476
IEEE
TRANSACTIONS
ON
AUTO~IATIC
CONTROL,
OCTOBER
1974
the application
of
the
MKY
lemma to these systevs.
The
problem solut,ion for a limited class of plants
is
discussed
in Section
IV,
and for the general class in Sect.ion
V.
A
computer simulation is included in Section
VI,
and the
conclusions in Section JII.
11.
PROBLEM
STATEMENT
AXD
DESIGN
OBJECTIVES
A
dynamic system (plant)
is
described by t,he non-
linear, nonautomonous, different,ial equat.ion
D,(P)
40
=
WP)
40
+
cf(x,O (1)
where
u(t)
and
x(t)
are the plant input and output,
re-
spect,ively,
f(~$)
is
a nonlinear time varying funct>ion of
known form,
p
is
the operat.or
d/dt,
D&)
=
p"
+
ulpn--l
+
. .
a,,
and
D,(p)
=
boprn
+
blpm-'
+
.
. .
b,.
It
is
assumed that coefficients
a,
bi,
and
c
are unknown and
constant,
or
slowly varying. The term
cf(x,t)
may be
re-
placed by
a
sum of terms of the same type. Since each
is
handled the same way in the design, there is no loss of
generality
in
carrying only the one term.
It.
is
also assumed
that
1)
the function
f
(after first being introduced, the
arguments of funct,ions and time variables will be omit,ted,
with t,he exception of
p
operators) satisfies t,he continuity
condit,ions necessary for solut.ions of
(1)
to exist and be
unique,
2)
all roots of
D,(s)
are in the open left half plane,
3)
bo
#
0,
and
4)
m
5
n
-
1.
Assumption
2)
is
required to insure a bounded control
input by not requiring the a.daptive syst.em t,o act
to
cancel
nonminimum phase plant zeroes. For a similar reason,
u
is
not included as
an
argument
off.
In certain cases func-
tions
of
t.he form
f(z,u,t)
may
be
allowed.
However,
in
general, it
is
not. known what rest.rictions to impose on
these functions to insure that- the cont.ro1 input
u
is
bounded. In the purely t,heoretical sense assumpt,ion
3)
is
not necessary. The system will adapt and follow t,he model
but the control input will become unbounded-an unde-
sirable practical result.. Similarly
f(x,u,t)
can be allowed
theoret.ically provided it does not, impose a magnitude
constraint, on
u.
The design objective is to have the plant out.put follow
the output of
a
model reference defined by the equation
D,(P)
s,(t>
=
KO
r(i>
+
g(x,,r7f) (2)
where
D,(p)
=
pn
+
udl
pX-l
+
. .
.
ad,,
x,
is
the model
output,
r
is
t,he reference input
x,
is
the model state vector,
and
g
is a nonlinear, time varying function wit.h t,he
smoot,hness properties required to insure the existence and
uniqueness of solut,ions to
(2).
If
it is considered desirable
t.0
have a model which differentiates the reference input,
~(t)
may be replaced by
r(t)
=
D,(p)rl(t)
where
D,(p)
=
pa
+
RIP"-'
+
. .
.
R,.
If
a
_<
m,
no derivatives of
,rl
will be required in the design. However,
if
a
>
m,
t.hep
will
be. Stability of the operator
Dm@)
is
assumed, i.e.,
D,(s)
=
0
has roots in the open left half plane only. The
design problem
is
to synthesize a parameter adaptive
control system for
(1)
which will muse the error,
e(t)
=
x,
-
x,
between plant and model outputs
t.0
approach
zero. The distinguishing feature between this work and
previous designs of this type is that derivat.ives of the
plant, output,
x
are not, to be used in the design for the
obvious reason that. in pract>ice they may be t.oo noisy.
A
new concept, an augment,ed error signal, must be
introduced tmo achieve the design objective.
This
signal
used
in
conjunction wit.h the state variable filter concept
makes it possible
to
derive syst.em differential equations
in
a
form suitable for direct application of the
3IKY
lemma, and
a,s
in ot.her designs using t,his lemma
[4],
1111,
[16],
no derivatives of
z
are required.
An
augmenting signal
y(f)
is
added to
e@)
t,o give the
augmented
error
signal
~(t),
do
=
4)
+
Y(0.
(3)
The signal
~(t)
is
the output. of the error augmenting filter
defined by
D,(P)Y
=
D,(P)U.(O
(4
where
D,(p)
=
pn-'
+
~~p~-~
+
.
. .
c,,
and
'ZL'
is
an
auxiliary system input to be determined along wit.h the
control input
u
as
part of the design. C0efficient.s
ci
in
D,(p)
must be chosen such that, t,he transfer funct.ion
D,(s)/D,(s)
is
a
posit.ive real function of
s
in order to use
the
3IBY
lemma lat.er in the development.
Subtracting
(1)
from
(2)
gives the different,ial equation
for
e
which
is
D,(p)e
=
&r
+
g
-
D,@)u
-
cf
+
D,(P)z
(5)
where
D,(p)
=
D,(p)
-
Dm(p)
=
Actl
pn-'
+
.
. .
Au,
and
Aai
=
ai
-
udi
for
i
=
1
to
7%.
Xext,
(4)
is
added
to
(3)
to
obt.ain thv differential
equation for the augmented error signal
7,
which
is
D,(p)s
=
Kor
-I-
g
-
D,(p)u
-
cf
+
DA(p)x
+
D,(p)-zc.
(6)
Equat,ion
(6)
is
the starting equation for the synt,hesis
procedure. The design problem
is
to generat.e
u
and
w
independent of derivat.ives of
x
and in such a way that
e
0
as
1
---f
.
In a sense, the augmenting signal
y
is
a
catalyst which plays
a
role only during t,he adapt,ive
transient period and goes
to
zero once adaptat,ion
is
com-
plet.ed.
Its
successful applicat.ion in this problem leads one
to
speculate about, the possibilit*y
of
using the concept of
an augmented error signal to insure convergence in other
types
of
gradient algorit,hms.
111.
THE
RII<\-
LEMMA
IN
ADAPTIVE COSTROL
SYSTEM DESIGN
A
statement of the
MI<Y
lemma
is
given in Bppendix I.
The reason for it,s usefulness in designs of this type
is
ex-
plored in this sect.ion.
Consider t,he system
pe(t)
=
Ae(l)
+
dr(t)
(7)
with output
e
=
k'
e.
Here
A,
d,
and
k
are the
71.
X
12
ma.trix and
n
vectors referred to in the lemma. The lemma