# The effects on the system’s performance

adding the open zeros or open poles
Adding a open zero in the left s-plane
For example GH1 ( s ) 

K1
K1 ( s  a )
 GH 2 ( s ) 
s( s  2)( s  3)
s( s  2)( s  3)
Im

Im

 a  2.5

 a  0.5
Re

3

Re

2

6

3

2
Im

Im

4

 2.5

Re

3 2
 a  0.5

3

Re

2
 a  1.25

Generally, adding a open zero in the left s-plane will lead the root loci to be
bended to the left. And the more closer to the imaginary axis the open zero is,
the more prominent the effect on the system’s performance is.

The effects on the system’s performance
adding the open zeros or open poles
Adding a open pole in the left s-plane
For example

GH1 ( s ) 

K 1 ( s  3)
K 1 ( s  3)
 GH 2 ( s ) 
s ( s  2)
s( s  2)( s  a )
Im

Im

 a  2
Re
3

2

Re

5

3

2

Im

Im

Re

3

2
a  0

1

Re
3

2

 a  0.5

Generally, adding a open pole in the left s-plane will lead the root loci to be
bended to the right. And the more closer to the imaginary axis the open
pole is, the more prominent the effect on the system’s performance is.

Dominant poles and zeros of transfer functions

The location of the poles and zeros of a transfer function in the s-plane
greatly affects the transient response of the system.
For analysis and design purposes, it is important to sort out the poles
that have a dominant effect on the transient response and call these
the dominant poles.
Because most control systems in practice are of orders higher than two,
it would be useful to establish guidelines on the approximation of highorder systems by lower-order ones insofar as the transient response is
concerned.
In design, we can use the dominant poles to control the dynamic
performance of the system, whereas the insignificant poles are used for
the purpose of ensuring that the controller transfer function can be
realized by physical components.

Dominant poles and zeros of transfer functions

For all practical purposes, we can divide the s-plane into regions in
which the dominant and insignificant poles can lie.
We intentionally do not assign specific values to the coordinates,
since these are all relative to a given system.

The poles that are close to the
imaginary axis in the left-half
s-plane give rise to transient
responses that will decay relatively
slowly, whereas the poles that are
far away from the axis (relative to
the dominant poles) correspond to
fast-decaying time responses.
The distance D between the
dominant region and the least
significant region will be subject to
discussion.

Im

region of
dominant
poles

region of
insignificant
poles

unstable
region
Re

D

unstable
region

Regions of dominant and insignificant poles in the s-plane.

Dominant poles and zeros of transfer functions

The question is: How large a pole is considered to be really large? It
has been recognized in practice and in the literature that if the
magnitude of the real part of a pole is at least 5 to 10 times that of a
dominant pole or a pair of complex dominant poles, then the pole
may be regarded as insignificant insofar as the transient response is
concerned.
The zeros that are close to the imaginary axis in the left-half s-plane
affect the transient responses more significantly, whereas the zeros
that are far away from the axis (relative to the dominant poles) have
a smaller effect on the time response.

Dominant poles and zeros of transfer functions

We must point out that the regions shown in Fig. are selected merely
for the definitions of dominant and insignificant poles.
For design purposes, such as in pole placement design, the dominant
poles and the insignificant poles should most likely be located in the
red regions.
Im
Again, we do not show any
region of
absolute coordinates. except
region of
dominant
insignificant
unstable
that the desired region of the
poles
poles
region
dominant poles is centered
Re
450
around the line that corresponds
450
to ζ = 0.707.
D
unstable
It should also be noted that,
region
while designing, we cannot place the
insignificant poles arbitrarily far to the
left in the s-plane or these may require
Regions of dominant and insignificant poles
in the s-plane for design purpose.
unrealistic system parameter values.

Example
The proper way of neglecting the insignificant poles with
C ( s)
20

R( s) ( s  10)(s 2  2s  2)

(a)

C ( s)
20

R( s) 10( s / 10  1)(s 2  2s  2)

(b)

The pole at s=-10 is 10 times the
real part of the complex conjugate
poles, which are at -1 ± j 1 .

Then we reason that s / 10  1 when the absolute value of s is much smaller than 10,
because of the dominant nature of the complex poles. The term s/10 can be neglected
when compared with 1. Then, Eq.(b) is approximated by
M ( s) 

20
10( s 2  2s  2)

(c)

the third-order system described by Eq. (a) and the second-order system
approximated by Eq. (c) all have a final value of unity when a unit-step input is applied.
On the other hand, if we simply throw away the term (s + 10) in Eq. (a), the
approximating second-order system will have a different steady-state value when a
unit-step input is applied.

Extension of The Root Locus
Conventional root locus
Generally we select the K * (root locus gain ) as the variable
parameter to plot theroot locus of a systemand K * is
proportional to the K (open loop gain ) of the system.

Parameter root locus
Maybeother parameter of the system is variable in many
cases, then the root - locus of the no-K * parameter is need
to be investigat ed.
Parameter root locus --- the variable parameter of the control
systems is another parameter besides K * .
We illustrate the parameter root locus and it’s sketching
approaches by following example:

Loci versus Other Parameters
Example 1

The open loop transfer function of a systemis :
4
G(s)H(s) 
s(s  1 )(s  α)
If  varing from 0  , sketch the root - locus of the system.

Solution :

characteri stic equation of the systemis :
s(s  1 )(s  α)  4  0 

s 2(s  1 )  4  s(s  1 )  0

αs(s  1 )
αs(s  1 )
1 2
 1
 1  Geq ( s)  0
2
s (s  1 )  4
(s  2 )( s  s  2 )

Loci versus Other Parameters
Example 1

Geq ( s) 

αs(s  1 )
(s  2 )( s 2  s  2 )

The equivalent open - loop
transfer function

The procedure of sketching root locus is shown as following:
Im

1
7
j
2
2

(1) Open loop zeros :
z1  0, z 2  1
Open loop poles :
p1, 2 

1
7
j
, p3  2
2
2

Re

2

1
1
7
j
2
2

Loci versus Other Parameters
Example 2

1
s 1

4

1
s

KT

The open-loop transfer function of the system is
4
s( s  1  KT )

which is not in the standard form as:
m

G ( s) H ( s)  K

 (s  z )
i

i 1
n

 (s  p )
j

j 1

Loci versus Other Parameters
Example 2

The characteristic equation of the system is
s 2  s  4  KT s  0

Now, equation is in suitable form for a root-locus study. We
need to identify open-loop transfer function, which we do
by writing the equivalent to the equation as

s
1  KT 2
0
s s4
Thus, for root-locus purposes,
the “zeros” are at s=0,
And the “poles” are at -1/2+j1.94 and -1/2-j1.94.

Zero-Degree Root Loci
The open loop transfer function
m

G ( s) H ( s)  K 

 (s  z )

G(s)

i

i 1
n

 (s  p )
j

H (s)

j 1

The characteristic equation is
m

1 K

 ( s  zi )
i 1
n

 (s  p )
j

j 1

m

0

K

 (s  z )
i

i 1
n

 (s  p )
j

j 1

1

Zero-Degree Root Loci
The characteristic equation is

G (s)

m

G (s) H ( s)  K

 (s  z )
i

i 1
n

 (s  p )

1

H (s)

j

j 1

The magnitude and angle requirement for the
zero-degree root locus are
m

K

| s  z

i

|
1

i 1
n

| s  p

j

 Magnitude criterion

|

j 1

m

n

 (s  z )   (s  p )  2k
i 1

i

j 1

j

k  0,  1,  2,   

The Zero-Degree (00) Root Locus

 Angle criterion

Zero-Degree Root Loci
If we substitute 2k for (2k  1) ,
the sketching rules of the conventional root locus
are also suitable to the“zero degree” root locus
(only related to the rule 4, 5 and 9 ).
In summary, all rules are the same, except:
All 1800s become 00s.
“Odd” becomes “even” in Rule 4.