Y. Su, “Variable structure control of
robotic manipulator with PID sliding surfaces,” Int. J. Robust Non-
linear Control, vol. 8, pp. 79–90, 1998.
[24] V. Parra-Vega, S. Arimoto, Y.-H. Liu, G. Hirzinger, and P. Akella,
“Dynamic sliding PID control for tracking of robot manipulators:
Theory and experiments,” IEEE Trans. Robot. Automat., vol. 19, no.
6, pp. 967–976, Dec. 2003.
[25] I. Eker, “Sliding mode control with PID sliding surface and experi-
mental application to an electromechanical plant,” ISA Trans., vol. 45,
no. 1, pp. 109–118, Jan. 2006.
[26] N. Sadati and R. Ghadami, “Adaptive multi-model sliding mode con-
trol of robotic manipulators using soft computing,” Neurocomputing,
vol. 71, no. 13–15, pp. 2702–2710, Aug. 2008.
[27] A. S. Putra, S. Huang, K. K. Tan, S. K. Panda, and T. H. Lee, “Design,
modeling, and control of piezoelectric actuators for intracytoplasmic
sperm injection,” IEEE Trans. Control Syst. Technol., vol. 15, no. 5,
pp. 879–890, Sep. 2007.
[28] H.-J. Shieh and C.-H. Hsu, “An integrator-backstepping-based
dynamic surface control method for a two-axis piezoelectric microp-
ositioning stage,” IEEE Trans. Control Syst. Technol., vol. 15, no. 5,
pp. 916–926, Sep. 2007.
[29] L. Lu, Z. Chen, B. Yao, and Q. Wang, “Desired compensation adaptive
robust control of a linear-motor-driven precision industrial gantry with
improved cogging force compensation,” IEEE/ASME Trans. Mecha-
tron., vol. 13, no. 6, pp. 617–624, Dec. 2008.
[30] Y. Li and Q. Xu, “Design and analysis of a totally decoupled flexure-
based XY parallel micromanipulator,” IEEE Trans. Robot., vol. 25, no.
3, pp. 645–657, Jun. 2009.
[31] T. S. Low and W. Guo, “Modeling of a three-layer piezoelectric bi-
morph beam with hysteresis,” J. MEMS, vol. 4, no. 4, pp. 230–237,
1995.
[32] M. Clerc and J. Kennedy, “The particle swarm: Explosion, stability,
and convergence in a multi-dimensional complex space,” IEEE Trans.
Evol. Comput., vol. 6, no. 1, pp. 58–73, Feb. 2002.
[33] Q. Xu and Y. Li, “Error analysis and optimal design of a class of trans-
lational parallel kinematic machine using particle swarm optimization,”
Robotica, vol. 27, no. 1, pp. 67–78, Jan. 2009.
[34] J.-L. Ha, Y.-S. Kung, R.-F. Fung, and S.-C. Hsien, “A comparison
of fitness functions for the identification of a piezoelectric hysteretic
actuator based on the real-coded genetic algorithm,” Sens. Actuator
A-Phys., vol. 132, no. 2, pp. 643–650, Nov. 2006.
[35] B. Birge, “PSOt—A particle swarm optimization toolbox for use with
Matlab,” in Proc. 2003 IEEE SIS, Indianapolis, IN, 2003, pp. 182–186.
[36] S.-M. Yang and S.-J. Ke, “Performance evaluation of a velocity ob-
server for accurate velocity estimation of servo motor drives,” IEEE
Trans. Ind. Appl., vol. 36, no. 1, pp. 98–104, Jan./Feb. 2000.
Authorized licensed use limited to: Universidade de Macau. Downloaded on June 24,2010 at 11:43:16 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
[37] J. J. Gorman, N. G. Dagalakis, and B. G. Boone, “Multi-loop control
of a nanopositioning mechanism for ultra-precision beam steering,” in
Proc. SPIE—Free-Space Laser Communication and Active Laser Illu-
mination III, D. G. Voelz and J. C. Ricklin, Eds., 2004, vol. 5160, pp.
170–181.
[38] H. K. Khalil, Nonlinear Systems, 3rd ed. Upper Saddle River, NJ:
Prentice-Hall, 2002.
[39] Y. Cao and Y. Stepanenko, “A novel variable structure control scheme
for an industrial robot: Theory and experiments,” in Proc. 2nd IEEE
Conf. Control Appl., Vancouver, BC, Canada, 1993, pp. 723–727.
[40] Y. Koren, “Cross-coupled biaxial computer controls for manufac-
turing systems,” ASME J. Dyn. Syst., Meas., Contr., vol. 102, no. 4,
pp. 265–272, 1980.
Yangmin Li (M’98–SM’04) received the B.S. and
M.S. degrees from Jilin University, Changchun,
China, in 1985 and 1988, respectively, and the Ph.D.
degree from Tianjin University, Tianjin, China, in
1994, all in mechanical engineering.
He is currently a Professor of Electromechanical
Engineering at the University of Macau, Macao
SAR, China, where he also directs the Mechatronics
Laboratory. He has authored 205 scientific papers,
and has served 70 international conference pro-
gram committees. His research interests include
micro/nanomanipulation, nanorobotics, micromanipulator, mobile robot,
modular robot, multibody dynamics, and control.
Dr. Li is a Member of the American Society of Mechanical Engineers
(ASME). He currently serves as Technical Editor of the IEEE/ASME
TRANSACTIONS ON MECHATRONICS, a Council Member and an Editor of the
Chinese Journal of Mechanical Engineering, and a Member of Editorial Board
of the International Journal of Control, Automation, and Systems.
Qingsong Xu (M’09) received the B.S. degree in
mechatronics engineering (with honors) from Bei-
jing Institute of Technology, Beijing, China, in 2002,
and the M.S. and Ph.D. degrees in electromechanical
engineering from the University of Macau, Macao
SAR, China, in 2004 and 2008, respectively.
He is currently a Post-Doctoral Fellow at the Uni-
versity of Macau. His current research interests in-
clude design, analysis, and control of parallel manip-
ulators, compliant mechanisms, and micro-/nanoma-
nipulators, with a particular emphasis on the field of
micro-/nanomanipulation.