Page |1

Sliding Mode Control

Lab Assignment Report

Submitted To: Dr. Chris Edwards Submitted By: SALMAN SALEEM (ss672) Module: Nonlinear Control (EG7040/EG4011) Submission Date: 31st May, 2011.

Page |2

INTRODUCTION TO SMC
Variable structure control with sliding mode control was first proposed and elaborated by several researchers from the former Russia, starting from the sixties The ideas did not appear outside of Russia until the seventies when a book by Itkis (Itkis, 1976) and a survey paper by Utkin (Utkin, 1977) were published in English. Since then, sliding mode control has developed into a general design control method applicable to a wide range of system types including nonlinear systems, MIMO systems, discrete time models,large scale and in infinitedimensional systems. Essentially, sliding mode control utilizes discontinuous feedback control laws to force the system state to reach, and subsequently to remain on, a specified surface within the state space (the so-called sliding or switching surface). The system dynamic when concerned to the sliding surface is described as an ideal sliding motion and represent the controlled system behaviour. The advantages of obtaining such a motion are twofold: Firstly the system behaves as a system of reduced order with respect to the original plant; and secondly the movement on the sliding surface of the system is insensitive to a particular kind of perturbation and model uncertainties. This latter property of invariance towards so-called matched uncertainties is the most distinguish feature of sliding mode control and makes this methodology particular suitable to deal with uncertain nonlinear system. The design of a sliding mode controller (SMC) involves designing of a sliding surface that represents the desired stable dynamics and a control law that makes the designed sliding surface attractive. The phase trajectory of a SMC can be investigated in two parts, representing two modes of the system [1]. The trajectories starting from a given initial condition off the sliding surface tend towards the sliding surface. This is known as reaching or hitting phase and the system is sensitive to parameter variations in this part of the phase trajectory. When the convergence to the sliding surface occurs, the sliding phase starts and the trajectories are insensitive to parameter variations and disturbances in this phase [2]. LAB SHEETS Consider the second order integrator regulator system =bu, b> .(1)

Where the value of the system parameter b is not precisely known but lies within the known range 1<b< 2.Let the state x have two components x1 and x2. If x1 = y and x2 = y then the system can be written in the state space form as Ax +Bu ..(2)

The Variable Structure Controller is given by

Page |3

 Where s(x)=c1x1+x2,





where , >0.(3)

c1>0....(4)

is the switchi functi n. The set of points in the st te space satisfying s(x)=0 is called the switching or sliding line.

Part 1
In this part I plotted the control action u which is gi en in equation 3 as a function of s over the interval [-1 1] assuming that =1 and =0.01. I wrote the code for equaton 3 on matlab editor which is given below.

When I run this m file I had a plot which is given below.

Figure 1: Controller action u In figure 1 I have got the non linear behavior of the controller u for the given integrator regulator system. Now If I compare this controller action u with sign(s) function which is discontinues and non linear function I wrote the following code.

Page |4

After compiling this code on Matlab I got the graph which is shown below.

Figure 2: (Comparison b/w controller action u with sign(s) function) In figure 2 the comparison clearly shows that there is nonlinear relationship with controller action u which is a red line and sign(s) function which is green in color.

Part 2
In this part I downloaded the runl.m and vsim.mdl and open them in Matlab. After run this I had a graph which is given below. The parameters that I gave as follows: b=2; x0T [1 0] ; c1 =1 ; =1 ; =0.01 ; time interval=10msec

Figure 3: Phase plane trajectory x1on x-axis x2 on y-axis

Page |5

The (x1-x2) phase plane trajectories for the SMC are given in Figure 3. As it can be seen from the figure, after reaching the sliding mode which is s(x) = 0, the phase plane trajectory is nonlinear and it smoothly enters the sliding mode region. In this region the control action wouldnt effect. Motion of the trajectories now will depend on the parameters of the sliding surface.

Part 3
In this part I changed the value of controller smoothing coefficient delta to very close to zero around 0.00001 then I had the chattering effect which is given below in the figure 4.

Figure 4: Chattering Effect (control action u with respect to time) Explanation of Chattering effect: We have noticed that the controller is discontinuous at s(x) ! 0 . Due to the effects of sampling, switching and delays in the devices used to implement the controller, respectively in the simulation engines used when modelling the controlled system, sliding mode control suffers from chattering. The figure 5 shows how delays can cause chattering. It depicts a trajectory in the region s > 0 heading toward the sliding manifold s = 0 .It first hits the manifold at a point a. In ideal sliding mode control, the trajectory should start sliding on the manifold from a point a .In reality, there will be a delay between the time the sign of s changes and the time the control switches. During this delay period, the trajectory crosses the manifold into the region s < 0 .Chattering results in low control accuracy, high heat losses in electrical power circuits and high wear of moving mechanical parts. It may also excite unmodeled high frequency dynamics, which degrades the performance of the system and may even lead to instability. There are many strategies used to avoid chattering, e.g. you can introduce a boundary layer. Here, the sign function is made continuous by using a piecewise linear approximation within the boundary layer you have exponentially convergence to the sliding mode.

Page |6

Figure 5 To see the chattering effects onto the controller action u I plotted some graphs which is shown below.

Figure 6: Plot of controller action u against Figure 7: Plot of controller action u against time. time. =0.001 =0.00001

Figure 8: Plot of controller action u against time. =0.00000001 From figure 6, 7 and 8, I can clearly see when I am changing the value of delta towards zero the chattering effect is going to increase which clearly shows that when would be slightly small, controller will display chatter motion.

Page |7

Part 4:
Switching function is defined as s(x)= c1x1+x2 =0, In sliding mode s(x) = 0, i.e c1x1+x2 =0 In state-space design

c1>0

For

again I need to take switching function c1x1+x2 =0 x2 = - c1x1

   

After getting the state values and I wrote the following code in matlab for plotting x1(t) and x2(t) and I got a graph regardless of the value of b which is given below in figure 9.

Page |8

Figure 9: System Dynamics in terms of phase portrait (x1 on x axis and x2 on y-axis) In Figure 9 I have the same system dynamics in sliding mode as I had for full order system in Part 2.To see the controller output against time I changed the function in the vsim simulink file for first order system which is given below.

F(u)= -(1*u[1])/(abs(u[1])+delta).After simulating this model I got a graph which is given below.

Figure 10: Plot of Controller action u against time Figure 10 clearly indicates that the we have the function which is same as we got in part 1 and as compared to sign(x1 ) shown in figure 10b we have again the same nonlinear relationship.

Page |9

Figure 10b:Plot of sign(x1)

Part 5:

Figure 11:Phase portrait(x1 on x-axis and x2 on y-axis) for b=0.5

Figure 12:Phase portrait(x1 on x-axis and x2 on y-axis)for b=0.8

Figure 13:Phase portrait(x1 on x-axis and x2 on y-axis) for b=18

Figure 14:Phase portrait(x1 on x-axis and x2 on y-axis) for b=22.

From all figures 11,12,13 and 14, The effect of the uncertainity in the model can be easily seen from the phase plane trajectory. I can easily find the range of b that will keep system on sliding mode after touching the sliding surface. In other words I have to calculate the values

P a g e | 10

for

and

so that it would be

<b<

.From figures I have gotten

=0.8 and

2=

18 in

which I have the proper sliding towards the switching line once it touched.

Part 6:
In this part I considered the different system =-asin(y)+u, a=0.25

I run the runn.m file in which the system was simulated in vsimp.mdl Simulink file. After giving following parameters I wrote the plot(x1,x2) on the command window and got the graph which is given below. b=2; x0T [1 0] ; c1 =1 ; =1 ; =0.01 ; time interval=10msec

Figure 15: Phase trajectory x1 and x2 As I can see from figure the state approaches the switching line and thereafter remains in the neighborhood of the switching line until the origin is attained (i.e. a sliding mode is attained).As I can see, figure 3 and figure 7 have got the same results which means the nonlinear sine term has been eliminating from the system in part 6.

Conclusion:
In this lab sheet I got the basic understanding of control law and the sliding surface which is described by its switching function. Change of controller smoothing coefficient in control law has its impact on the system in terms of chattering. System is eliminating the effect of nonlinearities like sine and cosine in nonlinear systems. High order systems can have the same dynamic system responses as in low order by representing high order systems in terms

P a g e | 11

of low order. System uncertainty parameter b has a certain range in which we have the good performance and good phase plane trajectory.

References:
[1] J. Y. Hung, W. Gao, J. C. Hung, Variable Structure Control: A survey, IEEE Transactions on Industrial Electronics, 40(1), pp.2-22, (1993). [2] J. J. Slotine, S. S. Sastry, Tracking control of nonlinear systems using sliding surfaces with application to robotic manipulators, International Journal of Control, 38(2), pp. 465-492, (1983).