skip to main content
research-article

A passivity approach for model-based compositional design of networked control systems

Authors Info & Claims
Published:01 January 2013Publication History
Skip Abstract Section

Abstract

The integration of physical systems through computing and networking has become pervasive, a trend now known as cyber-physical systems (CPS). Functionality in CPS emerges from the interaction of networked computational and physical objects. System design and integration are particularly challenging because fundamentally different physical and computational design concerns intersect. The impact of these interactions is the loss of compositionality which creates tremendous challenges. The key idea in this article is to use passivity for decoupling the control design of networked systems from uncertainties such as time delays and packet loss, thus providing a fundamental simplification strategy that limits the complexity of interactions. The main contribution is the application of the approach to an experimental case study of a networked multi-robot system. We present a networked control architecture that ensures the overall system remains stable in spite of implementation uncertainties such as network delays and data dropouts, focusing on the technical details required for the implementation. We describe a prototype domain-specific modeling language and automated code generation tools for the design of networked control systems on top of passivity that facilitate effective system configuration, deployment, and testing. Finally, we present experimental evaluation results that show decoupling of interlayer interactions.

References

  1. Anderson, R. and Spong, M. 1992. Asymptotic stability for force reflecting teleoperators with time delay. Int. J. Robotics Res. 11, 2, 135--149. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  2. Antsaklis, P. and Baillieul, J., Eds. 2007. Technology of Networked Control Systems (Special Issue). Proc. IEEE, 95, 1.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  3. Arcak, M. 2007. Passivity as a design tool for group coordination. IEEE Trans. Auto. Control 52, 8, 1380--1390.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  4. AS-2 Embedded Computing Systems Committee. 2004. Architecture analysis and design language (AADL). Tech. rep. AS5506, Society of Automotive Engineers.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  5. Bai, H., Arcak, M., and Wen, J. T. 2008. Rigid body attitude coordination without inertial frame information. Automatica 44, 12, 3170--3175. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  6. Baillieul, J. and Antsaklis, P. 2007. Control and communication challenges in networked real-time systems. Proc. IEEE 95, 1, 9--28.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  7. Balarin, F., Watanabe, Y., Hsieh, H., Lavagno, L., Paserone, C., and Sangiovanni-Vincentelli, A. L. 2003. Metropolis: an integrated electronic system design environment. IEEE Computer 36, 4, 45--52. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  8. Bao, J. and Lee, P. L. 2007. Process Control : The Passive Systems Approach. Springer-Verlag.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  9. Bhave, A. and Krogh, B. 2008. Performance bounds on state-feedback controllers with network delay. In Proceedings of the 47th IEEE Conference on Decision and Control. 4608--4613.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  10. Brockett, R. and Liberzon, D. 2000. Quantized feedback stabilization of linear systems. IEEE Trans. Auto. Control 45, 7, 1279--1289.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  11. Chopra, N., Berestesky, P., and Spong, M. 2008. Bilateral teleoperation over unreliable communication networks. IEEE Trans. Control Syst. Technol. 16, 2, 304--313.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  12. Chopra, N. and Spong, M. 2006. Passivity-based control of multi-agent systems. In Advances in Robot Control: From Everyday Physics to Human-Like Movements, 107--134.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  13. Corke, P. I. 2002. Robotic toolbox for Matlab, Release 7.1. Tech. rep., CSIRO.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  14. Craig, J. J. 1989. Introduction to Robotics: Mechanics and Control. Addison-Wesley. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  15. Crustcrawler.com. 2009. Dynamixel AX-12 Manual. http://www.crustcrawler.com/products/bioloid/docs/AX-12.pdf.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  16. Eyisi, E., Porter, J., Hall, J., Kottenstette, N., Koutsoukos, X., and Sztipanovits, J. 2009. PaNeCS: A modeling language for passivity-based design of networked control systems. In Proceedings of the 2nd International Workshop on Model Based Architecting and Construction of Embedded Systems (ACES-MB '09). 27--41.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  17. Fettweis, A. 1986. Wave digital filters: theory and practice. Proc. IEEE 74, 2, 270--327.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  18. Gao, H., Chen, T., and Chai, T. 2008. Passivity and passification for networked control systems. SIAM J. Control Optimiz. 46, 4, 1299--1322. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  19. Haddad, W. M. and Chellaboina, V. S. 2008. Nonlinear Dynamical Systems and Control: A Lyapunov-Based Approach. Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  20. Hespanha, J., Naghshtabrizi, P., and Xu, Y. 2007. A survey of recent results in networked control systems. Proc. IEEE 95, 1, 138--162.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  21. Hirche, S. and Buss, M. 2007. Transparent data reduction in networked telepresence and teleaction systems. part ii: Time-delayed communication. Presence: Teleoper. Virtual Environ. 16, 5, 532--542. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  22. Hirche, S., Matiakis, T., and Buss, M. 2009. A distributed controller approach for delay-independent stability of networked control systems. Automatica 45, 8, 1828--1836. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  23. Hudak J. and Feiler P. 2007. Developing AADL models for control systems: A practitioner's guide. Tech. rep. CMU/SEI-2007-TR-014, CMU SEI.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  24. Ihle, I.-A. F., Arcak, M., and Fossen, T. I. 2007. Passivity-based designs for synchronized path-following. Automatica 43, 9, 1508--1518. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  25. Karsai, G., Sztipanovits, J., Ledeczi, A., and Bapty, T. 2003. Model-integrated development of embedded software. Proc. IEEE 91, 1, 145--164.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  26. Kottenstette, N. and Antsaklis, P. 2010. Relationships between positive real, passive dissipative, & positive systems. In Proceedings of the American Control Conference. 409--416.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  27. Kottenstette, N., Hall, J., Koutsoukos, X., Antsaklis, P., and Sztipanovits, J. 2011. Digital control of multiple discrete passive plants over networks. Int. J. Syst., Comm. Control 3, 2, 194--228. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  28. Kottenstette, N., Koutsoukos, X., Hall, J., Sztipanovits, J., and Antsaklis, P. 2008. Passivity-based design of wireless networked control systems for robustness to time-varying delays. In Proceedings of the Real-Time Systems Symposium (RTSS 08). 15--24. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  29. Kottenstette, N. and Porter, J. 2009. Digital passive attitude and altitude control schemes for quadrotor aircraft. In Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on Control and Automation (ICCA'09).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  30. LeBlanc, H., Eyisi, E., Kottenstette, N., Koutsoukos, X., and Sztipanovits, J. 2010. A passivity-based approach to deployment in multi-agent networks. In Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on Informatics in Control, Automation and Robotics (ICINCO '10). 53--62.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  31. Ledeczi, A., Bakay, A., Maroti, M., Volgyesi, P., Nordstrom, G., Sprinkle, J., and Karsai, G. 2001a. Composing domain-specific design environments. IEEE Computer, 44--51. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  32. Ledeczi, A., Maroti, M., Bakay, A., Karsai, G., Garrett, J., IV, C. T., Nordstrom, G., Sprinkle, J., and Volgyesi, P. 2001b. The generic modeling environment. In Proceedings of the Workshop on Intelligent Signal Processing.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  33. Li, P. Y. and Horowitz, R. 1997. Control of smart machines, Part 1: Problem formulation and non-adaptive control. IEEE/ASME Trans. Mechatron. 2, 4, 237--247.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  34. Lian, F.-L., Moyne, J., and Tilbury, D. 2002. Network design consideration for distributed control systems. IEEE Trans. Control Syst. Technol. 10, 2, 297--307.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  35. Montestruque, L. A. and Antsaklis, P. 2004. Stability of model-based networked control systems with time-varying transmission times. IEEE Trans. Aut. Control 49, 9, 1562--1572.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  36. Nešic, D. and Liberzon, D. 2009. A unified framework for design and analysis of networked and quantized control systems. IEEE Trans. Auto. Control 54, 4, 732--747.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  37. Niemeyer, G. and Slotine, J.-J. E. 2004. Telemanipulation with time delays. Int. J. Robotics Res. 23, 9, 873--890.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  38. Oppenheim, A., Willsky, A., and Nawab, S. 1997. Signals and Systems. Prentice hall Upper Saddle River, NJ. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  39. Ortega, R. and Spong, M. 1988. Adaptive motion control of rigid robots: A tutorial. In Proceedings of the 27th IEEE Conference on Decision and Control. 1575--84.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  40. Porter, J., Karsai, G., Volgyesi, P., Nine, H., Humke, P., Hemingway, G., Thibodeaux, R., and Sztipanovits, J. 2008. Towards model-based integration of tools and techniques for embedded control system design, verification, and implementation. In Proceedings of the Workshops and Symposia at MoDELS. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 5421, Springer.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  41. Seiler, P. and Sengupta, R. 2005. An H-infinity approach to networked control. IEEE Trans. Auto. Control 50, 3, 356--364.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  42. SIRSLab. 2009. Haptik library overview. http://sirslab.dii.unisi.it/haptiklibrary/overview.htm.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  43. Skaf, J. and Boyd, S. 2007. Analysis and synthesis of state-feedback controllers with timing jitter. IEEE Trans. Auto. Control 54, 3, 652--657.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  44. Stramigioli, S., Secchi, C., van der Schaft, A. J., and Fantuzzi, C. 2005. Sampled data systems passivity and discrete port-hamiltonian systems. IEEE Trans. Robotics 21, 4, 574--587. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  45. van der Schaft, A. 1999. L2-Gain and Passivity in Nonlinear Control. Springer-Verlag, Berlin, Germany. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  46. Walsh, G. C., Ye, H., and Bushnell, L. G. 2002. Stability analysis of networked control systems. IEEE Trans. Control Sys. Technol. 10, 3, 438--446.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref

Index Terms

  1. A passivity approach for model-based compositional design of networked control systems

    Recommendations

    Comments

    Login options

    Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

    Sign in

    Full Access

    PDF Format

    View or Download as a PDF file.

    PDF

    eReader

    View online with eReader.

    eReader
    About Cookies On This Site

    We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website.

    Learn more

    Got it!