Experimental Comparisons of Sliding Mode Controlled Pneumatic Muscle and Cylinder Actuators
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Pneumatic muscle actuators offer a higher force-to-weight ratio compared to traditional cylinder actuators, and introduce stick-slip-free operation that offers an interesting option for positioning systems. Despite several advantages, pneumatic muscle actuators are commonly avoided in industrial applications, mainly due to rather different working principles. Due to the highly nonlinear characteristics of the muscle actuator and pneumatic system, a reliable control strategy is required. Although muscle actuators are widely studied, the literature lacks detailed studies where the performance for servo systems is compared with traditional pneumatic cylinders. In this paper, a pneumatic servo actuation system is compared with a traditional cylinder actuator. As the overall system dynamics are highly nonlinear and not well defined, a sliding mode control (SMC) strategy is chosen for the control action. In order to improve the tracking performance, an SMC strategy with an integral action (SMCI) is also implemented. The control algorithms are experimentally applied on the pneumatic muscle and the cylinder actuator, for the purposes of position tracking. The robustness of the systems are verified and compared by varying the applied loads.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".