## Are you sure?

This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?

**Copynght~ 1994ElsewerSc~.nceLtcl
**

Printed m Great Britain All nightsreserved

0005 1098/945600+000

Automattca

Pergamon

0005-10~(93)E0010--2

**Application of Model Reference Adaptive
**

Control to a Benchmark Problem*

P A COOK?

**A discrete-ttme model-reference adapttve control scheme, apphed to a
**

simulation of an unknown time-varymg plant, achieves good performance

when the parameters of the algorithm are appropriately selected

Key Words--Adapt,ve systems, &screte t~me systems, model reference adaptwe control, parameter

estimation, robustness

**low-order models, while also keeping the
**

algorithm as simple as possible

The baste algorithm IS described m SecUon 2,

along weth various mo&ficatlons, of which some,

though not all, have been tried m the present

investigation In Section 3, the apphcatton to the

'benchmark problem' of the unknown plant is

reported, mainly by means of simulation results

On the basts of this study, some tentatwe

conclusions are drawn and presented in Section

4

**Abs/rset--Several vers,ons of a d,screte-t,me modelreference adaptive control scheme are apphed to a
**

s,mulatmn model of an unknown plant, m order to

mvesttgate the effect of mod,ficattous intended to enhance

the robustness of the system It ts found that, m this

apphcateon, the s, mplest form of the algonthm appears to be

the most effectwe, provided that the samphng rate, reference

model and adaptatton gain are appropnately chosen

1 INTRODUCTION

**NUMEROUS METHODS have been proposed to
**

improve the robustness of adapuve control

algorithms, including the use of known or

assumed parameter bounds, leakage and/or

dead zones in the estimator, filtenng and

normalization of data etc, apart from rehance

on persistent exotatton (Ioannou and Kokotowe, 1984; Krelsselmeler and Anderson, 1986,

Ortega et al 1985) This paper reports the

apphcatlon of a discrete-time model-reference

adaptwe control scheme, based on a proJection

algorithm (Goodwm et al, 1980) but capable of

incorporating modifications to enhance tts

robustness, to a simulation model of an

unknown plant (Graebe, 1994) The general

approach, as m Cook (1989, 1991, 1992), ts to

sample as slowly as is compatible with the

destred performance, so as to filter out

unmodelled dynamic effects and allow the use of

2 ADAPTIVE CONTROL SCHEME

**At samphng mstant k, let the plant input be
**

denoted by u(k), the output by y(k), and the

reference signal by r(k) The adaptive control

scheme, as used in the present investigation, ~s

based on the approximate representation of the

mput-outpt~t relation in the form

y(k + 1) = ay(k) + bu(k),

where (a, b) are unknown parameters

defining a parameter vector

0 = [a, b/w],

Then,

(2)

**where w is an adjustable weighting factor, and a
**

regressor v e c t o r

~b(k) : [y(k), wu(k)]T

(3)

the relation (1) can be written as

*** Rece,ved m final form 28 September 1993 The original
**

vet's,on of this paper was presented at the 12th IFAC World

Congress wh,ch was held in Sydney, Austraha, Dunng 19-23

July 1993 The Pubhshed Proceedings of this IFAC Meeting

may be ordered from Elsevier Soence Lira,ted, The

Boulevard, Langford Lane, Kldhngton, Oxford OX5 1GB,

U K This paper was recommended for pubhcat,on m revised

form by Guest Ed,tor S Graebe under the direct,on of

E&tor H Kwakernaak Corresponding author P A Cook

Tel +44 61 236 3311, Fax +44 61 228 7040

t Control Systems Centre, Department of Electrical

Engmeenng and Electromcs, Umvers,ty of Manchester

Inst, tute of Sc,ence and Technology, Manchester M60 1QD,

UK

y(k + 1) : OTep(k)

(4)

**Since 0 is unknown, It IS replaced by an estimate
**

O(k) m order to calculate a predicted output.

)3(k + 1) = OT(k)dp(k)

(5)

and a pre&ctlon error

e(k + 1) = y(k + 1) - ~(k + 1)

(6)

**The control law is then chosen so that, ff the
**

585

AUTO30:4-C

(1)

. I~1 > lel-----<6. to preserve some memory of past data. where 0 is a prior estimate of 0 and o is a small positive constant and the output prediction can be altered to )~(k + 1) = y ( k ) + e r ( k ) ¢ ' ( k ) (11) and the control law obtained by computing u(k) from (7)-(11) This procedure has the potential advantage that it incorporates integral action m the controller. arise either from persistent excitation. defining Incremental variables u'(k) = u(k) . based on the regressor vectors (3). in . provides for a trade-off between robustness and alertness Modifications to the algorithm. albeit at the place of decreased alertness to parameter change 3 1 Stmulat~on results The specified requirements for performance of the controlled system were that the output should always remam between +1. ¢(k) IS replaced in (12) and (13) by ~'(k) The robustness properties of the estimation algorithm.# < 1 . (13) and # ms a constant factor. include the following Parameter bounding The parameter estimates can be forced to remain within given bounds by taking the value calculated from (12) as a preliminary update. where D ( ) is a 3 APPLICATION The benchmark simulation model (Graebe. given O(k). even though it may also h i l t the attainable performance of the controlled system This consequently provides a further means of making the control scheme more robust. even if the parameter estimates are frozen.5 (preferably +1 2).1). 0 .6 sgn (e). since a lower sampling rate tends to eliminate the effect of paraslttC dynamics. so as to avoid arbitrary dnftIng Dead zones The factor e(k + 1) in (12) can be replaced by D ( e ( k + l ) ) .u(k . Parameter esumauon The basic form of the parameter estimator is O(k + 1) = O(k) + ge(k + 1)~p(k)/p(k). (8) y ' ( k ) = y ( k ) . 1984). O(e) = 0. as proposed by Krelsselmemer and Anderson (1986) Leakage This mechanism. to be replaced by the nearest vector in the allowed set.l < p < l . with a variety of values for the sampling rate (20/N Hz). (12) where g is the adaptation gain. and the only parameter bound used was a lower hmlt of 0 01 on the estimate of b. the possibihty of altering N appears worth investigating. as it stands. which serves.586 P A Cook parameter estimation were exact. relative parameter weighting (w). wu'(k)] T (10) dead-zone functmn e . while 3. b) subject to change and some noise disturbance added A set-point reference r(k) IS specafied In the form of a square-wave signal with unit amplitude and penod 20 s The output is sampled at intervals of 50 ms. p ( k ) = # p ( k . and the Input held fixed over N successive sampling Instants In the present context. two versions of the adaptive control scheme described above were used. or from the 'memory factor' # in (13) which. with 0 < g < 2. 2.1. which can be achieved by setting )~(k + 1) = p y ( k ) + (1 .p ) for some p with . which have been suggested in order to make it more robust. reference model pole (p). 1994) represents a system with time-varying parameters and noisy output measurements. memory factor (#) and dead zone width (6) The constant A In (13) was set at 0 01 throughout. which may be either constant or related to the input and output magnitudes.1) (9) t~'(k) = [y'(k).o ) O ( k ) + o O . but preliminary open-loop studies indicate that it can be reasonably well approximated by the basic form (1).y ( k . when # > 0. (14) for some posmve 6. adaptation gain (g). but the sampling rate can be reduced by an arbitrary integer factor N. with (a. where higher levels involve more severe time-variation In the present study. also known as the o-modification (loannou and Kokotovlc. due to disturbances and/or changes in the reference signal.p ) / ( z .. with rise time of a few seconds and fast settling to zero steady state error (wlthm the noise amplitude) Moreover. this should be achieved for each of three 'stress levels'.p ) r ( k ) (7) and then computing u(k). (10) respectively. at least as regards undermodelhng. is a small positive constant introduced to avoid the possibility of &vision by zero In the case that incremental variables are used. the controlled system would match a reference model with z-transfer function ( 1 . by using (3) and (5) Alternatively.1) + eT(k)¢(k) + ). according to Ortega et al (1985). could be mtroduced by replacing O(k) in (12) wah ( 1 .

the precautionary lower bound on the estimate of b was never reached 4 CONCLUSIONS -11 5' 1b 15 ' FIG 1 Szmulatlon results for stress level 1 ZO The alms of this study were to investigate the apphcabdlty of model-reference adaptive control and the effect of venous modifications to the adaptation algorithm From the simulation . stress level 2. corresponding to a time constant ~2 3 s. the transient behavlour appeared acceptable. # = 0 and di=0 In choosmg the adaptation gem. stress level 3. and the model pole p = 0 8. was unsuccessful in th~s apphcatlon. g = 0 15 (Fig 2). the parameter estimates were gwen the initial values 0T(0)= [0 9. in the simulations reported here. it was indeed found in more extensive simulation runs that the output bounds were occasionally violated. all simulations with the values of g given above showed the output remaining within the required bounds. for this reason. and that changes in the relative weighting of parameters d~d not have much effect. g = 0 2 (Fig 1). while w = l . and reasonable rise and setthng times For all stress levels. each of 100s duration. 0 1]. but that the results were strongly dependent on the reference model and adaptation gem. and so attention was concentrated on the first one It was found that neither the memory factor nor the dead zone appeared to give any advantage. g = 0 12 (Fig 3) Each figure shows the output from three simulation runs. 1 e N = 10.Apphcatlon of model reference adaptwe control order to avoid dlwslon by zero when calculating u(k) Otherwise. which suggests that g should be further reduced. and to some extent on samphng rate The results here presented were obtained with a samphng time of 0 5 s (rate 2 Hz). although there were some signs of non-minimumphase behavlour (lnmal movement in the wrong direction) In each simulation run. a somewhat arbRrary but not crucially important choice. the results indicate that the achievement of adequate control was more difficult for the higher stress levels. based on incremental vanables. which was the reason for reducing the adaptation gem in these cases For level 3. based on open-loop experiments The results did not appear very sensltwe to the preose values chosen and. tt appeared necessary to compromise between speed of response and keeping the output within the prescribed bounds. leakage was not employed The simulation results indicated that the second scheme. with the result that slightly different values were found statable for the different stress levels The values actually used were stress level 1. spilt into five 20s segments and superimposed As might be expected. even though this would tend to slow down the response and decrease the alertness of the system In the cases 15 1 05 0 -05 587 15 1 °i -°i 0 5 10 15 20 FIG 2 SImulatmn results for stress level 2 15 -0 -I 5 10 1 20 FIG 3 Simulation results for stress level 3 of levels 1 and 2. a prtort assumptmns about true parameter values were avoided and.

is probably attributable to the plant transfer function being dominated by a single pole (u) The n o n . pp 205-214 Oxford Umverslty Press. starting wtth wildly inappropriate p a r a m e t e r estimates. AC-31.ve controllers 1EEE Trans Automat Control. L Praly and I D Landau (1985) Robustness of discrete-time adapt. indicating that the reference signal and disturbances provided sufficient excitation to m a k e the estimator work 5 POSTSCRIPT With details of the actual plant m the benchmark problem now avadable ( G r a e b e . followmg changes m the reference signal REFERENCES Cook. reference model dynamics and adaptation gains. AC-3O. 3O Ioannou. 202-211 Kreisselmeler. Oxford Goodwin. G and B D O Anderson (1986) Robust model reference adaptive control 1EEE Trans Automat Control. and that robustness-enhancmg modifications were not helpful Further simulations. pp 270-273 Cook. showed eventual convergence into a region of much m o r e reasonable values and correspondmgly good control.m t m m u m . R . smce the plant ~tself m fact has thts property (m) Inspection of the control mput m the Cook simulation data (not shown here) reveals that saturation frequently occurred. 1994). P A (1992) Robustness of direct adaptive control systems with slow samphng In N K Nichols and D H Owens (Eds). Italy. P A (1989) Direct adaptive control of nonhnear systems IFAC Symposmm on Nonhnear Control Systems Design. AC-25. S F (1994) Robust and adaptive control of an unknown plant a benchmark of new format Automauca. pp 533-538 Cook. The Mathematics of Control Theory. 449-456 Graebe. Capri. P A and P V Kokotovic (1984) Robust redesign of adaptive control IEEE Trans Automat Control. U K IEE Conference Publication No 232. P A (1991) Performance of model-reference adaptive control algorithms under non-~deal conditions International Conference on Control '91 Edmburgh. AC-29. 127-132 Ortega. but only briefly.p h a s e b e h a w o u r ts unsurpnsmg. 1179-1187 . G C.588 P A results. the following c o m m e n t s m a y be m order (t) The surprisingly good p e r f o r m a n c e obtained here. P J Ramadge and P E Calnes (1980) Discrete-time multlvarlable adaptive control IEEE Trans Automat Control. considering the slmphctty of the model. it appears that adequate p e r f o r m a n c e could be obtained by usmg the basic algorithm with suttable samphng rate.

- Lect 1uploaded byArslan Khalid
- Gao_ACC2006uploaded byfaridrahman
- c4.pdfuploaded byAyad M Al-Awsi
- LFC PID 2uploaded bySouvik Ganguli
- Chapter 01uploaded byGustavo Cedeno
- IJACEEEuploaded byijaceee
- The International Journal of Applied Control, Electrical and Electronics Engineering (IJACEEE)uploaded byijaceee
- IJACEEEuploaded byijaceee
- 1 Introduction to Control Systemsuploaded byMuhammad Farhan
- SDCEXP-1(Position and Speed Control)uploaded bybirdtai
- IJACEEEuploaded byijaceee
- Lecture 41uploaded byGyan Bshn
- Paper1_Speedcontroluploaded byDuvan Morales Guzman
- ijaceeeuploaded byijaceee
- DONGWuploaded byeriosc2
- ijscmcuploaded byijscmc
- Full Text 01uploaded byAhmad Adel El Tantawy
- hmwk5uploaded byEren Can Kızıldağ
- IJCSITCSEuploaded byijcsitce
- 46 Dynamic Force Control With Hydraulic Actuators Using Added Compliance and Displacement Compensationuploaded byRRAdwan77
- IJCSITCEuploaded byijcsitcejournal
- Powers Ys 900uploaded bymakroum
- books recom..pdfuploaded byAhmed Mabrouk
- lcs lec1uploaded byShafaq Ejaz
- Closed System Expuploaded byMUHAMMAD AKRAM
- Lab 6 Engineering Measurement and Lab sampleuploaded bytk_atiqah
- Adaptive CONTROL UnitIgfhuploaded bySapari Vel
- Control System 2011uploaded byaditvas
- Genetic Algorithm for Robust h Infinityuploaded byMd Kaleemullah
- automatic control systemsuploaded byDoru Tărcău

Close Dialog## Are you sure?

This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?

Loading