Observability matrix: What is its rank?

$\begingroup$

I'm writing a controller for an inverted pendulum in which the state vector isn't completely measurable. The state vector is $\mathbf{x}\in\mathbb{R}^4$ and the output vector is $\mathbf{y}\in\mathbb{R}^2$.

The worked examples of evaluating observability that I've found all use $\mathbf{y}\in\mathbb{R}^1$, so I'm reaching out here to ask whether I'm correctly calculating rank of the observability matrix $O$.

The output matrix $C$ is$$ C = \begin{bmatrix} 1&0&0&0 \\ 0&0&1&0 \end{bmatrix} $$

The observability matrix $O$ is$$ O = \begin{bmatrix} C \\ CA \\ CA^2 \\ CA^3 \end{bmatrix} $$

A rounded version of the system matrix $A$ is$$ A = \begin{bmatrix} 0&10&0&0\\ 1&0&0&0\\ 0&-20&0&0\\ 0&0&1&0\end{bmatrix} $$

The resulting observability matrix $O$ is then

$$ O = \begin{bmatrix} \begin{bmatrix}1&0&0&0\\0&0&1&0\end{bmatrix}\\ \begin{bmatrix}0&10&0&0\\0&-20&0&0\end{bmatrix}\\ \begin{bmatrix}10&0&0&0\\-20&0&0&0\end{bmatrix}\\ \begin{bmatrix}0&100&0&0\\0&-200&0&0\end{bmatrix}\\ \end{bmatrix} $$

Clarifications

1. On taking the rank of nested matrices

Wikipedia defines the rank of a matrix A is the dimension of the vector space generated (or spanned) by its columns. Could I not say that $O$ is full rank 1 of 1 because it contains a single column of nonzero elements?

No, in this context we view this not as a 4x1 of 2x4 but as a melded 8x4 matrix. Rank is then established by checking linear independence of the four columns.

2. On how the output matrix $C$ is represented

The way I represented the output matrix $C$ here as $q$x$n$ where $\mathbf{x}\in\mathbb{R}^n$ and $\mathbf{y}\in\mathbb{R}^q$is in accordance with the Wikipedia article on State-Space.

However, the two controls textbooks I'm looking at:

  • Feedback Control of Dynamic Systems (6th Edition) (FPE)
  • Control Systems Engineering (7th Edition) (Nise)

strictly consider cases in which the shape of $\mathbf{x}$ and $\mathbf{y}$ is identical. The shape of the $C$ matrix is always $1$x$n$. Zero terms in $C$ are used to represent un-measurable terms in the output vector $\mathbf{y}$. For example, let $\mathbf{x} = \begin{bmatrix}\dot\theta\\\theta\\\dot\phi\\\phi\end{bmatrix}$. If only the terms $\dot\theta$ and $\dot\phi$ appear in the output vector $\mathbf{y}$, then the C matrix is given as $C = \begin{bmatrix}1&0&1&0\end{bmatrix}$

This approach feels misleading to me, as a term in the output vector $\mathbf{y}$ that's always zero is conceptually different from a term that doesn't appear at all. Nonetheless, it's valid for the sake of calculating rank.

$$ O = \begin{bmatrix} 1&0&1&0\\ 0&-10&0&0\\ -10&0&0&0\\ 0&-100&0&0 \end{bmatrix} $$

Conclusion

Both approaches show one three columns with linear independence and one without. Therefore the rank is 3.

$\endgroup$ 6

1 Answer

$\begingroup$

You've evaluated it correctly although it is easier to see the rank through the columns in this case. The last column of zeros places an upper bound on the rank at 3; from that alone you can conclude the system is not observable. Specifically, the first three columns are linearly independent so then you can conclude the rank is 3 and therefore you can only observe the evolution of the system in a 3 dimensional subspace of the entire state-space. Note that last column of zeros indicate that you cannot observe the evolution of the 4th state.

$\endgroup$ 2

Your Answer

Sign up or log in

Sign up using Google Sign up using Facebook Sign up using Email and Password

Post as a guest

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

You Might Also Like