1977
DOI: 10.1109/tac.1977.1101435
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Eigenvalue-generalized eigenvector assignment with state feedback

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
42
0

Year Published

1980
1980
2014
2014

Publication Types

Select...
7
1
1

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 128 publications
(42 citation statements)
references
References 1 publication
0
42
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Where methods [1], [4], [5] all employ parameter matrices of dimension m × n, the parameter matrices in [6] and [7] have dimension n × n. In our recent papers [8]- [9], we gave a novel parametric form for X and F based on the famous pole placement algorithm of Moore [10]. This parameterisation employed parameter matrices of dimension m × n, but required Λ to be diagonal, and hence also assumes the closed-loop eigenvalues have multiplicities of at most m. Very recently in our papers [11]- [12] we generalized this parametric form to accommodate arbitrary multiplicities; the method was based on the pole placement method of Klein and Moore [13]. The principal merit of this approach was to obtain a parameterisation that combines the generality of [6] and [7] with the computational efficiency that comes from an m × n dimensional parameter matrix.…”
Section: X(t) = a X(t) + B U(t)mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Where methods [1], [4], [5] all employ parameter matrices of dimension m × n, the parameter matrices in [6] and [7] have dimension n × n. In our recent papers [8]- [9], we gave a novel parametric form for X and F based on the famous pole placement algorithm of Moore [10]. This parameterisation employed parameter matrices of dimension m × n, but required Λ to be diagonal, and hence also assumes the closed-loop eigenvalues have multiplicities of at most m. Very recently in our papers [11]- [12] we generalized this parametric form to accommodate arbitrary multiplicities; the method was based on the pole placement method of Klein and Moore [13]. The principal merit of this approach was to obtain a parameterisation that combines the generality of [6] and [7] with the computational efficiency that comes from an m × n dimensional parameter matrix.…”
Section: X(t) = a X(t) + B U(t)mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…He showed that there is a considerable design freedom beyond the simple pole placement that allows the controller designer to both place the eigenvalues and assign the related eigenvectors; thus, both the speed of response that is determined by the closedloop eigenvalues, and the shape of response that is related to the closed-loop eigenvectors can be controlled. Klein and Moore [4] also presented an algorithm for non-distinct closed-loop eigenvalues and their related eigenvectors keeping the full state feedback scheme by calculating the basis of the null space of the combined system.…”
Section: Eigenstructure Assignmentmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This method identifies the class of achievable eigenvectors and describes explicitly the generalized eigenvectors associated with the assigned eigenvalues. Their approaches to eigenstructure assignment are similar to [3,4]; however, instead of taking an ad hoc approach by identifying the appropriate closed-loop eigenvectors, the design freedom apperas in terms of choosing the appropriate free parameters in the process of finding the state feedback gain matrix. This leads to extra free parameters if the entire open-loop eigenvalues are not required to be moved [7].…”
Section: Eigenstructure Assignmentmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The method of eigenvalue and eigenvector assignment with state feedback [3], [4]» as well as simulation of the solution of (5.3) were used to calculate the finite dimensional stabilizing feedback operator.…”
Section: ) and (42) Respectively Then X(t) = Xr+-i It -î-*H)mentioning
confidence: 99%