applied
sciences
Article
A Novel Model-Free Adaptive Proportional–Integral–Derivative
Control Method for Speed-Tracking Systems of Electric
Balanced Forklifts
Jianliang Xu 1 , Zhen Sui 2, *, Feng Xu 1 and Yulong Wang 3, *
Citation: Xu, J.; Sui, Z.; Xu, F.; Wang,
Y. A Novel Model-Free Adaptive
Proportional–Integral–Derivative
Control Method for Speed-Tracking
Systems of Electric Balanced Forklifts.
Appl. Sci. 2023, 13, 12816. https://
doi.org/10.3390/app132312816
Academic Editor: Rosario Pecora
Received: 4 November 2023
Revised: 26 November 2023
Accepted: 28 November 2023
Published: 29 November 2023
Copyright: © 2023 by the authors.
Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland.
This article is an open access article
distributed under the terms and
conditions of the Creative Commons
Attribution (CC BY) license (https://
creativecommons.org/licenses/by/
4.0/).
Appl. Sci. 2023, 13, 12816. https://doi.org/10.3390/app132312816
1 School of Mechanical and Electrical Engineering, Quzhou College of Technology, Quzhou 324000, China;
xujianliang84@gmail.com (J.X.); fengxu15@mails.jlu.edu.cn (F.X.)
2 College of Communication Engineering, Jilin University, Changchun 130022, China
3 Quzhou Special Equipment Inspection Center, Quzhou 324000, China
* Correspondence: suizhen@jlu.edu.cn (Z.S.); wyl125739@163.com (Y.W.)
Abstract: Similar to many complex systems, the operation process of electric balanced forklifts has
characteristics such as time-varying model parameters and nonlinearity. Establishing an accurate
mathematical model becomes challenging, making it difficult to apply model-based control methods
in engineering practice. Aiming at the longitudinal control system of electric forklifts containing
external disturbances, this paper proposes an improved full-format dynamic linearization model-free
adaptive PID control (iFFDL-MFA-PID) method. Firstly, the full-format dynamic linearization (FFDL)
method is employed to transform the operating system of the electric balanced forklift into a virtual
equivalent linear data model. Secondly, the nonlinear residual term and pseudo-gradient (PG) of
the data model are estimated using the difference estimation algorithm and the optimal criterion
function, respectively. Furthermore, in order to enhance the robustness of the system, the idea of
intelligent PID (iPID) is introduced and the principle of equivalent feedback is utilized to derive the
iFFDL-MFA-PID control scheme. The design process of this scheme only requires the use of the input
and output data of the system, without relying on the mathematical model of the system. Finally,
the iFFDL-MFA-PID method proposed in this paper is simulated and tested with the EFG-BC/320
counterbalanced forklift equipped in the Special Equipment Testing Center and compared with the
model-free adaptive control method (FFDL-MFAC) and the PID control method. Simulation results
show that the speed-tracking error of the electric forklift truck under the action of the iFFDL-MFA-
PID algorithm is maintained within ±0.132 m/s throughout the process, achieving higher tracking
accuracy and better robustness compared to the MFAC and PID methods.
Keywords: electric balanced forklift; model-free adaptive control; intelligent PID; full-format data
model; longitudinal control; robustness
1. Introduction
With the rapid development of industrial logistics, the role of electric balanced forklifts
in the fields of warehousing, loading and unloading, and transportation is becoming
increasingly important [1]. These forklifts offer advantages such as zero emissions, ease
of operation, and high handling efficiency. However, traditional forklift operations rely
heavily on the experience and skills of the driver, which may result in low operational
efficiency and safety accidents such as rollovers and rear-end collisions. Therefore, it is of
great significance to conduct research on intelligent control technology based on automatic
driving for electric balanced forklifts. This research aims to improve forklift operational
efficiency and ensure operational safety.
In recent years, autonomous driving technology has seen rapid advancements and
demonstrated remarkable achievements in various fields, including smart cars [2,3], un-
manned aerial vehicles [4,5], and rail transportation [6,7]. However, when it comes to
https://www.mdpi.com/journal/applsci
Appl. Sci. 2023, 13, 12816 2 of 20

electric balanced forklifts, the practical application of autonomous driving is still in its early
stages. This is primarily due to the complex and ever-changing operating environments of
forklifts. These environments involve diverse cargo types, shapes, and weights, as well
as unique operational scenarios, which present significant challenges for implementing
autonomous driving technology in the forklift industry.
Due to the reasons outlined above, research on automatic driving technology for
forklifts has become a hot topic, especially in the areas of visual positioning [8], lidar
positioning [9], and adaptive control [10]. For instance, the Vecna company (Cambridge,
MA, USA) in the US has launched an automatic navigation forklift that employs multiple
sensing technologies, such as lidar, an inertial navigation system, and visual sensors, to
achieve accurate positioning and path planning [11]. Similarly, KUKA, a German company
(Augsburg, Germany), has developed an automatic forklift based on visual navigation,
which captures ground feature points with a camera to enable autonomous navigation and
accurate handling of the forklift [12]. In practical research, the tracking of path and time in
electric balanced forklifts exhibits a complex nonlinear relationship. On the other hand, the
impact of disturbances and load variations makes the vehicle system itself a complex and
difficult-to-model nonlinear system. Additionally, traditional forklift operations rely on
the driver’s experience and skills, which can lead to low operational efficiency and safety
accidents such as tipping over [13]. In order to address these challenges, researchers need to
develop innovative control methods to enhance the performance and adaptability of electric
balanced forklifts. Currently, most of the research is focused on using two- or four-wheeled
mobile robots instead of electric forklifts. Refs. [14,15] applied model predictive control
methods based on tracking error models to successfully track the trajectory of mobile robots.
Refs. [16–18] used neural network control methods to simulate the nonlinear movements of
robots and applied them to the trajectory tracking of mobile robots. Ref. [19] applied fuzzy
control methods to the trajectory tracking control of mobile robots. Ref. [20] combined
reinforcement learning with PID algorithms to apply trajectory tracking control of mobile
robots. The aforementioned control methods primarily perform trajectory tracking in the
time domain and are based on model-based control. However, they have lower control
accuracy and adaptability. Electric forklifts experience significant disturbances due to
the increasing load during operation, resulting in a time-varying model. This makes it
challenging for the aforementioned control methods to meet the high-precision autonomous
driving requirements of time-varying electric forklifts.
According to the aforementioned literature, when analyzing controller design and
system stability, it is necessary to obtain the model parameters in advance or linearize the
forklift model. These factors lead to mismatches between the controller and the actual model
in model-based control methods, resulting in a significant impact on control performance.
To address this issue, some scholars have started exploring data-driven control approaches.
PID control is one of the earliest control methods and has been widely applied in industrial
processes due to its advantages of simplicity and high reliability [21,22]. Moreover, the PID
is also a typical data-driven control method. However, due to the nonlinear, time-varying
uncertainties; strong disturbances often present in practical systems; and the difficulty
in tuning PID controller parameters with unsatisfactory performance, the application
of PID control is limited in complex and high-performance systems [23]. To overcome
the limitations of traditional PID control, such as poor tracking performance and slow
convergence, scholars have actively combined the PID with intelligent algorithms to achieve
adaptive changes in PID gains [24]. However, there are still suboptimal phenomena, such
as an excessively high sampling frequency. MFAC was proposed by Professor Hou in his
doctoral thesis [25]. The basic idea of MFAC is to dynamically linearize a nonlinear system
by introducing the concept of pseudo-partial derivatives and establishing an equivalent
dynamically linearized data model. Based on this virtual data model, the controller and
parameter update laws are designed. This algorithm can achieve both parameter adaptation
and structure adaptation and has been applied in various industrial fields after years of
development [26,27]. However, traditional MFAC represents the system’s input-output
Appl. Sci. 2023, 13, 12816 3 of 20

data and uncertainties (primarily including parameter estimation errors and external
disturbances) using a dynamic linearized data model. Furthermore, parameter estimation
errors and uncertainties are estimated through parameter estimation algorithms. In the
case of significant system disturbances, this approach may lead to issues such as over-
linearization [28,29]. Additionally, research results indicate [30] that in the absence of
external disturbances, conventional MFAC schemes can converge the system output error
to zero. However, when measurement disturbances are present, applying conventional
MFAC schemes will cause the system’s output error to converge to a non-zero constant.
Therefore, the presence of measurement disturbances significantly deteriorates the control
performance of the MFAC scheme.
In [31], the advantages of MFAC and iPID were combined to propose an MFAC PID
scheme based on compact-form dynamic linearization (CFDL). This approach extends the
applicability of iPID to nonlinear and non-affine systems, addressing the issues of poor
robustness in the PID and weak disturbance rejection capability in MFAC. However, in the
dynamic linearization process in [31], only the output at the next time instant in relation to
the input at the previous time instant was considered, resulting in a relatively simplistic
design.
Based on the analysis presented above, this paper proposes an iFFDL-MFA-PID
scheme by combining the advantages of MFAC and iPID. Firstly, we introduce the gradient
estimation algorithm and time difference algorithm based on the general formula for
nonlinear systems to effectively estimate time-varying parameters and uncertain nonlinear
terms. Moreover, by incorporating additional tracking error information using the iPID
algorithm, the iFFDL-MFAC system compensates for the decrease in system information
accuracy caused by excessive linearization. Finally, we redefine the learning update law
and parameter update law of the system to improve the controller structure. Simulation
results demonstrate that the proposed control strategy, iFFDL-MFA-PID, more effectively
suppresses the harmful effects of measurement disturbances on system stability, thereby
achieving more accurate tracking of the system output. The main contributions of this
paper are as follows:
(1) In the dynamic linearization process, this study fully considers the relationship be-
tween the system’s input and output, resulting in a more flexible controller design
process. Compared with the CFDL data model previously used, the FFDL method
adopted in this study comprehensively considers the relationship between the output
change at the next moment and the input and output within a fixed-length sliding
time window. The FFDL data model is insensitive to the system’s structure and
parameter time-varying characteristics.
(2) Compared with existing electric forklift operation control algorithms, the iFFDL-
MFA-PID scheme does not rely on the system’s dynamic model and only requires
its input-output data. It is a data-driven control method that is easy to implement.
On the other hand, the FFDL-based MFA-PID control method utilizes more control
information from the previous time step compared to the traditional MFAC method,
thus achieving better control performance.
(3) This study designs a time-delay estimator and a gradient-parameter estimator to
estimate the nonlinear uncertainties and unknown parameters in the FFDL model
instead of using rough parameter estimation algorithms. This approach avoids the
problem of over-linearization and further improves the equivalent description of
the dynamic linearization within the system. Moreover, the iFFDL-MFA-PID adds
compensation for the uncertain system in the control law, enhancing the control
system’s robustness.
The remaining structure of this paper is as follows. Section 2 gives the traditional
MFAC structure; Section 3 presents the MFAC scheme combined with iPID and proves its
stability; Section 4 gives the numerical values of the iFFDL-MFA-PID scheme, as well as the
simulation results and an analysis of the electric forklift; and Section 5 provides a summary
of this text.
Appl. Sci. 2023, 13, 12816 4 of 20

2. Traditional MFAC
2.1. Dynamic Linearization
This study adopts the FFDL method for data linearization, which incorporates the
influence of inputs and outputs within a fixed length [32].
Consider the following SISO system

I (k + 1) = f ( I (k), · · · , I (k − n I ), u(k ), · · · , u(k − nu )) (1)

where u(k ) and I (k ) represent the input and output, respectively, and nu and n I are the
orders.
H(k) is defined as follows

H(k)= [∆I (k), · · · , ∆I (k − L I + 1), ∆u(k), · · · , ∆u(k − Lu + 1)]T (2)

where L I and Lu are the lengths of the output and input linearization, respectively.

Assumption 1 ([33,34]). The partial derivatives of f (·) for all system variables exist.

Assumption 2 ([33,34]). For any time k1 6= k2 ≥ 0 and H(k1 ) 6= H(k2 ), one has

| I (k1 + 1) − I (k2 + 1)| ≤ pkH(k1 ) − H(k2 )k (3)

where p is a constant.

Theorem 1. For System (1) that meets Assumptions 1 and 2, there must be a vector called a pseudo-
gradient (PG) so that the system can be transformed into the following FFDL data model [32].

I (k + 1) = I (k) + ΛT (k )∆H(k) (4)

where Λ(k) = [Λ1 (k), · · · , Λ L I + Lu (k)]T is bounded.

Proof. See [35].

2.2. Traditional MFAC Design

Consider the following performance metric functions:

J (u(k )) = ∂|u(k ) − u(k − 1)|2 + | Id (k + 1) − I (k + 1)|2 (5)

where Id is the reference output and ∂ > 0 is the weight factor.

By calculating the first-order partial differential with (5) and making it zero, one has:

ρΛ L I +1 (k )( Id (k + 1) − I (k))
u ( k ) = u ( k − 1) + 2
∂ + Λ L I +1 ( k )
!
LI L I + Lu (6)
Λ L u +1 ( k ) ρ ∑ Λi (i )∆I (k − i + 1) + ∑ Λk (i )∆u(k − L I − i + 1)
i =1 i = L I +2
− 2
∂ + Λ L I +1 ( k )

where ρ ∈ (0, 1] is the step factor.

Next, Λ(k) needs to be estimated. The following parameter estimation function is
given,
2 2
J (Λ(k)) = ∆I (k) − ΛT (k)∆H(k − 1) + µ Λ(k) − Λ̂(k − 1) (7)

where µ > 0.
Appl. Sci. 2023, 13, 12816 5 of 20

According to the minimization function (7), the following estimation algorithm can be
obtained

η∆H(k − 1) ∆I (k) − Λ̂T (k − 1)∆H(k − 1)

Λ̂(k) = Λ̂(k − 1) + (8)
µ + k∆H(k − 1)k2

where Λ̂(k) is the estimation of Λ(k) and η ∈ (0, 2] is a constant.

Therefore, the overall control scheme of FFDL-MFAC is as follows:


ρΛ L I +1 (k )( Id (k +1)− I (k ))

 u ( k ) = u ( k − 1) + 2
∂ + | Λ L I +1 ( k ) |



 !

 LI L I + Lu
Λ ( k ) ∑ Λ ( i ) ∆I ( k − i + 1 )+ ∑ Λ ( i ) ∆u ( k − L − i + 1 )
 ρ

 L u +1 i k I
i =1 i = L I +2
− 2 (9)

 ∂ + | Λ L I +1 ( k ) |
η∆H(k −1)(∆I (k )−Λ̂T (k−1)∆H(k −1))

 Λ̂(k) = Λ̂(k − 1) +




 µ+k∆H(k −1)k2
Λ̂(k) = Λ̂(1) if Λ̂(k) ≤ ε or k∆H(k − 1)k2 ≤ ε or sign Λ̂ L I +1 (k) 6= sign Λ̂ L I +1 (1)



3. Improved FFDL Model-Free Adaptive PID Controller

3.1. iFFDL-MFA-PID Design
Consider the following SISO system affected by disturbances

I (k + 1) = f ( I (k), · · · , I (k − n I ), u(k ), · · · , u(k − nu )) + d(k ) (10)

where d(k) is a bounded disturbance in the forklift system.

For System (10) to satisfy Assumptions 1 and 2, given 0 ≤ L I ≤ n I and 1 ≤ Lu ≤ nu ,,
there must be a parameter vector Λ(k ) so that System (10) can be transformed as

∆I (k + 1) = ΛT (k)∆H(k ) + q(k ) (11)

q(k) = f ( I (k − 1), · · · , I (k − n I ), u(k − 1), · · · , u(k − nu ))

where , q(k) is the
− f ( I (k − 1), · · · , I (k − n I − 1), u(k − 1), · · · , u(k − nu − 1))+∆d(k)
sum of the bounded disturbances of the nonlinear remainder.
Based on (11) and the principle of equivalent feedback, we have

LI
ρ ∑ Λi (k )∆I (k − i + 1)
ρ( Id (k + 1) − I (k) − q(k)) i =1
u ( k ) = u ( k − 1) + −
∂ + Λ L v +1 ( k ) ∂ + Λ L I +1 ( k )
(12)
L I + Lu
∑ Λi (k)∆u(k − L I − i + 1)
i = L I +2
−
∂ + Λ L I +1 ( k )

To further enhance robustness, by drawing on the ideas of Ref. [31] and incorporating
an iPID strategy into the control law (12), it can be concluded that

LI L I + Lu
ρ ∑ Λi (k )∆I (k −i +1) ∑ Λi (k )∆u(k −l I −i +1)
ρ( Id (k +1)− I (k )−q(k )) i =1 i = L I +2
u ( k ) = u ( k − 1) + ∂ + Λ L I +1 ( k )
_ ∂ + Λ L I +1 ( k )
_ ∂ + Λ L I +1 ( k )
(13)
+k1 (e(k) − e(k − 1))+k2 e(k)+k3 (e(k) − 2e(k − 1) + e(k − 2))

where e(k ) = Id (k ) − I (k) is the output error; k1 , k2 , and k3 are the control learning gains;
and q(k) and Λ(k) need to be estimated by the algorithm.
Firstly, we use the difference algorithm in [29] to estimate q(k )

q̂(k) = ∆I (k ) − Λ̂(k − 1)T ∆H(k − 1) (14)

Appl. Sci. 2023, 13, 12816 6 of 20

Then, we provide the following new function:

2 2
J (Λ(k)) = µ Λ(k) − Λ̂(k − 1) + ∆I (k) − q(k − 1) − Λ(k)T ∆H(k − 1) (15)

According to the minimization function (15), one has

η∆H(k − 1)
Λ̂(k) = Λ̂(k − 1) + × (∆I (k) − q̂(k − 1) − Λ̂T (k − 1)∆H(k − 1)) (16)
µ + k∆H(k − 1)k2

Then, the following reset algorithm is proposed:

Λ̂(k) = Λ̂(1) if Λ̂(k) ≤ ε or k∆H(k − 1)k2 ≤ ε or sign Λ̂ L I +1 (k) 6= sign Λ̂ L I +1 (1)

(17)

where ε > 0 is a sufficiently small positive number.

The control law (13), PG estimation algorithm (16), reset algorithm (17), and difference
estimation algorithm (14) together form the iFFDL-MFA-PID scheme, and the control block
diagram is shown in Figure 1.

Figure 1. The iFFDL-MFA-PID control block diagram.

Remark 1. The primary distinction between the FFDL data model (11) and the conventional
model (4) lies in the expression of the form of the total system uncertainty. Unlike the linear
parameter-based approach, the FFDL model considers nonlinear residual uncertainty. Incorporating
the estimation of nonlinear residual uncertainty into the control law enables compensation for such
uncertainties, thereby enhancing control design flexibility.

3.2. Stability Analysis

The stability analysis includes the boundedness of the parameter vector estimation
and the convergence proof for the system error. For ease of description, let L I = Lu = 1;
other situations follow similarly. Firstly, the following lemmas are introduced.

Lemma 1. For any matrix Bm ∈ Rm×m , b1 , · · · , bm are the eigenvalues of Bm . Then, the spectral
radius of Bm is s(Bm ) = max b j , j ∈ {1, · · · , m}.
j

Lemma 2. For any matrix Bn ∈ Rn×n and a constant σ > 0, there exists a matrix norm k·k that
satisfies
kBn k ≤ s(Bn ) + σ (18)

Theorem 2. If System (11) adopts the iFFDL-MFA-PID scheme, the system has the following
properties:
(1) The parameter vector estimation Λ̃(k) = Λ̂(k) − Λ(k) is bounded;
 
2ρ
(2) e(k + 1) converges to a small bound if 1 − Λ̂(k ) k1 + k2 + k3 + λ+Λ̂(k) < 1.
Appl. Sci. 2023, 13, 12816 7 of 20

Proof 1. Subtracting Λ(k) from both sides of (16) simultaneously yields

η∆u2 (k − 1) η∆u(k − 1)∆u(k − 2)

 
Λ̃(k) = 1− Λ̃(k − 1) + Λ̃(k − 2)
µ + |∆u(k)| 2 µ + |∆u(k)|2
(19)
η∆u(k − 1)
+ (q(k − 1) − q(k − 2)) + Λ(k − 1) − Λ(k)
µ + |∆u(k)|2

Define MΞ1 (k ) = diag(Ξ1 (k ), 0), MΞ2 (k) = diag(Ξ2 (k ), 0), and

η∆u2 (0)
 
1− µ+|∆u(0)|2
0 ··· 0 0
η∆u(1)∆u(0) η∆u2 (1)
 

 µ+|∆u(1)|2 µ+|∆u(1)|2
··· 0 0


.. .. .. ..
 
Ξ1 ( k ) = 
 ..  (20)

 . . . . . 
η∆u2 (k −2)
0 0 ··· 1− 0
 
µ+|∆u(k −1)|2
 
 
η∆u(k −1)∆u(k −2) η∆u2 (k −1)
0 0 ··· µ+|∆u(k −1)|2
1− µ+|∆u(k −1)|2

η∆u2 (0) η∆u2 (1) η∆u2 (k − 1)

 
Ξ2 (k ) = diag ··· (21)
µ + |∆u(0)|2 µ + |∆u(1)|2 µ + |∆u(k − 1)|2
Then, (19) can be rewritten as follows

Λ̃(k ) = MΞ1 (k)Λ̃(k − 1) + MΞ2 (k)(q(k − 1) − q(k − 2)) + Λ(k − 1) − Λ(k) (22)

where Λ̃(k) = [Λ̃(1), · · · , Λ̃(k ), 0]T , Λ(k) = [Λ(1), · · · , Λ(k), 0]T , q(k ) = [q(1), · · · ,
q ( k ), 0 ]T .
Taking the norm on both sides of (22), we obtain

k Λ̃(k)kv ≤k MΞ1 (k)kv k Λ̃(k − 1)kv + MΞ2 (k) vk

q(k − 1) − q(k − 2)kv
(23)
+ k Λ(k − 1)kv + k Λ(k)kv

Since |Λ(k)| ≤ b̄Λ , |q(k )| ≤ b̄o , so that both Λ(k ) and q(k) are bounded. Next, we
assume that kΛ(k)k ≤ BΛ and kq(k)k ≤ Bo , where BΛ > 0 and Bo > 0 are two constants.
Since 0 < η < 2 and µ > 0, one has

η∆u2 (k)
1− <1 (24)
µ + |∆u(k)|2

According to Lemma 1, one deduces that s(MΞ1 (k )) < 1. From Lemma 2, we have

M Ξ1 ( k ) v
≤ s(MΞ2 (k)) + σ1 ≤ d1 < 1 (25)

where σ1 > 0 and d1 > 0 are small constants.

Then, according to Lemma 1 and Lemma 2, one has

M Ξ2 ( k ) v
k q(k − 1) − q(k − 2)kv + k Λ(k − 1)kv + k Λ(k)kv ≤ 2d2 Bo + 2BΛ < ς 1 (26)

where 0 < ς 1 is a constant.

In terms of (22) and (26), we can deduce that
ς1
k Λ̃(k)kv ≤ d1 k Λ̃(k − 1)kv + ς 1 ≤ · · · ≤ d1k k Λ̃(0)kv + (27)
1 − d1

which implies that Λ̃(k) is bounded. Obviously, Λ̂(k) is bounded since Λ(k) is also bounded.
Then, we assume that Λ̂(k) ≤ b̄Λ̂ , where b̄Λ̂ > 0 is a constant and Λ̂(k) are the elements
of Λ̂(k).
Appl. Sci. 2023, 13, 12816 8 of 20

Proof 2. According to (13) and (14), we have

ρ Id (k + 1) − 2I (k) + I (k − 1) + Λ̂(k − 1)∆u(k − 1)

∆u(k) =
∂ + Λ̂(k)
+ k1 (e(k) − e(k − 1)) + k2 e(k) + k3 (e(k) − 2e(k − 1) + e(k − 2))
(28)
   
2ρ ρ
= k1 + k2 + k3 + e(k ) + −k1 − 2k3 − e ( k − 1) + k 3 e ( k − 2)
λ + θ̂ (k) ∂ + Λ̂(k)
ρΛ̂(k − 1) ρ
+ ∆u(k − 1) + ( Id (k + 1) − 2Id (k) + Id (k − 1))
∂ + Λ̂(k) ∂ + Λ̂(k)

Combined with the system data model (11), the tracking error can be written as

e(k + 1) = Id (k + 1) − I (k + 1)
(29)
= e(k) − Λ(k)∆u(k) + Id (k + 1) − Id (k) − q(k)

Substituting (28) into (29), one has

  
2ρ
e ( k + 1) = e ( k ) 1 − Λ ( k ) k 1 + k 2 + k 3 +
∂ + Λ̂(k)
 
ρ
− Λ(k) −k1 − 2k3 − e ( k − 1) − Λ ( k ) k 3 e ( k − 2)
∂ + Λ̂(k)
(30)
ρΛ̂(k − 1)Λ(k)
− ∆u(k − 1) + Id (k + 1) − Id (k ) − q(k)
∂ + Λ̂(k )
ρΛ(k)
− ( Id (k + 1) − 2Id (k) + Id (k − 1))
∂ + Λ̂(k)

Let e(k + 1) = [e(1) , · · · , e(k), 0]T , Id (k) =[ Id (0), · · · , Id (k), 0]T , ō(k ) = [o (0), · · · ,
2ρ
q(k), 0]T , Ξ(k) = 1 − Λ(k) k1 + k2 + k3 + λ+Λ̂(k) , and

ρΛ̂(k −1)Λ(k )
    
2ρ
k1 + k2 + k3 + ∂+Λ̂(k−1) − Λ(k) k1 + 2k3 +
ρ


 w(k) = ∂+Λ̂(k ) ∂+Λ̂(k )
ρΛ̂(k −1)
    
2ρ
Λ̂
k 1 + k 2 + k 3 + (31)
c(k) = k3 + ∂+Λ̂(k+1)  ∂+Λ̂(k)  ∂+Λ̂(k−1) 
 ρ ( k )

− k1 + 2k3 + ∂+Λ̂ρ (k)



Then, define MΞ3 (k ) = diag(Ξ3 (k) 0), MΞ4 (k ) = diag(Ξ4 (k) 0), and
 T
k −1
 ρΛ(0)Λ̂(−1) ρ2 Λ(0)Λ̂(0) ρΛ̂(−1) ρ k +1 Λ ( k ) ∏ Λ̂(n) 
m=−1
m(k) =  , ,..., , 0 (32)
 
 ∂ + Λ̂(0) ∂ + Λ̂(1) ∂ + Λ̂(0) k
∏ (∂ + Λ̂(m))

m =0

where
Appl. Sci. 2023, 13, 12816 9 of 20

Ξ (0)
 
0 ··· 0 0

 − w (1) Ξ (1) ··· 0 0

 .. .. .. .. ..


 . . . . .


−2 k −2
 ρk−3 Λ(k−1) k∏
 
Λ̂(n) ρk−4 Λ(k −1) ∏ Λ̂(n) 
Ξ 3 ( k ) =  − k −1 n =2
− n =3
· · · Ξ ( k − 1) (33)
 
c (1) k −1
c (2) 0 
∏ (∂+Λ̂(m)) ∏ (∂+Λ̂(m))
 
 
 m =3 m =4 
 k −1 k −1
ρk−3 Λ(k −1) ∏ Λ̂(n)

 ρk−2 Λ(k−1) ∏ Λ̂(n) 
 − n =2
c (1) − n =3
c(21) ··· −w(k) Ξ(k) 
 
k k
∏ (∂+Λ̂(m)) ∏ (∂+Λ̂(m))
m =3 m =4

 
ρΛ(0)
∂+Λ̂(0)
0 ··· 0
 
ρΛ(1) ρΛ(0) ρΛ(1)
··· 0
 
∂+Λ̂(1) ∂+Λ̂(0) ∂+Λ̂(1)
 
 
.. .. .. ..
Ξ4 ( k ) = 
 
 . . . . 
 (34)
 k −1 k −1 
 ρ k +1 Λ ( k ) ∏ Λ̂(n) ρk Λ(k ) ∏ Λ̂(n) 
n =0 n =0 ρΛ(k )
···
 
k k ∂+Λ̂(m)
 
∏ (∂+Λ̂(m)) ∏ (∂+Λ̂(m))
m =0 m =1

Then, (30) can be rewritten as follows

e(k + 1) = MΞ3 (k )e(k) − MΞ4 (k )(Id (k + 1) − 2Id (k) + Id (k − 1))

+ Id (k + 1) − Id (k) − ō(k) − m(k)Λ(−1)∆u(−1)
(35)
= MΞ3 (k)e(k) − MΞ4 (k)(Id (k + 1) − 2Id (k) + Id (k − 1))
+ Id (k + 1) − Id (k) − ō(k)

Define kId (k + 1)kv ≤ B Id , kō(k)kv ≤ Bō , where B Id and Bō are constants that are more
significant than 0.
According to (35), one has

k e(k + 1)kv ≤ MΞ3 (k) v

k e(k)kv + ( I − MΞ4 (k) v
+ 2MΞ4 (k) − I v
+ M Ξ4 ( k ) v
) B Id + Bō (36)

Since ε < Λ̂(k ) and |Λ(k )| < b̄Λ , and according to Lemma 2, we deduce that
MΞ4 (k) v is bounded.
Further, the parameters are set as follows
 
2ρ
1 − Λ(k) k1 + k2 + k3 + <1 (37)
∂ + Λ̂(k)

According to Lemmas 1 and 2, if σ3 > 0 exists, then the following inequality holds

M Ξ3 ( k ) v
≤ s(MΞ3 (k)) + σ3 ≤ d3 < 1 (38)

where d3 > 0 is a constant. Therefore, according to (35) and (38), one has
ς2
k e(k + 1)kv ≤ d3 k e(k)kv + ς 2 ≤ · · · ≤ d3k+1 k e(0)kv + (39)
1 − d3

where ( I − MΞ4 (k) v + 2MΞ4 (k) − I v + MΞ4 (k) v ) B Id + Bō ≤ ς 2 , ς 2 > 0, which
means that lim k e(k + 1)kv = 1−ς 2d , and conclusion (b) in Theorem 2 is proved.
k→∞ 3

Remark 2. It should be noted that the controller parameters of the proposed iFFDL-MFA-PID
scheme are generally selected through trial and error. On the other hand, the ranges of these
Appl. Sci. 2023, 13, 12816 10 of 20

parameters can be determined according to the convergence condition given in the following theorem
if the gradient information is available. Further, k1 , k2 , and k3 can also be selected using the
well-known PID control parameter-tuning methods.

4. Simulation Experiment
The experiments are divided into two groups. The first involves a typical numerical
simulation, primarily aimed at comparing the effectiveness of the proposed iFFDL-MFA-
PID method to that of the FFDL-MFAC method. The second employs the proposed method
to control an electric balanced forklift to validate its efficacy. Moreover, the FFDL-MFAC
and traditional PID methods are included in the comparison analysis using indicators such
as the MSE, MAE, settling time, and rise time. These comparisons aim to demonstrate the
superiority of the proposed method.

4.1. Experiment 1
To enhance the applicability of the proposed method, we extended iFFDL-MFA-PID
to a MIMO system and verified its effectiveness by simulating a typical controlled object.
We compared and simulated the iFFDL-MFA-PID and FFDL-MFAC algorithms using time-
varying signals. The first group of simulation objects consisted of a system with three
inputs and three outputs, as follows:

I1 (k + 1) = 1.5 × I1 (k) + 0.12 × I1 2 (k − 1) + 0.7 × u1 (k)






 +0.3 × u2 (k) + 0.3 × u3 (k) + 0.5 × d(k)
I2 (k + 1) = 1.6 × I2 (k) + 0.14 × I22 (k − 1) + 0.4 × u1 (k)


(40)

 +0.6 × u2 (k) + 0.3 × u3 (k) + 0.5 × d(k)
 I3 (k + 1) = 1.6 × I3 (k) + 0.15 × I3 2 (k − 1) + 0.1 × u1 (k)




+0.7 × u2 (k) + 0.6 × u3 (k) + 0.5 × d(k)

where d(k) represents a white-noise signal with a mean of zero and a variance of 0.05. The
predetermined trajectory settings were as follows:

lins(0, 50, 100) × 5/9, 0 < k ≤ 100




 lins(250, 250, 50)/9, 100 < k ≤ 150


Id = lins(250, 290, 50)/9, 150 < k ≤ 200 (41)
lins (290, 290, 600)/9, 200 < k ≤ 800




lins(290, 0, 200)/9, 801 < k ≤ 1000


The controller parameters were set to Λ̂(1) = Λ̂(2) = diag{0.55, 0.6, 0.55}, η = 0.75,
µ = 1, ρ = 0.15 , ∂ = 0.2, k1 = 0.45, k2 = 0.7, k3 = 0.05, L I = 1, and Lu = 1.
Figure 2 depicts the system output under the influence of the iFFDL-MFA-PID and
FFDL-MFAC methods, whereas Figure 3 shows the corresponding output error graphs.
Table 1 presents the corresponding control performance indicators. By zooming in on the
details in the magnified graphs in Figure 2, it can be observed that at the 100th and 200th
sampling points, the FFDL-MFAC method experienced phase delay and poor disturbance
rejection capabilities, resulting in delayed tracking phenomena and significant oscillations.
This significantly diminished the rapid response characteristics of the model-free adaptive
control algorithm. On the other hand, the iFFDL-MFA-PID method exhibited no phase
delays, promptly providing feedback on the output signal. It maintained the fast response
characteristic of the model-free adaptive control algorithm while eliminating disturbances.
At the 200th sampling point, even when the reference signal changed, the iFFDL-MFA-PID
method continued to maintain its convergence, further demonstrating the adaptability of
the proposed algorithm.
Appl. Sci. 2023, 13, 12816 11 of 20

(a) iFFDL-MFA-PID (b) FFDL-MFAC

Figure 2. System output curves.

(a) iFFDL-MFA-PID (b) FFDL-MFAC

Figure 3. System output error curves.

Table 1. Performance indexes.

Method FFDL-MFAC iFFDL-MFA-PID

Rise time (s) 5 3
Adjust time (s) 27 15
MAE 3.41 × 10−2 1.15 × 10−2
MSE 7.29 × 10−4 2.32 × 10−4

Additionally, by examining the local magnified graphs in the output curve in Figure 2
and the time indicators in Table 1, it can be observed that the iFFDL-MFA-PID method
achieved stability within 15 s under varying reference outputs, whereas MFAC required
more than 27 s. Furthermore, the iFFDL-MFA-PID method exhibited approximately half
the rise time of the MFAC. Moreover, from the error change curve, it is evident that the
iFFDL-MFA-PID method not only possessed fast tracking characteristics but also effectively
suppressed the influence of external disturbances, consistently outperforming traditional
MFAC throughout the tracking process. The error-related indicators shown in Figure 3 and
Table 1 indicate that regardless of whether the reference signal was constant or changing,
the tracking performance of the proposed iFFDL-MFA-PID method was superior to that of
traditional MFAC. The MAE and MSE values of the iFFDL-MFA-PID method were only
1.15 × 10−2 and 2.32 × 10−4 , respectively, whereas the MAE and MSE values of traditional
MFAC were 3.41 × 10−2 and 7.29 × 10−4 , respectively. In conclusion, the iFFDL-MFA-PID
method achieves nonlinear compensation for unknown disturbances such as measurement
noise without relying on a model. It further introduces the iPID method to optimize the
adaptive controller, resulting in a low-order controller with superior simulation results,
robustness, and control performance.
Figure 4 illustrates the control input curves corresponding to each control scheme.
In the iFFDL-MFA-PID scheme, all the control inputs changed smoothly in each stage.
Even when the predetermined signal changed, the control input adjusted at a lower rate,
effectively alleviating the chattering phenomenon of the system. On the other hand, the
FFDL-MFAC scheme exhibited significant control input changes during the predetermined
Appl. Sci. 2023, 13, 12816 12 of 20

signal-change stage. The amplitudes of these changes were large, leading to a more
pronounced chattering phenomenon in the system.
(1) MAE
n T
1
MAE =
nT ∑ ∑ | Is (i) − Id (i)| (42)
s =1 i =1

(2) MSE
n T
1
MSE =
nT ∑ ∑ | Is (i) − Id (i)|2 (43)
s =1 i =1

(a) iFFDL-MFA-PID (b) FFDL-MFAC

Figure 4. System input curves.

In summary, the iFFDL-MFA-PID method not only maintains the fast response charac-
teristic of the MFAC method but also benefits from the strong adaptive ability of intelligent
PID parameters, achieving an optimal control effect for systems affected by noise distur-
bances. Furthermore, the parameter adjustment process based on the iFFDL-MFA-PID
method is simpler and less challenging.

4.2. Experiment 2: Simulation of Longitudinal Dynamic Control of Electric Forklift

The electric forklift, with its advantages of environmental protection, zero emissions,
simple operation, and high efficiency, finds wide applications in various industries, in-
cluding logistics warehousing, manufacturing, port terminals, supermarkets, and logistics
parks. The working site of an electric forklift is illustrated in Figure 5. By utilizing electric
forklifts, logistics efficiency can be improved, labor intensity reduced, and the goals of
energy saving and emission reduction achieved [36].

Figure 5. Electric balanced forklift operating site.

(1) Structure and composition: A general electric forklift comprises a chassis, cab, fork
assembly, power system, and control system. The chassis is the infrastructure of the
forklift, which supports and carries the components of the whole forklift. The cab is
where the operator works, including the seat, joystick, instrument panel, etc. Fork
assemblies are used to load, unload, and carry goods.
(2) Power type: Electric forklifts use two main power types: battery and power line supply.
Battery-powered forklifts are powered by a battery pack, which has the characteristics
of high flexibility and wide adaptability, making them suitable for indoor and outdoor
Appl. Sci. 2023, 13, 12816 13 of 20

operations. Power line-powered forklifts obtain power by connecting to a fixed power

line, making them suitable for continuous logistics operations.
(3) Load capacity: The load capacity of electric forklifts is usually between 1 and 10 tons.
According to different work needs and scenarios, a forklift with an appropriate load
capacity can be selected to meet the handling needs.
(4) Operation mode: The operation of the electric forklift is usually completed by the
operator through control devices such as joysticks, buttons, or touch screens. The
operator can control the driving, steering, lifting fork, tilting fork, and other actions of
the forklift.
(5) Safety and intelligence: Modern electric forklifts are equipped with various safety
equipment and auxiliary systems, such as safety warning lights, reverse radar, anti-
collision devices, driver status monitoring, etc., to improve operational safety. At the
same time, some electric forklifts also have intelligent functions, such as navigation
systems, automatic storage devices, etc., which improve work efficiency and accuracy.
The drive system is a crucial component of an electric forklift and typically consists of
a traction motor, control system (including motor driver, controller, and various sensors),
mechanical deceleration and transmission, wheels, and other related components. Cur-
rently, there are two common types of speed regulation systems for electric forklifts: DC
and AC drives. The operational control of an electric forklift mainly involves the following
aspects:
(1) Start and stop: An electric forklift is usually started and stopped by pedals or buttons.
When starting, the operator needs to ensure the safety of the surrounding environment
and press the start switch or pedal to start the electric forklift. When stopping, the
operator needs to release the start switch or pedal, and the electric forklift will stop
running.
(2) Direction control: Electric forklifts usually use a steering wheel to control the driving
direction. The steering wheel is pushed forward to drive the electric forklift forward
and pulled backward to drive the electric forklift backward. When turning, the
operator can turn to the left or right to select the lever or steering wheel. When
making turns, the directional lever or steering wheel is turned to the left or right.
(3) Speed control: The speed of the electric forklift can usually be adjusted by the acceler-
ator pedal or the acceleration and deceleration button.
(4) Lifting control: Electric forklifts are usually equipped with forklifting functions, which
can be used for loading and unloading goods. The lifting and lowering of the fork
can be controlled by lifting the lever or buttons. Usually, the lifting lever is pushed
upward and the fork will rise; the lifting lever is pulled down to lower the fork.
(5) Auxiliary function control: Some electric forklifts also have auxiliary functions, such
as tilt-angle adjustment, a side-shift function, rotary seat control, etc. These functions
can be operated through the corresponding control devices to meet different work
requirements.
This paper focuses exclusively on the longitudinal speed control of electric forklifts,
which encompasses drive control, brake control, and relevant mode switching. We assume
that the forklift is operating on an inclined road and consider the forklift itself as rigid.
The force distribution acting on the forklift is depicted in Figure 6. The tires on the vehicle
axle experience longitudinal and normal forces, whereas other external forces acting on
the forklift include air resistance, rolling resistance, and gravity. The force equilibrium
equation in the forward direction of the forklift can be expressed as [37]

Ft − Ff − Fw − Fb − Fg
mah = (44)
δ
Ti i η
where Ft = e gr 0 T ; Ff = mg f cos θ; Fw = 21 CD Aρu2r ; Fb = kb pb ; and Fg = mg sin θ. Ft is the
driving force; Ff is the rolling resistance; Fw is the air resistance; Fb is the wheel braking
force; Te is the motor torque; ig is the motor transmission ratio of the electric balanced
Appl. Sci. 2023, 13, 12816 14 of 20

forklift; i0 is the transmission ratio of the reducer; ηT is the transmission efficiency; f is

the rolling resistance coefficient; CD is the air resistance coefficient; A is the windward
area; ρ is the air density; ur is the speed of the forklift on the ramp; kb is the braking-force
proportional coefficient; pb is the braking force; m is the total mass of the forklift; g is the
gravity acceleration; θ is the ramp angle; and δ is the rotation mass conversion coefficient.
From (44), the desired motor torque Tdes can be obtained by the expected acceleration ades :
 
mg f cos θ + mg sin θ + 21 CD Aρu2r + kb pb + δmah r
Tdes = (45)
i g i 0 ηT

Under the driving conditions, there is a certain relationship between the steady-state
output torque Te and the speed ne of the motor, in which any parameter can be obtained
from the other two parameters.
For the braking conditions, the relationship between pb and Fb applied to the wheels
can be regarded as linear. Therefore, under the braking condition, we can obtain the desired
braking force pdes as
Te ig i0 ηT !
δmah + r + mg f cos θ + mg sin θ + 21 CD Aρu2r
pdes = (46)
kb

Electric forklifts are susceptible to changes in the environment and road conditions
during operation, which can impact model parameters such as the quality parameters,
resistance coefficient, and motor torque, making it challenging to obtain accurate dynamic
models. To address these issues, the iFFDL-MFA-PID method is an ideal choice for achiev-
ing longitudinal autonomous driving control of electric forklifts.

(a) Internal controller of the electric balanced forklift. (b) Force analysis of the electric balanced
forklift.

Figure 6. Diagram showing working the principle of the electric balanced forklift.

This paper collected real-time control force and speed data from electric forklifts and
employed the recursive least-squares method to identify the online longitudinal operational
model parameters of the forklifts, allowing for real-time corrections. Equations (44)–(46)
present the dynamic equations for controlling the force and speed of electric forklifts.

C ( z −1 ) V ( k )
A ( z −1 ) I ( k ) = B ( z −1 ) u ( k − 1 ) + (47)
1 − z −1

where I (k) and u(k ) are the speed and control force of the electric forklift, respectively, and
the corresponding system parameters can be defined as

 A ( z −1 ) = 1 + a 0 z −1 + · · · + a n a z − n a


B(z−1 ) = b0 + b1 z−1 + · · · + bnb z−nb (48)

C ( z −1 ) = 1 + c 1 z −1 + · · · + c n c z − n c

Appl. Sci. 2023, 13, 12816 15 of 20

We rewrite (47) in the following form

∆I (k) = [1 − A(z−1 )]∆I (k) + B(z−1 )∆u(k − 1) + V (k)

(49)
= MT ( k ) Y ( k ) + V ( k )

where M(k ) and Y(k) are the data vectors and model parameters, respectively, defined as

M(k ) = [−∆I (k − 1), · · · , −∆I (k − n a ), ∆u(k − 1), · · · , ∆u(k − nb − 1)]T


(50)
Y(k) = [ a1 , · · · , ana , b0 , · · · , bnb ]T

The parameter vector Y(k) to be estimated is calculated using the following recursive
least-squares method with a forgetting factor [38].

 Ŷ(k ) = Ŷ(k − 1) + K(k )[∆I (k) − M (k)Ŷ(k − 1)]

T


P ( k −1) M ( k −1)
K ( k ) = λ + MT ( k ) P ( k −1) M ( k ) (51)
P(k ) = λ1 I − K (k )MT (k) P(k − 1)

  

where Ŷ(k) is the estimated value of the model parameters; K(k) and P(k) are the parameter
matrices; P(0) = (104 − 1010 )I; and λ is the forgetting factor, with values ranging from 0.9
to 1.
The four coefficients in (50) calculated using the recursive least-squares method were
input into (47) to obtain the control model.
To validate the effectiveness of the proposed iFFDL-MFA-PID algorithm, the operating
speed, position, and other relevant information of the electric forklift were recorded. The
parameters of the EFG-BC/320 electric balanced forklift, as well as the control parameters
of the iFFDL-MFA-PID algorithm, are shown in Table 2. Simulation verification was
conducted using the iFFDL-MFA-PID, FFDL-MFAC, and PID methods, respectively. The
tracking error, control force, and acceleration were compared and analyzed to demonstrate
the superiority of the iFFDL-MFA-PID method. The parameters of the other contrasting
control methods were set as follows:
(1) FFDL-MFAC method: I (1) = Id (1), η = 0.85, µ = 0.9, ρ = 0.1 , ∂ = 0.25, L I = 1, and
Lu = 1.
(2) PID method [39]: I (1) = Id (1), K1 = 0.65, K2 = 0.7, and K3 = 0.06.

Table 2. EFG-BC/320 electric balanced forklift (Jungheinrich Company, Shanghai, China) and iFFDL-
MFA-PID parameters.

Parameter Name - Parameter Name -

Forklift model EFG-BC/320 Control method iFFDL-MFA-PID
Maximum speed 18 km/h Load capacity 2000 kg
Overall length 3096 mm Power system Electric drive (48 V)
I (1) = Id (1), η = 0.85
ig = 3.95, CD = 0.75,
System parameter Control parameter µ = 0.9, ρ = 0.1
kb = 1.23, A = 1.85
∂ = 0.25, k1 = 0.35
f = 0.05, m = 3820 kg
k2 = 0.2, k3 = 0.01
L I = 1, Lu = 1
Speed, position, and ±0.132 m/s (velocity
Input and output data Control accuracy
driving-force sensors tracking error)

Figure 7 shows the speed-tracking curves of the electric forklift with the iFFDL-MFA-
PID, MFAC, and PID methods, and Figure 8 shows their error curves. In Figures 7 and 8,
it can be seen that the speed-tracking error range of the electric forklift under the action
of MFAC is in the range of [−0.128 km·h−1 , 0.194 km·h−1 ], whereas that of the PID is
in the range of [−0.228 km·h−1 , 0.313 km·h−1 ]. For iFFDL-MFA-PID, firstly, the MFAC
law was obtained by using the principle of equivalent feedback. Secondly, to enhance the
Appl. Sci. 2023, 13, 12816 16 of 20

system’s robustness, the idea of an intelligent PID was introduced, and the delay estimation
method was used to estimate the disturbance, parameter error, and other uncertainties
of the data model. Further ensuring convergence, the speed-tracking error of the electric
forklift remained stable throughout the entire process in the range of [−0.078 km·h−1 ,
0.124 km·h−1 ], with minimal disturbance, thereby meeting the speed-tracking accuracy
requirements. This method has higher tracking accuracy and better robustness compared
to the FFDL-MFAC method.

(a) iFFDL-MFA-PID (b) FFDL-MFAC

(c) PID

Figure 7. Electric forklift output curves.

Figure 8. Electric forklift output error curves.

(1) MAE
T
1
MAE =
T ∑ | Id − I (k)| (52)
k =1
Appl. Sci. 2023, 13, 12816 17 of 20

(2) MSE
T
1
MSE =
T ∑ | Id − I (k)|2 (53)
k =1

Furthermore, the following performance indicators were introduced to evaluate the

iFFDL-MFA-PID, FFDL-MFAC, and PID methods. Table 3 presents the control performance
of these three control methods. The calculation method for the performance indicators is
shown in (52) and (53), where k and T represent the current sampling time and total time,
respectively. The settling time is an important indicator of a control system’s performance.
In this study, we observed the response curve of the system when the reference signal
changed at the 50th second to identify the time point at which the output first reached and
remained within a certain range of stability under the influence of the input. From Table 3,
it is evident that the settling time of the iFFDL-MFA-PID method was approximately
7 s, which was less than half of the settling time of the MFAC method and significantly
lower than that of the PID method. The iFFDL-MFA-PID method achieves an MAE of
1.14 × 10−2 and an MSE of 1.48 × 10−4 , whereas the MFAC method yielded an MAE of
3.26 × 10−2 and an MSE of 8.62 × 10−4 . These values are much smaller than those of the
PID method, indicating higher precision and better stability. The results demonstrate that
the control strategy proposed in this paper can more effectively suppress the harm caused
by measurement disturbances to the system’s stability, thereby achieving more accurate
tracking of the system output.

Table 3. Control schemes’ performance indexes.

Method PID FFDL-MFAC iFFDL-MFA-PID

Adjust time (s) 35 20 7
MAE 5.67 × 10−2 3.26 × 10−2 1.14 × 10−2
MSE 2.15 × 10−3 8.62 × 10−4 1.48 × 10−4

Figure 9 shows the control force (driving force/braking force) variation curves of the
electric forklift under the action of the iFFDL-MFA-PID, FFDL-MFAC, and PID methods.
As shown in the figure, the control forces of the electric forklift under the FFDL-MFAC and
PID methods changed frequently and were greatly affected by interference. The control
force change using the iFFDL-MFA-PID method was relatively stable, and the amplitude
was smaller than that of the FFDL-MFAC method. This ensures the operational safety of
the electric forklift and that no rollovers or other phenomena occur during the handling
process.

Figure 9. Electric forklift control force curves.

Appl. Sci. 2023, 13, 12816 18 of 20

Figure 10 shows the acceleration variation curves of electric forklifts using iFFDL-
MFA-PID, FFDL-MFAC, and PID methods. As shown in the figure, the acceleration changes
using the FFDL-MFAC and PID methods were too fast. In contrast to the iFFDL-MFA-PID
method, the acceleration of the electric forklift changed slowly, which ensures the safe
operation of the electric forklift and that there is no rollover in the handling process.

Figure 10. Electric forklift acceleration curves.

These results indicate that the control strategy proposed in this paper can effectively
mitigate the adverse effects caused by measurement disturbances on system stability,
leading to more accurate tracking of the system’s output.

5. Conclusions
This paper introduces the iFFDL-MFA-PID algorithm to address the challenges posed
by sensor measurement noise and other disturbances in electric cargo forklift systems.
The algorithm is specifically designed to handle uncertain disturbed systems. The ef-
fectiveness of the controller is verified through both theoretical analysis and simulation
experiments. Firstly, the gradient estimation algorithm and time difference algorithm are
employed based on the nonlinear general equation of the electric cargo forklift system.
These algorithms effectively estimate time-varying parameters and uncertain nonlinear
terms, enabling accurate estimation of changing parameters and nonlinear terms in the
system. Furthermore, the proposed control strategy leverages the iPID algorithm and
utilizes additional tracking error information to compensate for the decrease in system
information accuracy caused by excessive linearization in the iFFDL-MFAC approach. This
ensures better system output tracking by taking advantage of the benefits offered by the
iPID algorithm. Additionally, the learning update law and parameter update law of the
system are restructured to enhance the controller’s structure, resulting in improved overall
performance and stability. The simulation results demonstrate that the proposed control
strategy effectively suppresses the harmful effects of disturbances on system stability,
achieving more accurate tracking of the system output. This ensures the safe operation
of electric forklifts and helps prevent accidents such as rollovers and rear-end collisions
during operation. In addition, in future work, we plan to extend the theory of autonomous
driving for cars to forklift systems. By integrating image recognition technology, we can
make the forklift autonomous driving system more intelligent, safe, and efficient, providing
drivers with a safer driving experience.
It should be noted that adaptively adjusting the controller parameters without relying
on model information is crucial. For instance, PID control parameter-tuning methods, such
as iterative feedback tuning and virtual reference feedback tuning, are data-driven methods.
Therefore, in future research, we plan to develop parameter-tuning mechanisms that
Appl. Sci. 2023, 13, 12816 19 of 20

reference these methods to enhance control performance. While the adaptive adjustment
of controller parameters without relying on model information is crucial, we recognize
that in specific engineering applications, reliance on model information remains vital.
Therefore, the purpose of this study is not to completely negate the importance of model
information but to emphasize the advantages and practicality of adaptively adjusting
controller parameters in the absence of detailed model information.

Author Contributions: Conceptualization, J.X.; Validation, Z.S.; Formal analysis, F.X.; Data curation,
Y.W.; Writing—original draft, J.X.; Writing—review & editing, Z.S.; Supervision, Z.S. All authors have
read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.
Funding: This research was funded by the Quzhou City Science and Technology Plan project:
(2023K263, 2023K265, 2023K045) and General Research Project of Zhejiang Provincial Department of
Education (2023): (Y202353440, Y202353289).
Institutional Review Board Statement: Not applicable.
Informed Consent Statement: Not applicable.
Data Availability Statement: The data presented in this study are available in the article.
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References
1. Zhang, T.; Li, H.; Fang, Y.; Luo, M.; Cao, K. Joint Dispatching and Cooperative Trajectory Planning for Multiple Autonomous
Forklifts in a Warehouse: A Search-and-Learning-Based Approach. Electronics 2023, 12, 3820.
2. Qin, Y.; Luo, Q.; Wang, H. Stability analysis and connected vehicles management for mixed traffic flow with platoons of connected
automated vehicles. Transp. Res. Part C 2023, 157, 104370.
3. Hu, L.; Zhou, X.; Zhang, X.; Wang, F.; Li, Q.; Wu, W. A review on key challenges in intelligent vehicles: Safety and driver-oriented
features. IET Intell. Transp. Syst. 2021, 15, 1093–1105.
4. She, X.; Li, X.M.; Yao, D.; Li, H.; Lu, R. Vision-based adaptive fixed-time uncooperative target tracking for QUAV with unknown
disturbances. J. Frankl. Inst. 2023, 0, 12394–12414.
5. Keith, A.; Sangarapillai, T.; Almehmadi, A.; El-Khatib, K. A Blockchain-Powered Traffic Management System for Unmanned
Aerial Vehicles. Appl. Sci. 2023, 13, 10950.
6. Li, Z.; Zhou, L.; Yang, H. Data-driven model-free adaptive control method for high-speed electric multiple unit. Acta Autom. Sin.
2023, 49, 437–447.
7. Yang, H.; Fu, Y.; Wang, D. Multi-ANFIS Model Based Synchronous Tracking Control of High-Speed Electric Multiple Unit. IEEE
Trans. Fuzzy Syst. 2018, 26, 1472–1484.
8. Zhang, Y.; Gao, J.; Chen, Y.; Bian, C.; Zhang, F.; Liang, Q. Adaptive neural network control for visual docking of an autonomous
underwater vehicle using command filtered backstepping. Int. J. Robust Nonlinear Control 2022, 32, 4716–4738.
9. Holmberg, M.; Karlsson, O.; Tulldahl, M. Lidar Positioning for Indoor Precision Navigation. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF
Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, New Orleans, LA, USA, 18–24 June 2022; pp. 359–8.
10. Liu, S.; Zheng, T.; Zhao, D.; Hao, R.; Yang, M. Strongly perturbed sliding mode adaptive control of vehicle active suspension
system considering actuator nonlinearity. Veh. Syst. Dyn. 2022, 60, 597–616.
11. Mei, P.; Karimi, H.R.; Yang, S.; Xu, B.; Huang, C. An adaptive fuzzy sliding-mode control for regenerative braking system of
electric vehicles. Int. J. Adapt. Control. Signal Process. 2022, , 391–410.
12. Chen, G.; Peng, R.; Wang Z.; Zhao, W. Pallet Recognition and Localization Method for Vision Guided Forklift. In Proceedings of
the 2012 8th International Conference on Wireless Communications, Networking and Mobile Computing, Shanghai, China, 21–23
September 2012; pp. 1-4. doi: 10.1109/WiCOM.2012.6478603.
13. Gödde, T.; Henning, K.; Prothmann, H. Warehouse Management System with AGVs and Forklifts. In Proceedings of the 2018
IEEE International Conference on Automation Science and Engineering (CASE), Munich, Germany, 20–24 August 2018.
14. Klan, A.; Krjanc, I. Tracking-error model-based predictive control for mobile robots in real time. Robot. Auton. Syst. 2007, 55,
460–469.
15. Krjanc, I.; Klanar, G. A comparison of continuous and discrete tracking-error model-based predictive control for mobile robots.
Robot. Auton. Syst. 2017, 87, 177–187.
16. Gu, D.; Hu, H. Neural predictive control for a car-like mobile robot. Robot. Auton. Syst. 2002, 39, 73–86.
17. Yu, X.; He, W.; Xue, C.; Sun, Y.; Sun, C. Disturbance observer based adaptive neural network tracking control for robots. Acta
Autom. Sin. 2019, 45, 1307–1324.
18. Hwang, C.L.; Chang, L.J. Internet-based smart-space navigation of a car-like wheeled robot using fuzzy-neural adaptive control.
IEEE Trans. Fuzzy Syst. 2008, 16, 1271–1284.
Appl. Sci. 2023, 13, 12816 20 of 20

19. Tzafestas, S.G.; Deliparaschos, K.M.; Moustris, G.P. Fuzzy logic path tracking control for autonomous non-holonomic mobile
robots: Design of system on a chip. Robot. Auton. Syst. 2010, 58, 1017–1027.
20. Wang, S.; Yin, X.; Li, P.; Zhang, M.; Wang, X. Trajectory Tracking control for mobile robots using reinforcement learning and PID.
Iran. J. Sci. Technol. Trans. Electr. Eng. 2019, 44, 1059–1068.
21. Zhao, R.; Qin, D.; Chen, B.; Wang, T.; Wu, H. Thermal Management of Fuel Cells Based on Diploid Genetic Algorithm and Fuzzy
PID. Appl. Sci. 2022, 13, 520.
22. Zhang, J.; Zhao, T.; Guo, B.; Dian, S. Fuzzy fractional-order PID control for two-wheeled self-balancing robots on inclined road
surface. Syst. Sci. Control Eng. 2022, 10, 289–299.
23. Mohammad, I.; Ahmad, A. IMC based robust PI/PID controllers for time-delayed inverse response processes. ISA Trans. 2022,
134, 278–289.
24. Zhu, N.; Gao, X.T.; Huang, C.Q. A data-driven approach for on-line auto-tuning of minimum variance PID controller. ISA Trans.
2022, 130, 325–342.
25. Hou, Z.-S. Nonlinear System Parameter Identification, Adaptive Control and Model Free Adaptive Learning Control; Northeastern
University: Shenyang, China, 1994. (In Chinese)
26. Zhou, L.; Li, Z.Q.; Yang, H.; Fu, Y.; Yan, Y. Data-Driven Model-Free Adaptive Sliding Mode Control Based on FFDL for Electric
Multiple Units. Appl. Sci. 2022, 12, 10983.
27. Li, Z.; Zhou, L.; Yang, H. Iterative Learning Control Method for EMU Based on Predictive Control. J. Traffic Transp. Eng. 2023, 23,
280–290.
28. Hui, Y.; Chi, R.; Huang, B.; Hou, Z.; Jin, S. Observer-based sampled data model-free adaptive control for continuous-time
nonlinear nonaffine systems with input rate constraints. IEEE Trans. Syst. Man Cybern. Syst. 2021, 51, 7813–7822.
29. Zhang, S.H.; Chi, R.H. Model-free adaptive PID control for nonlinear discrete-time systems. Trans. Inst. Meas. Control 2020, 42,
1797–1807.
30. Bu, X.H.; Hou, Z.S.; Yu, F.; Wang, F. Robust model free adaptive control with measurement disturbance. IET Control Theory Appl.
2012, 6, 1288–1296.
31. Ma, Y.; Che, W.; Deng, C. Dynamic event-triggered model-free adaptive control for nonlinear CPSs under aperiodic DoS attacks.
Inf. Sci. 2022, 589, 790–801,
32. Zhou, L.; Li, Z.-Q.; Yang, H.; Fu, Y.-T. Data-driven integral sliding mode control based on disturbance decoupling technology for
electric multiple unit. J. Frankl. Inst. 2023, 0, 9399–9426.
33. Xiong, S.-S.; Hou, Z.-S. Model-free adaptive control for unknown MIMO nonaffine nonlinear discrete-time systems with
experimental validation. IEEE Trans. Neural Netw. Learn. Syst. 2022, 33, 1727–1739.
34. Ma, Y.S.; Che, W.W.; Deng, C.; Wu, Z.G. Distributed model-free adaptive control for learning nonlinear MASs under DoS attacks.
IEEE Trans. Neural Netw. Learn. Syst. 2023, 34, 1146–1155.
35. Hou, Z.-S.; Xiong, S.-S. On model-free adaptive control and its stability analysis. IEEE Trans. Autom. Control 2019, 64, 4555–4569.
36. Liu, Z. Research on the Key Technology of Heavy Forklift Truck Automatic Shift; Hefei University of Technology: Hefei, China, 2014.
37. Yan, S. Collaborative Optimization Design Method and Specialized Software Development of Vertical and Horizontal Stability of Forklift;
Hefei University of Technology: Hefei, China, 2022.
38. Xu, Y.T.; Wu, A.G. Integral sliding mode predictive control with disturbance attenuation for discrete-time systems. Iet Control
Theory Appl. 2022, 16, 1751–1766.
39. Moon, S.; Yi, K. Human driving data-based design of a vehicle adaptive cruise control algorithm. Veh. Syst. Dyn. 2008, 46,
661–690.

Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual
author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to
people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.