Decentralized adaptive partitioned approximation control of high degrees-of-freedom robotic manipulators considering three actuator control modes

  • Hayder F. N. Al-ShukaEmail author
  • R. Song


Partitioned approximation control is avoided in most decentralized control algorithms; however, it is essential to design a feedforward control term for improving the tracking accuracy of the desired references. In addition, consideration of actuator dynamics is important for a robot with high-velocity movement and highly varying loads. As a result, this work is focused on decentralized adaptive partitioned approximation control for complex robotic systems using the orthogonal basis functions as strong approximators. In essence, the partitioned approximation technique is intrinsically decentralized with some modifications. Three actuator control modes are considered in this study: (i) a torque control mode in which the armature current is well controlled by a current servo amplifier and the motor torque/current constant is known, (ii) a current control mode in which the torque/current constant is unknown, and (iii) a voltage control mode with no current servo control being available. The proposed decentralized control law consists of three terms: the partitioned approximation-based feedforward term that is necessary for precise tracking, the high gain-based feedback term, and the adaptive sliding gain-based term for compensation of modeling error. The passivity property is essential to prove the stability of local stability of the individual subsystem with guaranteed global stability. Two case studies are used to prove the validity of the proposed controller: a two-link manipulator and a six-link biped robot.


Adaptive approximation control Orthogonal basis functions Actuator dynamics Electrically driven robots 


  1. 1.
    Luh JYS, Walker MW, Paul RPC (1980) On-line computational scheme for mechanical manipulator. Trans ASME J Dyn Syst Meas Control 102:69–76MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Hollerbach JM (1980) A recursive Lagrangian formulation of manipulator dynamics and comparative study of dynamics formulation complexity. IEEE Trans Syst Man Cybern SMC-10(11):730–736MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Walker M, Orin DE (1982) Efficient dynamic computer simulation of robotic mechanisms. Trans ASME J Dyn Syst Meas Control 104:205–211CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Balafoutis CA, Patel RV (1989) Efficient computation of manipulator, inertia matrices and the direct dynamics problem. IEEE Trans Syst Man Cybern 19:1313–1321CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Angeles J, Ma O, Rojas A (1998) An algorithm for the inverse dynamics of n-axis general manipulator using Kane’s formulation of dynamical equations. Comput Math Appl 17(12):1545–1561CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Saha SK (1999) Dynamics of serial multibody systems using the decoupled natural orthogonal complement matrices. ASME J Appl Mech 66:986–996CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Featherstone R (1983) The calculation of robot dynamics using articulated-body inertias. Int J Robot Res 2(1):13–30CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Brandle H, Johanni R, Otter M (1986) A very efficient algorithm for the simulation of robots and similar multibody systems without inversion of the mass matrix. In: Proceeding of the IFAC/IFIP/IMACS international symposium on theory of robots, Vienna, pp 95–100CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Mohan A, Saha SK (2007) A recursive numerically stable and efficient simulation algorithm for serial robots. Int J Multibody Syst Dyn 17(4):291–319MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Lee K, Chirikjian GS (2005) A new perspective on O (n) mass-matrix inversion for serial revolute manipulators. In: Proceeding of the IEEE international conference on robotics and automation, Barcelona, pp 4722–4726Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Featherstone R, Orin D (2000) Robot dynamics: equations and algorithms. In: IEEE international conference on robotics and automation, ICRA 1, pp 826–834Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Saha SK (2007) Recursive dynamics algorithms for serial, parallel and closed-chain multibody systems. In: Indo-US workshop on protein kinematics and protein conformations. IISC, BangaloreGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Fu KS, Gonzalez RC, Lee CSG (1987) Robotics: control, sensing, vision, and intelligence. McGraw-Hill, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Sandell NR, Varaiya P, Athans M, Safonov MG (1978) Survey of decentralized control methods for large scale systems. IEEE Trans Autom Control AC-23(2):108–128MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Spong MW, Vidyasagar M (1989) Robot dynamics and control. Wiley, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Boha J, Belda K, Valasue M (2002) Decentralized control of redundant parallel robot construction. In; Proceeding of the 10th mediterranean conference on control and automation, Libson, pp 9–1Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Ohri J, Dewan L, Soni MK (2007) Tracking control of robots using decentralized robust PID control for friction and uncertainty compensation. In: Proceedings of the world congress on engineering and computer science, San FranciscoGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Xu K (2010) Integrating centralized and decentralized approaches for multi-robot coordination. Dissertation, Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering, New BrunswickGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Leena G, Ray G (2012) A set of decentralized PID controller for an n-link robot manipulator. Indian Acad Sci 37:405–423zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Liu M (1999) Decentralized control of robot manipulators: nonlinear and adaptive approaches. IEEE Trans Autom Control 44(2):357–363MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Yang Z-J, Fukushima Y, Qin P (2012) Decentralized adaptive robust control of robot manipulators using disturbance observers. IEEE Trans Control Syst Technol 20(5):1357–1365CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Jasim IF, Plapper PW (2014) Enhanced decentralized robust adaptive control of robots with arbitrarily-switched unknown constraints. In: IEEE international conference on systems, man, and cybernetics, October 5–8, San Diego, pp 4027–4032Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Lewis FL, Yesildirek A, Liu K (1995) Neural net robot controller: structure and stability proofs. J Intell Robot Syst 13:1–23CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Lewis FL, Liu K, Yesildirek A (1995) Neural net robot controller with guaranteed tracking performance. IEEE Trans Neural Netw 6(3):703–716CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Lewis FL, Yesildirek A, Liu K (1996) Multilayer neural net robot controller with guaranteed tracking performance. IEEE Trans Neural Netw 7(2):1–12CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Liu J (2013) Radial basis function (RBF) neural network control for mechanical systems: design, analysis and Matlab simulation. Tsinghua University Press, Springer, Beijing, BerlinCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Al-Shuka HFN, Song R (2017) Adaptive hybrid regressor and approximation control of robotic manipulators in constrained space. Int J Mech Mechatron Eng IJMME-IJENS 17(3):11–21Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Al-Shuka HFN, Song R (2018) Hybrid regressor and approximation-based adaptive control of robotic manipulators with contact-free motion. In: The 2nd IEEE advanced information management, communicates, electronic and automation control conference (IMCEC 2018), Beijing, pp 325–329Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Al-Shuka HFN, Song R (2018) Hybrid regressor and approximation-based adaptive control of piezoelectric flexible beams. In: The 2nd IEEE advanced information management, communicates, electronic and automation control conference (IMCEC 2018), Beijing, pp 330–334Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Huang A-C, Chien M-C (2010) Adaptive control of robot manipulators: a unified regressor-free approach. World Scientific, SingaporeCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Ge SS, Lee TH, Harris CJ (1998) Adaptive neural network control of robotic manipulators. World Scientific, River EdgeCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Al-Shuka HFN (2018) On local approximation-based adaptive control with applications to robotic manipulators and biped robots. Int J Dyn Control 6(1):339–353MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Al-Shuka HFN, Song R (2019) Decentralized adaptive partitioned approximation control of robotic manipulators. In: Arakelian V, Wenger P (eds) ROMANSY 22—robot design, dynamics and control. CISM international centre for mechanical sciences (courses and lectures), vol 584. Springer, ChamGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Panagi P, Polycarpou MM (2008) Decentralized adaptive approximation based control of a class of large-scale systems. In: American control conference westin seattle hotel, Seattle, pp 4191–4196Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Tan KK, Huang S, Lee TH (2009) Decentralized adaptive controller design of large-scale uncertain robotic systems. Automatica 45(1):161–166MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Fateh MM, Fateh S (2012) Decentralized direct adaptive fuzzy control of robots using voltage control strategy. Nonlinear Dyn 70:1919–1930MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Li T, Li R, Li J (2011) Decentralized adaptive neural control of nonlinear interconnected large-scale systems with unknown time delays and input saturation. Neurocomputing 74:2277–2283CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Kim YT (2010) Decentralized adaptive fuzzy backstepping control of rigid-link electrically driven robots. Intell Autom Soft Comput 16(2):135–149CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Zhu L, Li Y (2010) Decentralized adaptive neural network control for reconfigurable manipulators. In: Chinese control and decision conference, pp 1760–1765Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Zhou Q, Li H, Shi P (2015) Decentralized adaptive fuzzy tracking control for robot finger dynamics. IEEE Trans Fuzzy Syst 23(3):501–510CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Zhu W-H (2010) Virtual decomposition control, toward hyper degrees of freedom robots. Springer, BerlinCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Kelly R, Santibáñez V, Loría A (2005) Control of robot manipulators in joint space. Springer, LondonGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Vázquez LA, Jurado F, Alanís AY (2015) Decentralized identification and control in real-time of a robot manipulator via recurrent wavelet first-order neural network. Math Probl Eng 2015:12. MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Burden RL, Faires JD (1989) Numerical analysis, 4th edn. PWS Publishing Co., BostonzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Mulero-Martínez JI (2007) Uniform bounds of the Coriolis/centripetal matrix of serial robot manipulators. IEEE Trans Rob 23(5):1083–1089CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Sciavicco L, Siciliano B, Villani L (1996) Lagrange and Newton–Euler dynamic modeling of a gear-driven robot manipulator with inclusion of motor inertia effects. Adv Robot 10(3):317–334CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Utkin VI, Poznyak AS (2013) Adaptive sliding mode control. In: Bandyopadhyay B, Janardhanan S, Spurgeon S (eds) Advances in sliding mode control. Lecture notes in control and information sciences, vol 440. Springer, BerlinGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Ioannou P, Fidan B (2006) Adaptive control tutorial. SIAM, USACrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Farrell JA, Polycarpou MM (2006) Adaptive approximation based control: unifying neural, fuzzy and traditional adaptive approximation approaches. Wiley, New YorkCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Slotine J-J, Li W (1991) Applied nonlinear control. Pearson, LondonzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Al-Shuka HFN (2014) Modeling, walking pattern generators and adaptive control of biped robot. PhD Dissertation, RWTH Aachen University, Department of Mechanical Engineering, IGMGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    Al-Shuka HFN (2017) An overview on balancing and stabilization control of biped robots. GRIN Verlag, Munich.
  53. 53.
    Al-Shuka HFN, Corves BJ, Zhu W-H, Vanderborght B (2016) Multi-level control of zero moment point-based biped humanoid robots: a review. Robotica 34(11):2440–2466CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. 54.
    Al-Shuka HFN, Corves BJ, Vanderborght B, Zhu W-H (2015) Zero-moment point-based biped robot with different walking patterns. Int J Intell Syst Appl 7(1):31–41Google Scholar
  55. 55.
    Al-Shuka HFN, Corves BJ, Zhu W-H, Vanderborght B (2014) A simple algorithm for generating stable biped walking patterns. Int J Comput Appl 101(4):29–33Google Scholar
  56. 56.
    Al-Shuka HFN, Corves BJ, Zhu W-H (2014) Dynamic modeling of biped robot using Lagrangian and recursive Newton–Euler formulations. Int J Comput Appl 101(3):1–8Google Scholar
  57. 57.
    Al-Shuka HFN, Allmendinger F, Corves BJ, Zhu W-H (2014) Modeling, stability and walking pattern generators of biped robots: a review. Robotica 32(6):907–934CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. 58.
    Al-Shuka HFN, Corves BJ, Zhu W-H (2014) Function approximation technique-based adaptive virtual decomposition control for a serial-chain manipulator. Robotica 32(3):375–399CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. 59.
    Al-Shuka HFN, Corves BJ (2013) On the walking pattern generators of biped robot. J Autom Control 1(2):149–156Google Scholar
  60. 60.
    Al-Shuka HFN, Corves BJ, Zhu W-H (2013) On the dynamic optimization of biped robot. Lect Notes Softw Eng 1(3):237–243CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. 61.
    Al-Shuka HFN, Corves BJ, Vanderborght B, Zhu W-H (2013) Finite difference-based suboptimal trajectory planning of biped robot with continuous dynamic response. Int J Model Optim 3(4):337–343CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. 62.
    Vanderborght B (2010) Dynamic Stabilisation of the biped Lucy powered by actuators with controllable stiffness. Springer, BerlinCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of Control Science and EngineeringShandong UniversityJinanChina

Personalised recommendations