988

IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON CONTROL SYSTEMS TECHNOLOGY, VOL. 13, NO. 6, NOVEMBER 2005

Model-Based Multirate Controllers Design

Julin Salt and Pedro Albertos, Senior Member, IEEE

AbstractIn many industrial control applications the control action updating can be faster than the output measurement, leading
to multirate controllers. In this paper, some dual rate operations
are used to model the controller as well as the controlled plant.
The controller design is model-based and depends on the input to
be tracked. The controller is split into two parts acting at different
sampling rates and its design is approached based on the characteristics of each available sampling rate. The control target is to reach
the similar performances to those the faster single rate controller
would achieve. Model-based cancellation controllers are designed
using this approach and promising results are obtained.
Index TermsDigital control, modeling, model-based control,
multirate sampled data systems, proportionalintegral derivative
(PID) control.

NOMENCLATURE
CT
DT
DRDT
DRZOH
FSDT

MR

SSDT

Polynomial in
as defined in (5).
Continuous time.
Discrete time.
Dual rate discrete time.
Dual rate zero order hold.
Fast sampling discrete time.
DT transfer function of a CT plant with sample and
hold devices at -period.
Dual rate operator (input
-expanded sequence
and output -sequence).
DT controller designed to match the -period DT
model
.
Multirate.
Closed-loop transfer function of the plant with
controller.
Slow sampling discrete time.
Staircase signal from
.
Expanded polynomial (9).
Output of a DR controlled system.
sequence.
Z-transform of
sequence.
output of a plant with
controller.
-sequence expanded from an
-one.
-sequence obtained from a -one.
-unit operator
.

Manuscript received March 25, 2004; revised December 3, 2004. Manuscript received in final form July 29, 2005. Recommended by Associate
Editor K. Schlacher. This work was supported by the Plan Nacional de I+D,
Comisin Interministerial de Ciencia y Tecnologa (CICyT) under Program
DPI2003-01964.
The authors are with the Department of Systems Engineering and Control Universidad Politcnica de Valencia, Valencia 46022, Spain (e-mail:
julian@isa.upv.es; pedro@isa.upv.es).
Digital Object Identifier 10.1109/TCST.2005.857410

I. INTRODUCTION

ATA acquisition systems in industrial control applications

have, in general, more time constraints than actuators
and, as a result, different rates are used for control updating
and output sampling. Some process variables are difficult to be
directly measured and the measurement process requires some
time, enlarging the sampling period. This can be, for instance,
the case of chemical analyzers or offline measurements devices
where the sample should be prepared beforehand requiring
some preparation time, like in cement or ceramics applications
[1]. Also in robotics and manufacturing systems where the
measurement is got through a visual feedback [2], the image
processing will require a lot of time. In other cases, although
it could be possible, it is not convenient to have so many measurements and the resources are used for other purposes. This
is the case of the reader/writer header positioning in hard disk
drives servo systems. In the modern embedded sector servo
technique, the position signal is only available at the sectors,
improving the traditional option where an area was dedicated
to store the servo position. This results in a larger storage
capability without increasing the number of servo sectors [3].
In distributed computer controlled systems, as reported in [4],
a number of control loops are sharing the same communication
channels, and some conflicts in the use of the common resource
may appear. In this case, if the measurement sampling period is
large enough all the measurements can be processed, the network
is not so busy and the control actions can be applied on time. This
approach has been also used in robotics applications [5].
It is well known that the performances of a digitally controlled
plant could be degraded as far as the sampling period increases,
[6]. Thus, instead of using the same lowest sampling rate for all
the variables in the process, the multirate (MR) approach tries
to reach the fast sampling rate control performances but using
the available data, that is, data sampled at different rates.
Since the 1950s [7], [8], several techniques have been proposed and used for the modeling and design of MR systems.
A common feature in these approaches is the representation
of the MR system by means of an equivalent single-rate linear
time-invariant model with a sampling period (frame period),
which is the least common multiple of all sampling periods in
the system, and which contains more inputs and outputs than
the original system (this is the so-called lifting [9], [10] representation of the MR system). Several authors [11], [12] have
shown that this representation preserves many of the properties
of the original MR system (reachability, observability, stability).
The original idea of the switch decomposition method by Kranc
[13] could be used for understanding this kind of techniques
and procedures. The first work about the modeling of MR systems based on the statespace representation was introduced by
Kalman and Bertram [14].

1063-6536/$20.00 2005 IEEE

Authorized licensed use limited to: IEEE Xplore. Downloaded on January 14, 2009 at 07:20 from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.

SALT AND ALBERTOS: MODEL-BASED MULTIRATE CONTROLLERS DESIGN

But the main difficulty is the design of MR control algorithms. Many approaches have been reported in the literature
[15], [16]. One simple and direct approach is proposed in [17]:
Given a continuous time (CT) controller and a fast discrete time
(DT) controller obtained by discretization, a DT controller is redesigned by using a dual-rate hold device.
If a model of the process is available, some other alternatives are possible. Most of them are based on the feedback of
a computed output, which is estimated based on the process
model. There are many options to get the computed output, as
reviewed in [18]. Any time a measurement is available, the feedback signal could be the actual output, like in the inferential control, [19]. But, in a more general case, the computed output is
a function of both, the actual output, if it is available, and the
estimated output.
The approach in this paper is to design a two steps controller
with a slow part computing the control error anytime an actual
measurement is available, and generating, also using a model
of the process, a fast control updating to get results similar to
those achievable with a faster controller. This reduces the computing load to evaluate the complete control algorithm. Now a
slow part (remote control in a networked control system environment with shared medium) is assumed complementing a fast
one (local control). In the case of the classical inferential control techniques, just a local fast control based on some estimated
output (only slow measurement is known) is considered.
The paper is structured as follows. In the next section a
number of input/output DT models are reviewed. Then, the
control problem is properly defined. Different controller design
techniques, such as PID or cancellation are considered. In any
case, the use of cancellation controllers is part of the design,
raising the issue of robustness of the controlled plant. A number
of examples illustrate the results.

989

Fig. 1. Multirate system.

where the variable

represents the -unit delay operator. In a
similar way, if the sampling and updating periods were enlarged,
,
, the input and output
such that
sequences would have the following transforms:

(1b)
where the series on the right-hand side only present powers of
. Note that the physical meaning does not allow a
trivial substitution.
On these sequences, some operations can be defined, [20].
i) The expand (upsampling) operator creates a
-sequence, as follows:
from an

-sequence

(2a)
because a T-sequence
In this case it is correct to use
is actually obtained.
ii) The skip (downsampling) operator creates an
sequence from a -sequence, as follows:

II. MR SAMPLED-DATA MODELS

In order to deal with MR systems, some discrete-time
models attached to either an -order CT system represented
and the involved
by the strictly proper transfer function
variables are reviewed.

(2b)
The skip operation applied to the -transform of a signal can
be obtained using the expression (3), due to [21]:

A. Signals
From a CT signal, such as
in Fig. 1, a sequence of data
,
,
is represented by
.A
taken at rate
hold device
, operating at time periods , delivers a staircase signal
, from the input
. Ideally, a sequence, denoted by
, can be attached to the input of the hold device.
, the previous sequences are related to signal
For
values at the same time instant. Their -transforms can be expressed by

(3)
Some known [20] skip-expand properties usually considered
in this work are
(4a)
(4b)
(4c)

(1a)

that is, a) the skip operation does not commute, and b) the expand operation does. The third property is a clear rule with an

Authorized licensed use limited to: IEEE Xplore. Downloaded on January 14, 2009 at 07:20 from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.

990

IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON CONTROL SYSTEMS TECHNOLOGY, VOL. 13, NO. 6, NOVEMBER 2005

easy proof that will be used in the following. If the signals considered in (1) were finite time signals, their Z-transforms will be
polynomials.

Assumption a) is required to avoid aliasing [15]. By assumption b), the notation is simplified.
The following useful relationship is easily derived:

B. Process
Assume the CT process in Fig. 1. For any pair of sequences
like those in (1), considered as process output and input, respectively, a DT transfer function of the process plus the hold device
can be written.
1) The fast sampling DT (FSDT) model is defined by

(5)
,
are polynomials in
. As previously
where
mentioned, following the notation in (1a), these polynomials
, realso represent finite sequences with -elements
, being
, and
. The
spectively, for
expand and skip operators, (2), can be also applied to polyno.
mials in
2) For the same process, a slow sampling DT (SSDT) model
can be similarly defined by

(6)
where
,
are polynomials in
and, math. A treatment similar to that expressed for
ematically, in
the skip and expand signal operations will be assumed for these
polynomials.
applied to a system is defined as the Z
The operator
transform of the -period discretized impulse response of that
system.
. That is
The FSDT transfer function poles are denoted by

(9)
that is

In the same way, for any polynomial

similar to (7),
, a transformation polynomial
can be
such that
defined.
The FSDT model may be also expressed by

(10)
where
.
, are distributed into
The parameters of the numerator,
groups of coefficients in such a way that the sum of each of
these groups leads to the slow single-rate numerator coefficient.
So, the SSDT model can be derived from the FSDT model, [22].
In the following, the arguments are omitted if their interpretation
is clear.
From (10), it yields (every variable expressed in )
(11)
If a skip operation is applied to the -time sequences, that is,
resampling, the result is
doing an

(12a)
(7)
whereas the SSDT poles are

where
is
, but expressed by means of the -varisamable. The physical meaning is the consideration of an
pler at the process output, that is, a slow output

, such that

(12b)

(8)

Note that, dealing with the same CT system,

.
Two very mild technical assumptions are taken.
a) If is a pole of
, then
,
, is not a pole of
.
b) All poles are different, i.e.,
;

In (12), the term

is indivisibleskip operation
does not commute (4a). This is clear and well known: It is not
possible to define a transfer function between a fast input and a
slow output.
3) Let us now consider the opposite situation: the transformation of a slow frequency DT sequence into a fast DT sequence.
The dual rate zero order hold (DRZOH) device is composed of

Authorized licensed use limited to: IEEE Xplore. Downloaded on January 14, 2009 at 07:20 from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.

SALT AND ALBERTOS: MODEL-BASED MULTIRATE CONTROLLERS DESIGN

991

a slow rate ZOH, which input is such as

, followed by
. Altogether, it is represented by
a fast sampler delivering

(13)
where
. In this case, it is possible to obtain a
transfer function of the process plus the DRZOH device
(14)
because the expand operation commutes, (4b). Also, by using
(13)
(15)

Fig. 2.

Basic MR control loop.

expand or up-sampling operation is needed in order to assure

the composition of two different frequency elements.
will be considered for
The CT fast sampled output
the purpose of the analysis. Let us first obtain some closed-loop
DRDT expressions of the controlled system.
Lemma 1: With the previous notation, the process output in
the MR controlled system, Fig. 2, is expressed by

Thus, a dual rate discrete time (DRDT) operator is defined

(18)

(16)
where
describes the transfer function from an exto a fast output
.
panded slow input
Using a similar notation, the DRZOH operation, (13), is rep.
resented by
Clearly, if the output is sampled with period
, it is obtained (see [22] for details)

Proof: For the system represented in Fig. 2, it is possible

to express

(19)
As the expand (upsampling) operation commutes, (4b), and
assuming some elementary block algebra considerations

(20)
(17)

that is, the SSDT model.

C. Closed-Loop MR controlled system
The basic MR control scheme assumed in this work is
shown in Fig. 2, where the plant is represented by a -order
single-inputsingle-output LTI CT system, with transfer func. The controller output is updated at a period
tion
through the fast hold device,
. The system output,
, is
, being represented by a fast sampler
measured at period
followed by an -sampler skip operation, and compared to
the reference
sampled at the slow rate,
. The MR
controller,
, processes the error. To simplify the computation, is assumed to be integer. The main issue now is how
to design the dual-rate controller. A nonconventional structure
composed by slow and fast parts is proposed; obviously an

Combining (20) and (19), (18) is obtained. Two remarks are

pertinent.
As previously said, the skip operation does not commute,
that is, although the fast transfer function
can be defined it is not possible to obtain a relation beand
.
tween
as part of a
It is necessary an expand operation
dual rate controller
.
Based on these models, the dual rate implementation of classical controllers is considered. The basic design approach is the
matching of the DRDT controlled plant behavior with that of
the FSDT controlled plant.
III. MULTIRATE CONTROLLER DESIGN
Given a CT process,
, the main goal is to design a
MR controller to obtain a closed-loop behavior as close as possible to that represented by the closed-loop transfer function
. In principle, to design a DT controller, two options can

Authorized licensed use limited to: IEEE Xplore. Downloaded on January 14, 2009 at 07:20 from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.

992

IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON CONTROL SYSTEMS TECHNOLOGY, VOL. 13, NO. 6, NOVEMBER 2005

be followed: 1) To design a CT controller

to achieve
and discretize it, acthe closed-loop transfer function
cording to the sampling rate, for instance by using the ZOH DT
equivalent, or 2) To derive the DT controller to match the DT
closed-loop model, also with the corresponding sampling rate.
or
the DT
1) In the first case, let us denote by
, for sampling periods
or
,
equivalent of
respectively. The closed-loop controlled system transfer
function will be

part given by
part given by

and a fast
. That is

(22)
b) Moreover, if the skipped fast output
should be
the same that the slow single rate control-loop output
, then the parts of the controller should be
a fast part given by

or

(23a)

(21a)
a slow part given by
or
, the
None of them will match
, and thus, for
corresponding DT equivalents of
step reference changes, none of the output sequences will
match the CT response equivalent ones.
2) In this case, the single rate controllers will be

(23b)
a rate converter with the form
(23c)

or
(21b)
For a step reference change, the CT controlled system output
is denoted by
. Now, the controlled system discretized
output for step reference changes will coincide with the corresponding DT sequences taken from the initial CT system, i.e.,
;
. That is to say

(21c)
Our MR controller design goal is to achieve the fast controlled
system performances
based on the slow output measurement sequence. The MR controller is composed by three parts,
as depicted in Fig. 2. The low rate computed error is first proand passed through a rate concessed by the subcontroller
verter (upsampling block). The second and faster subcontroller,
, finally provides the control input to the plant. The result
can be expressed as follows.
, and
Main Result: Given a CT process
for the controlled system, assuming
a reference model
a control updating rate
, the output being sampled at rate
, Fig. 2, the following hold.
a) The output response of the dual rate controlled plant to the
, being
its -period discretized
reference input
representation, will match the fast single rate output response, if the dual-rate controller is composed of a slow

placed after the upsampling block.

Comments
1) For step changes in the reference, it achieves the same DT
response than the fast controller
does, but some ripple
could eventually appear.
,
2) To avoid the ripple, the fast part of the controller,
is changed by taking
as given by (21a) instead
, but the response does not match the FSDT
of
controlled plant response.
3) Similar results can be derived for other reference inputs
but the rate converter will be obviously different.
Proof:
a) Applying Lemma 1 and considering that

(24)
(25)

and identifying fast and expanded slow parts, we have:

the fast part
(26)
the expanded slow part

Authorized licensed use limited to: IEEE Xplore. Downloaded on January 14, 2009 at 07:20 from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.

SALT AND ALBERTOS: MODEL-BASED MULTIRATE CONTROLLERS DESIGN

and without expand operator:

(27)
so, the main result a) is proved.
b) If the fast skipped output response and the slow single rate
loop output should match, that is
(28)
then,

(29)
it can be formulated that

993

units, as can be easily checked. A

introducing a delay of
similar approach can be followed for other kind of inputs.
Remark 1: The proposed approach is basically a digital direct design method. The main purpose is not the dual-rate digital
redesign of a continuous control loop. A cancellation controller
type has been introduced and some conditions (causality, stability, zero error regulation, etc.) similar to Ragazzini classical
method must be observed. In Section IV-B, some of them are
assumed.
Remark 2: The controller design depends on the considered
reference input, as it is the case in some other control design
approaches. Here, the rate converter is different for each kind
of input, as shown in (31). A general expression for the rate
converter (23c) can be derived for a generic polynomial input.
It is possible to introduce the use of interpolators.
Remark 3: If a real cancellation controller is designed, it
must be observed that in order to verify (28), that is the matching
between the slow skipped and fast output response, it is necessary that

(35)
(30)
and it is possible to express

(31)
hence, part b) has been proved.
Comment 1) is evident from the definitions of
,
,
.
To check 2), first realize that the fast controller, either (22)
or (23a), cancels the process dynamics, but the numerators of
and
are not the same. Thus, the intersampling
ripple could appear depending of
numerators roots,
[24]. If the fast controller is taken as
(32)
does not cancel the numerthe dual-rate controller
ator of the process transfer function, avoiding the ripple, but the
does not hold.
matching
With respect to comment 3), if the reference is a unitary step,
then
(33)
For a ramp input, that is
given by

, the rate converter (24) is

(34)

from
or simply
This could provide a way to obtain
to express a link condition between both rate transfer functions.
must be known or computed beforehand.
Evidently
Remark 4: In general, the stability margins of the DR controlled system are between those of the slow and fast single rate
discrete time schemes. Nevertheless, due to the cancellation features, the design strongly depends on the process model.
Remark 5: If the process is nonminimum phase, the cancellation of unstable pole-zero pairs must be avoided. Thus, the fast
part of the controller could be alternatively computed by (32). If
the slow part is maintained the output does not match the output
predicted by the closed loop transfer function. Nevertheless, if
is computed by using (35) the response will follow the
.
performance fixed by
Remark 6: The approach works for unstable processes, as
far as there is not pole cancellation in (22) and (23a). This is
avoided by using (32) instead.
Remark 7: The inputoutput stability of the designed controlled system is ensured because the output matches some given
references and the possible ripple can be avoided. On the other
hand, as any other control design approach based on (partial)
model cancellation, the robustness of the result should be analyzed. In general, [27], the system internal stability requires that
none of the four functions
the sensitivity (or output/output_disturbance transfer) function;
the control/reference transfer function;
the output/control_disturbance transfer
function;
the control/control_disturbance transfer
function;
should have unstable poles. In the MR setting, this is achieved
as far as the fast part of the controller is implemented by (32).
This result allows for a simple design of dual-rate controllers,
easy to be implemented. Also, the separation of the controller

Authorized licensed use limited to: IEEE Xplore. Downloaded on January 14, 2009 at 07:20 from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.

994

IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON CONTROL SYSTEMS TECHNOLOGY, VOL. 13, NO. 6, NOVEMBER 2005

actions in different frequency ranges provides a more flexible

design. Currently this is a topic of our research activity.
As a conclusion, the following algorithm will concrete the
design approach.
MR Controller Design Algorithm
Given the model of the plant
,
the reference model of the controlled
, the reference input to be
plant
and
considered and the sampling
control updating
periods, design a
MR controller with three parts
a fast controller (23a);
a slow controller (23b);
a rate converter (23c);
using the discretized models of the
plant, the closed-loop controlled
plant and the reference.
If the plant is open-loop unstable,
nonminimum phase or some ripple appears due to the cancellations, some
additional computations should be carried out:
compute the CT cancellation
controller

Fig. 3.

PID control.

Following the proposed design, the PID controlled plant

is assumed as the design target. In this
transfer function,
, adapts the process
case, the fast part of the MR controller,
dynamics in such a way that the new process can be controlled
.
by a slow DT part,
As an example, consider the process

An acceptable CT PID controller is given by

and discretize it to obtain
.
should be chosen such
Note that
that there are not unstable poles
cancellations in this controller;
proceed as before but substitute the
fast controller by (32).

for:
,
proximation for

,
, is given by

. A DT PID controller ap-

IV. APPLICATION DESIGNS

The proposed design approach can be used with different settings, always based on a desired closed-loop transfer function
model and some sort of cancellation. The main design option
is the selection of the closed-loop transfer function. It is well
known that ripple and hidden oscillation may occur if the selection is not appropriate. In the following, some options are
considered. In any case, this design methodology gives a rule of
thumb for other industrial controllers.
A. ProportionalIntegral Derivative (PID) Controlled Plants

For different sampling periods the controlled system response

is plotted in Fig. 3, becoming unstable for
s.
Assume that the output sampling period cannot be lower than
,
, is designed
0.3 s. A dual-rate controller, with
and implemented. The first solution is to implement a cancellation controller arranging a fast and a slow part given by (23):

Given a CT process
, a CT PID controller
is
designed. If a discretized PID is applied [24], the controlled
process dynamic performances are degraded if a slow sampling
period is chosen. Assume the DT behavior of the controlled
plant is acceptable for a sampling period , with the fast con, but too poor if it is taken as
,
. The question
troller
, is
in the MR setting is: if the input can be updated at rate
it possible to get similar performances if the output is measured
s?
any

The response matches the points of FSDT and SSDT controlled

system, as expressed by part b) of the main result, but the ripple
appears, as shown in Fig. 4, where is the discretized closed, corresponds to
and c is
loop response for
the multirate controlled plant step response.

Authorized licensed use limited to: IEEE Xplore. Downloaded on January 14, 2009 at 07:20 from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.

SALT AND ALBERTOS: MODEL-BASED MULTIRATE CONTROLLERS DESIGN

995

B. Finite Settling Time Controller

In robotic applications, it would be very useful to achieve
model reference tracking with minimum time response, the control magnitude being bounded. If the process model is reliable
and robustness is not a critical issue, the cancellation controller
is the proper choice.
As is well known [25], the procedure for obtaining a finite
settling time behavior with prescribed steady-state requirements
leads to two diophantine equations

(36)

Fig. 4. Model-based multirate cancellation control.

being the order of the polynomial reference (for instance,

for step,
for ramp, ), where
and
are
polynomials to be determined. Note that, by this notation, the
polynomial (13) would be written as
.
To avoid the intersampling ripple, the last condition should
be expressed as

or, alternatively, taking into account (10)

(37)
which is easier to solve. Anyway, the solution of the proposed
equation system could require a sophisticated procedure, because there are discrete transfer functions at different periods.
An experimental example was developed on a portic robotics
environment. Assume a CT process model such as

Fig. 5. PID controlled plant.

To avoid the ripple, the fast part of the MR controller is computed as (32), that is

The excellent results are shown in Fig. 5, where the step responses for the PID controlled plant for a CT controller, the
and
s, as
single rate PID controllers for
well as the dual-rate model-based controlled plant are plotted
altogether. Using the perfect plant model, the initial part of the
dual rate controlled plant response follows that achieved by the
s. a new
fast rate controller. However, at time
measurement is taken and the response is improved.
Obviously, the full controller is much more complex than either of the two simply discretized single rate PID controllers. It
is also better than the slow rate cancellation controller design to
.
match the targeted discretized transfer function

It has been shown [26] that a single rate cancellation control,

with
s, introduces hidden oscillations.
A dual-rate controller to track a ramp, as usually required for
a robotic environment, is designed, according to (36).
The resulting controller with
,
, is given by the
following.
1) MT

As it can be seen in the output response, Fig. 6, some

hidden oscillations occur.
If the process numerator is included in the closed
loop dual rate model, following (37), a new controller is
designed.
2) FT

the response being ripple-free, as shown in Fig. 7.

Authorized licensed use limited to: IEEE Xplore. Downloaded on January 14, 2009 at 07:20 from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.

996

IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON CONTROL SYSTEMS TECHNOLOGY, VOL. 13, NO. 6, NOVEMBER 2005

Fig. 6. Cancellation controller.

For instance in a shared medium distributed control environment, it is possible to have a central rough slow control and
best fast tuning after the information framepartial control actionhas traveled across the transmission medium.
The stability of the dual rate controlled plant can be assured
as the design is based on matching the reference responses obtained by the fast and slow rate predesigned (and stabilizing)
controllers.
Another relevant issue is the robustness against model uncertainty. This has not being used as a requirement in the design approach and will depend on how the desired closed loop transfer
function is defined. Anyway, the cancellation part of the controller will suffer from this internal disturbance.
By this approach it will be possible to extend the dual-rate
control design to a controller which is process-model independent by adjusting its fast and slow parts like a lag and lead phase
controllers, respectively.
Robustness of the design and frequency tuning of the controller, are currently issues under research.
V. CONCLUSION

Fig. 7. Ripple free MR control.

C. General Comments
In the proposed control design approach, the model of the
plant is assumed to be known, both in CT and the DT versions.
Thus, as previously stated, if the model of the plant is used for
implementing the controller, why not use the model to predict
the output? By means of an inferential control the fast model
can be used to estimate the intersample output, [19]. Of course,
this is an alternative approach leading, under ideal working conditions, to similar results. It depends very much on the specific
design to decide which result is better. However, if the computed
output is used, there is only one degree of freedom to design the
controller, just considering the faster sampling rate.
The new approach provides a better insight in the slow and
fast activities of the controller and it can be considered as a tool
to design a controller focusing on the requested frequency range.
Two different time scales have been considered with the consequent benefits in computational load and easy understanding.

Working under constraints in reducing the sampling rate of

the acquisition system, the design of MR controllers in order
to achieve with a slow output sampling the same performances
than a single rate fast sampling control system has been discussed. The main result is a simple design approach based on
the fast and slow controlled process behavior.
The controller implementation is straightforward, mainly for
stepwise references. It allows for a reduction in the measurement processing. It is also convenient in the case of slower sampling due to technical limitations and for distributed control systems, by splitting the control into a low frequency part to be sent
through the communication channel and a fast part to be locally
computed.
Different kinds of MR controllers with nonconventional
structure have been developed. Controllers designed to match
the PID controlled plant step response have been proposed,
with slight modifications to avoid the intersampling ripple.
Also, the finite time settling time design was revised and the
ripple is also cancelled.
Although the ideas behind the design are similar to those
used in the inferential control, the splitting of the controller into
two ranges of frequencies allows for a better understanding and
freedom in the design.
In any case, promising results are obtained when applied to
simple processes.
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
The authors would like to thank the Associate Editor and the
anonymous reviewers for their many helpful suggestions and
comments.
REFERENCES
[1] F. Morant, P. Albertos, and A. Crespo, Oxide composition control in
a raw material mill, in Proc. IFAC Symp. Microprocessor in Control,
Istambul, Turkey, 1986, pp. 127132.

Authorized licensed use limited to: IEEE Xplore. Downloaded on January 14, 2009 at 07:20 from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.

SALT AND ALBERTOS: MODEL-BASED MULTIRATE CONTROLLERS DESIGN

[2] T. Tsao and S. Hutchinson, Multi-rate analysis and design of visual

feedback digital servo-control, J. Dyna. Syst. Measure. Control, vol.
116, no. 1, pp. 4555, 1994.
[3] S. Baek and S. Lee, Design of multi-rate estimator and its application
to a disk drive servo system, in Proc. Amer. Control Conf., San Diego,
CA, 1999, pp. 36403644.
[4] Y. Halevi and A. Ray, Integrated communication and control systems. Part Ianalysis, J. Dyna. Syst. Measure. Control, vol. 110, pp.
367373.
[5] A. Valera, J. Salt, V. Casanova, and S. Ferrus, Control of industrial
robot with a fieldbus, in Proc. IEEE Industry Applications Soc. Annu.
Meeting, Barcelona, Spain, 1999, pp. 12351241.
[6] P. Albertos and A. Crespo, Integrated design and implementation of
digital controllers, in In Lecture Notes in Computer Science CAST2001,
R. Moreno-Daz, B. Buchberger, and J. L. Freire, Eds. New York:
Springer-Verlag, 2001, pp. 385392.
[7] D. P. Glasson, Development anp application of multirate digital control
system, Control Syst. Mag., pp. 28, Nov. 1983.
[8] M. Araki, Recent development in digital control theory, in Proc. 12th
IFAC World Congr., vol. 9, 1993, pp. 951960.
[9] P. P. Khargonekar, K. Poola, and A. Tannenbaum, Robust control of
linear time-invariant plants using periodic compensation, IEEE Trans.
Autom. Control, vol. AC30, no. 11, pp. 10881096, Nov. 1985.
[10] B. Bamieh, J. B. Pearson, B. A. Francis, and A. Tannenbaum, A lifting
technique for linear periodic systems with applications to sampled-data
control, Syst. Control Lett., vol. 17, pp. 7988, 1991.
[11] S. Longhi, Structural properties of multirate sampled-data systems,
IEEE Trans. Autom. Control, vol. 39, no. 3, pp. 692696, Mar. 1994.
[12] D. G. Meyer, A new class of shift-varying operators, the shift-invariant
equivalents and multirate digital systems, IEEE Trans. Autom. Control,
vol. 35, no. 4, pp. 429433, Apr. 1990.
[13] G. M. Kranc, Input-output analysis of multirate feedback systems, IRE
Trans. Autom. Control, vol. 3, pp. 2128, 1957.
[14] R. E. Kalman and J. Bertram, A unified approach to the theory of sampling systems, J. Franklin Inst., vol. 267, pp. 405436, 1959.
[15] H. In and C. Zhang, A multirate digital controller for model matching,
Automatica, vol. 30, no. 6, pp. 10431050, 1994.
[16] D. Eckardt, Design of finite response controllers by pole assigment
in multirate sampled-data systems, Int. J. Control, vol. 49, no. 4, pp.
11851193, 1989.
[17] J. Tornero, Y. Gu, and M. Tomizuka, Analysis of multi-rate discrete
equivalent of continuous controller, in Proc. Amer. Control Conf., San
Diego, CA, 1999, pp. 27592763.
[18] P. Albertos, J. Sanchis, and A. Sala, Output prediction under scarce
data operation: Control applications, Automatica, vol. 35, no. 10, pp.
16711681, 1999.
[19] J. H. Lee and M. Morari, Robust inferential control of multi-rate sampled-data systems, Chem. Eng. Sci., vol. 47, no. 4, pp. 865885, 1992.
[20] T. C. Coffey and I. J. Williams, Stability analysis of multiloop, multirate
sampled systems, AIAA J. Guid. Control Dyna., no. 4, pp. 21782190,
1966.
[21] J. Sklansky and J. R. Ragazzini, Analysis of errors in sampled-data
feedback systems, AIEE Trans., pt. II, vol. 74, pp. 6571, 1955.
[22] P. Albertos and J. T. Salt, Dual rate adaptive control, Automatica, vol.
32, no. 7, pp. 10271030, 1996.
[23] P. T. Kabamba, Control of linear systems using generalized sample-data
hold functions, IEEE Trans. Autom. Control, vol. AC32, no. 9, pp.
772783, Sep. 1987.
[24] R. Isermann, Digital Control Systems. New York: Springer-Verlag,
1981.

997

[25] G. M. Kranc, Compensation of an error-sampled system by a multirate

controller, Trans. AIEE, pt. II, vol. 6, pp. 149155, 1957.
[26] R. Sanchis and P. Albertos, Design of ripple-free controllers, in Proc.
3rd Eur. Control Conf., Rome, Italy, 1995, pp. 36603664.
[27] P. Albertos and A. Sala, Multivariable Control Systems. An Engineering
Approach. New York: Springer-Verlag, 2004.

Julin Salt was born in Valencia, Spain, in 1960.

He received the M.Sc. degree in industrial engineering and the Ph.D. degree in control engineering
from Valencia Polytechnic University, Valencia,
Spain, in 1986 and 1992, respectively.
He is currently a Professor of Automatic Control,
Valencia Polytechnic University, teaching a wide
range of subjects in the area from continuous and
discrete simulation to automation and programmable
logic controllers applications. His research interests
include nonconventionally sampled control systems
and networked based control systems. He has taken part in research projects
funded by local industries, government and the European Science Foundation.
He has also been involved in educational projects and currently is Head of
the Systems Engineering and Control Department at UPV. He has been the
Director of eight Ph.D. dissertations and coauthor of about 60 technical papers
in journals and technical meetings.

Pedro Albertos (M81SM88) received the M.Sc.

degree in industrial engineering and the Ph.D. degree in control engineering from the Madrid Polytechnic University, Madrid, Spain, in 1968 and 1973,
respectively.
He has been a Professor in the Department of
Systems Engineering and Control, Polytechnic
University of Valencia, Valencia, Spain, since 1975.
He was the Director of the Department from 1979
to 1995, and in 1998. He has been teaching courses
on advanced control systems, intelligent control
systems and systems theory. He is an Honorary Professor at the Northwestern
University, Senhyang, China, and Doctor Honoris Causa at the Universities
of Oulu, Finland, and Polytechnic of Bucharest, Romania. He is an Invited
Professor at more than 20 Universities, all around the world, he has delivered
seminars at more than 30 universities and research centers. He has authored
more than 300 papers, book chapters, and congress communications, he is
a co-editor of seven books and coauthor of Multivariable Control Systems
(New York: Springer-Verlag, 2004). He has directed 16 Ph.D. dissertations
and is the Coordinator of the Ph.D. Program on Automatica and Industrial
Informatics, which has been implemented in Spain, Mexico, Columbia, and
Venezuela. He has participated in many national and international research
projects. Currently, he is involved in the ARTIST2 Node of Excellence on
Embedded Control Systems.
Dr. Albertos is an Associate Editor of Control Engineering Practice and Automatica and Editor-in-Chief of the Journal Revista RIAI (Revista Iberoamericana
de Automtica e Informtica Industrial). From 1999 to 2002, he was the IFAC
President.

Authorized licensed use limited to: IEEE Xplore. Downloaded on January 14, 2009 at 07:20 from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.