IEEETRANSACTIONS O N AUTOMATIC CONTROL, VOL. AC-12, NO.

6, DECEMBER 1967 651

Decouplingin the Design and Synthesis of

MultivariableControl Systems

Absfracf-Necessary and sdicient conditionsfarthe "decou- proof of sufficiency, and they did not consider the ques-
pling" of an m-input, m-output time-invariant linear system using tion of necessity.
state variable feedback are determined.Given a system which satis-
fies these conditions, i.e., which can be decoupled by state variable
In this paper, a necessary and sufficient condition for
feedback,theclass of all feedbackmatriceswhichdecouplethe decoupling will be given; a characterization of the class
system is characterized. The characterization of @ is used to deter- of feedback matrices which decouple a system u-ill be
mine the number of closed-loop poles which canbe specified for the determined; the number of closed-loop poles which can
decoupled system and to develop a synthesis technique for the real- be specifiedwhile decoupling will also be determined;
ization of desired closed-loop pole configurations. Transfer matrix
and a synthesis procedure for obtaining desired closed-
consequences of decoupling are examined and practical implications
discussed through numerical examples. loop pole configurations will be developed. In line n-ith
these objectives, the remainder of this paper is divided
I. INTRODIJCTION into thefollowing sections:
11. Definitions
H ED E V E L O P M E N T of techniquesforthe
111. Main Theorem
design of multivariable control systems is of con-
11'. Class of Decoupling 3Iatrices
siderablepracticalimportance. A particularde-
sign approach involves the use of feedback to achieve
v . A Synthesis Procedure
VI. Decoupling by Output Feedback
closed-loop controlsystemstability.Inconjunction
VII. A Practical Example.
withthisapproach,it isoften of interesttoknow
whether or not it is possible to have inputs control out- In Section I1 precise definitions of state variable feed-
putsindependently, Le., a single input influences a back and decoupling are given. Then the basic necessary
single output. This is, in heuristic terms, the problem of and sufficientcondition for decouplingisprovedin
decoupling. Section 111. Using the main theorem, a descriptionof all
T h e problem of decoupling a time-invariantlinear thedecouplingmatrices is presentedinSection 117.
system using state variable feedback and the relation of Next, in Section V the questionsof synthesis andclosed-
thisproblem to control system design have been dis- loop pole placement are examined. In Section VI state
cussedbyseveralauthors. [11--[31 hiorgan[']considered variable feedback is replaced by output feedback and
thequestion of decouplingforsystemsn-hosestate the relevant theory developed. The practical potential
equations had a somewhat special form. His main re- of themethods is indicated in the discussion of a
s u l t , which is a special case of the main theorem of this VjSTOL stability augmentation systemin Section VII.
paper,wasthe following: thetime-invariantlinear
system 11. DEFIXITIONS
x=Ax+Bu Consider the time-invariant linear system
X=Ax+Bu
y = cx
y = cx (1)
canbedecoupled if thematrix C B isnonsingular.
where x is an n vector called the state, u an m vector
Rekasius[*] extended Morgan's result 'and outlined an
called the control (or input), y an m vector called the
essentiallytrial-and-errorprocedureforspecifying a
output, and A , B, and C are n X n , n X m , and YIZ X n
certain number of the system's poles while decoupling
matrices, respectively. I t is assumed that n z s n . If F is
the system. Xeither IIorgan nor Rekasius gave a clear
an m X n matrix and G a nonsingular n z X m matrix, then
the substitution of
First partof manuscript received Sovember 28, 1966; secondpart
of manuscript received March 29, 196;. First part revised April 19, u = Fx 4- Go (2)
1967; first and second parts combined and revised J u l y 14, 1967.
This research was supported in part by the Air Force Office of sci- whererepresentsthenew m vectorcontrol(Fig. I),
entific Research under AFOSR Grant 693-67 and in part by N.-2S.I.
P. L. Falb is with the Div. of AppliedMathematics, Brown into (1) shall be called linear stafe variablefeedback.
University,Providence,R.
Center, Cambridge, Mass.
I., and KASd ElectronicsResearch -
Let d l , d?, . . , d m be given by
IV. A. ITolovich is with NASA ElectronicsResearchCenter,
Cambridge, Mass.

Authorized licensed use limited to: PAKISTAN INST OF ENGINEERING AND APPLIED SCIENCES. Downloaded on March 14,2021 at 06:17:58 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 652 AUTOMATIC
TRANSACTIONS
ON IEEE CONTROL, DECEMBER 1967

where 0 is a zero matrix consistent with the order of

Y
- Li{ F, G ) . If Eij denotes the n2X.m matrix with 1 as
ijth entry and zeros elsewhere,then E& is a n m X n
I
I -=- ' E I matrix xith the ith row identical to the ith row of and
all other rows zero. The matrix EiiQ will be denoted by
Fig. 1 . &Idtivariable feedback system. Qi. T h e following definition canno\\- be made.
T h e matrices F and G , with G nonsingular, decouple
or the system (1) if

a; = tz - 1 if CiAjB = 0 for a l l j
I:=O
x-here Cidenotes the ithrow of C. Then, a simple calcu-
lation shows that
= t r ( L i ( F GIG'),
,

. , ill. (11)
for i = I , . . . , m.. Application of the state variable feed- Note that this is a precise definition t h a t does not
back (2) and repeated differentiation togetherwith (4) involvevaguestatementsaboutinputscontrolling
yield the relations outputs independently.

Yi =C ~=
X C;(A + BF)OX 111. AIAIS THEOREM
y
i X C i ( A + BF)x
= C~A= IVith the definitions of Section 11, it is no\v possible
to state and prove a theorem which gives a necessary
and sufficient condition for decoupling.

(12)

Then there is a pair of matrices F and G which decouple

the system (1) if and only if
det B* # 0 (13)
\\-here the &(F) are scalars depending on F. Thus, x can
be eliminated from thefinal relation of (5) to give Le., if and only if B* is nonsingular.
Proof: Suppose first that B* is nonsingular. Then it
n-1
3, . ( n ) - p k ( F ) y i c k )= tr ( L i { F ,GIB) (7) is claimed that the pair
k=O F* = - B*-lA*
where tr (.) denotes the traceof a matrix, P is the mX?z G* = B*-l

matrix given by \\-here

and Li[ F,G ] is the n X m matrix given by

A*=[
CIAdl+l

C,Adm+l
]

+
C i [ ( A BF)di]BG
0 J
Authorized licensed use limited to: PAKISTAN INST OF ENGINEERING AND APPLIED SCIENCES. Downloaded on March 14,2021 at 06:17:58 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 FALB AND WOLOVICH: DECOUPLING IN MULTIVARIABLE CONTROL SYSTEMS 653

decouples (1). I n view of (4), Since (5) implies t h a t

C i ( A + BF*)di+l = C.Adi+l + C.Ad’
lBF*. (16) yi(di+l) = C i ( A + B F ) d s + l+~ CiAd’BGw (25)
But CiAdiBis simply the ithrow of B* and so i t follows u-hich may also be writtenin the form
that
y* = (A” + B*F)x + B*Go (26)
CAdiBF* = - Bi*B*-lA* = - Ai* = - CiAdi+l (17)
where y* is the m vector with components y i ( & + l ) , it is
where Bi* and Ai* are the ithrows of B* and A*, respec- clear that the choice F = F* and G = G* leads to
tively. Thus
y* = 0 (27)
Ci(A + BF*)di+k= 0 (18)
or, equivalently, to
for any positive integer k. I n a similar way, i t follows jri(di+l) = uj. (28)
that
C i ( A + BF*)diBB*-l = B .*B*-l (19) Caution: Equation (28) doesnotrepresentthede-
coupled system since, in general, it involves the cancel-
and hence that lation of zeros. The equations of the decoupled system
are given by (10) or in state form as
1 x = (A + BF)x + B G o
y = cx
’ Bi*B*-l where F, G are a decoupling pair.
I t has now been established that the nonsingularity
l o of B* is a necessaryandsufficientconditionforthe
existence of a pair of matrices F, G which decouple (1).
However, Bi*B*-l = e i , a row vector with 1 in t h e i t h In the next section, the set of all pairs F, G which de-
place and zeros elsewhere and so couple (1) will be characterized under the assumption
t r ( L ~ ( F *G, * } Q )= - ~ ~ i + l ( ~ ) W ~ - ~ ~ * + ~ ( ~ ) W i ( l ) - ... t h a t B* is nonsingular. This characterization leads to
+ Wi(n-di-l) (21) “answers” to the following two questions:

= tr ( L i {F*, G * } a i )P O . (22) 1) the synthesis question, namely: how many closed-

loop poles can be specified for the decoupled sys-
In other words, F* and G* decouple (1). tem, howarbitrarilycantheybe specified, and
Now suppose that there is a pair of matrices F, G how easily can an algorithm for specifying these
which decouple (1). Then it follows from (4) t h a t poles be developed?
Ci(A + BF)diBG = Bi*G, i = 1, . * * , m. (23) 2) the output feedback question, namely: when can
feedback of the form u = H y + G w decouple ( l ) ?
Since CiAiB = 0 for all j would imply that
t r ( L i {F, G }SL) = 0, whichwould contradict the fact that IV. CLASSOF DECOUPLIKG RIATRICES
F and G decouple ( l ) , i t isclear t h a t Bi*#O for
i = l , . . . , m. As G is nonsingular, Bi*G#O forall i. Let F be an m x n matrix and let G be a nonsingular
Since (10) is satisfied, i t follows t h a t Bi*G is an m row m Xm matrix. Under the assumption that(1) can be de-
vector of theform airi with ai#O [otherwisethere coupled, necessary and sufficient conditions for F, G to
would be uj(;:), j#i, terms in t r (Li{ F, G}SL)].Thus, be adecoupling pairaredetermined in thissection.
These conditions turn out to be independent of G so
t h a t i twill make senseto speakof the class C€J of matrices
F which “decouple” (1).
B*G =
Definition

where

Hence, B* is nonsingular since G is.

m
TJI ai # 0.
i= 1

T h e theorem just proved shows that B* is of para-

mountimportance in thedecoupling of (1) bystate
variable feedback. T h e basis for the choice of F* andG*
Let Q(F) be the nXm matrix given by

Qi(F) = [ Ci(A

Ci(A
+ BF)n-’B
Ci(A + BF)n-2B
\
+ BF)d’B
1, i

where 0 is a zero matrix consistent with the order

= 1,. - . ,nz (29)

of
in the proof of the theorem is thefollowing observation. Q i ( F ) . Let Pi(F) be the n X n matrix given by

Authorized licensed use limited to: PAKISTAN INST OF ENGINEERING AND APPLIED SCIENCES. Downloaded on March 14,2021 at 06:17:58 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 634 DECEMBER
AUTOMATIC
CONTROL,
TRANSACTIONS
ON IEEE 1967

where the &(F) are the coefficients of the characteristic

polynomial of A+BF, i.e., tr (L'(F, B*-']Q) = tr ( P ~ ( F ) Q ~ ( F ) B * - ~ P )
n- 1 = tr (Pi(F)Qi(F)B*-'Pi)# 0 (39)
(A + BF)" =
0
pk(F)(A + BFIk (3 1)
andpair
so the F,B*-l decouples (1).
and I is an identity matrix consistent with the order
of Pi(F). Corollary 1
~,

Since P'(F) is nonsingular, it follon-s that the rank If the pairF,G decouples (l),then there is adiagonal
of Pi(F)Qi(F)is the same as the rank of Qi(F). Kote matrix A such that G=AB*-l.
also t h a t Proof: If F, G decoupless (l), then Q i ( F ) is given by
(37) and
L i { F ,G } = Pi(F)Qi(F)G (3 2)

where Li { F,G } is defined by (9). Thus

rank [L'{F, GI] = rank[Qi(F)],
since G is nonsingular.
view
In of definition
the of de-
i = 1, .- I ?
'Z(33) Qi(F)G = 0 1
I
I

.
I xis+ I

.I "y 1
1

l xi
I

l
.. .I
I
1

0 1 ; Xi#(), (40)

coupling, the follou-ing theorem can be established. I I I I

I 1 0 1 I

Theorem 2 I t follo\vs
B*G=diag
that [ X 1 , . . , X.],theand cod-
If the pair F, G decouples ( l ) , then the rank of Q i ( F ) 1aV is established.
is one for all i ; conversely, if the rank of Qi(F)is one for
all i and if B* is nonsingular,thenthepair F, E*-' Corollary 2
decouples the system (1). If the pair F,G decouples (l),then there is a diagonal
Proof: Supposefirstthat F, G decouple (1). Thenmatrix such that ~

tr ( L ~ { FG, ] Q ) = tr ( L ~ ( FG)Q'>
, z o (34) FB = B*-l{ ,,A** - A*}B
(41)
forall i where a is the m X l z matrixgivenbywhere A** and A* are given by

Since Parbitrary,
p

is column
ith
the
=[ I
I
I
I
...j
1
"(n-1)
I
of L i ( F , G } is a
. (35)
A** = [ ] CIA''

C,AL
, A* = A**A.
(42)

nonzero vector, while every other column of Li{ F, G }

is the zero vector. I t follows that Li( F,G } has rank one Proof: T h e corollary is an immediate consequence of
and
hence,
by (33), that
rank [ Q i ( F ) ]= 1. the
relations
Kow suppose that rank [ Q i ( F ) =
B* is nonsingular. Since
] 1 for all i and that Ci(A + BF)"+' = CiAdiB + CiAdi+'BFB (43)
C i ( A + BF)"+' = riCi(A + BF)'iB. (44)
Ci(A + BF)d'B= CiA'iB = Bi* # 0 (3 6)
In summary, thus fari t has been shown that the non-
by
the
definition
of
di, \There &* is
theith of B*, of sufficient condition
is a necessary and
i t follows that
for the existenceof a decoupling pairF,G. Furthermore,
the set of all pairs F, G which decouple (1) consists of
matrices F such that rank [Qi(F)] = 1 for all i, and G
(35) suchthat G=AB*-l, where A is diagonalandnon-
singular. In order to clarify these points, an example
will now be presented.

Authorized licensed use limited to: PAKISTAN INST OF ENGINEERING AND APPLIED SCIENCES. Downloaded on March 14,2021 at 06:17:58 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 FALB iWD WOLOVICH:
MULTIVARIABLE
DECOUPLING
IN CONTROL SYSTEMS 655

Example 1 whichindicates t h a t F and G decouple (1) and that

Let m+ cy=ld i of the closed-loop poles can be varied by

A=[::
1 1 0
:I, .-[d b], varyingthe Mk. Inthislight,considerthe
example.

Example 2
Let
following

1 0 0
= [o 0 11. - 0 1 0 0 0 0 - -0 1

Then 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0

B* = ['IB
C2AB
] [
=
-1
'1.
1
A =
0
0
0-1
0 0
0
0 1
0 0
0 '
B=
0
0
0
0
0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0
Thus, B* is nonsingularandthesystemcanbede-
-0 0 0 0 0 0- ,1 0
coupled. The set @ of all F which decouple the system
(45) can now beobtainedbydetermining all 2x3
matrices F such that rank [ Q i ( F ) ]= 1. In this example,
this implies that the elements of SP must be of the form

V. A STXTHESIS
PROCEDURE
Theorem 2 does provide a procedure for determining N O m
a, the class of all feedback matrices F which decouple
(1). However, the direct application of the condition,
rank [ Q i ( F ) ]= 1 forall i, results only in constraints
B* = A*=[ [y ,]A
0 1 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
being placed on certain of the nzn parameters of F.W h a t Since B* is nonsingular, the system can be decoupled.
is still required is a procedure for specifying closed-loop Setting, for example,
system poles while simultaneously decoupling (1) using
an appropriate FE@. Inthislight, a synthesispro-
cedure will now be presented for directly obtaining a
feedback matrix F e @ whose parameters are so deter-
mined as to yield a desired closed-loop pole structure. one obtains, using (29), the decoupled system
In particular, suppose that M k , R =0, 1, . . . , 6 are
given m X m matrices. Then the choice
6
F = B*-'[ M&Ak - A*]

Note thatin this case

det (SI- A - BF) = s2(s + l)(s3- s? - s - 1)
where the poles representing s(s3-ss% -s- 1) have been
specified by the choice of the M k . Other choices of the
M kwould lead to other closed-loop pole configurations.
Therefore, if B* is nonsingular, m+ d , of thesys-
tem's closed-loop poles canbearbitrarily specified
(&+l a t a time) while simultaneously decoupling the
systemusingthesynthesisprocedure.Thesynthesis
question is, therefore, partially resolved, although some
points still require clarification. In particular, it will be
shown thatm+ zz,
d i can never exceed n, the number
of system poles, a n d t h a t i t is sometimespossible t o
specify more thanm+xy-l d i poles whilesimultaneously
decoupling the system.

Authorized licensed use limited to: PAKISTAN INST OF ENGINEERING AND APPLIED SCIENCES. Downloaded on March 14,2021 at 06:17:58 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 656 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON AUTOMATIC CONTROL, DECEMBER 1967

Lemma Example 3
Let K be the (m+ x?=,X n matrix given by
di) Let

"1
0 1 0 0 1

A=
1 0 '
O o0 10 O 0 I '
0 B=
L o o o IJ 0 1
K=
rl 0
c ' = J 0 0
0 0
Lo 1
Then rank [K] =m + x;"=
d i and hence m di 4n. + Then
Proof: Let ki denote the ith row of K, and let ri be
arbitrary scalars such that B* =
C1A2B
[c2B =I ]
2 1
riki = 0 (57) and m+ d i = 4 =n. Thus, all the closed-looppoles
can be specified by using the synthesis procedure.
where
m

v =m + 1
di.

In order to establish the lemma, one need only show hioreover,

that application of Theorem 2 shows t h a t (62)
(57)implies that each ri=O. However,this follows represents the most general form for a decoupling F so
directly from (57) by successive postmultiplication by t h a t f = 4 = n. T h e general form ofthe decoupled transfer
B , AB, . . . , A6B, and the fact that B* is nonsingular. matrix is

1
0
I
Now let p denote the number of closed-looppoles Example 4
which can bespecified while decoupling, and letf denote Let
the number of free parameters (entries) in a decoupling
0 1 0

1
matrix F [for example, f = 3 in (47)]. Then the lemma 0 0
and (51) combine to give A= B=[l 0
m [ 21 31 011 , 0 1
n z f ~ d i I p I n 1 1 0
1

= co 0 11.
Then
Moreover, if m f cy
di= n, then all n of the closed-
loop poles can be arbitrarily positioned while simultane-
ouslydecouplingthe
system. Also, if f = m + di,
B* = [zz] = I.

then (51) gives direct physical significance to the free Thus, B* is nonsingular and the system (64) can be de-
parametersin F. If f >m+ di (or n ) , then i t may coupled. I t can be shown that the elements
of @ must be
be
possible to
specify
morethan .m+ di
of
the such that
closed-loop poles. In this situation, it is often advanta-
geous to calculate C(s1- A-BF)-lBB*-l with f entries
in F remainingarbitrary.The following examples
illustratetheseideasandsome
volved in their application.
of the difficultiesin- so t h a t f = n = 3 > 2 = m+
loop transfer matrix is given by
xy
di. Moreover, the closed-

Authorized licensed use limited to: PAKISTAN INST OF ENGINEERING AND APPLIED SCIENCES. Downloaded on March 14,2021 at 06:17:58 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 FALB AND WOLOVICH:
DECOUPLING
MULTIVARIABLE
IN CONTROL
SYSTEMS 657

C(d-A- BF)-'BB*-' thesystem described by (60),withthemostgeneral

[ H given by

-
-
( S S 1) (

(s-jz3-1)
s;j2r 1) 0
S2-(fi2f3)S-((fi~f2)

[~'-((f12+3)S-((fll+2)]
1 (65)

so t h a t all of the closed-loop poles can be specified by Since det(sI-A-BHC) = (s- 1-hz2)(s3-h11), output
application of Theorem 2. However,notethatappli- feedback will not be adequate to stabilize the system
cation of thesynthesisprocedure in this casewould although state variable feedback provides a higher de-
allow one to specify only two of the three closed-loop gree of flexibility (63).
poles.
Example 6
I?I. DECOCPLING FEEDBACK
BY OUTPUT
Consider the system described by (64). I t has been
Since output feedback is only a special case of state shown in ( 6 7 ) that state variable feedback can be used
variable feedback, i.e., to decouple the system while simultaneously specifying
u=Hy+Go=HCx+Go (68) all three closed-looppoles. Application of Theorem 2
and (39) imply that any2 x 2 matrix H of the form
with H C replacing F , i t follows immediately that (1)
can be decoupled using output feedback if and only if (74)
1) B* is nonsingular and 2) there is an m X m matrix H
such that rank [Q'(HC)] = 1 for i = 1, . . . , m. These
conditions provide a suitable test for whether or not a will define anoutputfeedback n-hichdecouplesthis
system can be decoupled using output feedback. system. From ( 7 4 ) it follows t h a t
det(sl-A-BHC)=(s-l-h~~)(s2-(h~+3)s-(hll+2))
Example 5
and hence that the system can be stabilized using out-
Let
put feedback (e.g., hZ2=- 1, kll= - 5 ) , although the
poles are not completely arbitrary.

Example 7

1 0 0 Let
c = [o 0 11-
Then

B* = [-1 '1
1
is nonsingular so that the systemdefined by (69) can be
decoupled. However, i t is not possible to decouple this
system using output feedback.T o see this, observe that Then
c' = L -1 0

Theorem 2 and (39) imply that an F which decouples

0 1
must be of the form B* = CB = [1 0]

m
m + ai = 2 <3 = n.
1
a n d t h a t H C m u s tbe of the form
I t can be shown, using Theorem 2 , that any decoupling
F is of the form
0 fl2
Equations (71) and ( 7 2 ) lead to the contradictory re-
quirement that flz = 0 and flz = - 1. This example illus-
= [, f2Z -1 - f22
f131
(77)

trates the point that decoupling by state variable feed-

back need not imply decoupling by output feedback.
I t should be noted that, although a system may be
decoupled using output feedback, someof the flexibility
of specifying closed-loop poles, as with state variable
feedback, wil1:in general be lost. For example, consider

Authorized licensed use limited to: PAKISTAN INST OF ENGINEERING AND APPLIED SCIENCES. Downloaded on March 14,2021 at 06:17:58 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 658 AUTOMATIC
TRAiiSACTIONS
ON IEEE CONTROL, DECEMBER 1967

so t h a t p = 2, i.e., only two of the closed-loop poles can In this example

be specified. I t can also be shown for this example that
output feedback leads to the transfer matrix
- l)(s - h12
[
(s
0
(s - 1) (s
- 1)

- 1212
(s - l)(s -
- l)(s - h21
0
1221

- 1)
- 1) 1 (79) and is nonsingular since it is assumedZcsl?f~nfXcr;
that zO.
Therefore
so that output and state variable feedback are equiva- 3

lent. This, as previous examples illustrate, is not true ?rz 4- di = 6

1
in general.
and hence all six of the closed-loop poles can be arbi-
VII. A PRACTICAL
EXAMPLE trarily specifiedwhile simultaneouslydecouplingthis
An area in which decoupling techniques may be of system. I t can be shown, using Theorem 2, that a de-
interest is the design of flightcontrolandstability coupling F has 6 (Le., f = 6) free parameters. Thus, the
augmentation systems. Consider, for example, the fol- synthesis procedure (Section 1,') can be directly applied
lowing linearized longitudinal equations of motion for to give physical significance to these free parameters.
a lift-fan V/STOL vehicle' in a hovering condition. Forexample,supposethatindependentpitch,trans-
lation, and altitude control is desired, i.e.,
X , X e O 0 0 0
e = mlOe + + W1
0 0 1 0 0 0
AX = ?rzzoAx -l- ?n2'Af 4-u2
Mu 0 Me l t i , 0 0
0 0 Z e Z , O 0
= ?1Z3°h + ?n.3'& + W3. (83)

1 0 0 0 0 0 According to the synthesis procedure,F can be set equal

to
0 0 0 1 0 0

I t can be shown t h a t for this decoupling F,

1
0 0 0 0

T 1
zcs ?n2' WZ20

0 0 0 1 0 0 0
0
where
1 0 0 0 0
24 =incremental
longitudinal ( x ) velocity change,
8 =incremental pitch angle, 0 0 0 1 0 0
O I
e
= pitch rate,
If G is now set equal to B*-l, the closed-loop transfer
w =incremental vertical (2) velocity change, matrix is
Ax = incremental position error,
AZ =incremental altitude error, C(d-A -BF)-'BB*-'
6, =incremental collective fan input,
= incremental nose fan input,
6, =incremental fan stagger input.

The relevant outputs in this example are 8, A x , and

Az, and the subscripted capitals (e.g., X,) are the rele-
vant stability derivatives.
-
-
[
(S2-?~22.71s-?~20)(s2-m31s--230),

0,
0,
(S'-17t11S-?~Z10)(~-m31S-~30),

0, (s2-nzllS-nzlo)(s2-~~p'S-m20)
(85)
(s2-~~z11s-~~~10)(s2-~~z21--1n20)(s2-m31s-?~.30)
0,

:I -
If the m i i are suitably chosen, then, in effect, the pilot
The output matrix C is thus defined as
will be faced with the task of controlling three highly
0 1 0 0 0 0 stable second-order systems. This example serves only
to indicate a potential practical area of application for
c = 0 0 0 0 1 0 .
the ideas presented in this paper.
[ o o o o o l l (81) Theaboveexamplesillustratethetechniquesde-
velopedfor
synthesizing decoupling
controllers
for
1 Similar to the XV-5.4. multivariable systems.

Authorized licensed use limited to: PAKISTAN INST OF ENGINEERING AND APPLIED SCIENCES. Downloaded on March 14,2021 at 06:17:58 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 F.4LB AND WOLOVICH:
DECOUPLING IN MULTIVARIABLE
CONTROL
SYSTEMS 659

VIII. CONCLCSIONS 4ssociateProfessorin theDe-

Theproblem of decoupling a time-invariantlinear partment of Aeronautics and
systemusingstatevariablefeedbackhas been con- Astronautics at Stanford Uni-
sidered.Necessaryandsufficientconditionsforde- versity, Stanford, Calif. In 1966
couplinghavebeendetermined in terms of the non- hewas -Associate Professor of
Information and Control a t t h e
singularity of a matrix B*.T h e class @ of all feedback
University of Riichigan, Ann Ar-
matrices n-hich decouple a system has been character-
ized, and a synthesis technique for the realizationof de- bor.CurrentlyheisXssociate
sired
closed-loop
pole configurations has been de- Professor of ,Applied 3lathe-
veloped. In essence, the major theoretical questions re- matics a t Brown University,
lating to decoupling via state variable feedback have Providence, R. I., and a Consultant for XASAAand Bolt
been resolved for time-invariant linear systems. Beranek and Newman, Inc. His research interests are
4 number of interesting potential areas of future re- in control and applied mathematics, and he is coauthor
search arise from the results obtained here. In particu- of the book Optiwzal Control (McGraw-Hill, 1966). Heis
lar, the question of extending the theory to the time- a Member of the Editorial Board of the S I A X J o u r m l
varying situation is of considerable interest. Some pre- on Control.
liminary results relating to stabilization have already Dr. Falb is a member of Phi Beta Kappa, Sigma Xi,
beenobtained.r61 T h e design of aircraft and V/STOL the -American Mathematical Society, and the Society for
stabilityaugmentationsystemsviadecouplingtech- Industrial and Applied Mathematics.
niques is a potential practical areaof application asmas
mentioned in Section VII. Practical implementation of
the techniques presented in this paper has begun but William A. Wolovich (31’64) was
muchremainstobedonebeforethetheory is trans- bornin
Hartford,Conn.,on
formed into a practical design technique. October15, 1937. H e received
REFERENCES theB.S.E.E. degree fromthe
University of Connecticut,
111 B. S. Morgan, “The synthesis of linear multivariable systems
bystatevariablefeedback,”Preprints,JointAutomaticControl Storrs, in 1959, and the M.S.E.E.
Conf. (Stanford, Calif., June 1964), pp. 468472. Also I E E E T ~ a n s . degreefrom
Worcester Poly-
dzctonzatic Corttrol, vol. AC-9, pp. 405-411, October 1964.
r21 Z. V. Rekasius,“Decoupling of multivariablesystemsby technic
Institute,
Worcester,
means of state variable feedback,” Proc. 3rd -4nn. Allerton Covf. on 3.lass., in 1961.
Circui’ and System TJzeoFy (Urbana, Ill., 1965), pp. 439-447.
P. L. Falb and 11:. A. \37010vich, “On the decoupling of multi- From 1959 to 1961 he was with
variable systems,” Preprints, Joint Automatic Control Conf. (Phila- the Research Laboratories of the United Aircraft Corp.
delphia, Pa., June 1967), pp. 791-796.
[‘I L. A. Zadeh and C. A. Desoer, L h z e a ~S ~ s l e mTheory. New H e served as Ground Electronics Officer in the U. S.
York: McGraw-Hill, 1963. Air Forcefrom1961to 1964. In 1964 hejoinedthe
P I E. Seckel, Stability and Con.trol of A i r p l a m s and Helicopters.
New York:AcademicPress, 1964. staff of the Electronics Research Center in the Control
1:. A. !A:olovich, “On the stabilization of controllable systems,” andInformationSystemsLaboratory.Hehastaken
161 1
IEEE Tfans. Azrtonzdu Confrol (to be p u b l i s k d ) .
graduate courses attheMassachusettsInstitute of
Technology, Cambridge, and Northeastern University,
Peter L. Falb (M’64) was born in New York, N. ET., on Boston, Mass., and he is currently a graduate student
July 26, 1936. H e received t h e A B . , M A . , and Ph.D. in the Department of Engineering, Brown University,
degrees, all in mathematics, from Harvard University, Providence, R. I., working in the area of dynamic sys-
Cambridge, %lass., in1956, 1957, and 1961, respectively. tems theory.
From 1960 t o 1965 he was at the M.I.T.Lincoln Lab- Mr. Wolovich is a member of Tau Beta Pi and Eta
oratory,Lexington,Mass.In 1965 hewasa Visiting Kappa Nu.

Authorized licensed use limited to: PAKISTAN INST OF ENGINEERING AND APPLIED SCIENCES. Downloaded on March 14,2021 at 06:17:58 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.