A Survey of Some Sliding Mode

Control Designs

Dennis Driggers
EE691
March 16, 2006
Overview
Most types of system control techniques
incorporate some type of disturbance
waveform modeling. Even if the
disturbance waveform is completely
unknown, a disturbance characterization
of the waveform is assumed. This
assumption is usually made on a worst
case basis to insure stability of the
targeted system.
Classical and Modern Control theory
incorporates waveform characterization of
disturbances with and without waveform
structure. Modern control theory is
centered around modeling the disturbance
to either completely reject, minimize, or to
even utilize the disturbance in controlling
system behavior. In all of these
circumstances it is necessary to model the
waveform.
Some Waveform Models used in
Modern Control Design
) ( ) ( ) (
) cos( ) sin( ) cos( ) sin( ) (
) ( ) (
) ( ) (
) ( ) (
2
3
3
2 2
5
5
5 4 3 2 1
2
2
2 1
2
2
2 1
t
dt
dw
dt
w d
dt
w d
t c t c t c t c c t w
t
dt
dw
dt
w d
e c c t w
t
dt
w d
t c c t w
t
dt
dw
c t w
t
e u| | u
| | u u
e o
e
o
o
= + + +
+ + + + =
= + + =
= + =
= =
Introduction to Sliding Mode
Control
Sliding Mode Control does not require a disturbance
waveform characterization to implement the control law.
The main advantage of Sliding Mode Control (SMC) is
the robustness to unknown disturbances. Required
knowledge of the disturbance is limited to the
disturbance boundary. Traditional SMC was, however,
limited by a discontinuous control law. Depending on the
plant dynamics, high frequency switching may or may
not be an issue to contend with. There are techniques to
limit and eliminate the high-frequency switching
associated with traditional SMC. It is the intent of this
paper to look at several SMC techniques utilizing an
aircraft model with bounded external disturbances.
Agenda
Background of SMC
Definitions
SMC Design Methodology
Derivations
Traditional SMC
Supertwist
SMC driven by SMC observer
Simulation Results
Conclusions





Agenda
Background of SMC
Definitions
SMC Design Methodology
Derivations
Traditional SMC
Supertwist
SMC driven by SMC observer
Simulation Results
Conclusions





Background
Sliding Mode Control (SMC) theory was founded and
advanced in the former Soviet Union as a variable
structure control system.
SMC is a relatively young control concept dating back to
the 1960s.
SMC theory first appeared outside Russia in the mid
1970s when a book by Itkis (1976) and a survey paper
by Utkin (1977) were published in English.
The SMC reachability condition is based on the
Russian mathematician, Lyapunov, and his theory of
stability of nonlinear systems.
Agenda
Background of SMC
Definitions
SMC Design Methodology
Derivations
Traditional SMC
Supertwist
SMC driven by SMC observer
Simulation Results
Conclusions





Definitions
State Space An n-dimensional space whose
coordinate axes consist of the x1 axes,x2
axis,,x
n
axes.
State trajectory- A graph of x(t) verses t through
a state space.
State variables The state variables of a system
consist of a minimum set of parameters that
completely summarize the systems status.
Disturbance Completely or partially unknown
system inputs which cannot be manipulated by
the system designer.


Definitions
Sliding Surface A line or hyperplane in
state-space which is designed to
accommodate a sliding motion.
Sliding Mode The behavior of a dynamical
system while confined to the sliding surface.

Signum function (Sign(s))

Reaching phase The initial phase of the
closed loop behaviour of the state variables
as they are being driven towards the
surface.

<
> +
0 ) , ( 1
0 ) , ( 1
y y if s
y y s if

Agenda
Background of SMC
Definitions
SMC design Methodology
Derivations
Traditional SMC
Supertwist
SMC driven by SMC observer
Simulation Results
Conclusions





SMC Design Methodology
Three Basic Steps
Design a sliding manifold or sliding surface
in state space.
Design a controller to reach the sliding
surface in finite time.
Design a control law to confine the desired
state variables to the sliding manifold.


SMC Graphical Illustration

Agenda
Background of SMC
Definitions
SMC design Methodology
Derivations
Traditional SMC
Supertwist
SMC driven by SMC observer
Simulation Results
Conclusions





Aircraft Modeled Parameters
Simplified aircraft model consist of angle of attack,
aircraft pitch rate, and elevator deflection represented
as ,q, and
e.
Aircraft parameters for a particular airframe at a
particular attitude and altitude.
Changes in airframe due to damage (unknown,
uncertain, and bounded)

Horizontal tail and rudder areas.

Flight profile filters.






A A

n
A
B

* o
o
c
Aircraft and Disturbance Models
used in Simulations
u
e e
20 20 + = o o

,
~
e
B
q
A
q
o
o o
+
(

=
(

,
~
A A A
n
A + =
(

=
26 . 1 72 . 3
99 . 15 . 1
An
), 3 (
42 . 0 85 . 1
003 . 0 04 . 0

(

= A t U A
,
5 . 19
0
(

= B
where
). (
4 3
4
2
t U
s s
c
+ +
=
-
o
o
) 3 sin( ) ( t t =
0 ) 0 ( , 1 . 0 ) 0 ( , 0 ) 0 (
:
= = = q and
Conditions Initial
c
o o
Derivations for Traditional SMC
It is necessary to find the relative degree of the system in
state-space. Relative degree, , is determined by the
number of times the output has to be differentiated before
any control input appears in its expression.
The aircraft model in scalar format is:





The relative degree of the plant is 3 as the control u
appears as follows:
e
q q
q
o o
o o
5 . 19 26 . 1 72 . 3
99 . 0 15 . 1
=
+ =

I
bu h gq f y
e
+ + + = = o o o

o = y
u e e 20 20 + = o o

Sliding Surface Design

The sliding manifold is formulated as:
where
then .
and are deigned to make the dynamic
sliding surface stable. This is achieved by
making the equation Hurwitz stable. The
equation from the ITAE tables for a 2
nd
order
system is:

and for a then C
1
and C
2
are 14 and 100
respectively.

e C e C e
n n
2
1
1
+ + =

o

1 I = n
e C e C e
2 1
+ + =

o

1
C
2
C
10 =
n
W
2
2
4 . 1
n n
w s w s + +
Derivation for reaching phase
To guarantee an ideal sliding motion the -reachability
condition must be met and is given by

o
o o
o o
o
o
o o o o
o
o
) 0 (
: by (0) any for satisfied is
condition ty reachabili the zero to setting By

) 0 (
) 0 (
) 0 ( ) 0 ( ) (
dt
0
) (
) 0 (
s
= =
=
= =
s s
} }
r
r
t t
t
t t
t t
dt d
d
then

constant. positive small a is o o o where s
Reaching Phase Design
Introduce a Lyapunov function candidate.

The derivative of the Lyapunov function is

The initial conditions are given as:
and .
Desire seconds, then





04 . 17
5 . 0
52 . 8 ) 0 ( ) 0 (
=

= > s
r
r
t
t
o

o
o o o s =

V
2
2
1
) ( o o = V
, 1 . 0 ) 0 ( = o 0 ) 0 ( = q , 0 ) 0 ( =
c
o
8.52 100(0.1) 1.15(0.1)) 14( 1.32(0.1) (0) = =
5 . 0 =
r
t




) ( 100 ) ( 14 o o o o o o o + + =
c c c

SMC Controller Design
The controller can be implemented with the
signum function as follows:

( ) ) (o sign L u + =
) 3 sin( t L >
. 5 . 1 let 1 ~ > L L
04 . 17
5 . 0
52 . 8
= >
) ( 5 . 18 o sign u =
Simulink Diagram for Traditionial
SMC
Supertwist Design
It has been shown (not in this brief) that the solution
to the following differential equation


and its derivative converge to zero in finite time if
, , and .

On this basis u is introduced as:






o o | o o o d sign sign u ) ( ) (
2 / 1
}
+ =
L 2 / 1 > o
L 4 > |
L t s ) (
) ( ) ( ) (
2 / 1
t d z sign z sign z z t | o = + +
}

Supertwist Design
Supertwist utilizes the same sliding surface and
values as the traditional SMC. The signum
control function is replaced with the function:


The values for L=1.5 are:







o o | o o o d sign sign u ) ( ) (
2 / 1
}
+ =
L 2 / 1 > o L 4 > |
612 . 5 . 1 2 / 1 = > o
, 6 ) 5 . 1 ( 4 = > |
Supertwist Block Diagram
SMC Observer Design
. ) (
) 3 ( )) ( ( ) ) ( (
: yields ) (
with ng substituti and Eq(2) of inequality the to (1) Eq. Applying
(2) 0

(1) ) (
) (
: yields solving and into ng substituti and ating Differenti

: follows as
designed is and as introduced is variable sliding auxiliary new A

0
1 1

o
o

+ > s
+ s + =
+
> <
+ =
+ + = + =
+ = + =
= > + =
+ = = + =
L and L where
s wsign L s w s s s
s wsign L
s s s
w s
w v v z s
z s
w v z and z s
s
) ( and v , K v -K v
v where ) ( v, bu, bu ) (

SMC Observer Design
). (

obtain filter to pass - low a of means by filter

to necessary is it of switching frequency - high the remove To
). ( and 0 surface sliding in the mode sliding the of existance
indicates which Eq.(3) as same the is which ) s s( ) ) ( s(
then ) (
)) ( ( ) ) ( (
then
(4)
: as selected is SMC If
eq
=
= =
s s +
s +
+ s +
+ =

w w
w
w s
s s w
s )sign(s)) (L s(
s sign )sign(s) L-(L s )sign(s) -(L s
)sign(s) -(L w
w
eq

Disturbance Observer Block

Diagram
Agenda
Background of SMC
Definitions
SMC design Methodology
Derivations
Traditional SMC
Supertwist
SMC driven by SMC observer
Simulation Results
Conclusions





Disturbances
Phase Diagram
of the Sliding Surface
Traditional SMC
Supertwist
SMC Observer
Agenda
Background of SMC
Definitions
SMC design Methodology
Derivations
Traditional SMC
Supertwist
SMC driven by SMC observer
Simulation Results
Conclusions





Conclusion and Comments
Traditional SMC.
High frequency switching controller.
Simple controller design.
High quality control.
Supertwist
Continuous control function.
Controller is more complex.
High quality control.
Disturbance SMC Driven by SMC Observer
Continuous controller.
More complex than supertwist.
Very high quality control.
All SMC designs provided high quality of control without
disturbance waveform modeling.
Summary
Reviewed some background and definitions
related to SMC.
Derived three types of sliding mode controllers,
traditional, Supertwist, and SMC Driven by a
SMC Observer.
Simulated each controller in Simulink using a
partial plant model of a F-16 aircraft.
Simulated a phase portrait of the sliding surface
in state space.
Compared simulation results of the error and
control output for each design.




References
Shtessel, Y., Buffington, J., and Banda, S.Multiple
Timescale Flight Control Using Reconfigurable Sliding
Modes, Journal of Guidance, Control, and Dynamics,
Vol. 22, No. 6, Nov. Dec. 1999, pp. 873-883
Edwards, Christopher, and Surgeon, Sarah, K. Sliding
Mode Control, Theory and Applications, Taylor and
Frances Inc., 1900 Frost Road, Suite 101, Bristol, PA
19007
Brogan, William, L. Modern Control Theory, Third
edition, Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey
07632
Dorf, Richard, C., and Bishop, Robert, H, Modern
Control Systems, Ninth edition, Prentice Hall, Upper
Saddle River, NJ 07457