Have a personal or library account? Click to login

Integrating Disturbance Handling into Control Strategies for Swing-up And Stabilization of Rotary Inverted Pendulum

Journal of Automation, Mobile Robotics and Intelligent Systems
Volume 19 (2025): Issue 1 (March 2025)
By:
Open Access
|Mar 2025

Figures & Tables

Figure 1.

The 3D model of the RIP.
The 3D model of the RIP.

Figure 2.

The comparison results without external disturbance: (a) the pendulum angle, (b) the arm angle, and (c) the control signal of two controllers.
The comparison results without external disturbance: (a) the pendulum angle, (b) the arm angle, and (c) the control signal of two controllers.

Figure 3.

The Extended State Observer in the first scenario: (a) the pendulum angle velocity, (b) the arm angle velocity of the LQR controller, (c) the pendulum angle velocity, and (d) the arm angle velocity of the LQR-based SMC controller.
The Extended State Observer in the first scenario: (a) the pendulum angle velocity, (b) the arm angle velocity of the LQR controller, (c) the pendulum angle velocity, and (d) the arm angle velocity of the LQR-based SMC controller.

Figure 4.

The comparison results when there is external disturbance (a): the pendulum angle (b), the arm angle (c), and the control signal of two controllers (d).
The comparison results when there is external disturbance (a): the pendulum angle (b), the arm angle (c), and the control signal of two controllers (d).

Figure 5.

The Extended State Observer in the first scenario: (a) the pendulum angle velocity, (b) the arm angle velocity of the LQR controller, (c) the pendulum angle velocity, and (d) the arm angle velocity of the LQR-based SMC controller.
The Extended State Observer in the first scenario: (a) the pendulum angle velocity, (b) the arm angle velocity of the LQR controller, (c) the pendulum angle velocity, and (d) the arm angle velocity of the LQR-based SMC controller.

Figure 6.

The comparison results during changes in model parameters: (a) the pendulum angle and (b) the arm angle of two controllers.
The comparison results during changes in model parameters: (a) the pendulum angle and (b) the arm angle of two controllers.

The parameters of the pendulum_

SymbolDescriptionValuesUnits
mpPendulum’s mass0.125kg
LpPendulum’s length0.15m
LrRotary arm’s length0.15m
JpPendulum’s inertia moment2.3 × 10−4kgm2
JrInertia moment of arm9.4 × 10−4kgm2
BpViscous friction coefficient of the pendulum rod9.5 × 10−3-
BrViscous friction coefficient of the pendulum arm0.04-
KrMotor torque constant0.042Nm/A
KmMotor back EMF constant0.042Vs/rad
RmTerminal resistance2.6Ω
LmRotor Inductance0.85mH
gGravitational acceleration9.81m/s2
DOI: https://doi.org/10.14313/jamris-2025-002 | Journal eISSN: 2080-2145 | Journal ISSN: 1897-8649
Journal RSS Feed
Language: English
Page range: 7 - 16
Submitted on: Jan 13, 2024
Accepted on: Feb 8, 2024
Published on: Mar 31, 2025
Published by: Łukasiewicz Research Network – Industrial Research Institute for Automation and Measurements PIAP
In partnership with: Paradigm Publishing Services
Publication frequency: 4 times per year
Keywords:
Rotary inverted pendulum,
Stabilization,
Swing-up,
LQR controller,
Sliding mode controller,
LQR-based SMC controller
Related subjects:
Computer sciences,
Artificial intelligence,
Engineering,
Electrical engineering,
Control engineering, metrology and testing,
Mechanical engineering,
Fundamentals of mechanical engineering

© 2025 Thi-Van-Anh Nguyen, Ma-Sieu Phan, Quy-Thinh Dao, published by Łukasiewicz Research Network – Industrial Research Institute for Automation and Measurements PIAP
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 License.

Previous articleVolume 19 (2025): Issue 1 (March 2025)Next article