Event-triggered control for discrete-time linear systems subject to bounded disturbance

Abstract

Summary This paper considers event‐triggering controller design for directly observable discrete‐time linear systems subject to bounded disturbances. The main control objective is diminishing the influence aroused by the disturbances despite a reduction of the communication. Criteria are given to design feedback controllers in order to guarantee that systems are uniformly ultimately bounded in an ellipsoidal‐positive invariant set, which is used as an estimate of control performance for disturbance rejection. An optimization for minimizing the ellipsoidal‐positive invariant set is achieved by synthesizing the feedback control gain and the given event‐triggering conditions in LMIs. The effectiveness and applicability of the controller are illustrated by simulations and experimental implementations. Copyright © 2015 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Decentralized Integral-Based Event-Triggered Stabilization for Linear Plant with Actuator Saturation and Output Feedback

“…However, Ref. [30] pointed out that the volume optimization can lead ellipsoids to be "flat" in some directions. On the contrary, the trace optimization yields the ellipsoids that tend to be homogeneous in all directions.…”

“…On the contrary, the trace optimization yields the ellipsoids that tend to be homogeneous in all directions. Referring to [18,30], we consider the following optimization problem to find the largest ellipsoid for given K, L, ρ 0 and some ε 1 , ε 2 > 0: min −tr(P −1…”

Event‐triggered control via impulses for exponential stabilization of discrete‐time delayed systems and networks

“…The (strict) inequality of event triggering condition at event instants brings difficulty and inaccuracy in estimating the state under ETC and thus it may lead to conservative conditions. To the best of our knowledge, fewer results have been reported for solving these ETC issues for discrete‐time dynamical systems and networks despite the recent works in the literature …”

“…For instances, for continuous-time systems, these include centralized or decentralized ETC in a framework of input-to-state stability 1,4 ; output-based decentralized ETC for linear systems 3,5 ; distributed ETC for interconnected subsystems 6,7 ; event-triggered synchronization control 8 ; ETC via the method of delayed system 9 ; quantized and robust ETC for nonlinear systems via small-gain approach 10,11 ; ETC for stochastic systems 12,13 ; and stabilization via event-triggered impulsive control (ETIC). 14 For discrete-time systems, similarly, there are stabilization via ETC for discrete-time systems, [15][16][17][18] event-triggered strategies for control with an extension to self-triggered formulation, 15 event-triggered model predictive control, 19 ETC subject to disturbances or parameter-varyings, 20,21 consensus via event-triggered and self-triggered control, 22 and ETC via dynamic thresholds. 16 Notwithstanding the merits of ETC for dynamical systems and networks, it should be noted that there are several key issues in ETC design.…”

Event‐triggered control for a class of strict‐feedback nonlinear systems

“…However, it is sometimes less preferable, especially during the peak of communications, because the sampling takes place periodically regardless of whether the current behaviors of the system states needs or not. In order to make up for the shortcomings of periodic data sampling, another control method, namely, event‐based control strategy, emerges as the times require . More specifically, an introduction of event‐triggered control and self‐triggered control for linear systems was provided in the work of Heemels et al Subsequently, Wu et al investigated the problem of event‐triggered control for directly observable discrete‐time linear systems subject to exogenous disturbances.…”