Journal of Engineering and Applied Science

Model Reference Adaptive Controller (MRAC) for a Double Line-Sensors Mobile Robot
--Manuscript Draft--

Manuscript Number: JEAS-D-23-00976

Full Title: Model Reference Adaptive Controller (MRAC) for a Double Line-Sensors Mobile Robot

Article Type: Research

Funding Information:

Abstract: Wheeled mobile robots are widely used in various daily applications due to their
simplicity, robustness, stability, and cost-effectiveness in manufacturing. Typically,
mobile robots are driven using PID controllers. However, the robot's performance
heavily relies on the carefully tuned PID control parameters and the mechanical
system's robustness. In this research, we explore the combination of Model Reference
Adaptive Controller (MRAC), MIT law, and PID controller to automatically adjust the
coefficients of an adaptive PID controller for a mobile robot equipped with double line
sensors. The simulation results with the mobile robot, which has a quadratic transfer
function, demonstrate reasonable auto-adjusting control coefficients and achieve
commendable tracking control quality.

Corresponding Author: Thanh Nhu Vo, Ph.D.

Danang University of Science and Technology
Da Nang, Đà Nẵng VIET NAM

Corresponding Author E-Mail: vnthanh@dut.udn.vn;thanhvous@gmail.com

Corresponding Author Secondary

Information:

Corresponding Author's Institution: Danang University of Science and Technology

Corresponding Author's Secondary

Institution:

First Author: Thanh Nhu Vo, Ph.D.

First Author Secondary Information:

Order of Authors: Thanh Nhu Vo, Ph.D.

Duan Dinh Tran, M.S.

Nam Hoai Le, Ph.D.

Anh Kim Nguyen, Ph.D.

Order of Authors Secondary Information:

Opposed Reviewers: Khoa Ngoc Dang Tran, Ph.D.

Senior Lecturer/researcher, Industrial University of Ho Chi Minh City
tranngocdangkhoa@iuh.edu.vn
Expertise in the field

Vijay Kumar, Ph.D.

Professor, Siddhartha Institute of Engineering & Technology
gvkumar@gmail.com
Similar field of interest

Additional Information:

Question Response

Powered by Editorial Manager® and ProduXion Manager® from Aries Systems Corporation
Manuscript Click here to access/download;Manuscript;MRAS Double Line
Sensor Mobile Robot _ Correction.docx
Click here to view linked References

1
2
3
4
5
6
7 Model Reference Adaptive Controller (MRAC) for a
8
9 Double Line-Sensors Mobile Robot
10
11
12 Nhu Thanh Vo1[0000-0001-5383-3119], Duan Dinh Tran1, Hoai Nam Le1, Kim Anh Nguyen1
13
14
1 Department of Mechanical Engineering, The University of Danang – Danang University of
15 Science and Technology. Nguyen Luong Bang 54, Danang, Viet Nam..
16 Correspoding author: vnthanh@dut.udn.vn
17
18
19 Abstract. Wheeled mobile robots are widely used in various daily applications
20 due to their simplicity, robustness, stability, and cost-effectiveness in manufac-
21 turing. Typically, mobile robots are driven using PID controllers. However, the
22 robot's performance heavily relies on the carefully tuned PID control parameters
23 and the mechanical system's robustness. In this research, we explore the combi-
24 nation of Model Reference Adaptive Controller (MRAC), MIT law, and PID con-
25 troller to automatically adjust the coefficients of an adaptive PID controller for a
26 mobile robot equipped with double line sensors. The simulation results with the
27 mobile robot, which has a quadratic transfer function, demonstrate reasonable
28 auto-adjusting control coefficients and achieve commendable tracking control
29 quality.
30
31 Keywords: Mobile Robot, Double Line-Sensors, Model Reference Adaptive
32 Control (MRAC), MIT Law, Adaptive PID.
33
34
35 1 Introduction
36
37 Robotics has advanced significantly in industrial production, particularly with ro-
38 botic arms that boast high speed, precision, and enhanced labor productivity. However,
39 these robots often face limitations in their workspace due to the number of degrees of
40 freedom and mounting position [1],[2]. In contrast, mobile robots offer versatility and
41 autonomy, performing tasks without human intervention. With modern sensors, they
42 can perceive their surroundings, proving valuable in various industries, commerce,
43 healthcare, and scientific applications [3]-[5]. As mobile robotics evolves to meet prac-
44 tical demands, researchers encounter new challenges. The guiding problem for mobile
45 robot movement can be categorized into global and local scenarios. In global problems,
46 the robot's working environment is entirely known, while in local problems, the envi-
47
ronment may be partially known or unknown, requiring sensors and positioning devices
48
to identify obstacles and determine the robot's position on its path to the target location
49
50 [6]-[10].
51 Among robotic navigation techniques, line-following navigation has been marked as
52 one of the simplest but most effective and accurate techniques currently used in many
53 industries. The line tracking mobile robot was often designed with only 1 line tracking
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
 1
2
3
4 2
5
6
sensor, so the possibility of being deflected is quite large and it is difficult to adjust to
7
8 go straight on the path. There are various solutions such as algorithm improvement [6]
9 or double path design [11] to improve the operation quality of the path tracking robot.
10 A rather unique proposal is to use 2 tracking sensors in front and back of the robot [3]
11 allowing the mobile robot to run straight along the path with less adjustment than has
12 been proposed. However, in the study of double sensor line following robot, the control
13 plan is only given when the parameters of the robot are fixed. Changing the parameter
14 values of the robot such as the increased mass, the friction of the transmitters is
15 changed, or the electrical values such as voltage, amperage are changed, the robot's
16 performance will be greatly affected [12]-[15]. Therefore, in this study, the authors
17 propose an adaptive control plan according to MRAC to improve the situations where
18 the system parameters of the mobile robot are changed. The models of mechanical
19 structures and simulation models are established, the MRAC controller is designed and
20 simulated based on the simulation model[16]-[20]. The simulation results of the MRAC
21 and PID controllers are compared and evaluated with the situations where the operating
22 parameters of the robot are replaced, showing that the MRAC controller works quite
23
well in this situation.
24
25
26 2 Mechanical design and modelling
27
28
A common practice in line following wheeled mobile robots involves using a single
29
30 line sensor to detect and track their movement. Nevertheless, this method has its draw-
31 back as it fails to detect the angle offset between the robot and the desired line of travel.
32 Consequently, even when the line is centered in the sensor, the robot's actual direction
33 might deviate from the intended path. To tackle this issue, Andhra [11] presented a
34 double line sensors following approach that demands two parallel guiding lines on the
35 floor, making it applicable only to that particular system.
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49 Fig.1. Double Line-Sensors Mobile Robot Design and Prototype
50 The robot consists of three distinct parts. The base is responsible for the robot's mo-
51 bility and is equipped with double line sensors, depicted in Figure 1(A). The real pro-
52 totype is shown in Figure 1(B), while Figure 1(C) presents the 3D design of the robot
53 body, which includes two trays for carrying food and controller panels for inputting
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
 1
2
3
4 3
5
6
commands to operate the robot [3]. Since the robot was built for restaurant serving
7
8 purpose, the most concerned issue was that the speed of the robot must be stable and
9 sustainable at a value of 0.5m/s [3].
10
11 2.1 Robot movement
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31 Fig.2. Geometrically movement and position of the robot
32
33
34 First, to determine the robot's position in the plane, we establish the relationship
35 between the global reference coordinates of the plane and the local reference coordi-
36 nates of the robot, as shown in Figure 2. The x and y axes define the coordinates of any
37 point in the global coordinate system with the origin O (xOy). Point P is considered the
38 center of the robot's displacement and is used to determine the robot's position. The
39 local reference coordinate system xmPym is attached to the robot. Thus, the position of
40 point P in the global reference coordinate system is determined by the coordinates x, y,
41 and the angle between the two global and local coordinate systems. The geometric pa-
42 rameters of the robot include vR(t): linear velocity of the right wheel, vL(t): linear ve-
43 locity of the left wheel, ωR(t): angular velocity of the right wheel, ωL(t): angular velocity
44 of the left wheel, r: wheel radius, L: distance between the two wheels, R: distance from
45 the robot's center to the instantaneous center of velocity, ICC - Instantaneous Center of
46
Curvature, R-L/2: radius describing the curved motion trajectory of the left wheel,
47
R+L/2: radius describing the curved motion trajectory of the right wheel
48
49
50 vR = r.ωR (1)
51 vL= r.ωL (2)
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
 1
2
3
4 4
5
6
Where, r is the wheel radius, ωr and ωl are the angular velocities of the right and left
7
8 wheels, respectively. The robot always rotates around the instantaneous center of cur-
9 vature, which is the intersection point of the two wheel axes. This point is known as the
10 instantaneous center of curvature (ICC). From the ICC, we can determine the center of
11 the robot's angular velocity as follow.
12 vR (t)
ωR (t) = (3)
13 R + L/2
14
15 vL (t)
16 ωL (t) = (4)
R + L/2
17
18 vR (t) - vL (t)
19 ω(t) = (5)
L
20
21 The radius of curvature from the center of the robot's movement to the instantaneous
22 rotation is calculated using the following formula:
23 L( vR (t)+ vL (t))
24 R= (6)
25 2( vR (t)- vL (t))
26 From there, the linear velocity of the robot is calculated:
27
28 1
v(t) =ω(t).R = ( v (t)+ vL (t))
29 2 R (7)
30
31 The mathematical equations in state space can be written as follows:
32
33 ẋ (t) = v(t)cosθ(t)
34 ẏ (t) = v(t)sinθ(t) (8)
35 θ̇ (t) = ω(t)
36 After integrating both sides, we obtain:
37 t
38 x(t) = ∫ v(t)cos(θ(t)) d(t)
39 0
t
40
y(t) = ∫ v(t)sin(θ(t)) d(t) (9)
41 0
42 t
43 θ(t) = ∫ ω(t) d(t)
0
44
The equation above can be rewritten in matrix form as:
45 vx (t) cosθ 0 v(t) v(t)cosθ
46
v (t) v (t)
[ y ] = [ sinθ 0] [ ] = [ v(t)sinθ ] [ L ]
47 ω(t) vR (t)
48 θ̇ (t) 0 1 ω(t)
49 1 1 1
(v - v )cosθ cosθ cosθ
50 2 R L 2 2 vL
51 = 1 = 1 1 [v ] (10)
(vR + vL )cosθ sinθ sinθ R
52 2 2 2
53 [ (vR - vL )/L ] [ 1/L -1/L ]
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
 1
2
3
4 5
5
6
7
8 This is the equation that will be used to build the robot model in the Matlab Simulink
9 simulation software. In this simulation, the robot will be controlled by a PID controller
10 with MRAC (Model Reference Adaptive Controller) implementation.
11
12 2.2 Robot model
13
14 The transfer function of the robot is represented by equation (11) [3], the parameters
15 of the robot is shown in table 1.
16
17 ω(s) Kt /n
18 Gspeed (s) = = (11)
Vin (s) La .Jequiv .s2 + (Ra .Jequiv + bequiv .La ).s+ (Ra .bequiv + Kt .Kb )
19
20 N 2
21 With Jequiv = Jm + JLoad . ( 1 )
N2
22
Table. 1. Mobile robot parameters
23
24 Symbol Parameter Unit Value
25 Vin Input voltage Volt 12
26 Kt Motor torque constant N.m/A 1.2
27 Ra Armature resistance Ohm (Ω) 0.15
28 La Armature inductance Milli Henry (mH) 0.82
29 Jm Gear transmission inertia kg.m2 0.27
30 bm Damping (friction) coefficient N.m.s 0.3
31 Kb Back-EMF constant V/rad/s 1.2
32 n Transmission ratio - 3
33 r Wheel radius mm 120
34 h Robot height mm 1300
35 b Robot width mm 300
36 L Wheelbase distance mm 400
37 Jequiv Equivalent Inertia Kg.m2 0.125
38 bequiv Equivalent damping coefficient N.m.s 0.4
39 ω angular velocity rad/s 4.167
40 v Linear speed m/s 0.5
41 Ktac Encoder constant rad/s 2.88
42
43 The basic PID transfer function is:
44 KI
45 V(s)=KP .e(s) + .e(s) + s.KD .e(s) (12)
s
46 In which, e(s) =Vin(s) - Vout(s)
47 With the input signal Vin(s) in the form of a square wave, to avoid excessive am-
48 plification of the derivative term s.KD.e(s) due to abrupt changes in the input signal
49
Vin(s), the term s.KD.e(s) is replaced by s.KD.Vout (s). From the transfer function, it
50
51 follows that:
KI
52 V(s) = (KP + ).(Vin(s) - Vout(s)) - s.KD .Vout(s) (13)
53 s
54 The relationship between the output and input signals in a closed-loop control:
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
 1
2
3
4 6
5
6
Vout(s) = V(s).Ktac.ω(s) (14)
7
8 Thus, we have
KI
9 Kt /n .((KP + ).(Vin(s) - Vout(s)) - s.KD .Vout(s) )
Vout(s) = Ktach . s (15)
10 2
La .Jequiv .s + (Ra .Jequiv + bequiv .La ).s+ (Ra .bequiv + Kt .Kb )
11
12 Where, b = Ktac.Kt/n; a1 = La.Jequiv; a2 = Ra.Jequiv + La.bequiv; a3 = Ra.bequiv + Kt .Kb
13 Thus,
14 b.((KP .s + KI ).(Vin(s) - Vout(s)) - s2 .KD .Vout(s) )
Vout(s) =
15 a1 s3 + a2 .s2 + a3 .s
16
17 Vout(s) b.(KP .s + KI )
18 ⟹ =
19 Vin(s) a1 s + (a2 + b.KD ).s2 + (a3 + b.KP ).s + b.KI
3

20
21 Vout(s) b.(KP .s + KI )
22 ⟹ =
Vin(s) (a + b.K D ) 2 (a3 + b.KP ) b.KI (16)
23 s3 + 2 .s + .s +
24 a1 a1 a1
25
26 When the robot operates under ideal conditions, the speed response curve for this
27 PID parameter set is standard. Therefore, during the development of the control system
28 using the model approach, the robot system with these selected PID parameters is cho-
29 sen as the model. Consequently, the model can be expressed as follows:
30
31 Vm(s) bm1 .s + bm2
32 =
Vin(s) am1 .s3 + am2 .s2 + am3 .s + am4 (17)
33
34
35 Where, bm1 = b.KP; bm2 = b.KI; am1 = a1; am2 = a2 + b.KD; am3 = a3 + b.KP; am4 = b.KI;
36 From this, the standard model is selected with the given system parameters as indi-
37 cated in Figure 3. The PID controller parameters will be adjusted using the PID tuner
38 software in Matlab. The tuned PID parameter are Kp= 5.353, Ki= 5.455, Kd=1.294 as
39 indicated in Figure 4.
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
Fig.3. Standard model in Matlab Simulink
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
 1
2
3
4 7
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18 Fig.4. The simulation results with the PID controller.
19
20
21 2.3 Adaptive algorithm following the MIT rule.
22
23
24 MIT rule [15],[17] is described in equation (18).
25 dθ ∂J ∂J ∂e ∂e
26 = - γ. = - γ. . = - γ.e. (18)
dt ∂θ ∂e ∂θ ∂θ
27
28 Where:
29
J: Cost function
30
θ: Vector of control parameters
31
32 e: Error between the actual system and the model
33 Vout: Output value of the system
34 Vm: Output value of the model reference
∂e
35 : Sensitivity of the error with respect to the adjusted coefficient vector - partial
∂θ
36 derivative
37 dθ
: Derivative of θ with respect to time t
38 dt
39 The control coefficient vector is θ = [KP KI KD]
40
41 dKP ∂J ∂J ∂e ∂Vout
= - γP . = - γP . . . (19)
42 dt ∂KP ∂e ∂Vout ∂KP
43
44 dKI ∂J ∂J ∂e ∂Vout
45 = - γI . = - γI . . .
dt ∂KI ∂e ∂Vout ∂KI (20)
46
47 dKD ∂J ∂J ∂e ∂Vout
48 = - γD . = - γD . . . (21)
49 dt ∂KD ∂e ∂Vout ∂KD
50
51 We have the error between the standard model and the actual model as follows:
52 ∂e
e = Vout - Vm ⟹ =1 (22)
53 ∂Vout
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
 1
2
3
4 8
5
6
With
7
∂J
8 =e
9 ∂e
10 From there, we can recalculate the derivatives of the parameters KP, KI, and KD as
11 follows:
dKP ∂J ∂Vout
12 = - γP . = - γP .e.
13 dt ∂KP ∂KP
14 dKI ∂J ∂Vout
= - γI . = - γI .e. (23)
15 dt ∂KI ∂KI
16 dKD ∂J ∂Vout
= - γD . = - γD .e.
17 dt ∂KD ∂KD
18
19 With the transfer function of the standard model being:
20
21 Vout(s) b.(KP .s + KI )
22 e = (24)
Vin(s) a1 s3 + (a2 + b.KD ).s2 + (a3 + b.KP ).s + b.KI
23
24 Calculate the updating parameter for KP
25
26 ∂Vout b.s.(Vin - Vout)
27 =
∂KP a1 . s + (a2 + b.KD ).s2 + (a3 + b.KP ).s + b.KI
3
28
29
dKP ∂J ∂Vout b.s.(Vin - Vout)
30 = - γP . = - γP .e. = - γP .e. 3
31 dt ∂KP ∂KP a1 s + (a2 + b.KD ).s2 + (a3 + b.KP ).s + b.KI
32
33 γP b.s
34 ⟹ KP = - .e. .(Vin - Vout)
s (a1 s + (a2 + b.KD ).s2 + (a3 + b.KP ).s + b.KI )
3 (25)
35
36
37 In which, (Vin - Vout) represents the error between the setpoint signal and the sys-
38 tem response, also denoted as e. To avoid confusion, we define the error between the
39 standard model and the actual model as etracking.
40
41 γP b.s
⟹ KP = - .e . .e (26)
42 s tracking (a1 s3 + (a2 + b.KD ).s2 + (a3 + b.KP ).s + b.KI )
43
Similarly,
44 γI b
45 KI = - .etracking . 3 2
.e (27)
46 s (a1 s + (a2 + b.KD ).s + (a3 + b.KP ).s + b.KI )
47 γD b.s2
48 KD = .etracking . .Vout (28)
49 s (a1 s3 + (a2 + b.KD ).s2 + (a3 + b.KP ).s + b.KI )
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
 1
2
3
4 9
5
6
7 3 Simulation experiment
8
9 The simulation models are constructed based on mathematical and modeling princi-
10 ples as presented in the previous section. Figure 5 illustrates the general model, which
11 includes the PID controller, the MRAC_PID controller, and the Standard Model. The
12 simulation results from these control systems will be compared for analysis and evalu-
13 ation. Figures 6 and 7 represent the Simulink models for updating the values of the PID
14 parameters and further detail the updating process.
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28 Fig.5. The simulation model with the PID and MRAC_PID controller.
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46 Fig.6. MRAC_PID subsystem in Matlab Simulink
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
Fig.7. Kp Adaption subsystem in Matlab Simulink
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
 1
2
3
4 10
5
6
We conduction the simulation with different scenarios. Firstly, we keep the fixed
7
8 parameters of P; I; D corresponding to the updates for Kp, Ki, and Kd the input
9 signal changes from the input as step, square wave and sine wave respectively. Next,
10 we change the vaule of P; I; D to investigate the effect of these parameters to the
11 output response of the robot . Lastly, we conduct the simulation modelling the line-
12 following system with the changed transfer function of the robot to investigate and
13 confirm the working principle of the system.
14
15
16 4 Results and Discussion
17
18 First, we simulated with the parameters P = -6; I = -5; D = -1.2 corresponding to
19 the updates for Kp, Ki, and Kd. When the input signal is a square wave with an ampli-
20 tude of 12V, the response of the robot's straight-line motion speed is shown in Figure
21 8. The error between the standard model and the modified model is depicted in Figure
22 9. It can be observed that the MRAC_PID controller closely follows the model's re-
23 sponse, while the PID controller is considerably slower.
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37 Fig.8. The response of the linear speed of the robot
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51 Fig.9. Deviation compared to the model reference with the modified model
52 Next, we simulated with the same parameters P = -6; I = - 5; D = -1.2 correspond-
53 ing to the updates for Kp, Ki, and Kd. When the input signal is a square wave with an
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
 1
2
3
4 11
5
6
amplitude of 12V, a period of 10s, and a 50% duty cycle, the response of the robot's
7
8 straight-line motion speed is shown in Figure 10.
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22 Fig.10. The response of the linear speed of the robot with a square wave input
23
24 Next, we simulated with the same parameters P = -6; I = -5; D = -1,2
25 corresponding to the updates for Kp, Ki, and Kd, but with a change in the input signal
26 to a sine wave, symbolizing the robot's speed varying gradually or decreasing gradually
27 with an amplitude of 12V. The response of the rotational speed and straight-line motion
28 speed of the robot is shown in Figure 11.
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43 Fig.11. The response of the linear speed of the robot with a sine wave input
44
To examine the influence of adaptive tuning coefficients for the PID controller, we
45
simulated with the parameters P = -5; I = - 3; D = -1.5 corresponding to the updates
46
47 for Kp, Ki, and Kd, and changed the input signal to a square wave with an amplitude
48 of 12V. The response of the straight-line motion speed of the robot is shown in Figure
49 12. The results indicate that reducing the tuning coefficients results in a smoother
50 response with fewer oscillations, but the adherence is lower as a consequence of lower
51 tuning coefficients.
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
 1
2
3
4 12
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20 Fig.12. The response of the linear speed of the robot with P; I; D decrease
21
To further investigate the influence of adaptive tuning parameters for the PID con-
22
23 troller, we simulated with the parameters P = - 5.5; I = - 2.125; D = 1.25 correspond-
24 ing to the updates for Kp, Ki, and Kd, and continued with a square wave input signal
25 with an amplitude of 12V. The response of the robot's straight-line motion speed is
26 shown in Figure 13. The results indicate that increasing the tuning coefficients leads to
27 more oscillations in the following response and higher adherence to the reference, while
28 increasing the number of tuning parameters results in overshooting and oscillations in
29 the tracking process of the model's signal.
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43 Fig.13. The response of the linear speed of the robot with P; I; D increase
44
The model of the line-following robot with the adaptive PID controller, where the
45
46 transfer function of the robot has been replaced with a completely different one (sym-
47 bolizing the process of changing the robot's parameters during operation), is simulated
48 in MATLAB Simulink as indicated in Figure 14.
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
 1
2
3
4 13
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31 Fig.14. The simulation model of the line-following system with the modified transfer function
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46 Fig.15. Simulation results of the line-following system with the modified transfer function
47 As seen in the simulation results in Figure 15, when a deviation occurs (from the 3rd
48 to the 6th second), there is a simultaneous deviation in the speed of both wheels, with
49 the same magnitude but opposite signs. This ensures that the robot always moves with
50 a stable speed and stays close to the line. Similarly, in Figure 16, we observe that when
51 the line changes, the orientation angle θ of the robot also changes accordingly, enabling
52 the robot to follow a certain curved trajectory (Figure 17) and then return to a straight
53 path when there is no deviation.
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
 1
2
3
4 14
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18 Fig.16. The simulation results of the orientation angle θ when the deviation is non-zero with the
19 modified transfer function
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32 Fig.17. The simulation results of the robot's position when the deviation is non-zero with the
33 modified transfer function
34
35
36 5 Conclusions
37
38 From this, we can conclude that with the designed MRAC_PID controller, the robot's
39 performance is consistently ensured to achieve stable speed of 0.5 m/s even when the
40 robot's transfer function changes. The simulation results obtained are fully in line with
41
theoretical research, confirming the correctness and accuracy of the algorithm and the
42
construction of the adaptive PID controller.
43
44 Static error, overshoot, settling time, and the number of oscillations in the transmis-
45 sion system are all well within acceptable ranges as indicated in section 4, especially
46 the overshoot and settling time are minimal. The simulation results once again demon-
47 strate and confirm that the application of the adaptive PID controller can fully meet the
48 control quality requirements of the transmission system. In the event of a change in the
49 robot's transfer function, we conduct simulations to anticipate potential parameter ad-
50 justments during actual operations. However, accurately determining these changes for
51 experimental purposes in the real model presents challenges.
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
 1
2
3
4 15
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Declarations
The data and source code used to support the fndings of this study are available from
12
13 the corresponding author upon request.
14
15
16
Competing interests
17 The authors declare that they have no competing interests.
18
19
20
Funding
No funding was received on this project.
21
22
23
Authors' contributions
24
Authors contributions: Vo is corresponding author who conducted research and exper-
25
26 iments also analyzed the data, developed the key studies, and wrote the manuscript as
27 active members of this project, Duan partially conducted research and experiments, Le
28 and Nguyen advised the research and experiments of this project. All authors read and
29 approved the fnal manuscript.
30
31
32 Acknowledgements
33
34 The authors would like to thank members of Mechatronics Division of Faculty of
35 Mechanical Engineering, Univesity of Science and Technology-The Univesity of Da
36 Nang for their support and feedback.
37
38
39 References
40
41 1. Pham, AD., Ahn, HJ. High Precision Reducers for Industrial Robots Driving 4th Industrial
42 Revolution: State of Arts, Analysis, Design, Performance Evaluation and Perspective. Int. J.
43 of Precis. Eng. and Manuf.-Green Tech. 5, 519–533 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40684-
44 018-0058-x
45 2. Tran, T. H. T., Nguyen, D. S., Vo N. T. and Le, H. N. Design of Delta Robot Arm based on
46 Topology optimization and Generative Design Method," 2020 5th International Conference
47 on Green Technology and Sustainable Development (GTSD), Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam,
48 2020, pp. 157-161, doi: 10.1109/GTSD50082.2020.9303083.
49 3. Vo, N.T., Dang, P.V., Ngo, T.N., Le, H.N., Do, L.H.T.: Restaurant Serving Robot with Dou-
50 ble Line Sensors Following Approach. 2019 IEEE International Conference on Mechatron-
ics and Automation (ICMA). 235-239 (2019). DOI: 10.1109/ICMA.2019.8816404
51
4. Nguyen, D.N., Cao, T.B., Pham, T.H., Vo, N.T., Dang,P.V and Le, H.N.: Design and Con-
52
trol of a Ball-balancing Robot. The 4th International Conference on Green Technology and
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
 1
2
3
4 16
5
6
Sustainable Development(GTSD), Ho Chi Minh City. 317-322 (2018). DOI:
7 10.1109/DDECS.2019.8724645
8 5. Vo, N. T. and Sawada, H. (2016) “Automatic Vowel Sequence Reproduction for a Talking
9 Robot Based on PARCOR Coefficient Template Matching,” IEIE Transactions on Smart
10 Processing and Computing. The Institute of Electronics Engineers of Korea. doi:
11 10.5573/ieiespc.2016.5.3.215.
12 6. Thanh, V.N.; Vinh, D.P.; Nam, L.H.; Nghi, N.T.; Le Anh, D. Reinforcement Q-learning PID
13 Controller for a Restaurant Mobile Robot with Double Line-Sensors. In Proceedings of the
14 4th International Conference on Machine Learning and Soft Computing, Haiphong City,
15 Vietnam, 17–19 January 2020; pp. 164–167. https://doi.org/10.1145/3380688.3380718
16 7. Wang, J., Takahashi, Y. Indoor mobile robot self-localization based on a low-cost light sys-
17 tem with a novel emitter arrangement. Robomech J 5, 17 (2018).
18 https://doi.org/10.1186/s40648-018-0114-x
19 8. Inotsume, H., Kubota, T. Terrain traversability prediction for off-road vehicles based on
20 multi-source transfer learning. Robomech J 9, 6 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1186/s40648-021-
21 00215-3
22 9. Ozaki, R., Sugiura, N. & Kuroda, Y. LiDAR DNN based self-attitude estimation with learn-
23 ing landscape regularities. Robomech J 8, 26 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1186/s40648-021-
24 00213-5
25 10. Shamsudin, A.U., Ohno, K., Hamada, R. et al. Consistent map building in petrochemical
26 complexes for firefighter robots using SLAM based on GPS and LIDAR . Robomech J 5, 7
27 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1186/s40648-018-0104-z
28 11. Andhra, P. Design and Implementation of Double Line Follower Robot, International Jour-
29 nal of Engineering Science and Technology, vol.3, no. 6, pp. 47-53, 2011.
30 12. Le, H.N., Dang, P.V., Pham, A-D., Vo, N.T. (2020). System identifications of a 2DOF pen-
31 dulum controlled by QUBE-servo and its unwanted oscillation factors. Archive of Mechan-
32 ical Engineering,67 (4), 435-450. DOI: 10.24425/ame.2020.131699
33 13. Karan, V.K., Alam, A. & Thakur, A. Hybrid control using fuzzy logic and adaptive space
34 vector modulation for reduction of torque ripples in PM-BLDC motor drive. J. Eng. Appl.
35 Sci. 70, 66 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1186/s44147-023-00238-0
14. Xu, W., Zeng, L. Speed tracking control for electro-hydraulic system considering variable
36
load disturbance. J. Eng. Appl. Sci. 70, 15 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1186/s44147-023-
37
00185-w
38
15. Maruyama, N., Mouri, H. A proposal for adaptive cruise control balancing followability and
39
comfortability through reinforcement learning. Robomech J 9, 22 (2022).
40
https://doi.org/10.1186/s40648-022-00235-7
41 16. Mirza, A., Zeb, A. & Sheikh, S.A. Robust adaptive algorithm for active control of impulsive
42 noise. EURASIP J. Adv. Signal Process. 2016, 44 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1186/s13634-
43 016-0344-0
44 17. Neto, A.A., Macharet, D.G., da Silva Campos, V.C. et al. Adaptive complementary filtering
45 algorithm for mobile robot localization. J Braz Comp Soc 15, 19–31 (2009).
46 https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03194503
47 18. Barton, A., Volna, E. & Kotyrba, M. Control of autonomous robot behavior using data fil-
48 tering through adaptive resonance theory. Vietnam J Comput Sci 5, 85–94 (2018).
49 https://doi.org/10.1007/s40595-017-0103-7
50 19. Yamakawa, S., Ebara, K. Control of mobile robot by switching traveling direction and con-
51 trol gain. Robomech J 4, 29 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1186/s40648-017-0097-z
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
 1
2
3
4 17
5
6
20. Kawaguchi, N., Araki, N., Sato, T. et al. Active fault-diagnosis method using adaptive allo-
7 cator and fault-tolerant adaptive control system design. Robomech J 7, 28 (2020).
8 https://doi.org/10.1186/s40648-020-00175-0
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65