2017 IEEE 3rd International Conference on Control Science and Systems Engineering

Design of Milling Machine Control System Based on Root Locus Method

Bashir Osman Haitao Zhu

Harbin Engineering University Harbin Engineering University
College of Mechanical and Electrical Engineering College of Ship Building Engineering
Harbin, China Harbin, China
e-mail: basheer931@hotmail.com e-mail: zhuhaitao@hrbeu.edu.cn

Abstract—This paper aims to add a controller to the exiting error [8]. This method need to do more attempts to the ramp
milling machining transfer function according to some design input and step response of the closed loop transfer function
requirements, while establishing a control system based on to check the requirements is obtain or not until achieve the
Simulink simulation, the system corrected through Mat lab goal through MATLAB simulation and SIMULINK tool.
simulation. This experiment uses advanced correction methods The dynamic performance of the control system are
to improve the system performance, observe its step and ramp stability and steady state error: increasing the system open
response to determine the parameters needs be used to loop gain gives smaller steady-state error and more damping
describe the corrector. The basic idea of this correction is use ratio, but at the same time the maximum overshoot and
using the bodes diagrams and root locus method to check the
oscillation system will be increased. Therefore in order to
system is stable or not through the static gain, root locus gain
make control system have satisfactory dynamic performance
will be used to improve the system through the phase lead and
phase lag methods, simulation analysis of the steady state error it is necessary to add some correction to the system.
of the closed loop transfer function ramp input and the
II. THE DESIGN GOALS
analyses of the step response of the open loop transfer function
of the system overshoot will be used as good indicator to obtain Correct the existing milling machine transfer function
the design requirements. controller to meet the following requirements: (1) Steady-
state error ess, due to a ramp input R(s)=1/s2 ,which is less
Keywords-component; milling machining; Matlab/Simulink; than 1/8 of velocity of ramp , (2) for step inputs, the output
phase lead; phase lag controller; root locus overshoot is less than 20%.
The main contents of milling machining parts with
I. INTRODUCTION control sensor are working together to do the process, where
v is a velocity of the rotating cutter as shown in Fig. 1,
Two major problems in the field of metal cutting are tool
wear and tool breakage. Number of schemes, techniques and
paradigms have been used for the development of functional
decision making systems that would derive a conclusion on
machining process conditions, based on sensor signals [1]-
[2], [3]. There are various numbers of modelling methods to
predict the machining process from the cutting force effects
point of view, such as FEM modelling, modelling geometric
ratio of the engagement of the cutting tool, modeling based
on the empirical data and modelling based on a specific
cutting force [4, 5and 6]. Before we can control a system we
must understand in mathematical terms how the system Figure 1. Example of a ONE-COLUMN figure caption.
behaves without control [7], to make the design easer it is
often to assume there are limited number of transfer function The cutting process was represented by a transfer
in the design objective. Simulink is a good tool to represent function G(s):
the function that’s needed to make feedback control works.
This article use the frequency domain techniques together 2
with root locus method which have been very popular G(s) 
classical methods for both analysis and design for control s(1  s)(5  s)
systems using phase-lead and phase lag controllers. Working
steps will follow the rules which mentioned in [6, 7]. The
model of system component can be entered into MATLAB III. THE ORIGINAL SYSTEM DESIGN
as transfer function using some typical closed loop
specifications. The controller design technique based on A. Theoretical Analysis of the Steady-State Error of the
Bode diagrams shown how to use the Phase-lag and Phase- System
lead controllers such that compensated systems have the To obtain the steady state error ess, let’s apply the final
desired and Phase and gain stability margins the steady state theorem to obtain e (∞).

978-1-5386-0484-7/17/$31.00 ©2017 IEEE 141

Authorized licensed use limited to: Concordia University Library. Downloaded on September 20,2021 at 23:44:51 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 s(s  1)(s  5) 1 5 As shown in the following Fig.4, the step response
 e(t) limsE(s) lims  abstained a value of 3.75% overshoot, which is satisfy the
s o0 s o0 s(s  1)(s  5)  2 s 2 2
overshoot requirements. According to the above analysis, the
system needs to be improved due the system’s steady-state
However, the calculated steady error is greater than the error. Where,
required one.
B. Simulation Analysis of the Steady State Error 2 1
 G(s) 2. 
The Simulink model for this system is shown in Fig. 2, s(s  1)(s  5) s(s  1)(s  1)

The systems can be classified into different types,

specifically this system is Type 1 system, the unit slope
steady state error ess= 1/kv ,where the speed error coefficient
kv =2 /5, to reduce the steady state error of the ramp response
Figure 2. The original system simulink model. of the system, a suitably increased value is required.
According to requirements, steady state error need to be less
The only that will yield a finite steady-state error in this than 1/8, that mean kv˃8, then the root locus gain requires
system is a unit ramp r (t) =t, and the output y (t), which k=5kv˃40.For the following open-loop transfer function
obtained in the following Fig. 3,
Type 1 Ramp Response
1
25
 G c(s) 
r(t) s(s  1)(s  5)
y(t))
20
The root locus of gain 1, shown in Fig.5, as below.
15 Root Locus
Amplitude

2.6

10 2.5

2.4
Imaginary Axis (seconds-1)

5
2.3

0 2.2 System: G
0 5 10 15 20 25 Gain: 30
Time (sec) Pole: 0.00062 + 2.24i
2.1 Damping: -0.000277
Figure 3. The ramp input response of the original system. Overshoot (%): 100
Frequency (rad/s): 2.24
2
In Fig. 3, The system has reached the steady state error at
25 sec, which has value of 2.5 steady state error, which 1.9

indicate that simulation and theoretical result are the same. -0.2 -0.15 -0.1 -0.05 0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25
Real Axis (seconds -1)
C. Simulation Analysis of the Step Response
Figure 5. Root locus of the open-loop transfer function gain of 1.

1.4
Step Response
It can be seen form Fig. 5, for any value after the gain 30,
System: T the system will be unstable, therefore only increasing the
1.2
Peak amplitude: 1.04
Overshoot (%): 3.75
system gain will not achieve the design requirements.
At time (seconds): 7.44 According to the above analysis the root locus gain will
1 be used to improve the system. To meet the steady state error
kv˃8, the root locus gain k=5kv>40, fore more safety,
0.8
consider kv =10, then k=50.
Amplitude

0.6 IV. DESIGN OF PHASE LAG BY USING ROOT LOCUS

METHOD
0.4

0.2
A. Analysis of the Steady State Error
The phase-lag compensator obtained by
0
0 5 10 15
Time (seconds) k sz
 G cLag (s) 
Figure 4. The step response of original system closed loop. α sp

142

Authorized licensed use limited to: Concordia University Library. Downloaded on September 20,2021 at 23:44:51 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 Hence, the steady state errorˈ The corresponding Bode diagrams for the a above Gꞌ(s)
tell us that,When frequency = 0 rad/sec, the phase = -
192 ̊ .Hence,-192<180 ̊ the system will be unstable. To make
ª1 1 º 1 the system is stable let’s use other an advanced correction
ess limsE(s) lims. « 2 . »

s o0 s o0
¬ s 1  G c (s)G(s) ¼ 8  compensator method.
2 k z B. Compensator Design with Phase-Lead Controller
kv . . 10 ! 8
5 α p The specific structure of the compensator for Phase-lead
correction witch takes two parameters, α and T, to describe
Root locus of the open-loop transfer function of the the steady- state error.
original system G(s) are obtained in the following Fig. 6,
1  αTs
Root Locus
 G clead (s) 
15
0.76 0.64 0.5 0.34 0.16 1  Ts
0.86
10
System: G The open loop transfer function of the system can be
0.94 Gain: 2.06
obtained after lead correction
Imaginary Axis (seconds-1)

Pole: -0.405 + 0.792i

5 Damping: 0.456
0.985 Overshoot (%): 20
Frequency (rad/s): 0.89 50(1  1.4482s)
17.5 15 12.5 10 7.5 5 2.5  G(s) G cG c (s) 
0
System: G s(s  1)(s  5)(1  0.01114s)
Gain: 1.35
0.985 Pole: -0.436 + 0.579i
-5 Damping: 0.602
Overshoot (%): 9.38 It can be seen from Bode diagrams for the above opened-
0.94 Frequency (rad/s): 0.725
loop G(s) , the crossover frequency of the corrected system
-10 approximately is 7.72 rad/s, the corresponding phase is about
0.86
-150 ,̊ and the phase margin 30 ̊.Plotting the root locus for the
0.76 0.64 0.5 0.34 0.16
-15 same G(s) obtained in in Fig. 7, as fellow,
-20 -15 -10 -5 0 5 10
Real Axis (seconds -1) Root Locus

Figure 6. The original system root locus.

100
According to the above Fig.6, if the overshoot is less than
20%, the required damping ratio is greater than 0.45. To
Imaginary Axis (seconds-1)

leave enough margin let us take damping ratio of 0.6, which 50 System: G
Gain: 6.54
has system gain 1.35, and then the transfer function of the Pole: -0.0934 - 21.2i
Damping: 0.00441
lag compensator was calculated. The whole system transfer 0 Overshoot (%): 98.6
Frequency (rad/s): 21.2
function is Gt(s)
-50
2.7(s  0.01)
 G t (s) G clag (s)G(s) 
s(s  1)(s  5)(S  0.00054) -100
-140 -120 -100 -80 -60 -40 -20 0 20 40 60
Real Axis (seconds -1)
B. Simulation Analysis of the Step Response after First
Figure 7. The root locus of the system after lead correction.
LagCorrection
For the new system Gt(s), the closed loop step response It can be seen from Fig. 7, that the root locus gain when
overshoot is 11.3%, is less than 20, which meet the design the root locus passes the imaginary axis is approximately
overshoot requirement. k=6351.8*6.54= 41540.772, therefore, the required root-path
gain k=50 meet the requirement and the system is stable.
V. DESIGN OF PHASE LEAD USING ROOT LOCUS The simulation shows that, the steady state error of the
METHOD ramp response is 0.1, which indicate that kv =10. The step
overshoot about 40.2% which still greater than required
A. Analysis of the Steady State Error design overshoot.
Hence static gain that produces the desired steady state
error, K>20, for more safety consider k= 25, then G(s) will VI. COMPENSATORS DESIGN WITH PHASE-LAG
corrected as CONTROLLER
According to lag compensators design rules, and since
50 we want phase margin to be at least 45.
 Gc(s) 
s(s  1)(s  5) Hence, the phase-lag compensator obtained is given by

143

Authorized licensed use limited to: Concordia University Library. Downloaded on September 20,2021 at 23:44:51 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 1  21.88s Because the value of the ramp input steady state error has
 G c (s)  no change witch still 0.1, Fig. 8 shows that new system
1  19.95* 21.88s
corresponding Pm=50 ̊ at 0.456 rad/s. By plotting the step
The Bode diagrams of above open-loop G(s) is obtained response of the close loop of Gc(s) in Fig. 9, the step
in Fig. 8 as fellow: response overshoot is 16.9%, which is less than the required
overshoot 20%. The final corrected model will appear in Fig.
Bode Diagram
Gm = 21.1 dB (at 2.18 rad/s) , Pm = 54.8 deg (at 0.456 rad/s) 10.
100
Step Response
50 1.4
System: Gf
Magnitude (dB)

Peak amplitude: 1.17

Overshoot (%): 16.9
0 At time (seconds): 6.18
1.2
-50
1
-100

0.8

Amplitude
-150
-90

0.6
-135
Phase (deg)

System: G
Frequency (rad/s): 0.456
-180 Phase (deg): -125 0.4

-225 0.2

-270
-4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 0
10 10 10 10 10 10 10 0 10 20 30 40 50 60
Frequency (rad/s) Time (seconds)

Figure 8. The system bode diagrams after lag correction. Figure 9. The step response of the system after lag correction.

Figure 10. The corrected model.

VII. CONSULTATION REFERENCES

Due to the performance of the system, changed the gain [1] Chryssolouris, G., Domroese, M., 1989, An Experimental Study Of
alone improved the system’s steady state error, but as the Strategies For Integrating Sensor Information In Machining" CIRP
Annals, Volume 38, No.1, pp. 425-428.2
same time had increased its overshoot. Therefore, root design
[2] Chryssolouris, G., Domroese, M., Zsoldos, L., 1990, A Decision-
method analysis had been used to try the solution through the Making Strategy For Machining Control, CIRP Annals, Volume 39,
lead compensator design method witch also failed to solve No.1, pp. 501-504.3
the problem. Finally lag correction method met the design [3] Chryssolouris, G., Guillot, M., 1990, A Comparison Of Statistical
requirements. And AI Approaches To The Selection Of Process Parameters In
Intelligent Machining, Journal Of Engineering For Industry, ASME,
ACKNOWLEDGMENT Volume 112, pp. 122-13.4
This paper is funded by the International Exchange [4] Tlusty J Manufacturing Processes and Equipment, 1stedn. Upper
Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall(2000)
Program of Harbin Engineering University for Innovation-
[5] L.G LASITZHAN, Mechanical Vibrations And Industrial Noise
oriented Talents Cultivation. Control, pp. 464 (2013)
[6] Alok Sinha, Vibration of Mechanical System. pp. 265-266.
[7] Crandall, S. H., Dahl, N.C. And Lardner, T. J. An Introduction To
Mechanics Of Solids, Mcgraw-Hill, New York (1999)
[8] Boyce, W. E. And Diprima, R. C. Elementary Differential Equations
and Boundary Value Problems, John Wiley and Sons, Hoboken, NJ.
2005).

144

Authorized licensed use limited to: Concordia University Library. Downloaded on September 20,2021 at 23:44:51 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.