Professional Documents
Culture Documents
dynamical systems
The MIT Faculty has made this article openly available. Please share
how this access benefits you. Your story matters.
x s x x = Ms
and 1 j ~2 j 21 (~ + ~1 + ~2 )2 f in g, by multi-
jectory reaches a resetting set. A sufficient condition for finite-time stability
s x x = Ms
of SD-IDLS is provided. -procedure arguments are exploited to obtain a
plying by j ~ + ~1 + ~2 j f in g 1. Substituting into formulation of this sufficient condition which is numerically tractable by
=
(31), noting that 1 1 f2 2 g, and grouping terms gives means of Differential Linear Matrix Inequalities. Since such a formulation
V W s; ; Z W s; ;
2
2 0 3 (~ ~1 ~2 ) + 1 2 ~ 0 4 (~ ~1 ~2 ) where 2 is
may be in general more conservative, a procedure which permits to au-
tomate its verification, without introduce conservatism, is given both for
now as in Remark 4.
s x x Ms
second order systems, and when the resetting set is ellipsoidal.
Case 2M: If j ~+ ~1 + ~2 j in , then a slight variant of the proof
s x x Ms
of Lemma 3 gives j ~j + j ~1 j + j ~2 j (2+ ) in . Therefore, (31) gives
Index Terms—Finite-time stability (FTS), state-dependent impulsive dy-
V W s; ; C C C
_ 2 0 4 (~ ~1 ~2 ) + 3 1 where 3 is now redefined to be 3 =
namical linear systems (SD-IDLS).
C M M s MC x =x M s
2 1 + 2 (2+ ) in 2
+[2 2 1 + f +( 1? 2? ) g(2+ )] in .
The rest of the proof is exactly as before, because we again have (32). I. INTRODUCTION
Authorized licensed use limited to: MIT Libraries. Downloaded on November 16, 2009 at 15:05 from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
862 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON AUTOMATIC CONTROL, VOL. 54, NO. 4, APRIL 2009
asymptotic stability for hybrid systems have been proposed in the lit-
erature (see for instance [6], [7] and references therein).
In this note, as in [8] and [9], we exploit S -procedure arguments [10],
in order to end up with numerically tractable analysis conditions for-
mulated as DLMIs. The main result of the present work is a sufficient
condition which guarantees the FTS of a given SD-IDLS. Moreover it
is shown that, either in presence of second order systems or when the
resetting set is ellipsoidal, the S -procedure does not introduce conser-
vatism in the FTS analysis.
For the sake of completeness, it should be noticed that a more re-
cent notion of finite-time stability, which is strictly related to LAS,
has been given in [11] for continuous autonomous systems and in [12]
for nonlinear impulsive dynamical systems. This different concept of
finite-time stability requires convergence of system trajectories to an
equilibrium state in finite-time. Hence, the notion in [12] is unrelated
to the notion of FTS here adopted, since the former implies LAS and
does not require to specify any bounding regions nor the time interval. Fig. 1. Example of evolution of a state-dependent impulsive dynamical linear
The present work is structured as follows: the next section presents system. The trajectory starts inside the sphere defined by a positive definite
matrix , and remains inside the sphere defined by a positive definite matrix
the notation, the class of state-dependent impulsive dynamical linear 0, [ + ]. When the trajectory reaches one of the two resetting
systems, together with some preliminary results exploited throughout sets the state jumps.
this note. The main results are given in Section III, while in Section IV
the conservatism introduced by the S -procedure is discussed, and two
procedures are presented to reduce such conservatism. The applica- }
bility of the proposed results is illustrated in Section V through a nu- Fig. 1 shows an example of FTS trajectory.
merical example. Remark 1: If a system is finite-time stable in the sense of [12],
its state trajectory is confined in an open neighborhood of the origin
II. PRELIMINARIES (moreover it converges to zero in finite-time and the origin is Lyapunov
stable). Neither the bounding region (denoted by N in [12]) nor the
The notation used throughout this note is presented in this section,
time interval, however, can be prespecified, as in the FTS definition
together with the FTS problem statement for SD-IDLS. Preliminary
given above. }
results on quadratic forms are also provided.
B. Some Useful Definitions
A. Problem Statement
The following definitions will be useful throughout this note.
Let us consider the time-varying SD-IDLS described by Definition 2 (Conical Hull [13], p. 28): Given a set S n , the set
N
x_ (t) = A(t)x(t); x(t0 ) = x0 ; x(t) 2 n n Sk (1a) cone( S ) := f1 x1 + . . . + k xk : fx1 ; . . . ; xk g S ; i 0g
k=1
is said to be the conical hull of S [13]. The notation cone(0S ) denotes
x(t+ ) = Ad;k x(t); x(t) 2 Sk ; k = 1; . . . ; N (1b)
the set
where A(1) : + n2n , A n2n , k = 1; . . . ; N . The sets
0 7! d;k 2 cone( 0S ) := f1 x1 + . . .+ k xk : fx1 ; . . . ; xk g S ; i 0g :
Sk n , k = 1; . . . ; N , are connected and closed pairwise disjoint
sets (i.e. Si \ Sj = ;, 8i 6= j ), such that 0 62 Sk . We refer to the }
differential (1a) as the time-varying continuous-time dynamics, to the Definition 3 (Projection wrt the Origin): Consider a hyper-surface
difference (1b) as the resetting laws, and to the sets Sk as the resetting H n and a set S n . The projection of S on H with respect to
sets [6]. If x(1) is a solution of (1a), (1b), it is then possible to define the origin is defined as
the correspondent resetting times set as follows:
SH := fy 2 H : y = x; 2 ; x 2 Sg :
Tx(1) = t 2 +
0 jx(t) 2 Sk ; k = 1; . . . ; N : }
The projection wrt the origin is a perspective projection, where the
It turns out that x(1) is left-continuous, i.e. it is continuous 8 t 62 Tx(1) point of perspective is the origin of the state space, and the projection
and x(t) = lim !t x( ), 8 t 2 Tx(1) . In order to guarantee the well- surface is the hyper-surface H .
posedness of the resetting times we make the following assumption,
which prevents x(1) from intersecting the interior of the resetting sets. C. Preliminary Results on Quadratic Forms
Assumption 1: For all t 2 + 0 : x(t) 2 Sk , k = 1; . . . ; N , 9 " > As it will be shown later, the main result of this work requires to
0 : x(t + ) 62
k Sk , 8 2 (0; "]. } check whether, given a connected and closed set S n and a sym-
Definition 1 (FTS of SD-IDLS): Given an initial time t0 , a positive metric matrix Q0 2 n2n , the inequality
scalar T , a positive definite matrix R, a positive definite matrix-valued
function 0(1) defined over [0; T ], with 0(0) < R, system (1) is said to
be finite-time stable with respect to (t0 ; T; R; 0(1)) if xT Q0 x < 0; x 2 S n f0g (2)
Authorized licensed use limited to: MIT Libraries. Downloaded on November 16, 2009 at 15:05 from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON AUTOMATIC CONTROL, VOL. 54, NO. 4, APRIL 2009 863
The following theorem gives a sufficient condition for FTS of system P (t0 ) < R (7d)
(1). then the SD-IDLS (1) is FTS wrt (t0 ; T; R; 0(1)).
Theorem 1: The SD-IDLS (1) is FTS wrt ( 0 t ; T; R;
0(1)) if the fol- Remark 2: In view of the results given in Theorem 2, it is now pos-
lowing coupled differential/difference Lyapunov inequalities with ter- sible to clarify the usefulness of the formulation introduced in Problem
minal and initial conditions: 1. Such formulation, indeed, allows us to replace condition (5b) with
P_ (t) + A(t)T P (t) + P (t)A(t) < 0 (5a) condition (7b). Note that in principle the former requires to solve an
infinite number of time-varying inequalities over the sets Sk , the latter
xT ATd;k P (t)Ad;k 0 P (t) x < 0 is just a set of LMIs, which can be easily solved in an efficient way. }
8x 2 Sk ; k = 1; . . . ; N (5b)
P (t) 0(t 0 t0 ) (5c) IV. ANALYSIS OF SOME CASES OF INTEREST
P (t0 ) < R (5d) Theorem 2 may introduce conservatism with respect to Theorem 1
since, in general, the S -procedure is lossy. However, if for every reset-
admit a continuously differentiable symmetric solution P (1) over the Q
ting set Sk there exists a symmetric matrix k which satisfies condi-
t ;t
interval [ 0 0 + ]. T tions (4), then Theorem 2 is equivalent to Theorem 1. In this section
Authorized licensed use limited to: MIT Libraries. Downloaded on November 16, 2009 at 15:05 from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
864 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON AUTOMATIC CONTROL, VOL. 54, NO. 4, APRIL 2009
0 r)T ;
structive geometrical procedure.
Procedure 1 (Construction of EH ): Given a connected and closed
0s = (0 ... r2 :
set S n , construct the set EH as follows: • The hyper-plane H is orthogonal to the n-th coordinated axis.
1) denote with Ss the projection, with respect to the origin, of S on As a matter of fact, it is always possible, by means of opportune ro-
the unit sphere xT x = 1; tations, to satisfy these assumptions. In view of the assumptions made
2) denote with 0s the Chebyshev center of Ss ;1 above, it is possible to describe the set @EH by the two equations
3) denote with H the hyper-plane of dimension n 0 1 orthogonal to
x21 x2
the line that joins the origin to 0s , and such that 0s 2 H ; + . . . + 2n01 = 1; xn = r
4) EH is the projection, with respect to the origin, of S on the hyper- a1
2 an01
plane H .
where ai 0, i = 1; . . . ; n0 1. It is then straightforward to check that
An example of construction of the set EH is shown in Fig. 2. }
the following matrix Q = diag(1=a12 . . . 1=an 2
01 0 (1=r2 )), satisfies
Definition 4 (Ellipsoidal Resetting Set): Consider a non-trivial re-
setting set S n and construct the set EH using Procedure 1. If EH
conditions (9).
is an hyper-ellipsoid of dimension n 0 1, then S is called ellipsoidal
V. EXAMPLE
resetting set. }
Remark 3: Since EH is constructed using two projections with re- The following example illustrate the effectiveness of the proposed
spect to the origin it follows that cone(S ) = cone(EH ). } procedure. Let consider the second order SD-IDLS defined by the fol-
lowing matrices:
A. Resetting set S in 2 0 1 1:2 0
A= ; Ad;1 = ;
The following theorem provides a necessary and sufficient condition 01 + 0:3 sin 10t 0:5 0 00:75
which enables to find a symmetric matrix Q 2 222 that verifies con- 00:72 0:16
Ad;2 =
ditions (4). 0:13 00:78
Theorem 3: Every non-trivial resetting set S in 2 admits a sym-
metric matrix Q 2 222 that verifies conditions (4).
where the two resetting sets S1 and S2 are given by
Proof: To prove our statement, we provide a procedure to calcu- 00:4 0:8
late a matrix Q satisfying conditions (4). Let s1 ; s2 2 S such that, said S1 = conv ; ;
0:6 0:7
S = conv(fs1 ; s2 g), we have2 cone(S) = cone(S ). Then, taking into
account Lemma 1, condition (4) can be equivalently evaluated on the 00:8 0:4
S2 = conv ; :
set S. In particular, considering the properties of the quadratic forms, it 00:3 00:6
is easy to verify that such condition can be replaced by the following:
Note that the continuous dynamic is unstable, while the discrete dy-
xT Qx < 0 8x 2 int(S) (8a) namic Ad;1 is not Schur stable.3 We want to analyze the FTS for such
xT Qx = 0 for x = s1 ; s2 (8b) impulsive system, for t0 = 5 s, T = 2:5 s, and
xT Qx > 0 8x 2 H n S: (8c)
0:20 00:10 7:5 4:5
1The 0= ; R= :
Chebyshev center of a set
0 := arg min (max
is defined as
). 00:10 0:18 4:5 9:0
2Given a set of points = ... , conv( ) de- 3A matrix is said to be Schur stable if all the roots of its characteristic poly-
notes the convex hull of , i.e. the smallest convex set containing [13]. nomial lie in the open unit disk.
Authorized licensed use limited to: MIT Libraries. Downloaded on November 16, 2009 at 15:05 from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON AUTOMATIC CONTROL, VOL. 54, NO. 4, APRIL 2009 865
for each resetting set, which is not a straightforward task. To deal with
these problems, a procedure which allows us to automate the building
of the symmetric matrices, without introducing conservatism, is pro-
vided both for ellipsoidal resetting sets in n and when we deal with
second order systems.
APPENDIX
The two results presented in this appendix are needed to prove
Lemma 1 in Section II.
Lemma 2: Consider a nonempty, connected and closed set S n
and a symmetric matrix Q0 2 n2n ; then (2) is satisfied if and only if
P0 +21 (t 0 t0 ); t 2 [t0 ; t0 + Ts ], then condition (11) holds. It is not trivial that when p = 1, the converse
P (t) = 0 P +
j
2
h=1 h s T holds, provided that
+2j +1 (t 0 jTs 0 t0 ); t 2 ]t0 + jTs ; t0 +(j +1)Ts ]
j = 1; . . . ; J 9~x such that x~T Qx~ < 0: (12)
Authorized licensed use limited to: MIT Libraries. Downloaded on November 16, 2009 at 15:05 from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.