Discontinuous energy shaping control of the
Chaplygin sleigh
Joel Ferguson ∗ Alejandro Donaire ∗∗ Richard H. Middleton ∗

arXiv:1801.06278v1 [cs.SY] 19 Jan 2018

∗
School of Electrical Engineering and Computing and PRC CDSC,
The University of Newcastle, Callaghan, NSW 2308, Australia (e-mail:
Joel.Ferguson@uon.edu.au; Richard.Middleton@newcastle.edu.au).
∗∗
Department of Electrical Engineering and Information Theory and
PRISMA Lab, University of Naples Federico II, Napoli 80125, Italy,
and with the School of Electrical Eng. and Comp. Sc. of the
Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, QLD, Australia
(e-mail: alejandro.donaire@qut.edu.au)

Abstract: In this paper we present an energy shaping control law for set-point regulation
of the Chaplygin sleigh. It is well known that nonholonomic mechanical systems cannot be
asymptotically stabilised using smooth control laws as they do no satisfy Brockett’s necessary
condition for smooth stabilisation. Here, we propose a discontinuous control law that can be
seen as a potential energy shaping and damping injection controller. The proposed controller is
shown to be robust against the parameters of both the inertia matrix and the damping structure
of the open-loop system.
Keywords: Nonholonomic systems; port-Hamiltonian systems; discontinuous control; robust
control.
1. INTRODUCTION

Mechanical systems are often subject to constraints which
restrict the motion of the system. These constraints are
often categorised as begin either holonomic or nonholonomic. Holonomic constraints refer to static relationships
between configuration variables which, in effect, restricts
the configuration space of a system. Nonholonomic constraints, however, refers to all constraints that cannot be
described in this manner (Goldstein, 1980). Of particular
interest to this work, the constraints that arise from nonslip condition of wheels are necessarily described as a
relationship between the configuration and velocity of a
system (Bloch et al., 2003). As such, these constraints
restrict in what directions the system can move and therefore, they are nonholonomic. In this work, we consider
the Chaplygin sleigh which is a benchmark system widely
used for nonholonomic control design (van der Schaft and
Maschke, 1994; Astolfi, 1996; Lee, 2007; Fujimoto et al.,
2012; Tian and Li, 2002; Bloch and Reyhanoglu, 1992).
Nonholonomic systems with constraints that are linear in
velocities can be represented as port-Hamiltonian (pH)
system with Lagrange multipliers that enforce the constraints. In the work of van der Schaft and Maschke
(1994) it was shown that by reducing the dimension of
the momentum space, these systems have an equivalent
representation without Lagrange multipliers. The reduced
representation is essentially ‘constraint free’ insofar as any
state in the reduced state-space is permissible. Important
to this work, the Chaplygin sleigh admits such a representation (Astolfi et al., 2010).

Here, we utilise this ‘constraint free’ representation of the
Chaplygin system to develop a control law to achieve setpoint regulation of the system. Unfortunately, as it is
well known, Brockett’s necessary condition for asymptotic
stabilisation using smooth feedback control is not satisfied
by nonholonomic mechanical systems. As a consequence,
this class of system cannot be stabilised using continuously differentiable control laws (Brockett, 1983). This
restriction does not rule out the possibility of asymptotic
stabilisation using non-smooth controllers, which has been
achieved in (Astolfi, 1996; Fujimoto et al., 2012). In this
work, we propose a discontinuous energy shaping control
law for the Chaplygin system.
While control of the Chaplygin system (and nonholonomic
systems generally) has been extensively studied, control
methods that exploit the natural passivity of the system
are quite limited. Similar to the method proposed here, a
discontinuous energy shaping control law was proposed by
Fujimoto et al. (2012) for the rolling coin system—which
is encompassed in the Chaplygin system used here—to
asymptotically stabilise the system. A different approach
was taken by Lee (2007) where a switching strategy was
used to drive a mobile robot—which again is encompassed
in the Chaplygin system used here—to a compact set
containing the origin.
Previously, we studied the control of the Chaplygin system in (Ferguson et al., 2016) by switching between two
manifold regulating control laws where each law could
be considered to be energy shaping controllers. Here, we
extend this previous work by proposing a single energy
shaping control law that drives the configuration of the
system to the origin. By exploiting the passivity properties

"
cos θ
Q(q) = sin θ
0


y
u
l

#


ml
0
p
2

J + ml2 
J(p) = 

ml
−
p2
0
2
 J + ml 
m
0
M=
,
(2)
0 J + ml2
where m is the mass of the sleigh and J is the rotational
inertia about the centre of mass.

(x, y)

θ

0
0
1

x

Fig. 1. The Chaplygin sleigh is fixed to the ground at the
point (x, y). It is able to pivot about this point and
move forwards in the u direction. The point (x, y) is
constrained from moving in a direction perpendicular
to u. The centre of mass is indicated by the red spot
and is a distance l from the point (x, y).
of the open-loop system, the controller is robust against
both the inertia and damping matrices.
The remained of the paper is structured as follows: The
Chaplygin sleigh model is presented and the problem
formulated in section 2. In Section 3 the discontinuous,
potential energy shaping controller is presented and the
stability properties of the closed-loop are analysed in
section 4. A numerical simulation of the closed-loop is
presented in Section 5 and conclusions drawn in section
6.
Notation: For a differentiable function H(x), ∇H denotes
>
the column vector of partial derivatives ∂∂xH . Given a
differentiable function f (x) ∈ Rn , ∂f
∂x denotes the standard
Jacobian matrix. 0n is a matrix of dimension n × n with
all elements equal to zero whereas 0n×m is a n × m matrix
of all zeros. In denotes a n × n dimension identity matrix.
2. PROBLEM FORMULATION
2.1 Chaplygin sleigh model
This paper is focused on control design for the Chaplygin
sleigh system (Figure 1). This system can be modelled as
a pH system of the form (Astolfi et al., 2010):
  

 

03
Q(q)
q̇
∇q H
03×2
=
+
u
ṗ
I2
−Q> (q) J(p) − D(q, p) ∇p H
(1)
y = ∇p H
1 > −1
H = p M p,
2
with generalised coordinates q = (x, y, θ), where x and
y denote the position at which the sleigh is fixed to the
ground in the x − y plane and θ describes the sleigh’s
heading angle, p = (p1 , p2 ) is the momentum and D(q, p)
is the damping matrix satisfying D = D> ≥ 0. The system
matrices are given by

In the special case where l = 0, this system coincides
with the knife edge system (Bloch et al., 2003). The knife
edge system is closely related to the rolling disk system,
studied in (Fujimoto et al., 2012), which has an extra
state associated with the roll angle of the disk. If the roll
angle from the rolling disk is ignored, it coincides with the
knife edge system. Due to the relationship between these
systems, the regulating controller developed in this paper
can be applied to either of these examples.
2.2 Problem statement
Considering the Chaplygin sleigh system (1), our objecting
is to design a control law
u = u(q, p)
(3)
such that limt→∞ q(t) = 0n .
3. DISCONTINUOUS CONTROL LAW
The approach taken to control the Chaplygin system is to
first perform two consecutive coordinate transformations,
q → z → w. The control law is then designed in
the w coordinates where the control objective can be
achieved by potential energy shaping using a quadratic
potential function. The stability analysis relies heavily on
the relationship between the z and w coordinates.
3.1 Transformation q → z
The first of our coordinate transformations q → z is
defined by the mapping
" #
"
#" #
z1
0
0
1 x
z = z2 = fz (q) , cos θ sin θ 0 y .
(4)
z3
sin θ − cos θ 0 θ
The Chaplygin system (1) can be expressed in the coordinates (z, p) by the equations
  

 

03
Qz (z)
ż
∇z H
03×2
=
+
u
ṗ
∇p H
I2
−Q>
z (z) J(p) − Dz (z, p)
y = ∇p H
1
H = p> M −1 p,
2
(5)
with Qz and Dz defined by
"
#
0 1
∂fz
Qz (z) =
(q)Q(q)|q=fz−1 (z) = 1 −z3
∂q
0 z2
Dz (z, p) = D(p, q)|q=fz−1 (z) .
(6)

The reason for expressing the system as a function of z is
the structure of Qz in (6). Importantly, Qz has a full-rank
left annihilator
Q⊥
(7)
z (z) = [−z2 0 1] .
3.2 Transformation z → w
Similar to the transformation to z in the previous subsection, we now consider the coordinate transformation
z → w. The proposed transformation is given by


" #
z1
w1
w = w2 = fw (z) , z2 z1−1 − 2z3 z1−2  .
(8)
w3
2z3 z1−2
The inverse transformation z = fw−1 (z) is given by


" #
w1
z1


z = z2 = fw−1 (w) , w1 w12 + w1 w3  .
(9)
2
z3
w1 w3
2
This are two important properties that have motivated
this choice for fw : Firstly, the mapping fw−1 : w → z is
smooth. This means that if a solution w(t) is bounded,
then z(t) is be bounded also. Secondly, the entire set
{w ∈ R3 |w1 = 0} corresponds to z = 03×1 . This means
that in the w coordinates, the control objective can be
addressed simply by regulating the variable w1 to zero
whilst keeping w2 and w3 bounded.
The Chaplygin system (5) can be expressed as a function
of (w, p) by the equations
  

 

03
Qw (w)
ẇ
∇w H
03×2
=
+
u
ṗ
∇p H
I2
−Q>
w (w) J(p) − Dw (w, p)
y = ∇p H
1
H = p> M −1 p,
2
(10)
with Qw and Dw defined by
∂fw
Qw (w) =
(z)Qz (z)|z=fw−1 (w)
∂z

0
1
2w2
1


− w3 − w12 w3 
1 −
=

w1
2


2w2
0
w12
Dw (w, p) = Dz (p, z)|z=fw−1 (w) .
(11)
Importantly, the matrix Qw is ill-defined at w1 = 0. This
has the consequence of the dynamics (10) being undefined
at this point. As such we define the set on which the
dynamics (10) are defined:
U = {(w, p) ∈ R5 |w1 6= 0}.
(12)
The dynamics (10) are well defined on the set U .
3.3 Regulation control law
Consider the following control law as a solution to the
problem statement:


0 0
 k  ∇p H
u(w, p) = −Q>
w Lw − D̂∇p H − 0
(13)
w12
| {z }
Di (w)

where D̂ ∈ R2×2 is positive definite, L = diag(l1 , l2 , l3 )
where each li ∈ R is positive and k > 0 is a constant.
Remark 1. Considering the Chaplygin system (5), the
term ∇p H can be expressed as a function of z, ż as

 
z 1 ż1
∇p H = 3
.
(14)
1 0 ż2
Thus, the control law (13) can be written independent of
the mass matrix M .
Remark 2. The control law (13) is independent of the
open-loop damping Dw and is, thus, robust against this
parameter.
Remark 3. The control law (13) has been given as a
function of (w, p) but can be equivalently expressed as a
function of (z, p) or (q, p) using the mappings fw (8) and
fz (4).
Now we show that the closed-loop system admits a Hamiltonian representation.
Proposition 4. Consider the Chaplygin system (10) in
closed-loop with the control law (13). The closed-loop
dynamics are given by
  


0n×n
Qw (w)
ẇ
∇w Hd
=
ṗ
∇p Hd
−Q>
w (w) J(p) − Dd (w, p)
(15)
1 > −1
1 >
Hd = p M p + w Lw,
2
2
where
Dd (w, p) = Dw (w, p) + D̂ + Di (w).
(16)
Proof. The proof follows from direct matching. 2
The control law (13) can be interpreted as potential energy
shaping plus damping injection. To see this, first notice
that the role of the term −Q>
w Lw is to add the term
1 >
2 w Lw to the closed-loop Hamiltonian. This term can be
considered a potential function in w. Secondly, the term
−D̂∇p H − Di ∇p H is to increase the damping from Dw to
Dd in closed-loop.
4. STABILITY ANALYSIS
We now analyse the asymptotic behaviour of the closedloop system (15). Note, however, that the analysis is not
straightforward as the right-hand side of the dynamic
equation is discontinuous. In fact, considering the form
of Qw in (11), the closed-loop dynamics are not defined at
w1 = 0. This is even more troublesome when we consider
that we wish to regulate the system to a configuration
satisfying w1 = 0.
With this in mind, we will determine the asymptotic
behaviour of the system in two steps: Firstly, it is shown
that the choice of Di in (13) has the consequence that,
provided that w1 (0) 6= 0, then w1 (t) cannot reach zero
in finite time. This means that the closed-loop dynamics
are well defined for all finite time. The second step is to
show that the system cannot be positively invariant on the
set U . As a consequence, we show that w1 tends towards
zero asymptotically but will not reach this configuration
in finite time.
Our result requires the following Lemma:

Lemma 5. Any real valued function f (x) satisfies the
inequality,
2
Z x2
Z x2
1
−
f 2 (x)dx
f (x)dx ≥ −
(17)
x2 − x1
x1
x1
where x2 > x1 are in the domain of f .
Proof. The proof is provided in the appendix.

2

It will now be shown that any solution to the closed-loop
dynamics (15) cannot satisfy w1 (T ) = 0 for any finite time
T < ∞.
Lemma 6. The set U is positively invariant. That is, if
(w(0), p(0)) ∈ U , (w(t), p(t)) ∈ U for all time t ≥ 0.
Proof. First note that the time derivative of Hd satisfies
Ḣd = −∇>
p Hd Dd ∇p Hd
>
(18)
< ∇p Hd Di ∇p Hd
≤ 0.
As Hd is quadratic in p, w, (18) this implies that for any
solution with initial conditions in U , p(t) and w(t) will
be bounded over any time interval in which the solution
is contained within U . We denote such an interval as
∆t = [0, T ). Considering Qw in (11), as p(t) is bounded ∆t,
ẇ1 (t) is bounded on the same time interval. Boundedness
of ẇ1 implies that limt→T w1 (t) exists for all T .
Now, for the sake of contradiction, assume that
limt→T w1 (t) = 0 for some finite T ∈ [t0 , ∞). Taking
any interval [t1 , T ], such that t1 ≥ 0, pick t0 such that
w1 (t0 ) = max{w1 (t)} ∀t ∈ [t1 , T ]. From (18) it can be
verified that time derivative of Hd satisfies
k
k
Ḣd (t) ≤ − 2 ∇p2 Hd2 (t) = − 2 ẇ12 (t)
(19)
w1 (t)
w1 (t)
Integrating with respect to time from t0 to T
Z T
k
(20)
Hd (T ) − Hd (t0 ) ≤ −
ẇ12 (t)dt
2
t0 w1 (t)
As w1 (t0 ) = max{w1 (t)}∀t ∈ [t0 , T ],
Z T
k
0
(21)
ẇ2 (t)dt
Hd (T ) − Hd (t ) ≤ − 2 0
w1 (t ) t0 1
Applying Lemma 5 to this inequality yields
!2
Z T
k
1
0
Hd (T ) − Hd (t ) ≤ − 2 0
ẇ1 (t)dt
w1 (t ) T − t0
t0
1
2
(w1 (T ) − w1 (t0 ))
T − t0
1
k
≤− 2 0
w2 (t0 )
w1 (t ) T − t0 1
k
≤−
.
T − t0
(22)
0
As T −t ≤ T −t1 is arbitrarily small, the right hand side of
this inequality can be made arbitrarily large by choosing a
small enough time interval. However, Hd is lower bounded,
thus we have a contradiction. Thus, we conclude that
there is no finite T such that limt→T w1 (t) = 0. As a
consequence, U is positively invariant. 2
≤−

k

w12 (t0 )

As the set U is positively invariant, the closed-loop dynamics (15) are well defined for all time. We now show

that w1 (t) tends to zero asymptotically. This will be done
by considering two properties. Firstly, as Ḣd ≤ 0, the
trajectories (w(t), p(t)) are confined to a compact set. Secondly, it is shown that there is no subset of U that satisfies
Ḣd = 0 identically. Combining these two properties, it can
be deduced that w1 → 0.
Lemma 7. Consider the closed-loop dynamics (15). On the
set U there is no solution to (w(t), p(t)) satisfying Ḣd = 0
identically.
Proof. From (18), it can be seen that time derivative of
Hd satisfies
Ḣd ≤ −p> M −1 D̂M −1 p.
(23)
As D̂, M > 0, for (23) to be identically equal to zero, p
must be identically equal to zero. This means that ṗ = 0
along such a solution.
Evaluating the ṗ dynamics of (15) at p = ṗ = 0 results in


∂ > fw
>
>
−Qw (w)Lw = − Q (z)
Lw = 02 . (24)
−1
∂z
z=fw
(w)
Recalling that Qz has a left annihilator given by (7), (24)
is satisfied if
∂ > fw
Lw = Q⊥
a(w),
(25)
−1
z z=fw
(w)
∂z z=fw−1 (w)
where Q⊥
z is defined by (24) and a ∈ R is an unknown, possibly state dependant, function. Rearranging (25) results
in
∂ > fw−1 ⊥
(26)
Qz z=f −1 (w) a.
Lw =
w
∂w
Using the definition of fw−1 in (9) and Q⊥
z in (7), (26) can
be evaluatedto find

" #
1 w2 + w3 w1 w3 "−w w − w w #
w1
1 2
1 3

w1
0 
0
L w2 = 0
a. (27)

1 2
w3
1
w1
0
w1
2
The second row of (27) implies that w2 = 0. Substituting
w2 into the first row of (27) implies that w1 = 0. However,
such a solution is not contained in U , thus, there is no
trajectory in U such that Ḣd = 0 identically. 2
We are now in a position to determine the asymptotic
behaviour of the closed-loop system (15). The typical approach to verifying asymptotic properties of pH systems
is to first show that the system is stable as Hd (t) ≤
Hd (0). Then asymptotic stability is shown by application of LaSalle’s theorem together with some detectability requirements. Here, there are two problems with this
approach. Firstly, the dynamics are ill-defined at w1 =
0, thus, the point (w, p) = (03×1 , 02×1 ) cannot be an
equilibrium—although it behaves just like one in the sense
that if (w, p) starts small, it stays small. Secondly, as the
system dynamics are not defined for w1 = 0, LaSalle’s
theorem does not apply. The following Proposition provides an argument which is similar in nature to LaSalle’s
theorem to show that w1 (t) tends towards 0. Considering
the transformation (9), this means that z(t) tends towards
03×1 , satisfying the control objective.
Proposition 8. Consider the closed-loop dynamics (15)
with initial conditions (w(0), p(0)) ∈ U . The system verifies:

(i) For each  > 0 there exists a δ() > 0 such that
||(w(0), p(0))|| < δ =⇒ ||(w(t), p(t))|| < .
(ii) limt→∞ q(t) = 03×1 .
Proof. For this proof, we let x = (p, w). Noting that as
Ḣd ≤ 0 for all time, Hd (t) ≤ Hd (0). As Hd is quadratic in
w and p, claim (i) can be verified to be true. Furthermore,
this means that the set
{x|Hd (x) ≤ Hd (0)}

(28)

is both bounded and positively invariant.

First note that limt→∞ Hd = HL exists and is in the set
[0, Hd (0)] as Hd (t) is monotonic and bounded below by
zero. Now define the set

3
2
1
0
-1

-3
-4
-5
-6
-6

-4

-2

0

2

4

6

(29)

which is bounded. By Lemma 6, together with claim (i),
the set V is positively invariant. Let x(x0 , t) denote the
solution such the x(x0 , 0) = x0 ∈ V .
Consider a solution x(x0 , t) to the system. As the right
hand side of (15) is smooth on V , it is locally Lipschitz.
Thus, the solution x(x0 , t) exists and is unique for all time.
By the Bolzano-Weierstrass theorem, the solution admits
an accumulation point as t → ∞. The set of all accumulation points is denoted L+ . Furthermore, L+ is compact
and x(t) → L+ as t → ∞. (See Section C.3 Khalil for
details).
+

Now suppose that W = L ∩ V 6= ∅. By definition,
for each y ∈ W , there exists a sequence tn such that
limn→∞ x(tn ) = y. As Hd is continuous and limt→∞ Hd =
HL , Hd (W ) = HL .
By the continuity of solutions on V and claim (i), a
solution x(y, t) is contained in W . Thus, such a solution
satisfies Ḣd (t) = 0.
But by Proposition 7, there is no solution in the set U
satisfying Ḣ = 0 identically. Thus we conclude that W = ∅
L+ is contained in the set
V̄ \ V = {x|H(x) ≤ H(0), w1 = 0}.

4

-2

The proof of claim (ii) follows from similar argument to
LaSalle’s invariance principle. The proof is as follows:

V = U ∩ {x|Hd (x) ≤ Hd (0)}

5

(30)

As x(t) → L+ , w1 → 0.
Considering the transformation fw−1 in (9) and the fact
that w(t) is bounded, w1 (t) → 0 implies that z(t) → 03×1 .
Then, considering the transformation fz in (4), z(t) →
03×1 implies that q(t) → 03×1 as desired. 2
Notice that although q tends towards the origin, the
asymptotic behaviour of p has not been established.
Clearly p(t) ∈ L∞ as 12 p> M −1 p < Hd (t) ≤ Hd (0) for
all time. Further analysis is considered beyond the scope
of this paper and left as future work.
5. SIMULATION RESULTS
In order to demonstrate the effectiveness of the control
strategy, a numerical simulation was preformed. The parameters used for the open-loop Chaplygin system were
m = 2, J = 1, l = 1 and

Fig. 2. Chaplygin sleigh initialised from several initial conditions. The system is controlled by a discontinuous,
potential energy shaping controller which drives the
configuration to the origin.

1
p
0
 0.1 + p2

1
.
D=


1
p
0
2
0.1 + p2


The expression √

1
0.1+p2i

(31)

is an approximation of Coulomb

friction (Gómez-Estern and van der Schaft, 2004) and
assumed to be unknown for control purposes. The inertial
parameters, m and J, are also assumed to be unknown.
The control law (13) was utilised for control with the
following parameters:
L = diag(2, 0.5, 0.8)
k = 0.1

(32)

D̂ = diag(4, 8).
The Chaplygin sleigh was initialised from an assortment
of positions and the simulation was run for 100 seconds.
The resulting path of each simulation is shown in Figure 2
where the ghosted images of the sleigh represent the initial
positions and the solid image of the sleigh is the target
final position. The time histories of the configuration,
momentum and control signals for each run can be found
in Figures 3, 4 and 5, respectively. Notice that although we
have not proved convergence of the functions p(t) or u(t),
they appear well behaved in the numerical simulation.
Notice that the simulation plotted in blue, which was
initialised at (x, y, θ) = (−3, −2, 18 π), takes a rather
inefficient path to the origin. This is because it was
initialised close to the set parametrised by w1 = z1 = θ =
0, on which the control law and closed-loop are not defined.
As a result of this singularity, initial conditions close to
θ = 0 will have a large initial closed-loop Hamiltonian Hd .
To dissipate this energy from the closed-loop, the system
traverses a long path before converging. Simulations with
initial conditions away from this singularity take more
‘natural’ paths.

Configuration

Control action

2

0

u1

x

5

0

-5
0

20

40

60

80

100

10
-2

y

0

0

20

40

60

80

100

0

20

40

60

80

100

5
-10
0

20

40

60

80

100

u2

5
0

0
-5
0

20

40

60

80

100

Fig. 3. Time history of the configuration variables of
the closed-loop Chaplygin sleigh system from several
simulation scenarios.

p1

Fig. 5. Time history of the control signals of the closedloop Chaplygin sleigh system from several simulation
scenarios.

Momentum

1

0

-1
0

20

40

60

80

100

0

20

40

60

80

100

1

p2

-5

0

-1

Fig. 4. Time history of the momentum variables of the
closed-loop Chaplygin sleigh system from several simulation scenarios.
6. CONCLUSION
In this paper we presented a discontinuous control law
for the Chaplygin sleigh system which is robust against
both the inertial parameters and damping structure of the
open-loop system. The proposed control law is successful
in driving the configuration of the system to the origin.
The results were demonstrated by performing numerical
simulations to verify the theoretical claims. In future work,
we aim to both extend the analysis to characterise the
behaviour of the momentum and control signals as well
as extend the controller to apply to a wider class of
nonholonomic systems.
REFERENCES
Astolfi, A. (1996). Discontinuous control of nonholonomic
systems. Systems & Control Letters, 38(27), 15–37.
Astolfi, A., Ortega, R., and Venkatraman, A. (2010). A
globally exponentially convergent immersion and invari-

ance speed observer for mechanical systems with nonholonomic constraints. Automatica, 46(1), 182–189.
Bloch, A., Baillieul, J., Crouch, P., and Marsden, J. (2003).
Nonholonomic Mechanics and Control. Springer-Verlag,
New York.
Bloch, A. and Reyhanoglu, M. (1992). Control and
stabilization of nonholonomic dynamic systems. IEEE
Transactions on Automatic Control, 37(11), 1746–1757.
Brockett, R.W. (1983). Asymptotic stability and feedback
stabilization. In Differential Geometric Control Theory,
181–191. Birkhauser, Boston.
Ferguson, J., Donaire, A., and Middleton, R.H. (2016).
Switched PassivityBased Control of the Chaplygin
Sleigh. In Proc. IFAC Symposium on Nonlinear Control
Systems, 1012–1017. Elsevier B.V., Monterey, California.
Fujimoto, K., Sakai, S., and Sugie, T. (2012). Passivity
based control of a class of Hamiltonian systems with
nonholonomic constraints. Automatica, 48(12), 3054–
3063.
Goldstein, H. (1980). Classical Mechanics. AddisonWesley, Reading, MA, 2 edition.
Gómez-Estern, F. and van der Schaft, A. (2004). Physical damping in IDA-PBC controlled underactuated mechanical Systems. European Journal of Control, 10(5),
451–468.
Lee, D. (2007). Passivity-Based Switching Control for
Stabilization of Wheeled Mobile Robots. In Proc.
Robotics: Science and Systems, 8.
Lieb, E.H. and Loss, M. (2001). Analysis. American
Mathematical Society, Providence, RI, 2 edition.
Tian, Y.P. and Li, S. (2002). Exponential stabilization of
nonholonomic dynamic systems by smooth time-varying
control. Automatica.
van der Schaft, A. and Maschke, B.M. (1994). On the
Hamiltonian formulation of nonholonomic mechanical
systems. Reports on Mathematical Physics, 34(2), 225–
233.

Appendix A. PROOFS
Proof of Lemma 5 By the Schwarz inequality (Lieb
and Loss, 2001), any two real valued functions f (x), g(x)
satisfy
 2 Z x2
Z x2
Z x2
f 2 (x)dx
g 2 (x)dx. (A.1)
f (x)g(x)dx ≤
x1

x1

x1

Taking g(x) = 1, (A.1) simplifies to
 2 Z x2
Z x2
Z x2
1dx
f 2 (x)dx
f (x)dx ≤
x1
x1
x1
Z x2
≤ (x2 − x1 )
f 2 (x)dx (A.2)
x1

Z

x2

2 Z
f (x)dx ≤

x2

1
f 2 (x)dx
x2 − x1
x1
x1
Taking the negative of this inequality results in
2
Z x2
Z x2
1
−
f 2 (x)dx
f (x)dx ≥ −
x2 − x1
x1
x1
as desired. 2

(A.3)

