-
摘要: 频率合成源是射频发生和频谱分析中最重要的组成之一，评价合成源性能指标的是输出信号的相位噪声、杂散、频率分辨率和频率切换时间.本文通过分析传统锁相环原理，提出一种通用的超低相位噪声合成源设计方案（带宽100MHz以内）.在锁相环基础上，通过引入直接数字合成（Direct digital synthesizer，DDS）混频鉴相技术，使得到的射频信号理论值达到0.1mHz的频率分辨率，同时将带内相位噪声指标优化17dB以上.新方案同时兼顾了杂散和频率切换时间指标，保障合成源的输出信号稳定可靠，使其在自动测试领域拥有广阔的应用前景.Abstract: Frequency synthesizer is one of the most important component of RF generator and spectrum analysis. The performance of its output signal is evaluated in terms of phase noise, scattering, frequency resolution and frequency hopping time. By analyzing the traditional theory of phase-locked loop, a ultralow-phase-noise scheme for the frequency synthesizer is put forward (bandwidth within 100MHz). In order to make the frequency resolution of the output signal reach to 0.1mHz in theory and optimize the in-band phase noise cver 17dB, direct digital synthesizer (DDS) and mixer phase detection technology based on phase-locked loop are introduced. Consideration is also given to both scattering and frequency hopping time to ensure the output signal is stable and reliable. The synthesizer has a good application in the field of automatic test.
-
Key words:
- Frequency synthesizer /
- phase-locked loop /
- high resolution /
- ultralow phase noise
-
1. Introduction
Since recent few decades, some researchers focus their energy on the robust stability and controller design problems about the networked-control systems (NCSs) with some uncertain parameters because some networked-control systems have been succeeded in applications in modern complicated industry processes, e.g., aircraft and space shuttle, nuclear power stations, high-performance automobiles, etc. The fuzzy-logic control based on the Takagi-Sugeno (T-S) is widely used to dealing with complex nonlinear systems because it has simple dynamic structure and highly accurate approximation to any smooth nonlinear function in any compact set. One can consult [1]$-$[8] and the other cited literature therein [9]$-$[31]. Data-packet dropout is an important issue to be addressed in the networked-control systems [6], [32]. Zhang [33] solves the problem of $H_\infty$ estimation for a class of Markov jump linear systems but he neglect possible dropout in practice. Reference [34] reports the problem of $H_\infty$ stability of discrete-time switched linear system with average dwell time and with no dropout. In [6], piecewise Lyapunov function is proposed to analyze robust of the nonlinear NCSs without time-delay issue. Random data-packet dropout and time delay are well considered but the controlled NCSs are linear systems in [32]. Reference [8] discusses the problem of robust $H_\infty$ output feedback control for a class of continuous-time Takagi-Sugeno (T-S) fuzzy affine dynamic systems with parametric uncertainties and input constraints on ignoring some nonlinearities induced by system with data-packet dropout and random time delay. Reference [5] investigates the robust $H_\infty$ stability of a class of half nonlinear NCSs with multiple probabilistic delays and multiple missing measurements regardless of the dropout in the forward path. According to above consideration, we investigate a class of new nonlinear NCSs, in which not only sensors communicate with controllers by network but also controllers do with actuator in the same manner.
The highlights of this paper, which lie primarily on the new research problems and new system models, are summarized as follows:
1) A new model is established, in which the controllers communicate with the actuator by a wireless network and the random missing control from the controller to the actuator occurs and the sensors do with the controllers in the same manner.
2) The investigation on the T-S fuzzy model is used for a class of complex systems that describe the modeling errors, disturbance rejection attenuation, probabilistic delay, missing measurements and missing control within the same framework.
The rest of this paper is organized as follows. The problem under consideration is formulated in Section 2. Development of robust $H_{\infty}$ fuzzy control performance on the exponentially stability the closed-loop fuzzy system are placed in Section 3. Section 4 gives design of robust $H_\infty$ fuzzy controller. An illustrative example is given in Section 5, and we conclude the paper in Section 6.
Notation 1: The notation used in the paper is fairly standard. %The superscript "T" stands for matrix transpose; $\mathbb{R}^n$ denotes the $n$-dimensional real vectors; $\mathbb{R}^{m\times n}$ denotes the $n$-dimensional matrix; and $I$ and 0 represent the identity matrix and zero matrix, respectively. The notation $P>0$ ($P\geq 0$) means that $P$ is real symmetric and positive definite (semi-definite), ${\rm tr}(M)$ refers to the trace of the matrix $M$, and $ \|\cdot\|_2 $ stands for the usual $l_2$ norm. In symmetric block matrices or complex matrix expressions, we use an "$\star$" to represent a term that is induced by symmetry, and ${\rm diag}\{\cdots\}$ stands for a block-diagonal matrix. In addition, ${E}\{x\}$ and ${E}\{x|y\}$ will, respectively, mean expectation of $x$ and expectation of $x $ conditional on $y$.
2. Problem Formulation
In this note, the output feedback control problem for discrete-time fuzzy systems in NCSs is taken in our consideration, where the frame-work is depicted in Fig. 1.
图 1 Framework of output feedback control systems over network environment.Fig. 1 Framework of output feedback control systems over network environment.The sensors are connected to a network, which are shared by other NCSs and susceptible to communication delays and missing measurements or pack dropouts). As Fig. 1 depicts, pack dropouts from the controller to actuator can take place stochastically. The fuzzy systems with multiple stochastic communication delays and uncertain parameters can be read as follows:
Plant Rule $i$: If $\theta_{1}(k) $ is $ M_{i1}$, and $\theta_{2}(k)$ is $M_{i2}$, and, $\ldots$, and $\theta_{p}(k)$ is $M_{ip}$, then
$ \begin{align} x(k+1)=&\ A_i(k)x(k)+A_{di}\sum\limits_{m=1}^{h}\alpha_m(k)x(k-\tau_m(k))\notag\\ & +B_{1i}u(k)+D_{1i}v(k)\notag\\ \tilde{y}(k)=&\ C_ix(k)+D_{1i}v(k)\notag\\ z(k)=&\ C_{zi}(k)+B_{2i}u(k)+D_{3i}v(k)\notag\\ x(k)=&\ \phi(k)\quad\forall\, {k}\in \mathbb{Z}^{-}, ~\, i=1, \ldots, r \end{align} $
(1) where $M_{ij}$ is the fuzzy set, $r$ stands for the number of If-then rules, and $\theta(k)=[\theta_1(k), \theta_2(k), \ldots, \theta_{p}(k)]$ is the premise variable vector, which is independent of the input variable $u(k)$. $x(k)\in \mathbb{R}^n$ is the state vector, $u(k)\in \mathbb{R}^m$, $\tilde{y}$ $\in$ $\mathbb{R}^s$ is the process output, $z(k)\in \mathbb{R}^q$ is the controlled output, $v(k)\in \mathbb{R}^p$ presents a vector of exogenous inputs, which belongs to $l_2[0, \infty)$, $\tau_m(k)$ $(m=1, 2, \ldots, h)$ are the communication delays that vary with the stochastic variables $\alpha_m(k)$, and $\phi(k)$ $(\forall\, {k}\in \mathbb{Z}^{-})$ is the initial state.
The stochastic variables $\alpha_m(k)\in \mathbb{R}$ $(m=1, 2, \ldots, h)$ in (1) are assumed to satisfy mutually uncorrelated Bernoulli-distributed-white sequences described as follows:
$ \begin{align} & {\rm Prob}\{\alpha_m(k)=1\}={E}\{\alpha_m(k)\}=\bar{\alpha}_m\notag\\ & {\rm Prob}\{\alpha_m(k)=0\}=1-\bar{\alpha}_m.\notag \end{align} $
In this note, one can make the random communication-time delays satisfy the following assumption that the time-varying $\tau_m(k)$ $ (m=1, 2, \ldots, h)$ are subject to $ d_t\leq \tau_m(k)$ $\leq$ $d_T$. The matrices $A_i(k)=A_i+\Delta{A_i(k)}$, $C_{zi}(k)= C_{zi}$ $+$ $\Delta{C_{zi}}(k)$, where $ A_i, A_{di}, B_{1i}, B_{2i}, C_i, C_{zi}, D_{1i}, D_{2i}$, and $D_{3i}$ are known constant matrices with compatible dimensions. $\Delta{A_i(k)} $ and $\Delta C_{zi}(k)$ with the time-varying norm-bounded uncertainties satisfy
$ \begin{align} \left[ \begin{array}{c} \Delta A_i(k)\\ \Delta C_{zi}(k)\\ \end{array} \right]=\left[ \begin{array}{c} H_{ai}\\ H_{ci}\\ \end{array} \right]F(k)E \end{align} $
(2) with $H_{ai}$, $H_{ci}$ being constant matrices and $F^T(k)F(k)\leq I$, $\forall\, {k}$.
In this note, the packet dropout (the miss-measurement) read as
$ \begin{align} y_c(k)&= \Xi{C_i}x(k)+D_{2i}(k)\notag\\ &=\sum\limits_{l=1}^{s}\beta_lC_{il}x(k)+D_{2i}v(k)\notag\\ u(k)&=W(k)u_c(k)=W(k)C_{ki}x_c(k) \end{align} $
(3) where $\Xi=\hbox{diag}\{\beta_1, \ldots, \beta_s\}$ with $\beta_l$ $(l=1, 2, \ldots, s)$ being $s$ unrelated random variables, which are also unrelated with $\alpha_m(k)$ and $W(k)$ denoting the random packet missing from the controllers to the actuator. One can assume that $\beta_l $ has the probabilistic-density function $q_l(s)$ $(l=1, 2, \ldots, s)$ on the interval $[0, 1]$ with mathematical expectation $\mu_l$ and variance $\sigma_l^2$. $C_{il}={\rm diag}\{\underbrace{0, \ldots, 0}\limits_{l-1}, 1, \underbrace{0, \ldots, 0}\limits_{s-l}\}C_i$. We denote the stochastic pack dropouts from the controller to the actuator by $W(k)= {\rm diag}\{\omega_1(k), \ldots, \omega_m(k)\}$, where $\omega_l$ $(l=$ $1, 2, \ldots, m)$ are mutually unrelated random variables and obey Bernoulli distribution with mathematical expectation $\bar{\omega}_l$ and variance$\rho_l $and assumed to be unrelated with $\alpha_m(k)$. For a given pair of $(x(k), u(k))$, the final output of the fuzzy system is read as
$ \begin{align} x(k+1)=&\, \sum\limits_{i=1}^{r}h_i(\theta(k))[A_i(k)x(k)+B_{1, i}u(k)\notag\\ &\, +A_{di}\sum\limits_{m=1}^{h}x(k-\tau_m(k))+D_{1i}v(k)]\notag\\ y_c(k)=&\, \sum\limits_{i=1}^{r}h_i(\theta(k))[\Xi{C_i}x(k)+D_{2i}v(k)]\notag\\ z(k)=&\, \sum\limits_{i=1}^{r}h_i(\theta(k))[C_{zi}(k)x(k)+B_{2i}u(k)+D_{3i}v(k)] \end{align} $
(4) where the fuzzy-basis functions are described as
$ \begin{align} &{h_i(\theta(k))}=\frac {\vartheta_i(\theta(k))} {\sum\limits_{i=1}^{r}\vartheta_i(\theta(k))}\notag\\ &\vartheta_i(\theta(k))=\prod\limits_{j=1}^{p}M_{ij}(\theta_j(k))\notag \end{align} $
with $M_{ij}(\theta_j(k))$ being the grade of membership of $\theta_j(k)$ in $M_{ij}$. It is clear that $\vartheta_i(\theta(k))\geq 0$, $i=1, 2, \ldots, r$, $\sum_{i=1}^{r}\vartheta_i(\theta(k))>0$, $\forall\, {k}$, and $h_i(\theta(k))\geq 0$, $i=1, 2, \ldots, r$, $\sum_{i=1}^{r}h_i(\theta(k))=1$, $\forall\, {k}$. In the sequel, we denote $h_i=h_i(\theta(k))$ for brevity.
In the note, the fuzzy dynamic output-feedback controller for the fuzzy system (4) is given as
Controller Rule $i$: If $\theta_1(k)$ is $M_{il}$ and $\theta_2(k)$ is $M_{i2}$ and, $\ldots$, and $\theta_p(k)$ is $M_{ip}$ then
$ \begin{align} \begin{cases} x_c(k+1)=A_{ki}x_c(k)+B_{ki}y_c(k)\\ u(k)= W(k)C_{ki}x_c(k) \end{cases} \end{align} $
(5) with $x_c(k)\in \mathbb{R}^n$ being the controller state along with the controller parameters $A_{ki}$, $B_{ki}$ and $C_{ki}$ to be determined. Naturally, the overall fuzzy output-feedback controller is read as
$ \begin{align} \begin{cases} x_c(k+1)=\sum\limits_{i=1}^{r}h_i[A_{ki}x_c(k)+B_{ki}y(k)]\\ u(k)=\sum\limits_{i=1}^{r}h_iW(k)C_{ki}x_c(k), \ \ i=1, 2, \ldots, r. \end{cases} \end{align} $
(6) Combining (6) with (4), we can obtain the closed-loop system described as
$ \begin{align} \begin{cases} \bar{x}(k+1)=\sum\limits_{i-1}^{r}\sum\limits_{j=1}^{r}h_ih_j[(A_{ij}+B_{ij})\bar{x}(k)+D_{ij}v(k) \\ \qquad \qquad \quad\, +\sum\limits_{m=1}^{h}(\bar{A}_{dmi}+\tilde{A}_{dmi})\bar{x}(k-\tau_m(k)]\\ z(k)=\sum\limits_{i=1}^{r}\sum\limits_{j=1}^{r}h_ih_j[\bar{C}_{ij}(k)+\bar{\bar{C}}_{ij}]\bar{x}(k) +D_{3i}v(k) \end{cases} \end{align} $
(7) where
$ \begin{align*} &\bar{x}(k)=\left[ \begin{array}{c} x(k) \\ x_c(k) \\ \end{array} \right], \quad A_{ij}=\left[ \begin{array}{cc} A_i(k)&B_{1i}\bar{W}C_{kj} \\ B_{ki}\bar{\Xi}C_j&A_{ki} \\ \end{array} \right]\\[1mm] &B_{ij}=\left[ \begin{array}{cc} 0& B_{1i}\tilde{W}(k)C_{kj}\\ B_{ki}\tilde{\Xi}C_j& 0\\ \end{array} \right]\\[1mm] &\bar{A}_{dmi}=\left[ \begin{array}{cc} \bar{\alpha}_mA_{di}&0 \\ 0&0 \\ \end{array} \right], \quad \tilde{A}_{dmi}=\left[ \begin{array}{cc} \tilde{\alpha}_mA_{di}&0 \\ 0&0 \\ \end{array} \right]\\[1mm] &D_{ij}=\left[ \begin{array}{c} D_{1i} \\ B_{ki}D_{2j} \\ \end{array} \right], \quad \bar{C}_{ij}(k)=\bigg[ \begin{array}{cc} C_{zi}(k)&B_{2i}\bar{W}C_{kj} \\ \end{array} \bigg]\\[1mm] &\bar{\bar{C}}_{ij}(k)=\bigg[ \begin{array}{cc} 0&B_{2i}\tilde{W}(k)C_{kj} \\ \end{array} \bigg] \end{align*} $
with $\tilde{\alpha}_m(k)=\alpha_m(k)-\bar{\alpha}_m(k)$ and $\tilde{\omega}_j(k)={\omega}_j(k)-\bar{\omega}_j(k)$. It is evident that $E\{\tilde{\alpha}_m(k)\}=0$ and that $E\{\tilde{\omega}_j(k)\}=0$ and that $E\{\tilde{\alpha}_m^2(k)\}=\bar{\alpha}_m(1-\bar{\alpha}_m)=\sigma_m^2$ and that $E\{\tilde{\omega}_j^2(k)\}$ $=$ $\bar{\omega}_j(1-\bar{\omega}_j)=\rho_j^2$.
Denote
$ \begin{align*} &\bar{x}(k-\tau)\\ &=\left[ \!\!\begin{array}{cccc} \ \ \bar{x}^T(k-\tau_1(k)) &\!\bar{x}^T(k-\tau_2(k))&\! \cdots &\!\bar{x}^T(k-\tau_h(k))\ \ \\ \end{array} \!\!\right]^T\\ &\xi(k)=\left[ \begin{array}{ccc} \bar{x}^T(k)&\bar{x}^T(k-\tau) &v^T(k) \\ \end{array} \right]^T\end{align*} $
then (7) can also be rewritten as
$ \begin{align} \begin{cases} \bar{x}(k+1) =\sum\limits_{i=1}^{r}\sum\limits_{j=1}^{r}h_ih_j\left[A_{ij}\!+B_{ij}, \hat{Z}_{mi}\!+\Delta\hat{Z}_{mi}, D_{ij}\right]\xi(k) \\ z(k)=\sum\limits_{i=1}^{r}\sum\limits_{j=1}^{r}h_ih_j\left[\bar{C}_{ij}+ \bar{\bar{C}}_{ij}, 0, D_{3i}\right]\xi(k) \end{cases} \end{align} $
(8) where $\hat{Z}_{mi}=[\bar{A}_{d1i}, \ldots, \bar{A}_{dhi}]$ and $\Delta\hat{Z}_{mi}=[\tilde{A}_{d1i}, \ldots, \tilde{A}_{dhi}]$. In order to smoothly formulate the problem in the note, we introduce the following definition.
Definition 1: For the system (7) and every initial conditions $\phi$, the trivial solution is said to be exponentially mean square stable if, in the case of $v(k)=0$, there exist constants $\delta>0$ and $0<\kappa<1$ such that $E\{\|\bar{x}(k)\|^2\}$ $\leq$ $\delta\kappa^k \sup_{-d_M\leq i\leq 0}E\{\|{\phi(i)}\|^2\}$, $\forall\, {k}\geq 0$.
We will develop techniques to settle the robust $H_{\infty}$ dynamic output feedback problem for the discrete-time fuzzy system (7) subject to the following conditions:
1) The fuzzy system (7) is exponentially stable in the mean square.
2) Under zero-initial condition, the controlled output $z(k)$ satisfies
$ \begin{align} \sum\limits_{k=0}^{\infty}E\left\{\|{z(k)}\|^2\right\}\leq \gamma^2\sum\limits_{k=0}^{\infty}E\left\{\|{v(k)}\|^2\right\} \end{align} $
(9) for all nonzero $v(k)$, where $\gamma>0$ is a prescribed scalar.
Remark 1: The proposed new model has the function that not only the controllers communicate with the actuator by wireless but also the sensors do with the controllers by the same manner.
3. Development of Robust ${\pmb H}_{\pmb \infty}$ Fuzzy Control Performance
At first, we give the following lemma, which will be adopted in obtaining our main results.
Lemma 1 (Schur complement): Given constant matrices $S_1$, $S_2$, $S_3$, where $S_1=S_1^T$ and $0<S_2=S_2^T$, then $ S_1$ $+$ $S_3^TS_2^{-1}S_3$ $<$ $0$ if and only if
$ \begin{align*} \left[ \begin{array}{cc} S_1&S_3^T \\ S_3 &-S_2 \\ \end{array} \right]<0~~ \hbox{or}~~ \left[ \begin{array}{cc} -S_2&S_3 \\ S_3^T&S_1 \\ \end{array} \right]<0. \end{align*} $
Lemma 2 (S-procedure) [5]: Letting $L=L^T$ and $H$ and $E$ be real matrices of appropriate dimensions with $F$ satisfying $FF^T\leq I$, then $ L+HFE+E^TF^TH^T<0$ if and only if there exists a positive scalar $\varepsilon>0$ such that $L$ $+$ $\varepsilon^{-1}HH^T+\varepsilon E^TE<0$, or equivalently
$ \begin{align*} \left[ \begin{array}{ccc} L&H&\varepsilon{E^T} \\ H^T &-\varepsilon{I}&0 \\ \varepsilon{E}&0 &-\varepsilon{I} \\ \end{array} \right]<0. \end{align*} $
Lemma 3: For any real matrices $X_{ij}$ for $i$, $j=1, 2, \ldots, $ $r$ and $n>0$ with appropriate dimensions, we have [35]
$ \sum\limits_{i=1}^r\sum\limits_{j=1}^r\sum\limits_{l=1}^r\sum\limits_{l=1}^rh_ih_jh_kh_lX_{ij}^T\Lambda{X_{kl}}\leq\sum\limits_{i=1}^r\sum\limits_{j=1}^rh_ih_jX_{ij}^T\Lambda X_{ij}. $
Theorem 1: For given controller parameters and a prescribed $H_{\infty}$ performance $\gamma>0$, the nominal fuzzy system (7) is exponentially stable if there exist matrices $P>0$ and $Q_k$ $>$ $0$, $k=1, 2, \ldots, h$, satisfying
$ \left[ \begin{array}{cc} \Pi_i&\star \\ 0.5\Sigma_{ii}&\bigwedge \\ \end{array} \right]<0 $
(10) $ \left[ \begin{array}{cc} 4\Pi_i&\star \\ \Sigma_{ij}&\bigwedge \\ \end{array} \right]<0, \quad 1\leq i<j\leq r $
(11) where
$ \Pi_i =\ {\rm diag}\bigg\{-P+\sum\limits_{k=1}^h(d_T-d_t+1)Q_k, \hat{\alpha}\breve{A}_{di}^T\breve{P} \breve{A}_{di}\notag\\ \ \ \ \ \ \ -{\rm diag}\{Q_1, Q_2, \ldots, Q_h\}, -\gamma^2I\bigg\} $
(12) $\begin{align*} \hat{\alpha}=&\ {\rm diag}\left\{\bar{\alpha}_1(1-\bar{\alpha}_1), \ldots, \bar{\alpha}_h(1-\bar{\alpha}_h)\right\}\notag\\ \breve{A}_{di}=&\ {\rm diag}\{\underbrace{\hat{A}_{di}, \ldots, \hat{A}_{di}}\limits_h\}\notag\\ \check{C}_{ij}=&\ \left[\sigma_1\hat{C}_{11ij}^TP, \ldots\!, \sigma_s\hat{C}_{1sij}^TP, \rho_1\hat{C}_{k1ij}^TP, \ldots\!, \rho_m\hat{C}_{kmij}^TP\right]^T\notag\\ &\check{P}=\hbox{diag}\{\underbrace{P, \ldots, P}\limits_{s+m}\}\\ &{\small\bigwedge}=\hbox{diag}\{-\check{P}, -P, -I, \hbox{diag}\{\underbrace{-I, \ldots, -I}\limits_m\}\}\\ &\breve{P}=\hbox{diag}\{\underbrace{P, \ldots, P}\limits_h\}\\ &\hat{A}_{di}=\left[ \begin{array}{cc} A_{di}&0\\ 0&0\\ \end{array} \right] \\ &\Sigma_{ij}=\\ &\!\!\!\left[\!\!{\small \begin{array}{ccccc} \check{C}_{ij}\!+\!\check{C}_{ji}\! &\! 0\!&\!0 \\[2mm] PA_{ij}\!+\!PA_{ji} \! &\! P\hat{Z}_{mi}\!+\!P\hat{Z}_{mj} \! &\!PD_{ij}\!+\!PD_{ji}\\[2mm] \bar{C}_{ij}\!+\!\bar{C}_{ji}\! &\!0\! &\!D_{3i}\!+\!D_{3j}\\[2mm] \, [0 ~~ \rho_1B_{2i}C_{kj1}\!+\!\rho_1B_{2j}C_{ki1}] \! &\!0\! &\!0\\[2mm] \vdots\! &\!\vdots\! &\!\vdots\\[2mm] \, [0 ~~ \rho_mB_{2i}C_{kjm}\!+\!\rho_mB_{2j}C_{kim}]\! &\!0\! &\!0\\ \end{array}}\!\!\!\! \right]. \end{align*} $
Proof:
Let
$ \begin{align*} &\Theta_j(k)=\{x(k-\tau_j(k), x(k-\tau_j(k)+1, \ldots, x(k)\}\\ &\chi(k)=\{\Theta_1(k)\bigcup\Theta_2(k)\bigcup\ldots\bigcup\Theta_h(k)\}=\bigcup\limits_{j=1}^{h}\Theta_j(k) \end{align*} $
where $j=1, 2, \ldots, h$. We consider the following Lyapunov functional for the system of (7): $V(\chi(k))=\sum_{i=1}^3V_i(k)$, where
$ \begin{align*} &V_1(k)=\bar{x}^T(k)P\bar{x}\\ &V_2(k)=\sum\limits_{j=1}^{h}\sum\limits_{i=k-\tau_j(k)}^{k-1}\bar{x}^T(i)Q_j\bar{x}(i)\\ &V_3(k)=\sum\limits_{j=1}^h\sum\limits_{m=-d_M+1}^{-d_m}\sum\limits_{i=k+m}^{k-1}\bar{x}^T(i)Q_j\bar{x}(i) \end{align*} $
with $P>0$, $Q_j>0$ $(j=1, 2, \ldots, h)$ being matrices to be determined.
$ \begin{align} {E}[\Delta{V}|x(k)]&={E}[V(\chi(k+1))|\chi(k)]-V(\chi(k))\notag\\ & ={E}[(V(\chi(k+1))-V(\chi(k)))|\chi(k)]\notag\\ & =\sum\limits_{i=1}^{3}{E}[\Delta{V_i}|\chi(k)]. \end{align} $
(13) According to (7), we have
$ \begin{align*} &{E}\{\Delta{V_1}|\chi(k)\}\\ &\qquad={E} \left[(\bar{x}^T(k+1)P\bar{x}(k+1)-\bar{x}^T(k)P\bar{x}(k))|\chi(k)\right]\\ &\qquad\leq\xi^T(k)\sum\limits_{i=1}^{r}\sum\limits_{j=1}^{r}\Omega_{ij}\xi(k) \end{align*} $
where
$ \begin{align} & {{\Omega }_{ij}}=E\left\{ \left[\begin{matrix} A_{ij}^{T}P{{A}_{ij}}+B_{ij}^{T}P{{B}_{ij}}-P & {} \\ \star & {} \\ \star & {} \\ \end{matrix} \right. \right. \\ & \left. \left. \begin{matrix} {} & A_{ij}^{T}P{{{\hat{Z}}}_{mi}} & A_{ij}^{T}P{{D}_{ij}} \\ {} & \hat{Z}_{mi}^{T}P{{{\hat{Z}}}_{mi}}+\Delta \hat{Z}_{mi}^{T}P\Delta {{{\hat{Z}}}_{mi}} & \hat{Z}_{mi}^{T}P{{D}_{ij}} \\ {} & \star & D_{ij}^{T}P{{D}_{ij}} \\ \end{matrix} \right] \right\} \\ \end{align} $
$ {{B}_{ij}}=\left[\begin{matrix} 0 & 0 \\ {{B}_{ki}}\tilde{\Xi }{{C}_{j}} & 0 \\ \end{matrix} \right]+\left[\begin{matrix} 0 & {{B}_{1i}}\tilde{\omega }(k){{C}_{kj}} \\ 0 & 0 \\ \end{matrix} \right] $
$ \begin{align} & E\{B_{ij}^{T}P{{B}_{ij}}\} \\ & \ \ \ \ \ =\sum\limits_{l=1}^{s}{\sigma _{l}^{2}}{{\left[\begin{matrix} 0 & 0 \\ {{B}_{ki}}{{C}_{jl}} & 0 \\ \end{matrix} \right]}^{T}}P\left[\begin{matrix} 0 & 0 \\ {{B}_{ki}}{{C}_{jl}} & 0 \\ \end{matrix} \right] \\ & \ \ \ \ \ +\sum\limits_{l=1}^{m}{\rho _{l}^{2}}{{\left[\begin{matrix} 0 & {{B}_{1i}}{{C}_{kjl}} \\ 0 & 0 \\ \end{matrix} \right]}^{T}}P\left[\begin{matrix} 0 & {{B}_{1i}}{{C}_{kjl}} \\ 0 & 0 \\ \end{matrix} \right] \\ & \ \ \ ={{({{{\overset{\lower0.5em\hbox{$\smash{\scriptscriptstyle\smile}$}}{P}}}^{-1}}{{{\overset{\lower0.5em\hbox{$\smash{\scriptscriptstyle\smile}$}}{C}}}_{lij}})}^{T}}\overset{\lower0.5em\hbox{$\smash{\scriptscriptstyle\smile}$}}{P}({{{\overset{\lower0.5em\hbox{$\smash{\scriptscriptstyle\smile}$}}{P}}}^{-1}}{{{\overset{\lower0.5em\hbox{$\smash{\scriptscriptstyle\smile}$}}{C}}}_{lij}}) \\ \end{align} $
$ \begin{align} & \overset{\lower0.5em\hbox{$\smash{\scriptscriptstyle\smile}$}}{P}=\rm{diag}\{\underbrace{\mathit{P}, \ldots, \mathit{P}}_{\mathit{s}+\mathit{m}}\} \\ & {{{\hat{C}}}_{1lij}}=\left[\begin{matrix} 0 & 0 \\ {{B}_{ki}}{{C}_{jl}} & 0 \\ \end{matrix} \right] \\ & {{{\hat{C}}}_{klij}}=\left[\begin{matrix} 0 & {{B}_{1i}}{{C}_{kjl}} \\ 0 & 0 \\ \end{matrix} \right] \\ & {{{\overset{\lower0.5em\hbox{$\smash{\scriptscriptstyle\smile}$}}{C}}}_{ij}}={{\left[{{\sigma }_{1}}\hat{C}_{11ij}^{T}P, \ldots, {{\sigma }_{s}}\hat{C}_{1sij}^{T}P, {{\rho }_{1}}\hat{C}_{k1ij}^{T}P, \ldots, {{\rho }_{m}}\hat{C}_{kmij}^{T}P \right]}^{T}} \\ \end{align} $
$ \begin{align} & E\left\{ \Delta \hat{Z}_{mi}^{T}P\Delta {{{\hat{Z}}}_{mi}} \right\} \\ & \ \ \ \ \ =\sum\limits_{m=1}^{h}{{{{\bar{\alpha }}}_{m}}}(1-{{{\bar{\alpha }}}_{m}}){{\left[ \begin{matrix} {{A}_{di}} & 0 \\ 0 & 0 \\ \end{matrix} \right]}^{T}}P\left[ \begin{matrix} {{A}_{di}} & 0 \\ 0 & 0 \\ \end{matrix} \right] \\ & \ \ \ \ \ \ =\sum\limits_{m=1}^{h}{\hat{A}_{di}^{T}}P{{{\hat{A}}}_{di}}=\hat{\alpha }\overset{\lower0.5em\hbox{$\smash{\scriptscriptstyle\smile}$}}{A}_{di}^{T}\overset{\lower0.5em\hbox{$\smash{\scriptscriptstyle\smile}$}}{P}{{{\overset{\lower0.5em\hbox{$\smash{\scriptscriptstyle\smile}$}}{A}}}_{di}} \\ \end{align} $
$ \begin{align} & \hat{\alpha }=\rm{diag}\{{{{\bar{\alpha }}}_{1}}(1-{{{\bar{\alpha }}}_{1}}), \ldots, {{{\bar{\alpha }}}_\mathit{h}}(1-{{{\bar{\alpha }}}_\mathit{h}})\} \\ & {{{\overset{\lower0.5em\hbox{$\smash{\scriptscriptstyle\smile}$}}{A}}}_{di}}=\rm{diag}\{\underbrace{\mathit{{{\hat{A}}}_{di}}, \ldots, \mathit{{{\hat{A}}}_{di}}}_\mathit{h}\} \\ & E\{\Delta {{V}_{2}}|\chi (k)\}\le E\{\sum\limits_{j=1}^{h}{({{{\bar{x}}}^{T}}(}k){{Q}_{j}}\bar{x}(k) \\ & \ \ \ \ \ -{{{\bar{x}}}^{T}}(k-{{\tau }_{j}}(k)){{Q}_{j}}\bar{x}(k-{{\tau }_{j}}(k)) \\ & \ \ \ \ \ +\sum\limits_{i=k-{{d}_{M}}+1}^{k-{{d}_{m}}}{{{{\bar{x}}}^{T}}}(i){{Q}_{j}}\bar{x}(i))|\chi (k)\} \\ & E\{\Delta {{V}_{3}}|\chi (k)\}=E\{\sum\limits_{j=1}^{h}{((}{{d}_{T}}-{{d}_{t}}){{{\bar{x}}}^{T}}(k){{Q}_{j}}\bar{x}(k) \\ & \ \ \ \ \ -\sum\limits_{i=k-{{d}_{m}}+1}^{k-{{d}_{m}}}{{{{\bar{x}}}^{T}}}(i){{Q}_{j}}\bar{x}(i))|\chi (k)\}. \\ \end{align} $
It is clear that
$ {E}\{\Delta{V_2}|\chi(k)\}+{E}\{\Delta{V_3}|\chi(k)\}\leq\xi^T(k)T_{ij}\xi(k) $
with
$ \begin{align*} T_{ij}=&\ \hbox{diag}\Bigg\{\sum\limits_{k=1}^h(d_T-d_t+1)Q_k, \\ &-\hbox{diag}\{Q_1, Q_2, \ldots, Q_h\}, 0\Bigg\}.\end{align*} $
Therefore, we have ${E}\{\Delta{V}|\chi(k)\}\leq\xi^T(k)\Gamma_{ij}\xi(k)$, where $\Gamma_{ij}$ $=$ $\Omega_{ij}+T_{ij}$. Due to
$ \begin{align*} &{E}\left\{z^T(k)z(k)-\gamma^2v^T(k)v(k)\right\}\\ &\qquad\leq\xi(k)\sum\limits_{i=1}^r\sum\limits_{j=1}^rh_ih_j {E}\left\{[\bar{C}_{ij}+\bar{\bar{C}}_{ij}, 0, D_{3i}]^T\right.\\ &\qquad\quad \left.\times[\bar{C}_{ij}+\bar{\bar{C}}_{ij}, 0, D_{3i}] - \hbox{diag}\{0, 0, \gamma^2I\}\right\}\xi(k) \end{align*} $
we can obtain
$ \begin{align*} &{E}\left\{z^T(k)z(k)-\gamma^2v^T(k)v(k)+\Delta{V(k)}\right\}\\ &\qquad \leq\xi^T(k)({\Omega}_{ij}^T\hbox{diag} \{P, I\}{\Omega}_{ij}\\ &\qquad\quad +\mathcal{Z}_{ij}^T\hbox{diag}\{\check{P}, I\}\mathcal{Z}_{ij}+\bar{P})\xi(k) \end{align*} $
where
$ \begin{align*} &{\Omega}_{ij}=\left[ \begin{array}{ccc} A_{ij}&\hat{Z}_{mi}&D_{ij}\\ \bar{C}_{ij}&0&D_{3i}\\ \end{array} \right]\\ & \Game _{kijt}= \bigg[ \begin{array}{ccc} \left[ \begin{array}{cc} 0&\rho_tB_{2i}C_{kjt} \end{array} \right]&0&0 \end{array} \bigg]^T \\ &\mathfrak{D}_{ij}=\bigg[ \begin{array}{ccc} \Game_{kij1}&\ldots&\Game_{kijm} \end{array} \bigg]^T \\ &\mathcal{Z}_{ij}=\left[ \begin{array}{c} [\check{P}^{-1}\check{C}_{ij}, 0, 0]\\ \mathfrak{D}_{ij} \end{array} \right]\\ &\bar{P}=\hbox{diag}\bigg\{-P+\sum\limits_{k=1}^h(d_T-d_t+1)Q_k, \hat{\alpha}\breve{A}_{di}^T\breve{P} \breve{A}_{di}\\ &\qquad -\hbox{diag}\{Q_1, Q_2, \ldots, Q_h\}, -\gamma^2I\bigg\}. \end{align*} $
Define $J(n)={E}\sum\nolimits_{k=0}^n[z^T(k)z(k)-\gamma^2v^T(k)v(k)]$, we have
$ \begin{align*} J(n)=&\ {E}\sum\limits_{k=0}^n\left[z^T(k)z(k)-\gamma^2v^T(k)v(k)+\Delta{V(\chi(k))}\right] \\ &-{E}V(\chi(n+1))\\ \leq&\ {E}\sum\limits_{k=0}^n\left[z^T(k)z(k)-\gamma^2v^T(k)v(k)+\Delta{V(\chi(k))}\right]\\ \leq&\ \sum\limits_{k=0}^n\sum\limits_{i=1}^r\sum\limits_{j=1}^rh_ih_j\xi^T(k)({\Omega}_{ij}^T \hbox{diag} \{P, I\}{\Omega}_{ij}\\ &\ +\mathcal{Z}_{ij}^T\hbox{diag}\{\check{P}, I\}\mathcal{Z}_{ij}+\bar{P})\xi(k)\\ =&\ \sum\limits_{k=0}^n\sum\limits_{i=1}^rh_i^2\xi^T(k)({\Omega}_{ii}^T \hbox{diag} \{P, I\}{\Omega}_{ii}\\ &\ +\mathcal{Z}_{ii}^T\hbox{diag}\{\check{P}, I\}\mathcal{Z}_{ii}+\bar{P})\xi(k)\\ &\ +\frac{1}{2}\sum\limits_{k=0}^n\sum\limits_{j=1, i<j}^rh_ih_j\xi^T(k)\\ &\ \times\left[({\Omega}_{ij} +{\Omega}_{ji})^T\hbox{diag}\{P, I\}({\Omega}_{ij}+{\Omega}_{ji})\right.\\ &\ +\left. (\mathcal{Z}_{ij}+\mathcal{Z}_{ji})^T\hbox{diag}\{\check{P}, I\} (\mathcal{Z}_{ij}+\mathcal{Z}_{ji})+4\bar{P}\right]\xi(k). \end{align*} $
According to Schur complement, we can conclude from (10) and (11) that $J(n)<0$. Letting $n\rightarrow\infty$, we have
$ \begin{align*} \sum\limits_n^\infty{E}\left\{\|z(k)\|^2\right\}\leq\gamma^2\sum\limits_n^\infty{E}\left\{\|v(k)\|^2\right\}. \end{align*} $
According to Schur complement again, we know that ${E}\{\Delta{V}|x(k)\}$ $<$ $0$ if and only if (10) and (11) hold true. Furthermore, one can easily verify the fact that the discrete-time nominal (7) with $v(k)=0$ is exponentially stable.
4. Design of Robust ${\pmb H}_{\pmb\infty}$ Fuzzy Controller
In this section, we are devoted to how to determine the controller parameters in (6) such that the closed-loop system (7) is exponentially stable with $H_\infty$ performace.
By Theorem 1, one can easily draw the conclusion as follow:
Theorem 2: For a prescribed constant $\gamma>0$, the nominal fuzzy system (7) is exponentially stable if there exist positive definite matrices $P>0$, $L>0$, $Q_k>0$ $(k=1, 2, $ $\ldots, $ $h)$, and $K_i$ and $\bar{C}_{ki}$ such that
$ \Gamma_1=\left[ \begin{array}{cc} \Pi_i&\star \\ 0.5\bar{\Sigma}_{ii}& \bar{\Lambda} \\ \end{array} \right]<0, \ \ i=1, 2, \ldots, r $
(14) $ \Gamma_2=\left[ \begin{array}{cc} 4\Pi_i&\star \\ \bar{\Sigma}_{ij}&\bar{\Lambda} \\ \end{array} \right]<0, \ \ 1\leq i<j\leq r $
(15) $ PL=I $
(16) hold, then the nominal system (7) is exponentially stable with disturbance attenuation $\gamma$, where $\overline{\bigwedge}=\hbox{diag}\{-\bar{L}, -L, $ $-I, $ $\hbox{diag}\{\underbrace{-I, \ldots, -I}\limits_m\}\}$
$ \bar{\Sigma}_{ij}=\left[ \begin{array}{ccc} \Phi_{11ij}+\Phi_{11ji}&0&0 \\ \Phi_{21ij}+\Phi_{21ji}&\Phi_{22ij}+\Phi_{22ji}& \Phi_{23ij}+\Phi_{23ji} \\ \Phi_{31ij}+\Phi_{31ji}&0&\Phi_{33ij}+\Phi_{33ji} \\ \Phi_{41ij}+\Phi_{41ji}&0&0 \\ \end{array} \right] $
(17) $\begin{align} &I_l=\hbox{diag}\{\underbrace{0, \ldots, 0}\limits_{l-1}, 1, \underbrace{0, \ldots, 0}\limits_{m-l}\}, \quad K_i=\bigg[ \begin{array}{cc} A_{ki}&B_{ki}\\ \end{array}\bigg] \notag\\[1mm] &\bar{C}_{ki}=\bigg[ \begin{array}{cc} 0&C_{ki}\\ \end{array} \bigg], \quad \bar{E}=\left[ \begin{array}{c} 0 \\ I \\ \end{array} \right], \quad \bar{\bar{E}}=\left[ \begin{array}{l} I \\ 0 \\ \end{array} \right] \notag\\[1mm] &\bar{A}_i=\left[ \begin{array}{cc} A_i&0 \\ 0&0 \\ \end{array} \right], \quad \bar{B}_{1i}=\left[ \begin{array}{c} B_{1i} \\ 0 \\ \end{array} \right], \quad R_{il}=\left[ \begin{array}{cc} 0&0 \\ C_{il}&0 \\ \end{array} \right] \notag\\[1mm] &\bar{D}_{1i}=\left[ \begin{array}{c} D_{1i} \\ 0 \\ \end{array} \right], \quad \bar{D}_{2i}=\left[ \begin{array}{c} 0 \\ D_{2i} \\ \end{array} \right]\notag\\[1mm] & \Phi_{11ij}=\left[ \begin{array}{c} \sigma_1\bar{E}K_iR_{j1} \\ \vdots \\ \sigma_s\bar{E}K_iR_{js} \\ \rho_1\bar{E}\beta_{1i}I_1\bar{C}_{kj} \\ \vdots \\ \rho_m\bar{E}\beta_{1i}I_m\bar{C}_{kj} \\ \end{array} \right], \ \ \Phi_{41ij}=\left[ \begin{array}{c} \rho_1B_{2i}I_1\bar{C}_{kj} \\ \vdots \\ \rho_mB_{2i}I_m\bar{C}_{kj} \\ \end{array} \right]\notag\\[1mm] & \Phi_{21ij}=\bar{A}_i+\bar{E}K_i\bar{R}_j+\bar{B}_{1i}\hbox{diag}\{w_1, \ldots, w_m\}\bar{C} _{kj} \notag\\[1mm] &\Phi_{31ij}=\bar{C}_{zi}+B_{2i}\hbox{diag}\{w_1, \ldots, w_m\}\bar{C}_{kj}\notag \\[1mm] & \bar{C}_{zi}=\left[ \begin{array}{cc} C_{zi}&0 \\ \end{array} \right], \quad \bar{L}=\hbox{diag}\{\underbrace{L, \ldots, L} \limits_{s+m}\}\notag \\[1mm] & \Phi_{22ij}=\hat{Z}_{mi}, \quad \Phi_{23ij}=D_{ij}, \quad \Phi_{33ij}=D_{3i}.\notag \end{align} $
Proof: We rewrite the parameters in Theorem 1 in the following form:
$ \begin{align*} & A_{ij}=\bar{A}_i+\bar{E}K_i\bar{R}_j+\bar{B}_{1i}\hbox{diag}\{w_1, \ldots, w_m\}\bar{C}_{kj} \\ &\hat{C}_{lij}=\bar{E}K_i{R}_{jl} \\ & \bar{C}_{ij}=\bar{C}_{zi}+B_{2i}\hbox{diag}\{w_1, \ldots, w_m\}\bar{C}_{kj} \\ & D_{ij}=\bar{D}_{1i}+\bar{D}_{1i}K_i\bar{D}_{2j}. \end{align*} $
Pre-and post-multiplying the (10) and (11) by $ \hbox{diag}\{I, $ $I, $ $I, $ $\check{P}^{-1}, $ $P^{-1}, $ $\underbrace{I, \ldots, I}\limits_m\}$ and Letting $L=P^{-1}$, we have (14)$-$(16) and complete the proof easily. Now we will point out that the robust $H_\infty$ controller parameters can be determined in light of Theorem 2.
Theorem 3: For given scalar $\gamma>0$, if there exist positive define matrices $P>0$, $L>0$, $Q_k>0$ $(k=1, 2, \ldots, h)$, and matrices $K_i$, $\bar{C}_{ki}$ of proper dimensions and a constant $\varepsilon>0$ such that
$ \left[ \begin{array}{cc} \Gamma_1&\star \\ \Xi_{ii}&\hbox{diag}\{-\varepsilon{I}, -\varepsilon{I}\} \\ \end{array} \right]<0, \notag\\ \qquad\qquad\qquad\qquad\qquad i=1, 2, \ldots, r $
(18) $ \left[ \begin{array}{cc} \Gamma_2& \star \\ \Xi_{ij}&\hbox{diag}\{-\varepsilon{I}, -\varepsilon{I}\} \\ \end{array} \right]<0, \notag\\ \qquad\qquad\qquad\qquad\qquad 1\leq i<j\leq r $
(19) $ PL=I $
(20) hold, where
$ \begin{align*}&\Xi_{ii}=\left[ \begin{array}{ccccccc} 0&0&0&0&[H_{ai}^T ~~ 0] &H_{ci}^T&0 \\ \varepsilon[ E ~~ 0] &0&0&0&0&0&0 \\ \end{array} \right]\\ &\Xi_{ij}=\left[ \begin{array}{ccccccc} 0&0&0&0&[H_{ai}^T+H_{aj}^T ~~ 0] &H_{ci}^T+H_{cj}^T&0 \\ \varepsilon[E ~~ 0] &0&0&0&0&0&0 \\ \end{array} \right] \end{align*} $
then the uncertain fuzzy system (7) is exponentially stable and the controller parameters $K_i$ and $\bar{C}_{ki} $ can be obtained naturally.
Proof: Replace $\bar{A}_i$, $\bar{A}_j$, $\bar{C}_{zi}, $ and $ \bar{C}_{zj}$ in Theorem 2 by $\bar{A}_i+\triangle\bar{A}_i(k)$, $\bar{A}_j\triangle\bar{A}_j(k)$, $\bar{C}_{zi}+\triangle\bar{C}_{zi}(k), $ and $ \bar{C}_{zj}\, +\, \triangle\bar{C}_{zj}(k)$, respectively, where
$ \begin{align} & \triangle\bar{A}_i(k)=\left[ \begin{array}{cc} \triangle{A}_i(k)&0 \\ 0&0 \\ \end{array} \right], \quad \triangle\bar{C}_{zi}(k)=[ \triangle{C}_{zi}(k) ~~ 0].\!\notag \end{align} $
According to Lemma 1, (18) and (19) can be rewritten as follows:
$ \begin{align} &\Gamma_1+{H}_1F(k){E}+{E}^TF(k)^T{H}_1^T<0\notag\\ &\Gamma_2+{H}_2F(k){E}+{E}^TF(k)^T{H}_2^T<0\notag \end{align} $
where
$ \begin{align*} &{E}=[E ~~ 0]\\ &{H}_1=\left[ \begin{array}{ccccccc} 0& 0&0&0&[H_{ai}^T ~~ 0] &H_{ci}^T&0 \\ \end{array} \right]\\ & {H}_2=\left[ \begin{array}{ccccccc} 0& 0&0&0 &[H_{ai}^T+H_{aj}^T ~~ 0] &H_{ci}^T+H_{cj}^T&0 \\ \end{array} \right]. \end{align*} $
According to Lemma 1 along with Schur complement, we can easily obtain (18) and (19).
In order to solve (18), (19) and (20), the cone-complementarity linearization (CCL) algorithm proposed in [36] and [37] is used in this note.
The nonlinear minimization problem: $\min\hbox{tr}(PL) $ subject to (18) and (19) and
$ \left[ \begin{matrix} P & I \\ I & L \\ \end{matrix} \right]\ge 0. $
(21) The following algorithm [5] is borrowed to solve the above problem.
Algorithm 1:
Step 1: Find a feasible set $(P_0, L_0, Q_{k(0)}, K_{i(0)}, \bar{C}_{ki(0)})$ satisfying (18), (19) and (21). Set $q=0$.
Step 2: Solving the linear matrix inequality (LMI) problem, $\min\hbox{tr}(PL_{(0)}+P_{(0)}L) $ subject to (18), (19) and (21).
Step 3: Substitute the obtained matrix variables $(P$, $L$, $Q_{k}, K_{i(0)}, \bar{C}_{ki})$ into (14) and (15). If conditions(14) and (15) are satisfied with $|\hbox{tr}(PL)-n|<\delta$ for some sufficiently small scalar $\delta >0$, then output the feasible solutions. Exit.
Step 4: If $q>N$, where $N$ is the maximum number of iterations allowed, then output the feasible solutions $(P$, $L$, $Q_{k}, K_{i}$, $\bar{C}_{ki})$, and exit. Else, set $q=q+1$, and goto Step 2.
5. An Illustrative Example
we give an illustrative examples to explain the proposed model is effective and feasible in this section.
Example 1: Consider a T-S fuzzy model (1). The rules are given as follows:
Plant Rule 1: If $x_1(k)$ is $h_1(x_1(k))$ then
$ \begin{align} \begin{cases} x(k+1) = A_1(k)x(k)+A_{d1}\sum\limits_{m=1}^h\alpha_m(k)x(k-\tau_m(k))\\ \qquad\qquad\quad +~B_{11}u(k)+D_{11}v(k) \\[2mm] y(k) = \Xi C_1x(k) +D_{21}v(k) \\[2mm] z(k) = C_{z1}(k)x(k)+B_{21}u(k)+D_{31}v(k) \end{cases} \end{align} $
(21) Plant Rule 2: If $x_1(k)$ is $h_2(x_1(k))$ then
$ \begin{align} \begin{cases} x(k+1) = A_2(k)x(k)+A_{d2}\sum\limits_{m=1}^h\alpha_m(k)x(k-\tau_m(k))\\ \qquad\qquad\quad +~B_{12}u(k)+D_{12}v(k) \\[2mm] y(k) =\Xi C_2x(k) +D_{22}v(k) \\[2mm] z(k) =C_{z2}(k)x(k)+B_{22}u(k)+D_{32}v(k) \end{cases} \end{align} $
(22) The given model parameters are written as follows:
$ \begin{align} & {{A}_{1}}=\left[ \begin{matrix} 1 & 0.2 & 0 \\ 0.1 & 0.1 & 0.1 \\ 0.1 & 0.2 & 0.2 \\ \end{matrix} \right],\quad {{D}_{11}}=\left[ \begin{matrix} 0.1 \\ 0 \\ 0 \\ \end{matrix} \right] \\ & {{A}_{d1}}=\left[ \begin{matrix} 0.03 & 0 & -0.01 \\ 0.02 & 0.03 & 0 \\ 0.04 & 0.05 & -0.1 \\ \end{matrix} \right], \quad {{B}_{11}}=\left[ \begin{matrix} 1 & 1 \\ 0.4 & 1 \\ 0 & 1 \\ \end{matrix} \right] \\ & {{D}_{31}}=\left[ \begin{matrix} -0.1 \\ 0 \\ 0.1 \\ \end{matrix} \right], \quad \ {{C}_{1}}=\left[ \begin{matrix} 1 & 0.8 & 0.7 \\ -0.6 & 0.9 & 0.6 \\ \end{matrix} \right] \\ & {{C}_{2}}=\left[ \begin{matrix} 0.1 & 0.8 & 0.7 \\ -0.6 & 0.9 & 0.6 \\ \end{matrix} \right],\quad {{D}_{21}}=\left[ \begin{matrix} 0.15 \\ 0 \\ \end{matrix} \right] \\ & {{D}_{22}}=\left[ \begin{matrix} 0.1 \\ 0 \\ \end{matrix} \right], \quad \ {{C}_{z1}}=\left[ \begin{matrix} 0.2 & 0 & 0 \\ 0 & 0 & 0 \\ 0 & 0 & 0.1 \\ \end{matrix} \right] \\ & {{B}_{21}}=\left[ \begin{matrix} 1 & 1 \\ 0 & 1 \\ 0 & 1 \\ \end{matrix} \right], \quad {{H}_{a1}}=\left[ \begin{matrix} 0.1 \\ 0.1 \\ 0.1 \\ \end{matrix} \right],\quad {{H}_{c1}}=\left[ \begin{matrix} 0.1 \\ 0 \\ 0.1 \\ \end{matrix} \right] \\ & {{H}_{a2}}=\left[ \begin{matrix} 0.1 \\ 0 \\ 0.1 \\ \end{matrix} \right], \quad \ {{H}_{c2}}=\left[ \begin{matrix} 0.1 \\ 0 \\ 0.5 \\ \end{matrix} \right],\quad {{D}_{32}}=\left[ \begin{matrix} 0.1 \\ 0 \\ 0.1 \\ \end{matrix} \right] \\ & E={{\left[ \begin{matrix} 0.1 \\ 0.1 \\ 0.1 \\ \end{matrix} \right]}^{T}},{{A}_{2}}=\left[ \begin{matrix} 1 & -0.38 & 0 \\ -0.2 & 0 & 0.21 \\ 0.1 & 0 & -0.55 \\ \end{matrix} \right] \\ & {{B}_{12}}=\left[ \begin{matrix} 1 & 0 \\ 1 & 1 \\ 0 & 1 \\ \end{matrix} \right],\quad {{A}_{d2}}=\left[ \begin{matrix} 0 & 0.01 & -0.01 \\ 0.02 & 0.03 & 0 \\ 0.04 & 0.05 & -0.1 \\ \end{matrix} \right] \\ & {{D}_{12}}=\left[ \begin{matrix} 0.1 \\ 0 \\ 0.1 \\ \end{matrix} \right],\quad {{C}_{z2}}=\left[ \begin{matrix} 0.1 & 0 & 0 \\ 0.2 & 0 & 0.2 \\ 0 & 0.1 & 0.2 \\ \end{matrix} \right] \\ & {{B}_{22}}=\left[ \begin{matrix} 1 & 0 \\ 0 & 1 \\ 1 & 1 \\ \end{matrix} \right]. \\ \end{align} $
Assume that the time-varying communication delays satisfy $2 \leq\tau_m\leq 6$ $(m=1, 2)$ and
$ \begin{align*} & \bar{\alpha}_1={E}\{\alpha_1(k)\}=0.8, \quad\bar{\alpha}_2={E}\{\alpha_2(k)\}=0.6 \\[1mm] & \bar{\omega}_1={E}\{\omega_1(k)\}=0.4, \quad \bar{\omega}_2={E}\{\omega_2(k)\}=0.6. \end{align*} $
Assume also that the probabilistic density functions of $\beta_1$ and $\beta_2$ in $[0 \quad 1]$ are read as
$ \begin{align} q_1(s_1)=\begin{cases} 0,&s_1=0 \\ 0.1,&s_2=0.5 \\ 0.9,&s_3=1 \end{cases}, \quad &q_2(s_2)=\begin{cases} 0,& s_2=0\\ 0.2,&s_2=0.5 \\ 0.8,&s_3=1 \end{cases}. \end{align} $
(23) The membership functions are described as
$ \begin{align} &h_1=\begin{cases} 1,&x_0(1)=0 \\ \left|\dfrac{\sin(x_0(1))}{x_0(1)}\right|,&\hbox{else} \end{cases} \nonumber\\& h_2=1-h_1. \end{align} $
(24) Now, we are to design a dynamic-output feedback paralleled controller in the form of (6) such that (7) is exponentially stable with a given $H_\infty$ norm bound $\gamma$. In the example, we assume $\gamma=0.9$ and obtain the desired $H_\infty$ controller parameters as follows
$ \begin{align} & {{A}_{k1}}=\left[ \begin{matrix} -0.0127 & -0.0083 & -0.0317 \\ 0.0229 & 0.0149 & 0.0221 \\ -0.0588 & -0.0429 & -0.0654 \\ \end{matrix} \right] \\ & {{A}_{k2}}=\left[ \begin{matrix} -0.1365 & -0.1296 & -0.0570 \\ -0.0107 & -0.0095 & 0.0239 \\ -0.0125 & -0.0129 & -0.0260 \\ \end{matrix} \right] \\ & {{B}_{k1}}=\left[ \begin{matrix} -0.3236 & 0.1389 \\ 0.0291 & -0.0043 \\ -0.3077 & 0.1867 \\ \end{matrix} \right] \\ & {{B}_{k2}}=\left[ \begin{matrix} 0.1664 & 0.0834 \\ 0.1374 & -0.0712 \\ -0.4340 & 0.5688 \\ \end{matrix} \right] \\ & {{C}_{k1}}=\left[ \begin{matrix} 0.1355 & 0.0856 & 0.1789 \\ 0.0311 & 0.0209 & 0.0372 \\ \end{matrix} \right] \\ & {{C}_{k2}}=\left[ \begin{matrix} 0.0110 & 0.0464 & 0.0731 \\ 0.0832 & 0.0622 & 0.0502 \\ \end{matrix} \right]. \\ \end{align} $
We take the initial conditions $ x_0=[1 \quad 0 \quad-1]^T$, $x_{c0}$ $=$ $[0 \quad 0 \quad 0]^T $ for the simulation purpose and let external disturbance $v(k)=0$. Fig. 2 depicts the state responses for the uncontrolled fuzzy systems, which are unstable. We can see the fact that the closed-loop fuzzy systems are exponentially stable from the Fig. 3.
图 2 State evolution $x(k)$ of uncontrolled systems.Fig. 2 State evolution $x(k)$ of uncontrolled systems.
图 3 State evolution $x(k)$ of controlled systems.Fig. 3 State evolution $x(k)$ of controlled systems.In order to illustrate the disturbance-attenuation performance, we take the external disturbance
$ \begin{align*} v(k)= \begin{cases} 0.3,&20\leq k\leq 30 \\ -0.2,&50\leq k\leq 60 \\ 0,&\hbox{else}. \end{cases} \end{align*} $
Fig. 4 presents the controller-state evolution $x_c(k)$, Fig. 5 plots the state evolution of the controlled output $z(k)$, and Fig. 6 shows the output feedback controller. From Figs. 3$-$6, one can see that the convergence rate is rapid and effective. By the above simulation results, we can draw the conclusion that our theoretical analysis to the robust $H_\infty$ fuzzy-control problem is right completely.
Remark 2: The above simulation is performed on the basis of the software MATLAB 7.0 and the cone-complementarity linearization algorithm may takes several minutes because of choosing initial feasible set.
6. Conclusion
In this paper, we establish general networked systems model with multiple time-varying random communication delays and multiple missing measurements as weil as the random missing control and discuss its robust $H_\infty$ fuzzy-output feedback-control problem. The proposed system model includes parameter uncertainties, multiple stochastic time-varying delays, multiple missing measurements, and stochastic control input missing. The control strategy adopts the parallel distributed compensation. We obtain the sufficient conditions on the robustly exponential stability of the closed-loop T-S fuzzy-control system by using the CCL algorithm and the explicit expression of the desired controller parameters. An illustrative simulation example further shows that the fuzzy-control method to the proposed new control model is feasible and the new control model can be used for future applications. Whether to construct piecewise Lyapunov functions [8] to solve the proposed control model or not is an interesting topic and in active thought.
-
图 5 新方案各输入信号相噪表现
Fig. 5 Input Signals' phase noise spectrum performance in the new scheme
图 8 实际工程应用中$F_X$与$F_M$的产生方式
Fig. 8 The producing way of $F_X$ and $F_M$ in the practical engineering application
图 9 新方案$F_X=3 200$ MHz的相位噪声指标
Fig. 9 The phase noise curve of $F_X=3 200$ MHz in the new scheme
图 10 新方案$F_O$输出为3 250 MHz的相噪曲线
Fig. 10 The phase noise curve of the 3 250 MHz in the new scheme
图 11 $F_O$ = 3 250 MHz时, 500 MHz以内杂散测试图
Fig. 11 The spurious test pattern at $F_O$ = 3 250 MHz within 500 MHz bandwidth
表 1 DDS频率切换时间
Table 1 DDS frequency hopping time
DDS切换频点(MHz) DDS切换时间($\mu$s) 107$\rightarrow$110 3.044 110$\rightarrow$113 3.022 113$\rightarrow$114 2.978 114$\rightarrow$121 3.044 121$\rightarrow$125 2.978 $\Delta$$T_{\rm DDS}$均值 3.013 
下载: 导出CSV
表 2 环路切换时间
Table 2 Loop locked time
环路切换频点(MHz) 环路切换时间($\mu$s) 3 227$\rightarrow$3 232 13.67 3 232$\rightarrow$3 238 14.22 3 238$\rightarrow$3 240 15.00 3 240$\rightarrow$3 243 15.44 3 243$\rightarrow$3 248 14.00 $\Delta$$T_{\rm PLL}$均值 14.47
下载: 导出CSV
-
[1] 侯君锋. 多环路频率合成器的设计与实现[硕士学位论文], 电子科技大学, 中国, 2014 http://cdmd.cnki.com.cn/Article/CDMD-10614-1015701201.htmHou Jun-Feng. Design and Implementation of Multi-loop Frequency Synthesizer[Master dissertation], University of Electronic Science and Technology of China, China, 2014 http://cdmd.cnki.com.cn/Article/CDMD-10614-1015701201.htm [2] 陈丛宏. 低相噪X波段信号发生器的研究[硕士学位论文], 电子科技大学, 中国, 2014 http://cdmd.cnki.com.cn/Article/CDMD-10614-1015705743.htmChen Cong-Hong. The Research of Low Phase Niose X-band Signal Generator[Master dissertation], University of Electronic Science and Technology of China, China, 2014 http://cdmd.cnki.com.cn/Article/CDMD-10614-1015705743.htm [3] 程鹏.自动控制原理.北京:高等教育出版社, 2003. 35-57Cheng Peng. Principles of Automatic Control. Beijing:Higher Education Press, 2003. 35-57 [4] 储昭碧, 张崇巍, 冯小英.基于基波频率估计的多谐波分析.自动化学报, 2009, 35(5):532-539 http://www.aas.net.cn/CN/abstract/abstract15788.shtmlChu Zhao-Bi, Zhang Chong-Wei, Feng Xiao-Ying. Multi-harmonics analysis based on fundamental frequency estimate. Acta Automatica Sinica, 2009, 35(5):532-539 http://www.aas.net.cn/CN/abstract/abstract15788.shtml [5] 方涌. 8-10G低噪声频率综合器系统设计[硕士学位论文], 南京理工大学, 中国, 2011 http://cdmd.cnki.com.cn/Article/CDMD-10288-1011173193.htmFang Yong. Design of 8-10G Low Phase Noise Frequency Synthesizers[Master dissertation], Nanjing University of Science and Technology, China, 2011 http://cdmd.cnki.com.cn/Article/CDMD-10288-1011173193.htm [6] Mehrotra A. Noise analysis of phase-locked loops. IEEE Transactions on Circuits and Systems I:Fundamental Theory and Applications, 2002, 49(9):1309-1316 doi: 10.1109/TCSI.2002.802347 [7] Maffezzoni P, Levantino S. Analysis of VCO phase noise in charge-pump phase-locked loops. IEEE Transactions on Circuits and Systems I:Regular Papers, 2012, 59(10):2165-2175 doi: 10.1109/TCSI.2012.2185312 [8] Arakali A, Gondi S, Hanumolu P K. Analysis and design techniques for supply-noise mitigation in phase-locked loops. IEEE Transactions on Circuits and Systems I:Regular Papers, 2010, 57(11):2880-2889 doi: 10.1109/TCSI.2010.2052507 [9] ADF4106 data sheets[Online], available:http://www.analog.com,February 25, 2016. [10] AD9956 data sheets[Online], available:http://www.analog.com, February 25, 2016. 期刊类型引用(4)
1. 练红海，肖伸平，罗毅平，周笔锋. 基于T-S模糊模型的采样系统鲁棒耗散控制. 自动化学报. 2022(11): 2852-2862 . 
本站查看2. 顾晓清，倪彤光，张聪，戴臣超，王洪元. 结构辨识和参数优化协同学习的概率TSK模糊系统. 自动化学报. 2021(02): 349-362 . 本站查看3. 李军，黄卫剑，万文军，刘哲. 一种新型反馈控制器的研究与应用. 控制理论与应用. 2020(02): 411-422 . 百度学术4. 唐晓铭，邓梨，虞继敏，屈洪春. 基于区间二型T-S模糊模型的网络控制系统的输出反馈预测控制. 自动化学报. 2019(03): 604-616 . 本站查看其他类型引用(1)
-
下载:
计量
- 文章访问数: 1861
- HTML全文浏览量: 399
- PDF下载量: 606
- 被引次数: 5
