Pid Based Self-Balancing Robot

PID BASED SELF-BALANCING ROBOT
CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION
We, since childhood, have inherently and unknowingly been practicing to balance
various objects. It may be balancing stick on palm, moving with a glass of water filled up to the
brim, walking on a narrow wall, cycling, etc. All of it requires a balancing algorithm for which
we have trained our brain to do so. Similar examples can be quoted from industrial applications
like Segway, loading machines at shipyard, robotic applications, etc.
We, in this project, will be working on a similar concept with a focus on transportation
industry and affordability. Over the years, this industry has been evolving, rolling out various
innovative products in the market. There has also been a constant focus on customer’s needs and
demands.
This project of ours will focus on small spectrum of personalized mobile platform,
primarily for physically challenged people for the Indian market. During the course of this
project, we will be making a scaled down version of the same to prove the concept, incurring
minimum cost. To be more precise, it is a two-wheeled platform with a dummy weight at the top
symbolizing a person, required to balance vertically and be able to move in desired direction.
A similar concept being studied since long is an experimental setup known as ‘Inverted
Pendulum’. It is a common control system implementation. It is a system with mass above its
pivot point. While a normal pendulum is stable hanging downwards, an inverted pendulum is
inherently unstable. For an inverted pendulum to balance, it is required to continuously take the
feedback of its tilt from its unstable equilibrium position and correct it by applying external
force, which, in our case, is done by actuating a motor.
In our case, we need to balance the pendulum about its unstable equilibrium. Hence, any
disturbance needs to be quantifiably detected and instantly corrected by an external force. There
EE DEPARTMENT , SRMGPC , LUCKNOW Page 1

is a limited disturbance angle beyond which it may be mathematically impossible to get it back
to its equilibrium position with any amount of external force.
It’s quite difficult to hold a pen in your hand and balance it. But to do the same thing with
a broom in your hand, it’s relatively simple. The reason is that there is more time to compensate.
For that reason, it’s actually easier the higher we are off the ground. There are various control
algorithms widely used for such applications. We have used a PID controller in our case. A
processor and electric motors in the base of the device keep the vehicle upright when powered on
with balancing enabled. Gyroscopic sensors are used to detect tilting of the device which
indicates a departure from perfect balance. Motors driving the wheels are commanded as needed
to bring the vehicle back into balance. The dynamics of the vehicle are identical to a classic
control problem, the inverted pendulum. The vehicle has electric motors powered by lithium-
polymer batteries. It balances with the help of a microcontroller, accelerometer, and gyroscope.
1.1. MOTIVATION
Over past few years, we have seen the transportation industry grow and providing its
customers with innovative solutions in personalized mobile platforms. But, less was focus on
physically challenged people. Our focus in this project will be towards trying to engineer a
personalized mobile vehicle for physically challenged people and design it in away keeping in
mind their inherent constraints. At the same time, the vehicle will be designed with affordability
as one of the deciding factors in coming up with the design and manufacturing process.
1.2. SCOPE
As it is not possible for us to come up with a full scale, robust and aesthetic product in the
given time frame, we will be concentrating on making a scaled down version of the experimental
setup to prove the concept and affordability. During the process, we will be taking a standard
literature of inverted pendulum on an experimental basis and make a two-wheeled personalized
mobile platform, which could travel in the desired direction by sensing either the external control
signals or the tilt of the rider, which will be a dummy weight in our experiment. This inverted
pendulum, being free to move in any translational direction and rotate about its own vertical axis.
For the theoretical analysis, we will consider cart and a pendulum problem. For balancing this

system, there are various controllers that can be used. We, in our case, will be using PID
controllers, which is a common and basic of all. We will be stating a standard protocol to
manually tune the PID controller as per our needs with varying physical parameters. Because of
limited resources available, the setup will be limited to balance and traverse only on flat surfaces,
not even on inclined planes. Scaling it up to commercially launch it in the market will require
scaling up of hardware as well as electronics. Power requirements for the battery and current
ratings of the motor driver will go up proportionally. Motors will require to have higher torque
and speed. Sensor should be able to detect tilt independent of the ground in order for the setup to
work in all-terrain. Hardware will need to be stronger for it to be able to support an average
human being’s weight. Aesthetics and ergonomics will play an important role when placing the
same in the consumer market.
1.3. OBJECTIVE
Objective of this project is to demonstrate a working prototype (scaled down version) of a
personalized mobile platform which can move in desired direction of travel inclusive of
translation while at the same time balancing itself vertically in a smooth fashion.
1.4. LIMITATION
Resources available limit us, in this project. Sensors used in this project are not suited for
wide range of applications, as we would explain later in detail. Motors do not have inbuilt
encoders and hence cannot be used for dead reckoning. Motors not being a standard one, its
gains could not be determined and hence computer simulation of the same could not be carried
out with accuracy. Due to limited time availability, battery voltage could not be regulated for the
motors, which plays an important role in the response of the system. Acquisition of data on to the
computer for the purpose of further analysis of data is again limited due to less powerful
microprocessor onboard.

CHAPTER 2
LITERATURE REVIEW
Hau-Shiue Juang, et al (2013), Author in his research paper “Design and control of a two-wheel
self-balancing robot using the arduino microcontroller board” have discussed about design,
construction and control of a two-wheel self-balancing robot. The system architecture comprises
a pair of DC motor and an Arduino microcontroller board; a single-axis gyroscope and a 2-axis
accelerometer are employed for attitude determination. In addition, a complementary filter is
implemented to compensate for gyro drifts. Electrical and kinematic parameters are determined
experimentally; PID and LQR-based PI-PD control designs, respectively, are performed on the
linearized equations of motion. Experimental results show that self-balancing can be achieved
with PI-PD control in the vicinity of the upright position.
Frank L. Lewis, et al (1999), Author in his research paper “Hybrid Control for a Class of
Underactuated Mechanical Systems” have discussed about stabilizing hybrid scheme to control a
class of underactuated mechanical systems. The hybrid controller consists of a collection of state
feedback controllers plus a discrete-event supervisor. When the continuous-state hits a switching
boundary, a new controller is applied to the plant. Lyapunov theory is used to determine the
switching boundaries and to guarantee the stability of the closed-loop hybrid system. This
approach is applied to the well-known swing up and balancing control problem of the inverted
pendulum.
Joshua Gafford, et al (2012), Author in his article “Modeling, Simulation and Fabrication of a
Balancing Robot” said that we had to perform a hardware design of the balancing robot,
including any rationale behind component selection. We will then give a derivation of the
equations of motion using a Lagrangian approach, and investigate the effect of center-of-mass
position on the closed-loop dynamics of the system. In addition, we will discuss controllability
and observability of the system and derive a fullstate feedback control based on the Linear

Quadratic Regulator (LQR) method. Finally we will derive a two-state discrete Kalman filter for
smoothing out sensor/process noise, and simulate the entire system in Simulink. We will close
with some discussion on the actual response of the physical balancing robot, outfitted with full-
state control and Kalman filter.
Eldhose P. Kunnel, et al (2018), The article is about “Controlling of two wheeled self balancing
robot using PID”. According to this article Self balancing robot is essentially an inverted
pendulum. It can balance better if centre of mass is higher relative to the wheel axels. A higher
centre of mass means a higher moment of inertia which means a lower angular acceleration. It
act as a robot which can balance by itself. The experiment requires Arduino, MPU6050 board,
L293D driver module. Balancing of the robot can be done with help of feedback and a correction
element. Feedback element is the MPU6050 board which tells the Arduino about current
orientation of the robot. Experiment mainly uses PID controller, having gains Kp, Kiand Kd. PID
provides correction between desired value and actual value. The difference between input and
output is called error. The PID controller reduces the error to smallest value possible by adjusting
theoutput. MU6050 reads the current tilt of robot and feeds it to the PID algorithm, which
performs calculations to control motor and keep the robot in upright position.
Nguyen Gia Minh Thao, et al (2010), Write a paper “ A PID backstepping controller for two
wheeled self balancing robot”. This paper presents a method to design and control a two-wheeled
self-balancing robot and it focus on hardware description, signal processing, discrete Kalman
filter algorithm, system modelling and PID backstepping controller design. In the system, signals
from angle sensors are filtered by a discrete Kalman filter before being fed to the PID
backstepping controller. The objectives of the proposed controller are to stabilize the robot while
try to keep the motion of robot to track a reference signal. The proposed PID backstepping
controller has three control loops, in which the first loop uses a backstepping controller to
maintain the robot at equilibrium, the second loop uses a PD controller to control the position of
robot and the last uses a PI controller to control the motion direction. Simulations and
experimental results show that the proposed control system has good performances in terms of
quick response, good balance, stability .

Rich Chi Ooi, et al (2003), In his thesis on the topic “ Balancing a two wheeled autonomous
robot” discusses the processes developed and considerations involved in balancing a two-
wheeled autonomous robot based on the inverted pendulum model. The instability of inverted
pendulum systems has always been an excellent test bed for control theory experimentation.
Therefore it is also the aim of this thesis to investigate the suitability and examine the
performance of linear control systems like the Linear Quadratic Regulator and Pole-placement
controller in stabilising the system.
Siddhesh Bhagat, et al (2018), Author have discussed in their research article about “Self
Balancing Robot”. Author writes, In last few decades, the open source community has expanded
to make it possible for people to build complex product at home. The most common is the
passively balanceness (i.e. state of stable equilibrium). The main goal of our project is to design
and implement a discrete control system that will provide robotic stability. There has been
varieties of technique to increase the robotic stability on dynamic environments .One such
popular technique used for mobile robots is an inverted pendulum based model. A robot that
implements the inverted pendulum is usually a tower shaped structure, usually standing on two-
wheels and autonomously commanding the motors such that it can keep itself upright while also
travelling guided by the user input .Complementary are implemented which is associated with
the noise of the signal .Thus the purpose of complementary filter if to simplify the noise by
passing it to low pass and high pass filter. We are demonstrating a method which presents the
stability by reading the robots tilt from sensors and computing commands for the motors and is
analysed using different filter coefficients using PID algorithm as the control strategy.
Peter Miller, et al (2008), Author have written an article about “ Building a two wheeled
balancing robot”. According to him two wheeled balancing robots are an area of research that
may well provide the future locomotion for everyday robots. The unique stability control that is
required to keep the robot upright differentiates it from traditional forms of robotics. The
inverted pendulum principle provides the mathematical modelling of the naturally unstable
system. This is then utilised to develop and implement a suitable stability control system that is
responsive, timely and successful in achieving this objective.

Henrik, et al (2015), Author have written an article on “ Two wheeled self balancing robot”.
According to author In the last decade, the open source community has expanded to make it pos-
sible for people to build complex products at home. In this thesis a two- wheeled self-balancing
robot has been designed. These types of robots can be based on the physical problem of an
inverted pendulum . The system in itself requires active control in order to be stable. Using open
source microcontroller Arduino Uno and reliable angular and positional data the system can be
made stable by implementing a controller.A modern and efficient controller is the LQR - Linear
Quadratic Regulator. Being a state space feedback controller the model has to be a good
representation of reality since the output signal depends on the model. In this thesis, the
validation process was performed using a PID-regulator. The results showed that the model is
not yet reliable. The reasons for this are discussed and recommendations for future development
are listed.

CHAPTER 3
METHODOLOGY
We will carry out a theoretical analysis of our project and try to mathematically calculate the
results with given assumptions and constraints. We hereby state that these results may not
closely match the experimental results due to underlying assumptions and unavailability of few
parameters that determine the response of the setup.
3.1. STUDY AREA

Our area of study will be primarily Control Theory. It is an interdisciplinary branch of
engineering and mathematics that deals with the behavior of dynamical systems. The external
input of a system is called reference. When one or more output variables of a system need to
follow a certain reference over time, a controller manipulates the inputs to a system to obtain the
desired effect on the output of the system.
Our system is a practical application of a common control system experimental setup,

known as ‘Inverted Pendulum’. While a pendulum is normally stable handing downwards, a
pendulum upside-down is inherently unstable and needs a continuous external force to keep it in
an upright position. Every pendulum setup has two equilibrium points – Stable and Unstable
Equilibrium. As the setup demands, we are required to continuously take the tilt feedback and
provide an external force to keep the system balanced about its unstable equilibrium. There are
various control algorithms that can be implemented in order to achieve the same. However, we
will be using most commonly used algorithm, PID (Proportional Integral Differential).
We will also be looking at methods to manually tune the controller, looking at its response
to any given parameter.
3.2. EQUILIBRIUM
Equilibrium is a state of a system in which the variables that describe the system are not
changing. Every pendulum pivot about a frictionless point has two equilibrium positions, stable
and unstable in its complete possible rotation. In a Stable equilibrium, if a small perturbation
away from equilibrium is applied, the system will return itself to the equilibrium state. In an

unstable equilibrium, if a small perturbation away from equilibrium is applied, the system will
move farther away from its equilibrium state. Strictly speaking, mathematically we determine
whether a mechanical equilibrium is stable or unstable by looking at the second derivative of the
energy with respect to the coordinate of interest.
As an example, assume we have a pendulum weighing 1kg and is pivot about a point
with the help of massless rod of length 50cm. Following will be its energy curve (assuming the
velocity to be zero at equilibrium) as a function of angle from vertical.
Figure 3.1: Stable and Unstable Equilibrium of the free pendulum pivot about a
frictionless point
3.3. ASSUMPTIONS
The dynamic model of the proposed robot is calculated based on Newtonian method.
Assumptions which are considered in this dynamics model can be regarded as:
1) Body and wheels are rigid.
2) Both wheels have same radius.

3) The wheels roll on the ground without slipping.

4) The ground is a flat surface with a certain slope.
5) Both wheels have the same mass.
3.4. DYNAMICS MODEL
Figure 3.2: Dynamic model parameters
Figure 3.3: Free body diagram of wheels

Figures 3.2 and 3.3 illustrate the proposed robot dynamic model parameters. By considering ‘m’
as wheel mass and Ff as friction force between the ground and wheels, one has equation 3.1:
ma= Ff - FH (3.1)
Where ‘a’ is the linear acceleration and FH is the reactionary force between wheels and the
proposed robot body. By considering ‘α’ as the wheel’s angular acceleration and ‘τ’ as motor
torque, one has equation 3.2:
τ – Ff × r = Jα (3.2)
In (3.2), ‘r’ is the wheel radius and ‘J’ is the model rotational moment of inertia. In order to
calculate the proposed robot body dynamic model terms, by considering M as the robot mass and
‘xs’ as distance between the robot center of mass and x-axis, one has:
xs = x + dsinθ (3.3)
d2 xs (3.4)
M = 2 FH
dt2
In (3.3), θ is the angular displacement of the under-study self balancing robot body from balance
situation and ‘d’ is the distance between the motor shaft and the proposed robot body center of
mass. By substituting (3.3) into (3.4), one has:
d2 (x+dsinθ) (3.5)
M = 2 FH
dt2
For y-axis, (3.3), (3.4) and (3.5) can be rewritten as:
ys = d×(1-cosθ) (3.6)

d2 y s (3.7)
M = 2 Fv –Mg
dt2
where Fv is the reactionary vertical force. By substituting (3.6) into (3.7), one has (3.8):
d2 (d×(1−cosθ)) (3.8)
M = 2 Fv –Mg
dt2
By considering Js as the proposed robot rotational moment of inertia, one has:
Jsα = -2×(τ + FH × Lcosθ - FV × dsinθ) (3.9)
Due to the balance angle in τ = 0, two assumptions can be regarded as:
sinθ ≈ θ (3.10)
cosθ ≈ 1 (3.11)
By considering (3.10) and (3.11), (3.5), (3.8) and (3.9) are rewritten as:
M×(a + dα) = 2 FH (3.12)
Mg = 2Fv (3.13)
Js α = -2×(τ + FHL – Fv dθ) (3.14)
Now, by substituting (3.1), (3.12) into (3.2), one has:

J rM rMd (3.15)
τ = a× [ + r×m + ] + α× [ ]
r 2 2

3.5 CONTROL MODEL

By considering τ as motor torque and kτ as torque constant, one has:
τ = kτ × I (3.16)
di (3.17)
V = Ri + L + Ve
dt
In (3.17), R is nominal terminal resistance, L is rotor inductance and Ve is back electromotive

force (EMF) voltage. Equation (3.17) can be written as (3.18) because the electrical actions of
motors are faster than mechanical action:
V = R×I + Ve (3.18)
The back EMF voltage in (3.17) is:
Ve = Ke × ω (3.19)
where Ke is the back-EMF constant and ω is the shaft angular velocity. By considering (3.16),
(3.17), (3.18) and (3.19), one has:
𝑅×τ (3.20)
V≈ + 𝐾𝑒 ω
𝐾τ
Due to difference of angular velocity in ground coordinate and the angular velocity which is
measured by encoder, one has:
ẋ (3.21)
𝜔𝑒 =
𝑟
𝑑θ (3.22)
ω=𝜔𝑒 +
𝑑𝑡
In (3.21) and (3.22),𝜔𝑒 is the angular velocity which is measured by encoder. By substituting
(3.22) into (3.21), one has:

ẋ 𝑑θ (3.23)
ω= +
𝑟 𝑑𝑡
Now, by substituting (3.23) in (3.20), one has:

𝑅×τ ẋ 𝑑θ (3.24)
V= +𝐾𝑒 [ + ]
𝐾𝑇 𝑟 𝑑𝑡
By substituting (3.15) from dynamics model section in (3.23), one has:

𝑅 𝐽 (𝑟𝑀𝑎+𝑟𝑀𝑑𝑎) ẋ 𝑑θ (3.25)
V= + [ 𝑎 + rma + ]a + 𝐾𝑒 [ + ]
𝐾𝜏 𝑟 2 𝑟 𝑑𝑡
Now, by substituting (3.12), (3.13) and (3.15) in (3.14), one has:

2𝐽 (3.26)
[𝐽𝑠 + Md(r+d)]θ + [ + 2rm + (r+d)M] ẋ - Mgdθ = 0
𝑟
Now, tilt angle, θ and displacement, x can be calculated as shown in equation (3.27) and (3.28).
[𝐽𝑠 + Md(r+d)]𝑎 (3.27)

θ = 2𝐽 dt
[ 𝑟 + 2rm + (r+d)M]a
(3.28)
𝑀𝑔𝑑𝜃−[𝐽𝑠 + Md(r+d)a]
x = ∫∫ 2𝐽
+ 2rm + (r+d)M
𝑟

CHAPTER 4
EXPERIMENTS
Many experiments were carried out before coming up with a working prototype which
suits our purpose. Depending on feasibility and success, some of them are implemented on the
final prototype, while others are not.
4.1. INERTIAL MEASUREMENT UNIT

An Inertial Measurement Unit, or IMU, is an electronic device to measure the relative
states of a static or mobile unit with respect to the inertial reference frame. It measures and
reports on a craft’s velocity, acceleration, and gravitational forces, using a combination of
accelerometers, gyroscopes and magnetometers. IMUs are typically used to maneuver aircraft,
including unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs), among many others, and spacecraft, including
shuttles, satellites and landers. IMU has an onboard processor, ATmega 2560 , the output can be
modified as desired by changing its firmware. Procedure to modify its firmware is exactly same
as that of Arduino, an electronic open source prototypic platform. Hence, it was modified to
calculate and give euler angles i.e., pitch, roll and yaw as its output in a standard format, taking
input from accelerometer, gyroscope and magnetometer present onboard. A special hardware
called UART, piece of hardware that translates data between parallel and serial forms, present on
both sides of the communications enables the transfer of data from IMU to Arduino. The
continuous feedback of tilt angles is used to run a PID algorithm in ATmega 2560 , which in turn
actuates the motor.
Discussion:
The earth’s gravity is a constant acceleration where the force is always pointing down to
the center of the earth. When the accelerometer is parallel with the gravity, the measured
acceleration will be 1G, when the accelerometer is perpendicular with the gravity, it will measure
0G. Unfortunately, this theory can be applied when the robot is completely static. When robot is
moving, there will be other components of acceleration acting on the robot and causing the
calculated tilt angle to be inaccurate.

It is challenging to design, test and integrate low-cost inertial sensors into a powerful
IMU for navigation uses. More considerations for system design and sensor fusion algorithms
need to be addressed to achieve autonomous navigations missions. The sensor fusion problem is
defined as making an optimal estimation of the required vehicle states with the direct
measurement from multiple sensors. There are possible solutions to this problem such as Kalman
filters or complimentary filters. The orientation is not directly measurable and has to be
estimated from a set of correlated states. Therefore, the estimation accuracy of IMUs heavily
relies on the sensor fusion algorithm. These algorithms may have high demands for
computational power, which is not possible for low-cost IMUs.
Accelerometer lets us measure the forces caused by turning, accelerating or braking, but
the measurements won’t be accurate unless the vehicle is level relative to the earth during these
maneuvers. If the vehicle tilts forward, we will get gravity components measured by the
accelerometer we use to measure the braking force. Most tilt sensors sense the direction of
gravity as a reference direction. Braking, accelerating and turning a vehicle produce
accelerations on the vehicle. In a tilt measurement, we want to measure gravitational acceleration
only. In a measurement of a vehicle’s dynamics, we want to measure motional acceleration only.
A tilt sensor (uncompensated) will give inaccurate angle measurements when subjected
to motion acceleration. An accelerometer will give inaccurate acceleration measurements when
the vehicle tilts.
Angular rate sensors can help correct for the effect of the forward tilt by measuring
rotations around the center of gravity of the vehicle. Unfortunately, angular rate measure rotation
rate, not rotation angle; the rotation angle is found by integrating the measured rotation rate over
time. Error in rotation rate will integrate in larger error value. In addition, the random noise in
the rate sensors will produce a random walk effect in the calculated angle. These effects will
limit the usefulness of all but the most expensive angular rate sensors for measurements longer
than a few minutes.
Fortunately, use the rate sensor to measure angle changes on short time scales. Use the
accelerometer like a tilt sensor to calculate the tilt angles, and force the rate sensor derived

angles to slowly match the accelerometer angles over a long time scale. To perform these
measurements, we need sensors, data-acquisition equipment and computational power.
Results:
This IMU could not be used as the data was not reliable in case of dynamic environment.
Its acceleration compensation for the dynamic movements of the setup was not proper due to
limited computing power. Also, its delayed response makes it unsuitable for our purpose.
Further, one of the problems noticed was the continuous shift of reference angle even during its
operation.
4.2. MOTOR DRIVER

We were initially using a standard motor driver used very commonly in all the basic
robotics applications. It was TB6612FNG.
TB6612FNG Specifications:
o Power supply voltage; Vm = 15V (Max)


o Output current; Iout = 1.2A(Ave) / 3.2A(Peak)

o Output low ON resistor; 0.5 Ohm (Upper + Lower Typ. @ Vm >= 5V)

o Two input Signals

o Standby (Power Save) system

o Built-in thermal shutdown circuit and low voltage detecting circuit

o Small faced package
In a typical application, power connections are made on one side of the board and control
connections are made on the other.

CHAPTER 5
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Block Diagram of self balancing robot is shown in figure 5.1. It consists of MPU 6050, micro
controller AT Mega 2560, TB6612FNG motor driver and DC gear motor.
POWER SUPPLY
BLUETOOTH MODULE
RIGHT RIGHT
GYROSCOPE
MOTOR WHEEL
MICRO
CONTROLLER
MOTOR
DRIVER



ACCELEROMETER LEFT LEFT
 MOTOR WHEEL



Figure 5.1: Block diagram of self balancing robot

5.1. MATERIALS USED

5.1.1 MPU 6050
Overview:
Motion Interface is becoming a “must-have” function being adopted by smartphone and
tablet manufacturers due to the enormous value it adds to the end user experience. In smart
phones, it finds use in applications such as gesture commands for applications and phone control,
enhanced gaming, augmented reality, panoramic photo capture and viewing, and pedestrian and
vehicle navigation. With its ability to precisely and accurately track user motions, Motion
Tracking technology can convert handsets and tablets into powerful 3D intelligent devices that
can be used in applications ranging from health and fitness monitoring to location-based
services. Key requirements for Motion Interface enabled devices are small package size, low
power consumption, high accuracy and repeatability, high shock tolerance, and application
specific performance programmability all at a low consumer price point.
The MPU-6050 shown in figure 5.2 is the world’s first integrated 6-axis Motion Tracking
device that combines a 3-axis gyroscope, 3-axis accelerometer, and a Digital Motion Processor™
(DMP) all in a small 4x4x0.9mm package. With its dedicated I2C sensor bus, it directly accepts
inputs from an external 3-axis compass to provide a complete 9-axis Motion Fusion output. The
MPU-6050 Motion Tracking device, with its 6-axis integration, on-board Motion Fusion, and
run-time calibration firmware, enables manufacturers to eliminate the costly and complex
selection, qualification, and system level integration of discrete devices, guaranteeing optimal
motion performance for consumers. The MPU-6050 is also designed to interface with multiple
non-inertial digital sensors, such as pressure sensors, on its auxiliary I2C port. The MPU-6050 is
footprint compatible with the MPU-30X0 family.
The MPU-6050 features three 16-bit analog-to-digital converters (ADCs) for digitizing
the gyroscope outputs and three 16-bit ADCs for digitizing the accelerometer outputs. For
precision tracking of both fast and slow motions, the parts feature a user-programmable

gyroscope full-scale range of ±250, ±500, ±1000, and ±2000°/sec (dps) and a user-
programmable accelerometer full-scale range of ±2g, ±4g, ±8g, and ±16g.
An on-chip 1024 Byte FIFO buffer helps lower system power consumption by allowing
the system processor to read the sensor data in bursts and then enter a low-power mode as the
MPU collects more data. With all the necessary on-chip processing and sensor components
required to support many motion-based use cases, the MPU-6050 uniquely enables low-power
Motion Interface applications in portable applications with reduced processing requirements for
the system processor. By providing an integrated Motion Fusion output, the DMP in the MPU-
6050 offloads the intensive Motion Processing computation requirements from the system
processor, minimizing the need for frequent polling of the motion sensor output.
Communication with all registers of the device is performed using either I2C at 400kHz
or SPI at 1MHz (MPU-6000 only). For applications requiring faster communications, the sensor
and interrupt registers may be read using SPI at 20MHz (MPU-6000 only). Additional features
include an embedded temperature sensor and an on-chip oscillator with ±1% variation over the
operating temperature range.
By leveraging its patented and volume-proven Nasiri-Fabrication platform, which

integrates MEMS wafers with companion CMOS electronics through wafer-level bonding,
InvenSense has driven the MPU-6050 package size down to a revolutionary footprint of
4x4x0.9mm (QFN), while providing the highest performance, lowest noise, and the lowest cost
semiconductor packaging required for handheld consumer electronic devices. The part features a
robust 10,000g shock tolerance, and has programmable low-pass filters for the gyroscopes,
accelerometers, and the on-chip temperature sensor.
For power supply flexibility, the MPU-6050 operates from VDD power supply voltage
range of 2.375V-3.46V. Additionally, the MPU-6050 provides a VLOGIC reference pin (in
addition to its analog supply pin: VDD), which sets the logic levels of its I2C interface. The
VLOGIC voltage may be 1.8V±5% or VDD.

Features:
Gyroscope Features:
The triple-axis MEMS gyroscope in the MPU-6050 includes a wide range of features:
 Digital-output X-, Y-, and Z-Axis angular rate sensors (gyroscopes) with a user-
programmable full-scale range of ±250, ±500, ±1000, and ±2000°/sec
 External sync signal connected to the FSYNC pin supports image, video and GPS
synchronization
 Integrated 16-bit ADCs enable simultaneous sampling of gyros
 Enhanced bias and sensitivity temperature stability reduces the need for user calibration
 Improved low-frequency noise performance
 Digitally-programmable low-pass filter
 Gyroscope operating current: 3.6mA
 Standby current: 5μA
 Factory calibrated sensitivity scale factor
 User self-test
Accelerometer Features:
The triple-axis MEMS accelerometer in MPU-6050 includes a wide range of features:
 Digital-output triple-axis accelerometer with a programmable full scale range of ±2g,
±4g, ±8g and ±16g
 Integrated 16-bit ADCs enable simultaneous sampling of accelerometers while requiring
no external multiplexer
 Accelerometer normal operating current: 500μA
 Low power accelerometer mode current: 10μA at 1.25Hz, 20μA at 5Hz, 60μA at 20Hz,
110μA at 40Hz
 Orientation detection and signaling
 Tap detection
 User-programmable interrupts

Figure 5.2: MPU 6050

Applications:
 Handset and portable gaming
 Motion-based game controllers
 Wearable sensors for health, fitness and sports
 Toys
5.1.2. Micro Controller AT Mega – 2560
The Arduino Mega 2560 is a microcontroller board based on the ATmega2560 (datasheet). It has
54 digital input/output pins (of which 14 can be used as PWM outputs), 16 analog inputs, 4
UARTs (hardware serial ports), a 16 MHz crystal oscillator, a USB connection, a power jack, an
ICSP header, and a reset button. It contains everything needed to support the microcontroller;
simply connect it to a computer with a USB cable or power it with a ACto-DC adapter or battery
to get started. The Mega is compatible with most shields designed for the Arduino Duemilanove.
Figure 5.3: Summary

Power : The Arduino Mega can be powered via the USB connection or with an external power
supply. The power source is selected automatically. External (non-USB) power can come either
from an AC-to-DC adapter (wall-wart) or battery. The adapter can be connected by plugging a
2.1mm center-positive plug into the board's power jack. Leads from a battery can be inserted in
the Gnd and Vin pin headers of the POWER connector. The board can operate on an external
supply of 6 to 20 volts. If supplied with less than 7V, however, the 5V pin may supply less than
five volts and the board may be unstable. If using more than 12V, the voltage regulator may
overheat and damage the board. The recommended range is 7 to 12 volts. The Mega2560 differs
from all preceding boards in that it does not use the FTDI USB-toserial driver chip. Instead, it
features the Atmega8U2 programmed as a USB-to-serial converter.
The power pins are as follows:
● VIN. The input voltage to the Arduino board when it's using an external power source (as
opposed to 5 volts from the USB connection or other regulated power source). You can supply
voltage through this pin, or, if supplying voltage via the power jack, access it through this pin.
● 5V. The regulated power supply used to power the microcontroller and other components on
the board. This can come either from VIN via an on-board regulator, or be supplied by USB or
another regulated 5V supply.
● 3V3. A 3.3 volt supply generated by the on-board regulator. Maximum current draw is 50 mA.
● GND. Ground pins.
Figure 5.4: ARDUINO MEGA 2560

Input and Output : Each of the 54 digital pins on the Mega can be used as an input or output,
using pin Mode() , digital Write(), and digital Read() functions. They operate at 5 volts. Each pin
can provide or receive a maximum of 40 mA and has an internal pull-up resistor (disconnected
by default) of 20-50 kOhms. In addition, some pins have specialized functions:
● Serial: 0 (RX) and 1 (TX); Serial 1: 19 (RX) and 18 (TX); Serial 2: 17 (RX) and 16 (TX);
Serial 3: 15 (RX) and 14 (TX). Used to receive (RX) and transmit (TX) TTL serial data. Pins 0
and 1 are also connected to the corresponding pins of the ATmega8U2 USB-to-TTL Serial chip.
● External Interrupts: 2 (interrupt 0), 3 (interrupt 1), 18 (interrupt 5), 19 (interrupt 4), 20
(interrupt 3), and 21 (interrupt 2). These pins can be configured to trigger an interrupt on a low
value, a rising or falling edge, or a change in value. See the attach Interrupt() function for details.
● PWM: 0 to 13. Provide 8-bit PWM output with the analog Write() function.
● SPI: 50 (MISO), 51 (MOSI), 52 (SCK), 53 (SS). These pins support SPI communication using
the SPI library. The SPI pins are also broken out on the ICSP header, which is physically
compatible with the Uno, Duemilanove and Diecimila.
● LED: 13. There is a built-in LED connected to digital pin 13. When the pin is HIGH value,
the LED is on, when the pin is LOW, it's off.
● I2C: 20 (SDA) and 21 (SCL). Support I2C (TWI) communication using the Wire library
(documentation on the Wiring website). Note that these pins are not in the same location as the
I2C pins on the Duemilanove or Diecimila. The Mega2560 has 16 analog inputs, each of which
provide 10 bits of resolution (i.e. 1024 different values). By default they measure from ground to
5 volts, though is it possible to change the upper end of their range using the AREF pin and
analog Reference() function.
There are a couple of other pins on the board:
● AREF. Reference voltage for the analog inputs. Used with analog Reference().
● Reset. Bring this line LOW to reset the microcontroller. Typically used to add a reset button to
shields which block the one on the board.
Communication : The Arduino Mega2560 has a number of facilities for communicating with a
computer, another Arduino, or other microcontrollers. The ATmega2560 provides four hardware
UARTs for TTL (5V) serial communication. An ATmega8U2 on the board channels one of these
over USB and provides a virtual com port to software on the computer (Windows machines will
need a .inf file, but OSX and Linux machines will recognize the board as a COM port

automatically. The Arduino software includes a serial monitor which allows simple textual data
to be sent to and from the board. The RX and TX LEDs on the board will flash when data is
being transmitted via the ATmega8U2 chip and USB connection to the computer (but not for
serial communication on pins 0 and 1). A SoftwareSerial library allows for serial communication
on any of the Mega2560's digital pins. The ATmega2560 also supports I2C (TWI) and SPI
communication. The Arduino software includes a Wire library to simplify use of the I2C bus; see
the documentation on the Wiring website for details. For SPI communication, use the SPI
library.
Physical Characteristics and Shield Compatibility : The maximum length and width of the
Mega2560 PCB are 4 and 2.1 inches respectively, with the USB connector and power jack
extending beyond the former dimension. Three screw holes allow the board to be attached to a
surface or case. Note that the distance between digital pins 7 and 8 is 160 mil (0.16"), not an
even multiple of the 100 mil spacing of the other pins. The Mega2560 is designed to be
compatible with most shields designed for the Uno, Diecimila or Duemilanove. Digital pins 0 to
13 (and the adjacent AREF and GND pins), analog inputs 0 to 5, the power header, and ICSP
header are all in equivalent locations. Further the main UART (serial port) is located on the same
pins (0 and 1), as are external interrupts 0 and 1 (pins 2 and 3 respectively). SPI is available
through the ICSP header on both the Mega2560 and Duemilanove / Diecimila. Please note that
I2C is not located on the same pins on the Mega (20 and 21) as the Duemilanove / Diecimila .
5.1.3. DC Gear Motor

DC motor (BO) Battery Operation converts electrical energy into mechanical energy is
shown in figure 5.4.DC motor concept is where gears reduce the speed of the vehicle but
increase its torque is known as gear reduction. In DC motor is assembled with multiple gear
setup. Speed of motor is counted in terms of RPM. RPM means Revolution per Minute. The
setup assembles helps to increasing the torque and reduces the motor speed. All micro-
controller based Robots use this type of DC motor. The speed of motor is counted in terms of
rotations of the shaft per minute and is termed as RPM. The gear assembly helps in increasing
the torque and dropping the speed. Using the correct arrangement of gears in a gear motor, its
speed can be reduced to any required figure. This concept of reducing the speed with the help of
gears and increasing the torque is known as gear reduction. Reducing the speed put out by the

motor while increasing the quantity of applied torque is an important feature of the reduction
gear trains found in a gear motor. The decrease in speed is inversely relative to the increase in
torque. DC Geared motors with robust metal gear box for heavy duty applications, available in
wide RPM range and ideally suited for robotics and industrial applications. It is very easy to use
and available in standard size. Nut and threads are used on shaft to easily connect and internal
threaded shaft used for easily connecting it to wheel.
Figure 5.4: DC Gear Motor
Specifications:
Weight: 100gm
RPM: 60 TO 400
Voltage: 2 DC to 12 VDC
Shaft diameter: 6mm
Torque: 2 Kg-cm
No-load current: 70mA (Max)
5.1.4. DC Motor Driver

Description:
The TB6612FNG (207k pdf) is a great dual motor driver that is perfect for interfacing two small
DC motors such as our micro metal gearmotors to a microcontroller, and it can also be used to
control a single bipolar stepper motor. The MOSFET-based H-bridges are much more efficient

than the BJT-based Hbridges used in older drivers such as the L298N and Sanyo’s LB1836M,
which allows more current to be delivered to the motors and less to be drawn from the logic
supply (the LB1836 still has the TB6612 beat for really low-voltage applications). Our little
breakout board gives you direct access to all of the features of the TB6612FNG and adds power
supply capacitors and reverse battery protection on the motor supply (note: there is no reverse
protection on the Vcc connection).
In a typical application, power connections are made on one side of the board and control
connections are made on the other. All of the control inputs are internally pulled low. Each of the
two motor channels has two direction control pins and a speed control pin that accepts a PWM
input with a frequency of up to 100 kHz. The STBY pin must be driven high to take the driver
out of standby mode.
Figure 5.5: TB6612FNG With pin description
TB6612 Specifications:
• Recommended motor voltage (VMOT): 4.5 – 13.5 V
• Logic voltage (VCC): 2.7 – 5.5 V
• Output current maximum: 3 A per channel
• Output current continuous: 1 A per channel (can be paralleled to deliver 2 A continuous)
• Maximum PWM frequency: 100 kHz

• Built-in thermal shutdown circuit

• Filtering capacitors on both supply lines
• Reverse-power protection on the motor supply Real-world power dissipation considerations
The TB6612 motor driver used on the carrier board has a peak current rating of 3 A per channel.
The peak ratings are for quick transients (e.g. when a motor is first turned on), and the
continuous rating of 1 A is dependent on various conditions, such as the ambient temperature.
The actual current you can deliver will depend on how well you can keep the motor driver cool.
The carrier’s printed circuit board is designed to draw heat out of the motor driver chip, but
performance can be improved by adding a heat sink
5.1.5. HC-05 Bluetooth module:

HC-05 module shown in figure 5.6 is an easy to use Bluetooth SPP (Serial Port Protocol)
module, designed for transparent wireless serial connection setup. Serial port Bluetooth module
is fully qualified Bluetooth V2.0+EDR (Enhanced Data Rate) 3Mbps Modulation with complete
2.4GHz radio transceiver and baseband. It uses CSR Bluecore 04-External single chip Bluetooth
system with CMOS technology and with AFH (Adaptive Frequency Hopping Feature). It has the
footprint as small as 12.7mmx27mm.
Figure 5.6: HC 05 Bluetooth Module

Specifications:
1. Hardware features:
 Typical -80dBm sensitivity
 Up to +4dBm RF transmit power
 Low Power 1.8V Operation ,1.8 to 3.6V I/O
 UART interface with programmable baud rate
 With integrated antenna
 With edge connector
2. Software features:
 Default Baud rate: 38400, Data bits:8, Stop bit:1,
 Parity: No parity
 Data control has supported baud rate: 9600,19200,38400,57600,115200,230400,460800.
 Permit pairing device to connect as default.
5.2. I2C INTERFACE

Inter-integrated Circuit (I²C pronounced I- Squared- C) is a 2 wire serial bus generally used to
communicate with sensors and other small accessories. The 2 lines of the I2C bus are SDA
(acknowledge) and SLC (clock) which can be run in parallel to communicate with a couple of
instruments at once. I2C enables up to 112 "slave" (similar to a sensor) contraptions to be
controlled by a single "master" (such as Arduino, in our case). Every slave device on the bus
ought to have it is own special deal with so the master can keep up a correspondence
immediately with the supposed device. This enables more than one of the same device to be on
the same bus without conflicting addresses.
I2C basic command sequence.
1. Send the start bit (S).
2. Send the slave address with (ADDR).

3. Send the read(R)-1 / Write(W)-0 bit.

4. Wait up for/send an acknowledge bit (A).
5. Send//Receive the data byte (eight bits) (information).
6. Expect/send acknowledge bit (A).
7. Send the STOP bit (P).
5.3. WORKING
Two wheeled balancing robot is an unstable dynamic system. Unstable means that robot
is free to fall forward or backward without any applied forces. The word balance means the robot
is in equilibrium state, which its position is like standing upright 90 degrees. However, the
system itself is not balance, which means it keeps falling off, away from the vertical axis.
Therefore, a combination of gyroscope and accelerometer is needed to sense angle position of
the robot and input into the microcontroller, which implements the balancing procedure to Self-
Balancing Robot stabilize the robot. The microcontroller will then provide a type of feedback
signal to the H-bridge circuit to turn the motor clockwise or anticlockwise. If tilt is in forward
direction, wheels are moved in forward direction and vice versa, thus balancing the robot.
IMU consists of accelerometer and gyroscope. The job of the IMU is to quickly and
accurately report the angle of your robot. The angle is used to decide to move your robot
forward or backward in an attempt to keep it upright. This tiny board combines a gyroscope with
an accelerometer with a convenient Arduino library.Much of the internal workings of an IMU
implementation depend on the physical installation and orientation of the hardware. The
following diagram in figure 5.7 shows how it is Installed.
Figure 5.7: Robot Model

The IMU is installed so that the “front” of the robot points in the positive z direction.
When the robot tilts forward, it corresponds to a positive rotation about the x-axis and a
downward (negative) acceleration of the z-axis. The tilt angle can be determined based on a
combination of the accelerometer and gyroscope readings. The accelerometer readings return the
linear acceleration for each of the three axis. Axis defined when tilted by an angle is shown in
figure 5.8.
Figure 5.8: Axis defined when tilted by an angle
As the robot tilts forward by an angle of θ, gravity exerts a force on the y and z aspects of
the accelerometer. After projecting the force of gravity along those axes, we can express the z-
axis acceleration Az is shown in equation 5.1.
Sin (θ) = Az/g (5.1)
For angles, less than 30 degrees (our intended control range for the robot), the angle in
radians can be approximated within 1% or less by using the sine of the angle as a close
approximation of the actual angle is shown in equation 5.2.
θ (t) = Az/g (for a point in time from the accelerometer) (5.2)

The tilt angle from the accelerometer is a point-in-time measurement and is not constant
over any period of time.
As the robot tilts forward by an angle of θ over a period of time, it acquires an angular
velocity. The angular velocity is measured by a gyroscope as the number of radians per second
and is often designated ω. In this implementation leaning forward will be designated as a
positive tilt angle. Using the right-hand rule, the above example will have a positive angular
velocity. In order to make an angle determination, a time element must be considered in
conjunction with the angular velocity the value must be integrated.
Figure 5.9: Control loop of robot
Figure 5.10: Diagram showing steps involved in feedback control of robot

Control loop of robot is shown in figure 5.9 and steps shown in figure 5.10. The inputs to
control loop are target angle and feedback signal, current angle. The error will be computed and
given to PID controller to give output to motors so as to reduce error.
In this project, we will also design a HC-05 Bluetooth based Android Mobile controlled robot
with AVR ATmega 328 microcontroller. Here, we will use the Android Mobile as the input
device to drive the robot in different direction.
The communication between HC-05 Bluetooth Module and Android Mobile takes place
through wireless Bluetooth technology. And the communication between HC-05 Bluetooth
Module and AT mega 2560 microcontroller takes place through UART serial communication
protocol. The HC-05 Bluetooth Module and Android Mobile are connected through Bluetooth.
User enters the control signal from the connected Android Mobile through Bluetooth Terminal
App and the Android Mobile transmits the control signal to the HC-05 Bluetooth Module
through its Bluetooth. The HC-05 Bluetooth Module receives the control signal and transmits it
to the ATmega microcontroller through UART.
The ATmega microcontroller receives the control signal and processes it and sends the
required control signal to the DC Motor Driver () of the robot to drive the robot in the desired
direction. Now, we can press different keys from the Android Mobile and drive your robot as
you want.
5.4. PID CONTROLLER

Process is a controlled object. The purpose of control is to make the output y (PV)
followed r set point (set point-SP). To do this, the controller will get the error between output
signal and input signal and then through the stages of control to make control signals
accordingly, to minimize this error. A proportional controller (Kp) will have the effect of
reducing the rise time and will reduce, but never eliminate, the steady-state error. An integral
control (Ki) will have the effect of eliminating the steady-state error, but it may make the
transient response worse. A derivative control (Kd) will have the effect of increasing the stability
of the system, reducing the overshoot, and improving the transient response

5.4.1. Proportional control
Proportional control generates the changes of output and the equation is given by 5.3.
This change is proportional to the bias current value. Response of Proportional control shown in
figure 5.11 can be adjusted multiplying the difference signal with Kp.
Pout = Kp×e(t) (5.3)
Where Kp is Gain, e is error = SP-PV, t is current time
Figure 5.11: Response of Proportional control
With larger Kp value is easy to adjust error. However, the system lost stability. K p is too
small then the system will react very slowly with the input error. A high proportional gain results
in a large change in the output for a given change in the error. If the proportional gain is too high,
the system can become unstable. In contrast, a small gain results in a small output response to a
large input error, and a less responsive (or sensitive) controller. If the proportional gain is too
low, the control action may be too small when responding to system disturbances.
5.4.2. Integral control
The value adjusted at Integral control is proportional with bias in a period of time and the
equation is given by 5.4. It is total of bias. This signal is then multiplied by the integral gain Ki
and taken to adjust output. Response of Integral control is shown in figure 5.12.

(5.4)
Where Iout is the integral of output, Ki is Gain of the integral, e is error = SP-PV, t is
current time. The contribution from the integral term is proportional to both the magnitude of the
error and the duration of the error. Summing the instantaneous error over time (integrating the
error) gives the accumulated offset that should have been corrected previously. The accumulated
error is then multiplied by the integral gain and added to the controller output.
Figure 5.12: Response of Integral control
Integral control in PID controller increase process to output close SP value and eliminate
setting error of proportional control. However, Integral control added up all bias in stages before,
so it is cause of overshoot. The integral term (when added to the proportional term) accelerates
the movement of the process towards set point and eliminates the residual steady-state error that
occurs with a proportional only controller. However, since the integral term is responding to
accumulated errors from the past, it can cause the present value to overshoot the set point value.

5.4.3. Derivative control
Derivative control will determine the rate of change of error given by equation 5.5.
(5.5)
Where Dout is the derivative of output, Kd is Gain of the derivative, e is error = SP-PV, t
is current time. Derivative control is used to reduce the magnitude of the overshoot produced by
the integral component and improve the combined controller-process stability. The derivative
term slows the rate of change of the controller output and this effect is most noticeable close to
the controller set point. Hence, derivative control is used to reduce the magnitude of the
overshoot produced by the integral component and improve the combined controller-process
stability. Response of Derivative control is shown in figure 5.13.
Figure 5.13: Response of Derivative control
A proportional–integral–derivative controller is a control loop feedback mechanism

widely used in industrial control systems. A PID is the most commonly used feedback controller.
A PID controller calculates an "error" value as the difference between a measured process
variable and a desired set point. The controller attempts to minimize the error by adjusting the

process control inputs. Its calculation involves three separate parameters, and is accordingly
sometimes called three-term control: the proportional, the integral and derivative values, denoted
P, I, and D.P depends on the present error, I on the accumulation of past errors, and D is a
prediction of future errors, based on current rate of change. The weighted sum of these three
actions is used to adjust the process variable. By tuning the three constants in the PID controller
algorithm, the controller can provide control action designed for specific process requirements.
This section describes the parallel or non-interacting form of the PID controller.
Output= Pout + Iout + Dout (5.6)
Where, Pout, Iout, and Dout are the contributions to the output from the PID controller from each of
the three terms and output is given by equation 5.6.
Tuning parameters are:
Proportional gain, Kp:
Larger values typically mean faster response since the larger the error, the larger the
proportional term compensation. An excessively large proportional gain will lead to process
instability and oscillation.
Integral gain, Ki:
Larger values imply steady state errors are eliminated more quickly. The trade-off is
larger overshoot: any negative error integrated during transient response must be integrated away
by positive error before reaching steady state.
Derivative gain, Kd:
Larger values decrease overshoot, but slow down transient response and may lead to
instability due to signal noise amplification in the differentiation of the error.

5.5. STABILITY
If the PID controller parameters (the gains of the proportional, integral and derivative
terms) are chosen incorrectly, the controlled process input can be unstable, i.e. its output
diverges. Instability is caused by excess gain. So, for stability, gain must not be too large.
Generally, stability of response is required and the process must not oscillate for any
combination of process conditions and set points, though sometimes marginal stability (bounded
oscillation) is acceptable or desired. Problem faced with PID controllers is that they are linear,
and in particular symmetric. Thus, performance of PID controllers in non-linear systems is
variable. In this case the PID should be tuned to be over damped, to prevent or reduce overshoot.
5.6. PID CONTROLLER TUNING

PID parameters affect the system dynamics and table 5.2 shows the effects of increasing each of
the controller parameters kp, ki and kd. We are most interested in four major characteristics:
o Rise Time: The time it takes for the plant output to rise beyond 90% of the desired level
for the first time
o Overshoot: It the difference between the peak level and the steady state
o Settling Time: The time it takes for the system to converge to its steady state
o Steady State Error: The difference between the steady-state output and desired output
Response Rise Time Overshoot Settling Time S-S Error
kp Decrease Increase NT Decrease
ki Decrease Increase Increase Eliminate
kd NT Decrease Decrease NT
Table 5.2: Effects of increasing each of the controller parameters kp , ki and kd

Where NT means No definite Tread or Minor change.

Steps for designing a PID controller are:
o Determine what characteristics of the system needs to be improved
o Use kp to decrease the rise time
o Use kd to reduce the overshoot and settling time
o Use ki to eliminate the steady-state error
Here are the steps which adopted to get Kp, Ki and Kd faster:
o Set I and D term to 0, and adjust P so that the robot starts to oscillate (move back and
forth) about the balance position. P should be large enough for the robot to move but not
too large otherwise the movement would not be smooth.
o With P set, increase I so that the robot accelerates faster when off balance. With P and I
properly tuned, the robot should be able to self-balance for at least a few seconds.
o Finally, increase D so that the robot would move about its balanced position gentler, and
there shouldn’t be any significant overshoots
5.7. ANDROID PLATFORM
Android devices are powerful mobile computers and they become more and more popular
smart phones used worldwide. They become more and more popular for software developers
because of its powerful capabilities and open architecture, also it’s based on the java
programming language. For the communication of the robot with the cell phone or a mobile we
are using the Bluetooth device. The Bluetooth device (HC-05) is attached to the robot that
receives the data from the mobile and also can transmit data. Figure 5.14 shows the circuit
diagram of self balancing robot.
Figure 5.15 shows the circuit diagram of self balancing robot. 7805 regulator used to get 5-volt
output to drive the circuit. Capacitor used to filter out ripples. 16 MHz crystal oscillator
connected to pins XTAL1 and XTAL2 of Atmega 8. Enable pins of motor driver (EN) used for
PWM to control speed of motor and motor driver connection is shown in figure 5.14. OUT 1 and
OUT 2 of the motor driver is used to drive the motor 1 and OUT 3 and OUT 4 of the motor

driver is used to drive the motor2. Program is written to micro controller through MAX32. MPU
6050 is connected to ADC pins.
Figure 5.14: Motor driver connection
Figure 5.15: Circuit Diagram

CHAPTER 6
PROJECT IMPLEMENTATION
6.1. PHASES
Phase 1:
We have learned about embedded system, then introduction to Arduino microcontroller and next
we have done basic programming in Arduino microcontroller and interfacing with Arduino
microcontroller and studied about inertial sensors in this phase. Finally, we completed our
literature review.
Phase 2:
We did our hardware part of the project in this phase. Interfacing of motors through drivers,
MPU 6050 (which contains inbuilt gyroscope and accelerometer) to the microcontroller were
studied and obtained. After that we did hardware design i.e., chassis design which is built in
three layer. In the top most layer we placed load and Bluetooth module HC 05. In the second
layer we placed designed PCB board and in the third layer we placed motor driver.
Phase 3:
We have done software part of the project in this phase. Programming is done in
Arduino Software (Integrated development environment). PID controlling is done using
programming where present error is depending on proportional term (P), past error obtained by
integrating all the past errors using Integral term (I) and future error depends on rate of change of
present error obtained using Derivative term (D). So, combination of all these error gives us the
required error to be compensated.
Phase 4:
In this phase, we assembled our robot and made the final prototype. We have done hardware
connection between sensors, motors and Atmega 2560. For this we have done PCB circuit design
and then finally using soldering we connected the circuits between various components.

6.2. COST ESTIMATION
COMPONENT PRICE
1x ATmega-2560 Rs. 725
4x Headers and 0 PCB Rs.100
2x Gear Motor Rs.340
2x Wheel and Chassis Rs. 200
1x TB6612FNG Rs. 530
MPU 6050 Rs.215
Battery Rs.130
Adapter Rs. 395
Jumper wires Rs. 55
Blue tooth module (HC 05) Rs. 510
ESTIMATED PRICE Rs. 3200
Table 6.1: Cost Estimation table
Cost estimation is shown in table 6.1 and estimated price is about Rs. 3200.

CHAPTER 7
RESULTS
In our project by gradually tuning the PID coefficients, we were able to improve the
stability of the system. It turns out that the robot is most stable for settings with very low D
coefficients in PID, so our controller is effectively PI. To find the reason why this is the case will
require a deeper analysis. After a lot of trial and error, we successfully got our robot to balance.
If the gyroscope is properly calibrated, the tilt is zeroed, and the robot is placed gently in an
upright position, it stays upright despite disturbances that would normally make it fall over. It is
even able to carry a significant load and remain perfectly balanced:
In our demo, the robot balanced before we turned it off. On a surface with high resistance, like
carpets, the robot is able to balance more steadily than it does on hard surfaces like floors. We
also noticed that raising the center of gravity improves the stability of the robot. So to prove this
we put the load at the very top.
While the robot performed at least as well, if not better, than we expected, we did notice a
few limitations that affected its performance. For example, regardless of how the PID
coefficients are tuned, the robot always exhibits a minor wobble. We think this is due to the
motors having a minimum PWM duty cycle threshold below which they do not move. That can
possibly be compensated for in software to improve stability.
Second of all, while we supplied exactly the same power to both of the wheels
simultaneously, one wheel tends to spin noticeably faster than the other at low speeds. This
causes the robot to move in somewhat of an arc. The difference seems less noticeable at higher
speeds. The robot still balances, so we did not spend too much time looking into this issue.
A third issue has to do with a design choice that we made. Due to budget limitations, we
decided to not add motor encoders to our robot. Encoders are not inherently necessary for self-
balancing, but they would have allowed us to directly measure and control the speed of the robot.
When testing our robot, we noticed that, for various reasons, it sometimes begins to accumulate
speed. It remains balanced until it reaches a point where the motor speed saturates, the wheels

cannot keep up with the body of the robot, and it falls over. Having faster motors could have
helped, but the issue here is the lack of encoders. With encoders, we could have prevented the
robot from approaching speeds that it cannot handle, and even controlled the robot such that it
stayed in place rather than roaming around with no speed control
Kp Ki Kd
50 300 4
Table 7.1: PID constants
By using trial and error method we finally obtained PID constants as shown in table 7.1. The
project model is shown in figure 7.1.
Figure 7.1: Project Model

CHAPTER 8
ADVANTAGES AND DISADVANTAGES
8.1. ADVANTAGES
1. Reduces time for travelling foot distance.

2. A clean, green, eco-friendly machine. (zero emission)
3. Require less space for riding, parking.
4. Become more productive: more work can be done by using the product versus walking.
5. Become more recognizable: Riders stand an additional eight inches off the ground,
allowing you to be better seen and giving the rider better sight lines, over cars in a
parking lot or boxes in a warehouse.
6. Low operating costs: no need for gas and inexpensive battery charging (A complete cycle
charge will take eight to ten hours)
LOW
REDUCES
CARB
GLOBAL
WARMING
ON
EMISS
IONS
AVOI
NO FUEL
DS
CONSUMP
TRAF
TION
FIC
HELPS IN
MULTITAS
KING
Figure 8.1: Advantage loop
8.2. DISADVANTAGES
1. If system becomes unstable, it may fall.
2. Does not exactly say how far the system will go with objects of different masses.

CHAPTER 9
APPLICATIONS
o It is used for carrying load.

o It can be used in such a way to move forward or backward.
o They can be used as vehicles by humans.
o The current day short distance usage vehicles can be substituted by them, which will
make travelling more easy and comfortable.
o It can be used for surveillance purpose.
o They require batteries for the movement, hence they are more eco-friendly and helps in
reducing the pollution.

CHAPTER 10
CONCLUSION AND FUTURE SCOPE

A self balancing robot was designed and manufactured as desired with limited resources
possible. It was able to balance smoothly with a maximum tilt error of 5 degrees. Range of
payload and its height for which it balances was quantified. Maximum angle of tilt for balancing
was also determined through various experiments. However, there are some limitations. Such
technology is suitable only for flat ground. In order to make it work on slant surface, the angle of
slant needs to be fed into the system, either manually or using some intelligence. Project can
further be extended to make a full scale personalized mobile vehicle for common people,
especially physically challenged. Further, such robots in higher quantity can be made to work in
coordination and realize a collective effort. This can also be developed as a surveillance body
and made to send back informative signals back to base station from remote areas which are
partially or completely inaccessible. This report studies the balancing of a system in only one
direction i.e., pitch. Such theory can also be extended to balance in multiple axis i.e., pitch and
roll and is under research. Any practical implementation may not be easy and requires
continuous effort and improvement. In order to get a prototype working of similar nature, one is
required to have a good knowledge in manufacturing, product design, basic electronics, PCB
design, basic programming language like C, C++ or Java, and debugging skills. Latest
manufacturing technologies may not be available which may pose some problems and may lead
to a compromise on designs. Many concepts are generally not included in theory and come into
picture only when it comes to implementation stage. Something working may not work in all
conditions and will have constraints, similar to sensor sensitivity, which keeps changing in
accordance to ambient lighting conditions. Also, it’s a good practice to perform any activity or
experiment in best manner possible and not implement any temporary solution which might end
up taking more time in debugging the unknown errors. In this implementation, because we have
non-zero integral constant in PID controller, system does not start balancing the moment it is
switched on, but takes some time before the integral error goes to zero.

10.1 EVALUATION
We came into this project expecting to build a two-wheeled robot that would balance
itself with the help of an IMU. It took a good amount of work, and we encountered significant
challenges, but we met our expectations and achieved our goal. After building the chassis,
designing and testing the circuits, writing the software, and tuning the PID coefficients, we were
able to successfully balance the robot on the two wheels, and even carry a load. But it is still not
perfect the few issues detailed above, including the minor wobble, the asymmetrical motor
speeds, and the lack of encoders are small problems that can be fixed in a future update.
The key to completing this project was careful advance planning of every step we needed to
make, and every material we need to buy. We spent what at first seemed like an excessive
amount of time planning, but it all paid off in the end, because we were able to more effectively
manage our time, and were more prepared for the problems we would encounter.
10.2. IMPROVEMENTS AND ALTERATIONS

Improvements to the current version of the robot can easily be achieved through the
microcontrollers programming. This would provide the fundamental benefits faster control
responses, effective and efficient computations and improved overall system performance.
Completing the software implementation of the interaction system would allow the operator to
have video and audio streaming capabilities, locomotion control and microcontroller
reprogramming capability. Although the hardware would not require any significant change, the
completion of visual basic programs would complete the process.
10.3. ADDITIONAL FEATURES AND CAPABILITIES

Additional feature or capabilities that may improve the effectiveness, efficiency or
operability of the robot include the addition of arms. This would allow the robot to interact with
its surrounds thus providing a larger impact on the operability it may now achieve. This could be
further extended to include grippers at the end of each arm that would be capable of effectively
lifting large masses or obscure shapes. The number of arms fitted would increase the complexity
of the control systems in place but the enhanced capability may be beneficial.

Although not fully explorer, the webcam vision could be expanded to incorporate stereo
vision. This would allow the robot to autonomously navigate, identify and avoid obstacles
through the added vision capability. The voltage monitoring circuit could provide a signal to the
microcontroller that would indicate that a low voltage measurement has been established. This
would call upon a ‘return to charge station’ procedure which would ensure the robot returns
safely before power is lost to its systems.
To better transverse uneven terrain such as stairs, the wheels could be enhanced to allow
an upward and/or downward extension to its height. This could either apply a force in the
direction of travel onto the obstacle to push itself up or it could raise the wheel over the obstacle
itself. This would allow the robot to travel upstairs or over obstacles whilst maintaining balance.
An outer skin may be incorporated for cosmetic and well as shielding effect for the robot.
A skin that allows the IR sensors to easily see through would be ideal, allowing a smooth
covering of the outer side. This would also be protective against dust, water and other forms of
intrusion into the sensitive circuits within. A cushion belt could be added to the bumper switch
arrangement to allow a softer collision in the event one may occur.
10.4. FUTURE IMPROVEMENTS
o Fix the wobble by setting a minimum PWM duty cycle that is just below the threshold at
which the motors begin to spin. That will get rid of the current dead spot in which the
motors don't spin for a number of degrees.
o Fix the asymmetry in the motor speeds. That likely has to do with friction, so using
machine oil to lubricate one or both of the motors might fix the problem.
o Add encoders to the robot to allow it to measure and control its speed. That will prevent it
from approaching its maximum speed and falling over.
o Implement automatic tilt calibration so that the robot will always remain balanced even if
its centre of gravity is shifted, requiring no action by the user.
o Implement manual remote steering of the robot, commanding it to rotate clockwise or
counter-clockwise.
o Add a light sensing system to the bottom of the robot and make it autonomously follow a
dark path drawn on the ground.

10.5. ETHICAL CONSIDERATIONS

During the course of final project, we made decisions consistent with safety such that
nobody was in danger of getting injured. We are honest and realistic in stating our claims
according to data collected. We are accurate in listing our component cost to our best knowledge.
We are willing to accept constructive feedback and incorporate it into our design. We strove to
solve challenging problems by ourselves, and sought the help of the instructor and TAs for those
we were not able to resolve. We did not hold any bias against anyone nor engaged in acts of
discrimination based on race, religion, gender, disability, age, national origin, sexual orientation,
and gender identity. We treated all of our peers with equal respect and offered help to our
colleagues whenever possible. We give credit when using the code from any external sources to
prevent any perceived conflicts of interests, and acknowledge all contributions made to the final
project.


Pid Based Self-Balancing Robot

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Pid Based Self-Balancing Robot

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

PID BASED SELF-BALANCING ROBOT

EE DEPARTMENT , SRMGPC , LUCKNOW Page 1

EE DEPARTMENT , SRMGPC , LUCKNOW Page 2

EE DEPARTMENT , SRMGPC , LUCKNOW Page 3

EE DEPARTMENT , SRMGPC , LUCKNOW Page 4

EE DEPARTMENT , SRMGPC , LUCKNOW Page 5

EE DEPARTMENT , SRMGPC , LUCKNOW Page 6

EE DEPARTMENT , SRMGPC , LUCKNOW Page 7

3.1. STUDY AREA

Our system is a practical application of a common control system experimental setup,

EE DEPARTMENT , SRMGPC , LUCKNOW Page 8

EE DEPARTMENT , SRMGPC , LUCKNOW Page 9

3) The wheels roll on the ground without slipping.

3.4. DYNAMICS MODEL

Figure 3.2: Dynamic model parameters

Figure 3.3: Free body diagram of wheels

EE DEPARTMENT , SRMGPC , LUCKNOW Page 10

For y-axis, (3.3), (3.4) and (3.5) can be rewritten as:

EE DEPARTMENT , SRMGPC , LUCKNOW Page 11

By considering Js as the proposed robot rotational moment of inertia, one has:

Jsα = -2×(τ + FH × Lcosθ - FV × dsinθ) (3.9)

Due to the balance angle in τ = 0, two assumptions can be regarded as:

M×(a + dα) = 2 FH (3.12)

Js α = -2×(τ + FHL – Fv dθ) (3.14)

Now, by substituting (3.1), (3.12) into (3.2), one has:

EE DEPARTMENT , SRMGPC , LUCKNOW Page 12

3.5 CONTROL MODEL

In (3.17), R is nominal terminal resistance, L is rotor inductance and Ve is back electromotive

The back EMF voltage in (3.17) is:

EE DEPARTMENT , SRMGPC , LUCKNOW Page 13

Now, by substituting (3.23) in (3.20), one has:

By substituting (3.15) from dynamics model section in (3.23), one has:

Now, by substituting (3.12), (3.13) and (3.15) in (3.14), one has:

[𝐽𝑠 + Md(r+d)]𝑎 (3.27)

EE DEPARTMENT , SRMGPC , LUCKNOW Page 14

4.1. INERTIAL MEASUREMENT UNIT

EE DEPARTMENT , SRMGPC , LUCKNOW Page 15

EE DEPARTMENT , SRMGPC , LUCKNOW Page 16

4.2. MOTOR DRIVER

o Power supply voltage; Vm = 15V (Max)

EE DEPARTMENT , SRMGPC , LUCKNOW Page 17

Figure 5.1: Block diagram of self balancing robot

EE DEPARTMENT , SRMGPC , LUCKNOW Page 18

5.1. MATERIALS USED

EE DEPARTMENT , SRMGPC , LUCKNOW Page 19

By leveraging its patented and volume-proven Nasiri-Fabrication platform, which

EE DEPARTMENT , SRMGPC , LUCKNOW Page 20

EE DEPARTMENT , SRMGPC , LUCKNOW Page 21

Figure 5.2: MPU 6050

Figure 5.3: Summary

EE DEPARTMENT , SRMGPC , LUCKNOW Page 22

Figure 5.4: ARDUINO MEGA 2560

EE DEPARTMENT , SRMGPC , LUCKNOW Page 23

EE DEPARTMENT , SRMGPC , LUCKNOW Page 24

5.1.3. DC Gear Motor

EE DEPARTMENT , SRMGPC , LUCKNOW Page 25

Figure 5.4: DC Gear Motor

5.1.4. DC Motor Driver

EE DEPARTMENT , SRMGPC , LUCKNOW Page 26

Figure 5.5: TB6612FNG With pin description

EE DEPARTMENT , SRMGPC , LUCKNOW Page 27

• Built-in thermal shutdown circuit

5.1.5. HC-05 Bluetooth module: