Proceedings of the ASME 2009 International Design Engineering Technical Conferences &

Computers and Information in Engineering Conference

Proceedings of the ASME 2009 International Design Engineering Technical Conferences &
Computers and Information in EngineeringIDETC/CIE
Conference 2009
August 30 - September 2, 2009, San Diego, California,
IDETC/CIE 2009 USA
August 30-September 2, 2009, San Diego, USA

DETC2009-87202
DETC2009-87202

COMPARING GENERALIZED ORDER PID CONTROLLERS FOR NETWORKED

CONTROL SYSTEMS WITH RANDOM DELAYS AND DATA DROPOUTS

Inés Tejado, Blas M. Vinagre YangQuan Chen

Industrial Engineering School Center for Self-Organizing and Intelligent Systems (CSOIS)
University of Extremadura Utah State University
06071 Badajoz, Spain 4120 Old Main Hill, Logan
Email: itejbal,bvinagre@unex.es Email: yqchen@ece.usu.edu

ABSTRACT use of a multipurpose shared network to connect spatially dis-

The performance of a Networked Control System (NCS) can
be affected directly and indirectly by transmission time delays
and data losses in the communications network. In this paper,
we propose different control strategies, traditional and fractional
order PID controllers, to control remotely an experimental plat-
form, called Smart Wheel, at the Center for Self-Organizing and
Intelligent Systems (CSOIS), Utah State University, and analyze
their effectiveness by means of the jitter margin in simulation.
A simulation model of a communications network for different
nature of transmission delays, based on MATLAB/Simulink, is
presented and used for simulations.
INTRODUCTION
Future automation systems, an even those currently in use
today, will to an increasing extent consist of a large number of
intelligent devices and control systems connected by local or
global communications networks [1]. Networked Control Sys-
tems (NCSs) or Network Based Control Systems (NBCSs) are
feedback control systems where sensors, actuators and comput-
ing elements are connected by means of a communications net-
work or other shared medium. So, the defining feature of an NCS
is that control and feedback signals are exchanged among the
system components in the form of information packages through
a network.
The study of NCSs brings together the historically separate
disciplines of communications networks and control theory. The
tributed elements results in flexible architectures and generally
reduces installation and maintenance costs. Consequently, NCSs
have been finding application in a broad range of areas. How-
ever, the insertion of the communications network in the feed-
back loop makes the analysis and design of an NCS complex,
since it imposes additional challenges to the control system due
to several issues: fixed or randomly distributed delays in trans-
mitting information between components, unreliable communi-
cation links with information losses (packet dropout), or the con-
sideration of band-limited channels (see [2–4] for more informa-
tion).
The goal of networked control systems is similar to other
kinds of control systems, i.e. to achieve stability, and provide
good closed loop performance. General procedures for designing
controllers for networked control include either modifying the
network protocol to suit the system (as the controller may not
take into account delay effects), or considering/compesating such
effects during controller design [5].
IP based NCSs networks have been shown to have non-
uniform distribution and multifractal nature, while these findings
have not been effectively utilized in NCSs analysis and synthe-
sis (see [6] and the references therein). Our previous work on
NCSs [8–10] showed a communications network model for sim-
ulations which consisted of a packet losses model and a trans-
mission delays model, that is, two separated models. Here, we
present a whole model for the network traffic with packet losses
and transmission delays, considering different kinds of distribu-

1 Copyright 
c 2009 by ASME

Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 01/30/2016 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use


tions for these delays.
The rest of this paper is organized as follows. In Section 2,
main problems induced in an NCS due to the communications
network are described and modeled. A network traffic model for
simulations is presented. Section 3 shows the description of the
experimental platform used in this work. In Section 4, the pro-
posed controllers are designed. Simulation results are included
in Section 5 in order to verify the robustness of the designed
controllers. The final section draws the main conclusions of this
paper.
TRAFFIC MODEL OF A COMMUNICATIONS NETWORK
Network modeling is in many cases a prerequisite for control
design. Among the problems introduced by the communications
network, random transmission delays and information losses are
described and modeled in this section in order to develop a traffic
model of the network for simulations considering different delay
nature.
Transmission Delays
The major drawback of NCS is that the network dynamics
affect the stability of the control system due to the additional net-
work delays. Two transmission delays can be considered, caused
by the network portion lying between the plant outputs and the
controller and the one lying between the controller and the plant
actuator [11]: sensor-to-controller delay (τ sc ), and controller-to-
actuator delay (τ ca ).
In practice, these delays are induced not only by the finite
speed allowed by the communication medium, but also for the
particular structure of the communication protocol, and they can
be of fixed or time-varying/random nature depending on the com-
munications protocol used. Some studies consider the modeling
of delays or traffic in NCS. In the literature, there are several
models available for network delays depending on the network
type and protocols used: 1) constant delay, 2) random delay with
probability distributions [12, 13], and 3) random delay with mul-
tifractal nature [5, 6]. These varying delays are often referred to
as jitter [12, 13]. Hence, different delay distributions are consid-
ered for simulations: uniform or gaussian distribution, multifrac-
tal nature or non-uniform distribution, and random nature.
α − stable distributions can be used to model network traffic
[5, 7], whose characteristic function has this form:
 
ϕ(υ) = exp jδϕ − γ|υ|α [1 + jβsign(υ)ω(υ, α)]
where
 to the control input of the switch, letting the present delay be
tan απ
2 , if α = 1
ω(υ, α) =
2
π log |υ|, if α = 1
Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 01/30/2016 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use
⎧
⎨ 1, if υ > 0
sign(υ) = 0, if υ = 0 (3)
⎩
−1, if υ < 0
and α ∈ (0, 2], β ∈ [−1, 1], γ ∈ (0, ∞) and δ ∈ (−∞, ∞). These pa-
rameters are (see [5] and the references therein for more infor-
mation):
- The characteristic exponent, α, which specifies the thick-
ness of probability density function.
- The skewness index, β, which means the assymetry of the
function.
- The scale, γ, expresses the dispersion of the distribution.
- δ is the location parameter and is a function of the mean or
median of the entire distribution.
Information Losses
Another important issue is the occurrence of information
losses or missing messages, either in the controller site or at
the plant site, which is referred to as the problem of data packet
losses or dropout. Some of the packets get lost in the network due
to interference, noise, node failures and packet collisions [12].
According to [14, 15], packet losses can be modeled as an
infinite delay.
Simulation Model of the Network Traffic
The model of the traffic network presented here is a model
based on delay, τ network , and includes transmission delays and
information losses by the following form:

τ, if there is not dropout
τnetwork = (4)
∞, if there is dropout
being τ the transmission delay with the corresponding distribu-
tion mentioned above.
In order to consider the possible asymmetry of network de-
lays in simulation, referred to different values of τ ca and τsc , the
network model includes two different blocks. These transmis-
sion time delays have different distributions (uniform, α-stable
or random), whose values are between a tunable maximum and
minimum values.
Following [16], the data network subject to data losses is
(1) simulated as a random number generator with uniform distribu-
tion between 0 and 1, a zero order hold and a switch, where its
threshold is set to (1 − r), being r the transmission rate at the
network. During r percent of the time, a logic level 1 is applied
transmitted to its output. The rest of the time, the switch causes
(2)
the delay in the network be infinite [14, 15]. Therefore, with
2 Copyright 
c 2009 by ASME
 this model, when a packet dropout is simulated, the present data
is the previous available data. On the contrary, the transmitted
data is the present data with the corresponding assigned delay. In K −Ls 0.1484 −0.592s
this model, maximum and minimum values of τ sc and τca can be P(s) = e = e (5)
τs + 1 0.045s + 1
tuned.

DESCRIPTION OF PROTOTYPE SMART WHEEL AS-
SEMBLY AT CSOIS
A stand-alone 3-axes robotic wheel assembly at CSOIS
called Smart Wheel is the NCS plant taken into consideration
for our experimental study. It is a self-contained robotic wheel
which has a steering axis, drive axis and z-axis, each of which
can be actuated independently [17] as shown in Fig. 1. Smart
Wheel is equipped with steering and drive motors and has a lin-
ear actuator for z-axis movement. It also has a power distribu-
tion unit, drive circuitry for the motors and actuators, encoders
for drive and steering feedback and a microcontroller.
CONTROLLERS DESIGN
When applying the ideal PID algorithm in control of NCS,
where varying time delays are present, one can show by using the
concept of jitter margin that the stability of the system cannot be
guaranteed, at least in the sense of the jitter margin condition, for
any additional delays. In such case the jitter margin is zero. It
should be noted that the jitter margin is a conservative criterion
and only sufficient, so the zero jitter margin does not necessarily
imply instability for additional delays [12, 20].
The aim of this work is to analyze and compare the robust-
ness of three different PID controllers, a traditional PID designed
from Ziegler-Nichols method, an optimal PID controller taking
into account tuning rules for varying time delay systems and a
fractional order PID, for the network based control of the Smart
Wheel in simulation.

PID Controller Using an Improved Ziegler-Nichols

Method
Traditional Ziegler-Nichols method is not enough to design
a PID controller which gets a proper system performance be-
cause of its intrinsic characteristics, so it is necessary to apply an
improved method. In [21], the authors propose the tuning rules
(7) and (8) for a PI controller with the following expression:

ki
PI(s) = k p + (6)
s

Figure 1. SMART WHEEL PICTURE AT CSOIS

0.15L + 0.35τ
kp = (7)
KL
Anyone with a computer connected to the network can con-
trol the Smart Wheel by communicating with it through serial
server. An internet camera (DLink - model DCS5300) with a
built in web server is directly connected to hub and is located 0.46L + 0.02τ
ki = (8)
near the Smart Wheel assembly. It has pan, tilt and zoom capabil- KL2
ities and sends streaming audio and video of the wheel’s motion
to the remote computer. The audio and video streams are inde- According to Eqn. (5), k p = 1.1901 and k i = 5.2533.
pendent of the controller data which uses the serial server. The
performance of the closed loop system is analyzed by plotting
the encoder data on the screen of the remote computer (see [18] Optimal PID Controller
for more information and the references therein). The tuning rules of an optimal PID controller (9) for varying
From results in [18, 19], the dynamical mathematical model time delay systems [12,19], referred to as OPID, are given by the
of the Smart Wheel is given by the following transfer function: expressions (10)-(12).

3 Copyright 
c 2009 by ASME

Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 01/30/2016 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use

 ki
PID(s) = k p + + kd s (9)
s


1 0.4τ − 0.04
kp = + 0.16 (10)
K L

Figure 2. BODE DIAGRAMS OF CONTROLLED SYSTEM USING THE

 PROPOSED CONTROLLERS
1 −0.11τ3 + 1.5τ2 − 1.5 0.35τ2 + 4τ + 50
ki = + (11)
100K L2 L
In order to use this controller in Simulink, an approximation
for the PIλ and PDµ parts have been obtained by polynomials
of order 2 using a simple MATLAB command, invfreqs, being
1
 the controller expression (16). With regard to the PI λ part, the
kd = 0.4τ2 + 11τ (12) approximation has been done to keep the integral action by the
100K
form shown in (17), that is, the non-integer part of the integral
order.
Therefore, this is the optimal PID for the Smart Wheel:

0.069s4 + 1.725s3 + 2.941s2 + 1.085s + 0.039

5.4241 PI λ Dµ (s) = 102
PID(s) = 0.8277 + + 0.0334s (13) 10−4 s5 + 8.558s4 + 65.85s3 + 14.8s2 + 0.687s
s (16)

 λ
Fractional Order PIλ Dµ Controller λ λ1 s + 1 (λ1 s + 1)λ 1
In order to design the fractional order PI λ Dµ (FPID) based PI = = · (17)
s sλ−1 s
on the rules in [22], we consider the phase margin of the con-
trolled system applying the optimal PID and the crossover fre-
quency: 67.7 o at the frequency of 0.811 rad/s. Therefore, we Figure 2 presents the Bode diagrams of the controlled sys-
want to design the PI λ Dµ controller with Eqn. (14) from these tem using the proposed controllers. As we can see, the differ-
specifications. ences between the designed controllers in the frequency domain
are not meaningful. Obtained results are summarized in Tab. 1,
where ωc is the crossover frequency.

 λ  µ Table 1. SUMMARY OF SPECIFICATIONS IN THE FREQUENCY DOMAIN

λ λ1 s + 1 λ2 s + 1
PI D (s) = Kx
µ µ
(14) Strategy Gain Margin (dB) Phase Margin (o ) ωc (rad/s)
s xλ2 s + 1 PIZ−N 11.1 71.3 0.792
OPID 10.6 67.7 0.811
The obtained values for the controller parameters are: K = PIλ Dµ 9.08 70.2 0.641
11.923, x = 8.87·10 −4, λ = 0.887, µ = −0.476, λ 1 = 1.974 and
λ2 = 26.6. So, the designed fractional order controller has the
expression: SIMULATION RESULTS
Next, the effectiveness of the proposed controllers over a
network configuration, using the developed model of the net-
 0.887  −0.476 work traffic, will be illustrated through MATLAB/Simulink sim-
λ 1.974s + 1 26.6s + 1 ulations.
PI D (s) = 338.314
µ
s 0.024s + 1 In order to evaluate the performance of the closed-loop con-
(15) trol system, a criterion must be set. One candidate measure for

4 Copyright 
c 2009 by ASME

Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 01/30/2016 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use

 Figure 3. SYSTEM RESPONSES FOR LOCAL CONTROLLERS Figure 4. SYSTEM RESPONSES FOR LOCAL CONTROLLERS WITH
JM = 1.457s
NCS is the jitter margin [12]. Therefore, we present simulation
results to analyze the system performance in two cases: consid-
ering local and remote controllers. In both, we focus on the mea-
sure of the jitter margin.
The jitter margin is defined as a function of the amount of
constant delay in the control loop, and it describes how much
additional time-varying delay can be tolerated before the loop
goes unstable [20].

Simulation Results for Local Controllers

Figure 3 shows the step responses of the Smart Wheel using
the proposed controllers locally.
Figure 5. SYSTEM RESPONSES FOR LOCAL CONTROLLERS WITH
Doing an analysis in the frequency domain and taking into
JM = 1.571s
account the definition of jitter margin, the condition (18) is veri-
fied at the crossover frequency:

PM·π
= JM·ωc (18)
180

where PM is the phase margin of the controlled system, in de-

grees, ωc is the crossover frequency, in rad/s, and JM is the jitter
margin, in seconds. So, the jitter margin can be calculated ap-
plying the following expression:

PM·π
JM = (19)
180ωc Figure 6. SYSTEM RESPONSES FOR LOCAL CONTROLLERS WITH
JM = 1.911s
Therefore, the jitter margin of the controlled system using
each designed controllers can be obtained from Tab. 1 as:
Table 2. JITTER MARGIN APPLYING THE PROPOSED CONTROLLERS These theoretical results can be contrasted by the simulation
Strategy Jitter Margin (s) results in Fig. 4, 5 and 6. It is seen that the best system perfor-
PIZ−N 1.571 mance is obtained using the fractional order PI λ Dµ controller, as
OPID 1.457 it can be deduced from the Tab. 2.
PIλ Dµ 1.911

5 Copyright 
c 2009 by ASME

Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 01/30/2016 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use

 Figure 7. DIAGRAM OF NETWORKED SMART WHEEL

Simulation Results for Remote Controllers Figure 8. NETWORK TRAFFIC WITH UNIFORM DISTRIBUTION FOR
Here, we include simulation results considering remote con- DELAYS
trollers according to the scheme in Fig. 7 in different simulation
cases for packet losses.

The selection of the sampling time plays an important role

in NCS. Traditionally, a small sampling time is chosen to ap-
proximate the continuous-time plant as closely as possible and
to enable accurate control. Nevertheless, in NCS, a small sam-
pling time causes high network load and an increasing risk of
network congestion, which results in longer delays and hence
lower performance. Thus the network delay and the sampling
time are coupled, and finding an optimal balance between the
two is a core requirement for achieving well performing and sta-
ble NCS [12].
Figure 9. NETWORK TRAFFIC WITH α-STABLE DISTRIBUTION FOR
In this case, we use the simulation model for the network
DELAYS
traffic presented above, with the following parameters for the
communications network: we suppose a symmetrical network
with the following time delays values: τ ca |max = τsc |max = 1.6h
and τca |min = τsc |min = 0.2h, where h is the sampling time (h =
20ms). It is reasonable to assume that the delays are distributed
on [0,bh], with b < 0.5 [13], so we consider a worse case. More-
over, firstly we set the parameter r as 0.9, that is, 90% of informa-
tion is transmitted through the network correctly and 10% of the
messages is missing. With regard to the delay distributions, we
simulate: a) an uniform or Gaussian distribution between τ max
and τmin ; b) an α − stable distribution with α = 1.1, β = 0, γ = 1
and δ = 0 (this distribution has been generated with the program
’stable.exe’ [23, 24]); and c) a random distribution with mean 1
and variance 0 between τ max and τmin . Therefore, network traf-
fic in these situations, including transmission delays and packet Figure 10. NETWORK TRAFFIC WITH RANDOM DISTRIBUTION FOR
losses, are shown in Fig. 8, 9 and 10, where packet loss is repre- DELAYS
sented as ’*’, at the top of the figures.

With these simulation parameters, the step responses con-
sidering the designed controllers remotely are depicted in
Fig. 11, 12 and 13 for different delay distributions. As we can
see, problems induced by the communications network, that is,
transmission delays and packet losses, do not meaningfully af-
fect the performance of the controlled system, independently of
the traffic model considered for the network (delay distribution
considered).
Hence, in order to measure the jitter margin of the controlled
system using remote controllers, we focus on α − stable distri-
butions to model network traffic as same as recent researches and

6 Copyright 
c 2009 by ASME

Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 01/30/2016 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use

 Figure 11. SYSTEM RESPONSES APPLYING REMOTE PID Figure 14. SYSTEM RESPONSES FOR REMOTE CONTROLLERS
ZIEGLER-NICHOLS CONTROLLER

Figure 15. SYSTEM RESPONSES FOR REMOTE CONTROLLERS

Figure 12. SYSTEM RESPONSES APPLYING REMOTE OPID CON-
WITH JM = 1s
TROLLER

trollers (see Fig. 3).

In Fig. 15, 16, 17 and 18 system responses are represented

using the same jitter margins as the local simulation. It is clear
that the system goes unstable in each case for a smaller value
of the jitter margin. Anyway, the best effectiveness of the con-
trolled Smart Wheel is obtained using the fractional order PI λ Dµ
controller.

Moreover, the proposed controllers effectiveness is verified

Figure 13. SYSTEM RESPONSES APPLYING REMOTE FPID CON-
TROLLER
publications [5, 14] (multifractal nature of delays).
Figure 14 shows the Smart Wheel responses using remote
controllers. As we can observe, taking into account the men-
tioned before about the low influence of the communications net-
work, these responses are similar to the obtained using local con-
for different dropout cases, that is, for different values of the
transmission rate r in the network. Figure 19, 20, 21 and 22 show
the behavior of each controller over the system in these different
information losses situations. It is observed the smaller value
of r, the smaller value of the jitter margin. So, the controlled
system goes unstable for a smaller value of the jitter margin as
long as the value of r decreases. On the other hand, an addi-
tional delay is induced on the system response as time passes for
higher dropout and jitter margin. Anyway, using the fractional
order PIλ Dµ controller remotely, the Smart Wheel has the best
behavior.

7 Copyright 
c 2009 by ASME

Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 01/30/2016 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use

 Figure 16. SYSTEM RESPONSES FOR REMOTE CONTROLLERS Figure 18. SYSTEM RESPONSES FOR REMOTE CONTROLLERS
WITH JM = 1.457s WITH JM = 1.911s

Figure 17. SYSTEM RESPONSES FOR REMOTE CONTROLLERS

WITH JM = 1.571s
Figure 19. SYSTEM RESPONSES FOR REMOTE CONTROLLERS
WITH DIFFERENT RATE TRANSMISSION

CONCLUSIONS
This paper has focused on the networked control of the ex-
perimental platform Smart Wheel applying traditional and frac-
tional order control strategies in order to analyze the effects
of the communications network by means of the jitter margin.
Specifically, a PID controller tuned by improved Ziegler-Nichols
method, an optimal PID controller for time-varying systems and
a fractional order controller have been proposed. Moreover, a
simulation model of a communications network considering dif-
ferent nature of delays is presented.
The behavior of the system applying the proposed con-
trollers remotely is adequate, however the best effectiveness is
obtained using the fractional order PI λ Dµ , since the jitter mar-
gin of the controlled system is higher than using the rest of con-
trollers. Besides, the way of tune the PI λ Dµ controller is so easy.
On the other hand, experimental results are needed in order to
verify the proposed controllers.
Further research is needed on obtaining new and better ap-
proximations of the fractional order controller.
To sum up, the fractional order PI λ Dµ controller has proved
to be a versatile and valuable tool to deal with networked sys-
tems.
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
This work has been supported by the Spanish Ministry
Research Grants DPI2005-07980-C03-03 and TRA2008-06602-
C03-02/AUT.
REFERENCES
[1] Vatanski, N., Georges, J.P., Aubrun, C., Rondeau, E., and
Jämsä-Jounela, S.L., 2009, “Networked Control With De-
lay Measurement and Estimation”. ScienceDirect, Control
Engineering Practice, 17, pp. 231-244.
[2] Hristu-Varsakelis, D., and Levine, W.S., ed., 2005,
Handbook of Networked and Embedded Control Systems,
Birkhäuser.
[3] Hespanha, J.P., Naghshtabrizi, P., and Xu, Y., 2007, “A

8 Copyright 
c 2009 by ASME

Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 01/30/2016 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use

 Figure 20. SYSTEM RESPONSES FOR REMOTE CONTROLLERS
WITH DIFFERENT RATE TRANSMISSION (WITH JM = 1.457s)
Figure 21. SYSTEM RESPONSES FOR REMOTE CONTROLLERS
WITH DIFFERENT RATE TRANSMISSION (WITH JM = 1.571s)
Survey of Recent Results in Networked Control Systems”.
In: Proceedings of the IEEE, 95(1), pp. 138-162.
[4] Gómez-Skarmeta, A.F., Martinez-Barberá, H., and Tomás-
Balibrea, L.M., 2002, “Mimics: Exploiting Satellite Tech-
nology for an Intelligent Convoy”. Intelligent Transporta-
tion Systems, pp. 85-89.
[5] Mukhopadhyay, S., Han, Y., and Chen, Y.Q., 2009, “Frac-
tional Order Networked Control Systems and Random
Delay Dynamics: A Hardware-In-The-Loop Simulation
Study”. In: Proceedings of the 2009 American Control
Conference.
[6] Peng, C., Yue, D., Tian, E., and Gu, Z., 2009, A Delay Dis-
tribution Based Stability Analysis and Synthesis Approach
for Networked Control Systems. Journal of the Franklin In-
stitute, In Press, Corrected Proof, Available online 23 Jan-
uary 2009.
[7] Kasaridis, A., and Hatzinakos, D., 2001, “Network Heavy
9 Copyright 
Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 01/30/2016 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use
Figure 22. SYSTEM RESPONSES FOR REMOTE CONTROLLERS
WITH DIFFERENT RATE TRANSMISSION (WITH JM = 1.911s)
Traffic Modeling Using α−stable Self-similar Processes”.
IEEE Transactions on Communications, 49(7), pp. 1203-
1214.
[8] Tejado, I., Vinagre, B.M., and Suárez, J.I., 2008, “Effects
of a Communication Network on the Longitudinal and Lat-
eral Control of an AGV”. In: Proceedings of 2008 IEEE In-
ternational Symposium on Industrial Electronics, pp. 2084-
2089.
[9] Tejado, I., Vinagre, B.M., Suárez, J.I., and de Pedro, T.,
2008, “Bounded Control Strategies for Minimizing the Ef-
fects of the Communications Network on Lateral Control
of an AGV”. In: Proceedings of 14th IEEE Mediterranean
Electrotechnical Conference.
[10] Romero, M., Tejado, I., Suárez, J.I., Vinagre, B.M., and de
Madrid, A.P., 2009, “GPC Strategies for the Lateral Con-
trol of a Networked AGV”. In: Proceedings of 5th IEEE
International Conference on Mechatronics.
[11] Ray, J., 2004, “Networked Control System Co-simulation
for Co-design: Theory and Experiments”. Ph.D. Thesis,
Case Western Reserve University.
[12] Eriksson, L., 2008, “PID Controller Design And Tuning
In Networked Control Systems”. Ph.D. Thesis, Helsinki
University of Technology.
[13] Nilsson, J., 1998, “Real-time Control Systems With De-
lays”. Ph.D. dissertation, Lund Institute of Technology.
[14] Zaborovsky, V., and Meylanov, R., 2001, “Informational
Network Traffic Model Based on Fractional Calculus”. In:
Proceedings of the 2001 International Conferences on Info-
tech and Infor-net, 1, pp. 58-63.
[15] FRACTEL, Inc., 2002, “New Traffic Model on
the Base of Fractional Calculus”. See also URL
http://www.fractel.ru/papers.shtm.
[16] Ostertag, E., and Carvalho-Ostertag, J., 2006, “Inverted
Pendulum Stabilization in an NCS Scheme with Packet
c 2009 by ASME
 Losses”. In: Proceedings of the 7th Portuguese Conference
on Automatic Control.
[17] Flann, N., and Moore, K., 2000, “A Six-wheeled Omnidi-
rectional Autonomous Mobile Robot”. IEEE Control Sys-
tems Magazine, 20, pp. 53-66.
[18] Bhambhani, V., Han, Y., Mukhopadhyay, S., Luo, Y., and
Chen, Y.Q., 2008, “Experimental Study on the Real-
time Smart Wheel Networked Speed Control System Using
Hardware-in-the-Loop Control”. Submitted to Communi-
cations in Nonlinear Science and Numerical Simulation.
[19] Bhambhani, V., Han, Y., Mukhopadhyay, S., Luo, Y., and
Chen, Y.Q., 2008, “Random Delay Effect Minimization on
a Hardware-in-the-Loop Networked Control System Using
Optimal Fractional Order PI Controllers”. In: Proceedings
of the IFAC Conference on Fractional Differentiation and
Its Applications.
[20] Cervin, A., Lincoln, B., Eker, J., Årzén, K.E., and But-
tazzo, G., 2004, “The Jitter Margin and Its Application in
the Design of Real-Time Control Systems”. In: Proceed-
ings of the 10th International Conference on Real-Time and
Embedded Compunting Systems and Applications.
[21] Åström, K.J., and Murray, R.M., 2008, Feedback Systems.
An Introduction for Scientists and Engineers. Princeton
Universtiy Press, Princeton.
[22] Monje, C.A., 2006, “Design Methods of Fractional Order
Controllers for Industrial Applications”. Ph.D. Thesis, Uni-
versity of Extremadura.
[23] Nolan, J.P., John Nolan’s Stable Distribution Page. See
URL http://academic2.american.edu/˜jpnolan.
[24] Nolan, J.P., 2001, “Maximum Likelihood Estimation and
Diagnostics for Stable Distributions”. Lévy Processes: The-
ory and Applications, Birkhäuser, pp. 379–400.

10 Copyright 
c 2009 by ASME

Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 01/30/2016 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use