Published in IET Control Theory and Applications

Received on 23rd February 2012

Revised on 30th September 2012
Accepted on 9th November 2012
doi: 10.1049/iet-cta.2012.0066
ISSN 1751-8644
Adaptive robust controls of biped robots
Zhijun Li
1
, Shuzhi Sam Ge
2
,
3
1
The Key Lab of Autonomous System and Network Control, College of Automation Science and Engineering, South China
University of Technology, Guangzhou 510641, Peoples Republic of China
2
Robotics Institute, and School of Computer Science and Engineering, University of Electronic Science and Technology of
China, Chengdu 610054, Peoples Republic of China
3
Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, The National University of Singapore, Singapore 117576, Singapore
E-mail: zjli@ieee.org
Abstract: This paper presents a structure of robust adaptive control for biped robots, which includes balancing and
posture control for regulating the centre-of-mass (COM) position and trunk orientation of bipedal robots in a compliant way.
First, the biped robot is decoupled into the dynamics of COM and the trunks. Then, the adaptive robust controls are
constructed in the presence of parametric and functional dynamics uncertainties. The control computes a desired ground
reaction force required to stabilise the posture with unknown dynamics of COM and then transforms these forces into full-
body joint torques even if the external disturbances exist. Based on Lyapunov synthesis, the proposed adaptive controls
guarantee that the tracking errors of system converge to zero. The proposed controls are robust not only to system
uncertainties such as mass variation but also to external disturbances. The verication of the proposed control is conducted
using the extensive simulations.
1 Introduction
Recently, advances in both mechanical and software systems
have promoted development of biped robots around the
world [110]. Although, many works on dynamics and
control of biped robot had been investigated in [3, 11, 12],
the realisation of reliable autonomous biped robots is still
limited by the current level of motion control strategies. For
example, some control algorithms were proposed by
introducing passive dynamics, linearised model [4], and
reduced-order non-linear dynamic model for biped robots in
the past two decades [1316]. In [13], a control strategy
based on feedforward compensation and optimal linear state
feedback was derived for a seven-link, 12 degree-of-
freedom (DOF), biped robot in the double-support phase. In
[17], sliding-mode robust control applied to the walking of
a 9-link (8-DOF) biped robot was investigated. The biped
robot is assumed to involve large parametric uncertainty,
while its locomotion is constrained to be on the sagittal
plane. In [16], an name of this approach was proposed
to nd stable as well as unstable hybrid limit cycles for
a planar compass-like biped on a shallow slope without
integrating the full set of differential equations and
approximating the dynamics. In [18], the energy-based and
passivity-based control laws were design for exploiting the
existence of passive walking gaits to achieve walking on
different ground slopes.
Efforts were also made to build complete models to
represent the whole periodic walking motion and three
phases of the walking cycle (single-support, double-support,
and transition phase) as an integrated model, such that the
performance and stability analysis of the whole closed-loop
motion system could be improved, such as in [11, 15, 19].
In the recent, using the approximation property of the fuzzy
systems and the neural networks, adaptive control have
obtained many results [2023]. Fuzzy neural networks
(FNN) quadratic stabilisation output feedback control
scheme was proposed for a biped robot in [24]. In [25], a
design technique of a recurrent cerebellar model articulation
controller (RCMAC)-based on fault-tolerant control system
was investigated to rectify the non-linear faults of a biped
robot. In [26], the impact dynamics of a ve-link biped
walking on level ground were studied and the results can
be used to correlate the gait parameters with the contact
event following impact. In [27], a systematic architecture
and algorithm of gait control based on energy-efciency
optimisation was presented to reduce the high-energy
consumption. In [3], an approach for the closed-loop
control of a fully actuated biped robot that leverages on
its natural dynamics when walking was presented, the
input state-dependent torques were constructed from a
combination of low-gain spring-damper couples.
Most biped robots founded in the real world are composed
of a lot of interconnected joints, and the dynamic balance and
posture need to be considered simultaneously. As such,
non-linear biped systems are one of the most difcult
control problems in the category. Owing to the complexity
of the multi-degrees-of-freedom (multi-DOF) mechanism of
humanoid robots, an intuitive and efcient method for
whole-body control is required. However, how to improve
the tracking performance of biped robots through designed
controls is still an challenging research topic that attracts
www.ietdl.org
IET Control Theory Appl., 2013, Vol. 7, Iss. 2, pp. 161175 161
doi: 10.1049/iet-cta.2012.0066 & The Institution of Engineering and Technology 2013
great attention from robotic community. In this paper,
considering both the dynamic balance and the posture
position to be guaranteed, we decouple the dynamics of
biped into the dynamics of centre of mass (COM) and the
trunks, and then implement decoupled control structure
because of the bipeds specic physical nature.
Owing to the nite foot support area, pure position control
is insufcient for executing bipedal locomotion trajectories.
Therefore some approaches utilised force sensors in the feet
for implementing an inner force or zero moment point
(ZMP) control loop [2831]. However, in this paper, we
propose an approach that gives a desired applied force from
the robot to the ground to stabilise the posture position and
ensures the desired contact state between the robot and the
ground, then distributes that force among predened contact
points and transforms it to the joint torques directly. The
approach does not require contact force measurement or
inverse kinematics or dynamics.
Since, along the walk, toe and heel are independently
characterised by non-penetration and no-slip constraint
with the ground, in this paper, we consider the holonomic
and non-holonomic constraints [24, 27] into the biped
dynamics. The biped robot is rstly decoupled into the
dynamics of COM and the trunks. Then, the adaptive robust
control is constructed in the presence of parametric and
functional dynamics uncertainties. The control computes
a desired ground reaction force required to stabilise the
posture with unknown dynamics of COM and then
transforms these forces into full-body joint torques even
if the external disturbances exist. Based on Lyapunov
synthesis, we develop the robust control based on the
adaptive parameters mechanisms using on-line parameter
estimation strategy in order to have an efcient approximation.
The proposed control approach can ensure that the outputs
of the system track the given bounded reference signals
within a small neighbourhood of zero, and guarantee
semi-global uniform boundedness of all the closed loop
signals. Finally, simulation results are presented to verify
the effectiveness of the proposed control.
2 Dynamics of biped robots
In general, the walking motion period of a biped robot is
divided into the single-support phase, the double-support
phase, and the transition phase. In biped locomotion,
the double-support and single-support phases alternate.
The biped robot usually starts and stops motion at the
double-support conguration. The analysis of biped
locomotion in both single-support and double-support phase
is very important for improving the smoothness of the
biped locomotion system, especially when the control
becomes important for moving the centre of gravity and
raising the heel.
Consider a multi-DOF biped robot contacting with the
ground, as shown in Fig. 1. Let r [ R
3
be translational
position coordinate (e.g. base position) and q [ R
n
be the
joint angles and attitude of the base. Using the generalised
coordinates x = [r
T
, q
T
]
T
[ R
3+n
, the exact non-linear
dynamics of the biped with the holonomic constraints and
non-holomic constraints (generated by the respective
situations of one or both feet grounded with no-slip) can be
derived using a standard Lagrangian formulation
M(x) x +C(x, x) x +G+D = u +J
T
l
G
(1)
where M(x) =
M
r
M
rq
M
qr
M
q
_ _
[ R
(n+3)(n+3)
is the inertia
matrix; C(x, x) =
C
r
C
rq
C
qr
C
q
_ _
[ R
(n+3)(n+3)
is the
centrifugal and Coriolis force term; G [ R
(n+3)
is the
gravitational torque vector; D [ R
(n+3)
is the external
disturbance vector; u = [0
31
, t
T
n1
]
T
[ R
(n+3)
is the
control input vector; J = [J
T
n
, J
T
h
]
T
[ R
3(n+3)
and
l
G
= [l
T
n
, l
T
h
]
T
[ R
3
are Jacobian matrix and Lagrangian
multiplier corresponding to the non-holonomic and
holonomic constraints.
Let r
c
= [x
c
, y
c
, z
c
]
T
[ R
3
be the position vector of
the COM coordinate, and r
p
= [x
p
, y
p
, z
p
]
T
[ R
3
be the
position vector from COM to the contact point. The contact
point does not move on the ground surface. The constraint
forces l
G
= [l
T
n
, l
T
h
]
T
and a ground reaction force f
R
satisfy
l
G
+f
R
= 0.
If we replace r by r
c
, we can rewrite the dynamics (1) as the
decoupled dynamics [32]
M
rc
0
0 M
_ _
r
c
q
_ _
+
0
C(q, q) q
_ _
+
G
0
_ _
+
D
r
D
q
_ _
=
0
t
_ _
+
I
J
T
_ _
l
G
(2)
where M
rc
[ R
33
is the diagonal mass matrix for the COM
of the biped, M [ R
nn
is the inertia matrix, C(q, q) q [ R
n
is the centrifugal and Coriolis term, and I [ R
33
denotes the
identity matrix.
The rst part of (2) corresponding to the dynamics of the
COM is the simple linear dynamics
M
rc
r
c
+G +D
r
= l
G
(3)
which can be used to produce the desired forces from the
ground for dynamic balancing of the biped.
There are some useful properties for the dynamics of COM
listed as follows.
Property 1: Matrix M
rc
is symmetric and positive denite.
Fig. 1 Biped robot
www.ietdl.org
162 IET Control Theory Appl., 2013, Vol. 7, Iss. 2, pp. 161175
& The Institution of Engineering and Technology 2013 doi: 10.1049/iet-cta.2012.0066
Property 2: There exist some nite unknown positive
constants q
1
, q
2
, q
3
such that q, q [ R
n
, M
rc
q
1
,
G q
2
, and supD
r
q
3
.
The second part of (2) corresponding to the dynamics of
trunks is the non-linear dynamics
M(q) q +C(q, q) q +D
q
= t +J
T
l
G
(4)
In the following section, we will eliminate the constraints
force to obtain the reduced dynamics for (4), which
involves only the selected independent variables and
dependent variables that are related through a Jacobian
matrix for the single-support (SS), impact, and double-
support (DS).
3 Ground constraints
The following constraints need to be considered for neither
foot can penetrate the ground, the knee joints cannot extend
beyond the fully straight position, and both feet are
assumed not to slide when in contact with the ground.
3.1 Non-holonomic constraints
Consider no-slip between each foot and the ground. The
biped is subjected to non-holonomic constraint with matrix
J
n
. Assume that the l non-integrable and independent
velocity constraints can be
J
n
(q) q = 0 (5)
where J
n
(q) [ R
ln
.
Since J
n
(q) [ R
ln
, it is always possible to nd an l
rank matrix S(q) [ R
n(nl)
formed by a set of smooth
and linearly independent vector elds spanning the
null space of J
n
(q), that is, S
T
(q)J
T
n
(q) = 0. Since
S(q) = [s
1
(q), . . . , s
nl
(q)] is formed by a set of smooth
and linearly independent vector spanning the null space
of J
n
(q), there exists dene an auxiliary time function
z(t) = [ z
1
(t), . . . , z
nl
(t)]
T
[ R
nl
, such that
q = S(q) z(t) = s
1
(q) z
1
(t) + +s
nl
(q) z
nl
(t) (6)
It is easy to have
q =

S(q) z +S(q) z (7)
Considering (6) and (7), we can rewrite (4) as
M(q)S(q) z +[M(q)

S(q) +C(q, q)S(q)] z +D

q
= t +J
T
n
(q)l
n
+J
T
h
(q)l
h
(8)
Multiplying (8) by S
T
(q), we have
M
1
z +C
1
z +D
1
= S
T
t +S
T
J
T
h
l
h
(9)
where M
1
= S
T
(q)M(q)S(q), C
1
= S
T
(q)[M(q)

S(q) +C(q, q)
S(q)], and D
1
= S
T
(q)D
q
.
The force multiplier l
n
can be obtained by (8)
l
n
= Z
1
((M(q)

S(q) +C(q, q)S(q)) z +D

q
t J
T
h
l
h
) (10)
where Z
1
= (J
n
(q)M
1
(q)J
T
n
(q))
1
J
n
(q)M
1
(q). Consider the
control input decoupled into the locomotion control t
a
and
the interactive force control t
b
as t = t
a
J
T
n
t
b
. Then, (9)
and (10) can be changed to
M
1
z +C
1
z +D
1
= S
T
t
a
+S
T
J
T
h
l
h
(11)
l
n
= Z
1
([M(q)

S(q) +C(q, q)S(q)] z +D

q
t
a
J
T
h
l
h
) +t
b
(12)
3.2 Holonomic constraints
Assume that both feet are in contact with a certain
constrained surface (z) that is represented as ((z)) = 0,
where ((z)) is a given scalar function, x(z) [ R
m
denotes the position vector of the end-effector in contact
with the environment.
Remark 1: Assume that the constraint surface is rigid and
has a continuous gradient. The Jacobian J =
x
z
is of full
row rank m, such that the joint coordinate z can be
partitioned into z = [z
h
, z
c
]
T
where z
h
[ R
nlm
and
z
c
[ R
m
, with z
c
= V(z
h
) with a non-linear mapping
function () from an open set R
nlm
R R
m
. The
terms V/z
h
,
2
V/q
2
h
, V/t,
2
V/t
2
exist and are
bounded in the workspace.
It is easy to have matrix J(z) = J
h
S = V/z, which can
be partitioned as J(z) = [J
1
, J
2
] with J
1
= V/z
h
and J
2
= V/z
c
, and the Jacobian matrix J
2
[ R
mm
never degenerates in the set . It is easy to have z = H z
h
with H = I
nlm
J
1
J
1
2
_ _
T
, where H(q) is full column
rank if and only if J
1
2
exists. There exists a matrix
J
T
such that H
T
J
T
= 0. Consider the control input
S
T
(q)t
a
decoupled into t
a1
and the force control t
a2
as
S
T
(q)t
a
= t
a1
J
T
t
a2
, and z = H z
h
, a reduced-order
model is obtained by taking the above constraints into
consideration, one obtains
M
2
z
h
+C
2
z
h
+D
2
= U (13)
l
h
= Z
2
[C
1
z +D
1
t
a1
] +t
a2
(14)
where M
2
= H
T
M
1
H, Z
2
= (JM
1
1
J
T
)
1
JM
1
1
, C
2
= H
T
[M
1

H +C
1
H], D
2
= H
T
D
1
, U = H
T
t
a1
.
From (12) and (14), it is easy to have
l
h
= Z
2
(q)H
+T
(q)M
2
(q) z
h
+t
a2
(15)
l
n
= Z
1
(q)S
+T
(q)M
1
(q) z +t
b
(16)
where H
+
(q) = H(q)(H
T
(q)H(q))
1
is the pseudo-inverse of
H(q) and S
+
(q) = S(q)(S
T
(q)S(q))
1
is the pseudo-inverse
of S(q).
Remark 2 [27]: Matrices H
+
(q) and S
+
(q) exist and are
bounded for all q.
Property 3: Matrix M
2
is symmetric and positive denite and
matrix

M
2
2C
2
is skew-symmetric.
Property 4: There exists a unknown nite-positive vector
C = [c
1
, c
2
, c
3
, c
4
]
T
with c
i
. 0, such that q, q [ R
n
,
M
2
c
1
, C
2
c
2
+c
3
q, sup
t0
D
2
c
4
.
www.ietdl.org
IET Control Theory Appl., 2013, Vol. 7, Iss. 2, pp. 161175 163
doi: 10.1049/iet-cta.2012.0066 & The Institution of Engineering and Technology 2013
Property 5: All Jacobian matrices are uniformly bounded
and uniformly continuous if q is uniformly bounded and
continuous.
According to the denition of (13), z
hj
is denoted as the jth
element of z
h
[ R
(nlm)
, and z
h
= [z
h1
, z
h2
, . . . , z
h(nlm)
]
T
,
M
2
= [m
ji
]
(nlm)(nlm)
, C
2
= [c
ji
]
(nlm)(nlm)
, D
2
=
[d
j
]
(nlm)1
, then we can obtain the jth local dynamics as
m
jj
z
hj
+c
jj
(q, q) z
hj
+d
j
+

nlm
i=1,i=j
m
ji
z
hi
+

nlm
i=1,i=j
c
ji
(q, q) z
hi
= U
j
(17)
Remark 3: As in the scheme for the biped, the local
dynamics (17) consists of two parts: the rst part is
the local dynamics of each subsystem with parameter
uncertainty and local disturbances, and the second part is
the interconnections among these subsystems. Since the
bound on the parameter uncertainty and disturbances of
each subsystems depend on local variables and are
relatively easy to obtain, their effects can be compensated
separately by designing a control for each of them to reduce
conservativeness.
4 Impact model
The impact between the swing foot and the ground is
assumed as a rigid collision. We make two assumptions
on the impact model: (i) there is kinetic energy reduction
at every impact and; (ii) the impact velocity becomes very
small and the legs have no bounce. If we assume that the
impact occurs over an innitesimally small period of time,
then (1) all velocities remain nite and; (2) there is no
change in position of the system. If t is the duration of
collision and F
ext
is the impact force during collision,
then the force impulse because of the impact at time is
given by
M
2
( z
+
h
z

h
) = F
ext
(t, z
h
, z
h
) (18)
where z
+
h
( z

h
) denotes the velocity just after (respectively,
before) an impact.
The rst assumption about the kinetic energy reduction
at impact is given by K
+
K

= DK 0, where
K

=
1
2
( z

h
)
T
M
2
( z

h
) and K
+
=
1
2
( z
+
h
)
T
M
2
( z
+
h
) denote the
pre-impact and post-impact kinetic energy, respectively. The
second assumption leads to F(z
h
) = 0. Then J = F/z
h
,
then we have that
J z
h
= 0 (19)
and F
ext
= J
T
l
f
where l
f
= [l
ft
, l
fn
] with l
ft
and l
fn
corresponding to the tangential and normal forces at the
moment of impact.
5 Control objective
In order to balance the biped, we should give the desired
position r
d
c
and velocity r
d
c
for the COM. Therefore the
rst control objective is to design a balancing control such
that the tracking error of r
c
and r
c
from their respective
desired trajectories r
d
c
and r
d
c
to be within a small
neighbourhood of zero, that is, r
c
r
d
c
1
1
, and
r
c
r
d
c
1
2
. The desired reference trajectory z
d
h
is
assumed to be bounded and uniformly continuous, and has
bounded and uniformly continuous derivatives up to the
second order.
The second control objective can be specied as designing
a controller that ensures the tracking error of z
h
from
their respective desired trajectories z
d
h
to be within a
small neighbourhood of zero, that is, z
h
(t) z
d
h
e
1
,
z
h
(t) z
d
h
e
2
where e
1
. 0 and e
2
. 0. Ideally, e
1
and
e
2
should be the threshold of measurable noise.
In order to avoid the slipping or slippage and tip-over, from
(3), r
c
r
d
c
brings the ground applied constraints force
to a desired value l
d
G
= [l
dT
n
, l
dT
h
]
T
; therefore the constraint
force errors and (l
G
l
d
G
) should be to be within a small
neighbourhood of zero, that is, l
G
l
d
G
6, where > 0
is the threshold of measurable noise. For the impact phase,
we should guarantee the system stability during the
transition phase.
The controller design will consist of two stages: (i) a virtual
control input l
d
G
is designed, so that the subsystems (3)
converge to the desired trajectory, and (ii) the actual control
input is designed in such a way that z
h
z
d
h
and l
G
l
d
G
to be stabilised to the origin.
Lemma 1: For x > 0 and 1, we have ln(cosh(x)) +d x.
Proof: If x 0, we have
_
x
0
2
e
2s
+1
ds ,
_
x
0
2
e
2s
ds = 1 e
2x
, 1
Therefore ln(cosh(x)) +d ln(cosh(x)) +
_
x
0
2
e
2s
+1
ds with
1. Let
f (x) = ln(cosh(x)) +
_
x
0
2
e
2s
+1
ds x
we have

f (x) = tanh(x) +
2
e
2x
+1
1
=
e
x
e
x
e
x
+e
x
+
2
e
2x
+1
1 = 0
From the mean value theorem, we have
f (x) f (0) =

f (x)(x 0)
Since f(0) = 0, we have
f (x) = 0
that is, ln(cosh(x)) +
_
x
0
2
e
2s
+1
ds = x, then, we have
ln(cosh(x)) +d x. This completes the proof.
Remark 4: Lemma 1 is used to facilitate the control design.
www.ietdl.org
164 IET Control Theory Appl., 2013, Vol. 7, Iss. 2, pp. 161175
& The Institution of Engineering and Technology 2013 doi: 10.1049/iet-cta.2012.0066
Assumption 1: Time-varying positive function f (t) converges
to zero as t and satises
lim
t1
_
t
0
f (v) dv = @ , 1
with a nite constant .
6 Adaptive robust control
6.1 Balancing control
For subsystem (3), we can dene
e
c
= r
c
r
d
c
(20)
r
r
c
= r
d
c
L
c
e
c
(21)
s = e
c
+L
c
e
c
(22)
with L
c
being diagonal constant matrix.
Considering (21) and (22), we can rewrite (3) as
M
r
s = l
G
D (23)
D = M
r
r
r
c
+G +D
r
(24)
where M
r
is diagonal and l
G
[ R
3
.
Lemma 2: Consider Property 2, the upper bound of kth
sub-vector D
k
of satises
D
k
ln (cosh(C
k
)) +d (25)
where 1 is a small function, C
k
= g
T
k
w
k
with w
k
=
[1, sup s
k
]
T
, and g
k
= [g
k1
, g
k2
]
T
is a vector of positive
constants dened below.
Proof: According to Property 2, the upper bound of D
k
satises
D
k
q
1
r
d
ck
L e
ck
+q
2
+q
3
q
1
r
d
ck

+q
1
L e
ck
+q
2
+q
3
(26)
Consider the linear system dened by e
ck
= Le
ck
+s
k
,
e
ck
(0) = e
0
. Since the matrix is Hurwitz, there exist
constants b
1
, b
2
, b
3
and b
4
such that e
ck
(t) b
1
e
ck0
+
b
2
sup s
k
and e
ck
(t) b
3
e
ck0
+b
4
sup s
k
.
Substituting the later equation into (26), we could nally
obtain D
k
g
k1
+g
k2
sup s
k
.
For the kth vector l
Gk
, we can design the desired producing
constrain force l
Gk
as
l
Gk
= Y
k
s
k
ln(cosh(

C
k
))sgn(s
k
) d sgn(s
k
)

C
k
= g
T
k
w
k
(27)

g
k
= h g
k
+kw
k
s
k
(28)
where the designed constant Y
k
. 0, k . 0, if s
k
0,
sgn(s
k
) = 1, else sgn(s
k
) = 1; 1 and in the simulation,
we choose d = 1 +
1
(1+t)
2
; and satises Assumption 1, that
is, lim
t1
h(t) = 0 and lim
t1
_
t
0
h(v)dv = @
h
, 1 with
the nite constant @
h
, that is, can be chosen as
1
(1+t)
2
.
Remark 5: A control block diagram that summarises the
control is shown in Fig. 2. The proposed approach is
based generally on the idea of duality of control with
respect to position and force, as well as to the
orthogonality of the subspaces of possible displacements
and reaction forces of a robot in contact with the
environment. Consider the position of the base (COM) is
stabilised by the force control, the required force is
realised by the ground reaction force. While the posture
and the joint angle are used to project dynamics on the
reduced motion subspace of the generalised coordinates. A
computed torque method can be established to linearise
the motion subproblem. Once this is done, a force control
will follow as in any other hybrid control scheme. Thus,
the proposed control (26) and (41)(43) constitute one of
the main contributions of this paper, as seen in Fig. 2,
achieves global tracking convergence. Once we have
decouple linearised the position and force patterns, we will
proceed to synthesise respectively a full-order feedback
controller for the position loop and an proportional action
to regulate the force loop.
Theorem 1: Consider the dynamics of COM described by (3),
using the control law (27) and the adaptive law (28), the
following hold for any (r
c
(0), r
c
(0)):
(i) r
c
= [r
c1
, r
c2
, r
c3
]
T
converges to the desired trajectory
r
d
c
= [r
d
c1
, r
d
c2
, r
d
c3
]
T
as t ;
(ii) e
ck
and e
ck
converge to 0 as t , and l
G
is bounded for
t 0.
Proof: To facilitate the control design, consider the following
Lyapunov function candidate with

() = ()

() as
V =
1
2
s
T
M
rc
s +

3
k=1

2
i=1
1
2k
g
ki
g
ki
(29)
The derivative of V along (23) is given by

V = s
T
M
rc
s +

3
k=1

2
i=1
1
k
g
ki

g
ki
=

3
k=1
s
k
[l
Gk
D
k
] +

3
k=1

2
i=1
1
k
g
ki

g
ki
(30)
Fig. 2 Control structure
www.ietdl.org
IET Control Theory Appl., 2013, Vol. 7, Iss. 2, pp. 161175 165
doi: 10.1049/iet-cta.2012.0066 & The Institution of Engineering and Technology 2013
Integrating (27) into (30), we have

3
k=1
s
k
[l
Gk
D
k
] +

3
k=1

2
i=1
1
k
g
ki

g
ki
=

3
k=1
s
k
[Y
k
s
k
ln(cosh(

C
k
))sgn(s
k
)
dsgn(s
k
) D
k
] +

3
k=1

2
i=1
1
k
g
ki

g
ki
=

3
k=1
Y
k
s
2
k

3
k=1
ds
k
+

3
k=1

2
i=1
g
ki

g
ki

3
k=1
s
k
ln(cosh(

C
k
))sgn(s
k
)

3
k=1
s
k
D
k

3
k=1
Y
k
s
2
k

3
k=1
ds
k

3
k=1
s
k
ln(cosh(

C
k
)) +

3
k=1
s
k
D
k

3
k=1

2
i=1
h
k
g
ki
g
ki

3
k=1

2
i=1
g
ki
w
ki
s
k
(31)
Considering Lemmas 1 and 2 and using g
ki
g
ki
= g
ki
(g
ki

g
ki
) = (1/4)g
2
ki
((1/2)g
ki
g
ki
)
2
(1/4)g
2
ki
, we have

3
k=1
Y
k
s
2
k

3
k=1
s
k
ln(cosh(

C
k
))
+

3
k=1
s
k
ln(cosh(C
k
)

3
k=1

2
i=1
g
ki
w
ki
s
k

3
k=1

2
i=1
h
k
g
ki
g
ki

3
k=1
Y
k
s
2
k
+

3
k=1

2
i=1
h
k
g
ki
g
ki

3
k=1
Y
k
s
2
k
+
1
4

3
k=1

2
i=1
h
k
g
2
ki
(32)
Since (1/4)

3
k=1

2
i=1
h
k
g
2
ki
is bounded and converges
to zero as t by noting lim
t1
h = 0, there exists
t . t
1
, (1/4)

3
k=1

2
i=1
h
k
g
2
ki
@
2
, when |s
k
|
....
@
2
Y
min
_
,
with Y
min
= min(Y
1
, Y
2
, . . . , Y
nlm
),

V 0, from above
all, s
k
converges to a small set containing the origin as
t .Integrating both sides of the above equation gives
V(t) V(0) ,
_
t
0

3
k=1
Y
k
s
2
k
ds +
1
4

3
k=1

2
i=1
@
h
k
g
2
ki
(33)
by noting lim
t1
h = 0, and lim
t1
_
t
0
h(v)dv = @
h
, 1.
Thus V is bounded, which implies that s [ L
1
. From
s = e
c
+Le
c
, it can be obtained that e
c
, e
c
[ L
1
. As we
have established e
c
, e
c
[ L
1
, we conclude that r
c
, r
c
,
r
c
[ L
1
.
Therefore all the signals on the right-hand side of (3) are
bounded, it is easy to conclude that l
G
is bounded from
(27).
6.2 Posture control
Since the dynamics uncertainties of the system, such as
dynamics parameters and disturbances in the system, are
usually hard to measure and construct, we need to estimate
those uncertainties in this paper, we develop robust control
combing on-line parameters identication.
Let
e = z
h
z
d
h
(34)
z
r
h
= z
d
h
L
h
e (35)
r = e +L
h
e (36)
with L
h
being diagonal positive-denite constant matrix.
Considering (35) and (36), we can rewrite (13) as
M
2
r +C
2
r = U J (37)
J = M
2
z
r
h
+C
2
z
r
h
+D
2
(38)
According to the denition of J [ R
(nlm)
, we denote
J
k
, k = 1, 2, . . . , (n l m) as the kth elements of J,
which corresponds to the kth equation in the dynamics
of the jth sub-system. Similarly, we denote r
k
as the kth
element of r [ R
(nlm)
, and in addition, denote r =
[r
1
, r
2
, . . . , r
nlm
]
T
.
We dene the kth component of trunk dynamics in (37) as

nlm
j=1
m
kj
r
j
+

nlm
j=1
c
kj
(q, q)r
j
= U
k
J
k
(39)
Lemma 3: Consider Property 4, the upper bound of Jsatises
J
k
ln( cosh (F
k
)) +d (40)
where is a small function, F
j
= a
T
k
w with w =
[1, supr, supr
2
]
T
, and a
k
= [a
k1
, a
k2
, a
k3
]
T
is a
vector of positive constants dened below.
Proof: According to Property 4, the upper bound of J
k
satises
J
k
c
1
z
d
hk
L e
k
+(c
2
+c
3
z
d
hk
+ e
k
) z
d
hk
Le
k

+c
4
+c
5
c
1
z
d
hk
+c
1
L e
k
+c
2
z
d
hk
+c
2
Le
k

+c
3
z
d
hk

2
+c
3
z
d
hk
Le
k
+c
3
e
k
z
d
hk

+c
3
Le
k
e
k
+c
4
+c
5
c
1
z
d
hk
+c
2
z
d
hk
+c
3
z
d
hk

2
+c
4
+c
5
+(c
2
L +c
3
z
d
hk
L)e
k
+c
3
Le
k
e
k

+(c
1
L +c
3
z
d
hk
) e
k

b
1
+b
2
e
k
+b
3
e
k
+b
4
e
k

2
+b
5
e
k

2
(41)
www.ietdl.org
166 IET Control Theory Appl., 2013, Vol. 7, Iss. 2, pp. 161175
& The Institution of Engineering and Technology 2013 doi: 10.1049/iet-cta.2012.0066
where b
1
= c
1
z
d
hk
+c
2
z
d
hk
+c
3
z
d
hk

2
+c
4
+c
5
, b
2
=
c
2
L +c
3
z
d
hk
L, b
3
= c
1
L +c
3
z
d
hk
, b
4
=
1
2
c
3
L,
b
5
= b
4
.
Consider the linear system dened by e
k
= Le
k
+r
k
,
e
k
(0) = e
0
. Since matrix is Hurwitz, there exist
constants a
1
, a
2
, a
3
and a
4
, such that e
k
(t)
a
1
e
k0
+a
2
supr
k
and e
k
(t) a
3
e
k0
+a
4
supr
k
.
Substituting these two equations into (41), we could nally
obtain J
k
a
k1
+a
k2
supr
k
+a
k3
supr
k

2
.
We propose the following control for the biped
U
k
= k
k
r
k
ln(cosh(

F
k
))sgn(r
k
) dsgn(r
k
) (42)
t
a2
= l
d
h
K
h
(l
h
l
d
h
) (43)
t
b
= l
d
n
K
n
(l
n
l
d
n
) (44)

F
k
= a
T
k
w
k

a
k
= S a
k
+Gw
k
r
k

(45)
where k
k
. 0, > 1, if r
k
0, sgn(r
k
) = 1, else
sgn(r
k
) = 1, and > 0, satises Assumption 1, such as,
lim
t1
S = 0, and lim
t1
_
t
0
S(v)dv = r
S
, 1 with the
nite constant r
S
, that is, S =
1
(1+t)
2
. It is observed that the
controller (42) only adopt the local feedback information.
Theorem 2: Consider the mechanical system described by
(13) and its dynamics model (39), using the control law
(42) and (45), the following hold for any (z
h
(0), z
h
(0)):
1. r
k
converges to a set containing the origin as t;
2. e
k
and e
k
converge to 0 as t; and are bounded for all
t 0; and
3. l
G
l
d
G
= [e
T
h
, e
T
n
]
T
= [(l
h
l
d
h
)
T
, (l
n
l
d
n
)
T
]
T
is
bounded and can be made arbitrarily small.
Proof: To facilitate the control design, consider the following
Lyapunov function with a
k
= a
k
a
k
as
V =
1
2
r
T
M
2
r +

n1m
k=1

3
i=1
1
2G
a
ki
a
ki
(46)
The derivative of V along (39) is given by (see (47))
Considering Property 3, and integrating (42) into (47), we
have

nlm
k=1
r
k
[U
k
J
k
] +

nlm
k=1

3
i=1
1
G
a
ki

a
ki
=

nlm
k=1
r
k
[ k
k
r
k
ln(cosh (

F
k
))sgn(r
k
)
dsgn(r
k
) J
k
]
+

nlm
k=1

3
i=1
a
ki
G
1

a
ki
=

nlm
k=1
k
k
r
2
k

nlm
k=1
dr
k
+

nlm
k=1

3
i=1
a
ki
G
1

a
iki

nlm
k=1
r
k
ln(cosh(

F
k
))sgn(r
k
)

nlm
k=1
r
k
J
k

nlm
k=1
k
k
r
2
k

nlm
k=1
dr
k

nlm
k=1
r
k
ln(cosh (

F
k
)) +

nlm
k=1
r
k
J
k

nlm
k=1

3
i=1
S
G
a
ki
a
ki

nlm
k=1

3
i=1
a
ki
w
ki
r
k

(48)
Considering Lemmas 1 and 3 and using a
ki
a
ki
= a
ki
(a
ki

a
ki
) = (1/4)a
2
ki
((1/2)a
ki
a
ki
)
2
(1/4)a
2
ki
, we have

nlm
k=1
k
k
r
2
k

nlm
k=1
r
k
ln(cosh (

F
k
))
+

nlm
k=1
r
k
ln(cosh (F
k
)

nlm
k=1

3
i=1
a
ki
w
ki
r
k

nlm
k=1

3
i=1
S
G
a
ki
a
ki

nlm
k=1
k
k
r
2
k
+

nlm
k=1

3
i=1
S
G
a
ki
a
ki

nlm
k=1
k
k
r
2
k
+
1
4

nlm
k=1

3
i=1
S
G
a
2
ki
(49)
Since (1/4)

nlm
k=1

3
i=1
S
G
a
2
ki
is bounded and converges to

V =
1
2
[r
T

M
2
r + r
T
M
2
r +r
T
M
2
r] +

nlm
k=1

3
i=1
1
G
a
ki

a
ki
=
1
2

nlm
k=1

nlm
j=1
r
k
m
kj
r
j
+

nlm
k=1

nlm
j=1
r
k
m
kj
r
j
+

nlm
k=1

3
i=1
1
G
a
ki

a
ki
=

nlm
k=1
r
k

nlm
j=1
1
2
m
kj
r
j

nlm
j=1
c
kj
r
j
+U
k
J
k
_ _
+

nlm
k=1

3
i=1
1
G
a
ki

a
ki
(47)
www.ietdl.org
IET Control Theory Appl., 2013, Vol. 7, Iss. 2, pp. 161175 167
doi: 10.1049/iet-cta.2012.0066 & The Institution of Engineering and Technology 2013
zero as t by noting lim
t1
G = 0, there exists t . t
1
,
1
4

nlm
k=1

3
i=1
S
G
a
2
ki
r
3
with a nite small constant r
3
,
when |r
k
|
....
r
3
k
min
_
with k
min
= min(k
1
, k
2
, . . . , k
nlm
),

V 0, from above all, r

k
converges to a small set
containing the origin as t.
Integrating both sides of the above equation gives
V(t) V(0) ,
_
t
0

nlm
k=1
k
k
r
2
k
ds +
1
4

nlm
k=1

3
i=1
r
G
a
2
ki
(50)
Table 1 Range of each joint for the biped robot
Range of joint
angel for human
Range of joint
angle for our robot
leg
hip roll 45

20

40

20

pitch 125

15

130

40

yaw 45

45

45

45

knee pitch 0

130

150

ankle roll 20

30

30

40

pitch 20

45

50

45

toe pitch 45

30

30

Fig. 3 Video snapshots of walking

12.0 9.0 6.0 3.0 0.0
0.0
1.0
0.5
0.0
-0.5
-1.0
-1.5
Analysis: LastRun_Adaptive 2012-05-28 13:04:47
Joint Angles of Left Lower Limb
Time (sec)
A
n
g
l
e

(
r
a
d
)
Actual_Left_Ankle_Pitch
Desired_Left_Ankle_Pitch
Actual_Left_Ankle_Roll
Desired_Left_Ankle_Roll
Actual_Left_Hip_Pitch
Desired_Left_Hip_Pitch
Actual_Left_Hip_Roll
Desired_Left_Hip_Roll
Actual_Left_Knee_Pitch
Desired_Left_Knee_Pitch
Fig. 4 Trajectories of left leg (unit: rad) under adaptive control
www.ietdl.org
168 IET Control Theory Appl., 2013, Vol. 7, Iss. 2, pp. 161175
& The Institution of Engineering and Technology 2013 doi: 10.1049/iet-cta.2012.0066
by noting lim
t1
S = 0, and lim
t1
_
t
0
S(v)dv = r
S
, 1.
Thus V is bounded, which implies that r [ L
1
. From
r = e +Le, it can be obtained that e, e [ L
1
. As we have
established e, e [ L
1
, we conclude that z
h
, z
h
, z
h
[ L
1
.
Therefore all the signals on the right-hand side of (39) are
bounded, it is easy to conclude that U
k
is bounded from (42).
We substitute the control t
a2
= l
d
h
K
h
(l
h
l
d
h
) and
t
b
= l
d
n
K
n
(l
n
l
d
n
) with the constant matrices of
proportional control feedback gains K
h
and K
n
into the
reduced order dynamics (15) and (16) yielding (K
h
+1)
(l
d
h
l
h
) = Z
2
(q)H
+T
(q)M
2
(q) z
h
, (K
n
+1)(l
d
n
l
n
) =
Z
1
S
+T
(q)M
1
(q) z. Since z
h
z
d
h
, z
h
z
d
h
, z
h
z
d
h
, z z
d
,
z z
d
, z z
d
; therefore Z
2
(q)H
+T
(q)M
2
(q) and
Z
1
S
+T
(q)M
1
(q) are bounded; therefore the size of (l
h
l
d
h
)
and (l
n
l
d
n
) are bounded and can be regulated by
choosing suitable K
n
and K
h
to arbitrary small.
12.0 9.0 6.0 3.0 0.0
0.0
4.5E+005
4.0E+005
3.5E+005
3.0E+005
2.5E+005
2.0E+005
1.5E+005
1.0E+005
50000.0
0.0
-50000.0
Analysis: LastRun_Adaptive 2012-05-28 13:04:47
Joint Torques of Left Lower Limb
Time (sec)
T
o
r
q
u
e

(
N
*
m
m
)
torque_LAP
torque_LAR
torque_LHP
torque_LHR
torque_RAP
Fig. 5 Torques of left leg (unit: Nmm) under adaptive control
12.0 9.0 6.0 3.0 0.0
0.0
1.5
1.0
0.5
0.0
-0.5
-1.0
Analysis: LastRun_Adaptive 2012-05-28 13:04:47
Joint Angles of Right Lower Limb
Time (sec)
A
n
g
l
e

(
r
a
d
)
Actual_Right_Ankle_Pitch
Desired_Right_Ankle_Pitch
Actual_Right_Ankle_Roll
Desired_Right_Ankle_Roll
Actual_Right_Hip_Pitch
Desired_Right_Hip_Pitch
Actual_Right_Hip_Roll
Desired_Right_Hip_Roll
Actual_Right_Knee_Pitch
Desired_Right_Knee_Pitch
Fig. 6 Trajectories of right leg (unit: rad) under adaptive control
www.ietdl.org
IET Control Theory Appl., 2013, Vol. 7, Iss. 2, pp. 161175 169
doi: 10.1049/iet-cta.2012.0066 & The Institution of Engineering and Technology 2013
Remark 6: From the designed controller (25), (40), (41) and
(42), the control does not use the dynamics information,
that is, the dynamics are unknown for the controller.
Although the unmodelled dynamics exists, and it is
suppressed by the proposed control and the system
stability is achieved, the following simulation veries the
effectiveness of the proposed control.
7 Switching stability
For the system switching stability between the single support
and double support, we give the following theoremas follows:
Theorem 3: Consider system (13) with single support phase
and the double support phase, if the system is both stable
12.0 9.0 6.0 3.0 0.0
0.0
5.0E+005
4.0E+005
3.0E+005
2.0E+005
1.0E+005
0.0
-1.0E+005
Analysis: LastRun_Adaptive 2012-05-28 13:04:47
Joint Torques of Right Lower Limb
Time (sec)
T
o
r
q
u
e

(
N
*
m
m
)
torque_RAP
torque_RAR
torque_RHP
torque_RHR
torque_RKN
Fig. 7 Torques of right leg (unit: Nmm) under adaptive control
12.0 9.0 6.0 3.0 0.0
0.0
3000.0
2500.0
2000.0
1500.0
1000.0
500.0
0.0
-500.0
2012-05-27 23:50:13
Centroid
Time (sec)
L
e
n
g
t
h

(
m
m
)
.body.CM_Position.X
.body.CM_Position.Y
.body.CM_Position.Z
Fig. 8 Position of COM under adaptive control, Z-axis is the forward direction
www.ietdl.org
170 IET Control Theory Appl., 2013, Vol. 7, Iss. 2, pp. 161175
& The Institution of Engineering and Technology 2013 doi: 10.1049/iet-cta.2012.0066
before and after the switching phase using the control law
(42), even if there exist external impacts during the
switching, the system is also stable during the switching
phase.
Let V

=
1
2
( z

h
z
h
)
T
M
2
( z

h
z
h
) and V
+
=
1
2
( z
+
h
z
h
)
T
M
2
( z
+
h
z
h
) denote the Lyapunov function candidate before
and after the switching, and z
+
h
and z

h
represent the post-
and pre-switch velocities, and z
h
denotes the single-support
or double support velocity, respectively. The Lyapunov
function change during the switching can be simplied as
follows: DV=V
+
V

=K
+
K

[ z
+T
h
M
2
z
h
z
T
h
M
2
z
h
]=
DK z
T
h
M
2
( z
+
h
z

h
). Because the foot cannot be penetrated
into the ground; therefore z
h
should be on the tangential
plane of the ground, while D z
h
should be in the vertical
plane of the ground. Considering (18) and (19), we have
12.0 9.0 6.0 3.0 0.0
0.0
1.0
0.375
-0.25
-0.875
-1.5
Analysis: LastRun_PD_002 2012-05-27 17:25:10
Joint Angles of Left Lower Limb
Time (sec)
A
n
g
l
e

(
r
a
d
)
Actual_Left_Ankle_Pitch
Desired_Left_Ankle_Pitch
Actual_Left_Ankle_Roll
Desired_Left_Ankle_Roll
Actual_Left_Hip_Pitch
Desired_Left_Hip_Pitch
Actual_Left_Hip_Roll
Desired_Left_Hip_Roll
Actual_Left_Knee_Pitch
Desired_Left_Knee_Pitch
Fig. 9 Trajectories of left leg (unit: rad) under PD control
12.0 9.0 6.0 3.0 0.0
0.0
4.5E+005
4.0E+005
3.5E+005
3.0E+005
2.5E+005
2.0E+005
1.5E+005
100000.0
50000.0
0.0
Analysis: LastRun_PD_002 2012-05-27 17:25:10
Joint Torques of Left Lower Limb
Time (sec)
T
o
r
q
u
e

(
N
*
m
m
)
torque_LAP
torque_LAR
torque_LHP
torque_LHR
torque_LKN
Fig. 10 Torques of left leg (unit: Nmm) under PD control
www.ietdl.org
IET Control Theory Appl., 2013, Vol. 7, Iss. 2, pp. 161175 171
doi: 10.1049/iet-cta.2012.0066 & The Institution of Engineering and Technology 2013
DV = DK z
T
h
F
ext
= DK z
T
h
J
T
l
f
= DK , 0. Therefore
the Lyapunov function is decreasing during impact, the
motion of the system is also stable.
8 Simulations
Consider a 12-DOF biped robot shown in Fig. 1 modelling
using ADAMS, which consists of a torso, and a pair of legs
composed of six links. The left and right legs are numbered
Legs 1 and 2, respectively. The height of the biped is
1.2 m, the lower limbs are 460 mm, and the height of foot
is 90 mm, the weight is 22 kg. The range of each joint for
the biped in ADAMS is shown in Table 1, and inertia
parameters of the biped are listed in Table 2.
In this study, a cycloidal prole is used for the trajectories
of the hip and ankle joints of the swinging leg, which can be
12.0 9.0 6.0 3.0 0.0
0.0
1.5
1.0
0.5
0.0
-0.5
-1.0
Analysis: LastRun_PD_002 2012-05-27 17:25:10
Joint Angles of Right Lower Limb
Time (sec)
A
n
g
l
e

(
r
a
d
)
Actual_Right_Ankle_Pitch
Desired_Right_Ankle_Pitch
Actual_Right_Ankle_Roll
Desired_Right_Ankle_Roll
Actual_Right_Hip_Pitch
Desired_Right_Hip_Pitch
Actual_Right_Hip_Roll
Desired_Right_Hip_Roll
Actual_Right_Knee_Pitch
Desired_Right_Knee_Pitch
Fig. 11 Trajectories of right leg (unit: rad) under PD control
12.0 9.0 6.0 3.0 0.0
0.0
4.0E+005
3.0E+005
2.0E+005
1.0E+005
0.0
Analysis: LastRun_PD_002 2012-05-27 17:25:10
Joint Torques of Right Lower Limb
Time (sec)
T
o
r
q
u
e

(
N
*
m
m
)
torque_RAP
torque_RAR
torque_RHP
torque_RHR
torque_RKN
Fig. 12 Torques of right leg (unit: Nmm) under PD control
www.ietdl.org
172 IET Control Theory Appl., 2013, Vol. 7, Iss. 2, pp. 161175
& The Institution of Engineering and Technology 2013 doi: 10.1049/iet-cta.2012.0066
found in [33]. This prole is used because it shows a similar
pattern to a humans ankle trajectory in normal walking and
it describes a simple function, which can be easily changed
for different walking patterns. The equations are given as
follows: x
a
(i) =
a
p
[
2p
k
i sin(
2p
k
i)], z
a
(i) =
d
2
[1 cos(
2p
k
i)],
x
hip
(i) =
1
2
x
a
(i) +
a
2
, z
hip
(i) =
1
2
z
a
(i) +l
1
+l
2

d
2
, where x
hip
and z
hip
denote the positions of the hip, and x
a
and z
a
denote the positions of the swinging angle, a is the step
length, d is the height of the swinging ankle, is the total
sampling number of a step, and i is the sampling index, and
l
i
is the length of link i. In order to avoid the tumbling, we
design the lateral trajectory as y
h
(i) = 102.5 sin(
p
k
i), where
y
h
is the projection of COM on the ground such that the
position of COM is in the foot support area, n is the total
sampling number of a step, and i is the sampling index,
and 102.5 mm is the distance between the COM and
support leg. In the simulation, we choose the parameters
as a = 200 mm, d = 120 mm, and l
1
= 235.5 mm,
l
2
= 233.5 mm, = 200. Therefore we can obtain the every
joint in the working space. For the support leg, q
1
and q
2
,
the constraint equation is given by l
2
cos(q
2
) +l
3
cos(q
3
) =
z
hip
l
4
with the angle height l
4
. Therefore, q
2
is
independent coordinate, and q
3
= F(q
2
) =
cos
1 z
h
ipl
4
l
1
cos (q
2
)
l
3
we design the H = [1, 0, 0, 0;
F
q
1
, 0, 0,
0; 0, 1, 0, 0; 0, 0, 1, 0; 0, 0, 0, 1], J
n
= [0, 0, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 0,
1, 0; 0, 0, 0, 0,1, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1], S = [1
33
, 0
33
; 0
23
, 0
23
;
0
33
, 1
33
, 0
23
, 0
33
], l=4, m=2.
The parameters in the adaptive control are set as

q = [0.0, 0.0, 0.0]

T
, a = [0.0, , . . . , 0.0]
T
, and k = G =
diag[1.0], h = S = diag[
1
(1+t)
2
], d = 1 +
1
(1+t)
2
, the balance
control gain are choose as L
c
= diag[10] and
Y = [20 000, 20 000, 20 000]
T
. The posture control gain is
listed in Table 4. For comparison, we implement the PD
control in the biped robot, and the control is set as
t
i
= P
i
e
i
D
i
e
i
with e
i
= z
h
z
d
h
, and the control gain is
listed in Table 3.
The video snapshots are shown in Fig. 3. The positions
tracking for each joint proles of the left and right legs are
shown in Figs. 4 and 6. Similarly, the input torques for the
joints of the left and right leg are shown in Figs. 5 and 7.
The position of COM is shown in Fig. 8. For comparison
with the traditional PD control, Figs. 9 and 11 are the joint
positions using PD control, the corresponding input
torques are listed in Figs. 10 and 12. The summary of
Fig. 13 Sum of all joint position errors using adaptive robust control (red) and PD control (blue)
Table 2 Inertia parameters of the biped
Name Mass, kg
body 40.410
right hip yaw harmonic driver 0.981
left hip yaw harmonic driver 0.981
right hip 1.066
left hip 1.066
right hip pitch harmonic driver 0.979
left hip pitch harmonic driver 0.979
right thigh 1.006
left thigh 1.006
right knee motor 1 0.480
left knee motor 1 0.480
right hip pitch motor 0.480
left hip pitch motor 0.480
right knee motor 2 0.480
left knee motor 2 0.480
right knee harmonic driver 1.500
left knee harmonic driver 1.500
right knee bearing 4.624E-002
left knee bearing 4.624E-002
right shank 0.718
left shank 0.718
right ankle pitch motor 0.342
left ankle pitch motor 0.342
right ankle 1.943
left ankle 1.943
right foot 1.205
left foot 1.205
Table 3 Parameters in the PD control
Parameters Ankle pitch Ankle roll Hip pitch Hip roll Knee
P
i
400 000 29 998 500 2 500 000 35 500 000 900 000
D
i
40 000 3500 20 000 250 000 20 000
www.ietdl.org
IET Control Theory Appl., 2013, Vol. 7, Iss. 2, pp. 161175 173
doi: 10.1049/iet-cta.2012.0066 & The Institution of Engineering and Technology 2013
all joint tracking errors and all joint input torques are
shown in Fig. 13 using both PD control and adaptive
robust control, respectively, and we can see the tacking
errors using the proposed adaptive robust control are
bounded and especially smaller than PD control, that is,
the walking locomotion using adaptive control is more
stable since the robot could adaptively update the control
parameters online, while the PD control is without the
capability. Since the initial values of the dynamics are
assumed to be unknown for the controls in the
simulation, from these gures, even if the nominal
parameters of the system are uncertain, and the initial
disturbances boundedness from the environment are
unknown, we can obtain satisfactory performance by the
proposed control, which is veried by the ADAMS
environment.
9 Conclusions
In this paper, a structure of adaptive robust control has been
presented for a biped robot, which includes balancing
control and posture control for regulating the COM position
and trunk orientation of bipedal robots in a compliant way.
The biped robot can be decoupled into the decoupled
dynamics of COM. The trunks and the adaptive robust
control are constructed in the presence of parametric and
functional dynamics uncertainties. The controller computes
a desired ground reaction force required to stabilise the
posture with unknown dynamics of COM and then
transforms these forces into full-body joint torques even if
the external disturbances exist. The verication of the
proposed control has been conducted by using the extensive
simulations.
10 Acknowledgments
This work was supported by the Natural Science Foundation
of China under Grants 61174045, 61111130208, 60935001,
the International Science and Technology Cooperation
Programme of China under 0102011DFA10950, and the
Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities
(Grant no. 2011ZZ0104), National High Technology
Research and Development Programme of China (863,
2011AA040701), and the Program for New Century
Excellent Talents in University.
11 References
1 Ferreira, J.P., Crisostomo, M.M., Coimbra, A.P., Ribeiro, B.: Control of
a biped robot with support vector regression in sagittal plane, IEEE
Trans. Instrum. Meas., 2009, 58, (9), pp. 31673176
2 Xu, D., Li, Y.F., Tan, M., Shen, Y.: A new active visual system for
humanoid robots, IEEE Trans. Syst. Man Cybern. B, Cybern., 2008,
38, (2), pp. 320330
3 Braun, D.J., Goldfarb, M.: A control approach for actuated dynamic
walking in biped robots, IEEE Trans. Robot., 2009, 25, (6),
pp. 12921303
4 Gu, G.-Y., Zhu, L., Ding, H., Su, C.-Y.: Motion control of piezoelectric
positioning stages: modeling, controller design and experimental
evaluation, IEEE/ASME Trans. Mechatronics, 2012, pp. 113, doi:
10.1109/TMECH.2012.2203315, (In Press)
5 Li, H., Chow, M.-Y., Sun, Z.: EDA-based speed control of a networked
DC motor system, IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., 2009, 56, (5),
pp. 17271735
6 Chen, M., Chen, W.H.: Sliding mode controller design for a class
of uncertain nonlinear system based on disturbance observer,
Int. J. Adapt. Control Signal Process., 2010, 24, (1), pp. 5164
7 Chen, M., Jiang, B., Zou, J., Feng, X.: Robust adaptive tracking control
of the underwater robot with input nonlinearity using neural networks,
Int. J. Comput. Intell. Syst., 2010, 3, (5), pp. 646655
8 Chen, M., Jiang, C.S., Wu, Q.X.: Robust adaptive control of uncertain
time delay systems with FLS, Int. J. Innovative Comput., Inf. Control,
2008, 4, (8), pp. 19952004
9 Gu, G.-Y., Zhu, L., Xiong, Z., Ding, H.: Design of a distributed
multiaxis motion control system using the IEEE-1394 bus, IEEE
Trans. Ind. Electron., 2010, 57, (12), pp. 42094218
10 Li, H., Sun, Z., Chow, M.-Y., Sun, F.: Gain scheduling based state
feedback integral control for networked control systems, IEEE Trans.
Ind. Electron., 2011, 58, (6), pp. 24652472
11 Liu, Z., Zhang, Y., Wang, Y.: A type-2 fuzzy switching control system
for biped robots, IEEE Trans. Syst. Man Cybern. C, Appl. Rev., 2007,
37, (6), pp. 12021213
12 Morimoto, J., Atkeson, C.G.: Learning biped locomotion, IEEE Robot.
Autom. Mag., 2007, 14, (2), pp. 4151
13 Shih, C., Gruver, W.A.: Control of a biped robot in the double-support
phase, IEEE Trans. Syst. Man Cybern., 1992, 22, (4), pp. 729735
14 Furusho, J., Sano, A.: Sensor-based control of a nine-link biped,
Int. J. Robot. Res., 1990, 9, (2), pp. 8398
15 Grizzle, J.W., Abba, G., Plestan, F.: Asymptotically stable walking for
biped robots: analysis via systems with impulse effects, IEEE Trans.
Autom. Control, 46, 1, 2001, pp. 5164
16 Freidovich, L.B., Mettin, U., Shiriaev, A.S., Spong, M.W.: A passive
2-DOF walker: hunting for gaits using virtual holonomic constraints,
IEEE Trans. Robot., 2009, 25, (5), pp. 12021208
17 Tzafestas, S.G., Krikochoritis, T.E., Tzafestas, C.S.: Robust
sliding-mode control of nine-link biped robot walking, J. Intell.
Robot. Syst., 1997, 20, pp. 375402
18 Spong, M.W., Holm, J.K., Lee, D.: Passivity-based control of bipedal
locomotion, IEEE Robot. Autom. Mag., 2007, 14, (2), pp. 3040
19 Liu, Z., Li, C., Xu, W.: Hybrid control of biped robots in the
double-support phase via H-approach and fuzzy neural networks, IEE
Proc. Control Theory Appl., 2003, 150, (4), pp. 347354
20 Liu, Y.J., Wang, W.: Adaptive fuzzy control for a class of uncertain
nonafne nonlinear systems, Inf. Sci., 2007, 177, (18), pp. 39013917
21 Liu, Y.J., Wang, W., Tong, S.C., Liu, Y.S.: Robust adaptive tracking
control for nonlinear systems based on bounds of fuzzy approximation
parameters, IEEE Trans. Syst. Man Cybern. A, Syst. Humans, 2010,
40, (1), pp. 170184
22 Liu, Y.J., Tong, S.C., Wang, D., Li, T.S., Chen, C.L.P.: Adaptive neural
output feedback controller design with reduced-order observer for a
class of uncertain nonlinear SISO systems, IEEE Trans. Neural
Netw., 2011, 22, (8), pp. 13281334
23 Liu, Y.J., Tong, S.C., Chen, C.L.P.: Adaptive fuzzy control via
observer design for uncertain nonlinear systems with unmodeled
dynamics, IEEE Trans. Fuzzy Syst., 2012, doi: 10.1109/
TFUZZ.2012.2212200.
24 Li, Z., Ge, S.S., Adams, M., Wijesoma, W.S.: Robust adaptive control
of uncertain force/motion constrained nonholonomic mobile
manipulators, Automatica, 2008, 44, (3), pp. 776784
25 Lin, C., Chen, C.: Robust fault-tolerant control for a biped robot using a
recurrent cerebellar model articulation controller, IEEE Trans. Syst.
Man Cybern. B, Cybern., 2007, 37, (1), pp. 110123
26 Mu, X., Wu, Q.: On impact dynamics and contact events for biped
robots via impact effects, IEEE Trans. Syst., Man Cybern. B,
Cybern., 2006, 36, (6), pp. 13641372
27 Li, Z., Ge, S.S., Ming, A.: Adaptive robust motion/force control of
holonomic constrained nonholonomic mobile manipulators, IEEE
Trans. Syst. Man Cybern. B, 2007, 37, (3), pp. 607617
28 Vukobratovic, M., Borovac, B.: Zero-moment point thirty ve years of
its life, Int. J. Humanoid Robot., 2004, 1, (1), pp. 157173
29 Raibert, M.H., Chepponis, M., Brown, H.B.: Running on four legs as
though they were one, IEEEJ. Robot. Autom., 1986, RA-2, (2), pp. 7082
Table 4 Parameters in the adaptive control
Joints DOF
h
k
k
hip roll 20 250 000
hip pitch 125 20 000
knee pitch 45 20 000
angle roll 140 3500
angle pitch 10 40 000
www.ietdl.org
174 IET Control Theory Appl., 2013, Vol. 7, Iss. 2, pp. 161175
& The Institution of Engineering and Technology 2013 doi: 10.1049/iet-cta.2012.0066
30 Harada, K., Kajita, S., Kaneko, K., Hirukawa, H.: ZMP analysis for
arm/leg coordination. Proc. IEEE/RSJ Int. Conf. Intelligent Robots
and Systems, Las Vegas, NV, October 2003, pp. 7581
31 Hirai, K., Hirose, M., Haikawa, Y., Takenaka, T.: The development of
Honda humanoid robot. Proc. IEEE Int. Conf. Robotics and
Automation, Leuven, Belgium, 1998, vol. 2, pp. 13211326
32 Hyon, S., Hale, J.G., Cheng, G.: Full-body compliant human
Chumanoid interaction: balancing in the presence of unknown
external forces, IEEE Trans. Robot., 2007, 23, (5), pp. 884898
33 Juang, J.: Fuzzy neural network approaches for robotic gait
synthesis, IEEE Trans. Syst. Man. Cybern. B, Cybern., 2000, 30, (4),
pp. 594601
www.ietdl.org
IET Control Theory Appl., 2013, Vol. 7, Iss. 2, pp. 161175 175
doi: 10.1049/iet-cta.2012.0066 & The Institution of Engineering and Technology 2013