machines

Article
Enhanced Output Tracking Control for Direct Current Electric
Motor Systems Using Bio-Inspired Optimization
Hugo Yañez-Badillo 1 , Francisco Beltran-Carbajal 2, * , Ivan Rivas-Cambero 3 , Antonio Favela-Contreras 4 ,
Jose Humberto Arroyo-Nuñez 3 and Juan Nabor Balderas-Gutierrez 1

1 Departamento de Investigación, TecNM: Tecnológico de Estudios Superiores de Tianguistenco,

Tianguistenco 52650, Mexico; hugo_mecatronica@test.edu.mx (H.Y.-B.);
nabor_mecatronica@test.edu.mx (J.N.B.-G.)
2 Departamento de Energía, Unidad Azcapotzalco, Universidad Autónoma Metropolitana, Azcapotzalco,
Mexico City 02200, Mexico
3 Departamento de Investigación y Posgrado, Universidad Politécnica de Tulancingo, Tulancingo de Bravo 43629,
Hidalgo , Mexico; ivan.rivas@upt.edu.mx (I.R.-C.); humberto.arroyo@upt.edu.mx (J.H.A.-N.)
4 Tecnologico de Monterrey, School of Engineering and Sciences, Ave. Eugenio Garza Sada 2501,
Monterrey 64849, Mexico; antonio.favela@tec.mx
* Correspondence: fbeltran@azc.uam.mx

Abstract: In this paper, an efficient output reference trajectory tracking control scheme for direct
current electric motor systems based on bio-inspired optimization is proposed. The differential
flatness structural property of the electric motor along with dynamic tracking error compensation
is suitably exploited for the backstepping control design. Off-line optimal selection of control
parameters, implementing bio-inspired ant colony and particle swarm optimization algorithms,
is addressed by minimizing an objective function where the decision variables are the tracking
error and control input effort. A novel adaptive version of the control approach based on B-spline
artificial neural networks is provided as well. The introduced flat output feedback tracking control
design approach can be further extended for other differentially flat dynamic systems. Considerably
perturbed, diverse velocity and position reference trajectory tracking scenarios are developed for
demonstrating the acceptable closed-loop system performance. The results prove the efficient and
Citation: Yañez-Badillo, H.;
robust tracking of the position and velocity reference profiles planned for the operation of the
Beltran-Carbajal, F.; Rivas-Cambero, I.;
controlled electric motor system under variable torque disturbances using bio-inspired optimization.
Favela-Contreras, A.; Arroyo-Nuñez,
J.H.; Balderas-Gutierrez, J.N. Enhanced
Keywords: machines; DC motors; robust control; differential flatness; backstepping control; optimization;
Output Tracking Control for Direct
Current Electric Motor Systems
bio-inspired algorithms
Using Bio-Inspired Optimization.
Machines 2023, 11, 1006. https://
doi.org/10.3390/machines11111006
1. Introduction
Academic Editor: Kwanho You
Nowadays, there is a wide range of applications and processes that demand increas-
Received: 21 September 2023 ingly advanced automatic systems capable of providing movement with high precision
Revised: 16 October 2023 while being subjected to various unwanted and unknown external disturbances in multiple
Accepted: 23 October 2023 operating scenarios. A large part of these automatic systems depends on the proper control
Published: 2 November 2023
of actuation subsystems that provides to the main system the ability to perform specific
regulation and trajectory tracking tasks. Direct current (DC) electric motors are ideal for
a multitude of industrial and service applications where high torque and variable speed
Copyright: © 2023 by the authors.
are required [1,2]. These range of applications stand from the construction of educational
Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. prototypes to the development of advanced systems where precise movements are required,
This article is an open access article such as in robots [3,4].
distributed under the terms and The development of DC motor control systems remains an active and multifaceted
conditions of the Creative Commons research field driven by several motivations. Researchers persistently endeavour to enhance
Attribution (CC BY) license (https:// the efficiency, performance, and reliability of these systems by refining control algorithms,
creativecommons.org/licenses/by/ sensor technologies, power electronics, and overall system integration to achieve height-
4.0/). ened energy efficiency and responsiveness. Constant advancements in control theory lead

Machines 2023, 11, 1006. https://doi.org/10.3390/machines11111006 https://www.mdpi.com/journal/machines

Machines 2023, 11, 1006 2 of 27

to the discovery and exploration of novel techniques, such as predictive, adaptive, model-
based, and optimal control, aimed at achieving superior precision and robustness in DC
motor control. Simultaneously, the mitigation of noise and vibration, often undesirable in
motor systems, prompting research into control algorithms and mechanical enhancements
to diminish these effects, particularly crucial in noise-sensitive applications like medi-
cal equipment and precision machinery. Additionally, researchers delve into sensorless
control methods, reducing reliance on external sensors and bolstering cost-efficiency and
system dependability.
The synergy between DC motor control systems and renewable energy sources like
solar panels and wind turbines becomes a focal point, necessitating the optimization of
control strategies to harness variable and intermittent energy inputs efficiently. Inno-
vation in sustainable energy sources is crucial for ensuring the availability of clean and
dependable energy, with electric motors playing a pivotal role in this endeavor [5]. The
ever-evolving landscape of applications, encompassing robotics, drones, electric vehicles,
and automation, compels researchers to tailor and innovate control systems to meet specific
requirements. In tandem, the development of robust fault detection and tolerance mecha-
nisms assumes paramount importance, particularly in critical applications, as researchers
work on enhancing the systems’ ability to detect and respond to faults or anomalies.
Hardware innovations, driven by advances in power electronics and semiconductor
technology, lead to the exploration of novel materials, designs, and manufacturing tech-
niques to engender more efficient and reliable motor control hardware. Lastly, in scenarios
necessitating coordinated efforts of multiple motors, real-time and distributed control
systems take precedence, with researchers concentrating on developing algorithms and
architectures facilitating seamless coordination and communication among multiple DC
motor control units.
Important velocity and position control approaches for the DC electric machine have
been proposed in the literature for improving the closed-loop performance of this electrome-
chanical system. The authors of [6–8] propose different robust controllers and parameter
estimation schemes for suitably integration of output tracking controllers, where consider-
ably perturbed case studies are evaluated by simulation and experimental set-ups. In the
same breath, in [9] an adaptive backstepping approach is proposed for the speed control
of a separately excited DC motor. Comparison results regarding a conventional Propor-
tional Integral (PI) controller demonstrate an improved response of the overall system by
using the adaptive backstepping controller. In the meantime, an observer-based Active
Disturbance Rejection Controller for robust tracking performance is proposed for a sepa-
rately excited DC motor in [10]. The introduced control scheme concentrates disturbance
estimation to feed it back in the control loop, achieving a robust and stable performance.
Despite several important contributions having been made, the DC motor control design is
an open research area due to its complexity, interdisciplinary nature, diverse applications,
adaptability to uncertainty, and the constant emergence of new technologies and ethical
considerations. Researchers are continually pushing the boundaries of our understanding
of motor control and its practical applications.
On the other hand, optimization is a keystone of engineering, playing a pivotal role
in ensuring that the systems, processes, and designs we create are efficient, cost-effective,
and sustainable. By fine-tuning and enhancing various parameters and variables, en-
gineers strive to find the best possible solutions, maximizing performance, minimizing
waste, and ultimately shaping a more innovative and resource-conscious daily world.
The reader can find more detailed information about these kinds of optimization appli-
cations in [11–14] and references therein. Simultaneously, bio-inspired computation is
a broader field that encompasses various computational techniques inspired by biology,
while bio-inspired optimization algorithms are a specific subset of these techniques tailored
for solving optimization problems. Both fields use biological metaphors and principles to
develop algorithms that can solve complex real-world problems in diverse domains, such
as engineering, finance, biology, among others. In this context, interesting approaches have
Machines 2023, 11, 1006 3 of 27

been proposed in specialized literature for improving the performance of several types of
electric machines by an optimal selection of control design parameters. The parameter tun-
ing problem addresses the issue for finding an appropriate parameter settings of algorithms
such a way performance can be optimized [15]. The authors of [16] use a metaheuristic
technique based on genetic algorithms to adjust the parameters of a Proportional Integral
Derivative (PID) controller to attain the optimal behavior of a DC motor. On the other
hand, in [17] an optimal gain selection scheme is presented for the tuning of a PI speed
controller of a Permanent Magnet Synchronous Motor. Here, the performances of the
Bat Algorithm, Biogeography-Based Optimization, the Cuckoo Search Algorithm and the
Flower Pollination Algorithm, which are nature inspired algorithms, are suitably evaluated
during the optimization process.
At the same time, the authors of [18] proposed a PID controller for the speed control of
a DC motor by using different metaheuristic techniques such as Genetic Algorithms, Particle
Swarm Optimization (PSO), and a simulated annealing algorithm, which was inspired
by the crystal formation process when solids are cooled down from a high temperature.
Similarly, in [19], an Ant Colony Optimization (ACO) outline is employed for tuning
the parameters of PID controllers. An interesting comparative of the yielded results
in contrast with a classic approach based on the Ziegler–Nichols methodology and a
metaheuristic approach based on the genetic algorithms is also presented. Moreover,
from a different perspective, an adaptive control strategy is introduced in [20], which is
rooted in a bioinspired optimization methodology for the speed regulation of a DC motor,
wherein an online optimization problem is formulated and subsequently solved through the
implementation of a modified differential evolution optimizer. All the previously research
aims to include intelligent algorithms to further improve the system’s performance.
The present research explores the capabilities of backstepping and differential flatness
theories to handle the tracking velocity and position control problem of electric direct
current machines. Moreover, it discusses the implementation of ACO and PSO algorithms
for the purposes of enhancing the system’s closed-loop performance by optimizing both
the tracking error and the control signal effort. A demonstration of the effectiveness and
efficiency of DC electric motors’ control for the tracking of reference trajectories is assessed
by numerical simulation scenarios. Addtionally, smoothly transitioning from initial to
desired operating points is properly addressed by introducing Bézier polynomial reference
profiles. Finally, the performance of an adaptive integral backstepping control scheme
based on the B-spline neural networks is evaluated where the gains tuning process is
constantly performed online. It is worth mentioning that, to the best knowledge of the
authors, there are no previous reports on this control design approach for electric DC
motors in the specialized literature.
The organization of this paper is as follows: in the first section, a brief introduction to
the state-of-the-art of the optimization of DC motor output tracking control is presented.
Section 2 introduces the mathematical modelling of the DC machine, where position and
velocity representations are derived. Subsequently, a control design scheme is formulated
based on the backstepping as well as differential flatness theories. Moreover, the analysis
of the system and subsystems stability is properly addressed by implementing Lyapunov
functions. Finally, intelligent algorithms are utilized for enhancing the system output
tracking performance based on the error and the control input effort. Several simulation
scenarios are introduced to outcomes to delineate the operational efficiency of the control
approach outlined in this paper, presenting it as a viable alternative for effectively managing
the angular position and velocity control in direct current electric motors.

2. Direct Current Electric Machine Modelling

A frequently employed actuator, grounded in the principles of motors, generators,
and control systems, is the direct current motor. A DC generator is a device that transforms
mechanical energy into DC electrical power, while when it is employed to convert DC
electrical power into mechanical energy, it is referred to as a DC motor [21]. Its purpose is to
Machines 2023, 11, 1006 4 of 27

generate rotary motion. The magnets employed can either be electromagnets or, in the con-
text of compact motors, permanent magnets [22]. Permanently-magnetic DC machines are
commonly encountered in a diverse range of low-power applications, featuring a simplified
construction where the field winding is substituted with a permanent magnet [23]. The fol-
lowing set of differential equations constitutes the elemental mathematical model of the
system which has been vastly examined by the scientific and engineering community [22]:

Jm θ̈ = −bm θ̇ + k t i a
di a
La = −k e θ̇ − R a i a + u, (1)
dt
where θ is the rotor angular position and Jm stands for the rotor inertia moment. The
electrical parameters of the armature circuit, L a and R a , quantify the inductance and
resistance. Additionally, we employ the symbol k t to represent the motor torque constant,
while k e is utilized to denote the back electromotive force constant. The previous model
can be further extended for a representation of the dynamic model of a DC motor actuator
with a gearhead,
   
Jg + n2 Jm θ̈ = − bg + n2 bm θ̇ + nk t i a
di a
La = −k e nθ̇ − R a i a + u, (2)
dt
with the inertia moment of the gearhead denoted by Jg , the viscous damping as bg , and
n signifies the speed reduction ratio intrinsic to the gearhead. Common applications of
electric motors with gearhead mechanisms include robotics, conveyor systems, automotive
systems, industrial machinery, and household appliances. In these cases, the combination
of an electric motor and a gearhead enhances the motor’s performance and makes it
better suited to the specific demands of the application. Moreover, the load torque can
be considered, for purposes of control design and system performance evaluation, in
expression (2) as follows:
   
Jg + n2 Jm θ̈ = − bg + n2 bm θ̇ + nk t i a − τL
di a
La = −k e nθ̇ − R a i a + u. (3)
dt
Additionally, the system mathematical model can be expressed by considering a
generalized inertia moment Je and an equivalent viscous damping as be ; therefore, the
system (2) can be rewritten as follows:

Je θ̈ = −be θ̇ + nk t i a
di a
La = −k e nθ̇ − R a i a + u, (4)
dt

with Je = Jg + n2 Jm and be = bg + n2 bm . Observe that, by performing a variable change

as θ̇ = ω, the second order position model given by equations in (4) can be implemented
for velocity control design,

Je ω̇ = −be ω + nk t i a
di a
La = −nk e ω − R a i a + u. (5)
dt
Notice that if the inductance value L a ≈ 0 is depreciated in Equation (4), the following
simplified model can be used for purposes of position control design:
Machines 2023, 11, 1006 5 of 27

n2 k t k e
 
be nk t
θ̈ = − + θ̇ + u. (6)
Je Je R a Je R a

Then, by using the state variables z1 = θ and z2 = θ̇, the mathematical model in
Equation (6) can be expressed as follows:

ż1 = z2
ż2 = − az2 + bu, (7)

with
be nk t k e nk t
a= + and b= .
Je Je R a Je R a

Despite the exhibited dynamic behaviour being linear, mismatching load torque distur-
bance τL in (3) might affect the system’s performance. Dealing with rejecting mismatched
disturbances poses a greater challenge. These discrepancies in disturbances are prevalent
in various real-world systems, such as missile roll autopilots, electric motors, and flight
control systems, which are susceptible to such disparities. Unlike matched disturbances,
these mismatched disturbances cannot be effectively converted into input channels that act
upon the system, making their direct elimination through inputs infeasible.
As a result, regardless of the chosen control strategy, completely eradicating the impact
of mismatched disturbances on the system’s state remains unattainable. Consequently, a
pragmatic approach involves mitigating the effects of mismatched disturbances in specific
variables of interest that describe the controlled state. Backstepping control can efficiently
deal with mismatching disturbances by using virtual controllers.

Differential Flatness Modelling

Differential flatness is a structural property of a wide class of dynamical systems in
which the system variables can be expressed in terms of a set of flat outputs and a finite
number of their time derivatives [24,25]. In a differentially flat system, the state variables
and control input can be described as formulae in terms of flat or linearizing outputs
and their time derivatives. The integration of any differential equation is not required
in the differential parameterizations of the system variables. Thus, systems that exhibit
this property have outputs that are easily controllable and allow for the generation of
feasible control inputs. Essentially, it is a property of certain systems that can simplify
control design by allow for the transformation of the system into a linear or simpler form.
This property is particularly useful when dealing with complex systems because it easily
enables the design of controllers for them. The structural property of differential flatness
has been exploited to derive solutions to robust and efficient tracking control problems
of desired motion profiles and simultaneous active vibration suppression in linear and
nonlinear, disturbed vibrating systems [26]. A flat output of the system model (5) is given
by the angular velocity y f = ω. Time derivatives of the flat output are functions of system
variables as well. Then for purposes of control design the system in (5) can be expressed as

yf = ω
be nk t
ẏ f = − ω+ ia
Je Je
be nk t R a n2 k e k t nk t
ÿ f = − ω̇ − ia − ω+ u. (8)
Je Je L a Je L a Je L a

Therefore, from expression (8), the differential parametrization yields

ω = yf
Machines 2023, 11, 1006 6 of 27

Je be
ia = ẏ + y
nk t f nk t f
   2 
L a Je be L a + R a Je n k e k t + R a be
u= ÿ + ẏ f + yf . (9)
nk t f nk t nk t

The flat output y f then satisfies the following perturbed input–output differential
equation:

ÿ f + a1 ẏ f + a0 y f = bc u, (10)

with

n 2 k t k e + R a be
a0 =
Je L a
be Ra
a1 = +
Je La
nk t
bc = .
Je L a

It is worth noting that the previous model can be employed for control design purposes.
In doing so, we can leverage its capabilities to achieve the control goals. In the next sections,
the derived dynamic models will be used for both position and velocity in the output
backstepping tracking control design. Table 1 summarizes the system parameters used for
the numeric simulation experiments.

Table 1. Parameters of the RE 40 150 watt DC motor and a planetary gearhead GP 52 from Maxon®.

Parameter Units Value

Ra Ω 2.5
Je kg m2 0.0774
be Nm s/rad 6.562
La mH 0.612
n - 81
kt mNm/A 82.2
ke mV/rad/s 82.3215

3. Direct Current Electric Machine Control

3.1. Bio-Inspired Algorithms for Control Design
Bio-inspired optimization, also known as nature-inspired optimization, draws its
inspiration from the principles and behaviors observed in the natural world (please refer
to [27–30] and references therein for further detailed information on optimization algo-
rithms). This approach has gained significant attention and popularity in various fields,
including automatic control design. Some of the more significant benefits of incorporat-
ing bio-inspired optimization techniques in the realm of automatic control are improved
performance, adaptability, enhanced robustness, reduced development time, handling
complex nonlinearities, and reduced dependency on prior knowledge and energy effi-
ciency. Utilizing bio-inspired optimization in automatic control design offers a multitude
of advantages.
These techniques enhance control system performance, adaptability, and robustness by
mimicking nature’s processes, making them particularly effective in handling dynamic and
uncertain environments. They succeed in multi-objective optimization scenarios, reducing
development time and mitigating the need for extensive prior knowledge. Bio-inspired
methods also excel in managing complex nonlinearities, and can be scaled for systems
of various sizes, promote sustainability, and enhance energy efficiency. Overall, these
nature-inspired approaches represent a versatile and promising avenue for creating more
Machines 2023, 11, 1006 7 of 27

efficient, resilient, and adaptive control systems in diverse applications within automation
and control engineering.
Particle Swarm Optimization [31] and Ant Colony Optimization [32] are valuable tools
for control design due to their abilities to handle nonlinear and complex systems, design
robust controllers, optimize for complex objectives, adapt to changing conditions, and ex-
plore diverse control strategies. They excel in multimodal optimization, online adaptation,
and parameter tuning, making them suitable for a wide range of control challenges. Their
versatility, speed of convergence, and nature-inspired foundations also offer advantages in
control applications, particularly in cases where accurate system modelling is difficult or
where innovative control strategies are required.
ACO is a probabilistic optimization method designed for scenarios where the objective
is to find the optimal path within a graph. This technique draws its inspiration from the
foraging behavior of ants as they search for the most efficient route between their colony and
a food source. In contrast, PSO draws inspiration from the collective behavior seen in bird
flocks and fish schools, emphasizing information sharing and social interactions. It serves
as a global optimization algorithm, which is especially effective when tackling problems
involving multidimensional parameter spaces (real-valued optimization). In the realm
of computational science, PSO stands as a computational approach aimed at enhancing
a candidate solution iteratively in pursuit of improving its quality as measured against a
predefined criterion [33]. The inspiration from these natural analogies, such as schooling
and flocking, is reflected in the fact that agents, represented as particles, possess not only
a position but also a velocity, enabling them to explore and navigate within the search
space [34,35].
The following steps summarize how ACO works:
1. Initialization: a set of artificial ants is created, each representing a potential solution
to the optimization problem. A pheromone matrix is initialized, typically with small
values, to represent the desirability of different paths or solutions. Pheromones are
used to communicate between ants.
2. Ant movement: each ant explores the problem space by iteratively making decisions
based on a combination of pheromone levels and a heuristic function. The heuristic
function guides ants towards potentially better solutions. Ants construct solutions
incrementally by selecting one element (e.g., a path or a solution component) at a time.
3. Pheromone update: after all ants have constructed their solutions, the pheromone lev-
els are updated. Ants deposit pheromone on the components of their solutions based
on the quality of their solutions. Better solutions receive more pheromone. Pheromone
levels also decay over time to simulate the natural evaporation of pheromones.
4. Solution evaluation: the quality of the solutions constructed by the ants is evaluated
based on the objective function of the optimization problem.
5. Global information exchange: ants communicate indirectly through the pheromone
matrix. Good solutions result in higher pheromone levels on the components used in
those solutions. This indirect communication guides other ants towards exploring
similar paths or solutions.
6. Iteration: steps 2 to 5 are repeated for a certain number of iterations or until a termina-
tion condition is met.
7. Termination: the algorithm finishes when a stopping criterion is reached, such as a
maximum number of iterations or when no significant improvement is observed.
8. Output: the best solution found by the algorithm is returned as the output.
ACO is particularly useful for solving optimization problems with a large search space
and complex constraints, such as the travelling salesman problem (TSP) or the vehicle
routing problem (VRP). By simulating the way ants explore and communicate in nature,
ACO can efficiently find high-quality solutions to these problems. In this work, we propose
a control design scheme where the ACO and PSO algorithms are used for tuning of the
control parameters. Figure 1 portrays a graph representing how the ACO is implemented.
Here, λ1 to λi stands for a finite number of control parameters to be selected.
Machines 2023, 11, 1006 8 of 27

Figure 1. Main diagram of the central ideas behind the functioning of the ACO for control parameter tuning.

The algorithm explores paths concerning the numbers of columns i, or control param-
eters, and rows, associated with the possibly j number of values than each parameter can
adopt, and which is selected based on the experience of the designer (e.g., λ ∈ (0, ∞) for
ensuring stability). Line colours represents different combinations or paths chosen for each
ant. Notice that for each iteration k a set of individuals or ants H are tasked to probe a
specific and different path or combination that minimizes the objective function f o (ey , u).
From Figure 2 a hypothetical case can be observed in which the l-th individual from
the colony has selected the best path (highlighted in green) based on information from
previous iterations. No other element repeats the same path which helps with the algorithm
convergence and its objective function record is properly stored for future comparisons.
On the other hand, the step summary of how PSO works is presented below:
1. Initialization: PSO starts by initializing a population of particles. Each particle repre-
sents a potential solution to the optimization problem. Each particle has a position
and a velocity, which are randomly assigned at the beginning.
2. Objective function evaluation: the objective function of the optimization problem
is evaluated for each particle, and the fitness or quality of each particle’s solution
is determined.
3. Particle movement: each particle adjusts its velocity and position based on its own
best-known solution (individual best or “pBest”) and the best-known solution of the
entire population (global best or “gBest”). The velocity of each particle is updated by
considering its current velocity, its distance from its pBest, and its distance from gBest.
This update encourages particles to move towards better solutions. The particle’s
position is updated based on its updated velocity.
4. Updating pBest and gBest: after the position update, each particle compares its new
solution to its pBest. If the new solution is better, it updates its pBest. The algorithm
also updates the gBest by comparing the pBests of all particles in the population.
5. Termination: the algorithm continues to iterate through steps 3 and 4 for a specified
number of iterations or until a termination condition is met (e.g., a target fitness level
is achieved).
6. Output: the best solution found by any particle in the population, typically the gBest,
is returned as the final output.
Machines 2023, 11, 1006 9 of 27

Figure 2. Hypothetical selection of the best path for an element of the colony.

PSO is known for its ability to efficiently explore solution spaces and find optimal or
near-optimal solutions in a wide range of optimization problems. It is particularly useful for
continuous and high-dimensional search spaces. PSO’s strength lies in its ability to balance
exploration (searching broadly) and exploitation (focusing on promising areas), making it a
popular choice for optimization in various fields, including engineering, machine learning,
and economics.
Figure 3 represents the main search space used in this work (as a result of a combina-
tion of parameter values λ) for the PSO. Here, each sphere represents a possible solution
and could be evaluated by a particle in some iteration. As observed in Figure 4, each
particle, represented by a dark sphere, will seek the better solution based on the previous
iterations knowledge. Initially, they are located randomly and will move towards the best
solution. The algorithm will carry the particles, after each iteration, towards the fitness
solution, represented by the gold particle in the diagrams, see Figure 5.
In this research, the ACO is utilized for tuning of the position control parameters
and the PSO for velocity control design. Simultaneously, in this study, data from the
output tracking error and the control input magnitude are used as design parameters of
the following objective function:

f o = [(1 + eα )ITAE + κ (ISCI)], (11)

where the coefficients α and κ are weighting factors that penalize the error and the mag-
nitude of the voltage control input. Additionally, the ITAE index (Integral Time Absolute
Error) is given by
Z t
ITAE = t ey (t) dt (12)
0

Here ey is the output tracking error and t is the time variable. Additionally, the ISCI
term stands for the Integral Squared Control Input index introduced in Equation (13) and
which is associated with the voltage control input.

Z t
ISCI = u2 dt. (13)
0
Machines 2023, 11, 1006 10 of 27

Figure 3. Main diagram of the search space for the PSO for control parameter tuning.

Figure 4. Initial randomly distribution of particles.

Machines 2023, 11, 1006 11 of 27

Figure 5. Convergence of particles’ motion while seeking the best solution.

3.2. Backstepping-Based Position Control

In the field of control theory, backstepping [36] is a control technique introduced
around 1990 by Petar V. Kokotovic and his colleagues. It is employed to design stabilizing
controllers for a particular class of dynamical systems. These systems consist of intercon-
nected subsystems, with one core subsystem that can be stabilized using an alternative
method. Due to this recursive arrangement, the controller designer initiates the design pro-
cess from the already stable core subsystem and systematically goes backward to develop
new controllers that progressively stabilize each successive outer subsystem. The procedure
concludes when the ultimate external control layer is established. As a result, this method
is properly named backstepping [37].
In this section, a backstepping based control is introduced for the DC electric motor
machine with a planetary gearhead. The objective is to find a control law such that the
system output tracks the reference trajectory. This method guarantees asymptotic stability
for the system and offers the advantage of easy applicability to dynamic systems, providing
flexibility in the design of feedback control laws [38].
Considering the system in (7), it is possible to design an output tracking controller by
using backstepping control theory. The intention is to track a reference trajectory given
with acceptable level of tracking error. Then, for purposes of control design, lets consider
the following representation of the model as follows:

ẋ0 = x1 (14a)
ẋ1 = x2 (14b)
? ?
ẋ2 = −ÿ − a( x2 + ẏ ) + bu, (14c)

with
Z t
x0 = eθ dt
0
Machines 2023, 11, 1006 12 of 27

x1 = eθ = z1 − z1?
x2 = z2 − ż1? , (15)

where y = z1 = θ is the system output variable to be controlled. eθ represents the tracking

error of the desired angular position reference trajectory z1? = y? = θ ? . Then, for the
previous extended 3D linear system, a backstepping control design is introduced as follows:
System 1: from Equation (14a) x1 can be seen as a virtual controller as follows:

ẋ0 = γ1 . (16)

For the stability analysis of expression (16), let us consider the next candidate Lya-
punov function,

x02
V1 = . (17)
2
It is evident that V1 is quadratic and positive definite and its derivative

V̇1 = x0 ẋ0 = x0 γ1 ; (18)

therefore, the virtual control input γ1 is proposed in such a manner to ensure the negative
definitiveness of V̇1 ,

γ1 = − β 0 x0 , (19)

with β 0 > 0. Thus, by Lyapunov stability theory [39], the following closed-loop system
matches the globally asymptotically stable condition

ẋ0 = − β 0 x0 . (20)

In order for the state x0 to be globally asymptotically stable the state x1 → γ1 . In this
regard, let us introduce the following error variable,

e1 = x1 − γ1 = x1 + β 0 x0 , (21)

where

x 1 = − β 0 x 0 + e1 ; (22)

then, Equation (14a) can be rewritten as

ẋ0 = − β 0 x0 + e1 , (23)

while

ė1 = ẋ1 + β 0 ẋ0 = x2 + β 0 ẋ0 , (24)

by substituting expression in (23) it yields

ė1 = x2 + β 0 (− β 0 x0 + e1 ) = x2 − β20 x0 + β 0 e1 . (25)

Then, the original system can be expressed as follows:

ẋ0 = − β 0 x0 + e1 (26a)
ė1 = − β20 x0
+ β 0 e1 + x 2 (26b)
ẋ2 = −ÿ − a( x2 + ẏ? ) + bu.
?
(26c)
Machines 2023, 11, 1006 13 of 27

System 2: Notice from expression (26b) that the state variable x2 can be adopted as a
virtual control input for the subsystem. Then, let us work with the following
set of expressions:

ẋ0 = − β 0 x0 + e1 (27a)
ė1 = − β20 x0 + β 0 e1 + γ2 (27b)

and introduce the following Lyapunov function and its time derivative:

e12
V2 = V1 +
2
V̇2 = V̇1 + e1 ė1 , (28)

after elemental mathematical manipulation and by substituting Equation (35a,b) it yields

 
V̇2 = − β 0 x02 + e1 x0 + γ2 − β20 x0 + β 0 e1 , (29)

where, in order to V̇2 be negative definite, the virtual controller γ2 is proposed as follows:

γ2 = − x0 + β20 x0 − β 0 e1 − β 1 e1 , (30)

with β 1 > 0, and utilizing (30) in (29) it results in

V̇2 = − β 0 x02 − β 1 e12 . (31)

Therefore, the linear system (35a,b) is globally asymptotically stable by the virtual
controller effect. Similarly, as in the previous system, the state x2 → γ2 . Let us introduce
the following tracking error:

e2 = x2 − γ2 , (32)

then

ė2 = ẋ2 − γ̇2 = ẋ2 + ẋ0 − β20 ẋ0 + β 0 ė1 + β 1 ė1 , (33)

and

x2 = e2 + γ2 = e2 − x0 + β20 x0 − β 0 e1 − β 1 e1 , (34)

and by substituting (33) in (34) in the (26a–c), the system can be expressed by the following
set of first order differential equations:

ẋ0 = − β 0 x0 + e1 (35a)
ė1 = − β 1 e1 − x0 + e2 (35b)
? ?
ė2 = −ÿ − a( x2 + ẏ ) + bu + (1 − β20 ) ẋ0 + ( β 0 + β 1 )ė1 . (35c)

System 3: Finally, let us introduce the total Lyapunov function given by

x02 e2 e2
V= + 1+ 2 (36)
2 2 2
V̇ = x0 ẋ0 + e1 ė1 + e2 ė2 (37)

and after mathematical manipulations

V̇ = x0 (− β 0 x0 + e1 ) + e1 (− x0 − β 1 e1 + e2 ) + e2 ė2 . (38)
Machines 2023, 11, 1006 14 of 27

Therefore, by considering the above expression, it is possible to propose an integrator

backstepping control law u given by

1h    
u= −e1 + ÿ? − a( x2 + ẏ? ) − β30 − 2β 0 − β 1 x0 − 1 − β20 − β 0 β 1 e1
b
−( β 0 + β 1 + β 2 )e2 ] (39)

and after substituting all the design variables, the real control input voltage is as follows:

1h ?  
u= ÿ + az2 − β 2 + β 0 β 1 β 2 + 2β 0 β21 − 2β 0 x0
b  i
− 1 + β 0 β 1 + 2β21 + β 0 β 2 + β 1 β 2 z1 − β 2 z2 . (40)

Hence, by Lyapunov stability theory, it is corroborated that the linear system in (31) is
globally asymptotically stable.
Notice the control design intention for including an integral action in the system
closed-loop error dynamics as an extended system. Integral action helps the controller
to deal with the disturbances existing in the motion control and to improve the system’s
transient and steady state performance [40,41].

3.3. Backstepping-Based Velocity Control

The differentially flat electric motor system model (10) can be used for velocity ref-
erence trajectory tracking control design. A state space representation of the flat output
dynamics is then given by

ż1 f = z2 f
ż2 f = − a1 z2 f − a0 z1 f + bc u. (41)

The state variables are denoted as z1 f = ω = y f and z2 f = ẏ f . For derivation of

some backstepping control law based on differential flatness, the following state space
description for the extended velocity trajectory tracking error dynamics, eω = y f − y?f ,
is considered:

ẋ0 f = x1 f (42a)
ẋ1 f = x2 f (42b)
   
ẋ2 f = −ÿ?f − a1 x2 f + ẏ? − a0 x1 f + y?f + bc u. (42c)

The velocity reference trajectory is here represented by y?f . The error state variables
are thus defined as follows:
Z t
x0 f = eω dt
0
x1 f = e ω
x2 f = ėω . (43)

Similarly to the above described procedure, an angular velocity trajectory tracking

controller from a backstepping approach results in

1h      
u= −e1 f + ÿ?f + a1 x2 f + ẏ?f + a0 x1 f + y?f − β30 f − 2β 0 f − β 1 f x0 f
b    i
− 1 − β20 f − β 0 f β 1 f e1 f − β 0 f + β 1 f + β 2 f e2 f (44)
Machines 2023, 11, 1006 15 of 27

with

e1 f = x 1 f + β 0 f x 0 f
e2 f = x2 f + x0 f − β20 f x0 f + ( β 0 f + β 1 f )e1 f . (45)

Tuning a backstepping controller efficiently can be a challenging task, especially for

complex systems with nonlinear dynamics and uncertainties. There are various methods
and algorithms that can be used to tune the controller parameters effectively. Two popular
optimization algorithms for controller tuning are the PSO and ACO optimization algorithms.
On the other hand, differential flatness and backstepping are two distinct theory con-
cepts, but they can be related in some control system scenarios and utilized satisfactory in
control design, especially when dealing with complex systems. Recently, the authors of [42]
introduce an interesting approach for controlling a mechanical system where trajectory
planning and backstepping is proposed for the antisway problem of an underactuated
overhead cranes. Here, the planned trajectory is obtained by solving for the optimal param-
eters of the selected flat output. Different from that proposal, in this paper, the DC electric
motor differential flatness property is properly used as a starting point for the design of a
backstepping controller. The flat output of the system serves as intermediate virtual control
inputs in the backstepping design process. This simplifies the design of control laws for
several complex systems. The flatness property helps for selecting suitable virtual control
inputs that, combined with the backstepping approach, ease the closed-loop control design.

4. Numeric Simulation Results

During the experiments, the system is assigned to perform velocity and position
output tracking tasks. Here, in order to obtain smooth transitions between initial and final
operation states, the following motion scheme is adopted [7]:

Γ0


  0 ≤ t < T1
Γ? = Γ0 + Γ f − Γ0 Bz (t, T1 , T2 ) T1 ≤ t ≤ T2 (46)
Γf

t > T2 ,


where Γ0 and Γ f stand for the initial and final desired values, respectively. On the other
hand, T1 is the time when the transition begins and T2 when it finishes. Therefore,

n k
t − T1

Bz (t, T1 , T2 ) = ∑ bk T2 − T1
; (47)
k =0

here, n = 6, y b1 = 252, b2 = 1050, b3 = 1800, b4 = 1575, b5 = 700, b6 = 126.

4.1. Case: 1 Backstepping Position Control

In the first case study, the controller proposed in (39) is implemented, where it is
intentionally provided a vibrating load torque given by

τL = D cos(2t)F sin(0.5t), (48)

which is smoothly injected (for 15s < t ≤ 35s) to the system with amplitude parameter
values D = 3.5 and F = 0.8. Notice that, despite the load torque not being explicitly
considered in the control design, the controller is capable of attenuating a bounded load
torque due to the integral term.
From Figure 6 an acceptable output position tracking performance can be corroborated.
The position set-point was established at 45 degrees ( π4 rad), and by using expression (47),
it is possible to achieve soft transitions between operational points, as can be seen in
the figure. Moreover, the control input voltage is portrayed as well as the tracking error.
Machines 2023, 11, 1006 16 of 27

In the presented figures, dashed lines denote the trajectory references. Table 2 summarizes
the optimization data utilized in this case study when the ACO is suitably featured for
control design.

Table 2. Optimization parameters and fitness value.

Algorithm ISCI ITAE f0 Size Iterations

ACO 35.72 0.14 11.42 50 100

(a) (b)

(c) (d)

Figure 6. Closed-loop position output tracking with vibrating load torque: (a) Controlled position y.
(b) Controlled Velocity ẏ. (c) Voltage control input u. (d) Position output tracking error x1 .

4.1.1. Noisy Measurements in the Backstepping Position Control

Additionally, for the purposes of closed-loop performance assessment, the system is
tested when noisy position measurements yn = ηw × |y| are utilized in the control input
computation, with

ηw = A[U (0, 1) + sgn(G(µ, σ ) − 0.25)], (49)

where U (0, 1) stands for noisy components with uniform distributions in the interval [0, 1].
Moreover, white Gaussian noise G(µ, σ ) with mean value µ = 0 and standard deviation
σ = 1 are considered. Lastly, A represents the noise amplitude in the output measurement
and sgn stands for the signum function. Figure 7 presents two cases when the system
output measurements are corrupted with noise. In both of them, it is clear that the system
performance is deteriorated. Notwithstanding, the controller allows the system to perform
the tracking in an acceptable fashion.
Machines 2023, 11, 1006 17 of 27

(a) (b)

Figure 7. Closed-loop position output tracking with noisy sensor measurements yn with: (a) Noise
level A = 0.05. (b) Noise level A = 0.1.

4.1.2. Convergence of Virtual Errors

Now let us consider the initial conditions of the system that are different from zero,
in order to visualize how, as expected, the virtual errors e1 and e2 converge quickly to
zero. Consider the initial conditions y0 = θ0 = 0.3 and ẏ0 = θ̇0 = 0.01. Here, a small time
simulation was selected for purposes of presentation as can be seen in Figure 8. Notice, the
system is capable of recovering efficiently from an initial condition that is different from
the desired position through the designed virtual controller for each subsystem.

(a) (b)

Figure 8. Closed-loop position output tracking: (a ) Controlled output y. (b) Virtual tracking errors
e1 and e2 from Equations (21) and (32) used for backstepping control design.

4.2. Case 2: Backstepping Velocity Control

In this simulation case, the DC machine is tasked to track a desired velocity profile.
The motor stars from the rest and has to reach a velocity of 2.1 rad/s (approximately 20 rpm)
in a short time. Observe from Figure 9 how the control input and the electric current try
to compensate the load torque undesired effects. Additionally, notice an acceptable level
of velocity tracking error. From deriving that the designed controller takes care of the
asymptotic stability of the system, an acceptable performance is achieved despite the
presence of completely unknown load torques.
Table 3 summarizes the optimization data utilized in this case study when the PSO is
suitably featured for velocity output tracking control design.
Machines 2023, 11, 1006 18 of 27

(a) (b)

(c) (d)

Figure 9. Closed-loop velocity flat-output tracking subjected to a slow varying bounded load torque:
(a) Controlled velocity y f . (b) Armature electric current i a . (c) Voltage control input u. (d) Velocity
output tracking error x1 f .

Table 3. Optimization parameters and fitness value.

Algorithm ISCI ITAE f0 Size Iterations

PSO 1.61 × 103 0.79 4.84 × 103 45 100

4.3. Case 3: Performance Comparative Regarding a LQR-like Controller

The LQR (Linear Quadratic Regulator) control is of paramount significance in the field
of automatic control, as it enables the design of optimal control systems that efficiently min-
imizes a quadratic cost function. Its ability to consider both system dynamics and control
constraints makes it an essential choice in applications ranging from aerospace engineering
to industrial automation [43,44]. For the purposes of system responses comparison, an
integral LQR controller is implemented based on model (41) for minimizing the following
quadratic cost function for the system [45–47]
Z ∞ 
J= x T Qe
e x + ueT Rue dt, (50)
0

where Q is an output error weighting matrix and R is the matrix that penalizes the rate of
change of control input. Additionally,
 
ey f
x =  ėy f  (51)
 
e
ηey f
Machines 2023, 11, 1006 19 of 27

and

ue = uc − u? . (52)

Thus, the feedback control law that minimizes the value of J is given as follows:

uc = u? − k1 ey f − k2 ėy f − k3 ηey f , (53)

with the control parameters k1 , k2 and k3 > 0, ey f = z1? − z1? and ηey f as the tracking error
f f
integral used as an extended state. Finally,

ż2? f + a1 ż1? + a0 z1?

? f f
u = . (54)
bc

It is worth mentioning that the PSO algorithm has been utilized for tuning the con-
troller parameters in both cases with the same optimization criteria and features, which are
summarized in Table 4. In order to further assess the system’s closed-loop performance, a
completely unknown vibrating load torque is intentionally injected in both scenarios as
portrayed in Figure 10:

Figure 10. Completely unknown vibrating load torque in the third case study.

In Figure 11 it can be seen the system output tracking responses using the LQR and
backstepping controllers. Notice it is used the subscript bks to differentiate the backstepping
response. Additionally, it is observed that despite the load torque information not being
included, nor the output tracking controller’s designs, the system achieves acceptable levels
of load torque attenuation but, remarkably, its best performance when using the introduced
backstepping control approach. The proposed backstepping controller demonstrates a
superior performance in comparison with the integral LQR control approach for the velocity
control of a DC electric machine, where the backstepping controller exhibits a higher degree
of adaptability and robustness. As a result, it can achieve enhanced velocity control,
maintaining greater stability and accuracy even in the presence of varying external factors,
thus making it a more promising choice for DC motor velocity control applications. Take
into account that the concept of differential flatness can be effectively harnessed and suitably
extended in the design of a variety of control schemes, as exemplified herein through the
application of the flat integral LQR control approach.
Machines 2023, 11, 1006 20 of 27

(a) (b)

(c) (d)

Figure 11. System output tracking responses using the LQR and backstepping controllers. (a) Com-
parison of the controlled output velocity using the optimal LQR controller y f LQR and the introduced
backstepping controller y f bks . (b) Yielded velocity output tracking errors with the LQR controller ey f LQR
and the backstepping ey f . (c) Voltage control input comparison utilizing the LQR approach u LQR
bks
and the introduced backstepping ubks . (d) Comparison of the armature electric current employing
the LQR controller i a LQR and the proposed controller i abks .

Table 4. Optimization parameters and fitness value for case study 3 using PSO, α = 0.95, and
κ = 0.05.

Controller ISCI ITAE f0 Size Iterations

LQR 1.860 × 103 21.62 987.34 35 80
Backstepping 1.863 × 103 2.52 939.12 35 80

4.4. Case 4: Adaptive Integral Backstepping Control

B-spline artificial neural networks (Bs-ANN) represent intelligent agents that exhibit
the ability to adapt and optimize control system performance in response to significant
variations in the plant dynamics and operational conditions, all while adhering to stringent
controller specifications. These specifications typically encompass objectives such as mini-
mizing system output errors and controlling input effort. As system complexity increases,
accompanied by rising model uncertainties and the presence of unwanted external distur-
bances during system operation, BsNNs effectively facilitate continual learning through
their adaptive learning rules and synaptic weight updates, thereby ensuring the reliable
operation of the control system.
The existence of unpredictable perturbations, whether originating from internal dy-
namics or external factors, can present formidable obstacles to the attainment of satisfactory
process or system control. Consequently, there is a burgeoning interest in the exploration
and development of advanced and intricate control strategies. In this research, the au-
thors propose the innovative integration of B-spline artificial neural networks for real-time
Machines 2023, 11, 1006 21 of 27

computation of backstepping control parameters in the context of output tracking control

for a DC electric machine. This forward-looking approach seeks to augment the control
system’s capacity to adapt dynamically to evolving conditions and unforeseen distur-
bances, thereby making a substantial contribution to the enhancement of overall control
system performance.
The selection of the inputs in the neuron architecture is based on a close relationship
that exists between the controller output error and the control input signals [35]. A weighted
linear combination of the transformed inputs constitutes the neuron output. Figure 12
introduces a generalized architecture for a Bs-ANN when a couple of basis functions are
considered per input signal.
Hidden layer

Input Basis Weight Weighted sum Output

functions vector

Figure 12. The main scheme of a B-spline artificial neural network.

The proposed adaptive controller using B-spline artificial neural networks is designed
to adapt to varying system dynamics and disturbances adjusting its control parameters
based on the changing system operational conditions. This type of artificial neural network
employs an instantaneous learning rule structure as a perspective of online and continuous
learning. The constant updating depends on the presented changes of the selected input
signals; in this paper, this input is defined by the error between the desired trajectory and
the actual system output. In this fashion, the output is then given by:

β(t) = a T w, (55)

where the weight and transformed input (or basis function outputs) column vectors, defined
by the number of synaptic weights n, are given as follows:

w T = [ w1 w2 . . . w n ] , a T = [ a1 a2 . . . a n ], (56)

with
w(t) = w(t − 1) + ∆w(t − 1). (57)
In this study, we utilize a B-spline for each of the control parameter’s calculus, where
the architecture observed in Figure 12 is adopted. Moreover, the output tracking errors are
used as main inputs throughout the simulation experiments and, by using the following
instantaneous learning rule, the neuron is continuously trained:

λe(t)
∆w(t − 1) = a ( t ). (58)
k a(t) k22

In the context of our study, the notation e(t) represents the instantaneous system
output tracking error, while λ denotes the learning rate index. The utilization of instanta-
neous error correction rules enables the iterative adjustment of the neural network’s weight
vector, aimed at reducing output errors following the presentation of each training sample.
This adaptation process is facilitated through the mechanism of backward output error
propagation, a technique well-documented in the literature [48,49].
Furthermore, to comprehensively assess the functionality of the Bs-ANN, we employ
a Functional Flow Block Diagram methodology [50]. This visualization technique is exem-
Machines 2023, 11, 1006 22 of 27

plified in Figure 13, illustrating a scenario where the output tracking error serves as the
correction input signal for real-time computation of control parameters within the Bs-ANN.

2.0
Update
Measured 1.0 weights values 5.0 Control
tracking error parameters
Transform input AND OR AND Get scalar
3.0 product
Hold
AND
weights values

4.0

Store weights

Figure 13. Functional Flow Block Diagram of a Bs-ANN.

In this process, the measured tracking error assumes the role of the central input to
the neuron and undergoes transformation via the B-spline basis functions, yielding the
transformed input vector a within function block 1.0. Notably, to enhance the convergence
of the learning rule during the update procedure, a dead band may be incorporated. Con-
sequently, weight factor values are preserved without modification if the error magnitude
falls below a predetermined threshold, as described in functions 2.0 and 3.0. This continu-
ous storage of current weight values ensures their availability for the subsequent update
stage in the subsequent iteration, as outlined in function block 4.0. Lastly, the adaptive
output is determined as the weighted sum, representing the scalar product of weights
and weighted input vectors. The magnitudes of these weights dictate the strength of the
connections between each input and the output. In this research, the artificial network
is mainly used for the on-line computing of the control parameters related to the output
tracking control based on the tracking error, adopting the structure presented in Figure 12.

4.5. B-Spline Off-Line Training by PSO

The utilization of intelligent agents, referred to as “particles”, enables this algorithm
to iteratively discover the optimal solution within a defined search space. As a result, the
capabilities of the PSO have been effectively harnessed in various engineering and research
applications, including fine-tuning automatic controllers and training artificial neural
networks. The training process is performed while the system is commanded to reach a
desired velocity. This methodology has been adopted from [35] under the following outline
sumarized in Algorithm 1, where the pseudocode for the training process is presented, and
a simulation time of 10 seconds is adopted.
The adaptive scheme has been adopted for the designed backstepping flat controller.
Firstly, the system close-loop response is presented when there is no load disturbing
external torque, as shown in Figure 14. Notice from this figure a properly closed-loop
system performance where soft behavior of the variables of interest is achieved. As can be
observed, an adaptive evolution of the control parameters is exhibited as a result of the
online learning process, which is a invaluable premise when a detailed system model is not
available or when significant environmental changes deteriorate the system’s performance.
Table 5 summarizes the optimization data utilized in this case study when the PSO is
suitably featured for velocity output tracking control design.

Table 5. Optimization parameters and fitness value.

Algorithm ISCI ITAE f0 Size Iterations

PSO 25.65 × 103 1.84 7.95 × 103 35 80
Machines 2023, 11, 1006 23 of 27

Algorithm 1: Evaluation of the objective function f o .

Input: wki (0), for i = 0, 1, 2 // weight vector
Output: f o
α = 0.7, κ = 0.3, ∆t = 0.001 // constants
y0 = 0, ẏ0 = 0, ts = 0 // initial conditions
ts
for k = 1 to s do // s = ∆t , con ts = 10
calculus of β i
Solution of system dynamics // by Runge-Kutta Fehlberg numerical method
ts = ts + ∆t
save e[k] = ey , u[k ] = u, t[k ] = ts
end
calculus ITAE = ∑1n t|e|2 ∆t
calculus ISCI = ∑1n |u|2 ∆t
evaluation of f o

Simultaneously, in the same experiment, a slow time varying bounded load torque
with high frequency components is intentionally included. The yielded response can
be appreciated in Figure 15. By using the adaptive approach, the system can effectively
perform trajectory tracking tasks in a satisfactory fashion even when unpredictable changes
occur, providing a comprehensive understanding of its capabilities and advantages.

(a) (b)

(c) (d)

Figure 14. Closed-loop adaptive velocity flat-output tracking: (a) Controlled velocity y f . (b) Ar-
mature electric current i a . (c) Velocity output tracking error x1 f . (d) Adaptive backstepping
control parameters.
Machines 2023, 11, 1006 24 of 27

(a) (b)

(c) (d)

Figure 15. Closed-loop velocity flat-output tracking subjected to a slow varying bounded load
torque with high frequency components: (a) Controlled velocity y f . (b) Armature electric current i a .
(c) Voltage control input u. (d) Adaptive backstepping control parameters.

5. Conclusions
A new output feedback control approach for the efficient and robust tracking of
planned reference trajectories for both position and velocity in DC motor systems has
been introduced in this research. Differential flatness, backstepping, and bio-inspired
optimization were integrated to derive a novel alternative solution to the tracking control
problem. In the presented flat output feedback control scheme, intelligent bio-inspired
algorithms were performed for enhancing the closed-loop electric motor system’s perfor-
mance. Multiple case studies demonstrated the feasibility and efficiency of the new tracking
control perspective. Numerical results proved the accurate and robust tracking of position
and velocity reference profiles planned for a realistic DC electric machine with a coupled
gearhead. Moreover, undesired and completely unknown disturbance load torques and
noisy measurements were intentionally integrated for performance evaluation. Acceptable
levels of vibrating load torque attenuation were achieved by using the introduced control
technique despite the presence of high frequency components in the feedback output sig-
nal measurements. Furthermore, an extra case study was conducted, where an adaptive
integral backstepping design was introduced for updating the control parameters by using
B-spline artificial neural networks that are trained off-line using the PSO algorithm. The
future direction of this research is to further extend the integral backstepping control to im-
prove the system’s robustness using the central ideas of Generalized Proportional-Integral
(GPI) control theory as well as experimental implementation. Integral reconstructors
of unavailable state variables from the GPI control perspective will be used to eliminate
dependence on asymptotic or numerical differentiation with respect to the time of flat
output signals. In future research, the adaptive robust tracking control problem will also be
considered based only on the output feedback of highly uncertain vibrating mechatronic
Machines 2023, 11, 1006 25 of 27

systems using electric motors as motion actuators, in which the structural differential flat-
ness property is exhibited. In this sense, the backstepping control approach, bio-inspired
optimization algorithms, and artificial neural networks will be integrated for the construc-
tion of innovating strategies to efficiently regulate differentially flat systems toward the
desired reference trajectories in the presence of significant dynamic disturbances.

Author Contributions: Conceptualization, H.Y.-B. and F.B.-C.; methodology, H.Y.-B., F.B.-C. and
J.N.B.-G.; software, H.Y.-B. and J.N.B.-G.; validation, H.Y.-B.; formal analysis, H.Y.-B., F.B.-C., I.R.-C.,
A.F.-C. and J.H.A.-N.; investigation, H.Y.-B., F.B.-C., A.F.-C., I.R.-C. and J.H.A.-N.; resources, I.R.-C.
and J.H.A.-N.; data curation, H.Y.-B., F.B.-C. and J.N.B.-G.; writing—original draft preparation, H.Y.-B.
and F.B.-C.; writing—review and editing, H.Y.-B. and F.B.-C.; visualization, H.Y.-B. and J.N.B.-G.;
supervision, A.F.-C. and F.B.-C.; project administration, A.F.-C. and F.B.-C.; funding acquisition, I.R.-C.
and J.H.A.-N. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.
Funding: This research received no external funding.
Institutional Review Board Statement: Not applicable.
Data Availability Statement: Not applicable.
Acknowledgments: The authors would like to thank Consejo Nacional de Humanidades, Ciencias y
Tecnologías (Conahcyt), TecNM: Tecnológico de Estudios Sueriores de Tianguistenco and Universidad
Politécnica de Tulancingo for the support given to developing this work.
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Abbreviations
The following abbreviations are used in this manuscript:

ANN Artificial Neural Network

DC Direct Current
PID Proportional Integral Derivative
PI Proportional Integral
Bs-ANN B-Spline Artificial Neural Network
PSO Particle Swarm Optimization
ACO Ant Colony Optimization
ITAE Integral Time Absolute Error
ISCI Integral Squared Control Input
LQR Linear Quadratic Regulator
GPI Generalized Proportional-Integral

References
1. Barkas, D.A.; Ioannidis, G.C.; Psomopoulos, C.S.; Kaminaris, S.D.; Vokas, G.A. Brushed DC Motor Drives for Industrial and
Automobile Applications with Emphasis on Control Techniques: A Comprehensive Review. Electronics 2020, 9, 887. [CrossRef]
2. Buenestado, P.; Gibergans-Báguena, J.; Acho, L.; Pujol-Vázquez, G. Predictive Speed Control of a DC Universal Motor Applied to
Monitor Electric Vehicle Batteries. Machines 2023, 11, 740. [CrossRef]
3. Merida-Calvo, L.; Rodriguez, A.S.M.; Ramos, F.; Feliu-Batlle, V. Advanced Motor Control for Improving the Trajectory Tracking
Accuracy of a Low-Cost Mobile Robot. Machines 2023, 11, 14. [CrossRef]
4. Manuel, N.L.; İnanç, N.; Lüy, M. Control and performance analyses of a DC motor using optimized PIDs and fuzzy logic
controller. Results Control. Optim. 2023, 13, 100306. [CrossRef]
5. Guerrero-Ramirez, E.; Martinez-Barbosa, A.; Contreras-Ordaz, M.A.; Guerrero-Ramirez, G.; Guzman-Ramirez, E.; Barahona-
Avalos, J.L.; Adam-Medina, M. DC Motor Drive Powered by Solar Photovoltaic Energy: An FPGA-Based Active Disturbance
Rejection Control Approach. Energies 2022, 15, 6595. [CrossRef]
6. Beltran-Carbajal, F.; Valderrabano-Gonzalez, A.; Rosas-Caro, J.; Favela-Contreras, A. An asymptotic differentiation approach of
signals in velocity tracking control of DC motors. Electr. Power Syst. Res. 2015, 122, 218–223. [CrossRef]
7. Beltran-Carbajal, F.; Tapia-Olvera, R.; Valderrabano-Gonzalez, A.; Yanez-Badillo, H.; Rosas-Caro, J.C.; CarlosMayo-Maldonado, J.
Closed-loop online harmonic vibration estimation in DC electric motor systems. Appl. Math. Model. 2021, 94, 460–481. [CrossRef]
8. Beltran-Carbajal, F.; Favela-Contreras, A.; Valderrabano-Gonzalez, A.; Rosas-Caro, J.C. Output feedback control for robust
tracking of position trajectories for DC electric motors. Electr. Power Syst. Res. 2014, 107, 183–189. [CrossRef]
Machines 2023, 11, 1006 26 of 27

9. Harrouz, A.; Becheri, H.; Colak, I.; Kayisli, K. Backstepping control of a separately excited DC motor. Electr. Eng. 2018,
100, 1393–1403. [CrossRef]
10. Okoro, I.S.; Enwerem, C.O. Robust control of a DC motor. Heliyon 2020, 6, e05777. [CrossRef]
11. Singiresu, S.R. Engineering Optimization Theory and Practice, 5th ed.; John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.: Hoboken, NJ, USA, 2019.
12. Kochenderfer, M.J. Algorithms for Optimization, 1st ed.; The MIT Press: Cambridge, MA, USA, 2019.
13. Nguyen, T.; Nhut VO, T.M. Centrifugal Pump Design: An Optimization. Eurasia Proc. Sci. Technol. Eng. Math. 2022, 17, 136–151.
[CrossRef]
14. Huynh, N.T.; Nguyen, T.V.T.; Tam, N.T.; Nguyen, Q.M. Optimizing Magnification Ratio for the Flexible Hinge Displacement
Amplifier Mechanism Design. In Proceedings of the Annual International Conference on Material, Machines and Methods for
Sustainable Development, Nha Trang, Vietnam, 12–15 November 2020; Long, B.T., Kim, Y.H., Ishizaki, K., Toan, N.D., Parinov,
I.A., Vu, N.P., Eds.; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2021; pp. 769–778.
15. Huang, C.; Li, Y.; Yao, X. A Survey of Automatic Parameter Tuning Methods for Metaheuristics. IEEE Trans. Evol. Comput. 2020,
24, 201–216. [CrossRef]
16. Serradilla, F.; Cañas, N.; Naranjo, J.E. Optimization of the Energy Consumption of Electric Motors through Metaheuristics and
PID Controllers. Electronics 2020, 9, 1842. [CrossRef]
17. Templos-Santos, J.L.; Aguilar-Mejia, O.; Peralta-Sanchez, E.; Sosa-Cortez, R. Parameter Tuning of PI Control for Speed Regulation
of a PMSM Using Bio-Inspired Algorithms. Algorithms 2019, 12, 54. [CrossRef]
18. Sabir, M.M.; Khan, J.A. Optimal Design of PID Controller for the Speed Control of DC Motor by Using Metaheuristic Techniques.
Adv. Artif. Neural Syst. 2014, 2014, 126317. [CrossRef]
19. Chiha, I.; Liouane, N.; Borne, P. Tuning PID Controller Using Multiobjective Ant Colony Optimization. Appl. Comput. Intell. Soft
Comput. 2012, 2012, 536326. [CrossRef]
20. Rodríguez-Molina, A.; Villarreal-Cervantes, M.G.; Álvarez-Gallegos, J.; Aldape-Pérez, M. Bio-inspired adaptive control strategy
for the highly efficient speed regulation of the DC motor under parametric uncertainty. Appl. Soft Comput. 2019, 75, 29–45.
[CrossRef]
21. Sahdev, S.K. Electrical Machines, 1st ed.; Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, MA, USA, 2017.
22. Franklin, G.F.; Powell, J.D.; Emami-Naeini, A. Feedback Control of Dynamic Systems, 8th ed.; Pearson Education Limited: Harlow,
UK, 2020.
23. Umans, S.D. Fitzgerald & Kingsley’s Electric Machinery, 7th ed.; McGraw-Hill: New York, NY, USA, 2014.
24. Fliess, M.; Levine, J.; Martin, P.; Rouchon, P. Flatness and defect of non-linear systems: introductory theory and examples. Int. J.
Control. 1995, 61, 1327–1361. [CrossRef]
25. Fliess, M.; Levine, J.; Martin, P.; Ollivier, F.; Rouchon, P. Controlling Nonlinear Systems by Flatness. In Systems and Control in the
Twenty-First Century; Byrnes, C.I., Datta, B.N., Martin, C.F., Gilliam, D.S., Eds.; Springer: Boston, MA, USA, 1997; pp. 137–154.
26. Beltran-Carbajal, F.; Silva-Navarro, G. Output feedback dynamic control for trajectory tracking and vibration suppression. Appl.
Math. Model. 2020, 79, 793–808. [CrossRef]
27. Del Ser, J.; Osaba, E.; Molina, D.; Yang, X.S.; Salcedo-Sanz, S.; Camacho, D.; Das, S.; Suganthan, P.N.; Coello-Coello, C.A.; Herrera,
F. Bio-inspired computation: Where we stand and what’s next. Swarm Evol. Comput. 2019, 48, 220–250. [CrossRef]
28. Yang, X.S.; Karamanoglu, M. Nature-inspired computation and swarm intelligence: A state-of-the-art overview. In Nature-Inspired
Computation and Swarm Intelligence; Yang, X.S., Ed.; Academic Press: London, UK, 2020; pp. 3–18.
29. Siddique, N.H.; Adeli, H. Nature-Inspired Computing: Physics- and Chemistry-Based Algorithms, 1st ed.; Chapman and Hall/CRC:
Boca Raton, FL, USA, 2017.
30. Slowik, A. Swarm Intelligence Algorithms: Modifications and Applications, 1st ed.; CRC Press: Boca Raton, USA, 2020.
31. Sun, J.; Lai, C.H.; Wu, X.J. Particle Swarm Optimisation: Classical and Quantum Optimisation, 1st ed.; CRC Press: Boca Raton, FL,
USA, 2012.
32. Marco Dorigo, T.S. Ant Colony Optimization, 1st ed.; The MIT Press: Cambridge, MA, USA, 2004.
33. Bonyadi, M.R.; Michalewicz, Z. Particle Swarm Optimization for Single Objective Continuous Space Problems: A Review. Evol.
Comput. 2017, 25, 1–54. [CrossRef]
34. Marini, F.; Walczak, B. Particle swarm optimization (PSO). A tutorial. Chemom. Intell. Lab. Syst. 2015, 149, 153–165. [CrossRef]
35. Yañez-Badillo, H.; Beltran-Carbajal, F.; Tapia-Olvera, R.; Favela-Contreras, A.; Sotelo, C.; Sotelo, D. Adaptive Robust Motion
Control of Quadrotor Systems using Artificial Neural Networks and Particle Swarm Optimization. Mathematics 2021, 9, 2367.
[CrossRef]
36. Kokotović, P.V. The joy of feedback: nonlinear and adaptive. IEEE Control. Syst. Mag. 1992, 12, 7–17. [CrossRef]
37. Sepulchre, D.R.; Janković, M.; Kokotović, P.V. Recursive designs. In Constructive Nonlinear Control; Springer: London, UK, 1997;
pp. 229–284.
38. Bansal, N.; Bisht, A.; Paluri, S.; Kumar, V.; Rana, K.; Azar, A.T.; Vaidyanathan, S. Single-link flexible joint manipulator control
using backstepping technique. In Backstepping Control of Nonlinear Dynamical Systems; Vaidyanathan, S., Azar, A.T., Eds.; Academic
Press: Cambridge, MA, USA, 2021. [CrossRef]
39. Khalil, H.K. Nonlinear Systems, 3rd ed.; Pearson Education Limited: London, UK, 2014.
Machines 2023, 11, 1006 27 of 27

40. Tan, Y.; Chang, J.; Tan, H.; Hu, J. Integral backstepping control and experimental implementation for motion system. In Proceed-
ings of the 2000 IEEE International Conference on Control Applications, Anchorage, AK, USA, 27 September 2000; pp. 367–372.
[CrossRef]
41. Skjetne, R.; Fossen, T. On integral control in backstepping: Analysis of different techniques. In Proceedings of the 2004 American
Control Conference, Boston, MA, USA, 30 June–2 July 2004; Volume 2, pp. 1899–1904. [CrossRef]
42. Yu, Z.; Niu, W. Flatness-Based Backstepping Antisway Control of Underactuated Crane Systems under Wind Disturbance.
Electronics 2023, 12, 244. [CrossRef]
43. Wang, M.; Wang, K.; Zhao, Q.; Zheng, X.; Gao, H.; Yu, J. LQR Control and Optimization for Trajectory Tracking of Biomimetic
Robotic Fish Based on Unreal Engine. Biomimetics 2023, 8, 236. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
44. Dul, F.; Lichota, P.; Rusowicz, A. Generalized Linear Quadratic Control for a Full Tracking Problem in Aviation. Sensors 2020, 20, 2955.
[CrossRef] [PubMed]
45. Fortuna, L.; Frasca, M.; Buscarino, A. Optimal and Robust Control: Advanced Topics with MATLAB, 2nd ed.; CRC Press: Boca Raton,
FL, USA, 2021.
46. Sir Elkhatem, A.; Naci Engin, S. Robust LQR and LQR-PI control strategies based on adaptive weighting matrix selection for a
UAV position and attitude tracking control. Alex. Eng. J. 2022, 61, 6275–6292. [CrossRef]
47. Foehn, P.; Scaramuzza, D. Onboard State Dependent LQR for Agile Quadrotors. In Proceedings of the 2018 IEEE International
Conference on Robotics and Automation, Brisbane, Australia, 21–25 May 2018; pp. 6566–6572. [CrossRef]
48. Harris, C.J.; Moore, C.G.; Brown, M. Intelligent Control: Aspects of Fuzzy Logic and Neural Nets, 1st ed.; World Scientific: London,
UK, 1993.
49. Brown, M.; Harris, C.J. Neurofuzzy Adaptive Modelling and Control, 1st ed.; Prentice Hall International (UK) Ltd.: Hertfordshire,
UK, 1994.
50. Blanchard, B.; Fabrycky, W. Systems Engineering and Analysis, 5th ed.; Pearson Education: London, UK, 2014.

Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual
author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to
people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.