Next: 4.2.5 Terminal cone
Up: 4.2 Proof of the
Previous: 4.2.3 Spatial control perturbation
Contents
Index
4.2.4 Variational equation
We are now interested in how the difference between the trajectory
arising from a spatial (needle) perturbation and the optimal trajectory
propagates after the perturbation stops acting, i.e., for
.
To study this question, let us
begin by writing
|
(4.16) |
for
, where
is a quantity that we want to characterize and
is the same as in Section 4.2.3. We know from (4.14) that
exists and is given by
|
(4.17) |
We now derive a differential equation that
must satisfy on the time interval
, where both
and
have the same corresponding control
. It is clear from (4.16) that
|
(4.18) |
(the existence of this partial derivative, and therefore of
, for
will become evident in a moment).
Let us rewrite the system (4.7) as an integral equation:
Differentiating both sides of this equation with respect to
at
and using (4.16) with
and (4.17),
we obtain
which, in view of (4.16) and (4.18), amounts to
Taking the derivative with respect to
, we conclude that
satisfies the differential equation
|
(4.19) |
We will use this equation to describe
how spatial perturbations propagate with time.
Pictorially, the role of
is illustrated
in Figure 4.6, with the understanding that the labels
involving
are accurate only up to terms of order
.
Figure:
Propagation of a spatial perturbation
|
The equation (4.19) can be written in the form
|
(4.20) |
where
. This system is simply the
linearization of the original system (4.7) around
the optimal trajectory
. Recall that a more detailed description of the system (4.7) is given by (4.5). Letting
be the corresponding components of
and writing out the variational equation (4.19) in terms of these
components, we easily arrive at
(because
and
do not depend on
). Here
is a row vector (the transpose of the gradient of
with respect to
) and
is an
matrix (the Jacobian matrix of
with respect to
). The resulting more explicit formula for
is
|
(4.21) |
The equation (4.19) is
in fact the variational equation corresponding to the system (4.7), according to the terminology
introduced in Section 2.6.2. The equation (3.27) in Section 3.4 is also similar and was similarly derived, although it served a different purpose (it described the effect of a small
control perturbation on a given trajectory, while here we are studying
the difference between two nearby trajectories with the same control).
Also, we see that
in the definition of a
needle perturbation
essentially corresponds to
in the variational approach; we chose to use different symbols for these two parameters because of the different specific ways in which they are introduced.
The value of
at the terminal time
gives us an approximation of the terminal point
of the perturbed trajectory. Namely, from (4.16) evaluated
at
we have
|
(4.22) |
Let us denote by
the transition
matrix for the linear time-varying system (4.20), so that
The initial value
is given by (4.17),
hence
where
was defined in (4.15).
Plugging this expression into (4.22), we obtain
|
(4.23) |
Let us introduce the notation
|
(4.24) |
to arrive at the more compact formula
(here the interval
used for constructing the needle perturbation encodes information about the values of
and
).
Next: 4.2.5 Terminal cone
Up: 4.2 Proof of the
Previous: 4.2.3 Spatial control perturbation
Contents
Index
Daniel
2010-12-20