2007
DOI: 10.1155/2007/93904
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

The Best Achievable2Tracking Performances for SIMO Feedback Control Systems

Abstract: This paper is concerned with the inherentℋ2tracking performance limitation of single-input and multiple-output (SIMO) linear time-invariant (LTI) feedback control systems. The performance is measured by the tracking error between a step reference input and the plant output with additional penalty on control input. We employ the plant augmentation strategy, which enables us to derive analytical closed-form expressions of the best achievable performance not only for discrete-time system, but also for continuous-… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
4
1

Citation Types

1
6
0

Year Published

2007
2007
2020
2020

Publication Types

Select...
5
2
1

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 15 publications
(8 citation statements)
references
References 15 publications
(24 reference statements)
1
6
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The results in [5] show that not only non-minimum phase zeros and unstable poles affect the optimal performance, but also the total variation of the plant direction with frequency. Similar results are presented in [6], where closed form expressions are derived for discrete time SIMO systems, and an unify view of both continuous and discrete-time results is discussed. The results in [5], [6] assume that the reference vector lies in the subspace spanned This work was supported by grants Anillo ACT53, FONDECYT 1100692, and CONICYT through the Advanced Human Capital Program.…”
Section: Introductionsupporting
confidence: 59%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…The results in [5] show that not only non-minimum phase zeros and unstable poles affect the optimal performance, but also the total variation of the plant direction with frequency. Similar results are presented in [6], where closed form expressions are derived for discrete time SIMO systems, and an unify view of both continuous and discrete-time results is discussed. The results in [5], [6] assume that the reference vector lies in the subspace spanned This work was supported by grants Anillo ACT53, FONDECYT 1100692, and CONICYT through the Advanced Human Capital Program.…”
Section: Introductionsupporting
confidence: 59%
“…Performance bounds in control systems have been the subject of much interest in the literature, and significant results have been obtained (see, e.g, [1], [2], [3], [4], [5], [6], and the references therein). The main contribution of these works is the development of closed form expressions for the best achievable performance, when a feedback control system is considered.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Note that f(1)=(1p)2ε. In addition, one calculates 1eminfQscriptRscriptℋ∥∥W1z122+∥∥W2z122=ε2ππ+πε(1p)2Re{f}11cosωnormaldω. Applying the lemma 1 from yields that 12ππ+πε(1p)2Re{f}11cosωdω=ε(1p)2f(1). Hence, by invoking lemma 2 in , one has ε(1p)2f(1)=12ππ+πlogε(1p)2f(e)×dω1cosω.…”
Section: Lower Bound Of Tracking Performancementioning
confidence: 95%
“…This is because the underlying continuous domain descriptions cannot be obtained by setting sampling period to zero in the discrete domain approximations. In optimal tracking error control problem, for instance, contribution of nonminimum phase zeros for continuous and discrete-time systems are provided in completely different ways, see [3,7]. The delta operator has often been proven entailing many advantages in connecting discrete-time and continuoustime systems, such as control synthesis [4], control design [5], estimation [9] and filtering [11].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%