Abstract

Lawrence & Rugh (1995), Kaminer et al. (1995) propose that the realisation for a gain-scheduled controller should be chosen to satisfy a local linear equivalence condition. However, this provides an inadequate basis selecting an appropriate realisation. Many realisations satisfy the local linear equivalence condition yet are not equivalent and can exhibit quite different dynamic behaviour. Furthermore, the condition imposes restrictions on the controller states and inputs which are not a priori necessary.