Chinese Journal of Aeronautics 25 (2012) 446-452

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Chinese Journal of Aeronautics

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/cja

A Backstepping Simple Adaptive Control Application to Flexible

Space Structures
LIU Min, XU Shijie*, HAN Chao
School of Astronautics, Beihang University, Beijing 100191, China
Received 2 November 2011; revised 4 January 2012; accepted 2 February 2012

Abstract
Although the simple adaptive control (SAC) is widely studied both in theory and application in flexible space structure control
and other control problems, it is restricted by the almost strictly positive real (ASPR) conditions. In most practical control prob-
lems, the ASPR conditions are not satisfied. Therefore, based on the SAC theory, this paper proposes a backstepping simple
adaptive control algorithm which suits the system with arbitrary relative degree with no need of parallel feedforward compensa-
tor. The proposed control algorithm consists of decomposition of the arbitrary relative degree system into a known subsystem
and an unknown ASPR subsystem which are connected in cascade, design of constant output feedback controller for the known
subsystem, and implementation of backstepping method and SAC of the unknown ASPR subsystem. Inheriting the characteris-
tics of the SAC, this method can be adaptive online for the parameter uncertainties. Then, the application of the proposed con-
troller to large flexible space structure with collocated sensors and actuators is studied, and the simulation results validate the
proposed controller. It is a new strategy to apply the classical SAC to high relative degree plants.

Keywords: simple adaptive control; almost strictly positive real; backstepping; flexible structure; intermediate control law

1. Introduction 1
The simple adaptive control (SAC) methodology
was first introduced by Sobel, et al. in 1979 [1] and fur-
ther developed by Bar-Kana, et al. [2]. It has also been
developed by Balas, et al. to infinite-dimensional sys-
tems [3], discrete systems [4] and systems with unknown
delays and persistent disturbances [5]. It gives a
low-order controller with no need of the order knowl-
edge of the controlled plant, so it can stabilize
large-scale system with small number of adjustable
parameters. The simplicity and robustness of SAC have
led to successful implementations in such diverse ap-
plications as flexible space structures [2,6-8], flight con-
trol [9-10], power systems [11], robotics [12-13] and wind
*Corresponding author. Tel.: +86-10-82339275.
E-mail address: starsjxu@yahoo.com.cn
Foundation item: National Natural Science Foundation of China
(10902003)
1000-9361/$ - see front matter © 2012 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi: 10.1016/S1000-9361(11)60401-9
turbines [14-16].
In order to apply a simple adaptive controller, the
system should comply with some requirements. One of
the requirements is that the plant should be almost
strictly positive real (ASPR) [8], that is, there exists a
constant output feedback so that the resulting
closed-loop system is strictly positive real. It has been
shown that plants with minimum-phase transfer func-
tions of relative degree 1 in the single-input sin-
gle-output (SISO) case, or of relative degree m in the
multiple-input multiple-output (MIMO) multivariable
case, are ASPR [13]. However, most practical plants are
not ASPR. Taking the flexible space structure as an
example, it has a relative degree of 2, so it is not an
ASPR system. In order to apply the SAC to the flexible
space structure system, Mehiel and Balas [17-18], Mufti [7]
and Bar-Kana, et al. [2,8,19] have done a lot of jobs to
solve the ASPR problem. But those solutions are not
suitable for many other control problems, especially
the system with higher relative degree. One needs a
design method which can expand the SAC to high rela-
tive degree systems.
No.3 LIU Min et al. / Chinese Journal of Aeronautics 25(2012) 446-452
It has been subsequently shown how various forms
of parallel feedforward compensators (PFCs) [10,13,20]
can be used to satisfy the ASPR conditions. However,
with the addition of the feedforward compensator, the
output tracking error of the controlled system is no
longer guaranteed to approach zero asymptotically, but
remains bounded. Besides, the design of an appropriate
PFC accurate parameters of the original plant. Some-
times this may be unfeasible, because usually the SAC
method is adopted in plants with parameter uncertain-
ties.
In this paper, based on backstepping control algo-
rithm [21], a nonlinear backstepping simple adaptive
controller is derived for plants with arbitrary relative
degree. One of the advantages is that the proposed
control algorithm is free of PFCs. The basic design
procedure consists of three steps. Firstly, the arbitrary
relative degree unknown plant is decomposed into a
known subsystem and an unknown nonlinear subsys-
tem with the linear part being ASPR system and the
nonlinear part being Lipchitz continuous. Then, the
output of the unknown subsystem is selected as the
virtual control vector and a constant feedback control
is designed to stabilize the known subsystem. Finally,
via adopting backstepping control method, the un-
known subsystem is considered and the backstepping
simple adaptive controller is derived. The stability of
the proposed controller is investigated by Lyapunov
stable theory and positive real theory.
To validate the efficiency of the controller, its appli-
cation to large flexible space structure is studied by
decomposing the large flexible space structure into the
kinematics subsystem and the dynamics subsystem.
The ASPR property of the dynamics subsystem is con-
firmed, and then the backstepping simple adaptive
controller for flexible structures with collocated sen-
sors and actuators is given. Finally, a numerical exam-
ple is presented.
2. Problem Statement
In many practical engineering problems, the con-
trolled system can be described by subsystems in series.
The most common case is that the controlled system is
formed by a dynamics subsystem which describes the
evolution of the velocities as time progresses and a
known kinematics subsystem which describes the dis-
placement responses, and these subsystems are con-
nected by velocities. For example, the flexible space
structures can be described by a dynamics subsystem
and a simple known kinematics subsystem in cascade.
Even in a general case, one can use the method de-
scribed in Ref. [22] to decompose the controlled sys-
tem into subsystems. So we assume that the continuous
nonlinear time invariant controlled system with relative
degree n can be decomposed into the two subsystems
connected in cascade as follows:
­° x p1 (t ) Ap1 xp1 (t )  Bp1up1 (t )  f ( xp1 , t )
Sp1 : ®
°̄ yp1 (t ) C p1 xp1 (t )
· 447 ·
­° x p2 (t ) Ap2 xp2 (t )  Bp2 yp1 (t )
Sp2 : ® (2)
°̄ yp2 (t ) C p2 xp2 (t )
where the subsystem Sp1 is an unknown nonlinear sys-
tem with relative degree mp1. The plant state xp1(t) is a
np1×1 vector, up1(t) the mp1×1 control input, yp1(t) the
mp1×1 system output vector, and Ap1, Bp1 and Cp1 are
unknown matrices while the plant {Ap1, Bp1, Cp1} is
ASPR. We assume throughout this paper that f (xp1, t)
is Lipchitz continuous. The subsystem Sp2 is a known
continuous linear time invariant system with relative
degree nmp1, and the subsystem Sp2 can be stabilized
by an output feedback controller. xp2(t) is the np2×1
plant state vector, yp1(t) the mp1×1 control vector of
subsystem Sp2, yp2(t) the mp1×1 output vector, and Ap2,
Bp2 and Cp2 are known matrices with appropriate di-
mensions.
The objective of control in this paper is to design the
control input up1(t) to cause the output yp2(t) of the
subsystem Sp2 to track the output of the continuous
nonlinear time invariant reference model asymptoti-
cally which can also be decomposed into the two sub-
systems connected in cascade as follows:
­ x m1 (t ) Am1 xm1 (t )  Bm1um1 (t )  g ( xm1 , t )
Sm1 : ®
¯ ym1 (t ) C m1 xm1 (t )
(3)
­° x m2 (t ) Ap2 xm2 (t )  Bp2 ym1 (t )
Sm2 : ® (4)
°̄ ym2 (t ) C p2 xm2 (t )
where the reference subsystem Sm1 state xm1(t) is an
nm1×1 vector with mp1×1 output ym1(t), and g(xm1,t) the
nonlinear part of the Sm1. The subsystem Sm1 is de-
signed to meet some desired performance properties
and has the same number of output as the subsystem
Sp1, but xm1(t) and xp1(t) need not to have the same di-
mensions, and it will be permissible to have
np2 = dim( xm1 )  dim( xp1 ) np1 (5)
where the operator “dim” denotes the dimension of the
vector. um1(t) is mp1×1 control vector of reference
model and can be presented as the output of an com-
mand generating system of the form
­vm (t ) Av vm (t )
® (6)
¯um1 (t ) C v vm (t )
where vm(t) is the command state vector. The matrices
Av and Cv are unknown, and only measurements of the
input um1(t) are permitted.
Since subsystem Sp2 is a known system, the subsys-
tem Sm2 is selected the same as Sp2. xm2(t) is the np2×1
plant state vector, ym1(t) the mp1×1 control vector of
subsystem Sp2, and ym2(t) the mp1×1 output vector.
3. Backstepping Adaptive Controller
(1)
According to the backstepping control algorithm,
· 448 · LIU Min et al. / Chinese Journal of Aeronautics 25(2012) 446-452 No.3

yp1(t) is selected as the virtual control vector to design ­ x * (t ) Ap1 xp1

*
(t )  Bp1
* *
up1 (t )  f ( xp1
*
, t)
* ° p1
an intermediate control law for subsystem Sp2. First, Sp1 :® (16)
°̄ yp1 (t ) C p1 xp1 ym1 (t )
* *
define the output error of the subsystem as (t )
e2 (t ) yp2 (t )  ym2 (t ) (7) Assuming that the ideal trajectories are a linear
combination of the model reference system, a linear
Then, let the state error of the system Sp2 be defined
transformation can be written as
as
­° xp1
*
(t ) S11 xm1 (t ) + S12 um1 (t )
ep2 (t ) xp2 (t )  xm2 (t ) (8) ® * (17)
°̄up1 (t ) K *x xm1 (t ) + K u* um1 (t )
So, the error equations of Sp2 are
where S11, S12, K *x and K u* are constant but unknown
­°ep2 (t ) Ap2 ep2 (t )  Bp2 ( yp1 (t )  ym1 (t ))
® (9) matrices. Taking the derivative of the linear transfor-
°̄e2 (t ) C p2 ep2 (t ) mation Eq. (17) and substituting Eq. (3) and Eq. (6)
into it results in the following equations which are
Select the intermediate control law as called the matching conditions.
p1 (t ) ym1 (t )  k1e2 (t ) (10) ­ Ap1 S11  Bp1 K *x S11 Am1
°
where k1 is a positive definite matrix. If yp1(t)=p1(t), °( Ap1 S12  Bp1 K u* )C v S11 Bm1C v  S12 C v Av
the next equation holds. °°
® f ( xp1 , t ) S11 g ( xm1 , t )
*
(18)
ep2 (t ) ( Ap2  Bp2 k1C p2 ) ep2 (t ) Ac2 ep2 (t ) (11)
°
The positive definite Lyapunov function is selected °C p1 S11 C m1
°C S C 0
as °̄ p1 12 v
V1 ep2
T
(t ) Pep2 (t ) (12) If the matching conditions are satisfied and
where P = P > 0. Taking the derivative of the
T yp1
*
(t )ym1 (t ) , one gets
Lyapunov equation V1 and substituting Eq. (11), there
is yp1
*
(t ) o p1 (t ) (19)

V1 ep2
T
(t )( Ac2
T
P  PAc2 )ep2 (t ) (13) Define the output error of subsystem Sp1 as
e (t ) yp1 (t )  p1 (t ) (20)
Since Sp2 can be made stable by output feedback,
there is a positive definite matrix Q which satisfies When yp1(t) differs from p1(t) at t=, asymptotic
tracking is achievable provided stabilizing output
Ac2
T
P  PAc2 Q (14)
feedback is included in the control law. The control law
Substituting Eq. (14) into Eq. (13) results in
up1 (t ) K *x xm1 (t )  K u* um1 (t )  K e*e (t ) (21)
V1 ep2
T
(t )Qep2 (t ) d0 (15)
results in yp1(t) ė p1(t) ė ym1(t) and e(t) ė0, where
It is obvious that V1 0 if and only if ep2(t)=0, K e* is a stabilizing output feedback gain, and K e* always
namely the set E={ep2| ep2(t)=0} is the largest invariant exists because the subsystem Sp1 satisfies the ASPR
set contained in V1 0 . Then according to the LaSalle conditions. When asymptotic tracking occurs, the cor-
invariance principle of differential equation, when responding state and control input are defined to be the
yp1(t)=p1(t), under the intermediate control law de- asymptotic stable state trajectories and control trajecto-
scribed in Eq. (10), the output of subsystem Sp2 tracks ries. These trajectories are denoted by xp1 *'
(t )
ym2(t) asymptotically, that is ep2(t)ė0 and e2(t)ė0 as
and up1
*'
(t ) respectively, and the superscript “ * ' ” denotes
tė.
Then, backing a step, considering the subsystem Sp1, the asymptotic tracking condition. So the next equa-
backstepping control algorithm is adopted to get the tions satisfy:
adaptive controller for the controlled system. When ­ x *' (t ) Ap1 xp1
*'
(t )  Bp1up1
*'
(t )  f ( xp1
*'
, t)
*' ° p1
perfect output tacking occurs (i.e., when yp1(t) = ym1(t) Sp1 :® (22)
°̄ yp1 (t ) C p1 xp1
*' *'
for tt), the corresponding state and control trajecto- (t )
ries are defined to be the ideal state and ideal control
and the error
trajectories, respectively. These ideal trajectories are
denoted by xp1 *
(t ) and up1
*
(t ) , where the superscript e* (t ) yp1
*'
(t )  p1 (t ) (23)
“ȗ” denotes the ideal tracking condition. By definition, vanishes asymptotically. The state tracking error is
these ideal trajectories satisfy Eq. (1), therefore, defined as
No.3 LIU Min et al. / Chinese Journal of Aeronautics 25(2012) 446-452 · 449 ·

ep1 (t ) xp1 (t )  xp1

*'
(t ) (24) are combined to obtain the tracking error system:

From Eq. (20) and Eq. (23) , we have °­ep1 (t ) Ac1ep1 (t )+Bp1 Kr (t )  'f
® (34)
°̄e (t ) C p1ep1 (t )  e (t )
*
e (t ) C p1ep1 (t )  e* (t ) (25)
With the result above, the backstepping adaptive law The stability of the nonlinear system described as
is chosen to have a similar form to Eq. (21) and is de- Eq. (34) can be analyzed by Lyapunov theory. The
scribed as positive definite Lyapunov function is selected as
up1 (t ) K (t )r (t ) K x (t ) xm1 (t )  V V1  V2 V1  ep1
T
(t ) P2 ep1 (t ) 
K u (t )um1 (t )  K e (t )e (t ) (26) tr( K T  1 K ) t 0 (35)
where where P2 is a positive symmetric matrix. V1 equals to
K (t ) [ K x (t ) K u (t ) K e (t )] (27) the Lyapunov function defined in view of the subsys-
tem Sp2 and described as Eq. (12). Since e1(t)0, the
r (t ) [ xm1
T
(t ) um1
T
(t ) e (t )]
T T
(28) derivative of V1 is not Eq. (15) any more. Substituting
The gains Kx(t), Ku(t) and Ke(t) are adapted as fol- yp1(t)=e(t)+ p1(t) into Eq. (12) results in
lows: ep2 (t ) Ac2 ep2 (t )  Bp2 e (t ) (36)
­ K (t )  e (t )r T (t )  , K (0) K0 V1  ep2
T
(t )Qep2 (t )  ep2
T
(t ) PBp2 e (t ) (37)
°
° K x (t )  e (t ) xm1 (t )  x , K x (0) K x0
T
Taking the derivative of the Lyapunov equation V2
® (29)
along the trajectories of Eq. (34) and using Eq. (29)
° K u (t )  e (t )um1 (t )  u , K u (0) K u0
T

° yield
¯ K e (t )  e (t )e (t )  e , K e (0) Ke0
T
V e T (t )( AT P  P A )e (t ) 
2 p1 c1 2 2 c1 p1
where , x, u and e are positive definite adaptive  (t )  2tr( K T  1 K ) 
parameter matrices that determine the rate of adapta- 2ep1
T
(t ) P2 Bp1 Kr
tion, K0, Kx0, Ku0 and Ke0 are initial values. 2ep1
T
(t ) P2 'f (38)

4. Closed-loop Stability Analysis and

 1  T
tr( K K ) tr(e (t )r T (t )  1 K T )
Taking the derivative of the state tracking error ep1(t)
and substituting Eq. (1) and Eq. (22) into it results in tr(e (t )r T (t ) K T ) e T (t ) Kr
 (t ) (39)
ep1 (t ) x p1 (t )  x p1
*'
(t ) Ap1ep1 (t )+ Substituting Eq. (39) into Eq. (38) results in

Bp1 ( K x  K *x ) xm1 (t )+Bp1 ( K u  K u* )um1 (t )+ V2 ep1

T
(t )( Ac1
T
P2  P2 Ac1 )ep1 (t ) 

Bp1 ( K e  K e* )e (t )  Bp1 K e* e (t )  Bp1 K e* e* (t )+ 2ep1

T  (t )  2e T (t ) Kr
(t ) P2 Bp1 Kr  (t ) 

f ( xp1 , t )  f ( xp1
*'
, t) (30) 2ep1
T
(t ) P2 'f (40)

We form Since subsystem Sp1 satisfies ASPR conditions, there

is a positive definite matrix Q2 which satisfies the
­ K x K x  K *x Kalman-Yacubovic conditions:
°
° K u K u  K u
*
­° Ac1T
P2  P2 Ac1 Q2
® (31)
® (41)
°Ke Ke  Ke
*
°̄ P2 Bp1 C p1
T
°   
¯K [K x K u Ke ] Substituting Eq. (25) into Eq. (40) results in
Then, Eq. (30) can be described as V  e T (t )Q e (t )  2e* (t ) Kr
2 p1
 (t ) 
2 p1
 (t )+B K *e (t ) 
ep1 (t ) Ap1ep1 (t )+Bp1 Kr p1 e 2ep1
T
(t ) P2 'f (42)
Bp1 K e*e* (t )  'f (32)
and
where 'f f ( xp1 , t )  f ( xp1 V
*'
, t) . Substituting the defi-  ep2
T
(t )Qep2 (t )  ep1
T
(t )Q2 ep1 (t ) 
nition of e(t) into Eq. (32) gives  (t )  e T (t ) PB e* (t ) 
2 (e* (t ))T Kr p2 p2
ep1 (t )  (t )  'f
Ac1ep1 (t )+Bp1 Kr (33)
ep2
T
(t ) PBp2 C p1ep1 (t )  2ep1
T
(t ) P2 'f (43)
where Ac1 Ap1  Bp1 K e*C p1 . Equations (25) and (33) Since e* (t ) vanishes asymptotically as time tends to
· 450 · LIU Min et al. / Chinese Journal of Aeronautics 25(2012) 446-452 No.3

be infinity, the third and the fourth items on the right

 diag(Z12 , Z22 ," , Zn2 ), Z1 d Z2 d " d Zn (51)
hand of Eq. (43) can be omitted since these items have
no effect on the stability of the controlled system. One n denotes the nth modal frequency, and  is the
can prove this judgment by the modified invariance damping coefficient. The velocity is selected as output,
principle and the detailed evidences can be found in then
Ref. [23]. Therefore,
Cp [0 C ] (52)
V  e T (t )Qe (t )  e T (t )Q e (t ) 
p2 p2 p1 2 p1
where C is the output matrix. If the sensors and the
ep2
T
(t ) PBp2 C p1ep1 (t )  2ep1
T
(t ) P2 'f (44)
actuators are collocated, i.e., if
Using the Cauchy-Schwarz inequality on | ep2
T
(t ) P ˜ B CT (53)
Bp2 C p1ep1 (t ) | if nonlinearity f(xp1,t) is Lipchitz, then Then,
ª0º
| f ( xp1 , t )  f ( xp1
*'
, t ) |d L | xp1  xp1
*'
| (45) C p Bp [0 C ] « » CC T ! 0 (54)
¬B¼
or |f |d L|ep1(t)|, where L is a positive constant coeffi-
cient. Substituting Eq. (45) into Eq. (44) gives This shows that the flexible structure with collocated
sensors and actuators is minimum-phase and its prod-
V d  ep2
T
(t )Qep2 (t )  ep1
T
(t )Q2 ep1 (t )  uct Cp Bp>0. In other words, the dynamics subsystem
1 of the flexible structure is ASPR [8]. There exists an
| PBp2 C p1 | (| ep2T
(t ) |2  | ep1 (t ) |2 )  unknown constant output feedback control gain Kb and
2 positive definite symmetric matrices P1, Q1, making the
2 | ep1
T
(t ) || P2 | L | ep1
T
(t ) |d Kalman-Yacubovic equations
D | ep2 (t ) |2  E | ep1 (t ) |2 (46) ­° P1 ( Ap  Bp K b C p )  ( Ap  Bp K b C p )T P1 Q1
®
°̄ P1 Bp C p
T
where
­ 1
°°D Omin (Q )  sup | PBp2 C p1 |! 0
2
(55)
® satisfied. When the sensors and the actuators are col-
°E 1
Omin (Q2 )  sup | PBp2 C p1 | 2sup(| P2 | L) ! 0 located, the system is ASPR by selecting velocity as
°̄ 2 the output. But in space missions, designers care about
(47) position as well as velocity. Therefore, in Ref. [19],
and min(Q) denotes the smallest eigenvalue of Q. So velocity plus scaled position feedback is used. In this
paper, the backstepping simple adaptive method pro-
V d D | ep2 (t ) |2  E | ep1 (t ) |2 d 0 (48) posed above is used to design controllers for large
space structure by taking the position into considera-
If and only if ep1(t)=0 and ep2(t)=0 , V 0 holds. tion. According to the backstepping algorithm, the
We can use LaSalle invariance principle of differential flexible space structure model is defined as
equation to make the system output track the reference ­° x (t ) Ap x (t )  Bp u(t )
output asymptotically, i.e. the output tracking error e(t) S1 : ® (56)
and e2(t) vanish asymptotically as time tends to be in- °̄ y (t ) C p x (t )
finity while the adaptive gains remain bounded.
S2 :  (t ) y (t ) (57)
5. Application to Flexible Space Structures
where x (t ) [ T (t )  T (t )]T , y (t )  (t ) is selected
In this section, backstepping simple adaptive control as the virtual control vector, and (t) the system output.
algorithm is used to design controller for large space So a reference model can be defined as
structure in the collocated case. The large flexible
space structure model used in the subsequent simula- ­ x m (t ) Am xm (t )  Bm um (t )
S1m : ® (58)
tions can be defined by the following matrices [8]: ¯ ym (t ) C m xm (t )
ª 0 I º
Ap « S2m : m (t ) ym (t ) (59)
1/ 2 »
(49)
¬   2 ¼
where Am, Bm and Cm are known matrices, m(t) is the
ª0º reference output, and the reference model has ideal
Bp «B» (50) closed-loop responses. So the backstepping simple
¬ ¼ adaptive controller applied to large space structure with
where B is the input matrix, collocated sensors and actuators is
No.3 LIU Min et al. / Chinese Journal of Aeronautics 25(2012) 446-452 · 451 ·

­f (t ) ym (t )  k ( (t )  m (t ))
°
°ef (t ) y (t )  f (t )
°
®u(t ) K f (t )rf (t ) K fx (t ) xm (t )  (60)
° K fu (t )um (t )  K fe (t )ef (t )
°
° K (t ) e (t )r T (t ) 
¯ f f f

where the first equation denotes the intermediate con-

trol law, k is a positive definite matrix, Kf (t) = [Kfx(t)
Kfu(t) Kfe(t)] the adaptive control matrix and rf (t )
[ xmT (t ) umT (t ) efT (t )]T , f the positive definite adaptive
parameter matrix.
Fig. 2 Closed-loop time response to an impulse disturbance
6. Illustrative Example (k=1 and c=0.3).

In this section, a two-mass spring system which is

well known as a typical example of flexible spacecraft
structure is considered [24] (see Fig. 1).

Fig. 1 Two-mass spring system.

In Fig. 1, x1 and x2 are displacements of the masses,

and U is the control input of the system. It can be as-
sumed that both bodies have unit mass, i.e., m1=m2=
1 kg, and the two masses are connected by a spring
with a spring coefficient k and a dashpot with a damp-
ing coefficient of c. The spring constant k has a nomi-
nal value of 1 and is assumed to be uncertain (0.5dkd2).
So the flexible mode frequency can vary between 1
rad/s and 2 rad/s. The dashpot damping coefficient c
has a nominal value of 0.3 and is assumed to be un-
known too.
When x1 is measured, the system is a flexible struc-
ture with collocated sensor and actuator. So the system
satisfies ASPR conditions. The backstepping adaptive
controller can be used directly.
In the collocated case, the backstepping adaptive
controller is Eq. (60). The aim of the control is to make
x1 stable, so, the reference state xm(t)=0 is selected, the
reference input um(t)=0, and the reference output
m(t)=0. Here we choose k=1, e=0.5. The initial con-
dition is that there is an impulse disturbance with initial
value of x1 (0)=1 .
Simulation results with k and c being nominal value
are shown in Fig. 2. The results with k=2 and c=0 are
shown in Fig. 3. The simulation results show that the
control performance of the controller developed in this
paper is good, even when the system has parameter
uncertainties, and the controller has strong robustness
to the system parameter uncertainties.
Fig. 3 Closed-loop time response to an impulse disturbance
(k=2 and c=0).
7. Conclusions
1) In this paper, a backstepping simple adaptive
control method is developed for high relative degree
nonlinear systems which can be decomposed into sub-
systems mentioned above. The proposed controller is
simple, low-dimensioned, with no need of full state
feedback or state observer. It does not depend on the
accurate model of controlled system, and has strong
robustness to system parameter uncertainties.
2) The proposed controller is applied to flexible
space structure with collocated sensors and actuators
and the simulation results validate the efficiency of the
controller.
3) The control method presented in this paper is a
new approach to expand the application of simple
adaptive control to high relative degree systems with
no need of parallel feedforward configurations.
References
[1] Sobel K, Kaufman H, Mablius L. Model reference
output adaptive control system without parameter iden-
tification. 18th IEEE Conference on Decision and Con-
· 452 · LIU Min et al. / Chinese Journal of Aeronautics 25(2012) 446-452
trol including the Symposium. 1979; 347-351.
[2] Bar-Kana I, Kaufman H, Balas M. Model reference
adaptive control of large structural systems. AIAA
Journal of Guidance 1983; 6(2): 112-118.
[3] Balas M J. Finite-dimensional direct adaptive control
for discrete-time infinite-dimensional linear systems.
Journal of Mathematical Analysis and Application 1995;
196: 153-171.
[4] Balas M J, Fuentes R, Mehiel E. Adaptive control and
rejection of persistent disturbances: continuous and
discrete-time. AIAA-2003-5323, 2003.
[5] Balas M J. Adaptive control of nonlinear systems with
unknown delays and persistent disturbances. AIAA-
2010-7537, 2010.
[6] Bar-Kana I, Kaufman H. Some applications of direct
adaptive control to large structural systems. Journal of
Guidance 1984; 7(6): 717-724.
[7] Mufti I H. Model reference adaptive control for large
structural systems. Journal of Guidance 1987; 10(5):
507-509.
[8] Barkana I, Ben-Asher J Z. A simple adaptive control
application to large flexible structures. 15th IEEE
Mediterranean Electrotechnical Conference. 2010; 806-
811.
[9] Mooij E. Model reference adaptive guidance for re-
entry trajectory tracking. AIAA-2004-4775, 2004.
[10] Barkana I. Classical and simple adaptive control for
nonminimum phase autopilot design. Journal of Guid-
ance, Control, and Dynamics 2005; 28(4): 631-638.
[11] Barkana I, Fischl R. A simple adaptive enhancer of
voltage stability for generator excitation control. Pro-
ceedings of the American Control Conference. 1992;
1705-1709.
[12] Ulrich S, Sasiadek J Z, Barkana I. Modeling and direct
adaptive control of a flexible-joint manipulator. Journal
of Guidance, Control, and Dynamics 2012; 35(1): 25-
39.
[13] Kaufman H, Barkana I, Sobel K. Direct adaptive con-
trol algorithms. 2nd ed. New York: Springer, 1998.
[14] Johnson K E, Fingersh L J, Pao L Y, et al. Adaptive
torque control of variable speed wind turbines for in-
creased region 2 energy capture. AIAA-2005-392,
2005.
[15] Balas M J, Li Q, Peterman R. Adaptive disturbance
tracking control for large horizontal axis wind turbines
in variable speed region II operation. AIAA-2010-248,
2010.
[16] Frost S A, Balas M J, Wright A D. Modified adaptive
control for region 3 operation in the presence of wind
turbine structural modes. AIAA-2010-249, 2010.
[17] Mehiel E A, Balas M J. Some conditions for strict posi-
No.3
tive realness of second order and almost second order
systems. AIAA-2005-5941, 2005.
[18] Mehiel E A, Balas M J. Determining strictly positive
realness from system modal characteristics. Journal of
Guidance, Control, and Dynamics 2007; 30(5): 1539-
1542.
[19] Bar-Kana I, Fischl R, Kalata P. Direct position plus
velocity feedback control of large flexible space struc-
tures. IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control 1991;
36(10): 1186-1188.
[20] Iwai Z, Mizumoto I, Deng M. A parallel feedforward
compensator virtually realizing almost strictly positive
real plant. Proceedings of the 33rd IEEE Conference on
Decision and Control. 1994; 2827-2832.
[21] Zheng M J. Spacecraft attitude control system design
via backstepping control method. PhD thesis, School of
Aeronautics, Beihang University, 2007. [in Chinese]
[22] Dosho T, Ohmori H, Sano A. New design method of
simple adaptive control for systems with arbitrary rela-
tive degree. Proceedings of the 36th IEEE Conference
on Decision and Control. 1997; 1914-1917.
[23] Barkana I. On gain condition and convergence of sim-
ple adaptive control. AIAA-2003-5327, 2003.
[24] Wie B, Byun K W. New generalized structural filtering
concept for active vibration control synthesis. Journal
of Guidance 1989; 12(2): 147-154.
Biographies:
LIU Min received B.S. degree from Beihang University in
2007 and is now a Ph.D. student in the School of Astronaut-
ics, Beihang University. His main research interests are
flexible spacecraft attitude control and simple adaptive con-
trol.
E-mail: liumin@sa.buaa.edu.cn
XU Shijie is a professor and Ph.D. supervisor at the School
of Astronautics, Beihang University. He received the Ph.D.
degree from Henri Poincaré University in 1995. His current
research interests are guidance, navigation, dynamics and
control of spacecraft.
E-mail: starsjxu@yahoo.com.cn
HAN Chao is a professor and Ph.D. supervisor at the School
of Astronautics, Beihang University. He received the Ph.D.
degree from the same university in 1989. His current research
interests are guidance, navigation, dynamics and control of
spacecraft.
E-mail: hanchao@buaa.edu.cn