2018
DOI: 10.1007/s00500-018-3180-3
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Combined PID and LQR controller using optimized fuzzy rules

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
1
0

Year Published

2019
2019
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
8
1

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 17 publications
(6 citation statements)
references
References 22 publications
0
1
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The multivariate nature of LQR allows for simultaneous control of displacement angles across the 3-link inverted pendulum [3]. LQR was chosen based on its capacity to deal with significant disturbance events and keep systems stable with no reductions in operational performance [14][15][16][17].…”
Section: Pid Controllermentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The multivariate nature of LQR allows for simultaneous control of displacement angles across the 3-link inverted pendulum [3]. LQR was chosen based on its capacity to deal with significant disturbance events and keep systems stable with no reductions in operational performance [14][15][16][17].…”
Section: Pid Controllermentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Compared to the traditional PID algorithm, the algorithm is able to optimize the calculation process and find a suitable solution. In addition, to understand the effectiveness of the regulation algorithm, a simulation of a one-wheeled robot was used to verify the results, which displayed that its regulation effect was significantly improved [12]. George T et al put forward a stable regulation algorithm combined with an artificial neural network for the sake of improving the regulation performance of the current PID regulator, aiming to solve the rectification time lag system of the traditional PID, through the MATLAB platform.…”
Section: Related Workmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…C F = 67.3s 6 +4.19×10 4 s 5 +1.53×10 10 s 3 +2.73×10 12 s 2 +1.97×10 14 s+3.79×10 15 s 7 +923s 6 +6.50×10 5 s 5 +3.59×10 8 s 4 +7.48×10 10 s 3 +5.45×10 12 s 2 +1.04×10 14 s C M = 34.8s 6 +1.81×10 4 s 5 +1.67×10 7 s 4 +6.21×10 9 s 3 +7.40×10 11 s 2 +3.26×10 13 s+4.63×10 14 s 7 +883.2s 6 +6.19×10 5 s 5 +3.36×10 8 s 4 +6.35×10 10 s 3 +3.60×10 12 s 2 +5.92×10 13 s C S = 12.1s 6 +5912s 5 +5.77×10 6 s 4 +2.00×10 9 s 3 +2.42×10 11 s 2 +1.07×10 13 s+1.52×10 14 s 7 +697s 6 +5.49×10 5 s 5 +2.56×10 8 s 4 +4.20×10 10 s 3 +2.34×10 12 s 2 +3.87×10 13 s (6) where C F , C M , and C S provide fast, intermediate, and smooth responses, respectively, for the PZT stage. The control design processes are illustrated in Appendix A, in which the stability margins of all controllers are greater than the system gap ∆ M ∆ N ∞ ; therefore, internal stability can be guaranteed during operation.…”
Section: Multiple Switching Control For the Pzt Stagementioning
confidence: 99%
“…Armaghan et al [5] designed two PID controllers and a switching logic for a magnetically driven system. Asl et al [6] proposed a fuzzy switching control, which fused a PID controller and a linear quadratic regulator, for a unicycle robot. Rana et al [7] applied model predictive control to improve the high-speed imaging performance of an atomic force microscope.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%