High-tech commercial mechanical ventilators are designed to provide a constant and accurate flow, thus ensuring the precision of ventilatory treatment. Therefore, this research aims to evaluate the flow control in a prototype electro-pneumatic unit for mechanical ventilator applications using a PID versus a Fuzzy Logic method. Specifically, the intention is to determine if there is evidence of superior performance of fuzzy logic control over PID in this application. For this reason, the methodology is based on measurement and numerical analysis. The design of this research is quasi-experimental and conducted in a laboratory. Thus, samples of the data of the variables were taken at convenience under a pre-established scheme and conditions. In terms of the type of study, it is considered quantitative, experimental, and applied. The main results show that according, the Bland-Altman analysis both controllers meet the accuracy limits of commercial equipment. However, the fuzzy logic controller presented better standard deviation and difference limits, demonstrating greater reliability in the accuracy of results. Additionally, the PID control demonstrated quicker response times with a shorter settling time (between 0.32 and 0.43 seconds) than in the fuzzy logic control (between 0.43 and 0.77 seconds); moreover, the fuzzy control presents an improvement in the volume of 900 mL, highlighting the efficiency of this controller in conditions of higher demand. The results show that both the PID and Fuzzy Logic controllers meet the stability conditions of the Jury Test. The system's poles are within the unit circle of the Z plane, confirming the controllers' stability. Also, the curve of the fuzzy control in the Nyquist analysis is farther away from the origin and from the point (-1, 0j) than the curve of the PID control, indicating better stability and a more robust system against variations or disturbances.

The authors have declared no competing interest.

Yes

I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.

Not Applicable

The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:

The research was granted an exemption from formal ethical approval because it did not involve human participants or patient data, focusing solely on laboratory-based simulations and device performance testing.

I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.

Not Applicable

I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).

Not Applicable

I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable.

Not Applicable

All relevant data are within the manuscript and its Supporting Information files.