Preface |
|
xi | |
|
1 Introduction of basic knowledge |
|
|
1 | (36) |
|
1.1 Linear matrix inequalities |
|
|
1 | (20) |
|
1.1.1 What are linear matrix inequalities? |
|
|
1 | (7) |
|
1.1.2 Useful lemmas for linear matrix inequalities |
|
|
8 | (6) |
|
1.1.3 Advantages of linear matrix inequalities |
|
|
14 | (1) |
|
1.1.4 Some standard linear matrix inequalitie problems |
|
|
15 | (6) |
|
1.2 Spacecraft attitude kinematics and dynamics |
|
|
21 | (16) |
|
1.2.1 Attitude representations |
|
|
22 | (6) |
|
1.2.2 Attitude kinematics |
|
|
28 | (3) |
|
|
31 | (3) |
|
|
34 | (3) |
|
2 State feedback nonfragile control |
|
|
37 | (26) |
|
|
37 | (1) |
|
|
38 | (5) |
|
2.2.1 Attitude dynamics modeling |
|
|
38 | (4) |
|
|
42 | (1) |
|
2.3 State feedback nonfragile control law |
|
|
43 | (7) |
|
|
43 | (1) |
|
2.3.2 Sufficient conditions under additive perturbation |
|
|
44 | (4) |
|
2.3.3 Sufficient conditions under multiplicative perturbation |
|
|
48 | (2) |
|
|
50 | (9) |
|
2.4.1 Simulation results under additive perturbation |
|
|
51 | (2) |
|
2.4.2 Simulation results under multiplicative perturbation |
|
|
53 | (2) |
|
2.4.3 Simulation results using a mixed H2/Hm controller |
|
|
55 | (4) |
|
|
59 | (4) |
|
|
60 | (3) |
|
3 Dynamic output feedback nonfragile-control |
|
|
63 | (44) |
|
|
63 | (2) |
|
|
65 | (6) |
|
3.2.1 Attitude system description |
|
|
65 | (3) |
|
3.2.2 Nonfragile control problem |
|
|
68 | (2) |
|
|
70 | (1) |
|
3.3 Dynamic output feedback nonfragile control law design |
|
|
71 | (16) |
|
|
71 | (5) |
|
3.3.2 Controller design under additive perturbation |
|
|
76 | (3) |
|
3.3.3 Controller design under multiplicative perturbation |
|
|
79 | (2) |
|
3.3.4 Controller design under coexisting additive and multiplicative perturbations |
|
|
81 | (6) |
|
|
87 | (18) |
|
3.4.1 Simulation results under additive perturbation |
|
|
87 | (6) |
|
3.4.2 Simulation results under multiplicative perturbation |
|
|
93 | (9) |
|
3.4.3 Simulation results under coexisting additive and multiplicative perturbations |
|
|
102 | (3) |
|
|
105 | (2) |
|
|
105 | (2) |
|
4 Observer-based fault tolerant delayed control |
|
|
107 | (32) |
|
|
107 | (3) |
|
|
110 | (3) |
|
4.2.1 Attitude system description |
|
|
110 | (3) |
|
|
113 | (1) |
|
4.3 Observer-based fault tolerant control scheme |
|
|
113 | (14) |
|
4.3.1 Intermediate observer design |
|
|
113 | (1) |
|
4.3.2 Delayed controller design |
|
|
114 | (1) |
|
|
115 | (12) |
|
|
127 | (9) |
|
4.4.1 Simulation results using the proposed controller |
|
|
128 | (4) |
|
4.4.2 Simulation results using the prediction-based sampled-data Hx controller |
|
|
132 | (2) |
|
4.4.3 Comparison analysis using different controllers |
|
|
134 | (2) |
|
|
136 | (3) |
|
|
136 | (3) |
|
5 Observer-based fault tolerant nonfragile control |
|
|
139 | (38) |
|
|
139 | (3) |
|
|
142 | (6) |
|
5.2.1 Attitude system description |
|
|
142 | (4) |
|
5.2.2 Stochastically intermediate observer design |
|
|
146 | (1) |
|
5.2.3 Nonfragile controller design |
|
|
147 | (1) |
|
|
148 | (1) |
|
5.3 Feasible solution for both cases |
|
|
148 | (8) |
|
|
148 | (1) |
|
5.3.2 Sufficient conditions under additive perturbation |
|
|
149 | (3) |
|
5.3.3 Sufficient conditions under multiplicative perturbation |
|
|
152 | (4) |
|
|
156 | (17) |
|
5.4.1 Comparison analysis under additive perturbation |
|
|
158 | (8) |
|
5.4.2 Comparison analysis under multiplicative perturbation |
|
|
166 | (7) |
|
|
173 | (4) |
|
|
173 | (4) |
|
6 Disturbance observer-based control with input MRCs |
|
|
177 | (28) |
|
|
177 | (3) |
|
|
180 | (2) |
|
6.2.1 Attitude system description |
|
|
180 | (2) |
|
|
182 | (1) |
|
6.3 Controller design and analysis |
|
|
182 | (9) |
|
|
183 | (1) |
|
6.3.2 Coexisting conditions for observer and controller gains |
|
|
184 | (1) |
|
|
185 | (6) |
|
|
191 | (11) |
|
6.4.1 Nonzero angular rates |
|
|
192 | (3) |
|
|
195 | (2) |
|
6.4.3 Evaluation indices for the three conditions |
|
|
197 | (3) |
|
6.4.4 Parametric influence on control performance |
|
|
200 | (2) |
|
|
202 | (3) |
|
|
203 | (2) |
|
7 Improved mixed control with poles assignment constraint |
|
|
205 | (28) |
|
|
205 | (3) |
|
|
208 | (3) |
|
7.2.1 Flexible spacecraft dynamics with two bending modes |
|
|
208 | (1) |
|
7.2.2 Ho, and H2 performance constraint |
|
|
209 | (1) |
|
|
210 | (1) |
|
|
211 | (1) |
|
7.3 Improved mixed H2/H∞ control law |
|
|
211 | (8) |
|
|
211 | (2) |
|
|
213 | (4) |
|
7.3.3 Mixed H2/H∞ control |
|
|
217 | (2) |
|
|
219 | (11) |
|
7.4.1 Simulation results using static output feedback controller |
|
|
220 | (2) |
|
7.4.2 Simulation results using improved mixed H2/Hoo controller |
|
|
222 | (5) |
|
7.4.3 Simulation results using a traditional mixed H2/Hx controller |
|
|
227 | (3) |
|
7.4.4 Comparison analysis using different controllers |
|
|
230 | (1) |
|
|
230 | (3) |
|
|
231 | (2) |
|
8 Nonfragile H∞ control with input constraints |
|
|
233 | (50) |
|
|
233 | (3) |
|
|
236 | (10) |
|
8.2.1 Attitude system description of flexible spacecraft |
|
|
236 | (2) |
|
8.2.2 Passive and active vibration suppression cases |
|
|
238 | (2) |
|
8.2.3 Brief introduction on piezoelectric actuators |
|
|
240 | (3) |
|
8.2.4 Improved model and control objective |
|
|
243 | (3) |
|
8.3 Nonfragile HK control law |
|
|
246 | (6) |
|
8.3.1 Sufficient conditions under additive perturbation |
|
|
246 | (4) |
|
8.3.2 Sufficient conditions under multiplicative perturbation |
|
|
250 | (2) |
|
|
252 | (27) |
|
8.4.1 Comparisons of control performance under additive perturbation |
|
|
254 | (10) |
|
8.4.2 Comparisons of control performance under multiplicative perturbation |
|
|
264 | (10) |
|
8.4.3 Simulation comparison analysis |
|
|
274 | (5) |
|
|
279 | (4) |
|
|
280 | (3) |
|
9 Antidisturbance control with active vibration suppression |
|
|
283 | (40) |
|
|
283 | (2) |
|
|
285 | (8) |
|
9.2.1 Attitude dynamics modeling |
|
|
285 | (7) |
|
|
292 | (1) |
|
|
293 | (1) |
|
9.3 Antidisturbance control law with input magnitude, and rate constraints |
|
|
293 | (16) |
|
9.3.1 Stochastically intermediate observer design |
|
|
293 | (2) |
|
9.3.2 Antidisturbance controller design |
|
|
295 | (1) |
|
9.3.3 Sufficient conditions for uniform ultimate boundedness |
|
|
296 | (3) |
|
9.3.4 Sufficient conditions for H∞ control strategy |
|
|
299 | (2) |
|
9.3.5 Sufficient conditions for input magnitude, and rate constraints |
|
|
301 | (8) |
|
|
309 | (11) |
|
9.4.1 Simulation results using an antidisturbance controller |
|
|
311 | (6) |
|
9.4.2 Simulation results using a mixed H2/H∞ controller |
|
|
317 | (3) |
|
|
320 | (3) |
|
|
320 | (3) |
|
10 Chaotic attitude tracking control |
|
|
323 | (14) |
|
|
323 | (1) |
|
|
324 | (6) |
|
10.2.1 Chaotic attitude dynamics |
|
|
324 | (2) |
|
10.2.2 Chaotic system characteristics and chaotic attractor |
|
|
326 | (1) |
|
10.2.3 Tracking error dynamics and control objective |
|
|
326 | (4) |
|
10.3 Adaptive variable structure control law |
|
|
330 | (2) |
|
|
332 | (3) |
|
|
335 | (2) |
|
|
335 | (2) |
|
11 Underactuated chaotic attitude stabilization control |
|
|
337 | (24) |
|
|
337 | (2) |
|
|
339 | (5) |
|
11.2.1 Chaotic attitude system description |
|
|
339 | (1) |
|
11.2.2 Two examples of Chen and Lu systems |
|
|
340 | (2) |
|
|
342 | (2) |
|
11.3 Sliding mode control law |
|
|
344 | (4) |
|
11.3.1 Reference trajectory design |
|
|
344 | (1) |
|
|
345 | (3) |
|
|
348 | (9) |
|
11.4.1 Simulation results for the failure of one actuator |
|
|
349 | (2) |
|
11.4.2 Simulation results for failure of two actuators |
|
|
351 | (6) |
|
|
357 | (4) |
|
|
357 | (4) |
Index |
|
361 | |