Documente Academic
Documente Profesional
Documente Cultură
1
Main Result 1: The eigenvalues of A-BK can be moved
to any desired locations iff the system (*) is controllable.
Another situation: the state x is not completely available.
Only a linear combination of x, e.g., y = Cx, can be
measured. How can we realize u = v-Kx?
A possible solution: build an observer to estimate x based
on measurement of y.
Main result 2: The observer error (difference between the
real x and estimated x) can be made arbitrarily small within
arbitrarily short time period iff (*) is observable.
We will arrive at these conclusions in Chapter 8. Before
that, we need to prepare some tools and go through these
fundamental problems: controllability and observability.3
2
An example: A circuit system
R1 R2
C1 C2
+
u + x − + x − y
1 2
−
Controllability: Definition
Consider the system
x& = Ax + Bu, x ∈ R n ; u ∈ R p .
Controllability is a relationship between state and input.
Definition: The system, or the pair (A,B), is said to be
controllable if for any initial state x(0)=x0 and any final
state xd, there exist a finite time T > 0 and an input u(t),
t∈[0,T] such that
T
x(T) = e AT x 0 + ∫ e A(T-τ) Bu(τ )dτ = x d (1)
0
3
Examples: uncontrollable networks.
+ +
R1= 1 Ω R2= 1 Ω 1F x1 x21 F
+ +
u u − −
+x −
− −
R3= 1 Ω R4= 1 Ω 1Ω 1Ω
Observation: Observation:
• If x(0)=0, then x(t)=0 for • If x1(0)=x2(0)=0, then
all t > 0. The input u can x1(t)=x2(t) for all t > 0.
do nothing about it. You cannot bring x(t) to any
• If the resistance is changed point in the plane.
so that R1/R3 ≠ R2/R4, then • This situation can be changed
you can bring x to any desired by altering the parameters
value. of the components.
7
Main idea of the proof: Suppose Wc(t1)-1 exists. Recall the solution
t1
x(t 1 ) = e At1 x 0 + ∫ e A(t1 - τ) Bu( τ )dτ
0
If we choose −1
u(t) = − B' e A'(t1 − t) Wc (t1 )[e At1 x 0 − x d ]
Then, x(t 1 ) = e At x 0 − t e A(t - τ) BB' e A'(t −τ ) Wc −1 (t1 )[e At x 0 − x d ]dτ
∫
1
1 1 1 1
{∫ }
0
t1 −1
= e At1 x 0 − e A(t1 - τ) BB' e A'(t1 −τ ) dτ Wc (t1 )[e At1 x 0 − x d ]
0
= e At1 x 0 − e At1 x 0 + x d = x d
The necessity of the condition is shown by contradiction. (p.146)
8
4
t t
Wc (t) = ∫ e Aτ BB' e A'τ dτ = ∫ e A(t − τ) BB' e A'(t − τ) dτ
0 0
10
5
t
Wc (t) = ∫ e Aτ BB' e A'τ dτ
0
12
6
t
Wc (t) = ∫ e Aτ BB' e A'τ dτ
0
1) Wc(t) is nonsingular for any t > 0.
3) For every v∈Rn, v≠0, v’eAt B not identically zero.
Explanations: 1) ⇔ 3)
Suppose Wc(t1) is singular for certain t1.
Exist v∈Rn such that v’Wc(t1) v =0 .
Since v’eAτBB’eA’τ v≥0 for all τ, must have
⇒ v’eAτBB’eA’τ v=0, v’eAτB=0 for all τ∈[0,t1]
⇒ v’eAtB=0 for all t by analyticity.
On the other hand if v’eAtB=0 for all t,
⇒ v’Wc(t) v =0 for all t
⇒ Wc(t) must be singular since it is positive
semi-definite.
13
7
t t
Wc (t) = ∫ e Aτ BB' e A'τ dτ = ∫ e A(t − τ) BB' e A'(t − τ) dτ
0 0
t
Wc (t) = ∫ e Aτ BB' e A'τ dτ
0
Some observations: Recall from the proof of Theorem 1(slide 8).
To bring the state from x(0) = x0 to x(t1) = xd , a particular input is
u(t) = − B' e A'(t1 − t) W −1 (t1 )[e At1 x 0 − x d ]
This is actually the minimal energy control, i.e., if there is another
input w(t) to transfer x0 to xd within the same time interval, then
t1 t1
∫0
w(τ )' w(τ )dτ ≥ ∫ u (τ )' u (τ )dτ
0
If (A,B) is controllable, Wc(t)-1 exists
for all t > 0.
⇒ The transfer of the state can be accomplished in arbitrarily small
time interval
Note that as t1 decrease, both λmin[Wc(t1)] and λmax[Wc(t1)] decrease.
Then ||Wc(t1)-1|| increases. ⇒ larger magnitude of u is required.
As t1 → 0, ||Wc(t1)-1|| → ∞ , u(t) → ∞.
16
8
t
Wc (t) = ∫ e Aτ BB' e A'τ dτ
0
An example:
⎡0 1 0⎤ ⎡1⎤
x& = Ax + Bu, A=⎢ 0 0 1 ⎥, B = ⎢1⎥
⎣⎢− 1 − 2 − 3⎦⎥ ⎣⎢1⎦⎥
Eigenvalues of Wc(t1) Eigenvalues of Wc(t1)-1
2 8
10 10
0 6
10 10
-2 4
10 10
-4 2
10 10
-6 0
10 10
-8 -2
10 10
0 1 2 3 4 5 0 1 2 3 4 5
t t
1
9
Example:
x& = Ax + Bu, A = ⎡− 1 0 ⎤, B = ⎡a ⎤
⎢⎣ 0 − 2⎥⎦ ⎢⎣b ⎥⎦
Approach 1: G c = [B AB] = ⎡a -a ⎤
⎣⎢b - 2b ⎥⎦
⎧ρ(G c ) = 2, if a ≠ 0 and b ≠ 0
detG c = −ab, ⎨
⎩ ρ(G ) < 2, if either a = 0 or b = 0
c
⎡λ1 0 L 0⎤ ⎡ b1 ⎤
⎢ 0 ⎥, B = ⎢b2 ⎥
x& = Ax + Bu, A = ⎢ 0 λ2 L
M M O M⎥ ⎢M⎥
⎢0 0 L ⎥
λn ⎦ ⎢b ⎥
⎣ ⎣ n⎦
20
10
Example:
α −β⎤ ⎡ b1 ⎤
x& = Ax + Bu, A = ⎡⎢ , B = ⎢⎣b2 ⎥⎦
⎣ β α ⎥⎦
⎡ b αb1 − βb 2 ⎤
G c = [B AB] = ⎢ 1
⎣b 2 βb1 + αb 2 ⎥⎦
21
Example: ⎡A 0 ⎤ ⎡B ⎤
A=⎢ 1 ⎥ , B = ⎢ 1⎥
⎣ 0 A2⎦ ⎣ B2 ⎦
Suppose that the eigenvalues of A1 and those of A2 are disjoint.
⇒ (A,B) is controllable iff (A1,B1) is controllable and (A2,B2) is
controllable.
Proof: Consider M(λ ) = [λI − A B ] = ⎡λI - A1 0 B1 ⎤
⎢⎣ 0 λI - A 2 B2 ⎥⎦
⎡X 0 ⎤
Problem: Show that rank ⎢ ⎥ ≥ rank(X) + rank(Y)
⎣ Z Y⎦
11
Theorem: Consider the pair
⎡ A1 0 L 0 ⎤ ⎡ B1 ⎤
⎢ ⎥ ⎢ ⎥
A = ⎢ 0 A2 L 0 ⎥ , B = ⎢ B2 ⎥
M M O 0 M
⎢0 0 L A ⎥ ⎢B ⎥
⎣ m⎦ ⎣ m⎦
23
24
12
Procedure to determine controllability:
25
Example:
⎡0 1 0 0⎤ ⎡0 0⎤
A = ⎢3 0 0 2⎥ , B = ⎢1 0⎥
⎢0 0 0 1⎥ ⎢0 0⎥
⎣⎢0 − 2 0 0⎦⎥ ⎣⎢0 1⎦⎥
26
13
Example:
⎡1 0 0 0⎤ ⎡1 0⎤
A = ⎢0 2 1 0⎥ , B = ⎢1 0⎥
n=4, p=2. ρ(B)=2.
⎢0 0 2 0⎥ ⎢1 0⎥
⎢⎣0 0 0 3⎥⎦ ⎢⎣0 1⎥⎦
⎡1 0 1 0 1 0⎤
G c
= [B AB A B] = ⎢1 2 0 3 0 8 0⎥
n − p +1 ⎢1 0 2 0 4 0⎥
⎢⎣1 1 3 3 9 9⎥⎦
b1 b 2 Ab1 Ab 2 A 2 b1 A 2 b 2
The first 3 columns are LI.
The 4th is dependent on the first 3.
⎡1 0 1 1 ⎤
[b1 b 2 Ab1 A b1 ] = ⎢⎢112 0
0
3
2
8
4
⎥
⎥ has full row rank
⎢ ⎥
⎣1 1 3 9 ⎦
Hence (A,B) is controllable.
27
14
Review: Definition of Controllability
29
30
15
Observability: A dual concept
Consider an n-dimensional, p-input, q-output system:
x& = Ax + Bu; y = Cx + Du
u System y
+
+ 1Ω
1Ω 1Ω 1F x2 = y
1Ω 1F x2 = y
−
−
⎡ x& 1 ⎤ ⎡0 − 1⎤ ⎡ x1 ⎤ + ⎡1⎤ u,
⎡ x& 1 ⎤ ⎡− 1 0 ⎤ ⎡ x1 ⎤ + ⎡1⎤ u, ⎢⎣ x& 2 ⎥⎦ = ⎢⎣1 − 2⎥⎦ ⎢⎣ x 2 ⎥⎦ ⎢⎣1⎥⎦
⎢⎣ x& 2 ⎥⎦ = ⎢⎣ 0 − 1⎥⎦ ⎢⎣ x 2 ⎥⎦ ⎢⎣1⎥⎦
y = x2
y = x2
The output is independent of x1; x1 has some effect on x2= y.
Or any change on x1 will not be We will see later that the
reflected from the output. circuit is observable.
⇒ Unobservable.
32
16
Some observations:
Recall the state-space solution,
t
y(t) = Ce At x 0 + C ∫ e A(t - τ) Bu( τ )dτ + Du(t)
0
17
Proof continued. (necessity)
Take a comparison between Wo and Wc
t t
Wo (t) = ∫ e A'τ C' Ce Aτ dτ Wc (t) = ∫ e Aτ BB' e A'τ dτ
0 0
Mathematically they have the same structure. So we
have the following equivalent conditions:
1) Wo(t) is nonsingular for any t > 0.
2) Wo(t) is nonsingular for at least one t > 0.
3) For every v∈Rn, v≠0, CeAt v not identically zero.
If W0(t) is singular for any t > 0, then there exists v∈Rn,
v≠0 such that CeAtv=0 for all t.
If we have y(t)= CeAtx0 for some x0, then
Ce At (x 0 + kv) = Ce At x 0 + kCe At v = y(t)
This means that different initial conditions will yield the same
output. And the difference can never to told. ⇒ unobservable.35
36
18
Equivalent conditions for observability:
1) The pair (A,C) is observable.
2) Wo(t) is nonsingular for some t > 0.
3) The observability matrix
⎡ C ⎤
G = ⎢⎢ CA ⎥⎥
o
M
⎢⎣CA n −1 ⎥⎦
has full column rank, i.e., ρ(Go) = n.
4) The matrix
M o ( λ) = ⎡A − λI⎤
⎢⎣ C ⎥⎦
38
19
Examples: Two circuits
1H 1H x1
x1
+ +
1Ω 1Ω
x2 = y 1Ω 1F x2 = y
1Ω 1F
− −
y = [0 1] x y = [0 1] x
G o = ⎡ C ⎤ = ⎡0 1⎤ G o = ⎡ C ⎤ = ⎡0 1⎤
⎢⎣CA ⎥⎦ ⎢⎣0 − 1⎥⎦ ⎢⎣CA ⎥⎦ ⎢⎣1 − 2⎥⎦
⎡ A1 0 L 0 ⎤
⎢ ⎥
A = ⎢ 0 A2 L 0 ⎥ , C = [C1 C2 L Cm ]
M M O 0
⎢0 0 L A ⎥
⎣ m⎦
40
20
Comments on controllability and observability
Controllability: Recall from the proof of the theorem on slide 8.
To bring the state from x(0) = x0 to x(t1) = xd , a particular input is
u(t) = −B' e A'(t1 − t) Wc−1 (t1 )[e At1 x 0 − x d ]
Usually we don’t apply such an input to move the state between
points in the state space. (open-loop control, very sensitive).
A more practical problem is to use a simple linear feedback
control, such as u = Fx + u0, to bring the state asymptotically
toward a certain point.
– Such a problem is related to stabilizability.
A future result:
If a system is controllable, then it is stabilizable.
41
21
So far, we have learned
• Controllability
• Observability
Next, we will study
• Canonical decomposition: to divide the state space
into controllable/uncontrollable,
observable/unobservable subspaces
43
Canonical Decomposition
Consider an LTI system,
x& = Ax + Bu, y = Cx + Du
Let z = Px, where P is nonsingular, then
z& = Ax + Bu, y = C z + Du
where A = PAP -1 , B = PB, C = CP −1 , D = D
22
Controllability decomposition
Recall Gc=[B AB … An-1B]. Suppose that ρ(Gc) = n1 < n.
Then Gc has at most n1 LI columns.
They form a basis for the range space of Gc.
Theorem: Suppose that ρ(Gc) = n1 < n. Let Q be a
nonsingular matrix whose first n1 columns are LI
columns of Gc. Let P=Q-1. Then
⎡A A12 ⎤ ⎡B ⎤
A = PAP −1 = ⎢ c , B = PB = ⎢ c ⎥, A c ∈ R n1 ×n1 , Bc ∈ R n1 ×p
⎣0 A c ⎥⎦ ⎣0⎦
[
C = Cc Cc ]
Moreover, the pair (A c , Bc ) is controllab le and
Cc ( sI − A c ) −1 Bc + D = C(sI − A) −1 B + D
Discussion:
After state transformation, the equivalent system is
z& 1 = A c z1 + A12 z 2 + Bc u
z& 2 = Acz2
The input u has no effect on z2. This part of state is uncontrollable.
The first sub-system is controllable if z2=0. If z2≠0, then
t t
z1 (t1 ) = e A t z10 + ∫ e A (t - τ) Bc u( τ )dτ + ∫ e A (t - τ) A12 z 2 ( τ )dτ
1 1
c 1 c 1 c 1
0 0
z 2 (τ ) = e A cτ z 20
Given a desired value for z1, say z1d. If we let
t1 t1
v(t1 ) = ∫ e A c (t1 - τ) A12 e A cτ z 20 dτ , Wc (t1 ) = ∫0 e A τ Bc Bc ' e A 'τ dτ
c c
0
−1
and u(t) = − Bc ' e A c '(t1 − t) Wc (t1 )[e A c t1 z10 + v(t1 ) − z1d ]
Then you can verify that z1(t1)=z1d.
46
23
x& = Ax + Bu
Example:
⎡1 1 0⎤ ⎡0 1⎤ n=3, p=2, n-p+1=2.
A = ⎢0 1 0⎥ , B = ⎢1 0⎥
⎢⎣0 1 1⎥⎦ ⎢⎣0 1⎥⎦ Only need to check Gc2
⎡0 1 1 1⎤
G c2 = [B AB] = ⎢1 0 1 0⎥ ρ (G2c ) = 2 < 3, uncontrollable
⎢⎣0 1 1 1⎥⎦
⎡0 1 1⎤ q is picked to make
Let Q = [b1 b 2 q ] = ⎢1 0 1⎥, P = Q −1
⎢⎣0 1 0⎥⎦ Q nonsingular
⎡−1 1 1 ⎤ ⎡1 1 0⎤ ⎡0 1 1⎤ ⎡1 0 0⎤ ⎡A A12⎤
A = PAQ= ⎢ 0 0 1 ⎥ ⎢0 1 0⎥ ⎢1 0 1⎥ = ⎢1 1 1⎥ = ⎢ c ,
⎢⎣ 1 0 −1⎥⎦ ⎢⎣0 1 1⎥⎦ ⎢⎣0 1 0⎥⎦ ⎢⎣0 0 1⎥⎦ ⎣ 0 Ac ⎥⎦
⎡1 0⎤ ⎡B ⎤
B = PB= ⎢0 1⎥ = ⎢ c ⎥
⎢⎣0 0⎥⎦ ⎣ 0 ⎦
Note: the last column of Q is different from the book (page 161).
As a result, Ā12 is different from that in the book, which is 0.
47
24
Summary for today:
• Controllability
• Observability
• Canonical decomposition
– Controllable/uncontrollable
– Observable/unobservable
Next Time:
• Controllability and observability continued
– Controllability/observability decomposition
– Minimal realization
– Conditions for Jordan form conditions
– Parallel results for discrete-time systems
– Controllability after sampling
• State feedback design (introduction) 49
Problem Set #9
25
⎡X 0 ⎤
Bonus Problem: Show that rank ⎢ ⎥ ≥ rank(X) + rank(Y)
⎣ Z Y⎦
51
26