This paper presents an observer–based robust controller for constant reference tracking of linear time invariant systems with polytopic model uncertainties. To this end, this paper not only designs a robust integral controller gain but also suggests how to determine the robust observer gain and the observer model used in the observer. Since the observer model selection is not obvious due to the polytopic uncertainties, particular attention needs to be paid to that. This paper computes the robust controller and observer gains first. Then, the observer model is selected in a way that the whole closedloop is stable and LMIs are used in the middle of choosing the gains and observer model. Simulation examples show that the proposed observerbased feedback control successfully achieves robust reference tracking.
1. Introduction
Since it is important to take model uncertainties into account in control systems for practical engineering applications, the robustness analysis and the robust controller design for uncertain systems have been studied for a long time
[1

7]
. In general, output variables rather than state variables are available for use by the controller. Accordingly, the applicable scope of an output feedback control is larger than that of a state feedback control. Therefore, much research efforts have still been made for the output feedback control technique dealing with model uncertain systems
[8

10]
.
In the previous results on observerbased feedback controls for uncertain systems, the model uncertainty is usually expressed as norm bounded uncertainties such that (
A_{O}
+ Δ
A, B_{O}
+ Δ
B
) where (
A_{O}
,
B_{O}
) is the nominal model and ( Δ
A
, Δ
B
) is perturbation. In such a case, it is straightforward to choose the nominal model (
A_{O}
,
B_{O}
) as the observer model. However, if the model uncertainty is assumed to be polytopic type, it is not obvious how to select the nominal model of the uncertain system in the polytopic set for observer design. This is why there are rare results on this problem
[8
,
11
,
12]
. There are only a few results which use the static output feedback control
[13]
,
[14]
. On the other hand, the polytopic uncertain model is popularly employed in robust control design
[15

18]
, because many control systems are identified as polytopic uncertain systems. In addition, polytopic uncertainty type usually describes the uncertainty of nominal system more precisely than norm bounded uncertainties
[19]
. Since an observerbased controller can have dynamics in controller, it can handle wider class of control systems than static output feedback controller. These facts are motivation of researches on the observerbased feedback control scheme for the polytopic uncertain systems.
Recently, an observer based robust regulation scheme for polytopic uncertain type proposed in
[20]
. For the purpose, robust control and estimation gains are computed first and then an optimal observer model is found in a way that the closedloop system is asymptotically stable. This paper not only extends the previous regulation scheme to the robust reference tracking but also handles more general systems. It is worth noticing that a tracking controller for polyopic uncertain system has not been reported yet. In addition, this paper presents the observerbased controller design without solving BMIs problem in contrast with previous result. To this end, an integral control law and iterative linear matrix inequality (ILMI) are adopted in this paper. The feedback gain for the integral control law and observer gain are computed such that all possible controller and observer poles of the uncertain system are located in the open unit disk of the complex plane under the assumption that the nominal model for observer design (observer model hereafter) is determined properly. Then, inspired by
[20]
, the observer model is selected such that the tracking error dynamics is asymptotically stable under the assumption that the observer model belongs to the polytopic set. For the sake of selecting such an observer model, it is first expressed as a convex combination of known models and then the convex combination coefficients are found by solving LMIs iteratively. This means that the observer model is used as a control parameter in the proposed scheme. Owing to the stabilizing property of the observer model, robust tracking performance is achieved for polytopic uncertain systems.
2. Preliminaries
To design the state observer for discrete–time uncertain LTI systems, we use the robust stability condition proposed in
[21]
. Consider the following discretetime linear systems:
where
A
(
α
) belongs to a convex polytopic set defined as:
Definition 1
:
[21]
,
[22]
System (1) is robustly stable in the uncertainty domain (2) if all eigenvalues of matrix
A
(
α
) have magnitude less than one for all values of
α
such that
A
(
α
) ∈ Λ.
It is wellknown that robust stability can be checked by using the following Lemma.
Lemma 1
:
[21
,
22]
System (1) is robustly stable in the uncertain domain (2) if, and only if, there exists a matrix
P
(
α
) =
P
(
α
)
^{T}
> 0 such that
for all
α
such that
A
(
α
) ∈ Λ.
Lemma 2
:
[21
,
22]
Uncertain system (1) is robustly stable in uncertainty domain (2) if there exist symmetric matrices
P_{i}
and a matrix
G
such that
for all
i
= 1, ⋯ ,
N
.
3. Problem Formulation
Consider the following discretetime uncertain LTI system:
where
u
∈
R^{nu}
,
x
∈
R^{nx}
,
y
∈
R^{ny}
are the control input, unmeasurable states, and output, respectively. Matrices
A
(
α
),
B
(
β
), and
C
(
α
) are unknown constant matrices that belong to the polytopic uncertainty class as follows:
A_{i}
,
B_{j}
, and
C_{i}
are known constant matrices but coefficients
α_{i}
for
i
= 1, ⋯ ,
N
and
β_{j}
for
j
= 1, ⋯ ,
M
are unknown constants. It is noted that uncertain system (5) can describe more general parametric uncertainties than a general polytopic uncertainty (i.e.(
A
(
α
),
B
(
α
),
C
(
α
))).
The objective of this paper is to design an observerbased offsetfree reference tracking controller for uncertain system (5) such that it results in
where
r
denotes a constant reference.
4. Main Results
The design procedure for the proposed observerbased robust tracking control consists of three steps: the robust tracking controller gain design, the robust observer gain design, and the observer model selection.
 4.1 Robust tracking controller design
If the state is measurable, the following control law can be employed for offsetfree constant reference tracking
where
K_{1}
and
K_{2}
are the controller gains. With this control law, the closedloop dynamics can be represented as:
To achieve reference tracking, we choose the controller gains
K_{1}
and
K_{2}
such that the closedloop dynamics (10) is stable, i.e. the following matrix is stable:
Stability of matrix (11) is guaranteed if the matrices
are all stable where
i
= 1,2, ⋯ ,
N
and
j
= 1,2, ⋯ ,
M
[4
,
21
,
22]
. Note that
A_{i}
,
B_{j}
, and
C_{i}
are known and the vertices of the polytopic uncertain set (6) and (7). Matrices (12) can be rewritten as follows:
where
i
= 1, ⋯ ,
N
and
j
= 1, ⋯ ,
M
. The matrices
F_{i}
,
H_{j}
,
K
are defined as:
Equation (13) can be interpreted as a closedloop system of (
F_{i}
,
H_{j}
) with feedback gain
K
. Finding such a stabilzing feedback gain is formulated as LMIs in the following Theorem.
Theorem 1:
Uncertain system (5) can be robustly stabilized in uncertainty domain (6) and (7), if there exist symmetric matrices
P_{ij}
,
G
such that
for all
i
= 1, ⋯ ,
N
,
j
= 1, ⋯ ,
M
, and
ε
∈ (0,1) is a tuning parameter. If the (14) is feasible, we can get controller gains
K_{1}
and
K_{2}
as follows:
which achieve reference tracking in the case of the state feedback control.
Proof:
This theorem can be proved with the similar way in [Theorem 3.
21
]. The difference is that this theorem computes the integral controller gain, but this does not affect the proof.
 4.2 Robust observer design
Suppose that the full order state observer is of the form
where
and
are the observer model and
L
is the robust observer gain. Unlike existing results in the literature in which the observer model is the same as the plant model, in this paper, the observer model is also a design parameter, which is in sharp contrast to the previous results. In the subsequent sections, the observer gain
L
is designed first under the assumption that
and
are chosen appropriately. It is presented afterwards how to select the observer model.
The robust observer gain
L
is chosen such that
A
(
α
) −
LC
(
α
) is a stable matrix. In order to make
A
(
α
) −
LC
(
α
) stable, consider the following inequalities:
where
i
= 1, ⋯ ,
N
,
δ
∈ (0,1) is a tuning parameter. These inequalities (17) are not LMIs. However, it can be easily transformed into LMIs in the following
[5]
:
where
i
= 1,2, ⋯ ,
N
and
δ
∈ (0,1) is a tuning parameter. If the LMIs (18) are feasible, then the observer gain
L
is obtained by
Based on these observer gains, the observer model is determined. To choose the observer model, it is assumed that the observer model is parameterized as follows:
where
A_{i}
,
B_{j}
,
C_{i}
are known constant matrices and coefficients
ρ_{i}
,
η_{j}
are design parameters. It implies that coefficients
ρ_{i}
,
η_{j}
can be chosen arbitrary for achieving the control goal. The observer model selection problem is equivalent to selection of the coefficients
ρ_{i}
(
i
=1,⋯ ,
N
) and
η_{j}
(
j
=1,⋯ ,
M
).
Lemma 3 proposes how to choose coefficients
ρ_{i}
(
i
=1,⋯ ,
N
) and
η_{j}
(
j
=1,⋯ ,
M
) defining the observer model which can stabilize the estimation error equations.
Lemma 3:
Suppose that there exist symmetric matrices
P_{ij}
and matrices
O_{ρ}
,
O_{η}
, and
G
such that following conditions hold:
for all
i
= 1,2, ⋯ ,
N
and
j
= 1,2, ⋯ ,
M
. The matrices
O_{ρ}
,
O_{η}
, φ, χ, and Π
_{i}
are defined as:
Then, matrix Ψ(
α
,
β
) defined by
is robustly stable.
Proof:
Consider the feasibility problem (23)(a). For each
i
, multiply the corresponding
j
= 1, ⋯ ,
M
inequalities by
β_{j}
and sum as mentioned below:
Similarly, multiply the resulting
i
= 1, ⋯ ,
N
inequalities by
α_{i}
and sum. Then, following inequalities can be obtained:
where the matrix
Since the inequality (25) is equivalent to following inequality:
Ψ(
α, β
) is robustly stable with a parameterdependent Lyapunov matrix
P
(
α, β
) by Lemma 1. Converting inequality (25) into inequality (26) is given in[Theorem 1.
21
].
Remark 1:
Since the system (5) has parametric uncertainty, the separation principle is no longer applicable. Thus, with the controller and observer gains computed in (15), (20), the closedloop system is not guaranteed to stable. Lemma 3 is a procedure to compensate the nonseparation principle by choosing the suitable observer model which stabilizes the estimation error equations.
In the feasibility problem (23), constraint (23)(a) is form of bilinear matrix inequality (BMI) due to the structural constraints in
O_{ρ}
,
O_{η}
.
 4.3 Iterative Linear Matrix Inequalities for selectingOρ,Oη
Unlike the linear matrix inequality (LMI), BMI formulation has some drawbacks such as difficulties for handling numerical errors and local optimization solver. Therefore, we have presented an algorithm which exploits LMI solver iteratively instead of BMI solver. This algorithm is called iterative linear matrix inequality (ILMI).
 *ILMI Algorithm
Step 0:
Select the initial observer model parameters
ρ_{i}
for all
i
= 1,2, ⋯ ,
N
and
η_{j}
for all
j
= 1,2, ⋯ ,
M
as the center of the vertices.
.
Step 1:
Solve the feasibility problem (23). If the feasibility problem (23) has the solution, these parameters can be used as observer model parameters. If feasibility problem (23) is infeasible, then go to the Step 2.
Step 2:
Change the observer model parameters
ρ_{i}
(
i
=1,⋯ ,
N
) and
η_{j}
(
j
=1,⋯ ,
M
) into the different values. Move to the Step 1.
Since the observer model parameters
ρ_{i}
for all
i
= 1,2, ⋯ ,
N
and
η_{j}
for all
j
= 1,2, ⋯ ,
M
are fixed in algorithm (it implies that matrices
O_{ρ}
and
O_{η}
are constant matrices and constraints (23)(c),(d),(e),(f) are removed), the feasibility problem (23) can be solved by using LMIs technique in Step 1. The observer model candidates can be obtained via ILMI algorithm and one may choose the suitable model for one’s control goal.
Remark 2:
In general, optimization packages solve an optimization problem in order to find a solution to the feasibility problem in (23). For example, a representative of such an optimization problem is given by
subject to (28
af
), (28
h
)
where
i
= 1,2, ⋯ ,
N
and
j
= 1,2, ⋯ ,
M
. It is obvious that a feasible solution to this optimization is also a feasible solution to (23). In addition to the optimization problem (27), in order to find a feasible solution to (23), it is also possible to consider various optimization problems whose cost functions take performance of the system into account.
 4.4 Analysis of reference tracking
In this subsection, it is proved that the proposed observer based output feedback control described in the previous sections successfully achieves offsetfree piecewise constant reference tracking.
Theorem 2:
Assume that the LMIs (14), (18), and feasibility problem (23) are feasible. The controller gain
K_{1}
and
K_{2}
are computed using the solution of (14), the observer gain
L
using that of (18), and the observer model
using that of (23). Then, the observer based feedback control
leads to successful reference tracking, where
is an estimated state which is provided from the state observer (16).
Proof:
Define the estimation error as a difference between the state and its estimated value
Then, the estimation error dynamic is given by
Moreover, the estimated state
and the controller state
z
are written as
Then, the whole closed loop system becomes
where Ψ(
α,β
) is defined in (24). Since the observer model
and
are selected in a way that the matrix Ψ(
α,β
) is robustly stable and reference
r
is constant, the estimated state
, estimation error
e
, and the controller state
z
converge to the unique constant equilibrium point
,
e
*,
z
* , respectively. Therefore, it follows from the controller equation that
It is equivalent to
This is the end of the proof.
5. Numerical Simulation Result
Consider the system with polytopic uncertainty (5). Simulation is done with vertex matrices
A_{j}
,
B_{j}
, and
C_{i}
given by
For the numerical simulations, uncertain plant parameters (
α
_{1}
= 0.4639,
α
_{2}
= 0.3123,
α
_{3}
= 0.2238) and (
β
_{1}
= 0.2264,
β
_{2}
= 0.4037,
β
_{3}
= 0.3317,
β
_{4}
= 0.0382) are selected arbitrarily. The reference signal is set to 35, 40, 0, and 20.
Consider the case where the state is unmeasurable. The controller and observer gains can be computed by solving proposed LMIs in (14), (18) as follows:
Besides, the observer model is computed by solving the feasibility problem (23) with ILMI algorithm.
Fig. 1
shows that the resulting observerbased controller successfully leads to piecewise constant reference tracking.
Simulation result with observer model parameters (ρ_{1} = 0.8, ρ_{2} = 0.1, ρ_{3} = 0.1) and (η_{1} = 0.4, : η_{2} = 0.3, η_{3} = 0.2, η_{4} = 0.1) The reference signal, output, and the input are plotted. Uncertain plant parameters: α_{1} = 0.4639, α_{2} = 0.3123, α_{3} = 0.2238, β_{1} = 0.2264, β_{2} = 0.4037, β_{3} = 0.3317, β_{4} = 0.0382 .
To verify the robustness of the proposed controller, similar simulation is done with the different uncertainty parameters
α
_{1}
= 0.8639,
α
_{2}
= 0.1123,
α
_{3}
= 0.0238,
β
_{1}
= 0.6264,
β
_{2}
= 0.3037,
β
_{3}
= 0.0317,
β
_{4}
= 0.0382. As depicted in
Fig. 2
the proposed controller also stabilized the different uncertain system.
Simulation result with observer model parameters (ρ_{1} = 0.8, ρ_{2} = 0.1, ρ_{3} = 0.1) and (η_{1} = 0.4, : η_{2} = 0.3, η_{3} = 0.2, η_{4} = 0.1) The reference signal, output, and the input are plotted. Uncertain plant parameters: α_{1} = 0.8639, α_{2} = 0.1123, α_{3} = 0.0238, β_{1} = 0.6264, β_{2} = 0.3037, β_{3} = 0.0317, β_{4} = 0.0382 .
To fully illustrate the purpose of this scheme, we show the case that for a badly chosen observer model can cause some unwanted behavior. The plant uncertainty parameters are the same as those used in
Fig. 2
. It is assumed that the observer model parameters are selected as the center of the polytopic set
,
. We can find out that in
Fig. 3
the control goal cannot be achieved by using the badly chosen observer model.
Simulation result with the badly chosen observer model: The reference signal, output, and the input are plotted. Uncertain plant parameters: α_{1} = 0.8639, α_{2} = 0.1123, α_{3} = 0.0238, β_{1} = 0.6264, β_{2} = 0.3037, β_{3} = 0.0317, β_{4} = 0.0382 .
6. Conclusion
This paper proposes an observerbased controller which achieves reference tracking for model uncertain linear time invariant systems. To this end, robust controller and observer gains are computed. In addition, the observer model is also treated as a design parameter and it is selected such that the closedloop system is stable. This scheme not only extends the applicable scope wider than the static output feedback controller but also deals with tracking problems for polytopic uncertain systems.
Future work includes observerbased robust tracking controller for inputconstrained uncertain systems and observerbased MPC (Model Predictive Control) for the uncertain system.
Acknowledgements
This work was supported by the National Research Foundation of Korea Grant funded by the Korean Government (NRF2012S1A2A1A01031675)
BIO
SangRok Oh He received his B.S degree in electrical and electronics engineering from CHUNGANG University, Korea, in 2013. He received his M.S degree from Seoul National University, Korea, in 2015. He is currently on duty for ROKAF (Republic of Korea Air Force) officer. His research interests are nonlinear control and MPC.
JungSu Kim He received BS., MS., and Ph.D degree in electrical engineering from Korea University. Since 2009 he has been with Dept. of Electrical and Information Engineering, Seoul Nat’l University of Science and Technology. His research interest includes MPC and its application to energy systems.
Hyungbo Shim He received his BS, MS, and PhD degrees from Seoul National University, Korea, in 1993, 1995, and 2000, respectively. From 2000 to 2001, he was a postdoctoral researcher at the Center for Control Engineering and Computation, University of California, Santa Barbara. In 2002, he joined the faculty of the Division of Electrical and Computer Engineering, Hanyang University, Seoul, Korea. From 2003, he has been with the Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering at Seoul National University, Korea, where he is currently an associate professor. His research interests include analysis and control of nonlinear systems. He had been an associate editor in European Journal of Control, and is currently for IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control and International Journal of Robust and Nonlinear Control.
Feron E.
,
Apkarian P.
,
Gahinet P.
1996
“Analysis and synthesis of robust control systems via parameterdependent Lyapunov functions,”
IEEE Transactions. Automatic Control
4
(7)
1041 
1046
Haddad W. M.
,
Kapila V.
1996
“Robust stabilization for discretetime systems with slowly timevarying uncertainty,”
Journal of Franklin Institude
333
(1)
71 
84
DOI : 10.1016/00160032(95)000879
Garofalo F.
,
Celentano G.
,
Glielmo L.
1993
“Stability robustness of interval matrices via Lyapunov quadratic forms,”
IEEE Transactions. Automatic Control
38
(2)
281 
284
DOI : 10.1109/9.250472
de Oliveira M. C.
,
Skelton R. E.
,
Moheimani S. R.
2001
“Stability tests for constrained linear systems,”
Springer
London
Perspectives in Robust Control
268
241 
257
Kothare M. V.
,
Balakrishnan V.
,
Morari M.
1996
“Robust constrained model predictive control using linear matrix inequalities,”
Automatica
32
(10)
1361 
1379
DOI : 10.1016/00051098(96)000635
Ackermann J.
,
Blue P.
2002
Robust Control: The Parameter Space Approach
Springer
Green M.
,
Limebeer D. J.
2012
Linear Robust Control
Pearson Education
Lien C. H.
2004
“An efficient method to design robust observerbased control of uncertain linear systems,”
Applied Mathematics and Computation
158
(1)
29 
44
DOI : 10.1016/j.amc.2003.08.062
Gu D. W.
,
Poon F. W.
2001
“A robust state observer scheme,”
IEEE Transactions. Automatic Control
46
(12)
1958 
1963
DOI : 10.1109/9.975500
Veluvolu K. C.
,
Soh Y. C.
,
Cao W.
2007
“Robust observer with sliding mode estimation for nonlinear uncertain systems,”
IET Control Theory & Applications
1
(5)
1533 
1540
DOI : 10.1049/ietcta:20060434
JenqDer C.
2007
“Robust output observerbased control of neutral uncertain systems with discrete and distributed time delays: LMI optimization approach,”
Chaos, Solitons & Fractals
34
(4)
1254 
1264
DOI : 10.1016/j.chaos.2006.03.123
Arzelier D.
,
Peaucelle D.
,
Salhi S.
2003
“Robust static output feedback stabilization for polytopic uncertain systems: improving the guaranteed performance bound,”
IFAC Symp. Robust Control Design
425 
430
Mehdi D.
,
Boukas E. K.
,
Bachelier O.
2004
“Static output feedback design for uncertain linear discrete time systems,”
IMA Journal of Mathematical Control and Information
21
1 
13
DOI : 10.1093/imamci/21.1.1
Fujimori A.
2005
“Descriptor polytopic model of aircraft and gain scheduling state feedback control,”
Japan Society of Aeronautical Space Sciences Trans
47
138 
145
Fujimori A.
,
Ljung L.
2005
“A polytopic modeling of aircraft by using system identification,”
IEEE International Conference on Control and Automation
Budapest
107 
112
Ljung L.
1999
System Identification – Theory for the User
Prentice Hall
Angelis G. Z.
2001
“System Analysis, Modelling and Control with Polytopic Linear Models,” Doctoral thesis
Technische Universiteit Eindhoven
Jin S. H.
,
Park J. B.
2001
“Robust H∞ filtering for polytopic uncertain systems via convex optimization,”
IET Control Theory & Applications
148
55 
59
DOI : 10.1049/ipcta:20010237
Oh S.
,
Kim J.S.
,
Shim H.
2014
“Robust stabilization of uncertain LTI Systems via observer model selection,”
Journal of Institute of Control, Robotics and Systems
(in Korean)
20
(8)
822 
827
DOI : 10.5302/J.ICROS.2014.14.0041
de Oliveira M. C.
,
Maurício. C.
,
Bernussou J.
,
Geromel J. C.
1999
“A new discretetime robust stability condition,”
Systems & Control Letters
37
(4)
261 
265
DOI : 10.1016/S01676911(99)000353
Boyd Stephen
,
El Ghaoui Laurent
,
Feron Eric
,
Balakrishnan V.
1994
“Linear Matrix Inequalities in System and Control Theory,”
SIAM
15
Garcia G.
,
Bernussou J.
,
Arzelier D.
1996
“Stabilization of an uncertain linear dynamic system by state and output feedback: a quadratic stabilizability approach,”
International Journal of Control
64
(5)
839 
858
DOI : 10.1080/00207179608921660