Unidentified input observer: comparative study

through Block pulse function and Hybrid function

Anindita Gamguly[1] , Tathagata Roy Chowdhury[2] ,Suman Kumar Ghosh[2] Aishik

Panigrahi[2] , Nilotpal Chakraborty*[2] , Anirudhha Ghosh[3] ,Neelakshi Ganguly[2]
1
Department of Electrical Engineering, Guru Nanak Institute of Technology, West Bengal,
700114, India aninditaganguly80@gmail.com
2
Department of Electrical Engineering, St. Thomas College of engineering and Technology,
West Bengal ,700023 India, tathagataroychowdhury94@gmail.com
,aishikpanigrahi5@gmail.com, nilchakraborty100@gmail.com, neelakshi5597@gmail.com
3
Department of Electrical Engineering, Indian Institute of Technolo-
gy,Dhanbad,Jharkhand,826004 India aniruddhaghosh1993@gmail.com,

Abstract. Often a system can be modeled having unidentified inputs. In order

to achieve certain control objectives, it may be necessary to estimate the inputs
and states for such systems. In this paper to estimate the desired quantities ob-
servers are designed and linear systems are studied with unidentified inputs. To
make the state and input estimation possible, the use of delayed observers is
considered here to enlarge the class of systems. The design procedure encom-
passes the design of Unidentified Input Observers via appropriate choices of de-
sign matrices. For the existence of such observers necessary and sufficient con-
ditions are provided.

Keywords: block pulse functions, hybrid functions, UIO, B.P.F. differential

operation, H.F. algorithm, algebraic approach.

1 INTRODUCTION
When designing control systems, some degree of uncertainty surrounds the
plant. These uncertainties can be incorporated into the system model by treat-
ing them as unidentified inputs. The unidentified inputs may represent some
input uncertainty, unknown external drivers, or instrument faults. The equation
for the Unidentified Input Observer [1] and the derived observer has the differ-
ential of the system outputs. To get the differentiated system outputs we are
using an algebraic method formulated through BLOCK PULSE FUNCTION
(B.P.F.) [2]to estimate the unidentified inputs. Over the last few decades the
Unidentified Input Observer (UIO) [1] has gained significant interest. Re-
2

searchers who have an interest in UIO, proposed various approaches. The

widely popular method is coordinated transformation [3, 4, 5] because of its
systematic approach. An additional differential operator is needed in this sys-
tem. Which makes the problem more complex. So by an algebraic procedure
[1] we are aiming to solve the UIO problem. So the differential of the system
output does not need to solve. This is executed by the orthogonal property of
the HYBRID FUNCTION (H.F.)[6]. It is now possible to rewrite the system
by carefully examining the system and simple algebraic manipulations [1] by
eliminating the unknown inputs. It can be divided into two interconnected sub-
systems [3]. Out of which one is dependent on the known inputs. The Luen-
berger [1, 7, 8] observer is capable of solving any unknown inputs of a system
via an algebraic procedure. In this project we have utilized the Hybrid function
approximation and its applications to differential operations.

2 DETAILS OF ANALYSIS

2.1 Solution by BPF’s differential operation

A brief review of B.P.F.
Block pulse function set ∅(𝑡) = [∅1 (𝑡)∅2 (𝑡) … … … ∅𝑚 (𝑡)]𝑇 is a set of a set of
piecewise constant function and defined in the time interval [0, 𝑡𝑓 ] as follows:-
𝑡𝑓 𝑡𝑓
1, 𝑓𝑜𝑟 (𝑖 − 1) ≤ 𝑡 < 𝑖
∅(𝑡) = { 𝑚 𝑚 … . (1)
0, 𝑜𝑡ℎ𝑒𝑟𝑤𝑖𝑠𝑒
Where, i=1 ,2,…m .
In the equation (1), m is the B.P.F.’s expansion number. B.P.F. has the following
orthogonal and disjoint properties,
𝑡𝑓
𝑡 , 𝑖=𝑗
Orthogonal property: - ∫0 𝑓 ∅𝑖 (𝑡)𝜑𝑗 (𝑡)𝑑𝑡 = {𝑚 … (2)
0, 𝑖 ≠ 𝑗
∅ (𝑡), 𝑖 = 𝑗
Disjoint property: - ∅𝑖 (𝑡)𝜃𝑗 (𝑡) = { 𝑖 … (3)
0, 𝑖 ≠ 𝑗
If an arbitrary function f (t) is absolutely integrable in the interval [0, 𝑡𝑓 )it can be
approximated using B.P.F. expansion as : - 𝑓(𝑡) = ∑𝑚𝑖=1 𝐹𝑖 ∅𝑖 (𝑡) … (4)
𝐹𝑖 is a coefficient of the i-th block pulse function.In the equation (4),the i-th B.P.F' S
coefficient 𝐹𝑖 of an arbitrary function f(t)is determined as follows: -
𝑡𝑓
𝑡𝑓 𝑖
𝑚
𝑚 𝑚 1 𝑡𝑓 𝑡𝑓
𝐹𝑖 = ∫ 𝑓(𝑡)∅𝑖 (𝑡)𝑑𝑡 = ∫ 𝑓(𝑡)𝑑𝑡 [𝑓 (𝑖 ) + 𝑓(𝑖 − 1) ] … (5)
𝑡𝑓 𝑡𝑓 2 𝑚 𝑚
0 𝑡𝑓
(𝑖−1)
𝑚
Where, i=1,2,…m .
The approximation for the forward integral of B.P.F.is: -
𝑡 𝑚
𝑡𝑓 𝑡𝑓
∫ ∅𝑖 (𝜏)𝑑𝜏 ∅𝑖 (𝑡) + ∑ ∅𝑗 (𝑡) … (6)
𝑚 𝑚
𝑜 𝑗=𝑖+1
 3

B.P.F.in differential operation

Similar to (4), if a differential of f (t) is absolutely integrable in the interval[0, 𝑡𝑓 ],
it can be also approximated as (7) by using B.P.F. expansions (9) as: -
𝑚

𝑓(𝑡) = ∑ 𝐹𝑖 ∅̅𝑖 (𝑡) … (7)

𝑖=1
Many researchers resolved the problem by a calculus of variation as: -
𝑓(𝑡+∆𝑡)−𝑓(𝑡) 𝑚 𝑡𝑓 𝑡
𝑓̇(𝑡) = 𝑙𝑖𝑚∆𝑡 0 = ∑𝑚
𝑖=1 [𝑓(𝑖 + 1) 𝑓 (𝑖 𝑓)] … (8)
∆𝑡 𝑡𝑓 𝑚 𝑚
𝑡𝑓
Where ∆𝑡 = and i=1,2….m-1.
𝑚
But in this paper a coefficient 𝐹 ̅𝑖 ..is obtained on the basis of B.P.F.'s orthogonal and
disjoint properties.
To obtain a recursive algorithm for the B.PF’s coefficients of f ̇(t)described by F
and f(0)which are f(t)'s B.P.F coefficients and their initial value respectively. Let us
integrate f(t)in the interval [0,t), which gives,
𝑡
̇ 𝑑𝜏 = 𝑓(𝑡) − 𝑓(0)
∫ 𝑓(𝜏) … (9)
0
Equation (9) can be represented as (10) by using B.P.F's expansions as: -
𝑚 𝑡 𝑚 𝑚
̅𝑖 ∫ ∅𝑖 (𝜏)𝑑𝜏 = ∑ 𝐹𝑖 ∅𝑖 (𝑡) − ∑ 𝑓(0)∅𝑖 (𝑡)
∑𝐹 … (10)
𝑖=1 0 𝑖=1 𝑖=1

Where, 𝑓(𝑡)̇ = ∑𝑚 ̅
𝑖=1 𝐹𝑖 ∅𝑖 (𝑡)
Substituting (6) in (10), we can obtain an equation as,
𝑚 𝑚
𝑡𝑓 𝑡𝑓
̅𝑖 (
∑𝐹 ∅𝑖 (𝑡) + ∑ ∅𝑖 (𝑡)) … (11)
2𝑚 𝑚
𝑖=1 𝑗=𝑖+1

Expanding (11) such as (12),

𝑡𝑓 ̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅
1 1 1
𝑥 {𝐹̅1 ( ∅(𝑡) + ⋯ ∅𝑚 (𝑡)) + ̅̅̅ 𝐹2 ( ∅2 (𝑡) + ⋯ ∅𝑚 (𝑡)) … + ̅𝐹̅𝑚 ̅̅( ∅𝑚 (𝑡))} … (12)
𝑚 2 2 2
By multiplying ∅1 (𝑡), ∅2 (𝑡), … ∅𝑚(𝑡) to (12) sequentially and applying B.P.F.’s
disjoint property, (12) can be deduced as follows,
𝑡𝑓 1
(𝐹̅1 + ̅̅̅
𝐹2 + ⋯ ̅̅̅̅̅
𝐹𝑖−𝑖 + 𝐹 ̅ ) = 𝐹1 − 𝑓(0) … (13)
𝑚 2 𝑖
Then arranging (13) for 𝐹̅𝑖 ,we can obtain (14),
2𝑚
𝐹̅1 = [𝐹̅ − 𝑓(0)] 𝑎𝑛𝑑
𝑡𝑓 1
2𝑚
̅̅̅̅̅
𝐹 𝑖+1 =
̅̅̅̅̅ − 𝐹1 ] − 𝐹
[𝐹 ̅𝑖 … (14)
𝑡𝑓 𝑖+1
for, i=1,2,3…m-2.
In (14), the f(t)' s i-th B.P.F. coefficient 𝐹 ̅𝑖 can be obtained by using 𝐹
̅𝑖 and
f(0),recursively and (15) is the generalised form of (14).
4

𝑖−1
2𝑚
̅𝑖 =
𝐹 ̅𝑖 + (2𝑥(−1)′ ∑(−1) 𝑗 𝐹𝑗 ) + (−1)𝑖 𝑓(0)].
[𝐹
𝑡𝑓
𝑗=1
̇ = ∑𝑚 𝐹̅ for,i=1,2…m ………(15)
Where 𝑓(𝑡) 𝑖=1 𝑖 ∅𝑖 (𝑡)

3 UIO design procedure

3.1Co-ordinate transformation method

Let us consider a linear time-invariant dynamic system represented as follows,
𝑥̇ (𝑡) = 𝐴𝑥(𝑡) + 𝐵𝑢(𝑡) + 𝐷𝑑(𝑡) . . (16)
𝑦(𝑡) = 𝐶𝑥(𝑡)
𝑤ℎ𝑒𝑟𝑒 𝑥 ∈ 𝑅𝑛 , 𝑢 ∈ 𝑅𝑚 𝑎𝑛𝑑 𝑑 ∈ 𝑅𝑞 𝑎𝑟𝑒 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑠𝑡𝑎𝑡𝑒 𝑖𝑛𝑝𝑢𝑡𝑠,
Outputs and the unknown input vectors of the system. In (16), the ranks of the ma-
trix D and C are p(D)=q p(c )=m, respectively. It is well known that if m≥q is satis-
fied, than there exist a similar transformation matrix
0
𝑇1 𝑠𝑢𝑐ℎ 𝑎𝑠 𝑇1 −1 𝐷 = (𝐼 ) 𝑎𝑛𝑑 (16)𝑐𝑎𝑛 𝑏𝑒 𝑟𝑒𝑝𝑟𝑒𝑠𝑒𝑛𝑡𝑒𝑑 𝑎𝑠
𝑞

𝑥1 ∗ (𝑡) = 𝐴11 ∗ (𝑡)𝑥1 ∗ (𝑡) + 𝐴12 ∗ (𝑡)𝑥2 ∗ (𝑡) + 𝐵1 ∗ (𝑡)𝑢1 (𝑡)

𝑥2 ∗ (𝑡) = 𝐴21 ∗ (𝑡)𝑥1 ∗ (𝑡) + 𝐴22 ∗ (𝑡)𝑥2 ∗ (𝑡) + 𝐵2 ∗ (𝑡)𝑢1 (𝑡) + 𝑑(𝑡) … (17)
∗ ∗ (𝑡) ∗ ∗ (𝑡)
𝑦(𝑡) = 𝐶1 𝑥1 + 𝐶2 𝑥2
𝑥 ∗
𝑤ℎ𝑒𝑟𝑒, 𝑥 = 𝑇1 𝑥 ∗ = 𝑇1 ( 1 ∗ ) , 𝑥1 ∗ ∈ 𝑅 (𝑛−𝑞) , 𝑥2 ∗ ∈ 𝑅𝑞 ,
𝑥2
𝐴 ∗𝐴 ∗ 𝐵∗
𝑇1 −1 𝐴𝑇1 = ( 11 ∗ 12 ∗ ) , 𝑇1 −1 𝐵 = ( 1 ∗ ) ,
𝐴21 𝐴22 𝐵2
𝑎𝑛𝑑 𝐶𝑇1 = (𝐶1 ∗ 𝐶2 ∗ )
By defining a variable such as, 𝑧(𝑡) = 𝑥2 ∗ (𝑡) − 𝐵2 ∗ 𝑢(𝑡) − 𝑑(𝑡) − 𝐴∗ 22 𝑥2 ∗ (𝑡)
in (17), (18) can be obtained ,
𝐶1 ∗ 𝐶2 ∗ ⋮ −1𝑚 0 𝑥 ∗ (𝑡)
( ∗ ).( ∗ ) = 0 ……(18)
𝐴21 0 ⋮ 0 − 1𝑞 𝑦 (𝑡)
𝑦(𝑡)
𝑤ℎ𝑒𝑟𝑒, 𝑦 ∗ (𝑡) = ( ) 𝑎𝑛𝑑 𝑧(𝑡) = 𝐴21 ∗ 𝑥1 ∗ (t). Thus, the non-singular
𝑧(𝑡)
mation 𝑇2 ∈ 𝑅 (𝑚+𝑞)+(𝑚+𝑞) , which satisfies (19) exists any
𝐶1 ∗ 𝐶2 ∗ ⋮ −1𝑚 0 𝑀1 0 ⋮ 𝑁1 𝑁2
time.𝑇2 ( )=( ) …(19)
𝐴21 ∗ 0 ⋮ 0 − 1𝑞 𝑀2 0 ⋮ 𝑁3 𝑁4

Using transformation matrix 𝑇2 (18) can be represented as (20), (21)

 5

(𝑀1 + 𝑁2 𝐴21 ∗ )𝑥1 ∗ (𝑡) + 𝑁1 𝑦(𝑡) = 0 …(20)

𝑥2 ∗ (𝑡) = −(𝑀2 + 𝑁4 𝐴21 ∗ )𝑥1 ∗ (𝑡) − 𝑁3 𝑦(𝑡) …(21)
Let us substitute 𝑥2 ∗ (𝑡) in (17) by (21) and define a variable such as 𝑦̅(𝑡) = −𝑁1 𝑦(𝑡)
in (20). As a result of the previous, we can deduce the following (n-q) th order dy-
namic system (22) which consists of 𝑥1 ∗ (𝑡) only.
𝑥1 ∗ (𝑡) = 𝐴0 𝑥1 ∗ (𝑡) + 𝐵1 𝑢(𝑡) − 𝐴12 ∗ 𝑁3 𝑦(𝑡) 𝑎𝑛𝑑
𝑦̅(𝑡) = (𝑀1 + 𝑁2 𝐴21 ∗ )𝑥1 ∗ (𝑡) … (22)
𝑊ℎ𝑒𝑟𝑒, 𝐴0 = 𝐴11 ∗ + 𝐴12 ∗ 𝑀2 + 𝐴12 ∗ 𝑁4 𝐴21 ∗

3.2. Algebraic UIO design procedure

It is obvious that (22) is a convenient from to design a Luenberger type observer.
To design an algebraic observer for (22), let us represent (22) by using B.P.F. expan-
sions,
𝑚 𝑚 𝑚 𝑚
∗
̅̅̅̅
∑𝑋 0 ∗
1 𝑖 ∅𝑖 (𝑡) = 𝐴 ∑ 𝑋𝑖 1 ∅𝑖 (𝑡) + 𝐵1 ∑ 𝑈𝑖 ∅𝑖 (𝑡) − 𝐴
∗ ∗
12 𝑁3 ∑ 𝑌𝑖 ∅𝑖 (𝑡) … (23)
𝑖=1 𝑖=1 𝑖=1 𝑖=2

𝑚 𝑚
∗
∑ 𝑦̅ ∅𝑖 (𝑡) = (𝑀1 + 𝑁2 𝐴21 ) ∑ 𝑋1𝑖 ∗ ∅𝑖 (𝑡)
∗
… … (24)
𝑖=1 𝑖=1

Algebraic Luenberger type observer for (23) can be designed as following,

m 𝑚 𝑚 𝑚
̅ i ∅𝑖 (𝑡) = 𝐴 ∑ 𝑊𝑖 ∅𝑖 (𝑡) + 𝐵𝑖 ∑ 𝑈𝑖 ∅𝑖 (𝑡) − 𝐴
∑W 0 ∗ ∗
12 𝑁3 ∑ 𝑌𝑖 ∅𝑖 (𝑡)
i=1 𝑖=1 𝑖=1 𝑖=2
𝑚 𝑚

+ 𝐿(∑ 𝑈𝑖 ∅𝑖 (𝑡) − (𝑀1 + 𝑁2 𝐴21 ∗ ) ∑ 𝑊𝑖 ∅𝑖 (𝑡)) … (25)

𝑖=1 𝑖=1

Determine an error function as: -

𝑚 𝑚

𝑒(𝑡) = ∑ 𝑊𝑖 ∅𝑖 (𝑡) − ∑ 𝑋 ∗1 𝑖 ∅𝑖 (𝑡) … (26)

𝑖=1 𝑖=1

From (23) and (25), (27)is derived directly as: -

𝑚 𝑚
̅̅̅𝑖 ∅𝑖 (𝑡) − ∑ 𝑋 ∗1 ∅𝑖 (𝑡) = [𝐴0 − 𝐿(𝑀1 + 𝑁2 𝐴21 ∗ )]𝑒𝑖 (𝑡)
𝑒(𝑡) = ∑ 𝑊 … . . (27)
𝑖
𝑖=1 𝑖=1

It is easy to know that the observer gain matrix L in (27) is chosen to have the Eigen
values of the matrix [𝐴0 − 𝐿(𝑀1 + 𝑁2 𝐴21 ∗ )]is negative assignment,proposed algebra-
ic observer can be converged to the actual state of (23)at 𝑡 ∞. By using a relation,
∑𝑚 ̅ 𝑚
𝑖=1 𝑌𝑖 ∅𝑖 (𝑡) = −𝑁1 ∑𝑖=1 𝑌∅𝑖 (𝑡),
6

∑𝑚 ̅̅̅
𝑖=1 𝑊𝑖 (t)∅𝑖 (𝑡) =
𝑚
𝐹 ∑𝑖=1 𝑊𝑖 (𝑡)∅𝑖 (𝑡) +
𝐺 ∑𝑚𝑖=1 𝑈𝑖 (𝑡)𝜑𝑖 (𝑡) +
𝐻 ∑𝑚𝑖=1 𝑌𝑖 (𝑡)𝜑𝑖 (𝑡) … … … (28)
Where F=[𝐴0 − 𝐿(𝑀1 + 𝑁2 𝐴21 ∗ )] G=𝐵1∗ H=−(𝐴12 ∗
𝑁3 + 𝐿𝑁1 )
Now the main problem of algebraic observer equation (28) is how to obtain the
B.P.F coefficients W=[W1,W2,…..Wm]. We note the recursive algorithm which is
deduced by using a proper B.P.F differential operation summarized as follows,
Step1: Obtain the B.P.F expansion equation from (28)
̅̅̅̅
𝑊1 = 𝐹𝑊1 + 𝐺𝑈1 + 𝐻𝑌1
Step2: Adopting (14) for ̅̅̅̅
𝑊1
2𝑚
̅̅̅̅
𝑊1 = [𝑊1 − 𝜔(0)]
𝑡𝑓
Step3: The first B.P.F coefficients 𝑊𝑖 which is obtained from step 1 and step 2 to
be equal
𝑡𝑓 −1 𝑡𝑓 𝑡𝑓
𝑊1 = (𝐼 − 𝐹) × [𝜔(0) + 𝐺𝑈1 + H𝑌1 ] … … … . (29)
2𝑚 2𝑚 2𝑚
Step4: Sum of the i-th and (i+1) th B.P.F coefficients of(28)

̅̅̅̅̅̅
𝑊 ̅̅̅ ̅̅̅̅̅̅ ̅̅̅ ̅̅̅̅̅̅ ̅̅̅̅ ̅̅̅̅̅ ̅
𝑖+1 + 𝑊𝑖 = 𝐹(𝑊𝑖+1 + 𝑊𝑖 ) + 𝐺(𝑈𝑖+1 + 𝑈𝑖 ) + 𝐻(𝑌𝑖+1 + 𝑌𝑖)
Step5:Redo like step 2
̅̅̅̅̅̅
𝑊 ̅̅̅ 2𝑚 [𝑊𝑖+1 + 𝑊𝑖 ]
𝑖+1 + 𝑊𝑖 = 𝑡𝑓
Step 6: Redo like step 3 for Wi+1 by using step 4 and step 5
−1
𝑡𝑓 𝑡𝑓 𝑡𝑓 𝑡𝑓
𝑊𝑖+1 = (𝐼 − 𝐹) × [(𝐼 + 𝐹) 𝑊𝑖 + 𝐺(𝑈𝑖+1 + 𝑈𝑖 ) + 𝐻(𝑌𝑖+1 + 𝑌𝑖 )
2𝑚 2𝑚 2𝑚 2𝑚
For i= 1,2,3….. m-1 …………….(30)
Therefore B.P.F coefficients W=[W1,W2…….Wm] can be obtained recursively
from 29,30. Finally from 21 estimated staes of the system (16) can be obtained by
state construction sich as (31),
X(t)=T1× [∑𝑚 ∗ 𝑚 𝑚
𝑖=1 𝑊𝑖 𝜑𝑖 (𝑡) − (𝑀2 + 𝑁4 𝐴21 ) ∑𝑖=1 𝑊𝑖 𝜑𝑖 (𝑡) − 𝑁3 ∑𝑖=1 𝑌𝑖 𝜑𝑖 (𝑡)] ...(31)
From (17) . If (t) 𝑊𝑖 𝜑𝑖 (𝑡) in (31), an equation for UIO estimation is deduced as
follows ,
d(t)=- (𝑀2 + 𝑁4 𝐴∗21 )(𝑡) − 𝑁3 𝑦(𝑡) − (𝐴∗21 − 𝐴∗22 (𝑀2 + 𝑁4 𝐴∗21 )) (𝑡) ……(32)
+(𝐴∗22 𝑁3 𝑦(𝑡) − 𝐵2∗ 𝑢(𝑡)
In (32) UIO estimation can be achieved by additional differentiation of system out-
puts . By using B.P.F expansion and its differential operation (14), it can be estimates
as algebraic form (33)
d(t)=Q∑𝑚 𝑚 𝑚 𝑚
𝑖=1 𝑊𝑖 𝜑𝑖 (𝑡) + 𝑅 ∑𝑖=1 𝑌𝑖 𝜑𝑖 (𝑡) + 𝑆 ∑𝑖=1 𝑈𝑖 𝜑𝑖 (𝑡) − 𝑁3 ∑𝑖=1 𝑌⎺𝑖 𝜑𝑖 (𝑡)
where Q=)=[- (𝑀2 + 𝑁4 𝐴21 )𝐹 − 𝑁3 𝑦(𝑡) − (𝐴21 − 𝐴22 (𝑀2 + 𝑁4 𝐴∗21 ))] … (33)
∗ ∗ ∗

R=-[−(𝑀2 + 𝑁4 𝐴∗21 )𝐻 − 𝐴∗22 𝑁3 ] and S=−[(𝑀2 + 𝑁4 𝐴∗21 )𝐺 + 𝐵2∗ ]

In (33) it is east to note that the differential of system output can be from (34)
2𝑚
𝑌̅1 = [𝑌1 − 𝑦(0)]
𝑡𝑓
 7

2𝑚
̅̅̅̅̅̅
𝑌𝑛+1 = [𝑌𝑖+1 − 𝑌1 ] − 𝑌̅1 ……………………………….(34)
𝑡𝑓
For i=1,2,…..m-1

Example 1:
Let us consider the following linear time-invariant dynamical systems with
unknown inputs [3], [5]. For the convenience of the simulation, u(t) is omitted
without loss of generality.
−2 −2 0 1 0
𝑥̇ (𝑡) = [ 0 0 1 ] 𝑥(𝑡)+ [0 1] 𝑑(𝑡)
0 −3 −4 0 0
1 0 1
𝑦(𝑡) = [ ] 𝑥(𝑡) .......... (35)
0 1 0
From the previous UIO design procedure, the coordinate transformation
matrices T1 and T2 are determined as follows.
0 0 1 0
0 1 0
0 0 0 1
𝑇1 = [0 0 1] 𝑎𝑛𝑑 𝑇 2 = [ ] .......... (36)
1 0 0 0
1 0 0
0 1 0 0
The observer gain is chosen such us𝐿 = [1 1]and the derived algebraic ob-
server equation is as follows.
∑𝑚 𝑚 𝑚
𝑖=1 𝑊 i∅i(𝑡) = −4 ∑𝑖=1 𝑊 i∅i(𝑡) + [0 −3] ∑𝑖=1 𝑌 i∅i(𝑡) … … (37)

Derived recursive formulas for the algebraic observer equation (37) are as fol-
lows.
𝑊 1 = [0 −0.125] 𝑌1
𝑊 i+1 = 0.667𝑊 i + [0 −0.125] 𝑌i

And an algebraic equation for unknown inputs estimation is as follows.

2 2 5 ∑𝑚
𝑑̂ (𝑡) = [ ] ∑𝑚 𝑊 i∅i(𝑡) + [ ] 𝑌i∅i(𝑡)
−1 𝑖=1 0 0 𝑖=1
1 0 𝑚
+[ ] ∑ 𝑌 i∅i(𝑡) … … … . (38)
0 1 𝑖=1
5
In this Example 1, we assume that 𝑑(𝑡) = [ ]and choose tf= 10sec. and m =
3
100.
Now, we have compared the estimated output for 𝑥1 (𝑡), 𝑥2 (𝑡), 𝑥3 (𝑡) in Table
1, thereby providing the graphs in Fig. 1,Fig2. And Fig.3 to aid the results ob-
tained.
8

x1(t) by x1(t) by x2(t) by x2(t) by x3(t) by x3(t) by

B.P.F. R.K.-4 B.P.F. R.K.-4 B.P.F. R.K.-4
-0.3399 0 -0.149 0 0.018 0
0.1346 -0.028 0.154 0.298 0.049 -0.039
0.4679 -0.104 0.456 0.590 -0.005 -0.139
0.6877 -0.218 0.750 0.869 -0.117 -0.276
0.8171 -0.361 1.031 1.134 -0.266 -0.435
0.8755 -0.525 1.296 1.382 -0.435 -0.605
0.8793 -0.702 1.543 1.613 -0.614 -0.778
0.8415 -0.887 1.773 1.826 -0.795 -0.949
0.7730 -1.076 1.984 2.023 -0.974 -1.114
0.6826 -1.265 2.178 2.204 -1.145 -1.271
Table 1:Comparison of the estimated output for 𝑥1 (𝑡), 𝑥2 (𝑡), 𝑥3 (𝑡)

Fig. 1:Comparison between actual and estimated solution via B.P.F. for 𝑥1 (𝑡).
 9

Fig. 2:Comparison between actual and estimated solution via B.P.F. for 𝑥2 (𝑡).

Fig. 3:Comparison between actual and estimated solution via B.P.F. for 𝑥3 (𝑡).
10

4 CONCLUSION

To decouple the unknown inputs from the systems in the UIO design process, the
method of coordinate transformation has been adopted. To estimate the state vectors a
Luenberger type observer is designed for the system from which the unidentified
inputs are decoupled. Here an improved B.P.F. and H.F. differential operation is used
to eradicate such problem in an algebraic form. To check the efficiency of the pro-
posed method an arbitrary example is carried out by using a MATLAB (version
R2015b) programming. All the programming and the simulations with the compara-
tive study between the B.P.F., H.F. and R.K. - 4 methods with its corresponding Ta-
bles and Figures are given.

References
1. [ 1] P.Ahn,"Unknown Input Observer Design Via Block Pulse Functions",,Vol-4, No.3,
September,2002.
2. [2] Z. H. Jiang and W. Schaufelberger, “Block-pulse function And their and their appli-
cation in control systems”, Springer-Verlag, 1990.
3. [3] Y. Guan and M. Saif, “A nobel approach to the design of unknown input observer”,
IEEE ytans. Automatic Control, vol.36, pp.632-635, 1991.
4. [4] M. Hou and P. C. Muller, “Design of observers for linear systems with unknown in-
puts”, IEEE Trans. Automatic Control, vol.37, pp. 871-875, 1992.
5. [5]M. Darouach, M. Zasadzinski and S. J. Xu.“Full-order Observers for linear systems
with unknown inputs”, IEEE Trans. Automatic Control, vol. 39. Pp. 606-609. 1994.
6. [6] A.Deb, G.Sarkar, A.Ganguly and A.Biswas, “Approximation, integration and differ-
entiation of time functions using a set of orthogonal hybrid functions (HF) and their appli-
cation to solution of first order differential equations”, vol.218, issue 9, 1 Jan, 2012, pp.
7. 4731-4759, Applied Mathematics and Computation.
8. [7] D. G. Luenberger, “Observing the state of a linear system”, IEEE Trans. Mil, Elec-
tron., vol. MIL-8, pp.74-80, Apr. 1964.