IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON INDUSTRIAL ELECTRONICS, VOL. IE-34, NO.
1, FEBRUARY 1987
A Microprocessor ased oot
Hontro KIt AiND
HIDEKI HASH:IMOTO, STUDENT M4EMBElR, IBEEEKOJI MARUYAMA, ANDFIJMIO HARASHIMA, SENIOR MEMBER, IEEE
Abstract-The application of a sliding-mode control based on a--
Variable Structure System (VSS) for a multijoint manipulator is pre-
sented. The high-gain effect of a sliding-mode control suppresses the
complicated interactions between each joint of a robot arm. The resulting
system is completely robust whereas the obtained control law is simple
and easy to apply to on-line computer control. In this -paper, the practical
sliding-mode controller, which has a simple nonlinear compensator and
proper continuous function, is implemented for a two-linkage manipula-
tor. The validity of this technique is confirmed in experiments where the
system shows robust performance in spite of the existing nonlinear
interactions and unkuown parametric changes. In addition, this sliding-
mode control is improved to track the desired path.
I. INTRODUCTION
OST of the computer-controlled robots are serial linkage
manipulators because their available workspace is large.
Such a multijoint robot arm, however, is a highly nonlinear
system with complicated interactions between each of the
joints. These interactions represent gravitational forces depen-
dent on positions of the arm, reaction forces due to accelera-
tions of other joints, and Coriolis and centrifugal forces.
Furthermore, there are parameters dependent on the variable
payloads carried by robots in the manufacturing process.
In regard to such complicated interactions, quite a number
of papers have been presented on the aspect of manipulator
control. Linear feedback control using linearized models as
the basis for decoupling and control have been proposed. This
method is, however, only valid in cases where some condi-
tions are satisfied. For example, the rate-resolved control
method [1] will not keep good performances while manipula-
tors are in high-speed motion. The nonlinear control system
based on complete decoupling [21 is effective in high-speed
motion, but the nonlinear compensations are complex and
costly to compute. The Newton-Euler method [3] solves the
on-line computational problem of manipulators, but, such a
scheme has the shortcoming that computing inaccuracies will
be caused if the system contains unknown parameter varia-
tions.
In order to realize the on-line manipulator control in high-
speed motion, the following two points are the key problems
for which designers must choose a control law:
1) avoidance of complex computations for the nonlinear
compensation; and
Manuscript received March 30, 1985; -revised September 15, 1986.
H. Hashimoto and F. Harashima are with the Institute of Industrial Science,
University of Tokyo 7-22-1, Roppongi, Minato-ku, Tokyo 106, Japan.
K. Maruyama is with Japan Radio Company, Ltd., 5-1-1, Shimorenjaku,
Mitaka-shi, Tokyo, 181 Japan.
IEEE Log Number 8611672.
0278/0046/87/0200-001 1$0l .00
I1I
an'ipulator
O MEe
2) robustness of the manipulator control to the unknown
parameter variations or modeling ambiguities.
To overcome the above difficulties, the authors of this paper
developed a sliding-mode controller based on the Variable
Structure System (VSS) theory [41, [5]. The main feature of
sliding-mode control is that a sliding mode occurs on a
predetermined switching surface. While in sliding mode, the
system will be forced to "slide"' along or nearby the vicinity
of the switching surface. The system is then robust and
insensitive to the interactions as well as to unmodeled
dynamics. In addition, the designer does not require an,
accurate model of the plant: it is only necessary to how the
boundaries of the parameter variations and load disturbances.
The sliding-mode control strategy proposed in this paper
includes not only a sliding mode but also simple nonlinear
compensators, while previous methods [6], [71 utilized the
sliding mode alone. In the new method, the, majority of
interactions in the manipulator dynamics, which are easy to
estimate precisely in the course of modeling, are removed by
simple nonlinear compensators. The rest of the interactions are
eliminated by the sliding mode. This technique suppresses the
chattering caused by the discontinuous control input. In
addition, a proper continuous fnction is introduced to remove
the high-frequency component of control input.
As for experiments of this paper, continuous-path motion is
executed because the strict tracking of a desired path must be
required in the prospective control of improved robots. For
this purpose, sliding-mode control is improved to track
arbitrary trajectories.
A two-linkage manipulator is taken as an example of a
multijoint manipulator. The characteristics of the developed
method are clarified through experimental results.
II. CONTROL METHODOLOGY
First, we implement sl-iding-mode control for a robotic
manipulator (two-linkage manipulator in experiment). Second,
simple nonlinear compensators are also used to mitigate the
extent of "chattering." Last, instead of a relay function, a
continuous fnction is introduced in order to remove the high-
frequency component of control input.
A. Sliding-Mode Control
Sliding-mode control based on VSS is characterized by
discontinuous control which changes "structure" upon reach-
ing a set of predetermined switching surfaces in the state space
[4], [5]. A general type is considered, represented by
,. =f(x, t) + B (x,, t) u (1)
1987 IEEE
12 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON INDUSTRIAL ELECTRONICS, VOL. IE-34, NO. 1, FEBRUARY 1987

where
x, f ERn S wit
u E RmX surff ace
B E Rnxmn.
The control input has the form Fig. 1. Sliding mode.

if sj(x)>0 by substituting ueq into the original equation (1). The invariant
ui(x, t)= =

u i (X, t), if sj(x)c<O nature of this equation is discussed in [5].

ueq is equivalently the average value of u which maintains
where ui is the ith component of u, and si(x) = 0 is the ith the state on the switching surface s(x) = 0. The actual control
component of the m switching hypersurfaces u consists of a low-frequency (average) component ueq and a
high-frequency (chatter) component Au as follows:
s(x) = O
U= Ueq+ Au
s E Rm (3)
in the state space. The above system with discontinuous A u1(x, t) AU/+(X,
IA~x t),
= ) if sj(x) >0
(8)
if si(x) < 0.
control is termed as a variable structure system, since the
feedback control structure is switched alternatively according Nonlinear compensation for ueq reduces the amplitude of the
to the state of the system. vibrational input in sliding motion compared with (2).
Sliding mode occurs on a switching surface si(x) = 0 when Namely, this compensation mitigates the extent of chattering
all of the trajectories move toward the switching surface as due to sliding-mode control, since it removes the main
shown in Fig. 1. Then the state slides and remains on the interactions.
surface s1(x) = 0. The condition for the sliding mode to exist
on the ith hypersurface is C. Continuous Function
The main drawback of sliding-mode strategy is that the
lim s,,j < 0 (4) resulting control function is discontinuous on the above
hyperplane and, consequently, the control input chatters at a
in the neighborhood of si(x) = 0. In the sliding mode, the theoretically infinite frequency. Such a control, besides being
system satisfies the equation difficult to realize in practice, may not even be directly
applicable to the plant.
si(x)=0 To overcome this problem, the discontinuous sign function
and is replaced by a proper continuous function as follows [8]:
(4x)=O0. (5) sign Si
(s+) (9)
Equation (5) yields the motion which is described by the
switching surface. Thus the trajectories of the system are where
constrained to move or slide along the predetermined hyper-
surface. The system in the sliding mode is completely robust; bi positive constant.
independent of parameter variations and external disturbances. This ftinction is very similar to the saturating function of [7].
B. Nonlinear Compensation The ef
Ffects of these replacements are nearly the same in small
identical in large s,.
The system in sliding mode satisfies (5). From (1) and (3)
III. DESIGN CONSIDERATION
as
S(x)=ax k In tlhis section, the design procedure for the manipulator
controi Iller is described.
-G[f(x, t)+B(x, t)ueq] (6)
A. Mcanipulator Model
as\
Maniipulator dynamics are obtained from the Lagrange
ax/ equaticon [9] as follows:
is obtained. When GB is not a singular matrix, ueq is uniqi iely M(0) +ff (06, 0) + VO+ g(6) = u (10)
determined and called the "equivalent control' [4] wJ hich
yields the ideal sliding-mode equation where T = * 0 ] is the angular rotation vector, 0 is the
angular velocity vector, u T = [u I, *X, u] is the torque input
=
[I-B(GB)-1G]f(x, t) (7) vector, M(O) is a n x n inertia matrix, f(6, 0) represents
 HASHIMOTO et al.: ROBOT MANIPULATOR CONTROL WITH SLIDING MODE 13
Coriolis force and centrifugal force, VO is the viscous Au is used to eliminate the influence of AUeq. Substituting (16)
damping force, and g(G) is the torque due to the gravity. into s yields
B. Switching Surface s=M(0)-1(Aueq + Au). (17)
The switching surface is described as follows: When the condition (4) is satisfied in each joint, the sliding
mode occurs.
s3[CInJ [j_ (11) As for selection of Au in a multi-input multi-output (MIMO)
system such as (10), Au must be transformed as follows:
where
Au =M(8)Ar (18)
e A 0 Od where M(0) is the estimated matrix of M(0), as precise as
possible. Accordingly, the following equation is obtained:
C=diag [cl, c-,cJ
M(O)- 1M(6)=In 6I(O) (19)
cj>0
where
I, is unity matrix, and ad is desired path.
While in the ideal sliding motion, this system is expressed (bI(O))ij (i= 1,
<< 19 - -
-, n j= 1, n)--- -,
by s = 0 and s = 0. This is transformed into the following
error system: I, is unity matrix, and 6I(6) is error matrix dependent on
M(O). This equation is usually valid for a mechanical system
such as a robot arm and satisfies the condition of quasi-
dt [e ] [0 C [ e ](2 decoupling because the diagonal component of the
which decouples the joint interactions. In point-to-point (PTP) M(O) -1M(6) is more than the sum of other absolute compo-
nents of the same row [5]. Critical condition of decoupling for
motion, transient response is identical to the reference model (19) is discussed in [11].
s(x) = 0 and the manipulator results in a completely Using (18) and (19), (17) is rewritten as follows:
noninteracting system.
s = [M(O) 1Aueq+ I(6)Ar] + Ar. (20)
C. Design Procedure
1. Select the Switching Surface: Robustness and speed of That is, the MIMO system is decomposited into single-input
response are in trade-off relation [10]. From this point, in single-output (SISO) systems and the design of sliding mode
(11), the switching surface s = 0 is selected as close as using the condition (4) is applicable directly.
possible to time optimal control trajectory in order to realize a Each component of s is notated as
fast response keeping the robustness.
2. Solve Equivalent Control ueq: The inertia matrix M(O) Si=d(O0, 6, O)+Ari, (i= 1, n) (21) - -
,

is symmetric and positive definite. Equation (10) is trans- where dC(O, 0, 0) are unknown dynamics dependent on
formed into parameter variations, model ambiguities, and so on. But in
order to calculate the control input, the following assumption
6=M() 1[u-f(O, 0)- V6-g(o)]. (13) is imposed on d,(6, 0, 0):
Substituting (13) into s = 0 yields the equivalent control
di(O, 6, 6)1 :!!. yi (22)
Ueq -f=(, 0) + V + g( M()Od CO) (14) where -y is a positive constant. y is dependent on errors
)+ -

wheref(O, 0), V6, g(0), and M(6) have parameters dependent between the true parameters and the estimated parameters of
on the manipulator structure and the payload it carries. It is arm dynamics. Ari has the following form:
difficult to obtain a completely accurate value for these
parameters. Therefore the following equation is used which is Ari= ((pi ei + tj 1,6i + k,) sign (si). (23)
estimated as precisely as possible: This method is suitable for the decentralized controller of
the multilinkage manipulator, because the required
taeq=ueq + A Ueq (15) tion is restricted to the state of each joint and the informa-
obtained
where Cieq indicates the estimated value. Auq corresponds to algorithm is very simple and practical.
the unknown dynamics of (14) caused by the parameter
variations, variable payload, and disturbances. IV. EXPERIMENT
3. Calculate Control Input: The control input is of the A. Description of Experimental System
form A robotic manipulator must have three degrees of freedom,
u =aeq+Au. (16) Twoleast,
at in order to move to an arbitrary point in the space.
degrees of freedom, however, are sufficient for examin--
aeq is a nonlinear term and Au is a sliding-mode term in (16). ing the validity of the control method, since two-linkage
 y IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON INDUSTRIAL ELECTRONICS, VOL. IE.34, NO. 1, FEBRUARY 1987

; ' :l;0 0:0 000tiverarm ;

12b,,t ::

12btt I lW

_Fi._3. Cotr,o-lO system.

r

TABLEI
ACTUATOR CHRCTRSTC

Lower Upper
arm arm
JUfoer are 3cs 80:1 Hormonic drive

(60w dc) lOOpuls/rev. encoder Rated output (w) 200 60

Tachogenerotor Rated torque (kg.cm) i6.5 1. 95
.Lower arm 30cm 80:1 Harmonic drive
(200wfdtli 1OOOpuls/rev. encoder Rated speed (rpm) 3000 3000
Tachogenerotor
Torque constant (kg.cm/A). 1. 21 0. 584
iFig. 2. Two-linkage:manipulator.
Armature resistance (Q) 0. 4 1. 1
Counter-EMF cornstant (mV/rpm) 12.4 6. 0
manipulator dynamics have interactions such as Coriolis force Mechanical time constant (msec) 4. 8 5. 3
and centrifugal force. Electric time constant (msec) 2. 5 0. 82
The two-linkage manipulator is shown in Fig. 2. This Moment of inertia(g.cm.sec2) 1.71 0. 1t
manipulator .is designed so as :to emphasize the effects of
inertia varation, Coriolis force, and centrifugal force. Actua-
tors are dc servo motors (60 and 200 W) mounted on each joint TABLE II

PARAMETER VARIATIONS BY VARIABLE PAYLOAD

and are coupled to the links through harmonic drives (1:80).
: tThe control system is shown in Fig. 3. Each dc servo motor payload (Kg) 2 4
tis fed 0by a PWM power MOSFET chopper amplifier operating
0

(.m?51 ~ ()+1:229x}0cose,
e N3
89 4 .20 4 .52
at 10 lcHz.: A 1000-pulse-per-revolution shaft encoder is used al,t5) +4.42x104cos12 +7.44XlO'cos,2
I

4to sese e output position, while a dc tachogenerator coupled a

,.2 (8) (N.Mi
6 .i1 x 10
+66. 46Xl1G2cost2
l. 91 x lO
+2.219104cosQ
3 .2 5 xl O 3
+3.?72x10'cos3z.
directly to the servo motor provides an analog signal for the az,(14.Ie) 6.51x1o0 8.21X10' 9.55x10'
output speed. A 12-bit A/D converter provides the required :-2.26xio'sine -2.585xlO'sint)l -3.44x10'sin(i,
isignal.The microcomputer used is an INTEL-8086-based P(N.m)a
P -2.11sin(S,+Oz) -7.21sin( 1+O2) -1.22x1l'sin(83t32)
system with an 8-MHz clock. The characteristics of actuators P2z(N .m) -2 . lsiHn (et+ei -7 .21sin (3, +02) -} . 242XIO'in(61+0t32 )
are shown in Table I.

MB. athematical Model of Two-Linkage Manipulator detached from the other joint. Note that these values are
The, dynamics of the manipulator including actuators are estimated ones based on the arm model and rather different
described in from true values of the real arm. Probably the magnitude of
errors is within 20 percent except for viscous damping forces.
[u1u2 La,2(0)
[ra11I (O)
-
a12(0) 1
a22
PR
02
Viscous damping forces vary widely during rotation and also
depend on rotational direction. Therefore their values in (24)
are averages during rotation in fixed direction.

: dai22 c+ ail:a1
2
2
2 .1f2+P
.

}8 C. Continuous-Path:Control
(24)
In order to examine the validity of the proposed method, the
whole system is forced to move along the desired trajectories,
namely, it is under continuous-path control. The desired
trajectories are illustrated in Fig. 4. In addition, the calculated
where v1 - 7.8 and v2 = 3.2. angular position, velocity, and acceleration of each joint are
These values are shown in Table II in the case when the arm shown in Fig. 5.
has: variable payload. The inertia variations,l the centrifugal
forces, and: the Coriolis forces are small enough compared D. Constitution of Control Input
with the gravitational forces PI and P2 because of the effect of The simple nonlinear compensate term teiq is as follows:
fthe& harmonic drive (1:80). The terms: of viscous damping
forces v161 and u202 are obtained by actually rotating each joint Ueq= +g(i) +M-(O)(6d- C) (25)
HASHIMOTO et at.: ROBOT MANIPULATOR CONTROL WITH SLIDING MODE 15

where
daa2 daa
fi(0 O)= , 02+
> d 102
dO2 d9o

f2(0, 6> - - 92
2 d 02 "*
Fig. 4. Desired trajectory. Since (alla22 - a'2) is always positive in spite of modeling
ambiguities, the control gains are chosen to satisfy the
2.5 5 following inequalities:
( 1<
62

fZ' 0 t, < (aala22 a2)-

- - I
[ 2 02
laroO-
'a
N
N
.CD
a12 daO1 12G -+e2
7 d2 1de1JJ (28)
04 . . .

ki < - (alla22 - a2) -1

-2. 5 |aa2 02 } +aal . al2 2alI
2 dO2 2d
0 0.5
t (S)
1.0 a22
dO2 81aOd62
22d2
+ 9
l
(a) \K
2.5 About s2% the control gains are obtained from a similar
derivation as given in (28):

S2A2 =
(alla22 i 1s2[al2fl (0, 6)

N,
*:
- allf2(0, 0)] +S2AT2<O
NO

N( r

t2 <- (alla22 a,22 1 a12

a-~(202d + e2)
-
02
-2.5 aall *
u V. _x dOa12
da ~~
t(s)
(b) (29)
Fig. 5. Calculated angular position, velocity, and acceleration: (a) upper
and (b) lower aall aall
arm; arm.
k2< - (al1a22- a212))- al2 2
2d
+ d 102dI
ao

where V, g(9) and M(0) are estimates of V, g(O) and M(0), allaall2
respectively. Inertia variations, centrifugal forces, and Cor- +
2 aO2
02.
iolis forces are regarded as unknown dynamics Aueq of (15).
Actual control input u is
This design procedure can be realized, because the diagonal
U =ieq +M(9)AT (26) component of M(0) - 1M(O) in (19) is more than the sum of
where other absolute components in the same row in experiments.
Ari= (9oI ei +-tj I es + k) sign (si) That is, the MIMO system is decomposited into SISO systems
by regarding the nondiagonal components as disturbances.
si = ij+ ciei, (i1, 2). Where the nondiagonal components are too large to be
E. Decision of Control Gains regarded as disturbances, the accuracy of M(9) will play a
more important role in such a case.
Control gains Soi and (i are selected so as to satisfy the
sliding-mode existence condition (4) as follows: Taking maximum velocities, modeling ambiguities, and
disturbances into consideration, the gain constants in experi-
ments are chosen as following those shown in Table III. Note
s11 =(alla22-a12)1-sI[-a22f1(0, 6)
that ki may not satisfy the condition in (28) and (29) partly in
+ al2f2(0, 6)] + s1 AT, < 0 (27) the area where the arm is in high-speed motion. However,
 16 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON INDUSTRIAL ELECTRONICS, VOL. IE-34, NO. 1, FEBRUARY 1987

TABLE III stairt point end point

GAIN CONSTANTS la
a

z
Gain constants i=1 i==2
i (N.m/rad) s5 -50 0.0
f (N.m.sec/rad) -150 -150

ki (N.m) -10 -10

c (1/ec) 30 30 I-
0 200 ,
0-
0E
since sjsi is kept negative by the other terms, ki satisfies the .

condition in steady-state or slow motion. LU

-J
200 I7
0 0.5 TM(ec1.0
TIME (sec)
F. Experimental Results
(b)
Experimental results are concerned with the upper arm in
this paper, because the rate of parametric change caused by 20 r
variable payload is large compared with the lower arm. The
control scheme is set such that the payload is equal to 2 kg. I-
z 10
UJ
The sampling time obtained is 1.25 ms. :
cc

1. Tracking Performance: The experimental results of 0 0

tracking performance of the upper arm with payload (2 kg) are c- -10I
shown in Fiig. 6. The continuous function is set up at 6 = 0.1. 5

The switching effect of control input is reduced according to -20

the sequence of the armature current, the velocity, and the 0

TIME (sec) 1.0

position. These results indicate that sliding-mode control (C)
makes the most of the integral characteristics of the arm in
order to achieve a robust performance.
2. Robust Performance: Fig. 7 shows the robust perform-
ance of sliding-mode control which is tuned at 2-kg payload.
z
100
X
Tracking error without payload, with 2-kg payload, and with 1-
50-
4-kg payload is shown in Fig. 7(a)-(c), respectively. Tracking 0.
0 II 6....A . .

errors are nearly the same throughout transient response and, Io- III, I
for steady state, errors are not seen. These results show good z -50
performances considering the maximum position-sensor reso- 0
0
lution of 0.0140. The maximum tracking error is about Io0n
.I.

- 0,23' in Fig. 7(b), which corresponds to about twenty times 0 0.5

the maximum position-sensor resolution.
3. Comparison with Proportional-plus-Derivative Con-
trol: The robustness of sliding-mode comnpared with propor-
tional-plus-derivative (PD) control is shown in Fig. 8. Both
controls are tuned to the best responses at 2-kg payload, and
the results shown are those in the case of 4-kg payload.
Tracking error of the sliding mode stays smaller than that of
the PD control. The steady-state error shows the prominent
comparison. PD control cannot compensate for gravitational
torque because it does not have any integral compensator. As
for sliding mode, it can compensate completely without any
integral component through high-gain effect.
Table IV shows the numerical results of the comparison. It
is clear that the sliding-mode control is robust compared with
the PD control.
4. Effect of Continuous Function: Fig. 9(a) shows a
control input without the use of continuous function, that is, a
purely relay-type controller. The control input is changed
throughout the process and the mag nitude of chattering is
considerably large compared with Fig. 9(b) and (c). Fig. 9(b)
TIME. (sec)
1.0
(d)
Fig. 6. Tracking performance (upper arm, 2-kg payload) b = 0.1: (a)
position; (b) velocity; (c) armature current; and (d) calculated control input
in microprocessor.
and (c) shows use of continuous functions 6 = 0.1 and 6 =
0.5, respectively. These result show that the chattering
becomes smaller as 6 becomes larger. As for control input,
large 6 is suited for the practical controller. However, large 6
inevitably brings about increasing tracking error.
Fig. 10 shows that tracking error increases in the sequence
of large 6. In the case of 6 = 0 the tracking error is smallest,
theoretically, but for the practical -manipulator, 6 = 0 is
causing undesirable chattering error. Compromising between
the results of the tracking error and the input chattering, 6 =
0.1 is selected for experiments.
V. CONCLUSION
Sliding-mode control algorithm for a two-linkage manipula-
tor is proposed. By using the sliding-mode control law, the
 HASHIMOTO et al.: ROBOT MANIPULATOR CONTROL WITH SLIDING MODE 17

star It nrint -n}' nnint TABLE IV

1.0
N V,
v COMPARISON BETWEEN SMWAND PD
0)
-00 ~ ~~~~~
IControl law Sliding mode PD
lo
cc:
0
0 . .
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~I
Payload (kg) -0 2 4 0 2
Maximum .I
LU
,-1.0 I
error (deg) -0.33 -4.23
I. 024 -0.50
Mean value
0 0.5 1.0
TIME (sec) j.
I1jejjT-/ isec 0.130 0.068 0.099 0.260 0.1600a. 210
(deg)
(a)

1.0
m
0 start point end point
la:cc 0 100 Iv ..

0 * t .Ii
.U -1.0
0 0.5 1.0 * 0
TIME (sec)
(b) I- -00
z
0 -50
1.0 .

0-
0 -100
.~~~~~~~
0 0.5 1.0
0) TIME (sec)
lY: .I
0 .~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ (a)
cc
- 1.0

0 0.5 1.0
TIME (sec)
(c) z
Fig. 7. Tracking error of upper arm (tuned at 2-kg payload) 6 - 0.1: (a) .-

without payload; (b) with 2-kg p'ayload; and (c) with 4-kg payload.
-J
0
z
0
starlt point end point
1.0
0)
C)
10

cc cc (b)
|~'
0

0
cc

w
R l
.s te l t 1- ! ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~I X
100
-1.0

0 1.0
TIME (sec)
a: I-

(a)
Z
z 0
-

1.0
0)
10 z -50
0
a0

0 - 100 L.. .I j -t I
0 0.5 1.0
-1.0 TIME (sec)
0 0.5 1.0
(c)
TIME (sec)
PD control Fig. 9. Effect of continuous function (calculated control input in micropro-
(b) cessor, upper arm, 2-kg payload): (a) without continuous function, a = 0;
Fig. 8. Comparison of tracking error (tuned at 2-kg payload, upper arm, 4-
(b) with continuous function, 6 = 0.1; and (c) with continuous function, 6
= 0.5.
kg payload): (a) sliding-mode control, 6 0. 1; and (b) PD control.

real-time computer control, which is also confirmed through

nonlinear dynamic interactions of the manipulator joints are actual experiments. Simple nonlinear compensators and con-
effectively suppressed and the system is insensitive to the tinuous function are also confirmed to be available for
physical parameter variations. The experimental results show practical sliding-mode control.
robust performances against the payload variations and the For future study, the usage of the sliding mode should be
good tracking capability in continuous-path motion. In addi- restricted to the transient response. While in the sliding mode,
tion, the obtained control law is very simple and available for the system could identify the payload, and the control method
.~~~~
18 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON INDUSTRIAL ELECTRONICS, VOL. IE-34, NO. 1, FEBRUARY 1987

start point end point would then change into a continuous-type control which is
1.0
v
tuned to the best condition based on estimated payload.
10 -
~~~~~
.1 REFERENCES
0 -
a: [1] D. E. Whitney, "Resolved rate control of manipulators and human
-1.0 prostheses," IEEE Trans. Man.-Mach. Syst., vol. MMS-10, pp. 47-
53, 1969.
o ~~~~~~~0.5TIME (sec) 1.0 [2] E. Freund, "Fast nonlinear control with arbitrary pole-placement for
(a) industrial robots and manipulators," Robotics Res., vol. 1, no. 1, pp.
65-78, 1982.
_^1.0 [31 J. Y. S. Luh and M. W. Walker, "On-line computational scheme for
.-
0)
mechanical manipulators," Trans. ASME, J. DSMC, vol. 102, pp.
69-76, June 1980.
[4] V. I. Utkin, "Variable structure systems with sliding modes," IEEE
Trans. Automat. Contr., vol. AC-22, pp. 212-222, 1977.
a: [5] V. I. Utkin, Sliding Modes and Their Application in Variable
LII
-1.0 Structure Systems. Moscow: Mir, 1978.
0 0.5 1.0 [6] K. D. Young, "Controller design for a manipulator using theory of
TIME (sec) variable structure systems," IEEE Trans. Syst. Man, Cybernetics,
0 (b) vol. SMC-8, pp. 101-109, 1978.
[7] J. J. Slotine and S. S. Sastry, "Tracking control of nonlinear systems
_^1.0 using sliding surfaces, with application to robot manipulators," Int. J.
Contr., vol. 38, no. 2, pp. 465-492, 1983.
[8] G. Ambrosino, G. Celentano, and F. Garofalo, "Variable structure
a: model reference adaptive control systems," Int. J. Contr,, vol. 39,
no. 6, pp. 1339-1349, 1984.
a:
LL
-1.0 ,I 1 1 , 1
_1 [9] R. P. Paul, Robot Manipulators: Mathematics, Programming and
Control. Cambridge, MA: M.I.T. Press, 1981.
0
0.5
TIME (sec)
1.0
[10] F. Harashima, H. Hashimoto, and S. Kondo, "MOSFET converter-fed
position servo system with sliding mode control," IEEE Trans. Ind.
(c)
Electron., vol. IE-32, no. 3, pp. 238-244, 1985.
Fig. 10. Effect of continuous function (tracking error of upper arm): (a) [1 ] F. Harashima, H. Hashimoto, and K. Maruyama, "Practical robust
without continuous function, 6 = 0; (b) with continuous function, = 0.1; control of robot arm using variable structure system," in Proc. 1986
and (c) with continuous function, 6 = 0.5. IEEE Conf. Robotics, Automation (San Francisco, CA), Apr. 1986.