Está en la página 1de 6

A Methodology for the Design of Fuzzy Fractional PID Controllers

Ramiro S. Barbosa and Isabel S. Jesus


GECAD - Knowledge Engineering and Decision Support Research Center, ISEP/IPP - School of Engineering,
Polytechnic Institute of Porto,
Rua Dr. Antonio Bernardino de Almeida, 431, Porto, Portugal
{rsb, isj}@isep.ipp.pt

Keywords: Fuzzy Control, PID Controller, Fractional Calculus, Fractional PID Control, Fuzzy Fractional PID Control.

Abstract: This paper proposes two novel fuzzy fractional PID structures. The tuning of the fuzzy fractional controllers
is based on the prior knowledge of fractional-order control tuning rules. The digital implementation of these
controllers is also investigated. The effectiveness and robustness of the proposed tuning methodology is illus-
trated through its application on a fractional-order plant. The simulations results show that the control system
performance is better than that of conventional fractional PID control.

1 INTRODUCTION controller nonlinear and fine tune it in order to get


better control of the system. The fuzzy fractional con-
troller will give, at least, the same performance of its
In recent years, the fractional-order PID (FO-PID) linear counterpart.
controllers have been a fruitful field of research (Pod- The paper is organized as follows. Section 2
lubny, 1999a; Podlubny, 1999b). However, no effec- presents the basic ideas of continuous and discrete
tive and simple tuning rules still exist for these con- fractional PID controllers. Section 3 outlines a pro-
trollers as those given for the integer PID controllers cedure for the design of FF-PID controllers. In sec-
(Astrom and Hagglund, 1995). It is well known that tion 4, we test the proposed fuzzy fractional con-
the FO-PID extends the capabilities of the classical trollers and assess their applicability and robustness
counterpart and, thus, have a wider domain of appli- on a fractional-order plant. Finally, section 5 draws
cation, such as in suspension systems, robotics, sig- the main conclusions and addresses perspectives to
nal processing, control and diffusion (Oldham and future developments.
Spanier, 1974; Podlubny, 1999a; Podlubny, 1999b).
On the other hand, the fuzzy logic controllers (FLC)
have also been successfully applied in the control of
many physical systems, particularly those with un-
2 FRACTIONAL PID
certainty, unmodelled, disturbed and/or nonlinear dy- CONTROLLERS
namics (Lee, 1990; Li and Gatland, 1996; Carvajal
et al., 2000). The fractional-order controller of PID-type, usually
In this paper, we combine the features of fuzzy named PIλ Dµ controller, may be given as (Podlubny,
controllers with those of fractional controllers of PID- 1999b; Barbosa et al., 2010):
type. The resulting fuzzy fractional PID (FF-PID)
U (s) Ki
controller is investigated in terms of its digital imple- C (s) = = K p + λ + Kd sµ (1)
mentation and robustness. The combined advantages E (s) s
of the two controllers results in a better controller with where K p , Ki and Kd are the proportional, inte-
superior robustness and wider domain of application. gral and derivative gains, and usually the fractional
The tuning methodology of these controllers is based orders (λ, µ) ∈ [0, 1]. Clearly, taking (λ, µ) ≡
on the prior knowledge of fractional-order control. {(1, 1) , (1, 0) , (0, 1) , (0, 0)} we get the classical
First, a fractional-order controller is built and tuned {PID, PI, PD, P}-controllers, respectively. The
(or used one already implemented). Then, we replace PIλ Dµ -controller is more flexible and gives the possi-
it with a linear fuzzy fractional controller displaying bility of adjusting more carefully the dynamical pro-
exactly the same step response. After, we make the prieties of a control system (Podlubny, 1999b).

276
AMethodologyfortheDesignofFuzzyFractionalPIDControllers

The time domain equation of the PIλ Dµ controller memory principle (Podlubny, 1999a), resulting in ex-
is: pression:

u (t) = K p e (t) + Ki D−λ e (t) + Kd Dµ e (t) (2) Ki k


∑ cj
(−λ)
u (k) = K p e (k) + e (k − j)
T −λ
where D(∗) (≡ 0 Dtα ) denotes the differential operator j=v

of integration and differentiation (differintegral) to a k


Kd
∑ cj
(µ)
fractional-order α = {−λ, µ} ∈ ℜ. + e (k − j) (7)
Tµ j=v
The two most commonly used definitions for the
differintegral are the Riemann-Liouville definition  
where v = 0 for k < L T or v = k − L T for

and the Grünwald-Letnikov definition. For our pur-  k >L T;
(α) α
pose we use the Grünwald-Letnikov definition, which L is the memory length and c j = (−1) j are
j
can be written as (α ∈ ℜ):
the binomial coefficients which may be calculated re-
cursively as:
1 [t /h] α
 
Dα f (t) = lim ∑ (−1) j
h→0 hα j=0 j
f (t − jh) (3a)
(α) (α)

1 + α (α)

c0 = 1; cj = 1− c j−1 , j = 1, 2, · · ·
j
α Γ (α + 1)
 
(8)
= (3b)
j Γ ( j + 1) Γ (α − j + 1) Note that (7) is given in the form of a FIR filter.
where f (t) is the applied function, Γ(·) is the Gamma Other discrete-time approximations in the form of IIR
function, h is the time increment, and [·] means the filters are also possible (Vinagre et al., 2003; Barbosa
integer part. et al., 2006; Chen et al., 2004).
From a control and signal processing perspective,
approach (3) seems to be the most useful and intu-
itive, particularly for a discrete-time implementation 3 DESIGN OF FUZZY
(Barbosa et al., 2006; Machado, 1997). In fact, using FRACTIONAL PID
(3), a discrete fractional PIλ Dµ control equation can CONTROLLERS
be obtained from (2) as (h ≈ T, T is the sampling
period): Despite of variety of possible fuzzy controller struc-
tures, the controller is usually arranged in cascade
u (k) = K p e (k) + Ki D−λ e (k) + Kd Dµ e (k) (4) with the system being controlled. This type of ar-
rangement is shown in Fig. 1 and will be used in this
with study.
The main idea here is to explore the fact that the
1 k 
α
 FLC, under certain conditions, is equivalent to a PID
Dα e (k) ≈
Tα ∑ (−1) j j
e (k − j) (5) controller (Mizumoto, 1995; Li and Gatland, 1996;
j=0 Jantzen, 2007). In a certain sense, the fuzzy PID con-
The difference control equation (4) is then given trollers are a special case of the more general FF-PID
by: controllers, in which are involved two extra tuning
k  parameters: the fractional orders (λ, µ) of controller
Ki −λ
u (k) = Kp e(k) +
T −λ
∑ (−1) jj
e(k − j) equation (4).
j=0 The basic form of a fuzzy controller is illustrated
Kd k

µ

in Fig. 2 (Passino and Yurkovich, 1998). In gen-
+ µ ∑ (−1) j e(k − j) (6)
T j=0 j eral, the mapping between the inputs and the outputs

Eq. (6) shows that the current value of control sig- l(t)
nal u (k) depends on all previous values of error e (k), r(t) e(t) Fuzzy u(t) y(t)
+ +
making the computation too heavy as time increases Fractional G(s)
+
and so unsuitable for a practical implementation of − Controller
these algorithms. This fact illustrates the global char-
acter (i.e., unlimited memory) of the fractional-order
operators. For practical implementation of fractional
integral and derivative (5) we often apply the short Figure 1: Fuzzy fractional PID controlled system.

277
ICINCO2013-10thInternationalConferenceonInformaticsinControl,AutomationandRobotics

Fuzzy
u (t) = K p e (t) + Kd Dµ e (t)

Defuzzification
(9)

Fuzzification
inference
Input Output
The corresponding discrete-time fractional PDµ -
controller is:
Rule Base

u (k) = K p e (k) + Kd Dµ e (k) (10)


Figure 2: Structure of a fuzzy controller. Fig. 3 illustrates the block diagram of the fuzzy
fractional PDµ (FF-PDµ ) controller. As can be seen,
of a fuzzy system is nonlinear (Galichet and Foulloy, the controller acts on the error, E = Ke e (k), and on
1995; Jantzen, 2007). However, it is possible to con- the fractional change of error, FE = K f e Dµ e (k). The
struct a rule base with a linear input-output mapping control signal is U = Ku u. The controller has three
(Mizumoto, 1995; Jantzen, 2007). For that, the fol- tuning gains, Ke and K f e , corresponding to the inputs
lowing conditions must be fulfilled: and Ku to the output.
The control signal U is generally a nonlinear func-
• Use triangular input sets that cross at the member-
tion of E and FE:
ship value 0.5;
• The rule base must be complete AND combina- U = f (E, FE)Ku = f (Ke e, K f e Dµ e) Ku (11)
tion (cartesian product) of all input families; With a proper choice of design, a linear approxi-
• Use the algebraic product (*) for the AND con- mation can be obtained as:
nective;
• Use output singletons, positioned at the sum of the f (Ke e (k) , K f e Dµ e (k)) ≈ Ke e (k) + K f e Dµ e (k) (12)
peak positions of the input sets;
and
• Use sum-accumulation and centre of gravity for
singletons (COGS) defuzzification.
U (k) = (Ke e (k) + K f e Dµ e (k)) Ku
It seems reasonable to start with the design of
= Ke Ku e (k) + K f e Ku Dµ e (k) (13)
a conventional integer/fractional PID controller and
from there to proceed to a fuzzy control design. In Comparing (13) with (10), it yields the relation for
this way, the linear fuzzy controller may be used in a the gains of the two controllers:
design procedure based on integer/fractional PID con-
trol, as follows (Jantzen, 2007; Barbosa et al., 2010;
Barbosa, 2010): Ke Ku = K p
K f e Ku = Kd (14)
1. Build and tune an integer/fractional PID con-
troller; The linear FF-PDµ -controller provides all the
2. Replace it with an equivalent linear fuzzy con- advantages of the conventional fractional PDµ -
troller; controller.
For an equivalent linear FF-PDµ -controller, the
3. Make the fuzzy controller nonlinear; conclusion universe should be the sum of the premise
4. Fine-tune it. universes and the input-output mapping should be lin-
ear. Table 1 lists a linear rule base for the FF-PDµ
With the above procedure, the design of fuzzy
controller composed of four rules. There are only
fractional PID controllers will be greatly simplified,
two fuzzy labels (Negative and Positive) used for the
particularly if the controller was already implemented
fuzzy input variables and three fuzzy labels (Negative,
and it is desirable to enhance its performance. More-
Zero and Positive) for the fuzzy output variable. This
over, this new type of controllers extends the poten-
rule base should satisfy conditions mentioned above
tialities of both fuzzy and fractional controllers and
in order to provide a linear mapping.
performs, at least, as well as its linear fractional coun-
terpart (Jantzen, 2007; Barbosa et al., 2010; Barbosa,
2010). e E
Ke u U
FF-PDµ
3.1 Fuzzy Fractional PD Controller Rule base
Ku
FE
Dµ K fe
The time-domain equation of a fractional PDµ -
controller is given by (Ki = 0 in (2)): Figure 3: Fuzzy fractional PDµ -controller.

278
AMethodologyfortheDesignofFuzzyFractionalPIDControllers

Table 1: Rule base for the FF-PDµ controller.


The linear FF-PDµ +Iλ controller provides all the
Rule 1 If E is N and FE is N then u is N advantages of the conventional fractional PIλ Dµ -
Rule 2 If E is N and FE is P then u is Z controller.
Rule 3 If E is P and FE is N then u is Z
Rule 4 If E is P and FE is P then u is P
4 ILLUSTRATIVE EXAMPLE
Scaling the input gains may be necessary to pre-
serve the linearity of the fuzzy controller. However, Many real dynamical processes are modeled by
that should be made without affecting the tuning (Bar- fractional-order transfer functions (Podlubny, 1999a;
bosa et al., 2010; Barbosa, 2010). This scaling has Oldham and Spanier, 1974). Here we consider
some advantages, as it will avoid saturation and will the fractional-order plant model given in (Podlubny,
provide a simpler design, since the universes ranges 1999b):
of inputs and outputs are normalized to a prescribed
1
interval, say percentage of full scale [−100, 100]. G (s) = (18)
0.8s2.2 + 0.5s0.9 + 1
3.2 Fuzzy Fractional PID Controller An integer-order PD controller and a fractional-
order PDµ -controller were designed in (Podlubny,
The inclusion of an integral action is necessary when- 1999b):
ever the closed-loop system exhibits a steady-state er-
ror. The fuzzy fractional PDµ +Iλ (FF-PDµ +Iλ ) con- CPD (s) = 20.5 + 2.7343s (19)
troller combine the fractional-order integral action CPDµ (s) = 20.5 + 3.7343s1.15 (20)
with a fuzzy PDµ -controller, as illustrated in Fig. 4.

e E Fig. 5 shows the unit-step response of the closed-


Ke
FF-PDµ
u + U loop fractional-order system with the conventional
Ku
FE Rule base PD-controller and with the PDµ -controller. The com-
Dµ K fe +
parison shows that for satisfactory feedback con-
FIE
trol of the fractional-order system is better to use a
D −λ K fie fractional-order controller. Note, however, that the
control system presents a steady-state error, since no
Figure 4: Fuzzy fractional PDµ + Iλ controller. integral action is employed.
Let us now design an equivalent linear FF-PDµ
The control signal U is generally a nonlinear func- controller. By configuring the fuzzy inference system
tion of error E, fractional change of error FE, and (FIS) and selecting three scaling factors, we obtain a
fractional integral of error FIE: FF-PDµ -controller that reproduces the exact control
performance as the fractional PDµ -controller. We first
fix Ke = 100, since the error universe is chosen to be
U = ( f (E, FE) + FIE) Ku
  1.6
= f (Ke e (k) + K f e Dµ e (k)) + K f ie D−λ e (k) Ku PD−controller
1.4 PDµ−controller
(15)
Adopting the linear approximation (12) yields the 1.2
control action:
  1
Plant output

U (k) ≈ Ke e(k) + K f e Dµ e(k) + K f ie D−λ e(k) Ku


0.8
= Ku Ke e(k) + Ku K f e Dµ e(k) + Ku K f ie D−λ e(k) (16)
0.6
Comparing (16) with the discrete fractional PIλ Dµ -
0.4
controller (4), it yields the relation for the gains of
the two controllers: 0.2

0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6
Ke Ku = K p Time [s]

K f ie Ku = Ki
Figure 5: Unit-step responses of the fractional-order control
K f e Ku = Kd (17) system with the PD and PDµ -controllers.

279
ICINCO2013-10thInternationalConferenceonInformaticsinControl,AutomationandRobotics

1 1

Degree of membership
200

Degree of membership
200
0.8 0.8

0.6 0.6
0 0
u

u
0.4 0.4
−200 −200
100 0.2 0.2
100
100 100
0 0 0
0 0 0
−100 0 100 −100 0 100
FE −100 −100 −100 −100
E Input family: Neg and Pos FE E Input family: Neg and Pos

Figure 6: Linear surface with the corresponding input fam- Figure 7: Nonlinear control surface with the corresponding
ilies. input families.

percentage of full scale [−100, 100], and the maxi- 1.6


PD−controller
mum error to a unit step is 1. The values of K f e and 1.4 FF−PDµ−controller
Ku are obtained using expressions (14). Fig. 6 shows Nonlinear FF−PDµ−controller

the input families and the linear control surface ob- 1.2

tained by using the rule base of Table 1 while satis- 1


fying conditions outlined in section 3. Note that this
Plant output
result represents the step 2 – replace the conventional 0.8

controller with an equivalent linear fuzzy controller –


0.6
of the design procedure. In order to enhance the per-
formance of the control system we proceed to step 3 0.4

and 4 of the design – make the fuzzy controller non-


0.2
linear and fine-tune it.
Thus, after verifying that the linear FF-PDµ - 0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6
controller is properly designed, we may adjust the FIS Time [s]

settings such as its style, membership functions and Figure 8: Unit-step responses of the fractional control sys-
rule base to obtain a desired nonlinear control sur- tem with the linear PD and FF-PDµ -controllers, and with
face. In our example, we choose Gaussian member- the nonlinear FF-PDµ -controller.
ship functions for the inputs, as illustrated in Fig. 7
with the corresponding nonlinear control surface. In this experiment, the simulation parameters are:
absolute memory computation of approximation (5),
In Fig. 8, the comparison of the unit-step response
scale factor M = 0.1 and T = 0.05 s. Fig. 9 shows the
of the closed-loop system with plant model (18) con-
step and load responses of closed-loop system with
trolled by the linear PD and FF-PDµ -controllers, and
FF-PDµ +Iλ controller, (µ, λ)=(1.15, −0.8), for the lin-
with the nonlinear FF-PDµ -controller is given. The
ear and nonlinear control surfaces. We observe the
simulation parameters are: absolute memory compu-
better response of the fuzzy controller to the reference
tation of approximation (5), fractional-order µ=1.15,
and disturbance inputs with the nonlinear rule base
scale factor M = 0.4 and T = 0.05 s. As can be seen,
compared to their linear counterpart. Once more, we
making the controller nonlinear improved the control
demonstrate the robustness and effectiveness of this
system performance, namely the overshoot, rise time,
type of controller.
settling time, and steady-state error, when compared
with the linear fuzzy controller. The fuzzy fractional
controller provides greater flexibility than the frac-
tional controller and can be used to better adjust the 5 CONCLUSIONS
dynamical properties of a control system.
Now, let us consider the FF-PDµ +Iλ -controller. In This paper introduced two novel fuzzy fractional PID
order to test the robustness of the fuzzy controller, we structures: the FF-PDµ and FF-PDµ +Iλ controllers. It
introduce a load disturbance of amplitude l = 2 after was demonstrated that these controllers are equiva-
7 seconds in system of Fig. 1. We use the same (K p , lent to the conventional fractional PD and PID con-
Kd ) parameters of the linear FF-PDµ -controller and trollers by using a linear input-output mapping of the
tuned the (Ki , λ) for a satisfactory control response. rule base of the fuzzy fractional controller. Moreover,
The final tuned parameters are (Ki , λ) = (10, −0.8). by making the controller nonlinear, the performance
With Ke = 100, and using (17) we obtain K f e , Ku , and of the control system proves to be, in most systems,
K f ie of the fuzzy controller. better than its linear counterpart. A methodology for

280
AMethodologyfortheDesignofFuzzyFractionalPIDControllers

1.6
Linear FF−PDµ+Iλ controller Barbosa, R. S., Machado, J. A. T., and Silva, M. F. (2006).
1.4 Nonlinear FF−PDµ+Iλ controller Time domain design of fractional differintegrators
uing least-squares. Signal Processing, 86:2567–2581.
1.2
Carvajal, J., Chen, G., and Ogmen, H. (2000). Fuzzy
PID controller: Design, performance evaluation, and
1
stability analysis. Journal of Information Science,
Plant output

0.8 123:249–270.
Chen, Y. Q., Vinagre, B. M., and Podlubny, I. (2004).
0.6 Continued fraction expansion approaches to discretiz-
ing fractional order derivatives-an expository review.
0.4
Nonlinear Dynamics, 38:155–170.
0.2 Galichet, S. and Foulloy, L. (1995). Fuzzy controllers: Syn-
thesis and equivalences. IEEE Transactions on Fuzzy
0
0 5 10 15 20
Systems, 3(2):140–148.
Time [s] Jantzen, J. (2007). Foundations of Fuzzy Control. Wiley
Figure 9: Unit-step and load responses of the fractional con- and Sons, Chichester, England.
trol system with the linear and nonlinear FF-PDµ +Iλ con- Lee, C. C. (1990). Fuzzy logic in control systems: fuzzy
trollers. logic controller-Part I and II. IEEE Transactions on
System Man, and Cybernetics-Part B: Cybernetics,
tuning the nonlinear fuzzy fractional PID controllers 20(2):404–435.
is also presented. This methodology is simple and Li, H.-H. and Gatland, H. B. (1996). Conventional fuzzy
effective and can be used to replace an existent frac- control and its enhancement. IEEE Transactions on
tional/integer PID controller in order to get better per- System Man, and Cybernetics-Part B: Cybernetics,
26(5):791–797.
formance of the control system. In this perspective,
Machado, J. A. T. (1997). Analysis and design of fractional-
future research on this topic includes the application
order digital control systems. SAMS Journal of Sys-
of the proposed fuzzy fractional PID controllers and tems Analysis, Modelling and Simulation, 27:107–
tuning methodology in other types of linear and non- 122.
linear plants of integer and/or fractional-order. We Mizumoto, M. (1995). Realization of PID control by fuzzy
expect that the incorporation of fuzzy reasoning into control methods. Fuzzy Sets and Systems, 70:171–
fractional-order controllers will increase the applica- 182.
bility of these controllers. Oldham, K. B. and Spanier, J. (1974). The Fractional Cal-
culus. Academic Press, New York.
Passino, K. M. and Yurkovich, S. (1998). Fuzzy Control.
Addison-Wesley, Menlo Park, California.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Podlubny, I. (1999a). Fractional Differential Equations.
Academic Press, San Diego.
This work is supported by FEDER Funds through Podlubny, I. (1999b). Fractional-order systems and PIλ Dµ -
the ”Programa Operacional Factores de Competitivi- controllers. IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control,
dade - COMPETE” program and by National Funds 44(1):208–214.
through FCT ”Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnolo- Vinagre, B. M., Chen, Y. Q., and Petras, I. (2003). Two di-
gia”. rect tustin discretization methods for fractional-order
differentiator/integrator. Journal of the Franklin Insti-
tute, 340:349–362.

REFERENCES
Astrom, K. J. and Hagglund, T. (1995). PID Controllers:
Theory, Design, and Tuning. Instrument Society of
America, USA.
Barbosa, R. S., , Jesus, I. S., and Silva, M. F. (2010). Fuzzy
reasoning in fractional-order PD controllers. In Pro-
ceedings of AIC’10, 10th WSEAS International Con-
ference on Applied Informatics and Communications,
pages 252–257, August 20-22, Taipei, Taiwan.
Barbosa, R. S. (2010). On linear fuzzy fractional pd and
pd+i controllers. In Proceedings of FDA’10, 4th IFAC
Workshop Fractional Differentiation and its Applica-
tions, pages 1–6, October 18-20, Badajoz, Spain.

281

View publication stats

También podría gustarte