Robust Adaptive Control by Petros A. Ioannou, Jing Sun - HTML preview

PLEASE NOTE: This is an HTML preview only and some elements such as links or page numbers may be incorrect.
Download the book in PDF, ePub, Kindle for a complete version.

We use Lyapunov-like functions and similar arguments as in the example

above to analyze the stability of a wide class of adaptive schemes considered

throughout this book.

3.4. LYAPUNOV STABILITY

119

3.4.4

Lyapunov’s Indirect Method

Under certain conditions, conclusions can be drawn about the stability of the

equilibrium of a nonlinear system by studying the behavior of a certain linear

system obtained by linearizing (3.4.1) around its equilibrium state. This

method is known as the first method of Lyapunov or as Lyapunov’s indirect

method and is given as follows [32, 232]: Let xe = 0 be an equilibrium state

of (3.4.1) and assume that f ( t, x) is continuously differentiable with respect

to x for each t ≥ 0. Then in the neighborhood of xe = 0, f has a Taylor

series expansion that can be written as

˙ x = f ( t, x) = A( t) x + f 1( t, x)

(3.4.15)

where A( t) = ∇f |x=0 is referred to as the Jacobian matrix of f evaluated

at x = 0 and f 1( t, x) represents the remaining terms in the series expansion.

Theorem 3.4.5 Assume that A( t) is uniformly bounded and that

|f

lim sup 1( t, x) | = 0

|x|→ 0 t≥ 0

|x|

Let ze = 0 be the equilibrium of

˙ z( t) = A( t) z( t)

The following statements are true for the equilibrium xe = 0 of (3.4.15):

(i)

If ze = 0 is u.a.s. then xe = 0 is u.a.s.

(ii) If ze = 0 is unstable then xe = 0 is unstable

(iii) If ze = 0 is u.s. or stable, no conclusions can be drawn about the

stability of xe = 0 .

For a proof of Theorem 3.4.5 see [232].

Example 3.4.9 Consider the second-order differential equation

m¨

x = 2 µ( x 2 1) ˙ x − kx

where m, µ, and k are positive constants, which is known as the Van der Pol os-

cillator. It describes the motion of a mass-spring-damper with damping coefficient

120

CHAPTER 3. STABILITY

2 µ( x 2 1) and spring constant k, where x is the position of the mass. If we define

the states x 1 = x, x 2 = ˙ x, we obtain the equation

˙ x 1 = x 2

k

2 µ

˙ x 2 = − x

( x 2

m 1 − m

1 1) x 2

which has an equilibrium at x 1 e = 0 , x 2 e = 0. The linearization of this system

around (0 , 0) gives us

˙ z 1

0

1

z

=

1

˙ z

2 µ

2

− k

z

m

m

2

Because m, µ > 0 at least one of the eigenvalues of the matrix A is positive and

therefore the equilibrium (0 , 0) is unstable.

3.4.5

Stability of Linear Systems

Equation (3.4.15) indicates that certain classes of nonlinear systems may be

approximated by linear ones in the neighborhood of an equilibrium point or,

as often called in practice, operating point. For this reason we are interested

in studying the stability of linear systems of the form

˙ x( t) = A( t) x( t)

(3.4.16)

where the elements of A( t) are piecewise continuous for all t ≥ t 0 0, as a

special class of the nonlinear system (3.4.1) or as an approximation of the

linearized system (3.4.15). The solution of (3.4.16) is given by [95]

x( t; t 0 , x 0) = Φ( t, t 0) x 0

for all t ≥ t 0, where Φ( t, t 0) is the state transition matrix and satisfies the

matrix differential equation

Φ( t,t

∂t

0) = A( t)Φ( t, t 0) ,

∀t ≥ t 0

Φ( t 0 , t 0) = I

Some additional useful properties of Φ( t, t 0) are

(i)

Φ( t, t 0) = Φ( t, τ)Φ( τ, t 0) ∀t ≥ τ ≥ t 0 (semigroup property)

(ii) Φ( t, t 0) 1 = Φ( t 0 , t)

(iii)

Φ( t, t

∂t

0) = Φ( t, t 0) A( t 0)

0

3.4. LYAPUNOV STABILITY

121

Necessary and sufficient conditions for the stability of the equilibrium state

xe = 0 of (3.4.16) are given by the following theorems.

Theorem 3.4.6 Let Φ( t, τ ) denote the induced matrix norm of Φ( t, τ ) at

each time t ≥ τ . The equilibrium state xe = 0 of (3.4.16) is

(i)

stable if and only if the solutions of (3.4.16) are bounded or equivalently

c( t 0) = sup Φ( t, t 0) < ∞

t≥t 0

(ii) u.s. if and only if

c 0 = sup c( t 0) = sup sup Φ( t, t 0)

< ∞

t 0 0

t 0 0

t≥t 0

(iii) a.s. if and only if

lim Φ( t, t 0) = 0

t→∞

for any t 0 ∈ R+

(iv) u.a.s. if and only if there exist positive constants α and β such that

Φ( t, t 0) ≤ αe−β( t−t 0) ,

∀t ≥ t 0 0

(v) e.s. if and only if it is u.a.s.

(vi) a.s., u.a.s., e.s. in the large if and only if it is a.s., u.a.s., e.s., respec-

tively.

Theorem 3.4.7 [1] Assume that the elements of A( t) are u.b. for all t ∈

R+ . The equilibrium state xe = 0 of the linear system (3.4.16) is u.a.s. if

and only if, given any positive definite matrix Q( t) , which is continuous in

t and satisfies

0 < c 1 I ≤ Q( t) ≤ c 2 I < ∞

for all t ≥ t 0 , the scalar function defined by

V ( t, x) = x

Φ ( τ, t) Q( τ )Φ( τ, t) dτ x

(3.4.17)

t

exists (i.e., the integral defined by (3.4.17) is finite for finite values of x and

t) and is a Lyapunov function of (3.4.16) with

˙

V ( t, x) = −x Q( t) x

122

CHAPTER 3. STABILITY

It follows using the properties of Φ( t, t 0) that P ( t)= Φ ( τ, t) Q( τ)Φ( τ, t)

t

satisfies the equation

˙

P ( t) = −Q( t) − A ( t) P ( t) − P ( t) A( t) (3.4.18)

i.e., the Lyapunov function (3.4.17) can be rewritten as V ( t, x) = x P ( t) x,

where P ( t) = P ( t) satisfies (3.4.18).

Theorem 3.4.8 A necessary and sufficient condition for the u.a.s of the

equilibrium xe = 0 of (3.4.16) is that there exists a symmetric matrix P ( t)

such that

γ 1 I ≤ P ( t) ≤ γ 2 I

˙

P ( t) + A ( t) P ( t) + P ( t) A( t) + νC( t) C ( t) ≤ O

are satisfied ∀t ≥ 0 and some constant ν > 0 , where γ 1 > 0 , γ 2 > 0 are constants and C( t) is such that ( C( t) , A( t)) is a UCO pair (see Definition 3.3.3).

When A( t) = A is a constant matrix, the conditions for stability of the

equilibrium xe = 0 of

˙ x = Ax

(3.4.19)

are given by the following theorem.

Theorem 3.4.9 The equilibrium state xe = 0 of (3.4.19) is stable if and

only if

(i)

All the eigenvalues of A have nonpositive real parts.

(ii) For each eigenvalue λi with Re {λi} = 0 , λi is a simple zero of the

minimal polynomial of A (i.e., of the monic polynomial ψ( λ) of least

degree such that ψ( A) = O).

Theorem 3.4.10 A necessary and sufficient condition for xe = 0 to be a.s.

in the large is that any one of the following conditions is satisfied 1 :

(i)

All the eigenvalues of A have negative real parts

1Note that (iii) includes (ii). Because (ii) is used very often in this book, we list it

separately for easy reference.

3.4. LYAPUNOV STABILITY

123

(ii) For every positive definite matrix Q, the following Lyapunov matrix

equation

A P + P A = −Q

has a unique solution P that is also positive definite.

(iii) For any given matrix C with ( C, A) observable, the equation

A P + P A = −C C

has a unique solution P that is positive definite.

It is easy to verify that for the LTI system given by (3.4.19), if xe = 0 is

stable, it is also u.s. If xe = 0 is a.s., it is also u.a.s. and e.s. in the large.

In the rest of the book we will abuse the notation and call the matrix

A in (3.4.19) stable when the equilibrium xe = 0 is a.s., i.e., when all the

eigenvalues of A have negative real parts and marginally stable when xe = 0

is stable, i.e., A satisfies (i) and (ii) of Theorem 3.4.9.

Let us consider again the linear time-varying system (3.4.16) and suppose

that for each fixed t all the eigenvalues of the matrix A( t) have negative real

parts. In view of Theorem 3.4.10, one may ask whether this condition for

A( t) can ensure some form of stability for the equilibrium xe = 0 of (3.4.16).

The answer is unfortunately no in general, as demonstrated by the following

example given in [232].

Example 3.4.10 Let

1 + 1 . 5 cos2 t

1 1 . 5 sin t cos t

A( t) =

1 1 . 5 sin t cos t

1 + 1 . 5 sin2 t

The eigenvalues of A( t) for each fixed t,

λ( A( t)) = −. 25 ± j. 5 1 . 75

have negative real parts and are also independent of t. Despite this the equilibrium

xe = 0 of (3.4.16) is unstable because

e. 5 t cos t

e−t sin t

Φ( t, 0) =

−e. 5 t sin t e−t cos t

is unbounded w.r.t. time t.

124

CHAPTER 3. STABILITY

Despite Example 3.4.10, Theorem 3.4.10 may be used to obtain some

sufficient conditions for a class of A( t), which guarantee that xe = 0 of

(3.4.16) is u.a.s. as indicated by the following theorem.

Theorem 3.4.11 Let the elements of A( t) in (3.4.16) be differentiable 2 and

bounded functions of time and assume that

(A1) Re{λi( A( t)) } ≤ −σs ∀t ≥ 0 and for i = 1 , 2 , . . . , n where σs > 0 is some constant.

(i) If

˙

A ∈ L 2 , then the equilibrium state xe = 0 of (3.4.16) is u.a.s. in

the large.

(ii) If any one of the following conditions:

1

(a) t+ T

˙

A( τ ) dτ ≤ µT + α

t

0 , i.e., (

˙

A ) 2 ∈ S( µ)

(b) t+ T

˙

A( τ ) 2 dτ ≤ µ 2 T + α

t

0 , i.e.,

˙

A ∈ S( µ 2)

(c)

˙

A( t) ≤ µ

is satisfied for some α 0 , µ ∈ R+ and ∀t ≥ 0 , T ≥ 0 , then there exists a

µ∗ > 0 such that if µ ∈ [0 , µ∗) , the equilibrium state xe of (3.4.16) is

u.a.s. in the large.

Proof Using (A1), it follows from Theorem 3.4.10 that the Lyapunov equation

A ( t) P ( t) + P ( t) A( t) = −I

(3.4.20)

has a unique bounded solution P ( t) for each fixed t. We consider the following

Lyapunov function:

V ( t, x) = x P ( t) x

Then along the solution of (3.4.16) we have

˙

V = −|x( t) | 2 + x ( t) ˙

P ( t) x( t)

(3.4.21)

From (3.4.20), ˙

P satisfies

A ( t) ˙

P ( t) + ˙

P ( t) A( t) = −Q( t) ,

∀t ≥ 0

(3.4.22)

where Q( t) = ˙

A ( t) P ( t) + P ( t) ˙

A( t). Because of (A1), it can be verified [95] that

˙

P ( t) =

eA ( t) τ Q( t) eA( t) τ dτ

0

2The condition of differentiability can be relaxed to Lipschitz continuity.

3.4. LYAPUNOV STABILITY

125

satisfies (3.4.22) for each t ≥ 0, therefore,

˙

P ( t) ≤ Q( t)

eA ( t) τ

eA( t) τ dτ

0

Because (A1) implies that eA( t) τ ≤ α 1 e−α 0 τ for some α 1 , α 0 > 0 it follows that

˙

P ( t) ≤ c Q( t)

for some c ≥ 0. Then,

Q( t) 2 P ( t)

˙

A( t)

together with P ∈ L∞ imply that

˙

P ( t) ≤ β ˙

A( t) ,

∀t ≥ 0

(3.4.23)

for some constant β ≥ 0. Using (3.4.23) in (3.4.21) and noting that P satisfies

0 < β 1 ≤ λmin( P ) ≤ λmax( P ) ≤ β 2 for some β 1 , β 2 > 0, we have that

˙

V ( t) ≤ −|x( t) | 2 + β ˙

A( t) |x( t) | 2 ≤ −β− 1

˙

2 V ( t) + ββ− 1

1

A( t) V ( t)

therefore,

t

( β− 1 −ββ− 1

˙

A( τ ) )

V ( t) ≤ e

t

2

1

0

V ( t 0)

(3.4.24)

Let us prove (ii) first. Using condition (a) in (3.4.24) we have

V ( t) ≤ e−( β− 1 −ββ− 1 µ)( t−t

α

2

1

0) eββ?