Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Katsuhisa Furuta
Masayoshi Tomizuka
F(z
1
) =
f
0
+
f
1
z
1
+ ... +
f
n1
z
n+1
G(z
1
) = g
0
+ g
1
z
1
+ ... + g
m+d1
z
(m+d1)
Let,
T
= [y
k
, y
k1
, ..., y
kn+1
, u
k
, ..., u
kmd+1
]
be a vector containing measured and control sig-
nal data,
T
= [f
0
, f
1
, ..., f
n1
, g
0
, ..., g
m+d1
]
the vector containing the controller parameters,
and
T
k
= [
f
0
,
f
1
, ...,
f
n1
, g
0
, ..., g
m+d1
]
the estimation of .
j=0
[
j
]
2
(6)
by the recursive least-squares algorithm
k
=
k1
+
P
k1
kd
1 +
T
kd
P
k1
kd
k
(7)
P
k
= P
k1
P
k1
kd
T
kd
P
k1
1 +
T
kd
P
k1
kd
(8)
where
k
is the prediction error.
In this paper the control law is:
u
k
=
G(z
1
)
1
[
F(z
1
)y
k
C(z
1
)r
k+d
] (9)
where the estimates of control parameters are
given by (Furuta, 1993a),
k
=
k1
+
k1
kd
1 +
T
kd
k1
kd
(10)
[s
k
+ C(z
1
)r
k
T
kd
k1
]
k
=
k1
k1
kd
T
kd
k1
1 +
T
kd
k1
kd
(11)
The stability of the self-tuning control algorithm,
recursive estimates of controller parameters based
on generalized minimum variance criterion (REG-
MVC), is analyzed by using Lyapunov function as
follows:
Theorem 1. . Recursive estimates of controller pa-
rameters based on generalized minimum variance
criterion: Given
0
and
0
, the estimate
k
of the
controller (9) satises the recursive equations (10)
and (11), then the overall self-tuning controller
combining (9), (10) and (11) for system (1) is
stable.
Proof. s
k+d
is written as
s
k+d
= (12)
G(z
1
)u
k
+
F(z
1
)y
k
C(z
1
)r
k+d
+
T
k
k+d
where
k
=
k
. Using the control law (9), (12)
is rewritten as
s
k+d
=
T
k
k+d
(13)
Consider the candidate Lyapunov function:
V
k
=
1
2
s
2
k
+
1
2
T
k
1
k
k
, (
0
> 0) (14)
The time dierence of (14) is:
V
k
= V
k
V
k1
(15)
=
1
2
s
2
k1
+
1
2
T
k
1
k
1
2
T
k1
1
k1
k1
(16)
+
1
2
s
2
k
=
1
2
(
k1
)
T
1
k1
(
k1
) +
1
2
s
2
k
(17)
1
2
s
2
k1
+
1
2
T
k
(
1
k
+
1
k1
)
T
k
1
k1
k1
=
1
2
s
2
k1
1
2
(
k1
)
T
1
k1
(
k1
) (18)
+
1
2
T
k
(
1
k
1
k1
)
k
+
T
k
1
k1
T
k
1
k1
k1
1
2
s
2
k
+ s
2
k
From (13), s
2
k
is
s
2
k
=
T
k
kd
T
kd
k
(19)
substituting (19) into (18), the following relation
is derived:
V
k
=
1
2
(
k1
)
T
1
k1
(
k1
) (20)
1
2
s
2
k1
+
1
2
T
k
(
1
k
1
k1
kd
T
kd
)
k
+
T
k
1
k1
(
k1
+
k1
kd
T
kd
k
)
If
1
2
T
k
(
1
k
1
k1
kd
T
kd
)
k
(21)
+
T
k
1
k1
(
k1
+
k1
kd
T
kd
k
) = 0
then, V
k
is proven to be negative semidenite,
i.e. V
k
0.
From the rst term on the left of (21) the following
is derived:
1
k
1
k1
kd
T
kd
= 0 (22)
k
= (
1
k1
+
kd
T
kd
)
1
(23)
k
=
k1
(24)
k1
kd
T
kd
(
1
k1
+
kd
T
kd
)
1
this yields (11) by the matrix inversion lemma.
From the second term of (21) the following is
derived
k1
+
k1
kd
T
kd
k
= 0 (25)
k
+
k1
kd
T
kd
k
=
k1
(26)
(I +
k1
kd
T
kd
)
k
= (27)
(I +
k1
kd
T
kd
)
k1
k1
kd
T
kd
k1
k
=
k1
+ (28)
k1
kd
(1 +
T
kd
k1
kd
)
1
T
kd
(
k1
)
from (3),
s
k
=
T
kd
C(z
1
)r
k
(29)
thus (10) is derived.
Thus V
k
0, which implies that as k goes to
innity s
k
and
k1
approach to zero then
the stability of the overall self-tuning is proved.
The stability is proved in straight forward way.
The results are just the extension of Goodwin,
et al. (Goodwin et al., 1980); but the proof is so
straight forward and simple.
(20) gives, s
k
shall vanish when V
k
is negative
semidenite for all k, and the generalized mini-
mum variance is minimized.
Remark 1. Note that we do not prove, or claim,
that
k
converges to . Instead each element of
k
approaches to constant values.
Now, instead of (9), consider the following control
law,
u
k
=
G(z
1
)
1
[C(z
1
)r
k+d
F(z
1
)y
k
+ s
k
](30)
where 0 < < 1. Substituting (30) into (3), if
the controller parameters are known exactly, the
following relation is derived
s
k+d
= s
k
(31)
The idea is similar to the introduction of an
additional control parameter to give system ro-
bustness. Some results on this topic are found
in (Furuta, 1993b). When (30) is used instead of
(9), the method will be referred as generalized
minimum variance criterion - equivalent control
approach (GMVC-). The following theorem, re-
cursive estimates of controller parameters based
on generalized minimum variance criterion -
equivalent control approach (REGMVC-), estab-
lishes overall system stability when (30) is used.
Theorem 2. . Recursive estimates of controller pa-
rameters based on generalized minimum variance
criterion - equivalent control approach: Given
i
and
i
, i = 0, 1, 2, ..., d, the estimate
k
of the
controller (30) satises the recursive equations,
k
=
kd
+
kd
kd
1 +
T
kd
kd
kd
(32)
[s
k
+ C(z
1
)r
k
T
kd
kd
+ s
kd
]
k
=
kd
kd
kd
T
kd
kd
1 +
T
kd
kd
kd
(33)
then the overall self-tuning controller combining
(30), (32) and (33) for system (1) is stable.
Proof. Using (12) and control law (30), s
k+d
is
s
k+d
= s
k
+
T
k
k+d
(34)
The time dierence of the candidate Lyapunov
function is given by:
V
k
= V
k
V
kd
(35)
where the candidate Lyapunov function is the
same as in (14). Then,
V
k
= (36)
1
2
s
2
k
1
2
s
2
kd
+
1
2
T
k
1
k
1
2
T
kd
1
kd
kd
=
1
2
s
2
kd
1
2
(
kd
)
T
1
kd
(
kd
) (37)
+
1
2
s
2
k
+
1
2
T
k
(
1
k
+
1
kd
)
T
k
1
kd
kd
=
1
2
s
2
kd
1
2
(
kd
)
T
1
kd
(
kd
) (38)
+
1
2
T
k
(
1
k
1
kd
)
k
+
T
k
1
kd
T
k
1
kd
kd
1
2
s
2
k
+ s
2
k
from (34), s
2
k
is
s
2
k
= (39)
2
s
2
kd
+ 2s
kd
T
kd
k
+
T
k
kd
T
kd
k
Substituting (39) into (38), the following relation
is derived
V
k
=
1
2
T
k
(
1
k
1
kd
kd
T
kd
)
k
(40)
1
2
(
kd
)
T
1
kd
(
kd
) +
T
k
1
kd
(
kd
+
kd
kd
T
kd
k
+
kd
kd
s
kd
)
1
2
s
2
kd
(1
2
)
If
1
2
T
k
(
1
k
1
kd
kd
T
kd
)
k
+
T
k
1
kd
(41)
(
kd
+
kd
kd
T
kd
k
+
kd
kd
s
kd
)
= 0
then the dierence of the candidate Lyapunov
function (35) is proven to be negative semidenite,
V
k
0.
From the rst term on the far left of (41) the
following is derived:
1
k
1
kd
kd
T
kd
= 0 (42)
k
= (
1
kd
+
kd
T
kd
)
1
(43)
k
=
kd
(44)
kd
kd
T
kd
(
1
kd
+
kd
T
kd
)
1
which yields (33). From the second term of (41),
kd
+
kd
kd
T
kd
k
(45)
+
kd
kd
s
kd
= 0
k
=
kd
kd
kd
(1 +
T
kd
kd
kd
)
1
(46)
(
T
kd
(
kd
) + s
kd
)
Noting from (3),
s
k
=
T
kd
C(z
1
)r
k
(47)
(32) is obtained from (46).
Thus V
k
0, and s
kd
and
kd1
ap-
proach to zero as k goes to innity, and the sta-
bility of the overall self-tuning has been proved.
Remark 2. Note that for the case d = 1 when =
0, REGMVC- algorithm is same as REGMVC.
4. SIMULATION RESULTS
As an hypothetical example consider the following
true non-minimum phase plant with d = 2,
(1 0.7z
1
)y
k
= z
d
(1 + 2.8z
1
)u
k
(48)
The nominal plant is
(1 0.5z
1
)y
k
= z
d
(1 + 2.5z
1
)u
k
(49)
For the nominal controller design using the gener-
alized minimum variance criterion, the following
polynomials are chosen:
C(z
1
) = 1 + z
1
+ 0.3z
2
(50)
Q(z
1
) = 40(1 z
1
) (51)
which lead to the following polynomials for the
controller law,
F(z
1
) = 1.05,
G(z
1
) = 41 36z
1
+ 3.75z
2
F(z
1
) and
G(z
1
) give initial estimates of the
controller parameters.
When polynomial C(z
1
) and Q(z
1
) in (50) and
(51) respectively, are used to computed the op-
timal controller polynomials F(z
1
) and G(z
1
)
for the real plant (48), the following polynomials
are obtained,
F(z
1
) = 1.49, G(z
1
) = 41 35.5z
1
+ 4.76z
2
In Fig. 1 the output responses of the system
(48), using the xed controller GMVC, and the
self-tuning controllers REGMVC and REGMVC-
(for selected values of : = 0.4 and = 0.8),
are shown. The initial condition for is set to
the identity matrix, i.e.
i
= I, (i = 0, 1).
The reference signal is chosen as a sequence of
steps with length of 50 samples. Note that the
generalized minimum variance controller (GMVC)
is very sensitive to the presence of parametric
Fig. 1. y
k
vs. r
k
using GMVC, REGMVC, and REGMVC-, for the true non-minimum phase system
(48), d = 2.
(i)i=0,1
= I and = 0.4 and 0.8.
uncertainties, and that the self-tuning controller
can improve the responses as the parameters are
identied. In this particular example, the case
REGMVC- for small values of , e.g. 0.2
the response behave very similar to the case
REGMVC.
5. CONCLUSIONS
Two design methods for the self-tuning stabilizing
controller based on generalized minimum variance
for discrete-time systems were studied: REGMVC
and REGMVC-. Parameter identication has
been used in the presence of parametric uncertain-
ties. The overall stability for the two algorithms
was proved by the Lyapunov theory. The robust-
ness and performance of the self-tuning algorithms
has been shown through a simulated example.
REFERENCES
Astrom, K.J. and B. Wittenmark (1973). On self-
tuning regulators. Automatica 9, 185199.
Astrom, K.J. and B. Wittenmark (1989). Adaptive
control. Addison-Wesley. USA.
Clarke, D.W., D. Phil and P.J. Gawthrop
(1975). Self-tuning controller. IEE Proceed-
ings 122(9), 929934.
Clarke, D.W., D. Phil and P.J. Gawthrop
(1979). Self-tuning control. IEE Proceedings
126(6), 633640.
Furuta, K. (1993a). Vss type self-tuning control.
IEEE Transaction on Industrial Electronics
40(1), 3744.
Furuta, K. (1993b). Vss-type self-tuning control-
beta equivalent control approach. Proceed-
ings of the 1993 American control conference
(ACC), San Francisco, California pp. 980
984.
Gawthrop, P.J. (1980). On the stability and con-
vergence of a self-tuning controller. Interna-
tional Journal of Control 31(5), 973998.
Goodwin, G.C., P.J. Ramadge and P.E. Caines
(1980). Discrete-time multivariable adaptive
control. IEEE Transaction on Automatic
Control 25(3), 449456.
Johansson, R. (1986). Direct adaptive control.
global lyapunov stability and exponential
convergence. Proceedings of the 25th Confer-
ence on Decision and Control, Athens, Greece
pp. 813818.
Landau, I.D. (1980). An extention of a stabil-
ity theorem applicable to adaptive control.
IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control
25(4), 814817.
Landau, I.D. (1982). Near supermartingales for
convergence analysis of recursive identica-
tion and adaptive control schemes. Interna-
tional Journal of Control 35(2), 197226.
Morse, A. (1992). Towards a unied theory of pa-
rameter adaptive control - part ii: certainty
equivalence and implicit tuning. IEEE Trans-
actions on Automatic Control 37(1), 1529.
Patete, A., K. Furuta and M. Tomizuka (n.d.).
Self-tuning control based on generalized min-
imum variance criterion for auto regresive
models. Submitted to Automatica.
Slotine, J.E. and W. Li (1964). VSS controller
design for discrete-time system. Prentice Hall.
Xinghuo, Y. and X. Jian-Xin (1992). Advances in
variable structure systems. IEEE Proceedings
of thr 6th International Workshop on Vari-
able Structure Systems.
Zinober (1994). Variable structure and lyapunov
control. In: An introduction to sliding mode
variable structure control (A.S.I Zinober,
Ed.). pp. 122. Springer-Verlag. London.