processes

Article
An Adaptive Discrete Integral Terminal Sliding Mode Control
Method for a Two-Joint Manipulator
Jianliang Xu 1 , Zhen Sui 2, *, Wenduo Wang 3 and Feng Xu 1,2

1 School of Mechanical and Electrical Engineering, Quzhou College of Technology, Quzhou 324000, China;
[email protected] (J.X.); [email protected] (F.X.)
2 College of Communication Engineering, Jilin University, Changchun 130022, China
3 China Railway Wuhan Bureau Group Co., Ltd. Wuhan EMU Depot, Wuhan 430080, China;
[email protected]
* Correspondence: [email protected]

Abstract: In response to the trajectory tracking control problem of manipulators under measurement
disturbances, a novel multi-input multi-output discrete integral terminal sliding mode control scheme
is proposed. Initially, this scheme establishes a dynamic model of a two-joint manipulator based
on the Lagrangian dynamics analysis method. Subsequently, a discrete integral terminal sliding
mode control law based on the dynamic model of the two joints is designed, incorporating delayed
estimation of unknown disturbances and discretization errors in the manipulator system. To enhance
the trajectory tracking accuracy of the control scheme and suppress the impact of sliding mode
chattering on the manipulator system, an adaptive switching term is introduced into the discrete
integral terminal sliding mode control law. The paper derives an adaptive discrete integral terminal
sliding mode control scheme and provides stability proof for the proposed approach. Simulation
experiments are conducted to compare the proposed adaptive discrete integral terminal sliding mode
control scheme with classical discrete sliding mode control schemes and discrete integral terminal
sliding mode control schemes. The simulation results demonstrate that the designed adaptive discrete
integral terminal sliding mode control scheme maintains trajectory tracking errors within 0.004 radians
for each joint of the manipulator, with minimal changes in control torque for each joint. The absolute
integral of the control torque variations is calculated at 5.85 × 103 , which is lower than other control
schemes, thereby validating the effectiveness and superiority of the proposed approach.
Citation: Xu, J.; Sui, Z.; Wang, W.; Xu,
F. An Adaptive Discrete Integral Keywords: adaptive control; discrete integral terminal sliding mode control; disturbance delay
Terminal Sliding Mode Control estimation; manipulator; trajectory tracking
Method for a Two-Joint Manipulator.
Processes 2024, 12, 1106. https://
doi.org/10.3390/pr12061106
1. Introduction
Academic Editor: Jan Pitel
With the rapid development of computer science and automation control technology,
Received: 24 March 2024 robotic arms have been widely utilized in high-precision industrial control applications [1].
Revised: 21 May 2024
Compared to traditional manual or semi-automatic control methods, robotic arms offer
Accepted: 25 May 2024
multiple advantages, such as high precision, efficiency, and versatility. However, in practical
Published: 28 May 2024
engineering applications, factors such as load conditions, external disturbances, and system
friction may lead to variations in control parameters, resulting in deviations in the motion
trajectory of robotic arms, especially in complex and unstructured scenarios where the
Copyright: © 2024 by the authors.
precision of trajectory control may decrease, making it difficult to meet high-precision
Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. requirements [2–4]. Therefore, achieving adaptive high-precision trajectory control of
This article is an open access article robotic arms in complex and nonlinear environments is currently a major focus of research
distributed under the terms and for the large-scale practical engineering application of robotic arms.
conditions of the Creative Commons Currently, scholars, both domestically and internationally, have proposed numerous
Attribution (CC BY) license (https:// control strategies to address the issue of robotic arm trajectory control. For instance, in
creativecommons.org/licenses/by/ reference [5], based on the theories of RBF neural network control and iterative sliding
4.0/). mode control, a novel RBF neural network fractional-order iterative sliding mode control

Processes 2024, 12, 1106. https://doi.org/10.3390/pr12061106 https://www.mdpi.com/journal/processes

Processes 2024, 12, 1106 2 of 18

strategy is proposed. Stability analysis of the control strategy is provided. Subsequently,

using a two-joint robotic arm as an example, various control strategies are simulated,
compared, and analyzed. Finally, the effectiveness of the proposed strategy is verified
through simulation experiments. However, neural networks are associated with drawbacks
such as low computational efficiency and long training times. To address this issue, refer-
ence [6] combined extended Kalman filters with fuzzy neural networks to train fuzzy neural
networks to generate feedforward torques and continuously update the output weights
and center vectors of the fuzzy neural networks, thereby enhancing the computational
efficiency and accuracy of the training algorithm. Additionally, in reference [7], a robust
impedance controller was proposed for delayed compensation mobile robotic arms, capable
of handling system non-integrity constraints, nonlinearity, system motor dynamics, and
uncertainties, thus enhancing the robustness of the controller. Finally, in reference [8], a
new robust finite-time tracking controller was designed for the trajectory tracking problem
of manipulators with uncertainties and external disturbances, and the system uncertainties
and external disturbances were estimated by the extended state observer. While these
studies fully considered system nonlinearity and uncertainties, in reality, mobile robotic
arms are influenced by multiple factors during operation, making it difficult to obtain
accurate mathematical models. The aforementioned control algorithms are unable to meet
the required control precision when the model is uncertain. Research has indicated that
discrete sliding mode control (DSMC) is insensitive to changes in controlled system param-
eters and external disturbances, providing a simple and effective method for overcoming
system disturbances [9]. The essence of DSMC is to drive the system state trajectory onto a
specified sliding surface and maintain its movement along the surface. Once on the sliding
surface, the controlled system exhibits robustness to certain changes in the model and
external disturbances [10]. Therefore, when the model is uncertain, DSMC has significant
advantages over other control methods.
For instance, reference [11] proposed an improved discrete-time fast terminal sliding
surface for discrete linear single-input single-output models, designing a fast terminal
sliding mode control law to achieve higher tracking accuracy. For disturbed discrete-time
nonlinear systems, reference [12] introduced a model-free adaptive sliding mode control law
based on an extended state observer to achieve higher precision trajectory tracking. In recent
years, various discrete integral sliding mode control (ISMC) methods have been reported
in the literature in different fields, as ISMC can provide smaller tracking errors compared
to traditional discrete sliding mode control methods [13–17]. Reference [18] put forward
a sliding mode control law and an approaching law for high-performance tracking of
uncertain discrete-time systems, analyzing the boundary of tracking errors. In reference [19],
a discrete integral terminal sliding mode control (DITSMC) approach was proposed for
achieving velocity tracking control. However, the aforementioned method still suffers from
the chattering phenomenon when the system encounters uncertain stochastic disturbances.
Currently, adaptive control has been successfully applied in various fields of the
process industry. Adaptive control continuously extracts information about the model
during system operation, gradually improving the model and correspondingly changing
the controller parameters to make the system adapt over time. For example, reference [20]
proposed an NTSM (Robust Adaptive Nonsingular Terminal Sliding Model) control strat-
egy, ensuring that the position and velocity tracking errors of the system converge to zero
within a finite time and eliminating the chattering caused by the terminal sliding mode con-
troller. Addressing the lower control precision and sliding mode chattering phenomenon
in robotic arm trajectory tracking, reference [21] addressed the trajectory tracking problem
of a robotic arm with uncertainties and external disturbances. It proposed a novel robust
finite-time tracking control scheme and designed an adaptive backstepping nonsingular
fast terminal sliding mode controller to achieve finite-time convergence of tracking errors
while avoiding singularity issues. Additionally, an adaptive updating law for switch gains
was devised to further mitigate chattering problems. In summary, combining adaptive
Processes 2024, 12, 1106 3 of 18

control with an approaching law in discrete terminal sliding mode control to eliminate
sliding mode chattering is entirely feasible.
In consideration of the actual operating conditions of robotic arms, this paper proposes
a new algorithm, Adaptation Discrete Integral Terminal Sliding Mode Control (ADITSMC),
for the motion control of robotic arm systems under complex operating environments.
The proposed scheme achieves precise motion control of robotic arm systems in complex
operating environmental conditions. Simulation results demonstrate that the ADITSMC
scheme outperforms DITSMC and DSMC controllers in terms of motion tracking precision.
The main contributions of this paper are as follows:
(1) A novel ADITSMC algorithm is proposed, which uses a one-step delay estimation
method to compensate for disturbances in the controlled object and adopts the idea of
adaptive control to improve the trajectory tracking precision of robotic arm systems
and suppress system chattering.
(2) Compared to previous approaches utilizing robust control, neural networks, fuzzy
control, etc. [5–9], the proposed scheme features a simpler controller design and
higher tracking precision. In comparison to reference [11], the proposed scheme
is applicable to multi-input and multi-output systems, thus offering higher system
accuracy. In contrast to reference [12], the proposed scheme does not require a state
observer, and the data-driven control algorithm is less sensitive to changes in system
parameters, maintaining high tracking precision. When compared to references [18,19],
the proposed scheme exhibits smaller chattering in the presence of high disturbances.
In comparison to references [20,21], the proposed scheme requires fewer parameter
adjustments and achieves slightly higher tracking precision.
(3) The primary advantage of the proposed ADITSMC scheme is to provide an easily
implemented control method for multi-input and multi-output systems, capable of
handling uncertainties and disturbances.
The rest of this paper is structured as follows: Section 2 elaborates on the modeling
issues of the two-degree-of-freedom robotic arm motion system. Section 3 details the design
process of the DITSMC and ADITSMC schemes. Section 4 presents a series of simulation
experiments. Section 5 concludes the paper.

2. Two-Joint Manipulator Model and Its Discrete State Space Expression

2.1. Two-Joint Manipulator Model
The research this paper reports focuses on the control of a two-degree-of-freedom
robotic arm system as depicted in Figure 1. The lengths of the individual links, joint
angular displacements, and link masses are specified in the diagram. The dynamic model
of the robotic arm is established using the Lagrangian equation method, with the following
dynamic equations:
M(q)q̈ + C(q, q̇)q̇ + G(q) = uzy + d. (1)
Here, M(q) represents the inertia mass matrix of the system; C(q, q̇) represents
the Coriolis and centrifugal force matrix; G(q) represents the gravitational term ma-
trix; uzy stands for the control input; and d denotes external unknown disturbances and
model uncertainties.
 T  T  T  T
q = q1 q2 ; q̇ = q̇1 q̇2 ; uzy = uzy1 uzy2 ; d = d1 d2 . The
displacement of joint 1 and joint 2 of the manipulator are denoted as q1 q2 , respectively;
the angular velocity of the robotic arm joints 1 and 2 are denoted as q̇1 q̇2 , respectively;
the angular acceleration of the robotic arm joints 1 and 2 are denoted as q̈1 q̈2 , respec-
tively; the driving torque of the robotic arm joints 1 and 2 are denoted as uzy1 uzy2 ,
respectively; the uncertain disturbances of the robotic arm joints 1 and 2 are denoted as
d1 d2 , respectively.
Processes 2024, 12, 1106 4 of 18

Figure 1. Two-joint manipulator model diagram.

2.2. Discrete State Space Expression of Two-Joint Manipulator

Equation (1) yields the nonlinear dynamic equation of the robotic arm. Subsequently,
 T
the state vector x = q q̇ is defined as the joint angular displacement and angular
velocity of the robotic arm, the control input variable u = uzy represents the control torque
of the robotic arm, and the output vector y = qT signifies the output values of the robotic
arm joint angular displacement achieved through torque control. Therefore, the state–space
equations of the robotic arm system are expressed as follows:

 ẋ =  f(x, u), 
q̇ (2)
 f(x, u) = .
M−1 uzy − C(q, q̇)q̇

Next, the Jacobian linearization of Equation (2) is conducted. Based on the state vector
defined earlier, the Jacobian sub-matrix of the derivative functions f for its components is
derived as follows:
 ∂f ∂ f1 ∂ f1

1
∂x1 ∂x2 · · · ∂x 4
 ∂ f2 ∂ f2 ∂ f2 
 ∂x1 ∂x2 · · · ∂x4 
 
Al =  . . . . , , (3)
 .. .. .. .. 
 
∂ f4 ∂ f4 ∂ f4
∂x1 ∂x2 · · · ∂x4
 ∂f ∂f

1 1
∂u1 ∂u2

 ∂ f2 ∂ f2 

∂u1 ∂u2
Bl =  . (4)
 
.. ..

 . . 

∂ f4 ∂ f4
∂u1 ∂u2

After obtaining the Jacobian matrices from Equations (3) and (4), the system at the
desired equilibrium point is linearized using the Jacobian linearization method.Assuming
the control vector at this equilibrium point is denoted as ur , the state vector as xr , and
the time derivative as ẋr , the system is linearized around the equilibrium point where the
Jacobian sub-matrices in Equations (3) and (4) are linearized at x = xr ẋ = ẋr u = ur .
Firstly, the linearized state vector is defined as x x and the control vector is defined as
u x . Then, the system equation is

ẋ x = xr + Al (x x − xr ) + Bl (u x − ur ). (5)

The constant term in Equation (5) can be expressed by d. Then, the linearized system
is as follows:
ẋ x = Al x x + Bl u x + d. (6)
Processes 2024, 12, 1106 5 of 18

Discretizing Equation (6) using a zero-order hold with a sampling period of Ts and
incorporating an error disturbance term, the discrete-time state-space representation of the
multi-input, multi-output robotic arm is as follows:

x(k + 1) = Ax(k) + Bu(k) + D(k),
(7)
y(k) = Cx(k).

Here, the matrix parameters are as follows: A =eAl Ts , B = ∫0Ts eAl t Bl dt.
The factors not accounted for in the modeling and errors introduced by discretization,
collectively termed disturbances D(k), along with external interferences to the system, are
represented below.
 T
D(k) = 0 0 d1 ( k ) d2 ( k ) . (8)

Assumption 1. Assuming that the disturbance d before sampling is smooth and bounded, the
discrete uncertainty D(k ) has the following properties [22]: as the sampling time is small, the
variation in disturbances between adjacent sampling intervals is minimal [23,24].

d(k) = O( Ts ),
d(k) − d(k − 1) = O Ts2 ,


(9)
d(k) − 2d(k − 1) + d(k − 2) = O Ts3 .

3. Design of Adaptive Discrete Integral Terminal Sliding Mode Controller for

Two-Joint Manipulator
3.1. Trajectory Tracking Control Structure of Two-Joint Manipulator
This section introduces the discrete integral terminal sliding mode control based on
the adaptive reaching law. This control law ensures that the discrete sliding mode surface
enters a quasi-sliding mode after a finite number of steps, meaning that although the state of
the discrete sliding mode system cannot strictly lie on the sliding mode surface, it can move
within a certain neighborhood of the sliding mode surface while maintaining a sliding
motion state near the sliding mode surface. This achieves the goal of trajectory tracking
control for the robotic arm. Under reasonable assumptions, the rigorous convergence proof
process for this control law is provided. Figure 2 illustrates the control block diagram of
the system.

Figure 2. ADITSMPC scheme control block diagram.

3.2. Design of Adaptive Discrete Integral Terminal Sliding Mode Control Law
Define the trajectory velocity tracking error e(k) of the manipulator:

e ( k ) = y ( k ) − yr ( k ), (10)

where y(k) is the controller output trajectory and yr (k) is the desired trajectory.
Processes 2024, 12, 1106 6 of 18

The design of the discrete integral terminal sliding mode surface is as follows:

s ( k ) = λ1 e ( k ) + λ2 E ( k − 1). (11)

The integral terminal error term in the formula is as follows:

k
E(k) = ∑ (e(i))α = E(k − 1)+(e(k))α . (12)
i =0

The parameter value in the formula is λ1 > 0, λ2 > 0, 0 <α< 1. In addition, α is selected as
the ratio of two odd numbers [25].
The discrete integral terminal sliding mode control law ueq (k ) of the manipulator is
derived from the following conditions:

∆s(k)= s(k + 1) − s(k) = 0. (13)

In the equation:
s ( k + 1) = λ1 e ( k + 1) + λ2 E ( k ). (14)
In the equation:

e(k + 1) = y(k + 1) − yr (k + 1) = CAx(k) + CBu(k ) − CD(k ) − yr (k + 1). (15)

Due to the uncertainty of the disturbance D(k) in the robotic arm, a one-step ahead
estimation method is employed for estimation, as shown in Equation (16).

D(k − 1) = x(k) − Ax(k − 1) − Bu(k − 1). (16)

By combining Equations (9)–(16), the discrete integral terminal sliding mode control
law for the robotic arm can be derived as follows:
h
ueq = (CB)−1 λ1−1 s(k) − λ1−1 λ2 E(k) + yr (k + 1) − CAx(k) − CD(k − 1)]. (17)

In order to enhance the disturbance rejection capability of the robotic arm system (7),
a nonlinear switching term is introduced.

usw = −(CB)−1 βsgn(s(k)), (18)

where β is a parameter that can be adjusted.

The value of parameter β will affect the magnitude of the sliding mode chatter in the
robotic arm system (7). When parameter β is small, the sliding mode chatter of the system
(7) will decrease. However, if β is too small, it will also affect the convergence speed of the
system (7). Therefore, the value of β should be variable [11]. Hence, an adaptive law is
designed to allow the parameter β to change with variation of the system (7). The specific
adaptive law is as follows:
Ts
β̂ i (k) = ς | si ( k )| i = 1, 2, 3, · · · , n. (19)

In the equation, ς is a constant; ς is chosen as a constant of O Ts2 magnitude.

In conclusion, the adaptive discrete integral terminal sliding mode control law uzeq for
robotic arms is as follows:
h
uzeq = (CB)−1 λ1−1 s(k ) − λ1−1 λ2 E(k) + yr (k + 1) − CAX(k) − CD(k − 1) − J(k)]. (20)

In the equation:
 T
J(k) = β̂ 1 (k)sgn(s1 (k)) β̂ 2 (k)sgn(s2 (k)) ··· β̂ n (k)sgn(sn (k)) . (21)
Processes 2024, 12, 1106 7 of 18

3.3. Proof of Convergence for the Robotic Arm Adaptive Discrete Integral Terminal Sliding
Mode Controller
Theorem 1. For the nonlinear system of robotic arms with external disturbances (6), if the distur-
bance d(k) satisfies Assumption 1, the system possesses the following property.

∆
The sliding mode state starting s(k) = [s1 (k) · · · sn (k)]T from any initial state can enter
the region Θ within at most k steps, where Θ and k are defined as follows:
n  o
Θ = s(k) : si (k ) ≤ κ + β = O Ts2 , (22)

( )
s i (0) − (κ + β )2
k = max {|b
ri |} + 1 = max + 1. (23)
1≤ i ≤ n 1≤ i ≤ n β2 − κ 2

Proof 1. Substituting Equation (20) into Equation (15) yields:

= λ1−1 s(k) − λ1−1 λ2 E(k) − J(k) + C D(k) − D̂(k)

 
e ( k + 1)
(24)
= λ1−1 s(k) − λ1−1 λ2 E(k) − J(k) + C[D(k) − D(k − 1)].

Substituting Equation (24) into Equation (11) yields:

s(k + 1) = s(k ) − J(k) + C[D(k ) − D(k − 1)]. (25)

For the convenience of calculation definition:

F(k) = C[D(k) − D(k − 1)]. (26)

Moreover, for multi-input multi-output systems, matrix A can be expressed in terms

of matrix F(k) and s(k ) sub-elements as follows:

∆
F(k) = [ F1 (k) · · · Fn (k)]T , (27)

∆
s(k) = [s1 (k) · · · sn (k )]T . (28)
According to Assumption 1, it can be inferred that there exists a minimal positive
number κ such that Equation (29) holds true, and κ is a constant of O Ts2 magnitude. Let

us choose β i (k) > β > κ, and rewrite Equation (25) in terms of matrix sub-elements.

| Fi (k)|∞ ≤ κ, i = 1, . . . , n. (29)

si (k + 1) = si (k) − βsgn(si (k)) + Fi (k ), i = 1, 2, · · · , n. (30)

The reaching condition for the discrete sliding mode, as referenced in [5], is illustrated
by Equation (31). When the system (7) is not on the sliding surface, Equations (32) and (33)
can be derived. 
[si (k + 1) − si (k)]sgn(si (k)) < 0,
(31)
[si (k + 1) + si (k)]sgn(si (k)) > 0,

[si (k + 1) − si (k)]sgn(si (k)) = [ Fi (k) − βsgn(si (k))]sgn(si (k))

= Fi (k)sgn(si (k)) − β
(32)
< κ−β
< 0,
Processes 2024, 12, 1106 8 of 18

[si (k + 1) + si (k)]sgn(si (k)) = [2si (k) + Fi (k) − βsgn(si (k))]sgn(si (k))

= 2|si (k)| + Fi (k)sgn(si (k )) − β
(33)
> κ+β
> 0.

Based on Equations (31)–(33), it can be concluded that the system (7) satisfies the
reaching condition of discrete sliding mode.
Next, we will demonstrate that the system (7) will enter the quasi-sliding mode with a
band of width ε = κ + β centered around the sliding switching surface in a finite number
of steps.
The Lyapunov function is designed as follows:

Vi (k) = s2i (k). (34)

Differentiating the Lyapunov function yields:

∆Vi (k)
V̇i (k ) = . (35)
T

Because T > 0 is certain to be established, the signs of V̇i (k) and ∆Vi (k) are the same.
Therefore, it suffices to prove proposition ∆Vi (k) < 0 . We will discuss the following
two cases:
When si (k ) > κ + β , (35) can be written as

∆Vi (k) = Vi (k + 1) − Vi (k)

= s2i (k + 1) − s2i (k)
= [si (k + 1) − si (k)][si (k + 1) + si (k)] (36)
= [ Fi (k) − βsgn(si (k))][2si (k) + Fi (k) − βsgn(si (k))]
= [ Fi (k) − β][2si (k) + Fi (k) − β].

In the equation:
−κ − β < Fi (k) − β < κ − β < 0, (37)

2si (k) + Fi (k) − β > κ + β > 0. (38)

Therefore, it can be deduced that

∆Vi (k ) < (κ − β)(κ + β) < κ 2 − β2 < 0, (39)

/ Θ, g = 0, 1, 2, · · · , ri − 1,
If si ( g) ∈

∆Vi (k ) = s2i ( g + 1) − s2i ( g) ≤ κ 2 − β2 . (40)

According to Equation (40), it can be derived that Equation (41),

s2i (1) ≤ s2i (0) + κ 2 − β2

s2i (2) ≤ s2i (0) + 2 κ 2 − β2

s2i (3) ≤ s2i (0) + 3 κ 2 − β2 (41)
..
.
s2i (ri ) ≤ s2i (0) + ri κ 2 − β2 .

ri κ 2 − β2 = (κ + β)2 implies s2i (b

When s2i (0) + b ri ) ≤ (κ + β)2 , after taking the integer

steps through rounding rbi , the system (6) enters a quasi-sliding mode centered on the sliding
mode switching surface with ε = κ + β as the bandwidth of the quasi-sliding mode.
Processes 2024, 12, 1106 9 of 18

By utilizing Equation (41), we can solve for

s i (0) − (κ + β )2
ri = . (42)
β2 − κ 2
b

Let |b
ri | be defined as the largest integer not exceeding b ri .
( )
s i (0) − (κ + β )2
k = max + 1. (43)
1≤ i ≤ n β2 − κ 2

Therefore, we can conclude that when si (k ) > κ + β, the system (7) will enter the
quasi-sliding mode with ε = κ + β as the bandwidth of the quasi-sliding mode, centered on
the sliding mode switching surface in a finite number of steps, with the step count being k.
When si (k ) < −κ − β, the following is similarly available:

∆Vi (k) = [ Fi (k) + β][2si (k) + Fi (k) + β]. (44)

In the equation:
0 < −κ + β < Fi (k ) + β < κ + β, (45)

2si (k) + Fi (k ) + β < −κ − β < 0. (46)

Therefore, it can be deduced that

∆Vi (k) < (−κ − β)(−κ + β) < κ 2 − β2 < 0. (47)

Furthermore, due to the fact that

∆Vi (k ) = s2i ( g + 1) − s2i ( g) ≤ κ 2 − β2 . (48)

Given the similarity in expression to ∆Vi (k), it can likewise be derived that
ri ) ≤ (κ + β)2 follows. That is, after integer steps of taking rbi , the system (7) enters a
s2i (b
quasi-sliding mode centered around the sliding mode switching surface with ε = κ + β as
the bandwidth of the quasi-sliding mode.
Similarly, we can obtain:

s i (0) − (κ + β )2
ri = . (49)
β2 − κ 2
b

Let |b
ri | be defined as the largest integer not exceeding b ri .
( )
s i (0) − (κ + β )2
k = max {|b ri |} + 1 = max + 1. (50)
1≤ i ≤ n 1≤ i ≤ n β2 − κ 2

Based on Equation (50), it can be deduced that at si (k) < −κ − β, the system (7)
will enter a quasi-sliding mode centered around the sliding mode switching surface with
ε = κ + β as the bandwidth of the quasi-sliding mode, in a finite number of steps denoted
as k.
Therefore, starting from any initial state, the system (7) will reach the switching surface
within a finite number of steps, and then traverse along it. However, its motion comprises
three stages: an approaching mode, a quasi-sliding mode, and a steady state. Consequently,
it is essential to prove that once the system (7) enters the switching surface, it will not
escape from it.
To begin with, a switching band enclosing the switching surface is defined:
n  o
Θ = s(k) : si (k ) ≤ κ + β = O Ts2 . (51)
Processes 2024, 12, 1106 10 of 18

Subsequently, the analysis is divided into the following two cases:

(1) If 0 ≤ si (k) ≤ κ + β
Based on Equation (30), it can be deduced that Equation (52)

si (k + 1) = si (k) − β + Fi (k). (52)

Based on Equation (52), it can be deduced that Equation (53)

−κ − β < si (k + 1) < 2κ < κ + β. (53)

(2) If −κ − β ≤ si (k ) ≤ 0
Based on Equation (30), it can be deduced that Equation (54)

si (k + 1) = si (k ) + β + Fi (k). (54)

Based on Equation (54), it can be deduced that Equation (55)

−κ − β < −2κ < si (k + 1) < κ + β. (55)

Based on Equations (52)–(55), the conclusion can be drawn that once the system (7)
enters region (51), it will never escape from that region. Here, ε
= κ + β represents the
bandwidth of the quasi-sliding mode, with a magnitude of O Ts2 .
Next, we will demonstrate that the designed adaptive discrete integral terminal sliding
mode control is stable and will enter the quasi-sliding mode
within a finite number of steps.
Given that the system bandwidth is ε = κ + β = O Ts2 , |si (k)| is bounded. Therefore,
as long as Equation (56) is satisfied, the system (7) will be stable and enter the quasi-sliding
mode within a finite number of steps.

Ts |si (k )|
β i (k) > β > κ ⇒ α< κ . (56)

In conclusion, it can be stated that the system (7) satisfies the conditions for discrete
sliding mode reaching and will enter the quasi-sliding mode with quasi-sliding mode
bandwidth ε = κ + β centered around the sliding mode switching surface within a finite
number of steps, denoted as k. The proof of Theorem 1 is thus completed.

4. Simulation Experiment and Analysis

4.1. Related Introduction of Two-Joint Manipulator
The dual-joint robotic arm is a type of mechanical arm system with two joints, com-
monly employed in industrial automation and robotic applications. This robotic arm can
move along two axes, providing enhanced flexibility in operation and capability for exe-
cuting more complex tasks. Typically composed of a series of joints, links and actuators,
dual-joint robotic arms are controlled via various transmission systems. This design allows
the robotic arm to perform precise positioning, handling, and assembly tasks in diverse
work environments, thereby maximizing production efficiency.

4.2. Simulation Parameter Setting

In order to validate the effectiveness of the proposed adaptive discrete integral ter-
minal sliding mode control method, this section focuses on a two-joint manipulator as
the research subject and conducts simulation verification of the proposed manipulator
trajectory tracking control strategy. The specific parameters are as follows:
       
q̈1 q̇1 τ1 d1
M(q) + C(q, q̇) + G(q) = + . (57)
q̈2 q̇2 τ2 d2
Processes 2024, 12, 1106 11 of 18

The parameters in the equation are shown as in Equations (58)–(60).

 
v + q01 + q02 cos(q2 ) q01 + q02 cos(q2 )
M(q) = , (58)
q01 + q02 cos(q2 ) q01

 
−q02 q̇2 sin(q2 ) −q02 (q̇1 + q̇2 ) sin(q2 )
C(q, q̇) = , (59)
q02 q̇1 sin(q2 ) 0

 
15g cos q1 + 8.75g cos(q1 + q2 )
G(q) = . (60)
8.75g cos(q1 + q2 )
In this study, the parameters of the manipulator model are consistent with those in ref-
erence [5], where v = 13.33, q01 = 8.98, q02 = 8.75, g = 9.8. These parameters serve as
the original parameters for the model discretization. The system is discretized using the
sampling time Ts = 0.01 s to obtain the discretized parameters of the system (7).
During simulation, the desired trajectories for the two axes are denoted as sin(0.008πt)
and cos(0.008πt), with initial positions set at 0 and 1, respectively. Comparative experi-
ments are conducted using the adaptive discrete integral terminal sliding mode controller,
the discrete integral terminal sliding mode controller, and the classic discrete sliding
mode controller.
The classical discrete sliding mode control scheme is as follows,

uds = (CB)−1 [s(k) + yr (k + 1) − CAX(k ) − CD(k − 1) − Q(k )]. (61)

In the equation:
 T
Q(k) = βsgn(s1 (k)) βsgn(s2 (k)) ··· βsgn(sn (k)) . (62)

The simulation parameters are detailed in Table 1.

Table 1. Simulation parameters.

Parameter Parameter Value

λ1 0.975
λ2 1.135
α 17/19
ς 100
β 0.05
Ts 0.01 s

4.3. Simulation Results and Analysis

Under the simulation conditions outlined in Section 4.2, the following ideal simulation
results were obtained, wherein Figures 3 and 4 illustrate the mechanical arm trajectory
tracking performance of the three control methods: ADITSMC, DITSMC, and DSMC.
Figures 5–7 display the tracking errors of the mechanical arm for the three control methods.
In Figures 8–10, the control inputs for the mechanical arm under the three control methods,
ADITSMC, DITSMC, and DSMC, are presented.
Processes 2024, 12, 1106 12 of 18

(a) (b)

Figure 3. Comparison of three control methods for joint 1 tracking. (a) Joint 1 tracking, (b) partial
enlarged detail.

(a) (b)

Figure 4. Comparison of three control methods for joint 2 tracking. (a) Joint 2 tracking, (b) partial
enlarged detail.

(a) (b)

Figure 5. ADITSMC robot arm trajectory tracking error. (a) Joint 1, (b) joint 2.
Processes 2024, 12, 1106 13 of 18

(a) (b)

Figure 6. DITSMC robot arm trajectory tracking error. (a) Joint 1, (b) joint 2.

(a) (b)

Figure 7. DSMC robot arm trajectory tracking error. (a) Joint 1, (b) joint 2.

(a) (b)

Figure 8. ADITSMC robot arm control torque. (a) Joint 1, (b) joint 2.
Processes 2024, 12, 1106 14 of 18

(a) (b)

Figure 9. DITSMC robot arm control torque. (a) Joint 1, (b) joint 2.

(a) (b)

Figure 10. DSMC robot arm control torque. (a) Joint 1, (b) joint 2.

From Figure 3, it can be observed that the control effectiveness of ADITSMC is superior
to that of DITSMC, while the control effectiveness of the DSMC scheme exhibits significant
oscillations. Specifically, within the time interval of [308 s, 320 s], noticeable jitter occurs
in the trajectory tracking performance of DSMC. In contrast, the control effectiveness of
ADITSMC closely approximates the reference trajectory compared to DITSMC. This trend
is also evident from Figure 4. Concerning joint 2 of the mechanical arm, during the time
span of [240 s, 260 s], ADITSMC continues to outperform DITSMC in terms of control
effectiveness, whereas the DSMC control scheme shows pronounced oscillations. The graph
prominently illustrates the severe oscillations in the DSMC control scheme, whereas the
control effectiveness of DITSMC is relatively good but inferior to ADITSMC. Subsequent
sections will present the trajectory tracking error situations for the three control schemes to
validate the differences in control effectiveness as discussed earlier.
Based on Figures 5–7, it can be observed that for both joint 1 and joint 2 of the me-
chanical arm, the control effectiveness of the ADITSMC scheme surpasses that of DITSMC,
demonstrating its disturbance rejection capability. In the presence of white noise distur-
bances, the trajectory tracking error in the DITSMC control scheme is larger and exhibits
significant oscillations compared to ADITSMC. As for the DSMC control scheme, the
tracking errors are excessively large due to its pronounced oscillations, indicating signif-
icant tracking errors compared to the former two methods. Specifically, the trajectory
tracking error of joint 1 in the DITSMC control scheme stabilizes only within the range of
[0.005 rad, 0.015 rad], highlighting severe oscillations. This situation is more pronounced
for joint 2, where the trajectory tracking error oscillates above and below zero, rendering
the mechanical arm unable to function properly in practical engineering scenarios.
Processes 2024, 12, 1106 15 of 18

In contrast, the proposed ADITSMC control scheme exhibits no oscillations in control

effectiveness. Even under white noise disturbances, it effectively reduces the trajectory
tracking errors of joint 1 and joint 2 within the range of [−0.004 rad, 0.004 rad], showcasing
faster convergence, robust disturbance rejection capabilities, and excellent control perfor-
mance. These attributes make it suitable for practical engineering applications, as they
ensure the mechanical arm operates smoothly without the risk of failures attributed to the
control algorithm itself.
Based on Figures 8–10, it is evident that the torque variation oscillation in the control
scheme of DSMC is particularly severe. This is also the reason for the poor trajectory
tracking performance of the DSMC scheme. Fundamentally, this issue arises from the
insufficient convergence speed of the discrete sliding mode surface. On the other hand,
while DITSMC enhances the convergence speed of the discrete sliding mode surface, some
oscillations occur during trajectory transitions of the robotic arm, as evidenced in Figure 6.
These oscillations are due to the oscillations of the sliding mode surface.
In contrast, for the ADITSMC designed in this study, whether it is joint 1 or joint
2 of the robotic arm, under white noise disturbances, the variation in its control torque
is not as significant as that of DITSMC and DSMC. Furthermore, no oscillations occur
during trajectory transitions. Therefore, compared to DITSMC and DSMC, ADITSMC
exhibits better disturbance rejection capabilities, faster convergence speed, and effectively
eliminates the influence of sliding mode oscillations.
In order to visually demonstrate the advantages of the proposed method in this
paper, two metrics, namely, the mean square error (MSE) performance and the integral of
the absolute force variation (IAFV), are employed to quantitatively evaluate the control
methods presented in this study.
Firstly, e(k) and u(k ) are expressed in matrix sub-element form as follows:

∆  T
e(k) = e1 ( k ) · · · en ( k ) , (63)

∆  T
u(k) = u1 ( k ) · · · un (k ) . (64)
Next, the index functions of MSE and IAFV are given:
(1) MSE
n Tt
1
MSE =
nTt ∑ ∑ |ei (k)|2 , (65)
i =1 k =1

(2) IAFV
n Tt
IAFV = ∑ ∑ |ui (k) − ui (k − 1)|. (66)
i =1 k =2

The computation results of the two performance indices for each control method
are presented in Table 2. Both performance indices of the ADITSMC control scheme
outperform those of the DITSMC control scheme. This superiority is attributed to the larger
tracking error and control force variation induced by the inherent chattering of DITSMC,
while the classical discrete sliding mode control exhibits larger tracking errors during
direction changes of the robotic arm due to its inferior convergence compared to other
control schemes.

Table 2. Performance indexes.

Control Method MSE IAFV

ADITSMC 2.19 × 10−6 5.85 × 103
DITSMC 4.37 × 10−5 1.37 × 104
DSMC 7.12 × 10−4 1.73 × 104
Processes 2024, 12, 1106 16 of 18

Finally, when the robotic arm faces more complex trajectories, the proposed control
scheme’s trajectory tracking performance is verified. During simulation, the desired tra-
jectories for the two axes are artificially set as 3 sin(0.035t) + 2 cos(0.087t). The remaining
simulation conditions remain unchanged and the simulation results are as follows:
From Figures 11 and 12, it can be observed that even when faced with more complex
trajectories, ADITSMC can still track the reference trajectory with small tracking errors.
Even with frequent changes in trajectory direction, the magnitude of errors does not exhibit
significant abrupt changes. Therefore, it can be concluded that the proposed approach
in this paper can still stably track the reference trajectory even when the system (7) is
confronted with more complex trajectories.

(a) (b)

Figure 11. Joint 1 tracking situation and error. (a) Tracking situation, (b) error.

(a) (b)

Figure 12. Joint 2 tracking situation and error. (a) Tracking situation, (b) error.

5. Conclusions
This paper establishes a two-degree-of-freedom robotic arm model based on the
characteristics of robotic arm dynamics, and proposes an adaptive discrete integral terminal
sliding mode control method. In order to enhance the convergence speed of the sliding
mode and reduce tracking errors, this method incorporates a sliding mode integral operator
and a sliding mode terminal operator into the classical discrete sliding mode control. Given
the variability of operational environments in practical robotic arm engineering, it is
essential to strengthen the control algorithm’s disturbance rejection capability. Therefore,
the combination of adaptive control and discrete integral terminal sliding mode control,
along with the use of delay estimation to estimate system disturbances, not only improves
the system’s robustness but also enhances the trajectory tracking accuracy of the robotic
arm while reducing the occurrence of sliding mode chattering.
Comparative results with other control schemes demonstrate the advantages of the
proposed control method as follows:
Processes 2024, 12, 1106 17 of 18

(1) Achieving more precise trajectory tracking control than DITSMC and DSMC, with an
error range within [−0.004 rad, 0.004 rad], ensuring the stable operation of the robotic
arm in practical engineering applications.
(2) After replacing the disturbances that the robotic arm may encounter in its opera-
tional environment with white noise, the control force variation becomes smaller and
smoother compared to DITSMC and DSMC.
Subsequent research based on this paper will address the following:
(1) Considering the multi-degree-of-freedom robotic arm model as the research object, the
effectiveness of this control scheme in complex environments will be investigated.
(2) Considering the incorporation of state observers for disturbance estimation, the current
one-step delay estimation method in the algorithm may not fully estimate disturbances.
Therefore, the use of state observers or disturbance observers for disturbance estimation
will be explored to further improve the algorithm’s disturbance rejection capability.

Author Contributions: Conceptualization, J.X. and Z.S.; validation, Z.S.; formal analysis, F.X.; data
curation, W.W.; writing—original draft, J.X.; writing—review and editing, Z.S.; supervision, Z.S. and
W.W. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.
Funding: This research was funded by the Quzhou City Science and Technology Plan project
(2023K263, 2023K265, 2023K045) and the General Research Project of the Zhejiang Provincial Depart-
ment of Education (2023) (Y202353440, Y202353289).
Data Availability Statement: The data presented in this study are available in the article.
Conflicts of Interest: Author Wenduo Wang was employed by the company China Railway Wuhan
Bureau Group Co., Ltd. Wuhan EMU Depot. The remaining authors declare that the research was
conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a
potential conflict of interest.

References
1. Meng, G.; Han, L.L.; Zhang, C.F. Research progress and technical challenges of space robot. Acta Aeronaut. Astronaut. Sin. 2021,
42, 1–27.
2. Nash, B.; Walker, A.; Chambers, T. A simulator based on virtual reality to dismantle a research reactor assembly using master-slave
manipulators. Ann. Nucl. Energy 2018, 120, 1–7. [CrossRef]
3. Zhang, X.; Xie, Y.; Jiang, L.; Li, G.; Meng, J.; Huang, Y. Fault-tolerant dynamic control of a four-wheel redundantly-actuated
mobile robot. IEEE Access 2019, 7, 157909–157921. [CrossRef]
4. Sacchi, N.; Incremona, G.P.; Ferrara, A. Sliding mode based fault diagnosis with deep reinforcement learning add-ons for
intrinsically redundant manipulators. Int. J. Robust Nonlinear Control 2023, 33, 9109–9127. [CrossRef]
5. Zhang, X.; Xu, W.; Lu, W. Fractional-order iterative sliding mode control based on the neural network for manipulator. Math.
Probl. Eng. 2021, 2021, 1–12. [CrossRef]
6. Xia, K.; Gao, H.; Ding, L.; Liu, G.; Deng, Z.; Liu, Z.; Ma, C. Trajectory tracking control of wheeled mobile manipulator based on
fuzzy neural network and extended Kalman filtering. Neural Comput. Appl. 2018, 30, 447–462. [CrossRef]
7. Souzanchi-K, M.; Arab, A.; Akbarzadeh-T, M.R.; Fateh, M.M. Robust impedance control of uncertain mobile manipulators using
time-delay compensation. IEEE Trans. Control Syst. Technol. 2017, 26, 1942–1953. [CrossRef]
8. Reboucas Filho, P.P.; da Silva, S.P.P.; Praxedes, V.N.; Hemanth, J.; de Albuquerque, V.H.C. Control of singularity trajectory tracking
for robotic manipulator by genetic algorithms. J. Comput. Sci. 2019, 30, 55–64. [CrossRef]
9. Young, K.D.; Utkin, V.I.; Ozguner, U. A control engineer’s guide to sliding mode control. IEEE Trans. Control Syst. Technol. 1999, 7,
328–342. [CrossRef]
10. Hou, H.; Yu, X.; Xu, L.; Chuei, R.; Cao, Z. Discrete-time terminal sliding-mode tracking control with alleviated chattering.
IEEE/ASME Trans. Mechatronics 2019, 24, 1808–1817. [CrossRef]
11. Du, H.; Chen, X.; Wen, G.; Yu, X.; Lü; J. Discrete-Time Fast Terminal Sliding Mode Control for Permanent Magnet Linear Motor.
IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron. 2018, 65, 9916–9927. [CrossRef]
12. Huang, X.; Dong, Z.; Zhang, F.; Zhang, L. Discrete-time extended state observer-based model-free adaptive sliding mode control
with prescribed performance. Int. J. Robust Nonlinear Control 2022, 32, 4816–4842. [CrossRef]
13. Zhai, J.; Xu, G. A novel non-singular terminal sliding mode trajectory tracking control for robotic manipulators. IEEE Trans.
Circuits Syst. II Express Briefs 2020, 68, 391–395. [CrossRef]
14. Dachang, Z.; Baolin, D.; Puchen, Z.; Wu, W. Adaptive backstepping sliding mode control of trajectory tracking for robotic
manipulators. Complexity 2020, 2020, 1–11. [CrossRef]
Processes 2024, 12, 1106 18 of 18

15. He, J.; Yang, X.; Zhang, C.; Liu, J.; Zhang, Q.; Chen, X. Tracking control via sliding mode for heavy-haul trains with input
saturation. Meas. Control 2020, 53, 1720–1729. [CrossRef]
16. Dong, H.; Yang, X.; Gao, H.; Yu, X. Practical terminal sliding-mode control and its applications in servo systems. IEEE Trans. Ind.
Electron. 2022, 70, 752–761. [CrossRef]
17. Xu, D.; Shi, Y.; Ji, Z. Model-Free Adaptive Discrete-Time Integral Sliding-Mode-Constrained-Control for Autonomous 4WMV
Parking Systems. IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron. 2017, 65, 834–843. [CrossRef]
18. Yuan, L.; Li, J. Consensus of discrete-time nonlinear multiagent systems using sliding mode control based on optimal control.
IEEE Access 2022, 10, 47275–47283. [CrossRef]
19. Kang, S.; Wu, H.; Yang, X.; Li, Y.; Yao, J.; Chen, B.; Lu, H. Discrete-time predictive sliding mode control for a constrained parallel
micropositioning piezostage. IEEE Trans. Syst. Man Cybern. Syst. 2021, 52, 3025–3036 [CrossRef]
20. Yao, X.; Park, J.H.; Dong, H.; Guo, L.; Lin, X. Robust adaptive nonsingular terminal sliding mode control for automatic train
operation. IEEE Trans. Syst. Man Cybern. Syst. 2018, 49, 2406–2415. [CrossRef]
21. Xu, Z.; Yang, X.; Zhou, S.; Zhang, W.; Zhang, W.; Yang, S.; Liu, P.X. Extended state observer based adaptive backstepping
nonsingular fast terminal sliding-mode control for robotic manipulators with uncertainties. Int. J. Control. Autom. Syst. 2022, 20,
2972–2982. [CrossRef]
22. Bartoszewicz, A. Discrete-time quasi-sliding-mode control strategies. IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron. 1998, 45, 633–637. [CrossRef]
23. Abidi, K.; Xu, J.X.; Xinghuo, Y. On the discrete-time integral sliding-mode control. IEEE Trans. Autom. Control 2007, 52, 709–715.
[CrossRef]
24. Xu, Q.S. Digital integral terminal sliding mode predictive control ofpiezoelectric-driven motion system. IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron.
2016, 63, 3976–3984 [CrossRef]
25. Abidi, K.; Xu, J.X.; She, J.H. A discrete-time terminal sliding-mode control approach applied to a motion control problem. IEEE
Trans. Ind. Electron. 2008, 56, 3619–3627. [CrossRef]

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.