DAMPING INJECTION CONTROL OF WINDING SYSTEMS BASED ON PORT CONTROLLED

HAMILTONIAN SYSTEMS

Fouad Mokhtari a, Pierre Sicard a, Nicolas Léchevin b

a
Groupe de recherche en électronique industrielle, Department of ECE
Université du Québec à Trois-Rivières, Trois-Rivières (Québec), Canada, G9A 5H7
b
Defense Research and Development Canada, Québec (Québec), Canada, G3J 1X5

Abstract: In web and metal sheet processing systems and winders, flexibility of the web is
a source of vibrations and resonance amongst motor drives. Port-Controlled Hamiltonian
with Dissipation (PCHD) modelling is considered to develop stabilization strategies with
a physical interpretation and motivation of the control action. A web transport system is
modelled as a PCHD system and the control action is defined to obtain asymptotically
stable operating points for the controlled system by a passivity argument. The controller
negative output feedback gain matrix is interpreted as the realization of virtual dampers
added to the system. Copyright © 2007 IFAC

Keywords: Multimachine, Interaction mechanism, Interconnexion matrices, Transient

oscillations, Damping, Disturbance rejection, Transient energy transfers.

1. INTRODUCTION high velocities must also be accounted for by the

Web refers in a broad sense to any continuous
material whose width is significantly less than its
length and whose thickness is significantly less than
its width, including plastic wrap, paper, film, and
aluminium strips (Shin, 2000). Guaranteeing quality
of web processing and rewinding is a goal shared by
many industries. Two quantities are of prime
importance for control: web velocity and web
tension. It is essential to keep the web in the process
at a preset tension, which could change throughout
the process by many conditions such as disturbances
from uneven rollers and web speed variations
(Pagilla et al., 2003). Variations in tension during
winding can bring unacceptable mechanical
deformation of the structure of the web and excessive
variations can cause breakage.
PID control dominates industry, but it becomes
insufficient at the increasingly high web velocities
demanded by the industry and with thin or fragile
materials. Vibrations and nonlinearities that appear at
controller. To respond to this demand, many schemes
have been proposed, including multivariable control
by Geddes and Postlethwaite (1998) and Jeon et al.
(1999) for steel mill applications, H∞ control to
decouple web velocity and tension by Laroche et al.
(2001) and Koç et al. (2002), decentralized control
by Pagilla et al. (2007) for web processing lines and
artificial neural networks for tension control with
velocity and tension decoupling by Wang et al.
(2004). Simplicity and practical interpretation of PID
control are lost with these approaches.
Recently, port controlled Hamiltonian (PCH) systems
have been the subject of many studies (Ortega et al.,
1999, 2002). Based on the energy balance principle,
this representation allows representing clearly
interconnexions through which energy flows or is
exchanged. There are two key advantages in working
with PCH models: firstly, they directly capture
physical constraints of the system; and secondly
structural properties for energy shaping and damping
injection are highlighted (Åström et al., 2000).
In mechanical systems, total stored energy (kinetic
and potential energies) may be used to define the
Hamiltonian function and can be used as a candidate
Lyapunov function. Hamiltonian systems are also
passive systems (van der Schaft, 2000). Henceforth it
is possible to use results from passivity theory: the
system can be stabilized asymptotically by injecting
damping through negative output feedback. PCH has
been applied to a large class of physical systems, for
example, a multimachine power system has been
represented as a PCH with dissipation (PCHD) by Xi
et al. (2003), while Wang et al. (2003) obtained this
form using a feedback approach.
The contributions of the paper are twofold: (i)
development of stabilizing controllers for web
transport systems, another type of multimachine
system, by injecting dissipation motivated by a
PCHD representation; and (ii) physical interpretation
of the controller realization to generalize the results
and to provide physical insight for control design.
Section 2 presents a brief overview of PCHD
systems and control. In section 3, a web transport
system is represented using a PCHD model to control
web velocity and web tension and an energy storage
function is defined. In section 4, the control
methodology to inject dampers, and henceforth
dissipation in the system, is defined. Output feedback
is used to guarantee asymptotic stability and to
reduce the effects of web flexibility. Two control
realizations are interpreted physically. Conclusion
and future work are described in section 5.
2. OVERVIEW OF PORT CONTROLLED
HAMILTONIAN SYSTEMS
The port controlled Hamiltonian approach was
proposed by Maschke and van der Schaft (1992) as a
mean to model physical systems. PCH systems are
described in details by Ortega et al. (1999), van der
Schaft (2000) and Macchelli (2004).
A PCH system is represented by a model of the form
∂H
x& =J (x) (x)+g(x)⋅u (1)
∂x
∂H
y =g T (x)⋅ ( x) (2)
∂x
where: x∈ℜn, u∈ℜm and y∈ℜm are respectively the
state, input and output of the system; the natural in-
terconnexion matrix J(x) = –JT(x) ∈ℜn×n is asym-
metric; g(x)∈ℜn×m is the port matrix; and the
Hamiltonian function of the system H(x)∈ℜ repre-
sents the total stored energy.
In practice, a lossless system can result into an ex-
tremely oscillatory movement. Energy dissipation is
included by terminating certain ports by resistive
elements. In that case, the port controlled Hamilto-
nian system with dissipation (PCHD) is described by
∂H
x& = [J (x) − R(x)]⋅ (x) + g(x) ⋅ u (3)
∂x
∂H
y =g T (x)⋅ ( x) (4)
∂x
where the damping matrix R(x) = RT(x) ∈ℜn×n is
symmetric and positive semi-definite. The rate of
variation of energy in the system is given by the
power balance equation
dH ∂T H ∂H
(x) = − ( x ) ⋅ R ( x) ⋅ (x) + u T y (5)
dt ∂x ∂x
where the first term on the right hand side represents
energy dissipation due to resistive elements in the
system and the term uTy is the power injected into the
system, or supply rate. Since R(x) is symmetric and
positive semi-definite
m
dH
(x) ≤ uT y = ∑ yi ui (6)
dt i =1
System (3)(4) is passive if it is dissipative with a
supply rate uTy. In other words, the increase in stored
energy in passive systems can only be due to external
sources. The relationship between passivity and
Lyapunov stability can be established by using stored
energy H(x) as a candidate Lyapunov function
(Sepulchre et al., 1999). Since Hamiltonian systems
are passive, asymptotic stability of the system can be
obtained by injecting damping through negative
output feedback, as found in passivity theory.
Theorem: Passivity and stability (Sepulchre et al.,
1999) – If equilibrium point xe=0 of the PCHD
system (3)(4) is a local strict minimum, and if the
system is zero state detectable, then system (3)(4) is
stabilized by the output feedback control
u = –C·y (7)
where C > 0 is the matrix of feedback control gains.
This theorem guarantees closed-loop asymptotic
stability. In that case, the supply rate is of the form
uT y = –yT·C·y (8)
This choice of output feedback control guarantees
that the total energy of the system decreases to a
minimum, as concluded by substituting (8) into (6).
3. MODELING OF WEB TRANSPORT SYSTEM
Consider a simple web transport system composed of
an unwind roll, a traction roll which imposes the web
velocity and a winder. Such a system can be used as
a basis to represent processes in industries such as
textile, plastic, metal and paper. The diagram of the
web-fed machine is shown in Fig. 1. In this section
the dynamical equations of this system are written in
the form of a PCHD system.
3.1 State model.
The dynamical model is composed of the drive train
model and of the web model, as follows.
 ⎡ − f1 K1r1 0 0 0 ⎤
⎢− K r
⎢ 11 0 K1r2 0 0 ⎥⎥
v2 M(x) = ⎢ 0 − K1r2 − f 2 K2r2 0 ⎥ (12)
⎢ ⎥
k1 k2 ⎢ 0 0 − K2r2 0 K2r3 ⎥
⎢⎣ 0 0 0 − K2r3 − f3 ⎥⎦
T0
T1 T2
FOC U2

M1 v3 Matrices J(x) and R(x) are given respectively by

v1 Velocity
controller
FOC U1
v2-ref
FOC U3 ⎡ 0 K1r1 0 0 0 ⎤
Velocity Velocity ⎢− K r 0 K1r2 0 0 ⎥⎥
controller controller
⎢ 11
Tension Tension J ( x) = ⎢ 0 − K1r2 0 K 2 r2 0 ⎥ (13)
controller controller
⎢ ⎥
T1-ref T2-ref ⎢ 0 0 − K 2 r2 0 K 2 r3 ⎥
⎢⎣ 0 0 0 − K 2 r3 0 ⎥⎦
Fig. 1. Model web transport system.
⎡ f1 0 0 0 0⎤
⎢0 0 0 0 0 ⎥⎥
⎢
Speed dynamical model of each motor: R (x) = ⎢ 0 0 f2 0 0⎥ (14)
⎢ ⎥
J k v&k =r (Tk −Tk −1 ) − f k vk +rkU k , k = 1, 2, 3
k
2
(9) ⎢0 0 0 0 0⎥
⎢⎣ 0 0 0 0 f 3 ⎥⎦
where vk is the velocity of the web at roll k; Jk is the
total inertia at roll k as seen by motor k; rk is the Matrix J(x) is asymmetric and matrix R(x) is sym-
radius of roll k; fk is the viscous friction at roll k; Uk metric and positive semi-definite. In that case, sys-
is the electromagnetic torque of motor drives and Tk tem (11) can be formulated as a PCHD system (3)-
is the web tension between roll k and k+1. (4) with
T
Web strain or tension between two consecutive rolls: ⎛ U1 ⎞ ⎡1 0 0 0 0⎤
⎜ ⎟
T&k = K k (vk +1 −vk ) , k = 1, 2 (10) u = ⎜U 2 ⎟, g = ⎢⎢0 0 1 0 0⎥⎥ (15)
⎜U ⎟ ⎢⎣0 0 0 0 1⎥⎦
⎝ 3⎠
The web is characterized by Kk = E·A/Lk, which
represents the equivalent spring constant of the web and output y of (11) is given by
segment between roll k and roll k+1, where E is the
elastic modulus of the web; A is its section and Lk is ⎡ v1 / r1 ⎤
∂H
the length between the two consecutive rolls. y =g (x)⋅ (x)=⎢⎢v2 / r2 ⎥⎥
T
(16)
∂x
⎢⎣ v3 / r3 ⎥⎦
The range of the product E·A can be quite large:
small values with very elastic and narrow materials; Inputs U1, U2 and U3 directly act upon velocities vk of
high values in steel-manufacturing and metallurgical motors Mk (k=1, 2, 3) respectively.
applications. In the latter, it is common to model the
metal sheet only by a spring (Hoshino et al., 1996). Hamiltonian function H(x) is obtained by integrating
its gradient:
Assumption of time invariant parameters: Time
variations of inertia and of the roll radii are not taken 1 3 1 2
H (x ) = ∑ J i (vi / ri ) 2 + ∑ (1/ K i )Ti = Ec + E p (17)
2

into account: these parameters are assumed to be 2 i =1 2 i =1

constant. This assumption is particularly valid when
variations of inertias and of radii are very slow as The term first term on the right hand side represents
compared to the dynamics of velocities and tension. the total kinetic energy (Ec) and the second term
represents the total potential energy (Ep).
Hamiltonian function H(x) in (17) is quadratic and
3.2 PCHD model based on local coordinates. positive definite so that it can be used as a candidate
Lyapunov function.
Using local coordinates for x, (9)-(10) are written as
⎡ J1v&1 / r1 ⎤ ⎡ v1 / r1 ⎤ ⎡U1 ⎤ 4. DAMPING ASSIGNEMENT IN WEB
⎢ T& ⎥ ⎢T / K ⎥ ⎢ 0 ⎥
⎢ 1 ⎥ ⎢ 1 1⎥ ⎢ ⎥ TRANSPORT SYSTEM
⎢ J 2v&2 / r2 ⎥ = M(x) ⋅ ⎢ v2 / r2 ⎥ + ⎢U 2 ⎥ (11)
⎢ & ⎥ ⎢ ⎥ ⎢ ⎥ Given the PCHD representation of the system of
⎢ T2 ⎥ ⎢T2 / K 2 ⎥ ⎢ 0 ⎥ figure 1, the model is used to define control
⎢⎣ J 3v&3 / r3 ⎥⎦ ⎢⎣ v3 / r3 ⎥⎦ ⎢⎣U 3 ⎥⎦
structures to reduce vibrations. The control objective
is to impose the tension in both web segments and
where velocity of the traction roll to meet production and
quality specifications. It is proposed to design the
controller in two phases. Firstly, system set point
performances are imposed using the control structure Equivalent model of the controller

presented in figure 1. Secondly, inner velocity b12 b32

controllers are added to introduce damping within
the structure. A solution is to insert virtual dampers
in the structure by using output feedback to obtain M1 M2 M3
asymptotic stability of the controlled system (Inman, Power
Flow
1989). The difficulty with this approach is to choose
gain matrix C in (7) to obtain the desired properties b1 b2 b3

of the response. This matrix contains the coefficients

of the virtual dampers injected by output feedback –
the location of the dampers must be chosen to obtain (a) Master-slave structure
the desired reduction of vibrations in the structure. Equivalent model of the controller

b 12 b32

4.1 Damping injection structures.

Design of the controllers for the first step follows the Power M1 M2 M3
Flow
procedure described by Thiffault et al. (2005),
without considering the dampers that will be added
b1 b2 b3
in the second step. The second step of the design is
presented, in particular to inject damping to obtain
disturbance rejection properties: the virtual dampers
(b) Cross coupled structure
detune the controllers for disturbance rejection.
Fig. 2. Equivalent system with damping injection.
Master-slave control structures are commonly used Legend: Thick lines represent the web, double
in web transport systems. In master speed control, arrows represent energy exchange and small
the velocity of a selected driven roller is set at a pre- circles represent measurement points without
defined constant value (‘‘master speed’’). Generally, energy exchange.
a feedback control system is employed to produce
accurate control of the velocity of the selected driven
roller. In this case, the velocity of the output shaft of is satisfied for
the motor driving the selected roller is measured and
compared continuously with its reference. Other bi ≥ 0 (i=1, 2, 3) and
(23)
drives may be slaved to the master (Shin, 2000). b2 – (b12 + b32)/4 ≥ 0.
Two realizations are considered for matrix C (C1 and System (11) in closed loop is passive, and is
C2) for the system of figure 1, with M2 identified as stabilized with the output feedback controllers.
the master that imposes speed of the web:
⎛ b1 + b12 − b12 0 ⎞ 4.2 Interpretation of the damping injection
⎜ ⎟
C1 = ⎜ 0 b2 0 ⎟ (18) structures.
⎜ 0 − b32 b3 + b32 ⎟⎠
⎝ Using matrix C=C1 (18),(20) is physically interpreted
as inserting virtual dampers at the locations shown in
⎛ b1 + b12 − b12 0 ⎞ figure 2a. Each control input ui contains velocity
⎜ ⎟
C2 = ⎜ − b12 b2 + b12 + b32 − b32 ⎟ (19) feedback term –bivi/ri, which represents a damping
⎜ 0 − b32 b3 + b32 ⎟⎠ torque exerted upon roll i; it can be represented by a
⎝
virtual damper with coefficient bi for each motor Mi.
The respective control laws are defined by Feedback terms in velocity differences in control
inputs u1 and u3 represent damping torques acting
⎧U 1 =−b1 y1 −b12 ( y1 − y 2 ) upon rolls 1 and 3, due in particular to variations of
⎪
C1: ⎨U 2 =−b2 y 2 (20) velocity of motor 2. The energy required by the
⎪U =−b y −b ( y − y ) virtual dampers is injected or absorbed by the
⎩ 3 3 3 32 3 2
controller but no energy corresponding to these terms
is exchanged with motor M2. Motor M2 is identified
⎧U 1 =−b1 y1 −b12 ( y1 − y 2 ) as the master (is not affected by the dampers) and the
⎪ (21) two other motors are identified as slaves (they are
C2: ⎨U 2 =−b2 y 2 −b12 ( y 2 − y1 )−b32 ( y 2 − y1 )
⎪U =−b y −b ( y − y ) affected by the virtual dampers).
⎩ 3 3 3 32 3 2
The same interpretation can be used when using
With feedback controllers (20) and (21) and outputs C=C2 given by (19) and (21). However, mutual
y (16), dissipation inequality interactions (cross-coupling) between every pair of
adjacent motors, result into the structure of the
m
(dH /dt )≤∑ yiU i ≤0 (22) equivalent system of figure 2b: all motors are
i =1 affected by the virtual dampers. We associate this
structure to a master-slave structure with coupling.
 -3
x 10
6 5
Table 1 Main system parameters

Speed error(m/s)
4

speed(m/s)
E S L1 = L2 r1 = r 3 2 0

(N/m2) (m2)
Velocity reference
(m) (m) 0 Without Damp.Contr

6.9·1010 3.27·104 10 m 0.25 -2

0 2 4 6
-5
0 2 4 6
r2 J1 = J3 J2 f1 = f1 = f3 Time (s) Time (s)

(m) (kg·m2) (kg·m2) (N·m ·s/rad) 0.4

Master-slave structure(b2=0)
0.4
Master-slave structure (Damp.Contr)

Speed error(m/s)

Speed error(m/s)
Coupled structure(b2=0)
0.15 10 2.15 0.04 0.2 0.2 Coupled structure (Damp.Contr)

0 0

Table 2 Reference signals and damping controller -0.2 -0.2

parameters -0.4
0 2 4 6
-0.4
0 2 4 6
Time (s) Time (s)

T1ref = T2ref v2ref b1 = b3 b2 b12 = b32 Fig. 3. Web velocity reference and error signals.
(N) (m/s)
100 5 100 6·105 2·105 150
110

Tension T1(N)

Tension T1(N)
100 105

4.3 Evaluation of the damping injection structures. 50 100

0 95
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 5 5.2 5.4
The simulation results were obtained in the Matlab- Time (s) Time (s)
SimulinkTM environment with a model comprising 101
150
not only the web model, but also the model of the

Tension T2(N)

Tension T2(N)
100.5
motor drives and of their controllers, which 100
100
implement field oriented control. PI velocity 50
99.5
controllers and IP tension controllers are used to 0
99
implement the structure described in figure 1; the 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 5 5.05 5.1
Time (s) Time (s)
effect of adding the damping controller is then
evaluated. In particular, the two implementations on (a) Tension step and (b) Load step torque
the damping controller are evaluated with respect to velocity ramp. disturbance on M1.
a tension set point variation followed by ramping in Fig. 4. Unwind tension T1 and Winder tension T2
web velocity and then a load disturbance equivalent responses without damping controller.
to 10 N applied on M1. The main parameters of the
winding system, based on (Pagilla et al., 2003), and 100
106

of the damping controller are given in tables 1 and 2. 104 Master-slave structure
Tension T1(N)

Tension T1(N)

80
Coupled structure
60 102

Figure 4 shows the response of the system without 40 Master-slave structure

100

the damping controller. It is noted that the velocity 20 Coupled structure

98

and tension control loops were tuned for fast set 0

0.5 1 1.5
96
5 5.2 5.4 5.6
point response and include decoupling terms. Since Time (s) Time (s)

decoupling is imperfect, discontinuities in 100 100.2

acceleration (ramping or torque disturbance)
Tension T2(N)

Tension T2(N)

80
significantly affect tension and cause oscillations. 60
100

Smoothing the speed reference signal (e.g. S-profile) 40 Master-slave structure 99.8
would alleviate the problem for velocity set point 20 Coupled structure Master-slave structure
Coupled structure
99.6
variations, but not for load torque disturbance. 0
0.5 1 1.5 5 5.2 5.4 5.6
Time (s) Time (s)
Figure 5 shows the results with the damping (a) Tension step and (b) Load step torque
controller using the parameters from table 2. velocity ramp. disturbance on M1.
Sensitivity to the disturbances was decreased
significantly with only a marginal effect on the Fig. 5. Unwind tension T1 and Winder tension T2
tension set point response. The response of the two responses with damping controller.
implementations of the damping controller only
differ significantly in the way the load torque of the effect of the imperfect velocity-tension
disturbance propagates to affect T2 in the coupled decoupling as compared to figure 4. One notes that
structure, whilst there is no effect in the master-slave with b2=0, condition (27) is not satisfied; however,
structure. However, in both cases, ramping of the this condition is sufficient and not necessary for
line velocity is slowed down as shown in figure 3. stability, in particular considering that the PI velocity
controllers inject some damping into the system.
Removing the damping term b2 on motor M2 has
little effect in the coupled structure (figure 6) but this
term is very important during the velocity ramping 5. CONCLUSION
period in the master-slave structure. With b2=0, web
velocity follows the ramp reference signal closely A PHCD model was established to represent the
(Figure 3) so that there is a much smaller reduction model of a web transport system. Realizations of the

Tension T1(N)
100
50
Master-slave structure(b2=0)
Coupled structure(b2=0)
0 90
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2
Time (s)
Tension T2(N)
100
50
Master-slave structure(b2=0) 99.8
Coupled structure(b2=0)
0
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2
Time (s)
(a) Tension step and (b) Load step torque
velocity ramp.
Fig. 6. Unwind tension T1 and Winder tension T2
responses with damping controller and b2=0.
controllers were interpreted physically as adding
virtual dampers to the system, giving some practical
insight in choosing the structure of the control gain
matrix. The damping controller was used to detune
the velocity and tension controller for disturbance
rejection. It appears that the best response would be
obtained by using a smooth velocity reference
trajectory to reduce the effect of imperfect velocity-
tension decoupling and to use the master-slave
damper structure to reduce propagation of
disturbances within the system.
The results can be applied to other types of systems
such as automated vehicles travelling in convoys or
flight formation. Future work includes the use of a
Linear Matrix Inequalities (LMI) approach to tune
the gains of the control laws in order to meet the
control objectives (performance, robustness,
constraints on the actuators …) and the experimental
evaluation of the control approach with web
processing systems and the vehicle convoy problem.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
This work was supported by a grant from Natural
Sciences and Engineering Research Council of
Canada.
REFERENCES
Åström, K.J., P. Albertos and M. Blanke (2000).
Control of complex systems, Springer.
Geddes, J.E. and M. Postlethwaite (1998).
Improvements in product quality in tandem cold
rolling using robust multivariable control. IEEE
Trans. on Control System Techn., 6, 257-267.
Hoshino, I., Y. Okamura and H. Kimura (1996).
Observer-Based Multivariable Tension Control
of Aluminium hot rolling mills. In: Proc. of 35th
IEEE Conf. on Decision and Control,1217-1222.
Inman, D.J. (1989). Vibration with control,
measurement, and stability. Prentice-Hall Inc.
Jeon, S.H., J.M. Kim, K.C. Jung, S.K. Sul and J.Y.
110
Choi (1999). Decoupling control of bridle rolls
for steel mill drive system. IEEE Transactions
Tension T1(N)
105
100 on Industry Applications, 35, 119-125.
95
Koç, H., D. Knittel, M. Mathelin and G. Abba
Master-slave structure(b2=0)
Coupled structure(b2=0)
(2002). Modeling and robust control of winding
5 5.2 5.4 systems for elastic webs. IEEE Transactions on
Time (s)
Control System Technology, 10, 197-208.
Laroche, E., H. Koç, D. Knittel and M.D. Mathelin
(2001). Web winding system robustness analysis
Tension T2(N)
100
via µ-analysis. In: Proc. of. 10th IEEE Int.
99.9
Conference on Control Applications, 5-7.
Master-slave structure(b2=0)
Coupled structure(b2=0)
Macchelli, A. (2004). Port Hamiltonian systems, A
5 5.2 5.4 unified approach for modeling and control finite
Time (s)
and infinite dimensional physical systems. Ph.D.
Thesis, University of Bologna.
disturbance on M1. Maschke, B.M. and A.J. van der Schaft (1992). Port-
controlled Hamiltonian systems: modelling
origins and system theoretic properties. In: Proc.
of the Second IFAC Symposium on Nonlinear
Control Systems Design, NOLCOS92, 282-288.
Ortega, R., A.J. van der Schaft, B.M. Maschke and
G. Escobar (1999). Energy-shaping of port-
controlled Hamiltonian systems by
interconnection. In: Proc. of 38th IEEE Conf. on
Decision and Control, 1646-1651.
Ortega, R., M.W. Spong, F. Gómez-Estern and G.
Blankenstein (2002). Stabilization of a class of
underactuated mechanical systems via
interconnection and damping assignment. IEEE
Trans. on Automatic Control, 47, 1218-1233.
Pagilla, P.R., I. Singh and R.V. Dwivedula (2003). A
Study on Control of Accumulators in Web
Processing Lines. In: Proc. American Control
Conf. 3684-3689.
Pagilla, P.R, N.B. Siraskar and R.V. Dwivedula
(2007). Decentralized Control of Web
Processing Lines. IEEE Transactions on Control
System Technology, 15, 106-117.
Sepulchre, R., M. Janković and P. Kokotović (1999).
Constructive nonlinear control. Springer-Verlag,
London.
Shin, K.H. (2000). Tension control. Tappi Press,
Atlanta GA.
Thiffault, C., P. Sicard and A. Bouscayrol (2005).
Desensitization to voltage sags of a rewinder by
using an active dancer roll for tension control.
In: Proc. of IEEE, International Electric
Machines and Drives Conferences, 466-473.
van der Schaft, A.J. (2000) L2-gain and passivity
techniques in nonlinear control, Springer-
Verlag, London.
Wang, C., Y. Wang, R. Yang and H. Lu (2004).
Research on tension control system based on
neural network. IEEE Transactions on Industrial
Electronics, 51, 381-386.
Wang, W., D. Cheng, C. Li and Y. Ge (2003).
Dissipative Hamiltonian realization and energy-
based L2 disturbance attenuation control of
multimachine power systems. IEEE Tran. on
Automatic Control, 48, 1428-1433.
Xi, Z., G. Feng, D. Cheng and Q. Lu (2003).
Nonlinear decentralized saturated controller
design for power systems. IEEE Transactions on
Control System Technology, 11, 539-546.