IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON INDUSTRIAL ELECTRONICS, VOL. 45, NO.
2, APRIL 1998
Absolute Stability Conditions in a Fuzzy
Phase-Lead Compensation and Their
Extension to MIMO Systems
Kazuo Tanaka, Member, IEEE, and Takayuki Ikeda
Abstract—This paper presents absolute stability conditions in
a fuzzy phase-lead compensation and their extension to multi-
input–multi-output (MIMO) systems. A theorem which realizes
an effective phase-lead compensation is recalled. A so-called
“transformation matrix” is derived in the theorem. A fuzzy
phase-lead compensator (FPLC) is constructed by using the
transformation matrix. The circle condition is employed to derive
absolute stability conditions of feedback systems in a fuzzy
phase-lead compensation. Next, a generalized class of FPLC’s
is defined, and its stability conditions are derived from the
viewpoints of H1 norm and quadratic stability. It is found
that the stability conditions realize stability analysis not only for
single-input–single-output (SISO) systems, but also for MIMO
systems.
Index Terms— Absolute stability, fuzzy control, fuzzy phase-
lead compensation, multivariable systems, nonlinear systems.
I. INTRODUCTION
F UZZY CONTROL was first introduced in the early 1970’s
by Mamdani [1]. However, we lack, at present, systematic
design techniques, although fuzzy control has been applied to
many real industrial processes. In fact, most fuzzy controllers
have been designed by trial-and-error procedures using the
operator’s control knowledge.
A fuzzy phase-lead compensation was proposed in [6] and
[7] to effectively improve transient response, such as speed of
response and damping characteristics. However, the stability
of feedback systems in the fuzzy phase-lead compensation has
not been analyzed. Stability is one of the most important things
in controller design. If we offer a method of stability analysis
for the fuzzy phase-lead compensation, it might be widely
applicable to more complicated systems. The Popov condition
and circle condition [11], [12] have often been utilized for
stability analysis of fuzzy systems. These approaches are
generally useful only for single-input–single-output (SISO)
linear systems, although they are intuitive and simple methods.
This is a serious problem in practical applications, because real
systems are often multi-input–multi-output (MIMO) systems.
In this paper, we analyze stability not only using the circle
condition, but also using norm and quadratic stability.
norm and quadratic stability play an important role
Manuscript received September 30, 1995; revised August 11, 1997.
The authors are with the Department of Human and Mechanical Systems
Engineering, Kanazawa University, Kanazawa, 920 Japan.
Publisher Item Identifier S 0278-0046(98)01566-4.
0278–0046/98$10.00  1998 IEEE
Authorized licensed use limited to: GLA Institute of Technology & Management. Downloaded on April 22,2010 at 15:21:20 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
333
in the robust control field. An important point is that the
stability conditions based on norm and quadratic stability
derived in this paper realize stability analysis for MIMO
systems.
In this paper, a theorem which realizes an effective phase-
lead compensation is recalled. A so-called “transformation
matrix” is derived in the theorem. A fuzzy phase-lead com-
pensator, which is reduced to a Takagi–Sugeno type [10]
of fuzzy controller with two rules is constructed by using
the transformation matrix. The circle condition is employed
to derive absolute stability conditions in a fuzzy phase-lead
compensation. Next, we derive stability conditions for a gen-
eralized class of fuzzy phase-lead compensators from the
viewpoints of norm and quadratic stability. It is found
that the stability conditions based on norm and quadratic
stability realize stability analysis not only for SISO systems,
but also for MIMO systems. This paper will deal with stability
only for linear controlled objects, because the circle condition
can basically be utilized only for the feedback system which
consists of a linear controlled object and a nonlinear feedback
controller, i.e., a Luré system.
II. A FUZZY PHASE-LEAD COMPENSATION
Fujii [5] first considered a phase-lead compensation for
fuzzy control systems. However, it is stated in [6] and [7]
that the method does not effectively realize a phase-lead
compensation. Furthermore, in [6], the following important
theorem for effectively increasing phase margin was derived.
This theorem gives a new transformation matrix which is
directly related to a fuzzy phase-lead compensation. The
following terms are used in this paper:
transfer function of a controlled object;
transfer functions of controllers,
( is arbitrary transfer function);
gain crossover frequency of the open-loop
transfer function ;
phase margin of the open-loop transfer func-
tion .
Theorem 2.1 [6]: Assume that and
are stable. The gain crossover frequency and the phase margin
of become and respectively, if
we use instead of
334 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON INDUSTRIAL ELECTRONICS, VOL. 45, NO. 2, APRIL 1998

where Rule 2: IF is about “ or ”

THEN

(1)
where
is called the “transformation matrix.” Theorem
2.1 shows that phase margin can be increased without changing
gain crossover frequency if we use the transformation when
matrix with the lead angle i.e., if we use
instead of Notice
is the set point and is the output of a controlled object.
that is reduced to the identity matrix, that is,
The membership functions are defined as
(the identity matrix), when Therefore,
and when
It has been stated in [5] that a phase-lead compensation in
fuzzy control systems can be realized if we use the following
transformation matrix :
where and are the fuzzy set, about “ or 0 or ,”
(2) of Rule 1 and the fuzzy set, about “ or ” of Rule
2, respectively. It is found from the properties of the phase
The coordinate transformation achieved by the transformation plan that the fuzzy areas partitioned by fuzzy sets (Rule
matrix (2) means rotation of the coordinate system. 1) and (Rule 2) are related to speed of response and
Equation (2) is a special case of (1). In other words, (2) is damping characteristics, respectively. Therefore, in the FPLC,
equivalent to (1) only when that is, linear controller 1 and linear controller 2 are assigned to the
consequent parts of Rules 1 and 2, respectively. The final
output of the FPLC is calculated as
Therefore, the phase-lead compensation by (2) is useful only if
However, required design performance with respect (4)
to speed of response is not always We should
use the transformation matrix (1) instead of (2), in order to where
effectively realize phase-lead compensation.
To construct a fuzzy phase-lead compensator (FPLC), we
use two different linear controllers in its consequent parts; Notice that the FPLC is reduced to a linear controller:
linear controller 1 is

when , since
and linear controller 2 is

The parameters of the FPLC are and in (3).

where Linear controller 1 is designed by con-
sidering speed of response, i.e., gain crossover frequency.
Linear controller 2 is designed by considering damping char-
acteristics, i.e., phase margin. As mentioned above, we can
increase the value of phase margin without changing the value
of gain crossover frequency by using the matrix
We can expect that an effective “fuzzy combination” of these
controllers realizes a good transient response. An FPLC is
constructed by the following “fuzzy combination” of these
rules, i.e., effective switching of two rules.
Rule 1: IF is about “ or 0 or ”
THEN
The controller design is to determine these parameters. The
detailed design procedure is presented in [6] and [7].
Remark 2.1: The FPLC can be regarded as a kind of fuzzy
sliding-mode controller. A main difference is that the FPLC
has parameters for effectively improving transient response. It
is actually stated in [7] that overshoot (damping characteris-
tics) can be effectively improved by increasing the value of
However, the main purpose of this paper is not to point
out differences between the FPLC and other fuzzy sliding-
mode controllers. The main purpose is to derive new stability
conditions, particularly stability conditions based on norm
and quadratic stability. These conditions offer a way of robust
(3) stability analysis. Of course, the conditions might be applicable
to fuzzy sliding-mode control systems.

Authorized licensed use limited to: GLA Institute of Technology & Management. Downloaded on April 22,2010 at 15:21:20 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
TANAKA AND IKEDA: ABSOLUTE STABILITY CONDITIONS IN A FUZZY PHASE-LEAD COMPENSATION 335

Fig. 1. Feedback control system.

Fig. 2. Equivalent feedback system.

III. ABSOLUTE STABILITY OF FEEDBACK SYSTEMS Fig. 3. A graphical image of Theorem 3.1.

Let us consider a SISO second-order linear system:

where
(5)
(11)
where and
is the scalar input. Fig. 1 shows the feedback control system, (12)
where is the set point. Without loss of
The extended controlled object described by (8) and (9) is
generality,

(6)

when We assume in this paper that

To apply the circle condition to the feedback system, Assump-
Equation (4) can be rewritten as follows:
tion 1 and the following assumption are required.
Assumption 2: is controllable and is ob-
servable.
Remember that

(7)

where
where when It is clear that

(13)
Notice that for all
The following assumption is required for guaranteeing the From the circle condition, we derive the following theorem.
stability of the feedback system. Theorem 3.1: The feedback system described by (8)–(10)
Assumption 1: is a stable matrix. is absolutely stable if the following condition holds:
The above assumption is required when The FPLC
for (14)
is reduced to the linear controller
where

when Therefore, the feedback system is From

the assumption, the feedback system is stable when
Hence, we consider stability for Fig. 2 shows an Theorem 3.1 says that the feedback system is absolutely
equivalent transformation of the feedback system described by stable if the real parts of are always bigger than 1
(5) and (7). The equivalent feedback system can be described for The condition is, of course, a sufficient condition
as for ensuring stability of the feedback system. Fig. 3 illustrates
a graphical image of this theorem. In Fig. 3, three types of
(8)
examples are shown. Fig. 3(a) shows an absolutely stable case,
(9) in Fig. 3(b), it is impossible to judge, and Fig. 3(c) is an
(10) absolutely unstable case.

Authorized licensed use limited to: GLA Institute of Technology & Management. Downloaded on April 22,2010 at 15:21:20 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
336 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON INDUSTRIAL ELECTRONICS, VOL. 45, NO. 2, APRIL 1998

Remark 3. 1: As is well known, the circle condition is more

conservative than the Popov condition. However, the Popov
condition cannot be applied to the feedback system described
by (8)–(10), since the nonlinear block must be regarded
as a time-varying element.
Remark 3.2: In this section, we have considered a SISO
second-order lag system and a fuzzy controller with
where denotes the number of IF–THEN rules. Section V will
present stability analysis for a MIMO high-order system and
a fuzzy controller with

IV. STABILITY CONDITIONS BASED ON NORM

As mentioned above, when

the feedback system is absolutely stable if the condition (14)

holds. Next, to find a relation between the absolute stability
condition and norm, we derive a stability condition for
the case of
Fig. 4. A graphical image of (20).

(15)
Theorem 4.1: Assume that
Then, (14) can no longer guarantee the stability of the feedback
system, shown in Fig. 2, under (15). (18)
Remark 4.1: Generally speaking, must be a nonneg-
ative value from the properties of fuzzy sets. However, as where Then, the feedback system described by (8)–(10)
mentioned above, by introducing (15) instead of (13), we can is absolutely stable if
find a relation between the stability condition (14) and
norm. The point will be made in Theorem 4.1. (19)
In the case of (15), the following sufficient condition for
ensuring stability of the feedback system can be derived from In Theorem 4.1, (19) is reduced to (17) when
the circle condition: Notice that the condition of (17) is more conservative than
that of (14), because (17) guarantees stability not only for
(16) , but also for To solve
the above conservative problem, we introduce the following
Equation (16) means that all trajectories of Nyquist plots must equivalent transformation:
be in the unit circle. The condition (16) is equivalent to

(17)

for all norm is defined as follows:

where The above feedback system is equiv-
alent to (8)–(10). A stability condition for the transformed
system is obtained from Theorem 4.1 as follows:
where must be a stable system. If is a transfer matrix,
i.e., the system is a MIMO system, then

Fig. 4 illustrates the graphical image of this condition.

where Theorem 4.2: Assume that where
Then, the feedback system described by (8)–(10) is absolutely
stable if

From the above discussion, we derive the following theorem (20)

from the viewpoint of norm.

Authorized licensed use limited to: GLA Institute of Technology & Management. Downloaded on April 22,2010 at 15:21:20 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
TANAKA AND IKEDA: ABSOLUTE STABILITY CONDITIONS IN A FUZZY PHASE-LEAD COMPENSATION 337

Remark 4.2: The conditions of Theorems 4.1 and 4.2 can where and are known real matrices which characterize
be applied not only to SISO second-order systems, but also to the structure of the uncertainty. The uncertainty is bounded
SISO high-order systems. In addition, Section V will present as follows:
stability analysis for a MIMO high-order system and a fuzzy
the elements of
controller with
are Lebesgue measurable
V. A GENERALIZATION OF FPLC AND STABILITY It is noted in [8] that the existence of a fixed Lyapunov function
CONDITIONS FOR SISO AND MIMO SYSTEMS for the uncertain system is equivalent to a certain small gain
In the preceding sections, we considered the SISO second- condition.
order system (5) and the FPLC (3) [i.e., (7)]. In Section V-A, Theorem 5.1 [8]: The uncertain system (24) is quadratically
we consider a generalization class of the FPLC and derive its stable if and only if it satisfies the following condition:
stability conditions. Section V-B derives stability conditions (C1) is a stable matrix and .
for a MIMO high-order system. Equivalent conditions [9] for (C1) are presented in Theorem
5.2.
A. SISO Systems Theorem 5.2 [9]: The condition (C1) in Theorem 5.1 holds
if and only if one of the following equivalent conditions holds.
Consider the following SISO systems:
(C2) The following Riccati equation has a positive definite
(21) solution :

where
and is the (C3) Assume that
single input. is the state variable. Equation (21) is
reduced to (5), discussed in Section III, when To
stabilize (21), we generalize the FPLC (7) as follows:
All the real parts of eigenvalues of the matrix are
(22) nonzero, i.e., for
We can use one of the conditions (C1)–(C3) to guarantee
where stability of the uncertain system (24). If the feedback control
system, which consists of (21) and (23) [or (22)], can be
represented in the form of (24), it can be analyzed by using
the conditions (C1)–(C3). We will show that this is possible
below. Define and matrices as follows:

Since
..
.

we have
where
(23)

where
(25)
Then, the feedback system of (21) and (23) can be represented
as
Remark 5.1: Notice that the FPLC loses the physical mean-
(26)
ing as a phase-lead compensator in the case of high-order
systems In other words, (22) is no longer an FPLC Notice that the feedback system (26) is represented in the form
because (22) has no transformation matrix which is related of (24). However, if we apply Theorems 5.1 and 5.2 to (26),
to a phase-lead element. On the other hand, the generalized the stability conditions for (26) become conservative because
fuzzy controller (22) can be regarded as a kind of polytopic- As mentioned in Section IV,
type nonlinear controller. Therefore, the stability conditions even if for To solve the
that will be derived below can be applied to polytopic-type conservative problem, we introduce the following equivalent
nonlinear controllers. transformation (the detailed transformation will be given in
Next, we consider stability for a class of uncertain systems: the Appendix):
(24) (27)

Authorized licensed use limited to: GLA Institute of Technology & Management. Downloaded on April 22,2010 at 15:21:20 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
338 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON INDUSTRIAL ELECTRONICS, VOL. 45, NO. 2, APRIL 1998

where In the same way as in the case of SISO systems, we can

obtain stability conditions. To begin with, define and
matrices as follows:

Notice that
..
.
We can derive an important theorem for the feedback control
systems (27) from Theorems 5.1 and 5.2.
Theorem 5.3: Equation (27) is quadratically stable if one
of the following equivalent conditions holds. where
(C4) is a stable matrix and .
(C5) The following Riccati equation has a positive definite
solution:
(31)

(C6) Assume that Then, the feedback system can be represented as

(32)

Furthermore, to solve the conservative problem, we introduce

Then, for
the following equivalent transformation:
In the conditions of Theorem 5.3,
(33)
(28)
where
B. MIMO Systems
Consider the following MIMO systems:
(29)
Notice that
where
For the case of the MIMO system (29), we use the following
controller, instead of (22):
We can derive an important theorem for the feedback
nonlinear control systems (33) from Theorems 5.1 and 5.2.
Theorem 5.4: Equation (33) is quadratically stable if one
where of the following equivalent conditions holds.
(C7) is a stable matrix and .
(C8) The following Riccati equation has a positive definite
solution :

Since
(C9) Assume that

we have

(30)
Then, Re for
In the conditions of Theorem 5.4,
where

(34)

Authorized licensed use limited to: GLA Institute of Technology & Management. Downloaded on April 22,2010 at 15:21:20 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
TANAKA AND IKEDA: ABSOLUTE STABILITY CONDITIONS IN A FUZZY PHASE-LEAD COMPENSATION 339

Fig. 5. Control result (Example 1). Fig. 6. Control result (Example 2).

C. Numerical Examples compensation has been recalled. A so-called “transformation

Example 1: Let us consider the feedback system described
by (29) and (30), where
Then, from (34), we obtain the following matrix
The eigenvalues are and
Therefore, the feedback system is (quadratically) stable from
the stability condition (C6) of Theorem 5.3. Fig. 5 shows the
control result.
Example 2: Let us consider the feedback system of Exam-
ple 1, where
matrix” has been derived in the theorem. A fuzzy phase-lead
compensator, which is reduced to a Takagi–Sugeno type of
fuzzy controller with two rules, has been constructed by using
the transformation matrix. The circle condition has been used
to derive absolute stability conditions of feedback systems in
a fuzzy phase-lead compensation. Next, a generalized class
of fuzzy phase-lead compensators has been defined, and its
stability conditions have been derived from the viewpoints
of norm and quadratic stability. It has been found that
: the stability conditions of norm and quadratic stability
realize stability analysis not only for SISO systems, but also
for MIMO systems.
Although only stability analysis has been discussed in this
paper, the design problem, i.e., determination of the parameters
of fuzzy controllers, is more important. This is a future subject
of our work [13]–[19], as is the extension of this approach to
MIMO nonlinear systems.
APPENDIX
EQUIVALENT TRANSFORMATION FROM (26) TO (27)
Consider the uncertain system

(A1)
Then, from (34), we obtain the following matrix :
where

The eigenvalues are and The Equation (A1) is different from (26), because is
stability condition (C6) of Theorem 5.3 is not satisfied. Fig. 6 not required. By introducing symmetric matrices
shows the control result.

VI. CONCLUSIONS
This paper has presented absolute stability conditions in a
fuzzy phase-lead compensation and their extension to MIMO
systems. A theorem which realizes an effective phase-lead we can realize the following equivalent transformation for

Authorized licensed use limited to: GLA Institute of Technology & Management. Downloaded on April 22,2010 at 15:21:20 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
340 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON INDUSTRIAL ELECTRONICS, VOL. 45, NO. 2, APRIL 1998
(A1):
(A2)
where
Notice that
Since and from (25), we obtain
Therefore, (27) can be derived from (26).
REFERENCES
[1] E. H. Mamdani, “Applications of fuzzy algorithms for control of simple
dynamic plant,” Proc. Inst. Elect. Eng., vol. 121, no. 12, pp. 1585–1588,
1974.
[2] M. Sugeno, Fuzzy Control. Tokyo, Japan: Nikkankogyou, 1988.
[3] K. Tanaka and M. Sano, “A new tuning method of fuzzy control,” in
Proc. 4th IFSA World Congr., 1991, vol. 1, pp. 207–210.
[4] A. Ishigame et al., “Design of electric power system stabilizer based
on fuzzy control theory,” in Conf. Rec. IEEE Int. Conf. Fuzzy Systems,
1992, pp. 973–980.
[5] A. Fujii, T. Ueyama, and N. Yoshitani, “Design of fuzzy controller
using frequency response,” in Proc. 5th Fuzzy System Symp., 1989, pp.
115–120.
[6] K. Tanaka and M. Sano, “Design of fuzzy controllers based on frequency
and transient characteristics,” in Conf. Rec. 2nd IEEE Int. Conf. Fuzzy
Systems, 1993, vol. 1, pp. 111–116.
[7] , “Analysis and design of fuzzy controllers in frequency domain,”
in Proc. IEEE IECON’93, Nov. 1993, vol. 1, pp. 236–241.
H1
[8] P. P. Khargonekar, I. R. Petersen, and K. Zhou,“Robust stabilization
of uncertainty linear systems: Quadratic stabilizability and control
theory,” IEEE Trans. Automat. Contr., vol. 35, pp. 356–361, Mar. 1990.
H1
[9] K. Zhou and P. P. Khargonekar,“An algebraic Riccati equation approach
to optimization,” Syst. Contr. Lett., vol. 11, pp. 85–91, 1988.
[10] T. Takagi and M. Sugeno, “Fuzzy identification of systems and its
applications to modeling and control,” IEEE Trans. Syst., Man, Cybern.,
vol. 15, pp. 116–132, Jan. 1985.
[11] S. Kitamura and T. Kurozumi, “Extended circle criterion and stability
analysis of fuzzy control systems,” in Proc. Int. Fuzzy Eng. Symp.’91,
1991, vol. 2, pp. 634–643.
[12] R. Katoh et al.,“Graphical stability analysis of a fuzzy control system,”
in Proc. IEEE IECON’93, 1993, vol. 1, pp. 248–253.
[13] H. Wang, K. Tanaka, and M. Griffin, “Parallel distributed compensation
of nonlinear systems by Takagi and Sugeno’s fuzzy model,” in Proc.
FUZZ-IEEE ’95, pp. 531–538.
[14] , “An approach to fuzzy control of nonlinear systems: Stability
and design issues,” IEEE Trans. Fuzzy Syst., vol. 4, pp. 14–23, Feb.
1996.
Authorized licensed use limited to: GLA Institute of Technology & Management. Downloaded on April 22,2010 at 15:21:20 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
[15] K. Tanaka, T. Ikeda, and H. O. Wang, “Design of fuzzy control systems
based on relaxed LMI stability conditions,” in Proc. 35th IEEE Conf.
on Decision and Control, 1996, pp. 598–603.
[16] , “A unified approach to controlling chaos via an LMI-based fuzzy
control system design,” IEEE Trans. Circuits Syst. I, to be published.
[17] K. Tanaka, T. Taniguchi, and H. O. Wang, “Model-based fuzzy control
of TORA system: Fuzzy regulator and fuzzy observer design via LMIs
that represent decay rate, distrubance rejection, robustness, optimality,”
to be presented at FUZZ-IEEE’98, Alaska.
[18] K. Tanaka, T. Ikeda, and H. O. Wang, “Fuzzy regulators and fuzy
observers: Relaxed stability conditions and LMI based designs,” IEEE
Trans. Fuzzy Syst.,, to be published.
[19] , “Fuzzy regulators and fuzzy observers: A linear matrix in-
equality approach,” in 36th IEEE Conf. on Decision and Control, to
be published.
Kazuo Tanaka (S’86–M’90) received the B.S. and
M.S. degrees in electrical engineering from Hosei
University, Tokyo, Japan, in 1985 and 1987, re-
spectively, and the Ph.D. degree in systems science
from Tokyo Institute of Technology, Tokyo, Japan,
in 1990.
He is currently an Associate Professor in the
Human and Mechanical Systems Engineering De-
partment, Kanazawa University, Kanazawa, Japan.
He was a Visiting Scientist in Computer Science
at the University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill,
during 1992 and 1993. He is the author or coauthor of nine books. His research
interests include principles, analysis, and design of intelligent control systems,
such as fuzzy control, neurocontrol, and evolutionary control.
Prof. Tanaka is a member of the IEEE Control Systems Society Technical
Committee on Intelligent Control. He received the Best Young Researchers
Award from the Japan Society for Fuzzy Theory and Systems in 1990, the
Theoretical Paper Award at the 1990 Annual NAFIPS Meeting in Toronto,
Ont., Canada, in 1990, the Outstanding Paper Award at the Joint Hungarian-
Japanese Symposium on Fuzzy Systems and Applications in Budapest,
Hungary, in 1991, the Best Young Researcher Award from the Japan Society
of Mechanical Engineers in 1994, and the Best Book Award from the Japan
Society for Fuzzy Theory and Systems in 1995.
Takayuki Ikeda received the B.S. and M.S. degrees
in mechanical systems engineering from Kanazawa
University, Kanazawa, Japan, in 1995. He is cur-
rently working towards the Ph.D. degree in the
Control Systems Engineering Department, Tokyo
Institute of Technology, Tokyo, Japan.
His research interests include analysis and design
of intelligent control systems.