Discretization of Non-Linear Controls With Application To Robust, Sliding-Mode-Based Control Systems

Discretization of non-linear controls
with application to
robust, sliding-mode-based control systems
Thesis submitted for the degree of

Doctor of Philosophy
at the University of Leicester
by
Dipl.-Ing.* Guido Herrmann (*TU Berlin)

Department of Engineering
University of Leicester
December 2000
UMI Number: U140539
All rights reserved
INFORMATION TO ALL USERS

The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted.
In the unlikely event that the author did not send a complete manuscript
and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if material had to be removed,
a note will indicate the deletion.
Dissertation Publishing
UMI U140539
Published by ProQuest LLC 2013. Copyright in the Dissertation held by the Author.
Microform Edition © ProQuest LLC.
All rights reserved. This work is protected against
unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States Code.
ProQuest LLC
789 East Eisenhower Parkway
P.O. Box 1346
Ann Arbor, Ml 48106-1346
A bstract
Discretization of non-linear controls with application to robust,

sliding-mode-based control systems
by Guido Herrmann
This thesis deals with sampled-data implementations of continuous-time, non-linear control

systems. The basis for the analysis is a static, continuous-time feedback law for non-linear,
affine systems with bounded input gain. The sampled-data implementation is obtained from
the discretization of the control via a sample-and-hold-process. With the incorporation of
the aspect of robustness, a theoretical framework is created which supersedes previous work
concentrating on stability. Bounding constraints for the closed-loop differential system allow
uncertainty and disturbances to be considered. Other assumptions for the continuous-time
control are Lipschitz continuity, exponential decay outside a compact set and existence of a
Lyapunov function. The important parameter for the discretization analysis is the sampling
time; fast sampling implies robust stability. The controller sampling residual, the difference
between the discretized and the original control, is of key interest within a Lyapunov-type
stability analysis; suitable norms, such as the Euler norm, are chosen to find upper bounds for
the sampling residual. The generalization of a result from linear to non-linear sampled-data
control permits the application of the Lp-norm. The theoretical framework is also suitable
for dynamic control systems and the investigation of computational delays.
The analysis approaches are demonstrated for two different robust control strategies based
on sliding-mode approaches. A state-feedback sliding-mode-based control extends ideas for
smoothing discontinuous sliding-mode control components by introducing a cone-shaped
sliding-mode layer. A non-smooth Lyapunov function is used to prove stability of the dis
cretized control. An observer-based tracking control improves a previous control scheme by
considering a class of non-minimum phase and relative-degree-zero plants.
Simulation and numerical fast-sampling analysis results are provided for all developed dis
cretization and sliding-mode-based control techniques in application to non-trivial examples.
The simulation of a highly non-linear, large-scale chemical plant for benzene production
with non-minimum phase and relative-degree-zero characteristics proves the effectiveness of
sliding-mode output control.
Acknowledgments
First of all, I would like to express my gratitude to have been supervised by two very accomplished
scientists, Dr. Sarah K. Spurgeon and Dr. Christopher Edwards. In particular, I would like to thank
them for their support and confidence in me when I applied at the beginning of my PhD-research for
additional financial funding for the research project and my personal expenses. This led to the success
ful award of two research scholarships. A grant from the ‘Gottlieb Daimler-und Karl Benz-Stiftung’,
Germany, (January- October, 1998, project no.: 02-37/97) has been an important support for me
and my family. From November 1998 onwards, a Marie-Curie-Research-Training-Grant (project no.:
FMBICT983463) within the scheme ‘Training and Mobility of Researchers’ of the European Commis
sion has supplied significant finance for the PhD-research project and the costs of living.
Further, I would like to mention Dr. Diane Rossiter and Dr. Yi Cao who provided me with the
non-linear simulation model of the HDA-plant. By lending me his knowledge, Dr. Yi Cao has given me
important insight into the HDA-plant model which in particular sped up the initial period of my work
on this model.
I also would not like to forget Professor Konstantinov and Professor Petkov who provided me with
a numerically robust routine for solving linear H qo-problems. Certainly, I would like to acknowledge
some very interesting discussions with Dr. Emanuel Prempain about linear control techniques. Dr.
Matthew Turner has been very helpful not only when reading through parts of my thesis but also as
a conscientious scientist in help to many people within our research group. I am also very grateful to
Dr. Da-Wei Gu for his very critical and helpful remarks on my work. Further, I would like to thank
Professor Ian Postlethwaite and Dr. Da-Wei Gu for their support in the search for a position which will
hopefully allow me to be united with my wife. The time in the Control & Instrumentation Group has
given me a pleasant experience; many current and former members of our ‘wider’ research group such
as Ashu, Govert, Paul, Melker, Sarah, William, Erciiment, Fernando, Karim, Vasilios, Edwin, Rod or
Chinmay have been sociable and supportive throughout.
My parents deserve a special mention who always supported me in many ways by giving me their
advice or providing me with the means for my education from the very first start of my life. Last but by
far not least, I would like to thank my wife, Aini, and also the kids, Fareez, Natasya and Zizi, for the
necessary mental support and their understanding throughout my PhD-research.
Contents
1 Introduction 1
1.1 O v e rv ie w ............................................................................................................................. 1
1.2 Thesis Organization............................................................................................................. 4
2 Sampled-data controller implementations 8

2.1 Introduction.......................................................................................................................... 8
2.2 The considered class of non-linear systems andcontrols.................................................... 10
2.2.1 From sliding mode to sliding-mode-based concepts............................................ 13
2.3 Discretization via sample-and-hold elem ents..................................................................... 19
2.4 Controller discretization versus discrete design:A variable structure control viewpoint 21
2.4.1 State-feedback control methods with bounded uncertainty ................................ 23
2.4.2 Observer-based sch e m e s........................................................................................ 24
2.4.3 Slowly varying disturbances and adaptive control sch e m e s................................ 24
2.4.4 Application to continuous-time p la n ts .................................................................. 25
2.5 Approaches to controller discretization.............................................................................. 27
2.5.1 Discretization of linear control l a w s ..................................................................... 27
2.5.2 Discretization of non-linear control law s............................................................... 30
2.6 S u m m a ry ............................................................................................................................. 36
3 A sliding-mode-based state-feedback control 37

3.1 Introduction......................................................................................................................... 37
3.2 The considered class of systems ........................................................................................ 38
3.3 The non-linear control l a w ................................................................................................. 40
3.4 Stability and sliding-mode-based perform ance.................................................................. 43
3.4.1 A controller modification for systems with parametric and input uncertainty only 48
3.5 Practical issues: The inverted pendulum e x a m p le ............................................................ 49
3.6 S u m m a ry ............................................................................................................................. 51
C o n t e n t s _____________________________________________________________________________________________________ ii i
4 A non-smooth Lyapunov function for the sliding-mode-based control 52

4.1 Introduction....................................................................................................................... 52
4.2 A non-smooth Lyapunov function for the sliding-mode-basedcontrol............................. 53
4.3 Stability theorems for a non-smooth Lyapunov function usingLebesgue theory .... 54
4.4 A non-smooth Lyapunov function stability theorem using Clarke’sderivative ............. 59
4.5 Stability analysis for the sliding-mode-based control .................................................... 63
4.6 S u m m a ry ........................................................................................................................... 64
5 A mean value theorem based approach to controller discretization 65

5.1 Introduction....................................................................................................................... 65
5.2 A generalized mean value th eo rem ................................................................................... 66
5.3 A generic approach to non-linear controller discretization.............................................. 67
5.4 Discretization of a sliding-mode-based control................................................................ 73
5.4.1 Sliding-mode like performance of the discretized c o n tro l................................... 91
5.4.2 Procedure for calculation of a sampling time b o u n d ............................................ 92
5.5 A numerical example: The inverted pendulum and a stablesecondorder p l a n t .............. 93
5.6 S u m m a ry ........................................................................................................................... 96
6 An observer-based control for non-minimum phase and semi-proper plants 97

6.1 Introduction........................................................................................................................ 97
6.2 The system requirem ents................................................................................................... 98
6.3 An output measurement filter for semi-proper plants....................................................... 99
6.4 The non-linear observer..................................................................................................... 102
6.5 The observer based feedback control la w .......................................................................... 104
6.6 A design methodology using an # 2-ap p ro ach ................................................................ 108
6.6.1 # 2-regulator: sub-optimal observer and sub-optimalstate fe e d b a c k ...................... 108
6.6.2 An LMI-design methodology for the observer..................................................... Ill
6.6.3 Designing the state feedback................................................................................. Ill
6.7 S u m m a ry .......................................................................................................................... 113
7 A generalized Lp-based approach for sampled-data implementations 115

7.1 Introduction....................................................................................................................... 115
7.2 Notation for the Lp-norm approach................................................................................... 117
7.3 L aj>-%ain of non-linear systems with sampled-data output.............................................. 118
7.4 Z/a>2-based closed loop analysis of sampled-data c o n tro ls.............................................. 121
7.5 Sampled-data implementation of an observer-based pseudo-sliding-mode control . . . 124
C o n t e n t s _______________________________________________________________________________________________ iv
7.5.1 The system requirements....................................................................................... 125

7.5.2 The observer based tracking c o n tro l.................................................................... 126
7.5.3 The sampled-data im plementation....................................................................... 128
7.5.4 Augmenting the discrete-time c o n tr o l..................................................................... 129
7.5.5 -analysis of the sampling re sid u a l................................................................ 130
7.5.6 Closed loop stability analysis .............................................................................. 132
7.5.7 A practical approach of finding sampling-time upper b o u n d s............................ 137
7.5.8 A furnace e x am p le ................................................................................................ 138
7.5.9 A note on sampled-data tracking control for semi-proper systems ................... 141
7.6 The state feedback control system with cone shaped sliding modelayer ....................... 144
7.6.1 A numerical example: The inverted pendulum..................................................... 148
7.7 S u m m a ry ................................................................................................................................ 149
8 Sliding-mode control of a non-linear, large scale chemical process 151

8.1 Introduction............................................................................................................................. 151
8.2 The HDA-plant: A Benzene producing chemical p r o c e s s ............................................... 152
8.3 Non-linear dynamics and model linearizations.................................................................. 156
8.4 Model reduction................................................................................................................... 158
8.4.1 Model scaling and reduction for the linearized HDA-plant m odel...................... 159
8.5 A non-linear observer based control strategy..................................................................... 161
8.5.1 Design of the control for the H D A -plant.................................................................. 162
8.5.2 Performance and robustness to uncertainty ............................................................ 163
8.5.3 Disturbance rejection and performance for purity measurement d e lay s 166
8.5.4 Discretization of the observer-based c o n tro l............................................................ 167
8.6 An H x -controller based a p p ro a ch ....................................................................................... 168
8.6.1 Posing the ifoo-problem ...........................................................................................169
8.6.2 The weak separation principle in iioo-control.........................................................170
8.6.3 A linear observer based closed loop control system with auxiliary non-linear
control input sig n al................................................................................................ 171
8.6.4 Derivation of a sliding mode hyperplane from a stable plant representation . . 173
8.6.5 Controller d e sig n ................................................................................................... 177
8.6.6 Tracking performance .............................................................................................. 178
8.6.7 Disturbance rejection and performance for purity measurement d e lay s.................180
8.7 The two sliding-mode based control methodologies in com p ariso n................................... 181
8.7.1 Tracking performance .......................................................................................... 181
Contents v
8.7.2 Disturbance rejection andpurity measurement d e lay s............................................. 182

8.8 S u m m a ry ............................................................................................................................ 183
9 Discretization of non-linear controls with small computational delays 184

9.1 Introduction........................................................................................................................ 184
9.2 System requirements and control law discretization......................................................... 185
9.3 A fast sampling th e o re m ................................................................................................... 188
9.4 The approach of Hsu & S a s tr y .......................................................................................... 190
9.5 An approach for robust stability ......................................................................... 194
9.6 Discretization of the sliding-mode based control.................................................................. 218
9.6.1 A numerical example forthe sliding-mode based c o n tro l.......................................219
9.7 S u m m a ry ............................................................................................................................... 224
10 Conclusions and future work 225

10.1 Concluding rem arks............................................................................................................... 225
10.2 Recommendations for future w o r k .......................................................................................227
A Mathematical notation 230
B Physical properties and units 232
Bibliography 233
C hapter 1
Introduction
1.1 Overview
With modern technology, control systems for continuous-time plants are commonly implemented in
discrete time. Thus, measurements of the plant system are taken at given, generally equally spaced,
time instants. A discrete control algorithm evaluates these measurements to calculate a controller value,
which is then applied to the plant actuator during a given time-interval. The discrete-time algorithm and
continuous-time plant combine to form a sampled-data control system.
Within the area of sampled-data control, much research has been done for linear system theory and
most of the problems of linear sampled-data control have been solved. Thus, a theoretical framework
for robust and performance oriented control design of linear sampled-data control systems is read
ily available. For non-linear system theory, fundamental research results have been obtained within the
last two decades concerned with problems such as existence of stabilizing sampled-data control laws for
non-linear continuous-time systems, existence of discrete-time models obtained from continuous-time
descriptions or controllability under sampling. However, much of the research interest for non-linear
control system design has concentrated on the continuous-time domain. Advanced tools are available
for control design and analysis within this area. Further, many physical systems can be readily modelled
in continuous time via theoretical approaches from physics, chemistry, biology or mathematics. Since
many of these systems have non-linear character, a representative discrete-time model is then not easily
obtained. Thus for such systems, the design of a control system is most suitably carried out in con
tinuous time. The requirement for analysis tools of sampled-data implementations of continuous-time
control laws is immediate. Additional practical considerations also raise the question of the behaviour
of hybrid control systems where the measurements are additionally subject to magnitude quantization.
However, problems of quantization are not strictly treated in this work.
Hence, this thesis concentrates on the analysis of non-linear and robust control systems which have
been designed in continuous time but are subject to a sampled-data implementation via discretization of
the continuous-time control. Within this sub-area of sampled-data control, many conceptual results have
C h a p t e r 1. I n t r o d u c t i o n 2
been established. An important role is played here by the sampling time, the length of the interval be
tween two output measurement instances. Under assumptions of control systems without computational
delay and with unique sampling frequency, the interval is also the time period during which a control
value is applied after computation from the output measurement. For very general cases, it has been
shown in previous work that a non-linear, discretized control system recovers stability provided the sam
pling time is small enough. Hence, fast sampling implies stability. Nevertheless, issues of robustness
within these approaches have been most often neglected. These are problems concerned with a mis
match between the physical plant and the respective model or with the effect of external disturbances.
Within this thesis, a framework for non-linear, affine systems is developed for robust discretization
analysis to consider different types of uncertainties and disturbances. Non-linear, affine differential
systems, consisting of a system drift and an input gain for the actuator, easily lend themselves to a
large variety of non-linear analysis techniques. Thus, the discretization approaches of this thesis are
developed for this class of non-linear systems combined with a suitable feedback. The continuous-time
control of interest initially is static and Lipschitz-continuous in the closed loop system states and en
sures that the states ultimately enter in finite time a bounded vicinity of the state origin. Outside this
set, the states decrease exponentially. It is not difficult to provide a fast-sampling result for such sys
tems. However, complications arise when the task is to compute sampling frequencies for robust closed
loop stability, which are not too ‘fast’ in comparison to the dynamics of control system and plant: Many
discretization approaches do not directly include the stabilizing effect of the discretized control nor con
sider the problem of complex dynamic control systems. Hence, it will be seen that the framework of a
non-linear affine system and a static output feedback control can also accommodate a class of complex,
dynamic control systems and the analysis of the respective sampled-data implementation. Another issue
is the existence of computational delays within sampled-data systems which have been rarely consid
ered so far. Suitable techniques analyzing these issues are developed. New techniques for discretization
analysis are suggested; an important theoretical basis of linear H ^ - and L p-sampled-data analysis has
been generalized and employed for non-linear system analysis. Thus, this thesis seeks to put emphasis
on the following three different issues for the ‘fast-sampling’-analysis of discretized control systems:
• computation of practically feasible sampling frequencies
• suitability for the analysis of large scale and dynamic control structures
• consideration of practically relevant problems, such as robustness and computational delays.
To satisfy these requirements simultaneously is a complex problem and examples of practically relevant
control systems will show the characteristics of each developed ‘fast-sampling’-technique. Sliding
mode based control systems have been chosen for this purpose.
Continuous-time sliding mode control has been established within the last three decades as a pow
erful nonlinear, robust control method. By ultimately forcing the states of a closed loop control system
onto a predefined stable surface, the sliding mode, the control system achieves insensitivity to uncer
tainties or disturbances which lie in the range of the system actuator. Thus, robustness to uncertainties
and disturbances of a particular class is achieved, the class of matched uncertainty and disturbances.
Another advantage is that the order of the closed loop system is eventually reduced after the states have
reached the stable sliding mode, which simplifies system motion. However to achieve this dynamic be
haviour, a non-linear, discontinuous control law has to be employed, which is able to switch infinitely
fast along the stable sliding surface. For actual control systems, this switching is finite creating high
frequency dynamics of the actuator. This can result in undue actuator wear or excitation of un-modeled
plant dynamics. Techniques have been developed to resolve this problem by smoothing the non-linear
control component with the effect that the non-linear continuous-time control components are rendered
to be Lipschitz-continuous. In this case, the closed loop control system states enter ultimately a bound
ary layer of the sliding-mode.
For this thesis, a robust, sliding-mode based state feedback control law is developed which adopts
the idea of the sliding mode boundary layer in a more general sense. A constant layer is combined
with a sector shaped layer. A non-smooth Lyapunov function has been used to prove stability of the
discretized sliding-mode based state feedback control. Further, a known robust, observer-based sliding-
mode controller for strictly proper, linear uncertain systems with minimum phase behaviour has been
theoretically advanced so that an application to a class of non-minimum phase and relative degree zero
plants is possible.
The effectiveness of the observer-based control approach is shown in application to a chemical pro
cess simulation, which has relative degree zero and non-minimum phase characteristics. The simulated
process is a realistic 270-state model of a chemical plant for production of benzene. The process is
highly non-linear and it consists of several different unit elements such as a furnace, a continuous reac
tor and three distillation columns. The tracking control of the benzene productivity is considered while
minimizing interaction with the other four output measurements, such as the benzene product purity.
The plant has been of interest to chemical process engineers and process control theorists for many
years. In prior work, the production process has been extensively analyzed for control purposes such as
selection of the five most effective actuators for single-input single-output control schemes. Chemical
process design and analysis for control purposes has been decisively advanced with the availability of
software packages, which also make exact linearizations of the process available. However, the applica
tion of multi-variable control schemes for this plant has never been considered before and is in general a
challenging task for large scale chemical systems. The availability of exact plant linearizations readily
implies the suitability of the continuous-time observer-based control and also allows a discretization
analysis of the system.
1.2 Thesis Organization
This thesis initially considers the main problems of sampled-data control with special emphasis on the
discretization of continuous-time control systems. In particular, the general non-linear, affine system
and sliding mode control approaches are introduced. Within later chapters, continuous-time, robust
sliding-mode based control techniques are developed, which are each followed by a suitable analysis
technique for sampled-data implementation. The presentation of the continuous-time control laws fol
lows the logical development of first considering the static, state feedback control system before the
presentation of the robust, observer-based output tracking control.
Chapter 2 introduces the general structure of sampled-data control systems and presents the generic
non-linear, affine system and the respective static, continuous-time stabilizing control law. Three gen
eral assumptions are raised for this continuous-time stabilized system, which pertain to the discretiza
tion techniques presented throughout the thesis. Assumptions are made for the existence of solutions of
the differential systems, for the existence of a closed loop Lyapunov function, for parametric and con
stant bounds of the continuous-time controlled system and the Lipschitz continuity of the continuous
time control. Sliding mode control as a robust, non-linear control technique is described and the smooth
ing methodologies for the non-linear unit-vector control component are introduced as the basis for the
development of sliding-mode based control systems. It is verified that the robust, non-linear sliding-
mode based control in application to linear uncertain systems fits the framework of non-linear, affine
systems in connection with a static, Lipschitz-continuous control. This framework is then used as a
basis to define the sample-and-hold-procedure which is employed within the thesis. Important notation
and terminology for sampled-data analysis are introduced which concern continuous-time signals and
the respective discretized signal resulting from a sample-and-hold-process. A significant notion in the
fast-sampling analysis of this thesis is the sampling residual, the difference between the discretized
signal and the original, continuous-time signal. The estimation of upper bounds for a suitable norm of
the sampling residual will be an important issue within the developed fast-sampling analysis. Work is
reviewed which is particularly concerned with the issue of sliding mode control in discrete time or in
the form of a sampled-data implementation. Prior results are contrasted to the issues which are consid
ered within this thesis. In conclusion, a revision of analysis approaches for discretization of linear and
non-linear control systems establishes the scope of this thesis in comparison to former results.
Chapter 3 presents a continuous-time state-feedback control law employing sliding mode control
techniques. The non-linear unit-vector component is modified so that a constant and a sector shaped
boundary layer of the sliding mode are combined to minimize chattering. Robust stability to matched
and limited unmatched uncertainty or disturbances is proved with a Lyapunov function approach. Fur
ther, sliding-mode based performance can be guaranteed; the states enter after finite time the boundary
layer and remain there afterwards. Numerical examples for an inverted pendulum system show charac
teristics of the sliding-mode based closed loop behaviour and the effect of the adjustment of the control
parameters is presented. These results and the mathematical background of the control law have been
published in Herrmann, Spurgeon & Edwards (1998).
Chapter 4 considers an important pre-requisite for the closed-loop analysis of the discretized state-
feedback control law from Chapter 3. A non-smooth Lyapunov function is introduced. For the sliding-
mode based control law, the non-smooth Lyapunov function is not differentiable at the boundary points
of the sector which acts as the layer of the sliding mode. This leads to flexibility when analyzing
the control system dynamics inside and outside the sector. Two different theoretical approaches are
considered to prove that this non-smooth Lyapunov function is a valid tool for stability theory. Lebesgue
integration theory is shown to be straightforward for this purpose, while the theory of non-smooth
analysis and generalized derivatives by Clarke is a potentially more powerful tool for sampled-data
control systems and other problems of control theory.
Chapter 5 introduces an approach for the analysis of discretized control systems. This technique is
based on the application of a generalized mean value theorem to derive an upper bound for the Euler
norm of the sampling residual. The mean value theorem is therefore considered first and proved for non
smooth signals occurring within the particular class of non-linear, affine systems of this thesis. The fast-
sampling analysis method to prove stability of the discretized control is demonstrated for the non-linear,
affine system in connection with the stabilizing feedback. An important fact, the stabilizing effect of the
discretized control, is explicitly exploited when estimating the upper bound of the sampling residual;
a partial analysis for the Lyapunov function from the continuous-time control takes into consideration
the fact that the Lyapunov function remains decreasing for finite time after each sampling instant. The
Euler norm upper bound for the sampling residual is directly included into a Lyapunov function analysis
providing closed loop stability under fast-sampling constraints. The demonstrated approach is applied
to the particular example of the sliding-mode based control system of Chapter 3. The technique is
adjusted to the structure of the sliding-mode based control and uses the non-smooth Lyapunov function
of Chapter 4. Numerical examples show the effectiveness of the approach. Note, that the theory from
this chapter together with earlier developments for Chapter 3 and 4 have been accepted for publication
in the IMA Journal of Mathematical Control and Information (Herrmann, Spurgeon & Edwards 19996)
while the numerical results have been documented in Herrmann, Spurgeon & Edwards (1999a).
Chapter 6 presents a further non-linear, continuous-time control method based on sliding-mode

control ideas. Instead of state feedback, the problem of observer-based output feedback for plants
with relative degree zero and non-minimum phase characteristics is considered. A robust, non-linear,
observer-based, tracking control, previously only applicable to minimum-phase and relative degree
one plants, is extended to a class of linear uncertain, non-minimum phase and relative degree zero
systems. The introduction of an output filter with unity gain converts the relative degree zero plant
into a strictly proper system by filtering only those output channels which are directly affected by the
actuator. Analysis shows that this filter introduces also robustness to output measurement noise. Linear
system theory implies that non-minimum phase behaviour of the actuator-to-output characteristics can
be accepted provided the matched disturbance-to-output behaviour is minimum phase. For this case, a
non-linear, observer-based tracking control is applied to the new plant system with output filter. The
Lipschitz-continuous, non-linear components of control and observer are designed so that a constant
boundary around the sliding-modes of observer and state-feedback are ultimately entered after finite
time. Lyapunov theory shows that the closed loop system is robustly stable to the considered class
of matched uncertainty and disturbances. A theoretical # 2-framework is developed for the design of
the linear components of the tracking control and of the observer incorporating a state feedback and a
known observer design scheme.
Chapter 7 provides a novel approach to fast-sampling analysis. The sampling residual of the non
linear, affine system states is investigated with respect to a more general concept of Lp-norm theory.
Instead of the Lp-norm for a function f (t), the Lp-norm for eaptf (t), a € R is investigated which
permits exponential stability to be proved. Using this idea, a result of Chen & Francis known from lin
ear, sampled-data control is generalized to non-linear, affine systems showing that exponentially stable,
non-linear, affine systems with sampled-data output have a finite Lp-gain and the respective input-to-
sampling-residual-gain vanishes with decreasing sampling time. These techniques are then used within
an L2-norm approach for the discretized continuous-time control in combination with the non-linear,
affine system. In application to the sliding-mode based tracking control for a strictly proper plant, it is
shown that this generalized Z/2-norm approach is a flexible tool for investigating the sampled-data im
plementations of a dynamic controller for linear, uncertain systems. Non-linear scalar L2-gains change
into non-singular matrices, so that non-linear matrix inequalities replace scalar inequalities for the fast-
sampling constraints. Methods are described which permit the discretization analysis of the tracking
control for relative degree zero plants in connection with a limited class of disturbances and a modi
fied sample-and-hold-scheme. The Z/2-approach is also derived for the sliding mode based control of
Chapter 3 showing a smaller degree of analysis complexity in comparison to Chapter 5. Non-trivial
numerical examples present characteristics of the analysis methodology. Observe that preliminary ma
terial of this chapter has been published in Herrmann, Spurgeon & Edwards (2000<i) and Herrmann,
Spurgeon & Edwards (20006).
Chapter 8 demonstrates the techniques of Chapters 6 and 7 in application to the simulation of

the benzene producing chemical plant. Another sliding mode control technique employing a linear
observer is also presented and a comparative study for the two control methodologies is carried out.
The design of the two tracking control methods is based on a model linearization of this plant. Linear
model reduction methods for the balanced realization of the linearized plant model are used to obtain
a 17-state model for design. The linear models have non-minimum phase and relative degree zero
actuator-to-output-measurement characteristics, while the disturbance-to-output characteristics are for
the two major disturbances minimum phase and the disturbances are mainly matched. Thus, the non
linear observer based control of Chapter 6 fits the tracking control problem for this chemical plant.
The # 2-framework 0f Chapter 6 delivers the basis for the design of the linear control component in
combination with an empirical approach for the non-linear component gains. A sampled-data analysis
includes simulation results and numerical results obtained from the theory of Chapter 7. The linear
observer based sliding-mode control method is employing the observer characteristics of a stable H qq-
control. A modification of the ifoo-control introduces exact pole separation for observer and control.
A linear stable mode from the linear closed loop system is chosen as sliding mode using a selection
scheme which ensures robustness to perturbations due to unmatched uncertainty affecting the sliding
mode. The two different design methods imply different behaviour in application to the chemical plant.
The non-linear observer based control has very good disturbance rejection behaviour, while the linear
observer based control operates in a larger operation envelope. These results have been reported at
two different conferences. The non-linear observer-based pseudo-sliding-mode control law of Chapter
6 and the respective results in application to the chemical process simulation have been published in
Herrmann, Spurgeon & Edwards (2000e) while material from Herrmann, Spurgeon & Edwards (2000c)
has been used for the -based control system.
Chapter 9 considers in contrast to Chapters 5 and 7 the issue of computational delays within
sampled-data control systems. Delays are in practice crucial in particular for static control systems
operating within a sampling interval in the order of output measurement, actuator computation and
actuation. Previous work on theoretical approaches to small computational delays is reviewed and pre
sented for the non-linear, affine system. Drawbacks of prior techniques and the respective assumptions
for them are explained showing that robustness problems cannot be investigated. A methodology is
suggested to improve previous schemes to allow robustness analysis and a new approach to robust dis
cretization analysis for computational delays is presented. The two considered methods estimate upper
bounds for the Euler norm of the sampling residual for the non-linear system states which is now depen
dent on the extent of the delay. Previous work used integration methods such as the Gronwall-Bellman
Theorem, while the new technique employs the generalized mean value theorem. The application of the
Gronwall-Bellman Theorem can result in more conservative fast-sampling constraints; a suitable com
parative study using numerical results for the sliding-mode based control of Chapter 3 is undertaken.
Note that an excerpt of the theory for the newly developed discretization method considering robust
control problems has been presented and published in Herrmann, Spurgeon & Edwards (2000a).
Chapter 10 summarizes the results obtained within the thesis and draws conclusions. Areas of
interest for future work are indicated.
Chapter 2
Sampled-data controller implementations
2.1 Introduction
First accounts of research on sampled-data controllers for continuous-time plants with plant or control
law non-linearities go back to the fifties of the last century. Kalman (1956) investigated single-input-
single-output (SISO) linear systems with an input non-linearity and a sample-and-hold element closing
the control loop. In terms of Figure 2.1, this would be a SISO continuous-time linear plant P with
non-linearities in the input, the discrete control element K s being the identity and with the sample
operator ST and the zero-order hold H T, linking plant and control. Iglesias (1995), Chen & Francis
(1995) and also Mousa, Miller & Michel (1986) termed such control systems hybrid or sampled-data
control systems as they consist of a continuous-time plant P , a discrete control system K & and the
two connecting elements, the sample operator S T and the zero-order-hold H r . The sample operator
S T converts piecewise continuous functions y (t) into sequences v(i), while the zero-order hold H r
realizes the opposite, forming piecewise continuous functions u(t) from sequences z(i) by employing
a constant sampling time r > 0. Kalman (1956) pointed out that the sample operator S T and the
zero-order-hold H T are linear elements, where the well known superposition principle holds. Thus in
plant
u(0 y 0)
P
hold controller sam pler

z (i) v ( i) r r n
H '
u (iz+ s)= z(i) v(i)=y(hj

0<s< T,
x—const.,
i= 0,l,2,...
Figure 2.1: A simple hybrid control system

C h a p t e r 2. S a m p l e d - data c o n t r o l l e r im p l e m e n t a t io n s 9
terms of a linear time-invariant plant and control, the problems of stability (Francis & Georgiou 1988,
Chen & Francis 1991) have been solved. Stability at the sampling instants t{ = ir is equivalent to
stable behaviour within the sampling instants, which gives internal stability of the hybrid system. This
allows the use of the well known z-transform. Robust control design methodologies have been treated
using continuous-time systems with discrete-time jumps (Sun, Nagpal & Khagonekar 1993) or lifting
techniques (Chen & Francis 1995).
These methodologies, useful for linear hybrid control configurations, are not trivially applicable if
the control or the plant contain non-linearities. Another complexity of hybrid control systems arises
since they are time-varying even if the continuous-time plant P and the discrete control K & are time-
invariant. With linear methods, the time-variance is easily taken account of via the mentioned lifting
techniques or the continuous-time systems with discrete jumps while time-variance creates for non
linear systems an extra degree of complication. Further, the derivation of discrete-time representations
of a continuous-time non-linear plant P at the sampling instants tt = ir is non-trivial (Monaco &
Normand-Cyrot 1985) and requires differentiability of the right hand of the continuous-time differ
ential model. An alternative possibility is to find approximate models for control design from exact
continuous-time system representations. For small enough sampling step r, Nesic, Teel & Kokotovic
(1999) have proved the effectiveness of such an approach, implying, under certain conditions, stability
of the discrete controller designed for the approximate model and applied to the exact plant discretiza
tion. Nevertheless, stability at the sampling instants does not necessarily satisfy constraints to achieve
stable behaviour within the sampling interval [£*, tl+\], implying hybrid system stability (Ne§ic, Teel &
Sontag 1999). Further, uncertainty within the continuous-time description may inhibit the computation
of an approximate discrete model.
The alternative is to use a continuous-time control system and to derive a respective discrete imple
mentation K &. Stability may then follow if the sampling time r is chosen small enough or the sampling
frequency 1 /r large enough. From a theoretical point of view this ‘fast sampling approach' is feasi
ble, since asymptotically controllable systems can be asymptotically stabilized by a sampled control
(Clarke, Ledyaev, Sontag & Subbotin 1997). However, the length of the sampling intervals [ti,U+i]
may have to be adjusted depending on the value of the system states at the time instant ti, the sampling
time is in this case varying and, for some systems, possibly has to tend to 0 for asymptotic stability.
Nevertheless, if both a continuous-time differential system and a continuous-time exponentially sta
bilizing control satisfy certain Lipschitz and sector conditions then the sampled-data implementation
of the control is generally exponentially stable for large enough finite and fixed sampling frequency.
Additionally, the closed loop analysis for the discretized control allows continuous-time techniques to
be employed to prove robustness to uncertainty and disturbances for the sampled-data control system.
It is therefore sensible to categorize within this chapter the class of systems which are investigated
C h a p t e r 2. S a m p l e d - data c o n t r o l l e r i m p l e m e n t a t i o n s 10
here. These are generally non-linear affine systems. It will be seen that they are particularly useful
with respect to the different techniques which are used to prove closed loop stability and robustness
of the hybrid control system. A main intention of this thesis is to derive practical approaches for the
discretization of sliding-mode-based control systems. Thus, basic ideas of sliding mode and sliding-
mode-based controls will be given and it will be shown that non-linear affine systems can represent
the systems and control laws of interest. The state-of-the-art of research on discrete sliding-mode and
variable structure control for discrete and continuous-time plants will be outlined in relation to the work
here. Since many techniques from linear control can be useful also in non-linear control, a discussion on
linear sampled-data control and some related techniques is also carried out. Additionally, the theoretical
approaches developed within this thesis will be contrasted to other methodologies and theories known
from research on non-linear sampled-data control.
2.2 The considered class o f non-linear systems and controls
The main interest of the research work in this thesis has been directed towards developing theoretical
approaches for the discretization of control laws in application to non-linear affine systems:
x(t) = f(t,x ) + g(x)u, x E Rn , f : R x Rn —>Rn , g : Rn —>Rnxm (2.1)
with continuous and bounded input gain g(x):
llgll <g, s e R +.
Non-linear, affine differential equations can represent a wide class of existing non-linear plants and lend
themselves easily to non-linear techniques such as non-linear H qo and Hamilton-Jacobi-inequality-
analysis. Thus, the investigated theoretical discretization approaches for proving stability will be
demonstrated for the non-linear affine system of (2.1) and a continuous-time feedback u = u c (x)
u c (x) : Rn —> Rm ,
considered for discretization. With slight modifications, analysis methods for non-linear affine systems
can be used to investigate systems which can be rewritten as linear differential equations with system
or input uncertainties and non-linearities:
x = Ax + B u -I- F (t, x) + G (t, x, u)u ,
A E Rnxn, B E Rnxm, F : R x Rn ->■ Rn , G : R x Rn x Rm -)• Rnxm. (2.2)
The unknown functions F(-, •) and G(-, •, •) model uncertainties, non-linearities in the system and ex
ogenous disturbances. Linear uncertain systems are of specific interest as the sliding-mode-based con
trol laws which will be investigated for application of the discretization methods have been developed
for these plants. It will be seen that all the newly developed techniques and theoretical proofs for non
linear, affine systems can be applied to the linear uncertain systems of interest.
The class of non-linear, affine systems and continuous-time feedbacks is best described by a set of
assumptions. The first assumption on system and feedback will ensure the existence of solution of the
system. The second assumption limits the class of control laws to be exponentially stabilizing outside a
compact vicinity of the origin, while the last assumption raises structural constraints on both the control
and closed loop system which are used later within the analysis of the discretized control. Provided
the feedback u = u c (x), not necessarily stabilizing, is applied to the system in (2.1), then it can be
rewritten in the form of
x(f) = / ( t ,x ) . (2.3)
The existence of a local, continuous solution x(f) satisfying for all i in a sufficiently large vicinity of
to'.
x(t) = x ( f 0) + / /(s ,x (s ))d s
Jto
can be assured by the following conditions postulated by Caratheodory (1948):

Assumption 2.1a:
1. /(£, •) : Rn —>• Rn is continuous for each fixed t G R
2. /(•, x) : R+ U {0} Rn is Lebesgue measurable for each fixed x and
3. There exists for each compact set U C R71 a Lebesgue-integrable function m u(-) so that
||/(f ,x )|| < m u (t), x e U .
A solution starting in a compact set U exists, as long as it remains in this set U. Caratheodory’s solution
is not ensured to be unique and the trajectory x(i) is proved to be absolutely continuous, which is a
stronger notion of continuity:
Definition 2.1 The function x(t) is absolutely continuous on [ta, t^] if for each e > 0, there is (5(e),
such that:
(tpj ~ taj ) < S(e) =» Ej ||x(t pj ) - x(*QJ)|| < e
fo r any finite set o f disjoint open intervals {taj , tpj) in [ta, t&]. □
Since the trajectory x(t) is absolutely continuous, it is not necessarily differentiable forall, but for
almost all times t (Craven 1982, Proposition 5.5.3) and x(t) satisfies almost everywhere thedifferential
equation (2.3). This solution concept of Caratheodory is the prerequisite for the assumptions on stability
and feedback/system structure for a continuous-time control.
Global exponential decay of the states and quadratic stability outside a set of ultimate boundedness
of the closed loop for a continuous-time feedback u = u c (x) follows provided a function V (i,x)
exists:
C h a p t e r 2. S a m p l e d - da ta c o n t r o l l e r im p l e m e n t a t io n s 12
Assumption 2.2a:
1. V(t, •) : W1 -» R is locally Lipschitz, uniformly in any closed interval of t G R+ U {0}
2. V(-,x) : U {0} -> M is absolutely continuous, uniformly in any compact set of x G W1
3. For ci, C2, C3, C4 > 0 and C5 > 0:
sv
< c411X 11, C\ 11x112 < V (t,x) < c2 ||x ||2 ,
(2.4)
Note that the first two points of Assumption 2.2a imply that V(t,x.(t)) is absolutely continuous for
t > 0 provided x(f) is absolutely continuous. By Craven (1982, Proposition 5.5.3), it follows that
dytyixtQl exists almost everywhere and:
The last point of Assumption 2.2a implies differentiability of V(£,x) in x for constant t. Thus, the
last point implies that the states remain bounded and do not have finite escape time, showing global
existence of solution. As a conclusion stability follows.
Remark 2.1 The fact that the first two points of Assumption 2.2a imply absolute continuity of V(£, x(£))
in t will be established in a Lemma of Chapter 4. This is particularly of interest if V( t , x) is not every
where differentiable in x, which will be discussed in Chapter 4 while any other prior Lyapunov analysis
will deal with differentiable V(f, x). In Chapter 4, it will be shown that the differentiability condition
for the Lyapunov function can be relaxed by using a non-differentiable Lyapunov function and suitable
conditions. An example and its practical application will be given in Chapters 4 and 5. o
It will be seen that for the class of non-linear controls satisfying Assumptions 2.1a-2.2a, it is possible to
prove for the discretized control exponential decay of the states outside a set of ultimate boundedness.
For this reason, the following is assumed in addition
Assumption 2.3a:
|f(*,x) + g (x ) u c (x)|| < JCc ||x|| + /Cc)C, ||u c (xi) - u c (x2)|| < Ku ||x x - x 2| | , (2.5)
^C,c > 0, JCc > 0.
Note that the last assumptions are practical. Assumption 2.1a represents the minimal knowledge about
the solvability of the system, while a Lyapunov function is generally used for non-linear control system
design and proving stability of the controlled system. Assumption 2.3a is giving information about the
closed loop and control which should be known at the time of control design. As will be seen, the
designer of a control law can compute with this knowledge a value for the sampling frequency 1 /t
so that the discretized continuous-time control gives exponentially fast decay outside a set of ultimate
boundedness.
The converse approach is to assume an exponentially stabilizing control to derive a Lyapunov func
tion for proving the existence of a sampling frequency so that the closed loop of the sampled-data
implementation is exponentially stable. Using this approach the following assumptions would be suffi
cient:
Assumption 2.1b: f ( t , x) and g(x) are continuously differentiable
Assumption 2.2b: u c (x) is exponentially stabilizing
Assumption 2.3b: l|f(*,xi) - f(f,x 2)|| < /Cf ||xx —x 2I|, /Cf > 0
||uc (xi) - uc (x2)|| < Ku ||xi - x 21|, Ku > 0.
Since the control u c (x) is exponentially stabilizing, /(£, 0) = 0 and Assumption 2.3a with /Cc,c = 0
in (2.5) follows, while the existence of a continuously differentiable Lyapunov function also satisfying
Assumption 2.2a with C5 = 0 of (2.4) is implied from the converse stability theorem (Khalil 1992a,
Theorem 3.12). Further, it can be seen that the solution under Assumptions 2.1b-2.3b is unique
(Khalil 1992a. Theorem 2.3).
Remark 2.2 Observ e that all the conditions given with Assumptions 2.2a-2.3a or 2.1b-2.3b are global.
These conditions can be easily reformulated for local results with respect to a large enough compact set
V containing the origin in its interior. All the theory presented in this thesis would be valid but always
consider an invariant set within V. For reasons of simplicity this will not be done. The examples of this
thesis are always considering global results only. o
Under fast sampling constraints, a system of equation (2.1) and a discretized controldefined with
Assumptions 2.1a,b-2.3a,b has been proved to be exponentially stable for C5 = 0 and JCc>c = 0. This
will be discussed in Sections 2.5.2 and 5.3. Hence, it is not the main concern of this thesis to repeat
these proofs. One area of concern is to find practical approaches in application to sliding-mode-based
control systems. Thus, an introduction to sliding-mode control and sliding-mode based control systems
will show the practical feasibility of such research and that the controls of interest fit into the class of
systems introduced above.
2.2.1 From sliding mode to sliding-mode-based concepts
Sliding-mode control laws have been developed for many different types of systems, for non-linear,
linear uncertain systems or also considering robust observers for output feedback (Utkin 1992, Edwards
& Spurgeon 1998). In this section, only linear uncertain systems will be considered. Further, sliding-
mode control is best explained using a state feedback control approach. Thus, an ideal discontinuous
sliding-mode control will be introduced first to show typical robustness and performance characteristics,
which are also mainly achieved if the discontinuous control is altered to be Lipschitz.
The linear uncertain system (2.2) must satisfy that B is full rank and (A, B ) controllable. This is a
general requirement. Further, assume the uncertainty is within the range X(B) of the input matrix B:
rank ([B (F (£, x) 4- G (t, x, u)u)]) = rank (B ).
This type of uncertainty is called matched. Cases where in particular F (£, x) is not within the range
space of B , thus un-matched, will be treated in Chapter 3. It has been shown that under the matching
condition there is a linear transformation Tx (Edwards & Spurgeon 1998, pp.37-38), so that the linear
uncertain system can be written in this nominal form
Zi = A n Z \ 4- A 1 2 Z 2 ( 2 .6 )
z2 = A 2 1 Z1 -I- A22Z2 4- B 2U + G i( f ,x ,u ) u -I- F (f,x ), (2.7)
where B 2 £ imxm is non-singular,
zi
Tzx = , zi £ Rn -m , z2 £ Rm
Z2
and F (t, x), G i stem from the transformation of F (f, x) and G.
Example 2.1 An inverted pendulum is formed by a light rod of length I and a heavy mass m attached
to one end of the rod with the pivot of rotation at the other end. The angular movement of the rod is
subject to damping proportional to the angular speed. A torque u(t) is used as the actuator.
6{t) = j sin(0(£)) 4- b6{t) -I---- ^ u(t) ( 2 . 8)

I ml *
u(t)
( actuating
V. J Torque)
Suppose the parameters of the pendulum have been chosen considering a damping coefficient b = —0.1
with an error of 10%, then it is possible to rewrite the pendulum equation to satisfy these two different,
however, equivalent linear uncertain systems (2.2) with x = [0 0]T :
0 1 0 ’ 0 0 0 XI
X = x 4- u4- x 4~ , x = (2.9)
O
0
rH
1 0 6 4 -0 .1 _ 0 .5 s i n ( r r i ) _ X2 _
1
•
1
C h a p t e r 2. S a m p l e d -data c o n t r o l l e r im p l e m e n t a t io n s 15
0 1 ’ 0 ' 0 0
x = x + 11+ X, ( 2 . 10)
H— 1
1-----
Crt
1
1 0 .5 ( s i n c ( x i ) — 1 ) 6 + 0 .1
O
0
1
ifx i# 0
sine (a;i) = { , - 0.11 < b < -0.09.
1 if x\ — 0
where the linear part of system (2.10) is the linearization at the unstable equilibrium point [xi X2 ] = [0 0]
for constant 6 = —0.1. Both systems have matched uncertainty only and are in nominal form already.
However, system (2.9) has two types of uncertainty, parametric and constant bounded (||0.5 sin(xi)|| <
0.5). This contrasts to the system of (2.10) which assumes parametric uncertainty only. A
The fact that ( ^ 11, ^ 12) of (2.6) is controllable if and only if (A , B ) is controllable (Edwards &
Spurgeon 1998, Proposition 3.3) guarantees the existence of a matrix M , so that
E — A n —A 1 2 M
is Hurwitz stable. With the transformation matrix

1
1
•-i
zi
T0 = , T x = T ^T zx = ( 2 . 11)
M I
. * .
the linear uncertain system (2.2) is represented as:
zi = E zi + A i2</>, ( 2 . 12)
4> = ©zi + f t y + ( £ 2 + G i ) u + F (2 . 1 3 )
The sub-system (2.13) represents the range-space dynamics. The sub-system of equation (2.12) defines
the null-space dynamics.
The null-space dynamics are not directly affected by the matched uncertainty. Thus, sliding-mode
control attempts to achieve that (f> = 0 is satisfied after a finite time period, so that the dynamics are
confined to stable dynamics of (n —m)-th order:
Zi — E zi.
The dynamics of the sliding-mode plane:
def
S = {x € R" : S x = 4> = 0} , S = [M I)T,
are invariant to any matched uncertainty. Once sliding motion is achieved the control:
U = tie , = ~ { S { B + G ) ] - 1 (S A x + S F ) ,
known as the equivalent control, is necessary to maintain sliding (0 = 0, 0 = 0). Practically, the
equivalent control cannot be computed since the uncertainty is not known. However, a discontinuous,
non-Lipschitz control can achieve sliding motion within finite time, provided bounds for both input
uncertainty G i
<■W inf > 0, IIGjU < gx (2.14)
and F
l |F ||< / ( t , x )
are known, where f ( t , x) is a known function satisfying Assumption 2.1a. A state-feedback control has
then two parts:
u(f) = u£(zi (f), 0 (f)) + U ^L(zi(f), 0 (f)),
where u£( ) and u ^ L( ) are the linear and the non-linear control components. The linear controller
part
u £(*!(«),^(t)) =' -Bj-1(ex x(t) + (n - n*)0(f))
mainly enhances reachability of the sliding mode, where ft* is a Hurwitz-stable design matrix. The
discontinuous non-linear control component achieving sliding-motion 0 = 0 is
D - l (J 7 ( * ,Z 1 ,0 ) + 7 A T l) P2 0,
J7(f,z 1}0) = /( f ,x ) H-sri ||u£|| > G iu £ (z i(f ),0 (f)) + F i
and the positive definite matrix ,P2 £ Mmxm satisfies
p2n‘ + (i'Tp2 = - i m. ( 2. 16)
The discontinuous term

P20
(2.17)
11^2011
is known as the unit vector. A Lyapunov function F2(f) for the analysis of the range-space dynamics is:
W W ) = \<t>T (t)P2<t>(t). (2.18)
However, differential equations with discontinuous right hand, as in the closed loop system formed
with the control of (2.15), do not satisfy Assumption 2.1a and Caratheodory’s solution does not apply.
Generally, Filipov’s (1964) solution of differential equations is used, which guarantees the existence
of an absolutely continuous x(f). Under this condition, U2(0(f)) as a function of t is also absolutely
C h a p t e r 2. S a m p l e d - da ta c o n t r o l l e r im p l e m e n t a t i o n s 17
continuous and satisfies V^(0(f)) = /q Vi(4>(s))ds + V2(<£(0)). Particularly for V2 {4>{t)) > e and
arbitrarily small e > 0, it is implied for almost all t:
v2 = - M 2
+<t>T(t)P2 ( G iu £ + F - +yNL)[Im + + (-Bf‘)T%-] P2<t>

< m n
< - M 2 + 4>T (t)P2 {§1 ||u £ || + / ( t , x ) - (ri(t,zu 4>) + 7N i) ] ( ^ |j i )
< - 11011 -7 N L II0II < - 7 N L \/‘Z V2l\max{P2) (2.19)
By integrating the differential inequality of (2.19), it follows that for j n l > ®and for all e > 0:
7 NL
As this is valid for any e > 0, sliding-motion is achieved for t > t s. In actual fact for V2 < e, a
more general setting of Lyapunov function theory and respectively differential inclusion theory should
be considered which has been done by Gutman (1979).
Example 2.2 Lyapunov function analysis can show that a linear state feedback control can globally
stabilize the unstable equilibrium point of the inverted pendulum (2.10) (Figure 2.2(a)):
u(t) = -[0.99 1.3]x (2.20)
where the closed loop poles are {-0.7, —0.7} for the linearization. Now, suppose accidentally a mass
of double its nominal value is used, then it is obvious from (2.8) that the actuator gain decreases by
linear c.(m=nom. val.)

sl.-mode c.(m=2xnom.v.)
sl.-mode c.(m=nom. val.)
0.5
•o
T3
- 0.5
- 1.5
timefsl 0
(a) x\ = 6it) for different controls and (b) Phase portrait for sliding mode
different mass of the pendulum (nominal mass)
Figure 2.2: State feedback for inverted pendulum

C h a p t e r 2. S a m p l e d - data c o n t r o l l e r i m p l e m e n t a t i o n s 18
50% and the control (2.20) is not stabilizing. However, a simple non-linear state-feedback element
f o r <f>> 0
{1 (0 elsewhere)
—1 fo r <f>< 0
added to the linear state feedback can achieve global exponential stability. This is even true if a slower
linear feedback configuration with poles at {—0.5, —0.5} is chosen:
u{t) = —[0.75 0.9]x — (|x i| + O.l)sign(0).
Thus, the non-linear control is more robust and shows less overshoot than the linear control in the case
of the nominal mass (Figure 2.2). A
Practically, it is impossible to implement the non-linear control of (2.15) since it is necessary that
the control is able to switch infinitely fast to achieve and keep sliding motion. However, in particular
sampled data controllers operate at a fixed frequency. Switching of the control would result in the
well-known chattering, which can cause excessive wear on the actuator. One possibility to prevent this
problem is to modify the discontinuous unit-vector (2.17) to be a continuous or a Lipschitz-continuous
term (Ryan & Corless 1984, Spurgeon & Davies 1993). Generally it has been convenient to adopt a
modified unit-vector approach:
7l ||^ ll+ < 5 c

introducing a pseudo-sliding-mode where 71 > 1 and 8C > 0 are constant (Ambrosino, Celantano &
Garofalo 1984, Burton & Zinober 1986, Spurgeon & Davies 1993). This results in a constant boundary
layer (Spurgeon & Davies 1993)
around the sliding-mode, which is ultimately entered after finite time. In particular for systems with
constant bounded uncertainty ||F|| < / = const. (G i = 0), the control could be modified to be
globally Lipschitz.
Example 2.3 If as initially assumed the pendulum mass of (2.8) is exactly measured, no input uncer
tainty is introduced, which allows a sliding mode control to be designed using the linear, uncertain
system of (2.9):
—[0.25 0.9]x —0.605sign (</>), <f = 0.5:ri + x<i-
The non-linear component compensates for the constant bounded uncertainty, while the linear part
deals with the small uncertainty of the damping b. The control can be changed to
u(t) = -[0.25 0 .9 ]x - 1.1
101+0 0.1
- 0.5
- 1.5
- 2 -5,
15
time [si time [si
(a) xi(<) = 9(t) (b) Control signal
Figure 2.3: Pseudo-sliding-mode-control for inverted pendulum
to prevent chattering and to render the control to be globally Lipschitz (Figure 2.3). Observe for the
current choice of the linear control part with poles at {—0.5, —0.5} considering (2.9), the non-linear
control is necessary for closed loop stability, which shows that constant bounded uncertainty can be
destabilizing. A
A different globally Lipschitz control is used in Chapter 3 to treat a more general class of uncertainty
also considering G i 0.
It is seen that sliding-mode based systems can provide performance and robustness while the control
is Lipschitz-continuous and therefore does not need to show high frequency chattering. These control
laws also satisfy the class of systems and controls introduced with Assumption 2.1a-2.3a. Thus as the
next step, some characteristics of discretization of such control systems are pointed out.
2.3 Discretization via sample-and-hold elements
Hybrid control systems as depicted with Figure 2.1 operate in two different domains, in the space of
piecewise continuous vector valued functions Cp and in the space of vector valued sequences 6 . The
two spaces are joined via the sample-operator S T and the zero-order hold H T. Thus, the sample element
S T is an operator in
ST : Cp -> 6 ,
so that for constant sampling-time r > 0
v = S Ty <=* v(t) = lim y (t) = y (tr_), i = 0 ,1, 2,3..., r > 0, (2.23)

t —n r —
while the hold H r element satisfies:
H r : S -> Cp
and
V t € (ir, (i + l)r] : u(i) = z (i), i = 0,1,2,3...,
u = H r z <=> (2.24)
u(t = 0) = 0.
Observe that the operator (S TH T) is the unit delay in 6 , which is due to the definition of the sample and
hold element (2.23,2.24) initially suggested by Francis & Georgiou (1988). The definition implicitly
considers the issue of computational delay, which is here infinitely small, however, resulting in (S TH T)
to be the unit delay. This definition contrasts to formulation using the interval 1) f°r the hold
element H r instead of (tt, f*+i] which would demand the impractical procedure that measurement and
control calculation are carried out at the same time instant U. Thus, the definition of H r from (2.24)
is preferred throughout the thesis. An exemption will be given in Chapters 6 and 7, which will also be
justified from a practical point of view.
y(t).\'(t,y)
10x 20t time
Figure 2.4: Discretization of a continuous-time signal with sample-and-hold element
The time-varying operator (HTS T) is of main interest for the analysis of discretized control laws in
the continuous-time domain. That this element is time-varying can be best analyzed by rewriting the
operator H TS Ty:
H TS Ty ( t ) = y (t - s(t)), t > 0 (2.25)
using a scalar time-varying function s(t):
s(t) = (t - ir), t € ( i t , ( i -I- l)r], t > 0 . (2.26)
Since the sample-and-hold process for a signal y(t) is often considered,it is helpful to use the abbrevi
ation:
yA/T(«,y) “=f HTsTy(t) (2.27)
where the discretized signal y A/r is derived from y in a time-varying operation. In particular, the
difference signal of discretized signal y A/ T(£, y) and y (t)
Ay/rd- yA/r (*>y) - yW (2-28>

C h a p t e r 2 . S a m p l e d - da ta c o n t r o l l e r im p l e m e n t a t io n s 21
will be investigated. This signal Ay/T is also called the sampling residual of y(t). As only in hybrid
control systems with multiple sampling rates the sampling-time r is not unique, for simple single rate
systems the sampling-time can be omitted and short forms such as y A or Ay are preferred.
It is important to note that for a function f (y) : Rp —>Rn continuous in y , the following holds
f ( y A/T(«,y)) = f A/TM ( y ) ) - (2.29)
Lipschitz-continuous functions f satisfy for global Lipschitz constant /Cf:
f A/W ( y ) ) - f ( y ) < K t y A/T(<,y) - y(t) (2.30)
Further, if y (t) is limited to be a continuous function y( ) £ C°, then y (ir) = y (ir_ ), i = 0 ,1,2,...,
and :
V* € (f*,*i+i] : y A/T(^,y) = y(ti), y A /r(f = 0,y ) = 0, ti = i r , i = 0 ,1 ,2,3 ,... (2.31)
using the definition of the sample and hold operators (2.23,2.24). Generally, the discretization of system
states or other related signals, which are continuous in time t are considered, so that (2.31) applies.
As Lipschitz properties are expected to hold for the control laws of interest, the relations (2.28-2.31)
are useful for the analysis of the inter-sampling behaviour. In this thesis, it is preferred to investigate
system stability in the continuous-time domain of Cp via fast sampling techniques which allows con
sideration of both inter-sampling behaviour and effects at sampling instants. However, much research
has been done on discrete-time analysis in 6 , in particular for sliding-mode systems. The following
section will explain why fast-sampling can be a feasible solution in comparison to discrete-time designs
of sliding-mode controls.
2.4 Controller discretization versus discrete design: A variable structure control view
point
With the emergence of sliding-mode control as a robust control technique (Itkis 1976), issues of im
plementation of the discontinuous control laws soon lead to work on sliding-mode-control for dis
crete systems and the sampled-data implementation of sliding-mode-controls for continuous-time plants
(Milosavljevic 1985, Sarpturk, Istefanopulous & Kaynak 1987, Magana & Zak 1988). Milosavljevic
(1985) and Sarpturk et al. (1987) were the first to point out certain characteristics for discrete systems
and the robustness of sliding-modes and the existence of a control achieving sliding-motion. A discrete
system:
x(i + 1) = $x(i) + Hu{i) + lfv (t), x £ Rn , $ £ Rnxn , i = 0 ,1, 2,... (2.32)
with actuators u(i) £ Rm, full rank matrix H G Rnxm and matched disturbance or uncertainty v(z) is
invariant to the matched uncertainty if ideal sliding motion on a sliding plane
S = {x G Rn : <f){i) = Sx} , S G Rmxn, S H non-singular, \ fa ... <pm]T

C h a p t e r 2 . S a m p l e d - d a t a c o n t r o l l e r im p l e m e n t a t io n s 22
is assured. The equivalent control keeping sliding-motion <£(i + l ) = 0 ( i ) = Owould be
Ue,(t) = - ( S H r 1 (5f#x(») + S H \ ( i ) ) . (2.33)
However for discrete-time systems, it is not possible to achieve sliding motion using a non-linear control
to counteract unknown uncertainty with known bounds. Thus, the concept of quasi-sliding motion has
been introduced, which requires that the control satisfies after finite time:
+ 1) - <f>k(i)) < 0 , k = 1 , 2 , . . , m .
Since this does not satisfy stable convergence of the states to the sliding plane, the idea of a convergent
quasi-sliding regime was used to demand:
\4>k (i + 1)| < \<f>k(i)\. (2.34)
Some implications of the idea of quasi-sliding regimes pointed out by Sarpturk et al. (1987) and Kotta
(1989) are best explained with respect to single input systems (m = 1) using a switched control:
u+(i), <p(i) > 0
u=< u~(i), 4>(i) < 0 ,m = l
0, otherwise
which represents a large class of non-linear sliding-mode controls. The requirement for a convergent
quasi sliding-mode from (2.34) implies:
u eq ~ |^ ^ - | ^ u (0 ^ u eq "1“ J g j j - y u eq ~ ^ U ^ UeQ |g ^ - | ’ 771 = 1. (2.35)
Note that only bounds are generally known for the uncertainty within the equivalent control u eq of
(2.33). This shows that the non-linear gains used for u +(i) or u~(i) need to have lower and upper
bounds dependent on the system dynamics (ueq, H ), the choice of the sliding motion S and the un
certainty. This mainly contrasts to continuous-time sliding-mode concepts, where the dynamics of the
sliding-mode reaching phase and the sliding motion can be chosen independently and are not con
strained by the magnitude of matched uncertainty. The concepts of Sarpturk et al. (1987) and Kotta
(1989) have been extended by Sira-Ramirez (1997) showing for non-linear systems that a switched
control has to satisfy locally in a small vicinity of the sliding mode 0 = 0:
u~ < u eq < u +. (2.36)
Westphal (1999) has pointed out that it is not easily possible to satisfy these constraints by showing that
a numerical example of Sarpturk et al. (1987) is not valid; the designed quasi-sliding mode controller
is not stable for all initial states despite the fact that (2.36) is satisfied. This stresses the local nature of
the requirement (2.36).
Not every discrete-time sliding-mode control concept uses a convergent quasi-sliding-mode to

counteract matched uncertainty. However, it has been found that the mutual constraint between the
chosen control dynamics, the system dynamics and the bound on the uncertainty remains an impor
tant issue also for other discrete sliding-mode based approaches. In particular, state feedback-based
methods show this characteristic.
2.4.1 State-feedback control methods with bounded uncertainty
An approach employing a multi-input, unit vector control element for a linear discrete system of (2.32):
has been investigated by Magana & Zak (1988) for a Lyapunov matrix P with (p\ + p 2 ||x*.||), the
upper bound of the matched uncertainty. For robust stability, the gain p2 has to be smaller than a given
bound dependent on the nominal closed loop behaviour. Robustness margins for matched uncertainty
within systems as from (2.32) were increased by Spurgeon (1992) using a linear state feedback control
element based on the equivalent control. Yang & Tomizuka (1990) use a non-linear single input control
which is also derived via two bounds, an upper and lower limit for the non-linear control.
The idea of a sector shaped layer for the sliding mode in discrete-time systems of (2.32) was intro
duced by Furuta (1990) for a single input plant employing a state feedback control law. In Furuta &
Pan (1995), this layer is given by
S F = {x G R n : x TPiX < x r P2x} (2.37)
describing a sector for positive semi-definite matrices Pi and P2, while the sliding mode would be given
by P x2x = 0. The control law changes structure along the boundary x r P ix = x TP2x of S F, forcing
the states into the layer S F where the behaviour is chosen to be stable. Design methodologies of the
sector S F have been based on LQG-methods, defining an ‘optimal’ sliding sector (Pan & Furuta 1993,
Suzuki, Pan & Furuta 1996). This does not necessarily create a sector S F which can be interpreted
as a small boundary of the sliding mode. Thus, this control concept does not necessarily create a
i
sliding-mode like behaviour, the reaching of a small vicinity of the sliding plane P f x = 0. Robustness
of this control is also provided through implicitly raised bounds on the parametric uncertainty (Pan
& Furuta 1995). Extensions of this state-feedback methodology to discrete SISO schemes have been
suggested (Suzuki & Furuta 1996, Suzuki et al. 1996), while Wang, Lee & Yang (1996) employ sectors
within variable structure techniques for multi-input systems.
Sliding-mode control schemes cannot always assume the existence of a state measurement for con
trol, which makes it necessary to discuss the issue of output feedback schemes. One option within state
space analysis methods is to introduce an observer, which shall be discussed next.
C h a p t e r 2 . S a m p l e d - d a ta c o n t r o l l e r im p l e m e n t a t io n s 24
2.4.2 Observer-based schemes
The development of robust discrete-time observer-based schemes is still an important area of research.
As in state-feedback control systems, observer based sliding mode control schemes have to take account
of the limitations with respect to uncertainty and disturbance bounds. However, the availability of
output-information only:
C7x(*), C e Rpxn
also limits the class of parametric uncertainty which can be counteracted and to which a sliding-mode
control system is invariant. As in continuous-time observer schemes, a sliding mode for non-linear
observers is defined by C (x - x) = 0 for observer state x. For instance, Koshkouei & Zinober (1996)
investigate a non-linear observer within a control scheme for a SISO-plant as from (2.32) (p = m =
1) and with output measurement Cx. They consider uncertainty which depends only on the output
estimation error C (x —x). The robustness of the ideal sliding-mode assuming exact reaching is proved
by Aitken & Schwartz (1995), while the local existence of quasi-sliding for the non-linear observer is
discussed with respect to the system without uncertainty. In contrast, Misawa (1995) use a full order
Luenberger-observer to estimate states one step ahead for compensation of delays. The considered
uncertainty is constant bounded.
On the other hand, in continuous-time systems, robust observer based control schemes have in
cluded uncertainty which can take account of a wider class of parametric uncertainty; Edwards &
Spurgeon (1994a) show invariance of their observer-based control to matched uncertainty depending
on the output measurement C x and matched uncertainty with constant bound. Thus, it has been seen
for discrete time control that analysis of robustness associated with matched, bounded uncertainty or
disturbances is always subject to additional constraints. One method to relax limits for the uncertainty
bound rely on slowly varying disturbances. Further, discrete-time systems lend themselves easily to
adaptive control schemes and output feedback analysis via auto-regressive models. These issues are
discussed next.
2.4.3 Slowly varying disturbances and adaptive control schemes
The assumption of slowly varying matched disturbances v(z) can be of merit to control schemes based
on state space methods or also to adaptive control schemes (Chan 1998). For instance, Chan (1994) has
derived a simple controller for a linear uncertain system as from (2.32) using a Schur-stable matrix II
and past state values:
u(i) = u ( i - l ) + ( 5 i? ) - 1 [ - 5 $ ( x ( i ) - x ( t - l ) ) - ( / - n ) 5 ' x ( i ) ]
=► S x (i + 1) = IIS x(i + 1) + S H (v (i) — v(i —1)),

which is stable and practically feasible if ||v(i) —v(t —1) || « 1. Clearly, such control schemes are only
valid if the control acts much faster than the expected disturbance and the uncertainty and disturbances
are sufficiently smooth functions of time. Note that this is not a necessary requirement for continuous
sliding-mode schemes where generally parametric and constant bounded uncertainty are allowed to be
discontinuous functions of time as seen with Assumption 2.1a.
Linear systems where the system matrix or input distribution matrix are partially or fully unknown
have been controlled via adaptive sliding mode techniques by Chen & Fukuda (1999) or Chan (1999a).
Faster time-varying uncertainty or non-linearities are only allowed to be of very small value (Won &
Hedrick 1995, Chen & Fukuda 1998). On the other hand, adaptive control schemes lend themselves eas
ily to control schemes where no state space representations of the plant are known and auto-regressive
models can be used for control (Kaynak & Denker 1993, Chan 1999b).
Considering the application of discrete-time adaptive and predictive control schemes to continuous
time systems, it is understood that the sampling-time r has to act as a parameter. Only if the sampling
time r is chosen small, disturbances can be assumed to be slowly changing and parameter prediction
can be appropriately carried out. The application to continuous-time plants also has implications with
respect to inter-sampling behaviour and for the discrete-time model as the counterpart of a continuous
time model.
2.4.4 Application to continuous-time plants
Sarpturk et al. (1987) were the first to point out issues of design of discrete-time sliding-mode control
systems for continuous-time plants. By remarking that for decreasing sampling-time r , one of the
respective bounds of u+ and u" in (2.35) vanishes and approaches the continuous-time case, Sarpturk
et al. (1987) indicated that the sampling-time is an important parameter in the derivation of a discrete
model and a control. However, Sarpturk et al. (1987) did not explain in what ways a linear uncertain
discrete-time model as in (2.32) is derived from the respective continuous-time differential equation
which can include uncertainties and non-linearities.
As mentioned before, the derivation of exact or approximate discrete models is non-trivial in partic
ular if non-linear uncertainty is involved. Tesfaye & Tomizuka (1995) solved this problem by limiting
the model to be linear, time-invariant:
x = {A + B A a ) x + (B + B A b )u + Bd{t), A e Mnxn, B <E Rnxm , d{t) : R -> Rm
so that parametric and input uncertainty € Rmxn and A # E l mxm are constant as well, while the
external disturbance d(t) has to be assumed to be piecewise constant and in particular constant over
each sampling interval. It was emphasized that despite the fact that all uncertainty and disturbances in
C h a p t e r 2. S a m p l e d - d a ta c o n t r o l l e r im p l e m e n t a t io n s 26
the continuous-time model are matched, the discrete-time model for constant sampling time r:
x((i + l) r ) = e('A+BAA^Tx.(ir) + f eÂ+BAA^sds(B -I- B A b )(u (2t ) -I- d (ir+ ))

Jo
may also exhibit un-matched uncertainty. However, with the assumptions above, Tesfaye & Tomizuka
(1995) derived that for small sampling time r , it is sufficient to investigate for $ = eAr and H =
f j eAsB ds a model as in (2.32) where v(i) would represent the parametric and input uncertainty B A a
and B A b as well as the disturbance vector d. For this set-up, the control of Tesfaye & Tomizuka (1995)
provides a robust stability result, also considering inter-sample behaviour.
A linear time-invariant model is also widely used when investigating the existence of quasi sliding-
motion or related concepts of discrete control systems in application to continuous-time systems. Thus,
Yu & Potts (1991) investigate a single-input continuous-time system pair (A ,B ) and respectively a
discrete-time system (2.32) without disturbance or uncertainty (v(i) = 0). They give for a simple
single-input control:
u(i) = jK(x(i))Tx(i)
with switched gain vector K (x) : Rn —>• Rn a sufficient upper bound for r so that a quasi-sliding
motion within the hybrid control system exists. Similar approaches are used by Gao, Wang & Homaifa
(1995) or Yu (1993) for a single-input control containing the signum-function to prove pseudo-sliding,
showing that the states enter ultimately a constant boundary layer |5 x | < e (e > 0) after finite time.
Slowly varying matched uncertainty within linear continuous-time systems has been considered
(Su, Drakunov & Ozgiiner 1993, Su, Drakunov & Ozgiiner 2000) incorporating a disturbance estimate
into a linear control employing the equivalent control concept:
u(i) = —{ S H )~ l S ($ x (i) + v(i — 1)),
where the past value v (i — 1) can be calculated exactly using the state values. It is proved that under
limiting assumptions on the derivative of the continuous-time matched disturbance, pseudo-sliding mo
tion (115x11 < e) is achieved for small enough sampling time while the boundary layer width 2e is of
order T 2 (^ < OO).
As emphasized before, continuous-time sliding mode control schemes do not require the limiting
assumptions on the magnitude of the uncertainty bounds and non-linear gains. This is particularly use
ful since uncertainties and in particular non-linearities bear a ‘certainty’ with respect to their bounds.
The knowledge about a non-linearity with uncertain parameters defines an upper bound which cannot
be modified or decreased. Further, Assumption 2.1a allows uncertainty and disturbances to be discon
tinuous functions of time t. The bounds of the uncertainty enable an estimate to be made of how fast
a discontinuity of the disturbance can affect the system state, so that the discretized control can com
pensate for this effect. This knowledge has also been indirectly used by Itkis (1976), when discretizing
single-input sliding-mode control laws counteracting bounded parametric uncertainty. In particular,

the issues of discontinuity of the disturbance are not easily represented in discrete time. In contrast,
a framework of continuous-time sliding-mode controls and observers has been developed (Edwards &
Spurgeon 1998) for a large class of uncertainty and non-linearities within linear uncertain systems of
(2.2). It will be seen that the control laws of Edwards & Spurgeon (1998) can be easily extended to other
problems. Thus, the discretization of continuous-time sliding-mode based controls via fast-sampling
analysis is a relevant and practical option for sampled-data control implementations. Therefore in the
following, work in the area of linear and non-linear discretized and sampled-data control systems will
be investigated.
2.5 Approaches to controller discretization
Intuitively, a discretized control should recover stability if the sampling time r is chosen small enough.
Using this as an implicit assumption, control systems have been implemented in practice. Rigorous
proofs of this claim have been given for linear time-invariant systems by Chen & Francis (1991) and
for non-linear systems (Clarke et al. 1997, Hsu & Sastry 1987), while Itkis (1976) is one of the earliest
research workers using fast sampling techniques for non-linear, stability analysis. Linear time-invariant
systems bear a high flexibility so that not only stability but also performance and robustness can be
shown to be recovered if the sampling-time r is chosen small enough. These issues and related problems
of discretized controllers and plants will be discussed with respect to linear systems.
2.5.1 Discretization of linear control laws
Problems related to the use of sampled-data controllers for continuous-time plants are controllability
and observability of discretized systems. Kimura (1990) found a necessary and sufficient condition so
that a strictly proper linear time-invariant system
P : x = Ax + Hu, y = Cx, A G Mnxn, B G Rnxm, C G Rpxn (2.38)
remains reachable or observable after discretization STP H T provided the continuous-time system is. A
u (t)
Figure 2.5: Discretized plant
sufficient condition is given if there are no eigenvalues of $ = erA with equal real part and imaginary
part differing by an integral multiple of ^r. Thus, fast enough sampling can recover reachability or
observability. This ‘fast sampling’-result is also indirectly proved by discretizing linear controls using
a sufficiently small sampling time r.
Internal stability of a hybrid control system as from Figure 2.1 with linear time-invariant continuous
plant and linear time-invariant discrete control:
P : xp(£) = A p xp (t) -1- B p u(t) K & : x.Ke{i + 1) = $ x Ke{i) + H v(i)
y(t) = C p xp (t) + D p u(t) z (i) = C K&x Ke{i) -1- D K&\( i ) (2.39)
u{t) = H Tz v(i) - STy
has been found to be equivalent to stability at the sampling instants ti = ir (Francis & Georgiou 1988):
\\X-hybrid{t) II — ||x /iy6rid(0) WPp 6 X p (—Ocpt) •<=> IlS rX /iy & rtd ^) II ^ 11 (0 ) ll/^/f® ®XP ( —^ K 6 ^) >
XhybrxdW = [ Xp(*)r (HTz{i))T (HTx K e (i + 1))T ]T, otp,(3p,aKe,(3K& > 0 (2.40)
and always implies exponential stability. The vector x.hybrid(t) is a state of the hybrid control system
since any future value within the hybrid control system can be computed if Xhybrid is known. L 0c-
gain stability for suitably introduced exogenous inputs is also a necessary implication from the internal
stability (Francis & Georgiou 1988) of such a hybrid control system, where however general Lp-gain
stability is subject to some extra constraints as discussed below.
The issue of design of sampled-data controllers in application to continuous-time linear systems has
found wide attention and has often concentrated on the design of discrete controls or the re-design of
continuous-time controls for fixed t . Examples of this are given with the work of Yackel, Kuo & Singh
(1974), who developed a methodology so that the sampled-data closed loop matches the plant states of
the continuous-time controlled closed loop system at certain multiples of the sampling time. Later work
concentrated on comparing the closed loop frequency responses (Rattan & Yeh 1978), while optimal
criteria for approximation of the continuous-time control were used by Kleinman & Rao (1977) for
LQG-based re-design and by Keller & Anderson (1992) for Hoo-techniques.
Exact solutions for the Hoo- and ffe-design problems of hybrid linear control systems as de
picted with Figure 2.6 for fixed sampling time r have been found via two methodologies; the lifting
methodology transforms the hybrid control problem into a discrete-time Hoo- and ^-p ro b lem (Chen
& Francis 1995) while Sun et al. (1993) approach the problem from the opposite direction stating the
design problem using continuous-time linear systems with discrete jumps. Related to this problem is
controlled J-O) exogenous

measured u (t) actuator
outputs inputs
Figure 2.6: Linear design problem for a discrete control K e within a sampled-data control system
the investigation of the input-output behaviour of the sample and the hold operator, in particular the
C h a p t e r 2 . S a m p l e d - data c o n t r o l l e r im p l e m e n t a t io n s 29
issue of existence of an induced norm for these operators. Hence, the spaces:
def
K ( 0 ,T ) f : (0, T) —> Rn | f is (Lebesgue) integrable , { [ I W ds < oo > , (2.41)
N
def
^ | | s ( i ) | | p < oo > , p e [l,oo]. (2.42)
\ t= 0
are of interest which define the extended spaces:
L% =f { f € Lp(0,T) f o r all T > 0} , (2.43)
i"e =' {s 6 ip [0, JV] f o r all AT > 0} . (2.44)
The spaces of piecewise continuous functions and sequences with finite L p or Zp-norm
C (M " ) = / t f ’(R n ) n £ " e
epe(®") e{Rn) m ; e.
are then suitable for the sample and the hold operator. Chen & Francis (1991) have shown that the
sample operator ST ■ Cpe —> 6 pe has a finite induced norm only for p = oo, while the hold element
H r : ©pe -* Cpe has an Lp-induced norm of magnitude r 1/p.
The sample-and-hold operator H TS T is similarly problematic to the sample element S T, but it has
been shown that H TST is bounded in combination with a strictly proper, stable linear filter. In partic
ular for a stable time-invariant filter P : (A, B , C) as from (2.38), an Tp-gain relationship holds for
H t S t P : Lpe -» Cpe C Lpe and any T > 0:
l|yA/T(t , y)||P,T T= ( /Q | | u ( t ) f * "
u(t) y (t)
A finite Lp-gain is also associated with the sampling residual of the output y(t) of P : (A, B , C)
l|yA/T(*,y) - y « l l p , r < 7a - /( A ,B ,C ) ||u W ||p,t + ^ a - / ( ^ , B , C , x ( 0)). (2.46)
Chen & Francis (1991) have shown by calculating explicit upper bounds for 7a - / and Pa - i that the
bias term and the gain vanish for r -> 0+:
Thus, the Lp-gain 7a(A , B ,C ) of (2.45) converges for r —>■0+ towards the Lp-gain associated with
the continuous-time system P : Lpe Lpe. This also implies that performance and robusmess of
discretized continuous-time controllers K c can be recovered if the sampling time r is decreasing. In
particular for a hybrid control system as in Figure 2.7, stability and robusmess is recovered if the dis
cretized controller STK CH T has been originally derived from a strictly proper stabilizing control and the
transfer function from [wa w& u] to y is strictly proper. Lifting techniques can be used to investigate, for
u n c e r t a in t
*,(t) w/r;
1(0 u(t)
Figure 2.7: Robust stability of discretized hybrid systems considering a discretized control S TK CH T
a given sampling time r, the H qq-robusmess of this configuration. Thus, Chen & Francis (1995) have
shown in their treatment of linear sampled data control systems the close relation of techniques used for
solving optimal hybrid-control problems to -analysis methods for discretized continuous controls.
These methodologies have been extended to linear time-varying systems (Iglesias 1995, Iglesias 1997).
It has been seen that linear system theory readily allows the investigation of sampled-data im
plementations not only with respect to stability but also considering robusmess. For Lp-gain related
techniques, this advantage has been identified with the finite gain of H TS TP. In non-linear systems,
this approach could introduce simple solutions to robust stability as will be seen in Chapter 7. However
generally, this concept has not found a generalization yet, which mostly resulted in the analysis of the
closed loop using continuous-time Lyapunov functions. An overview on this issue will be given in the
next section.
2.5.2 Discretization of non-linear control laws
It has been already emphasized that, within non-linear, hybrid control systems, the relation between the
spaces of discrete sequences 6 and control and the space Cp of piecewise continuous-time functions
is non-trivial. The derivation of a discrete model S TP H T for a non-linear affine system with time-
independent drift fti'.
P : x(i) = fti(x) + g(x)u, x £ Mn , fa : Rn ->• , g : Kn —►Rnxm (2.47)

and output vector y = x demands that both drift and input gain g are infinitely often differentiable. A
Lie-algebraic model (Monaco & Normand-Cyrot 1985) is
Ui
U2
S TP H T : x(»+ l) = ~ ( Lf + ut{i)Lgl ) (x (t))+ x (i), u = 6 [gl 62 ' ' ’ 6m]
j= i i=i
Um
(2.48)
where
(x)
dXi Sin
Z -fh (x ) = f(x ), h (x ) :
6hk(x) £Mx)
6x i <5ln
However, a model P may not satisfy these constraints or also be time-dependent.

Another issue is that a control stabilizing the discrete model (2.48) may not imply stability of the
hybrid system. On the other hand, stability analysis based on a discrete model has been carried out for
particular examples such as a tracking control for an induction motor by Ortega & Taoutaou (1996) or a
low gain integral tracking control for linear systems with input and output non-linearities only (Fliegner,
Logemann & Ryan 1999). A general approach to stability of hybrid systems has been given by Nesic,
Teel & Sontag (1999) for a system as from Figure 2.1 and given by:
P : x P{t) = fp(t, x P {t), u(f)) K 6 : x Ke (* + 1) = fK&(*» (*)> v (*))
y (t) = h p (x P (t),u (t)) z(i) = h Ke (x K6 (i),v (i))
u(t) = H Tz v(i) = S Ty
with hybrid state x hybri(i{t) = [ x P{t)T (HTz{i))T (H Tx Ke(i + 1))T ]T already known for the
linear hybrid control system of (2.39). Necessary and sufficient conditions have been found so that
asymptotic stability with respect to 5,T(x/lJ/br^)(*) implies asymptotic stability for x^y^^ff):
||x /iy6rtd(f)|| 5; '7(llx /iy& rtd(fi)||)5 f “1“ (2.49)
where 7 ( ) : R+ U {0} -> E+ U {0} is a continuous, unbounded and strictly increasing function with
7 (0) = 0. The theory has been also extended to the relation between discrete and hybrid system stability
with respect to exponential stability and Loo-gain input-to-state stability for suitable exogenous inputs.
Nevertheless, the application of Nesic, Teel & Sontag’s (1999) extension of linear theory of (2.40)
subject to (2.49) is often dependent on a small enough sampling time (2.49) which is based on two
issues. Ayels & Peuteman (1998) analyze a control at discrete instants to derive asymptotic decay to the
equilibrium of a Lyapunov function at those instants while satisfying a relation similar to (2.49). The
respective example demands the distance between the discrete instants small enough for the Lyapunov
function to decay from one sampling instant to the next. Another point raised is the discrete model
which is used for designing the control. The use of an approximate discrete model may be preferred
to circumvent the computation of an exact model as it has already been discussed for a more simple
approach within Section 2.4.4. A more general approach to the validity of approximated discretized
models for x = f (x, u) has been provided by Ne§ic, Teel & Kokotovic (1999). Asymptotic stability of a
control for a discrete approximated model implies ultimate bounded stability of this control for the exact
model discretization provided the exact and approximate models satisfy a mutual consistency measure.
Such consistency has been provided for certain cases if the sampling time r is small. Examples prove
that the consistency of exact and approximate models can provide a control which is advantageous over
a discretized continuous-time control with respect to the size of the region of attraction. However, it
is also shown that a control derived from an approximate model may not imply stability for the exact
system. The interest of discretizing continuous-time control laws is apparent after this discussion.
Approximate models can also be advantageous when analyzing discrete implementations of
continuous-time control laws (Guilaume, Bastin & Campion 1994, Guilaume, B astin & Campion 1995).
Lower order terms of the Lie algebraic series of the exact model (2.48) and of the Taylor series of a
continuous-time, linearizing state-feedback control are used to calculate the respective sampled-data
implementation r r_ 1uM, which approximates up to the degree r a feedback linearization for the
discrete model. This can be advantageous over the simple zero-order hold discretization with respect to
convergence behaviour if the sampling time r is chosen small. Nevertheless, continuous-time control
laws are often not necessarily differentiable but Lipschitz-continuous or only continuous as the intro
duced sliding-mode-like control laws of Section 2.2.1. Thus, the simpler concept of zero-order hold
discretization is required.
Despite the possibility to analyze discretized continuous-time control laws as Guilaume et al. (1995)
at discrete sampling instants, it does not seem to be practical for the general case and analysis has
therefore generally resided in the continuous-time domain. Existence theorems for discretized control
laws have therefore used a continuous-time Lyapunov function which suits the continuous-time control
law. A very general perspective is presented by Clarke et al. (1997) who do not assess a continuous-time
control but investigate a system:
x = f(x, u), f : Rn x u -> r (2.50)
under the assumption of asymptotic controllability for continuous f with local Lipschitz continuity in x
and assuming a locally compact metric space U. Asymptotic controllability is satisfied for such systems
if
3 u (t) => lim x(f) = 0

t-¥O Q
Ve38 > 0 : \\x(t = 0)|| < 8 => ||x(f)|| |t>0 < £
and if x (t = 0) € N is in a neighborhood N of 0 then for almost all t the control u (t) G Uq is

within a compact set Uq C U implying bounded control values. Thus, not one particular control but
a whole class of controls is investigated where at least one possible control asymptoticallystabilizes
the origin for given initial state x{t = 0). Control-Lyapunov functions Vc//(x), which always exist for
asymptotically controllable systems (Clarke et al. 1997), are used for the stability analysis:
Vd /(x ) > 0|xô, Vc//(0) = 0, Vc//(x ) : Rn -> R
V/3 > 0 3M > 0 : x G {x : Vci/(x) < (3} => ||x|| < M
and in case the Control-Lyapunov function is differentiable, it satisfies:
VNSU oCU : inf < - W d / (x), W d /M > 0|x#o, % ( x ) : R" E (2.51)

u€Wo OX
for continuous Wc//(x). The important point of the analysis is that the value
mrr = inf Wc//(x ), 0 < r < R

r< ||x ||< A
remains positive for any pair [r, i?]. It is then always possible to pick a control Uj at the time instants U
that satisfies
5Vdf (x(ti))
f(x(fi),Ui) < - m r,R
if r < ||x(ti)|| < R. For small enough interval [£*, U+\], the continuity and Lipschitz continuity of
f( x ,u ) ascertain for k G (0,1)
— — f(x(fr) , u i) < - m r>R => Vcif { x (t)) -V cif{x{ti)) < - ( 1 -K )m r tR ( t-ti), t G
Thus, there exists a finite interval so that the Control-Lyapunov function remains strictly decreas
ing at least for finite duration. There are then two sets = {x : V^/(x) < i?r } and IIt?JR =
{x : Vc//(x) < with = sup||x||_r Vc//(x) and “d R = inf||X||-# Vc//(x) for which II^k is an
invariant set and Il0r is ultimately entered after finite time for any trajectory starting within n^*.
The sampling time r has to be chosen small enough r < f and the upper bound f(r, R) > 0 of
r is then a function of 0 < r < R. This result can be rendered to be global if the sampling
time r is not constant but dependent on the state x (^ ) at the sampling instant. Suitable sequences
0 < rk < Rk with limfc_>_00 R k = lim ^ -o o rk = 0 and lim * .^ R k = lim ô o rk = oo defining
sequences of nested sets I I ^ and II^rjt are chosen to calculate f ( r k, R k). It is therefore possible that
inf_00<A;<oo T(rfc, R k) = 0 to achieve a global stability result. This has been also emphasized by Grime
(1999) giving an example of an asymptotically stabilizing control for which the discretization has to
satisfy \imk-+-.00f ( r k, R k) = 0 to achieve asymptotic stability of the origin. Nevertheless, it must
be noted that the Control-Lyapunov function which results from an asymptotically controllable system
may not be differentiable, which actually demands a much more elaborate framework of non-smooth
analysis for (2.51) and for all the respective implications (Clarke et al. 1997).
Owens, Zheng & Billings (1990) established a result with respect to exponential controllability of
a system x = f (x(£), u) as (2.50) but for
u = x A/ T(t,x ),
for continuous and not necessarily Lipschitz-continuous function f and with respect to a quadratic,
differentiable Lyapunov function
V,„a<i(x) = x TP x , P e Rnx", P > 0.
As in Clarke et al. (1997), it is expected that r < ||x(£j)|| < R to prove that from V(fi) < —czV(t{) at
the sampling instants tt = ir an inequality V(t) < —( l —K)csV(t) follows fo rt E [U, f*+r], 0 < k <1
and small enough sampling-time r. The upper bound f( r, R ) is also here a function in particular of
r. Markechko & Rybashov (1989) prove similar results to, however, more restricted systems, while
extensions to special cases have been given by Grime (2000).
The presented approaches to the existence of a stabilizing discretized control are, nevertheless,
impractical for the derivation of applicable sampling frequencies 1 /r. It is therefore useful to limit
the very general class of non-linear systems of (2.50) via some extra conditions to arrive at theoretical
approaches which are also practical. Mainly these conditions are Lipschitz continuity of f(x, u) in u
and of a continuous-time control u c (x) in x. For the non-linear affine systems (2.1) of interest within
this thesis, these two conditions have been also raised with Assumption 2.3 of Section 2.2 and the
bounding constraint on the input gain. A third condition is often Lipschitz continuity of f(x, u) in x.
For systems of this type, Teel, Nesic & Kokotovic (1998) exploit the time-varying characteristics of
a discretized, asymptotically stabilizing control u A/T(f, u c ) as indicated with (2.25-2.26) to derive an
upper bound f for the sampling time r and also to consider Loo-gain input-to-state-stability for suitable
exogenous inputs.
Hsu & Sastry (1987) and also Djenoune, El-Moudni & Zerhouni (1998) investigate non-linear affine
systems as in (2.1) with, however, time-independent drift f. Exponentially stabilizing controls are
discretized under conditions, which correspond to the more stringent set of Assumptions 2.1b-2.3b. This
implies the existence of a Lyapunov function as from Assumptions 2.1a (C5 = 0). In these approaches,
the sampled-data controlled system:
x(f) = f(t,x ) + g(x)uA /r(f,u c ) = f(f,x ) + g (x ) u c (x) + g (x )A uC/T
is investigated with respect to the sampling residual || A uc/ T\\ and an upper bound is derived:
I|A uc/t || < t £ a ||x(t)H (2.52)

for some positive scalar K A . Considering a Lyapunov function analysis using Assumptions 2.2a, the
upper bound of (2.52) and the continuous-time closed loop terms f(t,x ) -1- g(x)uc (x) can establish
exponential stability:
dV (t,x(t)) SV 6V 8V
+ ~8x ( f + guA/T) - - c3llx WII2 + t
||g||/CA ||x(t)||
dt 8t Sx
< (c3 - t c 4^/C a)||x(f)||2 < -( 1 - /s)c3||x(f)||2 < -( 1 - «) —V (f,x(f)),

C2
for small enough sampling-time r < C4g ^ A (« € (0,1)). The important point of the assumptions
enforced now is that the upper bound f of the sampling-time is not dependent on a scalar r. Provided
the Lipschitz conditions are global then f is also not dependent on R. A similar framework is developed
by Itkis (1976) to derive an upper bound for || Ax/ r || within a single-input, quasi-sliding mode control
system counteracting parametric uncertainty.
The class of non-linear affine systems with Assumptions 2.1b-2.3b also allows to investigate sampled-
data implementations involving delays A r (Hsu & Sastry 1987) when applying a discretized control:
u (t) = uA/r( t - A T,u c )
Delays 0 < A T(f) < r can occur when computing in practice the next control value and are due to the
limitations of measurement, microprocessor and actuator equipment. This also implies that the delay
AT(t) is not constant in practice but a function of time t. Hsu & Sastry (1987) establish a result by
proving
u A / r (t - Ar, u c ) - u c {x{t)) < t K A u ||x (t) ||, /CAu > 0
for Lipschitz-continuous drift f. This result is extended within this thesis to systems which satisfy
Assumptions 2.1a-2.3a, but do not require the Lipschitz continuity of f in x.
The main problems with static feedback control laws as considered within the latter two paragraphs
is that they generally do not allow to consider tracking requirements or demand the availability of a
large part of the plant states. Hence, the discretization of dynamical control feedbacks is of practical and
theoretical interest. The application of the latter explained discretization approaches to exponentially
stabilizing dynamical feedback systems is from a theoretical point of view trivial and will be given in
Chapter 5. In contrast, Hsu & Sastry (1987) investigate an asymptotically stabilizing continuous-time
dynamic control which is implemented using the Euler approximation. Under some mild Lipschitz
conditions mainly on the derivative of the combined Lyapunov function for plant and continuous-time
dynamic control an upper bound f(r, R) > r for the sampling time is derived giving also a semi-
global result; a compact set is invariant with respect to the hybrid state and a set II^r is ultimately
entered, while f (r, R) is a function of 0 < r < R. However, large scale dynamical control systems
may require a more effective analysis idea. Within Chapter 7, an approach based on a generalized
C h a p t e r 2. S a m p l e d - d a ta c o n t r o l l e r im p l e m e n t a t io n s 36
Z/p-norm is presented, which allows, in particular for complex dynamical controllers of linear uncertain
systems, the computation of suitable control implementations with even multiple sampling times within
the control.
2.6 Summary
An overview of the systems and continuous-time control laws of interest has been given. Non-linear
affine systems with bounded input gain were identified as the generic class of systems which is used
to exemplify discretization analysis techniques for exponentially stabilizing and Lipschitz-continuous
control laws.
The systems which are within this thesis of practical interest are linear uncertain systems and robust
control laws which are derived from sliding-mode control concepts. The basic principles and important
characteristics of sliding mode control have been presented under the simplifying assumption of state-
feedback. Subsequently, schemes preventing chattering and rendering a discontinuous sliding mode
control to be Lipschitz-continuous have been given.
A review of work on discrete sliding-mode control and certain aspects of discrete sampled-data
control of continuous plants has clarified advantages of discretization techniques for continuous-time
control systems over the design of discrete control laws. Well-known proofs for the existence of dis
cretized control systems using the fast-sampling technique have been outlined and the main focus of
discretization approaches has been directed towards techniques using the continuous-time Lyapunov
function of the original control law. A fast sampling-result of linear hybrid control systems related to
Lp-norm analysis of the sample-and-hold operator has been identified as promising for application and
generalization to non-linear systems.
In the following chapters, continuous sliding-mode based control systems are extended consider
ing a modified, Lipschitz-continuous state-feedback control and an observer-controller pair for non
minimum phase and relative degree zero systems. For the discretization of these controls, the aim is
to derive mathematical tools to either find sampling frequencies 1/ r as small as possible, to be easily
applicable to practical large scale systems with control dynamics or to consider practical problems such
as computational delays within the sampled-data implementation of a control.
C hapter 3
A sliding-mode-based state-feedback control
3.1 Introduction
In the previous chapter, the class of systems and controls of interest have been specified in particular
with Assumptions 2.1a-2.3a. In this chapter, a non-linear state-feedback control is introduced comply
ing with Assumption 2.1a and 2.3a while a global, however, non-smooth Lyapunov function and the
respective theory is derived at a later stage in Chapter 4.
It has been emphasized in Section 2.2.1, that a disadvantage of practical implementation of sliding
mode control is the chattering of the control signal due to high frequency switching when the states
have reached a small vicinity around the sliding mode. However, another problem related to high
control effort is characterized by a high initial peak when the states are forced onto the sliding mode.
Dynamic sliding mode control has been introduced to prevent chattering (Lu & Spurgeon 1997).
The more simple approach, the introduction of a constant layer around the sliding mode plane (Burton &
Zinober 1986, Spurgeon & Davies 1993, Ryan & Corless 1984) has been presented in Chapter 2, where
the unit vector was modified to include a constant in the denominator and subsequently a constant
boundary layer of the sliding-mode is introduced. In single input systems, this problem is also solved
with using the saturation-fimction (Slotine & Sastry 1983). Alternatively, different layer shapes have
been discussed such as the introduction of cone or sector and parabolic shapes for the boundary layer.
In particular, for single input systems and in practical applications, sector or cone shaped layers have
been suggested by Chem & Wu (1991) and also by DeJager (1992). However, these approaches have
not yet been analyzed rigorously for continuous-time systems and the unit vector approach.
It has been found that other smoothing techniques of the unit-vector control law have been sug
gested by Wu & Mizukami (1993) introducing a sliding-mode layer with the structure of a paraboloid
and a control law singularity at the origin. Further, cone shaped layers have been widely used for
discrete variable structure control (Furuta & Morisada 1989) as discussed in Section 2.4.1. Control
laws adopting this approach by switching along the boundary of the sector layer and not along the
sliding mode plane have long been applied only to discrete-time systems (Pan & Furuta 1993, Wang
C h a p t e r 3. A s l id in g - m o d e - b a se d s t a t e -f e e d b a c k c o n t r o l 38
et al. 1996). Recently, a continuous-time switched, non-Lipschitz control has been suggested by Pan,
Furuta & Hatakeyama (1999) for continuous single input systems.
In contrast, this chapter considers the idea of a cone-shaped layer as a smoothing technique of the
unit-vector based control. The constant term in the denominator of the unit-vector-based pseudo-sliding
mode control (2.21) is rendered to be a linear function of the norm of the system states. The control
is globally Lipschitz while counteracting parametric bounded, constant bounded uncertainty and input
uncertainty. The introduction of the cone-shaped layer has the practical merits of reducing high initial
controller peaks and preventing chattering. A two step approach similar to Ryan & Corless (1984) and
Spurgeon & Davies (1993) is used to show ultimate boundedness. This approach is different to Wu &
Mizukami (1993), whose stability proof does not consider an analysis of the state space structure given
by the sliding mode layer. In the case presented here, this would lead to more conservative constraints.
This chapter first introduces the investigated class of systems, a wider class than the one discussed
for (2.2) in Section 2.2.1 of the introductory Chapter 2. The control law is presented and ultimate
boundedness and sliding mode based performance of the control is then proved. It is also shown,
with the assumption of a reduced class of uncertainty, that the non-linear control can be modified for
asymptotic stability of the closed loop. A numerical example is given at the end of the chapter.
3.2 The considered class of systems
Linear, uncertain systems as from (2.2) shall be considered
x = Ax -I- B n -I- F (t, x) + G(t, x, u )u (3.1)
where x G f , u G Rm and the known matrix pair (A, B) define the nominal linear system, which is
assumed to be controllable with B of full rank. As before, the unknown functions F and G represent
uncertainties, non-linearities and disturbances in the system, while now F + G u belongs to a class of
functions, T , also containing unmatched uncertainty. Thus for each (F + G u) 6 T , the matched and
unmatched uncertainty and disturbance components can be decomposed as
F (f,x ) = F i(f,x )x + F 2(f,x) + G 2(f,x),
F i ( v ) : K x r —>• Rnxn, F 2(-, •) : 1 x Rn -► (1 (B ))1 ,
G(-, v j i R x f x r ^ 1 ( B ) , G 2(-,- ) : R x R n ^ 1 (B ) (3.2)
where the operation (-)1- refers to the orthogonal complement of (•). The uncertainty has well defined
bounds such that
< K F l, ||F2(i,x )|| < JfF j,

(3.3)
l|G (t,x ,u )|| < K g , ||G 2(£,x)|| < K G l.
C h a p t e r 3. A s l id in g - m o d e - b a s e d s t a t e - f e e d b a c k c o n t r o l 39
Here K ? 1, K p 2, K q and K q 2 are known constants and the usual Caratheodory assumptions as with
Assumption 2.1a are made to ensure existence of solution. Thus, F and G are continuous in x and u
for constant t , while they are Lebesgue measurable in t for constant x and u.
Consider as in equation (2.11) a linear transformation T to design the sliding-mode:
Zl
z = Tx (3.4)
<t>
where
0 0 ’ F2 '
TB = , TG = , f (f 2 + g 2) =
b 2 .
g2
’ AE AA 12 E A12
T F iT -1 = , T A T -1= (3.5)
A0 Aft 0 ft
ft, A ft, G i G Rmxm, G 2 G Rm, B 2 € Rmxm is non-singular and E is a Hurwitz-stable design

matrix. The transformed system can be written as:
zi(£) = Ezi(f) + A i 2 <f>{t) + F 2, (3.6)
= 4” A 0 ) zi(f) -+■ (ft + A ft) (p{t) ^^2 + G r^ u 4" G 2, (3.7)
where
S =7 S + A S, A n A n + AA n- (3.8)
The matrices A 0 , Aft represent the parametric matched uncertainty of the system matrix A whilst AE
and A A 12 are the unmatched parametric uncertainties of the system matrix. The matched uncertainty
G i is the non-linearity or uncertainty of the input matrix and the matched and unmatched uncertainties
G 2 and F 2 are disturbances or uncertainties of constant bound.
Rem ark 3.1 The existence of a bound for ||F i (t, x) || implies that the parametric uncertainty F i (£, x)
is contained within a polytopic, convex set, so that in particular E and A 12 can be rewritten as:
*12 ~ ^ ^ == ^ ^ ] Âi2,j = 'y ^ = 1?

j i j i
where the constant matrices A{2 and E1 (j = 1, 2,..., Au12,2 = 1, 2,..., k z) are of the same size as A12
and E and the scalar functions
Â i 2,j{'i •)? ê,z(*5•) : K x Rn —>R U {0}.
o
C h a p t e r 3. A s l id in g - m o d e - b a s e d st a t e - f e e d b a c k c o n t r o l 40
3.3 The non-linear control law
The continuous control law has two parts:
u (*) = u l ( z i + u °n l ( z (3 -9 )
where u£( ) and u ^ L( ) are the linear and the non-linear control components. The non-linear control
component
uSr £ ( »i (t ) , * w ) c’ * e R + - P 2 e R m x m (310)
achieves robusmess by counteracting the matched uncertainties and ensuring reachability of the cone
shaped layer. The linear controller part
u i( z ,( t) > ( t) ) = ' - B J 1 (Q zi(i) + (n - Q')<p(t)) (3.11)
mainly enhances reachability of the cone shaped boundary layer around the ideal sliding mode </> = 0,
where Q* is a Hurwitz-stable design matrix and the positive definite matrix PT (t)p2m , (3,i3)
and a Lyapunov function V\{z\(t)) for the null-space dynamics in (3.6) is
V i{z i{t))d= ^ z i T {t)Pizi{t), (3.14)
where the positive definite matrix Pi 6 R(n-m)x(n-m ) satisfies
A E + ETA = - /( n - m ) . (3-15)
The expression 5(||zi(<)|| + ||^(f)|| + c) has been introduced into the denominator of (3.10) to
prevent chattering. The value of the non-linear control cannot change rapidly around the sliding mode
plane <p(t) = 0. This way of suppressing chattering contrasts to the constant boundary around the
sliding mode as in (2.22) (Ambrosino et al. 1984, Burton & Zinober 1986, Spurgeon & Davies 1993).
The component is not of constant value but it decreases with ||zi(t)|| -1- ||0(£)||. This results in a cone
shaped layer. The layer is defined by the set:
S Bs = | z = [zj <Pt }T e r : V2(4>(t)) - <JVi(xi(t)) < £ ^ 2^ 11; {3.16)
where w € IR+ is a small, positive design dependent constant. This approach is also different to (2.37)
of Furuta & Pan (1995). The boundary layer of (3.16) combines boththe constant boundary layer
C h a p t e r 3. A s l id in g - m o d e - b a s e d s t a t e - f e e d b a c k c o n t r o l 41
with the sector boundary layer, so that this combination of boundary shapes can be used for chattering
prevention. It will be proved that the set S b s (3.16) will be ultimately entered.
The parameter c from (3.10,3.16) defines the ultimate bound of the system in a similar manner to
Spurgeon & Davies (1993) for the constant 6 of the non-linear control component. The constant c also
ensures the non-linear control component is non-singular and can be used to prevent chattering. The
parameter u>is not dependent on the design parameter c. The constant lj
def U)n t t n V + SXmi„(P22) ' (317)

U) =
2 a>„ =' Armn(Pi) U m iniPi)) (7 1 -1 ) -2 5 - s 2 \ min(P*)6, (3.18)
can be adjusted by the control parameters 6, s E and 71 > 7^ > 1. The constant u has to be
positive. This can be assured by the constraint
i . A2 25
Am in (P i) > T, (3.19)
/ 7i - 1
which guarantees that u r e m a i n s positive. Generally, choosing u larger minimizes the chattering of
the control signal.
The function p(z\{t), <p(t)) is defined as:
p ( z i(*),<£(*)) =7 ||P20|| + % |jz i|| + 772). (3.20)
The constant value q
q deJ inf
:_r I \ XT , 1 + (B2
( n -"l1)i
\ T '- ± ] J > 0, (3.21)
used already in (2.14) is well known from Spurgeon & Davies (1993) and has been introduced to cope
with the input distribution matrix uncertainty G i by requiring implicitly a bound ^ > 0 for G i.
The multiplicative non-linear controller part 7 f (•) > 1 has previously been constant. Controller
performance (Spurgeon & Davies 1993), especially dynamic controller features, are largely governed
by the choice of the sliding mode poles. However, these dynamic features can only be achieved when
all the states enter a small vicinity around the sliding mode plane. Here, this is the layer of (3.16).
The reaching time normally involves high control effort due to the possibly high gain nature of the non
linear control component. Practical evaluation using numerical simulation results shows that high initial
controller peaks are present when 7 *(Vi(zi(£)), V2(</>(£))) is constant. These peaks can be decreased
by varying dynamically the gain 7J1(Vi (z\ (£)), V2 (&(t))) between two limit values
7i > 7 i ( V i ( z i ( t ) ) , V 2(&(t))) > 7 i > 1-

C h a p t e r 3. A s l id in g - m o d e - b a s e d st a t e -f e e d b a c k c o n t r o l 42
The initial peak of the control can be made smaller by choosing a small value for 7 *(Vi (zi (t)), V2 {<fr(t)))
away from the cone shaped sliding mode layer, i.e. for large values of V2(<f>{t)) » uj2V\{z\{t)). The
reaching of the cone shaped layer can be assured by gradually increasing the value of
7 j‘(V i(zi(f)), V2(4>(t))) the nearer the states come to the sliding plane layer:
7l ^ 7; + ------------ ,------- _ . (3.22)

VVi + s ( v V 2 + c ^min ( p h / ' / z )
The rate of increase can be chosen with the positive value of s. The smaller s the higher will be the rate
of increase.
The gains 771,772 and 773 in (3.20) have been defined so that they ensure robusmess with respect to the
matched disturbances. Hence, they ensure that the Lyapunov function V2(<f>(t)) is decreasing as long as
it is outside the cone shaped layer. It can be proved that the states always enter the cone shaped layer
by showing that V2(</>(£)) —u;2Vi (zi (£)) is decreasing. Hence, the gains 772 and 773 have also to depend
on —u;2Vi, so that V2W ~ w2Vi(£) is negative outside the cone shaped layer. These dependencies can
be observed in the definition of the gains:
def
771 = max ( i A mol {P2- 1T r + T P 2- 1} j ,0 ,
def
rn = sup IIG2II)+u> sup PYF2II ||P2 2
G2 F2
A©,G
+ ||p i ||p j + w 2 sup /'1|p i i i 2p - i || ) > a 2 3 )

AA12
T(AO, G!) (1 - 73 ) n* + An - G1B2"1(fi - n*), 1 > 73 ; 73 € R+. (3.24)
The partial expressions multiplied by a; ensure reaching of the cone shaped layer while the other terms
have been defined to achieve robusmess in the presence of the matched uncertainties.
The stabilizing linear control u£(zi(i), <f>(t)) enhances the reachability of the cone shaped layer.
However, linear control can also be used to achieve robusmess with respect to the parametric uncertainty
AQ and some components of the input distribution matrix uncertainty G i. Hence, it is not always
necessary to apply non-linear control to have robust performance with respect to matched uncertainty.
A compromise between the two control components can be made. The compromise is possible by
adjusting the parameter 1 > 73 > 0. Linear control will be solely used for achieving reachability of the
cone shaped layer when 73 = 1. The controller gain 77! (3.23) is high enough to tackle the respective
matched uncertainty. The smaller the choice of 73, the more the linear control is utilized to ensure
C h a p t e r 3. A s l id in g - m o d e - b a se d s t a t e - f e e d b a c k c o n t r o l 43
robustness. The gain 771 decreases when choosing 73 < 1. However, the time duration of the reaching
phase of the cone shaped layer will be extended. Reachability cannot be shown for 73 —►0.
Rem ark 3.2 Combining the definition of the non-linear control component in (3.10,3.20,3.22), it is
seen that the non-linear control part is globally Lipschitz and therefore also the combined control from
(3.9). This and the knowledge about the considered system of (3.1) and the considered class of uncer
tainty in (3.2) implies also the sector condition for the closed loop in Assumption 2.3a. o
3.4 Stability and sliding-mode-based performance
Stability and sliding mode based performance is shown in a two step analysis approach known from
Ryan & Corless (1984) or Spurgeon & Davies (1993). The ultimate reaching of the sliding mode layer
of (3.16) is proved at first and then stable behaviour and exponentially fast decay of the states outside
a set of ultimate boundedness. This makes it necessary to show that the null space Lyapunov function
Vi (zi (t)) in (3.14) is decreasing as soon as the states have entered the cone shaped layer. This has been
done by formulating quadratic Lyapunov stability constraints and imposing an implicit bound on the
uncertainty AS:
Amax (Pi S + S TP l ) < 0 (3.25)
Under this condition,it is possible to design to small enough, so that thereis for a positive constant $
0< < -A max( P ? t P ^ + P ~ * ± TP ?) (3.26)
a scalar = inf(£) > 0, which is the minimal value satisfying the matrix inequality for all S and
A \2 ’.
P ? t P ~ * + P ^ ± TP? + d l + i l u P ? A 12P 2 h 1
< 0. (3.27)
uPÂ & P* -£ /
Hence to ensure the existence of , the parameter values of 5, 5, 71 and 7 J defining u have to be
carefully selected. The existence of the scalar implies stability of the control once the sliding
mode layer of (3.16) is ultimately reached. However, the value of ££“5 also indirectly determines the
Li,Ai2
size of the set of ultimate boundedness.
The set Ti(e) of ultimate boundedness depends also on the choice of w and c. The larger uj or c, the
larger the set of ultimate boundedness. This controller, as is the case for other sliding mode controllers,
does not cope well with an unmatched disturbance F 2 of constant bound; such uncertainty increases
the set it{e) of ultimate boundedness:
H(e) d= j z : V i < v + e,V2 < + u 2(v + e) j , £ > 0 (3.28)

C h a p t e r 3. A s l id in g - m o d e - b a se d sta te- f e e d b a c k c o n t r o l 44
where
def
i/ = sup
F2 y/2 d V 2d2 2 ujH
V
Note for F 2 = 0, e —>0 and for c 0, the set 7£(e) is the singleton {0}.
Theorem 3.1 It can be shown that with > 0, c > 0 and by the assumption (3.19) for the system
(3.6-3.7) using a control law as given in (3.9-3.10):
I. The Junction
f v ly 2 = V 2(4>(t))-u?Vl (zl (t)) (3.29)
will become ultimately smaller than after a finite duration of time, implying sliding-mode-
based performance. The time needed is bounded above by:
w t u \ ^ ^ ^ m ax{P2 ) . m ( f (4. \\ ^ m axiP t) f 2/ v i ,V2 ( ^ o ) ^ (0 orVk

V f Vly,(to) > ------ 5--------• T ( f Vly 2(t0)) = In (3.30)
//. The system is g l o b a l l y u l t i m a t e l y b o u n d e d by the set P(e)^ £ > 0 . 0
Note that the parameter c affects the reaching time. For c —>0, the reaching time is infinite. The same
has been said about 73. However, the choice of 73 does not have any effect on the size of the set of
ultimate boundedness.
Proof of Theorem 3.1: The idea of the proof is to decouple partly the unmatched sub-system from the
matched system component. This facilitates the proof and it has the advantage that it can be shown that
the states reach a vicinity of the sliding plane. In the case presented here the sliding mode layer is the
cone shaped layer produced by the relation V2 < u 2V\ (z\ (£)). For this, the function
/v 1.va = V2( ^ ( t ) ) - u V 1(z1(t))
will be of special concern. It can be shown that f v ltvi becomes ultimately smaller than c
An upper estimate of Vi(z\(t)) will be then used for decoupling and investigating the unmatched sub
system (3.6).
Suppose throughout the first part of the proof:
r . (?^max{P2) 'i-t\
f v u V2 > -------- «--------- • ( 3 .3 1 )
This implies
2 V im )) =
^max(P2) ^max (P2 )
and
iw o II > c. (3.32)
A further consequence is
V2(<t>(t)) > “ 2Vi(zi(t)) ||p M * )II > (3.33)
=*• I I ^ I I I I ^ W I I > o )||P15z1(t)||. (3.34)
Using (3.6-3.7) and (3.24), the derivative f v ltv2 is found to be for almost all t:
f v i,v 2 = 4>TP 2 <t>—u;2z f P i Z i
(Irn + G i B ^ P W
< 73 Q*4> - p- + (T > + (A © - G j B j- 1©) Z! + G 2)
l lf lW I + « ( l l » i l l + M + c )
infAS {^min (p 1t + t TP1) ) n „ - i

—u; IIA ÎIINillll^zill - w 2z J P i A i 24>- u 2z J P i F 2
(3.35)
By (3.34), a further estimate of an upper bound for fvi,v2 can derived for almost all t
P(lU<t>)(Im + G lB 2 l )Pj<t>
f v !,V2 < <t> P2 73 + w + ( A © - g i b j 1©) z i + g 2)
P W | | + * (||» i|| + M + c )
1_
+w\\P2<l>\\ IIP ^ IIIIP j
sp\\P2\\
- V l 11^2011 — T73||Z11| -772
||P20|| + <KI|zi|| + M + c )
+ I W I I Q A ^ f P f ' ^ + T P ^ J I I P ^ I I + | a 0 - G 1B2- 1©|| llzill + g2
W llP ii^ P f^ lllz ill - + s 7 > 1 » ||P l 5 | | | | P 2 i | | | | Z l .
+o;||P12F 2||||P2 21| - Vl\\P2cf>\\ - ^ | | Zl|| - 772 (3.36)
By applying the definitions (3.20) and (3.23) to the latter inequality, the following upper estimates of
fvi,v2 can t>e verified for almost all t :
73
(3.37)
f v u v2 < 2 IW)II CP( ||P 2^|| + 5(||Z l|| + | | ^ | | + c) l l ( V u V2)
It follows by (3.32), if
iip ^ ii _ ^ + c( ! f )lP 110(011 > 5 l|zlWI1 (3.38)

lU V u V 2) - l 'rl(Vi,v2) - i
C h a p t e r 3. A s l id in g - m o d e - b a s e d st a t e- f e e d b a c k c o n t r o l 46
then the term ^ ( z i (t),<fi(t)) of equation (3.37) is non-negative in value.
By (3.32) and using the equalities ||-P220WII = HîîWII = x/2Vi(zi(t)), it

follows that
<^(1 + 0/ 11011)11^11 26
“ 1 1 7 i* (V i ,K 2 ) - 1 11011
> I Am i n ( P h ------------- ;— —--------------- ] V m (3.39)

*min (Pj)hI (Vl,V2) - l ) J
and
<511*1(t) II < _____________________ (340)
7i*(Vi(zi(<)),V2W(i))) - 1 (7l*(v,(Zl(i)),K2( ^ ) ) ) - )
IT
If
> Q) (341)
Am, „ ( / f ) f ^ min(P j )) (T (V u V2) - 1) - 26
then inequality
> ---------------------- 5----------A m in ( P j ) 6 y / V [ --------------------------------- (3 4 2 )
Ami„ ( P |) ) Amj„(p5)(7r(Vi, V2) - 1) - 2 \ min(P?)6
can be verified by combining the right hand sides of (3.39) and (3.40) so that II > n '. By 7 f >
(3.22), the inequality (3.41) is true since (3.19) holds. This yields that under the assumption of (3.32)
and (3.19) the relation (3.42) implies that ^ ( z i (t), 4>(t)) is non-negative. The constraint (3.42) may be
i
replaced by a more conservative condition under the assumption (3.32). By (3.32) and ||P220(f)|| =
y / 2 V2 (<p(t)) it can be shown that
( y 2 V 2 + c \ min( p j ) \ < y / W 2 ( l + c l U \ \ ) < 2 ^ W 2. (3.43)
Using (3.19)
^min CP25)<s/Amin(/Y )
( a mi„ ( p h ) 2 ( li + ----------------------------^ _ i) _ 26
\ / v/2W+s ( V 2V2+ C ^ m in ( * ? ) )
Thus, (3.42) is satisfied if
Amin (Pj)S/Xmin(Pl2)
'J v i > ■y/vi
Âmin(P22)^ (7 l l) 25
(3.45)
and (3.32) hold. Assuming, V\ ^ 0 (the case Vi = 0 is trivial), (3.32), (3.19) and x = equation
(3.45) can be equivalently re-arranged to:
x W P h U m ^ P h ) 2 (Vi + - !) - 2 x -W ^ Y )'5 > A™„(Bf)<5,
2x2sAmin(P12) Amin(-P22) (7l —1) —2(5
+XAmin(-Pi2) - x2sAmin(P22)(5 - AminiPi )5 >
(3.18)
(3.18),(3.17) c<Jn f Wn \ _j_ fiXmin{P% ) _

x > - - — + UJ (3.46)
\ 2LJd ) Wd
By f v uv2 > c2A--2i(-— (3.31), the latter and (3.37):
*(*1,0) > o , M y , < - y l l 0 l l 2 < 0 .
It is easily verified that the function fvi,v2 always become in finite time smaller than c
since the following is true for almost all t:
73
fv uv2 < — ■fvi,v3- (3.47)
^max(p2)
The differential inequality (3.47) can be solved out by integration. Hence, the time which is needed
that the function fvi,v2 is smaller than or equal to c ArsylffO wjn have an upper limit given by (3.30)
of Theorem 3.1.
The last result allows the unmatched, first sub-system (3.6) to be disconnected and investigated with
Lyapunov function V\ for V2 —w2V\ < By using (3.6) and the constant $ from (3.26) it
follows for almost all t:
z f t t ) (P rE + ^ P ^ z r W
Vi = + z{ (t)PiF2 + z[ (t)Pi A i 2 <f>{t)
C h a p t e r 3. A s l id in g -m o d e - b a s e d s t a t e - f e e d b a c k c o n t r o l 48
v, + q x , + z f ( t ) P 1F 2. (3.48)
Now the condition on the matrix of (3.27) which is a consequence of the 5-procedure (Boyd, El Ghaoui,
Feron & Balakrishnan 1994, Section 2.6.3) can be applied. As it is assumed that the states have ulti
mately entered the cone-shaped layer (V2 — uj2Vi < c Am^x(P2))t it is implied for almost all t:
Vi < -m + + zt (t )Pl f 2
< - m + + V V W ’M l I (3.49)
This shows that the system will ultimately enter a bounded set as defined by 7£(e) from (3.28) in finite
time. ■
Remark 3.3 In case the polytopic sets for A \ 2 and E as defined in Remark 3.1 are known, then the
value of can be replaced by
....
[*j]€[l,...,fcE]x[l>...,fci4l2j
which is the maximum of the minimal values £ solving the linear matrix inequality of (3.27) for E =
E l = const, and A\n = A[2 = const.. This is readily implied by observing the equations (3.48) and
(3.49). Thus, the problem of determining f? 11! can be reduced to k-% x /c^ 12 matrix inequalities. o
Theorem 3.1 implies ultimate boundedness for the control law. However, a modification of the assump
tions for the system uncertainty and the control also allows exponential stability of the origin to be
shown. This will be discussed next.
3.4.1 A controller modification for systems with parametric and input uncertainty only
An asymptotic stability result can be provided if it is assumed that there is only parametric and input
uncertainty considered. Thus in the case when F 2 = 0 and G 2 = 0 for the system (3.1), the non-linear
gain 772 of (3.20,3.23) vanishes. Hence, the control, in particular the non-linear control component of
(3.10,3.22) can be modified:
u fo r {zf <f>T]T ? 0 ^ gR+
[ 0 fo r [zj1<f)T]T = 0
^ def / , (7 i-7 i)> A T
* = * + ( 3 '5 0 )
removing the constant c from the control. This also allows the definition of lj from (3.17-3.18) to be
relaxed
def U)n
V ~ ~ o2 *"\\ 2 u>dj
C h a p t e r 3. A s l id in g - m o d e - b a se d st a t e - f e e d b a c k c o n t r o l 49
(3.51)
^miniPz ) ) (7l ~ 1) —^ S^miniPo )î (3.52)
demanding
A, \p h >
7l' - 11 ’
while all other definitions and constraints in Section 3.2 and 3.3 are valid. The modified control is glob
ally Lipschitz and asymptotically stabilizing, which can be shown by adapting the proof of Theorem
3.1 accordingly. In particular, the states will enter in finite time the boundary layer of (3.16) for positive
but arbitrary values of c.
3.5 Practical issues: The inverted pendulum example
0.5
- 0.5
©
T3 -©■
- 0.5
- 1.5
- 1.5
0 1 2 3 4 5 6
e
Figure 3.1: Trajectory of non-linear controlled inverted pendulum and time response of the range space
dynamics <j>{t) for 71 = 7^ = 1.62
The inverted pendulum example as introduced with (2.8) in Example 2.1 is reconsidered. Of par
ticular interest will be the parameterized system representation of (2.10):
0 1 0 0 0 XI ’ e '
X= x+ u+ x, x =
0
to
1
iH
0.5(sinc(xi) — 1) b 4- 0.1 _e _
1
. X2.
•
for the ultimate-bounded stable non-linear control of Section 3.3. Choose as in Example 2.2, E =
—0.5, Cl* = —0.5. It can be calculated that the cone J 2 V\ — V2 is given here by:
X2 = - ± cj'j x \. (3.53)
It is obvious that the uncertainty of the damping coefficient b = —0.11... —0.09 does not destabilize
the control. It is not necessary to deal with this uncertainty via the non-linear control gain 771, i.e.
the parameter 73 is set to 0.98 so that the non-linear gain 771 is 0. The control gain 772 is 0 since the
uncertainty G 2 is 0. The gain 773 depends on the choice for the sliding cone, i.e. w. The parameter c
within (3.10) has been chosen generally small, c = 1 • 10-14. This ensures a very small ultimate bound
(3.28) close to asymptotic stability and also shows practically that the parameter c within the non-linear
control component of (3.10) has little importance in the case when the uncertainty with constant bound
(F 2 = 0,G 2 = 0) is absent. Let S = 0.04, s = 2.2 and 71 = 7i = 1.62 then the layer defining
parameter uj and the gain 773 have the values of 0.074 and 0.5476. This parameter choice reveals stable
control. It is seen (Figure 3.1) that the cone around the sliding mode is ultimately entered.
The parameters 71 and 7^ can be adjusted to the values of 71 = 1.8 and 7^ = 1.1 so that the lj and
S values remain 0.074 and 0.04. Hence, the sliding mode cone is of the same size and the non-linear
gain 773 = 0.5476 and the value 7? (3.26) retain their magnitudes with respect to the last considered
controller. This choice makes it possible to decrease the control signal from an initial peak of 2.45 to
2.25 (Figure 3.2) with similar dynamic performance of the angular position (Figure 3.3). Lowering the
value of 6 to a value of 8 = 0.001 (71 = 7 ^ = 1.62), i.e. u; = 0.0016, 773 = 0.5058 would imply
chattering of the control signal when using a sampled-data control with sampling frequency of 120 Hz.
-0 .5
-1 .5
-2
-2 .5
time [s]
Figure 3.2: Time response of the control signal for 71 = = 1.62 = solid;7i = 1.8, 7^ = 1.1 =
dashed
0.5
tim e [s]
Figure 3.3: Time response of x \(t) = 6 (t) for 71 = = 1.62 = solid;7 i = 1.8, = 1.1 = dashed
C h a p t e r 3. A s l id in g - m o d e - b a se d st a t e - f e e d b a c k c o n t r o l 51
3.6 Summary
This chapter has introduced and mathematically analyzed a sliding-mode-based, state-feedback control.
The well-known unit vector used for sliding-mode control has been modified so that a cone-shaped
boundary layer around the sliding-mode follows, combining both sector boundary layer and constant
boundary layer. The class of uncertainty which has been considered is bounded input uncertainty,
bounded parametric uncertainty and constant bounded disturbances. Provided the parametric uncer
tainties and disturbances are matched, then the sliding-mode-based control can effectively counteract
them and there is no limitation given for the bounds of these disturbances. The bounds for un-matched
parametric uncertainty and input-uncertainty are implicitly given. The un-matched parametric uncer
tainty is constrained by the sliding-mode-based dynamics. An example has proved that the cone-shape
of the boundary layer is particularly useful if only parametric uncertainty or input uncertainty has to be
considered.
The sliding-mode based control is globally Lipschitz and satisfies Assumption 2.3a. The control
law is therefore suitable for analytical investigation of discretization. However, the proof of stability
implying ultimate boundedness has been carried out by using two Lyapunov functions for the range
space and the null space dynamics of the linear uncertain system. Thus, a global non-smooth Lyapunov
function taking account of the structuring of the state-space due to the cone-shaped sliding-mode plane
layer will be introduced in the next chapter.
Chapter 4
A non-smooth Lyapunov function for the sliding-mode-based control
4.1 Introduction
Non-smooth analysis is a current popular topic, in particular for systems with discontinuous right
hand side (Liberzon & Morse 1999) and also for non-standard, constrained optimization techniques
(Clarke 1983). In particular, the associated stability analysis tools presented by Lafferiere & Sontag
(1993), Shevitz & Paden (1993) or Wicks, Peleties & DeCarlo (1994) were developed with the idea
of differential systems with discontinuous right hand sides in mind. Most recently the interest in non
smooth analysis culminated in the publication of the book of Clarke, Ledyaev, Stem & Wolenski (1998),
while first accounts on non-differentiable Lyapunov functions go back to a note by Moissejev (1936).
However, it has been found that non-smooth analysis and respectively non-smooth Lyapunov func
tions are also useful for systems with Caratheodory-type solution. In this case, non-smooth analysis
can provide a simple stability analysis tool for systems split into different interdependent sub-systems
and with the state space structured into different regions. In particular, the sliding-mode based control
of Chapter 3 lends itself to the application of a non-smooth Lyapunov function since the control and
the respective cone-shaped boundary layer implicitly divide the state space into sectors. In Chapter
3, the Lyapunov function V \(zi(t)) was used inside the sliding-mode layer of (3.16) for investigating
one part of the system dynamics, the null-space dynamics, while the Lyapunov functions V i(z\(t)) and
V2 (<p(t)) were used in combination outside the layer. Both Lyapunov functions can be combined to
one global non-smooth, quadratic Lyapunov function which is not differentiable at the sector boundary
V2(<£(£)) = uj2 V i(z\{t)). Other researchers have followed similar state-space structuring ideas; the
particular case of a non-quadratic, non-smooth Lyapunov function for a smooth control has been inves
tigated by Blanchini (1995). Stalford (1981) considers also systems with Lyapunov functions which
can be decomposed and which are particularly suitable for control systems with discontinuous right
hand sides and non-Caratheodory solutions.
Thus, this chapter is intended to introduce a non-smooth Lyapunov function for the sliding-mode
based control and to set up a framework of tools for the analysis of the considered class of non-smooth
C h a p t e r 4 . A n o n - s m o o t h L y a p u n o v f u n c t io n f o r t h e s l id in g - m o d e - b a s e d c o n t r o l 53
Lyapunov functions and systems. This framework is essentially based on the classical derivative and
a more general environment using Lebesgue integration and measure theory is created to take account
of the non-smoothness of the Lyapunov function. A short discourse on Clarke’s generalized derivative
from Clarke (1983) will give then an alternative approach for proof of stability also using the classical
derivative. In contrast, Blanchini (1995) has applied the Dini-derivative in a different setting which
does not use the more intuitive classical derivative to show stability for systems with Caratheodory
type solutions. All the latter three approaches allow exponential stability to be proved under certain
conditions, while Stalford’s (1981) approach generally only establishes asymptotic stability.
4.2 A non-smooth Lyapunov function for the sliding-mode-based control
Recall again the closed loop range-space and the null-space dynamics from (3.6-3.7) and (3.9-3.11):
zi (t) = E zi (t) + A i 2 <f>(t) + F 2,
<p(t) = AOzi(£) -t- (Cl* -f AQ) 4>{t) -1- (jB2 -I- G i^ u%L(zi(t), <f>{t)) + G 2,
with z = [ z j <pT]Tand the respective Lyapunov functions (3.13-3.14) as developed for the sliding-
mode based control:
V2 (<f>) = ±<t>TP2$.
The same conditions as in Section 3.3 and 3.4 are imposed on the control parameters. The non-linear
control component u ^ L(zi(<), <p(t)) of (3.10) introduces the cone-shaped sliding-mode layer from
(3.16) which is a combination of a constant layer and the sector:
{z € R" : V2(</>(t)) - w 2V i(zi(i)) < 0} (4.1)
where uj is the small positive constant scalar defined by (3.17). A non-standard, non-smooth Lyapunov
function can be postulated by investigating the Lyapunov functions V\ and V2 inside and outside the
sector (4.1). Suppose first that the states are outside the sector (4.1) and investigate the derivative of
V2 {4>). In particular, it has been shown in the first part of the proof for Theorem 3.1 that for the non
linear control of (3.10) follows for (f>> c and F2(<^>(f)) —u;2Vi(zi(f)) > 0:
<pT P 2 ( ( B 2 + G i ) u ^ l + 7 7 i | | P 2 </>|| + 7 ? 3 | | z i | | + 772)
< —T P ll^ ll ( i i ^ n + 4J | ^ 7 + W + c ) - 7i*(V1,V-2) ) - ° (4'2)
This shows that the non-linear gain term 77i||P20|| + 773f|zi (| + r)2 and partially the linear control com
pensate for the uncertainty and non-linearities A©, AQ, G i and G 2. It follows as in (3.37) for almost
allf:
m m ) < - y m 2-
Investigating now the sum

v 1(z1(t)) + m m ) ) , k > o
outside the sector of (4.1) implies for <f>> c and almost all t:
T
Z i(t) P iE + E r Pi Zi (t)
+ z f ( i ) P i F 2.
_ Vk<f>(t) ff±2 P}. _ 73/
Vk
(4.3)
It follows from the constraints on the closed loop (3.25) that there exists a k > 0 large enough so that
the matrix on the right hand side of inequality (4.3) is negative definite. Thus, there is for suitable k > 0
a positive constant so that for almost all t:
i_
V i(z i(t))+ k V 2 (<P(t)) < - ^ ( V 1(z1(f)) + fcV2W(4))) + v ^ v^ r W T T ^ W f » | | P 15F 2|| (4.4)
Suppose now that the states are inside the sector (4.1) to analyze the derivative of Vi(zi). In similarity
to equations (3.48-3.49), it follows from V2(</>(£)) —v 2 V\ (zi (£)) < 0 for almost all t:
(few2 + l)Vi < -(few2 + l)i?V) + (few2 + l)V/2v/i4 ||P 1' F 2||. (4.5)
Investigate now the function
V ( z i (f),0(f)) = m a x (V i(zi(t)) + kV 2 (<t>(t)), (k v 2 + l)V i(zi(t)))
Vi(zi(f)) + kV 2 W ) ) fo r V2 W ) ) > ^ 2^ i(ziW )

(4.6)
(k v 2 -I- l)V i(z i(t)) fo r V2 (<f>(t)) < v 2 Vx{zi(t))
Employing
1
or
+fcW < ^ “ (P2)lw
2
— + k
U!Z
it can be readily verified that
M e 2
V (zi ,<t>) > — + k (4.7)
2 \ uj*
implies ||</>|| > c for V (zi(t), = Vi(zi(f)) + kV 2 (<p(t)). In particular for F 2 = 0 and (4.7), the
two functions V\ (zi (t)) + kV 2 ((p(t)) and (k v 2 + 1 ) Vi (zi (£)) are shown to be decreasing (4.4) at those
points where they define V ( z \ , <fi). Thus, it is questioned if V ( z \ (f), <p(t)) can act as a global Lyapunov
function, which seems to be inhibited by the fact that V (zi, <f>) as a function of [zp (f)T]T e Rn is not
differentiable everywhere, but differentiable almost everywhere in Rn . In the next section, theoretical
tools will be developed to show that a non-smooth Lyapunov function can act as Lyapunov function.
4.3 Stability theorems for a non-smooth Lyapunov function using Lebesgue theory
Consider as in (2.3) the system
x (t) = /( t,x ) , x e r , / : R x r - ^ r ( 4 .8 )
C hapter 4. A no n -sm ooth Lyapunov fu n c t io n for th e s l id in g -m ode -based control 55
with x(f) satisfying Caratheodory’s definition as considered with Assumption 2.1a. Then x(t) is abso
lutely continuous, the derivative of x(£) exists for t £ Clx and x(t) satisfies the equation (4.8) for t £ S
where Qx and S are sets of measure zero (Caratheodory 1948).
The prospective Lyapunov function for the sliding-mode-based control of (4.6) can be generalized
by modifying the concept of max-functions proposed in Shevitz & Paden (1993) for use with differential
systems which do not necessarily have discontinuous right hand sides:
Definition 4.1 A function V'(x) : Rn —> R is called a max-Lyapunov function iff there exists a finite
number o f functions Vj(x) : R n —>• R , j = 1 ,..., k continuously differentiable for x E Kn , such that
V(x) = max Vj{x), (4.9)

j=l,...,k
and
V(x) > Oforx 7^ 0, V(x) = 0 f o r x = 0. (4.10)
Thus, the max-Lyapunov function V (x) is a positive definite function which is continuous but not
continuously differentiable everywhere. It is easy to check that V (x) is also locally Lipschitz (Clarke
1983, pp.47), which makes it possible to use it in terms of non-smooth theory. The definition of the
max-Lyapunov function divides the state space implicitly into regions where one particular V^-(x), or
several Vj(x) of the same magnitude, define the actual max-Lyapunov function value. For instance,
for a secondorder system with states x = [xi,X2]t , a max-Lyapunov function F (x) = maxfxfjX^)
does not havethe usual elliptical but square shaped level sets and sub-regions of sector shape as seen in
Figure 4.1.
X,
V(x)=x.
V(X)=X;
Figure 4.1: Level sets of a max-Lyapunov function V (x) = max(xf, X2 ) of a second order system
Since V( x) as a function of x is locally Lipschitz, it is readily implied that V^xft)) is absolutely

continuous as function of t. This fact can be summarized with:
C h a p t e r 4 . A n o n - s m o o t h L y a p u n o v f u n c t io n f o r t h e s l i d i n g - m o d e - b a s e d c o n t r o l 56
Lemma 4.1 Suppose a scalar Junction V (t,x ) is locally Lipschitz in x G l f for constant i G R uni
formly in any closed interval oft, and absolutely continuous in t € R /o r constant x E W1, uniformly in
any compact set o f s.. lfx ( t) as a function o ft is absolutely continuous on [fa, f&], then the composition
V(t, x(f)) is absolutely continuous o n tE [ta, tb\. •
Proof Since the function x(t) is continuous on [ta, tb], the set {x(t) € Rn : t E [ta, tb]} is closed and
bounded. From absolute continuity of x(t) and V(t, x) in t, it follows for any finite set of disjoint open
intervals (fQj,f/? j) in [taih]:
~ tot,j) < 6x(e) =b Lj | | x ( ^ } j) —x(fttj)ll < £
f ts j - ta j) < < M ^X) =*> Ej IV ( tp j,x ) - V (ta J , x )I < e,
where 6 v yCl}b(e) = mfxefxêR*: > 0 must exist. Further, there is a bounded scalar
function K a$(-) > 0 on [f0, t J , which satisfies by the Lipschitz constraint on V(f, x):
x a, x 6 € (x(f) 6 1 " : t E [ta,tfc]} : |V (s,xa) - V (s,x 6)| < K a>b(s) ||xa - x 6| | , 5 E [ta, t b]
and i f x,a,b — suPs€[ta,t6] ^ a»fe(5)) < 00• inequality follows:
x (^ /3 j)) — x (^ Q ,j))l
< S j IV (ta J ,x ( t 0 J)) - V(fa j , x ( f aj ) ) | + Ej IV { tp j,x { tp j)) - V (ta J ,x ( tPd))\
< K ^ b Z jW x itp j) - x(fa j-)|| + Ej |V(t/3 j , x ( t 0 j) ) - V (taj , x ( t 0 j ) ) |
and
^ j ftp,j ~ t a , j ) < m i n [ ^ x ( £ )? ^ V , a , ^ l^ (^ /3 ,j? x (f/3 ,j)) — x (^ Q j))l ^ [Kx,a,b "b 1 ] £ •
Define therefore
6 (e) d= min [£x (e/ [K âJb + 1]), 6 v ,a,b(e/ [K*,a,b + 1])]
and absolute continuity of V(f, x(f)) follows using e and 6(e). ■
This shows that the derivative of V (x(i)) from (4.9) with respect to time t within an interval [ta, t b]
exists for almost all times t and that for tb > ta > 0 (Craven 1982, Proposition 5.5.3):
j ‘t ? ^ ^ - d s = V (x (tb) ) - V ( x (ta)). (4.11)
However, it is now the question how to calculate of the max-Lyapunov function from Definition
4.1. It is often only of interest to know bounds on the derivative instead of the exact values. For
derivatives of Lyapunov functions, this is mostly the upper bound giving a measure of the rate of decay
of the Lyapunov function:
Proposition 4.1 (I) Let Vj(x) be continuously differentiable in x, then there exists K j(t,x (t)) so that
the derivative V j(x(t)) satisfies fo r system (4.8):
Vj(x(t)) < K j(t,x (t) ), t £ flx U S
where K j ( •, •) is continuous in x fo r constant t and Lebesgue measurable in tfo r constant x.

(II) An upper bound o f the derivative o f the max-Lyapunov function can be calculated for almost all
times t with
< ma x (K j(t,x (t))). (4.12)
at j€ /(t)
where I (t ) is the set o f indices j fo r which V (x(t)) = Vj (x(t)). o
Proof (I) Suppose x (t) of (4.8) exists in [ta, U], then
x(t) = f ( t , x )
for t € [ta,h ] \ (fix U S). Since dV^ is continuous, K j(t,x (t)) = x) follows from the
chain rule and satisfies the claim.
(II) Suppose that there is more than one function Vj(x(t)) (k > 1) used for the max-Lyapunov function
F(x(£)) (4.9). For any function V j(x (t)) with V j(x(tj)) = V ( x ( tj)) at time-instant tj G [ta,h],
there must exist, due to continuity of Vj(x(£)), a closed interval [ta,jitp j\, so that tj G [ta,j,tpj]
and Vj{x(t)) = V (x (t)) for all t G [tajitpj]- This can also include the case where
However, provided t aj = tp j then there is due to continuity for small enough e > 0 another function
V i(x(t)), (i 7^ j ) so that Vi{x(t)) = V (x(t)) for t G [tj, tj -1- e] or t G [tj — e, tj). Thus, the interval
[ta,tb] can be decomposed via a countable number of time instants ta = t\ < t 2 < h ... < into
sub-intervals [ti,U+1] C so fât there is for each sub-interval [ti,t<+i] a^ ( x f t ) ) = V (x(t)).
Since Vji (x(t)) = F (x (t)) in each of those sub-intervals [tj, fj+i], the derivativeo fV (x (t)) satisfies
for almost all t G [t*, t*+i]:
d v (x (t ) ) dV jM t))
dt dt
In particular, the equation does not need to hold at the time instants t\ < £2 < h ... < The set
{ t i , t 2 i ts, ...tb} is of measure zero. The claim of (4.12) follows. ■
Having now provided a tool for calculating the derivative of the max-Lyapunov function, Lebesgue
integral theory is used in the following generalized stability theorem of ultimate boundedness and ex
ponential stability:
Theorem 4.1 (I) Suppose for x = /(£, x) the assumptions as for (4.8) hold and assume the existence
o f a max-Lyapunov function V (x(t)), so that
V s > 0 3((e) > 0 : V (x (t)) > c + s, => < - ( ( e ) ( “v t j (4.13)

and the max-Lyapunov function is radially unbounded, lim||x||_>00(V’(x)) = oo, then the system states
will always ultimately enter a set Ilc+e = {x : V'(x) < c -I- e} after a finite duration o f time and all the
states converge at least asymptotically to fig = {x G Mn : V (x) < c}.
(II) In addition, the derivative V(x.(t)), which exists fo r almost all t, is Lebesgue-integrable and
provided it is bounded outside Ilg by
< - c3 V (x {t)), c3 > 0, x(f) £ lie (4.14)
for almost all t and V (x) satisfies
Cl ||x||c < V(x) < c2 ||x||c , c i,c 2,c > 0 (4.15)
then the trajectory x(i) decreases exponentially fast before entering Ilc+e. 0
Proof (I) Stability of the system motion will be shown by using Lebesgue integration theory and the
proof is based on Lyapunov’s stability theorem as in Khalil (1992b). Issues of non-smoothness of
V(x(£)) are particularly considered. lie is bounded since V (x) is radially unbounded. Thus, there
must exist three scalars h ,r e (0, h] and (3 € (c, a) large enough where a — min||x||=r V (x) such that
Up = {x G B r : V (x) < /?} , B r = {x G Rn : ||x|| < r} , B r D Up D IIe.
An a > 0 must exist due to (4.10). Further, it may be observed that 11^ lies in the interior of B r. The
set has the property that any trajectory starting in Up at to = 0 remains there for t > 0. This can be
shown by contradiction. Suppose the trajectory leaves the set Up. Since the solution x(£) is continuous,
there exists a t and a sufficiently small is > 0, so that x(f) € B r and:
x(*o = 0) G Up, 3t > to = 0, is > 0 : x(i) ^ 11^, 'X.{t)\t^[to,i—u ] ^ x ( ^ ) ^ H/? 3) Ilg
Thus,
V{x.(t — is)) < (3 < V ( x ( t)). (4.16)
Since, /? > c and t He it can be concluded for almost alH € (t — is, t\:
« » < 0 (4.17)
dt
Since V (x(t)) is absolutely continuous in t G [t — is, t ] (Lemma 4.1), it follows from (4.11) and (4.17):
V ( x ( * - i / ) ) > V (x(f)), (4.18)
which is a contradiction to (4.16). Since F (x) is continuous in x and F (x = 0) = 0 there must also
exist a q > 0, so that ||x|| < q => V (x) < (3. This proves that the system (4.8) is bounded and the
solution x(f) exists for t G [0, oo).
Now it has to be shown that the state x(f) ultimately enters the set IIc+e, where e > 0 is arbitrary.
Suppose x(io = 0) £ Ilc+e. Further, assume that the states x(t) do not enter IIc+e. Then for any
solution in an arbitrary interval [ti, t2]» fi < h , it follows via integration from (4.13):
V’(x(*2))-V '(x(*i)) < - ( f 2“ *i)C(e) => ^ ( x fe )) < V’( x ( t i ) ) - ( t 2-fi)C (e) < ^ ( x (*i))- (4-19)
Hence, V (x(t)) is strictly monotonically decreasing and converges to a constant c > c + e. Thus,
it is possible to find a large enough t' > 0, so that V (x(t')) — V (x (t' + 1)) < C(£ )- This is a con
tradiction to (4.19). The states will always enter a set IIc+e after a finite time, since any solution
x(t) will also enter IIc+e', s' < e, which lies entirely in IIc+e, i.e. no element of IIc+e' lies on the
boundary of IIc+e. Furthermore, no trajectory can leave IIc+e due to the monotonicity of V (x(f))
outside lie- Thus, IIc+e is ultimately entered and x(£) converges to the set Ilg at least asymptotically.
(II) Lemma 4.1 has shown that V {x(t)) as a function of t is absolutely continuous, which implies the
equality of (4.11). However, not only this relation is true but also the change-of-variable-theorem holds
for the non-smooth Lyapunov function. Suppose x(fo = 0) ^ IIc+e and x (f) enters IIc+e at the time
instant £#, then by (4.14) and the change-of-variable-theorem (Caratheodory 1948, pp. 556-563):
- - i g e i u . r ™ - % > r 1*
Jto ^3l^(x (f)) Jv(x(to)) ^3!^ JiQ
since V (x(<)) is absolutely continuous and for x (t) £ IIc+e a strictly decreasing function of t. Solving
out the upper integral inequality and applying relation (4.15) it follows that the states are exponentially
decreasing ||x(t)|| < e~ 3( c o) c ||x(f0)||. ■
An alternative approach of proving that the max-Lyapunov function is suitable to show stability is to
use a generalized derivative. Clarke’s (1983) theoretical approach considers in particular the problem
of non-differentiable, but Lipschitz-continuous and finite-dimensional functions. Thus, the theory is
easily applied to problems within this thesis. However, the theoretical framework also extends to infi
nite dimensional problems and a generalized derivative for non-Lipschitz functions. It is therefore an
important tool within control theory and has been also used within a fundamental treatment by Clarke
et al. (1997) of sampled-data controllers for non-linear systems. The next section will consider some of
the theory of Clarke (1983) which is suitable for this thesis.
4.4 A non-smooth Lyapunov function stability theorem using Clarke’s derivative
Clarke’s generalized derivative involving Lipschitz-continuous functions uses the theorem of

Rademacher, stating that Lipschitz-continuous functions are differentiable almost everywhere and im
plying that the derivative is locally bounded. With these characteristics, the generalized derivative of
Clarke is readily calculated. Using these characteristics Clarke (1983, Proposition 2.5.1) derives, that a
locally Lipschitz-continuous function g : Rk -» E has the generalized gradient
8 g(z) = co{lim Vp(zj) : Zj -> z, z* ^ U S5}, (4.20)
where co{ } denotes the convex hull, Sg is an arbitrary set of measure zero and Qg is the set of measure
zero where g is not differentiable. This relation is used now within a stability analysis involving the
max-Lyapunov function.
For the analysis of dynamical systems, consider again the autonomous system of (4.8) which has as
before a Caratheodory-type solution so that for t £ Clx U S:
x(t) = /( f ,x ) .
However, it may now also be expected that the solution x(t) is locally Lipschitz. The local Lipschitz
constraint on x (t) can be easily satisfied by tightening Caratheodory’s constraint on / ( i , x) for exis
tence of solution. It is assumed that in any compact set of Rn , particularly B k x = {x E Rn : ||x ||< K x },
the function f ( t , x) is not only bounded by a Lebesgue integrable function, (t) > \\f(t, x(f))||,
of t (Caratheodory 1948, p. 682), but by a constant ||/(£, x(t))|| < rriBKx = const. Hence, acts
as a Lipschitz constant of the solution x(t) in t for x(£) £ B k x-
It will be seen that the concept to prove stability is similar. The non-smooth max-Lyapunov function
V (x) of Definition 4.1 is used. However, to prove exponential decay, a different function is investigated:
v (t,x (t)) = e°3 tV (x(t)) = e°zt max V j(x(t)) = max (eC3tV)(x(£)))

j=l,...,k j=l,...,k
where cz is a suitably chosen positive scalar. This function derived from the max-Lyapunov function
is depending on time t. Its investigation prevents the use of Lebesgue integration. A set of tools for
calculating the generalized derivative of V (x) and v(t, x(£)) is derived at first.
The Lipschitz properties of V (x) and v(t, x(t)) justify the application of Clarke’s generalized
derivative with Clarke (1983, Proposition 2.1.1) and (4.20). Suppose a function
V j ( t , x ) : R x Rn 4 R,
is continuously differentiable in t and x. It follows from (4.20) for the generalized derivative with
respect to t considering (4.8):
5 v j(t,x (t)) = co :U t, ti £ £lx(t) U S j .

(4.21)
As with Proposition 4.1, it is now of interest to derive theoretical approaches so that upper bounds
for Clarke’s generalized derivative can be calculated which is done with the following proposition for
Proposition 4.2 Let V j ( t , x(i)) be continuously differentiable and suppose the derivative Vj is bounded
dyA1^ ) ) < K (t, x ( t ) ) : t ^ Qx U S where K (-, •) is continuous in (t, x(f)), then the generalized
derivative satisfies sup^€Jt;.(t>x(t)) xp < K { t,x (f)). o
Proof Any element of 6 v j (t, x(f)) can be expressed as:
i p G 8 v j ( t , x ( t ) ) : xp = A lim ( - V^ S— f(s, x(s)) + - j ^

t->oo \ ox os J S = ti
+(1 _ A) lim I ( ,,* ( ,) ) + *<**» 0 < A < 1,

k-+oo \ 8x 8s
s -tk
where t{ t and —>t. Furthermore,
Iim i£E)/{ 5 , x(s)) + foj ( ^ f e ) ) < tf (f ,a ;(f ) ),

z-*oo V OX OS S = ti
since AT(t, x(t)) is continuous. The claim is implied from the latter. ■
Having established the generalized derivative of V j ( t , x(f)), the generalized derivative of a function
Vmax(t,x(t)) = max Vj(t,x(t))
with respect to t is implied by Theorem 2.3.12 from Clarke (1983)
fiVmax (f j x(t)) = C0 { 8 V j{t,x(t)) : j G I(t)},
where I(t) is the set of indices j for which v m a x ( t , x(t)) = Vj(t, x (t)).
The mean value theorem is, for continuously differentiable functions, the means of proving mono
tonicity and a tool providing a measure of how fast a function increases or decreases. The same ap
proach in terms of Clarke’s non-smooth theory is used to provide the non-smooth analysis counterpart
to Theorem 4.1 :
Theorem 4.2 (I) Suppose for x. = f(t,x) a Caratheodory-type and locally Lipschitz-continuous solu
tion and assume the existence o f a radially unbounded max-Lyapunov junction V (x(f)), so that
Ve > 0 3C(e) > 0 : V (x(t)) > c + e, xp G £K(x(f)) => xp < —£(e), (4.22)
then the system states will always ultimately enter a set IIc+e = {x : V (x) < c -f- e} after a finite
duration o f time and all the states converge at least asymptotically to rig = {x : V (x) < c}.
(II) In addition, provided Clarke’s derivative o f the time dependent function xj(t, x(t)) = ecztV (x (t))
satisfies fo r a positive scalar C3:
V £> 0 3C(e) > 0 : V (x(t)) > c + e, xp G 8 v{t, x(t)) => xp < 0, (4.23)
and V (x) satisfies

Cl ||x ||c < F (x ) < c2 ||x ||c , c > 0 (4.24)
then the trajectoryx(t) decreases exponentially fast before entering IIc+e. 0

Proof (I) The first part of the proof goes along the lines of the proof of Theorem 4.1. Hence, it
is sketched only and those points which are different are pointed out accordingly. As assumed, the
solution x (t) is Lipschitz in B k x with Lipschitz constant , where B k x = {x € Rn : ||x|| < K x }.
Provided K x has been chosen large enough, three scalars /i, r G (0, h] and /3 G (c, a) with a; =
min||x||_r V (x) exist to determine the sets:
Up = {x G B r : V (x) < (3} , B r = {x G Rn : ||x|| < r } , B k x D B r D Up D rig.
Similarly to the proof of Theorem 4.1, it can be shown, that the set Up is an invariant set and system
motion is bounded. However instead of Lebesgue integration, the mean value theorem is applied. In
particular the inequality of equation (4.18) can be implied from the mean value theorem for non-smooth
analysis (Clarke 1983, Theorem 2.3.7). The same procedure as for Theorem 4.1 is also used to show that
IIc+e is a set of ultimate boundedness. The inequality of (4.19) is also implied from the mean value the
orem for non-smooth analysis instead from Lebesgue integration. Thus, the first part of the theorem is
proved.
(II) Provided x(to) € Up and x(to = 0) ^ Ilg+e, then x(t) remains outside IIc+e for a finite in
terval [to,tE] and enters this set ultimately at the time instant ts- During this time interval
the relation of (4.23) is satisfied and the mean value theorem for non-smooth analysis implies for any
t G [to,tE]'-
v {t,x(t)) - v{t 0 ,x { t0)) < 0
implying:
K(x(i)) < V(-x.(t0 ))e~e3it- to)
and ||x(i)H < ( | f ) ' ||x (t0)||. ■
Remark 4.1
• For explanation of the relation between the two theorems, Theorem 4.1 and 4.2, it might be noted that
any function V (x (t)) which is differentiable at the time instant t satisfying V (x(t)) < —C3V (x(f))
then also implies d (eC3tV (x (t)))/ dt < 0.
• With respect to the systems which are investigated in this thesis, the assumption of Lipschitz conti
nuity of the solution x(t) is not restrictive. The continuous-time controlled systems as introduced in
Chapter 2, actually satisfy the bounding constraint ||/(i,x (f))|| < m u for any compact set U C W1.
This can be readily implied from Assumption 2.3a or Assumption 2.3b. o
Theorem 4.1 and 4.2 indicate that the non-smooth function of (4.6) developed for the sliding-mode-
based control is a valid non-smooth max-Lyapunov function. The respective stability analysis for the
sliding-mode-based control may be carried out in the next section with respect to the Lebesgue theory
approach.
4.5 Stability analysis for the sliding-mode-based control
The non-smooth function
V{zi{t),<f>(t)) = max (Vi(zi(£)) + kV 2 {<p(t)), (ku; 2 + T)Vi(zi(t)))
from (4.6) is according to Definition 4.1 a max-Lyapunov function. It is also readily found that:
^min (Pi)
V(zi (<),*(*)) >
\ min (l -----
> ^min(Pl)
- , ku-----
^min(P 2 ) \ u ~ u2
- ----- 1 11z || (4.25)
Cl
and
2 , j ^max
2 + k—
^
< max I( / (kw*
/ 2
+i i1)\ -----
^ m a x (P l) j ^max(P2) \ ii~i|2
- ------,-k ----- ------ I || z || (4.26)
C2
From Proposition 4.1, a relation for the derivative of V (zi (t), <fi(t)) can be computed by using (4.4-4.5)
and (4.7) which holds for almost all times t :
d ) V (z i(t), - b /2 ( k v 2 + 1) s/V(zi(t),(f>(t)) supUP^F21|

dt p2
Thus, V (zi, <f>) is strictly decreasing for z £ 11(e):
iT
11(e) = | z = [z\ 4>
t] e l " : V (z i, <f>) > max rm w
def y j 2 (ku 2 + 1) supj. H -P ^ H

min($, d)
where e > 0 is an arbitrary positive scalar and n(e) is a set of ultimate boundedness. Provided z(f0 =
0) ^ n (e ), the absolutely continuous function V (zi(t), 4 >{t)) can be used for the change-of-variable-
theorem for a finite interval [0, t). Therefore, a corollary to Theorem 4.1 may summarize the result:
Corollary 4.1 The non-smooth max-Lyapunov function V (zi, <fr) is a global, quadratic Lyapunov func
tion fo r the linear uncertain system o f (3.6-3.7) and the sliding-mode-based control from (3.9-3.11). It
sufficiently provides ultimate boundedness o f the closed loop control with respect to the set 11(e). The
set n(e) is entered exponentially fast and for arbitrary initial value z(to = 0):
min(iM)f f /T 7 7 Z ~ i7 i\—jl7 K \\ ~ \ , ~ ^ II ||
( v v ( z 1 ( o ) , m ) -*> )+ *> Z>2
and
Note, that both sub-functions Vi(zi) + kV2 {<f>) and (kuj2 + l)V i(zi) are differentiable for all z G Mn
and satisfy:
< m a x ( ||P i ||,f c ||P 2||) ||z ||, < { k u 2 + 1 ) IIP! II ||Z !||
Si 8z
(4.27)
Despite V(z\,<J>) is not differentiable in z everywhere, the latter has shown that Assumption 2.2a is
satisfied for almost all z G Rn . In particular the inequalities of (4.27), will be shown to be sufficient to
prove that the discretized sliding-mode based control is robustly stable for small enough sampling-time.
4.6 Summary
A global Lyapunov function, the non-smooth max-Lyapunov function, has been introduced for sliding-
mode-based control. A general stability theory approach has been provided for the non-smooth max-
Lyapunov function, which is the maximum of a countable number of differentiable functions.
The max-Lyapunov function has been developed so that the state-space-structure due to the sliding-
mode-based control is obeyed. The cone-shaped boundary, which combines a constant layer and a
sector, is the basis of the non-smooth max-Lyapunov function. The boundary of the sector is the points
where the max-Lyapunov function is not differentiable. This approach allows independent account to
be taken of the sliding-mode-based control inside and outside the cone-shaped-sliding-mode layer by
analyzing the range-space and null-space Lyapunov functions. Thus, the max-Lyapunov function fits
most suitably the sliding-mode based control.
Two different general frameworks of Lebesgue integration theory and Clarke’s non-smooth analysis
have been used to show the feasibility of the max-Lyapunov function. With the application of Clarke’s
generalized derivative, the analysis is placed into a larger theoretical framework which can be also of
interest for future research within the area of sampled-data control. For both techniques, it has been
found that it is sufficient to carry out a standard analysis for the time-derivatives of the differentiable
functions, which define the max-Lyapunov function. The results are then combined to derive an upper
bound for the time-derivative of the max-Lyapunov function. Stability or exponential stability follow
under certain conditions.
The pre-requisites for the analysis of the discretized sliding-mode-based control have been pro
vided, Lipschitz continuity of the control and a global Lyapunov function. Thus, the next chapter is
devoted to develop a general approach to discretized exponentially stabilizing controls, which is then
applied to the sliding-mode based control example.
C hapter 5
A mean value theorem based approach to controller discretization
5.1 Introduction
An important conclusion of the ‘fast sampling’ existence proofs in Section 2.5.2 has been that a control
value causing a Lyapunov function to decrease at one particular time-instant ti will continue forcing
the Lyapunov function to become smaller for finite time. Many practically oriented approaches to the
discretization of non-linear control laws have ignored this fact (Hsu & Sastry 1987, Djenoune et al.
1998). Hsu & Sastry (1987) and also Djenoune et al. (1998) investigated non-linear affine systems with
constraints similar to Assumptions 2.1b-2.3b. As already emphasized, their approach is to find an upper
bound on the Euler norm of the sampling residual, which is then ultimately included in a Lyapunov
function analysis. Thus, the larger the upper bound for the sampling residual, the more conservative
are the results from the Lyapunov function analysis. Hsu & Sastry (1987) and Djenoune et al. (1998)
use integration techniques employing the Gronwall-Bellman theorem for the upper bound. This causes
the upper bound of the residual norm to increase exponentially. In contrast, Itkis (1976) suggested
the use of the mean value theorem to find an upper estimate for the sampling residual. This idea has
been further developed here. Additionally, the stabilizing effect of the discretized control has been
considered when integration procedures are used to find upper approximates of the norm of the state
during a sampling interval. Further, it will be seen that the Lipschitz continuity of the drift of the non
linear, affine system is not necessary for global exponential stability in contrast to Hsu & Sastry (1987)
and Djenoune et al. (1998). A trade-off of any of these techniques is the requirement of a minimum
sampling frequency for a proof of stability even for a stable, uncontrolled system. However from a
heuristic point of view, a robust, discrete controller has to be able to act faster than the initial system
speed and the targeted control system speed to compensate the uncertainty and the rate of change of the
states during a sample interval. This demand is implicitly included in the analysis. As emphasized in
the closing of Section 2.4.4, this assumption does not exclude the case of disturbances or uncertainty
with discontinuities, since upper bounds on the uncertainties allow the extent to which discontinuities
affect the system within a time interval to be estimated.
C h a p t e r 5 . A m e a n v a l u e t h e o r e m b a s e d a p p r o a c h t o c o n t r o l l e r d is c r e t iz a t io n 66
The discretization approach is introduced for a general non-linear affine system with Assumptions
2.1a-2.3a. The mean value theorem which is used is therefore explained at first and extended to sys
tems involving Caratheodory-type solutions. Finally, the discretization technique is demonstrated for
the non-linear, sliding-mode-like control from Chapter 3 involving the use of the non-smooth max-
Lyapunov function of Chapter 4.
5.2 A generalized mean value theorem
The following generalized mean value theorem for vector valued, non-differentiable functions will be
used to derive an upper estimate for the sampling residual || Ax/r || = ||x(f) —x A/r (t, x) ||. The theorem
generalizes the mean value theorem for a vector valued function x(f) proved by Rudin (1964, Theorem
5.20) considering an absolutely continuous x(t) instead of a continuously differentiable x(£):
Theorem 5.1 Let x(t) be an absolutely continuous mapping from the open interval (a, (3) into Rn and
let a, 6; a < b be two points in (a, (3). Let £(t) be a bounded function from [a,/?] into W 1 such that
f = x(£) almost everywhere. Then
||x(b) - x ( a ) || < ( h - a ) sup ||f(t)||.

te(a,b)
Note that if there is a function fu(t) continuous in [a, 6] with ||fu(t)|| > ||f(t)|| on (a, 6), then there
exists a tc € [a, 6], so that supt6(a>6) ||f(f)|| < ||ftt(tc)ll-
Proof Since x (t) is absolutely continuous in (a,/3), it is differentiable almost everywhere in (a,/?)
(Craven 1982, Proposition 5.5.3). Thus, f exists, where f (t) = x(t) almost everywhere. The derivative
:x ( t) is Lebesgue-integrable over [a, b]:
f b
x(b) —x(a) = / x ( t ) d t = f i(t)dt
Ja Ja
Since, f (t) is integrable, the components fi(t), i = 1,..., n are measurable over [a, 6], which shows that
the non-negative functions \fi{t)\, |/i( t)|2, £"= 1|/i( t)|2 and ^ /S ”=1|/i(f)|2 = ||f(t)j| are measurable
and Lebesgue integrable over [a, 6] (Craven 1982). Since, the value of ||f(f)|| is bounded in (a, b) the
following holds:
f ||f(f)[| dt < [ sup ||f(f)|| dt = (b — a) sup ||f(t)||,

Ja Ja t€(a,6) tE(a,b)
This implies that ||f(£)|| has a Lebesgue integral of bounded value in [a, 6]. It can be shown that
[ f(f)df|| < [ ||f(*)||df

Ja II Ja
holds by applying a similar procedure as given by Rudin (1964) (Theorem 6.20). The proof is finished
by combining the two last results. ■
This mean value theorem will be now used to analyze the closed loop behaviour of a discretized control.
5.3 A generic approach to non-linear controller discretization
The general procedure for control law discretization is introduced using the generic non-linear affine
system of (2.1) with continuous and bounded input gain:
x(t) = f(f,x) + g (x )u , x G Rn , f : R x Rn -» Rn , g : Rn -*• Rnxm, ||g|| < Q.
Consider therefore a globally Lipschitz, continuous-time control law u c (x) which satisfies Assump
tions 2.1-2.3 from Section 2.2. Both alternative sets of assumptions a and b will be considered.
The sampled-data implementation of the continuous-time control u c (x) uses the discretized control
signal u = u A(t, u c ), which is the result of a sample-and-hold process of (2.27,2.31) with constant
sampling-time r:
uA(f, uc) = H TSTu c (x.(t)).
The first step of the analysis of the control law discretization approach is to establish the existence of
solution for the closed loop:
Lemma 5.1 Suppose a globally Lipschitz-continuous control u c (x) for the non-linear affine system of
(2.1) exists so that the closed loop Assumptions 2. la,2.3a hold. Then a Caratheodory solution for the
differential system employing the discretized u = uA(i, u c ) exists within the interval [0, oo) and the
system has no finite escape time for any sampling-time r > 0. •
Proof It can be verified that for the discretized control system, an absolutely continuous solution to
the discrete controlled system exists. This can be shown using the principle of complete induction.
• Assume 3 x(to = 0), u(£o = 0) : x(to = 0) = xo, u(fo = 0) = 0.
• Induction start: It is to prove that there exists a solution within the interval [0, t \. This is a direct
conclusion of the procedure described in the induction step, which is given now.
• Induction step: Assume there exists a solution x(t) with finite value ||x(£)|| within the interval
[ti-i,ti] (U = zr, i = 0 ,1,2,...) for i > 1. Within the induction step, it has to be shown that
there exists a bounded solution in [£*, U+i].
The closed loop system for t G (U, U+i] can be rewritten using the relation (2.31) from the sample-
and-hold process:
x(f) = [f(f,x(f)) + g (x (f))u c (x(f))] + g (x (f))(u c (x(fi)) - u c (x(f))) (5.1)

= u (t)
The control value u (t) is for t G {U, ti+1] constant, while it has a possible single discontinuity jump
ing from u c (x(fj_i)) to u c (x(U)) at t = U. Hence within [fj,f»+i], the right hand side of (5.1) is
continuous in x(t) for constant t in f (t, •) and Lebesgue measurable in t for constant x(t). Further by
Assumption 2.3a
||f(f,x(f)) + g (x (f))u c (x(fi))|| < Kc ||x(f)|| + Kc,c + GlCu \\x(ti) —x(t)|| (5.2)
which is bounded for any bounded x (^ ) and x(£). Thus, there exists an absolutely continuous solution
x(£) at least within an interval [£j, t{ x], 0 < x < r. This solution satisfies t G [f», U + x]:
IIx ( t ) - x(*i)|| = | f [f(s, x(s)) + g(x(s))uc (x(s))] + g(x(s))(uc (x(£i)) - uc ( x ( s ) ) ) d s

IIJti
<
f (/Cc ||x(f<)|| +/Cc,c + {QICu + /Cc)||x(tj) -x (s)||)c fs. (5.3)
Jti
It is implied from the Gronwall-Bellman Inequality (Khalil 1992a, Lemma 2.1)
||x(t) - x(fj)|| < r (Kc ||x(fi)|| + JCc,c) exp((<?£„ + Kc )(t - t,))
showing that x ( t ) remains bounded for bounded x(f*), which allows to continue the solution x(<) over
the whole interval [f*, f*+i].
• Conclusion: The procedure of the induction step can be also applied to prove the correctness of the
induction start. Therefore according to the principle of complete induction, an absolutely continuous
solution x(£) for the discretized control exists over the interval [0, oo) and the escape time is not finite
for any r > 0. ■
As generally known, existence of solution does not imply uniqueness of solution. The second set of
Assumptions, 2. lb,2.3b, implies the uniqueness of solution.
Lemma 5.2 A globally Lipschitz-continuous control u c (x) for the non-linear affine o f (2.1) satisfying
the closed loop Assumptions 2. lb,2.3b ensures that the solution x (t) to the closed loop system applying
the discretized control u = u A(f, u c ) exists and is unique within the interval [0, oo) and the system has
no finite escape time for any sampling-time r > 0. •
Proof The existence of solution x(<) and the infinite escape-time for the discretized control has been
proved with Lemma 5.1. The proof of uniqueness can be carried out as the proof for Lemma 5.1 using
the principle of complete induction. Thus in the induction start, it has to be proved that there is a
unique solution in the interval [0, r] assuming existence and uniqueness of x(fo = 0) = xo, u(to =
0) = 0. This is carried out similarly as for the induction step, where it has to be proved that there is a
unique solution for the interval [t{, fj+i] assuming the existence of a unique solution for [fj_i, U]. With
Assumption 2.1b/2.3b, it follows that f(f, x) and g(x) are Lipschitz-continuous in x, so that the right
hand side of (5.1) is also Lipschitz-continuous in x for any constant value of t e (U, £,•+1], while the
right hand is continuous in t G {ti,U+1] with a possible discontinuity for t = fj, t»+i. Thus by Khalil
(1992a, Theorem 2.2) the solution in [ti, U+\] is unique. This argument applied to the induction start
implies uniqueness of solution in [0, oo) by the principle of complete induction. ■
Having established existence or uniqueness of solution x(£), it is now of interest to investigate stability
via the fast-sampling approach. For reasons of simplicity, the continuous-time control u c (x) is inves
tigated assuming that it exponentially stabilizes the equilibrium 0. Therefore, a respective Lyapunov
function from Assumption 2.2a satisfies (C5 = 0):
6V
< c4 11x 11, Ci11x 112 < V (t,x) < C2 | | x | | 2 , ay ' t : ^ + ^ ( f ( t,x ) + g(x)uc (x)) < - c 3||x||2.
Jx
(5.4)
and the control assumes the following specialized condition Assumption 2.3a (/Cc,c = 0):
||f(f,x) + g(x)uc (x)|| < K c ||x ||, ||u c (xi) - u c (x2)|| < JCU | | X ! - x 2|| (5.5)
The extension of the discretization approach to ultimate bounded stability will be carried out with
respect to the example of the sliding-mode-based control. The following theorem ensures stability of
the discretized control. It contrasts to previous work by Hsu & Sastry (1987) and Djenoune et al. (1998)
since it does not use the Gronwall-Bellman inequality or similar techniques and the upper estimate of
the sampling residual ||A X|| = ||x(£) —x A/r (f,x)|| does not increase exponentially with r:
Theorem 5.2 Assume a globally Lipschitz control u c (x) exponentially stabilizes the system (2.1) and
satisfies Assumptions 2. la-2.3a with C5 = JCc,c = 0 or Assumptions 2. lb-2.3b. Then, there exists a f
small enough such that for any r, r < t the discretized control u = u A(f, u c ) for the system (2 . 1 ) is
exponentially stable. 0
Rem ark 5.1 The proof of this theorem always derives a finite value for f . Thus, there is always a
constraint on the sampling time t even if there is no control needed, which would be so in the case
of open loop exponential stability. Theoretically, this constraint is not necessary. A suitable technique
showing this will be given in Chapter 7 which is based on Lp-norm analysis techniques. o
Proof
Step I: Existence or unique existence of an absolutely continuous solution have been proved with
Lemma 5.1 and Lemma 5.2.
Step II a: An upper estimate of the sampling residual || Ax || can be derived by using the equality
f(t,x (t))+ g (x (t))u A( t,u c ) = f(t,x (t))+ g (x (t))u c (x(t)) + (g(x(t))uA( t,u c ) - g ( x ( t) ) u c (x(f)))
(5.6)
and the Mean Value Theorem 5.1 for vector valued functions:
Vta < t b e Btc e [ta, t b] : ||x(ta) x(tft)|| < r ||f ( t c,x ( tc)) + g(x(tc))uc (x(tc))||
+T|[g(x(tc) ) u Af e + , u c )1—g(xftc))uc (x(fc))||

= u c (x(ti))
By (5.5) (Kc,c = 0) from Assumption 2.3a and the bounding constraint on ||g||, it follows:
||x(fa) - x (t&)|| < r/Cc ||x (tc)|| + t Q K u sup (||x (ta ) - x (^ ) ||) (5.7)
ta )t(3E[it
Step II b: In (5.7), an upper estimate JCU ||xA(f, x) —x(f) || has been used for the control law residual
||uA(f,u c ) - u c (x(f))||
This upper estimate should be computed as tight as possible for less conservatism.
Step III: A partial Lyapunov analysis follows by considering the equality (5.6) and the Lyapunov
function as found in (5.4) from Assumption 2.2a
V < - c 3 ||x ||2 + ^ (g(x(f))uA(f,u c ) - g(x(f))uc (x(f)))
< - —V (f,x(f)) + c4 ||x(f)|| QKU sup (||x (ttt) —x(t^)||)

°2 t * , t 0 e[t i , t i + i]
< V (f,x(t)) + -y= y/V (t,x(t))g jC u sup (||x (ttt) - x ( ^ ) l l ) (5.8)

c2 Vci t « , t 0 e [ t i ,ti+ 1]
Suppose there is a V(t, x (t)), U+i > t > f* larger than V(fj, x(ff)) and assume V(U, x(f*)) > 0. This
is only possible if V is positive for a finite duration of time in the interval [fj, U+i] , i.e. only under the
assumption
v (ti,x (ti) ) < ( (5.9)

y c3v/cT J
V can be increasing. Hence, assume that
,^N , (G K uÔ lSV P ta ,m ti,«i+l](IN < o )-x (* fl)ll)V

V(t’X(t)) <(----------- ^ J
Thus, there must exist an interval [6 , t] C [ft, tj+i] for the continuous function V(f, x(f)) such that:
V(0,x(0)) = V (ft,x(ft)) < V (f,x(f)) < V (t,x (t)), t e [0,t]
and
0 < v { t,x (t)) < 16 m
The integration of the differential inequality (5.8) in the interval [0, t] implies:
V^V(f,x(f)) < v/V (ft,x(ft))e_ 2^(i_e)
c2c4 f l - e _ ^ (^ ))
+ -------------- gjcu sup (||x(fQ) x(f^g)||), t e [0,t].
C3 v Cl t a ,t0 e[ti, ti+i]
(5.10)
The latter solution of the differential inequality (5.8) is not unique if V(ft,x(fj)) = 0. However, by
results relating to the limitation process in improper integrals (Craven 1982, pp. 35, pp. 114) the last
inequality also must hold if
V (t,x (t)) = I ----------------------- c3^ = -------------------------) or = °-

T he w o rst case is th a t V ( t , x ( t ) ) is in c r e a s in g t h r o u g h o u t t h e w h o l e i n t e r v a l [ £ * ,£ » + 1] , w h e r e a n y
V ( i , x ( £ ) ) , t G f o , U + i ] h a s th e b o u n d g iv e n b y :
/ x C2 C4 ( l - e_ ^ T>)
su p ( y/V {t,x (t))) < y/V (ti,x{ti)) + ----------^ ------- — --------- ^ - £ / C u sup ( ||x ( t a ) - x (fy )ll)
H a v in g c o n s id e re d th e c a s e ( 5 .9 ), it c a n b e v e r ifie d th a t i f V ( t i , x ( t i ) ) d o e s n o t s a tis f y (5 .9 ), th e
L yapunov fu n c tio n V is n o n - in c r e a s in g fo r t = t i , i.e . th e re c a n n o t b e a t G s u c h th a t
V ( t,x (t) ) > V ( fj,x ( fi) ) . T h e u p p e r e s tim a te f o r V ( £ ,x ( f ) ) ( 5 .1 0 ) a ls o a p p lie s in th is c a s e a n d is
r a t h e r c o n s e r v a tiv e . I t f o llo w s b y ( 5 .4 ) f r o m in e q u a lity ( 5 .1 0 ) :
c 2c4 ( l - e
sup ( ||x ( f ) ||) < — ||x ( f < ) || + - G K U su p ( ||x ( f a ) - x ( f y ) ||) .
v ci c3c i t a ,t0 e [ u , t i + 1]
T h e e x p o n e n t o f e in th e la tte r in e q u a lity is n e g a tiv e . Thus ( l — e ~ ^ r ^ —» 0 f o r r —>• 0 a n d
^1 — e _ ^ 2 = 1 fo r r -> 00. T h is c o n t r a s t s t o th e i n te g r a tio n p r o c e d u r e s b y H s u & S a s tr y ( 1 9 8 7 )
a n d D je n o u n e e t a l. ( 1 9 9 8 ), w h e r e th e s ta b iliz in g e f f e c t o f th e c o n tr o l h a s n o t b e e n c o n s id e r e d a n d
e x p o n e n tia lly r is in g u p p e r e s tim a te s a re fo u n d .
S t e p I V a : T h e l a tte r r e s u lt c a n b e s u b s titu te d in to ( 5 .7 ). B y
ICa /1 d=
y Ci
K a/2 = ' QIC* (1+ /CeC2C4(1 6
\ C3 C 1
2 ) | (5 U )
| | x ( t a ) - x ( f 6 ) || < t/ C a / i ||x ( f i ) || + r / C A /2 su p ( ||x ( t 0 ) - x ( t y ) ||) , t a , t b G [tu U + i]
S in c e t a a n d t b a r e a r b itra r y , it f o llo w s f o r r < £ “ •'
sup ( ||x ( f Q ) - x ft^ J II) < T K- * j} — ||x ( f i ) || ( 5 .1 2 )

1] l “ r ^ A /2
O b s e r v e , i f th e s y s te m is s ta b le a n d n o c o n tr o l is u s e d u = 0 th e n K u = 0 . C o n s e q u e n t l y , fCA / 2 = 0
w h ic h m a k e s th e o n ly c o n s tra in t r p r io r to th e L y a p u n o v f u n c tio n a n a ly s is o f S te p V o b s o le te .
S te p IV b : T h is s te p in v o lv e s s u b s titu tin g ( 5 .1 2 ) in to | | u c ( x ( £ ) ) — u c ( x 2 ) ( * j ) || < JCU | | x ( £ ) — x ( t j ) | |
to o b ta in :
||u c ( x ( t ) ) - u c ( x ( t,- )) ll < t K u — jjx (tj)H ( 5 .1 3 )

1 - r / C a /2
T h is r e s u l t m a y b e c o n s e rv a tiv e in p r a c tic e . E q u a tio n ( 5 .1 2 ) a n d k n o w le d g e a b o u t th e c a lc u la tio n
p r o c e d u r e f o r K u c a n b e u s e d to a c h ie v e a le s s c o n s e r v a tiv e re s u lt. T h is w ill b e s e e n in S e c tio n 5 .4 . T h e
r e s u l t s c a n b e in c lu d e d in th e fin a l L y a p u n o v a n a ly s is .
S t e p V : T h e u p p e r e s tim a te o f th e s a m p lin g r e s id u a l ||x ( t ) — x ( t j ) || in th e in te r v a l t G [ t i , U + 1] c a n
now b e u s e d f o r a fin a l L y a p u n o v a n a ly s is s h o w in g e x p o n e n tia l s ta b ility . I t is s e e n b y ( 5 .8 ), ( 5 .1 3 ) ,

x(t) = x(t{) + (x(i) —x(£i)) and 0 < k < 1 for almost all f G [U, t*+i]:
V < - c 3 ||x (t)||2 + rc 4 ||x(i)|| QKU — ||x(fi)||

1 — TA,A/ 2
< -(1 - k ) c3 ||x(f)||2 - kc3 ||x(ti)||2 + «2c3x r (<i)(x(ti) - x(t)) - kc3 ||x(tj) - x(t)||
K K
+ r c 4 \\x(U) - x(f)|| QKU Ar—
— ||x(«i)|| + ttc
l|x (* i)|| + QKu -—
c 44QKu ——lr —
------ ||x(t<;
I — T / L' Aa //22 1 —
L — T
T/L
^ aa //92
By x T (ti)(x(ti) - x ( t ) ) < ||x(ti)|| ||x(tj) - x ( t ) || and (5.12):
V < - ( 1 - « )— V (f,x(t)) - KCs ||x(fj) —x (t)||2 - KC3 ||x(fj]

C2
/C a /1
-Hr I k 2 c 3 + t c 45 /C „ ) + c 4g E U l ^ )||x(ti)H2 (5 .1 4 )
l - r / C A/2 V l-rX :A/2/ 1 -rJ C A / 2 J
It follows that the sampling time can be chosen small enough so that the sum of the last two terms in
the latter inequality result is non-positive. In this case, it is found that
V < —(1 —k )— V.
C2
The system is exponentially stable.

)C
It may be observed in this last step that the magnitude of the term «2c3 is mainly governed
by the factor /CA/ X(5.11), which cannot be 0. The continuous-time closed loop system is chosen to be
exponentially stable; thus, Kc > 0 is a necessary constraint and the upper bound for the sampling time
is always dependent on the performance related constant Kc > 0. ■
The extension of the discretization approach to dynamic feedback systems is easily possible. Sup
pose there is a plant system P , a continuous-time dynamic feedback control K c :
P : x p (t) = f p ( t,x p ( t) ) + g P (x p { t))u { t) K c : * c (< ) = fc (x c { t),y (t) )
y (t) = h p (x p (t)) u (t) = h c ( x c ( f ) ,y ( f ) )
fp : R x R np -> R n p , g P : R np -> R nPx m P fc : R nc x W p -> R nc ( 5 .1 5 )
h p : R np -> R Pp h c : R nc x R pp -+ R m p
u G R m p , y G Rpp , x p G R np xc G R nc
and the dynamic feedback is implemented using the Euler approximation:
P : x P (t) = fp (t,x p (t))+ g p (x p (t))ffr (v)(t) K 6 : x K6(i + l) = x K e {i)-prfc(x K&(i), ST(y)(i))
y (t) = h p (x p (f)) v(i) = h cfxêW ^T fyK *))

(5.16)
For the dynamic control system of (5.16), the framework of non-linear affine systems from (2.1) can be
used by defining the drift f , the input gain with g and the feedback signal uc with:
fp(t,xp(t)) 0 gp(xp(t)) 0 c
hc(xc(t),hp(xp(t)))
»6 = J U =
. 0 0 _0 I _ fc(xc(t),hp(xp(t)))
Using this configuration it is now possible to formulate a corollary to the ’Fast Sampling’ Theorem 5.2:
Corollary 5.1 Suppose the output and control functions hp, he and ic o f the dynamic control system
o f (5.16) are globally Lipschitz and the functions f, g and u c satisfy for x = [xp x£]T the Assump
tions 2.1a-2.3a o f Section 2.2, which ensures the existence o f a continuous-time Lyapunov function and
a sector characteristic fo r the continuous-time closed loop system o f (5.15). Then there exists a con
stant f, so that for any sampling time 0 < r < f the system (5.16) is ultimately bounded stable and
exponentially decaying outside a set o f ultimate boundedness. 4b
Note that the analysis for the particularly defined f, g and u c with respect to x = f + guA/T(£, uc )
implies the stability of the hybrid control system (5.16).
Rem ark 5.2 Observe that the plant output function hp (x p (f)) from (5.15) is independent of the ac
tuator signal u (t). Provided the opposite was true for Lipschitz-continuous h p = h p (x p (t), u(£)), it
would not be easily possible to carry out the analysis of the sampled-data implementation by employ
ing Theorem 5.2. For the hybrid control system of (5.16), a unit-delay with respect to the actuator is
introduced for the output measurement at the sampling instants:
S,T(h p (x p (t),ffr (v(t))))(0 = h p (5 r (xp(*)),v(i - 1)).
This is a result of the definition of the hold operator from (2.24). However in case the control output
he was not a function of the plant output y(t), a modification of the sample and hold elements would
allow the analysis with respect to Theorem 5.2. This will be discussed with respect to an example in
Chapters 6 and 7. °
5.4 Discretization of a sliding-mode-based control
In the previous Section, a general approach has been outlined for a proof of stability of discretized
non-linear control systems. In this section, a proof of stability for the discretized sliding-mode-like
control will be provided. Thus, the linear uncertain system of (3.1) transformed into the nominal form
of (3.6-3.7) for sliding-mode state feedback control:
z i (t) = Szi(£) + A i 2 <f){t) + F 2,
<j)(t) = (0 4- A©) Z\ (t) 4- (fI 4* Af2) 4>(t) + [B 2 4- ^

is reconsidered. The continuous-time sliding-mode-based control of (3.9-3.11)
u £ ( Z i(t),0 (t)) + u cN L{zi{t),<t>(t))
is discretized as in (2.31) and applied to the linear uncertain system (3.6-3.7):
U (t) = ll£ (f,u £ ) + u%L { t,u cN L)
using a constant sampling time r.

The proof of the main theorem in this section will use the established steps of Theorem 5.2 as a
guideline. However, the procedure of the proof has to be changed and case-optimized. The special sys
tem structure due to the sliding-mode based control law is taken into account, so that the upper bounds
on norms of the sampling residuals can be estimated as low as possible. Further, the non-linear affine
system (2.1) has been investigated using an exponentially stabilizing control law for the discretization
approach, while the sliding-mode-based control is ultimately bounded stable. In particular, the uncer
tainties of constant bound F 2 and G 2 have to be considered. Thus, C5 ^ 0 and Kc,c 7^ 0 for Assumption
2.2a and 2.3a follow. The global non-smooth max-Lyapunov function V(zi(t),<f>(t)) (4.6) of Chapter
4
V(z(t),(/>(t)) = max (V i(zi(f)) + kV 2 (4>(t)) , (k u 2 + l)V i(zi(f))) (5.17)
is employed for the fast-sampling-result, which allows to investigate the dynamics inside and outside
the sector region of (4.1). This will show that the differentiability constraints of Assumption 2.2a can
be relaxed. The following theorem formulates the fast-sampling result.
Theorem 5.3 Suppose a discretized control u £ (£, u£) -1- u ^ L(t, u ^ L) is used as a feedback control
fo r the system (3.6-3.7). Then there exists a global, non-smooth max-Lyapunov function V (z\(t), <f>{t))
and a f > 0 such that ultimate boundedness can be proved fo r any r < f . The states are exponentially
decreasing outside a compact vicinity o f the origin. 0
Note that in contrast to Theorem 3.1, sliding-mode-like performance with respect to the cone shaped
sliding-mode layer is not proved. A relevant discussion will follow in Section 5.4.1.
Rem ark 5.3 With slight modifications, the discretization approach demonstrated with Theorem 5.3 is
also valid for the modified sliding-mode based control of Section 3.4.1 (c = 0) under the assumption
of parametric and input uncertainty only. o
Proof Step I: Existence of solution for [0,00) follows from Lemma 5.1, while uniqueness cannot be
implied.
Step II a: To prevent conservatism on the upper estimate of the sampling error, the Step-II-analysis
will not be carried out with respect to the whole system. It is rather of interest to find upper estimates
of the sampling residual norms for each sub-system-state vector, i.e. ||AZl || = ||zi(f) —zi(£t-)|| and
|| A^|| = ||0(f) —4>{ti) || with t € [fz, U+1]. Hence by Theorem 5.1 and (3.6), it follows that for any pair
€ [fz,f z+i], t b > t a.
||zi(f6) - Z i ( f a )|| < (tb - to) sup (||Ezi(/i) + A i 2 <f>(h) + F 2||)

h€[tb,ta]
< r sup ( ||E z i( h ) + A i20(/i) + F 2 )

he[ti,ti+1] 7
< T sup ( l l f i l l N W i i + iiiiwllll^W II + ll^ l l)

/*€[*»,t*+i] x 7
< t s u p (||E ||) sup ( ||z i ( /i ) ||) + T s u p ( | | i i 2||) sup (||0(h )||) + r s u p (||F 2||) (5.18)
AS he[ti,ti+i] A A 12 F2
The analysis for the sub-system (3.7) follows similarly:
H0(f&) —0(fa)|| 5: T SUP ( ||(® ~b A 0 ) z l(/i) -f- (fl + Afl) <f>(h) + (B 2 + U "b Cr211^
< r sup f A G z i (h) + (fl* + AQ) 0(h) — G i B^1 ( 0 z i ( f z) + (Q — Q*)0(ij))
- © ( Z l(ti) - Zl(h)) - (n - - m ) + g2
( b 2 + G ,) B ? P 24>(ti)
Il^2 0 (f<)|| + <5(||zi(f<)ll + 110(^)11 + c)
Under consideration of the definition of p(-, •) (3.20), the following upper estimate for \\<f>(tb) — 4>(ta)
follows:
| | 0 ( f b) - 0 ( f a)|| < T SUp ( | | A©||) SUp (||zi(/l)||) + T S U p (||J 2 * + Aft||) SUp (||0(/l)||)
a © An Ae[<i,«*+i]
+r sup (||G iB 2 ‘©ll) + sup ( ||( b 2 + G i) B 2 1 ) — tj3 J ||z i(i
+r su p (||G 1B2- 1(n -f i* )ll) + s _ u p (|(b 2 + G 1) b 2- 1| | ) 2 V | | P 2 | | ) |W « i) ||
+ r (sup (||G 2||) + sup (|| ( b 2 + G^) B 2 l ||)
+ r ||0 ||||z 1(ti) - Zl(fc)|| + r||fi - Sl*||||^(<i) - m ||
= ™ A / 0 1 + r n A /0 2 sup ( | | Z l ( / i ) | | ) + r n A /0 3 sup (||0(A)||) + TnA/04||zi(«,
+ ^ A /O 5 | | 0 ( f i ) | | + T | | © | | | | z i ( f i ) ~ zi{h )\\ + r ||0 —f 2 * | | | | 0 ( f z) — 0 (h )|| (5.19)

where
n A/01 = sup(||G2||) + sup(||(£2 + G i)£ 2 1||)—T72, n A/02 = sup(||A©||),

g 2 Gi * a©
A /0 3 = sup(||Q* + AQ||), nA/04 = su p (||G i£ 2 ^ H ) + sup(||(£2 + G x)£2 ^l)—ry3

AH <=:, Gi *
n A/05 = s u p d lG i^ - 1^ - n * )||) +sup(H ( £ 2 + G O B J 111) ^ 77! ||P2||. (5.20)

Gi Gi C
Step II b: The computation of a Lipschitz constant Ku is considered in particular due to the complexity
of the sliding-mode-like control. The notation for certain continuous-time and discretized controller
components is as follows:
= 771 ||P 2 0 ( t ) || +773 || z 1 ( f ) || + 772 ,
"■NL.UVW = uC(f) = «£(*(*)) +
7f (t,7 l) = HrSrY,(Vl{t),Vi(t)) = 7l*(Vl(t),K2(t)) + A7J,
where the discretized signals pA(f,p), v$fL,uv)* u l ( ^ u £ )’ u a/x) sampling

residuals A„c . A„c , A„c , A^* are defined according to the convention of (2.27-2.28). With
USL.S\\ X L,UV NL '1
the above definitions, the residual A„cA' L of the non-linear controller part may be obtained:
UNL = P ^ USL,UV = 7 A ~ 77A u 7VL,I7V
= b r t v i W , v 2( 0 ) + A 7l-) ( i « ? ( i W ) + a u'n l ,s w )
______________ B 2
l P2 <t>{t)______________ .
||P20(t)|| + idlZ! (i)|| + |W t)|| + c) + <L. VV
\\P2<P(t)W + tf(||zi(<)|| + ||tf(<)|| + c)
B ^ p 2m
” - " m m w + «(iiai(on + iw * )ii+ c)
A A B 2 l P2<f>(t) A A A
+ ’ U w i 'sw ' IIA tfW II + i(IN l(« )ll + IW«)II + c ) + '
Thus fo ri € (ii.tj+i],
Pi<M
B 2&uc r = A uc
I I^ W II + i(l|z i(i)|| + ||<6(t)|| + c)
+ 7l- m m i + 4(| | , l ( t ) || + w t ) i i + c )
+ B 2A ucNL u v ±v(zi(ti),(ti)mV1(ti), V-2(tj)). (5.21)

The three terms A„cNL,UV , A~*

'1
and A„cNL,SW are analyzed
J
first. Thereafter, these results can be substi-
tuted into (5.21) to obtain the specific global Lipschitz constant Ku.
|B 2a UNL,UV
uc !
(||P 20(OII + <5(11*1 (Oil + 110(011 + O K II^ O O II + <S(1|Z! (ti)ll + 110(0)11 + c))
__________ ^20(0 (<5(11*1 (ti)ll - ll*i(0ll) +4(|10(O)|| - 110(011))__________

+
(m tm + < 5(ii*i ( o n + w o n + c ) ) ( i i i 32 0 f t ) i i + < 5(ii*! (ti)n + i i ^ ) h + c ) )
p 2 (^(t) - m ) a i o ^ o i i + 5(iizi wii + i w o i i + c))
+
(||P 20(OII + <5(11*1(Oil + 110(011 + c))(||P20(O)|| + 4(11*1 (tj)|| + + c))
< 2||P2(0(ti) - 0 ( t ) ) || _ 11*1 (**) - * ! ( 0 II

+<5(11*1 (ii)ii + u m n + c) m m w + *(ii«i(*)ii + l i m a + o
110(0) - 0(011
+ P W ( 0 ) l l + 4 ( l l « i ( 0 ) l l + 110(0)11 + c )‘ (5'22)
The following result can then be derived from the latter, establishing the first part of the Lipschitz
constant (5.21):
t e : \\B2&ucN Luv^r} ^ | |
< 2jjP2(0(ft) ~ \\P2<f>(ti)\\ + r73||zi(fi)|| + rj2)

<r||P2</>fe)|| + C<5(||zi(fi)|| + ||<?!»(fi)|| + c )
\\zi{tj) ~ ziW ll7 i(7 i \\P2 <j>{ti)\\ +??3|lzife)l| + m )

+5
c||P20(fi)ll + (l|zi(*«)ll + ||0(fi)|| + c)
II<p{ti) - ||P2^(fi)|| +7/3||Zl(fx)|| + r ) 2 )

+8
c||P20(^)ll + <;8(\\zi(ti)i\ + \\<})(ti)\\ + c)
< ( ||0 ( O ) - 0 (t)ll + l ) + ll* l(0 ) - * l ( 0 l l ) ^ ( 1 + S X m i n i P ^ ) + 1,3 + ? ) •
(5 .2 3 )
In a similar fashion, the upper

rr
bound for the residual norm 1||1A„cN L .S W || can be calculated:
IIP2AJ + % ||A21||)
By the inequalities 1 < 7*(Vi(£), V2{t)) < 71 and ||u^ Lû v \\ < 1, the second part of the Lipschitz
constant ( 5 .2 1 ) can be concluded:
A uc iS iv7i*(Vi(O,V-2(O)P20(O
\\P2<t>{t)\\ + ^ (||zi(f)|| + | |<£(t)| | + C )
An upper bound of the residual |A7*| of the third and last non-linear controller term 7* will be deter
mined:
C h a p t e r 5 . A m e a n v a l u e t h e o r e m b a s e d a p p r o a c h t o c o n t r o l l e r d i s c r e t i z a t i o n __________ 7 8
t £ (t{, î+i] | A Ti
(7i —7 i)s V2
+ s ( y / K2W + c + n ^ ) ) j ^ V i ( t i)+ 3 (> / l
(71 - < > VVl(f)(VV 2(fi) - y/V 2(t))

<
nin(P2 ) \^
+ s i V ^ 2 (t) -b C + s(y/V 2 (ti) + C ^ v/2 >J
l
(71 - 7 i) s ( V V i W + c )) ( \ / yi(f0 - V W ) )
+ _ ------------------------
+ c ) ( s/W T ) + s ( V m i + c V2 >)
< ( 7 1 - 7 i) f
llP^Zife)!! + 5 ^||P 22^ ) | | + c Amin(P22)
( l l ^ Zl(tz) - P ^ a i W I I ) _
+ (7i —7i) (5.25)
PY zifeJII + * ( \\P ^(t i)\ \ + c Amin(P22)^
The third part of the Lipschitz constant can be found by (5.21) and the inequality \\u^L u v \\ < 1:
b 2a , j i i f t ^ j n + ^ w i l + WWll + c)
5 (W P iW i) - P j m M m ^ m W + m W M un+m )
< (7 i-7 i)
d lP ^ zi^ i)!! + C5 ^ ||p 22^ ) H + c Amin(P22)
(H P^zifti) - P ^ z iftjlD fa ||P2<^(t»)|| + ry3l|zi(^)ll + 772)

+ (7i —7i)
dlP^Zife)!! +C5 (J|P22^ - ) | | + c Amtn(P22)
< 1I0( ^ ) - 0 WII ^ ~ 7l) fih llftll + « » P > « + l + l|P22||,?2
+ l l* i( ti) - * i ( t) ll(7- + ( UA3II11^2*Nm + ||jPiI,[[jf> S |f a + .p y il^

C \ s SC Xmin(P22)
(5.26)
The upper bounds of the residual of the linear control component can be computed in the same manner:
=► ||P 2A uc || < J | © | | 13AZl || + ||0 —f2*||||A^|| (5.27)

A full computation of a Lipschitz constant K,u can be accomplished using (5.23-5.24) and (5.26-5.27):
||B 2A uci| + ||B 2AuC || < n a/1||A 2 l|| + r v 2||A*|| (5.28)
= ll0 H+ (71 7l) ( + IIÎH IP, *||% + J I S l J ! ^

\ 5 s c \ min{Pj)
V1 4" SXmin (1~2
n u/2 = lift - f t ' l l + I m | | p 2 || + s m | | P / | | | | P 1 5 1| + II- 2 n-« , + m | | p 2 n2L

? V c \ min( P j ) J ?
+H . ( 3 M + 1) ( V + ,» + * ) (5.29)
S \ 3 J \1 -f- SXmin {P2 ) c J
Step in: Since the sampling error and the control law residual have been investigated with respect to
the sub-system states zi and </>, the same sub-systems must be considered in Step HI. The Lyapunov
functions, Vi (zi (t)) for the null-space dynamics and V2 (0(f)), for the range space dynamics have to be
investigated. By (3.14), the derivative of Vi(zi (t)) with respect to time is for almost all t G [U, f<+i]:
Vi = -l 7 .j ( t ) p $ ( p ? ± p ~ * + p ~ h T p ^ p ? z 1( t ) + z T ( t ) p ? p * A l2 m + * l ( t ) p h ? * ' 2
1 ~
< -m (t) + A n \\ sup H ^hJII + v ^ x /V U tjsu p llP ^ P jII (5.30)

,tt+x] F2
where
i = - sup (^Xmax ( p ? £ p ~ l + P ~ * Z TP?
is positive as required in equation (3.26). As ^ ||zi|| < y/Vi{z\) < Ama^ Pl ^ ||zi|| and using
the same argument as in Step HI of the proof of Theorem 5.2, it follows for all t G [fj, U+i]:
1
sup (||zi(/>)||) < Tnzi/1 + t t i z i / 2 sup (||^(ft)||) + '-Pl l|zife)||, (5.31)

Aetti.ti+1) fc€[«i,«i+i] Xmm(P?)
where
I - 1 - e -l/2 ^ r 1_ 1_ - 1 / 2 tfr
n Zl/l = 2 s u p ( | | P 15 F 2 | | ) ----------------------- — : n Z l / 2 = a s u p d l P j M u l l ) --------------------- - . (5.32)
p’ T ti\min(P?) p> T # \ min(P*)
Note, that n Zl/i and nz l/ 2 are bounded, positive functions of r > 0, since 0 < -1- eJ j ~ T < \ for
any r > 0. Since the exponent of e is negative, the values of n Zl/i and n Zl/ 2 are converging to 0 for
rising r . As already pointed out in Section 5.3, this approach is different to Hsu & Sastry (1987) and
Djenoune et al. (1998).
The analysis of the range-space dynamics (3.7) is more complicated due to the complex non-linear
control signal. By the definition of V2 (<f>(t)) in (3.13), the definition of the continuous control (3.9-3.11)
and by (3.20,3.23-3.24), it is found similar to (3.37) for almost all t G [U,U+J:
V i W ) ) < - 1 u r n 2 - <p\\p*t>\\ ( l l m i +<5| l||Z21'jjll+ i^ i i+ c ) - 7 . (Vii V2)
*(zi (*),<*>(*))
+<fiTP2 ( b 2 + G i) ( a UC + A UC J (5.33)
It has been shown in the proof of Theorem 3.1, that \£(zi(f), </>(£)) in the inequality above is non-
1
negative for \ / 2\ ^ > ljy/ 2Vi -I- cAmax(P22)* Therefore, it is sufficient for an upper estimate of the right
hand of the latter inequality to investigate ^ (z i(i), (f>(t)) under the condition
sJ W 2 < + c \ max( P j ).
By the latter condition, the relation V2) > 7^, the definition of p (3.20), it follows for $ (z i, <f>):
-CP tf(zi(t), </>(£)) = cp

1 IIP ^ II
< Cp-
,7r(V i,F2) I W I I + * ( I M + W W + c )) 7r(V i,F2)
^ 1 ^ 7i
< — <rp < — VVl l l ^ l l l l ^ l l +773^ llziWII+7?l||P2||c + P2
Vl 7 i
This result can be substituted into (5.33) so that for almost alH € [U, f»+i]:
V im )) < - f M O I r + Ilftd l4 11^1111*? II + v z j l|zi(t)|| + t7l ||P2l|c + t)2
+ fP 2 (b 2+ G i) (a„c + A UC J
< + 11^ IIP f 11+%) sup (|M h )||)
+ V 2 V v m IIP#II3 ( m m \ \ c + m )
+V2 v m t ) sup P j ( b 2 + G r) B 2 l n u/\ sup (||zi(h) -Zi(fi)ll)

Gi h£[ti,i»-(-1]
+ V 2 V W ) sup p j ( b 2 + G r) B 2 l
Gi
where the inequality (5.28) has been used.

i
It is again possible to apply the relation ■M l < ^ Xrnz^ £ i l ||^||, the argument
found in Step III of the proof of Theorem 5.2 to solve the latter differential inequality:
sup (H^WII) < r n 0/1 + rn^/2 sup (\\zi(h)\\) + T n ^ sup (||zi(h) - zi(ft-)||)
+T n ^ /4 sup (||^(/l) - </>(*i)||) + T"ll0 fe)l (5.34)

/i€ [ii A m in {P2 )
where
n^/i
T"^min (P 2 )T3 Ti
.( f t) ( i - g Amoif e z '
n<
t>/2 - -------------j--------------- -J 2 \ \ f t ? | | £ ( P ¥ H I |ft5 || + rj3
TAmin(P22)73 7i
g /
.(f t) ( i -
n d>/3 - — ---------------------- - 2 s u p ( P * ( b 2 + G i) B J 1 n u/l
Am i n { P 2 ) l Z Gi V
A, .( f t) ( l -
— 2 sup f P 22 ( P2 + G1 ) P 2" 1 n u/2- (5.35)
^m in{P 2 )lZ 61
The results of (5.31) and (5.34) are upper estimates for ||zi(t)|j and ||</>(£)|| in the interval t 6 [U , f»+i].
However, the right sides of the respective inequalities still contain supt€[t. <i+1j(||z i(f)||) and
supt€^t . t.+ 1](||0 (f)||). These can be replaced by the upper estimates of ||zi(£)|| and ||^(tf)||, i.e. it
is possible to solve out the system of inequalities (5.31) and (5.34) by requiring r > 0 to satisfy the
implicit inequality:
1
T < (5.36)
where n Zl/ 2 and n ^ /2 are bounded, positive functions of r. Thus, the latter inequality can be always
satisfied for small enough r. It may be observed that the value of n ^ /2 (5.35) and respectively of the
product n Zl/ 2^ 0 /2 are zero as soon as there are no non-linear control gains 771 and 773 of (3.23), i.e.
those gains which are responsible for achieving reachability of the cone-shaped sliding mode layer and
for robustness with respect to matched parametric uncertainty. Thus, the above constraint on r would
be obsolete for n Zl/ 2n ^/2 = 0. However, if 773 = 0 then u = 0, what contradicts the constraint on
u) > 0 from (3.19).
It follows from (5.36):
/II / , mi \ ^ n z\/l T n z \ / 2 n (f>/l 2 n z i / 2 n (f>/3 / , \ 11\

sup (11*1 WII) < T . ' 2 „---- Z— 1- + r \ _ Z 2„---- „---- SUP (llz l(ft) - z l(*i)ll)
h€[U,ti+i] *■ T n z i / 2 n <)>/2 1 T n z x / 2 n <t>/2 h£[ti,ti +i]
n Zl /211ft5 II
+ r 2 _ ^ / 2 ^ / 4 ---- gup
1 9 f
1 - T^nzi/ 2n ^ 2 /i€[i,,(,+.]
_ 0(^)||) + r-
-w m w
(1 ^ ' ^ z x / 2 n <f>/2)^min{P2 )
lift
—h i(u (5.37)
(1 T 2 7T.Z l / 2 7T,^>/ 2 ) A m j n ( P 12 )
sup (110(/i)H) < +2rn0/2nzi/1 + T — - ? * /3-------- sup (\\zi{h)-Z i(ti)ll)

h£[ti,ti+i] 1 T n <t>/2 n z i / 2 1 T n<f>/2n z1/2
i
+TT . 2 ? '4"r,---- SUP ( « « * ) - « *«)ll) + -- - - - - - - - - - - ~ - - - -- - - - - - H I W O I I

/"^ /2 (1 _ r2„^/2„ 2l/2)Ami„(/-25)
1
n H 2 \\P ? \\
+ r --------------------------------- j-||z i(ti)||. (5.38)
(1 —T^n <j>/2n zi/2)^min{.P\ )
Step IV a: The inequalities (5.18) and (5.19) must undergo another analysis so that the right hand sides
of these are only functions of ||zi(fj)||, ||<£(fz)|| and values determined from the controller, system and
uncertainty parameters. A first step is to substitute suptG[t. t.+1](||zi(f)||) and suptG[t. t.+1j(||0(f)||) in
(5.18) and (5.19) with the results from (5.37) and (5.38), so that for t a , t\> € [£*, <»+i]:
llzi(t6) - z i(fa)|| < r 2n A/11 sup {\\zi{h) - zi(f<)||) + r 2n A/12 sup (\\<f>(h) - (f>(U)||)
/»€[«.-,«<+i] Ae[ti,ti+i]
+ ™ A/13||zi(*t)ll + T n A / 1 4 \\<p(ti)\l + r n A/15,
\\<f>{tb ) - <f){ta )\\ < r n A/2i sup (||z i(/i)-Z i(fi)H ) 4- r n A/22 sup {\\<j)(h) - (f>{ti)\\)
h€[ti,£t+i] h £ [ t { , £i+i]
+™A/23llzi(*i)ll + TnA /2i\\4>{ti)\\ + r n A/25,
where
™ A/11 = T S U p d lS H ) \ 2 * n *,Z- ------+ SU p ( | | A i 2 | | ) - ------- ~2 ~ ~~ ------

AS 1“ T n Z!/2n (p/2 A A 12 1 - r n ^ / 2n a i/2
™A /12 = r sup(||S||) n *2 *n<l>l*— + s u p ( ||i i 2||)-------- ~ 2 n ~ n ----

AS 1 ~ T nzi/2n <f>/2 A A 12 1 — T n 4>/2nzi/2
n A/ i 3 = supdlEII)---------------- !!5lJ!-------------r + T s u p ( | | i 12||)------------ n */2 l|P l1 -------------

AS (1 - T2n Zl/2n 0/2)Amin(P12) (1 _ ^ n ^ n ^ ^ X m i n i P ^ )
1 1
«A/14 =--rsuP(l|£|l)--------- nZl- 2ll" 2-J------- y---H SUP (||^4l2||)------------------ 1“

a s (! _ r 2n Zl/2n 0/2)Amin(P22) AA^ (1 - T % /2n Zl/2)Amin(P22)
/iit* II\ , t\\vmi\W*i/1 7"nzi/2n <()/l / 7 us n <t>/l r n <t>/2n zi/l

n A/15 = sup(||F 2II) + r sup(||S ||)-T ^— 2- + r sup (P12ID-T— 5-— ------
p2 AS 1 ^ Tlzi/2™<p/2 A A 12 1 ^ ^'<p/2^'Zi/2
(5.39)
2 n zi/2'n'<t>/3 n 4>/3
»A/* = r + rnA/03x + 11011
/2
n A /2 2 = ---- r 2 n A/02-,-------X~2~ ^ 11^ “ ^*11 + -T n A/03^j------Z 2 ~ ~ Z

1 1 1 - r^nZl/2n0/2 1~ ^^^/
2 ^ Z l/2
ll^ ll
n A /2 3 — n A /0 2 ' T b r n A /0 3 — + n ^ /0 4
(1 - T 2n z l / 2 n 0/ 2 )A (1 - T2n ^ / 2 n Z l /2 )A min (A 2)
n *i/2ll^ H , „ ll^ ll
n A/24 ~ r n A /0 2 ------------ + n A /0 3 ----------- T~ + n A /05
(1 T2n 2 i 7 2 ^ 0 /2 ) ^ m i n { P 2 ) (1 - T2n 0/2n Zl/2)Am in ( f 22 )
^ z i/1 ”b 7’7^ z i / 2 710 / 1 » f y / i "h 'r n 4>/2riz \ / l

n A /2 5 r n A/02—y o-------------------------- r n A /0 3 ^ j-------- <2^ --------------------*" n A /01- (5.40)
7 1 - r ^"nzi/2n
n ,, /5n ^/9<f>/2 7 1 - Tzn < t>/ 2n Zl/ 2 7
By putting the latter two inequalities into a matrix format:
su p (||zi(fa) -Zi(ffr)ll) SU p ( ||z i( f a ) - Z i( f f t) ||)

£ [î jî + 1]
r 2n A / n T2n A/12 ta [tj
<
su p ( ||0 ( < a ) - <£(*fc)l|) r ™A /2 1 r n A /2 2 su p (\\<f>{ta ) ~ (f>{tb)\\)
_ +1] _ ta )^t+l]
™ A /i3 llz if e )ll + TnA/ 14\\(t>{ti)\\ + r n A/15

+ (5.41)
_ r n A / 2 3 l l z l ( ^ i ) l l + r n A / 2 4 l l 0 ( f i ) l l + r n A /2 5
it can be seen that this is another system of inequalities which can be solved out by assuming a suffi
ciently small sampling time r. One approach is to substitute the upper estimate of
suPi«,iseii„t,+i](llz i (*“ ) - M tf O I I ) suPt,,,ti,€[ti,ti+1) ( M t«) - tf’M I I ) ]
into itself infinitely often such that an infinite geometric series X)£o 7 - 1 ^ 311 infinite sequence
r xN l of the matrix
r n A /ll r n A /12
TN = T (5.42)
_ n A /2 1 n A /2 2
evolves on the right hand side of (5.41). A sufficient condition for the sequence to converge to 0 and
the series to converge to (J —t N )~1 is to satisfy the implicit inequality (Graybill 1969, pp. 100):
1
T < (5.43)
m ’
A small enough r for the latter inequality can be found since the norm of matrix N is for small enough
r, 0 < r < t \ satisfying (5.36) for any r 6 (0, fi] bounded and non-negative. The solution is similar
to the one of linear equality systems, a matrix inversion of (I — rN):
suPta,t6€M<+1](llzl(*a) - zlft>)ll)
. SUPta,t6€[ti,«i+l](ll^(t«) - ^ ) l l )
-1
<
1 - r 2 n A / 11 - r 2 n A /1 2 ™ A / 13||zi(*i)|| + r n A / 1 4 ||^ ( f< )|| + r n A / 1 5
(5.44)
~ r n A /21 1 “ r n A /2 2 ™ A / 2 3 l l z i ( * i ) l l + r n A /24\\(f)(ti)\\ + r n A / 2 5 _
However by the definitions (5.39-5.40) of the non-negative values n A / n , n A / 12, n A / n and n A / 12, the
norm || 7V|| is only 0 if there is no control or uncertainty. In particular, these values will be zero if n^/3
and 7*0/4 (5.35) are 0. This is satisfied if n u/ i and n u/ 2 (5.29) are 0; these become 0 if there is no linear
or non-linear control used to stabilize the system. This is not possible since 773 > 0. Observe, that the
two conditions (5.36) and (5.43) are the only constraints on r prior to the final stability analysis using
the generalized Lyapunov function approach in Step V. The result in (5.44) implicitly defines values
n Azi/i > 0 , 7*A z i / 2 > 0, nAzi/3 > 0, r*A 0 / ! > 0, n A<t>/ 2 > 0 and n A(j>/3 > 0 such that:
sup (||zi(f0) - z i ( ^ ) || ) < r n Azi/1||zi(^)|| + r n Azi/2||</)(ti)||+ r n Azi/3 (5.45)
sup (\\<fr(ta) - 0(tfc)i|) < r n ^ / i llzi(ti)II+ r n A0/2||</>(ti)II+ rr*A0/3 (5.46)

€ [î jî+1]
Step IVb: From (3.28), the constant c in the non-linear control will finally determine the size of the
set of ultimate boundedness. If there is no unmatched disturbance F2 of constant bound, then c has
a major influence on the size of the ultimate bounded set for the continuous controller. The smaller
c, the smaller the ultimate bounded set H for the continuous control. Thus, it seems to be desirable
to keep c small. However, c is in the denominator of some terms of the expressions for the Lipschitz
constant K u in (5.29), where the corresponding numerator is largely determined by the disturbances F2
and G2 of constant bound. Nevertheless, by substituting (5.45) and (5.46) into the preliminary upper
estimates for the control law residual norms l|Auc || and ||A uc ||, it is possible to decrease the number
of occurrences of c in the denominator. Hence, the relation (5.21) is used again to recalculate the upper
estimates of the control law residual norms.
It follows for A uc uv from (5.23) and (5.45-5.46) for t G (£*, ti+i]:
< 2||P2A0||7i(t7i \\P2<f>(ti)\\ + ry3||zi(*»)ll + 1 2 )

B2A uc
nl uv ^ (z x (ti), 4>(ti))71*(Vi (k ), V2m
C | | P 2 0 ( * i ) | | + < ^ ( | | Z i ( * z ) | | + \\(f>{ti)\\ + c)
J A z j 7 if a i ll-P2</>(^)ll +m\\zi{ti)|| + 772) \\P2<l>(ti)\\ + m\\*i(U)\\ + m)

+0 c||P20(*z)|| +tf(l|zi(*i)|| + 11^)11 + c) + c||P2^ z ) ||+ ^ ( ||z 1fe)ll + 11^)11 + C)
7 i 2 | | P 2 ||(77i ||P 2 ^ ( f i) ll + 773l|zi(<i)|| + 7 7 2 ) ( T n A 0 / 1 | | z i ( f i )|| + T n A 0 / 2 | | 0 ( ^ ) | | + tt*A 0 / 3 )

<
\\P2 <P(ti)\\ + <J(||Zife)|| + ||0(tj)|| + c)
71(771 ll-P2(/>(^)ll + T 7 3 | | z i f e ) | | + 7 7 2 ) ( r n A z i / 1 | | z i f e ) | | + T n A z i / 2 || 0 ( f i ) || + t t* A z i / 3 )
71(771 11^20(^)11 + 7 ? 3 l | z i f e ) | | +*72)(raA0/1|lz1fe)|| + r n A 0 / 2 ||^ ( f i) || + r n A 0 / 3 )

+(5
11^20(^)11 + <J(||Z i(fi)|| + ||0(fz)|| + c)
< 7 i2 ||P2 ||77i(TnA0 /i||zi(fi)|| + r n A0 / 2 ||0 fe)|| + r n A0 /3) 712)1^2II772Tt*A0/3
I + S X m i n t t 1) SC
, 7-nA0/27i2||P2||(773||zi(ti)|| + 772 ) 7 i2 ||P2 ||773(TnA0 / 1 ||zi(ti)|| + r n A0 /3)

^min(P2) “1“ S 5
t ^71771 ( t t * A z i / 1 | | z i ( ^ ) | | + r n Azi/2||0fe)H + tt* A z i/3 ) ^ 71 ( t 7 3 l | z i (^) |[ + 772)rnAzi/2

1 ”1” ^^min{P2 ) ^min (P2) + S
t 5 l i V i ( T n A H l \\zi(tj)\\ + TnA 4i 2 \\<f>{ti)\\ + r n A0/3) ^ 7 i(^ 3l|zi(^)ll + ^2)rn A0/2

1 + 2 *) Am jn ( P 2) + $
+ 7 i 773( r n A(/>/1||zi(ti)|| + r n A0/3) + T717271^/1 + — 3
, n ^m. , \ , T7i%nAll/3
1 T 7 i2 ||ft||f» n ^ /1 ,C/I^
+7i773(TnAzi/ i||z i( ^ ) ||+ 'r n Azi/3)+T7i772nA2l/1 + ------ + ----------- - --------------(5.47)
By (5.25), the same can be done for A7*, t E (tz, tj+i]:
B 2A , r u p Af . \ | i , lu m il j. >
1^ \\P2 <f>{t)\\+ <Kl|ziMH + ||0(*)|| + c)
< (7a -') I (3I1P2?A^11 + ll^M zJD ^l \\P2 (t>{tj)\\ + *73llzife)ll + 72)
cllP^ZxftJII+^llpi^JII+cW ^))
< (7l _ 7 ) | TS HP2' Hn A0/ l ( 7/l ||P2||||0 (fr)l| +T73llzife)|| +7?2) + 11^2* llr n A<ft/3^111^2*
<Âm in iP i)
, , ’1 1 ^ lln A0/ 2(î 11^ 211110(^)11 + 73l|zi(ft)|| +772) , ts \\P£\\nA<t,/3r)3\

I ------------------------------------------------------------ 1---------------------------------------------- 1-----------------------------T---------
+ (7 l - 7 i)
Âmjn {£*2) <»Amxn (.Pj^) y
, ^ 1 1 ^ 1 1 ^ /3 7 7 2 T\\P*\\nAzi/1{m \\P 2 \ \M { t i) \\+ m \\^ U ) \\+ m )

+ (7 i “ 7 i) I --------------------------— + -------------------------------------------------------------1--------------------------------------------
c c Am jn (P g2 ) cA m j n ( P i 2 )
l l ^ l l ( ™ A z i / 2 | | 0 ( * i ) | | + ™ A 2 i /3)*73 , 1 1 ^ 1 1 ^ ^ /2 (7 7 1 1 1 ^ 2 1 1 1 1 0 (^ )1 1 + 7 2 )
+ (7 l “ 7 l) I -----------------------------------------------1------------------------------- + 1----
<>Am jn ( P j2 ) ^ sA m jn (* ? )
' J l^ l5 |k7lAZl/37l H i? II . , ' J I ^ I I ^ A z i/3 7 2 ,C/|C,

+ (7 1 “ 7 i ) 7 T ------ — + (7l - 7 i ) --------------------- — (5 *4 8 )
$ sc\min (P£ )
The result of A„c

UN L ,SW
can be established byJ (5.24) for all t e (U,
v
f*+i]:
J
A „ c i Si v7f ( Vi W, K2(<))P2^ t )
< (71 ||P2||nA0/i + 7 3 n Azi/1) ||zi(«>)||
ll-FW WII + « (ll» iW II + M * ) ll + c)
+ r ~ " (7ill^2l|nA0/2 + 73n Azi/2) ||0(*i)|| + (7i||^2||tia0/3 + 7?3n Azi/3) (5-49)
By recalling (5.21) and adding the right hand sides of (5.47), (5.48) and (5.49) together, the implication
for || A uc l || is for all t E [t*, t j + i ] :
||B2A uc i. || < *rnAr£,/1||z1(t»)|| + T n N L / 2 \\<f>(ti)\\ + r n N L / 3 (5.50)
where
nA0/27i2||P2||73 , 7i2||P2||73nA(/)/i ( ^7i 7 i ^ a Zi / i , <^7i73nAzi/2 ,

" M / 1 _ X m in(P 2)+ S S + 1 Aro<n(P2) + ^ 7l%"AZl/1
C h a pt e r 5. A m e a n v a l u e t h e o r e m b a s e d a p p r o a c h t o c o n t r o l l e r d is c r e t iz a t io n 86
,7 i ± \ 7 i2 ||P 2 ||7 7 in A 0 /i , , 7 i »7i ^ A 0 / i

+T + w w O + 1 + , A m fa (ifl) + +* T T s x ^ m
+(71 _ 7 ;j f + I I P .W /i* + jj^ j | n ^ \ (5.51)
\ ^X m inim i ) C-^mzn ( P / ) ? A m i „ ( P 25 ) /
i 1
x 7im«A*i/2 ,, ll-P22Hn A0/im ll^ll , , ' JI-P2'lln A0/277l 11^2 II
n N L /2 = <>— 7 7 ------ T T T K + (71 - 7 i ) ----------------------- i-----------+ (71 - 7 i ) ------------------------ 1-------
l+ d \m in (P 2 ) <;\min(P?) S*m in(P j)
ll ^ l 2 I I ^ A z i / i m II-P2 II , W P i W n ^ p m , ||-Pj5 ||n A z1/2 ,?l II-P2 II

+ (7 i ~ 7 i) I ----------------------------1------------------H -----------------------1— + ------------------------------—
(-Pi2) S^min{Pi ) SS^miniP'z)
,7 1/ 1, DM„ , 7i2||P2||r?iÂ0/2
, 71^11-^2 II7?ln A0/2 , s HVITIAH2 ,c
T M ^ I I » a */2 + ’»"*■>/*)+ r _ ^ in(p->) + i i + ' i w ^ i ) (5-52)
and
, > J S IIP22 lln A ^ /1 ^ 2 , ||P 22 |ln A ^ /2 ^ 2 , ||P 2 ||n A 0 /3 ? 7 ll|P 22 || , 5 | | P > 2 ||71A 0 / 3 7?3 ^
nNL/ 3 = (7 i ~ 7 i)( ---------------- 1-----+ --------------- — + ------------- Z------------- + -----------------1----
CX m i n { P \ ) C^ m i n { p i ) c <Am i„ ( i Y ) /
. > I I|P25 II"a^/3»72 , !|Pi5 ||nA2l/ir,2 i ||P 15 ||nA, 1/ 3)j3 i HP," ||na z i/2 J72
■> (7i 7 i) I 1 “r 1 i 1 + 1
ScXm iniP"}) <» ^ m z n (P i2 ) s X m in ( P i ) SsX m i^P^)
, llP il^ A z a /S ^ , ll P i'I I ^ A z x /S ^ l I I P / I I ^ , 7 1 / „ „ „ , ^

+ (7 i - 7 i) — + ---------------- '-------------- + — f a i l l e ||n A * / 3 + 773 n A z l / 3 )
SScX m iniP J) qS J ^
^ / 2 7 i 2 ||P 2 ||r 7 2 7 i 2 | | P 2 ||r/3 n A 0 /3 7 i2 ||P 2 ||* ? 2 7 iA 0 / i 7i2||P2||t7271A ^ / 3 , 7 i^ 2 7 iA z i/3
H------------ -------------1------------ z------------1----------- ;------------ 1----
Xnxin{tP‘2 ) "f" 8 8 8 8c c
7lT7i71Azi/3 7l7/271Azi/2 , , , 7l2||P2||77l71A^/3

+ 5 T1 T
+ T8Xmin\P2
\ r ^ ~ )\ + S ^mzn(P2)
\ ~ . ( P \ "i"
+ x0 + ^ 3nW 3 + 71 ^ 1/1 + 7 — TT— 77= 17
1 + o^mzn(P2 )
c 7 l7 ln A0/3 , r 7l77271A<^/2 , , , l i m n A<t>/z ,c
+ l + t f W l f 1) W f t ) + « + 7 l% n ^ / 3 + 7 l% n ^ / 1 + — 7 — (5-53)
By (5.27), the conclusion for the whole control residual is for al1<6 [£*, tj+i]:
l|P2(A uc + A UCJ | | < r n c /1 ||zi(ti)|| + m c/2 ||<£(*<)|| + ™ c /3 (5.54)
where
n C / l = T lA T L /l + 11^ — ^ * \ \ n A(t>/l + ll© l|7 lA z i/l> n C / 2 = n N L / 2 + 11^ ~ ^ * 1 1 ^ 0 / 2 + l l © I I ^ A z i / 2
n C/3 = n NL/3 + 11^ —^*l|7lA0/3 + ||©||nAzx/3- (5.55)
Theresults of (5.50) and (5.54) contrast to the one in (5.13) for the more simple system asdiscussed
in Step IVb of the proof of Theorem 5.2. The relation (5.13) contains only purely‘parametric’ upper
estimates of the control law residual, while (5.50) and (5.54) are also characterized by a term TnC/z.
This term has been caused by the uncertainties of constant bound and can be included into a final
Lyapunov function analysis.
Step V: For the final analysis, the max-Lyapunov function V (zi (f), 0(f)) from (4.6) of Chapter 4 will
be used for a proof of stability. Let B be the bounded set
B = j z = [zf
■ V ]T : 2 ' LO“ + * ) }
containing the element 0. The analysis of the generalized derivative of V{z\ (f),0(f)) may proceed
outside this set B: V (zi(f), 0(f)) > + k) to show that B is a subset of the set of ultimate
boundedness.
First consider the case
F ( Zl(f),0(f)) = V i(M f)) + *V2(0(f)), (5.56)
then uj2Vi < V2 . As with (4.7), it follows for the considered case ||0|| > c. It has been found in
the proof of Theorem that ^ (z i(f), 0(f)) from (5.33) and (3.37) is non-negative for u;2Vi < V2 and
11011 > c, which implies by combining (5.30) and (5.33) so that there is k > 0 for almost all f:
t r
(S r P i+ P iS ) P tA n
Z i(f) Z i(f)
Vri ( z 1 ( f ) ) + A r V 2 ( 0 ( f ) ) < + z f(f) P iF 2
il21 0 (f)
+ k<f>T (t)P2(Im + G1B2 (a UC + A UC J

T r-
(± t P !+ P i ± ) P , A 12
z i(f) Z i(f)
2 2
= (1 - « ) + z [ (t)P {F 2
0 (f) 4 l2 Pl ft, 2 0 (f)
T
r (E r P i + P i E ) Pi A t 2 1
Z i(f) Z i(f)
2 2
+* + k f ( t ) P 2(Im + G i B ^ ) B 2 ( a uc + A uc J ,
. 0 (*) L 2 * 2 J . 0(< )
(5.57)
where
(£ T P i+ P if:) p ^
2 2
(5.58)
Aj.Pi
is negative definite. The constant « can be chosen arbitrarily in the interval (0,1), where (1 - «) will
determine the rate of decrease, as seen later. Now, consider only the last two terms of inequality (5.57).
It can be verified by
0 P2(/m + G 1B2- 1)6

ML =k
0 r (/m + g 1b 2- 1)t p 2 P2(im + G i B j 1) (n - n*) + (n - n*)T (im + G 1b 2- 1)i > 2
(5.59)
that for t E (ti, ti+i]:

r (S T P i+ P lS ) Pi A t 2
Zi(t) 2 2 Zi(t)
+ k<t>T (t)P2(Im + G ( A u£ + A uc J
AToPi £.73/
~2~ . </>(*)
(E r P i+ P if : ) p ,a 12
Z1(U) —AZl 2 2 Z1(^z) ~' ^ z i
= K
HU) ~ ^ <
f> ^ 12Pl 4>(t{)
2
+k<f>T (t)P2(Im + G 1B 2- 1) S 2 ( a u£ + A uc J
T T
zi (U) Zi (**) Zl (t*) ’ AZ1 '
Ms -2 Ms
. <£(*z) . <£(*z) . 0(t») . A* .
AAzi A Zl
+ (Ml + M s ) + k<t,T (ti)P2(Im + G !B 2- l )B2 ( a u£ + A uc J
A (j, A*
+ k A.Tl P 2(Im + G 1B2- 1)B2A uc t .
There must exist a «2 > 0 such that:

T
A Zl A Zl
(M l + M s) < k2 (||A Zl||2 + ||A ,||2) , k2 > 0 (5.60)
_ A* . . A* .
r r iiw t w » ---------- 1----------------
5.46), (5.50) and (5.54) as upper estimates for || A^||, || A Zl ||, ||B2A ucJy L || and ||J52(AucL + AuciVL )||, it
can be shown that for t E (U, t»+i]:
T
( S r P i+ P l S ) P tAi2
Zi(t) 2 2 Zl (t)
+ fc ^ (t)B 2(/m+ G 1B2- 1)B2(Aui + Auc J
A^Pi
_ <f)(t)
T
Zi ( U ) Zl (ti)
< Ms + « ||E r B1 + B 1f:||||A z l||||z1(ti)|| + «fc73| | ^ i )||||A^||
_ HU) _ HU)
+ « ||B 1A12|||^ ( t i )||||A z l|| + «||B 1i 12||||z1(ti)||l|A 0||
+ « 2 (||A Z1||2 + ||A *||2) + k U i u m m i m + G iB ^JIIIIB , (A U£ + Auc J ||
+fc||A ^||||B2(/m + G 1B2- 1)||||B 2A uc i ||
T
Zl (ti) z i (U)
< Ms + IW * i)ll ll® l(ti)ll + l|3 l ( * i ) l|2
_ HU) _ Hu)
+ ™ ^ ||0 ( « i ) ||2 + r n ZI ||zi(tj)|| +Tn^||^(tj)|| + r 2n;, (5.61)

where
™Zl/0 = k ||S t Pi + P iS ||n Azi/2 + K P\A\2 n A<f>/2 + K P 1 A 12 n A z i / l + « ^ 7 3 ^ A 0 /1
-\-t 2 k,2( ^ A z i / l n A z i /2 + n A<t>/ln A<pi/2) + Tk P2{Im + G i P 2 *) ( n N L /ln A<p/2 + n NL/2n A<t>/l)
+ k | P2(Im + G j B J 1) n C/l
^zi/zi — ^11^ P\ Pl^llÂzi/1 K P 1 A 12 Â<p/\ + t k 2n 2A(f>i 1 + ™ 2n Azi/1
+ rh P2(Im + G jB j-1) n N L /ln A<t>/l
4>/4> = « ^ 7 3n A^/2 + t k 2 ( n 2A 4>/2 + n A z x/ 2) + rk P2(/m + GiP2_1) n NL/2n A<t>/2
+k P2{Im + G l P 2 * )| n C/2 + K ||P l ^ l 2 n A Z l/2
n Zl = «||E t Pi + P i 2 ||nAzi/3 + k P\A\2 n A<t>/3 + t 2 k,2 ( n A 0 / i n A^/3 + n A z i/ ! n A z i / 3 )
+r& P2(Im + G iP 2 ) ( n ATL/ln A<£/3 + n NL/3n A<t>/l)
riff, = «A:73 n A 0/3 + t 2 k 2 (™ A z i/2 n A z i / 3 + n A<t>/2n A(l>/z) + K P i -^12 Âzi/3
+ r fc P 2 ( / m + G i P 2 X) {n NL/2n A<t>/3 + n NL/3n A<f>/2) + & P 2 (^ m + G i P 2 ) n C/3
n6 = K 2 ( n i 0/3 + n A z l / 3 ) + Tk P2(/m + G ^ j " 1) n NL/3n A<f>/3- (5.62)
There must exist K3, «4 > 0 such that

T
1
1_____
•to
(U)
N
zi
r-4
Ms < - « 3 ||z if e ) ||
< - «4||0(<*)|| , (5.63)
. </>(U) . <t>(U)
where and *4 have to be chosen as large as possible. It is now possible to choose r small enough so
that the following expression is negative for z(f*) 7^ 0:
- « 3 | | z i ( f i ) ||2 - KA\\<f)(ti)\\2 + m Zl/0 \\<f>{ti)\\ + ™ z i / Zl l | z i ( f i )||2 + T n ^ | | 0 ( f i ) ||2 < 0
(5.64)
With this choice of r, a quadratic equation in ||0(t»)ll and ||zi(ti)||:
- k 3||zi(*z)II2 - K 4 ||^ i)l|2 + r n Zl/<t> ||^(fi)|| ||zi(<i)|| + r n zi/zi ||z i(fj)||2 + r n 0/0 ||</>(*z)l|2
+ r n Zl ||zi(*i)|| + r n 0 ||^(<*)|| + r 2n b
has always a well-defined global maximum. Thus, the right hand of inequality (5.61) is bounded:
T
Z l (t i) Z l(fi)
Ms + m Zl/(j) ||0(ti)|| ||zi(fi)ll + ™ Zl/Zl ||z if t)||2
_ <f>(ti) . 4>(U)
+ r n 4>/0 H0(*t)l|2 + r n Xl \\zi(ti)\\ + r n 0 \\(f>(ti)\\ + r 2n b < n A/sup,
where n A/ sup > 0. From the definitions of n 2l, and n b in (5.62), it can be proved that n A/sup is 0 if
and only if G2 = 0 and F2 = 0. The latter result can be substituted into (5.57) and it follows similarly
to (4.4) with a;2Vi < V2, z £ B for almost all t E [U, fi+i] and subsequently for almost all t E [0,00):
V i(zi(t)) + kV2W ) ) < - ( V 1(zi(t))+ k V 2(<l>(t)))$+^Vl (zl (t))+kV2(4>(t))s/2\\P?§2\\+nA/sup,

(5.65)
where
(p , ^ £ TP ^ + p ? tP , p ? a 12Pt, * \
ti = -2 (1 - K) SU p I Am a X
2 2Vk > 0. (5.66)
t , A l2 P Â ^P ? 73P-T1
2y /k 2 /
It is now of interest to investigate the case when the max-Lyapunov function satisfies
V ( Z ! = (ku2 + 1) V i(zj(t)) (5.67)
and u)2V\ > Vo. Under this condition the time derivative of Vi(zi) satisfies as in (4.5) for almost all t:
(ku>2 + l)Vi < - ( kui2 + l)tfVi + (k u 2 + ljV^v/VlHP^Fzll (5.68)
where ti > 0.
As demonstrated with Corollary 4.1, the latter result can be combined with the inequality of (5.65)
to derive an expression for the derivative of the max-Lyapunov function V^ziff), 0(f)) for z(f) £ B
and for almost all t:
dV- ^ — <-mm{ti,ti)V{zi,<l))Vy/2{kuj2 + 1)> /V (zi, 0) s u p ||P /F 2|| + n Afsup

f2
It follows that the max-Lyapunov function is decreasing for V (zi, 0) > max[i>, ^P7^ c (-jj + &)], where
. _ n A/sup + (ku2 1) S U P p2 ||F ^ 2 F 2 1|2
m in($.$) min(ti,ti)
yj2{ku)2 + lJ s u p p J P ^ i^ ll (k u 2 + 1) supp2||P12F 2|l2 (fcc^2 + 1) supg.g||jy F 2||2

mm(ti,ti) ^ 2m in($,$) m in($,$)
Further for every e > 0, there is a ti(e) > 0 so that for
V(z1,4>)>i> + e: dV(* f - <-0( e) V( z! , t )
implying
V (z i (f), 0(f)) < max ( v (z i (f = 0), 0(f = 0))e-1*(e)*, v + e, ---2^ ~ ( ^ + *0^ .

Employing constants c\ and C2 as particularly determined with (4.25), then also
l|2(t)ll < ~ max f (t = 0)11 e~ ^ 2t, v ^ T 7 , . (5-69)
follows, which finishes the proof. ■
Thus, ultimate bounded stability of the discretized sliding mode control has been shown for small
enough sampling time r , while a discussion on sliding mode based performance of the discretized
control is provided next.
5.4.1 Sliding-mode like performance of the discretized control
Sliding-mode like performance does not strictly follow for the discretized control. However, it may be
shown using a simplified approach that a result in a semi-global sense can be formulated; the sliding-
mode layer also depends on the initial state. Suppose throughout the analysis for sliding-mode like
performance:
/vi,v2 = V2m ) ) - w2Vi(zx(«)) >
Therefore, it follows from equation (3.47) and the analysis of equations (5.33) and (5.54):
fv uv2< - xmai(P2) fvuV% + + G iB 2- 1) | | P 2(Au£ + A ujJII
— T—^ 7 £ T \fv l ,V2+T\\<l>(t)\\\\P2(Im + II + n C /2 ll 0 A H + n C/ 3)1

/Vnax(P2)
Solving the differential inequality, it follows for almost all t G [0, oo):
22i__
f v l ,v2(t) < e Xma*(P2)f v uv2{t = o)
-|-g ^ m a x ( P 2) m a x (P 2 )T ||0 (s )||||P 2 (7m + G i ^ 1)||(n c/1 ||z f ||+ n c/2 ||0A||+ n c /3))ds.
For convenience, relatively conservative upper estimates for ||0(£)||, ||0A|| and ||z f || can be implied
from (5.69) for t > 0:
II0A|| < 0||z||> P f II < a \\z\\, II0(5)|| < <*||z||
a M = - j = max ^ y/c2 P (t = 0) | | , Vi> + £, 2+ •
Thus, it follows:
f v u v2{t) < e ~ Xrna*(p2) fvi,v2(t = 0) + t(1 —e *m azW )af,
73*
— e ( ^ ^ (^ = 0) — ray) + ray,
_ maxi 2)a sup ^||p2(/m+ G iP ^ 1)||] {nc/i<x\\z\\+nc/2 <x\\z\\+nc/z)

73 Gi v '
Hence the following Lemma may summarize the analysis:

Lemma 5.3 For any (3 > 1, the value of f v xy 2{t) will be smaller than max(r/3oif, ^P2^ c ) within a
maximal time period of
( W i(f2)
max ( }v''V' (t = * \ - Ta! ,1 ^ ” .
\m£Lx(r/?Q/, ^ 2 )— T O Lf J)
Note, that rpotf is for t > 0 dependent on the initial states zi (t = 0) and <p(t = 0). For the continuous
time control of Chapter 3, this dependency vanishes (r a / = 0).
Since the proof of Theorem 5.3 has been provided to calculate practically sampling frequencies
± > * ensuring robust stability and a certain controller performance, the next section describes the
necessary steps in a generic manner.
5.4.2 Procedure for calculation of a sampling time bound
The calculation of a sampling frequency bound 4 for the discretized sliding-mode based control requires
the preparatory step of control system design, computation of a suitable Lyapunov function and the
choice of the performance of the discretized control via 0 < k < 1.
Thus within the preliminary step, the controller performance is determined via choosing the sliding
mode dynamics S (3.6) and the linear part of the reaching dynamics fI* (3.12) of the cone-shaped
boundary layer of the sliding mode. These choices also define the Lyapunov matrices Pi (3.15) and
P2 (3.12). The non-linear controller part for the reaching dynamics is determined by the choice of
c, <5 (3.10), s (3.17,3.22), 71 > 7^ (3.22) and 73 (3.24). Note that in particular the parameters for
the non-linear part of the control (3.10) are subject to stability constraints given by (3.19) and (3.27).
Further, sufficient knowledge about the uncertainty and non-linearities should be available to calculate
the non-linear gains (3.23) such as 771 and 773. This can be either carried out analytically for simpler
systems or via numerical optimization tools which are available from the Optimization Toolbox (Branch
& Grace 1996) of Matlab® (fmin, fmins, constr). Within the process of calculating the sampling
frequency bound 4, also other optimization problems involving supF q ( ) or infF,G( ) are considered
to maximize or minimize a function over the bounded uncertainty F and G (3.1). These can be also
solved either symbolically or numerically using the Optimization Toolbox of Matlab.
The choice of 0 < k < 1 allows now the computation of the sampling time bound 4 via the non
smooth max-Lyapunov function (5.17). The parameter k within the max-Lyapunov function is a free
parameter which however has to be chosen large enough so that 3 > 0 from (5.66) exists. A lower
bound for k can be obtained from (5.66) via numerical LMI-techniques. Considering the lower bound
on k, it is possible to iterate over different choices of k via numerical techniques to derive a sampling
frequency bound 4 as small as possible. The sampling frequency bound 4 can be calculated as follows
involving three distinctive fast sampling constraints (5.36,5.43,5.64).
The first constraint (5.36) is given by
T <
y/n z i/2 Tl<f>/2
which is an implicit inequality in r where n Zl/2 (5.32), n ^/2 (5.35) are also functions of r. A first upper
bound f \ can be derived so that for any r < t \ the relation (5.36) is satisfied. It is also necessary to cal
culate ri0/3 and 710/4 (5-35) using (5.29) for t i ^ and n uj2. Employing the definitions of «A/02"*n A/05
(5.20) to define n A/ n ...7iA/ 14 (5.39) and 7iA/21...7iA/24(5.40), a second upper bound f 2 can be derived
considering the second fast-sampling constraint (5.43):
T n A /U r n A/12
< 1
_ n A/2l n A/22
and assuring also the condition of (5.36) for any r < f 2. This permits the computation of 7iAzi / x, 7iAzi /2
(5.45) 7iA0 /l5 7iA0/2 (5.46), n NL/1 (5.51), n NL/2 (5.52) and tic/1, n C / 2 (5.55). Within a linear numer
ical optimization process, the minimal value for k2 (5.60) and the maximal values for ks and «4 (5.63)
can be calculated by employing the definitions of M s (5.58) and M l (5.59). Using those values and
tiZi/0, 7i Zl/ Zl and 7i0/0 from (5.62), it is possible to find f for the third fast sampling condition (5.64)
- K 3 \\Z i{ti)\\2 - K4||</>(fz)||2 + T71Z l / 0 \\<f>(ti)\\ ||Zi(fi)|| + T71Z l / Zl ||z1(ii)||2 + T 7 1 0 /0 \\<f>(ti)\\2 <0
so that also (5.36,5.43) are satisfied for any r < f . This procedure can be carried out for constant value
of k and an iteration process over k can be used to determine numerically the maximal value of f for
which an example is provided within the next section.
5.5 A numerical example: The inverted pendulum and a stable second order plant
The effectiveness of the described approach is demonstrated using the inverted pendulum as represented
with the uncertain system of (2.10)
0 1 0 ’ 0 0 Xi
x = x + u+ x, x = ( 5 .7 0 )
0.5 -0 .1 1 0.5(sinc(o:1) — 1) 6 + 0.1 X2
while the second example is chosen to be stable with the same type of uncertainty:
- 0 .5 1 0 0 0
X = x + u+ x, b = -0.1 1 ...-0 .0 9 (5.71)
0.5(sinc(a;i) — 1) b + 0.1
or
1
1
p
0
1
i
which allows characteristics of the presented theory to be shown with respect to stable plants. For
reasons of comparison, the system has the same input matrix B as the pendulum system such that the
interconnection matrix Ayi (3.5) from the nominal system for sliding-mode design retains its value
independent of the choice of E and Q*. The considered uncertainty and non-linearities are only para
metric. Thus, the modified sliding-mode based control of Section 3.4.1 (c = 0) (Remark 5.3) can also
be investigated. It is also of interest to consider the nominal case when the uncertainty is set to zero and
773 and the linear control are only used for reachability of the sliding-mode.
All controllers are chosen to have the following non-linear controller features:
7i = 7i = 1-6, m = 0
The value of s is of no importance since 7! = 7^. By demanding 771 = 0 (3.23), the linear controller
is used to compensate for the parametric uncertainty (b + 0.1) of Cl. Therefore assuming 771 = 0, the
value of 73 (0 < 73 < 1) must be chosen as large as possible, so that the linear control is also used
for reachability. Provided the matrix E (3.5) determining sliding-mode performance, the linear control
matrix Cl* (3.11) and the respective Lyapunov matrices Pi (3.14) and P 2 (3.13) have been set, then the
features of the sliding-mode cone and the parameter u> from (3.17) can be determined using nominal
system and controller parameters only:
—Amo* (P iS + & P i ) - 2\Pl A 12PP\u>\F*\ = 0.85 (5.72)

N- v ------ ✓
= 1
For the considered single input, second order systems, this constraint is necessary and sufficient so
that for any state satisfying V2 < u 2V\ the derivative V\ holds for almost all t: V\ < —0.85\zi\2.
This ensures comparability of the control of the nominal and the uncertain systems and implies stable
performance for the nominal system. The value 8 can then be calculated from (3.17) or (3.51). The
value of 8 computed with (3.51) for the modified control is expected to be larger than the value for the
unmodified control (c 7^ 0). The value of k, 0 < k < 1, is set to 0.5 as a trade-off between controller
performance and low sampling frequency as derived in the proof of Theorem 5.2. As explained in
Section 5.4.2, the constant k from the max-Lyapunov function (4.6) has been adjusted via numerical
methods so that the sampling frequency bound 1 /f for each controller is minimal. Let c = 1 • 10“ 14 for
the unmodified sliding-mode based control to ensure a very small ultimate bound close to asymptotic
stability.
3.5 0.045
1
0.95 .. ......... l S .
0.04
2.5 0.9
0.85 0.035
> -” 0.8 <«
0.75 0.03
0.7
0.025
0.5 0.65
0.6
0.02
-3 -2 -1
Q*=I
Figure 5.1: Values of 773, 73 and 8 against changing sliding-mode and linear controller poles E == Cl*
for un-modified control (c ^ 0); System (5.70) and System (5.71) with uncertainty; ’- -’= System
(5.70) and System (5.71) without uncertainty
200
150
100
-3 -1
Figure 5.2: Values of 1/ f and k against changing sliding-mode and linear controller poles E = f2*
for the unmodified control (c ^ 0); System (5.70) with uncertainty; System (5.71) with
uncertainty; System (5.70) without uncertainty; -’= System (5.71) without uncertainty
Note that there is a minimum required sampling frequency (Figure 5.2) of 13Hz and 20Hz for the
nominal systems close to E = = —0.5 with un-modified sliding-mode based control (c ^ 0), which
is similar to the absolute values of the open-loop poles of {0.6588, —0.7588} or {—0.5, —0.5}. The
minimums of 48Hz and 55Hz for the uncertain systems are shifted to E = Q* = —1.5. Furthermore,
the minimum sampling frequency with respect to the theory presented here increases to infinity for
E = Q* —> —oc and E = O* —> —0. The infinite sampling frequency required for E = Q* —¥ —0 is
the result of the structure of the max-Lyapunov function and its sub-function Vi + W 2 (4.6) outside the
cone V2 > uj2\ i . The lower bound of k and consequently k itself (Figure 5.2) has to increase infinitely
in relation to P\ and P 2 if E = Q* —> —0 since A u = 1 remains constant. As a result, constants
similar to c \ ,.... C4 of (5.4) and from (4.25-4.26) increase as k rises. This forces 1 /f to increase as can
be deduced from equation (5.14).
The analysis for the modified control with c = 0 shows similar characteristics (Figure 5.3). Since
the value of <5is as expected larger for the modified control, the sampling frequency which is computed
200 0.045
0.04
150
0.035
^ 100 CO
0.03
0.025
0 .02,
Figure 5.3: Values of 1 / f and S against changing sliding-mode and linear controller poles E = Cl* for
the modified control (c = 0); = System (5.70) for c ^ 0; System (5.70) for c = 0; System
(5.71) without uncertainty for c ^ 0; ’- -*= System (5.71) without uncertainty for c = 0
for this control configuration is slightly less conservative. However, the overall influence of the larger
magnitude of 6 is not very large.
The results may seem to be conservative, but it will be seen that other techniques such as Lp-norm
based approaches which are demanding less algebraic effort for calculating a sampling frequency give
even higher sampling frequencies.
5.6 Summary
An analysis technique to derive sampling frequencies which ensure exponentially stable behaviour out
side a set of ultimate boundedness for discretized Lipschitz-continuous control laws has been presented.
The technique has been shown to be effective with respect to a sliding-mode based controlled inverted
pendulum example.
The theoretical result could be achieved by indirectly exploiting the fact that a continuous-time
Lyapunov function within sampled-data control systems generally continues to decrease after the sam
pling instant. For the particular example of the sliding-mode based control, the structure of the closed
loop system with range-space and null-space dynamics has been taken into account for calculation of
sampling-residual bounds. However, in general, control structures might be even more complicated
including control dynamics which will not allow to extend this analysis approach. Another technique
more suitable for large scale and dynamic control systems employing an extended Lp-norm is presented
in Chapter 7. This methodology will be demonstrated on a robust observer based pseudo-sliding-mode
control. This control law will be presented in the next chapter. It is a generalization of a well-known
robust tracking control by Edwards & Spurgeon (1994a).
Chapter 6
An observer-based control for non-minimum phase and semi-proper

plants
6.1 Introduction
The continuous-time, sliding-mode based control systems described so far rely on full state information
of the plant. Generally, this assumption is not valid and output feedback has to be considered. In order
to be able to use common sliding-mode based state feedback structures, state observers can provide
estimates of the system states. Edwards & Spurgeon (1994a) developed and rigorously analyzed a ro
bust sliding-mode controller-observer pair for output tracking of strictly proper, minimum phase plants.
However, plants are often not minimum phase or the actuator directly affects the output measurement.
A relevant example of a large scale, relative degree zero, non-minimum phase chemical plant will be
presented in Chapter 8. It is therefore readily understood that an extension of Edwards & Spurgeon’s
(1994a) approach is of vital interest for practical problems.
This chapter, therefore, provides a solution which sets the robust observer-based tracking-control
into a more general framework for a class of non-minimum phase and relative degree zero plants. It
is shown that the tracking control for plants with nominal representation (A ,B ,C ,D ) and non-zero
throughput matrix D ^ 0 (semi-proper (Skogestad & Postlethwaite 1996, p.5) or relative degree zero)
have the same degree of disturbance rejection as strictly proper systems (D = 0). The existence of
a throughput matrix D allows uncertainty of the plant output measurements within the range space of
D. This degree of robustness is achieved by extending the actual plant by (rank(D)) states, partly
filtering the plant output, and introducing new measurements for the tracking control. Thus, the system
is transformed into a strictly proper representation (A, B,C). Low-pass filtering is often applied to
semi-proper plants (Edwards, Spurgeon & Akoachere 2000). However, it is believed that a robustness
analysis for such sliding configurations has not been carried out so far.
In contrast to Edwards & Spurgeon (1998), it is not assumed that the input distribution matrix
B € Rnxm of a plant (A, B, C) is also the disturbance input matrix. However, the range space of
the disturbance input matrix V, € Rnxm/ is expected to be a sub-set of the range-space of B and
C h a p t e r 6. A n o b s e r v e r - b a s e d c o n t r o l f o r n o n - m in im u m p h a s e a n d s e m i - p r o p e r p l a n t s 98
the system (A,'H,C) is assumed minimum phase with (CH) full rank, while (A,B,C) can be non
minimum phase. This changes the class of uncertainty, which is normally counteracted by sliding
mode control, from the range-space of B to the range-space of H. Thus for 7i ^ 0, this control
methodology requires that the plant has more than one actuator. This approach has been motivated by
the structure of the large scale chemical process, which will be considered in Chapter 8. Bag (1997)
posed a similar problem for a dynamic compensator/observer-based sliding mode control where H is
not necessarily in the range space of B and it was mentioned that T-L has to be in the range space for
full disturbance rejection. The assumptions on (A,'H,C) may restrict the class of admissible systems.
However, it has been observed that many non-square systems do not have transmission zeros (Bosgra
& Kwakemaak 1998, Maciejowski 1989).
The observer-based control designs for this type of tracking controller (Edwards & Spurgeon 1994b,
Bhatti, Spurgeon & Edwards 1995) have generally been applied to plants of lower order so that design
of the controller dynamics was relatively straightforward. However, large scale plants necessitate more
elaborate tools for design. Thus, a theoretical framework is suggested for posing the design problem for
the linear components of the control as a sub-optimal # 2 -problem. This result has been initiated by the
work of Tan & Edwards (2000) who considered the design of a robust sliding mode observer for fault
diagnosis in an LQG-ffamework. As the sliding-mode based control requires the linear components of
the observer and the state feedback control to have a certain structure, it is generally not possible to
achieve an optimal linear solution with the prescribed structure. Using ^-regulation theory (Colaneri,
Geromel & Locatelli 1997, Zhou, Doyle & Glover 1996), a design methodology is derived which takes
account of these structural requirements. The design is based on the separation principle using an
adapted approach of Tan & Edwards (2000) for the observer design, a methodology of Utkin (1992) for
the sliding plane design and a numerical optimization technique for the design of the dynamics of the
reaching phase of the sliding plane.
The chapter begins by outlining the considered class of systems followed by a description of the
output filter, the observer/controller system and a short discussion with respect to sampled-data imple
mentation. The presentation of the design procedure finalizes the chapter.
6.2 The system requirements
Consider a linear uncertain system
x = A x + B u + H jF tf (f, x, u)
y = C x + D u 4- H n F H{t, x, u), (6 . 1)
where x € Rn , u € Rm, y G W , F h € IR771' with 0 < m ' < m = p < n and
rank(D) = < m,
C h a p t e r 6 . A n o b s e r v e r - b a s e d c o n t r o l f o r n o n - m in im u m p h a s e a n d s e m i- p r o p e r p l a n t s 99
Assume that the nominal linear system ( A ,B ,C ,D ) and H i, H u are known. Further, the function
x, u) : R+ U {0} x Rn x Rm —> Wn> satisfying Caratheodory’s conditions for existence of
solution is unknown and represents non-linearities plus model uncertainties. However, the bound
||F # ( f,x ,u )|| < ki ||u(f)|| + a ( f , y ) . ( 6 .2 )
for some known positive scalar ki < 1 and a Caratheodory-type function a : R+ U {0} x may
be known. For simplicity, a ( t , y) is assumed to satisfy
= fa ||y|| + h , k2 > 0, k3 > 0. (6.3)
It is assumed that the nominal system satisfies:

Assumption 6.1: The matrices of H j and H u satisfy for H E R mxm' , (m' < m):
Hi = B H , Hn = DH
rank H ,T H ,, t ] = m'.
Hence, the allowable uncertainty in the measurement y is closely related to the system uncertainty. It
is important to note that a class of output measurement uncertainty is permissible.
Assumption 6.2: The matrix
" Af(D T )T C H /
(6.4)
Hn
is full rank m! where Af(-) denotes the null-space of a matrix.

Assumption 6.3: The r invariant zeros of (A, H i, C, H u ) are in C“ , r < (n —p)
Assumption 6.4: (A, B , C, D) has no invariant zero at the origin
Assumption 6.5: J BT DT J is full rank
Assumption 6.6: (A , B ) is fully controllable
6.3 An output measurement filter for semi-proper plants
The tracking control structure of Edwards & Spurgeon (1994a) which was initially developed for strictly
proper plants is used. An augmented output filter can transform the semi-proper plant (6.1) into a strictly
proper system and robustness can be assured with respect to the assumed class of uncertainty.
There exists an orthogonal matrix Ud so that
0 M (D t )t '
udd = £> = , uD = • ^ 6 (6.5)
. #2 . . ub, .
C h a p t e r 6 . A n o b s e r v e r - b a s e d c o n t r o l f o r n o n - m in im u m p h a s e a n d s e m i- p r o p e r p l a n t s 1 0 0
where £>2 G Rr2
is a p x p matrix. Let
r Ci
UDC = C = , C2 G
and consider the system
X A 0 X B ’ Hi
= + u+ Fj f ( t , x, u) (6.6)
. *y . AyC2 Ay . xy . —A yD2 . -A yU ^H n _
p/
A X B n
where A y G W dXTd is a Hurwitz-stable design matrix and auxiliary output measurements are defined
by:
_ Cii
C 00 1 r xX
s?
(6.7)
II
. Kv .
1
y
►
A new augmented system (A , B, C) has been introduced, which incorporates the output filter dynamics.
Observe that the output filter has low pass character and unity gain.
The system (A, B,C) is strictly proper and is therefore suitable for application of the tracking
control of Edwards & Spurgeon (1994a). The rejection of the considered class of uncertainty can
be assured by the following remark:
Remark 6.1
• The range space of H is a subset of the range space of B if and only if Assumption 6.1 holds,
which is necessary for rejection of the considered uncertainty.
• B is full rank if and only if Assumption 6.5 holds.
The assumptions required by Edwards & Spurgeon (1994a) for the strictly proper system can be satis
fied by considering the following two Lemmas.
Lemma 6.1
1. From Assumption 6.1, CK is full rank rn! if and only if Assumption 6.2 holds
2. From Assumption 6.1, the invariant zeros o f (A ,H ,C ) are equivalent to the invariant zeros of
(A, H i, C, H j i ) and hence belong to C~ (Assumption 6.3)
3. (A, B, C.) has no invariant zero at the origin if and only if Assumption 6.4 holds
C h a p t e r 6. A n o b s e r v e r - b a s e d c o n t r o l f o r n o n -m in im u m p h a s e a n d s e m i-p r o p e r p l a n t s 101
Proof The claim is easily shown using the respective definitions of the matrices A, B, C and H (6.6-
6.7).
1. This claim follows from
C iB H M ( D t )t C B H
rank(C?f) = rank = rank
- A yD 2H DH
A f ( D T )T U p U p C B H \
=A f{DT)T =C
= rank
U lD H
D
2. Using the respective Rosenbrock matrix for (A, H, C) it follows that
[ s i —A 0 -B H
s i- A -B H \
AyC2 s i —Ay A yD 2H
rank = rank Ci 0 + rd
Ci 0 0
D 2H
\ . °2 /
\ _0 Ird 0 /
s i-A -B H
~ rank + rd
C DH
3. This part is derived similarly to claim 2 of the Lemma.
Limiting the choice of the filter matrix A y by a finite number of values, the controllability of (A, B)
can be guaranteed by the following Lemma:
Lemma 6.2 (A, B) is fully controllable if each eigenvalue o f the filter matrix A y is not an invariant
ze ro of(A ,B ,C2, D 2 ) •
Proof The controllability of (A, B) can be shown with Assumption 6.6 and using the PBH-test for
(A, B) which requires
rank Q 5 J -.A 5 ] ) = n + rd
for all s E C Suppose s satisfies s £ X(Ay) for the set of eigenvalues X(Ay) of A y, then it follows that
(s I Td — A y ) is full rank and from Assumption 6.6
s ln —A 0 B
rank ( [ s i - A B ]) = rank
AyC2 Slrd Ay AyD2
= rank s l n —A B + rd = n + rd
C h a p t e r 6 . A n o b s e r v e r - b a s e d c o n t r o l f o r n o n - m in i m u m p h a s e a n d s e m i - p r o p e r p l a n t s 102
If s G A(Ay) then
s ln —A B \ ( sin — A B
rank Q SI - A B ] ) > rank = rank
AyC2 —A y D 2 ) \ C2 - d2
The latter square matrix is full rank n + rd if only and only if
s i —A -B
rank = n + r d.
C2 D2
which is satisfied iff s is not an invariant zero of (A, B , C 2,D 2). ■
Using Remark 6.1 and Lemma 6.1, there exists by Edwards & Spurgeon (1998, Lemma 5.3) a
linear transformation T so that the system (A ,B ,C ) can be transformed into the nominal form for
sliding mode observer design. Thus for A = T A T - 1 , B = T B , C = C T~l and H = 7"H, it follows
that
r 0
n = , c = [ o c2 ] , n b g , C2 G ( 6 . 8)
nb
where H b and C2 are non-singular. Defining now a non-singular matrix T q = \M (H t ) , then by

( 6 .8 )
r Bn 0
BT b = (6.9)
B2i n b
and the matrix B\\ has to be full rank for BT b and B to be full rank.
Assuming controllability of (A , B) with Lemma 6.2 and introducing the transformed state x = T x
for the system:
x = A x + B vl + 7 i¥ h ( 6. 10)
y = Cx, ( 6 . 11)
an observer based tracking control can be developed using the controller of Edwards & Spurgeon
(1994a). Thus, the following sections will introduce a non-linear observer for the augmented plant
(6.10-6.11) and a modified tracking control of Edwards & Spurgeon (1994a).
6.4 The non-linear observer
A Walcott-Zak (Walcott & Zak 1996) observer as described in Edwards & Spurgeon (1998, pp. 133)
has, for the system (A , B, C) (6.10-6.11) with disturbance input matrix H, the following structure:
z ( t ) = A z ( t) + Bu(t) —G(Cz(t) —y(t)) + H v0{t), (6.12)

C h a p t e r 6. A n o b s e r v e r - b a s e d c o n t r o l f o r n o n -m in im u m p h a s e a n d s e m i-p r o p e r p l a n t s 103
where A 0 — A — GC is a Hurwitz-stable matrix with a positive definite Lyapunov matrix V Qwhich

satisfies:
VoA o + Alv„ < 0 (6.13)
and the structural constraint:

VoU = Ct F t (6.14)
for some matrix F E Mm/ xp. The observer error dynamics for e = z — x are given by:
e(t) = A 0e{t) + U (v0(t) - F H{t, x , u)).
A common choice for the non-linear output error injection term is based on the unit vector approach:
_ FCejt)
lo/ lPo\\FCe{t)\\+60' ( ‘ }
7o/1 > 1, S0 > 0 (6.16)
where the scalar function p0 is defined by
= *1 K l l + * ( « . y > +„fe17c7c/1 [|g |l l|A - J _ +. ^ , 7 t |7 . > 0 (6.17)

(l-7 c/lfcll|i?l|K (A ))
and A E Em xm' is a non-singular diagonal design matrix with condition number «(A) satisfying
*2||£>||||£||k(A )7c/i + h W H M A ) ^ < 1, (6.18)
where 7 ^ > 70/i > 1 is a parameter which will be determined when introducing the non-linear and
linear control terms u ^ L and u£ in Section 6.5. It can be shown using Edwards & Spurgeon (1998,
Proposition 7.1) that p0 > k\ ||u(£)|| -I- a( f , y) -I- 70. Thus, it follows from the structural constraint
(6.14), the uncertainty bounds (6.2) and using V0 (6.13):
2eTV 0H {Vo- V „ ) < - 2 p ? V 0e \\lo + 2 ||H r Poe|[ p0 f l - p ^ | | + X ) ' (6' 19>
The scalar 60 introduces a constant boundary layer around the sliding plane S 0 which is defined by the
relation \\'HV0e\\ < —^ r . Thus, the uncertainty F n(t) is compensated for by the non-linear output
1 7o/l
error injection term enforcing a pseudo-sliding motion in a boundary layer of the plane S Q:
S 0 = { e e Rn+rd : FCe(t) = 0} . (6.20)
For the design of the observer, it is necessary to find matrices V0, F and G so that (6.13) and
(6.14) are satisfied for a Hurwitz-stable design matrix A 0. Assumptions 6.2 and 6.3 are necessary and
sufficient conditions for the existence of these matrices (Edwards & Spurgeon 1998). It can be shown
that a specially structured matrix V 0 introduced by Tan & Edwards (2000) is necessary and sufficient
for satisfying the constraint (6.14). This matrix V 0 will be discussed in Section 6.6.2 with respect to the
controller and observer design.
C h a p t e r 6. A n o b s e r v e r - b a s e d c o n t r o l f o r n o n - m in i m u m p h a s e a n d s e m i- p r o p e r p l a n t s 104
6.5 The observer based feedback control law
The set-up of the tracking controller is a modification of the control law of Edwards & Spurgeon (1998).
For tracking purposes, integral action is introduced for the augmented plant (A, B,C) (6.10-6.11):
x r {t) = r { t ) - y ( t ) , (6 .21 )
where the reference r(t) follows
r(f) = T(r(f) —H), R = const., R E ( 6 .22)
and r is a Hurwitz-stable design matrix. Combining the states of the integral action and the observer
system (6.12):
Xr Z\
z = , z i e R”+r<*+P-™', z 2 e R™' (6.23)
Z . *2 .
the following open loop state space representation including the observer dynamics is given by:
z\ — A n Z i + ^12^2 —G\Ce + B in + Bt t, (6.24)
Z2 = ^21^1 + A 2 2 Z 2 ~ G2Ce + B 2 U + Rbôt (6.25)
e = A 0e + H&o - F h ) (6.26)
where
1
1
___________
^11 -4l2 0 -C Gx ’ -I '

1
3
X
’ '
?
= 3 » #11 =
_ .4.21 A 22 . 0 A G2 G .^11
Bi = [ Bu 0 ] T g 1, B2 = [ B 21 U b ] T g \ Br = "" . (6.27)
_ ^(n+r<
i+p—Tn,)xm _
Similarly to Edwards & Spurgeon (1998, pp. 83) it can be proved that if (A,B) is completely con
trollable and (A, B ,C ) does not have invariant zeros at the origin, then ^ 4 n , £ A 12 B\ ] ) is M y
controllable. Thus, there are matrices M e R m ' * (" + » v i-" » '+ iO , K € R m x ( n + r d - m ' + P) s o ^
’M '
An = — [ A12 Bi j (6.28)
Bl J
K _
is Hurwitz-stable. Hence, there is a linear transformation T for the state vector z
’ I 0 zi
f = , S2 = A S l = S 2M , = t z , z i € Rn+ ^ + P -m', z 2 E Rm> (6.29)
. S2 , _ *2 .
in which the system (6.24-6.26) becomes:
z \ = («4n —A n M ) z i + J[i25j 1Z2+ ^ i u —G\Ce -1- Br r
^ 2:=:5'2*^2i ^ i + ^ 2^.22'S,2 1^ 2+ S i& u + S 2 B 21 | A j TB 1u —(S\G i + Ai/0 4- S iB rr,
e = ,40e -1- Tiii/o - F h ),
where
.421 — M ( A n — A n M ) + A 21 —-4.22Af, ^4.22 = M A 12 + *422* (6.30)
A pseudo sliding motion in a suitable boundary layer can be achieved for a hyperplane given by:
{[zT rT]T : z 2 = S rr} , (6.31)
where Sr G M771’xp is a suitably chosen design matrix. The following control law is introduced
u = ucL + ucNL
where the linear control u £ is
TB/ 1 K r (t - R ) - TB/1K z i
uC
l = Tb
A' 1 ( - S 2 ^ 2 i 2 i + ( $ - 5 2i2 2 S 2- 1) z 2 - ( ^ S ,r + 5 iB r ) r + 5 rr ^ ,c ( ii'r ( r - R) - i f z i ) )
(6.32)
with G R771*xm' a Hurwitz-stable design matrix, enhancing the reaching of the sliding mode and
K r G Rmxp is a design matrix, where
rp -\ _ Tb / i 2—771 x m
B ~ 5 7 b /1 £ , Z/c — (S,iB n + S 25 2 i) 7 i/ i.
Tb /2
Note that from the definition of 7# (6.9) follows that 7g/i = N ( H T )T .

The non-linear control law u ^ L is given by
U ATL = (6.33)
_ . —1 P 2(^2 ~ ffrr)
I'r = (6.34)
7c/1/,c||P2(2 2 - S r r ) || + 6c ’
pc = ||A|| pG+ 7c, <SC > 0, 7c > 0,
where V 2 is a positive definite Lyapunov matrix so that
<§F'p2 4“ 7^2^ < 0* (6.35)

C h a p t e r 6 . A n o b s e r v e r - b a s e d c o n t r o l f o r n o n - m in im u m p h a s e a n d s e m i- p r o p e r p l a n t s 10 6
Identically to Edwards & Spurgeon (1998, pp. 161), the affine changes of the states z i, z 2 and r(t):
e T(t) = r(t) - R, Ci = z i + A ^ i A n S r + Br) R , C2 = z 2 - Srr, (6.36)
imply for A u = A n S ^ 1 a state space representation in [er , ( f , (£ , erT]T:
1
1
1
e A0 0 0 0 e
£
Cl -G iC An •A 12 (Br + A i 2 S r + B xK r) Cl 0
+
C2 - ( S i G l + S 2 G2)C 0 $ 0 C2 A(uc + v0)
. *r . 0 0 0 r 6f 0
A-clsd
(6.37)
The closed loop state space representation (6.37) can be split into two parts. It consists of a linear
part, the first term, with a Hurwitz-stable system matrix. The second term determines the non-linear
component of the observer and state feedback. The non-linear part v 0 ensures the robustness with
respect to the uncertainty and disturbance function F # while vc compensates for the effect of v 0 on the
state vector £2- A constant boundary layer is introduced via the smoothed unit vector control:
2<2T ? M A (i'c + 1/.)) < -27c7o/i IIP2C2II + 27./1 Pc \ W 2 i 2 W ( l - ^ 7 <SC) (6 3 8 )

for UP2C2II > ~*Tcft— ■The closed loop system (6.37) is ultimately bounded stable. Using the matrices
' "—1
7o / l
Vo (6.13), V 2 (6.35), a positive definite matrix V r € W xp and V\ € R(n+r^+p-m,)x{n+rd+p-m') ^ a
constant k > 0 and x > 0, there exists a positive definite matrix
V = diag(fcP0, V X,V 2 ,Vr), V A dsd + A T

d siV < - x V . (6.39)
Defining a Lyapunov function for the closed loop system as
V = [eT , i f, if, erT] V [eT , i f, if, e rT]T
the derivative ^ satisfies using (6.19) and (6.38):
y < - h V - 2 \ \ n r V 0 e \\l 0 - 2^ 0/ 1 ^ ^
+2 n TV
+2 II||H e\\ pp0 (y i1 - nWUTVoeW
V 0 ell ^ T ^ e ii + l \ -j.
lolsoJ + 27 n pc \\V C21W
11 22I»2 1 (( l - 7o/1 \ \ v 2i 2 \\ + 6 C)^
Noticing that the last two terms are non-positive for HP 2 C2 II > 1J 1 and for 'fV.TV 0 e\\ >
T'o/l
then it follows:
V < ->trU —2 H ^ P o e ll 70 - 27c70/! UP2C2II + (6.40)

C h a p t e r 6 . A n o b s e r v e r - b a s e d c o n t r o l f o r n o n - m in im u m p h a s e a n d s e m i-p r o p e r p l a n t s 10 7
It can be shown from (6.1,6.18), the definitions of pQ(6.17), pc (6.34) and Edwards & Spurgeon (1998,
Proposition 7.1)
,|u c + u c m < K l l + 7 c / i l l # l l « ( A ) ( f c 2 | | C x l | + fc3 ) + 7 c 7 c / i l l - g l l l | A - 1 H + 7 o 7 c / i l | g | l « ( A )

UL UNL ~ l - f c 2 | | D | | | | H | | « ( A ) 7 <!/i - f c i | | f f | | K ( A ) 7 c / i
Using
llyll < ||C7x|| + ||-0||||u£ + U & J
and the definitions of p 0 (6.17) and pc (6.34), there exist non-negative constants ki, k^, ki and ^2 so
that:
Po < k i W + k2, pc < k \y /V -I- £2, fci, k\, > 0,
Substituting this upper bound of pQand pc into (6.40) implies ultimate bounded stability of the closed
loop system. The set of ultimate boundedness decreases in size for decreasing values of S0 and Sc. The
following theorem summarizes the main result of this section:
Theorem 6.1 Assume a square system (A, B , C , D ), not necessarily minimum phase, with system and
measurement uncertainty H fF jj, H i jF jj described in (6 .1-6.3) satisfies Assumptions 6 .1-6.6. Then
there exists a Walcott-Zak observer for the plant (A, B , C , D ) with augmented output measurement
filter, so that a sliding-mode state-feedback controller employing error integration tracks robustly a
piecewise constant measurement reference R. 0
Remark 6.2 Since this control methodology considers semi-proper plants a sampled-data implementa
tion of this control is not trivially analyzed with the tools which have been presented so far. In particular,
Remark 5.2 applies. The sampled output measurement STy would introduce a unit delay for the control
signal:
Sr(y)(i) = CSr(x(t)) + D u(i - 1) + Hn SrFH.
In contrast, strictly proper systems (D = 0) are suitable, since they are applicable to Corollary 5.1
provided the non-linear control and observer elements v 0 and vc of (6.15) and (6.34) are globally Lip-
schitz. For uncertainty with constant bound k\ = &2 = 0 (6.2-6.3), this condition is satisfied and a
respective sampled-data implementation will be analyzed in Chapter 7. Further, the re-definition of the
hold element H r allows the analysis of semi-proper systems and will be also discussed in Chapter 7. o
With the short discussion of the sampled-data implementation of the tracking control, the exposition of
the control system is finished and a suitable design methodology for this control is described within the
next section.
C h a p t e r 6 . A n o b s e r v e r - b a s e d c o n t r o l f o r n o n - m in im u m p h a s e a n d s e m i-p r o p e r p l a n t s 108
6.6 A design methodology using an i f 2-approach
The linear part of the observer based tracking control is to be based on an # 2-methodology. For that
reason, a discussion on sub-optimal # 2-design for the observer based tracking control is included. The
actual design is then described applying LMI techniques for the observer of Tan & Edwards (2000), a
method of Utkin (1992, Chapter 9) and other numerical optimization methods for the control.
6.6.1 ^ -re g u la to r: sub-optimal observer and sub-optimal state feedback
For investigation of the linear control and observer components, the non-linear terms vQ, vc from (6.37)
are omitted. Further, the uncertainty F h is replaced by a more general set of input signals. Thus in an
H 2 -framework, £1, £2 model disturbance signals, matched and unmatched to the range space of H,
models output measurement noise and R is the demand signal in the i f 2-tracking problem. Using the
integrating state x r , the open loop system is of the form:
_ _ R
r r 0 0 r 0 - T A i 0 0 0
ti
Xr = I 0 -c xr 0 u + 0 0 0 -C y
c
s2
X 0 0 A X B 0 ua 2 M {U T)kz 0
*- ✓ —v------------- ✓
AH *H/ u Bh/ x
where the output including the measurement noise is given by
-1 R
r ip 0 0 r 0 0 0 0
Ym Xr — 0 Ip 0 x T + 0 0 0 0
y 0 0 c X 0 0 0 Cy
—v— -1✓ L -1 VL
Ch/ i Dh/j
and assuming Cy 6 M” *1’ non-singular and Aj € A2 e W n' xm', A3 6

Since the control system is supposed to track the signal r, the controlled variable is defined by:
-A 4 0 A4 C r 0
t> m xm
Yc = 0 A 5 0 xr + 0 u, A4 € Rpxp, As e Rpxp, A6 6 (6.41)
0 0 0 X A q
' H/ c 'H/c
where A6 and A4 are non-singular. Since D H/m is not full row rank, the optimal regulator solution is a
combination of a reduced order observer (Saberi, Sannuti & Chen 1995, Section 9.3-9.4):
z = A z + B u + G (y — Cz) (6.42)
and a state feedback regulator:

u = —K \ t — K 2 x r — K 3 z. (6.43)
With e = z — x , the closed loop system is:
r T O O 0 r r -rA i 0 R
u
o
Xr xr 0 0 -Gy
1
= +
z -B K X -B K 2 A - B K z -g c z 0 0 GCi &
e 0 0 0 (A -G C ) e 0 -W A 2 A3 GCy . .
V 11,1............... ...
vH / c l s d B H/ cl sd W
(6.44)
and
r
-a 4 0 A4C -AiC
xr
yc = 0 As 0 (6.45)
z
-A eK i -A 6K 2
e
CH/clsd
The closed loop / / 2-norm can be calculated from Zhou et al. (1996, Lemma 4.6):
» = Ilry ./.W II* , = y j* {C h / c m Q C Z/ cJ ) (6.46)
where Tyc/ U.(s) is the transfer function from w to y c and Q € B£(2P+2r<z+ 2 n ) x (2p + 2rd+ 2n) js given b y
-A-H /clsdQ + Q A t f / d s d = —B H /c ls d ^ H /c ls d * (6-47)
This relationship holds irrespective of the choice of the control [K\ K 2 K 3] and the observer gain G.
The only condition is that the closed loop system matrix A H/dsd is Hurwitz-stable.
If the observer gain G is chosen optimally, the resulting A 0 = A - G C does not imply the existence
of a V 0 satisfying (6.13) and (6.14). To introduce more flexibility replace (6.47) with
A n /c lsd Q + Q A H /c ls d = ~ B n / c l s d B ] { / cis 0 ( n + r 0, A 6 Rn+rd xn+rd. It will be seen that this framework lends itself to a convenient LMI-
solution for the observer gain G for which the resulting A 0 does possess a V 0 satisfying (6.13) and
(6.14). From Willems (1971, Lemma 3) the solutions Q and Q of (6.47) and (6.48) respectively satisfy:
Q > Q =4- CH/ clsdQC'ff/clsd > Gfj/dsdQCjjfcisd =>■ a > a (6.49)
where
<7 — y j t l ( CH/ ds dQC H/dsd) i (6.50)

and a is given in (6.46). It can be shown from the arguments in Colaneri et al. (1997, Lemma 6.4) using
the definition of A H/clsd, B H/clsd from (6.44) that
Q = d ia g (Q i,Q )
if G = QCT (CyC y )~ l , Q is the solution of
A Q + Q A t + (D sD j + A) - QCT {CyC T )~ lCQ = 0, (6.51)
D S = [HA 2 M ( H t )A3] (6.52)
and Q\ > 0 is the solution of:
A-H/dsdQi + Q iAff/dsd = - C g C q , A H/dsd = (A h - B H/ u[Ki K 2 K 3] ) , (6.53)
-rA i 0
CG = 0 -C y
0 G CV
This implies:
a-= J t t ( A 4 CQCTAT) + tr ((C H/c- D H/c[Kx K 2 m Q ^ C ^ - D H ^ K x K 2 t f 3])T).
However by Zhou et al. (1996, Lemma 4.6)
tr ( ( Ch / c - D h /c {Kx K 2 K z\)Q i{C h i c- D EIc{Ki K 2 K 3])t ) = tr(C%PCa )
where P satisfies
PAufcisd + A f f /clsdP = - C f f /cCff/ c - [Ki K 2 K 3]TA jA e lK i K 2 K 3 ], (6.54)
which is a sub-optimal solution of the in s ta te feedback problem with the following state space repre
sentation (convention as Zhou et al. (1996)):
' Ah CG B h / u
Ch/c 0 B h/c (6.55)
I 0 0
Thus, the upper bound <7 of the H 2~norm a for non-optimal state feedback [K\ K 2 K 3 ] and sub-optimal
observer gain G is:
‘
a = ^ tr(A 4CQCr= A
_ ^j) + tr (C%PCG).
~~ " (6.56)
C h a p t e r 6 . A n o b s e r v e r - b a s e d c o n t r o l f o r n o n - m in im u m p h a s e a n d s e m i- p r o p e r p l a n t s 111
6.6.2 An LMI-design methodology for the observer
Tan & Edwards (2000) introduced an efficient LMI-methodology for designing the observer gain ac
cording to an LQG-cost. This approach is modified here and incorporated into the design of the closed
loop control. The design scheme of Tan & Edwards (2000) considers the task of finding a matrix Q > 0
so that (6.51) is satisfied for A > 0 while G = QCT (CyC y )~ l . Choose V 0 — Q~l . The quadratic
matrix equality (6.51) changes then equivalently into a LMI for A > 0 (Tan & Edwards 2000):
V 0A + A t V 0 + V 0 D , D j V 0 - ^ ( C y C ^ - ' C < 0. (6.57)
Further the latter can be equivalently transformed into:
V 0(A - GC) + ( A - GC)t V 0 < -V o D s D jV o - CT (CyC ^ ) - l C, (6.58)
which implies stability of the observer using this design approach. Tan & Edwards (2000) used a
specially structured matrix within their observer design scheme:
7 >n
Vo = v 12 , V n e R { n + r d ~ m ') x { n + r d - m ,\ V 12 6 # ~ m')xm', (6.59)
_ 0 V?2 v 22
F = [ n fP f2 U lV-n ] C2 l .
This structural requirement for the observer Lyapunov matrix V 0 (6.59) is equivalent to the particular
structural constraint (6.14) mentioned in Section 6.4. Therefore, applying the structured matrix V 0 to
(6.57) is sufficient for a Lyapunov matrix stability constraint (6.13),(6.58) and the structural constraint
(6.14) to hold. The task is then to minimize ti(h±CV~lCT ) subject to (6.57). This can be formulated
in terms of two LMI-inequalities:
Vo A + A TVo - CT { C y d T )-lC V 0 D S
<0
D ^Vq ~In+rd
-n aA
c
<0, n e W xp, (6.60)
CTA j - Vo
where the minimization of tr(II) implies the minimization of tr(A4CyP “ 1CTA^) < tr(II).
6.6.3 Designing the state feedback
The linear control gain [K\ K 2 Kz] (6.32),(6.43) is now chosen combining an approach developed
by Utkin (1992) with the idea of minimizing a (6.56). Hence, the sliding mode is chosen according
to an H 2 -criterion. This determines implicitly part of the gain [K\ K 2 Kz). The remaining part of
the state feedback, <E>, (6.32) a Hurwitz-stable design matrix, is then found by minimizing the value of
tr (C%PCG).
The idea is to minimize a cost functional for the system dynamics in sliding motion £2 = 0 (6.31).
It would be most suitable if a (6.46), Xi (C q P C g ) (6.50), (6.49) could be minimized in this case.
However, it has been argued by Utkin (1992) that in the case of minimizing a or tr(CGP C g ), the
respective matrix equation would be higher than order 2 and too complex to be solved. However, Utkin
(1992) suggested a cost functional which depends only on the states and actuator signals determining
the sliding mode. Accordingly, the functional used here shall be derived from <r (6.46) by modifying
the controlled variable (6.41):
Yc/sl = CH/c [ Olxp XrT x t1 \ + D „ lcM (HT)M(HT)Tn (6.61)
Thus, in this case the sliding plane design problem has been reduced of finding a matrix
M
, S r = 0, k t = 0, (6.62)
LT b/ iK j
(6.28,6.32) for the # 2-state feedback problem with state space representation:
L
[Co m Sr] [-4x2 B 1 M ( H t )\ ‘
Csl/c 0 Dsl/c (6.63)

1-----
where («4, B,C) has been assumed to be in nominal form as required in Section 6.3 so that Tq/\ =
N ’{H t ) t and the matrices Csl/c, D sl/c and CG/ Si = [ I n+2p+rd- m> 0 ]Cg can be derived from
(6.9),(6.27) and the definitions of C # /c and D h / c (6.41):
_ 0
0 A4c r In+rd—m1 0 iJ T " AAC 0
I-m'
'sl/c A5 0 ? Dsl/c
0 0
0 0
0 A6Ar(H T)
The respective Riccati-equation and the optimal solution is easily derived (Utkin 1992, Zhou et al.
1996). Thus, the ^ -s lid in g plane design problem of (6.63) is a ‘reduced’ version of (6.55) and can
be optimally solved. As described in Section 6.3 before, plants (A, B , 67, D) with non-zero matrix D
are transformed into a strictly proper system (A, B, C) by augmenting states. It would be reasonable to
include for the suggested sliding plane tuning methods a tracking requirement for the actual measure
ment y (6.1) into the design of the sliding plane. For instance for the first sliding plane design method
(6.63), the controlled output may be changed to:
Csl/c x T D h/c
Yc/sl + W i H 1) u (6.64)
[ 0 [a 4 C 0] f - 1 J X A aD
C h a p t e r 6 . A n o b s e r v e r - b a s e d c o n t r o l f o r n o n - m in im u m p h a s e a n d s e m i-p r o p e r p l a n t s 1 1 3
It should be noted that it is possible to choose the gains Sr and K r optimally as well. Thus, in this
case a matrix Riccati-equation would have to be solved out for the gains
-S ^S r M
—Tb / i K t Tb / \ K
which minimizes the # 2-cost for the controlled output
y c/sl/b = CH/c [ r T XrT x T ] T + D h I cM ( H t ) N ( H t )t u
However, for semi-proper systems this design methodology implies ST ^ 0, K r ^ 0 and any change
of the demand R and respectively r would have direct effect on the control (6.32) and the actual output
y (6.1) which might cause high interaction.
For the design of the remaining part of the linear control (6.32), it is assumed that the observer
gain G (Section 6.6.2), the sliding plane with (6.62) and the design matrix A (6.17-6.18) have been
already determined. The component (6.32) a Hurwitz-stable design matrix, can now be determined
numerically by minimizing the value of tr(C q P C q ) subject to (6.54). This ^-problem for (6.55) is
non-convex since the structure of the linear state feedback control is pre-determined. The non-convex
problem can be solved practically by an iteration procedure. As the first step, a Hurwitz-stable matrix
is chosen, the linear control is calculated (6.32) and the closed system matrix Ajj/dsd (6.53) can be used
to compute with (6.54) the i / 2-norm Xi{CqPCg)- N ow different values of $ can be taken to compare
the respective cost in an iteration process until a satisfactory sub-optimal value for tr (CqPCq) has
been found. This in turn minimizes also the value of a (6.46), the actual cost of the control. However,
the global minimum of a is not necessarily achieved with this method.
6.7 Summary
A robust sliding-mode output tracking control methodology suggested by Edwards & Spurgeon (1994a)
has been extended to the control of a class of MIMO non-minimum phase plants. Further, by augment
ing an output measurement filter to semi-proper plants, it has been proved that the tracking control
robustly controls semi-proper systems and allows also a limited class of output measurement uncer
tainty in addition to system uncertainty and disturbances.
A theoretical framework for a suboptimal # 2-tracking control fitting the control structure of the
linear components of the sliding-mode control has been suggested as a scheme for the controller design.
For strictly proper plants, it is possible to analyze the sampled-data implementation of this observer-
based control within the framework of this thesis considering a reduced class of uncertainty and distur
bances allowing only non-parametric, constant bounds for the norm of the uncertainty. In the case of
semi-proper systems, a unit delay of the control signal would be introduced within the sampled output
measurement. A suitable discussion for semi-proper systems will be carried out within Chapter 7, while
an example of a chemical process will be considered in Chapter 8. Another issue is that most known
analysis techniques are not practically suitable for large scale systems and dynamic feedback systems.
The next chapter therefore suggests an analysis methodology based on a generalized Lp-norm, which
allows linear uncertain systems combined with globally Lipschitz non-linear control structures to be
treated.
Chapter 7
A generalized L p-based approach for sampled-data implementations
7.1 Introduction
An analysis method for discretized controllers was presented in Chapter 5. It was shown that this
methodology had to be case-optimized for the particular structure of the sliding-mode based state-
feedback control. However, dynamic feedback control systems and more complicated control struc
tures are not readily analyzed via such methods. A technique has to be found which is flexible enough
for such case-optimization. Within Section 2.5.1, the Lp-analysis approach by Chen & Francis (1991)
from (2.45-2.46) has been regarded suitable for such purposes. It will be shown that the generalization
of the technique to non-linear system theory is particularly useful for the analysis of large scale struc
tures of linear uncertain systems in combination with exponentially stabilizing dynamic controllers and
Lipschitz-continuous non-linear control system components. The approach also allows different sam
pling rates of sampled-data controller inputs and outputs to those within the control system dynamics.
Theoretically and practically, control schemes with different sampling rates within sampled-data imple
mentations have been of interest (Ito, Ohmori & Sano 1994, Djenoune et al. 1998) in accommodating
the issue of time-scale differences within plant dynamics or hardware constraints.
To allow the analysis of exponentially stabilizing control laws, a generalized Lp-norm approach is
adopted. Instead of the usual finite horizon integral:
[ T \ m \ \ p dt
Jo
for an integrable function f : (0, T) -¥ Rn , the more general integral
f T w{t ) m m * * , : (°>T ) R+
Jo
is investigated (Desoer & Vidyasagar 1975). As suggested by Sandberg (1965) and Mousa et al. (1986),
the choice w(t) = eapt, a G R will be used. This choice is particularly useful for exponentially
stable systems or systems which are decreasing exponentially outside a compact set, a set of ultimate
boundedness, around the origin. The respectively defined Lp-norm is used to analyze strictly proper,
C h a p t e r 7 . A g e n e r a l i z e d L p - b a s e d a p p r o a c h f o r s a m p l e d - d a ta im p l e m e n t a t io n s 116
affine, non-linear, exponentially stable systems with continuous outputs, which are Lipschitz in the
states. It is readily shown that the respective input-output Lp-gain exists and is finite. However, the Lp-
gain with respect to the discretized output, which is created via a zero-order sample-and-hold element
from the continuous output signal, is also finite and converges to the Lp-gain of the continuous-time
output for r —» 0+. This result can be used within a fast-sampling analysis for the control and the
non-linear affine system satisfying Assumptions 2.1a-2.3a or 2.1b-2.3b. An Z^-norm approach for the
discretized control provides exponential stability of the closed loop.
Characteristics of this analysis method are shown in application to the observer-based tracking
control of Chapter 6 and the sliding-mode-based state-feedback of Chapter 3. For the observer-based
tracking control, strictly proper plants are considered. The option of two different sampling rates, a
fast sampling rate for the measurement and a slow sampling rate for the control signals, is taken into
account. In this example, it is also shown that the suggested Z^-norm analysis technique is useful to
analyze ultimate boundedness, although asymptotically stable systems are normally investigated via
Lp-norm analysis. Numerically calculated results are given for a furnace temperature control problem
(Edwards & Spurgeon 19946).
Problems connected to the analysis of sampled-data control systems for semi-proper plants have
been indicated by Remarks 5.2 and 6.2. For the same reason, a full analysis of the sampled-data
implementation for the tracking control is only carried out for application to strictly proper systems.
However, a more detailed discussion of a sampled-data tracking control for a semi-proper plant is
undertaken to show how some of the issues are overcome by a different sample and hold procedure.
For comparative reasons, the sliding mode based state feedback control law from Chapter 3 is re
considered. A numerical example for the inverted pendulum and the stable system of Section 5.5 of
Chapter 5 delivers also for the generalized L 2-norm approach an ‘optimal’ controller with minimal sam
pling frequency for a certain pole configuration. The results for the stable plant show some similarity
to those from Chapter 5.
The analysis for the two control strategies will show that the presented technique is particularly
effective for investigation of complex robust, non-linear control structures applied to linear uncertain
systems. The stability constraints on the sampling time can be expressed in the form of non-linear ma
trix inequalities which can be solved via a combination of LMI and non-linear optimization techniques.
For the discretization analysis technique of Chapter 5, the stabilizing effect of the formerly continuous
time control has been directly exploited when utilizing integration techniques. Characteristics of the
non-linear fast sampling stability constraints will prove that this stabilizing effect has been indirectly
included within the generalized L2-analysis technique. This can be readily explained for the non-linear
matrix inequalities and the respective numerical solution technique.
This chapter begins therefore with an explanation of the notation for the generalized L p-technique,
C h a p t e r 7 . A g e n e r a l i z e d L p - b a s e d a p p r o a c h f o r s a m p l e d - d a t a im p l e m e n t a t io n s 117
before the general results for non-linear systems and discretized control laws are proved. The approach
is then used in Section 7.5 to show the ultimate boundedness of a sampled-data implementation of a
continuous-time sliding mode tracking controller applied to a furnace model. The methodology for
solving the non-linear matrix inequalities is explained. The section concludes with a discussion of the
control of semi-proper plants. Finally, an analysis involving the non-smooth max-Lyapunov function is
carried out for the sliding mode based state feedback control.
7.2 Notation for the Lp-norm approach
To be able to work in a more general environment of Lp-normed spaces, the concept of extended
Lebesgue-p spaces introduced with (2.41,2.43) in Chapter 2 is generalized combining the notation of
Green & Limebeer (1995) and that of Mousa et al. (1986). Define for p G 1 + and a G R the space
L” p(0, T ) of vector valued functions:
L” p(0, T) — : (0, T) —» Rn | f is (Lebesgue) integrable, ^j J eaPs ||f(,s)||p ds < oo
The corresponding norm |H lc r ,p ,T is defined as:
iifL ,P,r = f / [ iif w i r * •
The extended Lebesgue space L” pe is defined with:
£ " pe = { f S L I P(0,T ) f o r all T > 0}
If P is a non-linear operator from L™pe to L £pe, then the induced norm or the L^p-gain of P is given
by:
7„ ( P ) = sup | : T > 0, f 6 L " pe, |lf||CTjP>r # o j
Thus, an L ajPe-gain relationship holds:
\\Pf\\a,p,T — 7<rj>(-P) l|f|la,p,T + â,p(P)i
where ^ ( P ) is the bias term.

In the following section, this general concept is applied to the generalization of a result of Chen &
Francis (1991) from linear to non-linear systems. Note that for the problems of sampling the notational
convention from (2.27,2.31) of Section 2.3 is used.
7.3 L^ p-gain o f non-linear systems with sampled-data output
It is assumed that the following system has bounded input gain ||p|| < Q
x(t) = /( t,x ) + £ ( x ) u , x e R n , / : l x f -+ R n , g : R n -> R nx™,
y = h(x), h : R n -+BP, h(0) = 0 (7.1)
and is such that the free system (u = 0) is exponentially stable. Further, suppose /(£, x) and g(x)
are continuous in x for any fixed t and the drift /( f ,x ) satisfies Assumption 2.1a of Chapter 2. This
ensures the existence of a solution for appropriate input signal u. Further, it is assumed that there exists
a Lyapunov function V(t, x) such that for ci, C2, C3, C4 > 0:
SV
< c 4 ||x ||, Cl ||x|| < V (f,x )< c 2 ||x|| . (7.2)
<5x
From the converse theorem of Khalil (1992a, Theorem 3.12), the existence of the Lyapunov function
can be assured by assuming that /(£, x) is continuously differentiable in x and / has a Jacobian which
is uniformly bounded in t on any compact set of x. For the L^p-gain and sampled-data analysis, the
output measurements y = h(x) and the system function / (i, x) satisfy the following Lipschitz and
sector properties:
\\h(xi) - fi(x 2) II < Kh ||xi - x 21|, ||/(£, x) || <Kf_ ||x || . (7.3)
The following Lemma will be used with respect to the sampled-data analysis:
Lemma 7.1 A stable affine system as given by (7.1) and satisfying (7.2-7.3) has for any constant value
0 < ^ a finite L cr,p-gain for p € [1, 0 0 ]. •
Proof The proof of Lemma 7.1 is undertaken using the method of Khalil (1992a, Theorem 6.1) and
a sketch is given here only. The non-linear affine system in (7.1) satisfies the requirements of Khalil
(1992a, Theorem 6.1). Similarly to equation (6.13) of Khalil (1992a, Theorem 6.1) follows the inequal-
ity: _
r —c%t C A G l Ch C —ca(t—3 )
which implies:
/ — fCh\\x(t = 0)\\e 2c2 + 2- ^ ^ e 2c2 | | u ( s ) ||ds
{fat |IMx (f))||) < ||x(£ = 0)|| JQ e " ^ " a) (f“ s ) ( e ^ ||u ( s ) ||) d s .
Thus, for any a satisfying a < ^ the proof deriving a finite L^p-gain can proceed as carried out by
Khalil (1992a, Theorem 6.1) considering the gain from (eat ||u(£) ||) to (ept ||MXW )||)• ■
This non-linear gain relationship can be used for a generalization of the result from (2.45-2.46) by Chen
& Francis (1991). It can be shown that stable affine systems (7.1) have finite L^p-gain with respect to
an output h A (t, /i(x)) - h{x.) and that this gain approaches 0 for r + 0:
Theorem 7.1 An exponentially stable system (7.1) with sampled data output h ^ (t,h (x )) satisfying
(7.2-73) has finite L a^p-gain (p E [1, oo]) for any constant value o < The gain converges to the
value o f the L a#-gain with respect to the continuous output h(x) as r —►+0. Further, it can be shown
that for the output signal hA (t, h(x)) — h(x) the L a^-induced norm has the limit 0 as t ^ + 0. 0
Proof Consider for the proof p E [1, oo). The case p = oo follows then easily. Since the output
function h(x(t)) is globally Lipschitz with Lipschitz constant Kh the analysis of {hA (t,h(x)) — h{x))
can be carried out investigating the sampling residual of the states x A (t, x) —x(t), as
||^ A(f,/i(x)) -f c (x ) || < /C*||xA(t,x ) - x ( f ) | | . (7.4)
A finite La;P-gain can be derived for this residual, which can be then used to prove the claims of the
theorem.
It follows from (7.1) that:
x (t) - x ( t i ) = f f_(s,x(s))ds + [ g (x(s))u (s)d s, t E

Jti Jti
Using the assumption of (7.3) and the bound of the input gain g, it follows
||x(t) - x(fi)|| < [ ||/( s ,x ( s ) ) || ds + Q [ ||u (s)||d s,

Jti Jt i
< Kf f \\x{s)\\ds + G f \\u(s)\\ds. (7.5)

~Jti Jti
Applying now Holder’s Inequality (Maddox 1970, p.21) for finite sums it is implied:
k k
(7.6)
j= 1 j= 1
and
||x(f) —x (ii)||p < \\x(s)\\ds + g £ \\u(s)\\dsj , p > 1
< 2 V-l K.l ( f ||x(s)|| dsj + 2 ”- 1 g» ( J * ||u(«)|| d s )
Now suppose t E [**>*«+1]- Using Holder’s Inequality for integrals (Craven 1982, Proposition 4.3.17),
it can be proved that:
||x(t) - x (tj)||p < (2 r)f~ 1 /CP

Lf ||x(s)||p rfs + ( 2 r f - 1 g pJ ^ ||u (S) f (7.7)
and
f pt ||x(i) - x (fi)||p < ( 2r)p~1Kpf ecpt f ||x ( a ) f ds + (2 r)p~xgp e°pt f ||u(S) f d 5. (7.8)
C h a p t e r 7 . A g e n e r a l i z e d X p - b a s e d a p p r o a c h f o r s a m p l e d - d a ta im p l e m e n t a t io n s 120
Integrating both sides of (7.8) from U to t £ [U, t i+i], it follows:
f ^ e aps\\x(s)-x.(ti)\\p ds < (2T)”- 1Kp J ‘ e"p‘j ‘ \\x(s)\\p dsdl
+ ( 2 t ) p~ 15 p P e cpl [ \\vl( s )\\p d s d l.

Jti Jti
Suppose o > 0 and assuming t £ [ti, fj+i] then:
J ‘ e,rps \\x(s) - x(ti)\\p ds < { 2 t ) p ~ 1K. p J ‘ e,rp« - ti'>j ‘ e°ps \\x(s)\\p ds dl
+ ( 2r)p- 1gp P f e^ W ^ fdsdl

Jti Jti
e <rpr _ i ft
< (2r)p K?,--------- e‘7ps||x(s)||p <i5
L ap Jti
+ (2 t)p-1(Jp— —— P (?ps ||u(5) ||p ds.

°P Jti
For <7 < 0, similar considerations imply that for all a £ M, cr ^ 0 follows:
f V ps \\x(s)-x{ti)\\p ds < (2r)p- 1i ^ - p i ( * 7 ||x(5)||p <i5+gp£ e " ps ||u(5)||p ds
Note that for o — 0 the term is replaced by r . Thus, it is seen from (7.7) and to = 0 that for all
t > 0:
y V ps||x ( 5 ) - x A(5 ,x )||Pd5 < (2r)p- xi ^ p i ( / C ^ ‘e<’ps||x(5)||p d5+ ?p^ ‘e‘'ps||u(5)||p <i5j.
0 (7.9)
From Lemma 7.1, there exist scalars 7 > 0 and (3a# > 0 for any constant a < ^ so that an
Z^p-gain relationship is satisfied:
P epps ||x(s)||p ds < 7PP P e°ps ||u (S)||p ds + (7.10)

Jo J0
Combining (7.9) and (7.10), it follows:
P eaps ||x(s) - (s, x) f ds < (2r)p_1 |e^ ~ -11 (/C^7?,P + Qp) jf* e'7”’ l|u(s) ||p ds
+ (2 r )P -1 ^ r % ^ p-
It easily follows from (7.4):
d J ‘e*p* \\hA (t, h )-h (x)\ \p ds < L^ , v+Qp \ j j ‘ecps l|u(s)||p ds

2 ^ K ikr ^ ^ - ^ ^ K P
\pa[:
7A
p-i p - x \eapr — l i p
-1-2 P J C h T p ----------;---- JCf/ 3<j,p
\pa\p
/3a
which shows the L^p-gain relationship for (hA{t,h(x)) - h(x)). Further
Hm 7a = 0, lim /3a = 0.
r -> 0 + r-^0-1-
This also implies that the input-output behaviour for h^(t,h(x)) has finite L^p-gain which converges
for t —>0+ to the L^p-gain of the continuous-time output h{x). The case p = oo is similarly derived
and is therefore omitted. ■
The technique developed using the generalization of the result of Chen & Francis (1991) can now be
employed within an analysis of a discretized non-linear control.
7.4 Z/a 2-based closed loop analysis of sampled-data controls
The procedure for the analysis of a discretized control law is again demonstrated using the generic
non-linear affine system of (2.1) with continuous input gain:
x(t) = f ( t,x ) + g ( x ) u , x e f , f : R x R n -+ R n, g : Rn Rnxm, ||g|| < Q.
The system satisfies the Assumptions 2.1a-2.3a or the stricter set of Assumptions 2.1b-2.3b. For reasons
of brevity, the case of exponential stability of the origin is investigated here only so that C5 = 0 for
Assumption 2.2a and /Cc,c = 0 for Assumption 2.3a is considered only. This ensures the existence of
an exponentially stabilizing control u c with:
||f(f,x ) + g ( x ) u c (x)|| < Kc ||x ||, ||u c (xi) - u c (x2)|| < JCu ||xi - x 2| | , (7.11)
which allows to investigate asymptotic stability of the origin. The problem of ultimate boundedness
with exponentially fast decreasing states outside a set of ultimate boundedness is treated within the
particular example of Section 7.5.
With the assumptions raised, it is now possible to investigate a discretized control which is applied
to the system :
u(t) = u A(f,u c ). (7.12)
The following theorem ensures stability of the discretized control using an 2-gain approach:
Theorem 7.2 There exists a f small enough such that for any r < f, the discretized control for the
non-linear affine system (2.1) is exponentially stable. The constraint on the sampling time r vanishes,
f _|_00, /o r a control with Lipschitz constant ICU -» +0 and exponentially stable system (2 . 1 ). 0
Proof
Step I: From Lemma 5.1 or 5.2, the existence or respectively the uniqueness of a solution for the
sampled-data control can be verified.
C h a p t e r 7 . A g e n e r a l i z e d L p - b a s e d a p p r o a c h f o r s a m p l e d - d a t a im p l e m e n t a t i o n s 122
Step II: A Lyapunov function V(t, x (t)) exists due to Assumption 2.2a (cs = 0) or 2.1b-2.3b such that
for c i , C 4 > 0:
5V
< c41|x11, Cl ||x ||2 < V(t, x) < c2 ||x ||2, °v' t : ^ ^ (f (f, x) + g(x)uc (x)) < c3 ||x ||2 .
Sx
(7.13)
Step III: Instead of the non-linear affine system from (2.1) a system
x = (f(f,x (f)) + g ( x ( f ) ) u c (x(t))) + g(x(f)û, x{t = 0) = x{t = 0) (7.14)

L S.
with auxiliary input u and an output signal u
u = u A( t,u c ) —u c (x(t))
is investigated. The signal u is the sampling residual of the continuous-time control which is defined
on the basis of x(f). Some results on L2-analysis and Hamilton-Jacobi inequalities by Khalil (1992a)
can be used to derive the first part of an -analysis with respect to the input-output behaviour of the
system of (7.14). As in Khalil (1992a, Theorem 6.5) for t £ (<i, f»+i], it can be easily derived using a
scalar 7 > 0 and an auxiliary scalar e > 0:
In contrast to Khalil (1992a, Theorem 6.5), the auxiliary scalar e has been introduced to achieve a higher
degree of freedom for maximization of 7 , which is used in a similar fashion to an I<2-gain. Using (7.11),
(7.13) and the bound of the input gain g = 9, it follows:
^ + ^ S 2 (* w ) * r ( 4 ( t ) ) £ + 2 ? iiuA(*’uC) - " c(*M>u2
< -C 3 ||xW I|2 + ^ 2 C& 2 l|x(«)H2 + 5\ i Kl
Combining the result of (7.16) with (7.15), it is easily seen that:
££ + * (* )) + ^ £ ( * W ) a W S i H uW II2 - 2^2 lia w II2

-C 3 ||x (f)|[2 + ll*WI|2 + 2^2 ^ lli A (4>X) - * W l|2 •
Introducing a positive scalar k < 1, it follows from (7.13):
^ + g / (<,x (f)) + g 2 (x (t))u (t) < g ||4 ( i ) ||* - ^ ||a ( t ) ||2 - 2 lL ^ lv ( t,* W )
+ ||x(f)H2 + ||x A(i,x ) - X(f)||2 . (7.17)

The constant value « is used as in Chapter 5 as a compromise between performance and the stability
constraint for the sampling-time r.
Step IV: Using the positive scalar C3-^ ~ ^ and the Lyapunov function V, the auxiliary function
may be introduced. It is easily seen using (7.17):
dv c3 (1 —k) / c3 ( 1 - k ) \ W I c3 ( 1 - k ) \ ( $ v 8V •
— exp ( -------------1 V(t, x(<)) + exp ( — ^ — t ) ( ¥ +
dt C2 \ C2 )
V c2
+ exp
( ~ C2
c2 ~) f)J (\ (\ ^2722 C^ 2 _ K°3) + 2 ? x2 _ ^W ll2) ■
Thus, integrating the latter inequality, it follows:
i/(t, x(t)) —i/(0, x (0))
C3(l - k) \
< f ex ^T ||u (s )||2 ds - exp ( C3(1 K) ^ -
Jo
+ J o exp S) ( ( ^ r 20^ 2 ~ '“ * ) + _ i W l|2) d s -
(7.18)
Step V: Having derived the inequality in (7.18), an upper bound for
C3^ ||x A( s , x ) - x ( s ) ||2 ds

f exp( C2
will be found in terms of u and x which is then substituted into (7.18) for the final part of the proof of
stability. Using (7.9) for t e [U,ti+1], it can be similarly written for (7.14) andp = 2:
J exp ll*(s) - x A( s ,x ) ||2 ds < 2 f 2 )Cc J Q exP ( C3^ C2 II^WII2 ^5
c3(l - k )
+ 2f 2 g 2 s ||u(s)r<k(7.19)
I exp( C2
where r is a function
f (r) : E+ -> R+ , f (r) = [eXp ( ^ ^ t ) - 1 (7.20)
For this monotonically increasing function holds:

For sake of brevity, the dependency of r on r has been dropped.

Step VI: Substituting the result of (7.19) into (7.18):
v{t,-x{t)) - i/(0, x (0))
" Jo 6XP ( C3(1C2 2e2 [ ^ 2 + 2 K i f 2 G 2 ) lla (5)H2 - l|u(5)||2 d s
+ Jo exp (~C3(1C2 ^ S) ( ^ y 2 C^ 2 + 2f2/C^ 2 ? ^ “ *Cs) l l ^ s )ll2ds
= Jo GXP ( " c 2 ~^ 5) 2 ? + 2 K % f 2 G 2 ) Ha (5)il2 “ H^MII2 d s
ip
The auxiliary input signal u may now be chosen to satisfy u = u in which case the system in (7.14) is
equivalent to the sampled-data controlled system. Thus for 7 = l f uhapV
A _ JCuy/ 2 fKcc^Q _ K,u y/ 2 tJCq

'isubcpt ~ — . e - ^ ■
it follows ip = 0 and:
i/(f,x(t)) - z/(0, x (0)) < J exp 2? ^ + 2^ 2f2^ 2 ~ 1) ll^(5)H2 ds•
From (7.21), it is possible to choose the sampling-time r small enough so that
( 7 2 f 2g2) - 1 < 0.
+ 2K2u
Then
1/(t,x (t)) < i/(0, x (0))
or
V (t,x (t)) < exp ( - C3(1C~ - -*) V(0,*(0))
implying exponential stability of the closed loop system. B
This provides the fast-sampling analysis using the generalized X^p-norm for the generic non-linear
affine system. Within the next sections, it will be shown that the L^p-norm approach is a flexible tool
in application to discretized non-linear control laws for linear uncertain systems.
7.5 Sampled-data implementation o f an observer-based pseudo-sliding-mode control
This section presents the -based methodology for stability analysis of the sampled-data implemen
tation of the observer-based pseudo-sliding-mode control from Chapter 6. The special case of strictly
C h a p t e r 7 . A g e n e r a l iz e d L p - b a s e d a p p r o a c h f o r s a m p l e d - da ta im p l e m e n t a t io n s 125
proper, non-minimum phase plants with nominal representation (A, B , C) is investigated. Hence, the
control law reduces to the tracking control approach which has been presented by Edwards & Spurgeon
(1994a). Certain issues for this special case of the tracking control are described first. The L a^2-stability
analysis is then carried out on one possible sampled-data implementation. It will be seen that the scalar
small gain inequalities of Step VI of the proof of Theorem 7.2 which imply stability of the sampled-data
controlled closed loop system are replaced by matrix inequalities. A discussion on the sampled-data
control for a semi-proper plant concludes the section.
7.5.1 The system requirements
In contrast to (6.1), consider a system
x(t) = Ax(£) + B u + B ¥ s ( t , x, u) (7.22)
y(t) = C x(t) (7.23)
where x G M.n , u G Mm , y G W , F b € with m = p < n. Providedthe nominal linear system

(A, B , C )is known and the matrices B and C are of full rank, the plant(7.22) describes asubclass of
(6.1) with D = 0 and H j = B. Thus, the function Fjs(£, x, u) : M+ U{0} xMn x Rm Rm satisfying
Caratheodory’s conditions for existence of solution represents non-linearities plus model uncertainties
in the range space of B and is assumed to satisfy:
||Fj5(t,x , u)|| < /c3 (7.24)
for some known positive scalar k$ implying ki = k 2 = 0 in (6.2-6.3). This constraint will ensure the
global Lipschitz continuity of the non-linear components of the tracking control.
It is assumed, that the nominal system satisfies Assumption 6.1-6.6, which implies that:
1. (A, B ) is fully controllable
2. C B is full rank
3. The r invariant zeros of (A, £ , C) are in C“ , r < (n - p)
It can be, therefore, assumed that the system is already in the nominal form for sliding mode observer
and control system design (Edwards & Spurgeon 1998, Lemma 5.3):
’ 0 ’ An A \2
, b 2 e Rmxm, c 2 e Rpxp, (7.25)
Q
B = , A =
II
o
. ^ .
_ A 2\ a 22
where B 2 and C 2 are non-singular and A n is stable.

7.5.2 The observer based tracking control
Since the nominal system is strictly proper an output measurement filter as in Section 6.3 is not required.
Thus, the Walcott-Zak observer is applied to the system (7.22-7.23):
z ( t) = A z ( t) + B u ( t) - G {C z(t) - y(t)) + B v 0 (t), (7.26)
where A 0 = A — G C is a Hurwitz-stable matrix. The Lyapunov matrix V 0 of A 0 satisfies (6.13-6.14).

With (6.15-6.17), the non-linear output error injection term is :
F C e(t)
(7.27)
1 °llp°\\FCe(t)\\ + 50'
po = k s + 7o- (7.28)
From (6.59) follows, that V 0 has the following structure:
Y -l
V 0 = diag(P„,U V 0,2), V a,i Vo ,2 €K mxm, F = '2 ■ (7.29)
Augmenting to the dynamics of the integral action for the tracking error (r —y) (6.21-6.22)
±r(t) = r(f) - y{t), r{t) = T{r{t) - R), (7.30)
the observer dynamics

Xr Zi
z = , z i G Rn , z 2 G Rm ; (7.31)
Z . .
the open loop representation from (6.24) is
z\ — A \ \ Z \ + A \ 2 Z 2 — G \C e + Brr,
z2 — ^ 21^1 + •A2 2 Z 2 ~ G2C e + B 2\i + B 2 v0, (7.32)
e = A 0e + B (v 0 — F b) (7.33)
where e = z — x and
-4 ll «^12 ’ 0 -C ' ’ G1 ' ’ -I ' 'i p

= = , Br = (7.34)
_ A 21 A 22 _ 0 A . ^2 . _G _ 0 ( n —m ) x p
With (6.28), there exists a matrix M G Rmxn so that
A n = A n — A 12 M (7-35)
is Hurwitz-stable. Note that the matrices K and Bi of (6.28) are now obsolete. For the choice of
A == 7m, the transformation T of (6.29)
applied to the sub-system (7.32) implies:
z \ = (*4n —A i 2 M ) z i + A i 2 S 2 1Z2 — G \ C e + Br r
%2 = £>2 A.2 iZi-\- S 2 A 2 2 S 2 (iSj G\ + S 2 G2 )Ce.-\-v0 + SiBrr,
e = A 0e 4- B { y 0 - F#),
where
-4-21 — M { A \ 1 — A 1 2 M ) + A 2 I ~ A 2 2 M , A 22 — M A \ 2 + ^ 22- (7.37)
The control law u = u£ + of (6.32-6.34) simplifies to
u£ = - S 2 A 2i i i + (‘l>~S 2 A 2 2 S z 1 ) z 2 - ( § S r + S 1 Br)r + S ri, (7.38)
UNL ~~ "c, (7.39)
V 2 ( z 2 - STr) _ r^ a
Vr = — (7.40)
lc n P c \\V2 ( z 2 - Srr)|| + Sc ’ Pc ~ p0 + l c ' c,7c > °
where the Hurwitz-stable design matrix $ € Rmxm and the respective Lyapunov matrix V 2 satisfy
(6.35). From the affine state changes of (6.36):
e r (t) = r(t) - R, Ci = z i + A i i i A u S r + Br) R , C2 = z 2 - Srr, (7.41)
the closed loop representation follows:

1
1
to
e Ao 0 0 0 e
Cl —G \ C A \\ -A12 Br + -4 i2Sr Ci 0
+ , (7.42)
C2 - ( S 1 G 1 + S 2G 2 ) C 0 $ 0 C2 {yc + vQ)
_ er _ 0 0 0 r 0
■Aclsd.
where A 12 = A u S ^ 1- Using the Lyapunov function from (7.43)
V = [eT , Cf, CL erT] V [eT, CiT , e /] T, (7.43)
the closed loop stability analysis is carried out with the positive definite matrix V from (6.39)
V = diag (kV 0 , V i , V 2 , V r ), V A a si + A dsiTV < - x P , x > 0, P > 0, fc > 0 (7.44)
to show as in (6.40) ultimate boundedness of the control:

Po & o n 1 o /lP c ^ c
V < - x V - 2 k \ \ B TV 0 e \\io -^ c \\V 2 < :2 \\+ 2 k +2 (7.45)
W - 1 ' " ^ r -1
Note that the non-linear control components in (7.27,7.40) are globally Lipschitz-continuous in F C e
and 7^2C2- This allows the analysis of a sampled-data implementation of the dynamic feedback control
system. A suitable sampled-data implementation is suggested within the next section.
7.5.3 The sampled-data implementation
Since the observer-based tracking control is a combination of linear and non-linear components for a
linear uncertain system, practical implementation is simple. The observer can be realized by consider
ing the system:
z = A z -|- zz7A/Tl (£, w),
where w Alrx (t, zu) is constant over the interval ( in , (i -f l)n ]- Under this condition, it is found that:
z((i + l ) n ) = eTlAz(iri) + f esAd s w A^Tl(in + 8,w), 0 < <5 < n ,

Jo
which can be implemented discretely if
w AlTl(iTi + 8, w ) = Bu(iTi+S) —G(Cz(iTi)—y(iTi)) + BvA/Tl(iTi+5,i'0) = const., 0 < 8 < n ,
and u is the discrete control, which however may have the same or a smaller sampling-ffequency A-
as the observer A- where T2 = kTri, kT € Z +. The values of y ( i n ) and v ^ Tx {in + 8 ,v 0) are
results of a sample-and-hold process for y(t), where vQfrom (7.27) is a globally Lipschitz function of
e(t) = z (t) — x.(t). Its value can be evaluated at the sampling instants for the discretely implemented
observer. Thus, the sampled-data implementation of the observer has the same state variable values z
at the sampling instants i r as the continuous-time system using the discrete input signals:
z = A z-\- B u (t) - G ( C z a /ti (t , z ) - y A/ri (t , y)) -I- B v A!Tx(t, v0)
= A z + B u (t) - G (C z(t) - y (t)) + B v a(t) - G C & e /rx W + B A Uo/ ti (t), (7.46)
where the last two terms of equation (7.46) account for the sampling error due to the discretization.
The dynamics of the tracking signal r are implemented as
r((i + l ) n ) = eT>r ( r ( in ) - R). (7.47)
which is equivalent to
f = T (r - R) (7.48)
at the sampling instants ir\. Since T is Hurwitz, the sampling error A r/ri (t) converges exponentially
with time t to 0. For reasons of simplicity, it may be assumed that T is a diagonal matrix.
Since measurements of y(t) = C x(t) are taken using the sampling rate — at time instants i n , the
integrator can also operate at this sampling rate:
x r ((i + 1 )ti) = Xr(iTi) + n (r(iri) - C x ( i n ))
where the continuous-time system:
ir ( t) = r ( t ) - C X ( t ) - C ( A z/T 1 ( t ) - A e/T1 ( t ) ) + A r/T1 (t) (7.49)

C h a p t e r 7 . A g e n e r a l i z e d L p - b a s e d a p p r o a c h f o r s a m p l e d -d a t a im p l e m e n t a t io n s 129
is equivalent for the sampling instants ir\ to the latter discrete-time system.
The sampled-data control signal u is applied to the plant which implies trivially
x = Ax 4- B u -I- B F s{ t) (7.50)
and the observer error dynamics of the sampled-data implementation using (7.46) are:
e = A 0e + B ( v 0 (t) - FB) - G C A e, Tl (t ) + B A UoJti (t). (7.51)
7.5.4 Augmenting the discrete-time control
Adopting the state vector z from (7.31) and the definitions of (7.34), the open-loop representation for
the plant combined with the dynamics from (7.46,7.49,7.51) for the sampled-data implementation is:
z\ = A \ \ Z \ + A 1 2 Z 2 —G \C e -f- Br r —G iC A e/Tl + Br (A r/ Tl — C A Z/Tl),
Z2 — A 2 1 Z 1 + A 2 2 Z 2 — G - z C e + B 2 U + B 2 v £ ‘/ T l ( t , i ' o ) — G 2 C A e / T l ,
e = A 0e + B(i/ 0 (t) - F B) - G C A e /n (t ) + B A Vo/rx (t) (7.52)
Further, it follows introducing the linear transformation as in (7.36):
z\ = ( A n — A i 2 M ) z \ + A i 2 S 2 Z 2 ~ G \C e + Brv — G \ C A ej T\
+ B r ( A Tj Tl + C 2 M A z 1/ Tl — C 2 S 2 l A z 2/Ti),
Z2 = S2A 2 1 Z 1 + ‘$ 2 * 4 2 2 * $ 2 ^ £ 2 - (S1G 1 + S 2 G 2 ) C e + U + V ^ I Tl(t,Vo) + S \ B r T
—( S i G i A S 2 G 2 ) C A q i Ti - \ - S i B r A r / Tl + S \ B r C 2 M A Z l j T l ~ S \ B r C 2 S 2 ^ z 2/ r i ’ (7 * 5 3 )
The slower sampling frequency ^ with T2 = kTr\ is used for the control signal. Thus,
u L = - ^ 2 i 5 f /T2( i ^ i ) + ( ^ - ^ ) ^ /r2( ^ ^ ) - ^ i ^ r A/ rU r ) + 5 rr (r A/ ^ , r ) - i 2 )
22
= — “b — A 22)Z2 S \B tv + 5 rT (r R)
—A-2 1 A £ : /T2+ ($ — *^22 ) 2/T2 — ^ r/ T2 Sr T A r/T2

u NL = Vc + &Vc/ t2 >
where
A-21 = S 2 A 2 1, A-22 = S 2 A 2 2 S 2 1-
C h a p t e r 7 . A g e n e r a l iz e d £ p - b a s e d a p p r o a c h f o r s a m p l e d - d a ta im p l e m e n t a t io n s 130
It can be shown for (7.53) using this discretized feedback signal u = ul + u n l and the affine changes
of (7.35) and (7.41,7.42)
Ci = *4.11^1+A i 2 C2 —G iC e + B rer + A i 2 S re T—G i C A e /Tl+ B TC 2 M A £ 1/Tl —Brc 2 s ; ' AC2/T1
+(Br - B rC2S2- 1Sr)ACr/ri,
C2 = K 2 - ( S l G l + S 2G2) C e + ( l ' o ,T1(t,V„)+Vc) + &„Q/n + {SlBr - S ^ ^ S ^ S r ) ^ / , ,
~ { S \G \ + S2G2)CAe/Tl —.A21A^,/T2 + S ^ r C i M A ^ / ^ + ( $ —A 22 )A(2/T,
- S 1BrC2S2- 1AC2/T1 + ( ( $ - ^ 22)Sr - 5 iBr + Srr)A e„/T2. (7.54)
This leads to the following closed loop behaviour of the sampled-data control:
e ’ A0 0 0 0 e
Cl -G iC «4n A 12 Br + Ci
+ B „ ( Vo - ¥ B ) + B c( v c + V ^ )
C2 - ( S ^ i + S 26?2)C7 0 $ 0 C2
er _ 0 0 0 r 67*
Aclsd X
C & e /T i
^ C l / T2
^ C i/n
+ a + G & /b ^C2/T2
+ { E \A er/Tl + E 2 A er/T2) (7.55)
^C2/ n
^ V c lT l
. ^ ^ /r i _
where
0 0 B 0
E a — Br — x5r ,
Ea 0 0 0
Ei = , E2 — , B c— j B c— E b = SiBr - S i B & S ^ S r ,
Eb £ c 0 Im
E c = { § —A.22)Sr ~ S\B r + SrT ,
0 0 0 0
-G 0 0 B~ 0 0 0 "
—G i B r C 2M - B r C 2S i l 0 0 0 0
O)
II
<f
Ga / q. ~
—(S\G i + S 2G 2) S i B r C 2M - 5 iB r C25'2“ 1 0 —-^21 ( $ —^ 22) Im
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
7.5.5 L a ,2 -analysis of the sampling residual
The controlled system and the respective sampling residuals may now be investigated with respect to
the La 2-norm approach as presented in Step V of the proof of Theorem 7.2. Thus, upper bounds
C h a p t e r 7 . A g e n e r a l i z e d L p - b a s e d a p p r o a c h f o r s a m p l e d - d a ta im p l e m e n t a t io n s 13 1
are derived for the 1^ 2-norm of the sampling residuals which are of importance for the sampled-data
controlled closed loop system presented in equation (7.55). The analysis is initially done for arbitrary
o > 0 while later a is more and more restricted. For this reason, the closed loop system (7.55) may
now be modified introducing a perturbation u
® = A cisdX 4- B 0 (v 0 —F # ) 4- B c{vc 4- ) -f- 4- (E \A Cr/Tl 4- E 2 A er/ T2), (7.56)
where
Ga = [ Q&ja g A/b ] •
The following auxiliary signal u, a vector of sampling residuals, will be investigated with respect to the
Le^-noTm on a finite horizon:
T
u = [u f n l f , «! = [ C A l /Ti A l /n A l /Ti Aô/ti ] T , U 2 = [ a ’’i/t2 A £ /t> A £ /tj j
The sub-vectors of u may be investigated individually. Note that the non-linear observer and controller
components v 0 and vc are globally Lipschitz in {FCe) and (P2C2) with Lipschitz constants
2 2
K u 0 ~ rfo/lPo~^~ 1 fc-vc = I f c / i P c j -
Hence, it follows
||A t,o/T| | < ^ | | F C A e/T||= 7 0/ 1po£ ||F C A e/T||, HA^/ÎI^/C^||F>2A C2/t|| = Tc/lPc^ ||P 2AC2/t||.
which implies that the norms of vector u i and U2 have the following upper bounds:
lluill < ||u /||, ||u2|| < ||u //||,
where
f i / = [ c A j /n A l /n A ? /n ^ F C A J / t i ] T , u // = [ A Cl/T2 A (2 /T2 ]T-

Thus, an upper bound on the L a>2-norm for u can be obtained by investigating u / and u //. For this
reason, a generic expression for J i A x / t may be developed, where the matrix J\ G R(')x2n+2p is
determined at a later stage. This can be then applied to the particular sampling residuals of u / and u.77-
For instance for A e / T, the choice J\ = diag(Jn, 0,0,0) would be suitable.
Define therefore similarly to (7.20) a function f a (r) for a scalar a > 0:
r (e2<TT _ IN
% ( r ) : R+ -> R+ , t, ( r ) = yj ---- >-. (7.57)
Using again the Holder inequality (7.6), it follows similarly to (7.9) for a > 0 for J\Ax /r and arbitrary,
constant r:
P e2as W J i A x / ^ f ds < 4 rI t e2°s || J 2^cis<i ^ ) l |2 ds + 4f* [ e*” \\J2 g * H s ) f ds

Jo Jo Jo
C h a p t e r 7 . A g e n e r a l iz e d L p - b a s e d a p p r o a c h f o r s a m p l e d - d a ta im p l e m e n t a t io n s 132
+ 4 r* f <*” \\j 2 E i A e r/Tl(s) + /T2( s ) f ds

J0
rt
+ 4 f 2 / e2‘' s | | j 2B <:(I/c + i/^) + J 2B0K - F B)||2 ds, (7.58)
Jo
where J 2 E r ( )x2ti+2p is a matrix of the same size as J\ and the relation holds for the choice of
J 2 = J\- However, it might be observed that the term || J 2(-£^1zXe r/Tl + E 2 A €r/T2)\\ of the residual
A e / T is zero for J x = J 2 = diag(/n , 0,0,0). This shows that the number of elements for the upper
bound of the L a^~norm of A e /T reduces to three. Therefore, it is valid to define J\ = diag(/n, 0,0,0)
/o
and J 2 = ^=diag(/n , 0,0,0) so that (7.58) is still satisfied for A e /r . The same argument is also correct
for the sampling residual A ^ / T, so that a coefficient is used for the respective ^-m atrix. Thus
considering now the vectors u / and u //, it follows that:
U j — ^ l / l A x / T l, U /J — J i / 2 A x / t2 ■
where
c 0 0 0
0 In 0 0
0 In 0 0
^1/1 — , J i /2 — 0 0 Im 0
0 0 I-m 0
0 0 KucV2 0
_ K UoF C 0 0 0
Thus, the suitable ^-m atrices of the residuals ( J 1/1 A x /Tl) and (J i/ 2 A x /T2) f°r (7.58) to hold are:
1-
0 0 0
r-r X r> 0 0
\/3 T V4 n
0 0 0
VI n (7*59)
II
J2 /1 — Im
to
0 0 ’ 1/ 2 '
0 0 Im 0
0 0 Im
0 0 0
1
It is seen that ^-coefficients have been used wherever the residuals A e /T and A ^ /r are partial vectors
of u 1 and u //.
Suppose now that a ^ —Amax(T). As T is assumed to be diagonal, it follows for the sampling error
of the reference signal dynamics (7.48)
||A er/T(t)|| < ||er t e r (0)|| sup ||e- rs - I\\ < e*"““ <r >‘ ||er (0)|| (e"r "T - 1)
S € [ 0 ,r ]
(1 —e2(°r+Ama:E(r ^ t ) ||er (0)||2 (ellr HT —l )2

[ e2as || A e r/T(s)||2 ds < (7.60)
Jo 2(Amax(r) + <7)
7.5.6 Closed loop stability analysis
As in Step HI, IV and VI of the proof of Theorem 7.2, the stability of the closed loop system may
now be investigated with respect to a Lyapunov function V and the L a^ -approach. Hence, the function
e2atV is ultimately investigated.
The Lyapunov function of interest has been already defined with equation (7.43). Thus, define the
auxiliary function:
v = e2 atV.
Observe that
^ = e 2 {,iV(t) + 2o e 2 atV (t)
< 2<re2 °t V + e 2 atx T(t)('PAdsi + A ^ ? V ) a f $ + 2 < & tx T(t)VQ bK t)+ 2ebrt<t)M>0 B(uc --E B)
+2 e 2 °tg ( t ) V 2 (vc+ v?)+ 2 e2 ° tt f ( t ) V 1 E aA er/Tl t ) + 2 e2 °tg ( t ) V 2 {EbA er/ 4 t) + E cA er/rlt)).
(7.61)
Similar to Khalil (1992a, Theorem 6.5) follows for the first three terms of the right hand of (7.61) using
a non-singular matrix Z E ]R(2n+5P)x(2n+5P) instead of a scalar 7 for e > 0:
x {t){V A cisd + Adsd V ) x { t) + 2 x (t)VG&u(t)

2
Z u - 2eZ~TG l V x
e
+ x T (t)(V A dsd + A dsdTV ) x ( t) + p U T2 TZ u + 2e2 x Tv g ± Z - 1 Z - Tg l V x
< x T (i)(V A dsd + A dsiTV ) x ( t) + ^ u TZ TZH + 2i 2 x TV g ± Z - xZ - Tg 1 V x (7.62)
This relationship will be then included in an analysis of inequality (7.61) and the respective integration
over (0, t). From (7.16) and Step V of the proof of Theorem 7.2, an upper bound for ^ u T (t)u(t) or
rather of its L a,2 ~norm on the finite horizon (0, t) has also to be included into the analysis of (7.61).
This upper bound for the L a>2-norm readily follows using (7.58) with (7.59) for the particular sampling
times T\ and t 2-
f e2<TS^2U T(s)u( s ) d s < e2<T5^ 2(u J’(s)uKs) + Un(*)M*))<i*
< J ^ ^ - e 2<TSxr(s)?iX/i«A/i®(«)<is + (T- ^ — e ^ x i ^ U ^ U A / i ^ d s
+J ^T° ^ - - e 2asx T{ s )U ^ l2'H&i23{s)ds + ^ p ^ - e 2,7SuT(s)Wj/2WA/2u(«)ds
+ [ i e 2-r%J2/ 1B l A er/Tl(S) +
, ( r „ ( n ) ) 2 f \ e ^ s p 2 / i B c { l ,c + v A ) + J i 2 I i B o { V o _ ¥ b ) ^ d s
2 e2 Jo
{f^ - 2- f ‘ 4e2<7i|J 2/2£:1A er/Tl(s) + J2nE2Aerln(s)\fds

, O v fa ))
- f 4e2™|| J2/2BC(«/C+ Â) + J2ftB0 (u0 - F b) ||2 ds
2e2 Jo
where
Ma /1 — 2J2/1Â? 7Â/1 — 2J2/l^c/sd5 Â/2 ~ 2J2/2Â? Â/2 ~ 2J2/2A dsd.
Trivially, there exist constants /Ci and /C2 so that
^ 4 || J 2/ i B c(z/c-I-i>'^) + J 2/i-B0(i/0—F b )|| , £2 > 4 || J 2/ 2-Bc(^c+I/^ ) + ^ r2/ 2-®o(i/o—F b )||
and it follows
't
f ro0 ^ 2aS^ T ^ ^ d s
^ ft 2<75 T< \ ( {t <
7 iTl ) ) 2 t j T n.( 1 (t^ (t 2))2 ^ , t \ / \ , C2<rt— 1 {ja ( r l ) ) 2 y~
Jo 6 X \ 2c2 ^ a /i^ a /iH ^ 2 ^ a / 2^ a / 2J a (5 ) r fs + 2 e2 1
, ( ( f A n ) ) 2?/T u , ( ^ ( r 2))2, T e2^ - 1 ^ ^ ) ) 2

Jo V 2c2 ^ A /l^ A /lH 2? A /2^*A /2J u ( 5 ) d 5 + 2^2 2
+ {fa2tl ]-2 [ 4e 2a 1l J2/iEiAer/Tl(t>) + Jv l EhAer/T2( s ) f d S

. ( ? „ ( t2 ) ) 2 r ^ {s) + j 2/2E2A er/T2(s)\\2ds. (7.63)
2e2 Jo
jo
By integrating the inequality of (7.61), it follows:
v ( t ) - v ( 0 ) < 2 a f e 2 (TSV { s )d s + [ e2 asx T{s)(V A dsd+ A dsdTV )x (s )d s + [ e2 (TS2 x T(s)V Q A ^s)ds

Jo Jo 7o
+ t e 2 as2 ^ s ) k V 0 B (u 0 - F B)ds + f e 2 ™ 2 g(s)V 2 (vc + v£)ds

Jo Jo
+ f e ^ s2<^{s)V 2 {EbA e Tir, W + E cA er/T2(s))ds

Jo
+ f e2l" 2 ( f ( S)P 1E 0A e r/T1(»)<is. (7-64)

Jo
It can be derived for k 6 (0,1) by applying (7.44,7.62) and by adding the zero term
J^g2crs_i^(u^(5)0(5) - u T(s)u(s))ds on the right hand of (7.64) to include the upper estimate of
/o e2<TS2? " r (s)C|M ds “ (7-63):
+ (2 a - >c(l - k)) f e 2 l7 SV{s)ds

Jo
r T, llTr , w , e2<rt —1 (tv(ti))2 e2<rt _ 1 (f(,(r2))2
+ / ^ ------- 2^2— JCi + “ 2^-------- 2 £ ~ ‘
J0
-Ig T - f 4e 2 ^ \ \ J 2 / 1 B 1 A e r /n (s ) + J 2 n E 2 A er/T2( s ) f d s
J0
m t 2))2 r \ e2 * s p E iA {s)+ J (s)^ ds

2e2 Jo
+ [ ' e 2 as2CT(s)r 1 E aA er/T1(s)ds+ f e 2 ’’s2 ^ ( s ) V 2 S l (EbA er, ri(s)+ EcA er,4 s ) ) d s

Jo Jo
+ [ e2 as2€(s)kVoB(u 0 - F B)ds + f e 2 as2(^(s)V 2(^c + v£)ds (7.65)

Jo Jo
where
* = U v A d s i +KAcU/ v + 2 e1 v g &z - l z ~ T g l v + {T-~ ^ - n l n n A n + (- - ^ l — n l
The constant k is used again as a compromise between the convergence speed of the control determined
by the term —x ( l — k) Jq6 2 cxsV (s)ds and the use of the term kPAciS(i + k A c Is ^ V to compensate for
the sampling effect, the discretization error.
As in Step VI of the proof for Theorem 7.2, the choice
u(t) = u (t)
for the system of (7.56) guarantees the same stability characteristics for the sampled-data implemen
tation of the tracking control as for the system from (7.56). Therefore for this particular choice, the
following matrix inequalities are required to hold:
[ z T z + ( f 0 ( n ) ) 2 u l , xu N 2 + {fa (r 2 ))2 u l n u A / 2 - / ) < 0 (7.66)
and
< 0.
However, < 0 is equivalent to
K VAdsd + KAdsdTV + + a 2| p a ! « A /2^ A /2 -J K P Q * .

< 0 . (7.67)
- \ Z 2eg£ V ~ Z TZ
Using Holder’s inequality (7.6) to split
|| J 2/lJE’1A e r/ Tl + J 2 / 1 B 2 A er/T2 jj2 , || J 2 / 2 E i A er/Tl + J 2 / 2 E 2 A e r / T2\\2
into two components each, it is implied for the inequality (7.65):
+ f g ^ n + I I JV 2E, Il’ d s
C h a p t e r 7 . A g e n e r a l iz e d L p - b a s e d a p p r o a c h f o r s a m p l e d - da ta im p l e m e n t a t io n s 136
l'(r<r(Tl))22^ (T‘r(T2))2 Jo J 2/l3»l |2 + P 2/2S 2|| 2)l|Ae r/ 72||2d3
+ f e 2 °s2<;l(s)V1 E aA er/T1(s)dS+ [ \ 2 ™ 2 $ ( S)V 2 {Eb&eriTl(s)+ E c& eTlT&))ds

Jo Jo
+ f e2as 2c{s)kVoB ( v 0 - F B )ds + [* e2 °s2 g ( s ) V 2 {i'c + u^)ds. (7.68)

Jo Jo
Using now (7.60) and upper bounds of (2e k V 0 B ( v 0 —F # )) and + v£)) as in (7.45), it
follows:
u(f) v(M
v(0) <
< (In - >c( 1 - k\\
(2a k)) J[ l e V(s)ds +I e2gt~
^ 1 (f ^(Tl))2
2 €2
r 1 I e2at2<j- 1 (f <r(T
2e^2 ) ) 2 r
ne2crt - 1 kp0S0 ne2crt - 1 lo/iPc^c

2a T o / i - l 2a 2 £ £ !_ l
JO/1
, ( M n ) ) 2 + ( M t 2) ) 2 0 ,„ t _ ||2. (1 - e ^ + W D ) * ) ||er (0 )||2 ( e l l ^ - l ) 2

------------ £ 2 ------------ S f l l J i / ^ H + IU2/ 2 S 1 II )--------------- _ _ _ -----------------
. ( f . ( n ) ) 2 + (fff(r2))2 2 2 (1 - e^ +W ( D ) t) ||er(0)||2 (e"r IN _ 1}2

------------ £ 2 ------------ 8(||72/1£ 2|| + ||J 2/2£ 2|| )--------------- l ^ t f ) + 7 )----------------
+ /V « 2 ||^ C i ( s ) l l l |P i * £ « l |e ^ “ (r)V r||T1 - 1) ||er (0)|| ds

Jo
+ j ' e 2°s2\\vi b(s )\ \ ^ ||-p |s6 ||(ellr "T1 - 1) + HrP^êll(el|r|,'r2 - 1 )) eA’"“* ||er (0)|| ds.
(7.69)
Choose the value of a additionally to cr ^ —Amax(r ) to satisfy:

k (1 —k)
r -•
Thus, it can be derived that the function v(t) satisfies:
g2(cr-fAmai (r))i \ 1
v(f) - ,( 0 ) + > C T r K*/ l + ~ v
+ J ( £ „ / 3e(A”‘“ (r)+<’)s \/v(s) + (2cr - x ( l - k))w(s)) ds, (7.70)
where
£ r/1 = +2(f* (T2J ) ! 8||er (0)||2 ((|1J2/1^ |1 2 + ||J2/2g 1||2)(ellr HT> - l ) 2
-KIIJ2/ 1-B2 II2 + l|J 2/ 2.E2||2Xel|r||T2- l ) 2) ,
^ (fa(ri))2 K (Ta(/r2))2 r o kp0So_ 07o/lPcSc

K»/2 = ” 2 ^ * 1+ _ 7. / 1- 1 *<0/1f - l ’
/C,/s = 2 || 7^ £ J ( e l l r ^ - l ) | | e r (0 ) ||+ 2 - l R I I ^ I K e 11^ * - ! ) ) ||er (0) ||.

C h a p t e r 7 . A g e n e r a l i z e d L p - b a s e d a p p r o a c h f o r s a m p l e d - d a t a im p l e m e n t a t io n s 13 7
Note that the scalars K.v/\, JCv / 2 and JCv / 3 are independent of t and constant. However, Kv/i and Kv/3
are functions of the initial value e r (0). It is easily found that
max (r )+< t ) s
+ (2(7 _ x (1 _ < _ 4Vg g _ x ( 1 _ ^ .
This implies for (7.70):

( l _ e 2(<r+Am a x ( r ) ) t ) e 2 at _ 1 rt ^ 2 e 2(Ama*(r)+<r)5
ds
x ( l —«))
" cm ( l - e 2^ ™ * ™ ') e2a‘ - 1 r K j/3(e2<A"‘“ (r >+<r>1 - 1 )

- ”(0 )+ -2(<r+Amai(r)) “/1 + 2,7 —8(Amax(r) + cr)(2cr —x{\ — k))
This in turn implies for the investigated Lyapunov function V :
(e -2at_^X m ax(T)t\ l — e “ 2°t K2 (e2^ ^ - e-2at)
V(t) < V(0)e~2at + L _ ------------------ + -----^------r /2 + /---- rr—------- r------ r^.
—2(a+AmaI(r)) 2cr —8(Ama3;(r) + ,r)(2cr —x (l —k ))
If (7.66) and (7.67) hold, the discrete-time closed loop system is ultimately bounded stable. The states
enter after finite time a set described by the relationship:
^ v/ 2
V < + £>0
2(7
for arbitrarily small but constant e.
7.5.7 A practical approach of finding sampling-time upper bounds
The problem of finding two upper bounds for the different sampling times t\ and t 2 which are maximal
according to the presented theory involves solving the matrix inequalities (7.66) and (7.67). Observe
that the matrix inequalities (7.66) and (7.67) do not demand knowledge of the relation t2 = kTr\- The
value kT £ Z~ does not need to be given explicitly. Thus provided it is possible to find maximized
values for and r 2 based on the matrix inequalities of (7.66) and (7.67), the value kT is implicitly
given as the closest positive integral value of However, it is not possible to maximize both values t\
and r 2 at the same time; a criterion of maximizing
t? + rf (7.71)
is more appropriate.
It should be noted that the matrix inequalities (7.66) and (7.67) are non-linear in n and r 2. Linear
matrix inequality solvers are not trivially applied. However, the matrix inequalities (7.66) and (7.67)
are linear in V , ( Z T Z ), (fa (r i ) ) 2 and (fa (r2))2 assuming a constant given value e > 0.Thus, these
parameters can actasvariableswithin a linear matrix inequality problem involving(7.66) and (7.67).
Therefore, an approximate optimal solution for constant e = const, can be obtained if instead of (7.71)
the value of
( f „ ( n ))2 + (7>(t2))2 (7.72)
is maximized. Given a stable continuous-time controller design for the observer-based tracking control,
not all sub-matrices of V = diag(kV 0 , V i , V 2 ,V r) (7.44) are free. The matrix V0& partial matrix
of V 0 = diag('P0 l , 7^0,2)» is determined by (7.29) while F is fixed by the choice of the smoothing
component S0 in (7.27). The choice of the smoothing component 5C fixes the value of V 2 in (7.40).
Thus, only the other variables of V, the scalar k and the positive definite matrices kV 0 ,i, V\, Vr can be
treated as variables of the matrix inequalities (7.66) and (7.67).
The maximal value of (7.72) for any e > 0 can be found numerically by solving the linear problem
of (7.66) and (7.67) for a sufficiently large range of values e > 0 to determine the largest value of (7.72).
Suppose the maximal value of (7.72) occurs for r\ = f\ and r2 = T2 and a — b > 0, then the maximal
value f f 4- f f for o = a > 0 of (7.71) satisfies:
( ^ r ( n ))2 + (fa {f 2 ) ) 2 > (r^ (fi))2 + (?&(f 2 ) ) 2 > r f + f f > f f + f | (7.73)
from the monotonicity of the function f ff( ) (7.57). In particular, assuming that b f\ and a f 2 are small
then from (7.57) follows:
f * ( r i ) % f u Ta{T2 ) % r 2
and the maximal solution (f ^ (fi))2 -1- (t* (t2))2 (7.72) is close to f 2 + f f . An upper bound 0 =
for a and successively for &f\ and o f 2 can be obtained by finding the maximal value of x satisfying
(7.44) for the particular V which satisfies (7.66) and (7.67) for maximal value of (f^(fx))2 + {f^(f 2 ) ) 2
(7.72) and optimal value of e.
Note that the inequality of (7.73) also shows that the stabilizing effect of the discretized continuous
control has been considered with the 1^ 2-analysis technique. The larger the value of o for the optimal
values of f f -1- t | , the larger the difference between (f* (fi))2 + (f^(f2))2 > (f^ (fi))2 + (f^(f2))2 and
f f + f 2. However for the example of the controlled furnace system within the next section, it will be
shown that this characteristic of the theory does not have large effect on the computational process for
f 12 4r--tr22.
7.5.8 A furnace example
A furnace control problem (Edwards & Spurgeon 19946) is investigated for computation of numerical
results. The furnace can be regarded as a gas filled enclosure including a heat sink bounded by insu
lating walls. Heat input is achieved via a burner located in one of the end walls and the combustion
products are evacuated through a flue positioned in the roof (Figure 7.1). The plant has been modeled
via the ‘Zone-method’ (Rhine & Tucker 1991, Edwards 1995), where the furnace is split into isother
mal sub-volumes and sub-surfaces and the integro-differential equations are reduced to finite difference
equations; in this way, controller designs can be tested in simulation before practical implementation.
C hapter 7. A g e n e r a l iz e d L p-b a sed approach for sa m p l e d - data im p l e m e n t a t io n s 139
flue
products
insulated walls
tem perature
air flow m easu rem en t
fuel flow
burner
Figure 7.1: Schematic of the furnace (similar to Edwards & Spurgeon (1994b))
For a single-input-single output control scheme, the task of the observer based tracking control is
to adjust the fuel supply via a fuel valve for the burner to achieve a certain required temperature-time
profile (Edwards & Spurgeon 1994b). Hence, the furnace temperature is measured. In this control
scheme, the air flow is controlled independently via an Electronic Ratio Controller (ERC) using a fixed
air-fuel ratio. Open loop identification of this plant setup yields a strictly proper, third-order model:
0 1 0 0
A = 0 0 1 0 ,c = 0.0001 0.0022 0.0053 ]•
-0.0001 -0.0082 -0.1029 1
The invariant zeros of the plant are {-0.3749, -0.0358}, which allows the design of an observer based
control. The identified plant model is not yet in the required canonical form (7.25) for observer design
and the appropriate linear transformation has to be applied (Edwards & Spurgeon 1998). The eigenval
ues of A u (7.25) are the two invariant zeros of {A, B, C). Thus in the design of Edwards & Spurgeon
(19941)), the linear observer gain G (7.26) can be computed via:
A12C7 1
G=
_ A 22C 21
where A22/ 0 is Hurwitz. It has been set to A 22/o = “ °-2- The Poles of the sliding surface of the state
feedback control (7.35) have been chosen as {-0.025, -0.03 ± 0.025*}. The pole associated with the
reaching of the sliding mode has been set to $ = -0 .1 (7.38). The parameter Sr has been chosen as
Sr = 26.1642, so that at steady state the integrating state satisfies x r = 0. The respective formula for
Sr has been derived by Edwards & Spurgeon (1998):
Sr= S i K - 'B j A u 1 B r=
where K s is non-singular if the nominal plant {A, B, C) has no zero at the origin (Edwards & Spurgeon
1994a). The dynamics of the tracking signal r (t) are selected with T = -0.025. The smoothing
components 60 and 8Cof the unit vectors from (7.27) and (7.39) are
Sc = 1, S0 = 0.01
for F = 1 and = 5.
In accordance with the theory presented here, the uncertainty has to be assumed to be bounded
by a constant. However, this assumption contradicts Edwards & Spurgeon (1994b) where parametric
uncertainty has also been considered. For the numerical calculations carried out here, constant gains
are investigated within a given range implying:
0 < I 0/ 1P 0 < 1 -8 5 , 0 < 7c / l p c < 2, lo /lP o = J 0/ 1P 0 = c o n s t . , 7c/ i p c = c o n s t . {1 .1 A)

Ic/lPc A
This range of 7 0 / \ p 0 and 7c/i/oc is similar to the range of the non-linear gains considered by Edwards
& Spurgeon (1994b).
x 10"4 x K f4
4.95
4.9
4.8
4.75
4.7
0.5 1 1.5 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1

Yc/l Pc K
Figure 7.2: Minimal sampling frequency for ± and ^ sufficient for stable and robust closed loop
system: in dependence on k and 7c/ip c
2000-
1500-
1000
Y,,i P.
Figure 7.3: Minimal sampling frequency for ± sufficient for stable and robust closed loop system: in
dependence on k and j c/ i Pc
The calculation of the maximal values (f^ (fi))2 + (f<r(f2))2 has been executed as described in
Section 7.5.7 without assuming knowledge of kT. The numerical calculations revealed that the actual
maximum of r \ + ff is not more in error to ff + ff and (f*(fi ))2 + (f*(f2))2 than 7 • 10_9%. This
shows the small effect of cr — 0 within the numerical calculation. Further, it is seen that the calculated
sampling times f \ and f 2 are very close to each other 1 < < < 2 and therefore the recommended
relation is kT = 1 (Figure 7.2). Thus, the value
has to be considered as the lower bound for the sampling frequency. An increase in k increases the
sampling time 77 (Figure 7.2). The sampling time 77 as a function of k is nearly linear for a broad range
of values of J 0 / 1 P0 and Ic/iPc■This confirms the compensating effect of the term KVAciSd+KAciSdT'P
in (7.67) for the sampling residual, which is higher for increasing k. However, it is also seen that
the maximal sampling time 77 does not change very much if the gains 70/ip 0 and 7c/ip c are varied
over the range (7c/ip c) £ [0.095,1.85] (Figure 7.2). This shows a conservatism in the theoretical
approach. The sampling residuals due to the linear control term seem to have a higher impact on
the values of U ^ j 2 UA/2, and 'H^/ 2 'Ha / 2 than sampling residuals due to the
non-linear control. Further, the calculated minimal resulting sampling frequencies (Figure 7.3) are
more conservative than those practically used (Edwards & Spurgeon 1994h). The applied sampling
frequencies are 10H z for the control and the output measurement. The computed minimal sampling
frequencies found here are however between 1000H z and 2400Hz for both the observer and controller.
This example concludes the analysis of the sampled-data implementation of the tracking control
for strictly proper plants. A discussion on the control of semi-proper systems follows explaining issues
which have been already raised within Remark 5.2 and 6.2. One possible solution will be introduced.
7.5.9 A note on sampled-data tracking control for semi-proper systems
Within Chapter 6, the output signal has been modeled for design with (6.1):
y = Cx + Du + HuFH{t , x, u)
From Remark 6.2, the sample operator of (2.23) and the hold element from (2.24), a unit delay would
be introduced for the sampled output measurement within a sampled-data control system:
S T(y) W = O S T(x(t)) + D u (i - 1) + H u S tF h • (7.75)
Nevertheless, two characteristics of the continuous-time tracking control and the linear uncertain plant
model from Chapter 6 allow the analysis of a sampled-data implementation via fast sampling tech
niques.
The first characteristic, is given by the fact that the continuous-time control system K c in connec
tion with the plant P can be modeled by the following abstract model:
P : k p ( t ) = fp ( t ,x p ( t ) ) -f g p ( x P (t))u(t) K c : x c (f) = fe(xc(*),y(i))
y(t) = h p ( x P (t), u(t)) u (t) = hc(xc(t))
fp : R x Rnp -+ Rnp , gP : Rn^ Rnp xmp fc : Mnc x jrpp ->
h p : Rn* X R mp h c : R nc ->• W np
uG , y G RPp, xp G Mnp x^ G
(7.76)
Note that both the plant and the control system contrast the closed loop system of (5.15), which was used
for the sampled-data analysis within Chapter 5. The plant output measurement y (t) = hp(xp(£), u (t))
is a function of the actuator signal u (£), while the actuator u (t) = h^(xc(f)) does not depend on the
plant output measurement.
The other feature is given by the assumption on the class of the considered uncertainty F p (6.2-
6.3,7.24) of the plant of (6.1):
l|F p (f,x , u)|| < fc3-
Note that so far the assumption of (7.24) has been only needed toachieve global Lipschitz continuity
of the non-linear components of the tracking control, which impliesglobalstability results and prevents
the investigation of regions of attraction. Now, the assumption is necessary to provide stability of the
sampled-data control.
These two characteristics allow a feasible sampled-data implementation with a different sample and
hold scheme to be considered. In contrast to (2.23-2.24), consider the operators ST and H r
ST : -> <5; v = Sry v(i) = y(»r), * = 0,1,2,3..., r > 0, (7.77)
V t G [ir, (i + l) r ) : u(t) = z (*),

H t -’ < S ^ £ p; u = H tz (7.78)
i = 0,1,2,3...,
where the discretized signal and the respective residual are given by:
y A/T(t,y) =f HTs Ty(t)
A y/T = ' y A /T (t,y ) - y (i). ( 7 .79)

In particular, the combined operation S r H r is now the identity while S TH T is the unit-delay. This,
implies a sampled-data implementation of the control system (7.76) with:
P : x P (t) = f p ( t,x p ( t) ) + g p ( x p ( t) ) f f T(v)(t) K e : x k s (i+ l) = x.k e (i)pr{c(xite(i), Sr(y)(i))
y(t) = h p (x P (t),H T(v)(t)) v(») = h c (x ^ 6 (»'))

This sampled-data implementation does not introduce the problematic unit-delay. The scheme is practi
cally implementable since the control output v(i) is computed with values x ^ s (^—1) and Sr(y)(i —1)
of the prior discrete-time instant (i —1). The control within the interval [^, fj+i) does not depend on the
output signal y ( t ) of the time instant t = Thus, the control value u (t) = H T(v)(t) can be initiated
at the same time-instant as the output signal measurement, S t(y)(i), is carried out.
In difference to (7.75), it follows therefore for the sampled output measurement of the linear, un
certain plant:
Sr{y)(i) = C§r(x(t)) + Du(i) + HnSr F *.
Thus also here, the unit delay has been eliminated. This plant output measurement can now be investi
gated for the measurement filter which has been introduced within Section 6.3 for semi-proper systems.
With Ud and from (6.5) follows:
Cii, 1 Tn
0 1
S T(UDy)(i) = S Tx(t) + u(t) + Ud H i i StF h -
. & . . ^d22 J.
so that an implementation of the input filter is given by:
Xy( ( i + l ) n ) = eAyTlx y{ir i) - (eAyTl - /)S r ( ^ 2y)W
Note that the same sampling time n as for the plant measurement is used. The respective differential
equation for the sampled-data implementation analysis is therefore:
Xy = A y X y ~ A y C 2X ^ /Tl ~ A y D 2 U ~ A y U ^ H j J S TF f j
= Ay[xy - (C2x + D2u + U ^ H i i F h ) ] - AyC 2 K , rx - A y U ^ H n & Y u / ^ (7.80)
where u is a sampled-data control with sampling time, r2, r 2 > r\, and therefore constant over the
interval [ir\ , (i -I- l) r i) . Thus, the differential equation of (7.80) provides the information which is nec
essary for the sampled-data analysis, in particular, the sampling residual A x/Tl has to be analyzed for
the L a 2-norm. The respective sampling residual analysis for Section 7.5.5 would have to be extended.
However, the sampling residual K Y h / Ti of the uncertainty F h can only be investigated with respect to
the bound from (7.24). The sampling residual A F h/ Ti satisfies:
< 2fc3. (7.81)
Within the sampled-data analysis approaches of this thesis to date, disturbances or uncertainty have
been examined which affected the differential system equation but not the output measurement, so that
sampling residuals decreased with increasing sampling frequency. However now, the sampling residual
A f h / ti °f a disturbance of the output measurement has to be taken directly into account for the stability
analysis. A stability analysis as for Section 7.5.6 implies that a set of ultimate boundedness is directly
influenced by the value of 2k^ without any decreasing effect via t \ . The only solution to overcome this
is to assume that F # is a slowly varying disturbance, so that
The matched disturbance is then effectively counteracted for t \ —¥ 0. Note that this assumption is raised
due to the effect of the disturbance on the plant output. This contrasts to the research results which
have been reported within Chapter 2, where the uncertainty or disturbances were affecting the system
equation but not the output directly. In the case F h also includes parametric uncertainty as posed with
(6.2-6.3), this analysis is not easily possible since the resulting bound of the sampling residual would
be a function of k 2 \\yA/ Tl || + k 2 ||y(f)|| + 2&i || u(t) ||. The assumption of a slowly varying uncertainty
would not be justified. When considering linear Hoo-techniques for direct sampled-data design, Chen
& Francis (1995, Part II) excluded cases such as semi-proper plants in their work or they assumed that
the plant output filter had been realized analogously to prevent the problems which have been discussed
in this section.
This finalizes the exposition of the L ^ 2 -fast-sampling technique for an output tracking control.
Within Chapter 8, the approach is reconsidered for the control of a chemical process, whilst now the
non-linear state feedback control system from Chapter 3 is investigated for the 1 ^2 -norm approach. It
will be shown that the L ^ -n o rm approach has also the potential to provide good results for one of the
example systems of Section 5.5.
7.6 The state feedback control system with cone shaped sliding mode layer
Within this section, it is shown that the L ^ 2-approach is effectively applied to the discretization analysis
of the sliding-mode based control of Chapter 3. With the aim of retaining simplicity for the analysis,
the modified sliding-mode based control of Section 3.4.1 is investigated without consideration of input
gain uncertainty (G i = 0). There is also no uncertainty of constant bound F 2 = 0 and G 2 = 0 for the
case considered here. Recall the closed-loop range space dynamics of the discretized control as derived
from (3.7) and the respective continuous-time control of (3.50):
AZl
4>= A@zi + (fi* + Att)4> + B 2 u cN L(zi{t),<f>(t)) + [ - 0 -(Q -Q * ) B2 ] A, (7.82)
Ga
lN L J
For the discretization analysis, the sliding-mode based controlled system with auxiliary input u and
output signal u might be investigated:
zi = S z i + A \ 2 4 >,
4> — A © zi + (Q* + Af£) <f>4- -B2u a/x(zi(^)’ $(£)) + (7.83)
instead of the system from (7.82). The non-smooth Lyapunov function as defined with (4.6) and as used
for the discretization approach within Chapter 5 is employed:
V(zi{t),4>{t)) = max (V i(zi(t)) + kV 2 (<t>{t)), (k J 2 + l)V i(zi(t))) , fc > 0
Vi(Zl) = iz f P iZ j, V2 (4,) = \ $ TP 2 <t>.
This demands the analysis of the derivatives of each of the two Lyapunov functions Vi(zi(t)) +
kV 2 (<P(t)) and (kuj2 4- l)V i(zi(t)). Since u affects only the derivative of Vi(zi(t)) -1- kV2 (<j){t)),
this analysis is carried out first under the assumption of V2 (4>(t)) > lo2 Vi(zi (t)). It follows from (4.3)
for almost all t using 0 < k < 1 and a large enough k > 0:
M z M ) + kV 2 (4>(t)) < "(V i (a i(t))+ k V 2 (<f>m$

T
Zi(t)
(Sr Pi+PiS) Pi Ai 2 Zl (t)
+K
ATiPi
2 2
+k<f>7(t)P 2g A u , O M )
_<£( *) _ -* ¥
where > 0 is defined as in (5.66):
l p P £ TP ? + p ? ip P ) P ?M iP P \
2 2Vk > 0.
# = —2(1 — k ) sup I Amai l i
p 5 I T plS
M i2 2 12 1 -l* 5 l
2y/k 2 \
Note, that it is not necessary to investigate this case for 4>> c, since c does not appear in the modified
sliding-mode based control of (3.50).
Investigate now the last term of the right hand of (7.84). As for (7.62), it follows using e > 0 and a
non-singular matrix Z 6 ]^(n+Tn)x(n+rn) ;
2
1
/c0r (f)P 2^ A U =
+k2j4>T(t)P2S^Z-1Z 'TSlP2<l>T(t) + 2^2* TZ TZ u ,
which implies for (7.84):

T
Zl(t) (S^Pi+PiE) P1A12 Zi(t)
2 2
V i(zi(f)) + kV 2 {4>(t)) < - ( V i ( z i ( t ) ) + k V 2 (<Rt)))9 + K
Ai 2 pi
m _ 1 2 li 2 J J (t)
+k 2 ^4>r (t)P 2 G a Z XZ TG^P 2 (f>T (t) 4- ± (u T Z TZ u - u Tu + u Tu ) .
(7.85)
C h a p t e r 7 . A g e n e r a l i z e d -Lp - b a s e d a p p r o a c h f o r s a m p l e d - d a t a i m p l e m e n t a t i o n s 146
Similar to (3.48), it follows under the assumption of V2WW) ^ k>2^ i( zi W) for V\ and 0 > 0, £ > 0
from (3.27):
r -7 T rr-
1 Zl Pit + t TPl + -dPi + (Pi Pi An Zl
2
0 ■A1 2 -Pi . <t> .
-0 V i - +
2e*{kw2 + 1) 2 €2(fcw2 + 1)
< Vl - ^ 7 7 7 - ^ — TT + (7.86)
2e2(ku>2 -f 1) 2e2{k<jj2 + 1)
The I/CT)2-norms of u may be derived before combining the two latter results for the analysis of the
non-smooth Lyapunov function V (zi (t), <£(£)). It follows for the sampling residuals AZl and A^ from
(7.6):
z iW
f e2"* \\AZl( s ) f ds < [ s ^ 12]
Z i(5 )
/ ' e2^ ||A*( s ) f d s < 4 t 2f I e2™ [A© fT + A fi] d s + 4 f2 f e2 <TS\\QAu \\2 ds
Jo Jo Jo
. ^ s)
+ 4 f 27 ^ /* e2<rs ||P2^ W I|2 d5 + 4 ^ 7 ^ /* e2crs ||zi(s)||2 ds

7o 7o
where
r{e2aT - 1)
: ’> T<r(T) = 2<7
Since the non-linear control is globally Lipschitz, there exist constants ICUNL/ZI,JCUNL/(f, > 0 so that:
||A U;vl||< ^ :ujvl/0 \\A(i)\\+KUNL/Xl ||A Zl|| => ||A UArJ | <2K,^1n l ^ \ \ A \\ +2/CUjVi/Zl||AZl|| ,
Therefore
A Zi^ 1 + 2/C2wl/ zi
lull <
which implies that

T
Z i(s) z i (s)
,2 as ds + f 2 f e 2 asx ^ (s)U^JUAu{s)ds,
[ e2 asu T{s)u(s)ds< f 2 f n ln A
Jo
'0 Jo Jo
where
V 1 + 2 K uM / , 1^
xA + i ^ w ^ A e V/4 + 8/Cu„1/ ^ « , + A fi)

UA = , Wa = \ A + 8C ^ 5 a
Consider now the following matrix inequality

P\ +P\ S ) k P \ A ij
0 0 =2
+
~ p2gAz - 1z - TglP2 _
. o k2€
for (7.85) and
(E TP l + P i t ) + 0Pi + & P iA n f2
+ n \u A <o (7.88)
(ku>2 + l)e2
^12-^1 ~^T
with respect to (7.86). In the case that both inequalities are satisfied for £, k, e > 0 and f a > 0,
then equations (7.85) and (7.86) can be combined to investigate e2 asV { z \ ( t ) , ( f > ( t ) ) . Observe, that
e2 <rtV ( z i (t), (j>(t)) is absolutely continuous in t and therefore (Craven 1982, Proposition 5.5.3):
d(e 2 crsV(zi(s),<p(s)))
/Jo
r0 ds
ds = e2<rtF ( Zl «,<£(*)) - V(Zl(O),0(O)). (7.89)
Thus, it follows using Proposition 4.1, the chain rule for differentiation and the latter inequality (7.89):
e2<rtV (Z l(f ),<£(*)) - F ( Zi(0),<£(0)) < e2<JS (2 c r-m in (tf,tf))
+^2 J e2<TS (uT(s)ZTZu(s) + f 2uT(s)l/£l/Au(s) — uT(s)u(s)) ds
As before, the choice u = u for the auxiliary input renders the system (7.83) to be equivalent to the
sampled-data controlled plant. Provided that
min($, d)
0< a < (7.90)
and
( Z T Z + f%UlUA - I) < 0, (7.91)
the non-smooth max-Lyapunov function is exponentially decreasing
V(Zi(t),4>(t)) < e - M V ( Z i ( 0 ) , m )
and using the values c\ and C2 as given with (4.25) and (4.26), it also follows:
Thus, exponential stability of the sampled-data implementation follows provided the matrix inequalities
of (7.87), (7.88) and (7.91) hold or equivalently the following matrix inequalities are satisfied:
K ( t TP l + Pl ± ) kPiAu
2 2 0
Ta n/T
kAT0 P\ 73/ 7„ € D n
"v/2eÂ
(S TP i + P1± ) + d P 1 + iP i Pi A n
<0 (7.93)
■nA (k u 2 + 1 ) /
Z TZ - I TM l
< 0 (7.94)
TrrZA/\ I
Assuming the continuous-time sliding mode based control acts stabilizing and in particular (3.26) ap
plies, then there is always a scalar k > 0 large enough and a non-singular matrix Z which satisfy the
latter three matrix inequalities for small enough ra > 0, e > 0, u > 0 and > 0. Thus, an upper bound
t on r exists for which any r < f implies exponential stability of the closed loop using the discretized
control. The feasibility of this approach is shown again in application to the pendulum example which
has been already used within Section 2.2.1 and Section 5.5 of Chapter 5.
7.6.1 A numerical example: The inverted pendulum
The parameterized inverted pendulum of (2.10,5.70) is reconsidered.
0 1 ’ 0 ’ 0 0 Xi
X = x + u + x, x = (7.95)
0.5 -0 .1 _ 1 0.5(sinc(a;i) — 1) 5 + 0.1 .x 2 .
Further, the stable system of (5.71) without any uncertainty is investigated for the sliding mode based
control:
- 0 .5 1 ’ 0 '
X= X+ u, (7.96)
in
1
1
O
p
1
1
For comparative reasons, the parameters of the control have been chosen as in Section 5.5
7l = 7 ; = 1.6, 77! = 0, 1 - 2\Pl A l 2 P P \ u \ p \ I = 0.85 (7.97)
For the parameter from (7.86,7.93) a compromise has to be found so that the matrix inequality (7.93)
holds and a > 0 satisfies (7.90) at the same time:
= k 0.85 P f 1. (7.98)
The scalar k is again k = 0.5. Also the constant k from the max-Lyapunov function (4.6) has been nu
merically optimized for the sampling frequency bound 1 /f to be minimal. The parameter c is obsolete
within the control of Section 3.4.1, which is considered here.
The results of the minimal sampling frequency for certain choices of controller poles E = Q* have
been computed in a similar procedure as explained for the observer-based tracking control in Section
7.5.7. The error of the computed sampling frequency for the results of the L a^-approach is less than
C h a p t e r 7 . A g e n e r a l i z e d £ p - b a s e d a p p r o a c h f o r s a m p l e d - d a t a im p l e m e n t a t io n s 149
1500 100
1000
500
(a) Inverted pendulum (7.95) (b) Stable system (7.96)
Figure 7.4: Values of 1 / f against changing sliding-mode and linear controller poles E = Q* ’- -’=
results from Chapter 5; results from the £ a,2-approach
0.5%. Note that the results in Figure 7.4 for the £<7,2-11orm based technique are more conservative
than those calculated for the mean value theorem based analysis approach of Chapter 5. However, the
technique also delivers an ‘optimal’ control, a pair of control system poles for which the sampling fre
quency is minimal. In particular for the stable system from (7.96), the minimal sampling frequency
of 14H z the £<7,2-approach is close to the minimal frequency value of the mean value theorem tech
nique (Figure 7.4(b)). The minimum for the £<7,2-method is found at a very slow pole combination
of E = fi* = —0.26. The reason for the more positive results of the mean-value-theorem based
methodology are possibly based on the fact, that the very large value of the Lipschitz constant of the
non-linear control u cNL from (3.50) could be compensated by the upper estimate of the sampling error
suP*a€[«.,*i+i] (llx (â) —x (ii)||), which is not straightforward for the £<7,2-norm technique.
7.7 Summary
An analysis of the stability of discrete-time implementations of non-linear, continuous-time controls

has been presented. A result of Chen & Francis (1995) for strictly proper, stable linear systems is
extended to strictly proper, affine, non-linear, exponentially stable systems. The £ £7)P-gain with respect
to the sampled output of such a system is finite and converges to the £<7,p-gain with respect to the
continuous-time output.
When applied to a particular sliding mode control configuration, the £<7,2-gain, which is usually
scalar, is replaced by a matrix. A constructive, flexible analysis tool based on matrix inequalities results.
However despite these positive characteristics of the approach, numerical results have shown to be
conservative for a furnace example. The discretization analysis for the sliding-mode based control with
cone-shaped sliding mode boundary layer gave similarly conservative results also in comparison to the
discretization approach of Chapter 5.
C h a p t e r 7 . A g e n e r a l i z e d L p - b a s e d a p p r o a c h f o r s a m p l e d - d a t a i m p l e m e n t a t i o n s _________ 1 5 0
Within the next chapter, the tracking control of Chapter 6 is applied to a large scale non-linear
chemical plant. The L a^ technique will be useful for investigation of a sampled-data control system.
Chapter 8
Sliding-mode control of a non-linear, large scale chemical process
8.1 Introduction
A key part of this thesis is to demonstrate the developed sliding-mode control and discretization analysis
techniques for a non-trivial system. A chemical plant for production of benzene, the HDA-plant, imple
mented with Aspen Custom Modeler (Aspen Technology, Inc.) for numeric simulation has been chosen
for this reason. This plant has been of longstanding interest to chemical process engineers (McKetta
& Cunningham 1977. pp. 182-235, Douglas 1988, Smith 1995) until it was considered for process
simulation and control by Brognaux (1992). The HDA-plant is a highly integrated and non-linear, large
scale plant with non-minimum phase and relative degree zero characteristics.
Chemical processes are particularly challenging since research on control for large scale chem
ical plants has mostly concentrated on single-input-single-output (SISO) control schemes (Luyben
& Luyben 1997). Tools for the controllability analysis of chemical processes, not only useful to
SISO-control schemes, have been developed, such as for the selection of the most effective actuator
and measurement combinations (Cao & Rossiter 1997, Cao, Rossiter & Owens 1997, Skogestad &
Postlethwaite 1996). Further, the HDA-process has never been used for the design of a model-based
linear or non-linear controller; control has been limited to SISO control schemes (Luyben, Luyben &
Tyreus 1998) and the plant has undergone a detailed analysis with respect to the available combina
tions of SISO-control schemes and the choice of the six most effective actuators from a set of thirteen
(Cao & Rossiter 1997, Cao et al. 1997, Cao & Rossiter 1998). In general, multi-variable model-based
linear and non-linear control design for chemical plants has been limited to processes of smaller scale
(Bequette 1991, Skogestad & Postlethwaite 1996, Petit, Rouchon, Boueilh, Guerin & Pinvidic 2000).
The control of the HDA-plant is therefore also, from a control engineering point of view, of interest for
research.
Modem chemical engineering software packages have the potential to integrate plant design and
model-based control design into one process prior to the actual set-up of the chemical plant. Software
products such as SpeedUp and Aspen Custom Modeler can provide the user with exact model lineariza-
C h a p t e r 8. S l i d i n g - m o d e c o n t r o l o f a n o n - l i n e a r , l a r g e s c a l e c h e m i c a l p r o c e s s 152
tions useful for controllability analysis and controller design. The HDA-process model was initially
implemented as a 68 state model by Brognaux (1992) using SpeedUp (SpeedUP User Manual, Issue
5.3.2 (1991), Aspen Technology, Inc.). The HDA-process is continuous and contains a reactor, three
distillation columns and two recycle streams for vapour and fluid (Figure 8.1). The process model was
extensively re-developed into a 270-state system under SpeedUp by Cao, Rossiter, Edwards, Knechtel
& Owens (1998), who exchanged the simplified distillation column models for rigorous models and
introduced a quench to decrease the temperature of the reactor product stream. For this thesis, the pro
cess has been converted to a simulation model under Aspen Custom Modeler (see also Aspen Custom
Modeler (10.0/10.1-0) User Guides (1998-1999), Aspen Technology, Inc.).
Two multi-variable control methodologies have been tested on this plant which employ sliding mode
control approaches. The first control approach is the non-linear observer based method of Chapter 6.
The semi-proper, non-minimum phase HDA-plant is particularly suitable since, for the particular class
of disturbances, the respective disturbance-input to measurement-output characteristics are minimum
phase. The framework of the discretization approach from Chapter 7 is then also used to consider an
analysis of the sampled-data implementation of the presented control. For this reason, the discussion
of Section 7.5.9 is taken into account. The second control method also introduces sliding motion via a
state-feedback control. However, the non-linear control law is designed on the basis of a linear observer-
based control system, whose dynamic part follows an exact separation of observer and control system
poles. The linear observer is derived from a linear mixed sensitivity H qq-controller. The non-linear
control law uses the states of the linear observer. The sliding mode is a linear stable sub-manifold of
the linear closed loop control system chosen via a robust pole selection scheme.
This chapter introduces at first the HDA-plant, non-linear characteristics and linear model reduction
methodologies. The results for the non-linear, observer-based control of Chapter 6 including an analysis
of the sampled-data implementation is presented afterwards while the chapter finishes with the H ^ -
controller based control and a comparison of the two control methodologies.
8.2 The HDA-plant: A Benzene producing chemical process
In the HDA-plant, production of benzene (Figure 8.1) is carried out via hydrodealkylation (HDA) of
toluene. The reactions taking place for production of benzene comprise an exothermic reaction
C7H8 + H2 —> Q 5H6 -1-
TOLUENE HYDROGEN BENZENE METHANE
and an equilibrium reaction
2 C gH g C 12H 10 +
BENZENE DIPHENYL HYDROGEN
Thus, there are two input substances, pure toluene and hydrogen which can contain impurities of
methane of up to 5 % (measured in mol-%) and three product substances, benzene, diphenyl and
f t gas
electrical power
1 valve
Puige
Compressor
pressure flash
flash ' ’ vapour
gas (Hj. C H J Cooler y M et Ji£L
s— valve
M ixer Reactor Flash
toluene aromatics ratio cooler rature
duty flash
liquid
outlet
valve
gas
Heat
Total Condenser
Total Condenser Exchanger
Pump
benzene
proauct
r0 - Flash
Cooler
rate
+puritv
reflux reflux
ratio ratio
3 ag
H
9 g
£ .C
Q. reboiler
vapour
reboiler L * / / \ _ flow
reboiler +
heat Y -S heat heat
Reboiler
Reboiler Reboiler duty
diphenyl
Figure 8.1: The benzene production process, actuators= italic, measurements= italic
methane. The nature of the chemical reactions allows the production to be carried out as a continu
ous process. Recycling structures allow hydrogen, which is generated in the equilibrium reaction, and
un-reacted toluene to be re-used in the production process. Small amounts of methane fed back into the
process are also permissible.
The production process follows the diagram of Figure 8.1. After the input toluene stream pressure
has been increased via the feed pump to 575psia, the hydrogen stream (575psia) is mixed with the
heavy input substances which will then be pre-heated via the feed-effluent-heat-exchanger (FEHE)
from approximately 125°F to about 1110°F. Since the reaction takes place in the temperature range
of 1150°F to 1300°F, the remaining heat is provided by the furnace to increase the temperature of
the reactor feed to 1150°F. A reaction constraint is that the hydrogen is in access to the aromatics
(benzene, diphenyl and toluene) and a ratio of 5/1 at the reactor inlet should be kept. This forces the
equilibrium reaction to go into the reverse direction towards benzene and prevents the coking of the
reactor feed substances, which would lead to a decomposition into solid carbon and could disrupt the
chemical process (Smith 1995, p.39). The reaction takes place in an adiabatic plug-flow reactor. Thus
while the reactor feed substances pass the reactor, the exothermic reaction takes place and benzene,
diphenyl and hydrogen are produced. The temperature of the reactor substances has been raised by
the reaction heat to approximately 1265°F. The hot output stream is then cooled down to 1150°F by
mixing it with a cooler recycle stream mainly containing aromatics. This in particular inhibits the
Component vapour-liquid equilibrium constant K (465 psia / 100°F)

hydrogen 99.07
methane 20.00
Benzene 0.0104
Toluene 0.00363
Diphenyl 0.00008
Table 8.1: Vapour-liquid constants of process components, suitable for flash calculations (Douglas
1988, pp. 167)
possibility of hydrocracking (Douglas 1988, pp.520), the splitting of the hydrocarbon molecules into
simpler molecules. The cooled stream is then used as heat effluent in the feed-effluent-heat-exchanger
(FEHE) and further cooled down to about 240° F. After the stream temperature has been decreased
to approximately 100°F in the cooler, the major part of the light substances (hydrogen, methane) are
separated in the flash from the aromatics at comparably lower pressure of about 460psia (see also Table
8.1). The light substances are then partly fed back into the process via the gas recycle stream. A small
percentage (approx. 10%) is purged (Purge) to the outside of the process plant. The purged gas could be
used as fuel. The pressure of the larger part of the gas is increased by the compressor and the stream is
mixed with the process feed to be re-used within the production process. The part of the cool aromatics
stream (70%) which is not used within the quench for cooling the reactor output stream is then fed into
the heavy component recycle stream.
The heavy component recycle stream still contains some of the light gases. Additionally, the aro
matics need to be split into their three parts, toluene, benzene and diphenyl. The toluene can be re-used
within the production process. According to the vapour-liquid equilibrium values, the lightest sub
stances are hydrogen and methane, the substances benzene, toluene and diphenyl follow (see also Table
8.1). The light components are to be separated in a high pressure stabilizer column from the aromatics.
The stabilizer column operates at a pressure range around 150psia. The pressure drop from the flash
pressure to the stabilizer column input stream (155psia) is realized via the flash liquid outlet valve. The
light gases, which remain in the heavy component recycle stream, are removed as vapour from the par
tial condenser of the high pressure stabilizer column. The removal of the remaining lightest component,
the main product benzene, is carried out in the benzene column while a recovery of 99.43% and a purity
of 99.97% is achieved. The benzene column bottom product mixture of toluene and diphenyl is then
split in the toluene column achieving a bottom product purity of 93.89% of diphenyl with a recovery
of 99.491% and a total condenser toluene output stream purity of 98.3% and a toluene recovery of
99.66%.
measurements required range

1 Flash inlet temperature 98 to 102 [ °F]
2 Production rate 240-280 [lb.mol/hr]
3 Product purity at least 99.97 [%] (mol-%)
4 Hydrogen to aromatics ratio
4-9 ‘° 51 [1M S ]
5 Flash outlet vapour pressure 458 to 460 [psia]
Table 8.2: Measurements available for control
Note that the loops introduced via the feed-effluent-heat exchanger (FEHE) (Figure 8.1) and the
quench cause the whole system to destabilize. Furthermore for operation, the distillation columns need
a part of the pressure profile, the condensation drum and reboiler fluid levels fixed. Brognaux (1992)
and also Cao, Rossiter, Edwards, Knechtel & Owens (1998) therefore introduced simple PID controllers
to stabilize the system and to keep these plant variables in a well-defined range. The remaining output
values which can be measured and need to be controlled are given in Table 8.2. Three out of these five
measurements, production rate, product purity and hydrogen-to-aromatics-ratio, are most important.
Production rate and product purity are concerned with product quantity and quality, while keeping
the hydrogen-to-aromatics-ratio in the required range is important to prevent coking, as mentioned
before. Thus, a tracking controller for this plant is supposed to follow production demand changes
while keeping the interaction with the other 4 output measurements as low as possible. For reasons of
brevity, the evaluation of the two tracking control methodologies will concentrate on the three important
output measurements.
Further, the disturbances as listed in Table 8.3 affect the closed loop system performance. Both dis
turbances are due to external effects. The cooling effluent temperature is dependent on the temperature
of supplied cooling water, while the purge down stream pressure is dependent on the pressure of the
environment into which the light gases are purged.
Disturbance nominal value

1 Pre-flash cooler: cooling effluent temperature 59 [°F]
2 Purge down stream pressure 350 [psia]
Table 8.3: Disturbances influencing the control
Another problem usually connected to chemical plant systems are delays. Delays of up to 10 m in
for the product purity measurement have been investigated by Cao, Rossiter & Owens (1998).
Theoretical input/ouput controllability analysis applied to the HDA-plant by Cao & Rossiter (1997),
Cao et al. (1997) and Cao & Rossiter (1998) led to the result that 6 out of 13 possible actuators are both
C h a p t e r 8. S l i d i n g - m o d e c o n t r o l o f a n o n - l i n e a r , l a r g e s c a l e c h e m ic a l p r o c e s s 156
actuator unit
1 Benzene column splitter: reflux ratio [ lb.mol/hr 1
Llb.mol/hr J
2 Compressor horse power [hp]
3 Pre-flash cooler duty [BTU/hr]
4 Gas feed flow [lb.mol/hr]
5 Toluene feed flow [lb.mol/hr]
6 Purge outlet valve opening []
Table 8.4: Most effective actuators for low control effort, high robustness and good disturbance rejection
practically and theoretically the most effective for control as indicated in Table 8.4, while Figure 8.1
shows all the 13 accessible actuators. The analysis tools take into account disturbance rejection, model
mismatch and effectiveness of actuators to the output measurements. The latter analysis tools were
derived particularly for SISO control schemes and for those schemes the compressor horse power has
been regarded as less effective than the other five actuators.
The plant has been rigorously modeled by Cao, Rossiter, Edwards, Knechtel & Owens (1998) as a
270-state non-linear model considering non-linear relationships between physical variables of the pro
cess system. The non-linear relations such as the molar weight being a function of light and heavy
substance, of density, vapour-liquid constant and also for enthalpy as a function of pressure, tempera
ture and concentration are taken into account; a data-base is accessed during dynamic simulation. In
particular, the distillation columns have been dynamically modeled with respect to each tray and the
plug-flow reactor model has been realized by a series of 12 continuous well-stirred reactors. This re
sults in highly non-linear dynamic and steady-state characteristics, which are investigated within the
next section.
8.3 Non-linear dynamics and model linearizations
The HDA-plant model is highly non-linear. One characteristic of the responses of output measurements
of the open loop plant to positive and negative step changes of the inputs is that they are not inverted
to each other. Thus, the dynamics deviate very much from any linear model, even in a small vicinity of
a linearization point. In particular, the Benzene column reflux ratio, an important actuator for control
of the purity shows this non-linear behaviour (see Figure 8.2). This is particularly problematic for the
steady state of these responses which show here, for the production rate output, a phase error of 180°.
However, model based multi-variable control requires a reasonably accurate linear model. For this
reason, exact linearizations provided by the Aspen Custom Modeler-software packages for different
operating points have been used. The dynamic responses of these linearizations are also visualized in
Figure 8.2. They show that fast dynamics seem to match well the responses of the non-linear plant
266.5
1.33
266
,1.325 |'2 6 5 .5
1I
| 265
| 1.32
! * 2 6 4 .5
11.315
1 264
i 1 Y \
1.31 £ 2 6 3 .5
263
1.305
10 20 30 40 50 60 10 20 30 40 50 60
time [hr] dme [hr]
5.08
E 9 9 .6
4.98
4.96
0 10 20 30 40 50 60
time[hr] time [hr]
Figure 8.2: Responses to small positive and negative step-changes (±1%) of the benzene column reflux
ratio (Zme=non-linear responses to positive change, dotted=non-\mear responses to negative change,
dot-dashed=\mQZi responses to positive change, dashed^linear responses to negative change)
while slow dynamics cannot match a linear model due to the non-linearity in steady state. This is also
confirmed by comparing linear models at different operating points as presented in Figure 8.3 showing
large low frequency gain differences of the frequency responses of linearizations at two different yet
close operating points. This low frequency model uncertainty will present problems for the model based
multi-variable control.
“ 10°
frequency [rad/hr]
Figure 8.3: Frequency responses of two model linearizations {line,dashed) at steady state before and
after a -1% -change of the gas feed flow
The non-linear model representation and also the linearizations of the HDA plant has 270 dynamic
states. This high model order makes it impossible to design a reasonable multivariable controller using
C h a p t e r 8. S l id in g - m o d e c o n t r o l o f a n o n -l in e a r , l a r g e s c a l e c h e m ic a l pr o cess 158
2 6 5 .2
265.1
I
o 265
J 264.9
= .4 9 2
264.1
5490 264.7
Qu264.6
264.5
264.4
30 0 10 20 30 40 50 60
tim e [hr] time [hr]
100 5.08
5.06
99.95
5.04
^ 99.9
£ 5 .0 2
£ 4 .9 8
£ 99.8-
~ 4 .9 6
99.75-
4.9 4
997, 4.9 2
60
dmefhr] time [hr]
Figure 8.4: Responses to small positive and negative step-changes (±1%) of the gas feed (line=non
linear responses to positive change, dotted=non-lmeai responses to negative change, dot-dashed= linear
responses to positive change, dashed= linear responses to negative change)
common approaches. Thus, the next section will consider model reduction techniques for the linear
model.
8.4 Model reduction
Since the HDA-plant has been set up so that it is open-loop stable, model reduction methodologies can
be applied to the 270 state linearization. For this reason, reduction methodologies (Zhou et al. 1996)
use the balanced realization of a given stable linear system representation, which can be determined via
linear transformation T# for any minimal realization of the stable linear model Gur
S t. s p . "X-ur A -u r B ut Xt
(8 . 1)
Yur C Ur B Uf Utir
where the balanced realization:

T h B ut
(8.2)
_ CurTJ, 1 Dur
has the same input/output behaviour. The controllability and observability Gramians Pur and Qur of
(8.1) transform for the balanced realization into:
T f f P u rT'fl — T h Q u t T h — diag (CFi/Ur ^ 2 /ur 5 •••) ? &l/ur —&2 /ur-" > 0

C h a p t e r 8. S l id in g -m o d e c o n t r o l o f a n o n - l in e a r , l a r g e s c a l e c h e m ic a l pr o c e ss 159
where cr\/ur, ^ 2 /ur, are the Hankel singular values. Expressed verbally, those states corresponding
to a small Hankel singular value are not well controllable or observable, i.e. can be omitted (Zhou et al.
1996). Three different techniques for state reduction of the balanced realization have been investigated:
balanced truncation, residualization and approximation. Each method uses a different approach of
calculating a lower order model Gred of order rred from the balanced realization of (8.2). Balanced
residualization has the advantage of having the same steady state gain as (8.1). Z^-induced-norm (H0c)
bounds (||*||2) or Hankel-norm (||-||#) bounds on the model difference (Gur — Gred) exist for each
method (Skogestad & Postlethwaite 1996):
||Gur — Gred \\2 < 2(Ej<7j/ur — cri/ur), (truncation, residualization)
11Gur ~ GTed\\H < Vi+rTed/ Ur, (approximation)
Thus, important information about the errors which occur within the three different reduction method
ologies is given by the two values of:
^ ^1=1 ^ i / u r & i/ u T
S i< T j/ur /u r
8.4.1 Model scaling and reduction for the linearized HDA-plant model
The design methodologies for the two different control methodologies which are investigated in this
chapter both take the two disturbances of Table 8.3 and the five output measurements of Table 8.2 into
account, while the second presented control methodology employs six actuators and the first uses only
five actuators from Table 8.4. Thus, this section presents the model reduction considering 6 actuators,
2 disturbance inputs and 5 output measurements. The model linearization for the operation point of
the nominal values of Tables 8.2 and 8.3 (middle of required value range) and a production rate of 265
lb.mol/hr is investigated in this case. The reduction results for 5 actuators show better results with
respect to model errors (Gur — Gred) for the same order of the reduced model, which also results from
the fact that 5 actuators cannot excite the same extent of the plant dynamics as 6 actuators. Thus, a
linear model:
A hda B hda
_ Chda D hda
of 270 states, 8 inputs and 5 outputs is considered for model order reduction. For this purpose, input
and output scalings Xsc = diag(Xi,X2, ...,X 5 ) , O sc = dmg(Ol , 0 2, - , 0 8) were introduced to account
for the expected actuator and disturbance amplitudes and the permissible amplitudes of the output
measurements:
( A - u r i B u r •>G u r , D ur) = {A h d a , B h d a Z sc, O scC h d a , O scD h d a ^ sc)-

C h a p t e r 8. S l id in g - m o d e c o n t r o l o f a n o n -l in e a r , l a r g e s c a l e c h e m ic a l pr o c e ss 160
Actuator Scaling
1 Benzene column splitter: reflux ratio Z i = 0.265
2 Compressor horse power I 2 = 64.494
3 Pre-flash cooler duty 1 3 = 2658.677
4 Gas feed flow X4 = 98.500
5 Toluene feed flow I 5 = 55.875
6 Purge outlet valve opening X6 = 9.183
Disturbance Scaling
as
1 Cooling effluent temperature
II
2 Purge down stream pressure X8 = 50
Output Scaling
1 Flash inlet temperature Oi = !
2 Production rate
II
to
o
3 Product purity <% =ofe
4 Hydrogen to aromatics ratio <24 = 5 3

o
5 Flash vapour outlet pressure

II
Table 8.5: Input-Output scaling factors
These scalings have to be re-considered later when implementing the multi-variable control for the
non-linear HDA-simulation. The scalings of Table 8.5 as documented in Cao & Rossiter (1997) and
often used within input and output selection schemes (Cao 1995) have been also found here suitable
for model reduction and control design. The Hankel singular values from Figure 8.5 indicate that the
scaled, linear HDA-model can be easily reduced to a state space representation with order between 10
and 20. For current numerical design tools, reasonable controller designs can be carried out for systems
of this order. The balanced truncation methodology provides the best model matching results in the high
Figure 8.5: Hankel singular values of scaled linear model

C h a p t e r 8 . S l i d i n g - m o d e c o n t r o l o f a n o n - l in e a r , l a r g e s c a l e c h e m ic a l p r o c e s s 161
f r e q u e n c y a r e a ( F i g u r e 8 .6 ( c ) ) , w h e r e t h e b a l a n c e d r e s i d u a l i z a t i o n r e s u l t s h a v e f o r l o w f r e q u e n c y v e r y
s i m i l a r f r e q u e n c y r e s p o n s e s t o t h e o r i g i n a l 2 7 0 s t a t e m o d e l ( F i g u r e 8 .6 ( a ) - 8 .6 ( b ) ) . S in c e it h a s b e e n
f o u n d in S e c tio n 8 .3 t h a t t h e m o d e l lin e a r i z a t i o n in c o m p a r i s o n to o th e r lin e a r m o d e ls o f v e r y c lo s e
o p e r a tio n p o in ts c a n d iv e r g e v e r y m u c h in p a r t i c u l a r in t h e lo w f r e q u e n c y r a n g e , it is m o r e s u ita b le
to a c h ie v e g o o d h ig h f r e q u e n c y m o d e l m a tc h in g o f th e m o d e l re d u c tio n . T h e m o d e l e rro r re sp o n se s
ii 10"
10"1 10'2
10 10
frequency [rad/hr] frequency [rad/hr] frequency [rad/hr]
(a) M odel responses, reduct, to (b) Errors, reduction to 17-th (c) Errors, truncation, ‘:’= 18-th
17-th order, ‘- ’= o r i g ., ‘:’= trunc., order,‘:’= truncation, ‘.-’= resid- order, ‘- ’= 17-th order, ‘.-’= 16-th
‘.-’= residualiz., ‘- - ’= approxim . ualization, - ’= approxim ation order
F i g u r e 8 .6 : F r e q u e n c y r e s p o n s e s f o r t h e m o d e l r e d u c tio n m e th o d s
o f ( G ur — G red) f ro m F i g u r e 8 .6 ( c ) s h o w th a t th e m o d e l re d u c tio n o f 1 7 -th a n d 1 8 -th o r d e r h a v e
s im ila r e r r o r n o r m s in th e h ig h f r e q u e n c y a r e a , w h ile th e e r r o r s f o r 1 6 -th a n d 1 7 -th o r d e r a r e s im ila r in
th e lo w f r e q u e n c y a r e a . T h e 1 7 -th o r d e r r e d u c e d lin e a r m o d e l h a s b e e n th e r e fo re p r e fe rr e d a c h ie v in g
g o o d m o d e l m a tc h in g in th e h ig h f r e q u e n c y d o m a in a n d a n JT o o -n o rm e r r o r o f m a x im a lly 0 .5 % . T h e
in f lu e n c e o f th e m o d e l e r r o r in th e lo w f r e q u e n c y a r e a is m in o r c o m p a r e d to th e la r g e n o n - lin e a rity o f
th e s im u la te d p la n t a t s te a d y s ta te . T h is h a s b e e n a ls o ju s tif ie d b y r e le v a n t te s ts o f s te p r e s p o n s e s .
T h e s e r e d u c e d m o d e ls a r e n o w u s e d to d e te r m in e c o n tr o lle rs b a s e d o n tw o d iffe re n t c o n tro l m e th o d
o lo g ie s . N o te , th a t a ll th e o r d e r r e d u c e d m o d e ls h a v e u n s ta b le in v a r ia n t z e r o s o f la r g e m a g n itu d e . T h e
c o n tro l m e th o d o lo g y in v e s tig a te d in th e n e x t s e c tio n h a s b e e n d e v e lo p e d in C h a p te r 6 , w h ile la te r a
p s e u d o -s lid in g m o d e c o n tr o lle r is d e v e lo p e d u s in g th e o b s e r v e r d y n a m ic s o f a n -c o n tro l.
8.5 A non-linear observer based control strategy
T h e tr a c k in g c o n tr o l o f C h a p te r 6 h a s b e e n p a r tic u la r ly d e v e lo p e d f o r s q u a re p la n ts . W ith in th is c o n
tr o l s c h e m e a p p l i e d t o t h e H D A - p la n t, t h e f iv e m o s t e f f e c tiv e a c tu a to r s f r o m T a b le 8 .4 a r e u tiliz e d . I t
h a s b e e n r e p o r t e d t h a t t h e c o m p r e s s o r h o r s e p o w e r is th e le a s t i m p o r ta n t a c tu a to r o f T a b le 8 .4 ( C a o &
R o s s ite r 1 9 9 8 ). T h e re f o r e th e lin e a r m o d e l r e d u c tio n a n d d e s ig n f o r th is c o n tro l a p p ro a c h d o n o t c o n
s i d e r t h i s a c t u a t o r b u t i n c l u d e t h e o t h e r c o n t r o l s i g n a l s o f T a b l e 8 .4 a n d t h e d i s t u r b a n c e s o f T a b le 8 .3 .
It w a s f o u n d th a t lin e a riz a tio n s c lo s e to s e t-p o in ts o f a p ro d u c tio n d e m a n d o f 2 7 0 r e s u lt in n o t
v e ry r o b u s t c o n tr o l s y s te m s w h ile lin e a r iz a tio n s f o r s e t-p o in ts o f lo w e r p ro d u c tio n d e m a n d w e re m o re

s u ita b le f o r r o b u s t c o n t r o l d e s ig n b u t te n d e d to g iv e h ig h e r in te r a c tio n o f th e c o n tro l. A lin e a riz a tio n
c lo s e to a d e m a n d o f 2 5 5 l— ^ r l s e e m e d t o b e m o s t s u i t a b l e . T h e r a n g e s p a c e o f t h e i n p u t d i s t r i b u t i o n
m a tr ic e s h a s b e e n e v a lu a te d ; it w a s f o u n d th a t th e r a n g e s p a c e o f th e d is tu r b a n c e in p u t m a tr ic e s H j
and H u fro m (6 . 1 ) is b e s t d e s c r ib e d b y th e a c tu a to r r a n g e s p a c e d u e to th e f o u r a c tu a to rs : benzene
c o l u m n r e f l u x r a t i o , p r e - f l a s h c o o l e r d u t y , g a s f e e d f lo w a n d p u r g e o u t l e t v a l v e ( T a b le 8 .4 ) . T h is p r o
v id e s a l in e a r r e d u c e d m o d e l ( A , B , C , D ) (6 . 1) a n d th e r e s p e c tiv e d is tu r b a n c e a n d u n c e r ta in ty m o d e l
(A , H i , C , H u ) w ith a m o d e l o rd e r o f 17.
8.5.1 Design of the control for the HDA-plant
T h e g iv e n lin e a r (A , B , C , D ) m o d e l o f th e H D A - p la n t h a s to b e tr a n s f o r m e d in to a r e p re s e n ta tio n
( A , B , C ) ( 6 .6 ,6 . 1 0 ) b y l o w p a s s f i l t e r i n g t h r e e o f t h e o u t p u t s s i n c e r a n k ( D ) = 3:
A y — d ia g ( —7 , —7, —7 ),
w h i c h g i v e s a m o d e l o r d e r o f ( A , B , C ) ( 6 .6 ) o f ( 1 7 + 3 ) = 2 0 . N o te th a t [h r] is th e b a s e tim e u n it u s e d
h e re w h ic h a ls o a p p lie s to th e e ig e n v a lu e s a n d p o le s . O th e r p a ra m e te rs h a v e b e e n c h o s e n w ith A = J4
( 6 .2 9 ),( 6 .1 8 ) , T = d ia g (—5, - 5 , - 5 , - 5 , - 5 ) ( 6 .2 2 ).
F o r t h e s l i d i n g m o d e c o n t r o l d e s i g n e m p l o y i n g t h e # 2 - m e t h o d o l o g y o f S e c t i o n 6 .6 , i t w a s p r e f e r r e d
to s e t S r = 0, K r = 0 and A i = 0 ( 6 .6 2 - 6 .6 3 ) . A r e a s o n f o r th is c h o ic e is th a t a n o n - z e r o m a trix
5 r ^ 0 im p l i e s t h a t t h e q u a n tity r h a s d i r e c t e f f e c t o n th e lin e a r c o n tr o l ( 6 .3 2 ) a n d in tu r n o n th e a c tu a l
m e a s u re m e n ts o f th e c h e m ic a l p la n t s y s te m ( A , B , C , D ) d u e to D ^ 0 . T h is is c e r ta in ly n o t d e s ira b le ,
as c a n b e v e rifie d f ro m t h e l i n e a r l y c o n t r o l l e d l i n e a r i z e d p l a n t ( F ig u r e 8 .7 ) . A d d itio n a lly , it s e e m e d to
260 101.6
101.4
259
£258
c 100.8
2257 100.6
100.4
256
100.2
255 100
0 1 2 3 4 0 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.1
Time [hr]
F ig u r e 8 .7 : L in e a r ly c o n tr o lle d lin e a r iz a tio n o f th e H D A - p la n t c o m p a r in g tw o s lid in g p la n e d e s ig n
m e th o d o lo g ie s ( R e s p o n s e to a p r o d u c tio n d e m a n d c h a n g e fro m 2 5 5 to 2 6 0
b e m o re s im p le to c h o o s e S r = 0, K r — 0 and A i = 0 f o r th e d e s ig n . T h e c o n tr o lle d o u tp u t o f th e
^ - s l i d i n g p l a n e d e s i g n p r o b l e m h a s b e e n m o d i f i e d s i m ila r to ( 6 .6 4 ) to a c c o u n t f o r th e a c tu a l o u tp u t o f
th e s e m i- p r o p e r p l a n t a s s e e n in e q u a tio n ( 6 .6 4 ) . T h e f o llo w in g w e ig h ts w e r e u s e d in th e d e s ig n
A4 = d ia g ( 0 .4 , 2 , 12, 1 .3 , 0 .1 ) , A 4 = d i a g ( 0 .6 , 2 , 1 2 , 1 .3 , 0 .1 ) ,
A 5 = d ia g ( 4 .5 , 30, 1 2 9 , 2 5 .5 , 4 .2 ) , A 6 = d i a g ( 0 .6 3 2 5 , 0 .0 1 , 0 .6 3 2 5 , 0 .6 3 2 5 , 0 .6 3 2 5 )
f o r th e c o n tr o lle d o u tp u t. T h e o u tp u t m e a s u r e m e n t n o is e le v e ls C y h a v e b e e n sim p ly c h o s e n a s:
C y = d i a g ( 0 .0 0 1 , 0 .0 0 0 5 , 0 .0 0 1 , 0 .0 0 5 , 0 .0 0 7 ) ,
a n d th e n o is e le v e ls a f fe c tin g th e s y s te m s a r e g iv e n b y
A i = 0, A 2 ~ 0 , A3 « [A ^ 0]
A3 = [ - 1 7 . 2 1 . 6 2 1 .5 - 1 8 . 6 - 1 3 . 8 - 2 3 . 4 1 8 . 6 7 . 3 - 7 . 9 - 3 7 .6 - 5 .4 - 0 .9 - 2 1 . 7 9 . 9 8 1C6.6 - 4 2 . 9 ] ,
T h e s e w e ig h ts a re th e n a ls o u s e d to d e te rm in e $ w h ile m in im iz in g t r ( C q P C g ) ( 6 .5 6 ).
F o r t h e n o n - l in e a r c o n tr o l c o m p o n e n t, th e L y a p u n o v m a tr ix ( 6 .3 5 ) h a s b e e n d e te r m in e d , s o th a t th e
p o s itiv e c o n s ta n t d s a tis f y in g
+ 4 f r T >2 < —$7^2
is m a x im iz e d . I t d id n o t s e e m p r a c tic a l to c o n s id e r n o n - lin e a r g a in s k i = 0 a n d &2 = 0 w h ic h re s u lt
f r o m p a r a m e t r i c u n c e r t a i n t y a n d u n c e r t a i n t y o f t h e a c t u a t o r ( 6 .2 ) ,( 6 .3 ) . I n s te a d c o n s t a n t g a in s ( y 0/ i P o =
c o n s t., 7 c/ i p c = c o n s t.) h a v e b e e n c h o s e n in th e ra n g e :
0 .3 7 5 < 7 o / iP o < 6 , 0 .4 3 7 5 < 7 c/ i P c < 7 , = |.

' lo /lP o 6
T h e b o u n d ary la y e r h a s b e e n c h o se n w ith 6C = 5, S0 = 50. T h is s e e m e d to b e m o s t s u ita b le f o r
a c h ie v in g g o o d p e r f o r m a n c e a n d k e e p in g th e b o u n d a r y la y e r s o f th e c o n tr o l la r g e e n o u g h to p r e v e n t
c h a tte rin g .
280
275 production rate

demand r
E270
2265
260
255
0 10 20 30 40 50
T im e [hr]
Figure 8.8: Production rate response of non-linear simulation to demand r ( j c/ i P c = 4.375, j 0/ \ P o =
3.75)
8.5.2 Performance and robustness to uncertainty
The control methodology shows good tracking behaviour with respect to production demand changes
(Figure 8.8) with settling times of less than five hours. Also the interaction with the other measurements
C h a p t e r 8. S li d in g - m o d e c o n t r o l o f a n o n - l i n e a r , l a r g e s c a l e c h e m ic a l p r o c e s s 164
46 0 .4 5.01
5.005
459
4.99
458.:
0 10 20 30 40 50 0 10 20 30 40 50
T im e [hr] Time [hr]
99.9702
101.5 99.97 ~_j
99.9698
101
gS99.9696
“ 100.5
9 9.9692
100
99.969
99.5
9 9.9688
0 10 20 30 40 50 0 10 20 30 40 50
F i g u r e 8 .9 : O u t p u t m e a s u r e m e n t c h a n g e s d u e t o p r o d u c t i o n r a t e t r a c k i n g a s in F i g u r e 8 .8
h a v e f a s t r e s p o n s e s a n d r e m a i n in t h e r e q u i r e d v a lu e r a n g e ( F ig u r e 8 .9 ) . G e n e r a lly n o c h a tte r in g o f th e
c o n tr o l h a s b e e n d e te c te d . T h e a c t u a to r m a g n i t u d e w a s m a in ta in e d w ith in p r a c tic a l lim its .
T h e d y n a m ic s o f th e r e a c h in g p h a s e o f th e s lid in g - m o d e f o r th e lin e a r ly c o n tr o lle d lin e a r iz a tio n o f
th e H D A - p la n t c a n b e n e g le c te d . I t d o e s n o t h a v e a la r g e in f lu e n c e o n th e o v e ra ll d y n a m ic s o f th e c lo s e d
lo o p c o n tro l. H o w e v e r , t h e s lid in g - m o d e c o n tr o l a p p lie d to th e n o n - lin e a r m o d e l s h o w s s ig n ific a n t
d iffe re n c e s . T h e r e a c h i n g p h a s e e x te n d s o v e r a la r g e t im e p e r io d a n d d e p e n d s o n th e d e m a n d e d s e t-
p o in t o f t h e c o n tr o l in t h e o p e r a tio n e n v e lo p e ( F ig u r e 8 .1 0 ) . T h u s , th e d y n a m ic s o f th e r e a c h in g p h a s e o f
th e s l i d i n g m o d e h a s t o b e w e ll d e s i g n e d f o r a n a c tu a l p la n t. T h e m a tr ix $ f r o m ( 6 .3 2 ) h a s b e e n c h o s e n
a c c o r d in g to th e # 2 - c r ite r io n ( S e c tio n 6 .6 .3 ) w h ile th e v a lu e o f th e g a in s o f th e n o n - lin e a r c o m p o n e n ts
o f o b s e r v e r a n d t h e s t a te - f e e d b a c k c o n tr o l h a v e to b e c h o s e n e m p ir ic a lly . T h e a d ju s tm e n t o f th e n o n
lin e a r g a i n s is a c o m p r o m is e b e t w e e n g o o d tr a c k in g p e r f o r m a n c e a n d lo w in te r a c tio n o f th e c o n tr o l
w ith th e tw o p o s s ib le d is tu rb a n c e s . G e n e r a lly , it h a s b e e n f o u n d th a t la rg e r n o n - lin e a r g a in s im p ro v e
p e r f o r m a n c e a n d d e c r e a s e th e tr a c k i n g e r r o r ( F i g u r e 8 .1 1 ) . T h is h a s b e e n a ls o v e r if ie d in T a b le 8 .6
b y e v a lu a tin g th e m e a n a b s o lu te e r r o r o f th e tra c k in g e rro rs ( y - r ) a s u se d b y E d w a rd s & S p u rg e o n
( 1 9 9 4 b ):
1 Ns
= aT ~ r J’ t e ) l > J = 1 -5 ( 8 .3 )
C h a p t e r 8 . S l i d i n g - m o d e c o n t r o l o f a n o n - l i n e a r , l a r g e s c a l e c h e m ic a l p r o c e s s 165
-13
x 10
0 .005
-0 .0 0 5
-5
- 0.01
-0 .0 1 5
-1 0
- 0.02
-0 .0 2 5
-1 5
-0 .0 3
(a) Linearly controlled linearization to a dem and (b) Sliding-m od e controlled non-linear plant to a
as in Figure 8.7 dem and as in Figure 8.8
F i g u r e 8 .1 0 : R e s p o n s e f o r t h e s lid in g f u n c tio n (2 to a p r o d u c tio n d e m a n d c h a n g e
a n a l y z i n g p r o d u c t i o n d e m a n d t r a c k i n g r e s p o n s e s b e t w e e n 2 5 5 lb- ™ 1 a n d 2 8 0 lb '™ ~ a s s h o w n i n F i g u r e
8 .8 . F u r th e r , th e s y s te m is h ig h ly n o n - lin e a r . T h u s , s y s te m in te r a c tio n d o e s n o t r e m a in s im ila r o v e r th e
7 c /lP c " 0 / 1 P 0 prod, track, err. purity hydr.-to-arom.-ratio flash outl. vap. pres.
0.4375 0.375 0.21586 8.9267 • 10~5 0.001314 0.099367
4.375 3.75 0.20347 7.2143 • 10” 5 0.0012527 0.0898
7 6 0.20071 6.7985 • 10~5 0.0011807 0.083042
T a b l e 8 .6 : M e a n a b s o l u t e e r r o r e v a l u a t i n g t h e t r a c k i n g e r r o r f o r s e v e r a l d e m a n d c h a n g e s b e t w e e n 2 5 5
lb ‘™ 1 a n d 2 8 0 lb ™ ° 1- i n t h e i n t e r v a l [ 0 h r , 5 4 . 5 h r ]
5.002
4.998
2 -0 .4
=4.996
= - 0 .6
S 4.994
po» 0.373 *4.992
99.9697 4.99
999697
4.988
30 20 22 24 26 28 30
Tune [hr] Time [hr] Time [hr]
459.1
100.:
3.459.6
-100.6 T„i p„*0 37i
i.459.4
100.4
■=459.2
£ 1 0 0 .2 459
100 458.1
20 22 24 26 28 30
Time [hr] Time [hr]
F ig u r e 8 .1 1 : T ra c k in g e rro rs y j{ ti) — T j(ti) o f th e o u tp u t m e a s u r e m e n t d u e to p r o d u c tio n d e m a n d
ch an g e fro m 2 5 5 lJ^ t o 2 6 5 -l ^ sL ( s e e F i g u r e 8 . 8 )
w h o le o p e ra tio n e n v e lo p e ; tra c k in g e rro rs in c re a s e fo r dem ands in th e in te rv a l
[2 7 0 l b . m o l / h r , 2 8 0 l b . m o l / h r ] ( F ig u r e 8 .9 ) a n d in s ta b ility h a s b e e n o b s e rv e d to o c c u r f o r p r o d u c
tio n d e m a n d s b e lo w 245 . T h e c o n tr o lle r is n o t a b le to re a liz e d e m a n d c h a n g e s h ig h e r th a n 2 8 0
lb ' h f l s i n c e t h e s t a b i l i z e r c o n d e n s e r c o o l i n g d u t y w o u l d h a v e t o d e c r e a s e b e l o w 0 w h i c h i s p h y s i c a l l y
im p o s s ib le .
8.5.3 Disturbance rejection and performance for purity measurement delays
T h e c o n tr o l is a b le to r e je c t b o th d is tu r b a n c e s c o n s id e r e d h e r e , e v e n f o r la rg e a n d fa s t c h a n g e s (F ig u re
8 .1 2 a n d 8 .1 3 ) . F o r c o m p a r a tiv e r e a s o n s th e f la s h o u tle t v a p o u r p r e s s u r e is d is p la y e d f o r th e p u rg e -
d o w n - s tr e a m p r e s s u r e d i s tu r b a n c e a s c o n s id e r e d b y C a o ( 1 9 9 5 ). S in c e th e p u r g e -d o w n - s tr e a m p r e s s u re
is p h y s i c a l ly t h e c l o s e s t t o th e f la s h o u t l e t , t h e w o r s t e f f e c t o f th e p r e s s u r e d is tu r b a n c e is to b e e x p e c te d
th e re . F u r th e r , la r g e g a in s in th e n o n - lin e a r o b s e rv e r a n d c o n tro l te r m s m a y in c re a s e tra c k in g e rro rs
w h e n e n c o u n t e r i n g a c o o l i n g - e f f l u e n t - t e m p e r a t u r e d i s t u r b a n c e ( F i g u r e 8 .1 3 a n d T a b le 8 .7 ) .
T h e c o n tr o l a ls o p e r f o r m s w e ll w h e n d e la y s o f th e p ro d u c t p u r ity m e a s u re m e n t a re e n c o u n te re d
400
459.73
1459.72
£360
1265.005
§459.71
300 459.61
0 5 10) 15
Time [hr]
20 25 0 5 10 15
Time (hr)
20 25 0 5 10 15
Time (hr)
20 25
F i g u r e 8 .1 2 : R e a c tio n o f c o n t r o l to a P u r g e - d o w n - s tr e a m p r e s s u r e d is tu r b a n c e
265.6
1 265.4
L265.2
“55
| 265
o.
264.8
0 5 10 15 0 5 10 15
Time [hr] Time [hr]
F i g u r e 8 .1 3 : R e a c tio n o f c o n tr o l to a c o o lin g - e f f lu e n t- te m p e r a tu r e d is tu r b a n c e
Ic/lPc lo/lPo prod, track, err. purity hydr.-to-arom.-ratio flash outl.vap. pres.
0.4375 0.375 0.021082 1.5419-lO "5 0.0015697 0.10116
4.375 3.75 0.024531 1.8392 • 10” 5 0.0015046 0.1803
7 6 0.025574 2.0537 • 10"5 0.0015146 0.22513
T a b le 8 .7 : M e a n a b s o lu te e r r o r e v a lu a tin g th e tr a c k in g e r ro r f o r c o o lin g -e fflu e n t-te m p e ra tu re d is tu r
b a n c e in t h e i n t e r v a l [0 h r , 2 0 h r ]
14.995
- 0-1
4.99
- 1.2
-1.4
20 22 24 26 28 30
Time [hr] Tone [kr] Time [iff]
F ig u r e 8 .1 4 : T r a c k in g e r r o r s y j ( U ) — r j { t i ) o f th e o u tp u t d u e to p r o d u c tio n d e m a n d c h a n g e f r o m 2 5 5
—~ i t o 2 6 5 lb ' ™ 1 ( s e e F i g u r e 8 . 8 ) e n c o u n t e r i n g p u r i t y m e a s u r e m e n t d e l a y f o r 'y 0/ \ p 0 = 0 .3 7 5
( F ig u r e 8 .1 4 ) . T h e t r a c k in g e r r o r in c r e a s e s a n d s h o w s o s c illa to r y b e h a v io u r w ith a n in c r e a s e o f th e
d e la y f r o m 0 to 1 0 m i n .
T h is c o n c lu d e s th e a n a ly s is o f th e c o n tin u o u s - tim e im p le m e n te d tr a c k in g c o n tro l. T h e n e x t s e c tio n
c o n s id e r s a s a m p le d - d a ta im p le m e n ta tio n o f th e tr a c k in g c o n tro l.
8.5.4 Discretization of the observer-based control
F o r th e c o n tro l o f th e H D A - p la n t, a s a m p le d -d a ta im p le m e n ta tio n o f th e tra c k in g c o n tro l h a s b e e n
te s te d f o r th e n o n - lin e a r p la n t s im u la tio n . I t w a s o f in te r e s t to d e te r m in e w h ic h s a m p lin g f re q u e n c y is
s u ff ic ie n t f o r s ta b le a n d r o b u s t c o n tr o l. T h e s a m p le d - d a ta im p le m e n ta tio n u s e d a s in g le s a m p lin g - tim e
265 t = 1.398 [sec] 1.355

T = 1.44 [sec]
1.35
•S 1.345
£263 d 1.34
■ 31.335
es 1.33
261 1.325
1.32 x = 1.398 [sec]

T= 1.44 [sec]
260
0 1 2 3 4 5 0 1 2 3 4 5
T im e [hr] T im e [hr]
F ig u r e 8 .1 5 : P r o d u c tio n r a te a n d b e n z e n e c o lu m n r e flu x r a tio f o r a p r o d u c t d e m a n d c h a n g e f r o m 2 6 5 to
260 f o r t w o d i f f e r e n t s a m p l i n g r a t e s (7 c/ i P c = 4 . 3 7 5 , j 0/ i P o = 3 .7 5 )
r f o r th e c o n tr o lle r d y n a m ic s , th e a c tu a to r a n d th e o u tp u t m e a s u re m e n t. I t w a s fo u n d th a t th e s a m p lin g
tim e r h a d to b e s m a lle r th a n
r < 1 .4 [ s e c ]
to e n s u r e r o b u s t s ta b ility o f th e c lo s e d lo o p s y s te m s im u la tio n . T e s ts s h o w e d th a t th e tra c k in g b e h a v io u r
o f th e s a m p le d -d a ta im p le m e n ta tio n is m a in ly id e n tic a l to th e c o n tin u o u s -tim e im p le m e n ta tio n o f th e
tr a c k in g c o n tro l. A t r a je c to r y o f t h e c lo s e d lo o p tr a c k in g c o n tr o l is s h o w n in F ig u r e 8 .1 5 , g iv in g a n
e x a m p le o f tw o c o n tr o lle rs a t r = 1 .3 9 8 [ s e c ] a n d r = 1 .4 4 [ s e c ] . T h e c o n tro l w ith r = 1 .4 4 [ s e c ] is
u n s ta b le a n d th e n u m e r ic a l s im u la tio n p r o c e s s s to p s a t t — 2 .8 h r . N o te th a t th e ra n g e o f th e n u m e ric a l
s te p s iz e w ith in th e n o n - lin e a r s im u la tio n w a s s e t a p p r o p r ia te ly to a llo w a c c u r a te s im u la tio n s f o r th e
c o n tr o lle r w ith s a m p li n g tim e s o f a b o u t 1 — 2 [s e c ]. H o w e v e r , it m u s t b e n o te d th a t th e s im u la tio n s y s te m
A s p e n C u s to m M o d e l e r is a c o m p le x n u m e r ic a l s im u la tio n p a c k a g e , w h ic h h a s to b e ta k e n in to a c c o u n t
a ls o in c o n te x t w i t h t h e v e r y s m a ll s a m p li n g t im e o f 1 .4 [ s e c ] . T h e s a m p lin g tim e is s m a ll f o r a c h e m ic a l
p la n t w ith th e b a s ic tim e u n it o f 1 h r . T h is in d ic a te s th e h ig h c o n s tr a in ts o n th e s a m p lin g - tim e f o r a
p s e u d o -s lid in g -m o d e c o n tro l.
W ith in S e c tio n 7 .5 .9 , a m o d if ie d f r a m e w o r k f o r th e s a m p le a n d h o ld o p e r a to rs h a s b e e n o u tlin e d ,
w h ic h a l l o w s a s a m p le d - d a t a a n a l y s i s o f t h e t r a c k i n g c o n tr o l f o r a s e m i- p r o p e r s y s te m . T h u s s im ila r to
S e c tio n 7 .5 , m a tr ic e s H & / \ , % a / 2 > ^ a /i U & /2 c a n b e d e f in e d f o r th e s e t o f n o n - lin e a r m a trix
in e q u a litie s o f ( 7 .6 6 ) a n d ( 7 .6 7 ). T h is a llo w s to g e th e r w ith th e d a ta o f th e n o n - lin e a r tr a c k in g c o n tro l
a n d o f t h e r e d u c e d l i n e a r H D A - p la n t m o d e l to c o m p u t e a s a m p lin g tim e f o r th e c o n tr o l s y s te m . F o r th e
c o n t r o l s y s t e m v a l u e s a s f r o m S e c t i o n 8 . 5 . 1 w i t h j c/ i p c — 7 a n d j 0/ i P o = 6 , th e s a m p lin g tim e w h ic h
h a s b e e n c a l c u l a t e d f o r r o b u s t, s t a b le c o n t r o l is : r < 4 • 1 0 ~ 12 [ s e c ] . I t h a s b e e n f o u n d t h a t i n p a r t i c u l a r
\ p A / i \ \ a n d ||W A / 2 || i n ( 7 . 6 6 ) a r e v e r y l a r g e . F o r j c/ i P c = 7 a n d 'y 0 / i Po = 6 , th e y h a v e th e v a lu e
3 • 1 0 10 a n d 1 • 1 0 9 , w h i l e f o r 7 c / i / 9 c = 0 a n d 7 0/ i P o = 0 th e v a lu e s r e d u c e to 8 • 1 0 7 a n d 1 • 1 0 6 . F ro m
( 7 .6 6 ) f o llo w s :
1
T" ( r ) - m a a ( ||« A /1||,||W A /2 | | ) ’
w h ic h in d ic a te s t h e r e a s o n w h y th e c a l c u l a t e d s a m p lin g tim e is v e r y s m a ll.
F o r th e c o n tro l o f th e H D A -p la n t, a s e c o n d c o n tro l m e th o d o lo g y h a s b e e n o f in te re s t. A non
l i n e a r o b s e r v e r h a s b e e n u s e d w i t h i n t h e c u r r e n t s c h e m e , w h i l e in t h e n e x t s e c t i o n a c o n t r o l s c h e m e is
in v e s tig a te d u s in g a lin e a r o b s e rv e r.
8.6 An H qq-controller based approach
T h e s lid in g - m o d e b a s e d c o n tr o l m e th o d o lo g y o f th is s e c tio n e m p lo y s a lin e a r o b s e rv e r a n d n o n - lin e a r
s ta te f e e d b a c k . S u c h c o n tr o l s tr u c tu r e s h a v e b e e n u s e d in p r a c tic e b y B h a tti (1 9 9 7 ) a n d h a v e b e e n r e
p o r te d b y U t k i n ( 1 9 9 2 ) a s p r a c tic a lly i m p o r t a n t . H o w e v e r , s tr ic t m a th e m a tic a l p r o o f s o f ro b u s t s ta b ility
f o r th e c o m b in a tio n o f lin e a r o b s e r v e r a n d n o n - lin e a r s ta te f e e d b a c k c o n s id e rin g m a tc h e d d is tu rb a n c e s
a n d u n c e r ta in ty h a v e n o t b e e n s h o w n s o fa r.
F o r th e d e s ig n o f th e c o n tr o l, a lin e a r m ix e d s e n s itiv ity H o o - c o n tro l p r o b le m is p o s e d u s in g a g e n
e r a l m e th o d o lo g y w e ig h tin g th e a c tu a to r s ig n a ls , o u tp u t e r r o r a n d d is tu r b a n c e in p u ts . S in c e th e p la n t
h a s h ig h u n c e r ta in ty a t lo w f re q u e n c y , th e o u tp u t e r r o r w e ig h ts a r e c h o s e n to c o n ta in p o le s o n th e im a g
i n a r y a x i s . T h e r e s u l t i n g n o n - s t a n d a r d H o o - c o n t r o l p r o b l e m c a n b e s o l v e d w i t h S a f o n o v ’s m e t h o d o l o g y
(C h ia n g & S a fo n o v 1 9 9 2 ).
T h e n o n - l in e a r c o n t r o l le r a s s u m e s th e lin e a r, s ta b le , o b s e rv e r - b a s e d -c o n tro lle r f o r th e H D A -
p ro c e ss. E n fo rc in g p o le s e p a ra tio n f o r th e c o n tr o lle r a n d o b s e r v e r o f th e lin e a r c o n tro l, th e lin e a r
c o n t r o l is a u g m e n t e d b y a n o n - l in e a r c o n t r o l s ig n a l u s in g th e o b s e r v e r s ta te s . T h e n o n - lin e a r c o n tr o lle r
in d u c e s a s lid in g m o t i o n f o r c i n g t h e c l o s e d lo o p s ta te s o n to a s u b - m a n if o ld o f th e s ta b le lin e a r c lo s e d
lo o p c o n tr o l. T h e s lid in g m o d e is c h o s e n a c c o r d in g to a r o b u s t p o le s e le c tio n s c h e m e m in im iz in g th e
c o n d itio n n u m b e r o f t h e r i g h t h a n d e i g e n v e c t o r m a tr ix o f th e s lid in g m o d e s y s te m m a tr ix .
T h e r e s u lts o f th e d e s ig n in a p p lic a tio n to th e H D A - p la n t w ill s h o w th e fe a s ib ility o f th is a p p r o a c h
w ith r e s p e c t to t r a c k i n g p e r f o r m a n c e a n d r o b u s tn e s s to n o n - lin e a r itie s in th e o p e r a tio n e n v e lo p e .
8 .6 .1 P o s in g th e H qo- p ro b le m
S u p p o s e a lin e a r, tim e -in v a r ia n t s y s te m is g iv e n b y :
x = i x + B u + B dd , x G R n , B G f xm , B d G Mn x m ^ St. sp. ’A B Bd "

y = C x + P u + D dd , C G W x n C D Dd m
w h ere u G Mm (n > m) a re th e a v a ila b le a c tu a to rs , d th e p la n t d is tu rb a n c e s a n d y G IR.P th e o u tp u t
m e a s u r e m e n t s . A m i x e d s e n s itiv ity H o o - c o n tr o l p r o b l e m c a n b e p o s e d a c c o r d in g to F ig u r e 8 .1 6 s im ila r
to th a t p r o p o s e d in P r e m p a in , S u n & P o s tle th w a ite ( 1 9 9 9 ). T h e a c tu a to r is w e ig h te d u s in g tw o w e ig h t-
rm 1
i
w.. rt*
y hu u i Wu u f y f t i u
i i
i i
i i
w.. i Wur " T y Hu r
y hu
i r—
’A B Bi
c D A C D Dd *yHy
I ,----------
■f! * 0 0 * - w„ -1 K ' t *
I L______ 1 i ______ i
F i g u r e 8 .1 6 : A u g m e n te d p la n t f o r H qo- o p tim iz a tio n
in g f u n c t i o n s , W u u a n d W u r , a f ilte r d e p e n d in g o n u n - s tr u c tu r e d u n c e r ta in ty a n d a f ilte r w e ig h tin g th e
d e r iv a tiv e o f th e a c tu a to r s ig n a ls . W p s h a p e s th e c la s s o f d is tu r b a n c e s d a n d W y th e se n s itiv ity fu n c tio n .
W y h a s b e e n i n c l u d e d i n to th e l o o p to a c h ie v e a s te a d y s ta te e r r o r o f 0 a n d in tro d u c e s in te g r a tin g . T h is
h o w e v e r i m p l i e s p o l e s o f t h e a u g m e n t e d o p e n p l a n t l i e o n t h e i m a g i n a r y a x i s . S a f o n o v ’s p o l e s h i f t i n g
m e th o d o lo g y (C h ia n g & S a fo n o v 1 9 9 2 ) h a s th e re fo re b e e n u s e d f o r -d e s ig n .
S u p p o s e th e p l a n t G , t h e d i s tu r b a n c e m o d e l G d a n d W u s a tis fy :
st._sp. ’A B " st._sp. ’A Bd ' ’ w uu

Gr = >G d = ,w u =
_C D C Dd . . W ur
a n d th e r e s p e c tiv e w e ig h ts W y , W p , W u r , W u u a r e g iv e n . T h e H o o -o p tim iz a tio n c rite rio n m in im iz e s
t h e T ^ o o - n o r m o f t h e t r a n s f e r f u n c t i o n T y H ) ^ / )r/]/
f r o m th e e x o g e n o u s i n p u t s [£ r , r T ]T t o t h e c o n t r o l le d o u t p u t s y # = [ y j , Yjjuu, y # ur]T ( F i g u r e 8 .1 6 ) .
It c a n b e s h o w n th a t:
" W ySocG dW p W ySoo

(8 .4 )
_ W uK coW ySooG dW p W uK ooW ySoc _
w h ere
S o o is ) = (/ - G (s )K o o (s )W y ( s ) ) - 1. (8 .5 )
and K qo is th e d e s ig n e d c o n tro l. R o b u s tn e s s w ith re s p e c t to u n -s tru c tu re d a d d itiv e u n c e rta in ty A ,
|| A | | 2 < 1 o f th e p la n t:
G + W u A
i s a c h i e v e d i f \ \ W u K o o W y S 0 0 II2 < 1 . A s u f f i c i e n t c o n d i t i o n f o r t h i s i s t h a t | | Ty H 1| 2 < 1.
W e ig h ts W y h a v e b e e n u s e d w ith p o le s a t 0 to a c h ie v e a s te a d y s ta te e r r o r o f 0 ; th is p r e c lu d e s
th e u s e o f th e s ta n d a rd H qo- s y n th e s is p r o c e d u r e o f G lo v e r & D o y le . S a fo n o v s u g g e s ts a p o le s h iftin g
m e th o d o lo g y f o r th e s e c a s e s (C h ia n g & S afo n o v 1 9 9 2 ), re s u ltin g in to th e d e s ig n o f a s u b -o p tim a l
H qo - c o n tro lle r .I n s h o r t,th e f o llo w in g a p p r o a c h is u s e d : S u p p o s e th e s y s te m m a tr ix o f th e o p e n lo o p
a u g m e n te d p la n t is A g , th e n th e a u g m e n te d p la n t p o le s a re s h ifte d f o r -d e s ig n b y p G R + :
A g d= Ag +p i (8 .6)
so th a t n o e ig e n v a lu e s o f A g + p i lie o n th e im a g in a r y a x is . N o te th a t th e s y s te m m a tr ix A k o f th e
c o n tro lle r d e s ig n e d u s in g A g is u n d e r g o in g th is p o le s h if t. T h u s , s h if tin g th e c o n tr o lle r s y s te m m a trix
p o le s o f th e d e s ig n e d A k
A k = A k - p i ( 8 .7 )
r e s u lts in a s t a b le s u b - o p t i m a l H o o - c o n t r o l la w .
8.6.2 The weak separation principle in Hqo-control
T h e s o lu tio n o f th e H q o -c o n tro l p ro b le m p ro v id e s a c e n tra l c o n tro lle r K o o = (A k ,B k ,C k ,D k )
(G lo v e r & D o y le 1 9 8 8 ). I t is u n d e r s to o d th a t th is c e n tr a l c o n tr o lle r h a s th e s a m e s y s te m o r d e r a s th e
a u g m e n t e d s y s t e m . S u p p o s e t h e a u g m e n t e d p l a n t G oo is r e p r e s e n t e d b y
Xg Ag i B g/2
yH = Con ^ e /ii D g j 12 u i
to
&
yg D g / 2i E g / 22 U2
D Xm2, D g f 21 €
xm i (8 .8)
Q! 12
w h e r e t h e i n p u t / o u t p u t m a t r i c e s h a v e b e e n ‘i n p u t / o u t p u t s c a l e d ’ s o t h a t
D g /u — - A ? / 2l = [ 0 / ] •
U s in g t h e n o t a t i o n o f G l o v e r & D o y le , t h e d y n a m ic p a r t o f th e c o n tr o lle r w ith s ta te s x g r e d u c e s a f te r
th e tw o p o le s h if ts o f ( 8 .6 - 8 .7 ) to :
= AgXg + H 2 ( C g / 2X.g + D g / 22U 2 —y g) + B g j2U 2 + H12U2 + [H u H i2]Cg/iX g,

V------------------v------------------ '
y g = Output measurement estimate
w h ere [H u H u H2] i s d e te r m in e d a s in G lo v e r & D o y le (1 9 8 8 , e q u . 1 2 ) u s in g A g f r o m ( 8 .6 ) i n
s te a d o f A g f o r d e s ig n . T h is s h o w s th a t if m = 0 and [Hu Hu] = 0 th e n th e d y n a m ic p a rt o f th e
H q q - c o n t r o l l e r w o u l d r e p r e s e n t a L u e n b e r g e r t y p e o b s e r v e r . H o w e v e r i n g e n e r a l , t h e ‘p o l e s e p a r a t i o n ’
p rin c ip le d o e s n o t a p p ly to Ho o -c o n tro l s y s te m s . T h e m a tric e s [Hu Hu] fo llo w a weak s e p a ra tio n
p r in c ip le , w h i c h h a s b e e n d i s c u s s e d f o r t h e o u t p u t f e e d b a c k p r o b le m b y Z h o u e t a l. (1 9 9 6 ). I n th e c o n
tro l d e s ig n s in v e s tig a te d h e re , it h a s b e e n fo u n d th a t m o s t o f th e e le m e n ts o f [Hu Hu] a r e s m a ll. T h is
f a c t w i l l b e n o w u s e d t o a c h i e v e e x a c t p o l e s e p a r a ti o n w h ile i n tr o d u c in g a n o n - lin e a r c o n tr o l s ig n a l.
8 .6 .3 A lin e a r o b s e r v e r b a s e d c lo s e d lo o p c o n tr o l s y s te m w ith a u x ilia r y n o n -lin e a r c o n tro l in p u t
s ig n a l
F o r i n v e s ti g a t i o n o f t h e s t a te s p a c e s tr u c tu r e , a n a u g m e n te d p la n t w ith o u t th e c o n tr o lle d o u tp u ts is g iv e n
b y Q\
Xg
St. sp. Xg A g B g /i B g /2
Ui ( 8 .9 )
B g j 22
<N
B g /21
. y e .
1
U2
A lin e a r c o n tr o lle r f o r ( 8 .9 ) w ith a u x ilia r y in p u ts u N L a n d u * is
^Q / mod
st. sp. ^ g / mod A k B k B n l B x UK
K
0
0
Ck
*
y k UNL
1
U *
w h e re th e c o n tr o lle r = ( A K , B K , C K , D K ) h a s b e e n d e s ig n e d f o r u K = y g a n d y K = u 2 so th a t
xg a r e o b s e r v e r s ta te s a n d a t le a s t a w e a k p o le s e p a r a tio n p r in c ip le a p p lie s to th is c lo s e d lo o p sy s te m .
T h e m a tr ic e s B n l , a n d th e in p u t u x a r e d e te r m in e d la te r.
F o r th e c lo s e d lo o p in v e s tig a te d h e r e , a s s u m e th e a u x ilia ry s ig n a l u n l ( F ig u r e 8 .1 7 ) is a ls o a d d e d
to th e lin e a r c o n tr o lle r o u tp u t s ig n a l y x , so th a t
U2 = u XL + y K , u K = yg
C h a p t e r 8. S l i d i n g - m o d e c o n t r o l o f a n o n - l in e a r , l a r g e s c a l e c h e m ic a l p r o c e s s 172
AX
F i g u r e 8 .1 7 : C lo s e d lo o p s y s te m w ith a u x ilia r y in p u ts
a n d th e c lo s e d lo o p s y s te m c a n b e d e riv e d fro m a g e n e r ic t r a n s f e r m a tr ix f o r m u la ( Z h o u e t a l. 1 9 9 6 ,
p .6 6 ):
xg 0
/mod
A d sd j 11 A d s d /1 2 B d s d /1 1 B d s d / 12
Ui
^ -g /m o d _ A d s d j 21 A d s d /2 2 B d s d / 21 B d s d /2 2
UJVX
U l
w h ere
A - d s d / 11 = A g + B g /2 D l< R lC g /2 , A d s d /1 2 — B g / 2R 2 C K ,
A-clsdj 21 = B k R \ C q/2> A d s d /2 2 — A k + B k D q i2 2R2C k
B c is d / i i = B g /i + B g /2 R 2 D K D g /2 h B d s d / 12 = B g /2R 2 ,
B cl s d f 21 = B k ( D g /2l + D g /22R 2D K D g /2\) , B d s d /2 2 — ^ i C ^ a / 2 2 -^2 + B ^ l,
-1
Ri = {I ~ D g / 22D K ) \ R2 = (I - D K D g f2 2 )
D e fin e
&g — X g X g /m o d
th e n
1
Xg Xg
o
1
. . X g /m o d
1
1
and
Xg
X-g/ mod
Xg ^ c i s d /1 1 A d s d /1 2 B d s d /1 1 B d s d / 12 0
Ul (8. 10)
_ A d s d / 21 A d s d /2 2 B d s d / 21 B d s d /2 2 B x
U iV L
U *
w h ere
B d s d / 22 = B n l - B KDg/ 2 2 R 2 + B g/2R 2
a n d t h e r e m a i n i n g f o r m u l a e f o r t h e q u a d r u p l e ( A d s d , B d s d >C c is d , B d s d ) c a n b e e a s i l y d e r i v e d .
I f th e e rro r e g d e f i n e s th e d y n a m i c s o f a n o b s e r v e r e r r o r w ith a t le a s t w e a k p o le s e p a ra tio n , th e n
g e n e ra lly ||^ 4 .c/< fd /2 i || < < ||-^ .c Z s rf/2 2 1|• H e n c e b y a s s u m i n g u i = 0 , th e o b s e rv e r e rro r d y n a m ic s a re
e n s u re d to c o n v e rg e if
B n l — B k Dg/22B2 + Bg/ 2 R 2 , B x d— A dsd/ 2 1 > u x d= xg/mod.
a n d A ci s d / 2 2 + A d Sd / 2 i h a s H u r w i t z - s t a b l e e i g e n v a l u e s . E x a c t o b s e r v e r / c o n t r o l l e r p o l e s e p a r a t i o n a p
p lie s .
8 .6 .4 D e riv a tio n o f a s lid in g m o d e h y p e r p la n e fro m a s ta b le p la n t re p re s e n ta tio n
H a v in g e s ta b lis h e d a s ta b le lin e a r c lo s e d lo o p s y s te m w ith p o le s e p a ra tio n o f o b s e r v e r a n d s ta te -
f e e d b a c k c o n tr o l la w , a s li d i n g - m o d e s ta te - f e e d b a c k c o n tr o l c a n b e c o n s tr u c te d f o r th e s ta b le s y s te m
p a ir { A c i s d / n , B d s d / 12) h i ( 8 . 1 0 ) u s i n g a n a p p r o p r ia te n o n - lin e a r a u x ilia r y in p u t un l b a s e d o n th e
s ta te s o f th e lin e a r o b s e r v e r . T h u s a s s u m in g B d s d /1 2 is h i l l c o lu m n r a n k , th e r e e x is ts a n o n - s in g u la r
lin e a r tr a n s f o r m a tio n ( E d w a r d s & S p u r g e o n 1 9 9 8 ) s o th a t, d is re g a r d in g th e in te ra c tio n v ia th e o b s e rv e r
e r r o r a n d t h e e x o g e n o u s i n p u t , ( A d s d / i h B d s d / 12) c a n h e r e p r e s e n t e d a s :
x A x + B u n l , x G Rn , A E Rn x n , B G Knxm
0
jrnxm
B , s 2 e r ,Un l € > (8 . 11)
B 2
w h e re B 2 is f u ll r a n k a n d A a H u r w itz - s ta b le m a tr ix w ith
A V a = Va A a , VA , k A € C n x n ,
a n d t h e d i a g o n a l m a t r i x A .4 c o n t a i n s t h e e i g e n v a l u e s o f A . N o t e t h a t B i s n o t n e c e s s a r i l y a l w a y s i n t h e
n o m in a l f o r m o f ( 8 .1 1 ) . P r o v id e d B is f u ll r a n k , a lin e a r tr a n s f o r m a tio n e x is ts g iv in g th e n o m in a l fo rm
above.
T h e L e m m a b e lo w s h o w s t h a t it is p o s s ib le to fin d , s u b je c t to a p a r tic u la r c o n s tra in t, a tr a n s f o rm a
tio n m a tr ix r e a liz in g th e c a n o n ic a l s y s te m f o r m f o r s lid in g m o d e c o n tro l. T h e L e m m a p u ts a n a p p ro a c h
o f B h a tti (1 9 9 7 ) in to a m a th e m a tic a l fra m e w o rk .
L e m m a 8 .1 S u p p o s e th e r e e x is ts a c h o ic e o f ( n - m ) e ig e n v a lu e s o f A . T h is c h o ic e c o n ta in s r , 0 <
r < n — m , r e a l e ig e n v a lu e s A i, A2 , A3 , . . . , \ r G R '
^ [ v R / i * " v R / r ] — [v R / i - - v R / r ] d i a g ( A i , . . . , A r )
and Q < n — rn — r < n — m , p a ir s o f c o m p le x c o n ju g a te e ig e n v a lu e s Ar + i = A r + 2 , •••,
G C \R
n —m } V c { n -m } d ia g (A r+ i, ^ r + 2 , A n —m ) 1
C h a p t e r 8. S l i d i n g - m o d e c o n t r o l o f a n o n - l in e a r , l a r g e s c a l e c h e m ic a l p r o c e s s 174
w ith
V q n -m } — [v C / r + i + l"v c / r + 2 v C / r + i ~ ■*v c / r + 2 " - ] j V c /A : ^ ? r + 1 < A; < n m .
7 7 zere w a t r a n s f o r m a t i o n m a t r i x
r I 0
p x m
TA = i & A /2 ^
’A / l &A / 2 _
a n d a m a tr ix E a wzY/z e i g e n v a l u e s A i , A r , A r + i , A n _ m szzc/z f/zzzr
^ -4 - 4 ^ 4 /1 2
(8. 12)
o n*.
i f a n d o n ly i f
ra n k ([ In - m 0 ] V jr n _ m } ) = n - m , (/izZZ r a n k ) ( 8 .1 3 )
w h e r e V { n _ m } d= •••v M / r v c / r + i ■■•v C / n - m ] * F u r t h e r m o r e ,
’ S i '
=
Fa / i Fa /2 0 I-m ] ’ V { T l— m } ~ S —
— 1
1
w ztfz G Mn x n zm zf G R ( n - m ) x ( n - m ) o r th o g o n a l a n d E i > 0 , E i G R ( n - m ) x ( n - m ) d ia g o n a l,
r e s u ltin g fr o m a n S V -d e c o m p o s itio n . •
N o te th a t if th e e ig e n v a lu e s o f A a r e a ll r e a l a n d d is tin c t th e n th e r e e x is ts a t le a s t o n e c h o ic e o f ( n - m )
e i g e n v a l u e s s o t h a t t h e r e i s a t r a n s f o r m a t i o n m a t r i x T 4 a n d a m a t r i x E .4 w i t h t h e e i g e n v a l u e s a s c h o s e n .
P ro o f T h e p r o o f is a n e x te n s io n o f B h a tti ( 1 9 9 7 , p p .1 5 8 - 1 5 9 ). A t firs t it h a s to b e s h o w n th a t th e tr a n s
f o r m a tio n m a tr ix e x is ts i f a n d o n ly i f c o n s tr a in t ( 8 .1 3 ) is s a tis f ie d , th e n th e s tr u c tu r e o f th e tr a n s f o rm e d
m a tr ix a n d th e r e s p e c tiv e e ig e n v a lu e s a r e in v e s tig a te d .
S uppose
r U u U 12
, U n G K ( n “ m ) x (n - m )
Ut =
U 21 U 22
th e n
vTi
F a / i — ^ i 2 > F a / 2 — U 221 ^ 1 — » \ J n —m 0 ] V { n —m } — ^ 1 1 ^ 1
vT12, ûfo
22
H ence, T a e x is ts o n ly i f o r U 22 is in v e r tib le a n d [In - m 0 ]V { n -m } h a s o n ly fu ll r a n k i f U u h a s.
T h u s , it is s u f f ic ie n t to s h o w th a t a n in v e r tib le Z 7 n is e q u iv a le n t to a n in v e r tib le t / 22.
N e c e s s i t y : S u p p o s e U 22 i s i n v e r t i b l e , t h e n S c h u r ’s f o r m u l a i m p l i e s
d e t(Z 7 v ) = d e t(Z 7 22) d e t ( U n — U 12U 2 2 U 21)

and Y — U n — U 1 2 U 2 2 U 21 i s i n v e r t i b l e s i n c e is u n ita ry . T h e re f o r e ,
-1
■
i-*
1
’ I7 n u 12 '
•
. U 2i U 22 . • •
w h a t im p lie s th a t Y ~ l — and U u h a v e f u ll r a n k . S u ff ic ie n c y is a p p r o a c h e d in th e s a m e m a n n e r.
T h e r e f o r e , th e e x i s te n c e o f T 4 is e q u iv a le n t to ( 8 .1 3 ) .
N o w th e s e c o n d p a r t o f th e c la im ( 8 .1 2 ) h a s to b e s h o w n . N o te th a t
[ -S U / 1 S a /2 ] V{n -m } = 0 => S 4/I S a /2 ] \y < C { n -m } V R /1 v R / 2 - v R / r ] = °-
A s s u m e w ith o u t lo s s o f g e n e r a lity
A i 0
Va = V {i nn -—m } ] , A a = , A i = d ia g (A i, A2 , A3 , An - m )
0 A 2
th e n
---------- 1
1----------
1------- 1
O
S
V {n -m }
6
0
T A VA = L____ 1
1____
i 3
O
h-*
to
I
1
F ro m (T a A T ^ 1) ( T a Va ) = (T a V a )A a and
A A / 12
t a a t z 1 =
■A-21
f o llo w s
I 0 j V { n -m } I 0 j ^ { n -m } A i
(8 .1 4 )
_ 0
<N
H
I 0 ] V { n -m }
—1
S in c e | I 0 ] V { n - m } is in v e r tib le it f o llo w s *42 i = 0 and h a s th e e ig e n v a lu e s A i a s c la im e d . ■
T h u s , i f a s u ita b le c h o ic e o f e ig e n v a lu e s e x is ts th e n th e s ta b iliz e d s y s te m ( 8 .1 1 ) c a n b e a lw a y s tr a n s
fo rm e d f o r a p p lic a tio n o f s lid in g m o d e c o n tro l sc h e m e s:
z i( t ) = E^zi(f) + A A / 1 2 <f>(t)
<t>{t) = ^ 4 0 W + (SAf2B2)\LNL(t),
w h ere E ^ and a r e H u r w i t z - s t a b l e m a t r i c e s , r e s u l t i n g t o g e t h e r w i t h A ^ / 12 f r o m t h e t r a n s f o r m a t i o n
( 8 .1 2 ) a n d a m a tr ix P q > 0, (P q e Rn x n ) , w h ic h s a tis f ie s th e L y a p u n o v m a tr ix e q u a lity
p a ir A + n ‘A T p n = - i .
T h e c h o ic e f o r th e n o n - lin e a r c o n tro l sig n a l
UN L — — / N L ||[ ZT ^ T ]|| + / 72/ n l ) i & N L > 0 , 7l/JVL»72/JVX > 0 (8 .1 5 )

011 + OJVL
in tr o d u c e s th e n a p s e u d o - s lid in g m o d e c o n tr o l la w in c o m b in a tio n w ith th e lin e a r o b s e rv e r. N o te , th a t
th e o b s e r v e r s t a te s x g j m o d h a v e t o b e u s e d f o r t h e n o n - lin e a r c o n tr o l s in c e x g is n o t a v a ila b le .
A q u e s tio n r e m a in s in th e c a s e o f th e a v a ila b ility o f s e v e ra l c h o ic e s f o r th e s lid in g m o d e p la n e ,
w h ic h c h o ic e is p r e f e r a b le . T h is is a c o m b in a to r ia l p r o b le m . W ith A G Mn x n , B G M n x m a n d a s s u m in g
n d i s t i n c t e i g e n v a l u e s o f A , t h e m a x i m u m n u m b e r o f p o s s i b l e c h o i c e s f o r t h e s l i d i n g p l a n e i s j n ^ m ) \m \ •
I n th e c a s e o f c o m p le x c o n ju g a te p o le s th e n u m b e r o f c h o ic e s r e d u c e s a c c o rd in g ly . N e v e r th e le s s , th e
n u m b e r o f c h o ic e s in v o lv e d f o r h ig h o r d e r p la n ts p r e v e n ts te s tin g o f e a c h p o s s ib le s lid in g m o d e p la n e
v ia s im u la tio n . A c r ite rio n in v o lv in g p e r fo r m a n c e o r ro b u s tn e s s , f o r a s s e s s in g th e s lid in g m o d e p la n e
p rio r to s im u la tio n , is p re fe ra b le . O n e a p p r o a c h to m a x im iz e ro b u s tn e s s u s e s ro b u s t e ig e n s tru c tu re
a s s ig n m e n t. N u m e r ic a l a n a ly s is to o ls d e riv e d b y W ilk in s o n (1967) m a y b e a p p lie d so th a t th e s lid in g
m o d e p o le s b e c o m e in s e n s itiv e to u n c e r ta in tie s o r p e r tu r b a tio n s o f th e s y s te m m a tr ix A \ th e c o n d itio n
n u m b e r o f th e m a tr ix o f r ig h t h a n d e ig e n v e c to rs / 0 j V {n -m } fro m (8.14) of is m in im iz e d
(E d w a rd s & S p u rg e o n 1998):
- l
£ I 0 V {n -m } || ^ [ I 0 j (8.16)
T h e s e a r c h f o r a s e le c tio n w ith lo w c o n d itio n n u m b e r m a y b e c o m p u ta tio n a lly e x p e n s iv e . H e r e a n e ffi
c ie n t s e a r c h a lg o r ith m f r o m C a o & R o s s ite r ( 1 9 9 8 ) is u s e d , b a s e d o n th e b r a n c h - a n d -b o u n d te c h n iq u e .
T h e s e a rc h a lg o r ith m is g e n e r ic a n d c a n b e u s e d f o r a n y c o m b in a to r ia l p ro b le m w h e re a b a s is s e t o f n
e le m e n ts is g iv e n , n — m e le m e n ts h a v e to b e c h o s e n w ith a m in im a l c o s t J ( n — m ) . E a c h s e le c tio n
o f k , (0 < k < n — m), e le m e n ts is a s s o c ia te d w ith a c o s t J ( k ) w h ic h m o n o to n ic a lly in c re a s e s w ith
k, J (k + 1) > J ( k ) , w h e n a d d in g a n e w e le m e n t to th e e x is tin g s e t o f k e le m e n ts . F o r th is re a s o n , th e
f o llo w in g c h a r a c te r is tic s o f k , (1 < k < n — m ) lin e a rly in d e p e n d e n t v e c to rs # * , 1 n ,
h a s e x a c tly k n o n - z e r o s in g u la r v a lu e s w h e r e th e la r g e s t s in g u la r v a lu e is o y k > 0 a n d th e s m a lle s t
is crk/k > 0- S u p p o se a (k + 1) —th v e c to r $k+i is a d d e d so th a t th e s e t o f k + 1 v e c to rs is lin e a rly
in d e p e n d e n t, th e n th e re a re n o w k + 1 n o n - z e r o s in g u la r v a lu e s w h e r e th e la r g e s t is (7 \/( k + \) > 0 and
th e s m a lle s t is a ^ k + i) /( k + i) > 0 - I t fo llo w s :
° l/(J fe + l) > <*\/k, <7 ( k + l ) / ( k + l ) < ° k / k
and
0i/k °i/(fc+i)
& k /k a ( k + l)/{ k + l)
p or £ _ tn _ m ) th e re la tio n i s tth<
h e c o n d itio n n u m b e r o f th e m a tr ix o f v e c to rs
> ' & k /k
T h u s, th e m o n o to n ic ity o f J ( k ) = in k c a n b e e a s ily u s e d w ith th e s e t o f n a v a ila b le v e c to rs

AC/ K
[ I 0 V a -> w h e r e Y a is th e m a tr ix o f r ig h t e ig e n v e c to r s o f A . N e v e r th e le s s , th e b ra n c h - a n d -b o u n d
m e th o d n e e d s to b e m a d e s u ita b le f o r c o m p le x v a lu e d e ig e n v a lu e s a n d e ig e n v e c to rs : A se le c tio n o f
v e c to r s c o n ta in in g a c o m p le x v a lu e d v e c to r a lw a y s h a s to in c lu d e th e c o m p le x c o n ju g a te e ig e n v e c to r to
e n s u re th a t th e m a tr ix is r e a l v a lu e d . F u r th e r , it m a y n o t b e p r e f e r a b le to u s e th e m o s t o p tim a l c h o ic e
o f p o le s w ith m in im a l c o n d itio n n u m b e r ( 8 .1 6 ) . T h e m in im iz a tio n o f th e c o n d itio n n u m b e r p ro v id e s a
ro b u s tn e s s m e a s u r e f o r th e s y s te m in s lid in g m o tio n b u t d o e s n o t n e c e s s a rily im p ly g o o d p e rfo rm a n c e .
I t is t h e r e f o r e b e t t e r t o e v a lu a te a l s o o t h e r p o l e c o m b i n a t i o n s w ith c o n d itio n n u m b e r ( 8 .1 6 ) c lo s e to th e
o p tim u m . T h e b r a n c h - a n d - b o u n d a lg o r ith m a llo w s th is a n a ly s is a n d it h a s b e e n u s e d w ith in th e d e s ig n
p ro c e s s w h ic h is d e s c rib e d in th e n e x t s e c tio n .
8.6.5 Controller design
T h e l i n e a r i z e d m o d e l c o n s i d e r i n g a l l s i x a c t u a t o r s o f T a b l e 8 . 4 a n d t h e d i s t u r b a n c e s o f T a b l e 8 .3 h a s
b e e n u s e d f o r m o d e l r e d u c tio n a n d c o n tr o lle r d e s ig n . W ith in th is d e s ig n a p p ro a c h , a lin e a riz a tio n a t a
s e t - p o i n t o f a p r o d u c t i o n d e m a n d o f 2 6 5 lb - ™ - h a s b e e n f o u n d s u i t a b l e f o r d e s i g n .
A l i n e a r H o o - c o n t r o l l e r h a s to b e d e t e r m i n e d f ir s t a s d e s c r i b e d in S e c tio n 8 .6 .1 . T h e m ix e d s e n s itiv
ity c o n tr o lle r w e ig h ts W u r , W y a n d W p a r e c h o s e n to b e firs t o r d e r w e ig h ts , w h ile f o r th e W uu w e ig h t a
th ird o r d e r m o d e l w a s c h o s e n . T h e w e ig h t W u u is s u p p o s e d to m o d e l a d d itiv e u n - s tru c tu re d u n c e rta in ty
o f th e p la n t:
- / \ \ 1 0 0 0 0 0 s -f" 1
W u r(s) = d i a g ( 1 . 9 t i ; u r , 2 . 3 w u r , w u r , 0 . 1 i s u r , w u r , w u r \ s ) ) , w UT — s + 1 0 0 0 0 0
W u u (s) = d i a g ( 0 . 0 0 7 7 w u u , 0 . 0 0 9 u > u u , 0 . 0 0 9 u ; u u , O .O l t U u u , 0 . 0 1 t u u u , O . O l u ; ^ ) ,
4 5 0 .9 s 3 + 4 .8 1 3 • 1 0 6 s 2 + 3 .0 3 5 • 1 0 9 s + 5 .7 1 • 1 0 9
s 3 + 2 .2 2 8 • 1 0 4 s 2 + 1 .7 6 8 • 1 0 6 s + 2 .1 6 1 • 1 0 7
s + 2 1 .4 3 0 .7 1 4 3 s + 2 .0 6 9 l.llls + 2 0 .9 0 9 1 s + 4 .4 4 4 s + 1 .4 4 4
W y (s) = d ia g 0 .1
s
W p (s) = d ia g ( o - S — o p 0 - 5 ^ ^ ) • ( 8 .1 7 )
T h is im p lie s a c o n tr o l s y s te m o r d e r o f 4 8 s ta te s a n d a n a d d itio n a l fiv e s ta te s f o r th e s e n s itiv ity w e ig h t W y
w ith in te g r a to r w h ic h is in c lu d e d in to th e c lo s e d lo o p . S a f o n o v ’s p o l e s h i f t i n g m e t h o d o l o g y ( C h i a n g
& S afo n o v 1 9 9 2 ) is u s e d f o r th e H q o - d e s ig n w ith p = 0 .0 0 0 1 f o r ( 8 .6 - 8 .7 ) . T h e n u m e ric a l H qq -
o p tim iz a tio n f o r ( 8 .4 ) w ith th e c h o s e n w e ig h ts g iv e a c lo s e d lo o p n o r m o f
l l ^ y # i t e V 'l 'l b — 2 -3
a n d th e r e s p e c tiv e lin e a r f re q u e n c y r e s p o n s e s o f th e H o o -c o n tro l f o r th e p la n t lin e a riz a tio n fro m F ig u re
8 .1 8 .
10 '* 10"4
icf2
frequency [rad/hr] frequency [rad/hr] frequency [rad/hr]
(a) Soo(s) from (8 .5 ) (b) K 00(s)Wy(s)S00(s) (c) (7 - S ^s))
F i g u r e 8 .1 8 : F r e q u e n c y r e s p o n s e s o f H o o - c o n tr o lle r f o r lin e a r iz e d p la n t m o d e l
T h e c l o s e d l o o p p e r f o r m a n c e a n d r o b u s t n e s s o f th e l i n e a r c o n tr o l f o r th e n o n - lin e a r H D A - p la n t is
im p ro v e d b y th e in tr o d u c tio n o f s lid in g m o tio n a p p ly in g th e lin e a r o b s e rv e r d e riv e d f r o m th e d e s ig n e d
H q o - c o n tr o l. F o r th is r e a s o n , th e l i n e a r c o n t r o l is m o d if ie d to in tr o d u c e p o le s e p a r a tio n ( S e c tio n 8 .6 .3 ) .
T h is is f o u n d t o b e f e a s i b l e s i n c e A d s d / 2 i f r o m ( 8 .1 0 ) is s m a ll c o m p a r e d to A d s d /22
P d « f / 2 ill = 0 .1 5 6 5 2 6 « \ \ A d s i m \\ = 1 • 1 0 5 , \ \ A d s i l u || = 2 .3 5 • 1 0 4
a n d th e m a tr ix { A d s d / 22 + A d s d / 2 i ) is H u r w itz s ta b le . T h e s lid in g m o d e p la n e is c h o s e n s o th a t th e
c o n d itio n n u m b e r f ro m ( 8 .1 6 ) is s m a ll. I n p a r tic u la r, it h a s b e e n f o u n d th a t th e o p tim a l c h o ic e w ith
s m a lle s t c o n d itio n n u m b e r v a lu e 1 7 1 .1 9 d o e s n o t g iv e g o o d p e r f o r m a n c e re s u lts . A p o le c o m b in a tio n
r e s u ltin g in to a c o n d itio n n u m b e r v a lu e o f 2 2 2 .1 h a s b e e n th e r e f o r e p r e f e r r e d . T h e c o n d itio n n u m b e r
o f t h e e i g e n v e c t o r m a t r ix f o r o t h e r p o l e c h o i c e s c a n r e a c h v a lu e s o f a t le a s t 1 .7 3 9 • 1 0 17 . W ith in th is
c o n tr o l s c h e m e , t h e g a in s a n d th e s m o o th in g c o m p o n e n t o f th e p s e u d o - s lid in g m o d e c o n tr o l f r o m ( 8 .1 5 )
h a v e b e e n c h o s e n w ith :
7 l/NL = 7 2 / N L — 0 ? &NL = 1 -1 0 5.
I n th e f o llo w in g s e c tio n , th e r e s u lts o f th e c o n tr o lle r d e s ig n a re p re s e n te d . T h e p e rfo rm a n c e a n d
r o b u s tn e s s im p r o v e m e n t o f th e c o n tr o l a f te r th e in tr o d u c tio n o f p s e u d o s lid in g - m o tio n a r e sh o w n .
8 .6 .6 T ra c k in g p e rfo rm a n c e
A s in th e d e s ig n f o r th e n o n - lin e a r o b s e r v e r b a s e d c o n tr o l o f S e c tio n 8 .5 , th e li n e a r H qo- c o n tro lle r
w a s d e s ig n e d s o th a t th e s e ttlin g tim e s o f th e lin e a r r e s p o n s e s w e re le s s th a n 5 [h r]. T h e n o n -lin e a r
s im u la tio n s s h o w f a s t r is e tim e s f o r th e p r o d u c tio n r a te ( F ig u r e 8 .1 9 ), b u t lo n g s e ttlin g tim e s . I n te r a c
tio n w ith th e r e m a in in g 4 o u tp u t m e a s u re m e n ts f o r th e - c o n t r o ll e r is r e la tiv e ly s lo w ( F i g u r e 8 .2 0 ) .
N o te th a t in c r e a s in g th e b a n d w id th o f th e s e n s itiv ity fu n c tio n S qo ( 8 .5 ) o f th e lin e a r c lo s e d lo o p o f
th e H o o - c o n t r o l l e r b y a d ju s tin g th e w e ig h t W y ( 8 .4 ) d o e s n o t r e s u lt in a f a s te r r e s p o n s e w ith im p ro v e d
in te ra c tio n o f th e n o n - lin e a r s im u la te d c lo s e d lo o p s y s te m . T h is h a s b e e n p a r tic u la rly o b s e rv e d f o r
th e p u r ity m e a s u r e m e n t r e s p o n s e . S u b s e q u e n tly , a s lid in g m o d e c o n tr o lle r is d e s ig n e d b a s e d o n th e

280 with sliding

without sliding
demand
,275
265
255
0 10 20 30 40 50
T im e [hr]
F ig u r e 8 .1 9 : P r o d u c tio n r a t e tr a c k in g r e s p o n s e o f a n d lin e a r o b s e r v e r b a s e d s lid in g m o d e c o n tro l
with sliding
100.3 without sliding 99.974
demand
100.2 99.972
£ 99.97
; 100.1 •
a. 99.968
2 100
99.966
99.9 with sliding
without sliding
99.964 demand
40 40
/»
M : Ij
_460.4 : '• i :
: n : ‘t
5.01 M
11
i,
1.
§460.2 : I' 11 : ,t i J1 1,
II *1 1 ,
: f 1 ! *1 . t \
| 460 ................:" V" i..........•«................. :-'r - .......
: I . : 1I : 1 x
a. : I 1 : J1 : 1
^459.8
> ^ a ^>7V « A \
y; 1 v -
3459.6
o 1, ; 1
1,
11 1—' ' .... - - ■ 1
with sliding s 459.4 1J 'J ------ with sliding
4.98 without slidinj
demand
11 ----- without sliding
459.2
0 10 20 30 40 50 0 10 20 30 40 50
T im e [hr] Tim e [hr]
F i g u r e 8 .2 0 : T r a c k i n g e r r o r s o f t h e o u t p u t m e a s u r e m e n t d u e t o p r o d u c t i o n d e m a n d s ( s e e F i g u r e 8 .1 9 )
control meth. prod, track, err. purity hydr.-to-arom.-ratio flash outl. vap. pr. flash ini. temp.
Hoo 0.72194 0.0020467 0.0025931 0.15528 0.053876
Sliding Mode 0.80306 0.0013715 0.00087376 0.020893 0.015864
T a b le 8 .8 : M e a n a b s o lu te e r r o r e v a lu a tin g t h e tr a c k in g e r r o r f o r s e v e ra l d e m a n d c h a n g e s b e tw e e n 2 5 5
l- b ™ ° 1 a n d 2 8 0 i n t h e i n t e r v a l [0 h r , 5 4 . 5 h r ]
H oo - c o n t r o l l e r . T h is r e d u c e s th e r e s p e c tiv e in te r a c tio n a n d g iv e s f a s te r s e ttlin g tim e s f o r th e f o u r o u t
p u t m e a s u r e m e n t s f r o m F i g u r e 8 .2 0 , w h i l e f o r th e p r o d u c tio n r a te th e tr a c k in g r e s p o n s e c h a r a c te r is tic s
a re v e ry s im ila r to th e lin e a r c o n tro l. T h is is a ls o c o n f ir m e d w ith th e m e a n a b s o lu te e r r o r f r o m ( 8 .3 )
( s e e T a b le 8 .8 ). T h e n o n - l in e a r c o n tr o lle r a ls o o p e r a te s in a w id e r e n v e lo p e th a n th e H q o -c o n tro lle r.
T h e s l i d i n g m o d e c o n t r o l l e r r e m a i n s s t a b l e f o r p r o d u c t i o n r a t e d e m a n d s b e l o w 2 4 0 [ lb 'fa.°l ] > w h i l e t h e
if o o - c o n t r o l l e r b e c o m e s o s c i l l a t o r y f o r a d e m a n d o f 2 4 0 [ lb ' ^ ° l ] a n d u n s t a b l e b e l o w t h i s v a l u e ( F i g u r e
8 . 21 ).
set point:
2 4 0 lb.m ol/hr
235
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
tim e [hr]
F ig u r e 8 .2 1 : N o n - l i n e a r r e s p o n s e s o f t h e tw o if o o - b a s e d c o n tr o lle r s to a p r o d u c tio n r a te r a m p d e m a n d
c h a n g e d u r in g 0 .5 [h r] a n d 1 [h r] f r o m 2 6 5 to 2 4 0 [ lb ' ™ 1] ( --------= l i n e a r , - = s lid in g m o d e c o n tr o lle r)
8.6.7 Disturbance rejection and performance for purity measurement delays
B o th c o n tr o lle r s , th e s lid in g m o d e c o n tr o lle r a n d i f o o -c o n tro lle r a r e r o b u s t to p r o d u c t p u r ity m e a s u re
m e n t d e l a y s o f m o r e t h a n 2 0 m i n ( F i g u r e 8 .2 2 ) . T h e s lid in g m o d e c o n tr o l g e n e r a lly a ls o s h o w s b e tte r
280 99.976 5.004
99.974 5.002
99.972
§270
5 99.97
99.968
260
99.966 4.996
255 99.964 4.994

0 10 20 30 40 50 0 10 20 30
Time [hr]
40 50
Time [hr] Time [hr]
F ig u re 8 .2 2 : O u tp u t tra c k in g o f th e ifo o -b a s e d s lid in g - m o d e c o n tr o lle r d u e to p ro d u c tio n dem and
c h a n g e e n c o u n te r in g p u r ity m e a s u re m e n t d e la y
c lo s e d lo o p r e s p o n s e s to s m a ll c o o lin g - e ff lu e n t te m p e ra tu re d is tu rb a n c e s th a n th e i f ^ - c o n t r o l (F ig u re
8 .2 3 ) , w h ile f o r p u r g e - d o w n s tr e a m p r e s s u r e d is tu r b a n c e s b o th c o n tr o lle rs h a v e s im ila r p e rfo rm a n c e .
N o t e in p a r t i c u l a r t h e c o o lin g - e f f lu e n t- te m p e r a tu r e d is tu r b a n c e is s m a ll w h ile s e ttlin g tim e s a f te r a n y
o f th e t w o d i s tu r b a n c e s a r e s lo w . T h is c h a r a c te r is tic o f th e i f ^ - b a s e d c o n tr o l is s e e n to b e d is a d v a n -
C h a p t e r 8. S li d in g - m o d e c o n t r o l o f a n o n - l i n e a r , l a r g e s c a l e c h e m ic a l p r o c e s s 181
265.4
60.5
99.972-
99.971
265
_ 99.97
£99.969
99.968
58.5 264.6 99.967
99.966
264.4
0 5 10 15 20 25
Time [hr] time [hr] Time [hr]
F ig u r e 8 .2 3 : R e a c tio n o f c o n tr o l to a c o o lin g - e f f lu e n t- te m p e r a tu r e d is tu r b a n c e
400 99.99
268
'390
99.985
i267
99.!
1 370 266 with sliding
without sliding
99.975
265
350 99.97
0 5 10 15
tim e [hr]
20 25 0 5 10 15
Time [hr]
20 25 0 5 10
Time [hr]
15 20 25
F ig u r e 8 .2 4 : R e a c tio n o f c o n tr o l to a P u r g e - d o w n - s tr e a m p r e s s u r e d is tu r b a n c e
ta g e o u s in c o m p a r is o n to th e n o n - lin e a r o b s e r v e r b a s e d c o n tr o l, a s w ill b e d is c u s s e d w ith in th e n e x t
s e c tio n .
8.7 The two sliding-mode based control methodologies in comparison
T h e t w o s l i d i n g - m o d e b a s e d c o n t r o l m e t h o d o l o g i e s a s d e s i g n e d i n S e c t i o n s 8 .5 a n d 8 .6 h a v e b o t h s h o w n
g o o d tr a c k in g b e h a v io u r a n d r o b u s tn e s s to p u r ity m e a s u r e m e n t d e la y s . H o w e v e r, p e rfo rm a n c e w ith
r e s p e c t to d is tu r b a n c e s is s ig n if ic a n tly d if fe r e n t. T h is , s e c tio n th e r e f o r e c o m p a r e s th e tw o c o n tr o lle rs
w ith r e s p e c t to th e la tte r th r e e c a te g o r ie s .
8.7.1 Tracking performance
B o th c o n tr o lle r s s h o w f a s t r is e tim e s . H o w e v e r, th e s e ttlin g tim e s o f th e H o o -b a s e d c o n tro l a re la rg e r so
th a t th e tr a c k in g b e h a v io u r o f th e n o n - lin e a r o b s e r v e r b a s e d c o n tr o l is b e tte r f o r th e tw o im p o rta n t o u tp u t
m e a s u r e m e n t s , t h e p r o d u c t i o n r a t e a n d p u r i t y t r a c k i n g e r r o r s f o r r a t e d e m a n d s b e t w e e n 2 5 5 l- ^ j ~ and
280 ( F ig u r e s 8 .1 9 - 8 .2 0 a n d 8 .8 - 8 .9 ) , w h ile th e tr a c k in g e r ro r s o f th e H q o - b a s e d s lid in g m o d e
c o n tr o l f o r th e h y d r o g e n - to - a r o m a tic s r a tio , th e p u r g e in le t p r e s s u re a n d th e fla s h in le t te m p e ra tu re a re
m o re a d v a n ta g e o u s . T h is is a ls o c o n f ir m e d w h e n o b s e r v in g t h e m e a n a b s o lu te e r r o r ( 8 .3 ) in T a b le
8 .9 . B o th c o n tr o lle r m e th o d o lo g ie s s h o w in p a r tic u la r tr a c k in g p r o b le m s f o r p r o d u c tio n ra te d e m a n d s
w ith in th e a r e a o f 2 6 5 lb ' ™ 1 a n d 2 8 0 lb ' ^ ° l . T h i s i s d u e t o t h e h i g h n o n - l i n e a r i t y o f t h e p l a n t , w h i c h i s
p a r tic u la rly h ig h w ith in th is r e g io n o f o p e ra tio n . T h is c a n b e a ls o v e rifie d b y th e fre q u e n c y re s p o n s e s
o f t h e l i n e a r iz a tio n s o f th e c h e m ic a l p l a n t ( F ig u r e 8 .2 5 ) . A n o th e r e f f e c t o f th e n o n - lin e a r itie s is th e s iz e
o f th e o p e r a tio n e n v e lo p e o f b o th c o n tr o lle r s . T h e H q o - b a s e d s lid in g m o d e c o n tr o l is c a p a b le to tr a c k

control meth. prod, track, err. purity hydr.-to-ar.-r. flash outl. v. pr. flash ini. temp.
-based sl.m.c. 0.68745 9.5957 10"4 0.00067938 0.01628 0.015864
non-lin. obs. based 0.270347 7.2143 • 10“ 5 0.0012527 0.0898 0.13408
T a b l e 8 . 9 : M e a n a b s o l u t e e r r o r e v a l u a t i n g t h e t r a c k i n g e r r o r f o r d e m a n d c h a n g e s b e t w e e n 2 5 5 lb 'J £ °l
and 280 i n t h e i n t e r v a l [0 h r , 5 4 . 5 h r ] o f b o t h c o n t r o l m e t h o d o l o g i e s ( n o n - l i n e a r o b s e r v e r b a s e d
c o n tr o l f o r g a in 7 c/ i p c = 4 .3 7 5 , 'f 0/ i P o — 3 .7 5 )
Prod.Set-pnt. Ilb. mol/hr]

frequency [rad/hr]
F ig u r e 8 .2 5 : M a x im u m s in g u la r v a lu e o f th e lin e a riz e d s y s te m fre q u e n c y re s p o n s e a s a fu n c tio n o f
d i f f e r e n t s e t - p o i n t s w i t h i n t h e o p e r a t i o n e n v e l o p e o f t h e t r a c k in g c o n tr o l, i.e . f o r d if f e r e n t p r o d u c tio n
ra te d e m a n d s
p r o d u c tio n r a te d e m a n d s a s lo w as 240 w h ile th e n o n - lin e a r o b s e rv e r b a s e d c o n tro l d o e s n o t
tra c k ra te d e m a n d s lo w e r th a n 2 4 5 I t h a s b e e n o b s e r v e d w h e n in v e s tig a tin g th e lin e a r iz a tio n s o f
F i g u r e 8 .2 5 w i t h r e s p e c t to m a t c h e d a n d u n m a tc h e d u n c e r ta in ty , th a t th e u n c e r ta in tie s a r e f o u n d to b e
m a in ly u n m a tc h e d , o u ts id e th e a c tu a to r ra n g e sp a c e . T h is c a n b e p a r tic u la rly d e tr im e n ta l to th e n o n
lin e a r o b s e r v e r b a s e d c o n tr o l. F u r th e r , it h a s b e e n f o u n d th a t b o th c o n tr o lle rs d o n o t o p e r a te a t tr a c k in g
d e m a n d s a b o v e 2 8 0 lb ™ ~ d u e t o p h y s i c a l r e a s o n s .
8.7.2 Disturbance rejection and purity measurement delays
B o t h c o n tr o l s y s t e m s a r e r o b u s t to p r o d u c t p u r ity m e a s u r e m e n t d e la y s . H o w e v e r , th e if© o -b a s e d s lid in g
m o d e c o n tr o l r e m a in s s ta b le w ith in th e o p e ra tio n e n v e lo p e f o r m e a s u re m e n t d e la y s a b o v e 2 0 m i n ,
w h ile th e n o n - lin e a r o b s e rv e r b a s e d c o n tr o l c a n a c c e p t d e la y s o f 10 m i n .
W ith r e s p e c t to d is tu r b a n c e r e je c tio n , th e tw o c o n tr o l te c h n iq u e s h a v e v e ry d iffe re n t c h a ra c te ris tic s .
T h e d is tu r b a n c e r e je c tio n c a p a b ilitie s o f th e n o n - lin e a r o b s e rv e r b a s e d c o n tro l a re d e c is iv e ly b e tte r ( F ig
u r e 8 .1 2 - 8 .1 3 ) t h a n t h o s e o f t h e H o o - b a s e d c o n tr o l ( F ig u r e 8 .2 3 - 8 .2 4 ). F o r th is r e a s o n , it m u s t b e n o te d
th a t th e n o n - lin e a r c o m p o n e n ts o f th e n o n - lin e a r o b s e rv e r b a s e d c o n tro l h a v e b e e n p a rtic u la rly d e s ig n e d

C h a p t e r 8 . S l i d i n g - m o d e c o n t r o l o f a n o n - l i n e a r , l a r g e s c a l e c h e m ic a l p r o c e s s 18 3
to c o u n te r a c t th e tw o d is tu r b a n c e s . T h e n o n - lin e a r e r r o r in je c tio n te r m ( 6 .1 5 ) f r o m th e n o n - lin e a r o b
s e rv e r h a s b e e n c h o s e n s o th a t it o p e r a te s w ith in th e r a n g e s p a c e o f th e tw o c o n s id e re d d is tu rb a n c e s
a n d t h e r e f o r e a c h i e v e s d i s t u r b a n c e r e j e c t i o n . I n c o n t r a s t , t h i s c h o i c e i s n o t p o s s i b l e f o r t h e .H q o - b a s e d
c o n tro l. F o r th e lin e a r m ix e d s e n s itiv ity H qo- c o n tro l, e x o g e n o u s d is tu rb a n c e s h a v e b e e n c o n s id e re d .
H o w e v e r, a m ix e d s e n s itiv ity d e s ig n is a d e s ig n o f c o m p r o m is e b e tw e e n ro b u s tn e s s , d is tu rb a n c e re je c
tio n a n d tr a c k in g p e r f o r m a n c e ( F ig u r e 8 .1 6 ) . G e n e r a lly , a h i g h e r d e m a n d o n tr a c k in g p e r f o r m a n c e is
d is a d v a n ta g e o u s to r o b u s t p e r f o r m a n c e a n d d is tu r b a n c e r e je c tio n a n d v ic e v e rs a ; th e m ix e d s e n s itiv ity
w e ig h ts W y , W p a n d W u u f ro m ( 8 .4 ) h a v e b e e n c h o s e n a c c o r d in g ly . T h e s e is s u e s a ls o a p p e a r f o r th e
if o o - b a s e d s lid in g m o d e c o n tr o l, s in c e th e c o m b in a tio n o f lin e a r o b s e rv e r a n d n o n -lin e a r c o n tro l d o n o t
s tric tly e n s u r e r o b u s tn e s s to m a tc h e d d is tu r b a n c e s . O n th e c o n tra ry , th e d e s ig n c o m p ro m is e d o e s n o t
n e e d to b e c o n s id e re d f o r s lid in g m o d e c o n tro l s y s te m s a n d m a tc h e d u n c e rta in ty o r d is tu rb a n c e s , w h ic h
is p r o v e d h e r e n o t o n ly t h e o r e t i c a l l y b u t a ls o p r a c tic a lly .
8.8 Summary
T w o o b se rv e r b a se d s lid in g - m o d e c o n tr o l s c h e m e s h a v e b e e n p r e s e n te d in a p p lic a tio n to th e h ig h ly
n o n -lin e a r, b e n z e n e p r o d u c in g H D A - p la n t. T h e p la n t h a s a p a r tic u la r h ig h ly n o n - lin e a r s te a d y s ta te
c h a ra c te ris tic . B o th c o n tr o l te c h n iq u e s u s e a lin e a r m o d e l f o r d e s ig n . T h e re fo re , th e lin e a r 2 7 0 -s ta te
m o d e l r e tr ie v e d v ia a lin e a r iz a tio n to o l o f th e s im u la tio n s o f tw a r e h a d to b e o rd e r-re d u c e d . T h e b a la n c e d
tr u n c a tio n m e th o d o lo g y r e d u c in g th e p la n t m o d e l to 17 s ta te s h a s b e e n f o u n d to in tro d u c e m in o r m o d e l
e rro rs c o m p a re d to th e lin e a r 2 7 0 -s ta te m o d e l. B o th c o n tro l te c h n iq u e s p ro v id e d g o o d re s u lts f o r a
tr a c k in g r e q u ir e m e n t a n d a r e r o b u s t to d e la y s w ith in th e b e n z e n e p u r ity m e a s u re m e n t. H o w e v e r, o n ly
th e n o n - lin e a r o b s e r v e r b a s e d tr a c k in g c o n tr o l c a n r e je c t e x te r n a l d is tu r b a n c e s e a s ily . T h is p r a c tic a l
re s u lt a ls o v a lid a te s th e o ry , w h ic h h a s b e e n d e riv e d w ith in C h a p te r 6 . A s a m p le d -d a ta a n a ly s is h a s
b e e n c a r r ie d o u t f o r th is n o n - lin e a r c o n tr o l m e th o d .
T h e f a s t- s a m p lin g a n a ly s is w ith in th is c h a p te r a n d a ls o th e te c h n iq u e s p r e s e n te d w ith in th e C h a p te rs
5 a n d 7 w e r e h o w e v e r a s s u m in g th a t s a m p le d - d a ta m e a s u r e m e n ts a n d c o n tr o l la w c o m p u ta tio n s c a n b e
o b ta in e d in in f in ite ly s m a ll tim e in te r v a ls w ith o u t a n y d e la y . I n th e n e x t c h a p te r a g e n e r ic n o n - lin e a r
c o n tr o l is in v e s tig a te d u n d e r th e p r a c tic a l a s s u m p tio n o f s m a ll c o m p u ta tio n a l d e la y s .

Chapter 9
Discretization of non-linear controls with small computational delays
9.1 Introduction
T h is th e s is h a s tr e a te d to d a t e s a m p le d - d a ta im p le m e n ta tio n s o f c o n tin u o u s - tim e c o n tr o lle rs w ith th e
a s s u m p tio n th a t m e a s u r e m e n ts a n d c o m p u ta tio n s o f c o n tr o lle r v a lu e s a re c a r r ie d o u t a t th e s a m e tim e -
in s ta n t w h ic h p e r m its th e s e c o n tro l v a lu e s to b e u s e d im m e d ia te ly . T h is is p r a c tic a lly p r o b le m a tic in
p a r tic u la r f o r s ta tic c o n tin u o u s - tim e c o n tr o l s y s te m s , w h e r e th e s a m p le d -d a ta c o n tro l a lg o r ith m f o llo w s
th e p r o c e d u r e o f o u tp u t m e a s u r e m e n t a t tim e -in s ta n t U a n d th e n im m e d ia te c o n tro l v a lu e c o m p u ta tio n
s o t h a t c o n t r o l l e r a c t u a t i o n i s p o s s i b l e d u r i n g t h e i n t e r v a l (£ ;, f ; + i ] . H o w e v e r , a n y c o m p u t a t i o n r e q u i r e s
f in ite tim e to b e c o m p le te d . T h u s in p r a c tic e , th e c o n tr o l is in itia te d a f te r a s h o rt d e la y A t; > 0 a n d is
a c tu a lly a p p lie d d u r in g th e in te rv a l (t; -I- A t;, £ ;+ i + A t;+ i] u n til a n e w m e a s u re m e n t is ta k e n a n d th e
n e w c o n tro l v a lu e c a lc u la te d .
T h is c h a p te r , th e r e f o r e , p r o p o s e s a th e o r e tic a l a p p r o a c h w h ic h a llo w s th e a n a ly s is o f s a m p le d -d a ta
im p le m e n ta tio n s o f c o n tin u o u s - tim e c o n tr o l la w s in c lu d in g th e is s u e o f s m a ll c o m p u ta tio n a l d e la y s
A t; < t . T h e n o n - lin e a r a ffin e s y s te m o f ( 2 .1 ) w ith th e A s s u m p tio n s 2 .1 a - 2 .3 a is p a r tic u la rly c o n
s id e re d , s o th a t r o b u s t s ta b ility in c lu d in g th e is s u e o f p a ra m e tric u n c e rta in ty a n d c o n s ta n t b o u n d e d
d is tu rb a n c e s c a n b e ta k e n in to a c c o u n t.
R o b u s t s ta b ility p r o b le m s h a v e b e e n a ls o o f in te r e s t to I tk is (1 9 7 6 ) fo r s lid in g -m o d e s c h e m e s a n d
s i n g l e i n p u t s y s t e m s . H o w e v e r , I t k i s ( 1 9 7 6 ) a s s u m e d t h e c o n t r o l i n t h e i n t e r v a l [£ ;, U -1- At;] to b e z e ro .
T h is c a n s im p lif y th e c lo s e d - lo o p a n a ly s is b u t d o e s n o t s e e m p ra c tic a l. T h e th e o re tic a l fra m e w o rk p r e
s e n te d w ith in th is c h a p te r is th e r e fo r e tr e a tin g th e m o r e p ra g m a tic a p p ro a c h . I t h a s b e e n fo u n d th a t H s u
& S a s try (1 9 8 7 ) a ls o e x a m in e d th e p ro b le m o f d e la y s w ith in c o n tr o l im p le m e n ta tio n s f o r n o n - lin e a r
a ffin e s y s te m s . H o w e v e r in th e ir a p p r o a c h , th e d r if t o f th e n o n - lin e a r a ffin e s y s te m h a s to b e L ip s c h itz -
c o n tin u o u s to d e r iv e a s ta b ility r e s u lt o f th e s a m p le d -d a ta im p le m e n ta tio n . T h is s tr ic te r r e q u ire m e n t
d o e s n o t a llo w r o b u s tn e s s o f th e c lo s e d lo o p to b e c o n s id e re d . T h e r e f o r e , a n a p p r o a c h is p r e s e n te d
f r o m w h i c h r o b u s t s ta b ility o f th e s a m p le d - d a ta im p le m e n ta tio n w ith c o m p u ta tio n a l d e la y f o llo w s . T h e
m e th o d o lo g y o f H s u & S a s tr y ( 1 9 8 7 ) is a ls o in tr o d u c e d to c a r r y o u t a c o m p a r a tiv e s tu d y f o r a n u m e r ic a l
C h a p te r 9. D is c r e tiz a tio n o f n o n - lin e a r c o n t r o l s w ith s m a ll c o m p u ta tio n a l d e la y s 185
e x a m p le in v o lv in g th e s lid in g - m o d e - b a s e d s ta te -f e e d b a c k c o n tro l o f C h a p te r 3 . B o th te c h n iq u e s c a lc u
la te a n u p p e r e s tim a te o f th e n o r m o f th e s a m p lin g r e s id u a l ||x(£) - x(t*) ||, t € [£ ,• + A t * , t i + i + A r i + i ] ,
w h ic h is n o w d e la y d e p e n d e n t. T h e r o b u s t a n a ly s is m e th o d , p r e s e n te d h e re , r e s e m b le s th e m e th o d f ro m
C h a p te r 5 . T h e te c h n iq u e e m p lo y s th e m e a n v a lu e th e o re m a s k n o w n f r o m S e c tio n 5 .2 , w h ile H s u &
S a s try (1 9 8 7 ) u s e in te g r a tio n te c h n iq u e s in c lu d in g th e G r o n w a ll-B e llm a n th e o re m . S te p s w ill b e a ls o
o u t l i n e d w h i c h a l l o w H s u & S a s t r y ’s ( 1 9 8 7 ) m e t h o d o l o g y t o b e r e n d e r e d s o t h a t t h e i r m e t h o d c a n b e
u s e d to p r o v e r o b u s t s ta b ility .
I n a s im ila r f a s h io n to C h a p te r 5 , th e c h a p te r c o n s id e rs a t f irs t th e p r o b le m o f e x is te n c e a n d u n iq u e
n e s s o f s o lu tio n s a f te r in tro d u c in g th e c la s s o f s y s te m s a n d d e s c rib in g th e s a m p le d -d a ta s c h e m e . T h e
m a in r e s u lt o f th is c h a p te r is s ta te d a f te rw a r d s a n d is s u e s f o r th e p r o o f a re e x p la in e d . T h e tw o d iffe re n t
a p p r o a c h e s to p r o v e th e r e s u lt a r e g iv e n a n d a n u m e r ic a l e x a m p le f o r th e s lid in g m o d e b a s e d c o n tro l
c o m p a re s th e m e th o d o lo g ie s .
9.2 System requirements and control law discretization
A s f o r C h a p te r 5 a n d 7 , c o n s id e r th e n o n - lin e a r a ffin e s y s te m o f ( 2 .1 ) w ith c o n tin u o u s a n d b o u n d e d
in p u t g a in g ( x ) :
x(<) = f ( £ , x ) + g ( x ) u , x E R n , f : E x R " -» R n , g : R ” -+ R n x m , ||g || < Q.
a n d a s s u m e th e e x is te n c e o f a g lo b a lly L ip s c h itz , c o n tin u o u s - tim e c o n tr o l la w u c ( x ) , w h ic h s a tis fie s
th e A s s u m p t i o n s 2 .1 a - 2 .3 a o r th e s t r i c t e r c o n s tr a in ts 2 .1 b - 2 .3 b .
Assumption 9.1: S u p p o s e th a t d u e to c o m p u ta tio n a l d e la y s a d is c re tiz e d c o n tro l u s in g x ( t j ) , t i =
ir , i > 0 c a n o n ly b e a p p lie d a fte r a d e la y o f A T ( t) , 0 < A T (t) < r :
u (t) = u A / r (f — A r (f), u c ) ( 9 .1 )
w h e re
A T : R ->• [ 0 , t ) , Vt € (U , t i + i] : A r ( t) = A t* = c o n s t. ( 9 .2 )
T h e c o m p u ta tio n a l d e la y s A t* o f th e d is c re tiz e d c o n tr o l u s in g x ( t i ) a re n o t n e c e s s a rily id e n tic a l f o r
e a c h s a m p l i n g i n t e r v a l [£*, i i + i ] .
Assumption 9.2: T h e r e e x is ts a k n o w n x , 1> x > 0 s0 that:
o < — < X, (9 .3 )
T
f o r a ll i > 0.
Assumption 9 . 2 : I t is a s s u m e d
||u(t = * o ) - u c (x(io))|| <CU (9.4)

C h a p te r 9. D i s c r e t i z a t i o n o f n o n - l i n e a r c o n t r o l s w ith s m a l l c o m p u ta tio n a l d e la y s 186
a n d th u s , th e in itia l c o n tr o l u ( t = t o ) a p p l i e d d u r i n g t h e t i m e i n t e r v a l [to , to + A to ] is n o t b a s e d o n a n
a c tu a l m e a s u re d v a lu e . H o w e v e r , it is a s s u m e d th a t a b o u n d C u o n th e d iffe re n c e b e tw e e n th e d e s ire d
c o n tr o lle r v a lu e u c ( x ( t o ) ) a n d th e a c tu a lly a p p lie d c o n tr o l is k n o w n .
T h is s a m p le d - d a ta im p le m e n ta tio n s c h e m e c h a n g e s a ls o th e a s s u m p tio n s w h ic h h a v e b e e n m a d e to
p r o v e e x i s t e n c e o r u n i q u e n e s s o f s o l u t i o n s w i t h L e m m a 5 .1 a n d 5 . 2 f o r a d i s c r e t i z e d c o n t r o l la w w i t h o u t
d e la y s . T h u s c o n s id e r in g th e s e c h a n g e s th e f o llo w in g L e m m a a s s u r e s th e e x is te n c e o r u n iq u e n e s s o f
th e d is c re tiz e d c o n tr o l in c lo s e d lo o p .
Lemma 9.1 S u p p o s e th e g lo b a lly L ip s c h itz -c o n tin u o u s c o n tr o l uc { x ) f o r th e n o n - lin e a r a ffin e s y s te m
o f ( 2 .1 ) s a tis fie s th e c l o s e d lo o p A s s u m p ti o n s 2 . l a , 2 .3 a .
(I) A C a r a th e o d o r y s o lu tio n fo r th e d iffe r e n tia l s y s te m e m p lo y in g a d is c r e tiz e d c o n tr o l
u = u A ( t — A T . u c ) o f A s s u m p t i o n 9 . 1 - 9 . 3 e x i s t s w i t h i n t h e i n t e r v a l [0 , o o ) a n d t h e s y s t e m h a s n o
fin ite e s c a p e tim e f o r a n y s a m p lin g - tim e r > 0.
( I I ) T h e s o lu tio n is u n iq u e i f A s s u m p ti o n s 2 . l b ,2 . 3 b a r e s a tis fie d in a d d itio n . •
P ro o f T h e p r o o f g o e s a l o n g t h e l i n e s o f t h e a n a l y s i s f o r L e m m a 5 .1 a n d 5 .2 f r o m C h a p t e r 5 u s i n g t h e
p r i n c i p l e o f c o m p l e t e i n d u c t i o n . T h u s f o r r e a s o n s o f b r e v i t y , t h e p r o o f m a y b e s k e t c h e d o n ly .
F ro m A s s u m p t i o n s 2 . l a , 2 . 3 a f o l l o w s t h a t t h e r i g h t h a n d s i d e o f t h e n o n - l in e a r a f f in e s y s te m ( 2 .1 )
in c o m b in a tio n w ith th e c o n tr o l u = u A ( t — A T , u c ) is w i t h i n t h e i n te r v a ls ( fo ,* o + A r 0), (f, +
A T { ,ti + A t,) (i > 0 ) L e b e s g u e m e a s u r a b l e in t f o r c o n s ta n t x ( f ) w ith a p o s s ib le d is c o n tin u ity f o r
t = to 4 - A t 0 . *i - f A t i , t 2 + A t 2 , .... T h u s , th e r ig h t h a n d is L e b e s g u e m e a s u ra b le f o r a ll t > 0
a n d c o n s ta n t x { t ) . F u r th e r , th e c o n t i n u i t y in x ( t ) f o r fix e d t is a ls o s a tis f ie d w ith in e a c h in te r v a l t €
( U -I- A t , , 1 + A r i+ J a n d t G [fo , + A r 0] ( i > 0 ). T h is is a n im p o rta n t im p lic a tio n f o r th e p r o o f
o f e x is te n c e o f s o lu tio n .
A s im ila r d i s c u s s i o n c a n b e c a r r ie d o u t w ith A s s u m p tio n s 2 . l b ,2 .3 b s h o w in g L ip s c h itz c o n tin u ity
in x ( f ) f o r fix e d t a n d p ie c e w is e c o n tin u ity in t f o r fix e d x ( t ) w ith in th e in te r v a ls [ fo ,f o + A to ],
( t i -I- A t , , t i + 1 + A t , + i ] ( i > 0 ). T h is f a c t is u s e d to s h o w u n iq u e n e s s o f s o lu tio n .
S im ila r to ( 5 .2 ) f o llo w s th a t th e r ig h t h a n d s id e o f th e d if fe r e n tia l s y s te m ( 2 .1 ) w ith d is c r e tiz e d
c o n tr o l ( 9 . 1) is b o u n d e d in t e [fo , to + A t 0 ] o r in t e ( U + A r < , t i + 1 -I- A r i + i ] f o r b o u n d e d x ( f ) , x ( f j )
and u (t = to).
I t c a n b e a l s o v e r i f i e d t h a t a s o l u t i o n r e m a i n s b o u n d e d w i t h i n e a c h f i n i t e i n t e r v a l [ f o , t] f o r b o u n d e d
in itia l v a lu e s u ( t = f o ) a n d x ( f 0 )- T h i s f o l l o w s f r o m in v e s ti g a t i n g t h e i n te r v a ls [f0 , t 0 + A r 0 ] , [<o +
A t0, + A t i ] a n d [U - 1- A t * , t i + 1 + A r< + i] (i > 1 ). F r o m A s s u m p tio n 2 .3 a
| | f ( f , x ) + g ( x ) u c ( x ) | | < JCc | | x | | + / C c , c , | | u c ( x i ) - u c ( x 2 ) | | < Ku | | x x — x 2 | | ,

it c a n b e im p lie d f o r th e s e in te rv a ls :
t € [ * o ,* o + A t 0 ] : || x ( f ) - x ( * 0 )|| = | f f ( s , x ( s ) ) + g ( x ( s ) ) u ( t = t0)ds
\\Jtn
< f (Kc | | x ( s ) | | + )Cc,c + QJCu | | x ( s ) - x(t0)\\)ds + A t 0QCu

Jto
< [ {ICc+G)Cu) | | x ( s ) - x ( £ 0 ) | | d s
J'to
tn
+ X r ( ^ C ||x ( t o ) || + ^ i t + ^ C , c ) •
F r o m th e G r o n w a l l - B e l l m a n I n e q u a lity ( K h a lil 1 9 9 2 a , L e m m a 2 .1 ) fo llo w s :
t e [to , to + A to] : | | x ( f ) - x ( t 0 ) || < e * T <, C c + c ,c * V ( K c | | x ( t 0 ) || + Q C U + K c ,c ) ( 9 .5 )
F o r th e o th e r in te r v a ls e m p lo y in g a g a in t h e G r o n w a ll- B e llm a n In e q u a lity , it fo llo w s :
t £ [£ o H- A t o , t \ -t- A t i ] :
II rt /*to+ATo rt
||x(<) x (t0)II
— = / f ( s , x ( s ) ) d s +Jto/
11J to
g(x(s))u(£ = t 0)d s +
J <o+Aro
g { x { s ))u c ( x ( t0))d s
< [ {JC c + Q J C U ) | | x ( s ) - x ( < o ) || d s + ( t — t 0 ) (JCq | | x ( t o ) | | + / C c , c ) + A r o ^ C tt

Jto
< e (K ^ gK^ +^ T ( { x + ( ) r ( K c M t 0 )\\ + K c , c ) + x r Q C u ) ( 9 .6 )
a n d fo r i > 1
t E -f- A r t-, t i + i + A tj+ i] :
II rt rti-h&Ti rt
l|x(f) x(fj)|| = / f ( s , x ( s ) ) d s +J/t i
\\J ti
g (x (s))u c ( x ( t i_ i) ) d s +J/ti+ A n g (x (s))u c (x(ti))ds
< f (/Cc + QICu) ||x(s) — x(ti)|| ds + (t — U ) {Kc ||x(ti)|| + /C c,c)

J ti
+ A t ^ / C u ||x ( ^ ) - x(*<_i)||
< e{Kc+GKu){x+i)r + 1jr ( £ c + Kc,c) + x r£ /C Jx (* i) - x(£j_i)||).
( 9 .7 )
F r o m ( 9 .5 - 9 .6 ) , it is im p lie d th a t a s o lu tio n x ( t ) h a s to r e m a in b o u n d e d f o r t € [ t o ,t \ + A t i ] . A s s u m in g
x . ( U ) a n d x ( ^ _ i ) b o u n d e d , i t f o l l o w s f r o m ( 9 . 7 ) t h a t x ( t ) i s b o u n d e d w i t h i n [U + A r< , t i+ 1 + A r i + i].
U s i n g t h o s e r e s u l t s n o w w i t h i n a c o m p l e t e i n d u c t i o n a r g u m e n t s i m i l a r t o L e m m a 5 .1 a n d 5 .2 , i t f o l l o w s
th a t x ( f ) e x is ts a n d is b o u n d e d f o r a n y f in ite t > 0 . U n iq u e n e s s is s h o w n f o r A s s u m p tio n s 2 .lb ,2 .3 b
r e s p e c tiv e ly ( K h a lil 1 9 9 2 a , T h e o r e m 2 .2 ) . ■
W ith th e e x is te n c e o f s o lu tio n , th e c lo s e d lo o p s ta b ility o f th e s a m p le d - d a ta c o n tr o lle d s y s te m c a n b e
in v e s tig a te d w ith in th e n e x t s e c tio n .
9.3 A fast sampling theorem
F r o m A s s u m p tio n 2 .2 a , it is k n o w n th a t th e r e is a L y a p u n o v f u n c tio n V w ith
V| | x| | >c5 V t : ^ + ^ ( f (* , x ) + g (x )u C (x )) < — c3||x||2, c3 > 0 , c5 > 0 ( 9 .8 )
so th a t th e se t
c2
Ilc + e = {x € Kn : V (t, x ) < c + e}, e > 0, c — — ( 9 .9 )
ci
is s h o w n to b e a s e t o f u ltim a te b o u n d e d n e s s f o r th e c o n tin u o u s - tim e c o n tro l u c , w h ile f ro m A s s u m p tio n
2 . 2 b w o u l d f o l l o w C5 = 0 . E m p lo y in g th e s e t o f ( 9 .9 ), th e m a in r e s u lt o f th is c h a p te r is g iv e n w ith th e
f o llo w in g f a s t s a m p lin g th e o re m :
T h e o re m 9 .1 S u p p o s e A s s u m p tio n s 2 . l a - 2 .3 a a r e s a tis fie d a n d a c o n tr o lle r d is c r e tiz a tio n s c h e m e a s
g iv e n w ith A s s u m p tio n s 9 .1 - 9 .3 is im p le m e n te d .
(I) F o r k n o w n x = c o n s t., 1 > x > 0 s o th a t:
0 < — - < X, * > 0

T
th e r e e x is ts a f > 0 s m a ll e n o u g h s u c h th a t f o r a n y s a m p lin g tim e r > 0, r < f th e d is c r e tiz e d c o n tr o l
f o r th e n o n - l i n e a r a ffin e s y s t e m o f ( 2 .1 ) i n c l u d i n g a v a r y i n g c o n t r o ll e r d e la y A T is u ltim a te ly b o u n d e d
w ith r e s p e c t to I lc + e d e fin e d in ( 9 .9 ).
( I I ) W ith A s s u m p t i o n s 2 .2 b - 2 .3 b , t h e o r i g i n is g lo b a lly , a s y m p to tic a lly s ta b iliz e d f o r r < t. 0
T h e p r o o f o f th e th e o r e m c a n b e b r o k e n d o w n in to a s e rie s o f s te p s . H o w e v e r, th e m a in p a r t o f th e p r o o f
is b a s e d o n f in d in g a n u p p e r e s t im a t e o f t h e n o r m f o r th e d e la y d e p e n d e n t s a m p lin g re s id u a l:
x A //r ( t — A T ( t ) ,x ) — x (£ ) .
I n p a r tic u la r , t h e in te r v a l (U + A t* , t i + 1 + A t^ + i] a n d th e u p p e r b o u n d o f
||x ( f ) - x ( < j) ||, t e (ti + A r ,j,tj+1 + A r i + i]
w ill b e o f i n te r e s t; w ith in th is i n te r v a l t h e c o n t r o l u A is c o n s ta n t a n d th e c o n tr o l v a lu e d e p e n d e n t o n
x(£j) is a p p lie d .
C o n s i d e r th e f o llo w in g L y a p u n o v a n a ly s is to m o tiv a te th e is s u e o f f in d in g a n u p p e r e s tim a te f o r
||x a / t ( £ _ a t ( £ ),x ) - x ( i ) ||. S u p p o se t € (U + A r ^ + i + A r <+1], th e n th e s y s te m e q u a tio n ( 2 .1 )
m a y b e re w ritte n as:
x (f) = f (f ,x (< ) ) + g ( x ( f ) ) ^ ,
uc(x(ti))
= f (f ,x (f ) ) + g ( x (* ) )u c (x (* )) + g (x ) ( u c ( x f e ) ) - u c (x (t))) ,
Using this equation in the Lyapunov analysis gives for almost all t G [U 4- At*, U+i + A t;+i]:
dV 6V 8V,r/ , C/ *\
~dt = + J Z (f(*’x (*)} + W)
+ ^ g (x (^)) (u c (xfe)) - u c (x (f))). (9.10)
Using inequality (9.8) for the first two terms of inequality (9.10), it follows for almost all t € [U +
A U+i + A ri+i] and V(f, x) > c:
^ < - c 3 I|x(f)||2 + ^ g ( x ( t ) ) (uc (x(fi)) - u c (x(f)))

dt
8V
< - c 3 ||x(f)||2 + £/Cu (||x(f) x (fj)||). (9.11)
8x
Thus, an appropriate upper estimate for \\x(t) —x(fj)|| of the form ||x(f)|| +/C2, /Ci, /C2 > 0, would
be suitable for Lyapunov analysis. It will be seen that this upper estimate exists if the sampling time r
is chosen small enough:
Lemma 9.2 (I) For a system described by Assumptions 2. la,2.3a and 9.1-9.3, there exists an upper
bound T6 > 0 on the sampling time r so that the deviation o f x ( t ) from x(ti), the delay dependent
sampling residual for t G [U + At*, tj+i + A ri+i], has an upper approximate of:
T e (0 ,f6], t G [ti + A T i,ti+i + A r i+i] : ||x(t) -x (* i)|| < A i ||x(<)|| + A 2+ A 3/i, (9.12)
ti = i r , i > 0
where A i > 0,A 2 > 0 and A 3/j > 0 are continuous functions o f r in (0, tq], tq > 0, such that
lim (A i) = 0, lim (A2) = 0, lim (A3/i) = 0,lim (A3/i) = 0.

r - f 0+ r —»-0+ r -» 0 + z-»oo '
(II) From Assumptions 2.3b and u (t — tf) = 0 follows A 2 = 0 and A3/j = 0. •
Since A i, A 2 and A 3/z converge to 0 for r ->■ 0+, the result of Lemma 9.2 can easily be included
into a Lyapunov analysis by choosing the sampling time small enough and ultimate boundedness can
be proved. From (2.4)
5V
< C4||x||, Ci||x||2 < V (t,x ) < c2 ||x|| , Cl, c2, c4 > 0 (9.13)
Sx
and (9.11), it follows for r G (0, t 6] and V(t, x) > c and a k, 0 < k < 1 for almost all t > t 0 + A r 0 :
< —c 3 l|x(f)||2 + c\QKu Âi ||x(f)||2 + A2 ||x(t)|| + A 3/j ||x(f)||^
< _(1 _ K) | v ( t , x ) - «c3 ||x||2 + C4SK U ||x ||2 + A2 llxll +

Under the assumption that > 1 it follows from (9.13) that > 1. Thus, it is seen:
^ < - ( l- « ) ^ V ( t,x ) - ( kcz - c AgiCu ( A i + ||x ||2 + c4giCtl^ V 'V ( f , x ) (9.14)
From Lemma 9.2 for any arbitrary e > 0, it is possible to choose an %> 0 large enough so that
Q2K l r 2r
oC 2
* = ^/iir' V ? < g+£-

C
(1 —K)zC^Ci
1
Furthermore, there must be a f > 0, so that for any r e (0, f]:
( k c 3 - c4 g}Cu ^ A i + ^ > 0. (9.15)
Thus, it can be shown using Lyapunov theory that the states will ultimately enter a compact set IIc+e
(9.9). It is seen that before the states enter the set n max(c+e)maxi(ei))* they decrease exponentially
fast. The Lyapunov analysis shows that k can be again regarded as a parameter which is used for a
compromise between performance and stability of the discretized controller. This establishes the robust
stability of the sampled-data controlled non-linear affine system provided Lemma 9.2 holds.
The main problem of deriving the upper bound of ||x ( f ) —x(U)\\ for t € [t; + At*, U+i -1- At;+i],
i > 0 is the dependence of the control on the measurement x(U) from a time instant within the prior
interval [£;_i + A r^-i, U + At;]. This causes an interdependence between the intervals for the upper
bounds of ||x A / r ( t —A T(£), x ) — x ( £ ) ||. Within Chapter 5 the upper estimates could be considered
independently for any sampling interval, since no computational delays were assumed. However here,
an interdependence occurs, which has to be removed. Within the technique of Hsu & Sastry (1987),
a ‘forward calculation’ approach is established via integration techniques. From a result for the upper
bound for the first interval, the results of the next intervals are established. The alternative approach
presented within this thesis is a ‘back calculation’ approach using the generalized mean value Theorem
5.1. With a result for the first %intervals, a technique is derived which removes dependence of the bound
of ||x A / r (f —A r ( £ ),x ) —x ( £ ) || for the i-th interval on any of the prior intervals. The two different
methods for Lemma 9.2 are shown within the next two sections.
9.4 The approach of Hsu & Sastry
This section presents the approach of Hsu & Sastry (1987), which proves the part (II) of Lemma 9.2.
The non-linear affine system and continuous-time control satisfying Assumptions 2.1b-2.3b and in par
ticular:
| | f ( * , x i ) - f ( f , x 2 ) | | < JCf | | x i - x 2 | | , | | u c ( x ! ) - u c ( x 2 ) | | < Ku | | x i - x 2 | | , Kf,1Cu > 0
are used which also ensure the existence of a Lyapunov function V(f, x ) as for Assumption 2.2a or (9.8)
with C5 = 0. For reasons of simplicity, Hsu & Sastry (1987) assumed that during the initial interval
[to, to + A to] the control value has been chosen:
t € [to, to + A t0] : u = 0 (9.16)
Another condition is raised for the drift f and the continuous-time control u c:
f ( - ,0 ) = 0 , u c ( 0 ) = 0 . (9.17)
With these assumptions, the ‘forward calculation’-scheme of Hsu & Sastry (1987) is easily presented,
while a minor improvement of the method has been made to decrease conservatism and to abolish a
small error. The main idea of the approach is to show via integration techniques that for the discretized
control there is a scalar A h s :
||x (i(<+1)) - x(fi)|| < A h s ||x (t(j+1)) | | , A h s > 0, * > 0 (9.18)
where the scalar A h s satisfies for small enough sampling time r:
lim A h s = 0- (9.19)
T—>0+
This result is then used to show the claim of Lemma 9.2. The proof may be structured into three steps.
Step I: As the first step, it can be proved that there is A ns,i for (9.18-9.19), where A h s is replaced
by A HS,i- Later it can be shown that there is A ns,i independent of i > 0. The existence of A ns,i is
shown employing the principle of complete induction:
• Step 0: Consider the state in the interval t E [£o + Ato, £i]. From (9.16) and Assumption 9.1:
|| rto + A ro rt
||x ( t ) - x ( f o ) || = / f ( s ,x ( s ) ) d s + / (f(s,x(s)) + g (x (s))u (x(t0)))d s
II*/to 7fo+Aro
< [ ||f ( s ,x ( s ) ) - f ( s , x ( f 0))||ds

Jto
+ [
J to
||f(.s,x(£o))|| + ds [
J to+Aro
||g(x(s))u c (x(*o))||efe
Using (9.17), the Lipschitz constants /Cf and K u and the bound on ||g||:
||x(f) —x(to)|| < f /Cf llx (s ) ~ x (fo)|| ds + f llx (fo)|| ds + f GKu\\x{to)\\ds (9.20)
J to Jto Jto+ A ro
With t e [to + A r0, t\], it follows from the Gronwall-Bellman Inequality (Khalil 1992a, Lemma 2.1):
||x ( f ) - x ( * o ) || < r e TlCi (/Cf -1- QKU) ||x(t0)||
< r e T,Cf (/Cf + QJCU) ||x(£) —x (t0)|| -f- r e TlCf (/Cf + QKU) ||x(£)|| (9.21)
For small enough t follows 1 —Ter ^ f (/Cf -I- GJCU) > 0 and
" x(<o)il * l | xW" (9'22)

C h a p t e r 9. D i s c r e t i z a t i o n o f n o n - l i n e a r c o n t r o l s w ith s m a l l c o m p u t a ti o n a l d e la y s 192
With the choice of t = ti, the existence of A h s ,o is shown.

• Assumption i:
||x (f(i+i)) “ x (*i)|| < Affs,* ||x(f(<+1) ) || , lim+A HS,i = 0, i> 0
Step i: For t G [fi+i + A rI+i, ^ + 2], the state x (t) satisfies:

P'*»+!+
H + l - r Arj+i
^Ti+l
/ (f (s?x W ) + g ( x 0 0 )u c (x(*i))) ds
'U+i
+ f
7t i + i + A r i + i
(f(5>x (5)) + g(x M ) u C(x (*i+i))) ds
rt /• t i+ i+ A r j + i
</ « /< t+ i
||g(x (s ))u (x (fi+ i ) ) ||d s + / Jti+i
||g (x (s))(u c ( x f e ) ) - u c (x(ti+ i)))||d s
+ [ ||f(s,x(f<+ i ) ) ||d s + f ||f ( s ,x ( f ) ) - f ( s ,x ( t i+1))||d s (9.23)
With t G [ti+i + A rj+i, tj+2] and the respective Lipschitz constants it follows
||x(t) - x (ti+ i)|| < r e r;Cf (((//Cu + /C f) ||x(fi+ i)|| + ||x(tj) - x(t<+ i)||)
Using Assumption i for small enough sampling time r so that
1 — T e TlCi{ Q K u + /C f + xOfCu^HS,i) > 0
and
II*W - * (* .« ) II < ^ S + f g ^ h s A l|x(t)l1 (9-24)

This shows the existence of A ns,i+ i and limT_»o+ &HS,i+i = 0 for small enough r.
• Conclusion: Using the principle of complete induction, it is shown that A ns,i exists for any i > 0 for
small enough sampling time r.
Step II: Nowthe existence of A h s is shown. Note that Hsu & Sastry (1987) did notprovide this partial
result. It is readily seen that A h s ,o < A ns,i for all i > 0. Thus, it is sufficient to prove that there is
A HS,i < A HS satisfying (9.18-9.19) or
r -r>c, (QKu + K.f + xQK,u^ „ s ) A
1 — Terlc'( Q K u + K ,f + x S ^ uA h s )
1 - r e TK*(GKU + K f + x SICu & h s ) > 0, (9.26)
lim A h s = 0 (9.27)
r —►O-f
for small enough r > 0. Define

then (9.25) is satisfied provided
t/C A/i + + /CA/2) - l) A h s + t)CA/ 2 A 2h s ^ 0, (9.28)
0 < 1 —r(/CA/i+ /C A/ 2), 0 < (r(/CA/i+ /C A/2) —l) —4 t2/CA/i/CA/2 (9.29)
hold. The fast-sampling constraints of (9.29) ensure that the quadratic inequality in A h s has real and
non-negative solutions for A h s >where the smallest satisfying (9.28) is for /CA/2 > 0
1 - r(/CA/i + /CA/2) / ( I - t ( / C a / i + /CA/ 2))2 £ a/1

a / / 5 = ---------r - p ------------------ 4-/ ----------- 2IF2-------------------------------------- (9-3°)
2 t/C a / 2 y 4r ^ i/2 ^ a /2
while for /CA/ 2 = 0

t /C A / i
A hs = ^ • (9.31)
1 - 7XA/!
It is easy to show that (9.27) is satisfied, which also implies that the constraint of (9.26) can be fulfilled.
Step III: As thelast step, the actual upper bound for the delay dependent sampling residual
||x A/r (f —A T, x) —x(£) || is derived. Consider therefore the interval t G [to,h + A ri]. It follows
from (9.20) a relation similar to (9.22):
c(l+x)T/Cf (ir 1 Qir \
IW 4 - x(.„)|| < r d + IWOII ( « 2)
For the interval t G [tl + A t;, + A r;+ i] follows with (9.23) similar to (9.24):
im «) - * « , » < • <M3)
where the fast-sampling constraint for the two relations from (9.32-9.33) is necessary
1 _ Ter(l+x)K,((1 + X)(QKU + Kf) + x 5 KuA „ s ) > 0 (9.34)
replacing (9.26). This shows that in the approach of Hsu & Sastry (1987), the upper bound of the delay
dependent sampling residual (9.12) is defined by :
Ai = reT(1+*)/Cf (U + X)(g£y + /Cf) + xQû^Hs)-------- ^ ^ = . = Q (9 35)

1 —reT^1+^ 1Cf((1 -1- x){Gfcu + /Cf) + X^/CuAtfs)
From the inequalities of (9.20) and (9.23), it is seen that the Lipschitz continuity of the drift f is explic
itly exploited. However, it has been found that the integration approach of Hsu & Sastry (1987) can be
adapted so that only Assumptions 2.1a-2.3a are used instead of Assumptions 2.1b-2.3b and the extra
conditions (9.16-9.17):
Rem ark 9.1 The methodology of Hsu & Sastry (1987) can be adjusted so that Assumptions 2.1a-2.3a,
in particular Assumptions 2.3a, are sufficient to derive the result from Lemma 9.2. This can be readily
seen from (9.6) for t G [to, h + Ari]:
||x(£) —x(£o)ll < [ {fa + Qfcu) llx (s) —x(f0)|| ds + (t —to) (JCc ||x(fo)||+/Cc,c)+ATo(/Cu
Jt 0
C h a p te r 9. D is c r e t i z a t i o n o f n o n - l i n e a r c o n t r o l s w ith s m a l l c o m p u ta tio n a l d e la y s 194
and (9.7) for t e [ U + Ar<, t i + 1 + A ri+i]:
IIx(t) - x (ti)|| < [ \} C c + 0 /C*) ||x(s) - x(ti)|| da + (t - *<) (/Cc ||x(ti)|| + Kc,c)
J t i
+AT<^/Cu ||x(f<) -x (f< _ i)||.
These two inequalities allow A ns,i to be derived as in Step I of this section. The value of A h s and
the analysis for Step III follow then respectively. The full derivation of the expressions for A i, A2 and
A 3/i is omitted. However, the formula for A i is
Ai - r e T{i+x){Kc+GK.u)__________ (1 + x)/Cc + x QKu& h s __________ (g36)

1 1 - r e ^ + x ) ^ c + G t c u) { { 1 + x ) K c + x g j C u A H S ) K ’
0 < l - r c ^ + ^ ^ + ^ t a + xJ/Cc + X ^ A ^ )
where A h s is defined in this case by
K a /i = e r<-Kc+SK^ ICc , 1Ca / 2 = e ^ + ^ x Q I C « (9.37)
and the relations of (9.28-9.31). This is in particular useful for the case when C5 = JCc,c = 0 for
Assumptions 2.1a-2.3a, which also implies A 2 = 0. o
Remark 9.1 indicates the analysis steps for the robust, control approach using Assumptions 2.1a-2.3a
and the method of Hsu & Sastry (1987). Instead of providing a full derivation for this approach,
another technique using ‘back calculation’ is suggested within the next section. Within a numerical
example it will be seen later that this technique is slightly superior to the robust, modified Hsu &
Sastry-methodology.
9.5 An approach for robust stability
Within this section, the general case for a non-linear affine system (2.1) with a continuous control
satisfying Assumptions 2. la-2.3a is considered. Of particular importance is the Assumption 2.3a:
||f(t,x ) + g (x ) u c (x)|| < /Cc||x|| + JCc,c ||u c (xi) - u c (x2)|| < / C u ||x i - x 2||,
ICu, ICc,c > 0, Kc > 0.
The proof of Lemma 9.2 within this section has been broken down into seven steps. The approach
initially considers the task of finding upper estimates for the maximum deviations of the states within
t G [U, U + A n ] and t G [U + At*, ti+i]
sup (||x(ta) - x ;42 , sup (||x(fQ) - x ( ^ ) | | ) ,

to e , t p 6 [ft , t t + A r t ] f a ,f /3 € [ f t + A r , , f t + 1 ]
C h a p te r 9. D is c r e tiz a tio n o f n o n - l in e a r c o n t r o l s w ith s m a ll c o m p u ta tio n a l d e la y s 195
which are both in sum larger than ||x(f) —x (^ )|| for t E (U, t*+i]. This can be done by first apply
ing the generalized mean value Theorem 5.1 from Chapter 5 and this will form Step I of the proof.
Since the control u A = u c (x(£;)) is only invoked in the interval (t* + A r i: fi+1 + Ar<+i] due to
the delay, the upper estimate for supta ^ €[t .+AT. t .+i] (||x (tQ) —x (t^ )||) is dependent on values in
[ti,U + Ari] in particular also on suptQ)t/3€[f. ^ +Ar.j (||x(fQ) —x(f/j)||). To remove this dependence on
values of prior intervals, a ‘back calculation’ of these dependencies from (f*-1- At*, t{+\ -1- Arj+i] to the
very first partial interval [to, to + Aro] will result in 2i inequalities for the interval [U + A r^tj+i].
These inequalities will form a linear system of 2i inequalities (Step IT) for the upper estimate of
suPta,t0 e[ti+ATi,ti+1] (llx (ta ) —x 42
' . It will be shown that this system of inequalities can be solved
by inverting a matrix of 2i-Xh order. A sufficient condition for the existence of this matrix inverse
is a small enough r {Step III to Step VI). This will solve the problem of inter-dependencies between
the intervals. From the upper approximates of supW/j€[t.+AT.>t.+1] (||x(t0) - x (^ )||) and
suPi«,t/9€ft,t<+ATi] (llx (*a) ~ x (t/?)ll)>il: is then possible to derive Lemma 9.2 {Step VII):
Step I: First, an upper estimate of the maximum deviation sup*Q,tpe[u,u+&Ti] (llx (ta) —x (^ )||)
andsupta ^ €^.+Ar. t .+1j (||x (tQ) —x(f/j)||) of the states will be derived. The first interval [to,to+A 7o]
has to be investigated in particular. Hence, three different cases are considered, the deviations of the
states in the interval [to, to + Aro], [£<, U + A t *], {i > 1), and [ti + A n , tj+i], {i > 0).
Case I: Here it is of interest to determine upper bounds for suptaf/3€[t0)t0+AT0] (||x(fa ) - x (i/g)||).
Thus, consider the following equality derived from the system equation (2.1) for the interval (to, to +
A r0]:
x = f(t,x (t)) + g (x (t))u (t = t0)
= f ( t,x ( t ) ) + g ( x ( t ) ) u c (x ( t)) + ( g ( x ( t) ) u c ( x ( f 0 )) - g ( x ( t ) ) u c (x ( f)) )
+ (g (x (t))u (f = t0 ) - g (x ( f)) u c (x (f0))) •
By applying the generalized mean value Theorem 5.1 for any two ta,t& E [to, to + Aro] (|t& - ta| <
Aro < x r ) considering the bound on the initial controller value u(to = 0) (9.4), it is then found:
V ta < tf,, t a ,t& E [to, to + A tq], 3 t c C [ta ,tf>] :
|| x ( t a ) - x ( t 6 )|| < x r | | f ( t c , x ( * c ) ) + g ( x ( t c ) ) u c ( x ( t c )) ||
|| ( g ( x ( t c ) ) u c ( x ( t 0 ) ) - g ( x ( f c ) ) u c ( x ( f c ) ) ) ||
+XT || ( g ( x ( t c ) ) u ( t 0 = 0 ) - g ( x ( f c ) ) u c ( x ( t 0 ) ) ) ||
< XT ||f(tc,x ( tc)) + g ( x ( tc))uc (x(fc))|| + x t G)Cu M t Q) - x ( t c)\\+XTGCu.

C h a p te r 9. D is c r e tiz a tio n o f n o n - lin e a r c o n tr o ls w ith s m a ll c o m p u ta tio n a l d e la y s 196
Using Assumption 2.3a, it follows
||x(to) - x ( f 6)|| < ||f(fc,x (tc)) + g(x(*c))uc (x(*c))|| + X ' tGK'U\\x(fo) - x ( f c)|| + x t QCu
< x tICc || x (*c ) || + x rQJCu ||x(f0) - x (tc) || + x tQCu + x tK c,c- (9-38)
Since ta and tf,are arbitrary in the interval [to, to + A r o ] , the left hand side of the inequality above can
be substituted by supW/36[*0),0+ATo] (||x (ia ) - x ( tfi)\\).
3 t c e [ t o , + A r0] : su p (||x(fQ) - x (t/?)||) < x t 1Cc ||x(tc)|| + xrGfCu ||x (t0) —x (tc)||
ta ,t/3€[to,io+Aro]
+ X t GCu + x t JCc#
From the triangle inequality, it follows for any t E [to, to + A r o ]
sup (||x (ta ) - x ( ^ ) | | ) < xrJCc ||x(fc) - x ( f ) || + x t/C c ||x(t)||

ta ,tp € [io,to+Ar0]
+ X r G1Cu ||x(fo) ~ x(fc)H + xtGCu + xt!Cc,c
< X t { 1Cc + G}Cu) sup (||x(ia ) —x (t/3) ||)

ta,tpe[to,to+Aro]
+X t JCc I|x(f) II + x t(^ c ,c + GCU) (9.39)
Under the assumption, the value of r has been chosen small enough so that
1 > t X (ICc + GJCu), (9.40)
it can be then concluded:
sup
ta,t0 €[to,to+ATo] (||x (fa ) - x (^ )ll) < 1 - x n */C, Ic? +
+ ys ^r u )\ l|x(<)11 + ii ^- Ix nh ^kc +
+ yq^ku )Y (9-41)
Case 2: The procedure to find an upper estimate for supttt>t/8€[t .>t.+AT.] (||x(ta ) - x (tp )||) (i > 0)
is similar to Case 1.Due tothe delay, the controller value applied for t £ (U,ti + At,-] (i > 0) to the
closed loop system is u c (x(tj_i)). At first, the system equation (2.1) is again split into a sum of terms:
x = f(f,x (f)) + g(x.(t))uA (t - AT,u c ) = f(f,x(«)) + g(x(*))uc (x(*))
+g(x(<)) u A (t - AT, u c ) -g(x(< ))uc (x (^ _ i + A rj_i))

^ mmmmmrnmrnmmm
=uc(x(ti_i))
+ (g(x(t))uc (x(ti_i + A ri_i)) - g(x(*))uc (x(£z-)))
+ (g(x(*))uc (x(*i)) - g(x(*))uc (x(i))) . (9.42)

The mean value theorem applied to an interval [i0, c [£j, U + A rJ gives:
V£a < £5, £a, £5 G [ti,ti + At*], 3£c € :
IIx(£a) “ x (^)ll < XT ||f(*,x(£c)) + g(x(£c))u C(x(£c))||
+XT ||g (x (tc))u c (x (ti_ i)) - g(x(£c))u c (x(£i_i + A r i_ i))||
+XT ||g (x (tc))u C(x (ti_ i + A r j -i) ) - g(x(£c))u c (x(£i))||
+XT llg(x(tc))ua(x(ti )) - g(x(£c))u c (x(£c) ) | | .
Due to Assumption 2.3a and referring to the bounding constraint on ||g||, it follows:
3 £c G [U,ti + Ari] : sup (||x(£a ) - x ^ ) ! ! ) < X tK,c ||x(£c)||

t a , t p e [ t i ,« i+ A r i]
+ X t Q1Cu SUp (||x(*Q) - X ( ^ ) ||)

t a ,t(3 € [ti - 1 ,ti _ i + A Ti _ i ]
+ X t GK>u sup (||x (tQ) — x(t^)H)

t a >tff £ [ t i — i + A T j _ i ,t j ]
+ x t Q1Cu sup (\\x{ta) - x(tp)\\) + x t JCc,c- (9.43)

t a ,t0 e [ ti,ti+ A T i]
Considering again an arbitrary £ G [U, ti 4 - At,-], it can be implied using the triangle inequality:
sup (||x(£a ) - x(t0)\\) < x t JCc ||x(£)|| + x t JCc ||x(£c) - x(t)||

t a i t f i € [£j , t i ")"& T% ]
+ X t G)Cu sup (||x(£a ) ~ x ( ^ ) ||)

t a i t f i € [î —1 1 ”1“ i]
+ x t G1Cu sup (||x (iQ) - x ( ^ ) | | )

t a >t f i € [ t i —XH ~ x jî]
+ X t GK,u sup (||x(£a ) - x (fy )||) + x t K,c,c

t a ,tp € [ti ,U+ Arj]
< x t JCc I|x(t)|| + x t GKu sup (||x(£Q) - x(tp)\\)

ta 1 )£i—l + A T j —l ]
+ X t GK,u sup (||x(£a ) - x ( ^ ) | | )

t a y tfi £ [î —I “I” x >ti]
+X t (G1Cu + fcc) sup (||x(£a ) - x ( ^ ) ||) + x t JCc,c

t a ) t f i € [ t %y ti A T j]
From the constraint on the sampling time r in (9.40):

£c
up (l|x(iaJ - x W I U S XT, _ v r l
ta , t /3 € [t
“ XTl-XT{G1Cu + lCc)
if r +X A
+ * T11 - XnGKu lc) ta,t/3€[ti- sup
'r ^
i >ii_1+Ari_1] (llx(<a) - x M H )
+ x r 1i _ XwT\y^'U
r r -ur ^ sup
+ A'C; t a € [ t i - 1+ Art-1,tj]
(llxfe) - *(*/?)II)
XT/Cc,c (9.44)
1 - X t {G£ u + £ c ) ’
Case 3: As before, the system equation (2.1) for t € (ti + A n , f<+i] (* > 0) has to be restructured
to find an upper estimate for supW/36[t.+AT.^ +l] (||x(fa) ~ x(<6)||) (* > 0):
x = f(f,x (f)) + g (x (f))u A(f - A T,u c )) = f(t,x (t)) + g(x(f))uc (x(*))
+ g(x(f)) u A {t - A r , u c) -g (x (f))u c (x(fj + Arj))

Vi ... y .— I.
= U c (x (ti))
+ (g(x(f))uc (x(fi + Arj)) - g(x(f))uc (x(f))) .
Note that the control applied now depends on the measurement of the signals at the time instant t{.
Using again the Assumption 2.3a, it is possible to deduce from the generalized mean value theorem for
[*aj h] C [ti + A Ti, ti+i], (|fa - tb| < r) and for an arbitrary t G [t<+ At*, fi+i]:
Vffl <Ct b, ta, t b G [f* "I- ATjj f 3 f c G [fajffe] •
||x (fa) - X ( f 6)|| < T ||f(fc, x ( f c)) + g (x (fc))u C(x (fc))||
+ r ||g(x(fc))uc (x(f*)) - g(x(fc))uc (x(£* + Ar^))||
+ r ||g(x(fc))u c (x(£* + A n ) ) - g(x(fc))uc (x(£c))||
< r)Cc ||x(fc)|| + t QKu ||x(fj) - x(fi + An)\\
+tQJCu ||x(fj + A n ) ~ x(fc)|| + rKc,c
< tK c ||x ( < ) || + rJCc ||x(fc) - x(t) || + rQlfCu ||x (* * ) - x (f* + A n ) ||
+rQKu ||x(fi + A n ) - x (fc)|| + rJCc,c• (9.45)
This leads to:
sup (||x(fa ) - x ( ^ ) ||) < t Kc ||x(f)||

t a , t p € \ t i + A r i,t i+ i]
+r(JCc + QKu) sup (||x(ta ) - *(*/?) II)
+ t QK,u sup (||x(fQ) - x 42

( + r / C c , c- (9.46)
ta ,t0 e[ti,ti+ A r ]
Again for small enough sampling time r ,
1> r{K c + GKu) (9.47)

and
sup (||x(tQ)-xCfyJII) < -— r7 p ^% 7 rp -rl|x (i)||

ti+ATi,t<+1]
ta ->tf}E[tj+ ATj i - n/Cc + GKU)
t QKu
sup (||x(fa ) —x(t^)ll)
1 - r { K c + G K U ) tQ ,t0 e [ t i , t i + A T i ]
t /Cc,c
(9.48)
1 - r ( K c + Q K u )
For the three cases, the following values:
c d=f c dej XtGJCu

A/1 i - x r ( Q f C u + Kc ) ' A/2 l - x r ( Q f C u + K c)'
r d±f X t K c ,c r def XT(lCc,c + QCU) Q Q.

A /3 1 - x r ( G K u + KcY A/“ 1 - x t (ICc + G£u)
and
, d g (1- xr(G K u + Kc ))
A x ( l - r i f f K u + Kc))
can be defined. Note that CA/i, CA/ 2, CA/ 3, CA/U and kA are positive provided r has been chosen
small enough as in (9.40) and (9.47). Furthermore, CA/ 1, CA/ 2, CA / 3 and CA/Uare under this constraint
continuous functions of r > 0 and
lim (CA/1) = lim (CA/2) = lim (CA/3) = lim (CA/li) = 0. (9.50)

r —> 0 + ' r —► () + ' t — > 0+ ' r —> - 0 + 1
Furthermore
lim ( < oo, lim ( < oo, lim < oo, lim < oo. (9.51)
r _>0+ \ t J T-*o+ \ r J t->o+ \ r J r->o+ \ r J
It must be pointed out here that kA is an auxiliary variable and always appears within the proof as a
factor of CA/i, CA /2 or CA/3, where
i. r rlCc
A A/i 1 - r{GKu + Kc )
u r - rQ1Cu
A A/2 ~ 1 - r(GKu + Kc)
t K c,c
A A/3 1 - r(GKu + Kc )
and
A a Ca / A < lim / ^ a Ca / A < (9.52)

-+o+
T—¥0+ V T J t->o+ V T J T-^0+ \ T J
for small enough r (9.47).

From the definitions above, inequality (9.41) and (9.48) become:
sup (||x(*a ) - x 42
v ___ < C&/\ ||x(t)|| + CA/*x, t E [fo>ô + Ato] (9.53)
t a ,t@ E [io ,to + A ro ]
and
sup ( l |x ( < a ) - x ( ^ ) ||) < kACA / 1 ||x(i)|| + kACA / 2 sup ( ||x ( i a ) - x ( ^ ) ||)
ta ,tp e [ ti + Ar» , t i + 1 ] t Q ,tf3 E [ti, t i + A rj]
+â<â/35 t E [tj + At*,£*+i] (9.54)
and equation (9.44) can be written as
sup (||x (ta) - x ( t b)||) < CA/1 ||x(t)|| + C A/2 sup (||x(tQ) - x ( t^ ) ll)
t a ,t/3 € [ti , t i + A ri ] t a ,t / 3 € [ti—1, t i — l + A t ,—1 ]
+CA/2 sup (||x(*Q) - x (^ )i|) -h CA/3, t € [ti,U + At*].

t a ,t/3 € [ti-1 + A ri_ l ,ti]
(9.55)
Step II: Note that the upper estimates for supW/9€[t .+AT.ft.+l] (||x(fQ) - x(fy)||) in (9.54) and
suptajt (||x (ta) —x (^ )||) in (9.55) are dependent on maximum state deviations from prior
intervals.It is necessary to eliminate these dependencies.Consider an upper estimate for ||x(fj)||,
where j, j < i is arbitrary but constant. Using thetriangle inequality:
l|x(i/)|| < ||x (tj) - x (tj + AtjOU + ||x(tj + A Tj) - x (ti+ i)|| + \\x(tj+i) - x{tj+ 1 + Ari+ i)|| +
... + ||x(ti + A t*) x (f;)|| |t ' e i u + A T iti+ i] + llx (*')||
tj-f i+ A 7 j + i] ta ,ty9 €[ti+ATi^-x ,ti+ l]
+ ||x(*') | | , t' E [ti + At*, ti+i]. (9.56)
Similarly, for ||x(£j + A tj)|| and t' E [U + At*,£*+i]:
llx(fj + a t j )|| < sup (l|x(ta ) - x ;42
+ sup (||x(fa) - x ( ^ ) | | ) + ... + sup (||x(*a) - x ( fy )||)

t a , t 0 e [ tj +1 , t j + 1+ A rj + 1] ta ,tp e [ti + A ri ,t<+x]
+ ||x (f ') ||, t ' e [ t i + A n , ti+1}. (9.57)
The results of (9.53), (9.54) and (9.55) have been achieved for an arbitrary t in the respective intervals
[to, to + A tq ], [tf + A t* , t i + i ] or [f*, f* + A t* ]. Thus, it is possible to choose t to be t = f0 + A t 0,
t = and t = t{ + A 7* in the relevant three cases. By using the relations (9.56) and (9.57), it can be
then concluded from (9.53), (9.54) and (9.55) that for i > 1
SUPta,^€[io,«o+Aro] (IW*a) “ x(fy)||)

s u P W * € [to + A 7 d ,ti] (llx (* a ) - x ( f y ) | | )
suP«a,t/9€[ti,«i+ATi] (llx(â) - X ( ^ ) ||)

t G [ti + ATj,^2+i] :
S U P t a , i / 9 € [ i i + A T i >t 2 ] ( l | x ( f a ) ~ X ( * / 3) | | )
S U P W /3€ [ t i + A r i , t i + 1 ] ( I I X ( t a ) “ x ( ^ ) ||)
Â /l Â/l ^ A /l £ a /1
^ A ^ A /1 *** *a Ca / x
<?A/2 Â/2 0 Â/l ^ A /l
< 0 0 kACA / 2 00 kACA/1
Â/2 Ca / i
a
0
to
>
0 0 &a £ a /2 0
-1 ^ A /l Ca / u
SUPta,*/3€[<0,*0+ATo] (llX(*a) X(f^)||)
^ A ^ A /1 kAÂ/Z
SUPta,t/96 [*0+A70,ti] (llX(^*) ~ X(^)||)
^ A /l Â/Z
s u P * a ,t/j e [ti,* i+ A n ] (llx ( * * ) ~ x f o ) l l )
x + kACA/1 l|xWI| + kACAj^
SUPfQêî+Ari.ti] (llx (^<*) —x(f^ )||)
Ca / i Ca / z
Su^ta ,t0 e[ti+ATi,ti+i) (llx (^ a ) - x ( ^ ) | | )
-
_ &a £ a / i kACA/^
The first term on the right hand side of the inequality can be subtracted, so that
—Ca / i —Ca / i 'A/l —Ca / i
k ACA /2 1 —&a£a/1 —^ a Ca /I • •• —kACA/i
—Ca /2 -c A /2 -C A /l —Â /l
0 ÂÂ/2 1 -& a £ a / i
'A/2 —c A /2 - c A /l
~ k ACA / 2 1
SUP ta ,t0 e[to,to+ A ro} (llx(ta) ~ XM I I )

s u P ta ,t/3e[to+Aro,ti] (llx (^c*) — x ( ^ ) | | )
s u P < a ,£ /3 € [< i,ti+ A T i] (llx ( ^ a ) — x (f /? )l|)

x
SUP*a,t/»€[*l+A71ft2] dlX(^ ) ~ Xfe )||)
^ P ta^ elti+A riA +j] (llx (â) - x ( ^ ) ||)

Ca / i Ca / u
^ A ^ A /l ^ A ^ A /3
Ca / i Ca /3
< kACA /l llx MII + ^ A ^ A /3 ,t G 4- A Tj, ti-f-i] (9.58)
Ca / i Ca /3
&a C a / i _ ^ A ^ A /3
This results in a ‘linear’ system of inequalities. If it is possible to find an inverse for Mî and to show that
the elements of M ^ 1 are non-negative, then this solves the system of inequalities. In particular, in the
last line of the solved inequality system, an upper estimate of supta (||x(fQ) —x42
'
would be found which was independent of the maximum state deviations from prior intervals. Similarly,
it is possible to develop an inequality system of order (2 i —1) for i > 1 involving a matrix
1 - C A/l —C a / i —C a / i ................. -C a /i
—Â ^ A / 2 1 - k a Ca / i - ^ a Ca / i ............ —ÂÂ/l
—C a /2 —Ca / 2 1 —C a / i ................. —C a / i
0 0 —ka C a / 2 1 ............ —ÂÂ/1
0 0 —kACA / 2 1 —A;a CA/i
0 —Ca/2 —Ca/ 2 1
M 2i- 1 € R2i- l x 2i- l
(9.59)
obtained by deleting the last row and column from M 2 i~\.
Step III: Having derived the systems of inequalities, it is now necessary to find conditions for the
existence of M 2~x and for arbitrary i. Furthermore, it shall be shown that M ^ 1 and have
non-negative elements when the sampling time r is chosen sufficiently small.
C h a p te r 9. D is c r e t i z a t i o n o f n o n - l i n e a r c o n t r o l s w ith s m a l l c o m p u ta tio n a l d e la y s 203
By the proof of Graybill (1969, Theorem 11.4.3, p. 383) it follows, that if all leading principal
minors of M^x or Mî-x are positive, then the respective inverses of Mî or M<n-\ exist and have non
negative elements. Due to the patterned structure of the matrices M u and M u - 1 , this is equivalent to
demanding:
det(M 2j) > 0, det(M 2j_ i) > 0
for any j , where i > j > 0. It is therefore sufficient to derive conditions for arbitrary i, so that
the determinants of M 2 i and M 2 i~i are positive. For this reason, consider the following sub-matrices
M s / 2 i—i-> M s i/ 2 i - 2 and M $ 2 / 2 i —2 °f ^ 2 i and M.2 i—\- The matrix M s / 2 i - 1 £ 1>c2*—1, results
from deleting the (2i — l)-th column and the (2?)-th row of matrix M 2*. The matrices M $1 / 2 1 - 2 ^
j^2 x—2 x2i —2 or m s 2 j 2 i _ 2 £ ]^2 x-2 x2 x- 2 can found by deleting the (2i —l)-th row and the (2i —2)-th
or the (2i — 3)-th column of M 2 %-\. Using the general rules for cofactor expansion to calculate the
determinants of matrices, it follows by observing the last row of the matrices M 2*, M zi-i, M S/ 2 i - 1 ,
M s i/ 2 i - 2 and M 5 2 / 2 1 - 2 for i > 1:
det(M2i) = det(M2*—1 ) + ââ/2 det(M s/ 2 i—i) (9.60)
det(M 2i- i ) = det(M 2*-2) + Ca/2 (det(M 5 1 / 21- 2 ) —det( ^ 5 2/2i-2)) (9.61)
det(M 5 / 2 i_i) = —Ca /1 det(M 2 i_ 2 ) + Ca/2 / 2 i - 2 ) ~ det(Ms2/ 2 i- 2 )) (9.62)
det [M $i/ 2 i - 2) = det(M 2 i_ 3 ) + &a£a / 2 det(-^5/2i-3) (9.63)
det (M52 / 2 i_ 2 ) = - ( ^ a Ca /I + 1) det(^S/2i-3)* (9.64)
By substituting for det(M 2 i - 2 ) (9.60), det(M si/2f—2 ) (9.63) and det(M$ 2 / 2 i - 2 ) (9.64) in the right
hand side of the result for det(M 2i_i) (9.61), it follows that:
det(M 2i_i) = det(M2i_3) + A:aâ/2 det(-^5/2i-3)
+Â /2 (—ÂÂ/1 det(M2*-3) + &aCa/ 2 det(^5/2x-3) + (^ a^ a/i + 1) det(M5/2i_ 3 ))
= (1 —/c a ^ a /i^ a /2) det(M2i_3)
+ (JzaCa/ 2 + âC a / 2 + ÂÂ/lÂ/2 + Â/2) det(^S /2i-3)
Thus, it is possible to define:
7-11 d= (1 —kACA/lCA/ 2 ) (9.65)
r 12 d— ~ (&aCa/2 + Â<â/2 + ÂÂ/lÂ/2 + Â/2) (9.66)

and it follows from these definitions that
det(M 2j_i) = r n det(M 2i_3) + r r i2 det(Af5/2i_3). (9.67)
Substituting similarly the results of det(M 2j_i), det(M 5i/2*_2) and det(M 52/2i_2) into (9.62), it
follows that:
det(M s/2j_:i.) = —1^ a /i (det(2^ 22—3) + & a£a/2 det(M 5/2j_3))
+ ^ a /2 (—^ a ^ a /i det(M 2i_ 3) 4- k^C ^ / 2 det(M s/2i_3) + (&a£a/i + 1) det(M 5/2i_3))
= d e t ( M 2 j _ 3 ) ( — C a / i — ^ a ^ a / 2 ^ a / i ) + d e t ( M 5 / 2 i _ 3 ) (k&C\j2 + C& / 2 ^ .
By (9.51), it is justified to define for small enough r:
r 21 d=} i ( f c AC i/2 + CA/2) (9.68)
r 22 =7 i (CA/1 + fcACA/2CA/1) (9.69)
Thus,
det(M 5/2i_!) = - r det(M 2i_3)r22 + rd e t(M s /2i_3)r2i. (9.70)
By (9.50), there must exist a positive fi so that
1 > AjaCa/iâ/2 (9-71)
and the relations (9.40) and (9.47) are satisfied for any r in the interval (0, n ]. Choosing r G (0, fi], it
follows by (9.50) and (9.51) for the values of r n , r i2, r 2i and r 22:
m > 0, lim ( r n ) = 1 < 00, r X2 > 0, lim (rx2) < 00,

r —>0+ r —>0+
r 2i > 0, lim (r2X) < 00, r 22 > 0, lim (r22) < 00.
_ T -+ 0 + T->-0+
Having derived (9.70), the determinant det(M S/ 2 i- i) can be recursively expressed as:
det(M 5/ 2i_ i) = - r d e t ( M 2i_3)r22 + r d e t( M 5/2i_3)r2i
= —r det(M 2j_3)r22 —r 2r 2Xr 22 det(M 2j_5) + r 2 r%i d et{Ms/ 21 - 5 )
= - r det(M 2i_3)r22 - r 2r 2xr 22 det(M 2i_5) r ^ r ^ f 1 det(M 2i_ i_ 2fc)
+ r *r2i det(M 5/2j_ !_ 2fc), (9.72)

where i > 1 and k G Z are chosen so that 2i —1 —2k > 1. By (9.72) and (9.67) and choosing k — i —1,
it follows for det(M 2i_i), i > 2:
det(M 2i_i) = r n det(M 2i_3) ~ t 2 det(M 2x_5)ri2r 22 - T3r i 2r 2i r 22 det(M 2i_7) • • •
- r A:r i 2r 22r^1_ 2det(M 2i_ i_ 2fc) + r fcr i 2rJ1- 1det(M s /2i_ i_ 2fc) |*=«-i
= 7*ii det(M 2x_3) - t 2 det(M 2i_5)ri2r 22 - r 3r i 2r 2i r 22 det(M 2i_7) • • •
—Tl_1r i 2r 22r273 det (M i) + det(M 5/i). (9.73)
The latter recursive formula for det(M 2j_i) can now be used to show that det(M 2j_i) is positive for
small enough sampling time r . This shall be done by applying the principle of complete induction:
• Assumption 0: det (M i) > 0 is true, since det (M i) = 1
• Step 0: Show that det (M3) > 0 for small enough r.
By (9.50) and using
det(M 3) = 1 —2 &A Â/l £ a /2 —Â ^ a /2 Â/l —Â/2 Â/l —('A/l Â/2 (9.74)
there must exist a constant f 2 > 0, such that det (M3) > 0 for any r in the interval (0, f 2].
• Assumption i: There exists a constant f3(z — 1) > 0
3 f3(i — 1) > 0 V t G (0, T3(i — 1)] : det(M 2i_3) > 0, det(M 2i_5) > 0, ...,det(M i) > 0. (9.75)
• Step i: Show that det(M 2j_i) > 0 for sufficiently small r, i.e. it has to be shown that there is a
constant f 3(z) > 0 so that for r € (0, f 3(i)], the determinant det(M 2i_i) > 0 is positive.
Since det(M 2j_3), ... , det(M i) are continuous, non-singular functions of r , r G (0,T3(z - 1 )],
and
lim (det(M 2j_3)) = 1, lim (det(M 2i_5)) = 1,..., lim (det(M i)) = 1
T—>0+ T—►()+ T—>0-f
and due to Assumption i, there must exist a function
k = x (2, r) : Z x R —> M, >c{i, r) > 1
for all r € (0, f 3(i - 1)], so that:
d e t ( M 2 i- 5 ) < - o d e t(M 2i- 7) < & Q d et(M Q < ^

d e t( M 2i_ 3 ) ’ d e t( M 2x_5) ’ ’ d et (M 3)
and
lim (k) = 1. (9.76)
T-+0+
Note that the value of k is larger than 1 as seen from the relation of det (M i) = 1 to det (M3) (9.74).
Furthermore, the condition limT_).o+(*0 = 1 is admissible since
/ d e t ( M 2 i- 5 ) \
t - > o + V d e t ( M 2i _ 3 ) y
for any i > 2. Using the value of k , it can be implied:
d e t ( M 2 i- 5 ) d e t ( M 2 i_ 7 ) _ d e t ( M 2 i_ 7 ) d e t ( M 2 i_ 5 ) » det(M i) ^ - 2
d e t ( M 2 i_ 3 ) d e t ( M 2 i_ 3 ) d e t ( M 2 i_ 5 ) d e t ( M 2 i_ 3 ) “ ’ d e t ( M 2i_ 3 )
(9.77)
Using (9.73) and d et(M s/i) = —CA/i, it follows:
d e t ( M 2 i_ i ) = d e t ( M 2 i _ 3 ) (rn - r 2 r i2 r 2 2 - T 3 r i 2 r 2 i r 2 2 ^ e t ^ 2 *“ 7 ^
det(M 2i_3) det(M 2j_3)
_z—1„ „ i—3 det(Ûi) ^ z—1 „z—2/7

" r ri2r22r21 d e t ( f c ) J “ T r i 2r 2i C A/1.
Thus, it is deduced using (9.77) and applying the formulas for a geometric series:
det(M 2i_i) > det(M 2i_3) ( r n - r 2*rri2r 22 - r 3r i 2r 2i r 22i<2 ------T*_ 1r i2r 22r^73x z-2)
—r z—1r i 2r„z—2/7
2i CA/i
= det(M 2i_ 3) ( r n - r r 22— ri* r2i - r r 22— ( r x r 2i )2 r r 22— ( r x r 21)1" 2 )

V r 21 r21 r 2i )
- r l~ 1 r i 2 r l2J 2 CA/l
= det(M 2i_3) ^ r n - r 2>cri2r 221 x ^ “ 'r*_ lr i27272CA/i
j /n j_ A/ T2x r i 2r 22^
= det(M 2i_ 3) r n ~ z--------- =-
V 1 - r ^ r21 J
z- 1 i_ 2 /» , 2 - det(M 2i_3) ( r x r 2i)z_2

- r J’- lV
„
12rJ .^- 2 ,CA/1
-'A /l +
"T" d e t( M 0 r * r 12r 22 t ^ •
=1
By assuming 1 - r& r21 > 0 and utilizing (9.77) and det(M i) = 1 , it can be seen that
r 2>rri2r 22^ {_2n ( _2^ _____ ( r r 2i )*~2

d e t ( M 2 i_ i ) > d e t ( M 2 i_ 3 ) ^ n - [ ~ r * l r i 2 ^ 2 i 2 ^ A / i + r 2 5h - i 2 r 2 2 y ^ r x r 2i
^ r 2x r i 2r 2 2 ^ ( r x r 22 - CA l + r x r 2iCA l \
(M2i_3)
= d e t
v \rn -
1- r x r r 2 i J
^ z + r* Ar 2 i l V i2
\ 1— r x r 2 i
----------------- ----------- -------------------------
/
7 w w s( r 2k r 12r22\
= det(M 2i_3) ( r n - x Z J
* ( C a /1 + * a C A /2Ca / 1 ) - C A /1 + * ( k A C A / 2 + C A / 2 ) C A /1
+ t * 1 r 2 i z 2 r i2 1 —riirr2i
C h a p te r 9. D i s c r e t i z a t i o n o f n o n - l in e a r c o n t r o l s w ith s m a l l c o m p u ta tio n a l d e la y s 207
= det(M 2i_3) ( r n -
V 1 - T X T 21 /
+ r i- V 21- V 12CA/1 ( ^ - l + ^ /2 + ^ C j /2 + ^ / 2\ (9?8)

' \ 1 - TXT21 J
There must exist fs(i) > 0 such that for any r in the interval (0, fs(i)] the relations (9.40), (9.47),
(9.71), (9.75) and
T2 Stri2 ro2
1 > r ^ r 2i, r n > ------ ----- (9.79)
1 —TXT21
hold. Under such conditions, and using k > 1, the right hand side of (9.78) is always positive and it
follows det(M 2i- i ) > 0 for r € (0, 73(2)].
• Conclusion: Using the principle of complete induction, it follows that det(M 2;_i) > 0, where
r e (0 , T3 (2 )].
This result can now be used to show that det (M2;) is positive for small enough r. At first, it needs
to be proved that det (M2) > 0 for small enough r. It is obvious that:
det (M 2) = 1 —kA CA/iC A/2' (9.80)
Thus, there must exist r4(i = 1) > 0 so that det(M 2) > 0 for any r e (0 ,f4(i = 1)]. As the next
step, the general result must be derived showing det (M2;) > 0. By considering (9.60) and (9.72) and
choosing k = i — 1, a formula for det (M2;) is:
det(M 2l) = det(M 2i_i) - r k ACA/ 2 r 22 det(M 2;_3) - r 2 kACA/ 2 r 2 1 ^ 2 2 det(M 2;_5) • • •
- T i~ 1 kACAi 2 r 2 2 r 2 i 2 det (M i) + det (M5/1).
As before:
( det(M2i_3) 2» n det(M2i_5)
det(M 2i) = d e t^ -O [1 - rfcACA/2r 22det(M2._^ - r •••
- T- 1A:ACA/2r 22r*725^ g l y ) + det(M s/1).
By assuming (9.75) and det(M 2;- i ) > 0 hold if r € (0, f 3(*)], there is k = x (i + 1 , r) > k > 1, such
that:
det(M 2i_i) > 0,det(M 2i_3) > 0, ...,det(M i) > 0, (9.81)
det(M 2i_3) „ . det(M ai-s) det(Afa - 5) det(M 2i_3) n , det (M i)

° < det(JW2i_ i) d e t d e t ( A f 2i- 3) det(M 2i_i) ~ det(M 2l_i) “
and
lim (k) = 1. (9.82)
T —► ()+
C h a p t e r 9 . D is c r e t iz a t io n o f n o n - l in e a r c o n t r o l s w it h s m a l l c o m p u t a t io n a l d e l a y s 208
Suppose 1 —r r 2i x > 0, it can be concluded from det(MS/i) = —CAj\ that:
det(M 2i) > det(M 2j- i) ( l - — kACA / 2 ( r r 21x) - — kACA / 2 {rr 2 i x )2 • • •

V ^21 ^21
~ ^ ~ k ACA / 2 ( r r 2i>ir)t-1 ^ + r ^ k ^ C ^ r ^ 1 d et(M s / l )
> d e t(M 2i
2i—l) ^1 - r k r 2 2 k A CA/ 2— ^ + Tl~l kACA(2 r ^ 1 &et{MSfi)
= d e t (M2i- i ) ( l - T* r22kAC* /2)+Tdet(M 2i- 1)kr22k±CA/2 (tr21^ ‘ !

\ 1 — r r 2 i*c J 1 — t t 2\ k
- r l~l r ^ l kA CA / 2 CA / 1
> d e t(M 2i_ i) ( l - + r j C T - 2 2 fcA C A / 2 x ~
= det(M 2j_ i) f l -
\ 1 —r r 2i x J ' l — Tr2\K
j \ (i T^r 2 2 kACA/2\ i_ l7 „ „ x - l + xfcACA/2 + r r 2i x

= det(M 2j_ i) 1 r1- I + t* r 21 kACA / 1 CA / 2 ----------- :----------- .
\ 1— r r 2 i x / ' ' 1— r r 2 i x
(9.83)
Therefore, there must be a f^fz) > 0 so that for r € (0, 74(2)] the inequalities (9.40), (9.47), (9.71),
(9.81),
^ T2 k r \ 2 r 22
rn > z 1---- (9.84)
1 —r x r 2i
and
r k r 2 2 kACAj 2 .
1> — r —, 1 > T x r21 (9.85)
1 — rr2i x
hold.
Thus, the right hand side of (9.83) is positive for x > 1. This shows that det(M2i) > 0 for
T € (0, f 4(i)] (2 > 0). Thus, for small enough r > 0 any M 2i- 1 and M 2i (2 > 0) are invertible.
or Mî have only non-negative elements.
S t e p V : I t h a s b e e n s e e n t h a t M2i- 1 o r M2i h a v e i n v e r s e s w i t h n o n - n e g a t i v e e l e m e n t s i f t h e s a m
p l i n g t i m e r is c h o s e n s m a l l e n o u g h . H o w e v e r , t h e u p p e r b o u n d s 7 3 (2 ) a n d 7-4(2) f o r r a s w e ll a s th e
v a l u e s o f x ( z ) a p p e a r t o b e d e p e n d e n t o n t h e o r d e r o f t h e m a t r i c e s M 2i- 1 o r M 2i. T h u s , i t w o u l d b e
m o r e u s e f u l to p r o v e th a t th is d e p e n d e n c y o n 2 is n o t n e c e ss a ry .
F o r th is re a s o n , a p re lim in a ry re s u lt m a y b e d e riv e d . It sh all b e s h o w n u s in g th e p rin c ip le o f c o m -
p le te in d u c tio n th a t any * > 3.
• Assumption 0:
det (Mi) det(Ms) . ^ ..
det (M 3 ) ^ det(Ms) / ° r T G (°»^(* = 3)1
Using the relation for det (M3 ) in (9.74), the fact that det (Mi) = 1 and
det(Ms) = 1 —4 Ca / 1 Ca/ 2 —4 /ca Ca/ 2 Ca/i ~ 2 Ca/ 2 Ca/i —â Ca/2 Ca/i
—2 Ca /\ Ca /2 ~ 2 &A Â/2 Ca /1 “I" Â Ca/2 Ca/1 Â Â/2 Â/l —Â Â/2 Ca/1
—2 & a C a /2 C a /i — C a / i C a /2
and since r E (0, f 3(i = 3)], it is sufficient to prove:
0 < det(Ms ) 2 —det(Ms).
However, this is satisfied for r E (0, t 3 (2 = 3)] since
det (M 3 ) 2 — det(Ms) = 2&a C^ /2 C a /i + ^ a C a /2 C a / i + C a / i C a /2 + 2 A?a C a / 2 C a /i
+2 /ca Ca/2 Ca/i + 3 /ca Ca/2 Ca/i + 4 &at Ca/2 Ca/i 3 â t Ca /2 Ca/i
+ ^ a C a /2 C a /i + ^ a C a /2 C a / i + 2 A ja C a / 2 C a / i + 2 A ;a C \ j 2 C a / i + C a / 2 C a / i ^ a
+2 Ca/2 Ca/i â + C \ j x C \ j 2 + 4 Aja C^/2 C \ jx > 0.
• Assumption i:
det(M 2j_ 7 ) < det(M 2 i_ 5 )
det(M 2 i_ 5 ) ” det(M 2i_ 3 )
and
det(M 2 i_i) > 0, det(M 2i_ 3 ) > 0, det(M 2j_ 5 ) > 0,
r e (o,f3(i)] =>
ru > 0 , r i2 > 0 , r 2i > 0 , r 22 > 0
. S t e p i : Show that
By (9.67) and (9.70), it follows:
r 2i det(M 2i_i) = n i ^ i det(M 2i_ 3 ) + Tri2 r 2 i det(M 5 / 2i_ 3 )
det(M 5 / 2<-i)ri 2 = -T det(M 2i_ 3 )ri 2 r 22 + rdet(M iS/ 2z-3 ) n 27*2 i
Subtracting the two latter equations gives:
7*21 det(M 2i-i) - det(M 5 / 2i_ i)ri 2 = (m ^ i + r r i 2 r 22 ) det(M 2i - 3)
<*=> d et (M s/ 2 i - i)r i 2 = r 2 i det(M 2i-i) - ( r n r 2 i 4- r r u ^ ) det(M 2i_ 3 )- (9.86)

F u r t h e r m o r e , i t f o l l o w s f r o m ( 9. 67) t h a t
d e t {M2j- 3) _ r n d e t ( M 2 i - 5 ) + rrn d e t ( M 5 / 2 i _ 5 )
d e t ( M 2 i _ i ) r n d e t ( M 2 i _ 3) + r r i 2 d e t ( M 5 / 2 i _ 3 )
S u b s t i t u t i n g f o r r i 2 d e t ( M 5 / 2 i _ 5 ) a n d r i 2 d e t {Ms/2i-z) u s i n g ( 9. 86) i m p l i e s :
d e t ( M 2 i_ 3 ) _ ( r n + r r 2 i) d e t ( M 2 i_ 5 ) - ( r r n r 2 i + r 2 r i 2 r 2 2 ) d e t ( M 2i _ 7 )
d e t ( r n + rr2i) d e t ( M 2 i _ 3 ) - ( r r n r 2 i + r 2 r i 2 r 2 2 ) d e t ( M 2 i _ 5 )
(r ll + r r 2l) det(M2| : 3 ) - (Trn r 21 + T2rn rn ) J

(rn + r r 2i) - ( r r n r 2i + T2r l2r 22 ) d e ta il,}
( r n + r r 2i) ~ ( r r n r 2i + T 2ri2ra ) d et(fel)

(r u + r r 21) - ( r r u r 21 + T 2r 12r 22) d S ^ I , }
U sin g < d e t ( M 2 * ~ 3 ) ^rom Assumption i, t h e f o l l o w i n g i n e q u a l i t y c a n b e d e r i v e d :
d e t( M 2j_ 3 ) ^ ( r n + r r 2i) ~ ( r r u r 2i + r 2r 12r 22) _ d e t ( M 2 i- 5 )

d e t ( M 2 l_ i ) _ ( r n + r r 2 1 ) _ ( r r u r 2 i + t 2t x2t 22) d e t ( M 2 l_ 3 )
• Conclusion: B y t h e p r i n c i p l e o f c o m p l e t e i n d u c t i o n , i t f o l l o w s t h a t d e t ( M 2 i ~ 3 ) — d e t ( A ^ ~ I ~ f j ^ o r ^
i > 3 a n d f o r s m a l l e n o u g h r > 0.
T h e l a t t e r s h a l l s e r v e a s t h e p r e - r e q u i s i t e t o s h o w t h a t x(i, r) > 1 is n o t n e c e ssa rily d e p e n d e n t
o n t h e o r d e r o f t h e m a t r i c e s d e t ( M 2 j _ i ) a n d d e t ( M 2 j ) . S u p p o s e a g a i n r € ( 0, f 3 ( z — 1) ] , su c h th a t
d e t ( M 2 i_ 3 ) > 0, d e t ( M 2 i_ 5 ) > 0, d e t ( M 2 i_ 7 ) > 0, . . . , d et(M i) > 0. A d d itio n a lly , it c a n b e s h o w n
sim ila rly to ( 9. 73) :
d e t ( M 2 i_ 3 ) = r n d e t ( M 2 i_ 5 ) - r 2 d e t ( M 2 i_ 7 ) r i 2 r 22 - r 3 r i 2 r 2 i r 22 d e t ( M 2 i_ 9 ) • • •
—TA:_1ri2r22r2f3 det(M2i_i_2/t) + rfc 1r\2r%1 2 det(Ms/2i-i-2k)i (9 .87 )
and
d e t ( M 2 i_ 5 ) = r n d e t ( M 2 i_ 7 ) - r 2 d e t ( M 2 i_ 9 ) r i 2 r 22 - r 3 r i 2 r 2 i r 22 d e t ( M 2 i_ n ) • • •
—T/c-2ri2r22r2f4 det(M2j_i_2/;) -1- r k 2ri2rki 3 det(Ms/2i-i-2k)>
w h e r e m u l t i p l y i n g b y r r 2 i > 0 a n d c h o o s i n g k = i —1 i m p l i e s :
r r 2 1 d e t ( M 2 j _ 5 ) = r r 2 i r n d e t ( M 2 i_ 7 ) - r 3 d e t ( M 2 i_ 9 ) r 2 i r i 2 r 22 - r 4 r i 2 r 2 j r 22 d e t ( M 2 i_ n )
r z _ 2r i 2r 22r 2 7 4 d e t ( M i ) + t 1 - 2 ^ ^ 3 d e t ( M 5 /1 ).
B y s u b t r a c t i n g f r o m t h e l a t t e r t h e e q u a l i t y ( 9. 87) :
r r 2i d e t ( M 2j_ 5 ) — d e t( M 2j_ 3 ) = ( r r 2 i r n + r 2r i2r 22) d e t( M 2j_ 7 ) — r n d e t( M 2j_ 5 )

it follows
det(ilf2i_ 3) = det(M 2i_5)( rn + r r 2i) - (r r2i n i + r 2r 12r 22) det(M 2i_7).
Thus,
det(M 2i_5) det(M 2i_5)
det(M 2z_3) det(M 2i_5)(rn + r r 21) - ( r r 2i r n + r 2n 2r 22) det(M2i- 7)
_ 1______________
(9.88)
(r n + r r 2i ) - ( r r 2i r u + T2r 12r 22) ^ j ^ ‘^ j
S“ ce d e t ^ and defining
_ def det(M 2j_7)

det(M 2i_5 )5
it can be concluded
1
x <
( r n + r r 2i) - ( r r 2i r n + T2r i 2r 22)xr'
Thus, it is possible to solve the following quadratic inequality in x
> ^ (rr2i r i i + T2r i2r 22) - (rn + T r 2 \)> c + 1> 0
and it follows that either
^ < r n + r r 21 / (rn + r r 2i )2
( r r 2i m + T2r i2r 22)2 y ( rr 2i r n + T2r i2r 22)24 (rr2i r n + T2r i2r 22)
or
^ r n + r r 2i | / ( r n + T r 2i)2______________ 1_______
X ~~ ( r r 2i r n + r 2r 12r 22)2 y (rr2i r n + r 2r i2r22)24 (rr2i r n + r 2ri2r 22)
The second alternative may be discarded as
u ( r n + r r 21 ^ / ( n i + T r 2 i ) 2______________________ 1____________
= oo,
r^?o+I ( r r 2i r n + r 2r i2r 22)2 y (rr2i r n + r 2r i2r 22)24 (rr2i r n + r 2r i 2r 22)
which contradicts the condition that limT_).o+(*f) = 1 and limT_>o+(><) = 1 as seen in (9.76) and
(9.82). Thus, choose
(. _ 1 , def rn + r r 2i_________/ (rn + rr21 ) 2 _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 1 __________

,T ( rr 2i r n H-r2r i2r 22)2 y (rr2i r n + r 2r i2r22)24 (rr21r n + r 2r i2r 22)
and it follows by (9.88):
d e t( M 2j-5 ) ^ 1 _____________________
d e t ( M 2 i_ 3 ) ” (rn + rr21) - (rr2i r n + r 2ri2r22)x{i - 1 , r)
2
r n + r r 2i + y j (rn - r r 2 1)2 - 4 r2r 2i r 22
= x (i-l,r ). (9.89)
Hence, it is now possible to set
/■ \ d e f
x = x (i, r) = (9.90)
m + r r 2 i + \ / ( r ii - r r 2 1)2 - 4r 2r 2i r 22
and this x — x(i, r), x(r) : ]R+ —5 i, which is independent of *, can be used to prove det(M 2 i-\) > 0
for small enough r.
With this result, it can be concluded that there exists a fs > 0 , so that for any i > 0, det(M 2 i-\) > 0
and det(M 2f) > 0 and r G (0, fs]. It is sufficient for fs to satisfy the following constraints:
Vr G (0, f 5] : 1 > r (K c + GJCU)(see (9.40) and (9.47)),
1 > kACA / 1 CA/2(see (9.71))
1> t 35 t 2 i , r n > f f i j g g 2(see (9.79))
1> (see (9.85))
det(M s) > 0, det(Ms) > 0, det(M j) > 0,
det (M 2) > 0(see (9.80))
==► det(M 2i_ i) > 0, det(M2i) > 0, i > 0. (9.91)
Step V: Since it has been seen that for r G (0, f 5], the matrices and M ^ 1 exist and have only
non-negative elements, it is now possible to solve the inequality system (9.58). In particular, it is of
interest to find an upper approximate for the (2i - l)-th and (20-th element (i.e. the bottom elements)
of the following two column vectors:
1
Â/l
&a£a/ i ÂÂ/1
.,2t—1 def Tir— 1 v Â/l Â/l

V - M 2i- i x , v 2i =f x
kACA / 1 kACA/i
i--------
I—
*
âCa/ i
>
_ _
i
By calculating the inverses of the matrices M 2 i - i (9.59) and M 2i (9.58) via the respective adjuncts, it
is derived:
9i_i , , d et (M 2i_ 2)
(n , ^ 2 *, det(M 2<_ i) , p x
= - 1 + det(M2j: i ) ^ + 9 ’ - 2i “ _1 + det (M 2 i) + !) •
Thus, it is sufficient to find upper estimates for and Wi

Consider first an upper estimate for d e t a i l ) - (9.60):
det(M 2i_2) = det(M2i_3) + kACA / 2 det(Ms/2z-3)
It can be concluded from (9.70) that det(M s/2»-3) < 0 for r € (0,f5] since det(M 5/!) = —CA/i-
Thus,
det(M 2i_2) < det(M 2i_3).
Hence,
det(M2i_ 3 )
Sal-1 < - 1 + d etJA fa-i) (Ca/1 + ^ ~ _1 + * ^ A/1 + ^ ‘
Use the relation (9.83) to find
* = _ 1+ ^ t( ^ _ x ) ( ) d e t^ y -O ( }
d e t(M 2i) ^ A/ ‘ > det(M2i_l} ( 1 - T,^ V » ) ^ AA ’
= -1 + , (kACA/i + l) .
T3a~22fcAÂ/2
1—7T21
Thus, define the values
def
A i/i - / (—1 + x (C a/i + l) ) 5 A 1/2 — ( “ 1 + Tftrj kACA/; (fcACA/l + 1) j (9-92)
\ l- r r 2i* /
It can be seen that A 1/ 1 > 0, lin v ^+ olA x/i) = 0 and A 1/2 > 0, limT_>+0(A1/2) = 0 for r G (0, f 5].
Step VI: The last term of the inequality system (9.58) will now be considered.
r
1
Ca / u Ca / i
co
i
3
^ a Ca /3 ^ a Ca / i 0
Ca /3 Ca / i 0
w 2' - 1 =' M 2- 1 , x = X ^ + M2l i l X
^ a Ca /3 ^ a Ca / i <-A/l
: 0
0
<
rH
. ^ A/3
1
i
dZ/z2i-l
1
i
Ca / i Ca/u —Ca/3
3
^ a C a /3 k A CA / i 0
tÂ/3 0
<f
CO
Ca / i
w 2i d= M ^ 1 x = x + M2~1 x
Ca / i
^ a C a /3 ^ a Ca / i
&a C a / 3 k A CA f \
C h a p te r 9. D i s c r e tiz a tio n o f n o n - l in e a r c o n t r o l s w ith s m a l l c o m p u ta tio n a l d e la y s 214
Using the result of (9.92), upper approximates of the bottom elements in the vectors yP‘‘l and w 2% 1 are:
.2i ^ A
a ^~ A
A //3
3 , jJ2i
h ...22 1i -1
- l ^/ aA ^WA
ZV/ 33 ., „j i2ii—1
-i
— 2i S ^ 1/ 2 7 ; H z 2 i, — 2i —1 ^ ^ 1/ 17 ; ------------b ^ 2i — 1 "
CA /1 t-A /1
n
Note that = c o n s t. < 00 for any t € (0, T5] and A t. This can be seen from the definitions of
C^/i and Ca/3 in (9.49) and from the fact that Kc > 0 for the exponentially decaying continuous-time
control (Assumption 2.3a). Thus, define the following values
def 'A /3 A def A 'A /3

^2/1 A 1/ 17; 5 A 2/2 — ^ l /2 7r (9.93)
C' A
a /1
/l C
' '-'A /l
and this implies
™2i < A 2 /2 + d b ™ 2 i- l < A 2/1 + d i - V
It is now a simple step to show that z^\Z\ —> 0 and —* 0 for z — 00 for small enough r. Consider
the matrix M r / / 2i_ 1
—âC a/2 1 —&aCa/i —âC a/i -& a Ca / i
Ca/2 —C a /2 1 —C a / i —Ca / i
df / 0 0 — A;aCa/2 1 - / caCa / i
M R7/2 i —1
—C a /2 -C A /2
0 - / caCa /2
M R 1/ 2 i—l e i- l) x ( 2 z - l ) ^ (9 .9 4 )
which is the result of deleting the first row and the 2z-th column of M u (9.58). Respectively, the matrix
M r u /2z—2 is the result of deleting the first row and the (2z —l)-th column of the matrix M2f_i (9.59):
—k&CA / 2 1 ^ a Ca / i ^ a Ca / i ■â Ca / i
—C a/2 —C a /2 1 -C A / l - c A /l
def 0 0 —^ a C a /2 1 -&a Ca / i
M,Rn / 2 i - 2
— Aj a C a / 2 1
'A /2 -C A /2
M r i i / 2 1 -2 e R(2i- 2)x(2i- 2). (9.95)
„2i can be calculated using the adjunct of M 2i_i and M2i:

The values of z ^ I i and z§
d et (M r / / / 2j _ 2 ) 2< _ d e t ( M r / / ^ - x)
~ 2i —1 _ (9.96)
—2i —1 — (CA/. - CA/3) . d i = - ■ i t^ f ' (CA/. - Ca/s) .
d et (M 2
The determinants of M r ii j 2i_ 2 and M ri j 2i_ x can be recursively calculated by observing the bottom
rows of the two matrices:
det(M /j//2i_i) = —^ a ^ a /2 det(Mj[j///2i - 2)
d et(M Rn / 2i__2) = “ Ca/2 det (M jj//2j_3) + C^/2 det ( M # //2j_4)
= (k&C\ /2 + det(M R///2i_4)*
det(M^///2) — (k&C\i2 + C71/2)
it follows that
det(M j?/ / 2i- i ) = —&aCa/2 (âC ^/2 + C a/2^
and
det(M ^///2i-2) = (^ a C ^ /2 + CA/2)
By (9.78), (9.89) and (9.90) and det(M i) = 1, a lower bound for det(M 2i_i) is:
det(M 2i_i) > det(M2i_3) ( r u - T >cri*r22\

\ 1 - r x r 2i J
/ 2= \ ®~i
/ t z n r i 2 r 22 \
> m - z— -— 1
V 1 —r x r z i J
Thus, it is seen for det (M2i) using the lower estimate of det(M 2t- i) and (9.83)
d et(M a) > det(JW2i- i ) ( l -

\ 1 - r r 2\H J
T2x ri2 r2 2 V -1 A TXT22â C a/2\

> rn
1 — t k t 2\ J \ 1 —r r 2\>c )
These lower estimates of det(M 2*) and det(M 2i_i) lead to upper approximations of \z%~\ | and \z2\\
in (9.96)
( ri1 _ 1^7^2122.)
y 1 —T X T 2 1 J
I 2 i| ^ fc A ^ A /2 ( f c A C j /2 + C a / 2 ) ^
2 ~~ (r. (l Tfe-23fcACA/2y A/" A/3^'

^ 11 1— T X T 2 X J \ 1— TT21X J
Thus, if
(fcACi/2 + CA/2) < ( r n - g g ) (9.97)
C h a p te r 9. D is c r e tiz a tio n o f n o n - l in e a r c o n t r o l s w ith s m a l l c o m p u ta tio n a l d e la y s 216
then lim ôo (z^\_1) — 0 and lim ôo — 0. These results imply that there are upper estimates
for supW /j€[f.+Ar.>ti+l] (||x(fa ) - x(t^)||) and suptatt/s6[t.ft.+Ar.] (||x(f0) - x (t6)||) which are inde
pendent of state values prior to the considered intervals [ti + At*, tj+i] and [t*, ti + Arj]:
3 f 6 > 0, Vr e (0, f 6] :
1 > r(/Cc + GJCU)(see (9.40) and (9.47)),
1 > kACA/ 1 CA/ 2 (see(9.7l))
1 > r * r 2i, r „ > + (*aC| /2 + C&/2 ) (see also (9.79) and (9.97))
1> (see (9.85))
det(Ms) > 0, det(M s) > 0, det(M 7) > 0,
det (M2) > 0(see (9.80))
t e [ti,ti + ATi] : suptQ^ €[t.jf.+AT.] (||x (tQ) - x ( t /3)||) < A 1/x ||x(t)|| + A 2/i + I
t € [ti + ATj, : SUPtaêî+Arijti+i] (llx (^Q:) ~ x (fy8)l|) ^ ^ 1/2 llx (^)ll + ^ 2/2 + |^2i|
lim ôo (zllzl) = 0, lim ôo (lii) = 0 (9-98)
Step VII: The outcome of Step VI is the pre-condition to find upper estimates for the deviation
of the state x(t) at time instants t e [U + Ar*,£*+i -1- A rj+ J from the state value x(U) at the
sampling instant £*, which establishes the upper bound on the delay dependent sampling residual
||xA/r (f _ A r (f), x) —x (t)|| for the considered interval. Thus, consider the following inequality de
duced from the triangle inequality:
t e [U + A ri,fi+i] : ||x(f) - x(f*)|| < ||x(f< + At*) - x(*i)|| + ||x(f< + Arj) - x(<) ||
< sup (||x(fQ) - x (f/?)ll) + sup (||x(fQ) - x(f/3)||)

ta ,tp € [ ti , t i + A t,] t a ,t) 3 € [ ti + A t ,t * + i ]
Applying (9.98) for r G (0, f 6], it follows:
||x(f) - x(<j)|| < A i / i ||x(f')|| I*'€[*;,*;+A t*] + ^ 2/1 + |—2i—11
+ A 1/2 | | x (* * )II |t * € [ ti + A T * ,t i+ i] + A 2/2 + \% 2 i\

Since t' 6 [U , t i + A Tj\ is arbitrary, it is possible to set t ' = U + Arj. The inequality
||x(t< + A ri)|| < \\x (ti + An ) - x(t*)|| + ||x(t*)||
< sup (||x (fa ) - x ( ^ ) ||) + ||x(f*)||
leads to
l|x (i) - x ( * i ) | | |t € [ti + ATi ,i<+1] < (^ 1 /1 + l ) ^ l / 2 llx ( * * ) l l | i * € [ t i + A r i , t i + i] + ( ^ 1 / 1 + l ) ^ 2 / 2 + ^ 2 / 1
+ ( A 1/1 + 1 ) | ^ | + | ^ = } | . (9.99)
Using (9.99) and (9.98), the same procedure applied to the states at time instants t, t G [tj+ i,£j+ i +
A ri+i] gives the result such as:
t £ [ti+ i , t i + i + ATj+i] :
||x(<) - x (ti)|| < ||x (t<+i) - x ( ii)|| + ||x(*i+i) - x (t)||
< (A i/i + l)A 1/2 ||x(t*)|| lfe^+Ari.ti+1] + (Ai/i + l)A 2/2 + A2/1
+ ( ^ i / i + 1 ) U i i | + |—2 i — 11
+ & 1 /1 llx ( O I I l t ° € [ t i + i >« i + i + A r i + i] + & 2/1 + \S iX W
£ -f-1
< ( ^ 1 / 1 + l)A l / 2 ||x(«i+i) —x(OII lt°€[ti+ljti+l+ATt+i]
+ ( ^ 1 / 1 + l ) ^ l / 2 llx (*°)ll |to€[ti+i^+ i+ A ri+i] + ( & 1/1 + l)^ 2 /2 + & 2/1
+ (^1/1 + 1) \S i \ + k i i- l|
+ ^ 1 / 1 llx ( ^ ° ) II |t « € [ « * + i , 4 i+ i+ A r i + i] + ^ 2 /1 + U ii+ ll
< ( ( ^ i / i + 1)2^ i /2 + ^ l / l ) llx (^°)II lt°€[*i+i^t+i+Ari+x]
+ (^1/1 + l)(^2/2 + A 1/ 2 A 2/ 1 ) -j- 2A2/ x
+ (^1/1 + 1) \S i \ + k i i - l | + ((A l/1 + l ) ^ l / 2 + 1) lîi+il (9.100)
Choosing t° = t , t £ [U + A r i: t i+ 1 + A r i+ i], the maximum deviation of x (i) from x (ti) has an upper
approximate of:
r 6 ( 0 ,f 6], t e [ t i + A T i,ti+1 + Ar»+i] : ||x(f) - x (^ )|| < A i ||x(t)|| + A 2 + A 3/i (9.101)
where
Ai d— ((A 1/1 + 1)2Ax/2 4- Ax/x)

def
A2 = (Aj/! + l)(A 2/2 + A 1/2A2/i) + 2A2/i
A 3 fi = (A i/j + 1) |£ 2 $| + |^ 2 i_ i| + ((A i/i + l)A ! / 2 + 1) (9.102)
are continuous functions of r for r G (0, tq] and it can be deduced
U™, (A i) = °> lim (A 2 ) = 0, lim (A3/i) = 0, lim (A3/i) = 0. (9.103)

T —> 0 + T —► ()+ T —> 0 + ' I —►OO '
Thus, Lemma 9.2 is proved in a robust control framework which can be then included in the Lyapunov
function analysis of (9.13-9.15) to prove closed-loop stability under fast sampling constraints. This will
be done within the next section for the sliding-mode based control law from Section 3.4.1 of Chapter 3.
9.6 Discretization o f the sliding-mode based control
The three different approaches for discretization analysis presented within Section 9.4 and 9.5 and Re
mark 9.1 can now be investigated with respect to the m o d i f i e d sliding-mode based control law of Section
3.4.1 for which the constant c is obsolete (3.50). In actual fact, only the discretization analysis methods
presented with Remark 9.1 and Section 9.5 are admissible. However, it will be ensured that Assump
tions 2.2b-2.3b are satisfied for the numerical example so that all three techniques can be applied. The
stability analysis has to consider the non-smooth max-Lyapunov function from Chapter 4. The main
problems with respect to the discretization approach within this chapter are outlined.
As in Section 7.6, the input uncertainty is assumed to be zero G i = 0 to retain simplicity. Further
the modified sliding-mode control assumes also F 2 = 0 and G2 = 0. The resulting closed loop system
using (3.6-3.7) can be then written as:
zi = Szi-f-Ai20
<^>= A©zi + (fi*-fAfi)
+ B 2(u $ L(f - A t , u ^ l ) - n cN L{zi,<f>) + u £ (f—AT,u£) - u£(zi,0)),
employing the linear control u£ of (3.11) and the non-linear control \xcNL from (3.50). The analysis for
the non-smooth max-Lyapunov function
V(zi{t),(f>{t)) = m ax(V i(zi (t)) + kV2(<f>{t)), (kcu2 + l)Vi(zi(t)))
considers again the two cases V2((f>(t)) > iv2Vi{zi{t)) for Vi(zi(f)) + kV2(<j>(t)) and V2(<p{t)) <
u;2Vi(zi(f)) for (ku)2 + l)V i(zi(t)). For the case of V2(<j>(t)) > u;2Vi(zi(t)), it follows similarly to
(5.57) and (7.84) for almost all t :
Vi(zi (t)) + kV2(4>(t)) < -(V i(*i W J+fcV ^W ))*

T
Zi (t ) r (S^Pi+FiE) F,Ai2 1
Zi (t )
2 2
AUp i k 22l
. 0W 1 2 K 2 J _ 0(f)
+k(pT{t)P2B2{u%L{t - A t, u%l ) - ucNL{zi,(j>) + u £ ( t- A T,u£) - u£(zi,0)),
using the definition of 3 > 0 (5.66) for suitable k > 0 and 0 < « < 1.
Within Remark 3.2, it has been pointed out that the continuous-time sliding mode based control
satisfies Assumption 2.1a and 2.3a. Thus, Lemma 9.2 applies and the expression (9.12) of the delay
dependent sampling residual can be represented for z = [z^ 4>T]T implying A 2 = 0. Using the
Lipschitz constant Ku of the control n cNL + u£ in z, it follows by Lemma 9.2
l>l(z1W) + A:l/2(^W)<-(Vi(z1(<))+^2W(<)))<?+v/^l(zi(<))+^2(0(i)y2fc||P;ff!2||KuA3/i
provided the fast-sampling constraint

( f^ + P iS ) P,A t>
2 2
K At + ||*J^B2|| /CuAi < 0 (9.104)
AJ^P1 - k ^ 2l J ^c4g
--C 3
can be satisfied for small enough r < f. This constraint parallels the relation of (9.15) for A 2 = 0. The
second part of the max-Lyapunov analysis for V2(<f>(t)) < uj2V\(zi(t)) follows as for (5.68):
{ku;2 + l)Vi < -{ku;2 + l)0V i
using > 0 given by (3.26) and the matrix inequality condition of (3.27). The final part of the Lyapunov
analysis follows from Proposition 4.1, so that for almost all t:
V{zi(t),<f>(t)) < -min(tf,tf)U(zi(t),<£(f)) + y/V{zi{t), (f;{t))V2k\\P^B 2\\K,uA z/i.
This implies using the absolute continuity of V in t, the method from Theorem 4.1 and 9.1 and
limôo A 3/i = 0, that the origin of the sampled-data controlled system is asymptotically stable for
small enough sampling time r > 0. This concludes the formal fast-sampling analysis for the dis
cretized sliding-mode based control with delayed actuation. Within the next section, two examples for
the sliding-mode based control will be given showing some characteristics of the approaches.
9.6.1 A numerical example for the sliding-mode based control
In Chapter 5 and 7, two different examples have been considered, which are further investigated
within this chapter to allow comparison. Within Chapter 7, the parameterized inverted pendulum of
(2.10,5.70,7.95):
’ 0 i1 l I n0 i I n0
’ o0 l \ xXi-i
X= x+ u+ x, x = (9.105)
0.5 -0.1 1 0.5(sinc(a:i) —1) 0 . X2
and the stable system from (5.71,7.96)
1
*
0
rH
IO
O
1
X= x 4* u (9.106)
0 -0.5 _ 1
have been of interest. Note that within this section the damping b (2.10) has been chosen not to have
uncertainty. Thus b — 0.1. In the case of uncertainty for b, the method of Hsu & Sastry (1987) would
not be applicable since the drift f from (2.1) would not be Lipschitz. Thus, Assumption 2.3b would
not be satisfied and only Assumption 2.3a would hold allowing only the robust discretization analysis
approaches to be investigated.
The modified sliding-mode based control is set up as within Chapter 7 with (7.97):
71 = Yi = 1-6, m = 0, 1 - 2\Pl A l2P P \u> \p\\ = 0.85.
and the other values of the control can be calculated from the equations given in Section 3.3 and 3.4.1.
In particular, 772 = 0. For the discretization analysis, k is k = 0.5 and similar to (7.98) it follows
d = 0.85 P f 1. For both examples, the two closed loop poles have been chosen as before to be similar:
S = Q* = p i , p i G
With the inverted pendulum of (9.105), however, it has been found simpler to express the Lipschitz
constant K u of the control and the scalars C 3, c\Q, Q, JCf, JCc from Assumptions 2.1a/b-2.3a/b and
(9.104) in terms of the two original states x = [0 0]r (2.8) instead of z. Thus, it can be calculated that
In v e rte d P endulum o f (9.105) :
/C |2 p i + 0 .1 |+ - - + 71773 l>V
2P l ( “ 2p T +
2pi6
7i*?3(-l/2 + £(pi - 1))

11
7173
+ | —0.5 —Pi \ +
2 (5 + <fr) 2P!(” 2pr+ ^
Kc
2 _ TUB
_ r> 0.2172
Pi 26 2pi + 8 S
0 1
JCf = 1 C4 Q , 0 = 1,
0.5 -0.1 k
2pi J
1 I k{p\ + 1) h2(pi + 1)2 1 \

(9.107)
C3 = 2 1 2— V — 4— k+& r
In contrast, the analysis for the stable system of (9.106) has been chosen to be analyzed in terms of the
states transformed into z. The suitable values are in this case given by:
Stable S y ste m o f (9.106) :
liPz
Pi 1
JCc =
0 Pl + P \6 .
-0 .5 1
, c\Q =
0 -0.5 2pi
c3 = ~ (9.108)
These values allow now the calculation of the sampling time bounds f for different values of x and
pi, so that for any r < f the closed loop system is stable. The original method of Hsu & Sastry
considers the fast sampling constraints of (9.29) which are necessary for the definition of AHs (9.30).
This is the pre-requisite for the definition of Ai from (9.34,9.35) used for the stability constraint (9.104)
demanding fast-sampling. For the modified technique of Hsu & Sastry, the definition of Ai in (9.36) has
P. *
Figure 9.1: Values of k for the inverted pendulum of (9.105) for robust method of Section 9.5
Figure 9.2: Sampling time bound f for the inverted pendulum of (9.105) for three analysis approaches,
robust method of Section 9.5 (upper surface), robust modified method o f Hsu & Sastry from Remark
9.1 (middle surface), orig. method of Hsu & Sastry from Section 9.4 (lower surface)
C hapter 9. D isc r e t iz a t io n of non -l in e a r c o n t r o l s w ith sm a l l c o m pu t a tio n a l d e la y s 222
robust approach robust approach robust approach

Hsu & Sastry
robust Hsu & Sastry
X=le-010 Hsu & Sastry Hsu & Sastry
robust Hsu & Sastry robust Hsu & Sastry
X=0.437S
X=0.9375
-3 -2.5 -2 -1.5 -1 -0.5 -3 -2.5 -2 -1.5 -1 -0.5 -3 -2.5 -2 -1.5 -1 -0.5

P. P. P.
Figure 9.3: Sampling time bound t for the inverted pendulum of (9.105) for three analysis approaches
been applied to the closed loop Lyapunov function analysis, in particular for (9.104). This also requires
a modified A u s (9.29,9.30,9.36) by employing (9.37) for )CA/i and /CA / 2 . The novel technique for
analysis of robust control systems uses for Ai the definition from (9.102) for which the fast sampling
constraints of (9.98) and (9.104) have to be satisfied.
As in Chapters 5 and 7, the parameter k > 0 from the closed-loop max-Lyapunov function is a free
parameter and should be adjusted so that the sampling time is maximal for given x and Pi- It has t>een
found here that k does not change significantly with x (Figure 9.1).
It is seen that the modified approach of Hsu & Sastry (1987) and the robust approach from Section
9.5 provide similar results for f (Figure 9.2 and 9.4). However, the robust approach of Section 9.5
delivers results for f which are generally less conservative. For the inverted pendulum, the robust
technique revealed sampling time bounds t more than 1% larger than Hsu & Sastry’s (1987) modified
approach (Figure 9.3). An up to 6% greater value of f for the robust, mean value theorem based method
has been found for the stable system (Figure 9.5). This advantage of the robust method from Section
9.5 over the modified approach of Hsu & Sastry (1987) has been also confirmed within other examples.
Figure 9.4: Sampling time bound f for the stable system of (9.106) for three analysis approaches,
original method of Hsu & Sastry from Section 9.4 (upper surface), robust method of Section 9.5
), robust modified method of Hsu & Sastry from Remark 9.1 (lower surface)
Xi o "3 X 10'3 x 10'3

robust approach robust approach robust approach
Hsu & Sastry Hsu & Sastry Hsu & Sastry
— robust Hsu & Sastry — robust Hsu & Sastry — robust Hsu & Sastry
-3 -2.5 -2 -1.5 1 -0.5 -3 -2.5 -2 -1.5 1 -0.5 •3 -2 -1.5 •1 -0.5

P, P, P,
Figure 9.5: Sampling time bound f for the stable system of (9.106) for three analysis approaches
Within the inverted pendulum example, the robust analysis results for f are up to 13% larger than for
the non-robust method of Hsu & Sastry (1987) (Figure 9.3), while for the stable plant the non-robust
method of Hsu & Sastry (1987) has for a large range of the closed loop poles p\ up to 50% better results
than the robust techniques (Figure 9.5). Note that the non-linear control for the inverted pendulum has
been designed to counteract the non-linearity and to achieve sliding-mode based behaviour while for the
stable plant the continuous-time control is designed to achieve a specified performance. Since the two
methods for analysis of robust control laws have taken particularly account of parametric uncertainty
or non-linearity, this superiority over the original method of Hsu & Sastry (1987) is recognized for the
inverted pendulum.
The value of f as a function of x is decreasing with x which is also expected from the analysis
(Figures 9.3 and 9.5); the bound for the delay dependent residual increases with x as readily seen
from analysis results of (9.35,9.36) or (9.53-9.55). Thus, there has to be a compromise between the
choice of x and the achievable magnitude of f. However, it must be noted from Figure 9.6 that in any
case the results from the fast-sampling analysis for discretized controls with computational delays are
more conservative than those achieved with the method from Chapter 5. This result can be attributed
10000 2000
robust approach
Hsu & Sastry
robust Hsu & Sastry
8000 X=0. (Chapter5)
1500
6000
4000
robust approach 500

2000 Hsu & Sastry
robust Hsu & Sastry
X=0, (Chapter5)
-2 .5 -2 -1 .5 -0 .5
P, P,
(a) For the inverted pendulum o f (9.105) (b) For the stable system o f (9.106)
Figure 9.6: Sampling frequency bound f for three analysis approaches with x = 1 ■10~10 and for the
fast-sampling analysis of Chapter 5
to the fact that the fast-sampling techniques considered within this chapter do not take account of the
stabilizing effect of the discretized control or the structure of the control system. The application of the
Gronwall-Bellman theorem within the methods of Hsu & Sastry implies that the bounds of the sampling
residual are exponentially increasing with r. Within the discussion of the numerical results of Chapter
7, it has been pointed out that it is important to compensate for the large value of the Lipschitz constant;
it is assumed that the conservatism of the results from the current analysis technique in comparison to
Chapter 5 are also due to this factor.
9.7 Summary
Within this chapter, the problem of computational delays of discretized control laws has been theo
retically treated. An analysis technique for robust discretized control laws has been suggested and
compared to an existing technique of Hsu & Sastry (1987). Within both techniques, an upper bound
for the norm of the delay dependent sampling residual has been calculated. However for this purpose,
Hsu & Sastry (1987) made the assumption of Lipschitz continuity for the non-linear system drift which
does not allow external disturbances or parametric uncertainty to be investigated. Thus, an analysis
approach has been provided which permits the consideration of control system robustness. Further, a
modification of Hsu & Sastry’s (1987) technique also gives the possibility to consider robustness. The
examples of the inverted pendulum and a stable system, ensuring Lipschitz continuity for the system
drift, allowed the comparison of all the analysis techniques. It was found that the results for the sam
pling time of all three techniques are within a similar range. The robust analysis technique, which is
suggested within this thesis, showed an advantage over the modified robust analysis technique of Hsu
& Sastry (1987). All three methods supplied sampling frequencies much higher than those achieved
before within Chapter 5. For future research, it is therefore of interest to consider some of the crucial
ideas of Chapter 5 to improve results.
C h a p t e r 10
Conclusions and future work
10.1 Concluding remarks
This thesis presented analysis techniques for discretized continuous-time control laws. A framework for
non-linear, affine systems has been developed with the particular emphasis on robust control schemes.
An important assumption is a sector bound in combination with a constant bound for the continuous
time controlled system allowing bounded uncertainty and disturbances within the differential system
to be analyzed. With this assumption, this thesis relaxes constraints of previous work and raises the
importance of robust discretization analysis instead of existence of ‘fast-sampling’ control systems as
considered within previous work. Other preconditions such as Lipschitz continuity of the non-linear
feedback components and the existence of a Lyapunov function for the continuous-time control are
generally determined within the controller design procedure. Thus, the developed framework lends
itself easily to existing robust, continuous-time control methods and also to the sliding-mode based
control systems developed in this thesis.
The analysis techniques are based on the estimation of upper bounds of a suitable norm for the
sampling-residual of the sampled-data control system. Two distinct approaches, an Euler norm and a
generalized Tp-norm technique, are developed and applied to the presented sliding-mode based con
trollers. The contributions of this thesis are summarized below:
• The sliding-mode based state feedback control law from Chapter 3 modifying the unit-vector for
introduction of a cone-shaped sliding-mode layer had so far neither been analyzed rigorously for
robust stability/sliding mode based performance nor considered within a multi-input framework.
Interest for this control structure has only been raised before in application related work. Within
this thesis, it has been shown that the cone-shaped layer particularly suits parametric uncertainty
in combination with constant bounded disturbances. In addition, non-linear gains have been
introduced which can be tuned for minimization of high initial controller peaks.
C h a p t e r 10. C o n c l u s io n s a n d f u t u r e w o r k 226
• A non-smooth Lyapunov junction as presented within Chapter 4 is novel to sliding mode control
theory or sliding mode based control systems despite non-smooth Lyapunov functions have been
a popular topic for controllers with discontinuities. Further, non-smooth Lyapunov functions
have been rarely used for differential systems with Caratheodory-type solution notwithstanding
certain advantages of non-smooth Lyapunov functions such as the introduction of a particular
state space structure allowing independent analysis of sub-systems. Thus, it was necessary to
provide a theoretical framework for the non-smooth Lyapunov function as a prerequisite for sta
bility analysis.
• The discretization analysis approach o f Chapter 5 considers the stabilizing effect of the dis
cretized control when estimating an upper bound of the Euler norm for the sampling residual.
This contrasts to former work where researchers employed integration techniques including the
Gronwall-Bellman-Theorem so that upper bounds on the sampling residual would increase expo
nentially with the sampling time. In application to the sliding mode based state feedback control,
the importance of adjusting the developed analysis technique to the control structure has been
pointed out.
• A robust output tracking control for a class o f non-minimum phase and semi-proper plants has
been posed. The control structure improves a non-linear observer-based output tracking control,
which was previously developed only for minimum phase and relative-degree one systems. De
spite output filters have been used already to deal with relative degree zero plants, a strict analysis
for robust stability had not been carried out in preceding work. The analysis implies that even a
class of output measurement noise is permissible. The set-up of a theoretical framework for an
H.2 -design methodology for the output tracking control is novel and is a continuation of preceding
work for design of sliding mode observers.
• A generalized Lp-frameworkfo r fast-sampling’ analysis has been developed for the class of non
linear, affine systems of interest. The application of Lp-norm theory to non-linear discretized
control systems has not been considered before; the Lp-norm for a function eapii(t) instead
of f (t) is particularly beneficial to prove exponential stability instead of the usual asymptotic
stability. A novel result and important pillar within this approach is the generalization of a result
from linear sampled-data analysis to non-linear system theory which allows the sampling residual
of sampled-data control systems to be analyzed with respect to the generalized L a,p-norm. The
merits of this theoretical achievement are that large scale, linear uncertain sampled-data control
systems with dynamic control elements and non-linear Lipschitz-continuous control components
are easily analyzed for ‘fast sampling’. Fast-sampling constraints are expressed in form of matrix
inequalities which are adjusted to the sampled-data control system structure and replace the usual
scalar inequalities.
• The application o f non-linear, multi-variable control techniques to the HDA-plant is novel for this
highly non-linear, highly integrated chemical process. The HDA-plant has been considered so far
for SISO control schemes only. Generally, multi-variable sliding-mode techniques and other de
terministic multi-variable control methods have been very rarely applied to large scale chemical
processes; thus, it is believed that this work is among the first applications of deterministic multi-
variable controllers to a large scale chemical plant. Furthermore, the non-linear observer based
tracking control applied to this highly non-linear non-minimum phase and semi-proper process
simulation is a unique practical proof of the effectiveness of the developed control method and
in general of sliding mode control as a robust control methodology counteracting matched uncer
tainty and disturbances. The developed # 2 -design method has proved to be an efficient tool for
fast and simple implementation of the tracking control. Furthermore, the sampled-data analysis
in simulation and via the developed Z^p-norm approach gives an important insight into the high
constraints on the magnitude of the sampling frequency for this non-linear control method. The
ifoo-controller based sliding mode control has shown the importance of robust design methods
for the stable sliding mode in face of unmatched uncertainty and non-linearity.
• A new method for the analysis for discretized controllers with computational delays has been
developed. It uses the generalized mean value theorem to estimate the upper bound for the Euler
norm of the sampling residual. With this approach, the use of integration techniques and the
exponential growth of the bound with the sampling time can be prevented which result from
the application of the Gronwall-Bellman theorem. The new approach is also advantageous in
comparison to previous work since it fits the framework of robust discretization analysis. Despite
the fact that the new approach is algebraically more complicated, it produces superior numerical
results to those achieved by modifying a previously developed technique.
10.2 Recommendations for future work
This thesis delivers a theoretical platform for robust discretization approaches which is new in com
parison to former work. Thus, much of the research work considered here is always subject to new
developments and further research. This also concerns the continuous-time control methods which
have been suggested within this thesis. Certain issues are of interest for further work:
• The sliding-mode-based state feedback control with the cone-shaped boundary layer has been
beneficial to the prevention of chattering for a control encountered by matched, parametric uncer
tainty and also constant bounded disturbances. Thus, it would be topical to consider cone-shaped
sliding-mode layers within output feedback control schemes, such as observer based schemes.
Research has been undertaken to include cone shaped sliding mode layers into dynamic and ob
server based control systems. A theoretical basis has been laid which needs further development
and most importantly practical justification.
• The study o f two tracking control systems fo r the HDA-plant has shown the significance of robust
design schemes for the sliding mode. Sliding mode approaches are very effective when encoun
tering matched uncertainty. However, analysis of the HDA-plant showed that uncertainty and
non-linearities are mainly unmatched. This implies a smaller operation envelope for the non
linear observer based control than for the ifqq-based sliding mode control employing a robust
sliding mode selection scheme. In contrast, the ifoo-based controller is less robust to matched,
external disturbances. Thus, the development of design methods which permit not only ‘tun
ing’ but also the inclusion of robustness measures for the sliding mode dynamics are an area of
research with many problems to be solved. Problematic are structural constraints on the linear
elements of the non-linear observer based control which can easily result in non-convex design
problems. This raises difficulties when applying linear optimization techniques to design such as
linear matrix inequalities.
• The discretization analysis approaches attempt to combine three issues of stability proofs for
discretized control systems:
- computation of practically feasible sampling frequencies
- suitability for the analysis of large scale and dynamic control structures
- consideration of practically relevant problems, such as robustness and computational delays.
Clearly, it is a complex problem to unify these issues into one discretization analysis method. For
a fast-sampling analysis method considering the estimation of an upper bound of a suitable norm
for the system states’ sampling residuals, it has been found important to employ knowledge about
- the stabilizing effect of the discretized control
- and the structure of the non-linear, Lipschitz-continuous control
to minimize the bound of sampling residual and subsequently the sampling frequency. The dis
cretization method of Chapter 5 took account of these two issues while the £ ^ 2 -norm technique
considered the first point implicitly. Research has to be undertaken to implement these ideas into
the fast-sampling analysis methods of Chapter 7 and 9.
A promising route for further research has been also indicated with the result of Clarke et al.
(1997). This general treatment of stabilizing sampled-data controllers shows that non-smooth
C h a p t e r 10. C o n c lu s i o n s a n d f u t u r e w o r k 229
analysis is a powerful tool. With this approach, the estimation of upper bounds for the sampling
residual can possibly be circumvented.
The investigation of sampled-data implementations for switched, discontinuous control systems

is similarly interesting since many discontinuous control methods, such as sliding mode control,
are often used without smoothing of the switching process; many practical systems such as actu
ators for induction motors allow ‘hard’ switching. Another issue which has not been addressed
so far is magnitude quantization of the sampled measurement and actuator signals. Within the
framework considered in this thesis, it should be sufficient to keep the quantization steps small to
achieve stability.
It is believed that the analysis of discretized control systems still demands intensive research and
the achievement of conceptually important results.
A p p e n d ix A
Mathematical notation
SISO single-input-single output
ll ll Euclidean or induced Euclidean norm
<*=> equivalence
R real numbers
R+ real positive numbers
R- real negative numbers
C complex numbers
C~ complex numbers with negative real part
Z integer numbers
Rn real vector space of order n
Cp(Rn ) piecewise continuous Rn-vector valued functions in t 6 R
Ck k- times continuously differentiable function in t € R
©(Rn ) Rn-vector sequences in i 6 {0,1,2,...}
/(f+ ) /(f+ ) = lim s->t+(f(s))

a.e.
V for almost all
Z( •) range of a matrix
I identity matrix
(•)T transpose of a matrix
(■)* complex conjugate transpose of a matrix
Amax (•) maximum eigenvalue (of a symmetric matrix)
Amin (•) minimum eigenvalue (of a symmetric matrix)
V(-) V p(z) =
A p p e n d i x A . M a t h e m a t i c a l n o t a t io n 231
£ ? ( o ,r ) Lebesgue space with finite Lp-norm on (0, T)
ip . extended Lebesgue space
/” [0,iV] sequence space with finite !p-norm on [0, N]
& extended sequence Lebesgue space
C?e(K") c£e(Rn) d= C’(R " )n i," e
6 p e(R ") 6 p e(R n ) d= 6(M")nZ£e
ll'llj/2 7^2-norm
III12 ifoo-norm (L2-induced norm)

A p p e n d ix B
Physical properties and units
Pressure p [psia] = pounds per square inch (absolute pressure),

lpsia=6.895 kPa, [Pa] = Pascal
Temperature T [°F] = degree Fahrenheit

T[°F] = 1.8T[°C] + 32, [°C] = degree Celsius -
Energy E [BTU] = British thermal unit

1BTU=1054.185115 J, [J] = Joule
Power P [hp] = horse power

lhp=745.71 W, [W]= Watt
Substance quantity [lb.mol] = pound-mole

llb.mol=453.593mol,
[mol] gram-mole, lmol= No units (atoms, molecules) of a substance,
N q = 6.02217 x 1023 (Avogadro constant)
Time t [hr] = hour, [sec]= second

lhr= 3600 sec
Bibliography
Aitken, V. C. & Schwartz, H. (1995), Towards robust discrete-time sliding mode observers, in ‘Pro
ceedings of the American Control Conference, Seattle, Washington’, pp. 3730-3734.
Ambrosino, G., Celantano, G. & Garofalo, F. (1984), ‘Variable structure model reference adaptive
control systems’, International Journal o f Control 39(6), 1339-1349.
Aspen Custom Modeler (10.0/10.1-0) User Guides (1998-1999), Aspen Technology, Inc., Cambridge,
USA.
Ayels, D. & Peuteman, J. (1998), ‘A new asymptotic stability criterion for nonlinear time-variant dif
ferential equations’, IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control 43(7), 969-971.
Bag, S. K. (1997), Robust Sliding Mode Control Using Output Information, PhD thesis, University of
Leicester.
Bequette, B. W. (1991), ‘Nonlinear control of chemical processes: A review’, Journal on Industrial

and Engineering Chemistry 30(7), 1391-1413.
Bhatti, A. I. (1997), Advanced Sliding mode controllers for industrial applications, PhD thesis, Univer
sity of Leicester.
Bhatti, A. I., Spurgeon, S. K. & Edwards, C. (1995), Multibumer furnace control using a nonlinear
controller observer pair, in ‘Proceedings of 1995 IEE Colloquium on Adaptive Controllers in
Practice’, Vol. 7, pp. 1—4.
Blanchini, F. (1995), ‘Nonquadratic Lyapunov functions for robust control’, Automatica 31(3), 451-
461.
Bosgra, H. B. & Kwakemaak, H. (1998), ‘Design methods for control systems’, Course Notes of the
Dutch Institute of Systems and Control.
Boyd, S., El Ghaoui, L., Feron, E. & Balakrishnan, V. (1994), Linear Matrix Inequalities in System and
Control Theory, Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics, Philadelphia.
233
BIBLIOGRAPHY 234
Branch, M. A. & Grace, A. (1996), ‘Optimization toolbox’, Matlab Toolbox User’s Guide, Mathworks
Inc.
Brognaux, C. (1992), A case study in operability analysis: The HDA plant, Master’s thesis, Imperial
College, London, Prince Consort Rd., London SW7 2BY.
Burton, J. A. & Zinober, A. S. I. (1986), ‘Continuous approximation of variable structure control’,

International Journal o f Systems Science 17(6), 875—885.
Cao, Y. (1995), Control Structure Selection for Chemical Processes using input-output controllability
analysis, PhD thesis, University of Exeter.
Cao, Y. & Rossiter, D. (1997), ‘An input pre-screening technique for control structure selection’, Com
puters and Chemical Engineering 21(6), 563- 569.
Cao, Y. & Rossiter, D. (1998), Globally optimal control structure selection using the branch-and-bound
method, in ‘Proceedings of the 5th IFAC Symposium on Dynamics and Control of Process Sys
tems, Corfu, Greece’.
Cao, Y., Rossiter, D., Edwards, D., Knechtel, J. & Owens, D. (1998), ‘Modelling issues for control
structure selection in a chemical process’, Computers and Chemical Engineering 22(SS), S411-
S418.
Cao, Y., Rossiter, D. & Owens, D. (1997), ‘Input selection for disturbance rejection under manipulated
variable constraints’, Computers and Chemical Engineering 21(SS), S403—S408.
Cao, Y., Rossiter, D. & Owens, D. (1998), Controllability improvement using secondary measurements,
in ‘Proceedings of the Conf. on Advanced Process Control 5’.
Caratheodory, C. (1948), Vorlesungen iiber reelle Funktionen, 2nd edn, Chelsea Publishing Company,
New York.
Chan, C. Y. (1994), ‘Robust discrete-time sliding mode controller’, Systems and Control Letters
23, 371-374.
Chan, C. Y. (1998), ‘Discrete adaptive sliding mode control of a state-space system with a bounded
disturbance’, Automatica 34(12), 1631—1635.
Chan, C. Y. (1999a), ‘Discrete adaptive quasi-sliding mode control’, International Journal o f Control
72(4), 365-373.
Chan, C. Y. (1999b), ‘Discrete adaptive sliding mode control of a class of stochastic systems’, Auto
matica 35, 1491-1498.
BIBLIOGRAPHY 235
Chen, T. & Francis, B. (1995), Optimal Sampled-Data Control Systems, Communications and Control
Engineering Series (CCES), Springer-Verlag, London.
Chen, T. & Francis, B. A. (1991), ‘Input-output stability of sampled-data systems’, IEEE Transactions
on Automatic Control 36(1), 50-58.
Chen, X. & Fukuda, T. (1998), ‘Robust adaptive quasi-sliding mode controller for discrete-time sys
tems’, Systems and Control Letters 35, 165-173.
Chen, X. & Fukuda, T. (1999), ‘Adaptive quasi-sliding mode control for discrete-time multivariable
systems’, International Journal o f Control 72, 133-140.
Chem, T.-L. & Wu, Y.-C. (1991), ‘Design of integral variable structure controller and application to
electrohydraulic velocity servosystems’, IEE Proceedings-D 138(5), 439-444.
Chiang, R. Y. & Safonov, M. G. (1992), ‘Robust control toolbox’, Matlab Toolbox User’s Guide, Math-
works Inc.
Clarke, F. H. (1983), Optimization and Nonsmooth Analysis, John Wiley and Sons, New York.
Clarke, F. H., Ledyaev, Y. S., Sontag, E. D. & Subbotin, A. I. (1997), ‘Asymptotic controllability implies
feedback stabilization’, IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control 42(10), 1394-1407.
Clarke, F. H., Ledyaev, Y. S., Stem, R. J. & Wolenski, P. R. (1998), Nonsmooth Analysis and Control
Theory, Springer-Verlag, New York.
Colaneri, P., Geromel, J. C. & Locatelli, A. (1997), Control Theory and Design - An R H 2 and R H <*>
Viewpoint, Academic Press, San Diego.
Craven, B. D. (1982), Lebesgue measure and Integral, Pitman Publishing Inc.
DeJager, B. (1992), Comparison of methods to eliminate chattering and avoid steady state errors in
sliding mode control, in ‘Proceedings of the IEEE International Workshop on Variable Structure
and Lyapunov Control of Uncertain Dynamical Systems, Sheffield’, pp. 37-42.
Desoer, C. A. & Vidyasagar, M. (1975), Feedback Systems: Input-Output Properties, Academic Press,
New York.
Djenoune, S., El-Moudni, A. & Zerhouni, N. (1998), ‘Stabilization and regulation of a class of non
linear singularly perturbed system with discretized composite feedback’, International Journal of
systems science 29(4), 419—434.
Douglas, J. M. (1988), Conceptual design o f chemical processes, Me Graw Hill.

BIBLIOGRAPHY 236
Edwards, C. (1995), Sliding Mode Schemes Using Output Information with Application to Heating
Plant Problems, PhD thesis, University of Leicester.
Edwards, C. & Spurgeon, S. (1994a), ‘Robust output tracking using a sliding mode controller/observer
scheme’, International Journal o f Control 59, 967-983.
Edwards, C. & Spurgeon, S. K. (1994b), Robust nonlinear control of heating plants, in ‘Proceedings of
IEE’, Vol. D/144(4), pp. 227-234.
Edwards, C. & Spurgeon, S. K. (1998), Sliding Mode Control: Theory and Application, Taylor and
Francis Ltd., London.
Edwards, C., Spurgeon, S. K. & Akoachere, A. (2000), ‘A sliding mode static output feedback controller
based on linear matrix inequalities applied to an aircraft system’, Journal o f Dynamic Systems,
Measurement and Control, (to appear) .
Filipov, A. F. (1964), ‘Differential equations with discontinuous right-hand side’, American Mathemat
ical Society - Translations 42, 199-231.
Fliegner, T., Logemann, H. & Ryan, E. (1999), ‘Discrete-time low-gain with input/output nonlineari
ties’, Preprint 99/26, School of Mathematical Sciences, University of Bath.
Francis, B. A. & Georgiou, T. T. (1988), ‘Stability theory for linear time-invariant plants with periodic
digital controllers’, IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control 33(9), 820-832.
Furuta, K. (1990), ‘Sliding-mode control of a discrete system’, Systems & Control Letters 14,145-152.
Furuta, K. & Morisada, M. (1989), ‘Sliding-mode control of discrete systems’, Transactions o f the
Society o f Instrument and Control Engineers 25(5), 574-578.
Furuta, K. & Pan, Y. (1995), A new approach to design a sliding sector for vss controller, in ‘Proceed
ings of the American Control Conference, Seattle, Washington’, pp. 1304-1308.
Gao, W., Wang, Y. & Homaifa, A. (1995), ‘Discrete-time variable structure control systems’, IEEE
Transactions on Industrial Electronics 42(2), 117-122.
Glover, K. & Doyle, J. C. (1988), ‘State space formulae for all stabilizing controllers that satisfy an
iToo-norm bound and relations to risk sensitivity’, Systems and Control Letters 11, 167-172.
Graybill, F. A. (1969), Matrices with Applications in Statistics, 2nd edn, Wadsworth International
Group Belmont, California.
Green, M. & Limebeer, D. J. N. (1995), Linear Robust Control, Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, New
Jersey.
BIBLIOGRAPHY 237
Griine, L. (1999), Stabilization by sampled and discrete feedback with positive sampling rate, in
D. Aeyels, F. Lamnabhi-Lagarrigue & A. van der Schaft, eds, ‘Stability and Stabilization of Non
linear Systems (NCN)’, Springer Verlag, Berlin, pp. 165-182.
Griine, L. (2000), ‘Homogeneous state feedback stabilization of homogeneous control systems’, SIAM
Journal on Control and Optimization 38, 1288-1314.
Guilaume, A. M., Bastin, G. & Campion, G. (1994), ‘Sampled-data adaptive control of a class of
continuous nonlinear systems’, International Journal o f Control 60(4), 569-594.
Guilaume, A. M., Bastin, G. & Campion, G. (1995), Lyapunov design of sampled-data stabilising feed
back control for nonlinear continuous-time systems, in ‘IFAC Symposium on Nonlinear Control
Systems Design, Tahoe City’, pp. 777-782.
Gutman, S. (1979), ‘Uncertain dynamical systems - a Lyapunov min-max approach’, IEEE Transac
tions on Automatic Control 24(3), 437-443.
Herrmann, G., Spurgeon, S. K. & Edwards, C. (1998), A new non-linear, continuous-time control law
using sliding-mode control approaches, in ‘Proceedings of the Fifth International Workshop on
Variable Structure Systems, Long Boat Key, Florida’, pp. 50-56.
Herrmann, G., Spurgeon, S. K. & Edwards, C. (1999a), Discretization of sliding mode based control
schemes, in ‘Proceedings of the 38th Conference on Decision and Control, Phoenix’, pp. 4257-
4262.
Herrmann, G., Spurgeon, S. K. & Edwards, C. (1999b), ‘A new approach to discretization applied to
a continuous non-linear, sliding-mode-like control using non-smooth analysis’, Accepted in IMA
Journal o f Mathematical Control and Information .
Herrmann, G., Spurgeon, S. K. & Edwards, C. (2000a), Discretization of a non-linear, continuous-time

control law with small control delays - a theoretical treatment, in ‘Proceedings of the Fourteenth
International Symposium on Mathematical Theory of Networks and Systems, France’.
Herrmann, G., Spurgeon, S. K. & Edwards, C. (2000&), Discretization of a non-linear, exponentially

stabilizing control law using an Lp-gain approach, in ‘Proceedings of the 39th Conference on
Decision and Control, Sydney, Australia’, pp. 3398-3403.
Herrmann, G., Spurgeon, S. K. & Edwards, C. (2000c), Model-based control of the hda-plant, a non
linear, large scale chemical process, using sliding mode and Hqo approaches, in ‘Proceedings of
the UKACC International Conference, CONTROL 2000’.
BIBLIOGRAPHY 238
Herrmann, G., Spurgeon, S. K. & Edwards, C. (2000*2), On the discretization of sliding-mode-like

controllers, in A. Isidori, F. Lamnabhi-Lagarrigue & W. Respondek, eds, ‘Nonlinear Control in
the Year 2000’, Vol. 1, Springer Verlag, Berlin, pp. 481-496.
Herrmann, G., Spurgeon, S. K. & Edwards, C. (2000e), A robust sliding-mode output tracking control
for a class of relative degree zero and non-minimum phase plants: a chemical process application,
in ‘Proceedings of the Sixth International Workshop on Variable Structure Systems, Gold Coast,
Australia’, pp. 209-218.
Hsu, P. & Sastry, S. (1987), The effect of discretized feedback in a closed loop system, in ‘Proceedings
of the 28th Conference on Decision and Control’, pp. 1518-1523.
Iglesias, P. (1995), ‘Input-output stability of sampled-data linear time-varying systems’, IEEE Transac
tions on Automatic Control 40(9), 1647-1650.
Iglesias, P. (1997), ‘On the induced norms of discrete-time and hybrid time-varying systems’, Interna
tional Journal of Robust and Nonlinear Control 7, 811-833.
Itkis, U. (1976), Control systems o f variable structure, John Wiley and Sons, New York.
Ito, H., Ohmori, H. & Sano, A. (1994), ‘Stability analysis of multirate sampled-data control systems’,
IMA Journal of Mathematical Control and Information 11, 341-351.
Kalman, R. E. (1956), Nonlinear aspects of sampled-data control systems, in ‘Proceedings of the Sym
posium on Nonlinear Circuit Analysis’, pp. 273-313.
Kaynak, O. & Denker, A. (1993), ‘Discrete-time sliding mode control in the presence of system uncer
tainty’, International Journal o f Control 57(5), 1177-1189.
Keller, J. & Anderson, B. D. O. (1992), ‘A new approach to the discretization of continuous-time

controllers’, IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control 37, 214-223.
Khalil, H. K. (1992a), Nonlinear Systems, 2nd edn, Macmillan Publishing Company, New York.
Khalil, H. K. (19926), Nonlinear Systems, Macmillan Publishing Company, New York.
Kimura, M. (1990), ‘Preservation of stabilizability of a continuous time-invariant linear system after

discretization’, International Journal o f Systems Science 21(1), 65-91.
Kleinman, D. L. & Rao, P. K. (1977), ‘Continuous-discrete gain transformation methods for linear
feedback control’, Automatica 13, 425-428.
Koshkouei, A. J. & Zinober, A. S. I. (1996), Sliding mode state observers for SISO linear discrete-time
systems, in ‘Proceedings of the UKACC International Conference on Control’96’, pp. 837-842.
BIBLIOGRAPHY 239
Kotta, U. (1989), ‘Comments on ‘On the stability of discrete-time sliding mode control systems”, IEEE
Transactions on Automatic Control 34(9), 1021-1022.
Lafferiere, G. A. & Sontag, E. D. (1993), Remarks on Control Lyapunov functions for discontinuous
stabilizing feedback, in ‘Proceedings of the 32nd Conference on Decision and Control’, pp. 306-
308.
Liberzon, D. & Morse, A. S. (1999), ‘Basic problems in stability and design of switched system’, IEEE
Control Systems 19(5), 59-70.
Lu, X. Y. & Spurgeon, S. K. (1997), ‘Robust sliding mode control of uncertain non-linear systems’,
Systems and Control Letters 32, 75-90.
Luyben, W. L. & Luyben, M. L. (1997), Essentials o f Process Control, The McGraw Hill Companies,
Inc., New York.
Luyben, W. L., Luyben, M. L. & Tyreus, B. D. (1998), Plantwide Process Control, McGraw-Hill Book
Company, Inc., New York.
Maciejowski, J. M. (1989), Multivariable Feedback Design, Addison-Wesley Publishing Company,

Workingham.
Maddox, I. J. (1970), Elements o f Functional Analysis, Cambridge University Press.
Magana, M. E. & Zak, S. H. (1988), ‘Robust state feedback stabilization of discrete-time uncertain
dynamical systems’, IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control 33(9), 887-891.
Markechko, M. I. & Rybashov, M. V. (1989), ‘On the dissipativity of continuously-discrete systems’,

Soviet Journal o f Computer and Systems Science pp. 146-150.
McKetta, J. J. & Cunningham, W. A. (1977), Encyclopedia of Chemical Processing and Design, Marcel
Dekker, Inc., New York, pp. 182-235.
Milosavljevic, C. (1985), ‘General conditions for the existence of a quasisliding mode on the switching
hyperplane in discrete variable structure systems’, Automation and Remote Control 46(3), 307-
314.
Misawa, E. A. (1995), Observer-based discrete-time sliding mode control with computational time
delay: The linear case, in ‘Proceedings of the American Control Conference, Seattle, Washington’,
pp. 1323-1327.
BIBLIOGRAPHY 240
Moissejev, N. (1936), ‘Uber den unwesentlichen Charakter einer der Beschrankungen, welche den
topographischen Systemen in der Liapunoffschen Stabilitatstheorie auferlegt werden.’, Comptes
Rendus (Doklady) de VAcademie des Science de I’URSS 1(4), 165-166.
Monaco, S. & Normand-Cyrot, D. (1985), On the sampling of a linear analytic control system, in
‘Proceedings of the 24th Conference on Decision and Control, Lauderdale, Florida’, pp. 1457-
1462.
Mousa, M. S., Miller, R. K. & Michel, A. N. (1986), ‘Stability analysis of hybrid composite dynam
ical systems: Descriptions involving operators and difference equations’, IEEE Transactions on
Automatic Control 31(7), 603—615.
Nesic, D., Teel, A. R. & Kokotovic, P. V. (1999), ‘Sufficient conditions for stabilization of sampled-data
nonlinear systems via discrete-time approximations’, Systems and Control Letters 38, 259-270.
Nesic, D., Teel, A. R. & Sontag, E. D. (1999), ‘Formulas relating ICC stability estimates of discrete-time
and sampled-data nonlinear systems’, Systems and Control Letters 38, 49-60.
Ortega, R. & Taoutaou, D. (1996), ‘A globally stable discrete-time controller for current-fed induction
motors’, Systems and Control Letters 28, 123-128.
Owens, D., Zheng, Y. & Billings, S. (1990), ‘Fast sampling and stability of nonlinear sampled-data
systems: Part 1. Existence theorems’, IMA Journal o f Mathematical Control & Information 7, 1-
11.
Pan, Y. & Furuta, K. (1993), VSS controller design for discrete-time systems, in ‘IECON -Proceedings’,
pp. 1950-1955.
Pan, Y. & Furuta, K. (1995), VSS approach to the design of robust digital controller, in ‘Proceedings of
3rd European Control Conference, Rome, Italy’, pp. 1969-1973.
Pan, Y., Furuta, K. & Hatakeyama, S. (1999), Invariant sliding sector for variable structure control, in
‘Proceedings of the 38th Conference on Decision and Control, Phoenix, Arizona’, pp. 5152-5157.
Petit, N., Rouchon, P., Boueilh, J.-M., Guerin, F. & Pinvidic, P. (2000), Control of an industrial poly
merisation reactor using harness, in A. Isidori, F. Lamnabhi-Lagarrigue & W. Respondek, eds,
‘Nonlinear Control in the Year 2000’, Vol. 2, Springer Verlag, Berlin, pp. 237-245.
Prempain, E., Sun, X. & Postlethwaite, I. (1999), ‘MEC benchmark challenge: Robust control of the
gasifier using a mixed approach’, Seminar on MEC Benchmark Challenge on Gasifier Con
trol, Coventry University, June.
BIBLIOGRAPHY 241
Rattan, K. S. & Yeh, H.-H. (1978), ‘Discretizing continuous-data control systems’, Computer Aided
Design 10(5), 299-306.
Rhine, J. M. & Tucker, R. J. (1991), Modelling o f gas fired furnaces and boilers and other industrial
heating processes, MacGraw Hill Book Company, New York.
Rudin, W. (1964), Principles o f Mathematical Analysis, 2nd edn, MacGraw Hill Book Company, New
York.
Ryan, E. P. & Corless, M. (1984), ‘Ultimate boundedness and asymptotic stability of a class of un
certain dynamical systems via continuous and discontinuous feedback control’, IMA Journal of
Mathematical Control and Information 1, 223-242.
Saberi, A., Sannuti, P. & Chen, B. M. (1995), optimal control, Prentice Hall, London.
Sandberg, I. W. (1965), ‘Some results on the theory of physical systems governed by nonlinear func
tional equations’, The Bell System Technical Journal 44, 871-898.
Sarpturk, S. Z., Istefanopulous, Y. & Kaynak, O. (1987), ‘On the stability of discrete-time sliding mode
control systems’, IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control 32(10), 930-932.
Shevitz, D. & Paden, B. (1993), Lyapunov stability theory of nonsmooth systems, in ‘Advances in
Robust and Nonlinear Control Systems, Proceedings of ASME’, pp. 53:53-60.
Sira-Ramirez, H. (1997), ‘Non-linear discrete variable structure systems in quasi-sliding mode’, Inter
national Journal o f Systems Science 28(10), 961-976.
Skogestad, S. & Postlethwaite, I. (1996), Multivariable feedback control: analysis and design, John
Wiley and Sons, Chichester.
Slotine, J. J. & Sastry, S. S. (1983), ‘Tracking control of non-linear systems using sliding surfaces, with
application to robot manipulators’, International Journal o f Control 38(2), 465—492.
Smith, R. (1995), Chemical Process Design, McGraw Hill Inc., New York.
SpeedUP User Manual, Issue 5.3.2 (1991), Prosys Technology Ltd., now: Aspen Technology, Inc.,
Cambridge, USA.
Spurgeon, S. K. (1992), ‘Hyperplane design techniques for discrete-time variable structure systems’,
International Journal of Control 55(2), 445—456.
Spurgeon, S. K. & Davies, R. (1993), ‘A nonlinear control strategy for robust sliding mode performance
in the presence of unmatched uncertainty’, International Journal o f Control 57(5), 1107-1123.
BIBLIOGRAPHY 242
Stafford, H. (1981), ‘Stability conditions for nonlinear control processes using Lyapunov functions with
discontinuous derivatives’, Journal of Mathematical Analysis and Applications 84, 356-371.
Su, W.-C., Drakunov, S. V. & Ozgiiner, U. (1993), Sliding mode control in discrete time linear systems,
in ‘Proceedings of the EFAC World Congress, Sidney, Australia’, Vol. 7, pp. 297-300.
Su, W.-C., Drakunov, S. V. & Ozgiiner, U. (2000), ‘An 0 ( T 2) boundary layer in sliding mode for
sampled-data systems’, IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control 45(3), 483—485.
Sun, W., Nagpal, K. M. & Khagonekar, P. P. (1993), t'H00 control and filtering for sampled-data sys
tems’, IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control 38(8), 1162-1175.
Suzuki, T. & Furuta, K. (1996), Discrete-time VSS represented by input-output relation, in ‘Proceedings
of the UKACC International Conference on Control’96’, pp. 122-126.
Suzuki, T., Pan, Y. & Furuta, K. (1996), Discrete-time VS controller design based on input-output
model, in ‘Proceedings of the 38th Conference on Decision and Control, Phoenix, USA’, pp. 122-
126.
Tan, C. & Edwards, C. (2000), ‘An LMI approach for designing sliding mode observers’, Leicester
University, Department of Engineering (submitted to the International Journal of Control).
Teel, A. R., Nesic, D. & Kokotovic, P. V. (1998), A note on input-to-state stability of sampled-data
nonlinear systems, in ‘Proceedings of the 37th Conference on Decision and Control’, pp. 2473-
2478.
Tesfaye, A. & Tomizuka, M. (1995), ‘Robust control of discretized continuous systems using the theory
of sliding modes’, International Journal o f Control 62(1), 209-226.
Utkin, V. I. (1992), Sliding Modes in Control Optimization, Springer-Verlag, New York.
Walcott, B. L. & Zak, S. H. (1996), ‘State observation of nonlinear uncertain dynamical systems’, IEEE
Transactions on Automatic Control 32,166-170.
Wang, W. J., Lee, R.-C. & Yang, D.-C. (1996), ‘Sliding mode control design in multi-input perturbed
discrete-time systems’, Journal o f Dynamic Systems, Measurements, and Control 118, 322-327.
Westphal, L. C. (1999), ‘Lessons from an example in ‘On the stability of discrete-time sliding mode
control systems”, IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control 44(7), 1444-1445.
Wicks, M. A., Peleties, P. & DeCarlo, R. (1994), Construction of piecewise Lyapunov functions for
stabilizing switched systems, in ‘Proceedings of the 33rd Conference on Decision and Control’,
pp. 3492-3497.
BIBLIOGRAPHY 243
Wilkinson, J. H. (1967), The algebraic eigenvalue problem, Oxford University Press.
Willems, J. C. (1971), ‘Least stationary optimal control and the algebraic riccati equation’, IEEE Trans
actions on Automatic Control AC-16(6), 621-634.
Won, M. & Hedrick, J. K. (1995), Discrete time adaptive sliding control of nonlinear systems without
matching condition, in ‘Proceedings of the American Control Conference, Seattle, Washington’,
pp. 1309-1313.
Wu, H. & Mizukami, K. (1993), ‘Exponential stability of a class of nonlinear dynamical systems with
uncertainties’, Systems and Control Letters 21, 307-313.
Yackel, R. A., Kuo, B. C. & Singh, G. (1974), ‘Digital redesign of continuous systems by matching of
states at multiple periods’, Automatica 10,105-111.
Yang, W.-C. & Tomizuka, M. (1990), ‘Discrete time robust control via state feedback for single input
systems’, IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control 35, 590-598.
Yu, X. (1993), Sampling period selection for the digital implementation of a variable structure control,
in ‘Proceedings of the 32nd Conference on Decision and Control, San Antonio, Texas’, pp. 900-
901.
Yu, X. & Potts, R. B. (1991), A class of discrete variable structure systems, in ‘Proceedings of the 30th
Conference on Decision and Control, Brighton, England’, pp. 1367-1371.
Zhou, K., Doyle, J. C. & Glover, K. (1996), Robust and Optimal Control, Prentice Hall, New Jersey.

Discretization of Non-Linear Controls With Application To Robust, Sliding-Mode-Based Control Systems

Încărcat de

Informații document

Titlu original

Drepturi de autor

Formate disponibile

Partajați acest document

Partajați sau inserați document

Opțiuni de partajare

Vi se pare util acest document?

Este necorespunzător acest conținut?

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

Discretization of Non-Linear Controls With Application To Robust, Sliding-Mode-Based Control Systems

Încărcat de

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

Discretization of non-linear controls

robust, sliding-mode-based control systems

Thesis submitted for the degree of

Dipl.-Ing.* Guido Herrmann (*TU Berlin)

All rights reserved

INFORMATION TO ALL USERS

Discretization of non-linear controls with application to robust,

This thesis deals with sampled-data implementations of continuous-time, non-linear control

2 Sampled-data controller implementations 8

3 A sliding-mode-based state-feedback control 37

4 A non-smooth Lyapunov function for the sliding-mode-based control 52

5 A mean value theorem based approach to controller discretization 65

6 An observer-based control for non-minimum phase and semi-proper plants 97

7 A generalized Lp-based approach for sampled-data implementations 115

7.5.1 The system requirements....................................................................................... 125

8 Sliding-mode control of a non-linear, large scale chemical process 151

8.7.2 Disturbance rejection andpurity measurement d e lay s............................................. 182

9 Discretization of non-linear controls with small computational delays 184

10 Conclusions and future work 225

A Mathematical notation 230

B Physical properties and units 232

• computation of practically feasible sampling frequencies

• consideration of practically relevant problems, such as robustness and computational delays.

1.2 Thesis Organization

Chapter 6 presents a further non-linear, continuous-time control method based on sliding-mode

Chapter 8 demonstrates the techniques of Chapters 6 and 7 in application to the simulation of

Sampled-data controller implementations

hold controller sam pler

u (iz+ s)= z(i) v(i)=y(hj

Figure 2.1: A simple hybrid control system

2.2 The considered class o f non-linear systems and controls

x(t) = f(t,x ) + g(x)u, x E Rn , f : R x Rn —>Rn , g : Rn —>Rnxm (2.1)

with continuous and bounded input gain g(x):

x = Ax + B u -I- F (t, x) + G (t, x, u)u ,

A E Rnxn, B E Rnxm, F : R x Rn ->■ Rn , G : R x Rn x Rm -)• Rnxm. (2.2)

can be assured by the following conditions postulated by Caratheodory (1948):

1. /(£, •) : Rn —>• Rn is continuous for each fixed t G R

2. /(•, x) : R+ U {0} Rn is Lebesgue measurable for each fixed x and

1. V(t, •) : W1 -» R is locally Lipschitz, uniformly in any closed interval of t G R+ U {0}

2. V(-,x) : U {0} -> M is absolutely continuous, uniformly in any compact set of x G W1

3. For ci, C2, C3, C4 > 0 and C5 > 0:

^C,c > 0, JCc > 0.

||uc (xi) - uc (x2)|| < Ku ||xi - x 21|, Ku > 0.

2.2.1 From sliding mode to sliding-mode-based concepts

rank ([B (F (£, x) 4- G (t, x, u)u)]) = rank (B ).

z2 = A 2 1 Z1 -I- A22Z2 4- B 2U + G i( f ,x ,u ) u -I- F (f,x ), (2.7)

where B 2 £ imxm is non-singular,

and F (t, x), G i stem from the transformation of F (f, x) and G.

6{t) = j sin(0(£)) 4- b6{t) -I---- ^ u(t) ( 2 . 8)

is Hurwitz stable. With the transformation matrix

the linear uncertain system (2.2) is represented as:

The dynamics of the sliding-mode plane:

<■W inf > 0, IIGjU < gx (2.14)

where 7atl > 0,

J7(f,z 1}0) = /( f ,x ) H-sri ||u£|| > G iu £ (z i(f ),0 (f)) + F i

and the positive definite matrix ,P2 £ Mmxm satisfies

p2n‘ + (i'Tp2 = - i m. ( 2. 16)

The discontinuous term

W W ) = \<t>T (t)P2<t>(t). (2.18)

+<t>T(t)P2 ( G iu £ + F - +yNL)[Im + + (-Bf‘)T%-] P2<t>

< - M 2 + 4>T (t)P2 {§1 ||u £ || + / ( t , x ) - (ri(t,zu 4>) + 7N i) ] ( ^ |j i )

< - 11011 -7 N L II0II < - 7 N L \/‘Z V2l\max{P2) (2.19)

u(t) = -[0.99 1.3]x (2.20)

V* € (f,i+i] : y A/T(^,y) = y(ti), y A /r(f = 0,y ) = 0, ti = i r , i = 0 ,1 ,2,3 ,... (2.31)

P : x P{t) = fp(t, x P {t), u(f)) K 6 : x Ke (* + 1) = fK&(» ()> v (*))