The infinite structure of linear time-invariant systems has been principally used to solve control problems. Nevertheless, this system characterization appears interesting in the design and sizing of mechatronic systems as well. Indeed, based on the bond graph language and inverse modelling, a methodology has already been developed for sizing mechatronic systems according to energy and dynamic criteria. One of the novelties of this methodology is its structural analysis step. This step enables structural properties to be deduced and helps in the formulation of the specifications. The aim of this paper is to add new graphical procedures to the structural analysis step to determine some structural properties (infinite pole orders and relative orders) from the inverse model (bicausal bond graph model). The structural analysis of the inverse model remains interesting since the essential orders are immediately obtained on the bicausal model. A discussion is carried out regarding the duality between the causal and bicausal procedures.
DionJ. MCommaultC.Smith–McMillan factorisations at infinity of rational matrix functions and their control interpretation. Syst. Control Lett., 1982, 1, 312–320.
2.
CommaultC.DescusseJ.DionJ. M.LafayJ. FMalabreM.New decoupling invariants: the essential orders. Int. J. Control, 1986, 44(3), 689–700.
3.
LafayJ. F.ZagalakP.HerreraAIcartS.Structural results about the interactor. In Proceedings of the IEEE Conference on Decision and control, December 1990, Vol. 2, pp. 1048–1049.
4.
VardulakisA. I. G.LimebeerD. J. N.KarcaniasN.Structure and Smith–McMillan form of a rational matrix at infinity. Int. J. control, 1982, 35, 701–725.
5.
HerreraA. NLafayJ. F. New results about Morgan’s problem. IEEE Trans. Autom. Control, 1993, 38(12), 1834–1838.
6.
CommaultC.DionJ. MStructure at infinity of linear multivariable systems: a geometric approach. IEEE Trans. Autom. Control, 1982, 27(3), 693–696.
7.
DescusseJ.LafayJ. F.MalabreM.Solution of the static-state feedback decoupling problem for linear systems with two outputs. IEEE Trans. Autom. Control, 1985, 30(9), 914–918.
8.
DescusseJ.LafayJ. F.MalabreM.Solution to Morgan problem. IEEE Trans. Autom. Control, 1988, 33(8), 732–739.
9.
Van Der WoudeJ. W.On the structure at infinity of a structured system. Lin. Algebra Applic., 1991, 148, 145–169.
KarcaniasN.SagianosE.MilonidisE.Structural identification: The computation of the generic McMillan degree. In Proceedings of the 44th IEEE Conference on Decision and control and the European Control Conference, CDC-ECC’05, Spain, December 2005, pp. 7222–7227.
12.
KarcaniasN.SagianosE.MilonidisE.Structured transfer function matrices and integer matrices: The computation of the generic McMillan degree and infinite zero structure. Int. J. Control, 2007, 80(9), 1404–1420.
RahmaniA.SueurC.Dauphin-TanguyG.Formal determination of controllability/observability matrices for multivariable systems modelled by bond graph. In Proceedings of IMACS/SICE International Symposium of Robotics, mechatronics and manufacturing systems, 1992, pp. 573–580.
15.
WuS. T.Youcef-ToumiK.On Relative Degrees and Zero Dynamics From Physical System Modeling. J. Dynam. Syst. Measure. Control, 1995, 117(2), 205–217.
16.
RahmaniA.SueurC.Dauphin-TanguyG.On the infinite structure of systems modelled by bond graph: feedback decoupling. In Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Systems, man and cybernetics, Beijing, China, October 1996, Vol. 3, pp. 1617–1622.
17.
BertrandJ. M.SueurC.Dauphin-TanguyG.On the finite and infinite structure of bond-graph models. In Proceedings of the IEEE Conference on Computational cybernetics and simulation, October 1997, vol. 3, pp. 2472–2477.
18.
NgwompoR. F.ScavardaS.ThomassetD.Structural inversibility and minimal inversion of multivariable linear systems – a bond graph approach. Simulation Councils Proceedings Series, 1997, 29(1), 109.
19.
NgwompoR. F.ScavardaS.Dimensioning problems in system design using bicausal bond graphs. Simul. Pract. Theory, 1999, 7(5), 577–587.
20.
NgwompoR. F.GawthropP. J.Bond graph-based simulation of non-linear inverse systems using physical performance specifications. J. Franklin Inst., 1999, 336(8), 1225–1247.
21.
NgwompoR. F.ScavardaS.ThomassetD.Physical model-based inversion in control systems design using bond graph representation, Part 1: theory. Proc. IMechE, Part I: J. Systems and Control Engineering, 2001, 215(12), 95–103.
22.
GlumineauA.MoogC. H.Nonlinear Morgan’s Problem: Case of (p + 1) Inputs and p Outputs. IEEE Trans. Autom. Control, 1992, 37(7), 1067–1072.
23.
BirkettS. H.RoeP. H.Mathematical foundations of bond graphs. III. Matroid theory. J. Franklin Inst., 1990, 327, 87–108.
24.
LichiardopolS.SueurC.Duality of linear systems: a bond graph perspective. In Proceedings of the 5th Mathmod Vienna, IMACS Symposium on Mathematical modeling, Vienna, February 2006.
25.
LichiardopolS.SueurC.Duality in system analysis for bond graph models. J. Franklin Inst., 2010, 347(2), 377–414.
26.
RahmaniA.Etude structurelle des systèmes linéaires par l’approche bond graph. PhD Dissertation, Université des Sciences et Technologie de Lille, France, 1993.
27.
YamadaT.SagaT.A sufficient condition for structural decouplability of linear non square systems. IEEE Trans. Autom. Control, 1985, 30(9), 918–921.
28.
JardinA.El FekiM.Marquis-FavreW.ThomassetD.BideauxE.Use of structural analysis in a bond graph-based methodology for sizing mechatronic systems. In Proceedings of the Mechatronics Congress, Le Grand Bornand, France, May 2008.
29.
NgwompoR. FBideauxE.ScavardaS.On the role of power lines and causal paths in bond graph based model inversion. In Proceedings of International Conference on Bond graph modelling and simulation, 2005, pp. 5–10.
30.
Dauphin-TanguyG.Les bond graphs, 2000 (Hermès Sciences, Paris).
31.
JardinA.Contribution à une méthodologie de dimensionnement des systèmes mécatroniques: analyse structurelle et couplage à l’optimisation dynamique. PhD Dissertation, Institut National des Sciences Appliquées de Lyon, 2010.
32.
MurotaK.Matrices and matroids for systems analysis, Algorithms and Combinatorics Series Vol. 20, 2000 (Springer, Berlin).
33.
SueurC.Dauphin-TanguyG.Poles and zeros of multivariable linear systems: a bond graph approach. In Bond graph for engineers, Eds BreedveldP. C.Dauphin-TanguyG., 1992, pp. 211–228 (Elsevier, Amsterdam).
34.
KarnoppD. C.MargolisD. L.RosenbergR. C.System dynamics: a unified approach, 1975 (Wiley, New York).
35.
BrockettR. W.Poles, Zeros, and Feedback: State Space Interpretation. IEEE Trans. Autom. Control, 1965, 10, 129–135.
36.
DescusseJ.DionJ. M.On the Structure at Infinity of Linear Square Decoupled Systems. IEEE Trans. Autom. Control, 1982, 27(4), 971–974.
37.
CommaultC.DionJ. M.TorresJ.Invariant spaces at infinity of linear systems application to block decoupling. IEEE Trans. Autom. Control, 1990, 35(5), 618–623.
38.
El FekiM.JardinA.Marquis-FavreW.BideauxE.ThomassetD.Determination of essential orders from a bond graph model. J. Dynam. Syst. Measure. Control, 2010, submitted.
39.
El FekiM.Di LoretoM.BideauxE.ThomassetD.Marquis-FavreW.On the role of essential orders on feedback decoupling and model inversion: bond graph approach. In Proceedings of the 22th European Conference on Modelling and simulation, Nicosia, Cyprus, June 2008.
