Skip to main content

Tuning of FOPID Controller for Robotic Manipulator Using Genetic and Multiple-Objective Genetic Algorithms

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Intelligent Manufacturing and Mechatronics (iM3F 2023)

Abstract

This study compares the performances of the GA-FOPID and MOGA-FOPID controllers, which are fractional-order proportional–integral–derivative (FOPID) controllers tuned using genetic algorithm and multiple-objective genetic algorithm for position tracking accuracy of robotic manipulator, respectively. The tuning process of six control gains in the three FOPID controllers is technically challenging to achieve high position accuracy of robotic manipulator. This study is performed to objectively assess the performances of genetic algorithm and multiple-objective genetic algorithm in tuning the six control gains in the FOPID controller. From the simulation study, it is interesting to note that the GA-FOPID and MOGA-FOPID controllers produce approximately 8.2990 and 14.6307% reductions of the mean square error in the angular position accuracy response of robotic manipulator as compared with the GA-PID controller. It is envisaged that the GA-FOPID and MOGA-FOPID controllers can be useful in designing effective position tracking accuracy of robotic manipulators.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 189.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 249.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Abbreviations

\(U\left( s \right)\) :

Control signal of the FOPID control

\(e\left( t \right)\):

Error between the desired angular position accuracy and

\(E\left( s \right)\):

Error in the s-domain

\(e\):

Exponential function

\(i_{\max }\):

Maximum number of iteration

MSE:

Mean square error

PO:

Percentage of overshoot

UDP:

Percentage of undershooting

\(T_{{\text{r}}} \left( s \right)\):

Rise time

\(T_{{\text{s}}} \left( s \right)\):

Settling time

\(n\):

Number of parameters

\(K_{{\text{p}}}\):

Proportional gain

\(K_{{\text{i}}}\):

Integral gain

\(K_{{\text{d}}}\):

Derivative gain

\(\lambda\):

Lambda (non-integer order in derivative)

\(\mu\):

Miu (non-integer order in derivative)

DOF:

Degree of Freedom

CTC:

Computed Torque Controller

FOPID:

Fractional Order Proportional Integral Derivatives controller

GA:

Genetic Algorithm

GA-PID:

PID controller Tuned using GA

GA-FOPID:

FOPID controller Tuned using GA

NN:

Neural Network

MOGA:

Multi-Objective Genetic Algorithm

MOGA-FOPID:

FOPID controller Tuned using MOGA

PID:

Proportional Integral Derivatives controller

PSO:

Particle Swarm Optimization

References

  1. IFR—International Federation of Robotics (2020) World robotics 2020 report. Int Fed Robot 49:16–18 [online]. Available: https://youtu.be/Fsn_w_gmHyk

  2. Huang Q, Lan J, Li X (2019) Automatic ultrasound scanning system based on robotic arm. Sci China Inf Sci 62(5). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11432-018-9664-3

  3. Lunghi G, Marin R, Di Castro M, Masi A, Sanz PJ (2019) Multimodal human-robot interface for accessible remote robotic interventions in hazardous environments. IEEE Access 7:127290–127319. https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2019.2939493

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Paraforos DS, Reutemann M, Sharipov G, Werner R, Griepentrog HW (2017) Total station data assessment using an industrial robotic arm for dynamic 3D in-field positioning with sub-centimetre accuracy. Comput Electron Agric 136:166–175. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compag.2017.03.009

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Norsahperi NMH, Danapalasingam KA (2020) An improved optimal integral sliding mode control for uncertain robotic manipulators with reduced tracking error, chattering, and energy consumption. Mech Syst Signal Process 142:106747. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ymssp.2020.106747

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Ibrahim K, Sharkawy AB (2018) A hybrid PID control scheme for flexible joint manipulators and a comparison with sliding mode control. Ain Shams Eng J 9(4):3451–3457. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asej.2018.01.004

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Nisi K, Nagaraj B, Agalya A (2019) Tuning of a PID controller using evolutionary multi objective optimization methodologies and application to the pulp and paper industry. Int J Mach Learn Cybern 10(8):2015–2025. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13042-018-0831-8

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Tayebi Haghighi S, Piltan F, Kim JM (2018) Robust composite high-order super-twisting sliding mode control of robot manipulators. Robotics 7(1). https://doi.org/10.3390/robotics7010013

  9. Norsahperi NMH, Ahmad S, Toha SF, Mutalib MAA (2022) Design, simulation and experiment of PSO-FOPID controller for height position control of a scissor mechanism platform. FME Trans 50(1):46–54. https://doi.org/10.5937/fme2201046N

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Sharkawy A, Koustoumpardis P (2022) Dynamics and computed-torque control of a 2-DOF manipulator: mathematical analysis to cite this version: HAL Id: hal-03598924 dynamics and computed-torque control of a 2-DOF manipulator

    Google Scholar 

  11. Ashagrie A, Salau AO, Weldcherkos T (2021) Modeling and control of a 3-DOF articulated robotic manipulator using self-tuning fuzzy sliding mode controller. Cogent Eng 8(1):33. https://doi.org/10.1080/23311916.2021.1950105

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Slotine JE (1985) On the robust control of robot manipulators. IEEE Trans Automat Contr 37(11):1782–1786. https://doi.org/10.1109/9.173151

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  13. Kumar N, Alotaibi MA, Singh A, Malik H, Nassar ME (2022) Application of fractional order-PID control scheme in automatic generation control of a deregulated power system in the presence of SMES unit. Mathematics 10(3). https://doi.org/10.3390/math10030521

  14. Tu T, Filipi B (2007) Algorithms in multiobjective optimization, pp 257–271

    Google Scholar 

  15. Norsahperi NMH, Danapalasingam KA (2019) A comparative study of LQR and integral sliding mode control strategies for position tracking control of robotic manipulators. Int J Electr Comput Eng Syst 10(2):73–83. https://doi.org/10.32985/ijeces.10.2.3

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Arya Y (2020) A novel CFFOPI-FOPID controller for AGC performance enhancement of single and multi-area electric power systems. ISA Trans 100:126–135. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.isatra.2019.11.025

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This study was funded by Universiti Putra Malaysia (UPM) through GP-IPM/2022/9712700.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Nor Mohd Haziq Norsahperi .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2024 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd.

About this paper

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this paper

Hambali, N.F. et al. (2024). Tuning of FOPID Controller for Robotic Manipulator Using Genetic and Multiple-Objective Genetic Algorithms. In: Mohd. Isa, W.H., Khairuddin, I.M., Mohd. Razman, M.A., Saruchi, S.'., Teh, SH., Liu, P. (eds) Intelligent Manufacturing and Mechatronics. iM3F 2023. Lecture Notes in Networks and Systems, vol 850. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-99-8819-8_47

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-99-8819-8_47

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Singapore

  • Print ISBN: 978-981-99-8818-1

  • Online ISBN: 978-981-99-8819-8

  • eBook Packages: EngineeringEngineering (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics