This article has been accepted for inclusion in a future issue of this journal.
Content is final as presented, with the exception of pagination.
IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON CYBERNETICS
Compound Adaptive Fuzzy Quantized Control for
Quadrotor and Its Experimental Verification
Xiuyu Zhang , Member, IEEE, Yue Wang, Guoqiang Zhu , Xinkai Chen, Senior Member, IEEE,
Zhi Li , Member, IEEE, Chenliang Wang , Member, IEEE, and Chun-Yi Su , Senior Member, IEEE
Abstract—This article aims to realize a precise position and
attitude tracking control for the quadrotor using a proposed fuzzy
approximator-based compound adaptive fuzzy quantized control
scheme. In the control scheme, a quantized output-feedback con-
trol for position tracking and a state-feedback quantized control
for attitude trajectory tracking are combined to deal with the
underactuated and strong coupling problems of the quadrotor.
The main contributions are: 1) the adaptive fuzzy quantized
control is realized, then the strong nonlinearities caused by
the quantizer are effectively mitigated, which implies that the
control precision can be improved when a low communication
rate is required in the real-time control system of quadrotor;
2) by applying the adaptive fuzzy dynamic surface control (DSC)
technique to the underactuated quadrotor control system, the
“explosion of complexity” problem in the backstepping method is
overcome and the L∞ tracking performance is achieved with the
proposed initializing technique inspired by Zhang et al. This guar-
antees that the attitude signals promptly converge to the desired
trajectories, then the underactuated problem of the quadrotor
is overcome by solving the designed adaptive fuzzy-quantized
control equations; and 3) the experiments on the platform of the
Quanser Qball-X4 quadrotor are conducted and the effectiveness
of the proposed control scheme is validated.
Index Terms—Adaptive quantized control, quadrotor, robust
adaptive control.
Manuscript received November 15, 2019; revised February 26, 2020;
accepted April 8, 2020. This work was supported in part by the National
Natural Science Foundation of China under Grant 61673101, Grant 61733006,
Grant 61973131, and Grant U1813201, in part by the Science and
Technology Project of Jilin Province under Grant 20180201009SF, Grant
20170414011GH, Grant 20180201004SF, and Grant 20180101069JC, and
in part by the Japan Society for the Promotion of Science under Grant
C-18K04212. This article was recommended by Associate Editor C.-M. Lin.
(Corresponding authors: Guoqiang Zhu; Xinkai Chen; Zhi Li.)
Xiuyu Zhang, Yue Wang, and Guoqiang Zhu are with the School of
Automation Engineering, Northeast Electric Power University, Jilin City
132012, China, and also with the Department of Jilin Province International
Research Center of Precision Drive and Intelligent Control, Northeast Electric
Power University, Jilin City 132012, China (e-mail: zhangxiuyu80@163.com;
wangyue930708@163.com; zhugqcn@gmail.com).
Xinkai Chen is with the Department of Electronic and Information
Systems, Shibaura Institute of Technology, Saitama 337-8570, Japan (e-mail:
chen@shibaura-it.ac.jp).
Zhi Li is with the State Key Laboratory of Synthetical Automation for
Process Industries, Northeastern University, Shenyang 110819, China (e-mail:
gavinlizhi@gmail.com).
Chenliang Wang is with the School of Automation, Beihang University,
Beijing 100191, China (e-mail: wangcl@buaa.edu.cn).
Chun-Yi Su is with the Department of Mechanical and Industrial
Engineering, Concordia University, Montreal, QC H3B 1R6, Canada (e-mail:
cysu@alcor.concordia.ca).
Color versions of one or more of the figures in this article are available
online at http://ieeexplore.ieee.org.
Digital Object Identifier 10.1109/TCYB.2020.2987811
2168-2267 
c 2020 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission.
See https://www.ieee.org/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
Authorized licensed use limited to: University of Exeter. Downloaded on June 18,2020 at 03:06:58 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
1
I. I NTRODUCTION
ECENTLY, the quadrotor, which is a typical unmanned
R aerial vehicle (UAV), has been widely used in the fields
of military reconnaissance, film and television aerial photog-
raphy, and fire rescue and climate monitoring. Though the
quadrotor can fly freely and take off and land vertically, the
precise position and attitude control are still challenging tasks
due to strong nonlinearities, complicated coupling, and under-
actuated problem (four rotors actuate six-freedom motions) in
the quadrotor system.
To improve the performance of the position control and the
attitude tracking control, control schemes, such as proportion–
integral–differential (PID) control [1]–[3], [52]; sliding-mode
control (SMC) [4]–[7], [53]; predictive control [8]–[11]; adap-
tive backstepping control [11], [12], [30]–[32]; and fuzzy or
neural networks-based intelligent control [15]–[20], [26]–[28],
have been developed. In [1], an adaptive PID linear control
scheme was proposed to achieve the weight-bearing flight
through force analysis of aircraft load bearing. In [2], by
constructing the global chartwise feedback lumbarization, the
small tracking error was guaranteed using the robust track-
ing control. In [3], a dynamic inversion control scheme
was developed to overcome the coupling problem in the
underactuated system and ensure the stability of internal
dynamics. In [52], a kind of intelligent control called the
PID neural-network control scheme was proposed to real-
ize the attitude controller of the astronaut-assisted robot.
In [4]–[7] and [53], SMC schemes were developed to achieve
the attitude and the position control for the quadrotor and
astronaut-assisted robot where the tracking performance was
guaranteed. In [10], the combined H-infinity and PID con-
trol scheme was proposed to cope with the uncertainties and
external disturbances, then its effectiveness is verified through
experimental results. In [12], a robust nonlinear controller,
which combines the SMC technique and the backstepping
control technique, was proposed and the Cartesian posi-
tion trajectory tracking capability was achieved. However,
the above research work can only deal with the individual
attitude control or the position trajectory tracking control,
and the assumption is strong, which requires the avail-
ability of all states of the positioning subsystems in the
quadrotor.
In addition, it should be noted that in the control of the
quadrotor, the control signals of position and attitude are
always generated by the computer and transmitted in the
communication channels, and they are always required to be
 This article has been accepted for inclusion in a future issue of this journal. Content is final as presented, with the exception of pagination.
2 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON CYBERNETICS
quantized before they go through communication channels
with a low communication rate [15], [21]–[25]. Therefore, for
the achievement of sufficient precise control performance, the
quantizer should be considered in the process of controller
design. Generally, a quantizer maps a continuous-time sig-
nal into a discrete-time finite set in which a piecewise time
function is involved. When a quantizer is considered in the
quadrotor control system, inevitable quantized errors are intro-
duced [15]–[16], [21]–[22]. This leads to the deterioration of
control performance, such as bursting phenomena, unaccept-
able tracking errors, and the transient process. Though some
previous works on mitigating these strong nonlinearities pro-
duced by the quantizer have been done [15], [21]–[25], [29],
the quantized problem for the control of the quadrotor, where
complicated couplings and the underactuated problem are
involved, needs to be further researched.
Inspired by the previous works [4]–[12], [44], [54]–[55],
in this article, a fuzzy approximator-based compound adap-
tive quantized control scheme is proposed for the quadrotor
control system. The fuzzy approximator is used to approxi-
mate the unknown continuous functions where the unknown
air resistance coefficients, aerodynamic drag coefficients, and
rotary inertia are included. The “compound” means the combi-
nation of an output-feedback controller for position trajectory
tracking control and a state-feedback controller for attitude
trajectory tracking control by employing the dynamic surface
control (DSC) technique, which develops from the backstep-
ping method but can avoid repeated derivations of the virtual
control law in the backstepping method [33], [44], [45]. This
implies that only the position information is available for
position tracking control because the measurement of motion
velocities is difficult, and the attitude angular velocity can be
obtained from the gyroscope when implementing the attitude
tracking control.
The main contributions of the proposed control scheme are
summarized as follows. First, the adaptive fuzzy quantized
control is designed, which can effectively eliminate the strong
nonlinearities caused by the quantizer. Second, by applying the
adaptive fuzzy DSC technique to the underactuated quadro-
tor control system, the “explosion of complexity” problem in
the backstepping method is overcome and the L∞ tracking
performance is achieved with the proposed initializing tech-
nique inspired by [44]. This guarantees the attitude signals
promptly converge to the desired trajectories, then the under-
actuated problem of the quadrotor is overcome by solving the
designed adaptive fuzzy quantized control equations. Third,
the experiments on the platform of the Quanser Qball-X4
quadrotor are successfully implemented and the effectiveness
of the proposed control scheme is verified via the experimental
data.
The remainder of this article is arranged as follows.
Section II introduces the mathematical model of the quadro-
tor and some preliminaries. The control algorithms are formed
in Section III. Section IV gives the analysis of the stability
and tracking performance. The implementation of experiments
and corresponding results is shown in Section V, and the
conclusion is drawn in Section VI.
Authorized licensed use limited to: University of Exeter. Downloaded on June 18,2020 at 03:06:58 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
Fig. 1. Structure of the quadrotor.
II. P ROBLEM S TATEMENT AND P RELIMINARIES
A. Model Construction of the Quadrotor
The structure of the quadrotor is shown as Fig. 1, from
which it can be seen that the entire control system consists of
four actual control inputs actuated by motors and six spatial
freedom outputs, including three displacement motions and
three attitude motions. Here, the displacement motions are
denoted by the motions along the x, y, and z axes of the body-
fixed coordinate system, and the attitude motions are denoted
by the motions of roll, pitch, and yaw. Hence, the quadro-
tor is physically an underactuated system which implies that
only four control signals can be utilized to control six degrees.
In the quadrotor, four propellers are mounted on four motors
labeled from No. 1 to No. 4, and the lift force Fi (i = 1, 2, 3,
4) of the motor will be changed according to the speed changes
of the propeller. Among them, rotor No. 1 and rotor No. 3 have
positive propellers, whose directions of rotation are opposite
the anti-propellers of rotor No. 2 and rotor No. 4. This leads to
the balance of the yaw torque as required. For example, if the
lift force is greater than the mass of the quadrotor, the aircraft
will move along the z-axis. If F1 > F3 , F2 = F4 , the aircraft
will do the pitching motion and perform a translational motion
along the x-axis. Similarly, when the aircraft produces a roll
angle, it will make a translational motion along the y-axis.
According to the mechanics of rigid body rotation and
Newton–Euler equations, a mathematical model of the four-
rotor quadrotor, including navigation equations and moment
equations, will be presented. Define [φ, θ, ψ] ∈ R3 and
[p, q, r] ∈ R3 , where φ, θ, and ψ represent the angle of
roll, pitch, and yaw with regard to the ground coordinate rep-
resented by Oxe ye ze , and p, q, and r represent the angular
velocity of roll, pitch, and yaw with regard to the body coor-
dinate represented by Oxb yb zb . For the x-axis direction, the
conversion equation between the ground coordinate system
and the body coordinate system is [9]
X=x
Y = cos φy − sin φz
Z = sin φy + cos φz (1)
where X, Y, and Z come from the ground coordinate system,
and x, y, and z come from the body coordinate system. For
simplicity, let S(·) and C(·) denote the trigonometric func-
tions sin(·) and cos(·), respectively. Then, the entire conversion
 This article has been accepted for inclusion in a future issue of this journal. Content is final as presented, with the exception of pagination.

ZHANG et al.: COMPOUND ADAPTIVE FUZZY QUANTIZED CONTROL 3

matrix of the quadrotor between the body coordinate system where dX (t), dY (t), dZ (t), d1 (t), d2 (t), and d3 (t) denote the
and the ground coordinate system can be formulated [4], [6] bounded external disturbances. Let xX,1 = X, xX,2 = Ẋ,
⎡ ⎤ xY,1 = Y, xY,2 = Ẏ, xZ,1 = Z, xZ,2 = Ż, x1 = φ, x2 = φ̇,
C θ Cψ Cψ S φ S θ − C φ S ψ S φ S ψ + C φ Cψ S θ
R(φ, θ, ψ) = ⎣ Cθ Sψ Cφ Cψ + S φ S θ S ψ Cφ Sθ Sψ − Cψ Sφ ⎦. x3 = θ, x4 = θ̇ , x5 = ψ, and x6 = ψ̇. Equation (5) can be
−Sθ Cθ S φ Cφ Cθ re-expressed as [12]
⎧
(2) ⎪
⎪ ẋX,1 = xX,2
⎪
⎪
⎪ ẋX,2 = (Cx1 Sx3 Cx5 + Sx1 Sx5 )U4 − a1 xX,2 + dX (t)
⎪
Let the lift force of the four motors be Fi , i = 1, 2, 3, 4, and ⎪
⎪
⎪ ẋY,1 = xY,2
⎪
define FH = F1 +F2 +F3 +F4 . Then, the motion model of the ⎪
⎪
⎪ ẋY,2 = (Cx1 Sx3 Sx5 − Sx1 Cx5 )U4 − a2 xY,2 + dY (t)
⎪
quadrotor with respect to the ground coordinate system can be ⎪
⎪
⎪ ẋZ,1 = xZ,2
⎪
obtained [5], [10] ⎪
⎪
⎡ ⎤ ⎡   ⎤ ⎪ ẋZ,2 = −g + (Cx1 Cx3 )U4 − a3 xZ,2 + dZ (t)
⎪
Ẍ FH Sφ Sψ + Cφ Cψ Sθ  − KX Ẋ  ⎨
yi = xi,1 , i = X, Y, Z
⎣ Ÿ ⎦ = ⎣ FH Cφ Sθ Sψ − Cψ Sφ − KY Ẏ ⎦ m (3) (6)
  ⎪
⎪ ẋ1 = x2
Z̈ FH Cφ Cθ − KZ Ż − mg ⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪ ẋ2 = a4 x4 x6 − a5  x4 − a6 x2 + U1 + d1 (t)
⎪
⎪
where KX , KY , and KZ are the unknown air resistance ⎪
⎪ ẋ3 = x4
⎪
⎪
coefficients in the corresponding directions; and m and g rep- ⎪
⎪ ẋ4 = a7 x2 x6 + a8  x2 − a9 x4 + U2 + d2 (t)
⎪
⎪
resent the mass and acceleration of gravity of the quadrotor, ⎪
⎪ ẋ5 = x6
⎪
⎪
respectively. ⎪
⎪ ẋ6 = a10 x2 x4 − a11 x6 + U3 + d3 (t)
⎩
Also, as given in [10], [12], and [48], utilizing Euler’s kine- yj = x2∗j−1 , j = 1, 2, 3
matics equation, the angular motion model with regard to the where a1 = KX /m, a2 = KY /m, a3 = KZ /m, a4 = (Iy − Iz )/Ix ,
ground coordinate system is a5 = Ir /Ix , a6 = dφ /Ix , a7 = (Iz − Ix )/Iy , a8 = Ir /Iy , a9 =
 
 dθ /Iy , a10 = (Ix − Iy )/Iz , and a11 = dψ /Iz are unknown; U1 ,
φ̈ = θ̇ ψ̇ Iy − Iz − Ir θ̇  − dφ φ̇ + l(F4 − F2 ) Ix

 U2 , U3 , and U4 are control inputs to be designed with U1 =
θ̈ = φ̇ ψ̇(Iz − Ix ) + Ir φ̇ − dθ θ̇ + l(F3 − F1 ) Iy l(F4 −F2 )/Ix , U2 = l(F3 −F1 )/Iy , U3 = (τ2 +τ4 −τ1 −τ3 )/Iz ,
   
 and U4 = (F1 + F2 + F3 + F4 )/m.
ψ̈ = φ̇ θ̇ Ix − Iy − dψ ψ̇ + τ2 + τ4 − τ1 − τ3 Iz (4) Remark 1: Generally, as shown in [12], [34], and [35], the
quadrotor formulations are divided into two parts, including
where  denotes the relative speed of the cross-coupled rotor
position formulations (Z, X, Y) and the attitude formulations
and satisfies  = w2 + w4 − w1 − w3 with wi being the rotat-
(φ-roll, θ -pitch, and ψ-yaw). The variables of φ-roll, θ -pitch,
ing speed of the propeller; Ix , Iy , and Iz represent the rotary
and ψ-yaw in attitude formulations are coupled in position
inertia with regard to each axis; Ir is the moment of inertia of
formulations (Z, X, Y). The advantage is that the adaptive
each motor; dφ , dθ , and dψ are the corresponding unknown
controller can be designed to guarantee stability of the atti-
aerodynamic drag coefficients; l denotes the distance from the
tude subsystem and provide tracking capability. However, the
rotor center to the centroid of the quadrotor; and τi , i = 1, 2,
controller has some deficiencies in realizing position control
3, 4, is the torque generated by each motor. As shown in [12]
since the dynamic model has an adverse form. For example,
and [34]–[38], before formulating the model of the quadrotor,
in (6), control input U4 , which is the unique external excita-
some requirements should be satisfied: 1) the elastic deforma-
tion for each of these three controlled variables, is explicitly
tion of each quadrotor part is neglected and treated as a single
related to both position formulations (Z, X, Y). This implies
rigid body; 2) the quadrotor should be a standard symmetrical
that it is difficult to design an individual control signal for all
structure; 3) the vertical distance between the barycenter and
position formulations (Z, X, Y). Therefore, a decentralized-like
the center of the propeller is neglected, which implies that
adaptive compound control is required to be designed.
the five points are on the same level; 4) the effects of the
Earth’s rotation and revolution on the quadrotor are neglected;
B. Signal Quantizer
and 5) the changes in the gravitational acceleration at different
heights during flight are also ignored. Then, the mathematical It should be noted that because the direct application of the
model of quadrotor can be obtained as follows [12], [48]: quantized signal including the high-frequency components to
 
 the actuator will lead to deterioration of control performance.
Ẍ = FH Cφ Sθ Cψ + Sφ Sψ − KX Ẋ m + dX (t) A signal quantizer needs to be considered to degrade the com-
 
 munication rate. In this article, a hysteresis quantizer is used
Ÿ = FH Cφ Sθ Sψ − Sφ Cψ − KY Ẏ m + dY (t)
to reduce the chattering phenomena [15], [16]
 
 ⎧
Z̈ = FH Cφ Cθ − KZ Ż − mg m + dZ (t) ⎪ pj , if pj /(1 + δ) < ud < pj , Q− ≥ pj
    ⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪ or pj ≤ ud ≤ pj /(1 − δ), Q− ≤ pj
θ̇ ψ̇ Iy − Iz − Ir θ̇  − dφ φ̇ ⎪
⎪
φ̈ = Ix + d1 (t) ⎪
⎪ (1 + δ)pj , if pj ≤ ud ≤ pj /(1 − δ)
+l(F4 − F2 ) ⎪
⎨ −
  Q ≥ (1 + δ)pj , or pj /(1 − δ) ≤ ud < pj+1
φ̇ ψ̇(Iz − Ix ) + Ir φ̇ − dθ θ̇ Q(ud ) = (7)
θ̈ = Iy + d2 (t) ⎪
⎪ Q− ≤ (1 + δ)pj
+l(F3 − F1 ) ⎪
⎪
    ⎪
⎪ 0, if 0 ≤ ud ≤ pj /(1 + δ)
⎪
⎪
φ̇θ̇ Ix − Iy − dψ ψ̇  ⎪
⎪
⎩ or pj /(1 + δ) < ud < p1 , Q− = 0
ψ̈ = Iz + d3 (t) (5)
+ τ2 + τ4 − τ1 − τ3 −Q(−ud ), if ud < 0

Authorized licensed use limited to: University of Exeter. Downloaded on June 18,2020 at 03:06:58 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 This article has been accepted for inclusion in a future issue of this journal. Content is final as presented, with the exception of pagination.

4 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON CYBERNETICS

where ud denotes the input of quantizer, δ(t) = [(1 − That is, fi (ξi ) can be approximated by FLSs with the approx-
(t))/(1 + (t))] and pj = a(t) 1−j (t), j = 1, 2, 3, . . . , with imated error εi (ξi ) described by
 being a measurement for quantization density satisfying
fi (ξi ) = ψiT (ξi )ϑi∗ + εi (ξi ) ∀ξi ∈ ξi ⊂ Rn (11)
0 < (t) < 1. The smaller the (t) is, the coarser the quan-
tizer is. The positive parameter a(t) decides the size of the where |εi (ξi )| ≤ εi,m , ϑi∗ is an optimal weight vector of ϑi and
dead zone of Q(ud ). Q− (t) is the latest value of Q before the is defined as
 
time instant t and Q− (0) = 0. Mathematically, Q− (t) = 0 for
t ∈ [0, T1 ] and Q− (t) = Q(ud (Th )) for t ∈ (Th , Th+1 ], where ϑi∗ = arg minn sup |fi (ξi ) − Yi (ξi )| . (12)
ϑ∈R ξ ∈ξi
Th (h = 1, 2, 3, · · ·) with 0 ≤ T1 < T2 < T3 < · · · < +∞
being the time instants when Q(ud ) makes transitions. Then, by using Lemma 1 and (11), the FLSs approximator is
Remark 2: It should be noted that the traditionally used used to approximate the unknown continuous functions in as
quantizer such as logarithmic quantizer will make a transition follows:
from one output value to another, which always produces the
fi (x) = ψiT (ξi )ϑi∗ + εi , i = X, Y, Z (13)
chattering phenomenon [15], [16]. To solve this problem, in
this article, the hysteresis quantizer [15], [16] in (7) is adopted. with εi being any positive constants denoting the FLSs approx-
Then, some dwell time elapses before a new transition occurs imated errors.
by adding some additional quantization levels. Therefore, the For convince, let UX = (Cx1 Sx3 Cx5 + Sx1 Sx5 )U4 , UY =
chattering phenomenon can be reduced compared with the (Cx1 Sx3 Cx5 − Sx1 Cx5 )U4 , UZ = (Cx1 Cx3 )U4 , fX (x) = −a1 xX,2 ,
traditional logarithmic quantizer. fY (y) = −a2 xY,2 , and fZ (x) = −a3 xZ,2 . Considering (7), (6)
can be rewritten as
⎧
C. Fuzzy-Logic Systems ⎪
⎪ ẋX,1 = xX,2
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪ ẋX,2 = Q(UX ) + fX (x) + dX (t)
Fuzzy-logic systems (FLSs) map an input vector Ui ∈ Rm ⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪ ẋY,1 = xY,2
to a scalar output Yi ∈ R by the fuzzy rules consisting of a ⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪ ẋY,2 = Q(UY ) + fY (x) + dY (t)
set of linguistic rules in the form of “If–Then,” that is ⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪ ẋZ,1 = xZ,2
⎪
⎪
(l)
R : If ξi,1 is Ai,1 and . . . and ξi,m is Ai,m , Then Yi is Ci (8)
l l l ⎪
⎪ ẋZ,2 = −g + Q(UZ ) + fZ (x) + dZ (t)
⎨
yi = xi,1 , i = X, Y, Z
(14)
where Ali,k and Cil , (l = 1, . . . , N, k = 1, . . . , m, i = X, Y, Z) ⎪
⎪ ẋ1 = x2
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪ ẋ2 = a4 x4 x6 − a5  x4 − a6 x2 + Q(U1 ) + d1 (t)
are fuzzy sets characterized by fuzzy membership functions ⎪
⎪
μAl (ξi,k ) and μCl (Yi ), respectively; N > 1 is the number of ⎪
⎪ ẋ3 = x4
⎪
⎪
i,k i ⎪
⎪ ẋ4 = a7 x2 x6 + a8  x2 − a9 x4 + Q(U2 ) + d2 (t)
fuzzy rules with ξi = [ξi,1 , ξi,2 , . . . , ξi,m ]T ∈ Ui ; and Yi ∈ Vi ⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪ ẋ5 = x6
being the input and output of FLSs, respectively. FLSs with ⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪ ẋ6 = a10 x2 x4 − a11 x6 + Q(U3 ) + d3 (t)
Singleton fuzzier, product inference engine, and center-average ⎩
yj = x2∗j−1 , j = 1, 2, 3
defuzzier by using the fuzzy “If–Then” rules in (8) can be
expressed as [26]–[28] where Q(UX ), Q(UY ), Q(UZ ), Q(U1 ), Q(U2 ), and Q(U3 ) are
the quantized signals of UX , UY , UZ , U1 , U2 , and U3 by
Yi = ϑiT ψi (ξi ) (9) the hysteresis quantizer in (7). Also, it should be noted that
because the air resistances KX , KY , and KZ are unknown, the
where ϑi = [ϑi1 , ϑi2 , . . . , ϑiN ]T ∈ RN is an ideal constant- system parameters a1 , a2 , and a3 in (14) are unknown which
parameter vector, and ψi (ξ ) = [ψi1 (ξ ), ψi2 (ξ ), . . . , ψiN (ξ )]T ∈ implies the continuous functions fX , fY , and fZ are unknown.
RN is a fuzzy basis function vector with ψil (ξi ) being cho- Therefore, fuzzy approximators in Lemma 1 can be utilized

sen as ψil (ξi ) = μi,l (ξi )/ N l=1 μi,l (ξi ). Therein, μi,l (ξ ) = to approximate them.
nk=1 μAl (ξi,k ) and μAl (ξi,k ) is called the fuzzy membership Now, define x5r as the desired trajectories of x5 (yaw
i,k i,k
function which is generally chosen as the Gaussian-type func- angle). Then, to achieve the controller design, the following
tion such as μAl (ξi,k ) = e−(ξi,k −μi,l ) /2 , where μi,l belongs to assumptions and lemmas are required.
2

i,k
the value interval of ξi,k . It should be emphasized that the fol- A1: The reference signals yri , i = X, Y, Z, and x5r , are
lowing two conditions on μAl (ξi,k ) should be satisfied. One is smooth and bounded functions and belongs to a compact
i,k
every (μAi (ξi,k ), μAj (ξi,k )) should be overlapped. The other
i,k i,k
is the entire sequence of μAl (ξi,k ), l = 1, . . . , N, i = X, Y, Z,
i,k
should cover the value interval of ξi,k .
Lemma 1 [26]–[28]: FLSs are used as universal approxima-
tor in the sense that given any continuous function fi (·) : Rn →
set r .
A2: The external disturbances di (t) ≤ d̄i with d̄i being
positive constant, i = 1, 2, 3, X, Y, Z.
A3: The roll and pitch angles are limited to (−π/2, π/2)
which is physically meaningful. In particular, the yaw
angle, in this article, is also limited to (−π/2, π/2).
R in a compact set ξi ⊂ Rn , and any εi,m > 0, there exists Lemma 2 [50]: For any vector x, y ∈ Rm , there exist ε > 0,
an FLS (9) such that m > 1, n > 1, and (m − 1)(n − 1) = 1, then, the following
inequality holds:
sup |fi (ξi ) − Yi (ξi )| < εi,m . (10)  
ξ ∈ξi xT y ≤ εm xm /m + yn / nεn .

Authorized licensed use limited to: University of Exeter. Downloaded on June 18,2020 at 03:06:58 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 This article has been accepted for inclusion in a future issue of this journal. Content is final as presented, with the exception of pagination.
ZHANG et al.: COMPOUND ADAPTIVE FUZZY QUANTIZED CONTROL
Fig. 2. Block diagram of the control structure.
Lemma 3 [51]: Let A be a positive-definite matrix, then,
for any vector x ∈ Rn , λmin (A)xT x ≤ xT Ax ≤ λmax (A)xT x,
where λmax (A) and λmin (A) are the maximum and minimum
eigenvalue of A, respectively.
III. D ESIGN OF C OMPOUND A DAPTIVE F UZZY
C ONTROL S CHEME
The compound adaptive fuzzy control DSC scheme implies
an output-feedback controller for position trajectory tracking
control and a state-feedback controller for attitude trajectory
with DSC. In this article, the control objective is to design an
adaptive quantized control scheme of the quadrator to achieve
the attitude and position tracking control. Then, the quantized
control signals can make the output yi , i = 1, 2, 3, X, Y, Z,
can precisely track the reference signals and all the signals of
the closed-loop system are semiglobally ultimately uniformly
bounded. The block diagram of a control structure is shown in
Fig. 2, where detailed explanations of the arithmetic inverter
can be found below (22) or referred to [12] and [48].
A. Output-Feedback Controller for Position Trajectory
Tracking Control
Substituting (13) into (14), the positioning model of the
quadrotor can be rewritten as the following state-space form:
ẋi = Ai xi + iT (ξi )ϑi∗ + εi + Dib (t) + Gi + bi Q(Ui )
yi = xi,1
with
5
To estimate the unmeasurable position states, inspired by the
original works of K-filter in [46] and [47], our previous
works [15], [44], and [45], the high-gain K-filter states
observer is designed as follows:
v̇i,0 = ki Ai,0 vi,0 + −1i ei,2 Q(Ui )
ζ̇i,0 = ki Ai,0 ζi,0 + ki qi yi
˙ i = ki Ai,0 i + −1 iT (17)
i
with i = X, Y, Z, ki ≥ 1 being positive design parame-
ters, ei,2 denoting the second coordinate vector in R2 , and
i = diag{1, ki }. By using (17), the estimated states vector is
designed as
x̂i = i ζi,0 + i vi,0 + i i ϑi∗ . (18)
Define
ρi = xi − x̂i (19)
to be the state-estimation error. Then, it can be verify that
ρ̇i = ẋi − x̂˙ i = Ai ρi − ki i qi ρi,1 + Bi (20)
where ρi,1 are the first entries of ρi . In this article, because
ϑi∗ is unavailable
x̂ˆ i = i ζi,0 + i vi,0 + i i ϑ̂i (21)
i = X, Y, Z, is used to estimate the actual states with ϑ̂i being
the estimation of ϑi∗ .
It should be emphasized that compared with solid works of
the fuzzy K-filter in [41] and [42], the high-gain fuzzy K-filter
is formulated in this article by adding the adjustable high-
gain coefficient ki , i = X, Y, Z, to the fuzzy K-filter in [41]
and [42]. This implies that the error of state observer can be
arbitrarily small by increasing the values of ki . However, the
price has to pay is that the procedures of analysis of stability
may become complicated. Then, the adaptive dynamic surface
output control scheme for the position trajectory tracking is
formulated as shown in Table I, where τi,2 is the time constant
to be designed, li,1 , li,2 , rϑi , σϑi , rji , σji , and i,2 , i = X,
Y, Z, are the positive design parameters, ϑ̂i is the estimation
of the optimal weight vector ϑi∗ , and jˆi is the estimation of
ji∗ = ki /λi , i = X, Y, Z, with λi = 2i min /(1 + i min ) and
i min being the minimum value of i in (7). vi,(0,2) and i,(2)
are the second row of vi,0 and i in (17), respectively.
(15) Then, by using (7) and the designed control law (TI. 5), one
has
        [cos x1 sin x3 cos x5 + sin x1 sin x5 ]U4
0
1 0 0 0 0   
Ai = , ϑi∗ = ∗ , bi = ,  T
= = UX = −SX,2 v̄2 / SX,2 v̄X,(0,3)  + X,2
0
0 ϑi,2 1 i 0 ψi,2 X,(0,3)
      [cos x1 sin x3 sin x5 − sin x1 cos x5 ]U4
0 0 0   
εi =
εi,2
, GX = GY =
0
, Gz =
−g = UY = −SY,2 v̄2 / SY,2 v̄Y,(0,3)  + Y,2
Y,(0,3)
  [cos x1 cos x3 ]U4
0   
and Dib (t) = , i = X, Y, Z. Let Bi = εi + Dib (t) + Gi , = UZ = −SZ,2 v̄2Z,(0,3) / SZ,2 v̄Z,(0,3)  + Z,2 . (22)
di (t)    
−qi,1 1 qi,1 It should be noted that in (22), UX , UY , and UZ are three
and Ai,0 = Ai − qi eTi,1 = , where qi = ,
−qi,2 0 qi,2 designed control signals which implies that they are known.
and Ai,0 is a Hurwitz matrix by choosing the vector proper qi . However, (22) has four unknown variables that are x1 , x3 ,
Then, it follows that: x5 , and U4 , respectively. This implies that four unknown
variables required to be calculated but only three equations.
ẋi = Ai,0 xi + qi yi + i ϑi∗ + Bi + bi Q(Ui ) To solve this problem, as shown in [12] and [35]–[38], a
yi = eT1 xi , i = X, Y, Z. (16) desired trajectory for yaw angle represented by x5r has to

Authorized licensed use limited to: University of Exeter. Downloaded on June 18,2020 at 03:06:58 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 This article has been accepted for inclusion in a future issue of this journal. Content is final as presented, with the exception of pagination.

6 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON CYBERNETICS

TABLE I
be given in advance as an extra reference signal and the C ONTROL A LGORITHMS OF Q UADROTOR P OSITION
designed control signal U3 guarantees the state x5 rapidly con-
verge to its reference signal x5r . Then, reference signals x1r
and x3r of x1 , x3 , and U4 can be obtained by solving (22)
as follows: x3r = arctan((UX cos x5r + UY sin x5r )/UZ ),
x1r = arctan((UX sin x5r − UY cos x5r ) cos x3r /UZ ), and U4 =
UZ /(cos x1r cos x3r ).

B. State-Feedback Controller for Attitude Trajectory

Tracking Control
From (14), all the attitude states can be obtained through the
measurement of the gyroscope, and the attitude mathematical
model of the quadrotor can be rewritten as
ẋ(2∗j−1) = x2∗j
 
ẋ2∗j = ϑαTj αj + Q Uj + dj (t)
yj = x2∗j−1 (23)
TABLE II
with j = 1, 2, 3, where ϑα1 = [a4 , a5 , a6 ], ϑα2 = [a7 , a8 , C ONTROL A LGORITHMS OF Q UADROTOR ATTITUDE
a9 ], ϑα3 = [a10 , a11 ], α1 = [x4 x6 , − x4 , −x2 ]T , α2 =
[x2 x6 ,  x2 , −x4 ]T , and α3 = [x2 x4 , −x6 ]T , and the adaptive
dynamic surface state-feedback control scheme for the attitude
trajectory tracking is formulated as shown in Table II, where
τ2 , τ4 , and τ6 are the time constants of the low-pass filter to
be designed, k2∗j−1 , k2∗j , rιj , rχj , σιj , σχj , αj , j = 1, 2, 3,
are the positive design parameter, χ̂j and ι̂j are the estimations
of ιj = 1/λj and χj = ϑαTj ϑαj , j = 1, 2, 3, with ϑαj defined
above, λj = 2j min /(1 + j min ) and j min being the minimum
value of the quantization density j defined below (7).
Remark 3: It should be noted that the proposed compound
control algorithms are different from some existing results.
First, compared with the traditional backstepping method
for quadrotor, that is, in [12], the adaptive DSC scheme is
designed where the explosion of complexity problem in back-
stepping methods is overcome and the structure of controller
is simplified and the L∞ norm of the tracking error is achieved
by using the initial technique. Second, compared with the
SMC scheme for the quadrotor, that is, in [12], [34], and ȯ2∗j = −o2∗j /τ2∗j + k2∗j−1 Ṡ2∗j−1 + ẍ(2∗j−1)r . (26)
[35], the sign-function-based switching control signal with
high frequency is avoided and the tracking error can arbitrar- Then, as shown in all DSC techniques [15], [33], [44], [45],
ily small for all t ≥ 0. Third, compared with the traditional it follows that:
PID control scheme, the nonlinear mathematical model of the    
ȯi,2 + oi,2 /τi,2  ≤ Bi,2 Si,1 , oi,2 , ϑ̃i , yri , ẏri , ÿri (27)
quadrotor is not required to be transformed into linear one    
which implies a better tracking performance can be obtained. ȯ2∗j + o2∗j /τ2∗j  ≤ B2∗j S2∗j−1 , o2∗j , ẍ(2∗j−1)r (28)

IV. A NALYSIS OF S TABILITY AND L∞ N ORM OF with Bi,2 and B2∗j are continuous functions. Using Tables I
T RACKING E RROR and II, it follows that:
Let the errors between the output and input of the low-pass  
Si,1 Ṡi,1 = −li,1 Si,1
2
+ ki Si,1 Si,2 + yi,2 − ϑ̃iT ki Ti,(2) Si,1
filters be defined as
+ ρi,2 Si,1 , (29)
oi,2 = zi,2 − v̄i,(0,2) , i = X, Y, Z Si,2 Ṡi,2 = −ki qi,2 vi,(0,1) Si,2 − Si,2 Q(Ui )/ki
o2∗j = z2∗j − x(2∗j)d , j = 1, 2, 3. (24) − żi,2 Si,2 (30)
 
By using (TI. 4) and (TII. 3), one has S2∗j−1 Ṡ2∗j−1 = S2∗j−1 x2∗j − x(2∗j)d + S2∗j−1 x(2∗j)d

− S2∗j−1 ẋ(2∗j−1)r , (31)
ȯi,2 = −oi,2 /τi,2 + li,1 Ṡi,1 + ki ζ̇i,(0,2)   
 S2∗j Ṡ2∗j = S2∗j ϑαT2∗j−1 α2∗j−1 + Q U2∗j−1
  
+ ϑ̂i ki i,(2) − ÿri
T T
ki (25) + d2∗j−1 (t) − ż2∗j (32)

Authorized licensed use limited to: University of Exeter. Downloaded on June 18,2020 at 03:06:58 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 This article has been accepted for inclusion in a future issue of this journal. Content is final as presented, with the exception of pagination.

ZHANG et al.: COMPOUND ADAPTIVE FUZZY QUANTIZED CONTROL 7

where i = X, Y, Z, j = 1, 2, 3, ρi,2 denotes the second raw

of ρi . Define the Lyapunov function as follows:
 
V= 2
Si,1 + Si,2
2
+ o2i,2 + ϑ̃iT ϑ̃i /rϑi + j˜i2 ki−1 λi /rji + 2Vρi 2
3 
  
6 
+ λj ι̃2j /rιj + χ̃j2 /rχj + o22∗j 2 + Sj2 2. (33)
j=1 j=1

Therein, χ̃i = χ̂i − χi , ϑ̃i = ϑ̂i − ϑi∗ , j˜i = jˆi − ji∗ , i = X, Y,

Z, ι̃j = ι̂j − ιj , j = 1, 2, 3, are the errors of the estimation; Vρi
is a quadratic function and defined as Fig. 3. Experimental devices and environment.

Vρi = ρiT Pi ρi (34)

Si,1 , i = X, Y, Z, can be theoretically small enough for all
where Pi = (−1
i ) P̄i 
T −1 with P̄i = P̄Ti > 0 being positive t > 0. However, with the increase of the values of above design
definite matrix, satisfying ATi,0 P̄i + P̄i Ai,0 = −2I with I is an parameters, the amplitude of the control signal will increase,
identity matrix. Then, from Lemma 3, for any ki ≥ 1, we have therefore, in the physically experimental environment, it may
V̇ρi ≤ −Cρ1 Vρi + Cρ2 (35) not be arbitrarily small due to constrained amplitude of the
input voltages, the measurement noises, the unexpectedly envi-
where Cρ1 = ki /λmax (P̄i ) and Cρ2 = 2ki (P̄i Bi max /ki2 )2 , ronmental disturbance, and unknown dynamic uncertainties of
with λmax (P̄i ) denoted the maximum eigenvalue of P̄i and the quadrotor.
Bi max being the maximum values of Bi . See Appendix B
for the proof of (35). It should be emphasized that by solving V. E XPERIMENTAL V ERIFICATION
the inequality (35), one has

A. Experimental Setup
Vρi (t) ≤ Cρ2 /(2Cρ1 ) + e−2Cρ1 t Vρi (0) − Cρ2 /(2Cρ1 ) In this article, the Qball-X4 produced by Quanser cor-
∀t ≥ 0 poration in Fig. 3 is used as an experimental platform.
Correspondingly, the architecture of the Qball-X4 control stage
which implies limt→∞ Vρi (t) ≤ Cρ2 /(2Cρ1 ). Then, if the value
is illustrated in Fig. 4 with the following components.
of Cρ1 is large enough (i.e., the design parameters ki are
1) Quanser’s onboard avionics data acquisition card (HiQ
selected large enough), the value of ρi could be arbitrarily
DAQ) embedded Gumstix, is an inertial measurement
small. Therefore, the rationality of the designed state observer
unit (IMU). It controls the vehicle by reading the
can be verified.
onboard avionics sensors (including 3-axis gyroscope
Combining the proposed output-feedback and the state-
with solution of 0.0125 deg/s/LSB and 3-axis accelera-
feedback control schemes, the main result of this article is
tor with resolution 3.33 mg/LSB) and outputting Servo
ready to be presented.
pulse-width modulation (PWM) (5%–10% of a 20-ms
Theorem 1: Considering the model of the quadrotor in (14),
duty cycle) motor commands.
the adaptive laws, the control input through the quantizer in
2) Sonar sensor (Maxbotix XL-Maxsonar EZ3), which
Tables I and II. If V(0) satisfies V(0) ≤ G1 with G1 being
measures distances between 20 and 765 cm with 1-
any given positive number, then all the signals in closed-
cm resolution, is used to measure the Qball height for
loop systems are semiglobally uniformly ultimately bounded
closed-loop height control.
(SUUB) and can be made arbitrarily small by properly select-
3) Optitrack positioning system provides 6DoF tracking for
ing the design parameters ki , li,1 , li,2 , rϑi , rji , σϑi , σji , i,2 ,
the Qball with Flex 3 camera which can offer integrated
k2∗j , k2∗j−1 , rιj , rχj , σιj , and σχj and the time constants of
image capture, processing, and motion tracking with its
the low-pass filter τi,2 , τ2 , τ4 , and τ6 . Also, the L∞ norm of
global shutter imager and 100 frames/s capture speed.
the tracking errors Si,1 , i = X, Y, Z, S1 , S3 , and S5 can be
4) E_Flite Park 400 motor, which fitted with paired
obtained and made arbitrarily small by utilizing the initializing
counter-rotating APC 10x4.7 propellers. The four motors
technology.
are controlled by electronic speed controllers (ESCs)
Proof: See Appendix A for details.
with receiving commands from the HiQ DAQ in the
Remark 4: The definition of SUUB is as follows [43].
form of PWM.
Consider a class of continuous nonlinear systems ẋ = f (x, t),
if the solution x(t, t0 , x0 ) ∈ Rn of the system is satisfied: deter-
B. Experimental Implementation
mine a bounded closed set  ⊂ Rn , as to all x(t0 ) = x0 ∈ ,
there exist ε > 0 and T(ε, x0 ), and x(t, t0 , x0 ) < ε for any
t ≥ t0 + T, then the solution x(t0 ) = x(t, t0 , x0 ) of the system
is SUUB.
Remark 5: As shown below (38) of Appendix A, by increas-
ing the values of design parameters ki , li,1 , li,2 , rϑi , rji , rlj , rχj ,
First, as shown in Fig. 4, the OptiTrack positioning system,
which is used to provide measurements of the Qball-X4
position and orientation, has been setup and calibrated.
Second, the design parameters in states observer (17) are
selected as follows:
     
σϑi , σji , σlj , and σχj , the attitude tracking errors of roll, pitch, qi,1 5 −qi,1 1
ki = 5, qi = = , Ai,0 =
and yaw angles S2∗j−1 , j = 1, 2, 3, and position tracking error qi,2 3 −qi,2 0

Authorized licensed use limited to: University of Exeter. Downloaded on June 18,2020 at 03:06:58 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 This article has been accepted for inclusion in a future issue of this journal. Content is final as presented, with the exception of pagination.

8 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON CYBERNETICS

Fig. 4. Architecture of the Qball-X4 control stage.

  Fig. 5. Position tracking performance.

1 0
−1
i = , i = X, Y, Z.
0 1/ki

Third, the design parameters of the control algorithms in

Tables I and II are chosen as lX,1 = 25, lY,1 = 20, lZ,1 = 19,
lX,2 = 18, lY,2 = 14, lZ,2 = 16, rϑX = rϑY = rϑZ = 5,
rjX = rjY = rjZ = 8, σϑX = σϑY = σϑZ = 0.5,
σjX = σjY = σjZ = 0.4, X,2 = Y,2 = Z,2 = 0.01,
k1 = k3 = k5 = 3, k2 = k4 = k6 = 2.5, 3 = 5 = 7 = 0.02,
rι1 = rι2 = rι3 = 4, rχ1 = rχ2 = rχ3 = 3, σι1 = σι2 =
σι3 = 0.4, and σχ1 = σχ2 = σχ3 = 0.6 and the time con-
stants of the low-pass filter τX,2 = τY,2 = τZ,2 = τ2 = τ4 =
τ6 = 0.002. For the FLS ψi (ξi ) which is used to approximate
the unknown function fi (x), ξi = (x̂ˆ i,2 ), i = X, Y, Z, the fuzzy
membership functions are chosen as μFl (ξi,k ) = exp{−[ξi,k − Fig. 6. Position tracking errors along x, y, and z axes.
i,k
1 + 0.3(l − 4.5)]2 /2}, where l = −3, −2, −1, 0, 1, 2, 3,
k = 1, 2, i = X, Y, Z. Then, iT (ξ ) = diag{0, ψi,2 (ξi )}
with ψi,2 (ξi ) = [ψi1,1 (ξi,1 ), . . . , ψi1,8 (ξ
i,1 )]. For the quan-
0.4, if |e| < 0.08
tizer described in (7), a = 0.5,  = .
0.8, if |e| ≥ 0.08
To achieve the L∞ tracking performance, the initial values
of the states and estimated values in the adaptive laws are
selected as xi,1 (0) = xi,2 (0) = 0, x(2∗j−1) (0) = x2∗j (0) = 0,
and ϑ̂i (0) = jˆi (0) = ι̂j (0) = χ̂j (0) = 0, with i = X, Y, Z,
j = 1, 2, 3, respectively.
Finally, to show the effectiveness of the proposed compound
control scheme, the comparisons of the proposed scheme,
backstepping-sliding mode control (BS) scheme in [12] and
Fig. 7. Tracking errors S1 , S2 , and S3 of roll, pitch, and yaw angles,
the PID-linear quadratic regulator (LQR) control scheme respectively.
in [49] are implemented. Therein, LQR controller was used for
the attitude movement with control law u = −K(t)x and the TABLE III
optimal-feedback gain matrix K(t) can be obtained by solving MVTE AND RMSVTE OF P OSITION T RACKING
the Riccati equation K̇(t) = −KA − AT K + KBR−1 BT K − Q.
The design parameters of LQR control are chosen as L = 0.2,
Q = diag(0.001, 10000, 0.01) and R = diag(1, 1, 1) in the roll
and the pitch control, and Q = diag(1, 0, 1) and R = 1000
in the yaw control. The PID control scheme is used for the
position movement. The design parameters of PID control are
selected as KP = 0.366, KI = 0.045, and KD = 0.38 in
horizontal direction control and KP = 0.035, KI = 0.041, In the experiments, the desired trajectories of the position
and KD = 0.014 in vertical direction control. For the BS are chosen as yrX = 0.3 cos(0.1πt), yrY = 0.3 sin(0.1πt), and
control scheme in [12], the SMC and backstepping method yrZ = 0.005t and the desired yaw angle is selected ψd = 0
is used to realize attitude and position control, respectively, rad. Then, the experimental results are shown in Figs. 5–13.
with the design parameters being chosen as k1 = k2 = k3 = Fig. 5 shows the Qball_X4 position and the desired trajec-
k4 = 2, ρ1 = 1.5, ρ2 = 2, ρ3 = 1.6, ρ4 = 2.1, ρ5 = 2, and tories along x, y, and z axes. It can be seen that the actual
ρ6 = 2.5. positioning trajectories along x, y, and z axes can precisely

Authorized licensed use limited to: University of Exeter. Downloaded on June 18,2020 at 03:06:58 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 This article has been accepted for inclusion in a future issue of this journal. Content is final as presented, with the exception of pagination.
ZHANG et al.: COMPOUND ADAPTIVE FUZZY QUANTIZED CONTROL
TABLE IV
MVTE AND RMSVTE OF A NGLE T RACKING
Fig. 8. Space diagram of position in the PID LQR control scheme.
Fig. 9. Space diagram of position in the backstepping SMC control scheme.
Fig. 10. Space diagram of position in the proposed control scheme.
track the desired trajectories. Fig. 6 illustrates the results of
the comparison of the tracking errors in position trajectories
along x, y, and z axes between the proposed control scheme,
BS scheme, and PID-LQR scheme. Fig. 7 illustrates the results
of the comparison of the tracking errors in attitude trajectories
of roll, pitch, and yaw angles between the proposed control
Authorized licensed use limited to: University of Exeter. Downloaded on June 18,2020 at 03:06:58 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
9
Fig. 11. Input PWM signals.
Fig. 12. Estimations of the norm of fuzzy ideal constant-parameter vectors.
Fig. 13. Estimations of ji∗ (i = X, Y, Z), respectively.
scheme, BS scheme, and PID-LQR scheme. To further illus-
trate the priority of the proposed control scheme, define the
maximum value of the steady-state tracking error as MVTE
and the root mean-square
  values of tracking error as RMSVTE
with RMSVTE = ( N k=kss Si (k))/(N − kss ), N = 50 000,
kss = 10 000, i = X, Y, Z, 1, 2, 3. The comparisons of
MVTE and RMSVTE between the proposed control scheme,
BS scheme, and PID-LQR scheme are shown in Tables III
and IV, respectively. Both Figs. 8 and 9 and Tables III and IV
clearly illustrate the validity of the proposed control scheme.
Figs. 8–10 show the 3-D tracking trajectory with the BS, PID-
LQR, and the proposed scheme, respectively. It is obvious
that the proposed control scheme obtains much better control
performance than the BS and PID-LQR scheme. Fig. 11 shows
the input duty cycle of PWM signals. It should be noted that
 This article has been accepted for inclusion in a future issue of this journal. Content is final as presented, with the exception of pagination.

10 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON CYBERNETICS

  2
in the implementation of the experiments, the thrust of each + κi /2 + 2ki P̄i Bi max /ki2
motor is decided by the actuator bandwidth ω and the PWM 
input to the actuator u. For example, if F is used to denote − ki−1 λi σji j˜i2 /2 + ki−1 λi σji ji∗2 /2
the thrust, F can be expressed by F = Kuω/(s + ω) with K 3 
   2
being a positive gain. Also, in this experiment, K = 120 N and + −k(2∗j−1) + 1 S(2∗j−1) − λj σιj ι̃2j /2
ω = 15 rad/s, the high level and low level of the pulse voltage i=1
signal in PWM is 3.3 and 0.6 V, respectively. Figs. 12 and 13   2
+ −k2∗j + 1/2 S2∗j − σχj χ̃i2 /2 + o22∗j /2
show the trajectories of the estimations of the norm of the   
fuzzy ideal constant-parameter vector ϑ̂i and the trajectories + 1 2αj2 + λj 2∗j+1 + ā2j /2
of the estimations of ji∗ (i = X, Y, Z), respectively.
+ d̄j2 (t)/2 + λj σιj ι2j /2 + σχj χj2 /2 − o2∗j /τ2∗j
  
VI. C ONCLUSION + o22∗j M2∗j
2
/ 2μ2∗j + μ2∗j /2 . (36)
In this article, a compound adaptive fuzzy-quantized con- Let the design parameters satisfy ki > 2λmax (P̄i )ci,1 +
trol scheme is proposed for the position and attitude tracking λmax P̄i /(2λmin (P̄i )), li,1 ≥ ki2 /2 + ki + ci,1 , li,2 ≥ ki /2 + ci,1 ,
control of the quadrotor. The output-feedback controller for 1/τi,2 ≥ Mi,2 2 /(2κ ) + k /2 + c , σ
i i i,1 ϑi ≥ 2ci,1 /rϑi , σji ≥
the position trajectory tracking control and a state-feedback 2ci,1 /rji , ci,2 = λi i,2 /ki + ā2i /(2ki2 ) + σϑi ϑi∗T ϑi∗ /2 + κi /2 +
controller for attitude trajectory tracking control are designed
by employing the DSC technique. Therefore, only the posi-
tion information is required for the position tracking control.
From the analysis of stability and experimental results of the
Quanser Qball-X4 quadrotor, it can be concluded that: 1) the
unmeasurable states in the positioning system have been esti-
mated online by constructing the high-gain observer; 2) the
“explosion of complexity” problem in the backstepping con-
trol scheme is overcome and the L∞ tracking performance has
been achieved by applying the DSC technique and the ini-
tializing technique; 3) the underactuated and strong coupling
problems are overcome by solving the developed control signal
equations; 4) the strong nonlinearities caused by the quantizer
error have been mitigated by using the proposed quantized
adaptive fuzzy control algorithms; and 5) compared with the
LQR scheme and backstepping-SMC method, a more precise
tracking performance can be obtained by using the proposed
control scheme.
A PPENDIX A
P ROOF OF T HEOREM 1
Consider the quantizer defined in (7) and define
Q(Ui )/Ui , if |Ui | ≥ ai (t)
ιi,1 (t) = and ιi,2 (t) =
 1, if |Ui | < ai (t)
0, if |Ui | ≥ ai (t)
, with i = X, Y, Z, one has
Q(Ui ) − Ui , if |Ui | < ai (t)
Q(Ui ) = ιi,1 (t)Ui + ιi,2 (t). By using the equality δi =
[(1 − i )/(1 + i )], it follows that ιi,1 ≥ λi , |ιi,2 (t)| ≤
āi ∀t ≥ 0 with āi denoting the maximum value of ai (t), and
λi = 2i min /(1 + i min ) with i min denoting the minimum
value of i (t). Similarly, let Q(Uj ) = h(2∗j−1) Uj + h(2∗j) with
2ki (P̄i Bi max /ki2 )2 + ki−1 λi σji ji∗2 /2, 1/τ2∗j ≥ 1/2 +
2 /(2μ ) + c , k
M2∗j j j,1 2∗j−1 ≥ 1 + cj,1 , k2∗j ≥ 1/2 + cj,1 ,
σlj ≥ 2cj,1 /rlj , σχj ≥ 2cj,1 /rχj , and cj,2 ≥ 1/(2αj2 ) +
λj 2∗j+1 + ā2j /2+ d̄j2 (t)/2+λj σιj ι2j /2+σχj χj2 /2+μ2∗j /2, where
ci,1 and cj,1 satisfy ci,1 ≥ ci,2 /(2G1 ) and cj,1 ≥ cj,2 /(2G1 ),
i = X, Y, Z, j = 1, 2, 3, respectively. From (36), we have
V̇ ≤ −2C1 V + C2 (37)
with C1 = min{cX,1 , cY,1 , cZ,1 , c1,1 , c2,1 , c3,1 } and C2 =
cX,2 + cY,2 + cZ,2 + c1,2 + c2,2 + c3,2 . Then, V̇ ≤ 0 when
V = G1 , which implies that V(t) ≤ G1 is an invariant set or
in other words, if V(0) ≤ G1 , then V(t) ≤ G1 , for all t ≥ 0.
Therefore, V is uniformly bounded and it can be proved that all
the signals of the closed-loop system are uniformly bounded.
By solving the inequality (37), it follows that:
V(t) ≤ C2 /(2C1 ) + e−2C1 t V(0) − C2 /(2C1 ) ∀t ≥ 0 (38)
which implies limt→∞ V(t) ≤ C2 /(2C1 ). It should be
noted that similar to [15], [33], and [44], the value
of C1 in (37) is decided by the minimum value of
ci,1 , i = X, Y, Z, 1, 2, 3, which satisfies the inequalities
in (65) and therefore are decided by the design parameters
ki , li,1 , li,2 , rϑi , rji , rlj , rχj , σϑi , σji , σlj , and σχj . This implies
large enough values of the above design parameters lead
to large enough value of C1 . Then, C2 /(2C1 ) can be small
enough because C2 defined in (37) is a constant.
Now, the procedures of obtaining the L∞ tracking
performance will be given. Let yri (0) = yi (0), Si,1 (0) = 0,
vi,0 (0) = 0, ζi,(0,1) (0) = 0, i (0) = 0, ϑ̂i (0) = 0, jˆi (0) = 0,
S(2∗j−1) (0) = 0, ι̂j (0) = 0, χ̂j (0) = 0, and y(2∗j−1)r (0) =
x(2∗j−1) (0). Since ζ i,(0,1) (0) = yi (0) = xi,1 (0), one has
h(2∗j−1) (t) ≥ λj , |h2∗j (t)| ≤ āj . V(t) ≤ C2 /(2C1 ) + i λmax (P̄i )ρi (0)2 /ki2 , i = X, Y, Z.
Then, in view of (33) and Lemma 2, the time derivative of Considering (36), it arrives  at Si,1 ∞ = supt≥0 |Si,1 | =
V yields 
xi,1 − yri ∞ ≤ C2 /(2C1 ) + i λmax (P̄i )ρi (0)2 /ki2 ,
     2 S
V̇ ≤ − li,1 − ki − ki2 /2 Si,1 2
− li,2 − ki /2 Si,2  2∗j−1 ∞ = 
supt≥0 |S2∗j−1 | = x1 − x1r ∞ ≤
  C2 /(2C1 ) + i λmax (P̄i )ρi (0)2 /ki2 , i = X, Y, Z, j =
+ λi i,2 /ki + ā2i / 2ki2 − σϑi ϑ̃iT ϑ̃i /2 + σϑi ϑi∗T ϑi∗ /2 1, 2, 3, which implies that the L∞ norm of the tracking error
 
of Si,1 ∞ and S2∗j−1 ∞ can be arbitrarily small by choosing
+ ki /2 − 1/τi,2 + Mi,2 2
/(2κi ) o2i,2
      sufficient large design parameters. This completes the proof of
+ 1/ 2λmin P̄i − ki /λmax P̄i Vρi Theorem 1.

Authorized licensed use limited to: University of Exeter. Downloaded on June 18,2020 at 03:06:58 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 This article has been accepted for inclusion in a future issue of this journal. Content is final as presented, with the exception of pagination.

ZHANG et al.: COMPOUND ADAPTIVE FUZZY QUANTIZED CONTROL 11

A PPENDIX B [10] J. P. Ortiz, L. I. Minchala, and M. J. Reinoso, “Nonlinear robust H∞ PID

P ROOF OF (35) controller for the multivariable system quadrotor,” IEEE Latin America
Trans., vol. 14, no. 3, pp. 1176–1183, Apr. 2016.
It can be verified that [11] C. H. Lin, S. S. Jan, and F. B. Hsiao, “Autonomous hovering of
an experimental unmanned helicopter system with proportional-integral
i ki Ai,0 −1
i = Ai − ki i qi ei,1
T
(39) sliding mode control,” J. Aerosp. Eng., vol. 24, no. 3, pp. 338–348,
Jan. 2011.
with eTi,1 = [1, 0, . . . , 0] ∈ Rni . Then, define the following [12] F. Chen, R. Jiang, K. Zhang, B. Jiang, and G. Tao, “Robust backstepping
sliding-mode control and observer-based fault estimation for a quadro-
error transformation ρ̂i = −1 i ρi . Considering (20) and (39), tor UAV,” IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., vol. 63, no. 8, pp. 5044–5056,
it follows that: Aug. 2016.
[13] A. Tayebi and S. McGilvray, “Attitude stabilization of a VTOL
ρ̂˙i = −1 −1
i ρ̇i = i (Ai ρi − ki i qi ρi,1 + Bi ) quadrotor aircraft,” Syst. Control Lett., vol. 19, no. 3, pp. 177–185,
Sep. 1992.
= ki Ai,0 −1 −1
i ρi + i Bi [14] X. Lin, C. Wu, and B. Chen, “Robust H∞ adaptive fuzzy track-
= ki Ai,0 ρ̂i + −1
i Bi . (40) ing control for MIMO nonlinear stochastic Poisson jump diffu-
sion systems,” IEEE Trans. Cybern., vol. 49, no. 8, pp. 3116–3130,
Aug. 2019.
Since Ai,0 is a Hurwitz matrix, there exists a symmetric, [15] X. Zhang, Y. Wang, C. Wang, C.-Y. Su, Z. Li, and X. Chen, “Adaptive
positive-definite matrix P̄i such that (33) holds. Define the estimated inverse output-feedback quantized control for piezoelectric
following quadratic function: positioning stage,” IEEE Trans. Cybern., vol. 49, no. 6, pp. 2106–2118,
Jun. 2019.
Vρ̂i = ρ̂iT P̄i ρ̂i . (41) [16] C. Wang, C. Wen, Y. Lin, and W. Wang, “Decentralized adaptive track-
ing control for a class of interconnected nonlinear systems with input
By using (40), the time derivative of Vρ̂i yields quantization,” Automatica, vol. 81, pp. 359–368, Jul. 2017.
[17] R. M. Sanne and M. J. Mears, “Stable adaptive tracking of uncertainty
 2   
V̇ρ̂i = −2ki ρ̂i  + 2ρ̂i P̄i Bi max /ki
systems using nonlinearty parameterized on-line approximators,” IEEE
Trans. Neural Netw., vol. 3, no. 6, pp. 837–863, Nov. 2010.
 2  2   2 [18] B. Erginer and E. Altuǧ, “Design and implementation of a hybrid fuzzy
≤ −2ki ρ̂i  + ki ρ̂i  + 2ki P̄i Bi max /ki2 logic controller for a quadrotor VTOL vehicle,” Int. J. Control Autom.,
     2 vol. 10, no. 1, pp. 61–70, Feb. 2012.
= −ki / λmax P̄i Vρ̂i + 2ki P̄i Bi max /ki2 . [19] Y. Wang, Q. Wu, and Y. Wang, “Consensus algorithm for multiple
quadrotor systems under fixed and switching topologies,” Syst. Eng.
Electron. J., vol. 24, no. 5, pp. 818–827, 2013.
Considering (32) and (41), one has [20] G. Nikolakopoulos and K. Alexis, “Switching networked attitude con-
trol of an unmanned quadrotor,” Int. J. Control Autom., vol. 11, no. 2,
Vρi = ρiT Pi ρi = ρ̂iT Pi ρ̂i = Vρ̂i ∀t ≥ 0 pp. 389–397, Apr. 2013.
[21] L. Xing, C. Wen, Y. Zhu, H. Su, and Z. Liu, “Output feedback control
where Pi = (−1 −1
i ) P̄i i . Therefore
T
for uncertain nonlinear systems with input quantization,” Automatica,
    2 vol. 65, no. 3, pp. 191–202, Mar. 2016.
V̇ρi ≤ −ki /λmax P̄i Vρi + 2ki P̄i Bi max /ki2 .
This completes the proof of (35).
R EFERENCES
[1] P. E. I. Pounds, D. R. Bersak, and A. M. Dollar, “Stability of small-
scale UAV helicopters and quadrotors with added payload mass under
PID control,” Auton. Robot., vol. 33, nos. 1–2, pp. 129–142, Aug. 2012.
[2] D. Chang and Y. Eun, “Global chartwise feedback linearization of the
quadcopter with a thrust positivity preserving dynamic extension,” IEEE
Trans. Autom. Control, vol. 62, no. 9, pp. 4747–4752, Sep. 2017.
[3] A. Das, K. Subbarao, and F. Lewis, “Dynamic inversion with zerody-
namics stabilisation for quadrotor control,” IET Control Theory Appl.,
vol. 3, no. 3, pp. 303–314, Mar. 2009.
[4] B. Mu, K. Zhang, and Y. Shi, “Integral sliding mode flight controller
design for a quadrotor and the application in a heterogeneous multi-agent
system,” IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., vol. 64, no. 12, pp. 9389–9398,
Dec. 2017.
[5] M. J. Reinoso, L. I. Minchala, P. Ortiz, D. F. Astudillo, and D. Verdugo,
“Trajectory tracking of a quadrotor using sliding mode control,” IEEE
Latin America Trans., vol. 14, no. 5, pp. 2157–2166, May 2016.
[6] N. Fethalla, H. Michalska, and J. Ghommam, “Robust observer-based
dynamic sliding mode controller for a quadrotor UAV,” IEEE Access,
vol. 6, pp. 45846–45859, 2018.
[7] C. Izaguirre-Espinosa, A. J. Muñoz-Vázquez, A. Sánchez-Orta,
V. Parra-Vega, and P. Castillo, “Attitude control of quadrotors based on
fractional sliding modes: Theory and experiments,” IET Control Theory
Appl., vol. 10, no. 7, pp. 825–832, Apr. 2016.
[8] K. Alexis, G. Nikolakopoulos, and A. Tzes, “Switching model predictive
attitude control for a quadrotor helicopter subject to atmospheric
disturbances,” Control Eng. Pract., vol. 19, no. 10, pp. 1195–1207,
Oct. 2011.
[9] K. Alexis, G. Nikolakopoulos, and A. Tzes, “Model predictive quadro-
tor control: Attitude, altitude and position experimental studies,” IET
Control Theory Appl., vol. 6, no. 12, pp. 1812–1827, Aug. 2012.
Authorized licensed use limited to: University of Exeter. Downloaded on June 18,2020 at 03:06:58 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
[22] J. Zhou, C. Wen, and G. Yang, “Adaptive backstepping stabilization of
nonlinear uncertain systems with quantized input signal,” IEEE Trans.
Autom. Control, vol. 59, no. 2, pp. 460–464, Feb. 2014.
[23] M. Fu and L. Xie, “The sector bound approach to quantized feedback
control,” IEEE Trans. Autom. Control, vol. 50, no. 11, pp. 1698–1711,
Nov. 2005.
[24] D. Liberzon, “Finite data-rate feedback stabilization of switched
and hybrid linear systems,” Automatica, vol. 50, no. 2, pp. 409–420,
Feb. 2014.
[25] F. Ceragioli, C. D. Persis, and P. Frasca, “Discontinuities and hys-
teresis in quantized average consensus,” Automatica, vol. 47, no. 9,
pp. 1919–1928, Sep. 2011.
[26] Y. M. Li, S. C. Tong, and T. S. Li, “Hybrid fuzzy adaptive output
feedback control design for uncertain MIMO nonlinear systems with
time-varying delays and input saturation,” IEEE Trans. Fuzzy Syst.,
vol. 24, no. 4, pp. 841–853, Aug. 2016.
[27] Y. J. Liu, S. C. Tong, C. L. P. Chen, and D. J. Li, “Adaptive NN
control using integral barrier Lyapunov functionals for uncertain nonlin-
ear block-triangular constraint systems,” IEEE Trans. Cybern., vol. 47,
no. 11, pp. 3747–3757, Nov. 2017.
[28] Y. M. Li, K. K. Sun, and S. C. Tong, “Observer-based adaptive fuzzy
fault-tolerant optimal control for SISO nonlinear systems,” IEEE Trans.
Cybern., vol. 49, no. 2, pp. 649–661, Feb. 2019.
[29] Y. Xu, R. Lu, H. Peng, and S. Xie, “Filtering for fuzzy systems with
multiplicative sensor noises and multi-density quantizer,” IEEE Trans.
Fuzzy Syst., vol. 26, no. 2, pp. 1011–1022, Feb. 2018.
[30] Z. Li and J. Shan, “Inverse compensation based synchronization con-
trol of the Piezo-actuated Fabry–Perot spectrometer,” IEEE Trans. Ind.
Electron., vol. 64, no. 11, pp. 8588–8597, Nov. 2017.
[31] R. Dong, Y. Tan, and Q. Tan, “Mirror angle tuning of elec-
tromagnetic micro-mirrors with oscillation compensation,” IEEE
Trans. Syst., Man, Cybern., Syst., early access, May 9, 2018,
doi: 10.1109/TSMC.2018.2829849.
[32] Q. Cao, Y. Tan, R. Dong, and W. Shen, “A modeling method of
electromagnetic micromirror in random noisy environment,” IEEE
Trans. Syst., Man, Cybern., Syst., early access, Apr. 23, 2018,
doi: 10.1109/TSMC.2018.2822736.
 This article has been accepted for inclusion in a future issue of this journal. Content is final as presented, with the exception of pagination.
12
[33] D. Swaroop, J. C. Gerdes, P. P. Yip, and J. K. Hedrick, “Dynamic surface
control for a class of nonlinear systems,” IEEE Trans. Autom. Control,
vol. 45, no. 10, pp. 1893–1899, Oct. 2000.
[34] J. J. Xiong and E. H. Zheng, “Position and attitude tracking control for
a quadrotor UAV,” ISA Trans., vol. 53, no. 3, pp. 725–731, May 2014.
[35] E. H. Zheng and J. J. Xiong, “Quad-rotor unmanned helicopter control
via novel robust terminal sliding mode controller and under-actuated
system sliding mode controller,” Int. J. Light Electron Opt., vol. 125,
no. 12, pp. 2817–2825, Jun. 2014.
[36] H. Bouadi, M. Bouchoucha, and M. Tadjine, “Sliding mode control
based on backstepping approach for an UAV type-quadrotor,” World
Academy Sci. Eng. Technol., vol. 26, no. 5, pp. 22–27, Jan. 2007.
[37] Z. Zuo, “Trajectory tracking control design with command-filtered com-
pensation for a quadrotor,” IET Control Theory Appl., vol. 4, no. 11,
pp. 2343–2355, Dec. 2010.
[38] T. Dierks and S. Jagannathan, “Output feedback control of a quadrotor
UAV using neural networks,” IEEE Trans. Neural Netw., vol. 21, no. 1,
pp. 50–66, Jan. 2009.
[39] T. Hayakawaa, H. Ishii, and K. Tsumurac, “Adaptive quantized control
for linear uncertain discrete-time systems,” Automatica, vol. 45, no. 3,
pp. 692–700, Mar. 2009.
[40] T. Hayakawaa, H. Ishii, and K. Tsumurac, “Adaptive quantized con-
trol for nonlinear uncertain systems,” Syst. Control Lett., vol. 58, no. 9,
pp. 625–632, Sep. 2009.
[41] S. C. Tong, C. L. Liu, and Y. M. Li, “Fuzzy adaptive decentral-
ized output-feedback control for large-scale nonlinear systems with
dynamical uncertainties,” IEEE Trans. Fuzzy Syst., vol. 18, no. 5,
pp. 845–861, Oct. 2010.
[42] S. C. Tong, C. L. Liu, and Y. M. Li, “Adaptive fuzzy decentralized
control for large-scale nonlinear systems with time-varying delays and
unknown high-frequency gain sign,” IEEE Trans. Syst., Man, Cybern.,
Cybern., vol. 41, no. 2, pp. 474–485, Apr. 2011.
[43] S. S. Ge, C. C. Hang, and T. H. Lee, Stable Adaptive Neural Network
Control. New York, NY, USA: Springer, 2013.
[44] X. Y. Zhang, Y. Lin, and J. G. Wang, “High-gain observer based
decentralized output feedback control for Interconnected nonlinear
systems with unknown hysteresis Input,” Int. J. Control, vol. 86, no. 6,
pp. 1046–1059, Jan. 2013.
[45] W. Chenliang and L. Yan, “Adaptive dynamic surface control for lin-
ear multivariable systems,” Automatica, vol. 46, no. 10, pp. 1703–1711,
Oct. 2010.
[46] M. Krstic, I. Kanellakopoulos, and P. V. Kokotovic, “Nonlinear design
of adaptive controllers for linear systems,” IEEE Trans. Autom. Control,
vol. 39, no. 4, pp. 738–752, Apr. 1994.
[47] F. Esfandiari and H. K. Khalil, “Output feedback stabilization of fully
linearizable systems,” Int. J. Control, vol. 56, no. 5, pp. 1007–1037,
Apr. 1992.
[48] G. Farid, H. W. Mo, A. H. Baqar, and S. M. Ali, “Comprehensive
modelling and static feedback linearization-based trajectory tracking
control of a quadrotor UAV,” Mechatron. Syst. Control, vol. 46, no. 3,
pp. 97–106, Jun. 2018.
[49] S. Srivastava, A. Misra, S. K. Thakur, and V. S. Pandit, “An optimal PID
controller via LQR for standard second order plus time delay systems,”
ISA Trans., vol. 60, no. 1, pp. 244–253, Jan. 2016.
[50] J. J. E. Slotine and W. Li, Applied Nonlinear Control. Englewood Cliffs,
NJ, USA: Prentice-Hall, 1991.
[51] P. A. Ioannou and J. Sun, Robust Adaptive Control. Upper Saddle River,
NJ, USA: Prentice-Hall, 1996.
[52] J. G. Liu, Q. Gao, Z. W. Liu, and Y. M. Li, “Attitude control for astronaut
assisted robot in the space station,” Int. J. Control Autom. Syst., vol. 14,
no. 4, pp. 1082–1095, Jun. 2016.
[53] Q. Gao, J. G. Liu, T. T. Tian, and Y. M. Li, “Free-flying dynam-
ics and control of an astronaut assistant robot based on fuzzy sliding
mode algorithm,” Acta Astronautica, vol. 138, no. 9, pp. 462–474,
Sep. 2017.
[54] S. C. Tong, S. Sui, and Y. M. Li, “Fuzzy adaptive output feed-
back control of MIMO nonlinear systems with partial tracking errors
constrained,” IEEE Trans. Fuzzy Syst., vol. 23, no. 4, pp. 729–742,
Aug. 2015.
[55] S. C. Tong, L. L. Zhang, and Y. M. Li, “Observed-based adaptive
fuzzy decentralized tracking control for switched uncertain nonlinear
large-scale systems with dead zones,” IEEE Trans. Syst., Man, Cybern.,
Cybern., vol. 46, no. 1, pp. 37–47, Jan. 2016.
Authorized licensed use limited to: University of Exeter. Downloaded on June 18,2020 at 03:06:58 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON CYBERNETICS
Xiuyu Zhang (Member, IEEE) was born in Jilin
City, China. He received the B.S. and M.S. degrees
from Northeast Dianli University, Jilin City, in
2003 and 2006, respectively, and the Ph.D. degree
from the Beijing University of Aeronautics and
Astronautics, Beijing, China, in 2012.
He is currently a Professor with the School of
Automation Engineering, Northeast Electric Power
University, Jilin City, where he is also with the
Department of Jilin Province International Research
Center of Precision Drive and Intelligent Control.
His research interest includes robust and adaptive control for nonlinear
systems.
Yue Wang was born in Jilin City, China. He received
the B.S. degree from the Hebei University of
Engineering, Handan, China, in 2015, and the M.S.
degree from Northeast Electric Power University,
Jilin City, in 2019, where he is currently pursuing
the Doctoral degree.
His research interest includes robust and adaptive
control for nonlinear systems.
Guoqiang Zhu was born in Heze, China. He
received the B.S. and M.S. degrees from Northeast
Electric Power University, Jilin City, China, in
2003 and 2007, respectively, and the Ph.D. degree
from the Beijing University of Aeronautics and
Astronautics, Beijing, China, in 2015.
He is currently an Associate Professor with
the School of Automation Engineering, Northeast
Electric Power University, where he is also with
with the Department of Jilin Province International
Research Center of Precision Drive and Intelligent
Control. His research interest includes robust and adaptive control for
nonlinear systems.
Xinkai Chen (Senior Member, IEEE) received
the Ph.D. degree in engineering from Nagoya
University, Nagoya, Japan, in 1999.
He is currently a Professor with the Department
of Electronic and Information Systems, Shibaura
Institute of Technology, Tokyo, Japan. His research
interests include adaptive control, smart materials,
hysteresis, sliding-mode control, machine vision,
and observer.
Prof. Chen has served as an Associate
Editor for several journals, including the IEEE
T RANSACTIONS ON AUTOMATIC C ONTROL, the IEEE T RANSACTIONS ON
C ONTROL S YSTEMS T ECHNOLOGY, the IEEE/ASME T RANSACTIONS ON
M ECHATRONICS, and the European Journal of Control. He has also served
for international conferences as organizing committee members, including
the Program Chairs and Program Co-Chairs.
Zhi Li (Member, IEEE) received the Ph.D. degree in
mechanical engineering from Concordia University,
Montreal, QC, Canada, in 2015.
He was a Postdoctoral Research Fellow with the
Eindhoven University of Technology, Eindhoven,
The Netherlands, from 2015 to 2016, and York
University, Toronto, ON, Canada, from 2016
to 2017. He was an Alexander von Humboldt
Research Fellow with the University of Magdeburg,
Magdeburg, Germany. He is currently a Professor
with the State Key Laboratory of Synthetical
Automation for Process Industries, Northeastern University, Jilin City, China.
His research interests include dynamics and control of smart actuators and
hysteresis modeling and compensation.
 This article has been accepted for inclusion in a future issue of this journal. Content is final as presented, with the exception of pagination.
ZHANG et al.: COMPOUND ADAPTIVE FUZZY QUANTIZED CONTROL
Chenliang Wang (Member, IEEE) was born
in Hunan, China, in 1986. He received the
B.Eng. and Ph.D. degrees from the School of
Automation Science and Electrical Engineering,
Beihang University, Beijing, China, in 2008 and
2013, respectively.
He is currently a Lecturer with Beihang
University. From 2015 to 2016, he was a Visiting
Scholar with the National University of Singapore,
Singapore. His research interests include adaptive
control, fault-tolerant control, multivariable systems,
and multiagent systems.
Authorized licensed use limited to: University of Exeter. Downloaded on June 18,2020 at 03:06:58 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
13
Chun-Yi Su (Senior Member, IEEE) received the
Ph.D. degree in control engineering from the South
China University of Technology, Guangdong, China,
in 1990.
After a seven-year stint with the University of
Victoria, Victoria, BC, Canada, he joined Concordia
University, Montreal, QC, Canada, in 1998, where
he is currently a Professor of mechanical and indus-
trial engineering and holds the Concordia University
Research Chair in Control. He has also held several
short-time visiting positions, including the Chang
Jiang Chair Professorship by China’s Ministry of Education and JSPS
Invitation Fellowship from Japan. He has authored or coauthored over 300
publications, which have appeared in journals, as book chapters and in con-
ference proceedings. His research covers control theory and its applications
to various mechanical systems, with a recent focus on control of systems
involving hysteresis nonlinearities.
Prof. Su has served as an Associate Editor for the IEEE T RANSACTIONS
ON AUTOMATIC C ONTROL and the IEEE T RANSACTIONS ON C ONTROL
S YSTEMS T ECHNOLOGY. He has been on the editorial board of 18 journals,
including IFAC’s Mechatronics. He has also been an organizing committee
member many conferences.