2000
DOI: 10.1080/002071700219876
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Finite word length stability issues in an l1 framework

Abstract: The report addresses the digital controller structure problem for the closed loop stability of a feedback digital control system subject to Finite Word Length (FWL). A new method of maximizing the stability subject to perturbations in the digital controller implementation is proposed. The approach is based on structured perturbation theory in an`1 framework. It can be simply extended to consider closed loop performance and robustness. The method is demonstrated with application examples.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
5

Citation Types

0
19
0

Year Published

2001
2001
2006
2006

Publication Types

Select...
4
2
2

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 28 publications
(19 citation statements)
references
References 5 publications
0
19
0
Order By: Relevance
“…However, different realizations possess different degrees of stability robustness to FWL errors. An FWL design is to select optimal realizations for the given filter/control law by optimizing some FWL stability measures, such as the Frobenius-norm pole sensitivity measure υ f [4], the l 1 -based stability measure υ l [5], the 1-norm pole sensitivity measure υ 1 [6], [7], the stability radius measure υ r [8] and the pole sensitivity sum measure υ s [9]. In fact, the FWL stability measure υ proposed in [10] quantifies the FWL stability characteristics of a realization best.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…However, different realizations possess different degrees of stability robustness to FWL errors. An FWL design is to select optimal realizations for the given filter/control law by optimizing some FWL stability measures, such as the Frobenius-norm pole sensitivity measure υ f [4], the l 1 -based stability measure υ l [5], the 1-norm pole sensitivity measure υ 1 [6], [7], the stability radius measure υ r [8] and the pole sensitivity sum measure υ s [9]. In fact, the FWL stability measure υ proposed in [10] quantifies the FWL stability characteristics of a realization best.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…There are generally two types of FWL errors in the digital controller implementation. The first one is the rounding errors that occur in arithmetic operations [4], [5], and the second one is the controller parameter representation errors which have critical influence on closedloop stability [6], [7], [8], [9], [10], [11], [12]. Typically, these two types of errors are investigated separately for the reason of mathematical tractability.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This property can be utilized to select "optimal" realizations that optimize some FWL performance measures. Various FWL performance measures have been investigated, and these include the averaged roundoff noise gain [5], the complex stability radius measure [6], the transfer function sensitivity measure [7], the l 1 -based stability measure [8], the Frobenius-norm pole sensitivity measure [9], and the 1-norm pole sensitivity measure [10], [11]. In the direct strategy, controller design involves explicitly the considerations of FWL implementation.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Due to the lack of analytical solutions to optimal FWL controller realization problems, numerical optimization methods have been adopted to search for optimal realizations [6]- [9]. A numerical optimization approach can be effective if the dimension of the problem is small.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…where ¡ denotes the Frobenius norm, that is, for any complex-valued matrix Å, Å Õ ØÖ´Å À ŵ (6) with À denoting the conjugate transpose operator.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%