Skip to main content
Log in

Iterative identification and control design with optimal excitation signals based on υ-gap

  • Special Focus
  • Published:
Science in China Series F: Information Sciences Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

An iterative identification and control design method based on υ-gap is given to ensure the stability of closed-loop system and control performance improvement. The whole iterative procedure includes three parts: the optimal excitation signals design, the uncertainty model set identification and the stable controller design. Firstly the worst case υ-gap is used as the criterion of the optimal excitation signals design, and the design is performed via the power spectrum optimization. And then, an uncertainty model set is attained by system identification on the basis of the measure signals. The controller is designed to ensure the stability of closed-loop system and the closed-loop performance improvement. Simulation result shows that the proposed method has good convergence and closed-loop control performance.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Lecchini A, Lanzon A, Anderson B D O. A model reference approach to safe controller changers in iterative identification and control. Automatica, 2006, 42(2): 193–203

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  2. Bazanella S, Gevers M, Mickovic L. Iterative minimization of H 2 control performance criteria. Automatica, 2008, 44(10): 2549–2559

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  3. Hjalmarsson H, Jansson H. Closed loop experiment design for linear time invariant dynamical systems via LMIs. Automatica, 2008, 44(3): 623–636

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Bitmead R, Zang Z. An iterative identification and control strategy. In: Proceedings of European Control Conference, Grenoble, France: EUCA, 1991. 1395–1400

    Google Scholar 

  5. Partanen A G, Bitmead R. The application of an iterative identification and controller design to a sugar cane crushing mill. Automatica, 1995, 31(8): 1547–1563

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  6. Callafon R A DE, Van Den Hof P M J. Suboptimal feedback control by a scheme of iterative identification and control design. Math Model Syst, 1997, 3(1): 77–101

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  7. Holmberg U, Valentinotti S, Bonvin D. An identification for control procedure with robust performance. Contr Eng Pract, 2000, 8(10): 1107–1117

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Date P, Lanzon A. A combined iterative scheme for identification and control redesigns. Int J Adapt Control Signal Proc, 2004, 18(8): 629–644

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  9. Li T, Georgakis C. Dynamic input signal design for the identification of constrained systems. J Proc Control, 2008, 18(3-4): 332–346

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Lindqvist K, Hjalmarsson H. Identification for control: adaptive input design using convex optimization. In: Proceedings of the 40th IEEE Conference on Decision and Control, Oriando, Florida USA, 2001. 4326–4331

  11. Jansson H, Hjalmarsson H. Input design via LMIs admitting frequency-wise model specifications in confidence regions. IEEE Trans Autom Control, 2005, 50(10): 1534–1549

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  12. Bombois X, Scorletti G, Gevers M, et al. Least costly identification experiment for control. Automatica, 2006, 42(10): 1651–1662

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  13. Vinnicombe G. Frequency domain uncertainty and the graph topology. IEEE Trans Autom Control, 1993, 38(9): 1371–1383

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  14. Gevers M, Bombois X, Codrons B. Model validation for control and controller validation in a prediction error identification framework. Part II: Illustrations. Automatica, 2003, 39(3): 417–427

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  15. Bombois X. Connecting prediction error identification and robust control analysis: A new framework. Dissertation for Doctoral Degree. Belgium: University of Catholique de Louvain, 2000. 42–50

    Google Scholar 

  16. Hildebrand R, Gevers M. Minimizing the worst-case υ-gap by optimal input design. In: Proceedings of 13th IFAC Symposium on System Identification, Rotterdam, The Netherlands, 2003. 665–670

  17. Zong Q, Dou L Q, Sun L K. Iterative excitation signal design for closed-loop system identification (in Chinese). Syst Eng Electr, 2008, 30(8): 1530–1534

    Google Scholar 

  18. Jansson H. Experiment design with applications in identification for control. Dissertation for Doctoral Degree. Sweden: Royal Institute of Technology, 2004. 152–165

    Google Scholar 

  19. Dehghani A, Lanzon A, Anderson B D O. An H algorithm for the windsurfer approach to adaptive robust control. Int J Adapt Control Signal Proc, 2004, 18(8): 607–626

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to LiQian Dou.

Additional information

Supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (Grant Nos. 60574055, 60874073), the Specialized Research Fund for Doctoral Program of Higher Education of China (Grant No. 20050056037), and the Tianjin Science and Technology Keystone Project (Grant No. 08ZCKFJC27900)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Dou, L., Zong, Q., Zhao, Z. et al. Iterative identification and control design with optimal excitation signals based on υ-gap. Sci. China Ser. F-Inf. Sci. 52, 1120–1128 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11432-009-0105-x

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11432-009-0105-x

Keywords

Navigation