EE250 Fall2012 Lecture-Notes PDF

Lectures for a 40-hour introductory course
on classical control system design
Ramprasad Potluri
Department of Electrical Engineering, IIT Kanpur
February 21, 2012

EE250 (Control Systems Analysis) IITK Lecture Notes
February 21, 2012 ii of 224 Ramprasad Potluri

Contents
Preface ix
Notation xiii
I Preliminaries 1
1 Introduction to the course 3
1.1 About the title of the course . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
1.2 Definition of negative feedback control . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
1.3 Examples of control systems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
1.4 Videos of control systems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
1.5 Appendix: History of control systems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
2 Dynamic systems 7
2.1 Definition of dynamic system . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
2.2 An example dynamic system: PMDC motor . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
2.3 A glimpse into the Laplace transform and transfer functions . . 10
3 Transfer functions and block diagrams 13

3.1 Why transfer functions ignore initial conditions . . . . . . . . . 13
3.2 Transfer function of time delay element . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
3.3 Block diagram of the PMDC motor . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
3.4 Why only the summator and gain block appear in block dia-
grams of LTI systems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
4 Preview of design in the state-space and the classical domains 17

4.1 State-space equations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
4.2 An example of design in the state-space domain . . . . . . . . . 18
4.3 An example of design in the classical control domain . . . . . . 20
4.4 Appendix: A little more on state-space theory . . . . . . . . . . . 21
4.5 Appendix: Similarities and differences between classical and LTI
state-space control . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
5 Block diagram manipulations, signal flow graphs 25

5.1 Rules of block diagram algebra . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
5.2 Examples . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
5.3 Signal flow graphs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
5.4 Definitions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
iii
5.5 SFG Algebra . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29

5.6 Appendix: Usage of these terms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30
6 Mason’s gain formula, properties desired from a control system 31

6.1 Mason’s gain formula . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
6.2 A note on loop gain . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32
6.3 Properties desired from a control system . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33
7 Virtues of control systems: Disturbance rejection 35
8 Virtues of control systems: Improvement in performance and over-

coming deadzone 37
8.1 Improvement in speed of response . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37
8.2 Command feedforward . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39
II Bode Plots 41
9 Frequency response 43
9.1 Definition of Frequency Response . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43
9.2 Problem statement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43
9.3 Solution . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43
9.4 Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45
9.5 Caution . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45
9.6 Appendix . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46
10 Bode plots (Part 1) 47

10.1 Uses of frequency response in control systems . . . . . . . . . . 47
10.2 Convention in constructing Bode plots . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48
10.3 Types of Bode plots . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50
10.4 Appendix: Angles in MATLAB . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51
10.5 Appendix: Angles in GNU Octave . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51
10.6 Appendix: Examples of departure of MATLAB from the conven-
tion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52

11.1 First method for sketching an ABMP . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55
11.2 Second method for sketching an ABMP . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59

12.1 Comparison of the two methods for constructing ABMPs . . . . 61
12.2 Selecting an ω to vertically fix an ABMP in the second method . 61
12.3 Examples of construction of ABPs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62

13.1 Filter-related terminology used in BPs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63
13.2 Examples of construction of ABPPs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63
13.3 Construction of polar plots . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63
13.4 Appendix: A review of the convention to sketch Bode phase plots 64
February 21, 2012 iv of 224 Ramprasad Potluri


14.1 Minimum phase transfer functions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65
14.1.1 Why the name “minimum-phase”: an explanation based
on the width of the interval of phases . . . . . . . . . . . 65
14.1.2 Why the name “minimum-phase”: an explanation based
on the increase in phase lag . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 66
14.2 Why practical rational TFs are proper . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67
14.3 Observation about the slopes of ABMPs due to zeros and poles 67
14.4 Appendix: A review of the concept of “minimum phase” . . . . 67

15.1 BP and ABP of the second order TF . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69
15.2 Notes on the ABMP of second order TF . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 71
15.3 Complete BP of second order TF . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 71
15.4 Appendix: MATLAB codes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 71
III Stability Theory 75

16 Stability theory (Part 1) 77
16.1 BIBO stability of LTI systems** . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 77
16.2 Discussion of the theorem and its proof** . . . . . . . . . . . . . 79
16.3 Appendix: Some literature that discusses BIBO stability . . . . . 80
17 Stability theory (Part 2) 81

17.1 A question of interest . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 81
17.2 Conclusions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 83
17.3 An interesting example . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 84
18 Nyquist Stability Criterion (Part 1)* 85

18.1 A quick recap . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 85
18.2 Problem statement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 85
18.3 Cauchy’s theorem (Principle of argument) . . . . . . . . . . . . . 86
19 Nyquist Stability Criterion (Part 2)* 89

19.1 Application of Cauchy’s theorem in Nyquist’s stability criterion 89
19.2 Discussion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 90
20 Nyquist Stability Criterion (Part 3) 93

20.1 Example 1: G (s) = K/s . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 93
20.2 Convention followed in sketching Nyquist plots . . . . . . . . . 94
20.3 Example: G (s) = K (s + 1) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 96
20.4 Example: G (s) = K (s + 10)2 s3 . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . 96
20.5 Appendix: A useful fact . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 96

21.1 Gain margin, phase margin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 97
21.2 When GM and PM are useful . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 98
21.3 Appendix: Dead-time element in MATLAB . . . . . . . . . . . . 99
February 21, 2012 v of 224 Ramprasad Potluri


22.1 Demonstration of quick construction of Nyquist plots . . . . . . 101
22.2 Critical gain . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 101
22.3 Conditionally stable systems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 102
22.4 Using − K1 + j0 instead of −1 + j0 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 102
22.5 Nyquist plots in MATLAB and GNU Octave . . . . . . . . . . . 102
22.6 Rotation of a vector instead of encirclement . . . . . . . . . . . . 103
22.7 Discussion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 105
IV Design using bode plots-based loop-shaping for

minimum-phase plants 107
23 NST (concluded), Loop-shaping (Part 1) 109

23.1 Nyquist stability theory (conclusion) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 109
23.2 Specifications for control system design . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 109
23.3 Loop gain and shaping . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 110
23.4 BMP-BPP correspondence for minimum-phase TFs . . . . . . . 111
23.5 Appendix: Bode’s theorem . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 111
23.6 Appendix: NST for SFG defintion of loop gain . . . . . . . . . . 111
24 Loop-shaping (Part 2) 113

24.1 Recap of specifications for control system design . . . . . . . . . 113
24.2 Gist of loop-shaping-based design . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 113
24.3 Stability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 114
24.4 Robustness to plant parameter variations . . . . . . . . . . . . . 114
24.5 Relation between OL and CL BMP . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 114

25.1 Satisfaction of desired performance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 117
25.1.1 Steady-state error . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 118
25.1.2 Settling time . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 118
25.1.3 Overshoot . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 119
25.2 Respecting constraints on control input . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 119
25.3 Appendix: Additional loop-shaping tips . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 119

26.1 Robustness to disturbances . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 121
26.2 Robustness to noises . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 121
26.3 Summary of loop-shaping recipe . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 122
26.4 MATLAB-based example of loop-shaping . . . . . . . . . . . . . 122
26.4.1 Problem . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 122
26.4.2 Solution . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 123
26.4.3 How to use MATLAB . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 123
26.4.4 Results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 124
26.4.5 MATLAB code . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 124
February 21, 2012 vi of 224 Ramprasad Potluri

27 Loop-shaping (Part 5): Information from lead/lag controllers 129

27.1 Background . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 129
27.2 Lead and lag controllers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 129
27.3 How DD-Φmax relationship for lead/lag controllers is useful in
loop-shaping . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 131
27.4 Appendix: Derivation of DD versus PM relationship . . . . . . . 133
28 Loop-shaping (Part 6): Relation between M p and PM 137

28.1 Relation between M p and PM for second order system . . . . . 137
28.2 Applying the second order relation to higher order . . . . . . . . 139
29 Loop-shaping (Part 7): A solved example 145

29.1 Problem . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 145
29.2 Solution . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 146
30 Metrics for steady-state accuracy of unity-feedback systems built

around minimum-phase systems 151
30.1 Error constants . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 152
30.2 How to read K p , Kv , Ka off the BMPs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 153
30.3 System type . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 153
30.4 Appendix: Various definitions of the Laplace transform . . . . . 155
30.5 Appendix: Unit impulse function . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 155
30.6 Appendix: Care needed in using the one-sided LT . . . . . . . . 157
31 An example of application of loop-shaping in automobile control 159
V Digital implementation of controllers 161
32 State space realization of transfer function 163

32.1 Example of state space realization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 163
32.2 Numerical integration of state space model . . . . . . . . . . . . 167
VI Pole-placement design using root locus 169
33 Unit step response of second order TF 171

33.1 State-space realization (concluded): Determining the response
of a transfer function to an arbitrary input . . . . . . . . . . . . . 171
33.2 Unit step response of standard second order TF . . . . . . . . . . 173
34 Second order TF with additional zero 177

34.1 Analysis of formulae developed for unit step response of stan-
dard second order system . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 177
34.2 The case of an additonal zero in a second order TF . . . . . . . . 177
February 21, 2012 vii of 224 Ramprasad Potluri

35 Second order TF with additional pole; recipe for pole-placement 185

35.1 Additional pole in second order TF . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 185
35.2 Recipe for placement of CL poles in a second order TF . . . . . . 186
35.3 Root locus: What it is . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 187
36 Root locus (Part 1) 189

36.1 Rules of sketching root locus . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 189
36.2 Appendix: An alternative way to see Rule 2 . . . . . . . . . . . . 189

38.1 Roots of multiplicity greater than 1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 193
38.2 Angles of departure and angles of arrival . . . . . . . . . . . . . 195
39 Root contours 197
40 Design using root locus 201

40.1 Appendix: TA09 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 201
VII Addressing nonlinearities 203

41 Stability of nonlinear control systems: Circle criterion 205
42 Dealing with plant input constraints: An anti-windup scheme 209
VIII PID Control 211

43 PID Controllers 213
44 Ziegler-Nichols tuning of PID controllers 215

44.1 What is controller tuning? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 215
44.2 What the two ZNT methods do . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 215
44.3 First method . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 216
44.4 Second method . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 218
44.5 Appendix: Further reading . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 218
February 21, 2012 viii of 224 Ramprasad Potluri

Preface
These lecture notes present the minimum set of topics that I have found nec-
essary to practically build and operate a simple control system based on an
approximately 40-hour lecture course. These notes evolved as I taught over
the past 8 years an introductory course on the analysis and design of control
systems first at the Indian Institute of Technology (IIT) Delhi and then at IIT
Kanpur, in the Electrical Engineering departments.
These notes, along with some tutorial sessions on Matlab or GNU Octave1 ,
and with a background acquired in a basic electrical engineering course on
motors, are adequate to design and operate, for example, a permanent magnet
dc motor control system.
The background expected of the reader to understand these lectures is a
comfort with (i) ordinary differential equations, and (ii) the Laplace transform
and the convolution integral. The first is acquired through a course on calculus
and the second is obtained through a course on signals and systems.
The subject of these lectures is classical control engineering. This subject
was born approximately in the 1930’s with the works of Nyquist, Bode, and
Black, and matured by the 1950’s with the works of Ziegler, Nichols, and Evans.
Since then, though many developments have taken place in this subject, the
set of techniques taught in an introductory course on this subject has largely
remained constant in most countries at what these authors developed.
A reader already has the choice of many excellent textbooks that are avail-
able in the market on the topic of classical control engineering. Books such as
those by Nagrath and Gopal, Gopal, Kuo, Ogata, Franklin and Powell, Nice,
and Dorf and Bishop already provide enough material for the said introduc-
tory course and more. Why then another book on this topic?
The present lecture notes are indeed based on these textbooks as well as
other books. These notes are mainly aimed at anyone who is a beginner in
the area of feedback control theory, and wishes to learn a minimum set of
practically applicable techniques through self-study. Being a beginnner, he/she
would not know which topics to read from these books, in which sequence,
and at what depth, in spite of the guidlelines in the prefaces of these books.
For the same reason, these notes will also be useful to a beginning teacher of
control systems.
These notes go beyond providing a set of lectures for a first course based on
the said textbooks. Listed below are the topics that are treated differently from
1 Matlab is an engineering software for numerical computation, and is sold by Math-
works; see www.mathworks.com. GNU Octave is an open source, freely downloadable

Matlab-like software that is an adequate substitute for Matlab in many respects; see
http://www.gnu.org/software/octave/.
ix
most popular books.

The Bode phase of a transfer function such as G (s) = ∏(s + zi ) ∏(s + p j )

is defined in books as G ( jω ) = ∑ arctan ω ω

zi − ∑ arctan p j , while account-

ing for the quadrant of each of the complex numbers jω + zi and jω + p j .

The present notes, on the other hand define the Bode phase as G ( jω ) =
∑ zi + jω − ∑ p j + jω . Calculation of the exact value of zi + jω is not

needed for successfully sketching an approximate phase plot; it is enough to

know the quadrant in which zi + jω lies. Sketching an approximate Bode phase
plot using this definition is straightfoward. The exact phase plot then can be
plotted using the said software. On the other hand, calculation of G ( jω ) from
the first definition is tedious, and, in my experience, leads to much confusion
as students usually forget the part about taking into account the quadrant.
Textbooks devote much space to discussing the frequency response
and the transient response of the standard second order transfer function
ωn 2 s2 + 2ζωn + ωn 2 . The clarification for why so much of space is de-

voted to this transfer function is not easy to find in the textbooks. In the present
notes, this transfer function is discussed only in the contexts in which it is used.
Three contexts are identified. The first is sketching Bode plots. The second is
loop-shaping, in developing a relation between phase margin of the open loop
system and the peak overshoot in the step response of the closed loop system.
The third is root locus-based design. Indeed, Matlab’s root locus tools gener-
ate graphs where the grid is a polar one specifically meant for working with a
second order transfer function.
In many textbooks, Nyquist plots are sketched using convenient points on
the s-plane contour. In the present notes, on the other hand, the Nyquist plot
is sketched by first sketching the Bode plot. This technique is much quicker
and easier than the first one for nearly all the transfer functions that the reader
encounters in an introductory course.
In these notes, the lectures on Bode plots-based design emphasize on the
end user being able to apply the technique quickly with reasonable approxi-
mations, and on fine-tuning the redesign by seeing its effect on the results of
simulation. On the other hand, the popular textbooks provide techniques to
exactly achieve, for example, a desired phase margin. Such exactness is neither
needed in practice, nor is useful; practical systems have nonlinearities that are
not accounted for at the design stage. So, a technique that focuses on accuracy
will slow the process of redesign of the controller.
These lecture notes carefully examine the background of many of the topics
discussed. For example, a counter example is provided to show that what
some of the textbooks provide as the reason for why certain transfer functions
are called minimum phase is actually incorrect. The correct reason is provided
through an example. Similarly, it is shown that the treatment of the Nyquist
stability criterion for the closed loop system 1+GGH is incorrect in many of the
textbooks. The correct treatment is provided.
Those in the business of applying feedback control theory to practice may
be able to suggest a different or more appropriate set of topics for these notes.
I welcome, and will be thankful for, such suggestions and others that will help
improve these lecture notes.
Where needed, the appropriate literature is cited. The appendices of these
February 21, 2012 x of 224 Ramprasad Potluri

Table 1: How the topics of this course are organized. The reader progresses
through the course from top to bottom along this table.
Background Negative feedback, LTI dynamic systems, Laplace transforms,
transfer functions, state-space equations, block diagram algebra,
signal flow graph algebra, Mason’s gain formula, virtues of a neg-
ative feedback control system, frequency response, Bode plots
Theory of stabil- How the location of poles and zeros in the s-plane determines
ity the nature of response of a system, BIBO stability of LTI systems,
Cauchy’s theorem of argument, Nyquist stability criterion
Analysis and de- Loop-shaping, performance specifications, lead and lag compen-
sign using Bode sators, error constants, system type, examples of design using
plots semilog graph papers
Digital imple- State-space realization of a transfer function, Euler’s

mentation of approximation-based discretization of a state-space equation,
controllers digital implementation, use of state-space realization to determine
the response of a transfer function to arbitrary input
Tuning of PID PID controllers, two Ziegler-Nichols tuning methods

controllers
Analysis and de- Rules for sketching root loci, simple examples of design using
sign using root root loci, standard second order model, MATLAB’s sisotool and
locus rlocus, effect of additional zero and additional pole
Addressing the circle criterion, anti-windup

nonlinearities
in practical
hardware
notes shed more light on their respective lectures. These appendices usually
contain material that may be slightly advanced for the course or of only special
interest, and are not discussed in the lectures. Each lecture also contains some
problems for practice. These problems are not discussed in lectures, and are in
addition to the problems that the students see in the tutorials.
In these notes, the primary software used to perform numerical compu-
tations and to generate plots is GNU Octave, which is helpful for most tasks
that are encountered in applying in practice the techniques described in these
notes. However, Matlab has certain tools such as SISOTOOL and Simulink the
equivalents of which are absent in GNU Octave. Except where SISOTOOL or
Simulink are used, the example codes have been written such that they execute
both in GNU Octave and in Matlab.
The topics of this course are organized as shown in Table 1. The reader may
visit this table occasionally to navigate through the course.
February 21, 2012 xi of 224 Ramprasad Potluri

February 21, 2012 xii of 224 Ramprasad Potluri

Notation
, “Is, by definition, equal to”. For example, ???????

< The set of all real numbers.
:= “Denotes”. For example, y1 := y reads “y1 denotes y”, ẋ :=
dx/dt reads “ẋ denotes dx/dt”.
x| Transpose of the vector x.
a.k.a. Also known as.
LT Laplace transform.
LTI Linear time invariant.
ODE Ordinary differential equation.
PMDC motor Permanent magnet dc motor.
TF Transfer function.
xiii
February 21, 2012 xiv of 224 Ramprasad Potluri

Part I
Preliminaries
1
Lecture 1
Introduction to the course
This lecture begins with an overview of the syllabus and the preface.
1.1 About the title of the course

The title of this course is “control system analysis”. However, we will also
learn “control system design”.
Analysis involves evaluating how something works, and how well. Design
involves building something to work as well as we desire.
A control system is a mechanism by which a given plant works, in spite of
disturbances, as desired by the designer of the control system.
Under the title of control system, we are interested in this course in negative
feedback control systems. Exist other kinds of control systems; see Figure 1.1.
The terms control and feedback control are usually synonymous with negative
feedback control. We define this last concept in the next section.
1.2 Definition of negative feedback control

To understand what a negative feedback control system is, we need to first under-
stand what feedback and negative feedback are.
Figure 1.2 states the goal of a control problem. The goal is that the output
of a plant must follow a desired value zref as closely as possible. For example,
if z is the actual speed of a motor’s shaft in rad/s, then zref is a number that
represents the desired speed in rad/s.
zref will need to be the input to, and z will be the output from, any system
that will achieve the above goal. Therefore, we call the direction from zref to z
as the forward direction, and that from z to zref as the backward direction.
Figure 1.3 shows how we can achieve the said goal using the concept of
negative feedback control. We use a sensor that outputs a quantity y that is
proportional to z, we take the negative of y, and we sum the quantity −y with
yref . The last is the output of a prefilter. The prefilter and the sensor are chosen
such that yref and y are dimensionally consistent and comparable in magni-
tude. In the example of the motor, yref and y are voltages, both of which may
be in the interval [0, 3] V. As y is taken from the output and fed towards the
3
Control Systems (CS)
Open-loop CS Closed-loop CS
(E.g., Household fan) (also known as feedback CS)
Human-in-the-loop CS
Automatic CS (E.g., driver and automobile)
Negative feedback CS Positive feedback CS
Figure 1.1: A classification of control systems. In this course, we are interested

in negative feedback control systems.
input, we say that y is fed back. The operation of taking −y is called negative
feedback. The act of using the error e = yref − y to apply an input u to the plant
so that e is reduced is called negative feedback control. A control system built
using the concept of negative feedback control is called negative feedback control
system.
The element represented by the shaded circle is called summator or sum-
mer or summing element. If its inputs are a and b, then its output is the sum
a + b. given that the summator performs the operation of summation, the sys-
tem of Figure 1.3 may be called a positive feedback control system if y were to
be fed back without a minus sign, that is, if e = yref + y were the output of the
summator.
Feedback action can be contrasted with feedforward action. This distinction
is explained in lectures 6 and 7.
1.3 Examples of control systems

The applications of control systems are numerous. Listed below are some ex-
amples of where control systems are used in practice.
1. The read head of hard disc drive needs to be positioned at a desired track,
or needs to remain at the track in spite of any mechanical shocks that the
PC/laptop may receive.
zref u z
Plant
Figure 1.2: Plant and goal. We have a plant whose input is u and output is z.
We want z to follow, as closely as possible, a quantity zref that is dimensionally
consistent with z.
February 21, 2012 4 of 224 Ramprasad Potluri

2. The write head of an inkjet printer needs to be positioned at a desired loca-

tion with a tolerance of a few micrometers.
3. The speed of the shaft of a motor needs to be maintained at a given value in
spite of voltage fluctuations.
4. In automobiles: antilock braking systems (ABS), cruise control systems, ac-
tive suspension, auxiliary steering, etc.
5. Aircraft autopilot.
6. Rockets need to be controlled so that they track a desired trajectory on their
ascent in spite of admissible wind gusts and variations in atmospheric pres-
sure.
7. The article [1] describes the many ways in which control theory is used in
digital imaging systems manufactured by Xerox.
1.4 Videos of control systems

www.youtube.com has many nice videos of control systems. Listed below are
some of these. All these videos existed on January 02, 2012.
1. Magnetic levitation. The concept of magnetic levitation is used in maglev,

as well as in magnetic bearings. The idea of using a control system is to keep
the magnet floating above/below another magnet at a desired distance.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kXodf7WKiFs.
2. Sojourner. The 6 wheels need to be driven and steered such that the rover
moves along the desired path with the desired speed.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zZWOGcdC_PI&feature=fvsr.
3. Inverted pendulum. Keep a pole upright on a movable cart. Simulates pole
balanced in the hand, and rocket launching.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ci_y14y3DU4.
zref yref + e = yref − y u z

Prefilter Controller Plant
−
y Sensor
Figure 1.3: A block diagram representing the standard architecture of a nega-

tive feedback control system (NFCS). This NFCS is one way to make z follow
zref as closely as possible. Underlying this control system are the concepts of
negative feedback and negative feedback control. zref is called reference input or de-
sired output or command input, z is called actual output or regulated output, y is
called sensor output, e is called error, u is called control input. The block dia-
grams seen in control system theory satisfy two conditions. First, each block
conveys signals unidirectionally. Second, each block is non-loading, that is, it
does not load the preceding block.

4. Two-wheeled inverted pendulum. This setup is a precursor to Segway.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DDBkg1PfvFY.
5. Segway. This setup is an advanced inverted pendulum.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BD-y8F1Fa7g&feature=fvst.
6. Ball on wheel. This setup is a cute one, though I have not yet imagined an
application for it.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F9CuHVAp5k0.
7. Dual-motor ball-beam (DMBB). We developed this setup in the Networked

Control Systems Laboratory1 . One application for this setup is as an inex-
pensive testbed for dual-manipulator coordination. If a certain analogue of
a control algorithm that coordinates two manipulators to handle a load to-
gether will not run successfully on the DMBB testbed, then most likely it
will not work on the actual manipulators. Details on dual-manipulator co-
ordination can be found in [2, 3, 4, 5].
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2KhvPT6935k and
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-tB6_CCJu_8.
8. Four wheels independently driven four wheels independently steered elec-
tric vehicle.
1.5 Appendix: History of control systems

Most textbooks devote space in their first chapters to a discussion of the history
of control systems. Besides textbooks, I found the discussion in [6, 7] to be
especially interesting and different. Prof. Chris Bissell of the Open University
of UK has written many easy-to-read articles on the history of control. These
articles may be available for free download on the web.
The explanation provided in Section 1.2 for negative feedback is consistent
with Harold Black’s statement that may explain why he called his amplifier
the negative feedback amplifier: “Then came the morning of Tuesday, August 2,
1927, when the concept of the negative feedback amplifier came to me in a
flash while I was crossing the Hudson River on the Lackawanna Ferry, on my
way to work. . . . I suddenly realized that if I fed the amplifier output back to
the input, in reverse phase, and kept the device from oscillating (singing, as
we called it then), I could have exactly what I wanted: a means of canceling
out the distortion in the output.” [8]. The section in [9] titled Two cultures of
feedback and stability describes the origins of the term negative feedback in more
detail, and states the modern meaning of negative feedback. The explanation
of Section 1.2 is consistent with this meaning.
Harold Black, Hendrik Bode, and Harry Nyquist of the Bell Laboratories are
credited by many textbooks for having laid the foundations of Control theory.
Black is credited for having invented the negative feedback amplifier, while
Bode plots and Nyquist stability theory are stuff that we will see in this course.
The article [9] describes the historical context in which these men made their
contributions.
1 Western Labs 217 B, IIT Kanpur.

Lecture 2
Dynamic systems
In this course, we work with dynamic systems described only by linear time-
invariant differential equations.
2.1 Definition of dynamic system

A dynamic system is one whose state at the next time instant is dependant on
the state at the current instant, and on the stimulus at the current instant.
Traditionally, differential and difference equations, as well as algebraic
equations, are used to describe dynamic systems. There are two types of differ-
ential/difference equations that describe a dynamic system. Equations such as
m ẍ = F, the relation between displacement x and force F causing this displace-
di
ment, and L dt = V, the relation between the EMF V across an inductor and the
current i that this EMF drives, are dynamic equations. Equations such as ẋ = v,
the relation between displacement x and velocity v), x (1) = x (0) + v(0)∆t (re-
lation between current position x (0), current velocity v(0), next position x (1),
and time step ∆t), and q̇ = i (relation between charge q and current i), are
kinematic equations.
We see that not every differential or difference equation is a dynamic equa-
tion. Only those differential equations that include the “causes” or “stimuli”
are dynamic equations. Figure 2.1 summarizes the discussion of this section.
Note that the terms dynamic equations and kinematic equations are not to
be confused with dynamics and kinematics, which are branches of mechanics1 .
The terms dynamic equation and kinematic equation do not occur commonly,
but when they occur, in my experience, they have the meaning provided above.
2.2 An example dynamic system: PMDC motor

When a conductor is placed in a magnetic field, and a current is sent through
the conductor, then the conductor experiences a thrust/force called Lorentz
1 From Oxford English Dictionary: mechanics, n. The branch of applied mathematics that deals
with the motion and equilibrium of bodies and the action of forces, and includes kinematics, dy-
namics, and statics. Now often distinguished as classical mechanics (as opposed to quantum me-
chanics).
7
Dynamic system
Differential/Difference Algebraic equations

equations
Dynamic Kinematic
equations equations
Figure 2.1: The types of equations that describe a dynamic system.
+
V −
N
Figure 2.2: Illustration for a conductor in a magnetic field. The applied EMF
V drives a current i through the conductor. The conductor turns about its axis
due to the interaction of i and the field.
force. The direction of this force relative to the directions of the field and cur-
rent is given by Fleming’s left hand rule which says that if the first finger, second
finger, and thumb were to be held mutually perpendicular, and the direction
of the field (from north pole to south pole is) indicated by the first finger, and
the direction of the current is indicated by the second finger, then the direction
of the thrust is indicated by the thumb:
field first finger
current second finger
thrust thumb
This phenomenon is utilized in motors: the current carrying conductor is
mounted on an axis and the thrust that the conductor experiences works as
a turning force (torque) that makes it rotate around the axis (Figure 2.2). If the
field is variable (as, for example, when using an electromagnet), then we can
write the torque as follows:
T (t) = K f Φi (t)
where K f is a constant of proportionality, i (t) is the current in the conductor
and Φ is the flux. If a permanent magnet is used to provide the field, then the
field will be constant, and the motor’s torque can be written as
T ( t ) = Kt i ( t ) (2.1)

Another phenomenon comes into play. When the conductor turns in the
field, it cuts through the field, and an EMF is induced in it that is, by Faraday’s
law, directly proportional to the rate of change of flux linkage (which in turn is
proportional to the flux Φ and the angular velocity of the conductor ω):
E(t) = Ke Φω (t)
If Φ is a constant, as when produced by permanent magnets, then
E ( t ) = Kb ω ( t ) (2.2)
By Lenz’s law, the direction of this induced EMF is such that it tends to oppose
the flux change causing it. So, the current that eventually flows through the
conductor is the result of the net EMF V − E, where V is the voltage applied to
the ends of the conductor as shown in Figure 2.2. This current causes a voltage
drop across the inductance L a and the resistance R a of the conductor:
di
V (t) − E(t) = L a + Ra i (2.3)
dt
In the present lecture, we are interested in dc motors. Equations (2.1), (2.2),
(2.3) describe the operations of dc motors. A dc motor has not just one turn of
wire for a conductor, but many turns of wires, all distributed evenly around a
cylindrical core. This set of wires is called armature. The core is mounted on
an axis. The entire rotating component (core plus conductors) of the motor is
called rotor. The L a and R a in Equation (2.3) are in fact the net inductance and
the net resistance of the armature, not of a single conductor.
In order for the rotor to spin, the torque T generated by any motor (ac or
dc) has to overcome any externally applied disturbance torques (TL ), the mo-
ment of inertia (J, assumed constant, although can be variable too) of the motor
(which matters when there is a change in angular velocity ω), and the friction
in the bearings as well as due to wind (summed up in B, the coefficient of vis-
cous friction), summarized by the fundamental torque equation:
dω
T = TL + J + Bω
dt
In the case of the dc motor that we have been discussing, this equation can be
written as follows:
dω
T (t) − TL (t) = J + Bω (2.4)
dt
In case a load is mounted on the rotor shaft, then the moment of inertia
and the coefficient of viscous friction of the motor rotor-load combination will
be different from J and B mentioned above and will be equal to some b J and B b
which are called respectively equivalent moment of inertia (of the rotor-load combi-
nation) referred to the rotor shaft and equivalent coefficient of viscous friction (of the
rotor-load combination) referred to the rotor shaft.
Table 2.1 summarizes the equations of a dc motor. Four of these equations
describe a permanent magnet dc (PMDC) motor.
Problem 2.1
Identify the algebraic and dynamic equations in Table 2.1.

Table 2.1: The equations that describe the working of a dc motor.
Equation Explanation
di
V (t) = L a dt + Ra i + The voltage applied to the armature pushes a current
E(t) through the armature. A part of this voltage drops
across the resistance R and inductance L. The balance
of this voltage overcomes the back emf E(t) that is in-
duced by the rotation of the rotor.
T ( t ) = K f Φ ( t )i ( t ) In a dc motor, the interaction between the current i
flowing through the conductors of the motor’s arma-
ture and the magnetic flux Φ produces torque T.
T ( t ) = Kt i ( t ) In a PMDC motor Φ is constant, resulting in K f Φ being
a constant denoted Kt .
T (t) − TL (t) − The torque T accelerates the rotor after overcoming any
Bω = J dω
dt
load or disturbance torques TL that may act on the mo-
tor shaft and the torque Bω due to viscous friction. B is
known as the coefficient of viscous friction.
E ( t ) = Ke Φ ( t ) ω ( t ) In a dc motor, the armature’s motion through the field
induces an EMF in the conductors of the armature.
E ( t ) = Kb ω ( t ) In a PMDC motor, as Φ is constant, Ke Φ is a constant
denoted Kb .
Table 2.2: Transfer functions corresponding to the individual equations of a

PMDC motor.
Time domain equation Equation in s domain Transfer function

di I (s) 1
V (t) − E(t) = L a dt + Ra i V (s) − E(s) = L a sI (s) − V (s)− E(s)
= sL a + R a
L a i (0) + R a I ( s )
T
T ( t ) = Kt i ( t ) T ( s ) = Kt I ( s ) I (s)
= Kt
Ω(s)
T (t) − TL (t) − Bω = J dω
dt T (s) − TL (s) − BΩ(s) = T (s)− TL (s)
= 1
sJ + B
JsΩ(s) − Jω (0)
E(s)
E ( t ) = Kb ω ( t ) E ( s ) = Kb Ω ( s ) Ω(s)
= Kb
2.3 A glimpse into the Laplace transform and trans-

fer functions
Classical control theory depends on the concept of transfer function. The trans-
fer function of an linear time invariant system is defined as the ratio of the
Laplace transform of the output of this system to that of the input to this sys-

tem. Note that this definition ignores the initial conditions.

Table 2.2 shows the equations of a PMDC motor and the corresponding
transfer functions obtained using the Laplace transform.
For this course, the Laplace transform is only a tool, not the focus. Only
a comfort with the Laplace transform is required in this course. Tables of the
Laplace transform do not have to be memorized. However, it is expected that
the student knows how these tables are derived, and given some time, can
derive on his/her own.
The purpose of the Laplace transform in classical control theory is only
mathematical rigor. Walter Evans, the inventor of the root locus method dis-
cussed transfer functions in his book [10] without using the Laplace transform
[11]. The Heaviside operator is an alternative to the Laplace transform in con-
trol theory and was used by some authors before the second world war, such
as [12]. Though it worked, the Heaviside operator was not supported by rigor-
ous mathematics [13]. This fact was probably the reason for this operator not
being adopted widely.


Lecture 3
Transfer functions and block

diagrams
Classical control theory uses the Laplace transform to represent LTI dynamic
sytems through transfer functions and block diagrams. The student has seen these
topics in an earlier course on signals and systems. This lecture recaps these
topics.
This lecture also provides a brief overview of state-space theory. In this the-
ory, ordinary differential equations (ODEs) are written as state-space equations.
3.1 Why transfer functions ignore initial conditions

In classical control theory, the only properties of a control system that are of
interest are
1. the stability of the control system,
2. the system’s speed of response, measured in terms of properties of the sys-

tem’s response to a unit step input such as rise time tr and settling time ts ,
3. the system’s tendency to oscillate, measured by the peak overshoot M p in

the system’s response to a unit step input,
4. how closely the output tracks the input once the transient phase of the re-
sponse is over, measured by the steady-state error ess to a unit step input,
and
5. the robustness of the above properties, that is, the approximate constancy of
these properties even if the plant’s parameters change.
For LTI systems modeled by ODEs, the satisfaction of these properties by the
system is independent of ICs []. As classical control theory restricts itself to
such systems, there is no loss in ignoring ICs. On the other hand, for nonlinear
systems, these properties are in general IC-dependant. Classical control theory
is inadequate here.
Additional interesting observations about TFs can be found in [14, Page 42].
13
3.2 Transfer function of time delay element

Transfer functions are defined only for LTI systems represented by ODEs of the
form
dn y d n −1 y dy
an n
+ a n − 1 n − 1
+ · · · + a1 + a0 y =
dt dt dt (3.1)
dm u d m −1 u du
bm m + bm−1 m−1 + · · · + b1 + b0 u,
dt dt dt
and by LTI algebraic equations. An example is the model of the PMDC motor
seen in Lecture 2.
Note that apart from LTI ODEs such as that of Equation (3.1), classical con-
trol theory also works with LTI ODEs containing time delay elements.
Consider the following examples.
1. In a thermal power plant, sensing of temperature x (t) in the path of super-

heated steam is done at a distance from where it is actually needed to be
sensed. This introduces a delay in sensing. Thus, as a first approximation,
we can say that what the controller receives is a delayed version, y(t) of x (t).
Of course, more accurately speaking, even the actual temperature sensed
downstream may be slightly different from even the delayed version of x (t).
2. In a distributed control system, where the sensors, actuators, and controllers

are interconnected by a “control network” such as Controller Area Network
(CAN), even though the sensor may have sensed the variable of interest x (t)
immediately, there may be a delay introduced by the network in this sensed
value reaching the controller. Thus, the controller receives y(t) which is a
delayed version of x (t).
In such cases, y(t) is a time-shifted version of x (t) as shown in Figure 3.1. This
behavior is summarized by the equation y(t) = x (t − td )1(t − td ). Applying
the Laplace transform on both sides of this equation gives Y (s) = X (s)e−td s .
Problem 3.1
Write the ODE corresponding to the TF Y (s)/U (s) = (s + a)e−td s /(s + b).
3.3 Block diagram of the PMDC motor

We can draw the block diagram of Figure 3.2 using the TFs of Table 2.2.
The advantage of working with a block diagram over working with equa-
tions is that a picture speaks a thousand words.
Problem 3.2
How will the motor block diagram change if you wish to include the kine-
matic equation θ̇ = ω?
Problem 3.3

x (t)
t
y(t)
td t
Figure 3.1: Illustration for time delay. y(t) is a delayed version of x (t).
TL (s)
V (s) + 1 I (s) T (s) + − 1 ω (s)
Kt
− sL a + RΣ Js + B
E(s) Kb
Figure 3.2: The block diagram of a PMDC motor.
Table 2.2 shows the four elemental TFs of a PMDC motor. Work out the
composite TF of this motor from the input V (t) to the output ω (t).
Problem 3.4
Draw a block diagram of a PMDC motor to include the initial conditions.
Do you see any advantages in such an inclusion?
3.4 Why only the summator and gain block appear

in block diagrams of LTI systems
In the block diagrams of such systems, only two blocks appear. These are the
summator and the gain block shown in Figure 3.3. For Equation (3.1), the gain
from u(t) to y(t) is the same as the TF from u(t) to y(t), and is the ratio of
Laplace transform of the output to the Laplace transform of the input as
Y (s) bm sm + bm−1 sm−1 + b1 s + b0

=
U (s) a n s n + a n −1 s n −1 + · · · a 1 s + a 0

Y1 (s) + Y (s) = Y1 (s) + Y2 (s) U (s) Gain Y (s)
+ G (s)
Y2 (s)
Figure 3.3: Only two blocks appear in the block diagrams of systems modeled
by LTI ODEs and by LTI algebraic equations. These are the summator and the
gain block. Figure 3.2 shows a sample block diagram.
The Laplace transform handles the product of two time-domain signals as

follows [15, Page 837]:
Z c+ j∞
1 1
L{ f 1 (t) f 2 (t)} = F1 (ξ ) F2 (s − ξ )dξ = F (s) ∗ F2 (s).
2πj c− j∞ 2πj 1
Thus, we may wonder why we did not apply it to the nonlinear element
K
TM (t) = K f Φ(t)i (t), obtain the s-domain expression TM (s) = 2πjf Φ(s) ∗ I (s),
and somehow incorporate this term in the block diagram of Figure 3.2. Note
that, once included in the block diagram, we may wonder how to work with
such a term.
As we see in the remainder of the course, even working with systems whose
block diagrams have only summators and gain blocks is sufficiently challeng-
ing. Thus, classical control theory restricts itself to these systems.
Problem 3.5
Prove, starting from the definition of linearity, that the equation T (t) =
K f Φ(t)i (t), representing a system with inputs Φ and i and output T, is a non-
linear one.
Acknowledgment: The discussions with Mr. Manavaalan Gunasekaran, Ph.D.

student, helped formulate the ideas presented in Section 3.4.

Lecture 4
Preview of design in the

state-space and the classical
domains
4.1 State-space equations

We call state-space equations of LTI systems LTI state-space equations, and the
control theory that uses these equations LTI state-space control theory.
As an example to illustrate the state-space framework, consider
d2 y dy
2
+ a1 + a0 y = u. (4.1)
dt dt
This equation is a linear time invariant (LTI) second order ordinary differential
equation in one variable (y). This equation models a certain plant. Denoting
y1 := y and y2 := ẏ1 = ẏ, we write this differential equation equivalently as
ẏ1 = y2 ,
ẏ2 + a1 y2 + a0 y1 = u,
which is a system of first order differential equations in two variables (y1 and
y2 ). This system is written as
" # " #" # " # " #
ẏ1 0 1 y1 0 h i y
1
= + u, y = 1 0 .
ẏ2 − a0 − a1 y2 1 y2
The vector z = [y1 y2 ]| is called the state vector of the plant that this second
order ODE models. Thus,
ż = Az + Bu, y = Cz, (4.2)
with " # " #

0 1 0 h i
A= , B= , C= 1 0 ,
− a0 − a1 1
17
is the state-space equation (a.k.a. state-space model) of this plant.

Rewriting the original ODE in the state-space form helps as follows. Note
that A contains the crucial information about the natural response of the origi-
nal second order ODE. If we construct u as
u = −kx + yref , (4.3)
we have
ż = Âz + Byref , y = Cz, (4.4)
where Â = ( A − Bk).
Thus, the state feedback control of Equation (4.3) helps us replace the input-
output behavior given by Equation (4.2) with the input-output behavior given
by Equation (4.4). As A is 2 × 2 and B is 2 × 1, k is 1 × 2. With k = [k0 k1 ], we
have " #
0 1
Â = .
−( a0 + k0 ) −( a1 + k1 )
With this Â, the state-space model of Equation (4.4) is equivalent to the LTI
ODE
d2 y dy
+ ( a1 + k 1 ) + ( a0 + k 0 ) = u
dt2 dt
This k can be constructed algebraically without solving any ODEs or state-
space equations.
4.2 An example of design in the state-space domain

In the LTI ODE of Equation (4.1), let a0 = 1, a1 = 0.05. For a unit step input,
that is, for u(t) = 1(t), where 1(t) is a unit step function, a.k.a., Heaviside
function, (
0, t < 0
1( t ) =
1, t > 0,
the output of Equation (4.1) is shown in Figure 4.1. This response is highly
oscillatory, and it overshoots almost 100% the value of 1 that it is required to
settle to. Hence, this response is undesirable, and needs to be changed. Given
that we cannot modify the plant, we decide to use state feedback to create a
new system around this plant such that the input-output behavior of this new
system is desirable.
From prior experience with the solution of the equation
d2 y dy
2
+ 2ζωn + ωn 2 = ωn 2 u, (4.5)
dt dt
which is more general than Equation (4.1), we know that, for a given ωn , the
larger the value of ζ, the less the overshoot and oscillations in the unit step
response√of Equation (4.5). In the present example, ωn = 1, and ζ = 0.025.
ζ = 1/ 2 with ωn = 1 give us an adequately damped response, that is, one
which has an overshoot of not more than about 10 − 15% and has only about
3 – 5 overshoots and undershoots before it settles to within about 95% of the

Unit step response of d2y/dt2 + 0.05 dy/dt + y = u
1.8
1.6
1.4
1.2
y(t)
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0
0 50 100 150 200 250
Time (sec)
Figure 4.1: The unit step response of the plant of Equation (4.1) with a0 = 1
and a1 = 0.05. This response is poorly damped as seen from the fact that it has
large overshoot and is very oscillatory.
desired value of 1, as shown in Figure 4.2. ζ is called the damping ratio and ωn
is called the natural frequency of Equation (4.1).
√
We use this prior experience to decide that √ we want a1 + k1 = 2 and
a0 + k0 = 1. Thus, we obtain k0 = 0 and k1 = 2 − 1.
In the initial stages of developing this experience, we may need to go fre-
quently from the design in the state-space domain to solving the resulting
state-space equation in the time domain, and back, to see how well the design
performs in practice. With experience, however, the design can be performed
without needing to see how the resulting system performs in the time domain.
Problem 4.1
Develop the state-space model of the PMDC motor.
Problem 4.2
Paste the following code at the command prompt of either MATLAB or
GNU Octave, and hit the enter key.
num = 1; den = [1, 0.005, 1]; sys = tf(num,den); step(sys);

2 2
Unit step response of d y/dt + 1.414 dy/dt + y = u
1.4
1.2
0.8
y(t)
0.6
0.4
0.2
0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Time (sec)
Figure√4.2: The unit step response of the plant of Equation (4.1) with a0 = 1 and
a1 = 2. This response is well-damped as seen from the fact that its overshoot
is low and it has very few overshoots and undershoots.
Without exiting the software, paste the following code at the command prompt
and hit the enter key.
title(’Unit step response of d^2y/dt^2 + 0.05 dy/dt + y = u’);
Observe the results. Modify the code to obtain the responses shown in fig-
ures 4.1 and 4.2.
4.3 An example of design in the classical control do-

main
Let us see how classical control theory would solve the design problem of Sec-
tion 4.2. Figure 4.3 shows the block diagram of a control system that we would
want to build around the given plant so that the closed-loop behavior is to our
satisfaction.

Yref (s) + U (s) 1 Y (s)

C (s)
− s2 + a1 s + a0
Figure 4.3: Block diagram of the proposed control system that we wish to de-
sign in the classical control domain.
We see that if we select C (s) as equal to c1 s + c0 , then the closed-loop TF is
Y (s) c1 s + c0
= 2 (4.6)
Yref (s) s + ( a1 + c1 ) s + ( a0 + c0 )
We can plot the unit step response of this TF in GNU Octave or MATLAB
using the code
c0=30; c1=5; a0=1; a1=0.05; num=[c1,c0]; den=[1,a1+c1,a0+c0];

step(tf(num,den));
Through trial and error using this code, we determine that for the given
value of a0 = 1 and a1 = 0.05, the values c0 = 30 and c1 = 10 provide us a
response that is satisfactory in the sense described in Section 4.2. This response
is shown in Figure 4.4.
Classical control theory says that if the zero of this TF s = −c0 /c1 is deep
in the left half plane in comparison to the poles of this TF, then the effect of this
zero will be negligible on the response of this TF to an input, and the nature of
the response will be determined by only the poles of this TF. Let us see if the
zero is much deeper than the poles with the above-selected values of c1 and c0 .
The following code provides us the values of these zero and poles.
c0=30; c1=5; a0=1; a1=0.05; num=[c1,c0]; den=[1,a1+c1,a0+c0];

-c0/c1, roots(den)
We see that the zero is at s = −3 and the poles are at −5.0250 + j2.3978 and
−5.0250 − j2.3978. We see that even though the poles are deeper than the zeros,
the response is still to our satisfaction. We explore the answer to this behavior
in the lectures on root locus.
4.4 Appendix: A little more on state-space theory

State-space theory works with differential equations that are of the general
form ẋ = f ( x, u, t). This equation is called state-space equation. Here, ẋ , dx/dt,
with t the time. x and f are real-valued vectors with n components each, and
u is a real-valued vector of m components. In mathematics, this last statement
is compactly written as x, f ∈ <n and u ∈ <m .

Step Response
1.4
1.2
1
Amplitude
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4
Time (sec)
Figure 4.4: The unit step response of the closed-loop system of Equation (4.6)
with a1 = 0.05, a1 = 1, c0 = 30, and c1 = 10. This response is well-damped as
seen from the fact that its overshoot is low and it has very few overshoots and
undershoots.
4.5 Appendix: Similarities and differences between

classical and LTI state-space control
Classical control theory and LTI state-space control theory work with LTI ODEs
and design controllers without solving the underlying differential equations.
This thought is illustrated in more detail in Figure 4.5.
The difference is that, while classical control theory designs controllers us-
ing the Laplace transform and transfer functions, state-space control theory
designs in the state space. Further, while classical control uses graphical tech-
niques for analysis and design, state-space control theory uses linear algebra.
Additionally, while classical control can handle time delay in the ODEs, LTI
state-space theory cannot [].

TF or Analysis
LTI
LTI ODE LTI SS &
ODE
form Design
Simulation
simulation Yes
Exit
No successful?
Figure 4.5: Illustration for the similarities between classical control theory and
LTI state-space control theory.


Lecture 5
Block diagram manipulations,

signal flow graphs
5.1 Rules of block diagram algebra

In our course, as we work with block diagrams, we will frequently have the
need to quickly determine the TF between a certain input and a certain output.
As mentioned in Lecture 2, it is easier to work with block diagrams than with
the underlying equations. Figure 5.1 lists the few simple rules that enable us to
manipulate block diagrams.
5.2 Examples
Example 5.1
An example of block diagram manipulation.
25
Figure 5.1: Rules of block diagram algebra.

Example 5.2
Example 5.3
We can quickly understand the block diagram algebra through just a few
more examples. Note that this algebra was possible because we have restricted
our attention to systems that are LTI.

Figure 5.2: A sample signal flow graph.
5.3 Signal flow graphs

Manipulation of block diagrams as demonstrated in Lecture 4 can be tedious
in the case of complex block diagrams.
Example 5.4
Example of a complex block diagram.
The difficulty in manipulating this block diagram arises from the fact that
we may be forced to move the summators through the branches that are to
their right. See Rules 10 in table 1-3 of Lecture 4 about transfer of a summator
into branches.
For a block diagram that looks complicated, we can determine the input-
output gain by first drawing a signal flow graph (SFG) that is equivalent to
this block diagram, and then applying a formula that has come to be known as
Mason’s gain formula (MGF). We see SFGs in this lecture and MGF in the next
one.
5.4 Definitions
Consider the SFG of Figure 5.2
Here are definitions of the various parts of this SFG.
Nodes represent signals. For example, x1 , x2 , x3 , x4 .
Transmittances / gains represent signal multipliers. For example, a, b, c, d.
Branches are directed line segments, each of which joins two nodes. Arrow
on a branch shows direction of signal flow. E.g. x1 to x2 , x2 to x3 , x4 to x3 , x3 to
x2 , x3 to x3 .
Input node / source has only outgoing branches. For example, x1 , x4 .
Output node / sink has only incoming branches. For example, x3 .

Mixed node has both incoming and outgoing branches. For example, x2 , x3 .
A mixed node can be converted into an output node by adding an outgoing
branch with a gain equal to 1.
A path is the traversal of connected branches in the direction of the arrows.
An open path is a path in which no node is crossed more than once. For
example, x1 − x2 − x3 , x4 − x3 , x1 − x2 , x4 − x3 − x2 .
A closed path is a path that ends at same node where it began and doesn’t
cross any other node more than once. For example, x2 − x3 − x2 , x3 − x2 − x3 .
A path that is neither open nor closed crosses some node more than once but
ends at a different node from which it began. For example, x1 − x2 − x3 − x2 ,
x4 − x3 − x2 − x3 , etc.
A loop is a closed path. For example, x2 − x3 − x2 , x3 − x2 − x3 .
Loop gain is the product of branch gains of a loop. For example, bc.
Nontouching loops do not possess common node. We don’t have any in this
example.
Forward path is a path from input node to output node that does not cross
any node more than once. For example, x1 − x2 − x3 − x3 , x4 − x3 − x3 .
Forward path gain is the product of branch gains of a forward path. For
example, ab, d, dc.
Example 5.5
Draw an SFG that is equivalent to the following block diagram.
Answer:
From Example 5, we see that a node may either represent a signal or the
sum of two or more signals. In this example, we have the nodes corresponding
to the signals C and R, the node corresponding to the sum E1 of signals N and
GE, and the node corresponding to the sum E of signals R and − HC.
5.5 SFG Algebra

Similarly as in block diagrams, we can list about 13 rules for manipulations
of SFGs. In fact, as block diagrams are same as SFGs, the 13 rules we saw for
block diagrams also apply to SFGs. However, we don’t need to build that list
here all over, as we will not use SFGs in our course — we will only use block
diagrams. However, we will try to develop a little familiarity with SFG algebra
through an example.
Example 5.6
Let us work out the following five rules that we choose purely arbitrarily.

5.6 Appendix: Usage of these terms

An SFG conveys exactly the same information as a block diagram. In fact, a
search on the Web for “signal flow graph” shows that even block diagrams are
sometimes known as SFG in the European literature. Our usage of the term
SFG is in keeping with the US literature.
The difference between block diagrams and SFGs is only in the pictorial
representation and the domains where each is used. Block diagrams are pri-
marily used in the control systems community. SFGs are used in the commu-
nications community.

Lecture 6
Mason’s gain formula,

properties desired from a
control system
Samuel J. Mason of MIT published a paper each in the years 1953 and 1956 that
resulted in “Mason’s gain formula”. Mason developed his formula for signal
flow graphs (SFG).
6.1 Mason’s gain formula

The gain from the input R to the output Y in an SFG is given by the following
formula:
Y 1 N
= ∑ Pk ∆k
R ∆ k =1
Here,
• ∆ is called “graph determinant” of the given SFG, and is given by the fol-
lowing expression:
∆ = 1 − ∑ loop gains of all loops taken one at a time

+ ∑ products of loop gains of all non-touching loops taken two at a time
− ∑ products of loop gains of all non-touching loops taken three at a time
+ ...
• N is the number of forward paths from R to Y.
• Pk is the kth forward path gain.
• ∆k is the ∆ for that part of the SFG that doesn’t touch the kth forward path.
31
Figure 6.1: A sample signal flow graph for which to find the gain.
Example 6.1
Find x5 /x1 for the SFG of Figure 6.1.
N
x5 1
x1
=
∆ ∑ Pk ∆k
k =1
with
N=2
∆ = 1 − ( G23 G32 + G23 G34 G42 + G23 G34 G45 G52 + G23 G32 G44 + G23 G35 G52 G44 )
+ ( G23 G32 × G44 + G23 G35 G52 × G44 )
P1 = G12 G23 G34 G45
P2 = G12 G23 G35
∆1 = 1−0 = 1
∆2 = 1 − G44
6.2 A note on loop gain

In classical control theory, we use the term loop gain frequently. This term is de-
fined slightly differently for SFGs and block diagrams. Figure 23.4 reproduces
the block diagram and the corresponding SFG from Example 5.
For an SFG, the loop gain for a given loop is defined as the prod-
uct of branch gains of the loop. By this definition, in Figure 23.4,
the loop gain is − G (s) G2 (s) H (s), and the gain from R(s) to C (s) is
G (s) G2 (s) (1 + G (s) G2 (s) H (s)) .
For a block diagram the loop gain for a given loop is defined as the product
of the gains around the loop ignoring the signs at the summator. By this defini-
tion, in Figure 23.4, the loop gain is G (s) G2 (s) H (s), and the gain from R(s) to
C (s) is G (s) G2 (s) (1 + G (s) G2 (s) H (s)) . We note that this last expression has
accounted for the signs at the summator.

Figure 6.2: A block diagram and the corresponding signal flow graph.
We often need to be able to quickly write the gain of a single-loop block

diagram from an input X to an output Y. We can write this gain easily as
Gain of the forward path from X to Y

Gain of the block diagram from X to Y =
1 + loop gain of this block diagram
Applying this formula, we can easily write
C (s) G1 (s) G2 (s)

= ,
R(s) G1 (s) G2 (s) H (s)
C (s) G2 (s)
= .
N (s) G1 (s) G2 (s) H (s)
6.3 Properties desired from a control system

A control system (CS) needs to have the following properties:
• Stability: This is the most fundamental property desired of any CS.
• Input amplitude constraints u(t) should remain within certain bounds so
that the approximation that the plant is linear remains valid.
r (t) u(t) y(t)

K (s) G (s)
−
• Disturbance rejection
• Noise filtering
• Low sensitivity to parameter variations
• Good performance — both in transient and in steady state.


Lecture 7
Virtues of control systems:

Disturbance rejection
We may decide that the final CS may be a feedforward CS or a combined feed-

forward feedback CS.
Example 7.1
Disturbance rejection One of the main purposes of a CS is to obtain the
desired behavior from the plant/object in the face of disturbances that may be
acting on the object. A negative feedback CS helps in disturbance rejection as
follows:
η
Plant
+
yd y
C P
+ +
−
Here, C and P are gains for amplification factors of the controller, plant, sensor
respectively. The goal is to minimize the effect of η on y. Let us see if the
feedback scheme shown achieves this goal.
Y (s) = η (s) + PCE(s)

=⇒ Y (s) = η (s) + PC (Yd (s) − Y (s))
=⇒ Y (s)(1 + PC ) = η (s) + PCYd (s)
η (s) PC
=⇒ Y (s) = + Y (s)
1 + PC 1 + PC d
if PC 1, then we see that η appears in y with a strength that is PC times less

than that with which yd appears as y.
Example 7.2
Disturbance feedforward.
35
In Example 1, we see that η will need to be inside the control loop for it to
be attenuated. That is, it will need to be sent around the loop, and it will need
to create the error e between yd and y before its effect can be minimized. Is it
possible to reject the effect of η without needing to first create an error? In those
cases, where η is measurable (by a sensor), we can reduce its effect as follows:
Gff η
+ Plant
+
yd y
C P
+
From the block diagram, we have
Y (s) = η (s) + PC (Yd (s) + Gff η (s))
That is,
Y (s) = (1 + PCGff )η (s) + PCYd (s)
We want Y (s) = Yd (s). We may choose Gff such that PCGff = −1, that is,
Gff = −1/( PC ). This is useful when the disturbance η may be sensed almost
as quickly as it hits the plant.
Where is the feedforward action in the figure of Example 2? In fact, which

is the “forward” direction? In that example, it was probably difficult to see that
the forward direction is from the input side, and that the backward direction is
from the output to the input. But if adopt the convention that all inputs come
from left, and all outputs exit from the right, thus
Inputs Outputs
System
agree that the forward path is from input to output, and redraw the block dia-
gram in Example 2 thus
η
Gff
+ Plant
+
yd y
C P
+ +
then, it is clear that the disturbance input is being injected along an alternative
forward path into that system. On the other hand, in Example 1, the output
was being fed back into the input channel.

Lecture 8
Virtues of control systems:

Improvement in performance
and overcoming deadzone
In this lecture, we discuss how a control system can be employed to achieve

the goal of the output of a plant following a reference signal. The task of fol-
lowing a reference signal can be broken into two components. One, when the
reference signal changes to a new constant value yref (∞), the output needs to
also eventually reach a new constant value y(∞) which is as close as desired to
yref (∞). Second, the while the output of the plant needs
8.1 Improvement in speed of response

We saw in the last lecture that, when we wanted a motor’s speed to quickly
reach a unit speed, a closed-loop configuration was more useful than an open-
loop configuration. We saw this as follows. We make the following assump-
tions:
• The motor is powered from a power amplifier, and a tachogenerator is
mounted on the motor’s shaft to measure the speed of the motor. The TF
from the power amplifier’s input to the tachogenerator’s output is τs1+1 .
• The signals rOL and yOL (and rOL and yOL ) are dimensionally consistent and
of comparable magnitudes.
• rOL (t) = rCL (t) = 1(t).
We see that yOL and yCL behave as shown in the following figure:
=1 (utOL
rOL (t)y-
OL ) (t)
-
τs + 1 yOL (t) = (1 − e−t/τ )1(t)
y-
ru-
CL ((t1)(pt()tt))
eCL
CL
−
+̀ yCL (t) =
- -K
τs6 +1 τ

K
1+ K 1 − e−t/ 1+K 1(t)
37
Apparently, the CL system provides faster settling time at the small cost of
a steady-state error ess , limt→∞ e(t) equal to 1+1 K . But how is the CL system
achieving this? Let us compare the control effort in the OL and CL cases.
While, uOL (t) = 1(t), uCL (t) can be obtained as follows:
UCL (s) K
=
RCL (s) 1 + τsK+1
Given that rCL (t) = 1(t), we have
K (τs + 1) 1
uCL (t) = L−1 { }
τs + 1 + K s
This gives
K τ

uCL (t) = 1 + Ke−t/ K+1 1(t)
1+K
We see that, at t = 0+ , uCL = K, and at t = ∞, uCL = K
1+ K . As we can see from
the following figure,
K
u CL
1 uOL
K
L
1+ K
C
y
yOL
in order to provide the improved settling time, the CL system is applying a

greater control effort:
uCL (t) > uOL (t), for most t.
Thus, if we want a motor to settle as quickly as possible to 1000 rpm, we

drive it, using uCL (t), for example, towards 10000 rpm, and as it is tending
towards 10000 rpm, we ask it to go to 8000 rpm, 7000, 6000,...,1000. The idea
is that no matter what inertia the motor has, we can always supply sufficient
power to help it overcome the inertia quickly.
But, in practice, it is not possible to provide enough power to overcome any
inertia, mostly because the power source or the motor have their own limita-
tions. The power source may be able to apply only so much voltage, or only
so much current may be permitted to pass through the armature of the motor.
That is, in practice, there are always constraints on the inputs to the system, and
the input cannot exceed certain values. The feedback control system needs to
respect these “input saturation constraints’.

8.2 Command feedforward

There is also what is known as command feedforward: For improving perfor-
mance through improving the shape of response.
yC dy
p+ p Y (s) (C + C2 ) P
-
-
-−
- P
+̀
+̀ 21? = 1
6 Yd (s) 1 + PC1
In the above scheme, we can use command feedforward to alter the zeros of
(C +C ) P
the TF from yd (t) to y(t). For this, we can modify the numerator of 11+ PC2 to
1
obtain certain desirable properties of the response y to input yd (for example,
rise time). In the chapter on performance analysis of control systems, we will
see what effect the zeros of a TF have on its response.
Let us compare through an example the command feed-forward (CFF)
structure with the negative feedback (NFB) structure.
We saw that the NFB structure helps achieve a good speed of response. In
the following figure,
y-
ruCL
e-(−(1tp()t()tt))
CL
CL
- - K
+̀
τs 6 +1
K τ

yCL (t) = 1 − e−t/ 1+K 1(t)
1+K
Thus, while the plant by itself has a speed of response governed by its time
constant τ, the closed-loop structure has a time constant τ/(1 + K ), and thus
is faster by 1 + K times.
However, the steady-state value of yCL (t) is yss = K/(1 + K ), and is not
equal to 1.
On the other hand, the CFF scheme below
has the TF
Y K + C2 1
=
Yd τ s + 1+τ K
and, for yd (t) = 1(t), this gives
K + C2 τ

y(t) = 1 − e−t/ 1+K 1(t)
K+1
This scheme, while allowing us to have the same speed of response as in the
case of the NFB configuration, allows us, for C2 = 1, to have yss = 1. That is,
this scheme also improves the steady-state error.
This is not the only advantage of the CFF structure. Note that, real-world
plants do not respond if their stimuli are not strong enough. That is, these
plants are said to have “dead zone” nonlinearities. For example, a DC motor’s
shaft will not turn unless the voltage applied to its armature is larger than a
certain minimum value. When the value is below this minimum, the power
supplied to the motor is not enough to help the shaft overcome the friction in
the bearings, and to overcome the losses in the electric and magnetic circuit
of the motor. The adjacent figure illustrates two nonlinearities that we find in

Output
Saturation
n
io
eg
rr
ea
n
Li
Dead zone
0 Input
a power amplifier-DC motor combination − → Power-amp − → DC motor . The

power amplifier (such as an H-bridge circuit) and the DC motor may have both
a dead zone nonlinearity and a saturation nonlinearity. A saturation nonlinear-
ity is the situation where raising the magnitude of the stimulus beyond a point
does not help anymore.
In the given NFB scheme, the magnitude of the voltage applied to the
power-amplifier depends on the error. If the error is small, then this voltage
will also be small, and may lie in the dead zone of the amplifier. In the CFF
scheme, on the other hand, a certain minimum voltage is applied to the power
amplifier thanks to feeding forward of the command input. This feature can be
utilized to stay out of the dead zone of the amplifier.

Part II
Bode Plots
41
Lecture 9
Frequency response
9.1 Definition of Frequency Response

Frequency response (FR) is the steady-state (SS) response of a system to a si-
nusoidal input. SS is when the transient response of the system has died out.
So, by definition, in the development of the concept of FR, we will talk about
systems where transient responses die out.
9.2 Problem statement

We will show that the SS value of y(t) — ySS (t) — in the following figure
r (t)= A sin ωt y(t)

−−−−−−−→ G (s) −−→
R(s) Y (s)
is given by
yss (t) = | G ( jω )| A sin (ωt + ∠G ( jω ))
G ( jω ) is called “sinusoidal TF” of the system
G ( jω ) = G (s)|s= jω (9.1)
9.3 Solution
We study systems modeled by LTI differential equations of the form of Equa-
tion (3.1) including a dead time component. As these differential equations
represent practical systems, they have real coefficients.
A corollary of the fundamental theorem of algebra is that every polynomial
with real coefficients can be expressed as the product of polynomials with real
coefficients of degrees 1 or 2.
The above two paragraphs mean that the TFs that we study in this course
are of the form
n n 2 2
∏i=1 0 (s + zi ) ∏k=
2
0 ( s ± ζ k ωnk s + ωnk )
G (s) = a d d
e−td s (9.2)
∏i=1 0 (s + pi ) ∏k=
2 2 2
0 ( s ± 2ξ k ωdk s + ωdk )
43
where a, zi , pi , ωnk , ωdk , td , ζ k , ξ k are all real.

In the TF of Equation (9.2), the part that does not include the exponential
term e−td s is said to be rational as it is the ratio of two terms. This part is said
to be proper if the order of the numerator is not more than the order of the
denominator, that is, if
n1 + 2n2 ≤ d1 + 2d2
and strictly proper if the order of the numerator is less than the order of the
denominator, i.e., if
n1 + 2n2 < d1 + 2d2
As we are interested in the SS response of G (s), G (s) will need to be stable.

Else, the SS value will not exist. We will discuss stability in the required detail
in a later lecture.
The term e−td s represents “dead time” or “transportation lag”.
We evaluate yss (t) for r (t) = A sin ωt under the assumption that G (s) is
stable and that e−td s is absent.
Steps
Aω
1. R(s) = .
s2 + ω 2
2. Y (s) = G (s) R(s) can be written as follows:
Aω
Y (s) = G (s) · (9.3)
(s + jω )(s − jω )
3. Split Y (s) into partial fractions:

γ1 γ2
Y (s) = Ψ( G (s)) + + (9.4)
s + jω s − jω
where Ψ( G (s)) represents all the partial fractions that G (s) generates.
4. Evaluate γ1 & γ2 using (9.3) & (9.4).
Aω γ1 γ2
G (s) = Ψ( G (s)) + +
(s + jω )(s − jω ) s + jω s − jω
γ1 and γ2 can be evaluated as follows:

Aω
γ1 = (s + jω ) G (s)
(s + jω )(s − jω ) s=− jω

Aω
γ2 = (s − jω ) G (s)
(s + jω )(s − jω ) s=+ jω
Therefore,
G (− jω ) Aω G (+ jω ) Aω
γ1 = , γ2 = .
−2jω +2jω

5. Are G (− jω ) & G (+ jω ) related? In particular is G (− jω ) = G (+ jω )∗ ?

We can see that this is indeed so as all the constant in G (s) (i.e.,
a, zi , pi , ωnk , ωdk , td , ζ k , ξ k ) are all real numbers. If they were not real, then
in general G (− jω ) would not be the complex conjugate of G ( jω ). Since we
are dealing with real systems, these constants are real in our case.
6. Now, let us take the inverse LT of (9.4):
y(t) = L−1 {Ψ( G (s))} + γ1 e− jωt + γ2 e+ jωt (9.5)
Here L−1 {Ψ( G (s))} contains all the transient terms.

7. As we have assumed that G (s) is stable, then L−1 {Ψ( G (s))} dies out even-
tually. Then,
yss (t) = γ1 e− jωt + γ2 e+ jωt

G (− jω ) Aω − jωt G ( jω ) Aω jωt
= e + e
−2jω −2jω
| G ( jω )|e− jφ A − jωt | G ( jω )|e jφ A jωt
= e + e
−2j 2j
| G ( jω )| j(ωt+φ)
= A e − e− j(ωt+φ)
2j
⇒ yss (t) = | G ( jω )| A sin(ωt + ∠G ( jω ))
Problem 9.1
Evaluate yss (t) assuming that e−td s is also present.
9.4 Conclusion
We have proved that the S.S. response of G (s) to an input r (t) = A sin ωt is
yss (t) = | G ( jω )| A sin(ωt + ∠G ( jω ))
So, the term
G ( jω ) = | G ( jω )|∠G ( jω ) = | G ( jω )|e j∠G( jω )
fully characterizes the S.S. response of the stable TF G (s) to a sine input.
So, the output sine from G (s) is r (t) amplified | G ( jω )| times and shifted
ahead by a phase of ∠G ( jω ).
9.5 Caution
Y (s)
While G ( jω ) can be written as in Equation (9.1), and though G (s) = R(s)
,

Y (s) Y ( jω )
G ( jω ) 6= =
R(s) s= jω
R( jω )

For, while G ( jω ) can be evaluated as done above, Y ( jω )/R( jω ) works out to

zero because
Aω Aω
R( jω ) = R(s)|s= jω = = =∞
( jω )2 + ω 2 −ω 2 + ω 2
9.6 Appendix
FR is developed in most books. My derivation is based on [14]. But, I have
taken care to avoid Ogata’s errors.
Note that, as per Section 9.1, FR exists only for stable systems. We develop
the machinery of Bode plots on the basis of FR. However, Bode plots are drawn
for unstable systems too. I have not seen that the standard textbooks explain
this anomaly. Indeed, they do not even mention it.

Lecture 10
Bode plots (Part 1)
10.1 Uses of frequency response in control systems

Frequency response G ( jω ) of a system may be sketched with | G ( jω )| against
ω and ∠G ( jω ) against ω as shown in Figure 10.1.
One value of a frequency response is that it allows us to compare the speed
of response of two systems. For example, from Figure 10.2, we can say that Sys-
tem 2 with transfer function G2 (s) is faster than System 1 that has the transfer
function G1 (s).
| G ( jω )|
20 log10 | G ( jω )|
linear scale
linear scale
[dB]
0 ω, [rad/s] 0 ω, [rad/s]
linear scale log scale
6 G ( jω ) 6 G ( jω )
[rad] [rad]
linear scale
linear scale
0 ω, [rad/s] ω, [rad/s]
linear scale log scale
Figure 10.1: Sample sketches of | G ( jω )| and ∠G ( jω ) versus ω.
This statement can be understood roughly as follows. To amplify a signal,

the system needs to work, needs to input energy. To amplify a fast sinusoid,
that is, a sinusoid that has a high frequency, the system needs to work fast, to
input energy fast. If the system can process a fast sinusoid, then it can process
any other fast signal whose fastest sinusoidal component is this fast sinusoid.
System 2 above is able to amplify with the same constant amplification factor
as System 1 more frequencies than System 1 is able to.
47
20 log10 | G1 ( jω )|
20 log10 | G2 ( jω )|
linear scale
linear scale
[dB]
[dB]
10 ω, [rad/s] 100 ω, [rad/s]
log scale log scale
Figure 10.2: Magnitude versus frequency plots with different bandwidths.
Note that this rough description does not try to explain why the system is
able to work fast, input energy fast, and process a fast sinousoid. Thus, for
example, this description does not try to explain why some systems are capable
of processing fast sinusoids, but not slow sinusoids. Such systems are called
high pass filters. To explain the why part, the physics of the system needs to be
examined.
The speed of response of a system is measured in the time domain through
such quantities as time constant, rise time, settling time. For example, in Lec-
ture 8, we see that the open loop system has a slower response than the closed
loop system. In the real world, all physical quantities evolve in the time do-
main, and we tend to think of speed of response of a system in the time do-
main. It may not seem very intuitive to think in the frequency domain. But,
the frequency domain does have conveniences that we exploit in this course.
For example, the frequency-domain quantity “bandwidth” is roughly the in-
verse of the time-domain quantity “time-constant” of a system. Thus, in order
to make a system faster, we need to increase its bandwidth.
Here is how the frequency response of a system can be determined in prac-
tice. If it is an electrical circuit, input a sine voltage of a fixed amplitude from
a function generator. Sweep the frequencies from 0 to some large value, say, 20
kHz or upto the frequency that the function generator supports. Take readings
of the amplitude of the output sinusoid. Also, take readings of the phase of
the output sinusoid with respect to the input sinusoid by observing both on
an oscilloscope. Overall, take about 10 – 15 readings of the amplitudes and
the corresponding phases. Plot the amplitude versus frequency, and the phase
versus frequency. This is the frequency response plot.
Spacing the readings logarithmically helps examine the behavior of the sys-
tem over a much wider range of frequencies than if the readings were spaced
linearly. Bode plots help display the frequency response logarithmically.
10.2 Convention in constructing Bode plots
Consider the general form of the transfer function of Equation (9.2). The fre-
quency response of the system whose transfer function G (s) is is given by the
sinusoidal transfer function

n n2 2 2
∏i=1 0 ( jω + zi ) ∏k=

0 ( jω ) ± 2ζ k ωnk jω + ωnk
G ( jω ) = a d d
e−td jω
∏i=1 0 ( jω + pi ) ∏k=
2 2 2
0 (( jω ) ± 2ξ k ωdk jω + ωdk )
The magnitude of G ( jω ) is
q
n 2
+ zi ∏nk=
p
∏i=1 0 ω2 2
(ωnk 2 − ω 2 ) + (2ζ k ωnk ω )2
2
0
| G ( jω )| = a q
d p d2 2
∏i=1 0 ω 2 + pi 2 ∏k= 0 (ωdk 2 − ω 2 ) + (2ξ k ωdk ω )2
The phase of G ( jω ) is
n1 n2 .
∑ ∑ ωnk 2 − ω 2 ± j2ζ k ωnk ω − td ω −

G ( jω ) = jω + zi +
i =0 k =0
d1 d2 .
∑ ∑ ωdk 2 − ω 2 ± j2ξ k ωdk ω

jω + pi −
i =0 k =0
While | G ( jω )| is straightforward to evaluate, ∠G ( jω ) needs care. Here is

the convention that control systems theory follows in evaluating ∠G ( jω ):
1. ∠ (ωk + jω ) can be in the interval [0, 2π ] rad. This restriction does not apply
to the exponential term e− jωtd ; here the angle is −ωtd in radians.
2. Angles of complex numbers are measured in the counter clockwise sense.
Example 10.1
Determine ∠G ( jω ) given that
(s + z1 )(−s − z2 )e−td s
G (s) =
(s + p1 )(s − p2 )(−s + p2 )
Note that all the coefficients in the transfer function are positive1 .
∠G ( jω ) = ∠ (z1 + jω ) + ∠ (−z2 − jω ) + (−td ω )−

− ∠ ( p1 + jω ) − ∠ (− p2 + jω ) − ∠ ( p2 − jω )
Let us calculate this angle for some fixed value ω = ω0 .
1 We talk of positiveness or negativeness of only real numbers, and not of complex numbers.

Angle Location of complex number Value of angle
π
6 (z1 + jω0 ) 4
π
6 (−z2 − jω0 ) π+
6
π
6 ( p1 + jω0 )
3
π
6 (− p2 + jω0 ) π−
4
π
6 ( p3 − jω0 ) 2π −
4
Then,
π π π π π
∠G ( jω0 ) = + π+ − ( t d ω0 ) − − π − − 2π − rad
4 6 3 4 4
The method demonstrated in this example to determine the angle of a

complex number can prove convenient in determining the phase of sinu-
soidal functions. For example, we can find the phase of G ( jω ) =
. transfer
jω
k
ω0 ωn + 1 by noting that as ω goes from 0 to ∞, the complex number
1+ j ωωn goes
from 1 + j0 to 1 + j∞, and consequently, the angle of this com-
plex number goes from 0 to 90◦ . Therefore, the plot of ∠G ( jω ) versus ω lies
between 0◦ and −90◦ .
10.3 Types of Bode plots

We use the following tools in our course:
• Bode plot (BP)
• Bode magnitude plot (BMP)
• Bode phase plot (BPP)
• Asymptotic Bode plot (ABP)

• Asymptotic Bode magnitude plot (ABMP)
• Asymptotic Bode phase plot (ABPP)
The ABP is a straight line approximation to BP. The (A)BP has two compo-
nents: (A)BMP and (A)BPP.
10.4 Appendix: Angles in MATLAB

In MATLAB, to determine the angle of a complex number x + jy, we have
several functions. We discuss here the suitability of these functions for the
purpose of drawing Bode plots. Suppose we wish to determine the angle of
the complex number -10-j10.
atan x = -10, y = -10, atan(x+i*y) will not work. 270 -

atan(abs(y/x))*180/pi will work. That is, we have to figure out the
quadrant in which x + jy lies2 . In this case, x + jy lies in the third quadrant.
atan2 Takes into account the quadrant. However, the solution, similar to
MATHEMATICA’s arctan, is in the range [−π, +π ]. So, for example,
atan2(-10,-10)*180/pi returns −135, whereas for the purposes of plotting
BPPs, we would like to obtain the answer as +225.
angle Takes into account the quadrant in which the complex number lies. For
example, angle(-10-j*10)*180/pi gives −135. That is, angle returns the
angle in the range [−π, +π ].
bode This function does not have the drawback of atan2 or

angle. For example, the commands sys = tf([10,10,0,0],1);
[mag,phase]=bode(sys,1) will return phase = 225.
10.5 Appendix: Angles in GNU Octave

GNU Octave’s atan, atan2, angle seem to be behaving the same way as
their counterparts in MATLAB. The bode function in these two software be-
have differently from each other. While MATLAB seems to have implemented
its bode function to calculate angles as explained in Section 10.2, GNU Octave’s
bode seems to be following a different convention to calculate angles. In this
connection, two observations about GNU Octave version 3.2.4 are
1. The commands sys = tf([10,10,0,0],1); [mag,phase]=bode(sys,1)

returns an error message that the number of poles is less than the number of
zeros. That is, GNU Octave’s bode seems to work only with proper transfer
functions.
2. sys = tf(1,[10,10,0,0]); [mag,phase]=bode(sys,1) returns phase =

135. This command returns phase = -225 in MATLAB, which is in keep-
ing with the convention of Section 10.2.
2 On the other hand, in MATHEMATICA, ArcTan(x,y) will take into account the quadrant in
which x + jy lies.

My guess is that when x + jy is in the first and second quadrants, GNU Oc-
tave 3.2.4’s bode calculates its angle in keeping with the convention of Sec-
tion 10.2, while if the complex number is in the third and the fourth quad-
rants, a different convention is used.
10.6 Appendix: Examples of departure of MATLAB

from the convention
Problem 10.1
If you were to design a software that would draw the Bode plots as per
the convention of Section 10.2, sketch how the phase plot in response to the
following commands would look:
sys=tf([1],conv([1 1],[1 1 1])); bode(sys)

sys=tf([1],conv([1 1],[1 0 1])); bode(sys)
Figures 10.3 and 10.4 show the result generated by the first line of commands
in GNU Octave 3.2.4 and MATLAB respectively. Figures 10.5 and 10.6 show
the result of the second line of commands generated by GNU Octave 3.2.4 and
MATLAB respectively.
|[Y/U](jw)|, u=u1, y=y1
-20
-40
Gain in dB
-60
-80
-100
-120
10-1 100 101 102

Frequency in rad/sec
phase([Y/U](jw)), u=u1, y=y1

0
-50
-100
Phase in deg
-150
-200
-250
10-1 100 101 102

Figure 10.3: Result of sys=tf([1],conv([1 1],[1 1 1])); bode(sys) from

GNU Octave version 3.2.4.

Bode Diagram
0
Magnitude (dB)
−50
−100
−150
0
−90
Phase (deg)
−180
−270
−2 −1 0 1 2
10 10 10 10 10
Frequency (rad/sec)

MATLAB.
|[Y/U](jw)|, u=u1, y=y1
50
0
Gain in dB
-50
-100
10-1 100 101 102

phase([Y/U](jw)), u=u1, y=y1
140
120
100
80
Phase in deg
60
40
20
-20
-40
10-1 100 101 102


GNU Octave version 3.2.4.

Bode Diagram
200
150
100
Magnitude (dB)
50
−50
−100
−150
−200
−180
−270
Phase (deg)
−360
−450
−2 −1 0 1 2
10 10 10 10 10
Frequency (rad/sec)

MATLAB.

Lecture 11
Bode plots (Part 2)
11.1 First method for sketching an ABMP

k
As an example, let us sketch the BP and ABP of G (s) = s + ω0 .
Step 1 First convert G (s) into what we shall call in this course the “Bode form”:
k/ω0
G (s) = s
ω0 + 1
This form is convenient for sketching BPs and ABPs.
Step 2 Write the sinusoidal TF corresponding to G (s).

k/ω0 k/ω0 ω
G ( jω ) = jω0
; | G ( jω )| = r 2 ; ∠G ( jω ) = − 1+j
ω0
+1
ω0 1 + ωω0
Step 3 To construct the BP, populate Table 11.1.

In the table, dB-gain is as follows:
s
2
k ω
dB-gain = 20 log10 | G ( jω )| = 20 log10 + −20 log10 +1
ω0 ω0
| {z } | {z }
C1 C2
Construct the BP using the data populated in Table 11.1.

Table 11.1: Table to populate to build the Bode plot of G (s) = k (s + ω0 ) .
ω0 ω0 ω0
ω, [rad/s] 100 10 2 ω0 2ω0 10ω0 100ω0
dB-gain, [dB]
∠G ( jω ), [rad]
55
20 log10 |G(jω)|
linear scale
[dB]
0 ω, [rad/s], if log scale
³ ´
ω
log10 ω0 , [decades], if linear scale
log10 ω, [decades], if linear scale

[rad] or degrees
linear scale
6 G(jω)
ω, [rad/s], if log scale

³ ´
ω
log10 ω0 , [decades], if linear scale
log10 ω, [decades], if linear scale
Figure 11.1: Setting up the axes on the graph paper on which we sketch the
Bode plot.
Step 4 To construct the ABMP, note that taking the logarithm of a product re-
sults in a sum, and that a sum is easier to sketch than a product. Thus, we
can sketch the ABMP of G ( jω ) as the sum of the ABMP corresponding to C1
with that corresponding to C2.
Let us consider C2. We note the following about C2:
s (
2 ω
ω 0, ω0 1 (i.e., when ω / ω0 /10)
−20 log10 +1 =
ω0 −20 log10 ωω0 , ωω0 1 (i.e., when ω ' 10ω0 )
Step 5 Set up the axes as shown in Figure 11.1.

We can use either a linear-linear graph paper or a semilog graph paper. A
2-cycle semilog graph paper is shown in Figure 11.2 and a 5-cycle paper is
provided in a larger size at the end of this book.
Step 6 Sketch the straight line approximations corresponding to C1 and to
Step 4’s approximation of C2 as shown in Figure 11.3.
Here is a brief explanation for how section C2-2 is constructed in Figure 11.3.
C2-2 is the plot of −20 log10 ω/ω0 versus log10 ω/ω0 . Sketching this sec-
tion is equivalent to sketching y = −20x versus x for x ≥ 0 as shown in

Figure 11.2: A 2-cycle semilog grid. The ordinate is graduated linearly. The
abscissa is graduated logarithmically meaning that within each cycle on the
abscicca from the left, the marks corresponding to 1, 2, 3, . . . , 10 are respectively
at log10 1 = 0, log10 2 = 0.30103, log10 3 = 0.47712, . . . , 1 units.
C1
20 log10 |G(jω)|, [dB]
20
C2-1
ω
0 − 10 ω0 −10ω0
−20
−40 −20 dB/dec

C2-2
Figure 11.3: A sketch of the straight line approximations to C1 and C2.

y = −20x
0 1 2 3 4 x
−20
−40
−60
Figure 11.4: Sketching section C2-2 is equivalent to sketching y = −20x versus

x for x ≥ 0.
ABMP C1
20 log10 | G ( jω )|, [dB]
of
k
s+
20 ω0
C2-1
0 − 10
ω
ω0 −10ω0
−20
−40 −20 dB/dec

C2-2

Figure 11.5: The final asymptotic Bode magnitude plot of k (s + ω0 )
Figure 11.4. On a graph of 20 log10 | G ( jω )| versus log10 ω/ω0 , the 0 on

the abscissa is at ω = ω0 . Therefore, beginning at ω = ω0 , the ABMP of
−20 log10 ω/ω0 is a straight line at a slope of −20 dB/dec.

Step 7 Add C1 and C2 point by point to obtain the ABMP of k (s + ω0 ) as
shown in Figure 11.5.
The maximum difference between the BMP and the ABMP is 3 dB and oc-
curs at the corner frequency as shown in Figure 11.6.
Step 8 Draw the BPP using the data filled into the table of Step 3. The BPP
must be presented below the BP with the grids aligned vertically as shown
in Figure 11.6.
Step 9 Draw a straight line approximation to the BPP. There can be multiple
choices for this straight line approximation. See Figure 11.6 for the most
commonly used choice.

Bode Diagram
0
−5
−10 3 dB
Magnitude (dB)
−15
−20
−20 dB/dec
−25
−30
−35
−40
0
o −45
5.7
Phase (deg)
deg/dec
−45
−90
−2 −1 0 1 2
10 10 10 10 10
Frequency (rad/sec)

Figure 11.6: Bode plot and asymptotic bode plot of G (s) = 1 (s + 1) . The
straight line plot in the thick solid line is the asymptotic plot, while the smooth
line plot in the thin solid line is the Bode plot. The maximum difference be-
tween these plots is at the corner frequencies. The maximum error between
the magnitude plots is 3 dB, while that between the phase plots is 5.7◦ .
Examples of straight line approximations to BPPs are in [16] and [17].
11.2 Second method for sketching an ABMP

The procedure shown above constructs ABMPs as sum of elemental ABMPs.
In practice, however, a much simpler method exists to quickly sketch ABMPs,
and works as follows.
Step 1 The shape of the ABMP is visualized first in terms of the slopes of its
various sections, and the corner frequencies. This step fixes the horizontal
location of the ABMP.
Step 2 The vertical position of the ABMP can be fixed by working out the value
of the dB-gain at any one frequency.

Thus, to sketch the ABMP of k (s + ω0 ) , we note that the ABMP of this TF
has the shape 0 dB/dec, −20 dB/dec. The corner frequency is at ω = ω0 . One

point on this ABMP is 20 log10 k/ω0 at ω ω0 , say ω = ω0 /10. This point

fixes the ABMP in the vertical direction.
As another example, to sketch the ABMP of k s(s + ω0 ) , we note that the
ABMP of this TF has the shape −20 dB/dec, −40 dB/dec. The corner frequency
is at ω = ω0 . One point on this ABMP is 20 log10 10k/ω0 2 at ω ω0 , say
ω = ω0 /10. This point fixes the ABMP in the vertical direction.

Lecture 12
Bode plots (Part 3)
12.1 Comparison of the two methods for construct-

ing ABMPs
Working out a few problems with the first method helps develop a comfort
with the second method.
While the first method is simplified by using the Bode form of the TF, the
second method does not need this form.
In practice, whenever there is any confusion in using the second method,
we can employ the first method.
While the elemental ABMPs are constructed through an analytical approx-
imation and do not need the BMPs to be constructed first, elemental ABPPs
are not as easy to construct analytically. Therefore, the elemental BPPs are con-
structed first, and only then their approximations are constructed as ABPPs.
We memorize the elemental ABPPs and sum them up when a composite ABPP
is needed.
While ABMPs can be constructed easily using the second method, ABPPs
are more easy to construct by summing the elemental ABPPs.
Elemental BPs are those corresponding to the various elemental TFs in the
composite TF of (9.2).
12.2 Selecting an ω to vertically fix an ABMP in the

second method
To fix the vertical location of the ABMP, working out the dB-gain in the low-
frequency section of the ABMP is less error-prone than working out the dB-
gain near one of the corner frequencies.
.p to fix the ABMP of k (s + ω0 ) , we use the expression for
For example,
magnitude k ω 2 + ω0 2 . If we select ω = ω0 as the frequency at which to
.√
work out the magnitude, then we obtain the point ω0 , 20 log10 k 2 ω0 ,
which lies on the BMP but not on the ABMP. Indeed, the ABMP at this
ω = ω0 lies 3 dB above this point. We could instead use the point
61
.√
ω0 /10 , 20 log10 k 1.01ω0 , which is only 0.04 dB below the point on

the ABMP ω0 /10, 20 log10 (k /ω0 ) .
Indeed, to fix the ABMP, it is convenient to use not just points from the low-
frequency section, but any points that are at least one decade away from their
closest corner frequency.
12.3 Examples of construction of ABPs

Consider the TF k (s (s + ω0 )) .
Consider the TF k s2 (s + ω0 ) .

Consider the TF k ((s + 10)(s + 1000)) .

Consider the TF k (s+ ω0 )n .
Consider the TF ke−s (s(s + 10)(s + 1000)) .
Most of the time of the lecture was spent on this section. I will fill this
section soon.

Lecture 13
Bode plots (Part 4)
13.1 Filter-related terminology used in BPs

Review of ideal low pass, band pass, high pass filters.
Review of concepts of bandwidth and cut off frequency for ideal filters.
That we are talking about frequency response of control systems means that
we can treat control systems as filters.
In practical filters, as it is not possible to have sharp demarcations of pass-
band and stopband, the passband is defined as “the frequency range where the
filter’s amplitude response is greater than some arbitrarily √ chosen minimum
value. Quite often, this minimum value is chosen as 1/ 2 of the maximum
amplitude response” [18, pages 178-179].
Certain frequency responses (e.g., those whose BMP has a non-zero first
slope, or those whose BMP has a non-zero last slope) are not even non-ideal
versions of the ideal filters. So, for these, we cannot define bandwidth and
cut-off frequency.
ωn 2
For example, for the TF s2 +2ζω 2 , the cutoff frequency is where the BMP
√ n s + ωn
falls to 1/ 2 of its low-frequency value, which is equal to 1.
13.2 Examples of construction of ABPPs
Example 13.1
Construct the Bode phase plots of the following transfer functions as sums
1−sτ1
of elemental phase plots: G1 (s) = 11+ sτ1 1+sτ1
+sτ2 , G2 ( s ) = 1+sτ2 , G3 ( s ) = 1−sτ2 , G4 (s ) =
1−sτ1
1−sτ2 .
13.3 Construction of polar plots
Example 13.2
63
Construct the polar plots of the sinusoidal version of the transfer functions
of Example 1.
Example 13.3
Construct the polar plot of the sinusoidal version of the transfer function
( s − 1) s2 .

13.4 Appendix: A review of the convention to

sketch Bode phase plots

Lecture 14
Bode plots (Part 5)
14.1 Minimum phase transfer functions

A transfer function is minimum phase if it has no open right half plane (RHP)
zeros, irrespective of whether it has RHP poles[19, page 77]. Why a transfer
function with no RHP zeros was decided to be called minimum-phase is ex-
plained by most books as explained in Section 14.1.1.
Some books, such as [20, pages 332-333], do not include transfer functions
with poles in the open right half s-plane (open RHP) into the discussion of
minimum-phase transfer functions, while other books, such as [19, page 77],
include these transfer functions.
These lecture notes have chosen not to include transfer functions with RHP
poles into the discussion of minimum-phase transfer functions.
14.1.1 Why the name “minimum-phase”: an explanation

based on the width of the interval of phases
In Example 1, among the transfer functions with the same magnitude plot and
with left half s-plane (LHP) poles, the phase plot of G1 (s) is in the narrowest
interval of phases. This observation is used by the following explanation.
Explanation 1 Of all the transfer functions that have no open RHP poles and that
have the same Bode magnitude plot, the one that has the phase plot spread over the
narrowest interval of phases is said to be minimum-phase transfer function.
Explanation 1 is provided in .........

By Explanation 1, of the TFs in Example 1 G1 (s) is minimum-phase. By
extension, − G1 (s) is also minimum-phase, while G2 (s) and G1 (s)e−td s are non-
minimum phase TFs.
Consider, for example, the transfer functions (s − 1) s2 and (s + 1) s2 .

The phase plot of the former lies in the interval [0◦ , −90◦ ], while the phase plot
of the latter lies in the interval [−180◦ , −90◦ ]. Thus, the phase plots of both the
transfer functions are equally narrow. Therefore, the former transfer function
seems to be a counter example to Explanation 1.
A more plausible explanation is provided by [20, pages 332-333] and is pre-
sented in Section 14.1.2.
65
14.1.2 Why the name “minimum-phase”: an explanation

based on the increase in phase lag
Consider the transfer function L(s) = (s − 1) s2 . L(s) can be written as L(s) =

Lm (s) A(s), where, Lm (s) = (s + 1) s2 and A(s) = (s − 1) (s + 1) .

The sinusoidal version of L(s) is L( jω ) = (−1 + jω ) ( jω )2 , that of Lm (s) is

Lm ( jω ) = (1 + jω ) ( jω )2 , and that of A(s) is A( jω ) = (−1 + jω ) (1 + jω ) .

The phase plot of Lm ( jω ) goes from −180◦ at ω = 0 to −90◦ at ω = ∞.

In other words, the phase lag of Lm ( jω ) at ω = 0 is +180◦ , and that at ω = ∞
is +90◦ . That is, the increase in phase lag of Lm ( jω ) from ω = 0 to ω = ∞ is
90◦ − 180◦ = −90◦ .
The phase plot of A( jω ) goes from 180◦ at ω = 0 to 0◦ at ω = ∞. In
other words, the phase lag of A( jω ) at ω = 0 is −180◦ , and that at ω = ∞
is 0◦ . Alternatively, the phase lead of A( jω ) at ω = 0 is +180◦ , and that at
ω = ∞ is 0◦ . The increase in phase lag of A( jω ) from ω = 0 to ω = ∞ is
0◦ − (−180◦ ) = +180◦ .
This discussion means that A( jω ) adds an increase in phase lag of +180◦
to the increase in phase lag of Lm ( jω ) over the interval [ω = 0, ω = ∞]. That
is, the increase in phase lag of L( jω ) over the interval [ω = 0, ω = ∞] is 180◦
greater than the increase in the phase lag of Lm ( jω ) over the same interval.
Through a similar reasoning, it can be seen that, of all the transfer functions
that have the same magnitude plot as Lm (s), Lm (s) has the smallest increase
in phase lag over the interval [ω = 0, ω = ∞]. Thus, Lm (s) can be called a
minimum phase lag transfer function. For simplicity, Lm (s) is called a minimum-
phase transfer function, instead.
Indeed, [21, page 457] says, “Minimum phase function must be called min-
imum phase lag function, but still, in most books it is inconsistently called
minimum phase function.”
Problem 1 seeks to generalize the above explanation.
Problem 14.1
Consider a proper transfer function
L(s) = D (s)(s − a1 )(s − a2 ) . . . (s − an ),
where, D (s) has no open RHP zeros or poles, and the real parts of the ai ’s are
positive. That is, the ai ’s are the open RHP zeros of L(s).
Let L(s) be written in the form Lm (s) A(s), where,
Lm (s) = D (s)(s + a1 )(s + a2 ) . . . (s + an )
and
(s − a1 )(s − a2 ) . . . (s − an )
A(s) =
(s + a1 )(s + a2 ) . . . (s + an )
is the transfer function of a so-called all pass filter.
Complete this discussion on the lines of the discussion that preceded this
example in Section 14.1.2 to conclude that Lm (s) is a minimum phase lag trans-
fer function.
Problem 14.2

Calculate the increase in phase lag ∆L of L( jω ) = (−1 + jω ) ( jω )2 over

the interval [ω = 0, ω = ∞] without introducing A( jω ). Calculate the increase

in phase lag ∆Lm of Lm ( jω ) = (1 + jω ) ( jω )2 over the same interval. By what

value is ∆L greater than ∆Lm ? Is this value the same as the value calculated
earlier in this section? If not, why not? If yes, is it expected to be the same?
14.2 Why practical rational TFs are proper

If they were not, then the magnitude of their frequency response would go to
infinity as ω → ∞. Real systems cannot provide such arbitrarily high gains;
their BMPs level off or drop after a certain frequency, meaning their TFs are
proper.
14.3 Observation about the slopes of ABMPs due to

zeros and poles
Several observations can be made from the constructions performed thus far
of ABMPs
1. A zero of the form s + z of multiplicity m introduces a slope of 20m dB/dec

into the ABMP.
2. A pole of the form s + p of multiplicity n introduces a slope of −20n dB/dec
into the ABMP.
3. A dead time element does not affect the ABMP.
14.4 Appendix: A review of the concept of “mini-

mum phase”
There are subtle and not so subtle differences in how the various books define
the concept of minimum phase.
1. There are differences in whether transfer functions with RHP poles are in-
cluded in the class of minimum phase transfer functions. For example, [19,
page 77] includes functions with RHP poles into this class, while [20, page
332 – 333] excludes functions with RHP poles from this class.
2. “A minimum-phase system (all zeros in the LHP) with a given magnitude
curve will produce the smallest net change in the associated phase . . . com-
pared with what the nonminimum-phase system will produce” [22, page
265].


Lecture 15
Bode plots (Part 6)
15.1 BP and ABP of the second order TF

We consider the second order TF ωn 2 s2 + 2ζωn s + ωn 2 for 0 < ζ < 1.

The ωn 2 in the numerator helps normalize the magnitude of this TF at low

frequencies to 1. ζ is known as damping ratio.
The magnitude of the sinusoidal version of this TF is
ωn 2 1
| G ( jω )| = q = r 2 2 (15.1)
2
(ωn 2 − ω 2 ) + (2ζωn ω )2

ω2
1− ωn 2
+ 2ζ ωωn
and the phase is

ω2

. ω
∠G ( jω ) = − ωn 2 − ω 2 + j2ζωn ω = − 1− + j2ζ
ωn 2 ωn
We see that, as r = ωωn goes from 0 to ∞, the complex number (1 − r2 ) + j2ζr
moves from the positive real axis to the first quadrant, to the positive imaginary
axis, to the second quadrant, to the negative real axis. So, the phase of this
number goes from 0 to 180◦ . So, the phase of our 2nd order TF goes from 0◦ to
−180◦ . The phase goes from 0◦ to −180◦ as ω goes from 0 to ∞.
To obtain a straight line approximation to the BMP, we note that

ω
ω0 1 (i.e., when ω / ω0 /10)
0,
−20 log10 | G ( jω )| = 2
ω
−20 log
10 ω0 , ωω0 1 (i.e., when ω ' 10ω0 )
This means that the ABMP has the slopes 0 dB/dec, −40 dB/dec, and that the
corner frequency is at ω = ωn .
While the ABMP of the second order TF is convenient, the difference be-
tween the BMP and the ABMP can be significant for values of ζ much smaller
than 1 as Figure 15.1 shows.
Problem 15.1
Write a MATLAB code to plot the BMP of the second order TF for various
values of ζ, and to mark the locus of the maxima of these BMPs.
69
20
ζ=0
10 ζ=0.15713
ζ=0.31427
ζ=0.4714
0 ζ=0.62854
dB gain of 2nd order TF
ζ=0.78567
ζ=0.94281
ζ=1.0999
−10 ζ=1.2571
ζ=1.4142
−20
−30
−40
−1 0 1
10 10 10
r = ω/ωn
Figure 15.1: Bode magnitude plots of the second order transfer func-
tion ωn 2 s2 + 2ζωn s + ωn 2 . This figure is generated using the m-file

order2tf.m.

15.2 Notes on the ABMP of second order TF

The following points are of interest about | G ( jω )| of (15.1).
p
1. The maximum of | G ( jω )| occurs at ω = ωd := ωn 1 − 2ζ 2 .
2. dB-gain at ω = ωd is 20 log10 √1 .
2ζ 1− ζ 2
√ √
3. At ζ = 1/ 2, dB-gain equals zero at ω = ωd . For ζ < 1/ 2, dB-gain at
ωd is greater
√ than zero. That is, a hump begins to appear in the BMP for
ζ < 1/ 2.
√ √
1/ 2, | G ( jωn )| = 1/(2ζ ) = 1/ 2.√Therefore, dB-gain at ω = ωn for
4. At ζ = √
ζ = 1/ 2 is −3 dB. Therefore, for ζ = 1/ 2, ω = ωn is the 3-dB frequency.
15.3 Complete BP of second order TF

The complete BP of the second order
√ TF is shown in Figure 15.2 for values of
the damping ratio ζ going from 2 to nearly 0 and is built using the m-file
order2bp.m.
Problem 15.2
Write a GNU Octave or MATLAB code to plot the BP of the second order
TF for various values of ζ.
Problem 15.3
Run the m-file order2bp.m in MATLAB and modify it suitably if necessary
to plot a figure that reproduces the salient information provided by Figure 15.2.
15.4 Appendix: MATLAB codes

%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
% order2tf.m: m-file to evaluate the value of the dB-gain of
% the TF
% wn^2
% --------------------
% s^2 + 2*zeta*wn + wn^2
%
% at various frequencies and for various values of zeta.
%
% This task can be implemented using a FOR loop.
% There may be other ways too. This code works nicely in
% GNU Octave version 3.2.4 and in MATLAB.
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
clear all % Clears workspace of the values of all variables

40
20
dB-gain 0
−20
−40
−60
−80
−100
10−2 10−1 100 101 102
0
−20
−40
−60
degrees
−80
−100
−120
−140
−160
−180
10−2 10−1 100 101 102
ω, rad/s
Figure 15.2: √The BP of the second order TF for values of the damping ratio ζ
going from 2 to close to 0. The smaller the value of ζ, the more pronounced
the hump in the BMP, and the more abrupt the transition from 0◦ to −180◦ .
% that have been evaluated.

close all % Closes all figure windows.
% Specify values of the damping ratio for which Bode plots

% will be drawn:
nzeta = 10;
zeta = linspace(sqrt(2),0,nzeta);
% Specify logarithmically-spaced frequencies at which dB-gain

% & phase will be evaluated:
nr = 150;
r = logspace(-3,+1,nr)’; % r = w/wn
for i = 1:nzeta
for j = 1:nr
dBgain(j,i) = -10*log10((1-r(j)^2)^2 + (2*zeta(i)*r(j))^2);
% What this is meant to generate is a matix of dB gains
% where each column corresponds to a given value of zeta and
% each row corresponds to a given value of r.
end
end

% Plot the Bode diagram for the first value of zeta:

a = [’\zeta=’,num2str(zeta(1))]
semilogx(r,dBgain(:,1)), grid, gtext(a);
axis([0.1,10,-40,+20]);
xlabel(’r = \omega/\omega_n’), ylabel(’dB gain of 2nd order TF’);
% Once the first diagram has been plotted, plot all

% subsequent diagrams on the same figure:
hold
for i = 2:nzeta
a = [’\zeta=’,num2str(zeta(i))]
semilogx(r,dBgain(:,i)); gtext(a);
end
% Next, show on the same plot, the locus of the peaks of each
% Bode magnitude plot:
zeta1 = linspace(sqrt(2),0,5*nzeta);
r = sqrt(1-2*zeta1.^2);
dBmax = -20*log10(2.*zeta1.*sqrt(1-zeta1.^2));
semilogx(r,dBmax,’-.r’)
print -depsc order2tf.eps

% -dbitmap, -depsc, -deps are available that are relevant
% to us.

%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
% order2bp: m-file to plot the complete Bode plot of the TF
%
% wn^2
% --------------------
% s^2 + 2*zeta*wn + wn^2
%
% for various values of zeta.
%
% This code works nicely in GNU Octave version 3.2.4, and
% in MATLAB.
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
clear all % Clears workspace of the values of all variables

% that have been evaluated.
close all % Closes all figure windows.
% Specify values of the damping ratio for which Bode plots

% will be drawn:

nzeta = 10;
zeta = linspace(sqrt(2),0.001,nzeta)
wn = 1;
w = logspace(log10(wn/100),log10(100*wn),500);
for i = 1:nzeta
[mag(i,:),ph(i,:),w] = bode(tf(wn^2,[1,2*zeta(:,i)*wn,wn^2]),w);
end
subplot(2,1,1), semilogx(w,20*log10(mag(:,:)));grid;
ylabel(’dB-gain’);
subplot(2,1,2), semilogx(w,ph(:,:));grid,
axis([1/100,100,-180,0]);
ylabel(’degrees’); xlabel(’\omega, rad/s’);
print -depsc order2bp.eps

Part III
Stability Theory
75
Lecture 16
Stability theory (Part 1)
16.1 BIBO stability of LTI systems**

Definition 1 A signal r (t) is bounded if it is bounded from above and below by a
non-negative finite number M, meaning − M ≤ r (t) ≤ M, 0 < M < ∞, for all
t ∈ [0, ∞).
As signals could also be of bounded energy and bounded power, whereas
Definition 1 implies only bounds on the magnitude of the signal, to avoid con-
fusion, we use the term bounded in magnitude (BIM) for a bounded signal.
Definition 2 An LTI system is said to be bounded-input bounded-output (BIBO) sta-
ble if and only if every bounded-in-magnitude (BIM) input r (t) results in a BIM out-
put y(t).
Note that, for a time-domain scalar function r (t), the magnitude is simply
the absolute value of r (t), denoted |r (t)| and equal to |r (t)| = sgn(r (t))r (t).
Here, sgn(·) is the signum function that is defined in Equation (16.2).
Here, we develop a necessary and sufficient condition for the BIBO stability
of a causal LTI system that will helps us evaluate the BIBO stability of a given
TF G (s).
From a basic course on signals and systems, we know that the response y(t)
of a system to an arbitrary input r (t) (for t ≥ 0) can be expressed in terms of its
impulse response g(t) as
Z ∞
y(t) = r (τ ) g(t − τ )dτ
0
This is summarized in the following figure:
causal R∞ causal R∞
δ(t) g(t) r (t)=
0 r (τ )δ(t−τ )dτ y(t)=
0 r (τ ) g(t−τ )dτ
−−−→ LTI −−−→ =⇒ −−−−−−−−−−−−−−
→ LTI −−−−−−−−−−−−−−→
plant plant
As δ(t − τ ) 6= 0 only at t − τ = 0, we see that the impulse response g(t − τ )

is non-zero only beginning t − τ ≥ 01 , that is only for τ ≤ t. Therefore, the
1 Here, we are using the assumption of causality of the system. Real-world systems are causal.
77
R∞
integral 0 r (τ ) g(t − τ )dτ does not need to be evaluated for all τ ≥ 0, but
only for 0 ≤ τ ≤ t. Therefore,
Z ∞ Z t
r (τ ) g(t − τ )dτ = r (τ ) g(t − τ )dτ
0 0
We shall use this result in order to develop the required condition.
Theorem 1 In a causal LTI system, forRa BIM input r (t), the corresponding response
∞
y(t) of the system is BIM if and only if 0 | g(τ )| dτ < ∞.
Proof: Given that |r (t)| ≤ M < ∞, we have

Z t Z t Z t

|y(t)| = r (τ ) g(t − τ )dτ ≤
|r (τ ) g(t − τ )| dτ = |r (τ )| | g(t − τ )| dτ
0 0 0
Therefore, Z t Z t
|y(t)| ≤ M | g(t − τ )| dτ = M | g(θ )| dθ
0 0
Thus, for y(t) to be bounded for a bounded r (t), for all t ∈ [0, ∞), it is
Rt
sufficient that 0 | g(τ )| dτ be bounded for all t ∈ [0, ∞). That is,
R∞
For all t ∈ [0, ∞), for a BIM r (t), y(t) is BIM if 0 | g(τ )| dτ < ∞.
R ∞ Next, to show that for y(t) to be BIM given r (t) is BIM it is necessary that
0 | g ( τ )| dτ < ∞, we
R∞
only need to show an example where y(t) is not BIM for
a BIM r (t) because 0 | g(τ )| dτ 6< ∞.
Consider, for example, the bounded input
r (τ ) = sgn ( g(t − τ ))
where the signum function sgn is defined as follows:


+1, x > 0

sgn ( x ) = 0, x=0 (16.1)

−1, x < 0

Then,
Z t Z t Z t
y(t) = r (τ ) g(t − τ )dτ = | g(t − τ )| dτ = | g(θ )| dθ
0 0 0
Rt
Thus, in this case, we see that if 0 | g(τ )| dτ 6< ∞, then y(t) 6< ∞. Thus, we
have a situation where, even though the input to the system is BIM, the output
is not. Thus, for y(t) to be BIM for a BIM r (t), for all t ∈ [0, ∞), it is necessary
Rt
that 0 | g(τ )| dτ be bounded for all t ∈ [0, ∞). That is,
R∞
For all t ∈ [0, ∞), for a BIM r (t), y(t) is BIM only if 0 | g(τ )| dτ < ∞.

16.2 Discussion of the theorem and its proof**

The proof of Theorem 1 is not entirely convincing. In particular, the proof of
the statement
R∞
For all t ∈ [0, ∞), for a BIM r (t), y(t) is BIM only if 0 | g(τ )| dτ < ∞.
is not convincing. Put another way, this statement says
R∞
For all t ∈ [0, ∞), for a BIM r (t), if 0 | g(τ )| dτ 6< ∞, then y(t) is not BIM.
We may claim that we have notR really proved this statement. We may claim
∞
that we have only proved that “if 0 | g(τ )| dτ 6< ∞, then y(t) is not BIM” only
R∞
for this particular r (t). For a different r (t), maybe even if 0 | g(τ )| dτ 6< ∞,
y(t) is BIM.
A careful survey of some literature shows that Theorem 1 is stronger than
what the literature claims. Theorem 2 summarizes what the literature says.
R∞
Theorem 2 A causal LTI system is BIBO stable if and only if 0 | g(τ )| dτ < ∞,
that is, its impulse response is absolutely integrable.
Proof: Given that |r (t)| ≤ M < ∞, we have
Z t Z t Z t

|y(t)| = r (τ ) g(t − τ )dτ ≤ |r (τ ) g(t − τ )| dτ = |r (τ )| | g(t − τ )| dτ
0 0 0
Therefore, Z t Z t
|y(t)| ≤ M | g(t − τ )| dτ = M | g(θ )| dθ
0 0
Thus, for y(t) to be bounded for a bounded r (t), for all t ∈ [0, ∞), it is
Rt
sufficient that 0 | g(τ )| dτ be bounded for all t ∈ [0, ∞). That is,
R∞
For all t ∈ [0, ∞), for a BIM r (t), y(t) is BIM if 0 | g(τ )| dτ < ∞.
R∞
Next, to show that if 0 | g(τ )| dτ 6< ∞, then the sytem is not BIBO stable,
we need to show that exist some BIM signals for which the output is not BIM.
Consider, for example, the bounded input
r (τ ) = sgn ( g(t − τ ))
where the signum function sgn is defined as follows:

+1, x > 0

sgn ( x ) = 0, x=0 (16.2)

−1, x < 0

Then,
Z t Z t Z t
y(t) = r (τ ) g(t − τ )dτ = | g(t − τ )| dτ = | g(θ )| dθ
0 0 0
Rt
Thus, in this case, we see that if 0 | g(τ )| dτ 6< ∞, then y(t) 6< ∞. Thus, we
have a situation where, even though the input to the system is BIM, the output
Rt
is not. Thus, we have shown that when 0 | g(τ )| dτ 6< ∞, there may be BIM
inputs for which the output is not BIM.
2

16.3 Appendix: Some literature that discusses

BIBO stability
Before I realized the fine difference between theorems 1 and 2, I investigated
[23, page 217], [24, pages 175–176], [25, pages 113 – 114], [18, page 77], and [26,
page 38]. [24, pages 175–176] guesses that [26] may have originated Theorem 2.
Problem 16.1
By the way, [26, page 54] says that
Z ∞ Z ∞
dτg1 (τ ) g2 (t − τ ) = dτg1 (t − τ ) g2 (τ )
0− 0−
Prove or disprove this statement.

Lecture 17
Stability theory (Part 2)
17.1 A question of interest

Question 1 Given that in our course we are studying systems modeled by the TF
R ∞ what is the effect of the poles and zeros of G (s) on whether or not the condition
(9.2)
0 | g ( t )| dτ < ∞ is satisfied for |r ( t )| ≤ M < ∞? That is, how do the poles and
zeros of G (s) affect its BIBO stability?
We may wonder why Question 1 does not ask about the effect of e−td s on
the BIBO stability of G (s). The following example answers our question.
Example 17.1
Problem 1 of Section 3.4 stated that y(t) being a delayed-in-time version of
x (t) can be summarized by the equation
y ( t ) = x ( t − t d )1( t − t d ),
and taking LT on both sides of this equation gives Y (s) = X (s)e−td s . So, e−td s
represents a time-delay. What is the effect of e−td s on the BIBO stability of G (s)?
Note that we can redraw the block diagram
r (t) y(t)
−−−→ G (s) −−−→
R(s) Y (s)
as follows:
n n 2 2
r (t) ∏i=1 0 (s + zi ) ∏k=
2
0 ( s + 2ζ k ωnk s + ωnk ) z(t) y(t)
−−−→ d
−−−→ e−td s −−−→
R(s) ∏i=1 0 (s + pi ) ∏dk=
2
0 (s
2 + 2ξ k ωdk s + ωdk 2 ) Z (s) Y (s)
The time delay element only delays z(t). It does not change the nature of z(t)
in any other manner. Thus, if z(t) is BIM, then y(t) is also BIM, and if z(t) is not
BIM, y(t) is not BIM. That is, e−td s has no effect on the BIBO stability of G (s).
Problem 17.1
Can we not express the fact that y(t) is a delayed-in-time version of x (t) as
either y(t) = x (t − td ) or y(t) = x (t)1(t − td )?
81
Table 17.1: Case of unrepeated poles. Impulse response of each term of G (s)
depending on the location of the poles of this term in the s-plane.
A1 s + B1 c1
G1 (s) = G2 (s) =
(s + a1 )2 + b12 s + d1
g1 (t) = Ae− a1 t cos(b1 t + φ1 ) g2 ( t ) = c 1 e − d 1 t
Poles g1 ( t ) g2 ( t )
a1 > 0 d1 > 0
in left
half (LH) R∞ 0 t R∞
0 | g1 (τ )|dτ < ∞ 0 | g1 (τ )|dτ < ∞ 0 t
s-plane
g1 ( t ) g2 ( t )
a1 = 0 d1 = 0
Poles on
jω-axis R∞ 0 t R∞
0 | g1 (τ )|dτ 6< ∞ 0 | g1 (τ )|dτ 6< ∞ 0 t
g1 ( t )
Poles g2 ( t )
a1 < 0 d1 < 0
in right
half (RH) R∞ 0 t R∞
0 | g1 (τ )|dτ 6< ∞ 0 | g1 (τ )|dτ 6< ∞ 0 t
s-plane
Example 1 showed why we may safely ignore any time delay elements in
G (s) in studying its BIBO stability.
To study Question 1, we considered 2 cases: case of G (s) containing unre-
peated poles, and case of G (s) containing repeated poles. In each of these two
cases, G (s) can be written as follows (ignoring the td part):
Case of unrepeated poles: We assume that the number of distinct real poles
is q and that the number of pairs of distinct complex conjugate poles is r.
A1 s + B1 Ar s + Br c1 cq
G (s) = 2
+···+ 2
+ +···+
( s + a1 )2 + b1 ( s + ar )2 + br s + d1 s + dq
Table 17.1 shows the form of the impulse response of each term of G (s)
depending on the location of the poles of this term in the s-plane:
Case of repeated poles: For convenience, we shall assume that we have one
real pole and one pair of complex conjugate poles, and that the real pole is re-
peated k times, while the second is complex conjugate pole is repeated r times.
Then,
A1k A B1r B11

G (s) = + · · · + 11 + r +···+
(s + α) k 2 2
s + α [(s + β) + b ] ( s + β )2 + b2
| {z } | {z }
H1 (s) H2 (s)

Table 17.2: Case of repeated poles. Impulse response of each term of H1 (s) and
H2 (s) of G (s) depending on the location of the poles of this term in the s-plane.
Response due to real roots of mul- Response due to complex conju-

tiplicity k ≥ 2 gate root pairs of multiplicity r ≥ 2
β>0
α>0
k
D t i −1 r
Ei ti−1 cos(bt + φi ) − βt
Poles in h1 ( t ) = ∑ (i −
i
1) !
e−αt h2 ( t ) = ∑ ( i − 1) !
e
LH s- i =1 i =1
plane Exponentially decaying response
Exponentially decaying response
R∞
|h1 (τ )|dτ < ∞ R∞
0
0 |h2 (τ )|dτ < ∞
β=0
α=0
k
D t i −1 r
Poles on h1 ( t ) = ∑ (i −
i
1) !
h2 ( t ) = ∑ ( i − 1) !
e
i =1 i =1
jω-axis
Growing response
Growing response
R∞
|h1 (τ )|dτ 6< ∞ R∞
0
0 |h2 (τ )|dτ 6< ∞
β<0
α<0
k
D t i −1 r
Poles in h1 ( t ) = ∑ (i −
i
1) !
e−αt h2 ( t ) = ∑ ( i − 1) !
e
RH s- i =1 i =1
plane Exponentially growing response
Exponentially growing response
R∞
|h1 (τ )|dτ 6< ∞ R∞
0
0 |h2 (τ )|dτ 6< ∞
Table 17.2 shows the form of the impulse response of H1 (s) and H2 (s) of G (s)
depending on the location of the poles of this term in the s-plane:
17.2 Conclusions
R∞
1. When a TF has poles in the left half s-plane (LHP), 0 | g(τ )|dτ < ∞, and
the TF is BIBO stable.
2. When a TF has poles R∞in the right half s-plane (RHP) or has repeated poles
on the jω-axis, then 0 | g(τ )|dτ 6< ∞, and the TF is unstable.
R∞
3. When a TF has unrepeated poles on the jω-axis, then 0 | g(τ )|dτ 6< ∞, and
the TF is not BIBO stable. However, the TF’s response to signals excluding
only the following is BIM:
3.1. In the case of an unrepeated complex conjugate pole pair, if r (t) is a
sinusoid whose frequency coincides with that of the pole pair, then y(t)
is unbounded.

For example, if G (s) = 1/ s2 + ω0 2 and the input is u(t) =

sin (ω0 t), then, using the information from Table 17.2, the output is
E1 cos (ω0 t + φ1 ) + E2 t cos (ω0 t + φ2 ).
3.2. In the case of a pole at the origin, if r (t) is of the form ti 1(t), where i ≥ 0
and integer, then y(t) is unbounded.
That is, a system with unrepeated poles on the jω-axis is BIBO unstable for
a narrow class of signals. For this reason, a system with unrepeated poles
on the jω-axis is called marginally stable. Marginal stability is the boundary
between stability and instability. We do not attach any more meaning to it
in this course.
17.3 An interesting example

Consider the TF G (s) = 1/(s − 1). In the light of the preceding discussion in
this lecture, we see that this TF is unstable.
Which of the following is a correct statement?
1. This TF is unstable because the response of this TF to no BIM input is BIM.
2. This TF is unstable because the response of this TF to not every BIM input
is BIM.
If we select the first one as the correct statement, then consider the BIM
input whose TF is R(s) = (ss+−11)2 . It seems that the response to this BIM input
is BIM1 . Let us examine this more carefully.
Indeed, in this case, the response to this R(s) is Y (s) = 1/(s + 1)2 , that is,
y(t) = te−t . So, the first choice is not the correct one. Is the second choice a
correct one? Does the second choice follow from the definition of BIBO stability
that we reproduce below from the previous lecture?
An LTI system is said to be bounded-input bounded-output (BIBO) stable

if and only if every bounded-in-magnitude (BIM) input r (t) results in a
BIM output y(t).
Yes, it does. This fact is an additional pointer to the fact that Theorem 2 is
all that we need to prove.
1 This input was constructed by Rohit Gupta, a Y8 student

Lecture 18
Nyquist Stability Criterion

(Part 1)*
“Nyquist’s original analysis was fairly complicated, but his main result had a
lasting value. It was later pointed out by MacColl [27] that the result can in fact
be easily obtained from a theorem of Cauchy or from the Argument Principle
of complex analysis” [28].
18.1 A quick recap

We saw in the previous lecture that the stability of a system described by a TF
of the form (9.2) is determined by the location of the poles. In particular, if the
poles are not in the open LHP, the system is not stable.
Except in the case of unrepeated poles on the jω axis, if the poles are any-
where other than in the open LHP, the system is unstable.
The systems that have unrepeated poles on the jω axis and all the remaining
poles in the open LHP are said to be marginally stable as their response is
bounded for all signals except those in a narrow class.
18.2 Problem statement

When we want to close the loop around a controller-plant-sensor combination,
we are concerned if closing the loop may result in an unstable system.
The Nyquist stability criterion (NSC), part of Nyquist stability theory, pro-
vides us a way to discuss the stability of the CL system based on the knowledge
of the location of the open loop poles.
Harry Nyquist developed this criterion in 1932. However, textbooks
present a version of the NSC that seems to be MacColl’s version, apparently
not realizing that credit is due to him. As MacColl apparently used Cauchy’s
princple of argument, we shall review this principle first. But, we will present
MacColl’s version of Nyquist’s stability criterion.
85
18.3 Cauchy’s theorem (Principle of argument)

1. Suppose we have the TF Q(s) = (s + z)/(s + p). The pole is s = − p and the
zero is s = −z.
2. Suppose some closed contour1 Γs in the s-plane encloses − p and −z, as shown
in the following figure.
jω
s-plane
Γs
−p −z σ
Enclosing − p and −z means that the contour does not pass through − p and
−z.
3. Take a point s on Γs and consider the angles θz and θ p made by the vectors
s + z and s + p.
jω
s-plane
s
Γs
θp θz
−p −z σ
Then,
∠Q(s) = ∠(s + z) − ∠(s + p) = θz − θ p
4. Suppose we traverse Γs in the clockwise direction. For one clockwise traver-

sal of Γs , the overall change in ∠Q(s) is
∆Γs ∠Q(s) = ∆Γs θz − ∆Γs θ p = −360◦ − (−360◦ ) = 0◦
5. On the other hand, if Γs encloses only the zero and not the pole, as shown
below,
1 In this context, by closed we mean that the contour starts and ends at the same point.

jω
s-plane
s
Γs
θp θz
−p −z σ
then for one clockwise traversal of Γs , the overall change in ∠Q(s) is
∆Γs ∠Q(s) = ∆Γs θz − ∆Γs θ p = −360◦ − (0◦ ) = −360◦
6. In general, if the s-plane contour Γs encloses Z zeros and P poles of the TF
∏in=0 (s + zi )
G (s) =
∏id=0 (s + pi )
then for one clockwise traversal of Γs , the change in the angle of G (s) is
∆Γs ∠G (s) = ( Z − P)(−2π )
7. Another way of stating this is as follows.

Each point on Γs is mapped by G (s) to a point on a new complex plane. This
collection of points is a closed contour ΓG . Note that this mapping may be
one-to-one or many-to-one, but not one-to-many. This is because G (s) is of
the form of (9.2).
We call this new complex plane the G (s)-plane, and label its axes Re{ G (s)}
and Im{ G (s)}) to emphasize that on this complex plane, we draw only the
map from Γs through G (s).
s-plane jω G (s) Re { G (s)}
ΓG
Γs
−p −z 0 σ 0 Re { G (s)}
G (s)-plane
For one complete clockwise traversal of Γs , ΓG encircles the origin of the G (s)-
plane N = Z − P times in the clockwise direction. For example, in the above
figure, N = 2.
Problem 18.1
Given the manner in which Γs has been constructed, can it be a contour that
is not closed?


Lecture 19

(Part 2)*
19.1 Application of Cauchy’s theorem in Nyquist’s

stability criterion
Consider the unity feedback closed-loop system GCL (s) formed around a plant
with transfer function G (s).
G (s)
GCL (s) =
1 + G (s)
The stability of GCL (s) is decided by the location of its poles. We wish to deter-
mine if GCL (s) has any poles in the closed RHP.
NSC helps determine if there are any poles of GCL (s) in the open RHP using
only knowledge of G (s). The following two theorems are useful in the discus-
sion.
Theorem 3 The set of poles of GCL (s) equals the set of zeros of 1 + G (s).
Proof: 2
Theorem 4 The set of poles of 1 + G (s) equals the set of poles of G (s).
Proof: 2
Theorem 3 allows us to convert the problem of examining the poles of
GCL (s) into a problem of examining the zeros of 1 + G (s).
NSC involves the following procedure.
Construct an s-plane contour that encloses the entire closed RHP (i.e., the
RHP including the jω-axis) while passing infinitesimally to the right of any
poles of 1 + G (s) that are on the jω-axis.
Construct the (1 + G (s))-plane contour corresponding to this s-plane con-
tour.
For one clockwise traversal of the s-plane contour, the (1 + G (s))-plane con-
tour encircles the origin N = Z − P times in the clockwise direction. Here, Z is
89
the number of zeros, and P is the number of poles, of 1 + G (s) enclosed by the
s-plane contour.
Alternatively, this means that the G (s)-plane contour encircles the point
−1 + j0 in the clockwise direction N = Z − P times.
Therefore, by knowing P and N, we can determine Z. From Theorem 4 we
know P as the number of poles of G (s) enclosed by the s-plane contour.
19.2 Discussion
Theorems 3 and 4 may seem obvious and needing no proof. Then, why state
them and invoke them?
NSC was published in 1932. More than half a decade later since then, I find
that the literature seems to have taken the NSC so much for granted that it
is stated rather imprecisely. Occassionally, this imprecision may lead us into
difficulties as is illustrated by Example 1.
Example 19.1
In the previous lecture, I made one of the following statements
(I don’t re-
call which) about the closed-loop system GCL (s) = G (s) (1 + G (s) H (s)) :
1. The poles of GCL (s) are the zeros of 1 + GH,
2. The zeros of 1 + GH are the poles of GCL (s).
My intention was to claim that, to discuss the stability of GCL (s), it is adequate
to examine the zeros of 1 + GH. If the first statement were true, then it would
be appropriate for our purpose.
However, Anurag Dash (Y9115) showed that for G = 1/(s + 5) and H =
(s + 5)/(s − 5) the closed-loop poles are −5 and +4, while the only zero of
1 + GH is +4. So, the first statement is not true.
Siddharth Sharma (Y9584) showed that for G = (s − 2)/(s − 4) and H =
s/(s − 2), there are no closed-loop poles, while the only zero of 1 + GH is +2.
So, neither the first nor the second statement is true.
Yet, as seen in Table 19.1, certain famous textbooks do claim to the effect
that for closed-loop stability, all roots of 1 + GH must lie in the LHP.
While I do some investigation to settle the applicability of NSC to GCL (s) of

Example 1, we shall work with the case of H (s) = 1. The applicability of NSC
for this case is clear from Section 19.1.

Table 19.1: Examples of the imprecision found in the literature in discussing

Nyquist stability criterion.
Statement and source Remarks
Consider the function F (s) = 1 + Denote by Z the set of zeros of F (s),

G0 (s)C (s). “. . . the zeros of F (s) are the and by P the set of the closed-loop
closed-loop poles in a unity feedback con- poles of the unity feedback control sys-
trol system” [19, page 140]. tem (that is, G0 C/(1 + G0 C )).
Then, this statement only means that
Z ⊆ P , It does not mean that P ⊆ Z
or that P = Z . To apply NSC, it would
have been better to have P ⊆ Z . Theo-
rem 3 shows that P = Z , which is ade-
quate.
“Also, the poles of F (s) are the open-loop Denote by P F the set of poles of F (s),
poles of plant and controller” [19, page and by POL the set of open-loop poles.
140]. Then, this statement only means that
P F ⊆ POL . Theorem 4 showed a
stronger result, namely that P F = POL .
However, this statement is adequate
for use with NSC.
“The closed-loop transfer function is The tacit assumption here is that the set
G/(1 + GH ). For stability, all roots of the of the roots (that is, zeros) of 1 + GH
characteristic equation 1 + GH = 0 must is a superset of the set of poles of the
lie in the left-half s plane.”[14, page 462]. closed-loop transfer function. As we
see in Example 1, this may not always
be true.
“the closed-loop transfer function
of a SISO The assumption is that the set of the
system is M(s) = G (s) (1 + G (s) H (s)) , poles of the closed-loop transfer func-
where G (s) H (s) can assume the form (9.2). tion equals the set of the zeros of 1 +
Since the characteristic equation is obtained GH. As we see in Example 1, this may
by setting the denominator polynomial of not always be true.
M(s) to zero, the roots of the characteristic
equation are also the zeros of 1 + G (s) H (s).
Or, the characteristic equation roots must
satisfy ∆(s) = 1 + G (s) H (s) = 0.” [29, page
557 – 558], [30, page 427]
“we consider the closed-loop transfer func- This version is the same as the one in
tion Y (s)/R(s) = G/(1 + GH ) . . . The char- the previous row.
acteristic equation of the closed-loop sys-
tem is obtained by setting the denominator
of Y/R to zero, which is the same as set-
ting the numerator of 1 + GH to zero. Thus,
the roots of the characteristic equation must
satisfy 1 + GH = 0.” [23, page 375]


Lecture 20

(Part 3)
We apply the Nyquist stability criterion (NSC) to three sample unity feedback
closed-loop systems.
The TF of the closed-loop system is GCL (s) = G (s) (1 + G (s)) . For G (s)
we consider K/s, K/(s + 1), and K (s + 10)2 s3 .

20.1 Example 1: G (s) = K/s

Here are the steps in applying NSC.
1. Mark on the s-plane the poles of G (s) that are in the closed RHP. In this case,
G (s) has only one pole in the closed RHP, and this pole is at the origin.
2. Draw the s-plane contour as shown in Figure 20.1. Note that, for the contour
to not pass through the poles on the jω-axis, it makes slight detours around
these poles at an infinitesimally small distance away from them. In the fig-
ure, the section of the s-plane contour near the origin has taken a detour to
the right of the pole. In practice, it can also take a detour to the left of the
pole.
3. Use the Bode plot (BP) of G (s) to map section C1 to the G (s)-plane.
Note that several textbooks map the jω-axis to the G (s)-plane using a few
points taken from this axis. The reader may verify that this way of mapping
is tedious in comparison to the BP way of mapping.
4. The section at infinity of the s-plane contour maps via G (s) into an infinites-
imally small area around the origin of the G (s)-plane. As this area does not
affect the count of the encirclements, we say that “the section at infinity of
the s-plane contour of G (s) maps into the origin of the G (s)-plane.”
5. The section of the s-plane contour around the origin maps into the section at
infinity of the G (s)-plane contour (same as NP of G (s)). We can sketch this
contour with just 1 – 2 points.
93
jω
s-plane
C2
C1
jφ
C6 ρe jθ
Re
σ
C5
ρ→0
R → ∞ Γs
C4
C3
Figure 20.1: The s-plane contour for G (s) = K/s. This contour has six sections
of interest, C1 — C6. Note that, by construction, the s-plane contours for any
G (s) are symmetric about the real axis. In this figure, the section of the s-plane
contour near the origin has taken a detour to the right of the pole, making
P = 0. If it had taken a detour to the left of the pole, then P = 1. To estimate the
location of the image of C6 under G (s), we select a convenient point, marked
◦
by •, which, in this case is ρe j45 .
6. Here is another fact that simplifies sketching NPs. As the s-plane contour is
symmetric about the σ-axis (i.e., Re{s}-axis), then the NP too is symmetric
about the Re{ G (s)}-axis.
The reason for this fact is that for the TFs of the form (9.2), G (s) = ( G (s∗ ))∗ ,
where x ∗ denotes the complex conjugate of x.
7. The complete G (s)-plane contour is shown in Figure 20.2.
20.2 Convention followed in sketching Nyquist

plots
Multiple poles are marked no matter what the multiplicity.
Sections of the s-plane contour are labeled C1, C2, · · · .
The corresponding sections on the NP are identified by the labels
C10 , C20 , · · · .
Points on the s-plane contour are labeled 1, 2, · · · .
The corresponding points on the NP are labeled 10 , 20 , · · · .
The section of the NP that maps from the jω-axis section of the s-plane
contour is called polar plot. However, by “polar plot” some books refer to the
entire NP.
The sections of the NP that map from the sections of the s-plane contour
that are above the σ-axis (i.e., the Re{s}-axis) are shown solid. Their mirror
images about the real axis are shown dashed.

Im { G (s)}
G (s)-plane
C50
C40
Ke
− jφ
ρ
C30
−1 + j0 C20 Re { G (s)}
C10 ΓG
C60
Figure 20.2: The Nyquist plot (NP) (also know as “G (s)-plane contour”) for
G (s) = K/s. This contour has six sections of interest, C10 — C60 . Note that
the G (s)-plane contours are symmetric about the real axis. In this figure, the
sections C20 and C30 are at the origin. The • on section C60 is the image of the
• on section C6 in Figure 20.1. In our procedure, the section C10 is constructed
first. This section is the polar plot of G (s), and for convenience is shown thicker
than the other sections. We note that the NP of K/s does not encircle −1 + j0.
Therefore, N = 0, and, consequently, Z = N + P = 0. This means that the
unity feedback closed-loop system built around K/s does not have any open
RHP poles for an K ≥ 0.


20.3 Example: G (s) = K (s + 1)
Example: G (s) = K (s + 10)2 s3

20.4
Problem 20.1
Sketch the NP of the TFs
K s
; ;
s2 ( s2 + 2) s + 1
20.5 Appendix: A useful fact

A necessary condition for a polynomial an s2 + an−1 sn−1 + . . . + a1 s + a0 to have
roots only in the LHP is that ai > 0, i = 0, 1, . . . , n.

Lecture 21

(Part 4)
21.1 Gain margin, phase margin

The concept of relative stability is used to express how close a control system is
to instability.
To evaluate the relative stability of the unity-feedback CL system, the terms
gain margin (GM) and phase margin (PM) are used frequently with respect to
Nyquist plots (NPs) that have simple forms such as those shown in Figure 21.1.
Note that the transfer functions (TFs) corresponding to these NPs usually
have simple forms such as
K ∏m
j =1 ( s + z i )
e−td s
s ∏in=1 (s + pi )
where K, td , pi and zi are real.

We define GM and PM using Figure 21.2.
The GM of this TF is defined as the amount by which G ( jω ) can be ampli-
fied at the phase crossover frequency ω p before G ( jω p ) passes through −1 + j0.
From this definition, it follows that

GM = 1 G ( jω p ) .
The PM of this TF is the angle through which the polar plot needs to be
rotated in the clockwise direction before G ( jω g ) passes through −1 + j0. ω g is
known as the gain crossover frequency of this TF. From this definition, it follows
that
PM = G ( jω g ) − (−180◦ ).

It has been found for many systems that GM 1 and PM > 30◦ help keep
the CL system stable in the face of parameter variations.
The GM is also expressed in logarithmic terms as 20 log10 ( GM), in dB, as
97
Figure 21.1: Nyquist plots for which concepts of GM and PM are relevant.
Note that the transfer functions (TFs) corresponding to these NPs usually have
K ∏m j =1 ( s + z i ) − t d s
simple forms such as s ∏in=1 (s+ pi )
e , where K, td , pi and zi are real.
21.2 When GM and PM are useful

Consider the minimum-phase TF [15]
85(s + 1)(s2 + 2s + 43.25)

s2 ( s2 + 2s + 82)(s2 + 2s + 101)
The polar plot of this TF is shown in Figure 21.3. The following GNU Octave
code generates this figure.
plot((-1:0.01:1),sqrt(1-(-1:0.01:1).^2),’-r’)
hold, plot((-1:0.01:1),-sqrt(1-(-1:0.01:1).^2),’-r’)
nyquist(tf(conv(85*[1,1],[1,2,43.25]),conv([1,2,82,0,0],[1,2,101])))
axis([-2,1,-1.5,1.5],"square")
We see that the multiple intersections of the polar plot with the unit circle
make it difficult to determine the PM of this transfer function.
When the NP has multiple crossings of the unit circle or of the −180◦ axis,
then we may not be able to convey much information by talking in terms of
GM and PM.
Other examples of situations where it is better to view the Nyquist plot as
a whole instead of discussing relative stability through GM and PM are the


G ( jω p )
ωp 20 log10 | G ( jω )|
0
−1 + j0 ωg ωp
φ 0 dB

20 log10 G ( jω p )

ωg
−90◦
6 G ( jω g )
−180◦
6 G ( jω )
−270◦
Figure 21.2: Illustration for the concepts of PM and GM. The left subfigure
shows the NP of a certain minimum phase TF, while the right figure shows
the approximate BP of the same TF. We see from the NP that, for the stability
of this closed-loop system, φ = −180◦ − ∠G ( jω g ) > 0 and 1 G jω p >

1 are desirable. φ is the PM. From the BP, we see that, while the PM is still
expressed as −180◦ − ∠G ( jω g ), the GM is expressed in dB. Specifically, the
GM is 0 − 20 log10 G ( jω p ) dB. In this figure, the GM in absolute terms works
out to a value greater than 1, and to a positive value in dB terms.
following TFs:
K ( s + 1) K (s + 10)2
s ; .
s ( − 1) s3
10
21.3 Appendix: Dead-time element in MATLAB

How to specify TF of a First-Order Plus Dead Time Model
in MATLAB is explained at http://www.mathworks.com/
products/control/demos.html?file=/products/demos/shipping/control/

Nyquist plot from u1 to y1, w (rad/s) in [1.000000e-01, 1.000000e+03]

1.5
+w
-w
0.5
Im( G(jw) )
-0.5
-1
-1.5
-2 -1.5 -1 -0.5 0 0.5 1
Re( G(jw) )
Figure 21.3: An example of a complicated Nyquist plot. The red circle is the
unit circle centered at the origin. Of the Nyquist plot, only the polar plot
(shown by the thin solid blue line) and its mirror image (shown by the ‘+’
line) are shown. The multiple intersections of the polar plot with the unit cir-
cle make it difficult to determine the PM of this transfer function. This TF is
85(s+1)(s2 +2s+43.25)
s2 (s2 +2s+82)(s2 +2s+101)
.
GSSpecifyingDelays.html#2.

Lecture 22

(Part 5)
22.1 Demonstration of quick construction of

Nyquist plots
Consider some sample transfer functions for G (s) of Figure 22.1
s−1 s−1 (s + 10)2 (s + 10)2

; ; ; .
s(s − 10) s(s + 10) s2 s3
22.2 Critical gain

The point −1 + j0 is known as critical point, and the value of K for which the
Nyquist plot of the system of Figure 22.1 passes through the critical point is
known as critical gain.
Example 1 shows how to evaluate the critical gain.
Example 22.1
s −1
Consider the TF s(s−10)
.
Yref (s) + E(s) Y (s)

KG (s)
−
Figure 22.1: Unity feedback closed-loop system. The parameter K is to be de-

signed through analysis such that this system is stable.
101
22.3 Conditionally stable systems

In practice, many plants are such that, the unity feedback closed-loop system
formed around them goes closer to instability as the controller gain K of Fig-
ure 22.1 increases. A PMDC motor is one such plant.
K (s+10)2
However, there are plants with TFs such as s3
. The unity feedback CL
systems corresponding to these TFs are examples of conditionally stable systems.
They become more stable as K increases.
K (s+10)2
In the example of s3
, we see that
(
2 K is small
N=
0 K is large.
Thus, as the number of open-loop poles P = 0, by NSC, the number of closed-

loop poles in the open RHP is
(
2 K is small
Z=
0 K is large.
22.4 Using − K1 + j0 instead of −1 + j0

From the examples, which we saw thus far, of applying NSC, we see that the
position of polar plot of KG (s) relative to −1 + j0 is the same as the position of
the polar plot of G (s) relative to − K1 + j0. This observation helps simplify using
NSC. We need to only sketch the polar plot of G (s), and not that of KG (s).
22.5 Nyquist plots in MATLAB and GNU Octave

Consider some sample transfer functions for G (s) of Figure 22.1
s−1 s−1 (s + 10)2 (s + 10)2

; ; ; .
s(s − 10) s(s + 10) s2 s3
The following code generates the Nyquist plots of these TFs in MATLAB
and GNU Octave. Figures 22.2 and 22.3 show the output of this code.
subplot(2,2,1), nyquist(tf([1,-1],[1,-10,0])),
xlim([-0.2,0.05]), ylim([-1,1]);
title(’(s-1)/(s(s-10))’);
subplot(2,2,2), nyquist(tf([1,-1],[1,10,0])),
xlim([-0.1,0.2]), ylim([-0.5,0.5]);
title(’(s-1)/(s(s+10))’);
subplot(2,2,3), nyquist(tf([1,20,100],[1,0,0])),
title(’(s+10)^2/s^2’);
subplot(2,2,4), nyquist(tf([1,20,100],[1,0,0,0])),
xlim([-1.5,0.1]), ylim([-0.5,0.5]);
title(’(s+10)^2/s^3’);

(s−1)/(s(s−10)) (s−1)/(s(s+10))
1 0.5
Imaginary Axis
Imaginary Axis
0.5
0 0
−0.5
−1 −0.5
−0.2 −0.15 −0.1 −0.05 0 0.05 −0.1 0 0.1 0.2
Real Axis Real Axis
(s+10)2/s2 (s+10)2/s3
50 0.5
Imaginary Axis
Imaginary Axis
0 0
−50 −0.5
−600 −400 −200 0 200 −1.5 −1 −0.5 0
Real Axis Real Axis
Figure 22.2: Nyquist plots of sample values of G (s) of Figure 22.1 generated by
MATLAB.
We see that in the name of Nyquist plots, we only have the polar plots and
their mirror images about the real axis. This picture may not seem enough to
talk about encirclements of the critical point. We may wonder how to use this
picture.
To use this picture, we need to perform one additional step. We need to
sketch the sections at infinity of the Nyquist plots.
22.6 Rotation of a vector instead of encirclement
Instead of visualizing as the encirclement of the origin by the 1 + G (s) contour,

we can visualize as the turning of the vector 1 + G (s), with its tail at the origin
and head on the 1 + G (s) contour, around the origin.
Similarly, instead of visualizing as the encirclement of the origin by the G (s)
contour, we can visualize as the turning around −1 + j0 of a vector that has its
tail at −1 + j0 and head on the G (s) contour.
Such a visualization may help where we are unable to visualize encir-
clement.

(s-1)/(s(s-10)) (s-1)/(s(s+10))
1
+w +w
-w 0.4 -w
0.5
0.2
Im( G(jw) )
Im( G(jw) )
0 0
-0.2
-0.5
-0.4
-1
-0.2 -0.15 -0.1 -0.05 0 0.05 -0.1 -0.05 0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2
Re( G(jw) ) Re( G(jw) )
(s+10)2/s2 (s+10)2/s3
20 +w +w
-w 0.4 -w
15
10
0.2
5
Im( G(jw) )
Im( G(jw) )
0 0
-5
-0.2
-10
-15
-0.4
-20
-100 -80 -60 -40 -20 0 -1.4 -1.2 -1 -0.8 -0.6 -0.4 -0.2 0
Re( G(jw) ) Re( G(jw) )
Figure 22.3: Nyquist plots of sample values of G (s) of Figure 22.1 generated by
GNU Octave.

22.7 Discussion
For those TFs that have one or more poles at the origin, the section at infinity of
the s-plane contour (this section is also known as the D-section) maps into an
infinitisimally small section of a circle around the origin of the Nyquist plane.
This section does not affect the count of the encirclements. So, we can safely
assume that the D-section maps into the origin of the Nyquist plane in this
case.
When the OL TF does not have a pole at the origin, the D-section does not
map into the origin any more.
The Nyquist plane is also known as the G (s)-plane.


Part IV
Design using bode

plots-based loop-shaping for
minimum-phase plants
107
Lecture 23
NST (concluded),
Loop-shaping (Part 1)
23.1 Nyquist stability theory (conclusion)

Examples 1 and 2 wrap up our discussion of Nyquist stability theory.
Example 23.1
Sketch the NP of K/(s2 ) and discuss the stability of the unity feedback
closed-loop system formed around this TF.
Example 23.2
Sketch the NP of K/(s2 + 1) and discuss the stability of the unity feedback
closed-loop system formed around this TF.
When the NP passes through the critical point, then N is unknown.
23.2 Specifications for control system design

The closed-loop (CL) system should
1. be stable,
2. be robust to plant parameter variations, disturbances (usually mechanical

such as wind gusts on vehicle, tyre-road friction, etc), noises (usually electro-
magnetic interference (EMI)),
3. demonstrate desired performance (such as fast rise time (tr ), limited over-
shoot (M p ), fast settling time (ts ), and small steady-state error (ess )), and
4. apply limited control input to the plant.
109
D (s)
+
R(s) E(s) + Y (s)
+ GOL (s)
− + N (s)
+
Figure 23.1: A unity feedback closed-loop system formed around the open-
loop transfer function GOL (s).
R(s) E(s) U (s) Y (s)

+ C (s) G (s)
Cascade configuration −
R(s) E(s) + U (s) Y (s)

+ C1 (s) G (s)
−
+
C2 (s)
Minor loop feedback
Figure 23.2: Two sample configurations of plant and controller.
23.3 Loop gain and shaping
In classical control theory, the design technique called loop-shaping provides a

collection of graphical tools by which we can design the CL system’s properties
as desired by modifying the open-loop (OL) system’s transfer function (TF).
This modification is called “shaping” because this TF is modified by shaping
the corresponding Nyquist/Bode/Nichols plot of this TF.
We already saw an instance of discussing the CL system’s properties via the
OL system’s TF in the form of Nyquist stability criterion (NSC).
Consider the CL system of Figure 23.1. GOL (s) is called the loop gain of the
control system. See Section 6.2 for details.
Given that the plant gain G (s) is fixed, the loop gain can be as desired if
we design a controller for the plant. The plant-controller configuration can be
of many types. Two configurations are shown in Figure 23.2, ignoring distur-
bances and noises.
The configurations we can have are probably only limited by our creativity.
In this course, we will consider only cascade configuration. However, the
techniques developed may be applied to other configurations through a suit-
able modification of the block diagram.

Slope:
−20 dB/dec
1 decade
0◦ 1
−90◦
2
−180◦
3
−270◦
Figure 23.3: Illustration for Example 3.
23.4 BMP-BPP correspondence for minimum-phase

TFs
For minimum phase TFs, we can uniquely construct the BPP given the BMP.
A theorem by Hendrick Bode says that for a minimum-phase TF, if a section
of the BMP persists with a slope of n for at least one decade, then in the middle
of that section, the BPP has a value of n × 90◦ [22, pages 291-293]. Here n =
. . . , −2, −1, 0, +1, +2, . . ., where −2 ≡ −40 dB/dec, −1 ≡ −20 dB/dec, etc.
Example 23.3
Consider the BMP and BPPs shown in Figure 23.3 for a certain minimum-
phase TF. Which of the three BPPs are valid candidates?
23.5 Appendix: Bode’s theorem
23.6 Appendix: NST for SFG defintion of loop gain

Applying the discussion of Section 6.2 to the SFG equivalent shown in Fig-
ure 23.4 of the block diagram of Figure 23.1, the loop gain is bc.
Thus, if we used the signal flow graph definition, we should have called
− GOL (s) the loop gain. Then NSC would have been modified to examine the

Figure 23.4: The signal flow graph equivalent of the block diagram of Fig-
ure 23.1.
encirclement of the point +1 + j0 by the Nyquist plot of − GOL (s). Indeed,

“the critical point in Nyquist’s paper is +1 instead of −1 as is commonly used
today” [28].

Lecture 24
24.1 Recap of specifications for control system de-

sign
The following properties are desired of a CL system
1. Stability,
2. Robustness to plant parameter variations,
3. Robustness to disturbances,
4. Robustness to sensor noise,
5. Demonstration of desired performance (transient as well as steady-state),

and
6. Respect for constraints on control input to the plant.
24.2 Gist of loop-shaping-based design

As we will consider only cascade configuration in our course, GOL (s) =
C (s) G (s), where C (s) is the controller TF, and G (s) is the plant TF. C (s) needs
to be designed, and G (s) is fixed.
Loop-shaping using Bode plots for minimum-phase TFs involves the fol-
lowing simple steps:
1. Draw the ABMP of the plant (G) on a semilog graph paper.
2. Draw the ABMP of the desired OL TF (GOL ) on the same semilog graph
paper
3. Subtract the first ABMP from the second. This gives the ABMP of the con-
troller.
4. Write the TF of the controller.
113
24.3 Stability
For minimum-phase TFs with simple-looking Nyquist plots (NPs), we saw that
gain margin (GM) and phase margin (PM) were adequate measures of how far
the NP was from encircling the −1 + j0 point. Thus, PM and GM are adequate
measures of stability.
For minimum-phase TFs that do not have second order elements, taking
care of PM takes care of CL stability.
Problem 24.1
Cook up a minimum-phase TF that includes a second order component
such that the unity-feedback closed-loop system built around this TF has BP
and NP that show adequate PM but not adequate GM.
24.4 Robustness to plant parameter variations

Plant parameters variations may bring the CL system closer to instability. Pro-
vide adequate PM so that the CL system remains stable in spite of coming
closer to instability.
How much PM is adequate? A value of 60◦ has been found to be adequate
for many systems occurring in practice. A PM greater than this makes the
system relatively more stable but also sluggish.
How to obtain a PM less than 90◦ ? Though the statement of Section 23.4
talks in terms of phases which are integral multiples of 90◦ , Bode’s theorem
says more. For example, if a section of the BMP persists with a slope of n for a
certain fraction of a decade, then in the middle of that the BPP has a value that
is proportional to this fraction of 90◦ , as illustrated in Figure 24.1.
Loop-shaping Recipe 1 From Bode’s theorem discussed in Section 23.4, it follows

that, to have adequate PM, make the BMP of GOL (s) have a −20 dB/dec section that
is centered at ω g and has appropriate width. Doing so provides the CL system both
stability and robustness to plant parameter variations.
24.5 Relation between OL and CL BMP

The closed-loop (CL) TF from input r (t) to output y(t) is
GOL (s)
GCL (s) =
1 + GOL (s)
The GOL ( jω ) designed by loop-shaping usually has a high low-frequency

gain and a low high-frequency gain, while being minimum-phase. It follows
that (
1, ∀ω ω g
| GCL ( jω )| =
| GOL ( jω )|, ∀ω ω g
For a minimum-phase TF, in the vicinity of the gain crossover frequency
ω g , where | GOL ( jω g )| = 1, | GCL ( jω g )| depends heavily on the phase margin

Slope:
−20 dB/dec
1 decade
1
2
0◦
−90◦
−180◦
−270◦
Figure 24.1: If a section of the BMP persists with a slope of −20 dB/dec for
less than a decade, then in the middle of that section, the phase is appropri-
ately away from −90◦ . This figure shows the ABMPs in contrast to Figure 23.3,
which showed the BMP. Note that if a section of the BMP has to persist for a
decade with a slope of, for example, −20 dB/dec, then the same section on the
ABMP needs to persist for more than a decade with a slope of −20 dB/dec.
ABMP 1 of this figure corresponds to the BMP of Figure 23.3. Note that the
PM shown by phase plot 1 is +90◦ , while that shown by phase plot 2 is about
+50◦ .
(PM)[22, pages 295-296], as illustrated by Example 1. The form of 20 log10 | GCL |

for two values of PM (45◦ and 90◦ ) is shown in the following figure (for the
moment, ignore the Low ω, Mid ω, and Hi ω bands).
GOL
dB-gain
PM = 45◦
0 dB GCL ωg
ω
PM = 90◦ (log scale)
Low ω Mid ω Hi ω
Example 24.1

Evaluate GCL ( jω g ) for PM = 90◦ and PM = 45◦ .

We have
GOL ( jω )
GCL ( jω ) =
1 + GOL ( jω )

Note that GOL ( jω g ) = 1. Thus, we only need to evaluate 1 + GOL ( jω g ).
The following figure shows 1 + GOL ( jω ) graphically for the case of PM =
90◦ (left subfigure) and PM = 45◦ (right subfigure).
G (s)-plane
G (s)-plane
0 1
0 1 )
g
( jω
GOL ( jω g )
1+
1+
L
GO
GO
G OL
L
(j
ωg
( jω g
)
)

1 + GOL ( jω g ) = 2 1 + GOL ( jω g ) ≈ 0.75
√
⇒ GCL ( jω g ) = 1/ 2 = 0.7 ⇒ GCL ( jω g ) = 1/0.75 = 1.33

More accurately, 1 + GOL ( jω g ) =
r
2 2
√1 + 1 − √1 ≈ 0.77
2 2
Historically, through calculations such as done in Example 1, | GCL ( jω )|

were found around ω g , and the BMPs of GCL (s) were sketched.

Lecture 25
25.1 Satisfaction of desired performance

The performance of a control system is expressed through how well the control
system tracks the test signals 1(t), t1(t), t2 1(t), etc. Which of these signals is
used to measure the performance depends on which signals the control system
most frequently encounters in practice.
The control system does not actually encounter any of these test signals in
practice. However, for a given plant, one or more of these test signals serve to
compare the performance of one control system built around this plant with
the peformance of another control system built around this plant. These test
signals are usually idealized versions of the signals that the control system
encounters in practice.
The unit step response presents the most pretty and clear picture of the per-
formance of a control system. So, this is most often shown in books. Once we
become comfortable with the unit step response, talking about the performance
to a ramp or parabolic input is not very difficult.
The unit step response of a general control system is shown in Figure 25.1.
The parameters of this response that are of interest to us are
• Percent overshoot M p defined as
y(t p ) − y(∞)
Mp , × 100%
y(∞)
• Settling time ts is the time taken by the system to enter the x% tube with the
intention of remaining in it. Here, x% of y(∞) is the radius of the tube. The
tube is centered about the steady-state value y(∞) of the unit step response.
• Steady state error ess = 1 − y(∞) is a measure of the steady-state accuracy
of the control system. For example, in a position control system, if, after the
transients die out, the position achieved is different from what was needed
to be achieved, we say that this control system has a non-zero ess .
• Rise time tr .
How do loop-shaping techniques help meet these performance specs? The
following subsections answer this question.
117
y(t)
1
y(∞)
Diameter = 2x%
ess x% tube
0 tr tp ts t
Figure 25.1: The unit step response of a control system. First order response
and second order responses are special cases of this response.
25.1.1 Steady-state error

Consider the following equation:
1 1 1
E(s) = R(s) − D (s) − N (s)
1 + GOL (s) 1 + GOL (s) 1 + GOL (s)
When R(s) = 1/s (that is, r (t) is unit step), we can write the following using
final value theorem:
1 1 1
ess , lim e(t) = lim sE(s) = lim s =
t→∞ s →0 s →0 1 + GOL (s) s 1 + GOL (0)
Therefore, GOL (0) ≈ 1/ess . Therefore, to reduce ess , increase the LF value of
| GOL |. We can define klf , 20 log10 | GOL (0)|. Then, klf can define the LF forbid-
den zone seen in the earlier figure.
25.1.2 Settling time

Consider the unit impulse response of the first order TF τs1+1 . This has the
equation
1
y(t) = e−t/τ 1(t)
τ
where, τ is the time constant of this response. This response reaches x% of its
initial value of 1 in time t x% . Therefore,
100
t x% = τ ln
x
For a x% tube centered about the y = 0 line, t x% is the settling time ts . The
following table summarizes the settling time ts for standard values of the tube:
x 1 2 5 10
ts 4.6τ 3.9τ 3τ 2.3τ

From the table, we can say that transients in a first order system die out in
approximately 5τ, that is, in five time constants. Therefore, for a first order
system, ts ≈ 5τ.
For a first order system, the TF τs1+1 shows that ωb = 1/τ. Therefore,
ωb ≈ 5/ts .
We can carry this approximation to higher order systems too, and say that
transients in any system die out — if they die out — in approximately five
times the largest time constant τmax . Then, assuming that ωb ≈ 1/τmax , the
bandwidth of any system can be defined roughly as being related to the sys-
tem’s ts as ωb ≈ 5/ts .
The inequality ω g ≤ ωb ≤ 2ω g , implies that ω g ≈ ωb . Therefore, in order
to provide the desired ts , we need to set ω g ≈ 5/ts .
25.1.3 Overshoot
The rule of thumb is, “the closer the system is to instability, the more oscillatory
its step response becomes, and the more will be its overshoot.” Of course, this
statement may not be applicable to a first order system. But, most practical
systems are not purely first order. If they are modeled as of first order, then
that may be because their higher order dynamics have been neglected.
To limit the value of M p , provide suitable PM. We will see soon the relation
between the desired maximum M p and the appropriate PM.
The measures we adopted in subsections 24.3 and 24.4 and are also ade-
quate to limit M p .
25.2 Respecting constraints on control input

We have the following equation for the cascade configuration of the controller:
C (s) C (s) C (s)

U (s) = R(s) − D (s) − N (s)
1 + GOL (s) 1 + GOL (s) 1 + GOL (s)
This equation shows that, to keep the initial spike in u(t) within limits, keep
20 log10 |C ( jω )| small at the appropriate frequencies. What are these appropri-
ate frequencies? Section 25.3 provides an answer to this question.
25.3 Appendix: Additional loop-shaping tips

This appendix starts where subsection 25.2 left off. These additional loop-
shaping tips use the following facts:
1. The final value theorem relates the low-frequency section of the loop-gain
to the area of the time-domain response that is near t = ∞
lim y(t) = lim sY (s)

t→∞ s →0
2. The initial value theorem relates the high-frequency section of the loop-gain
to the area of the step response that is near t = 0+
lim y(t) = lim sY (s)

t →0+ s→∞

3. From the previous two points, I am conjecturing that, as we travel right to

left on the ω axis, we travel left to right on the t axis of the time-domain
response. We summarize this idea through the following rule of thumb:
lim y(t) = lim sY (s).

t→0++ s→∞−−
Here, t = 0+ is the time instant immediately to the right of t = 0, while

t = 0 + +, t = 0 + ++, etc are time instants progressively further to the right
of t = 0+. s = ∞−, s = ∞ − −, etc carry similar meaning.
x (t)
xd
How the loop

gain affects t
20 log10 | Gdes ( jω )|
M p of x (t) and ωu
magnitude of ux ωl ωg ω
u(0+). Here
u x = u. t
Finally, the additional tips are as follows:

1. To reduce |u(0+)| reduce | Gdes ( jω )| immediately after ωu , as shown in the
above figure, while also keeping the loop gain at higher frequencies small
as shown.
This can be seen using initial value theorem as follows:
C (∞−)
u(0+) =
1 + C (∞−) G (∞−)
assuming R(s) = 1/s. So, making |C (∞−)| small will make |u(0+)| small.
Note that, the choice of ωu and ωl itself involves trial and error in practice.
2. To reduce M p (that occurs at t = 0 + +) of x reduce | Gdes ( jω ) in the region
much below high frequencies, but above the low frequency region, as shown
in the above figure.
This can be seen using the above-mentioned conjecture as follows:
C (s) G (s)
lim y(t) ≈ lim
t→0++ s→∞−− 1 + C ( s ) G ( s )
assuming R(s) = 1/s. So, making |C (∞ − −)| small will make M p small.
3. To reduce ts of x, we have two options:
3.1. Increase ω g .
3.2. Decrease M p as mentioned in item 2 above.

Lecture 26
26.1 Robustness to disturbances

Any undesired phenomenon acting on the plant can be modeled as disturbance
irrespective of whether it is electrical, mechanical or chemical in nature. Dis-
turbances are usually relatively slow phenomena.
Disturbance needs to be processed quickly. So, the system needs to be
quicker than the disturbance. So, have the bandwidth of the CL system much
larger than disturbance frequencies. So, design so that disturbance lies in the
low frequency (LF) region of the CL system’s passband. So, designate the fre-
quencies in which the disturbances lie as the “Low ω” frequencies as shown in
Figure 26.1. “Processing” the disturbance involves suppressing its effect on the
output y(t). This can be done as follows.
Consider the following the equation:
GOL (s) 1 GOL (s)

Y (s) = R(s) + D (s) − N (s)
1 + GOL (s) 1 + GOL (s) 1 + GOL (s)
We see that in order to reject disturbances, we need to make | GOL ( jω )| large in

the Low ω region. How large? Keep the low frequency (LF) loop gain above a
certain LF forbidden zone that lies in the interval [0, ωd ].
26.2 Robustness to noises

Noises are usually electrical in nature, such as the high frequency EMI induced
by transistors switching in a AC-DC or DC-DC converter circuit. They are also
of much higher frequencies than disturbances.
We see from the last equation above that keeping the noises within the
bandwidth of the CL system will not be the right thing to do, because the noise
n(t) will then appear unmitigated in the output y(t). So, the strategy adopted
is to select ωb smaller than the noise frequencies. That is, keep the noises out-
side the passband of the CL system. The inequality ω g ≤ ωb ≤ 2ω g , implies
that ω g ≈ ωb . This means that | GOL ( jω )| needs to be small in the Hi ω re-
gion. How small? Keep the high frequency (HF) loop gain below a certain HF
forbidden zone that lies in the interval [ωn , ∞).
121
klf
LF forbidden
HF forbidden zone
zone
ωu ωn
ωd ωl ωg
khf −20 dB/dec
Figure 26.1: Summary of loop-shaping. The width of the −20 dB/dec section
centered at ω g accounts for the CL properties of stability, robustness to distur-
bance rejection. This width, and, consequently, these properties are related to
the phase margin (PM). The height of the low frequency (LF) forbidden zone
accounts for steady-state accuracy of tracking an input signal, and for rejecting
disturbances. The right side boundary of this zone is at a frequency ωd that is
sufficiently small in comparison to ωb (the closed-loop bandwidth), and, conse-
quently, to ω g . This way, disturbances are tackled quickly. The high frequency
(HF) forbidden zone accounts for sensor noise. The lower level of this zone is
at a value of khf dB; the amplification of the sensor noise does not rise above
this level.
26.3 Summary of loop-shaping recipe

The loop-shaping technique we developed in these lectures is valid for
minimum-phase GOL (s).
The loop-shaping tips developed thus far are summarized by Figure 26.1
[22, pages 322].
Note that ω g being in the center of the −20 dB/dec section implies that
√
ω g = ωl ωu because ωl and ωu are logarithmically spaced.
Note that, if the −20 dB/dec section centered at ω g is at least one decade
wide on the BMP, then the PM will be 90◦ . If the section is one decade wide on
the ABMP, then the PM will be ≈ 60◦ .
Problem 26.1
Why are we not using GM in our design?
26.4 MATLAB-based example of loop-shaping

26.4.1 Problem
Design the TF GOL (s) such that the unity-feedback closed-loop system’s unit
step response satisfies the following specs:
M p ≤ 30%; ess ≤ 0.05; ts = 5 s for a 2% tube.

26.4.2 Solution

1
ess ≤ 0.05 implies that klf = 20 log10 | GOL (0)| & 20 log10 = 26 dB.
ess
5
ts = 5 s for a 2% tube can be achieved with ω g ≈ ≈ 1 rad/s.
ts
◦
M p ≤ 30% can be achieved with a PM ≈ 60 . This translates into a −20
dB/dec section that is approximately one decade wide centered at ω g .
Next, we will use MATLAB to generate a BMP that will have these three
features.
26.4.3 How to use MATLAB

1. In MATLAB, we cd to the directory that contains the files a.m and cleanup.m
that are shown below.
2. We type the word magshape at the command prompt. This launches the GUI
tool MAGSHAPE. Note that MAGSHAPE presents us a semilog grid where
the x-axis represents frequencies in rad/s, and y-axis represents dB-gain.
3. In MAGSHAPE —
3.1. We declare a filter named test.

3.2. We select the add point radio button and add points on the GUI’s grid
approximately along the desired BMP that we have in mind.
3.3. We specify the filter order as 3. We could have specified other filter
orders too. We want to have a filter of the smallest order that will match
our desired BMP.
3.4. We press the fit data button. This generates a filter of order 3 that best
approximates the filter that we specified through the points.
3.5. If the generated filter does not fit the specified filter properly, then select
the move point or delete point radio button, move or delete the points,
and fit data once again. Repeat this cycle until MAGSHAPE generates
a filter that whose BMP resembles what we want.
4. The filter generated by MAGSHAPE is now in MATLAB’s workspace. Run

the m-file a.m that I wrote. a.m does the following:
4.1. Converts the filter generated by MAGSHAPE into a TF form using the
function ltitf provided by MATLAB.
4.2. Plots this filter’s BP.
4.3. Plots the unit step response of the CL system corresponding to this filter.
5. If the step response does not satisfy the problem’s specs, then repeat the
entire exercise beginning with step 3.

26.4.4 Results
A few trials of the above algorithm gave us the filter shown in the MAGSHAPE
window of Figure 26.2. Figure 26.3 shows the Bode plot of GOL (s). Figure 26.4
shows the unit step response of the unity-feedback CL system built around
GOL (s). The step response approximately satisfies the three specs given by the
problem.
26.4.5 MATLAB code

% a.m: File to capture results from MAGSHAPE
% and plot various plots. This file is to
% be used after using MAGSHAPE.
%
% What I did in MAGSHAPE: I declared a filter
% named "test". Having selected the radio
% button corresponding to "test", I added
% many points that I wanted my Gol (which is
% the desired loop gain) to fit, and gave 3
% as the filter order (I could have given
% other numbers too). Then, I clicked on
% "fit data" button. This generated the
% filter named "test" that I am using in
% the following.
%-------------------------------------------
close all % Close any open figure windows

% (except MAGSHAPE window).
[num,den]=ltitf(test);
% I found that num or den may contain some

% terms that are about 0.0001 or less times
% less in absolute value compared to the
% largest-in-absolute-value term of num (den).
% These terms caused Gol (earlier obtained
% as Gol=tf(num,den)) to contain high-order
% nondominating terms that made it a non-proper
% TF. So, I wrote a little function "cleanup"
% that helps remove the non-dominating high
% order terms from the TF of "test".
[n,d]=cleanup(num,den);
gol=tf(n,d);
gcl=feedback(gol,1,-1);
% Plot the OL and CL BPs,

% and the CL step response.
%

Figure 26.2: Snapshot of MAGSHAPE showing the BMP of GOL that gives the desired CL response.

t = linspace(0,18,200);
%
% The above line was absent in the a.m
% mailed to the students immediately after the
% lecture. I addded it later because I found
% that the step reponse plotted by MATLAB was
% jagged. Jagged responses are not natural.
% Adding the above line gives a smooth response.
%
step(gcl,t), grid
print -depsc step.eps
% figure,
% bode(gcl), grid, title(’BP of Gcl’)
figure,
bode(gol), grid, title(’BP of Gol’)
print -depsc OLbode.eps
% cleanup.m
function [n,d]=cleanup(num,den)
numerr = 0.0001;
denerr = 0.0001;
% In future, we can specify the values of
% numerr \& denerr based on various factors
% such as the orders of the numerator and
% denominator, and maybe others that I am
% not seeing at the moment.
for i=1:size(num,2)
if abs(num(i))/abs(max(den)) < numerr
num(i) = 0;
end
end
for j=1:size(den,2)
if abs(den(j))/abs(max(den)) < denerr
den(j) = 0;
end
end
n = num; d = den;
Problem 26.2
Construct an ordinary differential equation of the smallest order possible
so that the solution of this differential equation to a unit step forcing function
has the form shown in Figure 25.1. Assume M p ≈ 30%, ess ≈ 0.04, ts ≈ 1

BP of Gol
50
0
Magnitude (dB)
−50
−100
−150
0
−45
Phase (deg)
−90
−135
−180
−3 −2 −1 0 1 2 3 4
10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10
Frequency (rad/sec)
Figure 26.3: BP of GOL . The PM is what we expected based on the width of the
section of slope −20 dB/dec centered at ω g .
s. The permitted tolerance for your solution is 5%. Multiple overshoots and
undershoots are not mandatory.

Step Response
1.4
1.2
1
Amplitude
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18
Time (sec)
Figure 26.4: Unit step response of the CL system. The step response approxi-
mately satisfies the three specs given by the problem.

Lecture 27
Loop-shaping (Part 5):

Information from lead/lag
controllers
27.1 Background
We are interested in designing a controller C (s) for the cascade combination
shown in Figure 23.2. Figure 27.1 shows the steps, which are involved in the
design and deployment of a controller.
In the flow chart, Step7 involves tuning. Tuning is required because the
controller may have been designed for an idealized model of the plant. The
model may have ignored nonlinearties and certain dynamics of the plant. So,
the controller may not work right unless it is tuned. The fewer the number of
parameters to be tuned in practice, the easier the tuning, as we can track the
effect of each parameter on the control system.
The simplest controller is a proportional controller. But, a proportional con-
troller is limited in what it can help the closed-loop system achieve. When a
controller is more than a proportional controller, we call it a compensator. A
transfer function (TF) that does not contain terms in s is called a static TF. A TF
that has terms in s is called a dynamic TF. A compensator contains terms in s;
so it is dynamic. Some of the simplest controllers are shown in Table 27.1
In this lecture, we study lead and lag controllers. We look at the PID con-
troller and its special cases (that is, PI and PD) after the second midsemester
exam.
27.2 Lead and lag controllers

The lead controller provides a positive phase, while the lag controller provides
a negative phase as shown in Figure 27.2.
We can develop the relationship between the maximum positive phase
Φmax (or the minimum negative phase Φmin ) provided by a lead (or lag) con-
troller and the corresponding decade distance (DD) between the corner fre-
129
Start
Exit
Step1
Mathematically
YES
model the plant
as LTI ODE
Step2 Review step 3 Mechanism

Analysis of the behaves well?
plant model (Is it
minimum phase?
Is it proper or
strictly proper?
What is its order?
What are its
poles and zeros?)
Step8
Deploy the control
system in the full
mechanism whose
Step3
component it is
Formulate design
goals in terms of
which signals to YES
track, with what
accuracy, what
disturbances to
reject & how much,
how much to reject CL system
Review the steps
sensor noises & at behaves as
that lead here
what frequencies? desired?
Step4
Convert design
goals into loop- Step7
shaping spec-s Tune the controller
such as PM, ω g , so that CL system
forbidden zones behaves as desired
Step5
Step6
Design & simulate
Program the con-
controller until sat-
troller in µC / DSP
isfactory on paper
Figure 27.1: Flow chart of the design and deployment of a controller.

Table 27.1: Some of the simplest controllers.
Proportional kp
Proportional plus derivative (PD) k p + kd s
Proportional plus integral (PI) k p + k I /s
Proportional plus integral plus derivative (PID) k p + k d s + k I /s
Ts + 1
Lead K , α<1
αTs + 1
Ts + 1
Lag K , α>1
αTs + 1
+20 dB/dec −20 dB/dec

ωmax 0◦
90◦
Φmin
Φmax
−90◦
0◦
1 1 1 ωmax 1
T αT αT T
Figure 27.2: Bode plots of lead and lag controllers. The lead controller provides
a positive phase, while the lag controller provides a negative phase.
quencies of the controller through the steps shown in Figure 27.3. See Sec-
tion 27.4 for details.
Table 27.2 tabulates the required DD (∆) between the corner frequencies
of the lead (or lag) controller and the corresponding Φmax (or Φmin ) that the
controller needs to provide for certain commonly occuring values of Φmax (or
Φmin ).
27.3 How DD-Φmax relationship for lead/lag con-

trollers is useful in loop-shaping
We can use the insights obtained so far for the lead/lag controller in our loop-
shaping techniques. Specifically, I claim that if the desired minimum-phase
√
loop gain is as shown in Figure 26.1, with ω g = ωl ωu , then the desired phase
margin (PM) in radians can be provided by choosing the DD ∆ between ωl and
ωu as
1 + sin PM
∆ = log10 decades, (27.1)
1 − sin PM
with PM expressed in degrees. Thus, for a given PM, we can choose the re-
quired DD between ωl and ωu from the above table by replacing Φmax with
PM.

Determine ωmax Determine Φmax

Determine α as a
as a function as a function of
function of Φmax
of T and α α using ωmax
Determine ∆ as a Determine ∆ as
function of Φmax a function of α
Figure 27.3: Steps in the development of the relation between the decade dis-
tance (DD, ∆) and Φmax . See Section 27.4 for details.
Table 27.2: The required DD (∆) between the corner frequencies of the lead (or
lag) controller and the corresponding Φmax (or Φmin ) that the controller needs
to provide for certain commonly occuring values of Φmax (or Φmin ). Note that
the DD is the same on the BMP and the AMBP.
Φmax (Φmin ) needed 90◦ (−90◦ ) 60◦ (−60◦ ) 45◦ (−45◦ ) 30◦ (−30◦ )
DD between corner ∞ 1.1439 0.76555 0.47712
freq-s of BP in decades ≈ 1.144 ≈ 0.766 ≈ 0.477
A plot of ∆ versus PM can be generated using the code shown in Figure 27.4
and is shown in Figure 27.5. This code uses Equation 27.1.
Example 27.1
Design using loop-shaping techniques on the 5-cycle semilog paper pro-
vided a controller of the minimum order possible to control the speed of a mo-
ω (s)
tor with the transfer function (TF) V (s) = s100
+20 for the following time domain
specifications: steady-state error to a step input ess ≤ 2%, settling time ts ≈ 0.5
s, peak overshoot M p ≤ 20%.
Label your axes appropriately. Show how the specifications are reflected in
your loop-shaping construction. Mark ω g suitably.
The solution is shown in Figure 27.6.

% ddpm.m: Plots DD verus PM.

% Works in GNU Octave and Matlab.
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
clear all, close all,
pm = linspace(0,pi/2,100);
D = log10((1+sin(pm))./(1-sin(pm)));
plot(pm*180/pi,D); grid;
xlabel(’PM (in degrees)’);
ylabel(’Decade Distance (in decades)’);
Figure 27.4: The code that generates Figure 27.5.
4.5
3.5
Decade Distance (in decades)
2.5
1.5
0.5
0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90
PM (in degrees)
Figure 27.5: Decade distance (DD) versus phase margin (PM). We note that
the DD is fairly proportional to the PM upto about 60◦ with a relationship of
DD = PM/60.
27.4 Appendix: Derivation of DD versus PM rela-

tionship

Figure 27.6: The solution of Example 1.

Derivation of DD versus PM relationship

Lead compensator Lag compensator
Ts + 1
C (s) = K , α<1 Ts + 1
αTs + 1 C (s) = K , α>1
αTs + 1
K s + T1
= K s + T1
1
α s + αT = 1
α s + αT
jωT + 1
C ( jω ) = K jωT + 1
jωαT + 1 C ( jω ) = K
jωαT + 1
Φ = arctan Tω − arctan αTω

Φ = arctan Tω − arctan αTω
dΦ T αT
⇒ = − dΦ T αT
dω 1 + T2 ω2 1 + α2 T 2 ω 2 ⇒ = −
dω 1 + T2 ω2 1 + α2 T 2 ω 2

d arctan y dy/dx dΦ
∵ = = 0 implies
dx 1 + y2 dω
To determine Φmax , set dΦ
dω = 0. This T αT
gives: 2 2
=
1+T ω 1 + α2 T 2 ω 2
T αT
=
1 + T2 ω2 1 + α2 T 2 ω 2 ⇒ 1 + α2 T 2 ω 2 = α + αT 2 ω 2
⇒ (α − 1)(αT 2 ω 2 ) = α − 1
⇒ 1 + α2 T 2 ω 2 = α + αT 2 ω 2 ⇒ αT 2 ω 2 = 1
⇒ α2 T 2 ω 2 − αT 2 ω 2 = α−1 1
⇒ ωmin = √
⇒ (α − 1)(αT 2 ω 2 ) = α−1 T α
⇒ αT 2 ω 2 = 1
1 1 1
ωmin is the GM of and αT .
⇒ ωmax = √ T
T α
We see that ωmax is the geometric

1
mean (GM) of T1 and αT .

Derivation of DD versus PM relationship (concluded)

Lead compensator Lag compensator
Plugging the expression for ωmax in
that for Φ, we obtain
Φmax = arctan Tωmax

⇒ Φmin = arctan Tωmin
− arctan αTωmax
√ − arctan αTωmin
1
⇒ Φmax = arctan √ − arctan α 1 √
α ⇒ Φmin = arctan √ − arctan α
√ α
√1 − α
⇒ Φmax
α 1−α
= arctan[ √ ] ⇒ Φmin = arctan √
1 + √1α α 2 α
1−α 1−α
= arctan √ ⇒ tan Φmin = √
2 α 2 α
1−α
⇒ tan Φmax = √
2 α
Using the relation sin θ = √ tan θ 2 ,
1+tan θ
we can write Φmax alternatively as
follows:
1−α 1−α
sin Φmax = sin Φmin =
1+α 1+α
1 − sin Φmin
1 − sin Φmax ⇒α=
⇒α= 1 + sin Φmin
1 + sin Φmax
1 1
1 1 The DD (∆) between T and αT is
The DD (∆) between T and αT is
1 1
1 1 ∆ = log10 − log10
∆ = log10 − log10 T αT
αT T
= log10 α > 0, α > 1
1
= log10 > 0, α < 1 1 − sin Φmin
α = log10
1 + sin Φmax 1 + sin Φmin
= log10
1 − sin Φmax 3
√
1+
E.g., Φmin = −60◦ : ∆ = log10 √2
E.g., for Φmax
√
= +60◦ , ∆ needs to be 1− 23
1+ 3 ⇒ ∆ = 1.1439 decades
∆ = log10 √2 = log10 1+0.877
1−0.877
1− 23
⇒ ∆ = 1.1439 decades.

Lecture 28
Loop-shaping (Part 6):

Relation between M p and PM
In this lecture, for the closed-loop (CL) system of Figure 23.2, we see the rela-
tion between the desired overshoot M p in the system’s unit step response and
the phase margin (PM) that would provide this M p . For this purpose, we de-
velop this relationship for a second order system, and assume this relationship
as being approximately valid for systems of higher order.
28.1 Relation between M p and PM for second order

system
Consider the standard second order TF
ωn 2
G (s) = (28.1)
s(s + 2ζωn )
Sample Bode and polar plots that correspond to this standard second order
TF, for ωn = 1 rad/s and ζ = 0.5, plotted using the m-file ord2.m included
in this lecture note are shown in figures 28.1 and 28.2 respectively. We show
these plots so that the PM of this TF is clear. The CL system is, of course, a
unity-feedback one.
Let us work out the PM of this TF. For this, we first determine the gain
crossover frequency ω g by setting the magnitude of G ( jω ) = 1 at ω g .
ωn 2

G ( jω g ) =
−ω g 2 + j2ζωn ω g = 1

This gives
rq
ω g = ωn 4ζ 4 + 1 − 2ζ 2
As
π ω
∠G ( jω ) = − − arctan
2 2ζωn
137
Bode Diagram
50
0
Magnitude (dB)
−50
−100
−90
Phase (deg)
−135
PM
−180
−2 −1 0 1 2
10 10 10 10 10
Frequency (rad/sec)
Figure 28.1: Bode plot of the standard open-loop second order system G (s) =
ωn 2
s(s+2ζωn )
. The item of interest in this plot is the phase margin of this open-loop
system.
90
4
120 60
3
150 2 30
180 0
210 330
240 300
270
Figure 28.2: Polar plot of the standard open-loop second order system G (s) =
ωn 2
s(s+2ζωn )
. The item of interest in this plot is the phase margin of this open-loop
system.

we have
π ωg
∠G ( jω g ) = − − arctan
2 2ζωn
The familiar expression
PM = π + ∠G ( jω g ).
π
gives us, using the fact that 2 − arctan x = arctan 1x ,
2ζ
PM = arctan qp (28.2)
4ζ 4 + 1 − 2ζ 2
Let us see how this PM is related to the peak overshoot M p (expressed as M p =

y(t p )−y(∞)
y(∞)
× 100%) of the unit step response of the unity-feedback CL system
ωn 2
G (s) = .
s2 + 2ζωn s + ωn 2
that corresponds to the above OL TF.
Problem 28.1
Show that, for the second order unity-feedback CL system built around the
TF of (28.1), M p is given by the expression:
√−πζ
Mp = e 1− ζ 2 × 100% (28.3)
A plot of M p versus ζ using Equation (28.3) and a plot of PM versus ζ

using Equation (28.2) is shown in Figure 28.3, and a plot of PM versus M p
based on the plot of Figure 28.3 is shown in Figure 28.4, using the m-file pmmp.m
that is included in this lecture note. Also, plotted in Figure 28.3 is the linear
approximation (denoted PM∼)
PM ≈ 100 × ζ, for 0 ≤ ζ . 0.707
to the PM vs. ζ curve.

In the figure, we see that PM ≈ 100ζ is a reasonable approximation to PM
given by Equation (28.2) only for 0 ≤ ζ . 0.707. This approximation provides
us the PM-to-M p approximate correspondence of Table 28.1 and Figure 28.4 for
a second order system.
Finally, we are interested in the DD-to-M p correspondence. This correspon-
dence is shown in Figure 28.5 by putting together information from figures 28.3
and 28.4.
28.2 Applying the second order relation to higher

order
Henceforth in our loop-shaping methodology, we will use the approximate cor-
respondence of Figure 28.5 as a guideline to choosing the width of the −20

100
PM (in °)
Mp (in %)
90
PM∼ (in °)
80
70
60
PM, Mp, PM∼
50
40
30
20
10
0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1
ξ
Figure 28.3: Relationship between M p and ζ and PM and ζ. Note that the
approximation shown by PM∼ is only valid for 0 ≤ ζ . 0.707.
100
PM
PM∼
90
80
70
PM, PM∼ (in degrees)
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
M_p (in \%)
Figure 28.4: Relationship between M p and PM. Note that the PM∼ versus M p
relationship is only valid for PM between 0 and 70◦ .

2
∆
PM/100
1.8
1.6
DD (in decades) & PM (in degrees)
1.4
1.2
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Peak overshoot M (in %)
p
Figure 28.5: Plot of DD versus M p constructed from figures 28.3 and 28.4. Also
reproduced is the information from Figure 28.4 of PM versus M p .
Table 28.1: The approximate correspondence of PM to M p of the standard sec-

ond order system.
PM 25◦ 40◦ 60◦ 70◦
Mp 45% 25% 10% 5%
dB/dec section centered about ω g . This figure is constructed from figures

28.3 and 28.4. Note that this approximation seemed to have worked in the
MATLAB-based example given in Section 26.4. There we have a PM of about
60◦ giving an M p of about 10%. See figures 26.3 and 26.4.
Note that this approximation is only an approximation. It may work very
well if the system is close to second order. It may not work very well for higher
order systems. For example, in Section 25.3 we mention that the section of the
Bode magnitude plot of Gdes ( jω ) in the region much below high frequencies,
but above the low frequency region, also has a bearing on M p .
Problem 28.2
Verify that the design of Example 1 meets its specifications, and see what
information you could have applied to that design from this lecture.
% ord2.m: m-file to plot Bode and polar plot of

% the 2nd second order system open-loop system.

%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
clear all;
close all;
clc;
% Define the standard OL 2nd order system’s

% coefficients:
wn = 1; zeta = 0.5;
s=tf(’s’);
g=(wn^2)/(s*(s+2*zeta*wn));
% Plot the BP of the OL 2nd order system:

bode(g); grid;
% Plot the polar plot of the OL 2nd order system:

n=1000;
w = logspace(-0.6,2,n);
[mag,ph] = bode(g,w);
%
% The mag and phase outputs of bode command in MATLAB
% even when the system is Single Input Single Output,
% are 3-D arrays. The polar command of Matlab is unable
% to handle these arrays. So we convert them into 1-D
% arrays as follows:
%
for i=1:n
mag1(i) = mag(:,:,i) ;
ph1(i) = ph(:,:,i)*pi/180;
% converted degrees to radians
end
%
figure; polar(ph1,mag1)
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
% pmmp.m: m-file to see the relationship
% between PM of the second order system
% $\frac{{\omega_n}^2}{s(s+2\xi\omega_n)}$,
% and the peak overshoot $M_p$ of the unit
% step response of the corresponding
% closed-loop system.
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
clear all; close all;
xi = linspace(0,1,40);
% Declare an array of values of xi at which to
% evaluate
pm = atan(2*xi./sqrt(sqrt(4*xi.^4+1)-2*xi.^2));

% This gives PM in radians. Convert this into

% degrees:
pm = pm*180/pi;
% Note the construct "./". The dot preceding

% the arithmetic operations *, /, and ^ allows
% to perform elementwise multiplication, division,
% and raising to a power respectively.
% For example, [1, 2].*[2, 3] gives [2, 6].
% [1,2]./[2,5] gives [0.5,0.4], and [1,2].^2
% gives [1,4].
mp = exp(-pi*xi./sqrt(1-xi.^2))*100;
% This gives the peak overshoot in percent
% Peak overshoot is defined as
% $M_p = \frac{y(t_p)-y(\infty)}{y(\infty)}\times 100\%$.
pmapprox = 100*xi;
plot(xi,pm,xi,mp,xi,pmapprox)
xlabel(’\xi’); ylabel(’PM, M_p, PM\sim’)
legend(’PM (in \circ)’,’M_p (in %)’,’PM\sim (in \circ)’)
grid
print -depsc pm-zeta-mp.eps
figure
plot(mp,pm,mp,pmapprox)
xlabel(’M_p (in \%)’); ylabel(’PM, PM\sim (in degrees)’);
legend(’PM’,’PM\sim’); grid
print -depsc mppm.eps
Problem 28.3
If necessary, edit ord2.m and pmmp.m so that these files run successfully in
GNU Octave, giving the same results that they gave in MATLAB.


Lecture 29
Loop-shaping (Part 7): A

solved example
29.1 Problem
Consider the control system of Figure 29.1. We wish to design a compensator
D (s) that satisfies the following design specifications:
(a) Kv = 100.
(b) PM ≈ 60◦ .
(c) Sinusoidal inputs of up to 1 rad/sec to be reproduced with ≤ 2% error.
(d) Sinusoidal inputs with a frequency of greater than 100 rad/sec to be atten-
uated at the output to ≤ 5% of their input value.
1. Determine K1 and K2 of Figure 29.2.
2. Write the numerical values of ω1 and ω2 of Figure 29.2.
3. What is the decade distance needed between the corner frequencies ωl and
ωh for the desired Bode plot of Figure 29.2?
4. Is this DD the distance on the BMP or on the ABMP or both?
5. On the semilog grid provided, draw the ABMPs of the desired D (s) G (s)
and of G (s). Your figure must contain all the necessary labels.
6. On the semilog grid provided, show the ABMP of the resulting D (s). Write
the TF of D (s).
7. For the resulting CL system, given that ωB ∈ [ωmin , ωmax ], where ωB is the
bandwidth, what are the values of ωmin and ωmax ?
145
Yref (s) + U (s) G (s) = 10 Y (s)

s
D (s)

− s +1
10
Figure 29.1: Control system to be designed.
20 log10 (K1 )
ωg
ω1 ωl ωh ω2
−20
dB/dec
20 log10 (K2 )
Figure 29.2: Parameters for loop-shaping for the problem.
29.2 Solution
We first translate the specifications into actionable information.
(a) Kv = 100.
At this point in the course, we have not yet seen the concept of Kv . We will
do so soon. In the meanwhile, it suffices to know that for a unity-feedback
control system built around the TF GOL (s) that contains a single integrator,
Kv is the frequency where the left-most asymptote of the ABMP of GOL (s)
has a value of 0 dB. Kv has the units of rad/s.
In this problem, Kv = 100 implies that the left most asymptote of the BMP
of D (s) G (s) has a slope of −20 dB/decade and passes through the point
{ ω = 100 rad/s, dB-gain = 0 dB }.
(b) PM ≈ 60◦ .
This specification can give us the decade distance (DD) between the ωl and
ωh of Figure 29.2. Table 27.2 says that a DD of 1.144 decades between ωl
and ωh with a −20 dB/decade decline between them implies PM ≈ 60◦ .
We have from this specification:
log10 ωh − log10 ωl = 1.144

(c) Sinusoidal inputs of up to 1 rad/sec to be reproduced with ≤ 2% error.
E(s) 1
Ge (s) , =
R(s) 1 + D (s) G (s)
1
⇒ Ge ( jω ) =
1 + D ( jω ) G ( jω )
Let us define e(t) , r (t) − y(t). For an input sinusoid r (t) = A sin ωt,
the steady-state value of e(t) is ess (t) = | Ge ( jω )| A sin(ωt + ∠Ge ( jω )). It
is given that ess (t) ≤ 2% when r (t) is upto 1 rad/s in frequency. Is this
a specification for the magnitude and phase of ess (t), or is it only for the
phase of ess (t)? Note that, the frequency responses of even ideal filters are
defined as having phases changing linearly with frequency. So, most likely,
we are not being asked to constrain the phase as well as magnitude of a
practical filter within 2%. This guess is verified by looking at specification
(d). So, the 2% specification can only be on the magnitude of ess (t). So,
we shall constrain the magnitude of ess (t) within 2%. This can be done as
follows:
1
| Ge ( jω )| = ≤ 2%,
|1 + D ( jω ) G ( jω )|
∀ω ≤ 1 rad/s.
⇒ | D ( jω ) G ( jω )| ' 50, ∀ω ≤ 1 rad/s.
So, K1 ≥ 50 and ω1 = 1 rad/sec.
(d) Sinusoidal inputs with a frequency of greater than 100 rad/sec to be atten-
Y (s) D (s) G (s)

GCL (s) , =
R(s) 1 + D (s) G (s)
D ( jω ) G ( jω )
⇒ GCL ( jω ) =
1 + D ( jω ) G ( jω )
Want | GCL ( jω )| ≤ 5% (wanting to keep ∠GCL ( jω ) ≤ 5% is unrealistic).

This can be achieved thus:
| D ( jω ) G ( jω )| / 5%, ∀ω ≥ 100 rad/s
So, K2 / 0.05 and ω2 = 100 rad/s.
Now that we have actionable information, we answer the questions.
1. Determine K1 and K2 of Figure 29.2.
K1 = 50, K2 = 0.05
2. Write the numerical values of ω1 and ω2 of Figure 29.2.
ω1 = 1 rad/sec, ω2 = 100 rad/sec

3. What is the decade distance needed between the corner frequencies ωl and
ωh for the desired Bode plot of Figure 29.2?
1.144 decades.
4. Is this DD the distance on the BMP or on the ABMP or both?
Both.
5. On the semilog grid provided, draw the ABMPs of the desired D (s) G (s)
and of G (s). Your figure must contain all the necessary labels.
See graph of Figure 29.3.
5.1. From the values of K1 , K2 and ω1 , ω2 we get the forbidden regions. The
BMP of D (s) G (s) cannot lie in this region.
5.2. Draw the left-most asymptote of the BMP of D (s) G (s). For this, using
Kv = 100, draw a straight line at a slope of −20 dB/decade and passing
through 100 rad/sec at 0 dB.
5.3. As no data is given to fix ω g , we choose ω g to be approximately equidis-
√
tant, on logarithmic scale, from ω1 and ω2 . That is, ω g ≈ ω1 ω2 . This
gives ω g = 10 rad/sec.
5.4. We draw a 1.144 decade-wide −20 dB/decade straight line centered at
ωg .
5.5. We connect the left end of this −20 dB/decade section to the asymptote
of step 5.2 via a straight line while being careful that this line does not
intersect the LF forbidden region.
This line will need to have a slope that is integer multiple of −20
dB/decade. We get this slope as −60 dB /dec in our case.
5.6. From the right end of the −20 dB/decline (of step 5), we draw a straight
line at a slope of −40 dB/dec (integral multiple of 20), that passes below
the HF forbidden zone.
The ABMP of the desired D (s) G (s) is shown in the graph of Figure 29.3.
Also shown on the same graph is the ABMP of G (s).
6. On the semilog grid provided, show the ABMP of the resulting D (s). Write
the TF of D (s).
See graph of Figure 29.3.
6.1. Subtract the ABMP of G (s) from that of D (s) G (s) to obtain the ABMP
of D (s) as shown on the graph.
6.2. The TF of D(s) is
s 2 s
10 +1 +1
D (s) = 2.5 2 10 .
s s
+1 +1
0.7 40

7. For the resulting CL system, given that ωb ∈ [ωmin , ωmax ], where ωb is the
bandwidth, what are the values of ωmin and ωmax ?
Since ω g ≤ ωb ≤ 2ω g , we have ωmin = ω g = 10 rad/s, and ωmax = 2ω g =
20 rad/s.
s 2 s
10 +1 +1
Figure 29.3: Solution to the problem. D (s) = 2.5 2 10 .
s s
+1 +1
0.7 40


Lecture 30
Metrics for steady-state

accuracy of unity-feedback
systems built around
minimum-phase systems
Consider the closed-loop system of Figure 23.1. Assuming that d(t) and n(t)
are absent,
the error in tracking a reference input R(s) is given by E(s) =
R(s) (1 + G (s)).
How accurately a control system tracks, for example, a step or a ramp input
is of interest in the design. More generally, test signals of the form r (t) =
tn 1(t) n! may be used to evaluate the performance of a control system. Note

that L− { tm m!} = 1 sm+1 . So, R(s) = 1 sm+1 . See Section 30.4 for the

definition of L− {·}.
The steady-state error ess is a measure of this accuracy, and is defined as
ess , lim e(t).

t→∞
We can use the final value theorem (FVT) to calculate ess as follows:
1
ess = lim e(t) = lim sE(s) = lim s R(s)
t→∞ s →0 s →0 1 + G (s)
Note that the FVT works only if ess to a given input r (t) exists and is finite.
Equivalently, FVT requires all poles of sE(s) to be in the open left half s-plane.
Problem 30.1
In practice, where is a step or a ramp used as a test signal for a control
system?
The TFs that we study in this course are of the form shown in (9.2). Assume
that G (s) of (9.2) is minimum-phase. This means that all the constants in G (s)
are non-negative, and that G (s) is rational. In the remainder of this lecture, we
151
study the concepts of error constants and system type, which are used to discuss
the steady-state accuracy of minimum-phase systems.
30.1 Error constants
Example 30.1
Evaluate ess for the case of a minimum-phase G (s) having 2 poles at the
origin and the CL system tracking a parabolic input.
Note that, though G (s) has 2 poles at the origin, if we wish to apply
FVT, then G (s) is not permitted 2
m + 1
2 to be, for example, of the form 1/s . For
R(s) = 1 s , G (s) = 1 s would result in sE(s) having a pair of com-
plex conjugate poles on the jω-axis, disqualifying this sE(s) for FVT. In the rest
of this example, we assume that G (s) is such that sE(s) is amenable to FVT.
1 1 1 1
ess = lim s 3
= lim 2 2
=
s →0 1 + G (s) s s →0 s + s G ( s ) lims→0 s2 G (s)
As G (s) has exactly two poles at the origin and is minimum-phase, s2 G (s) will
have all poles and zeros in the open left half s-plane. Therefore, lims→0 s2 G (s)
is a positive finite constant.
We summarize in Table 30.1 calculations similar to those in Example 1 for

the cases of r (t) being a step, ramp, and parabola, and G (s) having up to 2
poles at the origin, while being such that sE(s) has all poles in the open LHP.
Problem 30.2
Show a G (s), which is minimum-phase, but the sE(s) corresponding to
which has some poles that are not in the open left half s-plane.
In Table 30.1, K p , Kv , Ka are called error constants or error coefficients (ECs).

K p is called position (or step) constant or position (or step) error constant, Kv
is called velocity (or ramp) (error) constant, and Ka is called acceleration (or
parabolic) (error) constant.
We may wonder why control engineers would want to talk about steady-
state error as the inverse of some quantity. We provide an answer to this ques-
tion here.
ECs are attributes of the loop gain of a control system when this loop gain is
minimum-phase. They relate the loop gain of a unity feedback control system
to the steady-state error of the control system under various inputs such as
step, ramp, parabola, etc. ECs are especially obvious on the Bode magnitude
plot (BMP) of the loop gain. Indeed, their importance stems from the fact that
they can be read easily off the BMP []. Control system design specifications on
the steady state error are provided through ECs, particularly when designing
using Bode plots[]. Given the frequency response of the open loop system, we
can fit a TF to this frequency response, and an important parameter in this TF
is an EC. Therefore, an EC is a finite quantity.

Table 30.1: Calculations of the steady-state error (ess ) in tracking step, ramp,
and parabolic inputs by a unity-feedback closed-loop system whose loop gain
has upto 2 poles at the origin.
Number of poles of G (s) at origin
0 1 2
lims→0 s 1+G1 (s) 1s =
1
1+lims→0 G (s)
. Here,
0 < lim G (s) < ∞ Here, Here,
1 s →0 lim G (s) = ∞. lim G (s) = ∞.
s ∵ G (s) is s →0 s →0
minimum-phase. ∴ ess = 0. ∴ ess = 0.
Denote it by K p .
Then, ess = 1+1K p .
Cannot use FVT
lims→0 s 1+G1 (s) s12 =
to evalute ess
1 Here,
(∵ sE(s) has 1 pole .
Here,
R(s)
lims→0 sG (s)
1
at origin). Deter- 0 < lim sG (s) < lim sG (s) = ∞.
s2 s →0 s →0
mine y(t). Then, ∴ ess = 0.
∞. Denote it by Kv .
e(t) = r (t) − y(t)
Then, ess = K1v .
gives ess = ∞.
lims→0 s 1+G1 (s) s13 =
Cannot use FVT to Cannot use FVT to
1
evalute ess . Deter- evalute ess . Deter- lims→0 s2 G (s)
. Here,
1
s3
mine y(t). Then, mine y(t). Then, 0 < lim s2 G (s) <
e(t) = r (t) − y(t) e(t) = r (t) − y(t) s →0
∞. Denote it by Ka .
gives ess = ∞. gives ess = ∞.
Then, ess = K1a .
30.2 How to read K p , Kv , Ka off the BMPs

The ECs can be read off BMPs easily as shown in the Figure 30.1 and as justified
by Table 30.2.
30.3 System type

As we saw, ess depends on the input that the CL system is trying to track, as
well as the number of integrators (that is, poles at the origin) present in G (s).
The latter number is assigned the special name “system type”.
Definition 3 [29, page 371] The unity-feedback CL system built around G (s) is type
i (i = 0, 1, 2, . . .) if G (s) contains i integrators, i.e., if G (s) contains the element 1/si .
Thus, we have type 0, type 1, type 2, etc systems. The definition of system
type is much confused in literature[]. For example, which system is type i, G (s)
or its CL version? Books also define the system as type 0 if its position error
constant is finite, as type 1 if its velocity error constant is finite, etc. In my view,
these definitions are roundabout versions of Definition 3.

Table 30.2: Explanation for why the error constants can be read off the Bode magnitude plots.
ECs calculated for the minimum-phase ver- Information from the BMP of the minimum-phase version of G (s) of (9.2)
Lecture Notes
Ramprasad Potluri
sion of G (s) of (9.2) using Table 30.1
OL TF has no If a unit step isinput to the CL system, then On the BMP of G (s), the equation
poles or zeros we say ess = 1 (1 + K p ) , where
n n
!
2
at the origin ∏i=1 0 (zi ) ∏k=
2
0 ( ωnk )
n n 2 dB-gain = 20 log10
∏i=1 0 (zi ) ∏k=
2
0 ( ωnk ) d d
∏i=1 0 ( pi ) ∏k=
2 2
K p = G (0) = d d 0 ( ωdk )
∏i=1 0 ( pi ) ∏k=
2 2
0 ( ωdk )
describes the left-most asymptote. This observation helps in reading K p off
the BMP as equal to G (0).
OL TF has ex- If a unit ramp is input to the CL system, then On the BMP of G (s), the equation
actly one pole we say ess = 1 /Kv , where
n n2
!
2
at the origin 1 ∏i=1 0 (zi ) ∏k= 0 ( ωnk )
n n2
∏ 1 ( zi ) ∏ k = 2 dB-gain = 20 log10
0 ( ωnk ) ω ∏d1 ( pi ) ∏d2 (ωdk 2 )
154 of 224
Kv = lim sG (s) = di=0 d i =1 k =0
s →0 ∏i=1 1 ( pi ) ∏k=
2 2
0 ( ωdk )
describes the left-most asymptote. This asymptote intersects the ω-axis at
EE250 (Control Systems Analysis) IITK
n n 2
∏i=1 0 (zi ) ∏k=
2
0 ( ωnk )
ω= d d
,
∏i=1 1 ( pi ) ∏k=
2 2
0 ( ωdk )
that is, at ω = Kv .
OL TF has ex- If a unit parabola is input to the CL system, On the BMP of G (s), the equation
actly two poles then we say ess = 1 /Ka , where
n n
!
2
at the origin 1 ∏i=1 0 (zi ) ∏k=2
0 ( ωnk )
February 21, 2012

n n2
∏ 1 ( zi ) ∏ k = 2 dB-gain = 20 log10
0 ( ωnk ) ω 2 ∏d1 ( pi ) ∏d2 (ωdk 2 )
Ka = lim s2 G (s) = di=0 d i =2 k =0
s →0 ∏i=1 2 ( pi ) ∏k=
2 2
0 ( ωdk )
describes the left-most asymptote. This asymptote intersects the ω-axis at
n n 2
∏i=1 0 (zi ) ∏k=
2
0 ( ωnk )
ω2 = d d2
,
∏i=1 2 ( pi ) ∏k= 2
0 ( ωdk )
√
that is, at ω 2 = Ka , that is, at ω = Ka .
20 log10 K p
−20 −40
√
ω Kv ω Ka ω
Figure 30.1: How to read K p , Kv , Ka off the BMPs.
30.4 Appendix: Various definitions of the Laplace

transform
There are two kinds of LT we encountered in our earlier courses: one-sided LT
and two-sided LT.
For the function f (t), the various pairs of the definitions of the one-sided
LT and the corresponding inverse LT are shown in Table 30.3.
Here, c is any real number greater than the abscicca of convergence, α, of
the LT. Given that s = σ + jω, the smallest value α of σ for which the LT exists
is called the absicca of convergence of the LT [24]. In our course, we will not
need to use the inverse LT. Instead, we will use tables of LT, where needed.
The two-sided LT is as follows:
Z ∞
L{ f (t)} , f (t)e−st dt
−∞
But, we will not use this in our course because we will work with signals that
are zero always but abruptly acquire non-zero value at some point in time,
and this value of time can be arbitrarily chosen as t = 0. So, one-sided LT is
appropriate in this case.
Even when the signals may have non-zero values before t = 0, we assume
that we know their effect upto either t = 0− (immediately before t = 0), or
t = 0, or t = 0+ (immediately after t = 0) in the form of initial conditions of
differential equations at these time instants. So, one-sided LT is appropriate in
this case too.
Distinction between the three definitions of one-sided LT is needed when
an impulse is involved at the origin [22, page 62]. So, in the next section, we
will recap our knowledge of the unit impulse function.
30.5 Appendix: Unit impulse function

A unit impulse function (a.k.a Dirac delta function), denoted δ(t), has the fol-
lowing properties among others that are familiar to us and that we may use in
this course:
1. δ(τ − t) = 0, ∀τ 6= t [31].

Table 30.3: Pairs of definitions of the one-sided Laplace Transform.

Definition Source
Z ∞ [24]
F− (s) = L− { f (t)} , f (t)e−st dt
0−
Z c+ j∞
1
L− 1
− { F− ( s )} , F− (s)est ds = f (t) , t > 0−
2πj c− j∞
Z ∞
F (s) = L{ f (t)} , f (t)e−st dt
0
Z c+ j∞
1
L−1 { F (s)} , F (s)est ds = f (t) , t > 0
2πj c− j∞
Z ∞ [24]
F+ (s) = L+ { f (t)} , f (t)e−st dt
0+
Z c+ j∞
1
L− 1
+ { F+ ( s )} , F+ (s)est ds = f (t) , t > 0+
2πj c− j∞
d1(t)
2. δ(t) = dt , where 1(t) is a unit step function, a.k.a., Heaviside function,
(
0 t<0
1( t ) =
1 t>0
The Heaviside function has a jump discontinuity at t = 0. Its value at t = 0 is

usually taken to be 1/2. Sometimes, its value is taken equal to some constant
c, where 0 < c < 1 [31].
R +∞ R +∞ R 0+ R 0+
3. −∞ δ(τ − t)dτ = −∞ δ(t − τ )dτ = 0− δ(t − τ )dτ = 0− δ(τ )dτ = 1.
R +∞
4. −∞ δ(τ − t) f (τ )dτ = f (t), if f (τ ) is continuous at τ = t. “In other words,
the impulse is so short and so intense that no value of f matters except over
the short range where the δ occurs” [22, page 53].
We can work this property out as follows. The product f (τ )δ(τ − t) is illus-
trated in Figure 30.2.
We see that this product is equal to zero everywhere, except at τ = t where
it equals the unit impulse multiplied by f (t). Similarly,
Z +∞ Z +∞ Z +∞
δ(t − τ ) f (τ )dτ = δ(t − τ ) f (t)dτ = f (t) δ(t − τ )dτ = f (t)
−∞ −∞ −∞
The unit impulse function is not a function in the classical sense. For a
classical function r (t) that is defined as zero everywhere except at finitely many

0
t τ
f
0
t τ
f ×δ
0
t τ
Figure 30.2: Graphical illustration of the product f (τ )δ(τ − t).
R +∞
points, the integral −∞ r (t)dt evaluates to zero. Functions such as δ are called
generalized functions and are studied in the theory of distributions or measure
theory (see, for example, [31]).
30.6 Appendix: Care needed in using the one-sided

LT
“It is the transform of the unit-impulse function that led us to choose the L−
transform rather than the L+ transform” [22, page 64].
Much confusion exists in literature about the definition of the one-sided
LT and the delta function. The book [24] was probably the first to notice this
confusion. The paper [32] presents a survey of this confusion, and also lists the
literature that does not have this confusion. The book [22] is cited in [32] as
treating the one-sided LT and the delta function in a consistent manner.


Lecture 31
An example of application of
loop-shaping in automobile
control
159

Part V
Digital implementation of
controllers
161
Lecture 32
State space realization of

transfer function
32.1 Example of state space realization

Consider the following TF
Y (s) a s + a0
G (s) = = 2 1
U (s) s + b1 s + b0
We wish to find a state space model whose input and output are u(t) and y(t)
respectively, and whose TF is G (s). The following is one way to accomplish
this goal:
1. Introduce an intermediate variable X (s) thus:
Y (s) Y (s) X (s)

G (s) = =
U (s) X (s) U (s)
2. Let
X (s) 1 Y (s)
= 2 and = a1 s + a0
U (s) s + b1 s + b0 X (s)
3. From the last step above, we can write the following:
s2 X (s) = U (s) − b1 sX (s) − b0 X (s)

Y (s) = a1 sX (s) + a0 X (s)
4. Using this last step, we can construct the simulation diagram of Figure 32.1.
Note that here, the block containing the 1/s represents integration opera-
tion. Books show either of the two equivalent blocks shown in Figure 32.2.
The 1/s is more appropriate
R when the block diagram is in the Laplace Trans-
form domain, while the is more appropriate when the block diagram is in
time domain.
163
a1
+
U (s) s2 X ( s ) 1 sX (s) 1 X (s) Y (s)
s s
a0
+ +
− −
b1
b0
Figure 32.1: Simulation diagram for Step 4.
1
R
s =
Figure 32.2: The two equivalent blocks that represent an integrator. The 1/s is
more appropriate
R when the block diagram is in the Laplace Transform domain,
while the is more appropriate when the block diagram is in time domain.
a1
+
U (s) s2 X ( s ) 1 sX (s) 1 X (s) Y (s)
s s
a0
u(t) + ẋ2 x2 = ẋ1 x1 + y(t)
− −
b1
b0
Figure 32.3: Writing in the time-domain quantities into the simulation diagram
of Figure 32.1.

a1
+
U (s) s2 X ( s ) 1 sX (s) 1 X (s) Y (s)
s s
a0
u(t) + ẋ1 x1 = ẋ2 x2 + y(t)
− −
b1
b0
Figure 32.4: An alternative ssignment of state variables to the outputs of the

integrators of the simulation diagram of Figure 32.1.
5. In the block diagram, write the time-domain quantities u(t) and y(t) as
Also, assign a state variable to the output of each integrator block. In the
above case, we started the assignment at the output of the right-most inte-
grator block, going left.
6. Write the differential equations based on the time-domain quantities in the

simulation diagram
ẋ1 = x2
ẋ2 = −b0 x1 − b1 x2 + u
y = a0 x1 + a1 x2
This system of first order differential equations gives us the state-space (SS)
model " # " # " #
0 1 0 x1
ẋ = x+ u with x =
−b0 −b1 1 x2
Problem 32.1
Assign a state variable to the output of each integrator block starting from
the left-most integrator, going right as shown in Figure 32.4.
Verify that the SS model is as follows:
" # " # " #
−b1 −b0 1 x1
ẋ = x+ u, with x =
0 1 0 x2
In Example 1 and the disucssion preceding it, we illustrated two separate SS

realizations for a given TF. In practice, to each TF correspond an infinite number
of SS realizations. The dimension of a SS model is the dimension of the space
from which the state vector (also known as state) x comes. In our example, x
comes from a 2-D space.
The simulation diagram approach shown here is not the only simulation
diagram approach for obtaining the SS realization. Also, a simulation diagram
approach is not the only approach for obtaining a SS realization.

Summator Integral controller

Power amplifier
Desired output
−
+ −
+ −
+
DC motor
Signal inversion
Tachogenerator
or potentiometer
−
+
Figure 32.5: An example of an op-amp circuit for controlling a DC motor.
The above diagram is called a simulation diagram because it can be built

using hardware and simulates the behavior of the TF G (s) and of the corre-
sponding differential equation.
Simulation diagrams can be implemented for LTI systems using only opera-
tional amplifiers, capacitors, resistors, and, of course, power supplies. Indeed,
every LTI state-space equation can be implemented using an op-amp circuit
[33, page 16].
A simulation diagram represents an analog computer. Analog computers
for LTI systems implement the operations of integration, summation, and am-
plification. Analog computers used to be used for simulation before the days
of simulation on digital computers.
An op-amp circuit can be built for controlling the speed or position of the
shaft of a DC motor as shown in Figure 32.5.
In this figure, each of the op-amp-based blocks has been built in a inverting
feedback configuration. We need to be aware that this configuration introduces
a phase shift of 180◦ . An alternative is to build the op-amp-based blocks using
a non-inverting feedback configuration. The integral controller has the transfer
1
function sCR . The above figure does not show the power supply to each op-
amp.
Why did we build the circuit using op-amps? For example, a capacitor too
has the transfer function of an integrator. Then why not use a simple capacitor
in place of an op-amp based implementation of an integrator? Note that, as
mentioned in Lecture 1, each block in a block diagram needs to be non-loading.
Only then are our manipulations with block diagrams, the way we have been
doing them so far, valid. An op-amp has an almost infinite input impedance
and an almost zero output impedance. The first means that an op-amp will
not load the block that preceds it in a circuit. The second means that it keeps
a minimal share of the signal (voltage) that it outputs. On the other hand, a

simple capacitor, if used as replacement for an op-amp based integrator, would

load the preceding block.
Op-amps, in either inverting or non-inverting feedback configuration, can
be used to build arbitrary rational TFs.
32.2 Numerical integration of state space model

A SS model has more than one use. We can design in the SS framework a
control system for a given plant. In this sense, the SS modeling framework is
an alternative to the TF modeling framework.
Another use of the SS model is illustrated in the next section. In preparation
for that section, let us see how we can numerically integrate the differential
equation that a SS model represents.
Suppose we have the following SS model:
ẋ = Ax + Bu
y = Cx + Du
Example 32.1
Which of the following two definitions of a derivative do we use in our
differential equations, and why?
x (t + ∆t) − x (t) x (t) − x (t − ∆t)

ẋ , lim or ẋ , lim
∆t→0 ∆t ∆t→0 ∆t
The first one is sometimes called right derivative in order to contrast with the
left derivative which is the second one. The concept of a left derivative is used
when talking about the differentiability of a function, where we say that for
the function to be differentiable at a point the left derivative needs to be equal
to the right derivative at that point. The left and right derivatives are thus
mathematical artefacts that are used mainly to talk about differentiability of
functions.
For all other purposes, the derivative is defined only in the first manner,
and has the following two well-known physical interpretations:
(a) the slope of the function at each point, the slope being calculated by looking
ahead from the point;
(b) as estimating the value of the variable at the next time instant, given its
value at the current instant and its rate of change at the current instant:
y(t + ∆t) = y(t) + v(t)∆t.
In fact, the second interpretation is actually the origin of the derivative opera-
tion [34, page 112].
The derivative as a forward-looking element is the meaning and purpose

with which it is used in control systems. We will see evidence of this statement
when we talk about derivative control.
Digital implementation of a controller is necessarily constrained by the
speed of the processor. So, ∆t cannot be made arbitrarily small. This means

that in a digital implementation of the derivative action, using the left deriva-
tive may not give the same result as does using the right derivative.
Now let us return to the SS model. Euler’s approximation of the derivative
is
x (t + ∆t) − x (t)
ẋ ≈ , for small ∆t.
∆t
Using Euler’s approximation, we can write the state space model as
x (t + ∆t) − x (t)
≈ Ax (t) + Bu(t), for small ∆t.
∆t
y(t) = Cx (t) + Du(t)
which can be rewritten as
x (t + ∆t) ≈ ( A∆t + I ) x (t) + B∆tu(t),

y(t) = Cx (t) + Du(t)
We denote by x (k) the state at the k-th instant. The k-th instant is the time k∆t
starting from t = 0. Then the state at the instant (k + 1)∆t is x (k + 1). Using
this notation, the SS model can be written as follows:
x (k + 1) = ( A∆t + I ) x (k ) + B∆tu(k ),
y(k) = Cx (k) + Du(k)
In the literature, this system of equations is also written as
xk+1 = ( A∆t + I ) xk + B∆tuk ,

yk = Cxk + Duk
This system of equations is called discrete-time state-space model, and is conve-

nient for numerical integration of the continuous-time version. The numeri-
cal integration can be made sufficiently accurate by reducing ∆t. In situations
where there is a lower bound on ∆t, there are other methods of discretizing a
continuous-time SS model that are more accurate than the one resulting from
Euler’s approximation. See, for example, the chapter on ordinary differential
equations in [35].
Apart from numerical integration of the continuous-time SS model, another
use of the discrete-time version is that it can be used for the digital implemen-
tation of a controller. We design a controller, for example, using Bode plots.
We have the TF of the controller. We convert this TF into a SS model. We dis-
cretize it and program it in a microcontroller/microprocessor/DSP. We see this
process in more detail in EE380.
In the next section, we see how a discrete-time version of a SS model can be
used to numerically simulate the response of a control system to an arbitrary
input.

Part VI
Pole-placement design using

root locus
169
Lecture 33
Unit step response of second

order TF
33.1 State-space realization (concluded): Determin-

ing the response of a transfer function to an ar-
bitrary input
MATLAB provides us the step function to plot the unit step response of an
arbitrary TF. However, if we wish to plot the reponse of the same TF to an
arbitrary input, then MATLAB does not yet have any ready-made functions.
We have the following way out.
1. Convert the TF into a SS model.
2. Discretize this model, for example, using Euler’s approximation.
3. Numerically integrate this model using the chosen input.
As an example that illustrates the above three steps, consider the control
system we designed in Section 29.2.
Example 33.1
The plant TF was
10
G (s) = s
s +1
10
and the controller TF was
s 2 s
10 +1 +1
D (s) = 2.5 2 10
s s
+1 +1
0.7 40
We wish to see if the following two design specs are satisfied by our design:
1. Sinusoidal inputs of up to 1 rad/sec to be reproduced with ≤ 2% error.
171
2. Sinusoidal inputs with a frequency of greater than 100 rad/sec to be atten-

The m-file simul.m — that uses the m-file cleanup.m (that we used earlier in
Lecture 24) — implements the three steps that we listed above. We see from
figures 33.1 and 33.2 that both the specs are satisfied.
Problem 33.1
Peform the minimum needed modifications in the m-file simul.m so that
this file executes successfully in GNU Octave.
Problem 33.2
Which of the two methods of realization that we saw in this lecture does
the MATLAB function tf2ss perform?
1.5
y
u
0.5
−0.5
−1
−1.5
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Figure 33.1: Results for Example 1: Response y of the control system designed
in Lecture 27 to a sinusoidal input u with ω = 1 rad/s, T = 0.001 s, N = 10000.

1
y
u
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
−0.2
−0.4
−0.6
−0.8
−1
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1
Figure 33.2: Results for Example 1: Response y of the control system designed
in Lecture 27 to a sinusoidal input u with ω = 100 rad/s, T = 0.001 s, N =
1000.
33.2 Unit step response of standard second order TF

% simul.m: generates the response of the CL system
% designed in Lecture 27 to a sinusoidal input.
% This file runs in MATLAB.
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
clear all, close all
s = tf(’s’);
% Define G(s) and D(s) from Lecture 27:

G = 10/s/(s/10+1);
D = 10*(s/2.5+1)^2*(s/10+1)/(s/0.7+1)^2/(s/40+1);
% Form the closed-loop (CL) TF:

Gcl = D*G/(1+D*G);
% Extract the numerator and denominator of this

% CL TF for use with tf2ss:
[num,den] = tfdata(Gcl,’v’);

2.5
1.5
y(t)
0.5
tsa tse
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3

t (in s)
Figure 33.3: The unit step response of the standard second order TF. tsa and tse
are respectively the actual settling time of the response and the settling time of
the envelope of the response.

[n,d] = cleanup(num,den);
% Use tf2ss to convert the TF model into a state

% space (SS) model:
[A,B,C,D] = tf2ss(n,d);
% Define the step size T and the number of time

% steps N over which we wish to compute the
% sinusoidal response:
w = 1; T = 0.001; N = 10000;
% Define an identify matrix whose order is that of A.

I = eye(size(A,1),size(A,2));
% Declare and initialize variables x and y:

x(:,1) = zeros(size(A,1),1);
y(:,1) = zeros(size(C,1),1);
% Compute the sinusoidal response using the discret

% version of the SS model (we discretize using
% Euler’s approximation):
for k = 1:N
u(k) = sin(w*k*T);
x(:,k+1) = (A*T + I)*x(:,k) + B*T*u(k);
y(:,k) = C*x(:,k) + D*u(k);
end
% Plot y versus t and u versus t on one plot:

t = (1:N)*T;
plot(t,y,’-’,t,u,’--’);
legend(’y’,’u’); grid
print -depsc sineresp.eps
% ord2sys.m: Plot the step response and envelopes of the 2nd

% order system seen in Lecture 7.
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
close all
clear all
zeta = 0.1;
omegad = 20;
tau = 1/(zeta*omegad);
timelen = 6*tau;
numsteps= 1000;
t = linspace(0.001,timelen,numsteps);
y = 1 - exp(-zeta*omegad*t).*sin(omegad*t+acos(zeta))/sqrt(1-zeta^2);

% Equations of the upper and lower envelopes:

yeu = 1 + exp(-zeta*omegad*t)/sqrt(1-zeta^2);
yel = 1 - exp(-zeta*omegad*t)/sqrt(1-zeta^2);
% Specify the x% tube:

x = 5;
xl = (1-x/100)*ones(1,numsteps);
xu = (1+x/100)*ones(1,numsteps);
plot(t,y,t,yeu,t,yel,t,xl,’--’,t,xu,’--’), grid
xlabel(’t’); ylabel(’y(t)’);

Lecture 34
Second order TF with

additional zero
34.1 Analysis of formulae developed for unit step

response of standard second order system
Figure 34.1 shows the plots.
34.2 The case of an additonal zero in a second order

TF
The m-file addzero.m plots the responses due to the additional zeros in the
second-order transfer function. This file calculates the derivative dy/dt using
the five point numerical differentiation method given by the expression1
− f ( x + 2h) + 8 f ( x + h) − 8 f ( x − h) + f ( x − 2h)
f 0 (x) ≈
12h
1 See wikipedia.org.
177
100
tr*omegan
50
0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1
100
tp*omegan
50
0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1
1
Mp
0.5
0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1
4000
ts*omegan
2000
0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1
2
ess*omegan
0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1
xi
Figure 34.1: Plot of the formulae developed for the unit step response of the
standard second order system.
Note that addzero.m implements this formula without using a FOR loop.
Problem 34.1
Figure 34.2 shows the results from executing addzero.m. Identify the vari-
ous curves in this figure.

−2
−4
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3
Figure 34.2: Results from executing addzero.m. Can you identify each curve?

Problem 34.2
In the example discussed in Section 4.3, we see that even though the poles
are deeper in the left half s-plane than the zero, the response is to our satisfac-
tion. We intended to revisit this example in our lectures on root locus. Here,
we revisit this example.
Are there an contradications or errors in that section?

% allinone.m: m-file to plot tr, tp, Mp,
% ts, essr vs zeta.
%
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
close all
clear all
zeta = linspace(0.001,0.999,1000);
%Rise time:
tromn = (pi-acos(zeta))./sqrt(1-zeta.^2);
%tromn is the product of tr and omega_n.
% Peak time:
tpomn = pi./sqrt(1-zeta.^2);
% Peak overshoot:
Mp = exp(-pi*zeta./sqrt(1-zeta.^2));
% Settling time of envelope (x% tube):

x = 2;
tsomn = (1./zeta).*log(100./(x.*sqrt(1-zeta.^2)));
% Exact expression for ess*omega_n|ramp:

essomnr = 2*zeta;
subplot(5,1,1),
plot(zeta,tromn), ylabel(’t_r*omega_n’), grid

subplot(5,1,2),
plot(zeta,tpomn), ylabel(’t_p*omega_n’), grid
subplot(5,1,3),
plot(zeta,Mp), ylabel(’Mp’), grid
subplot(5,1,4),
plot(zeta,tsomn), ylabel(’t_s*omega_n|env’),
grid,
subplot(5,1,5),
plot(zeta,essomnr), xlabel(’zeta’),
ylabel(’ess*omega_n|ramp’), grid
% addzero.m: plots the responses due to additional zeros in the

% second-order transfer function.
% The TF with the additional zero is the following:
%
% wn^2*(s+alpha)
% Gaz = ----------------------------
% alpha*(s^2+2*zeta*wn*s+wn^2)
%
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
clear all
close all
alpha = -5;
zeta = 0.2;
wn = 10;
tau = 1/(zeta*wn);
steps = 2500;
t = linspace(0,6*tau,steps);
% 6*tau because the transient will die out in about 4-5 tau.
% Evaluate y(t) and its envelopes yel(t) & yeh(t):

yel = 1 - exp(-zeta*wn*t)/sqrt(1-zeta^2);
yeh = 1 + exp(-zeta*wn*t)/sqrt(1-zeta^2);
ysin = sin(wn*sqrt(1-zeta^2).*t+acos(zeta));
y = 1 - exp(-zeta*wn*t)/sqrt(1-zeta^2).*ysin;
% Numerically differentiate y using the ‘‘five point method’’

% method described at
% http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Numerical_differentiation
% I want to realize this formula using matrix manipulations
% alone, and not using a FOR loop. Here is how I am doing it:
yleftleft = [0,0,y(1,1:size(y,2)-2)];
yleft = [0,y(1,1:size(y,2)-1)];
yright = [y(1,2:size(y,2)),0];
yrightright = [y(1,3:size(y,2)),0,0];

h = t(1,2)-t(1,1);
dybydt = (yleftleft - 8*yleft + 8*yright - yrightright)/(12*h);
% The last point of dybydt comes out to be pretty large in

% comparison to the previous points. My guess is that the first
% point should also turn out to be large for the same reason that
% the last point is large (my guess turned out to be incorrect;
% don’t know why). As our dybydt was computed by prefixing two
% zeros and suffixing two zeros, the correct dybydt will be the
% one obtained by dropping the first 2 and the last 2 points. The
% slight gap at the origin resulting from this will not be so
% visible if we take sufficiently large number of steps. The
% following commands implements these thoughts:
tnet = t(1,3:size(t,2)-2);
ynet = y(1,3:size(y,2)-2);
yelnet = yel(1,3:size(yel,2)-2);
yehnet = yeh(1,3:size(yeh,2)-2);
dybydtnet = dybydt(1,3:size(dybydt,2)-2);
yaznet = ynet+dybydtnet/alpha;
% Specify the x% tube:

x = 5;
xl = (1-x/100)*ones(1,steps-4);
xu = (1+x/100)*ones(1,steps-4);
realpartofcomplexpole = -zeta*wn
realzero = -alpha
% Plot the y(t), yaz(t), envelopes of y(t), and x% tube:

plot(tnet,ynet,tnet,dybydtnet,tnet,yaznet,tnet,yelnet,tnet,yehnet,tnet,xl,tnet,xu),
grid
legend(’ynet’,’dybydtnet’,’yaznet’,’yelnet’,’yehnet’,’xl’,’xu’)
% The default grid created by GNU Octave may not be dense enough
% for our purpose. We can have control over the location of the
% xticks and yticks as shown by the following code. If these
% commands do not work in MATLAB, then they can be commented out
% and analogous commands can be written for MATLAB.
% set(gca(),"xtick", (linspace(min(tnet),max(tnet),10)));
% all = [ynet,yelnet,yehnet,yaznet];
% set(gca(),"ytick", linspace(min(all),max(all),10));
% How can we achieve a similar control over the xticks and yticks
% in MATLAB?
% Finally, I tried to increase the thickness of the lines using

% the following command:
%

% set(gca,"linewidth",1)
%
% This command is returning the message:
% warning: set: invalid property ‘linewidth’
% Maybe "linewidth" has not yet been implemented in Octave.
print -depsc addzero.eps


Lecture 35
Second order TF with

additional pole; recipe for
pole-placement
35.1 Additional pole in second order TF
185
The m-file addpole.m helps us verify the assertions made in this section.
35.2 Recipe for placement of CL poles in a second

order TF

+
G (s) +
− K G (s)
−
K
Figure 35.1: Two block diagrams for which exist software support for the de-
termination of root loci.
35.3 Root locus: What it is

For the CL systems shown in Fig 39.1, the root locus is the “set of values of s
for which 1 + KG (s) = 0 is satisfied as the real parameter K varies from 0 to ∞”
[15, page 295]. Alternatively, the root locus is the “graph of all possible roots of
1 + KG (s) = 0 relative to parameter K . . .” [15, page 290].
The MATLAB and GNU Octave function rlocus helps plot root loci. MAT-
LAB’s rlocus function works with the left hand block diagram of Figure 39.1,
while GNU Octave’s rlocus function works with the right hand block dia-
gram.
Example 35.1
Let G (s) = 1/(s(s + 2)). Determine the root locus.

% addpole.m: Helps see the effect an additional pole
% in the standard second order TF.
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
clear all
close all
wn = 10;
alpha = 1;
zeta = 0.2;
Gap = tf(wn^2*alpha,conv([1,alpha],[1,2*zeta*wn,wn^2]));
realpartofcomplexpole = -zeta*wn
realpole = -alpha
[gap,tap] = step(Gap);
[g,t] = step(tf(wn^2,[1,2*zeta*wn,wn^2]));
plot(tap,gap,’*’,t,g), grid on, legend(’gap’,’g’)


Lecture 36
Root locus (Part 1)
For
∏im=1 (s + zi )
G (s) = , where m ≤ n,
∏in=1 (s + pi )
the equation that describes the root locus is the characteristic equation
∏im=1 (s + zi )
1+K =0 (36.1)
∏in=1 (s + pi )
stated the magnitude criterion (MC) and phase criterion (PC).

Note that all the s that satisfy the PC also satisfy the MC in the sense that
for each s that satisfies the PC, we can determine a real non-negative K from
the MC.
On the other hand, not all points s that satisfy the MC satisfy the PC.
G (s) shown above has m finite zeros and n − m zeros at infinity. This is
because the TF approaches zero as s approaches infinity.
36.1 Rules of sketching root locus

Root Locus Rule 1 The RL has n branches.
Root Locus Rule 2 The RL starts at K = 0 at the poles and ends at K = ∞ on the m
zeros, and n − m of its branches end at ∞.
Root Locus Rule 3 On the real axis, the RL exists only on those segments to the
right of which the sum of the number of poles and the number of zeros is odd.
36.2 Appendix: An alternative way to see Rule 2

Chirag Gupta (Y9186) showed the following way of arriving at Rule 2.
Rewrite (36.1) as
∏in=1 (s + pi )
= −K
∏im=1 (s + zi )
We see that when K = 0, the roots of (36.1) are at the open-loop poles.
189
Rewrite (36.1) as
∏im=1 (s + zi ) 1
n =−
∏ i =1 ( s + p i ) K
We see that when K = ∞, the roots of (36.1) are at the open-loop zeros.
This way seems to be more convincing than simply saying that Rule 2 fol-
lows from (36.1).

Lecture 37
Root locus (Part 2)
Root Locus Rule 4 The RL is symmetric about the real axis.
Root Locus Rule 5 As K → ∞, n − m branches of the RL go asymptotically along

∑in=1 pi −∑im=1 zi
rays that emanate from the centroid s = −σ = − n−m .
Root Locus Rule 6 The angles that these rays form with the real axis are
±180◦ (2q+1)
n−m , q = 0, 1, 2, . . ..
191

Lecture 38
Root locus (Part 3)
38.1 Roots of multiplicity greater than 1

Consider the root locus shown in Figure 38.1. The point where the root locus
breaks away from the real axis is called the break away point, and where it breaks
in to the real axis is called the break in point. While this is the meaning which
much of the literature associates with these two terms, a root locus can also
break away or break in at points not on the real axis as shown in Figure 38.2.
Note that where the root locus breaks away, or where it breaks in, the char-
acteristic equation 1 + KG (s) = 0 has roots of multiplicity greater than 1, for
the appropriate value of K. Therefore, we are interested in finding such roots.
Root Locus Rule 7 The roots of multiplicity greater than one occur on the RL where
s satisfies dG/ds = 0, or, equivalently, dK/ds = 0.
To determine the multiplicity of a root of the characteristic equation 1 +

KG (s) = 0, we can utilize the following observation. Suppose s = −r is a root
of 1 + KG (s) of multiplicity 2. Then,
1 + KG (s) can be written as (s + r )2 M0 (s), where M0 (s) does not contain

the factor s + r.
d{1+KG (s)}
ds = K dG 1
ds ; dG/ds can be written as ( s + r ) M1 ( s ). Here, M1 ( s )
does not contain the factor s + r.
d2 {1+KG (s)} 2
ds2
= K ddsG2 ; d2 G/ds2 can be written as (s + r )0 M1 (s).
Thus, we see that both 1 + KG (s) and dG/ds evaluate to zero at s = −r,
and that d2 G/ds2 does not evaluate to zero at s = −r.
This reasoning shows that if s = −r is a root of multiplicity q of 1 + KG (s)

d2 G
for some value of K ∈ (0, ∞). Then, at s = −r, dG
ds has q − 1 roots, ds2 has q − 2
( q −1) q
roots, · · · , d (q−1G) has 1 root, and ddsGq has no roots.
ds
We can use the above result to determine the roots of the characteristic
equation of multiplicity greater than 1 as follows.
Step 1 Determine the roots of dG/ds by setting dG/ds = 0.
193
Root Locus
2
1.5
Break away point

1
Break in point
0.5
Imaginary Axis
−0.5
−1
−1.5
−2
−9 −8 −7 −6 −5 −4 −3 −2 −1 0 1
Real Axis
Figure 38.1: A root locus with break away and break in points on the real axis.
Step 2 Plug each of these roots into 1 + KG (s) = 0 and identify the root that
results in a K that is real and non-negative. Suppose s = ŝ is such a root.
Step 3 Evaluate di G/dsi at s = ŝ beginning i = 2 until we find an i for which
this derivative does not go to zero at s = ŝ. Let this value of i be î.
Step 4 The characteristic equation has î roots at s = ŝ.
An alternative to the algorithm shown in the above steps is to work with
dK/ds instead of with dG/ds. The justification for this alternative is as follows.
0 0
Suppose G (s) is of the form N (s)/D (s). Then dG/ds = N DD−2ND , where N 0 =
dN/ds and D 0 = dD/ds. Step 1 above is equivalent to solving N 0 D − ND 0 = 0.
On the other hand, the characteristic equation can be written as K = −1/G =
− D/N. Setting dK/ds = 0 gives N 0 D − ND 0 = 0. Thus, both dG/ds = 0 and
dK/ds = 0 are equivalent to N 0 D − ND 0 = 0.
Problem 38.1
1. In the above algorithm, can we also use di K/dsi instead of di G/dsi , for i =
2, . . . , î?
2. In the first algorithm, in working with dG/ds and higher derivates, our as-
sumption is that K is independent of s. On the other hand, in the alternative
algorithm, we are working with dK/ds, thus seemingly contradicting the
assumption. Explain.

38.2 Angles of departure and angles of arrival

Root Locus Rule 8 To determine the angle of departure from a pole, use the PC along
with a point s = ŝ that is infinitesimally close to the pole the angle of departure from
which needs to be calculated.
To determine the angle of arrival at a zero, use the PC along with a point s = ŝ that
is infinitesimally close to the zero the angle of arrival at which needs to be calculated.
We can use the idea presented in Example 1 to determine the angle of de-
parture of the RL of 1 + s(sK+2) = 0 from the two roots that are at s = −1.
Example 38.1
Demonstrate that the locus of the roots of the equation 1 + s(sK+2) = 0 begin-
ning from the roots s = −1 is the same as the locus of the roots of the equation
1 + (s+K1)2 = 0 for K ∈ [0, ∞).
K
Consider the characteristic equation 1 + s ( s +2)
= 0, which is equivalent to
the equation s2 + 2s + K = 0, which is equivalent to s2 + 2s + 1 + K − 1 = 0,
Root Locus of 1/(s(s+2)(s2+2s+5))

8
Break away points

4
2
Imaginary Axis
−2
−4
−6
−8
−8 −6 −4 −2 0 2 4 6
Real Axis
Figure 38.2: A root locus with break away points not only on the real axis.

K −1
which is equivalent to 1 + ( s +1)2
= 0.
Therefore, both the equations 1 + = 0 and 1 + (sK+−11)2 = 0 have the
K
s ( s +2)
same RL — even when K is varied only on a subset of [0, ∞).
Therefore, the RL of 1 + s(sK+2) = 0, K ∈ [1, ∞), and the RL of 1 + (s+K̂1)2 = 0,
K̂ (= K − 1) ∈ [0, ∞), are the same.
The above method can be applied to any other characteristic equation too.
∏m (s+z )
If 1 + K ∏ni=1(s+ pi ) = 0 has the roots p̂1 , p̂2 , . . . , p̂n for some value K0 of K, then
i =1 i
∏m (s+z ) ∏m (s+z )
the RL of 1 + K ∏ni=1(s+ pi ) = 0, K ∈ [K0 , ∞), and the RL of 1 + K̂ ∏ni=1(s+ p̂i ) = 0,
i =1 i i =1 i
where K̂ (= K − K0 ) ∈ [0, ∞), are the same.
Using this idea, we see that the angle of departure of the root locus from
the root s = −1 can be calculated from the phase criterion as
−2/ŝ + 1 = ±180◦ (2q + 1)
where, s = ŝ is a point that is infinitesimally close to s = −1. We can set q = 0

as this RL has only two branches that emanate from s = −1, and ±180◦ is
enough to calculate them.
Thus, /ŝ + 1 = ±90◦ are the angles of departure of the RL from s = −1.
This conclusion leads to the fact that a RL that departs from s = −1 perpendic-
ular to the real axis is the only valid RL of 1 + s(sK+2) = 0.
This completes the example started in Section 36.1.

Lecture 39
Root contours
Consider, for example, the equation
s3 + s2 + βs + α = 0 (39.1)
We wish to study how the roots of this equation behave with change in α ∈
(0, ∞) and β ∈ (0, ∞).
We could write (39.1) as
βs
1+ =0 (39.2)
s3 + s2 + α
and determine the roots of s3 + s2 + α for various values of α, thus generating
the locus of the roots of s3 + s2 + α, as shown in the upper subfigure of Fig-
ure 39.1. Then, keeping α fixed at a certain value, we could generate the root
locus of (39.2). The upper subfigure of Figure 39.2 shows a collection of root
loci of (39.2) generated in this manner. Such a collection is called root contour of
(39.2).
We could write (39.1) also as
α
1+ =0 (39.3)
s3 + s2 + βs
and determine the roots of s3 + s2 + βs for various values of β, thus generating

the locus of the roots of s3 + s2 + βs, as shown in the lower subfigure of Fig-
ure 39.1. Then, keeping β fixed at a certain value, we could generate the root
locus of (39.3). The lower subfigure of Figure 39.2 shows a collection of root
loci of (39.3) generated in this manner. This collection is the root contour of
(39.3).
Problem 39.1
What are some possible applications of root contours?
Problem 39.2
See Figure 39.2. It seems that the root contour of the upper subfigure shows
that even though the roots of (39.1) are unstable for large values of α, they are
stabilized by a corresponding increment in the value of β. On the other hand,
197
rlocus(tf(1,[1,1,0,0]))
1
Imaginary Axis
−1
−2
−3
−4
−5 −4 −3 −2 −1 0 1 2
Real Axis
rlocus(tf([1,0],[1,1,0,0]))
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
Imaginary Axis
−0.2
−0.4
−0.6
−0.8
−1.2 −1 −0.8 −0.6 −0.4 −0.2 0 0.2
Real Axis
Figure 39.1: The locus of the roots of s3 + s2 + α (upper subfigure), and the
locus of the roots of s3 + s2 + βs (lower subfigure).

rlocus(tf(1,[1,1,0,0])); hold; for alpha = 1:11, rlocus(tf([1,0],[1,1,0,alpha])); end;
15
10
5
Imaginary Axis
−5
−10
−15
−5 −4 −3 −2 −1 0 1 2
Real Axis
rlocus(tf([1,0],[1,1,0,0])); hold; for beta = 0.1:21, rlocus(tf(1,[1,1,beta,0])); end;
10
4
Imaginary Axis
−2
−4
−6
−8
−10
−10 −8 −6 −4 −2 0 2 4 6 8 10
Real Axis
Figure 39.2: The root contour (upper subfigure) of (39.1) rewritten as (39.2),
and the root contour (lower subfigure) of (39.1) rewritten as (39.3).

the root locus of the lower subfigure seems to show that even for large values
of β, a slight increment in the value of α could make the complex conjugate
pole pair unstable.
There probably is some error in this observation as both the root contours
eventually represent the same equation (39.1). Find this error.

Lecture 40
Design using root locus
Consider the control system of Figure 40.1. Discuss ways to improve its speed
of response while maintaining its overshoot at a value determined by the
damping ratio of ζ = 0.5.
40.1 Appendix: TA09

Solve the problems of TA06 using root locus based design.
Demonstration of the use of MATLAB’s SISOTOOL for solving problem 1
of TA06 using root locus.
Yref (s) + U (s) 1 Y (s)

K
− s(s + 1)(s/5 + 1)
Figure 40.1: A control system whose speed of response we wish to improve

while maintaining the damping ratio at ζ = 0.5.
201

Part VII
Addressing nonlinearities
203
Lecture 41
Stability of nonlinear control

systems: Circle criterion
Assume that G (s) in Figure 41.1 has no poles in the RHP and that the nonlin-
earity f is sector-bounded as defined in Figure 41.2. A sufficient condition for
input-output (from r1 , r2 to e1 , e2 , y1 , y2 ) stability of the system in Figure 41.1
is that the polar plot (i.e., G ( jω ), 0 ≤ ω ≤ ∞) does not enter or enclose the
circle that lies in the interval [−1/k1 , −1/k2 ] with center on the real axis in the
Nyquist plane (see Figure 41.3).
When the loop has nonlinearities in the forward path, instead of in the
feedback path as in Figure 41.1, we can use the block diagram transformations
shown in Figure 41.4 and then apply the circle criterion.
r1 e1 y1
G (s)
−
y2 e2 r2
f (·)
Figure 41.1: Block diagram for the circle criterion[36].
205
k2 y
f (y)
k1 y
0 y
Figure 41.2: A sector-bounded nonlinearity[36]. For such a nonlinearity, the

following holds: f (0) = 0, k1 ≤ f (y)/y ≤ k2 for y 6= 0.
Im
− k11 − k12
0 Re
G ( jω )
Figure 41.3: Illustration of the circle criterion. The circle’s center is on the real
axis and radius equals 1/k1 −2 1/k2 .

Figure 41.4: Block diagram transformations for the circle criterion[36].


Lecture 42
Dealing with plant input

constraints: An anti-windup
scheme
The problem we are interested in this lecture is as follows. In designing con-

trollers in this course, we have assumed that the plant behaves more or less lin-
early. However, all real-world plants are nonlinear to lesser or greater extent.
In some cases, the performance we see with our linear design and simulation
may not be realizable when we deploy the controller on the actual plant. In
such cases, we want to have techniques that help us design controllers for non-
linear plants. Such techniques are the subject of a course on nonlinear control.
In our course, we adopt the simpler path of designing controllers assuming
the plants are linear, and then modifying the control architecture to do the best
we can with the linear controller. To simplify the discussion, we focus our
attention on only a saturation nonlinearity.
Figure 42.1 shows one possible solution. C (s) is a biproper transfer func-
tion. While [19] recommends selecting c∞ such that C (s) = c∞ + C (s), where
C (s) is a strictly proper transfer function, the results of the simulink file
test1.mdl show seem to suggest that c∞ can be any constant.
r (t) + e(t) + û(t) u(t) y(t)

c∞ Lim Lim G (s)
− −
[C (s)]−1 − [c∞ ]−1
Figure 42.1: This anti-wind-up scheme is taken from [19]. The controller C (s)
needs to be a biproper transfer function.
209

Part VIII
PID Control
211
Lecture 43
PID Controllers
213

Lecture 44
Ziegler-Nichols tuning of PID

controllers
44.1 What is controller tuning?

Figure 44.1 shows PID control of a plant.
“If a mathematical model of the plant can be derived, then it is possible to
apply various design techniques for determining parameters of the controller
that will meet the transient and steady-state specifications of the closed-loop
(CL) system. However, if the plant is so complicated that its mathematical
model cannot be easily obtained, then an analytical approach to the design of a
PID controller is not possible. Then we must resort to experimental approaches
the tuning of PID controllers.”[37].
“The process of selecting the controller parameters to meet given perfor-
mance specifications is known as controller tuning.”[37].
In practice, tuning is used in the following three situations:
1. We have designed a controller and analyzed its performance on paper and
using simulation tools such as Matlab. We wish to deploy this controller on
the actual plant. We find that this controller does not give us the kind of
behavior in practice that it gave in simulation. The design has only brought
us roughly near what we want. Tuning of the parameters of the controller is
needed to obtain the behavior that we saw in simulation.
2. The plant model may not be known; so we may not have designed a con-
troller. We may use on-line estimation and tuning to stabilize the CL system.
3. We know that the plant belongs to a class of plants, and that for these plants
a certain kind of controller will work. So, we bypass the design stage and
go straight to tuning for a plant in this class. This is the situation that is
addressed by the two Ziegler-Nichols tuning (ZNT) techniques.
44.2 What the two ZNT methods do

The design specifications for both the ZNT methods is quarter amplitude decay
(QAD) [38]. What this means is that the tuned controller will impart the CL
215
y

r + 1 T s u
kp 1 + + D Plant
− TI s τs + 1
Figure 44.1: The CL system. The ZNT methods help tune k p , TI , TD . The time
constant τ has two purposes. Firstly, it makes implementing the derivative
controller possible. Secondly, it helps create a low pass filter for high frequency
noise. τ is selected to be between 0.1TD and 0.2TD [19, page 161].
unit step response a second overshoot whose ratio to the first overshoot is 25%
[15, page 240, Figure 4.14]1 .
The ZNT rules “suggest a set of k p , TI , and TD that will give a stable oper-
ation of the system. However, the resulting system may exhibit a large maxi-
mum overshoot in the step response, which is unacceptable. In such a case we
need a series of fine tunings until an acceptable result is obtained. In fact, the
ZNT tuning rules give an educated guess for the parameter values and provide
a starting point for fine tuning, rather than giving the final settings for k p , TI
and TD .” [37].
The first method is a time-domain method, while the second is a frequency
domain method[38]. In the remainder of this section, we will describe these
methods based on [37].
Though [19, page 162] only says that the second method is valid only for
open-loop stable plants, we can see in the following that, as an “S” curve can
be obtained for only such plants, the first method too is valid only for such
plants.
44.3 First method

This method applies to plants whose step response looks approximately like
an “S”.
Step 1: Obtain the unit step response of the open-loop (OL) plant as shown in
Figure 44.2.
Step 2: Determine T and L as shown, by drawing a tangent as shown to the

step response through the point of inflexion. Alternatively draw a tangent
to this curve of maximum slope.
Step 3: The approximate transfer function (TF) of the OL plant is
ω (s) Ke− Ls
=
U (s) Ts + 1
Step 4: Tune the PID controller parameters according to Table 44.1.
1 Interestingly, the fifth edition of this book does not have a chapter on ZNT.

K
Unit step response of OL system
Point of inflexion
0 t
L T
Figure 44.2: Unit step response of the plant is needed for the first ZNT method.
This response is also known as the reaction curve of the plant. As the first ZNT
method uses these curves, the first method is also known as reaction curve
method. See [19, page 167] for an alternative way of obtaining the reaction
curve.
Table 44.1: ZNT rules for the First ZNT method [37, 38].
Type of controller kp Ti TD
T
P ∞ 0
LK
0.9T L
PI 0
LK 0.3
1.2T
PID 2L 0.5L
LK

Table 44.2: ZNT rules for the Second ZNT method [37, 38].
Type of controller kp Ti TD
P 0.5k cr ∞ 0
PI 0.45k cr (1/1.2) Pcr 0
PID 0.6k cr 0.5Pcr 0.125Pcr
44.4 Second method

This method is also called the “ultimate gain method”. This method applies to
plants that exhibit sustained oscillations in CL under proportional control for
some value of k p > 0.
Step 1: Form the CL system with k p > 0, TI = ∞, and TD = 0.

Step 2: Apply a step input to the CL system and observe its response.
Step 3: With the step input on, increase the value of k p from 0 to some value
k cr (called the “critical gain” or “ultimate gain”) at which the CL system will
exhibit sustained oscillations.
Step 4: Determine the period Pcr of these oscillations.
Step 5: Tune the PID controller parameters according to Table 44.2.
Example 44.1
Take the plant transfer function as 1/(s + 1)3 , but assuming that you do not
know what it is, use the ultimate gain method to tune the three controllers.
The results are shown in Figure 44.3
Problem 44.1
Consider the first of the two simulink files that I gave you,
goodwin_ex_ultimate_gain.mdl and goodwin_ex_reaction_curve.mdl.
Theoretically determine the value of the critical gain, the value of the critical
period, and the values of the closed-loop poles corresponding to this critical
period.
44.5 Appendix: Further reading

Chapter 6 of [19] and the works by Karl Astrom are recommended for further
reading on PID control, including tuning methods.

Output from loop to identify Kc

2
0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20
Output from loop with P−controller

2
0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20
Output from loop with PI−controller

2
0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20
Output from loop with PID controller

2
0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20
Time
Figure 44.3: Results from tuning using the ultimate gain method.


Bibliography
[1] Lalit mestha [people in control]. Control Systems Magazine, IEEE, 30(6):38
–41, December 2010.
[2] Eric Paljug and Xiaoping Yun. Experimental study of two robot arms ma-
nipulating large objects. IEEE Transactions on Control Systems Technology,
3(2):177–188, June 1995.
[3] Dong Sun, James K. Mills, and Yunhui Liu. Position control of robot ma-
nipulators manipulating a flexible payload. The International Journal of
Robotics Research, 18(3):319 – 332, March 1999.
[4] H. Osumi and T. Arai. Cooperative control between two position-

controlled manipulators. In Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference
on Robotics and Automation, volume 2, pages 1509–1514, 1994.
[5] M. Uchiyama, N. Lwasawa, and K. Hakomori. Hybrid position/force

control for coordination of a two-arm robot. In Proceedings of IEEE In-
ternational Conference on Robotics and Automation, volume 4, pages 1242–
1247, 1987.
[6] Tamer Basar. Preface. In Tamer Basar, editor, Con-

trol Theory: Twenty-Five Seminal Papers (1932-1981).
Wiley-IEEE Press, 2000. This chapter is available at
http://as.wiley.com/WileyCDA/WileyTitle/productCd-0780360214.html.
[7] Christopher Bissell. A history of automatic control. In Shimon Y. Nof,

editor, Springer handbook of automation, Springer handbook series (LXXVI).
Springer Verlag, Heidelberg, Germany, 2009. This chapter is available on
the web through a search using the author’s name and the title of the
book.
[8] Harold S. Black. Inventing the negative feedback amplifier. IEEE Spec-
trum, pages 55 – 60, December 1977.
[9] David A. Mindell. Opening black’s box: Rethinking feedback’s

myth of origin. Technology and Culture, 41(3):405 – 434, July 2000.
http://www.jstor.org/stable/25147536.
[10] Walter R. Evans. Control-System Dynamics. McGraw-Hill Book Co., Inc,

1954. Available in IITK library (Call number: 621.8 Ev1c, Accession num-
bers 10365 and 39345.
221
[11] Gregory Walter Evans. Bringing root locus to the classroom: The story of
Walter R. Evans and his textbook Control-System Dynamics. IEEE Control
Systems Magazine, pages 74 – 81, December 2004.
[12] H.L. Hazen. Theory of servo-mechanisms. Journal of the Franklin Institute,
218(3):279 – 331, September 1934.
[13] Paul J. Nahin. Behind the Laplace transform. IEEE Spectrum, pages 60 –
60, March 1991.
[14] Katsuhiko Ogata. Modern Control Engineering. Prentice-Hall, Inc., 2nd edi-
tion, 1990. Later editions available in India.
[15] Gene F. Franklin, J. David Powell, and Abbas Emami-Naeini. Feedback
Control of Dynamic Systems. Pearson Education, fourth edition, 2002.
[16] William G. Vogt and Mohamed I. Younis. Straight-line approximations
for phase-angle plots. IEEE Tranasactions on Education, pages 249 – 252,
December 1968.
[17] Jr. Thomas F. Schubert. A quantitative comparison of three bode straight-
line phase approximations for second-order, underdamped systems. IEEE
Tranasactions on Education, 40(2):135 – 138, May 1997.
[18] Rodger E. Ziemer, William H. Tranter, and D. R. Fannin. Signals and Sys-
tems: Continuous and Discrete. Prentice Hall, fourth edition, 1998.
[19] Graham C. Goodwin, Stefan F. Graebe, and Mario E. Salgado. Control
System Design. Prentice-Hall, 2001.
[20] Issac M. Horowitz. Synthesis of Feedback Systems. Academic Press Inc.,
1963.
[21] Boris J. Lurie and Paul J. Enright. Classical Feedback Control. CRC Press,
2012.
[22] Gene F. Franklin, J. David Powell, and Abbas Emami-Naeini. Feedback
Control of Dynamic Systems. Pearson Education, fifth edition, 2006.
[23] Madan Gopal. Control Systems — Principles and Design. Tata McGraw-Hill,
3rd edition, 2008.
[24] Thomas Kailath. Linear Systems. Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1980.
[25] Alan V. Oppenheim and Alan S. Willsky. Signals and Systems. Prentice
Hall of India, 2nd edition, 1997.
[26] Hubert M. James, Nathaniel B. Nichols, and Ralph S. Phillips, editors. The-
ory of servomechanisms. McGraw-Hill Book Company, 1947.
[27] L.A. MacColl. Fundamental theory of servomechanisms. Van Nostrand,
Princeton, NJ, USA, 1945.
[28] K.J. Astrom. Regeneration Theory: H. Nyquist. In Tamer Basar, editor,
Control Theory: Twenty-Five Seminal Papers (1932-1981). Wiley-IEEE Press,
2000.

[29] Benjamin C. Kuo. Automatic Control Systems. Prentice-Hall, 7th edition,

1995.
[30] Farid Golnaraghi and Benjamin C. Kuo. Automatic Control System. John
Wiley & Sons, Inc., 2010.
[31] Ram P. Kanwal. Generalized functions: theory and technique. Academic press,
Inc. (London) Ltd., 1983.
[32] Kent H. Lundberg, Haynes R. Miller, and David L. Trumper. Initial con-
ditions, generalized functions, and the Laplace transform: Troubles at the
origin. IEEE Control Systems Magazine, pages 22 – 35, February 2007.
[33] Chi-Tsong Chen. Linear system theory and design. Oxford University Press,
Inc., 3rd edition, 1999.
[34] Feynman, Leighton, and Sands. The Feynmann Lectures on Physics. Narosa,
India, 2003. Copyright 1963
c by Addison-Wesley Publishing Company,
Inc.
[35] Cleve Moler. Numerical Computing with MATLAB. Society for Industrial
and Applied Mathematics, 2004. The electronic version of this book can be
downloaded from http://www.mathworks.com/moler/chapters.html.
[36] Torkel Glad and Lennart Ljung. Control Theory: Multivariable and Nonlinear
methods. Taylor & Francis, 2000.
[37] Katsuhiko Ogata. Modern Control Engineering. Pearson Education, fourth
edition, 2002. Available in India.
[38] Tore Hägglund and Karl J. Åström. Automatic tuning of PID controllers.
In William S. Levine, editor, The Control Handbook, pages 817 – 826. CRC
Press LLC, 1996.


EE250 Fall2012 Lecture-Notes PDF

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

EE250 Fall2012 Lecture-Notes PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Lectures for a 40-hour introductory course

on classical control system design

Department of Electrical Engineering, IIT Kanpur

February 21, 2012

February 21, 2012 ii of 224 Ramprasad Potluri

3 Transfer functions and block diagrams 13

4 Preview of design in the state-space and the classical domains 17

5 Block diagram manipulations, signal flow graphs 25

5.5 SFG Algebra . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29

6 Mason’s gain formula, properties desired from a control system 31

7 Virtues of control systems: Disturbance rejection 35

8 Virtues of control systems: Improvement in performance and over-

10 Bode plots (Part 1) 47

11 Bode plots (Part 2) 55

12 Bode plots (Part 3) 61

13 Bode plots (Part 4) 63

February 21, 2012 iv of 224 Ramprasad Potluri

14 Bode plots (Part 5) 65

15 Bode plots (Part 6) 69

III Stability Theory 75

17 Stability theory (Part 2) 81

18 Nyquist Stability Criterion (Part 1)* 85

19 Nyquist Stability Criterion (Part 2)* 89

20 Nyquist Stability Criterion (Part 3) 93

21 Nyquist Stability Criterion (Part 4) 97

February 21, 2012 v of 224 Ramprasad Potluri

22 Nyquist Stability Criterion (Part 5) 101

IV Design using bode plots-based loop-shaping for

23 NST (concluded), Loop-shaping (Part 1) 109

24 Loop-shaping (Part 2) 113

25 Loop-shaping (Part 3) 117

26 Loop-shaping (Part 4) 121

February 21, 2012 vi of 224 Ramprasad Potluri

27 Loop-shaping (Part 5): Information from lead/lag controllers 129

28 Loop-shaping (Part 6): Relation between M p and PM 137

29 Loop-shaping (Part 7): A solved example 145

30 Metrics for steady-state accuracy of unity-feedback systems built

31 An example of application of loop-shaping in automobile control 159

V Digital implementation of controllers 161

32 State space realization of transfer function 163

VI Pole-placement design using root locus 169

33 Unit step response of second order TF 171

34 Second order TF with additional zero 177

February 21, 2012 vii of 224 Ramprasad Potluri

35 Second order TF with additional pole; recipe for pole-placement 185

36 Root locus (Part 1) 189

37 Root locus (Part 2) 191

38 Root locus (Part 3) 193

39 Root contours 197

40 Design using root locus 201

VII Addressing nonlinearities 203

42 Dealing with plant input constraints: An anti-windup scheme 209

VIII PID Control 211

44 Ziegler-Nichols tuning of PID controllers 215

February 21, 2012 viii of 224 Ramprasad Potluri

works; see www.mathworks.com. GNU Octave is an open source, freely downloadable

most popular books.

is defined in books as G ( jω ) = ∑ arctan ω ω

ing for the quadrant of each of the complex numbers jω + zi and jω + p j .

needed for successfully sketching an approximate phase plot; it is enough to

February 21, 2012 x of 224 Ramprasad Potluri

Digital imple- State-space realization of a transfer function, Euler’s

Tuning of PID PID controllers, two Ziegler-Nichols tuning methods