2010 Conference on Control and Fault Tolerant Systems Nice, France, October 6-8, 2010

WeA2.2

ON SENSOR FAULTS ESTIMATION USING SLIDING MODE OBSERVERS

Anna Filasov and Duan Krokavec a s
Abstract This paper discusses the problem of designing the sliding-mode-based sensor faults estimation in a general structure suitable on the actuator as well as sensor faults detection and estimation. The problem addressed is indicated as an unied algebraic approach giving sufcient conditions of solution. Lyapunov inequality implying from two linear matrix inequalities are outlined to posses a stabile solution for the modied optimal estimator parameters in the standard estimator structure. An example is presented to explain the procedures for the execution of a sensor fault estimation and to illustrate the properties of the proposed design method in the continuous time system. Index Terms Fault detection, fault estimator, sliding mode, Lyapunov inequality, convex optimization, linear matrix inequalities.

I. I NTRODUCTION The essential aspect for designing the fault-tolerant control requires a complete diagnosis procedure capable of solving the fault detection and isolation problem. This procedure composes the residual signal generation followed by its evaluation within the decision-making process. The residuals are derived from implicit information in the functional or analytical relationships, which exist between the measurements taken from the process and the data obtained from a process model. The overall procedure of fault detection using the state estimation principle covers the residuals generation by the state observers and their evaluation. Here, the estimation error, or some function of it, is used as a fault residual. The standard design approach can be found e.g. in [4], [7], [12]. A special position among observer-based methods is occupied by the sliding mode observers. Essentially, the sliding mode observer uses discontinuous control action to drive the observer error trajectory toward a specic hyper-plane in the error space, and then the trajectory is maintained to slide on this until the origin of the state space is reached. If a sliding-mode is formulated using a Lyapunov approach then it guarantee that the observer error rst reaches the prescribed sliding mode in nite time from any initial state, and then remains on it there after by a discontinuous control. A complete Lyapunov stability standpoint for the design of sliding observers was presented in [8] Supported by existence of linear matrix inequality (LMI) solvers, the intention is to reformulate given problem and
The work presented in this paper was supported by VEGA, Grant Agency of Ministry of Education and Academy of Science of Slovak Republic under Grant No. 1/0328/08. This support is very gratefully acknowledged. A. Filasov , as well as D. Krokavec are with the Department of a Cybernetics and Articial Intelligence, Faculty of Electrical Engineering and Informatics, Technical University of Koice, Koice, Slovakia, s s

optimize it over LMI constraints [3], [10], [17]. In that sense in [18] was proposed the sliding mode observer design method detection, on which design condition in terms of LMI were given. Of course, sliding mode observers of another structure are proposed to explore in fault detection and reconstruction (e.g. see [11], [15], [16]). The work presented here is still limited to the assumption presented in [18], and its modication given in [6]. The main contribution is to present the design method as a modication of above mentioned principle for sensor faults estimation in continuous-time linear MIMO systems. To maintain the same formalism, Lyapunov inequality is used only as stability condition, and demonstrating the application suitability based on the unied algebraic approach [17]. Two standard forms of the linear matrix inequalities are used to posses the sufcient condition for the observer gain matrix solution existence, as well as a new observer gain matrix structure is introduced to solve the potentially feasible task for a sensor fault estimation in given sliding mode estimator structure. The necessary modications was motivated in the sense to obtain by the sensor faults un-destroying sliding mode regime. The method in here presented form enables extension considering bounded real lemma conditions, as well as to design the active sensor fault control reconguration. To the best of authors knowledge, the modication presented has not yet been fully investigated in this eld. II. S YSTEM M ODEL The formulation and study of the concepts of the slidingmode fault observer design is based in the next on the system canonical model which is described as q(t) = Aq(t) + B(u(t) + f a (t)) y(t) = Cq(t) + f s (t) (1) (2)

where q(t) I n , u(t) I r , and y(t) I m , are the R R R state, the input and the output vector variables, respectively, matrices A I nn , B I nr , and C I mn are R R R real matrices. Without loss of generality it is assumed, for simplicity that A= A11 A21 A12 A22 , B= 0 B2 , C= 0 L (3)

anna.filasova@tuke.sk, dusan.krokavec@tuke.sk

where A11 I (nm)(nm) , B 2 I mm is a nonR R singular matrix, and L I mm is an orthogonal matrix, R i.e. LT L = I m . (The results of [9] implies the existence of a nonsingular transform matrix to have this structure, and one way to obtain it is given in the Appendix). The bounded

978-1-4244-8154-5/10/$26.00 2010 IEEE

44

real signals f a (t) I r , f s (t) I m represent actuator and R R sensor faults, respectively. Throughout the paper it is assumed the pair (A, C) is observable, and the memory-less output controller is used, where m = r. III. S LIDING M ODE O BSERVER The state observer associated to the system (1), (2) is considered in the form q e (t) = Aq e (t) + Bu(t) + J (y(t) y e (t)) + H(t) (4) y e (t) = Cq e (t))
n m

A. Sliding Mode Motion Theorem 3.1: Considering the error dynamics (10), then there exists a stable sliding motion that is independent of f T (t) and f T (t) if there exists a symmetric positive denite a s matrix P > 0, P I nn such that the inequalities R P = PT > 0 C T (P A + AT P )C T T < 0 conditioned by the equalities C T P B = 0, H = P 1C TCB C T P J = 0 (16) (17) (14) (15)

(5)

where q e (t) I , y e (t) I R R are the state and the output vector variable estimate, respectively, (t) I m is the feedR forward output error injection signal, J I nm is the estiR mator gain matrix, and H I nm is the design parameter R matrix satisfying condition rank(CH) = rank(B) = m. This condition is necessary for the existence of the unique equivalent control, and the independence of the sliding mode dynamics from the fault signals. The problem is to design a parameter H that sliding mode estimator provides asymptotic faults tracking estimation decoupled from sliding mode dynamics. Assembling (1), (2) with (4), (5) after some algebraic manipulations it can be obtained q(t) A = q e (t) JC + B B B 0 0 J 0 AJC q(t) + q e (t) u(t) 0 f a (t) H f s (t) (t) T 1 e = I I 0 I

B TP B = (CB)T CB,

are satised, where C T is the orthogonal complement to CT . Proof: To obtain the state error estimate stability condition the Lyapunov function can be dened as follows v(eq (t)) = eT(t)P eq (t) > 0 q (18)

where P = P T > 0. Then evaluating derivative of v(eq (t)) with respect to t it can be obtained q v(eq (t)) = eT (t)P eq (t) + eT (t)P eq (t) < 0 q Since (10) implies (19)

(6)

eq (t) = (AJC)eq (t) + Bf a (t) Jf s (t) H(t) (20) then inserting (20) into (19) gives eT(t)P e (t) < 0 q q where eT (t) = q eT (t) f T (t) f T (t) T (t) q a s (22) (21)

It is straightforward to show using the state transformation q(t) eq (t) = Te q(t) q e (t) , Te = 0 I (7)

that with the notation I 0 A A = I I JC

0 AJC

I I

= (8)

A 0 = 0 AJC B = I I = 0 I B 0 B B B B B 0 0 J 0 H =

0 > P = P (AJC)+(AJC)TP P B PJ PH 0 0 0 (23) = 0 0 0 (Hereafter, denotes the symmetric item in a symmetric matrix). Dening the congruence transform matrices I I I I I I I , T = (24) Tq = q I 0 0 0 then pre-multiplying left-hand side of (23) by T q , and righthand side of (23) by T T gives q 0 > P = T q P T T = q P (AJC)+(AJC)TP P (B H) P J (25) 0 0 = 0

0 0 J H

(9)

respectively, and as a result (6) can be reformulated as q (t) = A q (t) + B u (t) where eq (t) = q(t) q e (t), q (t) = u (t) =

(10)

ey (t) = Cq e (t) f T (t) s (t)

T

(11) (12) (13)

q T (t) eT (t) q f T (t) a

u (t)

The equation (10) is formulated in such a way that the sliding manifold design conditions can now be derived.

45

Since (25) can be rewritten as P A + AT P P (B H) 0 T P C 0 J C 0 I 0 J T 0 I

where the observer gain matrix is 0 0 0 P 0 0 <0 J = BY

mm

(35)

(26)

and Y I R is the design matrix parameter. Proof: Dening the transform matrix T I nn , R T = CT P C (36)

then using the complement matrix T C C T = 0 = diag C T I I

1 T =

= C T T(C T P C T T )1 P 1C T(CP 1C T )1 0 (27) it can be introduced (t) = T eq (t) = C T P eq (t) ey (t) = 1 (t) ey (t)

(37)

where C T is the orthogonal complement to C T , and premultiplying left side of (26) by (27) and right side of (26) by its transposition gives C T (P A+ATP )C T T C T (P BP H) < 0 (28) 0

(38)

then using (20) it is evident that ey (t) = C(AJC)eq (t)+ +CH(t) + CBf a (t) CJ f s (t) (39)

It can be can easily veried that using (16) inequalities (18) and (28) imply (14), (15). Using the dual complement matrix P P = 0 = diag 0 I I (29) 0 then pre-multiplying left-hand side of (26) by (29) and righthand side of (26) by its transposition results in 0 (P B P H) 0 0 (30)

Therefore, combining (33 and (39) it can be easily derived that (t) = 0 C T P f (t) CB C J f s (t)+ (40)

0 C T P (AJC) 1 CB (t) + T CP 1C T C(AJC) After some tedious calculations it follows that 1 (t) A 11 = ey (t) A 21 + 0 CP 1C T A 12 A 22

1 (t) C T P J f s (t)+ ey (t) C

CB(t) + (CP 1C T )1 CBf a (t) (41)

Thus, to cancel the terms within the brackets of (30) it can be set using (16) P B = C T CB (31) Pre-multiplying left-hand side of (31) by B implies the rst equality in (17). This equality now denes the special symmetric structure of P . Introducing the reduced sliding mode variable as 1 (t) = C then (32) and (20) gives 1 (t) = C P eq (t) = = C T P (AJC)eq (t) C T P J f s (t)
T T T

where A = C T P AC T T(C T P C T T )1 11 A = C T P (AJC)P 1 C T (CP 1 C T )1 12 A = CAC T T(C T P C T T )1 21 A 22 = C(AJC)P

1 T 1 T 1

(42) (43) (44) (45)

C (CP

C )

P eq (t)

(32)

and it is possible to verify that A A A1 A = 0 22 21 11 12

T

(46)

(33)

To be 1 (t) independent on f s (t) the second equality in (17) has to be satised. This concludes the proof. B. Sliding Mode Switching Surface Since only y(t) is measurable, the conditions for the sliding mode existence have to be derived in the dependency on ey (t), where C is not a square matrix. Theorem 3.2: Considering (14)-(17), the sliding mode stability is governed by nm-order dynamics 1 (t) = C T P AC T T(C T P C T T )1 1 (t) (34)

So in what follows that if (17) is satised, i.e. C P J = 0, as well as if ey (t) = ey (t) = 0 then (41) implies (34). Thus, the sliding mode stability is governed by (nm)order dynamics, and sliding mode is restricted to the switching surface ey (t) = 0. To satisfy (17) it is possible to set J = BY . Then (16) implies C T P J = C T P BY = 0 (47) i.e. (47) implies (35). This concludes the proof. Corollary 3.1: Solving for stability on the switching surface it is possible to use Lyapunov function of the form v( 1 (t)) = T (t)Q1 1 (t) > 0 1 (48)

46

where 0 < Q = QT I (nm)(nm) is a positive denite R matrix. Then the derivative of v( 1 (t)) with respect to t is as follows 1 v( 1 (t)) = T (t)Q1 1 (t) + T (t)Q1 1 (t) < 0 1 Since 1 (t) = A 1 (t) 11 inserting (50), (42) into (49) the following holds Q1C T P AC T T(C T P C T T )1 + +(C T P C T T )1C T AT P C T TQ1 < 0 C
T

(49)

(50)

C. Design Condition As noted before, sliding mode estimator parameter design condition can be described in the form of matrix inequalities but the conditions (14), (15) cannot be directly used to compute the sliding-mode observer parameter J . Summarizing, it can be proved the following results. Theorem 3.3: Considering that P with the diagonal block structure as in (58) is a solution of (14), (15), then any solution of J exists if there exist a symmetric positive denite matrix R > 0, R I mm and a matrix Y R I mm such that R F RF T M where F R + GTY T R <0 (59)

(51)

P AC PC

T T

(C

PC

T T 1

Q+ <0

+Q(C

T T 1

) C

A PC

T T

(52)

respectively. Setting Q = (C T P C T T )1 (53)

F T = B TP 0 0 , G = C 0 I P A + AT P 0 0 M = 0 0<0 0

(60) (61)

(52) implies (15). That is if the sliding motion is stable the sliding mode observer is stable. Corollary 3.2: Since L in (3) is a square matrix of full rank, the orthogonal complement to C T takes form CT = E 0 (54)

The observer gain matrix is then given by (35). Proof: It can be seen that (26), (35) has an open form P A + AT P 0 0 0> 0 0 0 (62) PB CT T T 0 Y C 0 I 0 Y B P 0 0 0 I To solve the problem, using (60), (61) inequality (62) can be written as F Y G + GT Y T F T M < 0 (63)

where E I (nm)(nm) is a non-zero matrix. Then using R (3), (54) the condition (16) takes form C PB = 0 P 12 = EP 12 B 2 = 0 B2 P 22
T

= E 0

P 11 P 21

(55)

Now there exists a positive denite symmetric matrix R > 0 such that F Y G + GTY TF T M + GTY TR1Y G < 0 (64)

where P 11 I R , and a trivial solution can be obtained if the weighting matrix P of Lyapunov function is block-diagonal. Considering (55) let P > 0 is a block diagonal matrix of the form P = diag X W (56)

(nm)(nm)

In this case, after completing the square it can be obtained (F R+GTY T )R1(F R+GTY T)T F RF T M < 0 (65) Thus, using Schur complement property, (65) implies (59). Of course, this gives a regular solution, but more conservative. This concludes the proof. Remark 3.1: Since P (B H) = 0, then inserting (35) into (26) results in P A+ATP BY C C TY TC T 0 P BY < 0 (66) 0 0 0 It is evident that (66) is infeasible but for the above mentioned structure of P the LMI solver SeDuMi gives the same numerical result solving (66), or the next inequality P A + AT P BY C C TY TB T < 0 (67)

0 < X = X T I (nm)(nm) , 0 < W = W T I mm . R R Substituting, (3), (56) into (17) yields BT P B = = 0 BT 2

T

X 0

0 W

0 B2

(57)

BT W B2 2

= (CB) CB =

B T LT LB 2 2

It is obvious that (57) implies P = diag X L L

T

= P = diag X

Im

(58)

since L is orthogonal.

together with (14), (15). In the sense of reduced order dynamics stability design so (67) can be introduced. The observer gain matrix is then given by (35), too.

47

Remark 3.2: A conservative solution can be obtained using the congruence transform matrix T as dened in (24), q where the obtained conditions are closest to those presented in [6]. It is evident that problem of regularization of (23) can be solved using bounded real lemma principle as it is presented in [9]. The feed-forward output error injection signal (t) can be chosen to be discontinuous regulation policy as ey (68) (t) = (t)sign(W ey (t)) = (t) ey (t) where (t) is a gain high enough to enforce the sliding motion. IV. I LLUSTRATIVE E XAMPLE As a more specic the next system model is used for demonstration, where the system matrices A0 , B 0 , and C 0 are given below 0 1 0 1 3 1 1 A0 = 0 0 1 , B0 = 2 1 , CT = 2 1 0 5 9 5 1 5 1 1 Dening the transform matrix T 1 such that [13] 1 0 0 I nm 0 = 1 2 1 T 1 = 1 C0 1 1 1 1 3 B 11 B 1 = T 1 B 0 = 7 10 = 1 B 12 5 9 1 0.4615 0.8462 I nm B 11 B 1 1 12 1 0 T2 = = 0 0 Im 0 0 1
1 then with Tc = T 1 T 1 2 1 1 1 A = Tc A0 Tc , B = Tc B 0 , C = C 0 Tc

Thus, the estimator gain matrix is 0.0000 0.0000 J = BY = 0.1497 0.1256 0.1256 0.1065 and gives the stable estimator system matrix 0.0769 2.1124 0.1420 0.1821 Ae = A JC = 2.0000 4.2266 1.0000 3.6640 0.9526 (Ae ) = 1.2527 2.0018 0.3910 i where (Ae ) is the eigenvalue spectrum of the matrix Ae . To compare, using (14), (15) together (67) the next stable eigenvalue spectrum was obtained (Ae ) = 0.7867 6.1762 8.1470

However, the purpose of this example is only to illustrate this method and does not address issues of numerical stability. The simulations show the fault at the rst sensor, as well as their respective reconstruction, which visually are identical to the fault. This shows that the method presented is successful. V. C ONCLUDING R EMARKS Based on Lyapunov function and the standard sliding mode observer structure the modied principle of the sensor fault estimation is presented in the paper. The design conditions are derived in the terms of numerical optimization over LMI constraints using the new structured LMI variables. The obtained formulation is a convex LMI problem for a full order estimator design and manipulates the estimator statespace description matrix parameters in the system canonical form to apply in continuous-time linear systems. In particular, with the use of Lyapunov method, it was shown how to adapt the standard approach to design the matrix parameters of the sliding-mode-based sensor fault estimator. The procedure was derived in such way as the design problem boils down to solving a special structured problem under LMI constraints. The presented illustrative example conrms the effectiveness of used techniques. In the application context, an advantage of the proposed method is that allows to work directly with triple (A,B,C) in the optimization over LMI constraints thus allowing the exploitation of the structural properties which occur frequently in many practical applications. Note, the inclusion of an actuator fault model into the state-space equation (1) of the system was motivated by the structure of the sliding mode switching surface ey (t) = 0, when an actuator fault doesnt destroy the sliding mode, as (41) implies. A PPENDIX Let state description of the system (1), (2) with r = m is q 0 (t) = A0 q 0 (t) + B 0 u(t) y(t) = C 0 q 0 (t) (A.1) (A.2)

the canonical standard matrix parameters are as follows 0.0769 2.1124 0.1420 0 0 0.3077 , B = 7 10 A = 2.0000 4.0769 1.0000 3.5385 0.8462 5 9 C= 0 1 0 0 0 1

and the null space of C gives CT = 1 0 0

Solving with Self-Dual-Minimization (SeDuMi) package for Matlab [9] the inequalities (14), (15) for the LMI variable P , and subsequently the inequality (59) for Y conditioned by design parameter R = 103 I 2 the problem was feasible giving the solution 1.5754 , Y = 0.0070 0.0050 1 P = 0.0100 0.0090 1

48

1 y (t)
1

1 y (t)
1

y1e(t) 0.8 0.5 0.6

y1e(t)

0.4

0.2

0.5

0.2 1 0.4

1.5

0.5

1.5

2.5 time [s]

3.5

4.5

0.6

0.5

1.5

2.5 time [s]

3.5

4.5

Fig. 1.

Estimation of the rst sensor fault

Fig. 2.

Estimation of the rst sensor output oscillation

Dening the transform matrix T 1 such that 1 C 1 = C 0T 1 = then B 1 = T 1B 0 = T 1 1 1 B 11 B 01 B 01 = = B 12 C 0B0 B 02 (A.4) 0 I m , T 1 = 1 I nm 0 C0 (A.3)

If C 0 B 0 = B 12 is a regular matrix (in opposite case the pseudoinverse of B 12 is possible to use), then the second transform matrix T 1 can be dened as follows 2 T 1 = 2
1 Inm B 11B 1 12 , T = Inm B 11B 12 2 0 Im 0 Im

(A.5)

This results in B = T 1B 1 = 2 where B 11 = B 01 , and C = C 1T 2 = 0 I m I nm B 11B 1 12 = 0 Im 0 Im (A.8) B 2 = B 12 = C 0 B 0 (A.7) Inm B11 B 1 12 0 Im 0 B 11 = B2 B 12 (A.6)

1 Finally, with Tc = T 1T 1 it yields 2 1 1 A = Tc A0 Tc = T 1T 1A0 T 1 T 2 2 1

(A.9)

Thus, (A.6), (A.8), and (A.9) represent the system canonical model. Note, the structure of T 1 is not unique and others can 1 be obtained by permutations of the rst n m rows in the structure dened in (A.3) (e.g. see [13]). R EFERENCES
[1] B. Bandyopadhtay, F. Deepak and K.S. Kim, Sliding Mode Control Using Novel Sliding Surfaces, SpringerVerlag, Berlin, 2009. [2] J.P. Barbot, M. Djemap and T. Boukhobza, Sliding Mode Observers, in Sliding Mode Control in Engineering, Marcel Deckker, Inc., New York, pp.103-126, 2002. [3] D. Boyd, L. El Ghaoui, E. Peron and V. Balakrishnan, Linear Matrix Inequalities in System and Control Theory, SIAM Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics, Philadelphia, 1994.

[4] J. Chen and R.J. Patton, Robust Model-Based Fault Diagnosis for Dynamic Systems, Kluwer Academic Publishers, Norwell, 1999. [5] Y.P. Chen, J.L. Chang and K.T. Li, Output feedback sliding mode controller design for minimum phase linear systems, JSME International Journal, Series C, vol. 44, no.3, pp.682-685, 2001. [6] H.H. Choi and K.S. Ro, LMI-based sliding-mode observer design method, IEE Proceedings - Control Theory and Applications, vol.152, no.1, pp.113-115, 2005. [7] S. X. Ding, Model-Based Fault Diagnosis Techniques. Design Schemes, Alghorithms, and Tools, Berlin: SpringerVerlag, 2008. [8] C. Edwards and S.K. Spurgeon, On the development of discontionous observers, International Journal of Control, vol.59, pp. 1211-1229, 1994. [9] C. Edwards and C.P. Tan, Robust fault detection using slide mode observers, in Advances in Variable Structure and Sliding Mode Control, SpringerVerlag, Berlin, pp.293-312, 2006. [10] H. Hermann, M.C. Turner and I. Postlethwaite, Linear matrix inequalities in control, in Mathematical Methods for Robust and Nonlinear Control, SpringerVerlag, Berlin, pp.123-142, 2007. [11] M. H. Kim, S.W. Kang, G. Park and D. Inman, Application of sliding mode observer for simultaneous vibration control and structual health monitoring, in 14th International Conference on Adaptive Structures and Technologies ICAST 2003, Seoul, Korea, pp.195-203, 2003. [12] D. Krokavec and A. Filasov , Dynamic System Fault Diagnosis, Elfa, a Koice, 2007. (in Slovak) s [13] D. Krokavec and A. Filasov , Discrete-Time Systems, Elfa, Koice, a s 2008. (in Slovak) [14] D. Peaucelle, D. Henrion, Y. Labit and K. Taitz, Users Guide for SeDuMi Interface 1.04, LAAS-CNRS, Toulouse, 2002. [15] M. Saif and Y. Xiong, Sliding mode observers and their application in fault diagnosis, in Fault Diagnosis and Fault Tolerance for Mechatronic Systems. Recent Advances, SpringerVerlag, Berlin, pp.157, 2003. [16] M. Saif, W. Chen and Q. Wu, High order sliding mode observers and differentiators. Application to fault diagnosis problem, in Modern Sliding Mode Control Theory. New Perspective and Applications, SpringerVerlag, Berlin, pp.321-344, 2008. [17] R.E. Skelton, T. Ivasaki and K. Grigoriadis, A Unied Algebraic Approach to Linear Control Design, Taylor & Francis, London, 1998. [18] C.P. Tan and C. Edwards, Sliding mode observer for detection and reconstruction of sensor faults, Automatica, vol.38, pp.1815-1821, 2002. [19] D. Theilliol, C. Join, and Y.M. Zhang, Actuator fault tolerant control design based on a recongurable reference input, International Journal of Applied Mathematics and Computer Science, vol.18, no.4, pp. 553560, 2008. [20] J.S. Wu, Z. Weng, Z.H. Tian and J. Shi, Fault tolerant control for uncertain time-delay systems based on sliding mode control, Kybernetika, vol.44, no.5, pp.617-632, 2008. [21] J. Xiang, H. Su and J. Chu, On the design of Walcott-Zak sliding mode observer, in Proceedings of the American Control Conference 2005, vol. 4, pp.2451-2456, 2005.

49