www.ietdl.

org
Published in IET Control Theory and Applications
Received on 10th January 2011
Revised on 7th November 2011
doi: 10.1049/iet-cta.2011.0022
ISSN 1751-8644
Adaptive observer design for the uncertain
Takagi–Sugeno fuzzy system with output disturbance
T. V. Dang
1
W.-J. Wang
1
L. Luoh
2
C.-H. Sun
3
1
Department of Electrical Engineering, National Central University, JhongLi 32001, Taiwan
2
Department of Electrical Engineering, Chung Hua University, Hsin-Chu 10608, Taiwan
3
Department of Mechanical and Electro-Mechanical Engineering, Tamkang University, Tamsui, Taipei County 25137,
Taiwan
E-mail: wjwang@ee.ncu.edu.tw
Abstract: The study proposes an adaptive fuzzy observer for the uncertain Takagi–Sugeno (T–S) fuzzy system with output
disturbance. First, an augmented fuzzy model is built by integrating the system state and the output disturbance together as
new variables. Then, the desired adaptive fuzzy observer is designed to estimate the unavailable system state and the unknown
output disturbance simultaneously. Based on Lyapunov theory and linear matrix inequalities (LMIs) tools, two main conditions
are derived under which the fuzzy observer is designed. Finally, the procedure of the observer design is summarised and the
effectiveness of the designed observer is demonstrated with a numerical example.
1 Introduction
The design of observers for state estimation plays an
important role in the automatic control domain with
various areas of application. Besides, several issues require
system’s state reconstruction, such as designing a state
feedback control law [1] or constructing a diagnosis system
under supervisory [2] and reconfiguring the system with
appearance of failures [3]. Diverse approaches for the
observer design have been proposed, such as transfer
function methods, geometric-observers, differential algebraic
models and singular value decomposition [4–6].
In practical control problems, it is unavoidable to include
uncertain parameters and output disturbances because
of modelling error, measurement error and linearisation
approximation. Hence, it is necessary to design a robust
observer which ensures the exactness of state estimate
between the states of dynamical systems and observer in
the presence of the uncertainties. Therefore the problem of
robust state observer design for dynamical systems with
uncertainty has received considerable attention of many
researchers, and many approaches to design a robust state
observer have been developed in the past decades.
Among the solutions to the problem of the state
estimation, the most famous estimator is the Luenberger’s
observer [7]. The Luenberger’s observer bases on the
synthesis of a static gain which is synthesised to stabilise
the state estimation error and to guarantee its asymptotic
convergence. However, the existence of disturbance or
uncertain causes a bad reconstruction of the state’s system.
Other solutions as the proportional integral (PI) observer
design [8] or the proportional multiple-integral observer
design [9] permits us to attenuate either measurement
noise or modelling error. Unfortunately, a conventional
PI observer cannot provide a satisfactory estimation
performance when the output disturbance occurs in the plant.
The same drawback of the conventional observer is pointed
out in [8, 9], that is the output disturbance will be amplified
by the conventional observer gain matrix.
Fuzzy technique has been widely used in modelling
and controlling non-linear systems. The fuzzy control with
IF-THEN rules can combine with the other control methods
to reach the some difficult control objective, because of its
capability of modelling complex non-linear systems [10–15].
Among various kinds of fuzzy models, Takagi–Sugeno (T–
S) fuzzy model [16] is one of the most popular classes
of fuzzy model. It has recently gained much popularity
because of their special rule, consequent structure and
successful application in a functional approximation and
system analysis. Therefore T–S fuzzy model has been a
powerful tool in the analysis and synthesis to a non-linear
control system [16–18].
Many papers have been studying the observer design
for fuzzy T–S systems by using different techniques such
as the linear matrix inequalities (LMIs) approach, the
sliding mode technique and the adaptive method to design
the fuzzy observer [19–23]. However, the observer design
problems are more challenging in the presence of unknown
time-varying output disturbances [24]. Although there was
remarkable success in the observer design for linear crisp
system with measurement noise [25], the observer technique
for the crisp system cannot be utilised directly in the
fuzzy observer design because of the existence time-varying
weights in the fuzzy inference engine. In the presence of
bounded non-differentiable disturbances, adaptive observers
have been developed in [26–28] to guarantee bounded state
and parameter estimation errors.
IET Control Theory Appl., pp. 1–16 1
doi: 10.1049/iet-cta.2011.0022 © The Institution of Engineering and Technology 2012
www.ietdl.org
Therefore how to design the fuzzy observer for T–S fuzzy
systems with output disturbances is worth being studied. The
paper [24] studied the observer design technique for the
T–S fuzzy system with output disturbance. However, it
did not deal with the T–S fuzzy system with uncertain
parameters since uncertainties make the observer design
much more complicated. There is a pioneer paper
investigating the observer-controller design for T–S fuzzy
uncertain system [29] in which the stability criterion and
robustness area with respect to a single-grid-point in the
parameter space are derived. The paper [30] presents an
adaptive approach for the synchronisation of T–S chaotic
systems to estimate the uncertain parameters. Although the
objective can be completely achieved, the paper requires
a constraint (in Assumption 1) for the solution of LMI
problems. In the example, the authors have to use variables
in the state and input matrices which are found after the
common positive definite matrix P. Although in the systems
the state and input matrices are originally and normally
fixed.
The design of adaptive observer for uncertain non-
linear systems containing disturbance has attracted great
attention recently. The paper [31] demonstrates a robust
adaptive observer for multiple-in multiple-out non-linear
system with uncertain non-linearities and disturbances. The
existing problem in the paper is that the state estimation
error is uniformly bounded and does not converge to zero
asymptotically. The fuzzy observer-based fuzzy controller
is developed in [32]. The proposed methods efficiently
attenuate the peak of perturbation because of persistent
bounded disturbances. The question of bounded disturbance
is represented in [33] to deliver a method as using the
strictly positive real theory and Lyapunov stability theory
to design the state observer. All of the authors in [31–33]
use the popular lemma as Meyer–Kalman–Yakubovich [34]
about assumption of common matrix P for all subsystems.
This however seems to be a common practice in the related
literature.
In this paper, the problem to be handled is the estimation
of state and disturbance subjected to the influence of
unknown output disturbances and uncertain parameters in
the T–S fuzzy system. The work proposes a robust adaptive
fuzzy observer to accurately estimate the system state
and the output disturbance at the same time under the
existence of uncertainties. First, this work generates an
augmented system for uncertain T–S fuzzy model. Then,
the main theorem for the adaptive observer design is
proposed and LMIs tool [35, 36] is used to find the solution
of parameters such that the observer system can achieve
the goals. Finally, the computer simulation is conducted
to verify the effectiveness of the proposed method. The
rest of paper is organised as follows. In Section 2, some
preliminaries for T–S fuzzy model of uncertain system with
output disturbance and problem formulation are given. In
Section 3, the adaptive fuzzy state/disturbance observer is
designed and the conditions ensuring global and asymptotic
convergence of estimation error are derived as a set of LMI
terms. A numerical example is given in Section 4 to illustrate
the design procedure and the effectiveness of the proposed
approach. Finally, a conclusion is given in Section 5.
2 System model and problem description
A T–S fuzzy model described by IF-THEN rules is
considered, and each rule represents the local linear
input–output relation from a non-linear uncertain system.
The ith rule of the fuzzy model is of the following form:
Plant Rule i
IF z
1
is μ
i1
and … and z
s
is μ
is
, then
_
˙ x(t) = (A
i
+A
i
)x(t) +B
i
u(t), i = 1, . . . , r
y(t) = C
i
x(t)
(1)
where x(t) ∈ R
n
is the unavailable state, u(t) ∈ R
m
is the
control and y(t) ∈ R
p
is the output. In general, z
j
∈ Z
j
(j =
1, 2, . . ., s) are the antecedent variables which may be some
of the states, the function of states or the function of output
[36], but the states are unavailable, here, z
j
will be the
output y or some function of y. Moreover, μ
ij
(i = 1, 2, . . ., r;
j = 1, 2, . . ., s) are the fuzzy sets that are characterised by
membership functions, r is the number of IF–THEN rules
and s is the number of the premise variables. The matrices
A
i
, B
i
and C
i
are with appropriate dimensions and A
i
denotes the bounded uncertain constant matrix satisfying
A
i
≤ ε
i
. The overall fuzzy model achieved from plant
rules in (1) is given by









˙ x(t) =
r

i=1
h
i
(z){(A
i
+A
i
)x(t) +B
i
u(t)}
y(t) =
r

i=1
h
i
(z)C
i
x(t)
(2)
where
z(t) = [z
1
(t), . . . , z
s
(t)], h
i
(z) =
ψ
i
(z)

r
i=1
ψ
i
(z)
,
ψ
i
(z) =
s

j=1
μ
ji
(z)
Here, h
i
(z) is regarded as the normalised weight of each
IF-THEN rule and h
i
(z) ≥ 0,
r
i=1
h
i
(z) = 1
In real systems, it is possible that the system contains
uncertain parameters and output disturbance as follows
˙ x(t) =
r

i=1
h
i
(z){(A
i
+A
i
)x(t) +B
i
u(t)}
y(t) =
r

i=1
h
i
(z)C
i
x(t) +ω(t)
(3)
where ω(t) ∈ R
p
stands for the unknown output disturbance.
Since x(t) is unavailable and ω(t) is unknown, designing an
observer to estimate of the state and the disturbance for the
system (2) is the main objective of this paper.
3 Observer design
First, let us consider the particular case which has equal
output matrices in (3), that is, C
i
= C for all i. Subsequently,
this technique will be applied to the general case in which
the system contains different output matrices.
2 IET Control Theory Appl., pp. 1–16
© The Institution of Engineering and Technology 2012 doi: 10.1049/iet-cta.2011.0022
www.ietdl.org
3.1 Particular case
If output matrices of all subsystems are equal, that is, C
i
= C
for all i, (3) becomes
˙ x(t) =
r

i=1
h
i
(z){(A
i
+A
i
)x(t) +B
i
u(t)}
y(t) = Cx(t) +ω(t)
(4)
Rewrite (4) as the following augmented form
¯
E
˙
¯ x(t) =
r

i=1
h
i
(z){(
¯
A
i
+
¯
A
i
)¯ x(t) +
¯
B
i
u(t) +
¯
Nω(t)}
y(t) =
¯
C¯ x(t) = C
0
¯ x(t) +ω(t)
(5)
where
¯ x(t) =
_
x(t)
ω(t)
_
,
¯
E =
_
I
n
O
p
O
p
O
p
_
,
¯
A
i
=
_
A
i
O
p
O
p
−I
p
_
,

¯
A
i
=
_
A
i
O
p
O
p
O
p
_
,
¯
B
i
=
_
B
i
O
p×m
_
,
¯
N =
_
O
n×p
I
p
_
,
¯
C = [C I
p
] and C
0
= [C O
p
] (6)
and O
p
denotes a p ×p zero square matrix and O
n×p
is an
n ×p zero matrix. Add
¯
L˙ y(t) to both sides of (5), it yields
(
¯
E +
¯
L
¯
C)
˙
¯ x(t) =
r

i=1
h
i
(z){(
¯
A
i
+
¯
A
i
)¯ x(t)
+
¯
B
i
u(t) +
¯
Nω(t) +
¯
L˙ y(t)}
y(t) =
¯
C¯ x(t) = C
0
¯ x(t) +ω(t)
(7)
where
¯
L ∈ R
(n+p)×p
will be determined later. Since ω(t) =
y(t) −C
0
¯ x(t), then (7) becomes
(
¯
E +
¯
L
¯
C)
˙
¯ x(t) =
r

i=1
h
i
(z){
¯
A
0i
¯ x(t) +
¯
A
i
¯ x(t)
+
¯
B
i
u(t) +
¯
Ny(t) +
¯
L˙ y(t)} (8)
where
¯
A
0i
=
¯
A
i

¯
NC
0
. Suppose that, the pairs (
¯
A
0i
, C) is
observable, the fuzzy observer is proposed as follows
(
¯
E +
¯
L
¯
C)
˙
ˆ
¯ x(t) =
r

i=1
h
i
(z){
¯
A
0i
ˆ
¯ x(t) +
¯
B
i
u(t) +
¯
H
i
(y(t)
− ˆ y(t)) +
ˆ
¯
A
i
(t)
ˆ
¯ x(t) +
¯
Ny(t) +
¯
L˙ y(t)}
ˆ y(t) =
¯
C
ˆ
¯ x(t)
(9)
where
ˆ
¯ x(t) ∈ R
n+p
is the estimate of ¯ x(t) and ˆ y(t) ∈ R
p
is the
observer output,
ˆ
¯
A
i
is used to estimate
¯
A
i
. Moreover,
the gain
¯
H
i
∈ R
(n+p)×p
of the ith local observer will be
determined later.
Let
¯ e(t) = ¯ x(t) −
ˆ
¯ x(t) and
e
y
(t) = y(t) − ˆ y(t) =
¯
C¯ e(t)
(10)
From (9) to (10), the error dynamics is
(
¯
E +
¯
L
¯
C)
˙
¯ e(t) =
r

i=1
h
i
(z){(
¯
A
0i

¯
H
i
¯
C)¯ e(t)
+
¯
A
i
¯ x(t) −
ˆ
¯
A
i
(t)
ˆ
¯ x(t)} (11)
Furthermore
rank
_
¯
E
¯
C
_
= rank
_
I
n
0
0 0
C I
p
_
= n +p
Thus, we can find a
¯
L ∈ R
(n+p)×p
to satisfy rank[
¯
E +
¯
L
¯
C] =
n +p such that (
¯
E +
¯
L
¯
C)
−1
exists. Rewrite (11) as the form
below
˙
¯ e(t) =
r

i=1
h
i
(z){(
¯
E +
¯
L
¯
C)
−1
[(
¯
A
0i

¯
H
i
¯
C)¯ e(t)
+
¯
A
i
¯ x(t) −
ˆ
¯A
i
(t)
ˆ
¯ x(t)]}
=
r

i=1
h
i
(z){(
¯
A
1i

¯
H
1i
¯
C)¯ e(t) +
¯
A
1i
¯ x(t) −
ˆ
¯
A
1i
(t)
ˆ
¯ x(t)}
=
r

i=1
h
i
(z){
¯
A
2i
¯ e(t) +
¯
A
1i
¯ x(t) −
ˆ
¯
A
1i
(t)
ˆ
¯ x(t)} (12)
where
¯
A
1i
= (
¯
E +
¯
L
¯
C)
−1
¯
A
0i
,
¯
A
1i
= (
¯
E +
¯
L
¯
C)
−1

¯
A
i
and

ˆ
¯
A
1i
= (
¯
E +
¯
L
¯
C)
−1

ˆ
¯
A
i
(13)
¯
H
1i
= (
¯
E +
¯
L
¯
C)
−1
¯
H
i
,
¯
A
2i
=
¯
A
1i

¯
H
1i
¯
C (14)
Now, suppose
¯
A
1i
and
ˆ
¯
A
i
can be represented as

¯
A
1i
= M
¯
θ
i
(15a)
and

ˆ
¯
A
1i
= M
ˆ
¯
θ
i
(t) (15b)
respectively, where M is a constant matrix with dimensions
(n +p) ×p;
¯
θ
i
∈ R
p×(n+p)
is uncertain constant matrices
satisfying
¯
θ
i
≤ γ
i
and
ˆ
¯
θ
i
is the estimate of
¯
θ
i
. Furthermore,
since ||A
i
|| ≤ ε
i
, then
¯
A
i
≤ ε
i
imply
¯
A
1i
≤ ε
1i
,
where ε
1i
= (
¯
E +
¯
L
¯
C)
−1
ε
i
. From (12) and (15), it yields
˙
¯ e(t) =
r

i=1
h
i
(z){
¯
A
2i
¯ e(t) +M
¯
θ
i
¯ x(t) −M
ˆ
¯
θ
i
(t)
ˆ
¯ x(t)}
=
r

i=1
h
i
(z){
¯
A
2i
¯ e(t) +M
¯
θ
i
¯ x(t) −M
¯
θ
i
ˆ
¯ x(t)
+M
¯
θ
i
ˆ
¯ x(t) −M
ˆ
¯
θ
i
(t)
ˆ
¯ x(t)}
=
r

i=1
h
i
(z){
¯
A
2i
¯ e(t) +M
¯
θ
i
¯ e(t) +M
¯
θ
ei
(t)
ˆ
¯ x(t)} (16)
where
¯
θ
ei
(t) =
¯
θ
i

ˆ
¯
θ
i
(t). Before deriving the main result, the
following lemma is required.
IET Control Theory Appl., pp. 1–16 3
doi: 10.1049/iet-cta.2011.0022 © The Institution of Engineering and Technology 2012
www.ietdl.org
Lemma 1 [37]: Let x and y denote two constant vectors,
then x
T
y = tr(xy
T
), where tr(G) is the trace of the constant
matrix G.
Theorem 1: Consider the system (8) and the observer (9),
suppose
¯
A
1i
satisfies (15) with
¯
A
1i
≤ ε
1i
and
¯
θ
i
≤ γ
i
.
Then, the estimation errors (16) of the state and the output
disturbance converge to zero asymptotically if
˙
ˆ
¯
θ
i
(t) = h
i
(z)
i
e
y
(t)
ˆ
¯ x
T
(t) (17)
where
i
is any positive-definite matrix, and there exist a
common symmetric positive definite matrix P = P
T
and a
matrix
¯
H
i
such that
¯
A
T
2i
P +P
¯
A
2i
+2ε
1i
P < 0, i = 1, 2, . . . , r (18)
and
M
T
=
¯
CP
−1
(19)
Proof: Let the Lyapunov function candidate be
V = ¯ e
T
(t)P¯ e(t) +
r

i=1
tr(
¯
θ
T
ei
(t)
−1
i
¯
θ
ei
(t)) (20)
The time derivative of V(t) along function trajectories of
system (16) is shown as follows
˙
V =
˙
¯ e
T
(t)P¯ e(t) + ¯ e
T
(t)P
˙
¯ e(t) +
r

i=1
tr(
˙
¯
θ
T
ei
(t)
−1
i
¯
θ
ei
(t))
+
r

i=1
tr(
¯
θ
T
ei
(t)
−1
i
˙
¯
θ
ei
(t))
As
˙
¯
θ
ei
(t) = (
˙
¯
θ
i

˙
ˆ
¯
θ
i
(t)) = −
˙
ˆ
¯
θ
i
(t) then
˙
V =
r

i=1
h
i
(z){¯ e
T
(t)(
¯
A
T
2i
P +PA
2i
)¯ e(t)}
+2
r

i=1
h
i
(z){¯ e
T
(t)M
¯
θ
i
P¯ e(t)}
+2
r

i=1
h
i
(z){¯ e
T
(t)PM
¯
θ
ei
(t)
ˆ
¯ x(t)}
−2
r

i=1
tr(
¯
θ
T
ei
(t)
−1
i
˙
ˆ
¯
θ
i
(t)) (21)
By Lemma 1, (17) and (19), the last term of (21) is shown
as follows
2
r

i=1
tr(
¯
θ
T
ei
(t)
−1
i
˙
ˆ
¯
θ
i
(t))
= 2
r

i=1
h
i
(z){tr(
¯
θ
T
ei
(t)
−1
i

i
e
y
(t)
ˆ
¯ x
T
(t))}
= 2
r

i=1
h
i
(z){tr(
¯
θ
T
ei
(t)e
y
(t))(
ˆ
¯ x
T
(t))}
= 2
r

i=1
h
i
(z)e
T
y
(t)
¯
θ
ei
(t)
ˆ
¯ x(t)
= 2
r

i=1
h
i
(z){¯ e
T
(t)
¯
C
T
¯
θ
ei
(t)
ˆ
¯ x(t)}
= 2
r

i=1
h
i
(z){¯ e
T
(t)PM
¯
θ
ei
(t)
ˆ
¯ x(t)} (22)
According to (22), the sum of the last two terms of (21)
equals to zero. Thus
2
r

i=1
h
i
(z){¯ e
T
(t)M
¯
θ
i
P¯ e(t)}
≤ 2
r

i=1
h
i
(z){¯ e
T
(t)M
¯
θ
i
P¯ e(t)}
= 2
r

i=1
h
i
(z){¯ e
T
(t)
¯
A
1i
P¯ e(t)}
≤ 2
r

i=1
h
i
(z){¯ e
T
(t)ε
1i
P¯ e(t)}
Then
V ≤
r

i=1
h
i
(z){¯ e
T
(t)(
¯
A
T
2i
P +PA
2i
)¯ e(t)}
+2
r

i=1
h
i
(z){¯ e
T
(t)ε
1i
P¯ e(t)}
If (18) holds
˙
V ≤
r

i=1
h
i
(z){¯ e
T
(t)[
¯
A
T
2i
P +P
¯
A
2i
+2ε
1i
P]¯ e(t)} ≤ 0 (23)
The proof is completed.
Remark 1: Based on Theorem 1, the fuzzy observer (9)
is obtained and the condition (19) is used for supporting
the solution of LMI (18) which is originally from Meyer–
Kalman–Yakubovich Lemma [34].
3.2 General case
The output matrices of all subsystems are not necessary to
be equal, that is, C
i
= C
j
, for i = j. Then, the T–S fuzzy
system (3) can be rewritten as a new form
˙ x(t) =
r

i=1
h
i
(z){(A
i
+A
i
)x(t) +B
i
u(t)}
y(t) = Cx(t) +
r

i=1
h
i
(z)(C
i
−C)x(t) +ω(t)
(24)
where C is the matrix chosen from the set {C
1
, C
2
, . . ., C
r
}.
Let
ω
0
(t) =
r

i=1
h
i
(z)(C
i
−C)x(t) +ω(t)
the (24) becomes
˙ x(t) =
r

i=1
h
i
(z){(A
i
+A
i
)x(t) +B
i
u(t)}
y(t) = Cx(t) +ω
0
(t)
(25)
4 IET Control Theory Appl., pp. 1–16
© The Institution of Engineering and Technology 2012 doi: 10.1049/iet-cta.2011.0022
www.ietdl.org
Similar to (4), (25) can be rewritten as
¯
E
˙
¯ x
0
(t) =
r

i=1
h
i
(z){(
¯
A
i
+
¯
A
i
)¯ x
0
(t) +
¯
B
i
u(t) +
¯

0
(t)}
y(t) =
¯
C¯ x
0
(t) = C
0
¯ x
0
(t) +ω
0
(t)
(26)
where ¯ x
T
0
= [x(t) ω
0
(t)] and the state-space system
coefficients
¯
A
i
,
¯
B
i
,
¯
N,
¯
C, C
0
,
¯
E and
¯
A
i
are defined as the
same as those in (6). Add L˙ y(t) to both sides of (26), it
yields
(
¯
E +
¯
L
¯
C)
˙
¯ x
0
(t) =
r

i=1
h
i
(z){(
¯
A
i
+
¯
A
i
)¯ x
0
(t)
+
¯
B
i
u(t) +
¯

0
(t) +
¯
L˙ y(t)}
y(t) = C
0
¯ x
0
(t) +ω
0
(t) (27)
Substitute ω
0
(t) = y(t) −C
0
¯ x
0
(t) into (27)
(
¯
E +
¯
L
¯
C)
˙
¯ x
0
(t) =
r

i=1
h
i
(z){
¯
A
0i
¯ x
0
(t) +
¯
A
i
¯ x
0
(t)
+
¯
B
i
u(t) +
¯
Ny(t) +
¯
L˙ y(t)} (28)
which is similar to (8). Therefore we can design the T–S
fuzzy state-space observer (30) to estimate x(t) and ω
0
(t)
of system (28) by using the approach given in Theorem 1.
Since
_
ˆ x(t)
ˆ ω(t)
_
=



I
n
0
r

i=1
h
i
(z)(C
i
−C) I
p



−1
ˆ
¯ x
0
(t) (29)
where
ˆ
¯ x
0
(t) is the estimate of ¯ x
0
(t) let the T–S fuzzy
observer (30) be designed to estimate x(t) and ω
0
(t)
(
¯
E +
¯
L
¯
C)
˙
ˆ
¯ x
0
(t) =
r

i=1
h
i
(z){
¯
A
0i
ˆ
¯ x
0
(t) +
¯
B
i
u(t) +
¯
H
i
(y(t)
− ˆ y(t)) +
ˆ
¯
A
i
ˆ
¯ x
0
(t) +
¯
Ny(t) +
¯
L˙ y(t)}
ˆ y(t) =
¯
C
ˆ
¯ x
0
(t) (30)
It is seen that (30) is similar to (9). Let ¯ e
0
(t) = ¯ x
0
(t) −
ˆ
¯ x
0
(t),
and e
0y
(t) = y(t) − ˆ y(t) =
¯
C¯ e
0
(t). Therefore by similar
derivations of (12) and (15)
¯ e
0
(t) =
r

i=1
h
i
(z){
¯
A
2i
¯ e
0
(t) +M
¯
θ
i
¯ e
0
(t) +M
¯
θ
ei
(t)
ˆ
¯ x
0
(t)} (31)
is obtained.
Theorem 2: Suppose
¯
A
1i
can be represented as the form
(15) with
¯
A
1i
≤ ε
1i
and
¯
θ
i
≤ γ
i
, then the fuzzy
observer (30) can asymptotically estimate the state and the
output disturbance of the fuzzy system (28), if the conditions
in (18) and (19) of Theorem 1 hold simultaneously and the
adaptive law in (17) is updated by
˙
ˆ
¯
θ
i
(t) = h
i
(z)
i
e
0y
(t)
ˆ
¯ x
T
0
(t) (32)
where
i
is any positive-definite matrix.
Proof: As the forms of the fuzzy system (28) and of the
fuzzy observer (30) are similar to the forms of the fuzzy
system (8) and of the fuzzy observer (9), respectively, based
on Theorem 1, we obtain that
lim
t→∞
__
x(t)
ω
0
(t)
_

_
ˆ x(t)
ˆ ω
0
(t)
__
= 0 (33)
where ˆ x(t) is the estimate of x(t). Since h
i
(t) is bounded for
any i ∈ r we have
lim
t→∞



I
n
0
r

i=1
h
i
(z)(C
i
−C) I
p



−1
__
x(t)
ω
0
(t)
_

_
ˆ x(t)
ˆ ω
0
(t)
__
= 0
(34)
Using ω
0
(t) =

r
i=1
h
i
(z)(C
i
−C)x(t) +ω(t) and the (29),
it has (see (35))
From (34) and (35), it yields
lim
t→∞
__
x(t)
ω(t)
_

_
ˆ x(t)
ˆ ω(t)
__
= 0 (36)
Therefore the proof is completed.
Remark 2: Let us define Q
i
= P
¯
H
1i
, based on (14), (18) can
be rewritten as the form
¯
A
T
1i
P +P
¯
A
1i

¯
C
T
Q
T
i
−Q
i
¯
C +2ε
1i
P < 0 ∀i ∈ r (37)
Here, P and Q
i
can be obtained by means of LMI method
and then by (14),
¯
H
i
is obtained. Based on Theorems 1
_
x(t)
ω(t)
_

_
ˆ x(t)
ˆ ω(t)
_
=
_
x(t)
ω(t)
_




I
n
0
r

i=1
h
i
(z)(C
i
−C) I
p



−1
_
ˆ x(t)
ˆ ω
0
(t)
_
=



I
n
0
r

i=1
h
i
(z)(C
i
−C) I
p



−1
×








I
n
0
r

i=1
h
i
(t)(C
i
−C) I
p



_
x(t)
ω(t)
_

_
ˆ x(t)
ˆ ω
0
(t)
_





=



I
n
0
r

i=1
h
i
(z)(C
i
−C) I
p



−1
×
__
x(t)
ω
0
(t)
_

_
ˆ x(t)
ˆ ω
0
(t)
__
(35)
IET Control Theory Appl., pp. 1–16 5
doi: 10.1049/iet-cta.2011.0022 © The Institution of Engineering and Technology 2012
www.ietdl.org
and 2, we can construct the procedure as follows to design
the fuzzy observer. Before the observer design, some known
parameters are stated in advance. For the system (3), A
i
is the uncertainty satisfying (15), where A
i
| ≤ ε
i
and

¯
θ
i
≤ γ
i
with known bounds ε
i
and γ
i
, respectively. Finally,
the procedure of the observer design is summarised as
follows.
Step 1: Find the matrix
¯
L such that (
¯
E +
¯
L
¯
C)
−1
exists, and
then ε
1i
is also obtained.
Step 2: Give a positive value p to satisfy p ≤ (ε
1i
/
¯

i
)
and assume P
−1
≤ p. The reason is as below. With
the aids of (19), we have
¯
A
1i
≤ P
−1
¯
C
T

¯
θ
i
≤≤
P
−1

¯

i
≤ ε
1i
. Therefore
P
−1

ε
1i

¯

i
(38)
Step 3: Define Q
i
= P
¯
H
1i
by means of LMI method, P and
¯
H
1i
in (37) are obtained. Substitute P into (38) to check
whether P
−1
≤ p holds? If not, go back to Step 2 and
give another p and re-run LMI again to solve (37) until
P
−1
≤ p holds. Then, go to next step.
Fig. 1 Flowchart of the fuzzy observer design
Step 4: Obtain M from (19).
Step 5: Choose the any positive symmetric matrix to
obtain the adaptive law (32).
Finally, the observer design is completed. The above
procedure is presented as the flowchart in Fig. 1.
Remark 3: In Step 3, using LMI method to solve (37) and
check P
−1
≤ p are two iterative processes. We can give
the initial p to be equal to (ε
1i
/
¯

i
), and decrease p to
p −p until the suitable P is found, where p is a very
small value.
4 Numerical example
Example 1: Consider an uncertain non-linear system des-
cribed by the following T–S fuzzy system.
Rule 1: If y
2
1
(t) is μ
1
(small), then
_
˙ x(t) = (A
1
+A
1
)x(t) +B
1
u(t)
y(t) = C
1
x(t)
Rule 2: If y
2
1
(t) is μ
2
(large), then
_
˙ x(t) = (A
2
+A
2
)x(t) +B
2
u(t)
y(t) = C
2
x(t)
where y
1
∈ [01], and A
i
, B
i
and C
i
are given as follows
x(t) = [x
1
(t) x
2
(t) x
3
(t)]
T
, y(t) = [y
1
(t) y
2
(t) y
3
(t)]
T
A
1
=
_
−1.25 −2.05 0
2.025 −1.025 0
1.05 0.05 −3
_
, B
1
=
_
1
0
0
_
,
C
1
=
_
1 0 0
−1 1 0
0 0 1
_
, A
2
=
_
−2 1.05 0
0 −0.5 −1.025
1.05 0 −1
_
,
B
2
=
_
0
1
0
_
, C
2
=
_
1 0 0
1 0 1
0 1 0
_
Identical to the definition in the paper [36], let μ
1
= 1 −
y
2
1
(t) and μ
2
= y
2
1
(t), then







h
1
(z) =
ψ
i
(z)

r
i=1
ψ
i
(z)
= 1 −y
2
1
(t)
h
2
(z) =
ψ
i
(z)

r
i=1
ψ
i
(z)
= y
2
1
(t)
(39)
In practical, the fuzzy system may be disturbed by some
output disturbance as follows











˙ x(t) =
2

i=1
h
i
(θ)(A
i
+A
i
)x(t) +B
i
u(t)
y(t) =
2

i=1
h
i
(θ)C
i
x(t) +ω(t)
(40)
where ω(t) represents the unknown disturbance output.
Suppose the constant uncertainty A
i
, i = 1, 2 are bounded
by ε
1
= 0.0608 and ε
2
= 0.1216, respectively. Moreover,
6 IET Control Theory Appl., pp. 1–16
© The Institution of Engineering and Technology 2012 doi: 10.1049/iet-cta.2011.0022
www.ietdl.org
(15) holds and
¯
θ
i
, i = 1, 2 are bounded by γ
1
= 0, 01 and
γ
2
= 0, 02, respectively. Assume A
i
is formulated as below
A
1
=
_
0.0608 0 0
0 0.06 0
0 0 0.03
_
η,
A
1
=
_
0.1216 0 0
0 0.1 0
0 0 0.03
_
η
(41)
where η is any constant belonging to the interval [−1, 1].
Now, according to the procedure in Section 3, let us start
the fuzzy observer design.
Step 1: Choose
¯
L
T
=
_
0 0 0 1 0 0
0 0 0 0 1 0
0 0 0 0 0 1
_
and C = C
1
such that (
¯
E +
¯
L
¯
C)
−1
exists in which
(
¯
E +
¯
L
¯
C)
−1
=







1 0 0 0 0 0
0 1 0 0 0 0
0 0 1 0 0 0
−1 0 0 1 0 0
1 −1 0 0 1 0
0 0 −1 0 0 1







Step 2: Based on Remark 1, give an initial p to be equal to

1i
/
¯

i
) = 6.6990
Step 3: Utilise LMI-Toolbox of MATLAB to obtain the
feasible solution P and
¯
H
1i
of (37), then based on
Remark 3, the matrix P satisfies P
−1
≤ 6.6987 = p, and
(see equations at the bottom of the page)
Step 4: Obtain M from (19)
M =







0.7358 −0.7358 −0.2700
0.0000 0.7358 −0.3812
0.0000 0.0000 1.6248
0.7358 0.0000 0.2700
0.0000 0.7358 0.1113
0.0000 0.0000 0.2149







Step 5: Let
1
=
2
= diag[5, 1, 1], then the adaptive law
(32) is established as follows
˙
ˆ
¯
θ
1
(t) = h
1
(z)
1
e
0y
(t)
ˆ
¯ x
T
0
(t)
˙
ˆ
¯
θ
2
(t) = h
2
(z)
2
e
0y
(t)
ˆ
¯ x
T
0
(t)
Suppose u(t) = sin(t) and ω(t) = [ω
1
(t) ω
2
(t) ω
3
(t)]
T
,
where
ω
1
(t) =
_
0.2 sin
2
(3(t −2)π), t ≥ 2
0 else
ω
2
(t) =
_
0.3 cos
2
(4(t −3)π), t ≥ 3
0 else
and ω
3
(t) = 0.4(sin
2
2πt +cos 3πt), t ≥ 0.
Let the initial conditions be selected as x(0) =
(0.5, 0.7, −0.5)
T
and ˆ x(0) = (0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0)
T
. The results of
simulation are shown in Figs. 2–8. It can be observed from
Figs. 2–4 that the state estimate of ˆ x(t) the proposed adaptive
fuzzy observer (30) indeed converges asymptotically to the
original state x(t) of the uncertain fuzzy system (3). On
the other hand, it can be seen from the Figs. 5–7, the
estimated output ˆ ω(t) indeed converges asymptotically to
the original disturbance ω(t) of the uncertain fuzzy system
(3). Specifically, Fig. 8 shows the curves of the state errors.
One can see that the estimation performance is desired in
the disturbance and perturbed environment.
Next, we consider about the estimate of state and sensor
fault signal in Example 2.
Example 2: Consider the following fuzzy system with sensor
fault [24]
˙ x(t) =
2

i=1
h
i
(θ)(A
i
+A
i
)x(t) +B
i
u(t)
y(t) =
2

i=1
h
i
(θ)C
i
x(t) +D
s
f
s
(42)
P =







1.0840 0.0017 0.1464 0.2751 −0.2769 0.0556
0.0017 1.2450 0.2543 −0.0017 0.1158 0.2306
0.1464 0.2543 0.6544 −0.1464 −0.1079 0.5807
0.2751 −0.0017 −0.1464 1.0840 0.2769 −0.0556
−0.2769 0.1158 −0.1079 0.2769 0.9664 −0.1750
0.0556 0.2306 0.5807 −0.0556 −0.1750 0.9025







Q
1
=







99.5520 99.3547 24.0209
−99.1200 −0.7214 −36.6378
12.0081 36.1252 1.2277
−0.2736 100.2149 −11.7282
−100.6824 −0.2151 −36.2771
11.8713 36.4382 −0.0028







; Q
2
=







−62.5805 −61.9457 −102.2214
62.3312 0.2077 74.4519
26.2671 −74.9067 0.8658
−0.1426 −62.8342 −25.9078
62.2580 −0.0966 75.3775
26.0239 −74.9049 −0.1093







and
¯
H
1
=







69.5174 62.9193 16.5113
−77.2680 −14.4091 −27.4455
19.9466 58.8165 5.7446
73.0467 146.8385 9.0447
−220.2577 −73.7918 −71.3230
21.6974 67.0093 2.2743







;
¯
H
2
=







−53.3387 −24.9351 −76.3845
35.8656 28.7691 54.3257
43.4246 −122.3873 4.9702
−46.1502 −91.8100 −94.2744
137.7150 45.6598 185.4529
48.2914 −138.1335 1.9888







IET Control Theory Appl., pp. 1–16 7
doi: 10.1049/iet-cta.2011.0022 © The Institution of Engineering and Technology 2012
www.ietdl.org
Fig. 2 State x
1
(t) and the estimated state ˆ x
1
(t)
Fig. 3 State x
2
(t) and the estimated state ˆ x
2
(t)
Fig. 4 State x
3
(t) and the estimated state ˆ x
3
(t)
8 IET Control Theory Appl., pp. 1–16
© The Institution of Engineering and Technology 2012 doi: 10.1049/iet-cta.2011.0022
www.ietdl.org
Fig. 5 Output disturbance ω
1
(t) and the estimated output disturbance ˆ ω
1
(t)
Fig. 6 Output disturbance ω
2
(t) and the estimated output disturbance ˆ ω
2
(t)
Fig. 7 Output disturbance ω
3
(t) and the estimated output disturbance ˆ ω
3
(t)
IET Control Theory Appl., pp. 1–16 9
doi: 10.1049/iet-cta.2011.0022 © The Institution of Engineering and Technology 2012
www.ietdl.org
Fig. 8 State estimated errors
a x
1
(t) − ˆ x
1
(t)
b x
2
(t) − ˆ x
2
(t)
c x
3
(t) − ˆ x
3
(t)
where f
s
∈ R
k
is the sensor fault, D
s
∈ R
p×k
is full column,
and all other matrices are defined as before. Let
ω(t) = D
s
f
s
(t) (43)
The (42) has the similar form to (24). Then, we
can apply the fuzzy observer (30) for estimating the
sensor fault f
s
(t). Suppose x(t) = [x
1
(t) x
2
(t) x
3
(t)]
T
, y(t) =
[y
1
(t) y
2
(t) y
3
(t)]
T
and A
i
B
i
and C
i
are same in [24].
A
1
=
_
−1 −2 0
2 −1 0
1 0 −3
_
, B
1
=
_
1
0
0
_
, C
1
=
_
1 0 0
−1 1 0
0 0 1
_
A
2
=
_
−2 1 0
0 −0.5 −1
1 0 −1
_
, B
2
=
_
0
1
0
_
, C
2
=
_
1 0 0
1 0 1
0 1 0
_
The constant uncertainties A
i
, i = 1, 2 are bounded by
ε
1
= 0.1199 and ε
2
= 0.2512, respectively. Moreover, (15)
holds and
¯
θ
i
, i = 1, 2 are bounded by γ
1
= 0.01 and γ
2
=
0.02, respectively. Assume A
i
is formulated as below
A
1
(t)


0.1199 0 0
0 0.1 0
0 0 0.009


η,
A
2
(t)


0.2512 0 0
0 0.135 0
0 0 0.03


(44)
where η is any constant belonging to the interval [−1, 1].
Choose f
s
(t) = [f
s1
(t) f
s2
(t) f
s3
(t)]
T
, where
f
s1
(t) =
_
0.2 sin(3(t −2)π, t ≥ 2
0 else
f
s2
(t) =
_
0.2 sin(4(t −3)π), t ≥ 3
0 else
(45)
f
s3
(t) = 0.4(sin 2πt +cos 3πt), t ≥ 0
and f
s3
(t) = 0.4(sin 2πt +cos 3πt), t ≥ 0.
Now, continue to establish the fuzzy observer design. We
will obtain as follows (see equations at bottom of the page)
P =







1.0985 0.0050 0.1473 0.2634 −0.2684 0.0552
0.0050 1.2579 0.2537 −0.0050 0.1090 0.2311
0.1473 0.2537 0.6561 −0.1473 −0.1064 0.5819
0.2634 −0.0050 −0.1473 1.0985 0.2684 −0.0552
−0.2684 0.1090 −0.1064 0.2684 0.9845 −0.1758
0.0552 0.2311 0.5819 −0.0552 −0.1758 0.9040







Q
1
=







65.4924 65.2214 −11.3705
−65.0034 −0.7170 15.2140
−4.4217 −15.7164 1.2280
−0.3128 66.1576 4.7099
−66.5728 −0.2609 15.5540
−4.5701 −15.3885 −0.0041







; Q
2
=







157.2621 157.9240 35.0218
−157.5289 0.2073 52.1182
−88.6387 −52.5717 0.8765
−0.1320 157.0138 88.9878
−157.6156 −0.0911 53.0445
−88.8707 −52.5709 −0.1129







and
¯
H
1
=







48.8341 51.5411 −9.4400
−45.8567 5.2319 10.7011
−6.7262 −25.1635 5.6746
47.8579 96.4646 −4.8905
−144.6969 −48.6067 30.9400
−8.5007 −28.1772 2.2373







;
¯
H
2
=







138.3019 130.0065 24.6232
−82.6335 19.7876 37.8285
−141.8137 −85.2032 4.9397
115.3722 231.2420 91.0537
−346.8630 −115.8698 51.5007
−162.0611 −96.4272 1.9691







10 IET Control Theory Appl., pp. 1–16
© The Institution of Engineering and Technology 2012 doi: 10.1049/iet-cta.2011.0022
www.ietdl.org
Let
1
=
2
diag[10, 1, 1] and the initial conditions
be selected as x(0) = (0.2, −0.3, 0.5)
T
and ˆ x(0) = (0, 0,
0, 0, 0, 0)
T
. The simulation results are shown in
Figs. 9–15. Figs. 9–11 show the curves of state estimation.
Figs. 12–14 express the estimated sensor fault
ˆ
f
si
(t) with
the different form of sensor fault f
si
(t) respectively.
Fig. 15 shows the curves of the state estimation
errors.
The above two examples show that the estimation
performance of the designed fuzzy observer is achieved
under the existence of uncertain parameters and output
disturbance.
To reinforce the application value of the proposed fuzzy
observer, the following Example 3 shows the approach
to be applied into a real example adopted from the
paper [8].
Example 3: Consider the dynamics of single link robot arm
with a revolute elastic joint in a vertical plane in [8]
_
J
1
¨ q
1
+k(q
1
−q
2
) +mgl sin q
1
= 0
J
2
¨ q
2
−k(q
1
−q
2
) = u
(46)
All parameters are the same as those in the example of [8].
We obtain the state equations of (47)













˙ x
1
= x
2
˙ x
2
= x
3
−10 sin x
1
−10x
1
˙ x
3
= x
4
˙ x
4
= 50x
1
−5x
3
+5u
y = x
1
+d
(47)
Fig. 9 State x
1
(t) and the estimated state ˆ x
1
(t)
Fig. 10 State x
2
(t) and the estimated state ˆ x
2
(t)
IET Control Theory Appl., pp. 1–16 11
doi: 10.1049/iet-cta.2011.0022 © The Institution of Engineering and Technology 2012
www.ietdl.org
Fig. 11 State x
3
(t) and the estimated state ˆ x
3
(t)
Fig. 12 Fault f
s1
(t) and the fault estimate
ˆ
f
s1
(t)
Fig. 13 Fault f
s2
(t) and the fault estimate
ˆ
f
s2
(t)
12 IET Control Theory Appl., pp. 1–16
© The Institution of Engineering and Technology 2012 doi: 10.1049/iet-cta.2011.0022
www.ietdl.org
Fig. 14 Fault f
s3
(t) and the fault estimate
ˆ
f
s3
(t)
Fig. 15 State estimated errors
a x
1
(t) − ˆ x
1
(t)
b x
2
(t) − ˆ x
2
(t)
c x
3
(t) − ˆ x
3
(t)
where x
1
∈ (−/2, π/2), Let sin(x
1
(t)) be represented as
follows
θ(t) = sin(x
1
(t)) =
_
2

i=1
h
i
(θ(t))b
i
_
x
1
(t) (48)
Let the membership functions be the form as (49a) and (49b)
which satisfy the property: h
1
(θ(t)) +h
2
(θ(t)) = 1, where
h
1
(θ(t)) =



θ(t) −(2/π) sin
−1
(θ(t))
(1 −2/π) sin
−1
(θ(t))
, θ(t) = 0
1 otherwise
(49a)
and
h
2
(θ(t)) =



sin
−1
(θ(t)) −θ(t)
(1 −2/π) sin
−1
(θ(t))
, θ(t) = 0
0 otherwise
(49b)
which are shown in Fig. 16. Then, we arrive at the following
T–S fuzzy model
Rule 1: If θ(t) is ‘zero’, then
_
˙ x(t) = A
1
x(t) +B
1
u(t)
y(t) = C
1
x(t) +d(t)
Rule 2: If θ(t) is ‘not zero’, then
_
˙ x(t) = A
2
x(t) +B
2
u(t)
y(t) = C
2
x(t) +d(t)
where, d(t) is the same form as the disturbance in [8], that
is d(t) is a measurement noise of 5% of the maximum value
IET Control Theory Appl., pp. 1–16 13
doi: 10.1049/iet-cta.2011.0022 © The Institution of Engineering and Technology 2012
www.ietdl.org
Fig. 16 Membership functions of two-rule model
of the output with zero mean and standard deviation 1
A
1
=




0 1 0 0
−20 0 1 0
0 0 0 1
50 0 −5 0




, A
2
=






0 1 0 0

20
π
−10 0 1 0
0 0 0 1
50 0 −5 0






,
B
1
= B
2
=




0
0
0
5




, C
T
1
= C
T
2
=




1
0
0
0




Construct the augmented system (50) as below
¯
E
˙
¯ x(t) =
r

i=1
h
i
(θ){
¯
A
i
¯ x(t) +
¯
B
i
u(t) +
¯
Nω(t)}
y(t) = C
0
¯ x(t) +d(t) =
¯
C¯ x(t)
(50)
where
¯
A
1
=





0 1 0 0 0
−20 0 1 0 0
0 0 0 1 0
50 0 −5 0 0
0 0 0 0 −1





;
¯
A
2
=





0 1 0 0 0
−20/π −10 0 1 0 0
0 0 0 1 0
50 0 −5 0 0
0 0 0 0 −1





;
¯
B
1
=
¯
B
2
=





0
0
0
5
0





;
¯
N =





0
0
0
0
1





and
¯
C
T
=





1
0
0
0
1





Now, let us establish the fuzzy observer design as follows:
Choose L
T
= [0 0 0 0 1] to guarantee (
¯
E +
¯
L
¯
C)
−1
existing, such that
(
¯
E +
¯
L
¯
C)
−1
=





1 0 0 0 0
0 1 0 0 0
0 0 1 0 0
0 0 0 1 0
−1 0 0 0 1





Utilise LMI-Toolbox of MATLAB to obtain the feasible
solution P and
¯
H
i
as follows
P =






2.2592 −0.2010 −0.5134 −0.0768 2.7653
−0.2010 1.0801 −0.0789 0.1328 0.2981
−0.5134 −0.0789 0.1644 −0.0119 −0.1504
−0.0768 0.1328 −0.0119 0.0583 −0.0878
2.7653 0.2981 −0.1504 −0.0878 16.3296






Q
T
1
= [−1.1295 −14.9640 1.1771 −0.0706 −31.2045]
Q
T
2
= [−1.4065 −13.0016 1.0337 0.1706 −30.7511]
¯
H
T
1
= [27.8133 −8.7405 89.7378 65.7083 22.5315]
and
¯
H
T
2
= [29.2736 −6.4259 94.4479 67.1429 23.7811]
The simulation was carried out to compare with the
performance among the proposed observer, the proportional
high gain observer (PO) and the PI high gain observer (PIO)
in of [8]. Fig. 17 shows the estimation of x
3
(t) using PO
and Fig. 18 shows the estimation of x
3
(t) applying PIO.
Furthermore, Fig. 19 shows the curve of the estimation state
x
3
(t) using the proposed adaptive fuzzy observer. It is seen
that there exists chattering phenomenon in Fig. 17 and the
estimation performance is not perfect in Fig. 18. Although
in Fig. 19, the estimation performance is much better than
the above two figures.
Fig. 17 State x
3
(t) and state estimation ˆ x
3
(t) using PO [8]
Fig. 18 State x
3
(t) and state estimation ˆ x
3
(t) using high gain PI
observer [8]
14 IET Control Theory Appl., pp. 1–16
© The Institution of Engineering and Technology 2012 doi: 10.1049/iet-cta.2011.0022
www.ietdl.org
Fig. 19 State x
3
(t) and state estimation ˆ x
3
(t) using the proposed adaptive fuzzy observer
5 Conclusion
In this paper, an adaptive fuzzy observer design for the
fuzzy system with unknown output disturbance and bounded
constant parameter uncertainty has been presented. The
fuzzy system is with equal output matrices or with different
output matrices, the estimation of the state and disturbance
is achieved. Based on the proposed main theorems, the
fuzzy observer is designed under the existence of uncertain
parameters and output disturbance. The procedure of the
observer design is also summarised. Simulation results have
been shown that the observer design is successful. Finally,
the proposed fuzzy observer has been applied into a real
example and the estimation performance comparison is
shown in the last example.
6 References
1 Rojas, C.R., Rojas, R.A., Salgado, M.E.: ‘Equivalence between
transfer-matrix and observed-state feedback control’, IEE Proc.
Control Theory Appl., 2006, 153, pp. 147–155
2 Kabore, P., Wang, H.: ‘Design of fault diagnosis filters and fault-
tolerant control for a class of nonlinear systems’, IEEE Trans. Autom.
Control, 2001, 46, pp. 1805–1810
3 Gao, Z., Breikin, T., Wang, H.: ‘Reliable observer-based control
against sensor failures for systems with time delays in both state
and input’, IEEE Trans. Syst. Man Cybern. Part A, 2008, 38,
pp. 1018–1029
4 Rugh, W.J.: ‘Linear system theory’ (Prentive Hall, NJ, 1996)
5 Reilly, J.O.’: ‘Observers for linear systems’ (Academic Press, NY,
1983)
6 Zhang, S.Y.: ‘Function observer and state feedback’, Int. J. Control,
1987, 46, pp. 1295–1305
7 Luenberger, D.G.: ‘An introduction to observers’, IEEE Trans. Autom.
Control, 1971, 16, pp. 596–602
8 Busawon, K.K., Kabore, P.: ‘Disturbance attenuation using
proportional integral observers’, Int. J. Control, 2001, 74, pp. 618–627
9 Gao, Z., Ho, D.W.C.: ‘Proportional multiple-integral observer design
for descriptor systems with measurement output disturbances’, Proc.
Inst. Electr. Eng., 2004, 151, pp. 279–288
10 Cao, Y.Y., Frank, P.M.: ‘Analysis and synthesis of nonlinear time-
delay systems via fuzzy control approach’, IEEE Trans. Fuzzy Syst.,
2000, 9, pp. 200–211
11 Xu, C., Shin, Y.C.: ‘Design of a multilevel fuzzy controller for
nonlinear systems and stability analysis’, IEEE Trans. Fuzzy Syst.,
2005, 13, pp. 761–778
12 Li, H.X., Tong, S.: ‘A hybrid adaptive fuzzy control for a class
of nonlinear MIMO systems’, IEEE Trans. Fuzzy Syst., 2003, 11,
pp. 24–34
13 Yi, Z., Heng, P.A.: ‘Stability of fuzzy control systems with
bounded uncertain delays’, IEEE Trans. Fuzzy Syst., 2002, 10,
pp. 92–97
14 Li, T.H.S., Lin, K.J.: ‘Composite fuzzy control of nonlinear singularly
perturbed systems’, IEEE Trans. Fuzzy Syst., 2007, 15, pp. 176–187
15 Tseng, C.S., Chen, B.S., Uang, H.J.: ‘Fuzzy tracking control design
for nonlinear dynamic systems via T-S fuzzy model’, IEEE Trans.
Fuzzy Syst., 2001, 9, pp. 381–392
16 Takagi, T., Sugeno, M.: ‘Fuzzy identification of systems and its
applications to modeling and control’, IEEE Trans. Syst. Man Cybern.,
1985, 15, pp. 116–132
17 Wang, H.O., Tanaka, K., Griffin, M.F.: ‘An approach to fuzzy control
of nonlinear systems: stability and design issues’, IEEE Trans. Fuzzy
Syst., 1996, 4, pp. 4–23
18 Taniguchi, T., Tanaka, K., Wang, H.O.: ‘Fuzzy descriptor systems and
nonlinear model following control’, IEEE Trans. Fuzzy Syst., 2000, 8,
pp. 442–452
19 Yoneyama, J., Nishikawa, M.: ‘Output stabilization of Takagi-Sugeno
fuzzy systems’, Fuzzy Sets Syst., 2000, 111, pp. 253–266
20 Tong, S., Tang, Y.: ‘Analysis and design of fuzzy robust observer
for uncertain nonlinear systems’. Proc. Ninth IEEE Int. Conf. Fuzzy
Systems, 2000, pp. 993–996
21 Ma, X., Sun, Z.: ‘Analysis and design of fuzzy reduced-dimensional
observer and fuzzy functional observer’, Fuzzy Sets Syst., 2001, 120,
pp. 35–63
22 Ma, K.M.: ‘Observer design for a class of fuzzy systems’. Proc. Int.
Conf. Machine Learning Cybernetics, 2002, pp. 46–49
23 Bergsten, P., Palm, R., Driankov, D.: ‘Observers for Takagi–Sugeno
fuzzy systems’, IEEE Trans. Syst. Man Cybern. B, 2002, 32,
pp. 114–121
24 Gao, Z., Shi, X., Ding, S.X.: ‘Fuzzy state/disturbance observer
design for T–S fuzzy systems with application to sensor fault
estimation’, IEEE Trans. Syst. Man Cybern. B, 2008, 38, pp.
875–880
25 Gao, Z., Wang, H.: ‘Descriptor observer approaches for multivariable
systems with measurement noises and application in fault detection
and diagnosis’, Syst. Control Lett., 2006, 55, pp. 304–313
26 Kim, Y., Lewis, F.L., Abdallah, C.: ‘A dynamic recurrent neural
network based adaptive observer for a class of nonlinear systems’,
Automatica, 1997, 33, pp. 1539–1543
27 Marino, R., Santosuosso, G.L., Tomei, P.: ‘Robust adaptive observer
for nonlinear systems with bounded disturbances’, IEEE Trans. Autom.
Control, 2001, 46, pp. 967–972
28 Stepanyan, V., Hovakimyan, N.: ‘Robust adaptive observer design for
uncertain systems with bounded disturbances’, IEEE Trans. Neural
Netw., 2007, 18, pp. 1392–1403
IET Control Theory Appl., pp. 1–16 15
doi: 10.1049/iet-cta.2011.0022 © The Institution of Engineering and Technology 2012
www.ietdl.org
29 Lam, H.K., Leung, F.H.F., Tam, P.K.S.: ‘On design of stable and
robust observer-controller for uncertain nonlinear systems based on
a grid-point approach’. Conf. Industrial Electronics, ISIE 97, 1997,
vol. 3, pp. 998–1005
30 Kim, J.H., Hyun, C.H., Kim, E.: ‘Adaptive synchronization of
uncertain chaotic systems based on T-S fuzzy model’, IEEE Trans.
Fuzzy Syst., 2007, 15, pp. 359–369
31 Tseng, C.S., Hwang, C.K.: ‘Fuzzy observer-based fuzzy control design
for nonlinear systems with persistent bounded disturbances’, Fuzzy
Sets Syst., 2007, 158, pp. 164–179
32 Liu, Y.S.: ‘Robust adaptive observer for nonlinear systems with un-
modeled dynamics’, Automatica, 2009, 45, pp. 1891–1895
33 Wang, Y.: ‘State observer-based adaptive fuzzy output-feedback
control for a class of uncertain nonlinear systems’, Inform. Sci., 2010,
180, pp. 5029–5040
34 Ionnou, P.A., Sun, J.: ‘Robust adaptive control’ (Upper Saddle River,
NJ: Prentice-Hall, 1996)
35 Boyd, S., Ghaoui, L.E., Feron, E., Balakrishnan, V.: ‘Linear matrix
inequalities in system and control theory’ (Society for Industrial and
Applied Mathematics, Philadelphia, 1994)
36 Tanaka, K., Wang, H.O.: ‘Fuzzy control systems design and
analysis: a linear matrix inequality approach’ (Wiley, New York, 2001)
37 Angeles, J.: ‘Fundamentals of robotic mechanical systems: theory,
methods, and algorithms’ (Springer, NewYork, 2003)
16 IET Control Theory Appl., pp. 1–16
© The Institution of Engineering and Technology 2012 doi: 10.1049/iet-cta.2011.0022

Sign up to vote on this title
UsefulNot useful