The dynamic behaviour of controlled systems depend significantly on the allowable magnitude and change rate of the control efforts, which need to be considered during controller design. The controller design algorithm investigated in this paper can independently address both the magnitude and rate constraints and their effect on actuator dynamics. The integral dynamics are augmented to the systems actuator. The original control effort is formulated as new states in the augmented dynamics formulation, and the inputs of the integrator represent the rate of the control effort. The feedback gain is then designed to obtain suitable actuator dynamics such that the desired H∞ performance can be optimized and the magnitude of the rate constraints can be satisfied. Using satellite attitude control and aircraft longitudinal control as case studies, the effectiveness of the proposed algorithm is verified through achievable H∞ performance and time response simulations with various chosen constraints on the magnitude and rate of the control.
DudaH.Flight control system design considering rate saturation. Aerosp. Sci. Technol., 1998, 2, 265–275.
2.
ChenP. C.JengY. F.ChangY. H.WangY. M.ChenG.Robust gain-scheduled control of a vertical takeoff aircraft with actuator saturation via the LMI method. Asian J. Control, 2004, 6, 112–122.
3.
BriegerO.KerrM.LeiBlingD.. Flight testing of a rate saturation compensation scheme on the ATTAS aircraft. Aerosp. Sci. Technol., 2009, 13, 92–104.
4.
ZhengJ.FuM.WangY.DuC.Nonlinear tracking control for a hard disk drive dual-stage actuator system. IEEE Trans. Mechatron., 2008, 13(5), 510–518.
5.
ChenP. C.ShammaJ. S.Gain-scheduled l1-optimal control for boiler-turbine dynamics with actuator saturation. J. Process Control, 2004, 14, 263–277.
6.
SaberiA.LinZ.TeelA. R.Control of linear systems with saturating actuators. IEEE Trans. Autom. Control, 1996, 41, 368–378.
7.
HuT.LinZ.ShamashT.On maximizing the convergence rate for linear systems with input saturation. IEEE Trans. Autom. Control, 2003, 48, 1249–1253.
8.
ChenS. H.ChouJ. H.Stability robustness of linear output feedback systems with both time-varying structured and unstructured uncertainties as well as actuator saturation. Proc. IMechE, Part I: J. Systems Control and Engineering, 2004, 218, 269–275.
9.
TeelA.A nonlinear small gain theorem for the analysis of control systems with saturation. IEEE Trans. Autom. Control, 1996, 41, 1256–1270.
10.
TyanF.BernsteinD.Dynamics output feedback compensation for linear systems with independent amplitude and rate saturation. Int. J. Control, 1997, 67, 89–116.
11.
CavalloA.MariaG. D.NistriP.Robust control design with integral action and limited rate control. IEEE Trans. Autom. Control, 1999, 44, 1569–1572.
12.
LeonessaA.HaddadW. M.HayakawaT.MorelY.Adaptive control for nonlinear uncertain systems with actuator amplitude and rate saturation constraints. Int. J. Adapt. Control Signal Process., 2009, 23, 73–96.
13.
GiovaniniL. L.Model predictive control with amplitude and rate saturation. ISA Trans., 2003, 42, 227–240.
14.
GaleaniS.OnoriS.TeelA. R.ZaccarianL.A magnitude and rate saturation model and its use in the solution of a static anti-windup problem. Syst. Control Lett., 2008, 57, 1–9.
15.
LinZ.Semi-global stabilization of linear systems with position and rate-limited actuators. Syst. Control Lett., 1997, 30, 1–11.
16.
HuiK.Design of rate and amplitude saturation compensators using three degrees of freedom controllers. Int. J. Control, 2001, 74, 91–101.
WuW.JayasuriyaS.Design for feedback systems with plant input amplitude and rate saturation. J. Dyn. Syst. Meas. Control, 2006, 128, 706–711.
19.
MhaskarP.KennedyA. B.Robust model predictive control of nonlinear process systems: handling rate constraints. Chem. Engng Sci., 2008, 63, 366–375.
20.
ChellaboinaV. S.HaddadW. M.OhJ. H.Fixed-order dynamic compensation for linear systems with actuator amplitude and rate saturation. Int. J. Control, 2000, 73, 1087–1103.
21.
SilvaJ.TarbouriechS.GarciaG.Local stabilization of linear systems under amplitude and rate saturating actuators. IEEE Trans. Autom. Control, 2003, 48, 842–847.
22.
WangJ.-Z.ChanC. W.ZhangJ.-F.Global stability of system with amplitude and rate saturation compensation. Int. J. Robust Nonlinear Control, 2005, 15, 155–170.
23.
JabbariF.KoseI.Rate and magnitude-bounded actuators: scheduled output feedback design. Int. J. Robust Nonlinear Control, 2004, 14, 1169–1184.
24.
BlanchiniF.MianiS.Any domain of attraction for a linear constrained system is a tracking domain of attraction. SIAM J. Control Optim., 2000, 38, 971–994.
25.
MahmoodM.MhaskarP.Enhanced stability regions for model predictive control of nonlinear process systems. AIChE J., 2008, 54, 1487–1498.
26.
HuT.LinZ.On semi-global stabilizability of anti-stable systems by saturated linear feedback. IEEE Trans. Autom. Control, 2002, 47, 1193–1198.
27.
WuF.LinZ.ZhengQ.Output feedback stabilization of linear systems with actuator saturation. IEEE Trans. Autom. Control, 2007, 52, 122–128.
28.
BoydS.GhaouiL.El FeronE.BalakrishnanV.Linear matrix inequalities in system and control theory, 1994 (SIAM, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania).
29.
ChilaliM.GahinetP.ApkarianP.Robust pole placement in LMI region. IEEE Trans. Autom. Control, 1999, 44, 2257–2269.
30.
MhaskarP.El-FarraN. H.ChristofidesP. D.Stabilization of nonlinear systems with state and control constraints using Lyapunov-based predictive control. Syst. Control Lett., 2006, 55, 650–659.
31.
GahinetP.NemirovskiA.LaubA.ChilaliM.The LMI control toolbox, 1995 (The MathWorks, Natick, Massachusetts).
32.
JengY. F.ChenP. C.ChangY. H.Design of a class of extended dynamic linear controller via LMI approach. J. Chin. Inst. Engrs, 2005, 28, 423–432.
33.
SafonovM. G.LaubA. J.HartmannG.Feedback properties of multivariable systems: the role and use of return difference matrix. IEEE Trans. Autom. Control, 1981, 26, 415–422.
34.
ZhengF.WangQ.-G.LeeT.-H.On the design of multivariable PID controllers via LMI approach. Automatica, 2002, 38, 517–526.
