Feedback Linearization

(ECES-817)
Presented by : Shubham Bhat

Feedback Linearization- Single Input case

Consider a system described by
x f ( x) ug ( x)
...1
where f and g are smooth vector fields on some open set X R"
containing 0, and f (0) 0.
There exists smooth functions q, s S ( X ) with s( x) 0 for all x
in some neighborhood of the origin, and a local diffeomorphism
T on R n with T (0) 0.
We define
v q( x) s( x)u
z T ( x)

...2
...3

Feedback Linearization- Single Input case

The resulting var iables z and v satisfy a linear differenti al equation
of the form
z Az bv

...4

where the pair ( A, b) is controllab le..

In this case, the system is called feedback linearizable.
q( x)
1

v,
...5
s ( x) s ( x)
q ( x)
1
where
and
are also smooth functions.
s ( x)
s ( x)

Hence if we think of v as the external input applied to the system,

then 5 represents the nonlinear feedback , and a nonlinear state depenedent
pre filter , applied to the system.

Feedback Linearization- Contd.

By applying a state transformation
z M 1z such that the resulting system is in controllab le canonical form
z M 1 AMz M 1bv,
where
0

0
1

M AM
..

a0

1
0
0

0
1.
0
, M 1b

..
.
.

a1 a2 .. an1

0
,
:

1
and the ai ' s are the coefficients of the characteristic polynomial
n

n 1

| sI A | s a j s j
i 0

Feedback Linearization- Contd.

A further state feedback form
v v [ a0 a1...an 1 ] z
results in the closed loop system
z A z b v ,
where
0

0
1..

..

..

1
0

0
..

,b

0

0

z M 1T ( x ), v v az q ( x) a ' M 1T ( x ) s ( x)u
where
a ' [ a0 a1 ...an 1 ].

Problem Statement
Given the system as in 1, does there exists ??
(i ) a smooth function q S ( X )
(ii ) a smooth function s S ( X ) such that s ( x) 0 for all x
in the neighborhood of 0.
(iii ) a local diffeomorphism T : R n R n such that T (0) 0,
satisfying the following conditions :
if new var iables v and z are defined ,
then z1 z2 , z 2 z3 ,....z n1 zn , z n v

Example- Controlling a fluid level in a tank

Consider the control of the level h of fluid in a tan k to a specified
level hd . The control input is the flow u int o the tan k , and the initial
level is h0 .
The dynamic mod el of the tan k is
d h
[ A(h)dh] u (t ) a 2 gh
dt 0
where A(h) is the cross sec tion of the tan k and a is the cross sec tion
of the outlet pipe.
If the initial level h0 is quite different from the desired level hd , the
control of h involves a nonlinear regulation problem.

Example Contd.
The dynamics can be written as
A(h)h u a 2 gh
If u (t ) is chosen as
u (t ) a 2 gh A(h)v
with v being an " equivalent input" to be specified , the resulting dynamics is linear
h v
~
Choo sin g v as v h
~
with h h(t ) hd being the level error , and being a positive cons tan t ,
the resulting closed loop dynamics is
h h~ 0
~
This implies that h (t ) 0 as t .

Example Contd.
The actual input flow is det er min ed by the nonlinear control law
~
u (t ) a 2 gh A(h)h
The first part on the RHS is used to provide the output flow a 2 gh
while the sec ond part is used to raise the fluid level.
If the desired level is a known time var ying function hd (t ),
the equivalent input v can be chosen as
~

v hd (t ) h
~
so as to still yield h (t ) 0 as t .

The idea of feedback linearization can be applied to a classs

of nonlinear systems described by the controllab le companion
form.

Example Contd.
A system is said to be in companion form if its dynamics are
x ( n ) f ( x) b( x)u
where u is the scalar control input , x is the scalar output and
f ( x) and b( x) are nonlinear function of the states.
x1
x2

...
...
d

xn
dt xn1

xn f ( x) b( x)u
U sin g the control input (assu min g b to be nonzero)
1
u [v f ]
b
multiple int egrator form
xn v

Example Contd.
Thus, the control law
v ko x k1x .... kn1x(n 1)
with the ki chosen so that the polynomial p n kn1 p n1 .... k0
has all its roots strictly in the left half complex plane, leading to
x ( n ) kn1x ( n1) ...k0 x 0
which implies that x(t ) 0

Input State Linearization

x1 2 x1 ax2 sin x1
x 2 x2 cos x1 u cos(2 x1 )
However , if we consider the new set of var iables
z1 x1
z2 ax2 sin x1
then, the new state equations are
z1 2 z1 z2
z 2 2 z1 cos z1 cos z1 sin z1 au cos(2 z1 )

Input State Linearization-Contd.

The nonlinearities can be canceled by the control law :
1
u
(v cos z1 sin z1 2 z1 cos z1 )
a cos(2 z1 )
where v is an equivalent input to be designed , leading
to a linear input state relation
z1 2 z1 z2
z 2 v
Thus, through the state transformation and input transformation,
the problem of stabilizing the original dynamics u sin g the original
control input u has been transformed int o the problem of stabilizing
the new dynamics u sin g the new input v.

Input State Linearization-Contd.

The linear state feedback control law
v k1z1 k2 z2
can place the poles anywhere with proper choices of
feedback gains.
For example, we may choose v 2 z2
resulting in the stable closed loop dynamics
z1 2 z1 z2
z 2 2 z2
whose poles are placed at 2.
In terms of the original state x1 and x2 ,
1
u
(2ax2 2 sin x1 cos x1 sin x1 2 x1 cos x1
cos(2 x1 )

Input State Linearization-Contd.

The original state x is given from z by
x1 z1
( z2 sin z1 )
x2
a
0

v K z

u u ( x, v )

x f ( x, u )

Linearization Loop

pole-placement loop

z z (x)

Input Output Linearization

Consider the system
x f ( x, u )
y h( x )

Our objective is to make the output y(t) track a desired trajectory

yd(t) while keeping the whole state bounded, where yd(t) and its
time derivatives up to a sufficiently high order are assumed to be
known and bounded.
e.g Consider the third order system
x1 sin x2 ( x2 1) x3

x 2 x15 x3
x 3 x12 u
y x1

Input Output Linearization-Contd.

To generate a direct relationship between the output y and the input u,
differentiate the output y
y x1 sin x2 ( x2 1) x3
Since y is not directly related to the input u , we differenti ate again.
y ( x2 1)u f1 ( x)
where f1 ( x) is a function of the state defined by
f1 ( x) ( x15 x3 )( x3 cos x2 ) ( x2 1) x12
This represents an exp licit relationsh ip between y and .
If we choose a control input in the form
1
u
(v f1 )
x2 1
where v is a new input to be det er min ed .

Input Output Linearization-Contd.

We obtain a simple linear double int egrator relationsh ip
between the output and the new input v,
y v
The design of a tracking controller for this double int egrator
is simple.
v yd k1e k2e where e y (t ) yd (t )
where k1 and k2 being positive cons tan ts.
The tracking error of the closed loop system is given by
e k2e k1e 0
which represents an exp onentially stable error dynamics.
Note : The control law is defined everywhere, except at the
singularity points such that x2= -1.

Internal Dynamics
If we need to differentiate the output r times to generate an
explicit relationship between output y and input u, the system is
said to have a relative degree r.
The system order is n. If r<= n, there is an part of the system
dynamics which has been rendered unobservable. This part is
called the internal dynamics, because it cannot be seen from the
external input-output relationship.
If the internal dynamics is stable, our tracking control design has
been solved. Otherwise the tracking controller is meaningless.
Therefore, the effectiveness of this control design, based on
reduced-order model, hinges upon the stability of the internal
dynamics.

Internal Dynamics
Consider the nonlinear system
x1 x23 u

x
2 u
y x1

Assume that the control objective is to make y track yd(t).

Differentiating y leads to the first state equation.
Choosing control law
3

u x2 e(t ) y d (t )
which yields exp onential convergence of e to zero
e e 0
The same control input is also applied to the sec ond
dynamic equation, leading to the int ernal dynamics

Internal Dynamics- Contd

x 2 x23 y d e
which is characterstically , non autonomous and nonlinear.

If e is bounded and y d is assumed to be bounded , we get

y d (t ) e D
where D is a positive cons tan t .
Thus, we conclude that
x2 D1 / 3
sin ce x 2 0 when x2 D1 / 3 ,
and x 2 0 when x2 D1 / 3.
Therefore the above controller does provide satisfactory control
given any trajectory yd (t ) whose derivative y d (t ) is bounded .

Internal Dynamics in Linear Systems

Consider the simple controllab le and observable linear system
x1 x2 u

x2 u
y x1
where y (t ) is required to track a desired output yd (t ).
With one differenti ation of the output , we get
y x2 u
which exp licitly contains u. Thus, the control law
u x2 y d e yields the tracking equation e e 0
where (e y yd ) and the int ernal dynamics x 2 x2 y d e(t )
We see that while y (t ) tends to yd (t ) ( y (t ) tends to y d (t ),
x2 remains bounded , so does u.

Internal Dynamics in Linear Systems

Consider a slightly different system :
x1 x2 u

x2 u
y x1
The same control law as above yields the same
tracking error dynamics, but the int ernal dynamics is
x 2 x2 e(t ) y d
This implies that x2 , and accordingl y u , both go to
inf inity as t .
Therefore this is not a suitable controller for the system.

Internal Dynamics in Linear Systems

To unders tan d this fundamental difference between the two systems
we consider the transfer functions,
p 1
W1 ( p) 2
p
p 1
W2 ( p) 2
p
Both the systems have the same poles but different zeros.
Specfically, for the first case, there is a left half plane zero at 1.
while for the sec ond case, there is a right half plane zero at 1.
Thus, int ernal dynamics of first system is stable because it is a
min imum phase system.
For non min imum phase systems, perfect tracking requires
inf inite effort.

Extension of Internal Dynamics to Zero Dynamics

Extending the notion of zeros to nonlinear systems is not a trivial
proposition.
For nonlinear systems, the stability of the internal dynamics
may depend on the specific control input.
The zero-dynamics is defined to be the internal dynamics
of the system when the system output is kept at zero by the input.
A nonlinear system whose zero dynamics is asymptotically stable is
an asymptotically minimum phase system.
Zero-Dynamics is an intrinsic feature of a nonlinear system, which
does not depend on the choice of control law or the desired
trajectories.

Mathematical Tools
Lie derivative and Lie bracket
Diffeomorphism
Frobenius Theorem
Input-State Linearization
Examples
The zero dynamics with examples
Input-Output Linearization with examples
Opto-Mechanical System Example

Lie Derivatives
Given a scalar function h( x) and a vector field , L f h,
called the Lie derivative of h with respect to f .
Definition : Let h : R n R be a smooth scalar function, and
f : R n R be a smooth vector field on R n , then the Lie derivative
of h with respect to f is a scalar function defined by L f h h f
Example:
x f ( x)
y h( x )
The derivatives of the output are
[ L f h]
h
y
x L f h ; y
x L f 2 h
x
x

Lie Brackets
Let f and g be two vector fields on R n .The Lie Bracket of
f and g is a third vector defined by
f , g g f f g
The Lie Bracket [ f , g ] is commonly written as ad f g ( where ad
s tan ds for adjo int)
Re peated Lie Brackets can be defined recursivel y by
o

ad f g g
i

ad f g [ f , ad f

i 1

g]

for i 1,2,....

Example - Lie Brackets

Example
Let x f ( x) g ( x)u
with the two vector fields f and g defined by
2 x1 ax2 sin x1

g ( x)

cos(
2
x
)
1

x
cos
x
2
1

The Lie bracket can be computed as

0
0 2 x1 ax2 sin( x1 ) 2 cos x1
a
[ f , g]

2
sin(
x
)
0

x
cos
x
x
sin
x

cos
x
1
2
1
1
1

2
a cos(2 x1 )

cos
x
cos(
2
x
)

2
sin(
2
x
)(

2
x

ax

sin
x
)
1
1
1
1
2
1

cos(
2
x
)
1

Properties of Lie Brackets

Lie Brackets have following properties
(i ) bilinearity :
[1 f1 2 f 2 , g ] 1[ f1, g ] 2 [ f 2 , g ]
[ f ,1g1 2 g 2 ] 1[ f , g1 ] 2 [ f , g 2 ]
where f , f1, f 2 , g , g1, g 2 are smooth vector fields , and

1 and 2 are cons tan t scalars.

(ii ) skew commutativity :
[ f , g ] [ g , f ]
(iii ) Jacobi identity :
Lad f g h L f Lg h Lg L f h
where h( x) is a smooth function of x.

Diffeomorphisms and State transformations

Definition :
A function : R n R n , defined in a region , is called a
diffeomorphism if it is smooth, and if its inverse 1 exists
and is smooth.
Lemma :
Let ( x) be a smooth function defined in a region in R n . If
the Jacobian matrix is non sin gular at a po int x x0 of ,
then ( x) defines a local diffeomorphism in a subregion of .

Example
Consider the dynamic system described by
x f ( x) g ( x)u
y h( x )
and let the new states be defined by
z ( x)
Differenti ation of z yields
z

x
( f ( x ) g ( x)u )
x
x

New state representa tion :

z f * ( z ) g * ( z )u
y h* ( z )
where x 1z

Frobenius Theorem- Completely Integrable

Definition of completely int egrable :
A linearly independent set of vector fields [ f1, f 2 ,... f m ] on R n
is said to be completely int egrable if , and only if , there exists
n m scalar functions h1 ( x), h2 ( x),...hnm ( x) satisfying the
system of partial differenti al equations
hi f j 0
where 1 i n m, 1 j m, and the gradients hi are linearly
independent.

Frobenius Theorem- Involutivity

Definition of involutivity condition :
A linearly independent set of vector fields [ f1, f 2 ,... f n ] is said
to be involutive if , and only if , there are scalar functions

ijk : R n R such that

m

[ f i , f j ]( x) ijk ( x) f k ( x)
k 1

i, j

Frobenius theorem
Theorem :
Let f1, f 2 ,... f m be a set of linearly independent
vector fields.
The set is completely int egrable if , and only if ,
it is involutive.
Consider the set of partial differenti al equations
h
h
4 x3

0
x1 x2
h
h
h
2
x1
( x3 3 x2 )
2 x3
0
x1
x2
x3

Frobenius theorem- example

The associated fields are [ f1, f 2 ] with
f1 [4 x3 1 0]T

f 2 [ x1 ( x32 3x2 ) 2 x3 ]T

In order to det er min e whether this set is solvable, let us check

the involutivity of the set of vector fields [ f1, f 2 ].
[ f1, f 2 ] [12 x3 3 0]T
Since [ f1, f 2 ] 3 f1 0 f 2 , this set of vector fields is involutive.
Therefore , the two partial differenti al equations are solvable.

Input-State Linearization
Definition :
A sin gle input nonlinear system in the form x f ( x) g ( x)u
with f ( x) and g ( x) being smooth vector fields on R n , is said to
be input state linearizable if there exists a region in R n ,
a diffeomorhpism : R n , a nonlinear feedback control law
u ( x ) ( x )v
such that the new state var iables z ( x) and the new input v
satisfy a linear time in var iant relation
z Az bv
where
0 1 0.. 0
0

0
0
1
..
.
.

A
b
.. .
.
.
.

0
0
0
0

1
The new state z is called the linearizing state and the control law
is called the linearizing law.

Conditions for Input-State Linearization

Theorem :
The nonlinear system with f ( x) and g ( x) being smooth vector fields,
is input state linearized if , and only if , there exists a region such
that the following conditions hold :
(i ) the vector fields {g , ad f g ,...ad f n1g} are linearly independent in
(ii ) the set {g , ad f g ,...ad f n1g} is involutive in
Few Re marks :
The first condition can be int erpreted as controllab ility condition for the
nonlinear system.
The involutivity condition is less int uitive. It is trivially satisfied for linear
systems, but not generally satisfied in the nonlinear case.

How to perform input-state Linearization

The input state linearization of a nonlinear system can be performed
through the following steps :
(i ) Construct the vector fields g , ad f g ,...ad f n1g for the given system.
(ii ) Check whether the controllab ility and involutivity conditions are satisfied .
(iii ) If both are satisfied , find the first stage z1 (the output function leading
to input output linearization of the relative deg ree n)
z1ad f n1g 0

i 0,...n 2

z1ad f n1g 0
(iv) Compute the state transformation z ( x) [ z1 L f z1 .... L f n1z1 ]T and the input
transformation, with

( x)
( x)

L f n z1
Lg L f n1z1
1

Lg L f n1z1

Example system
Consider a mechanism given by the dynamics which represents a single link flexible
joint robot.
Its equations of motion is derived as

Iq MgL sin q1 k (q1 q2 ) 0

Jq2 k (q1 q2 ) u
Because nonlinearities ( due to gravitational torques) appear in the first equation,
While the control input u enters only in the second equation, there is no easy way
to design a large range controller.

x [q1 q1 q2 q 2 ]
and corresponding vector fields f and g can be written as
MgL
k
k
f [ x2
sin x1 ( x1 x3 ) x4 ( x1 x3 )T
l
l
j
1 T
g [0 0 0 ]
J

Example system- Contd.

Checking controllability and involuvity conditions.

k
IJ

[ g ad f g ad 2 f g ad 3 f g ]

1
J

k
J2

k

IJ
0

J2
0

It has rank 4 for k>0 and IJ> infinity. Furthermore, since the
above vector fields are constant, they form an involutive set.
Therefore the system is input-state linearizable.

Example system - Contd.

Let us find out the state-transformation z = z(x) and the input
transformation u ( x) ( x)v so that input-state linearization is achieved.

z1
0
x2

z1
0
x3

z1
0
x4

z1
0
x1

Thus, z1 must be a function of x1 only.

The simplest solution to the above equation is
z1 x1
The other states can be obtained from z1
z2 z1 f x2
MgL
k
sin x1 ( x1 x3 )
I
I
MgL
k
z4 z3 f
x2 cos x1 ( x2 x4 )
I
I
z3 z2 f

Example system- Contd.

Accordingly, the input transformation is

u (v z4 f ) /(z4 g )
which can be written exp licitly as
IJ
u
(v a( x))
k
where
MgL
MgL
k
k
k k MgL
a ( x)
sin x1 ( x2 2
cos x1 ) ( x1 x3 )(
cos x1 )
I
I
I
I
I J
I

We end up with the following set of linear equations

z1 z2
z 2 z3
z 3 z4
z 4 v
thus completing the input state linearization.

Example system- Contd.

Finally, note that
The above input-state linearization is actually global, because the
diffeomorphism z(x) and the input transformation are well defined everywhere.
Specifically, the inverse of the state transformation is

x1 z1
x2 z2
I
MgL
x3 z1 ( z3
sin z1 )
k
I
I
MgL
x4 z2 ( z4
z2 cos z1 )
k
I
which is well defined and differenti able everywhere.

Input-Output Linearization of SISO systems

Given a nonlinear sin gle input system described by the state space
representa tion
x f ( x) g ( x)u
y h( x )
where y is the system output.
Issues :
(i ) How to generate a linear input output relation for a nonlinear system ?
(ii ) What are the int ernal dynamics and zero dynamics associated with
the input output linearization ?
(iii ) How to design stable controller s based on input output linearizations ?

Generating a linear input-output relation

The basic approach of input output linearization is simply to
differenti ate the output function y repeatedly until the input u
appears, and then design u to cancel the nonlinearity.
However , in some cases, the systems relative deg ree is undefined .
Definition : The SISO system is said to have relative deg ree r in a
region if , x
Lg L f i h( x) 0
Lg L f r 1h( x) 0

0 i r 1

Normal Forms
Let

[ 1 2 .... r ]T [ y y ... y ( r 1) ]T
In a neighborhood of a po int x0 , the normal form of the system can be
written as

..

a ( , ) b( , )u

w( , )
with the output defined as
y 1
The i and i are referred to as normal coordinate s or normal states
in (or at x0 )

Zero Dynamics
The int ernal dynamics associated with the input output
linearization simply corresponds to the last (n r ) equations
w( , ) of the normal form.
Generally, this dynamics depends on the output states .
However , we can define an int rinsic property of the
nonlinear system by considering the system' s int ernal
dynamics when the control input is such that the output
y is ma int ained at zero. Studying zero dynamics will
allow us to make some conclusions about the stability of
the int ernal dynamics.

Zero Dynamics
The constra int that the output y is identically zero implies that all of its time
derivatives are zero. Thus, the zero dynamics of a system is its dynamics when
its motion is restricted to the (n r ) dim ensional smooth surface in R n
Further , input must be such that y stays at zero.
In order for the system to operate in zero dynamics,
The original input u must be given by the state feedback
u* (t )

L f r h( x )
Lg L f r 1h( x)

Therefore , correspond ing to the zero dynamics, the system states x evolves
according to
x f ( x) g ( x)u* ( x)

Zero Dynamics- Contd.

Assu min g that the system' s initial state is on the
surface, i.e. (0) 0,
the system dynamics can be written in normal form as
0
w(0, )
By definition, the above equation is the zero dynamics
of the nonlinear system
The control input u0 can be written as a function only
of the int ernal states
a(0, )
u0
b(0, )

Local Asymptotic Stabilization

Theorem :
Assume that the system has relative deg ree r , and its zero dynamics
is locally asymptotically stable .
Let us assume that v kr 1 y ( r 1) .... k1 y k0 y where ki
Choose cons tan ts ki such that the polynomial
K ( p) p r kr 1 p r 1 ...k1 p k0
has all its roots strictly in the left half plane.
Then, the control law
u ( x)

1
Lg L f r 1 y

[ L f r y kr 1 y ( r 1) ... k1 y k0 y ]

leads to a locally asymptotically stable closed loop system

Example System
x1 x12 x2
x 2 3x2 u

The system' s linearization at x 0 ( where x x1

x1 0

x2 T is

x 2 3x2 u
and thus has an uncontroll able mod e corresponding to a pure int egrator.
Let us define the output function y 2 x1 x2
Correspond ing to this output , the relative deg ree of the system is 1, because
dy
2 x1 x 2 2 x12 x2 3x2 u
dt
The associated zero dynamics (obtained by setting y 0 ) is simply
x1 2 x13
and thus is asymptotically stable. Therefore , the control law
u 2 x12 x2 4 x2 2 x1
locally stablizes the nonlinear system.

Global Asymptotic Stability

Zero Dynamics only guarantees local stability of a control system
based on input-output linearization.
Most practically important problems are of global stabilization
problems.
An approach to global asymptotic stabilization based on partial
feedback linearization is to simply consider the control problem as a
standard lyapunov controller problem, but simplified by the fact
that putting the systems in normal form makes part of the dynamics
linear.
The basic idea, after putting the system in normal form, is to view
as the input to the internal dynamics, and as the output.

Steps for Global Asymptotic Stability

The first step is to find a control law 0 0 ( ) which stabilizes
the internal dynamics.
An associated Lyapunov function V0 demonstrating the stabilizing
property.
To get back to the original global control problem.
Define a Lyapunov function candidate V appropriately as a modified
version of V0
Choose control input v so that V be a Lyapunov function for the
whole closed-loop dynamics.

Local Tracking Control

The simple pole placement controller can be

extended to asymptotic
tracking control tasks. Let

d [ yd y d ... yd ( r 1) ]T
and define the tracking error vector by
~ (t ) (t ) d (t )

Tracking Control
Theorem :
Assume the system has relative deg ree r (defined and cons tan t
over the region of int erest ), that d is smooth and bounded ,
and that the solution d of the equation
d ( d , d )
d (0) 0
exists, is bounded , and is uniformly asymptotically stable.
Then by u sin g the control law
1
r
(r )
~]

u
[

....

f
1
d
r 1 r
0 1
r 1
Lg L f 1
the whole state remains bounded and the tracking error ~
converges to zero exp onentially.

Inverse Dynamics
For systems described by previous sec tion,
let us find out what the initial conditions x(0) and control input u
should be in order for the plant output to track a reference output
yr (t ) perfectly.
Let us assume that the system output y (t ) is identical to the reference
output yr (t ) i.e y (t ) yr (t ), t 0.
y k (t ) yr k (t )

k 0,1,....,.r 1

t 0

In terms of normal coordinate s,

(t ) r (t ) [ yr (t ) y r (t ) .... yr ( r 1) (t )]T
Thus, the control input u (t ) must satisfy
yr r (t ) a( r , ) b( r , )u (t )

t 0

Inverse Dynamics- Contd.

where (t ) is solution of the differenti al equation
(t ) w[ r (t ), (t )]

Given a reference trajectory yr (t ) , we can obtain the

required control input for output y (t ) identically
equal to yr (t ).
Pr evious equations allow us to compute the input u (t )
correspond ing to reference output history yr (t ).
Therefore , they are called inverse dynamics of the system.

Application of Feedback Linearization to

Opto-Mechanics

For the double slit aperture, the irradiance at any point

in space is given as:
I ( x) A sin c 2(

kb
x
ka
x
sin (tan 1 ( ) ) ) cos2 ( sin(tan 1 ( )))
2
z
2
z

= wavelength = 630 nm
k = wave number associated with the wavelength
a = center-to-center separation = 32 um
b = width of the slit = 18 um
z = distance of propagation =1000 um

Plant Model

1
( s 1)

X2

Motor Dynamics

Plant
Model

Y= X1

Plant Model

X2
1

U X1 s 1

Y X1 A sin c( X 2 )

X 2
X 2 X1 U
t

Y sin c( X 2 )

A 1 (assume)

X 2
sin c( X 2 ) X 2 U
t

Y sin c( X 2 )

A 1 (assume)

Input-State Linearization
X 2
sin c( X 2 ) X 2 U
t

U sin g a transformation z1 x2
We get z1 sin c( z1 ) z1 u
Therefore u z1 sin c( z1 ) z1
u v sin c( z1 ) z1
v z1
Select v k1z1
u k1z1 f ( z ) where f ( z ) sin c( z1 ) z1
By proper choice of feedback gains , we can get a stable closed
loop dynamics.

Input-State Linearization- Block diagram

v K1z1

U(x,v)

Pole-Placement loop

1
( s 1)

X2

Motor Dynamics

z1 x2

Plant
Model
Plant Model

Input-Output Linearization
sin( x2 )
y sin c( x2 )
x2
[cos( x2 ) x 2 ]x2 sin( x2 ) x 2
y
x2 2
x2 (cos( x2 )) x 2 sin( x2 ) x 2

x2 2
y

x2 cos( x2 )[ sin c( x2 ) x2 u ] sin( x2 )[ sin c( x2 ) x2 u ]

x2 2
x2 cos( x2 ) sin c( x2 ) x2 2 cos( x2 ) x2 cos( x2 )u
sin( x2 ) sin c( x2 ) sin( x2 ) x2 u sin( x2 )
x2 2

Input-Output Linearization
x2 cos( x2 ) sin c( x2 ) x2 2 cos( x2 ) x2 cos( x2 )u
sin( x2 ) sin c( x2 ) sin( x2 ) x2 u sin( x2 )

y
[

x2 2
x2 cos( x2 )u sin( x2 )u
x2

[ x2 cos( x2 ) sin c( x2 ) x2 2 cos( x2 ) sin( x2 ) sin c( x2 ) x2 sin( x2 )]

x2 2
u[

x2 cos( x 2 ) sin( x2 )
x2

[sin c( x2 ){sin( x2 x2 cos( x2 )} x2 2 cos( x2 ) x2 sin( x2 )]

x2 2

Input-Output Linearization
y u[

cos( x2 ) sin( x2 )

] f ( x)
2
x2
x2

where

v f ( x)
u
cos( x2 ) sin( x2 )
[

]
2
x2
x2
y v
Comparing with x Ax Bu, we get A 1, B 0
Select v y d k1e
[e y y d ]
Control law is defined everywhere except at sin gularity
cos( x2 ) sin( x2 )
po int s where [

]0
2
x2
x2

Zero Dynamics
Zero Dynamics is given by :
x 2 x2 u
This zero dynamics is asymptotically stable,
hence the feedback controller locally stabilizes the nonlinear
system.
There are no int ernal dynamics associated with this system
because relative deg ree r n ( system order ).

Conclusion
Control design based on input-output linearization can be made
in 3 steps:
Differentiate the output y until the input u appears
Choose u to cancel the nonlinearities and guarantee tracking
convergence
Study the stability of the internal dynamics
If the relative degree associated with the input-output linearization is
the same as the order of the system, the nonlinear system is fully
linearized.
If the relative degree is smaller than the system order, then the
nonlinear system is partially linearized and stability of internal
dynamics has to be checked.

Homework Problems

Design a linear input output controller for

x1 x2
x2 x1 ax12 x2 ( x2 1)u
y x1
Check global stability of the zero dynamics for
x1 kx1 2 x2u
x 2 x2 x1u
y x2