Output-Based Event-Triggered Control With Guaranteed ${\cal L}_{\infty}$-Gain and Improved and Decentralized Event-Triggering

Donkers, M.C.F.; Heemels, W.P.M.H.

doi:10.1109/tac.2011.2174696

Cited by 808 publications

(675 citation statements)

References 27 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

671

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The latter objective is particularly challenging when the system is affected by exogenous inputs [2] and/or when only an output of the plant is measured [6]. In addition, the quantization phenomenon is unavoidable in NCS due to the digital nature of the communication channel and the fact that only a finite amount of data can be transmitted over the network.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Input-to-state stabilizing event-triggered control for linear systems with output quantization

Abdelrahim

Dolk

Heemels

2016

2016 IEEE 55th Conference on Decision and Control (CDC)

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

To cite this version:M. Abdelrahim, V.S. Dolk Abstract-In this paper, we are interested in the stabilization of a linear plant based on output measurements that are subject to dynamic quantization. Moreover, to save communication resources, these measurements are transmitted to the controller using an output-based event-triggering condition. The proposed event-triggering mechanism and the dynamic quantization strategy ensure an input-to-state stability (ISS) property of a set around the origin with respect to the external disturbances. The existence of a strictly positive lower bound is ensured on both the inter-transmission times and the inter-zoom times in order to prevent the occurrence of Zeno behaviour. The chattering between zoom-in and zoom-out actions is avoided, and the zoom variable of the dynamic quantizer is guaranteed to be bounded. We characterize the inherent tradeoff between transmissions and quantization in terms of design parameters that can be tuned by the user. The effectiveness of the approach is illustrated on a numerical example.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Input-to-state stabilizing event-triggered control for linear systems with output quantization

Abdelrahim

Dolk

Heemels

2016

2016 IEEE 55th Conference on Decision and Control (CDC)

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…8 To mitigate the otiose communication of the sampling data and reduce the transmission-network loads, event-driven control approach is developed. [9][10][11] Compared with conventional schemes of transmitting all the sampled data, the event-driven control technique can eliminate some trivial sampled data, that is, only the sampled data can be transmitted after the sampling implementation when its value satisfies some prescribed 1 event-driven condition. Currently, some event-driven/ self-triggered control strategies have been reported.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Non-uniform sampling finite-time control for networked control systems via event-driven transmission

Liu

2016

Advances in Mechanical Engineering

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article investigates the networked finite-time control problem for a class of continuous-time linear systems. A novel event-driven data transmission scheme is invoked to reduce the network loads. Moreover, the non-uniform sampling triggered by sampling jitter or the fault of hold circuits is taken into account. By employing an input-delay approach, the underlying system is first reformulated to linear system with time-varying delays. Based on the Lyapunov-Krasovskii functional method, the stabilizing controller is then designed in the finite-time control sense, such that the closed-loop system is finite-time bounded. Potential and advantage of the developed techniques are demonstrated by a numerical example and an application to damping boring bar system.

show abstract

“…We term this new triggering scheme parsimonious triggering, as it introduces a new condition that reduces the number of necessary events. Related papers are Donkers and Heemels (2010), Mazo and Tabuada (2011) and Lemmon (2009a, 2011). Earlier accounts of our results have appeared in De Persis, Wirth (2011, 2012).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Parsimonious event-triggered distributed control: A Zeno free approach

2013

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Output-Based Event-Triggered Control With Guaranteed ${\cal L}_{\infty}$-Gain and Improved and Decentralized Event-Triggering

Cited by 808 publications

References 27 publications

Input-to-state stabilizing event-triggered control for linear systems with output quantization

Input-to-state stabilizing event-triggered control for linear systems with output quantization

Non-uniform sampling finite-time control for networked control systems via event-driven transmission

Parsimonious event-triggered distributed control: A Zeno free approach

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About