Appl Intell
DOI 10.1007/s10489-011-0276-1
A new adaptive fuzzy sliding mode control using fuzzy self-tuning
for 3 DOF planar robot manipulators
A.F. Amer E.A. Sallam W.M. Elawady
Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2011
Abstract This paper presents a new robust adaptive control
strategy for robot manipulators, based on the coupling of the
fuzzy logic control with the so-called sliding mode control,
SMC, approach. The motivation for using SMC in robot-
ics mainly relies on its appreciable features, such as design
simplicity and robustness. Yet, the drawbacks of the conven-
tional SMC, such as chattering effect and a required priori
knowledge of the bounds of uncertainties can be destruc-
tive. In this paper, these problems are suitably circumvented
by adopting a robust adaptive fuzzy sliding mode control,
RAFSMC, approach. In this new approach the discontinu-
ous term is replaced by a new efficient estimation approach
to estimate the perturbation and two supervisory fuzzy sys-
tems. The first one of the supervisory fuzzy systems is used
to adaptively tune the control gain of SMC and the sec-
ond one is used to adaptively tune the sliding surface slope.
The stability of the system is guaranteed in the sense of the
Lyapunov stability theorem. Simulations using the dynamic
model of a three DOF planar rigid robot manipulator with
A.F. Amer
Automatic Control Engineering Dept., Faculty of Engineering,
Arab Academy for Science and Technology, St. 13, Amen yehea,
Alexandria, Egypt
e-mail: aamer@aast.edu
E.A. Sallam
Computers and Automatic Control Engineering Dept., Faculty of
Engineering, Tanta University, St. 68, Ali Bek Alkabeer, Tanta,
Egypt
e-mail: sallam_9@hotmail.com
W.M. Elawady ()
Computers and Automatic Control Engineering Dept., Faculty of
Engineering, Tanta University, Abdelsalam aref, Kafr Elsheikh,
unit 2, No. 9, Tanta, Egypt
e-mail: wmeana2007@yahoo.com
uncertainties show the effectiveness of the approach in high
speed trajectory tracking problems. The simulation results
that are compared with the results of conventional SMC in-
dicate that the control performance of the robot system is
satisfactory and the proposed approach can achieve favor-
able tracking performance, and it is robust with regard to
uncertainties and disturbances.
Keywords Fuzzy control Robust adaptive control
Robots Sliding mode control (SMC) Uncertainties
1 Introduction
Motion control of rigid robot manipulators is a difficult task,
mainly because of the nonlinearities and the coupling effects
typical of robotic systems [17]. Different approaches have
been followed in order to cope with this problem, such as,
for instance, feedback linearization [2, 3], model predictive
control [1, 10], and sliding mode control [13, 14, 33]. In
the robotics context, feedback linearization is accomplished
by the so-called inverse dynamics control [19]. In [7, 20],
a computed torque control is developed on the basis of the
feedback linearization. However, these designs are possible
only when the dynamics of the robotic dynamic are well
known. The adaptive control schemes can be employed to
deal with the unknown robotic dynamics [6]. In these ap-
proaches, the linear parameterizations must be assumed, i.e.
the unknown parameters must be of linear structure. More-
over, the unknown parameters are assumed to be constant
or slowly varying. However, as the robotic dynamic systems
are nonlinear, highly coupled, and time varying, the linear
parameterization property may not be applicable [6, 17].
Also the implementation also requires a precise knowledge

of the structure of the dynamic model. Generally, uncertain-
ties may not be known in practical robotic systems such as
changing payload, nonlinear friction, unknown disturbance,
and the high-frequency part of the dynamics. Therefore, it
is necessary to consider these effects containing both struc-
tured uncertainties (parametric) and unstructured uncertain-
ties (un-modeled dynamics).
Sliding mode control (SMC) is one of the effective non-
linear robust control approaches since it provides system dy-
namics with an invariance property to uncertainties once the
system dynamics are controlled in the sliding mode [8, 13,
15, 28, 29, 32]. The first step of SMC design is to select a
sliding surface that models the desired closed-loop perfor-
mance in state variable space. In the second step, design a
hitting control law such that the system state trajectories are
forced toward the sliding surface and stay on it [4, 17]. The
system state trajectory in the period of time before reach-
ing the sliding surface is called the reaching phase. Once
the system trajectory reaches the sliding surface, it stays on
it and slides along it to the origin. The system trajectory
sliding along the sliding surface to the origin is the slid-
ing mode [17]. Under certain conditions, the SMC is robust
with respect to system perturbation and external disturbance
[8, 13]. However, this control strategy produces some draw-
backs associated with large control chattering that may wear
coupled mechanisms and excite undesirable high-frequency
dynamics.
Moreover, a priori knowledge of the upper bounds of the
norm of the perturbation vector is required to obtain robust-
ness and convergence. In order to overcome the drawbacks
of SMC (i.e., chattering and a priori knowledge of the upper
bounds of the perturbation requirement), the problem of per-
turbation estimation was investigated in [5] for a particular
class of nonlinear uncertain systems. However, these prob-
lems remained mainly unsolved [21].
The problem of designing robust adaptive controllers
without knowing the bound of uncertainties was addressed
in [12] and references therein, and in [25], which required
a specific linearly parameterized model of the system un-
der investigation to construct the controller. The robust Lya-
punov stability-based approaches allow knowing asymp-
totic behavior of the solution without solving the differen-
tial equations. The price paid for this is that one must find
a suitable Lyapunov positive definite function with a nega-
tive definite time derivative. Furthermore, similar to the slid-
ing mode control, the robust Lyapunov stability-based ap-
proaches produce discontinuous control laws which suffer
from the chattering [18].
Several methods of chattering reduction have been re-
ported. One approach [9] places a boundary layer around
the switching surface such that the relay control is replaced
by a saturation function. Another method [30] replaces a
maxmin-type control by a unit vector function. These ap-
proaches, however, provide no guarantee of convergence
A.F. Amer et al.
to the sliding mode and involve a tradeoff between chat-
tering and robustness. Continuous SMC can exponentially
drive the system state to a chattering-free sliding mode but
tends to produce conservative designs. In [11], an asymp-
totic observer in the control scheme can eliminate chatter-
ing despite the discontinuous control law. Both the boundary
layer approach and the observer design assume that the un-
modeled dynamics are completely unknown. In [6], the au-
thors use the integral sliding method to overcome the draw-
back of chattering phenomenon. Reduced chattering may be
achieved without sacrificing robust performance by com-
bining the attractive features of fuzzy control with SMC
[26, 31, 34].
Recently, Fuzzy SMC [2224], FSMC, has also been
used for this purpose, which is shown to be quite effec-
tive. Fuzzy logic, first proposed by Zadeh [16], has proven
to be a potent tool for controlling ill-defined or parameter-
variant plants. By encapsulating heuristic engineering rules
a fuzzy logic controller can cope well with severe uncertain-
ties, although a heavy computational burden may arise with
some implementations. Fuzzy schemes with explicit expres-
sions for tuning can avoid this problem [27]. The control
methodology proposed here is a computational-intelligence
approach to some of the engineering problems associated
with sliding-mode controllers.
This paper discusses the design of a novel robust adaptive
fuzzy sliding mode, RAFSMC, controller with two supervi-
sory fuzzy self-tuning controllers to achieve reduced chatter
and system robustness against parameter uncertainty, load
disturbance, and nonlinearities.
The proposed controller consists of three main parts: the
equivalent control of SMC as a model-based control term; a
new estimation technique to estimate the perturbation from
the dynamics of the sliding surface; and a two supervisory
fuzzy self-tuning controllers. The first one of the supervisory
fuzzy systems is used to adaptively tune the control gain of
SMC and the second one is used to adaptively tune the slid-
ing surface slope. It is proved that the closed-loop system is
globally stable in the Lyapunov sense and the system output
can track the desired reference output asymptotically with
modeling uncertainties and disturbances.
The proposed control algorithm is applied to a 3 DOF
planar manipulator arm through simulations. The simula-
tion results indicate that the control performance of the robot
system is satisfactory. The proposed approach is compared
with the existing conventional sliding mode controllers for
robot manipulators in terms of advantages and control per-
formances. A comparative analysis with simulation results
soundly confirmed that the performance of developed pro-
posed controller is better than those of an existing variable
structure controller with conventional SMC. The remainder
of this paper is organized as follows: Sect. 2 presents the
characteristics of a dynamical model of the robot, Sect. 3
A new adaptive fuzzy sliding mode control using fuzzy self-tuning for 3 DOF planar robot manipulators

presents the characteristics of a conventional SMC, Sect. 4 D(t) = Bo1 {B(q)q + n(q, q)
+ Fd q
presents the fuzzy sliding mode control, Sect. 5 presents the
+ Fs (q)
+ d (q, q)}
(5)
robust adaptive sliding mode control with perturbation es-
timation, Sect. 6 presents the robust adaptive fuzzy SMC From (4) and (5), the direct dynamics model can be written
using fuzzy self-tuning control gain, Sect. 7 presents the ro- as follows:
bust adaptive fuzzy SMC using fuzzy self-tuning sliding sur-
face slope, Sect. 8 presents the robust adaptive fuzzy SMC + Bo1 u(t) + D(t)
q = fo (q, q) (6)
with fuzzy self-tuning control gain and sliding surface slope,
= Bo1 no (q, q)
where fo (q, q) is a bounded known non-
Sect. 9 presents the simulation results, and Sect. 10 summa-
linear vector function that represents the nonlinear deriving
rizes the conclusions and contributions of the works.
terms and D(t) is the uncertainty vector of the direct dynam-
ics that consists of the vectors of all uncertainties including
2 Description of robot manipulator model external disturbances.

The basics of robot dynamics and control are sufficiently

well known by now that we will be brief in our derivation of 3 Conventional sliding mode controller
the control algorithm. Thus, given the Euler-Lagrange dy-
namic equations for an n-link robot [20] Sliding mode control (SMC) is a technique derived from
Variable Structure Theory. Controllers designed using this
q + Fd q + Fs (q)
B(q)q + C(q, q)
technique have the capability to handle nonlinear and time-
+ d (q, q)
+ g(q) = (1) varying systems. It is known that the crucial and the most
important step of SMC design is the construction of the slid-
B(q)q + n(q, q)
+ Fd q + Fs (q)
+ d (q, q)
= u(t)
ing surface s(t) which is expected to response desired con-
where n(q, q) = C(q, q)
q + g(q), and q, q,
q R n are the trol specifications and performance. The trajectories are en-
joint position, velocity, and acceleration vectors, respec- forced to lie on the sliding surfaces.
tively; B(q) denotes the bounded positive definite inertia In the conventional SMC design, a sliding surface s(t) is
matrix; C(q, q) expresses the coriolis, centripetal matrix; chosen in by the following equation:
g(q) is the gravity vector; Fd R nn and Fs (q) R n rep-
s(t) = e(t)
+ e(t) (7)
resent the dynamic friction coefficient matrix and static fric-
is the vector of distur-
tion vector, respectively; d (q, q) where s(t) is a n 1 vector, is a n n diagonal positive
bances and un-modeled dynamics; u(t) = is the control definite constant matrix that determines the slope of the slid-
vector representing the torque exerting on joints. ing surface and e(t) = q(t) qd (t) is the tracking position
can be
In the presence of uncertainties, B(q) and n(q, q) error, in which qd (t) is the desired position trajectory and
expressed as: = q(t)
e(t) qd (t) is the tracking velocity error in which
B(q) = Bo (q) + B(q) qd (t) is the desired speed trajectory.
(2) The purpose of sliding mode control law is to force
= no (q, q)
n(q, q) + n(q, q)
tracking error e(t) to approach the sliding surface and then
move along the sliding surface to the origin. Therefore it
are the known parts, and B(q)
where Bo (q) and no (q, q) is required that the sliding surface is stable, which means
and n(q, q) are the unknown parts of B(q) and n(q, q),
limt e(t) = 0; then the error will die out asymptotically.
respectively. This implies that the system dynamics will track the desired
Therefore, in the presence of the model uncertain- trajectory asymptotically. Take the derivative of sliding sur-
ties and external disturbances, (1) can be written as fol- face with respect to time and use (6), then
lows:
s (t) = e(t)
+ e(t)

Bo (q)q + no (q, q)
+ B(q)q + n(q, q)
+ Fd q
= q qd + e(t)

+ Fs (q)
+ d (q, q)
= u(t) (3)
+ Bo1 u(t) + D(t) + e(t)
= fo (q, q) qd (8)
The direct dynamics model is written as:
The control effort being derived as the solution of s (t) with-
q = Bo1 no (q, q)
Bo1 {B(q)q + n(q, q)
+ Fd q out considering uncertainty (D(t) = 0) is to achieve the de-
+ d (q, q)}
+ Fs (q) + Bo1 u(t) (4) sired performance under nominal model, and it is referred to
as equivalent control effort, represented by ueq (t)
It is assumed that all uncertain elements can be lumped as
follows: ueq (t) = Bo {qd e(t)
fo (q, q)}
(9)

However, if unpredictable perturbations from the parame-
ter variations or external load disturbance occur, the equiv-
alent control effort cannot ensure the favorable control per-
formance. Thus, auxiliary control effort should be designed
to eliminate the effect of the unpredictable perturbations.
The auxiliary control effort is referred to as reaching con-
trol effort represented by ur (t). The reaching control signal,
in conventional, ur (t) is given as follows:
ur (t) = Kr sign[s(t)] (10)
where Kr = diag{kr1 , kr2 , . . . , krn } represents reaching con-
trol gain concerned with the upper bound of uncertainties,
and sign[.] is a sign function.
Totally, the SMC law for nonlinear uncertain systems,
which guarantees the stability and convergence, is discon-
tinuous and can be represented as:
u(t) = ueq (t) + ur (t)
= Bo {qd e(t)
fo (q, q)}
+ Kr sign[s(t)] (11)
However, the upper bound of uncertainties, which is re-
quired in the conventional SMC system, is difficult to obtain
precisely in advance for practical applications. If the bound
is selected too large, the sign function of the reaching con-
trol law will result in serious chattering phenomena in the
control efforts. The undesired chattering control efforts will
wear the bearing mechanism and might excite unstable sys-
tem dynamics. On the other hand, if the bound is selected
too small, the stability conditions may not be satisfied. It
will cause the controlled system to be unstable. The finite
time delays for the control computation and limitations of
practical control systems render the implementation of such
control signals. In other words, the sign function in overall
control will cause the control input to produce the chattering
phenomenon.
Fig. 1 Block diagram of the robust adaptive sliding mode control
A.F. Amer et al.
4 Fuzzy sliding mode control
Fuzzy Control (FC) has supplanted conventional technolo-
gies in many applications. One major feature of fuzzy logic
is its ability to express the amount of ambiguity in human
thinking. Thus, when the mathematical model of the process
does not exist, or exists but with uncertainties, FC is an alter-
native way to deal with the unknown process. However, the
huge number of fuzzy rules for high-order systems makes
the analysis complex. Therefore, much attention has been
focused on the fuzzy sliding mode control FSMC.
In this paper, in order to eliminate the chattering prob-
lem, a fuzzy inference engine is used for reaching phase and
fuzzy sliding mode control methodology is proposed. The
main advantage of this method is that the robust behavior of
the system is guaranteed and the performance of the system
in the sense of removing chattering is improved. The config-
uration of our fuzzy sliding mode control (FSMC) scheme
is shown in Fig. 1; it contains an equivalent control part and
a two-input single-output FSMC in which Mamdanis fuzzy
inference method is used.
The reaching law is selected as:
ur (t) = Kf uf (t) (12)
where Kf is the normalization factor of the output variable,
and uf (t) is the output of the FSMC, which is determined
by the normalized s(t) and s (t). The fuzzy control rules can
be represented as the mapping of the input linguistic vari-
ables s(t) and s (t) to the output linguistic variable uf (t) as
follows:
uf (t) = FSMC(s(t), s (t)) (13)
where FSMC(s(t), s (t)) denotes the functional characteris-
tics of the fuzzy linguistic decision schemes. The member-
ship function of input linguistic variables s(t) and s (t) and
A new adaptive fuzzy sliding mode control using fuzzy self-tuning for 3 DOF planar robot manipulators

Fig. 2 Fuzzy sets of sliding surface s(t) and derivative of sliding surface s (t)

Fig. 4 Control surface of uf (t)

Fig. 3 Fuzzy sets of reaching control uf (t)

Table 1 Rule matrix of FSMC

the membership functions of output linguistic variable uf (t) s(t)
are shown in Figs. 2 and 3, respectively. They are decom-
posed into seven fuzzy partitions expressed as NB (Nega- uf (t) NB NM NS Z PS PM PB
tive Big), NM (Negative Medium), NS (Negative Small), Z NB NB NB NB NB NM NS Z
(Zero), PS (Positive Small), PM (Positive Medium) and PB NM NB NB NB NM NS Z PS
(Positive Big). The fuzzy control surface of the output uf (t) NS NB NB NM NS Z PS PM
is shown in Fig. 4. These linguistic fuzzy rules are defined s (t) Z NB NM NS Z PS PM PB
heuristically in the following form: PS NM NS Z PS PM PB PB
PM NS Z PS PM PB PB PB
R (l) :: IF s(t) is Al1 and s (t) is Al2 PB Z PS PM PB PB PB PB
l
THEN uf (t) is B

where Al1 and Al2 are the labels of the input fuzzy sets. B l used, the center average defuzzification process has been se-
is the labels of the output fuzzy sets. l = 1, 2, . . . , m de- lected. The fuzzy rule table is designed as in Table 1.
notes the number of the fuzzy IFTHEN rules. For the fuzzy In the above fuzzy rule table, the rules are designed such
implication, the intersection minimum operation has been that the following points are taken under consideration:

(i) The output fuzzy sets are normalized in the interval
(1, 1), then |uf = FSMC(s(t), s (t))| 1.
(ii) When the product of s(t) and s (t) is positive, the
membership functions of uf (t) are set such that its
sign is the same as that of s(t), then s T (t)uf (t) =
s T (t) FSMC(s(t), s (t)) |s(t)|. This condition is re-
quired to achieve the system stability as indicated
in (23) and (24).
Totally, the FSMC law can be represented as:
u(t) = ueq (t) + ur (t) = ueq (t) + Kf uf (t)
= ueq (t) + Kf FSMC(s(t), s (t))
The stability of the robotic system, represented by (6), con-
trolled by u(t) in (14), where the equivalent control part
ueq (t) is in (9), is proved by using the Lyapunov function
can be chosen as:
1
V (t) = s T (t)s(t)
2 The tracking control problem can be achieved by keeping
V (t) = s T (t)s (t)
The lamped uncertainty in robot dynamical mode is rewrit-
ten as: D(t) = Bo1 {B(q)q + n(q, q)
+ Fd q + Fs (q)
+ u(t) = ueq (t) + ua (t)
and the model is rewritten as: q = fo (q, q)
d (q, q)} +
Bo1 u(t) D(t).
Equation (16) is analyzed as:
V = s T s = s T {qd fo (q, q)
Bo1 u(t) + D(t) + e(t)}
Bo1 (ueq (t) + ur (t))
= s T {qd fo (q, q)
+ D(t) + e(t)}
Substituting the equivalent control from (9), (17) becomes:
V = s T s = s T {qd fo (q, q)
Bo1 (ueq (t) + ur (t))
+ D(t) + e(t)}
= s T {Bo1 ur (t) D(t)} (18)
Simplifying (18) results in
V = s T s = s T {qd fo (q, q)
Bo1 (ueq (t) + ur (t))
+ D(t) + e(t)}
= s T {Bo1 Kf FSMC(s(t), s (t)) D(t)} (19)
Using the above mentioned points in designing the fuzzy
rules yields
V s{Bo1 Kf  D(t)} (20)
So if we select Kf  > Bo D(t), one can conclude
that the reaching condition V = s T s < 0 is always satis-
fied. Thus the closed loop system is asymptotically stable
A.F. Amer et al.
and the error state trajectory converges to the sliding surface
s(t) = 0.
In this section, fuzzy logic control (FLC) scheme have
been used as a direct controller, in which, the FLC is non-
adaptive in nature. A FLC is called non-adaptive if all of its
parameters, i.e. scaling factors, membership functions and
rules are kept fixed during the operation of the controller.
An adaptive FLC that fine tunes an already working direct
controller is called a self-tuning FLC or supervisory FLC.
To improve the performance, we combine the FLC as a su-
pervisory control with the adaptive SMC.
(14)
5 Robust adaptive sliding mode control
The term Kr sign[s(t)] is the fundamental cause of chatter-
ing and is designed conservatively based on the bounds of
uncertainties, i.e. Kr . In this paper, the particular objective
(15) is to replace the term Kr sign[s(t)] by a continuous term.
(16) the system trajectory on the sliding surface s(t) = 0. For this
purpose, the proposed controller is chosen as:
(21)
where ueq (t) and ua (t) are the equivalent control and the
adaptive control, respectively. The equivalent control ueq (t)
is based on the nominal plant parameters without consid-
ering uncertainty (D(t) = 0) and provides the main control
action and is given by (9). The adaptive control ua (t) is con-
sidered to compensate for the perturbations and to enhance
(17) the closed-loop stability and to improve the transient perfor-
mance.
The adaptive robust control scheme design relies on the
online estimated uncertainty vector rather than relying on
the bounds of uncertainties. Therefore, a priori knowledge
of the bounds of uncertainties is not required, and the control
input compensates for the uncertainty that exists.
Lyapunov stability analysis is the most popular approach
to prove and to evaluate the stable convergence property of
sliding mode control. Here, direct Lyapunov stability ap-
proach is employed to investigate the stability property of
the proposed controller and to derive the adaptive robust
control. Lyapunov function can be chosen as:
1 1 T
V (t) = s T (t)s(t) + D(t) GD(t) (22)
2 2
where G is a diagonal positive definite constant matrix
which is a design parameter, and D is the vector of the
lumped uncertainty estimation error and is defined as fol-
lows:
D(t) = Dest (t) D(t) (23)
A new adaptive fuzzy sliding mode control using fuzzy self-tuning for 3 DOF planar robot manipulators

where Dest and D are the estimated perturbation and the Equation (28) can be written:
unknown actual perturbation vectors, respectively.
The derivative of Lyapunov function is: ua (t) = Bo Ks(t) Bo Dest (t) (34)

V (t) = s T (t)s (t) + D(t)

T GD(t) (24) The first term in (34) is a proportional controller with re-
spect to sliding surface and is used as a feedback term to en-
Substituting (8) into (24) yields hance closed-loop stability, improve transient performance.
The second term in (34) is an adaptive term to compensate
V (t) = s T (t){fo (q, q)
+ Bo1 u(t) + D(t) + e(t)
qd } for the perturbations. The estimated uncertainty Dest (t) is

T GD(t)
+ D(t) (25)
estimated from the dynamics of the sliding surface s(t) by
integrating (31) as:

Substituting D(t) = D est (t) D(t)
from (23) into (25) 
yields Dest (t) = G1 s(t)dt (35)

V (t) = s T (t){fo (q, q)

+ Bo1 u(t) + D(t) + e(t)
qd } Substituting (35) into (34) yields the following robust adap-
T G{D est (t) D(t)}
+ D(t) (26) tive control law:
  
Substituting (8) and (21) into (26) and simplifying yields ua (t) = Bo Ks(t) + G1 s(t)dt (36)

V (t) = s T (t)Bo1 ua (t) + s T (t)D(t)

The total proposed robust adaptive controller is expressed
T G{D est (t) D(t)}
+ D(t) (27) as:

The adaptive control law ua (t) can be chosen as: u(t) = Bo {qd fo (q, q)
e(t)}

  
ua (t) = Bo Ks(t) Bo Dest (t) (28) Bo Ks(t) + G 1
s(t)dt (37)
where Kis a n n diagonal positive definite constant matrix
which is a design parameter. The block diagram of the proposed controller is given in
Substituting (28) into (27) and results in Fig. 5.

V (t) = s T (t)Bo Ks(t) s T (t)Dest (t) + s T (t)D(t)

T G{D est (t) D(t)}
6 Robust adaptive fuzzy SMC using fuzzy self-tuning
+ D(t) (29)
control gain
Rearranging (29) results in
In this section, the fuzzy self-tuning control gain K =
V (t) = s T (t)Bo Ks(t) s T (t)D(t)
diag{k1 , k2 , . . . , kn } is presented through the tuning of the
T G{D est (t) D(t)}
+ D(t) (30) control gain K = diag{k1 , k2 , . . . , kn } in the proportional
term (Bo Ks(t)). The structure of the proposed robust
If the time evolution of the estimated uncertainty Dest (t) is adaptive SMC with fuzzy self-tuning control gain K is
chosen as given in Fig. 6. For 3 DOF robot manipulator, n = 3 and
K = diag{k1 , k2 , k3 }.
D est (t) = G1 s(t) (31) Specifically, a supervisory fuzzy inference system is used
to adaptively tune the control gain K in order to improve the
and substituting (31) into (30), then
performance of the controller. The supervisory fuzzy sys-
+ D(t)
V (t) = s T (t)Bo Ks(t) s T (t)D(t) T s(t) tem of the proposed tuning method contains operator knowl-
edge in the form of IFTHEN rules to decide the control
D(t)
T GD(t) (32) gain K according to the current operating conditions of the
T s(t) results in controlled system. Here, the control rules of the supervisory
Taking into account that s T (t)D(t) = D(t)
fuzzy system are developed with the error e(t) and deriva-
T GD(t)
V (t) = s T (t)Bo Ks(t) D(t) (33) as a premise, and K = diag{k1 , k2 , k3 } as
tive of error e(t)
a consequent of the each rules. The triangle shape member-
From the above analysis, the global asymptotic stability is ship functions with 50% of overlapping for the input and
guaranteed since the derivative of the Lyapunov function is output fuzzy variables are considering as shown in Figs. 7
a negative definite V (t) < 0. and 8. Figure 9 shows the fuzzy control surface of K =
 A.F. Amer et al.

Fig. 5 Block diagram of the robust adaptive sliding mode control

Fig. 6 Block diagram of the robust adaptive sliding mode control with fuzzy self-tuning control gain

Fig. 7 Membership functions of error and change of error Fig. 8 Membership functions of K
A new adaptive fuzzy sliding mode control using fuzzy self-tuning for 3 DOF planar robot manipulators
Fig. 9 Fuzzy control surfaces of K
Fig. 10 Time history of K
diag{k1 , k2 , k3 }. This surface has been used to adaptively
tune K = diag{k1 , k2 , k3 } on line. Figure 10 shows the time
history of K = diag{k1 , k2 , k3 }.
The physical domain of the inputs (e, e) is in the range
{0.05, 0.05} and that of the output (K = diag{k1 , k2 , k3 })
is in the range {5000, 15000}, respectively. The fuzzy vari-
ables are defined for the rule base as, (e, e) = {NB (Neg-
ative Big), NM (Negative Medium, NS (Negative Small),
Z (Zero), PS (Positive Small), PN (Positive Medium), PB
(Positive Big)}; (K = diag{k1 , k2 , k3 }) = {VVS (Very Very
Small), VS (Very Small), S (Small), M (Medium), B (Big),
VB (Very Big) and VVB (Very Very Big).
7 Robust adaptive fuzzy SMC using fuzzy self-tuning
slope
The conventional SMC with the fixed slope ( =
diag{1 , 2 , . . . , n }) degrades the desired dynamic behav-
ior of the system. A control strategy, based on a fuzzy self-
tuning slope of sliding surface, would achieve fast tracking
of the system state variables and preserve the robustness
property.
In this section, a robust adaptive sliding mode control
adaptive sliding surface slope = diag{1 , 2 , . . . , n } is
presented. In this controller, the slope of the sliding sur-
face is not constant but being changed by fuzzy logic unit
dynamically according to the error e(t) and derivative of er-
ror e(t). The general structure of this controller is shown
in Fig. 11. For stability, must be positive. Thus sliding
surface can only move on second and fourth quadrants as
shown in Fig. 12. For 3 DOF robot manipulator, n = 3 and
= diag{1 , 2 , 3 }. The membership functions for the in-
puts (e(t), e(t)) are represented by negative big (NB), neg-
ative medium (NM), negative small (NS), zero (Z), pos-
itive small (PS), positive medium (PM), and positive big
(PB) as shown in Fig. 13. Similarly, the membership func-
tions for the output (slope) are represented by zero (Z),
small (S), medium small (MS), medium (M), medium big
(MB), big (B), and very big (VB) as shown in Fig. 14.
The physical domain of the inputs (e, e) is in the range
{0.05, 0.05} and that of the output (slope ) is in the range
{0.5, 5}, respectively. Figure 15 shows the fuzzy control sur-
face of . This surface has been used to adaptively tune
on line. The trajectory of sliding surface slope is shown in
Fig. 16.
8 Robust adaptive fuzzy SMC with fuzzy self-tuning
gain and slope
Here, the robust adaptive sliding mode control using fuzzy
self-tuning gain proposed in Sect. 6 and the robust adaptive
sliding mode control using fuzzy self-tuning slope proposed
in Sect. 7 are combined in order to bring their advantages
together.
In this controller there are two supervisory fuzzy logic
controllers. The first one adaptively tune the control gain K
in the proportional term (Bo Ks(t)) and the second one
adaptively tune value of the sliding surface slope . As
before, the adaptation process is performed according to
the error e(t) and derivative of error e(t). The general
structure of this controller is shown in Fig. 17. The mem-
bership functions for the inputs (e(t), e(t)) are the same
as those in Figs. 7 and 13. The membership functions
for the output control gain K = diag{k1 , k2 , k3 } are the
same as given in Fig. 7 and the fuzzy control surface of
K = diag{k1 , k2 , k3 } is the same as that in Fig. 9. The
membership functions for the sliding surface slope =
diag{1 , 2 , 3 } are the same as given in Fig. 14 and the
fuzzy control surface of = diag{1 , 2 , 3 } is the same as
that in Fig. 15.
 A.F. Amer et al.

Fig. 11 Block diagram of the robust adaptive sliding mode control with fuzzy self-tuning slope

Fig. 12 Sliding surface with different values of slope

Fig. 14 Membership functions of

9 Simulation results

The proposed robust adaptive SMC was tested for the con-
trol of 3 DOF rigid three link manipulator shown in Fig. 18.
The equations of motion and dynamical parameters of the
arm are given as:

q + Fd q + Fs (q)
B(q)q + C(q, q) + d (q, q)

+ g(q) = i = u(t)

Inertia matrix:

b11 b12 b13
Fig. 13 Membership functions of error and change of error
B(q) = b21 b22 b23
b31 b32 b33
b12 = b21 , b31 = b13 , b32 = b23
A new adaptive fuzzy sliding mode control using fuzzy self-tuning for 3 DOF planar robot manipulators

Corolis/Centrifugal torques matrix:

c11 c12 c13
= c21 c22 c23
C(q, q)
c31 c32 c33
c11 = mm3 a1 a2 s1 q1
(ml2 a1 l2 s2 + ml3 a1 a2 s2 + ml3 a1 l3 s23 )q2
(ml3 a1 l3 s23 + ml3 a2 l3 s3 )q3
c12 = (ml2 a1 l2 s2 + ml3 a1 a2 s2 + ml3 a1 l3 s23 )q1
(ml3 a1 a2 s2 + ml3 a1 l3 s23 + mm3 a1 a2 s2
+ ml2 a1 l2 s2 )q2 (ml3 a1 l3 s23 ml3 a2 l3 s3 )q3
c13 = (ml3 a1 l3 s23 + ml3 a2 l3 s3 )q1 (ml3 a1 l3 s23
+ ml3 a2 l3 s3 )q2 (ml3 a2 l3 s2 + ml3 a1 l3 s23 )q3
Fig. 15 Fuzzy control surfaces of
c21 = (ml2 a1 l2 s2 + ml3 a1 a2 s2 + ml3 a1 l3 s23 )q1
(ml3 a2 l3 s3 )q3
c22 = ml3 a2 l3 s3 q3
c23 = (ml3 a2 l3 s3 )q1 ml3 a2 l3 s3 q2 ml3 a2 l3 s3 q3
c31 = (ml3 a1 l3 s23 + ml3 a2 l3 s3 )q1 + (ml3 a2 l3 s3 )q2
c32 = (ml3 a2 l3 s3 )q1 + (ml3 a2 l3 s3 )q2 (ml3 a2 l3 s3 )q3

Gravity matrix:

g1
g(q) = g2
g3
g1 (q) = (ml1 l1 + ml2 a1 + mm2 a1 + ml3 a1 + mm3 a1 )gc1
+ (ml2 l2 + ml3 a2 + mm3 a2 )gc12 + ml3 l3 gc123
g2 (q) = (ml2 l2 + ml3 a2 + mm3 a2 )gc12 + ml3 l3 gc123
Fig. 16 Time history of g3 (q) = ml3 l3 gc123

where
b11 = Il1 + ml1 l12 + kr1
2
Im1 + Il2
c1 = cos q1 , c12 = cos(q1 + q2 )
+ mm2 a12 + Im2 + ml2 (a12 + l22 + 2a1 l2 c2 ) + Il3
c123 = cos(q1 + q2 + q3 )
+ Im3 + mm3 (a12 + a22 + 2a1 a2 c1 ) + ml3 (a12 + a22 s1 = sin q1 , s12 = sin(q1 + q2 )
+ l32 + 2a1 a2 c2 + 2a1 l3 c23 + 2a2 l3 c3 ) s123 = sin(q1 + q2 + q3 )
b12 = b21 = Il2 + Il3 + kr2 Im2 + Im3 + mm3 (a22 + a1 a2 c2 )
l1 = l2 = l3 = 0.5 represent the distances of the centers
+ ml2 (l22 + a1 l2 c2 ) + ml3 (a22 + l32 + a1 a2 c2 of mass of the three links from the respective joint axes,
ml1 = ml2 = ml3 = 10 Kg are the masses of the three links,
+ a1 l3 c23 + 2a2 l3 c3 )
mm1 = mm2 = mm3 = 1 Kg are the masses of the rotors,
b22 = Il2 + Il3 + kr2
2
Im2 + Im3 + mm3 a22 + ml2 l22 Il1 = Il2 = Il3 = 1.0 Kgm2 are the moments of inertia of
links and Im1 = Im2 = Im3 = 0.01 Kgm2 are the moments
+ ml3 (a22 + l32 + 2a2 l3 c3 )
of inertia of rotors. All simulations are carried out using
b23 = b32 = Il3 + kr3 Im3 + ml3 (l32 + a2 l3 c3 ) MATLAB 7.01.
In order to show the effectiveness and robustness of the
b13 = b31 = Il3 + kr3 Im3 + ml3 (l32 + a1 l3 c23 + a2 l3 c3 )
proposed approach, large severe uncertainties representing
b33 = Il3 + kr3
2
Im3 + ml3 l32 the dynamic effects as nonlinear viscous and static frictions,
 A.F. Amer et al.

Fig. 17 Block diagram of the robust adaptive sliding mode control with fuzzy self-tuning control gain and fuzzy self-tuning slope

500 + 500 sin(2t) + 500 sin(1.5t) + 500 cos( 2 t)
+ 500 sin( t)
2

500 + 500 sin(2t) + 500 sin(1.5t) + 500 cos( 2 t)
d =
+ 500 sin( 2 t)

500 + 500 sin(2t) + 500 sin(1.5t) + 500 cos( t)
2
+ 500 sin( 2 t)

A step disturbance torque of 500 Nm is suddenly ap-

plied at the three joints at t = 2.0 sec. and an unpredicted
variation at the mass, the inertia and the center of the mass
of the third link of the robot is occurred at t = 2.0 sec. The
abrupt change of the mass ml3 , the inertia Il3 and the cen-
ter of the mass l3 of the third link 3 of the robot is shown in
Fig. 19. As indicated in Fig. 19, a step change from 10 Kg to
30 Kg occur at the mass of the third link, a step change from
Fig. 18 Rigid three link robot manipulator 1.0 Kg m2 to 3.0 Kg m2 occur at the inertia of the third link
and a step change from 0.5 m to 0.75 m occur at the center
of the mass of the third link.
small joint and link elasticity, backlash and bounded exter- In order to show the effectiveness of the proposed ap-
nal torque disturbances by the terms in (5) are given by: proach, two simulations are performed:

fd q1 5q1 9.1 Tracking control of high speed trajectory
Fd q = fd q2 = 5q2
fd q3 5q3 The desired trajectory used here is given as: qd (t) = 1
cos(t), 0 t 4 and is shown in Fig. 20.
fs sign(q1 ) 5 sign(q1 ) The parameters of the conventional SMC are set as:
= fs sign(q2 ) = 5 sign(q2 )
Fs (q) the hitting control gain Kr = diag{15000, 15000, 15000}
fs sign(q3 ) 5 sign(q3 ) and the slope of the sliding surface = diag{2.5, 2.5, 2.5}.
A new adaptive fuzzy sliding mode control using fuzzy self-tuning for 3 DOF planar robot manipulators
Fig. 19 Variation of physical parameters of link 3
For the FSMC, the control gain Kf is set as: Kf =
diag{3500, 3500, 3500}. For the robust adaptive SMC
(RASMC), the control gain K is set as: K = diag{5000,
5000, 5000}, the control parameter G is set as: G =
diag{25000, 25000, 25000} and the sliding surface slope
= diag{2.5, 2.5, 2.5}. For the robust adaptive SMC
(RASMC) with fuzzy self-tuning control gain, the range
of the control gain K = diag{k1 , k2 , k3 } is (5000, 15000),
the control parameter G is set as: G = diag{25000, 25000,
25000} and the sliding surface slope = diag{2.5, 2.5, 2.5}.
For the robust adaptive SMC (RASMC) with fuzzy self-
tuning sliding surface slope , the range of the slope of
sliding surface = diag{1 , 2 , 3 } is (0.5, 5). The con-
trol gain K is set as: K = diag{5000, 5000, 5000}, the con-
trol parameter G is set as: G = diag{25000, 25000, 25000}.
For the robust adaptive SMC (RASMC) with fuzzy self-
tuning control gain and fuzzy self-tuning sliding surface
slope , the range of the control gain K = diag{k1 , k2 , k3 }
is (5000, 15000), the range of the slope of sliding surface
= diag{1 , 2 , 3 } is (0.5, 5) and the control parameter G
is set as: G = diag{25000, 25000, 25000}.
Figure 21 shows the joint tracking position error profile
for joints 1, 2, and 3 respectively in the case of RAFSMC
with fuzzy self-tuning control gain. From Fig. 17 we observe
that the RAFSMC with fuzzy self-tuning control gain gives
smaller tracking error and better tracking performance than
conventional SMC.
Figure 22 shows the joint tracking position error profile
for joints 1, 2, and 3 respectively in the case of RAFSMC
with fuzzy self-tuning sliding surface slope. It is noted that
shows that the proposed RAFSMC with fuzzy self-tuning
sliding surface slope has smaller error values than conven-
tional SMC.

Fig. 20 Desired trajectory for high speed motion
Fig. 21 Trajectory tracking error for joints 1, 2, and 3
A.F. Amer et al.
Figure 23 shows the joint tracking position error profile
for joints 1, 2, and 3 respectively in the case of RAFSMC
with fuzzy self-tuning control gain and fuzzy self-tuning
sliding surface slope.
From the simulation results, it is concluded that our pro-
posed RAFSMC approach showed superior performance for
each of the three joints. Simulation results show that the pro-
posed approach has faster tracking with smaller error values
than both conventional SMC. Table 2 reiterates this claim
with the help of performance indices calculated for each of
the competing controllers for each joint. The performance
indices are integral absolute error (IAE) and integral time
multiplied absolute error (ITAE) given by:

IAE = |e(t)|dt
 (38)
ITAE = t|e(t)|dt
A new adaptive fuzzy sliding mode control using fuzzy self-tuning for 3 DOF planar robot manipulators

Fig. 22 Trajectory tracking error for joints 1, 2, and 3

Table 2 Performance comparison of the controllers for the trajectory tracking control

Algorithm IAE ITAE

Joint 1 Joint 2 Joint 3 Joint 1 Joint 2 Joint 3

Conventional SMC 59.77 46.33 53.23 124.14 89.5 95.01

FSMC 35.76 22.09 30.68 79.25 27.09 50.26
RASMC 30.72 22.63 21.86 59.09 36.91 32.14
RAFSMC with self-tuning of control gain 21.46 14.76 14.21 41.85 23.42 20.51
RAFSMC with self-tuning of sliding surface slope 25.52 19.72 18.51 48.33 31.27 26.59
RAFSMC with self-tuning of control gain and sliding surface slope 8.31 6.88 5.64 16.82 13.94 11.35

For the RAFSMC with fuzzy self-tuning control gain and
fuzzy self-tuning sliding surface slope, it is observed that
both (IAE) and (ITAE), for the three joints are considerably
reduced in magnitude than the other techniques dealt with in
this paper. The values of different errors for various control
strategies and various joints are tabulated in Table 2.
9.2 Pick and place task
The desired joint angle function is chosen as: qd (t) = 2 +
(1 + tanh(10 cos(0.25t))), 0 t 12 sec and is shown in
Fig. 24. This function is a pick-and-place type task that is
widely used in industrial applications. The uncertainty, ex-
 A.F. Amer et al.

Fig. 23 Trajectory tracking error for joints 1, 2, and 3

ternal disturbance and the parameter variations are all ap-

plied at t = 4.0 sec.
The parameters of the conventional SMC are set as:
the hitting control gain Kr = diag{15000, 15000, 15000}
and the slope of the sliding surface = diag{5, 5, 5}.
For the FSMC, the control gain Kf is set as: Kf =
diag{5000, 5000, 5000}. For the robust adaptive SMC
(RASMC), the control gain K is set as: K = diag{25000,
25000, 25000}, the control parameter G is set as: G =
diag{25000, 25000, 25000} and the sliding surface slope
= diag{5, 5, 5}. For the robust adaptive SMC (RASMC)
with fuzzy self-tuning control gain, the range of the con-
trol gain K = diag{k1 , k2 , k3 } is (25000, 50000), the con-
trol parameter G is set as: G = diag{25000, 25000, 25000}
and the sliding surface slope = diag{5, 5, 5}. For the ro- Fig. 24 Desired trajectory for pick and place task
bust adaptive SMC (RASMC) with fuzzy self-tuning sliding
surface slope , the range of the slope of sliding surface as: K = diag{25000, 25000, 25000}, the control parameter
= diag{1 , 2 , 3 } is (2.5, 7.5). The control gain K is set G is set as: G = diag{25000, 25000, 25000}. For the robust
A new adaptive fuzzy sliding mode control using fuzzy self-tuning for 3 DOF planar robot manipulators

Fig. 25 Position of joints 1, 2, and 3 for pick and place task

 A.F. Amer et al.

Table 3 Performance comparison of the controllers for pickand place task

Algorithm IAE ITAE 103

Joint 1 Joint 2 Joint 3 Joint 1 Joint 2 Joint 3

Conventional SMC 792.71 700.51 827.45 3.6565 3.0527 3.8464

FSMC 747.62 664.49 584.76 1.4416 1.0676 0.84833
RASMC 429.15 425.28 423.18 0.22897 0.19785 0.17829
RAFSMC with self-tuning of control gain 206.66 205.92 205.56 0.05652 0.04849 0.04364
RAFSMC with self-tuning of sliding surface slope 277.38 275.52 274.36 0.10844 0.09140 0.07993
RAFSMC with self-tuning of control gain and sliding surface slope 100.78 101.76 100.76 0.00754 0.00752 0.00721

adaptive SMC (RASMC) with fuzzy self-tuning control gain References

and fuzzy self-tuning sliding surface slope , the range of
the control gain K = diag{k1 , k2 , k3 } is (25000, 50000), the
range of the slope of sliding surface = diag{1 , 2 , 3 }
is (2.5, 7.5) and the control parameter G is set as: G =
diag{25000, 25000, 25000}. Figure 25 shows the position
profile for joints 1, 2, and 3 respectively. The values of dif-
ferent errors for three joints are tabulated in Table 3.
10 Conclusions
The present paper has described the development of a robust
adaptive fuzzy sliding mode, RAFSMC, controller with two
supervisory fuzzy self-tuning controllers to achieve reduced
chatter and system robustness against parameter uncertainty,
load disturbance, and nonlinearities. The closed-loop sys-
tem is globally stable in the Lyapunov sense and the system
output can track the desired reference output asymptotically
with modeling uncertainties and disturbances.
The proposed non-chattering RAFSMC based on fuzzy
self-tuning scheme possesses great benefit where there is a
precise tracking of fast trajectories. In this proposed RAF-
SMC, the control gain of SMC was tuned on-line according
to error states of the system by a supervisory fuzzy controller
and the slope of the sliding surface was adapted on-line
by another supervisory fuzzy system. The proposed method
does not require the bounds of uncertainty and disturbance
of the system and a linearly parameterized dynamic model
of the system is not required; meanwhile, the chattering phe-
nomenon that frequently appears in the conventional SMC is
also eliminated without deteriorating the system robustness.
Generally speaking, it can be said that the performance of
Adaptive Fuzzy Inference System based SMC is better than
the conventional approach in the control of robot manipula-
tors. Simulation results showed the effectiveness of the pro-
posed RAFSMC methodology. It has been verified that the
proposed RAFSMC has superior tracking performance with
robust characteristics to conventional SMC.
1. Ibrahimbegovic A, Knopf-Lenoir C, Kucerova A, Villon P (2004)
Optimal design and optimal control of elastic structures undergo-
ing finite rotations. Int J Numer Methods Eng 61:24282460
2. Abdallah B, Dawson D, Dorato P, Jamshidi M (1991) Survey of
robust control for rigids robots. IEEE Control Syst Mag 11(2):24
30
3. Kuo CY, Wang SPT (1989) Nonlinear robust industrial robot con-
trol. ASME J Dyn Syst Meas Control 11:2430
4. Yorgancioglu F, Komurcugil H (2010) Decoupled sliding-mode
controller based on time-varying sliding surfaces for fourth order
systems. Expert Syst Appl 37:67646774
5. Elmali H, Olgac N (1992) Theory and implementation of sliding
mode control with perturbation estimation. IEEE Int Conf Robot
Autom 3:21142119
6. Ho HF, Wong YK, Rad AB (2007) Robust fuzzy tracking control
for robotic manipulators. Simul Model Pract Theory 15:801816
7. Craig JJ (1989) Introduction to robotics, 2nd edn. Addison-
Wesley, Reading
8. Slotine JJE, Li W (1991) Applied nonlinear control. Prentice-Hall,
Englewood Cliffs
9. Slotine JJ, Sastry SS (1983) Tracking control of nonlinear systems
using sliding surfaces, with application to robot manipulators. Int
J Control 38:465492
10. Juang JN, Eure KW (1998) Predictive feedback and feedforward
control for systems with unknown disturbances. NASA/Tm-1998-
208744
11. Phuah J, Lu J, Yahagi T (2005) Chattering free sliding mode con-
trol in magnetic levitation system. IEE J Trans Electron Inf Syst
125:600606
12. Gong JQ, Yao B (1999) Adaptive robust control without knowing
bounds of parameter variations. Proc IEEE Conf Decis Control
4:33343339
13. Astrom KJ, Wittenmark B (1995) Adaptive control. Addison-
Wesley, Reading
14. Shyu KK, Chu PH, Shang LJ (1996) Control of rigid robot ma-
nipulators via combination of adaptive sliding mode control and
compensated inverse dynamics approach. In: IEE proceedings on
control theory and application, vol 143, pp 283288
15. Shyu KK, Shieh HJ (1996) A new switching surface sliding-
mode speed control for induction motor drive systems. IEEE Trans
Power Electron 11:660667
16. Zadeh LA (1965) Fuzzy sets. Inf Control 8:338353
17. Capisani LM, Ferrara A, Magnani L (2007) Second order sliding
mode motion control of rigid robot manipulators. In: Proceedings
of the 46th IEEE conference on decision and control, New Or-
leans, LA, USA, pp 1214
18. Corless MJ, Leitmann G (1981) Continuous state feedback guar-
anteeing uniform ultimate boundedness for uncertain dynamic
systems. IEEE Trans Autom Control 26(5):11391144
A new adaptive fuzzy sliding mode control using fuzzy self-tuning for 3 DOF planar robot manipulators
19. Adam MJK (1999) Basics of robotics: theory and components of
manipulators and robots. Springer, New York
20. Spong MW, Vidyasagar M (1989) Robot dynamics and control.
Wiley, New York
21. Zeinali M, Notash L (2010) Adaptive sliding mode control with
uncertainty estimator for robot manipulators. Mech Mach Theory
45(1):8090
22. Zhu M, Li Y (2010) Decentralized adaptive fuzzy sliding mode
control for reconfigurable modular manipulators. Int J Robust
Nonlinear Control 20(4):472488
23. Roopaei M, Zolghadri Jahromi M (2009) Chattering-free fuzzy
sliding mode control in MIMO uncertain systems. Nonlinear Anal
71:44304437
24. Yagiz N, Hacioglu Y (2009) Robust control of a spatial robot using
fuzzy sliding modes. Math Comput Model 49:114127
25. Barambones O, Etxebarria V (2000) Robust adaptive control for
robot manipulator with un-modeled dynamics. Int J Cybern Syst
31(1):6786
26. Ha QP, Rye DC, Durrant-Whyte HF (1999) Fuzzy moving sliding
mode control with application to robotic manipulators. Automat-
ica 35(4):607616
27. Ha QP (1996) Robust sliding mode controller with fuzzy tuning.
Electron Lett 32(17):16261628
28. Wai RJ (2000) Adaptive sliding-mode control for induction
servo motor drive. Proc Inst Electr Eng Electron Power Appl
147(6):553562
29. Aloui S et al (2010) Improved fuzzy sliding mode control for a
class of MIMO nonlinear uncertain and perturbed systems. Appl
Soft Comput J 11:820826
30. Spurgeon SK (1991) Choice of discontinuous control component
for robust siding mode performance. Int J Control 53:161179
31. Wang SY, Hong CM, Liu CC, Yang WT (1996) Design of a static
reactive power compensator using fuzzy sliding mode control. Int
J Control 63(2):393412
32. Utkin VI (1993) Sliding mode control design principles and appli-
cations to electric drives. IEEE Trans Ind Electron 40(1):2336
33. Chen Y, Chang JL (1999) Sliding-mode force control of manip-
ulators. In: Proceeding national science council ROC(A), vol 23,
pp 281289
34. Lu YS, Chen JS (1994) A self-organizing fuzzy sliding-mode con-
troller design for a class of nonlinear servo systems. IEEE Trans
Ind Electron 41:492502
A.F. Amer is Prof. in Automatic
Control Engineering Dept., Fac-
ulty of Engineering, Arab Academy
for Science and Technology, Amen
yehea, Alexandria, Egypt.
Brief Biographical History: 1967
Demonstrator, Faculty of Engineer-
ing, Alexandria University, Alexan-
dria, Egypt 1975 Master of Sci-
ence, Faculty of Engineering, Cairo
University, Egypt 1989 Ph.D., Lille
University, France 19901997 Lec-
turer, Automatic Control Dept., Fac-
ulty of Engineering, Arab Acad-
emy for Science and Technology,
Alexandria, Egypt 19972001 Head of Automatic Control Engineer-
ing Dept., Faculty of Engineering, Arab Academy for Science and
Technology, Alexandria, Egypt 20012008 Presidents Assistant of
European Cooperation, Arab Academy for Science and Technology,
Alexandria, Egypt.
Main Work: Robotics, automatic control, fuzzy control, and digital
control systems Membership in Academic Societies: Scientific Society
of Computers, Arab Academy for science and technology, Alexandria,
Egypt.
E.A. Sallam is Head of Computers
and Automatic Control Engineer-
ing Dept., Faculty of Engineering,
Tanta University, St. 68, Ali Bek
Alkabeer, Tanta, Egypt.
Brief Biographical History:
19771979 Demonstrator, Faculty
of Engineering and Technology,
El Menoufiah University, Shebin
Elkom, Egypt 1980 Krupp Atlas
Electronik (Ships Electronic), Bre-
men, West Germany 19811982
Ziemann Elektrotechnik (Part time),
Bremen, West Germany 1982
R. Hogenkamp (Transformatoren
und Apparate Bau), Bremen, West Germany 1983 K. Meyer Con-
sulting Engineer, Bremen, West Germany 19871998 Lecturer, En-
gineering Physics and Mathematics Dept., Faculty of Engineering and
Techn., Shebin Elkom, Egypt 19911993 Lecturer, Faculty of Technol-
ogy, Qatar University, Qatar 19992007 Lecturer, Computers & Auto-
matic Control Dept., Faculty of Engineering, Tanta University, Tanta,
Egypt 2007 Assis. Prof., Head of Computers & Automatic Control
Dept., Faculty of Engineering, Tanta University, Tanta, Egypt.
Main Work: Robotics, stochastic optimal control, system identifica-
tion and estimation Membership in Academic Societies: Scientific
Magazine of Computers, Arab Academy for Science and Technology,
Alexandria, Egypt; The Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engi-
neers (IEEE), Member.
W.M. Elawady works in Comput-
ers and Automatic Control Engi-
neering Dept., Faculty of Engineer-
ing, Tanta University, St. Abdel-
salam aref, Kafr Elsheikh, unit 2,
No. 9, Egypt.
Brief Biographical History: 1998
2006 Demonstrator, Faculty of En-
gineering, Tanta University, Tanta,
Egypt 2006 Lecturer Assistant,
Computers & Automatic Control
Dept., Faculty of Engineering, Tanta
University, Tanta, Egypt.
Main Work: Robotics, robot dynam-
ics, fuzzy control, robust nonlinear
control, and intelligent control. Membership in Academic Societies:
Scientific Magazine of Computers, Arab Academy for Science and
Technology, Alexandria, Egypt.