2022 Latin American Robotics Symposium (LARS), 2022 Brazilian Symposium on Robotics (SBR), and 2022 Workshop on Robotics
in Education (WRE) | 978-1-6654-6280-8/22/$31.00 ©2022 IEEE | DOI: 10.1109/LARS/SBR/WRE56824.2022.9995744
Tuning of FP-PID Controller based on PSO
Algorithm Applied to a Human Gait
Rodrigo B. de Medeiros, Daniel M. Muñoz
Department of Mechanical Engineering, Mechatronics Graduate Program, Automation and Control Group/GRACO
University of Brasilia, Brasilia, DF, Brazil
Email:rodrigo.medeiros@aluno.unb.br, damuz@unb.br
Abstract—Robotic manipulators are multi-input multi-output
(MIMO) systems with nonlinear points affected by numerous
uncertainties and disturbances. PID controllers are widely used
in industry for kinematic and dynamic control. However, when
applied to MIMO systems, they are not easy to tune and require
performance improvements. In this work, a PID controller is
proposed with a fuzzy precompensator (FP-PID), both tuned by
the bioinspired particle swarm optimization (PSO) algorithm to a
two-degree of freedom (2-DOF) robotic manipulator representing
a human leg. To validate the system, two real datasets of human
gait were used: normal walking and stair climbing to estimate
the error trajectory of the manipulator. The statistical analysis
of the PSO algorithm with 16 experiments was satisfactory, and
the addition of the fuzzy precompensator to the conventional PID
resulted in a reduction of the mean square error of one of the
manipulator links by up to 73 percent.
Index Terms—Fuzzy precompensated PID controller, Fuzzy
logic controller, 2-DOF Robotic manipulator, PSO, Human Gait.
I. I NTRODUCTION
Robotic manipulators can be used in many fields, from
traditional industry to nuclear and medical applications, and
require efficient controls for precise positioning and movement
of links. However, these mechanisms have characteristics that
affect their performance. This means that conventional PID
controllers, while easy to implement and widely used in
practice, perform poorly when applied directly to systems
with significant nonlinearities. With the advent of the concept
of fuzzy sets, several researches have been conducted to
show that fuzzy controllers provide better results compared to
conventional control approaches [1]. In [2], a fuzzy controller
was used along with a compensation term for a lower limb
exoskeleton system. In [3], a fuzzy logic-based approach to
precompensation of PID controllers for servo motors was pre-
sented. In [4], the authors use the precompensation approach
of [3] to develop a FOFP-FOPID, a fractional-order fuzzy
controller coupled with a PID controller also of fractional
order, for the motion of a robotic manipulator with 2 degrees
of freedom. To tune the parameters, the author used a hybrid
bioinspired algorithm based on an artificial bee colony (ABC)
and genetic algorithms (GA).
Robotic manipulators are used as models for rehabilitation
in various human conditions. In [5], the author proposes a
978-1-6654-6280-8/22/$31.00 ©2022 IEEE
109
Authorized licensed use limited to: FUDAN UNIVERSITY. Downloaded on February 25,2023 at 04:33:12 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
low-cost command and control unit used in an exoskeleton
leg specifically designed for individuals with neurological
disorders. In [6], the author designs a new hydraulic system
with the goal of reducing the power consumption of a leg
exoskeleton.
Tuning manipulators are complex because they are nonlinear
and have multi-input multi-output (MIMO). One strategy to
overcome this problem is tuning with bioinspired algorithms.
In [7], the ABC algorithm was chosen to tune a 4 DOF robotic
manipulator. In [8], a real-time machine learning control
(MLC) of robotic manipulators was presented, also using the
ABC algorithm in conjunction with fuzzy theory.
The identification of locomotion modes for exoskeleton
control is presented in [9], where the authors use the parti-
cle swarm optimization (PSO) algorithm to obtain the best
parameters for a support vector machine (SVM) to identify
the gait mode.
The contributions of this article are: (a) the use of two real
human gait datasets to validate the motion of a 2-DOF robotic
manipulator; (b) the insertion of a fuzzy precompensator to
improve the trajectory of the robotic manipulator validated
using the human gait datasets; (c) the use of a bioinspired
optimization algorithm in two phases, one for PID tuning, the
other for fuzzy precompensator tuning, which are discussed in
the following sections.
II. T WO - DEGREE OF FREEDOM ROBOTIC M ANIPULATOR
Simply put, a human leg can be modeled using a controller
with two-degree of freedom (2-DOF), as shown in Fig. 1.
The controller has two links with respective length l1 and l2 ,
masses m1 and m2 , and angular positions θ1 and θ2 . The
torque τ is then applied to each link to start the motion. The
dynamic model for two links describing the movements of the
manipulator is given by the equation (1),
τ = M (θ)θ̈ + C(θ, θ̇) + G(θ), (1)
where M (θ) ϵ ℜn×n is the positive matrix of the system,
˙ ϵ ℜn×1 is the vector representing the effects of the
C(θ, θ)
centrifugal and Coriolis forces, G(θ) ϵ ℜn×1 is the vector for
the effect of gravitational momentum, τ ϵ ℜn×1 is the vector
for the torques in the links, and θ, θ̇, θ̈ are a representation of
the position, velocity, and angular accelerations in each link.
The calculation of the differential equation is shown below,

 
Fig. 1: The 2-DOF planar robot manipulator.
τ1 = m2 l22 (θ¨1
+ θ¨2 ) + m2 l1 l2 c2 (2θ¨1 + θ¨2 )
+ (m1 +2 )l12 θ¨1 · · ·
− m2 l1 l2 s2 θ˙22 − 2m2 l1 l2 s2 θ˙1 θ˙2 · · ·
+ m2 l2 gc12 + (m1 + m2 )l1 gc1 ,
τ2 = m2 l1 l2 c2 θ¨1 + m2 l1 l2 s2 θ˙12 · · ·
+ m2 l1 gc12 + m2 l2 (θ¨1 + θ¨2 ),
With s2 = sin(θ2 ), c1 = cos(θ1 ), c2 = cos(θ2 ) and
c12 = cos(θ1 + θ2 ). The indices on the variables denote
the parameters of link 1 and 2 [9]. The values used for
the simulation were derived from two biomechanical data
of human gait, the normal gait [10] and the stair climbing
condition [11]. We used l1 = 0.314 m, l2 = 0.425 m, m1 =
5.670 kg, m2 = 2.636 kg for both datasets.
III. F UZZY P RECOMPENSATED P ROPORTIONAL I NTEGRAL
D ERIVATIVE
The fuzzy-compensated proportional-integral-derivate con-
troller (FP-PID) presented in this paper consists of two com-
ponents: the fuzzy precompensator and the conventional PID
controller, as shown in Fig. 2. The first component modifies the
control signal to compensate for errors in the output responses,
while the second component controls the robotic manipulator
variables θ1 (t) and θ2 (t), given in radians, to approach the
desired value for the human gaits θd1 (t) and θd2 (t) [4]. The
equations describing these dynamics are shown below, where
n = 1, 2 represents link 1 and 2.
en (t) = θdn (t) − θn (t).
∆en (t) = en (t) − en (t − 1).
where en (t) is the difference between the desired trajectory
value θdn (t) and the initial manipulator value θn (t). ∆en (t)
is the difference between the current and the previous error.
The estimation of en (t) and ∆en (t) are important to define
Authorized licensed use limited to: FUDAN UNIVERSITY. Downloaded on February 25,2023 at 04:33:12 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
the inputs of the fuzzy system, which provide from its control
bases the output that is added to θdn and produces the
precompensated value θpren (t), as shown in (6),
θpren (t) = KSn F LCn (en (t), ∆en (t)) + θdn (t). (6)
The new error, e′n (t),
for the PID controller input is the
difference between the modified desired position, θpren (t),
and the current plant position, θn (t),
e′n (t) = θpren (t) − θn (t). (7)
The torque τ (t) supplied to the manipulator is calculated
using the conventional PID formula shown below,
Z
τ (t) = KP n e′n (t) + KDn ∆e′n (t) + KIn e′n (t)dt. (8)
(2)
Finally, the generated torque is processed by the plant to
calculate θ1 (t) and θ2 (t) positions for manipulator movement
and control system feedback.
IV. P ROPOSED F UZZY LOGIC PRECOMPENSATOR
Fuzzy logic controllers (FLC) have been explored in con-
junction with traditional PID controllers because they offer
many advantages, such as the inclusion of human expertise,
(3) the fact that an exact dynamic model is not required, and the
reduced development effort and maintenance costs. A fuzzy
set is a set in which degrees of membership other than 0
and 1 are allowed, unlike a binary set. Vague expressions can
be represented by membership functions (MF), for example:
very large, large, not very large. FLCs have three main blocks:
Fuzzification, fuzzy inference associated with a set of rules,
and defuzzification [12]. Fig. 3 shows the block diagram.
A. Fuzzification
The fuzzification step consists of converting the input crisp
variable into a linguistic variable by membership functions.
There are several of these functions, e.g., triangular, trape-
zoidal, Gaussian, and others. For each link, there is one FLC
and the inputs are normalized en (t) and ∆en (t). The Fig. 4
shows the triangular MFs used in this work for both the inputs
(antecedent) and the output ( consequent ), which varies from
[-1.0, 1.0]. The seven linguistic variables are: NB ( Negative -
Large ), NM ( Negative - Medium ), NS ( Negative - Small ),
ZE ( Zero ), PB ( Positive - Large ), NM ( Positive - Medium
), NS ( Positive - Small ) [3].
B. Fuzzy inference
(4) Fuzzy inference generates the appropriate control action
from the rule base of Table I. There are two types: Mamdani
(5) and Takagi-Sugeno. In this work, Mamdani was used.
This association is based on human expertise or experimen-
tation. There are a total of 27 rules of antecedent association
for generating the consequent. For example, ”IF e is ZE and
∆e is NM, THEN the output is NM”. This control is used to
compensate for past errors such as the cumulative error and the
110
 Fuzzy Pre-compensator PID Controller

Fig. 2: FP-PID controller diagram for 2-DOF manipulator.

0.5

Control output
0

Fig. 3: FLC block diagram. -0.5

1
NB NM NS Z0 PS PM PB
1 0.5 1
0 0.5
0
-0.5
0.8 -0.5
-1 -1 e
Degree of membership

0.6

0.4
Fig. 5: Surface plot MFs.

0.2

average of maxima. In this work, the centroid is used. The

0 centroid is the arithmetic mean between the centroids of the
-1 -0.5 0 0.5 1 fuzzy sets to which the element belongs, weighted by the
degree of membership, as given in equation (9),
Fig. 4: Membership functions.
j j
! !
X X
crisp = µi .ci / µi , (9)
overshoot [3]. Fig. 5 illustrates the surface of the relationship i=1 i=1
between the antecedents and the consequents for FLC. where crisp is the output of the defuzzifier, j is the number
TABLE I: Rule base. of fuzzy sets to which the element belongs, and µi and ci
are the degree of membership and the centroid to which the
e/∆e NB NM NS ZE PS PM PB element belongs, respectively. The triangular MF fuzzification
NB NB NB
NM NB NB NB and the centroid defuzzification were used for simplicity for
NS NB NM NM NM PM an embedded hardware solution, as shown in [13], [14], [15].
ZE NB NM NS ZE PS PM PB
PS NM PS PS PM V. PARTICLE SWARM OPTIMIZATION
PM PM PB PB
PB PM PM PB In the Particle Swarm Optimization (PSO) algorithm, de-
veloped by Kennedy and Eberhart and inspired by the social
behavior of flocks of birds, each individual is called a particle
C. Defuzzification and the total population is a swarm. The advantages of the
Defuzzification is the conversion of linguistic variables algorithm are its global search capabilities and its simple
into crisp output used in precompensation. There are several implementation that does not require gradient calculations.
possible methods, including: centroid, center of maxima, and The ultimate goal is to maximize or minimize a cost function,

111
Authorized licensed use limited to: FUDAN UNIVERSITY. Downloaded on February 25,2023 at 04:33:12 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
where the position of a particle is a possible solution to the algorithm to tune them [9] and the dataset we resort to is the
problem. The following equations show the mathematical basis normal gait. Since there are two links with three parameters
of the algorithm, each, this is a 6-dimensional optimization problem. The search
space has been restricted to [0;350] for KP n and [0;50] for
(t+1) (t+1)
xij = xtij + vij , (10) KDn and KIn . The set of these values must minimize the cost
function given by (12),
inertia cognitive component social component
z }| { z }| { z }| { v
(i+1) (i) (i) (i) (i) (i) u k
vij = wvij + c1 U1j (yij − xij ) + c2 U2j (ysj − xij ) . u1 X
(11) cfan =t (θdn,k − θn,k )2 , (12)
k i=1
where i is the current iteration and vij and xij are the velocity
and position of a particle. Equation (10) represents the updates which represents the root mean square error (RMSE), i.e., the
of positions in the N -dimensional search space as a function statistical metric of the error between the desired value θdn
of velocity. The variable yij is the best individual position, and the value obtained from the plant θn . Another important
ysj is the global best position among all particles, c1 is the metric is the cfbn overshoot, which indicates how much the
cognitive coefficient, c2 is the social coefficient, and U1 and signal exceeds the desired value as below,
U2 are uniformly distributed random numbers between 0 and
1. The inertia factor w, which decreases linearly during the ||max(θn )| − |θdn ||
execution of the algorithm, is used to refine a solution during cfbn = . (13)
|θdn |
the final iterations. Equation (11) shows how these velocities
are updated as a function of the above parameters. A high The final fitness function is given by Equation (14),
c1 indicates greater confidence in the individual experience
represented by the cognitive component, and c2 expresses f itness = min q1 .cfa1 + q2 .cfb1 + q3 .cfa2 + q4 .cfb2 , (14)
greater confidence in the swarm represented by the social
component [16]. The pseudocode of the PSO is presented in Here, the weights q1 = 0.3, q2 = 0.2, q3 = 0.3, and q4 = 0.2
Algorithm 1 and consists of three steps: Evaluating and finding are assigned to the sum of the RMSE values and the overshoots
the best individual position, finding the global best position, of link 1 and 2. The values q1 and q3 are larger to ensure
and updating the parameters and particles in the search space. greater significance for the RMSE metric.
B. Optimization problem formulation for FLC tuning
Algorithm 1 Particle swarm optimization algorithm
FLC adjustment is applied only to parameters KS1 and
Require: S, N, C1 , C2 , xmax , vmax , M AXiter , threshold
KS2 , since this variable is a scaling factor for the controller
Ensure: gbest and f (gbest )
output that affects precompensation. Instead of starting from
Initialization ▷ swarm startup
the initial and final points of the dataset as in PID, the robotic
while f (ys < threshold) do
manipulator is sampled point by point at each iteration to
for k = 1 to S do ▷ finding the best individual
generate a set of solutions for the entire system. For this
if f (xk ) ≤ f (yik ) then
purpose, the entire human gait dataset is used, consisting of
yik = xk
106 values for θd1 and θd2 obtained at 1.5 second intervals.
end if
Thus, in the FLC scenario, the cost function is the sum of the
end for
RSME of the individual links.
calculate ys using the S values f (yik ) ▷ best global
for k = 1 to S do ▷ update VI. R ESULTS
for j = 1 to N do To modularize the process, the settings of the FLC and
vkj = wvkj + c1 U1 (yikj − xkj ) + c2 U2 (xsj − xkj ) PID modules are independent of each other and each has
xkj = xkj + vkj its own specifics. However, the PSO parameters are used
end for in common, such as: the cognitive and social coefficients
Check bounds c1 = 2.0, c2 = 2.1 and the inertia factor w, which takes
end for values between 0.9 and 0.1, with a constant decay rate as a
end while function of the number of iterations. Sixteen experiments were
performed to statistically validate the processes.
A. Optimization problem formulation for PID tuning A. PID controller tuning
PID controllers require optimal values for their tuning The simulation consisted of 100 particles with 100 iterations
parameters, i.e., the proportional constant KP n , the integral in each experiment. The algorithm fetches the PID parameters
constant KIn , and the derivative constant KDn . However, from a set point for each link, where [3.184; 2.993] are the
since there are hardly any well-defined mathematical models initial and set points for θ1 and [0.815; 0.295] for θ2 , both
for MIMO robotic manipulators, in this work we use the PSO given in radians.

112
Authorized licensed use limited to: FUDAN UNIVERSITY. Downloaded on February 25,2023 at 04:33:12 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 The statistical values for the mean, median, minimum, and
1.2 -0.5
standard deviation of the cost function with respect to the 16 Database
experiments are shown in Table II. The values for the PID 1
Manipulator
-0.6
parameters for the minimum value are given in Table III.
-0.7
0.8
TABLE II: Statistics for PID tuning. -0.8
0.6
Stats Mean Median Minimum Standard deviation
-0.9
Fitness 0.460 0.461 0.460 0.001
0.4
-1

0.2
-1.1
TABLE III: PID parameters for link 1 and 2.
0 -1.2
KP 1 KD1 KI1 KP 2 KD2 KI2
338.423 49.996 45.553 336.057 44.293 44.592 -0.2 -1.3
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6
time(s)
After tuning, the trajectory curves of the manipulator with-
out precompensation is shown together with the normal gait Fig. 7: θ2 curve without precompensator.
dataset reference in Fig. 6 for θ1 and in Fig. 7 for θ2 shown
in blue. To validate the result with the obtained parameters,
3.3 5
the results is tested under stair climbing conditions (upstairs) Database
and shown in orange. Manipulator
4.8
3.2

4.6
3.3 5 3.1
Database
4.4
Manipulator
4.8 3
3.2
4.2
4.6
3.1 2.9
4
4.4
3 2.8
3.8
4.2

2.9 2.7 3.6

0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6
4
time(s)

2.8
3.8 Fig. 8: θ1 curve with precompensator.
2.7 3.6
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6
time(s) 1.2 -0.5
Database
Manipulator
Fig. 6: θ1 curve without precompensator. 1 -0.6

-0.7
0.8

-0.8
B. FLC tuning 0.6
-0.9
The simulation includes 20 particles and 10 iterations in
0.4
each experiment. These numbers are smaller than for PID -1
tuning because each iteration is computationally high. The 0.2
search space was [0.5;1.5] for KS1 and KS2 . -1.1

Table IV exhibits the statistical values and Fig. 8 and 9, 0 -1.2

respectively, show the trajectory curves of θ1 and θ2 with
precompensation, where KS1 = 1.213 and KS2 = 1.167 are -0.2 -1.3
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6
given for the best overall result. time(s)

TABLE IV: Statistics for FLC tuning. Fig. 9: θ2 curve with precompensator.

Stats Mean Median Minimum Standard deviation

Fitness 0.078 0.079 0.078 0.001 VII. DISCUSSIONS AND CONCLUSIONS
Table V shows the RMSE and improvement of each gait
with their respective links, and Fig. 8 and 9 show that there

113
Authorized licensed use limited to: FUDAN UNIVERSITY. Downloaded on February 25,2023 at 04:33:12 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
was an improvement with the addition of the fuzzy precom- dynamic control analysis of the robotic manipulators. Another
pensator. The improvement was over 50% in all conditions important point for future applications is the development of an
and even reached 73.846% for link 1 of the normal gait. embedded system for the design of the manipulator, focusing
on the implementation of the fuzzy controller in hardware, e.g.,
TABLE V: RMSE without and with precompensator. with a Field Programmable Gate Array (FPGA) to reduce the
Link/RMSE Without With Improvement % response time.
Normal gait θ1 0.130 0.034 73.846 R EFERENCES
Normal gait θ2 0.271 0.113 50.302
[1] A. Kumar and V. Kumar, “Evolving an interval type-2 fuzzy PID
Upstairs θ1 0.245 0.097 60.408 controller for the redundant robotic manipulator,” Expert Syst. Appl.,
Upstairs θ2 0.222 0.079 64.414 vol. 73, pp. 161–177, 2017.
[2] W. Sun, J.-W. Lin, S.-F. Su, N. Wang, and M. J. Er, “Reduced
adaptive fuzzy decoupling control for lower limb exoskeleton,” IEEE
Nevertheless, better results were obtained in other studies. Transactions on Cybernetics, vol. 51, no. 3, pp. 1099–1109, 2021.
For example, in [9], the author applied the multiobjective [3] J.-H. Kim, K.-C. Kim, and E. Chong, “Fuzzy precompensated PID
algorithm NSGA-II without precompensation to tune the same controllers,” IEEE Transactions on Control Systems Technology, vol. 2,
no. 4, pp. 406–411, 1994.
manipulator used in this work and obtained more satisfactory [4] “Hybridized ABC-GA optimized fractional order fuzzy pre-compensated
results in terms of approximating the manipulator trajectory FOPID control design for 2-DOF robot manipulator,” AEU - Interna-
to the one originally desired. In [4], the author also used tional Journal of Electronics and Communications, vol. 79, pp. 219–233,
2017.
the same manipulator but tuned it with the ABC-GA hybrid [5] S. Dumitru, C. Copilusi, and N. Dumitru, “A leg exoskeleton command
algorithm with precompensation and obtained better results. unit for human walking rehabilitation,” in 2018 IEEE International
Nevertheless, in both studies the desired trajectories were Conference on Automation, Quality and Testing, Robotics (AQTR), 2018,
pp. 1–6.
modeled as polynomial functions with predictable behavior. [6] Y. Yang, X. Dong, X. Liu, and D. Huang, “Robust repetitive learning-
To our knowledge, no other study has used a real human gait based trajectory tracking control for a leg exoskeleton driven by hybrid
dataset to tune a fuzzy PID controller with precompensation hydraulic system,” IEEE Access, vol. 8, pp. 27 705–27 714, 2020.
[7] M. H. Mohd Zaman, M. F. Ibrahim, and A. Moubark, “Dimensional
for a 2-DOF robotic manipulator. It is important to highlight optimization of 4-DOF robot manipulator using artificial bee colony
that the proposed precompensation approach compensates for algorithm,” in 2021 International Conference on Electrical Engineering
the lack of generalization common to PID controllers for and Informatics (ICEEI), 2021, pp. 1–4.
[8] H.-C. Huang and C.-C. Chuang, “Artificial bee colony optimization
robotic manipulators. algorithm incorporated with fuzzy theory for real-time machine learning
Despite the improvement in RMSE for both links, it was control of articulated robotic manipulators,” IEEE Access, vol. 8, pp.
found that the torque of the controller with the precompensator 192 481–192 492, 2020.
[9] H. V. Hultmann Ayala and L. dos Santos Coelho, “Tuning of PID
fluctuated several times when trying to reach the set point for controller based on a multiobjective genetic algorithm applied to a
each point, as shown in Fig. 10 for link 1, which can cause robotic manipulator,” Expert Systems with Applications, vol. 39, no. 10,
damage to the actuators of the robotic manipulator. This was pp. 8968–8974, 2012.
[10] D. A. Winter, Appendix A: Kinematic, Kinetic, and Energy Data. John
also observed in [17] and in [9]. In the latter, multiobjective Wiley Sons, Ltd, 2009, pp. 296–360.
algorithms were used to smooth the torque. [11] Y. Luo, S. Coppola, P. Dixon, S. Li, J. Dennerlein, and B. Hu, “A
database of human gait performance on irregular and uneven surfaces
collected by wearable sensors,” Scientific Data, vol. 7, p. 219, 07 2020.
[12] Z. Kovacic and S. Bogdan, Fuzzy Controller Design: Theory and
4
Applications, ser. Automation and Control Engineering. Taylor &
Without precompensator
With precompensator Francis, 2005.
2 [13] T. Romeiro de Jesus and D. M. Muñoz, “Controle fuzzy embarcado em
arquiteturas reconfiguráveis para desvio de obstáculos em sistemas de
navegação para deficientes visuais,” in Anais do Simpósio Brasileiro de
0 Automação Inteligente - SBAI, 2017, pp. 1–6.
[14] T. Romeiro de Jesus, “Arquiteturas de hardware dedicadas de con-
troladores nebulosos para auxı́lio à locomoção de deficientes visuais,”
-2 Master’s Thesis, University of Brasilia, august 2017.
[15] P. Carvalho Faria, “Arquitetura de hardware para cálculo do centroide
aplicado a defuzzificação de sistemas nebulosos com inferência do tipo
-4
Mamdani,” Undergraduate Final Report, november 2021.
[16] J. Kennedy and R. Eberhart, “Particle swarm optimization,” in Proceed-
-6 ings of ICNN’95 - International Conference on Neural Networks, vol. 4,
1995, pp. 1942–1948 vol.4.
[17] Z. Bingül and O. Karahan, “A fuzzy logic controller tuned with PSO
-8 for 2 DOF robot trajectory control,” Expert Systems with Applications,
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6
vol. 38, no. 1, pp. 1017–1031, 2011.
time(s)
[18] U. Zakia, M. Moallem, and C. Menon, “PID-SMC controller for a 2-
DOF planar robot,” in 2019 International Conference on Electrical,
Fig. 10: τ1 curve with precompensator. Computer and Communication Engineering (ECCE), 2019, pp. 1–5.

For future work, sliding mode control (SMC) [18] and

multiobjective algorithms to minimize the error torque will be
used, improving results for human gait trajectory as well as for

114
Authorized licensed use limited to: FUDAN UNIVERSITY. Downloaded on February 25,2023 at 04:33:12 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.