Automatica 68 (2016) 87–91

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Automatica
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/automatica

Technical communique

Chattering-free discrete-time sliding mode control✩

Haibo Du a , Xinghuo Yu b,d , Michael Z.Q. Chen c , Shihua Li d
a
School of Electrical Engineering and Automation, Hefei University of Technology, Hefei, Anhui 230009, China
b
School of Engineering, RMIT University, Melbourne VIC 3001, Australia
c
Department of Mechanical Engineering, The University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong
d
School of Automation, Southeast University, Nanjing, Jiangsu 210096, China

article info abstract

Article history: To avoid the chattering problem in the reaching-law-based discrete-time sliding mode control (DSMC)
Received 29 January 2015 and the generation of over-large control action in the equivalent-control-based DSMC, a new DSMC
Received in revised form method based on non-smooth control is proposed in this paper. Since there is no use of any switching
4 January 2016
term in the proposed DSMC, it is a chattering-free SMC method. Meanwhile, it is shown that the newly
Accepted 9 January 2016
Available online 22 February 2016
proposed non-smooth control-based DSMC can guarantee the same level of accuracy for the sliding mode
motion as that of an equivalent control-based DSMC. To demonstrate the effectiveness of the proposed
Keywords:
approach, a simulation example is presented.
Discrete-time controller © 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Sliding mode control
Non-smooth control

1. Introduction Zhang, 2014) (usually called reaching-law-based DSMC), the study

As a popular nonlinear control method, sliding mode control
(SMC) has been widely studied in the theoretical research
community (Utkin, 1992) and successfully applied in industry
(Perruquetti & Barbot, 2002). The main reason is due to its many
advantages, such as simple design idea and good robustness (Yu
& Xu, 2002). Since more and more modern control systems are
implemented by computers, the study of SMC in the discrete-time
domain, i.e., discrete-time SMC, has been an important topic in the
SMC literature (Yu, Wang, & Li, 2012).
The main difference between discrete-time SMC (DSMC) and
continuous-time SMC (CSMC) lies in that the switching frequency
of DSMC is limited, which leads to the celebrated invariance
property of CSMC systems no longer holds (Drazenovic, 1969). In
this case, the study of DSMC has been paid attention by many
researchers and can be divided into two directions. One direction
is to follow the design idea of CSMC and the switching term is
still preserved, e.g., the design of DSMC law directly based on
discrete-time systems (Gao, Wang, & Homaifa, 1995; Qu, Xia, &
✩ This work is supported in part by the Natural Science Foundation of
China (61304007, 61374053, 61473080) and the Australian Research Council
(DP130104765). The material in this paper was not presented at any conference.
This paper was recommended for publication in revised form by Associate Editor
Keqin Gu under the direction of Editor André L. Tits.
E-mail addresses: haibo.du@hfut.edu.cn (H. Du), x.yu@rmit.edu.au (X. Yu),
mzqchen@gmail.com (M.Z.Q. Chen), lsh@seu.edu.cn (S. Li).
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.automatica.2016.01.047
0005-1098/© 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
of discretization effect on continuous-time SMC systems (Galias &
Yu, 2007; Li, Du, & Yu, 2014; Wang, Yu, & Chen, 2009; Xia & Zinober,
2006; Yu, Wang, Galias, & Chen, 2008). The other direction is based
on the equivalent control for discrete-time system, which is called
equivalent-control-based DSMC (Su, Drakunov, & Ozguner, 2000;
Utkin, 1994).
In the reaching-law-based DSMC, since the switching term is
still employed, the chattering problem will be inevitable. In the
equivalent control-based DSMC, although there is no switching
term, it will generate an over-large control effort since there is
no reaching process. Actually, in practice, due to the existence
of disturbances, no matter which kinds of DSMC methods are
employed, the sliding mode state cannot be precisely kept at zero.
In such a case, the central issue is how to guarantee a smaller
boundary layer for the sliding mode motion. In this regard, some
improved DSMC methods have been proposed, such as disturbance
observer-based DSMC (Su et al., 2000), discrete-time integral SMC
(Abidi, Xu, & Yu, 2007), etc. However, these improved DSMC
methods belong to the equivalent-control-based DSMC.
In this paper, we provide a new DSMC design method
which is based on non-smooth control. The advantage of non-
smooth control lies in its good performances such as better
robustness (Bhat & Bernstein, 2000). In this new DSMC, to
avoid the chatting phenomenon and the generation of overly
large control action, a non-smooth term (continuous function) is
employed instead of the switching term and a reaching process
is added. Under the proposed DSMC, a rigorous theoretic analysis
88 H. Du et al. / Automatica 68 (2016) 87–91
shows that the same accuracy for the sliding mode motion can
be obtained as that of the equivalent-control-based DSMC, who
provides a higher precision than that of the traditional reaching-
law-based DSMC. Finally, an example is provided to demonstrate
the potential of the proposed method.
2. System description and some existing results
2.1. System description
As in Wang et al. (2009) and Su et al. (2000), consider the
following single-input continuous-time system with matched
disturbances:
ẋ = Ax + Bu u + Bd f ,
where x ∈ Rn , u ∈ R, and f ∈ R are the state, input, and
disturbance, and A, Bu , Bd are constant matrices of appropriate
dimensions. The matching condition implies that rank[Bu , Bd ] =
rank[Bu ]. The disturbance f is assumed to be smooth and bounded.
Assume the control law u is digitally implemented through
a zero-order-holder (ZOH), i.e., u(t ) = u(k) over the time in-
terval [kh, (k + 1)h), where h is the sampling period. Then, the
continuous-time system (1) under the discrete-time control law
u(k) can be written in a discrete form as follows:
x(k + 1) = Φ x(k) + Γ u(k) + d(k),
where Φ = eAh , Γ = 0 eAτ dτ Bu , d(k) = 0 eAτ Bd f ((k + 1)h −
h h
τ )dτ . By Abidi et al. (2007), the system matrices of discrete-time
system (2) have the following properties.
A2 h2
Property 2.1. (1) Φ = I + Ah + 2!
+ · · · = I + O(h);
ABu h2
(2) Γ = Bu h + + · · · = O(h);
2!
(3) d(k) = O(h);
(4) The change rate of the disturbance δ(k) = d(k) − d(k − 1) =
O(h2 ).
2.2. Problems of the existing discrete-time SMC
To design a discrete-time SMC law, as that in Su et al. (2000), a
discrete-time switching function is usually chosen as:
s(k) = Cx(k),
where C ∈ R 1×n
is a constant matrix and is chosen such that C Γ is
invertible and the matrix (Φ − Γ (C Γ )−1 C Φ ) has 1 zero pole and
(n − 1) poles inside the unit disk in the complex z-plane. Based on
matrix C and Property 2.1(4), the following assumption is imposed.
Assumption 2.1. There is a constant δ ∗ such that |C δ(k)| ≤ δ ∗ ,
k = 0, 1, 2, . . . , and the constant δ ∗ is in the order of O(h2 ).
Remark 2.1. This Assumption is satisfied if the change rate of the
disturbance f (i.e., f˙ (t )) for the system (1) is bounded, whose
proof can be found in Lemma 1 in Abidi et al. (2007). In practice,
many kinds of disturbances satisfy this property, such as the load
disturbances for permanent magnet synchronous motor (Liu & Li,
2012), etc.
2.2.1. Discrete-time SMC based on reaching process
Similar to the continuous-time SMC, a method called reaching-
law-based DSMC approach is firstly introduced in Gao et al. (1995).
The reaching law for sliding mode is designed as:
s(k + 1) = s(k) − qh · s(k) − ε h · sgn(s(k)),
with ε > 0, q > 0, 0 < 1 − qh < 1.
Under this reaching law, the sliding mode state will enter the
vicinity of sliding mode surface s(k) = 0 with thickness ∆ and stay
there forever. That is, |s(k)| ≤ ∆ for all k > k∗ with a constant k∗ .
Clearly, the size of ∆ is important, which determines the accuracy
of sliding mode motion and eventually the steady-state of system
state. Solving Eq. (4) based on (2) and (3) leads to
u(k) = −(C Γ )−1 [C Φ x(k) − (1 − qh)s(k)
+ ε h · sgn(s(k)) + Cd(k)]. (5)
Due to the unavailable information d(k), as that in Su et al. (2000),
the disturbance can be estimated by using the so called delay
estimate method, i.e.,
d̂(k) = x(k) − Φ x(k − 1) − Γ u(k − 1) = d(k − 1), (6)
(1)
which yields the final realizable controller
u(k) = −(C Γ )−1 [C Φ x(k) − (1 − qh)s(k)
+ ε h · sgn(s(k)) + C d̂(k)]. (7)
Under this controller, it can be concluded that
s(k + 1) = (1 − qh)s(k) − ε h · sgn(s(k)) + C δ(k). (8)
By Lemma A.1 and Assumption 2.1, it can be concluded that the
sliding mode state s(k) will enter the following region in a finite
number of steps and stay there forever
(2)
{s(k) : |s(k)| ≤ ε h + δ ∗ = O(h)}. (9)
Remark 2.2. The main problem of this method is to use the
switching function sgn(s(k)), which leads to the well-known
chattering problem in practice. And from the control law (7), it can
be found that the switching gain, i.e., the amplitude of chattering,
is (C Γ )−1 ε h. Since C Γ = O(h), then (C Γ )−1 ε h is in the order of
O(1).
2.2.2. Discrete-time SMC based on equivalent control
To avoid the chattering problem, another method called
equivalent control is proposed in Su et al. (2000) to design a
chatter-free DSMC law. Directly solving s(k + 1) = 0, i.e., Cx(k +
1) = 0 leads to
u(k) = −(C Γ )−1 [C Φ x(k) + Cd(k)]. (10)
(3)
As that in (7), the disturbance d(k) can be substituted by the
estimate value d̂(k) defined in (6), which yields the final realizable
controller
u(k) = −(C Γ )−1 [C Φ x(k) + C d̂(k)]. (11)
Under this discrete-time controller, the dynamical behavior of
sliding mode state is given by
s(k + 1) = Cx(k + 1) = C Φ x(k) + C Γ u(k) + Cd(k)
= C [d(k) − d̂(k)] = C δ(k). (12)
By Assumption 2.1, s(k) is bounded by
|s(k)| ≤ δ ∗ = O(h2 ). (13)
Remark 2.3. Compared with the reaching-law-based DSMC, the
sliding mode state s(k) under the equivalent-control-based DSMC
has a higher accuracy. However, the magnitude of equivalent-
control-based DSMC law u(k) in (11) is in the order of O(h−1 )
because (C Γ )−1 = O(h−1 ), C Φ = O(1), and C d̂(k) = Cd(k − 1) =
O(h) from Property 2.1(3). Clearly, if h is sufficiently small, the
equivalent-control-based DSMC needs an over-large control input
(4) which may be undesirable due to the control saturation constraint.
 H. Du et al. / Automatica 68 (2016) 87–91 89

3. New chattering free discrete-time SMC then

q1 h · s(k) + q2 h · sα (k) − C δ(k)

How to guarantee not only a smaller boundary layer for sliding
mode motion but also avoidance of the chattering phenomenon ≥ q1 h · s(k) + ψ α (α)δ ∗ − |C δ(k)|
will be an interesting problem. In this section, we will employ a ≥ q1 hρ + [ψ α (α) − 1]δ ∗ := µ. (21)
non-smooth control method to design a non-smooth control-based α
DSMC, which is a chatter-free DSMC method. Since 1 < ψ (α) < 2 and δ > 0, then µ is a positive constant.
∗

On the other hand, by noticing that

Theorem 3.1. For the discrete-time system (2) under Assump- 1
 q h  1−α
2
tion 2.1, if the discrete-time sliding mode surface is chosen as (3), the s(k) > ψ(α) ,
1 − q1 h
disturbance estimation d̂(k) is defined as (6), and DSMC law is chosen
as: it can be concluded that

u(k) =−(C Γ )−1 [C Φ x(k) − s(k) + q1 h · s(k) (1 − q1 h)s1−α (k) > ψ 1−α (α)q2 h. (22)

+ q2 h · sigα (s(k)) + C d̂(k)], (14) By a further calculation, it can be obtained that

α
where 0 < q1 h < 1, 0 < q2 h < 1, 0 < α < 1, and sig (s(k)) = (1 − q1 h)s(k) > ψ 1−α (α)q2 h · sα (k) > q2 h · sα (k), (23)
sgn(s(k)) · |s(k)|α is a continuous function,
which means that
• the sliding mode state s(k) from any initial state will enter the
region Ω within at most K ∗ steps, where1 s(k) > q1 h · s(k) + q2 h · sα (k). (24)
 Based on this inequality and (21), it can be estimated for the latter
Ω = s(k) : |s(k)| ≤ ρ term in (19) that
1/α  2s(k) − q1 h · s(k) − q2 h · sα (k) + C δ(k)
δ∗ 1 

q2 h  1−α
= ψ(α) · max , ≥ q1 h · s(k) + q2 h · sα (k) − |C δ(k)| ≥ µ. (25)
q2 h 1 − q1 h
α 1 As a result, we have △V (k) ≤ −µ2 .
with ψ(α) = 1 + α 1−α − α 1−α , (15)
s2 (0) − ρ 2 Case 2: s(k) < −ρ
K ∗ = [m∗ ] + 1 with m∗ = , By a similar proof procedure, it can be shown that the relation
µ 2
△V (k) ≤ −µ2 still holds. Hence, based on the results in Case 1
µ = q1 hρ + [ψ α (α) − 1]δ ∗ , (16) and Case 2, if s(i) ̸∈ Ω , i = 0, 1, . . . , m − 1, then △V (i) =
s2 (i + 1) − s2 (i) ≤ −µ2 , which implies
• once the sliding mode state s(k) enters the region Ω , it cannot
escape from it. s2 (1) ≤ s2 (0) − µ2 ,

Proof. By (2) and (3), we obtain s2 (2) ≤ s2 (1) − µ2 ≤ s2 (0) − 2µ2 , . . . , s2 (m) ≤ s2 (0) − mµ2 .
(26)
s(k + 1) = C [Φ x(k) + Γ u(k) + d(k)]. (17)
By directly solving s (0) − mµ = ρ , it can be obtained that the
2 2 2
Under the proposed DSMC law (14), we obtain real number solution is m∗ defined in (16). That is to say that after
K ∗ = [m∗ ] + 1 steps, |s(K ∗ )| ≤ ρ.
s(k + 1) = s(k) − q1 hs(k) − q2 hsigα (s(k)) + C δ(k). (18)
Next, we will prove the fact that if s(k) ∈ Ω , then s(k + 1) ∈ Ω .
Next, we will show that the sliding mode state s(k) will enter the  1/α  1 
 1−α
δ∗
region Ω in a finite number of steps. Since there is a fractional For the sake of brevity, denote Φ = max q2 h
, 1−q2qh1 h ,
power term, the Lyapunov analysis method is employed. Construct which means that ρ = ψ(α)Φ . Then we have the following
a Lyapunov function V (k) = s2 (k). From (18), it can be obtained proposition (see Appendix for proof).
that
Proposition 1. δ ∗ ≤ q2 h · Φ α ≤ (1 − q1 h)Φ .
△V (k) = V (k + 1) − V (k)
  Since −ρ ≤ s(k) ≤ ρ , we can assume that
= − q1 h · s(k) + q2 h · sigα (s(k)) − C δ(k)
  s(k) = θ · ρ = θ ψ(α)Φ , −1 ≤ θ ≤ 1. (27)
× 2s(k) − q1 h · s(k) − q2 h · sigα (s(k)) + C δ(k) . (19) By (18), it can be obtained that

Now, we consider the two cases when s(k) ̸∈ Ω . s(k + 1) = (1 − q1 h)θ ρ − q2 hsigα (θ ρ) + C δ(k)

 1/α  1 
 1−α ≤ (1 − q1 h)ψ(α)θ Φ − q2 hsigα (ψ(α)θ )Φ α + δ ∗ . (28)
δ∗
Case 1: s(k) > ρ = ψ(α) · max , q2 h
q2 h 1−q1 h
. Using Proposition 1, we get when ψ(α)θ ≥ 0, then
In this case, sigα (s(k)) = sα (k). Since
s(k + 1) ≤(1 − q1 h)ψ(α)θ Φ − (ψ(α)θ )α δ ∗ + δ ∗ .
 1/α
s(k) > ρ = ψ(α) δ ∗ /(q2 h) , (20) If ψ(α)θ ≥ 1, then s(k + 1) ≤ (1 − q1 h)ψ(α)θ Φ ≤ ψ(α)Φ = ρ .
If 0 ≤ ψ(α)θ < 1, then s(k + 1) ≤ [1 + ψ(α)θ − (ψ(α)θ )α ](1 −
q1 h)Φ ≤ (1 − q1 h)Φ < ψ(α)Φ = ρ. When ψ(α)θ ≤ 0, it follows
from Proposition 1 that
1 For the sake of statement, the notation [m∗ ] denotes the maximal integer
bounded below the real number m∗ . s(k + 1) ≤−(1 − q1 h)|ψ(α)θ |Φ + |ψ(α)θ |α (1 − q1 h)Φ + δ ∗ .
90 H. Du et al. / Automatica 68 (2016) 87–91

If ψ(α)θ ≤ −1, then s(k + 1) ≤ δ ∗ ≤ (1 − q1 h)Φ < ψ(α)Φ = ρ.

If −1 < ψ(α)θ ≤ 0, then
s(k + 1) ≤ −[|ψ(α)θ | − |ψ(α)θ |α − 1](1 − q1 h)Φ . (29)
By Lemma A.2, we obtain |ψ(α)θ |−|ψ(α)θ |α −1 ≥ −ψ(α), which
leads to s(k + 1) ≤ (1 − q1 h)ψ(α)Φ < ψ(α)Φ = ρ.
Next, we will prove that s(k + 1) ≥ −ρ . By the first line of (28)
and the definition of ρ , we have
s(k + 1) ≥ (1 − q1 h)ψ(α)θ Φ − q2 hsigα (ψ(α)θ )Φ α − δ ∗ .
Similarly, by Proposition 1, if ψ(α)θ ≥ 1, then s(k + 1) ≥ −δ ∗ ≥
−(1 − q1 h)Φ > −ρ . If 0 ≤ ψ(α)θ < 1, then s(k + 1) ≥
[ψ(α)θ − (ψ(α)θ )α − 1](1 − q1 h)Φ ≥ −ψ(α) · (1 − q1 h)Φ >
−ψ(α)Φ = −ρ. If −1 < ψ(α)θ ≤ 0, then s(k + 1) ≥
−(1 − q1 h)|ψ(α)θ |Φ + |ψ(α)θ |α δ ∗ − δ ∗ ≥ −[1 + |ψ(α)θ | −
|ψ(α)θ |α ](1 − q1 h)Φ ≥ −(1 − q1 h)Φ > −ρ. If ψ(α)θ ≤ −1,
then s(k + 1) ≥ (1 − q1 h)ψ(α)θ Φ + |ψ(α)θ |α δ ∗ − δ ∗ ≥ (1 −
Fig. 1. Response curves of the closed-loop system under the non-smooth-control-
q1 h)ψ(α)θ Φ > −ψ(α)Φ = −ρ .
based DSMC with parameters q1 = q2 = 3, α = 1/2.
Therefore, −ρ ≤ s(k + 1) ≤ ρ , that is to say that s(k + 1) ∈ Ω .

Remark 3.1. It should be pointed out that the continuous function

sigα (·) has been used in Yu, Yu, Shirinzadeh, and Man (2005)
to design a continuous-time SMC law. However, to the best of
authors’ knowledge, this is the first time to use this kind of
functions to design a discrete-time SMC law.

Remark 3.2. Note that the boundary for the sliding mode state s(k)
is determined by the value ρ . Since δ ∗ = O(h2 ) by Assumption 2.1,
it follows from (15) that
 1/α  1 
 1−α
ρ = ψ(α) · max O(h) , O(h) . (30)

To obtain the smallest boundary for the final sliding mode motion,
it is better to choose α = 1/2 such that 1/α = 1/(1 − α) = 2,
which leads to ρ = O(h2 ). That is to say that sliding mode motion
can reach the same level of accuracy as that of the equivalent-
control-based DSMC. In addition, for the proposed new DSMC law
(14), since C Φ x(k) − s(k) = C (Φ − I )x(k), it can be found that the Fig. 2. Response curves of the closed-loop system under the reaching-law-based
magnitude of u(k) will be in the order of O(1), which avoids the DSMC with parameters q1 = ε = 5.
need of over-large control effort if h is sufficiently small. Since that
there is no switching term, there is no chattering phenomenon in is x(0) = [−1 0]T . The sampling period is selected as: h = 1
the control signal. ms. The matrix C is chosen as: C = [0.5 0.5]. For comparison,
three kinds of DSMC methods are employed, i.e., reaching-law-
Remark 3.3. Note that the steady-state for system’s state is not based DSMC, equivalent-control-based DSMC, and non-smooth-
discussed in this paper. Actually, by substituting the three kinds control-based DSMC. The response curves are given in Figs. 1–3. It
of DSMC laws, i.e., (7), (11) and (14), into the discrete-time system is shown that the non-smooth-control-based DSMC considers both
(2), it can be shown that the nominal part of closed-loop system the performance requirement and the control signal quality.
i.e.,
x(k + 1) = (Φ − Γ (C Γ )−1 C Φ )x(k), 4. Conclusions

is the same. The difference lies in the part from the sliding
mode state. Therefore different steady-state of sliding mode state
directly affects the final steady-state for system’s state, which is
shown in the following example.
Example. Consider the high-precision position control for a
piezomotor-driven linear stage system (Abidi, Xu, & She, 2009),
whose dynamical equation is:
kf kv
ẋ1 = x2 , ẋ2 = u− x2 + f ,
m m
where x1 is the linear displacement, x2 is the linear velocity, u is the
voltage input, and f is an unknown disturbance. In the simulation,
the parameters are chosen as: m = 1, kv = 144, kf = 6, and the
unknown disturbance is given by: f (t ) = 1 for 0 ≤ t ≤ 10 and
f (t ) = 1 + 2.2 sin(0.5π t ) for 10 ≤ t ≤ 20. The initial condition
A new chattering-free DSMC method based on non-smooth
control has been presented. It has shown that there is no chattering
phenomenon and no need for an overly large control effort in
the proposed DSMC. By synthesizing the benefit of non-smooth
control, the high precision for sliding mode motion can be kept
under the proposed DSMC, who provides a new choice for the
design of DSMC law.
Appendix
(31)
This Appendix collects some useful lemmas. The first lemma is
a simple extension of Lemma 2 of Yu et al. (2008), whose proof is
similar and is omitted here.
Lemma A.1. For the scalar dynamical system z (k + 1) = a · z (k) +
g (k)−ε · sgn(z (k)) with 0 ≤ a ≤ 1, if |g (k)| < γ , 0 ≤ γ < ε , there
is a finite number K ∗ > 0 such that |z (k)| ≤ ε + γ < 2ε , ∀k ≥ K ∗ .
 H. Du et al. / Automatica 68 (2016) 87–91 91

References

Abidi, K., Xu, J., & She, J. (2009). A discrete-time terminal sliding-mode control
approach applied to a motion control problem. IEEE Transactions on Industrial
Electronics, 56(9), 3619–3627.
Abidi, K., Xu, J., & Yu, X. (2007). On the discrete-time integral sliding-mode control.
IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control, 52(4), 709–715.
Bhat, S. P., & Bernstein, D. S. (2000). Finite-time stability of continuous autonomous
systems. SIAM Journal on Control and Optimization, 38(3), 751–766.
Drazenovic, B. (1969). The invariance conditions in variable structure systems.
Automatica, 5(3), 287–295.
Galias, Z., & Yu, X. (2007). Euler’s discretization of single input sliding-mode control
systems. IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control, 52(9), 1726–1730.
Gao, W., Wang, Y., & Homaifa, A. (1995). Discrete-time variable structure control
systems. IEEE Transactions on Industrial Electronics, 42(2), 117–122.
Li, S., Du, H., & Yu, X. (2014). Discrete-time terminal sliding mode control systems
based on Euler’s discretization. IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control, 59(2),
546–552.
Liu, H., & Li, S. (2012). Speed control for pmsm servo system using predictive
functional control and extended state observer. IEEE Transactions on Industrial
Electronics, 59(2), 1171–1183.
Perruquetti, W., & Barbot, J. P. (2002). Sliding mode control in engineering. New York:
Fig. 3. Response curves of the closed-loop system under the equivalent-control- Marcel Dekker.
based DSMC. Qu, S., Xia, X., & Zhang, J. (2014). Dynamics of discrete-time sliding-mode-
control uncertain systems with a disturbance compensator. IEEE Transactions
α 1 on Industrial Electronics, 61(7), 3502–3560.
Lemma A.2 (Li et al., 2014). If function ψ(α) = 1 + α 1−α − α 1−α Su, W. C., Drakunov, S. V., & Ozguner, U. (2000). An O(T 2 ) boundary layer in sliding
and 0 < α < 1, then 1 < ψ(α) < 2 and for any x ∈ [0, 1] mode for sampled-data systems. IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control, 45(3),
482–485.
xψ(α) − xα ψ(α)α + ψ(α) − 1 ≥ 0. Utkin, V. I. (1992). Sliding modes in control optimization. Berlin: Springer-Verlag.
Utkin, V. (1994). Sliding mode control in discrete-time and difference systems. In
A. S. I. Zinober (Ed.), Variable structure and Lyapunov control: Vol. 193
Proof of Proposition 1. Two cases will be considered. (pp. 87–107). New York: Springer-Verlag.
 1/α  1
 1−α Wang, B., Yu, X., & Chen, G. (2009). ZOH discretization effect on single-input
First, if δ ∗ /q2 h ≤ q2 h/(1 − q1 h) = Φ , then sliding mode control systems with matched uncertainties. Automatica, 45(1),
118–125.
Xia, X., & Zinober, A. S. I. (2006). Delta-modulated feedback in discretization of
 q h  1−α α sliding mode control. Automatica, 42(5), 771–776.
= q2 h · Φ α = (1 − q1 h)Φ .
2
δ ∗ ≤ q2 h (A.1) Yu, X., Wang, B., Galias, Z., & Chen, G. (2008). Discretization effect on equivalent
1 − q1 h control-based multi-input sliding-mode control systems. IEEE Transactions on
Automatic Control, 53(6), 1563–1569.
 ∗ 1/α  1
 1−α Yu, X., Wang, B., & Li, X. (2012). Computer-controlled variable structure
Second, if Φ = qδ h , then
q2 h
2
≥ 1−q1 h systems: the state-of-the-art. IEEE Transactions on Industrial Informatics, 8(2),
197–205.
Yu, X., & Xu, J. X. (2002). Lecture notes in control and information sciences: Vol. 274.
δ ∗ = q2 h · Φ α , and (δ ∗ )1−α ≥ q2 h/(1 − q1 h)α , (A.2) Variable structure systems: Towards the 21st century. Berlin: Springer-Verlag.
Yu, S., Yu, X., Shirinzadeh, B., & Man, Z. (2005). Continuous finite-time
 1/α control for robotic manipulators with terminal sliding mode. Automatica, 41,
which leads to δ ∗ ≤ (1 − q1 h) qδ h
∗
2
= (1 − q1 h)Φ . 1957–1964.