Automatica, VoL 20, No. 5, pp. 559 568, 1984 0005-1098/84 $3.00 + 0.

00
Printed in Great Britain. Pergamon Press Ltd.
~;) 1984 International Federation of Automatic Control

Nonlinear Adaptive Model-following Control*

A. BALESTRINO~, G. DE MARIA~ and A. S. I. ZINOBER~

Adaptive control of time-varying model-following control systems is considered using

variable structure control and hyperstability theory.

Key Words--Model reference adaptive control; nonlinear control systems; control system design; state
feedback; synthesis methods.

Abstract--The use of discontinuous control in adaptive model- parameter structure. Since they do not require any
following continuous control systems with nonlinear time- global convergence properties, these approaches are
varying plant is described. The first approach is based on the
theory of variable structure systems.Hyperstabilitytheory is the particularly well suited to the class of uncertain
basis of the secondscheme;the third one results by combiningthe time-varying plants under consideration.
previous approaches. The link among the three approaches is After defining the system and control aims, the
explored by studying the error dynamics. Practical implemen-
tation and applications are discussed. theory of VSS control is described in Section 3. The
hyperstability approach is elaborated in the
following section and a comparison between the
1. INTRODUCTION
VSS and the hyperstability approaches is given in
THE TECHNIQUE of model reference adaptive
Section 5, including a discussion of the mixed
control (MRAC) using Lyapunov and hyper-
approach. Aspects linked with the practical
stability theory has been widely described in the
implementation of such systems and some further
literature (Monopoli, 1974; Landau and Courtiol,
extensions of the approach are discussed in Section
1974; Landau, 1979). The designer specifies a model
6. A simple example is worked out both theoretically
the dynamic response of which he desires his actual
and by simulation in Section 7 in order to clarify and
plant to follow. M R A C relies upon the convergence
compare the three approaches.
of parameter identification schemes or a suitable
determination of auxiliary signals. The global
2. THE SYSTEM
stability of M R A C systems in the case of uncertain
The nonlinear time-varying plant satisfies the
nonlinear plants is problematic. In this review paper
differential equations
we shall describe three approaches to the synthesis
of adaptive model-following controllers (AMFC)
Y~(t) = A(x,t)x(t) + Bu(t) + h(x,t) (1)
for nonlinear time-varying plants with disturbances.
The first technique is based on the theory of
where x ~ R" is the plant state, u ~ R" is the control,
multivariable variable-structure systems (VSS)
h e R t is a disturbance vector and B0 = BoR(x,t)
(Utkin, 1974) which has desirable properties such as
where Bo is constant and R(x, t) is a square full rank
parameter invariance and disturbance rejection.
matrix. This structural assumption is equivalent to
Hyperstability theory is the basis for the second
the condition rank(B~, AB) = rank(B~) where
approach, whereas the third one is a suitable
B = B~ + AB. Clearly B = BoR = Bo(Ro + AR) =
combination of the previous approaches. These
B~ + AB. The additive form B = B~ + AB will be
techniques lead to control laws which are discon-
used in Section 3 and the multiplicative form
tinuous on linear switching hyperplanes. The
B = BoR in Section 4.
schemes do not incorporate any parameter
The designer specifies a linear time-invariant
identification algorithms, but the adaptation is
model
r e a l i z e d - t h r o u g h signal synthesis in a fixed
:~ (t) = / l ~ ( t ) +/~fi(t) (2)

* Received 17 October 1983; revised4 April 1984.The original
version of this paper was not presented at any IFAC meeting.
This paper was recommendedfor publication in revised form by
guest editor L. Ljung.
t Dipartimento di Informatica e Sistemistica, University of
Naples, via Claudio 21, 80125 Naples, Italy.
:[:Department of Applied and Computational Mathematics,
University of Sheffield, Sheffield SI0 2TN, U.K.
559
where ~ ~ R" is the model state and fi E R m is the
reference input./[ is a stable matrix and the pair (/i,/~)
is assumed completely controllable. The objective of
thecontrolleristoguaranteethattheerrore = ~ - x
between the plant and the model states tends
asymptotically to zero, i.e. lira e(t) = 0.
t~oo
560 A. BALESTRINO, G. DE MARIA and A. S. I. ZINOBER
E
{ AOAPTATIONL
MECHANISM1-
oi ,I .I
FIG. l. Adaptivemodel-followingcontrol system.
In the VSS technique presented below the error
transient dynamics will be directly specified un-
like the Lyapunov and hyperstability MRAC
approaches.
The error system satisfies the equation (see Fig. 1)
6 = A e + (A - A ) x + / J f i - B u - h.
Erzberger (1968), Chen (1973) and others have
established matching (or perfect model-following)
conditions which ensure that the equality x = ~ can
be achieved. These conditions may be expressed as
rank requirements or
(I - B B * ) B = 0; (I - BB*) (,4 - A ) = 0;
(I - BB~)h = O
where 13' = (BXB)-1BV is the pseudoinverse of B.
We shall assume in Sections 3 5 that the plant state
is accessible.
3. THE VSS APPROACH
3.1. Sliding motion and equivalent control
Variable-structure systems are characterized by
discontinuous control which changes structure on
reaching a set of switching surfaces.
The control has the form
Iu (e,x,fi), vi(e) > 0
ui = [ui-(e,x,fi), vi(e) < 0
where u~ is the ith component of u, and v~(e) - 0 the
ith component of the m switching hyperplanes
v(e)= G(:~-x)= Ge=0
in the error state space. The selection of the
switching hyperplanes will be discussed in Section
3.2. The above system with discontinuous control is
termed a variable-structure system, since the effect
of the switching hyperplanes is to alter the feedback
structure of the system. The VSS design philosophy
of the error system is similar to that of the general
multivariable system
~(t) = A(x,t)x + B(x,t)u + h(x, tt (7)
where h is a vector representing disturbances and
parameter variations in A. This problem has been
studied by numerous authors including Emel'yanov
(1964), Utkin (1971, 1974, 1977) and Itkis (1976).
The switching of the control inputs on the switching
hyperplanes yields the desirable properties of total
(or selective) invariance to system parameter
variations and disturbances (Drazenovic, 1969), as
well as closed-loop eigenvalue (and eigenvector)
placement.
Sliding (or chatter) motion occurs if, at a point on
switching surface vi(e) - 0, the directions of motion
along the state trajectories on either side of the
surface are not away from the switching surface
vi(e) = 0. Filippov (i 960) has defined rigorously the
solution of differential equations with discon-
(3) tinuous right hand sides, as we have here, in
particular in the neighbourhood of the discon-
tinui~ty v~ = 0.
The conditions for sliding motion to occur on the
ith hyperplane may be stated in numerous ways. We
need lira bi < 0 and lim bi > 0 or equivalently
t!i~O * 1!i~0
rio i < 0 in the neighbourhood of vi(e) = 0. In the
sliding mode the system satisfies the equations
(4)
vi(e)= 0 and i,i(e) = 0 (8)
and the system has invariance properties yielding
motion which is independent of certain system
parameters and disturbances. Thus variable-
structure systems are usefully employed in systems
with uncertain and time-varying parameters.
Before studying the nature of the control u
enforcing sliding for the case of constant G, i.e. fixed
switching hyperplanes, let us consider the behaviour
of the system dynamics during sliding. Suppose that
the sliding mode exists on all the hyperplanes. Thus,
during sliding, the system dynamics satisfy
v = Ge = 0, and ~ = G~ = 0. (9)
(5)
The equations governing the error system dynamics
may be obtained by substituting an equivalent
control Ueq for the original control u. From ~ = 0
and (3), assuming that GB is nonsingular.
(6)
Ueq : - ( G B ) - ' G { A e + (A - A)x ÷/3fi - hi. (lO)
The equivalent control Ueq is the function u which
yields the sliding motion equations. Thus the sliding
dynamics may be achieved by applying the
discontinuous control or the linear 'equivalent
control'. The former yields the desired dynamics
 Nonlinear adaptive model-following control
without precise knowledge of the plant parameters
and disturbances. Applications of Ueq in the form of
a linear feedback controller, on the surface v = 0,
would achieve the desired dynamics only in the case
of known constant parameter values and distur-
bances. The value of Ueq is effectively the average
value of u which maintains the state error on the
surface v -- 0. The actual control u consists of a low-
frequency (average) component, Ueq, and a high-
frequency (chatter)component. Substitution of (10)
into (7) yields the nth order equation
: {I - B ( G B ) - ' G } { , 4 e + (,4 - A)x +/~ii - h}.
(11)
When the structural conditions (4) hold, we obtain
(Young, 1978a)
= {I - B ( G B ) - ' G } , 4 e . (12)
The invariance of the error dynamics with respect
to x and fi is due the fact that the matching (or
perfect model-following) conditions coincide with
the invariance of the sliding mode if x and fi are
considered as 'disturbances' to the error dynamics.
For total disturbance rejection, namely
{I - B ( G B ) - I G } h = 0 (13)
we require (Drazenovic, 1969) rank(B,h) = rank(B),
which is equivalent to (4). If (13) does not hold,
suitable error response may still be possible
(Zinober, E1-Ghezawi and Billings, 1982).
VSS design is particularly useful in the case of
time-varying systems where the system parameters
are uncertain. For instance, if B -- B¢ + AB, where
/~ is the nominal value, invariance to all variations
AB results if
rank(B~,AB) = rank(B). (14)
Even if (14) does not hold, Young (1978a) has shown
how suitable design can yield an asymptotically
stable error transient. With structural constraints
(4), variations from a nominal value of A may also
be handled.
Equation (12) describes the dynamic behaviour of
the error system whilst sliding on the intersection of
the m switching hyperplanes. A suitable coordinate
transformation (Young, 1977) decomposes the
system into n - m 'slow' modes with the eigenvalues
2~eA characterizing the motion of the error
transient and a further m 'fast' modes. E1-Ghezawi,
Zinober and Billings (1983) have used a geometric
approach with projectors to study the properties of
the sliding mode. The system during the sliding
mode has an effective reduced order n - m v~ith the
eigenvalue set A specified by the matrix G,
561
independently of B. Shaked (1977) has shown that in
the linear time-invariant model-following control
problem order reduction is also the main feature of
the controller design.
To ensure that the set of the switching
hyperplanes is reached and that subsequently the
sliding mode is ensured, it is necessary to choose a
suitable control law (see Section 3.3).
3.2. Selection o f switching hyperplanes
The selection of the switching hyperplanes
v = G e - - 0 , is the central feature of VSS design.
Utkin and Young (1978) have described the
technique of arbitrary eigenvalue assignment and
links with the optimal quadratic regulator problem.
Young, Kokotovic and Utkin (1977) have shown
that if the pair (/LB) is controllable then the
eigenvalues of the reduced system (12) can be placed
in desired locations. The designer, having first
chosen the stable model (2) by taking into account
the structural constraints (4), chooses the desired
asymptotically stable error transient in the sliding
mode by specifying the eigenvalues of the sliding
mode. The geometric approach (E1-Ghezawi,
Zinober and Billings, 1983) yields algorithms for
eigenvalue assignment, arbitrary specification of the
matrix GB and also allows partial selection of the
eigenvectors wi. The eigenvalues 2i are the
transmission zeros (MacFarlane and Karkanias,
1976) of the triple (,4,/~,G) (Young, 1977; E1-
Ghezawi and co-workers, 1982; E1-Ghezawi,
Billings and Zinober, 1983). The determination of
the matrix G is equivalent to the output zeroing
problem in linear multivariable control theory
where one desires to choose a suitable output matrix
C where the output is given by y = Cx (Karkanias
and Kouvaritakis, 1979). The matrix
P = {I - B ( G B ) - 1G} is a projector which maps all
the columns of .4 into the nullspace of G. Some
useful relations between B, P and W = {Wl,W2.... ,
w,_,,}, where wi are the eigenvectors spanning the
nullspace of G, are given in El-Ghezawi, Zinober
and Billings (1983) and a straightforward algorithm
to determine a suitable set of switching hyperplanes
is presented.
3.3. T h e control law
It is now necessary to choose the nonunique
control law (5) to ensure that the error attains the
switching hyperplanes v - - 0 in a finite time and
thereafter maintains the error e on the sliding
manifold. The control may have many forms; for
instance consider the following:
ui = gi(e,x,fi) + fi(e,x,fi)sgn vi,
i-- 1,2..... m. (15)
562 A. BALESTRINO, G. DE MAR1A and A. S. 1. ZINOBER

The function g may specify additional linear

feedback, i.e.

g = Ke (16)

while the function specifying the discontinuity may

be a relay f = M (constant) in its simplest form, but
more usually would be specified as
l.L,v I- J
f : K~I~I 4- K21xl 4- K31fil (17) FIG. 2. Block diagram of error dynamics.

where the K are switchable gain vectors with

components Ki satisfying the form for the error e(t) to go asymptotically to zero, the
following conditions of hyperstability theory must
be satisfied:
gi =- ~I), ' +,~,,_ YiVj
yil)j <> 00; j = 1,2. . . . . . m (18) (i) The transfer function

where the Yi are respectively 2i, xi, ~ with G(sl - A ) - l B o (22)

appropriate values for the subscript i.
To achieve the reachability of a given switching is strictly positive real.
plane requires viOi < 0 and many authors have (ii) The integral inequality or passivity condition,
studied this problem by direct algebraic manipu-
lation or by using a Lyapunov approach (see, for
example, Utkin (1974), Young (1978), Gutman
(1979), Gutman and Palmor (1982), and Ryan
f0 vvTw dt _< 72 (23)

(1983) for details). The objective is to reach the is true VT > 0.

sliding mode within a suitably small time interval
from appropriate (or all) initial states in the state
space. The methods assume that the parameters of
the plant matrices A and B are known only within
specified upper and lower bounds, and that the
magnitude bounds of the disturbances are also
known. Thus the class of systems (1) can be handled.
For multivariable plants a special technique for
computing the controls ui, denoted as the hierarchy
of controls method, is described in Utkin (1974) and
Young (1978a).
Some simulated examples appear in Young
(1978a) and Zinober, E1-Ghezawi and Billings
(1982).
The global system, see Fig. 1, corresponds to a
parallel adaptive model-following control system
with signal synthesis adaptation (Landau, 1979).
Choosing the plant control u as follows
u - M(x){KI~ - KzX + Karl + ~b(v,f~,x,t)
+ ~9(v,~,t) + Ge/p} (24)
and assuming Yo = 0, (23) can be satisfied by
requiring
vTw = vT{Bto(A - A)x - Btoh + Bto/~0}
- vTRM(Klf~ - Kax + K3fi) - v T R M v / p
- vTRM(a(v,f~,x,t) - vTRMO(v,fi,t) <_ O. (25)

The signals 4) and ~ are due to the adaptation

4. THE HYPERSTABILITYAPPROACH
In using the hyperstability approach (Landau,
1979) the error dynamics (3) are rewritten as
follows:
6 = Ae + Bow
w=B~(A-A)x+Bto/~fi-Btoh-Ru.
The above equations represent a linear system (19)
with a nonlinear time-varying feedback signal w. A
block diagram of systems (19) and (20) is given in
Fig. 2.
By considering as the output of the system
mechanism while the feedforward and feedback
actions characterized by K~,/(2,/(3 and G/p can be
chosen so that the value IvXwlis kept near zero in the
absence of adaptation. If K~, K2 and/(3 are allowed
to be nonlinear a more efficient compensation can
(19) be achieved (Balestrino, De Maria and Sciavicco,
1982a). However, only the adaptation terms can
(20)
assure the inequality (25).
4.1. Adaptation laws
The adaptation laws are assumed to have the
structure
4~(v,~,x,t) = qb1(v)4)2(~,x,t) (26)

v = Ge (21) 0(v,fi,t) = ~Pl(v)~k2(fi,t) (27)

 Nonlinear adaptive model-following control 563

with (~2 and ~P2 positive scalar functions. In order to Another possible structure is to use m fixed vectors f~
satisfy the inequality (25) we must have in
m

d~[Ivl[ < vrRM~bl(V) < d211vtl + d3llvl[' (28) ~ i fisgn(vT RMfi) (36)
1

d411vll < vTRMffl(v) < dsllvll + d6llvllp
where d~ are positive constants and r and p are
positive integers. Assuming the structure
~2 = Co + cxl[~ll + c21lxlt
(29) which is more appealing when using micro-
processors in the implementation of the controllers.
Many other interesting adaptation laws can be
obtained by combining the above forms. A par-
ticularly appealing structure from the theoretical
(30) viewpoint has the form

~2 : c3l[~ll (31) v{I/(e~M - I) +/~llvlt}. (37)

any suitable norm may be used with ci positive

4.2. Real positivity
constants.
In order to realize a strictly positive real transfer
Any choice ~bl and ~/~ satisfying (28) and (29)
function (22) the output matrix G (23) can be chosen
leads to a feasible adaptation law because the
(Landau, 1979; Anderson and Vongpanitlerd, 1973)
inequality (25) can always be satisfied by a suitable
as
choice of the constants c~. The constant Co is
introduced in order to balance the effect of bounded G = B~P (38)
disturbances in (25), i.e.
where P is a positive definite symmetric matrix
IvTB?oh[ < ColvTRMc/~l(v)l (32) which is the solution of the Riccati equation

a similar argument applies to the choice of the other (A T + - PBoNoB~/p)P + P(A + ctI
constants ci. In order to complete the design of the - BoNoB~P/p) = - HTH (39)
plant control u (24) we must also choose the matrix
M(x). First suppose that a matrix M(x) exists such where H is any full rank matrix.
that In equation (39) we can put ct = 0, p = ~ , or, if we
R M + MTR T = N(x) > No > 0. (33) choose 0t > 0, a suitable p must be specified in order
to get a positive definite matrix P (Anderson and
Equation (33) leads in a natural way to classify the Moore, 1971).
different adaptation laws. If we know R(x) exactly
and can compute in real time R - l ( x ) an obvious 5. DESIGN PROCEDURES: COMPARISON AND
ERROR DYNAMICS
choice is M ( x ) = R - l ( x ) leading to perfect non-
linear compensation (Freund, 1975). If the com- 5.1. Stability
putation time of R - l ( x ) is too long we can use By using the hyperstability approach the global
M(x) = RT(x); but ifR(x) is not exactly known, as in asymptotic stability is directly ensured; indeed,
the case of uncertain systems, other choices must be choosing as Lyapunov function
made trying for instance constant matrices M. Of
course, if we know that R(x) is a positive definite V(e) = eXpe (40)
matrix, an obvious choice is M = I (Balestrino, De
Maria and Sciavicco, 1981). Having determined a with P solution of the Riccati equation (39), and
matrix M(x) satisfying (33) some possible choices assuming the plant control as
for the structure of ~b~(v) and ff~ (v) are (Balestrino,
De Maria and Sciavicco, 1982b; Gutman, 1982) u = M(x){KI~ - K2x + g3fi + q~ + ~ + Ge/p}
(41)
v/(vTQv) l/z, any Q > 0; v/~ilvd) (34)
from (19), (20) and (40) we obtain
or v/llvll (unit vector adaptation law) where Ilvll is
any norm. If the matrix L = R M is diagonally l?(e) = er(PA + ArP)e - er(GTRMG
dominant, i.e. lil> Efli~],i ~ j we can choose the + GTMrRTG)e/p + 2eTGTwl (42)
relay type adaptation law (Monopoli, 1966; Devaud
and Caron, 1975; Balestrino, De Maria and where
Sciavicco, 1980) w~ = B~(A - A)x + B ~ - B~h
sgn(v) = {sgnvl, sgnv2 . . . . . . sgnvm}T. (35) - R M ( K ~ - K2x + K3fi + ~b + ~,). (43)
564 A. BALESTRINO, G. DE MARIA and A. S. I. Z1NOBER
Therefore, taking into account (38) and (39),
l?(e) < --eT(HTH + 2c~P)e + 2eTGTwl. (44)
A suitable choice of~b and if, such that eVGwl < 0 in
(44), guarantees the global asymptotic stability;
moreover the choice of ~ in (39) and consequently
the addition of the feedback MGe/p sets an upper
bound on the convergence rate.
In order to set up the link between the VSS
approach and the hyperstability approach, selecting
as a Lyapunov function for the output variable,
v=Ge,
W(v) = vT(GBo)- iv = vT(BTpBo) - 1V, (45)
with the same assumptions (41) and (43) we obtain
l~(V) = -- vT(RM + MTRT)v/p
+ 2vT{(GBo)-IG,4e + Wl}. (46)
Hence the subspace v = Ge = B~Pe = 0 can be
made attractive and invariant, so that sliding
motion occurs, by choosing K1, K2, q5 and ~9 in (43),
i.e. including additional feedback of the error e, so
that
vT{(GBo)-IGAe + Wl} ~ 0. (47)
Making use of (39) in (46) in the same manner as the
determination of (44) gives the same upper bound
on the rate of convergence on v = 0. The condition
(47) along with hyperstability conditions, with q~
and ¢ chosen as in the previous section, yields a VSS
whose stability is ensured in advance. This point can
be regarded as in favour of the hyperstability
approach; reversely in the VSS approach the choice
of v = Ge is free, whereas in the hyperstability
approach the condition G = B~P appears as a
constraint.
5.2. Dynamics
In the VSS approach the choice of G specifies the
n - m eigenvalues characterizing the dynamics
during the sliding mode so that its free choice
implies arbitrary pole assignment. We claim that
this is true also for the hyperstability approach with
some minor modifications. Now to be more specific
and in order to clarify the error dynamics, given a
complete controllable and observable triplet
(/I,Bo,G) with rank Bo = r, we can always put the
error dynamics in the form
61 = / l l l e I + /[12e2 (48)
62 = /121el + A22e2 -F- B2w
where the pair (A11, "~12) is controllable and B 2 is
invertible (Young, Kokotovic and Utkin, 1977).
Then
v = Ge = Glet + G2e2 (49)
where G2 is assumed invertible.
A simple transformation yields
el = File1 + f l 2 v (50a)
= F21e I -f- F22v ~- G2B2 w (50b)
where
FII = 411 -- A12G21G1 . (51)
If the plant input u is designed so that the sliding
mode exists, then on v = 0 the dynamics related to
n - m variables el is described by the matrix (51)
whose eigenvalues can be arbitrarily assigned by
choosing G1, in force of the complete controllability
of the pair (f111,~Zl12). The above eigenvalues
characterize the 'slow modes', whereas in the
neighbourhood of v = 0 there are m 'fast modes'
characterized at first approximation by the eigen-
values
- g ).(G2Be) (52)
with g ~ ~ and ~.(G2B2) the eigenvalues of the
matrix G2B2 (Young, Kokotovic and Utkin, 1977).
However, in the VSS approach we must ensure
the asymptotic stability of v = 0 in the large and,
eventually set an upper bound on the rate of
convergence.
5.3. The mixed approach
The designer may favour either the VSS approach
or the hyperstability approach; but from the
previous discussion a third approach, which will be
referred to as the mixed approach, can easily be
developed. With the error dynamics in the form (48),
G given, i,e. the sliding hyperplanes and the related
dynamics, we are led to (50) and (51). The
hyperstability approach may be used in connection
with the subsystem
= Fzav + G2B2{w + (G2Ba)-IFalel}
= AmY + Bomwm (53)
whereas the eigenvalues of (51 ) are specified by the
choice of G. In connection with (53) the Riccati
equation (39) can be solved for PmeR "×m with the
obvious substitutions /[ = A,,, Bo = G2B2 = Born
for a given value of 7 and with the plant control u, see
(24),
u = M(x)B~mP,,{K~ - K2x + K3fi
+ 05(v,~,x,t) + 0(v,fi,t) + v/p] (54)
where M satisfies (33).
 Nonlinear adaptive model-following control
Choosing tho Lyapunov function V(v) = VTpm¥,
as in (40), we obtain an inequality similar to (44)
where the feedforward and feedback terms in (54)
along with the adaptation terms ~b and ff must be
chosen so that
vXpmB0mw,n < 0 (55)
in order to ensure that v = 0 is asymptotically stable
in the large with ~ as an upper bound on the rate of
convergence. Note that the mixed approach may
prove computationally more expedient because the
solution of a Riccati equation of lower order is
required.
5.4. Summary of design procedures
The above procedures are summarized as follows.
Required prior information.
(1) The plant must be specified in the state variable
form; all the state variables must be available.
(2) A model, whose order is equal to the order of the
plant, must be assigned; the perfect model
following conditions (4) must be satisfied.
(3) Specify the structure of the plant input matrix B,
i.e. B = Bc + AB or B = BoR.
Design procedure. As a design procedure select the
VSS or the hyperstability approach or the mixed
one.
(1) VSS approach.
(i) Choose G, i.e. the sliding hyperplanes,
taking into account that the dynamics
during the sliding motion are given by
(5.12).
(ii) Select u in order to ensure the asymptotic
stability in the large ofv = 0; now use can be
made of the Lyapunov method or of the
hierarchy of controls method.
(2) Hyperstability approach.
(i) Choose an upper bound on the convergence
rate to zero of the generalized error e, say ~.
(ii) Find a solution M of (33) with N > 0.
(iii) Solve the Riccati equation (39) for P and a
suitable p.
(iv) Let be G = B~P; select u (41) so that the
passivity condition (23) is satisfied, or if it is
required that v = Ge = 0 be invariant and
attractive select u in accordance with (47).
(3) Mixed approach.
(i) Choose G taking into account (51).
(ii) With the error dynamics in the form (50)
apply the hyperstability approach to the
subsystem (50b).
6. IMPLEMENTATIONAND APPLICATIONS
The proposed design techniques are readily
implemented using microprocessors since the
565
controllers are fixed with no on-line identification
being required. Robustness is achieved by the
inherent adaptation arising from the switching
structure which effectively alters the adaptive
feedback paths. An open problem is the relaxing of
the full state availability requirement in connection
with a nonlinear time-varying plant.
The plant model (1) will not have included any
high frequency parasitic dynamics present and
other imperfections in the adaptation mechanism
and switching structures. The high frequency
chatter component u¢ in the sliding mode is
undesirable since high order modes dynamic may be
excited. The inclusion of a small time delay,
hysteresis or a low pass filter in the input channels
yields nonideal sliding motion without excessive
chatter motion and Utkin (1974) has proved that
the state path remains within an ~-neighbourhood of
v = 0. Ambrosino, Celentano and Garofalo (1983)
give an example with the control input of the form
v/Ovl + 6) rather than the pure relay v/Iv] = sgnv; the
high frequency component is effectivelyremoved and
the system response is satisfactory.
Alternatively, we may ensure that the chatter
frequency is outside the bandwidth of the plant by
injecting high frequency dither (Zames and
Shneydor, 1976; Balestrino, De Maria and
Sciavicco, 1983a,b,c).
The most significant applications of VSS and
hyperstability approaches to the design of AMFC
for nonlinear or uncertain plants occur whenever
the plant dynamics are so fast that identification or,
more generally, on-line computations make other
approaches infeasible. The main areas of appli-
cations are electrical power systems, including
electrical drives, robotics and aerospace. High
performance electrical drives must ensure a good
time response independent of the variations of
electrical and mechanical parameters. Practical
schemes using discontinuous controllers have been
described by Balestrino, De Maria and Sciavicco
(1983a), De Maria and Marino (1983), Sabanovic
and co-workers (1983), Bilalovic and co-workers
(1983), and Dote, Manabe and Murakani (1983). In
robots with fast dynamics we must tackle the highly
nonlinear structure of dynamical equations and the
lack of knowledge of the payloads. An effective
reduction of the computer burden is achieved by
equipping the mechanical structure with an
adaptive model reference control (Young, 1978b;
Balestrino, De Maria and Sciavicco, 1983b; Slotine
and Sastry, 1983). Young and Kwatny (1982) have
studied turbine overspeed protection.
7. EXAMPLE
In order to illuminate more clearly the three
reviewed approaches and the kinship between them,
let us consider the position control of the pendulum
566 A. BALESTRINO,G. DE MARIA and A. S. I. ZINOBER

7.1. VSS design procedure.

The error

e v = (el,Ol) = (0 - 0, (i - 0t (641

during the sliding m o d e depends on the eigenvalue

associated with equation

v = Ge = glel + el = 0. (65)
y

FIG. 3. Variable length pendulum. F o r sliding we need vb <_ O. N o w

shown in Fig. 3, where m and l(O) are the mass and
the changeable length respectively. b = -aoel + (gl - al)kl
Assuming + {10(1 + cosO)sinO/OA(O)}O - {a~
l(O) = lo + l~cos0 (56) + 0.5sin0(1 + 0.5cos0)0/A(0)}0
+ ~J -- u/A(O). 1661
the equation of m o t i o n can be written as
The control u is chosen as in (15) with g(e,x,B) =- 0
0 =/1sin0(1 + llcosO/lo)O2/loA(O)
- gsin0(1 + cosO)/loA(O) + T/mlZAiO) (57) u = f(e,x,~)sgnv (67)

where g is the gravity acceleration and where g(e,x,~) must be chosen in order to satisfy the
sliding condition. Assuming gl = 7, ao = 2, a~ = 3,
A(0) --- (cos0 + tolt:)2Z~/t~o. (S8) equation (67) becomes

Choosing ll/lo -~ 1/2, g/lo = 10, and rnlg = 1 yields u = 2.25 sgnv(5.8 + 0.24 0
+ 12el - 4~1 + 20 + 30 - ~1). (68)
0 = 0.5 sin0(1 + 0.5cos0)0z/A(0)
- 10sin0(1 + c o s 0 ) / A ( 0 ) + T/A(O) (59) 7.2. Hyperstability design procedure
In order to set an upper b o u n d on the
and
convergence rate of the error e to zero a suitable
• m a x A(0) = 2.25; rain A(0) = 0.25. (60) feedback M G e / p must be chosen. Assuming
0 O
c~ = g2 = 49, M >_ 1.125, No = 1 (69)
Assuming x T = (0 0), iT = (0 0) and u = T plant
and model equations can be rewritten as follows:
from the solution of the Riccati equation (39) we
have
0
- 10(1 + cos0) sin0 sin0(1 +1 0.5cos0)0) 1 416
P=- t 80 ; l/p> 136.4. (70)
A(0)

+ (61) Therefore, from (38) and (64)

v = b~Pe = 80el + ~1. (71}

x= ~2+ ~. (62) Setting

--ao --al
w --- 10sin0(1 + cos0)/A(0) - 20 - 30
Equation (61) yields
- 0.5sin0(1 + O.5cosO)OZ/A(O) + (~ - u/A(O) (72)
bor = (0, l), R(x) = l/A(0). (63)
in order to satisfy the passivity condition (23) which,
with the choice (71), ensures the hyperstability of the
In the sequel we assume that the trigonometric
system (19 and (20) with an upper b o u n d on the
functions are not available for the controller
convergence rate fixed by c( = 49, we choose
implementation; the perfect model-following con-
ditions (4) are satisfied as can be easily verified from
u = 154v + 2.54(1ff - 20 - 3/)1
(61) and (62); the state variables both of the plant
and of the model are assumed all available. + 5.8 + 0.240Z)sgnv. (73)
 Nonlinear adaptive model-following control 567

If we want to ensure that v = 0 is an attractive and .iS

invariant subspace, we must satisfy (47) and hence

the plant input becomes

u = 154v + 2.54(Ig - 20 - 30 - 2e~ + 77k11

+ 5.8 + 0.2402)sgnv. (74)

7.3. M i x e d procedure
Assuming G = (7, 1), ~ = 49 and taking into
account that the error dynamics can be rewritten as -.0~

et = - 7 e l + v
= 4v + w - 30e~ = 4v + w,~
the Riccati equation with H T H = 1 = P yields
l/p = 107.
Setting Bo,,, = 1, choosing M = 1.125 in order to
satisfy (33) with No = 1, the input u (54) becomes
u = 120v + 2.54(130et + 20 + 30 - ~1
+ 5.8 + 0.2402)sgnv.
Figure 4 shows the response of the plant with i = 0,
and x(0) = (n/2,0), when the VSS approach (curve
a), mixed approach (curve b) or hyperstability
design with a = 49 and v = 0 attractive and
invariant (curve c) are used. Figures 5 and 6 show
the torque T applied in the case of VSS and mixed
approach respectively.
Some worked examples of design for the multi-
input-multi-output case are reported in Young
(1978a) and Zinober, E1-Ghezawi and Billings
(1982) for the VSS approach, and in Balestrino, De
Maria and Sciavicco (1983a,b,c) for the hyper-
stability approach.
(75)
-.18[,.
0 .3 .6 .9 1.2
FIG. 5. Plant control input for the VSS approach.
8. C O N C L U S I O N S
Three schemes for adaptive model-following
control of nonlinear uncertain systems have been
discussed; one based directly on variable structure
(76)
methods, the second derived from a hyperstability
approach, and the third obtained by a suitable
combination of the previous ones. All give robust
discontinuous control with related error dynamics
and do not require any adaptive identification
schemes.
The adaptation is realized by a suitable signal
synthesis in a fixed parameter structure; adaptivity
or robustness is achieved through 'high gain' effects
locally in the neighbourhood of the switching
hyperplanes.
The design procedures are theoretically well-
founded for nonlinear time-varying or uncertain
plants while the classical model-following control
techniques can be used only if the plant may be
considered linear and time-invariant during the
adaptation process.

"~/2

,;,'r/4

0 .3 .6 .9 1.2
FIG. 4. Free evolution of the plant output 0: (a) VSS design, (b) -I
mixed approach, (c) hyperstability design with ct = 49 and v = 0 .3 .6 .9 1.2
attractive and invariant. FIG. 6. Plant control input for the mixed approach.
 568 A. BALESTRINO, O. DE
REFERENCES
Ambrosino. O.. O. Celentano and F. Garofalo (1983). Variable
structure model reference adaptive control systems, lnt. J.
Control.
Anderson, B. D. O. and J. B. Moore 11971). Linear Optimal
Control. Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ.
Anderson, B. D. O. and S. Vongpanitlerd (1973). Network
Analysis and Synthesis. Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ.
Balestrino, A., G. De Maria and L. Sciavicco (1980). Adaptive
model following control systems for a class of nonlinear
muhivariable plants. Rieerche Automatica, 11, 95 110.
Balestrino, A., G. De Maria and L Sciavicco (1981). Controllo
adattativo a versore per una classe di sistemi non lineari.
International Cor~Jerence on Control (?J Industrial Processes
BIAS 17, Vol. 3, FAST/ANIPLA, Milano, Italy, pp. 21 36.
Balestrino, A., G. De Maria and L. Sciavicco (1982a). Feedback
and feedforward AMFC of a class of nonlinear time varying
plants. Workshop on Adaptive Control ISIS, University of
Florence, Florence, Italy. Ricerche Automatica
Balestrino, A., G. De Maria and L. Sciavicco 11982b).
Hyperstable A MFC of nonlinear plants. S),Men~sControl Let&
1,232 236.
Balestrino, A., G. De Maria and L. Sciavicco (1983a). Adaptive
control design in servosystems. 3rd I F A C Symposium on
Control in Power Electronics and Electrical Drives, Lausanne,
Switzerland. Pergamon Press, Oxford, pp. 125 131.
Balestrino, A., G. De Maria and L. Sciavicco {1983b). Adaptive
control of manipulators in the task oriented coordinate space.
13th ISIR/Rohots 7, Chicago.
Balestrino, A,, G. De Maria and L. Sciavicco ( t 983c). An adaptive
model following control for robotic manipulators. Trans.
A S M E J. Dynamic Syst. Measurements Control, 105.
Bilalovic, F., A. Sabanovic, O. Music and D. B. Izosimov (1983).
Current inverter in the sliding mode for induction motor
control. 3rd I F A C Symposium on Control in Power Electronics
and Electrical Drives, Lausanne. Switzerland. Pergamon Press,
Oxford, pp. 139 144.
Chen, Y. T. ( 1973 t- Perfect model following with real model. Proc.
JACC, pp. 287 293.
De Maria, G. and P. Marino (1983). An adaptive pulse width
modulator for control of d.c. drives. IAS Annual Meeting '83,
Mexico City.
Devaud, F. M. and J. Y. Caron (19751. Asymptotic stability of
model reference systems with bang-bang control. IEEE Trans.
Aut. Control, AC-20, 694 696.
Dote, Y., T. Manabe and S. Murakani (1983). Microprocessor
based force control for manipulation using variable structure
with sliding mode. 3rd I F A C Symposium on Control in Power
Electronics and Electrical Drives, Lausanne, Switzerland.
Pergamon Press, Oxford, pp. 145 149.
Drazenovic, B. (1969). The invariance conditions in variable
structure systems. Automatica, 5, 287 295.
E1-Ghezawi. O. M. E.. S. A. Billings and A. S. 1. Zinober (1983).
Variable structure systems and system zeros. Proe. lEE, 130.
E1-Ghezawi, O. M. E., A. S. I. Zinober and S. A. Billings (1983).
Analysis and design of variable structure systems using a
geometrical approach. Int. J. ('onlrol, 3g, 657 671.
EI-Ghezawi. O. M. E., A. S. I. Zinober, D. H. Owens and S. A.
Billings (1982). Computation of the zeros and zero directions
of linear multivarable systems. Int. J. Control, 36, 833 843.
Emel'yanov, S. V. (1964). Design of variable structure control
systems with discontinuous switching functions. Engng
Cybern., I, 156 160.
Erzberger, H. (1968). Analysis and design of model following
control systems by state space techniques. Proc. JACC, Ann
Arbor, pp. 572 581.
Filippov, A. C. (1960). Application of the theory of differential
equations with discontinuous right hand side to nonlinear
problems in automatic control. Proceedings of the 1st I F A C
Congress.
MAR1A and A. S. I. ZINOBER
Freund, E, I] 975). The structurc of decoupled notflincat s~',lem,,.
Int. J. Control, 21,443 450.
Gutman. S. 119791. Uncertain dynamical systems. A l,~apuno~
rain max approach, lEEk5, Tra~zs. ,hut. Control, AC-24.
Gutman, S. and Z. Palmor 11982). Properties ~1 mm max
controllers in uncertain dynamical systems. S I A M .l. (',ntr,)l
Optimiz., 20.
Itkis, U. (1976). Control Systenls o~ [m'iahle Structm'e. Katcr
Publishing House, Jerusalem.
Karkanias, N. and B. Kouvaritakis (1979). The output zeroing
problem and its relationship to the invarianl structure: a
matrix pencil approach. Int. J. Control, 30, 395 415.
Landau, I. D. (1979). Adaptile Control. The Model R~[erence
Approach. Marcel Dekker, New York, NY.
Landau, I. D. and B. Courtiol (1974). Design of multivariable
adaptive model following control systems. Automatica, 10,
488 494.
MacFarlane, A. G. J. and N. Karkanias {1976). Poles and zeros of
linear multivariable systems: a survey of the algebraic,
geometric and complex variable theory. Int. J. Control. 24,
33 74.
Monopoli, R. V. (1966). Engineering aspects of control system
design via the direct method of Lyapunov. NASA Rep., CR-
654.
Monopoli, R. V. (1974). Model reference adaptive control with an
augmented error signal. IEEE Trans. Aut, Control, AC-19.
Ryan, F. P. (1983). A variable structure approach to feedback
regulation of uncertain dynamical systems. Int. J. Control, 38,
1121 1134.
Sabanovic, A., D. B. lzosimov, F. Bilalovic and O. Music 11983).
Sliding modes in controlled motor drives. 3rd IFAC
Symposium on Control in Power Electronics and Electrical
Drives, Lausanne, Switzerland. Pergamon Press, Oxford, pp.
133 138.
Shaked, U. (1977). Design of general model following control
systems. Int. J. Control, 25. 213 238.
Slotine, J. J. and S, S. Sastry (1983). Tracking control of nonlinear
systems using sliding surfaces with applications to robot
manipulators. Int. J. Control, 38, 465 492.
U tkin, V. 1. (1971). Equations of sliding mode in discontinuous
systems 1, Aut. Remote Control, 21, 1897 1907.
Utkin, V. I. (1974). Sliding Modes and their Application in Variable
structure Systems. Mir Publisher, Moscow. (English trans-
lation, 1978.)
Utkin, V. I. (1977). Variable structure systems with sliding modes.
IEEE Trans. Aut. Control, AC-22, 212 222.
Utkin, V. I. and K. K. D. Young (I 978). Methods for constructing
discontinuity planes in multidimensional variable structure
systems. Aut. Remote Control, 26, 1466 1470.
Young, K. K. D. (1977). Asymptotic stability of model reference
systems with variable structure control. IEEE 7?ans. Aim
Control, AC-22, 279 281.
Young, K. K. D. (1978a). design of variable structure model
following control systems. IEEE Trans. Aut. Control. AC-23,
1079 1085.
Young, K. K. D. (1978b). Controller design for a manipulator
using theory of variable structure systems. 1EEE 7)'arts. Sy.stem
Man Cyhern. SMC-8, 108 119.
Young, K. K. D., P. V. Kokotovic and V. I, Utkin (19771. A
singular perturbation analysis of high gain feedback systems.
IEEE Trans. Aut. Control, AC-22, 931 937.
Young, K. K. D. and H. G. Kwatny (1982~. Variable structure
servomechanism design and application to overspeed pro-
tection control. Automatica, 18, 385 400.
Zames, C. and N. A. Shneydor (1976). Dither in nonlinear
systems. IEEE Trans. Aut. Control, AC-21. 660 666.
Zinober, A. S. 1., O. M. E. EI-Ghezawi and S. A. Billings 11982~.
Multivariable variable structure adaptive model IMlowing
control systems. Proc. lEE, 129, 6 12.