Automatika

Journal for Control, Measurement, Electronics, Computing and

Communications

ISSN: 0005-1144 (Print) 1848-3380 (Online) Journal homepage: https://www.tandfonline.com/loi/taut20

An improved adaptive fuzzy backstepping

control for nonlinear mechanical systems with
mismatched uncertainties

Wan Min & Qingyou Liu

To cite this article: Wan Min & Qingyou Liu (2019) An improved adaptive fuzzy backstepping
control for nonlinear mechanical systems with mismatched uncertainties, Automatika, 60:1,
1-10, DOI: 10.1080/00051144.2018.1563357

To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/00051144.2018.1563357

© 2019 The Author(s). Published by Informa

UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis
Group

Published online: 02 Jan 2019.

Submit your article to this journal

Article views: 1693

View related articles

View Crossmark data

Citing articles: 8 View citing articles

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

https://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=taut20
AUTOMATIKA
2019, VOL. 60, NO. 1, 1–10
https://doi.org/10.1080/00051144.2018.1563357

REGULAR PAPER

An improved adaptive fuzzy backstepping control for nonlinear mechanical

systems with mismatched uncertainties
Wan Min and Qingyou Liu

School of Mechatronic Engineering, Southwest Petroleum University, Chengdu, People’s Republic of China

ABSTRACT ARTICLE HISTORY

When the nonlinear mechanical system has mismatched uncertainties, it is difficult to design Received 9 March 2018
control algorithm to achieve high precision trajectory tracking control. Traditional backstepping Accepted 2 July 2018
control is an effective control method for uncertain, mismatched nonlinear systems, but there KEYWORDS
is inherent problem of “complexity due to the explosion of terms”. In this paper, based on the Mismatched uncertainty;
backstepping method, only one fuzzy system is used to approximate the unknown nonlinear mechanical system;
functions, the unknown control gain and the differential of virtual control law of each subsystem. nonlinear; fuzzy system;
In order to reduce the influence of fuzzy approximation error and external interference, the above backstepping
control scheme is further improved by designing special adjustable control parameters and first
order low pass filter. The improved control scheme not only improves the control precision of
the system obviously, but also solves the problem of “explosion of terms”, and greatly reduces
the initial control input, and provides the conditions for the practical application. The simulation
results show the effectiveness of the proposed methods.

1. Introduction functions. The advantage of sliding mode controller

In mechanical system modelling, due to modelling
error, unknown physical phenomena (friction in
mechanical system), load variation and random distur-
bance, system uncertainty is unavoidable. The mechan-
ical system is mainly affected by the following two kinds
of uncertainties, the structured uncertainty, that is, the
parameter uncertainty, and the unstructured uncer-
tainty, such as the modelling error and the external
disturbance. Because of the existence of high nonlinear-
ity and uncertainty of the mechanical system, it is very
difficult for the design of the controller [1–4].
In the past few decades, the adaptive control tech-
nology for feedback linearization for nonlinear systems
has made remarkable progress [4–6]. The feedback lin-
earization requires the uncertainty to satisfy the linear
parameterized condition. However, most of the sys-
tems in practice can’t be linearized. Robust control
strategy has good control effect for structured uncer-
tain systems, but the premise is that the boundary of
uncertainty is known [1–2]. But in actual control, it is
often impossible to know the boundary of its structured
uncertainty.
Wang Li-Xin proposed adaptive fuzzy control by
using the fuzzy system to approximate the unknown
control law or the unknown nonlinear function
[7]. In literatures [8–12], an adaptive neural net-
work controller is designed by using a neural net-
work to approximate uncertain continuous nonlinear
is that it has strong robustness to disturbances and
unmodeled dynamics, so it has also been widely applied
[13–18]. However, all the above methods require that
the system meet an important condition, that is, the
unknown nonlinearity and the control input appear in
the same equation of the state space model, which is
usually regarded as the matching condition.
In the actual system, there is a large class of nonlin-
ear systems that do not meet the matching condition,
such as the system of the mechanical hand which driven
by the motor. For mismatched uncertainty nonlinear
systems, the Backstepping control is very effective and
has achieved great success [19–24]. Traditional back-
stepping control needs to repeated differentiations of
the virtual control law of the former subsystem. If there
is a nonlinear function in the virtual control, repeated
differentiations will lead to the problem of “explosion
of complexity” with the increase of the order of the
system. This makes high order systems face great dif-
ficulties in controller implementation. If the system has
parameters or structural uncertainties and external dis-
turbances, it will further lead to the difficulty in the
application of backstepping control.
Hedrick et al. proposed a dynamic surface con-
trol method (DSC), which can avoid the problem of
repeated differentiations by using n first order low pass
filters, has been widely used [25–27]. But DSC can’t
deal with the uncertainty problem. Since fuzzy systems

CONTACT Wan Min 18940103@qq.com School of Mechatronic Engineering, Southwest Petroleum University, Chengdu 610500, People’s
Republic of China
© 2019 The Author(s). Published by Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group
This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted
use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
2 W. MIN AND Q. LIU

and neural networks can approximate arbitrary nonlin- where 1 ≤ i ≤ n − 1, x1 , x2 , · · · , xn are the state vari-
ear functions with arbitrary precision, many literatures ables, u ∈ R, y ∈ R are input and output of the system,
have combined them with DSC or backstepping control respectively; ωi (t) is the unknown, but bounded exter-
in recent years [27–34]. nal disturbance, fi is the unknown smooth function,bi
Furthermore, in literatures [35–36], fuzzy system is the unknown control gain.
and backstepping control are used to control the
nonstrict-feedback stochastic nonlinear systems. In Assumption 2.1: There exist positive constants bim and
[37] both adaptive fuzzy state feedback and observer- biM such that 0 < bim ≤ |bi | ≤ biM , i = 1, 2, . . . , n.
based output feedback control design schemes are pro-
posed. Qi Zhou et al. proposed adaptive fuzzy tracking Assumption 2.2: For smooth nonlinear function f (x)
control for a class of pure-feedback nonlinear systems and fuzzy logic system, there exists optimal parameter
with time-varying delay and unknown dead zone [38]. θ ∗ which defined as θ ∗ = arg min[sup |f (x) − θ T ξ (x)|],
Shaocheng Tong et al. proposed an adaptive fuzzy θ∈0 x∈
output feedback control for a class of switched where 0 and  are the sets of boundedness of θ and x
nonstrict-feedback nonlinear systems in literatures respectively.
[39,40]. Yongming Li et al. proposed an adaptive fuzzy
fault-tolerant control of non-triangular structure non- Assumption 2.3: The reference signal yd (t) is a suf-
linear systems with error-constraint in [41], and robust ficiently smooth function of t, and yd (t), ẏd (t) are
adaptive output feedback control to a class of non- bounded.
triangular stochastic nonlinear systems was designed
in [42]. Control Objective. The control objective is to design an
Based on the above results, a novel adaptive fuzzy adaptive control scheme such that the output y(t) tracks
backstepping control method is studied in this paper, the desired trajectory yd (t) while ensuring the bound-
which is suitable for nonlinear mechanical systems with edness of all the closed-loop
mismatched uncertainties. In each subsystem, only one signals.
fuzzy system is used to approximate the unknown con- For convenience, symbols x̄i are introduced, where
trol gain, the unknown nonlinear function, and the x̄i = [x1 , x2 , · · · , xi ]T ∈ Ri , i = 1, 2, · · · , n.
differential of the virtual control of the former subsys- The system (1) does not satisfy the so-called
tem, and the control of the system is realized by the matching condition, and there are uncertain non-
backstepping method. The advantage of the proposed linear functions and unknown control gains, and at
control method is to compensate all the uncertainties the same time, it is affected by external interfer-
at the same time and avoid the inherent “explosion of ence, so it is difficult to achieve the above control
complexity” problem. By introducing special adjustable purposes.
control parameters, not only the control precision of the
system is greatly improved, and the initial control input
is significantly reduced. 3. Fuzzy system and its approximation
This paper is organized as follows: Problem state-
Fuzzy system with product inference, singleton fuzzi-
ment and preliminaries is described in Section 2. In
fier and center-average defuzzifier is a universal
Section 3 fuzzy system and its approximation is pre-
approximator. If the fuzzy rule has the following
sented. Control design is presented in Section 4. Sta-
form:
bility analysis and adaptive law design are proposed in j j j
IF x1 is F1 , and x2 is F2 , and . . . and xn is Fn , THEN
Section 5. The simulation results and conclusion are
y is Bj (j = 1, 2, · · · , N), where x = [x1 , x2 , · · · , xn ]T ∈
given in Sections 6 and 7, respectively.
Rn is the system input, y represents the output of the
j
system, Fi (i = 1, 2, · · · , n) and Bj stand for fuzzy sets,
2. Problem statement and preliminaries N stands for the number of fuzzy rules, the output of
fuzzy system can be expressed as:
Consider the following class of uncertain, mismatched
nonlinear mechanical systems, which has the strict-

N 
n
j
feedback structure: θj μi (xi )
⎧ j=1 i=1
⎪ ẋ1 (t) = b1 x2 (t) + f1 (x1 (t)) + ω1 (t) y(x) = (2)
⎪
⎪ 
N 
n
⎪
⎪ ẋ 2 (t) = b2 x3 (t) + f2 (x1 (t), x2 (t)) + ω2 (t)
j
μi (xi )
⎪
⎪
⎨ .. j=1 i=1
.
⎪
⎪ ẋ (t) = bi xi+1 (t)+fi (x1 (t), x2 (t), · · · , xi (t)) + ωi (t) j
⎪
⎪ i where θj = max Bj (y), μi (xi ) and Bj (y) denote Gaus-
⎪
⎪ ẋ (t) = bn u(t)+fn (x1 (t), x2 (t), · · · , xn (t)) + ωn (t) y∈R
⎪
⎩ n
y(t) = x1 (t) sian membership functions with respect to fuzzy sets
j
(1) Fi and Bj .
 AUTOMATIKA 3

Define fuzzy base functions as: Define en = xn − αn−1 for the final subsystem, and
then we can have

n
j
μi (xi ) ėn = ẋn − α̇n−1 = bn u + fn (x̄n ) + ωn − α̇n−1 (8)
i=1
ξj (x) = , j = 1, 2, · · · , N (3) As a result, (1) can be rewritten as the following

N n
j
μi (xi ) form:
j=1 i=1 
ėk = bk ek+1 + bk αk − α̇k−1 + fk (x̄k ) + ωk
(9)
ėn = bn u − α̇n−1 + fn (x̄n ) + ωn
ξ (x) = [ξ1 (x), ξ2 (x), · · · , ξN (x)]T is the fuzzy basis
function vector, and θ = [θ1 , θ2 , · · · , θN ]T is the weight where α0 = yd , 1 ≤ k ≤ n − 1.
parameter vector, thus the final output of the fuzzy Equation (9) shows that the control object can be
system (2) can be rewritten as: achieved as long as the appropriate virtual control
law αk and control law u are designed [31]. However,
y(x) = ξ T (x)θ (4) Because of the existence of unknown nonlinear func-
tion fk and fn , unknown virtual control gain bk and
According to the universal approximation theorem bn , and external disturbance ωk and ωn , it is very dif-
of fuzzy system, if f (x) is a continuous function defined ficult to design the control law. Moreover, Equation
on the compact set , and using fuzzy system y(x) = (9) containing α̇k−1 and α̇n−1 , it shows that the design
ξ T (x)θ to approximate f (x), there exist optimal param- of virtual control law needs differentiation of the vir-
eter vector θ ∗ such that sup |f (x) − θ ∗ ξ (x)| ≤ ε, for tual control of the former subsystem. Such repeated
x∈ differentiations will greatly increase the complexity of
any given small constant ε > 0 [7]. the whole control system, resulting in the problem of
“explosion of complexity”. In order to deal with the
above problems, in this paper adaptive fuzzy system is
4. Adaptive fuzzy backstepping control design
applied to approximate the unknown nonlinear func-
4.1. Reconstruction of system equation tions, unknown control gains and the differentiation
of virtual control. The problems of the inherent prob-
The mismatched nonlinear mechanical system (1) can
lem of “explosion of complexity” and the mismatched
be reconstructed as follows:
uncertainties can be solved at the same time.
For subsystem 1: ẋ1 (t) = b1 x2 (t) + f1 (x1 ) + ω1 (t),
we can define e1 = y − yd . A virtual control signal α1
is introduced, then we can have 4.2. Adaptive fuzzy backstepping control (AFBC)
Step 1, the Lyapunov function can be chosen as
ė1 = ẏ − ẏd
1 2
= b1 x2 − b1 α1 + b1 α1 + f1 (x1 ) + ω1 (t) − ẏd V1 = e (10)
2b1 1
= b1 e2 + b1 α1 + f1 (x1 ) + ω1 (t) − ẏd (5) The time derivative of V1 is equal to
1
where e2 = x2 − α1 . V̇1 = e1 ė1
b1
For subsystem 2, a virtual control signal α2 is intro-
duced, and then we can have f1 (x̄1 ) − ẏd 1
= e1 (e2 + α1 + ) + e1 ω1
b1 b1
ė2 = ẋ2 − α̇1 1
= e1 (e2 + α1 + f̂1 ) + e1 ω1 (11)
b1
= b2 x3 − b2 α2 + b2 α2 − α̇1 + f2 (x̄2 ) + ω2
f (x̄ )−ẏ
= b2 e3 + b2 α2 − α̇1 + f2 (x̄2 ) + ω2 (6) where f̂1 = 1 1b1 d .
Define α1 = −λ1 e1 − ϕ1 , λ1 > 0, where ϕ1 is a fuzzy
where e3 = x3 − α2 . system for approximating nonlinear function f̂1 , then
For subsystem k, a virtual control signal αk is intro- we can have
duced, and then we can have 1
V̇1 = −λ1 e21 + e1 e2 + e1 (f̂1 − ϕ1 ) + e1 ω1 (12)
b1
ėk = ẋk − α̇k−1 Step 2, the Lyapunov function can be chosen as
= bk xk+1 − bk αk + bk αk − α̇k−1 + fk (x̄k ) + ωk 1 2
V2 = V1 + e (13)
= bk ek+1 + bk αk − α̇k−1 + fk (x̄k ) + ωk (7) 2b2 2
Define α2 = −λ2 e2 − e1 − ϕ2 , λ2 > 0, where ϕ2 is a
where ek+1 = xk+1 − αk . fuzzy system for approximating nonlinear function f̂2 ,
4 W. MIN AND Q. LIU

then we can have 4.3. Improved adaptive fuzzy backstepping

1 control (IAFBC)
V̇2 = V̇1 + e2 ė2
b2 Equation (20) illustrates the influence of fuzzy approxi-

f2 (x̄2 ) − α̇1 1 mation error (f̂i − ϕi ) and external disturbance ωi on

= V̇1 + e2 e3 + α2 + + e2 ω2
b2 b2 system stability. In order to improve the stability of
1 the system and reduce the initial control input, an
= V̇1 + e2 (e3 + α2 + f̂2 ) + e2 ω2 improved adaptive fuzzy backstepping control method
b2
is proposed in this paper.

2 
2 2
1 Step 1, we redesign the Lyapunov function as follows:
=− λi e2i + e2 e3 + ei (f̂i − ϕi ) + ei ωi
i=1 i=1
b
i=1 i 1 2
(14) V1 = e , β1 > 1 (21)
2b1 β1 1
f −α̇
where f̂2 = 2 b2 1 . The derivative of Equation (21) is given by the fol-
Step k(k = 3, 4, . . . n − 1), we can define lowing expression:

αk = −λk ek − ek−1 − ϕk (15) 1

V̇1 = e1 ė1
b1 β1
where λk > 0 and ϕk is a fuzzy system for approximat- (22)
1 1
ing nonlinear function f̂k , then we can have = e1 (e2 + α1 + f̂1 ) + e1 ω1
β1 b1 β1

k 
k
Define α1 = −λ1 β1 e1 − ϕ1 , we can have
V̇k = − λi e2i + ek ek+1 + ei (f̂i − ϕi )
i=1 i=1 1 1 1
V̇1 = −λ1 e21 + e1 e2 + e1 (f̂1 − ϕ1 ) + e1 ω1
k β1 β1 b1 β1
1 (23)
+ ei ωi (16)
i=1
b i Step 2, the Lyapunov function is redesigned as
Step n, the Lyapunov function can be chosen as 1 2
V2 = V1 + e , β2 > 1 (24)
1 2 2b2 β2 2
Vn = Vn−1 + e (17) β2
2bn n Define α2 = −λ2 β2 e2 − − ϕ2 , we can have
β1 e1
The time derivative of Vn is equal to
1
1 V̇2 = V̇1 + e2 ė2
V̇n = V̇n−1 + en ėn b2 β2
bn 1 1

= V̇1 + e2 (e3 + α2 + f̂2 ) + e2 ω2
fn (x̄n ) − α̇n−1 1 β2 b2 β2
= V̇n−1 + en u + + en ωn
bn bn 
2  1 2
1

n−1 
n−1 =− λi e2i + e2 e3 + ei (f̂i − ϕi )
β2 β
i=1 i
=− λi e2i + ei (f̂i − ϕi ) i=1
i=1 i=1 2
1

n
1 + ei ωi (25)
+ en (u + en−1 + f̂n ) + ei ωi (18) bβ
i=1 i i
bi
i=1
Step k(k = 3, 4 · · · n − 1), define
fn (x̄n )−α̇n−1
where f̂n = bn . βk
Define fuzzy system ϕn for approximating nonlin- αk = −λk βk ek − ek−1 − ϕk (26)
βk−1
ear function f̂n , then we can design the control law as
follows: We can obtain

u = −λn en − en−1 − ϕn , λn > 0 (19) 

k
1  1 k
V̇k = − λi e2i + ek ek+1 + ei (f̂i − ϕi )
i=1
βk β
i=1 i
Equation (18) can be rewritten as:

n 
n n 
k
1
2 1 + ei ωi (27)
V̇n = − λi ei + ei (f̂i − ϕi ) + ei ωi (20) bi βi
i=1 i=1
b
i=1 i i=1

According to the virtual control (15) and the control Step n, the Lyapunov function is redesigned as
law (19), not only all the uncertainties are compen- follows:
sated by fuzzy systems, but also there are no repeated 1 2
Vn = Vn−1 + e , βn > 1 (28)
differentiations problems [43]. 2bn βn n
 AUTOMATIKA 5

The derivative of Equation (28) is given by the The time derivative of Equation (32) is given by the
following expression: following expression:
1
V̇n = V̇n−1 + en ėn n
1 T˙
bn βn V̇ = V̇n + θ̃ θ̃ i
rβ i
i=1 i i

n−1 
n−1
1
=− λi e2i + ei (f̂i − ϕi ) 
n n
β 1
i=1 i=1 i
=− λi e2i + ei (f̂i − θ ∗T
i ξ i (x̄i ))

βi
1 βn fn (x̄n ) − α̇n−1 i=1 i=1
+ en u + en−1 +
βn βn−1 bn 
n
1 T 
n
1 T 
n
1
+ ei θ̃ i ξ i (x̄i )− θ̃ i θ̇ i + ei ωi
n
1 βi ri βi bi βi
i=1 i=1 i=1
+ ei ωi
bβ
i=1 i i 
n n n
1 T 1
≤− λi e2i + |ei εi | + θ̃ i (ei ξ i (x̄i )

n−1 
n−1
1 i=1
β
i=1 i i=1
βi
=− λi e2i + ei (f̂i − ϕi )
i=1
β
i=1 i 1  1 n

 − θ̇ i ) + ei ωi (33)
1 βn
n
1 ri i=1
bi βi
+ en u + en−1 + f̂n + ei ωi
βn βn−1 bβ
i=1 i i Equation (33) shows that for the same control
(29) parameters λi , as long as the designed parameters βi >
The control law is redesigned as follows: 1, the influence of fuzzy approximation error and exter-
βn nal disturbance on system stability can be reduced. For
u = −λn βn en − en−1 − ϕn , λn > 0 (30) convenience, symbols S is introduced, where
βn−1
Then (29) can be rewritten as: 
n 
n

T 1 1
S=− λi e2i + θ̃ i ei ξ i (x̄i ) − θ̇ i

n n
1 n
1 βi ri
V̇n = − λi e2i
+ ei (f̂i − ϕi ) + ei ωi i=1 i=1
β bβ 
n  1 n
i=1 i=1 i i=1 i i 1
(31) + |ei εi | + ei ωi (34)
βi bβ
i=1 i i
From Equation (31), we can see that by introduc- i=1
ing the control parameters βi (βi > 1) in virtual con-
trol law (26) and control law(30), the influence of Select the positive coefficients λi as
fuzzy approximation error and external disturbance
1 1
in each subsystem can be reduced by βi times, thus λi = αi + + (35)
2 2ρ 2 (bi βi )2
the stability and control precision of the system are
improved.
where αi and ρ are positive constants, so λi > 0.5.
From Equations (26) and (30), we can see that
Substituting (35) into (34) results in
because of introducing of βi , the initial control input
will increase, such that the control method is difficult  1 2 
n n n
1
to implement in practice. In order to decrease the initial S=− αi e2i − ei − e2
2 i=1 2ρ 2 (b β )2 i
control input, a low pass filter is designed in this paper i=1 i=1 i i
− T1 t
such that βi = βi0 + Ki (1 − e i ), where βi0 is a con- 
n
T 1 1  1 n

stant far less than 1, Ki is amplification coefficient, Ti is + θ̃ i (ei ξ i (x̄i ) − θ̇ i ) + |ei εi |

βi ri βi
time constant. If Ti is very small, βi will increase from i=1 i=1

βi0 to Ki + βi0 at a very fast rate. Through the above 

n
1
control scheme, not only the initial control input can + ei ωi (36)
i=1
bi βi
be obviously reduced, but also the system can achieve
higher control accuracy. Because βi ≥ 1, we can have

1 2  1 1 2
n n n
5. Stability analysis and adaptive law design
− ei + |ei εi | ≤ ε (37)
Now, consider the following Lyapunov candidate func- 2 i=1 β
i=1 i
2 i=1 i
tion:
 n
1 T
V = Vn + θ̃ i θ̃ i (32) 
n
1 n
1 n
1 2 2
2r i β i − e2i + ei ωi ≤ ρ ωi
i=1 2ρ 2 (bi βi )2 bβ 2
i=1 i=1 i i i=1
where θ̃ i = θ ∗i − θ i , ri > 0. (38)
6 W. MIN AND Q. LIU

Then, the inequality can be obtained as follows: 

n
2bim βi 2  ki T
n
≤− αi e − θ̃ θ̃ i
2bi βi i 2βi ri i

n 
n
T 1 1 i=1 i=1
S≤− αi e2i + θ̃ i (ei ξ i (x̄i ) − θ̇ i )  2ki ∗ T ∗ 1  2  1 2 2
n n n
βi ri
i=1 i=1 + θ θ + ε + ρ ωi (44)
βi ri i i 2 i=1 i 2
1 
n n i=1 i=1
1
+ εi2 + ρ 2 ωi2 (39)
2
i=1 i=1
2 Define A = min{2bim ai βi , ki , i = 1, 2, · · · , n} and

n
2ki ∗T ∗ 1  2
n
B= βi ri θ i θ i + 2 εi . ωi are bounded distur-
Define the adaptive updating law as: i=1 i=1

n
1 2 2
bances, so we have ωi2 ≤ ci . Define C = 2 ρ ci .
θ̇ i = ri ei ξ i (x̄i ) − 2ki θi (40) i=1
So (44) can be rearranged as:
where i = 1, 2, · · · , n, ki > 0.  n
Substituting (40) into (39) results in  1 n
1 T
V̇ ≤ −A e2i + θ̃ θ̃ i + B + C
2b i βi 2βi ri i

n n
2ki ∗
i=1 i=1
S≤− αi e2i + (θ i − θ i )T θ i ≤ −AV + B + C (45)
i=1
β r
i=1 i i

1 2 1 2 2 where A, B, C are positive constants.

n n
+ ε + ρ ωi Then, integrating the inequality (45), one has
2 i=1 i i=1
2
B+C

n 
n
ki V(t) ≤ V(0) + , ∀t ≥ 0 (46)
=− αi e2i + (2θ ∗i T θ i − 2θ i T θ i ) A
βi ri
i=1 i=1
From (46), we can prove that all the signals of the
1 
n n
1 designed control system are semi-globally uniformly
+ εi2 + ρ 2 ωi2 ultimately bounded.
2 i=1 i=1
2

n n
ki ∗ T ∗
≤− αi e2i + (θ i θ i − θ i T θ i ) 6. Simulations
i=1
β r
i=1 i i
A motor driven manipulator used in the simulations,
1 2 1 2 2
n n
the dynamic equation can be written as follows [43]:
+ εi + ρ ωi
2 2 ⎧
i=1 i=1
⎪
⎪ ẋ1 = x2

n n ⎪
⎪ B N Kt
ki ⎪
⎨ ẋ2 = − x2 + f2 (x1 , x2 ) +
=− αi e2i + ( − θ ∗i T θ ∗i − θ i T θ i ) Mt Mt Mt
x3
β r
i=1 i i
(47)
i=1 ⎪
⎪ 1 1
⎪
⎪ ẋ 3 = f (x , x
3 1 2 3 , x ) + u − ω
n
2ki ∗ T ∗ 1  2  1 2 2
n n ⎪
⎩ L L
+ θi θi + εi + ρ ωi y = x1
βr
i=1 i i
2 i=1 i=1
2
(41) where x1 = θ , x2 = θ̇ , x3 = I, N = mgl + Mgl, Mt =
J + 13 ml2 + 101
Ml2 D, g is the gravity acceleration
Since constant,f2 and f3 are unknown nonlinear functions, ω
T
is the external disturbance, θ is connecting rod angle, I
θ̃ i θ̃ i = (θ ∗i − θ i )T (θ ∗i − θ i ) = θ i ∗ Tθ ∗i − 2θ i ∗ Tθ i is electric current, Kt is torque constant, Kb is back EMF
coefficient, B is viscous friction coefficient of bearing, D
+ θ Ti θ i ≤ 2θ i ∗ Tθ ∗i + 2θ Ti θ i (42)
is load diameter, l is connecting rod length, M is load
We have quality, m is connecting rod weight, L is reactance, R
is resistance, u is the control voltage of the motor, J is
1 T actuator torque.
− θ̃ i θ̃ i ≥ −θ i ∗ Tθ ∗i − θ Ti θ i (43)
2 The desired trajectory is yd = 5 sin(2πt), f2 = sin θ ,
f3 = − RL x3 − KLb x2 , ω(t) = 4 sin(t).
Substituting (43) into (41) results in The parameters of the manipulator: B = 0.015, L =
0.0008, D = 0.05, R = 0.075, m = 0.01, J = 0.05, l =

n 
n
ki T 
n
2ki ∗ T ∗
V̇ ≤ − αi e2i − θ̃ i θ̃ i + θ θ 0.6, Kb = 0.085, M = 0.05, Kt = 1, g = 9.8. The initial
2βi ri βi ri i i state of the manipulator is x(0) = [0, 0, 0]T .
i=1 i=1 i=1
The two kinds of control schemes described above
1 
n 
n
1 2 2
+ εi2 + ρ ωi are summed up as (48) and (49), respectively. In order
2 i=1 i=1
2 to verify the effectiveness, we compare their control
 AUTOMATIKA 7

performance with that of DSC control (50). The Three

schemes use the same fuzzy system (4) and the adaptive
law (40).
Control Scheme 1: AFBC
⎧
⎪
⎪ α1 = −λ1 (x1 − yd ) + ẏd
⎪ α = −λ (x − α ) − (x − y ) − ϕ
⎪
⎪
⎪ 2 2 2 1 1 d 2
⎨
u = −λ3 (x3 − α2 ) − (x2 − α1 ) − ϕ3
(48)
⎪
⎪ e1 = x1 − yd
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪ e = x2 − α1
⎩ 2
e3 = x3 − α2
Control Scheme 2: IAFBC
⎧
⎪ α1 = −λ1 β1 (x1 − yd ) + ẏd
⎪
⎪ β2
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪ α2 = −λ2 β2 (x2 − α1 ) − (x1 − yd ) − ϕ2
⎪
⎪ β1 Figure 2. Part of details of Figure 1.
⎨ β3
u = −λ3 β3 (x3 − α2 ) − (x2 − α1 ) − ϕ3
⎪
⎪ β2
⎪
⎪ = −
⎪
⎪ e 1 x1 y d
⎪
⎪
⎩ e2 = x2 − α1
⎪
e3 = x3 − α2
(49)
Control Scheme 3: DSC
⎧
⎪
⎪ α1 = −λ1 (x1 − yd ) + ẏd
⎪
⎪ a1 − s1
⎪
⎪ α2 = −λ2 (x2 − s1 ) − (x1 − yd ) − ϕ2 +
⎪
⎪ τ1
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪ a2 − s2
⎪
⎨ u = −λ3 (x3 − a2 ) − (x2 − a1 ) − ϕ3 + τ
2
⎪ τ 1 ṡ 1 + s1 = α1 , s 1 (0) = α 1 (0)
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪ τ2 ṡ2 + s2 = α2 , s2 (0) = α2 (0)
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪ e = x1 − yd
⎪ 1
⎪
⎪
⎪ e = x2 − s1
⎩ 2
e3 = x3 − s2 Figure 3. The error of position tracking.
(50)
The control parameters in all the three control meth- simulation results, we can see that the positon track-
ods are designed as follows: λ1 = 3, λ2 = 8.5, λ3 = ing accuracy of AFBC and IAFBC is much higher than
8.5, K = 10, T = 0.1s, β1 = β2 = β3 = 0.1 + K(1 − that of DSC which is widely used in the existing liter-
1
e− T t ), τ = 0.01s, r1 = r2 = r3 = 2, k1 = k2 = k3 = atures. Due to the addition of control parameters βi ,
1.5. the influence of fuzzy approximation error and exter-
Figures 1–3 show the performance of the posi- nal disturbance is reduced, thus the control accuracy of
tion tracking of the three control methods. From the IAFBC can be further improved compared with AFBC.

Figure 1. The position tracking. Figure 4. The speed tracking.

8 W. MIN AND Q. LIU

Figures 4–6 show the performance of the speed
tracking of the three control methods. From the simula-
tion results, we can see that the initial error and steady-
state tracking error under DSC control are much larger
than those of AFBC and IAFBC. In the three methods,
the speed tracking error of IAFBC is the smallest.
Figures 7–9 show the control input signal of the
three control methods respectively. From Figure 7, we
can see that the initial control input of AFBC is 2300.
Figure 8 shows the initial control input of IAFBC is
54. Figure 9 shows the initial control input of DSC is
368210. The initial control input signal is significantly
reduced by IAFBC, this benefit is very conducive to the
actual engineering application.
Finally, for a better illustration, all the simulation
results are summarized in Table 1. From the Table 1,
it is clearly shown that the proposed control method
IAFBC indeed can have much better performance
than DSC.

Figure 5. Part of details of Figure 4.

Figure 8. The control input of IAFBC.

Figure 6. The error of speed tracking.

Figure 9. The control input of DSC.

Table 1. Performance comparison of the three control

schemes.
Performance comparison AFBC IAFBC DSC
t 2
e dt of position tracking 1.8 × 103 5.8 × 101 3.9 × 105
0t 2
0 e dt of speed tracking 1.1 × 105 4.9 × 104 1.9 × 107
Figure 7. The control input of AFBC. umax 2.3 × 103 5.4 × 101 3.6 × 105

7. Conclusion
In this paper, an improved adaptive fuzzy backstep-
ping control scheme has been proposed for a class of
nonlinear systems with mismatched uncertainties. By
using fuzzy systems and backstepping control, not only
mismatched uncertainties in systems, such as unknown
functions and unknown control gains, are identified,
but also the problem of “explosion of terms” inherent
in traditional backstepping control is avoided. More-
over, through the introduction of adjustable control
parameters and low pass filters, the influence of fuzzy
approximation error and external disturbances can be
further reduced, thus the control error convergence
is faster, the control precision is obviously improved,
and the initial control input signal is greatly reduced.
Finally, the stability of the control system is proved and
all the signals are guaranteed to be bounded. Some sim-
ulation results have demonstrated the effectiveness of
the proposed results. Future research directions are the
extension of the results to nonstrict-feedback stochas-
tic MIMO nonlinear systems with uncertainties and
unmeasured states.
Disclosure statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.
Funding
This research has been supported by the National Natural
Science Foundation of China [grant number 51775463].
References
[1] Sakthivel R, Santra S, Mathiyalagan K. Reliable robust
control design for uncertain mechanical system. J Dyn
Syst Measur Control. 2015;137(2):021003-1-11.
[2] Jin M, Lee J, Chang HP, et al. Practical nonsingular ter-
minal sliding-mode control of robot manipulators for
high-accuracy tracking control. IEEE Trans Ind Elec-
tron. 2009;56(9):3593–3601.
[3] Xiao B, Yin S, Kaynak O. Tracking control of robotic
manipulators with uncertain kinematics and dynamics.
IEEE Trans Ind Electron. 2016;63(10):6439–6449.
[4] An H, Zhou L, Wei X, et al. Nonlinear analysis of
dynamic stability for the thin cylindrical shells of super-
cavitating vehicles. Adv Mech Eng. 2017;9(1):16878140
1668565.
[5] Tall AI. Feedback linearizable feedforward systems: a
special class. IEEE Trans Automat Contr. 2010;5(7):
1736–1742.
[6] Semprun KA, Yan L, Butt WA, et al. Dynamic surface
control for a class of nonlinear feedback linearizable sys-
tems with actuator failures. IEEE Trans Neural Netw
Learn Syst. 2017;28(9):1–6.
[7] Wang LX, Mendel JM. Fuzzy basis functions, universal
approximation, and orthogonal least-squares learning.
IEEE Trans Neural Netw. 1992;3(5):807–814.
[8] Wang H, Shi P, Li H, et al. Adaptive neural tracking con-
trol for a class of nonlinear systems with dynamic uncer-
tainties. IEEE Trans Cybern. 2017;47(10):3075–3087.
AUTOMATIKA 9
[9] He W, Dong Y, Sun C. Adaptive neural Impedance con-
trol of a robotic manipulator with input saturation. IEEE
Trans Syst Man Cyber Syst. 2016;46(3):334–344.
[10] Pan Y, Sun T, Liu Y, et al. Composite learning from adap-
tive backstepping neural network control. Neural Netw.
2017;95:134–142.
[11] Ge SS, Wang C. Adaptive neural control of uncertain
MIMO nonlinear systems. IEEE Trans Neural Netw.
2004;15(3):674–692.
[12] Barhaghtalab MH, Bayani H, Nabaei A, et al. On
the design of the robust neuro-adaptive controller for
cable-driven parallel robots. Automatika. 2016;57(3):
724–735.
[13] Tran X, Kang H. Adaptive hybrid high-order terminal
sliding mode control of MIMO uncertain nonlinear sys-
tems and its application to robot manipulators. Int J Prec
Eng Manuf. 2015;16(2):255–266.
[14] Sun L, Zheng Z. Finite-time sliding mode trajectory
tracking control of uncertain mechanical systems. Asian
J Control. 2017;19(1):399–404.
[15] Cong B, Liu X, Chen Z. Improved adaptive sliding mode
control for a class of Second-order mechanical systems.
Asian J Control. 2013;15(6):1862–1866.
[16] Ye D, Park JH, Hao L. Fuzzy logic systems-based integral
sliding mode fault-tolerant control for a class of uncer-
tain non-linear systems. IET Control Theory Applic.
2016;10(3):300–311.
[17] Feng J, Gao Q, Guan W, et al. Fuzzy sliding mode control
for erection mechanism with unmodelled dynamics.
Automatika. 2017;58(2):131–140.
[18] Qian D, Tong S, Xu C. Robust multi-robot formations
via sliding mode controller and fuzzy compensator.
Automatika. 2016;57(4):1007–1019.
[19] Cai J, Wen C, Su H, et al. Adaptive backstepping con-
trol for a class of nonlinear systems with non-triangular
structural uncertainties. IEEE Trans Automat Control.
2017;62(10):5220–5226.
[20] Coban R. Dynamical adaptive integral backstepping
variable structure controller design for uncertain sys-
tems and experimental application. Int J Robust Non-
linear Control. 2017;27(18):4522–4540.
[21] Ahn KK, Nam DNC, Jin M. Adaptive backstepping con-
trol of an electrohydraulic actuator. IEEE/ASME Trans
Mechatron. 2014;19(3):987–995.
[22] Chaouch S, Abdou L, Alaoui LC, et al. Optimized
torque control via backstepping using genetic algorithm
of induction motor. Automatika. 2016;57(2):
379–386.
[23] Davila J. Exact tracking using backstepping control
design and high-order sliding Modes. IEEE Trans
Automat Contr. 2013;58(8):2077–2081.
[24] Tong S, Li Y, Li Y, et al. Observer-based adaptive fuzzy
backstepping control for a class of stochastic nonlinear
strict-feedback systems. IEEE Trans Syst Man Cybern B
Cybern. 2011;41(6):1693–1704.
[25] Swaroop D, Hedrick JK, Yip PP, et al. Dynamic sur-
face control for a class of nonlinear systems. IEEE Trans
Automat Control. 2002;45(10):1893–1899.
[26] Zhang TP, Ge SS. Adaptive dynamic surface control of
nonlinear systems with unknown dead zone in pure
feedback form. Automatica. 2008;44(7):1895–1903.
[27] Edalati L, Sedigh AK, Shooredeli MA, et al. Adaptive
fuzzy dynamic surface control of nonlinear systems with
input saturation and time-varying output constraints.
Mech Syst Signal Process. 2018;100:311–329.
[28] Chen XW, Zhang JG, Liu YJ, et al. Fuzzy control for
vehicle status estimation considering roll stability and
10 W. MIN AND Q. LIU
its application in target recognition of automobile cruise
system. Adv Mech Eng. 2017;9(8):1–12.
[29] Liu Y. Adaptive dynamic surface asymptotic tracking
for a class of uncertain nonlinear systems. Int J Robust
Nonlinear Control. 2018;28(4):1233–1245.
[30] Chang W, Tong S, Li Y. Adaptive fuzzy backstep-
ping output constraint control of flexible manipula-
tor with actuator saturation. Neural Comput Appl.
2017;28(S1):1165–1175.
[31] Liu W, Lim CC, Shi P, et al. Backstepping fuzzy adaptive
control for a class of quantized nonlinear systems. IEEE
Trans Fuzzy Syst. 2017;25(5):1090–1101.
[32] Yin S, Shi P, Yang H. Adaptive fuzzy control of strict-
feedback nonlinear time-delay systems with unmod-
eled dynamics. IEEE Trans Cybern. 2016;46(8):1926–
1938.
[33] Zong Q, Wang F, Tian B, et al. Robust adaptive dynamic
surface control design for a flexible air-breathing hyper-
sonic vehicle with input constraints and uncertainty.
Nonlinear Dyn. 2014;78(1):289–315.
[34] Wang X, Li H, Zong G, et al. Adaptive fuzzy track-
ing control for a class of high-order switched uncer-
tain nonlinear systems. J Franklin Inst. 2017;354(15):
6567–6587.
[35] Zhou Q, Li H, Wang L, et al. Prescribed performance
observer-based adaptive fuzzy control for nonstrict-
feedback stochastic nonlinear systems. IEEE Trans Syst
Man Cyber Syst. 2018;48(10):1747–1758.
[36] Li H, Bai L, Zhou Q, et al. Adaptive fuzzy control of
stochastic nonstrict-feedback nonlinear systems with
input saturation. IEEE Trans Syst Man Cyber Syst.
2017;47(8):2185–2197.
[37] Tong S, Li Y, Sui S. Adaptive fuzzy tracking control
design for SISO uncertain nonstrict feedback nonlinear
systems. IEEE Trans Fuzzy Syst. 2016;24(6):1441–1454.
[38] Zhou Q, Wang L, Wu C, et al. Adaptive fuzzy tracking
control for a class of pure-feedback nonlinear systems
with time-varying delay and unknown dead zone. Fuzzy
Sets Syst. 2017;329:36–60.
[39] Tong S, Li Y, Sui S. Adaptive fuzzy output feedback
control for switched nonstrict-feedback nonlinear sys-
tems with input nonlinearities. IEEE Trans Fuzzy Syst.
2016;24(6):1426–1440.
[40] Li Y, Tong S. Adaptive fuzzy output-feedback Stabiliza-
tion control for a class of switched nonstrict-feedback
nonlinear systems. IEEE Trans Cybern. 2017;47(4):
1007–1016.
[41] Li Y, Ma Z, Tong S. Adaptive fuzzy fault-tolerant
control of Non-triangular structure nonlinear sys-
tems with error-constraint. IEEE Trans Fuzzy Syst.
2018;26(4):2062–2074.
[42] Li Y, Liu L, Feng G. Robust adaptive output feedback
control to a class of non-triangular stochastic nonlinear
systems. Automatica. 2018;89:325–332.
[43] Liu JK. Design of robot control system and MATLAB
simulation. Beijing: Tsinghua University Press; 2013.