Control Systems Compensation

Implementation of Lead, Lag, and PID Compensation with MATLAB.

13 December 2005

Christian Winter University of North Texas College of Engineering ELET 4720 - Control Systems

Control Systems Compensation

Abstract
Compensation in control systems is necessary if a given system does not conform to set design criteria. System designers can improve transient response characteristics, such as rise time, settling time, and overshoot, as well as steady state error. This paper outlines the steps necessary to utilize MATLAB to create compensators. Using a simple control system, I will explain the steps to create lead and lag compensation and the implementation of a Proportional-Integral-Derivative (PID) controller.

Introduction
Compensators are used to alter the response of a control system in order to accommodate set design criteria. By introducing additional poles and/or zeros to a system the response of the system will change significantly. One must use proper design procedures in order to ensure that the added poles and/or zeros have the desired effect the designer is seeking. This paper discusses the use of MATLAB to implement three types of compensators -- lead, lag, and PID. Lead compensation alters the transient response of systems. This includes overshoot, rise time (TR), settling time (TS), and peak time (TP). Lag compensation alters steady-state error of systems. PID controllers (compensators) are used to alter transient response and steady-state error simultaneously. To achieve PID compensation, an active proportional derivative (PD) compensator first adjusts the transient response, followed by an active proportional integral (PI) compensator that adjusts steady state error. [1]

Control Systems Compensation Designing compensators by hand is a tedious effort, because the designer must

conduct several difficult calculations. Further, root locus technique helps identify the correct gain, zero, and pole location(s) for the compensators. If one would have to draw and redraw root locus diagrams during the design phase, the task can easily be too difficult to properly master. Fortunately, MATLAB can do most of the work for the designer.

Compensator Theory
The method of compensation that this paper discusses is called cascade compensation. Cascade compensation assumes a unity feedback system with a controller and plant in the forward path. To compensate the system, the transfer function for the compensator will be in series (cascaded) with the controller and plant. The overall system looks as shown in Figure 1.

G1(s)

G2(s)

G3(s)

Figure 1 - Cascade compensation technique [1]

We can realize lead and lag compensation by introducing a cascade compensator of the form Gc ( s ) = K ( s + Zc ) ( s + Pc ) (1)

where Zc and Pc are the zero and pole of the compensator, respectively. K denotes the gain necessary to ensure that the proper overshoot at the compensated pole and zero is met. For

Control Systems Compensation proper lead compensation, PC must be greater than ZC, while for proper lag compensation ZC must be greater than PC. A PID controller compensates systems in a different manner. Figure 2 shows the implementation of PID compensation. Values K1, K2, and K3 designate required gains for proper compensation, while the compensator itself has two zeros and two poles; one of the poles is located at the origin and therefore zero.

K3 s

K2 s

K1

G1(s)

G2(s)

Figure 2 - PID controller (compensator) [1]

The controller is between the two summing junctions and has the following transfer function
Gc ( s ) = K 1 + K2 + K3s s

(2)

To achieve proper compensation, one zero of the compensator, together with the pole at the origin, act as the PI compensator while the remaining zero characterizes the PD compensator. Using MATLAB I will illustrate how to incorporate each of the three compensators.

Control Systems Compensation

Control System Description

The control system I am using as an example for this paper is completely random. It does not serve a set purpose other than to illustrate how MATLAB can provide solutions to effectively and quickly design compensators. The control system that I will compensate is shown in Figure 3.

9.57 (s + 0.2)(s + 3.1)

Figure 3 - Unity-feedback control system used as example

This system has the following characteristics: %OS = 15% Tp = 1.14 s TR = 0.52 s TS = 2.46 s Ess = 0.383 Additionally, the system has two poles (-0.2, -3.1) and no zeros and a final steady-state value of 0.94.

Lead Compensation
To improve the transient response of this system, I will design a lead compensator that keeps the percent overshoot at 15 percent and adjusts the settling time, TS, to 0.5

Control Systems Compensation seconds. I will follow the same steps used in my MATLAB code, which is available as an attachment to this project report. First, I compute for the desired 15% overshoot. This value will be used to insert lines into the root locus graph in MATLAB. Next, I find the location on the root locus graph where the root locus intersects with the -line. This compensated design point is -1.65+2.73j. To find the actual design point of the lead compensator, I divide the current

settling time by the desired settling time in order to find the factor of improvement. In order to decrease the settling time by this factor, I must multiply the compensated design point with the factor. Hence, the actual design point is
Factor (d + dj ) = 8.12 + 13 .43 j

(3)

To start the design process, I arbitrarily choose the compensators zero, ZC, to be -2. Using a calculator or MATLAB, I find the sum of angular contribution of all zeros and poles of the system, including the arbitrarily chosen pole. I subtract this angle from 180 to receive the angular contribution, Lead, required for the compensator pole. Using geometry I find the compensators pole as follows PC =

design + design = 14.82 tan(Lead )

(4)

The values for ZC and PC are acceptable, since PC is greater than ZC. To finish the design, I use MATLAB to find the appropriate gain for the entire system. The appropriate gain for this system to achieve 15 percent overshoot and a settling time of 0.5 seconds is 287.6. I verified the design by graphing the step responses of the uncompensated and leadcompensated systems.

Control Systems Compensation

Lag Compensation
To improve the steady-state error of the system, I tried to decrease the error by a factor of ten. Since this system is unity-feedback without any pure integrators in the plants denominator, we can utilize the assumptions for a Type 0 system. Hence, I find the position constant KP as follows

KP =

1 = 15.44 1 + lim G ( s )
s 0

(5)

In order to improve the steady-state error of the system by a factor of ten, I must find the value of the desired steady-state error first by dividing the uncompensated system steady-state error by ten. Now, I can find the target value for KP as indicated below

KPT arg et =

1 ESST arg et

1 = 25.13

(6)

To continue, I assume the compensators pole, PC, at 0.01. It is important to choose a value that is close to the origin, to ensure that the added pole has little effect on the transient response of the system. Using this value and the previous values for KP I find the compensators zero, ZC, as follows
ZC = KPT arg et PC = 0.0163 KP

(7)

Because the compensators zero is larger than the compensators pole, this qualifies as a valid design for a lag compensator. Using MATLAB, I identify the required gain for the system to be 10.94. I verify the design be observing the step responses of the uncompensated and lag-compensated systems.

Control Systems Compensation

PID Compensation
In order to improve both the transient response and the steady-state error, I continue by designing a PID compensator. To do so, I try to reduce the peak time by a factor of 0.2 with 15 percent overshoot and zero steady-state error. First, I designed the PD compensator. I reused the uncompensated design point from the lead compensator, because the system is the same and the overshoot did not change. However, to find the new compensated design points I had to use the relationship

design

TPcurrent 0.2

= 13.77

(8)

Next, I found the angle, , between the -line and the positive real-axis. Using this angle I can calculate d for the design point as follows

design

design

tan( )

= 8.33

(9)

Using MATLAB, I find the sum of angles for all uncompensated poles and zeros to be 231.31. Subtracting 180 from this number yields the required angle, , for the PD compensators zero. The PD compensator zero, pdZC is calculated using the following relationship pdZ c =

design

tan( )

ddesign = 19.36

(10)

In order to adjust for PD compensation, the gain of the compensator is found to be 7.63. Next, the values for the PI compensator are chosen, as any ideal PI compensator will work. The following transfer function is used for the PI compensator
GPI ( s ) = s + 0 .5 s

(11)

Control Systems Compensation Unfortunately, I was unable to properly find the overall gain for the entire PID compensator. While I could not find an error in my code, I realize that the gain in all likelihood has to be something other than one. However, I did check my results comparing the step responses of the uncompensated system, PD-compensated system, and PIDcompensated system. The graphs indicated that the PID design was at least somewhat successful, as both steady-state error and transient response improved.

Results/Discussion
The lead and lag compensators I designed using MATLAB performed well. Figure 4 shows a comparative graph of the systems uncompensated and lead-compensated step response.

Figure 4 - Lead compensator performance to step input

Control Systems Compensation In Figure 4, the green curve is the lead-compensated curve, and we notice a tremendous improvement and rise time, peak time, and settling time. Further, the percent

10

overshoot is still 14.9 percent, with the target being 15 percent. The settling time improved from 2.46 seconds to the approximate target of 0.53 seconds. At the same time, the final value only increased minimally from originally 0.94 to 0.98. The final lead-compensated system looks as shown in Figure 5.

2876 (s + 2) . (s +14.82)

1 (s + 0.2)(s + 3.1)

Figure 5 - Lead-compensated control system

Figure 6 shows the performance of the lag compensator. Both the uncompensated and lag-compensated step responses are pictured. The green curve represents the lagcompensated system, while the blue curve is the uncompensated system. Both are almost overlapping, indicating a successful design, because transient characteristics remained unchanged. Further, the steady-state error decreased as desired by a factor of ten. The initial steady state error was 0.383 and the lag-compensated steady-state error was 0.336. The overshoot of the lag-compensated system is at 15.1 percent. The settling time increased slightly from 2.46 seconds to 2.77 seconds. The final design for the lag-compensated system is picture in Figure 7.

Control Systems Compensation

11

Figure 6 - Lag compensator performance to step input

10.94 (s + 0.0163 ) (s + 0.01 )

1 (s + 0.2)(s + 3.1)

Figure 7 - Lag-compensated control system

Unfortunately, the design of the PID control was not as successful as I had hoped. I did check my code numerous times and tried different approaches but I could never fully find a successful design. Figure 8 shows the step response of the controller, picturing the uncompensated, PD-compensated, and PID-compensated responses.

Control Systems Compensation

12

Figure 8 - PD and PID compensator performance to step input

In Figure 8, the green curve represents the PD-compensated system, the red curve represents the PID-compensated system, and the blue curve the original, uncompensated system. We can clearly identify that the PD-compensator performs well. The peak time is reduced by a factor of 0.2 from originally 1.13 seconds to 0.23 seconds. The overshoot, however, changes from 15 percent to 26.3 percent. While this change seems significant and should be avoided, the actual change is minimal. The peak amplitude of the original system is 1.08, while the PD-compensated peak amplitude is 1.26. Aside from improving transient response, the steady-state error is also slightly improved. Unfortunately, Figure 8 shows that the PID compensator shifts the curve towards the right, undoing some of the improvements to the transient response. While the transient response is still better than that of the original system, this should not happen. Further,

Control Systems Compensation MATLAB indicates that the PID-compensated system does not reach a final value, but rather tends towards infinity. The graph, on the other hand, does not seem to indicate this.

13

In fact, the graph itself, even over an extended amount of time, seems to indicate the system being stable. On the other hand, using the final value theorem shows that the PIDcompensated system does, indeed, tend towards infinity.

Summary
Compensators in control systems are essential when designing for specific steadystate or transient responses. I was able to successfully implement a lead and lag compensator, effectively improving transient response and steady-state error. Each of these improvements occurred on an individual basis. While I made every effort to design a PID compensator, I was unable to find a satisfactory solution. A PID compensator enables simultaneous improvements in transient response and steady-state error.

Conclusion
I conclude that I successfully designed lead and lag compensators in accordance to the desired target transient response and steady-state error. I incorporated MATLAB for the entire design and set-up code that one can modify with ease to quickly and efficiently design compensators for other unity-feedback systems. Contrary, I was unable to design a PID compensator that would decrease peak time by a factor of 0.2, decrease steady-state error to zero, and remain at 15 percent overshoot. The procedure I followed is outlined in [1] and should have yielded the desired results. Continuous analysis of my code and methods did not yield any obvious errors on my part.

Control Systems Compensation

14

Hence, I conclude that the MATLAB code I am providing with this project should aid persons in successfully designing lead and lag compensators. I outlined my steps thoroughly and presented evidence that my findings are correct.

References
[1] N. S. Nise, Control Systems Engineering, 4th Ed., Indianapolis: Wiley, 2004, pp. 500503, 509-536.