Ioannou Web Ch5

Page 5C.
Chapter 5. Complementary Material
Chapter 5
Complementary Material
5.3.2 MRC Schemes: Known Plant Parameters
Proof of Lemma 5.3.4. For n = 1 , we have (s) = 0 , (s ) = 1 . Hence, (5.83) implies 1 = 2 = 0 and a unique solution for 3 . For n 2 , consider the monic greatest common divisor H p (s ) of Z p (s ) and R p (s ) . Then we can write Z p (s ) = Z p (s )H p (s ) , R p (s ) = R p (s )H p (s ) for some coprime polynomial pair Z p (s ) , R p (s ) . Since Z p (s ) is Hurwitz, H p (s ) also has to be Hurwitz. Hence we can divide both sides of (5.83) by H p (s ) and obtain
*T * 1*T (s) R p (s ) + k p (2 (s) + 3 (s)) Z p (s) = (s) R p (s) Z p (s)0 (s) Rm (s) .
It can be easily seen that the degree of the right-hand side is n p + n rh 2 , where rh is the degree of H p (s ) . Since Z p (s ) , R p (s ) are coprime, Theorem A.2.5 (see the Appendix) implies that there exist unique polynomials
n 2, n p rh 1 , respectively, such that a(s ) R p (s ) + b(s )Z p (s ) = (s ) R p (s ) Z p (s )0 (s ) Rm (s ) .
a(s ), b(s )
of degree
Once the unique solution a(s), b(s ) of the above equation is calculated, the general *T * solution for 1*T (s ), k p (2 (s ) + 3 (s )) can be obtained as
1*T (s ) = (s )Z p (s ) + a(s ),
*T * k p (2 (s ) + 3 (s )) = (s ) R p (s ) + b(s ),
(5C.1)
where (s ) is any polynomial of degree n n p + rh 1 . Once a polynomial (s ) of

degree n n p + rh 1 is fixed, 1 , 2 , 3 can be calculated equating the coefficients of
both sides of (5C.1). If R p , Z p are coprime (i.e., rh = 0 ) and n = n p , then f (s ) = 0 and hence the
, 3 is unique. solution of (5C.1) for 1 , 2
Page 5C.2
5.4 Direct MRAC with Unnormalized Adaptive Laws

5.4.1 Relative Degree n * = 1
Proof of Theorem 5.4.1(ii) [1]. Since r L , from (i) we have that , L . Furthermore, can be expressed as
1 c(sI F )1 gG p (s ) y p (sI F )1 gy p = . yp r
Since y p = ym + e1 = Wm (s)r + e1 , we have

= H (s )r + ,
where = H 0 (s )e1 and

1 1 c(sI F )1 gG c(sI F )1 gG p ( s )Wm ( s ) p ( s ) (sI F )1 gWm (s ) (sI F )1 g . H (s ) = , H 0 (s) = Wm (s ) 1 0 1
H 0 (s ) is a proper transfer matrix whose poles are stable, and e1 L2 L and goes to zero as t . Hence, from Lemma 3C.1 we have L2 L and | (t ) | 0 as t . Therefore, by definition of PE, is PE if H (s )r is PE. Since r is sufficiently rich of order 2 n , applying Theorem 3.4.3, this further implies that is PE if rank[H ( j1 ), H ( j2 ), , H ( j2 n )] = 2n on C 2 n for any 1, 2 , , 2 n R with i j
for i j . H (s ) can be rewritten as

c(s ) R p (s )km Z m (s ) ( s )k Z ( s )k Z ( s ) T 1 1 p p m m H (s) = H s l , s l 1 ,,1 , = k p Z p (s )(s ) Rm (s ) (s )k p Z p (s )km Z m (s ) D(s ) (s )k Z (s ) R (s ) p p m
where
H R
D(s ) = k p Z p (s )(s) Rm (s ) ,
2 n( l +1)
l = deg((s )Z p (s ) Rm (s )) = 2 n 1 + qm ,
and
is a constant coefficient matrix. Therefore, we have
[ H ( j1 ),, H ( j2 n )] = H (1 ,, 2 n ) (1 ,, 2 n ) ,
where
Page 5C.3
( j1 )l ( j 2 )l ( j2 n )l 1 1 l l ( j ) ( j 2 ) ( j2 n )l 1 (1 ,, 2 n ) = 1 , 1 1 1 1 1 1 . ,, (1 ,, 2 n ) = diag D( j 2 n ) D( j1 ) (1 ,, 2 n ) is obviously nonsingular. (1 ,, 2 n ) is also nonsingular since it is a
submatrix
of
the
Vandermonde
matrix
and
i k , i k .
Therefore,
rank[H ( j1 ), , H ( j2 n )] = 2n if and only if rank( H ) = 2 n . Next we show that rank( H ) = 2n . Assume to obtain the contradiction that rank( H ) < 2 n . Then there exists a nonzero constant vector C R 2 n such that C T H = 0.
T , c3 , c4 ]T , where C1, C2 R n1 ; c3 , c4 R , this Using the decomposition C = [C1T , C2 implies that
T C T H s l , s l 1 ,,1 = C1T (s ) R p (s )km Z m (s ) + C2 (s )k p Z p (s )km Z m (s ) + c3 (s )k p Z p (s )km Z m (s ) T
+ c4 (s ) Rm (s )k p Z p (s ) = 0.
Observing that c4 is the coefficient of the s l term, we have c4 = 0 . This further implies that
(C
or, equivalently,
T 1
T ( s ) R p ( s ) + C2 (s )k p Z p (s ) + c3 (s )k p Z p (s )) km Z m (s ) = 0
T C1T (s ) R p (s ) + (C2 (s) + c3 (s)) k p Z p (s) = 0,
i.e.,
k p Z p (s ) R p (s) = C1T (s ) . T c3 (s ) + C2 ( s )
T (s )) n 1 , this contradicts the coprimeness of Z p (s ), R p (s ) . Since deg(c3 (s) + C2
Therefore, rank( H ) = 2 n and hence rank[H ( j 1 ), , H ( j2 n )] = 2n . Thus we have shown that is PE. Now consider (5.98) and (5.100), i.e.,
e = Ac e + Bc * T , e(0) = e0 , = e1sgn ( * ) , e1 = C e,
T c
(5C.2)
Page 5C.4
and the Lyapunov-like function in (5.99), i.e., V (, e) = we have
eT Pc e 2
1 2
| * | . From (5.101)
V =
eT qqT e c T T T e Lc e 1eT Cc Cc e = 1e1 e1 2 2
for some constant 1 > 0 , noting that Lc > 0 . We can rewrite (5C.2) as
e = A(t )e ,
where
e e = ,
e1 = C T e ,
Ac A(t ) = * T (t )sgn ( ) Cc
Bc * T (t ) , 0
C C = c. 0
We can also rewrite V (t ) as V = e T Pe , where
P=
1 Pc 2 0
. 0
* 1
T Hence we have V = e T ( PA + AT P )e 1e1 e1 = 1 e T CC T e , which implies that
PA(t ) + AT (t )P + 1CC T is negative semidefinite. Therefore, using Theorem A.8.3, to

show that and e1 converge to zero asymptotically and hence exponentially fast, it is sufficient to show that (C , A) is a UCO pair. By Lemma A.8.4, (C , A) is a UCO pair if and only if (C , A + KC T ) is a UCO pair, where
0 , K (t ) = * sgn ( ) (t )
which satisfies the integral condition in Lemma A.8.4 since L . The system corresponding to (C , A + KC T ) can be written as
Ac e e = , A(t ) = T (t )sgn (* ) Cc
Bc * T (t ) C c , C = 0 , 0
x1 = Ax1 + Bc * T x2 , x2 = 0,
T y0 = Cc x1 . T Observing that *Cc (sI Ac )1 Bc is stable and minimum-phase, since , L and T is PE, = *Cc (sI Ac )1 Bc is PE as well because of Lemma 3C.1 (see Chapter 3:
Page 5C.5
Complementary Material). Therefore, using Lemma A.8.5, we have that (C , A + KC T ) is UCO, and the proof is complete.
5.4.2 Relative Degree n* = 2

Proof of Theorem 5.4.3(ii) [1]. It has already been established that y p , L . From (5.113) and the fact that e1 L and hence y p L , we have that L . Next we show that is PE. Similar to the case of n = 1 , we write as
= H (s )r + ,
where = H o (s )e1 and

1 (sI F )1 gG p ( s )Wm ( s ) 1 (sI F )1 gWm (s ) 1 H (s) = , H0 (s) = s + p0 s + p0 Wm (s ) 1 1 (sI F )1 gG p ( s ) 1 (sI F ) g . 1 0
Since e1 L2 L and e1 L , it follows from Lemma 3C.1 that L2 L and

0 as t . Hence we can apply exactly the same steps in the proof of Theorem
5.4.1 to show that is PE. Now consider the error equations (5.110), (5.112), which have the same form as (5.98), (5.100). As in the proof of Theorem 5.4.1(i), we use Lemma 3C.1 and the results above stating that , L and is PE, and establish that the adaptive law (5.112) guarantees that | | converges to zero exponentially fast. Using (5.110), this also implies that e1 converges to zero exponentially fast.
5.4.3 Relative Degree Greater than 2

When the relative degree is greater than 2, the procedure is very similar but the control law becomes more complex. In this subsection, we present the relative degree-3 case to illustrate the approach and complexity. When the relative degree is n = 3 , the transfer function Wm (s ) of the reference model cannot be chosen to be SPR because according to assumption M2 (stated in section 5.3.1), the relative degrees of the reference model Wm ( s ) and the plant G p (s ) should be the same. Therefore, the parameterization (5.103) and the control law u p = T will not lead to a desired error equation where the SPR characteristics can be employed. In order to be able to employ these characteristics, we rewrite (5.104) in a form that involves an SPR transfer function as follows:
e1 = Wm (s )(s + p0 )(s + p1 ) (u p T ) ,
where
Page 5C.6
u p = H 0 (s )u p , = H 0 (s ), H 0 (s ) =
1 , (s + p0 )(s + p1 )
and Wm (s ), p0 , p1 are chosen so that Wm (s ) = Wm (s) H 0 (s) = Wm (s)(s + p0 )(s + p1 ) with relative degree 1 is SPR. Without loss of generality let us consider
Wm (s ) = 1 (s + p0 )(s + p1 )(s + p2 )
for some p2 > 0 so that

e1 = 1 of e1 is given by The estimate of e 1 = e 1 (u p T ), s + p2 1 (u T ) . s + p2
where , are the estimates of * , * , respectively. The design procedure for n = 2 suggests using
up = T 1 = to obtain e
1 s + p2
[0] and e1 =
1 s + p2
T . However, the suggested control law implies
u p = (s + p0 )(s + p1 )u p = (s + p0 )(s + p1 ) T
involving , which is not available for measurement, noting that could be obtained using the adaptive law chosen. Hence the choice of u p = T is not feasible. The difficulty of not being able to extend the results for n = 1, 2 to n 3 was circumvented only after the late 1970s. After that several successful MRAC schemes were proposed using different approaches [2,3,6]. In the following we present a design 1 : very similar to that in [3]. We first rewrite the equations for e1 and e
e1 = 1 1 1 = (e0 + T ), e e0 , e0 = u p T , s + p2 s + p2
where = . We select u p so that e0 goes to zero as t . In this case, the

1 satisfies estimation error 1 = e1 e 1 = 1 = e1 e 1 ( T e0 ). s + p2
Page 5C.7
Considering the Lyapunov-like function V = law
2 1 2
T 1
| | + 2 , we design the adaptive
= 1 sgn( ), = 1e0 ,
(5C.3)
where = T and > 0 . Let us now express e0 as

e0 = p0 e0 + u1 T T 1 ,
where
u1 = 1 1 u p , 1 = (s + p0 ) = . s + p1 s + p1
Substituting for , we obtain
e0 = p0 e0 + u1 + T 1 sgn( ) T 1 .
To counteract the term T 1sgn( ) , we use a so-called nonlinear damping term [4,5] in u1 as follows:
u1 = T 1 0 ( T ) e0 ,
2
(5C.4)
where 0 > 0 is a design constant. Using the above control law, we obtain
e0 = p0 + 0 ( T ) e0 + T 1sgn( ),
2
which will force e0 and hence e1 to converge to zero. To check the implementability of the control law, we substitute (5C.4) into u p = (s + p1 )u1 and obtain
u p = T + T 1 (s + p1 )0 ( T )2 e0 = T + T 1 40 T ( T )e0
2 0 ( p1 p0 ) ( T )2 e0 + 0 ( T ) e0 0 ( T ) 1sgn( ), 4 3
(5C.5)
s where = ( s + p0 )( . Hence the control law can be implemented without using s + p1 )
differentiators. The stability properties of the above MRAC scheme are summarized in the following theorem. Theorem 5.4.6 The MRAC scheme (5C.3), (5C.5) guarantees that (i) all signals in the closed-loop plant are bounded and e0 (t ), e1 (t ) 0 as t; (ii) the estimate converges to a constant asymptotically independent of the richness of r . If r is sufficiently rich of order 2 n and Z p , R p are coprime, then the parameter error = and tracking error e1 converge to zero
Page 5C.8
asymptotically.
Further, if k p is known, then , e1 converge to zero
exponentially fast. Proof [1]. (i) Observe that

1 = p2 1 + T e0 , e0 = ( p0 + 0 ( T )2 )e0 + T 1 sgn( ), = 1 sgn( ), = 1e0 .
(5C.6)
The time derivative of the Lyapunov-like function

V=
2 e2 12 1 + T + 0 0 , + 2 2 2 2
where 0 > 0 is a design constant to be selected, satisfies

2 2 V = p2 12 0 p0 e0 0 0 e0 ( T )2 + 0 1e0 T sgn( )
p2 12 0 p0 r02 0 0 r02 ( T )2 + 0 1 e0 T p2 12 2 2 ( T )2 . 0 p2 e0 0 0 0 e0 2 2 p2
Choosing 0 = 20 p2 , we have
V p2 12 2 0 p0 e0 0. 2
1 , e1 L L2 ; y p L . This Hence, 1, e0 , , L and 1, e0 L2 , and therefore e

further implies that = H 0 (s ) L . (5C.6) together with 1, L , 1 L2 implies that , L L2 . (5C.6) further implies that 1 , y p L and hence , 1 L . Since
, , e0 L , we have e1 L which together with y p = e1 + s 2Wm (s )r and properness
of s 2Wm (s ) implies that y p, L and hence = (s + p0 )(s + p1 ) L . Therefore, all the closed-loop signals are bounded. Since e0 , e1 L and e0 , e1 L2 , it follows that e0 (t ), e1 (t ) 0 as t . (ii) Since 1, e0 L2 we have
d | 1 || e0 | d (
0
2 12 d ) 2 ( e0 d ) 2
1 1
, L i.e., = L1 and therefore , converge to a constant as t . It can be established that is PE, provided that r is sufficiently rich of order 2 n and Z p , R p are coprime, using similar arguments and steps as in the proof of Theorem
5.4.3. If k p is known, then = 0 and (5C.6) is reduced to

1 = p2 1 + T , = 1 sgn( ).
Page 5C.9
Since , L and is PE, using the same steps as in the proof of Theorem 3.6.1 we can show that and e1 converge to zero exponentially fast. If k p is unknown, we consider the equations for 1 , in (5C.6), i.e.,
1 = p2 1 + T e0 , = 1 sgn( ),
as an LTV system with 1, as the states and e0 as the input. Since for the above system (as shown above) and e1 converge to zero exponentially fast when e0 = 0 and is PE, and since (as shown in part (i)) L , e0 L L2 , and e0 (t ) 0 as
t , it follows from Lemma A.5.9 (in the Appendix) that 1 (t ), (t ) 0 as t.
5.5 Direct MRAC with Normalized Adaptive Laws

Lemma 5.5.2. Consider the plant equation (5.72) and the MRAC scheme (5.116), (5.119). There exists a > 0 such that the fictitious normalizing signal
m2 f 1 + up + yp ,
2 2
where || || denotes the L2 norm,4 satisfies the following: (i) 1/m f , 2/m f L . (ii) If L and W (s ) is a proper transfer function with stable poles, then in addition to (i), u p/m f , y p /m f , /m f , W (s )/m f L . (iii) If r, L , then in addition to (i) and (ii), y p /m f , /m f L . Proof [1]. (i) Since 1 =
(s) ( s ) (s) ( s )
u p , 2 =
(s) ( s )
y p , and the relative degree of each element of
is at least 1 , the result follows from Lemma A.5.9 and the definition of m f . (ii) Since L , applying Lemma A.5.9 to (5.120), we obtain
y p (t ) c + c T c + c ,
where c 0 denotes any finite constant. Therefore, since
1 + 2 + y p + r c u p + c y p + c cm f + c
we have y p /m f , /m f L . Since u p = T and L this further implies that
u p/m f L . Finally, since W (s ) c
for some > 0 such that W (s 2) is
stable, W (s )/m f L .
4
The same notation is used in the proof.
Page 5C.10
(iii) The result follows by differentiating (5.120) and (5.121), using (5.116) and the inequality || || || 1 || + || 2 || + || y p || + || r || , and applying Lemma A.5.2.
Proof of Theorem 5.5.1. Step 1. Express the plant input and output in terms of the adaptation error T This step is already described in detail in the outline of the proof. For L , which is guaranteed by the adaptive law, we apply Lemma 5.5.1 to establish that the signal m f bounds all signals in the closed-loop adaptive system and some of their derivatives. Step 2. Use the swapping lemmas and properties of the L2 norm to upper bound
|| T || with terms that are guaranteed by the adaptive law to have finite L2 gains Using Lemma A.11.2, we have
T = F1 (s, 0 ) T + T + F (s, 0 ) ( T ),
where
n F (s, 0 ) = 0 (s + 0 )n , F1 (s, 0 ) = 1 F (s, 0 )s ,
0 > 0
is an arbitrary
constant, and n is the relative degree of Wm (s ) . Similarly, using Lemma A.11.1, we have
1 T = Wm (s ) T Wm (s ) + Wc (s ) (Wb (s ) T ) ,
))
where Wb (s ), Wc (s ) are as defined in Lemma A.11.1 for W (s ) = Wm (s ) . Combining the two swapping lemma equalities above, we obtain
1 T T T = F1 T + T + FWm Wm (s ) + Wc (Wb ) .
Expressing the normalized estimation error in (5.119) as ms2 = T and substituting in the above equation, we obtain
1 1 * ms2 + * + Wc (Wb T ) T = F1 T + T + FWm
) .
Using Lemma A.11.1, we have

= T + u f = T Wm (s ) + Wm (s ) T = Wc (Wb T ) .
Hence we can rewrite the expression for T as 1 1 2 T T = F1 T + T + * FWm ms + Wc ((Wb ) ) . Applying Lemma A.11.2 again, we obtain
Page 5C.11
c n T + T + c0 ( + ms2 ), 0
(5C.7)
where = Wc ((Wb T ) ) . Using Lemma A.5.2 and Lemma 5.5.2, we have

c m f , T c m f ,
2
T cm f ,
ms2 c ms m f .
Therefore, for 0 > 1 and g = 2 ms2 + | |2 , (5C.7) leads to (5.124), where because of
ms , L2 , g L2 .
Step 3. Use the BG lemma to establish signal boundedness This step is already described in detail in the outline of the proof. Step 4. Show that the tracking error converges to zero From (5.119) we have
e1 = ms2 + .
Since = T + Wm [ T ] = Wm [ T ] T Wm [ ] = Wc [Wb [ T ] ], , ms , L2 , and , ns

L , we have e1 , L2 . Furthermore, using (5.118), , L (as guaranteed by the
adaptive law (5.119)), Lemma 5.5.2, and Lemma A.11.1, we have e1 L . Therefore, using Lemma A.4.7, we establish that e1 (t ) 0 as t . Step 5. Establish that the parameter error converges to zero By definition, we have
(sI F )1 gu p 1 (sI F ) gy p = Wm (s ) . yp r
1 Substituting u p = G p ( s ) y p and y p = Wm ( s )r + e1 into this, we have
= Wm (s )H1 (s )r + Wm (s )H 2 (s )e1 ,
where
1 1 (sI F )1 gG (sI F )1 gG p ( s )Wm ( s ) p ( s ) 1 1 (sI F ) gWm (s ) (sI F ) g . H1 (s ) = , H 2 (s ) = Wm (s ) 1 0 1
It was established in the proof of Theorem 5.4.1 that if r is sufficiently rich of order 2 n , then H1 (s )r is PE. Hence applying Lemma 3C.1, since Wm ( s ) is stable and minimum phase and e1 L2 , it follows that is PE. Next, we establish the convergence results. From (5.119), we have
ms2 = T , = sgn(k p/km ).
Page 5C.12
Using u p , y p L we have , L . Hence, since is PE and L2 , applying the arguments in the proof of Theorem 3.9.1, we establish that (t ), e(t ) 0 as t .
5.6.2 Indirect MRAC with Normalized Adaptive Law

Proof of Theorem 5.6.1. Step 1. Express the plant input and output in terms of the adaptation error T As in the proof of Theorem 5.5.1 we have
y p = Wm (s ) r + c1 T ,
0
1 T 1 up = G p ( s )Wm ( s ) r + c .
0
Again as in the proof of Theorem 5.5.1 we use || || to denote the L2 norm and define the fictitious signal m 2 f
1+ || u p ||2 + || y p ||2 , for some > 0 , to satisfy Lemma 5.5.2.
Following the same steps as in the proof of Theorem 5.5.1, we obtain

T 2 m2 f c + c || || .
Step 2. Use the swapping lemmas and properties of the L2 norm to upper bound
|| T || with terms that are guaranteed by the adaptive law to have finite L2 gains Note first that based on (5.133) and (5.134) it can be established using similar arguments , L ; , L . Using (5.132), we have as in the proof of Theorem 5.5.1 that ,1 k p p p 2
*T 1*T Wm (s )1 + 2 Wm (s )2 + 3*Wm (s ) y p = Wm (s )u p
1 kp
Z p (s )Q(s )
Wm (s ) up (s ) yp .
1 kp
(Q(s) Rp (s) 0 (s) Rm (s)) m(s)
W (s)
Similarly, using (5.133), we obtain

T Wm (s )2 + 3Wm (s ) y p = Wm (s )u p 1T Wm (s )1 + 2
1 (s, t ) Wm (s ) u Z p (s, t ) Q p p (s ) k
1 (s, t ) (s ) R (s )) Wm (s ) y . (Q(s, t ) R 0 p m p (s ) kp
Taking the difference of the two equations above, we get

1T Wm (s )1 + 2T Wm (s )2 + 3Wm (s ) y p = e1 + e2 + e3 ,
where i
i i* and
Page 5C.13
e1 =
W (s) 1 (s, t ) Wm (s ) u (s, t )i R (s, t )i Z (s, t ) m y Q , Q p p p p p (s ) (s ) k
1 1 * 0 (s ) Rm (s ) Wm (s ) y p = (c0 c0 ) y p , e2 = ( ) s k p k p e3 = Q( s ) Wm (s ) ( Z p (s )u p R p (s ) y p ) = 0. k p (s )
1 [1T , 2T , y p , Wm (s ) y p ]T and
Therefore, for
* we have
T Wm (s ) = e1 .
Furthermore,
applying
Lemma
A.11.3
to
(s, t )i R (s, t ) Wm ( s ) y e1 = k1p (Q p p ( s )
(s, t ) Wm ( s ) u ) we obtain (s, t )i Z Q p p ( s ) e1 = e11 e12 ,
where
e11 = 1 (s, t ) Wm (s ) u , (s, t ) Wm (s ) y Z Q(s, t ) R p p p p ( ) ( ) s s kp
T Wm (s ) Wm (s ) T e12 = qT Dn* 2 (s ) n* 2 (s ) m (s) u p , n yp p , 1 ( s ) ( s ) ( s ) (s, t ) = qT * (s ). Q n 1
Since
e11 = = = 1 (s, t ) Wm (s ) u (s, t ) Wm (s ) y Z Q(s, t ) R p p p p p (s ) (s ) k T Wm (s ) p (s ) 1 (s, t ) T Wm (s ) p (s ) = 1 Q Q(s, t ) p p k p p (s ) (s ) k W (s ) p (s ) 1 ms2 Wc (s )[Wb (s )T ] p , Q(s, t ) m p (s ) k
where Lemma A.11.1 is used to obtain the last equality, using Lemma 5.5.2, the (s, t ) , and the fact that L definition of Q and y p = Wm (s )(r + c1 T ),
0
1 1 T up = G p ( s )Wm ( s )(r + c ) , we obtain

0
e1 e11 + e12 c ms m f + c m f ,
where c denotes a generic positive constant. Furthermore, from (5.117) we have
1 1 y p ym = Wm * (u p *T ) = Wm * T . c0 c0
(5C.8)
Page 5C.14
Therefore,
* T T = T ( ) = (c0 c0 ) (Wm1 y p r ) = * c0 c0 T , * c0
i.e., T =
c0
* c0
T . Hence, using Lemma A.11.2, we obtain

c0 , (s, 0 ) T + T + F (s, 0 ) T F 1 c0
T =
(5C.9)
where constant,
n F (s, 0 ) = 0 (s + 0 )n , F1 (s, 0 ) = 1 F (s, 0 )s ,
0 > 0
is an arbitrary and satisfies
and
is
the
1 m
relative
c
n 0
degree
of
Wm ( s )
F1 (s, 0 ) c0 , F (s, 0 )W (s )
for any 0 > > 0 . Applying Lemma
A.11.1 , we obtain
1 T 1 T = Wm Wm p + Wc Wb T = Wm e + Wc Wb T . 1
(5C.10)
Substituting in (5C.9), we get

T =
c0 1 (s ) e1 + Wc (s ) Wb (s ) T . F1 (s, 0 ) T + T + F (s, 0 )Wm c0
Since c0 is bounded from below, i.e., applying Lemma A.5.10 and Lemma 5.5.2, we obtain
T c c n m f + m f + c0 e1 + m f . 0 0
(5C.11)
, L ; , L , we obtain Using (5C.8), (5C.11) together with ,1 k p p p 2 T c n m f + c0 gm f , 0
where g
2n ( 12 | |2 +0 (| |2 + 2 ms2 + | p |2 ))1/ 2 L2 .
0
Step 3. Use the BG lemma to establish signal boundedness This step is the same as Step 3 of (the outline of ) the proof of Theorem 5.5.1. Step 4. Show that the tracking error converges to zero Using T = (5.117), we have
1 1 1 e1 = y p ym = Wm * (u p *T ) = Wm * T = Wm T . c0 c0 c0 Applying Lemma A.11.1 and substituting (5C.10), we obtain
c0
* c0
T in
Page 5C.15
e1 =
c 1 e1 + Wc (s ) Wb (s ) T Wc (s ) 0 Wb (s ) T . 2 c0 c0
Using boundedness of all the signals and parameter estimates, (5C.8), and ms , , p L2 , this implies that e1 L2 . Using similar arguments as in the proof of Theorem 5.5.1, we have e1 L . Therefore, using Lemma A.4.7, we establish that e1 (t ) 0 as t .
5.7.2 Robust Direct MRAC

Lemma 5.7.8. Consider the plant equation (5.166) and the MRAC scheme (5.168), (5.169). For any 0 > 0 and any (0, 0 ] , the fictitious normalizing signal
m2 f 1 + up + y p ,
2 2
where (i)
()t
denotes the L2 norm,5 satisfies the following:
1/m f , 2/m f , /m f , ms /m f L .
(ii) If L and W (s ) is a proper transfer function with all its poles in Re[ s ] < 0 / 2 , then in addition to (i), u p/m f , y p/m f , /m f , W (s )/m f ,
u p /m f , y p /m f L .
(iii) If r, L , then in addition to (i) and (ii), /m f L . (iv) For = 0 , m f = ms . Proof. (i) Using the same arguments as in the proof of Lemma 5.5.2(i), we have
1/m f , 2/m f , /m f L . Using ms2 = 1 + u pt
2 2 0
+ y pt
2 2 0
1 + u pt
2 2
+ y pt
2 2
, we
further have ms /m f L . (ii) Rewriting the equation for e1 = y p ym right before (5.169) as
y p = Wm (s ) T + + d + Wm (s )r ,
and using the expressions for , d , the fact that Wm , Wm m are strictly proper with all their poles in Re[ s ] < 0/2 , and , L , we establish that
y p (t ) c + c u p + c cm f + c;
i.e., y p/m f L . Using (i), this further implies that /m f L . Hence, since u p = T and , /m f L , we also have
up mf
, mpf L . Using Lemma A.5.2, we further have
W (s)/m f . Finally, y p /m f L follows by taking the derivative of both sides of

y p = Wm (s ) T + + d + Wm (s )r ,
The same notation is used in the proofs below.
Page 5C.16
observing
that
1 ( s ) + d sWm (s ) m (s ) (s)
u p + cd0 cm f + cd0
and
that
sWm (s ) is proper. (iii) The result is established using the same arguments as in the proof of Lemma 5.5.2(iii). (iv) The result follows by definition.
Proof of Theorem 5.7.5. Step 1. Express the plant input and output in terms of the parameter error term T . From (5.137), (5.138), we have
yp = up =
T 1T G0 (2 + 3 ) c0 G0 c0
r+
1T 1 T + , c0 c0
G0 D1 r + 1 T + T G ( T + ) , c0 G0 ( + ) 1 0 2 3
T 1 T 2 3
where
m u p + (m + 1) du . Substituting (5.139), we obtain
r + 1 T + y , y p = Wm * c0 1 T 1 u p = G0 Wm r + + , * u c
0
where u
T 2 +3 c0
Wm , y
T 1 c0
1 Wm . Since Wm , G0 Wm are stable, applying
Lemma A.5.2, this implies

yp c + c T + up c + c T + 1T c0 Wm m
u p + cd0 c + c T + c Wm m
mf , mf ,
T 2 + 3 c0
Wm m
u p + cd0 c + c T + c Wm m
T i.e., m 2 + c Wm m f c+c
m2 f , where c denotes a generic positive constant.
Step 2. Use the swapping lemmas and properties of the L2 norm to bound || T || from above with terms that are guaranteed by the robust adaptive laws to have small gains in the m.s.s. Using the same notation and the same steps as in the proof of Theorem 5.5.1, we have
1 T T T = F1 T + T + FWm Wm + Wc (Wb ) .
(5C.12)
Using (5.169), we get
Page 5C.17
ms2 = * ( *T + Wm T + + d ) ( T + Wm T ) = * ( T Wm + + d ) Wc (Wb T )
and hence
T Wm =
Substituting in (5C.12), we obtain
ms2 + * Wc (Wb T ) d. *
FW T = F1 T + T + *m
2 T ms + Wc (Wb )
) FW
)
1 m
[ + d ].
Following the same steps as in the proof of Theorem 5.5.1, we obtain

T c k ms2 + Wc (Wb T ) + + d T + T + c0 0 c k m f + c0 + cd0 , 0
c gm f +
where
g=
2 2 0 2k + 0 2 ms2 +
2 2 d0 + S 2 ms2
2 ms2 ) and 2 ms . since ms , S ( 2 ms2 + d0
Step 3. Use the BG lemma to establish boundedness This step is explained in detail in the outline of the proof. Step 4. Establish bounds for the tracking error e1 . It follows from (5.169) that
e1 = ms2 + .
Since
2
, ms , S ( 2 ms2 + d 2 ms2 )
2 s 2 2 s
and
, ms L ,
it
follows
2 2 0
that
e1
S ( m + d m ) . By definition of , this implies that e1 S ( + d ) , i.e.,

1 T
t +T
2 e12 d c(2 + d0 )+
c t 0, T > 0. T
Step 5. Establish convergence of the estimated parameter and tracking errors to residual sets From the definition of we have
T (s ) T (s ) = Wm (s ) up , yp , yp , r . (s ) (s )
T
Using y p = Wm (s )r + e1 and (5.166), we have
Page 5C.18
1 1 u p = G0 (s ) y p y = G0 (s )(Wm (s )r + e1 ) y ,
where y = m (s )(u p + du ) + du , and hence

= m + e ,
where
1 T (s ) T (s) m = Wm (s ) G0 (s )Wm (s ) , Wm (s ) , Wm (s ),1 [r ], (s ) (s ) T T T T T 1 ( s ) ( s ) (s) T . e = Wm (s ) G0 (s ) , ,1,0 [ e1 ] Wm (s ) ,0 (s ) n+1 y s s ( ) ( )
T 2 Lemma 3.11.6 implies that m is PE with level 0 > O(2 + d0 ) if r is dominantly rich and Z p , R p are coprime. Hence there exist T > 0 such that
1 T
t +T
T m ( )m ( )d 0 I t 0.
2 2 Furthermore, since e1 , y S (2 + d0 ) and u p L , we have e S (2 + d0 ) and
hence
1 lT
t +lT
( )T ( )d
1 2lT
t +lT
T ( ) d m ( )m
1 lT
t +lT
e ( )eT ( )d
0 c 2 c(2 + d0 ) I 2 lT
for any positive integer l . Therefore, for any l

c( + d ) <
2 2 0
0 8
satisfying
c lT
<
0 8
and for
, we have
1 lT
t +lT
( )T ( )d
0 I, 4
which implies that is PE. Applying the arguments in the proof of Theorem 3.12.2, we establish that when is PE, (5.169) guarantees that converges to a residual set whose size is of the order of the modeling error; i.e., satisfies | (t ) | c( + d0 ) + r (t ), where lim t r (t ) = 0 and the convergence is exponentially fast. From (5.171), we have
e1 (t ) =
1 Wm (s ) T + y . c0
Therefore, since L and | y | c(2 + d0 ) , we obtain
Page 5C.19
e1 (t ) c( + d0 ) + cre (t ),
where re
Wm r . Exponential convergence of r (t ) to zero implies that re (t ) 0
exponentially as t as well. Thus, we have established that e1 , converges exponetially to the residual set S defined in the theorem.
5.10 Examples Using the Adaptive Control Toolbox

The MRC and MRAC algorithms presented in this chapter can be implemented using a set of MATLAB functions and the Simulink block Adaptive Controller provided in the Adaptive Control Toolbox. For implementation of MRAC algorithms these tools need to be used together with the PI functions or blocks introduced in section 3.16. In this section, we demonstrate use of the Adaptive Control Toolbox in various MRC and MRAC problems via a number of simulation examples.
5.10.1 MRC
In section 5.3 we have seen that for a given plant of the form (5.73) and a reference model of the form (5.76), if the plant parameters are known, then an MRC scheme can be constructed to force the closed-loop system (the integration of the plant (5.73) and the MRC) to behave as the reference model. The control parameters of this MRC scheme are obtained by solving (5.84). The MATLAB function mrcpoly can be used to solve (5.84) for a given design polynomial 0 (s ) . Denoting the coefficient vectors of Z (s ), R(s ), Z m (s ), Rm (s ), 0 (s ) as Z,R,Zm,Rm,L0, respectively, [thetau,thetay,thetar,RETYPE]=mrcpoly(Z,R,Zm,Rm,L0)
* * returns the parameter vectors u , y , r* . RETYPE is returned as 0 if the equation
solving process is successful and as 1 if it fails. Example 5.10.1 Consider the plant y =
1 s ( s +3)2
u . It is necessary to choose u so that y
1 r with r (t ) = tracks the reference signal ym of the reference model ym = ( s + 1)3
1 + sin(4t + ) . The control signal for this task can be generated as 6

T u = u
( s ) T u + y (s )
( s ) y ( s ) + r , (s) = [ s, 1]T , r y
choosing the degree of (s ) = 0 (s ) as n 1 = 2 . Fixing (s ) = 0 (s ) = s 2 + s + 1 ,

u , y , r can be determined using mrcpoly:
Zp = 1; Rp = [1 6 9 0]; Zm = 1; Rm = [1 3 3 1]; Lambda0 = [1 1 1]; [thetau, thetay, thetar, RETYPE] = mrcpoly(Zp,Rp,Zm,Rm,Lambda0)
Page 5C.20
* * The resultant parameter vectors are u = [3 9]T , y = [51 36 35] , r* = 1 , and
the resultant control law is
u=
3s 9 51s 36 u+ 2 y + 35 y + r. s + s +1 s + s +1
2
5.10.2 Direct MRAC

When the plant parameters are unknown, we can no longer solve (5.84) to obtain the controller parameters. Instead, we need to use an adaptive control scheme which produces the estimates of the control parameters directly based on an appropriate parametric model involving these control parameters (direct adaptive control), or which first produces the estimates of the plant parameters based on another appropriate parametric model and then calculates the control parameters using these plant parameter estimates (indirect). A set of direct MRAC schemes have been introduced in sections 5.4 and 5.5, and some indirect MRAC schemes in section 5.6. The direct MRAC schemes with normalized adaptive laws of section 5.5 can be implemented using the MATLAB functions umrcdrl, umrcdrb or the Simulink block Adaptive Controller of the Adaptive Control Toolbox, incorporated with the parameter identification functions (or the Simulink block Parameter Estimator) described in Chapter 3. umrcdrl is used for schemes based on SPM or DPM, while umrcdrb is for B-SPM and B-DPM. Examples 5.10.25.10.7 demonstrate various uses of these tools. Example 5.10.2 Consider the plant and the reference model of Example 5.10.1. The corresponding linear SPM can be written as
z = *T
where
*T *T * = u , y , r* , z = Wm (s )u T T T = Wm (s ) ( H (s )u) , Wm (s ) ( H (s ) y) , Wm (s ) y, y , T
Wm (s ) =
[ s, 1] 1 ( s ) , H (s) = . = 2 3 (s ) s + s + 1 (s + 1)
T * the parameter vectors as u = [3 9]T , 3 s 9 s 2 + s +1 s 36 u + s51 y + 35 y + r . 2 + s +1
In Example 5.10.1, we have calculated
* y = [51 36 35] , r* = 1 , and the control law as u =
Now, we can generate the control signal as well as the signals in the SPM using the following code (added to the code of Example 5.10.1): Lambda = conv(Zm, Lambda0); theta = [thetau(:);thetay(:);thetar(:)]; dt = 0.01; % Time increment for simulation (sec). t = [0:dt:20]; % Process time (sec). tprev = [-5:dt:-dt]; ltprev =length(tprev);
Page 5C.21
lt = length(t); r = sin(4*t + pi/6) + 1; % Reference signal. rprev = sin(4*tprev + pi/6) + 1; % State initialization for the plant: [nstate, xp0] = ufilt('init',Zp,Rp,0); xp(:,1) = xp0; % State initialization for the reference model: [nstate, xm0] = ufilt('init',Zm,Rm,0); xm(:,1) = xm0; for k = 1:ltprev, dxm = ufilt('state',xm(:,1),rprev(k),Zm,Rm); xm(:,1)=xm(:,1) + dt*dxm; end % State initialization for linear parametric model: [nstate xl0] = umrcdrl('init',[3 0],Lambda,Zm,Rm); xl(:,1) = xl0; % Signal initialization: ym(1) = ufilt('output',xm(:,1),Zm,Rm); y(1) = 0; % Process: for k = 1:lt, u(k) = umrcdrl('control',xl(:,k),[y(k) r(k)],[3 0],Lambda,Zm,Rm,theta); [z(k), phi(:,k)] = umrcdrl('output',xl(:,k),[u(k) y(k)],[3 0],Lambda,Zm,Rm); dxl = umrcdrl('state',xl(:,k),[u(k) y(k)],Lambda,Zm,Rm); xl(:,k+1)=xl(:,k) + dt*dxl; dxm = ufilt('state',xm(:,k),r(k),Zm,Rm); xm(:,k+1)=xm(:,k) + dt*dxm; ym(k+1) = ufilt('output',xm(:,k+1),Zm,Rm); dxp = ufilt('state',xp(:,k),u(k),Zp,Rp); xp(:,k+1)=xp(:,k) + dt*dxp; y(k+1) = ufilt('output',xp(:,k+1),Zp,Rp); end % Outputs: ym = ym(1:lt); y = y(1:lt); The results are shown in Figures 5C.1 and 5C.2. Another means of simulation is using the Simulink block Adaptive Controller. One can use the scheme shown in Figure 5C.3, and choose the appropriate options and enter appropriate parameters in the menus of Adaptive Controller.
Page 5C.22
Figure 5C.1 Output and control signals of Example 5.10.2.
Figure 5C.2 Linear parametric model signals of Example 5.10.2.
Page 5C.23
t Clock 1 s3 +6s2 +9s Plant time y y(t) u theta theta Adaptive Controller Adaptive Controller T.1 z(t) Relay Product phi phi(t) r(t) 1 Constant 1 s3 +3s2 +3s+1 Model y_m ym(t) u(t) z
Sine Wave
Figure 5C.3 Simulink scheme to generate the control signal in Example 5.10.2. Example 5.10.3 Consider, again, the plant and the reference model of Example 5.10.1. This time, let us assume that we dont know any information about * , except that * 0.1 6 = k p / km 10 . Now we need to use a parameter identification algorithm to estimate * . For this task, we can modify the Simulink scheme of Figure 5C.3 as shown in Figure 5C.4. In this scheme, Parameter Estimator is incorporated into Adaptive Controller. The parameter identification algorithm is selected to be LS * with forgetting factor = 1 and initial covariance P0 = 10 I . Knowledge about 6 is used for parameter projection, and is initialized as [0 0 0 0 0 0.1]T . The results are plotted in Figures 5C.5 and 5C.6. Although the parameter estimation is not successful, as seen in Figure 5C.6, Figure 5C.5 shows that control and tracking are successful. Above, one may prefer to use the MATLAB function umrcdrl incorporated with one of the MATLAB functions for PI, e.g., ucgrad (see Chapter 3), instead of using Simulink as well.
Page 5C.24
t Clock time
1 s3 +6s2 +9s Plant u phi 0 Parameter Estimator Parameter Estimator Adaptive Controller Adaptive Controller u(t) z z(t) theta Relay Product r(t) 1 Constant 1 s3 +3s2 +3s+1 Model theta(t) y_m ym(t)
y y(t)
Sine Wave
Figure 5C.4 Simulink scheme to generate the control signal in Example 5.10.3.
Page 5C.25
Figure 5C.6 Linear model parameter estimates of Example 5.10.3. Example 5.10.4 Consider the scalar plant
x = ax + bu,
where a, b are unknown parameters but b is known to be nonnegative. The objective is to choose an appropriate control law u such that all signals in the closed-loop system are bounded and x tracks the state xm of the reference model given by
xm = x m + r
for a known reference signal r (t ) . The plant transfer function is G(s ) = is Wm (s ) =

1 s +1
b sa
, and the reference model transfer function
. So, we can construct the corresponding MRC as

* u = 1* x + 2 r,
(s) ( s )
since H (s ) = where
* = 1 . Here 1* and 2 can be estimated based on the SPM z = *T ,
z=
1 u, s +1
1 = x, x . s + 1
T
Using z = *T and x =
b sa
* . Now let us u , we can easily see that 1* = ab1 and 2 =1 b
simulate the plant, estimation of the parameters, and generation of the MRC signal for
Page 5C.26
a = 0.5, b = 2, x0 = 0.5, and r (t ) = 1 + sin(4t + ) . The Simulink blocks Parameter 6
Estimator and Adaptive Controller are used for simulation. The PI algorithm is selected to be LS with forgetting factor = 1 and P0 = 10 I , is initialized as
* * [0 0.1]T , and parameter projection for 2 is used assuming that 0.1 2 10 , as in Example 5.10.3. The results plotted in Figures 5C.7 and 5C.8 show that both the estimation and the tracking are successful.
Page 5C.27
Figure 5C.8 Linear model parameter estimates of Example 5.10.4.
Example 5.10.5 This example is the bilinear counterpart of Example 5.10.2. The B-SPM for the system in Example 5.10.2 can be constructed as
z = * ( *T + z1 ) ,
where
*T * = u *T y
r* , * =
T
1 , r*
T
z = y ym , ym = Wm (s )r ,
T T = Wm (s ) ( H (s )u) , Wm (s ) ( H (s ) y) , Wm (s ) y, ym , z1 = Wm (s )u,
[ s 1] 1 (s ) , H (s ) = . Wm (s ) = = 2 3 (s ) s + s + 1 (s + 1)
T
The control signal as well as the other signals in the B-SPM can be generated using the following lines instead of the corresponding lines in Example 5.10.2: [nstate xl0] = umrcdrb('init',[3 0],Lambda,Zm,Rm); u(k) = umrcdrb('control',xl(:,k),[y(k) r(k)],[3 0],Lambda,Zm,Rm,theta); [z(k),phi(:,k),z1(k)]=umrcdrb('output',xl(:,k),[u(k) y(k) r(k)],...[3 0],Lambda,Zm,Rm); dxl = umrcdrb('state',xl(:,k),[u(k) y(k) r(k)],Lambda,Zm,Rm);
Page 5C.28
The results are shown in Figures 5C.9 and 5C.10. One can use the Simulink block Adaptive Controller for simulation as well.
Figure 5C.10 B-SPM signals in Example 5.10.5. Example 5.10.6 This example is the bilinear counterpart of Example 5.10.3. The B-SPM constructed in Example 5.10.5 is used for parameter estimation. Instead of the LS algorithm, a gradient algorithm with = 100 I , = 100 , and ms = 1 is used, and 6 (0) = 1/ (0) is selected to be 1. The results are shown in Figures 5C.11 and 5C.12.
Page 5C.29
Figure 5C.11 Output and control signals in Example 5.10.6.
Figure 5C.12 B-SPM parameter estimates of Example 5.10.6. Example 5.10.7 This example is the bilinear counterpart of Example 5.10.4. The B-SPM for the system considered in Example 5.10.4 can be constructed as z = * ( *T + z1 ) , where
Page 5C.30
* = 1*
* * 2 , = T
1 , * 2
z = x xm , xm =
T
1 r, s +1
1 1 = x, xm , z1 = u. s + 1 s +1
Instead of the LS algorithm of Example 5.10.4, a gradient algorithm with = 100 I , = 100 , and ms = 1 is used, and 2 (0) = 1/ (0) is chosen to be 1. The results are shown in Figures 5C.13 and 5C.14.
Page 5C.31
Figure 5C.14 Linear model parameter estimates of Example 5.10.7.
5.10.3 Indirect MRAC

The indirect MRAC schemes of section 5.7 can be implemented using the MATLAB functions mrcpoly, umrcidr or the Simulink block Adaptive Controller of the Adaptive Control Toolbox, incorporated with the PI functions (or the Simulink block Parameter Estimator) described in Chapter 3. As mentioned before, each indirect MRAC scheme is composed of a PI algorithm to generate the estimates of the plant parameters, and a control law to generate the control signal using these plant parameter estimates. The task of the function mrcpoly is to calculate the control parameters in this control law based on (5.133). umrcidr generates the control signal as well as the other signals involved in the parametric model used in PI. The uses of the indirect MRAC tools of the Adaptive Control Toolbox are demonstrated in the following examples. Example 5.10.8 Consider the plant and the reference model of Example 5.10.1. Let us assume that we dont know any information about the plant, except that 0.1 k p / km 10 . We want to perform the control task of Example 5.10.3 using the indirect MRAC. We can use the Simulink scheme shown in Figure 5C.4, changing only the entries of the Adaptive Controller ( p (s ) is selected to be
p (s ) = (s + 2)(s ) ) and the Parameter Estimator blocks. The PI algorithm is
again selected to be LS with forgetting factor = 1 and P0 = 10 I . is initialized as

0 = [1, 1, 1, 1]T , and parameter projection is not used. The results are plotted in Figures 5C.15 and 5C.16.
Page 5C.32
Figure 5C.16 SPM parameter estimate = b 0
2 a
1 a
0 of Example 5.10.8. a
T
As above, one may prefer to use the MATLAB function umrcidr incorporated with one of the MATLAB functions for parameter identification, e.g., ucgrad (see Chapter 3), instead of using Simulink.
Page 5C.33
Example 5.10.9 Consider the scalar plant of Example 5.10.4 with the same reference signal. We want to perform the same control task using indirect MRAC. Choosing p (s ) = s + 2 , parameter estimation is based on the linear model z = *T , where
z= 1 s 1 T * y, p u, y . = [ b a ] , = s + 2 s+2 s + 2
T
The Simulink blocks Parameter Estimator and Adaptive Controller are used for simulation. The PI algorithm is selected to be LS with forgetting factor = 1 and P0 = 10 I , is initialized as 0 = [1, 1]T , and parameter projection is not used. The results plotted in Figures 5C.17 and 5C.18 show that both the estimation and the tracking are successful.
Page 5C.34
Figure 5C.18 SPM parameter estimate = [b 1
0 ]T in Example 5.10.9. a
5.10.4 Robust MRAC

Example 5.10.10 Consider the scalar plant of Example 5.10.4. In this example we will 2 s ; i.e., we will consider the existence of a multiplicative plant disturbance m (s ) = 1+ s assume that
x= b b 1 s u. (1 + m (s)) u = sa s a 1 + s
Let a = 0.5, b = 2, x0 = 0.5, and r (t ) = 1 + sin(4t + ) as in Example 5.10.4, and let 6

= 0.2 . If we use the PI algorithm and the MRC law of Example 5.10.4 as they are, we
obtain the results shown in Figures 5C.19 and 5C.20. As can be seen in these figures, 1 and x diverge, and the adaptive control design fails. Next, we apply the robust PI algorithm with dead zone modification ( g0 = 0.05, ms = 1 ). The results plotted in Figures 5C.21 and 5C.22 show that the parameter estimates do not diverge and the tracking error remains in an allowable range.
Page 5C.35
Figure 5C.19 Output and control signals of Example 5.10.10 without robustness modification.
Figure 5C.20 SPM parameters of Example 5.10.10 without robustness modification.
Page 5C.36
Figure 5C.21 modification.
Output and control signals of Example 5.10.10 with robustness
Figure 5C.22 modification.
SPM parameter estimates of Example 5.10.10 with robustness
Page 5C.37
Bibliography
[1] P.A. IOANNOU AND J. SUN, Robust Adaptive Control, Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ, 1996; also available online at http://www-rcf.usc.edu/~ioannou/ Robust_Adaptive_Control.htm. [2] A. FEUER AND A.S. MORSE, Adaptive control of single-input, single-output linear systems, IEEE Trans. Automat. Control, 23 (1978), pp. 557569. [3] A.S. MORSE, A comparative study of normalized and unnormalized tuning errors in parameter-adaptive control, in Proc. IEEE Conference on Decision and Control, 1991. [4] I. KANELLAKOPOULOS, P.V. KOKOTOVIC, AND A.S. MORSE, Systematic design of adaptive controllers for feedback linearizable systems, IEEE Trans. Automat. Control, 36 (1991), pp. 12411253. [5] M. KRSTIC, I. KANELLAKOPOULOS, AND P.V. KOKOTOVIC, Nonlinear and Adaptive Control Design, Wiley, New York, 1995. [6] A.S. MORSE, High-order parameter tuners for the adaptive control of linear and nonlinear systems, in Proc. US-Italy Joint Seminar on Systems, Models, and Feedback, Capri, Italy, 1992.

Ioannou Web Ch5

Transféré par

Informations du document

Copyright

Formats disponibles

Partager ce document

Partager ou intégrer le document

Options de partage

Avez-vous trouvé ce document utile ?

Ce contenu est-il inapproprié ?

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

Ioannou Web Ch5

Transféré par

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

Page 5C.

Chapter 5. Complementary Material

where (s ) is any polynomial of degree n n p + rh 1 . Once a polynomial (s ) of

Chapter 5. Complementary Material

5.4 Direct MRAC with Unnormalized Adaptive Laws

Since y p = ym + e1 = Wm (s)r + e1 , we have

where = H 0 (s )e1 and

for i j . H (s ) can be rewritten as

is a constant coefficient matrix. Therefore, we have

Chapter 5. Complementary Material

( j1 )l ( j 2 )l ( j2 n )l 1 1 l l ( j ) ( j 2 ) ( j2 n )l 1 (1 ,, 2 n ) = 1 , 1 1 1 1 1 1 . ,, (1 ,, 2 n ) = diag D( j 2 n ) D( j1 ) (1 ,, 2 n ) is obviously nonsingular. (1 ,, 2 n ) is also nonsingular since it is a

T C T H s l , s l 1 ,,1 = C1T (s ) R p (s )km Z m (s ) + C2 (s )k p Z p (s )km Z m (s ) + c3 (s )k p Z p (s )km Z m (s ) T

T C1T (s ) R p (s ) + (C2 (s) + c3 (s)) k p Z p (s) = 0,

T (s )) n 1 , this contradicts the coprimeness of Z p (s ), R p (s ) . Since deg(c3 (s) + C2

Chapter 5. Complementary Material

and the Lyapunov-like function in (5.99), i.e., V (, e) = we have

eT qqT e c T T T e Lc e 1eT Cc Cc e = 1e1 e1 2 2

We can also rewrite V (t ) as V = e T Pe , where

T Hence we have V = e T ( PA + AT P )e 1e1 e1 = 1 e T CC T e , which implies that

PA(t ) + AT (t )P + 1CC T is negative semidefinite. Therefore, using Theorem A.8.3, to

Chapter 5. Complementary Material

5.4.2 Relative Degree n* = 2

where = H o (s )e1 and

Since e1 L2 L and e1 L , it follows from Lemma 3C.1 that L2 L and

5.4.3 Relative Degree Greater than 2

Chapter 5. Complementary Material

for some p2 > 0 so that

T . However, the suggested control law implies

where = . We select u p so that e0 goes to zero as t . In this case, the

Chapter 5. Complementary Material

Considering the Lyapunov-like function V = law

| | + 2 , we design the adaptive

where = T and > 0 . Let us now express e0 as

Substituting for , we obtain

s where = ( s + p0 )( . Hence the control law can be implemented without using s + p1 )

Chapter 5. Complementary Material

Further, if k p is known, then , e1 converge to zero

exponentially fast. Proof [1]. (i) Observe that

The time derivative of the Lyapunov-like function

where 0 > 0 is a design constant to be selected, satisfies

1 , e1 L L2 ; y p L . This Hence, 1, e0 , , L and 1, e0 L2 , and therefore e

5.4.3. If k p is known, then = 0 and (5C.6) is reduced to

Chapter 5. Complementary Material

5.5 Direct MRAC with Normalized Adaptive Laws

y p , and the relative degree of each element of

where c 0 denotes any finite constant. Therefore, since

for some > 0 such that W (s 2) is

The same notation is used in the proof.

Chapter 5. Complementary Material

n F (s, 0 ) = 0 (s + 0 )n , F1 (s, 0 ) = 1 F (s, 0 )s ,

1 1 * ms2 + * + Wc (Wb T ) T = F1 T + T + FWm

Using Lemma A.11.1, we have

Chapter 5. Complementary Material

where = Wc ((Wb T ) ) . Using Lemma A.5.2 and Lemma 5.5.2, we have

Since = T + Wm [ T ] = Wm [ T ] T Wm [ ] = Wc [Wb [ T ] ], , ms , L2 , and , ns

Chapter 5. Complementary Material

5.6.2 Indirect MRAC with Normalized Adaptive Law

Following the same steps as in the proof of Theorem 5.5.1, we obtain

(Q(s) Rp (s) 0 (s) Rm (s)) m(s)

Similarly, using (5.133), we obtain

Taking the difference of the two equations above, we get

Chapter 5. Complementary Material

W (s) 1 (s, t ) Wm (s ) u (s, t )i R (s, t )i Z (s, t ) m y Q , Q p p p p p (s ) (s ) k

(s, t )i R (s, t ) Wm ( s ) y e1 = k1p (Q p p ( s )