Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Systems
Lecture Notes for
KJM597
Faculty of Mechanical
Engineering, UiTM Shah Alam
MATHEMATICAL REVIEW
1.1.1
angle of z= = tan1
2 + 2,
= tan1
= || sin
(source: Ogata)
Notes:
is tan1 . The angle is measured counterclockwise from the positive real axis.
b) Single-valued Function
In complex function analysis, we are interested in Single-Valued Function that can uniquely
determine the value of s. For instance, given the function
=
1
( + 1)
+ 2 ( + 10)
+ 1 + 5 ( + 15)2
1.2.1
Ri (t ) L
di(t ) 1
i(t )dt v(t )
dt
C
d n y(t )
d n1 y(t )
dy (t )
a
a1
a0 y(t ) f (t )
n 1
n
n 1
dt
dt
dt
Which is also known as a linear ordinary differential equation if the coefficients a0, a1, ,an-1 are
not a function of y(t).
Laplace Transforms
a) Laplace Transform
Laplace transform is used to convert from time domain to s-domain. Working with differential
equation is rather complicated. In analyzing and designing a control system it is easier to work in
s-domain. Laplace transform is defined as;
= =
0
1, t 0
u (t )
0, t 0
The Laplace transform of f(t) is obtained as
1
1
F ( s) u (t )e st dt e st
s
s
0
0
f (t ) et , t 0
where is real constant. The Laplace transform of f(t) is written as
F ( s) e t e st dt
0
e ( s )t
s
1
s
()
()
where Q(s) and P(s) are polynomials of s. It is assume that the order of P(s) in s is greater
than of Q(s). The polynomial P(s) may be written as
()
()
=
, 1 2
()
+ 1 + 2 ( + )
1
2
+
+ +
+ 1 + 2
+
Where K si ( s si )
Q( s )
P( s)
s si
The numerator of each fraction is called the residue. is called the residue of G(s)
for the pole = .
The inverse transform is the written as
10
G(s)
5s 3
( s 1)(s 2)(s 3)
G(s)
K
K 1 K 2
3
s 1 s 2 s 3
5(1) 3
1
(1 2)(1 3)
5(2) 3
K 2 ( s 2)G ( s)
7
s 2 (2 1)(2 3)
5(3) 3
K 3 ( s 3)G ( s)
6
s 3 (3 1)(3 2)
K 1 ( s 1)G ( s )
s 1
Thus,
G(s)
1
7
6
s 1 s 2 s 3
g (t ) et 7e2t 63t
Case 2: Multiple-order poles
If r of the n poles is identical, G(s) is written as
=
()
()
=
()
+ 1 + 2 + ( + )
11
G(s)
K s( n r )
K s2
A
A2
Ar
2
s s s s2
s s n r s si ( s si )
(s s ) r
1
i
n - r terms of simple poles
r terms of repeated poles
K s1
The (n-r) coefficients K-s1, K-s2, , K-s(nr) which correspond to simple poles may be
evaluated as explained before. The coefficients A1 Ar are evaluated as follows:
Ar ( s si ) r G ( s )
s s
Ar 1
Ar 2
d
( s si ) r G ( s )
s s
ds
i
1 d2
( s si ) r G ( s )
2
s s
2 ! ds
i
A1
1 d r 1
( s si ) r G ( s )
r 1
s s
(r 1)! ds
i
Example 2.4:
Consider the function
G(s)
2
( s 1)(s 2) 2
G(s)
K 1
A1
A2
( s 1) ( s 2) ( s 2) 2
2
K 1
2
2
( s 2) s 1
12
2
A2
2
( s 1) s 2
A1
d 2
ds ( s 1)
2
( s 1) 2 s 2
s 2
G( s)
2
2
2
s 1 s 2 ( s 2) 2
g (t ) 2e t 2e 2t 2te 2t
Case 3: Simple complex-conjugate poles
Suppose that G(s) contains a pair of complex poles:
s j and s - - j
The corresponding coefficients of these poles are
K j ( s j )G(s)
s j
K j ( s j )G( s)
s j
Example 2.5:
Considering transfer function G(s)
3
3
s ( s 2s 5) s( s 1 j 2)( s 1 j 2)
K 1 j 2
K 1 j 2
K
0
s s 1 j2 s 1 j2
G ( s)
13
3
3
K0 2
s 2s 5 s 0 5
3
3
K 1 j 2
(2 j1)
s ( s 1 j 2) s 1 j 2 20
3
3
K 1 j 2
(2 j1)
s ( s 1 j 2) s 1 j 2 20
3
3 2 j1
2 j1
G ( s ) 5
s 20 s 1 j 2 s 1 j 2
and the time function is given as
3 3
(2 j1)e ( 1 j 2 )t (2 j1)e ( 1 j 2 )t
5 20
3 3
e t (2e j 2t 2e j 2t ) j (e j 2t e j 2t )
5 20
e j 2t e j 2t
3 3
e j 2t e j 2t
e t 4
2
5 20
2
j2
g (t )
3 3 t
1
e cos 2t sin 2t
5 5
2
14
5
+ 3 + 2
2
+ 1 ( + 2)2
15
Monitoring systems, such as Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition (SCADA) systems, which
provide information about the process state to the operator;
Sequencing systems, used where some process must follow a pre-defined sequence of discrete
events;
Closed-loop systems, which is widely taught in engineering course, are typically implemented to
give some process a set of desired performance characteristics
The history of feedback control system begun as early as in 1769 when James Watts steam engine and
governor are developed. The Watt stem engine often used to mark the beginning of the Industrial
Revolution in England. The revolution of automatic control system continues in which the first ever
autonomous rover vehicle, known as Sojourner was invented in 1997.
In summary below is the history of feedback control system
1769
1927
1932
16
1970
1980
1997
Controlled
variable
Manipulated
variable
Plant
Processes
17
Disturbances
Feedback
control
Feedforward
18
2.1.1
A system is said to be an open loop system when the systems output has no effect on the control
action. In open loop system, the output is neither measured nor fed back for comparison with the input.
DISADVANTAGES
Disturbances and changes in calibration
cause errors
Output may be different from what is
desired
19
A system that maintains a prescribed relationship between the output and the reference input is called a
closed-loop system or a feedback control system. The system uses a measurement of the output and
feedback of the signal to compare it with the desired output.
The table below shows the comparison between the two systems:
OPEN LOOP
System stability is not a major problem,
therefore easier to build
2.2
CLOSED LOOP
The use of feedback makes the system
response relatively insensitive to external
disturbances and internal variations in
system parameters
System stability is a major problem
because the system tends to overcorrect
errors that can cause oscillations or
changing amplitude.
TRANSFER FUNCTION
The transfer function of a linear system is defined as the ratio of the Laplace transform of the output
variable to the Laplace transform of the input variable, with all initial conditions assumed to be zero. The
Transfer function of a system (or element) represents the relationship describing the dynamics of the
system under consideration. A transfer function may be defined only for a linear, stationary (constant
parameter) system. A non-stationary system often called a time-varying system, has one or more timevarying parameters, and the Laplace transformation may not be utilized. Furthermore, a transfer
function is an input-output description of the behavior of a system. Thus the transfer function
description does not include any information concerning the internal structure of the system and its
behavior.
20
The transfer function of a LTI system is defined as the Laplace transform of the impulse response, with
all the initial conditions set to zero.
G(s) L[ g (t )]
The transfer function is related to the Laplace transform of the input and the output through the
following relation:
G( s)
Y ( s)
R( s )
where all the initial conditions set to zero, and Y (s) and R(s) are the Laplace transform of y (t ) and
r (t ) respectively.
Although the transfer function of a linear system is defined in terms of the impulse response, in practice,
the input-output relation of a linear time-invariant system with continuousdata input is often described
by the differential equation, so it is more convenient to derive the transfer function directly from the
differential equation.
Let us consider that the input-output relation of a linear time-invariant system is described by the
following nth-order differential equation with constant real coefficients:
d n y(t )
d n1 y(t )
dy(t )
d m r (t )
d m1r (t )
dr (t )
......
a
y
(
t
)
b
..... b1
b0 r (t )
n
1
1
0
m
m
1
n
n 1
m
m 1
dt
dt
dt
dt
dt
dt
To obtain the transfer function of the linear system that is represented by Eq. (2.3), we simply take the
Laplace transform on both sides of the equation and assume zero initial conditions. The result is
G( s)
b s m .............. b1 s b0
Y ( s)
nm
R( s) s an1 s n1 ...... a1 s a0
21
Characteristic Equation: The characteristic equation of a LTI system is defined as the equation
obtained by setting the denominator polynomial of the transfer function to zero. Thus, the
characteristic equation of the system described by the Eq. (2.4) is
s n an1s n1 a1s a0 0
Later, we shall show that the stability of a linear single-input single-output system is governed
completely by the roots of the characteristic equation.
2.2.2
The definition of a transfer function is easily extended to a system with multiple inputs and outputs. A
system of this type is often referred to as a multivariable system. Figure 2.6 shows a control system with
two inputs and two outputs.
Since the principle of superposition is valid for linear systems, the total effect on any output due to all
the inputs acting simultaneously is obtained by adding up the outputs due to each input acting alone.
Thus, using transfer function relations we can write the simultaneous equations for the output variables
as
Y1 ( s) G11( s) R1 ( s) G12 ( s) R2 ( s)
Y2 ( s) G21( s) R1 ( s) G22 ( s) R2 ( s)
22
Gij
Yi ( s)
R j ( s)
In general, for j inputs and i outputs, we can write the simultaneous equations for the output variables
as
Y1 ( s) G11( s ) G12 ( s) G1 j ( s ) R1 ( s )
Y ( s) G ( s) G ( s) G ( s ) R ( s )
22
2j
2
2 21
Yi ( s ) Gi1 ( s ) G i 2 ( s ) Gij ( s ) R j ( s)
Y(s) G(s)R(s)
where
Y1 ( s )
Y ( s )
Y (s) 2
Yi ( s )
is the i 1 transformed output vector; whereas
R1 ( s )
R ( s)
2
R( s)
R j ( s )
is the j 1 transformed input vector; and
G11( s ) G12 ( s ) G1 j ( s )
G ( s ) G ( s ) G ( s )
21
22
2j
G( s)
Gi1 ( s ) G i 2 ( s) Gij ( s)
is the i j transfer-function matrix.
23
DEFINITION OF STABILTY
A stable system is defined as a system which gives a bounded output in response to a bounded input.
The concept of stability can be illustrated by considering a circular cone placed on a horizontal surface,
as shown in Fig. 2.7 and Fig. 2.8.
The stability of a dynamic system is defined in a similar manner. Let u(t), y(t), and g(t) be the input,
output, and impulse response of a linear time-invariant system, respectively. The output of the system is
given by the convolution between the input and the system's impulse response. Then
y(t ) u (t ) g ( )d
0
24
g ( ) d
Mathematically, Eq. (4.24) is satisfied when the roots of the characteristic equation, or the poles of G(s),
are all located in the left-half of the s-plane.
A system is said to be unstable if any of the characteristic equation roots is located in the right-half of
the s-plane. When the characteristic equation has simple roots on the j-axis and none in the right-half
plane, we refer to the system as marginally stable.
The following table illustrates the stability conditions of a linear continuous system with reference to the
locations of the roots of the characteristic equation.
STABILITY CONDITION
Stable
Marginally stable of marginally unstable
Unstable
The following examples illustrate the stability conditions of systems with reference to the poles of the
closed-loop transfer function M(s).
M ( s)
20
s 1s 2s 3
Stable
M ( s)
20( s 1)
( s 1)( s 2 2s 2)
M ( s)
20( s 1)
( s 2)( s 2 4)
25
M ( s)
2.3.1
10
( s 4) 2 ( s 10)
2
A system is open-loop stable if the poles of the loop transfer function G(s)H(s) are all in the left hand
side of s-plane.
Controller
ysp
H(s)
Plant
G(s)
e(s)
The following six basic control actions are very common among industrial automatic controllers:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
2.4.1
In a two-position control system, the actuating element has only two fixed positions which are, in many
cases, simply on and off. Two-position or on-off control is relatively simple and inexpensive and, for this
reason, is very widely used in both industrial and domestic control systems.
Let the output signal from the controller be m(t) and the actuating error signal be e(t). In two position
control, the signal m(t) remains at either a maximum or minimum value, depending on whether the
actuating error signal is positive or negative, so that
= 1 () > 0
= 2 () < 0
26
Proportional controller
For a controller with proportional control action, the relationship between the output of the controller
m(t) and the actuating error signal e(t) is
= ()
or, in Laplace Transform
()
=
()
Where , is termed the proportional sensitivity or the gain.
27
b
The second order PDE is:
Taking the LT
The TF is therefore:
Let M=1kg, b=10N.s/m, k=20 N/m & F(s)=1, therefore X(s) / F(s):
From the Transfer Function, the DC gain is:
Corresponding to the steady state error of:
The settling time is:
Open Loop Response
0.05
0.045
0.04
0.035
Displacement (m)
a)
b)
c)
d)
e)
f)
g)
0.03
0.025
0.02
0.015
0.01
0.005
0
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
Time (sec)
1.2
1.4
1.6
1.8
28
1.2
Displacement (m)
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.2
1.4
1.6
1.8
Time (sec)
Rise time and ss error reduced, slightly reduced settling time but increased overshoot.
2.4.3
Integral controller
In a controller with integral control action, the value of the controller output m(t) is changed at a rate
proportional to, the actuating error signal e(t). That is
Therefore;
()
= ()
= 0
If the value of e(t) is doubled, then the value of m(t) varies twice as fast. For zero actuating error, the
value of m(t) remains stationary.
29
load disturbance
ysp
1
sTi
plant
K
load disturbance
ysp
+
1
sTi
plant
30
1.2
Displacement (m)
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.2
1.4
1.6
1.8
Time (sec)
2.4.4
Derivative controller
load disturbance
ysp
+
-
KTd s
1+sTd /N
plant
31
1.2
Displacement (m)
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.2
1.4
1.6
1.8
Time (sec)
d) Reduced overshoot and settling time, small effect on rise time and ss error
32
1.2
Displacement (m)
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.2
1.4
1.6
1.8
Time (sec)
2.4.5
PID controller
In some system the commonly implemented controller consist of the P, I and D control action. We call
this type of controller as PID controller.
Tds
1/(Tis)
ysp +
-
G(s)
= (1 +
Or
= +
1
+ )
33
1.2
Displacement (m)
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.2
1.4
1.6
1.8
Time (sec)
PID tuning
Introducing the P, I and D controller has certainly proven to contribute some effect to our systems
response. These effects are summarized as in table below.
CLOSED LOOP
RESPONSE
K
Decrease
Increase
SETTLING
TIME
Small change
Decrease
Increase
Increase
Eliminate
Small change
Decrease
Decrease
Small change
RISE TIME
OVERSHOOT
SS ERROR
Decrease
When you are designing a PID controller for a given system, follow the steps shown below to obtain a
desired response.
1. Obtain an open-loop response and determine what needs to be improved
2. Add a proportional control to improve the rise time
3. Add a derivative control to improve the overshoot
4. Add an integral control to eliminate the steady-state error
5. Adjust each of K, Ki, and Kd until you obtain a desired overall response referring to the table
shown previously to find out which controller controls what characteristics.
34
A block diagram is used to describe the composition and interconnection of a system, or it can be used
together with the transfer functions to describe the cause-and-effect relationships throughout the
system. For instance, Figure 2.14 (a) shows a dc motor wiring diagram, (b) sketch, and (c) shows the
block diagram with transfer function.
35
We shall now define the block diagram elements used frequently in linear control systems and the
related algebra. All component parts of a block diagram for linear time-invariant systems are shown in
Figure 2.15.
The characteristic of the summing junction as shown in Figure 2.15 (c) is that the output signal, C (s) , is
the algebraic sum of the input signals. The figure shows three inputs, but any number can be presented.
A pickoff point, as shown in Figure 2.15 (d), distributes the input signal, R(s) , undiminished, to several
output points.
36
M (s) C (s) R(s) or Y (s) R(s) = closed-loop transfer function or system transfer function.
M (s) can be expressed as a function of G(s) and H (s) . From Figure 2.16, we write
Y ( s) G( s) E ( s)
B( s) H ( s)Y ( s)
The actuating signal is written as
Y ( s ) G ( s) R( s) G ( s ) B( s)
Y ( s)
G( s)
M ( s)
R( s ) 1 G ( s) H ( s)
The block diagram representation of a given system often can be reduced by block diagram reduction
techniques to a simplified block diagram with fewer blocks than the original diagram. Table below shows
some of the block diagram reduction techniques.
The block diagram reduction technique is based on the utilization of rule 6 in which eliminates feedback
loops. Therefore, the other transformations are used to transform the diagram to a form ready for
eliminating feedback loops.
37
For parallel subsystems as shown below in (a), the reduction technique is shown in (b).
38
A block diagram of a multiple-loop feedback control system is shown in Figure 2-5. It is interesting to
note that the feedback signal H1(s)Y(s) is a positive feedback signal, and the loop G3(s)G4(s)H1(s) is called
a positive feedback loop. First, to eliminate the loop G3G4H1, we move H2 behind block G4 by using rule
4, and therefore obtain Figure 2-6 (a).
39
40
41
The block diagram representation of feedback control systems is a valuable and widely used approach.
The block diagram provides the analyst with a graphical representation of the interrelationships of
controlled and input variables. Furthermore, the designer can readily visualize the possibilities for
adding blocks to the existing system block diagram to alter and improve the system performance. The
transition from the block diagram method to a method utilizing a line path representation instead of a
block representation is readily accomplished and is presented in the following section.
42
Block diagrams are adequate for the representation of the interrelationships of controlled and input
variables. However, for a system with reasonably complex interrelationships, the block diagram
reduction technique is cumbersome and often quite difficult to complete. An alternative method for
determining the relationship between system variables has been developed by Mason and is based on a
representation of the linear system by line segments called Signal-Flow Graph (SFG).
The advantage of the SFG method is the availability of a flow graph gain formula, which provides the
relation between system variables without requiring any reduction procedure or manipulation of the
flow graph.
2.6.1
When constructing a SFG, junction points or nodes are used to represent variables. The nodes are
connected by line segments, called branches. A signal can transmit through a branch only in the
direction of the arrow.
For instance, consider that a linear system is represented by a simple algebraic equation
y2 a12 y1
where y1 is the input, y2 the output, and a12 the gain between two variables. The SFG is shown in Figure
2-9.
a12
Y1
Y2
y2 a12 y1 a32 y3
y3 a23 y2 a43 y4
y4 a24 y 2 a34 y3 a44 y4
y5 a25 y2 a45 y4
43
44
2.6.3
Path
Forward Path
Loop
Path Gain
Loop Gain
Non-touching
Loops
45
Figure 2.18 (a & b): Modification of SFG so that y2 become output node
(c): Erroneous way to make node y2 an input node
46
2.6.4
SFG Algebra
Based on the properties of the SFG, we can outline the following manipulation rules and algebra of SFG.
1. The value of the variable represented by a node is equal to the sum of all the signals
entering the node. For the SFG of Figure 2.20 (a),
y6 a16 y1
y7 a17 y1
y8 a18 y1
47
Figure 2.20
3. Parallel branches in the same direction connecting two nodes can be replaced by a
single branch with the gain equal to the sum of gains of the parallel branches. Example:
Figure 2.20 (b).
4. A series connection of unidirectional branches can be replaced by one branch with gain
equal to the product of branch gains.
48
The overall gain between the input node yin and output node yout of a SFG with N forward paths and L
loops is given by
y
M out
yin
P
k
, k 1,2, N
where
yin = input-node variable
yout = output-node variable
M = gain between yin and yout
N = total number of forward paths between yin and yout
Pk = kth forward-path gain
y
M out
yin
P
k
, k 1,2, N
49
Care must be taken when applying the gain formula to ensure that it is applied between an input node
and an output node.
Example 2.8: Consider the SFG of a closed loop control system as given in Figure below. By using the
gain formula, find the transfer function Y ( s) R( s) .
1. There is only one forward path between R(s) and Y (s) , and the forward-path gain is
P1 = G(s) .
2. There is only one loop; the loop gain is L1 = G( s) H ( s) .
3. There are no non-touching loops.
4. = 1 - L1 = 1 G( s) H ( s) and 1 = 1.
5. Thus,
Y ( s) P11
G( s)
R( s )
1 G( s) H ( s)
50
Path 2: y1 y2 y4 y5
Path 3: y1 y2 y5
P3 = a12 a25
L1 = a23 a32
Loop 2: y3 y4 y3
L2 = a34 a43
Loop 3: y2 y4 y3 y2
Loop 4: y4 y4
L4 = a44
51
All the loops are in touch with forward path P1, thus 1 = 1.
All the loops are in touch with forward path P2, thus 2 = 1.
Two loops (y3 y4 y3 and y4 y4) are not touching with forward path P3.
Thus, 3 = 1 - a34a43 a44.
5. Thus,
y 5 P1 1 P2 2 P3 3
y1
Example 2.10: Consider the SFG as shown in the figure. The following input-output relation is obtained
by use of the gain formula:
y1
where
1 G1 H1 G3 H 2 G1G2G3 H 3 H 4 G1G3 H1 H 2
G1 H1 H 4 G3 H 2 H 4 G1G2G3 H 3 H 4 G1G3 H1 H 2 H 4
52
An equivalent SFG for a block diagram can be drawn by performing the following steps:
1. Identify the input/output signals, summing junctions & pickoff points they are replaced with
nodes.
2. Interconnect the nodes & indicate the directions of signal flow by using arrows.
3. Identify the blocks - they are replaced with branches.
For each negative sum, a negative sign is included with the branch.
4. Add unity branches as needed for clarity or to make connections.
5. Simplify the SFG eliminate redundant nodes/branches (only if the node is connected to branches
of a single flow in & a single flow out with unity gain).
6. Label the input/output signals and the branches accordingly.
Example 2.11: Convert the block diagram in the figure to a signal flow graph and determine the transfer
function using Masons gain formula.
53
4. = 1 (L1 + L2 + L3 + L4 + L5)
= 1 + G1G2H1 + G2G3H2 + G1G2G3 + G1G4 + G4H2
All the loops are in touch with forward path P1, thus 1 = 1.
54
5. Thus,
Y P1 1 P2 2
2.8
G1G2 G3 G1G4
1 G1G2 H 1 G2 G3 H 2 G1G2 G3 G1G4 G4 H 2
State space approach is an alternative method for representing physical system. In order to use this
approach, we have to limit our approach to linear, time-invariant systems or system that can be
linearized by the methods we have covered previously.
In state space method, the models are constructed in the time domain. This means we can work directly
with the governing differential equations to model, analyze and design a wide range of system. In
contrast, classical control design practices looking at the frequency domain output to interpret systems
physical dynamics. With the arrival of space exploration, requirements for control systems increased in
scope. Hence the use of classical control design seems inadequate.
Many systems do not have just a single input. Multiple-input, multiple-output systems can be compactly
represented in state space with a model similar in form and complexity to that used for single-input,
single-output systems. To address the multiple input and output system a convenient matrix based is
used in representing the state space. In addition, the state space approach is also attractive because of
the availability of numerous state-space software packages for the personal computer
55
2.8.1
DISADVANTAGES
Difficult to examine robustness (stability
margins)
More work than classical control for
simple problems
optimal systems require optimal error
criteria
State Variables
State Vector
State Space
State trajectory
Note: The selection of state variables is not unique. In the first instance, it is often reasonable to
choose something with physical meaning, often something associated with system energy
56
We begin our state space equation with a state equation. A state equation consist of the state equation
and output equation as follows:
= +
= +
State Equation
Output Equation
LECTURERS NOTES:
57
58
The ability to adjust the transient and steady-state response of a control system is a beneficial outcome
of the design of feedback systems. Since time is used as an independent variable in most of control
systems, it is usually of interest to evaluate the state and output responses with respect to time, or
simply the time response.
In the analysis problem, we will use selected input signals to test the response of control systems. This
response will be characterized by a selected set of response measures. In this chapter, we will strive to
delineate a set of quantitative performance measures that adequately represent the performance of the
control systems.
3.1
The time response of a control system is usually divided into two parts: the transient response and the
steady-state response. Let y(t) denote the time response of a continuous-data system; then, in general,
it can be written as
y(t) = yt(t) + yss(t)
(3.1)
where yt(t) denotes the transient response and yss(t) denotes the steady-state response.
In control systems, the transient response is defined as the part of the time response that goes to zero
as time becomes very large. Thus yt(t) has the property
lim yt (t ) 0
t
(3.2)
The steady-state response is simply the part of the total response that remains after the transient has
died out. All real stable systems exhibit transient phenomena to some extent before the steady state is
reached.
In the design problem, specifications are usually given in terms of the transient and steady-state
performance, and controllers are designed so that the specifications are all met by the design system.
59
Since it is difficult to design a control system that will perform satisfactorily for all possible forms of
input signals, it is necessary, for the purpose of analysis and design, to assume some basic types of test
signals properly for the prediction of the system's performance to other more complex inputs.
3.1.2
Step-Input Function
The step-function input represents an instantaneous change in the reference input. The mathematical
representation of a step function of magnitude A is
A
r (t )
0
t0
t0
Mathematically, r(t) = Aus(t), where us(t) is the unit-step function. The step function is shown in Fig.
3.1(a).
3.1.3
Ramp-Input Function
The ramp function is a signal that changes constantly with time. Mathematically, a ramp function is
represented by
r (t ) Atu s (t )
where A is a real constant. The ramp function is shown in Fig. 3.1(b).
3.1.4
Parabolic-Input Function
The parabolic function represents a signal that is one order faster than the ramp function.
Mathematically, it is represented by
r (t )
The parabolic function is shown in Fig. 3.1(c).
At 2
u s (t )
2
60
Figure 3.1: Test input signals: (a) Step, (b) Ramp, (c) Parabolic.
3.2
First & Second Order System: Transient & Steady State Response
For linear control systems, the time response is characterized by using the unit-step input. The response
of the control system to the unit-step input is called the unit-step response. Fig. 3.2 illustrates a typical
unit-step response of a linear control system. With reference to the unit-step response, the following
performance criteria (parameters) are defined:
1. Maximum overshoot: Let ymax denotes the maximum value of y(t) and yss be the steady-state value of
y(t) and ymax yss. The maximum overshoot of y(t) is defined as,
Maximum overshoot = ymax yss
maximum overshoot
100%
y ss
(3.3)
2. Delay time: The delay time, td is defined as, the time required for the step response to reach 50% of
its final value.
3. Rise time: The rise time, tr is defined as, the time required for the step response to rise from 10 to 90
percent of its final value.
4. Settling time: The settling time, ts is defined as, the time required for the step response to reach and
stay within a specified percentage (5%) of its final value.
61
Analytically, these quantities are difficult to establish, except for simple systems that are lower than the
third order.
3.2.1
Although it is true that second-order control systems are rare in practice, their analysis generally helps
to form a basis for the understanding of analysis and design of higher-order systems, especially the ones
that can be approximated by second-order systems.
Consider that a second-order control system with unity feedback is represented by the block diagram
shown in Fig. 3.3. The open-loop transfer function of the system is
n2
G( s)
ss 2 n
(3.5)
62
n2
Y ( s)
R( s) s 2 2 n s n2
(3.6)
The characteristic equation of the prototype of the second-order system is obtained by setting the
denominator of Eq. (3.6) to zero
(s) s 2 2 n s n2 0
(3.7)
The system is stable (Bounded output for bounded input) if the roots of the characteristic equation is
located on the left half of s-plane, and marginally stable (Oscillation for a bounded input) if the
characteristic equation has simple roots on the imaginary axis with all other roots on the left half of splane. For an unstable (Unbounded output for any bounded input) system, the characteristic equation
has at least one root on the right half of the s-plane or it has a repeated j roots.
n 2
Y ( s)
2
s( s 2 2 n s n )
(3.8)
By taking inverse Laplace transform, we obtain the unit step response of the control system
y (t ) 1
e nt
1
sin n 1 2 t cos 1
t0
(3.9)
63
3.2.2
The effects of the system parameters and n on the step response y(t) can be studied by referring to
the roots of the characteristic equation in Eq. (4.7). The roots can be expressed as
s1 , s2 n jn 1 2
j
(3.10)
where
= n
and
(3.11)
64
n 1 2
(3.12)
The physical significance of and is now investigated. As seen from Eq. (4.9), the factor = n
appears as a constant multiplied by t in the exponential term of the response y(t). Therefore, controls
the rate of rise or decay of the unit-step response y(t). In other words, controls the "damping" of the
system and is called the damping factor.
The inverse of , 1/ is proportional to the time constant of the system. When = 1, the oscillations
disappear and the system is said to be critically damped. Under this condition, = n. Thus, we can
regard as
Damping ratio,
(3.13)
When < 1, the system is under-damped and when > 1, the system is over-damped.
3.2.3
The parameter n is defined as the natural undamped frequency. As seen from Eq. (3.10), when = 0,
the roots of the characteristic equation are imaginary. Thus, the unit-step response of the system
becomes purely oscillatory with angular frequency of n. For 0 < < 1, the imaginary parts of the roots
have the magnitude of the actual (damped) frequency of oscillation. Thus
n 1 2
Fig. 3.5 illustrates the relationships between the location of the roots of the characteristic equation and
, , and n.
65
Figure 3.5: The relationships between the location of the roots of the characteristic equation and , ,
and n.
The effect of the roots of the characteristic equation on the damping of the second-order system is
illustrated in Fig. 3.6.
66
Figure 3.6: Step-response comparison for various locations of the roots of the characteristic equation in
the s-plane.
67
By taking the derivative of Eq. (3.9) with respect to time t and setting the result to zero, we get
n
dy (t )
e nt sin n . 1 2 . t
2
dt
1
n 1 2 t n
(3.14)
n 0,1,2,...
n 0,1,2,...
n 1 2
(3.15)
For the unit-step responses shown in Fig. 3.4, the first overshoot is the maximum overshoot. This
corresponds to n = 1 in Eq. (4.15). Thus, the time at which the maximum overshoot occurs is
tmax
(3.16)
n 1 2
With reference to Fig. 3.4, the overshoots occur at odd values of n, that is, n =1, 3, 5, , and
undershoots occur at even values of n.
The magnitude of the overshoots and undershoots can be determined by subistituting Eq. (3.14) into Eq.
(3.9). This results in y(t)max or min . Therefore
1 2
(3.17)
1- 2
(3.18)
The relationship between the percent maximum overshoot and the damping ratio, as given in Eq. (3.18),
is plotted in Fig. 3.7.
68
Figure 3.7: The relationship between the percent maximum overshoot and the damping ratio.
3.2.5
It is more difficult to determine the exact analytical expressions of the delay time td, rise time tr, and
settling time ts. However, we can utilize the linear approximation
td
1 0.7
0 1.0
(3.19)
The plot of ntr versus is shown in Fig. 3.8. This relation can be approximated by a straight line over a
limited range of .
tr
0.60 2.16
0 1
(3.20)
69
Figure 3.8: Normalized rise time versus for the prototype second-order system.
ts
(3.21)
We can summarize the relationships between ts and the system parameters as follows:
1. For < 0.69, the settling time is inversely proportional to and n. A practical way of reducing
the settling time is to increase n while holding constant.
2. For > 0.69, the settling time is proportional to and inversely proportional to n. Again, ts can
be reduced by increasing n.
70
The discussions in the preceding sections lead to the conclusion that the stability of a linear timeinvariant system can be determined by checking on the location of the roots of the characteristic
equation. When the system parameters are all known, the roots of the characteristic equation can be
solved by means of a root-finding computer program.
For design purposes, there will be unknown or variable parameter embedded in the characteristic
equation, and it will be feasible to use the root-finding programs. The method outlined below is well
known for the determination of stability of a LTI system without involving root solving.
3.3.1
Routh-Hurwitz Criterion
The Routh-Hurwitz criterion represents a method of determining the location of zeros of a polynomial
with constant real coefficients with respect to the left and right half of the s-plane, without actually
solving for the zeros.
Consider that the characteristic equation of a linear time-invariant SISO system is of the form
(3.25)
where all the coefficients are real. In order that Eq. (3.25) does not have roots in the right half of splane, it is necessary and insufficient that the following conditions hold:
1. All the coefficients of the equation have the same sign
2. None of the coefficients vanishes
However, these conditions are not sufficient, for it is quite possible that an equation with all its
coefficients nonzero and of the same sign still will not have all the roots in the left half of the s-plane.
The first step in the Routh-Hurwitz criterion is to arrange the coefficients of the Eq. (3.25) as follows:
71
sn
s
n 1
an
an1
an2
a n 3
an4
a n 5
sn
s
n 1
s n2
s n 3
s0
an
an 1
bn 1
cn 1
hn 1
an 2
an 3
bn 3
cn 3
an 4
an 5
bn 5
cn 5
where
bn1
1 an
an1 an1
an2
a n 3
bn3
1 an
an1 an1
an 4
a n 5
cn1
1 an1
bn1 bn1
a n 3
bn3
and so on.
Once the Routh's tabulation has been completed, we investigate the signs of the coefficients in the first
column of the tabulation. The roots of the equation are all in the left half of the s-plane if all the
elements of the first column of the Routh's tabulation are of the same sign. The number of changes of
signs in the elements of the first column equal the number of roots with positive real parts or in the righthalf s-plane.
72
s 2s 1s 3 s3 4s 2 s 6 0
This equation has one negative coefficient. Thus, we know without applying Routh's test that not all the
roots of the equation are in the left-half s-plane. In fact, from the factored form of the equation, we
know that there are two roots in the right-half s-plane, at s = 2 and s = 3. For the purpose of illustrating,
the Routh's tabulation is made as follows:
s3
s2
s1
s0
1
4
2 .5
6
1
6
0
0
Since there are two sign changes in the first column of the tabulation, the equation has two roots
located in the right-half s-plane.
2s 4 s 3 3s 2 5s 10 0
Since this equation has no missing terms and the coefficients are all of the same sign, it satisfies the
necessary conditions for not having roots in the right half or on the imaginary axis of the s-plane.
However, since these conditions are necessary but not sufficient, we have to check the Routh's
tabulation.
s4
s3
s2
s1
s0
2
3 10
1
5 0
7 10 0
6.43 0 0
10
0 0
Since there are two changes in the first column of the tabulation, the equation has two roots in the right
half of the s-plane.
73
Depending on the coefficients of the equation, the following difficulties may occur that prevent the
Routh's tabulation from completing properly:
1. The first element in any one row of Routh's tabulation is zero, but the others are not.
2. The elements in one row of Routh's tabulation are all zero.
In the first case, we replace the zero element in the first column by an arbitrary small positive number ,
and then proceed with Routh's tabulation. This is illustrated by the following example:
s 4 s 3 2s 2 2s 3 0
Since all the coefficients are nonzero and of the same sign, we need to apply the Routh-Hurwitz
criterion. Routh's tabulation is carried out as follows:
s4
s3
s2
1 2 3
1 2 0
0 3
Since the first element of the s2 row is zero, the element in the s1 row would all be infinite. To overcome
this difficulty, we replace the zero in the s2 row by a small positive number and then proceed with the
tabulation.
s2
s
s0
3
3
3
0
Since there are two sign changes in the first column of Routh's tabulation, the equation has two roots in
the right-half s-plane.
74
In the second special case, when all the elements in one row of Routh's tabulation are zeros before the
tabulation is properly terminated, it indicates that one or more of the following conditions may exist.
1. The equation has at least one pair of real roots with equal magnitude but opposite signs.
2. The equation has one or more pairs of imaginary roots.
3. The equation has pairs of complex-conjugate roots forming symmetry about the origin of the splane (e.g. s = -1 j1, s = 1 j1).
The situation with the entire row of zeros can be remedied by using the auxiliary equation A(s) = 0,
which is formed from the coefficients of the row just above the row of zeros in Routh's tabulation. The
roots of the auxiliary equation also satisfy the original equation. To continue with Routh's tabulation
when a row of zeros appears, we conduct the following steps:
1. Form the auxiliary equation A(s) = 0 by use of the coefficients from the row just preceding the
row of zeros.
2. Take the derivative of the auxiliary equation with respect to s; this gives dA(s)/ds = 0.
3. Replace the row of zeros with the coefficients of dA(s)/ds = 0.
4. Continue with Routh's tabulation in the usual manner.
Example 3.4: Consider the following characteristic equation of a linear control system:
s 5 4s 4 8s 3 8s 2 7s 4 0
s5
s4
s3
s2
s1
1
4
6
4
0
8 7
8 4
6 0
4
0
75
s1
s0
8 0
4
Since there are no sign changes in the first column, the system is stable. Solving the auxiliary equation
A(s) = 0, we get the two roots at s = j and s = -j, which are also two of the roots of the characteristic
equation. Thus, the equation has two roots on the j-axis, and the system is marginally stable. These
imaginary roots caused the tabulation to have an entire row of zeros in the s1 row.
Example 3.5: Consider that a third-order control system has the characteristic equation
s3
s2
s1
s0
1
3408.3
1.5 10 7 k 3408 1204 10 3
3408
1.5 10 7
1204 10 3
1.5 10 7 k
0
For the system to be stable, all the coefficients in the first column must have the same sign. This lead to
the following conditions:
0 k 273.57
76
Thus if the system operate with k = 273.57, the system response will be an undamped sinusoid with a
frequency of 1097.27 rad/sec.
3.4
One of the objectives of most control systems is that the system output response follows a specific
reference signal accurately in the steady state. Steady-state error is the difference between the output
and the reference in the steady state. Steady-state errors in control systems are almost unavoidable and
generally derive from the imperfections, frictions, and the natural composition of the system. In the
design problem, one of the objectives is to keep the steady-state error below a certain tolerable value.
3.4.1
Let us refer to the closed-loop system shown in Fig. 3.11, where r(t) is the input, e(t) the actuating signal,
and y(t) is the output. The error of the system may be defined as:
77
(3.26)
where the reference signal is the signal that the output is to track. When the system has unity feedback
(i.e. H(s) = 1), the error is simply
e(t ) r (t ) y(t )
s 0
sR( s)
s 0 1 G ( s )
lim
(3.27)
Clearly, ess depends on the characteristics of G(s). More specifically, ess depends on the number of poles
that G(s) has at s = 0. This number is known as the system type. Fig. 3.12 shows steady state errors for
different input functions.
78
Figure 3.12: Steady-state errors (a) step input, (b) ramp input
Now let us investigate the effects of the types of inputs on the steady-state error.
79
When the input r(t) to a control system with unity-feedback is a step function with magnitude A, then
R(s) = A/s and the steady-state error is written from Eq. (4.27),
ess lim
s 0
sR( s)
A
A
lim
0
1 G(s)
1 G( s) 1 lim G( s)
(3.28)
s 0
k p lim G(s)
s 0
ess
A
1 k p
3.4.3
Type 0 system:
ess
A
= constant
1 k p
ess = 0
When the input to the unity-feedback control system is a ramp function with amplitude A,
r (t ) Atu s (t )
where A is a real constant, the Laplace transform of r(t) is
R( s)
A
s2
(3.29)
80
A
A
s 0 s sG( s )
lim sG( s)
ess lim
(3.30)
s 0
kv lim sG( s)
s0
ess
A
kv
(3.31)
The following conclusions may be stated with regard to the steady-state error of a system with ramp
input:
3.4.4
Type 0 system:
ess =
Type 1 system:
ess = 0
r (t )
At 2
u s (t )
2
R( s )
A
s3
ess
A
lim s 2 G ( s)
s 0
(3.32)
81
ka lim s 2G( s)
s0
(3.33)
ess
A
ka
(3.34)
The following conclusions are made with regard to the steady-state error of a system with parabolic
input:
Type 0 system:
ess =
Type 1 system:
ess =
Type 2 system:
ess = 0
Example 3.5: Find the steady state errors of the following system
G( s)
k ( s 3.15)
s( s 1.5)(s 0.5)
H(s) 1
It is clear that this system is a type 1 system. The steady-state errors are:
Step input
Step-error constant, kp =
Ramp input
ess = A/1+kp = 0
3.4.5
For non-unity feedback control, we usually find the equivalent unity-feedback system, as shown in Fig.
3.13.
82
Figure 3.13: Forming an equivalent unity feedback for nonunity feedback system.
We have to take into consideration, that the above steps require that input and output of the same
units. The following example summarizes the concepts of steady-state error, system type, and the
steady state errors.
Example 3.6: For the system shown in Fig. 4.14, find the system type and the steady state error for the
unit step function. Assume input and output units are the same.
83
The first step in solving the problem is to convert the system of Fig. 3.14 into an equivalent unity
feedback system. Using the equivalent forward transfer function of Fig. 3.13(e) along with
G( s)
100
s( s 10)
and
H ( s)
1
s5
we find
Ge ( s)
G( s)
100( s 5)
3
1 G( s) H ( s) G( s) s 15s 2 50s 400
k p lim Ge ( s)
s 0
100 5
5
400
4
ess
1
4
1 kp
84
In practice, the performance of a control system is measured more realistically by its time-domain
characteristics. The reason is that the performance of most control systems is judged based on the time
response due to certain test signals.
In design problems, there are no unified methods of arriving at a designated system that meets timedomain performance specifications. On the other hand, in frequency domain, a wealth of graphical and
other techniques are available that are useful for system analysis and design, irrespective of the order of
the system.
It is important to realize that there are correlating relations between the frequency- and time-domain
performances in linear system so that time-domain properties of the system can be predicted based on
the frequencydomain characteristics. With these in mind, we shall study the frequency response
analysis of control systems.
3.5.1
It is well known from linear system theory that, when the input to a linear time invariant system is
sinusoidal with amplitude R and frequency o, i.e.,
r(t) R sin ot
the steady-state output of the system, y(t), will be a sinusoid with the same frequency o, but possibly
with different amplitude and phase; i.e.
Let the transfer function of a SISO system be M(s); the output Y(s) and the input R(s) are related through
Y(s) M(s)R(s)
85
Y(j) j)R j)
By writing Y(j) and M(j) as (similar expression for R j ) also):
Y ( j ) Y ( j ) Y ( j )
M ( j ) M ( j ) M ( j )
Y ( j ) M ( j ) R( j )
and the phase relation:
Y ( j) M ( j) R( j)
Thus, for the input and output signals described by equations (6.1) and (6.2),
Y M ( jo ) R
M ( jo )
Thus, by knowing the transfer function M(s), the frequency response of the system can be obtained.
The frequency response of the loop transfer function G(s)H(s) [G(s) if H(s) is unity] can be plotted in
several ways. The two commonly used representations are:
a. Bode diagram, or Logarithmic plot.
b. Polar plot, or Nyquist plot.
86
A Bode diagram consists of two graphs. One is a plot of the logarithm of the magnitude of a sinusoidal
transfer function; the other is a plot of the phase angle; both are plotted against the frequency on a
logarithmic scale.
The standard representation of the logarithmic magnitude of G(j) is 20 log |G(j)|, where the base of
the logarithm is 10. The unit used in this representation is the decibel (dB). The curves are drawn on a
semilog paper, using the log scale for frequency and linear scale for either magnitude (in dB) or phase
angle (degrees).
The main advantage of Bode diagrams is that the multiplication of magnitudes can be converted into
addition. Furthermore, a simple asymptotic method is available for sketching the approximate curve.
Should the exact curve be desired, corrections could be made easily to these basic asymptotic plots.
In Bode diagrams, the frequency ratios are expressed in terms of octaves or decades. An octave is a
frequency band from 1 to 21, where 1 is any frequency. A decade is a frequency band from 1 to
101, where 1 is any frequency.
d. Quadratic factors, 1 2 j / n j / n
G(j)H(j) = K
Magnitude: |G(j)H(j)| (dB) = 20 log10 |K| (dB).
Phase angle: G(j)H(j) = 0.
2 1
87
For sn:
G(j)H(j)=(j)n
Magnitude: |G(j)H(j)| (dB) = 20n log10 |j| (dB) = 20n log10 (dB)
(6.11)
For s-n:
G(j)H(j)=(j)-n
Magnitude: |G(j)H(j)| (dB) = 20n log10 |j| (dB) = 20n log10 (dB)
(6.12)
The Bode magnitude plots are a straight line in semi log coordinate. The slope of the line is 20n
dB/decade i.e. the magnitude change by 20n dB for the frequency change of 10 times. The straight line
passes through 0 dB at = 1. The phase angle () of j is constant and equal to 900.The Bode plots
are shown in Fig. 6.2.
88
c.
Magnitude:
|G(j)H(j)| (dB) = 20 log10 |1 + jT| (dB)
= 20 log10 *1 + 2T2] (dB)
(6.11)
89
20 log 1 2T 2 20 log1 0 dB
For high frequencies, such that T >> 1,
20 log 1 2T 2 20 log T dB
At =1/T, log magnitude = 0 dB while at =10/T, log magnitude = 20 dB. Thus, the value of
20 log T increases/decreases with 20 dB/decade. Hence, the magnitude plot can be approximated
by two straight-line asymptotes, one a straight line at 0 dB for the frequency range 0 < < 1/T and the
other a straight line with slope 20 dB/decade for the frequency range 1/T < < . The frequency,
=1/T, at which the two asymptotes meet is called the corner frequency or break frequency.
At corner frequency, G(j)H(j) = 45. The phase plot can be approximated by a straight line passing
through 0 at one decade below corner frequency and 90 at one decade above corner frequency. The
Bode plots are shown in Fig. 6.3 and Fig. 6.4.
An advantage of the Bode diagram is that for reciprocal factors, for example the factor 1/(1+jT), the
log-magnitude and phase angle curves need only be changed in sign, since
20 log
1
20 log 1 jT and phase angle of 1/(1+jT) = tan 1 T = (phase angle of
1 jT
(1+jT).
90
91
d. Quadratic factors: G( s) H ( s) 1 2 s / n s / n
2 1
G( j ) H ( j ) 1 2 j / n j / n
2 1
Magnitude:
|G(j)H(j)| (dB) = 20 log10 |1 + 2(j/n)+ (j/n)2| (dB)
2
= 20 log10
1 2 2
(dB)
n n
(6.12)
92
For low frequencies such that /n << 1, the log magnitude becomes 20 log 1 = 0 dB. The low
frequency asymptote is thus a horizontal line at 0 dB. For high frequencies such that /n >> 1, the logmagnitude becomes 20 log
40 log
dB. The equation for the high frequency asymptote is a
2
n
n
The frequency n is the corner frequency. The two asymptotes just derived are independent of the value
of . Fig. 6.5 shows exact curves with the straight-line asymptotes and the exact phase angle curves.
2
n
tan 1
2
1
n
(6.13)
93
94
1
1
1 1
Solution: G ( s)
, G ( j )
j
j 2 2
s2
1
2
1
s2
1
2
G( j ) tan1
-5
-15
-20
-25
0
-20
To: Y(1)
-10
-40
-60
-80
-1
10
10
Frequency (rad/sec)
10
95
Rewrite the sinusoidal transfer function as a product of the basic factors discussed above.
Draw the asymptotic log-magnitude curves with proper slopes between the corner frequencies
considering all the basic factors together. The exact curve, which lies very close to the
asymptotic curve, can be obtained by adding contributions from all the factors and proper
corrections.
3.5.3
Phase-angle curve can be drawn by adding the phase-angle curves of individual factors.
The polar plot of a sinusoidal transfer function G(j) is a plot of the magnitude of G(j) versus the phase
angle of G(j) on polar coordinates as is varied from zero to infinity. Note that, in polar plots, a
positive (negative) phase angle is measured counterclockwise (clockwise) from the positive real axis. The
polar plot is very often called the Nyquist plot in control system engineering. An example of such a plot
is shown in Fig. 6.7. Each point on the polar plot of G(j) represents the terminal point of a vector at a
particular value of . In the polar plot, it is important to show the frequency graduation of the locus.
96
The polar plot of G(j)H(j) = 1/j is the negative imaginary axis since
G j H ( j )
1
j 1
90 0
j
(6.14)
97
G j H ( j )
1
1
tan 1 T
2
2
1 jT
1 T
(6.15)
1 1 1
G j 0H ( j 0) 100 and G j H j
450
2
T T
If approaches infinity, the magnitude approaches 0 and the phase angle approaches 900. The polar
plot of this transfer function is a semicircle as the frequency is varied from 0 to . It is shown in Fig. 6.8.
The center is located at 0.5 in the real axis and the radius is equal to 0.5. The lower semicircle
corresponds to 0 , and the upper semicircle corresponds to 0 .
Figure 6.8: (a) Polar plot of 1/(1+jT) ; (b)Same plot in X-Y plane.
98
2 1
G( j ) H ( j ) 1 2 j / n j / n
2 1
The low and high frequency portions of the polar plot of the following transfer function
G j H ( j )
1 2 j / n j / n
Thus, the high frequency portion is tangent to the negative real axis. The polar plots are shown in Fig.
6.8.
99
2
n
tan 1
2
1
n
1 2 j / n j / n
G j H ( j ) 1 2 j / n j / n
2
1 2
n
2
j
n
lim G j H ( j ) 100
for > 0.
100
lim G j H ( j ) 1800
1
s2
G( j )
G( j )
1
j 2
1
2 4
G( j ) tan 1
101
Solution:
G( j )
10
s( s 1)( s 2)
10
j ( j 1)( j 2)
G( j )
10
( 1) ( 2 2)
2
G( j ) 90 tan1
tan1
102
The Cauchy criterion (from complex analysis) states that when taking a closed contour in the complex
plane, and mapping it through a complex function G(s), the number of times, N, that the plot of G(s)
encircles the origin is equal to the number of zeros, Z, of G(s) enclosed by the frequency contour minus
the number of poles, P, of G(s) enclosed by the frequency contour.
N=ZP
Encirclements of the origin are counted as positive if they are in the same direction as the original closed
contour or negative if they are in the opposite direction.
When studying feedback control, we are not as interested in G(s)H(s) as in the closed-loop transfer
function G(s)H(s)/[1+G(s)H(s)]
If 1+G(s)H(s) encircles the origin, then G(s)H(s) will enclose the point -1. Since we are interested in the
closed-loop stability, we want to know if there are any closed-loop poles (zeros of 1+G(s)H(s)) in the
right-half plane.
103
Z is the number of right hand plane poles for the closed loop system (or zeros of
1+G(s)H(s))
>
P is the number of open-loop poles (in the RH side of the s-plane) of G(s)H(s) (or poles of
1+G(s)H(s)), and
>
A feedback control system is stable if and only if the number of counter-clockwise encirclements of the
critical point (-1,0) by the GH polar plot is equal to the number of poles of GH with positive real parts.
(Nyquist Stability Criterion Definition)
Example:
104
From Nyquist diagram it can be seen that K can be increased by ____________ before the
Nyquist diagram encircles -1.
Gain margin is defined as the change in open loop gain required to make the system unstable. Systems
with greater gain margins can withstand greater changes in system parameters before becoming
unstable in closed loop. Phase margin is defined as the change in open loop phase shift required to
make a closed loop system unstable.
105
Bode plot is a very useful graphical tool for the analysis and design of linear control systems.
The gain margin is the difference between the magnitude curve and 0dB at the point corresponding to
the frequency that gives us a phase of 180 (the phase cross over frequency, p).
The phase margin is the difference in phase between the phase curve and 180 at the point
corresponding to the frequency that gives us a gain of 0dB (the gain cross over frequency, g).
106
L( s )
2500
s( s 5)( s 50)
From the provided Bode diagram, find the GM and PM and corresponding frequencies.
107
Fig. 6.14 illustrates PM and GM of a stable and unstable system in Bode diagrams.
108
Figure 6.14: Phase and Gain margins for stable and unstable systems.
Phase Margin, M
CLOSED LOOP
The change in open-loop gain, expressed in
dB, required at -180 to make the closedloop system unstable. A good range is
2<GM<5 (equivalent to 6dB < GM < 14dB).
The change in the open-loop phase shift
required at unity gain to make the closedloop unstable. Good range 30 < PM < 60
degrees.
quantitative measures of stability.
systems with large gain and phase margins
can withstand greater changes in system
parameter before becoming unstable.
related to root locus, in that systems with
poles farther from the imaginary axis have
a greater degree of stability.
109
110
PID CONTROLLER
Feature-based techniques
But before looking at PID tuning, we need to look at modeling of simple process dynamics. There are
two common approaches:
transient response methods, which look at the time domain characteristics of the system
response to a step or impulse
frequency response methods, which look at the response to an impulse, white noise or one
or more sinusoids
Stick to transient response models and very simple frequency response for the moment.
111
Amplitude
1.5
Unit
Step
Input
1.05
1
0.95
0.9
0.5
Rise Time
0.1
0
0 Time Delay
Time
Settling Time
Step Response
i)
Peak Overshoot
Time necessary for the response to rise from 10% to 90% of its final steady state
error
112
Time necessary for the step response to reach some value (often 50%) of the steady
state value. Not to be confused with Dead time = Time Delay
v) Settling Time
The time taken for the step response to decrease and stay within a specified range
of the final value.
Often 1%, 2% or 5%
Defined as the ratio between two consecutive maxima of the error for a step change
in the set-point
The value d=1/4, which is called quarter amplitude damping, is used traditionally
but is often too high
G( s)
1 G ( s)
CL( s )
n2
s 2 2 n s n2
1
1 2s / n ( s / n ) 2
d e
2 / 1 2
113
18
16
G(s) =
14
a -sL
e
Ls
12
amplitude
4.1.1
10
8
6
4
1
step response for e-2s
s
2
2
10 12
time
14
16
18
20
114
T
2
1.5
amplitude
4.1.2
G(s) =
k -sL
e
1+sT
0.5
step response for
0
0
2 -2s
e
1+s
5
6
time
10
Tangent to step response must be drawn at the location of the largest slope
Problem:
115
T
2
1.5
amplitude
4.1.3
G(s) =
.63k
k -sL
e
1+sT
0.5
step response for
0
0
1
L
2 -2s
e
1+s
5
6
time
63% =1-e-1
10
116
L+T
2
1.5
amplitude
4.1.4
G(s) =
A1
k -sL
e
1+sT
0.5
A2
0
0
L
3 Parameter Model Alternative:
5
time
10
117
Oscillatory
3 parameters - need k, w, z
Tp
3.5
d = e2 / e1
e1-e2=o(1-d)
3
2.5
amplitude
4.1.5
1.5
G(s) =
1
k2
s2 + 2s + 2
0.5
0
0
10 12
time
14
16
18
20
-2
2 1/2
d = e (1- )
Tp =
or
2
(1-2)1/2
=
or
1
2 1/2
(1 + (2/ log d) )
2
=
Tp(1-2)1/2
Time delay can be added to this model and determined as done previously in the tutorial.
118
Some tuning formulas are based upon the frequency response of the plant
Parameters of interest are the ultimate gain Ku and the ultimate period Tu
Find these by first closing the loop and then disabling the integral and derivative parts of the controller
(Td=0, Ti=very large), and increasing the proportional gain until the system begins to oscillate. Gain at
this point = Ku and period of oscillation = Tu
Controller
ysp
Plant
G(s)
e(s)
for the closed-loop system, find controller gain that produces a 1/4 decay ratio
(overshoot of one peak is 25% of the peak before it). Let this be K25%
Ku = 2 K25%
Period of oscillation, T25%, will be approximately Tu (a little longer in practice, but close
enough)
119
On a Nyquist plot:
ultimate point
-1
+
Im G(j)
=0
Re G(j)
120
There are several tuning law can be implemented in order to obtain the desired response. These
tuning law are as follows:
i)
Ziegler Nichols
Step Response
Generalised ZN
4.3.1
Ziegler-Nichols rule was first presented in 1942. This tuning law was developed empirically
based on large number of cases. It can be said as a standard starting point.
There are some drawbacks of using this rule mainly because it needs additional manual tuning
and not particularly robust.
Now we will employ this method for both step response and frequency response modeling.
121
CONTROLLER
TYPE
P
Ti
1/a
PI
PID
0.9/a
1.2/a
a= 0.218
L= 0.806
Tp
4L
3L
2L
Example:
Td
L/2
5.7L
3.4L
122
123
PID settings based upon ultimate gain, Ku, and ultimate period, Tu
Aims to achieve effective disturbance rejection, and acceptable set point following
CONTROLLER
TYPE
P
K
0.5Ku
PI
PID
0.4Ku
0.6Ku
Example:
Consider the plant G(s) = (s+1)-3
Ti
Td
Tp
Tu
0.8Tu
0.5Tu
0.125Tu
1.4Tu
0.85Tu
124
4.3.2
The Chien, Hrones and Reswick Method Improved Z-N step response modeling
The CHN method is a modified Z-N step response rules which can gives better damped closed
loop response.
The tuning method gives you two options depending on the desired response and they can be
either:
125
Ti
Td
0.3/a
0.6/a
0.95/a
4L
2.4L
0.42L
Ti
Td
0.7/a
0.7/a
1.2/a
2.3L
2L
0.42L
Cohen-Coon Method
Based on plant model
G( s)
K 0 sL
e
1 sT
Attempts to position dominant poles that give quarter amplitude decay ratio by employing:
For PID control, 3 poles are assigned, two complex conjugate poles and the third real pole is
positioned at the same distance from the origin as the other 2 poles.
CONTROLLER
TYPE
(1/a)*[1+0.35/(1-)]
PI
(0.9/a)*[1+0.92/(1-)]
PD
(1.24/a)*[1+0.13/(1-)]
PID
(1.35/a)*[1+0.18/(1-)]
Ti
Td
[(3.3-3)/(1+1.2)]*L
[(2.5-2)/(1-0.39)]*L
[(0.27-0.36) / (10.87)]*L
[(0.37-0.37)/(10.81)]*L
126
4.5
SPEED
Increases
STABILITY
Decreases
Ti increases
Decreases
Increases
Td increases
Increases
Z-N Step
Z-N Nyquist
K=1/a
0.5Ku
K=0.9/a
PID
K=1.2/a
amplitude
4.4
Ti=3L
Ti=2L
K=0.4Ku
time
a
L
Ti=0.8Pu
127
Pu
time
4.5.1
The ZN ultimate gain approach can be interpreted as shifting a point in the Nyquist curve. The
technique is based around finding the ultimate point, where the Nyquist curve intercepts the real axis.
ultimate point
= -1/Ku
Im G(j)
=0
-1
+
Re G(j)
I
P
D
128
The introduction of the state space representation has been discussed earlier in chapter 2.0. Please
refer to the chapter for basic overview of state space representation.
In this chapter, we will cover InsyaAllah the extension of state space representation for example the
conversion between the transfer function and state space equation. Also in this chapter we will gonna
look at how to solve the time invariant state equation, controllability and observability.
5.1
The transfer function of any system can be converted to state space equation and vice versa. Consider a
transfer function given by:
()
= ()
()
This system may also be represented in state space as:
= +
= +
Where x is the state vector, u is the input and y is the output. The Laplace Transform of the equations:
0 = + ()
= + ()
Assuming the initial conditions are zero
= ()
Or
= ()
By premultiplying ( )1 to both sides of this equation, we obtain
=
()
+ ()
129
Transfer Matrix
For MIMO system that the r inputs 1 , 2 , . , and m outputs 1 , 2 , . , define as:
1
2
= .
.
1
2
= .
.
The transfer matrix G(s) relates the output Y(s) to the input U(s), or
= ()
Since the input vector u is r dimensional and the ouput vector y is m dimensional, the transfer matrix is
an m x r matrix.
5.2
A modern complex system may have many inputs and outputs. Let say we have a state space
representations of the following:
+ 1 1 + + 1 + = 0 + 1 1 + + 1 +
Controllable canonical form
1
0
2
0
.
.
=
.
.
1
0
= 1 0
1
0
.
.
0
1
0
1
.
.
0
2
1 1 0
1
1
1
0
2
0
.
.
. + .
1
0
. 1 1 0
1
2
.
. + 0
1
130
0
0
.
.
0
0
0
0
.
.
0
1
1
1 0
2
1 1 0
.
.
. +
.
1
.
1 1 0
1
2
.
.
1
1
2
.
. + 0
1
= 0 0 0 1
Consider the transfer function system defined by equation below. In this case the denominator
polynomial involves only distinct roots only.
() 0 + 1 1 + + 1 +
=
()
+ 1 + 2 ( + )
= 0 + +1 + +2 + + +
1
1
1
2
0
.
.
=
.
.
1
0
0
= 1
0
2
.
.
0
0
0
0
0
0
.
.
.
.
0
.
0
1
1
2
1
.
.
. + .
1
.
1
2
.
. + 0
1
131
Consider the case where the denominator polynomial involves multiple roots.
()
0 + 1 1 + + 1 +
=
()
+ 1 3 + 4 + 5 ( + )
The partial fraction expansion becomes
()
1
2
3
4
= 0 +
+
+
+
+
+
()
( + 1 )3 ( + 1 )2 ( + 1 ) ( + 4 )
( + )
A state space representation of this system in the Jordan canonical form is given by:
1
1
0
2
0
3
0
4
=
.
.
.
.
.
.
= 1
1
1
0
0
0
1
1
0
0
0
0
4
.
.
.
0
0
0
0
0
.
.
.
1
2
+0
1
1
0
2
0
3
1
4
1
. + .
.
.
.
.
132
133
5.3.1
Controllability
Controllability is a test of the ability of the actuators. A system is controllable if it is possible to transfer
any state with any set of initial conditions to any final state in some finite time period. Alternatively, a
system is only controllable if every mode (or state) is connected to the control input.
A system is referred to as stabilizable so long as we can state control all unstable modes. This might
mean that there are some stable uncontrollable states. Strictly speaking the dynamical system described
by the pair (A;B) is said to be (state-feedback) stabilizable if there exists a state feedback u=-Kx such that
A+BK is stable.
In order to test the controllability of a LTI system, the Controllability Matrix must be of full rank. The
Controllability matrix, = i.e the controllability matrix must be invertible. Note
the difference between rank and determinant. Often in uncontrollable systems, part of the system is
unconnected from input.
Additional tests are to show that the controllability Gramian P is positive definite, where P may be found
by the solution to the Lyapunov equation: + = .
Alternatively;
134
1 0
1
,=
1 2
2
1
2
1
3
Example 2:
1 0
1
,=
0 1
3
Example 3:
135
Observability
Observability is a test of the ability of the sensors. A system is observable if every initial state x(0) can be
determined by observing the system output over some finite time period. A system is referred to as
detectable if all unstable modes are state observable. This may mean the system has unobservable
states which are stable. Strictly speaking the pair (C;A) is said to be detectable if there exists a matrix L
such that A+LC is stable.
In order to test the observability of an LTI system, the Observability Matrix must be of full rank. The
Additional tests are to show that the controllability Gramian Q is positive definite, where Q may be
found by the solution to the Lyapunov equation: + = .
Alternatively;
Example 1:
1 0
, = 1 0 and = 0 1
1 2
1 0
1 0
136
Example 2:
Investigate the observability of: =
1 0
,= 1 3
1 1
Example 3:
Investigate the observability of:
()
1
= = 3
2
()
+ 2 + 1 + 0
137
The state transition matrix is difficult to calculate. Hence there are two common ways of expressing it:
1. Expansion:
= = + +
2 2
+ +
2!
!
2. Inversion:
= 1
= 1
= 0 +
0
1
2 3
138
1
0
0
1
=
2 + 3
2 3
(sI A)1 =
1
s+3
s + 1 (s + 2) 2
+3
+ 1 ( + 2)
2
+ 1 ( + 2)
Hence = = 1
1
s
1
+ 1 ( + 2)
+ 1 ( + 2)
2 2
2 + 2 2
2
+ 2 2
Noting that 1 = ()
2 2
2 + 2 2
1 = =
2
+ 2 2
1
1
=
+ 1
1 2
2
0
1
= 1 2
2
1
Where 1 and 2 are suspension displacements, u is an electrical actuating signal and k is the
suspension stiffness.
i.
ii.
establish the conditions which must be avoided if the system is to remain observable.
b) If the values of k=2N/m, 1 =1 and 2 =0, determine
i.
ii.
iii.
The variation of x(t) response to a step change in u(t) at time t=0 from u=0 to u=1N for
initial conditions 1 () and 2 () equal to zero.
139
We have discussed so far the importance of the closed-loop system poles on the dynamic performance
of the system. The transient-response specifications can be translated into desired locations for
dominant closed-loop poles. The roots of the characteristic equation, which are the poles of the closedloop system, determine the absolute and relative stability of the system. Therefore, an important study
in linear control systems is the investigation of the trajectories of the roots of the characteristic
equation, or simply, the root loci when a certain system parameter varies. The basic properties and
construction of root loci are first due to W.R. Evans (1948).
In this chapter, we will discuss the construction of root loci using simple rules. For plotting the root loci
accurately, one can always use standard computer program packages like MATLAB. The basics of root
loci should be thoroughly understood so that the engineers may be able to interpret the data provided
by root loci for system analysis and design.
6.1
Consider the second-order system shown in Fig. 6.1, which represents a typical position control system.
The plant consists of a servomotor and load, driven by power amplifier with gain K. The open-loop
transfer function of the system is
G( s)
K
s( s 2)
(6.1)
140
The open-loop poles, marked in Fig. 5.2, are at s = 0 and s = -2. The closed-loop transfer function of the
system is
Y ( s)
G( s)
K
2
R( s ) 1 G ( s ) s 2 s K
(6.2)
141
( s ) s 2 2 s K 0
(6.3)
This second order system is always stable for positive values of K. The relative stability of the system
depends upon the location of the closed-loop poles
s1, 2 1 1 K
(6.4)
As K is varied from zero to infinity, the closed-loop poles move in the s-plane as shown in Fig. 6.2. At K =
0, the root s1 is equal to the open-loop pole at s = 0, and root s2 is equal to the open-loop pole at s = 2.
As K increases, the roots move toward each other. The two roots meet at s = 1 for K = 1. As K is
increased further, the roots breakaway from the real axis, become complex conjugate, and since the real
part of both roots remains fixed at s = 1, the roots move along the line = 1.
A root locus of a system is a plot of the roots of the system characteristic equation (poles of the closedloop transfer function) as some parameters of the system are varied.
The two branches A-C-E and B-C-D of the plot of Fig. 6.2 are thus two root loci of the system of Fig. 6.1.
Each root locus starts at an open-loop pole with K = 0 and terminates at infinity as K . Each root
locus gives one characteristic root (closed-loop pole) for a specific value of K.
The root locus plot gives us considerable information about the transient behavior of the system as gain
K is varied. From Fig. 6.2:
For 0 < K < 1, the roots are real and distinct and the system is overdamped.
For K = 1, the roots are real and repeated. Thus, the system is critically damped.
For K > 1, the roots are complex conjugate and the system is underdamped with the value of
decreasing as K increases.
142
6.1.1
KG(s)
Consider the control system shown in Fig. 6.3. The closed-loop transfer function is
Y ( s)
KG ( s)
R( s) 1 KG ( s) H ( s)
(6.5)
Let K be a positive quantity. The roots of the characteristics equation must satisfy the expression
or,
1 + KG(s)H(s) = 0
(6.6)
G(s)H(s) = -1/K
(6.7)
143
(6.8)
(6.9)
The angle condition is used to determine the trajectory of the loci in the s-plane.
Once the root loci are drawn, the values of K on the loci are determined by using the magnitude
condition.
Graphical Interpretation
Let KG ( s) H ( s)
K ( s z1 )(s z2 ) ( s zm )
( s p1 )(s p2 ) ( s pn )
(6.10)
G(s) H (s)
s z
i
i 1
n
s p
1
K
(6.11)
j 1
i 1
j 1
(6.12)
144
In Fig 6.4, let us assume a complex pole and real zero: s+p1 and s+z1 represent the respective vectors in
the complex plane. A and B are magnitudes of vectors (s+z1) and (s+p1) and 2 and 1 are angles of (s+z1)
and (s+p1), respectively.
Once the root loci are constructed, the values of K along the loci can be determined. Thus, the
construction of root loci involves:
1. A search for all the points in the s-plane.
2. Find the magnitude of K on the root loci.
145
The purpose of root locus is to show in graphical form the general trend of the roots of the characteristic
equation
(6.13)
where
G ( s) H ( s)
s z
i
; mn
i 1
n
s p
(6.14)
j 1
as the parameter K is varied from zero to infinity. Every point s = + j in the complex plane that
satisfies the angle criterion
m
i 1
j 1
G( s) H ( s) ( s zi ) ( s p j ) (2q 1)180o ; q = 0, 1, 2, .
is on the root locus. The value of the parameter K corresponding to a point on the root locus can be
obtained from the magnitude criterion
m
G( s) H ( s)
s z
i
i 1
n
s p
1
K
j 1
In principle, the root locus for a given F(s) can be sketched by measuring F(s) at all the points of the
complex plane and marking down those places where we find F(s) equal to an odd multiple of 1800.
However, this trial-and-error method would be a very tedious task. Therefore, certain rules have been
developed for making a quick approximate sketch of the root locus. This approximate sketch provides a
guide for the selection of trial points such that a more accurate root locus can be obtained by a few
trials. Further, the approximate root locus sketch is very useful in visualizing the effects of variation of
the parameter K, the effects of shifting of pole-zero locations and of bringing a new set of poles and
zeros.
146
The root locus for a given F(s) is to be sketched. F(s) has m zeros at s = -zi and n poles at s = -pj (refer to
Eq. (6.14)) where m n. These m zeros and n poles of F(s) are referred to as open-loop zeros and openloop poles, respectively.
j 1
i 1
( s) ( s p j ) K ( s zi ) 0
(6.15)
This equation has degree n. Thus, for each real K, there are n roots. As the roots are continuous function
of the coefficients of equation, the n roots form n continuous loci as K varies from 0 to . Since the
complex roots occur in complex conjugate pairs, the root loci must be symmetrical about the real axis.
p
)
( s zi ) 0
j
K j 1
i 1
When K = , the equation has roots at zi (i = 1, , m), which are open-loop zeros. Therefore, m root
loci end on the open-loop zeros.
147
s z
i
i 1
n
s p
1
, we find that this is satisfied by s ej as
K
j 1
(real part of open loop poles ) (real part of open loop zeros)
nm
(2q 1)1800
nm
; q 0,1,, (n m 1)
This rule will be justified by referring to a pole-zero patterns shown in Fig. 6.5. For a point far away from
the origin, the poles and zeros can be considered to cluster at the same point, say a, as shown in Fig.
6.5. Thus, Eq. (6.15) can be approximated as
m
K s zi
i 1
n
s p
K
(s a ) nm
j 1
This means that all m zeros are cancelled by poles, and only (n - m) poles are left at -a.
(6.16)
148
s p
n
j 1
m
s z
(s a ) nm
(6.17)
i 1
s nm p j zi s nm1 s nm n m a s nm1
i 1
j 1
j 1
i 1
( p j ) ( zi )
nm
(2q 1)1800
a
nm
; q 0,1,, (n m 1)
(6.18)
149
F(s)
K(s 2 )
(s 1 j 4 )(s 1 j 4 )(s 3 )(s 4 )
(6.19)
The root loci has four branches, each starting from an open-loop pole with K = 0. One root locus will
terminate on open-loop zero with K = . The other three loci will terminate on as K along the
asymptotes radiating out from s = -a
where a
1 1 3 4 (2)
7
4 1
3
at angles 600, 1800, and 3000, respectively. Fig. 6.6 shows the asymptotes.
150
For the system of Eq. (6.19), the open-loop pole-zeros are shown in Fig. 6.7(a). Take a point s0 on the
real axis. Join this point to all the open-loop poles and zeros. It is seen that (i) poles and zeros on the real
axis to the right of this point contribute an angle of 1800 each, (ii) poles and zeros to the left of this point
contribute angle of 00 each, and (iii) the net angle contribution of a complex conjugate pole or zero pair
is always zero.
Thus, F(s)=(mr nr)1800 = (2q+1) 1800 , q = 0, 1, 2,
where mr = number of open-loop zeros on the real axis to the right of s0 and nr = number of open-loop
poles on the real axis to the right of s0. Thus, the angle criterion is satisfied if (nr mr) or (nr + mr) is odd
and hence the rule. Thus, the real axis can be divided into segments on-locus and not-on-locus; the
dividing points being the real open-loop poles and zeros. The on-locus segments of the real axis
alternate as shown in Fig. 6.7(b).
151
Segments of root loci can exist in the right half of s-plane. This signifies instability. The points at which
the root loci cross the imaginary axis define the stability limits. The Routh Table determines the gains at
the stability limit. By using this gain in the auxiliary equation, the value s = j0 at the stability limit is
computed.
(6.20)
s4
43
s3
143+K
s2
(244 K)/9
204+2K
s1
s0
204+2K
204+2K
For stability, 244 K > 0, 18368 61K K2 > 0, and 204 + 2K > 0. It can be seen that these conditions are
satisfied if K < 108.4. For K = 108.4, all the coefficients in s1 row are zero. Thus, the auxiliary equation is
formed from the coefficients of s2 row and is given by
244 K 2
s (204 2 K ) 0
9
For K = 108.4, the roots of the above equation lie on the j axis and are given by s = j5.28. Thus, the
root loci intersect the imaginary axis at s = j5.28 and the corresponding value of K is 108.4.
152
Example 6.3: For the system of Eq. (6.19), the characteristic equation is
1 F(s) 1
K(s 2 )
0
(s 1 j 4 )(s 1 j 4 )(s 3 )(s 4 )
(6.21)
2 (1 3 4 )
Thus, the total phase of F(s) at s0 is - p. For s0 to be on the root locus, the total phase must be 1800.
So, p = 1800 +. This is the angle of departure from the complex open-loop pole.
153
There are four open-loop poles, so there are four loci. One locus departs from real pole at 3 and ends
on the zero at 2 along the real axis. The second locus departs from real pole at 4 and moves along the
asymptote on the negative real axis. The third locus departs from the complex pole at 1+j4 with a
departure angle of p = 500 and moves toward the asymptote radiating from the centroid at 7/3 at an
angle of +600; it crosses the imaginary axis at j5.28. Using the symmetry property, the fourth locus is
obtained immediately by reflection about the real axis.
154
1 F ( s) 1
K ( s 2 1)
0
s( s 2)
(6.22)
The pole-zero map of this F(s) is shown in Fig. 6.10. Open loop poles: s = 0, 2. Open-loop zeros: s = j1.
Let s0 be an arbitrary point on the root locus terminating on the zero at s = j1. Let the phase from this
zero to s0 = z. If the point s0 is very close to the zero at j1, then the vectors drawn from the other zero at
j1 and poles at 0 and 2 to s0 can be approximated by vectors to the zero at j1. Under this
approximation, the net angle contribution at s0 is given by
155
dK
0
ds
(6.23)
where
s p
n
j 1
m
(6.24)
s z
i
i 1
Let us assume that the characteristic equation has a multiple root at s = s0 of multiplicity r. Then,
1 F (s) (s s0 )r M (s)
,r2
(6.25)
where M(s) does not contain the factor (s - s0). Thus, by differentiating Eq. (6.25), we have
(5.26)
KB( s)
0
A( s)
(6.27)
dF
( s s0 )r 1 rM ( s) ( s s0 ) M ' ( s)
ds
At s = s0, the RHS of Eq. (6.26) is zero. Thus, at s = s0,
dF
0
ds
In pole-zero form, the characteristic equation is:
m
1 F (s) 1
K s zi
i 1
n
s p
j 1
Thus,
dF
A( s) B( s) A( s) B( s)
K
0
ds
A(s)2
(6.28)
(6.29)
156
s p
n
dK
A(s)
0 , where K
ds
B(s)
j 1
m
s z
(6.30)
i 1
K ( s 2)(s 3)
KB( s)
1
0
s( s 1)
A( s)
(6.31)
Fig. 6.11 shows the open-loop poles and zeros on the complex plane. Root loci segments exist on the
negative real axis between 0 and 1 and between 2 and 3. At K = 0, the roots are at s = 0 and s = 1.
As K increases, the two roots move away from poles at 0 and 1 toward each other inside the segment [1,0]. At some K, the two real roots will become repeated real roots and then break away from the real
axis into two complex conjugate roots. Such a point is called a breakaway point.
Applying Eq. (6.30) to this case, we get the solutions of dK/ds = 0 as s = 0.634 and s = 2.366. Thus, the
root locus has two breakaway points.
157
It is important to note that the condition for the breakaway point (as derived above) is necessary but
not sufficient. In other words, all breakaway points on root locus must satisfy Eq. (6.30), but not all
points that satisfy Eq. (6.30) are breakaway points.
1 KG ( s ) H ( s) 1 F ( s ) 1
K s zi
i 1
n
s p
j 1
; mn ; K 0
1. The root locus plot consists of n root loci (branches) as K varies from 0 to . The loci are symmetric
with respect to real axis.
2. As K increases from 0 to , each root locus starts from an open-loop pole with K = 0 and ends on an
open-loop zero or on with K = . The number of root loci ending at equals the number of openloop poles minus zeros.
3. The (n - m) root loci which tend to do so along straight line asymptotes radiating out from a single
point s= -a on the real axis (called the centroid) where
(real part of open loop poles ) (real part of open loop zeros)
nm
(2q 1)1800
nm
; q 0,1,, (n m 1)
4. A point on the real axis lies on the locus if the number of open-loop poles plus zeros on the real axis
to the right of this point is odd. By use of this fact, the real axis can be divided into segments onlocus and not-on-locus; the dividing points being the real open-loop poles and zeros.
5. The intersections (if any) of root loci with the imaginary axis can be determined by use of Routh
criterion.
6. The angle of departure p of a locus from a complex open-loop pole is given by p = 1800 + , where
is the net angle contribution at this pole of all other open-loop poles and zeros.
158
s p
n
dK
are the solutions of
0
ds
where
j 1
m
s z
i
i 1
6.1.3
A complete example
K
0 ; K 0
s( s 1)(s 2)
(6.32)
Solution:
The open-loop poles are located at s = 0, 1, 2. There are no finite open-loop zeros. The pole-zero
configuration is shown in Fig. 5.12.
Rule 1 tells that the root locus plot consists of three root loci as K varies from 0 to .
Rule 2 tells that the three root loci originate from the three open loop poles with K = 0 and terminate on
with K = .
Rule 3 tells that the three root loci tend to along asymptotes radiating out from
s a
(real parts of
2 1
1
30
with angles
(2q 1)1800
a
; q 0,1,2,
number of poles number of zeros
(2q 1)1800
; q 0,1,2
3
600 ,1800 , 3000
159
Rule 4 tells that the segments of real axis between 0 and 1, and between 2 and - lie on the root
locus. On-locus segments are shown by thick lines in the Figure.
From Fig. 6.12, it is seen that out of the three loci, one is a real-root locus originating from s = 2 and
terminating on . The other two loci originate from s = 0 and s = 1, and move on the real axis towards
each other as K increases. Their meeting point corresponds to a double root. As K increases further, the
root loci breakaway from the real axis to give complex conjugate pair of roots.
Rule 5 is used to calculate the intersection points on the imaginary axis by Routh Table. The
characteristic equation can be written as
s3 3s 2 2s K 0
The Routh Table is given below.
s3
s2
s0
(6-K)/3
K
160
For all roots to lie on the left half of the s-plane, the following conditions must be satisfied.
K > 0, and (6 K)/3 > 0
Therefore, the critical value of K, which corresponds to the roots on the imaginary axis, is 6. K = 6 makes
all the coefficients on s1 row to be zero. The auxiliary equation is formed from the coefficients of the s2
row as:
3s 2 K 3s 2 6 0
The roots of this equation lie on the j axis and are given by s j 2 which are also the points where
the two root loci intersect the imaginary axis and the intersection points correspond to K = 6.
Rule 6 and Rule 7 are not necessary in this case since there are no open-loop complex poles or zeros.
Rule 8 is used to determine the breakaway points. From the characteristic equation of the system,
K = (s3 + 3s2 + 2s).
Thus, by differentiating K and equate it to zero,
dK
(3s 2 6s 2) 0
ds
The solutions of this equation are:
s = 0.4226 and s = 1.5774
Thus, s = 0.4226 is the breakaway point and, since the other point s = 1.5774 is not on the root locus,
it is not a breakaway point.
If two loci breakaway from a breakaway point, their tangents will be 1800 apart. In general, if r loci
breakaway from a breakaway point, then their tangents will be 3600/r apart, i.e., the tangents will
equally divide 3600.
The complete root loci are shown in Fig. 6.12. For K > 6, the system has two closed-loop poles in the
right half s-plane.
A closed-loop pole with = 0.5 lies on a line passing through the origin and making an angle cos-1 = 600
with the negative real axis. From Fig. 6.12, the points of intersection are s = 0.33 j0.58 which are the
dominant closed-loop poles. From the magnitude criterion, the corresponding K can be found.
161
G(s)
K
s(s 4s 5 )
2
Solution:
The open-loop poles are located at s = 0, 2+j, 2j. There are no finite open-loop zeros.
Rule 1 tells that the root locus plot consists of three root loci as K varies from 0 to .
Rule 2 tells that the three root loci originate from the three open loop poles with K = 0 and terminate on
with K = .
Rule 3 tells that the three root loci tend to along asymptotes radiating out from
s a
(real parts of
22
4 / 3
30
with angles
(2q 1)1800
a
; q 0,1,2,
number of poles number of zeros
(2q 1)1800
; q 0,1,2
3
600 ,1800 , 3000
Rule 4 tells that the segments of real axis between 0 and lie on the root locus.
Rule 5 is used to calculate the intersection points on the imaginary axis by Routh Table. The
characteristic equation can be written as
s 3 4s 2 5s K 0
162
s2
s1
(20-K)/4
For all roots to lie on the left half of the s-plane, the following conditions must be satisfied.
K > 0, and (20K)/4 > 0
Therefore, the critical value of K, which corresponds to the roots on the imaginary axis, is 20. K = 20
makes all the coefficients on s1 row to be zero. The auxiliary equation is formed from the coefficients of
the s2 row as:
4s 2 K 4s 2 20 0
The roots of this equation lie on the j axis and are given by s j 5 which are also the points where
the two root loci intersect the imaginary axis and the intersection points correspond to K = 20.
Rule 6 tells the angle of departure for complex poles.
For pole 2+j,
p = 63.430
Rule 8 is used to determine the breakaway points. From the characteristic equation of the system, K =
(s3 + 4s2 + 5s).
Thus, by differentiating K and equate it to zero,
dK
( 3s 2 8s 5 ) 0
ds
The solutions of this equation are:
s = 1 and s = 1.667
Since the complete negative real axis is on the root loci, both are valid breakaway or break-in points.
K s 1 2 , K s 1.667 1.852
163
164
The controller design in control systems may be treated as an investigation of the effects to root loci
when poles and zeros are added to the loop transfer function KG(s)H(s).
Adding a pole to G(s)H(s) has the effect of pushing the root loci toward the right-half s-plane.
K
s( s 2)
The root loci are shown in Fig. 6.13(a). It is noted that the system is stable for all K. Let us introduce a
pole at s = b (b > 2). The loop transfer function G(s)H(s) becomes, with b = 3,
KG ( s) H ( s)
K
K
s( s 2)(s b) s( s 2)(s 3)
The root loci are shown in Fig. 6.13(b) where the root loci bend towards the right-half s-plane. The
asymptote angles and centroid are changed from 90 to 60 and 1 to (2+b)/3, respectively. The
addition of a pole may make the system unstable if K exceeds the stability limit.
K
s ( s 2)
165
K
s( s 2)( s 3)
Adding left-half plane zeros to the function G(s)H(s) generally has the effect of moving and bending the
root loci toward the left-half s-plane.
Fig. 6.14 shows the root loci of G(s)H(s) with a zero added at s = 3. The complex conjugate parts of root
loci of the original system are bent towards the left and form a circle. Thus, the relative stability is
improved by the addition of the zero.
166
6.1.5
K ( s 3)
.
s ( s 2)
The preceding chapters have shown that it is often possible to adjust the system parameters in order to
provide the desired system response. However, we often find that it is not sufficient to reconsider the
structure of the system and redesign the system in order to obtain a suitable one. That is, we must
examine the scheme or plan of the system and obtain a new design or plan that results in a suitable
system. Thus the design of a control system is concerned with the arrangement, or the plan, of the
system structure and the selection of suitable components performance is called compensation.
167
Figure 6.15: Types of compensation (a) Cascaded compensation. (b) Feedback compensation. (c) Output,
or load compensation. (d) Input compensation
The objectives of introducing compensator can be categorized as follows:
i.
ii.
168
2
2 1 ( + 1 )
= 1 +
=
169
1
+1 +2 (+10)
compensator to reduce the steady-state error to zero for a step input without appreciably affecting
transient response. The compensator has a zero at -0.1, close to the compensator pole.
To achieve these requirements, the compensated system should have a dominant closed-loop pole at
1 = 0.694 + 3.926, = 164.6
170
1
1
=
= 0.108
1 + 1 + 164.6/20
The dominant pole of the compensated system and the gain are approximately the same as for the
uncompensated system
, =
1
1
=
=0
1 + 1 + lim ()
0
171
( 0 )
0
When |0 |<|0 |, the compensator is called a phase-lead compensator, because this results in a
contribution to the angle criterion of the root locus that is always positive.
= 0 0 = > 0
When |0 |>|0 |, the compensator is called a phase-lag compensator, because this results in a
contribution to the angle criterion of the root locus that is always positive.
= 0 0 = < 0
172
( 0 )
0
1 + 0
1 + 1
Where,
=
1
0
1
, 0 = , 0 =
1
1
1
Assume that the parameter 0 is either known or can be determined. The design problem is to find
1 and 1 such that the compensated system will have a closed-loop pole at = 1 .
1 1 = 1 (1 )
1 + 0
1 +1
=0
1 1 + 0 1 (1 )
+
= 180
1 1 + 1
Where
1 =
sin + 0 1 (1 ) sin( )
1 1 (1 ) sin
173
sin( + ) + 0 1 (1 ) sin
1 sin
Example 6.8:
Design a phase-lead compensator such that the closed-loop compensated system has a settling time
around 4 sec. and a percent overshoot around 4.32%. The compensator has a DC gain as 0.15.
To achieve these requirements, the compensated system should have a dominant closed-loop pole at
1= 1 + . Because the DC gain for () is 0.15, so we have 0 =0.15.
At 1= 1 + , we have
21
+1 (+3) 1+
1=
sin + 0 1 (1 ) sin( )
= 0.1924
1 1 (1 ) sin
1 =
sin( + ) + 0 1 (1 ) sin
= 0.1417
1 sin
174
The negative angle contributed by the phase-lag compensator will tend to shift the root locus to the
right in the s-plane, i.e., towards the unstable region. Thus, in general, the angle contribution of the
phase-lag compensator must be small, which is assured by placing the pole and the zero of the
compensator very close to each other.
For convenience in the design, we assume that the compensator has a unit DC gain, i.e.,
()
=0
0
=1
0
175
0
<1
0
Suppose that the root locus of the point of the uncompensated system passes through the point 1 for
0 .
1 + 0 1 1 = 0
0 =
1
1 ((1 )
As we choose the value of 0 and 0 to be approximately equal, and the magnitudes of 0 and 0 to be
small compared to 1 , so
1 =
(1 0 )
1 0
Now the gain required to place a root of the locus at approximately 1 for the uncompensated system is
given by
=
1
1
0
=
=
1 (1 ) 1 1
Since < 1, so > 0 . The compensator has been chosen to have a unity DC gain; thus the open-loop
DC gain has been increased, but the transient response appears to remain unaffected.
176
The sready-state error has been improved, and this is the principal use of the phase-lag
compensator.
Design a radar tracking system of the uncompensated OLTF given by = (+2). Suppose that
the design requirements are such that a time constant of 1 second and damping coefficient of 0.707 are
satisfactory and the compensator has a DC gain as 1.
177
178
= 1 + 2 = 2 ( +
1
)
2
1
+ 1 + 2 ( + 5)
179
180
To achieve these requirements, the compensated system should have a dominant closed-loop pole at
1 = 1.205 + 2.064 = 43.45. Thus, the uncompensated systems settling time is =
4
1.205
= 3.302.
The desired real part of the closed-loop pole is = = 1.107 = 3.613. The desired imaginary part of
181
182
An alternative method yet powerful tools of control system design by using a State Space
representation. The concept of using state space is by placing a pole at a desired location. We call this as
pole placement method.
Similar in concept to classical control system design where we have to firstly formulate desired pole
locations to satisfy some performance criteria, then formulate control gains to make this happen.
In designing the control system by using state space application, we have to assume that all states can
be measured and used in control implementation; this is called full state feedback.
6.2.1
The controller pole placement method mainly concerns with the controllability matrix. It takes
measurement and/or estimates of the state variables, multiplies them by the control gains, and produce
the control signal. This can be designed by pole placement or optimal control.
183
1
0
.
.
0
1
0
1
.
.
0
2
1
1
0
0
.
=
.
0
1
= 1 0
1 1 0
. 1 1 0
184
1 1
0
+
0 2
1
Find the controller that places the both CL poles of the system at 2 . In other words, you want to
double the natural frequency and increase the damping ratio from 0 to 1.
Solution:
Assumption: Must be a full state feedback. We need to prove the system has a full state feedback by
assessing its controllability matrix.
0
0
2
0
1
0
+
0
1 1
2 + 2 + 2 + 1 = 0
Comparing with the desired characteristics equation gives:
2 = 4
1 + 2 = 42
We have now,
1 = 32
2 = 4
Hence,
= 1
= 32
2
4
185
0 0
0 1 0
1 1
For SISO systems the control gains using Ackermanns Formula are
= 0 0
1 01 ()
186
1 1
0
+
0 2
1
Find the controller that places the both CL poles of the system at 2 . In other words, you want to
double the natural frequency and increase the damping ratio from 0 to 1.
Solution:
Our objective is to get the vector k. According to Ackermanns Formula:
= 0 0
1 01 ()
The SS model must be controllable before we can proceed. Checking the controllability matrix,
=
0 1
1 0
Where
= + 1 1 + 2 2 + +
From the desired characteristics equation we have,
( + 2 )2 = 2 + 4 + 42
So we have,
= 2 + 4 + 42
Matrices 2 , 4 and 42 are given by,
2 =
2
0
4 =
42 =
0
2
0
43
42
0
4
0
0
42
32
43
4
32
187
0 1 32
1 0 43
= 32
4
32
Example 6.12:
2
1 2 2
2
Design a control system to move the system poles to = 1
188
The observer pole placement mainly concerns with Observability matrix. The objective of designing the
observer is to estimate some or all of the states of the system. This can be achieved by linear observers
(pole placement) or optimal observers (Kalman filters).
We need to extract by constructing a second linear system (a model of the target system), using the
known parameters (, , , ) of the target system, which predicts the (measurable) target system
output. If the predicted output is acceptably close to the actual output, then we can use the estimated
states in place of the actual states.
In other words, we want to minimize the difference between the actual and predicted states. This
difference or error in estimate of state is given by,
=
Which converges to zero if is stable.
189
Therefore, the characteristics equation = det ( ) = 0 i.e we can change convergence speed
by adding feedback.
0
0
.
.
0
0
0
0
.
.
0
1
1
2
.
.
1
1 0
1 1 0
.
=
.
.
1 1 0
= 0 0
With the observer feedback, the poles are defined by the expression: det ( ) = 0
190
0
+
0 1 + 1
.
.
.
.
2 + 2
1 + 1 + 1
The conclusion is that when the system is in control canonical form, then control gains can be calculated
by simple comparison of coefficients:
=
Example 6.13:
Compute the estimator (observer) gain matrix which will place both estimator poles at 10 , given
1
0
=
2
2
= 1
1 1
0
+
0 2
1
1
0
2
Solution:
The desired characteristics equation is given by;
( + 10 )2 = 2 + 20 + 100 2
Now we have to determine the poles of closed-loop system;
det + = 0
det
0
0
2
0
1
+ 1
0
2
0
0
191
+ 1
2 +2
det 2 + 1 + 2 + 2 = 0
Comparing with the desired characteristics equation gives:
1 = 20
2 + 2 = 1002
We have now,
1 = 20
2 = 992
Hence,
=
=
1
2
20
992
Generalised Strategy
= observability matrix =
0 0
0 1 0
1 1
192
Step 2: Calculate control gains by comparison with the desired characteristics equation
Step 3: Transform back to original state
Transform has the form:
For SISO systems the observer gains using Ackermanns Formula are
= ()1
b 0
0 0 1
Example 6.14:
Compute the estimator (observer) gain matrix which will place both estimator poles at 10 , given
1
0
=
2
2
= 1
1 1
0
+
0 2
1
1
0
2
193