ISA Transactions 46 (2007) 95101

www.elsevier.com/locate/isatrans
Some long time delay sliding mode control approaches
Oscar Camacho

, Rub en Rojas, Winston Garca-Gabn

Grupo de Investigaci on en Nuevas Estrategias de Control Aplicadas, Escuela de Ingeniera El ectrica, Facultad de Ingeniera, Universidad de Los Andes,
La Hechicera M erida 5101, Venezuela
Received 7 December 2005; accepted 28 June 2006
Available online 9 January 2007
Abstract
This paper presents a combined approach of predictive structures with sliding mode control (SMC). Control schemes have been proposed
looking for performance and robustness improvement. These structures were designed for processes that can be approximated either by a rst
order plus time delay or an integral rst order plus time delay model broadly used on chemical processes. The proposed schemes were tested for
performance and robustness against set point changes and disturbances as compared with classical approaches.
c 2006, ISA. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Keywords: Chemical processes; Predictive structures; Sliding mode control; Time delay
1. Introduction
The presence of time delays in many industrial processes
is a well-recognized problem. Time lag, transportation lag,
time delay and dead time are common phenomena in industrial
processes. Time delay can be produced by measurement lag,
analysis and computation time, communication lag or the
transport time required for a uid to ow through a pipe. The
achievable performance of typical feedback control systems can
decline if a process has a relatively large time delay compared
to the dominant time constant [1].
Predictive structures and sliding mode controllers have been
used to solve such problems. Primarily, internal model control
(IMC) and the Smith predictor (SP) are the most popular predic-
tive structures used for time delay compensation [2,3]. Further-
more, when the process presents an integral behavior the origi-
nal structures cannot be used since a constant load disturbance
results in a steady-state error [4]. To overcome this obstacle dif-
ferent approaches have been proposed [4,5]. Simulation studies
have shown that the set point and load disturbances are either
very oscillatory or highly damped when the process has a large
time delay [6]. To deal with this additional problem new struc-
tures were proposed, decoupling the disturbance from the set
point response [5,7,8]. In general, these approaches have some

Corresponding author. Tel.: +58 274 2402903; fax: +58 274 2402903.
E-mail address: ocamacho@ula.ve (O. Camacho).
problems: they are sensitive to modeling errors, since the design
requires the use of a process model, which can be difcult to ob-
tain in practice. Modeling errors are unavoidable and they result
in a mismatch between the model and the actual plant. Thus, the
controllers designed using particular models may perform quite
differently when they are implemented on the actual process.
On the other hand, SMC has been used to design
controllers based on its strength for dealing with modelplant
mismatches [9]. Even though this controller has proved to be
robust against modeling errors and disturbances, its overall
performance was too sluggish.
The aim of this paper is to summarize an approach that
combines simple predictive structures with sliding modes. In
that sense, three different controllers are presented to show the
performance of this approach: an internal model based sliding
mode controller (IM-SMCr), a time delay sliding mode con-
troller (TDSMCr), and a Smith predictor based sliding mode
controller (SPSMCr). So, the paper is organized as follows.
Section 2 shows the background necessary for developing these
controllers. Section 3 gives a brief description of the proposed
controller design procedure. Section 4 presents some computer
simulation results. Finally, some conclusions are offered.
2. Background
2.1. Models of the processes
Nonlinear high order models describe most processes in
industry. It is well known that a simplied model of a nonlinear
0019-0578/$ - see front matter c 2006, ISA. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.isatra.2006.06.002
96 O. Camacho et al. / ISA Transactions 46 (2007) 95101
Fig. 1. Internal model control.
high order model can be used to design a controller. In
chemical processes the reaction curve is an often-used method
for identifying dynamic models [10]. It is simple to use, and
provides adequate models for many applications. The curve is
obtained by introducing a step change in the controller output
and recording the transmitter output. That curve allows model
parameter calculation. A rst order plus time delay (FOPTD)
model, Eq. (1), is able to adequately represent the dynamics of
many chemical processes over a range of frequencies [11]:
Y(s)
U(s)
=
K
m

m
s +1
e
t
0m
s
(1)
where K
m
,
m
and t
0m
are the static gain, time constant and the
time delay of the model, respectively.
For processes presenting an integrating behavior, an
integrating rst order plus time delay (IFOPTD) process model,
Eq. (2), must be considered:
Y(s)
U(s)
=
K
m
s(
m
s +1)
e
t
0m
s
. (2)
In both equations, Y(s) is the Laplace transform of the
controlled variable (transmitter output), and U(s) is the Laplace
transform of the manipulated variable (controller output). Both
Y(s) and U(s) are deviation variables.
2.2. Predictive structures
2.2.1. Internal model structure
The internal model structure is shown in Fig. 1. The idea
behind this scheme is rstly to obtain a model of the process,
and then to decompose it into two parts, a directly invertible
term G

m
(s), and another, noninvertible term G
+
m
(s). Thus, the
model can be represented in the following way:
G
m
(s) = G
+
m
(s)G

m
(s). (3)
The noninvertible part has an inverse that is not causal or is
unstable, such as time delay or unstable poles. On the other
hand, the invertible component is causal and stable, which
allows one to design a realizable controller [12,13].
Therefore, the IMC procedure eliminates all elements in
the process model that can produce an unrealizable controller.
Thus, the design of the controller takes into consideration only
the invertible one.
Fig. 2. Smith predictor scheme.
Fig. 3. Graphical interpretation of SMC.
2.2.2. Smith predictor structure
The Smith predictor structure is shown in Fig. 2. In it, y(t )
is the process output, r(t ) is the set point or reference input,
G

m
(s) is the invertible part of the process model, y
m
(t ) is the
process model output and e
m
(t ) is the output modeling error.
So, the SP incorporates a model of the process, and thus it
is able to predict its output. This allows the controller to be
designed as though the system is delay free, therefore retaining
the simple tuning features of PID controllers [12,13].
The closed-loop transfer function of the system, coming
from the previous gure, can be written as
Y(s)
U(s)
=
G
c
(s)G
p
(s)
1 + G
c
(s)G

m
(s) + G
c
(s)[G
p
(s) G
m
(s)]
(4)
where G
c
(s), G
p
(s) and G
m
(s) are the controller, process and
process model transfer functions, respectively. If the model
and the process match, the characteristic equation will not
contain a time delay, because G
p
(s) and G
m
(s) will cancel.
Therefore, in this case, the characteristic equation involves only
the expression 1 + G
c
(s)G

m
(s), which allows an aggressive
adjustment of the manipulated variable. Obviously, the true
process is never known exactly, and therefore the performance
should decrease.
2.3. Sliding mode control
Sliding mode control is a technique derived from variable
structure control (VSC) which was originally studied by
Utkin [14]. A controller designed using the SMC method
is particularly appealing due to its ability to deal with
nonlinear systems and time-varying systems, showing a robust
behavior [15].
The idea behind SMC is to dene a surface along which
the process output can slide to its desired nal value. Fig. 3
O. Camacho et al. / ISA Transactions 46 (2007) 95101 97
depicts the SMC objective. The structure of the controller
is intentionally altered as its state crosses the surface in
accordance with a prescribed control law. Thus, the rst step
in SMC is to dene the sliding surface, S(t ), which represents a
desired global behavior, like stability and tracking performance.
The sliding surfaces used to derive the different con-
trol schemes presented in this work are based on an
integraldifferential equation acting on the tracking-error ex-
pression [15]:
S(t ) = sign(K
m
) f

e(t ),

e(t )dt,
de(t )
dt
, , n

(5)
where e(t ) is the tracking error, that is, the difference
between the reference value or set point, r(t ), and the output
measurement, y(t ), namely e(t ) = r(t ) y(t ). is a tuning
parameter, which helps to dene S(t ). This term is selected
by the designer, and determines the performance of the system
on the sliding surface. n is the models order, and therefore
once its value is included in the sliding surface it does not
appear explicitly. The sign(K
m
) function was included in the
sliding surface equation to guarantee the appropriate action of
the controller [9]. Note that sign(K
m
) only depends on the static
gain of the plant model; for that reason it never switches, giving
just a positive or negative sign multiplying f ().
The control objective is to ensure that the controlled variable
be equal to its reference value at all times, meaning that e(t )
and its derivatives must be zero. Once the reference value is
reached, S(t ) has reached a constant value; it is desired to set
dS(t )
dt
= 0. (6)
Once the sliding surface has been selected, attention must
be turned to designing the control law that drives the controlled
variable to its reference value and satises Eq. (6). The control
law, U(t ), consists of two additive parts: a continuous part,
U
C
(t ), and a discontinuous part, U
D
(t ). That is
U(t ) = U
C
(t ) +U
D
(t ). (7)
The continuous part is given by
U
C
(t ) = f (y(t ), r(t )) (8)
where f (y(t ), r(t )) is a function of the controlled variable and
the reference value.
The discontinuous part is nonlinear and represents the
switching element of the control law. This part of the controller
is discontinuous across the sliding surface. Mainly, U
D
(t ) is
designed on the basis of a relay-like function (i.e. U
D
(t ) =
sign(S(t ))), because it allows for changes between the
structures with a hypothetical innitely fast speed. In practice,
however, it is impossible to achieve the high switching control
because of the presence of nite time delays for control
computations or limitations of the physical actuators, thus
causing chattering around of the sliding surface [14,15].
Chattering is a high frequency oscillation around the desired
equilibrium point. It is undesirable in practice, because it
involves high control activity and can excite high frequency
Fig. 4. Proposed scheme of IM based SMC.
dynamics ignored in the modeling of the system [15]. The
aggressiveness for reaching the sliding surface depends on the
control gain (i.e. ), but if the controller is too aggressive it can
collaborate with the chattering. To reduce the chattering, one
approach is to replace the relay-like function by a saturation or
sigma function, which can be written as follows:
U
D
(t ) = K
D
S(t )
|S(t )| +
(9)
where K
D
is the tuning parameter responsible for the reaching
mode. is a tuning parameter used to reduce the chattering
problem. In summary, the control law usually results in a fast
motion to bring the state onto the sliding surface, and a slower
motion to proceed until a desired state is reached.
3. Controller design
In this section the syntheses of the sliding mode controllers
using the different predictive structures are presented.
The controllers are developed for processes that can be
approximated by FOPTD and IFOPTD models.
3.1. Internal model based sliding mode controller
The design of a sliding mode controller (SMCr) from an
FOPTD model was described by Camacho and Smith [11] but
their approach requires some assumptions and approximations
to deal with the time delay term. The internal model based
sliding mode controller (IM-SMCr) approach takes advantage
of choosing the invertible part of the model process to design
the controller.
Fig. 4 shows the proposed scheme. The nonlinear process
was modeled as an FOPTD. As was suggested in Section 2.2.1,
the model can be separated into two parts:
G
+
m
= e
t
0m
s
(10)
G

m
=
K
m

m
s +1
(11)
where G

m
(s) eliminates the time delay term from the model;
this simplication facilitates the SMC design.
Let us propose the following sliding surface:
S(t ) = e

m
(t ) +

t
0
e(t )dt (12)
98 O. Camacho et al. / ISA Transactions 46 (2007) 95101
where
e

m
(t ) = r(t ) y

m
(t ) (13)
e(t ) = r(t ) y(t ) (14)
where y

m
(t ) is the model output without time delay.
Now, following the procedure described in [11], the SMCr
is obtained:
U(t ) =

m
K
m

m
(t )

m
+e(t )

+ K
D
S(t )
|S(t )| +
(15)
S(t ) = sign(K
m
)

m
(t ) +

t
0
e(t )dt

. (16)
To complete the SMCr design, it is necessary to establish
a set of tuning equations. For the tuning equations as rst
estimates, using the NelderMead searching algorithm [16,17],
the following equations were obtained:

1

m
+t
0m
(17)
K
D

0.8
|K
m
|

m
t
0m

0.76
(18)
= 0.68 +0.12|K
m
|K
D
. (19)
These equations have a xed structure depending on the
parameter and the characteristic parameters of the FOPTD
model which is an advantage from the process control tuning
point of view. For an industrial application, Eq. (16) can be
implemented by a PI algorithm [18].
3.2. Time delay sliding mode controller
The time delay sliding mode controller (TDSMCr) was
developed using an approach similar to that presented in the
previous subsection. In this case the Smith predictor structure
was used and a different controller was obtained [12,13].
When the nonlinear process is modeled as an FOPTD, the
delay free part, G

m
(s), can be used to design the controller.
This simplies the procedure of obtaining a conventional SMCr
without delay compensation.
Then, the following proportional sliding surface was
proposed:
S(t ) = K
S
e
1
(t ) (20)
where K
S
is a design gain and e
1
(t ) is the SP-like error
(e
1
(t ) = r(t ) (y

m
(t ) + e
m
(t ))) that it is reduced to the
difference between the reference, r(t ), and the free delay
model output, y

m
(t ), when a perfect model matching is
considered, i.e. e
m
(t ) = 0. Thus, the process time delay is not
considered, shortening the controller design. Although previous
considerations are not so real, it is assumed that the controller
robustness will compensate for this.
The TDSMCr obtained is given by the following equation:
U(t ) =

m
K
m

dr(t )
dt
+
y

m
(t )

+ K
D
S(t )
|S(t )| +
(21)
Fig. 5. Smith predictor based sliding mode controller.
where S(t ) is the following sliding surface:
S(t ) = K
S
sign(K
m
) e
1
(t ) (22)
and the K
S
parameter is responsible for the controller
aggressiveness, K
S
> 0.
To complete the controller design, it is necessary to have a
set of tuning equations. The tunings for rst estimate values
were determined using time-domain performance methods [5],
resulting in the following equations:
K
D
=
0.72
|K
m
|

m
t
0m

0.76
(23)
= 0.68 +0.12|K
m
|K
D
t
0m
+
m
t
0m

m
(24)
K
S
= 15K
P
(25)
where K
P
can be calculated as the controller gain of a PID con-
troller. Thus, the value chosen for this parameter depends on the
tuning equations used, giving a more aggressive controller if the
ZieglerNichols are chosen instead of Dahlin equations [2].
3.3. The Smith predictor based sliding mode controller for
integrating processes
The Smith predictor based sliding mode controller
(SPSMCr) presented uses the standard SP architecture while
the controller is a sliding mode controller (SMC). The block
diagram of the proposed scheme is shown in Fig. 5. It is well
known that the original SP controller is not effective for integral
processes because it cannot reject a constant load disturbance.
Many modied SP for integral processes with different
structures have been proposed in the literature to remove the
steady-state error produced by a constant load disturbance. Tian
and Gao [20], and Matau sek and Mici c [8] added derivative
action, G
d
(s), to their proposed TDCto overcome this problem.
This was also considered in our approach.
G
d
(s) = K
O
(
d
s +1). (26)
To develop the SPSMCr, an integrating rst order plus time
delay (IFOPTD) process model was considered. The model
transfer function without time delay can be written as
G

m
(s) =
K
m
s(
m
s +1)
. (27)
Again assuming perfect model matching, e
m
(t ) = 0. Thus,
the time delay part is not considered in the SMC design. Then,
O. Camacho et al. / ISA Transactions 46 (2007) 95101 99
the complete SPSMCr can be represented as
U(t ) =
1
K
m

(1
m

1
)
dy

m
(t )
dt
+
m

0
e

m
(t )

+K
D
S(t )
|S(t )| +
(28)
with
S(t ) = sign(K
m
)

dy

m
(t )
dt
+
1
e

m
(t ) +
0

t
0
e

m
(t )dt

(29)
where y

m
(t ) is the G

m
output and e

m
(t ) = r(t ) y

m
(t ).
Eqs. (28) and (29) dene the SPSMCr. In this case the
tuning equations for rst estimate values were determined
from a systematic set of simulations as a function of the
controllability relationship, CR =
t
0

m
. The following values
provide satisfactory system performance and robustness against
modeling errors [19]:

1
=

m
[=][time]
1
if CR 4
1.5

m
[=][time]
1
if CR 4
(30)

0
=

2
1
8
[=][time]
2
(31)
K
D
=
0.75
|K
m
|

t
0

0.76
[=][fraction CO] (32)
= 2[0.68 +0.12(|K
m
|K
D

1
)][=][fraction TO/time]. (33)
A proportional-derivative controller given in Eq. (26) is
used in the proposed SPSMCr. The parameters of the G
d
(s)
controller for enabling the load disturbance rejection were
found as recommended by Matau sek and Mici c [8]:
K
0
=
0.7239
K
m
(
m
+t
0m
)
(34)

d
= 0.4(
m
+t
0m
). (35)
4. Simulation results
To illustrate the performance of the proposed controllers a
high order model with long time delay of a system is given, for
each case. The different controllers were tested when set point
and disturbances changes were applied to the process. Finally,
IM-SMCr was compared against IMC and SMC; TDSMCr was
compared against a dead time compensator (DTC), and for
this comparison an SP was used as a DTC; and SPSMCr was
compared against a predictive controller structure proposed by
Matau sek and Mici c (MM99) [8].
4.1. Internal model based sliding mode controller
In this case a fourth order system with time delay and a
controllability ratio above 1 was used (t
0m
/
m
4.38):
G(s) =
e
5s
(s +1)(0.5s +1)(0.25s +1)(0.125s +1)
. (36)
Fig. 6. Process response for set point and disturbance changes.
Table 1
Controller tuning parameters
IM-SMC Values SMC Values IMC Values
0.10
0
0.19
m
1.5
K
D
0.90
1
0.87 K
m
1.0
0.69 K
D
0.21
f
1.8
0.70
For this system a FOPTD model was obtained by using the
reaction curve procedure [3],
G
m
(s) =
e
5.68s
(1.3s +1)
. (37)
In Table 1 are shown the tuning values for each controller.
These values were kept constant in all simulations. The tuning
values for the SMCr were obtained as given in Camacho [9,17]
and those for the IMCr were obtained as given in Marlin [2],
where
m
is the model time constant, K
m
is the model static
gain, and
f
is the robustness lter time constant (see Fig. 1).
Figs. 6 and 7 shows the process and controller outputs when
a set point change was introduced at time t = 0 units of time
(UT) and a disturbance change was applied at time t = 100 UT.
It is observed that the IM-SMC and IMC controllers presented
very close behavior, while the SMC controller presented a
slower and oscillatory response, with a higher overshoot.
4.2. Time delay sliding mode controller
In this case a fourth order system with long time delay and a
controllability ratio above 1 was used (t
0m
/
m
8.22):
G(s) =
e
10s
(s +1)(0.5s +1)(0.25s +1)(0.125s +1)
. (38)
For this system a FOPTD model was obtained by using the
reaction curve procedure,
G
m
(s) =
e
10.68s
(1.3s +1)
. (39)
100 O. Camacho et al. / ISA Transactions 46 (2007) 95101
Fig. 7. Controller output when set point and disturbance changes were applied.
Fig. 8. Process response for set point change applied to G(s).
Table 2
Tuning parameters
DTC G(s) DTSMC G(s)
K
c
0.07 K
s
1.07
T
i
1.5 K
D
0.164
T
d
5.25 0.695
In Table 2 the tuning values for each controller are shown.
These values were kept constant in all simulations. The tuning
values for the PID adjustment in the DTC were obtained
using the Dahlin equations [3] and for the TDSMC, using
Eqs. (23)(25).
The system with both controllers, DTC and DTSMC, was
tested against set point changes and disturbances. Fig. 8 shows
the system responses when a set point change of 10% was
simulated; both responses were overdamped, but the DTSMC
produces a faster response than that given by the DTC. Fig. 9
depicts the responses for the same system when a disturbance
of 5% is simulated at time t = 400 UT, similar to the set point
change result; the DTSMC presents a better performance than
the DTC.
Fig. 9. Process response for disturbance change applied to G(s).
Fig. 10. Responses of the proposed SPSMCr and MM99 for G(s). Nominal
case.
4.3. The Smith predictor based sliding mode controller for
integrating processes
In this case a fourth order system with long time delay and a
controllability ratio above 1 was used (t
0
/ 11):
G(s) =
e
20s
s(s +1)(0.5s +1)(0.2s +1)(0.1s +1)
(40)
and the corresponding IFOPTD model was
G
m
(s) =
e
20.64s
s(1.28s +1)
. (41)
For MM99, the equivalent time constant, T
e
, is set to 2.4 UT
as in [8] to improve robustness. The rest of the parameters of
the MM99 and SPSMCr are given in Table 3. A unit step input
was introduced at time t = 0 UT and a 10% load disturbance
at time t = 70 UT. Fig. 10 shows the system response when
both control schemes were used. Fig. 11 shows the effect of a
20% time delay modeling error on the system performance. The
MM99 scheme becomes unstable.
O. Camacho et al. / ISA Transactions 46 (2007) 95101 101
Fig. 11. Responses of the proposed SPSMCr and MM99 for G(s). 20% error
in t
0
.
Table 3
Controller tuning parameters for process G(s)
MM99 SPSMCr
T
r
K
r
K
o
T
d

1

0
K
D
K
o
T
d
2.4 0.417 0.027 10.56 1.172 0.172 0.09 0.139 0.033 8.77
5. Conclusions
A combined approach of predictive structures with sliding
mode control was presented. This control schemes showed
the benets for dealing with long time delays using the
predictive structure plus the robustness of the sliding mode
theory. The proposed structures work well for processes that
can be approximated either by a rst order plus time delay
or an integral rst order plus time delay model, broadly
used on chemical processes. The proposed schemes showed a
better performance and robustness against set point changes
and disturbances when they were compared with classical
approaches. The use of simple predictive structures and the
provision of tuning equations make implementation easy and
give a good starting point for the adjustment.
References
[1] Tan KK, Lee TH, Leu FM. Predictive PI versus Smith control for dead-
time compensation. ISA Transactions 2001;40:1729.
[2] Marlin TE. Process control. New York: McGraw-Hill; 1995.
[3] Smith C, Corripio A. Principles and practice of automatic process control.
New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.; 1997.
[4] Watanabe K, Ito M. A process-model control for linear systems with
delay. IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control 1981;26(6):12619.
[5] Zhang WD, Sun YX. Modied Smith predictor for controlling
integrator/time delay processes. Industrial Engineering Chemistry
Research 1996;35:276972.
[6] Astrom KJ, Hang CC, Lim BC. A new Smith predictor for controlling
a process with an integrator and long dead-time. IEEE Transactions on
Automatic Control. 1994;39(2):3435.
[7] Matau sek MR, Mici c AD. A modied Smith predictor for controlling
a process with an integrator and long dead-time. IEEE Transactions on
Automatic Control 1996;41(8):1199203.
[8] Matau sek MR, Mici c AD. On the modied Smith predictor for controlling
a process with an integrator and long dead-time. IEEE Transactions on
Automatic Control 1999;44(8):16036.
[9] Camacho O, Smith CA. Sliding mode control: An approach to regulate
nonlinear chemical process. ISA Transactions 2000;39:20518.
[10] Camacho O, Rojas R. A general sliding mode controller for nonlinear
chemical processes. Transactions of ASME 2000;122:6505.
[11] Camacho O, Smith C, Moreno W. Development of an internal model
sliding mode controller. Industrial Engineering Chemistry Research 2003;
41:56873.
[12] Camacho O. A predictive approach-based sliding mode control. In:
Proceedings of 15th IFAC triennial world congress B02; 2002.
[13] Camacho O, Rojas R. An approach of sliding mode control for dead time
systems. WSEAS Transactions on Circuits and Systems 2004;4:78993.
[14] Utkin VI. Variable structure systems with sliding modes. IEEE
Transactions on Automatic Control 1997;AC-(22):21222.
[15] Slotine JJ, Li W. Applied nonlinear control. New Jersey: Prentice-Hall;
1991.
[16] Himmelblau DM. Applied nonlinear programming. New York: McGraw-
Hill; 1972.
[17] Camacho O. A new approach to design and tune Sliding Mode Controller
for Chemical Process. Ph.D. dissertation, University of South Florida;
1996.
[18] Camacho O, Smith C, Chac on E. Toward an implementation of sliding
mode control to chemical processes. In: Proceedings of ISIE97. 1997.
p. 11015.
[19] Camacho O, De la Cruz F. Smith predictor-based sliding mode controller
for integrating processes with elevated deadtime. ISA Transactions 2004;
43:5572.
[20] Tian Y, Gao F. Control of integrator processes with dominant time delay.
Industrial Engineering Chemistry Research 1999;38:297983.
Oscar Camacho received an Electrical Engineering
and M.S. in Control Engineering degrees from
Universidad de Los Andes (ULA), M erida, Venezuela,
in 1984 and 1992, respectively, and an M.E. and
Ph.D. in Chemical Engineering at University of
South Florida (USF), Tampa, Florida, in 1994 and
1996, respectively. He has held teaching and research
positions at ULA, PDVSA, and USF. His current
research interest includes sliding mode control, dead
time compensation, and fault detection systems. He is the author of more than
60 publications in journals and conference proceedings.
Rub en Rojas received a Systems Engineering degree
from Universidad de Los Andes (ULA), M erida,
Venezuela, in 1986, and an M.Sc. and Ph.D. in
Biomedical Engineering at University of lows (UI),
Iowa City, Iowa, in 1994 and 1997, respectively. He
has held teaching and research positions at ULA. His
current research interest includes sliding mode control,
dead time compensation, mathematical modeling, and
identication. He is the author of more than 50
publications in journals and conference proceedings.
Winston Garca-Gabn received an Electrical Engi-
neering, and M.S. in Automation and Instrumenta-
tion degrees from Universidad de Los Andes, M erida,
Venezuela, in 1994 and 1998, respectively, and a Ph.D.
in Industrial Engineering at University of Seville,
Spain, in 2002. He has held teaching and research po-
sitions at the Electrical Engineering School at Univer-
sidad de Los Andes. His current research interests in-
clude sliding mode control, model predictive control,
and time delay systems. He is the author of more than 50 publications in jour-
nals and conference proceedings. He has been in consultancy work, as well as
lecturing in short courses for companies.