See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/370940226

Russian Text © The Author(s), 2023, published in Izvestiya Akademii Nauk

Article in Journal of Computer and Systems Sciences International · September 2023

DOI: 10.1134/S1064230723020107

CITATIONS READS

0 24

2 authors:

Svetlana Igorevna Gulyukina V. A. Utkin

Russian Academy of Sciences Russian Academy of Sciences
9 PUBLICATIONS 7 CITATIONS 109 PUBLICATIONS 590 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by V. A. Utkin on 22 May 2023.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

ISSN 1064-2307, Journal of Computer and Systems Sciences International, 2023, Vol. 62, No. 2, pp. 263–280. © Pleiades Publishing, Ltd., 2023.
Russian Text © The Author(s), 2023, published in Izvestiya Akademii Nauk, Teoriya i Sistemy Upravleniya, 2023, No. 2, pp. 123–139.

CONTROL IN STOCHASTIC SYSTEMS

AND UNDER UNCERTAINTY

The Problem of Controlling a Steam Generator under Uncertainty

with Constraints on the Phase Variables and Controls
S. I. Gulyukinaa,* and V. A. Utkina,**
a
Trapeznikov Institute of Control Sciences, Russian Academy of Sciences, Moscow, Russia
*e-mail:gulyukina.si@mail.ru
**e-mail: vicutkin@ipu.ru
Received September 8, 2022; revised September 17, 2022; accepted December 5 , 2022

Abstract—The problem of controlling a steam generator is considered, taking into account restrictions
on the phase variables and control under the effect of external uncontrolled disturbances. To synthe-
size the control law, a block approach is used with the formation of linear local relationships with sat-
uration, which makes it possible to take into account restrictions on phase variables and control when
choosing feedback parameters. Under conditions of incomplete information about the state vector and
under the effect of external disturbances, an observer of states and disturbances is synthesized, which
makes it possible to obtain estimates of unknown signals with the given accuracy. The efficiency of the
proposed algorithms is confirmed by the results of numerical simulation.

DOI: 10.1134/S1064230723020107

INTRODUCTION
A scheme for generating electricity and heat, based on the generation of water vapor by burning coal or
natural gas and its subsequent supply to steam turbine plants, is widely used at large modern thermal
power facilities. This scheme achieves has better technological characteristics, including energy efficiency,
especially for high-capacity energy facilities, than other installations. Mathematical models describing
thermal power objects are multidimensional and multiply connected, with a large number of physical
parameters that cannot be directly measured [1–3]. The need to take into account nonlinearities in such
models is determined by thermal, mechanical, and electrical limitations in the presence of a general lim-
itation on the total power of the processes. Accounting for these restrictions becomes mandatory due to
the general requirement to minimize the loss of energy resources while simultaneously intensifying the
technological processes of energy facilities.
The well-known control algorithms for power facilities are often based on the methods of linearization
of the original nonlinear system [4, 5]. It should be noted that, in relation to linearized models, it is pos-
sible to ensure the operability of the control system only in the vicinity of the operating point. In contrast
to linearized models, the methods of feedback linearization of nonlinear models developed in the block
approach [6, 7] and back-stepping control algorithms [8, 9] ensure the global convergence of a closed sys-
tem. Robust control methods [10–12] are also often used in control problems; in particular, robustness
and invariance to external disturbances are ensured using methods of the theory of sliding modes [13–16].
To obtain estimates that are inaccessible for measuring the components of the state vector, as well as
model uncertainties and external disturbances, state observers with discontinuous controls and deep feed-
backs are very effective [17–19].
Issues related to taking into account restrictions on phase variables and controls have not been suffi-
ciently studied in control theory. Recently, a number of studies have appeared that take into account
restrictions on phase variables and controls [20–22], in which, using the block approach, local feedbacks
and controls are synthesized in the form of functions with saturation, which makes it possible to take into
account these restrictions in the feedback synthesis stage.
This paper poses the problem of synthesizing a robust control system for a steam generator under the
action of external inconsistent disturbances limited in absolute value on the control object. The purpose
of the feedback control is to maintain the pressure in front of the valve that controls the steam supply to
the turbine at the given level, taking into account the restrictions on the phase variables and control. To

263
264 GULYUKINA, UTKIN

Задвижка

ДПТ Котлоагрегат

Устройство Горелка
подачи топлива

Fig. 1. Scheme of the boiler–steam generator.

solve this problem, it is proposed to apply a block approach using linear functions with saturation (sat-
functions) as the local feedbacks.
This study is organized as follows: In Section 1 a mathematical model of the control object is shown
and the problem statement is formalized. Section 2 describes the synthesis of the feedback taking into
account the restrictions on phase variables and control under the assumption that the state vector of the
control plant model and external disturbances are available for measurement. For informational support
of the proposed control algorithms with an incomplete set of sensors in Section 3, an observer of states
and disturbances is being developed. In Section 4 the results of numerical simulation in the MATLAB-
Simulink environment, demonstrating the performance of the proposed algorithms, are shown.

1. MATHEMATICAL MODEL OF THE CONTROL OBJECT: PROBLEM STATEMENT

The system under consideration is represented by a boiler–steam generator, used in steam turbines.
This type of steam generator is widely used in technological operations of various industries. The sche-
matic diagram of the boiler is shown in Fig. 1.
The industrial steam generator consists of a metal boiler filled with water. A heater inside the device
brings the water to a boil through the heat flow DQ (t ), which then turns into a state of steam. The super-
heated steam rises to the valve, which is in position q(t), in front of which a high pressure PT (t ) is created.
The control action in the system is The fuel supply to the furnace furnace is controlled by the system so
that it is proportional to the fuel consumption u1(t ).
The model of processes in the boiler is described by the system from three differential equations [1–3]:

CnPT (t ) = ks PD (t ) − PT (t ) − kμ PT (t )q(t ),
Сb PD (t ) = kmDQ (t ) − ks PD (t ) − PT (t ), (1.1)
Tb DQ (t ) = −DQ (t ) + u1(t ),

where PT (t ) is the steam pressure in front of the valve that regulates the steam supply directly to the turbine,
Сn is the thermal constant for high-pressure pipelines, PD (t ) is the steam pressure at the outlet of the
boiler–steam generator, ks is the coefficient of proportionality of the pressure drop between the boiler and
the valve, kμ is the coefficient of proportionality of the valve position, DQ is the furnace heat flux, Сb is the
thermal constant of the boiler, km is the coefficient of proportionality, Tb is the time constant, and u1(t ) is
the fuel consumption in the furnace furnace.

JOURNAL OF COMPUTER AND SYSTEMS SCIENCES INTERNATIONAL Vol. 62 No. 2 2023

 THE PROBLEM OF CONTROLLING A STEAM 265

It is assumed that the fuel supply to the furnace is provided by a DC motor (DCM) fuel feeder. The
behavior of the DCM is described by a system of second-order equations [23],
ω (t ) = a21(a22I arm.(t ) − mL (t )),
(1.2)

I arm.(t ) = a32(u2(t ) − a22ω(t ) − a31I arm.(t )),
where ω (t ) ∈ R is the rotation frequency of the motor shaft, I arm.(t ) ∈ R is the armature current, u2(t ) ∈ R
is the armature voltage, mL (t ) is the load moment, and a21, a22, a31, a32 are positive constants.
Assuming that the rate of fuel supply to the furnace is proportional to the rotational speed of the DCM,
u1(t ) = mω(t ), m = const > 0 , we write systems (1.1) and (1.2) as follows:
e1(t ) = −a1q(t )e1(t ) + a2 x2(t ) − η1(t ),
x2(t ) = 1 [a1q(t )e1(t ) + a3 x3(t ) + η1] − η2, (1.3)
2 x2(t )
x3(t ) = −bx3(t ) + bmx4 (t ),
x4 (t ) = a21[a22 x5(t ) − mL ],
(1.4)
x5(t ) = a32[u2(t ) − a22 x4 (t ) − a31 x5(t )].
Hereб e1(t ) = PT (t ) − PTd (t ) , PTd (t ) is the desired pressure in front of the valve, x2(t ) = PD (t ) − PT (t ) ,
x3 = DQ (t ) , x4 = ω (t ), x5 = I я (t ) , η1(t ) = a1q(t )PTd , η2(t ) = ks (Cb + Cn )/(2CbCn ) = const, a1 = kμ /Сn,
a2 = ks /Сn , a3 = km /Сb , b = 1/Tb , and aij = const > 0 are the DCM parameters.
The task of monitoring the set pressure value in front of the valve PTd = const is set with the given accu-
racy
e1(t ) = PT (t) − PTd ≤ Δ1 = const (1.5)
under the following assumptions about systems (1.3) and (1.4):
(1) the pressure before the valve PT (t ) and hence e1(t ) = PT (t ) − PTd , the pressure in the steam generator
PD (t ) and hence x2(t ) = PD (t ) − PT (t ) , and the DCM armature current x5(t) are available for measure-
ment;
(2) disturbancesη1(t ), η2 and the position of valve q(t) are assumed to be unknown and satisfy the fol-
lowing constraints:
q(t ) ∈ [qmin ,1], q(i)(t ) ≤ Qi , i = 1,4  η1(t ) ∈ [N11, N12 ], η2 ≤ N 2;
(1.6)
Qi , qmin , N11, N12, N1, N 2 = const > 0.
The fact that the position of the outlet valve is assumed to be unknown and is considered as an external
disturbance means that the steam generator operates in an autonomous mode. This situation is often
encountered in the group use of steam generators operating in a common steam pipeline;
(3) the system’s variables are subject to the following physical constraints:
e1 ∈ E1, x2 (t ) ∈ ( X 21, X 22 ], xi (t ) ∈ [0, X i ], i = 3,4;
x5(t ) ≤ X 5, u1(t ) ∈ [0,U 1], u2 (t ) ≤ U 2; (1.7)
E1, X 21, X 22, X i , X 5,U 1,U 2 = const > 0.
In Section 2, we solve the problem of feedback synthesis in the control problem with respect to the out-
put variable (1.5) under the conditions of complete parametric and signal certainty, taking into account
constraints (1.6) and (1.7).

2. FEEDBACK SYNTHESIS
We present the solution in a general form within the block approach under the conditions of complete
information about the components of the state vector and disturbances. Further, the following definition
is used.
Definition. For M = const > 0 and the argument of the function s, we have
satM (s) = min( s ,M )sign(s), satM+ (s) = 0.5satM (s)[1 + sign(s)],

JOURNAL OF COMPUTER AND SYSTEMS SCIENCES INTERNATIONAL Vol. 62 No. 2 2023

266 GULYUKINA, UTKIN

satM(s)

M
M S

M

Fig. 2. Graph of a linear function with saturation satM (s) .

satM+(s)

0 M S

+
Fig. 3. Graph of a linear one-way function with saturation satM (s) .

which are shown for clarity in Figs. 2 and 3.

Below is a step-by-step procedure for synthesizing feedback in solving control problem (1.5) under
assumptions (1.6) and (1.7).
Stage 1.
1. In the first equation of system (1.3), as a fictitious control action, the pressure difference at the outlet
of the boiler and in front of the valve is considered to be x2.
2. We introduce a nondegenerate change of variables that takes into account constraints (1.7):
e2(t ) = a2 x2(t ) − satM+ 2 (s2(t )), (2.1)
where s2(t ) = −k1e1(t ) + η1(t ) . As we can see, the solution of the problem of stabilization of the variable
e2(t ) → 0 when choosing an amplitude 0 < M 2 ≤ a2 X 2 ensures the given restrictions x2 ∈ [0, X 2 ] (1.7).
After substitution (2.1), the first equation of system (1.3) is transformed to the form
e1(t ) = −a1q(t )e1(t ) + e2(t ) + satM+ 2 (s2(t )) − η1(t ). (2.2)
3. When the variable s2(t ) enters the linear zone 0 < s2(t ) < M 2 , the first system (1.3) is described by
the equation
e1(t ) = −[a1q(t ) + k1]e1(t ) + e2 (t ), (2.3)

JOURNAL OF COMPUTER AND SYSTEMS SCIENCES INTERNATIONAL Vol. 62 No. 2 2023

 THE PROBLEM OF CONTROLLING A STEAM 267

where the choice of parameter k1 = const ≥ 0 determines the convergence of the state of the given subsys-
tem to some neighborhood of zero, defined by the expression e1(t ) ≤ Δ 2 /(a1qmin + k1) under the assump-
tion that the inequality e2(t ) ≤ Δ 2 = const in the second stage of the procedure is fulfilled.
4. The conditions for entering the linear zone are determined by the choice of amplitude M2 and gain
k1, based on ensuring the ratio s2(t )s2 (t ) < 0 in the nonlinear zone s2(t ) ∈ (−∞,0) ∪ (M 2, ∞).
We write the differential equation with respect to the variable s2(t ):
s2(t ) = f1(t ) − k1[satM+ 2 (s2 (t )) + ϕ1(t )], (2.4)
where f1(t ) = η 1 and ϕ1(t ) = −a1q1(t )e1 + e2(t ) − η1(t ) .
5. The problem is set to choose coefficient k1 and amplitude M2 of the function with saturation
satM+ 2 (s2 ) .
We assume further that f1(t ) ≤ F1 = N1 , −ϕ1(t ) ∈ [Φ11, Φ12 ], and F1, Φ11, Φ12 = const > 0.
At s2(t ) ∈ (M 2, ∞) and hence satM+ 2 (s2(t )) = M 2, the inequality s2(t ) = f1(t ) − k1[M 2 + ϕ1(t )] < 0 must
hold, from which the inequality for the choice of amplitude M 2 > Φ12 + F1 /k1 follows.
At s2(t ) ∈ (−∞,0) and hence satM+ 2 (s2(t )) = 0 , the inequality s2(t ) = f1(t ) − k1ϕ1(t ) > 0 must hold. Since
ϕ1(t ) < 0 , coefficient k1 > 0 can be found such that condition s2(t ) < 0 holds: k1 > F1 /Φ11.
Stage 2.
1. We ensure that the variable e2(t ) from (2.1) falls in the given neighborhood of zero e2(t ) ≤ Δ 2 . In
other words, we solve the problem of stabilization with the given accuracy of a system of the form
a2
[a1q(t )e1(t ) + a3 x3(t ) + η1(t )] − a2η2 − d [satM 2 (s2 (t ))],
+
e2(t ) = (2.5)
2 x2(t ) dt
where
d [sat + (s (t ))] = 0, s2(t ) ∈ (−∞,0) ∪ (M 2, ∞),

s2(t ), s2(t ) ∈ (0, M 2 ).
M2 2
dt
2. Considering the variable x3(t ) in system (2.5) as a fictitious control, we introduce a change of vari-
able,
e3(t ) = a3 x3(t ) − satM+ 3 ( s3(t )) , (2.6)
where

s3(t ) = −a1q(t )e1(t ) − η1(t ) − k2e2 (t ) + {

2 x2 d
a2 dt
[satM+ 2 ( s2 (t ))] + a2η2 .}
The selection of the amplitude from the relation 0 < M 3 ≤ a3 X 3 as a result of solving the problem of
stabilization of the variable e3(t ) provides a constraint x3(t ) ∈ [0, X 3 ].
3. After substituting (2.6) into (2.5), we have
a2
[a1q(t )e1(t ) + e3(t ) + satM3 ( s3(t )) + η1(t )] − a2η2 − d [satM 2 ( s2 (t ))].
+ +
e2(t ) = (2.7)
2 x2(t ) dt
4. When entering the linear zone, system (2.7) is described by an equation of the form
a2
e2(t ) = (−k2e2(t ) + e3(t )). (2.8)
2 x2(t )
Thus, the problem of stabilization of the variable e2(t ) around zero e2(t ) ≤ Δ 2 = Δ3 /k2 is solved under
the assumption that at the next stage the relation e3(t ) ≤ Δ3 is fulfilled.
5. The choice of the amplitude and function gain satM+ 3 ( s3(t )) in order to ensure that the variable s3(t )
falls into the linear zone is determined similarly to the first stage.

JOURNAL OF COMPUTER AND SYSTEMS SCIENCES INTERNATIONAL Vol. 62 No. 2 2023

268 GULYUKINA, UTKIN

We write an equation describing the behavior of the variable s3(t ):

k2a2 +
s3(t ) = f2 (t ) − [satM3 (s3(t )) + ϕ2 (t )], (2.9)
2 x2(t )
where
2 x2(t ) d 2 x (t ) 2
f2(t ) = −a1(qe
 1(t ) + qe1(t )) − η 1(t ) + [satM+ 2 ( s2 (t )) + a2η2 ] + 2 d 2 [satM+ 2 ( s2 (t ))],
a2 dt a2 dt
2 x2(t ) d
[satM 2 ( s2 (t )) + a2η2 ].
+
ϕ2(t ) = a1qe1(t ) + e3(t ) + η1(t ) −
a2 dt
We assume further that f2(t ) ≤ F2, −ϕ2(t ) ∈ [Φ 21, Φ 22 ], and F2, Φ 21, Φ 22 = const > 0 .
By analogy with the first stage, the choice M 3 > Φ 22 + 2 X 22F2 /(k2a2 ) and k2 > 2 X 22F2 /(a2Φ 21) guaran-
tees the variable s3(t ) falls into the linear zone s3(t ) ∈ [0, M 3 ].
Stage 3.
1. We ensure that the variable e3(t ) from (2.6) falls into the given neighborhood of zero e3(t ) ≤ Δ3 ; i.e.,
we solve the problem of stabilization with the given accuracy of the system of the form

e3(t ) = a3b(− x3(t ) + mx4 (t )) − d [satM+ 3 ( s3(t )) ]. (2.10)

dt
2. We consider the variable x4 (t ) in system (2.10) as a fictitious control, and we introduce a change of
the variable

e4 (t ) = mx4 (t ) − satM+ 4 ( s4 (t )) , (2.11)

where

s4 (t ) = x3(t ) − k3e3(t ) + 1 d [satM+ 3 ( s3(t ))].

a3b dt
The choice of the amplitude from the relation 0 < M 4 ≤ mX 4 as a result of solving the problem of sta-
bilization of the variable e4 (t ) provides the constraint x4 (t ) ∈ [0, X 4 ].
3. After substituting (2.11) into (2.10), we have

e3(t ) = a3b[− x3(t ) + e4 (t ) + satM+ 4 ( s4 (t ))] − d [satM+ 3 ( s3(t ))]. (2.12)

dt
4. When operating in a linear zone, system (2.12) stabilizes with the given accuracy
e3(t ) = a3b(−k3e3(t ) + e4 (t )). (2.13)
In fact, e3(t ) ≤ Δ3 = Δ 4 /k3 on the assumption that e4 (t ) ≤ Δ4 = const will be ensured in the next step.
5. The choice of the amplitude and function gain satM+ 4 ( s4 (t )) to ensure that the variable s4 (t ) enters the
linear zone is determined similarly to the first stage.
We write an equation describing the behavior of the variable s4 (t ) :

s4 (t ) = f3(t ) − k3a3bsatM+ 4 ( s4 (t )) + ϕ3(t )), (2.14)

where
2
f3(t ) = x3(t ) + 1 d 2 [satM+ 2 ( s2 (t ))], ϕ3(t ) = − x3(t ) + e4 (t ) − 1 d [satM+ 3 ( s3(t ))].
a3b dt a3b dt
We assume further that f3(t ) ≤ F3; −ϕ3(t ) ∈ [Φ31, Φ32 ]; and F3, Φ31, and Φ32 = const > 0 .
The choice of M 4 > Φ32 + F3 /(k3a3b) and k3 > F3 /(a3bΦ31) by analogy with the first stage, guarantees
that the variable s4 (t ) falls into the linear zone s4 (t ) ∈ [0, M 4 ].

JOURNAL OF COMPUTER AND SYSTEMS SCIENCES INTERNATIONAL Vol. 62 No. 2 2023

 THE PROBLEM OF CONTROLLING A STEAM 269

Stage 4.
1. We consider a dynamic equation with respect to the variable of the system e4 (t ) from (2.11) of the
form

e4 (t ) = ma21(a22 x5(t ) − mL ) − d satM+ 4 (s4 (t )). (2.15)

dt
2. In expression (2.15), the armature current acts as a fictitious control x5(t ) ; we set it as
e5(t ) = a22 x5(t ) − satM 5 (s5(t )), (2.16)
where

s5(t ) = mL − k4e4 (t ) + 1 d satM 4 (s4 (t )).

+

ma21 dt
The choice of the amplitude from the relation M 5 ≤ a22 X 5 as a result of solving the problem of stabi-
lization of the variable e5(t ) provides the constraint x5 ≤ X 5 .
3. After substituting (2.16) into (2.15), we have

e4 (t ) = ma21[e5(t ) + satM 5 (s5(t )) − mL ] − d satM+ 4 (s4 (t )). (2.17)

dt
4. When operating in a linear zone, system (2.17) stabilizes with the given accuracy
e4 (t ) = ma21(−k4e4 (t ) + e5(t )), (2.18)
where the selection of parameter k4 > 0 determines the convergence of the variable of this subsystem to the
given neighborhood of zero, defined by the expression e4 (t ) ≤ Δ5 /k4 , assuming that the condition
e5(t ) ≤ Δ5 = const at the last stage of the procedure is fulfilled.
5. The selection of amplitude M 5 > 0 from (2.16), which ensures that variable e4 in the neighborhood
of zero is determined based on the second Lyapunov method: V = 0.5s52(t ).
We write the derivative of the function s5(t ) as
s5(t ) = f4 (t ) − k4 ma21(satM5 (s5(t )) + ϕ4 (t )), (2.19)
where
2
f4 (t ) = m L + 1 d 2 satM+ 4 (s4 (t )), ϕ4 (t ) = e5(t ) − mL − 1 d satM+ 4 (s4 (t )).
ma21 dt ma21 dt
The requirement V = s5(t )[f4 (t ) − k4 ma21satM 5 (s5(t )) + ϕ4 (t ))] < 0 outside the linear zone s5(t ) ≥ M 5
gives the derivative of the Lyapunov function of the form V = s5(t )[f4 (t ) − k4 ma21sign M 5 (s5(t )) + ϕ4 (t ))] <
0, from which the expression for the selection of amplitude M 5 > Φ 4 + F4 /(k4 ma21), where f4 (t ) ≤ F4 =
const and ϕ4 (t ) ≤ Φ 4 = const , follows.
Stage 5
We solve the stabilization problem for variable (2.16) described by the equation

e5(t ) = a22a32[u2 (t ) − a22 x4 (t ) − a31 x5(t )] − d satM 5 (s5(t ))

dt
or taking into account (2.11) and (2.16)
 a a 
e5(t ) = a22a32 u2 (t ) − 22 [e4 (t ) + satM 4 (s4 (t )] − 31 [e5(t ) + satM5 (s5(t )] − d satM 5 (s5(t )).
+
(2.20)
 m a22  dt
We choose the control in the form of a discontinuous function due to physical considerations:
u2 = −M 6 sign(s6(t )), s6(t ) = e5(t ). (2.21)
Under the condition that the condition for the existence of a sliding mode is satisfied

M 6 > −a22 x4 (t ) − a31 x5(t ) − 1 d sat (s (t ))

M5 5
a22a32 dt

JOURNAL OF COMPUTER AND SYSTEMS SCIENCES INTERNATIONAL Vol. 62 No. 2 2023

270 GULYUKINA, UTKIN

in system (2.20), a sliding regime arises over the plane in finite time e5(t ) = 0 .
For clarity, we write the equations of motion of a closed system (1.3) and (1.4) in new variables ei (t ) = 0,
i = 1,5, given by Eqs. (1.5), (2.1), (2.6), (2.11), and (2.16) when the vector components in the new variables
fall into the linear zones of the corresponding sat-functions and the sliding mode occurs along the plane
e5(t ) = 0 , according to Eqs. (2.3), (2.8), (2.13), and (2.18):

a2
e1(t ) = −(a1q(t ) + k1)e1(t ) + e2 (t ), e2 (t ) = (−k2e2 (t ) + e3(t )),
2 x2(t ) (2.22)
e3(t ) = a3b(−k3e3(t ) + e4 (t )), e4 (t ) = ma21(−k4e4 (t ) + e5(t )), e5(t ) = 0.
In system (2.22), the general motion is decomposed from below upwards into subsystems of the first
order successively converging to zero, е5(t ) = 0  e4 (t ) → 0 ⇒ e3(t ) → 0  e2(t ) → 0  e1(t ) → 0 ,
which solves the problem of regulating the output variable.
In the next section, we solve the problem of estimating the components of the state vector and distur-
bances in system (1.3) and (1.4) using the cascade method of observer synthesis within the methods of sys-
tems with deep feedback and sliding modes.

3. OBSERVER OF THE STATE VECTOR AND EXTERNAL DISTURBANCES

3.1. Observer of the state vector and disturbances. Regarding the control object model (1.3) and (1.4), it
is assumed that variables are available for measurement e1(t ), x2(t ), and x5(t ) , and we construct an observer
of the form

z1(t ) = a2 z2(t ) + ε1(t )l1,

z2(t ) = 1 a3 z3(t ) + ε2 (t )l2,
2 x2(t )
z3(t ) = −bz3(t ) + bmz4 (t ) + υ3(t), (3.1)
z4 (t ) = a21a22 x5(t ) + υ4 (t ),
z5(t ) = a32(u2(t ) − a22 z4(t ) − a31 x5(t )) + υ5(t ),

where ε1(t ) = x1(t ) − z1(t ) and ε2(t ) = x2 (t ) − z2 (t ), parameters l1, l2 = const > 0 , and corrective actions
υ3, υ4, and υ5 are defined below.

We write the system in residuals εi (t ) = xi (t ) − zi (t ), i = 1,5, taking into account (1.3), (1.4), and (3.1):

ε1(t ) = a2ε2(t ) − η1*(t ) − l1ε1(t ),

ε 2(t ) = 1 [a3ε3(t ) + η1*(t )] − η2 (t ) − l2ε2 (t ),
2 x2(t )
ε 3(t ) = −bε3(t ) + bmε4 (t ) − υ3(t ), (3.2)
ε 4 (t ) = −a21mL − υ4 (t ),
ε 5(t ) = −a32a22ε4 (t ) − υ5(t ),

where η1*(t ) = a1q(t )[e1(t ) + PTd ] = a1q(t )x1(t ) .

The further analysis and synthesis of the observer of the state vector and disturbances (3.1) are based
on the following result.
Lemma [21]. Assume the system ε(t ) = −l ε(t ) + η(t ), l, N , N = const > 0, η(t ) ≤ N , and η (t ) ≤ N is
given. Then after a finite time interval t1 ≥ 0 , the following estimates are valid:

ε(t ) ≤ Δ = N , ε(t ) ≤ Δ = N , Δ, Δ = const, − l ε(t ) + η(t ) = δ(t ) ≤ Δ.

l l
JOURNAL OF COMPUTER AND SYSTEMS SCIENCES INTERNATIONAL Vol. 62 No. 2 2023
 THE PROBLEM OF CONTROLLING A STEAM 271

Below is a step-by-step procedure for the cascade synthesis of the observer of the state and disturbances
as applied to system (1.3) and (1.4) based on the theory of sliding modes and deep feedbacks.
1. By choosing a corrective action in the last subsystem (3.2) in the form υ5(t ) = M sign (ε5(t ))
(M = const > a32a22ε4 (t ) ), the sliding mode is ensured along the straight line ε5(t ) = 0 . In this case, the
average value of the discontinuous signal is υ5eq (t ) = −a32a22ε4 (t ).
2. From the last expression we have ε4 (t ) = −υ5eq (t )/(a32a22 ), and after taking this into account, we con-
struct the corrective action for the fourth subsystem (3.2) in the form υ4 = l4 (−υ5eq (t )/(a32a22 )) = l4ε4,
l4 = const > 0 . After substituting the corrective action, the fourth subsystem will take the form
ε 4 (t ) = −l4ε4 (t ) − a21mL . Assuming mL ≤ M L, m L ≤ M L, and M L, M L = const , according to the lemma,
stabilization of the variable ε4 with the given accuracy ε4 (t ) ≤ a21M L /l4 = Δ 4, limΔ 4 = 0 at l4 → ∞ is
ensured; i.e., we obtain an estimate of the variable x4 (t ): ε4 (t ) → 0  z4 (t ) ≈ x4 (t ). In addition, from the
relation of the lemma −l4ε4 (t ) − a21mL ≤ a21M L /l4 = Δ 4, lim Δ 4 = 0, at l4 → ∞ we obtain an estimate of
the moment of resistance with the given accuracy:
υ4
l4ε4 (t ) = −a21mL + δ4 (t ), δ4 (t ) ≤ Δ 4  mL ≈ − .
a21
Note that, according to the lemma, for mL = const, m L = 0  Δ 4 → 0 , the estimate of the load
moment converges to the true value asymptotically:
lim l4ε4 (t ) = −a21mL.
t →∞

3. Using the original model of the control object (1.1), we synthesize an auxiliary autonomous observer
of the first order of the state
Сb z2(t ) = km z3(t ) − ks PD (t ) − PT (t ) + υ2
and write the equation for the residual ε2 = PD − z2 , taking into account the designation x3 = DQ from
(1.3): Сb ε2 = kmε3 − υ2 . The choice of corrective action, υ2 = M 2 sign ( ε2(t )), M 2 = const > km ε2(t ) ,
ensures the sliding mode along the sliding plane ε2 = 0, and the average value of the discontinuous control
in the sliding mode is υ2eq = kmε3 . Forming a corrective action in the third subsystem (3.2) in the form
υ3 = l3υ2eq = l3km ε3 , we have a subsystem of the form ε 3(t ) = −b[ε3(t ) + mε4 ] − l3kmε3 . Taking into account
ε4 (t ) ≤ Δ 4 by the selection of the coefficient l3 > 0 , it is possible to ensure the given accuracy of stabiliza-
tion of the variable ε3(t ) :
bmΔ4
ε3(t ) ≤ = Δ 3.
b + l3km
4. We consider the second subsystem (3.2), which, for ε3(t ) = 0 will take the form
1 η*(t ) − η (t ) − l ε (t ).
ε 2(t ) = (3.3)
1 2 2 2
2 x2(t )
System (3.3) in the notation of the lemma is written as

ε 2(t ) = η* − l2ε2(t ), η* = 1 η*(t ) − η (t ).

1 2
2 x2(t )
Assuming η* (t ) ≤ N *, η * (t ) ≤ N *, and N *, N ⋅ = const > 0 , the relations from the lemma are valid:
there is such a coefficient l2 > 0 , such that ε2(t ) ≤ Δ 2 = N * /l2 , ε(t ) ≤ Δ 2 = N * /l2 , and Δ2, Δ 2 are pre-
determined numbers, −l2ε2(t ) + η* (t ) = δ2(t) ≤ Δ 2 and hence the variable l2ε2(t ) = η* (t ) + δ2(t ) serves as
an estimate of the disturbance with the predetermined accuracy.
5. Taking into account ε2(t ) → 0 , the first equation of system (3.2) takes the form
ε1(t ) = −η1*(t ) − l1ε1(t ) , where under the assumption |η1*(t )| ≤ N1*, |η 1*(t )| ≤ N1*; and N1*, N1* = const > 0,
selection of the coefficient l1 > 0 ensures the stabilization of ε1(t ) ≤ N1* /l1 = Δ1 at l1 → ∞  Δ1 → 0 

JOURNAL OF COMPUTER AND SYSTEMS SCIENCES INTERNATIONAL Vol. 62 No. 2 2023

272 GULYUKINA, UTKIN

z1(t ) → e1(t ). According to the lemma, taking into account ε1(t ) ≤ N1* /l1 = Δ1 , an estimate of the external
disturbance can also be obtained with the given accuracy l1ε1(t ) = −η1*(t ) + δ1(t ), δ1(t ) ≤ Δ1.
As a result of the synthesis of the observer of the state vector and disturbances (3.1), there are estimates
with the given accuracy of the variables of the state vector of system (1.3) and (1.4) zi (t ) → x i (t ), i = 1,5,
and instead of estimating the variables z1(t ) ≈ e1(t ) and z2(t ) ≈ x2 (t ), the variables e1(t ) and x2(t ) available
for measurement can be used.
In addition, we have estimates of external disturbances with the given accuracy:
the moments of resistance on the DCM shaft at the second stage: mL ≈ −υ4 /a21;
at the fourth stage of the procedure, the disturbance estimate is obtained: η*(t): l2ε2(t ) = −η*(t ) + δ2 (t ) ,
l2ε2(t ) ≈ η*(t );
at the fifth stage of the procedure, the disturbance estimate η1*(t ): l1ε1(t ) = −η1*(t ) + δ1(t ),
l1ε1(t ) ≈ −η1*(t ) ;
from expression η* = η1*(t )/(2 x2(t )) − η2 (t ), the fourth stage is the disturbance

η2(t) = 1 η*(t ) − η* (t ) = 1 [−l ε (t ) + δ (t )] − l ε − δ η* (t ),

1 1 1 2 2 2 2
2 x2(t ) 2 x2(t )
η2(t ) ≈ −l2ε2 (t ) − 1 l1ε1(t );
2 x2(t )
from expression η1*(t ) = a1q(t )[e1(t ) + PTd ] = a1q(t )x1(t ) from (3.2), an estimate of the valve position is
determined: q(t ) ≈ η1*(t )/a1 x1(t ) .
3.2. Synthesis of the observer-differentiator. As follows from Section 2, for the formation of control
(2.21) information about the position of the valve q(t) and its first four derivatives is required. An estimate
of the valve position was found above. To obtain estimates for its first four derivatives, we construct an
additional observer-differentiator.
We briefly outline the procedure for designing an observer-differentiator.
1. We construct a filter with stable intrinsic dynamics:
ξ i (t ) = ξi +1(t ) + q(t ), i = 1,4, ξ 5(t ) = cT ξ(t ) + q(t ), (3.4)

where ξT (t ) = (ξ1(t ),..., ξ5(t )) ∈ R 5 , c ∈ R 5 , is the coefficient vector of the Hurwitz polynomial.
2. We present system (3.4) in the canonical form
ξ i (t ) = ξi +1(t ), i = 1,4, ξ 5(t ) = cT ξ(t ) + ξ6(t), (3.5)
where
ξ1(t ) = ξ1(t ),
ξ2(t ) = ξ2 (t ) + q(t ),
ξ3(t ) = ξ3(t ) + q(t ) + q(t ),
(3.6)
ξ4 (t ) = ξ4 (t ) + q(t ) + q(t ) + q(t ),
ξ5(t ) = ξ5(t ) + q(t ) + q(t ) + q(t ) + 
q (t ),
ξ6(t ) = cT ξ + q(t ) + q(t ) + q(t ) + 
q (t ) + q(4)(t ).
3. We build an observer of the state vector ξT (t ) = (ξ1(t ),..., ξ5(t )) and signal ξ6(t ) as applied to system
(3.5)
 
ξˆi (t ) = ξˆi +1(t ) + vi , i = 1,4, ξˆ5(t ) = cT ξˆ(t ) + v5, ξˆT (t ) = (ξˆ1(t ),..., ξˆ5(t )). (3.7)
4. We write Eqs. (3.6) and (3.7) in the residuals εi (t ) = ξi (t ) − ξˆi (t ) :
εi (t ) = εi +1(t ) − vi , i = 1,4, ε5(t ) = cT ε(t ) + ξ6(t ) − v5, εT (t ) = ( ε1(t ),..., ε5(t )). (3.8)

JOURNAL OF COMPUTER AND SYSTEMS SCIENCES INTERNATIONAL Vol. 62 No. 2 2023

 THE PROBLEM OF CONTROLLING A STEAM 273

Table 1. Parameters of the control object model and feedback

Steam generator model: ks = 2.41, kμ = 0.25, Cn = 2.78, Cb = 27.767, km = 0.2,Tb = 150, m = 3, q = 0.6.
DCM Model: a21 = 0.5, a22 = 1.8, a31 = 0.02, a32 = 20, mL = 10

Initial conditions of the CO: PT (0) = 18, PD (0) = 19.27, DQ (0) = 13.5, ω(0) = 450, I arm. = 0.05

Sc Simulation Scenario: PTd (t ) = 18at t ∈ [0, t1) ∪ [t 2,∞] , PTd (t ) = 14 at t ∈ [t1, t 2 ), t1 = 2000, t2 = 4000

Observer options: zi (0) = 0, i = 1, 4 , l1 = 100, l2 = 10, l3 = 0.1, l4 = 1, M = 1000

Controller options: k1 = 0.1, k2 = 1, k3 = 50,k4 = 1000, M 2 = 10,M 3 = 30, M 4 = 1000, M 5 = 30,M 6 = 220

Physical restrictions on phase variables:

PD ∈ [0,30], DQ ∈ [0,150], ω ∈ [0,9000], I я < 20, u2 ≤ 220

5. It was shown in [24, 25] that the choice of corrective actions in the observer (3.7) in the class of linear
functions with saturation according to the hierarchical principle

v1 = L1sat(l1ε1(t )), vi = Li sat(li vi −1), i = 2,5, L1, Li , li = const

allows us to solve the stabilization problem for system (3.8) with the given accuracy.

Indeed, assuming εi (t ) ≤ Ei , εi (t ) ≤ Ei , Ei = const , and ξ(t ) ≤ E6 = const We describe schemati-

cally the stabilization procedure for system (3.8).

1. In the first subsystem ε1(t) = ε2(t ) − L1sat(l1ε1(t )) , when choosing an amplitude L1 > ε2(t ) , the vari-
able ε1(t ) turns out to be in the linear zone in finite time and the following equality holds:
ε1(t) = ε2(t ) − l1 ε1(t ). According to the lemma, the relations ε1(t ) ≤ E2 /l1 and ε2(t ) − l1 ε1(t ) ≤ E2 /l1 are sat-
isfied and with an increase in the gain, the variable ε1(t ) ≈ 0 is stabilized with the given accuracy. As a
result, we have an estimate with the given accuracy of the variable ε2(t ) ≈ l1 ε1(t ) .
We describe the first point with a logical scheme:

E
ε1(t ) = ε2(t ) − L1sat(l1 ε1(t )), L1 > ε2 (t )  ε1(t) = ε2 (t ) − l1 ε1(t )  ε1(t ) ≤ 2 ,
l1
E2
ε2(t ) − l1 ε1(t ) ≤  l1 → ∞ : εi (t ) ≈ 0, εi +1(t ) ≈ li εi (t ).
l1

2. Later in the subsequent stages, i = 2,4 , we synthesize corrective actions according to the following
logical scheme:

E
εi (t ) = εi +1(t ) − Li sat(li εi (t )), Li > εi +1(t )  εi (t) = εi +1(t ) − li εi (t )  εi (t ) ≤ i +1 ,
li
Ei +1
εi +1(t ) − li εi (t ) ≤  li → ∞ : εi (t ) ≈ 0, εi +1(t ) ≈ li εi (t ).
li

3. The system ε5(t ) = cT ε(t ) + ξ6 (t ) − L5sat(l5 ε5(t ) is considered and taking into account εi (t ) ≈ 0, the
relation ξ6 (t ) ≈ l5 ε5(t ) is ensured by the choice of L6 > | ξ6 (t)|.

Using the obtained estimates of the state vector ξ(t ) and signal ξ6(t ) , we find the first four derivatives
of the signal q(t), solving the system of equations (3.6) sequentially from top to bottom.

JOURNAL OF COMPUTER AND SYSTEMS SCIENCES INTERNATIONAL Vol. 62 No. 2 2023

274 GULYUKINA, UTKIN

u103

4 0

3 5

2 10

1 1900 1950 2000 2050 2100 2150 2200 2250

H1(t)

0
1
2
3
4
5
0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000 4500 5000 5500
t, c

Fig. 4. Observation error ε1(t ).

1.2

1.0
u103
0.8
5
0.6
H2(t)

10

0.4 15
1600 1800 2000 2200 2400 2600 2800

0.2

0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000 4500 5000 5500
t, c

Fig. 5. Observation error ε2 (t ).

Thus, to form control (2.21), instead of the state vector components and disturbances in system (1.3)
and (1.4) that are inaccessible for measurement, the estimates obtained in this section should be used.

4. NUMERICAL SIMULATION
The results of numerical simulation were carried out in the MATLAB–Simulink system. The param-
eters from Table 1 were chosen to model system (1.4) and (1.5), observer (3.1), and control (2.21).
It is assumed that the steam pressure in front of the valve PT (t ), steam pressure at the outlet of the
boiler–steam generator PD, and armature current Ia are available for measurement. To obtain complete
information about the phase variables of the control object and about the external disturbances acting on
it, state observer (3.1) that gives estimates of unknown signals with the given accuracy was constructed.
Figures 4–8 show the observation errors εi = xi − zi , i = 1,5. Figure 9 shows a graph of the dependence
of the load moment mL (t ) on the DCM shaft on time, the dotted line indicates the true value of the

JOURNAL OF COMPUTER AND SYSTEMS SCIENCES INTERNATIONAL Vol. 62 No. 2 2023

 THE PROBLEM OF CONTROLLING A STEAM 275

16
14
12 15

10
10
5
H3(t)
8
0
6 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350

4
2
0

0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000 4500 5000 5500
t, s
Fig. 6. Observation error ε3(t ).

500

400
500

400
300
300
H4(t)

200
200 100

0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6

100

0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000 4500 5000 5500
t, s
Fig. 7. Observation error ε4 (t ) .

500 10

1000
5

0
1500
H5(t)

5

2000 10
0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000

2500

3000

3500
0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000 4500 5000 5500
t, s
Fig. 8. Observation error ε5(t ).

JOURNAL OF COMPUTER AND SYSTEMS SCIENCES INTERNATIONAL Vol. 62 No. 2 2023

276 GULYUKINA, UTKIN

20
mL observable
mL real
15

mL 10

5
0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000 4500 5000 5500
t, s
Fig. 9. Load moment mL (t ) .

2
e1(t)

2

4

0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000

t, s

Fig. 10. Deviation of the actual pressure in front of the valve from the desired one e1(t ) .

28

26

24

22
PD(t)

20

18

16


0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000 4500 5000 5500
t, s
Fig. 11. Steam pressure at the boiler outlet PD (t ) .

JOURNAL OF COMPUTER AND SYSTEMS SCIENCES INTERNATIONAL Vol. 62 No. 2 2023

 THE PROBLEM OF CONTROLLING A STEAM 277

45
40
35
30
25
DQ(t)

20
15
10
5

0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000 4500 5000 5500
t, s

Fig. 12. Heat flow of furnace DQ (t ) .

20
15
10
5
Iя(t)

0
5
10
15
20
0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000 4500 5000 5500
t, s

Fig. 13. Armature current I arm.(t ).

load moment from the table, and the continuous line indicates the value obtained with the help of
observer (3.1).
Figure 10 shows a graph of the deviation of the steam pressure in front of the valve from the desired
value, and Fig. 11 contains a graph of the steam pressure at the outlet of the boiler–steam generator
depending on time.
The graphs in Figs. 12–15 show the heat flow of the furnace DQ (t ), angular frequency of rotation of the
motor’s shaft ω(t), armature current Ia(t), and armature voltage u2(t ) depending on time, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS
Feedback synthesis algorithms are proposed for the solution of maintaining the given pressure in front
of the outlet valve in a steam generator under the effect of external disturbances and incomplete informa-
tion about the state vector of the control object model. A significant difference of this study from the well-
known results of solving a similar problem [4, 7, 9, 11] is that it takes into consideration the technological

JOURNAL OF COMPUTER AND SYSTEMS SCIENCES INTERNATIONAL Vol. 62 No. 2 2023

278 GULYUKINA, UTKIN

8000

6000
Z(t)

4000

2000

0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000 4500 5000 5500
t, s

Fig. 14. Angular frequency of rotation of the motor shaft ω(t ) .

200

100
u2(t)

100

200

0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000 4500 5000 5500
t, s

Fig. 15. Armature voltage u2 (t ).

restrictions on the components of the state and control vector at the stage of development of control algo-
rithms.
The use of the block approach made it possible, on the one hand, to carry out feedback linearization
of the nonlinear model of the steam generator, and, on the other hand, to provide the specified restrictions
on phase variables and control by using linear functions with saturation as local feedbacks. For informa-
tional support of the proposed control algorithms, a combined observer of states and disturbances based
on methods of systems with deep feedback and sliding modes has been developed, which makes it possible
to obtain estimates of the components of the vector of states and disturbances with the given accuracy.
The performance of the proposed algorithm has been confirmed both analytically and by modeling in
the MATLAB–Simulink environment.

REFERENCES
1. F. P. de Mello, “Boiler models for system performance studies,” IEEE Trans. Power Syst. 6 (1), 66–74 (1991).
2. F. P. de Mello, “Dynamic models for fossil fueled steam units in power system studies,” IEEE Trans. Power Syst.
6 (2), 753–761 (1991).

JOURNAL OF COMPUTER AND SYSTEMS SCIENCES INTERNATIONAL Vol. 62 No. 2 2023

 THE PROBLEM OF CONTROLLING A STEAM 279

3. K. J. Äström and R. D. Bell, “Drum boiler dynamics,” Automatica 36 (3), 363–378 (2000).
4. B. Labibi, H. J. Marquez, and T. Chen, “Decentralized robust PI controller design for an industrial utility boil-
er,” Process Control 19, 216–230 (2009).
5. A. V. Utkin, V. A. Utkin, and S. A. Krasnov, “Synthesis of a control system for a waste heat boiler with forced
circulation under restrictions on control actions,” Mathematics 10, 1–24 (2022).
https://doi.org/10.3390/ math10142397
6. V. A. Utkin, “Invariance and independence in systems with separable motion,” Autom. Remote Control 62 (11),
1825–1843 (2001).
7. A. V. Utkin, “Synthesis of a control system for a steam turbine,” Autom. Remote Control 79 (12), 2185–2201
(2018).
8. M. Krstic, P. V. Kokotovic, and I. Kanellakopoulos, Nonlinear and Adaptive Control Design (John Wiley and
Sons, New York, 1995).
9. W. Bolek, J. Sasiadek, and T. Wisniewski, “Adaptive backstepping control of a power plant station model,” in
IFAC 15-th Triennial World Congress (Barcelona, 2002), pp. 1650–1655.
10. S. A. Krasnova, T. G. Sirotina, and V. A. Utkin, “A structural approach to robust control,” Autom. Remote
Control 72 (8), 1639–1666 (2011).

JOURNAL OF COMPUTER AND SYSTEMS SCIENCES INTERNATIONAL Vol. 62 No. 2 2023

 280 GULYUKINA, UTKIN

11. K. Zheng, J. Bentsman, and C. W. Taft, “Full operating range robust hybrid control of a coal-fired boiler/tur-
bine unit,” Dyn. Syst. Meas. Control 130 (4), 1–14 (2008).
12. V. A. Utkin and A. V. Utkin, “Problem of tracking in linear systems with parametric uncertainties under unstable
zero dynamics,” Autom. Remote Control 75 (9), 1577–1592 (2014).
13. A. G. Loukianov, J. R. Domínguez, and B. Castillo-Toledo, “Robust sliding mode regulation of nonlinear sys-
tems,” Automatica 89, 241–246 (2018).
14. A. G. Loukianov, “Robust block decomposition sliding mode control design,” Math. Probl. Eng. 74, 349–365
(2002).
15. A. G. Loukianov, J. R. Domínguez, and B. Castillo-Toledo, “Robust sliding mode regulation of nonlinear sys-
tems,” Automatica 89, 241–246 (2018).
16. S. A. Krasnova, V. A. Utkin, and A. V. Utkin, “Block approach to analysis and design of the invariant nonlinear
tracking systems,” Autom. Remote Control 78 (12), 2120–2140 (2017).
17. V. A. Utkin, “The motion separation method in observation problems,” Avtom. Telemekh., No. 3, 27–37
(1990).
18. H. K. Khalil and L. Praly, “High-gain observers in nonlinear feedback control,” Int. J. Robust Nonlinear Con-
trol 24 (6), 993–1015 (2014).
19. A. I. Malikov, “Synthesis of state unknown inputs observers for nonlinear Lipschitz systems with uncertain dis-
turbances,” Autom. Remote Control 79 (3), 406–424 (2018).
20. E. Campo, J. Monroy, H. Abundis, A. Chemori, V. Creuze, and J. Torres, “A nonlinear controller based on sat-
uration functions with variable parameters to stabilize an AUV,” Int. J. Nav. 11 (1), 211–224 (2019).
21. S. I. Gulyukina and V. A. Utkin, “A block approach to CSTR control under uncertainty, state-space and control
constraints,” Control Sci. 5, 43–52 (2021).
22. A. Antipov, S. Krasnova, and V. Utkin, “Methods of ensuring invariance with respect to external disturbances:
Overview and new advances,” Mathematics 9, 1–20 (2021).
https://doi.org/10.3390/ math9233140
23. S. A. Kochetov and V. A. Utkin, “Vortex algorithms in the problem of DC motor control,” Probl. Upr., No. 5,
20–27 (2014).
24. D. V. Krasnov and V. A. Utkin, “Synthesis of a multifunctional tracking system in conditions of uncertainty,”
Autom. Remote Control 80 (9), 1704–1716 (2019).
25. Yu. G. Kokunko, S. A. Krasnova, and V. A. Utkin, “Cascade synthesis of differentiators with piecewise linear
correction signals,” Autom. Remote Control 82 (7), 1144–1168 (2021).

SPELL: перевод рисунков

JOURNAL OF COMPUTER AND SYSTEMS SCIENCES INTERNATIONAL Vol. 62 No. 2 2023

View publication stats