Table of Contents Author Guidelines Submit a Manuscript
Mathematical Problems in Engineering
Volume 2011 (2011), Article ID 146038, 17 pages
http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2011/146038
Research Article

Robust Sensor Fault Reconstruction for Lipschitz Nonlinear Systems

Department of Electrical Engineering, Sahand University of Technology, P.O. Box 51336-1996, Sahand, Tabriz, Iran

Received 29 December 2010; Revised 27 January 2011; Accepted 3 February 2011

Academic Editor: Oleg V. Gendelman

Copyright © 2011 M. J. Khosrowjerdi. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Abstract

We extend existing theory on robust nonlinear observer design to the class of nonlinear Lipschitz systems where the systems are subject to sensor faults and disturbances. The designed observer is used for robust reconstruction of fault signals. Allowing bounded unknown disturbances to model system uncertainties, it is shown that by adjusting a design parameter we can trade off between fault reconstruction and disturbance attenuation. An LMI procedure solvable using commercially available softwares is presented. Two examples are presented to illustrate the application of the results.

1. Introduction

Modern control systems strongly rely on actuators, sensors, and data acquisition/interface components to ensure a proper interaction between the physical controlled system and control devices. Any faults in sensors and/or actuators may cause process performance degradation, process shutdown, or a fatal accident. For instance, in feedback control applications, faulty sensors give wrong information about the system status, which could cause disastrous results as the system may go unstable. On the other hand, even if the system is stable, inaccurate sensor values can introduce poor regulation or tracking performance, which may be highly undesirable for many high precision control applications. Similarly, faulty actuators may severely affect the overall system performance. Therefore, there is a growing demand for reliability, safety, and fault tolerance in modern control systems. To improve the reliability and safety, much effort has been made to develop model-based fault detection and isolation (FDI) techniques (see, e.g., [13], and the references therein for recent advances). One of the particular interesting techniques among all model-based techniques for FDI is an observer-based fault detection filter design. The goal has been to utilize the underlying system model to generate a residual signal [46]. This signal is then processed to detect the occurrence of a fault and possibly identification of its type (bias, drift, noise, or complete failure) and location. However, the magnitude of the fault cannot be provided by FDI. The process of estimating the magnitude of the fault is called fault reconstruction. This approach is however different from the residual generation techniques in the sense that it not only detects and isolates the faults, but provides an estimate of the faults that can be then used to design a fault tolerant controller (FTC) which stabilizes the closed-loop system and guarantees a prescribed performance level in the presence of faults; for example, see [710]. For example, if the magnitude of the sensor fault can be obtained, the correct measurement can be obtained by subtracting the fault from the faulty measurement. Thus, the controller and observer can continue to function normally without the need of reconfiguration. Clearly, sensor and/or actuator fault reconstruction plays a key role in the FTC design.

During the last decade, a number of results have been reported on sensor and/or actuator fault reconstruction for Linear Time-Invariant (LTI) systems: pseudo-inverse [11], discrete max-min approach [12], sliding mode-based techniques [1320], frequency weighted approach [21], adaptive techniques [22, 23], and descriptor approach [24]. In contrast to the LTI case, however, the nonlinear problem lacks a universal approach and is currently an active area of research, for example, see [2539] for some important nonlinear results. The main obstacle in the solution of the observer-based nonlinear fault reconstruction problem is the lack of a universal approach for nonlinear observer synthesis.

A class of nonlinear systems that has recieved much attention in the literature is the class of Lipschitz nonlinear systems [40]. In recent years, different approaches to the observer-based FDI problem for this class of nonlinear systems have been reported and is currently an active area of research, for example, see descriptor system approach [10], unknown input observers (UIO) [35], adaptive techniques [37], sensor fault diagnosis using dynamic observers [38], and high-gain observers [39]. It is worth mentioning that the technique proposed for fault reconstruction in this paper is different from [10, 39]. The main idea in these works is to include the fault model in the state variables and try to estimate the states of the resulting augmented system. These techniques can however increase the order of the augmented system. In addition, they are only applicable for a special class of faults; for example, constant-like faults, step-like faults and ramp-like faults. In particular, the technique presented in [10] is valid provided that the th derivative of the fault signal is bounded, even when is high. The use of high-gain observer for fault reconstruction as discussed in Proposition  3.1 in [39] is limited due to strict conditions on the system dynamics. For example in [39], the system dynamic must be in a semitriangular form and the states must remain bounded. In [35], an unknown input observer is designed for estimation of disturbances and faults, but there is no systematic solution for computing observer gain, for example, in terms of linear matrix inequalities (LMIs).

The main contribution of this paper is the generalization of the obtained results for sensor fault reconstruction in [16, 19] for linear time-invariant (LTI) systems to continuous-time Lipschitz nonlinear systems in the presence of disturbances and measurement noises. This generalization is based on robust observer design recently reported in [41]. In this direction, the sensor fault reconstruction problem is formulated as an LMI feasibility problem whose solution is easily generated by using commercial softwares [42, 43]. As it will be shown, by adjusting a single design parameter, it becomes possible to trade off between fault reconstruction performance and robustness to unknown disturbances and noises. The proposed approach is practical for real systems and FTC design.

This paper is organized as follows. In Section 2, the sensor fault reconstruction problem is formulated. In Section 3, an easily implementable design algorithm summarizes the proposed methodology for fault reconstruction. In Section 4, this algorithm is applied to two numerical examples and simulation results are presented. Concluding remarks are given in Section 5.

The notation used in this paper is fairly standard. For a given matrix , denotes its transpose. denotes unity matrix with appropriate dimension. If and are symmetric matrices, (resp., ) denotes positive semidefinite (resp., positive definite) and (resp., ) denotes negative semidefinite (resp., negative definite). and denote minimum and maximum eigenvalue of , respectively. The space represents the set of all signals which are square integrable and satisfy ; and the -norm of is defined by . The following result is used in the paper.

Lemma 1.1 (see [22]). Let , and be real matrices of appropriate dimensions and satisfying . Then for any scalar and vectors , we have

2. Problem Formulation

We consider the nonlinear systems given by : where is the state, is the control, is the output, and is a known nonlinear vector function. The input is assumed to be the unknown disturbance which can also be used to represent a general class of modeling errors. In any case, is assumed to be an unknown exogenous disturbance/noise. Here, sensor faults are described by the vector , assumed to be zero prior to the failure time nonzero after the fault occurrence. , , , , , and are assumed to be known constant matrices of appropriate dimensions. It is worth noting that the distribution matrix indicates how the system (2.1) is affected by the nonlinearity . We assume that , rank, and . Without loss of generality, it can be assumed that the outputs of the system have been reordered (and scaled if necessary) so that the matrix has a structure where is a nonsingular matrix. As mentioned in [16], the assumption that only certain sensors are fault prone is a limitation. However in practical situations, some sensors may be more vulnerable to damage or may be more sensitive or delicate in terms of construction than others, and so such a situation is not unrealistic. Also certain key sensors may have backups (hardware redundancy) and so essentially a fault-free signal can be assumed from a certain subset of the sensors.

Finally, we assume that the system (2.1) is locally Lipschitz in a region containing the origin, uniformly in , that is: for all , for all , for all and . Here, the parameter is referred to as the Lipschitz constant and is independent of , , and . Many nonlinearities are locally Lipschitz. Examples include trigonometric nonlinearities occurring in robotics, nonlinearities which are square or cubic in nature, and so forth. The function can also be considered as a perturbation affecting the system; see [40] for more details about nonlinear Lipschitz systems.

Scaling the output and partitioning appropriately yields where and , , , , , and are appropriate matrices depending on , and . The output vector has now been partitioned into nonfaulty () and potentially faulty (). Notice now that the subsystem (2.1) and in (2.4) makes up a fault-free system. Assume further that is detectable.

Consider a nonlinear observer for the fault-free system defined by (2.1) and in(2.4) where is an estimate for the state and is the observer gain. Define as the state estimation error. Equations (2.1), (2.4), and (2.5) are combined to yield where . A well-known result in [44] states that the error system (2.6) is asymptotically stable for all in (2.3) with a Lipschitz constant if the observer gain can be chosen in such a way that where The ratio in (2.7) is maximized when [45]. The problem is then reduced to that of choosing to satisfy As shown in [41], using Schur's complement lemma, the inequality (2.9) is equivalent to

In the following, motivated by the development in [16, 19] for the LTI systems, an approach for reconstructing the sensor fault from the residual for Lipschitz nonlinear systems in (2.1) is proposed. Define a reconstruction for the sensor fault where is the residual and with being a weighting matrix. It is easy to show that combining (2.1), (2.2), (2.11), and (2.12) yields where is the fault reconstruction error, and Equations (2.6) and (2.13) show the effect of the disturbance on the quality of the fault reconstruction error, that is, The objective now would be to minimize the effect of on . To achieve unknown disturbance attenuation and fault reconstruction, the following problem can be formulated: find the gain   such that the system   in (2.15) be asymptotically stable and the -gain from the disturbance   to the fault reconstruction error   is less than or equal to a prescribed   performance , that is, This motivates us to consider the following optimization problem.

Problem 1. Given , find the gain such that the error dynamic system in (2.15) be asymptotically stable and

In the next section, a solution is proposed to Problem 1 in terms of LMIs.

3. Fault Reconstruction

Following the lines of [41] for robust nonlinear observer design, we propose an LMI-based solution to Problem 1 that leads to a constructive algorithm for sensor fault reconstruction. The following result summarizes the main result of this section.

Theorem 3.1. Consider the nonlinear system (2.1). Given Lipschitz constant and , there exists an th-order nonlinear observer in the form (2.5) which solves Problem 1, if there exist and the solutions and such that the following LMIs have a solution where Once the problem is solved

Proof. Define a Lyapunov function , where satisfies in (2.10). From the error system (2.6), we have where is given by (2.8). The second term in the right-hand side of (3.4) can be upper bounded as follows Using Lemma 1.1, we have where is any positive real constant and hence from (3.4), we have where
Now, from (2.17), it is easy to show that Therefore, a sufficient condition for is that But, from (3.7), we have where Thus a sufficient condition for is that . Using Schur's complement lemma and the change of variable , the inequality can be replaced by (3.1) immediately. Therefore, if there exists scalars and and matrices and such that the LMIs in (3.1) have a solution, then .

Using (2.5) and (2.11), the nonlinear dynamical system for sensor fault reconstruction is given by

Thanks to Theorem 3.1, Problem 1 can be solved efficiently using the following algorithm and by reducing iteratively, an optimal solution is approached.

Algorithm 1. Given plant (2.1) with Lipschitz constant , construct the sensor fault signal by performing the following steps.
Step 1. Choose the weighting matrix and compute using (2.12).Step 2. Given and , obtain and to the LMIs in (3.1).Step 3. Compute the gain using (3.3).Step 4. Construct the nonlinear dynamical system in (3.13).

This algorithm is constructive and can be implemented using standard scientific softwares such as Scilab [42] and Matlab [43].

Remark 3.2. Although the main objective of this paper is sensor fault reconstruction, but the proposed method has good potential to extended to the even more interesting case of the reconstruction of actuator fault situations. It can however be an interesting topic for future research and it is under investigation. A good staring point for this research can be motivated by the developments in [46] to transform the plant (2.1) into two subsystems with one of them decoupled from the actuator fault. Then, the nonlinear observer (2.5) could be designed to provide the estimation of unmeasurable state, which are used to construct actuator fault estimation algorithm. It is worth mentioning that a constructive algorithm based on mixed approach is also proposed in [25] for actuator fault reconstruction for Lipschitz nonlinear systems.

4. Numerical Examples

To illustrate the application of the results obtained in the paper, we consider two different examples of nonlinear systems.

Example 4.1. Consider the plant (2.1) with the following state space matrices for an aircraft model [47] and with Lipschitz constant . The sensor fault reconstruction is obtained by using Algorithm 1 where and . The LMI minimization has been performed using LMITOOL, a user-friendly Scilab package [42]. The simulation results are shown in Figures 13. The disturbance is set as [47] And and are white noise processes which are assumed to be zero-mean white noise processes with variance 0.05. The control signal is assumed to be . The faulty outputs and are shown in Figure 1. As shown in Figures 2-3, the fault reconstruction scheme reconstructs the faults perfectly when sensor faults are applied in the presence of disturbance and noises which justify the proposed scheme for fault tolerant control.
Here, a comparison of the estimation capabilities of the presented approach with the descriptor system approach for Lipschitz nonlinear systems as recently proposed in [10] can be performed. In this direction, the sensor fault model (2.1) with can be denoted as where Following the approach presented in [10], a sensor fault estimator in the form can be constructed, where and the matrices , , and can be obtained through satisfying an LMI as proposed in Theorem  2 in [10]. Using LMITOOL in Scilab package, it can be shown that for the aircraft example there does not exist any solution to this LMI for all and , so the descriptor system approach as proposed in [10] is no longer applicable this exhibits the significance of our approach proposed in this paper.

146038.fig.001
Figure 1: The faulty outputs and .
146038.fig.002
Figure 2: The reconstructed sensor fault .
146038.fig.003
Figure 3: The reconstructed sensor fault .

Example 4.2. Consider the following nonlinear system [41] where , where is the disturbance and is the measurement noise which is assumed to be a zero-mean white noise process with unit covariance and is the sensor fault. The fault reconstruction scheme is performed by using Algorithm 1 in the previous section with and . To be able to make a fair comparison between the fault reconstruction for different values of , the actual and estimated fault are displayed in Figures 4, 5, 6, and 7. As shown in these figures, in order to analyze the performance of the fault reconstruction, a sensor fault with magnitude 1 and a disturbance are applied. Figures 47 clearly indicate that by reducing , the effect of on can be made arbitrarily small and the sensor fault can be effectively reconstructed. Also, as shown in Figure 7, when is reduced to optimal value 0.38, the effect of noise will increase. This clearly shows that there is a definite tradeoff between fault reconstruction, disturbance attenuation, and noise rejection.

146038.fig.004
Figure 4: Fault reconstruction and disturbance attenuation for .
146038.fig.005
Figure 5: Fault Reconstruction and disturbance attenuation for .
146038.fig.006
Figure 6: Fault Reconstruction and disturbance attenuation for .
146038.fig.007
Figure 7: Fault Reconstruction and disturbance attenuation for .

5. Conclusion

In this paper, a robust sensor fault reconstruction method for a class of Lipschitz nonlinear systems is proposed through LMI optimization in the presence of disturbances and noises. The advantage of the fault reconstruction method is that it provides a good estimate of faults, thus providing useful information for fault tolerant controller design. As shown in simulation results, by adjusting a single parameter, it becomes possible to trade off between fault reconstruction, disturbance attenuation and noise rejection.

Further research work includes two aspects. The first one is that the proposed sensor fault reconstruction approach could be extended to nonlinear systems with arbitrarily large Lipschitz constant or one-sided Lipschitz systems as described in [48]. Possible extensions to a large class of uncertain nonlinear systems as described in [49] with simultaneous actuator and sensor faults and implementation on an experimental setup similar to that in [19] could be another interesting issues.

Acknowledgments

The author would like to thank the associate editor and the anonymous reviewers for their valuable comments and constructive suggestions. They were very helpful for this study. The financial support of the research and programming administrator of the Sahand University of Technology (SUT) under Grant no. 30/10330 is also greatly acknowledged.

References

  1. Y. Chen and R. J. Patton, Robust Model-Based Fault Diagnosis for Dynamic Systems, Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, The Netherlands, 1999.
  2. Y. Zhang and J. Jiang, “Bibliographical review on reconfigurable fault-tolerant control systems,” Annual Reviews in Control, vol. 32, no. 2, pp. 229–252, 2008. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  3. I. Hwang, S. Kim, Y. Kim, and C. E. Seah, “A survey of fault detection, isolation, and reconfiguration methods,” IEEE Transactions on Control Systems Technology, vol. 18, no. 3, Article ID 5282515, pp. 636–653, 2010. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  4. R. Nikoukhah, “Innovations generation in the presence of unknown inputs: application to robust failure detection,” Automatica, vol. 30, no. 12, pp. 1851–1867, 1994. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Zentralblatt MATH
  5. M. J. Khosrowjerdi, R. Nikoukhah, and N. Safari-Shad, “Fault detection in a mixed 2/ setting,” IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control, vol. 50, no. 7, pp. 1063–1068, 2005. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar
  6. N. Liu and K. Zhou, “Optimal solutions to multi-objective robust fault detection problems,” in Proceedings of the 46th IEEE Conference on Decision and Control (CDC '07), pp. 981–988, December 2007. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  7. C. P. Tan and C. Edwards, “Robust sensor fault tolerant control scheme implemented on a crane,” Asian Journal of Control, vol. 9, no. 3, pp. 340–344, 2007. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  8. C. Edwards and C. P. Tan, “Sensor fault tolerant control using sliding mode observers,” Control Engineering Practice, vol. 14, no. 8, pp. 897–908, 2006. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar
  9. C. P. Tan and M. K. Habib, “Tolerance towards sensor faults: an application to a flexible arm manipulator,” International Journal of Advanced Robotic Systems, vol. 3, no. 4, pp. 343–350, 2006. View at Google Scholar
  10. Z. Gao and S. X. Ding, “Sensor fault reconstruction and sensor compensation for a class of nonlinear state-space systems via a descriptor system approach,” IET Control Theory and Applications, vol. 1, no. 3, pp. 578–585, 2007. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar
  11. R. H. Chen and J. L. Speyer, “Sensor and actuator fault reconstruction,” Journal of Guidance, Control, and Dynamics, vol. 27, no. 2, pp. 186–196, 2004. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  12. C. Kwan and R. Xu, “A note on simultaneous isolation of sensor and actuator faults,” IEEE Transactions on Control Systems Technology, vol. 12, no. 1, pp. 183–192, 2004. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar
  13. C. P. Tan and C. Edwards, “Sliding mode observers for detection and reconstruction of sensor faults,” Automatica, vol. 38, no. 10, pp. 1815–1821, 2002. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Zentralblatt MATH
  14. C. P. Tan and C. Edwards, “Robust fault reconstruction in uncertain linear systems using multiple sliding mode observers in cascade,” IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control, vol. 55, no. 4, pp. 855–867, 2010. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar
  15. K. Y. Ng, C. P. Tan, Z. Man, and R. Akmeliawati, “New results in disturbance decoupled fault reconstruction in linear uncertain systems using two sliding mode observers in cascade,” International Journal of Control, Automation and Systems, vol. 8, no. 3, pp. 506–518, 2010. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  16. H. Alwi, C. Edwards, and C. P. Tan, “Sliding mode estimation schemes for incipient sensor faults,” Automatica, vol. 45, no. 7, pp. 1679–1685, 2009. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  17. C. P. Tan, F. Crusca, and M. Aldeen, “Extended results on robust state estimation and fault detection,” Automatica, vol. 44, no. 8, pp. 2027–2033, 2008. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar
  18. K. Y. Ng, C. P. Tan, C. Edwards, and Y. C. Kuang, “New results in robust actuator fault reconstruction for linear uncertain systems using sliding mode observers,” International Journal of Robust and Nonlinear Control, vol. 17, no. 14, pp. 1294–1319, 2007. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Zentralblatt MATH
  19. C. P. Tan and M. K. Habib, “Robust sensor fault reconstruction applied in real-time to an inverted pendulum,” Mechatronics, vol. 17, no. 7, pp. 368–380, 2007. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  20. S. Dhahri, F. B. Hmida, A. Sellami, and M. Gossa, “LMI-based sliding mode observer design method for reconstruction of actuator and sensor faults,” International Journal on Sciences and Techniquess, vol. 1, no. 1, pp. 91–101, 2007. View at Google Scholar
  21. C. P. Tan, F. Crusca, and M. Aldeen, “A frequency weighted approach to robust fault reconstruction,” in Proceedings of the 6th Asian Control Conference (ASCC '06), pp. 355–360, Bali, Indonesia, 2006.
  22. Y. Y. Wang, L. Xie, and C. E. de Souza, “Robust control of a class of uncertain nonlinear systems,” Systems & Control Letters, vol. 19, no. 2, pp. 139–149, 1992. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Zentralblatt MATH
  23. K. Zhang, B. Jiang, and V. Cocquempot, “Adaptive observer-based fast fault estimation,” International Journal of Control, Automation and Systems, vol. 6, no. 3, pp. 320–326, 2008. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  24. Z. Gao and H. Wang, “Descriptor observer approaches for multivariable systems with measurement noises and application in fault detection and diagnosis,” Systems & Control Letters, vol. 55, no. 4, pp. 304–313, 2006. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Zentralblatt MATH
  25. M. J. Khosrowjerdi, “Mixed 2/ approach to fault-tolerant controller design for lipschitz non-linear systems,” Control Theory and Applications, IET, vol. 5, no. 2, pp. 299–307, 2011. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar
  26. K. Adjallah, D. Maquin, and J. Ragot, “Non-linear observer-based fault detection,” in Proceedings of IEEE Conference on Control Applications, pp. 1115–1120, August 1994. View at Scopus
  27. G. Schreier, J. Ragot, R. J. Patton, and P. M. Frank, “Observer design for a class of nonlinear systems,” in IFAC Fault Detection, Supervision and Safety for Technical Processes, pp. 498–503, Kingston Upon Hull, UK, 1997.
  28. E. A. García and P. M. Frank, “Deterministic nonlinear observer-based approaches to fault diagnosis: a survey,” Control Engineering Practice, vol. 5, no. 5, pp. 663–670, 1997. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  29. H. Hammouri, M. Kinnaert, and E. H. El Yaagoubi, “Observer-based approach to fault detection and isolation for nonlinear systems,” IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control, vol. 44, no. 10, pp. 1879–1884, 1999. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Zentralblatt MATH
  30. P. Kabore and H. Wang, “Design of fault diagnosis filters and fault-tolerant control for a class of nonlinear systems,” IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control, vol. 46, no. 11, pp. 1805–1810, 2001. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Zentralblatt MATH
  31. X. Zhang, M. M. Polycarpou, and T. Parisini, “Fault diagnosis of a class of nonlinear uncertain systems with Lipschitz nonlinearities using adaptive estimation,” Automatica, vol. 46, no. 2, pp. 290–299, 2010. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  32. X.-G. Yan and C. Edwards, “Adaptive sliding-mode-observer-based fault reconstruction for nonlinear systems with parametric uncertainties,” IEEE Transactions on Industrial Electronics, vol. 55, no. 11, pp. 4029–4036, 2008. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar
  33. A. T. Vemuri, “Sensor bias fault diagnosis in a class of nonlinear systems,” IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control, vol. 46, no. 6, pp. 949–954, 2001. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Zentralblatt MATH
  34. X.-G. Yan and C. Edwards, “Nonlinear robust fault reconstruction and estimation using a sliding mode observer,” Automatica, vol. 43, no. 9, pp. 1605–1614, 2007. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Zentralblatt MATH
  35. M. Aldeen and R. Sharma, “Estimation of states, faults and unknown disturbances in non-linear systems,” International Journal of Control, vol. 81, no. 8, pp. 1195–1201, 2008. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Zentralblatt MATH
  36. X. Zhang, T. Parisini, and M. M. Polycarpou, “Sensor bias fault isolation in a class of nonlinear systems,” IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control, vol. 50, no. 3, pp. 370–376, 2005. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar
  37. X. Zhang, M. M. Polycarpou, and T. Parisini, “Fault diagnosis of a class of nonlinear uncertain systems with Lipschitz nonlinearities using adaptive estimation,” Automatica, vol. 46, no. 2, pp. 290–299, 2010. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  38. A. M. Pertew, H. J. Marquez, and Q. Zhao, “LMI-based sensor fault diagnosis for nonlinear Lipschitz systems,” Automatica, vol. 43, no. 8, pp. 1464–1469, 2007. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Zentralblatt MATH
  39. G. Besançon, “High-gain observation with disturbance attenuation and application to robust fault detection,” Automatica, vol. 39, no. 6, pp. 1095–1102, 2003. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Zentralblatt MATH
  40. H. J. Marquez, Nonlinear Control Systems: Analysis and Design, John Wiley & sons, New York, NY, USA, 2003.
  41. M. Abbaszadeh and H. J. Marquez, “A robust observer design method for continuous-time Lipschitz nonlinear systems,” in Proceedings of the 45th IEEE Conference on Decision and Control (CDC '06), pp. 3795–3800, December 2006. View at Scopus
  42. L. El Ghaoui, R. Nikoukhah, F. Delebecque, and J. L. Commeau, “LMITOOL-2.0 Package: An Interface to Solve LMI Problems,” Optimization and Control Group, ENSTA, France, 1998.
  43. P. Gahinet, A. Nemirovski, A. J. Laub, and M. Chilali, LMI Control Toolbox, The Math Works, Natick, Mass, USA, 1995.
  44. F. E. Thau, “Observing the state of non-linear dynamic systems,” International Journal of Control, vol. 17, no. 3, pp. 471–479, 1973. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  45. R. Patel and M. Toda, “Quantitative measures of robustness for multivariable systems,” in Proceedings of American Control Conference (ACC '80), San Francisco, Calif, USA, 1980.
  46. Z. Mao, B. Jiang, and P. Shi, “Observer based fault-tolerant control for a class of nonlinear networked control systems,” Journal of the Franklin Institute, vol. 347, no. 6, pp. 940–956, 2010. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Zentralblatt MATH
  47. H. R. Karimi, M. Zapateiro, and N. Luo, “A linear matrix inequality approach to robust fault detection filter design of linear systems with mixed time-varying delays and nonlinear perturbations,” Journal of the Franklin Institute, vol. 347, no. 6, pp. 957–973, 2010. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Zentralblatt MATH
  48. M. Abbaszadeh and H. J. Marquez, “Nonlinear observer design for one-sided Lipschitz systems,” in Proceedings of the American Control Conference (ACC '10), pp. 5284–5289, July 2010.
  49. M. Abbaszadeh and H. J. Marquez, “Robust observer design for a class of nonlinear uncertain systems via convex optimization,” in Proceedings of the American Control Conference (ACC '07), pp. 1699–1704, July 2007. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus