From 43779e6e33fd04912d95043eb07c1b2af1c3f956 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Dane Sabo Date: Wed, 16 Oct 2024 11:06:56 -0400 Subject: [PATCH] vault backup: 2024-10-16 11:06:56 --- 4 Qualifying Exam/3 Notes/Robust Control.md | 4 +++- 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/4 Qualifying Exam/3 Notes/Robust Control.md b/4 Qualifying Exam/3 Notes/Robust Control.md index 47967459..8f711f77 100644 --- a/4 Qualifying Exam/3 Notes/Robust Control.md +++ b/4 Qualifying Exam/3 Notes/Robust Control.md @@ -10,4 +10,6 @@ Robust control works with Not particularly a limit but something to look at: there are a ton of papers that use the word 'robust' but aren't actually doing textbook robust control as Doyle puts it. Instead, they're doing some kind of formal methods and calling it robust because...? Who knows. Here's some examples: [[farzanRobustControlSynthesis2020]] -**Limitation**: Using automated design tools for robust control of SISO systems has its benefits outweighed by the labor involved in creating the weighting transfer functions [@atsumiModifiedBodePlots2012]. \ No newline at end of file +**Limitation**: Using automated design tools for robust control of SISO systems has its benefits outweighed by the labor involved in creating the weighting transfer functions [@atsumiModifiedBodePlots2012]. + +**Limitation**: Disk unstructured uncertainty cannot lend itself to creating individual examples of perturbed plants. It is not as simple as picking a plant that is within the robust control disk, because the transfer function that actually gets you there is lost in the abstraction. Or perhaps generalized. \ No newline at end of file