Professional Documents
Culture Documents
ABSTRACT
When the specications of the disturbance rejection, imposed on a controlled system, are not met by a feedback
controller, the control conguration can be extended with
a disturbance observer. For this component a systematic
design procedure is given. The design procedures provides
in a few rules-of-thumb, which are based on the required
additional disturbance rejection, and on the resulting overall robustness and noise rejection properties.
1. INTRODUCTION
An important reason for the use of feedback is the attenuation of disturbances. Disturbances in practical control
systems can be divided in two categories. The rst category contains stochastic disturbances, which are normally
characterized by statistical properties, such as mean value,
covariance and power spectral density. The second category contains waveform-structured signals, which show
distinguishable patterns, at least over short time intervals.
In this paper we focus on waveform-structured signals W ,
as these are appropriate to describe important disturbances
in electromechanical systems and can explicitly be incorporated in the design of the control system.
The internal model principle (IMP) states that a regulator
is structurally stable only if the controller utilizes feedback
of the regulated variable, and incorporates in the feedback
path a suitably reduplicated model of the dynamic structure
of the exogenous signals, which the regulator is required to
process [3]. I.e., a feedback component has to include an
internal model of the dynamics of the disturbance it tries
to attenuate. A controller structure that includes such a
model is the disturbance observer [4]. In this paper we
will derive a new systematic design procedure for a disturbance observer, as a part of the control conguration with
=
=
Aw xw , xx (t0 ) = xw0
Cw xw
(1)
x w0
Cw
Aw
75
2. DISTURBANCE OBSERVER
The general concepts of observer theory have been described extensively in textbooks, such as [1, 2, 5]. These
concepts are also applicable to the disturbance observer
that is used in this paper. First, assume that the plant P,
without disturbances, is linear time-invariant, such that it
can be described as:
x =
z =
Ax + Bu
Cx + Du
(2)
LD
LP
x
x w
A BCw
0
Aw
x
xw
xw
+
+
^
w
with:
Ao
=
=
(4)
o + Bou + L(z Co xo )
Ao x
0 Cw xo
(5)
x^
plant
model
+
_
P
+
^
w
A BCw
0
Aw
Lp
, xo =
Ld
x
w
Remark 2
(6)
Cw
Aw
(3)
B
0
disturbance
model
x w0
If we now assume that the plant is disturbed by the autonomous system (1), the plant model (2) can be augmented with the disturbance generator, to result in the dynamics:
When these conditions are fullled, the design of the disW to output Z . The transfer matrix that has to be inverted
turbance observer reduces to a pole-placement problem.
can be rewritten using (6):
The poles have to be placed such that the desired attenu
sIx A + Lp C
0
ation of the disturbance is obtained.
sIxo Ao + LCo + Bo G =
sIxw Aw
Ld C
3. ANALYSIS
=
=
(8)
(9)
Q
W
0
V
1
=
Q1
V 1 W Q1
0
V1
(12)
(sIxw
(sIx A + Lp C)1
Aw )1 Ld C(sIx A + Lp C)1
(sIxw
0
Aw )1
(13)
(14)
Substitution of (14) and (13) into (10) leads to the rst two
desired transfer matrices. From input Uc to output Z :
Z = (Iz + P E)1 P (Iw + EC(sIx A)B)Uc
(15)
(16)
where
E = (Cw (sIw Aw )1 Ld )(Iz + C(sIx A)Lp )1
(17)
(7)
)
Z = P (s) (W + Uc W
(11)
= E(Iz + P E)1 P W
W
(18)
(19)
This expression can be written as two separate transfer matrices, i.e. from input Uc to output Z and from disturbance
To = (Iz + P E)1 P E
(20)
(21)
77
Statement 1
(22)
Wout = P (s) W
(23)
We know that the sensitivity function So is small at low frequencies and close to one at high frequencies. This means
that, at low frequencies, the feedback component sees a
plant with a dynamic behavior equal to the dynamic behavior of the nominal plant transfer matrix P0 . At high frequencies, the observer cannot inuence the plant anymore
and the original plant transfer matrix P is again obtained.
As always, the indenite region is the crossover region,
where the behavior of the plant, as seen by the feedback
component, will be a transition from the observer model
P0 to the real plant P .
The plant with disturbance observer, seen
by the feedback component, behaves as the model of the
plant in the disturbance observer P0 , in the frequency
range where the disturbance observer is active, i.e. where
Statement 2
(27)
When we combine (15) and (27) and we disregard measurement noise, we obtain an expression for the output Z ,
according to Fig.3:
stands for the nominal plant transfer matrix that is incorporated in the observer and is the modeling error, i.e. the
unstructured uncertainty. When we assume w = 0, we can
write (15) as
(26)
4. MODEL UNCERTAINTY
As the system is presumed to be linear, the input disturbance w can easily be rewritten to an output disturbance
wout :
(28)
(29)
(30)
Thus the sensitivity function of the overall control conguration can be written as:
Z = (Iz + P C)1 (Iz + P E)1 Wout = Sc So Wout
(31)
Thus:
S = Sc So
(32)
5. SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS
where Sc is the sensitivity function of the control conguration with only a feedback component, i.e. a 1-DOF
controller, and S is the sensitivity function of the control
conguration with both a feedback component and a disturbance compensator.
|So | = 1
78
Statement 3
Similarly, we can investigate the inuence of the measurement noise N . When we assume the input disturbance W
to be zero, we can write for the output Z :
Z
(33)
for < l
When we again close the loop with the feedback component Cc (s) and assume r = 0, we obtain:
=
wl
(34)
|S wz(jw)| [dB]
(36)
6. DESIGN ISSUES
log w [rad/s]
will be chosen such that we obtain a Butterworth polynomial or that its roots are all located at . Consequently,
the observer sensitivity function will peak at about this frequency. The low-frequency slope of the observer sensitivity function is determined by the order of the disturbance
model; a disturbance model of order k results in a slope of
20k [dB/decade]. When a Butterworth polynomial is used,
the peak of the sensitivity function at occurs at about
twice the frequency of the crossing of the 0 dB-line. When
the poles are placed on the real axis this ratio c is about 3.
These observations allow for an approximate frequency
for the poles of the observer:
c l 10 20k
(37)
sl
(35)
(39)
(38)
(41)
79
1 Real-poles pattern
2 Butterworth pattern
(43)
1
2
log w [rad/s]
time [s]
is given (it is wise to use a feedback component without integral action, as the disturbance observer will
incorporate one or more integral actions).
the overall specication for input disturbance attenuation is given as: |Swz (s)| < sl for < l .
80
Step response
|S o(jw)| [dB]
2
1
(42)