LAPORAN AKHIR RISET

Program Riset Unggulan KK

Development of Smartgrid Infrastructure Integrating Multiple Powerplant

Generation in the Application of Power Distributions in a Building

Periset Utama:
Augie Widyotriatmo, ST, MT, Ph.D.
Nama KK/P/PP:
Instrumentasi dan Kontrol

INSTITUT TEKNOLOGI BANDUNG

Desember 2014

I. HALAMAN IDENTITAS
1. Judul
Infrastructure

Development of Smartgrid
Integrating Multiple Powerplant

Generation
in the Application of Power
Distributions in a
2. Jenis Riset
3. Waktu Pelaksanaan
4. Tim Riset
a. Nama Lengkap Ketua Tim
b. N I P
c. Pangkat/Golongan
d. Jabatan
e. Fakultas/Sekolah & Prodi
f. Kelompok Keahlian
g. Alamat Kantor/Telp/Fax/E-mail
2504424 /

:
:

Building
Program Riset Unggulan KK
Februari November 2014

:
:
:
:
:
:
:

Augie Widyotriatmo, ST, MT, Ph.D.

197708042010121001
III/b
Lektor
Teknologi Industri
Instrumentasi dan Kontrol
Jl. Ganesha 10 Bandung / 022

h. Alamat Rumah/Telp/Fax/E-mail
Bandung/0222511367/-

022 2506281 / augie@tf.itb.ac.id

Jl. Cisitu Lama XI 27
/ augieharjay@gmail.com

5.1 Anggota Tim Riset:

Bidang Keahlian

1.

Dr. -Ing Yul Yunazwin

Intelligent
Instrumentation and
Control Systems

KK-IK/FTI

10

2.

Dr. Mohammad
Rohmanuddin

Intelligent Control and

Human Machine
Interaction

KK-IK/FTI

10

3.

Dr. Agus Samsi

Intelligent
Instrumentation

KK-IK/FTI

10

4.

Dr. Endang Juliastuti

Optical
Instrumentation

KK-IK/FTI

10

5.

Prof.Dr. Deddy Kurniadi

Industrial
Instrumentation and
Tomography

KK-IK/FTI

10

6.

Dr. Endra Joelianto

Hybrid Discrete Event

Control Systems

KK-IK/FTI

10

7.

Dr. Ir. Sutanto

Hadisupadmo

Industrial
Instrumentation and
Safety Instrumentation
System

KK-IK/FTI

10

8.

Dr. Suprijanto

Intelligent Medical
Instrumentation

KK-IK/FTI

10

9.

Dr. Estiyanti Ekawati

Optimal Control

KK-IK/FTI

10

10.

Dr. Ing. Parsaulian

Ishaya Siregar

Industrial
Instrumentation and
Control

KK-IK/FTI

10

11

Vebi Nadira, ST., MT.

Image-Based
Instrumentation

KK-IK/FTI

10

12

Faqihza Mukhlish, ST.,

MT.

Optimal Control

KK-IK/FTI

10

13

Ayu Garetha
Risangtumi, ST., MT.

Intelligent Medical
Instrumentation

KK-IK/FTI

10

Unit Kerja/
Lembaga

Alokasi Waktu
Jam/mg
bulan

Nama dan Gelar

Akademik

No.

14

Narendra Kurnia Putra,

ST., Msc., DIC.

Intelligent Medical
Instrumentation

KK-IK/FTI

10

5.2 Asisten Peneliti/Mahasiswa:

Alokasi Waktu
Jam/mg
bulan

No
.

Nama dan Gelar

Akademik

2.

Mahasiswa S2 (3
orang)

Instrumentasi dan
Kontrol

10

3.

Mahasiswa S1 (5
orang)

Teknik Fisika

10

Bidang Keahlian

5.3 Biaya yang disetujui oleh ITB

Rp 300.000.000,-

Mengetahui,
Ketua Kelompok Keahlian
Instrumentasi dan Kontrol

Bandung, 12 Januari 2014

Ketua Tim Riset,

(Prof. Dr. Deddy Kurniadi)

NIP: 196309301988101001

(Augie Widyotriatmo, ST, MT, Ph.D.)

NIP: 197708042010121001

Dekan Fakultas Industrial Teknologi, ITB,

(Prof. Ir. Bermawi P. Iskandar)

NIP.

II. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

1. TITLE OF RESEARCH

: Development of Smartgrid Infrastructure

Integrating Multiple Powerplant Generation in the
Application of Power Distribution in a Building

2. HEAD OF RESEARCH TEAM : Augie Widyotriatmo, ST, MT, Ph.D.

3. TEAM MEMBERS
:
Dr. -Ing Yul Yunazwin
Dr. Mohammad Rohmanuddin
Dr. Agus Samsi
Dr. Endang Juliastuti
Prof.Dr. Deddy Kurniadi
Dr. Endra Joelianto
Dr. Ir. Sutanto Hadisupadmo
Dr. Suprijanto
Dr. Estiyanti Ekawati
Dr. Ing. Parsaulian Ishaya Siregar
Vebi Nadira, ST., MT.
Faqihza Mukhlish, ST., MT.
Ayu Garetha Risangtumi, ST., MT.
Narendra Kurnia Putra, ST.
4. OFFICIAL ADDRESS

Faculty/School

: Industrial Technology

Research Group

: Instrumentation and Control

Home Add./Tel/Fax/Email

: Jl. Ganesha No. 10 Bandung/Telp: 0222504424/

Fax: 0222506281/Email: augie@tf.itb.ac.id

Home Add./Tel/Fax/Email
0222511367/

: Jl. Cisitu Lama XI No. 27 Bandung/Telp.

HP. 085220913456

5. EXTENDED ABSTRACT

5.1. Introduction
Lack of power generation and increment of demand of electricity in all sectors raise
the needs of the use of renewable energy plants. Renewable energy power generations have
not been maximally utilized. Optimization of power distribution can be assigned by the
used of power and information infrastructures.

Figure 1. Power and information infrastructure in power distribution systems

5.2. Methodology
The research begins with development of smartgrid system including monitoring
system, power distribution controller, and converter. Then, prototype of storing energy is
developed. Afterwards, the optimal control algorithm for power distribution is conducted.

Figure 2 Research methodology

5.3. Results
Renewable power generation and storing energy systems are designed according to
Figure 3.

Figure 3. The renewable energy model

Let the following nomenclature be defined as follows:
t = 124 Index for time period for 1 days (1 hours).
KPV = Photovoltaic panel specific cost ($/kW).
KPHS = Pumped Hydro Storage specific cost ($/kWh).
KPLN = Grid electricity price ($/kWh).
CPV = Photovoltaic panel installed capacity (kW).
CPHS = Pumped Hydro Storage installed capacity (kWh).
PV = Solar panel efficiency constant.
IPV = Ideal energy produced by 1 solar panel (kW/panel).
EPLN = Energy used from electricity grid ($/kWh).
EDC = Energy discharged from Pumped Hydro Storage (kWh).
ECH = Energy charged to Pumped Hydro Storage (kWh).
Cur = Curtailed Renewable Enegy Source output (kWh).
Load = Energy needed for electricity load (kWh).
ESTOR = Energy stored at Pumped Hydro Storage (kWh).
CH= Pumped Hydro Storage charge efficiency.
DC = Pumped Hydro Storage discharge efficiency constant.
Rgrid = Maximum ratio of electricity energy from grid to total energy used for load.
Rcur = Maximum curtailing ratio.
The objective function is:
24

K PV CPV K PHS CPHS K PLN EPLN t

t 1

The constraints:

Constraints explanation is as follows:

1. Energy balance constraint : Total energy produced from PV panel (Maximum possible
energy produced Curtailed if any) + Energy discharged from Pumped Hydro Storage
Energy charged to Pumped Hydro Storage is equal to Load at time period t.
2. Energy stored inside Pumped Hydro storage facility at time period t is equal to energy
stored inside Pumped Hydro Storage at previous time period + energy charged to Pumped
Hydro Storage energy discharged from Pumped Hydro Storage.
3. Energy stored inside Pumped Hydro Storage is ranged from 0 to maximum capacity.
4. Total energy from grid less or equal maximum grid energy ratio times load.
5. Total curtailed PV energy less or equal maximum curtailed energy ratio times maximum
possible PV energy produced.
From the optimization model, a model is defined as follows:
t=1...24
KPV = $2500/kWh.
KPHS = $500/kWh.
KPLN = $0.1/kWh.
PV = 0.85
CH = 0.41
DC = 1.96
RGrid = 0.2
Rcur = 0.2
The IpV and load are depicted in Figure 4.

Figure 4. The IpV vs Load

The results are obtained as depicted in Figure 5.

Figure 5. Optimization results

5.4. Discussions and Conclusions
In this research, the optimization of distributive renewable energy power distribution is
conducted. The design uses two storing energy systems battery and microhydro plant. It is
shown form the optimization results that the design is working.

III. EVALUASI DIRI

1.
CAPAIAN:
a.
TUJUAN YANG TERTULIS DI PROPOSAL:
1 Membangun infrastruktur smart grid yang meliputi monitoring, pengontrol distribusi
daya, sensor penggunaan daya dan aktuator pengalihan daya.
2. Membangun plan daya mikrohidro sebagai pelengkap sel surya dan jala-jala listrik
PLN.
3. Merancang kontrol optimal pada distribusi daya pada gedung.
b.
TUJUAN YANG TELAH DICAPAI:
1 Perancangan kontrol optimal distribusi daya pada plant renewable energy telah
dibangun
2.
PRODUK RISET
Yang Dijanjikan Pada Proposal

Yang Dihasilkan Pada Penelitian

1.

Publikasi

3 Jurnal
Internasional
6 Prosiding
Internasional

2.

Publikasi

3.

P. Y. Nugraha, A. Widyotriatmo, Optimization of

renewable energy sources and energy storage in
microgrid systems, (Draft International Journal).
A. Rofiq, A. Widyotriatmo, Model predictive
control for power distribution systems, (Draft
International Journal)
A. Widyotriatmo, S. Hadisupadmo, et al.
Asymptotic stabilization of constrained nonlinear
system, submitted to IJAMAS, 2014

Propototipe
1 Prototipe
Propototipe Sizing design prototype
HAKI
HAKI
3.
KEGIATAN DISEMINASI HASIL RISET:
1. Smartgrid workshop, International Conference on TIME-E, Bandung 2014
4.
SINERGI DENGAN KEGIATAN DAN PROYEK RISET LAIN:
1. Implementasi dan Optimisasi Pengontrolan Distribusi Listrik dari Pembangkit Energi
Terintegrasi, IPTEKS DIKTI
5.
KEMANFAATAN PROYEK RISET:
Thesis S2:
1. Petrus Yuri
2. Arista
3. Muhammad Rofiq
4. Isa Puncuna
6.
7.
1.
2.
3.
4.

PERMASALAHAN YANG DIHADAPI DAN SARAN PERBAIKAN:

Permasalahan utama adalah dana yang tidak kunjung turun, sedangkan penelitian
memerlukan dukungan peralatan yang memadai.
RENCANA KELANJUTAN PENELITIAN:
Merancang optimisasi dari setiap komponen pembangkitan energi listrik, penyimpanan,
dan pemasokan listrik dilihat dari berbagai sisi;
Merancang algoritma kontrol untuk pengaturan pembangkitan energi listrik serta
pengaturan penyimpanan;
Membangun prototipe mikrogrid dari skema yang diajukan;
Melakukan pengujian algoritma pada plant prototipe mikrogrid.

IV. LAMPIRAN OUTPUT PENELITIAN

Lampiran 1 Artikel Ilmiah 1
To
The Editor-in-Chief / Executive Editor
International Journal of Applied Mathematics and Statistics
Subject: Submission of Manuscript for Journal ---- International Journal of Applied Mathematics
and Statistics.
Reference:
1. Paper Title: Asymptotic Stabilization of Nonlinear Systems with State Constraints
2. Subject Classification Numbers (At least one of the followings):
A. Mathematics Subject Classification (MSC): 93C10
B. Computing Classification System (CCS) : G.1.7
3. Journal Topic(s):Nonlinear control with state constraint
4. Corresponding authors name:Augie Widyotriatmo
5. Affiliation(s), Mailing address of Author(s):
Instrumentation and Control Research Group, Faculty of Industrial Technology
Bandung Institute of Technology,
Ganesha 10, Bandung 40132, Indonesia
Email: augie@tf.itb.ac.id
Dear Editor,
With reference to above, please find my submission of paper for possible publications in
International Journal of Applied Mathematics and Statistics.
I have read the Author Instructions of journal.
I hereby affirm that the content of this manuscript are original. Furthermore it has been neither
published elsewhere fully or partially or any language nor submitted for publication (fully or
partially) elsewhere simultaneously.
I affirm that the all authors have seen and agreed to the submitted version of the paper and
their inclusion of name(s) as co-author(s).
Also, If our paper accepted, I/We agree to pay the publication charge as per given on Author
Instructions at website of journal.

Signature of Corresponding Author

Name:Augie Widyotriatmo
Affiliation:Bandung Institute of Technology
Mailing address:
Instrumentation & Control Research Group,
Faculty of Industrial Technology,
Institut Teknologi Bandung
LABTEK VI, ITB, Ganesha 10, Bandung, Indonesia
Office Phone: +62-22-250-4424, Fax.: +62-22-250-6281
Mobile Phone: +62-85220913456
Email: augie@tf.itb.ac.id; augieharjay@gmail.com
Website: www.widyotriatmo.com

Asymptotic Stabilization of Nonlinear Systems with

State Constraints
A. Widyotriatmo1 , S. Hadisupadmo1, D. Kurniadi1 , B. Anggoro2 and K.-S. Hong3
1

Instrumentation and Control Research Group, Faculty of Industrial Technology

Bandung Institute of Technology,
Ganesha 10, Bandung 40132, Indonesia
Email: augie@tf.itb.ac.id, sutanto@tf.itb.ac.id, kurniadi@tf.itb.ac.id
1
Instrumentation and Control Research Group, Faculty of Industrial Technology
Bandung Institute of Technology,
Ganesha 10, Bandung 40132, Indonesia
Email: ian@stei.itb.ac.id
2
Department of Cogno-Mechatronics Engineering and School of Mechanical Engineering
Pusan National University
3
30 Jangjeon-dong, Geumjeong-gu, Busan 609-735, Korea.
Email: kshong@pusan.ac.kr

ABSTRACT
This paper presents asymptotic stabilization strategy for nonlinear systems, in which the
individual states are constrained within certain ranges. A barrier function whose value
increases to infinity as the argument approaches the boundary of the constrained region is
utilized as a Lyapunov function candidate. The derived control law guarantees that, for all
initial conditions within the constraint range, the asymptotic stability of the origin is
achieved and the state constraints are not violated for all time. The control gains assign
the desired spectrum of the closed-loop system in a neighborhood of the origin, and a fast
convergence of the states from initial conditions to the origin is achieved. By simulation,
the performance of the proposed control law is compared with that of the control law
derived upon a quadratic Lyapunov function and that of the nonlinear model predictive
control.

Keywords: Barrier function, Lyapunov method, nonlinear systems, state constraints,

simulation.

10

Mathematics Subject Classification: 93C10

Computing Classification System: G.1.7

1. INTRODUCTION
Nonlinear control problems with state constraints exist in many physical systems including robotics
(Widyotriatmo, 2012; Zhang, Shang, & Gao, 2013), electrostatic microactuator (Tee, Ge, & Tay, 2009a),
magnetic bearings systems (Do, 2010), and aeroelastic systems (Xiang, Liu, & Liu, 2013). Constraint
violations can cause poor performance or component degradation, and damage of the system. Asymptotic
stabilization of nonlinear systems without violating the constraints is of great importance in many
applications. In this paper, a control design for uncertain nonlinear systems with state constraints is
focused.
For linear systems, the set invariance method (Blanchini, 1999) can be used to handle state constraints.
For nonlinear systems, the model predictive controls (MPCs) (Mayne et al., 2000; Findeisen et al., 2003;
Mhaskar, El-Farra, & Christofides, 2006; Bravo, Alamo, & Camacho, 2006) and the reference governor
methods (Bemporad, 1998; Gilbert & Ong, 2011) have been proposed. The MPC utilizes an iterative finite
horizon optimization of the plant model. The reference governor methods modify the reference signal
using an optimization algorithm to avoid constraint violation. For successful implementation of the
methods, a proper optimization problem should be well formulated. In (Mahindrakar & Sankaranarayanan,
2008; Ding, 2009) linear-matrix-inequality-based (LMI-based) optimization methods were utilized in the
control design of nonlinear systems with state constraints. In (Kristic & Bement, 2006), a backstepping
method with appropriate control gains was used to ensure a small overshoot of tracking response. In (Liu
& Zhao, 2012), fuzzy systems are utilized in backstepping design procedure. Necessary conditions for
optimality for regular solutions of the terminal optimal control problems with state and endpoint constraints
are presented in (Imanov, 2012).
The Lyapunov method allows the direct design of a control law, which is embedded in an appropriately
chosen Lyapunov function (Freeman & Kokotovic, 1996; Khalil, 2002; Widyotriatmo & Hong, 2011; Rehan
& Hong, 2011). A quadratic function is usually utilized as a Lyapunov function candidate. Recently, for the
systems with state constraints, the use of barrier functions was introduced: In (Tee & Ge, 2011), a barrier
function method for output tracking of a state-constrained nonlinear system in strict feedback form was
presented. However, in this work, an offline optimization method was utilized to determine the control
parameters for maintaining the states inside the ranges of constraints. For the case of an asymptotic
stabilization problem, it was shown that the initial conditions close to the boundary of a constraint region
are not feasible to converge to the origin (Tee, Ge, & Tay, 2009b). On the other hand, for the systems with
output constraints, the tracking control of a single-input-single-output (SISO) system using the barrierfunction-based method was applied to electrostatic parallel plate microactuators (Tee, Ge, & Tay, 2009a)
and to magnetic bearings (Do, 2010).

In this paper, a control law for a nonlinear system utilizing a barrier function as a Lyapunov function
candidate is designed. Using the proposed control law, the time derivative of the Lyapunov function
becomes negative semidefinite, and the convergence of the states from all the initial conditions within
constraints to the origin is guaranteed. The boundedness of the barrier functions ensures that the states
never violate their constraints.
Contributions of this paper are the following. First, a control law that achieves the asymptotic stability of
the origin of a nonlinear system with state constraints is proposed. Second, using the proposed control
law, all the initial conditions inside the constraints are forced to converge to the origin, while not violating
the state constraints for all time. Thus, the method can be a viable solution to the problem in which any
violation of constraints is absolutely prohibited. Third, the proposed method does not require an offline
optimization method for determining the control parameters. Fourth, the proposed method can be applied
to MIMO systems. Fifth, the control gains determine the performance of the closed-loop system in a
neighborhood of the origin, and a fast convergence of the states to the origin is achieved. Sixth, the
effectiveness of the proposed method is shown by comparing the performance of the proposed control law
with the one derived from a quadratic Lyapunov function, and that based on the nonlinear model predictive
control (NMPC) in (Grune & Pannek, 2011).
This paper is organized as follows. Section 2 provides the problem formulation including the considered
system and the properties of a barrier function. Section 3 discusses the derivation of control law based
upon the barrier function as a Lyapunov function candidate. Section 4 presents simulation results of the
proposed control law showing the effectiveness of the methodology, and the comparison of the proposed
control law with other two methods available in the literature. Section 5 draws conclusions.

2. PROBLEM FORMULATION
Let x p (t ) [ x p , 1 (t ), , x p , n p (t )] T R

np

T
and xq (t ) [ xq , 1 (t ), , xq , n q (t )] R nq be the

partitions of the state vector x (t ) [ xTp (t ), xqT (t )]T , and p (t ) [ p , 1 (t ), ,

n , p

and q (t ) [ q , 1 (t ), ,

p , n (t )] T
, p

q , n (t )] T R n , q be the unknown parameter vectors, where

,q

(t ) [ Tp (t ), qT (t )]T . The following nonlinear system is considered.

x p (t ) Fp x (t ) p (t ) G p x (t ) xq (t ) ,

(1)

x q (t ) Fq x(t ) q (t ) Gq x (t ) u (t ) ,

(2)

where Fp x (t ) : R n p nq R n p n , p , G p x(t ) : R n p nq R n p nq , Fq x(t ) : R n p nq R n q n , q

, and Gq x (t ) : R n p nq R nq n q are smooth mappings, and u (t ) R nq is the input. Let x p , i and
xq , i be the upper bounds of x p , i and xq , i , respectively. The control objective is to achieve the
n
asymptotic stability of the origin, from the intial values xp(0) p { x p (t ) R p :

1, , n p }, and xq(0) q { xq (t ) R n q :

xq , i (t )

x p , i (t ) x p , i , i =

xq , i , i = 1, , nq }, while keeping xp(t)

p and xq(t) q for all time. The following assumptions are made.

Assumption 1: p , i

p, i , i = 1, , n, p, and q , i

q , i , i = 1, , n, q, where p, i and q , i

are the upper bounds of p, i and q , i , respectively .

Assumption 2: Fp x (t ) k F p

xq (t ) and Fq x (t ) k F

xq (t ) for all time, where k F p and

k F q are positive constants.

Assumption 3: Gq1 x(t ) exists for all time.

Remark 1. Assumption 1 limits the upper bounds of the uncertainties. Assumption 2 indicates that the
uncertain term of the system can be directly compensated by the control input. Assumption 3 ensures that
the control input always exists for all time. The three assumptions are adopted from the literature that
discusses nonlinear control problem (Freeman & Kokotovic, 1996 ; Khalil, 2002).

To prevent all the states of x from violating their constraints, the following barrier functions for individual

states, Vi xi (t ) : xi , xi R , i = 1, , np + nq, are utilized as a Lyapunov function (Tee, Ge, & Tay,
2009b):


1
x2
V i xi (t ) ln 2 i 2
2 xi xi (t )

(3)

which are continuous on ( xi , xi ) , positive definite, and Vi xi (t ) as xi (t ) xi . The

following lemma shows the use of barrier functions as a Lyapunov function candidate.

Lemma. Let z(t) = [ z1 (t ), ,

Rn

zn z (t )]T R n z . For some constants zi , i = 1, .., nz , let z {z(t)

: zi (t ) zi , i = 1, , nz }. Consider the system

z (t ) f (t , z ) ,

(4)

where f: R R n z R n z . Let Vi : z i , z i

R , i = 1, , n , be positive definite functions that are

+

continuously differentiable on z . Let Vi ( zi ) as zi zi , i = 1, , nz . Let

z
V ( z (t )) i 1Vi ( zi (t )) and z (0)

z . If

V ( z (t )) 0 ,

(5)

in the set z , it follows that z (t )

for t [0, ) .

Proof. Since V is a positive definite function, the negative semidefinite form in (5) implies that
V ( z (t )) V ( z (0)) t [0, ) , that is, V ( z (t )) is bounded t [0, ) . Since

z
V ( z ) i 1Vi ( zi ) is a positive definite function, then

nz

Vi ( zi ) becomes bounded

i 1

t [0, ) . From the property of the barrier function, that is, Vi ( zi ) only if zi z i , i = 1, ,

nz , and given that zi (0)

z , it can be concluded that

zi (t )

z , i = 1, ,

nz , t [0, ) .

3. CONTROL DESIGN
Let a Lyapunov function candidate for (1)-(2) be introduced as

1
V
2

np
i 1

k p , i ln

x Tp , i x p , i

x p2, i x 2p , i

1
2

nq
i 1

ln

xqT, i xq , i

(6)

xq2, i xq2, i

where k p , i , i = 1, , n p , are positive constants. The time derivative of V is as follows

V x Tp K p p1 x p x qT q 1 xq

(7)

Tp FpT K p p1 x p xqT G Tp K p p1 x p qT FqT q1 xq u T GqT q1 xq .

where K p =

diag k p , 1 , , k p , n

diag x

, and

and q are as follows.

p diag x p2, 1 x 2p , 1 , , x p2, n x 2p , n ,

q

2
q, 1

xq2, 1 , , xq2, n xq2, n

q

(8)
(9)

Let the control law be designed as

u Gq1 q G Tp K p p1 x p K q xq v ,

where K q =

diag kq , 1 , , kq , n

(10)

is a diagonal constant matrix, k

q, i

, i = 1, , nq , are positive

constants, and v is to be designed. The time derivative of V becomes

V xqT K q q 1 xq vT q 1 xq Tp FpT K p p1 x p qT FqT q 1 xq
xqT K q q1 xq vT q1 xq k F p p

Let v be designed as follows.

K p p1 x p

xq q

Fq

q1 xq .

(11)

k F p p1 x p q q Fq xq / xq , if xq 0,

(12)

if xq 0.

0,

If x q 0 , (11) becomes

V xqT K q q 1 xq k F p
q

Fq

T
q

p1 x p

q1 xq / xq k F p

T
q

xq / xq
K p p1 x p

xq q

Fq

q1 xq

xqT K q q1 xq

(13)

0,

in the set that xp p and xq q . If xq 0 , V (t ) 0 .

Theorem. Consider the system (1)-(2) under Assumptions 1-3. Let the control law be chosen as follows.

GqT qG Tp K p p1 x p K q xq (k F p p1 x p q q Fq ) xq / xq , if xq 0,

T
T
1
Gq ( qG p K p p x p K q xq ),

if xq 0.

(14)
Then, if xp(0) p and xq(0) q , it follows that xp(t) p and xq(t) q for t [0, ) . The origin
x = 0 is asymptotically stable.
Proof. We first show that xp(t) p and xq(t) q for

t [0, ) . Since V 0 for x (t)

p

and

xq(t) q , it is concluded that V ( x (t )) V ( x (0)) for t [0, ) . According to the lemma, if xp(0)
p and xq(0) q , it follows that xp(t) p and xq(t) q for t [0, ) .

Now, we show that xp(t) 0 and xq(t) 0 as t

. If

xq

0 , the closed-loop system of (1)-(2)

becomes

x p Fp p G p xq ,

(15)

x q Fq q q G Tp K p p1 x p K q x q k F p

K p p1 x p q q

Fq

/ xq

(16)
T
1
Let S = { xp(t) p , xq(t) q : V (xp(t), xq(t)) = 0}. Since V xq K q q xq 0 , V 0 implies

that xq(t) 0 . Then, S = {xp (t )

p , x (t) q : x (t) = 0}. Suppose that x(t) is a trajectory that

q

q (t ) = 0. According to Assumption 2,
belongs identically to S, then xq (t ) = 0 implies that x
Fp x (t )

k Fp xq (t ) , xq (t ) = 0 implies that Fp x (t ) 0. Then, from (15), x p (t ) = c, where

c is a constant vector.

q (t ) = 0, and from the Assumption 2

Since xq (t ) = 0, x

Fq x (t )

k Fq xq (t ) , (16) becomes

q G Tp K p p1c = 0, and therefore x p (t ) = c = 0. Thus, the only solution that can stay identically in S is

x p (t ) = xq (t ) = 0. Thus it is obtained that x p (t )

0 and

xq (t )

0 as t .

Remark 2. By using (14), the origin of (1)-(2) becomes the only equilibrium point for xp p , xq q .
The linearization of (15)-(16) around the origin yields

Fp (x) p

Fp (x) p
G p ( x)

x p

x
p
q

F (x)
x q q q 2 T 2 Fq (x)q
xq G p ( x ) K p x p K q
xq
xp

xp

xq

x 0

Then, the spectrum of the matrix in (15) and (16) is completely assigned by K p and K q .

(17)

4. SIMULATION RESULTS
4.1. Simulation of Second Order Nonlinear System
In this subsection, to demonstrate the performance of the proposed control law, a numerical study of a
single-input second order system is presented. The following nonlinear system is considered (for brevity,
the independent variable t is omitted if there is no confusion).

x1 x2 1 x1 sin x2 ,

(18)

x 2 2 x22 x1 u ,

(19)

where x1 and x2 are the states, which are constrained by x1 (t ) x1 and x2 (t ) x2 , respectively,

1 and 2 are unknown parameters with 1 1 and 2 2 , 1 and 2 are the bounds,
respectively, and u is the control input. Let a Lyapunov function candidate for (18)-(19) be the following.

V 1 / 2 k1 ln 11 x12 ln 21 x22

(20)

where k1 is a positive constant, 1 x12 x12 , and 2 x22 x22 . Let the control input be designed as

u
k 1 x ,

k111 2 1 x1 k2 x2 k111 21 x12 2 x22 sgn x2 , if x2 0,

1
1 1 2

(21)

if x2 0,

where k 2 is a positive constant. If x2 0 , the substitution of (21) into (18)-(19) yields:

x1 x2 1 x1 sin x2 ,

(22)

x 2 2 x22 k111 2 x1 k 2 x2 k111 21 x12 2 x22 sgn x2 .

(23)

Using (22)-(23), the time derivative of V in (20) becomes

V k 2 21 x22 k1111 x12 21 2 x22 x2 k1111 x12 sin x2 21 2 x23

1
2

k 2 x

(24)

2
2

0,

in the set that x1 (t ) x1 and x2 (t ) x2 . From (21)-(23), it is concluded that, if x1 (0) x1 and
x2 (0) x2 , x1 (t ) x1 and x2 (t ) x2 for t [0, ) , and x1 (t ) , x2 (t ) 0 as

t .

A quadratic-function-based control law is also simulated. Let a Lyapunov function candidate for (18)-(19)
be

V 1 / 2 k1 x12 x22 ,

(25)

and the control law be

k1 1 x1 k2 x2 k11x12 2 x22 sgn x2 , if x2 0,

k1 1 x1,

if x2 0.

(26)

If x2 0 , the substitution of (26) into (18)-(19) yields:

x 1 x2 1 x1 sin x2 ,

(27)

x 2 2 x22 k1 x1 k 2 x2 k11 x12 2 x22 sgn x2 .

(28)

Using (27)-(28), the time derivative of the Lyapunov function V in (24) becomes

V k 2 x22 k11 x12 2 x22 x2 k11 x12 sin x2 2 x23

(29)

k 2 x22
0.
From (27)-(29), it is concluded that x1 (t ) , x2 (t ) 0 as

t .

A control law based on the receding horizon NMPC is also simulated, see [24] for details.
The performance of the control law based upon the barrier function, the second one based upon the
quadratic function in, and the third one based upon the NMPC are compared. For the barrier-functionbased and quadratic-function-based control law, the gains are set to k1 = 8 and k2 = 4, in which the
eigenvalues of the closed-loop linearized system of (22)-(23) and (27)-(28) are set to 2 2 j . The
bounds of the states are x1` x2 0.4. The unknown parameters 1 and 2 are normally distributed
9

random signals with 1 , 2 < 1. The phase portraits of the system using the barrier-function-based,
the quadratic-function-based, and the NMPC-based control laws are depicted in Figs. 1-3, respectively.
The trajectories using the barrier-function-based control law (21) and the NMPC do not violate the

constraints for all time when the initial conditions are x1 (0) ,

x 2 ( 0)

0.4. However, using the

quadratic-function-based control law in (26), the trajectories violate their constraints when the initial
conditions are close to the constraints.

Fig. 1. Phase portrait of the system (18)-(19) using control law derived from the barrier function as the
Lyapunov function.

10

Fig. 2. Phase portrait of the system (18)-(19) using using the control law derived from the quadratic
Lyapunov function.

Fig. 3. Phase portrait of the system (18)-(19) using the NMPC.

Figs. 4-6 shows the motions of x1 (t) and x 2 (t) with barrier-function-based, quadratic-function-based,
and the NMPC control laws, respectively. The initial conditions are x1 (0) = x 2 (0) = 0.395. Using the
barrier-function-based control law, x1 and x 2 reach zero in 3 s and do not violate the given constraints
for all time. If using quadratic-function-based control law, x1 violates the constraint from 0.01 s to 0.13 s,
11

and x 2 violates from 0.17 s to 0.63 s, respectively. If using the NMPC, x1 and x 2 go to zero in 10 s and
their constraints are not violated for all time. It should be noted that the computation time of the control
input of the barrier-function-based control law and the quadratic-function-based control law took 103 ms.
On the other hand, the NMPC took 1.642 s for computing the control input. Fig. 7 depicts the control inputs
of barrier-function-based, quadratic-function-based, and the NMPC control laws, respectively. The barrierfunction-based control law provides the fast changing of the control input at the beginning compared to
other control laws.

Fig. 4. x1(t) and x2(t) of system (18)-(19) using barrier-function-based control law: x1(t) and x2(t) converge to
zero in 3 s while the constraints are not violated.

Fig. 5. x1(t) and x2(t) of system (18)-(19) using quadratic-function-based control law: x1(t) and x2(t) converge
to zero in 3 s, but both violate the constraints.

12

Fig. 6. x1(t) and x2(t) of system (18)-(19) using the NMPC control law: x1(t) and x2(t) converge to zero in 10 s
while the constraints are not violated.

Fig. 7. Control input u used in Figs. 4-6.

4.2. Multi-Input Nonlinear Systems

In this section, the following two-input nonlinear system is investigated.

x p F p1 G p xq ,

(30)

x q Fq 2 Gq u ,

(31)

T
T
where x p and xq are the states, x p x1 , x2 , xq x3 , x4 , that are constrained by xi 1 , i =

1~4, 1 and 2 are the unknown parameters with 1 1 and 2 2 , respectively, Fp

0.2 sin x3 ,

0 .2 x 3 x 4

, Fq

0.1x2 x3 ,

0.2 x1 x4

13

0.1
1 sin x3
,
0.2
1 sin x1

(32)

1 x1 x3
0.1sin x4

(33)

Gp

Gq

and u u1 , u 2

0.11x3

are the inputs.

The control law based upon the barrier function is designed as follows:

GqT q G Tp K p p1 x p K q xq k F 1 K p p1 x p 2 Fq xq / xq , if xq 0,

T
q

1
p p

G ( G K p x ),
T
q p

if xq 0,

where K p K q 2 I , k F 1 , p diag( x12 x12 ,

x22 x22 ) , q diag ( x32 x32 ,

(34)

x 42 x 42 ) , and

xi = 1, i = 1~4. Fig. 8 shows the trajectories of xi(t), i = 1~4, of the system (30)-(31) when the control law
(34) is used. The initial conditions are xi(0) = 0.995, i = 1~4. The unknown parameters are uniformly
distributed random signals with bounds 1 0.2 and 2 0.1 . All the trajectories converge to zero and
do not violate the constraints at all time. Fig. 9 depicts the control inputs provided through (34).

Fig. 8. xi(t), i = 1-4, of the system (30)-(31) with barrier-function-based control law.

14

Fig. 9. Control input u1 and u2 used in Fig. 8.

5. CONCLUSIONS
The asymptotic stabilization control for nonlinear systems with state constraints was addressed. A barrier
function was utilized as a Lyapunov function candidate in deriving the control law. The proposed control
law guaranteed the asymptotic stability of the origin for all initial conditions inside the constraint region,
while the given constraints were never violated. The desired spectrum of the linearized closed loop system
was determined by designing the control gains, and thus a fast convergence of the states from all initial
conditions within the constraint-region to the origin was achieved. The performance of the proposed
control laws was compared with the one derived from a quadratic Lyapunov function and the NMPC. The
proposed control law performed best in the aspects of convergence of the states to zero and in computing
time of the control law among the three methods.

6. REFERENCES
Bemporad, A. 1998, Reference governor for constrained nonlinear systems, IEEE Trans. Autom. Control,
43, 415-419.
Blanchini, F., 1999, Set invariance in control, Automatica, 35, 1747-1767.
Bravo, J. M., Alamo, T., Camacho, E. F., 2006, Robust MPC of constrained discrete-time nonlinear
systems based on approximated reachable sets, Automatica, 42, 1745-1751.
Ding, B., 2009, Quadratic boundedness via dynamic output feedback for constrained nonlinear systems in
Takagi-Sugenos form, Automatica, 45, 2093-2098.
Do, K., 2010, Control of nonlinear systems with output tracking error constraints and its application to
magnetic bearings, Int. J. Control, 83, 1199-1216.
Findeisen, R., Imsland, L., Allgower, F., Foss, B. A., 2003, Output feedback stabilization of constrained
systems with nonlinear predictive control, Int. J. Robust Nonlin., 13, 211-227.
15

Freeman, R., A., Kokotovic, P., V., 1996, Robust nonlinear control design: state-space and Lyapunov
techniques, Birkhauser.
Gilbert, E. G., Ong, C.-J., 2011, Constrained linear systems with hard constraints and disturbances: an
extended command governor with large domain of attraction, Automatica, 47, 334-340.
Grune, L., Pannek, J., 2011, Nonlinear model predictive control: theory and algorithms, Springer-Verlag.
Imanov, M. H., 2012, Regularity analysis for nonlinear terminal optimal control problems subject to state
constraints, Int. J. Appl. Math. Stat., 30, 80-92.
Khalil, H. K., 2002, Nonlinear systems, Prentice Hall, 3rd Ed.
Krstic, M., Bement, M., 2006, Nonovershooting control of strict-feedback nonlinear systems, IEEE Trans.
Autom. Control, 51, 1938-1943.
Liu, H., Zhao, H., 2012, Adaptive fuzzy backstepping control for a class of uncertain nonlinear systems,
Int. J. Appl. Math. Stat., 40, 106-114.
Mahindrakar, A. D., Sankaranarayanan, V., 2008, State constrained stabilization of beam-balance
systems, Int. J. Robust Nonlin., 18, 333-350.
Mayne, D. Q., Rawlings, J. B., Rao, C. V., Scokaert, P. O. M., 2000, Constrained model predictive control:
stability and optimality, Automatica, 36, 789-814.
Mhaskar, P., El-Farra, N. H., Christofides, P. D., 2006, Stabilization of nonlinear systems with state and
control constraints using Lyapunov-based predictive control, Syst. Control Lett., 55, 650-659.
Rehan M., Hong, K.-S., Ge, S. S., 2011, Stabilization and tracking control for a class of nonlinear systems,
Nonlinear Anal-Real, 12, 1786-1796.
Tee, K. P., Ge, S. S., 2011, Control of nonlinear systems with partial state constraints using a barrier
Lyapunov function, Int. J. Control, 84, 2008-2023.
Tee, K. P., Ge, S. S., Tay, E. H, 2009a, The control of electrostatic parallel plate microactuators with
guaranteed non-contact between the movable and fixed electrodes, IEEE Trans. Control Syst. Technol.,
17, 340-352.
Tee, K. P., Ge, S. S., Tay, E. H., 2009b, Barrier Lyapunov functions for the control of output-constrained
nonlinear systems, Automatica, 45, 918-927.
Widyotriatmo, A., Hong, K.-S., 2011, A navigation function-based control of multiple wheeled vehicles,
IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., 58, 1896-1906.
Widyotriatmo, A., Hong, K.-S., 2012, Switching algorithm for robust configuration control of a wheeled
vehicle, Control Eng. Pract., 20, 315-325.
Xiang, W., Liu, X., Liu, H., 2013, An adaptive fuzzy sliding mode control scheme for aeroelastic systems,
Int. J. Appl. Math. Stat., 43, 478-485.
16

Zhang, N., Shang, Y., Gao, F., 2013, Adaptive disturbance attenuation of nonholonomic systems with
nonlinear parameterization, Int. J. Appl. Math. Stat., 44, 409-421.

17