Professional Documents
Culture Documents
where, G2(s) is the plant that needs to be controlled, such as motor system,
equivalent mass-damping-spring system, etc.; G1(s) is the controller to be
designed. Ignoring the sensor dynamics, that is, H(s)=1, the error signal E(s)
is obtained by E(s)=R(s)-C(s). The control action is a control actuating signal
U(s) generated by G1(s) based on the error signal: U(s)=G1(s)E(s)
In general,
proportional action------ amplifies the error signal instantaneously;
integral action -------- accumulates the error effect so that even the error
signal is zero, the regulation action could still last;
Differential action ------- predicate the future of the error signal and forward
looking regulation.
Design of A P-I-D Controller
Following methods can be applied to design of a PID controller
1. Trial-and-Error
2. Ziegler-Nichols Tuning Rules
3. Frequency Response and Root Locus
Kb
Block transfer function diagram
Case Study
Suppose that the shaft angle is the controlled variable. The shaft angle is measured
by either a rotary transformer or an encoder installed on the same shaft and the
angle signal (a voltage signal) can be fed back to a comparator to compare with the
reference angle signal in voltage form. An angle error signal can then be obtained
and will be used to drive the controller to be designed. The control actuating signal is
the armature voltage. Z(s)
K(s)
Case Study
Note that, normally,
that is, the transient process in the armature circuit can be ignored and the motor
transient process is dominated by the mechanical motion. On the other hand,
since sensor is also an device with fast transient dynamics , so we can ignore
its transient dynamics too and assume that H(s)=1, without loss of generality.
Considering that
Case Study
We have the following reduced blocked transfer function diagram
Plant
Controller
Ve(s) Ea(s)
Vr(s)
+ 1/s
C(s)
-
Vf(s)
and, clearly, the controller must be designed such that the performance (stability,
transient and tracking error, etc.) of the closed-loop transfer function from Vr(s) to
the shaft angle is satisfied.
Case Study
1. P-Control: C(s)=Kp
Ve(s) Ea(s)
Vr(s)
+ 1/s
Kp
-
Vf(s)
Ve(s) Ea(s)
Vr(s)
+ 1/s
Kp+Kp /(Tis)
-
Vf(s)
Ve(s) Ea(s)
Vr(s)
+ 1/s
Kp+Kp Tds
-
Vf(s)
Transient analysis:
Comparing with P-control, the D-control increase the damping ratio of the closed-
loop system without changing the natural frequency, therefore, resulting in lower
Overshoot while unchanging oscillation frequency, as well as a longer reponse time.
Tracking accuracy: Note that the PD-control yields same tracking performance as
that of P-control.
1. P-control: basic control action; stabilizing system; faster response and higher
overshoot; improving tracking error if applicable.
Td(s)
K(s)
Case Study
Still, assume La=0 and H(s)=1, and move the disturbance signal to Ea(s), we have
Td(s)
Ra / Kt
Ea(s)
Ve(s) +
Vr(s) + +
C(s) Kt /Ra 1/(sJm+Dm) 1/s
- -
Vf(s)
Kb
Case Study
We have already done performance analysis for the case that there is no
Disturbance signal. Now to conduct analysis that how controller would affect
the closed system response under a disturbance signal, we first derive the
closed-loop transfer function from the disturbance signal to the shaft angle
assuming that R(s)=0:
Note that stability performance of the system is not changed by the existence
of a disturbance signal. The most important performance concerned here is
the tracking performance. To illustrate the effect of disturbance signal, let’s
assume that a C(s), whatever is used here, stabilize the closed-loop system
and a unit-step disturbance signal (Td(s)=1/s) is considered. Then we have:
Case Study
For C(s)=Kp,
For C(s)=Kp+KpTds,