You are on page 1of 136

Introduction to Robust Control

Dr Abraham T Mathew

What is a Control System?


Is it the physical system?

Is it the mathematical system?

ENVIRONMENT

SYSTEM
BOUNDARY

INPUT

INPUT

CONTROL SYSTEM

OUTPUT

INPUT
SUCCESS IN CONTROL DESIGN IS SAID TO BE BASED ON THE
SUCCESS IN IDENTIFYING THE SYSTEM BOUNDARY,
INPUTS,OUTPUTS & THE ENVIRONMENT

Model Based Control Design- Issues


Analytical or computational models cannot truly characterize and

emulate the phenomenon.


A model, no matter how detailed, is never a completely accurate
representation of a real physical system

Control Design-classical way


Normally, in the conventional control design for SISO

system, the stability margin is specified to ensure stability in


the presence of model uncertainties
But, the uncertainties or perturbations are not quantified,
nor performance was not taken into account in terms of
disturbance, noise etc.
For MIMO systems, many of the SISO methods cannot be
scaled up

Robust Control
Design a controller such that some level of performance of the controlled system is
guaranteed irrespective of the changes in the plant dynamics/process
dynamics within a predefined class and
the stability is guaranteed

Control design targets


Stability

Disturbance rejection
Sensor(measurement) noise rejection
Avoidance of actuator saturation

Robustness- the process/plant performance should not

deteriorate to unacceptable level if there occurs the changes due


to the uncertainties
All these targets cannot be achieved simultaneously and perfectly. So
there has to be some compromise or tradeoffs, because of various
reasons

Modeling in the context of robust control

We consider a simple example !!

Modeling a DC Servo
We consider a DC servo mechanism consisting of a DC

motor, gear train, and the load shaft


It is required to control the angular displacement and speed
using a voltage signal applied across the armature

Motor
Load

Linear Model of the DC Servo-Physical


Equations of dynamics


0

0

1
0
NK m
La


0
0 0
1
NK m
0 v(t ) TL

1
Je
Je


Ra i L
0
a
La


1 0 0
0 1 0

i

TF FORM
(s)

NK m
J e La

a0

2
2
2
v( s )
2 Ra
N K m s s b1s b2

s s
s
La
J e La

Nominal Model
Km=0.05 Nm/A, Ra=1.2 ohms, La=0.05H

Jm=8x10-4 kgm2 , J=0.020 kgm2


N=12
Je=J+N2Jm=0.1352 kgm2

Uncertainty
Let the parameters are subject to changes as follows

0.04Km 0.06
6x10-4 Jm 10-3
0.01J 0.05

Model with Uncertainty


(as an Interval System)

[74.22, 99.58]
G( s) 2
s s 12s [47.8, 53.4]

Abstracting a

Control System Structure

Control System Structure


Disturbance
w(t)
wm

Noise v(t)

Sensor

S1
Input yd

Controller

Plant/Process

Sensor

Output ym

System Equations
If the Plant is LTI the zero state linearity dictates that y is a linear

combination of effects of the two plant inputs u and w


That is

y(s) P(s)u(s) P (s)w(s)


(1)
Quite often it is convenient to work with the disturbance d(s) at the
plant output given as
w

d (s) P (s)w(s)

Then, we have

y(s) P(s)u(s) d (s)

(2)

(3)

System Equations
Sensor is assumed to have two inputs, plant output y and the

measurement noise v. So, we have

y ( s ) P ( s ) y ( s ) v( s )
Ideally Ps(s)=1 and v(t)=0 so that ym=y
m

(4)

(this is achieved if sensor bandwidth is larger than system


bandwidth or we say the sensor is fast and accurate)

Now, look at the Controller

Disturbance
w(t)
wm

Noise v(t)

Sensor

S1
yd

Controller

Plant/Process

Sensor

ym

Contd
Controller gets three inputs ym, yd and wm

Here wm is the disturbance measured using suitable sensor


Let the controller be LTI. Then

s) all
Fdthe
(s) ythree
( s)
Fm (s)need
ym (sto
) be
Fwused
(s)wmalways
(s) here. Several
(5)
d
u(Not
inputs

control structures are defined according to whether ym, yd or wm


is used to produce u or not . Accordingly we will have different
schemes of control

1. Single Degree of Freedom controller


When Fm=-Fd and Fw=0, we have

u(s) F ( s)[ y ( s) y (s)]


d

The figure shows 1DoF Control Structure realizing this

equation
yd

+
ym

Fd

Two Degree of Freedom Controller


If we have a structure of the form given below, designer will

have freedom to independently select Fm and Fd we will have


the TDoF Feedback Controller structure

yd

Fd

+
+

Fm

ym

Feedback Control Scheme

w
Fw
Pw
yd

Fd

d
u

+
Fm

+
y

Ps

ym

Problem formulation
System enclosed in the dotted box is seen to have three

inputs and one output


By assuming linearity, we can say that plant output y(t) is
produced as a superposition of the effects of these three
signals coming to the output port through three transfer
channels
That is

y(s) H (s) y (s) H (s)w(s) H (s)v(s)


d

Tracking problem
Let the error e(t) be defined as e(t)=yd-y

That is,

e( s) y ( s ) H ( s) y ( s ) H ( s) w( s) H ( s )v( s)
d

Or

e( s) 1 H ( s)y ( s) H ( s) w( s ) H ( s )v( s)
d

The central design problem is to obtain Hd, Hw, and Hv with

desirable properties using appropriate methods or criteria

Look at it again

w
Fw
Pw
yd

Fd

d
u

+
Fm

+
y

Ps

ym

Emphasis for output disturbance


In cases where it is desirable or convenient to work with the

output disturbance d rather than w, we have

y(s) H (s) y (s) H (s)d (s) H (s)v(s)


d

wd

e( s ) y ( s ) H ( s ) y ( s ) H ( s ) d ( s ) H ( s ) v ( s )
d

wd

Or

e( s) 1 H ( s)y ( s ) H ( s)d ( s ) H ( s)v( s)


d

wd

Tracking performance
For the system to ideally track the reference, the error must

be zero
To achieve this for all possible yd,v,w and d, we would
require Hd(s)=1 and Hw(s)= Hwd(s)=Hv(s)=0
In the practical setting, as we see more in detail, we can see
that this condition cannot be satisfied perfectly for the entire
bandwidth or entire region of system perturbations
Some design tradeoffs, optimality conditions and so on would
have to be called for as we have already noted.

Admissible/acceptable designs
In order to do the adjustment/tradeoff for obtaining an

admissible or acceptable design and discriminate between


acceptable and unacceptable departures from the ideal
performance, we need to have the specifications
These specifications give rise to different control structures
like open loop, feedforward, feedback, etc.
We may differentiate between SISO and MIMO and start
with SISO and generalize the notations for MIMO,
subsequently

Control System Performance


From a systems perspective, the performance specification

for control system starts with Stability


Followed by Sensitivity, Disturbance Rejection, Noise
Rejection etc. where needed.

Stability
When it comes to stability, in the modern settings of design,

we consider two classes of stability, namely


Input-output stability
Internal stability

Internal stability is of paramount importance in the MIMO

system framework, both in Matrix Transfer function form


and State variable/transfer function forms

Internal Stability
A system to be internally stable means all the transfer functions

associated with all the transfer channels connecting exogenous


input to the output(including set point, disturbance & noise) shall
be stable
In reality, it is possible for a system to be internally unstable and
yet to have a stable set point to output channel transfer functions
Under this circumstance, we say that system has unstable hidden
modes
Therefore, internal stability must be ensured before the transfer
function that define the response to the system inputs are
considered

Design Model
be a set of all plants that each member of set
P is an admissible model, given the uncertainty
region (interval)

Let P

P0 in

P is one model with the nominal value of the

parameters
If P0 is used for the robust designs, then let us call P0 as Design

model (for the sake of convenience!!)

Model Uncertainty & Internal stability


If the plant is expected to deviate from the design

model(nominal model), it is better represented by a set of


models centered on the design model(nominal model)
For a control system to be acceptable, the design must be
internally stable for every model in the set
This property is known as robust stability
Once stability & robustness are assured, we can shift the
attention to response

Summary
A model of the physical system is only an approximation of

the real phenomenon/process


Control system output is the measurement showing the
status or effectiveness of control
Inputs, in a general framework will include set point,
disturbance and measurement noise

Summary contd
Models are subjected to various uncertainties

Nominal model in the set of uncertain models can be used as

Design model
Internal Stability and robust stability are starting points for
good control system design
Once stability is assured, other performance measures can be
specified

Design Dilemma
It will not usually be possible(which we will see in detail) to

have good set point tracking, and disturbance rejection and


noise rejection uniformly effectively for all functions of yd, v,
w and d
Also, emphasis on sensitivity on one may negatively affect the
other

Robust Control System


A system is said to be robust when
It is durable, hardy and resilient
It has low sensitivities in the system passband
It is stable over the range of parameter variations

The performance continues to meet the specifications in the

presence of a set of changes in the system parameters

Robustness is the sensitivity to the effects that are not


considered in the analysis and designfor example,
the disturbances,
measurement noise, and
unmodeled dynamics

Sensitivity & Sensitivity Analysis

Sensitivity
It is the percentage change in system transmission or

response or some quantity of interest with respect to the


percentage change in another quantity
In control theory we use
Parameter Sensitivity
System Sensitivity
Root Sensitivity
Eigenvalue Sensitivity

Parameter Sensitivity
Let T be the system function which depends on a parameter

Then, the parameter sensitivity ST of T with respect to s


defined as
T

ln T
T
T

ln
T

System Sensitivity
Let T be the system closed loop transfer function which

depends on the open loop transfer function G


Then sensitivity of T w.r.t G is given as
T

ln T
T
T

S
G
ln G G
G
G
T

Root Sensitivity
Let T be the system closed loop transfer function with the ith

root given as i and the parameter of interest is say K


Root sensitivity is the sensitivity in terms of the position of
the roots of the characteristic equation on the (, j)
plane(root locus plane)

Significance of Root Sensitivity


Roots of the characteristic equation represents the

dominant(visible) modes of the transient response


The effect of parameter variation on the position of the root
and the direction of shift of the root are important and useful
measures to say about the sensitivity
Can be combined with Root Locus Method for Control
Designs

Definition of Root Sensitivity


The root sensitivity of the system T(s) is defined as

ln K K
i

Let

T ( s)

K ( s z )
1

j 1

( s )
i 1

Contd
Let K be a parameter that influences the location of the roots i

and the gain K1


Then the root sensitivity is related to the system sensitivity to K
and is given as(if zeros of T(s) are not dependent)

ln K

S
ln K
ln K ( s )
n

i 1

In the event of gain K1 independent of K, we have

1
1

S
S
ln K ( s )
(s )
T

i 1

i 1

Eigenvalue Sensitivity
Let us assume that we have the relation(A is from the state

space equation)

A
i

Differentiating with respect to the element akj of A we will

have

a
a a
a
i

kj

kj

kj

kj

Contd
Premultiplying with i , the left eigenvector we have ii=1

and i (A-i I)=0


Then, we get


a
a

kj

kj

Contd
All elements in

which will be 1
Therefore we get

A
will
a be zero except the (k,j)th element,
kj


a
i

ik

kj

This is the eigenvalue sensitivity

ji

Sensitivity Analysis of transfer


functions
Consider a closed loop system as shown in Figure

yd

u
-

G
1 G

T
ln T
T G T 1
S

ln G G
T G 1 G
G
T

Waterbed effect
Now, add T and S

We get T+S =1

System with cascade compensator


We consider the following system
yd

GK
1 GK

T
ln T
T G T 1
S

ln G G
T G 1 GK
G
T

Check T+S

System with feedback compensator


Consider the following system

yd

H
T

G
1 GH

T
ln T
T G T 1
S

ln G G
T G 1 GH
G
T

Check T+S

Sensitivity & Complimentary Sensitivity Functions


In the Robust Control Literature, Sensitivity Function plays a

crucial role
Let S(s) be the Sensitivity Function
Then T(s) is the Complimentary Sensitivity Function such
that S+T=1 for SISO and S+T=I for MIMO

Open Loop Control

Open Loop Control


It is the simplest control structure

Limited in performance
Usually reserved for special applications where feedback

control is either impossible or unnecessary


It is a good starting point for control design
It helps to appreciate the advantages of feedback control
Stability, performance etc are relatively in simpler forms to
understand

Open Loop Structure


d

yd

+
P

+
y

Input-Output Relations
In open loop control input yd is usually a synthesized signal

for the given application and u is derived from that as shown


Open loop control requires no measurements.
Now, from Figure above, we write as

y FPy d
d

and e (1 FP) y d
d

H ( s) F ( s) P( s)
d

and H ( s) 1
wd

Tracking Performance
Perfect tracking of yd occurs if

H ( s ) F ( s ) P( s ) 1
d

That is, if

F ( s ) P( s )

The practical objective is to make

in the system passband

F ( j ) P( j ) 1

Disturbance rejection
Since

open
H ( s)
1 loop control does nothing to attenuate
wd

the effects of disturbance inputs nor does it amplify them


either

Sensitivity
The sensitivity of

H with
(s) respect to P(s) is calculated as
d

follows

H F ( P P) FP FP
0

FP
S
H

FP

A sensitivity 1 implies that a given percent change in P

translates into the equal percent change in the transmission


function
H d ( j )
Open loop control does not affect sensitivity

Stability Conditions
We modify the block diagram of the Open loop control

system as shown here


v

yd

+
F

Analysis
In any system, any addition or deletion of some of the input lines

or some output lines wont alter the internal stability


We shall add inputs and outputs and view this as injecting test
inputs into the system and taking extra measurements, neither of
which is expected to change the stability properties of the system
The test inputs and and outputs are chosen so that the resulting
system is controllable and observable
For such a fully controllable and observable system there shall not
be any hidden modes
So, internal stability is then guaranteed by input-output stability

Fig.1

yd

P
v

Fig.2

yd

+
F

The system, in Fig 1 and Fig 2 are same but with additional input v
and one additional output z in Fig 2

Controllability/Observability/Stability
System in Fig.2 is controllable and observable if both F(s) and P(s)

are controllable and observable


System in Fig 2 is internally stable if and only if the both F(s) and
P(s) are stable. See below

Y ( s ) FPy ( s ) Pv( s )
d

z ( s ) Fy ( s )
d

Or
y( s ) FP P y ( s )
z ( s ) F 0 v( s )

Analysis contd
Because the realization is controllable and observable, it is

internally stable if, and only if, it is input-output stable.


That is, if all elements of the matrix transfer function above
are stable
Thus F(s), P(s) and F(s)P(s) must have only LHP poles
If P is of non-minimum phase type, then F cannot be used to
cancel the RHP zeros of P, because then F will become
unstable.

Feedforward Control
Feedforward control is a variation of open loop control.

It is applicable when the disturbance input is measured


The open lop controller F is chosen, to make the output to follow the

reference, in spite of the disturbance


w
Pw

+
P

y +

d
y

Pw
Pw

Here, to realize Feedforward control:

+
P

y +

1. d has to be obtained by proper measurements


2. F is chosen such that y is close to d
3. Or FP is almost unity

d
y

Closed loop control-1 DoF

Closed loop control-1 DoF


Consider the following system

yd +

+
P

ym

Ps
+
+

Analysis
We have

FP
1
y( s )
y (s)
d (s)
1 FP
1 FP
d

1
1
e( s ) y ( s ) y( s )
y (s)
d (s)
1 FP
1 FP
d

With Sensor noise/Measurement Noise


If yd =d=0 and v0, then

y( s ) FP( y v )
y( s )

FP
v( s ) T ( s )v( s )
1 FP

and
e( s ) y y( s ) T ( s )v( s )
d

Norms are Performance Measures

Signal forms and Signal Norms


Norm based approach for control design gives a sound

platform for robust control designs


Different types of norms are used in control systems
Use would be depending on the mathematical approaches
used to define the norm

Norms of signals and systems


Euclidean Norm or l2 norm for vector x is given as

x x
2

i 1

( x x)
T

For a vector signal x(t), l2 norm is

x x (t ) x(t )dt

This norm is the square root of the energy in each

component of the vector


If norm exists x(t) l2

Norms of signals and systems


For power signals, we may use the root mean square

value(rms) norm

rms( x ) lim x (t ) x(t )dt


2T

Frobenius Norm
For an mxr matrix A, the Frobenius norm is defines as

A a
2

It can be shown that

i 1 j 1

i, j

A 2 tr ( A A) tr ( AA )
T

System Norm
LTI systems are generalization of matrices-

A matrix operates on a vector to produce another vector


An LTI system operates on a signal to produce another signal
So, analogous to Frobenius norm, we can define the system

norm

L2 Norm for LTI systems


Let G(s) be an mxr matrix transfer function

Then the L2 norm for G(s) is defined as

G tr G ( j)G( j)d
2

||G||2 exists if an only if each element of G(s) is strictly

proper. For SISO we have a scalar TF which need to be


strictly proper. There should not any poles on the imaginary
axis for either case.
Then we say G L2

G(s) plane in H2
When G L2 we can write the norm with respect to

complex s plane as
1
G
tr (G ( s )G( s ))ds
2j
2

tr (G ( s )G( s ))ds
2j
T

Contour of integration for the last integral is along the

entire imaginary axis and the infinite semicircle in the LHP


or RHP
Since G(s) is strictly proper, it is easily shown that the
integral vanishes over the semicircle
If G L2 and in addition, G is stable, then we say that G H2
H2 is the Hardy Space defined with the 2-norm

Exercise
Calculate the L2 norm of G(s) given as:

( s 3 ) ( s 2 )
1
G( s )

s 3s 2 2
( s 2)
2

Answer
3s 21
tr G ( s )G( s )
( s 1)( s 2)( s 1)( s 2)
2

Every term in G(s) is strictly proper


Contour is Imaginary axis + LHP semicircle with radius

L2 norm of G(s) =(3/2)

Induced norm
Induced norm is a different type of norm which applies to

operators and is essentially a type of maximum gain


For a matrix, the induced Euclidean norm is

A max Ad
2i

=sqrt(eigen(ATA))

( A)

is the max( ) and is min( )

Induced norm for LTI system


To obtain induced norm for an LTI system, consider first a

stable, strictly proper SISO system


Then, if the input u(.) l2 , then the output y(.) l2
By Parsevals theorem

1
y
G( j) u( j) d
2
2

(A)

Clearly

1
y sup G( j)
u( j) d
2
2

Or

y sup G( j) u
2
2

2
2

(B)

We argue that the RHS of the inequality in (B) can be

reached arbitrarily closely for a fixed value of ||u||2 that is


chosen to be 1 with no loss of generality

Suppose |u(j)|2 approach an impulse of weight 2 in the

frequency domain at = 0
Then the integral of Eq(A)

1
y
G( j) u( j) d
2
will approach
G( j )
2

(A)

If

G( j)has a maximum at some finite value of , we may

choose 0 to be that frequency


If not, then G( j
must
) approach a supremum as
.
We can make 0 as large as we like and
will
G( jbe
0as)
close to the supremum as we wish
The RHS of inequality in (B) can be reached arbitrarily
closely and we get

sup y sup G( j)
u 2 1

Hinfinity Norm
The norm calculated last is also the infinity norm given by

G lim( G( j) )

The infinity norm of G(s) exists if and only if G is proper

with no poles on the j axis


In that case we write G L
If in addition, G is stable, then we say G H
H is the Hardy Space defined with the -norm

Norms for Multivariable systems

H norm for Multivariable systems


For multivariable systems, we have

1
y
G( j)u( j) d
2

2
2

This can be written as

1
y
[ (G( j))] u( j) d
2
2
2

Further, we may write as

1
y sup (G( j)
u( j) d
2
2
2

Or

y sup [G( j)] u


2
2

2
2

Contd
The factor ||u(j)||2 in the integrand refers to the 2-norm

of the vector u(j)


In SISO, the equivalent term refers to the 2-norm of a signal
We argue that the RHS of the last inequality

y 2 sup
j)] by
u propoer
[G( closely,
can be approached
arbitrarily
choice of
2

u(j)
2

Essentially we pick u(j) to be the eigenvector of

G*(j)G(j) corresponding to the largest eigenvalue, and we


concentrate the spectrum of u(j) at the frequency where
is the largest (or for some frequencythat is arbitrarily large,
if has no maximum, but a supremum. Therefore

sup y sup [G( j)]


u 2 1

MIMO H norm
As a continuation of the development, we define

G sup [G( j)]

Disturbance Rejection

Disturbance Rejection
Disturbance rejection is a performance measure

Effect of disturbance is studied in two ways


Input disturbance
Output disturbance

Rejection of Input disturbance


d

yd

Analysis
T (s )
yd

G
1 GH

and
T (s )
d

G
1 GH

To suppress disturbance, we want |Td|<<1


For this we need |G|<<1
Keep |G(j)| small where d(t) contains stronger
components in the spectrum

Rejection of Output Disturbance


d

yd

Analysis
We have

G
T (s )
1 GH
and
yd

T (s )
d

1
1 GH

To suppress disturbance, we want |Td|<<1


For this we need |G|>>1

Keep |G(j)| large where d(t) contains stronger components in

the spectrum

Contradiction
The requirements to suppress disturbance at the input is

opposite to that needed for suppressing disturbance at the


output
If the disturbance is present both at input and output we need
to use some innovative ways to suppress both the
disturbances

Noise Rejection

yd

H
+
n

Analysis
T (s )
yd

G
1 GH

and
T (s )
n

GH
1 GH

To suppress noise, we want |Tn|<<1


For this, we need |G|<<1for a given H
Keep |G(j)| small where n(t) contains stronger
components in the spectrum

Exercise

yd

H
Derive the Sensitivity and Complimentary Sensitivity Functions
with respect to of the system given as G(s). G(s) is containing Uncertainty

Modeling the Uncertain Systems

Modeling the Uncertainties/perturbations


Uncertainties occur in control systems occur
due to variety of reasons
Actually, the purpose of control system itself is
to deal with uncertainties
Purpose of robust control is to render stability &
acceptable performance if the uncertainties of certain
class occur

Structured Uncertainty
Interval Models
State Space model
Transfer function model

Unstructured Uncertainty
Unstructured uncertainty is modeled, using the perturbation

approach, rather than representing the parameters using the


intervals
There are different formulations that give the uncertain
models, mostly use the norm bounds and the perturbations
in the additive or multiplicative forms

General Basis
Given a set of plants P with uncertainty in the parameters. A plant

transfer function P(,s)P is a transfer function admissible to


represent the uncertain system being considered.
P0(0,s) P is one such plant with nominal values of the
parameters, where 0 stands for the nominal value of the
parameter set(vector)
0 could be the mean value of in the interval [min, max], which
is intuitively appealing
Uncertainty could then be given as = 0[1+]
0 =(1/2)(min+max) & = (min -max)/ (min+max)
||1 is the perturbation

Unmodeled dynamics
Uncertainty due to neglected and unmodeled dynamics is

more difficult to quantify


The frequency domain is well suited for representing this class
of uncertainty through complex perturbations, which are
normalized such that ||||1 where |||| is the
H norm of =
sup ( j )

Classification of unstructured
uncertainty-SISO
Additive Uncertainty

Multiplicative Uncertainty
Inverse Multiplicative Uncertainty
Division Uncertainty

Use of the Uncertainty is depending on the problem being


considered and the designers skill.
For MIMO systems, the constraints of pre and post
multiplication gives rise to more classes of uncertainty

Additive Uncertainty
Let us sue the property
P0(0,s) P is one such plant with nominal values of the parameters,

where 0 stands for the nominal value of the parameter set(vector)

Let P(,s)= P0(0,s) +P(s)

P(s) is the complex perturbation applied to obtain the class of

uncertain plants P(,s) and is stable


Then P(,s) is given in the Additive Uncertainty form
Usually, this is written as
P:Gp(s)=G(s)+wa(s) a(s) with ||||1

Example
Consider the system

P: Gp(s)=AG (s). The uncertainty is in the Gain A and is


given as A[Amin ,Amax]
Let A0 =(1/2)(Amin+Amax)
A= (Amin -Amax)/ (Amin+Amax)
A= A0[1+ A ]
Gp(s)= A0[1+ A ] G (s)=A0 G (s)+ A0 A G (s)

Multiplicative Uncertainty
Let P(,s)= P0(0,s) + P0(0,s) P(s)

P(,s)= P0(0,s)(1+ P(s))


Or P(,s)= P0(0,s)[1+ wm(s) m(s)]
Or

||||1

Example
P: Gp(s)=AG (s). The uncertainty is in the Gain A and is given
as A[Amin ,Amax]
Let A0 =(1/2)(Amin+Amax)
A= (Amin -Amax)/ (Amin+Amax)
A= A0[1+ A ]
Gp(s)= A0 [1+ A ] G (s)=A0G (s) [1+ A ]

General method to find the Additive &


Multiplicative Uncertainty Model
Examples have shown the derivation of unstructured

uncertainty from parametric uncertainty


This is simple for simple cases but
Tough for high order systems with uncertainty in many
parameters, because
Assumption about model and parameters may be inexact
The exact model structure is indispensable

Unmodeled dynamics cannot be then handled

Method
Given a model with uncertainties

Choose a nominal model(or lower order or delay free or a model

of mean parameters or the central plant obtained from Nyquist


plot corresponding to all plants in the given set)
For Additive uncertainty, find the smallest radius
l a() which includes all possible plants such that
l a() =|Gp(j)-G (j)|
Find a rational lower order transfer function wa(s) which is the
uncertainty weight such that
|wa (j)| l a()
The uncertain additive plants Gp(s)=G(s)+wa (s) a(s)

Contd
In the case of multiplicative uncertainty, find the smallest

radius l a() such that for all possible plants


l a()=
G ( j ) G ( j )
max
G p P

G ( j )

For a chosen rational weight wm(s), there must be

|wm (j)| l m()


Then Gp(s)=G(s)(1+wm(s) m(s))

Block diagram forms of uncertainty

Additive Uncertainty Model

a (s)

wa(s)

+
G(s)

Multiplicative Uncertainty

wm(s)

m (s)

+
G(s)
+

Inverse Multiplicative
im (s)

wim(s)

+
G(s)

Division Uncertainty
Consider the

1
G (s)
s s 1
p

with 0.4 0.8

It is easy to see that =0.6+0.3 with ||1


G p ( s)

1
s 2 0.6s 1

G p ( s) G( s)[1 wd ( s)G( s)]1


1

w ( s ) 0.2s
d

Robust Control

Robust Control
Normally Robust control design considers two aspects
Robust Stability(RS)
Robust Performance(RP)
As a bottom line we need

Nominal stability(NS) and


Nominal performance(NP)

Robust Stability?
How far the uncertainty can be, without violating the

stability, if the nominal system is stable?

Im

(-1,j0)

?
|1+G(j)|
G(j)

Nyquist Plot

Re

Robust Stability with Multiplicative Uncertainty


Wm(s)
+
yd

K(s)
-

Gp(s)

m(s)
+

G(s)

Analysis
We have

G ( s ) G( s )(1 w ( s ) ( s ))
p

G(s) w ( s )G( s ) ( s )
m

Assume that the nominal plant is stable


Using Nyquist stability condition, we need

w ( s )G( s ) 1 G( s )
m

Or

w ( s )G( s )
1
1 G( s )
m

We have

S ( s ) [1 K ( s )G( s )]

T ( s ) K ( s )G( s )[1 K ( s )G( s )]

S (s) T (s) 1
For robust stability, we want

w ( s ) K ( s )G( s )
1
1 K ( s )G( s )
m

using H-inf we have


Or w ( s)T ( s ) 1, and
m

w ( s )T ( s ) 1
m

Robust Performance
We find the bounds on the Sensitivity Function S and/or

Complimentary Sensitivity Function T for the given bounds


on Disturbance or Measurement noise

Doyles Theorem
A necessary and sufficient condition for robust performance

is to satisfy the condition

W1S

W
T
2

Books
Prabha Kundur Power System Stability & Control Tata McGrawHill,

1994|2012
Richard C Dorf & Robert H Bishop, Modern Control Systems Addison
Wesley, 1999
Pierre R. Belanger, Control Engineering: A Modern Approach Saunders
College Publishing, 1995
John Dorsey, Continuous & Discrete Time Control Systems, McGrawHill
International, 2002
Vladimir Zakian, Control Systems Design-A new Framework, Springer 2005