Top Ten Research Problems in Nonlinear Control

Here is my personal list of the biggest research problems in nonlinear control theory (including links to what my group is doing about them). If you don't agree with these (which is likely), feel free to send me e-mail.

Current Previous
rank Research problem rank
10 Using experiments and applications to motivate new theory
-
9 Building good university experiments for evaluating controllers
-
8 Integrating algorithmic control with dynamical control
-
7 Recognizing the difference between regulation and tracking
-
6 Integrating good linear techniques into nonlinear methodologies
-
5 Recognizing the difference between linear and nonlinear stabilization
-
4 Finding nonlinear normal forms for control
-
3 Writing software for implementing theory
-
2 Exploiting special structure to synthesize controllers
-
1 Transferring successful nonlinear control methods to science and industry -

10. Using experiments and applications to motivate new theory

If you want to have an impact on engineering problems, you need to start with engineering problems as a basis for reseach. This has been the starting point for my own research on nonholonomic motion planning, flight control, and active control of fluids.


9. Building good university experiments for evaluating controllers

One of the hardest parts about doing controls research in a university is figuring out how to validate your results on an experiments that are representative of real engineering systems while at the same time being simple enough to be built, maintained, and used by faculty and graduate students (as opposed to a full-time, technical support staff). Two experiments that we have built at Caltech that I am reasonable happy with are the ducted fan and a low-speed compressor system.


8. Integrating algorithmic control with dynamical control

Modern controllers are implemented on computers and often consist of a lot of logic surrounding a core of feedback control algorithms. Figuring out how to integrate the logic with the controllers and how to design controllers which are compatible with higher level algorithms is basically an unsolved problem. We aren't doing a lot of work on this problem in my group right now, mainly because it hasn't yet come up in any of the problems we are working on (but it will...).


7. Recognizing the difference between regulation and tracking

For linear control systems, regulation and tracking are essentially identical. For nonlinear systems, and particularly motion control systems, the problem of tracking is significantly different and considerably harder. The role of trajectory generation is very important in nonlinear problems and is the motivation for much of our work in differential flatness, nonholonomic motion planning, and mechanical systems with symmetries.


6. Integrating good linear techniques into nonlinear methodologies

People who work in nonlinear control need to figure out how to make use of all of the latest advances in linear control techniques when they apply. The fact is that for a lot of control problems, the dynamic, error correction (feedback) portion of the controller can be made linear. And in that case, you may as well use a good linear controller with gauranteed robustness and performance rather than just using static, linear or nonlinear feedback (like pole placement). This is what we are trying to do on the ducted fan and is the basic idea underlying two degree of freedom design techniques.


5. Recognizing the difference between linear and nonlinear stabilization

For some classes of problems, looking at regulation to a single equilibrium point is not the right problem to study. The example that we are working on is active control of rotating stall, where you are usually much more interested in getting rid of hysteris behavior or guaranteeing a large domain of attraction in the presence of significant noise.


4. Finding nonlinear normal forms for control

Most of the research in nonlinear control to date has concentrated on extending linear methodologies to nonlinear problems. In essense, we convert or approximate nonlinear systems by linear ones and then applying traditional ideas. It is often very expensive (in terms of control energy) to convert a nonlinear system to a linear one and linear approximations are becoming increasingly inaccurate as we push the envelope of controller performance.

I envision a time when there is a big (online) catalog of nonlinear normal forms for control, with software for determining how close a given system is to each normal form listed, and methods and techniques for control of that normal form. All of this in some consitent format, so that an engineer can get a first cut design by combining existing results to attack their problems (kind of like a set operating system interface functions or a programming library in the world of computers).


3. Writing software for implementing theory

In this day and age, the only way anyone is going to use your personal technique for synthesizing controllers is if you write software to implement it. There is a strong need for a software protocol for nonlinear control which allows easy integration of modules from a variety of sources. Our initial work in this area has so-far been limited to Sparrow, RobotLinks, and EDSpack. A lot more needs to be done.


2. Exploiting special structure to synthesize controllers

You can't build a theory for nonlinear control that works for everything. Nonlinear systems are a lot more complicated than that. Concentrating on special classes of systems, like mechanical systems and propulsion systems, is the most likely way make significant progress in synthesizing nonlinear controllers.


1. Transferring successful nonlinear control methods to science and industry

The biggest research problem in nonlinear control is figuring out how to get people to use it. Most of the theoretical work in nonlinear control is just that: theory. In order to make control theory useful, we need to spend more energy on solving practical problems and applying techniques to physical examples (like the ducted fan, here at Caltech).


Richard Murray (murray@indra.caltech.edu)
Last modified: Fri Jan 12 09:44:05 1996