Disturbance Observer-Based Adaptive Tracking Control With Actuator Saturation and Its Application
Disturbance Observer-Based Adaptive Tracking Control With Actuator Saturation and Its Application
Disturbance Observer-Based Adaptive Tracking Control With Actuator Saturation and Its Application
1545-5955 © 2015 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission.
See http://www.ieee.org/publications_standards/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
This article has been accepted for inclusion in a future issue of this journal. Content is final as presented, with the exception of pagination.
most control systems must be assessed in light of actuator satu- to the plant, and is the output from the plant. rep-
ration [6], which may be possible to ignore this fact. However, resents the uncertain nonlinearities including external distur-
such unexpected actuator saturation may degrade the system bances. The actuator nonlinearity is described as a sat-
performance, render the instability of the closed-loop system. urated characteristic given by
Significant amount of analysis and synthesis of control systems
have been done to stabilize the system, while considering the (2)
saturation nonlinearities at the controller design stage, such as
the anti-windup techniques [7], [8] and the low-and-high gain where is the input saturation limit. In general, the system is
approaches [9], [10]. These designs focus on how to enlarge the subjected to structured uncertainties due to variations in system
domain of attraction by properly designing the linear feedback parameters. In addition, the partially known function ,
control laws while meeting certain performance requirements which represents the system unstructured uncertainty and the
such as disturbance rejection. However, in all those works, external disturbances that cannot be modeled by an explicit
it was assumed that the systems of concern are linear and function, is assumed to be a bounded constant. The control
exactly known, which, as stated earlier, is at variance with most objective of this paper is to design an adaptive controller
physical system in reality. for system (1) such that all signals in the closed-loop system
Therefore, it is necessary to concern with the problem of are bounded, while the output follows a desired reference
adaptive tracking control for a class uncertainty nonlinear signal with the tracking error converging to zero, where
system to follow a desired reference trajectory with actuator and its first derivatives are known and bounded. For
saturation, uncertainties and external disturbances. Meanwhile, the development of control laws, the following assumptions
by borrowing ideas from the ARC [5], [16] and to avoid em- are made.
ploying large feedback gains in practical implementations. An Assumption 1: In order to express convenient, we rewrite
approach that based on disturbance observer has been applied the function as a linear parameterized form:
for systems to compensate the strong effects of disturbances , where is a known contin-
[11]–[15]. Motivated by the observation, in this paper, a novel uous function vector and assumes that is
terminal sliding-mode-based nonlinear disturbance observer an unknown parameter vector which is to be estimated, are
(TSDO), where the modeling inaccuracy and disturbance are known constant vector values denoting the upper bound for its
integrated into a lumped disturbance, is designed to estimate absolute values.
the lump disturbances acting on the system. The proposed Remark 1: Although the unknown function can
TSDO can estimate the lumped disturbances and then used be represented in a linear parameterized form as above, a prac-
in the controller to compensate for them. This novel TSDO tical system is, in fact, mainly contain some uncertainty, and the
algorithm is designed to be equivalent to a low-pass filter, linear parameterized form is only its approximation. Thus, we
which can soften the switching control signal of the TSDO to can consider all possible uncertainties of the system as the parts
attenuate chattering. The effect of the filter can be properly . Therefore, it is important to estimate in real time
controlled by regulating the parameters in the algorithm. The for achieving good performances.
smooth control signal of the observer is directly used for the Assumption 2: Defining parameter set
parameter estimation in real time, and no phase lag of the , which represents the structured uncertainty, satisfies
estimation incurs. Then, integrating them via a robust control
action with some assumptions, a new saturation ARC with (3)
TSDO is proposed for a reference tracking system, such that
the output of the system achieve output tracking and meet the where and are
steady-state performance requirement in general. known, . In addition, we also assume that the
sign of is known, which implies that unknown constant is
II. PROBLEM FORMULATION strictly either positive or negative. Without losing generality,
we shall only consider the case when , namely,
This paper considers the same class of nonlinear dynamic sys- .
tems preceded by actuator saturation as in [17]–[19], which are
described by
III. CONTROLLER DESIGN
A. Parameter Adaptation
Let denote the estimate of and denote the estimation
error (i.e., ). The widely used projection mapping
(1) will be used to keep the parameter estimates within the
known bounded set as in [16] and [20]. Thus, a discontinuous
where , are some known continuous non-
projection is defined as
linear functions, is the system state vector defined by
assumed to be avail-
able, and parameters and represent unknown constants. (4)
is the output from the controller, is the actual input
This article has been accepted for inclusion in a future issue of this journal. Content is final as presented, with the exception of pagination.
PAN et al.: DISTURBANCE OBSERVER-BASED ADAPTIVE TRACKING CONTROL WITH ACTUATOR SATURATION AND ITS APPLICATION 3
where . In (4), represents the th compoent of the where and are the nominal values of and , and
vector , and the operation for two vectors is performed in is a feedback gain.
terms of the corresponding elements of the vectors. Remark 2: If the exact system model is known and the actu-
Suppose that the parameter estimated is updated using the ator saturation is ignored, i.e., ,
following projection-type adaptation law: and , then the FL controller (10) can obtain
asymptotic tracking performance. However, in fact, all physical
(5) systems have modeling uncertainties. Hence,
and in general. From (10), one can note that the
where is a diagonal adaptation rate matrix and is an FL controller requires exact cancellation of nonlinearities to
adaptation function to be synthesized later. For any adaptation achieve the desired performance. In the presence of uncertain-
function , the projection law structure used in (5) guarantees ties, the nonlinearities may not get canceled exactly, which may
the following desirable properties hold [6]: result in poor performance, and thus, it is necessary to compen-
sate for the effects of the uncertainties.
(6) 2) Design of the Adaptive Robust Controller: To further im-
(7) prove performance, it is necessary to introduce different mech-
anisms to handle parametric uncertainty and unstructured un-
certainty separately. In this area, ARC proposed by Yao [5] is a
B. Controller Design good choice. If actuator saturation is ignored in the design, the
1) Design of the Feedback Linearization Controller: Let us ARC controller can handle both parametric uncertainty by adap-
consider the following virtual control effort and the tracking tive control and unstructure uncertainty via deterministic robust
error in th step feedback control and integrate these two control techniques in
a unified form by using a projection-based adaptive law. Based
on (9), the resulting ARC controller can be given by
(8)
(14)
It seems that the control problem with uncertainties has been the sliding-mode surface in finite-time. In order to derive the
solved by the ARC controller (11). However, this controller TSDO algorithm for system (16), a sliding function is defined
might not work very well in practice. Considering the robust as follows:
control law (14) and condition (13) carefully, it seems that the
robust control law acts as a high-gain feedback law, which uses (17)
the maximum bound of uncertainties. In fact, it is difficult to
implement high-gain feedback control in practice due to mea- where and are constants. is designed
surement noise and unmodeled dynamics. As a result, high-gain such that the polynomial , which
feedback control may lead to actual system being unstable. To corresponds to system (17), is Hurwitz, i.e., the eigenvalues of
avoid this practical issue, finite gain and large have to the polynomial are all in the left-half side of the complex plane.
be employed. These parameter choices will make the results are positive values and satisfy the following condition as
of Lemma 1 have little sense. Hence, when unstructured un- [21]:
certainty is dominate in physical systems, model-based adap-
tive control can do little to handle it, and limited feedback gains (18)
cannot achieve excellent tracking performance anymore.
3) Design of the Adaptive Robust Controller With TSDO: where .
In order to dominate the disturbances coming from various un- When the state trajectories of the error system (16) enter into
certainties without high-gain feedback, a TSDO is designed to the ideal sliding-mode , the nonlinear system (17) will
compensate the uncertainties and to attenuate the external dis- behave in an identical fashion, namely
turbances. For the purpose of uncertain parameters estimation,
considering the system dynamic model (1), a sliding-mode ob-
server can be designed as follows:
(19)
(15) If in sliding-mode manifold (17) are selected using (18) and
in (17) are determined to guarantee that the polynomial
where represents state estimation for , which corresponds to system (17),
is the error compensation signal of the is Hurwitz, system (19), which represents the establishment of
TSDO, which will take the feedback into the design of the the ideal sliding-mode for system (17), can converge to
observer; and and are two nominal parameters that are its equilibrium point from any initial condition
some crude estimations of the true parameters in (1). and along the sliding-mode manifold in finite-time
can be determined initially based on the experiences and [21]–[23].
prior knowledge. It should be noticed that accuracy is not Assumption 3: The derivative of in system
necessary for either parameter. Although the exact values of (16) is bounded: , where
the system parameters and their estimations are unknown, one is a constant.
can reasonable assume that and , i.e., the errors between Theorem 2: For the system described by (1) with an estima-
the true system parameters and their crude estimations, are tion model (15), the tracking error systems defined by (16) sat-
bounded. isfy that the error dynamics converge to zero along within
Remark 3: In fact, it is not necessary to estimate the state finite-time, if the sliding-mode surface is chosen as (17) and
using (15). All of them are assumed to be directly measured the control laws are given by
using sensors. The purpose of the observer (15) is for the esti-
mation of the system errors parameters and and uncertain (20)
parameter . (21)
Defining the tracking errors as (22)
, then subtracting (1) from (15) leads to error (23)
dynamics systems as where repre-
sents the lump disturbances. The error compensation signal where and are all constants, as
is an control signal whose design will be described later. defined in (17); is a positive constant; is a constant defined
Now, the task of TSDO for nonlinear errors system (16), in Assumption 3; two constants, and are selected to
shown at the bottom of the page, is to design a control strategy satisfy the following condition:
which induces an ideal sliding-mode motion in the prescribed
sliding-mode surface and forces system (16) to the origin along (24)
(16)
This article has been accepted for inclusion in a future issue of this journal. Content is final as presented, with the exception of pagination.
PAN et al.: DISTURBANCE OBSERVER-BASED ADAPTIVE TRACKING CONTROL WITH ACTUATOR SATURATION AND ITS APPLICATION 5
Proof: From system (16), the sliding-mode manifold (17) or decreases. It should be noted that to obtain is much
can be rewritten as follows: easier than to obtain the accurate value of .
Remark 5: As stated in Theorem 2, the control signal (22) is
equivalent to a low-pass filter, where is the input and
is the output of the filter. The transfer function corresponding
to the filter (22) is , where the
Substituting the control (20) and (21) into above equation gives
bandwidth of the low-pass filter is equal to the parameter .
(25) Although the control law in (23) is discontinuity caused
by the switch function in (20) is the output of the
If the sliding-mode manifold , then it is not difficult to low-pass filter (22) and is softened to be a smooth signal by
get , that is, (22). From the proof of Theorem 2, it can be seen that the value
. On both sides of the inequality is multiplied by , one has of in the low-pass filter does not affect the stability of
. From (24), the following relationships under the observer. Therefore, can be designed arbitrarily based on
the condition can be obtained: , and the requirement of softening , given that the condition of
. (24) is satisfied. Hence, the control signal of the observer, ,
Similarly, when the sliding-mode manifold , then we cannot induce the chattering phenomenon in the system because
have . Finally, once the sliding-mode man- of the low-pass filter and can be directly used for the parameter
ifold , one has . estimation.
The aforementioned analysis yields to the following in- For system (1), its observer (15) can be designed according
equality kept forever: to Theorem 2. The error system (16) will converge to
in finite time. When , from (25), it can be obtained as
(26)
. Therefore, the estimation of
Consider the following Lyapunov function: . For can be obtained as follows:
sliding-mode manifold (17), its derivative with respect to time
(30)
along system (16) can be obtained from (25) as
. Substituting (22) into above equa- Remark 6: From (30), it can be seen that can be
tion yields estimated in real time because of the smooth . The gain of
(27) the switch function in (23) can be designed for guaranteeing
the robustness, while the equivalent low-pass filter in (22) can
Therefore, it is easy to obtain that soften and produce a smooth signal , which can be
directly used for estimating .
Now, the lump disturbance has already been perfect esti-
mated. In the last step (step ) of ARC, let the control law be
(28)
(31)
From (26), Assumption 3 and above equation, thus, the time-
derivative of the Lyapunov function candidate along system tra- where
jectory can be rewritten as
(32)
(29)
this positive invariant set, they will not go out of this set there- Theorem 4: Considering the lump uncertainty and
after. And the control effort needed to confine the error within its estimation (30), and letting the parameter estimation be up-
the positive invariant set is always within the saturation limits dated by the adaptation law (5) in which is chosen as Lemma
so that no saturation would occur. Such a set is given below. (1), then the control law (31) guarantees that all signals are
Lemma 3: With the control law (31), the set bounded and converge to in the presence of actuator satura-
is a positive invariant set and if tion. Furthermore, the proposed control law TMDO-ARC (31)
the following conditions are satisfied: guarantees that, after the finite time , the lump uncertainty is
1) ; well estimated, (i.e., ), then, zero final output
2) ; tracking error with respect to the desired trajectory is achieved,
3) i.e., as .
. Proof: By substituting (33) into (9), we have
Proof: Involving 2) and 3), it is obtained that
(35)
where
.
Suppose that . Then, some ele- Since and is bounded, signal and
ments must hit their boundaries or while others are still are thus uniformly continuous with respect to time.
within their limits. Let denote the elements Then, it can be verified that signal
that hit their upper bounds, i.e., . Let is also uniformly continuous. Furthermore, since
denote the elements that hit their lower bounds, i.e., . and d
Let denote the elements that are within their is lower bounded. By applying Barbalat's lemma,
limits, i.e., . Then it is easy to see that, the as . Therefore, we can
vector always points inward if the following conditions are obtain that as .
satisfied: and . Remark 7: It notes that the results in Theorem 4 are better
These conditions are verified as follows. than that in Lemma 1. Particularly, the proposed control is easier
1) If , then, we have . Based on condition 3) to be implemented and high-gain feedback is also avoided. This
in Lemma 3, which further implies that controller indeed has better performance which will be illus-
, which tells us trated in the following comparative experiments.
that when hits the upper bound will be decreased, IV. APPLICATION TO A QUARTER VEHICLE
and back to the set of . SUSPENSION SYSTEM
2) Conversely, if , which means hits the lower
In this section, the proposed control algorithm is applied to an
bound , then
quarter active suspension controller. Consider the experimental
, which means that when hits the lower
example of a bench-scale quarter-car model with active suspen-
bound will be increased, and back to the set of
sion system in [24] and [25]
as well.
3) If , which is easy to verify that
.
(36)
4) Similarly, if , we can obtain that
. where the sprung mass represents the body of the car; the
This completes the proof that is a positive invariant. unsprung mass denotes the wheels, brakes and part of the
suspension; and denote the forces produced by the springs
C. Main Result and dampers, and are the elasticity force and damping
In this section, by using the disturbance observer in the afore- force of the tires. and are the displacements of the sprung
mentioned section, a saturated adaptive robust control is de- and unsprung masses, respectively; is the road displacement
veloped, and the stability analysis of the closed-loop system is input; represents the saturated control input. It is to be
given. pointed that with a change in the number of passengers or the
This article has been accepted for inclusion in a future issue of this journal. Content is final as presented, with the exception of pagination.
PAN et al.: DISTURBANCE OBSERVER-BASED ADAPTIVE TRACKING CONTROL WITH ACTUATOR SATURATION AND ITS APPLICATION 7
payload, the vehicle load will easily vary and this will accord-
ingly change the vehicle mass . Thus, is an uncertain pa-
rameter, which extent is known, i.e., ,
where kg and kg.
The forces produced by the nonlinear suspension stiffness
spring, and the piecewise linear damper and the tire obey
(37)
(38)
(39)