0% found this document useful (0 votes)
60 views

Lyapunov Based Redesign: Motivation

Lyapunov Based Redesign aims to stabilize a system with uncertainty by finding a state feedback controller. The approach is to: 1) Choose the nominal controller to stabilize the nominal system. 2) Use a Lyapunov function to prove nominal stability. 3) Choose the additional control input to cancel the uncertainty using the Lyapunov function and knowledge of the uncertainty bound. Two cases are considered for bounded uncertainty: using an L2 or L∞ norm bound. The additional control input is chosen to match and cancel the uncertainty, resulting in closed-loop stability being proved using the Lyapunov function and its time derivative.

Uploaded by

Steve Demirel
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PPT, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
0% found this document useful (0 votes)
60 views

Lyapunov Based Redesign: Motivation

Lyapunov Based Redesign aims to stabilize a system with uncertainty by finding a state feedback controller. The approach is to: 1) Choose the nominal controller to stabilize the nominal system. 2) Use a Lyapunov function to prove nominal stability. 3) Choose the additional control input to cancel the uncertainty using the Lyapunov function and knowledge of the uncertainty bound. Two cases are considered for bounded uncertainty: using an L2 or L∞ norm bound. The additional control input is chosen to match and cancel the uncertainty, resulting in closed-loop stability being proved using the Lyapunov function and its time derivative.

Uploaded by

Steve Demirel
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PPT, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 35

Lyapunov Based Redesign

• Motivation

Consider x  f (t , x)  G (t , x)u , x  R n , u  R p
f : R  D  R n
G : R  D  R n p

But the real system is


x  f (t , x )  G (t , x )u  G (t , x ) (t , x, u )
 f (t , x)  G (t , x)(u   (t , x, u ))

 : R  D  R p  R p
 is unknown but not necessarily small. We assume
it has a known bound.
 (t , x, u )  (t , x, u )

11-1
Problem

Find a state feedback controller so that the closed loop system is stable in a
sufficiently strong sense.

Approach : u   (t , x)  v(t , x )
(i) (ii)

(i) chosen so that nominal closed loop system is


asymptotically stable.

(ii) chosen so as to cancel the effect of uncertainty.

11-2
Solution

Assume that u   (t, x) results in the uniformly asymptotically stable


nominal closed loop system,
x  f (t , x )  G (t , x ) (t , x)

Suppose also that V (t , x) is a Lyapunov function that proves


the following.

1 (|| x ||)  V (t , x)   2 (|| x ||) : l.p.d. and dec.

V V
  f (t , x)  G (t , x) (t , x)   3 (|| x ||) : l.n.d.
t x
where  i  K , i.e.  i : R   R ,  i (0)  0,  i () is strictly increasing.

11-3
Solution (Continued)

Suppose finally that ||  (t , x, (t , x)  v) ||  (t , x)  k || v ||,


where 0  k  1,  : R  D  R

The actual system with u   (t , x)  v becomes


x  f (t , x )  G (t , x ) (t , x)  G (t , x )[v   (t , x, (t , x )  v )]
V V V
Then V   ( f  G )  G (v   )
t x x
V
  3 (|| x ||)  G (v   )
x
V
Let wT  G
x
Then V   3 (|| x ||)  wT v  wT 

11-4
Solution (Continued)
Due to the matching condition, v can wipe out  .
There are two ways at least : when  is bounded in ||  ||2 or in ||  || .
i) ||  ||2
||  (t , x, (t , x)  v) ||2   (t , x)  k || v ||2 , 0  k  1
 T v   T    T v  ||  ||2 ||  ||2   T v  ||  ||2   (t , x)  k || v ||2 
Let  (t , x )   (t , x), (t , x)  R  D
and choose
 (t , x) 
v
1  k ||  ||2
 (t , x)   (t , x)
Then  T v    T  ||  ||2
1  k ||  ||2 1 k
 (t , x)  (t , x)
T v  T   ||  ||2   ||  ||2  ||  ||2 k
1 k 1 k
1 k
 (  ) ||  ||2   ||  ||2
1 k 1 k
   ||  ||2   ||  ||2  0
11-5
Solution (Continued)
ii) ||  ||
||  (t , x, (t , x)  v) ||   (t , x)  k || v || , 0  k  1

Now    i i  max |  i |  | i |  ||  ||1||  ||
T
i
i 1

 T v   T    T v  ||  ||1||  ||
  T v  ||  ||1   (t , x)  k || v || 
Let  (t , x)   (t , x), (t , x)  R  D
 (t , x)
and choose v  sgn( )
1 k
  (t , x)   k 
Then  T v   T    T   sgn( )   ||  ||1   (t , x) 
 1 k   1  k 
 k
  ||  ||1   ||  ||1  ||  ||1
1 k 1 k
 1 k 
     ||  ||1   ||  ||1
 1  k 1  k 
   ||  ||1   ||  ||1  0
11-6
Smooth Control

• Smooth Control (  2 case)

  (t , x) 
 1  k ||  || , if  (t , x) ||  ||2  
 2
v
2
   (t , x)  , if  (t , x) ||  ||  
 1 k 
2

 
V
where  T  G (t , x)
x

Obviously when  (t , x) ||  ||2    V  0


Analyze what happens when  (t , x ) ||  ||2  

11-7
We have
  2
 
V   3 (|| x ||2 )    
T
 
 1 k  
2
  3 (|| x ||2 )  ||  ||22   ||  ||2  k ||  ||2 || v ||2
(1  k )
2 2 k 2
  3 (|| x ||2 )  ||  ||2   ||  ||2  ||  ||22
(1  k ) (1  k )
2 2 2
  3 (|| x ||2 )  ||  ||2   ||  ||2    3 (|| x ||2 )  ||  ||22  ||  ||2
 
1 2 2z 
Here f ( z )   z  z is maximized at 1  z 
  2
1 1 2  
and max( z 2  z)    
  4 2 4

Thus V   3 (|| x ||2 )  , when  (t , x) ||  ||2  
4

On the other hand, when  (t , x) ||  ||2   , V is



V   3 (|| x ||2 )   3 (|| x ||2 ) 
4

Thus V   3 (|| x ||2 )  irrespective of the value of  (t , x) ||  ||2
4

11-8
Smooth Control (Continued)

Then take r large, so that 1  


 3 (r )  i.e. r ( )   31 ( )
2 4 2

1 1 
Then V ( x)    3 (|| x ||2 )   3 (|| x ||2 ) 
2 2 4
1
   3 (|| x ||2 ),  || x ||2  r ( )
2

Q  
Q   x :  3 (|| x ||)  
 2

r ( )  0 as   0

11-9
- When  is chosen small, we can arrive at a sharper result.
n
Assume that D  R
2
such that  3 (|| x ||2 )   ( x)
 (t , x)  0  0,  (t , x)  1 ( x) where  : R n  R .
Then, when  (t , x) ||  ||2   ,
2

V   3 (|| x ||2 )  ||  ||22   ||  ||2

2 02
  ( x)  ||  ||22  1 ( x) ||  ||2

T
1 2 1   ( x)   1  1    ( x) 
   ( x)    
2 2 ||  ||2    1 202 /   ||  ||2 

P
where P is positive definite if   202 12 .
202
Thus choosing   we
, have V   1  2 ( x ).
12 2

when  (t , x) ||  ||2   .
2 1 2
Also V   ( x)   2  ( x )
1 2
We conclude V   2  ( x) which shows that the origin is uniformly
asymptotically stable.
11-10
Example
Ex: x1  x2
x 2   a[sin( x1  1 )  sin 1 ]  bx2  cu
Let aˆ and ĉ denote the nominal values of a and c.
u
Let u  cu
ˆ u 

Choose u   ( x)  aˆ  sin( x1  1 )  sin 1   (k1 x1  k2 x2 )
where k1 & k2 are chosen so that
0 1 
 k k  b  is Hurwitz.
 1 2 

Then
x1  x2
x 2  k1 x1  (k2  b) x2   ( x, u )
ˆ  acˆ 
 ac  c  cˆ 
 ( x, u )  
ˆ   sin( x1   1 )  sin( 1 )    ˆ   k1x1  k2 x2 
 c   c 
11-11
Example (Continued)
ˆ  acˆ
ac c  cˆ c  cˆ
Hence  ( x, ( x)  v)  x1  k1 x1  k2 x2  v
cˆ cˆ cˆ
 1 || x ||2  k || v ||2
âac  acˆ c  ĉc c  ĉc
where 1   || k ||2 , k  .
cˆ cĉ ĉc
c  cˆ
We need  k 1

Calculate the control v. Let V  xT Px be the Liapunov function


for the nominal closed loop system where P is defined by

0 k1  0 1 
1 k  b  P  P  k k  b    I  solve P
 2   1 2 
V  P11 P12  0 
T
Then w  G  2 x PB  2  x1 x2  
T
 
x  P21 P22  1 
 2( P12 x1  P22 x2 )

11-12
Example (Continued)

Choose

  (t , x) 
 1  k ||  || , if  ||  ||2  
 2
v
2
   (t , x)  , if  ||  ||  
 1 k 
2

202
where   2
1

Then the control u is


u 1
u   ( ( x)  v )
cˆ cˆ
 stabilize the origin globally!!

11-13
Backstepping

Consider a system
  f ( )  g ( ) 1
  u 2
where   R n , u  R and f () with f (0)  0 and g () are smooth in D  R n .

Design a state feedback controller to stabilize the system at (  0,   0)

u  
 g ( ) + 

f ( )
f ()

11-14
Backstepping (Continued)

Suppose (1) is stabilized by    ( ) with  (0)  0, i.e., the origin of


  f ( )  g ( ) ( ) is asymptotically stable. Furthermore, suppose that
we know a positive Lyapunov function V ( ) where
V ( )
 [ f ( )  g ( ) ( )]   W ( ),   D A
where W ( ) is positive definite.
Then, from (1),(2)
  [ f ( )  g ( ) ( )]  g ( )[   ( )]
  u

u 
 + g ( ) +  

f ()  g () ()


  ( )

11-15
Backstepping (Continued)

Let denote z     ( ), then


  [ f ( )  g ( ) ( )]  g ( ) z
z  u  

u z g ( ) 
+  + 

f ()  g () ()


 

backstepping   ( ) through the integrator

where    [ f ( )  g ( ) ]

11-16
Backstepping (Continued)
Let v  u   , then
  [ f ( )  g ( ) ( )]  g ( ) z 3
z  v 4
which is similar to the original system but  has an asymptotically
stable origin when the input is 0.
Let Va ( ,  )  V ( )  12 z 2 , then
Va  V [ f ( )  g ( ) ( )]  V g ( ) z  zv   W ( )  V g ( ) z  zv
  

Thus choosing v   V g ( )  Kz, K  0, then


Va   W ( )  Kz 2
which shows that th e origin (  0, z  0) is asymptotically stable.
Since  (0)  0, the origin (  0,   0) is asymptotically stable
(z     ( )).
Then the state feedback control law
u   [ f ( )  g ( ) ]  V g ( )  K [   ( )] ( u    v)

11-17
Lemma & Example

Lemma: Consider the system defined by (1), (2). Let  ( )


be a stabilizing state feedback control for (1)
with  (0)  0 and V ( ) be a Lyapunov function
satisfying A . Then the above state feedback control
u stabilizes the origin of (1), (2) with
V ( )  12 [   ( )]2 as a Lyapunov function.

Ex: x1  x12  x13  x2


x 2  u
x1  x12  x13  x2 x1   x1  x13
let x2   ( x1 )   x12  x1

Then V ( x1 )  12 x12  V   x12  x14   x12 , x1  R


Thus

11-18
Example (Continued)
u  x1 ( x12  x13  x2 )  xV1  [ x2   ( x1 )]
 ( 2 x1  1)( x12  x13  x2 )  x1  ( x2  x12  x1 )
Va ( x)  12 x12  12 ( x2  ( x12  x1 ))2
 12 x12  12 ( x2  x12  x1 ) 2

Let’s consider
  f ( )  g ( )
  f a ( , )  g a ( , )u
If g a ( , )  0 over the domain of interest, choose
u 1
g a ( , )
[ua  f a ( , )]
Then   u a . Thus from the previous lemma
u   a ( ,  )  1
 
g a ( , ) 

[ f ( )  g ( ) ]  V g ( )  K [   ( )]  f a ( ,  )
with Va ( ,  )  V ( )  12 [   ( )]2
as a stabilizin g state feedback control and a Lyapunov function.

11-19
Recursive Backstepping

Consider the following strict feedback system


x  f 0 ( x)  g 0 ( x) z1
z1  f1 ( x, z1 )  g1 ( x, z1 ) z2
z 2  f 2 ( x, z1 , z2 )  g 2 ( x, z1 , z2 ) z3 f i and gi depend
 only on x, z1 ,, zi
z k 1  f k 1 ( x, z1 ,, zk 1 )  g k 1 ( x, z1 ,, zk 1 ) zk
z k  f k ( x, z1 ,, zk )  g k ( x, z1 ,, zk )u

where x  R n , z1 to z k are scalars and f 0 to f k vanish at the origin.

We assume g i ( x, z1 ,, zi )  0, for 1  i  K over the domain of interest.

11-20
Recursive procedure

Recursive procedure
x  f 0 ( x)  g 0 ( x) z1
 Consider a stabilizing feedback control z1  0 ( x) with 0 (0)  0 and
V0
V0 ( x) such that x
[ f 0 ( x)  g 0 ( x)0 ( x)]   W ( x)
p.d.f

 Consider
x  f 0 ( x)  g 0 ( x) z1
z1  f1 ( x, z1 )  g1 ( x, z1 ) z2

Then using the previous result, obtain

1 ( x, z1 )  g11 [ x0 ( f 0  g 0 z1 )  Vx0 g 0  K1 ( z1  0 )  f1 ] , K1  0


V1 ( x, z1 )  V0 ( x)  12 [ z1  0 ( x)]2

11-21
Recursive procedure (Continued)

Next consider x  f 0 ( x)  g 0 ( x) z1
z1  f1 ( x, z1 )  g1 ( x, z1 ) z2
z 2  f 2 ( x, z1 , z2 )  g 2 ( x, z1 , z2 ) z3

Then we recognize that

 x    z2  f  g 0 z1   0  fa  f2
   , , f  0  , g    ,
 z1  u  z3  f1   g1  g a  g 2

Thus, similarly, obtain the state feedback control

2 ( x, z1 , z2 )  
1 1
g 2 x
( f 0  g 0 z1 ) 
1
z1
( f1  g1 z2 ) 
V1
z1
g1  K 2 ( z2  1 )  f 2 
and

V2 ( x, z1 , z2 )  V1 ( x, z1 )  12 [ z2  1 ( x, z1 )]2

11-22
Extended Linearization (Gain scheduling method)

 Motivation
 Plant – nonlinear
 Controller – linear
 Design method – classical linearization
 Assumption – no single linear controller satisfies the
performance specification
 Idea – design a set of controllers, each good at a particular
operating point, and switch (schedule) the gains of the controllers
accordingly
 Problem – now we have a nonlinear (piecewise linear) system
with time dependent jump
 Solution – no good tool but some theory is being developed
mostly simulation in the past

11-23
Structure & Examples
gains Gain Operating
Structure Scheduler point

Controller Plant y

-Examples
Linearized model at an operating point,
 Tank system
qin  qin0 , h  h 0
qin 
G p ( s) 
h s 
1
a where  
A(h 0 )
qout
d h qin0 a 2 gh 0
 A( x)dx  qi  a 2 gh
dt 0  0 0

2 A(h )h 2 A(h 0 )h 0
where A(h) is the cross section of the tank at height h,
a is the cross section of the outlet pipe.
11-24
Control Goal

Control goal : h  h 0

h0 +
Gc Gp
-

1
Use PI controller : Gc ( s )  K (1  )
Ti s
Choose K and Ti so that the closed loop system has the natural frequency
 and relative damping  . Then K and Ti should be chosen as
qin0 2  
K  2A(h )  0
0
 K
2h 
2 qin0 2  
Ti    Ti 
 2 A(h 0 )h 0 2 2
Thus for a desired h  h 0 , we schedule the gain appropriately.
Problem : How will the system behave with switches?

11-25
Nonlinear Actuator

 A different angle – nonlinear actuator


r actuator y
Gc () f () Plant G p

Assume
1
f(u) G p ( s) 
( s  1)3
1
Gc ( s )  K (1  )
Ti s

u f (u )  u 4 (nonlinear value) so u 4 is good enough


 (operating point is not at 0)
Large gain
only open or close

11-26
Step Responses

with K  0.15, Ti  1, step responses at different operating conditions are

Introduce gain scheduling through the inverse


f 1 (u ) : f ( f 1 (u ))  u
Since f () may be unknown or for simplicity, we may not want
f 1 (u ) but an estimate fˆ 1 (u ) so that
f ( fˆ 1 (u ))  u
11-27
Approximation

Now we use this approximate inverse for gain scheduling :

r + u yp
Gc (s ) fˆ 1 (u ) f ( fˆ 1 (u )) v G p (s )
-
Now u  v

Approximate fˆ by two linear function

f(u)
16

fˆ 0u3
f ˆ 1  0.433u
Then f (u )  
3 0.0538u  1.139 3  u  16
1.3 2
Domain Domain

11-28
Results

Resulting behavior for the same plant with controller

No measurement of external conditions is required.

11-29
Classification

( ) Scheduling on the operating conditions


scheduler Operating point
gain
+ Gc (s ) plant
-
(  ) Scheduling on the reference signal
gain scheduler
r (t ) + Gc (s ) plant
-

( ) Scheduling on the plant output


gain scheduler

r (t ) y
+ Gc (s ) plant
-

11-30
Issues

In all cases, nonlinear time varying systems, many become unstable


even if at each frozen time all are fine.
The system is time varying
b
G p ( s)  with frozen time
s( s  a)
Controller : Gc ( s )  K (u (t ))(1  Td (u (t )) s )

Consider two systems


x  f (t , x), x  R n (1)
f : R  R n  R n
and x  f (r , x), x  R n , r  R (2)
frozen time system
It is easy to show that (1) can be unstable even if (2) is exponentially stable.

11-31
Example

Ex: x  A(t ) x
  1  a cos2 t 1  a sin t cos t 
A 2 
, a0
 1  a sin t cos t  1  a sin t 
det A  2  (2  a )  (2  a )  0
For a  2, Re   0. Thus the frozen system is exponentially stable. But
 e( a 1)t cos t e t sin t 
 (t ,0)   ( a 1)t 
 e sin t e t cos t 
So for 1  a, the system is unstable. However if A (t ) is small the above
problem doesn't occur.
Theorem: Consider x  A(t ) x. Suppose A(t ) is differenti able and Re i ( A(t ))  0,
t  0, i. Then 0 is uniformly asym. stable provided
sup A (t ) is sufficient ly small.
t

Proof: See Ch 5 in Nonlinear System Analysis


11-32
Formalization

 A version of scheduling on the output


 y 
x     f ( y, z )  Bu where y  R m , z  R n m , u  R m
 z 
f (0,0)  0 twice conti. differentiable in all variables.
 ueq ( y ) and zeq ( y ) such that
f ( y, z ( y ))  Bu ( y )  0
   eq    eq  
Family of equilibrium point parameterized by y

A linearization at y  y0 is :
d  y  y0  f  y  y0 
 z  z ( y )  ( y , z ( y ))
0    B (u  ueq ( y0 ))
dt  eq 0  x
0 eq
 z  z eq ( y )
0 


Design a controller Ac ( y0 ), Bc ( y0 ), Cc ( y0 )

11-33
Block Diagram

Block diagram
gain scheduler
gains

r e u u y
Gc (s ) plant

ueq H

In the scheduler
x c  Ac ( y (t )) xc  Bc ( y (t ))e
u  Cc ( y (t )) x

gain scheduling on the current output

11-34
Conditions

The theory gives condition under which y   the system is stable.


These conditions are that y   and nonoutput nonlinearity approaches zero

 scheduling variable should vary slowly.


 scheduling variable should capture the plant' s nonlinearities.

Ref : Analysis of Gain Scheduled Control for Nonlinear Plants


by J.S. Shamma, M. Athans
IEEE Tr. on Automatic Cont ol , vol.35, no.8, pp. 898 - 907, Aug.1990

11-35

You might also like