Escolar Documentos
Profissional Documentos
Cultura Documentos
+ + < .
Lemma 2 |WU et al., 2006| With the given symmetric matrix
11 12
12 22
T
S S
S
S S
=
,
in this matrix,
11
S ,
22
S is nonsingular invertible matrix, then the three conditions below is equivalent:
(1) 0 S < ;
(2)
11
0 S < ,
1
22 12 11 12
0
T
S S S S
<
;
(3)
22
0 S < ,
1
11 12 22 12
0
T
S S S S
< ;
Consider linear continuous time-invariable equation
( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) x t A A x t B B u t = + + + , (1)
where ( ) x t
l
=
l
l
]
, (3)
reach the minimum.
For the given quadratic perIormance index and system uncertainty, the closed system with state Ieedback
controller ( ) ( ) u t Kx t is optimal, iI the symmetric matrix P and K exist which satisIy
4 Yang Changwei and Chen Jie / AASRI Procedia 3 ( 2012 ) 2 7
1 2 1 2
( ) ( )
T
T
P A BK DF E E K A BK DF E E K P K RKQ0
, (4)
and then system perIormance upper bound is
0 0
T
J x Px
.
Consider the controller has parameter perturbation
0 0
( )
k k k
K K KK D F t E , (5)
the non-Iragile controller design approach with optimal perIormance can be given as Iollows.
3. Main results
3.1. Non-fragile controller design with robust performance optimal
Theorem 1 For system (1) with uncertainty (2), the necessary and suIIicient condition to the optimal
perIormance index (3) with non-Iragile Ieedback control strategy is that, iI there exists positive deIine matrix
X , W , and real constant 0 > that satisIy the LMIs below
1 2
1 2 2
1
1
2
(AX BW) ( ) ( )
( )
0
( ) ( )
T T T T T
k k
T
k
k
T T T
k k k
k
AX BW DD E X E W X W BD XE
E X E W I 0 0 E D 0
X 0 Q 0 0 0
W 0 0 R D 0
BD E D 0 D I 0
E X 0 0 0 0 I
+ + + + +
+
<
(6)
Moreover, iI the Ieasible solution Ior the inequality (6) above exists, then the control strategy
1
( ) ( ) u t WX x t
= is the controller Ior the system (1), and the perIormance upper bound is
0 0
T
J x Px
.
Proof. According to the Eq. (4), the necessary and suIIicient condition Ior minimizing the perIormance index
(3) with system uncertainty is
1 2 1 2
( ) ( ) ( )
T T T
Y PDF E E K E E K F PD + + + +
1 2 1 2
( ) ( ) ( )
T T
Y PD PD E E K E E K 0 + + < ,
where ( ) ( )
T T
YQ K RK P A BK A BK P + + + + + .
1 2
1 2
1
1
( ) ( ) ( )
( )
T T T T
P A BK A BK P PDD P E E K I K
E E K I 0 0
M 0
I 0 Q 0
K 0 0 R
+ + + +
+
= <
Substitute the Eq. (3) into the equation above, then we can get the results by Lemma 1
1 2 0 0
1 2 0
1
1
0
( ) ( ) ( )
( )
T T T T
P A BK A BK P PDD P E E K I K
E E K I 0 0
M
I 0 Q 0
K 0 0 R
+ + + +
+
=
[ ]
2
2
( ) ( )
k k
k T T T T
k k k k k k
k k
PBD E
E D 0
F E 0 0 0 F PBD E D 0 D
0 0
D D
+ +
5 Yang Changwei and Chen Jie / AASRI Procedia 3 ( 2012 ) 2 7
0 0 1 2 0 0
1 2 0
1
1
0
( ) ( ) ( )
( )
T T T T
P A BK A BK P PDD P E E K I K
E E K I 0 0
I 0 Q 0
K 0 0 R
+ + + +
+
[ ]
2 2 1
T
T
k k k
k k
k
k k
PBD PBD E
E D E D 0
E 0 0 0
0 0 0
D D 0
+ +
By the Lemma 2, M 0 < is equal to
0 0 1 2 0 0
1 2 0 2
1
1
0
2
( ) ( ) ( )
( )
( ) ( )
T T T T T
k k
k
k
T T T
k k k
k
P A BK A BK P PDD P E E K I K PBD E
E E K I 0 0 E D 0
I 0 Q 0 0 0
0
K 0 0 R D 0
PBD E D 0 D I 0
E 0 0 0 0 I
+ + + + +
+
<
.
Multiply the inequality above right and leIt with
{ }
1
, , , , , diag P I I I I I
respectively.
0 0 1 2 0 0
1 2 0 2
1
1
0
2
( ) ( ) ( )
( )
( ) ( )
T T T T T
k k
k
k
T T T
k k k
k
A BK X X A BK DD X E E K X XK BD XE
E E K X I 0 0 E D 0
X 0 Q 0 0 0
0
K X 0 0 R D 0
BD E D 0 D I 0
E X 0 0 0 0 I
+ + + + +
+
<
.
Let
1
X P
= ,
0
K X W = , then the Eq. (6) can be got. II the Ieasible solution to the LMIs (6) is existed, the
control strategy
1
( ) ( ) ( ) u t W X x t
is the non-Iragile state Ieedback controller.
3.2. Non-fragile controller design based on Linear Quadratic Regulator (LQR)
II the system uncertainty doesn`t exist, then this problem regresses to the non-Iragile control with
conventional linear quadratic perIormance index, e.g.
A 0 , B 0
Theorem 2 For system (1), the necessary and suIIicient condition to the optimal perIormance index (3) with
non-Iragile Ieedback control strategy is that, iI the positive deIine matrix X , W exist, and real constant 0 >
that satisIy the Iollowing LMIs
1
1
( ) ( )
0 0 0
0 0 0
( ) 0 0
0 0 0
T T T
k k
T
k
T T
k k
k
AX BW AXBW X W BD XE
X Q
W R D
BD D I
E X I
+ +
<
, (7)
6 Yang Changwei and Chen Jie / AASRI Procedia 3 ( 2012 ) 2 7
then
1
K KW
+ +
[ ]
( )
( ) ( ) ( ) ( )
T
k k
T T T
k k k k k
k
PBD E
0 F t E 0 0 0 F t PBD 0 D
D 0
+ +
1
1
( ) ( )
0 0 0
0 0 0
( ) 0 0
0 0 0
T T T
0 0 0 k k
0 k
T T
k k
k
ABK P P A BK I K PBD E
I Q
K R D
PBD D I
E I
+ +
<
.
Multiply the inequality above right and leIt with
{ }
1
, , , , diag P I I I I
respectively.
1
1
( ) ( )
0 0 0
0 0 0
( ) 0 0
0 0 0
T T T
0 0 0 k k
0 k
T T
k k
k
X ABK A BK X X XK BD XE
X Q
K X R D
BD D I
E X I
+ +
<
.
Let
1
X P
= ,
0
K X W = , then the Eq. (7) can be got.
4. Simulation examples
Consider the Iollowing Ilight model
( ) ( ) ( ) x t Ax t Bu t = + , (8)
0.0316 6.9739 1.0087 9.8036
0.002 0.6256 0.9128 0
0.0027 0.4 0.8845 0
0 0 1 0
A
=
,
0
0.0873
4.1063
0
B
=
,
the corresponding system states are: Ilight velocity J , attack angle , pitch rate q , and pitch angle ,
aircraIt system input is elevator angle
e
.
System controller addictive gain perturbation can be written as the Eq. (5)
[ ] 1
k
E =
,
[ ] 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1
k
F =
,
( ) 1
k
t
Using the inequality (7) above, the controller can be solved as
[ ] 2.3685 83.6093 3.536 45.6491 K =
For examining the control strategy, the Ilight system response with controller is given. Fig. 1 to 4 show
the state curves with perturbation.
7 Yang Changwei and Chen Jie / AASRI Procedia 3 ( 2012 ) 2 7
Fig. 1. (a) Ilight velocity V response curves; (b) angle oI attack u response curves
Fig. 2. (a) pitch rate q response curves; (b) pitch angle 0 response curves
5. Conclusions
Using the Quadratic perIormance optimization method, the control stability problem with controller
additive gain perturbation is discussed, and then the stability theorem and state Ieedback control approach are
derived in this paper. In Section 4, the Ilight system perIormance oI aircraIt has been veriIied by mathematical
simulation to validate the controller design approach.
References
|1| Zhou K, Doyle J C, Glover K. Robust and optimal control. New Jersey: Prentice Hall Englewood CliIIs, 1996.
|2| Sheldon. S. L. Chang. Adaptive Guaranteed cost control oI systems with uncertain parameters. IEEE Trans
on Automatic control, 1972;17:474-483.
|3|L.H. Keel, S .P. Bhattacharyya, Robust, Fragile or Optimal? Proceedings oI the American Control
ConIerence Albuquerque, New Meixco, June 1997:1307-1313.
|4|D. Famularo, P. Dorato, C. T. Abdallah, W. M. Haddad, and A. Jadbabaie. Robust non-Iragile LQ
controllers: the static state Ieedback case. International Journal oI control, 1998, 1109-1113.
|5| G.H. Yang, J.L. Wang, C Lin. H control Ior linear systems with additive controller gain variations,
International Journal oI control, 2000;73:1500-1506.
|6| YU Li. Robust control. Beijing: tsinghua university press, 2002.
|7| WU Ming, GUI Wei-hua, HE Yong. Modern robust control. Changsha: Central South university press,
2006.