Top Ten Research Problems in Nonlinear Control

June 1995

Here is my personal list of the biggest research problems in nonlinear control theory (including some relevant links, where appropriate). If you don't agree with these (which is likely), feel free to send me e-mail. This is more or less a way for me to think online, so I wouldn't take any of this too seriously.

Current Previous
rank Research problem rank
10 Integrating algorithmic control with dynamical control
8
9 Writing software for implementing theory
3
8 Building representative experiments for evaluating controllers
9
7 Recognizing the difference between regulation and tracking
7
6 Quantifying relative performance vs model complexity for nonlinear methods
-
5 Integrating good linear techniques into nonlinear methodologies
6
4 Recognizing the difference between linear and nonlinear stabilization
-
3 Finding nonlinear normal forms for control
4
2 Exploiting special structure to synthesize controllers
2
1 Convincing industry to invest in new nonlinear methodologies
-

10. 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...).


9. 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.


8. Building representative 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. Other examples are the the manufacturing experiments at University of Michigan and the PATH program at UC Berkeley.


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. Quantifying relative performance vs model complexity for nonlinear methods

Everyone seems pretty sure that in order for nonlinear control to give good performance, you need to have accurate models. Of course, this is also true for linear systems (good ol' Bode integrals...), but somehow it is even more critical for nonlinear systems (or so they say). We need to do meaningful (experimental?) comparisons between different linear and nonlinear control methodologies to try to determine how model complexity affects performance. In particular, we need to find out more about how much modeling is needed before nonlinear control techniques can outperform linear ones (including gain scheduling, which is pretty hard to beat). Some of the dynamic inversion techniques that Honeywell is promoting (and possibly testing) should provide some good insights in this regard.


5. 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


4. Recognizing the difference between performance and operability

One of the things that nonlinear control can do is increase the range over which a system can run without catastrophic failure. This is different than providing good performance and is a particularly hard problem because you have to know about the global behavior of the system in order to define something like operability. An example that has motivated me is active control rotating stall and surge in compression systems, where the main issue is to keep the system from getting stuck in deep stall in the presence of disturbances. Good performance is only required in normal operating conditions, so the real issue is dealing with system nonlinearities that appear when operating near the (uncontrolled) stability limits of the system.

3. 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. Even more nonlinear approaches like backstepping really only apply to problems that are absolutely equivalent to linear systems.

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 consistent 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).


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. Convincing industry to invest in new nonlinear methodologies

The biggest research problem in nonlinear control is figuring out how to get people to use it. To many of the potential users of our research, much of the theoretical work in nonlinear control is just that: theory. In order to make control theory useful, we need to spend more energy convincing industry that they should take that theory and spend the time and money necessary to develop it.


Richard Murray (murray@indra.caltech.edu)
Last modified: Fri Jan 12 09:45:25 1996