2016 American Control Conference (ACC)
Boston Marriott Copley Place
July 6-8, 2016. Boston, MA, USA
Design of Higher Order Repetitive Controller for Non Minimum Phase
Plants
Usman Rashid1 and Mohsin Jamil2
Abstract— We propose a procedure which can be used to de-
sign stable higher order repetitive controller for non minimum
phase plants. The procedure is based on a stability theorem
and a novel weight selection criterion for the internal model.
The theorem shows that the stability of higher order repetitive
controller depends on compensator gain, compensator phase
and the weights of the internal model. The proposed procedure
is applied to design a higher order repetitive controller for non
minimum phase two level grid connected converter. Simulation
results show that the designed higher order repetitive controller
outperforms the conventional repetitive controller under vari-
ation in grid frequency.
I. INTRODUCTION
Repetitive controller gives high performance in terms of
reference tracking and disturbance rejection for periodic
exogenous signals[1]. It is used in a wide range of appli-
cation areas, for example power converters, active filters,
multilink robotic manipulators, disk drives, power supplies
of high precision equipment and others[2][3][4]. However,
the performance of a repetitive controller is very sensitive
to variation in reference/disturbance frequency[5]. Higher
order repetitive controller tackles this problem by offering
relatively high gain in the region around a desired frequency
and its multiples[6].
The stability of repetitive controller is a challenging
issue[7]. To overcome the problem of stability, a non
causal low pass filter along with a phase compensator are
used. For minimum phase plants, an inverse of the closed
loop plant without the repetitive controller can be used
as a compensator[8]. Whereas, for non minimum phase
plants, zero phase error tracking controller (ZPETC) inverse
compensator[9], phase lead compensator[10] and infinite
impulse response (IIR) compensator[11] have been proposed.
These compensators, however, fail to give adequate stabil-
ity margins when used with higher order repetitive controller
especially for non minimum phase plants. An exception is
the inverse compensator used with higher order repetitive
controller for minimum phase plants[12]. A possible solution
to this problem is to use one of these compensators and
try to find a compromise between periodic and non periodic
performance using the weight selection criterion proposed by
Pipeleers et al. [13].
The reason behind the failure of these compensators is that
higher order repetitive controller uses more than one delay
The authors are with the Department of Robotics and A.I., School
of Mechanical and Manufacturing Engineering, National University of
Sciences and Technology (NUST), Islamabad, Pakistan.
1 usman@smme.edu.pk
2 mohsin@smme.nust.edu.pk
978-1-4673-8682-1/$31.00 ©2016 AACC
loop in its internal model. This modification introduces a non
unity factor W (z) (see equation 2) to stability conditions[12].
We have derived a theorem which links the magnitude of
W (z) to the phase and gain of the compensator. A novel
weight selection criterion is also presented which can be
used to obtain a desirable W (z). The stability theorem
and the weight selection criterion form the basis of our
procedure for design of higher order repetitive controller
for non minimum phase plants. The proposed approach is
employed to design a higher order repetitive controller for
non minimum phase two level grid connected converter. The
proposed design gives adequate stability margins and better
performance in terms of total harmonic distortion (THD)
of output current as compared to conventional repetitive
controller when subjected to variation in grid frequency.
The organisation of the paper is as follows: section II gives
a brief introduction of higher order repetitive controller and
the challenges related to its stability. Section III formulates
a stability theorem for higher order repetitive controller.
Section IV derives weight selection formulae for 2nd and
3rd order repetitive controllers. A step wise design procedure
is given in section V. The design, simulation and results
of conventional and higher order repetitive controller for
two level grid connected converter are given in section VI.
Section VII concludes the work.
In order to alleviate the notation, the frequency response of
a system H(z) is denoted by H(ω)ejh(ω) . Where, H(ω) is
the frequency magnitude response and h(ω) is the frequency
phase response.
II. HIGHER ORDER REPETITIVE CONTROLLER
A generic closed loop control system along with a plug-
in higher order repetitive controller is shown in figure 1.
The higher order repetitive controller comprises of three
components as shown in figure 2. These are internal model,
low pass filter and phase compensator[6]. The internal model
is given by following equation.
W (z)
Gim (z) = (1)
1 − W (z)
Where
∑
m
W (z) = wl z −lN (2)
l=1
N is the number of samples per period.
Tp
N= (3)
Ts
7510
Ts is the sampling time in discrete domain. Tp is the period When ∥W (z)∥∞ < 1, the right hand side can be kept
of the signal to be produced. m is the order of the internal positive by a compensator which satisfies |tcl (ω) + gx (ω)| <
model. wl is the weight of lth memory loop. The stability 90◦ . However, a higher order repetitive controller with
conditions are made less stringent by using a low pass filter ∥W (z)∥∞ < 1 fails to offer higher gains in the region around
Q(z) and a phase compensator Gx (z). the designed frequency. Thus, a good higher order repetitive
W (z)Q(z)Gx (z) controller always has ∥W (z)∥∞ > 1. Under this condition,
GHORC (z) = (4) following is true.
1 − W (z)Q(z)
The stability of higher order repetitive controller is given 1 − ∥W (z)∥2∞
= −α (10)
by following theorem[12]. ∥W (z)∥2∞
Theorem 1: The repetitive control system shown in figure Where the interval of α is [0,1].
1 is stable if
1 2cos(tcl (ω) + gx (ω))
1) Tcl (z) is stable. Gx (ω) < −α + (11)
Tcl2 (ω)Gx (ω) Tcl (ω)
2) ∥Q(z)∥∞ ≤ 1.
3) ∥(Tcl (z)Gx (z) − 1)W (z)∥∞ < 1. Reformulating the above inequality as follows:
Where Tcl (z) is the closed loop system excluding the Tcl2 (ω)G2x (ω) − 2Tcl (ω)Gx (ω)cos(tcl (ω) + gx (ω)) + α < 0
repetitive controller. (12)
Gc (z)Gp (z) Solving the corresponding equality for Gx (ω), yields follow-
Tcl (z) = (5)
1 + Gc (z)Gp (z) ing condition.
[ ]
Condition 1 of theorem 1 can be satisfied by designing a 1 √
suitable conventional controller Gc (z). Condition 2 is also cos(tcl (ω)+gx (ω))− cos2 (tcl (ω) + gx (ω)) − α
Tcl (ω)
easily satisfied by using a non causal low pass filter as given
< Gx (ω) <
below. [ ]
√
Q(z) = 0.25z + 0.5 + 0.25z −1 (6) 1
cos(tcl (ω)+gx (ω))+ cos (tcl (ω) + gx (ω)) − α
2
Tcl (ω)
The challenge lies in satisfying the third condition. This (13)
condition is satisfied by designing a suitable compensator
Gx (z). For a minimum phase plant, the inverse of Tcl (z) is This condition only holds when following two conditions are
a very convenient choice. However, for non minimum phase true.
plants this compensator cannot be used as the inverse of |tcl (ω) + gx (ω)| < 90◦ (14)
Tcl (z) is not stable. α ≤ cos2 (tcl (ω) + gx (ω)) (15)
The problem with condition 3 is that in this form it does
not convey any further intuition about the design of Gx (z). These results are summarised by following theorem.
We obtain a more elaborate form of condition 3 in following Theorem 2: The repetitive control system shown in figure
section. 1 is stable for ∥W (z)∥∞ > 1 if
1) Tcl (z) is stable.
III. STABILITY ANALYSIS OF HIGHER ORDER 2) ∥Q(z)∥∞ ≤ 1.
REPETITIVE CONTROLLER √
3) |tcl (ω) + gx (ω)| < cos−1 ( α).
Condition 3 from theorem 1 is analysed further by sepa- 4) γ2 < Gx (ω) < γ1 .
rating the gain and phase response of each component. For Where
example, for Gx (z) the gain and phase responses are Gx (ω)
and ejgx (ω) respectively. Thus, condition 3 from theorem 1 γ1 , γ 2 =
[ ]
becomes: 1 √
cos(tcl (ω)+gx (ω))± cos (tcl (ω) + gx (ω)) − α
2
|(Tcl (ω)Gx (ω)ej(tcl (ω)+gx (ω)) − 1)W (ω)ejw(ω) | < 1 (7) Tcl (ω)

Taking the absolute value and solving the subsequent in- Condition 3 and 4 from theorem 2 link the magnitude
equality for Gx (ω), following condition is obtained. of W (z) to the phase and √ gain of the compensator. As
∥W (z)∥∞ → ∞, cos−1 ( α) → 0◦ . 0◦ in condition 3
1 − W 2 (ω) 2cos(tcl (ω) + gx (ω)) means that the compensator has to provide perfect phase
Gx (ω) < +
W 2 (ω)Tcl2 (ω)Gx (ω) Tcl (ω) compensation which is only possible in case of inverse
(8) phase compensator. As inverse phase compensator cannot be
As Gx (ω) is positive, this inequality only holds if right obtained for non minimum phase plants, the only remaining
hand side is positive. Angle tcl (ω) + gx (ω) and magnitude solution is to modify the magnitude of W (z) in such a way
of W (ω) can make the right hand side negative. Thus, the that it does not demand stringent phase compensation while
maximum value of W (ω) is considered, i.e. ∥W (z)∥∞ . providing adequate periodic performance.
1 − ∥W (z)∥2∞ 2cos(tcl (ω) + gx (ω)) In the following section, we introduce a weight selection
Gx (ω) < +
∥W (z)∥2∞ Tcl2 (ω)Gx (ω) Tcl (ω) criterion which guarantees an upper bound on magnitude of
(9) W (z) while keeping adequate periodic performance.

7511
 E(z)
GHORC (z) V (z)

+ +
R(z) + + + Y (z)
Gc (z) Gp (z)
–

Fig. 1. Block diagram of a generic closed loop control system along with the plug-in repetitive controller.

+
A. Weights for second order repetitive controller
W (z) Q(z) Gx (z)
Solving (16) along with (19) for m = 2 and keeping w1
+
positive, we reach following conditions on weights.
√
β−1
1 + 1 + 2 1−cos(N Ω)
0 < w1 < (20)
2
Fig. 2. Internal structure of the higher order plug-in repetitive controller.
And
w2 = 1 − w1 (21)
IV. WEIGHTS SELECTION The minimum value of w1 occurs at frequencies where
cos(N Ω) = 0. Thus, (20) is reduced to following form.
The performance of higher order repetitive controller is √
highly dependent on the selection of weights of W (z). Two 1 + 2β − 1
methods for weight selection are discussed in literature. w1 = (22)
2
Steinbuch’s[6] method obtains the weights by equating fre-
B. Weights for third order repetitive controller
quency response of W (z) equal to 1 and its first m − 1
derivatives equal to 0 at the desired frequency and its Using similar reasoning, formulae for weights of third
multiples. Whereas, Pipeleers et al. propose an optimization order repetitive controller are obtained by solving (16), (18)
program for evaluation of weights[13]. The starting point of and (19). √
both these methods is performance. We modify the method 8 + 6β − 14
w1 = (23)
of Steinbuch and obtain weights which guarantee stability. 6
Steinbuch’s method leads to following two formulae for w2 = 3 − 2w1 (24)
weight selection of mth order repetitive controller.
w3 = w1 − 2 (25)
∑
m
wl = 1 (16) V. D ESIGN P ROCEDURE
l=1
Combining the results of weight selection criterion with
And stability conditions obtained in section III, we arrive at
∑
m
following design procedure for stable higher order repetitive
wl lp = 0 for p = 1, 2, 3, ..., m − 1 (17) controller.
l=1
1) Design a conventional controller Gc (z) such that the
We modify the second formula as follows: closed loop system without repetitive controller has
large stability margins.
∑
m
2) Choose an appropriate low pass filter Q(z) such that
wl lp = 0 for p = 1, 2, 3, ..., m − 2 (18) ∥Q(z)∥∞ ≤ 1.
l=1
3) Design a phase compensator which keeps the angle
As the number of unknowns now exceeds the number of tcl (ω)+gx (ω) at minimum value within (+90◦ , −90◦ ).
equations, thus, following new condition is introduced. 4) Find the maximum deviation of |tcl (ω) + gx (ω)|
from zero and use it to find the maximum allowable
∑m ∥W (z)∥∞ using the following formulae.
∥W (z)∥∞ = ∥ wl e−jΩlN ∥∞ < β (19)
l=1 αmax = cos2 (∥tcl (ω) + gx (ω)∥∞ )
√
This condition ensures that the magnitude of W (z) is 1
β = ∥W (z)∥∞ =
bounded by β. 1 − αmax

7512
 5) Evaluate the weights of higher order repetitive con-
troller as described in section IV using the obtained
β.
6) Finally, choose a suitable value of Gx (ω) such that
condition 4 in theorem 2 is satisfied and the resulting
system has fast error convergence.
VI. CURRENT CONTROL OF TWO LEVEL GRID
CONNECTED CONVERTER
A detailed description of the two level converter used here
can be found in [14]. Figure 3 shows the block diagram of
two level converter connected in closed loop. Here I2 (s) is
the output current of a single phase of the converter. Vu (s)
is the grid voltage. This is the point where harmonics enter
the system as disturbance. Following equations give the plant
and disturbance transfer functions.
1 system has large stability margins and its bandwith has also
Gp (s) = (26)
(L1 L2 C)s + Kc L2 Cs2 + (L1 + L2 )s
3
A. Conventional PID Controller
In order to design a PID controller for the two level
converter, its frequency response is analysed. Figure 4 shows
the frequency response of the transfer function from I2 (s) to
Vin (s). It is evident from this plot that the system has large
stability margins. Also, the system has a large D.C. gain.
However, it has a small bandwidth. Its bandwith is just 398
Hz. In order to improve the bandwith, a simple proportional
controller is used. Its gain is selected by inspection. The
conventional controller for the two level converter is given
by following equation.
Gc (z) = 3 (28)
Figure 5 shows the frequency response of the converter
along with the designed proportional controller. Now, the
improved to 1.62 KHz. Although the system has large

D(s) = L1 Cs2 + Kc Cs + 1 (27) 20

10

Magnitude (dB)
The parameters and component values for the two level con- 0

-10
verter are given in table I. The discrete time representation
-20
of the plant is obtained by adding a zero order hold (ZOH).
-30

-40
-90
-135
Vu (s)
Phase (deg)

-180
-225
-270
D(s)
-315
Iref (s) + Vin + – I2 (s) -360
Gc (s) Gp (s) 10 2 10 3 10 4
Frequency (Hz)
–
Fig. 4. Frequency response of the converter transfer function. The gain
margin is 19.1 dB, the phase margin is 81.2 degrees and system bandwith
is 398 Hz.

Fig. 3. Block diagram of the two level converter with conventional 30

controller. 20
Magnitude (dB)

10

0
TABLE I
-10
S YSTEM PARAMETERS AND COMPONENT VALUES FOR THE TWO LEVEL -20
GRID CONNECTED CONVERTER WITH LCL FILTER . -30
-90
-135
Parameter Description Value
Phase (deg)

-180
Vu Utility phase voltage 230 V(rms)
-225
VDC DC link voltage 750 V DC
-270
L1 1st inductor of filter 350 µH
-315
L2 2nd inductor of filter 50 µH
-360
C Filter capacitance 160 µF 10 2 10 3 10 4
Frequency (Hz)
Kc Inner loop gain 13
Fs Switching frequency 8 KHz
Fg Grid frequency 50 Hz Fig. 5. Frequency response of the converter transfer function along with
fs Sampling frequency 20 KHz proportional controller. The gain margin is 7.11 dB, the phase margin is
N No. of samples per period 400 52.9 degrees and system bandwith is 1.62 KHz.
Pinv Rated power 80 KVA

stability margins, a large D.C. gain and adequate bandwith,

Before designing a repetitive controller, it is required that the designed proportional controller fails when the grid has
the closed loop system be made stable using a conventional high harmonic content. In other words, it is unable to reject
PID controller. periodic disturbances.

7513
B. 2nd Order Repetitive Controller desired β using the formulae in section IV.A. The weights
To avert the problem of poor performance under high are given below.
harmonic content in grid, a repetitive controller is used. w1 = 1.366
A detailed design of repetitive controller for the two level
w2 = −0.366
converter along with a comparison of performance with con-
ventional controller is given in [2]. The repetitive controller Kr is selected as 0.8 to satisfy condition 4 in theorem 2
successfully rejects harmonics in the grid and the quality of while keeping fast error convergence. Figure 7 shows that the
injected current is as per international standards. However, designed system is stable with adequate stability margins.
it fails under variation in grid frequency.
In this section, a robust 2nd order repetitive controller is 150

100
designed for the two level converter by following the steps

Magnitude (dB)
listed in section V. The 2nd order repetitive controller is given 50

by following equation. 0

-50
W (z)Q(z)Gx (z)
GHORC = (29)
1 − W (z)Q(z)
-100
5.76
4.608
Where

Phase (deg)
3.456

W (z) = w1 z −N + w2 z −2N (30) 2.304

1.152

N is evaluated by the following expression. 0

-1.152
20000 10 -1 10 0 10 1 10 2 10 3 10 4
= 400 N= (31) Frequency (Hz)

50
Step 1 is the design of a conventional controller which has
already been accomplished. In step 2, Q(z) is chosen as the
low pass first order non causal filter.
Q(z) = 0.25z + 0.5 + 0.25z −1
The converter is a non minimum phase system, thus, an in-
verse model compensator cannot be used. Instead, a ZPETC
inverse compensator[9] is obtained by dropping the unstable
zero. The compensator is given by following equation.
Gx (z) = Kr Tcl∗ (z)
Where Tcl∗ (z)
is the inverse of Tcl (z) excluding the unstable
zero. Kr a is constant factor which is used to satisfy con-
dition 4 in theorem 2. It also controls the error convergence
rate.
Figure 6 shows that the angle tcl (ω) + gx (ω) stays well
within (-90◦ , +90◦ ). The maximum deviation of |tcl (ω) +
Fig. 7. Frequency response of the converter transfer function along with
designed 2nd order higher order repetitive controller. The gain margin is
3.6 dB and phase margin is 29◦ .
(32) C. Simulation Results
The proportional, 1st order and the proposed 2nd order
repetitive controllers are tested by simulations on MAT-
LAB/SIMULINK using the linear model of the two level
grid connected converter under following conditions.
1) The reference current is 100 A and the reference
(33) frequency is 50 Hz.
2) The grid voltage has high harmonic content. The
magnitude of the harmonics is given by figure 8. The
total harmonic distortion in grid voltage is 10.44%.
3) 1% variation in the grid frequency is allowed.
250

gx (ω)| from zero is 30◦ . Thus, the allowable value of

∥W (z)∥∞ is 2. In step 5, the weights are evaluated for 200

30
Amplitude V(rms)

150

100
Phase (deg)

50

0
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000
Frequency Hz

Fig. 8. Harmonic content in the grid voltage. The THD is 10.44%.

-30
10 -1 10 0 10 1 10 2 10 3 10 4 Figure 9 shows the output current THD of the two level con-
Frequency (Hz)
verter for different controllers under varying grid frequency.
Fig. 6. Frequency phase response of converter transfer function along with According to IEEE standards[15], the current THD should be
ZPETC inverse compensator. less than 5%. It is clear from this figure that the proportional

7514
 12%
50 Hz 49.5 Hz
10% 10.38% 10.38%
8%
6%
4.95%
4%
2%
0.3% 0.3%
0%
P Controller RC
Fig. 9. Comparison of the output current THD for different controllers
under variation in grid frequency. The grid voltage THD is 10.44%.
controller fails to meet the required standard when the grid
has high harmonic content. The conventional odd harmonic
repetitive controller successfully rejects harmonics under the
same conditions. However, it fails when the grid frequency
changes by 1%. Whereas the higher order repetitive con-
troller successfully rejects harmonics even in the presence
of variation in grid frequency.
VII. CONCLUSION
We showed that the stability of higher order repetitive
controller is linked with the weights of the internal model.
This poses a challenge in the design of phase compensator
for higher order repetitive controller. A high performance
internal model requires that the phase compensator provides
perfect phase compensation. However, this is impossible in
the case of non minimum phase plants. Thus, a weight
selection criterion was proposed which can be used to design
a stable higher order repetitive controller for a given phase
compensator, at the expense of periodic performance. The
proposed technique was used to design a 2nd order repet-
itive controller for grid connected converter. The designed
controller had adequate stability margins and outperformed
the conventional repetitive controller under variation in grid
frequency.
R EFERENCES
[1] L. Cuiyan, Z. Dongchun, and Z. Xianyi, “A survey of repetitive
control,” in IEEE/RSJ international conference on intelligent robots
and systems, 2004.
[2] M. Jamil, U. Rashid, R. Arshad, M. N. Khan, S. O. Gilani, and
Y. Ayaz, “Robust repetitive current control of two-level utility-
5%
connected converter using lcl filter,” Arabian Journal for Science and
Engineering, pp. 1–18, 2015.
[3] M. Jamil, R. Arshad, U. Rashid, Y. Ayaz, and M. Khan, “Design
3.7%
and analysis of repetitive controllers for grid connected inverter
considering plant bandwidth for interfacing renewable energy sources,”
in Renewable Energy Research and Application (ICRERA), 2014
International Conference on. IEEE, 2014, pp. 468–473.
2nd order RC [4] T. Inoue, M. Nakano, T. Kubo, S. Matsumoto, and H. Baba, “High
accuracy control of a proton synchrotron magnet power supply,” in
Proceedings of the 8th World Congress of IFAC, vol. 20, 1981, pp.
216–221.
[5] G. A. Ramos, R. Costa-Castelló, and J. M. Olm, Digital repetitive
control under varying frequency conditions. Springer, 2013, vol.
446.
[6] M. Steinbuch, “Repetitive control for systems with uncertain period-
time,” Automatica, vol. 38, no. 12, pp. 2103–2109, 2002.
[7] S. Hara, Y. Yamamoto, T. Omata, and M. Nakano, “Repetitive control
system: a new type servo system for periodic exogenous signals,”
Automatic Control, IEEE Transactions on, vol. 33, no. 7, pp. 659–
668, 1988.
[8] R. Griñó and R. Costa-Castelló, “Digital repetitive plug-in controller
for odd-harmonic periodic references and disturbances,” Automatica,
vol. 41, no. 1, pp. 153–157, 2005.
[9] M. Tomizuka, “Zero phase error tracking algorithm for digital control,”
Journal of Dynamic Systems, Measurement, and Control, vol. 109,
no. 1, pp. 65–68, 1987.
[10] B. Zhang, K. Zhou, Y. Wang, and D. Wang, “Performance improve-
ment of repetitive controlled pwm inverters: A phase-lead compensa-
tion solution,” International Journal of Circuit Theory and Applica-
tions, vol. 38, no. 5, pp. 453–469, 2010.
[11] E. Kurniawan, Z. Cao, and Z. Man, “Design of robust repetitive
control with time-varying sampling periods,” Industrial Electronics,
IEEE Transactions on, vol. 61, no. 6, pp. 2834–2841, 2014.
[12] G. Ramos, R. Costa-Castelló, J. M. Olm, R. Cardoner et al., “Robust
high-order repetitive control of an active filter using an odd-harmonic
internal model,” in Industrial Electronics (ISIE), 2010 IEEE Interna-
tional Symposium on. IEEE, 2010, pp. 1040–1045.
[13] G. Pipeleers, B. Demeulenaere, J. D. Schutter, and J. Swevers, “Robust
high-order repetitive control,” in American Control Conference, 2008.
IEEE, 2008, pp. 1080–1085.
[14] S. M. Abu Sharkh and M. A. Abu-Sara, “Current control of utility-
connected two-level and three-level pwm inverters,” European Power
Electronics and Drives Journal, vol. 14, no. 3, pp. 13–18, 2004.
[15] I. F II, “Ieee recommended practices and requirements for harmonic
control in electrical power systems,” 1993.
7515