, Volume 40, Issue 6, pp 1865–1898 | Cite as

Vibration suppression during input tracking of a flexible manipulator using a hybrid controller



The aim of this paper is to investigate the performance of the hybrid controller for end-point vibration suppression of a flexible manipulator, while it is tracking a desired input profile. Due to large structural vibrations, precise control of flexible manipulators is a challenging task. A hybrid controller is used to track large movements of flexible robotic manipulators, which is a combination of inverse dynamics feedforward control, command shaping and linear state feedback control. The case study of a single-link flexible manipulator is considered, where the manipulator is controlled under open-loop as well as closed-loop control scheme. In the open-loop control scheme, the aim is to test the effectiveness of the command shaper in reducing the vibration levels. Moreover, the effect of payload variations on the performance of command shapers and the importance of more robust shapers is demonstrated in this work. Under the closed-loop control scheme, the control objective is to track the large-hub angle trajectory, while maintaining low vibration levels. In comparison to collocated PD control, being reported in the literature, large reductions in tip acceleration levels as well as input torque magnitudes are observed with the proposed hybrid controller.


Command shaping vibration suppression flexible links finite element method state estimation. 


  1. Banerjee A and Singhose W 1998 Command shaping in tracking control of a two-link flexible robot. J. Guidance Control Dyn. 21 (6): 1012–1015CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Book W J and Majette M 1983 Controller design for flexible, distributed parameter mechanical arms via combined state space and frequency domain techniques. J. Dyn. Syst. Measur. Control 105(4): 245–254MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Cambera J C, Chocoteco J A and Feliu V 2014 Feedback linearizing controller for a flexible single-link arm under gravity and joint friction. In: ROBOT2013: First Iberian Robotics Conference, pages 169–184. SpringerGoogle Scholar
  4. De Luca A and Siciliano B 1991 Closed-form dynamic model of planar multilink lightweight robots. IEEE Trans. Syst. Man Cybern. 21(4): 826–839MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Drapeau V and Wang D 1993 Verification of a closed-loop shaped-input controller for a five-bar-linkage manipulator. IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation, pages 216–221Google Scholar
  6. Feliu V, Rattan K S and Brown H B 1990 Adaptive control of a single-link flexible manipulator. IEEE Control Syst. Mag. 10(2): 29–33CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Hillsley K L and Yurkovich S 1993 Vibration control of a two-link flexible robot arm. Dyn. Control 3(3): 261–280MATHMathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Hyde J M and Seering W P 1991 Using input command pre-shaping to suppress multiple mode vibration. IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation, pages 2604–2609Google Scholar
  9. Junkins J L and Kim Y 1993 Introduction to dynamics and control of flexible structures. AiaaGoogle Scholar
  10. Kapila V, Tzes A and Yan Q 2000 Closed-loop input shaping for flexible structures using time-delay control. J. Dyn. Syst. Measur. Control 122: 454–460CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Kenison M and Singhose W 2002 Concurrent design of input shaping and proportional plus derivative feedback control. J. Dyn. Syst. Measur. Control 124: 398–405CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Meirovitch L 1986 Elements of vibrational analysis. New York: McGraw-HillGoogle Scholar
  13. Mohamed Z and Tokhi M O 2002 Vibration control of a single-link flexible manipulator using command shaping techniques. Proc. Inst. Mech. Eng. Part I: J. Syst. Control Eng. 216(2): 191–210Google Scholar
  14. Mohan A and Saha S 2009 A recursive, numerically stable, and efficient simulation algorithm for serial robots with flexible links. Multibody Syst. Dyn. 21(1): 1–35MATHMathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Peláez G, Pelaez G, Perez J, Vizán A and Bautista E 2005 Input shaping reference commands for trajectory following Cartesian machines. Control Eng. Practice 13(8): 941–958CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Rattan K S and Feliu V 1991 A robust control scheme for flexible manipulators. IEEE National aerospace and electronics conference: 1090–1095Google Scholar
  17. Romano M, Agrawal B N and Bernelli-Zazzera F 2002 Experiments on command shaping control of a manipulator with flexible links. J. Guidance Control Dyn. 25(2): 232–239CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Shaheed M H and Tokhi O 2013 Adaptive closed-loop control of a single-link flexible manipulator. J. Vibr. Control 19(13): 2068–2080CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Singer N C and Seering W P 1990 Preshaping command inputs to reduce system vibration. J. Dyn. Syst. Measur. Control Trans. ASME 112(1): 76–82CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Singh T and Vadali S R 1994 Robust time-optimal control: Frequency domain approach. J. Guidance Control Dyn. 17(2): 346–353MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Singhose W, Derezinski S and Singer N 1996 Extra-insensitive input shapers for controlling flexible spacecraft. J. Guidance Control Dyn. 19(2): 385–391CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Tewari A 2002 Modern control design with MATLAB and SIMULINK. Chichester: WileyGoogle Scholar
  23. Tewari A 2004 Active vibration suppression of spacecraft with rate-weighted optimal control and multi-mode command shaping. In: AIAA/AAS astrodynamics specialist conference and exhibit, providence, Rhode Island Google Scholar
  24. Tokhi M O, Mohamed Z and Shaheed M H 2001 Dynamic characterisation of a flexible manipulator system. Robotica 19(5): 571–580CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Tzes A and Yurkovich S 1993 An adaptive input shaping control scheme for vibration suppression in slewing flexible structures. IEEE Trans. Control Syst. Technol. 1(2): 114–121CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Tzou H S 1989 Nonlinear structural dynamics of space manipulators with elastic joints. Int. J. Anal. Exp. Modal Anal. 4: 117–123Google Scholar
  27. Usoro P B, Mahil S S and Nadira R 1984 A finite element/Lagrange approach to modeling lightweight flexible manipulators, part one: one-link system. Sensors and Controls for Automated Manufacturing and Robotics: 215–228Google Scholar
  28. Usoro P B, Nadira R and Mahil S S 1986 A finite element/Lagrange approach to modeling lightweight flexible manipulators. J. Dyn. Syst. Measur. Control 108: 198–205MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Vaughan J, Yano A and Singhose W 2008 Comparison of robust input shapers. J. Sound Vibr. 315: 797–815CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Yigit A. S. 1994 On the Stability of PD Control for a Two-Link Rigid-Flexible Manipulator. J. Dyn. Syst. Measur. Control 116: 179–185CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Zain M, Tokhi M O and Mohamed Z 2006a Hybrid learning control schemes with input shaping of a flexible manipulator system. Mechatronics 16(3-4): 209–219Google Scholar
  32. Zain M, Tokhi M O and Mohamed Z 2006b Performance of hybrid learning control with input shaping for input tracking and vibration suppression of a flexible manipulator. J. Teknologi 44(A): 41–64Google Scholar
  33. Zhang N, Feng Y and Yu X 2004 Optimization of terminal sliding control for two-link flexible manipulators. IEEE 30th annual conference of industrial electronics society 2: 1318–1322Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Indian Academy of Sciences 2015

Authors and Affiliations

    • 1
    • 2
    • 3
  1. 1.Mechanical Engineering DepartmentThapar UniversityPatialaIndia
  2. 2.Department of Aerospace EngineeringIndian Institute of Technology KanpurKanpurIndia
  3. 3.Department of Mechanical EngineeringIndian Institute of Technology KanpurKanpurIndia

Personalised recommendations