In this study, a novel fuzzy logic–based decision support system approach to provide assistance in the selection of suitable input shaping techniques is presented. The proposed approach selects the suitable input shaping technique for point-to-point motion type of systems such as precise positioning, crane operations, flexible robotic systems and so on. The problem solution addressed is the selection of the input shaping technique and the settings for the selection of the input shaper. Some of these design issues require extensive expertise in command shaping and system modeling studies. To overcome these problems and the necessity for such an expertise in these application areas, the proposed technique is provided as a solution. The presented study also provides a review of input shaping methods as well as their advantages and disadvantages in terms of vibration elimination performance, traveling time and robustness features. In the final section of the study, the details of the simulations, as well as experimental results, are provided to validate the achieved high performance of the proposed technique. The experimental studies are conducted on a Quanser IP02 Gantry Crane experimental setup.
MohamedZTokhiMO.Command shaping techniques for vibration control of a flexible robot manipulator. Mechatronics2004; 14(1): 69–90.
2.
Dinesh Singh RanaD. Modelling, stability analysis and control of flexible single link robotic manipulator. Int J Adv Res Electr Electron Instrum Eng2014; 3: 7390–7401.
3.
SahinkayaMN.Input shaping for vibration-free positioning of flexible systems. Proc IMechE, Part I: J Systems and Control Engineering2001; 215(5): 467–481.
4.
MaghsoudiMJMohamedZTokhiMO, et al. Control of a gantry crane using input-shaping schemes with distributed delay. Trans Inst Meas Control2017; 39(3): 361–370.
5.
BilgicHHSenMAKalyoncuM.Tuning of LQR controller for an experimental inverted pendulum system based on The Bees Algorithm. J Vibroeng2016; 18(6): 3684–3694.
6.
IzadbakhshAKheirkhahanP.Adaptive fractional-order control of electrical flexible-joint robots: theory and experiment. Proc IMechE, Part I: J Systems and Control Engineering2019; 233(9): 1136–1145.
7.
SmithOJ.Posicast control of damped oscillatory systems. Proc IRE1957; 45(9): 1249–1255.
8.
SingerNCSeeringWP.Preshaping command inputs to reduce system vibration. J Dyn Syst Meas Control1990; 112(1): 76–82.
9.
SinghoseWSeeringWSingerN.Residual vibration reduction using vector diagrams to generate shaped inputs. J Mech Des1994; 116(2): 654–659.
10.
SinghoseWESeeringWPSingerNC.Input shaping for vibration reduction with specified insensitivity to modeling errors. Jpn USA Sym Flex Autom1996; 1: 307–313.
11.
MageeDPBookWJ.Filtering micro-manipulator wrist commands to prevent flexible base motion. In: Proceedings of 1995 American control conference-ACC’95, Seattle, WA, 21–23 June 1995, vol. 1, pp.924–928. New York: IEEE.
12.
AlıcıGKapucuSBayseçS.On preshaped reference inputs to reduce swing of suspended objects transported with robot manipulators. Mechatronics2000; 10(6): 609–626.
13.
KapucuSAliciGBaysecS.Residual swing/vibration reduction using a hybrid input shaping method. Mech Mach Theory2001; 36(3): 311–326.
14.
AlamMSTokhiMO.Designing feedforward command shapers with multi-objective genetic optimisation for vibration control of a single-link flexible manipulator. Eng Appl Artif Intell2008; 21(2): 229–246.
15.
YavuzHMıstıkoğluSKapucuS.Hybrid input shaping to suppress residual vibration of flexible systems. J Vib Control2012; 18(1): 132–140.
16.
SaeidiHNaraghiMRaieAA.A neural network self tuner based on input shapers behavior for anti sway system of gantry cranes. J Vib Control2013; 19(13): 1936–1949.
17.
XieXHuangJLiangZ.Vibration reduction for flexible systems by command smoothing. Mech Syst Signal Process2013; 39(1–2): 461–470.
18.
ConkerÇKilicAMistikogluS, et al. An enhanced control technique for the elimination of residual vibrations in flexible-joint manipulators. Strojniški Vestn J Mech Eng2014; 60(9): 592–599.
19.
MarRGoyalANguyenV, et al. Combined input shaping and feedback control for double-pendulum systems. Mech Syst Signal Process2017; 85: 267–277.
20.
LiWPLuoBHuangH.Active vibration control of flexible joint manipulator using input shaping and adaptive parameter auto disturbance rejection controller. J Sound Vib2016; 363: 97–125.
21.
ConkerÇYavuzHBilgicHH. A review of command shaping techniques for elimination of residual vibrations in flexible-joint manipulators. J Vibroeng2016; 18(5): 2947–2958.
22.
MasoudZNAlhazzaKA.A smooth multimode waveform command shaping control with selectable command length. J Sound Vib2017; 397: 1–16.
23.
RamliLMohamedZJaafarHI.A neural network-based input shaping for swing suppression of an overhead crane under payload hoisting and mass variations. Mech Syst Signal Process2018; 107: 484–501.
24.
VaughanJYanoASinghoseW.Performance comparison of robust negative input shapers. In: 2008 American control conference, Seattle, WA, 11–13 June 2008, pp.3257–3262. New York: IEEE.
25.
SinghoseW.Command shaping for flexible systems: a review of the first 50 years. Int J Precis Eng Manuf2009; 10(4): 153–168.
26.
SadeghianRSadeghianMR.A decision support system based on artificial neural network and fuzzy analytic network process for selection of machine tools in a flexible manufacturing system. Int J Adv Manuf Technol2016; 82(9–12): 1795–1803.
27.
ConkerÇ. A novel fuzzy logic based safe operation oriented control technique for driving HHO dry cell systems based on PWM duty cycle. Int J Hydrog Energy2019; 44(20): 9718–9725.
28.
Quanser. Linear pendulum gantry experiment for MATLAB/Simulink users. Markham, ON, Canada: Quanser.
29.
KaraTEkerI.Nonlinear modeling and identification of a DC motor for bidirectional operation with real time experiments. Energy Convers Manag2004; 45(7–8): 1087–1106.
30.
IzadbakhshAFatehMM.Real-time robust adaptive control of robots subjected to actuator voltage constraint. Nonlinear Dyn2014; 78(3): 1999–2014.
31.
SinghoseWEPorterLJSingerNC.Vibration reduction using multi-hump extra-insensitive input shapers. In: Proceedings of the American control conference, vol. 5, Seattle, WA, 21–23 June 1995, pp.3830–3830. Dayton, OH: American Automatic Control Council.
32.
SmithMAmosSKitchenerD, et al. U.S. Patent No. 6,426,723. Washington, DC: U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, 2002.
33.
VaughanJYanoASinghoseW.Comparison of robust input shapers. J Sound Vib2008; 315(4–5): 797–815.
34.
ShanJLiuHTSunD.Modified input shaping for a rotating single-link flexible manipulator. J Sound Vib2005; 285(1–2): 187–207.
35.
BalazinskiMBelleroseMCzogalaE.Application of fuzzy logic techniques to the selection of cutting parameters in machining processes. Fuzzy Sets Syst1994; 63(3): 307–317.
