3668
6, JUNE 2023
Fuzzy Adaptive Fault Tolerant Time-Varying
Formation Control for Nonholonomic Multirobot
Systems With Range Constraints
Yongming Li , Senior Member, IEEE, Shijie Dong , Kewen Li , and Shaocheng Tong , Senior Member, IEEE
Abstract—This article studies the fault tolerant tracking prob-
lem of time-varying formation for nonholonomic multirobot
systems. Uncertain nonlinear dynamics are approximated by em-
ploying fuzzy logic systems (FLSs), and based on the adaptive
backstepping recursive procedure and dynamic surface technology,
a fuzzy adaptive formation tracking control scheme is developed. It
is notable for formation to achieve collision avoidance and connec-
tivity maintenance, so the prescribed performance methodology
is introduced to solve the constrained range problem of distance
and angle. Meanwhile, in order to compensate the effect from
the infinite number of uncertain actuator failures, the robots can
maintain interacting with their leader at the moment of actuator
faults, and also uninterruptedly track the time-varying referenced
trajectory from the leader, a novel decentralized adaptive fault
tolerant control (AFTC) strategy is further proposed for time-
varying formation and guarantees all signals are semi-global uni-
formly ultimately bounded (SGUUB). Finally, the effectiveness of
AFTC strategy is illustrated perfectly for nonholonomic multirobot
systems.
Index Terms—Collision avoidance and connectivity
maintenance, fault tolerant control, fuzzy adaptive control,
nonholonomic multirobot systems, time-varying formation.
I. INTRODUCTION
N RECENT years, the task of agent has become more
I and more difficult as the amount of network information
increasing, the individual agent is often unable to perform tasks
efficiently, so the coordination control of multi-agent systems
(MASs) has received considerable attention in literatures [1], [2],
[3], [4], [5], [6], including mobile multirobot [2], [3], unmanned
aerial vehicles [4] and underwater vehicles [5], [6]. Among them,
the nonholonomic multirobot has been investigated from re-
searchers [7], [8], [9], because a class of robot is underdriven and
it is difficult to accurately model, the nonholonomic constraints
stand for that the number of independent control variables is
less than degrees of freedom. However, the early work [10] only
Manuscript received 15 February 2023; revised 20 March 2023; accepted 31
March 2023. Date of publication 5 April 2023; date of current version 20 July
2023. This work was supported by National Natural Science Foundation of China
under Grants U22A2043 and 61822307. (Corresponding author: Yongming Li.)
Yongming Li, Kewen Li, and Shaocheng Tong are with the College of
Science, Liaoning University of Technology, Jinzhou 121001, China (e-mail:
l_y_m_2004@163.com; likewen2018@163.com; jztongsc@163.com).
Shijie Dong is with the College of Electrical Engineering, Liaoning University
of Technology, Jinzhou 121001, China (e-mail: dongshijielove@163.com).
Color versions of one or more figures in this article are available at
https://doi.org/10.1109/TIV.2023.3264800.
Digital Object Identifier 10.1109/TIV.2023.3264800
2379-8858 © 2023 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission.
See https://www.ieee.org/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
Authorized licensed use limited to: Zhejiang University. Downloaded on November 17,2023 at 06:58:28 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON INTELLIGENT VEHICLES, VOL. 8, NO.
took into account the robot kinematics, the dynamics of mobile
robots were overlooked, so that the internal dynamics of the
robot cannot be controlled accurately. Although many studies
considered dynamics, the uncertainty of inherent model was
ignored. To solve such unknown nonlinear dynamic problems,
the adaptive fuzzy control, adaptive neural network control and
the sliding mode control approach were researched in [11], [12],
[13], [14], [15]. The formation tracking control problem is a
pivotal part in the coordination control, the purpose of formation
is to organize the scattered people, transportation vehicles, etc.
into a certain order or form of organization to perform their
respective tasks, and the problem of time-varying formation
has practical research significance. In the formation control
strategy, the leader-follower (L-F) method [16], behavior-based
method [17] and virtual structure method [18] are the relatively
main schemes, in which the L-F is one of the most simply
and general strategies, it can be extensible as the number of
robots increasing and reduces the signal computations, due to
that the robot does not need to perceive the full information of
the surrounding environment. Despite these existent efforts, the
most previous studies did not consider the range constraints of
collision and sensing devices. For these reason, many scholars
have conducted extensive research on these troubles. The Ln
type barrier function was employed in [19] to limit the boundary
of selected performance functions, then the margin of error is
restricted indirectly, this scheme can ensure that each robot can
maintain communication within the safe collision avoidance
range. The tangent Lyapunov barrier function was applied in [20]
with prescribed performance control (PPC) methodology, which
was well implement the connectivity maintaining and collision
avoidance of each robot for nonholonomic multirobot formation.
None of the above relevant documents have been resolved the
problem of asymmetric constraints, so the authors in [21] subtly
combined the PPC methodology and a general barrier function,
the predefined transient and steady-state performances were
guaranteed, which enforced that the performance requirements
on the formation tracking errors, the scheme successfully solved
the problem of asymmetric constraints. Nevertheless, the above
schemes are effective on the premise that the robot does not fail.
Once the actuator fails, they will become obsolete.
Along with the aging of robot components, the actuator may
occasionally fail. If these failures are not handled properly, the
failure of a single robot may quickly spread to the entire system,
these faults will make the system unstable, and then each robot
LI et al.: FUZZY ADAPTIVE FAULT TOLERANT TIME-VARYING FORMATION CONTROL FOR NONHOLONOMIC MULTIROBOT SYSTEMS
can not be controlled, which not only can not maintain the
normal formation structure, but also make the robots collide, and
can not maintain the normal connectivity, so the fault detection
of multirobot systems has received more and more attention.
But, in the previous research literature on robots, the treatment
of unknown different faults has not been considered, and the
adaptive compensation control method designed in this paper
can effectively solve this problem. On the premise of system
stability, it ensures the connectivity maintenance and collision
avoidance between robots, which is the research significance and
motivation of this paper. In other words, it is essential to hold the
reliability and performance in the presence of infinite number
of unexpected uncertain faults for multirobot systems. In order
to find the better solutions for this faults problem meaningfully,
a large number of FTC schemes were investigated widely in
literatures [22], [23], [24], [25], [26], [27], [28], [29], [30],
[31], [32], [33], the compensatory controllers are designed to
determine when actuators are invalid. In [23], a adaptive fuzzy
fault-tolerant control programme was developed for formation
tracking of uncertain nonlinear multiagent systems under di-
rected switching graph theory, it promptly responds the effect
of the sensor faults with unknown nonlinearity simultaneously.
Furthermore, to adapt infinite number of uncertain faults in
finite-time, a novel adaptive FTC method was first put forward in
[24] for the uncertain nonlinear systems, it realized more rapid
adaptation for infinite uncertain faults by combining finite-time
theory and command-filtering technology. But it only stays at the
theoretical stage and not apply to the actual engineering system,
for example, the nonholonomic multirobot systems. In [25], a
practical adaptive FTC approach was proposed for switched odd-
rational-power MASs in the predefined time. The authors of [26]
investigated a FTC scheme for the autonomous surface vessels
with the constraints of distance and angle to attain designated
leader-follower formation structure. In [27], a predesignated
formation tracking FTC scheme was proposed for networked
nonholonomic mobile robots in the presence of multiple faults,
however, it did not solve the problem of asymmetric constraints
and collision avoidance. The authors of [31] put forward an
approach of fault tolerant formation control for heterogeneous
multiagent systems, but it did not adapt to uncertain system
parameters and unknown faults. To sum up, according to the
author’s knowledge, these solutions fail to solve the problem
of infinite number of different actuator faults for nonholonomic
multirobot systems with uncertain dynamics, which have range
constraints and time-varying referenced trajectories.
The original ideas are drawn from the above literatures, this
article puts forward the AFTC strategy for nonholonomic mul-
tirobot systems. When robots are subjected to uncertain infinite
times actuator failures, the stability issues of time-varying for-
mation tracking control can be guaranteed, and the collision
avoidance and connectivity maintenance can be come true.
Compared with the previous literatures, the main innovations
of this article can be summarized as follows:
1) This article first proposes an adaptive fault tolerant control
strategy of time-varying formation for nonholonomic mul-
tirobot systems. In contrast to the ordinary FTC methods
in precious literatures [26], [27], [28], the proposed AFTC
strategy can effectively compensate the effect of infinite
Authorized licensed use limited to: Zhejiang University. Downloaded on November 17,2023 at 06:58:28 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
3669
number of uncertain actuator failures, what’s more the
controllers don’t need to acquire prior knowledge about
the different faults and the unknown system parameters.
2) Compared with the existing formation tracking control
schemes [19], [20], [21], a novel fuzzy adaptive control
method is introduced to approximate the uncertain dynam-
ics functions and unknown parameters of nonholonomic
multirobot. Meanwhile, the desired distance and bearing
angle of time-varying formation can be adjusted auto-
matically, it improves the shape transformation ability.
Thus, it is conducive to better meet the requirements of
environmental changes.
3) Although the papers [8], [9] and [27] also researched
the nonholonomic multirobot systems, the problems of
collision-avoiding and connectivity-maintaining were not
considered. The proposed control strategy employs the
PPC methodology and the general barrier function to solve
time-varying asymmetric constraint problem of distance
and angle ranges, the formation steady and transient per-
formance are guaranteed. In addition, they don’t also con-
sider adaptive system parameters and the AFTC problem.
II. THE PROBLEM FORMULATION AND PRELIMINARIES
A. Multirobot Communication Topology
Δ Δ
The directed graph G = (ν, ε), ν = {1, 2, . . ., M } is intro-
duced to explain the information transmission of robots that
have different communication ranges. The ith robot and the jth
robot can form a leader-follower (L-F) structure when lij < ¯lij ,
in which i = 1, . . . , M , j = 0, . . . , M and i is not equal to j.
¯lij is the maximum information transmission range of the ith
robot. The neighbor set of leaders for ith robot is represented by
Ni (t) = {j|lij (t) < ¯l}. ε ⊆ ν × ν is the set of edges, (i, j) ∈ ε
denotes that the ith robot can receive information from the jth
robot in the single direction. In the directed graph G, a group
of oriented edges are denoted from node i1 to node ik , its
representation is (i1 , i2 ), (i2 , i3 ),..., (ik−1 , ik ). In order to form
a directional transmission in decentralized L-F control strategy,
a directed spanning tree is formulated by a super leader, several
virtual leaders and followers. The followers receive information
from virtual leaders that as followers receive information from
super leader.
B. The Kinematic and Dynamic Model of Nonholonomic
Robot
Considering a group leader-follower formation structure, the
leaders are represented by robot0 to robotM and followers are
represented by robot1 to robotM , and the each robot has limited
ranges of communication. The generic kinematics and dynamics
of the ith nonholonomic robot are described by the following
equalities [21]:
ẋi = vi cos θi
ẏi = vi sin θi
θ̇i = ωi
Mi żi = −Fi (ωi ) zi − Di zi + τif (1)
3670 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON INTELLIGENT VEHICLES, VOL. 8, NO. 6, JUNE 2023

where i = 1, . . . , M , (xi , yi ) is the coordinate of the midpoint

between two driving wheels of the ith robot, θi is the heading
angle of the ith robot, vi is the linear velocity of the ith robot,
ωi is the angular velocity of the wheel of the ith robot, τif is the
control torque applied to the ith robot. The system matrices are
defined as
 
2 mi11 + mi12 0
Mi = ,
ri 0 ai (mi11 − mi12 )
 
2 0 −ai bi ωi
Fi (ωi ) = ,
ri bi ωi 0
 
1 di11 + di22 ai (di11 − di22 )
Di = ,
ri gai11 − di22 ai (di11 + di22 )
 T
zi = [vi , ωi ]T , τif = τiv f f
, τiω ,

in which mi11 = 0.25a−2 2 2 ¯

i ri (mi ai + Ii ) + Iiω , mi12 = Fig. 1. Basic setup of a pair of L-F robots with the constraints.
−2 2 2 ¯
0.25ai ri (mi ai − Ii ), mi = mib + 2mio , bi =
0.5a−1 2
i ri mib ci and I¯i = mib c2i + 2mio a2i + Iib + 2Iim .
mib is the mass of robot, mio is the mass of motor wheel, Iib is C. Time-Varying Formation Model and Problem Statement
moment of inertia of the robot about the vertical axis through
the mass center, Iiω and Iim are moments of inertia of the wheel The basic structure of a L-F model is shown in Fig. 1, the
with the rotor of a motor about the wheel axis and diameter, ri relative distance lij and the relative bearing angle ψij between
is radius of the actuated wheels, ai is the width of half robot the ith robot and the jth robot are described by

body, di11 and di22 are damping coefficients. According to
lij = (xi − xj )2 + (yi − yj )2
system (1), the following equalities are represented as:
f
v̇i = Fiv + miv τiv (2) ψij = atan2 (ỹi , x̃i ) (6)
    
f
ω̇i = Fiω + miω τiω (3) x̃i cos θij sin θij xj − xi
= (7)
ỹi − sin θij cos θij yj − yi
where Fiv and Fiω are unknown continuous functions affiliated
to linear velocity vi and angular velocity ωi , miv and miω are where i indicates a leader and j indicates a follower in this
the unknown variables related to the characteristics of the robot frame of L-F model, and atan2(ỹi , x̃i ) is an available arctangent
itself. Considering time-varying multiplicative and additive ac- function.
tuator failures [24], the fault-tolerant actuator signals described In the actual information exploration, the position and ori-
by: entation of leader can be obtained by the sensor of follower,
f the transmission distance and visual field must be considered
τiv (t) = ρivk (t)τiv (t) + ζivk (t) (4)
due to the limited range of exploration, moreover, the collision
f
τiω (t) = ρiωk (t)τiω (t) + ζiωk (t) (5) of avoidance with other robots needs to be treasured. Thus, to
satisfy the condition of the effective communication range, the
where τiv (t) and τiω (t) are the designed actual actuator sig- distance and angle restrictions are defined as
nals, k = 1, 2, 3. . . denotes the kth fault model, ρivk (t) ∈ [0, 1]
and ρiωk (t) ∈ [0, 1] represent unknown failure rate of actuator 0 < lmin < lij (t) < lmax ∀t ≥ 0 (8)
faults, ζivk (t) and ζiωk (t) are unknown actuator faults functions. π π
ρivk (t) = 1, ζivk (t) = 0 and ρiωk (t) = 1, ζiωk (t) = 0 explain − < −ψmax < ψij (t) < ψmax < ∀t ≥ 0 (9)
2 2
that the ith robot is free from actuator faults.
where lmax indicates the maximum range to keep communicat-
Remark 1: For nonholonomic mobile robots model (2) and
ing, the lmin is minimum relative distance to avoid collision
(3), the robot parameters mi11 , mi12 , ρivk (t), ρiωk (t) and the
and ψmax is the maximum relative bearing angle, the initial
functions Fiv and Fiω are very difficult to obtain precisely,
conditions of them satisfy the restrictions (8) and (9). The
owing to the change of different road conditions and wear of
tracking errors of time-varying formation are defined as follows:
robotic components, however, many studies only consider that
they are known or the parameters centripetal coefficient bi and zil (t) = lij (t) − lijd (t) (10)
damping coefficients di11 and di12 are uncertain. To better adapt
ziψ (t) = ψij (t) − ψijd (t) (11)
to these changes, it is necessary to research the impact of these
uncertain nonlinear dynamics and they will be approximated by where lijd (t) represents the desired relative distance function
employing FLSs and adaptive technology. Furthermore, most and ψijd (t) represents the desired relative bearing angle function
researches don’t consider the problem of infinite number of of ith robot. Their ranges are 0 < lmin < lijd (t) < lmax and
uncertain actuator faults. −ψmax < ψijd (t) < ψmax . Substituting (10) and (11) into (8)

Authorized licensed use limited to: Zhejiang University. Downloaded on November 17,2023 at 06:58:28 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
LI et al.: FUZZY ADAPTIVE FAULT TOLERANT TIME-VARYING FORMATION CONTROL FOR NONHOLONOMIC MULTIROBOT SYSTEMS 3671

and (9) yields The objectives of this article are that designing adaptive fault
lmin − lijd (t) < zil (t) < lmax (t) − lijd (t) (12) tolerant time-varying formation actual actuator signals τiv (t)
and τiω (t) for the ith robot to achieve collision avoidance,
− ψmax − ψijd (t) < ziψ (t) < ψmax − ψijd (t) (13) connectivity maintenance and track time-varying trajectories
In order to better achieve trajectory tracking, connectivity when the robot’s actuators appear infinite uncertain failures, such
maintaining and collision avoidance, the formation trajectory as
tracking errors zil (t) and ziψ (t) need further to be restricted, i. 0 < lmin < lij (t) < lmax ∀t ≥ 0
and compel them to satisfy the evolution within specified con- ii. − π2 < −ψmax < ψij (t) < ψmax < π2 ∀t ≥ 0
straints. The predefined steady-state and transient performance iii. limt→∞ |lij (t) − lijd (t)| ≤ ξ1 , limt→∞ |ψij (t) − ψijd
of the tracking errors can be constrained by employing PPC (t)| ≤ ξ2
methodology and designing appropriate variables parameters. where i = 1, . . . , M , ξ1 > 0 and ξ2 > 0 are positive small pa-
Considering that the convergence rate should meet the preset rameters that can be made arbitrarily.
value, the maximum overshoot could not exceed the preset value
and the steady-state performance of formation trajectory track- III. FAULT TOLERANT FORMATION CONTROLLER DESIGN
ing error must be guaranteed, the asymmetric and time-varying In this section, a fuzzy adaptive time-varying formation con-
performance constraints are described as follows: trol scheme is proposed with the infinite number of uncertain
− δin Φin (t) < zij (t) < Φin (t) ∀t ≥ 0, n = l, ψ (14) actuator failures for nonholonomic multirobot systems, and the
tracking error constraints (14) and (18) are considered. Finally,
lmin − lijd (t) ψmax + ψijd (t)
δil (t) = , δiψ (t) = (15) the tracking errors could converge to a small neighborhood of
lijd (t) − lmax ψmax − ψijd (t)
zero and the proposed AFTC strategy is proven to be effective.
where δin (t) > 0 is a design function, and Φin (t) > 0 is the
prescribed performance function defined as A. The Preliminary of AFTC Strategy
−in t
Φin (t) = (Φin,0 − Φin,∞ ) zij + Φin,∞ (16) The following transformations are defined as
where n = l, ψ, Φil,0 = lmax − lijd , Φiψ,0 = ψmax − ψijd , 1
Φin,∞ is the steady-state boundaries and Φin,0 > Φin,∞ > 0, ϑim = (20)
gim
in > 0 are design parameters. To normalize the error, the
transformed error variable is defined as follows: ςim = |mim | ζimk (21)
zin (t) where gim = |mim |ρimk , m = v, ω, the unknown parameters
sin (t) = , n = l, ψ. (17)
Φin (t) ϑim and ςim will be estimated later by designing adaptive laws
Substituting the time-varying constraint (14) into (17), the for ith robot.
following time-invariant constraint can be described as
B. Fault Tolerant Time-Varying Formation Controller Design
−δin (t) < sin (t) < 1, n = l, ψ. (18)
Obviously, if the constraint condition (18) is satisfied, then In this subsection, the virtual control signals and actual actu-
the conditions (12) and (13) will be guaranteed, which means ator signals will be designed by combining the adaptive back-
the conditions (8) and (9) will be achievable. stepping recursive procedure and dynamic surfaces technology.
The problem of errors constraints is usually intractable in the To make robots follow the leaders form desired formation, the
control process, to deal with such constraints and make robots tracking errors are defined as
achieve trajectory tracking in safe ranges, the barrier function is ziv = vi − αivf (22)
defined as follows:
ziω = ωi − αiωf (23)
sin (t)s̄in sin
Bin (t) = , n = l, ψ (19) zαv = αivf − αiv
(s̄in − sin (t))(sin (t) + sin ) (24)
where s̄in and sin are designed boundary functions in advance, zαω = αiωf − αiω (25)
sin (t) is transformed error variable, the relationship of them is
where zαv and zαω represent the boundary layer errors, αivf and
sin < sin (t) < s̄in .
αiωf are filtered signals that can be obtained when virtual con-
Remark 2: It should be mentioned that the barrier func-
trol signals αiv and αiω through the first order low-pass filters,
tion Bin (t) is very effective to limit formation tracking er-
the relationship are αivf = αiv − ιiv α̇ivf + ιiv Δ
Φil cos ψij and
il
rors, duo to that it has finite escape property that Bin (t) Δ
will become infinity ∞ or infinitesimal −∞ when sin (t) ap- αiωf = αiω − ιiω α̇iωf + ιiω Φiψiψ
, in which ιiv > 0 and ιiω >
proaches boundary functions s̄in or sin . Otherwise, Bin (t) = 0 0 are small time constants, αivf (0) = αiv (0) and αiωf (0) =
only if sin (t) = 0. In addition, when sin (t) is not be lim- αiω (0).
ited, which implies s̄in and sin will be going to infinity, it The barrier Lyapunov function candidate Vi1 is constructed
ensures lims̄in =sin →∞ [(sin (t)s̄in sin /(s̄in − sin (t))(sin (t) + as
sin ))] = sin (t). Therefore, the proposed barrier function can 1 1
Vi1 = B2il + B2iψ (26)
effectively deal with the symmetric and asymmetric constraint 2 2
problems. where barrier function Bin (t) is defined in (19), n = l, ψ.

Authorized licensed use limited to: Zhejiang University. Downloaded on November 17,2023 at 06:58:28 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
3672 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON INTELLIGENT VEHICLES, VOL. 8, NO. 6, JUNE 2023

In order to control position and angle of ith robot, the follow- 2Δiψ
υiω = λi2 ziω + ι−1
iω zαω −
ing virtual control signals αiv and αiω are designed as Φiψ
 
1 λil1 Φil sil (s̄il − sil )(sil + sil ) ziω
αiv = + ŵiω
T
ϕiω (X) + ςˆiω tanh (34)
cos ψij s̄il sil λiz

Δil v̄ˆj Φ̇il zil ŵ˙ im = Ωim [ϕim (X)zim − λiwm ŵim ] (35)
+v̄ˆj tanh − (27) where λi1 > 0, λi2 > 0 and λiwm are design parameters, m =
Φil  Φil
s s̄2 s2in (s2in +s̄in sin )
v, ω. λiz > 0 is a given constant, Δin = (s̄in in
−s )3 (s +s )3
is
λiψ1 Φiψ siψ (s̄iψ − siψ )(siψ + siψ ) in in in in

αiω = a known continuous function, and n = l, ψ, and X = [vi , ωi ]T

s̄iψ siψ is a variable need to be approximated.
 The actual actuator signals τiv (t), τiω (t) and the adaptive laws
vi v̄ˆj Δiψ v̄ˆj Φ̇iψ ziψ
+ sin ψij + tanh − ˙
lij lij Φiψ lij  Φiψ
(28) ϑ̂im , ςˆ˙im are designed as follows:
where λil1 and λiψ1 are positive design parameters, tanh(·) is a ziv ϑ̂2iv υiv
2
τiv = − sign(miv )  (36)
known hyperbolic tangent function and  > 0 is a given constant. 2 ϑ̂2 υ 2 + σ 2
ziv iv iv iv
vj represents the linear velocity of the leader, v̄j is the unknown
upper bound of vj and v̄ˆj is the estimate of v̄j , there are v̄˜j = ziω ϑ̂2iω υiω
2
v̄j − v̄ˆj . v̄ˆj is updated by the following equality τiω = − sign(miω )  (37)
2 ϑ̂2 υ 2 + σ 2
  ziω iω iω iω
Δil Δiψ
v̄ˆ˙ j = λvj1 + − λvj2 v̄ˆj (29) ˙

Φil Φiψ lij ϑ̂im = Γim zim ϑim − λiϑm ϑ̂im (38)
where λvj1 is a design parameter and λvj2 is an adjustable   
zim
parameter. ςˆ˙im = rim zim tanh − λiςm ςˆim (39)
Since the continuous nonlinear functions Fiv (X) and Fiω (X) λiz
are unknown in (2) and (3), thus, the FLSs F̂iv (X|ŵiv ) = where σiv > 0, σiω > 0, λiϑm > 0 and λiςm > 0 are design
T
ŵiv ϕiv (X) and F̂iω (X|ŵiω ) = ŵiω
T
ϕiω (X) are employed to ap- parameters, and m = v, ω.
proximate the unknown function Fiv (X) and Fiω (X), and we
assume that
∗T
C. Stability Analysis
Fiv (X) = wiv ϕiv (X) + εiv (X) (30)
In this subsection, according to Lyapunov stability theory,
∗T
Fiω (X) = wiω ϕiω (X) + εiω (X) (31) the fact that nonholonomic multirobot systems (1) is stable is
guaranteed by using the designed control signals and adap-
where X = [vi , ωi ]T is a variable that need to be approximated,
tive laws. Meanwhile, the stability theorem is elaborated as
εiv (X) and εiω (X) are the approximation errors. The positive
follows.
constants ε∗iv and ε∗iω satisfy |εiv (X)| ≤ ε∗iv and |εiω (X)| ≤ ε∗iω .
Theorem 1: Taking into account nonholonomic multirobot
In order to design the actual actuator signals τiv and τiω to
systems (1), the virtual control signals (27), (28), (33), (34) the
control velocities vi and ωi , the Lyapunov function candidate
updating laws (29), the adaptive laws (35), (38), (39), and the
Vi2 is constructed as
actual actuator signals (36), (37) are designed, and the proposed
1 2 2 2 2 AFTC strategy of time-varying formation can ensure all signals
Vi2 = Vi1 + z + ziω + zαv + zαω
2 iv of nonholonomic multirobot systems are SGUUB. Finally, the
+ λ−1 ˜2 T −1 T −1
vj1 v̄j + w̃iv Ωiv w̃iv + w̃iω Ωiω w̃iω
control objectives that collision avoidance, connectivity mainte-
nance and tracking time-varying trajectories are achieved when
+Γ−1 2 −1 2 −1 2 −1 2
iv giv ϑ̃iv + riv ς˜iv + Γiω giω ϑ̃iω + riω ς˜iω ) (32) the robot’s actuators appear infinite uncertain failures.
∗ Proof: Step 1. Differentiating (10) and (11) along system (1),
where w̃im = wim − ŵim , ϑ̃im = ϑim − ϑ̂im and ς˜im = ςim −
(6) and (7), one yields
ςˆim are parameter estimation errors, Ωim = ΩTim > 0 is an
adaptive matrix, Γim and rim are design parameters, in which żil = −vi cos ψij + vj cos Θij (40)
m = v, ω. vi vj
żiψ = −ωi + sin ψij − sin Θij (41)
The virtual control signals υiv , υiω and parameter adaptive lij lij
laws ŵ˙ im are designed as follows: where Θij = ψij + θij − θj , vj is the linear velocity of the jth
2Δil robot and θj is the heading angle of the jth robot, they are
υiv = λi1 ziv + ι−1
iv zαv − cos ψij
Φil unavailable due to the lack of communication among with others
 robots. Fortunately, the relative distance lij and relative bearing
ziv
+ ŵiv
T
ϕiv (X) + ςˆiv tanh (33) angle ψij can be acquired by the onboard stereo, the velocities
λiz vi and ωi can be obtained by the speed transmitter.

Authorized licensed use limited to: Zhejiang University. Downloaded on November 17,2023 at 06:58:28 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
LI et al.: FUZZY ADAPTIVE FAULT TOLERANT TIME-VARYING FORMATION CONTROL FOR NONHOLONOMIC MULTIROBOT SYSTEMS 3673

The derivative of Lyapunov function (26) is + miω (ρiωk τiω + ζiωk ) + υiω − υiω − α̇iωf ]

1 Φ̇il zil 
V̇i1 = Δil (vj cos Θij − vi cos ψij ) − Δil
Φil Φ2il + zαv −ι−1iv zαv + cos ψij − α̇iv
Φil
  
1 Φ̇iψ ziψ Δiψ
+ Δiψ
vi
sin ψij −
vj
sin Θij − ωi − + zαω −ι−1iω zαω + − α̇iω
Φiψ lij lij Φ2iψ Φiψ
(42) + λ−1 ˜ ˜˙ T −1 ˙ −1 ˙
vj1 v̄ j v̄ j + w̃iv Ωiv w̃ iv + w̃iω Ωiω w̃ iω
T

where Δin has been defined before. Substituting virtual control

˙ ˙
signals (27) and (28) into (42) yields + Γ−1 −1
iv giv ϑ̃iv ϑ̃iv + riv ς˜iv ς˜iv
λil1 s2il (t)s̄il sil (s̄il sil + s2il (t)) ˙ ˙
V̇i1 = − + Γ−1 −1
iω giω ϑ̃iω ϑ̃iω + riω ς˜iω ς˜iω (50)
(s̄il − sil (t))2 (sil (t) + sil )2
Substituting the virtual control signals (33), (34), into (50)
λiψ1 s2iψ (t)s̄iψ siψ (s̄iψ siψ + s2iψ (t)) and after a simple calculation, we can yield
−
(s̄iψ − siψ (t))2 (siψ (t) + siψ )2 2 2
V̇i2 = V̇i1 − λi1 ziv − λi2 ziω − ι−1 2
iv zαv
Δil vj Δiψ vj
+ cos Θij − sin Θij − zαv α̇iv − ι−1 2
iω zαω − zαω α̇iω
Φil Φiψ lij
 + ziv w̃iv
T
ϕiv (X) + ziω w̃iω
T
ϕiω (X)
Δil Δil v̄ˆj
ˆ
− v̄ j tanh
Φil Φil  + ziv εiv (X) + ziω εiω (X) + ziv υiv + ziω υiω

Δiψ Δiψ v̄ˆj + ziv miv ρivk τiv + ziω miω ρiωk τiω
− v̄ˆj tanh (43)  
Φiψ lij Φiψ lij  ziv
The following inequality holds + ςiv |ziv | − ziv tanh
λiz
λin1 s2in (t)s̄in sin (s̄in sin + s2in (t))  
− ≤ −λin1 B2in (44) ziω
(s̄in − sin (t))2 (sin (t) + sin )2 + ςiω |ziω | − ziω tanh
λiz
where n = l, ψ. Substituting (44) into (43) produces  
ziv
V̇i1 ≤ − λil1 B2il − λiψ1 B2iψ −1
+ riv ς˜iv ς˜˙iv + riv ziv tanh
λiz
Δil vj Δiψ vj  
+ cos Θij − sin Θij ziω
Φil Φiψ lij −1 ˙
+ riω ς˜iω ς˜iω + riω ziω tanh
λiz
Δil Δil v̄ˆj
− v̄ˆj tanh( ) + λ−1 ˜ ˜˙ T −1 ˙ −1 ˙
vj1 v̄ j v̄ j + w̃iv Ωiv w̃ iv + w̃iω Ωiω w̃ iω
T
Φil Φil 
 ˙ ˙
Δiψ Δiψ v̄ˆj + Γ−1 −1
− v̄ˆj tanh (45) iv giv ϑ̃iv ϑ̃iv + Γiω giω ϑ̃iω ϑ̃iω (51)
Φiψ lij Φiψ lij 
According to literature [24], and from (36) and (37), the
Step 2. According to (24) and (25), the time derivatives of zαv
following inequality holds
and zαω are
Δil z 2 ϑ̂2 υ 2
żαv = −ι−1 iv zαv + cos ψij − α̇iv (46) zim mim ρimk τim ≤ − |mim | ρimk  im im im
Φil 2 ϑ̂2 υ 2 + σ 2
zim im im im
Δiψ
żαω = −ι−1
iω zαω + − α̇iω (47) 2
gim zim ϑ̂2im υim
2
Φiψ ≤ −
¯ iv , |α̇iω | ≤ α̇
where |α̇iv | ≤ α̇ ¯ iω , in which α̇
¯ iv and α̇
¯ iω are given 2 ϑ̂2 υ 2 + σ 2
zim im im im
constants.
From (2)–(5), (22), (23), (30), and (31), the time derivatives ≤ gim σim − gim zim ϑ̂im υim (52)
of ziv and ziω can be got as follows:
where m = v, ω.
∗T
żiv = wiv ϕiv (X) + εiv (X) + miv τiv − α̇ivf (48) Invoking the fact 0 ≤ |β| − β tanh(β/χ) ≤ κχ, κ = 0.2785
∗T and substituting (52), the updating laws (29), and the adaptive
żiω = wiω ϕiω (X) + εiω (X) + miω τiω − α̇iωf (49)
laws (35), (38), (39), into (51), it follows that
where miv and miω are unknown robotic dynamics parameters.
The derivative of Lyapunov function (32) is V̇i2 ≤ − λil1 B2il − λiψ1 B2iψ − λi1 ziv
2 2
− λi2 ziω
 ∗T
V̇i2 = V̇i1 + ziv wiv ϕiv (X) + εiv (X) − ι−1 2 −1 2
iv zαv − zαv α̇iv − ιiω zαω − zαω α̇iω
+miv (ρivk τiv + ζivk ) + υiv − υiv − α̇ivf ] Δil vj Δil
+ cos Θ − v̄j
+ ∗T
ziω [wiω ϕiω (X) + εiω (X) Φil Φil

Authorized licensed use limited to: Zhejiang University. Downloaded on November 17,2023 at 06:58:28 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
3674 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON INTELLIGENT VEHICLES, VOL. 8, NO. 6, JUNE 2023

Δiψ vj Δiψ giv λiϑv 2 giω λiϑω 2 λiςv 2 λiςω 2

− sin Θ − v̄j + ϑiv + ϑiω + ς + ς
Φiψ lij Φiψ lij 2 2 2 iv 2 iω
 + giv σiv + giω σiω + κ(ςiv λiz + ςiω λiz + 2) (59)
Δil Δil Δil v̄ˆj
+ v̄ˆj − v̄ˆj tanh Considering the designed AFTC strategy with system (1), we
Φil Φil Φil 
 can obtain the final form of Lyapunov function (32) as follows:
Δiψ Δiψ Δiψ v̄ˆj
+ v̄ˆj − v̄ˆj tanh V̇i2 ≤ −Ci Vi2 + Di (60)
Φiψ lij Φiψ lij Φiψ lij 
with
+ λvj2 v̄˜j v̄ˆj + λiwv w̃iv
T
ŵiv + λiwω w̃iω
T
ŵiω Ci = min{2λil1 , 2λiψ1 , (2λi1 − λε1 ), (2λi2 − λε2 ),
+ ziv εiv (X) + ziω εiω (X) + giv σiv + giω σiω 
2ι−1 −1
iv − γiv , (2ιiω − γiω ), λvj2 , λiwv ,
+ κςiv λiz + giv λiϑv ϑ̃iv ϑ̂iv + λiςv ς˜iv ςˆiv λiwω , giv λiϑv , giω λiϑω , λiςv , λiςω }
+ κςiω λiz + giω λiϑω ϑ̃iω ϑ̂iω + λiςω ς˜iω ςˆiω (53) λvj2 2 ¯2
α̇ ¯2
α̇
Di = v̄j + iv + iω
By the Young’s inequality, we have 2 2γiv 2γiω
∗ 2 ∗ 2
− zαm α̇im + zim εim λiwv |wiv | ε∗2 λiwω |wiω | ε∗2
+ + iv + + iω
2 2λεv 2 2λεω
2
γim zαm ¯2
α̇ 2
λεm zim ε∗2
≤ + im + + im (54) giv λiϑv 2 giω λiϑω 2 λiςv 2 λiςω 2
2 2γim 2 2λεm + ϑiv + ϑiω + ς + ς
2 2 2 iv 2 iω
λvj2 v̄˜j v̄ˆj + λiwm w̃im
T
ŵim + giv σiv + giω σiω + κ(ςiv λiz + ςiω λiz + 2) > 0
2
λvj2 v̄˜j λvj2 v̄j2 λiwm w̃im 2 ∗
λiwm wim 2
According to inequality (60), it is clear that V̇i2 ≤ −Ci1 Vi2 ≤
≤− + − +
2 2 2 2 0 when Vi2 ≥Di /(Ci1 ), which implies Vi2 will  converge to the
(55) compact set Vi2 : Vi2 < D̄i |D̄i = Di /(Ci1 ) . Then, by (26)

gim λiϑm ϑ̃im ϑ̂im + λiςm ς˜im ςˆim and (32), we have |Bin | ≤ D̄i = D̄iB . Considering the defi-
s (t)s̄ s
nition of Bin , one can conclude that | (s̄in −sinin(t))(sinin in (t)+sin ) | ≤
gim λiϑm 2 gim λiϑm 2 λiςm 2 λiςm 2
≤ ϑim − ϑ̃im + ςim − ς˜ D̄iB , n = l, ψ, it implies that −Ms < M(t) ≤ sin (t) ≤ M̄(t) <
2 2 2 2 im
(56) Ms , in which M and M̄ are designed boundary func-
tions and it follows that the inequality |sin (t)| < Ms holds.
where 0 < λεm < [(ι−1 ¯2
im )/2], γim > 0 and α̇im > 0 are con- Then, in consideration of prescribed performance methodol-
stants, in which m = v, ω. ogy and the define of sin (t), we can infer that zin (t) is
The following inequalities hold bounded, which also leads limt→∞ |lij (t) − lijd (t)| ≤ ξ1 and
Δil vj Δil limt→∞ |ψij (t) − ψijd (t)| ≤ ξ2 , and by (8)–(14), it ensures 0 <
cos Θ − v̄j ≤0 (57) lmin < lij (t) < lmax and −π/2 < −ψmax < ψij (t) < ψmax <
Φil Φil
π/2 for t ≥ 0. The collision avoidance and connectivity mainte-
Δiψ vj Δiψ nance are guaranteed by the constraints of distance lij and angle
− sin Θ − v̄j ≤0 (58)
Φiψ lij Φiψ lij ψij , the error variables ziv , ziω , zαv , zαω , v̄˜j , w̃iv , w̃iω , ϑ̃iv , ϑ̃iω ,
Substituting (54)–(58) into (53), the following inequality can ς˜iv and ς˜iω are bounded. Furthermore, recalling the definitions of
be transformed as τiv in (36) and τiω in (37), it means that τiv and τiω are bounded.
Thus, all signals are SGUUB and the nonholonomic multirobot
V̇i2 ≤ − λil1 B2il − λiψ1 B2iψ systems are stable.
  The proof of Theorem 1 is completed.
λεv 2 λεω 2
− λi1 − ziv − λi2 − ziω
2 2 IV. SIMULATION STUDIES
γiv  2 γiω  2
− ι−1 − z − ι −1
− zαω In this section, the practicability of proposed AFTC strategy
iv
2 αv iω
2
is represented by following simulation studies. Considering the
λv λiwv λiwω
− j2 v̄˜j2 − w̃iv 2 − w̃iω 2 nonholonomic multirobot systems (1) and five mobile robots
2 2 2 with unknown modeling parameters miv , miω and unknown
giv λiϑv 2 giω λiϑω 2 λv functions Fiv , Fiω . By performing a comparative simulation
− ϑ̃iv − ϑ̃iω + j2 v̄j2
2 2 2 between the normal actuator signals and the actual fault tolerant
λiςv 2 λiςω 2 ¯ iv
α̇ 2 ¯ iω
α̇ 2 actuator signals (36) and (37) to explains the ability of dealing
− ς˜iv − ς˜iω + + with unknown infinite times actuator failures. All robot param-
2 2 2γiv 2γiω
eters are given in Table I, which are taken from literature [21].
∗ 2 ∗ 2
λiwv |wiv | ε∗2 λiwω |wiω | ε∗2 The parameters of uncertain actuator faults are chosen in Table
+ + iv + + iω II, in which f = sin t.
2 2λεv 2 2λεω

Authorized licensed use limited to: Zhejiang University. Downloaded on November 17,2023 at 06:58:28 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
LI et al.: FUZZY ADAPTIVE FAULT TOLERANT TIME-VARYING FORMATION CONTROL FOR NONHOLONOMIC MULTIROBOT SYSTEMS 3675

TABLE I
THE ROBOT PARAMETERS

TABLE II
THE ACTUATOR FAULTS PARAMETERS

Fig. 3. L-F formation structure graph in simulation studies.

bearing angle ψij . Thus, we chose the maximum communication

Fig. 2. The fuzzy membership functions.
Above all, the reference trajectories of leader are given as
x0 = 60 sin(0.02t), y0 = −60 cos(0.02t) + 60, the initial posi-
tions of robots are p0 (0) = [0, 0, 0]T , p1 (0) = [−4, 2, −π/4]T ,
p2 (0) = [−2, −3, π/3]T , p3 (0) = [−8.2, 1, π/9]T , p4 (0) =
[−6, −4, π/6]T , and the functions are
2ai bi ωi2 − vi (di11 + di22 ) − ai ωi (di11 − di22 )
Fiv =
2(mi11 + mi12 )
2bi vi ωi + vi (di11 − di22 ) + ai ωi (di11 + di22 )
Fiω = −
2ai (mi11 − mi12 )
in which F = 0.1 sin(vi + ωi ). Assuming that the universes
of discourse for variables vi and ωi are [−4, 4], i = 1, 2, 3, 4.
To approximate the unknown nonlinear functions in (2) and
(3), we select the Gaussian-type membership functions as
2 2
μFim = exp[− (vi −h) 2 ] ∗ exp[− (ωi −h)
2 ], h = −4, −2, 0, 2, 4,
i = 1, 2, 3, 4 and m = v, ω. The fuzzy membership functions
are shown in Fig. 2.
Secondly, the collision avoidance and connectivity mainte-
nance are guaranteed by the constraints of distance lij and
range lmax = 5 m, the collision avoidance distance lmin = 3 m,
the maximum detection angle ψmax = π/2, the desired relative
distance lijd (t) = 0.1 sin(0.02t) + 4, the desired bearing angles
ψ10d = ψ31d = 0.01 sin(0.02t) − π/6 for robots 1,3 and ψ20d =
ψ42d = 0.01 sin(0.02t) + π/6 for robots 2,4. The L-F formation
structure graph is shown in Fig. 3. The specific functions can
ensure the transient and steady-state performance specifications
on formation tracking error zin (t) with the constraints (12) and
(13). The following prescribed performance functions are given
as
Φil (t) = (1 − 0.1) exp(−0.3t) + 0.1
Φ1ψ (t) = Φ3ψ (t) = (2π/3 − 0.1) exp(−0.3t) + 0.1
Φ2ψ (t) = Φ4ψ (t) = (π/3 − 0.1) exp(−0.3t) + 0.1
In the end, the parameters in virtual control signals (27)
and (28) are taken as λil1 = λiψ1 = 0.2 and  = 1 for robots
1–4, the velocity parameters in updating law (29) are given as
λvj1 = λvj2 = 0.2 for robots 1,2,4 and λvj1 = λvj2 = 0.3 for
robot 3. The design parameters in virtual control signals (33)
and (34) are given as λi1 = λi2 = λiz = 0.2 for robots 1-4 and
the matrix and parameters in adaptive law (35), (38), and (39) are
taken as Ωim = diag{1}, λiwm = 1, in which m = v, ω, Γiv =
+F
0.1, r1v = 0.05, r2v = r3v = r4v = 0.1, Γiω = 10, riω = 10,
λiϑv = 8, λ1ςv = 4, λ2ςv = λ3ςv = λ4ςv = 2, λiϑw = 0.08 and
+F λiςw = 0.02, in which i = 1, 2, 3, 4. The design parameters in
the actual actuator signals (36) and (37) are given as σiv = σiω =
0.01 for robots 1–4.
Simulation results with the use of proposed adaptive fault
tolerant controllers are demonstrated in Figs. 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, and 9
and Figs. 13 and 14, then the result of using traditional controller
is shown in Figs. 10, 11, and 12 and Fig. 15. Finally, the change of
the control signal when selecting different parameters in Figs. 16
and 17.
By compared curves of formation tracking errors and different
controllers, it is clear that:

Authorized licensed use limited to: Zhejiang University. Downloaded on November 17,2023 at 06:58:28 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
3676 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON INTELLIGENT VEHICLES, VOL. 8, NO. 6, JUNE 2023

Fig. 7. Distance errors of the formation tracking with AFTC.

Fig. 4. The trajectories of five mobile robots in three dimensions.

Fig. 8. Bearing angle errors of the formation tracking for robot1,3 with AFTC.

Fig. 5. Curves of adaptive parameters v̄ˆj , ŵiv and ŵiω .

Fig. 9. Bearing angle errors of the formation tracking for robot2,4 with AFTC.

1) The proposed controllers with AFTC strategy can com-

pensate the effect from the infinite number of uncertain ac-
tuator failures effectively by adaptive intelligence technol-
ogy. On the contrary, traditional fault tolerant controllers
can’t solve these troubles.
2) The proposed method faces different faults, and the max-
imum value of the actuator is different. If the traditional
controller is used, it cannot cope with this uncertain fault,
Fig. 6. Curves of adaptive parameters ϑ̂iv , ϑ̂iω , ςˆiv and ςˆiω . and it will not play its role when the first fault occurs.

Authorized licensed use limited to: Zhejiang University. Downloaded on November 17,2023 at 06:58:28 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
LI et al.: FUZZY ADAPTIVE FAULT TOLERANT TIME-VARYING FORMATION CONTROL FOR NONHOLONOMIC MULTIROBOT SYSTEMS
Fig. 10. Distance errors of the formation tracking with traditional FTC.
Fig. 11. Bearing angle errors of the formation tracking for robot1,3 with
traditional FTC.
Fig. 12. Bearing angle errors of the formation tracking for robot2,4 with
traditional FTC.
3) Under the premise of asymmetric constraints, the demand
of transient and steady-state errors performance can be
complacent by adaptive fault tolerant controllers.
4) In the three-dimensional graph, the robots can track the
trajectory of the leaders perfectly and keep a safe distance
within communication ranges, which means the collision
Authorized licensed use limited to: Zhejiang University. Downloaded on November 17,2023 at 06:58:28 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
3677
Fig. 13. Curves of adaptive fault tolerant controller τiv (t).
Fig. 14. Curves of adaptive fault tolerant controller τiω (t).
avoidance and connectivity maintenance can be guaran-
teed.
The selection of parameters has a significant impact on the
control effect, so we will discuss the selection of simulation
parameters. First, the initial positions are strictly selected and
can float up and down within a range of 2. Then, when we choose
different controllers gains or different controllers failure rates,
the maximum values of the controllers will change significantly,
and the corresponding convergence rates will also change signif-
icantly. Finally, we provide guidelines to choose the parameters
and argue their choice of the performance evaluation indicators,
from the inequality sin < sin (t) < s̄in , the sin and s̄in can be
selected to astrict sin (t), when the value of s̄in is selected as
1(solid lines), the value of τiv (t) is relatively large, but the value
of τiω (t) is relatively small, then, we also took different values
such as 0.8(dotted line) and 0.5(dashed lines), when the value
of s̄in is selected as 0.5(dashed lines), the value of τiv (t) is
relatively small, but the value of τiω (t) is relatively large. Thus,
we can choose the best according to our own needs by adjusting
the designed parameters.
3678 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON INTELLIGENT VEHICLES, VOL. 8, NO. 6, JUNE 2023

V. CONCLUSION
This article has presented a fuzzy adaptive fault tolerant time-
varying formation tracking strategy for nonholonomic multi-
robot systems. FLSs have been devised to estimate the unknown
functions in robot dynamics. Furthermore, compared with previ-
ous research results on formation, the proposed AFTC strategy
has been extended to adjust to changing circumstances in the
presence of infinite number of uncertain faults, which means
that the robot can uninterruptedly track the time-varying desired
trajectory generated by the leader, avoid collision and maintain
connectivity with other robots. Based on Lyapunov stability
theory, the fact that all signals of the nonholonomic multirobot
systems are bounded has been proven. The simulation studies
have also demonstrated the availability of the decentralized
adaptive fault tolerant control strategy. Finally, we summarize
Fig. 15. Curves of traditional fault tolerant controllers. the next research direction, which is to further study and analyze
the robustness of nonholonomic multi robot formation, and
consider the optimal control issues [34] and more accurate and
fast asymptotic tracking.

REFERENCES
[1] L. An and G. H. Yang, “Collisions-free distributed optimal coordination for
multiple Euler-Lagrangian systems,” IEEE Trans. Autom. Control, vol. 67,
no. 1, pp. 460–467, Jan. 2022.
[2] X. Jin, S. L. Dai, and J. Liang, “Adaptive constrained formation tracking
control for a tractor-trailer mobile robot team with multiple constraints,”
IEEE Trans. Automat. Control, vol. 68, no. 3, pp. 1700–1707, Mar. 2023,
doi: 10.1109/TAC.2022.3151846.
[3] S. J. Yoo and B. S. Park, “Connectivity preservation and collision avoid-
ance in networked nonholonomic multi-robot formation systems: Unified
error transformation strategy,” Automatica, vol. 103, pp. 274–281, 2019.
[4] Q. QuanR. Fu, M. Li, and Y. Gao, “Practical distributed control for VTOL
UAVs to pass a virtual tube,” IEEE Trans. Intell. Veh., vol. 7, no. 2,
pp. 342–353, Jun. 2022.
[5] W. Wu, Z. Peng, L. Liu, and D. Wang, “A general safety-certified coop-
erative control architecture for interconnected intelligent surface vehicles
with applications to vessel train,” IEEE Trans. Intell. Veh., vol. 7, no. 3,
pp. 627–637, Sep. 2022.
Fig. 16. Curves of controller τiv (t) with different parameters. [6] Y. Yang, Y. Xiao, and T. S. Li, “A survey of autonomous underwater
vehicle formation: Performance, formation control, and communication
capability,” IEEE Commun. Surveys Tuts., vol. 23, no. 2, pp. 815–841,
Secondquarter 2021.
[7] J. Yang, F. Xiao, and T. Chen, “Event-triggered formation tracking control
of nonholonomic mobile robots without velocity measurements,” Auto-
matica, vol. 112, 2020, Art. no. 108671.
[8] W. Wang, J. Huang, and C. Wen, “Distributed adaptive control for con-
sensus tracking with application to formation control of nonholonomic
mobile robots,” Automatica, vol. 50, no. 4, pp. 1254–1263, 2014.
[9] B. Wang, S. Nersesov, and H. Ashrafiuon, “Formation regulation and
tracking control for nonholonomic mobile robot networks using polar
coordinates,” IEEE Control Syst. Lett., vol. 6, pp. 1909–1914, 2022.
[10] S. L. Dai, K. Lu, and X. Jin, “Fixed-time formation control of unicycle-type
mobile robots with visibility and performance constraints,” IEEE Trans.
Ind. Electron., vol. 68, no. 12, pp. 12615–12625, Dec. 2021.
[11] B. Cai, J. N. Yang, S. Yuan, Y. Shi, and L. X. Zhang, “Estimation for fuzzy
semi-Markov jump systems with indirectly accessible mode information
and nonideal data transmission,” IEEE Trans. Syst., Man, Cybern. Syst.,
vol. 51, no. 7, pp. 4016–4027, Jul. 2021.
[12] Y. Li, S. Tong, and L. Liu, “Adaptive output-feedback control design
with prescribed performance for switched nonlinear systems,” Automatica,
vol. 80, pp. 225–231, 2017.
[13] Z. Li, T. Li, G. Feng, R. Zhao, and Q. Shan, “Neural network-based
adaptive control for pure-feedback stochastic nonlinear systems with time-
varying delays and dead-zone input,” IEEE Trans. Syst., Man, Cybern.
Fig. 17. Curves of controller τiω (t) with different parameters.
Syst., vol. 50, no. 12, pp. 5317–5329, Dec. 2020.

Authorized licensed use limited to: Zhejiang University. Downloaded on November 17,2023 at 06:58:28 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
LI et al.: FUZZY ADAPTIVE FAULT TOLERANT TIME-VARYING FORMATION CONTROL FOR NONHOLONOMIC MULTIROBOT SYSTEMS
[14] H. Zhou, S. Sui, and S. Tong, “Finite-time adaptive fuzzy prescribed per-
formance formation control for high-order nonlinear multi-agent systems
based on event-triggered mechanism,” IEEE Trans. Fuzzy Syst., vol. 31,
no. 4, pp. 1229–1239, Apr. 2023, doi: 10.1109/TFUZZ.2022.3197938.
[15] S. Tong, K. Li, and Y. Li, “Robust fuzzy adaptive finite-time control for
high-order nonlinear systems with unmodeled dynamics,” IEEE Trans.
Fuzzy Syst., vol. 29, no. 6, pp. 1576–1589, Jun. 2021.
[16] J. Lin, Z. Miao, H. Zhong, and W. Peng, “Adaptive image-based
leader-follower formation control of mobile robots with visibility con-
straints,” IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., vol. 68, no. 7, pp. 6010–6019,
Jul. 2021.
[17] G. Lee and D. Chwa, “Decentralized behavior-based formation control
of multiple robots considering obstacle avoidance,” Intell. Serv. Robot.,
vol. 11, no. 1, pp. 127–138, 2018.
[18] A. Benzerrouk, L. Adouane, and P. Martinet, “Stable navigation in for-
mation for a multi-robot system based on a constrained virtual structure,”
Robot. Auton. Syst., vol. 62, no. 12, pp. 1806–1815, 2014.
[19] B. S. Park and S. J. Yoo, “Connectivity-maintaining and collision-avoiding
performance function approach for robust leader-follower formation con-
trol of multiple uncertain underactuated surface vessels,” Automatica,
vol. 127, 2021, Art. no. 109501.
[20] S. L. Dai, S. He, X. Chen, and X. Jin, “Adaptive leader-follower for-
mation control of nonholonomic mobile robots with prescribed transient
and steady-state performance,” IEEE Trans. Ind. Inform., vol. 16, no. 6,
pp. 3662–3671, Jun. 2020.
[21] S. L. Dai, K. Lu, and J. Fu, “Adaptive finite-time tracking control
of nonholonomic multirobot formation systems with limited field-of-
view sensors,” IEEE Trans. Cybern., vol. 52, no. 10, pp. 10695–10708,
Oct. 2022.
[22] L. Zhu, X. Li, D. Huang, and L. Cai, “Distributed cooperative fault-
tolerant control of high-speed trains with input saturation and actuator
faults,” IEEE Trans. Intell. Veh., vol. 8, no. 2, pp. 1241–1251, Feb. 2023,
doi: 10.1109/TIV.2022.3168550.
[23] C. Deng and W. W. Che, “Fault-tolerant fuzzy formation control for a class
of nonlinear multiagent systems under directed and switching topology,”
IEEE Trans. Syst., Man, Cybern. Syst., vol. 51, no. 9, pp. 5456–5465,
Sep. 2021.
[24] Y. X. Li, “Finite time command filtered adaptive fault tolerant control for a
class of uncertain nonlinear systems,” Automatica, vol. 161, pp. 117–123,
2019.
[25] T. Yang and J. Dong, “Predefined-time adaptive fault-tolerant control for
switched odd-rational-power multi-agent systems,” IEEE Trans. Automat.
Sci. Eng., early access, doi: 10.1109/TASE.2022.3208029.
[26] X. Jin, “Fault tolerant finite-time leader-follower formation control for
autonomous surface vessels with LOS range and angle constraints,” Auto-
matica, vol. 68, pp. 228–236, 2016.
[27] S. J. Yoo and T. H. Kim, “Predesignated fault-tolerant formation track-
ing quality for networked uncertain nonholonomic mobile robots in the
presence of multiple faults,” Automatica, vol. 77, pp. 380–387, 2017.
[28] T. S. Li, W. W. Bai, Q. Liu, Y. Long, and C. L. P. Chen, “Distributed fault-
tolerant containment control protocols for the discrete-time multi-agent
systems via reinforcement learning method,” IEEE Trans. Neural Netw.
Learn. Syst., early access, doi: 10.1109/TNNLS.2021.3121403.
[29] K. W. Li and Y. M. Li, “Fuzzy adaptive optimal consensus fault-tolerant
control for stochastic nonlinear multi-agent systems,” IEEE Trans. Fuzzy
Syst., vol. 30, no. 8, pp. 2870–2885, Aug. 2022.
[30] C. Deng and G. H. Yang, “Distributed adaptive fault-tolerant control
approach to cooperative output regulation for linear multi-agent systems,”
Automatica, vol. 103, pp. 62–68, 2019.
[31] W. Cheng, K. Zhang, B. Jiang, and S. X. Ding, “Fixed-time fault-tolerant
formation control for heterogeneous multi-agent systems with parameter
uncertainties and disturbances,” IEEE Trans. Circuits Syst., vol. 68, no. 5,
pp. 2121–2133, May 2021.
[32] J. Hu, Z. Wang, and H. Gao, “Joint state and fault estimation for time-
varying nonlinear systems with randomly occurring faults and sensor
saturations,” Automatica, vol. 97, pp. 150–160, 2018.
Authorized licensed use limited to: Zhejiang University. Downloaded on November 17,2023 at 06:58:28 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
3679
[33] Y. D. Song and J. Guo, “Neuro-adaptive fault-tolerant tracking control of
Lagrange systems pursuing targets with unknown trajectory,” IEEE Trans.
Ind. Electron., vol. 64, no. 5, pp. 3913–3920, May 2017.
[34] S. Tong, K. Sun, and S. Sui, “Observer-based adaptive fuzzy decentralized
optimal control design for strict-feedback nonlinear large-scale systems,”
IEEE Trans. Fuzzy Syst., vol. 26, no. 2, pp. 569–584, Apr. 2018.
Yongming Li (Senior Member, IEEE) received the
B.S. and M.S. degrees in applied mathematics from
the Liaoning University of Technology, Jinzhou,
China, in 2004 and 2007, respectively, and the Ph.D.
degree in transportation information engineering and
control from Dalian Maritime University, Dalian,
China, in 2014. He is currently a Professor with the
College of Science, Liaoning University of Technol-
ogy, Jinzhou, China. His research interests include
adaptive control, fuzzy control, and neural networks
control for nonlinear systems.
Shijie Dong received the B.S. degree in electrical
engineering and automation from Binzhou university,
Binzhou, China, in 2021. He is currently working to-
ward the M.S. degree in control science and engineer-
ing from Liaoning University of Technology, Jinzhou,
China. His research interests include adaptive control,
fuzzy control, formation control, nonholonomic mul-
tirobot systems.
Kewen Li received the B.S. and M.S. degrees in
applied mathematics from the Liaoning University
of Technology, Jinzhou, China, in 2016 and 2019,
respectively. He is currently working toward the Ph.D.
degree with the Institute of Automation, Qufu Nor-
mal University, Qufu, China. His research interests
include finite time control, fuzzy control, and adaptive
control for nonlinear systems.
Shaocheng Tong (Senior Member, IEEE) received
the B.S. degree in mathematics from Jinzhou Nor-
mal College, Jinzhou, China, the M.S. degree in
fuzzy mathematics from Dalian Marine University,
Dalian, China, and the Ph.D. degree in intelligent
control from the Northeastern University, Shenyang,
China, in 1982, 1988, and 1997, respectively. He is
currently a Professor with the College of Science,
Liaoning University of Technology, Jinzhou, China,
and also a Guest Professor and Ph.D. Supervisor
with Dalian Marine University. His research interests
include fuzzy system theory, intelligent control, and adaptive control and optimal
control.