Controller Synthesis Via Root Locus: ROBT303 Linear Control Theory With Lab

ROBT303 Linear Control Theory with Lab
Controller synthesis via root locus

Tohid Alizadeh
Academic year 2015-2016
Tohid Alizadeh (NU)
1 / 39
Part I
Improving steady-state error:
PI and lag compensators
Tohid Alizadeh (NU)
2 / 39
Denition of the PI controller

Imagine to use two components of the control action:
kp
the rst proportional to the error through a constant
the second proportional to the integral of the error through a constant
We get a
ki
Proportional-Integral (PI) controller

Z
u ( t ) = kp e ( t ) + ki
k
e ()d U (s ) = kp + i E (s )
s
0
The transfer function of this controller is
Gc (s ) =
kp s + ki
U (s )
s + zc
k
=
=K
, K = kp , zc = i
E (s )
s
s
kp
which has a pole at the origin, and a zero at

Tohid Alizadeh (NU)
ki / kp .
3 / 39
Denition of the PI controller

So, once
kp
is xed
ki zero close to the origin

ki zero far from the origin
low value of
high value of
Notice that, given an initial error
e (0),
the control variable
Z0
u (0) = kp e (0) + ki
u (0)
will be equal to
e ()d = kp e (0)
From time 0, the PI controller will start taking into account the integral of the
error: in practice, it will considerably increase the control amplitude if the error
does not decrease quickly enough
If no saturation is present on
an innite increase of
u (t ):
u (t )
(ideal case), a constant error
e (t )
will lead to
this is why the PI controller is not a BIBO stable
system
The integral action will never give up until the error is steered to zero
Now, let's see what are the benets of such a controller using the root locus
Tohid Alizadeh (NU)
4 / 39
Adding an integrator improves steady-state error

If a proportional controller does not allow us to achieve a desired steady-state
error, we can insert a pole at the origin in
Gc (s ),
which compensates the
system dynamics
In this way, if
Gp ( s )
is Type-0, by adding one integrator will make
L(s )
Type-1,
with all the consequent steady-state improvements
9.3
A is:
e root
thout
sator;
n the
us with
sator
ded;
ontinues)
Typically, adding a pole will change the root locus, and decrease the maximum
value of the controller gain for which the closed-loop system is stable.
Tohid Alizadeh (NU)
5 / 39
How to preserve the transient behavior

To obtain a root locus similar to that of the original system, thus obtaining
analogous transient characteristics, we add a zero close to the origin
Figure 9.3
(continued)
c. approximately on the root locus with compensator
pole and zero added
Control Systems Engineering, Fourth Edition by Norman S. Nise
In this way, the angular contributions

of
zero
and
integrator
are approximately
Copyright 2004
by John
Wiley &
Sons. All
rights reserved.
canceled out, and the system type is increased
Tohid Alizadeh (NU)
6 / 39
PI controller: example
Consider the system
Gp ( s ) =
(s + 1)(s + 2)(s + 10)
Design a controller such that the closed-loop system has
e = 0
for a constant
reference, and a damping ratio for the dominant complex poles equal to 0.174
Procedure (let's do it with
rltool):
design a proportional controller to meet the transient requirements
add an integrator and a zero near to the origin
tune the position of the zero and the gain
to satisfy the transient
requirements with the new controller

Solution:
kp = 164.6 we obtain the desired

kp
Kp = lim L(s ) =
= 8.23 e = 0.108
Setting
s 0
Tohid Alizadeh (NU)
damping ratio, with
20
7 / 39
Figure 9.7
PI
controller:
example (cont'ed)
Ideal
integral compensated
system response and the

uncompensated system
Then, we
add the integrator
and a zero at 0.1.
response
of Example
9.1
Finally, we adjust the gain
K,
i.e.
K = 15.81,
will satisfy the requirements

Copyright 2004 by John Wiley & Sons. All rights reserved.
Tohid Alizadeh (NU)
8 / 39
uncompensated system
response of Example 9.1
PI controller: example (cont'ed)

t =3
Notice that the two step responses are similar until
s, after which the
eect of the integrator becomes apparent

The output
c (t ),
t = 3 s, converges very slowly (Ts ,2% = 17.5s ) to the

r (t ) = 1, while for uncompensated system Ts ,2% = 5.14s .
after
constant reference
This is due to the fact that the very slow pole of

the integrator is
almost
T (s )
which originates from
canceled by the zero of the PI controller: as a
consequence, the term of the step response associated to this pole will be:
very slowly decaying (large time constant)
with a small amplitude (small residue, due to the presence of the zero)
Tohid Alizadeh (NU)
9 / 39
Lag compensator
In order to slightly reduce this eect, we can place the pole very near to the
imaginary axis (but not at the origin) and a zero with a slightly smaller time
constant
igure 9.9
. Type 1
ncompensated
ystem;
. Type 1
ompensated
ystem;
. compensator
ole-zero plot
For reasons that will become Copyright

clear later,
this
is called
2004 by John
Wileycontroller
& Sons. All rights reserved.
Tohid Alizadeh (NU)
lag compensator
10 / 39
Lag compensator (cont'ed)

To understand the eect of the compensator, let us consider a Type-1 process
To make it Type-2, i.e. to make
Kv = ,
we should insert one integrator in
Gc (s )
Instead, we add to the proportional term
kp
Gc ( s ) = K
In this way, we don't make
Kv = ,
Analogously to the PI controller,
a pole and a zero, as
s + zc
s + pc
but we increase it by a factor of
u (0)
will be equal to
Ke (0),
zc /pc
and then
u (t )
will
start increasing, but not indenitely, since

Constant
e (t ) = e
lim
u (t ) = K
zc
e
pc
Placing the pair pole-zero not too near to the imaginary axis will reduce the slow
convergence eect, but given a previously-determined
zc /pc
their distance will
increase (= no cancellation)
Tohid Alizadeh (NU)
11 / 39
Lag compensator: example

Consider again the system
Gp ( s ) =
(s + 1)(s + 2)(s + 10)
Design a controller such that
the closed-loop system has a damping ratio for the dominant poles equal to
0.174
for a step reference is improved about 10 times with respect to using a
proportional controller which achieves the same damping ratio

Procedure (let's do it with
rltool):
design a proportional controller to meet the transient requirements
zc /pc
add pole and zero with a given
tune the position of the zero and the gain
kp
to satisfy the transient
requirements with the new controller

Solution:
kp = 164.6
e = 0.108
Setting
Tohid Alizadeh (NU)
we get the desired damping ratio, with
Kp = 8.23
and
12 / 39
Lag compensator: example (cont'ed)

A tenfold improvement on
means
e =
Therefore
e =
The improvement in
1
1 + Kp
Kp
0.108
10
= 0.0108 Kp =
1 e
= 91.59
from the old (uncompensated) to the new
(compensated) system is equal to
zc /pc ,
Kpnew
zc
= old =
pc
Kp
If we arbitrarily choose
= 0.0108
pc = 0.01,
then
i.e.
91.95
8.23
= 11.13
zc = 11.13pc = 0.1113
As an alternative, we can choose
pc = 0.001,
Remember to adjust the value of
and then
zc = 11.13pc = 0.01113
(after you place the poles of the
compensator) in order to place the poles of the closed-loop system at the desired
position
Tohid Alizadeh (NU)
13 / 39
Lag compensator: example (cont'ed)
of
and
d
Let us compare the step responses of the uncompensated system, and the two
compensated systems
Figure 9.14
Step responses of the
system for Example 9.2
using different lag
compensators
We can see here that if the pair pole-zero is placed closer to the imaginary axis,
then a longer transient response is obtained
Engineering,
Edition
Normanas
S. Nise
As a consequence, it is good practice to place Control
the Systems
pole
and Fourth
zero
asbyfar
possible from the imaginary axis, but not too much
Tohid Alizadeh (NU)
14 / 39
Part II
Improving transient response:
PD and lead compensators
Tohid Alizadeh (NU)
15 / 39
Denition of the PD controller

Imagine to use two components of the control action:
kp
the rst proportional to the error through a constant
the second proportional to the derivative of the error through a constant
We get an ideal
kd
Proportional-Derivative (PD) controller

u (t ) = kp e (t ) + kd e (t ) U (s ) = kp + kd s E (s )
The transfer function of this controller is
Gc (s ) =
which has a zero at
Tohid Alizadeh (NU)
kp
U (s )
= kp + kd s = K (s + zc ), K = kd , zc =
E (s )
kd
zc = kp /kd .
16 / 39
Denition of the PD controller

So, once
kp
is xed
kd zero very far from the origin

kd zero near to the origin
low value of
high value of
Notice that the derivative action gives an anticipative action: if the error is
growing fast, the controller tends to make it decrease immediately
This kind of controller has three big problems:
1
First, it is not realizable in practice, since any physical system cannot have
more zeros than poles
Second, it would generate spikes in
e (t ))
3
u (t )
every time
r (t )
(and therefore
has a discontinuity (e.g., step)
Third, it would tend to amplify high-frequency components (i.e., sensor

noise)
For the moment though, let's assume that we can implement it, and let's
analyze its benet using the root locus
Tohid Alizadeh (NU)
17 / 39
Eect of PD controller
We have already seen that an additional zero has an anticipative action on the
step response
A zero in
Gc (s ),
and therefore in
Therefore, the step response of
L(s ),
T (s )
also appears in
T (s )
can be made faster
Mp ,
More precisely, we can decrease the settling time maintaing the same
can decrease
Mp ,
or we
keeping the same settling time (or even decreasing it)
In general, a zero on the negative real axis tends to move the root locus
branches to the left, so we can even stabilize an unstable system
Root Locus
Root Locus
1.5
1.5
1
Imaginary Axis
Imaginary Axis
1
0.5
0
0.5
0.5
0
0.5
1.5
1.5
2
4
Tohid Alizadeh (NU)
1
Real Axis
2
4
1
Real Axis
18 / 39
Eect of PD controller: example

Consider the system
Gp ( s ) =
(s + 1)(s + 2)(s + 5)
Let us consider rst a proportional controller to achieve
= 0.4,
i.e.
Gc (s ) = 23.72
Ts ,2% = 4.26 s, and can be obtained

quite precisely by second-order approximation
The settling time for a step response is
Tohid Alizadeh (NU)
19 / 39
Eects of adding a zero

Let's say that we are happy with the damping ratio (i.e., with the consequent
value of
Mp = 25.4%),
but we want a shorter settling time. This cannot be done
just by adjusting the gain
kp ,
so we add a zero
The ideal PD controller is dened as
4, 3, 2,
Gc (s ) = K (s + zc ), where
K to get = 0.4
we move
zc
at
and then adjust the value of
9.15
ed)
Figure 9.15
ensator Using ideal derivative
3;
compensation:
ensatora. uncompensated;
b. compensator
4
zero at 2;
(figure continues)
Notice that the settling time decreases at 2.14 s, 1Control

.64 s,Systems
1.33 Engineering,
s, as the Fourth
zero Edition
is
by N
Copyright 2004 by John Wiley & Sons. All r
moved towards the origin.
Tohid Alizadeh (NU)
20 / 39
Lead compensator
Given the zero at
Condition
pc zc
zc ,
we can insert a pole at
pc ,
with
pc zc
is needed to avoid canceling the derivative action introduced
by the zero, at the same time adding a natural low-pass ltering of the control
action
In this way, we can practically realize the controller, at the same time avoiding
spikes and noise amplication
This practical implementation of the PD controller is also called
compensator,
lead
the transfer function of which is
Gc (s ) = K
s + zc
, K = kd , zc = kp /K
s + pc
Notice that, given any error signal
e (t )
with bounded
e (t ),
the control action
will remain bounded, which did not happen for the ideal PD controller
Now let's see how to design practical PD controllers (i.e., lead compensators)
using the root locus
Tohid Alizadeh (NU)
21 / 39
Lead compensator: example

Consider the system
Gp ( s ) =
s (s + 4)(s + 6)
Design an ideal PD controller, and then a lead compensator, such that
the closed-loop system has
Ts ,2%
Mp
equal to 30%
for a step reference is improved twice (i.e. it's twice smaller) with
respect to using a proportional controller which achieves the same
Mp = 30%
Procedure for ideal PD controller (let's do it with
rltool):
design a proportional controller to meet the transient requirement
Mp = 30%
graphically compute Ts ,2% , and drag the new vertical line corresponding to
half of the previous value of Ts ,2%
add the zero of the ideal PD controller such that the root locus branches
intersect at a point with the required Mp and the new value of Ts ,2%
adjust the controller gain such that the poles are placed as required
Tohid Alizadeh (NU)
22 / 39
Lead compensator: example (cont'ed)

rltool):
the zero closer
Procedure for lead compensator (let's do it with
starting from the previous design, move
to the imaginary
axis, since the additive pole will partially compensate the anticipative eect
of the zero
then, place the pole at high frequency, such that the root locus branches
intersect at a point with the required Mp and the new value of Ts ,2%
adjust the controller gain such that the poles are placed as required
Remember: after each design phase, check if the second-order approximation

holds, both looking at the position of the closed-loop poles, and at the
close-loop step response
If needed, slightly adjust the gain, or the position of the pole/zero of the
controller to meet the requirements
Solution:
Setting
kp = 63.2
we get the desired
Mp ,
which corresponded to
Ts ,2% = 3.97
s.
We move the vertical line corresponding to the settling time requisite to the left
until we reach the value equal to 3.97/2
Tohid Alizadeh (NU)
= 1.99
23 / 39
Lead compensator: example (cont'ed)

Solution (cont'ed):
To make the root locus branches pass at the desired points by adding a zero, we
see that this latter must be placed at
s = 6,
and then adjust the gain at about
31.2
To design the lead compensator, we can make dierent choices, in any case
moving the zero to values to the right of
(a) if
(b) if
(c) if
zc = 5,
zc = 4,
zc = 2,
then
then
then
pc = 42.96
pc = 20.09
pc = 8.97 (second
6:
order approximation not valid)
Figure 9.29
Uncompensated
system and lead
compensation
responses for
Example 9.4
Tohid Alizadeh (NU)
24 / 39

Controller Synthesis Via Root Locus: ROBT303 Linear Control Theory With Lab

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Controller Synthesis Via Root Locus: ROBT303 Linear Control Theory With Lab

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

ROBT303 Linear Control Theory with Lab