1

From Classical Control to Fuzzy Logic Control

Charles P. Coleman

1.1 Introduction
Fuzzy logic controllers have been very successfully applied to many industrial
applications over the past few decades [2-5]. However, the traditionally trained
control engineer may be in need of a tutorial-like introduction to the comparison of
classical control techniques and fuzzy logic control techniques in order either to
transition to fuzzy logic control techniques, or to be convinced that fuzzy logic
control techniques can be successfully applied to typical control problem well
handled by classical control techniques.
It is the objective of this chapter to provide such a tutorial introduction. In this
chapter, two standard and established classical control techniques, Proportional-
Integral-Derivative (PID) control and sliding mode control, and fuzzy logic
control, will be applied to a typical industrial control application motor control.
Each control technology will be applied to the control task at hand in the most
equitable manner possible, so that resulting robustness performance can be
compared.
The success of fuzzy logic controllers has prompted much comparison to
classical control techniques, with detractors and supporters on both sides [6-ll].
The ensuing arguments have often occurred over the similarities and synergies of
classical and fuzzy logic approaches to control. Indeed, the practicing control
engineer usually has little interest in ideological debates. It is in his or her interest
to produce a working controller, with efficacy, making use of any and all
techniques available.
It should be apparent by the end of this chapter that classical control techniques
and fuzzy logic techniques can coexist and together bring great benefits to the
practicing engineer by expanding the repertoire of available control techniques
[12,13]. The following chapters in this edited volume will indeed clearly
demonstrate that fuzzy logic control can provide great benefit to advanced
industrial applications.
In the following sections we introduce the control problem. Then we synthesize
robust controllers using two classical control techniques PID and sliding mode
control. Finally we synthesize a robust fuzzy logic controller for comparison.
From the modeled performance of each of the controllers it will be apparent that
classical and fuzzy logic control techniques can be applied to a typical industrial
control application with similar performance results.
2 Advanced Fuzzy Logic Technologies in Industrial Applications

1.2 Choice of Controllers

In this chapter two classical control techniques, PID and sliding mode control, and
fuzzy logic control are selected. PID control is examined regarding their use to
synthesize robust controllers. PID control is chosen as one of the classical control
techniques because it is one of the most commonly used controllers in industrial
applications, and because it has plant perturbation robustness properties which can
be mathematically analyzed. We choose sliding mode control as the second
classical control technique because it is a robust nonlinear control method whose
robustness properties can also be mathematically analyzed. Fuzzy logic control is
chosen because it is the subject of this volume and, like the two classical control
techniques, fuzzy logic control also has empirically demonstrated robustness
properties [l]. In this chapter we do not present every robust control technique.
Indeed, the popular and successful H f , and adaptive control techniques are
noticeably absent from this study. We restrict ourselves to fuzzy logic control and
two other well established and popular control methods PID and sliding mode
control in order to keep this tutorial introduction brief, intelligible, and meaningful.

1.3 Control Problem

The control engineer is concerned about such properties as the robustness of a
controller to plant perturbations and uncertainty. Taking the perspective of the
control engineer who has several control tools available for the synthesis of robust
controllers, we are interested in determining the ability of classical control and
fuzzy logic control technique to synthesize a robust controller.
To assess the usefulness of fuzzy logic and classical control techniques in
designing a robust controller, we choose a benchmark problem, and then compare
the performance results of each control design method.

1.3.1 Motor Speed Control

Motivated by the work in [l, 14], we consider the typical control application of the
robust speed control of a rotating motor, modeled by a third-order linear time-
invariant transfer function. The general configuration for the motor speed control
problem is given in Figure 1.1.
We use the nominal plant, perturbed motor plants, and the performance criteria
given in [l] to design and compare robust fuzzy, PID, and sliding mode controllers.

1.3.2 Restrictions on Controller Inputs and Outputs

As shown in Figure 1.1, the reference step input speed Z r , and the output motor
speed Z c are available for comparison. To keep the controller comparison fair,
each controller only has access to the motor speed error, e = Z r  Z c , and the
motor angular acceleration Z c inputs. Each controller produces only one output
u.
 From Classical Control to Fuzzy Logic Control 3

Figure 1.1. Motor speed control problem

1.3.3 Nominal Plant

The nominal motor plant is modeled by the following transfer function:

5
G1 ( s ) = (1.1)
s ( s  1)( s  2)

1.3.4 Perturbed Plants

The two perturbed motor plants are modeled by the following transfer functions:

15
G2 ( s) = (1.2)
s ( s  1)( s  2)
5
G3 ( s ) = 2 (1.3)
s ( s  2)

1.3.5 Performance Criteria

The designed controllers must be robust to variations of system parameters. For the
fuzzy logic, PID, and sliding control designs, one single controller must render
acceptable the closed loop unit step responses of the nominal plant and the two
perturbed plants. To be acceptable, the closed loop step responses must
simultaneously have short rise time and no overshoot.
4 Advanced Fuzzy Logic Technologies in Industrial Applications

1.3.6 Design Approach

We design the fuzzy, PID, and sliding mode controllers based on the nominal plant
given in Equation (1.1). Each designed controller is then applied to all three
transfer functions, and numerical simulations are performed to analyze the
controller's robustness.
In the next two sections, the design of the two classical controllers is presented:
first PID and then sliding mode control. Then a fuzzy logic controller is
synthesized for comparison to the classical control techniques. Plots of each
controller's closed loop step response and control effort are shown in the Appendix
to this chapter. All three control techniques, the two classical and the fuzzy control
technique, will be found to provide adequate controllers, and for this application
we can conclude that all three approaches should be available to practicing control
engineer.

1.4 Analysis and Synthesis of a Robust PID Controller

The fuzzy logic controller designed in [l, 14] is similar to a nonlinear PD controller
[15]. We design a linear PID controller to obtain satisfactory step response for all
three transfer functions.
A linear PID controller can be characterized by the following transfer function:

Ki
C (s) = K p  K d s  (1.4)
s

Because, it is very difficult to realize a pure differentiator, we use the following

transfer function for implementation:

Kd s K
C (S ) = K p   i (1.5)
(Ws  1) s

To have a fair comparison, we use a small value for K i = 0.001 , just enough to
keep steady state error zero. We use a small value for W = 0.01 , so that its effect on
the dynamics is minimal, but the derivative controller is still realizable.
The selection of K p and K d is based on the root locus of C ( s )G1 ( s ) . The root
locus gives us the locations of closed loop poles. The proportional and derivative
gain values are chosen such that the closed loop pole locations are in the left half
complex plain for all three plants. Another criterion for selection of these gains is
the step response of the closed loop system.
We select the following gains: K p = 2 , K d = 5 . With these gains, the closed
loop system is stable for the open loop gain up to 51. Thus, in particular, the above
PID controller stabilizes the systems given by the transfer functions in Equations
(1.1) and (1.2). For the model given in Equation (1.3) we have closed loop stability
for the open loop gain up to 30. The step responses have no overshoot and are
critically damped as shown in Figures 1.2, 1.3 and 1.4.
 From Classical Control to Fuzzy Logic Control 5

1.5 Analysis and Synthesis of a Robust Sliding Mode Controller

To design a sliding mode controller, we convert the transfer function model into
state space format. The controllable canonical form realization of the model given
in Equation (1.1) is given by

0 1 0 0
x = 0 0 1 x  0u
(1.6)

0  2  3 5

y = >1 0 0@x

We consider the following sliding surface for this design (See [16] for details):

S = ( y  yd )  O1 ( y  y d )  O 2 ( y  y d ) (1.7)

The choice of sliding surface is based on the following considerations:

x The relative degree of the system in Equation (1.6) with S as output

should be 1. This ensures that the input u appears explicitly on the right
hand side of the equation for S .
x System dynamics on the sliding surface should be stable. This requires
O1 , and O 2 > 0 .

y d (t ) specifies the reference trajectory to be tracked by the output. If one

knows the entire trajectory of y d , then the derivative information y d (t ) and
yd (t ) can be extracted offline and used in the design to improve the performance.
If the information is not available, or as in this case, y d (t ) being unit step, is non-
differentiable, then we can assume y d and yd to be zero and let the robustness
property of the sliding mode controller take care of the mismatch.
With the definition of sliding surface as above, we have reduced the design
requirement from tracking y d (t ) to being on the surface S = 0 . Once on the
sliding surface, the dynamics (Equation (1.7)) are exponentially stable and
asymptotic trajectory tracking is achieved. The control u is designed to make the
surface S = 0 attractive and to reach the surface in finite time.
Consider the following Lyapunov function:

1 2
V = S (1.8)
2
Its time derivative is given by
V = SS (1.9)
6 Advanced Fuzzy Logic Technologies in Industrial Applications

As the system has relative degree 1 with S as output, we can solve for u from
the equation

S =  K sgn( S ) (1.10)

This results in a negative definite V and also guarantees finite time

convergence to the sliding surface. However, the controller will result in high
frequency chattering near sliding surface. To avoid this, we use the following
expression to solve for u 1:

S =  KS (1.11)
V =  KS 2 (1.12)

Expanding both sides of the equation, we get

S = 2 x 2  3x 3  5u  O1 x 3  O 2 x 2
=  K ( x3  O1 x 2  O 2 x1  O 2 y d )

The u obtained from this equation will be used for the control.
This controller needs access to all three states, whereas the fuzzy logic
controller of [l, 14] makes use of only x1 and x 2 . To have a fair comparison, we
will construct an observer to get an estimate of the state variable x 3 .
A standard Luenburger observer is designed to get an estimate of x 3 . We use
the state space model of the plant given in Equation (1.6) to design the observer as
follows:

x = Ax  bu  L( y  y ) (1.13)
y = cx

where, the matrices A , b and c correspond to the plant model in Equation (1.6).
The matrix L is chosen such that the eigenvalues of observer error dynamics
( A  LC ) are in the left half plane and the error dynamics is faster than the
dynamics on the sliding surface.
The closed loop step responses with this sliding mode controller are shown in
Figures 1.2, 1.3 and 1.4. The responses have no overshoot and are critical. The
controller is robust to input gain changes as well as to the changes in system
dynamics while keeping the input magnitude small.
Note: With the use of Equation (1.11), the controller is essentially a linear state
feedback controller. It results in closed loop eigenvalues of

1
With this controller, the trajectory is not guaranteed to reach the sliding surface in finite
time.
 From Classical Control to Fuzzy Logic Control 7

^ 1.3392,4.33 r 1.91 j` for the plant model in Equation (1.1). The same
controller, when applied to other plants, will give the following closed loop
eigenvalue locations: for the perturbed model given by Equation (1.2)
^ 1.32,3.55,19.12` , and for the perturbed model given by Equation (1.3)
^ 1.4,3.79 r 2.62 j` . Thus, by design, the increase in gain makes the closed loop
system more stable.

1.6 Analysis and Reconstruction of a Fuzzy Robust Controller

We implement the robust fuzzy controller given in [l,14]. The inputs to the fuzzy
controller are e and Z c . The output of the fuzzy controller is u. The universes of
discourse of e , Z c , and u are partitioned into seven fuzzy sets:

x NB - negative big
x NM - negative medium
x NS - negative small
x ZE - zero
x PS - positive small
x PM - positive medium
x PB - positive big

Each fuzzy set is represented by a Gaussian membership function. The rule

base of the fuzzy logic controller contains 49 rules that are tabulated in Table 1.1.
The output of each rule is determined by min-inference. The crisp output u of the
fuzzy logic controller is generated by centroid defuzzification.

Table 1.1 Fuzzy logic controller rule base

e
NB NM NS ZE PS PM PB
PB NB NB NB NB NM NS ZE
PM NB NB NB NM NS ZE PS
. PS NB NB NM NS ZE PS PM
ZC ZE NB NM NS ZE PS PM PB
NS NM NS ZE PS PM PB PB
NM NS ZE PS PM PB PB PB
NB ZE PS PM PB PB PB PB

The step response of this fuzzy logic controller applied to the nominal and
perturbed plants is shown in Figures 1.2, 1.3 and 1.4. The step responses for all
three plants have short rise times and no overshoot. Thus, they meet the specified
robust performance criteria. The control effort generated by the fuzzy logic
controller is also shown in the Appendix to this chapter, as are the control efforts
for the PID and sliding mode controllers (Figures 1.5, 1.6 and 1.7).
8 Advanced Fuzzy Logic Technologies in Industrial Applications

1.7 Conclusions

1.7.1 Comments on Controller Designs

The control engineer proficient in PID and sliding mode control techniques can
readily synthesize robust controllers to perform the benchmark control task
presented in this chapter. As demonstrated in [l] and verified in this chapter, the
control engineer utilizing fuzzy control techniques can readily achieve the same
goal. Thus, we have shown that classical and fuzzy logic control tools are available
to the control engineer for use in synthesizing an acceptable robust controller, a
typical motor control problem.
Fuzzy logic control software tools are readily available and so the developing
of a controller for the benchmark motor control problem in this chapter for this
problem was relatively simple to implement and it provided satisfactory results.
Software tools are also readily available for the design and simulation of the PID
and sliding mode controllers for these problems, and so these two controllers were
also easy to implement.

1.7.2 From Classical Controls to Fuzzy Logic Controls

Hopefully, this introductory tutorial of PID, sliding mode control, and fuzzy logic
control of motor speed clearly demonstrates that fuzzy logic control should have a
place in the industrial control engineer's toolbox alongside classical control
techniques. Classical control should not be abandoned but, as other chapters in this
volume demonstrate, the control engineer should take advantage of the power of
fuzzy logic control where he or she can in advanced industrial control applications.
We encourage the continued development of fuzzy logic control techniques and its
integration and synergistic development with classical control techniques in the
future.
 From Classical Control to Fuzzy Logic Control 9

Appendix. Controller Performance Results

Figure 1.2. Closed loop step response of nominal plant G1(s)

10 Advanced Fuzzy Logic Technologies in Industrial Applications

Figure 1.3. Closed loop step response of the perturbed model G2(s)
 From Classical Control to Fuzzy Logic Control 11

Figure 1.4. Closed loop step response of the perturbed model G3(s)
12 Advanced Fuzzy Logic Technologies in Industrial Applications

Figure 1.5. PID controller control effort

 From Classical Control to Fuzzy Logic Control 13

Figure 1.6. Fuzzy logic controller control effort

14 Advanced Fuzzy Logic Technologies in Industrial Applications

Figure 1.7. Sliding mode controller control effort

 From Classical Control to Fuzzy Logic Control 15

References
[1] H. T. Nguyen, C.-W. Tao, W. E. Thompson, "An Empirical Study of Robustness of
Fuzzy Systems", Proc. of 2nd IEEE Intl. Conf. on Fuzzy Systems, pp. 1340-1345.
[2] R. M. Tong, "An Annotated Bibliography of Fuzzy Control", in Industrial
Applications of Fuzzy Control, M. Sugeno, Ed., North- Holland, Amsterdam, Holland,
1985, pp. 249-269.
[3] T. Terano, K. Asai, M. Sugeno. Fuzzy Systems Theory and Its Applications. Academic
Press, Boston, MA, USA.
[4] W. Pedrycz. Fuzzy Control and Fuzzy Systems, 2nd extended ed. Wiley, New York,
NY, USA.
[5] H. Berenji, "Fuzzy Logic Controllers", in An Introduction to Fuzzy Logic Applications
in Intelligent Systems, R. R. Yager and L. A. Zadeh, Eds., Kluwer Academic
Publishers, Boston, MA, USA, 1992, pp. 69-96.

[6] S. Chiu, S. Chand, D. Moore, A. Chaudhary, "Fuzzy Logic for Control of Roll and
Moment for a Flexible Wing Aircraft", IEEE Control Systems Magazine, pp. 42-48,
Vol. 11, No. 4, June 1991.
[7] A. L. Schwartz, "Comments on Fuzzy Logic Control of Roll and Moment for a
Flexible Wing Aircraft", IEEE Control Systems Magazine, pp. 61-62, Vol. 12, No. 1,
February 1992.
[8] S. Chiu, "Author's Reply", IEEE Control Systems Magazine, pp. 62-63, Vol. 12, No.
1, February 1992.
[9] E. Cox, "Adaptive Fuzzy Systems", IEEE Spectrum, pp 27-31, Vol. 30, No. 2,
February 1993.
[10] C. J. Herget, Ed., "Reader's Forum", IEEE Control Systems Magazine, pp. 5-7, Vol.
13, No. 3, June 1993.
[11] M. Athans, "Control - The Adventure Continues", Bode Lecture, 32nd IEEE
Conference on Decision and Control, San Antonio, TX, USA, December 15-17, 1993.
[12] E. H. Mamdani, "Twenty Years of Fuzzy Control: Experiences Gained and Lessons
Learnt", Proc. of 2nd IEEE Intl. Conf on Fuzzy Systems, pp. 339-344.
[13] M. Tomizuka, "Fuzzy Control in Control Engineer's Tool Box", Lecture, ARO/NASA
Workshop on Formal Models for Intelligent Control, MIT, Cambridge, MA 02139,
USA, September 30 - October 2, 1993.
[14] C.-W. Tao, R. Mamlook, W. E. Thompson, "Reduction of Complexity for a Robust
Fuzzy Controller", Proc. of 2nd IEEE Intl. Conf on Fuzzy Systems, pp. 1346-1349.
[15] H. Ying, W. Siler, J. J. Buckley, "Fuzzy Control Theory: A Nonlinear Case",
Automatica, Vol. 26, No. 3, pp. 513-420, 1990.
[16] J.-J. E. Slotine and W. Li, Applied Nonlinear Control. Prentice Hall, 2nd ed., 1991.