2020
DOI: 10.1049/iet-cta.2020.0037
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Output feedback controller for trajectory tracking of robot manipulators without velocity measurements nor observers

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

0
7
0

Year Published

2022
2022
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
6
1

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 12 publications
(7 citation statements)
references
References 31 publications
0
7
0
Order By: Relevance
“…(3) Lastly, first and second-order anti-pitching controller performance without velocity estimation have been compared. Figures 18 and 19 show the heave displacement and pitch angle of the catamaran using the first-order controller 11 and second-order controller proposed in this paper respectively. Combined with Table 1, it can be seen that compared with the first-order controller, the heave displacement of the catamaran using the second-order controller is reduced by about 5%, and the pitch angle is reduced by about 15%.…”
Section: Simulation Analysesmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…(3) Lastly, first and second-order anti-pitching controller performance without velocity estimation have been compared. Figures 18 and 19 show the heave displacement and pitch angle of the catamaran using the first-order controller 11 and second-order controller proposed in this paper respectively. Combined with Table 1, it can be seen that compared with the first-order controller, the heave displacement of the catamaran using the second-order controller is reduced by about 5%, and the pitch angle is reduced by about 15%.…”
Section: Simulation Analysesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The first order dynamic system without velocity measurements was given in Rascón and Moreno-Valenzuela, 11 but the iteration method was too complicated to obtain the parameter. Moreover, the dynamic response of the first-order system G 1 ( s ) = e 3 ( s ) e 1 ( s ) = k 1 s + k 2 is obviously slower than that of the second-order system G 2 ( s ) = e 3 ( s ) e 1 ( s ) = k 1 s 2 + k 2 s + k 4 , resulting in the deterioration of the anti-pitching control performance.…”
Section: Second-order Dynamic Anti-pitching Controllermentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…In addition, MRM will be disturbed by external forces in uncertain environment during operation, which brings some difficulties to high-precision trajectory tracking of MRM, so it is particularly important for MRM to study trajectory tracking control methods with strong robustness and anti-interference ability (Nohooji, 2020). As a fundamental subject, the trajectory tracking control of MRM has attracted much attention of scholars (Guo et al, 2018; Pan et al, 2019; Rascon and Valenzuela, 2020). In early years, MRMs were usually controlled by linear proportional integral derivative (PID), which had the main features of control simplicity and ease of achievement but required high power consumption to govern in the case of large inertia changes and could only assure local stability (Liu and Ou, 2021; Zhang et al, 2020).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…A study that investigates the robust quantised H ∞ control problem for active suspension systems is presented in [8], while a different approach is taken by [9], where a fault-tolerant control approach is proposed to deal with the problem of fault accommodation for unknown actuator failures of active suspension systems. [10] presents an interesting procedure, where an output feedback controller is designed for trajectory tracking of robot manipulators without velocity measurements nor observers. This paper proposes a new design and practical implementation of two robust H ∞ control methods applied to a system of active suspension manufactured by Quanser [11].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%