This article was downloaded by: [North Carolina State University]

On: 25 November 2012, At: 10:02

Publisher: Taylor & Francis
Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: Mortimer House,
37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

International Journal of Control

Publication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information:
http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/tcon20

New methodologies for adaptive sliding mode control

a b a c
F. Plestan , Y. Shtessel , V. Brgeault & A. Poznyak
a
Ecole Centrale de Nantes-IRCCyN, Nantes, France
b
The University of Alabama in Huntsville, Huntsville, USA
c
CINVESTAV-IPN, Mexico DC, Mexico
Version of record first published: 21 Jul 2010.

To cite this article: F. Plestan, Y. Shtessel, V. Brgeault & A. Poznyak (2010): New methodologies for adaptive sliding mode
control, International Journal of Control, 83:9, 1907-1919

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00207179.2010.501385

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Full terms and conditions of use: http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematic
reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in any form to
anyone is expressly forbidden.

The publisher does not give any warranty express or implied or make any representation that the contents
will be complete or accurate or up to date. The accuracy of any instructions, formulae, and drug doses should
be independently verified with primary sources. The publisher shall not be liable for any loss, actions, claims,
proceedings, demand, or costs or damages whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in
connection with or arising out of the use of this material.
 International Journal of Control
Vol. 83, No. 9, September 2010, 19071919

New methodologies for adaptive sliding mode control

F. Plestana*, Y. Shtesselb, V. Bregeaulta and A. Poznyakc
a
Ecole Centrale de Nantes-IRCCyN, Nantes, France; bThe University of Alabama in Huntsville,
Huntsville, USA; cCINVESTAV-IPN, Mexico DC, Mexico
(Received 28 May 2009; final version received 11 June 2010)

This article proposes new methodologies for the design of adaptive sliding mode control. The goal is to obtain a
robust sliding mode adaptive-gain control law with respect to uncertainties and perturbations without the
knowledge of uncertainties/perturbations bound (only the boundness feature is known). The proposed
Downloaded by [North Carolina State University] at 10:02 25 November 2012

approaches consist in having a dynamical adaptive control gain that establishes a sliding mode in finite time.
Gain dynamics also ensures that there is no overestimation of the gain with respect to the real a priori unknown
value of uncertainties. The efficacy of both proposed algorithms is confirmed on a tutorial example and while
controlling an electropneumatic actuator.
Keywords: sliding mode; adaptive control; pneumatic actuator

1. Introduction as possible whereas sufficient to counteract the

The sliding mode control is a very popular strategy for
control of nonlinear uncertain systems, with a very
large frame of applications fields (Slotine and Li 1991;
Utkin, Guldner, and Shi 1999). Due to the use of
discontinuous function and high control gain, its main
features are the robustness of closed-loop system and
the finite-time convergence. However, its design
requires the knowledge of uncertainties bound, which
could be, from a practical point of view, a hard task; it
often follows that this bound is overestimated, which
yields to excessive gain. Then, the main drawback of
the sliding mode control, the well-known chattering
phenomenon (for its analysis, see Boiko and Fridman
(2005); Boiko, Fridman, Pisano, and Usai (2007)), is
important and could damage actuators and systems.
A first way to reduce the chattering is the use of a
boundary layer: in this case, many approaches have
proposed adequate controller gains tuning (Slotine and
Sastry 1983). A second way to decrease the chattering
phenomenon is the use of higher order sliding mode
controller (Levant 1993, 2001, 2007; Bartolini, Ferrara,
Usai, and Utkin 2000; Laghrouche, Plestan, and
Glumineau 2007; Plestan, Glumineau, and
Laghrouche 2008). However, in both these control
approaches, knowledge of uncertainties bound is
required.
As the objective is the non-requirement of the
uncertainties bound, another way consists in using
adaptive sliding mode, the goal being to ensure a
dynamical adaptation of the control gain to be as small
uncertainties/perturbations. As recalled previously,
this problem is an exciting challenge for applications
given that, in many cases, gains are also overestimated,
which gives larger control magnitude and larger
chattering. In order to adapt the gain, many controllers
based on fuzzy tools (Munoz and Sbarbaro 2000; Tao,
Chan, and Lee 2003) have been published; however,
these papers do not guarantee the tracking perfor-
mances. In Huang, Kuo, and Chang (2008) gain
dynamics directly depends on the tracking error
(sliding variable): the control gain is increasing since
sliding mode is not established. Once this is the case,
gain dynamics equals 0. The main drawback of this
approach is the gain over-estimation with respect to
uncertainties bound (see e.g. in Huang et al. (2008,
Section III)). Furthermore, this approach is not
directly applicable, but requires modifications for its
application to real systems: thus, the sign function is
replaced by a saturation function where the boundary
layer width affects accuracy and robustness.
Furthermore, no boundary layer width tuning metho-
dology is provided. A method proposed in Lee and
Utkin (2007) in order to limit the switching gain must
be mentioned. The idea is based on use of equivalent
control: once sliding mode occurs, disturbance magni-
tude is evaluable and allows an adequate tuning of
control gain. However, this approach requires the
knowledge of uncertainties/perturbations bounds and
the use of low-pass filter, which introduces signal
magnitude attenuation, delay and transient behaviour

*Corresponding author. Email: Franck.Plestan@irccyn.ec-nantes.fr

ISSN 00207179 print/ISSN 13665820 online

 2010 Taylor & Francis
DOI: 10.1080/00207179.2010.501385
http://www.informaworld.com
 1908
when disturbances are acting. In Hall and Shtessel
(2006) a gain-adaptation algorithm is proposed by
using sliding mode disturbance observer. The main
drawback is that the knowledge of uncertainties
bounds is required to design observer-based controller.
The objective of the current article is to propose
new methodologies for control of a class of uncertain
nonlinear systems for which uncertainties are bounded,
but this bound (which is finite) is not known. The first
controller is based on a gain-adaptation law derived
from coupling of Lee and Utkin (2007) and Huang
et al. (2008) methods, whereas the second one is using
an original gain-adaptation law. In both the control
algorithms, the gain is dynamically tuned in order to
ensure the establishment of a sliding mode; once this
Downloaded by [North Carolina State University] at 10:02 25 November 2012
sliding mode is achieved, the gain is adjusted in order
to get a sufficient value in order to counteract the
perturbations and uncertainties.
Section 2 states the problem, displays some recalls
on sliding mode and presents a review of Lee and
Utkin (2007) and Huang et al. (2008) by addressing
their deficiencies. Section 3 displays both the proposed
adaptive sliding mode control algorithms and Section 4
details -tuning. In order to prove the feasibility of the
approaches, both simulations (control of tutorial
system and position control of electropneumatic
actuator model) are presented in Section 5. Section 6
concludes this article.
2. Preliminaries
2.1 Problem statement
Consider the nonlinear uncertain system
x_ f x gx  u
with x 2 X  IRn the state vector and u 2 IR the control
input. Functions f(x) and g(x) are smooth uncertain
functions and are bounded for x 2 X ; furthermore, f(x)
contains unmeasured perturbations term and g(x) 6 0
for x 2 X (i.e. system (1) is controllable for all x 2 X ).
The control objective consists in forcing the continuous
function (x, t), named sliding variable, to 0. Supposing
that  admits a relative degree equal to 1 with respect
to u, one gets
@ @ @ @ @
_ x_  f x  gx u
@x @t @t @x @x
|{z} |{z} in Lee and Utkin (2007) and Huang et al. (2008) and
x,t x,t
x, t x, t  u:
Functions (x, t) and (x, t) are supposed to be
such that
jj  M , 0 5 m    M
F. Plestan et al.
for x 2 X . It is assumed that M, m and M exist but
are not known. The objective of this article is to
propose a new sliding mode controller u(, t) with the
same features as classical SMC (robustness, finite-time
convergence) but without any information on uncer-
tainties and perturbations (appearing in f(x)); this
latter is only known to be bounded. Furthermore, this
objective allows to ensure a global stability of closed-
loop system whereas the classical way (with knowledge
of uncertainties bounds) only ensures its semi-global
stability. In the sequel, definitions of ideal and real
sliding mode are recalled.
Definition 1 (Levant 1993): Consider the nonlinear
system (1), and let the system be closed by some
possibly dynamical discontinuous feedback. Variable 
is a continuous function, and the set
S fx 2 X j x, t 0g,
called sliding surface, is non-empty and is locally an
integral set in the Filippov sense (Filippov 1988), i.e. it
consists of Filippovs trajectories of the discontinuous
dynamical system. The motion on S is called sliding
mode with respect to the sliding variable .
In real applications, an ideal sliding mode as
defined in Definition 1 cannot be established. Then, it
is necessary to introduce the concept of real sliding
mode.
Definition 2 (Levant 1993): Given the sliding variable
(x, t), the real sliding surface associated with (1) is
defined as (with  4 0)
S  fx 2 X j jj 5 g: 4
1
Definition 3 (Levant 1993): Consider the non-empty
real sliding surface S  given by (4), and assume that it
is locally an integral set in the Filippov sense. The
corresponding behaviour of system (1) on (4) is called
real sliding mode with respect to the sliding variable
(x, t).
2.2 Discussion of adaptive sliding mode control
solutions and motivations
Two adaptive sliding mode controllers have been given
are discussed now. These two approaches follow two
different ways: the first does not require the knowledge
2
of uncertainties/perturbations bound and consists in
increasing the control gain since a sliding mode is
established whereas the second one requires the
knowledge of the bound and is using the equivalent
3 control concept in order to evaluate and to minimise
 International Journal of Control
the control gain. Then, the same objective can be
claimed, which is the dynamical adaptation of the gain
in order to counteract perturbations and uncertainties.
Theorem 1 (Huang et al. 2008): Given the nonlinear
uncertain system (1) with the sliding variable (x, t)
dynamics (2) controlled by
u Kt  signx, t nomena in case of perturbations. Also note that
with the adaptation law K(t) given by
K_ K  jx, tj 5
with K 4 0 and K(0) 4 0, then there exists a finite time
tF  0 so that a sliding mode is established in system for
Downloaded by [North Carolina State University] at 10:02 25 November 2012
all t  tF, i.e. (x, t) 0 for t  tF.
Discussion: The main feature of this approach is that
it does not require a priori the knowledge of control
gain. However, from K-dynamics, it yields that when
 0, K_ 0. In this case, the gain K is clearly
overestimated with respect to uncertainties, which
induces larger chattering (see simulations results in
Huang et al. (2008, Section III). Furthermore, this
methodology is applicable only for ideal sliding mode,
the objective  0 being reachable. In the case of real
sliding mode, this latter objective is not reachable which
induces that K gain is always increasing. In Huang et al.
(2008), the authors propose to modify K-dynamics by
introducing a boundary layer neighbouring the sliding
surface  0. It means that accuracy has to be
sacrificed in order to apply the previous controller
and that the control gain is still overestimated. Also,
with discrete-time measurements, adaptation law (5)
inevitably implies the tending of K to infinity, if the
sampling interval is separated from zero.
Theorem 2 (Lee and Utkin 2007): Given the nonlinear
uncertain system (1) with the sliding variable (x, t)
dynamics (2) controlled by
u Kt  signx, t algorithms that establish the sliding modes in SISO
with the adaptation law K(t) given by
Kt K  jj 
with K 4 0,  4 0 and  the average of sign() obtained
through a low pass-filter
  _  signx, t original. It does not require the estimation of the
with  4 0, if
 

K   ,
 6

then there exists a finite time tF 4 0 so that the sliding
mode is established for all t  tF.
1909
Discussion: The main feature of this controller is the
adjustment of the control gain by using the equivalent
control concept. It implies that chattering is decreas-
ing. However, K-adaptation law requires the
knowledge of uncertainties/perturbations bounds.
Furthermore, the use of low-pass filter introduces in
the closed-loop system dynamics and transient phe-
methodologies for the tuning of parameters  and 
have not been detailed except their positivity and the
fact that the time constant of the low-pass filter  must
be sufficiently small. However, their tuning could
engender very different behaviours of closed-loop
system.
Motivations: The main objective of the current article
consists in providing new adaptive sliding mode
controllers such that:
. Uncertainties/perturbation bounds exist but
are not known.
. The gain-adaptation law does not overesti-
mate uncertainties/perturbations magnitude
and then, the obtained control magnitude is
reasonable.
A first solution to the problem under interest in this
article consists in combining the two previous gain-
adaptation laws: the first one would be used since a
sliding mode is established, whereas the second allows
to decrease the control gain once sliding mode is
established. A second solution is an original adaptive
real sliding mode control law that does not allow to
overestimate the gain value without using concept of
equivalent control.
3. Main results
In this section, two adaptive sliding mode control
systems with bounded perturbations with unknown
bounds, are presented. The first algorithm combines
the adaptive schemes formulated in Theorems 1 and 2,
Section 2, while mitigating the deficiencies of the
combined gain-adaptation schemes. The second adap-
tive sliding mode control algorithm is completely
perturbations via equivalent control as in Lee and
Utkin (2007) (Theorem 2) and does not overestimate
the control gain as in Huang et al. (2008) (Theorem 1).
Furthermore, the second adaptive-gain sliding mode
control algorithm requires smaller amount of tuning
parameters than the first algorithm, and is developed
in the real sliding mode context.
 1910 F. Plestan et al.

3.1 First adaptive sliding mode control law so that

Consider the following controller
u K  signx, t
with the gain K(t) defined by ( being a positive
parameter)
. If jj 6 0, K(t) is the solution of
 
K_ K 1  x, t
with K 1 4 0 and K(0) 4 0.
. If  0, K(t) reads as
Kt K 2  jj K 3
Downloaded by [North Carolina State University] at 10:02 25 November 2012
Kt  K  8t 4 0:
7
Proof of Lemma 1 is given in the Appendix.
Theorem 3: Given the nonlinear uncertain system (1)
with the sliding variable (x, t) dynamics (2) controlled
by (7)(9), there exists a finite time tF 4 0 so that a
8
sliding mode is established for all t  tF, i.e. (x, t) 0
for t  tF.
Proof: The proof is composed of two steps. The first
step concerns  6 0 which yields K-dynamics described
by (8), whereas the second one concerns  0 with
9

 _  signx, t K-dynamics described by (9).

with K 2 Kt , K 3 4 0 and  4 0. t is the . Suppose that (0) 6 0: in this case, K(t)-
largest time value such that, by denoting t  dynamics read as (8). Consider the following
the time just before t , (x(t ), t ) 6 0 and Lyapunov candidate function, with K a
(x(t ), t ) 0. positive constant
1 1
Discussion: By supposing that j(x(0), 0)j 6 0, the V  2 K  K  2 : 10
adaptive sliding mode control law (7)(9) works as 2 2
follows: One has
. The gain K(t) is increasing due to the 1
adaptation law (8) up to a value large V_         K  sign K  K   K 1  jj

enough to counteract the bounded uncertainty 1
with unknown bounds in (1) until the  M  jj  m  K  jj K  K   K 1  jj

sliding mode starts. Denote the time instant
when the sliding mode starts for the first M  jj  m  K  jj m  K   jj  m  K 
time as t1. 1
 jj K  K   K 1  jj
. As sliding mode has started, i.e. (x(t), t) 0, 
from t t1, K(t) follows the gain-adaptation M  m  K   jj K  K 
law (9). Then, gain K(t) is adapted through (9)  
K
with K 2 Kt1 . Note that this strategy will  m  jj  jj :
allow to decrease the gain and then to adjust it 
with respect to the current uncertainties/ From Lemma 1, there always exists K 4 0
perturbations. such that K(t)  K 5 0 for all t 4 0. It yields
. However, if the varying uncertainty/perturba-
tion exceeds the value K 2 Kt1 , then the V_  m  K   M jj
|{z}
sliding mode will be destroyed and (x(t), t) 
will not be equal to zero. Next, the gain-  
K
adaptation will happen in accordance with (8).  m  jj  jj  jK  K  j: 11

The gain K(t) will be increasing until the |{z}
sliding mode occurs again at the reaching time K
instant t2. There always exists K and  such that
. As sliding mode has occurred and (x(t), t) 0 
K  4 Mm and  5 Km , which yields  4 0
from t t2, K(t) now follows the and K 4 0. Then, one gets
gain-adaptation law (9) with K 2 Kt2 . And
p jj p jK  K  j
so on.1 V_    2 p  K  2 p
2 2
Lemma 1: Given the nonlinear uncertain system (1) n p  
po jj jK  K  j
with the sliding variable (x, t) dynamics (2)  min  2, K 2 p p    V1=2
controlled by (7)(9), the gain K(t) has an 2 2
upper-bound, i.e. there exists a positive constant K 12
 International Journal of Control
p p
with 2 minf  , K  g. Therefore, finite-
time convergence to a domain  0 is
guaranteed from any initial condition
j(0)j 4 0, and the reaching time tr can be
easily estimated as
2V01=2
tr  :
. Suppose now that (0) 0: Theorem 1 of Lee
and Utkin (2007) claims that, if K is large
enough with respect to uncertainties/perturba-
tions effects, then sliding mode control (7)
with the gain-adaptation algorithm (9) allows
keeping trajectories of system (1) on the
Downloaded by [North Carolina State University] at 10:02 25 November 2012
sliding surface  0. Given that trajectories
of system (1) reach  0, it means that K is
large enough as required by Theorem 1 of Lee
and Utkin (2007). Then, the sliding mode is
established in system (1) for all t  tr. Theorem
3 is proven.
if K 
Implementation issues. The proposed adaptive-gain
sliding mode control algorithm in (7)(9) is not ready
4 0 very small. The
for the practical implementations. In fact, it is not
is introduced in order to get only positive
possible to reach the objective  0 due to sampled
computation, noisy measurements or other non-
idealities. That is why it is important considering the
for all t 4 0.
implementation of the previous controller in a real
sliding mode context. The following modifications of
the gain-adaptation algorithm (7)(9) are proposed2
. If j(x, t)j 4  4 0, K(t) is the solution of
 
K_ K 1  x, t 13
with K 1 4 0 and K(0) 4 0.
. If j(x, t)j  , K(t) reads as
Kt K 2  jj K 3
14
 _  signx, t
with K 2 Kt , K 3 4 0 and  4 0. t is the
largest time value such that, by denoting t 
the time just before t , j(x(t ), t )j 4  and
j(x(t ), t )j  .
Corollary 1: Given the nonlinear uncertain system (1)
with the sliding variable (x, t)) dynamics (2) controlled
by (7), (13) and (14), there exists a finite time tF 4 0 so
that a real sliding mode is established for all t  tF, i.e.
j(x, t)j 5  for t  tF.
Proof: The proof is composed of two steps. The first
step concerns jj 4  which yields K-dynamics
described by (13), whereas the second one concerns
jj   with K-dynamics described by (14). Then, the
proof follows the same way as the proof of Theorem 3
1911
based on Lyapunov analysis when jj 4 , and on
Theorem 1 of Lee and Utkin (2007) when jj  .
3.2 Second adaptive sliding mode control law
The first adaptive sliding mode control law uses
concept of equivalent control which introduces low-
pass filter dynamics with  parameter that is not easy
to tune (Utkin et al. 1999). The controller displayed
in this section does not estimate the boundary of
perturbation and uncertainties. But, there is an
eminent price to do that: the new strategy guarantees
a real sliding mode only. Consider the following
controller
u K  signx, t 15
with the gain K(t) defined such that
(
K  jx, tj  signjx, tj   if K 4
K_ 16
with K(0) 4 0, K 4 0,  4 0 and
parameter
values for K. In the sequel, for discussion and proof,
and without loss of generality but for a sake of clarity,
one supposes that K(t) 4
Discussion: Once sliding mode with respect to (x, t)
is established, the proposed gain-adaptation law (16)
allows the gain K declining (while j(x, t)j 5 ). In
other words, the gain K will be kept at the smallest
level that allows a given accuracy of -stabilisation.
Of course, as described in the sequel, this adaptation
law allows to get an adequate gain with respect to
uncertainties/perturbations magnitude.
Lemma 2: Given the nonlinear uncertain system (1)
with the sliding variable (x, t) dynamics (2) controlled
by (15) and (16), the gain K(t) has an upper-bound, i.e.
there exists a positive constant K so that
Kt  K  8t 4 0:
Proof of Lemma 2 is given in the Appendix.
Theorem 4: Given the nonlinear uncertain system (1)
with the sliding variable (x, t) dynamics (2) controlled
by (15) and (16), there exists a finite time tF 4 0 so that
a real sliding mode is established for all t  tF, i.e.
j(x, t)j 5  for t  tF, with
s
2
 2 M : 17
 m
K
 1912 F. Plestan et al.
p p
Proof: The proof is based on Lyapunovs approach with 2 minf  , K  g.
and shows that, when jj 4 , then control strategy
. Case 1 Suppose that jj 4 .  is positive if
ensures that jj 5  in a finite time. Furthermore, it is
proven that as soon as  reaches the domain jj  , it K
stays in the domain jj   defined by (17) for all m  jj  jj  K 4 0

consecutive time. Therefore, the proof shows that the
real sliding mode is established in finite time in the K  
) 5 : 22
domain jj  . m   K
Consider the following Lyapunov candidate From (21), one gets
function
1 1 V_    V1=2      V1=2 : 23
V  2 K  K  2 : 18
2 2 It is always possible to choose  such that the
One has previous inequality fulfils. Therefore, finite-
time convergence to a domain jj   is
Downloaded by [North Carolina State University] at 10:02 25 November 2012

1
V_         K  sign K  K  guaranteed from any initial condition

j(0)j 4 .
 K  jj  signjj   . Case 2 Suppose now that jj 5 . Function 
1 in (20) can be negative. It means that V_ would
 M  jj  m  K  jj K  K 
 be sign indefinite, and it is not possible to

 K  jj  signjj   conclude on the closed-loop system stability.
M  jj  m  K  jj m  K   jj Therefore, jj can increase over . As soon as
jj becomes greater than , V_    V1=2 and
1
 m  K   jj K  K   K  jj  signjj   V starts decreasing. Apparently, decrease of V
 can be achieved via increase of K allowing jj
M  m  K   jj K  K  to increase before it starts decreasing down
 
K to jj  . Without loss of generality, let us
 m  jj  jj  signjj   : estimate the overshoot when  0 (0) 

and K0 K(0) K(0) 4 0: considering the
Introduce parameter K 4 0 as worst case (with respect to uncertainties/
V_ M  m  K   jj K  K  perturbations), one has
 
K _ M  K  m
 m  jj  jj  signjj  
 24
 
K_ K  jj:
K  jK  K j  K  jK  K j: 19
Then, it yields
From Lemma 2, there always exists K 4 0 such that
K(t)  K 5 0 for all t 4 0. It yields q  q 
t 0 cos K  m t Mp  K0  m
 sin K  mt ,
V_  M m  K  jj  K  jK  K  j K m
|{z}
s
 40 q   
  K  M
K Kt 0
m
sin Km t K0 
m
 m  jj  jj  signjj    K  jK  K  j:
 q 
|{z}
  cos K  m t M : 25
m
20
Then, one gets
Then, one gets
s  
q
V_    jj  K  jK  K  j   2 M  K0  m 2 
t 0 sin Km t  ,
p jj p jK  K  j K m
   2 p  K  2 p   s
2 2   q 
n p   K M 2
po jj jK  K  j Kt 0 2 K0  
sin Km t K
M
:
 min  2, K 2 p p  m m m
2 2
   V1=2   21 26
 International Journal of Control
It appears from (26) that, when  0  ! , the
maximum value  of  M reads as
s jj  jj  K:
2
 2 M : 27
 m
K
In conclusion,  converges to the domain jj   in a
finite time, but could be sustained in the bigger domain
jj  . Therefore, the real sliding mode exists in the
domain jj  .
4. On -tuning
Downloaded by [North Carolina State University] at 10:02 25 November 2012
The objective of this section consists in providing a
methodology for the tuning of parameter  for both the
algorithms in the case of sampled controllers. In fact,
the choice of parameter  has to be made by an
adequate way because a bad tuning could provide
either instability and control gain increasing to infinity,
or bad accuracy for closed-loop system as described in
the sequel.
. If parameter  is too small, and due to large
gain K and sampling period Te, system
trajectories are such that jj never stays
lower than . From K-dynamics (13) or (16),
it yields that gain K is increasing, which
induces larger oscillation, and so on . . . .
. If parameter  is too large, system trajectories
are such that, in spite of large gain K and
sampling period Te, jj is evolving around , it
follows that controller accuracy is not as good
as possible.
Note that  should rather be too large than too small
because, in the first case, closed-loop system trajec-
tories are globally uniformly ultimately bounded even
if accuracy is bad.
Parameter  has to be tuned such that, as long as
K(t) is greater than j/j, jj 5 . In this case, given
that gain K(t) is sufficient to counteract the perturba-
tions, there is no reason that  increases over .
Suppose that, at t t1, j(t1)j   and
 
t1 
Kt1   : 28
t1 
It is clear that control gain K is sufficient to ensure
jt1 Te j  :
From Eulers formula, one has
t1 Te t1 t1  t1  Kt1  signt1
 Te : t 4KtTe :
29
1913
From (28), one has
It yields
jt1  t1  Kt1  signt1 j  2M  Kt1 :
_
Furthermore, as gain K(t) fulfils (28), -sign is the
opposite of  sign. It means that, if 0  (t1)   (resp.
    0), function  will decrease (resp. increase).
Then, in order to guarantee that j(t1 Te)j will not
exceed , the worst case is (t1) 0. From (29), it
yields
jt1 Te j  2M  Kt1 Te : 30
Given that it must be ensured j(t1 Te)j  , and as
the best accuracy and the closed-loop system are the
both objectives,  has to be chosen as a time-varying
function equal to the smallest admissible value
t 2M  Kt1 Te : 31
Discussion: Equation (31) means that the knowledge
of bounds of  is required for the choice of  in the case
of sampling controller. However, note that this latter
equation gives the best tuning. As said previously,
 can be tuned to a too large value which guarantees
the stability but with a worst accuracy. Furthermore,
Equation (31) gives at least a methodology for
-computation: no such information is given in
Huang et al. (2008) whereas such a parameter is
required for the boundary layer in case of practical
implementation of the controller.
However, in the case of many practical applica-
tions, the knowledge of  bounds is not really required.
In fact, when applied, the controller design procedure
is very often the following: uncertain functions read
as  Nom D and  Nom D where Nom
and Nom are the nominal known functions and D
and D their unknown parts. Furthermore, in most of
the cases, one has jNomj  jDj and jNomj  jDj.
Then, by supposing that Nom is invertible, the
control law3
Nom v
u
Nom
is applied to system (2) which gives
   
Nom D
_ D D 1   v: 32
Nom Nom
As jNomj  jDj, one gets j1  D
Nom
j  2. From (31), it
yields
 1914 F. Plestan et al.

5. Simulations Control algorithm 2 in Equations (15) and (16). Control

5.1 Tutorial
Consider the following uncertain system
_ t u:
0.1.
Function (t) is an uncertain bounded function
described by Figure 1. Simulations have been made
by supposing that (0) 10 and Te 0.0001 s. From
(31), parameter  reads as (t) 2K(t)  Te.
Control algorithm 1 in Equations (7), (13) and (14):
Control input u and gain-adaptation law K(t), respec-
tively, read as in Equations (7), (13) and (14). Gain is
initialised at K(0) 10, its dynamics being tuned with
Downloaded by [North Carolina State University] at 10:02 25 November 2012
input u and gain-adaptation law K(t) respectively read
as in Equations (15) and (16). Gain is initialised at
K(0) 10, its dynamics being tuned with K 1000 and
33
Figures 2 and 3 display simulations results of both
previous controllers applied to system (33). It appears
that both control laws yield very similar results. Based
on simulation plots, one can conclude that both
adaptation algorithms provide the controller gain
K(t) to follow closely the perturbation (t) whose
profile and boundary are not known a priori (see
bottom-right plots in Figures 2 and 3). Therefore, the
control gain K(t) is not overestimated and control
chattering is minimal. Also, the sliding variable  is

K 1 1000, K 3 1 and  0.1 s.

robustly constrainted to jj 5 (t) with exception of
sparse spikes.
70
60
50
5.2 Electropneumatic actuator
40
30 The electropneumatic system under interest is a double
20 acting actuator (Figure 4) composed of two chambers,
10 denoted P (as positive) and N (as negative). The air
0 mass flow rates entering the two chambers are
10 modulated by two three-way servodistributors con-
20 trolled with two electrical inputs of opposite signs
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 (u and u). The pneumatic jack horizontally moves a
Figure 1. Unknown term  versus time (s). load carriage of mass M.

10
0.06
8
0.04
6 0.02
4 0

2 0.02
0.04
0
0.06
2
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 0 50 100 150 200 250 300

400 350
300 300
200 250
100 200
0 150
100 100
200 50
300 0
400 50
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 0 50 100 150 200 250 300

Figure 2. Control algorithm 1 in Equations (7), (13) and (14). Top-left. Sliding variable  versus time (s). Top-right. Zoom on
sliding variable  (), (t) and (t) (  ) versus time (s). Bottom-left. Control input u versus time (s). Bottom-right. Gain K(t)
() and perturbation (t) (  ) versus time (s).
 International Journal of Control 1915

5.2.1 Model  
krT SN
Following standard assumptions on the pneumatic part p_N qmP u, pN pN v
VN y rT
of the electropneumatic system (Shearer 1956; Mac Cloy
1 34
1968; Brun, Belgharbi, Sesmat, Thomasset, and v_ SP pP  SN pN  bv  Ff  Fext

Scavarda 1999; Girin, Plestan, Brun, and Glumineau M

2009; Laghrouche, Smaoui, Plestan, and Brun 2006) one y_ v
gets a nonlinear dynamic model for the whole system with y the load carriage position, v its velocity and pP
  and pN the pressures of P and N chambers. VX (X P
krT SP
p_ P qmN u, pp  pP v or N ) is the volume in the chamber X, qmX(uX, pX)
VP y rT

10
0.06
8
0.04
Downloaded by [North Carolina State University] at 10:02 25 November 2012

6 0.02
4 0

2 0.02
0.04
0
0.06
2
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 50 100 150 200 250 300

400 350
300 300
200 250
100 200
0 150
100 100
200 50
300 0
400 50
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 0 50 100 150 200 250 300

Figure 3. Control algorithm 2 in Equations (15), (16). Top-left. Sliding variable  versus time (s). Top-right. Zoom on sliding
variable  (), (t) and (t) (  ) versus time (s). Bottom-left. Control input u versus time (s). Bottom-right. Gain K(t) () and
perturbation (t) (  ) versus time (s).

Figure 4. Electropneumatic system.

 1916 F. Plestan et al.

the mass flow rate provided from the servodistributor 0.25

X, k the polytropic constant, r the perfect gas constant, 0.2
0.15
T the supply temperature and SX the piston area in the 0.1
chamber X. The term Ff represents all the dry friction 0.05
forces which act on the moving part in the presence of 0
viscous friction (b  v) and an external force only due to 0.05
atmospheric pressure (Fext). 0.1
The model of mass flow rate delivered by each 0.15
0.2
servodistributor can be reduced to a static function
0.25
described by two relationships qmP(u, pP) and 0 1 2 3 4 5 6
qmN(u, pN). The first two equations of (34) concern
Figure 5. Desired position trajectory yd(t) (m) versus time (s).
the pneumatic part of the system and are obtained
from the state equation of perfect gases, the mass
conservation law and the polytropic law under the
defined in Figure 5. Following the previous section,
assumptions given above. The last two equations
Downloaded by [North Carolina State University] at 10:02 25 November 2012

consider the sliding variable

describe the mechanical part and are derived from
the fundamental mechanical equation applied to the  2  y  yd t 2  y_  y_d t y  y d t
moving part. In order to get an affine nonlinear state
36
model, the mass flow rate static characteristic issued
from measurements (Sesmat and Scavarda 1996) reads
as (Belgharbi, Thomasset, Scavarda, and Sesmat 1999)
qmP u, pP P pP P pP , sgnu  u,
35
qmN u, pN N pN  N pN , sgnu  u
with functions P and P (resp. N and N) fifth-order
polynomial functions with respect to pP (resp. pN).
Denoting x [ pP pN y v]T, system (34) can be written
as nonlinear system (1). Let us define X as the physical
domain
X x j 1 bar  pP  7 bar, 1 bar  pN  7 bar,
functions  and  are bounded for all x 2 X ;
200 mm  y  200 mm, jvj  1 m s1 :
It yields that, for x 2 X , system dynamics are bounded
under a bounded control input u.
Two kinds of uncertainties are taken into account:
uncertainties due to the identification of physical
parameters, and perturbations. Viscous and dry fric-
tion coefficients have been identified, but the determi-
nation of their variations around their nominal values
is a hard task. For example, the dry friction coefficient
with  4 0. As system (34) and (35) admits a relative
degree equal to 1 for  with respect to u, one gets4
_    u: 37
As described in Laghrouche et al. (2006) and Girin
et al. (2009) functions () and () can be written as
the sum of a nominal part (Nom and Nom) and an
uncertain one (D and D), i.e.
 Nom  D,  Nom  D: 38
From Laghrouche et al. (2006) and Girin et al. (2009)
furthermore, for all x 2 X , Nom 4 0. Then,  and 
fulfil (3). It yields that the control law reads as5
1
u Nom v 39
Nom
with control input v reading as previous control
algorithms. Parameter  reads as (t) 4K(t)  Te.
Parameters have been tuned as
is difficult to identify depending on the track surface
quality (thus the piston position), the seal wear, the
working conditions (temperature, pressure, quality of
air) etc. The mass flow rate delivered by each
servodistributor has been approximated by polynomial
functions (35); the uncertainties on () and () have
0.1. Following simula-
been evaluated to 15% and 5%, respectively.
Finally, during the load moving, the total mass in
displacement can evolve from 17 up to 47 kg.
5.2.2 Control design and simulations
The aim of the control law is to get a good accuracy in
terms of position tracking for the desired trajectory
Te 103 s, K 250, K 1 50, K0 1,  33:
Furthermore, for Algorithm 1, one has
K 3 1,  0:1 s:
For Algorithm 2, one has
tions have been made by making variations of load
mass (20%)6 and uncertainties on and (20%).
Figures 6 and 7 display, for both the control laws, the
actuator position with respect to desired trajectory
(top), the control input u (centre) and the gain K
(bottom). It appears that both the strategies yield quite
similar results. Note that, with the proposed gain
tuning, Algorithm 1 induces lower magnitudes of
 International Journal of Control 1917

0.3
0.2
0.1
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0 1 2 3 4 5 6
10
5
0
5
10
0 1 2 3 4 5 6
400
300
200
100
Downloaded by [North Carolina State University] at 10:02 25 November 2012

0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6

Figure 6. Control algorithm 1: Top. Current () and desired (- - -) position trajectories (m) versus time (s). Centre. Control input
u (V ) versus time (s). Bottom. Control gain K versus time (s).

0.3
0.2
0.1
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0 1 2 3 4 5 6
10
5
0
5
10
0 1 2 3 4 5 6
1000
800
600
400
200
0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6

Figure 7. Control algorithm 2: Top. Current () and desired (- - -) position trajectories (m) versus time (s). Centre. Control input
u (V ) versus time (s). Bottom. Control gain K versus time (s).

control and gain in this time interval; in fact,
Algorithm 2 gain is increasing to a larger value and
takes time to decrease to similar values of Algorithm 1.
However, in the authors experience, implementation
of Algorithm 2 is clearly easier.
6. Conclusion
This article proposes two new methodologies for
adaptive sliding mode controller design. Both the
algorithms allow establishing of the sliding mode via
the sliding mode control laws with gain-adaptation
without a priori knowing uncertainties/perturbations
bounds while both the adaptive-gain values are
not overestimated. The first algorithm is based on
evaluation of uncertainties/perturbation by using
equivalent control concept that requires employment
of low-pass filter. The second adaptive control law
does not estimate the boundary of perturbations/
uncertainties and yields establishing a real sliding
mode. The efficacy of these new strategies has been
confirmed on a tutorial example as well as by
controlling the electropneumatic actuator. Future
works will concentrate on extending the developed
methodologies to both MIMO uncertain nonlinear
systems and systems with higher order adaptive-gain
sliding mode control, as well as on experimental
validating the advanced algorithms.
 1918
Acknowledgements
This work has been made while Franck Plestan was on
sabbatical at UAH. This stay has been financially supported
in part by Ecole Centrale de Nantes, IRCCyN, and Centrale
Initiatives Foundation, Lille, France.
Notes
1. It yields that t defined just after (9) equals first-of-all t1,
then t2. Furthermore, in implementation case, t is
on-line determined by comparing, at each time t,
(x(t), t) and (x(t), t) 0.
2. The parameter  can be time-varying, as in the following
section. Its tuning is detailed in Section 4.
3. In Castro-Linares, Glumineau, Laghrouche, and Plestan
(2004) it has been shown that, for such class of
Downloaded by [North Carolina State University] at 10:02 25 November 2012
uncertainties, this control law allows to decrease the
influence of perturbations and uncertainties, and then to
reduce the control gain.
4. In Brun et al. (1999) stability of zero-dynamics has been
numerically established.
5. It can be shown that Nom is invertible in the physical
domain of the application (Laghrouche et al. 2006; Girin
et al. 2009).
6. This value and the following represent parameters
variations with respect to their nominal values.
References
Bartolini, G., Ferrara, A., Usai, E., and Utkin, V.I. (2000),
On Multi-input Chattering-free Second-order Sliding
Mode Control, IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control,
45, 17111717.
Belgharbi, M., Thomasset, D., Scavarda, S., and Sesmat, S.
(1999), Analytical Model of the Flow Stage of a Pneumatic
Servo-distributor for Simulation and Nonlinear Control,
in Scandinavian International Conference on Fluid Power
SICFP99, Tampere, Finland, pp. 847860.
Boiko, I., and Fridman, L. (2005), Analysis of Chattering in
Continuous Sliding-mode Controllers, IEEE Transaction
on Automatic Control, 50, 14421446.
Boiko, I., Fridman, L., Pisano, A., and Usai, E. (2007),
Analysis of Chattering in Systems with Second Order
Sliding Modes, IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control,
52, 20852102.
Brun, X., Belgharbi, M., Sesmat, S., Thomasset, D., and
Scavarda, S. (1999), Control of an Electropneumatic
Actuator, Comparison between some Linear and
Nonlinear Control Laws, Journal of Systems and Control
Engineering, 213, 387406.
Castro-Linares, R., Glumineau, A., Laghrouche, S., and
Plestan, F. (2004), High Order Sliding Mode Observer-
based Control, 2nd IFAC Symposium on System, Structure
and Control, Oaxaca, Mexico, pp. 517522.
Filippov, A.F. (1988), Differential Equations with
Discontinuous Right-hand Side, Dordrecht, The
Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Girin, A., Plestan, F., Brun, X., and Glumineau, A.
(2009), Robust Control of an Electropneumatic
F. Plestan et al.
Actuator: Application to an Aeronautical Benchmark,
IEEE Transactions on Control Systems Technology, 17,
633645.
Hall, C.E., and Shtessel, Y.B. (2006), Sliding Mode
Disturbance Observer-based Control for a Reusable
Launch Vehicle, AIAA Journal of Guidance, Control, and
Dynamics, 29, 13151328.
Huang, Y.-J., Kuo, T.-C., and Chang, S.-H. (2008),
Adaptive Sliding-mode Control for Nonlinear Systems
with Uncertain Parameters, IEEE Transactions on System,
Man, and Cybernetics Part B: Cybernetics, 38, 534539.
Laghrouche, S., Smaoui, M., Plestan, F., and Brun, X.
(2006), Higher Order Sliding Mode Control Based on
Optimal Approach of an Electropneumatic Actuator,
International Journal of Control, 79, 119131.
Laghrouche, S., Plestan, F., and Glumineau, A. (2007),
Higher Order Sliding Mode Control Based on Integral
Sliding Surface, Automatica, 43, 531537.
Lee, H., and Utkin, V.I. (2007), Chattering Suppression
Methods in Sliding Mode Control Systems, Annual
Reviews in Control, 31, 179188.
Levant, A. (1993), Sliding Order and Sliding Accuracy in
Sliding Mode Control, International Journal of Control,
58, 12471263.
Levant, A. (2001), Universal SISO Sliding-mode Controllers
with Finite-time Convergence, IEEE Transactions on
Automatic Control, 49, 14471451.
Levant, A. (2007), Principles of 2-sliding Mode Design,
Automatica, 43, 576586.
Mac Cloy, D. (1968), Discharge Characteristics of Servo
Valve Orifices, in Fluid Power International Conference,
Olympia, Greece, pp. 4350.
Munoz, D., and Sbarbaro, D. (2000), An Adaptive Sliding
Mode Controller for Discrete Nonlinear Systems, IEEE
Transactions on Industrial Electronics, 47, 574581.
Plestan, F., Glumineau, A., and Laghrouche, S. (2008),
A New Algorithm for High-order Sliding Mode Control,
International Journal of Robust and Nonlinear Control, 18,
441453.
Sesmat, S., and Scavarda, S. (1996), Static Characteristics of
a Three Way Servovalve, in Conference on Fluid Power
Technology, Aachen, Germany, pp. 643652.
Shearer, J.L. (1956), Study of Pneumatic Processes in the
Continuous Control of Motion with Compressed Air,
Transactions of the American Society Mechanical
Engineers, 78, 233249.
Slotine, J.-J., and Li, W. (1991), Applied Nonlinear Control,
Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Slotine, J.-J., and Sastry, S.S. (1983), Tracking Control of
Nonlinear System using Sliding Surfaces, with Application
to Robot Manipulators, International Journal of Control,
38, 465492.
Tao, C.W., Chan, M.L., and Lee, T.T. (2003), Adaptive
Fuzzy Sliding Mode Controller for Linear Systems with
Mismatched Time-varying Uncertainties, IEEE
Transactions on System, Man, and Cybernetics Part B:
Cybernetics, 33, 283294.
Utkin, V.I., Guldner, J., and Shi, J. (1999), Sliding Mode in
Control in Electromechanical Systems, London: Taylor &
Francis.
 International Journal of Control 1919

Appendix s(t )

Proof of Lemma 1
Suppose that (x, t) 6 0. From K-dynamics (8), and given
e
that functions  and  are supposed bounded, it follows that t
K is increasing and there exists a time t1 such that
M |y(t )G (t )|
Kt1 4 :
m
Note that this gain has a finite value by the absolute
continuity property of K(t). From t t1, given K-dynamics, K (t ) t
gain K is large enough to make the sliding variable  t1 t2 t3 t4
decreasing. Then, it yields that, in a finite time t2,  0 and
K(t2) admits a bounded value. It yields that there always Figure A1. Scheme describing the behaviour of  (top) and
exists a positive constant K such that K 4 K(t), for K (bottom) versus time.
all t  0.
Downloaded by [North Carolina State University] at 10:02 25 November 2012

From t t3, gain K is not large enough to counteract

Proof of Lemma 2 perturbations and uncertainties as it is decreasing. It yields
Suppose that j(x, t)j 4 . From K-dynamics, and given that that there exists a time instant t4 4 t3 such that j(t4)j 4 .
functions  and  are supposed bounded, it follows that K is The process then restarts from the beginning. By the
increasing and there exists a time t1 (see Figure A1) such that assumptions (3), the gains K(ti) remain bounded uniformly
  on ti. In fact,
t1 
Kt1  :  
t1  ti  M
Kti   : K
From t t1, given K-dynamics, gain K is large enough to ti  m
make the sliding variable  decreasing. Then, it yields that, in
a finite time t2 (Figure A1), jj 5 . It yields that gain K is and, hence, there always exists a finite constant K
decreasing from t2, gain K being at a maximum value at such that
t t2. From K-dynamics, it yields that there exists a time
instant t3 4 t2 (Figure A1) such that K   K  ,
 
t3  which proves the desired result.
Kt3  :
t3