2016
DOI: 10.1109/tcst.2016.2526639
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

A Distributed Control Reconfiguration and Accommodation for Consensus Achievement of Multiagent Systems Subject to Actuator Faults

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
5

Citation Types

0
11
0

Year Published

2019
2019
2020
2020

Publication Types

Select...
6
1

Relationship

2
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 40 publications
(11 citation statements)
references
References 35 publications
0
11
0
Order By: Relevance
“…However, in active FTC approaches, parameters and/or the structure of the nominal controller are reconfigured according to the occurred fault and they can be divided into two general categories, namely with or without a separate fault detection, isolation and identification (FDII) unit in their structure. A class of active FTC approaches requires an FDII unit that gives, in real time, information regarding the place and the severity of the fault and according to this information, the controller is reconfigured [12–19]. Other active FTC approaches are based on an adaptive control structure without requiring a separate FDII unit [20–25].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…However, in active FTC approaches, parameters and/or the structure of the nominal controller are reconfigured according to the occurred fault and they can be divided into two general categories, namely with or without a separate fault detection, isolation and identification (FDII) unit in their structure. A class of active FTC approaches requires an FDII unit that gives, in real time, information regarding the place and the severity of the fault and according to this information, the controller is reconfigured [12–19]. Other active FTC approaches are based on an adaptive control structure without requiring a separate FDII unit [20–25].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Our proposed approach has the following main distinctions with previous works reported in the literature, namely: (i) the proposed control schemes in [13–17, 20, 22, 24, 31] are only developed for a specific mission for the multi‐agent systems while our proposed approach is mission‐independent and can be easily augmented to the existing nominal controller for each agent, (ii) approaches in [12–19] are based on the existence of the FDII unit, while our approach does not require it, (iii) approaches in [13–17, 20, 22, 24, 32] are based on the state feedback while our approach only requires output measurement, (iv) approaches in [13–17] require an on‐line parameter design and controller reconfiguration, while in our proposed approach, all parameters are designed off‐line, (v) it is assumed in approaches of [13–17, 20, 22, 24, 32–35] that multi‐agent systems are homogeneous, while this assumption is not needed in our proposed approach, and (vi) in this work, the external disturbance and additive actuator faults are considered, while in [13,14,24] external disturbance and in [13–16] additive actuator fault have not been considered. To summarize, Table 1 presents a comparison between the proposed approach and other works in the literature.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In this respect, the research of fault tolerant control (FTC) has been widely concerned since FTC can keep the closed-loop control performance in case of faults. Some representative results are available [4][5][6][7][8][9][10]. They can be roughly divided into two types: active and passive.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…They can be roughly divided into two types: active and passive. Passive fault-tolerant control is to control the faulty system with the same design controller, while active fault-tolerant control is to design the corresponding controller according to different faults, including control reconfiguration [5][6][7], fault compensation [8][9] and fault hiding [10]. In industrial processes, the model based on data may not be consistent with the actual one.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…However, for a complex large object like MAS, the occurrence of fault is often unavoidable. In a MAS, common faults are classified into the following types: actuator fault (Gallehdari et al, 2016; Xie et al, 2016), sensor fault (Chang et al, 2017), communication fault (Zhao and Yang, 2018) and so on. In this paper, we mainly investigate the actuator fault problem of MAS.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%