Modern Control Systems

Similar documents
LMIs for Observability and Observer Design

Grammians. Matthew M. Peet. Lecture 20: Grammians. Illinois Institute of Technology

Module 08 Observability and State Estimator Design of Dynamical LTI Systems

Controllability, Observability, Full State Feedback, Observer Based Control

Module 03 Linear Systems Theory: Necessary Background

Observability. It was the property in Lyapunov stability which allowed us to resolve that

to have roots with negative real parts, the necessary and sufficient conditions are that:

Multivariable Control. Lecture 03. Description of Linear Time Invariant Systems. John T. Wen. September 7, 2006

POLE PLACEMENT. Sadegh Bolouki. Lecture slides for ECE 515. University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign. Fall S. Bolouki (UIUC) 1 / 19

Modern Optimal Control

Control Systems Design

ME 234, Lyapunov and Riccati Problems. 1. This problem is to recall some facts and formulae you already know. e Aτ BB e A τ dτ

1 Continuous-time Systems

Pole placement control: state space and polynomial approaches Lecture 2

CONTROL DESIGN FOR SET POINT TRACKING

Lecture 19 Observability and state estimation

Control Systems Design, SC4026. SC4026 Fall 2009, dr. A. Abate, DCSC, TU Delft

Observability and state estimation

Control Systems Design, SC4026. SC4026 Fall 2010, dr. A. Abate, DCSC, TU Delft

Linear Algebra. P R E R E Q U I S I T E S A S S E S S M E N T Ahmad F. Taha August 24, 2015

Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Department of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science : MULTIVARIABLE CONTROL SYSTEMS by A.

Control Systems I. Lecture 4: Diagonalization, Modal Analysis, Intro to Feedback. Readings: Emilio Frazzoli

Comparison of four state observer design algorithms for MIMO system

Module 07 Controllability and Controller Design of Dynamical LTI Systems

LMI Methods in Optimal and Robust Control

DESIGN OF OBSERVERS FOR SYSTEMS WITH SLOW AND FAST MODES

Topic # Feedback Control Systems

16.31 Fall 2005 Lecture Presentation Mon 31-Oct-05 ver 1.1

6.241 Dynamic Systems and Control

ME 132, Fall 2015, Quiz # 2

Stability, Pole Placement, Observers and Stabilization

ECEN 605 LINEAR SYSTEMS. Lecture 8 Invariant Subspaces 1/26

Zeros and zero dynamics

Module 09 From s-domain to time-domain From ODEs, TFs to State-Space Modern Control

MASSACHUSETTS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY Department of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science : Dynamic Systems Spring 2011

Balanced Truncation 1

Nonlinear Observers. Jaime A. Moreno. Eléctrica y Computación Instituto de Ingeniería Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México

5. Observer-based Controller Design

ECE504: Lecture 8. D. Richard Brown III. Worcester Polytechnic Institute. 28-Oct-2008

ACM/CMS 107 Linear Analysis & Applications Fall 2016 Assignment 4: Linear ODEs and Control Theory Due: 5th December 2016

Discussion on: Measurable signal decoupling with dynamic feedforward compensation and unknown-input observation for systems with direct feedthrough

ECEN 605 LINEAR SYSTEMS. Lecture 7 Solution of State Equations 1/77

4F3 - Predictive Control

LMI Methods in Optimal and Robust Control

OUTPUT CONTROLLABILITY AND STEADY-OUTPUT CONTROLLABILITY ANALYSIS OF FIXED SPEED WIND TURBINE

Control Systems I. Lecture 7: Feedback and the Root Locus method. Readings: Jacopo Tani. Institute for Dynamic Systems and Control D-MAVT ETH Zürich

1 Some Facts on Symmetric Matrices

Control Systems Design

Topic # Feedback Control. State-Space Systems Closed-loop control using estimators and regulators. Dynamics output feedback

Analysis of undamped second order systems with dynamic feedback

Linear System Theory

Problem Set 5 Solutions 1

Multivariable MRAC with State Feedback for Output Tracking

Theorem 1. ẋ = Ax is globally exponentially stable (GES) iff A is Hurwitz (i.e., max(re(σ(a))) < 0).

FEL3210 Multivariable Feedback Control

Intro. Computer Control Systems: F9

TRACKING AND DISTURBANCE REJECTION

EL 625 Lecture 10. Pole Placement and Observer Design. ẋ = Ax (1)

Diagonalization. P. Danziger. u B = A 1. B u S.

Modern Optimal Control

Identification Methods for Structural Systems

Output Stabilization of Time-Varying Input Delay System using Interval Observer Technique

Introduction to Modern Control MT 2016

State Feedback and State Estimators Linear System Theory and Design, Chapter 8.

Modern Control Systems

Systems and Control Theory Lecture Notes. Laura Giarré

ẋ n = f n (x 1,...,x n,u 1,...,u m ) (5) y 1 = g 1 (x 1,...,x n,u 1,...,u m ) (6) y p = g p (x 1,...,x n,u 1,...,u m ) (7)

Modeling and Analysis of Dynamic Systems

1 Similarity transform 2. 2 Controllability The PBH test for controllability Observability The PBH test for observability...

SYSTEMTEORI - ÖVNING Stability of linear systems Exercise 3.1 (LTI system). Consider the following matrix:

Chapter 8 Stabilization: State Feedback 8. Introduction: Stabilization One reason feedback control systems are designed is to stabilize systems that m

Intro. Computer Control Systems: F8

State will have dimension 5. One possible choice is given by y and its derivatives up to y (4)

Linear dynamical systems with inputs & outputs

Design Methods for Control Systems

SYSTEMTEORI - KALMAN FILTER VS LQ CONTROL

Chapter 3. LQ, LQG and Control System Design. Dutch Institute of Systems and Control

Controller Design for Robust Output Regulation of Regular Linear Systems

Discrete and continuous dynamic systems

Controllability. Chapter Reachable States. This chapter develops the fundamental results about controllability and pole assignment.

The norms can also be characterized in terms of Riccati inequalities.

EE263: Introduction to Linear Dynamical Systems Review Session 6

Solution of Linear State-space Systems

ECE 388 Automatic Control

Topics in control Tracking and regulation A. Astolfi

EL2520 Control Theory and Practice

ECE504: Lecture 9. D. Richard Brown III. Worcester Polytechnic Institute. 04-Nov-2008

3 Gramians and Balanced Realizations

Minimal Input Selection for Robust Control

Module 02 CPS Background: Linear Systems Preliminaries

CONTROL SYSTEMS, ROBOTICS AND AUTOMATION - Vol. VII - System Characteristics: Stability, Controllability, Observability - Jerzy Klamka

Kalman Decomposition B 2. z = T 1 x, where C = ( C. z + u (7) T 1, and. where B = T, and

Fall 線性系統 Linear Systems. Chapter 08 State Feedback & State Estimators (SISO) Feng-Li Lian. NTU-EE Sep07 Jan08

Linear System Theory. Wonhee Kim Lecture 1. March 7, 2018

Stabilisation of Linear Time-Invariant Systems subject to Output Saturation

ECEN 420 LINEAR CONTROL SYSTEMS. Lecture 6 Mathematical Representation of Physical Systems II 1/67

WHAT IS THE MINIMUM FUNCTION OBSERVER ORDER

Last lecture: Recurrence relations and differential equations. The solution to the differential equation dx

ECEEN 5448 Fall 2011 Homework #5 Solutions

Spectral factorization and H 2 -model following

Transcription:

Modern Control Systems Matthew M. Peet Arizona State University Lecture 09: Observability

Observability For Static Full-State Feedback, we assume knowledge of the Full-State. In reality, we only have measurements y m (t) = C m x(t) How to implement our controllers? Consider a system with no input: ẋ(t) = Ax(t), x(0) = x 0 y(t) = Cx(t) Definition 1. The pair (A, C) is Observable on [0, T ] if, given y(t) for t [0, T ], we can find x 0. M. Peet Lecture 09: Observability 2 / 24

Observability Let F(R p1, R p2 ) be the space of functions which map f : R p1 R p2. Definition 2. Given (C, A), the flow map, Ψ T : R p F(R, R p ) is Ψ T : x 0 Ce At x 0 t [0, T ] So y = Ψ T x 0 implies y(t) = Ce At x 0. Proposition 1. The pair (C, A) is observable if and only if Ψ T is invertible ker Ψ T = 0 M. Peet Lecture 09: Observability 3 / 24

Observability Theorem 3. ker Ψ T = ker C ker CA ker CA 2 ker CA n 1 = ker Proof. Similar to the Controllability proof: R t = image C(A, B) Definition 4. The matrix O(C, A) is called the Observability Matrix C CA O(C, A) =. CA n 1 C CA. CA n 1 M. Peet Lecture 09: Observability 4 / 24

Unobservable Subspace Definition 5. The Unobservable Subspace is N CA = ker Ψ T = ker O(C, A). Theorem 6. N AB is A-invariant. M. Peet Lecture 09: Observability 5 / 24

Duality The Controllability and Observability matrices are related O(C, A) = C(A T, C T ) T C(A, B) = O(B T, A T ) T For this reason, the study of controllability and observability are related. ker O(C, A) = [image C(A T, C T )] image C(A, B) = [ker O(B T, A T )] We can investigate observability of (C, A) by studying controllability of (A T, C T ) (C, A) is observable if image C(A T, C T ) = R n M. Peet Lecture 09: Observability 6 / 24

Duality Definition 7. For pair (C, A), the Observability Grammian is defined as Y = 0 e AT s C T Ce As ds The following seminal result is not surprising Theorem 8. For a given pair (C, A), the following are equivalent. ker Y = 0 ker Ψ T = 0 ker O(C, A) = 0 If the state is observable, then it is observable arbitrarily fast. M. Peet Lecture 09: Observability 7 / 24

Duality There are several other results which fall out directly. Theorem 9 (PBH Test). (C, A) is observable if and only if for all λ C. rank [ ] A λi = n C Again, we can consider only eigenvalues λ. No equivalent to Stabilizability? M. Peet Lecture 09: Observability 8 / 24

Observability Form Theorem 10. For any pair (C, A), there exists an invertible T such that T AT 1 = [Ã11 0 Ã 21 Ã 22 ] CT 1 = [ C1 0 ] where the pair ( C 1, Ã11) is observable. Invariant Subspace Form What is the invariant subspace? Dissecting the equations (and dropping the tilde), we have ẋ 1 (t) = A 11 x 1 (t) y(t) = Cx 1 (t) Then we can solve for the output: ẋ 2 (t) = A 21 x 1 (t) + A 22 x 2 (t) y(t) = Ce A11t x 1 (0) The initial condition x 2 (0) does not affect the output in any way! x 2 (0) ker Ψ T. No way to back out x 2 (0). M. Peet Lecture 09: Observability 9 / 24

Detectability The equivalent to stabilizability Definition 11. The pair (C, A) is detectable if, when in observability form, Ã 22 is Hurwitz. All unstable states are observable Theorem 12 (PBH for detectability). Suppose (C, A) has observability form T AT 1 = [Ã11 0 Ã 21 Ã 22 Then A 22 is Hurwitz if and only if for all λ C +. rank ] [ ] A λi = n C CT 1 = [ C1 0 ] M. Peet Lecture 09: Observability 10 / 24

Observers Suppose we have designed a controller but we can only measure y(t) = Cx(t)! u(t) = F x(t) Question: How to find x(t)? If (C, A) observable, then we can observe y(t) on t [t, t + T ]. But by then its too late! we need x(t) in real time! M. Peet Lecture 09: Observability 11 / 24

Observers Definition 13. An Observer, is an Artificial Dynamical System whose output tracks x(t). Suppose we want to observe the following system ẋ(t) = Ax(t) + Bu(t) y(t) = Cx(t) + Du(t) Lets assume the system is state-space What are our inputs and output? What is the dimension of the system? M. Peet Lecture 09: Observability 12 / 24

Observers Inputs: u(t) and y(t). Outputs: Estimate of the state: ˆx(t). Assume the observer has the same dimension as the system ż(t) = Mz(t) + Ny(t) + P u(t) ˆx(t) = Qz(t) + Ry(t) + Su(t) We want lim t 0 e(t) = lim t 0 x(t) ˆx(t) = 0 for any u, z(0), and x(0). We would also like internal stability, etc. M. Peet Lecture 09: Observability 13 / 24

Observers System: Observer: ẋ(t) = Ax(t) + Bu(t) y(t) = Cx(t) + Du(t) ż(t) = Mz(t) + Ny(t) + P u(t) ˆx(t) = Qz(t) + Ry(t) + Su(t) What are the dynamics of x ˆx? ė(t) = ẋ(t) ˆx(t) = Ax(t) + Bu(t) Qż(t) + Rẏ(t) + S u(t) = Ax(t) + Bu(t) Q(Mz(t) + Ny(t) + P u(t)) + R(Cẋ(t) + D u(t)) + S u(t) = Ax(t) + Bu(t) QMz(t) QN(Cx(t) + Du(t)) QP u(t) + RC(Ax(t) + Bu(t)) + (S + RD) u(t) = (A + RCA QNC)e(t) + (AQ + RCAQ QNCQ QM)z(t) + (A + RCA QNC)Ry(t) + (B + RCB QP QND)u(t) + (S + RD) u(t) Designing an observer requires that these dynamics are Hurwitz. M. Peet Lecture 09: Observability 14 / 24

Luenberger Observers Initially, we consider a special class of observers, parameterized by the matrix L ż(t) = (A + LC)z(t) Ly(t) + (B + LD)u(t) (1) ˆx(t) = z(t) In the general formulation, this corresponds to M = A + LC; N = L; P = B + LD; Q = I; R = 0; S = 0; So in this case z(t) = ˆx(t) and (A + RCA QNC) = QM = A + LC. Furthermore (A + RCA QNC)R = 0 and AQ + RCAQ QNCQ QM = 0. Thus the criterion for convergence is A + LC Hurwitz. Question Can we choose L such that A + LC is Hurwitz? Similar to choosing A + BF. (2) M. Peet Lecture 09: Observability 15 / 24

Observability If turns out that controllability and detectability are useful Theorem 14. The eigenvalues of A + LC are freely assignable through L if and only if (C, A) is observable. If we only need A + LC Hurwitz, then the test is easier. We only need detectability Theorem 15. An observer exists if and only if (C, A) is detectable Note: Theorem applies to ANY observer, not just Luenberger observers. M. Peet Lecture 09: Observability 16 / 24

Observability Theorem 16. An observer exists if and only if (C, A) is detectable Proof. We begin with 1) 2). We use proof by contradiction. We show 2) 1). Suppose (C, A) is not detectable. We will show that for some initial conditions x(0) and z(0), The observer will not converge ż(t) = Mz(t) + Ny(t) + P u(t) ˆx(t) = Qz(t) + Ry(t) + Su(t) Convert the system to obervability form where A 22 is not Hurwitz. ẋ 1 (t) = A 11 x 1 (t) ẋ 2 (t) = A 21 x 1 (t) + A 22 x 2 (t) y(t) = Cx 1 (t) M. Peet Lecture 09: Observability 17 / 24

Observability Proof. Choose x 1 (0) = 0 and x 2 (0) to be an eigenvector of A 22 with associated eigenvalue λ having positive real part. Then x 1 (t) = e A11t x 1 (0) = 0 for all t > 0. Then ẋ 2 (t) = A 21 x 1 (t) + A 22 x 2 (t) = A 22 x 2 (t). Hence x 2 (t) = e A22t x 2 (0) = x 2 (0)e λt. Thus lim t x 2 (t) =. However, y(t) = Cx 1 (t) = 0 for all t > 0. For any observer, choose z(0) = 0 and u(t) = 0. Then ż(t) = Mz(t) + Ny(t) + P u(t) = Mz(t) Hence z(t) = e Mt z(0) = 0 for all t > 0 and ˆx(t) = 0 for all t > 0. We conclude that lim t e(t) = lim t x(t) ˆx(t) = M. Peet Lecture 09: Observability 18 / 24

Observability Theorem 17. An observer exists if and only if (C, A) is detectable Proof. Next we prove that 2) 1). We do this directly by constructing the observer. If (C, A) is detectable, then there exists a L such that A + LC is Hurwitz. Choose the Luenberger observer ż(t) = (A + LC)z(t) Ly(t) + (B + LD)u(t) ˆx(t) = z(t) Referencing previous slide, A + RCA QNC = QM = A + LC and B + RCB QP QND = 0 and S + RD = 0 Then the error dynamics become ė(t) = ẋ(t) ˆx(t) = (A + LC)e(t) Which has solution lim t e (A+LC)t e(0) = 0. Thus the observer converges. M. Peet Lecture 09: Observability 19 / 24

Review: Luenberger Observer ż(t) = (A + LC)z(t) Ly(t) + (B + LD)u(t) (3) ˆx(t) = z(t) (4) Theorem 18. The eigenvalues of A + LC are freely assignable through L if and only if (C, A) is observable. Theorem 19. An observer exists if and only if (C, A) is detectable M. Peet Lecture 09: Observability 20 / 24

Dynamic Coupling Question: How to compute L? The eigenvalues of A + LC and (A + LC) T = A T + C T L T are the same. This is the same problem as controller design! Answer: Choose a vector of eigenvalues E. L = place(a T, C T, E) T So now we know how to design an Luenberger observer. Also called an estimator The error dynamics will be dictated by the eigenvalues of A + LC. For fast convergence, chose very negative eigenvalues. generally a good idea for the observer to converge faster than the plant. M. Peet Lecture 09: Observability 21 / 24

Observer-Based Controllers Summary: What do we know? How to design a controller which uses the full state. How to design an observer which converges to the full state. Question: Is the combined system stable? We know the error dynamics converge. Lets look at the coupled dynamics. Proposition 2. The system defined by ẋ(t) = Ax(t) + Bu(t) y(t) = Cx(t) + Du(t) u(t) = F ˆx(t) ˆx(t) = (A + LC + BF + LDF ) ˆx(t) Ly(t) has eigenvalues equal to that of A + LC and A + BF. Note we have reduced the dependence on u(t). M. Peet Lecture 09: Observability 22 / 24

Observer-Based Controllers The proof is relatively easy Proof. The state dynamics are Rewrite the estimation dynamics as ẋ(t) = Ax(t) + BF ˆx(t) ˆx(t) = (A + LC + BF + LDF ) ˆx(t) Ly(t) = (A + LC) ˆx(t) + (B + LD) F ˆx(t) LCx(t) LDu(t) = (A + LC) ˆx(t) + (B + LD) u(t) LCx(t) LDu(t) = (A + LC) ˆx(t) + Bu(t) LCx(t) = (A + LC + BF ) ˆx(t) LCx(t) In state-space form, we get [ẋ(t) ] [ ] [ ] A BF x(t) = ˆx(t) LC A + LC + BF ˆx(t) M. Peet Lecture 09: Observability 23 / 24

Observer-Based Controllers Proof. [ẋ(t) ] [ ] [ ] A BF x(t) = ˆx(t) LC A + LC + BF ˆx(t) [ ] I 0 Use the similarity transform T = T 1 =. I I [ ] [ ] [ ] T ĀT 1 I 0 A BF I 0 = I I LC A + LC + BF I I [ ] [ ] I 0 A + BF BF = I I A + BF (A + LC + BF ) [ ] A + BF BF = 0 A + LC which has eigenvalues A + LC and A + BF. M. Peet Lecture 09: Observability 24 / 24