On the inherent robustness of optimal and suboptimal nonlinear MPC

被引:81
作者
Allan, Douglas A. [1 ]
Bates, Cuyler N. [1 ]
Risbeck, Michael J. [1 ]
Rawlings, James B. [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Wisconsin, Dept Chem & Biol Engn, Madison, WI 53706 USA
关键词
Robust stability; Suboptimal model predictive control; Difference inclusions; Inherent robustness; Terminal constraints; MODEL-PREDICTIVE CONTROL; TO-STATE STABILITY; SYSTEMS;
D O I
10.1016/j.sysconle.2017.03.005
中图分类号
TP [自动化技术、计算机技术];
学科分类号
0812 ;
摘要
Suboptimal model predictive control (MPC) is a control algorithm that uses suboptimal solutions to optimal control problems to provide control actions quickly. In MPC, terminal control laws and terminal region constraints are frequently used to ensure recursive feasibility and stability. Suboptimal MPC was proven to be inherently robust for systems with soft terminal region constraints in Pannocchia et al. (2011). We extend that work to systems with hard terminal region constraints. If these hard constraints are defined as sublevel sets of appropriate terminal cost functions, a well-chosen initial guess (warm start) for the optimization algorithm is robustly feasible. As a result, the system controlled by suboptimal MPC admits an ISS-Lyapunov function and is therefore inherently robust. The authors of Yu et al. (2014) noted that the result in Pannocchia et al. (2011) applied only to systems with continuous optimal cost functions. However, discontinuous optimal cost functions may be present in systems with hard terminal region constraints. We include a simple example of a continuous dynamical system with a provably discontinuous optimal value function that, as a consequence of the main result of this work, is inherently robust. This example is to our knowledge the first such system reported in the literature. (C) 2017 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:68 / 78
页数:11
相关论文
共 24 条
[1]  
Allan DA, 2016, P AMER CONTR CONF, P32, DOI 10.1109/ACC.2016.7524887
[2]  
Bartle R.G., 2000, Introduction to Real Analysis, V2
[3]   Examples when nonlinear model predictive control is nonrobust [J].
Grimm, G ;
Messina, MJ ;
Tuna, SE ;
Teel, AR .
AUTOMATICA, 2004, 40 (10) :1729-1738
[4]   Nominally robust model predictive control with state constraints [J].
Grimm, Gene ;
Messina, Michael J. ;
Tuna, Sezai E. ;
Teel, Andrew R. .
IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON AUTOMATIC CONTROL, 2007, 52 (10) :1856-1870
[5]   Input-to-state stability for discrete-time nonlinear systems [J].
Jiang, ZP ;
Wang, Y .
AUTOMATICA, 2001, 37 (06) :857-869
[6]  
Khalil H., 2014, Control of Nonlinear Systems
[7]   Predictive control of hybrid systems: Input-to-state stability results for sub-optimal solutions [J].
Lazar, M. ;
Heemels, W. P. M. H. .
AUTOMATICA, 2009, 45 (01) :180-185
[8]   Further Input-to-State Stability Subtleties for Discrete-Time Systems [J].
Lazar, Mircea ;
Heemels, W. P. Maurice H. ;
Teel, Andy R. .
IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON AUTOMATIC CONTROL, 2013, 58 (06) :1609-1613
[9]  
Limon D, 2009, LECT NOTES CONTR INF, V384, P1, DOI 10.1007/978-3-642-01094-1_1
[10]  
Marruedo DL, 2002, P AMER CONTR CONF, V1-6, P364, DOI 10.1109/ACC.2002.1024831