Proceding of he 40h IEEE, Conference on Decson and Control ‘Orlando, Faria USA, December 2001 FrM01-2 Nonlinear Control and Reduction of Underactuated Systems with Symmetry I Unactuated Shape Variables Case Reza Olfati-Saber California Institute of Technology Control and Dynamical Systems 107-81 Pasadena, CA 91125 olfati@eds.caltech.edu Abstract In this paper, we address nonlinear control and reduction of two classes of high-order underactuated mechanical systems with ki- netic symmetry called Cless-II and Class-IIT systems. Class-II systems are underactuated systems with unactuated shape variables, de- coupled inputs, and integrable normalized momentumns (all to be defined). We show that all Class-IT underactuated systems can be transformed into cascade systems in non- triangular quadratic form using an explicit, change of coordinates and control. In addi- tion, we characterize a subclass of Class-II systems, called Class-IIl systems, that can be explicitly transformed into cascade systems in sttict feedforward form. This allows ap- plication of existing nonlinear control design methods like nested saturations and feedfor- warding to control of underactuated systems 1 Introduction Control design and analysis for underactu- ated mechanical systems is currently an ac- tive field of research. The importance of un- deractuated systems is due to their broad ap- plications in robotics, aerospace vehicles, and marine vehicles. In addition, restriction of 0-7803-7061-9/01/$10.00 © 2001 IEEE 4164 the control authority in underactuated sys- tems offers challenging control problems from theoretical point of view (see [5, 9} for recent surveys). ‘This paper is part Il of a series of articles that, aim to address reduction and nonlinear con- trol of broad classes of high-order underactu- ated systems. In [5], its shown that under- actuated systems can be essentially classified to eight main classes that overall cover the majority of the aforementioned real-life ap- plications. In part II of this paper, we focus on reduction and control of underactuated systems with unactuated shape variables, tegrable normalized momentums, and decou- pled inputs (all defined in section 2). We re- for to this particular class of underactuated systems as Class-II systems, ‘The reduction and control of underactuated systems with actuated shape variables and in- put coupling are addressed in parts I {7} and UI of this paper, respectively. ‘The main contribution of part II of this pa- per is providing a systematic way for ob- taining change of coordinates in closed-form that transform high-order Class-II underac-tuated systems into cascade systems in non- triangular quadratic form. In addition, we characterize a subclass of Class-IT systems, called Class-III systems, that can be trans- formed into cascade systems in feedforward form. This allows application of Teel’s nested saturations [13], nonlinear small-gain theo- rem [12], and feedforwarding methods due to Mazene and Praly [3] to stabilization of Class-IIl underactuated systems. Stabiliza- tion of nonlinear systems in nontriangular forms is, in general, an open problem. In im- portant special cases, this problem has been addressed in (5, 8]. ‘The outline of the paper is as follows. In sec- tion 2, we provide some background on dy- namics and symmetry properties of underac- ‘uated systems. In section 3, we present our main reduction and stabilization results. In section 4, we give a detailed example. Finally, ‘we make concluding remarks. 2 Underactuated Systems with Symmetry In this paper, we consider the class of simple Lagrangian systems with configuration vector 4 = col(aesqs) € Qe *Qx, configuration space Q_XQ, of dimension n, and Lagrangian 1 L(g) = K ~V = 547 M(ay)4 ~ V(ae, 4) where K is the kinetic energy, V(q) is the po- tential energy, and M(q) = M(q,) is the in- ertia matriz. We say the system has kinetic symmetry wrt. ge due to 2 = 0, We refer to ge and gy as the vectors Of external vari- ables and shape variables, respectively. ‘The forced Euler-Lagrange equation for this sys- tem can be written as dae a Soe oe = Bar oe a o Be oe = Or 4165 where 7 € R™ and F(q) = colfF:(g), Fs(a)] is the force matriz. We say the mechani- cal system in (1) is an wnderactuated sys- tem if m = rank(F(g)) < n. Since F(a) has full column rank, there exists a permu- tation of g such that F(q) can be partitioned as col[F;(q), F2(q)] where F;(g) is an invert- ible m xm matrix. If Fx(q) = 0, we say (1) is a mechanical system with decoupled in- puts, Otherwise, (1) is referred to as a me- chanical system with input coupling. This Paper is devoted to reduction and nonlinear control of high-order underactuated systems with unactuated shape variables and decou- pled inputs. Without loss of generality, set F.(q) = Im Fo(q) = 0 (otherwise, replace + by F;1(q)1). For the sake of simplicity of no- tation, we assume dim(Qz) = dim(Qz) (the general case can be found in {5](chapter 4)). By reduction, we mean transformation of the mechanical control system in (1) into a cas- cade nonlinear system in the form # = Med) & 9,4) (2) ‘using @ smooth invertible change of coordi- nates and control (i.e. diffeomorphism) (2,€) = ©1(4,9), v= 04,4,7) (3) Remark 1. Notice that, in general, a system with Lagrangian that is considered here does not possess symmetry properties in the classi- cal sense according to [2), unless V (de, ds) V(qz). As a result the generalized momen- tum py, = OL/Bie conjugate to a, is not anymore a conserved quantity for the un- forced Lagrangian system. This is @ funda- mental difference between kinetic symmetry and classical symmetry. ‘The Lagrangian equations of motion in (1)with F(q) = [Tm 0]? can be rewritten as Mzz(qe)de + Mz0(ds)as + he(Q,d) . Myx (Ge)de + Mas (Gu)Gs + he(G.4) 0 (4) where he,he contain the Coriolis, centrifa- gal, and gravity terms, In a similar approach taken in (11), the dynamics of an underactu- ated system in the form (4) can be partially linearized using an invertible change of con- trol in the form 7 = a(q)u + (9,4) over the following set U = {ae | der(mse(as)) #0} (5) This feedback is called a noncotlocated partially-linearizing feedback (J0] and it. re- duces the dynamies of g, to a set of double- integrators as de ‘The key tools in reduction of high-order un- deractuated systems with kinetic symmetry are generalized momentums, normalized mo- mentums, and their integrals which are de- fined in the sequel. Let p, be the general- ‘ized momentum conjugate to qs, then for sys- tem (4) az (Gs)de + 1Mee(qs)de (6) ‘We define the normalized momentum conju- gate to q, over U as, He = mee (42) at (ds) Mess) 45 @ We say the normalized momentum 2, is integrable, if there exists a smooth func- tion (a) = (h(q),--- ,Ara(q))? such that m, = h where h = Dh(q)q and Dh(g) = (Vhi(a),--- 1 Vlma(a)). Whenever mis inte- sable, we call h(q) the integral of x. Now, we are ready to define Class-Il underactuated systems, ac OGs anes Definition 1. (Class-II systems) We refer to the class of underactuated mechanical sys- tems with unactuated shape variables, decou- pled inputs, and integrable normalized mo- mentum Tr, as Class-II underactuated sys- tems. We find the following quadratic forms conve- nient for representation of the normal forms of Class-II underactuated systems. Definition 2. (Vector Consider a mapping © Quadratic Forms) RP xB > RP dew oP a0) yt @) where T(z) : RP > BP" jg a cubic matrix with layers (2) : RP > RP*"§ = 1... which are square matrices, We call U(2,») a vector quadratic form in v. 3 Main Results By definition, any ClassIT underactuated system satisfies the following assumption. Assumption 1. (integrability Assume all the elements of condition) w= M32 (Ge)mavl(as)dae, Vase U (9) are exact one-forms and let w = dy(q.). In other words, denoting 1(a,) m5 (de)Mea(qs), assisme all the one-forms TPLimiy (ge)das are exact for i= 1,... ,m (ji; and qj are ele- ments of (qe) anid gy respectively). Let a, = bya), ther (ge) = (ACG) --> va) Here is our first main result on reduction of Class-II underactuated systems:‘Theorem 1. Consider the underactuated system in (1) and suppose Assumption 1 holds. Then, there exists a change of coor- dinates (i.e. diffeomorphism) obtained from the Lagrangian of the system % Dr de + (as) oc ‘Maz (Ge)dz + Mee(Ie)Ge = 5 (Qa) + Teele) a (10) that transforms the dynamics of the under- actuated system (4) into a cascade nonlinear ‘system in nontriangular quadratic form & me" (4s)Pe Be = SrlGesd)+EnPePe) — (yy de = PB hou here D = V,,K (K is the kinetic energy) is a vector quadratic form in (pr, Ps) Pr Pe [Le Jr [% | with a cubie weight matrix (qs) and D(do,Prs Ps) m, (gs) Gee Gs) Maz (9s) = [VeV te: Ge hy (ae) Proof. See page 66 in [5] o Remark 2. The normal form for Class-II un- deractuated systems in (11) possesses a non- triangular structure which does not allow ap- plication of backstepping [4, 1] or forward- ing methods (3, 13}. Stabilization of different classes of nonlinear systems in nontriangular forms has been addressed in (5, 8]. ‘The following corollary states a physical property of the (q,, pe)-subsystem in (11). Corollary 1. In theorem 1, assume V(q) = V(gz). Then, the (q-,Pr)-subsystem is a La- grongian system with configuration vector qe 4167 and reduced Lagrangian Lo (Grs4rs%6) ‘mr(4s)ar (12) that satisfies the forced Euler-Lagrange equa- tion Z(GesPrvPe) (13) We need the following definition, before pre- senting our next result. Definition 3. (Differentially Symmetric Rows) We say a square matrix function m(z) : RY +R" has differentially sym- metric rows, if the #* row of the matrix ne (2) satisfies om(z) Bx: Smnin(z) (4) Oz for i in. (the derivative 8/22; on the LHS of (14) is taken clement-wise and the RS of (14) is a Jacobian matrix) Definition 4. (Class-III systems) The sub- class of Class-II underactuated systems that satisfy conditions i), ii), and iii) of Theorem Dare called Class-H1I underactuated systems. ‘The following theorem provides sufficient conditions such that Class-I underactuated systems can be transformed into feedforward nonlinear systems using a change of coordi- nates in explicit form. ‘Theorem 2. Assume all the conditions in theorem 1 hold. In addition, the underactu- ated system (4) satisfies the following condi- tions i) mez (qs) %8 constant. it) me2(qe) hos differentially symmetric rows.iti) V(q) = Ve(ge) + Volqe), Vir Qi > R forie {as} Then, applying the change of coordinates 21 = Or) 22 = ME "(45) Pr (where (desPr) are defined in (10) trans- forms the original system (4) into a cascade system i feedforward form as the following dn = (qs) + PM aa)ps (as) a = b= u there TI(gs) is a cubic matriz and y : Qs > RM is defined as (as) = —m="(q0)%o, Velde) Moreover, sf (0) = 0 and w(gz) has om in- ‘vertible Jacobian Vo,¥(qs) at qs = 0, then the origin for (15) (and (4)) can be globally asymptotically and locally exponentially stabi- lized over U using a state feedback in explicit form as nested saturations Proof. See pages 69-70 in [5]. a Remark 8. ‘The feedforward structure of the normal form of Class-III underactuated sys- tems in (15) makes it possible to apply the existing control design methods for feedfor- ward nonlinear systems in [13, 12, 3] 10 sta- bilization of a broad class of underactuated systems. 4 Example: The Pendubot In [5], it is shown that the pendubot, the rotating-pendulum, the planar cart-pole sys- tem, the beam-and-ball system, and the in- certia wheel pendulum (6), are all examples of Class-II underactuated systems. Among. all of them, only the cart-pole system and the in- ertia wheel pendulum are Class-IIT systems Here, we provide the details for reduction of the pendubot. Example 1. The pendubot is a two-link pla- nar robot with revolute joints and one actua- tor at the shoulder, as shown in Fig, 1. The Figure 1: The Pendubot inertia matrix of the pendubot is given by mi(qa) = a+ 2bcosla) mi2(q2) mai (qp) = € + beos(qn) malta) = © where a,b,c > 0 are given by milf +m} +2) +h +h mally mali +h b e Apparently, g. = q is an unactuated shape variable for the pendubot. ‘Thus, the pen- dubot is a Class-II underactuated system, After a noncollocated partial feedback lin earization process, one obtains d2 = u. Now, applying the change of coordinates n + (a2) mii(ga)Pi + MoaP2 ww and > byqr € [-™,n), we get Ge = Primas(as) Be = malagsin(ge ~ (qs) +4) + De PrsPs) ay = Ps b= 4168.where z my Clearly, the equation of j- consists of a quadratic term in (p,,p,) and a reduced grav- ity term gr(4r, 42) = Malzg sin(qr—(qe) +42) as in Theorem 1 5 Conclusion In this paper, we presented explicit change of coordinates for reduction of high-order un- deractuated systems with unactuated shape variables, decoupled inputs, and integrable normalized momentums (je, Class-II sys- tems). Under further conditions, we showed that a subslass of Class systems called Class-IIT underactuated systems can be transformed into nonlinear cascade systems in feedforward form. We provided several ex- amples of underactuated systems with un ‘uated shape variables, and applied our re- sults to reduetion of the pendubot References [1] A-sidori. Nonlinear Control Systems. Springer, 1995, (2) J. E. Marsden and TS. Ratiu, Introduction to Mechanics and Symmetry. Springer, 1999. (BF. Mazene and L. Praly. “Adding in- tegrations, saturated controls, and stabiliza~ tion for feedforward Systems”. IEEE Trans ‘on Automatic Control, 40:1559-1578, 1996 H]_ M. Krstié, 1. Kanellakopoulos, and P, Kokotovié. Nonlinear and Adaptive Con- trol Design. John Wiley & Sons, 1996. [5] _R. Olfati-Saber. ‘Nonlinear Controt of Underactuated Mechanical Systems with __bsin(te) (Pr — mapa) (Pr ~ (ms + m22)P4) 4169 Application to Robotics and Aerospace Vehi- cles”. PhD thesis, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Department of Electrical En- gineering and Computer Science, February 2001 [6] _R. Otfati-Saber. “Global Stabilization of a Flat Underactuated System: the Inertia Wheel Pendulum”. Proc. of the 40th Conf. ‘on Decision and Control, Orlando, FI, Dec. 2001 [7] R. Olfati-Saber. “Nonlinear control and reduction of underactuated systems with, symmetry I: actuated shape variables case” Proc. of the 40th Conf. on Decision and Con- trol, Orlando, Fl, Dec. 2001 [8] R. Olfati-Saber. “Fixed point con- trollers and stabilization of the cart-pole sys- tem and the rotating pendulum”. Proc. of the 38th Conf. on Decision and Control, 2:1174— 1181, Phoenix, AZ, Dec. 1999. [9] _M. Reyhanoglu, A. van der Scha‘t, N. H. McClamroch, ‘and 1. Kolmanovsky. “Dynamics and control of a class of underac- tuated mechanical systems”. IEEE Trans. on Automatic Control, 44(9):1663-1671, 1999, (10) M. W. Spong. “Underactuated me- chanical systems”. In B. Siciliano and K. P. Valavanis, editor, Control Problems in Robotics and Automation, Springer-Verlag, London, UK, 1997. [11] M. W. Spong. “Energy based control of a class of underactuated mechanical sys- tems". 1996 IFAC World Congress, July 1996. [22) ALR. Teel. “A nonlinear small gain theorem for the analysis of control systems with saturation”. [BBE Trans. on Automatic Control, 40:1256-1270, 1996, {13] A. R. Teel. “Using Saturation to sta- bilize a class of single-input partially lin- ear composite systems”. IFAC NOLCOS’92 Symposium, pages 369-374, June 1992,