Use uniform fuzzy sets i.e., employ same membership function to describe a
single variable.
Use fuzzy sets, which can be expressed in simple mathematical terms. Triangular
fuzzy sets are more preferred in this regard.
Employ symmetrical fuzzy sets.
The domain of a fuzzy set can be divided into left width and right width as
indicated in figure 4.1. A fuzzy set is said to be symmetric, if its left width is equal to the
right width. This property enables the defuzzified output, u* to fall in the middle of the
clipped fuzzy set; thereby satisfying plausibility.
μ(x)
1 1
0
x
1
μ(x)
LARGE HIGH
1
0
x
Uncovered domain
Figure 4.2
Thus when a fuzzy singleton falls in this domain, no proposition will be activated
resulting in no change in control action. This can cause poor response or instability even.
Figure 4.3 shows a special case where the two fuzzy sets just overlap. Here too,
the variable x1 does not belong to either LARGE or HIGH. Thus if fuzzy singleton is x1,
situation will be same as in the previous case. Thus cases in figures 4.2 and 4.3 suggest
that overlapping is compulsory for effective fuzzy logic control.
μ(x)
 LARGE HIGH
1
0
x
x1
Figure 4.3
2
μ(x)
A B
1 b
x B
B
0
x
Left Right
Width Width
Figure 4.4
Number of fuzzy sets: This is purely a problem dependent one. Lesser the fuzzy
sets, lesser the memory requirement for storing FAM; but this can reduce the
quality of system response. An increased number of fuzzy sets increases the
precision in the output and will lead to good dynamic response. However,
increased number of fuzzy sets will require more memory space. Thus the
number of fuzzy sets should be judicially chosen.
Once the membership grades are obtained, the scattered pattern can be viewed to
find a suitable standard fuzzy set to represent it. Then the membership grades are used to
construct the proper fuzzy set by using curve fitting methods.
3
This procedure of face to face interaction with a single expert works well; but
however, the drawback is that the questions are directly thrown and as a result, the
answers can be noncrisp and vary from the individual experts’ perception about the
linguistic term. Hence, it is better to request the expert to compare the grades of a set of
variable in a given fuzzy set. This is illustrated below:
Let x1, x2,…,xp, xq, …,xn be the variables falling in a fuzzy set S1. Instead of asking
the expert directly to assign the membership grades, the expert can be asked to compare
the relative value of
S 1 x1 S 1 x3 , S 1 xP
, ……… ………etc.
S 1 x2 S 1 x4 S 1 xq
This pairwise comparison gives more idea about the ‘actual’ membership grade and can
be considered to be more efficient than the previous method.
In a situation where numerous knowledge engineers are available, then it is possible
to consolidate the views put together by all. Here, each expert is asked to give
membership grades of x1, x2, ..., xn falling in the domain of a fuzzy set S1. If there are m
experts, then each variable has m different membership grades. Then actual value can be
taken as the average of all.
µ(x)
1.2
1
0
α β γ δ x
4
Step2: Let x1, x2, …, xi,…, xn be the values of the variables within the domain of the
proposed fuzzy set.
Where μ*(xi) is the membership grade of xi given by the expert. The task is to find
suitable values of parameters of the fuzzy set such that E is made as minimum as
possible. Once E reaches an acceptable value, then
(x1,y1) u1
(x2,y2) u2
………………………...
(xi,yi) ui
………………………..
(xn,yn) un
The task is to identify the fuzzy sets to represent this problem. Assume that it is desired
to construct a triangular fuzzy set as shown in figure 4.6.
μ(x)
0
α β γ x
Figure 4.6
5
Assume an initial set as α0 , β0 and γ0 and using the expression for defuzzification method
employed, compute the output emerging from the fuzzy system as ui*. Repeat the process
for all available information. Now the error function, E is written as
n
E (u i u i ) 2
*
i 1
where n represents the number of data available. The value of E depends on the initial
guess. If E is large, fine tuning can be performed by employing the Newton Raphson
method. With this iterative method, new values of parameters are computed as
(1) 0
(1) 0
(1) 0
where
J 1.E ( 0, 0, 0)
and J is the Jacobian matrix.
Thus, the parameters are updated till E reaches the lowest acceptable value.
μ(x)
NL NB NM NS ZERO PS PM PB PL
Input i
variable K x
100 50 0 50 100
Figure 4.7 Use of scaling factor.
changes from 50 to +50 for K=0.5 and from 0.1 to +0.1 with K=0.1. Variation of K
results in the classification of the input variable. For example, when the input variable
value is 70, for K=1, the variable belongs to the fuzzy sets PM to PB. The same variable
belongs to PS and PM fuzzy sets with K=0.5 whereas it falls to the domain of ZERO and
PS for K=0.1. Thus altering the value of scaling factor leads to activation of different
6
fuzzy propositions for the same input value. Thus, if the plant parameters vary largely,
then suitable variation can be adopted for K leading to adaptive fuzzy control.
Table 1
Operating point Ka Kw
For a typical operating point, where Ka=0.03717 and Kw=0.6331, KP and KI are
computed as 0.48 and 5 respectively. The response of the system for a step disturbance
with these controller gains at different operating points is shown in figure 4.8
7
Figure 4.8. System response with fixed gain controller.
It is evident that as operating point changes, response becomes poorer with fixed gain
controller. Thus, Kp, KI are to be varied in accordance with drift in the Ka and Kw, so as
to achieve best dynamic response. Online variation of controller gains is strenuous and
infeasible too, in practice.
For convenience of incorporating the intuition and experience into the fuzzy
control algorithms, the behavior of the dynamic response is first investigated. The error
and error change of the system are defined as
e(k ) = r* (k ) r (k )
 (4.3)
e(k ) e(k ) e(k 1)
where r* (k ) is the reference value, e(k ) is the speed error and e(k ) is the error change
in the kth sampling interval. The change in control variable is denoted as (k ) .
.
The step response waveform of the system with PI controller together with step
command is obtained and is drawn in figure 4.9.
8
1.5
System Response p1
p3
c1 c2 c3 c4
1
p2
s1 s2 s3 s4
0.5

     
0 1 2 4 6 8 10
Time (sec)
Change of control variable
1 αc2
 0.5 αc3
0  αp3
  αp2
1  α αp1
c1
2 
Ti
me     
0
Time(
(se 2 4 6 8 10
Tim
sec) Time (sec)
c)
e(se
Time(
c) 1 Figure 4.9 Dynamic response characteristics.
sec)
Referring figure 4.9, according to the magnitude of e and the sign of e , the
response plane is roughly divided into four segments. These segments are defined as
0.5
S1: e > 0 and e < 0; S2 : e < 0 and e <0  (4.4)
9
Also, the magnitude index for representing the extent of overshoot and undershoot such a
p1, p2 etc is defined as
10
Seven fuzzy sets are then defined to fall in line with equations (4.4) to (4.7) and are
shown in figure 4.10, where N denotes negative, P is positive, B is big, M is medium, S is
small and ZR is zero.
Having defined the membership functions, the linguistic control rules are then obtained
following the definitions in equations (4.4) to (4.7). This is shown in table 2.
The rule base listed in table 2 serves as a better guideline for forming the fuzzy
associative memory (FAM). The exact rules in the “gray” regions in table 2 such as
S1 are obtained through trial and error so as to achieve best dynamic response. The rule
base thus obtained is shown in table 3.
Table 2
e/e NB NM NS ZR PS PM PB
NB C1
NM S 2 C 2 S1A3 A3
NS C 3
ZR P 6 P 5 P 4 ZR P 3 P 2 P1
PS C 4
PM S 3 C 5 S 4
PB C 6
Table 3
e\e NB NM NS ZR PS PM PB
PB ZR PS PM PB PB PB PB
PM NS ZR PS PM PB PB PB
PS NM NS ZR PS PM PB PB
ZR NB NM NS ZR PS PM PB
NS NB NB NM NS ZR PS PM
NM NB NB NB NM NS ZR PS
NB NB NB NB NB NM NS ZR
11
4.6.1 Simulation Results
In order to validate the fuzzy logic approach, extensive simulation is carried out
on the system model with fuzzy controller and the results are shown in figure 4.11, where
system response with unit reference command and disturbance is plotted. It is seen that
the overshoot and settling time are drastically decreased yielding excellent response at all
operating points with fuzzy controller. The reason for superior performance of fuzzy
controlled system is that basically it is adaptive in nature and the controller is able to
develop different control laws for each input state of e and e ; on the other hand,
conventional PI controller is sensitive to model change that occurs with parameter
variation. This figure also shows system response with PIcontroller. The dynamic
response curves in figure 4.11 show that fuzzy controller rejects internal and external
disturbances and nullifies the effect of parameter variation.
4.7 Conclusion
A few fuzzy system design aspects are explained in this chapter. These
methodologies help a beginner to develop fuzzy logic systems.
12