Stabilization of systems with changing dynamics

  • Milos Zefran
  • Joel W. Burdick
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 1386)


We present a framework for designing stable control schemes for systems whose dynamic equations change as they evolve on the state space. It is usually difficult or even impossible to design a single controller that would stabilize such a system. An appealing alternative are switching control schemes, where a different controller is employed on each of the regions defined by different dynamic characteristics and the stability of the overall system is ensured through appropriate switching scheme. We derive sufficient conditions for the stability of a switching control scheme' in a form that can be used for controller design. An important feature of the proposed framework is that although the overall hierarchy can be very complicated, the stability depends only on the immediate relation of each controller to its neighbors. This makes the application of our results particularly straight forward. The methodology is applied to stabilization of a shimmying wheel, where changes in the dynamics are due, to switches between sliding and rolling.


Partial Order Hybrid System Lyapunov Function Controller Design Constraint Force 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    R. Alur, C. Courcoubetis, T. Henzinger, and P. H. Ho, “Hybrid automata: an algorithmic approach to the specification and verification of hybrid systems,” in LNCS 736, pp. 209–229, Springer-Verlag, 1993.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    X. Nicollin, A. Olivero, J. Sifakis, and S. Yovine, “An approach to the description and analysis of hybrid systems,” in LNCS 736, pp. 149–178, Springer-Verlag, 1993.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    R. W. Brockett, “Hybrid models for motion control systems,” in Essays in Control: Perspectives in the Theory and its Applications, pp. 29–53, Boston: Birkhäuser, 1993.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    A. Nerode and W. Kohn, “Models for hybrid systems: Automata, topologies, stability,” in LNCS 736, pp. 317–356, Springer-Verlag, 1993.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    A. Back, J. Guckenheimer, and M. Myers, “A dynamical simulation facility for hybrid systems,” in LNCS 736, pp. 255–267, Springer-Verlag, 1993.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    M. S. Branicky, V. S. Borkar, and S. K. Mitter, “A unified framework for hybrid control,” in Proceedings of the 33rd IEEE Conference on Decision and Control, (Lake Buena Vista, FL), pp. 4228–4234, 1994.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    J. Lygeros, D. N. Godbole, and S. S. Sastry, “A game theoretic approach to hybrid system design,” in LNCS 1066, pp. 1–12, Springer-Verlag, 1996.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    A. Puri, Theory of hybrid systems and discrete event systems. PhD thesis, U. C. Berkeley, 1995.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    A. Deshpande and P. Varaiya, “Viable control of hybrid systems,” in LNCS 999, pp. 128–147, Springer-Verlag, 1995.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    W. Kohn, A. Nerode, J. B. Remmel, and X. Ge, “Multiple agent hybrid control: carrier manifolds and chattering approximations to optimal control,” in Proceedings of the 33rd IEEE Conference on Decision and Control, (Lake Buena Vista, FL), pp. 4221–4227, 1994.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    M. S. Branicky and S. K. Mitter, “Algorithms for optimal hybrid control,” in Proceedings of the 34th IEEE Conference on Decision and Control, (New Orleans, LA), pp. 2661–2666, 1995.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    M. Źefran, J. Desai, and V. Kumar, “ Continuous motion plans for robotic systems with changing dynamic behavior,” in Robotic motion and manipulation, pp. 113–128, Wellesley, MA: A K Peters, 1997.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    B. Goodwine and J. W. Burdick, “A general method for motion planning for quasi-static legged robotic locomotion” Preprint, 1997.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    T. Henzinger, Z. Manna, and A. Pnueli, “Temporal proof methodologies for timed transition systems,” Inf. and Comp., vol. 112, no. 2, pp. 273–337, 1994.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    T. Henzinger, P. Kopke, A. Puri, and P. Varaiya, “What's decidable about hybrid automata,” in 27th Ann. ACM Symp. on the Theory of Computing, 1995.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    N. Lynch, “Modelling and verification of automated transit systems, using timed automata, invariants and simulations,” in LNCS 1066, pp. 449–463, Springer-Verlag, 1996.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    M. S. Branicky, “Stability of switched and hybrid systems,” in Proceedings of the 33rd IEEE Conference on Decision and Control, (Lake Buena Vista, FL), pp. 3498–3503,1994.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    J. Malmborg, B. M. Bernhardsson, and K. J. Åström, “A stabilizing switching scheme for multi-controller systems,” in 13th IFAC World Congress, (San Francisco, CA), 1996.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    P. Peleties and R. DeCarlo, “Asymptotic stability of m-switched systems using Lyapunov-like functions,” in American Control Conf., (Boston), pp. 1679–1684, 1991.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    R. R. Burridge, A. A. Rizzi, and D. E. Koditschek, “Sequential composition of dynamically dexterous robot behaviors” Preprint, 1996.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    G. Stépán, “Chaotic motion of wheels,” Vehicle System Dynamics, vol. 20, pp. 341–351, 1991.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    B. Goodwine and G. Stépán, “Controlling unstable rolling phenomena” To appear in the Journal of Vibration and Control, 1997.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    W. Hahn, Stability of motion. Springer-Verlag, 1967.Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    N. Rouche, P. Habets, and M. LaLoy, Stability theory by Liapunov's direct method. New York: Springer-Verlag, 1977.Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    A. Vannelli and M. Vidyasagar, “Theory of partial stability theorems, converse theorems, and maximal Lyapunov functions,” in Proc. Annu. Southeast Symp. Syst. Theory, (Piscataway, NJ), pp. 16–20, 1980.Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    M. Žefran and J. W. Burdick, “Switching control on embedded manifolds,” tech. rep., Caltech, 1997.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 1998

Authors and Affiliations

  • Milos Zefran
    • 1
  • Joel W. Burdick
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Mechanical Engineering, MC 104-44California Institute of TechnologyPasadena

Personalised recommendations