Copyright Cl IFAC Nonlinear Control Systems Design,

Enschede, The Netherlands, 1998

GLOBAL STABILIZATION OF NONLINEAR

CASCADE SYSTEMS: LIMITATIONS IMPOSED BY
RIGHT HALF PLANE ZEROS

R. Sepulchre a , M. Arcak b

(a)Institut Montefiore, B28

University of Liege
B-4000 Liege Sart- Ti/man, BELGIUM
e-mail: sepulchre@montefiore.ulg.ac.be

(b) Center for Control Engineering and Computations

University of California
Santa Barbara, CA 93106-9560 USA
e-mail: murat@seidel.eee.uesb.edu

Abstract: This paper analyzes the stabilizability properties of nonlinear cascades in

which a nonminimum phase linear system is interconnected through its output to a
stable nonlinear system. It is shown that the instability of the zeros of the linear system
can be traded with the stability of the nonlinear system up to a limit fixed by the
growth properties of the interconnection term between the two parts of the cascade.
Below thi~ limit, global stabilization is achieved by smooth static state feedback.
Beyond this limit, various examples illustrate that controllability of the cascade may
be lost, making it impossible to achieve large regions of attractions.
Copyright© 1998lFAC

Keywords: Stabilization, nonlinear cascades, peaking.

1. INTRODUCTION escape time for the solution z(t) if the output

y(t) of the linear subsystem (A, B, C, D) is not
It has been widely acknowledged in the nonlinear properly controlled.
stabilization literature that the study of partially
Beyond invertibility conditions for the linear sys-
linear cascades
tem (for simplicity, we only consider square sys-
~ = f(z) + \It(z,~,y)y tems (m = p) and assume a uniform relative
~ = A~+Bu degree {r, .. . , r} ), successive contributions in the
y = C~ + Du, (z,~, y, u) E lR$ X lRn x lRP x lRm literature have revealed the prominent role played
(1) by the zeros of the linear system in the global
stabilizability of the cascade (1) .
illuminates the structural properties which make
With their celebrated analysis of the peaking phe-
possible or impossible to achieve large regions
nomenon, Sussmann and Kokotovic (1991) have
of attraction (Sussmann and Kokotovic,1991;
shown that the infinite zeros of the linear system
Saberi, et al., 1990; Lin and Saberi, 1993; Braslavsky
are the most harmful ones. Because of the large
and Middelton, 1996; Sepulchre, et al., 1997; Teel,
transients that they exhibit during the fast stabi-
1996). The general scenario in these references is
lization of the output, the states associated to the
that the nonlinear subsystem i = f(z) has a glob-
infinite zeros, that is, the output derivatives, must
ally asymptotically stable equilibrium z = 0 but
be excluded from the interconnection \It to render
that the perturbation \It(z,~,y)y may cause finite

597
the global stabilization of the cascade possible. In
a subsequent paper (Saberi, et al., 1990), Saberi
and the same authors showed that if the out-
put derivatives do not enter the interconnection
and all the finite zeros of the linear system are
Lyapunov stable (the cascade is then said to be
"weakly minimum phase"), then the stabilizabil-
ity of the linear system guarantees the global sta-
bilizability of the cascade. This result was further
extended in (Sepulchre, et al., 1997) -see also
(Teel, 1996) for a different version and (Lin and
Saberi,1993) for the semiglobal counterpart- to
the unstable situation where repeated zeros lie on
the imaginary axis.
The situation of unstable finite zeros was con-
sidered for the first time in the recent paper
(Braslavsky and Middelton, 1996). With simple
but illuminating examples, like the two dimen-
sional system
~ = -O'Z + zq+1y1'
~ = v~ + u, (2)
y=u z E JR, ~ E JR, u E JR
the authors showed that unstable zeros may con-
stitute an obstacle to semiglobal stabilization if
they are "too far" to the right . Indeed, their sta-
bilization requires a finite output energy (Middel-
ton,1991) which is sufficient to cause finite escape
time for z(t). In the same paper, the authors
showed on an example (using discontinuous feed-
back) that global stabilization might be possible
when the zeros are closer to the imaginary axis.
The present paper completes the analysis initiated
in (Braslavsky and Middelton,1996) by quantify-
ing for the general cascade (1) a precise stabiliz-
ability boundary in terms of structural parameters
of the cascade. Below this boundary, we design
a smooth static state feedback which achieves
global stabilization of the cascade. Beyond this
boundary, various examples illustrate that struc-
tural limits are attained and may cause a loss
of global controllability, making the semiglobal
stabilization of the cascade impossible. The sta-
bilizability condition is expressed as an inequality
between two ratios: a stability ratio between the
local stability of the z-subsystem i =• (pa-
J(z)
rameter 0') and the instability of the finite zeros
(parameter v), and a growth ratio between the
growth of the interconnection term w(z,~, y) in
the variable z (parameter q) and in the variables
(~, y) (parameter p). Our stabilizability boundary
of the cascade is attained when the stability ratio
becomes equal to the growth ratio:
~='!.
0' P PA
Below this limit, the stability of the finite zeros
associated to the z-subsystem can be traded with
the instability of the finite zeros associated to the
~ -su bsystem.
598
Section 2 describes our main result in the relative
degree zero case, that is when y = u. Section
3 provides two examples of loss of global con-
trollability when the stabilizability boundary is
attained. The general cascade (3) is considered in
Section 4.
2. MAIN RESULT
If the cascade (1) has a uniform relative degree
zero, that is, if D is invertible, then a preliminary
feedback puts the system in the simpler form
(with new matrices A, B, and new variable u)
~=Fz+W(z,~,u)u (3)
~ . = A~ + Bu .
For clarity, we tehiporarily assume that the z-
subsystem is linear. We assume that W is smooth,
that the pair (A, B) is stabilizable, and that F is
Hurwitz. Let 0' > 0 such that QF+FTQ ~ -20'Q
for some Q > 0 (that is, 0' := - maxRe>.(F) > 0
if all the eigenvalues with real part -0' are simple) .
Although local stabilization is achieved with a lin-
ear feedback u = K~, a difficulty arises to achieve
large regions of attraction when the matrix A has
some eigenvalues in the right half-plane and the
growth of \11 is faster than linear in the variable z .
Indeed, a finite energy of the controller (in the L2
sense) is then needed to stabilize ~(t) (see for in-
stance (Seron, et ai, 1997). At the same time, any
finite perturbation in the z subsystem may cause
a finite escape time of the solution z(t) so that the
controller energy must be minimized. To overcome
these contradictory requirements, we will use a
form of local input-to-state (ISS) stability (Son-
tag,1995), for the nonlinear system and implement
the strategy suggested in (Braslavsky and Mid-
delton, 1996): letting ~(t) temporarily diverge, a
zero (or almost zero) control is first applied to let
z(t) converge to a small neighborhood of z = O.
Then we apply the finite energy control needed to
stabilize ~(t). This control will not destabilize z(t)
thanks to the local ISS property of the nonlinear
system . Our main result quantifies when such a
strategy is successful.
Theorem 1. Suppose that there exist positive con-
stants p, q, C such that, for z sufficiently small,
1I\II(z,e, u)1I ~ Cllzllq+11l({, u)IIP - 1 (4)
and there exist a constant 11 > 0 and a matrix
P > 0 that satisfy
+ AT P - 211 P ~0 (5)
A - BBT P Hurwitz. (6)
Then the equilibrium (z,e) = 0 of (3) is globally
stabilizable by smooth state feedback provided
that one of the two following conditions is sat- for some constant Cl so that
isfied:
v q IIzTQ1lr(Z~~rBT P~)llr(z,~)IIBT P~II
-<- (7) z z
a p
or
~= C£ and 1lr(z,~, 0) = 0 (8) Rearranging the terms of (14) we obtain
0' P
. IIBT P~1I2 1.
W:::; -2W(", + Pr II~II~ - qC2 W') .
Proof: Let Q > 0 be solution of Q F + FT Q :::;
-20'Q and define IlzllQ := JzTQz . Then impos- This means that in the region nf , the control (13)
ing u = 0 in the region IIzllQ 2: 6 guarantees that ensures ItV < - ~ W provided that { is chosen
all solutions of the cascade satisfy after a finite small enough to satisfy
time T= T(z(0),~(0),6)
'" - qC2 {21 >
- -2 .
'"

Vt > T: IIz(t)IIQ < 6 (9)

The constant 6 > 0 is a design parameter. We
will choose it small enough such that the growth
condition (4) holds when IIzllQ :::; 6.
Define 11~llp := Je P~ where P is as in (5) and
(6) . To analyze the convergence of the solutions
of (3), we will employ the nonnegative definite
function
W(z,O = IIzll~ 1I~1I;r ·
Evaluating the time-derivative of W along the
solutions of (3) yields
. zTQ1lr
W :::; -2(O'q - vp)W + 2W[q~Q + p~lu .
z z
We will treat conditions (7) and (8) separately.
Suppose first that ·the condition (7) is satisfied.
Then '" := (O'q - vp) > 0 and W decays ex-
ponentially along the solutions as long as u =
O. Choosing the control u = 0 in the region
where W(z,~) 2: { ensures that all solutions
of the cascade satisfy after a finite time T2 =
T 2 ( {, z(O), ~(O))
Vt 2: T2 : W(z(t),~(t)):::; {
Combining (9) and (12), we will select the control
u = 0 outside the region
n f := {(z,~)lllzIIQ :::; { and W(z,~):::; {}
where the constant { > 0 is a parameter yet to
be determined. By construction, the region n f is
attractive and invariant.
The control law in n f is selected in the form
u = -r(z,~)BT P~, o :::; r(z,~) :::; 1
With this choice, the time-derivative of W satisfies
1 . IIBT p~1I2 ~ new form 1/Ii(Z,~, u)u, i = l..m. Then,
2W:::;-",W-PrW II~II~ +qC2W
where we have used the fact that, for { > 0 small
To have a smooth feedback, we choose for r a
smooth gain which satisfies r( z,~) = 0 for (z,~) t/.
=
nf and r(z,~) 1 for (z,O E nf / 2·
Next we show that ~(t) is bounded in nf . Suppose
it is unbounded for some initial condition . Since
the product IIzll~q 1I~1I;r is decreasing, ~(t) ~ 00
implies z(t) ~ 0, therefore the solution (z(t) , ~(t))
enters the set nf / 2 in finite time. But the control
(10) u = _BT P~ in nf / 2 stabilizes the ~-subsystem
and the result follows by contradiction.
Having proved boundedness of solutions, we con-
ePB
clude the global attractivity of (z , O = (0,0)
by La Salle's invariance principle. Since the set
"P~ ItV == 0 is included in W == 0, we simply note
(11)
that the largest invariant set in W == 0 is the
origin . The local exponential stability follows by
inspection of the J acobian linearization at the
origin.
Suppose now that we have condition (8) instead
of condition (7). Then (11) gives the weaker con-
dition
. zTQ1lr ePB
W :::; 2W[q zTQz + p e P~ lu (15)
(12) so that the decay of W along the solutions is no
longer guaranteed with the control u = O. We will
now choose a control law in the form
2 T
u = -rl(lIzIIQ)1 +r2(W)B P~, 0:::; r1:::; I , r2 2: O.
(16)
For the gain r1, we choose a smooth function
which satisfies r(8) = 0 for 8 2: 6 in order to
ensure (9), which is strictly positive for 8 < 6,
and which satisfies r(8) = 1 for 8 :::; ~ .
(13)
Because \)(z,~, 0) = 0 and 1lr is smooth, we can
rewrite the_columns 1/Ii(Z,~,U) of1lr(z,~,u) in the
(14) T T - T-
I Z Q1lr ul < 11[ z Q1/IIU ... z Q1/Im u lllllull
zTQz - zTQz

< C 3 "m
enough, T - T - 2
L..ti-1 Iz Q1/Ii u l lIull < C 3 L~l IIz Q1/Iill lIull
IIzTQ1lr(z,~,r(W)BT P~)II:::; C11Izll~+211~1I~-1 - zTQz - zTQz

599
 12
< C W / ('Y11IBT P~II) 2
where (t) ~ i for some constant i > O. Using
Cauchy-Schwartz inequality, we have
- 4 II~II~ 1 + 1'2
where we have used the equivalence of norms and le P2 BBT pel ~ IIBT P2ellll BT pe 11
the growth condition (4) . Substituting this result and therefore
along with the control law (16) into (15) yields
d T T
dt 1I~1I~2 ~ -C611~1I~2 +(1-(t))IIB P2ellllB pell
W < -4P'Y1 ~ IIBT P~1I2
- 1 + 1'2 II~II~
(1 _12
Cs W / )
1 + 'Y2(W) Dividing both sides by lIe(t)II~, we obtain
for some positive constant Cs . By choosing for the
gain 1'2 a smooth function such that d
dt 10g(lIell~,) ~
S1/2 1 T
---<- < -C6 + (1 _ (t)) lIellp IIBT P2ellllB pe 11
1 + 'Y2(S) - 2Cs
- lie lip, lie 11 P, lIellp
and such that 'Y2(S) = 1 for S ~ (, with ( > 0, we ~ + Cd(t)
-C6
guarantee
for some constant C 7 > o. If /(t) ---> 0 as t ---> 00 ,
W< -2 W IIBT P~112 then -C6 + cdW ~ -~ for t large enough ,
- P'Y1 1 + 'Y2(W) II~II~ (17)
say for t ~ T . But 'then log(II~II~2) cannot grow
and we ensure that W(t) = IIz(t)lIbll~(t)lI~ expo- unbounded as t ---> 00, which contradicts the un-
nentially converges to zero. Then , the control law boundedness of e(t). This concludes the proof. 0
(16) is u = _BT P~ for W ~ ( and IIzllQ ~ ~ .
We now prove that the equilibrium (z,O = (0 , 0)
is globally attractive. Suppose first that ~(t) is It is clear from the proof that the exponential
bounded. Then by LaSalle Invariance Principle, stability of the z-subsystem is only used locally.
(z(t) , ~(t)) converges to the largest invariant set It is therefore a trivial adaptation of Theorem
where W == O. But W == 0 implies u == 0 so that 1 to replace the linear subsystem i = F z by
z(t) ---> O. Then 1'1 = 1 and u == 0 implies BT P~ == the nonlinear subsystem i = /(z) provided that
=
O. Because u _BT P~ stabilizes the pair (A, B), the equilibrium z = 0 is globally asymptotically
this implies ~(t) == O. We conclude that whenever stable and locally exponentially stable . In this
~(t) is bounded, the solution (~(t), z(t)) converges case, the norm IIzllb in the proof of Theorem 1
to the origin . must be replaced by a positive definite function
V(z), locally quadratic around the origin, which
Next suppose that ~(t) is unbounded for some locally satisfies V = L J V ~ -a V.
initial condition. Because W(t) = IIz(t)llbll~(t)lI~
is nonincreasing, this implies that z(t) ---> 0, so Assumption (6) can be relaxed to the stabilizabil-
that we can assume (for t large enough) that ity of the pair (A , B). This generalization requires
1'1 = 1. But then W(t) cannot converge to zero a different proof which will be presented in a
for, otherwise, we would have "12 == 1 for t large forthcoming publication (Sepulchre, et al., 1998) .
enough, which would imply that u = _BT P~ and
hence ~(t) ---> O. Hence W(t) must converge to
some positive constant W > 0, which implies, 3. OBSTACLES TO CONTROLLABILITY
from (17), that
The conditions of Theorem 1 are tight. In this
(>0 IIBT p~(t)1I2 section, we will show that they set a structural
10 lIe(t)lI~ dt < 00 .
(18)
limit to the possibility of achieving large regions of
· /() PHt)1I , ( 18) shows that /(t) E
attraction for the cascade (3). We will illustrate by
D efi mng t = IIBT
uw)llp two examples that relaxing any of the conditions
L 2 (0, 00), which, because j is bounded, implies in of Theorem 1 leads to situations in which the
particular that /(t) asymptotically converges to cascade (3) is no longer globally asymptotically
zero. controllable to the origin . (Global asymptotic con-
trollability to the origin is obviously a necessary
To end the proof, we show that /(t) ---> 0 leads
condition for semiglobal stabilization.) In each of
to a contradiction. Let P2 > 0 solution of the
Lyapunov equation the following examples, one condition of Theorem
1 is violated and we identify initial conditions
P2(A - BBT P) + (A - BBT pf P2 = -/ for which no open-loop control u(t) is able to
and define lIell~2 = er e.
P2 Then for t ~ 1, we
asymptotically drive the solution (z(t), e(t)) to the
origin.
have for some constant C 6 > 0
d Our first example is adapted from (Braslavsky
dt lIell~2 ~ -C6I1ell~, + 2(1 - ((t))e P2 BB P~
T
and Middelton, 1996) and illustrates a situation

600
of uncontrollability when the inequality (7) IS It is easily verified that z9 e=
0/ v is an invariant
reversed . manifold regardless of the choice of u because

Example 2. (Braslavsky and Middelton, 1996)

Consider the cascade
(24)
Z = -oz + z9+ 1 u 2
~ = v~ + u, z E JR, ~ E JR, u E JR Hence, initial conditions satisfying z9 e a/v
(19) cannot be controlled to the origin .

and assume that v - T

:= k > O. The change of
variables u = }. yields the equation
4. GLOBAL STABILIZATION OF PEAKING
u = qou - qu 2 CASCADES
which can be solved explicitely:
We now briefly return to the stabilization of the
u(t) = qe a9t (0) _ t e- a9 ·u 2(s)ds] . general cascade (1). Assuming a uniform relative
q lo degree r for the linear system, a preliminary
To avoid the finite escape time of z(t) , it is feedback puts the cascade in the normal form
necessary that u(t) > 0 for all t ~ 0, which (with new matrices A and B and new variable
Imposes u)
.z = J(z) + 1)(z,~o, y, iI, .. . , y(r-I))y
tOO e- a9'u 2(s)ds < lu(O)I. (20)
lo q ~o = A~o + By

On the other hand , the explicit solution

y(r) = u, z E IR! , ~o E JRn-mr, yE JRm , U E JRm
(25)
~(t) = e/lt[~(O) + lt e-/l'u(s)ds]
The peaking phenomenon (Sussmann and Koko-
tovic , 1991) imposes the restriction
imposes, if ~(t) -> 0, that
1)(z , ~o, y, iI, ... , y(r-l)) = q,(z,~o, y)
11 00

e-/l' u (s)dsI 2 = ~(0)2 in which case the cascade (25) becomes a relative
Using Holder 's inequality we obtain degree zero system of the form (3) controlled
through m chains of integrators oflength m . Using
~(0)2 = 110c> e-/l' u (s)dsI 2 the result of Theorem 1, a smooth control law
o( z , ~o) can be designed for the relative degree
00
zero subsystem, identifying the output y to a
= 11 e-be-T'u(s)dsI2 (21) virtual input. By backstepping this virtual control
law through m chains of integrators (Saberi, et
al., 1990) , a smooth stabilizing feedback is then
1 tOO a9 2 obtained for the overall system (25) .
~ 2k lo e- ·u (s)ds .
Standard backstepping requires, in addition to
Comparing (20) and (21) yields the constraint the stabilizing control law a( z, ~o) for the relati ve
degree zero subsystem, the knowledge of a pos-
(22) itive definite and radially unbounded Lyapunov
function V(~o, z) . Such a Lyapunov function is
We conclude that initial conditions which violate not provided by Theorem 1, which only ensures
(22) are uncontrollable to zero. the decay of the (semidefinite and not radially un-
bounded) function Wo(~o, z) = IIzllill~oll~ along
Our second example illustrates the necessity of the the solutions of the closed-loop system. Never-
condition 1)(z,~,O) = 0 in (8) of Theorem 1. theless, we show in (Sepulchre, et al., 1998) that
the knowledge of this function is sufficient for
Example 3. The cascade backstepping, yielding an explicit design for the
cascade (1). All the relative degree zero results of
~ = -oz - z9+1~P-IU Section 2 and 3 apply identically to relative degree
~ = v~ + u, z E JR, ~ E JR, u E R r cascades of the form (25), thus extending earlier
(23) stabilization results in the literature (Saberi, et
al., 1990); Teel, 1996; Sepulchre, et al., 1997).
with pv = oq , v -:/= 0, satisfies all the conditions of
Theorem 1 except that 1)(z,~,O) _zq+l~p-l # = The particular case of all zeros in the closed
O. left half-plane with possibly repeated zeros on

601
the imaginary axis is of interest: previous re-
sults do not require local exponential stabil-
it y of the z-subsystem but the unstable states
of the {-subsystem are excluded from the in-
terconnection because of the slow peaking phe-
nomenon(Sepulchre, et al. , 1997) . Theorem 1
yields different conditions: the unstable states are
no longer excluded from the interconnection but
the z-subsystem must be locally exponentially
stable and the interconnection must be at least
quadratic in z near z = 0 ( the inequality (7) is
t hen satisfied for any values of 0: , p, and q, because
1I can always be selected in the interval (0, ~)).
Thus, a form of local input-to-state stability prop-
erty for the nonlinear subsystem is sufficient to
overcome the slow peaking phenomenon in the {-
subsystem and make the global stabilization pos-
sible .
5. ACKNOWLEDGMENT
The authors acknowledge several discussions with
.J . Braslavsky, P. Kokotovic , M. Seron , and A. Teel
during the preparation of the manuscript . This
work was completed while the first author was at
CESAME, University of Louvain , Belgium . The
paper presents research results of the Belgian Pro-
gramme on Interuniversity Poles of Attraction ,
initiated by the Belgian State, Prime Minister's
Office for Science, Technology and Culture. The
scientific responsibility rests with the author. The
work of the second author was supported by the
Air Force Office of Scientific Research under grant
F49620-95-1-0409.
Sepulchre, R. , M. Arcak , A.R. Teel (1998). Trad-
ing the stability of finite zeros for global stabi-
lization of nonlinear cascade sytems. In prepa-
ration
Seron , M., J . Braslavsky, P. Kokotovic , D . Mayne
(1997) . Feedback limitations in Nonlinear Sys-
tems: From Bode Integrals to Cheap Control.
Proc. of 36th Conf. on Decision and Control
(San Diego) , pp . 2067-272.
Sontag, E.D . (1995) . State-space and I/O stabil-
ity for nonlinear systems . In : Feedback Con-
trol, Nonlinear Systems, and Complexity, B.A.
Francis and A.R. Tannenbaum eds., Lectures
Notes in Control and Information Sciences 202 ,
Springer Verlag.
Sussmann , H.J ., P.V. Kokotovic (1991) . The peak-
ing phenomen6n \il-nd the global stabilization of
nonlinear systems:' IEEE Trans . on Automatic
Control, vol. 36, pp . 424-439.
Teel , A.R.(1995) Semiglobal stabilizability of lin-
ear null controllable systems with input non-
linearities. IEEE Trans . on Autom. Control,
Vol. 40, No. 1, pp . 96-100 .
Teel ,A.R.(1996) . A nonlinear small gain theorem
for the analysis of control systems with satura-
tion . IEEE Trans. on Automatic Control, vol.
41 , no. 9.

References
Braslavsky, J .H., R.H. Middleton (1996) . Global
and semi-global stabilizability in certain cas-
cade nonlinear systems . IEEE Trans . on Au-
tomatic Control, vol. 41 , pp. 876-880 .
Lin, Z., A. Saberi (1993). Semi-globalstabilization
of partially linear composite systems via feed-
back of the state of the linear part. Systems &
Control Letters, vol. 20, pp . 199-207.
Middelton, R. (1991). Trade-offs in linear control
system design. Automatica, 27(2), pp. 282-292.
Saberi, A., P.V. Kokotovic , H.J. Sussmann (1990).
Global stabilization of partially linear compos-
ite systems. SIAM J. Control and Optimization,
vol. 28, pp. 1491-1503.
Sepulchre, R., M. Jankovic, P.V. Kokotovic
(1997) . Constructive Nonlinear Control,
Springer-Verlag.
Sepulchre, R . (1997). Slow peaking and low-gain
designs for global stabilization of nonlinear sys-
tems. Proc. of 36th Conf. on Decision and Con-
trol (San Diego) , pp . 3491-3496.

602