‘stomatica 103 (2019) 126-134 Contents lists ELSEVIER Automatica Journal homepage: wnnw.elsevier.comMlocste/eutomstics ble at ScienceDirect Brief paper Sampled-data control for a class of linear time-varying systems” Wenbing Zhang, Qing-Long Han, Yang Tang“, Yurong Liu* + epaemenof Mathematics Yagsou Unies, Yang, ag 2509, Cina > Shoo of Software and Elecrical Enginceing Swinburne Univers of Technology Melbourne, VIC 212, Astra «The Key Laboratory of Advanced Control and Optinzatian fr Chemical races Miya dacatian, Est Cina Univesity of Scence and ‘Tecnology Stang 200257, FE China ARTICLE INFO ABSTRACT ‘ie Rony Received Feouary 2018 Received in revised form 10 December 2018 Accepted 25 December 2018, ‘ualale online 14 February 2018 aca “eyworde Time varying linear systems Sampled contol Suabiiton ‘This paper is concerned with the sampled-data contol for a class of linear time-varying system. A ‘classic Halanay inequality i first extended to the time-varying sampled-data system. Then based on the comparison principle and the extended Halanay inequality, new criteria for globally uniformly lity and globally uniformly asymptotic stability of the corresponding closed-loop system are derived, Furthermore, an algorithm is presented to solve the gain synthesis problem. Finally, one examples given to show the effectiveness ofthe obtained resus ‘©2019 Elsevier Lid Allrights reserved, 1. Introduction During the past decades, various theoretical research and prac- tical applications show that linear time-varying systems play an important role in chemical engineering and aerospace (Tsakalis & Toannou, 1993),which stimulates the growing interest of scientists from contro! science and engineering, The stability of linear time~ varying systems is one ofthe most important issues in system de- sign (Aeyels & Peuteman, 1999; Zhou, 2016) Different from linear time-invariant systems, stability analysis for linear time-varying systems is complicated (Tan, Zhou, & Duan, 2016; Zhou, 2016). Itis well-known that a linear time-invariant system is asymptotically stable if the eigenvalues of the system matrix have negative real parts. However, fora linear time-varying system, this conclusion does not hold any more. Even for linear time-varying systems with periodic varying coefficients, stability analysis and controller design problems are not easy to tackle. Therefore. investigation on the stability problem of linear time-varying systems is interesting and challenging. “The stability problem has been studied for the analysis f linear time-varying systems (Krstic, 2010; Mazenc & Malisoff,2016; Zhou ‘This work was supported in part by the National Key Research and Devel. ‘pment Program of China under Grant 2018¥FC0809302, in par by the Nationa Natural Sctence Foundation of China (Grant Nos. 61873230 61751305, 61773017 £61503028,61673176) npartby the Programme of introducing Talents of isciptine "Universes (the 111 jet) under Grant 817017. The materia this pape was ot presented at any conference. This paper was recommended fr publication in ‘eve form by Associate Eto Tongwen Chen under teeireton of itor la R Petersen * Corresponding autor maladies: 248505060 126.com (W. Zhang) ghan@swin.edau (Q:L. Han. taratanyemacom¥, Tan lyarongemacom(¥. Li) aps: dirg/ 10.1016 automatic, 2019.01.027 .0005-1089/0 2019 Bsever Le lights reserve. & Egorov, 2016). For example, in Zhou (2016),some necessary and suflicient conditions were derived for testing asymptotic stability, ‘exponential stability and uniformly exponential stability of general linear time-varying systems. Although some progress has been made in the study of linear time-varying systems, most of the ‘existing results are constrained to the stability problem of linear time-varying systems (Karafyllis & Tsinias, 2003; Krstic, 2010; Liu, Lu, & Chen, 2012; Mazenc & Malisoff, 2016; Zhou & Egorov, 2016). However, there are few results available inthe literature on ‘controller design of linear time-varying systems (Tan et al, 2016). In Tan et al. (2016),the finite-time stabilization problem was stud- ied for linear time-varying systems by using a piecewise constant feedback approach. It should be noted that in the investigation on stabilization problem of linear time-varying systems, the control gain matrix evolves continuously (Tan et al, 2016), which is in fact not always effective, especially in digital control. However, it is well-known that in digital control, sampling-data widely exists in computer control systems. Indeed, a sampled-data controller is implemented based on periodic task models in as many as periodic tasks are simple for implementation. Note that there has been an increasing interest on the analy- sis and control of sampled-data systems (Beikzadeh & Marquez, 2016; Briat, 2016; Fridman, Seuret, & Richard, 2004; Guo, Ding, 8 Han, 2014; Liu & Fridman, 2012; Shen, Wang, & Huang, 2016: Zhang & Han, 2015: Zhang, Tang, Huang and Kurths, 2017). For ‘example, in Fridman et al. (2004), an input-delay approach was proposed to study the robust stabilization problem of linear sys- tems. In Beikzadeh and Marquez (2016) and Shen et al. (2016), 4 discretization approach was used to discuss the stabilization problem of sampled-data systems. In Sriat (2016), an impulsive system approach was extended into the stability and stabilizationW-2hang. QL Han ¥. Tang etal Automatics 1032019) 126-134 Po problem of stochastic sampled-data systems. In Guo et al. (2014) and Zhang and Han (2015), event-based sampled-data control for ‘sampled-data systems have been investigated, For more details on sampled-data control systems, one can refer to a recent compre- hensive overview (Hetel et al. 2077). Its worth pointing out that in the most existing results concerning sampled-data control of linear systems, time-invariant systems were considered and few results have been reported on sampled-data control of linear time- varying systems (Brat, 2018), which makes the implementation of the controller applicable. The difficulties are mainly reflected in the following aspects: (i) The stability analysis and synthesis problem for linear time-varying systems has not been fully investigated due to the difficulties in mathematical analysis, not to mention that the sampled-data controllers used to stabilize linear time-varying, systems; (ii) AS pointed out in Tan et al. (2016), how to solve ‘the synthesis problem in linear time-varying systems is also very challenging, since a linear matrix inequality method and a Riccati equation method widely used in time-invariant systems cannot be applied to linear time-varying systems directly. How to deal with ‘these issues motivates the current study. Based on the above discussions, n this paper, we will address the sampled-data control issue for linear time-varying systems. ‘The main contributions ofthis paper are highlighted as follows: (i) ‘The sampled-data control problem of linear time-vatying systems is investigated, where a well-known Halanay inequality is ex- tended into the sampled-data linear time-varying systems. Based ‘on the extended Halanay inequality and Gronwall lemma, a com- prehensive stabilization problem of linear time-varying systems is cartied out by using the Lyapunov function method: and (ii In comparison with Briat (2013), Briat (2016), Bria (2018), Fujioka (2009), Goebel, Sanfelice, and Teel (2012), Kao (2016) and Mirkin (2007), we do not need the derivative of the Lyapunov function decreases along the time evolution, which has a wider application than the results in Briat (2013), Briat (2016), Briat (2018), Fujioka (2009), Goebel etal, 2012), Kao (2016) and Mirkin (2007). Notations: Throughout this paper, |x} is used to denote the usual Euclidean norm of avector x © B".x' denotes the transpose of X y denotes n-dimensional identity matrix. Let K represent the class of continuous and strictly increasing function ¢ : [0, 0) > [0,c0) with $(0) = 0. For a scalar function f(t), [(t}| denotes its abso- lute value. For a symmetric matrix P, gas(P) and dnl) denote, respectively its maximal and minimal eigenvalues. A function [0, 00) x [0, 20) —> [0, co) is said to belong to the class of Kc, if Al. is of ciass& for each fixed ¢ > O and Ais, t) decreases to zero a8 > 00 for each fixed s > 0. 2, Model formulation and preliminaries Consider the following linear time-varying system described by 30) = ACO) + BUCO, a where x(f) € RY is the state vector, A(t) € R'® and B(t) € R=" are known matrix-valued functions, u(t) eR” i the control input ‘The initial value ofthe time-varying system in{ | )isgiven asx{tq) = x00). Inthis paper, we focus on the stabilization problem ofthe sys- ‘tem 1)-Thus. the following sampled-data controller is considered: CE) = KCL te). © € Estey) @ where K(f) is the control gain matrix that needs to be designed later. The sampling sequence (t4)(kt = 0. 1,2,...) satisfies fp < fy 0 is a constant. In this paper, all the involved time- vatying matrices are assumed to be bounded. The system in (1) with the control input 2) yields the following closed-loop system: HE) = ACE) + BEOK (tat). € Ea, tes. @ ‘The following definitions and lemmas will be needed to derive the main results of this paper. Definition 1. The system (3) is said to be globally uniformly asymptotically stable (GUAS), if there exists a KZ function 6 such that € [le fey1) Iso) < BUDO). t= ta). ‘Moreover, the system (3)is said to be globally uniformly exponen- tially stable (GUES) if there exist two positive constants My and a such that I(e)] = Moe) Definition 2 (Zrou, 2016). A continuous function i) is said to be 4 uniformly stable function (USF) if je) = Ke}yt) is GUAS, Lemma 1 (Zou & Egorov, 2016)-The function (t)is a USFifand only if for two given constants ¢ > O and d > 0, there exists a constant T > O (may be dependent on c) such thatthe following inequalities hold for any ¢ > to [0 wws- “ [wwsa ven 6) Lemma 2 (Zhou, 2016). The time-varying system X(0) = ACO) is CGUES if there exists a derivable matrix function P(c) = P¥ (0), @ US 1e} and conscans p, = py > Ostch that AT(E)P(O)+ POA) + PCE) = OP(O, 6) Pils PCO) < Pal a Denote at) = x(t) — x(t). Then we can rewrite system (3) as HO) =ALENE) + BLEIK(Ge}A(E) ~ BIENK(e4}0(0), Fe [tts 8) The following lemma presents an estimate of the upper bound of ot), which is important for deriving the main results. For the sake of simplicity, the following notations willbe used throughout the paper. Ale) = AO + BOK (G0), © € es fesr) e= sup tt, uy sup AI fetiethe) settee) (eps — oder, ‘ Lemma 3. The sampling error function ae) in (8) satisfies the following inequality Ho(O)H < CU). © € Us fap) 9) roof. It can be obtained from the fact dt) AG texte) that ol) [aswiss [A 5 eaa)ds HO) ACAD) + a Ie 2 f moments Applying Gronwall-eliman Lemma to (10) ved HeCel = else) iCe — eye A" a Inview of (11), one can easily obtain Ho(e s CUI (2) This completes the proof.pa W- Zhang, Q-L Hon, ¥. Tage a Automatica 132019) 125-134 3, Main results, 31. Stability analysis ‘Theorem 1. Suppose that there exist continuous functions Ke) with Mell sy, ale) > Oand V(t) > 0 satisfying the following condition ee) = MOC) + wl (td. € Ibe tera) (13) or dim (s) (s)e”"Ids ig, [uo suse then lim v(e) =0. Gi) PK 0) + u(e)e"* is @ USE as defined in Lemma |, hen Vie) < e°4e-F V(t), aa) where ¢ and dare the same as the ones in Lemma | Proof. (i). Let y(t) > 0 with y(t) = V(to) be the unique solution ‘of the following equation HE) = OVC) + LEVEE, Mea es) (15) ‘According to comparison principle, we have that V(t) = y{¢) for {> ta, In what follows, we will estimate the upper bound of y(t). Consider the following system ule) = Heya C0) yt) = vad € Mh tea (16) ‘As (Pte) = 0, according to the comparison principle, itis easy to see that y(t) > ya(e) for alle > ty. Itcan be obtained from (16) thar yi(e) = ey (6), € Ue ter) a7) ‘Therefore y(t) = yi(t) = ef "*y(e,), which further means that yee) = eA Hye, (1g) From (15) and (18),one has fort [a tess) HO) = Me) + wither Ye) a9) Then, it canbe obtained from (19) that for € ft, t4s1) xy, yo cetera efile on ‘Thus, for € € Ete tesa 0) eAMMHOH Meg) en and therefore dim VOo) = fim yet) = 0. (2) (ii) According to Lemma 1, as I(t) + te” is a USF, there exists ‘an admissible sequence (Typ with Tys1 ~ Ty = T.To = to, [+ mises = -c and [Wor neers <4.9 €10.11 ‘Thus, we have from (20) that V{e) < xe) < char“ (a), 23) Moreover, for ¢ € (Ty. Tayr) there exists a8 = T such that (= fp + nT +8, and then V(e) cetera wo Men se a ean Ay) <ée™V(to) ee HEV) mee HOV CG), (24) “Thus, the proofis completed. © Remark 1. In this paper, aperiodic sampling interval is con- sidered, I should be noted that our rsullscan be extended Sampled-data systems with time-varying sampling interval. The reason is provided as follows: Lemma 3 is given to estimate the samplingerrorand the sampling interval, However, it iseasytosee from Lemma 3 that our rests canbe applied tothe time-varying sampling sequence with 1 ~ 4 =f Usually. when investigating the stability of sampled-data contol systems (Brat, 2076, 2018 Fridman, 2010; Fridman et al, 2004% Fu, Li Cha & Su, 2016: Fujioka, 2008 Kao, 2016; Liu & Song, 2071, itis assumed that 0) = ~AyyebAaylt) where dy > Fa are two positive constants. ‘Thats itis presumed thatthe derivative ofthe Lyapunov function decreases along the time evolution. Cleary, this assumption is a lite bit conservative. In Theotem I, we allow ie) and x(t) tbe functions rather than constants, which makes the results more general and less conservative. Moreover, the restriction af Ie) < 0 is removed. It should be noted thatthe conditions in Theorem | may be somewhat difficult to check, since one needs to check whether a function is a USF. However, in Zhou (2016), some testing methods are discussed in deta For instance, leting (6,7) = J." sjds/T, according to the mean value theorem of integrals, if there exist a sufficiently large T such thatthe moving average of Ke) with respect to T is negative, then (4) holds. Specially, if It) is periodic with T, then we only need to check whether (4) holds. It ISeasy to see that (5) is satisfied if) is bounded uniformly. For more details, one can refer to Zh (2076). Based on Theorem 1, we have the following theorem on, ‘sampled-data control of linear time-varying systems. ‘Theorem 2. Suppose that there exists a continuous and bourided function (¢) such that (7) and AY(e, t)P(C) + PCO)ALE, te) + BEE) < OP(O) Then (4) The system in (3) is GUAS if one of the following conditions holds: (i-a) there exists a postive constant n such that din, fs) ++ wiser as = 00. (eb) ee in [he sae ids = (a Te system in (2) i GUES if oe ofthe following conditions rots (iia) there exists a positive constant n such that I(t) + 1 + (oe isa USE.W-2hang. QL Han ¥. Tang etal Automatics 1032019) 126-134 9 Gib) 51) + fi(t}e3" isa USF, where p(t) = ¢? 2 8(¢)I- IKWDP fe) = ¢/FUBONIKCN and defined Sinton Proof. (i-a). Consider the Lyapunov function V(¢) = x"(e)P(e)x(). Fort € [tates its derivative satisfies Veo) =x" (ATC, e)P(O) + PCOALE, te) + POC) ~ oN (KT (t)B" (E)PCEDA(E) — TCOPUNBOK(te)0L0) _OMOKT IB" (OPOBOK( U0) 7 + KOVE) + nV) tte + v0 + BOP IRC HOC (25) According to Lemma 3, one can further obtain that fort (tu, f441) Ho sto + V+ PHO KG ALO? 0 + MOP PE IOP IRFU) (28) ‘Then it can be obtained from Theovem | that the conclusion holds. T= b). Choose the Lyapunov function as ¥i(t) = VATMOPCOR(O. Then, for € © Ite 1) 1 m Tr KOM ~ 2 OPOKOK HAD] 1 " yy MOM + VCONPHOBOKG IAI 1, then tems) and (ia) may be essconservative than tems) and (ic) respectively since y(t in ems (a) and (contains BCE KCC). It should be noted that in Theorem 2, f(t) is dependent on {, which has an exponential term e and thus the results may be only applicable to small sampling interval. The conservatism is generated by using the Gronwall Lemma to estimate the upper bound of a) Remark 3. Recently, there are several results reported on sampled-data control systems, and various methods have been proposed to estimate ext). Generally, the methods can be di- vided into two categories: frequency domain and time domain approaches. In what follows, we will compare our results with the existing ones from the perspectives of the above two categories: Comparisons with frequency domain approach: It was reported in Fujioka (2009) and Mirkin (2007) that if the L, induced norm llo(t)|| < 2h/, then the stability can be achieved for sampled data system in the form of i(¢) = A(t) + Bks,). The results in Fujioka (2009) and Mirkin (2007) were then generalized in Kao (2016) by the use of aslight different loop transformation. However, it should bbe noted that the results in Fujioka (2009), Kao (2016) and Mirkin (2007) are based on the well-known small gain theorem, which ay be difficult to apply to time-varying systems, Moreover, the IMI conditions in Fujioka (2009), Kao (20 16) and Mirkin (2007) are also confined to time-invariant systems, Comparisons with time-domain approach: In Fridman (2010) and Fridinan etal. (2004), the input delay approach has been used to investigate stabilization problem of sampled-data systems, and then by constructing Lyapunov functionals, sufficient conditions are obtained in terms of LMls. In Naghsbtabrizi, Hespanha, and “Teel (2008), the exponential stability was obtained for nonlinear impulsive systems by employing Lyapunov functions with dis- continuity at impulsive instants, where the stability conditions can be formulated as LMIs. Then, the results have been extencled into the sampled-data contro! of linear systems. Moreover, very recently, various Lyapunov functionals have been proposed to get less conservative results, such as looped-functionals (Seuret, 2012; Seuret & Briat, 2015) and timer/clock-dependent Lyapunov functions (Briat, 2013, 2016, 2018; Goebel etal, 2012). In Etienne, Hetel, Efimov, and Petreczky (2017), the problem of observation was considered for continuous-time nonlinear Lipschitz systems with time-varying discrete measurements, where the problem of, sampled data control is transferred into a convex embedding of linear systems. However, the differences between our paper and these results are as follows: (1) Model differences: Ic is worth pointing out that most of the models investigated in the above results are confined to ‘time-invariant systems, while inthis paper, time-varying systems are considered. Although linear parameter-varying (LPV) systems ‘were investigated in Briat (2018), sampled-data control of linear time-varying systems has nat been investigated yet. (2) Method differences: The Gronwall Lemma is used to es- timate the upper bound of oX¢), in which the upper bound is ddepenclent on x(¢,), which is crucial for deriving our main results. (3) Results differences: One of our main contributions is that, in Theorem 1, where we do not need that It) is negative along the time evolution, which is more flexible than the above mentioned results, where (is negative al the time. However, it should be mentioned that due to the existence of an exponential term, the results may be conservative to some extent, and therefore, the results may be applied to the case of small sampling interval. It) = —e < 0 is chosen, then this exponential term canbe deleted. Inthe following corollary, we will give stability condition with the new estimation of fw(®)]| under the condition of It) = e < 0. Corollary 1. Suppose that there exists a positive constant ¢ such that (7) and the following condition holds A(t. PCO) + POAC, te) + PCE) = —eP IC), (28) The system in (3) is UES if ney (29) where 2 = sUPrengn)Y BLUBROKDI + IBOKGPT10 W- Zhang, Q-L Hon, ¥. Tage a Automatica 132019) 125-134 Proof. Consider the Lyapunov function Ve) = a"(t)P(e)«(t). Then itis to see from the definition of (t) that nce s [1asM) + BORON la max, I + BLOC) a) os) WB, si Cons sh SO + amoKCoo 1 fr shy eM cnt) + HCE IVC) (30) where Vaas(t) = maxecin.n V(@), Vismas(t) = maroc Vil). ‘Therefore, the estimate ofthe derivative of V(t) in (27) becomes We) = v4 + hE NOKC EDV al) 2 + IKOK(GIPVCE)L en Then, according to Lemma S in Zhang, Wang, Lis, Ding and Alsaadi (2017), we have thatif(29) holds, then, Vi, gax(¢) ingly, we have (te) Accord- Pe Yaee SEM + mY TE OKC + IKOK(CINIVAte) (32) Applying Theorem 1 to (32), one can conclude that the sampled- data system in (3) is GUES. Ifi{e) = ~€ is considered, one can also use the methods in Briat (2013)Briat (2016),riat (2018) and Goebel et al. (2012) to get less conservative results. However, it should be noted that the ‘computational complexity in Briat(2013),rat (2016)Briat (2018) and Goebel et al,(2012)is more complicated than Corollary 1 since more decision numbers are needed to reduce the conservatism. Thus, although our results ate conservative to some extent, the results presented here are easy to check. In the near future, we intend to reduce the conservatism by using the methods derived in these results. For instance, if(t) = ~€, one can use the Proposition 3 in Briat (2018) or one can construct more complex Lyapunov functionals as in Hooshmandi, Bayat, Jahed-Motlagh, and Jalali (2018) to reduce the conservatism. For the sake of page limitation, ‘we do not present it here. 4. Controller design In Theorem 2, we have presented a result to solve the stabiliza- tion problem ofthe time-varying sampled-data system. Moreover, as (ey) is dependent on ¢ and fin practice, if one intends to find k(t) such that AT(¢, f)P(0) + POAC, te) + P(E) = KOPCO) holds, then one needs to check the condition for allt € Ite. ess) and all k € N, Thisis difficult to verify. Thus, for practical applica- tions, in the following, we assume that K(ty) = K, Le. a constant ‘control gain matrix is taken into account. ‘Thus, in what follows, inspired by Briat (2015) and Zhou (2016), ‘we will discuss how to solve the control gain matrix K(th) 4.1. Construction of yapunov function with a constant P. In this subsection, we will discuss how to select the Lyapunov function with a constant P. ‘As shown in Zhou (2016), there is no general way to solve the gain synthesis problem in linear time-varying systems. Thus, in ‘what follows, a simple tractable way is given to solve the gain synthesis problem. First, we assume that there exists some f, © [ty tusn)such that (4(G,). B(G))is stabilizable. Then, for any positive number 5, there exists a solution P(t.) such that the following Riccati inequality holds: AT(G)P(t) + P(teMte) — 5PCE)BCE)B"(t)PCE) = ~B1-< 0. (33) In (33), let 5 = 2, we have that AT(C)P(t) + PCG IA) — 2PCE)B(}B" (P(E) = ~21 ‘Then, the gain synthesis problem is solved as K = ~8T(e)P(t). Let Ke) = AmaclAT(OPLG) + PCGIATE) ~ 2P(6 81098" OPC) 2uin(P~"G)}. Then K(f) may be a USF since Xt) = ~Zanl?-"t)} ="0, ie, Kt) is negative in the neighborhood of t. Aecordingly, the following algorithm can be used to solve the gain synthesis problem. ‘Theorem 3. Ifthere exists some time instant, such that (At), Bt) is stabilizable and (7), (1i-b) of Theorem 2 holds with I(t) = Pac IAT (EOPCtg) + PCEAT(e) ~ 2PCE,)BCE)B™(C)PCG,)Pean(P"()) them the system (3) is GUES with K = ~B¥()P(t Proof. The proof can be directly obtained according to Theorem 2 and here is omitted, © In (3), if state feedback controller Ket) is considered, then we have the following closed-loop system: 5(C) = ALONE) + BOK). 3a) ‘Then, based on Theorem 3, we have the following corollary on the stabilization problem of lineat-time-varying system. Corollary 2. Ifthere exists atime instant, such that (A(t). BC) i stabilizable and Kt) = Al (AT CPC) +PCEIA (0) 2P(C OBC) P{t)Paei(P1(t)) USF, then the system (34) is GUES with K = BUG )PG 4.2. Construction of Lyapunov function witha time-varying P(t). In Theorem 3, a simple tractable way is given to solve the gain, synthesis problem, where it is assumed that P(e) = P(t). ie, a ‘constant matrix P(t) is considered, However, in the main body of the paper, a time-varying P(r) is used to construct the Lyapunov function. Thus, in this subsection, we will discuss how to select a time-varying P(0). As pointed out in Zhou (2016), there is no general rule 0 ‘choose Lyapunov functions for linear time-varying systems. In ‘what follows, inspired by Zhou (20116), we try to choose some P(t) such that a time-varying Lyapunov function x"(t)P(t)(¢) is well- defined, Denote Ite) = At + BOK and Ae) = Ao + AulO, ‘where A contains all the constant elements ofA). As P(e) is a positive definite matrix, then P() isa symmetric matrix. For this Teason, we choose some constant f such that P(t) = P(.) + BP(®) with y(t) = —(AY(C)P(E,) + P(t,)Ax(€)) is positive definite. Then, itis easy to see that P(t) is a symmetric matrix since Pi) is, symmettic Ic is worth pointing out that such a P(t) indeed exists since limp P(C) = P()-In this case, KC.) = peel AU(CDPC) + PCCIA(e) + PCOV/pn. Ie should be noted that Covolary 2 can be applied to the case that A() is unbounded. For simplicity, if we assume that A(@) = ¢cos(®) and Ble) = Vin (34), then, we can {et that K = —1 solves the stabilization problem of (3).W-2hang. QL Han ¥. Tang etal Automatics 1032019) 126-134 Pa 20-0 ‘when the spring is unstressed — "Fig. 1. Spring-mas- damper system with thne-varying spring tines. 5. Anexample In this section, simulations are given to verify the theoretical results ofthe previous section, Example 1. Consider a mathieu oscillator-a spring-mass-damper system with time-varying spring stiffness and damping coefficient that is shown in Fig. 1, where mis the mass, u isthe external force. (Cis the spring stiffness and c(t) isthe damping coefficient, 2(¢) is the displacement. Then according to Newton's second law, ane can get the following dynamical system 4 eCEEEE) + MEz(C) = uC (35) Let z(t) (t), 2(¢) = Xo(t). Then one has a(t) a(t) (36) = “ee Peg MO which can be rewritten as Markovsky, Goos, Usevich, and Pintelon (2014) 40) = ACO) + BEOQuLC), (37) wt = [2 x= [Joma = [Bp] Taking into consideration the sampled-data controler in (2), fone has 3) = ACEC) + BOK (CG). © € Ua tes. (38) Letm = 1, k(t) = 2~1.5sin(t) and c(t) = ~1.5 cos(t).ttean be seen from Fig.2 that the system in (37) with u(t) = Ois not stable. ‘Solving (33) with 6 = 2 and ¢, = 2/4, we have that 35570 0.5351 rey= [2a Stag] k= [0st 19145] ‘The function ¢) withthe constant matrix P(t) is recorded in Fis. 3 with ff = 0, from which we can see that (is not negative al the time. Moreover one can obtain that fe" Kshs = 1.5123, Then according to Theorem 2, one can get that “ + ji(t)ed" is a USF forh < 0.04131, Itshould be noted thatthe control gain matrix K highly depends ‘on the choice of 5 and t, when solving the Riceati equation in (33) For instance. if we choose t, = 1/4, then f," Ks)ds for different choice of 8s listed in Table |, From which, We can see that when 3 = 1, Theorem 3 fails to solve the control gain matrix K. In addition, 2" Ks)ds for different choice of t, with 6 = 2 is listed Fig 5. The function Kia Beam with fever ‘rable (Eis) for erent 3 witht 7 f=1 ise 2a 1s ~sas77 ‘Table (lsd for diferent choice o with = 2. © ° © aa uae er tsias = =15123 840 46004 in Table 2, where f, = 27/2 and t = = fail to solve the control gain matrix. Thus, for practical applications, one needs to carefully check, and 6 Let h = thy — te = 0.041, The state trajectory and the control input u(t) ofthe time-varying system in (38) are plotted in Figs. and 5, respectively. itcan be seen that the simulation results confirm the theoretical results well Itshould be noted that in the above discussions, for the sake of simplicity, a constant matrix P(t, is considered to get the control sain matrix. However, in our main results a time-varying matrix P(«) is considered, in what follows, we will discuss how to select av2 W- Zhang, Q-L Hon, ¥. Tage a Automatica 132019) 125-134 Fig 4, State trajectory ofthe system in (38). G 5 0 © = Fig. 5. The control input ue) oFthesytem in (38), time-varying P(t). As discussed in Section 4.7, we can easily get i 0 1 fo=[ st) 1515] ‘Then, P(e) is in the form of 3.587 + 1.90532 cos(r) Patt) Pratt) 1.9145 ~ 5.74358 sin(t) where Pja(t) = 0.6351 ~ 0.9527 sin(t) + 2.8718 cos(t). Then (is positive definite for © (0.33, 0.33). Then, Kr, 6) with different f is also recorded in Fig. 3 from which we can see that Ic, 8) is also not negative all the time and by selecting an appro- priate f, the time-varying matrix P(¢) is better than the constant ‘one, Aue o o 15sin(e) 1.5 cos(t) iG Remark 4. In Example 1, if we replace Ac) in (38) by Ale) Ot 044+ 06sine) | BYS0Wing Theorem 3 with = O,we can {et that this system is stable with it < 0.0532, and (t)is plotted in Fig. 6, where it can be seen that (t) is not needed to be negative all the time. Furthermore, we can get that (38) is stable with this A(e) if h = 0.0532, while it has been shown in Briat (2018) that thi Fig 6. The function Kein Remark system is stable by using the hybrid system approach for all ht € [0.001, 1.3]. Clearly, the result in Briat (2018) is less conservative than the results here. The conservatism is generated by using the Yang Fangrecived the 8S and PRD depresin electrical tenginerng ftom Donghia University, shargha. china, {in 2006 and 2010, reepectivesy From 2008 to 2010, he asa Research Associate wth Te Hons Kong Plyech- ie University. Hong Kong From 2011 (0 2015 he was 2 Post-Doctoral Researcher with the Humboldt University ofllertn erin, Germany. and withthe Potsdam stitute for Climate Impact Reseate, Potsdam, Germany. Since 2015, he has bea Proessr with the East hina Un ‘erst of Scene ad Technology, Shangha His urent esearch interests inclide mutagen sjstemsfomplex necworks,yber-physical systems, hid dynamical systems, and artifii itll- _enceand thelr appkation. ot Tang was recipient ofthe Alexander von Hum Boldt elowshipand the Highly Cited Researches Awad by Clavat aly. He san Associate Editor of Scenic Reports, the Jounal ofthe Fan stitute, "Neurocomputing he Prceeigs ofthe tstiution of Mechanical Engineers Part the Jounal of Systems and Contol Engineering andthe international journal of Control automation. and Systems, and a ending Guest Eto ofthe journal of he Franklin nstiute and CHAOS. Ny, aa YYurong Liu was born in Ching in 1968, He received IIS BSE degree in Mathemates from Stzhou Universit, Schou, Chinn 1986, the Me derecin Applied Math emai from Nanjing Univesity of Scence and Tech holgy, Nanjing, China in 1865, andthe PD. degree in Applied Mathematics fom Suzhou University. Suzhou, hina ia 2001 ‘Dr isis curently a professor with the Department of mathemati af Yangzhou University, China. He aso fever an Asoc Editor of Neurocomputing Sof, ‘hea published more than 100 papers refereed inter” rational journals. is cuten interests nelide stochastic conto, neal network, ‘complex networks, nonlinear dams, ume dL systems, uv agen ystems, nd ehaotic dynamics.