A class of time-varying systems can be quadratically stabilized with satisfactory performance by a modified time-invariant-based observer. The modified observer driven by the additional adaptation forces with static correction gains is used to estimate the time-varying system states. Under the frame of quadratic stability, the closed-loop systems satisfying induced norm bounded performance criterion are exponentially stabilized while the states are exponentially approaching by the modified observer. This paper deals with the time-varying systems that can be characterized as the multiplicative type of time-invariant and time-varying parts. The time-invariant part is then used to construct the modified observer with additional driving forces, which are ready to adjust time-varying effect coming from the measured outputs feeding into the modified observer. The determination of the adaptation forces can be derived from the minimization of the cost of error dynamics with modified least-squares algorithms. The synthesis of control and observer static correction gains are also demonstrated. The developed systems have been tested in a mass-spring-damper system to illustrate the effectiveness of the design.
- quadratic stablilization
- time-invariant-based observer
- error dynamics
- least-squares algorithm
- adaptation forces
- time-varying parts
The study of optimal control for time-varying systems involves, in general, the solutions of Riccati differential equations (RDEs) and computations of the time-varying correction gains [1–4]. It is noted that the system is typically computer-implemented system, upon which the RDE and correction gains are calculated. The computations, however, induces unavoidable time delay. Although the time-delayed control has been considered, it leads to two disadvantages—complication of control mechanism and bulk of the control board. For some systems, for example, hard disk drives (a typically time-varying system) can only tolerate no delayed or very limited time delay control [5, 6] and use very small compartment. Hence, many literatures have focused on the static gain control of time-varying systems or the systems with time-varying or nonlinear uncertainties [7, 8]. It represents the simplest closed-loop control form but still encounters problems. One should aware that static output control is nonconvex, in which iterative linear matrix inequality approaches are exploited after it is expressed as a bilinear matrix inequality formulation( see [9–12]). As a result, it cannot be easily implemented in controlling the time-varying system and time delay problems remain.
It is a great challenge problem to design a linear continuous time-invariant observer with constant correction gains that regulate linear continuous time-varying plants. Although the vast majority of continuous TV control applications are implemented in digital computers [6, 13, 14], there are still opportunities to implement control with Kalman observer in continuous time (i.e., in analog circuits) [Hug88]. In particular, those control systems requiring fast response ask no or little delay effects. The difficulties for setting up those boards are because the algorithm of the design is too complex to implement in board level design, too expensive which can only be realized in a laboratory, or digital computation time induced unsatisfactory delay. It should be noticed that to realize the Kalman observer involves the computation of Riccati differential equations and inversion of matrices, which cause the obstacles of the board level design. A survey of linear and nonlinear observer design for control systems has been conducted in the literatures [15–18] and references therein. For controlling an linear time-invariant (LTI) system, the Lungerber observer  design with constant correction gain is straightforward and can be implemented on a circuit board with ease.
Many practical control systems implement time-invariant controllers with observers in the feedback loop, which can be easily realized not only in the laboratory but also in the industrial merchandize . The advantages of realization for the time-invariant controllers and observers are due to the constant parameters, which can be easily assembled by using resistors and other analog integrated elements in circuits board. The use of observers is also essential in industrial controls due to, in some cases, the states can be either not reachable or expensive to be sensed. Therefore, the use of observers are undoubtedly required to estimate unmeasured states since not merely full-state feedback control can be easily implemented but unmeasured states can be monitored [21–25].
With the aforementioned disadvantages and advantages, the control of time-varying systems is naturally arisen by designing a time-invariant observer-based controller that stabilizes, in particular exponentially, this time-varying plant. It is believed that this is a great challenge problem since we found no literatures tackling this problem. In what follows time-varying system control is first reviewed for laying the foundation of the robust control of the system with optimality property.
The feedback control of linear time-varying system has been extensively studied [1, 6, 7, 26–31]. The key observation of early works for exponential stability of time-varying systems requires that the time-dependent matrix-valued functions be bounded and piecewise continuous satisfying Lyapunov quadratic stability [29, 31]. In this regard, many, but not all, of them can be translated to robust control framework since time-dependent matrices are essentially bounded and are treated as uncertainties [8, 32]. This gives an opportunity for the control system design without solving RDEs, although what we pay for the avoiding solving RDEs is the conservative of control. The conservativeness comes from two reasons—solutions of RDEs are avoided and admit fast varying parameters. This, however, can be reduced by designing parameter-dependent type of criterion or introducing slack variables such that reduces the tightness of dependent variables( see, e.g.,  and reference therein).
This paper is organized as follows. The following section, Section 2, sets up the time-varying systems to be tackled, time-invariant observer to be built, feedback control problems to be solved, and system properties (assumptions) to be with the systems. Section 3 gives the main results for solving the feedback control problems, in which LMIs characterize the quadratically stability of the closed-loop system with of the closed-loop system is preserved; in addition, least-squares algorithm is suggested to drive the time-varying observer such that the time-varying plant states can be estimated asymptotically. Consequently, Section 4 demonstrates the synthesis of the static gains of control input and correction gains of observer. To verify the effectiveness, illustrative applications are to test the overall design of the feedback closed-loop system. The last section, Section 5, concludes the overall paper.
2. System formulation and problem statement
We consider a nonlinear time-varying system described by a set of equations
The first equation describes the
such that , which is equivalent to saying that
It should be aware that another equally good choice is to use additive type of representation, that is, , where lumps all time-varying factors. As a matter of fact, multiplicative and additive type of representations are interchangeable. Let be such that . Thus, , where
The control action to (1) is to design an observer-based output feedback control system, which processes the measured outputs
is the observed state of
The time-varying vector-valued function to be determined in the sequel is an additional degree of freedom for driving observer (3) to estimate the plant state
or, equivalently, by taking the advantages of polytopic bound of (S1)
where and , in which
Once the observed state is available, the control input
where K is the static gain to be designed. The control purpose has twofold: to
has all eigenvalues in ,
is strictly less than , or equivalently, for each input , the response
for some and every .
3. Analyses and characterizations
Two issues will be addressed in this section. Firstly, the theorem states the sufficiency condition showing that the problem of observer-based control via measured feedback of time-varying system is solvable. Secondly, an identification process based on least-squares algorithms for is derived to construct the feedback structure of the closed-loop system (8).
3.1. LMI characterizations
and matrices and with adaptive scheme of ϵ(t) satisfying
The matrices, and , defined in (10) are
3.2. Modified least-squares algorithms
Prior to stating the modified least-squares scheme for computing , the following assumption is made
where . This is to say that is kept constant within the small time interval , which, equivalently, is assumed that is a piecewise continuous time-varying function. The problem in this section is to determine an adaptation law for the vector-valued function in such a way that the computed from the model (4) agree as closely as possible to zero in the sense of least squares. The following least-squares algorithms are developed by summing the index of each small time interval with cost function defined as follows
To minimize the cost function , each index should be minimized as well and the following conditions may be obtained for each time interval
In view of (16), the
where is called
To assure positive definiteness and thus the invertibility, the covariance matrix will be further polished in the sequel. The covariance matrix plays an important role in the estimation of and is worth noting that
To find the least-squares estimator with recursive formulations, which parameters are updated continuously on the basis of available data, we differentiate (17) with respect to time and obtain
for . The covariance matrix acts in the update law as a time-varying, directional adaptation gain. We have to aware that by observing (18), which indicates positive semi definite of , implies that may go without bound and hence will become very small in some directions and adaptation in those directions becomes very slow. Therefore, to avoid slowing adaptive propagation speed and to assure the positive definiteness of covariance matrix such that invertibility exists, the following
The scalar is chosen such that the adaptation maintains suitable rate of propagation. The covariance resetting propagation is adjusted by (21), in which the initial condition is also reset. The condition (22) shows that the covariance matrix can also be reset within the time window if the covariance matrix is close to the singularity. That is, the covariance matrix is reset if its minimum eigenvalue is less than or equal to , that is, . The following Lemma shows that the covariance matrix is bounded and is positive definite based on the covariance resetting propagation law (21) and (22).
Before presenting the theorem for modified least-squares algorithms of showing that it is bounded, the following transition matrix Lemma for the solutions of (19) is essential.
where is the transition matrix of or the unique solution of
A constructive method is suggested by letting a differential equation , , where is a vector of appropriate dimensions. We may conclude that .
Let and Lyapunov candidate, , where is chosen as satisfying Lemma 1. Then, computing along solutions of between the covariance resettings is as follows,
Without loss of generality, let . Then,
At the point of resetting, that is, the point of discontinuity of , we obtain
where is the transition matrix shown in (23). In view of Lemma 2, we obtain
The boundedness of can be easily seen by observing (20), in which , , and followed by Theorem 1 have bounds and , as . The covariance matrix satisfies (21) and, then, is bounded by Lemma 1. Followed by system property (S1),
which indicates that , for . As time evolves, for each small time interval, (26) always holds. Hence, we may extend . This completes the proof.
4. Control and observer gain synthesis
The synthesis of control and observer gains is addressed in Theorem 1. For the simplicity of expression, the time argument of matrix-valued function
if and only if
where and are orthogonal complement of and , respectively, that is and is of maximum rank.
Next, the orthogonal complement of and is given by and , respectively, which are
which is defined as the orthogonal complement of and is such that and is of maximum rank. By applying Lemma 3, we may have the following inequalities,
To prove , let , we find the following
where . It is noted that the last
Again, the last
Thus, (Q1) implies (10). This completes the proof.
5. Illustrative application
In this application, a simple time-varying mass-damper-spring system is controlled to demonstrate that the time-varying effects appearing in the system matrix can be transferred to a force term in the observer structure. Thus, consider the system shown in Figure 3 without sensor fault. and are linear spring and damping constant, respectively. , , and are time-varying spring and viscous damping coefficients. The system is described by the following equation of motion
where time-varying functions are , , , and the constants are and . Define and , the state space representation of (36) is
Here, we consider the parameters , , , , , and . Thus, the set of vertices of polytope associated with time-varying matrix
By applying linear matrix inequalities (30) and (31) of (Q3) in Lemma 4, the control and observer gain,
The control input is then computed by , where the observed state is from
The implementation are coded in Matlab using the initial states: , , , , , , and . The simulation results are depicted in Figures 4 and 5. Figure 4(a) and (b) shows that the observer states cohere with the plant states . It is, therefore, seen that the observer (38) being driven by time-varying term
This paper has developed the modified time-invariant observer control for a class of time-varying systems. The control scheme is suitable for the time-varying system that can be characterized by the multiplicative type of time-invariant and time-varying parts. The time-invariant observer is constructed directly from the time-invariant part of the system with additional adaptation forces that are prepared to account for time-varying effects coming from the measured output feeding into the modified observer. The derivation of adaptation forces is based on the least squares algorithms in which the minimization of the cost of error dynamics considers as the criteria. It is seen from the illustrative application that the closed-loop systems are showing exponentially stable with system states being asymptotically approached by the modified observer. Finally, the LMI process has been demonstrated for the synthesis of control and observer gains and their implementation on a mass-spring-damper system proves the effectiveness of the design.
It is noted that in this appendix all time arguments of either vector-valued or matrix-valued time functions will be dropped for the simplicity of expression. They can be easily distinguished by their contents.
with , , and . Then, the performance index (9) can be written as
The second integrand in (39) is
Completing the square of (42), we have
Similarly, the second term of (41) is
Applying completing the square to (44), we obtain
Given that , if (11) of (T1) holds, then it concludes that
To prove that (O1) holds, we use the inequality (10) in (T1) and get the equivalent inequality as follows,
It is concluded, by a standard Lyapunov stability argument, that , that is (7), has all eigenvalues in , which shows that (O1) holds. This completes the proof of Theorem 1.
Amato F. Robust Control of Linear Systems Subject to Uncertain Time-Varying Parameters. Lecture Notes in Control and Information Sciences. Berlin Heidelberg: Springer-Verlag; 2006.
Grewal MS, Andrews AP. Kalman Filtering: Theory and Practice Using MATLAB. New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.; 2008.
Simon D. Optimal State Estimation: Kalman, , and Nonlinear Approaches. Hoboken, New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.; 2006.
Sontag ED. Mathematical Control Theory: Deterministic Finite Dimensional Systems. 2nd ed. New York: Springer; 1998.
Chen BM, Lee TH, Venkatakrishnan V. Hard Disk Drive Servo Systems. Advances in Industrial Control. London: Springer-Verlag; 2002.
Nie J, Conway R, Horowitz R. Optimal H∞ Control for Linear Periodically Time-Varying Systems in Hard Disk Drives. IEEE/ASME Transactions on Mechatronics. 2013;18(1):212–220.
Phat VN. Global Stabilization for Linear Continuous Time-varying Systems. Applied Mathematics and Computation. 2006;175(2):1730–1743.
Zhou K, Doyle JC. Essentials of Robust Control. Upper Saddle River, New Jersey: Prentice Hall; 1998.
Syrmos VL, Abdallah CT, Dorato P, Grigoriadis K. Static Output Feedback-A Survey. Automatica. 1997;33(2):125–137.
Huang D, Nguang SK. Robust Static Output Feedback Control of Fuzzy Systems: an ILMI Approach. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics, Part B: Cybernetics. 2006;36(1):216–222.
Rosinová D, Veselý V, Kućera V. A Necessary and Sufficient Condition for Static Output Feedback Stabilizability of Linear Discrete-time Systems. Kybernetika. 2003;39(4):447–459.
Leibfritz F. An LMI-Based Algorithm for Designing Suboptimal Static Output Feedback Controllers. SIAM Journal on Control and Optimization. 2000;39(6):1711–1735.
Zhang J, Zhang C. Robustness of Discrete Periodically Time-varying Control Under LTI Unstructured Perturbations. IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control. 2000;45(7):1370–1374.
Zhang Y, Fidan B, Ioannou PA. Backstepping Control of Linear Time-Varying Systems with Known and Unknown Parameters. IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control. 2003;48(11):1908–1925.
Astrom KJ, Wittenmark B. Adaptive Control. 2nd ed. Boston, MA: Addison-Wesley; 1994.
Besançon G. Observer Design for Nonlinear Systems. A Loría FLL, Panteley E, editors. Lecture Notes in Control and Information Sciences, vol. 328. London: Springer; 2006.
Besançon G. Nonlinear Observers and Applications. Lecture Notes in Control and Information Sciences. London: Springer; 2007.
Spurgeon SK. Sliding Mode Observers: A Survey. International Journal of Systems Science. 2008;39(8):751–764.
Luenberger DG. Observers for Multivariable Systems. IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control. 1966;11(2):190–197.
Parr EA. Industrial Control Handbook. Jordan Hill, Oxford: Industrial Press; 1998.
Franklin GF, Emami-Naeini A, Powell JD. Feedback Control of Dynamic Systems. 3rd ed. Boston, MA: Addison-Wesley; 1994.
Feng CC. Fault-Tolerant Control and Adaptive Estimation Schemes for Sensors with Bounded Faults. In: IEEE International Conference on Control Applications; Singapore, 2007. p. 628–633.
Feng CC. Robust Control for Systems with Bounded-Sensor Faults. Mathematical Problems in Engineering. 2012;2012, Article ID 471585.
Sepe RB, Lang JH. Real-time observer-based (adaptive) control of a permanent-magnet synchronous motor without mechanical sensors. IEEE Transactions on Industry Applications. 1992;28(6):1345–1352.
Swarnakar A, Marquez HJ, Chen T. A New Scheme on Robust Observer-Based Control Design for Interconnected Systems with Application to an Industrial Utility Boiler. IEEE Transactions on Control Systems Technology. 2008;16(3):539–547.
Bellman RE. Stability Theory of Differential Equations. Dover books on Intermediate and Advanced Mathematics. New York, NY: Dover Publications; 1953.
Amato F, Ariola M, Cosentino C. Finite-time control of linear time-varying systems via output feedback. In: Proceedings of the American Control Conference; Salt Lake City, 2005. p. 4722–4726.
Callier FM, Desoer CA. Linear System Theory. London: Springer; 2012.
Desoer C. Slowly Varying System . IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control. 1969;14(6):780–781.
Green M, Limebeer DJN. Linear Robust Control. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice Hall; 1995.
Rosenbrook HH. The Stability of Linear Time-dependent Control Systems. Journal of Electronics and Control. 1963;15(1):73–80.
Boyd S, El Ghaoui L, Feron E, Balakrishnan V. Linear Matrix Inequalities in System and Control Theory. vol. 15 of Studies in Applied Mathematics. Philadelphia, PA: SIAM; 1994.
Feng CC. Integral Sliding-Based Robust Control. In: Mueller A, editor. Recent Advances in Robust Control—Novel Approaches and Design Methods. Rijeka, Croatia: InTech; 2011.p. 165–186.