mathematics
Article
Taylor Series-Based Fuzzy Model Predictive Control for
Wheeled Robots
Libo Yang 1 , Mei Guo 2,3, *, Ardashir Mohammadzadeh 4, * and Amir Mosavi 5,6,7
Citation: Yang, L.; Guo, M.;
Mohammadzadeh, A.; Mosavi, A.
Taylor Series-Based Fuzzy Model
Predictive Control for Wheeled
Robots. Mathematics 2022, 10, 2498.
https://doi.org/10.3390/
math10142498
Academic Editor: António M. Lopes
Received: 9 June 2022
Accepted: 14 July 2022
Published: 18 July 2022
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral
with regard to jurisdictional claims in
published maps and institutional affil-
iations.
Copyright: © 2022 by the authors.
Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland.
This article is an open access article
distributed under the terms and
conditions of the Creative Commons
Attribution (CC BY) license (https://
creativecommons.org/licenses/by/
4.0/).
Mathematics 2022, 10, 2498. https://doi.org/10.3390/math10142498
1 School of Mechanical and Electrical Engineering, Guangdong University of Science and Technology,
Dongguan 523083, Guangdong, China; yanglibo2022@163.com
2 School of Computer and Artificial Intelligence, Xiangnan University, Chenzhou 423000, Hunan, China
3 Hunan Engineering Research Center of Advanced Embedded Computing and Intelligent Medical Systems,
Chenzhou 423000, Hunan, China
4 Multidisciplinary Center for Infrastructure Engineering, Shenyang University of Technology,
Shenyang 110870, China
5 Faculty of Civil Engineering, Technische Universität Dresden, 01067 Dresden, Germany;
amir.mosavi@mailbox.tudresden.de
6 John von Neumann Faculty of Informatics, Obuda University, 1034 Budapest, Hungary
7 Institute of Information Engineering, Automation and Mathematics, Slovak University of Technology in
Bratislava, 81237 Bratislava, Slovakia
* Correspondence: xnxygm@163.com (M.G.); a.mzadeh@ieee.org (A.M.)
Abstract: In this paper, a new hybrid method for controlling a wheeled robot is introduced. Model
predictive control (MPC) is the main controller and a fuzzy controller is used as a compensator. The
wheeled robot is a nonlinear, multi-input–multi-output system that requires new and combined meth-
ods for precise control. In order to stabilize the system the appropriate control input is set, and at the
same time, attention is paid to the reference signal tracking. In the simulation section, several different
scenarios are applied and parameter uncertainties and their effects on the controller’s performance
are evaluated. The simulation results show the success and efficiency of the proposed method.
Keywords: soft computing; fuzzy control; model predictive control; artificial intelligence; wheeled
robots; Taylor series; robotics; mobile robots; computational intelligence
MSC: 34H05; 03B52; 93C85
1. Introduction
Today, mobile robots are receiving a lot of attention. These robots have a variety of
uses and will definitely affect the future of humans. One of the most challenging issues in
robotics is their control. System control with non-holonomic constraints is one of the issues
that has obtained the attention of many researchers. Among these systems, wheeled mobile
robots enjoy a special situation according to their extensive application in the industry.
Hence, many studies have been conducted in the field of modeling and controlling these
systems [1–5]. Due to the structure of these robots, the wheels roll without slipping and the
robots have no speed along the wheels’ axis of rotation. The mentioned restriction is known
as a non-holonomic restriction. Mathematically, non-holonomic restrictions are constraints
that are not integrable. Considering that these restrictions do not reduce the system degrees
of freedom, and these restrictions are also considered alongside the system equations, the
existence of these constraints causes increasing complexity in dynamic modeling and the
control of these robots. The main challenge in non-holonomic systems is that the number of
degrees of freedom that have controllability is less than the total number of system degrees
of freedom. Thus, it is considered important to find suitable control inputs for guaranteeing
the stability of all state variables.
https://www.mdpi.com/journal/mathematics
Mathematics 2022, 10, 2498 2 of 13

Many related works have been completed. In the meantime, there is a great significance
in the issue of time trajectory tracking with high accuracy in wheeled mobile robots due to
the various applications of the robots. For this reason, many studies have been conducted
in this field by various methods to investigate tracking and stability, including controller
designs based on the Lyapunov method [6], the adaptive control method [7,8], the sliding
mode method [9–12], the feedback linearization method [13], robust control [14,15], the
fuzzy method [16,17], the backtracking method [18], a combination of the fuzzy methods
of neural networks [19,20], etc. In [21], an optimal proportional-derivative controller based
on feedback linearization is designed for tracking the trajectory of a wheeled robot. In
other research, the active observer control method based on the Kalman filter for the
dynamic control of mobile robots is proposed [22]. Some studies have also used optimal
methods, such as the reference [23], in which the optimum controller to the method of
time horizon ahead and the predictive control approach based on the model is presented.
It should be noted that using numerical calculations methods is not easy for resolving
optimization problems; it is difficult to implement them and they have great time delays.
The sliding mode control method has been widely used in recent years to control the moving
robot, but this method has drawbacks. Among these shortcomings, we can mention the
phenomenon of chatting, the lack of proper response in the face of immediate changes, and
so on. Experience has shown that if the sliding mode control method is combined with
computational intelligence in some way, the above problems can be overcome. The idea of
this paper is to use fuzzy control as a complement or compensator to sliding mode control.
In this paper, a novel optimal approach is developed to design a multi-variable
nonlinear controller for tracking the trajectory of a wheeled mobile robot, which is then
analyzed. This method has been applied by the authors previously to design the controller
of an anti-lock braking system with single-input–single-output and multi-input–multi-
output mechanisms for tracking wheel slipping [24,25]. The difference between this method
and the predictive control method based on the used model in previous works is that, in
general, the common predictive control method in each control step requires solving the
optimization problem simultaneously and numerically and for this reason it has delays,
and so it is not appropriate for implementation. However, the proposed control method
in this paper utilizes control–analysis laws with no mentioned problems. The basis of
this method is to predict the response of the nonlinear model of the robot. In this way,
the nonlinear response of the robot is predicted by Taylor series expansion at first, and
then the control law is obtained by minimizing the differences in desired responses and
predicted ones. On the other hand, according to the main challenge in non-holonomic
systems mentioned before, the capability of this method can be named in finding suitable
control inputs for guaranteeing the stability of all desired state variables. After designing
the controller, the analysis of the tracking error is analytically investigated and the effect
of the predicted time parameter as a control-free parameter is examined, and it will be
demonstrated that the control laws lead to feedback linearization. In order to indicate the
efficiency of the designed control system, the required simulations on the robot model
with three degrees of freedom with various maneuvers are conducted. The results of the
analysis and simulations denote the suitable performance of the proposed control system
in achieving the desired goals.
The novelty of this paper is as follows:
1. The MPC design for the robot system is based on the Taylor series expansion;
2. Using the fuzzy control system as compensation for the main control system when
the model’s uncertainty is high.

2. Statement of the Problem

The general structure of a wheeled mobile robot composed of two mobile wheels
located on one axis is shown in Figure 1. The wheels have the same radius r and are
located at a distance of l. Both wheels move to shift and orient the robot independently by
two actuators (two DC motors). According to Figure 1, the robot in the two-dimensional
 2. Statement of the Problem
The general structure of a wheeled mobile robot composed of two mobile wheels
Mathematics 2022, 10, 2498 located on one axis is shown in Figure 1. The wheels have the same radius r and are 3 oflo-
13
cated at a distance of l. Both wheels move to shift and orient the robot independently by
two actuators (two DC motors). According to Figure 1, the robot in the two-dimensional
plane composed
plane composed ofof three
three degrees
degrees of
offreedom
freedomincludes
includestwo
twotranslational
translational motions
motions and
and one
one
rotational motion. Thus, (x,y) is the position of the axis center on which the wheels
rotational motion. Thus, (x,y) is the position of the axis center on which the wheels are are
located and θ denotes the angle of robot placement.
located and θ denotes the angle of robot placement.

Figure1.
Figure 1. Configuration
Configuration of
ofwheeled
wheeledmobile
mobilerobot.
robot.

Due
Duetotothe
thefact that
fact thethe
that robot has no
robot hasvelocity along the
no velocity along rotation axis of wheels,
the rotation axis ofwe conclude:
wheels, we
conclude: .
  x
− sin θ cos θ . 𝑥= 0 (1)
[−sin 𝜃 cos 𝜃y] =0 (1)
𝑦
The above constraint equation is
The above constraint equation is not integrable not integrable andand thusthus
it isitknown
is knownas a non-
as a
holonomic constraint. Moreover, the governing equations based
non-holonomic constraint. Moreover, the governing equations based on the first-order on the first-order kinematic
model of the
kinematic robotofare:
model the robot are:  .   
x cos θ 0  
q =  y. 𝑥=  sin
.  .   cos 𝜃 0 v
θ 0 𝑣 (2)
𝑞 = 𝑦 = sin 𝜃 0 ω (2)
θ 0 1 𝜔
𝜃 0 1
T
 
Thus, q𝑞 == [𝑥
Thus, x y𝑦 θ𝜃]isisthe thegeneralized
generalizedcoordinatecoordinatevector, vector,v is translational
v is translational velocity,
veloc-
and ω is the
ity, and 𝜔 isangular velocity
the angular of theof
velocity robot. In
the robot. the control
In the system,
control this
system, will
thisbe used
will be from
used
T = [x T = x
 
two positions, q c c y c θ c ] and q r r y
from two positions, 𝑞 = [𝑥 𝑦 𝜃 ] and 𝑞 = [𝑥 𝑦 𝜃 ], where the first is related tothe
r θ r , where the first is related to the
position
positionor orreference
referencetrajectory
trajectoryof ofthe
therobot
robotthatthatmustmustbe betracked
trackedby bythe
thecontroller.
controller.
According
Accordingto toFigure
Figure2 2and andconsidering
considering thethe reference
reference coordinate
coordinate system
system x −𝑥y −
and the
𝑦 and
relative coordinate system x 0 − y0 to center of ( x − y ) and in the direction θ , the position
the relative coordinate system 𝑥 − 𝑦 to center c of c(𝑥 − 𝑦 ) and in the direction c 𝜃 , the
error e T =error
position ex 𝑒ey = e[θ𝑒 can 𝑒 be 𝑒defined
] can be bydefined
the following:
by the following:
e x𝑒 cos θ𝜃c sinθc𝜃 0 0
   
cos sin
 𝑒 = −sin 𝜃 cos 𝜃  0 (q(𝑞 −𝑞 ) (3)
 ey  = − sin θc cos θc 0 r − qc ) (3)
𝑒 0 0 1
eθ 0 0 1

By using relationship (2), we have:

. .
xr sin θr = yr cos θr (4)

Now, by differentiating Equation (3) using relationship (4) and some mathematical
calculations, it can be obtained that the error model is as follows [26]:
.     
ex cos eθ 0   −1 e y  
 ey  =  sin eθ 0 vr +  0 −ex  v
.
(5)
. ωr ω
eθ 0 1 0 −1

It should be noted that, in all relationships, the index r is related to the reference model.
Mathematics2022,
Mathematics 2022,10,
10,2498
x FOR PEER REVIEW 44 of 13
of 13

Figure 2. The
Figure 2. The robot’s
robot’s position
position error.
error.

3. Control System Design

By using relationship (2), we have:
By writing the Equation (5) in the form of the following state space, we have:
𝑥 sin 𝜃 = 𝑦 cos 𝜃 (4)
 .
x1 = vr cos x3 − u1 + x2 u2
Now, by differentiating  Equation
 . (3) using relationship (4) and some mathematical
calculations, it can be obtained x2 =the
that vr error − x1 u2is as follows [26]:
sin x3model (6)
 .

x 3 = ωr − u 2
𝑒 cos 𝑒 0 −1 𝑒
𝑣 𝑣
𝑒 = sin 𝑒 0 + 0variable
−𝑒 vector and uT = |u u (5)
T = x 𝜔 𝜔
   
where, x 1 x 2 x 3 = e x e y e is the state 1 2| =
  𝑒 0 θ
1 0 −1
v ω is the control input vector. The purpose is to design a controller with two inputs for
the system
It should withbe Equation
 noted that,(6), sointhat by tracking thethe
all relationships, reference
index rtrajectory
is relatedthe
to tracking error
the reference
T = e
emodel. x ey eθ equals zero and, in other words, the stability of the mentioned system
is guaranteed. Here, it will be used in the predictive nonlinear control method based on
optimization.
3. Control System In general,
Design in this method, firstly, the intended system outputs are predicted
by theByTaylor series expansion
writing the Equation (5) andinthen the form by minimizing
of the followingthe performance
state space,function,
we have: which is
defined based on the predicted errors; the control laws are then optimally and analytically
obtained. In addition to the mentioned 𝑥 = 𝑣 cos 𝑥 − 𝑢 +of
advantages 𝑥 𝑢this method, the capability for
𝑥 = 𝑣 sin 𝑥 − 𝑥
stabilizing a nonlinear system by selecting suitable outputs can also be mentioned. (6)𝑢 By
𝑥 =𝜔 −𝑢
selecting the following outputs, we have:
where, 𝐱 = [𝑥 𝑥 𝑥 ] = [𝑒 ( 𝑒 𝑒 ] is the state variable vector and 𝐮 = |𝑢 𝑢 | =
[𝑣 𝜔] is the control input vector. yThe x1 − x2 sgn
1 = purpose is (toωdesign
r) a controller with two inputs
(7)
for the system with Equation (6), so y2that
= xby 3 tracking the reference trajectory the tracking
error 𝐞 = 𝑒 𝑒 𝑒 equals zero and, in other words, the stability of the mentioned sys-
where
tem issin (.) is the signHere,
guaranteed. function.
it will In bethe usedsection in analyzing
the predictive and evaluating
nonlinear the control
control laws,
method
itbased
will beonshown that selecting
optimization. the above
In general, in thisoutputsmethod,leads to the
firstly, the feedback
intended linearization
system outputs of the
are
system’s input–output and consequent stabilization.
predicted by the Taylor series expansion and then by minimizing the performance func- Now, for developing the nonlinear
control
tion, whichlaws,isa performance
defined based index
on the is written
predicted in such
errors;a waythethat penalizes
control the then
laws are tracking errors
optimally
at the next instant, as follows:
and analytically obtained. In addition to the mentioned advantages of this method, the
capability for stabilizing a nonlinear 1system by selecting suitable outputs can also be
2
2 ∑ i =1 i
mentioned. By selecting theJ (following u1 , u2 ) = outputs, e2we
(t +have:
h)i = 1, 2 (8)
𝑦 = 𝑥 − 𝑥 sgn (𝜔 )
where h is the predictive time and a positive real number and the tracking errors are ei(7) . In
𝑦 =𝑥
this equation, Yi is the output of the system and the Yd is the desired output of the system.
where sin (. ) is the sign function. In the section analyzing and evaluating the control
laws, it will be shown that t + h) = ythe
ei (selecting + h) −outputs
i ( t above ydi (t + hleads
)i = 1,
to2the feedback linearization (9)
of the system’s input–output and consequent stabilization. Now, for developing the
Since it
nonlinear is supposed
control laws, athat there is noindex
performance restriction
is writtenon the incontrol
such a input for achieving
way that penalizes the
the
complete tracking, the performance
tracking errors at the next instant, as follows: index (8) does not involve the weight of the control
input; in other words, the design based on the control is inexpensive. On the other hand,
the significance of tracking errors 𝐽(𝑢 , 𝑢 is )supposed
= ∑   𝑒to(𝑡 be+the ℎ)𝑖same,
= 1,2 and so it is considered(8) to
Mathematics 2022, 10, 2498 5 of 13

have the same weight on the errors. Now, in order to develop performance index (8) as a
function of control input, it is necessary that the system outputs are predicted for the next
time interval by the Taylor series expansion. First, yi (t + h) is extended by the Taylor series
in q th order in the time t as follows:
. h2 ..
yi ( t + h ) = yi ( t ) + h yi ( t ) + 2! yi ( t )+
(10)
hq (q)
···+ q! yi ( t )i = 1, 2

In the following, the main issue is selecting the order of expansion q for system
outputs so that it is proportional to the design goals of the controller based on prediction.
Usually, the expansion order that denotes the highest derivation order of the used output
in prediction is bound to add to the relative degree of the nonlinear system and the selected
control order [27]. The relative degree of the dynamic equations of the nonlinear system
is acquirable and it is equal to the lowest order of output derivation in which the control
input appears in equations as explicit for the first time [28]. According to the equations of
system (6), both system outputs to both inputs have a relative degree 1, q = 1. On the other
hand, to reach the low control energy and to prevent the complexity of control law, here,
the control order is bounded at the least possible, i.e., zero. This selection, i.e., control order
0, causes the control energy to remain constant in a predictive time interval and does not
appear as a control input derivation in the prediction of the output.

d
u(t + τ ) = 0 for τ ∈ [0, h] (11)
dτ
Selecting the control order 0 for nonlinear systems with low relative degrees is ap-
propriate [29]. Commonly, the control order is set as the free parameter, and it is de-
termined by the designer proportional to the control system characteristics and control
energy restrictions.
Thus, according to the above reasons, the first-order series is proportional to the
relative degree of the system and is adequate for the expansion of system outputs.
.
yi (t + h) = yi (t) + hyi (t)i = 1, 2 (12)

By placing Equation (6) into (12) and using the selected outputs, we have:
. .

y1 ( t + h ) = y1 + h x 1 − x 2
= x1 − x2 sgn(ωr ) + h( x2 u2 − u1 +
vr cos x3 + x1 u2 − vr sin x3 ) (13)
.
y2 ( t + h ) = y2 + h x 3
= x 3 + h ( ωr − u 2 )

Now, by placing Equation (13) in (8) and given that the desirable values of the outputs
are equal to zero, the expanded performance index is obtained as a function of the control
inputs. By applying the optimization condition, we have:

∂J
= 0 ⇒ A11 u1 + A12 u2 + B1 = 0
∂u1
(14)
∂J
= 0 ⇒ A21 u1 + A22 u2 + B2 = 0
∂u2

Therefore, the control laws are calculated as follows:

1
u1 = − ( A u2 + B1 ) (15)
A11 12
 Therefore, the control laws are calculated as follows:
1
Mathematics 2022, 10, 2498
𝑢 =− (𝐴 𝑢 + 𝐵 ) 6 of 13
(15)
𝐴
𝐵 𝐴 −𝐵 𝐴
=A −B A
𝑢 B (16)
2 𝐴11 − 𝐴 𝐴
1 12
u2 = (16)
A12 2 − A11 A22
Thus,
Thus,
A11𝐴 =− =h,−ℎ,
A12𝐴 = =
h(ℎx1 𝑥+ +
x2𝑥sgn sgn r )),) ,
(ω(𝜔
.
B1 𝐵= x=1 −
𝑥 x− sgn
𝑥 sgn
(φr )𝜙+ hv + ℎ𝑣 cos 𝑥 − sin 𝑥 sgn (𝜔 ) ,
2 r (cos x3 − sin x3 sgn( ωr )),
A21𝐴 =− =h−ℎ 𝑥 x+ sgn
( x1 + 2
𝑥 sgn(ω(𝜔
r )),
) ,
(17)
(17)
𝐴 = ℎ 1 + 𝑥 + 𝑥 sgn (𝜔 ) ,
 
A22 =h 1 + ( x1 + x2 sgn(ωr ))2 ,
𝐵 = −(𝑥 + ℎ𝜔 ) + 𝑥 + 𝑥 sgn (𝜔 ) (𝑥 − 𝑥 sgn (𝜔 )
B2 =−( x3 + hωr ) + ( x2 + x1 sgn(ωr ))( x1 − x2 sgn(ωr )
+ℎ𝑣 cos 𝑥 − sin 𝑥 sgn (𝜔 )
+hvr (cos x3 − sin x3 sgn(ωr )))
Theexpanded
The expanded form
form of of the
the control
control law,
law,by byplacing
placingrelationship
relationship (17)
(17) in
in (15)
(15) and
and (16),
(16),
with some simplifications, is computable as
with some simplifications, is computable as follows: follows:
1
u1𝑢= =1h ( x1 𝑥− −x2 𝑥 sgn
sgn r ) +) (+x2 𝑥
(ω(𝜔 + x+1 sgn
𝑥 sgn r ))()x3(𝑥
(ω(𝜔 r) )
+ ℎ𝜔
+ hω
ℎ (18)
(18)
+hv +ℎ𝑣r (cos x3 𝑥− −
(cos sinsin (ωr )))))+ +
x3𝑥sgnsgn(𝜔 u1𝑢f

11
u2 𝑢= = (ℎx(𝑥
3 ++
) u2𝑢f
r) + +
hωℎ𝜔 (19)
(19)
h
Thefuzzy
The fuzzycompensator
compensatorsignals
signalsareare u2 f .𝑢The
u1 f𝑢andand . The
aboveabove feedback
feedback control
control laws laws
that
that have
have close close form minimize
form minimize the performance
the performance of function
of function (8). the
(8). Here, Here, the control
control inputs inputs
of linearof
velocity and angular
linear velocity velocity are
and angular calculated.
velocity The required
are calculated. Thetorques
required applied
torquesto the wheels
applied to for
the
generating
wheels forthe mentioned
generating theinputs of the inputs
mentioned dynamic of model of the robot
the dynamic modelmust be robot
of the calculated.
must Inbe
the next section,
calculated. the
In the obtained
next control
section, laws arecontrol
the obtained analyzed lawsandareevaluated.
analyzed Theand block diagram
evaluated. The
of the proposed
block diagram of control method control
the proposed is shown in Figure
method 3.
is shown in Figure 3.

Figure3.3.The
Figure Theproposed
proposedcontrol
controlsystem.
system.

Analyzing
Analyzingand
andEvaluating
EvaluatingthetheControl
ControlLaws
Laws
In
In this section, the main specifications of
this section, the main specifications of control
control laws
laws (18)
(18) and
and (19),
(19), and
and also
also the
the
significance of the free parameter of predictive time h in the control laws, will
significance of the free parameter of predictive time h in the control laws, will be exam- be examined.
By differentiating
ined. the first the
By differentiating output
firstofoutput
relationship (7) by supposing
of relationship (7) by ω r 6 = 0 and placing
supposing 𝜔 ≠ 0 andthe
system
placingEquation
the system(6) Equation
into it, we(6)
have:
into it, we have:
. . .
y1 𝑦= =
x1 𝑥− −
x2 𝑥 (ω(𝜔
sgn
sgn r)
)
= −u1 + u2 ( x2 + x1𝑥sgn
= −𝑢 + 𝑢 𝑥 + sgn(ω(𝜔 ) +
r ))+ (20)
(20)
v (𝑣coscos
x − 𝑥 sin
− sin
x sgn𝑥 (sgn (𝜔 )
ω ))
r 3 3 r
Placing control laws (18) and (19) in relationship (20) leads to:
Placing control laws (18) and (19) in relationship (20) leads to:

. 1
y1 + y1 = 0 (21)
h
Mathematics 2022, 10, 2498 7 of 13

Likewise, we have this for the second output:

. 1
y2 + y2 = 0 (22)
h
It is obvious that the dynamic of errors (21) and (22) are linear and time-independent.
It can be seen that the control laws lead to the special state of linearization of the input–
output. Thus, the closed loop system is linear and, when h > 0, is exponentially stable, and
by minimizing the predictive time h, response speed can be increased. In this case, we have:
(
y1 → 0 ⇒ x1 → x2 sgn(ωr )
if t → ∞, ⇒ (23)
y2 → 0 ⇒ x3 → 0

Now, by placing relationship (23) and the control laws (18) and (19) into the first two
equations of Equation (6), we have:
.
x1 + ωr sgn(ωr ) x1 = 0 (24)
.
x2 + ωr sgn(ωr ) x2 = 0 (25)
Considering that ωr 6= 0, Equations (24) and (25) are exponentially stable and we have:
(
x1 → 0
if t → ∞ ⇒ (26)
x2 → 0

Thus, considering Equations (22), (24) and (25), it can be concluded thatthe proposed
control system with control laws (18) and (19) makes the tracking error e T = ex ey eθ equal


to zero. In the next section, in order to indicate the performance of the designed control sys-
tem faced with various maneuvers, the performed simulation results will be investigated.

4. Simulation Results
To denote the performance of the control system, the required simulations on a kine-
matic model of a wheeled mobile robot with three degrees of freedom were performed
in MATLAB software, version 2015-a. To investigate the controller performance in real
conditions, we applied white noise to the state variables of the system. In the first maneuver,
the purpose was to achieve a tracking reference model with the following equations:

xr = 3 sin t
(27)
yr = 3 sin(2t)

According to relationship (27), the first position of the reference trajectory is

xr (0) = (0, 0, 1.1071) T . The real first position of the robot x(0) = (0, 2, π/4) T is also
considered. In Figure 4, the time change of the robot’s position variables (x,y) is shown.
As it can be seen from this figure, the time responses of the robot’s positions were able
to quickly reach the responses of the reference model. By comparing the robot trajectory to
the reference trajectory in Figure 5, it can be found that the designed controller was able to
track the desirable trajectories with high accuracy.
Moreover, in Figure 6, the tracking errors of the robot’s longitudinal position (ex,ey)
and the tracking error of the angular position of the robot eθ , are shown. It is seen that, in
any case, the initial error quickly reached 0.
In order to indicate the effect of control parameter h on the performance of the control
system, Figure 7 simulates the tracking error of the robot’s angular position for different
values of predictive time. It can be seen that, by reducing the value of predictive time h,
the tracking error decreased and the response speed increased. It should be noted that
reducing predictive time causes an increase in control energy at the start of the maneuver.
This is because the control energy is inversely related to the predicted time corresponding
Mathematics 2022, 10, x FOR PEER REVIEW 8 of 13

Mathematics 2022, 10, 2498 8 of 13

Mathematics 2022, 10, x FOR PEER REVIEW 8 of 13

to the control laws (18) and (19). Thus, we can compromise between the tracking error and
the control energy by adjusting the control parameter h.

(a)

(a)

(b)
Figure 4. Comparison of the robot trajectory to reference trajectory (27) (time changes x) (a). Com-
parison of the robot trajectory to reference trajectory (27) (time changes y) (b).

As it can be seen from this figure, the time responses of the robot’s positions were
(b)
able to quickly reach the responses of the reference model. By comparing the robot tra-
Figure 4.
jectory
Figure 4.toComparison
Comparison
the referenceofthe
of the robottrajectory
trajectory
robot trajectory totoreference
in Figure reference trajectory
5, it cantrajectory
be found (27)
that
(27) (time changes
thechanges
(time x) x)
designed (a). Com-
controller
(a). Compar-
parison
was of
ison of
able
thetothe robot
track
robot trajectory
the desirable
trajectory to reference trajectory
trajectories
to reference trajectory with (27)
(27)high (time changes
(timeaccuracy.
changes y) (b).y) (b).

As it can be seen from this figure, the time responses of the robot’s positions were
able to quickly reach the responses of the reference model. By comparing the robot tra-
jectory to the reference trajectory in Figure 5, it can be found that the designed controller
was able to track the desirable trajectories with high accuracy.

Figure 5.
Figure 5. The
The comparison
comparison of
of robot
robot trajectory
trajectory in
in the
the plane
plane x-y
x-y with
with reference
reference trajectory
trajectory (27).
(27).

Figure 5. The comparison of robot trajectory in the plane x-y with reference trajectory (27).
Mathematics 2022, 10, x FOR PEER REVIEW 9 of 13

Moreover, in Figure 6, the tracking errors of the robot’s longitudinal position (ex,ey)
Mathematics 2022, 10, 2498 9 of 13
and the tracking error of the angular position of the robot eθ, are shown. It is seen that, in
any case, the initial error quickly reached 0.

Figure 6. The tracking errors related to the translational position and angular position of robot (the
reference model tracking (27)).

In order to indicate the effect of control parameter h on the performance of the con-
trol system, Figure 7 simulates the tracking error of the robot’s angular position for dif-
ferent values of predictive time. It can be seen that, by reducing the value of predictive
time h, the tracking error decreased and the response speed increased. It should be noted
that reducing predictive time causes an increase in control energy at the start of the ma-
neuver. This is because the control energy is inversely related to the predicted time cor-
Figure 6. The tracking
responding errors related
to the control laws to the and
(18) translational position
(19). Thus, we and
canangular positionbetween
compromise of robot (the
the
reference model tracking (27)).
tracking error and the control energy by adjusting the control parameter h.

In order to indicate the effect of control parameter h on the performance of the con-
trol system, Figure 7 simulates the tracking error of the robot’s angular position for dif-
ferent values of predictive time. It can be seen that, by reducing the value of predictive
time h, the tracking error decreased and the response speed increased. It should be noted
that reducing predictive time causes an increase in control energy at the start of the ma-
neuver. This is because the control energy is inversely related to the predicted time cor-
responding to the control laws (18) and (19). Thus, we can compromise between the
tracking error and the control energy by adjusting the control parameter h.

Figure7.7.The
Figure Theeffect
effectofofpredictive
predictivetime
timehhononthe
theperformance
performanceofof the
the control
control system
system (the
(the tracking
tracking er-
error
ror of reference angular position).
of reference angular position).

In the
In the second maneuver, the
the purpose
purposeisistototrack
trackthe thereference
referencemodel
modelbyby
thethe
following
follow-
equations:
ing equations:
xr𝑥 ==(20
(20++1515cos
cos(0.2t ) cos(0.2t
(0.2𝑡)cos ) − 35
(0.2𝑡) − )35) (28)
(28)
yr𝑦==(20
(20 + 15 cos (0.2𝑡)sin (0.2𝑡))
+ 15 cos ( 0.2t ) sin ( 0.2t ))
Considering
Considering relationship
relationship (28), (28), the
the initial
initial position
position of the the reference
reference trajectory
trajectory is is
T
x𝐱 (
Figure
r𝐫 (0)
0 ) == (0,0,
( 𝜋/2)
0, 0, . ) The
. real
The initial
real position
initial of
position theof robot
the is
robot considered
7. The effect of predictive time h on the performance of the control system (the tracking er-
π/2 is as
considered 𝐱(0) =
as
x(−20,
ror(0of)= −5,
(−𝜋/3)
reference
20, − . To
angular
5, π/3 )T . To the
observe
position). brevity,
observe the itbrevity,
is selected
it is and plotted
selected andinplotted
only a infew diagrams
only a few
in this maneuver.
diagrams Figures 8Figures
in this maneuver. and 9 show8 and the
9 showcomparison of the time
the comparison responses
of the of the ro-
time responses of
bot’s
the Inposition
the second
robot’s andmaneuver,
position the
androbot’s the purpose
trajectory
the robot’s inisthe
trajectory to track
inplane the
x-y reference
the plane with model
the reference
x-y with byresponses.
the referencethe responses.
following
equations:In Figure 10, the tracking errors of the robot’s longitudinal position (ex,ey) and the
tracking error of the robot’s 𝑥 = angular
(20 + 15 position eθ , are (0.2𝑡)
cos (0.2𝑡)cos shown. It can be seen that, in this
− 35)
maneuver, the responses also 𝑦 =had (20a+great
15 cosadaptation
(0.2𝑡)sin with the reference responses. At(28)
(0.2𝑡)) the
end, in order to indicate the performance of the control system in various initial conditions,
Figure Considering
11 is simulated.relationship
In Figure(28),11a, the
it caninitial
be seenposition
that, forofvarious
the reference trajectorythe
initial conditions, is
𝐱robot
𝐫 (0) = (0,0, 𝜋/2) . The real initial position of the robot is
was well able to track the desired reference trajectory. To indicate the performance of considered as 𝐱(0) =
(−20,
the control−5, 𝜋/3)
system,. To Figure
observe theis brevity,
11b simulated it isfor
selected andconditions
the initial plotted infar only a few
from the diagrams
reference
in this maneuver.
trajectory. It can beFigures
seen that 8 and 9 show
the initial the comparison
conditions being soof farthe
fromtimetheresponses
reference of the ro-
trajectory
bot’s
affects position
the time andandthe the robot’s trajectory
quality in the plane
of reaching x-y withtrajectory,
the reference the reference butresponses.
the reference
trajectory is tracked with acceptable accuracy.
Mathematics2022,
Mathematics 2022,10,
10,xxFOR
FORPEER
PEERREVIEW
REVIEW 10 of
10 of 13
13
Mathematics 2022, 10, 2498 10 of 13

(a)
(a)

(b)
(b)
Figure8.8.(a)
Figure (a)The
Thecomparison
The comparisonof
comparison ofrobot
of robot
robot trajectory
trajectory
trajectory with
with
with reference
reference
reference trajectory
trajectory (28)
trajectory (28) (time
(time
(28) changes
changes
(time x).(b)
x). (b)
changes x). (b)
The
The comparison
The comparison
comparison of
of robot robot
of robot trajectory
trajectory
trajectory with
withwith reference
reference
reference trajectory
trajectory
trajectory (28) (time
(28) (time
(28) (time changes
changes
changes y).
y). y).

Figure9.9.The
Figure The comparisonof
ofthe
therobot
robottrajectory
trajectoryin
inthe
theplane
planex-y
x-ywith
withthe
thereference
referencetrajectory
trajectory(28).
(28).
Figure 9. The comparison
comparison of the robot trajectory in the plane x-y with the reference trajectory (28).

InFigure
In Figure10,10,the
thetracking
trackingerrors
errorsof ofthe
therobot’s
robot’slongitudinal
longitudinalposition
position(ex,ey)
(ex,ey)and
andthe the
tracking error
tracking error of
of the
the robot’s
robot’s angular
angular position
position eeθθ, , are
are shown.
shown. ItIt can
can be
be seen
seen that,
that, in
in this
this
maneuver,the
maneuver, theresponses
responsesalsoalsohad
hadaagreat
greatadaptation
adaptationwith withthe
thereference
referenceresponses.
responses.At Atthethe
end, in order to indicate the performance of the control system in various
end, in order to indicate the performance of the control system in various initial condi- initial condi-
tions,Figure
tions, Figure1111isissimulated.
simulated.In InFigure
Figure11a,11a,ititcan
canbe beseen
seenthat,
that,for
forvarious
variousinitial
initialcondi-
condi-
tions, the
tions, the robot
robot was
was well
well able
able to
to track
track the
the desired
desired reference
reference trajectory.
trajectory. To To indicate
indicate thethe
Mathematics 2022, 10, x FOR PEER REVIEW 11 of 13

performance of the control system, Figure 11b is simulated for the initial conditions far
performance of the trajectory.
from the reference control system,
It can Figure
be seen11b is the
that simulated for the initial
initial conditions conditions
being far
so far from
from the reference
the reference trajectory.
trajectory affectsItthe
cantime
be seen
and that the initial
the quality conditions
of reaching thebeing so fartrajec-
reference from
Mathematics 2022, 10, 2498 11 of 13
the
tory,reference trajectorytrajectory
but the reference affects the time and
is tracked the acceptable
with quality of accuracy.
reaching the reference trajec-
tory, but the reference trajectory is tracked with acceptable accuracy.

Figure 10. The tracking errors related to the translational position and angular position of the robot
Figure 10. The
Theoftracking
(the tracking
Figure 10. tracking errors
reference model
errors related to the
(28)).to
related the translational
translational position
position and
and angular
angular position
position of
of the
the robot
robot
(the tracking of reference model (28)).
(the tracking of reference model (28)).

(a)
(a)

(b)
(b)
Figure11.
Figure 11. (a)
(a) The
The robot
robot trajectories
trajectories tracking the reference model (28) for various
various initial
initial conditions.
conditions.
Figure
(b) The11. (a)
robot The robot trajectories
trajectories tracking tracking
the the
reference reference
model (28)model
for (28)
initial for various
conditions initial
(b) The robot trajectories tracking the reference model (28) for initial conditions far the
far from conditions.
refer-
from the
(b)
enceThe robot trajectories tracking the reference model (28) for initial conditions far from the refer-
trajectory.
reference trajectory.
ence trajectory.
As can be seen from the simulation results, the combined fuzzy control system and
the MPC had a good performance and can be further considered in the future.
In order to show the effectiveness of the proposed method, a comparison has been
made with the methods presented in [25,27]. The comparison criterion is the root mean
square error or RMSE.
Mathematics 2022, 10, 2498 12 of 13

The RMSE criterion is very common and important in control engineering articles. As
can be seen in Table 1, based on this criterion, the proposed method performed much better
than the other two methods. Definitely, the reason for this better performance was the use
of the compensating fuzzy controller next to the main controller. In places where the error
was high, the fuzzy control system was activated and produced a relatively large signal so
that the robot immediately approached the path.

Table 1. Comparison of the proposed method with two other methods.

Proposed Method Method of [25] Method of [27]

First maneuver 0.0011 0.0018 0.0025
Second maneuver 0.0096 0.0108 0.0110

5. Conclusions
In the future, mobile robots will definitely be used in abundance. One of the most
challenging issues with these systems is the precise control of them. In this paper, a
predictive control method for designing multi-input–multi-output nonlinear controllers in
analytical and optimum forms is developed to track the reference trajectory of a wheeled
mobile robot. A fuzzy control system was used to compensate the MPC. In addition,
by selecting the suitable outputs, the appropriate control inputs were extracted for the
stabilization of the system. The dynamic of the tracking error of the proposed controller
was extracted and the stabilization of all states of the system was investigated. Finally,
the simulation results in the various maneuvers denoted the proper performance of the
proposed control system in reaching the desired purposes.

Author Contributions: Conceptualization, L.Y., M.G., A.M. (Ardashir Mohammadzadeh) and A.M.
(Amir Mosavi); Formal analysis, L.Y., M.G., A.M. (Ardashir Mohammadzadeh) and A.M. (Amir
Mosavi); Methodology, L.Y., M.G., A.M. (Ardashir Mohammadzadeh) and A.M. (Amir Mosavi);
Writing—original draft, A.M. (Ardashir Mohammadzadeh). All authors have read and agreed to the
published version of the manuscript.
Funding: This research received no external funding.
Institutional Review Board Statement: Not applicable.
Informed Consent Statement: Not applicable.
Data Availability Statement: The paper presents no data.
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References
1. Mo, H.; Tang, Q.; Meng, L. Behavior-Based Fuzzy Control for Mobile Robot Navigation. Math. Probl. Eng. 2013, 2013, 561451.
[CrossRef]
2. Yu, H.; Sheng, N.; Ai, Z. Sliding mode control for trajectory tracking of mobile robots. In Proceedings of the 40th Chinese Control
Conference (CCC), Shanghai, China, 26–28 July 2021; pp. 13–17.
3. Huang, H.; Shirkhani, M.; Tavoosi, J.; Mahmoud, O. A New Intelligent Dynamic Control Method for a Class of Stochastic
Nonlinear Systems. Mathematics 2022, 10, 1406. [CrossRef]
4. Rubio, F.; Valero, F.; Llopis-Albert, C. A review of mobile robots: Concepts, methods, theoretical framework, and applications. Int.
J. Adv. Robot. Syst. 2019, 16, 1729881419839596. [CrossRef]
5. Tavoosi, J.; Shirkhani, M.; Azizi, A.; Din, S.U.; Mohammadzadeh, A.; Mobayen, S. A hybrid approach for fault location in power
distributed networks: Impedance-based and machine learning technique. Electr. Power Syst. Res. 2022, 210, 108073. [CrossRef]
6. Panahandeh, P.; Alipour, K.; Tarvirdizadeh, B.; Hadi, A. A kinematic Lyapunov-based controller to posture stabilization of
wheeled mobile robots. Mech. Syst. Signal Process. 2019, 134, 106319. [CrossRef]
7. Cui, M. Observer-Based Adaptive Tracking Control of Wheeled Mobile Robots with Unknown Slipping Parameters. IEEE Access
2019, 7, 169646–169655. [CrossRef]
8. Zou, Y.; Wen, C.; Shan, M.; Guan, M. An adaptive control strategy for indoor leader-following of wheeled mobile robot. J. Frankl.
Inst. 2020, 357, 2131–2148. [CrossRef]
Mathematics 2022, 10, 2498 13 of 13

9. Xie, Y.; Zhang, X.; Meng, W.; Zheng, S.; Jiang, L.; Meng, J.; Wang, S. Coupled fractional-order sliding mode control and obstacle
avoidance of a four-wheeled steerable mobile robot. ISA Trans. 2021, 108, 282–294. [CrossRef]
10. Matraji, I.; Al-Durra, A.; Haryono, A.; Al-Wahedi, K.; Abou-Khousa, M. Trajectory tracking control of Skid-Steered Mobile Robot
based on adaptive Second Order Sliding Mode Control. Control. Eng. Pract. 2018, 72, 167–176. [CrossRef]
11. Ren, C.; Li, X.; Yang, X.; Ma, S. Extended State Observer-Based Sliding Mode Control of an Omnidirectional Mobile Robot with
Friction Compensation. IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron. 2019, 66, 9480–9489. [CrossRef]
12. Han, S.I. Prescribed consensus and formation error constrained finite-time sliding mode control for multi-agent mobile robot
systems. IET Control Theory Appl. 2018, 12, 282–290. [CrossRef]
13. Owczarkowski, A.; Horla, D.; Zietkiewicz, J. Introduction of Feedback Linearization to Robust LQR and LQI Control—Analysis
of Results from an Unmanned Bicycle Robot with Reaction Wheel. Asian J. Control. 2018, 21, 1028–1040. [CrossRef]
14. Chen, X.; Zhao, H.; Sun, H.; Zhen, S.; Huang, K. A novel adaptive robust control approach for underactuated mobile robot.
J. Frankl. Inst. 2018, 356, 2474–2490. [CrossRef]
15. Mohammadi, F.; Mohammadi-Ivatloo, B.; Gharehpetian, G.B.; Ali, M.H.; Wei, W.; Erdinc, O.; Shirkhani, M. Robust control
strategies for microgrids: A review. IEEE Syst. J. 2021, 16, 2401–2412. [CrossRef]
16. Li, J.; Wang, J.; Peng, H.; Zhang, L.; Hu, Y.; Su, H. Neural fuzzy approximation enhanced autonomous tracking control of the
wheel-legged robot under uncertain physical interaction. Neurocomputing 2020, 410, 342–353. [CrossRef]
17. Mosavi, A.; Varkonyi-Koczy, A. Integration of machine learning and optimization for robot learning. In Recent Global Research and
Education: Technological Challenges; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2017; pp. 349–355.
18. Lim, T.H.; Ng, P.L. Evaluating Recursive Backtracking Depth-First Search Algorithm in Unknown Search Space for Self-learning
Path Finding Robot. Artif. Intell. Commun. Netw. 2021, 356, 531–543.
19. Tavoosi, J.; Shirkhani, M.; Abdali, A.; Mohammadzadeh, A.; Nazari, M.; Mobayen, S.; Asad, J.H.; Bartoszewicz, A. A new general
type-2 fuzzy predictive scheme for PID tuning. Appl. Sci. 2021, 11, 10392. [CrossRef]
20. Tavoosi, J.; Mohammadzadeh, A.; Jermsittiparsert, K. A review on type-2 fuzzy neural networks for system identification. Soft
Comput. 2021, 25, 7197–7212. [CrossRef]
21. Mahmoodabadi, M.J.; Nejadkourki, N. Trajectory Tracking of a Flexible Robot Manipulator by a New Optimized Fuzzy Adaptive
Sliding Mode-Based Feedback Linearization Controller. J. Robot. 2020, 2020, 8813217. [CrossRef]
22. Li, L.; Wang, T.; Xia, Y.; Zhou, N. Trajectory tracking control for wheeled mobile robots based on nonlinear disturbance observer
with extended Kalman filter. J. Frankl. Inst. 2020, 357, 8491–8507. [CrossRef]
23. Caspari, A.; Offermanns, C.; Schäfer, P.; Mhamdi, A.; Mitsos, A. A flexible air separation process: 2. Optimal operation using
economic model predictive control. Process Syst. Eng. 2019, 65, 11. [CrossRef]
24. Mirzaeinejad, H. Optimization-based nonlinear control laws with increased robustness for trajectory tracking of non-holonomic
wheeled mobile robots. Transp. Res. Part C Emerg. Technol. 2019, 101, 1–17. [CrossRef]
25. Sun, Z.; Xie, H.; Zheng, J.; Man, Z.; He, D. Path-following control of Mecanum-wheels omnidirectional mobile robots using
nonsingular terminal sliding mode. Mech. Syst. Signal Process. 2021, 147, 107128. [CrossRef]
26. Pang, F.; Luo, M.; Xu, X.; Tan, Z. Path Tracking Control of an Omni-Directional Service Robot Based on Model Predictive Control
of Adaptive Neural-Fuzzy Inference System. Appl. Sci. 2021, 11, 838. [CrossRef]
27. Bai, G.; Liu, L.; Meng, Y.; Luo, W.; Gu, Q.; Wang, J. Path Tracking of Wheeled Mobile Robots Based on Dynamic Prediction Model.
IEEE Access 2019, 7, 39690–39701. [CrossRef]
28. Goher, K.; Ahmad, S.; Tokhi, O.M. A new configuration of two-wheeled vehicles: Towards a more workspace and motion
flexibility. In Proceedings of the 2010 IEEE International Systems Conference, Menuires, France, 11–16 April 2010; pp. 524–528.
29. Li, X.; Xian, X.; Yuan, Y.; Xiaolong, L. A multi-input multi-output control strategy for intelligent nonholonomic robots. In
Proceedings of the 27th Chinese Control and Decision Conference (2015 CCDC), Qingdao, China, 23–25 May 2015; pp. 4698–4703.