Stability of time-delay reset systems with a nonlinear and
time-varying base systemII
A. Baños∗, M. A. Davó

arXiv:1605.09174v2 [] 8 Jul 2016

Dpt. Computer and Systems Engineering, University of Murcia, 30100 Murcia, Spain

Abstract
This work is devoted to investigate the stability properties of time-delay reset systems.
We present a Lyapunov-Krasovskii proposition, which generalizes the available results
in the literature, providing results for verifying the stability of time-delay reset systems
with nonlinear and time-varying base system. We demonstrate the applicability of the
proposed results in the analysis of time-delay reset control systems, and an illustrative
example with nonlinear, time-varying base system.
Keywords: Stability; Reset control; Time-delay systems; Impulsive systems; Nonlinear
systems.

1. Introduction
The investigation of reset systems was started more than fifty years ago with the
seminal work of Clegg [1], and carried on with a series of works by Horowitz and coworkers
([2, 3]). The main motivation for the study of reset systems arises from reset control ([4]),
since reset compensation may achieve fast and robust control solutions for problems under
linear limitations, which as it is well-known are particularly severe in the case of control
systems with time-delays ([5]). A large number of works have shown the advantages of
reset control over linear control ([6, 7, 8, 4]).
The term reset system was first introduced by Hollot, Chait, and coworkers ([9]) to
denote a “linear and time invariant system with (state-dependent) mechanisms and laws
to reset their states to zero”. Two distinctive characteristics of reset systems are that
the resetting law is state-dependent, and that (some) states are reset to zero. Therefore,
reset systems can be considered as a special type of impulsive/hybrid systems, in which
the system state (or a part of it) is instantaneously zeroed out at those instants in which
the system solution intersects some reset set. On the other hand, time-delay systems (see
the monographs [10, 11, 12], or for example the works [13, 14, 15, 16, 17]) are a natural
target for reset control. As a result, time-delay reset systems have a clear interest in
I c 2016.
This manuscript version is made available under the CC-BY-NC-ND 4.0 license
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/
∗ Corresponding author
Email address: abanos@um.es (A. Baños)

control practice and have been an active research topic in the last decade ([18, 19, 4]).
In addition, it should be noted that impulsive systems (without time-delays) have been
a very active research topic in different areas of mathematics and systems theory ([20,
21, 22, 23]), where the research effort has been concentrated in systems with impulses
at fixed/variable instants. However, as it has been discussed in ([4, 24]) reset systems
(with a time invariant base system) are a special case of autonomous impulsive systems,
a much less developed research topic in the literature. On the other hand, time-delay
impulsive systems, or more specifically impulsive functional differential equations, have
been investigated in a number of works. Again, most of the research effort has been
concentrated in systems with impulses at fixed instants ([25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30]), and
to a lesser extent in systems with impulses at variable times ([31]). Note that the vast
majority of stability results for impulsive functional differential equations uses LyapunovRazumikhin techniques (see [32] and references therein).
This work is focused on the internal stability analysis of time-delay reset systems
by using a Lyapunov-Krasovskii approach, with the goal of obtaining conditions formulated by using Lyapunov-Krasovskii functionals. To the knowledge of authors, all the
previous published results from the impulsive functional differential equations literature
are restricted to systems with impulses at fixed times, and thus they are not applicable
to our case, or are based on Lyapunov-Razumikhin techniques. In spite of that, the
Lyapunov-Krasovskii approach has been already investigated in the area of reset systems; in particular, a delay-independent condition is obtained in [18] for reset control
systems, and, in addition, extension to delay-dependent conditions is given in [19], and
more recently in [33], considering a more general resetting law (anticipative reset). Also,
quadratic stability of time-delay reset control systems with uncertainty in the resetting
law has been analyzed in [34]. In general, a previous work [35] suggests that it is necessary a deeper analysis of Lyapunov-Krasovskii functionals, focusing into the necessity of
obtaining less restrictive conditions. A first attempt to obtain less restrictive conditions
is [35], where it has been proposed criteria based on bounded increments of the functional after the reset instants. In addition, input-output stability has been investigated in
[36], based on the previous Lyapunov-Krasovskii results, and in [37], based on passivity
properties of reset systems [38], and the IQC framework.
To the authors knowledge, all the previous published results are about reset systems
with a linear and time-invariant (LTI) base system, and most of them are based on the
existence of a Lyapunov-Krasovskii theorem; and therefore, the proof of that theorem
has been only sketched, making the generalization to nonlinear and time-varying systems
challenging. On the other hand, some preliminary works [39, 40, 41] have extended
the hybrid inclusion model developed in [42] to investigate hybrid systems with timedelays, based on a generalized concept of solutions. In addition, the results in [40]
provide sufficient conditions for the stability analysis of hybrid systems with time-delays,
using Lyapunov-Razumikhin functions, but application to reset control system is still
unexplored. On the other hand, although [41] approaches the case of reset systems, it
deals with a restrictive class of reset systems in which the time-delay only affects a part
of the state and thus its applicability is very limited in practice.
The main result of this work is the development of a Lyapunov-Krasovskii theorem
for reset systems, in which the resetting law is generalized in the sense that the state
may be reset to a non-zero value after a reset action, and in addition the base system is
nonlinear and time-varying. In this way, this work is devoted to provide a formal and
2

complete proof, and then to analyze reset systems with a LTI base system as a particular case. The paper is structured as follows. After formally stating the problem in
Section 2, the main stability result is given in Section 3. In Section 4, two application
cases of the stability result are shown; firstly, a general reset system with a LTI base
system and a single time-delay; and secondly, a particular reset system with a nonlinear
and time-varying base system. The work concluded in Section 5 with some final remarks.
Notation: R is the set of real numbers, R+ is the set of non-negative real numbers, Rn
is the n-dimensional euclidean space, where kxk is the euclidean norm for x ∈ Rn , and
>
(x, y), with column vectors x ∈ Rn and y ∈ Rm , denotes the column vector x> y>
.
PC([a, b], F ) is the set of piecewise continuous functions from [a, b] to F , that is the set
of functions that are continuous on [a, b] except in a finite number of points (tk )N
k=1 ,
and with a norm kψk = supθ∈[a,b] kψ(θ)k. R(A) and N (A), for a matrix A ∈ Rn×m ,
stand for the column space and the null space of A, respectively. diag(A, B) is a block
diagonal matrix composed by the matrices A ∈ Rn×n and B ∈ Rm×m . For a symmetric
matrix A ∈ Rn×n , λm (A) and λM (A) stand for the minimum and maximum eigenvalue,
respectively.
2. Preliminaries
Consider a state-dependent time-delay reset system given by the impulsive differential
equation

x(t) ∈
/ M,
 ẋ(t) = f (t, xt ),
x(t+ ) = I(t, xt ), x(t) ∈ M,
(1)

x(t) = φ(t − t0 ), t ∈ [t0 − h, t0 ],
where t0 ∈ R+ is the initial instant, x(t) ∈ Rn is the system state at the instant
t ∈ [t0 − h, ∞), xt ∈ PC([−h, 0], Rn ) is the distributed state at the instant t ∈ [t0 , ∞),
that is xt (θ) = x(t + θ) for θ ∈ [−h, 0], and the initial condition is a function φ ∈
PC([−h, 0], Rn ). Henceforth, it will be denoted PC = PC([−h, 0], Rn ) for notational
simplicity. It is considered that the reset is applied at instants tk ∈ [t0 , ∞) if x(tk ) ∈ M,
where M ⊂ Rn is the reset set. It is assumed that reset instants are well-posed, that is for
any initial condition φ ∈ PC there exists a finite or infinite sequence of well defined reset
instants Tφ = (t1 , t2 , · · · ), such that they are distinct and satisfy t0 < t1 < t2 < · · · ; and
also that reset instants are Zeno-free, that is if the reset instants sequence is infinite then
tN → ∞ as N → ∞. Otherwise, as well as in the case of free-delay impulsive dynamical
systems ([22]), pathological behaviors like beating and existence of Zeno solutions may
be present. A simple manner to guaranty that reset instants are well-posed and Zeno-free
is to use time regularization (see for example [4]), which means that reset instants satisfy
tk+1 −tk > ∆, k = 0, 1, 2, . . ., for some ∆ > 0 (the initial instant t0 is not a reset instant).
Thus, the existence and uniqueness of solutions of the reset system (1) follows from
the existence and uniqueness of the following initial-value problem

 ż(t) = f (t, zt ),
z(t) = xtk (t − tk ), t ∈ [tk − h, tk ),
(2)

z(tk ) = I(tk , xtk ),
3

where t ≥ tk and xtk ∈ PC is the initial condition. It will be assumed that the initial
value problem (2) has a unique solution for t ≥ tk (see Corollary 3.1 in [25]). For example, that there exist constants M , N ∈ R+ such that kf (t, ψ)k ≤ M + N kψk for all
(t, ψ) ∈ R+ × PC; and that f is locally Lipschitz, that is for each compact set Ω ⊂ Rn
there exists some constant K ∈ R+ such that kf (t, ψ1 ) − f (t, ψ2 )k ≤ Kkψ1 − ψ2 k for all
t ∈ R+ and all ψ1 , ψ2 ∈ PC([−h, 0], Ω). Thus, the initial-value problem is well-posed and
for every (tk , xtk ) ∈ R+ × PC, there exists a continuous and unique solution z(tk , xtk )(t)
for all t ∈ [tk , ∞).
Hence, the solution x(t0 , φ) of (1) is made up of an initial condition φ and a sequence
of continuous solution segments z(tk , xtk ), that is

z(t0 , φ)(t),
t ∈ [t0 , t1 ],



 z(t1 , xt1 )(t), t ∈ (t1 , t2 ],
x(t0 , φ)(t) =
(3)
..

.



z(tk , xtk )(t), t ∈ (tk , tk+1 ].
If the sequence of reset instants is finite then x(t0 , φ)(t) = z(tN , xtN )(t), t ∈ (tN , ∞).
In addition, note that the solution is left-continuous with right limits, and there exists
jump discontinuities at the reset instants tk , k = 1, 2, · · · , that is the limits x(t+
k ) and
−
x(t−
)
exist,
and
x(t
)
=
x(t
).
k
k
k
Suppose f (t, 0) = 0 and I(t, 0) = 0 for all t ∈ R+ . The trivial solution xt = 0 of system (1) (henceforth named zero solution) is said to be stable if for any t0 ∈ R+ and  > 0,
there exists δ = δ(t0 , ) such that kφk < δ implies kx(t)k <  for t ≥ t0 . In addition, the
solution xt = 0 is uniformly stable if δ = δ(). On the other hand, the zero solution is
said to be asymptotically stable if it is stable and there exists δ0 = δ0 (t0 ) > 0 such that
limt→∞ kx(t)k = 0 whenever kφk < δ0 . The solution is uniformly asymptotically stable
if it is uniformly stable and there exists δ0 > 0 such that, for every η > 0 there exists a
T = T (η) such that kφk < δ0 implies kx(t)k < η for t ≥ t0 + T and for every t0 ∈ R+ ;
moreover, if δ0 can be an arbitrarily large finite number, then xt = 0 is said to be globally
uniformly asymptotically stable.
A function f : R+ → R+ is said to be nondecreasing if f (b) ≥ f (a) for all b > a,
where a, b ∈ R+ , if f (b) > f (a) then it is said to be strictly increasing. In addition, f is
of class K if it is continuous, strictly increasing, and f (0) = 0.
Let V : R+ × PC → R+ be continuously differentiable with respect to all of its
arguments, and let x(t0 , φ)(t) be the solution of the system (1). Thus, V (t, xt ) only has
(jump) discontinuities at t ∈ Tφ . In addition, the upper right-hand derivative of V along
the solution x(t0 , φ) is defined by
V̇ (t, xt ) = lim sup
→0, >0

V (t + , xt+ ) − V (t, xt )


(4)

for all t ∈ [t0 , ∞) \ Tφ . In addition, the increment of V along the solution x(t0 , φ) is
defined by
∆V (t, xt ) = V (t, I(t, xt )) − V (t, xt )
(5)
4

for any t ∈ Tφ .
3. Main Result
In this section, sufficient conditions for stability of the reset system (1) are proposed
as a Lyapunov-Krasovskii theorem, generalizing the basic result for retarded functional
differential equations (without reset actions) (see for example [10, 11]). The result takes
inspiration from [10]; in fact, since in general, for a given initial condition φ, the system
(1) may not have reset actions and thus Tφ = ∅, the proof is identical in that case.
Proposition 3.1: Assume that f is locally Lipschitz, u, v, w : R+ → R+ are continuous nondecreasing functions and in addition u, v ∈ K. If there exists a (LyapunovKrasovskii) functional V : R+ × PC → R+ such that
u(kψ(0)k) ≤ V (t, ψ) ≤ v(kψk)

(6)

for any ψ ∈ Ω = {ψ ∈ PC : kψk < γ} for some γ > 0 and all t ∈ R+ , and that for
every solution x(t0 , φ) of the system (1), V (t, xt ) is continuous for all t ≥ t0 and t0 ∈ R+
except on the set Tφ , and in addition
V̇ (t, xt ) ≤ −w(kxt (0)k),
∆V (t, xt ) ≤ 0,

xt (0) ∈
/ M,
xt (0) ∈ M,

(7)
(8)

where V̇ and ∆V are evaluated along the trajectories of (1) with xt ∈ Ω, then the zero
solution of (1) is uniformly stable. If w(s) > 0 for s > 0 then the solution is uniformly
asymptotically stable. In addition, if lims→∞ u(s) = ∞ and Ω = PC, then it is globally
uniformly asymptotically stable.
Proof: (Uniform stability) For a given  > 0, let set 1 < min(, γ), then it can be
found some δ = δ(1 ), 0 < δ < 1 , such that v(δ) < u(1 ). Suppose that x(t0 , φ)(t)
is the solution of (1) for (t0 , φ) ∈ R+ × PC. Therefore, x(t0 , φ)(t) is continuous on
[t0 − h, ∞) \ Tφ , where Tφ = {t1 , t2 , · · · } is the set of reset instants corresponding to
the initial condition φ, and t0 < t1 . Now, we will prove that kx(t0 , φ)(t)k < 1 <  for
any initial condition φ, with kφk < δ, and t ≥ t0 . By contradiction, if it is false then
kx(t0 , φ? )(t? )k ≥ 1 at some instant t? ≥ t0 , and for some initial condition φ? , with
kφ? k < δ . Let T ≥ t0 be given by T = min{t? ∈ R+ : lims→t? ,s>t? kx(t0 , φ? )(t? )k ≥ 1 }.
Note that if T ∈ Tφ? then kI(T, xT )k = 1 , otherwise kx(T )k = 1 ; thus, as a result,
we have kx(t0 , φ? )(t)k < 1 for t ∈ [t0 , T ). In addition, let Tφ? = {t?1 , t?2 , · · · } be the
sequence of reset instants corresponding to the initial condition φ? ; since reset instants
are well-posed and Zeno-free then there exists N > 0, defined as the largest integer for
which t?N ≤ T . Now, since δ < 1 , conditions (7) and (8) imply
V (t, xt ) ≤ V (t?k , I(t?k , xt?k )) ≤ V (t?k , xt?k )

(9)

for t ∈ (t?k , t?k+1 ], k = 1, 2, · · · , N − 1, and
V (t, xt ) ≤ V (t0 , φ? )
5

(10)

for t ∈ [t0 , t?1 ]. Since, in addition, V (T, xT ) ≤ V (t?N , xtN ? ), and kφ? k < δ < 1 ≤ γ,
combining (9)-(10) and (6) it follows
V (T, xT ) ≤ V (t0 , φ? ) ≤ v(kφ? k) < v(δ) < u(1 ),

(11)

But, from (6) and (8), it follows
u(1 ) = u(kx(T )k) ≤ V (T, xT ) if T ∈
/ Tφ?

(12)

u(1 ) = u(kI(T, xT )k) ≤ V (T, I(T, xT )) ≤ V (T, xT ) if T ∈ Tφ? ,

(13)

t0 + (2k − 1)h ≤ τk ≤ t0 + 2kh,

(14)

and
which is a contradiction in both cases.
(Uniform asymptotic stability) In this case, the proof is a bit more involved. For
 > 0 choose δa > 0 such as v(δa ) < u(min{, γ}), thus it is true that kφk < δa implies
kx(t0 , φ)(t)k < min(, γ) for t ≥ t0 . Now, it will be shown that for any η > 0 there exists
some T (δa , η) such that kx(t0 , φ)(t)k < η for any φ, with kφk < δa , and t ≥ t0 + T . This
is equivalent to prove that kxt0 +T k < δb , where v(δb ) = u(min{η, γ}). By contradiction,
suppose that there not exists such T , that is there exist some η > 0 and a solution
x(t0 , φ? )(t), with kφ? k < δa , such as kxt k ≥ δb for all t ≥ t0 . Thus, there exists a
sequence (τk ), k = 1, 2, · · · such that
where τk ∈
/ Tφ? = {t?1 , t?2 , · · · } and kx(τk )k ≥ δb . Since it is assumed that the system (1)
has well-posed and Zeno-free reset instants, and t0 is not a reset instant, then t0 < t?1 <
t?2 < · · · , and if Tφ? is infinite then t?N → ∞ as N → ∞. In addition, since f is locally
Lipschitz, and by uniform stability kx(t0 , φ? )(t)k < min(, γ) for t ≥ t0 , then there exists
a constant L > 0 such that kẋ(t)k < L for all t ∈ [t0 , ∞) \ Tφ . Therefore, it is possible
δb 2
δb 1
αk , τk + 2L
αk ] with αk1 , αk2 ∈ {0, 1}, αk1 + αk2 ≥ 1,
to build a set of intervals Ik = [τk − 2L
that do not contain reset instants and do not overlap (by using a number L > 0 large
enough and proper values of αk1 , αk2 ), that is Ik ∩ Tφ? = ∅, k = 1, 2, · · · , and then by
using the mean-value theorem on the intervals [τk , t] ⊂ Ik and [t, τk ] ⊂ Ik
kx(t0 , φ? )(t)k = kx(τk ) + ẋ(τk + θ1 (t − τk ))(t − τk )k,

(15)

kx(t0 , φ? )(t)k = kx(τk ) − ẋ(τk + θ2 (τk − t))(τk − t)k

(16)

for some θ1 , θ2 ∈ (0, 1), and then

kx(t0 , φ? )(t)k ≥ kx(τk )k − kẋ(τk + θ(t − τk ))k|t − τk | ≥

δb
2

(17)

for any t ∈ Ik and some θ ∈ (−1, 1). In addition, from (7) it is true that V̇ (t, xt ) ≤
−w(kx(t)k) ≤ −w( δ2b ) < 0, for any t ∈ Ik , this means that V (t, xt ) is decreasing with
at least a ratio −w( δ2b ) in each interval Ik , k = 1, 2, · · · . On the other hand, the reset
instants in the sequence Tφ? = {t?1 , t?2 , · · · } may be renamed as Tφ? = {t?k,l }, where the
reset instant t?k,l corresponds to the lth -instant prior to τk ∈ Ik , that is
δb 1
t0 ≤ t?1,1 < t?1,2 < · · · t?1,N1 < τ̌1 = τ1 − 2L
αk
δb 2
?
?
< τ̂1 = τ1 + 2L αk < t2,1 < · · · t2,N2 < τ̌2 < · · ·
6

(18)

for some integers N1 , N2 , · · · ≥ 0. Note that N1 , N2 , · · · do exist since reset instants are
well-posed and Zeno-free. Therefore, by integrating V̇ (t, xt ) over the interval [τ̌1 , τ̂1 ] and
using also (8), it is obtained
V (τ̌1 , xτ̌1 ) ≤ V (t?1,N1 , I(t?1,N1 , xt?1,N )) ≤ V (t?1,N1 , xt?1,N ) ≤ · · · ≤ V (t0 , φ? )
1

and

1

δb
(αk1 + αk2 )
V (τ2 , xτ2 ) ≤ V (τ̂1 , xτ̂1 ) ≤ V (τ̌1 , xτ̌1 ) − w( δ2b ) 2L
δ
δ
≤ · · · ≤ V (t0 , φ? ) − w( 2b ) 2Lb (αk1 + αk2 ).

(19)

(20)

Finally, since αk1 + αk2 ≥ 1 for k = 1, 2, . . ., then repeating the reasoning for any τk , it
follows
δb
δb
V (τk , xτk ) ≤ V (t0 , φ? ) − w( )(k − 1) ,
(21)
2
2L
and then for a large enough k it results that V (τk , xτk ) < 0, which is a contradiction.
Finally, if lims→∞ u(s) = ∞ and Ω = PC, then δa above may be chosen arbitrarily large,
and  can be set after δa to satisfy v(δa ) < u(). Therefore, global uniform asymptotic
stability can be concluded. 2

4. Application cases
In the following cases, it will be assumed that reset instants are time-regularized, and
thus they are well-posed and Zeno-free. In addition, the rest of assumptions in Prop. 3.1
can be easily checked to be satisfied, and it will not be explicitly shown.
4.1. Reset systems with a LTI base system and single time-delay
In this section, we establish delay-independent stability conditions for time-delay reset
systems with LTI base system as in [18], here the provided proof is linked to the main
stability result of Section 3. Consider a special case of (1), in which the base system is
a LTI base system with a single time-delay, given by

/ M,
 ẋ(t) = Ax(t) + Ad x(t − h), x(t) ∈
x(t+ ) = AR x(t),
x(t) ∈ M,
(22)

x(t) = φ(t),
t ∈ [−h, 0],
for arbitrary values of A and Ad , and where t0 = 0 is the initial instant, and the reset
matrix AR takes the form AR = diag(In̄ρ , 0nρ ), n̄ρ = n − nρ . The reset action is applied
on the last nρ states of the vector x ∈ Rn at those instants in which the state reaches
the reset set defined as M = {x ∈ Rn : Cx = 0} for some row vector C ∈ R1×n . The
asymptotic stability of this system can be analyzed by the following proposition.
Proposition 4.1: If there exist (symmetric) matrices P , Q > 0 such that
 >

A P + P A + Q P Ad
M=
<0
A>
−Q
dP
and

Θ> (A>
R P AR − P )Θ ≤ 0
7

(23)

(24)

for some Θ with R(Θ) = N (C), then the zero solution of system (22) is globally asymptotically stable.
Proof: Consider the Lyapunov-Krasowskii functional V : PC → R+ given by
Z 0
ψ > (θ)Qψ(θ) dθ,
V (ψ) = ψ(0)> P ψ(0) +

(25)

−h

with P , Q the matrices of the proposition. For this functional, since P , Q > 0 it is true
that
V (ψ) ≤ λM (P )kψ(0)k2 + hλM (Q)kψk2 ≤ (λM (P ) + hλM (Q))kψk2 = v(kψk)

(26)

and
V (ψ) ≥ λm (P )kψ(0)k2 + hλm (Q)kψk2 ≥ λm (P )kψ(0)k2 = u(kψ(0)k),

(27)

where u, v : R+ → R+ are continuous nondecreasing functions and u, v ∈ K. On the
other hand, the derivative of V along the solutions of (22), after some manipulation, is
given by



x(t)
V̇ (ψ) = x> (t) x> (t − h) M
.
(28)
x(t − h)
Therefore, condition (23) is obtained, and it implies
−V̇ (xt ) > λm (−M )(kx(t)k2 + kx(t − h)k2 ) ≥ λm (−M )(kx(t)k2 ) = w(kx(t)k)

(29)

for all x(t) ∈
/ M, where w : R+ → R+ is a continuous nondecreasing function and w ∈ K.
Finally, condition (24) is obtained by setting ∆V (xt ) = x> (t)(A>
R P AR − P )x(t) ≤ 0 and
considering that x ∈ M implies that there exist y such that x = Θy. As a result, all the
conditions of Proposition 3.1 are satisfied and thus the zero solution of the system (22)
is globally asymptotically stable. 2
Example 4.1: Consider the time-delay reset system (22) with matrices






−2
0
−1
1
a1 0
A=
,
Ad =
,
AR =
.
0 −0.9
−1 −0.5
a2 a3

(30)

The base system is asymptotically stable independently of the time-delay since there
exist matrices P and Q such that condition (23) is satisfied (see for example [11]). Now
suppose that C = ( 1 0 ), then condition (24) is satisfied whenever |a3 | ≤ 1, and thus, the
reset system is globally asymptotically stable. Moreover, if a2 = 0, |a1 | ≤ 1 and |a3 | ≤ 1
then the asymptotic stability of the reset control system is guaranteed for any row vector
C. The trajectory of the reset system with C = [ −2 1 ], h = 1, a1 = 1, a2 = 0 and a3 = 0
is shown in Fig. 1a. In addition, Fig. 1b shows the value of the Lyapunov-Krasovskii
functional along this trajectory. Note that the Lyapunov-Krasovskii functional obeys
the two conditions in Prop. 4.1, decreasing both during the continuous dynamic and the
jumps.

8

1

15

0.5
V

x

10

5

0

0

2

4

6

0

0

2

Time
(a) Trajectory: x1 (dashed) and x2 (solid).

4
Time

6

(b) Lyapunov-Krasovskii functional.

Figure 1: Trajectory and value of the Lyapunov-Krasovskii functional in the Example
4.1.
4.2. Reset system with a nonlinear and time varying base system
In general, for a reset system with nonlinear and time-varying base system without a particular structure, there is not systematic procedure for generating LyapunovKrasovskii functionals candidates. Therefore, in this section the main result is applied
to a reset system with a particular structure.
Example 4.2: Consider a second-order reset system given by
 

ẋ1 (t) = a1 (t)x31 (t) + b1 (t)x31 (t − h) + c1 (t)x2 (t)


, g(x1 (t), x2 (t)) 6= 0,


ẋ2 (t) = a2 (t)x2 (t) + b2 (t)x2 (t − h) + c2 (t)x31 (t)





x1 (t+ ) = x1 (t)


,

x2 (t+ ) = 0

(31)

g(x1 (t), x2 (t)) = 0.

where a1 (t), b1 (t), c1 (t), a2 (t), b2 (t), and c2 (t) are arbitrary continuous bounded functions
with a1 (t), a2 (t) ≤ −δ, |b1 (t)|, |b2 (t)| ≤ 2δ , and |c1 (t)|, |c2 (t)| ≤ 4δ for some given δ > 0.
Here, the reset set M is given as M = {(x1 , x2 ) ∈ R2 : g(x1 , x2 ) = 0, for some g : R2 →
R}.
Consider the candidate functional V be defined by
Z

x4 (t) x22 (t) δ 0 6
V (xt ) = 1
+
+
x1 (t + α) + x22 (t + α) dα,
(32)
4
2
2 −h
where x(t) = (x1 (t), x2 (t)) ∈ R2 and xt = x(t+α), α ∈ [−h, 0]. Let define the continuous
nondecreasing functions u(s) = 41 s4 and v(s) = 2s2 , then the above functional satisfies
condition (6),
u(kxt (0)k) =

1 2
1
(x (t) + x22 (t))2 ≤ (x41 (t) + x22 (t)) ≤ V (xt )
4 1
4
9

(33)

and
V (xt ) ≤ x21 (t) + x22 (t) +

δ
2

Z

0

−h


x21 (t + α) + x22 (t + α) dα ≤ 2kxt k2 .

(34)

q
It is easy to check that the above conditions are satisfied for any kxt k ≤ γ = 15 .
On the other hand, the derivative of the functional along the solutions of system (31)
is given by
δ
δ
V̇ (xt ) = x31 (t)ẋ1 (t) + x2 (t)ẋ2 (t) + (x61 (t) − x61 (t − h)) + (x22 (t) − x22 (t − h)).
2
2

(35)

After some manipulations the derivative of the functional is bounded by
V̇ (xt ) ≤ ξ > (t)M ξ(t),

where ξ(t) = |x1 (t)|3 , |x1 (t − h)|3 , |x2 (t)|, |x2 (t − h)| and

 δ
δ
δ
0
−2
4
4
 δ −δ
0
0 
4
2

M =
δ
δ .
 δ
0 −2
4
4
δ
0
0
− 2δ
4

(36)

(37)

Since M < 0 for any δ > 0, then defining w(s) = λm (−M )s6 it follows

−V̇ (xt ) ≥ λm (−M ) |x1 (t)|6 + |x1 (t − h)|6 + |x2 (t)|2 +|x2 (t − h)|2 ≥ w(kx(t)k) (38)
q
x2 (t)
for any kxt k ≤ 15 , and thus condition (7) is satisfied. Finally, ∆V (xt ) = − 22 , which
is negative for any reset instant, regardless of the function g. Hence, the solution xt = 0
of the system (31) is uniformly asymptotically stable.
Now, consider the reset system with functions a1 (t), b1 (t), c1 (t), a2 (t), b2 (t), and
c2 (t) given by
a1 (t) = 50e−t − 100δ,
a2 (t) = −e−t − δ,

b1 (t) = 2δ sin(t),
b2 (t) = − 2δ ,

c1 (t) = 4δ ,
c2 (t) = 4δ sin(t).

(39)

It can be easily seen that the above functions satisfy the required bounds for any δ >
0.51. In addition, consider the function g(x1 , x2 ) = −5x1 + x2 and the initial condition
1
1
φ(t) = ( 2√
, − 2√
), t ∈ [t0 − h, 0] such that kφk = √110 < √15 . The evolution of the
5
5
system with h = 1 and t0 = 0 is plotted in Fig. 2a. In addition, Fig. 2b shows the
value of the functional (32) along the trajectory. Once again, it can be observed how the
functional always decreases.
5. Conclusions
This work provides Lyapunov-Krasovskii based conditions that guarantee the stability
of time-delay reset systems. In comparison with previous works, the main contribution
has been to consider reset systems, whose base system is nonlinear and time-varying.
As an application, the proposed result have been applied to obtain delay-independent
condition in terms of LMI for time-delay reset control systems. In addition, the stability
of a particular reset system with nonlinear and time-varying base system is analyzed.
10

·10−2
0.2

0

V

x

4

2
−0.2
−1

0

1

2

3

4

Time

(a) Trajectory: x1 (dashed) and x2 (solid).

0

0

1

2
Time

3

4

(b) Lyapunov-Krasovskii functional.

Figure 2: Trajectory and value of the Lyapunov-Krasovskii functional in the Example
4.2.
Acknowledgements
This work has been supported by Ministerio de Economı́a e Innovación of Spain
under project DPI2013-47100-C2-1-P (including FEDER co-funding). The authors thank
helpful comments of Sophie Tarbouriech and Luca Zaccarian, that have motivated the
problem approached in this work.
References
References
[1] J. C. Clegg, A nonlinear integrator for servomechanisms, Trans. of the American Institute of Electrical Engineering 77 (1958) 41–42.
[2] K. R. Krishman, I. M. Horowitz, Synthesis of a non-linear feedback system with significant plantignorance for prescribed system tolerances, International Journal of Control 19 (4) (1974) 689–706.
[3] I. M. Horowitz, P. Rosenbaum, Non-linear design for cost of feedback reduction in systems with
large parameter uncertainty, International Journal of Control 21 (6) (1975) 977–1001.
[4] A. Baños, A. Barreiro, Reset Control Systems, Advances in Industrial Control, Springer, 2012.
[5] K. J. Åström, Limitations on control system performance, European Journal of Control 6 (2000)
2–20.
[6] O. Beker, C. Hollot, Y. Chait, Plant with integrator: an example of reset control overcoming
limitations of linear feedback, IEEE Transaction on Automatic Control 46 (11) (2001) 1797–1799.
[7] M. A. Davó, A. Baños, Reset control of a liquid level process, in: IEEE 18th Conference on Emerging
Technologies & Factory Autom., IEEE, 2013, pp. 1–4.
[8] J. Moreno, J. Guzmán, J. Normey-Rico, A. Baños, M. Berenguel, A combined FSP and reset
control approach to improve the set-point tracking task of dead-time processes, Control Engineering
Practice 21 (4) (2013) 351–359.
[9] O. Beker, C. V. Hollot, Y. Chait, H. Han, Fundamental properties of reset control systems, Automatica 40 (6) (2004) 905–915.
[10] J. K. Hale, S. M. V. Lunel, Introduction to functional differential equations, Springer, New York,
1993.
[11] K. Gu, J. Chen, V. Kharitonov, Stability of Time-Delay Systems, Birkhäuser, 2003.

11

[12] E. Fridman, Introduction to Time-Delay Systems, Systems & Control: Foundations & Applications,
Birkhäuser, 2014.
[13] E. Fridman, A descriptor system approach to H∞ control of linear time-delay systems, IEEE
Transaction on Automatic Control 47 (2) (2002) 253–270.
[14] J. Cao, J. Wang, Delay-dependent robust stability of uncertain nonlinear systems with time-delay,
Applied Mathematics and Computation 154 (1) (2004) 289–297.
[15] F. Ren, J. Cao, Novel α-stability criterion of linear systems with multiple time delays, Applied
Mathematics and Computation 181 (1) (2006) 282–290.
[16] F. Gouaisbaut, D. Peaucelle, Delay-dependent stability of time-delay systems, in: Proceedings of
the 5th IFAC Symposium on Robust Control Design, Toulouse, France, 2006, pp. 453–458.
[17] A. Seuret, F. Gouaisbaut, Wirtinger-base integral inequality: application to time-delay systems,
Automatica 49 (9) (2013) 2860–2866.
[18] A. Baños, A. Barreiro, Delay-independent stability of reset control systems, IEEE Transaction on
Automatic Control 54 (2009) 341–346.
[19] A. Barreiro, A. Baños, Delay-dependent stability of reset systems, Automatica 46 (2010) 216–221.
[20] D. D. Bainov, P. S. Simeonov, Systems with Impulse Effect: Stability, Theory and Applications,
Ellis Horwood, Chichester, UK, 1989.
[21] V. Lakshmikantham, D. D. Bainov, P. S. Simeonov, Theory of Impulsive Differential Equations,
World Scientific, Singapore, 1989.
[22] W. M. Haddad, V. S. Chellaboina, S. G. Nersesov, Impulsive and Hybrid Dynamical Systems:
Stability, Dissipativity, and Control, Princeton Series in Applied Mathematics, 2006.
[23] A. N. Michel, L. Hou, D. Liu, Stability of dynamical systems: continuous, discontinuous, and
discrete systems, Birkhauser, Boston, 2007.
[24] A. Baños, J. I. Mulero, Well-posedness of reset control systems as state-dependent impulsive dynamical sysetms, Abstract and Applied Analysis 2012.
[25] G. Ballinger, X. Liu, Existence, uniqueness and boundedness results for impulsive delay differential
equations, Applicable Analysis: An international Journal 74 (1-2) (2000) 71–93.
[26] M. de la Sen, N. Luo, A note on the stability of linear time-delay systems with impulsive inputs,
IEEE Transactions on Circuits and Systems I: Fundamental Theory and Applications 50 (1) (2003)
149–152.
[27] X. Liu, Stability of impulsive control systems with time delay, Mathematical and Computer Modelling 39 (2004) 511–519.
[28] X. Liu, X. Shen, Y. Zhang, Q. Wang, Stability criteria for impulsive systems with time delay and
unstable system matrices, IEEE Transaction on circuits and systems 54 (10) (2007) 2288–2298.
[29] P. Haghshtabrizi, J. P. Hespanha, A. R. Teel, Stability of delay impulsive systems with application
to networked control systems, Transaction of the Institute of measurement and control 32 (5) (2009)
511–528.
[30] Y. Sun, A. N. Michel, G. Zhai, Stability of discontinuous retarded functional differential equations
with applications, IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control 50 (8) (2005) 1090–1105.
[31] X. Liu, Q. Wang, The method of lyapunov functionals and exponential stability of impulsive systems
with time delay, Nonlinear Analysis 66 (2007) 1465–1454.
[32] I. M. Stamova, Stability Analysis of Impulsive Functional Differential Equations, Walter de Gruyter,
2009.
[33] J. A. Prieto, A. Barreiro, S. Dormido, S. Tarbouriech, Delay-dependent stability of reset control
systems with anticipative reset conditions, in: IFAC Symposium on Robust Control Design, 2012,
pp. 219–224.
[34] Y. Guo, L. Xie, Quadratic stability of reset control systems with delays, in: 10th World Congress
on Intelligent Control and Automation (WCICA), 2012, pp. 2268–2273.
[35] M. A. Davó, A. Baños, Delay-dependent stability of reset control systems with input/output delays,
in: IEEE 52nd Annual Conference on Decision and Control (CDC), 2013, pp. 2018–2023.
[36] P. Mercader, M. A. Davó, A. Baños, H∞ /H2 analysis for time-delay reset control systems, in: 3rd
International Conference on Systems and Control (ICSC), 2013, pp. 518–523.
[37] P. Mercader, J. Carrasco, A. Baños, IQC analysis for time-delay reset control systems with first
order reset elements, in: IEEE 52nd Annual Conference on Decision and Control (CDC), 2013, pp.
2251–2256.
[38] J. Carrasco, A. Baños, A. van der Schaft, A passivity-based approach to reset control systems
stability, Systems & Control Letters 59 (1) (2010) 18–24.
[39] J. Liu, A. Teel, Generalized solutions to hybrid systems with delays, in: Proceedings of the 51st
Annual Conference on Decision and Control, 2012, pp. 6169–6174.

12

[40] J. Liu, A. Teel, Hybrid systems with memory: Modelling and stability analysis via generalized
solutions, in: Proceedings of the 19th IFAC World Congress, 2014.
[41] A. Baños, F. Perez, S. Tarbouriech, L. Zaccarian, Low-Complexity Controllers for Time-Delay
Systems: Delay-independent stability via reset loops, Advances in Delays and Dynamics, Springer
International Publishing, 2014, Ch. 8, pp. 111–125.
[42] R. Goebel, A. R. Teel, R. G. Sanfelice, Hybrid Dynamical Systems: Modeling, Stability, and
Robustness, Princeton University Press, 2012.

13

