29 research outputs found
Linear Control Theory with an โโ Optimality Criterion
This expository paper sets out the principal results in โโ control theory in the context of continuous-time linear systems. The focus is on the mathematical theory rather than computational methods
Decentralized Robust Capacity Control of Job Shop Systems with Reconfigurable Machine Tools
Manufacturing companies are confronted with various challenges from the perspective of customers individual requirements concerning variations of types of products, quantities and delivery dates. This renders the manufacturing process to be more dynamic and complex, which may result in bottlenecks and unbalanced capacity distributions. To cope with these problems, capacity adjustment is an effective approach to balance capacity and load for short or medium term fluctuations on the operational layer. Particularly, new technologies and algorithms need to be developed for the implementation of capacity adjustment. Reconfigurable machine tools (RMTs) and operator-based robust right coprime factorization (RRCF) provide an opportunity for a new capacity control strategy. Therefore, the main purpose of the research is to develop an effective machinery-oriented capacity control strategy by incorporating RMTs and RRCF for a job shop system to deal with volatile customer demands
Recommended from our members
Optimization methods for deadbeat control design: a state space approach
This thesis addresses the synthesis problem of state deadbeat regulator using state space techniques. Deadbeat control is a linear control strategy in discrete time systems and consists of driving the system from any arbitrary initial state to a desired final state infinite number of time steps.
Having described the framework for development of the thesis which is in the form of a lower linear-fractional transformation (LFT), the conditions for internal stability based on the notion of coprime factorization over the set of proper and stable transfer matrices, namely RH, is discussed. This leads to the derivation of the class of all stabilizing linear controllers, which are parameterized affinely in terms of a stable but otherwise free parameter Q, usually known as the Q-parameterization. In this work, the classical Q- parameterization is generalized to deliver a parameterization for the family of deadbeat regulators.
Time response characteristics of the deadbeat system are investigated. In particular, the deadbeat regulator design problem in which the system must satisfy time domain specifications and minimize a quadratic (LQG-type) performance criterion is examined. It is shown that the attained parameterization for deadbeat controllers leads to the formulation of the synthesis problem in a quadratic programming framework with Q regarded as the design variable. The equivalent formulation of this objective as a quadratic integral in the frequency domain provides the means for shaping the frequency response characteristics of the system. Using the LMI characterization of the standard H problem, a new scheme for shaping the system frequency response characteristics by minimizing the infinity norm of an appropriate closed-loop transfer function is introduced. As shown, the derived parameterization of deadbeat compensators simplifies considerably the formulation and solution of this problem.
The last part of the work described in this thesis is devoted to addressing the synthesis problem of deadbeat regulators in a robust way, when the plant is subject to structured norm-bounded parametric uncertainties. A novel approach which is expressed as an LMI feasibility condition has been proposed and analysed
Guaranteed safe switching for switching adaptive control
Adaptive control algorithms may not behave well in practice due to discrepancies between the theory and actual practice. The proposed results in this manuscript constitute an effort in providing algorithms which assure more reliable operation in practice. Our emphasis is on algorithms that will be safe in the sense of not permitting destabilizing controllers to be switched in the closed-loop and to prevent wild signal fluctuations to occur. Coping with the connection or possible connection of destabilizing controllers is indeed a daunting task. One of the most intuitive forms of adaptive control, gain scheduling, is an approach to control of non-linear systems which utilizes a family of linear controllers, each of which provides satisfactory control for a different operating point of the system. We provide a mechanism for guaranteeing closed-loop stability over rapid switching between controllers. Our proposed design provides a simplification using only finite number of pre-determined values for the controller gain, where the observer gain is computed via a table look-up method. In comparison to the original gain scheduling design which our procedure builds on, our design achieves similar performance but with much less computational burden. Many multi-controller adaptive switching algorithms do not explicitly rule out the possibility of switching a destabilizing controller into the closed-loop. Even if the new controller is ensured to be stabilizing, performance verification with the new controller is not straightforward. The importance of this arises in iterative identification and control algorithms and multiple model adaptive control (MMAC). We utilize a limited amount of experimental and possibly noisy data obtained from a closed-loop consisting of an existing known stabilizing controller connected to an unknown plant-to infer if the introduction of a prospective controller will stabilize the unknown plant. We propose analysis results in a nonlinear setting and provide data-based tests for verifying the closed-loop stability with the introduction of a new nonlinear controller to replace a linear controller. We also propose verification tools for the closed-loop performance with the introduction of a new stabilizing controller using a limited amount of data obtained from the existing stable closed-loop. The simulation results in different practical scenarios demonstrate efficacy and versatility of our results, and illustrate practicality of our novel data-based tests in addressing an instability problem in adaptive control algorithms
Recommended from our members
Finite settling time stabilization for linear multivariable time-invariant discrete-time systems: An algebraic approach
The problem of Total Finite Settling Time Stabilization of linear time-invariant discrete-time systems is investigated in this thesis. This problem falls within the same area of the well-known deadbeat (time-optimal) control and in particular, constitutes a generalization of this problem. That is, instead of seeking time-optimum performance, it is required that all internal and external variables (signals) of the closed-loop system settle to a new steady state after a finite time from the application of a step change to any of its inputs and for every initial condition. The state/output deadbeat control is a special case of the Total FSTS problem.
Using a mathematical and system theory framework based on sequences and the polynomial equation (algebraic) approach, we are able to tackle the FSTS problem in a unifying manner. The one-parameter (unity) feedback configuration is mainly used for the solution of the FSTS problem and FSTS related control strategies. The whole problem is reduced to the solution of a polynomial matrix Diophantine equation which guarantees not only internal stability but also internal FSTS and is further reduced to the solution of a linear algebra problem over R. This approach enables the parametrizat ion of the family of all FSTS controllers, as well as those which are causal, in a Youla-Bongiorno-Kucera type parametrization.
The minimal McMillan degree FSTS problem is completely solved for vector plants and a parametrization of the FSTS controllers according to their McMillan degree is obtained. In the MIMO case bounds of the minimum McMillan degree controllers are derived and families of FSTS controllers with given lower/upper McMillan degree bounds are provided in parametric form.
Having parametrized the family of all FSTS controllers, the state deadbeat regulation is treated as a special case of FSTS and complete parametrization of all the deadbeat regulators is presented. In addition, further performance criteria, or design constraints are imposed such as, FSTS tracking and/or disturbance rejection, partial assignment of controller dynamics, l1-, lโ-optimization and robustness to plant parameter variations.
Finally, the Simultaneous-FSTS problem is formulated, and necessary as well as sufficient conditions for its solution are derived. Also, a two-parameter control scheme is introduced to alleviate some of the drawbacks of the one-parameter control. A parametrization of the family of FSTS controllers as well as the FSTS controllers for tracking and/or disturbance rejection is given as an illustration of the particular advantages of the two-parameter FSTS controllers
Algebraic geometric methods for the stabilizability and reliability of multivariable and of multimode systems
The extent to which feedback can alter the dynamic characteristics (e.g., instability, oscillations) of a control system, possibly operating in one or more modes (e.g., failure versus nonfailure of one or more components) is examined
Study on Spectrum Estimation in Biophoton Emission Signal Analysis of Wheat Varieties
The photon emission signal in visible range (380โnmโ630โnm) was measured from various wheat kernels by means of a low noise photomultiplier system. To study the features of the photon emission signal, the spectrum estimation method of the photon emission signal is described for the first time. The biophoton emission signal, belonging to four varieties of wheat, is analyzed in time domain and frequency domain. It shows that the intensity of the biophoton emission signal for four varieties of wheat kernels is relatively weak and has dramatic changes over time. Mean and mean square value are obviously different in four varieties; the range was, respectively, 3.7837 and 74.8819. The difference of variance is not significant. The range is 1.1764. The results of power spectrum estimation deduced that the biophoton emission signal is a low frequency signal, and its power spectrum is mostly distributed in the frequency less than 0.1โHz. Then three parameters, which are spectral edge frequency, spectral gravity frequency, and power spectral entropy, are adopted to explain the features of the kernelsโ spontaneous biophoton emission signal. It shows that the parameters of the spontaneous biophoton emission signal for different varieties of wheat are similar
๋ฐ์ดํฐ ๊ธฐ๋ฐ ๊ถค์ ์ต์ ํ๋ฅผ ๊ฒฐํฉํ ๊ณ์ฐ ํจ์จ์ ์ธ ๋ค์ค์ ํ ๋ชจ๋ธ ๊ธฐ๋ฐ ์ ์ด
ํ์๋
ผ๋ฌธ (๋ฐ์ฌ) -- ์์ธ๋ํ๊ต ๋ํ์ : ๊ณต๊ณผ๋ํ ํํ์๋ฌผ๊ณตํ๋ถ, 2021. 2. ์ด์ข
๋ฏผ.Model predictive control (MPC) is a widely used advanced control strategy applied in the process industry due to its capability to handle multivariate systems and constraints. When applied to nonlinear processes, linear MPC (LMPC) is limited to a relatively small operating region. On the other hand, nonlinear MPC (NMPC) is challenging due to the need for a nonlinear model with a large domain of validity and the computational load to solve nonlinear optimization problems. Multilinear MPC (MLMPC) or linear time-varying MPC (LTVMPC) complements the limitations, employing multiple linear models to predict dynamic behavior in a wide operating range. However, the main issue is obtaining the linear models, which is difficult to obtain without the nonlinear model and a trajectory from an initial condition to a set-point. Differential dynamic programming (DDP) can help to get the linear models and the suboptimal trajectory simultaneously. DDP iteratively improves the trajectory with the linear models of the previous trajectory, which can be identified by excitation of input around the trajectory.
We propose four novel methodologies in the thesis. First, we propose a scheme to design MLMPC based on gap metric, which achieves convergence to LMPC and offset-free tracking. Second, we propose a switching strategy of MLMPC. It consists of a design of the subregions from an initial point to a set-point and LMPC for each subregion. Next, we develop a scheme that combines constrained differential dynamic programming (CDDP) and MLMPC, starting without any models. Finally, we developed an algorithm that combines LTVMPC and LMPC based on the models from CDDP. It exploits the suboptimal trajectory from CDDP and achieves offset-free tracking. We apply developed MPC algorithms to an illustrative example for validation. It also supports that multiple linear models are appropriate to control nonlinear processes with or without the nonlinear models.๋ชจ๋ธ์์ธก์ ์ด (model predictive control) ๋ ์ฐ์
์์ ๋๋ฆฌ ์ฐ์ด๋ ๊ณ ๊ธ ๊ณต์ ์ ์ด ๊ธฐ๋ฒ์ผ๋ก, ๋ค๋ณ์ ์์คํ
์ ๋์ญํ๊ณผ ์ ์ฝ ์กฐ๊ฑด์ ๊ณ ๋ คํ์ฌ ์ค์๊ฐ์ผ๋ก ํ์ฌ ์ํ์ ๋ํด ์ต์ ํด๋ฅผ ๋์ถํด๋ธ๋ค. ์ ํ ๋ชจ๋ธ์ ์ด์ฉํ๋ ์ ํ ๋ชจ๋ธ์์ธก์ ์ด (linear model predictive control) ๊ฐ ๊ฐ์ฅ ๊ฐ๋จํ๊ณ ๋ง์ ์ด๋ก ๋ค์ด ์ ๋ฆฝ๋์ด ์์ผ๋, ์ค์ ๋น์ ํ ๊ณต์ ์์๋ ์ ํ ๋ชจ๋ธ์ด ๊ทผ์ฌํ ์ ์๋ ์ข์ ์ด์ ์กฐ๊ฑด์์๋ง ์ฌ์ฉํ ์ ์๋ค๋ ํ๊ณ๊ฐ ์๋ค. ๋น์ ํ ๋ชจ๋ธ์์ธก์ ์ด (nonlinear model predictive control) ๋ ๋น์ ํ ๋ชจ๋ธ์ ์ด์ฉํ์ฌ ๋์ ์ด์ ์กฐ๊ฑด์์๋ ์ต์ ํด๋ฅผ ์ ๊ณตํ ์ ์์ง๋ง, ๋น์ ํ ์ต์ ํ ๋ฌธ์ ๋ฅผ ์ค์๊ฐ์ผ๋ก ํ์ด์ผ ํ๊ธฐ ๋๋ฌธ์ ์ํ๋ง ํ์์ด ์์ ๊ฒฝ์ฐ, ์ ์ฉํ๊ธฐ ์ด๋ ต๋ค๋ ํ๊ณ๊ฐ ์๋ค. ๋ค์ค ์ ํ ๋ชจ๋ธ์์ธก์ ์ด (multilinear model predictive control) ๋๋ ์ ํ ์๋ณ ๋ชจ๋ธ์์ธก์ ์ด (linear time-varying model predictive control) ๋ ์ฌ๋ฌ ๊ฐ์ ์ ํ ๋ชจ๋ธ์ ์ด์ฉํ์ฌ ๋์ ์ด์ ๋ฒ์์์ ๊ณต์ ์ ๊ฑฐ๋์ ํํํ๊ณ ์ต์ ์ ๊ฐ๊น์ด ํด๋ฅผ ์ ๊ณตํ ์ ์๊ธฐ ๋๋ฌธ์ ์์ ๋ ๊ฐ์ง ์ ์ด ๊ธฐ๋ฒ์ ํ๊ณ๋ฅผ ๋ณด์ํ ์ ์๋ค. ๋ชจ๋ธ์์ธก์ ์ด ๊ธฐ๋ฒ์ ์ค์ ๋น์ ํ ๊ณต์ ์ ์ ์ฉํ๊ธฐ์ ๋ ๋ค๋ฅธ ์ด๋ ค์ด ์ ์ ์ค์ ๊ณต์ ์ ๋น์ ํ ๋ชจ๋ธ์ ์ป๊ธฐ๊ฐ ํ๋ค๋ค๋ ๊ฒ์ด๋ค. ๋ฏธ๋ถ๋์ ๊ณํ๋ฒ (differential dynamic programming) ์ ์ด๋ฌํ ์ํฉ์์ ํ์ฌ ๊ณต์ ์ด์ ๋ฐ์ดํฐ์ ๊ธฐ๋ฐํด ๋์ ์ต์ ํ (dynamic optimization) ๋ฅผ ์ํํ์ฌ ์ด๊ธฐ ์กฐ๊ฑด์์ ์ค์ ์ ๊น์ง์ ์ต์ ์ ๊ฐ๊น์ด ๊ฒฝ๋ก๋ฅผ ์ฐพ์ ๋ชจ๋ธ์์ธก์ ์ด ๊ธฐ๋ฒ์ ์ ์ฉํ ์ ์๋๋ก ๋์์ ์ค ์ ์๋ค. ๊ตฌ์ฒด์ ์ผ๋ก, ๋ฏธ๋ถ๋์ ๊ณํ๋ฒ์ ํ์ฌ ๊ณต์ ์ด์ ๋ฐ์ดํฐ๋ฅผ ์ด์ฉํด ์ด์ ๋ฐ์ดํฐ ๊ทผ์ฒ์ ๊ฑฐ๋์ ๋ฌ์ฌํ๋ ์ ํ ๋ชจ๋ธ๋ค์ ์ป๊ณ , ์ด๋ฅผ ์ด์ฉํ์ฌ ๋ฐ๋ณต์ ์ผ๋ก ๋ค์ ์ด์ ์์์ ์ต์ ํด๋ฅผ ์ ๊ณตํ์ฌ ์ด์ ๊ถค์ ์ ๊ฐ์ ํ๋ค.
๋ณธ ํ์ ๋
ผ๋ฌธ์์๋ ๋์ ์ด์ ๋ฒ์๋ฅผ ๊ฐ์ง ๊ณต์ ์์ ์ด์ ์กฐ๊ฑด์ ๋ณ๊ฒฝํ๊ธฐ์ ์ ํฉํ ๋ค์ค ์ ํ ๋ชจ๋ธ์์ธก์ ์ด์ ์ ํ ์๋ณ ๋ชจ๋ธ์์ธก์ ์ด ์ ๋ต์ ์ ์ํ๋ค. ์ฒซ๋ฒ์งธ๋ก, gap metric์ ์ด์ฉํ์ฌ ์ค์ ์ ์์ ๋ชจ๋ธ์์ธก์ ์ด๋ฅผ ์ ์ฉํ ์์คํ
์ ์์ ์ฑ์ ๋ณด์ฅํ๊ณ ์๋ฅ ํธ์ฐจ๋ฅผ ์ ๊ฑฐํ๋ ๋ค์ค ์ ํ ๋ชจ๋ธ์์ธก์ ์ด ๊ธฐ๋ฒ์ ์ ์ํ๋ค. ๋๋ฒ์งธ๋ก, ๋ค์ค ์ ํ ๋ชจ๋ธ์์ธก์ ์ด๊ธฐ์ ์ง๋ ๊ฐ๋ฅ์ฑ์ ๋ง๊ธฐ ์ํด, ์ด๊ธฐ ์กฐ๊ฑด์์ ์ค์ ์ ๊น์ง์ ๊ตฌ๊ฐ์ gap metric์ ๊ธฐ๋ฐํ์ฌ ๋๋๊ณ , ๊ฐ๊ฐ์ ๊ตฌ๊ฐ์์์ ํ์ ์ค์ ์ ๋ค์ ์ ํ์ฌ ์ด๊ธฐ ์กฐ๊ฑด์์ ์ค์ ์ ๊น์ง์ ๊ฒฝ๋ก๋ฅผ ํ์ ์ค์ ์ ๋ค์ ๊ทธ๋ํ๋ก ํํํ๊ณ , ๊ฐ ํ์ ์ค์ ์ ๊น์ง ๊ฐ๊ฐ ๋ฐฐ์ ๋ ์ ํ ๋ชจ๋ธ์์ธก์ ์ด๊ธฐ๋ฅผ ์ด์ฉํ์ฌ ์ค์ ์ ๊น์ง ๋๋ฌํ๊ฒ ํ๋ ์ ์ด ์ ๋ต์ ์ ์ํ๋ค. ๋ค์์ผ๋ก๋ ๊ณต์ ์ ๋ชจ๋ธ์ด ์์ ๋, ๊ณต์ ์ ์
๋ ฅ ์ ์ฝ ์กฐ๊ฑด์ ๊ณ ๋ คํ๋ ๋ฏธ๋ถ๋์ ๊ณํ๋ฒ์ ์ด์ฉํ์ฌ ์ต์ ์ ๊ฐ๊น์ด ๊ฐ๋ฃจํ (open-loop) ์ ์ด ์
๋ ฅ๊ณผ ํด๋น ์ด์ ๋ฐ์ดํฐ ๊ทผ๋ฐฉ์ ๊ทผ์ฌํ๋ ์ ํ ๋ชจ๋ธ๋ค์ ์ป์ด, ๋ค์ค ์ ํ ๋ชจ๋ธ์์ธก์ ์ด๋ฅผ ์ ์ฉํ์ฌ ์ค์ ์ ๊น์ง ๋๋ฌํ๊ณ ์๋ฅ ํธ์ฐจ๋ฅผ ์ ๊ฑฐํ๋ ์ ์ด ์ ๋ต์ ์ ์ํ๋ค. ๋ง์ง๋ง์ผ๋ก, ๋ฏธ๋ถ๋์ ๊ณํ๋ฒ์ด ์ ๊ณตํ๋ ์ค์ต์ (suboptimal) ์ด์ ๋ฐ์ดํฐ๋ฅผ ํ์ฉํ๊ธฐ ์ํด, ์ ํ ์๋ณ ๋ชจ๋ธ์์ธก์ ์ด ๊ธฐ๋ฒ๊ณผ ์๋ฅํธ์ฐจ-์ ๊ฑฐ ๋ชจ๋ธ์์ธก์ ์ด ๊ธฐ๋ฒ์ ์ด์ด์ ์ฌ์ฉํ๋ ์ ๋ต์ด ์ ์๋์๋ค. ๊ตฌ์ฒด์ ์ผ๋ก, ์ ๊ณต๋ ์ค์ต์ ์ด์ ๋ฐ์ดํฐ๋ฅผ ๊ณผ๋ ์๋ต (transient response) ๊ณผ ์ ์ ์ํ ์๋ต (steady-state response) ์ด ๋ํ๋๋ ๊ตฌ๊ฐ์ผ๋ก ๋๋๊ณ , ์ ํ ์๋ณ ๋ชจ๋ธ์์ธก์ ์ด๋ฅผ ํตํด ๊ณผ๋ ์๋ต์์์ ์ค์ต์ ๊ถค์ ์ ์ถ์ ํ๊ณ ์ํ ๋ณ์๊ฐ ์ ์ ์ํ์ ๊ฐ๊น์์ง๋ฉด ์๋ฅํธ์ฐจ-์ ๊ฑฐ ๋ชจ๋ธ์์ธก์ ์ด๋ฅผ ์ ์ฉํด ์ค์ ์ ์ ๋๋ฌํ๋๋ก ํ๋ค. ์ ์๋ ๊ธฐ๋ฒ๋ค์ ๊ณต์ ์์ ์ ์ ์ฉํ์ฌ ๊ณต์ ์ ๋ชจ๋ธ ์ ๋ฌด์ ๊ด๊ณ์์ด ์ ํ ๋ชจ๋ธ๋ค์ ์ด์ฉํ ๋ชจ๋ธ์์ธก์ ์ด ๊ธฐ๋ฒ์ด ๋์ ์ด์ ์กฐ๊ฑด์ ๊ฐ์ง ๋น์ ํ ๊ณต์ ์ ๊ณต์ ์กฐ๊ฑด์ ์ด๋ํ๊ธฐ์ ์ ํฉํ ๋ฐฉ๋ฒ๋ก ์์ ๊ฒ์ฆํ์๋ค.Abstract . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . i
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
1.1 Motivation and previous work . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
1.2 Statement of contributions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
1.3 Outline of the thesis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
2. Background and preliminaries . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
2.1 Offset-free linear model predictive control . . . . . . 8
2.2 Gap metric and stability margin . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
2.3 Multilinear model predictive control . . . . . . . . . 19
2.4 Linear time-varying model predictive control . . . . . 22
2.5 Differential dynamic programming . . . . . . . . . . 24
3. Offset-free multilinear model predictive control based on gap metric . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
3.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
3.2 Local linear MPC design . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
3.3 Gap metric-based multilinear MPC . . . . . . . . . . 35
3.3.1 Gap metric-based gridding algorithm . . . . . 36
3.3.2 Gap metric-based K-medoids clustering . . . . 39
3.3.3 MLMPC design . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42
3.4 Results and discussions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50
3.4.1 Example 1 (SISO CSTR) . . . . . . . . . . . 50
3.4.2 Example 2 (MIMO CSTR) . . . . . . . . . . . 62
4. Switching multilinear model predictive control based on gap metric . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 75
4.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 75
4.2 Shortest path problem . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 76
4.3 Switching Multilinear Model Predictive Control . . . 80
4.3.1 Local MPC design . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 80
4.3.2 Path design based on gap metric . . . . . . . . 84
4.3.3 Global MPC design . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 90
4.4 Results and discussions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 96
5. Design of data-driven multilinear model predictive control . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 112
5.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 112
5.2 Data-driven trajectory optimization . . . . . . . . . . 114
5.2.1 Constrained differential dynamic programming 114
5.2.2 Model identification around a trajectory . . . . 123
5.3 Data-driven offset-free MLMPC . . . . . . . . . . . . 126
5.3.1 Gap metric-based clustering algorithm . . . . 126
5.3.2 Prediction-based MLMPC . . . . . . . . . . . 129
5.4 Results and discussions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 134
6. Design of data-driven linear time-varying model predictive control . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 153
6.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 153
6.2 Design of data-driven linear time-varying model predictive control . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 154
6.2.1 Gap metric-based model selection . . . . . . . 154
6.2.2 Offset-free linear time-varying model predictive control . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 158
6.3 Results and discussions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 167
7. Conclusions and future works . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 187
7.1 Conclusions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 187
7.2 Future works . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 188
Bibliography . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 190Docto