Systems & Control Letters 58 (2009) 271275

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Systems & Control Letters
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/sysconle
Robust stabilization of nonlinear interconnected systems by decentralized
dynamic output feedback
Srdjan S. Stankovi
a,
, Dragoslav D. iljak
b
a
Faculty of Electrical Engineering, University of Belgrade, Belgrade, Serbia
b
School of Engineering, Santa Clara University, Santa Clara, CA, USA
a r t i c l e i n f o
Article history:
Received 6 May 2007
Received in revised form
15 June 2008
Accepted 5 November 2008
Available online 19 December 2008
Keywords:
Nonlinear interconnected systems
Decentralized dynamic output feedback
Linear matrix inequalities
Robustness
a b s t r a c t
The objective of this note is to propose a dynamic output control scheme within the LMI framework for
robust decentralized stabilization of systems composed of linear dynamic subsystems coupled by static
nonlinear interconnections satisfying quadratic constraints. The procedure utilizes the general linear
dynamic feedback structure, and consists of two steps, the first giving a block-diagonal Lyapunov matrix
together with the robustness degree, and the second the controller parameters. A numerical example
illustrates the applicability of the method.
2009 Published by Elsevier B.V.
1. Introduction
In recent years, modern control methods have found their way
into decentralized design of interconnected systems leading to a
wide variety of new concepts and results. In particular, paradigms
of Linear Matrix Inequalities (LMIs) and H

/H
2
design [15] have
appeared to be very attractive due to their promise of handling
systems with high dimensions. After the initial results [6], there
have been a large number of papers [716] that provide a rich
mix of models withimprovements inmethodology andalgorithms.
Applications having sophisticated theoretical generalizations of
the underlying concepts have been in control of multi-agent
systems, such as platoons of vehicles on highways and in the air,
interconnected spatially-invariant systems, and large-scale power
systems [1720]. In almost all work in this area, the decentralized
control designs imply (either explicitly or implicitly) that the
system, with local feedback loops closed around the subsystems,
is connectively stable [21,19], that is, the system remains stable
despite changes in its interconnection topology. Recently, control
of large-scale interconnected systems has been shown to benefit
from feedback that goes beyond decentralized structures [22,23].
Our objective in this paper is to develop an LMI-based method
for designing dynamic output feedback for robust decentralized sta-
bilization of interconnected systems. We select the scheme proposed

Corresponding author. Tel.: +381 11 3370150; fax: +381 11 3248681.

E-mail address: stankovic@etf.bg.ac.yu (S.S. Stankovi).
in [10] as a methodological basis for several reasons. First, the
method applies to systems composed of linear subsystems cou-
pled by nonlinear interconnections. This type of model is attrac-
tive since, in most practical situations, local subsystem models are
known with sufficient precision to make the linearization success-
ful, while the interconnections are largely unknown: only their
bounds are available for control design. Second, the scheme allows
for maximization of interconnection bounds, and third, the resulting
closed-loop system is connectively stable. Elaborations of the basic
scheme in [10] presented in the literature have been related either
to the state feedback [10], or to output feedback schemes contain-
ing an observer of Luenberger type [12,2426].
Assuming decentralized dynamic linear output feedback with the
most general structure, a line of thought starting from the classical
methodology of H

controller design (described e.g. in [5,2,3]) is

applied in this paper to the basic scheme from [10]. As a result, a
new two-step LMI-based design procedure is obtained, providing at
the first step the block-diagonal Lyapunov matrix, together with the
robustness degree vector, and at the second step the decentralized
controller parameters. Anumerical example is given to illustrate the
applicability of the proposed design tool.
2. Problem statement
Consider a nonlinear interconnected system S composed of a
finite number N of subsystems represented by
S
i
: x
i
= A
i
x
i
+ B
i
u
i
+ h
i
(t, x), y
i
= C
i
x
i
, (1)
0167-6911/$ see front matter 2009 Published by Elsevier B.V.
doi:10.1016/j.sysconle.2008.11.003
272 S.S. Stankovi, D.D. iljak / Systems & Control Letters 58 (2009) 271275
where x
i
R
n
i
, u
i
R
m
i
and y
i
R
p
i
are the subsystem
state, input and output vectors, respectively, x = (x
T
1
, . . . , x
T
N
)
T
(

N
i=1
n
i
= n) is the global state vector and h
i
(t, x) : R
n+1

R
n
i
are piecewise continuous vector functions in both arguments,
satisfying in their domains of continuity the following quadratic
inequalities
h
i
(t, x)
T
h
i
(t, x)
2
i
x
T

H
T
i

H
i
x, (2)
where
i
> 0 are bounding parameters and

H
i
are constant
i
n
matrices, i = 1, . . . , N (see e.g. [10,12]).
The entire system can be represented as
S : x = Ax + Bu + h(t, x), y = Cx, (3)
where u = (u
T
1
, . . . , u
T
N
)
T
and y = (y
T
1
, . . . , y
T
N
)
T
are the
global input and output vectors, respectively (

N
i=1
m
i
= m,

N
i=1
p
i
= p), A = diag{A
1
, . . . , A
N
}, B = diag{B
1
, . . . , B
N
}, C =
diag{C
1
, . . . , C
N
}, and h(t, x) = (h
1
(t, x)
T
, . . . , h
N
(t, x)
T
)
T
is the
global interconnection function. Let

H
T
=
_

H
T
1
. . .

H
T
N
_
, where

H
i
,
i = 1, . . . , N, are defined in (2), and

= diag{
1
I

1
, . . . ,
N
I

N
},
with
i
=
2
i
(I

i
represents the
i

i
identity matrix); then, it
is always possible to find matrices H and such that
h(t, x)
T
h(t, x) x
T

H
T

1

Hx x
T
H
T

1
Hx, (4)
where H = diag{H
1
, . . . , H
N
}, with
i
n
i
matrices H
i
, and =
diag{
1
I

1
, . . . ,
N
I

N
},
i
> 0, i = 1, . . . , N. Matrices H and
satisfying

max
(

H
T

H) min
i

i
max
i

i
min
i

min
(H
i
H
T
i
)
represent a possible choice; different structures can be chosen in
accordance with the problem under consideration.
We shall be looking for a general linear time-invariant dynamic
controller F for S which obeys the decentralized information
structure constraint requiring that each subsystemis controlled using
only its own local output. Therefore,
F : w = Fw + Ly, u = Kw + Gy, (5)
where w R
s
is the global observer state, w = (w
1
, . . . , w
N
)
T
,
w
i
R
s
i
,

N
i=1
s
i
= s, F = diag{F
1
, . . . , F
N
}, L = diag{L
1
, . . . , L
N
},
K = diag{K
1
, . . . , K
N
} and G = diag{G
1
, . . . , G
N
}. Denote by J
i
=
_
F
i
L
i
K
i
G
i
_
the (s
i
+m
i
)(s
i
+p
i
) local controller parameter matrices,
and by J = diag{J
1
, . . . , J
N
} the global controller parameter matrix.
The resulting closed-loop system S
f
= (S, F) can be, therefore,
represented by
S
f
: z = A
f
z + h
f
(t, z), y = C
f
z, (6)
where z = (x
T
1
, w
T
1
, . . . , x
T
N
, w
T
N
)
T
, A
f
= diag{A
f
1
, . . . , A
f
N
}, C
f
=
diag{C
f
1
, . . . , C
f
N
}, h
f
(t, z)
T
= (h
f
1
(t, z)
T
, . . . , h
f
N
(t, z)
T
)
T
,
A
f
i
=
_
A
i
+ B
i
G
i
C
i
B
i
K
i
L
i
C
i
F
i
_
, C
f
i
=
_
C
i
0
_
,
h
f
i
(t, z) =
_
h
i
(t, x)
T
0
_
T
.
Also, as a consequence of (4),
h
f
(t, z)
T
h
f
(t, z) z
T

H
fT

1

H
f
z z
T

H
T

1

Hz, (7)
where

H
f
=
_

H
fT
1
. . .

H
fT
N
_
T
,

H
f
i
=
_

H
1
i
0

H
2
i
0 . . .

H
N
i
0
_
,
in which
i
n
j
matrices

H
j
i
(i, j = 1, . . . , N) follow from the
decomposition

H
i
=
_

H
1
i
. . .

H
N
i
_
, while

H = diag{

H
1
, . . . ,

H
N
}
with

H
i
=
_
H
i
0
_
.
We shall be looking for a dynamic controller F which robustly
stabilizes S. According to [1012], S is robustly stabilized with vector
degree = (
1
, . . . ,
N
)
T
= (1/

1
, . . . , 1/

N
)
T
if the
equilibrium x = 0 of the closed-loop systemS
f
= (S, F) is globally
asymptotically stable for all h(t, z) satisfying (4) for some given

H
and , according to the first (left hand side) inequalities in (4) and
(7). Maximizing the controller stabilizes the linear part of S and,
at the same time, maximizes its tolerance to uncertain nonlinear
interconnections and perturbations. However, in this formulation,
the nonlinear interconnections bound is described, in general, by
a full matrix

H. Having in mind that the system model sparsity
implied by (1) and (3) and the adopted controller structure defined
in (5) correspond to the perfectly decentralized control (see [27,
28]), the corresponding controller subspace is not quadratically
invariant, leading to the conclusion that the related optimization
problem is not convex. In order to overcome this difficulty, we
introduce further decompositions by applying the second (right-
hand side) inequalities in (4) and (7), and formulate the following
modified robust stabilization problem as a basis for our further
elaborations:
S
f
= (S, F) is robustly stable with vector degree =
(
1
, . . . ,
N
)
T
= (1/

1
, . . . , 1/

N
)
T
if the following problem
is feasible:
Minimize
N

i=1

i
subject to

X > 0,
_
_

XA
f
+ A
fT

X

X

H
T

X I 0

H 0
_
_
< 0,
(8)
where

X is the global Lyapunov matrix [10]; notice that the matrix

H
is block-diagonal in accordance with the assumed systemsparsity,
i.e. with the subsystem dimensions. However, the second matrix
inequality in (8) is still not an LMI in both

X and the controller
parameter matrix. In the case of static state feedback, the problem
can be transformed into an LMI problem by a simple change of
variables [10]. In the case of dynamic output feedback, structures
involving decentralized observers of Luenberger type have been
considered in [12,25,26], and in [24] using algebraic Riccati
equations. Very successful solutions based on LMIs have been
presented in [25,26], efficiently exploiting the specific controller
structure introduced by the observer choice. In the next section,
we shall show that the above general robust stabilization problem
can also be formulated as an LMI problem.
3. Robust decentralized controller design
Having in mind the assumed system structure, together with
the a priori knowledge about the interconnection bounds supposed
to be available to the designer, we shall consider global Lyapunov
matrices

X structurally adapted to S and F:
Assumption A. Matrix

X in (8) possesses the block-diagonal
structure, that is,

X = diag{

X
1
, . . .

X
N
}, where

X
i
are (n
i
+ s
i
)
(n
i
+ s
i
) local Lyapunov matrices, i = 1, . . . , N.
This choice does not represent a significant restriction, having
in mind that the original problem has been already decomposed
in (8) into N independent robust dynamic output feedback design
problems (which still remain to be solved).
Let

A = diag{

A
1
, . . . ,

A
N
},

B = diag{

B
1
, . . . ,

B
N
} and

C =
diag{

C
1
, . . . ,

C
N
}, where

A
i
=
_
A
i
0
0 0
_
,

B
i
=
_
0 B
i
I 0
_
and

C
i
=
_
0 I
C
i
0
_
, so that we can write

A =

A +

BJ

C, where J is the global

S.S. Stankovi, D.D. iljak / Systems & Control Letters 58 (2009) 271275 273
controller parameter matrix. Then, the second inequality in (8) can
be written as

R +

B
x
J

C +

C
T
J
T

B
xT
< 0, (9)
where

R = diag{

R
1
, . . . ,

R
N
},

B
x
= diag{

B
x
1
, . . . ,

B
x
N
},

C =
diag{

C
1
, . . . ,

C
N
},

R
i
=
_
_

X
i

A
i
+

A
T
i

X
i

X
i

H
T
i

X
i
I 0

H
i
0
i
I
_
_
,

B
x
i
=
_
_

X
i

B
i
0
0
_
_
,

C
T
i
=
_
_

C
T
i
0
0
_
_
.
The problem (9) can remind of a compact formulation of a set
of N local classical H

problems for virtual subsystems defined as

x
i
= A
i
x
i
+ B
i
u
i
+ w
i
, z
i
= H
i
x
i
, where the aim is to compute
such local controllers that the H

-norms of the transfer functions

between w
i
and z
i
are less than
i
[5,4,2]. However, it is evident
that the second block in the first row of (8) consists of the entire
Lyapunov matrix

X, and not of

X
_
I
0
_
as it should be in the case
of the classical H

problems (see e.g. [5,4,2]). From the point of

view of H

design, one can interpret the inequality (8) in such a

way that it corresponds to a virtual system in which w
i
represent
inputs to the subsystems and their local controllers, i = 1, . . . , N;
this structural difference requires a special treatment described in
the sequel.
Lemma 1. Let Assumption A hold and let

X > 0. Then, (9) holds if
and only if

B
T
< 0,

C
T

C
TT
< 0, (10)
where

T = diag{

T
1
, . . . ,

T
N
},

T
i
=
_

X
1
i

A
T
i
+

A
i

X
1
i
I

X
1
i

H
T
i
I I 0

H
i

X
1
i
0
i
I
_
,

= diag{

1
, . . . ,

B

N
} and

B
T
i
=
_

B
T
i
0 0
_
(A

denotes a matrix
with the properties N(A

) = R(A) and A

A
T
> 0, where N(.) and
R(.) denote the null space and the range space of an indicated matrix).
Proof. The assumed structure of

X and J implies that (9) decouples
into N independent inequalities

R
i
+

B
x
i
J
i

C
i
+

C
T
i
J
T
i

B
xT
i
< 0 with
general (s
i
+m
i
)(s
i
+p
i
) matrices J
i
. According to the elimination
lemma [1,3,5], the necessary and sufficient conditions for these
inequalities are

B
x
i

R
i

B
xT
i
< 0,

C
T
i

R
i

C
TT
i
< 0, (11)
i = 1, . . . , N.
Furthermore,

B
x
i

R
i

B
xT
i
< 0 if and only if

B

i

T
i

B
T
i
< 0, since

B
x
i
= S
i
_

B
T
i
0 0
_
T
, where S
i
= diag{

X
i
, I, I}, so that we have

B
x
i
=

B

i
S
1
i
, having in mind that S
1
i

R
i
S
1
i
=

T
i
, and that

X > 0.
Hence the result.
The first inequality in (10) is nowan LMI in

X
1
, and the second
in

X. Following the standard approach, e.g. [5], we introduce the
following decompositions:

X
i
=
_
X
i
X
2i
X
T
2i
X
3i
_
,

Y
i
=

X
1
i
=
_
Y
i
Y
2i
Y
T
2i
Y
3i
_
, (12)
where X
i
andY
i
are n
i
n
i
real symmetric positive definite matrices,
i = 1, . . . , N.
Lemma 2. Let Assumption A hold, let

X > 0, and let X
i
, Y
i
and X
2i
be
given by (12), i = 1, . . . , N. Then inequalities (10) hold if and only if
E
c
VE
cT
< 0, E
b
WE
bT
< 0, (13)
where V = diag{V
1
, . . . , V
N
}, W = diag{W
1
, . . . , W
N
}, E
c
=
diag{E
c
1
, . . . , E
c
N
}, E
b
= diag{E
b
1
, . . . , E
b
N
}, E
c
i
=
_
C
T
i
0
0 I
_
, E
b
i
=
_
B

i
0
0 I
_
,
V
i
=
_
_
_
X
i
A
i
+ A
T
i
X
i
X
i
X
2i
H
T
i
X
i
I 0 0
X
T
2i
0 I 0
H
i
0 0
i
I
_

_,
W
i
=
_
_
Y
i
A
T
i
+ A
i
Y
i
I Y
i
H
T
i
I I 0
H
i
Y
i
0
i
I
_
_
.
Proof. By definition, we have

R
i
=
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
X
i
A
i
+ A
T
i
X
i
A
T
i
X
2i
X
T
2i
A
i
0
X
i
X
2i
X
T
2i
X
3i
H
T
i
0
X
i
X
2i
X
T
2i
X
3i
I 0
H
i
0 0
i
I
_

_
.
On the other hand, we have

C
T
i
=
_
C
T
i
0 0
0 0 I
_
, having in mind
the structure of

C
i
and

C
i
. As the second block-column in

C
T
i
contains only zero matrices, the second inequality in (10) gives the
first inequality in (13).
The second inequality in (13) is obtained analogously starting
from

T
i
=
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
A
i
Y
i
+ Y
i
A
T
i
A
i
Y
2i
Y
2i
A
T
i
0
I 0
0 I
Y
i
H
T
i
Y
T
2i
H
T
i
I 0
0 I
I 0
H
i
Y
i
H
i
Y
2i
0
i
I
_

_
and deleting the unnecessary block-rows and block-columns.
Hence the result.
It can be clearly seen now that the matrices X
i
, Y
i
and X
2i
are
constrained by (13), while in the standard H

design (e.g. [5,4,3]),

only the first diagonal blocks of the global Lyapunov matrix and its
inverse (X
i
and Y
i
in our case) are constrained by the corresponding
LMIs. Once X
i
, Y
i
and X
2i
are determined, the next problemis to find

X
i
> 0 satisfying (12), i = 1, . . . N.
Lemma 3. Assume: (a) s
i
= n
i
, (b) X
2i
in (12) is nonsingular,
and (c) Q
i
=
_
X
i
I
I Y
i
_
> 0. Then,
X
3i
= X
T
2i
(X
i
Y
1
i
)
1
X
2i
, (14)
implying

X
i
> 0, i = 1, . . . N.
Proof. From (12), we obtain Y
T
2i
= X
1
2i
(I X
i
Y
i
), giving directly
(14). Obviously,

X
i
> 0, since X
i
> 0 and X
i
X
2i
X
1
2i
(X
i

Y
1
i
)(X
T
2i
)
1
X
T
2i
= Y
1
i
> 0. Hence the result.
The results obtained so far can be assembled in the following
way:
Theorem 1. Assuming A, the system S in (3) is robustly stabilized by
the dynamic controller F in (5) with s
i
= n
i
if the following problem
274 S.S. Stankovi, D.D. iljak / Systems & Control Letters 58 (2009) 271275
is feasible:
minimize
N

i=1

i
subject to X > 0, Y > 0, Q > 0, Z > 0,

E
c

V

E
cT
< 0,
E
b
WE
bT
< 0,
(15)
where X = diag{X
1
, . . . , X
N
}, Y = diag{Y
1
, . . . , Y
N
}, Q =
diag{Q
1
, . . . , Q
N
}, Z = diag{Z
1
, . . . , Z
N
},

V = diag{

V
1
, . . . ,

V
N
},

V
i
=
_
_
X
i
A
i
+ A
T
i
X
i
+ Z
i
X
i
H
T
i
X
i
I 0
H
i
0
i
I
_
_
,
while matrix

E
c
is a matrix having the same structure as E
c
in (13),
but with the elements

E
c
i
obtained from E
c
i
=
_
C
T
i
0
0 I
_
in such a way
that the dimension of the identity matrix ensures compatibility of the
product with

V
i
(instead of V
i
), i = 1, . . . , N.
Proof. The proof is entirely basedonthe presentedlemmas. Notice
only that the inequality

E
c

V

E
cT
< 0 fromthe problem(15) follows
immediately from the first inequality in (13) in Lemma 2 after
applying the Schurs complement formula and replacing X
2i
X
T
2i
by
Z
i
(see the expression for

V
i
). Condition Z > 0 results from the
requirement that the matrices X
2i
are nonsingular, i = 1, . . . , N.
The inequality E
b
WE
bT
< 0 is identical to the second inequality in
(13). Thus, the result.
Solving (15), one gets X > 0, Y > 0 and Z > 0. Nonsingular
matrices X
2i
can always be constructed from any given Z
i
> 0;
one gets X
3i
from (14), and, consequently,

X
i
> 0 from (12),
i = 1, . . . , N. Then, we come back to the original inequality
(9), which represents then a system of N independent LMIs with
unconstrained matrix variables J
i
, i = 1, . . . , N. Any solution to
these LMIs gives the required block-diagonal parameter matrix
J = diag{J
1
, . . . , J
N
}, that is, a robustly stabilizing decentralized
dynamic controller F for S.
Assumptions (a) and (b) in Lemma 3 are important for the
formulation of Theorem 1 in terms of LMIs. In general, in the case
of reduced order observers (when s
i
< n
i
), one is faced with the
problem of the existence of solutions for Y
2i
, Y
3i
and X
3i
satisfying
(12); notice that in the case of H

design we have, similarly, the

rank condition in addition to the condition of the type Q
i
> 0 (see
e.g. [5], Corollary 7.11).
The obtained estimates of the robustness degree may appear
to be too conservative. A better insight into the real robustness can
be obtained by calculating A
f
with the obtained parameter matrix
J , replacing it in (8), and solving (8) for

X and . An even more
realistic and less conservative estimate can be obtained by using
(8) with

H being replaced by

H and by

, and by solving the
corresponding LMI problem for

X and

.
It has been found to be beneficial to limit the norm of the gain
matrices J
i
by applying the procedure proposed in [10,12].
Remark. Assume that the interconnection function in S is in the
form h(t, x) = h
L
(t, x) + h
N
(t, x), where h
L
(t, x) = A
h
x is a known
linear part in which A
h
is a constant N N block-matrix with
blocks A
h
ij
, i, j = 1, . . . , N, and h
N
(t, x) is an unknown nonlinear
part satisfying inequality (4). Taking A

= A + A
h
as a new state
matrix in (3), instead of (9) we have now

R +

B
x
J

C +

C
T
J
T

B
xT
< 0, (16)
where

R is an N N block-matrix with blocks

R
ij
=
_

X
i

A
h
ij
+

A
hT
ji

X
j
0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
_
,

A
h
ij
=
_
A
h
ij
0
0 0
_
, i, j = 1, . . . , N, i = j,

R
kk
=
0, k = 1, . . . , N, and

R

is obtained from

R in (9) by replacing A
i
by
A

ii
= A
i
+ A
h
ii
. Having in mind that

R

R is not block-diagonal,
Theorem 1 cannot be directly applied to (16). However, (16) can
have a solution satisfying Assumption A; it is reasonable to expect
that the resulting controller provides better performance than the
one obtained in the absence of the assumed a priori knowledge
about linear interconnections.
4. Numerical example
Consider the motion of two inverted pendulums connected by
a spring which can slide up and down the rods of the pendulums
in sudden jumps of unpredictable size and direction between the
support and the height equal to 1 [10]. Alinearized and normalized
model of this system is given by
S : x =
_
_
_
0 1 0 0
1 0 0 0
0 0 0 1
0 0 1 0
_

_x +
_
_
_
0 0
1 0
0 0
0 1
_

_u + h(t, x),
y =
_
1 0 0 0
0 0 1 0
_
x, (17)
where h(t, x) =
_
_
_
0 0 0 0
1 0 1 0
0 0 0 0
1 0 1 0
_

_e(t, x)x and e(t, x) : R

5

[0, 1] represents a normalized interconnection parameter. We

want to compute a decentralized control law which would con-
nectively stabilize the system for all values of e(t, x) [0, 1] [29].
The decentralized robust linear static state feedback according
to [10] provides

=
1
=
2
= 4.4950, with the local gain
matrix K =
_
725.9085 40.4346
_
and the local closed-loop
poles {20 j17.8093}. It easy to see that the system is not
stabilizable by any linear static output feedback.
The local dynamic output feedback controller parameters
obtained on the basis of Theorem 1, with H
i
= I are
F
i
= 10
4
_
0.4670 1.4182
1.0131 3.1931
_
, L
i
= 10
4
_
3.3926
1.5118
_
, K
i
=
_
243.5166 767.0817
_
, G
i
= 333.7029, i = 1, 2, with the local
closed-loop poles {3.6543 10
4
, 0.0390 10
4
, 0.7455
j0.5605} and

= 0.5670 < 1, that is, the desired property is not

achieved.
Assuming now that e(t, x) = 0.5 + e

(t, x), where

e

(t, x) [0.5, 0.5] one obtains the structure with known

linear interconnections with A
h
=
_
0 0 0 0
0.5 0 0.5 0
0 0 0 0
0.5 0 0.5 0
_
and

H =
_
0 0 0 0
1 0 1 0
0 0 0 0
1 0 1 0
_
(see the Remark). In this case the
LMI (16) is feasible and one gets a decentralized stabilizing
controller with

= 1.3526, ensuring stability for all spring

positions. The local controller parameter matrices are in this
case F
i
= 10
6
_
1.4090 1.5774
1.0938 1.2571
_
, L
i
= 10
6
_
5.0635
5.3116
_
, K
i
=
10
6
_
0.5753 0.6573
_
, G
i
= 10
6
1.6925, and the local closed-
loop poles {2.648710
6
, 1.721710
4
, 84.3866, 1.8834}.
A direct comparison with the results presented in relation with
the same example in [25] shows that a better performance is
obtained by using an observer of Luenberger type, incorporating
the state matrix of the systemmodel and leaving a smaller number
of free parameters in the controller design procedure.
S.S. Stankovi, D.D. iljak / Systems & Control Letters 58 (2009) 271275 275
5. Conclusion
A new LMI-based procedure has been formulated for the
design of decentralized dynamic output controllers for systems
composed of linear subsystems coupled by uncertain nonlinear
interconnections satisfying quadratic constraints. The scheme
utilizes the general linear dynamic output feedback structure. The
design procedure consists of two steps, the first providing the local
Lyapunov matrices together with the corresponding robustness
degrees, and the second the controller parameters providing a
robustly stable overall system. An example shows how connective
stability can be achieved by using the proposed methodology.
It would be interesting to apply the proposed procedure to the
design of overlapping decentralized dynamic output controllers
for large-scale systems, within the framework of the Inclusion
Principle [21].
References
[1] S. Boyd, L. El Ghaoui, E. Feron, V. Balakrishnan, Linear Matrix Inequalities in
System and Control Theory, SIAM, Philadelphia, 1994.
[2] P. Gahinet, P. Apkarian, A linear matrix inequality approach to H

control,
Internat. J. Robust Nonlinear Control 4 (1994) 421448.
[3] T. Iwasaki, R.E. Skelton, All controllers for the general H

control Problem:
LMI existence conditions and state space formulas, Automatica 30 (1994)
13071317.
[4] P. Gahinet, A. Nemirovski, A.J. Laub, M. Chilali, LMI control toolbox, The Math
Works, Natick, MA, 1995.
[5] G.E. Dullerud, F. Paganini, A Course in Robust Control Theory A Convex
Approach, Springer, N.Y, 2000.
[6] J.C. Geromel, J. Bernussou, P.L.D. Peres, Decentralized control through
parameter space optimization, Automatica 30 (1994) 15651578.
[7] Y.Y. Cao, Y.X. Sun, W.J. Mao, Output feedback decentralized stabilization: ILMI
approach, Systems Control Lett. 35 (1998) 183194.
[8] J.C. Geromel, J. Bernussou, M.C. de Oliveira, H
2
-norm optimization with
constrained dynamic output feedback controllers: Decentralized and reliable
control, IEEE Trans. Automat. Control 44 (1999) 14491454.
[9] G.H. Yang, J.L. Wang, Decentralized controller design for composite systems:
Linear case, Internat. J. Control 72 (1999) 815825.
[10] D.D. iljak, D. Stipanovi, Robust stabilization of nonlinear systems, Math.
Probl. Eng. 6 (2000) 461493.
[11] D.M. Stipanovi, D.D. iljak, Robust stability and stabilization of discrete-
time non-linear systems: The LMI approach, Internat. J. Control 74 (2001)
873879.
[12] D.D. iljak, D. Stipanovi, Autonomous decentralized control, Proc. ASME
Intern. Mech. Eng. Congress (2001) 761765.
[13] G. Zhai, M. Ikeda, Y. Fujisaki, Decentralized controller design: A matrix
inequality design using a homotopy method, Automatica 37 (2001) 565572.
[14] G. Scorletti, G. Duc, An LMI approach to decentralized control, Internat. J.
Control 74 (2001) 211224.
[15] G. Garcia, J. Daafouz, J. Bernussou, The infinite time near optimal decentralized
regulator problem for singularly perturbed systems: A convex optimization
approach, Automatica 38 (2002) 13971406.
[16] D.W.C. Ho, G. Lu, Robust stabilization for a class of discrete-time non-linear
systems via output feedback: The unified LMI approach, Internat. J. Control 76
(2003) 105115.
[17] R. DAndrea, G.E. Dullerud, Distributed control design for spatially intercon-
nected systems, IEEE Trans. Automat. Control. 48 (2003) 14781495.
[18] A.I. Zeevi, G. Nekovi, D.D. iljak, Robust decentralized exciter control with
linear feedback, IEEE Trans. Power Syst. 19 (2004) 10961103.
[19] D.M. Stipanovi,Inhalan, R. Teo, C. Tomlin, Decentralized overlapping control
of a formation of unmanned aerial vehicles, Automatica 40 (2004) 12851296.
[20] J.A. Fax, R.M. Murray, Information flow and cooperative control of vehicle
formations, IEEE Trans. Automat. Control. 49 (2004) 14651476.
[21] D.D. iljak, Decentralized Control of Complex Systems, Academic Press, New
York, 1991.
[22] D.D. iljak, A.I. Zeevi, Control of large-scale systems: Beyond decentralized
feedback, in: Proc. 10th IFAC Symposiumon Large Scale Systems, Osaka, Japan,
pp. PL1-10, 2004.
[23] A.I. Zeevi, D.D. iljak, Design of robust static output feedback for large-scale
systems, IEEE Trans. Automat. Control. 49 (2004) 20402044.
[24] P.R. Pagilla, Y. Zhu, A decentralized output feedback controller for a class of
large-scale interconnected nonlinear systems, Trans. ASME, J. Dynam. Syst.
Meas. Control 127 (2005) 167172.
[25] S.S. Stankovi, D.M. Stipanovi, D.D. iljak, Decentralized Dynamic Output
Feedback for Robust Stabilization of a Class of Nonlinear Interconnected
Systems, Automatica 43 (2007) 861867.
[26] Y. Zhu, P.R. Pagilla, Decentralized output feedback control of a class of large-
scale interconnected systems, IMA J. Math. Control Inform. 24 (2007) 5769.
[27] M. Rotkowitz, S. Lall, Decentralized control information structures preserved
under feedback, Proc. IEEE Conf. Decision and Control (2002) 596575.
[28] M. Rotkowitz, S. Lall, A characterization of convex problems in decentralized
control, IEEE Trans. Automat. Control 51 (2006) 274286.
[29] D.M. Stipanovi, D.D. iljak, Connective stability of discontinuous dynamic
systems, J. Optim. Theory Appl. 115 (2002) 711726.