SLIDINGMODECONTROL

M.SAMIFADALI
PROFESSOREBME
UNIVERSITYOFNEVADA,RENO
1
OUTLINE
Variablestructuresystems
Slidingmodecontrol
Motivatingexample(Khalil)
EquivalentControl
2
VARIABLESTRUCTURESYSTEMS
Dynamicsystemsoftheform
where has discontinuitieswithrespect
tosomearguments
Occurinproblemsinphysics,control
engineeringandmathematics.
Occurnaturallyinsomephysicalsystems,e.g.
forsomeelectricmotorsandpower
converters.
Forsuchsystems,thecontrollawisnaturally
discontinuous
3
VARIABLESTRUCTURECONTROL
Statedependentswitchingfeedbackcontrol
thatintentionallychangesthestructureofthe
system.
Origins:relaycontrol,bangbangcontrol.
Variablestructurecontrolsystem: composedof
independentstructuresandaswitchinglogic.
Overallsystembehaviorisunlikeanyofits
structures.
4
5
EXAMPLE:LINEARPLANT
) ( ) ( ) (
) ( ) (
2 2
2
t u t ax t x
t x t x
+ =
=

1
) ( ) ( t kx t u
1
=
PLANT:
LINEARSTATEFEEDBACK
CONTROLLAW:
Closedloopeigenvalues
2
4
2
1
k a a +
=
2
4
2
1
k a a +
=
For
2
theeigenvalueshavedifferent
propertiesfordifferent and parameter values.
Discontinuous argument

-1 -0.8 -0.6 -0.4 -0.2 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8
-4
-3
-2
-1
1
2
3
x
2
(t)
x
1
(t)
1
6
Assume a=1and|k|=12
CASE1:
4 12
2
a k > =
4278 . 3 5 . 0
2 , 1
j =
Unstableequilibrium
pointattheorigin.

- 1 - 0.8 - 0. 6 - 0 . 4 -0 . 2 0 .2 0 .4 0.6 0. 8 1
- 4
- 3
- 2
- 1
1
2
3
4
x
1
(t )
x
2
(t)
7
CASE2: 4 12
2
a k < =
, 3
1
= 4
2
=
Saddlepointattheorigin.
Greendashedline(eigenvectorofstableeigenvalue):
systemtrajectoriesconverge totheorigin.
VSSTHEORY: usethisstructure withadiscontinuous to
makethesystemstable.
8
) ( 3 ) (
) ( ) ( ) (
1 2
1 1 2
t x t x
t x t x s
+ =
= x

<
>
=
0 12
0 12
1 1
1 1
x s t x
x s t x
t u
) ( ), (
) ( ), (
) (
x
x
The green dashed line equation candefined as

- 1 - 0 . 8 - 0 . 6 - 0 . 4 -0 . 2 0 . 2 0 . 4 0 . 6 0 . 8 1
- 4
- 3
- 2
- 1
1
2
3
4
x 1(t )
x 2(t )
s(x)=0
Choosethe discontinuouscontrollaw
OVERALLSYSTEMBEHAVIOR
9
Unlikeanyofitsstructures.
VariableStructureSystem(VSS) canpossess
newpropertiesnotpresentinanyofthe
structuresused.
Intheexample,wehave
Case1:UnstableEquilibrium
Case 2:Saddle Point
VSSSystem:Asymptotically Stable
SLIDINGMODES
1
0
switching function ischosen from system
trajectories.
Ingeneral,theswitchingfunctionischosenusingthe system
trajectories.These are known assliding modes.
0 3
1 2
= + = x x s ) (x

-1 -0.5 0.5 1
-3
-2
-1
1
2
3
x
1
(t)
x
2
(t)
x
2
+3x
1
=0
x
2
+c
1
x
1
=0 (0<c
1
<3)
Newswitching
function
SLIDINGMODECONTROL (SMC)
SMCdesign involves twosteps:
(i)Selectionofstablehyperplane(s) inthe
state/errorspaceonwhichmotion should
berestricted,calledtheswitching
function,and
(ii)Synthesisofacontrollaw whichmakes
theselectedslidingsurfaceattractive .
1
1
SMCTRAJECTORIES
Atrajectorystartingfromanonzeroinitial
condition,evolvesintwophases:
a)Reachingmode,inwhichitreachesthe
slidingsurface,and
b)Slidingmode,inwhichthetrajectoryon
reachingtheslidingsurface,remainsthere
foralltimesandthusevolvesaccordingto
thedynamicsspeciedbythesliding
surface.
1
2
1
3
I:DESIGNOF SWITCHINGFUNCTION
PLANTANDSWITCHEDCONTROL
n m nm
Eachmatrixentry:continuouslydifferentiablew.r.t.
Switched(Corrective)Control:
c

SwitchingSurface: dimensionalmanifoldin
n
determinedby constraints.
1 m
1
1
4
1
5
a) Orderofswitchingfunctionislessthanorderofplant
Example:2ndordersystem 1storderswitchingfunction
2 1
b)Slidingmodedoesnotdependonplantdynamicsandis
determinedbyparametersoftheswitchingfunctiononly
(intheexampleon only)
c)Switchingfunctiondoesnotdependonthecontrollaw.

s(x) = u
x
2

x
1

PropertiesofSwitchingFunctions
1
6
Importance ofSwitching Functions
c
2
c
1
c
3
c
1
<c
2
<c
3
e
I. II.
III. IV.
e
1
(0),(0)
2
e
2
e
e
1
UpperLimitc
3
: dependsonthephysicalpropertiesofthe
systemandthetechnologyused.
LowerLimitc
1
: dependsontheallowabletrackingtime
TradeoffbetweenPERFORMANCEandROBUSTNESS
) (
2 2
2 1
s ksign ce e
e e
=
=

1
7
Switching Function Design
Linear
e
e(0),(0)
e
e
Nonlinear
e(0),(0)
e
e
e
ADVANTAGES
+Appropriateforglobaldynamic
propertiesofnonlinearsystems
+Numerousdesignoptions
DISADVANTAGES
Difficulttofindnonlinear functions
Difficulttoobtainthesurface
parameters
ADVANTAGES
+Easytoobtainthesurfaceparameters
DISADVANTAGES
Maynotbeappopriateforsystem
dynamics, ingeneral.
Magnitudeofthecontrolsignalincreases
directlyproportionaltothetrackingerror.
Fewer designoptions
1
8
TimeVarying
Switching Function Design
e
e(0),(0)
e
e
Constant
e(0),(0)
e
e
e
e
e(0),(0)
e
e
-1 -0.8 -0.6 -0.4 -0.2 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
-0.5
-0.4
-0.3
-0.2
-0.1
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
e1
e2
1
9
Switching Function Design
MostcommonchoiceisLTI SwitchingSurfaces
mn
n m
e
e
n = 2, m = 1
x
0
x
0
s
1
=0
s
2
=0
s=0
n = S, m = 2
2
0
II:FINDACONTROLLAWTOREACH
ANDSTAYTHEREAFTER
u(t)=u
c
(t)+u
eq
(t)
CORRECTIVECONTROL
(compensatethedeviations
fromthe sliding surface
to reach the sliding surface)
EQUIVALENTCONTROL
(makesthederivative
oftheslidingsurface
equalzero tostayon
theslidingsurface)
AttractiveSurface(SlidingSurface):Trajectories
outsidethesurfaceconvergetoit.Onceonthe
surface,trajectoriesremainonit
2
1
EXISTENCEOF SLIDING MODE
Asystemwith inputscanhave
switchingfunctionsand
m
sliding
surfaces.
Thecontrollawdesignandexistenceof
slidingmodearesurveyedin:
Hunget.al.,VariableStructureControl.A
Survey,IEEETran.IndustrialElectronics,40(1),
1993.
DirectSwitchingApproach
ReachingLawApproach
LyapunovFunctionApproach
LYAPUNOVFUNCTIONAPPROACH
PositivedefiniteLyapunovfunction
1
Derivative
v x
x
1
1
Choose foranegativedefinite :
trajectoriesconvergetothesurface.
2
2
SWITCHINGSURFACE
Correctivecontrol
c
:Usehighspeed
switchingtodrivethestatetrajectorytoa
specifiedswitchingsurface.
Attractivesurface:trajectoriesoutsidethe
surfaceconvergetoitandonesstartingonthe
surfacestayonit.
Localcontrol
I
:Designsurfacesothatthe
systemhasgooddynamicbehavioron
(e.g.bypoleplacementforalinear
surface).
2
3
CORRECTIVECONTROL
1
Choosetheinputamplitudesufficientlylarge
tomake negativedefiniteforany :
Robustw.r.t.modelingerrors.
Typicalchoice
c

mm
2
4
CORRECTIVECONTROL :
SISYSTEM/SCALARLINEARSURFACE
mn
1
CorrectiveControl:
c

2
5
EQUIVALENTCONTROL
Motiontangenttotheswitchingsurface
cq
-1
Equivalentdynamics(onthesurface)
-1
2
6
EQUIVALENTCONTROL :
LINEARSYSTEM/LINEARSURFACE
mn
Motiontangenttotheswitchingsurface
EquivalentControl:
eq
-1
SlidingModeDynamics(equivalentsystem):order
zeroeigenvalues
-1
Constraint:
2
7
POLEPLACEMENTDESIGN
LinearDynamics
Similaritytransformation
-1
1 2 1
n-m
2
m
1 11 1 12 2
2 21 1 22 2 2
2
mm
nonsingular
2
8
LEMMA:CONTROLLABILITY
If iscontrollablethen
11 12
is
controllable.
Proof:Controllabilityisinvariantunder
similaritytransformation,
11 12
21 22 2
2
11 12
2
9
LEMMA:CONTROLLABILITY
If iscontrollablethen
11 12
is
controllable.
Proof:Controllabilityisinvariantunder
similaritytransformation,
11 12
21 22 2
2
11 12
3
0
EQUIVALENTCONTROL
cq
-1
eq
-1
Usethetransformedsystem
2
1 2
11 12
21 22
eq 2 2
-1
1 11 2 21 1
1 12 2 22 2
2
-1 2
-1
1 11 21 1
2
-1
1 12 22 2
3
1
ONSWITCHINGSURFACE
2
1 2
11 12
21 22
eq 2
-1 2
-1
1 11 21 1
2
-1
1 12 22 2
1 1 2 2 2 2
-1
1 1
1 11 1 12 2 11 12 2
-1
1 1
Assign eigenvaluesusingpoleplacementtoselect
2
-1
1
andselectanynonsingular
2 2
Eigenvaluesinvariantundersimilaritytransformation
eq 2 2
-1
1 11 2 21 1 12 2 22
-1
3
2
EXAMPLE
z z
11 12
21 22
3
3
MATLAB
>>k=place(A11,A12,5)
k=
1.6000
3.2000
>>Ku=[k*A11+A21,k*A12+A22]/T
Ku=
1.20002.60001.4000
9.60003.20006.2000
>>eig(AB*Ku)
ans =
0.0000
5.0000
0
3
4
CHATTERING
Intheory,thetrajectoriesslidealongthe
switchingfunction.
Inpractice,thereishigh frequencyswitching.
Occursinthevicinityoftheswitchingsurface
duetononidealswitchinge.g.delays,
hysteresis,etc.
Calledchatteringbecauseofthesoundmade
byoldmechanicalswitches.
3
5
EXAMPLE(SLOTINE)
1 2
2
ModelUncertainty
2 1 1
2 1 1 1 2
1 2
3
6
SLIDINGCONDITION
1 2
1 2
Choose
3
7
EXAMPLE(KHALIL)
1 2
2
unknown
0
2
Designastatefeedbacklawthat
stabilizestheorigin.
3
8
SLIDINGMANIFOLD
Constrainthesystemtothesurface
(manifold)
1 2
Motiononmanifold
1 2 1
Stablefor forany .
Drivethetrajectoriestothesurfaceand
maintainthemonit.
3
9
LYAPUNOVFUNCTION
2
1 1 2
1 2
2
2

2
4
0
SLIDINGMODECONTROL
Assume
2
2
2
0 0
>0
0 0 0
4
1
COMPARISONPRINCIPLE
0 0
satisfies
+
0 0
0 0
Decreasestillitreachesitsminimum( )
Themanifold isreachedinfinitetime.
Staystherebecause
0 0
4
2
CONSTANTBOUND
Assume
1
,i.e.
2
1
2
1
(relay)
Relayleadstoafiniteregionofattraction
(invariantset)
4
3
REGIONOFATTRACTION
(invariantset)
1 2 1
1 1
2
1 1 1 1
2
1
1
2
1 1
1 1
Invariantset
1
c
u
4
4
TRAJECTORIESIN
Trajectoriesapproachtheinvariantset
1
c
u
Insidetheinvariantset,trajectories
approach if
2
1
4
5
REGIONOFATTRACTION
4
6
5 0 5
-4
-3
-2
-1
0
1
2
3
4
-5 -3 -1 1 3 5
SPECIFICSYSTEM:PENDULUM
1 2
2 1 2
1 2
2
2 1 2
2 1 1
Let
2 1
Simulatethesystemassumingnegligibleswitching
delays.
4
7
SIMULATIONDIAGRAM
4
8
NOSWITCHINGDELAYS
4
9
0 0.5 1 1.5 2
-2.5
-2
-1.5
-1
-0.5
0
SWITCHINGDELAYS
Chattering:highfrequencyswitching.
Occursinthevicinityoftheswitchingsurface
duetoswitchingdelays.
Iftherelayswitchestopositivefromnegativeat
andfromnegativetopositiveat ,
thesystemexhibitschatteringbehavior.
5
0
CHATTERING(SWITCH
5
1
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
-1.6
-1.4
-1.2
-1
-0.8
-0.6
-0.4
-0.2
0
0.2
REDUCINGCHATTERING
Addacontinuouscontrolcomponent
Changethesgn(.)functiontosat(.):linear
controlinsideaboundarylayerofwidth

5
2
EXAMPLE
Addacontinuouscontrolcomponent
Changethesgn(.)functiontosat(.):linear
controlinsideaboundarylayerofwidth
5
3
SWITCHINGDELAY0.1
5
4
-0.2 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
-1.6
-1.4
-1.2
-1
-0.8
-0.6
-0.4
-0.2
0
0.2
Ultimatelybounded
butdoesnotconverge
totheorigin.
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
-1.6
-1.4
-1.2
-1
-0.8
-0.6
-0.4
-0.2
0
0.2
With signum function
5
5
SlidingModeControlis
DETERMINISTIC(only bounds ofvariations are
considered)
NONLINEAR(the corrective term isnonlinear)
ROBUST (onceontheslidingsurface,thesystemis
robusttoBOUNDEDPARAMETERSVARIATIONSand
BOUNDEDDISTURBANCES)
Switchingfunctiondesignandcontrollawdesign
determinetheperformance.
Althoughchatteringisaproblem,variousmethods
areavailableformitigatingoreliminatingit.
CONCLUSION
REFERENCES
1. R.A.DeCarlo,S.H.Zak,andG.P.Mathews,Variable
StructureControlofNonlinearMultivariableSystems:A
Tutorial,ProceedingsIEEE,Vol.76,No.3,March1988.
2. H.Khalil,NonlinearSystems,PrenticeHall,UpperSaddle
River,NJ,2003.
3. J.J.Slotine andW.Li,AppliedNonlinearControl,Prentice
Hall,EnglewoodCliffs,NJ,1991.
4. KarKeungYoung,P.Kokotovic,andV.Utkin,Asingular
perturbationanalysisofhighgainfeedbacksystems,IEEE
Trans.Automat.Contr.,Vol.22,No.6,pp931938,1977.
5. S.H.Zak,SystemsandControl,OxfordUniv.Press,NY,2003.
5
6