Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • Model Answers Chapter 5 Ed 10

    Uploaded by

    Asma' Zubir
    49 views12 pages
    MODERN CONTROL SYSTEM 11TH ED RICHARD C.DORF, ROBERT H. BISHOP

    Copyright

    © Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    MODERN CONTROL SYSTEM 11TH ED RICHARD C.DORF, ROBERT H. BISHOP

    Copyright:

    Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    49 views12 pages

    Model Answers Chapter 5 Ed 10

    Uploaded by

    Asma' Zubir
    MODERN CONTROL SYSTEM 11TH ED RICHARD C.DORF, ROBERT H. BISHOP

    Copyright:

    Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    of 12
    rr The Performance of Feedback Control Systems Exercises E5.1 For a zero steady-state error, when the input is a step we need one inte gration, or a type I system. A type 2 system is required for 5 = 0 for a ramp input. B5.2 (a) The closed-loop transfer function is Gs) 100 _ 100 FG) (SFD(SFH) +100 P+ Mens ruR where R(s) = A/s and ‘Therefore, (b) The closed-loop system is a second-order system with natural fre- quency vio and damping ratio Since the steady-state value of the output is 0.909, we must modify the percent overshoot formula which implicitly assumes that the steady- state value is 1, This requires that we scale the formula by 0.909. The percent overshoot is thus computed to be P.O. = 0.909(100e-*6/V-@) 19% E5.3_ The closed-loop transfer function is ¥(s)__ G(s) K K Tis) 14G@) ae+ 14K s+ s+ K Ut 1 Table 5.6 in Dorf & Bishop, we find that the optimum coefficients ae given by P+ Lda tuk « We have S+istK, so equating, coefficients yields w, = 10 and K = 2 = 100. We ean also compute the damping ratio as 14 wn 6 07 ‘Then, using Figure 5.8 in Dorf & Bishop, we find that P.O. «5%. 85.4 (a) The closed-loop transfer funetion is Gs) 2s+8) 70) = Ga 7 P4604 16 (b) We can expand Y(s) in a partial fraction expansion as ¥() = 20+8)_A a(t st4 ) (P4604 16) 8° Ss” FF 6s +16 ‘Taking the inverse Laplace transform (using the Laplace transforn tables), we find y(t) = All — 1076 sin( v7 + 1.21)] (c) Using the closed-loop transfer function, we compute ¢ = 0.75 and wn = 4. Thus, a8 Gon 3 = 267, where a = 8. From Figure 5.13(a) in Dorf & Bishop, we find (approx- imately) that P.O. = 4% (d) This is a type 1 system, thus the steady-state error is zero and y(t) Aast ov. E5.5 (a) The closed-loop transfer function is _¥()_ Gls) 100 T(s) = Ris) = 14 Ge) ~ BF 100Ks + 100” where H(s) = 1+ Ks and G(s) = 100/s?. The steady-state exror is, computed as follows: ra A lim |. — 5 | — A =O 14+ a+ mal 3 (b) From the closed-loop transfer function, 7(s), we determine that wa = 10 and 100K $= 3G) = We want to choose K so that the system is critically damped, or ¢=10. Thus, 1 37020. The closed-loop system has no zeros and the poles are at S12 = 50K + 10V25K? -1 ‘The percent, overshoot to a step input is PO.= 10067? for 0< K <02 =0for K>02. E56 EST ‘The closed-loop transfer function is - 8) PGs) ae em mee (3h) pee pete (6,2) “ RG)” 14+KG(s)~ als +1) +K(s42) 8 Te) Fa +1) + 2K Therefore, w, = V2K and ¢ = $e. So, a Gen From Figure 5.13a in Dorf & Bishop, we determine that +1 or ‘The pole-zeo map is shown in Figure E5.7. Since the dominant, poles ag ee FIGURE 5.7 (@) Pole-zer0 map ep Respnse Aro FIGURE E5.7 CONTINUED: (b) Unit step response are real, you do not expect to have a large overshoot, as shown in Fig- ure F5.7b. 5.8 (a) ‘The closed-loop transfer function is K 76) = eee ee (= ay Rea ‘The damping ratio is sh and the natural frequency is wn = VK. Therefore, we compute the percent overshoot to be P.O. = 10 F/VIE = 4.3% for ¢ = 0.707. The settling time is estimated via 48 eae (b) The settling time is less than 1 second whenever K’ > 32. E5.9 The second-order closed-loop transfer function is given by “i 2+ uns tue s) From the percent overshoot specification, we determine that P.O.<5% implies ¢ > 0.69 From the settling time specification, we find that T,<4 implies wn6>1 And finally, ftom the peak tine specification we have T, <1 implies wayl-@ > ‘The constraints imposed on ¢ and w, by the performance specifications dofine the permissible area for the poles of T(s), as shown in Figure E5.9. ims) 1 een +0» “on a | . ee [ee | | ' FIGURE €5.9 Permissible area for poles of T(s) £5.10 The system is a type 1. The error constants are K,=0o and Ky=10 anerctore, the steady-state error to a step input is 0; the steady-state error to a ramp input is 1.049, where Ao is the magnitude (slope) of the ramp input. B5.11 (a) The tracking error is given by R(s) (s+ 9)(s +2)(s +4) THEGS) — SFOSF2VE+4 + KE +6) B(s) R(s) . The steady-state tracking error (with R(s) = 1/s) is 2 B20) = ae 6R We require ess < 0.05, so solving for K yields K > 228. (b) The tracking error due to the disturbance is = s+ 9)(6 +6) SF EF DE+D+ KE +H) D(s) - Arline ) 01 02 0} ve 05 08 07 Os 09 ne ees) FIGURE €5.11 ‘Tracking error due a step disturbance £5.12 The system is a type 0. The error constants are Ky = 0.2 and Ky ‘The steady-state error to @ ramp input is oo. The steady-state error to a step input is £5.13 (a) The tracking error is given by Els) = [L- T(s)] Rls) ‘The steady-state tracking error (with R(s) = 1/s) is ss = fi 91 —T(9)} R(6) = lng 1 — TC) ‘The closed-loop transfer function is K(s +01) SF O.1(s +2) + Ke +3) 0.033. Therefore, es; 0. ‘Then, T(s) = 907 —T(0) Jim 8 [1 ~ 7(3)Gp(3)] R(a) = lim T(s)Gp(s) = 1-30.70) = 0 £5.14 The plot of y(¢) is shown in Figure E5.14. FIGURE £5.14 Plot of y(t) with T(s) (solid line) and approximate Tas) (dashed line) E515 B5.16 Using the dominant poles, the approximate closed-loop transfer function is 1 50 Tol) = Fy 105+ 50 ‘The actual transfer function is 500 1) = Sie + 10s +5) The partial fraction expansion is le =1) + , 10(2—8) Te © +562 2,4,6 is shown in Figure E5.15. eM + 1.25 y= ‘The plot of y(t) for 2 2-2 (cok) & 204 (dashed) & 246 (Ste) “a FIGURE 5.15, Plot of y(t) for 2=2, 4, 6 ‘The desired pole locations for the 5 different cases are shown in Fig- ae B5.16. (2) 06 <¢<08 andy <10 Gime (0) 08 «520707 and 210 (©) ob «canes cop id FIGURE £5.16 Desired pole locations tm) z (08

    You might also like