INTRODUCTION TO AUTOMATIC CONTROL

CLASS NOTES FOR EE361

BY
VICTOR A. SKORMIN, Ph.D.
Professor, Watson School of Engineering, Electrical Engineering Department
Binghamton University
who is grateful to his former student, Dr. Michael Elmore, Senior Staff Systems
Engineer of Lockheed Martin-Owego for valuable suggestions and corrections

Some students tend to hibernate

In my Control class
And some are chronically late
And I have little chance
To teach about overshoot
And settling time, as well,
And how a right-sided root
Drives everything to hell,
The final value theorem,
The pole placement rule ...
And this is true, I'm teaching them
But they are sick of school
But life is cynical and tough
And playing games with men
And you will stop your happy laugh
One rainy day, and then
Will realize that SUNY is
The least of all headaches
And real life's the toughest quiz
Like Skormin never makes
 CONTENTS

Introduction ……………………………………………………………………………. 4
Principles of automatic control………………………………………………………….. 5
Role of feedback ………………………………………………………………………... 10
Assignments (Homework #1) …………………………………………………………... 13
EDUCATIONAL OBJECTIVE: understanding the feedback and feedforward control
principles

Chapter 1. Mathematical description of dynamic systems ……………….……….. 14

Time-domain description ...............................................................…………………….. 16

S-domain description ....................................................................……………………... 18
Frequency-domain description ......................................................………………….…. 28
Assignments (Homework #2 and Homework #2)…………………………………….… 36
EDUCATIONAL OBJECTIVE: ability to obtain a mathematical description of a
dynamic system in the appropriate form

Chapter 2. Mathematical description of control systems ………………………….. 38

Typical dynamic blocks ....................................................……………………............… 38
Block diagrams ................................................................…………............………….… 57
Signal-flow graphs .......................................................................………………………. 66
Assignments (Homework #4) ........................................................……………………... 77
Example Test ................................................................................……………………... 79
EDUCATIONAL OBJECTIVE: ability to utilize existing methods of describing a control
system as a combination of particular modules

Chapter 3. Common control engineering techniques ...........……………………….. 80

Numerical simulation .....................................................................……………………... 80
Loop and closed-loop transfer function .........................................……………………... 84
Computation of system poles and zeros .........................................…………………….. 87
Frequency-domain techniques: Nyquist procedure .........................……………………. 88
Frequency-domain techniques: Bode plots .....................................…………………….. 92
Root locus techniques ...................................................................………………………103
Assignments (Homework #5) ........................................................……………………...113
EDUCATIONAL OBJECTIVE: ability to utilize existing analytical and numerical
techniques and software tools developed in control
engineering

Chapter 4. Analysis of continuous-time control systems ........………………………115

2
Stability analysis ............................................................................……………………...115
Relative stability ............................................................................……………………...129
Analysis of system statics ..............................................................……………………...138
Analysis of system dynamics ..........................................................…………………….152
Assignments (Homework #6, Homework #7, and Homework #8) ..…………………....161
Example Test ..................................................................................…………………....164
EDUCATIONAL OBJECTIVE: ability to assess properties of an existing control system

Chapter 5. Design of continuous-time control systems ...........……………………..166

Design considerations and problem definition ................................………...….………166
S-domain design ...........................................................................……………………...170
S-domain design. Pole placement .................................................…………...………... 187
Frequency-domain design . . ……………………………………………………………211
Assignments (Homework #9 and Homework #10) ........................…………………….229
Example Test ................................................................................……………………. 233
EDUCATIONAL OBJECTIVE: ability to design a control system compliant with design
specifications

Chapter 6. Introduction to digital control ......................…………………………... 234

Discrete-time representation of continuous signals ........................…………………… 235

Discrete-time domain description of dynamic systems ...................…………………... 243
Analysis of discrete-time control systems ......................................…………………… 249
Z-domain design of control systems ..............................................……………………. 254
Assignments (Homework #11) …….….…………….....................…………………… 263
EDUCATIONAL OBJECTIVE: ability to apply Z-domain techniques for assessing
properties of the existing and design of new digital
control systems
References ....................................................................................……………………... 264

ASSIGNMENTS & GRADING POLICY

1. Homework Assignments - 20 points

2. Test #1 - 20 points
3. Test #2 - 20 points
4. Test #3 - 20 points
5. Final Exam - 20 points
TOTAL 100 points

3
 INTRODUCTION

Automatic control is a discipline that is approximately seventy years old. Developments in

various fields of engineering have resulted in very sophisticated machines, devices and
manufacturing processes. Successful operation of these machines, devices and processes requires
very short response time, large amount of complex, repetitious analytical and mechanical operations,
and low tolerance to errors that are well beyond human abilities. Automation became the only
alternative for continuing the technical progress.
While design of a particular automatic control system constitutes an electrical and/or mechanical
engineering problem, general control theory was formulated only by 1955. It was found that all
control systems operate according to the same principle known as the negative feedback. Linear
differential equations in combination with Laplace, Fourier and later, Z-transform techniques were
suggested as the main mathematical tool of the new theory. Stability issues were rediscovered and
successfully incorporated in the control theory. Special engineering-oriented methods of system
analysis and design were formulated.
Introduction of computers became the beginning of the new era in control engineering. First,
application of computers allowed for full-scale implementation of powerful mathematical tools
provided by numerical analysis and matrix theory for control systems analysis and design. Second,
computers allowed for numerical simulation of control and dynamic systems, providing the most
accurate and thorough analytical and design tools. Third, a computer became a part of a control
system, implementing in software the most sophisticated control laws.
Modern age controls became one of the most mathematical and computer-saturated fields of
engineering. Interdisciplinary by nature, control engineering offers its services and general methods
to electrical, mechanical, chemical, aerospace and power engineering, as well as metallurgy, biology,
material science, etc. Control theory provides a foundation for such new disciplines as cybernetics,
robotics, and bioengineering. Computer-based control engineering allows for the development of
new technologies utilizing physical phenomena that are inherently unstable.
A successful control engineer has a strong mathematical background, which includes the theory
of complex variables and functions, differential equations, matrix theory, Laplace-, Fourier- and Z-
transforms, optimization techniques and applied statistics. On this foundation methods and models
of control are formulated. Computer application skills allow control engineers to utilize modern
software tools implementing control engineering techniques and facilitating numerical simulation,
analysis and design of control systems. Microprocessor background is required for the

4
implementation of control laws through a microprocessor and interfacing microprocessors with
system components. Knowledge of circuits and electronics is crucial for understanding hardware
implementation aspects of control systems. Finally, a general knowledge of physics, mechanics, and
engineering is needed for understanding the nature of the system to be automated.

PRINCIPLES OF AUTOMATIC CONTROL

Automation implies development of a technical system capable of self-control. Any

deviation from the required status in such a system must result in the generation of control efforts,
partially or completely eliminating this deviation. It is important that the control efforts are
generated without any participation of a human operator, who is responsible only for the definition
of the "required status". An automatically controlled system is expected to maintain its actual status
consistent with the required status in spite of various disturbing effects.
It was noted that the ability of a complex system to maintain its status without any "intelligent"
supervision is based on a so-called negative feedback mechanism. A negative feedback mechanism
operates according to the following principle:
- an error, i.e., a discrepancy between the actual status and the required status of the system, is
detected,
- a control effort, defined as a certain function of the error, is generated,
- the direction (sign) of the control effort is always defined such that the detected error will be
reduced or eliminated, i.e., the overall effect of the control effort on the system is expected to
be equal (or close) to the effect of disturbing factors, taken with a minus sign (negative
feedback).
It can be noted that a control system, implementing the negative feedback principle, has a
distinctive closed-loop chain of resources/energy/signal/information transformations, as shown in
Fig. 1. The forward path is typically responsible for the major physical transformation that
constitutes the process to be controlled. The feedback path also performs physical transformations,
for example transformation of electric signals, but the electric power of these signals is very low: the
signals are used as carriers of information.
The following is an example of a voltage and frequency control system of an industrial power
generator. Fig. 2 shows schematics of its automatic control systems. The power generating unit
consists of a power generator (1), a turbine (2), a steam generator (3), and the steam line (4). The
speed of the turbine (and the frequency of the generated voltage) is controlled by the valve in the

5
 D isturbance FO RWAR D PA TH :
T he p hysica l p rocess Actua l status o f the p rocess
C O N TRO L to be a uto m atica lly co ntro lled
EFFO RT

_
FEED BAC K PATH : ER RO R Des ired status
De finitio n o f co ntro l e fforts of the proc ess
+

Figure 1 - Closed-loop control system.

steam line (5). The voltage of the generator is controlled by the current in the field (excitation)
winding (6). Module (7) represents devices that allow for manipulation of the excitation current
flowing through the field winding. Components (8), (9) and (10) are electronics block, servo-motor
and gearbox that allow for manipulation of the position of the valve in the steam line. The power
generator is connected to a varying electrical load (11) that consists of inductance, resistance, and
capacitance components that, acting together, affect voltage and speed of the generator (frequency).
It should be understood that without any control the speed of the turbine and voltage of the generator
would exhibit unacceptable fluctuations caused by a large number of external and internal factors,
such as the load of the generator, status of the steam generator, status of bearings, etc. It is difficult
to visualize a crew of human operators, manually controlling the steam valve (5) and the field
current circuitry (7); these functions are performed by an automatic system.
Let us assume that due to the increased load (i.e., decreased load resistance) the output voltage
of the generator decreases. The voltage signal V1 generated by the voltmeter (12) becomes lower
than the reference signal R1, defined by process operators. This results in the appropriate value and
polarity of the error signal E1 defined by the error detector (13) as the difference between the actual
voltage and the reference. As shown below, the error signal is transformed by special control
module (14) into an intermediate signal, which controls the field current through special circuitry (7)
thus affecting the magnetic flux and increasing the electromotive force (EMF) of the generator. This
action results in the increase of the controlled voltage until the error is eliminated. In the case when
the actual voltage is higher than the value of the reference signal, the error has the opposite sign, thus

6
 11
2
4 5
3 12 L
1
R
10
C
6
V1
_
9 E1
7 14 R1
+
13
V2
_
E2
8 16 + R2

Figure 2 - Control systems of an industrial power generator

resulting in the reduction of the EMF and the controlled voltage. Successful selection of the function
implemented in the control module (14), assures that the change in the field current promptly
balances the effect of changing loads and other disturbing factors. It could be seen that improper
selection of this function would result in the failure of the described system.
As shown in Fig. 2, the velocity of the turbine-generator assembly is being transformed into a
voltage signal V2 by a tachogenerator (15) and compared with the velocity reference signal R2. The
resultant error E2 represents the difference between the actual and desired velocities, and through
control module (16), power amplifier (8), servomotor (9), and gearbox (10) is used to increase or
decrease the opening of the valve (5) in the steam line, thus affecting the steam flow and the velocity
of the turbine. It should be emphasized that such a system must be well balanced, i.e., provide "as
much control effort as necessary" to maintain the actual velocity of the generator (and therefore the
frequency of the generated voltage) equal to the required one in spite of various external effects
(such as variation of the load of the generator or fluctuations in the operation of the steam generator).
While the above example presents the principle of operation of particular control systems, the
following general definitions are needed to discuss a generic control system.
To control - means to maintain a particular operation, status, or performance of a physical
process.
Controlled plant or controlled process - is the physical process, i.e., the combination of physical
transformations, which must be maintained according to a precisely defined operational regime.

7
 Controlled variable represents quantitatively the actual operation, status, or performance of the
controlled process.
Control system is a combination of components performing control functions. A control system
typically forms a closed-loop circuit with the controlled process in the forward path.
Actuation signal symbolizes the control efforts applied to the controlled plant in order to provide
the desired effects on its status or performance.
A controlled plant can be viewed as a system that has an actuation signal(s) in the input and the
controlled variable(s) in the output.
Transducer (sensor) is a technical device that transforms a controlled variable into an electrical
signal thus providing the quantitative characterization of the actual operation, status or performance
of the controlled process.
Reference is the signal that represents the desired operation, status, or performance of a
controlled process. The controlled variables (referred to above) are represented by particular low
power electric signals following some scale. The reference signals have the same order of
magnitude and power as the signals representing controlled variables, but are defined by the human
operators of the process.
Disturbance signals represent all external (and sometimes internal) factors that result in the
undesirable deviations of controlled variables from their required values.
Error signal is the difference between the actual and desired values of controlled variable, or
between the reference and transducer signals.
Controller is an analog or digital device that defines the control efforts transforming the error
signal into the control signal, in accordance with the control law. The following formula presents an
example of a control law:
de(t )
U (t ) = K1e(t ) + K 2 ∫ e(t )dt + K 3
dt
where e(t) and U(t) are the error and control signals. Appropriate selection of a control law, both its
configuration and parameters (K1, K2, K3), is crucial for the operation of the entire system, and
constitutes one of the central issues in control engineering.
Servomechanism is an electric, hydraulic, or pneumatic device that performs power
amplification of the control signal, generating a control effort.
Actuator is the device, driven by the servomechanism, which directly affects the controlled
process by applying the actuation (controlled input) signal.

8
 The schematics of Fig. 2, exhibit two control systems: the velocity (frequency) control and the
voltage control. The controlled plant of the first system is the transformation of the energy of
compressed steam into the energy of rotating turbine-generator assembly. The controlled variables
of the system are, obviously, the velocity of the turbine and the line voltage. The opening of the
valve in the steam line and the field current are the actuation signals. The tachogenerator (a small dc
generator) serves as the transducer, representing the velocity by a proportional low power dc signal.
Another transducer is the voltmeter in the power line. The reference signals are special voltages
defined by the human operator via a potentiometers; it is expected that when the velocity of the
turbine is exactly equal to its required value, the reference signal is equal to the signal of the
transducer. Similarly, when the line voltage is exactly equal to the required value, the small voltages
signal from the voltmeter is equal to the reference signal. The difference between the feedback and
reference signals constitutes the velocity and the voltage errors. The controllers of this system can
be implemented as an analog or a digital computer programmed in accordance with the particular
control laws. The control law must be selected based on known (or assumed) differential equations
of all system components.
Negative feedback mechanisms can be easily detected in many biological, economical and
physical systems capable of maintaining equilibrium.
Feedback control in market economy is the mechanism behind the "supply/demand" formula.
A manufacturing process could be viewed as the controlled plant. The capital investments
constitute the actuation signal. The output is represented by the amount of the product, i.e., the
supply. The role of the reference signal is played by the demand. The discrepancy between the
supply and demand, the system error, plays the major role in the price definition. Sales generate the
profit that in accordance with some control law is transformed into capital investments in
manufacturing. This closed-loop mechanism provides the only mechanism capable of maintaining
the balance between the supply and demand, providing that the man-made control law is properly
defined. (All known cases of destruction of this mechanism in so-called "socialist" systems have
resulted in the complete deterioration of economies.)
Feedback control in a biological system is a harmony mechanism in nature. It could be said
that the deer population within a particular geographic region is regulated by a biological control
system. The death and birth processes in such a system constitute the controlled process. The size
of the population is, obviously, the controlled variable. This variable can be defined in terms of the
required amount of vegetation to be consumed. The available amount of vegetation, which depends

9
on the soil productivity and weather conditions, serves as the reference signal. The system error,
defined as the difference between the available and required amount of vegetation, is one of the
major factors (control efforts) affecting the death and birth processes. The structure described
represents one of the mechanisms responsible for balance in nature. Any attempt to disconnect the
closed chain of processes may result in undesirable effects.

ROLE OF FEEDBACK

The examples clearly point at one very important property of the discussed control systems: the
control effort is being defined on the basis of the error signal, not on the basis of the phenomena
responsible for the occurrence of the error. This is a typical feature of all feedback systems, a
feedback system corrects the error without asking "why this error has occurred".
Assume, for example, that an automatic system to maintain the indoor temperature is being
developed. The indoor temperature is affected by the operation of the furnace (the control effort)
and by such disturbances as outdoor temperature, efficiency of the heater, by the doors and windows
that may or may not be completely closed, etc. The feedback approach implies that the indoor
temperature, represented by a proportional voltage signal, is being monitored. This voltage,
subtracted from the reference voltage, representing the desired indoor temperature, constitutes the
error signal. The error is converted into a control signal, and finally, in the fuel flow of a furnace.
Any deviation of the actual indoor temperature from the required one will be detected and eliminated
through the feedback mechanism, regardless what caused this deviation, fluctuation of the outdoor
temperature, opened window, or fluctuation of the efficiency of the furnace.
But there is an alternate approach, known as the feedforward control. It implies that the factors
leading to the occurrence of system errors are being monitored, and a control effort is being
generated and applied to the controlled process to compensate for the expected error. In the case of
a temperature control system, it is possible to monitor the outdoor temperature as the major factor
responsible for the fluctuations of the indoor temperature. Since it is known that the drop of the
outdoor temperature will eventually result in the drop of the indoor temperature, the fuel flow could
be increased immediately as the drop of the outdoor temperature has been detected. It is quite
important that the feedforward approach theoretically can completely eliminate the error: the drop of
the outdoor temperature can be compensated by the increase of the fuel flow before it will result in
the error! However, the described feedforward temperature control system would definitely fail to
offset the effects of opened windows, changing efficiency of the furnace, or any factor, other than

10
the outdoor temperature.
The following is the list of advantages and drawbacks of both control techniques.
FEEDBACK:
Advantage: a general-purpose error correction mechanism reacts to the error itself, not to the
factors causing it
Drawback: the error correction mechanism is activated by occurring errors, which results in the
increased response time.
Note that the closed-loop of mechanical/electrical/information transformations is formed only in
a feedback control system.
FEEDFORWARD:
Advantage: it reacts to particular disturbances before they cause system errors, which results in
a very short response time,
Drawback: it "protects" the controlled plant only from specific disturbances, acting as a special-
purpose error correction mechanism.
Note that the sequence of mechanical/electrical/information transformations taking place on a
feedforward control system does not form a closed loop. Feedforward control is also known as open-
loop control.
It could be concluded, therefore, that feedback normally presents the most practical technique
for the development of a control system. However, in a situation when the controlled plant is
affected by a small number of dominant disturbances, which can be properly monitored, the
feedback could be supplemented by a feedforward mechanism, responsible for dominant
disturbances.
Generally speaking, the feedback mechanism presents an ideal tool for a control system
designer. It can be shown that it allows for a complete modification of the dynamic properties of a
controlled plant, and for the reduction of system sensitivity to external signals and “internal” system
parameters. For example, a small change in the computer code implementing the control law in
modules (14), (16) of the control system of Fig. 2 can result in the same effects on the system
properties as very expensive modifications of the power generator. Effects of the road conditions on
the speed of an automobile could be virtually eliminated by the activation of the cruise control
system, which implies velocity feedback. Effect of varying mass on the flight dynamics of a guided
missile, as fuel is being spent, is practically negligible only due to the special feedback mechanisms.
At the same time, introduction of feedback may result in system instability, i.e., development

11
of a potentially self-destructive system. Poor knowledge of control principles can also lead to an
inefficient control system, which requires unnecessarily high control efforts.
It is important to realize that feedback control mechanisms are present in both automatic and
manually controlled systems. In a manually controlled system the human operator unavoidably
becomes the part of the control loop. He/she is responsible for monitoring the controlled variable
(for example speed of the vehicle using a speedometer), comparing the desired value of the
controlled variable with the actual value, detecting the discrepancy (error), implementing the control
law (that reflects mood, emotions, fatigue, etc.), and finally, generating the control effort (by
applying pressure at the brake or gas pedals). In an automatic system, the human operator “stays out
of the loop” and is responsible only for specifying the required value of the controlled variable,
while the feedback mechanism detects the position error and implements some control law to
generate the control effort.
There are two major types of problems in control engineering; the first is the assessment of
system properties and behavior, and the second deals with selection of appropriate feedback
mechanisms:
Analysis - the system configuration and all system components are known. It is required to
evaluate system behavior and performance characteristics.
Design - major system components, specifically the controlled plant, are known. The system
behavior and performance characteristics are specified. It is required to select the system
configuration and the control law to assure the desired system performance.
Both the analysis and the design problems can be solved only on the basis of the mathematical
description of the system, which consists of the mathematical descriptions of particular system
components and the overall system configuration.

12
 ASSIGNMENTS (HOMEWORK #1)

1.1. Identify major control system components of the voltage control system shown in Fig. 2.
1.2. Develop a schematic of the temperature control system, described above, that combines
feedback and feedforward mechanisms. Identify major control system components and their
functions.
1.3. Water level in a reservoir of a chemical plant can increase due to rains, and decrease due to
consumption and evaporation. It is controlled by pumping water from the lake or to the lake
using a reversible pump. Suggest a control procedure for maintaining the required water level
a) using the feedback principle
b) using the feedforward principle
Provide schematics and explain advantages and drawbacks of both systems.

13
 CHAPTER 1.

MATHEMATICAL DESCRIPTION OF DYNAMIC SYSTEMS

The word "system" is used to label any physical process to emphasize our interest not in its
physical nature, but in the way it converts its input signal, defined as a function of time x (t ) , into the

output signal y( t ) .

Figure 1.1

In Fig. 1.1 above, x (t ) and y( t ) are assumed to be single variables, t is continuous time, and
F(x) is the system operator which defines the output as a function of the input and, therefore,
describes the system. According to the configuration of its operator F (⋅), a system could be viewed
as linear or nonlinear and as static or dynamic.
The system linearity can be easily defined through the superposition principle. A system
y(t ) = F ( x ) is linear if:
N N
 N 
∑= 1 i ∑= 1 i
y = F ( x ) = F  ∑ xi 
 i= 1 
i i

Otherwise, the system is nonlinear. The following are examples of linear and nonlinear system
operators.
Linear: y(t ) = 5x (t ) + 10

y(t ) = 3 y (t − ∆ ) + 2 x( t ) + 4 x (t − ∆ ) + 0.5 x (t − 2∆ )

y ′′(t ) = 2 y ′(t ) + 5 y(t ) + 7 x( t )

Nonlinear: y ( t ) = x ( t ) + 5 x 2 ( t ) + 3x ( t ) y ( t )

[
y ′′(t ) = 4 x (t ) x ′(t ) + x (t ) + y ′( t ) ]
2

It is important, however, that any continuous nonlinear system y(t ) = F ( x ) could be linearized

in the vicinity of a particular point x o using Taylor series:

14
 ( ) ( ) ( )
y = F(x) = F x o + x − x o F ′ x o

This approximation is accurate if and only if the difference x − x o is "sufficiently" small.

As you remember, the purpose of control system is to maintain the operational regime of the
controlled process. This means that the process variables are not expected to fluctuate over a wide
range of values, and differences x − x o are expected to stay "sufficiently small". Therefore, in many
practical applications systems and system components are assumed to be either linear or linearized.
The distinction between static and dynamic systems reflects the extent to which time is involved

( )
in the definition of the value y t * , where t * is a particular time value. In a static system knowledge

( ) ( ) ( ) ( ( ))
of x t * is sufficient for the definition of y t * : y t * = ϕ x t * . However, in many physical

( )
systems a current value y t * can be defined only if the "history of the input" and the "history of the

output" are known. These histories, that is x (t ) and y( t ) for the period t1 ≤ t ≤ t * , can be defined in

( ) ( )
the form of a sequence of discrete values x t * − kT , k = 0,1, 2,... and y t * − kT , k = 1, 2,... , or

alternately, via initial conditions of variables x (t 0 ) , y(t 0 ) and their time derivatives X ( i ) (t 0 ) and

Y ( i ) (t 0 ) , i, k = 0,1, 2,...
Is time involved in the definition of the value of the output variable of a physical system? The
answer is "yes" because of the inertia that is a general property of matter. However, if a system
consists of a number of components that have different inertia, it is often possible to neglect inertia
of some components due to the fact that they practically do not contribute to the inertia of the entire
system. This is the only reason why some dynamic systems could be viewed as static on a different
time scale.
In our course we will deal with linear dynamic systems. We will learn how such a system can
be described
− in the time domain, i.e. using linear differential equations,
− in the s-domain using Laplace transform, i.e. in the form of transfer functions,
− in the frequency domain using Fourier transform, i.e. in the form of frequency response
or frequency-domain transfer functions, and later,
− in the discrete-time domain using Z-transform and Z-domain transfer functions.
We should be able to select the particular form of the mathematical description, facilitating
solution of the particular control problem. It is also important to be able to convert the available

15
mathematical description into any required form.
Time-varying systems, static and dynamic, constitute a special class of systems, such that their
operator F (⋅) is time-dependent. Typically, the configuration of F (⋅) stays unchanged, but its
parameters could be defined as functions of time. For example:
y(t ) = (5 + 3t ) x (t ) + e − 0.3t x ′(t )
This class of dynamic systems is not covered by our course.

TIME-DOMAIN DESCRIPTION

Linear differential equations constitute a time-domain description of a linear dynamic system.

These equations represent particular laws of physics governing major electrical, mechanical,
electromechanical, etc., transformations taking place in the system. It is always possible to obtain
this description in the form of a first or higher order differential equation, or a system of lower order
equations. The following example presents a mathematical description of an armature-controlled dc
motor driving an inertial load through a spring coupler and a gearbox. The system schematic is
shown in Fig. 1.2.
The voltage, applied to the motor, is viewed as the system input, and the load position is the
output. Let us follow the physical transformations taking place in the system and recall the
appropriate laws of physics.

N
i
L Gearbox: N
R

S Spring TL
coupler: K

Load: J L, f L

T
M otor: J, f
Figure 1.2 - Schematics of an armature-controlled dc motor driving an
inertial load through a spring coupler and a gearbox

16
a) Electrical transformations:
balance of voltages in the armature coil:
V (t ) = Ri(t ) + Li ′( t ) + E (t )
where
V (t ) is the armature voltage, acting as the input signal
i(t ) is the armature current
E ( t ) is the back EMF of the motor
R and L are the resistance and inductance of the armature coil of the motor
b) Electromechanical transformations:
electromotive force: E ( t ) = CE ω ( t )

motor torque: T ( t ) = C M i( t )
where
CE is the electrical constant of the motor
CM is the mechanical constant of the motor
c) Mechanical transformations:
balance of torques on the shaft of the motor:
T (t ) = Jω ′(t ) + fω (t ) + T1 (t )
torque applied to the gear mechanism:

[
T1 (t ) = K ∫ ω (t ) − ω1 (t ) dt]
load torque: TL ( t ) = T1 (t ) N

velocity of the moving load: TL ( t ) = J Lω L′ (t ) + f Lω L (t )

displacement of the load: ϕ (t ) = ∫ ω L (t )dt

relationship between the coupler and load velocities:

ω1 (t ) = ω L (t ) N
where
ω (t ) is the angular velocity of the motor
ω1 (t ) is the angular velocity of load side of the coupler
ω L (t ) is the angular velocity of the load
ϕ (t ) is the angular displacement of the load, the system output
T (t ) is the torque of the motor
T1 (t ) is the torque applied to the spring coupler

17
 TL ( t ) is the torque that drives the load
J and JL are moments of inertia of the rotor of the motor and the load
f and fL are viscous friction coefficients of the motor and of the load
N is the gear ratio (N > 1)
K is the stiffness coefficient of the spring coupler
The above equations can be combined into one higher order linear differential equation:
ϕ (5) (t ) + A1ϕ ( 4 ) (t ) + A2ϕ (3) (t ) + A3ϕ ′′(t ) + A4ϕ ′( t ) + A5ϕ (t ) = BV (t )
where A1 , K, A5 and B are constants dependent on the electrical and mechanical system parameters.
This problem, however, is quite time consuming. We will show later that it can be conveniently
solved by the application of one of "traditional" control techniques.
Time-domain models provide a very detailed description of a dynamic system and can be
applied for the analytical solution of all control-related problems. One of the typical problems
requires the definition of the system response to a particular input signal. For example, let us assume
that a voltage signal V (t ) = ae − bt is applied to the motor under zero initial conditions, and the load

displacement ϕ (t ) is to be defined analytically (i.e. as a function of time). Although your calculus

skills are sufficient for solving this class of problems, control engineers often deal with very high
order systems and analytical solution can be too formidable. Therefore, time-domain models are
typically used in controls only to obtain the initial mathematical model, which later is to be replaced
by a more suitable form of mathematical description.
Time-domain models present an ideal analytical tool for hardware designers, interested in
complete understanding of the physical phenomena behind the operation of hardware. They are also
used for the development of computer simulation models.

S-DOMAIN DESCRIPTION

S-domain description provides the mathematical foundation for the most common analysis and
design methods in control engineering. First, introduce a complex variable s = α + jω , where j is
the imaginary unit. Let us recall the Laplace transform that converts any time-domain signal, x (t ) ,
into an s-domain signal X(s) as follows:
∞
X ( s) = ∫ x (t )e− st dt (1.1)
t= 0

where the s-domain function X(s) is called "the Laplace transform of the signal x (t ) ". This

transformation, symbolically expressed as X ( s) = L {x (t )} , can be performed for any signal x (t ) ,

18
which satisfies the condition:
∞
∫ x(t )e− st dt ≠ ∞ (1.2)
t= 0

When an s-domain signal X(s) is defined, its time-domain equivalent also can be found through
the following procedure known as the "inverse Laplace transform":
1 σ + j∞
x (t ) = X ( s)e st ds
2π j ∫σ
(1.3)
− j∞

where σ is a real constant.

What is the rationale behind the Laplace transform? Those who remember Fourier analysis,
should recall that it can be viewed as a technique for representation of a continuous-time signal by a
combination of harmonic components as follows:
∞
x (t ) = ∑ (a i cos ω i t + bi sin ω i t ) (1.4)
i= 0

and the Fourier transform X ( jω ) = F {x (t )} basically defines coefficients ai and bi for each

frequency ωi, i = 0,1,2,… Similarly, the Laplace transform can be viewed as a technique for
representation of a time-domain signal x (t ) by the combination of exponentially decaying harmonic
components:
∞
x (t ) = ∑ e ai t sin(ω i t + ϕ i ) (1.5)
i= 0

and, therefore, the Laplace transform X ( s) = L {x (t )} defines a decay parameter αi, and phase shift

ϕi for each frequency ωi, i = 0,1,2,… This, however, does not justify the use of Laplace transform.
It became important because of a number of properties, which are extremely useful when dealing
with linear high order differential equations.

PROPERTY # 1, superposition: L {x (t ) + y(t )} = L {x (t )} + L { y (t )}

PROPERTY # 2, multiplication by a constant: L { Ax (t )} = AL {x (t )} , where A = constant

PROPERTY # 3, differentiation: L {x ′( t )} = sL {x (t )} − x 0

where x 0 = x (t ) , when t = 0, is the initial condition. While in many control engineering problems
zero initial conditions could be assumed, PROPERTY #3 can be stated as "taking the derivative in
the time domain is equivalent to multiplication by s in the s-domain". This property is the reason for
viewing the variable s of Laplace transform as the symbol of differentiation with respect to time.

19
PROPERTY # 4, integration: L {∫ x(t)dt} = 1s L {x(t)} + 1s ∫
0
t 0

−∞
x (t )dt
t= 0

Since the second right-hand side term is often equal to zero, this property can be stated as:
"integration in the time domain is equivalent to division by s in the s domain", which is also
consistent with the previous property.

PROPERTY # 5, the Shifting Theorem: L {x (t − T )} = e − Ts L {x(t )}

PROPERTY # 6, the Final Value Theorem: lim{x (t )} = s lim{ X ( s)}

t→ ∞ s→ 0

It provides the important analytical tool for the investigation of the control system accuracy.
CAUTION: Please note that in spite of wishful thinking of many generations of control
engineering students
L {x (t ) y (t )} is not equal to L {x (t )}L { y (t )}

(The correct relationship between these two functions implies the convolution integral.)
How the Laplace transform X(s) of a time-domain signal x(t) and, especially, the inverse Laplace
transform x(t) for a given X(s) are obtained practically? Control engineers normally do not use the
integration formulas (1.1) and (1.3). Instead, Laplace transforms of some basic time-domain
functions could be memorized:
1
1) unit step: u(t ) ⇔ X ( s) =
s
1
2) ramp: t ⇔ X ( s) =
s2
1
3) exponential: e − at ⇔ X ( s) =
s+a
1
4) time · exponential: te − at ⇔ X ( s) =
(s + a)2
ω
5) sinusoid: sin(ω t ) ⇔ (1.6)
s +ω2
2

s
6) cosinusoid: cos(ω t ) ⇔
s +ω2
2

7) exponentially decaying sinusoid:

ω
e − at sin(ω t ) ⇔
s + 2as + a 2 + ω 2
2

20
8) exponentially decaying cosinusoid:
s+a
e − at cos(ω t ) ⇔
s + 2as + a 2 + ω 2
2

Although very detailed Laplace transforms tables, including virtually any time- and s-domain
function are available, the above formulas in combination with the properties of Laplace transform
and the use of software tools are routinely utilized.
Partial Fraction Expansion (PFE) is a common technique used for obtaining inverse Laplace
transforms in the situations when X(s) can be represented by a ratio of two polynomials:
N ( s)
X ( s) = . PFE implies that the order of the polynomial in the numerator N(s) is lower than the
D( s)

order of the polynomial in the denominator (if necessary, this can be always accomplished by long
division). Then the roots of the polynomial denominator:
D( s) = s M + a1 s M − 1 + a 2 s M − 2 + ⋅ ⋅ ⋅ + a 0
must be determined by solving the equation:
s M + a1 s M − 1 + a 2 s M − 2 + ⋅ ⋅ ⋅ + a 0 = 0
Assume, for example, that this equation has single real roots ρ1, ρ2, ρ3, real multiple roots ρ4 =
ρ5 = ρ and two pairs of complex conjugate roots, α1 ± jβ1 and α2 ± jβ2 (obviously, in this case M =
9). It could be shown that the original s-domain function X(s) may be expressed as a sum of simple
s-domain expressions, known as partial fractions:
N ( s) A1 A2 A3 A A5
X ( s) = = + + + 4 +
D( s ) s − ρ1 s − ρ2 s − ρ3 s − ρ ( s − ρ )2
A6 s + A7 A8 s + A9
+ 2 2
+ 2 2 2
s + 2α1 s + α1 + β1
2
s + 2α 2 s + α 2 + β2
The inverse Laplace transform of these expressions yields:
x (t ) = A1e ρ 1 t + A2 e ρ 2 t + A3e ρ 3 t + A4 e ρ t + A5 te ρ t + B1eα 1 t cos β1t + B2 eα 2 t cos β2 t
where coefficients B1 and B2 are expressed through parameters of the appropriate partial fractions
(see for example [1]).
How to obtain coefficients of the partial fractions? The manual procedure known from a
"Signals and Systems" course should be applied for simple expressions X(s) [1]. In a more complex
case a special software tool can be recommended [2].

21
Example 1.1

[ ]
Given x (t ) = ∫ 5e − 3t + 2t + 10 cos(9t ) dt , find X ( s) = L {x (t )} , obtain X ( s) = L {x (t )} assuming
t

zero initial conditions.

Solution: First, utilizing PROPERTY # 1, define Laplace transform of the expression under the
integral sign as a sum of three terms. According to PROPERTIES #2 and #3, and the Laplace
transform formulas, these terms are:
5 2 5 2 10s
+ 2 + 10L {cos(9t )} = + 2 + 2
s+3 s s+3 s s + 81
s
Note that L {cos(9t )} = 2
.
s + 81
 5 2 10 s  1
Then, using PROPERTY #4, X ( s) =  + 2 + 2
s + 3 s s + 81 s
Example 1.2
5
Given Laplace transform of a signal: X ( s) = 2
, obtain its partial fractions “manually”.
s + 6s + 8
A B
Solution: Note that roots of the denominator are – 4 and – 2, therefore X ( s) = + .
s+4 s+2
The numerator of this expression is A( s + 2) + B( s + 4) = s( A + B) + 2 A + 4 B . Recall that the
“original” numerator of X(s) expression is equal to 5. This leads to the following equations:
A + B = 0 and 2A + 4B = 5. Therefore, A = –B and –2B + 4B = 5, finally, B = 2.5 and A = –2.5
Example 1.3

6s 3 + 11s 2 + 5s + 15
Given X ( s) = 5 4 3 2
, obtain x (t ) = L -1{ X ( s)} .
s + 15s + 99s + 385s + 800s + 500
Solution: first, note that order of the numerator is lower than order of the denominator. Then
find roots of the polynomial s 5 + 15s 4 + 99s 3 + 385s 2 + 800s + 500 that are:
ρ1 = –1, ρ2 = –5, ρ3 = –5, ρ4 = – 2 + 4j, ρ5 = – 2 – 4j
This defines partial fractions of X(s) as follows:
A B B2 Cs + D
X ( s) = + 1 + + 2
s + 1 s + 5 ( s + 5) 2
s + 4s + 20

or in time domain:
x (t ) = Ae − t + B1e − 5t + B2 te − 5t + Ee − 2 t sin(4t + ϕ )

22
 Application of a MATLAB software tool generates the following final result:
0.055 107
. 4.85 . s − 0.089
102
X ( s) = − + + 2
s + 1 s + 5 ( s + 5) 2
s + 4s + 20

One should realize that so far the Laplace transform was used exclusively to obtain an s-domain
description of signals. Only now we will concentrate on the description of dynamic systems.
Assume that a dynamic system is described by the following linear differential equation:
y ( n ) ( t ) + a1 y ( n − 1) ( t ) + a 2 y ( n − 2 ) (t ) + L+ a 0 y (t ) = b0 x ( m) ( t ) + b1 x ( m− 1) (t ) + L+ bm x (t )
where y(i)(t) and x(i)(t) represent i-th order time derivatives of the output signal y(t) and the input
signal x(t). Now let us take the Laplace transform of the left and right side parts of the expression,
assuming zero initial conditions for y(t) and x(t):
s n Y ( s) + a1 s n − 1Y ( s) + a 2 s n − 2Y ( s) + L+ a 0Y ( s) = b0 s m X ( s) + b1 s m− 1 X ( s) + L+ bm X ( s)

or ( ) (
Y ( s) s n + a1 s n − 1 + a 2 s n − 2 + L+ a 0 = X ( s) b0 s m + b1s m− 1 + L+ bm )
Y ( s) b0 s m + b1 s m− 1 + L+ bm
or = = G ( s)
X ( s) s n + a1 s n − 1 + a 2 s n − 2 + L+ a 0

The s-domain expression G(s) constitutes the transfer function of the dynamic system, which can
be defined as the "Laplace transform of the output signal divided by the Laplace transform of the
input signal, under zero initial conditions". It is important to realize that the transfer function G(s)
has nothing to do with the input or the output signals applied to the system. It represents the signal
transformation by the system, i.e. it describes the system itself.
According to the definition of the transfer function, the Laplace transform of the output signal
can be defined as the "Laplace transform of the input signal multiplied by the transfer function".
Likewise, the Laplace transform of the input signal can be defined as "Laplace transform of the
output signal divided by the transfer function". Therefore, when the system transfer function G(s) is
known, the system response y(t) to an arbitrary input signal x(t) (i.e. solution of the system's
differential equation) could be easily obtained by:
a) taking Laplace transform of the input signal, X ( s) = L {x (t )}

b) defining the system response (output signal) in the s-domain, Y ( s) = X ( s)G ( s)

c) converting the s-domain expression into time domain, x (t ) = L -1{ X ( s)}

Note that these steps would utilize properties of the Laplace transform, Laplace transform tables,
and partial fraction expansion.

23
 A similar procedure can be formulated for the definition of the input signal when the output and
the system transfer function are given.
It becomes clear why transfer functions provide an excellent mathematical tool for dealing with
high order differential equations: this technique transforms a problem of differential calculus into an
algebraic problem!
Example 1.4
Given system differential equation:
y ( 3) (t ) + 35 y ′′(t ) + 6 y ′(t ) + 11 y (t ) = 10 x ′′(t ) + 15 x ′(t ) + 20 x(t )
obtain the system transfer function.
Solution:
- take the Laplace transform of the above expression and factor out Y(s) and X(s):

( ) (
Y ( s) s 3 + 35s 2 + 6s + 11 = X ( s) 10s 2 + 15s + 20 )
- define transfer function as
Y ( s) 10s 2 + 15s + 20
G ( s) = = 3
X ( s) s + 35s 2 + 6s + 11

Example 1.5
s + 10
Given system transfer function G( s) = 3
, obtain the system differential equation.
s + 5s + 1
Solution:
Y ( s)
- recall that G( s) =
X ( s)
( )
, and therefore Y ( s) s 3 + 5s + 1 = X ( s)( s + 10) , or

s 3Y ( s) + 5sY ( s) + Y ( s) = sX ( s) + 10 X ( s)
- take the inverse Laplace transform of the above expression assuming zero initial
conditions:
y ( 3) (t ) + 5 y ′(t ) + y (t ) = x ′(t ) + 10 x (t )
Example 1.6
Obtain system's transfer function if its input and output signals are given as follows:
x (t ) = 10e − 2 t + 5t

y(t ) = 3e − 2 t + 11e − 5t − 2t

Solution:
- take Laplace transforms of these signals:

24
 X ( s) =
10
+ = =
2
5 10s 2 + 5s + 10 10 s + 0.5s + 1 ( )
s + 2 s2 s 2 ( s + 2) s 2 ( s + 2)

2 3s ( s + 5) + 11s ( s + 2) − 2( s + 2)( s + 5) 14s 3 + 35s 2 − 14s − 20

2 2
3 11
Y ( s) = + − 2 = =
s+2 s+5 s s 2 ( s + 2)( s + 5) s 2 ( s + 2)( s + 5)

- define transfer function as the "Laplace transform of the output signal over Laplace
transform of the input signal under zero initial conditions":
. s 3 + 35
14 . s 2 − 14
. s−2
G ( s) =
(
( s + 5) s + 0.5s + 1
2
)
Example 1.7
Given the system's differential equation:
y ( 3) (t ) + 5 y ′′(t ) + 4 y ′(t ) = 10 x ′′(t ) + 17 x ′(t ) + 25 x(t )
obtain a time-domain expression of the system response to the input signal
x (t ) = 3e − 2 t + u(t ) + 3t
Solution:
- obtain the system transfer function:
10s 2 + 17s + 25
G ( s) =
(
s s 2 + 5s + 4 )
- obtain the Laplace transform of the input signal:

1 3 3s + s( s + 2) + 3( s + 2) 4s 2 + 5s + 6
2
3
X ( s) = + + 2 = = 2
s+2 s s s 2 ( s + 2) s ( s + 2)

- obtain the Laplace transform of the output signal:

Y ( s) = G ( s) X ( s) =
(10s 2
)(
+ 17s + 25 4s 2 + 5s + 6 )
(
s s + 5s + 4 ( s + 2)
3 2
)
- note that order of the numerator is lower than the order of denominator and the roots of
the denominator are 0, 0, 0, –1, –4, and –2, therefore, application of PFE yields:
x (t ) = A1e − t + A2 e − 2 t + A3e − 4 t + A4 u(t ) + A5 t + A6 t 2
- obtain the coefficients of partial fractions using a software tool:
x (t ) = −30e − t + 23.25e − 2 t − 15.23e − 4 t + 2198
. u( t ) − 4.44t + 18.75t 2

Example 1.8
The system and its input are defined in the previous example. Obtain the so-called final value of

25
the system response, i.e., lim y(t) as t → ∞.
Solution: When y(t) has already been defined, its final value could be obtained by taking the
limit of the appropriate time-domain expression. However, in order to obtain this limit, a formidable
partial fraction expansion has to be carried out. This could be avoided by application of the final
value theorem directly to Y(s) as follows:

lim y (t ) = lim s
(10s 2
)(
+ 17s + 25 4s 2 + 5s + 6) = lim 25 ⋅ 6
=∞
t→ ∞ s→ 0
( )
s 3 s 2 + 5s + 4 ( s + 2) s→ 0 2
s ⋅4⋅2

which is consistent with the information available from the previous example's time-domain
expression.
Let us discuss some general issues pertaining to transfer functions. A transfer function is often
represented in the form of a ratio of two polynomials:
N ( s) b s m + b s m− 1 + L+ bm
G ( s) = = n 0 n−1 1
D( s) s + a1 s + a 2 s n − 2 + L+ a 0

Note that in all practical situations coefficients of the polynomials N(s) and D(s), ai and bk, are
real.
Typically, due to system inertia (or for any causal system) polynomial N(s) has a lower order
than D(s), i.e., n > m.
Polynomial D( s) = s n + a1 s n − 1 + a 2 s n − 2 + L+ a 0 is known as the characteristic polynomial of the

system, and equation s n + a1 s n − 1 + a 2 s n − 2 + L+ a 0 = 0 is called characteristic equation of the system.

The solution of a characteristic equation consists of real and/or complex conjugate numbers,
p1 , p2 , K, pn . These numbers, i.e. roots of the characteristic polynomial, are known as poles of the
system.
Roots of the polynomial of the numerator, N(s), can be found by solving the equation
b0 s m + b1 s m− 1 + L+ bm = 0 . These roots, are also real and/or complex conjugate pairs, z1 , z 2 , K, z m ,
are called zeros of the system.
Since polynomials can be represented through their roots, the following is an expression of a
transfer function through its poles and zeros (in a pole/zero form):
m

N ( s) ( s − z1 )( s − z 2 ) L( s − z m ) = K ∏ (s − z ) i
G ( s) = =K i= 1
(1.7)
D( s) ( s − p1 )( s − p2 ) L( s − pn ) n

∏ (s − p )
i= 1
i

26
Note that coefficient K = b0, known as the gain of the system.
We want to emphasize the role of system poles and zeros in the definition of the system
response. Assume that a system with transfer function (1.7) is affected by the input signal
P( s)
X ( s) = , where P(s) and Q(s) are also polynomials of s. Assume for simplicity that polynomial
Q( s)

Q(s) has real roots, ri, i = 1, 2, …, L, and no multiple roots, i.e.:

Q( s) = ( s − r1 )( s − r2 ) L( s − rL )
Then the input signal X(s) could be defined as a sum of partial fractions:
P( s) L
C L
X ( s) = = ∑ i or x (t ) = ∑ Ci e ri t
Q( s) i= 1 s − ri i= 1

Now, the system response, Y(s), can be defined as:

N ( s ) P( s ) N ( s) ⋅ P( s)
Y ( s) = G ( s) X ( s) = ⋅ =
D( s) Q( s) n L

∏ (s − p ) ⋅ ∏ (s − r )
i= 1
i
i= 1
i

Let us represent the response through the sum of partial fractions, also assuming for simplicity that
all poles pi, i = 1, 2, …, n, are real and different:
n L
Ai B
Y ( s) = ∑ + ∑ i = Y1 ( s) + Y2 ( s)
i= 1 s − pi i = 1 s − ri
n L
and y(t ) = ∑ Ai e pi t + ∑ Bi e ri t = y1 ( t ) + y 2 ( t )
i=1 i=1

Let us discuss this result.

A. The system response contains all components (partial fractions) of the input signal, taken
with different coefficients, Bi instead of Ci, i = 1, 2, …, L. In other words, the system response
contains the "reshaped input signal". This part of the system response, Y2(s), is known as the "forced
motion" of the system. Note that components of the forced motion are consistent with the partial
fractions of the input signal. The weights of these partial fractions i.e. coefficients Bi are dependent
upon the system parameters.
B. The system response contains components (partial fractions) directly associated with each
system pole, i.e. the response carries a distinctive "fingerprint" of the system. This part of the
system response, Y1(s), is known as the "natural motion" of the system. Note that components of the
natural motion do not depend on a particular input signal (forcing function). However, coefficients
or weights of these components do depend on the forcing function – it is said that a well-chosen

27
input signal is capable of “exciting all natural modes of the system”.
It is important to emphasize that all components of natural motion normally converge to zero as
time approaches infinity. This property of a dynamic system, known as stability, will be discussed
later.
PFE creates an opportunity to represent a transfer function of a particular system in the form of a
sum of partial fractions (network of parallel blocks), as well as in the pole-zero form (series of
cascades). This feature is utilized in system analysis and simulation.

FREQUENCY-DOMAIN DESCRIPTION

ω
Assume that a sinusoidal signal, x (t ) = a sin (ω t ) or X ( s) = a , is applied to the input of
s +ω2
2

a linear dynamic system with transfer function G(s). It is known that the system response will be
comprised of the natural motion components and components of the forced motion. These forced
motion components are:
K1 K2
YF ( s) = +
s − jω s + jω

where –jω and jω are roots of the equation s 2 + ω 2 = 0 .

It is also known that as t → ∞, components of the natural motion converge to zero. Let us
assume that time is sufficiently large, so the y(t ) = L -1{YF ( s)} . This inverse Laplace transform

yields y(t ) = M ⋅ sin(ω t + ϕ ) , where numerical values of the factor M and phase φ directly depend
on coefficients K1 and K2, and indirectly depend on the frequency ω and all parameters of the system
transfer function G(s). Factor M and phase φ expressed as functions of frequency, M(ω) and φ(ω),
provide adequate description of a dynamic system in the frequency domain. The combination of
M(ω) and φ(ω) is known as the frequency response of the system. The frequency response of a
dynamic system is a complex function of frequency and can be expressed in a polar form,
M (ω )e jϕ (ω ) , or in rectangular form R(ω ) + jI (ω ) , where R(ω) and I(ω) are real and imaginary

parts. It is known that [

R(ω ) = M (ω ) cos ϕ (ω ) , ] [ ]
I (ω ) = M (ω ) sin ϕ (ω ) , M (ω ) =

I (ω )
[ R(ω ) 2
+ I (ω ) ]
2 12
[ ]
, and tan ϕ (ω ) =
R(ω )
.

How is a frequency-domain description of a dynamic system obtained? First, according to the

definition of the system frequency response, sinusoidal signals x (t ) = a sin(ω i t ) , i = 1, 2, 3, ..., can

28
be applied to the input of the system, one at a time. When the natural motion components will “die
out” and the system responses converge to a steady-state sinusoidal signal, the magnitude, bi, and
bi
phase, φi, of this system response should be recorded. The results of such an experiment, M i =
a
and φi and the corresponding frequencies ωi are to be recorded and used as a numerically defined
system frequency response in the form of a table or a graph.
Fig. 1.3 illustrates the presented concepts. It shows the same dynamic system that affected by
sinusoidal signals of the same magnitude but different frequencies. First, note that in the beginning
the system response contains transient terms and does not look like a constant-amplitude sinusoidal
signal. As time increases, the natural motion terms “die out” and the system output turns into a
“classical” sinusoid. Its frequency is equal to the frequency of the sinusoidal input signal, but its
magnitude and phase are different. Recorded sinusoidal input signals and steady-state system
response to these inputs allow for the evaluation of the system frequency response at particular
frequencies and as follows:

Figure 1.3 - Experimental evaluation of a system frequency response

29
 @ frequency = 1 Hz = 6.28 rad/sec: gain = 4.31, phase = –48.6° or 4.31∠–48.6°
@ frequency = 1.5 Hz = 9.42 rad/sec: gain = 1.64, phase = –156° or 1.64∠–156°
@ frequency = 2 Hz = 12.56 rad/sec: gain = 0.63, phase = –162° or 0.63∠–162°
The above procedure can be modified by application of many sinusoidal signals simultaneously,
i.e. forming the input signal as:
N
x (t ) = ∑ a i sin(ω i t )
i= 1

and dealing with the steady-state system response to this signal:

N
y(t ) = ∑ bi sin(ω i t + ϕ i )
i=1

which utilizes the linearity property of the system. While it is difficult to extract particular
harmonics from the steady-state response of the system directly, and analyze separately particular
input/output harmonics, this problem can be solved by performing the Fourier analysis of the output
signal. This leads to the formal definition of the system frequency response as the "Fourier
transform of the output signal, Y ( jw i ) , divided by Fourier transform of the input signal,

X ( jw i ) ", i = 1, 2, .... This procedure has been automated and implemented in the most digital real-
time frequency analyzers. The following Fig. 1.4 illustrates the evaluation of the system frequency
response by utilizing Fourier transforms of the input and output data obtained experimentally. Note
that a unit-step signal presents an ideal choice of an input signal for such an experiment: its spectra
contains virtually “all” frequency terms. Also note that customarily, a frequency response is drawn
using a logarithmic scale of magnitude (gain of a frequency response is referred to as a magnitude)
and frequency, and a linear scale for phase.
Following the above definition of the system frequency response, introduce frequency
response as:
Y ( jω )
G ( jω ) = = G( jω ) ∠ϕ (ω ) = R(ω ) + jI (ω )
X ( jω )

where
G( jω ) is the magnitude (or absolute value)
ϕ (ω ) is the phase
R(ω ) is the real part
I (ω ) is the imaginary part of the frequency response

30
 Figure 1.4 - Frequency response of a dynamic system

Note that all components of a system frequency response, G( jω ) , ϕ (ω ) , R(ω ) , I (ω ) could be

defined numerically, i.e. as particular numbers corresponding to particular frequencies, ω i , i = 1, 2,

3, …, or as analytical functions of frequency.
Example 1.9
It is known that the magnitude of the input sinusoidal signal is 5 units, its frequency is 3 rad/sec
and its phase is 15o. The magnitude and phase of the steady-state system response to this signal are
0.4 units and –52o. Determine system frequency response at 3 rad/sec in polar and rectangular
forms.
Solution: First, note that the entire system frequency response cannot be determined based on
the available data; system frequency response represents the magnification factor and phase defined
numerically for a series of frequency values, or analytically as a function of frequency. In our
situation only the frequency response at the particular frequency of 3 rad/sec, M (3)e jϕ ( 3) , can be
found. The amplification factor (gain), also known as the absolute value or magnitude of the

31
 0.4
frequency response, can be found as M (3) = = 0.08 , the phase of the frequency response is
5
defined as "phase of the output signal minus phase of the input signal", i.e.,
ϕ (3) = −52°−15° = −67° . Finally, system frequency response at 3 rad/sec is G( j 3) = 0.08∠ − 67° .
In the rectangular form, G( j 3) = 0.08 cos( − 67°) + j 0.08 sin ( − 67°) = 0.031 − j 0.074
Example 1.10
Fig. 1.5 presents the absolute value and phase of the system frequency response determined
using a frequency analyzer. Given an input signal x (t ) = 5 sin(2t ) + 3 cos(26t + 14°) , find the steady-
state system response y(t).
Solution: Although the entire system frequency response is provided, solution of this problem
requires magnitude and phase values at only two frequencies, the frequencies of the input signal, ω1
= 2 and ω2 = 26 rad/sec. Then the steady state system response is:

[ ] [
y(t ) = G( j 2) ⋅ 5 ⋅ sin 2t + ϕ (2) + G( j 26) ⋅ 3 ⋅ cos 26t + 14°+ϕ (26) ]
. ⋅ 5 ⋅ sin( 2t − 4.9°) + 011
= 149 . ⋅ 3 ⋅ cos(26t + 14°−176°)

= 7.45 ⋅ sin (2t − 4.9°) + 0.33 ⋅ cos(26t − 162°)

Let us recall now that the Fourier transform could be viewed as a particular case of Laplace
transform, when the complex Laplace variable s = α + jω is replaced by the imaginary frequency jω.

Figure 1.5 – System frequency response

32
This approach results in the definition of the system frequency response as a "transfer function,
G(s), where the variable s is replaced by jω, i.e. G( jω)". Because of this reason, the system
frequency response is also called the "frequency-domain transfer function". It is important to note
that this approach results in the definition of a system frequency response in the form of an analytical
expression, which then can be discretized, tabulated, and/or plotted.
Example 1.11
Given differential equation of a dynamic system:
y ( 3) (t ) + 5 y ′′(t ) + 4 y ′(t ) + 16 y (t ) = 2 x ′′( t ) + 7 x ′(t ) + 20 x (t )
a) obtain analytical expressions for the system frequency response in the polar and rectangular
forms.
b) obtain system frequency response at the particular frequencies, 2.0 and 10.0 rad/sec.
Solution a): It is required to obtain system transfer function, G(s), replace “s” by “jω”, and
manipulate the resultant analytical expressions to obtain the required formats of the frequency
response.
Y ( s) 2s 2 + 7s + 20
One can see that G ( s) = = 3
X ( s) s + 5s 2 + 4s + 16

2( jω ) + 7( jω ) + 20
2

then G ( jω ) =
( jω )3 + 5( jω ) 2 + 4( jω ) + 16
− 2ω 2 + 7 jω + 20
=
− jω 3 − 5ω 2 + 4 jω + 16

=
(20 − 2ω ) + j(7ω )
2

(16 − 5ω ) + j(4ω − jω )
2 3

Now it is possible to define the frequency response in its polar form: G( jω) = M(ω)∠ϕ(ω),

where M (ω ) =
(20 − 2ω ) + 49ω2 2 2

(16 − 5ω ) + (4ω − jω )
2 2 3 2

7ω − 1 4ω − jω
3
and ϕ (ω ) = tan − 1 − tan
20 − 2ω 2 16 − 5ω 2
In order to obtain the rectangular form of the frequency response, G( jω ) = R(ω ) + jI (ω ) ,
transform the above expressions as follows:

33
 20 − 2ω 2 + j (7ω )
G(ω ) =
(
16 − 5ω 2 + j 4ω − jω 3 )
=
[20 − 2ω 2
][ (
+ j(7ω ) ⋅ 16 − 5ω 2 − j 4ω − jω 3 )]
(16 − 5ω ) + (4ω − jω )
2 2 3 2

Then expressions for the real part and imaginary part of the frequency response can be obtained as
(actually, these expressions should be simplified further):

R(ω ) =
(20 − 2ω ) ⋅ (16 − 5ω ) − (7ω ) ⋅ (4ω − jω )
2 2 3

(16 − 5ω ) + (4ω − jω )
2 2 3 2

I (ω ) =
(20 − 2ω ) ⋅ (4ω − jω ) + (7ω ) ⋅ (16 − 5ω )
2 3 2

(16 − 5ω ) + (4ω − jω )
2 2 3 2

It could be seen that obtaining a full-scale analytical expression for a frequency response is
quite a formidable task. This task must be performed if and only if it is explicitly called for.
Fortunately, in the most practical cases frequency response must be defined numerically at particular
frequencies of interest.
Solution b): In order to obtain G ( j 2) and G( j10) just replace “s” in

2s 2 + 7s + 20
G ( s) = by j2 and j10:
s 3 + 5s 2 + 4s + 16
− 8 + 14 j + 20
G( j 2) =
− 8 j − 20 + 8 j + 16
12 + 14 j
= = 4.609∠ − 131°
−4
− 200 + 70 j + 20
G( j10) =
− 1000 j − 500 + 40 j + 16
− 180 + 70 j
= = 018
. ∠ − 84°
− 484 − 960 j
Example 1.12
Given differential equation of a dynamic system, y ( 3) (t ) + 5 y ′′(t ) + 4 y (t ) = 10 x ′′(t ) +

17 x ′(t ) + 25x (t ) , and its input signal x (t ) = 5u(t ) + 3 sin(3t ) . Determine the steady-state system
response y(t).
Solution: In order to solve this problem, one should realize that according to the superposition
principle, the steady-state system response consists of the steady-state response to the aperiodic

34
component of the input signal, x 2 (t ) = 5u(t ) , and the steady-state response to the sinusoidal

component, x1 (t ) = 3 sin(3t ) . The easiest way to define the first one is to

5
- take Laplace transform of the input signal: X1 =
s
10s 2 + 17s + 25
- obtain the system transfer function: G( s) =
s 3 + 5s 2 + 4

- define the Laplace transform of the response: Y1 ( s) =

(
5 10s 2 + 17s + 25 )
( 3 2
s s + 5s + 4 )
125
- apply the final value theorem: y1 (4) = = 3125
.
4
It is known that the steady-state response of a linear dynamic system to a sinusoidal signal is
always a sinusoidal signal with the same frequency. The final value theorem is capable of
detecting only the aperiodic part of a signal, and being applied to a purely sinusoidal signal,
always yields zero. Therefore, the second component of the steady-state system response can be
defined only by using the system frequency response. The solution requires one to:
10s 2 + 17s + 25
- obtain the system transfer function: G( s) =
s 3 + 5s 2 + 4
- obtain the system frequency response at the frequency of interest, ω = 3 rad/sec, by replacing
"s" by "j3":
25 − 90 + j 51 − 65 + j 51
G( j 3) = =
4 − 45 − j 27 − 41 − j 27
82.62∠14188
. °
= = 168
. ∠ − 7148
. °
49.09∠21336
. °
- obtain the steady-state system response to the sinusoidal component of the input signal:
y 2 (t ) = 168
. ⋅ 3 sin(3t − 7148
. °)

Finally, the steady-state system response is y(t ) = 3125

. + 5.05 sin(3t − 7148
. °) .
In summary, a dynamic system could be described by its frequency response. System frequency
response is a complex function of frequency that can be defined analytically or numerically, in the
polar or rectangular form, by a table or a plot, depending on specifics of a problem.

35
 ASSIGNMENTS (Homework #2)

2.1. An armature-controlled dc motor drives a permanent-magnet ac generator with

resistive/inductive load. Obtain the differential equations of this system. Note, that EMF of
the generator is proportional to the velocity of its rotor; the frequency of the voltage of the
generator is equal to 2·angular velocity of the rotor; the load torque, which the generator
applies to the shaft of the motor, is proportional to the load current.
2.2. Given system differential equation, y ′′(t ) + 5 y ′(t ) + 10 y (t ) = 10 x ′(t ) + 5 x (t ) , the system input

is x (t ) = 2e − 0.3t + 2t + 5u(t ) .
a) Obtain the system transfer function.
b) Obtain the expression of the system response y(t).
c) Obtain the steady-state value for the system output using the Final Value Theorem.
2.3. Given time-domain functions, x(t), find their Laplace transforms X(s) assuming zero initial
conditions:
a) x (t ) = 10e5( t − 0.5) + u(t )

b) ( )
x (t ) = ∫ 2t + e − 7 t dt

2.4. Given s-domain functions, X(s), find their time-domain equivalents x(t) using a computer tool:
10s 2 + 13s + 44
a) X ( s) =
( s + 1) 2 ( s 2 + 6s + 8)
5s 2
b) X ( s) =
( s + 1)( s + 2)( s + 3)
as 3 + bs 2 + cs + d
c) X ( s) =
s 5 + 6s 4 + 70s 2 + 100
(Use letters A, B, C, and D to denote the coefficients of partial fractions.)
2.5. Obtain the system transfer function based on known input, x(t), and output, y(t), signals:
a) x (t ) = u(t )

y(t ) = 2e − 5t + 5u( t ) + 2t

b) x (t ) = 3e − 2 t + u( t ) + 0.3t

y(t ) = e − 2 t + 3e − t + 10u(t )

36
 (Homework #3)

3.1. Obtain the system transfer function based on the known differential equation of the system
y ′′′(t ) + 15 y ′′(t ) + 50 y ′(t ) = 10 x ′′( t ) + 5 x ′(t ) + 4 x(t )
Represent this transfer function in a pole/zero form.
s 2 + 33s + 15
3.2. Given the system transfer function, G( s) = , and the input signal
s 3 + 13s 2 + 32s + 20
x (t ) = e − 5t + u(t ) , obtain an analytical expression of the system response y(t). Extract natural
and forced motion components.
3.3. Given the system response, y(t), to an input signal x (t ) = 6 sin (13t ) , evaluate system's
characteristic polynomial if
y(t ) = 25e − 5 t sin(6t − 80°) + 77e − 2 t − 2.7 sin(13t − 56.3°) − 13te − 2 t + 8u(t ) + 0.3t

3.4. Given the system differential equation y ′′(t ) + 15 y ′(t ) + 50 y( t ) = 10 x ′(t ) + 4 x (t ) , obtain
explicit analytical expressions for G(jω), M(ω)=|G(jω)|, φ(ω), R(ω), and I(ω).
3.5. Given the system differential equation y ′′′(t ) + 15 y ′′(t ) + 50 y ′(t ) = 10 x ′′( t ) + 5 x ′(t ) + 4 x(t ) ,
obtain system frequency response for ω = 5 rad/sec in polar and rectangular forms.
10( s + 2)( s + 4)
3.6. Given the system transfer function G( s) = and input signal
( s + 1)( s + 3)( s 2 + 5s + 18)
x (t ) = 100 sin(5t ) + 30 sin(t ) + 5u(t ) + 6e − 6 t , determine the steady-state system response.

3.7. Given the system differential equation y ′(t ) + ay( t ) = bx(t ) and its frequency response at ω =
5 rad/sec, G( j5)=7.6 – 16j, evaluate parameters “a” and “b”.

37
 CHAPTER 2.

MATHEMATICAL DESCRIPTION OF CONTROL SYSTEMS

A control system consists of a number of elements, including the controlled plant, sensor,
controller, power amplifier, servo mechanism, actuator, etc., assembled in a specific structure
capable of performing the control functions. When mathematical descriptions of particular system
elements and the system configuration are known, mathematical description of the entire system can
be obtained. Mathematical description is necessary for the evaluation of system performance by
analytical means and/or computer simulation. Since a control system or its any part is, generally
speaking, a dynamic system, it can be described mathematically using the techniques listed in the
previous chapter. However, at this point we will assume that the mathematical description of
particular system components is already established, and will concentrate on the ways to assemble
the overall model of the system from the models of its particular blocks according to the system
configuration.

TYPICAL DYNAMIC BLOCKS

Regardless of different physical nature, components of control systems can have similar
differential equations and may be organized in the following six groups:
1) constant gain
2) first order system
3) second order system
4) integrator
5) differentiator
6) time delay
When a particular system component is too complex to be viewed as one of the blocks listed
above, it can be represented by a combination of several typical blocks. Use of typical blocks
provides a control engineer with a convenient way to describe and simulate a control system that
may consist of many components and have a complex configuration. It is important to know
properties of particular blocks and to be able to identify a system component as one of the typical
blocks or a combination of several typical blocks.
A typical block has a number of characteristics that are normally memorized by a control
engineer. These characteristics are:

38
 1) differential equation
2) transfer function
3) step response
4) frequency response
Transfer function, step response, and frequency response are the most common ways to
characterize a dynamic block. A differential equation is used to facilitate computer simulation of a
block.
System step response represents the solution of the system differential equation for the unit
step input signal and zero initial conditions. Numerically, step response is characterized by a
number of parameters, primarily by its settling time, overshoot, and steady-state value.
Steady-state value of the step response is defined as:
Yss = lim y (t ) = lim sY ( s)
t→ ∞ t→ ∞

Settling time, Tset, is the time required for the system response to converge to the steady-state
value, i.e. for any t ≥ Tset, y(t ) − Yss ≤ δ , where conventionally δ = 2% of Yss. This means that

during Tset the natural motion part of the system response reaches approximately 2% of its initial
value at t = 0.
While system step response often has an oscillatory nature, during the settling time it can reach
its maximum value Ymax. The overshoot, Pov, provides a way to characterize the step response,
Ymax − Yss
Pov = ⋅ 100% .
Yss
Figure 2.1 below presents a typical system step response and its characteristics.
Now we will consider typical dynamic elements of control systems and their properties.

CONSTANT GAIN

Constant gain represents a physical system with input x(t) and output y(t) described by the
equation:
y(t ) = kx( t )
where k is the parameter (gain) of this block. The above equation, which is not a differential
equation, indicates that the block represents a static system, i.e. a system with negligible inertia. For
example, inertia of an electronic amplifier driving an electric motor is negligible compared to the
inertia of the motor; therefore, the amplifier could be viewed as a constant gain element. It is good
to realize that the same amplifier, used within an electronic power supply, would not be described as

39
 Figure 2.1 - Typical step response of a dynamic system

a constant gain element because its inertia is comparable with inertia of the rest of the components.
According to the properties of Laplace transform, Y ( s) = kX ( s) , and therefore the transfer
function of this block is:
Y ( s)
G ( s) = =k (2.1)
X ( s)

The step response of the constant gain element has the self-explanatory expression y(t ) = ku( t ) .
Its steady-state value is equal to k, settling time is equal to zero, and overshoot is equal to zero.

FIRST ORDER SYSTEM

First order system is a physical system with input x(t) and output y(t) described by the following
differential equation:
y ′(t ) + ay( t ) = kx (t )
where parameter "k" is known as the system gain, and "a" is a positive parameter representing
inertia of the system. The above equation is typical for many physical phenomena where inertia
manifests itself, opposing the external forcing function. However, first order systems are capable of
storing only kinetic energy (or its non-mechanical equivalents). For example, the motion equation of

40
a mechanical system, not containing any stiffness elements (springs), can be written as:
f 1
ω ′( t ) + ω (t ) = F (t )
M M
where M, f, ω(t), and F(t) are correspondingly mass, viscous friction coefficient, velocity, and
forcing function. A similar equation:
R 1
i ′( t ) + i( t ) = v ( t )
L L
could be written for an RL-electric circuit (where L, R, i(t), and v(t) are inductance, resistance,
current and voltage). Note that both physical systems store energy if and only if velocity, ω(t), and
current, i(t), are different from zero, and therefore the stored energy can be viewed as kinetic. (Note
that if a spring would be introduced in the first system, or a capacitor in the second one, these
systems will be capable of storing both, kinetic energy (associated with the motion or flowing
current) and potential energy of a compressed spring or a charged capacitor. As a result, differential
equations would change, and the systems would not be first order any more).
Taking the Laplace transform of the original system equation yields:
sY ( s) + aY ( s) = kX ( s)
and therefore the transfer function of this system is:
Y ( s) k
G ( s) = = (2.2)
X ( s) s + a

The characteristic equation of this system is s + a = 0 , and therefore this system has single real
pole ρ = −a .
The step response of the first order system can be easily determined using Laplace transform. If
1 k
the input signal x (t ) = u(t ) , then X ( s) = and Y ( s) = G( s) X ( s) = . Application of the
s s( s + a )

partial fraction expansion technique results in:

k a k a k 1 1 
Y ( s) = − =  −
s s + a a  s s + a 
and finally in the step response
k
y(t ) =
a
(
1 − e − at ) (2.3)

which is shown in Figure 2.2

It should be noted that the step response of a first order system does not contain any oscillatory

41
 Figure 2.2 - Step response of a first order system

terms. From the point of view of physics, this can be explained by the fact that a first order system
does not exhibit any energy transformations from one kind to another, since only one kind of energy
is being stored. From the point of view of the transfer function the explanation is simpler: this
system has only one real pole, and its natural motion should be purely exponential.
k
Analysis of the above expression shows that the steady-state value of the step response, Yss = ,
a
k
is equal to its maximum value, Ymax = . Therefore the overshoot of this step response is Pov = 0%.
a
In order to determine the settling time of the system step response, assume δ = 2% of Yss, which
leads to the estimation of the settling time, Tset from the following equation:
Yss − y (t ) ≈ 0.02Yss

k k k
or
a a
( )
− 1 − e − at ≈ 0.02
a
or e − at ≈ 0.02
4
The approximate solution of this equation yields Tset = .
a

42
 The frequency response of a first order system can be obtained from its transfer function G(s) by
replacing s by jω:
k
G ( jω ) =
a + jω
= M (ω )∠ϕ (ω )
= R(ω ) + jI (ω )

k ω
where M (ω ) = , ϕ (ω ) = − tan − 1   , R(ω ) = M (ω ) cos ϕ (ω ) , and I (ω ) = M (ω )
a +ω
2 2  a

sin ϕ (ω ) . The following properties of the frequency response should be noted:

a) phase φ(0) = 0
b) for ω > 0 phase φ(ω) is always negative
c) at ω = a phase is equal to −45o
d) as ω → 4 phase φ(ω) → −90o
e) phase φ(ω) cannot exceed 90o in absolute value.
Figure 2.3 presents a typical frequency response of a first order system.

Figure 2.3 - Frequency response of a first order system

43
 SECOND ORDER SYSTEM

A second order system is a physical system with input x(t) and output y(t) described by the
differential equation:
y ′′(t ) + ay ′(t ) + by (t ) = cx(t )
which can be rewritten in so-called canonical form:
y ′′(t ) + 2ζω n y ′(t ) + ω n2 y (t ) = kω n2 x (t )

where parameter k is the system gain, parameter ζ is known as the damping ratio, and parameter ωn -
as natural frequency. Note that 0 < ζ ≤ 1 and ωn > 0.
The above equation represents many inertial systems where energy can be stored in two different
forms, for example, kinetic and potential, and is being converted from one form to another during
natural motion. For example, the motion equation of a mechanical system, containing stiffness
elements (springs capable of storing potential energy) can be written as:
f c 1
Ω ′′(t ) + Ω ′( t ) + Ω(t ) = F (t )
M M M
where M, f, c, Ω(t), and F(t) are correspondingly mass, viscous friction coefficient, stiffness
coefficient, displacement, and forcing function. A similar equation:
R 1 1
q ′′(t ) + q ′( t ) + q( t ) = V ( t )
L LC L
can be obtained for an RLC-electric circuit (where L, R, C, q(t), and V(t) are inductance, resistance,
capacitance, electric charge and voltage). Note that both physical systems store energy in two
different forms: in the mechanical system - energy of the moving mass and energy of the compressed
spring; in the electrical system - energy of the current flowing through the inductor and the energy of
the electric charge of the capacitor. During the natural motion, one kind of energy is being
transformed into another, resulting in oscillatory transient behavior, which can be observed only in
second order systems.
Taking Laplace transform of the original system equation yields:

( )
Y ( s) s 2 + 2ζω n s + ω n2 = kω n2 X ( s)

and the transfer function of this system is:

Y ( s) kω n2
G ( s) = = 2 (2.4)
X ( s) s + 2ζω n s + ω n2

The characteristic equation of this system is:

44
 s 2 + 2ζω n s + ω n2 = 0
and therefore this system has two complex conjugate poles:

ρ1, 2 = −ζω n ± jω n (1 − ζ 2 )
12

Using the Laplace transform and partial fraction expansion, step response of a second order
system can be defined as follows:
G ( s) kω n2
Y ( s) = G ( s) X ( s) = =
s (
s s 2 + 2ζω n s + ω n2 )
A1 A2 A3
or Y ( s) = + +
( ) ( )
12 12
s s + ζω + jω 1 − ζ 2 s + ζω n − jω n 1 − ζ 2
n n

The inverse Laplace transform of the above expression yields:

 
y(t ) = k 1 +

e − ζωnt
1−ζ 2 (
sin ω n 1 − ζ 2 t − ψ ) (2.5)

where ψ = cos − 1 ζ .
A typical step response of a second order system is shown in Figure 2.4.

Figure 2.4 - Step response of a second order system

45
 It should be noted that step response of a second order system has a more or less noticeable
oscillatory nature, and is characterized by the maximum value, Ymax, steady-state value, Yss,
overshoot, P, settling time, Tset, and the frequency of oscillations, ωosc. Analysis of the expression of
the step response allows for the definition of these characteristics as follows. The steady-state
value of the step response can be easily determined by applying the final value theorem to Y(s): Yss =
k.
The settling time of the step response can be defined by recalling that during Tset the natural
motion term of the step response converges to 2% of its initial value, i.e. at t = Tset, e-αt = 0.02. This
4
yields Tset = .
ζω n
In order to determine Ymax, the expression of the step response should be differentiated with
respect to time; the derivative should be equated to zero. The time value tmax, such that y(tmax) =
Ymax, can be found from this equation. Substitution of t by tmax in the expression of the step response
yields an analytical expression for Ymax. When ymax is determined, overshoot of the step response,
Ymax − Yss
Pov = ⋅ 100% , is analytically defined as:
Yss
ζπ
−
1− ζ 2
Pov = e ⋅ 100% (2.6)
This result indicates a very important property of a second order system: overshoot of its step
response depends only on the system's damping ratio. It is more convenient, however, to use

ζ 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0
P% 100 70 50 36 25 15 10 5 2 1 0

Table 2.1

the overshoot-damping ratio relationship defined numerically in the above table.

Known yss, ζ, and the overshoot-damping ratio relationship provide a convenient way to
determine ymax:
 P 
Ymax = Yss 1 + 
 100 
Analysis of the expression of the step response results in the following expression for the peak
time of the step response Tp, i.e. such time value that y(Tp)=Ymax:

46
 π
Tp = (2.7)
ω n (1 − ζ 2 )
12

Inspection of the expression of the step response y(t) clearly shows the frequency of its
oscillatory component:

ω osc = ω n (1 − ζ 2 )
12
(2.8)

Some problems require determining the number of oscillations during the transient process.
Since the settling time Tset is the "official" duration of the transient process, and the period of the
2π Tset
oscillations is Tosc = , the number of oscillations can be determined as .
ω osc Tosc
The frequency response of a second order system can be obtained from its transfer function G(s)
by replacing s by jω:
kω n2
G ( jω ) =
ω n2 − ω 2 + 2 jζωω n
or G( jω ) = M (ω )∠ϕ (ω )

kω n2
where M (ω ) =
[(ω ]
12
)
2
+ 4(ζωω n )
2
2
n −ω2

2ζωω n
and ϕ (ω ) = − tan − 1
ω n2 − ω 2
The rectangular form looks like G( jω ) = R(ω ) + jI (ω ) , where R(ω ) = M (ω ) cos ϕ (ω ) and

I (ω ) = M (ω ) sin ϕ (ω ) .
Figure 2.5 presents an example of a typical frequency response of a second order system.
The following properties of the frequency response should be noted:
a) phase ϕ (0) = 0
b) for ω > 0 phase ϕ (ω ) is always negative

c) at ω = ω n phase is equal to −90o

d) as ω → 4 phase ϕ (ω ) → −180o

e) phase ϕ (ω ) cannot exceed 180o in absolute value

f) at ω = ω n the absolute value of the frequency response reaches its maximum value,

47
 Figure 2.5 - Frequency response of a second order system

kω n2
M (ω n ) = .
2ζω n2
It can be seen that this value approaches infinity as the damping ratio approaches zero. This
very important phenomenon, known as resonance, is carefully avoided in some situations and
intentionally induced in others.

INTEGRATOR

An integrator does not represent an inertial system, but rather should be viewed as a functional
block describing the following correspondence between two physical variables, input x(t) and output
y(t):
t
y(t ) = k ∫ x (t )dt
0

where parameter "k" is the system gain. This relationship exists between such physical variables as
velocity and acceleration, displacement and velocity, electric charge and current, etc.
Taking the Laplace transform of the original system equation under zero initial conditions
yields:

48
 X ( s)
Y ( s) = k
s
and therefore the transfer function of this system is
Y ( s) k
G ( s) = = (2.9)
X ( s) s

This system has single real pole ρ = 0.

The step response of an integrator is a ramp function. It can be easily determined that, if the
k
input signal x(t) = u(t) then Y ( s) = and y(t) = kt. It should be noted that the step response of an
s2
integrator does not contain any oscillatory terms, and also does not settle to a particular constant
value. Application of the final value theorem clearly indicates that y(∞) = ∞. Therefore, such
characteristics as settling time and overshoot are not defined for an integrator.
The frequency response of an integrator can be obtained as follows:
k
G ( jω ) =
jω
or G ( jω ) = M (ω )∠ϕ (ω )

k ω
where M (ω ) = and ϕ (ω ) = − tan   = −90° = const
ω  0

or G ( jω ) = R(ω ) + jI (ω )

k
where R(ω) = 0 and I (ω ) = − .
ω
The following properties of the frequency response should be noted:
a) phase ϕ (ω ) = −90 o and does not depend on frequency
b) absolute value of the frequency response is inversely proportional to frequency.

DIFFERENTIATOR

A differentiator should be viewed as a functional block describing the following correspondence

between two physical variables, input x(t) and output y(t):
y(t ) = kx ′(t )
Here parameter "k" is the system gain. This relationship exists between such physical variables
as acceleration and velocity, velocity and displacement, etc.

49
 Taking the Laplace transform of the original system equation under zero initial conditions
yields:
Y ( s) = ksX ( s)
and therefore the transfer function of this system is:
Y ( s)
G ( s) = = ks (2.10)
X ( s)

This system has no poles. Its single real zero is z = 0.

The step response of a differentiator mathematically is defined as a delta function, δ (t). Signals
δ (t) do not exist in nature, as well as there is no physical system acting as a "pure" differentiator.
Although an electric transformer acts as a differentiator to a certain degree, its equation contains
some first order terms. Obviously, step response of a differentiator does not contain any oscillatory
terms and cannot be characterized by settling time and overshoot.
The frequency response of a differentiator can be obtained as follows:
G( jω ) = kjω

or G( jω ) = M (ω )∠ϕ (ω )

ω
where M (ω ) = kω and ϕ (ω ) = tan   = 90° = const
 0

or G( jω ) = R(ω ) + jI (ω )

where R(ω) = 0 and I (ω ) = kω .

The following properties of the frequency response should be noted:

a) phase ϕ (ω ) = 90° and does not depend on frequency
b) absolute value of the frequency response is proportional to frequency.

TIME DELAY

Time delay represents a system which does not alter the input signal due to its inertia, but just
delays the signal (shifts it against the direction of the time axis), so that the relationship between the
input x(t) and output y(t) variables can be written as:
y(t ) = kx( t − τ )
here parameter "k" is the system gain and parameter τ is the time shift. Note that τ > 0. Such a
relationship describes a physical system whose inertia could be neglected for the sake of simplicity,
but the propagation time for the input signal must be accounted for. An example of a delay-type
element is a conveyer carrying some materials on its belt, or a long and thin pipe used for continuous

50
sampling of the content of a chemical reactor.
Taking the Laplace transform of the system equation yields:
Y ( s) = ke − sτ X ( s)
and therefore the transfer function of this system is
Y ( s)
G ( s) = = ke − sτ (2.11)
X ( s)

This system has no poles and zeros. However, in some practical situations, assuming that the τ
value is quite small and the input signal does not contain high frequency harmonics, the transfer
function of a delay can be approximated by several terms of the series form of the exponential
function as follows:
k k
ke − sτ = ≈ (2.12)
e sτ s 2τ 2
1 + sτ +
2
i.e., represented by a first or a second order systems
The step response of a delay is obviously defined as ku(t − τ ) that implies zero overshoot,

steady-state value y ss = k , and Tset = τ .

The frequency response of a delay can be easily obtained as:
G( jω ) = k∠ϕ (ω )
180τω
where ϕ (ω ) = −τω (radian) or ϕ (ω ) = − (degrees).
π
The following properties of the frequency response should be noted:
a) phase ϕ (ω ) is proportional to frequency
b) absolute value does not depend on frequency
Example 2.1
Given the settling time of a first order system, Tset = 2.8 sec and the value of its step response
y(t) at t = 1.2 sec, y(1.2) = 5.6 units. Find the transfer function of the system.
k
Solution: First, recall the transfer function of the system G( s) = , the expression for its
s+a
k 4
step response y(t ) =
a
( )
1 − e − at , and the settling time formula Tset = . The "a" value can be found
a
4
immediately from the equation = 2.8 sec; a = 1.43. Then the "k" value can be found from the
a

51
 k
equation 5.6 =
143
.
( )
1 − e − 1.2 a ; k = 9.76

Example 2.2
Given the frequency response of a first order system at ω = 2 rad/sec: G(j2)=10∠-52o. Find the
response of this system to the signal x (t ) = 2 sin (5t ) .
Solution: First, let us define parameters of the system transfer function. It is known that
ω 2
= − tan(ϕ ) , therefore = tan(52°) = 128
. and a = 1.56. The "k" value can be found from the
a a
k
equation M (2) = = 10 ; k = 25.36. Now we can conclude that the steady-state part of the
. 2 + 22
156
system response to the signal x(t) (the forced motion) can be written as y ss (t ) =

25.36   5 
2⋅ sin 5t − tan − 1   = 9.68 ⋅ sin(5t − 72.67°) .
2
5 + 156
. 2
 .  
 156

It is known that the transient components of the system response (natural motion) are directly
associated with system's poles. Therefore y trans (t ) = Ce − 1.56 t , where C is a constant. Finally, the

system response is y(t ) = Ce −1.56 t + 9.68 sin(5t − 72.67°) .

Example 2.3
A second order system is characterized by the settling time and frequency of oscillation of its
step response, Tset = 5sec, ω osc = 9 rad/sec, and the absolute value of its frequency response at ω = 4
rad/sec, M(4) = 12 (units). Find the steady-state and maximum values of the system's step response.
4 ωn
Solution: It is known that Tset = = 5 (sec), and ω osc = = 9 (rad/sec). Therefore,
ζω n ωn 1 − ζ 2

( )
5ζω n = 4 and ω n2 1 − ζ 2 = 81 , or ζ 2ω n2 = 0.64 and ω n2 − ζ 2ω n2 = 81 , or ω n2 − 0.64 = 81 , or ω n =

4
9.035. Obviously, ζ = = 0.0885 . Now the overshoot can be defined from Table 2.1: Pov =
5 ⋅ 9.035
70%. The absolute value (or magnitude) of the system frequency response at ω = 4 rad/sec can be
defined as:
kω n2
M (4) = 12 =
(ω )
2
2
n − 16 + 4 ⋅ 16ζ 2ω n2

52
 8163
. k
= = 124
. k
65.632 + 40.92
therefore k = 9.69. This indicates that yss = 9.69 and ymax = 9.69(1 + 0.7) = 16.48.
Example 2.4
A second order system with adjustable natural frequency ω n is used as a filter which allows for
receiving one out of two signals transmitted over the same communication line. These signals have
equal magnitudes and different frequencies, ω1 = 100 and ω 2 = 105 rad/sec. Select the value of the
system damping ratio to assure that the received magnitude of the selected signal is at least 100 times
greater than the magnitude of the second one.
Solution The external signal applied to the input of the second order system includes both
frequencies and could be defined as x (t ) = a sin(ω1t ) + a sin (ω 2 t ) . Inevitably, the steady-state output

of the second order system is y(t ) = b1 sin(ω1t + ϕ1 ) + b2 sin(ω 2 t + ϕ 2 ) , however, numerical values
of coefficients b1 and b2 are defined by the choice of the natural frequency and the damping ratio of
the filter. Assume that the system is adjusted to select the first frequency, ω1 = 100. Then,
b1
according to the conditions of this problem, ≥ 100 . This effect can be achieved by utilizing the
b2
resonance phenomenon. Define coefficients b1 and b2 defined as follows:
akω n2
b1 =
(ω ) + (2ζω
2
⋅ 100)
2 2
n − 100 2 2

akω n2
and b2 =
(ω ) + (2ζω
2
⋅ 105)
2 2
n − 1052 2

where k, ω n and ζ are parameters of the second order system. Select ω n = 100 (rad/sec), then:

ak ⋅ 100 2 ak ⋅ 100 2
b1 = and b2 =
(100 ) + (2 ⋅100 ⋅100ζ ) (100 ) + (2 ⋅100 ⋅105ζ )
2 2 2 2 2
− 100 2 2
− 1052

ak ⋅ 100 2 ak ⋅ 100 2
or b1 = and b2 =
(2 ⋅ 100 ⋅ 100ζ )2 (100 ) + (2 ⋅100 ⋅105ζ )
2 2 2
− 1052

(100 ) + (2 ⋅ 100 ⋅105ζ )

2 2 2
b1 − 1052
or = ≥ 100
b2 (2 ⋅ 100 ⋅ 100 ⋅ ζ ) 2

53
 (100 ) + (2 ⋅100 ⋅105ζ )
2 2 2
− 1052
or ≥ 100 2
(2 ⋅ 100 ⋅ 100 ⋅ ζ ) 2

or
[(
100 4 1 − 105
. 2 . ζ) ]
) + (2 ⋅105
2 2

≥ 100 2
100 ( 2ζ )
4 2

or
(1 − 105
. ) + (212 2
. ζ)
2

≥ 100 2
(2ζ ) 2

( )
2
100 2 ⋅ (2ζ ) − (21
. ζ ) ≤ 1 − 105
2 2
or . 2

or . ζ ≤ 0.0105
399559
and finally ζ ≤ 2.6⋅10-6
Example 2.5
A delay element and an integrating circuit cause the same phase shift and no magnification
effect on a sinusoidal input signal x(t) = asin(5t). Determine their effects on the signal z(t) =
bsin(10t).
Solution: According to the problem definition, G( j 5) del = G( j5)intgr = 1∠ϕ . It is known that

180°
ϕintgr = −90° for any frequency and ϕ del (5) = −5τ ⋅ , therefore τ = 0.314 (sec).
π
k intgr
M (5) intgr = = 1 , therefore kintgr = 5. For the delay, kdel = 1. For the frequency of 10 rad/sec,
5
G( j10) del = 1∠ − 180° and signal z(t) will be transformed by the delay into bsin(10t − 180 °). For

the integrator, G( j10) intgr = 0.5∠ − 90° and the same signal will be transformed into 0.5bsin(10t −

90°).
Analysis of system's step response is one of the most common techniques used by control
engineers to determine the transfer function of a system. Assume that the input signal applied to a
system is x(t)=Au(t). (A step input is not such a "mathematical fiction" as a delta-function. In many
practical situations just turning an electric switch on results in the application of a step voltage,
x(t)=120V⋅u(t), to the piece of machinery!). During the analysis of a recorded system's step
response, y(t), the following questions are to be answered:
1) Does the step response y(t) converge to a constant Yss as time increases? If the answer is
"yes", the system in question can be described as a first or a second order system. If the

54
 answer is "no" and y(t) converges to a ramp, the system acts as an integrator or a
combination of integrator with a first or the second order system.
2) If the system's step response does converge to a constant, does it exhibit any oscillatory
behavior having a noticeable overshoot? If the answer is "no", the system can be
characterized as a first order system.
3) Is the system overshoot greater than 100%? If the answer is "yes" the system can be
approximated by a combination of a first or second order system, differentiator(s) and
constant gain(s). If the answer is "no", the system can be accurately described as a second
order system.
In the situation when a system step response exhibits effect of the superposition of several
decaying transient terms, the system cannot be accurately represented by a single “typical” block.
If the system behaves as a first order system, its parameters, "k" and "a" are to be defined. It
should be noted that the expression of settling time of the step response Tset = 4 a does not provide a
good way for estimation of parameter "a": it is virtually impossible to determine Tset accurately from
a recorded response (especially in the presence of measurement noise). However, the steady-state

( )
value, yss, can be determined fairly accurately. Recall that since y(t ) = Yss 1 − e − at , at time t = 1 a ,

Figure 2.6 - Processing step response of a first order system

55
y(t) = 0.63⋅Yss. Therefore, estimation of the parameter "a" implies the determination of Yss, then 63%
of yss, then the time value τ such that y(τ ) = 0.63⋅yss, and finally a = 1 τ . Then, since the steady state
value of step response y ss = A ⋅ k a , where A is the magnitude of the step input, parameter "k" can
be determined, see Fig. 2.6.
Parameter estimation of a second order system on the basis of its step response implies that, first,
parameter "k" is estimated knowing that Yss = Ak, where A is magnitude of the step input. When the
value of Ymax is measured, overshoot Pov is determined and the corresponding damping ratio ζ value
is determined. In order to determine natural frequency ω n , recall that the peak time Tp, i.e. such
time value that y(Tp) = Ymax, is related to parameters ζ and ω n by the formula:

π
Tp =
ωn 1 − ζ 2
Since Tp can be easily measured on a recorded step response, this approach results in a quite
accurate estimate of natural frequency. An alternate way of determining the ω n value exists when
the recorded step response y(t) allows for the estimation of the frequency of oscillations,

Figure 2.7 - Processing step response of a second order system

56
ω osc = ω n 1 − ζ 2 .
According to the Fig. 2.7, the peak value of the step response Ymax = 5.65 and the steady-state
value Yss = 3.7 that results in the overshoot of 53% and according to Table 2.1 the damping ratio ζ ≈
0.2. The period of transient oscillations Tosc = 0.77 sec and therefore ω osc = 2 ⋅ 314
. 0.77 = 816
.

(rad/sec). Since ω n 1 − 0.04 = 816

. , natural frequency ω n = 8.32 (rad/sec). Let us verify this result

( )
using the Tp value: 0.42 = π ω n 1 − 0.04 or ω n 1 − 0.04 = 314
. 0.42 = 7.48 . This results in ω n =

7.64. Finally, constant gain of the system k = 3.7. Knowing the “true” values of the system
parameters, one can conclude that the estimates are fairly accurate (actually, estimation errors should
remind you that all experiment-based conclusions are not perfect!)

BLOCK DIAGRAMS

Configuration of the forward path, feedback, and the entire control system can be quite complex.
System schematics, functional diagrams and block diagrams are intended to facilitate understanding
of the purpose of the system, the principle of its operation, the system configuration and
components, and its mathematical description.
Functional diagrams represent a control system by the combination of boxes and arrows,
showing the input and output signals and the interrelation between particular system components. In
a functional diagram the physical nature of each block (component) is identified as a "motor",
"amplifier", "actuator", etc. Functional diagrams represent
- the system configuration,
- the physical nature of each component,
- the function of particular components in the system.
However, functional diagrams do not provide mathematical description of the system
components and because of this have a limited use for system analysis.
Block diagrams also represent a control system by the combination of boxes and arrows,
showing the input signal and the interrelation between particular system components. But the main
purpose of block diagrams is to represent the sequence of signal transformations in control systems,
providing mathematical description of particular system components, and facilitating the
development of the mathematical description of the entire system. Therefore, block diagrams are the
most commonly used schematics of a control system.
The following example illustrates the use of block diagrams featuring a block diagram of an

57
 Z

R E W U Q F V Y
_ H(s) A(s) W(s) G(s) 1/s

X
T(s)

Figure 2.8 - Block diagram of a cruise control system

automobile cruise control system.

An automobile, viewed as an inertial system with a force F as the input and velocity V as the
output, can be represented, consistently with the second Newton's law, by a first order system with
transfer function
ω ( s) k1
G ( s) = =
α ( s) s + a1
The driving force F, as shown in the block diagram, is defined as the summation result of the
engine thrust Q and frictional forces Z, associated with the road conditions. It is easy to see in the
block diagram that the integration of the automobile velocity V results in its displacement D (transfer
function of the block is 1/s). The automobile engine is symbolized by the block W(s), which
represents the relationship between the position of the gas pedal U and the thrust of the engine Q in
Q( s) k2
the form of a first order system W ( s) = = . Transfer function T(s) = k3 represents the
U ( s) s + a 2

tachogenerator which transforms the velocity V into a dc signal X. The error signal E is formed as
the difference between the reference signal R, representing the required velocity of the automobile,
and the feedback signal X, representing the actual velocity. The block with transfer function
W ( s) k3
H ( s) = = represents so-called proportional-integral-differential controller,
E ( s) cI
cP + + cD s
s
generating the control signal W, according to its control law, and responsible for proper operation of
k3
the entire system. The block with transfer function A( s) = represents the power amplifier and the
s
servomechanism operating the gas pedal.
Mathematical description of the entire cruise control system can be obtained on the basis of the
system block diagram in the following forms,

58
 - a relationship between the reference and the actual velocity of the automobile,
- a relationship between the actual velocity of the automobile and the road conditions,
symbolized by the force Z,
- a relationship between parameters of the controller, cP, cI, cD, and the overall performance
characteristics of the cruise control system.
A block diagram can be implemented in a computer simulation code, and used for detailed
analysis of the system performance, analysis of various external and internal factors affecting the
performance, selection of the most appropriate parameters of the controller. Many control
engineering problems require that the block diagram be reduced just to a single block, and the
transfer function of this block be defined. The following are two commonly used block diagram
reduction techniques.
CONVENTIONAL BLOCK DIAGRAM REDUCTION TECHNIQUE is based on the detection
of some typical configurations within a block diagram, and application of the special reduction rules,
shown in Fig. 2.9 below. While the first two rules are quite self-explanatory, the third (and the
fourth) one could be easily justified:

Figure 2.9 - Block diagram reduction rules (Rules 1 – 4)

59
 [ ]
Y ( s) = X ( s) − Q( s)Y ( s) P( s)

Y ( s) + Y ( s) P( s)Q( s) = X ( s) P( s)

Y ( s) G ( s)
=
X ( s ) 1 + G ( s ) H ( s)

Note that in the case of a positive feedback, i.e., when the feedback signal is added to the input
signal, the resultant transfer function is quite different:

[ ]
Y ( s) = X ( s) + H ( s)Y ( s) G ( s)

Y ( s) G ( s)
leads to =
X ( s) 1 − G ( s) H ( s)

When already existing typical configurations have been identified and reduced, the block
diagram can be modified on order to facilitate further reduction. It is important, however, that the
modified block diagram must be equivalent to the original one. To assure this equivalence, the
following rules must be imposed:
RULE 5. Moving the summing point in the direction of the signal flow over a dynamic block

Figure 2.10 - Block diagram reduction rules (Rules 5 – 8)

60
with a transfer function, H(s), requires that an additional block with transfer function H(s) be
introduced in the system as shown in Fig. 2.10.
RULE 6. Moving the summing point against the direction of signal flow over a dynamic block
with a transfer function, H(s), requires that an additional block with transfer function H(s)-1 be
introduced in the system, as shown in Fig. 2.10.
RULE 7. Moving the pick-off point in the direction of signal flow over a dynamic block with a
transfer function, H(s), requires that an additional block with transfer function H(s)-1 be introduced
in the system as shown in Fig. 2.10.
RULE 8. Moving the pick-off point against the direction of signal flow over a dynamic block
with a transfer function, H(s), requires that an additional block with transfer function H(s) be
introduced in the system, as shown in Fig. 2.10
Example 2.6
The block diagram of Fig. 2.11 below represents a complex control system. It is required to
obtain transfer functions W1 ( s) = Y ( s) X ( s) , W2 ( s) = Y ( s) Z ( s) , and W3 ( s) = Y ( s) R( s) describing
the relationships between input variables X, R and Z and the output variable Y.
Solution This problem, common in control system analysis, can be solved by the block diagram
reduction, resulting in a simple system configuration and definition of transfer functions W1, W2, and
W3 through transfer functions of the particular system blocks.
According to the superposition principle, the output variable, Y, is defined as
Y ( s) = W1 ( s) X ( s) + W2 ( s)Z ( s) + W3 ( s) R( s)

D(s)

_
C(s) Z

_ A(s) _
+ +
X E(s) G(s) H(s) Y
_ B(s) + _ _
F(s)

R P(s)

U(s)
_
V(s) W(s)

Figure 2.11 - The original block diagram of a control system

61
 It could be said that this control system contains three dynamic channels relating the input X to
the output Y (channel #1), input Z to output Y (channel #2), and input R to output Y (channel #3).
Note that when a transfer function of a particular channel is being defined, all other variables, both
input and output, should be disregarded.
The following are the suggested steps of the block diagram reduction process,
- dynamic blocks, defined by transfer functions A(s) and B(s), form two parallel branches
and can be replaced by one block with transfer function A(s) + B(s),
- - dynamic block C(s) has a negative feedback with a unity constant gain transfer function
(unity feedback). This configuration can be reduced to one block with transfer function

[ ]
C ( s) 1 + C ( s ) ,

- - dynamic block V(s) is in series with block W(s), this configuration can be reduced to a
single block with transfer function V(s)W(s),
- - the pick-off point responsible for the input signal applied to the block D(s) is moved in
the direction of signal flow over blocks G(s) and H(s), therefore block [G(s)H(s)]-1 is
introduced in series with block D(s),
- - the pick-off point responsible for the input signal applied to the block P(s) is moved in
the direction of signal flow over block H(s), therefore block H(s)-1 is introduced in series
with block P(s). See Fig. 2.11a. (Note that “(s)” is omitted for simplicity).
Further transformations are:
- dynamic block V(s)W(s) has a negative feedback with transfer function U(s). This

[
configuration can be described as V ( s)W ( s) 1 + V ( s)W ( s)U ( s) , ]
- dynamic block E(s) has a negative feedback with transfer function F(s). This

D/[GH]

Z
C/(1+C)
_ _
+
X A+B
E(s) G(s) H(s) Y
_ _ _
F(s)
R
U(s)
_ P/H

VW

Figure 2.11a

62
 [
configuration can be described as E ( s) 1 + E ( s) F ( s) , ]
- dynamic block G(s) is in series with block H(s), this configuration can be reduced to a
single block with transfer function G(s)H(s),
- dynamic blocks, defined by transfer functions A(s) + B(s) and transfer function

[ ]
C( s) 1 + C( s) form two parallel branches and can be replaced by one block with

[ ]
transfer function A( s) + B( s) + C( s) 1 + C( s) . See Fig. 2.11b.

Continue the transformations as follows,

D/[GH]

_ _
X A+B+C/(1+C) E/[1+EF] GH Y
_ _

R P/H

VW/[1+VW U}

Figure 2.11b

- [ ]
dynamic block E ( s) 1 + E ( s) F ( s) is in series with block G(s)H(s), this configuration is

[ ]
reduced to a single block with transfer function G( s) H ( s) E ( s) 1 + E ( s) F ( s) ,

- the summing junction where the output of the block P( s) H ( s) is applied is moved in
the direction of the signal flow,
- two negative feedbacks, the unity and P( s) H ( s) constitute "two parallel branches" and

are combined into one negative feedback with transfer function P( s) H ( s) + 1 =

[ P( s) + H (s)] H (s) ,
See Fig. 2.11c.
The next transformation step implies that
- the summing junction where input R is applied is moved along the signal flow and
combined with the summing junction where X is applied. This prompts a quite important
conclusion: two dynamic channels of this system, “X – to – Y ” and “R – to – Y ” are

63
 D/[GH]

_
X A+B+C/(1+C) GHE/[1+EF] Y
_ _

R P/H + 1

VW/[1+VW U}

Figure 2.11c

identical and the corresponding transfer functions are the same.

- [ ]
block G( s) H ( s) E ( s) 1 + E ( s) F ( s) and its negative feedback, P( s) H ( s) + 1, is

replaced by a single block with transfer function:

G ( s) H ( s) E ( s)
[
1 + E ( s) F ( s) + G ( s) E ( s) P( s) + H ( s) ]
See Fig. 2.11d.
Finally, as shown in Fig. 2.11e below, two negative feedback paths are treated as "two parallel

D/[GH]

_ GHE
X A+B+C/(1+C) -------------------- Y
1+EF+GE(P+H)
_
R VW /[1+VW U}

Figure 2.11d
branches” and replaced by one block with transfer function:
V ( s)W ( s) D( s)
+
1 + V ( s)W ( s)U ( s) G( s) H ( s)

Now one can realize that the originally complex block diagram has been reduced to a “one loop”
configuration that contains only tree dynamic blocks:

64
 C( s)
M1 ( s) = A( s) + B( s) +
1 + C( s)

A( s) + B( s) + A( s)C( s) + B( s)C( s) + C( s)
or M1 ( s ) =
1 + C( s )

G ( s) H ( s) E ( s)
M 2 ( s) =
[
1 + E ( s) F ( s) + G( s) E ( s) P( s) + H ( s) ]
G ( s) H ( s) E ( s)
or M 2 ( s) =
1 + E ( s) F ( s) + G( s) E ( s) P( s) + G ( s) E ( s) H ( s)

V ( s)W ( s) D( s)
M 3 ( s) = +
1 + V ( s)W ( s)U ( s) G( s) H ( s)

V ( s)W ( s)G( s) H ( s) + D( s) + D( s)V ( s)W ( s)U ( s)

or M 3 ( s) =
G( s) H ( s) + V ( s)W ( s)U ( s)G ( s) H ( s)

GHE
C --------------------
X A+B+ -------- 1+EF+GE(P+H) Y
1+C
_
R VW D
----------- + ------
1+VWU GH

Figure 2.11e

In order to obtain the transfer functions W1 ( s) = Y ( s) X ( s) disregard inputs R and Z. It is

clear that the forward path of the system with the input X and the output Y has transfer function
M1(s)M2(s) and the system feedback transfer function is M3(s). Therefore:
M 1 ( s) M 2 ( s )
W1 ( s) =
1 + M 1 ( s) M 2 ( s) M 3 ( s)

Derivation of the transfer function W2 ( s) = Y ( s) Z ( s) requires that input signals X and R be

disregarded. Then the transfer function of the forward path is M2(s) and the transfer function of the
feedback as M1(s)M3(s), and the required transfer function is:
M 2 ( s)
W2 ( s) =
1 + M 1 ( s ) M 2 ( s ) M 3 ( s)

65
The transfer function W3 ( s) = Y ( s) R( s) can be easily defined as W3(s) =W2(s)
Note that although a complex control system can have more than one input and more than one
output and be described by many transfer functions, representing particular input-output channels,
all transfer functions have the same denominator (or the same poles), i.e. the same characteristic
polynomial. It can be stated that the denominator of a transfer function depends only on the system
configuration, while the numerator depends on:
(1) the system configuration,
(2) the point where the input signal is applied, and
(3) the point where the output signal is measured.

SIGNAL-FLOW GRAPHS

Signal-flow graphs present an alternate method to describe the sequence of signal

transformations in a complex system, and if necessary, to obtain the mathematical description of the
entire system. The following chart summarizes the differences between block diagrams and signal-
flow graphs.
Features Block diagrams Signal-flow graphs
Signals Arrows Nodes
Signal transformations Boxes representing transfer Branches (arrows)
functions representing transfer functions
Reduction methods Block diagram Mason Gain formula
reduction/transformation rules
Advantages - Easy to relate to functional - Ideal for computer
diagrams implementation
- Generally, more than one - Suitable for complex systems
reduction approach
Disadvantages Difficult to apply to complex Difficult to relate to the
systems functional diagram

The approach utilizes versatile techniques developed in so-called graph theory and computer-
based procedures implementing these techniques.
A signal-flow graph describes a system in the form of a network consisting of nodes connected
by branches. The following are the definitions and concepts adopted from the graph theory and
utilized by this approach.
Node represents a particular signal. It corresponds to the arrow of a block diagram and is
marked by the letter, identifier of the signal.
Branch represents a particular signal transformation and is characterized by the appropriate
transfer function. Its arrow indicates the direction of the signal flow, i.e. defines the input and the

66
output signals (nodes):

x y
G(s)

A branch with transfer function equal to one, i.e. the one that just transmits a signal, is called a
"unity branch". It should be noted that the length or the shape of the branch are irrelevant.
Path represents a sequence of signal transformations.

r x y
G1(s) G2(s)
G3(s) u

It is characterized by the path gain defined as the product of transfer functions of individual
branches along the path. In the above sketch, path gain is P( s) = G1 ( s)G2 ( s)G3 ( s) = U ( s) R( s) ,
where R and U are the input and the output signals (nodes) of the path.
Loop can be defined as a closed path, i.e. a path where the input node also serves as the output

Y Z
G2(s)
H4(s)
R

H1(s)
H3(s)
W
H2(s)
V

node. It is characterize by a loop gain that is defined as the product of all individual branch transfer
functions forming the loop. In our example, as shown above, the loop gain is L(s) =
H1(s)H2(s)H3(s)H4(s)G2(s)
Touching loops are the loops having one or more common nodes. The below sketch features a
signal-flow graph containing three loops. The loop gains are L1(s) = G1(s)P(s)H1(s), L2(s) =
H1(s)G2(s)H4(s)H3(s)H2(s), and L3(s) = H4(s)Q1(s)Q2(s)G3(s).

U
G3(s) Q2(s)
Y Z
G1(s) G2(s)
H4(s) R F
X
Q1(s)
P(s) H1(s)
H3(s)
W
H2(s)
V

67
 Note that loops 1 and 2 are touching, loops 2 and 3 are touching, but loops 1 and 3 are non-
touching. The concepts of touching and non-touching can be also defined for two paths and a path
and a loop, see below: the loop, gain L(s) = H1(s)H2(s)H3(s)H4(s)G2(s), is touching the path with gain
P(s) = G1(s)G2(s)G3(s).
U
G3(s)
Y Z
G1(s) G 2(s)
H 4(s)
R
X
H 1(s)
H 3(s)
W
H 2(s)
V

The existence of a common node, however, is not a self-explanatory issue and sometimes can be
determined only by understanding the physical system and viewing the system block diagram.
Technically, a unity branch can be introduced at any location of a signal-flow graph, however, it is
important to realize the difference between the situations when a unity branch is introduced
artificially, and the situations when it separates two different signals. The following cases are
presented below to clarify this issue.
Case 1.

-1

r - x y r G P
G u P y
x
-
H -H

Note that variable x is the output of the block with transfer function G(s). Variable u, applied to
the input of block with transfer function P(s) is different from x: its Laplace transform is equal to
X(s) − Y(s)H(s) ≠ X(s). Therefore when drawing a signal-flow graph, it is important to separate node
x from node u by a unity branch. One can realize that in this case loop #1 with gain L1(s) = −G(s)
and loop #2 with gain L2(s) = −P(s)H(s) are non-touching loops.
Case 2.

r x u y r G x 1 u P
G y
- - P
-1
H -H

68
 Analysis of the block diagram indicates that if signal x is viewed as the sum of the “output of
block G minus output of block H” then it is equivalent to signal u and both signals should be
represented by the same node of the signal-flow graph. But this implies that loop #1 with gain L1(s)
= −G(s) and loop #2 with gain L2(s) = −P(s)H(s) do have a common node and therefore are touching
loops.
Case 3.

-1

G x P
r y
1 u

-H
This signal-flow graph describes the same block diagram. Note that while the description is
correct, nodes x and u are artificially separated by the unity branch. The loops are still touching.
The most “reliable” way to draw a system signal-flow graph is by drawing its block diagram and
then converting it into a signal-flow graph. While performing this task, it is important to understand
and properly implement the following rule: if signal X is different from signal Y, corresponding
nodes must be separated by unity branches.
Example 2.7

X - a
+ -
c f g m n Y
- - b + + -
d e
e Z
p
-
q

-h
X
-1
1
a g
1 c f 1 1
n
Y
m
b e
e -1
-d 1
p

-1
-q 1
Z

69
Example 2.8

D(s)

_
C(s ) Z

_ A(s) _
+ +
X E(s) G(s) H(s) Y
_ B(s) + _ _
F(s)

R P(s )

U(s)
_
V(s ) W (s)

-D
-1
C
Z
1 -1
1
1
A 1 1 1 E G H
X 1 Y
B
-F
-P
R 1

-1
1 -U
1 V W

We recommend our readers to follow both examples very carefully and understand the “logic”
behind the applied transformation rules.
Transformation of existing block diagrams into signal-flow graphs has a very particular purpose:
it allows for the application of so-called Mason technique or Mason Gain formula for definition of
the overall system transfer function, i.e. reduction of the block diagram to a single block. Mason's
technique utilizes methods of graph analysis and results in a procedure that can be implemented in
software. The following are the steps of this procedure.
1) Establish the input and the output variables of the overall transfer function (remember that a

70
 system can have more than one input and output).
2) List all paths leading from the input to the output. Define each path gain, Pi, i = 1, 2, ..., N.
3) Find and list all loops of the signal-flow graph and define their gains, Li, i = 1, 2, 3, ..., M.
4) Find and list all existing combinations of two non-touching loops, and define products of
their gains, LiLj, i, j = 1, 2, 3, …
5) Find and list all existing combinations of three mutually non-touching loops, and define
products of their gains, LiLjLk, i, j, k = 1, 2, 3, …
6) Continue detection of existing combinations of 4, 5, etc. mutually non-touching loops
7) Define the denominator of the overall transfer function through the sum of loop gains and
products of gains of non-touching loops as follows:
∆ = 1 − ∑ Li + ∑ Li L j − ∑ Li L j Lk +L
i i, j i , j ,k

8) Define the numerator of the overall transfer function as follows:

η = ∑ Pi ∆ i
i

where Pi is the gain of the i-th path, and ∆i is obtained from the expression for ∆ by equating to zero
gains of all loops that touch the i-th path.
η
9) Construct the overall transfer function as .
∆
Example 2.9
Apply Mason technique to the signal-flow graph of Example 2.7 to define transfer functions
G1 ( s) = Y ( s) X ( s) and G2 ( s) = Y ( s) Z ( s) .

Solution for G1 ( s) = Y ( s) X ( s) :
1) Input and output variables are X and Y.
2) There are four paths from node X to node Y, their gains are [note that “(s)” is omitted]:
P1 = acfgmn, P2 = bcfgmn, P3 = acfemn, P4 = bcfemn.
3) Loops and their gains:
L1 = −aced, L2 = −bced, L3 = −acfgh, L4 = −bcfgh, L5 = −m, L6 = −mn, L7 = −pq, L8 =
−acfgmnp, L9 = −bcfgmnp, L10 = −acfemnp, L11 = −bcfemnp,
4) Combinations of two non-touching loops, and products of their gains:
L1L7 = acedpq, L2L7 = bcedpq, L3L7 = acfghpq, L4L7 = bcfghpq, L5L7 = mpq, L6L7 = mnpq,
L1L5 = acedm, L2L5 = bcedm, L3L5 = acfghm, L4L5 = bcfghm, L1L6 = acedmn, L2L6 = bcedmn,

71
 L3L6 = acfghmn, L4L6 = bcfghmn
5) Combinations of three mutually non-touching loops and the products of their gains:
L1L5L7 = −acedmpq, L2L5L7 = −bcedmpq, L3L5L7 = −acfghmpq, L4L5L7 = −bcfghmpq, L1L6L7
= −acedmnpq, L2L6L7 = −bcedmnpq, L3L6L7 = −acfghmnpq, L4L6L7 = −bcfghmnpq
6) There is no combinations of 4, 5, etc., mutually non-touching loops
7) Define the denominator of the overall transfer function through the sum of loop gains and
products of gains of non-touching loops as follows:
∆ = 1 + aced + bced + acfgh + bcfgh + m + mn + pq + acfgmnp + bcfgmnp + acfemnp +
bcfemnp + acedpq + bcedpq + acfghpq + bcfghpq + mpq + mnpq + acedm + bcedm + acfghm
+ bcfghm + acedmn + bcedmn + acfghmn + bcfghmn + acedmpq + bcedmpq + acfghmpq +
bcfghmpq + acedmnpq + bcedmnpq + acfghmnpq + bcfghmnpq
8) Define the numerator of the overall transfer function understanding that the only loop that
does not touch paths is L7 = −pq, therefore ∆1 = ∆2 = ∆3 = ∆4 = 1+ pq and η = [P1 + P2 + P3 +
P4](1 + pq) = [acfgmn + bcfgmn + acfemn + bcfemn](1 + pq) that results in a straight-forward
but formidable expression for the overall transfer function.
Solution for G2 ( s) = Y ( s) Z ( s) :
1) Input and output variables are Z and Y.
2) There are four paths from node Z to node Y, their gains are: P1 = pacfgmn, P2 = pbcfgmn, P3
= pacfemn, P4 = pbcfemn.
Loops and combinations of loops are already defined, therefore:
3) Define the numerator of the overall transfer function understanding that there are no loops
that would not touch paths, i.e. ∆1 = ∆2 = ∆3 = ∆4 = 1, and η = P1 + P2 + P3 + P4 = pacfgmn +
pbcfgmn + pacfemn + pbcfemn that also results in a formidable final expression for the
overall transfer function.
Example 2.10
Apply Mason technique to the signal-flow graph of Example 2.8 to define transfer functions
G1 ( s) = Y ( s) X ( s) and G2 ( s) = Y ( s) Z ( s) .

Solution for G1 ( s) = Y ( s) X ( s) :
1) Input and output variables are X and Y.
2) There are three paths from node X to node Y, their gains are: P1 = AEGH, P2 = BEGH, and
P3 = CEGH.

72
 3) Loops and their gains:
L1 = −C, L2 = −AED, L3 = −BED, L4 = −CED, L5 = −EF, L6 = −EGP, L7 = −EGH, L8 =
−WVU, L9 = −AEGHWV, L10 = −BEGHWV, L11 = −CEGHWV
4) Combinations of two non-touching loops, and products of their gains:
L1L8 = CWVU, L2L8 = AEDWVU, L3L8 = BEDWVU, L4L8 = CEDWVU, L5L8 = EFWVU, L6L8
= EGPWVU, L7L8 = EGHWVU, L1L5 = CEF, L1L6 = CEGP, L1L7 = CEGH, L1L9 =
CAEGHWV, L1L10 = CBEGHWV, L1L2 = CAED, L1L3 = CBED
5) Combinations of three mutually non-touching loops and the products of their gains:
L1L2L8 = −CWVUAED, L1L3L8 = −CWVUBED, L1L5L8 = −CWVUEP, L1L6L8 = −CWVUEPG,
L1L7L8 = −CWVUEGH
6) There is no combinations of 4, 5, etc. mutually non-touching loops.
7) Define the denominator of the overall transfer function through the sum of loop gains and
products of gains of non-touching loops as follows:
∆ = 1 + C + AED + BED + CED + EF + EGP + EGH + WVU + AEGHWV + BEGHWV +
CEGHWV + CWVU + AEDWVU + BEDWVU + CEDWVU + EFWVU + EGPWVU +
EGHWVU + CEF + CEGP + CEGH + CAEGHWV + CBEGHWV + CAED + CBED +
CWVUAED + CWVUBED + CWVUEP + CWVUEPG + CWVUEGH
8) Define the numerator of the overall transfer function understanding that the only loop that
does not touch paths is L1 = C, therefore ∆1 = ∆2 = ∆3 = ∆4v= 1 + C and η = [P1 + P2 + P3](1
+ C) = [AEGH + BEGH + CEGH](1 + C) that results in a straight-forward but formidable
expression for the overall transfer function.
Solution for G2(s)=Y(s)/Z(s).
1) Input and output variables are Z and Y.
2) There is one path from node Z to node Y: P1 = EGH.
Loops and combinations of loops are already defined, therefore:
3) Define the numerator of the overall transfer function understanding that the following loops
do not touch the path: L1and L8 , therefore, η = EGH(1+ C + VWU + CVWU) that results in
the required expression for the overall transfer function.

An observation: the denominator in Mason's formula reflects the system configuration only, it
does not depend on the inputs and outputs points. The numerator reflects input and output points
and also system configuration.

73
 Block diagrams and signal-flow graphs present a very convenient way to obtain high order
differential equations of complex technical systems. Let us consider the system containing a dc
motor, spring coupler, gearbox, and inertial load, described in Chapter 1. Differential equations of
its particular components can be easily replaced by transfer functions:
a) Electrical transformations
balance of voltages in the armature coil:
V (t ) − E (t ) = Ri(t ) + Li ′(t )
where
V(t) is the armature voltage, acting as the input signal
i(t) is the armature current
E(t) is the back EMF of the motor
R and L are the resistance and inductance of the armature coil of the motor
Taking Laplace transform of the above equation and assuming zero initial conditions results in
the following transfer function of this block:
I ( s) 1
G1 ( s) = =
V ( s) − E ( s) Ls + R

b) Electromechanical transformations:
electromotive force: E ( t ) = CE ω ( t )

motor torque: T ( t ) = C M i( t )
where
CE is the electrical constant of the motor
CM is the mechanical constant of the motor
E ( s) T ( s)
The corresponding transfer functions are: = CE and = CM
ω ( s) I ( s)

c) Mechanical transformations
balance of torques on the shaft of the motor:
T (t ) = Jω ′(t ) + fω (t ) + T1 (t )
ω ( s) 1
→ G 2 ( s) = =
T ( s) − T1 ( s) Js + f
torque applied to the gear mechanism:

74
 [
T1 (t ) = K ∫ ω (t ) − ω1 (t ) dt ]
T1 ( s) K
→ G3 ( s) = =
ω ( s) − ω1 ( s) s

load torque: TL (t ) = T1 (t ) N

TL ( s)
→ =N
T1 ( s)

velocity of the moving load: TL ( t ) = J Lω L′ (t ) + f Lω L (t )

ω L ( s) 1
→ G4 ( s) = =
TL ( s) J Ls + fL

displacement of the load: ϕ (t ) = ∫ ω L (t ) dt

ϕ ( s) 1
→ =
ω L ( s) s
relationship between the coupler and load velocities:
ω1 (t ) = ω L (t ) N
ω1 ( s)
→ =N
ω L ( s)
where
ω (t ) is the angular velocity of the motor
ω1 (t ) is the angular velocity of load side of the coupler
ω L (t ) is the angular velocity of the load
ϕ ( t ) is the angular displacement of the load, the system output
T (t ) is the torque of the motor
T1 (t ) is the torque applied to the spring coupler
TL ( t ) is the torque that drives the load
J and JL are moments of inertia of the rotor of the motor and the load
f and fL are viscous friction coefficients of the motor and of the load
N is the gear ratio (N > 1)
K is the stiffness coefficient of the spring coupler
The block diagram of this system is shown below:

75
 T1

i T T TL TL 1
V 1
CM 1 K 1 n
- sL + R sJ + f
- s T1 N sJ L + fL s

T1
N
E T
CE

Figure 2.12

Rules of block diagram reduction can be now applied to obtain the overall system transfer
function which can be easily converted to a high order differential equation. This task can be also
performed by obtaining the signal-flow graph and applying Mason Gain formula.

76
 ASSIGNMENTS (Homework #4)
4.1. Frequency response of a first order system has the phase of −15o at ω = 10 rad/sec. Its
response to the signal x(t) = u(t), y(t), is equal to 66 (units) at t = 0.1 sec. Determine transfer
function of this system.
4.2. Step response of a second order system has 3 sec settling time and 45% overshoot. The
magnitude of its frequency response is 45 (abs. units) at ω = 8 rad/sec. Determine transfer
function of this system.
4.3. Step response of a dynamic system exhibits decaying oscillatory process with frequency of 66
rad/sec and steady-state value of 90 (units). During one period of the oscillation its magnitude
reduction is 30%. Approximate this dynamics by a second order system.
4.4. Fig. 2.13 presents step responses of several dynamic systems to a unit step input. Determine
the system’s transfer functions and estimate parameters of these transfer functions.
4.5. Define transfer functions of typical dynamic systems based on the following information:
a) magnitudes of the frequency response at ω1 = 3.17 and ω 2 = 10 rad/sec are equal to 3.0

Figure 2.13

77
 and 0.188 (units), phase of the frequency response at ω1 is equal to −90°,
b) magnitudes of the frequency response at ω1 = 3 and ω 2 = 12 rad/sec are equal to 6 and 6
(units), phases of the frequency response at ω1 and ω 2 are equal to −25° and −100°,
c) magnitudes of the step response at ω1 = 3 and ω 2 = 30 rad/sec are equal to 60 and 6
(units), phases of the frequency response at ω1 and ω 2 are equal to −90° and −90°
4.6. Apply block diagram reduction technique and Mason Gain formula to obtain high order
differential equation of the system containing a dc motor, spring coupler, gears, and inertial
load, shown in Fig. 2.12.
4.7. Given a block diagram of a control system below, obtain transfer functions W1 ( s) = Y ( s) X ( s)

and W2 ( s) = Y ( s) Z ( s) using block diagram reduction and Mason technique. Show all
intermediate results.

H2 H3

Z H4

_ _
X G1 G2 G3 G4 Y
_ _

H1 H5

_
H6

78
 EXAMPLE OF A ONE HOUR TEST

PROBLEM#1: Given differential equation of a dynamic system, y ′′(t ) + 5 y ′(t ) + 10 y (t )

= 3x ′( t ) + 6 x (t ) , determine the steady-state system response to the input signal x (t ) = 5e − 2 t

+ u(t ) + 8 sin (3t ) . Assume zero initial conditions.

PROBLEM # 2: Given differential equation of a dynamic system, y ′(t ) + 5 y( t ) = 2 x (t ) and given

1
Laplace transform of the input signal, X ( s) = , obtain an analytical expression for
s + 2s 2 + 10s
3

the system response, list components of the natural and forced motion (note: do not estimate
coefficients of particular partial fractions, use A1, A2, …).

PROBLEM # 3: Signal y(t) is the response of a first order system to a unit step input. It is known
that y(0.6) = 0.3Yss (where Yss is the steady-state value) and y(1.1) = 10.5 (units). Evaluate
parameters of the system.

PROBLEM # 4: Given block diagram of a control system, see below, obtain its transfer function
W ( s) = Y ( s) X ( s) by block diagram reduction

H2 H3

H4

_ _
X G1 G2 G3 G4 Y
_ _

H1

H6

PROBLEM # 5: Apply Mason technique to solve the above problem.

79
 CHAPTER 3

ANALYTICAL AND NUMERICAL TOOLS OF CONTROL ENGINEERING

The following analytical and numerical techniques have been developed over the 75-year old
history of control engineering. They are intended for the alleviation of difficulties caused by high
order differential equations and complex configuration of control systems. These techniques are
commonly used by control engineers working on the analysis and design of control systems.
Availability of computers did not reduce the importance of these techniques but on contrary,
enhanced them and made more versatile.

NUMERICAL SIMULATION

A system block diagram, representing particular blocks by their transfer functions and showing
the interconnections between blocks, describes the sequence of signal transformations in the system,
rather than the physical nature of the system components. It is known from that signal
transformation by a dynamic system can be accurately represented in a computer by a software
module implementing one of several suitable numerical techniques. Consider for example a
dynamic system with input signal x(t) and output signal y(t) described by transfer function
Y ( s) b s + b0
G ( s) = = 2 1 (3.1)
X ( s) s + a1 s + a 0

Implementation of the signal transformation performed by this system by a digital computer is

based on discretization of the problem, i.e., replacing continuous-time signals x(t) and y(t) by
discrete-time sequences of numbers x(iT) and y(iT), where i = 1, 2, 3, … is a discrete-time index, and
T is a sufficiently small constant time step. For simplicity, and since T = const, x(iT) and y(iT) could
be defined as x(i) and y(i), i = 1, 2, 3, … Then, the transformation of x(i) into y(i), i = 1, 2, 3, …
could be performed in two different ways.
a) The backward-difference approach. According to (3.1), Y(s)(s2 + a1s + a0) = X(s)(b1s + b0) that
could be represented in the time domain as:
y ′′(t ) + a1 y ′( t ) + a 0 y (t ) = b1 x ′( t ) + b0 x( t ) (3.2)
Recall definition of derivatives and represent derivatives of (3.2) in the discrete-time domain,
assuming that time step T is sufficiently small:
t → iT , x (t ) → x( i), y ( t ) → y ( i)

80
 dx(t ) x (i) − x (i − 1) dy( t ) y (i) − y (i − 1)
x ′( t ) = → , y ′( t ) = →
dt dt dt dt

y ′′(t ) =
dy ′(t )
→ 
[
d  y (i) − y( i − 1)  1 d y (i) − y( i − 1) ]
dt dt  T =T dt


1  y (i) − y(i − 1) y (i − 1) − y (i − 2)  y (i) − 2 y (i − 1) + y( i − 2)

→ − =
T  T T  T2

i = 0, 1, 2, 3, …
Applied to (3.2), these expressions result in
y (i) − 2 y( i − 1) + y (i − 2) y (i) − y( i − 1) x (i) − x (i − 1)
+ a1 + a 0 y (i) = b1 + b0 x (i)
T 2
T T

1 a   2 a  1  b   b
or y(i)  2 + 1 + a 0  + y (i − 1)− 2 − 1  + y (i − 2) 2  = x (i)  1 + b0  + x(i − 1)− 1 
T T   T T  T   T   T

or [ ] [
y(i) 1 + a1T + a 0 T 2 − y (i − 1)[2 + a1T ] + y(i − 2) = x(i) b1T + b0T 2 − x(i − 1)b1T ]
 2 + a1T   1 
y(i) =  2 (
y i − 1) −  2 (
y i − 2)
1 + a1T + a 0 T  1 + a1T + a 0 T 
or
 b T + b0 T 2   b1T 
2 ( ) 2 (
+ 1 x i − x i − 1)
1 + a1T + a 0 T  1 + a1T + a 0T 
or y(i) = C1 y (i − 1) − C2 y (i − 2) + C3 x( i) − C4 x (i − 1), i = 0,1, 2, 3, K (3.3)
where C1 – C4 are constant coefficients dependent on the system parameters and the time step T.
Expression (3.3) is known as a recursive formula that being repeatedly applied to the sequence x(i), i
= 1, 2, 3, … representing the input signal, and numerical values y(i), i = 0, 1, 2, 3, …generated by the
previous steps of the procedure, results in the sequence y(i), i = 0, 1, 2, 3, …representing the output
signal. Procedure (3.3), supplemented with one-time computation of coefficients C1 – C4 could be
easily implemented in software and stored as a part of special “library of typical dynamic blocks”
provided by a simulation software package.
b) Utilization of numerical integration. One can realize that transfer function (3.1) could be
represented by the following block diagram (it is easy to reduce this block diagram to a single block
with transfer function (3.1)).
It could be seen that the sequence of signal transformations within this system includes only
integration and summation. These two highly accurate numerical operations, performed in the
appropriate order, implemented in software and stored in a special library are provided by any

81
 a1 b1
_ +
+
X 1/s 1/s b0 Y
_ +

a0

simulation software package.

In more advanced simulation packages, such as VISSIM and SIMULINK, libraries of typical
dynamic blocks are supplemented with modules generating various types of input signals. In
addition, these packages are equipped with interactive graphic interface software facilitating easy
user interface and convenient representation of the entire simulation setup and simulation results,
and various system analysis/design tools.
Consider a complex control system represented by a block diagram. It is desirable that
particular blocks of the block diagram represent particular physical components of the system, and
their inputs and outputs represent particular physical signals. The input signal(s) of the entire control
system, reference and/or disturbance, are defined by the appropriate signal generating module(s).
Then the simulation setup, performing the sequence of signal transformations consistent with the
control system it represents, generates all internal and output signals of interest thus providing the
most complete representation of the system operation. This process, known as numerical simulation
of control systems, presents the most comprehensive system analysis tool and facilitates the system
design.
Example 3.1
Consider the previously discussed electro-mechanical system containing a dc motor driving an
inertial load via a spring coupler and gearbox. This system is represented by the simulation setup of
Fig. 3.1. The setup utilizes VISSIM software that facilitates interactive development of the system
schematics, specification of dynamic characteristics of particular system blocks, application of input
signals, and representation of the system variables of interest.
According to the setup, the system has the following parameters,
Dc motor: inductance and resistance of the armature coil are 0.001 (H) and 0.1 (Ohm), moment
of inertia of the rotor is 0.8 (Kg⋅inch2), viscous friction coefficient is 0.01 (N⋅sec/inch), electrical and
mechanical constants are 0.6 (V⋅sec/rad) and 0.5(N⋅inch/A)
Inertial load: moment of inertia is 2 (Kg⋅inch2), viscous friction coefficient is 2.3 (N⋅sec/inch)

82
 Figure 3.1 Simulation diagram of an inertial load system driven by a dc motor

Spring coupler: stiffness coefficient is 200 (N⋅inch/rad),

Gearbox: gear ratio is 25.
One can realize that the “building blocks” of the system are chosen such that particular system
variables could be extracted and plotted. The input signal of the system is unit step voltage applied
to the motor. Only three out of six designated system variables are plotted. The plots present
comprehensive characterization of the transient process in the system, including magnitude of the
variables, magnitudes and frequencies of oscillatory processes, system settling time, etc. The
simulation setup allows the designer to vary parameters of every component of the system and
investigate its impact on the system performance.
While simulation schemes utilizing numerical procedures technique are flexible and convenient,
they have one important drawback: limited accuracy. Simulation results are dependent on the time
step. Numerical errors associated with the representation of a derivative by a finite difference or
replacing integration by summation are unavoidable; the error increases as the order of system
increases. It seems that reduction of the time step results in the improved accuracy of the simulation.

83
This is not necessarily true: one has to realize that reduction of the time step results in the increased
number of steps required to cover the same simulation time interval. Simulation and round-off
errors, generated at each step of the numerical procedure, affect all steps, performed consequently,
thus resulting in the "snow ball" effect of error accumulation. Therefore, decreasing the time steps
beyond some rational limits often shifts simulation errors from one category to another, and
increases the amount of calculations.
There is, however, a much more accurate but much less flexible simulation approach. If the
input signal x(t), affecting the system, is defined analytically (such as step, ramp, exponential, etc.),
one can easily obtain its Laplace transform X(s). When the system transfer function G(s) is known,
the system response, assuming zero initial conditions, is defined by its Laplace transform as Y(s) =
G(s)X(s). Represent Y(s) by the sum of partial fractions Wi(s), i = 1, 2, 3,...:
Y ( s) = ∑ a iWi ( s)

Now a numerical task, resulting in numerical errors, has to be performed only once: when
coefficients of partial fractions ai, i = 1, 2, 3, ..., have to be calculated. Inverse Laplace transform of
Wi(s) in the time-domain functions wi(t) is a purely analytical, error-free, procedure. The final result,
the time-domain function y(t) is now obtained as:
y(t ) = ∑ a i wi (t )

and can be presented in the numerical form. Although time step ∆t also has to be specified, it is used
only for the representation of the obtained function y(t) by a sequence of data points:
y(0), y(∆t), y(2∆t), y(3∆t), ....
This approach is implemented in a number of software packages, including package CC [2]
commonly used in aerospace control engineering where the simulation accuracy cannot be
compromised.

LOOP AND CLOSED-LOOP SYSTEM TRANSFER FUNCTIONS

The loop transfer function (also known as the open-loop transfer function), is a special way to
describe a control system which is a closed-loop system by definition. If G(s) is the transfer function
of a system's forward path and H(s) is the transfer function of its feedback, then the overall system

[ ]
transfer function is GCL ( s) = G( s) 1 + G( s) H ( s) . This transfer function, defined as a "Laplace

transform of the output signal over the Laplace transform of the input signal under zero initial
conditions", provides the complete description of the system properties. Indeed, it defines the output
signal of the system through the input signal and properties of the system. In addition, it defines the

84
system poles that are crucial for the characterization of system natural motion. Later it will be
shown that in many instances a control system (closed-loop) could be analyzed by investigation of
its open-loop system.
An open-loop transfer function GL(s)=G(s)H(s) can be defined as the "product of transfer
functions of system blocks along the control loop". (It is assumed that a complex control system that
could include many loops is reduced to a “one loop” configuration.) Although it describes a
fictitious system (a system which does not exist unless the original closed-loop system is
disconnected), the loop transfer function is commonly used to represent various properties of the
"real system". In many situations use of a loop transfer function is justified and even preferable
because of the following reasons:
1. The loop transfer function is just a product of transfer functions of system components and
is very easy to obtain
2. The expression of a loop transfer function is much more simple than the system transfer

[ ]
function: compare expressions G( s) 1 + G( s) H ( s) and G(s)H(s)

3. The loop transfer function is sufficient for the definition of the system characteristic
polynomial, which can be defined just as 1 + GL(s). It is, therefore, sufficient for the
definition of system poles and all analytical techniques that utilize system poles.
Example 3.2

(
A control system consists of a plant with transfer function G1 ( s) = (2s + 8) s 2 + 3s + 20 , )
controller G2 ( s) = 35
. ( s + 0.25) ( s + 133) , power amplifier G3 ( s) = 30 ( s + 20) , and actuator

( )
G4 ( s) = 11 s 2 + 8s + 14 . List the components of the natural motion which are expected to be

present in the system response.

Solution: Components of the natural motion can be directly associated with system poles.
Technically, a system transfer function (closed-loop) can be found, its denominator presented as the
characteristic polynomial, roots of this polynomial found, and finally, the natural motion components
defined. This approach requires that the following expression of the system transfer function be
defined and manipulated:
2s + 8 11 30
⋅ 2 ⋅
GCL ( s) = s + 3s + 20 s + 8s + 14 s + 20
2

2s + 8 11 30 35 . ( s + 0.25)
1+ 2 ⋅ 2 ⋅ ⋅
s + 3s + 20 s + 8s + 14 s + 20 s + 133
A shorter solution implies definition of the loop transfer function that is much simpler than

85
GCL(s):
2s + 8 11 30 3.5(s + 0.25)
G L (s) = ⋅ 2 ⋅ ⋅
s + 3s + 20 s + 8s + 14 s + 20
2
s + 133

but is sufficient for the definition of the characteristic equation:

2s + 8 11 30 3.5(s + 0.25)
1 + G L (s) = 1 + ⋅ 2 ⋅ ⋅ =0
s + 3s + 20 s + 8s + 14 s + 20
2
s + 133

or
(s 2
)( )
+ 3s + 20 s 2 + 8s + 14 ( s + 20)( s + 133) + 11 ⋅ 30 ⋅ 35
. ⋅ (2s + 8)( s + 0.25)
=0
(s 2
)( )
+ 3s + 20 s 2 + 8s + 14 ( s + 20)( s + 133)

or (s 2
)( )
+ 3s + 20 s 2 + 8s + 14 ( s + 20)( s + 133) + 11 ⋅ 30 ⋅ 35
. ⋅ (2s + 8)( s + 0.25) = 0

or s 6 + 164s 5 + 4401s 4 + 38336s 3 + 187776s 2 + 589977.5s + 747110 = 0

which yields the following system poles:
p1 = −2.523, p2,3 = −1543
. ± 4.297 j, p4 = −5.321, p5 = −20.07, p6 = −133

and natural motion components:

A1e − 2.523t + A2 e − 1.543t sin(4.297t + θ ) + A3e − 5.321t + A4 e − 20.07 t + A5 e − 133t

where parameters A1 – A5 and θ depend on the numerator of the closed-loop system transfer function
(i.e. the point of application of the input signal), and the input signal itself.
This example demonstrates a very convenient way to specify the characteristic equation of a
closed-loop system: by the sum of the numerator and denominator of the open-loop system transfer
function.
While transfer functions of system components are very often given, it takes virtually no effort
to define the open-loop transfer function and the characteristic equation of the system. Solving
characteristic equations, of course, is a different story, but when a computer does the job and a user
has only to specify the characteristic equation, loop transfer functions present an ideal way to
accomplish this task.
Similarly, open-loop frequency response is defined as the product of the frequency responses of
all system components along the control loop:
GL ( jω ) = G1 ( jω ) ⋅ G2 ( jω ) ⋅ G3 ( jω ) ⋅ K ⋅ GK ( jω ) = GL ( jω ) ∠ϕ L (ω ) = M L (ω )∠ϕ L (ω ) (3.4)

Definition of the open-loop system frequency response is further simplified by the fact that the phase
of the open-loop system frequency response is defined as the sum of phases of the frequency
responses of all system components along the control loop:
ϕ L (ω ) = ϕ1 (ω ) + ϕ 2 (ω ) + ϕ 3 (ω ) + K + ϕ K (ω ) (3.5)

86
and the magnitude of the open-loop system frequency response is defined as the sum of magnitudes
of the frequency responses of all system components defined in special logarithmic units, decibels
(see in this Chapter below):
AL (ω ) = A1 (ω ) + A2 (ω ) + A3 (ω ) + K + AK (ω ) (3.6)

[ ]
where Ai (ω ) = 20 log M i (ω ) = 20 log Gi ( jω ) , i = 1, 2,K
Again, in many cases analysis of a control system (closed-loop) could be performed by the
analysis of its open-loop frequency response

COMPUTATION OF SYSTEM POLES AND ZEROS

Assume that G( s) = N ( s) D( s) is the transfer function of a dynamic system and

N ( s) = b0 s m + b1 s m− 1 + b2 s m− 2 + K + bm and D( s) = s n + a1 s n − 1 + a 2 s n − 2 + K + a n are its numerator

and denominator defined in a polynomial form. It should be noted that, typically, the denominator
polynomial is of a higher order than the numerator (m < n). System poles can be found by solving
the system's characteristic equation s n + a1 s n − 1 + a 2 s n − 2 + K + a n = 0 . Solution of the equation

b0 s m + b1 s m− 1 + b2 s m− 2 + K + bm = 0 generates system zeros. Solution of polynomial equations is a

computationally intensive task, which presently is completely computerized. The following is the
printout of a common "root solver" program:

COEFFICIENTS OF A REAL POLYNOMIAL:

TERM ORDER COEFFICIENT
0 7000.0000
1 7300.0000
2 2650.0000
3 439.0000
4 34.0000
5 1.0000
NORMAL PROGRAM EXECUTION; ROOTS ARE:
REAL PART IMAGINARY PART
-2.0000 0.0000
-5.0000 0.0000
-7.0000 0.0000
-10.0000 0.0000
-10.0000 0.0000

A "root solver" does not differentiate between an open-loop or a closed-loop transfer function; it
is the responsibility of the user to properly specify the polynomial numerator and denominator of the
system transfer function and then define the poles and zeros as "closed-loop" or "open-loop" (i.e.
poles of a closed-loop or an open-loop transfer function).
Note that an open-loop transfer function is just a product of transfer functions of particular

87
components of the system, therefore, open-loop poles and zeros of a system are equal to the poles
and zeros of the particular system components. Indeed, the loop transfer function
GL ( s) = N ( s) D( s) is defined as the product of the transfer functions of particular system
components:
N L ( s) N ( s ) N ( s ) N ( s) N ( s)
G L ( s) = = G1 ( s) ⋅ G2 ( s) ⋅ G3 ( s) ⋅ K⋅ G K ( s) = 1 ⋅ 2 ⋅ 3 ⋅K⋅ K
D L ( s) D1 ( s) D2 ( s) D3 ( s) DK ( s)

where Gi ( s) = N i ( s) Di ( s) , i = 1, 2, K, K are the transfer functions of particular system components.

It is clear that polynomial equations NL(s) = 0 and DL(s) = 0 used to define open-loop system zeros
and poles can be replaced by N1(s) = 0, N2(s) = 0, ..., NK (s) = 0, and D1(s) = 0, D2(s) = 0, ..., DK (s) =
0, and the solution would provide poles and zeros of transfer functions G1(s), G2(s), ...., GK (s)
describing particular system components.
Conclusion:
Open-loop system poles and zeros represent only particular system components
Closed-loop system poles and zeros represent not only specific dynamics of particular system
components, but also the effect of the joint operation of all system components within the control
loop implementing the negative feedback.
Both poles and zeros play a very important role in system analysis and design and a "root solver"
is always a very useful tool of a control engineer.
In many instances, system poles are known, and the coefficients of the characteristic polynomial
are to be calculated. This problem, inverse to the “root solver task”, also is computationally
intensive and requires application of commonly available software tools.

FREQUENCY DOMAIN TECHNIQUES: NYQUIST PROCEDURES

The Nyquist procedure is a typical analytical tool intended for control engineers of the pre-
computer era. However, due to its simplicity and versatility this technique, enhanced by computer
applications, is still commonly used.
Nyquist techniques can be briefly defined as the analysis of a control system by the definition
and analysis of its open-loop frequency response represented by a plot in the complex plane known
as Nyquist plot. As frequency varies from zero to infinity, shape of the Nyquist plot reveals some
important system properties. Sometimes, Nyquist plot could be defined by a table featuring
frequencies within some range of interest, and corresponding values of real and imaginary parts of
the open-loop frequency response. Note that Nyquist technique is used to analyze closed-loop

88
systems by taking the advantage of the simplicity of the open-loop system transfer functions.
Assume that GL ( s) = N ( s) D( s) is the open-loop transfer function of a control system and

N ( s) = b0 s m + b1 s m− 1 + b2 s m− 2 + K + bm and D( s) = s n + a1 s n − 1 + a 2 s n − 2 + K + a n are its polynomial

numerator and denominator. Again, it is expected that m < n. The pole-zero representation of this
transfer function yields:
b0 ( s − z1 )( s − z 2 ) K( s − z m )
G L ( s) =
( s − p1 )( s − p2 ) K( s − pn )
where pi and zi are poles and zeros of the transfer functions of system components, i.e., open-loop
poles and zeros of the system. It is important to remember that Nyquist-based techniques imply that
the open-loop system poles, pi, i = 1, 2, ..., n, do not have positive real parts, i.e., are located in the
left-hand side of the complex plane. Therefore, prior to making any judgment based on the open-
loop frequency response one should make sure that this condition is satisfied.
The open-loop system frequency response, GL(jω), is defined as:
b0 ( jω − z1 )( jω − z 2 ) K( jω − z m )
GL ( jω ) =
( jω − p1 )( jω − p2 ) K( jω − pn )
It is also known that the open-loop system frequency response, GL(jω), is a complex function
of frequency ω that could be defined in a polar form as GL(jω) = ML(ω)∠ϕL(ω) or in a rectangular
form, GL(jω) = RL(ω)+jIL(ω). One way or another, for any particular frequency, ωi, open-loop
system frequency response, GL(jωi), is represented by a point in the complex plane defined by two
polar coordinates, ML(ωi) and ϕL(ωi), or by two rectangular coordinates, RL(ωi) and IL(ωi), as shown
in Fig. 3.2.
Typically, Nyquist paths are generated by software tools. Later, in Chapter 4 we will consider

Imaginary Nyquist path

axis
G(jω2)
I(ω2)
)
(ω 2
M

I(ω1) G(jω1)

M( ω1)
ϕ(ω2)
ϕ(ω1)
Real
axis
R(ω2) R(ω1)
Figure 3.2

89
application of Nyquist paths to various control-related problems.
Example 3.3
Given block diagram of a control system, see below. The system includes: a plant with transfer
2s + 8 . ( s + 0.25)
35 30
function G1 ( s) = , controller G2 ( s) = , power amplifier G3 ( s) = , and
2
s + 3s + 20 s + 133 s + 20
11
actuator G4 ( s) = 2
.
s + 8s + 14
a) Obtain the Nyquist plot of this system.
b) Evaluate frequency response of this system at ω = 7 rad/sec
Solution: a) This question refers to the open-loop system frequency response that could be

_ G3(s) G4(s) G1(s)

G2(s)

obtained by taking the open-loop transfer function of this system:

GL ( s) = G1 ( s)G2 ( s)G3 ( s)G4 ( s)
and using a software tool to obtain and plot the Nyquist plot. Note that most software tools require
only s-domain transfer function of the system (no replacement of “s” by “jω” is required), however,
the user is expected to choose the frequency range and the number of frequency points.
Prior to using the software tool, let us get an assurance that all open-loop poles of the system
are located in the left-hand-side of the complex plane, i.e., do not have positive real parts. Indeed,
the open-loop poles are:
−1.5 ± 4.21j, −133, −20, −5.41, and −2.59
The resultant Nyquist plot is shown below:
Solution: b) Note that this question requires to obtain the frequency response of the system, as
represented by the block diagram, at the particular frequency ω = 7 rad/sec. To obtain this frequency
response, one has to obtain the system transfer function:
G1 ( s)G3 ( s)G4 ( s)
GCL ( s) =
1 + G1 ( s)G2 ( s)G3 ( s)G4 ( s)

and replace “s” by “j7” that will result in GCL(j7) that will be defined by two numbers representing
its real and imaginary part or its magnitude and phase. Of course, a more rational way of solving

90
this problem requires to define the system via a simulation software tool, obtain its frequency
response, and then measure the magnitude and phase at the frequency of interest. As shown above:
at ω = 7 rad/sec G(j7) ≈ 0.1∠−225°

91
 FREQUENCY DOMAIN TECHNIQUES: BODE PLOTS

Bode plots were intended as typical "paper and pencil" technique for dealing with high order
linear differential equations of control systems during the pre-computer era. While fairly simple,
this technique allows for the solution of a wide scope of control system analysis and design
problems.
A Bode plot is also known as an asymptotic open-loop logarithm-amplitude-phase frequency
characteristic of a control system. Let us clarify this definition.
A Bode plot is drawn for an open-loop frequency response of control system, GL(jω), which is
defined as a "product of frequency responses of all system blocks along the control loop". For
example, if the forward path of a control system consists of blocks with transfer functions Gk(s), k =
1, 2, 3 and the feedback consists of blocks with transfer functions Hj(s), j = 1, 2 then the loop transfer
function is defined as:
GL ( s) = G1 ( s)G2 ( s)G3 ( s) H1 ( s) H 2 ( s) (3.7)

and GL(jω) can be obtained by replacing symbol s in the expression GL(s) by jω. In comparison, the
closed-loop of transfer function of this system is:
G1 ( s)G2 ( s)G3 ( s)
GCL ( s) =
1 + G1 ( s)G2 ( s)G3 ( s) H1 ( s) H 2 ( s)

G1 ( s)G2 ( s)G3 ( s)
or GCL ( s) = (3.8)
1 + GOL ( s)

It is important to realize that the actual performance of the control system with the forward path
GFP(s) = G1(s)G2(s)G3(s) and the feedback GFB(s) = H1(s)H2(s) is described by the transfer function
(3.8), not by (3.7). One of the advantages of Bode technique is that it allows for dealing with a
simple "open-loop" expression in order to characterize the closed-loop system.
A Bode plot, as shown in Fig. 3.3, consists of two plots: the amplitude (magnitude) plot,
representing the magnitude of the open-loop system frequency response A(ω) in decibels, and the
phase plot representing the phase of the open-loop system frequency response Φ (ω) in degrees. The
plots share the same frequency axis.
Magnitude of a Bode plot is defined in specific units, decibels (db) as follows:
A(ω ) = 20 log10 GL ( jω ) (3.9)

where GL(jω) = M(ω) is the absolute value of the open-loop frequency response of the system.
Phase Φ (ω) is typically defined in degrees.

92
 Figure 3.3

In a Bode plot the frequency axis has logarithmic scale and is marked in rad/sec (sometimes in
Hz). Due to the logarithmic scale, a special unit, decade, is also used to deal with the frequency
axis: if a frequency ω1 is greater than frequency ω0 by one decade, this means that ω1 = 10ω0.
The following are major advantages of Bode plots, which explain the popularity of this
technique:
1. Due to logarithmic scale and special units, decibels, a Bode plot is capable of
accommodating a very wide range of magnitudes, M(ω), without loss of resolution
2. Due to logarithmic scale and special units, decades, Bode plot is capable of accommodating
a very wide range of frequencies without loss of resolution
3. Due to logarithmic scale for magnitudes, Bode plot allows to replace multiplication and
division of magnitudes by addition and subtraction, that can be easily performed graphically.
This is a very important feature: a loop transfer function is indeed defined as a product of
transfer functions.
4. Logarithmic scale for magnitudes and frequencies allows for quite accurate linearization of
complex functions of frequency and representation by straight lines - asymptotes. These

93
 asymptotes, representing magnitudes and phases of particular system components could be
easily sketched and graphically added to obtain a very accurate approximation of an open-
loop frequency response of a complex system.
While many generations of control engineers utilized hand-sketched Bode plots of control
systems and their components, proliferation of computer-based tools makes hand-sketched plots
quite outdated. Indeed, it does not make sense to draw an asymptotic approximation of an open-loop
frequency response when one can easily obtain the “exact” one using a software tool! We suggest
that the word “asymptotic” in the definition of a Bode plot should be dropped, but overall, this
technique is useful and must be kept in our professional toolbox.

BODE PLOT OF A FIRST ORDER SYSTEM

Recall transfer function of a first order system, G( s) = k ( s + a ) . This transfer function can be
normalized as:
k a
G ( s) =
1+ s a

and replacing s by jω and assuming for simplicity that a = k, one will obtain:
1
G ( jω ) =
1 + jω a
The associated absolute value and phase can be expressed as:
1 ω
G ( jω ) = and ϕ (ω ) = − tan − 1  
1 + (ω a )
2  a

Expressing the magnitude in db results in:

1
A(ω ) = 20 log
1 + (ω a )
2

= −20 log 1 + (ω a )
2

[
= −10 log 1 + (ω a )
2
]
[
Although function A(ω ) = −10 log 1 + (ω a )
2
] is quite nonlinear, it can be significantly

simplified providing that:

1. ω < a, this implies that (ω a ) < 1 and (ω a ) << 1 , therefore after taking into consideration
2

special properties of the function log(⋅), one can conclude that for ω < a:

94
 A(ω ) ≈ −10 log[1] = 0 dB

2. ω > a, which implies that (ω a ) > 1 and (ω a ) >> 1 , therefore after taking into
2

consideration special properties of the function log(⋅), one can conclude that for ω > a:

A(ω ) ≈ −10 log(ω a ) = −20 log[ω ] + 20 log[a ] dB

2

Due to logarithmic scales, the above expression represents a ramp function. Recall that the
slope of a ramp function is defined as the "increment of the function over the increment of the
argument". In order to utilize this definition, the argument, i.e. frequency, can be increased by one
decade, from some value ω to 10ω. It can be seen that the incremented value of the function,
A(10ω ) ≈ −20 log[10ω ] + 20 log[a ] = −20 log[10] − 20 log[ω ] + 20 log[a ] = A(ω ) − 20 dB. Therefore,

the slope of the ramp is −20 db per decade.

While sketching a phase plot, the following three features are to be remembered:
- at ω ≈ 0 phase ϕ (ω ) ≈ 0°
- at ω = a phase ϕ (ω ) = −45°
- as ω → ∞ phase ϕ (ω ) → −90°
As an illustration, magnitude and phase of the Bode plot of a first order system is shown
in Fig. 3.4

Figure 3.4

95
 BODE PLOT OF A SECOND ORDER SYSTEM

Transfer function of a second order system is G( s) = kω n2 s 2 + 2ζω n s + ω n2 , or after ( )

normalization and assuming for simplicity that k = 1:
1
G ( s) =
s s2
1 + 2ζ +
ωn ω n2
Replacing s by jω yields:
1
G ( jω ) =
ω 2
ω
1− + 2 jζ
ωn2
ωn
The associated absolute value and phase can be expressed as:
1
G ( jω ) =
2 2
 ω2  ω
1 − 2  +  2ζ 
 ωn   ωn 

 ω   ω2 
ϕ (ω ) = − tan − 1  2ζ 1−
ω n   ω n2  
and

Expressing the magnitude in db results in: A(ω ) = 20 log G( jω )

1
= 20 log
2 2
 ω2   ω
1 − 2  +  2ζ 
 ωn   ωn 

 ω 2  2  ω 
2

= −10 log 1 − 2  +  2ζ  

 ω n   ωn  


[(
Although function A(ω ) = −10 log 1 − ω 2 ω n2 ) + (2ζω ω ) ] is quite nonlinear, it could be
2
n
2

observed that if

1. ω < ωn, therefore ω ω n < 1 , ω 2 ω n2 << 1 , and ( 2ζ ω ω n ) << 1 , and after taking into
2

consideration special properties of the function log(⋅), one can conclude that for low
frequencies ω < ωn:
A(ω ) ≈ −10 log[1] = 0 dB

96
 2. ω > ωn, which implies that ω ω n > 1 and the entire expression A(ω) is dominated by the 4-

th order term ω 4 ω n4 , therefore:

[ ]
A(ω ) = −10 log ω 4 ω n4 = −40 log[ω ω n ] = −40 log[ω ] + 40 log[ω n ]

which, due to logarithmic scales of Bode plots, constitutes a ramp function. Analysis, similar to the
one conducted previously indicates that the slope of this ramp function is −40 db/dec.
Speaking of the phase of the frequency response of this system, it is useful to memorize that:
− at ω ≈ 0 phase ϕ (ω ) ≈ 0°
− at ω = ωn phase ϕ (ω ) = −90°
− as ω → ∞ phase ϕ (ω ) → −180°

Fig. 3.5 presents magnitude and phase of a Bode plot of a second order system:
10
G ( s) = 2
s + 2 s + 10

Figure 3.5

Note that at ω = ωn Bode plot of a second order system exhibits a resonant peak. The peak
magnitude is dependent on the system damping ratio, Fig. 3.6 presents magnitude Bode plots of
several second order systems with damping ratios of 0.001, 0.01, 0.1, 0.3 and 0.7 and natural
frequencies of 0.1 , 1, 10, 100, and 1000 (rad/sec), correspondingly.

97
 Figure 3.6

BODE PLOT OF AN INTEGRATOR

The transfer function of an integrator, G( s) = k s , can be easily replaced by its frequency

response, G( jω ) = k jω , with the absolute value G( jω ) = k ω and phase ϕ(ω) = const = −90°.

The magnitude of the Bode plot of an integrator, assuming that k = 1, is a ramp function
A(ω ) = 20 log G( jω ) = −20 log[ω ] . It could be seen that the slope of this ramp function is −20

db/decade, and it intersects the frequency axis at ω = 1 rad/sec, i.e., A(1) = −20log[1] = 0 db.
This result is based on the assumption that k = 1, otherwise, the entire magnitude plot would be
shifted up or down by 20log[k] db. As an illustration, magnitude and phase of the Bode plot of the
integrator, G( s) = 1 s , are shown in Fig. 3.7 below.

BODE PLOT OF A DIFFERENTIATOR

The transfer function of a differentiator, G(s) = ks, can be easily replaced by its frequency
response, G(jω) = jkω, with the absolute value G(jω) = kω and phase ϕ (ω) = const = +90°. The
magnitude of the Bode plot of a differentiator, assuming that k = 1, is a ramp function
A(ω ) = 20 log G( jω ) = −20 log[ω ] . It could be seen that the slope of this ramp function is 20

98
 Figure 3.7
db/decade, and it intersects the frequency axis at ω = 1 rad/sec, i.e., A(1) = 20log[1] = 0 db, see Fig.
3.8.

Figure 3.8

99
 BODE PLOT OF A DELAY

The transfer function of a delay is G( s) = e − sτ and its frequency response is G( jω ) = 1∠ϕ (ω ) ,

where phase ϕ (ω ) = −ωτ in radians or ϕ (ω ) = −180ωτ π in degrees. It could be seen that

magnitude of the Bode plot of a delay coincides with the horizontal axis. Phase, which is
proportional to frequency, due to logarithmic scale of the frequency axis has a specific nonlinear
shape. As an illustration, phase of the Bode plot of the delay G( s) = e − 0.04 s is shown in the Fig. 3.9
below.

Figure 3.9

BODE PLOT OF A COMPLEX SYSTEM

The main application of the “old-fashioned” Bode technique was the development of a
composite approximated magnitude and phase plots of the open-loop system using approximated
magnitude and phase plots of its components. Nowadays, this result could be easily achieved by the
use of a computer tool, moreover, a computer tool would result in the “true” frequency response, not

100
an approximation. However, Bode plots are still present a useful approach for analyzing dynamics
of a system defined by frequency responses of its components. The specific features of a Bode plot
are magnitudes, represented in db and the logarithmic frequency axis. Frequency response
characteristics of control system components, obtained by laboratory testing, are often plotted using
logarithmic scales and called Bode plots.
Example 3.4
Define magnitude and phase of the steady-state response of a unity feedback control system to
the input signal x (t ) = 15 sin(14
. t ) . Open-loop frequency response of this system is given in the table
below.
Solution: First, realize that the closed-loop transfer function of a unity feedback system is

[ ]
defined as GCL ( s) = G L ( s) 1 + GL ( s) . Therefore, the closed-loop system frequency response at ω =

1.4 rad/sec is:

GCL ( j14
. ) = GL ( j14 [
. ) 1 + G L ( j14
. ) ]
. ) = [131
GCL ( j14 . °] [1 + 9.78 − j8.66]
. ∠ − 415

. ) = [131
GCL ( j14 . °] [10.78 − j8.66]
. ∠ − 415

. ) = [131
GCL ( j14 . °] [1338
. ∠ − 415 . ∠ − 38.8°]

GCL ( j14
. ) = 0.95∠ − 2.7°

Then the steady-state response is y SS (t ) = 15 ⋅ 0.95 sin(14

. t − 2.7°) = 14.25 sin(14
. t − 2.7°) .

FREQ. MAGN. PHASE

# REAL PART IMAG. PART ABS. VALUE
(RAD/SEC) (dB) (DEG)
1 0.100E-09 0.112E+02 -0.291E-09 0.112E+02 21.0 0.0
2 0.200E+00 0.113E+02 -0.889E+00 0.113E+02 21.0 -4.5
3 0.400E+00 0.113E+02 -0.182E+01 0.114E+02 21.0 -9.2
4 0.600E+00 0.113E+02 -0.285E+01 0.116E+02 21.0 -14.2
5 0.800E+00 0.113E+02 -0.403E+01 0.119E+02 22.0 -19.7
6 0.100E+01 0.111E+02 -0.538E+01 0.123E+02 22.0 -25.9
7 0.120E+01 0.106E+02 -0.695E+01 0.127E+02 22.0 -33.1
8 0.140E+01 0.978E+01 -0.866E+01 0.131E+02 22.0 -41.5
9 0.160E+01 0.830E+01 -0.103E+02 0.133E+02 22.0 -51.2
10 0.180E+01 0.614E+01 -0.116E+02 0.131E+02 22.0 -62.1

Example 3.5
The forward path of a control system consists of two dynamic blocks, specified by Bode plots,
shown in Fig. 3.10, and a constant gain element, K = 3570. The feedback module has transfer
function H ( s) = 330 ( s + 50) . Determine steady-state system response to the input signal

101
x (t ) = 10 sin(30t ) .
Solution: Note that we are interested in a steady-state response of the closed-loop system at the
particular frequency of the input signal: 30 rad/sec. This frequency response can be compiled from
the Bode plots of the components of the forward path, G1( j30) and G2( j30) and the frequency
response of the feedback, H( j30):
KG1 ( j30)G2 ( j30)
GCL ( j30) =
1 + KG1 ( j30)G2 ( j30) H ( j 30)

First, define the transfer function of the forward path, G FP ( j 30) = G1 ( j 30)G2 ( j30) . From the graph,

A1(30) + A2(30) = −85.81 db, and ϕ1(30) + ϕ2(30) = −341°, or converting the magnitude into abs.
units:
85.81
−
G FP ( j 30) = 3570 ⋅ 10 20
= 0183
.

330
Now define H ( j 30) = = 5.66∠ − tan − 1 (30 50) = 5.66∠ − 31° .
50 + j 30

The open-loop frequency response is KG1 ( j30)G2 ( j30) H ( j30) = (0183

. ∠ − 341°) ⋅ (5.66∠ − 31°) =
. ∠ − 372° = 104
104 . ∠ − 12° . Finally, the required closed-loop system frequency response is,

102
 . ∠ − 341° 0183
0183 . ∠ − 341° 0183 . ∠ − 341°
GCL ( j30) = = = = 0.09∠ − 335° = 0.09∠25° .
1 + 104
. ∠ − 12° 2.02 − 0.22 j 2.03∠ − 6°

Therefore, the steady-state system response is y SS (t ) = 0.9 sin(30t + 25°) .

ROOT LOCUS TECHNIQUES

Closed-loop system poles play a very important role in system behavior. Let us consider again
some aspects of pole computation. Poles can be found by solving the equation formed on the basis
of denominator of a closed-loop transfer function of a control system: 1 + GL(s) = 0. This equation
can be rewritten for the situation when GL(s) is defined through open-loop poles, zeros and constant
gain:
k ( s − z1 )( s − z 2 )( s − z 3 ) L( s − z m )
G L ( s) =
( s − p1 )( s − p2 )( s − p3 ) L( s − pn )
As it was mentioned above, open-loop poles and zeros, zi & pi, and the constant gain, k, representing
system hardware, are readily available from hardware manufacturers. Then system poles (i.e.
closed-loop poles) can be defined from the equation:
k ( s − z1 )( s − z 2 )( s − z 3 ) L( s − z m )
1+ =0
( s − p1 )( s − p2 )( s − p3 ) L( s − pn )
or ( s − p1 )( s − p2 )( s − p3 ) L( s − pn ) + k ( s − z1 )( s − z 2 )( s − z3 ) L( s − z m ) = 0 (3.10)
The following observations can be made:
1) Equation (3.10) results in a n-th order polynomial equation (n > m) known as the system
characteristic equation:
s n + a n − 1 s n − 1 + a n − 2 s n − 2 + a n − 3 s n − 3 + K + a1 s + a 0 = 0
2) Open-loop poles, zeros and constant gain provide all information required for the definition
of closed-loop system poles
3) Parameters of the equation (3.10), providing closed-loop poles, depend on every open-loop
pole, open-loop zero and constant gain
4) Numerical values of the closed-loop poles could be manipulated by varying constant gain, k,
and open-loop poles and zeros.
While closed-loop poles are responsible for various aspects of system behavior, a typical control
system has a specially designated component, the controller, that has adjustable parameters. These
parameters, typically the constant gain, are to be adjusted such that system behavior will be
appropriately modified. This modification, of course, is being achieved by the modification of the

103
 Specification of the open- loop system poles

Specification of the open- loop system zeros

Specification of the variation range,

[0 to KM AX], and step size ∆k o f the constant
gain of the system

Selection of the particular value of the gain

k = i × ∆k

Computation of the coefficients ai of the

polynomial
s +an-1 s +an-2 sn-2 +an-3 sn-3 +…+a1 s+a0 =
n n-1

(s-p1 )…(s-pn )+k (s-z1 )…(s-zm )

Solution of the characteristic equation

sn +an-1 sn-1 +an-2 sn-2 +an-3 s n-3 +…+a1 s+a0 =0

Representation of the closed-loop poles

PCL1 , PCL 2 , PCL3 , …, PCLn
in the co mplex plain

Checking if k>KMAX

NO YES

i = i +1 Termination

Figure 3.11- Flow-chart of a root-locus procedure

closed-loop system poles. While it is quite difficult to establish an analytical relationship between
the closed-loop system poles and the adjustable parameter of the system, such a relationship can be
established in a numerical form through the root-locus procedure represented by the flow-chart of
Fig. 3.11.
It should be understood that root-locus procedure is an ideal tool for finding system closed-loop
poles: it requires minimum preliminary work and minimum data to be entered in a computer. It also

104
presents a technique for the investigation of the impact of perturbation of system parameters,
typically constant gain, on the system's behavior.
Example 3.6
Given transfer function of the forward path and the feedback of a control system:
0.5( s + 1)( s + 7)( s + 11) k(s + a)
G ( s) = and H ( s) =
(
s( s + 4) s + 6s + 25
2
) ( s + 0.5)( s + 20)
a) obtain closed-loop system poles when k = 2 and a = 50
b) investigate the variation of the closed-loop system poles as parameter k varies from 4 to 10,
while a = 50
c) investigate the variation of the closed-loop system poles as parameter a varies from 50 to 15,
while k = 1
Solution:
a) The solution can be obtained by running a root-locus procedure. Although parameter variation is
not expected, the procedure can be executed with respect to the constant gain. Note that the
constant gain in this system K = 0.5k and the procedure cannot differentiate between the “fixed
part” and the “varying part” of the constant gain. Therefore, the procedure must be executed for
the gain value varying from 0.0 to 2.0 with the step of 1.0 and, therefore, constant gain value of 2
corresponds to k = 1.0. The computer printout is shown below.

ROOT LOCUS ANALYSIS

===================
ORDER OF THE SYSTEM: 6
VARIABLE PARAMETER: CONSTANT GAIN
VARIATION RANGE: FROM 0.000000E+00 TO 0.200000E+01, STEP:0.100000E+01

FIXED OPEN-LOOP POLES (REAL, IMAGINARY):

( -4.00000000, 0.00000000E-01)
( -3.00000000, -4.00000000)
( -3.00000000, 4.00000000)
( 0.00000000E-01, 0.00000000E-01)
( -0.50000000, 0.00000000E-01)
( -20.00000000, 0.00000000E-01)

FIXED OPEN-LOOP ZEROS:

( -1.00000000, 0.00000000E-01)
( -7.00000000, 0.00000000E-01)
( -11.00000000, 0.00000000E-01)
( -50.00000000, 0.00000000E-01)

=================================================================
GAIN VALUE : 0.000000E+00 POLES ARE:
-.400000E+01 0.000000E+00 -.300000E+01 -.400000E+01
-.300000E+01 0.400000E+01 0.000000E+00 0.000000E+00
-.500000E+00 0.000000E+00 -.200000E+02 0.000000E+00
=================================================================
GAIN VALUE : 0.100000E+01 POLES ARE:

105
 -.149864E+01 0.000000E+00 -.270466E+01 -.192777E+01
-.270466E+01 0.192777E+01 -.177854E+01 -.290857E+01
-.177854E+01 0.290857E+01 -.200350E+02 0.000000E+00
=================================================================
GAIN VALUE : 0.200000E+01 POLES ARE:
-.113383E+01 0.000000E+00 -.410588E+01 -.213848E+01
-.410588E+01 0.213848E+01 -.542330E+00 0.393630E+01
-.542330E+00 -.393630E+01 -.200697E+02 0.000000E+00

According to the printout, at k = 2 (or the “overall” gain K = 0.5k = 1.0) closed-loop system
poles are: −1.5
−2.70 ± 1.93j
−1.78 ± 2.91j
-20
b) Since constant gain of the system is equal to 0.5k, it is required that the “overall gain” be varied
from 2 to 5. The variation step, ∆, is not specified by the problem and is selected to be 0.5. The
computer printout is shown below.

ROOT LOCUS ANALYSIS

===================
ORDER OF THE SYSTEM: 6
VARIABLE PARAMETER: CONSTANT GAIN
VARIATION RANGE: FROM 0.200000E+01 TO 0.500000E+01, STEP:0.500000E+00

FIXED OPEN-LOOP POLES:

( -4.00000000, 0.00000000E-01)
( 0.00000000E-01, 0.00000000E-01)
( -3.00000000, 4.00000000)
( -3.00000000, -4.00000000)
( -0.50000000, 0.00000000E-01)
( -20.00000000, 0.00000000E-01)

FIXED OPEN-LOOP ZEROS:

( -1.00000000, 0.00000000E-01)
( -7.00000000, 0.00000000E-01)
( -11.00000000, 0.00000000E-01)
( -50.00000000, 0.00000000E-01)

=================================================================
GAIN VALUE : 0.200000E+01 POLES ARE:
-.113383E+01 0.000000E+00 -.410588E+01 -.213848E+01
-.410588E+01 0.213848E+01 -.542330E+00 0.393630E+01
-.542330E+00 -.393630E+01 -.200697E+02 0.000000E+00
=================================================================
GAIN VALUE : 0.250000E+01 POLES ARE:
-.109914E+01 0.000000E+00 -.437247E+01 -.217022E+01
-.437247E+01 0.217022E+01 -.200871E+02 0.000000E+00
-.284415E+00 -.426779E+01 -.284415E+00 0.426779E+01
=================================================================
GAIN VALUE : 0.300000E+01 POLES ARE:
-.107882E+01 0.000000E+00 -.457508E+01 -.219054E+01
-.457508E+01 0.219054E+01 -.201044E+02 0.000000E+00
-.833175E-01 -.454860E+01 -.833175E-01 0.454860E+01
=================================================================
GAIN VALUE : 0.350000E+01 POLES ARE:
-.106545E+01 0.000000E+00 -.473975E+01 -.220387E+01

106
 -.473975E+01 0.220387E+01 -.201216E+02 0.000000E+00
0.832891E-01 -.479559E+01 0.832891E-01 0.479559E+01
=================================================================
GAIN VALUE : 0.400000E+01 POLES ARE:
-.105597E+01 0.000000E+00 -.487907E+01 -.221252E+01
-.487907E+01 0.221252E+01 -.201388E+02 0.000000E+00
0.226473E+00 -.501800E+01 0.226473E+00 0.501800E+01
=================================================================
GAIN VALUE : 0.450000E+01 POLES ARE:
-.104889E+01 0.000000E+00 -.500015E+01 -.221783E+01
-.500015E+01 0.221783E+01 -.201560E+02 0.000000E+00
0.352599E+00 -.522154E+01 0.352599E+00 0.522154E+01
=================================================================
GAIN VALUE : 0.500000E+01 POLES ARE:
-.104341E+01 0.000000E+00 -.510742E+01 -.222066E+01
-.510742E+01 0.222066E+01 -.201731E+02 0.000000E+00
0.465687E+00 -.541002E+01 0.465687E+00 0.541002E+01

Analysis of the printout indicates that as the “overall” constant gain K exceeds 3.5 (i.e., k
exceeds 7.0) two closed-loop system poles "move in" the right hand side of the complex plane.
Such a finding can be important for system analysis and design.
c) It is important to realize that parameter a represents the open-loop system zero, which is equal to
−a, and therefore, variation of this parameter from 50 to 15 should be viewed as the variation of
the appropriate open-loop zero from −50 to −15. Since the constant gain of the system is 0.5k, k
= 1 implies that the “overall” constant gain is 0.5. The step size of the variable parameter is
selected to be 5. The computer printout is shown below.

ROOT LOCUS ANALYSIS

===================
ORDER OF THE SYSTEM: 6
VARIABLE PARAMETER: OPEN-LOOP ZERO
VARIATION RANGE: FROM -.500000E+02 TO -.150000E+02, STEP:0.500000E+01

FIXED OPEN-LOOP POLES:

( -4.00000000, 0.00000000E-01)
( 0.00000000E-01, 0.00000000E-01)
( -3.00000000, 4.00000000)
( -3.00000000, -4.00000000)
( -0.50000000, 0.00000000E-01)
( -20.00000000, 0.00000000E-01)

FIXED OPEN-LOOP ZEROS:

( -1.00000000, 0.00000000E-01)
( -7.00000000, 0.00000000E-01)
( -11.00000000, 0.00000000E-01)

CONSTANT GAIN VALUE: 0.500000E+00

=================================================================
OPEN-LOOP ZERO: -.500000E+02 POLES ARE:
-.343413E+01 0.000000E+00 -.800830E+00 -.856576E+00
-.800830E+00 0.856576E+00 -.272336E+01 -.359806E+01
-.272336E+01 0.359806E+01 -.200175E+02 0.000000E+00
=================================================================
OPEN-LOOP ZERO: -.450000E+02 POLES ARE:
-.725098E+00 0.804394E+00 -.725098E+00 -.804394E+00

107
 -.352392E+01 0.000000E+00 -.275565E+01 -.365351E+01
-.275565E+01 0.365351E+01 -.200146E+02 0.000000E+00
=================================================================
OPEN-LOOP ZERO: -.400000E+02 POLES ARE:
-.656577E+00 0.749986E+00 -.656577E+00 -.749986E+00
-.360322E+01 0.000000E+00 -.278598E+01 -.370544E+01
-.278598E+01 0.370544E+01 -.200117E+02 0.000000E+00
=================================================================

OPEN-LOOP ZERO: -.350000E+02 POLES ARE:

-.593853E+00 0.692579E+00 -.593853E+00 -.692579E+00
-.367425E+01 0.000000E+00 -.281465E+01 -.375438E+01
-.281465E+01 0.375438E+01 -.200088E+02 0.000000E+00
=================================================================
OPEN-LOOP ZERO: -.300000E+02 POLES ARE:
-.535916E+00 -.631131E+00 -.535916E+00 0.631131E+00
-.373853E+01 0.000000E+00 -.284190E+01 -.380070E+01
-.284190E+01 0.380070E+01 -.200058E+02 0.000000E+00
=================================================================
OPEN-LOOP ZERO: -.250000E+02 POLES ARE:
-.481986E+00 -.564204E+00 -.481986E+00 0.564204E+00
-.379726E+01 0.000000E+00 -.286792E+01 -.384473E+01
-.286792E+01 0.384473E+01 -.200029E+02 0.000000E+00
=================================================================
OPEN-LOOP ZERO: -.200000E+02 POLES ARE:
-.431477E+00 -.489411E+00 -.431477E+00 0.489411E+00
-.385131E+01 0.000000E+00 -.289287E+01 -.388672E+01
-.289287E+01 0.388672E+01 -.200000E+02 0.000000E+00
=================================================================
OPEN-LOOP ZERO: -.150000E+02 POLES ARE:
-.383919E+00 -.402272E+00 -.383919E+00 0.402272E+00
-.390137E+01 0.000000E+00 -.291686E+01 -.392690E+01
-.291686E+01 0.392690E+01 -.199971E+02 0.000000E+00

Recall that any pole, real or complex, is represented by a particular location in the complex
plane. Variation of system poles defined through the use of a root-locus procedure is often
represented by special plots in complex plane. Fig. 3.12 illustrates "the motion" of closed-loop poles
of a third order system in the complex plane as the system gain changes from the value of k1 to k2 to
k3.
When the increment of the varying system parameter is small enough, these points form a
specific pattern known as root loci. Fig. 3.13 provides an example of root loci, obtained for a
s 2 + 4s + 64
particular open-loop transfer function, GL ( s) = , as constant gain, k, varies
( )
s( s + 5)( s + 8) s 2 + s + 1

form k = 0 to k = ∞.
Note that symbol × corresponds to the open-loop poles and symbol Ο represents open-loop zeros
of the system. It could be seen from Equation 3.10 that when the gain value is zero, open-loop poles
are equal to the closed-loop poles, therefore symbols × also represent closed-loop poles for the gain
of zero. Symbols represent closed-loop poles for the gain of 25. Symbols ● represent closed-loop
poles for the gain of 100 (note that the fifth pole just happened to be outside the chosen window in

108
 Imaginary

P2

P2
P2

Real
P1 P1 P1

k = k1
P3

P3
k = k2
P3

k = k3

Figure 3.12
the complex plane).
A fairly accurate approximation of root loci could be obtained without computers. This

Figure 3.13

109
technique utilizes the special relationship between open-loop poles, open-loop zeros, constant gain,
and closed-loop poles of a control system. Since computer-based root locus procedure is widely
available to control engineers, we believe that this procedure could be omitted in our course.
However, is quite important to be able to predict what happens with the closed-loop poles as the gain
approaches infinity.
It is clear from Equation 3.10 that as k = 0 this equation turns into:
( s − p1 )( s − p2 )( s − p3 ) L( s − pn ) + 0 ⋅ ( s − z1 )( s − z 2 )( s − z3 ) L( s − z m ) = 0
or just ( s − p1 )( s − p2 )( s − p3 ) L( s − pn ) = 0
therefore, it is said that root loci are originated in the open-loop poles. As k → ∞, Equation 3.1
becomes “dominated” by the k ⋅ ( s − z1 )( s − z 2 )( s − z 3 ) L( s − z m ) term and could be redefined as

( s − z1 )( s − z 2 )( s − z3 ) L( s − z m ) = 0 . Then it could be said that as k → ∞ closed-loop poles are

approaching open-loop zeros. But the number of zeros, m, is typically less than the number of poles,
n. What is happening to n − m closed-loop poles? The answer could be found by introducing some
fictitious zeros in the system as shown below:
 s  s   s 
( s − z1 )( s − z 2 )( s − z3 ) L( s − z m ) *
+ 1  * + 1 L * + 1 = 0
 − z m + 1   − z m+ 2   − z n 

where z i* are fictitious open−loop zeros, such that z i* → ∞ , i = m + 1, m + 2, …, n.

Now it could be concluded that as k → ∞ m out of n closed-loop poles are approaching open-
loop zeros, and the rest n − m poles are approaching infinity.
As far as it is known that some closed-loop poles approach open-loop zeros, their "future is very
predictable". Let us concentrate on the investigation of those closed-loop poles that approach
infinity. This is done by establishing asymptotes, approximating root loci of these poles as constant
gain becomes sufficiently large. The following steps are to be made:
1. Compute the real quantity:
n m

∑ pi − ∑ z i
Q= i= 1 i= 1
n−m
where pi and zi are open-loop poles and zeros. (Point Q on the real axis is sometimes referred to as
"the center of gravity" of the root locus.)
2. Compute angles:

110
 Figure 3.14

2L + 1
Φ L = −180°
n−m
where L = 0, 1, 2, …, n − m − 1.
It could be seen that the total number of angles ΦL is equal to the number of poles that approach
infinity. Straight lines in the complex plane, originated at point Q and forming angles ΦL with the
axis, are the asymptotes of the root loci, for those closed-loop poles that approach infinity.
Example 3.7
Consider the open-loop system transfer function of a system:
s 2 + 2s + 10
G L ( s) =
( )( )
s 2 + 6s + 45 s 2 + 4s + 68 ( s + 6)( s + 10)

Its open-loop poles and zeros are: −3 ± 6j, −2 ± 8j, −6, −10, and −1 ± 3j. Define Q =
− 22 (6 − 2) = −5.5 .

Define Φ1 = − 180° 4 = −45° , Φ 2 = − 180°⋅3 4 = −135° , Φ 3 = − 180°⋅5 4 = −225° , Φ 4 =

− 180°⋅7 4 = −315° .
One can realize that the root loci are originated at to locations of open-loop poles, −3 ± 6j, −2 ±

111
8j, −6, −10. As k → ∞, two closed-loop system poles approach two open-loop zeros, −1 ± 3j, and
the rest four closed-loop poles asymptotically converge to straight lines originated at the point –5.5
on the real axis and constituting with the real axis angles of −45°, −135°, −225°, and −315° = +45°.
This is very consistent with the root locus shown in Fig. 3.14.

112
 ASSIGNMENTS (HOMEWORK #5)

5.1. Use computer simulation to investigate properties of a second order system.

a) Vary damping ratio (ζ = 0.1, 0.3, 0.4, 0.5, 0.6, 0.8), simulate step response, measure the
overshoot, and compare the obtained values with the ones corresponding to the values of
damping ratio.
b) Select ζ = 0.2, simulate step response, estimate period of the oscillatory component of the step
response, and compare the result with the theoretical value.
c) Select ζ = 0.6, apply sinusoidal signal with the period approximately equal to the 1/3 of the
settling time, obtain steady-state response, measure its magnitude and phase. Compare the
results with the theoretical values.
5.2. The following block diagram features a position control system.

0.2

R -
H(s) P(s) G(s) .15 W(s) 1/s Q(s)
Y
- -
Z

.15

Figure 3.15

Transfer functions of particular system components are:

10( s + 10)
H ( s) =
s + 100
2.5
P( s) =
s + 10
3600
G ( s) =
s+3
1
W ( s) =
s +1
Q(s) is a 2-nd order system, k = 1.0, ωn = 6 rad/sec, ζ = 0.6
a) Obtain simulation model of the system.

113
 b) Simulate system response, y(t), to the reference signal r(t) = u(t), evaluate the settling time,
overshoot and steady-state values.
c) Simulate system response y(t) to the disturbance signal z(t) = u(t), evaluate the settling time
and steady-state values.
d) Verify steady-state values of b) and c) analytically, i.e., by obtaining the appropriate transfer
functions and applying the Final Value theorem.
e) Simulate system response to disturbance signal z(t) = sin(6t). Evaluate magnitude and phase
of the deviations of variable Y(t) caused by disturbance (in steady-state).
Verify this result analytically using system frequency response.
5.3. Given transfer functions of the forward path and the feedback of a control system:

GFP ( s) =
(
500 s 2 + 20s + 200 ( s + 2))
( s + 01. )( s 2
+ 160s + 1000 )
1
GFB ( s) =
s( s + 500)

a) Obtain magnitude and phase of the Bode plot of this system.

b) Obtain closed-loop system frequency response at ω=3 rad/sec.
5.4. Given transfer functions of the forward path and the feedback of a control system:
100( s + 10)
GFP ( s) =
(
s( s + 1)( s + 50) s 2 + 6s + 900 )
k
GFB ( s) =
s + 500
a) Obtain loop transfer function of this system, list open-loop poles and zeros.
b) Obtain closed-loop system transfer function, assuming that k = 0, 0.1, k = 5, k = 10. List
closed-loop system poles and zeros for each case. (Save time, use software tools!)
c) Sketch root loci of this system i.e., define the asymptotes of the closed-loop poles.
d) Run root locus for this system using a software tool. Obtain closed-loop poles at k = 2,
10,100, and 1000

114
 CHAPTER 4

ANALYSIS OF CONTROL SYSTEMS

Properties of control systems are not self-explanatory. When a system is described by a set of
high order differential equations, evaluation of its properties constitutes a formidable task. This task
can be carried out experimentally, as well as analytically. The first approach can be immediately
rejected as too expensive and potentially resulting in the destruction of the system. The second one,
utilizing indirect analytical and numerical techniques, which do not require the solution of system's
differential equations, will be considered below.

STABILITY ANALYSIS

The system's response to an external forcing function consists of two components, known as
"natural motion" and "forced motion". It is expected that any dynamic system, being affected by an
external force, will eventually engage in a steady-state process, which can be viewed as a state of
equilibrium. For example, an automobile after a period of acceleration reaches such a speed when
friction forces become equal to the thrust of the engine, and maintains this state of equilibrium until
the engine regime or friction forces (road conditions) change, and a new state of equilibrium be
reached. It is understood that the state of equilibrium is reached only after the settling of the natural
motion terms of the system response.
Although it is not common in nature, there are some dynamic systems that are not capable of
reaching a state of equilibrium. Once disturbed, they engage in an irreversible process completely
consuming all available energy and leading to its full exhaustion. Comparing two oxidation
processes, burning and detonation, leads to the conclusion that in the case of burning, a state of
equilibrium between the supply and consumption of oxygen is being reached. In the case of
detonation, such equilibrium does not exist: burning results in ever increasing release of oxygen,
which accelerates the oxidation and results in generation of more oxygen (with commonly known
consequences).
The ability of a physical system to reach and maintain a state of equilibrium is known as
stability. While most natural systems are stable, many man-made systems and especially systems
with a feedback can be unstable. Instability is unacceptable for control systems. It is important to be
able to detect instability of a system analytically, before this instability will manifest itself
physically.

115
 Stability and system poles. It can be seen that any stable system obeys the "bounded input -
bounded output" (BIBO) principle, which implies that a bounded forcing function applied to a stable
system cannot result in unlimited magnitudes of the output variables. On the contrary, the
magnitude of the response of an unstable system can approach infinity regardless of the magnitude
of the input signal. The BIBO principle allows for an easy definition of the following stability
analysis rule.
Assume that a bounded signal x(t) is applied to a dynamic system with transfer function G(s).
Let us represent the input signal by its Laplace transform written in the form:
X n ( s) X n ( s)
X ( s) = = (4.1)
X d ( s) ( s − ρ1 )( s − ρ2 ) L( s − ρn )

where X n ( s) is the polynomial numerator of X(s), X d ( s) is the polynomial denominator of X(s), and

ρi, i = 1, 2, .., n are roots of the equation X d ( s) = 0 .

Transfer function G(s) also can be represented as a ratio of two polynomials, and its
denominator can be defined through system poles pi, i = 1, 2, …, N, as follows:
G n ( s) G n ( s)
G ( s) = =
Gd ( s) ( s − p1 )( s − p2 ) L( s − p N )

For simplicity, let us assume that all ρi, i = 1, 2, …, n, and all pi, i = 1, 2, ..., N, are distinct.
Representing expression (4.1) as a sum of partial fractions yields:
A1 A2 An
X ( s) = + + L+
s − ρ1 s − ρ2 s − ρn
which can be converted into time domain as follows:
x (t ) = A1e ρ1t + A2 e ρ2t + L + An e ρn t

Now recall that roots ρi are generally complex, i.e., ρi = αi + jωi, then:
x (t ) = A1eα1t sin(ω1t ) + A2 eα2t sin(ω 2 t ) + L + An eαn t sin(ω n t )

Note that a function eαt sin ( βt ) is bounded if and only if α is a negative number. It was

assumed that signal x(t) is bounded, this implies that all αi, i = 1, 2, …, n, are negative.
Now let us define the system response, y(t), and its representation through the sum of partial
fractions:
X n ( s)Gn ( s) X n ( s )G n ( s )
Y ( s ) = X ( s )G ( s ) = =
X d ( s)Gd ( s) ( s − ρ1 )( s − ρ2 ) L( s − ρn )( s − p1 )( s − p2 ) L( s − p N )

116
 n N
Bk Ck
=∑ +∑
k=1
s − ρk k = 1 s − pk

and in the time domain

n N n N
y(t ) = ∑ Bk e ρk t
+ ∑ Ck e pk t
= ∑ Bk e αk t
sin(ω k t ) + ∑ Ck e ak t sin(bk t )
k =1 k=1 k=1 k =1

where ak and bk are real and imaginary parts of a system pole pk, k = 1, 2, …, N. It already has been
established that all αk are negative, and therefore regardless of coefficients Bk, the entire sum

∑ B eα
k
kt
sin(ω k t ) is bounded. Therefore, y(t) is bounded if the sum ∑C e k
ak t
sin(bk t ) is also

bounded which can be assured if and only if all real parts of system poles, ak, k = 1, 2, ..., N, are
negative. This conclusion results in the following system stability condition: a dynamic system is
stable if and only if all its poles have negative real parts.
What if the real part of one of the system poles is equal to zero? Since e 0 t = 1 , the appropriate
term of the sum:

∑C e k
ak t
sin(bk t )

is expected to be a "pure sinusoidal", which indicates that the system will become engaged in steady-
state oscillations, even if the input signal is aperiodic. Such a system can be viewed as a "system on
the border of stability".
Example 4.1
Given transfer functions of the forward path, G(s), and of the feedback, H(s), of a control
s+3 10( s + 10)
system, G( s) = 2
and H ( s) = 3 , determine if the system is stable.
s + 6s + 20 s + 11s 2 + 40s + 50
Note that if stability is the only concern, the system transfer function is not needed. One needs
only the denominator of the transfer function to define the characteristic equation:
1 + G ( s) H ( s) = 0

10( s + 10)( s + 3)
or 1+ =0
(s 2
)(
+ 6s + 20 s 3 + 11s 2 + 40s + 50 )
or (s 2
)(
+ 6s + 20 s 3 + 11s 2 + 40s + 50 + 10( s + 10)( s + 3) = 0 )
s 5 + 17s 4 + 126s 3 + 520s 2 + 1230s + 1300 = 0 .
The following is the computer printout featuring system poles:

117
 COEFFICIENTS OF A REAL POLYNOMIAL:
TERM ORDER COEFFICIENT
0 1300
1 1230
2 520
3 126
4 17
5 1
NORMAL PROGRAM EXECUTION; ROOTS ARE:
REAL PART IMAGINARY PART
-3.30708361 0.00000000
-4.75692511 -1.72535348
-4.75692511 1.72535348
-2.08953309 -3.31451988
-2.08953309 3.31451988

It can be clearly seen that all system poles have negative real parts and therefore the system is
stable.

STABILITY ANALYSIS USING ROOT LOCUS PROCEDURE

The root locus procedure can be viewed as a numerical tool for finding system poles when the
system is specified by open-loop poles, open-loop zeros and constant gain. However, a root locus
procedure allows for more than just computation of system poles: it facilitates the investigation of
the relationship between the system poles and varying system parameters. It presents a valuable
stability analysis instrument:
− it does not require one to derive the formidable characteristic polynomial of the closed-
loop system, it rather utilizes the system's open-loop poles, zeros and constant gain
− it relates system stability to particular intervals of values of its varying parameters, thus
defining allowable (i.e. "stable") regions for these parameters.
Example 4.2
Given transfer functions of the forward path, G(s), and of the feedback, H(s), of a control
s+3 k ( s + 10)
system, G( s) = 2
and H ( s) = 3 , determine if the system is stable if its
s + 6s + 20 s + 11s 2 + 40s + 50
constant gain, k = 10. Define allowable region of values for parameter k.
The first part of this problem is equivalent to the one of Example 1. But the major advantage of
using the root-locus software is that it is not required to obtain the characteristic equation of the
closed-loop system: the procedure extracts closed-loop poles from the open-loop poles and zeros and
the constant gain. The following figures present the computer-generated root locus of the system

118
 Figure 4.1

featuring values of system poles corresponding to many values of parameter "k", including k = 10.
It could be seen from Fig. 4.1 that at k = 10 all system poles have negative real parts and the

Figure 4.2

119
system is, therefore, stable.
To determine the allowable range of "k" values, this parameter is to be varied over a wide range
of values and the fact of appearance of system pole(s) with positive real part(s) should be detected.
Then the range of "k" values should be narrowed around this "trouble spot" until the "stability limit"
is accurately defined. It can be seen from Fig. 4.2 that this system is stable if its constant gain, k,
does not exceed 120 (if necessary, this value can be determined with a greater accuracy).

STABILITY ANALYSIS USING HURWITZ TECHNIQUE

Hurwitz, a German mathematician of the beginning of the 20th century, suggested a so-called
"algebraic" stability analysis approach. This approach detects the presence of system poles with
positive real parts without solving the characteristic equation. It will be shown that while most
stability analysis methods are purely numerical, the Hurwitz technique allows for the definition of
analytical stability conditions.
The Hurwitz technique implies the following steps:
1) the denominator of the system transfer function should be obtained in the form 1 + GOL(s), where
GOL(s) is the open loop transfer function of the system
2) the characteristic equation of the system, 1 + GOL(s) = 0, should be obtained in the polynomial
form a 0 s n + a1 s n − 1 + a 2 s n − 2 + L + a n − 1 s + a n = 0 , where n is the order of the system
3) make sure that coefficient a0 is positive
4) the Hurwitz table should be obtained according to the following rules:
a) the table has n rows and n columns
b) the first row of the table contains coefficients of s n−1 , s n− 3 , s n− 5 , ...; since the total number of
elements in each row is n, missing coefficients must be replaced by zeros
c) the second row of the table contains coefficients of s n , s n− 2 , s n− 4 , ...; since the total number
of elements in each row is n, missing coefficients must be replaced by zeros
d) the third row starts from zero, followed by the first row; since the total number of elements
in each row is n, the last element (zero) of the first row must be dropped
e) the fourth row starts from zero, followed by the second row; since the total number of
elements in each row is n, the last element (zero) of the second row must be dropped
f) the fifth row starts from two zeros, followed by the first row; since the total number of
elements in each row is n, the last two elements (zeros) of the first row must be dropped
g) this procedure should be continued until all required n rows are defined

120
 As an example, the following is a Hurwitz table obtained for the following characteristic
equation:
s 7 + 5s 6 + (a + b) s 5 + 10s 4 + 7s 3 + Ks 2 − 33s − 100 = 0

5 10 K − 100 0 0 0 
1 a + b 7 − 33 0 0 0 
 
0 5 10 K − 100 0 0 
 
0 1 a+b 7 − 33 0 0 
0 0 5 10 K − 100 0 
 
0 0 1 a+b 7 − 33 0 
0 0 0 5 10 K − 100


5) n Hurwitz determinants must be obtained as follows:

∆1 − for the 1x1 matrix containing the upper left element of the Hurwitz table
∆2 − for the 2x2 matrix containing 4 upper left elements of the Hurwitz table
∆3 − for the 3x3 matrix containing 9 upper left elements of the Hurwitz table
…
∆n − for the nxn matrix containing the entire Hurwitz table.

Definition: A system is stable if and only if all Hurwitz determinants are positive.
Therefore, the Hurwitz stability analysis procedure implies computation of a number of
determinants. When the system order exceeds 3, application of a computer is expected. It should be
clear that computation of determinants can be terminated as soon as a negative one is found: this is
enough to claim that the system is unstable. However, all n determinants are to be calculated in
order to prove that a system is stable.
Example 4.3
Given transfer function of the forward path, G(s), and the feedback, H(s), of a control system:
s+3 10( s + 10)
G ( s) = 2
and H ( s) = 3 , determine if the system is stable using
s + 6s + 20 s + 11s 2 + 40s + 50
Hurwitz technique.
The characteristic equation of the system, 1 + G(s)H(s) = 0, can be obtained as follows:
10( s + 10)( s + 3)
or 1+ =0
(s 2
)( )
+ 6s + 20 s 3 + 11s 2 + 40s + 50

or (s 2
)( )
+ 6s + 20 s 3 + 11s 2 + 40s + 50 + 10( s + 10)( s + 3) = 0

121
or s 5 + 17s 4 + 126s 3 + 520s 2 + 1230s + 1300 = 0 .
17 520 1300 0 0 
 1 126 1230 0 0 
 
Then the Hurwitz table is:  0 17 520 1300 0 
 
0 1 126 1230 0 
 0 0 17 520 1300

The determinants are: ∆1 = 17 > 0

17 520
∆ 2 = det   = 1622.0 > 0
 1 126 
17 520 1300
∆ 3 = det  1 126 1230 = 5.0 E5 > 0
 
 0 17 520 
17 520 1300 0 
 1 126 1230 0 
∆ 4 = det   = 364
. E8 > 0
 0 17 520 1300
 
0 0 126 1230

17 520 1300 0 0 

 1 126 1230 0 0 
 
∆ 5 = det  0 17 520 1300 0  = 5.043E12 > 0
 
0 1 126 1230 0 
 0 0 17 520 1300
This analysis clearly indicates that the system is stable.
Example 4.4
Given transfer function of the forward path, G(s), and the feedback, H(s), of a control system:
30 k
G ( s) = and, H ( s) = , determine the allowed range of "k" values to assure that the
2
s + 6s + 20 s+8
system is stable.
First, let us obtain the characteristic equation of this system:
1 + G ( s) H ( s) = 0

30k
or 1+ =0
( )
s + 6s + 20 ( s + 8)
2

or (s 2
)
+ 6s + 20 ( s + 8) + 30k = 0

122
or s 3 + 14 s 2 + 68 s + 160 + 30 k = 0
14 160 + 30 k 0 

The Hurwitz table is obtained as follows: 1 68 0 
 
 0 14 160 + 30 k 
The Hurwitz determinants are:
∆1 = 14
∆ 2 = 14 × 68 − 160 − 30 k = 792 − 30k

∆ 3 = 14 × 68(160 + 30k ) − (160 + 30 k ) = (792 − 30 k )(160 + 30 k )

2

To assure that the system is stable, let us require that all determinants be positive, which results
in the following conditions:
a) 792 − 30 k > 0 , i.e., k < 26.4
b) 792 − 30 k > 0 AND 160 + 30k > 0 , or
c) 792 − 30 k < 0 AND 160 + 30k < 0
Note that condition c) contradicts a) and must be discarded. From condition b) we have the stability
requirement: 5.33 < k < 26.4.
It would be interesting to verify this result by using the root locus technique. The computer
printout is shown below:
ROOT LOCUS ANALYSIS
====================
ORDER OF THE SYSTEM: 3
VARIABLE PARAMETER: CONSTANT GAIN
VARIATION RANGE: FROM 0.790000E+03 TO 0.795000E+03, STEP:0.100000E+00

FIXED OPEN-LOOP POLES:

( -3.00000000, 3.31999993)
( -3.00000000, -3.31999993)
( -8.00000000, 0.00000000E-01)

=================================================================
GAIN VALUE : 0.792000E+03 POLES ARE:
-.139995E+02 0.000000E+00 -.254536E-03 -.824714E+01
-.254536E-03 0.824714E+01
=================================================================
GAIN VALUE : 0.792100E+03 POLES ARE:
-.139999E+02 0.000000E+00 -.651920E-04 -.824746E+01
-.651920E-04 0.824746E+01
=================================================================
GAIN VALUE : 0.792200E+03 POLES ARE:
-.140002E+02 0.000000E+00 0.124253E-03 -.824778E+01
0.124253E-03 0.824778E+01
=================================================================
GAIN VALUE : 0.792300E+03 POLES ARE:
-.140006E+02 0.000000E+00 0.313567E-03 -.824810E+01
0.313567E-03 0.824810E+01
=================================================================

123
 The analysis of the printout indicates that instability occurs as the overall system constant gain
exceeds the value of 792.1 This result is perfectly consistent with the one obtained by Hurwitz
technique: since the overall system constant gain is equal to 30k, 30k < 792.1, which implies that k <
26.4.

NYQUIST STABILITY ANALYSIS

This stability analysis technique deals with the open-loop system frequency response, also
known as Nyquist plot. Nyquist path (plot) can be formed in the complex plane by connecting with
a continuous line points [R(ωk), I(ωk)] representing the real part and imaginary part of the open-loop
system frequency response at frequencies ωk = (k−1)∆ω, k = 1, 2, 3, ..., 4, where ∆ω is some
frequency step.
Definition (Nyquist stability criterion): A control system is stable if its Nyquist path does not
encircle point "−1" on the real axis, providing that all open-loop system poles are located in the left-
hand side of the complex plane. We will not provide here the proof of this statement, but rather
concentrate on its applications.

Figure 4.3 - Nyquist Stability Analysis

Fig. 4.4 below presents typical configurations of Nyquist plots of stable systems. Note that as ω
varies from zero to infinity Nyquist path passes to the right of point "−1".

124
 I
I ∞ I
ω→
R
R R -1
-1 -1
ω
∞←
∞
←
ω

Figure 4.4 − Typical Nyquist Paths of Unstable Systems

Fig. 4.5 shows typical configurations of Nyquist plots of unstable systems. Note that as ω varies
from zero to infinity the Nyquist path passes to the left of point "-1" and encircles it.

I
I ∞ I
→
ω
R
R R -1
-1 -1
ω ω
∞
← ∞←

Figure 4.5 − Typical Nyquist Paths of Stable Systems

In many situations, when dealing with a low order system, application of the Nyquist stability
criterion does not require obtaining the entire Nyquist plot. It is enough to consider the open-loop
system frequency response at only one frequency ω*, such that phase ϕ (ω*) = −180°. If the
magnitude of the open-loop frequency response at this frequency, M(ω*) < 1 the system is stable; if
M(ω*) > 1, the system is unstable. Fig. 4.3 that presents Nyquist plot of a relatively simple stable
system can justify this rule. It could be seen that for a simple configuration of the Nyquist plot point
"−1" cannot be encircled if M(ω*) < 1, as well as M(ω*) > 1 implies that this point is definitely
encircled. What is special about the phase ϕ (ω*) = −180°? This phase points at the negative half of
the real axis, where all real negative numbers, including the “magic number “−1”, are located.
When the open-loop system frequency response is defined by a table, application of the Nyquist
stability criterion implies locating the phase of the frequency response equal to −180°, and the
absolute value M* corresponding to this phase. The system is stable if M* < 1, the system is unstable
if M* > 1. Note that the Nyquist path of a complex system with several open-loop poles and zeros
can intersect the horizontal axis more than once and the suggested analysis should be used with
caution.

125
Example 4.5
Given transfer function of the forward path, G(s), and the feedback, H(s), of a control system:
s+3 10( s + 10)
G ( s) = 2
and H ( s) = 3 . Determine if the system is stable using the
s + 6s + 20 s + 11s 2 + 40s + 50
Nyquist technique. The computer printout featuring the open-loop system frequency response is
shown below:
# FR.RAD/SEC REAL PART IMAG. PART ABS. VALUE MAGN.DB PHASE DGR
============================================================================
.........................................
48 0.470E+01 -0.101E+00 -0.214E-01 0.103E+00 -20. -168.0
49 0.480E+01 -0.976E-01 -0.162E-01 0.989E-01 -20. -170.5
50 0.490E+01 -0.939E-01 -0.115E-01 0.946E-01 -20. -173.0
51 0.500E+01 -0.901E-01 -0.721E-02 0.904E-01 -21. -175.4
52 0.510E+01 -0.863E-01 -0.341E-02 0.864E-01 -21. -177.7
53 0.520E+01 -0.825E-01 -0.248E-04 0.825E-01 -22. -179.9
54 0.530E+01 -0.787E-01 0.297E-02 0.788E-01 -22. -182.1
55 0.540E+01 -0.751E-01 0.560E-02 0.753E-01 -22. -184.2
56 0.550E+01 -0.715E-01 0.790E-02 0.719E-01 -23. -186.3
57 0.560E+01 -0.680E-01 0.990E-02 0.687E-01 -23. -188.2
58 0.570E+01 -0.646E-01 0.116E-01 0.656E-01 -24. -190.1

Analysis of the obtained data indicates that the phase of −180° is reached approximately at ω = 5.2
rad/sec. The corresponding absolute value M* = 0.0825 which is less than 1, and therefore the
system is stable. The "complete" Nyquist path of this system, shown in Fig. 4.6, supports this
conclusion.

Figure 4.6

126
Example 4.6
Given transfer function of the forward path, G(s), and the feedback, H(s), of a control system,
30 2
G ( s) = and H ( s) = . Determine if the system is stable. This problem features a third
2
s + 6s + 20 s
order system, and it looks like obtaining its open-loop frequency response calls for a computer.
However, this problem could be solved without a computer. It is known that application of the
Nyquist-based stability analysis technique requires dealing with the absolute value of the open-loop
system frequency response corresponding to the phase of −180°. It is also known that the phase of
the frequency response of an integrator is always equal to −90°, and its absolute value is k ω .
Therefore, in order to solve this problem, one has to:
30
1) determine the ω value, such that phase of the second order system, 2
, is equal to
s + 6s + 20
−90° (because the additional −90° will be contributed by the integrator). From the properties
of second order systems, it is known that the phase of −90° corresponds to the natural
frequency of this system, ωn = 201/2 = 4.47 (rad/sec)
2) find the absolute value of the frequency response of the second order system at ω = 4.47:
30
M(4.47) = = 1.12
6 ⋅ 4.47
3) determine the open-loop system frequency response of the entire open-loop system at ω =
4.47: phase = −90° (from the second order system) plus −90° (from the integrator) = −180°
absolute value = 1.12 (from the second order system) × 2/4.47 (from the integrator) = 0.5
4) realize that 0.5 is less than 1 and therefore the system is stable
Again, the "complete" Nyquist path of this system, shown in Fig. 4.7, supports this conclusion.

BODE STABILITY ANALYSIS

Recall that a Bode plot presents the same information that a Nyquist plot but in a more
convenient format. Therefore, it also facilitates stability analysis. According to Nyquist stability
criterion, a system is stable if at a certain frequency, ω*, its open-loop frequency response has the
phase ϕ (ω*) = −180°, and the magnitude at this frequency M(ω*) < 1. Following this approach, one
can locate on the Bode plot the frequency ω*, such that ϕ (ω*) = −180° and inspect the magnitude at
this frequency, A(ω*) = 20log[M(ω*)] dB.

127
 Figure 4.7

It should be clear that negative value of A(ω*) dB, indicates that M(ω*) < 1, and therefore, the
system is stable. A positive value of A(ω*) dB, implies that M(ω*) > 1 and the system is unstable.
The following figures feature Bode plots of stable and unstable systems.

Figure 4.8

128
 Figure 4.9 − Bode Plot of an Unstable System

RELATIVE STABILITY

All control systems must be stable. Instability occurs only due to the mistakes made by the
system designer or due to the changes in the properties of the controlled plant, which could not be
foreseen at the stage of system design. While there is no protection from human errors, the second
issue can be addressed by designing not a just stable system, but a stable enough system, i.e., a
system that would stay stable even if the plant parameters have some drift. The concept of relative
stability addresses this issue, showing how far a system is from the "point of instability". Parameter
variations in a control system typically manifest themselves as an increase of the constant gain
and/or additional phase shift (delay) in the open-loop frequency response. Therefore, relative
stability is characterized by stability gain margin (SGM) and stability phase margin (SPM).

STABILITY GAIN MARGIN

Consider a control system that has the following open-loop system frequency response:
GL(jω) = kG( jω)H(jω)
It should be understood that the constant gain k acts as a scaling factor "inflating" or "shrinking"
the Nyquist plot, i.e. affecting absolute value of the frequency response but not the phase.
Figs. 4.10 – 4.11 illustrate the effect of increasing gain value on the system Bode plot. An
increase of the constant gain, as shown in the figures below, can result in the situation when a

129
 Figure 4.10 −Increase of the Constant Gain Causes System Instability
Nyquist plot which initially does not encircle point "−1" may eventually encircle this point, and a
system that was initially stable, can become unstable. Then the following question can arise: what is
the maximum value of the extra gain that does not result in the instability?
Assume that the initial gain value is k0. Following the Nyquist technique, let us identify the
frequency ω*, such that ϕ (ω*) = −180°. Since the system was assumed to be stable, the magnitude at

Figure 4.11 – The Same as 4.10, but Better Resolution

130
this frequency is less than 1., i.e.:

( ) ( ) (
M ω * = k 0 G jω * H jω * < 1 )
With the introduction of an additional constant gain k+, the magnitude of the system frequency
response of the modified system is

( ) (
M + jω * = k + k0 G jω * H jω * ) ( )
( )
Since the system is stable while M + jω * < 1 , the maximum additional gain, which can be

+ 1
introduced without making the system unstable, is k MAX = . This value is the SGM of the
M ω*( )
system. Indeed, assuming:
1 1
k+ = =
( )
Mω *
( ) (
k 0 G jω * H jω * )
( )
results in M + jω * = 1 , i.e., brings the system to the “edge of stability”.

Example 4.7
Given transfer function of the forward path, G(s), and the feedback, H(s), of a control system,
95( s + 11) 10
G ( s) = 2
and H ( s) = 2 :
s + 6s + 20 s + 10 s + 45
a) Determine the SGM of the system.
b) Introduce an additional gain, k+, to assure that the SGM = 10.
Solution a): As it is seen in the Nyquist plot of the system below, M(ω*) = 0.0543
(Note that the numerical value of frequency ω* does not have to be identified in this case).
Therefore, SGM of this system is 1/0.0543 = 18.416.
Solution b): Realize that if an additional gain k+ would be introduced in the system, then the
value of M(ω*) = 0.0543 will be replaced by M(ω*) = 0.0543k+. If the required SGM = 10, then 1/
(0.0543k+) = 10 and 0.0543k+ = 0.1 and k+ = 0.1/0.0543 = 1.842.
The obtained results can be easily verified using the root locus procedure. Indeed, if an
additional gain equal to the system SGM is introduced in the system, the system is expected to be
“on the edge of stability”. In terms of the root locus procedure, the “edge of stability” is defined as a
situation when at least one closed-loop system pole is located on the imaginary axis and small
increase of the constant gain will move this pole in the right-hand-side of the complex plane.
Therefore, if the “original system gain” is k0 and according to the root locus procedure K is the gain

131
 Figure 4.12

that “brings the system to the edge of stability”, then K/ k0 is the SGM.
The following Fig. 4.13 presents the root loci of the system with the open-loop transfer function
1
G L ( s) = . It could be seen that introduction of a gain K =
( )( )
( s + 11) s + 6s + 20 s 2 + 10s + 45
2

17495.395 “moves” two closed-loop poles on the imaginary axis, i.e., brings this system “to the edge
of stability”. Recall that the original system gain k0 = 950, and 17495.395/950 = 18.416 that is the
system SGM.
Stability gain margin of a system, expressed in dB, could be conveniently evaluated using a
Bode plot by:
1) finding a frequency ω* such that ϕ (ω*) = −180°.
2) determining the magnitude at this frequency, A(ω*) dB. (This value must be negative; if it is
positive, the system is unstable and the SGM is meaningless.)
3) the SGM, dB, is equal to −A(ω*)
Indeed, if an additional constant k+, such that 20log(k+) = −A(ω*) would be introduced in the
system, the magnitude of the open-loop frequency response at ω* will be equal to 0 dB, and the

132
 Figure 4.13

system will be on the edge of stability. The following Fig. 4.14 presents the solution of the parts (a)
of Example 4.7. Note that 25 dB ≈ 18 (abs. units).

Figure 4.14

133
 STABILITY PHASE MARGIN

Introduction of a delay in a control system causes additional negative phase shift, θ, in the open-
loop system frequency response, GL(jω) = M(ω) ∠ ϕ (ω), resulting in the modified frequency

[ ]
response, GL+ ( jω ) = M (ω )∠ ϕ (ω ) + θ . Graphically, this modification can be viewed as the

reshaping of the original Nyquist path of the system. As shown in the Fig. 4.15 below, this
reshaping can cause the encircling of the point "−1", which originally was not encircled.

Figure 4.15 – Introduction of a Delay in the System Causes Instability

Consequently, the originally stable system becomes unstable. Then the following question
arises: what is the largest absolute value of the additional phase angle θ that the system can
withstand without becoming unstable? This value constitutes the stability phase margin (SPM) of
the system. Definition of a system's SPM requires to identify the "point of concern" on the Nyquist
path, i.e., the point which potentially can reach point "−1" on the real axis if an additional negative
phase θ would be introduced. Obviously, this point is the one which corresponds to such frequency
ω** that the absolute value of the open-loop frequency response M(ω**) = 1. This point can be found
graphically by drawing a unit circle and finding its intersection with the Nyquist path. Assume that
phase ϕ (ω**) is the phase corresponding to the detected "point of concern". This phase is normally
negative, therefore it is clear that the phase angle θ (also negative), is such that ϕ (ω*) + θ = −180o.

134
 Imag.

-1 Real

SPM

Figure 4.17 – Definition of a SPM of a System

Phase angle θ is the system SPM, as shown in the Fig. 4.16 above, it could be determined
graphically by measuring the appropriate angle in degrees. Note that SPM is always defined as a
positive quantity.
One can realize that Bode plots, explicitly featuring magnitude, phase an frequency of a system
frequency response, present an even more convenient way to investigate SPM of a system.

Figure 4.16

135
Definition of a SPM using a Bode plot requires to locate such a frequency, ω**, where the magnitude
plot intersects with the horizontal axis, i.e. where A(ω**) = 0 db. Then the system phase at this
frequency, ϕ (ω**), must be measured. Finally, SPM will be defined as the absolute difference
between this phase and −180o, i.e., SPM = −180° − ϕ (ω**) (Note that if the phase of −180° is
reached at a frequency lower that ω**, it indicates that the system is most likely unstable and the very
concept of SPM for this system is meaningless). Fig. 4.17 provides the illustration of a SPM defined
using a Bode plot.
Example 4.8
Given transfer function of the forward path, G(s), and the feedback, H(s), of a control system,
s + 50 k
G ( s) = and H ( s) = :
2
s + 4s + 20 s + 01
.
a) Determine SPM if k = 1.
b) Select k to have SPM = 60°.
Solution: Part a). Fig. 4.18 below presents a Bode plot of the system obtained for k = 1.
It can be seen, that at ω = 3.3 rad/sec absolute value of the system frequency response A(3.3) = 0
dB. The corresponding system phase ϕ (3.3) = −140°, this implies that SPM = 180°−140° = 40°.
Indeed, if an additional phase angle of −40° would be introduced in the system then at ω = 3.3

Figure 4.18

136
rad/sec the phase would reach −180° and with the magnitude A(3.3)= 0 the system will be on the
edge of stability.
To solve part (b), let us realize that we are interested in the system phase of −180° + SPM =
−180° + 60° = −120°. Using the system Bode plot for k = 1 obtain the frequency value ω**, such that
ϕ (ω**) = −120°, it could be seen that ω** = 2.4 rad/sec. Note that at this frequency A(2.4) = 2 dB.
Therefore, in order to achieve the required SPM the magnitude of the entire frequency response must
be reduced by 2 dB, or an additional gain of –2 dB must be introduced. Converting –2 dB in the
absolute units yields the required value of the constant gain k = 0.79.
Example 4.9
100
Given open-loop transfer function of a control system GL ( s) = ,
( )
( s + 01. ) s 2 + 10s + 100
K
introduce integrator, H ( s) =, in this system to achieve SGM of 30°.
s
Solution According to the required SPM of 30° we are interested in the system phase of
−180° + SPM = −150°. Note that the integrator that will be introduced in the system will contribute
its own phase of −90° across the entire frequency range. Therefore, we are interested in the phase of
−150° − (−90°) = −60°. Bode plot of the original system shown in Fig. 4.19 indicates that phase of
−60° is reached at ω = 0.17 rad/sec. It is clear that with the integrator, phase ϕ (0.17) will become
equal to −150°. Recall that at ω = 0.17 rad/sec the integrator K/s will contribute additional

Figure 4.19– Bode Plot of the Original System

137
magnitude equal to + 20log(K) - 20log(0.17) = 20log(K) dB + 15.4 dB. With the integrator, at ω =
0.17 rad/sec the magnitude will be equal to 14 dB (of the original system) + 15.4 dB + 20log(K) =
29.4 dB + 20log(K) dB. In order to achieve the required SPM, it is necessary to assure that at ω =
0.17 rad/sec the magnitude is zero db. This could be achieved by choosing gain of the integrator K
such that 20log(K) = −29.4 or K = 0.034 (abs). Fig. 4.20 indicates that the resultant system has the
required SPM.

Figure 4.20 – Bode Plot of the Resultant System (SPM = 30°°)

ANALYSIS OF SYSTEM STATICS

Any control system is driven by two external forces: reference and disturbance. The reference
represents the required value of the controlled variable. A properly designed control system is
capable of maintaining the value of its output variable reasonably close to the reference value. It is
said that such a system tracks the reference signal. Disturbance is a general "label" attached to all
undesirable external forces affecting the controlled plant and resulting in the undesirable fluctuations
of the plant output. A properly designed control system minimizes the effects of disturbance on the
controlled plant, and in many instances eliminates these effects. It is said that such a system rejects
the disturbance.
Let us recall that according to the feedback principle, the discrepancy between the actual and

138
desired values of the system output must first occur, than be detected, then the appropriate control
efforts are to be generated, and eventually, the discrepancy will be reduced or eliminated. This
process cannot take place instantly but develops in time in accordance with inertia of all involved
system components. In many practical situations, however, the entire time history of the error
elimination process is not important, the important are only the final results of this process. These
situations are addressed by the analysis of system statics, i.e. by assessing the steady-state values of
system errors, i.e. the discrepancies between the actual and desired values of the controlled variables.

R H(s) G(s) Y
_

Figure 4.21
The following is the representation of a control system by a single loop block diagram, where
G(s) represents the controlled plant, and H(s) all control instruments (sensors, controllers, power
amplifiers, etc.).
Input R(t) is the reference signal, representing the required value of the system output Y(t) (that
also is the output of the controlled plant). It should be noted that the reference is always applied
through the control circuitry, and a system with transfer function for the reference input
GR(s)=Y(s)/R(s) typically has a unity feedback, i.e.:
G ( s) H ( s)
G R ( s) =
1 + G ( s) H ( s )

Input D(t) is the disturbance signal. Note that a disturbance is always applied directly to the
input of the controlled plant: control circuitry is normally well shielded from any undesirable
external signals. Although the system configuration does not change, the system transfer function
for the disturbance input G D ( s) = Y ( s) D( s) is quite different from G R ( s) :

G ( s)
G D ( s) =
1 + G ( s) H ( s)

There are two situations leading to system errors:

a) The controlled plant is affected by a disturbance signal, resulting in a deviation of the controlled
variable from its required value. The resultant error is system's response to the disturbance.

139
b) A change of the reference signal took place, but due to inertia the system cannot immediately
follow the new value of the reference. The resultant error is known as the tracking error.
Due to the superposition principle, one can analyze these errors separately, superimposing the
results when necessary.
The following Fig. 4.22 features an anti-aircraft guided missile. The radar station generates
signals representing the position of the missile and the enemy's airplane. The first signal, provided
by the radar, R(t), serves as the reference, and the second one, Y(t), represents the actual coordinates
of the missile thus providing the feedback for the guidance system. The error signal, E(t),
representing the difference in positions of the missile and the target, is extracted. The ground control

TARGET
ATMOSPHERIC
DISTURBANCE

GUIDED
MISSILE

COMM.
CHANNEL RADAR

- + R
Y

CONTROL LAW

Figure 4.22
station transforms the error information in the control effort(s) affecting the position of the missile.
In addition, the missile is affected by random turbulence of atmosphere, acting as disturbance D(t).
Looking at the Figure one can realize that time functions R(t) and D(t) could be quite complex.
Fortunately, a sufficiently accurate analysis of system performance is achieved by assuming that R(t)
and D(t) are steps and ramp functions.

140
 STEADY-STATE ERRORS CAUSED BY DISTURBANCE

Definition: The system response to a disturbance signal is an error. Therefore, assuming that
R(t) = 0:
G( s) D( s)
Y D ( s ) = E D ( s ) = G D ( s ) D ( s) =
1 + G ( s) H ( s )

and the steady-state error caused by disturbance is:

 G ( s ) D ( s) 
E SSD = lim E D (t ) = lim  s 
t→ ∞ s→ 0
 1 + G ( s) H ( s) 
We will employ some numerical examples to illustrate how these errors can be evaluated and
controlled by the introduction of various types of feedback.
Example 4.10
Given transfer functions of the controlled plant, G(s), and the control circuitry, H(s), of a control
10( s + 11)
system, G( s) = , and H(s) = k. The system configuration is shown in Fig. 4.21.
s 2 + 6s + 20
a) Evaluate the steady-state error caused by a unit step disturbance assuming that the feedback is
disconnected (the control system is disabled).
Solution: The steady-state error, E SSD , in this case is defined just as the steady-state response of
the controlled plant to the unit step:
 10( s + 11) 1 
[ ]
E SSD = lim sG( s) D( s) = lim s 2 ⋅  = 5.5( units)
s→ 0 s→ 0
 s + 6s + 20 s 
b) Evaluate the steady-state error caused by a unit step disturbance assuming that the control system
is activated.
The steady-state error, E SSD , in this case will be defined as the steady-state response of the entire
system to the unit step:
 10( s + 11) 
 G ( s)   2 1
E SSD = lim  s D( s) = lim  s s + 6s + 20 ⋅ 
s→ 0
 1 + G ( s) H ( s)  s→ 0  1 + 10( s + 11) k s 
 s 2 + 6s + 20 

 10( s + 11) 1 110

= lim  s 2 ⋅ = ( units)
 s + 6s + 20 + 10( s + 11)k s  20 + 110k
s→ 0

It is obvious that introduction of the feedback gives the ability to control the error by the

141
selection of the appropriate value "k". The error could be reduced by increasing the value of the
constant gain “k”. For example, selection of k = 100 results in the steady-state value of
E SSD = 0.00998 (units). (Compare with E SSD = 55
. units without the feedback!)
The example illustrates the following property of feedback: properly defined feedback results in
the significant reduction of the system's sensitivity to disturbance signals.
Note 1: A proportional feedback H(s) = k does not result in the elimination of steady-state errors
caused by a step disturbance.
Note 2: It is important to make sure that the system with the selected gain value is stable. In our
case, since the order of the system is just two, the stability could be analyzed by the direct solution of
the system characteristic equation. It could be seen that in our case the system characteristic
equation is 1 + G(s)k = 0, or:
s 2 + 6s + 20 + 10( s + 11)k
= s 2 + (6 + 10k )s + 20 + 110k
= s 2 + 1006s + 11020 = 0
Roots of this equation are −503 ± 492, and therefore with k = 100 the system is stable and the
value of steady-state error E SSD = 0.00998 is attainable.
c) Evaluate the steady-state error caused by a ramp-type disturbance assuming that the control
system is activated.
The error, E SSD , is defined as the steady-state response of the entire system to the signal D(t) =
at:
 G ( s)   10( s + 11) a
E SSD = lim  s D( s) = lim  s 2 ⋅ 2
s→ 0
 1 + G ( s) H ( s)  s→ 0  s + 6s + 20 + 10( s + 11)k s 
 110 a
= lim  ⋅ =∞
s→ 0 20 + 110 k s

This indicates that the proportional feedback H(s) = k does not allow the system to withstand the
ramp-type disturbance.
d) Evaluate the steady-state error caused by a unit step disturbance when system feedback
contains an integrator, H(s) = k/s.
 10( s + 11) 

E SSD = lim s
G ( s ) D( s )  
= lim  s
2
s + 6s + 20 1
⋅ 


s→ 0
 1 + G( s) H ( s)  s→ 0  1 + 10( s + 11) ⋅ k s 
 s 2 + 6s + 20 s 

142
  10s( s + 11) 1  100 s 
= lim  s 2 ⋅  = lim  =0
s→ 0
( )
 s s + 6s + 20 + 10( s + 11)k s  s→ 0 100k 

This indicates that an integrator in the feedback allows for the complete elimination of the
steady-state errors caused by a step-type disturbance signal.
e) Evaluate the steady-state error caused by a ramp-type disturbance D(t) = at when the system
feedback contains an integrator, H(s) = k/s.
 10( s + 11) 
 2 a
E SSD = lim s s + 6s + 20 ⋅ 2
s→ 0
 1+ 10( s + 11) k s 
⋅
 s 2 + 6s + 20 s 

 10s( s + 11) a 100a  a

= lim  s 2 ⋅ 2  = lim  =
s→ 0
( )
 s s + 6s + 20 + 10( s + 11) k s  s→ 0 100k  k

This result shows that the integrator in the feedback provides the means for controlling the
steady-state error caused by a ramp-type disturbance by selecting the value of the constant gain, k,
however, it does not allow for the complete error elimination.
Note: It is important to make sure that the system with the selected gain value is stable. One
can utilize the root locus technique to determine the allowed values of the constant gain. The open-
loop system transfer function, assuming that k = 1, is:
10( s + 11)
G L ( s) =
(s 2
)
+ 6s + 20 s

According to Fig. 4.23, the allowable gain value is k < 2.4 and therefore, the steady-state error
cannot be reduced below a/2.4 where a is the slope of the ramp.
f) Evaluate the steady-state error caused by a ramp-type disturbance when system feedback
contains a double integrator, H ( s) = k s 2 .

 10( s + 11) 
 2 a
E SSD = lim s s + 6s + 20 ⋅ 2
s→ 0
 1+ 10( s + 11) k s 
⋅
 s 2 + 6s + 20 s 2 

 10s 2 ( s + 11) a  100a 

= lim  s 2 2 ⋅ 2  = lim s =0
s→ 0
( )
 s s + 6s + 20 + 10( s + 11)k s  s→ 0  100k 

This indicates that double integrator in the feedback allows for the complete elimination of the

143
 Figure 4.23

steady-state error caused by a ramp-type disturbance.

Note (warning): A system with two integrators in the feedback path may exhibit serious
instability problems.
The following table summarizes our findings.
ERRORS CAUSED BY DISTURBANCE SIGNALS

Disturbance Number of Integrators in the Feedback

Type 0 1 2
step constant ≠ 0 0 0
ramp 4 constant ≠ 0 0

STEADY-STATE ERRORS ASSOCIATED WITH REFERENCE

(TRACKING ERRORS)
Definition: Tracking error is defined as the reference minus system's response to the reference.
Therefore, assuming that disturbance D(t) = 0, for the system configuration of Fig. 4.21 tracking
error can be defined as:
G ( s) H ( s)
E R ( s) = R( s) − G R ( s) R( s) = R( s) − R( s)
1 + G ( s) H ( s)
 G ( s) H ( s)  R( s)
= 1 −  R( s ) =
 1 + G ( s) H ( s)  1 + G ( s) H ( s)

and the steady-state tracking error is:

144
  R( s) 
E SSR = lim E R (t ) = lim  s 
t→ ∞ s→ 0
 1 + G ( s) H ( s) 
The following numerical examples will illustrate how these errors can be evaluated and
controlled by the introduction of various types of feedback.
Example 4.11
Given transfer functions of the controlled plant, G(s), and the control circuitry, H(s), of a control
10( s + 11)
system, G( s) = , and H(s) = k, see Fig. 4.21.
s 2 + 6s + 20
a) Evaluate steady-state tracking error for reference R(t) = u(t) assuming that the feedback is
disconnected (the control system is disabled).
This problem does not have a solution: a reference signal can be applied only through the control
circuitry.
b) Evaluate steady-state tracking error for a step reference R(t) = u(t) assuming that the control
system is activated.
The steady-state error, E SSR , in this case will be defined as:

 1 
 R( s)  
s

E SSR = lim s  = lim  s 
s→ 0
 1 + G( s) H ( s)  s→ 0  1 + 10( s + 11)k 
 s 2 + 6s + 20 
 s 2 + 6s + 20 1 20
= lim  s 2 ⋅ =
s→ 0
( )
 s + 6s + 20 + 10( s + 11)k s  20 + 11k

It is obvious that control circuitry gives the ability to manipulate the error by the selection of the
appropriate value "k". For example, selection of k = 50 results in the steady-state value of
E SSR = 0.00362 (units).
Note 1: In the case when control circuitry works as a constant gain, i.e., the feedback is H(s) =
k, steady-state errors associated with a step-type reference cannot be completely eliminated.
Note 2: It is important to make sure that the system with the selected gain value is stable.
c) Evaluate steady-state error associated with a ramp-type reference R(t ) = at :

 a 
 R( s )  
s 2 
E SSR = lim  s  = lim  s 
s→ 0
 1 + G( s) H ( s)  s→ 0  1 + 10( s + 11) k 
 s 2 + 6s + 20 

145
  s 2 + 6s + 20 a 20a
= lim  s 2 ⋅ 2  = lim =∞
s→ 0
( )
 s + 6s + 20 + 10( s + 11)k s  s→ 0 (20 + 110k ) s

This indicates that a constant gain-type feedback, H(s) = k, does not allow the system to track a
ramp-type reference signal.
d) Evaluate steady-state error associated with a step-type reference R(t) = u(t) when the feedback
control circuitry acts as an integrator, i.e., H(s) = k/s:
 1 
E SSR = lim s
 R( s )  
= lim  s s

 
s→ 0
 1 + G( s) H ( s)  s→ 0  1 + 10( s + 11) ⋅ k 
 s 2 + 6s + 20 s 

= lim  s 2
( )
s s 2 + 6s + 20 1
⋅ =0
s→ 0
( )
 s s + 6s + 20 + 10( s + 11)k s 

This indicates that the feedback H(s) containing an integrator allows for the complete
elimination of steady-state errors associated with step-type reference signals.
Note: It should be understood that an integrator can be introduced in the control circuitry but
not in the controlled plant. However, if an integrator is already a part of the controlled plant, its
effect on the steady-state error associated with reference is the same as in the case when it "belongs"
to H(s). This fact can be easily realized since either way the integrator will be within the open-loop
system transfer function G(s)H(s).
e) Evaluate steady-state error associated with a ramp-type reference R(t) = at when control circuitry
acts as an integrator, i.e., H(s) = k/s:

 a 
 R( s)  
s 2 
E SSR = lim  s  = lim  s 
s→ 0
 1 + G( s) H ( s)  s→ 0  1 + 10( s + 11) ⋅ k 
 s 2 + 6s + 20 s 


= lim  s 2
(
s s 2 + 6s + 20 ) a  20a
⋅ 2 =
s→ 0
( )
 s s + 6s + 20 + 10( s + 11) k s  110k

This indicates that integrator within the module H(s) allows to control the steady-state error by
selecting the value of the constant gain, k, however, it does not allow for the complete error
elimination.
Note: It is important to make sure that the system with the selected gain value is stable.
(f) Evaluate steady-state error associated with a ramp-type reference R(t) = αt when control

146
circuitry acts as a double integrator, i.e., H ( s) = k s 2 :

 a 
 R( s)  
s2

E SSR = lim s  = lim s 
s→ 0
 1 + G( s) H ( s)  s→ 0  1 + 10( s + 11) ⋅ k 
 s 2 + 6s + 20 s 2 

= lim  s 2 2
(
s 2 s 2 + 6s + 20 ) a
⋅ 2  = lim s
20a
=0
s→ 0
( )
 s s + 6s + 20 + 10( s + 11)k s  s → 0 110k

This indicates that double integrator as a part of H(s) allows for the complete elimination of the
steady-state error associated with a ramp-type reference.
Note: A system with two integrators in the loop may exhibit serious stability problems. The
following table summarizes our findings for a control system configuration of Fig. 4.21.
TRACKING ERRORS

Reference Number of Integrators in the Loop

Type 0 1 2
step constant ≠ 0 0 0
ramp 4 constant ≠ 0 0

Example 4.12
s +1
Transfer function G( s) = describes the properties of a controlled plant, and the
( 2
s s + 6s + 25 )
2
transfer function H ( s) = represents the control circuitry.
s+5
a) Evaluate steady-state errors in the system for unit step-type and unit ramp-type disturbance and
reference signals.
Solution: Prior to assessing steady-state errors, it is wise to check if the system in question is
stable: in an unstable system steady-state regimes cannot be reached and the entire steady-state error
concept is meaningless. Stability of this system is demonstrated by Fig. 4.24 following.
First, evaluate steady-state errors in the system for step-type and ramp-type disturbance. For a
unit step disturbance:
 2( s + 1) 
 
E SSD
 G( s) D( s) 
= lim s  ( 2
s s + 6s + 25 ) 1
 = lim  s ⋅ 
s→ 0
 1 + G ( s) H ( s )  s → 0  1 + 2( s + 1) s

 ( )
s s + 6s + 25 ( s + 5) 
2

147
 Figure 4.24

 2( s + 1)( s + 5) 1  10
= lim  s 2 ⋅ = = 5 (units)
s→ 0
( )
 s s + 6s + 25 ( s + 5) + 2( s + 1) s  2

For a ramp disturbance with the slope of 1:

 2( s + 1) 
 
D
E SS = lim s
 G ( s) D( s)   (
2
s s + 6s + 25 ) 1
 = lim s ⋅ 2
s→ 0
 1 + G ( s ) H ( s )  s→ 0  1 + 2( s + 1) s

 (2
)
s s + 6s + 25 ( s + 5) 
 2( s + 1)( s + 5) 1
= lim  s 2 ⋅ 2=∞
s→ 0
( )
 s s + 6s + 25 ( s + 5) + 2( s + 1) s 

which is consistent with the properties that were previously established results.
For a unit step reference the steady-state tracking errors are:
 
 1 
 R( s)   s 
E SSR = lim s  = lim s
s→ 0 1 + G ( s ) H ( s ) s→ 0  2( s + 1) 
   1+ 
 ( )
s s 2 + 6s + 25 ( s + 5) 


= lim  s 2
( )
s s 2 + 6s + 25 ( s + 5) 1
⋅ =0
s→ 0
( )
 s s + 6s + 25 ( s + 5) + 2( s + 1) s 

and for a unit ramp reference:

148
  
 1 
 R( s)   s 2

E SSR = lim s  = lim  s 
s→ 0
 1 + G ( s ) H ( s)  s → 0
 1+
2( s + 1)

 ( )
s s 2 + 6s + 25 ( s + 5) 

= lim  s 2
( )
s s 2 + 6s + 25 ( s + 5) 1  125
⋅ 2= = 62.5
s→ 0
( )
 s s + 6s + 25 ( s + 5) + 2( s + 1) s  2

Again, the findings are consistent with the properties that were previously established results.
b) Assume that R(t) = 0.1t is the reference signal applied to the system. Modify H(s) to keep the
steady-state error associated with the step reference under 0.01 (unit).
Solution: Note that since this system already contains one integrator in the loop (within the
transfer function of the plant), its steady-state tracking error for a ramp reference is a constant. This
constant could be manipulated by introducing additional constant gain in the feedback. Consider the
error expression for R(t) = 0.02t and H(s)=k/(s+5):
 
 0.02 
 s 2
  ( )
s s 2 + 6s + 25 ( s + 5) 0.02  2.5
 s→ 0  s s 2 + 6s + 25 ( s + 5) + 2k ( s + 1) s 2  = 2k
E SSR = lim s = lim  s ⋅
s→ 0
 1+
2( s + 1) k
  ( ) 
 ( )
s s 2 + 6s + 25 ( s + 5) 

Figure 4.25

149
 2.5
Then, from the expression ≤ 0.01 one can find that k ≥ 125. To determine if this result is
2k
attainable, refer to Fig. 4.24 to determine the SGM of this system. Note that at ω = 6.65 rad/sec the
phase angle is −180° and the magnitude is −45 dB that results in the SGM = 45 dB = 177.8 abs.
Since k = 125 does not exceed the SGM, the required steady-state error could be achieved. System
simulation shown in Fig. 4.25 above illustrates this finding.
c) Assume that D(t) = 0.5t is the disturbance signal applied to the system. Select a modify
expression for H(s) to keep the steady-state error caused by the disturbance under 0.01 (unit).
Solution: Note that this time we are dealing with the disturbance error and the integrator in the
loop (within the transfer function of the plant) has no effect on the steady-state error. Therefore,
introduce an integrator in the block H(s) that with respect to the disturbance input constitutes a
k
feedback element. Now H ( s) = and the error expression is:
s( s + 5)

 2( s + 1) 
 
E SSD 
= lim s
(2
s s + 6s + 25 ) 0.5 
⋅ 2
s→ 0 2( s + 1) k s
 1+ ⋅ 
 ( )
s s 2 + 6s + 25 s( s + 5) 

 2s( s + 1)( s + 5) 0.5  5 2.5

= lim  s 2 2 ⋅ 2= =
s→ 0
( )
 s s + 6s + 25 ( s + 5) + 2( s + 1)k s  2k k

Therefore, 0.01 ≥ 2.5/k and in order to satisfy the steady-state error requirement k must be

Figure 4.26

150
 Figure 4.27

greater than 250.

250
Let us apply the root locus procedure to determine if the system is stable with H ( s) = .
s( s + 5)

First, we will obtain root loci for the open-loop transfer function:
2( s + 1) 1
G L ( s) = ⋅
( 2
s s + 6s + 25 ) s( s + 5)

and then will check closed-loop system poles for extra gain of 250. According to Fig. 4.26, this gain

Figure 4.28

151
exceeds the SGM of this system. Further root locus analysis indicates that as per Fig. 4.27
maximum allowable gain value is k = 167 and, therefore, minimum attainable steady-state error is
0.015. However, with the gain so close to the SGM the system excessively oscillates and Fig. 4.28
presents the simulation results featuring system response to this disturbance signal for a smaller gain
value.

ANALYSIS OF SYSTEM DYNAMICS

System dynamics addresses the way a control system reaches a steady-state regime. It
concentrates on the characterization and analysis of transient processes in a system. It could be said
that system dynamics is interested only in the natural motion in the system, while system statics
deals with the forced motion. Since system response to any input signal comprises the natural
motion and forced motion terms, system dynamics can be evaluated in situations when natural
motion is most noticeable in the system response. Such a situation arises when a system responds to
a step-type input signal - it is said that a step input provides maximum excitation to natural motion
components. Therefore, system dynamics is often described by the system step response, and
characterized primarily in terms of settling time, TSET, and percent overshoot, P%.
Settling time of a system step response, TSET, is expressed in seconds. It is defined by majority
of control engineers as a time interval during which all amplitudes of the natural motion components
decay to 2% or less of their initial values. It should be understood that the rate of decay of natural
motion components depends on the real parts of the appropriate system poles, and does not depend
on the type and magnitude of the input signal. However, a step response provides the best
illustration of the "settling" of natural motion components.
Assume that σi, i = 1, 2, ..., n, are real parts of the closed-loop system poles. First, it should be
understood that all σi < 0, otherwise the system is unstable, and as such is just incapable of reaching
the steady-state regime. Magnitude decay of the particular natural motion components follows the
exponential rule eσ i t . It can be seen that the highest rate of decay can be expected of those terms
with the largest absolute values σ i . But as far as the settling time of the entire system is concerned,

the term with the smallest absolute value σ i is the most important, it converges to the 2% of its
initial value last thus determining the system settling time. Therefore, settling time is defined as
4
TSET = , where σ * is the real part of the system pole (or two complex conjugate poles) with the
σ*
*
smallest absolute value (it could be seen that e TSETσ = 0.018 ).

152
Example 4.13
s + 0.8
A control system consists of a plant with transfer function G1 ( s) = 2
, controller
s + 12 s + 20
s +1 70 100
G2 ( s) = 0.01 , power amplifier G3 ( s) = , and actuator G4 ( s) = . Determine settling
s + 10 s+7 s+5
time of the system step response.
Solution: Define the open-loop system transfer function:

Figure 4.29

70( s + 0.8)( s + 1)
G L ( s) =
(s 2
)
+ 12s + 20 ( s + 10)( s + 7)( s + 5)

Now the best way to solve the characteristic equation of the closed-loop system, 1 + GL(s) = 0, is
by running a root locus procedure for

G L ( s) =
( s + 0.8)( s + 1)
(s 2
+ 12s + 20)( s + 10)( s + 7)( s + 5)

and find the closed-loop poles for gain k = 70, see Fig. 4.28. The inspection of the closed-loop poles
reveals that the smallest absolute value of its real part is 2.118, therefore TSET = 4/2.118 = 1.9 (sec).
The following Fig. 4.30 shows the transient response of this system and indicates that the estimated

153
 Figure 4.30

settling time is fairly accurate.

Dominant poles. Assume that the system poles (closed-loop) are:
p1, 2 = −1 ± 3 j

p3, 4 = −5 ± 8.7 j

p5 = −10.5
p6 = −18.9
It could be seen that the system settling time, defined by the slowest transient term, associated
with poles p1,2 is 4/1 = 4 (sec). It also could be seen that the second slowest transient term will
practically disappear in 4/5 = 0.8 sec after the application of step input. Other transients will "die
out" in 4/10.5 = 0.38 sec and 4/18.9 = 0.21 sec. Due to the particular ratio between real parts of the
system poles, 1:5:10.5:18.9, the last 3.2 seconds of the system settling time will be practically
dominated by the transient term associated with poles p1,2, and poles p1,2 are called dominant. As far
as dynamics is concerned, the denominator of this system can be just approximated as
( s − p1 )( s − p2 ) = s 2 + 2s + 10 .
Generally speaking, if a dynamic system has one real or two complex conjugate poles, such that
the absolute values of their real parts are at least four times smaller than that of all other poles, they
are called dominant.
Indeed, consider simulated step responses of two systems with transfer functions:

154
 199819.305
G ( s) =
( )( )
s + 2s + 10 s + 10s + 100.69 ( s + 10.5)( s + 18.9)
2 2

10
and G APPR ( s) = 2
s + 2s + 10
Note that the steady-state values of the step responses of both systems are equal to 1, and the second
system contains only dominant poles of the first one. Fig. 4.31 below indicates that step responses
of both systems are practically identical.

Figure 4.31
RULE: System dominant poles can be used for the estimation of the overshoot of a system step
response if the system does not have zeros.
Y MAX − YSS
Overshoot of the system step response is defined as P = 100% ,
YSS
where YMAX and YSS are the maximum and the stead-state values of the system response to an input
step-type signal.
Can the overshoot of a system be evaluated without running a computer simulation model? The

155
answer is "YES" if the following two conditions are satisfied:
1) the system transfer function does not have zeros, and
2) the system has dominant poles.
Example 4.14
199819.305
a) Given transfer function G( s) = , evaluate
( )( )
s + 2s + 10 s + 10s + 100.69 ( s + 10.5)( s + 18.9)
2 2

the overshoot of its step response.

Solution: Note that the transfer function has two complex conjugate dominant poles, −1 ± 3j and
does not have any zeros. Therefore dynamic behavior of this system is consistent with the one of a
2
2 2 −
1 1
 12 
second order system with the characteristic polynomial s + 2s + 10 = s + 2 ⋅ 10 2
⋅ 10 s + 10  ,
2
 
1
−
i.e., a second order system with the damping ratio of 10 2
= 0.32 and natural frequency of
1
10 2 = 316
. . According to the overshoot-damping ratio table, the step response of this system is
expected to be approximately 36%. This is very consistent with the plot of Fig. 4.31.
b) Given transfer function of a control system GCL ( s) =

125
, evaluate overshoot of its step response.
s + 34s + 439s + 3350s 2 + 8560s + 7560
5 4 3

Solution: The system poles are: p1,2 = −1.773 ± 0.703j, p3,4 = −5.741 ± 8.752j, and p5 = −18.973.
The absolute value of the real parts of first two poles is 3.2 times smaller than the absolute value of
the real parts of poles 3 and 4, and 10.7 times smaller than the absolute value of the real parts of pole
5. The dominance cannot be established and therefore the system overshoot cannot be predicted
accurately.
12( s + 1)
c) Given transfer function of a control system GCL ( s) = ,
(s 2
)( )
+ 2s + 26 s 2 + 11s + 30 ( s + 8)

evaluate overshoot of its step response.

Solution: The system poles are: p1,2 = −1 ± 5j, p3 = −5, p4 = −6, and p5 = −8. The ratio of the
absolute values of real parts of system poles is 1:5:6:8, which clearly indicates that the first two
poles are dominant. However, the system has a zero, z1 = −1, and its overshoot cannot be predicted.
Approximation of high order systems by a first order system can be accurately performed if the
high order system does not have zeros and has one real dominant pole.

156
 Approximation of high order systems by a second order system can be accurately performed if
the high order system does not have zeros and has two complex conjugate dominant poles. The
approximation implies that the denominator of the high order system transfer function is replaced by
a second order term, if there are two complex conjugate dominant poles, or a first order term if there
is one real dominant pole. The constant gain of the first or second order system is selected such that
the steady-state values of the step responses of the original high order system and its approximation
be the same.
Example 4.15
28
a) Given transfer function of a control system, GCL ( s) = , evaluate
( )
( s + 0.5) s + 6s + 25 ( s + 8)
2

overshoot of its step response.

The system has one real dominant pole p1 = −0.5. It can be approximated by a first order system
with transfer function g(s) =k/(s + 0.5). Let us define the final values of step responses of both
systems to a unity step signal:
− for the original system this value found through the final value theorem is 28/ [0.5⋅25⋅8]
= 0.28,
− for the first order system this value is k/0.5.
It can be seen that the value of parameter k is found from the equation k/0.5 = 0.28, k = 0.14.

Figure 4.32

157
 Figure 4.33

Step responses of the original system and its first order approximation are given in Fig. 4.32. Fig.
4.33 presents frequency responses of the original system and its approximation. Note that while the
approximated step response is quite inaccurate at low time values, the approximated frequency
response just does not work at high frequencies.
2000
a) Given transfer function of a control system, GCL ( s) = ,
( )( )
s + 2s + 10 s 2 + 8s + 25 ( s + 8)
2

evaluate the overshoot of its step response.

The system has two complex conjugate dominant poles p1,2 = −1 ± 3j. It can be approximated by
k
a second order system with transfer function g( s) = 2
. Let us define the final values of
s + 2s + 10
step responses of both systems to a unity step signal:
− for the original system this value is 2000/[10⋅25⋅8] = 1,
− for the second order system this value is k/10 and therefore k = 10.
Step responses of the original system and its second order approximation are given in Fig. 4.34.

ROLE OF SYSTEM ZEROS

It could be seen that system zeros present an obstacle in the evaluation of system dynamics.
Why it happens? First of all, note that zeros do not affect our ability to estimate the system settling
time.

158
 Figure 4.34

Assume that y(t) is a step response of a system with transfer function G(s), which has no zeros.
Obviously, y(t ) = L − 1 { X ( s)G( s)} , where X(s) = 1/s is the Laplace transform of the unit step input

signal. If dominant poles are present, we should be able to evaluate the overshoot by representing
system dynamics by a first or second order system. Now assume that one real zero, z1 is added to the
system transfer function, and the new transfer function is G1(s) = (s − z1)G(s). Now the system
response to a unit step input can be written as y1 (t ) = L − 1 { X ( s)G1 ( s)} = L− 1 { X ( s)( s − z1 )G( s)} =

L − 1 {sX ( s)G( s)} − z1L − 1 { X ( s)G ( s)} .

If for simplicity we will assume that z1 = −1, the above result has a very straightforward
interpretation: y1(t) = y(t) + y′(t), i.e., adding a zero to the transfer function results in adding a time
derivative to the system response. It is clear that if the approximation of a system response by a first
or second order response is not a simple task, then the approximation of a system response + a
derivative of the system response could be quite difficult. Note that at steady-state derivatives of a
system response approach zero, therefore derivatives always increase system overshoot. Fig. 4.35
below shows the step response of a high order system without zeros and with one real zero z1 = −1.
Specification of system dynamics by a frequency response is quite common. The frequency
response is defined in terms of a DC gain, bandwidth (rad/sec), and damping at high frequencies
(db/dec). This information could be easily interpreted in terms of a Bode plot:
− the DC gain corresponds to the magnitude at frequencies below the first break-point
frequency,

159
 Figure 4.35

− the bandwidth is closely related to the first break-point frequency,

− and the damping at high frequencies (typically, −20db/dec, −40db/dec, …) can be also
associated with the slope of the magnitude plot after break-point frequencies.
When the DC gain, break-point frequency, and the slope after the break-point frequency are
known, one can easily define a first or a second order system with the appropriate Bode plot
parameters. Then, the overshoot and settling time will be defined, see Figure 4.36.

Figure 4.36

160
 ASSIGNMENTS (HOMEWORK #6)

6.1 Given transfer functions of the forward path, G(s), and the feedback, H(s), of a control
5( s + 2) k
system, G( s) = 2
, H ( s) = 2 :
s + 4s + 68 s + 2s + 10
a) Obtain system's root locus, assuming that constant gain, k, varies from 0 to 20 with the step
of 5, by direct solving the characteristic equation.
b) Obtain the asymptotes of root loci as gain approaches infinity.
c) Obtain the system’s root locus plot using a computer tool.
d) Obtain the system's Nyquist plot using a computer tool.
e) Obtain the system's Bode plot using a computer tool.
6.2 Given transfer functions of the forward path, G(s), and the feedback, H(s), of a control
5 k
system, G( s) = , H ( s) = :
2
s + 4 s + 36 s
a) Apply Hurwitz technique to determine the maximum value of parameter k.
b) Apply Nyquist technique to determine the maximum value of parameter k (do not use
computers).
c) Apply root locus technique to determine the maximum value of parameter k (use a software
tool). Compare the result with a) and b).
6.3 Given transfer functions of the forward path, G(s), and the feedback, H(s), of a control
5 k
system, G( s) = , H ( s) = .
2
s + 4 s + 36 s
a) Select k value to obtain SGM = 40 dB (no computers).
b) Select k value to obtain SPM = 50° (no computers).
6.4 Solve problems 6.3a) and 6.3b) graphically using computer-generated Bode plot.

161
 HOMEWORK # 7

7.1 Given transfer functions of the forward path, G(s), and the feedback, H(s), of a control
500( s + 1)( s + 8) k
system, G( s) = , H ( s) = :
( s + 4)( s 2
)(
+ 4s + 36 s + 10s + 100 2
) s( s + 7)

a) Select k value to obtain SGM = 40 dB.

b) Verify the obtained SGM by root locus.
c) Select k value to obtain SPM =50°.
d) Verify the obtained result by running the Nyquist procedure.
7.2 Given transfer functions of the forward path, G(s), and the feedback, H(s), of a control
500( s + 1)( s + 8) k
system, G( s) = , H ( s) = :
(s 2
)( 2
+ 4s + 36 s + 10s + 100 ) s( s + 7)

a) Determine steady-state error caused by a step-type disturbance D(t) = 5u(t), assume k = 10.
b) Determine steady-state error caused by a ramp-type disturbance D(t) = 5u(t), assume k = 10.
c) The system is affected by a disturbance D(t) = 50t + 15u(t), what is the minimum steady-
state error which can be achieved in this system?
d) The system is affected by a disturbance D(t) = 2t. It is the required that steady-state error
shall not exceed 0.01 (units), is this accuracy feasible?
10( s + 7)
7.3 Transfer function G( s) = 2
describes the properties of a controlled plant, and the
s + 6s + 125
transfer function H(s) represents the control circuitry.
a) Assume that R(t) = u(t) is the reference signal applied to the system. Select a simple
expression for H(s) to keep the steady-state tracking error under 0.01 (units).
b) Assume that R(t) = 3t is the reference signal applied to the system. Select a simple
expression for H(s) to keep the steady-state tracking error under 0.01 (units).
c) Assume that R(t) = u(t) is the reference signal applied to the system. Select a simple
expression for H(s) to keep the steady-state tracking error equal to zero.

7.4 Transfer function G( s) =

(
10 s 2 + 7s + 10 ) describes the properties of a controlled
(
s( s + 3) s + 6s + 1252
)
plant, and the transfer function H(s) represents the control circuitry. Assume that disturbance
D(t) = t and reference R(t) = 10t affect the system. Select a simple expression for H(s) to
have steady-state errors ER ≤ 0.02 and ED ≤ 0.02. Check if this accuracy is feasible.

162
 HOMEWORK # 8
8.1 Given transfer functions of the forward path, G(s), and the feedback, H(s), of a control
500( s + 8) k
system, G( s) = , H ( s) = , use root locus to
( s + 4)( s 2
)( 2
+ 4s + 36 s + 10s + 100 ) s+7

determine such a value of parameter k which results in a stable closed-loop system. Verify
this result by Hurwitz technique (check if the system is stable with the selected k-value).
Evaluate settling time of the system. Discuss the possibility of evaluating system overshoot
of the step response. Evaluate overshoot and settling time by computer simulation.
100
8.2 Given closed-loop system transfer function, G( s) = ,
( )( )
( s + 9) s 2 + 4s + 36 s 2 + 16s + 100
approximate dynamics of this system by a low order system. Obtain simulated step response
of the original system and its approximation. Compare the original system frequency
response and the frequency response of its low order approximation.
8.3 Fig. 4.37 presents step response of a complex dynamic system. Find a suitable
approximation for the system transfer function, which would represent all noticeable transient
components. Verify your finding by computer simulation.

Figure 4.37

163
 EXAMPLE OF A ONE HOUR TEST

PROBLEM #1 Given transfer function of the forward path of a unity feedback dynamic system,
5
GFP ( s) = 3 2
:
s + 8s + 6s + 4
a) Determine if this system is stable.
b) Introduce an additional gain in the system feedback, such that the system be stable with the
SGM = 6 dB.
PROBLEM #2 Given open-loop system frequency response (note that frequency is given in
rad/sec, magnitude in abs. units, and phase in degrees):
ω 2 5 8 13 20 26 30 37 46 52
A(ω) 18 16 11 4 2 0.3 0.1 0.03 0.01 0.001
ϕ (ω) −3 −24 −50 −75 −90 −120 −165 −180 −199 −210

a) Determine if the system is stable.

b) Introduce an integrator, k/s, in the system. Select gain k to achieve SGM = 13 dB.
c) Introduce an integrator, k/s, in the system. Select gain k to achieve SPM = 40°.
PROBLEM #3 Given transfer function of dynamic systems, if possible, determine their
dynamic characteristics (settling time and overshoot of step response):
s + 0.3
a) G( s) =
( )
s + 4s + 33 ( s + 20)( s + 13)
2

s + 0.3
b) G( s) =
( )
s + 4s + 33 ( s + 3)( s + 13)
2

77
c) G( s) =
( )( )
s + 4s + 33 s + 18s + 1000 ( s + 20)( s + 13)
2 2

3000
d) G( s) =
( )
s + 28s + 1000 ( s + 2)( s + 13)
2

3000
e) G( s) =
( )
s + 40s + 3300 ( s + 2)( s + 1)
2

If possible, define low order approximations of the above systems

NOTE:
ζ 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0
P% 100 70 50 36 25 16 10 5 2 0 0

164
 5
PROBLEM #4 Given transfer function of the controlled plant, GP ( s) = , and the
s + 8s 2 + 6 s
3

k ( s + 1)
feedback, H ( s) = , of a control system:
s+8
a) Determine steady-state error caused by a unit step disturbance.
b) If necessary, modify the controller to achieve zero steady state error caused by a unit step
disturbance.
c) Determine steady-state error associated with a unit step reference.
d) If necessary, modify the controller to achieve zero steady state error caused by a unit step
reference.
e) Determine steady-state error associated with a ramp reference, r(t) = 0.3t.
f) If necessary, modify the controller to assure that steady state error caused by the ramp
reference r(t) = 0.3t, is equal to 0.01 (units).
NOTE: Disregard the stability issues in this problem.

165
 CHAPTER 5

DESIGN OF CONTROL SYSTEMS

The power of purposely chosen feedback could be utilized for a complete modification of both
static and dynamic properties of a dynamic system. This chapter presents the most common
techniques of control system design.

DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS AND PROBLEM DEFINITION

The controlled process (plant) is the most important part of a control system. The control loop is
built around the plant to assure its acceptable performance. The performance includes the ability of
the controlled process to withstand undesirable effects of disturbance and to follow (track) the time-
varying reference (set point). These, rather qualitative, properties of the controlled process, are
represented quantitatively by:
− steady-state error caused by a disturbance, εd
− steady-state tracking error, εr
− settling time, Tset
− overshoot of step response, P%
− system bandwidth, ωB (rad/sec or Hz)
− disturbance rejection, λ (db)
representing various aspects of what we call the "performance".
The above characteristics address static and dynamic behavior of the process and provide
answers to the following questions:
a) what is the equilibrium point that the process will eventually reach after being affected by an
external signal (reference or disturbance)?
b) and how the process behaves on its way to the equilibrium point?
It is easy to realize that these questions refer to the specifics of the forced and natural motion of
the controlled process.
When performance characteristics are defined, the desirable performance implies that the
− steady-state error caused by a disturbance is finite and sufficiently small, i.e., in spite of
undesirable external forces the controlled process eventually returns to the same (or almost
the same) point of operation
− steady-state tracking error is finite and sufficiently small, i.e., the controlled process

166
 eventually reaches (or follows close enough) the point of operation defined by the reference
− settling time is sufficiently small, assuring the ability of the process to reach the required
point of operation within the acceptable period of time
− overshoot of the step response is sufficiently low, assuring the acceptable dynamic
behavior of the process exposed to the extreme conditions (input step signal does constitute
such conditions for any inertial system)
− system bandwidth represents the highest frequency of the sinusoidal reference signal that
the process must be able to follow (track) with sufficient accuracy and acceptably small
phase delay. This implies that the closed-loop frequency response of the reference channel
is required to have the magnitude close to 1 (abs) or close to 0 dB and have a small phase
lag for all frequencies within the bandwidth range.
− disturbance rejection refers to the highest magnitude value of the closed-loop system
response of the disturbance channel. In order to achieve low disturbance effects on the
system, system frequency response, defined with respect to the disturbance input, within
the feasible frequency range of disturbance signals is required to have low magnitude
(obviously, the phase of the frequency response of a disturbance channel is irrelevant).
Mathematically, the performance characteristics are defined as follows:
− steady-state error caused by an aperiodic disturbance ∆(t) is viewed as the final value of
the process response to this disturbance:
ε d = lim sG( s)∆( s) (5.1)
s→ 0

where G(s) is the transfer function of the process

− steady-state error caused by a periodic disturbance signal:
N
∆( t ) = ∑ Ak sin(ω k t + n k )
k=1

is defined on the basis of the appropriate frequency response of the system:

1
N 22
ε d = ∑ Ak2 G( jω k )  (5.2)
 k=1 
− steady-state tracking error in the case of an aperiodic reference signal R(t) is defined as
the final value of the difference between the reference and the response to this reference of
the process:
ε r = lim sR( s)[1 − G( s)] (5.3)
s→ 0

167
 − settling time, defined as the "time period during which magnitudes of natural motion
components decay to 2% or less of its initial values" is expressed as:
4
Tset = (5.4)
σ
where σ is the smallest absolute value of the real parts of the poles of the transfer function G(s):
− overshoot of step response:
Ymax − Yss
P% = 100 (5.5)
Yss
where Ymax and Yss are the maximum and the final values of the system response to a step-type input
signal (typically, reference).
Closed-loop system frequency response should be defined separately for the reference channel
G R ( jω k ) = M R (ω k )∠ϕ R (ω k ) and for the disturbance channel G D ( jω k ) = M D (ω k )∠ϕ D (ω k ) ,
where k = 1, 2, 3, ... is the discrete frequency index, then:
− system bandwidth, ωB, is such a frequency that:
M R(ωk) ≤ 3 dB and ϕ R(ωk) ≈ 0 for any ωk ≤ ωB (5.6)
− disturbance rejection λ (normally λ = −15 dB, −20 dB, −40 dB, …) indicates that:
M D(ωk) ≤ λ for any ωk , k = 1, 2, 3, ... (5.7)
It can be seen that every performance characteristic of the control system is defined on the basis
of its transfer function, and therefore, is originated in the equations representing the physical nature
of the relevant processes.
Ideally, the control considerations are to be addressed at the stage of the process design. This
implies, for example, that the designers of an airframe should be concerned with the ability of the
aircraft to follow the pilots' commands and to withstand atmospheric gusts. Unfortunately, the
design problem of a modern aircraft is so complex that the mechanical designers are simply
incapable of incorporating "control issues" in their design procedures. It is good to know that their
product, an airframe of a modern jet fighter, not only is incapable of following the pilots' commands
but is structurally unstable! It is up to the control system designers to make the airplane usable.
While the physical structure of the airframe is well defined and is not to be changed at this stage of
design, introduction of various feedback mechanisms presents control engineers the only alternative
to solve this problem.
It is time to recall that the introduction of a negative feedback in a dynamic system, results in the
modification of its transfer function. Properly defined, feedback mechanisms allow for customizing

168
the transfer function of a system without rebuilding the controlled process itself, thus assuring its
required performance at the lowest possible cost.
In the past, a number of students expressed the following concern: if the physical nature of a
controlled process is not to be affected by the feedback mechanism, then how the change in its
dynamic characteristics is being achieved? In other words, how is an undesirable step response of a
physical process changed by a control system? It should be understood that when a controlled
process operates as part of a control system, it is not exposed to the step input directly. The step
input, applied to the control system, is converted by the system blocks, other than the process, into a
control effort. This control effort is definitely not a step, it is defined such that, being applied to the
process, it results in the desired shape of the step response.
Control engineers have developed a number of techniques for the definition of system
components, other than the controlled plant, and system configurations that result in the required
dynamic properties of the entire system. These techniques, outlined below, constitute system design
as a specific discipline.
The following is a typical formulation of a control system design problem:
− given a controlled process,
− given operational conditions,
− given the design specifications,
− design the feedback and feedforward components of the control loop allowing to comply
with the required design characteristics under the expected operational conditions.
The controlled process is typically defined by its transfer function, frequency response or
differential equations, providing a simplified representation of its dynamic properties. Operational
conditions include the expected types of the reference and disturbance signals (step, ramp,
exponential, periodic, etc.) and their characteristics (magnitude, slope, frequency content). The
steady-state system operation is characterized by steady-state errors with respect to aperiodic
disturbance and reference signals, and in the case of periodic reference and disturbance signals, by
the required frequency responses of the particular dynamic channels. The transient regimes are
defined by the settling time and overshoot of the step response, or by a frequency response of the
particular dynamic channels (bandwidth and disturbance rejection). It can be shown that both types
of transient characteristics, step and frequency responses, are equivalent and are being used by
control engineers depending on types of input signals and the tradition existing in a particular
company.

169
 Generally, control circuitry consists of a sensor, actuator, amplifier, and controller blocks,
implementing the feedback and feedforward control laws. When a control system is being designed,
all system elements except the controller blocks are defined and labeled as the "controlled process";
and design procedures are employed only to define the control laws. Note that the formulated design
problem is quite generic, and a particular problem can be much more simple.
It will be shown below that, as with any design problem, a control system design does not have
a unique solution. This creates a situation when a system designer can take advantage of various
design techniques, finding a reasonable compromise between the steady-state and transient system
performance, complexity and robustness of the controller, magnitude (cost) of control efforts, etc.
Until recently, performance of the designed system could be tested only experimentally, now
computer simulation tools are widely used to verify and even optimize designed controllers. At the
same time, the availability of microprocessors allows for the implementation of the most complex
control laws without the penalty of additional cost and weight. The magnitude and related cost of
control efforts still present the major concern to system designers, and play an important role in the
final selection of a particular design.
In this course we will consider a number of design techniques, which fall under one of two
design approaches, s-domain and frequency-domain designs. S-domain techniques deal primarily
with transfer functions and include pole-zero cancellation, root-locus and pole placement.
Frequency-domain design includes the use of Bode plots and phase-lead-lag compensators.
Simulation-based design techniques imply that a particular controller configuration (typically
proportional-integral-derivative) is to be selected and then optimized with respect to its parameters
using a simulation model, and can be viewed as an independent design approach. Various design
techniques will be illustrated by numerical examples.

S-DOMAIN DESIGN

UTILIZATION OF THE PROPERTIES OF SECOND ORDER SYSTEM

The following example presents a wide class of situations when the dynamics of the controlled
process can be expressed as a second-order system:
k
G ( s) = 2
s + as + b
The design specifications include
− steady-state tracking error for a step reference R(t ) = u( t ), ε r ≤ E1

170
 − steady-state error caused by step disturbance D(t ) = u(t ), ε d ≤ E2

− settling time Tset ≤ T*

− overshoot of the step response P ≤ P *

First note that these requirements do not call for steady-state errors being equal to zero,
therefore, there is no need for introducing an integrator in the feedback path.
As shown in the figure below, introduce the system controller in the form: H(s) = C = const.

R H(s) G(s) Y
_

Figure 5.1

Note that this component will constitute a part of the feedforward path, as far as the reference is
concerned, and it will work as the feedback for the disturbance input. The overall system transfer
function is:
k
G ( s) H ( s) C
2
s + as + b kC
G R ( s) = = = 2 (5.8)
1 + G ( s) H ( s) k
1+ 2 C s + as + b + kC
s + as + b
Note that transfer function (5.8) describes the relationship between the reference signal and the
output variable of the plant. Recall that a disturbance normally is applied directly at the input of the
controlled plant, and, therefore, the appropriate transfer function is:
k
G ( s) 2
s + as + b = k
G D ( s) = = (5.9)
1 + G ( s) H ( s ) k 2
1+ 2 C s + as + b + kC
s + as + b
Let us define the characteristics of this system as per design specifications:
a) the steady-state tracking error (which is equal to the difference between the unit-step
reference and the system response to the reference):
1 1 b
s→ 0
[ ]
ε r = lim s R( s) − G R ( s) R( s) = lim s  − G R ( s)  = 1 − G R ( 0) =
s→ 0  s s b + kC
≤ E1 (5.10)

b) the steady-state disturbance error (which is equal to the system response to the
disturbance):

171
 1  k
ε d = lim s  G D ( s) = ≤ E2 (5.11)
s→ 0 s  b + bC

c) the overshoot of the step response P < P* requirement can be redefined through the damping
ratio of the second order transfer function of the reference channel: ζ ≥ ζ * , where ζ * value
corresponds to the overshoot of P*. Then the required damping ratio of the closed-loop
system can be defined as from the characteristic polynomial of the closed-loop system as
follows:
s 2 + as + b + kC
a
( )
2
= s2 + 2 ⋅ ⋅ b + kC ⋅ s + b + kC
b + kC
a
and therefore, ζ= ≥ζ* (5.12)
b + kC
d) the settling time can be derived from the closed-loop characteristic equation:
s 2 + as + b + kC = 0
understanding that the absolute values of real parts of the system poles are a/2:
8
Tset = ≤ T* (sec) (5.13)
a
Note that the introduction of the constant gain element H(s) = C does not affect the settling time
of the system.
It could be seen that the solution of the design problem implies the selection of such a value of
constant gain C that would simultaneously satisfy conditions (5.10) − (5.12). In addition, it is up to
the controlled plant to satisfy condition (5.13). Fortunately, in some practical situations design
specifications do not include all of the above requirements, and can be satisfied by a simple
controller H(s) = C.
Generally speaking, conditions (5.10) − (5.12) may not be satisfied by any choice of constant
gain C, and a more complex expression H(s) will be required. A more complex expression H(s)
would be also required if the settling time of the controlled plant does not satisfy condition (5.13).
Example 5.1
35.
Given transfer function of the controlled plant, G( s) = 2
, introduce a constant
s + 4.6s + 119
.
gain controller to satisfy the following specifications:
− steady-state tracking error for a step reference R(t) = u(t), εr ≤ 0.1 (abs. units),
− steady-state error caused by step disturbance D(t) = u(t), εd ≤ 0.01,

172
 − settling time Tset < 4sec,
− overshoot of the step response P < 25%
Solution: Note that steady-state errors for step-type inputs do not have to be equal to zero.
Then, note that the settling time of the controlled plant is equal to 4/2.3 < 4 (sec) which satisfies the
settling time requirement. Therefore, one can investigate the possibility of using a very simple
controller H(s) = C = const.
From condition (5.10), 11.9/(11.9 + 3.5C) ≤ 0.1
or 11.9 ≤ 1.19 + 0.35C
or 10.71 ≤ 0.35C
and C ≥ 30.6
From the condition (5.11), 3.5/ (11.9 + 3.5C) ≤ 0.01
or 3.5 ≤ 0.119 + 0.035C
or 3.381 ≤ 0.035C
and C ≥ 96.6
Recall the overshoot-damping ratio relationship that the overshoot requirement can be redefined
in terms of the damping ratio: ζ ≥ 0.4, then, from the condition (5.12),
4.6/[2(11.9 + 3.5C)1/2] ≥ 0.4
or 21.16/ [4(11.9 + 3.5C)] ≥ 0.16
or 21.16 ≥ 0.64(11.9 + 3.5C)
or 13.544 ≥ 2.24C
and C ≤ 6.046
It could be seen that the above requirements are mutually-exclusive, and the problem has no
solution with H(s) = const.
Example 5.2
Given transfer function of a controlled process, G(s) = 1/(s + 0.2). Design a control system to
assure that steady-state error caused by unit step disturbance is equal to zero, i.e., ε d = 0, and
steady-state tracking error for a ramp reference signal R(t) = 0.5t, ε r ≤ 0.05. System settling time
Tset ≤ 8 sec, and overshoot of the step response P ≤ 10%.
Solution: Recall that if an integrator would be introduced in the control loop, steady-state error
caused by step disturbance will be equal to zero. The steady-state tracking error for a ramp reference
will be equal to a constant. The system block diagram is shown in Fig. 5.1, where H(s) = k/s.

173
 Constant gain k now can be determined to accommodate for design specifications. The system
transfer function for the reference input is:
1 k
⋅ k
G R ( s) = s + 0.2 s = 2
1 k s + 0.2s + k
1+ ⋅
s + 0.2 s
The steady-state tracking error for a ramp reference, R(t) = 0.5t, can be defined as:
0.5
[ ] [
lim s R( s) − G R ( s) R( s) = lim s 2 1 − G R ( s)
s→ 0 s→ 0 s
]
0.5  k  0.5  s 2 + 0.2 s + k − k 
= lim 1 − = lim
s→ 0 s  s 2 + 0.2s + k  s→ 0 s  s 2 + 0.2 s + k 

0.5  s 2 + 0.2s  0.5  s( s + 0.2)  01.

or ε r = lim   = lim   = ≤ 0.05
s→ 0 s  s + 0.2s + k  s→ 0 s  s + 0.2s + k  k
2 2

It can be seen that k ≥ 2 would satisfy the steady-state error requirement.

Let us investigate the dynamics of the closed-loop system. Note that parameter k has no effect
on the real parts of system poles, responsible for the settling time and the system settling time is
unacceptable: Tset = 4/0.1 = 40 sec. The damping ratio of the system ζ = 0.1/k−1/2 and for k = 2, ζ =
0.071, which indicates that overshoot of the system step response is definitely greater than 10%
(recall that 10% overshoot corresponds to the damping ratio of 0.6). This indicates that design
specifications cannot be met with the simple controller H(s) = k/s.
Consider a more complex controller, H(s) = (k1s + k2)/s. The controller still contains an
integrator which will have the required effect on steady-state errors.
k1 s + k 2
The system transfer function for the reference input is G( s) = .
s + (0.2 + k1 )s + k 2
2

The steady-state tracking error for a ramp reference, R(t) = 0.5t, can be defined as:

0.5 0.5  k1 s + k2 
lim s [ ]
1 − G R ( s) = lim 1− 2 
 s + ( 0.2 + k1 )s + k 2 
s→ 0 s 2 s→ 0 s

0.5  s + (0.2 + k1 ) s − k 2 − k1 s − k 2  01
2
.
= lim  = k
s→ 0 s
 s + (0.2 + k1 )s + k 2
2
 2

It can be seen that to satisfy the steady-state error requirement is satisfied by k2 ≥ 2.

Let us make sure that the steady-state error caused by unit step disturbance is equal to zero:

174
  1 
1 1    s 
lim s G D ( s) = lim s  s + 0.2  = lim  2 =0
s→ 0 s s→ 0 s k1 s + k 2  s→ 0  s + (0.2 + k1 ) s + k2 
1+
 ( s + 0.2)s 

In order to assess system dynamics, rewrite system characteristic polynomial in canonical form:
0.2 + k1
( k)
2
s 2 + (0.2 + k1 )s + k 2 = s 2 + 2 ⋅ ⋅ k2 ⋅ s + 2
2 k2

0.2 + k1 0.2 + k1
Obviously, the system damping ratio is defined as and real parts of its poles are .
2 k2 2

The required overshoot can be achieved by assuring that damping ratio:

0.2 + k1
1> ≥ 0.6 , that results in 2 k2 > 0.2 + k1 ≥ 12
. k2
2 k2

The settling time can be assured by selecting such k1 that:

2
4⋅ ≤ 8 or 0.2 + k1 ≥ 1, or k1 ≥ 0.8
02.+ k1

It could be seen that k1 = 1.8 and k2 = 2 satisfy this condition, indeed, 2 2 > 0.2 + 1.8 ≥ 1.2

2.
. s+2
18
Finally, the recommended controller is H ( s) = and the system transfer function,
s
18. s+2 . ( s + 1111
18 . )
G R ( s) = =
s 2 + 2s + 2 s 2 + 2s + 2
Note that the overshoot of the step response of this system could be adversely affected by the
presence of system zero, z = −1.111.
1111
.
This zero can be canceled by introducing a special filter F ( s) = in the reference
s + 1111
.
channel, as shown in the VISSIM diagram below, see Fig. 5.2.
The example indicates that design specifications were successfully met by the introduction of
the controller H(s) = (k1s + k2)/s and, if necessary, the filter F(s). These modules provide enough
"leverage" to affect both statics and dynamics of the system.
Rewrite the controller transfer function as:
H(s) = k1 + k2/s
It can be seen now that the control effort is defined as the system error taken with the coefficient k1
(proportional part), plus the integral of the error taken with the coefficient k2 (integral part). This

175
 Figure 5.2

controller configuration, known as PI (proportional-integral) controller, is commonly used by

control system designers.
Note that even more "leverage" could be expected of a controller:
H(s) = k1 + k2/s + k3s
known as a PID (proportional-integral-derivative) controller.

POLE-ZERO CANCELLATION

This approach, already demonstrated by the previous example, implies that specially designed
filters are to be used for the cancellation of the undesirable poles and zeros of the open-loop transfer
function of the controlled plant.
It is known that zeros of the controlled plant tend to adversely affect system dynamics. They are
canceled most often. Assume that zi is one of the zeros of the controlled plant, then the transfer
function of the controlled plant can be written as:

G p ( s) =
( s − z i ) N ( s)
D( s)

where N(s) is the polynomial containing the rest of the plant zeros. In order to cancel zero zi of the

176
plant, a filter F(s) = 1/(s − zi) should be placed in series with the plant, so that the overall "plant &
filter" transfer function be G(s) = Gp(s)F(s) = N(s) /D(s). It should be understood that zi serves as the
pole of the filter F(s), and therefore, in order for the filter to be stable, zi must have a negative real
part. Zeros of a controlled plant located in the right-hand-side of the complex plane cannot be
canceled and constitute one of the major difficulties in control system design.
Note that the ability to "cancel out" the existing system dynamics is often limited by the
magnitude of control efforts which can be generated and applied to the controlled plant. For
example, mathematically, it is very easy to convert a dynamic system described by transfer function
G(s) = 3/(s+1) into a static system with constant gain k = 3. As shown below, this could be achieved
by introducing a filter F(s) = s + 1. In this case, the response of the system F(s)G(s) to an input

x u y
F(s) G(s)
Figure 5.3

signal X(t) = u(t), theoretically, is equal to 3u(t). From the point of view of physics, however, this
move should be interpreted as the "elimination of inertia". Technically, such an effect can be
achieved ONLY by the application of a very large control effort, u(t ) = ∞ , which most likely would

exceed any realistic feasibility limits

Example 5.3
s + 01
.
Given transfer function of a controlled plant, G( s) = 2
. Utilize pole/zero cancellation
s + 6s + 5
to design a controller, H(s), to assure that Tset ≤ 1 sec and P ≤ 10% for the reference input, and
steady-state error for a step disturbance is equal to zero.
Solution: Note that the "natural" plant dynamics is unacceptable from the point of view of
design requirements: the settling time of the plant is 4 sec, and the overshoot of its step response is
expected to be very high. The design specifications could be assured only by the appropriately
designed control system. Consider the following block diagram of the control system:

R y
F(s) H(s) G(s)
_

Figure 5.4

177
 Assume that H(s) is a PI controller, i.e. H(s) =k1 + k2/s = (k1s + k2)/s and the filter in the
reference channel F(s) = k3. Obtain closed-loop transfer function of this system:
( k1 s + k2 )( s + 01. )
GCL ( s) = k3
(
s s 2 + 6s + 5 ) =
k3 ( k1 s + k 2 )( s + 01
.)

1+
( k1 s + k2 )( s + 01. ) ( )
s s + 6s + 5 + ( k1 s + k 2 )( s + 01
2
.)
( 2
s s + 6s + 5 )
This expression does not result in an easy selection of parameters k1, k2, k3 in order to satisfy the
design specifications. First, because it is not that easy to work with the third order denominator of
GCL(s). Second, because of the adverse effect of zeros of GCL(s) on the system overshoot. Let us
apply the pole-zero compensation approach to simplify the problem. First, introduce a filter, W(s) =
(s + 1)/(s + 0.1) is series with the controlled plant. This would result in a “simplified” transfer
function of the “plant & filter” combination:
s +1 s + 01
. s +1 s + 01. 1
G P & F ( s) = ⋅ 2 = ⋅ =
s + 01 . ( s + 1)( s + 5) s + 5
. s + 6s + 5 s + 01

One can conclude that the “plant & filter” combination already satisfies the system dynamics
requirements and the feedback may not be needed. – This is a wrong conclusion: without a controller
block including an integrator the steady-state error requirement cannot be satisfied. We will choose
H(s) = k1 + k2/s = (k1s + k2)/s and the filter in the reference channel F(s) that will result in the
following closed-loop system transfer function:
k1 s + k 2
s( s + 5) F ( s)( k1 s + k2 ) F ( s)( k1 s + k 2 )
GCL ( s) = F ( s) = = 2
k s + k2 s( s + 5) + ( k1 s + k 2 ) s + (5 + k1 )s + k 2
1+ 1
s( s + 5)

Note that the above transfer function relates system output to the reference. In order to eliminate
effect of zeros on the overshoot, it makes sense to choose F(s) = 1/(k1s + k2) that results in the
closed-loop system transfer function:
1
GCL ( s) =
s + (5 + k1 )s + k2
2

It is clear that if the reference is a unit step signal (that represents the desired value of the output)
then, in steady-state, the system response must be equal to 1. One can see that with the above
system transfer function the steady-state system response to a unit step reference is equal to 1/k2
This flaw can be easily eliminated by choosing F(s) = k2/( k1s + k2).

178
 It is time now to satisfy the settling time and overshoot requirements. The settling time
requirement yields:
4 8
= = 1 (sec)
0.5(5 + k1 ) 5 + k1

or 8 = 5 + k1
or k1 = 3
The overshoot of 10% corresponds to damping ratio of 0.6, that results in the following
expression for the system characteristic polynomial:
 4 
s 2 + (5 + k1 )s + k 2 = s 2 + 8s + k2 = s 2 + 2 ⋅   ⋅ k2 ⋅ s + k 2
 k2 

4
that yields the damping ratio expression: = 0.6 k 2 = 6.67 and k2 = 44.4.
k2

44.4 3s + 44.4
Finally, F ( s) = and H ( s) = . The following simulation setup presents the
3s + 44.4 s
resultant system.

Figure 5.5

179
 A word of caution: indeed pole-zero cancellation seems to be a perfect way to control
dynamics of a controlled plant. In practice, this approach would not necessarily work because of two
reasons:
1) numerical values of poles and/or zeros of the controlled plant to be cancelled may not be
accurately known to the system designer, and
2) pole/zero cancellation may result in drastic increase of the control effort applied to the plant,
far beyond the feasibility limits

USE OF ROOT LOCUS

The application of root locus for system design has two aspects. First, it can be used to "drive"
dominant closed-loop system poles into the desired region of the complex plane by the selection of
the appropriate constant gain. Second, it utilizes the relationship between open-loop poles and zeros
and the closed-loop poles to cancel some and introduce some open-loop poles and/or zeros.
Let us define the "desired region of the complex plane". Assume that system dominant poles
4
are: α ± jβ. It is known that if design specifications imply that Tset ≤ T* and P% ≤ P*, then ≤ T*
α

4
and α ≥ . And since α is negative:
T*
4
α≤− (5.14)
T*

β 1 − ζ *2
It is also known that = , where ζ * is the damping ratio which corresponds to the
α ζ *

1 − ζ *2
overshoot P*. Note that the quantity decreases with the increase of damping ratio ζ *. For
ζ*

1 − 0.2 2 1 − 0.4 2 1 − 0.6 2

example, = 4.9 , = 2.29 and = 133
. , therefore, in order to satisfy the
0.2 0.4 0.6
overshoot requirement, P% ≤ P*:

1 − ζ *2
β ≤α (5.15)
ζ*
Consider the area of the complex plain that contains all complex numbers with real parts

4 1 − ζ *2
α≤− and imaginary parts β ≤ α . This is the area, shown in the Fig. 5.6 below,
T* ζ*

180
where angle Ω is defined as:

I m a g in a r y A x is

4 / T*

R eq u ire d lo c a t io n ar ea fo r Ω = T an - 1 [( 1 -ζ *2 ) 1 /2 / ζ * ]
d o m in a n t p o le s

R e a l A x is

Figure 5.6

 1 − ζ *2 
Ω = tan 
−1 
 (5.16)
 ζ *

It should be understood, however, that the ability to "drive system dominant poles" to the
desirable region by adjusting the constant gain is quite limited. Indeed, one adjustable parameter,
constant gain, does not provide enough "leverage" for handling dominant poles and also assuring
that the rest of poles will maintain their non-dominant status. This approach still is instrumental for
3-rd order systems and can be used for higher order systems in conjunction with pole/zero
cancellation.
Example 5.4
2( s + 100)
Given transfer function of the controlled plant, G( s) = . Introduce a
( s + 10)(s 2 + s + 15)
controller to assure that Tset ≤ 1 sec, overshoot of the system response to a unit step reference P ≤
30%.
Solution: Recall that overshoot of 30% corresponds to the value of damping ratio of
approximately 0.35. The desirable region in the complex plane can be defined by the vertical line
 1 − 0.352  -1
crossing the real axis at point −4, and the angle Ω = tan − 1   = Tan (2.676) = 70°.
 0.35 

181
 The system poles, located in this region have the following properties: their real parts are less
than −4, their imaginary part / real part ratios are 2.676 or less (by absolute value).
a) Consider a constant gain in the feedback path in the role of a controller, H(s) = k.
Fig. 5.7 below presents a root loci obtained for the transfer function:
2( s + 100)
G ( s) =
( s + 10)(s 2 + s + 15)
Observation of the root loci indicates that as gain k increases, two complex conjugate closed-
loop poles leave the left hand side of the complex plane before entering the "desirable region". This
implies that design specifications cannot be satisfied by a constant gain controller.
Recall that root loci are always originated at the location of the open-loop poles. Let us make
sure that root loci are originated “deep in the allowable region of the complex plane. This could be
achieved by introducing the following filter in series with the controlled plant:
s 2 + s + 15
W ( s) =
s 2 + 20s + 100
and the consequent pole/zero cancellation that would result in the “plant & filter” transfer
function:

Figure 5.7

182
 2( s + 100)
G P & F ( s) =
( s + 10)( s 2 + 20s + 100)
The root loci obtained for this transfer function are shown below.
According to Fig. 5.8, at the constant gain value k = 6, the closed-loop system has two dominant
poles, p1,2 = −5 ± 9.2j and one non-dominant pole, p3 ≈ −20 (Indeed, 20/5 = 4). Also, imaginary
part/real part ratio for dominant poles is 9.2/5 = 1.84 that is less than the required 2.676.

Figure 5.8

Obtain the closed-loop system transfer function:

W ( s)G( s) 2( s + 100)
G CL ( s) = =
( )
1 + kW ( s)G( s) ( s + 10) s 2 + 20s + 100 + 12( s + 100)

The simulation setup, Fig. 5.9 below, represents the designed system and its properties,
compliant with the design specifications. It could be seen that the appropriate steady-state value of
the system step response requires that the gain of 11.05 be introduced in the reference channel. Note
that in this particular case, zero of the closed-loop system does not jeopardize the overshoot
requirement, otherwise this zero should be cancelled by a special filter in the reference channel.

183
 Figure 5.9

To illustrate the second aspect of the root-locus application, assume that the following is an
open-loop transfer function of a control system:
kk c ( s − z c )( s − z1 )
G OL ( s) =
( s − pc )( s − p1 )( s − p2 )
where k, z1, p1, and p2 are constant gain, zero and poles of the controlled plant, and kc, zc and pc are
adjustable constant gain, zero and pole of a controller.
The characteristic equation of this system can be written as:
G OL ( s) + 1 = 0 or G OL ( s) = −1

In the complex plane (recall that s = α + jβ) the equivalent expression is:
kk c ( s − z c )( s − z1 )
G OL ( s) = = −1 = 1∠ − 180°
( s − pc )( s − p1 )( s − p2 )
If ρ* is one of closed-loop poles of this system, it must satisfy this equality, i.e.:

( )(
kk c ρ * − z c ρ * − z1 ) = 1∠ − 180°
(ρ *
)(
− pc ρ − p1 ρ − p2
*
)( *
)
Note that in the complex plane terms ρ* − zi and ρ* − pk are represented by absolute values and
phases, i.e.:

184
 ρ * − z c = ρ * − z c ∠ϕ zc

ρ * − z1 = ρ * − z1 ∠ϕ z1

ρ * − pc = ρ * − pc ∠ϕ pc

ρ * − p1 = ρ * − p1 ∠ϕ p1

ρ * − p 2 = ρ * − p 2 ∠ϕ p 2

and the following equations can be obtained for the magnitudes and phases:
ρ * − z c ⋅ ρ * − z1
kkc =1
ρ * − pc ⋅ ρ * − p1 ⋅ ρ * − p2

ϕ zc + ϕ z1 − ϕ pc − ϕ p1 − ϕ p 2 = −180°

While closed-loop poles ρ* can be selected such that the dynamics requirements be satisfied (the
dominant poles should be located in the special region of the complex plane), the above equations
are sufficient for the derivation of the gain kc, pole pc and zero zc of the controller. Several
grapho−analytical techniques exist for the solution of this problem.
Example 5.5
2( s + 01
.)
Given transfer function of the controlled plant, G( s) = . Introduce a
( s + 1)( s 2 + 4s + 20)
controller to achieve Tset ≤ 1 sec and the overshoot of system response to unit step reference P ≤
10%.
k(s − z)
Solution: Assume that a controller H ( s) = will be introduced in the forward path of the
( s − p)
system. Let us select the zero of the controller z = −1. This results in the cancellation of one pole of
the controlled plant with one important consequence: the system order will be reduced to three and
we will be able to represent its performance just by two complex conjugate poles and canceling, if
necessary, the third pole if it will become dominant.
Following the design specifications, establish the borders of the desirable region in the complex
plane. The overshoot of 10% corresponds to the value of damping ratio of 0.6. The vertical line will
cross the real axis at point −4, and angle:

1 − 0.6 2
Ω = tan − 1 = tan − 1 (1333
. ) = 53°
0.6

185
 The system poles, located on the border of this region have real parts equal to −4 and imaginary
parts equal to ± 5.3.
Note that open-loop zero and poles of the controlled plant are −0.1, and −2 ± 4j (recall that pole
−1 has been canceled). Select one of the desired closed-loop poles, ρ* = −4 + 5.3j. Determine
absolute values and phases of the following terms:
ρ * + 01
. = −4 + 5.3 j + 01
. = −39
. + 53
. j = 6.58∠126.34°

ρ * + 2 − 4 j = −4 + 53
. j + 2 − 4 j = −2 + 13
. j = 2.385∠146.98°

ρ * + 2 + 4 j = −4 + 5.3 j + 2 + 4 j = −2 + 9.3 j = 9.513∠10214

. °
Define the magnitude and phase equations:
k × 2 × 6.58
=1
2.385 × 9.513 × − 4 + 5.3 j − p

. °−ϕ = −180°
126.34°−146.98°−10214
where k and p are gain and pole of the controller, still unknown, and n is the phase of –4 + 5.3j – p.
It could be seen that:
ϕ = 180°+126.34°−146.98°−10214
. ° = 57.22°
Also recall that since pole of the controller, p, is real:
5.3
tan ϕ = = tan(57.22°) = 155
.
−4− p
53 .
and −4− p= = 3.42
.
155
and p = -7.42
Let us determine gain k as:
2.385 × 9.513 × − 4 + 5.3 j + 7.42
k= = 172
. × 3.42 + 5.3 j
2 × 6.58
k = 1.72 × 6.3 = 10.836
10.836( s + 1)
Finally, the controller is . Fig. 5.10 represents the simulation setup and the step
s + 7.42
response of the obtained system which exhibits two major problems: unacceptable overshoot and
steady-state values. The high overshoot is caused by the zero of the closed-loop system equal to
−0.1. It has to be canceled by the introduction of first order system in the reference channel. The
magnitude of steady-state response to the unit step reference can be increased to the value of 1 by the
introduction of constant gain in the reference channel.

186
 Figure 5.10

S-DOMAIN DESIGN − POLE PLACEMENT

This technique, more common in modern than in classical control, assures complete compliance
with the design specifications, resulting, however, in a quite complex configuration of the controller.
It implies that the zeros of the controlled plant are being canceled, and therefore the overshoot and
the settling time of the system step response are completely defined by a pair of complex conjugate
dominant poles. Then a feedback is being introduced to assure that the closed-loop system indeed
has the required dominant and some arbitrary non-dominant poles (pole placement). In order to
satisfy the steady-state error requirements, special provisions are to be made.
Assume that the controlled process is defined by the transfer function G(s) = M(s)/N(s), where
N(s) is an m−th order polynomial numerator and D(s) is a n−th order polynomial denominator:
N ( s) = bm s m + bm− 1 s m− 1 + bm− 2 s m− 2 + L + b1 s + b0

D( s) = s n + a n − 1 s n − 1 + a n − 2 s n − 2 + L + a1 s + a n

187
It is implied that n > m. First, consider the following simplified set of design specifications:
− settling time Tset ≤ T*
− overshoot of the step response P ≤ P*
The design procedure includes the following steps:
Step 1. Cancellation of zeros of the controlled process. This can be achieved by introducing a
filter W(s) = 1/N(s) in series with the controlled process (it is assumed that the numerator M(s) does
not contain any right-hand-side zeros, and therefore the filter W(s) is stable). Introduce a transfer
function:
1
G0 ( s) = W ( s)G( s) =
D( s)

describing the "controlled process with canceled zeros".

Step 2. Definition of the desired closed-loop system poles. When the maximum settling time
and overshoot of the step response are specified, this information can be used to define a pair of
complex conjugate dominant poles of the system:
first, the value of damping ratio, ζ*, has to be defined from the overshoot value P*,
second, settling time T* is converted into the absolute value of the real part of the dominant
poles: a = 4/T*, and therefore, real part of the dominant poles is α = −a,
third, recall that imaginary parts of the dominant poles, β, are related to the real part as

β 1 − ζ *2
=
α ζ*

1 − ζ *2
and therefore β =α
ζ*
Finally, the required dominant poles are defined as p1, 2 = α ± βj .

Step 3. Definition of non-dominant closed-loop system poles. The pole placement procedure
does not result in the increase of the system order. Therefore, the designed closed-loop system is
expected to have n poles. While the two dominant poles have been already defined, the number of
non-dominant poles is n − 2. It is known that non-dominant poles are located in the complex plane
at least four times further to the left from the imaginary axis than the dominant poles. Any location,
satisfying this condition, is suitable for placing a non-dominant pole. However (unless there are
some additional considerations), it is recommended that all non-dominant poles:
− be sufficiently different

188
 − have small absolute values
− when possible be defined by conjugate pairs.
Step 4. Definition of the feedback control law. When system poles, dominant and
non-dominant, are defined, the characteristic polynomial of the closed-loop system can be expressed
as:
Q( s) = ( s − p1 )( s − p2 ) L( s − pn )
or in the polynomial form (using a software tool):
Q( s) = s n + qn − 1 s n − 1 + qn − 2 s n − 2 + L + q1 s + q0

Introduce a (n − 1) order polynomial representing the feedback control law in the form of:
H ( s) = hn − 1 s n − 1 + hn − 2 s n − 2 + L + h1 s + h0
Define the characteristic polynomial of a closed loop system with the transfer function of the
forward path G0(s) and the transfer function of the feedback H(s), as shown below:

1 N(s)

- N(s) D(s)

H(s)

Figure 5.11

Q( s) = D( s) + H ( s) = s n + (a n − 1 + hn − 1 )s n − 1 + (a n − 2 + hn − 2 )s n − 2 + L + (a1 + h1 )s + (a 0 + h0 )
But at the same time, in order to assure the settling time and overshoot requirements:
Q( s) = ( s − p1 )( s − p2 ) L( s − pn ) = s n + qn − 1 s n − 1 + qn − 2 s n − 2 + L + q1s + q0
where pi, i = 1, … , n, are selected closed-loop poles.
By obtaining both expressions for Q(s), one provides the conditions for the definition of
parameters hi: ai + hi = qi or hi = qi − ai , i = 1, 2, ..., n.
Step 5. Introduction of the feedforward gain. It can be seen that the closed-loop system transfer
function, relating its output to the reference signal can be written as GCL(s) = 1/Q(s), and therefore,
steady-state system response to a unit step reference is Yss = 1/Q(0) = 1/ (a0 + h0) = 1/q0. It is known
that since the reference represents the required value of the system output, this steady-state value
should be equal to 1. This can be achieved by the introduction of a special gain in the reference
channel, C = q0.

189
 Step 6. Transformation of the system block diagram and the definition of the feedback controller
and the filter should be performed as follows:
This transformation results in the final expression for the filter in the reference channel:

C N(s)
N(s)
- D(s)

H(s)
N(s)

Figure 5.12

q0
F ( s) = m− 1
m
bm s + bm− 1 s + bm− 2 s m− 2 + L + b1 s + b0
and the feedback controller:
hn − 1 s n − 1 + hn − 2 s n − 2 + L + h1 s + h0
P( s) =
bm s m + bm− 1 s m− 1 + bm− 2 s m− 2 + L + b1 s + b0
Example 5.6
5s 3 + 90s 2 + 260s + 200
Given transfer function of the controlled plant, G( s) = , and design
s 4 + 3s 3 + 4s 2 + 4s + 11
specifications: overshoot of step response P ≤ 10%, and settling time Tset ≤ 4 sec. Design the control
system.
Solution: First, let us make sure that the controlled plant does not have right-hand-side zeros.
Indeed, application of a software tool yields:

(
5s 3 + 90s 2 + 260s + 200 = 5 s 3 + 18s 2 + 45s + 40 = 5( s + 136675
. )
)( s + 2)( s + 14.63325)
Cancellation of plant's zeros can be achieved by introducing the filter:

1
W ( s) = 3 2
5s + 90s + 260s + 200

According to the required settling time, real parts of the closed-loop dominant poles should be
equal to −1. It is known that 10% overshoot corresponds to the damping ratio of 0.6, therefore the

1 − 0.6 2
imaginary parts of the dominant poles can be found as β = ± = ±133
. , and finally, the
0.6
dominant poles are:
p1, 2 = −1 ± 133
. j

190
 The non-dominant poles can be selected as p3, 4 = −4 ± j .

Define the characteristic polynomial of the closed-loop system as:

Q( s) = ( s + 1 + 133
. j )( s + 1 − 133
. j )( s + 4 + j )( s + 4 − j )
( )(
= s 2 + 2s + 2.78 s 2 + 8s + 17 )
= s 4 + 10s 3 + 35.78s 2 + 56.24s + 47.26

Define coefficients of the feedback controller:

3 + h3 = 10 → h3 = 7
4 + h2 = 35.78 → h2 = 3178
.
4 + h1 = 56.24 → h1 = 52.24
11 + h0 = 47.26 → h0 = 36.26
Define the feedforward gain: C = 47.26
It could be seen that the feedback controller now can be defined by its transfer function as:

7s 3 + 3178. s 2 + 52.24s + 36.26

P( s) =
5s 3 + 90s 2 + 260s + 200
. s 3 + 6.356s 2 + 10.448s + 7.252
14
=
s 3 + 18s 2 + 52s + 40

and the filter in the reference channel, sometimes called “feedforward controller” has transfer
function:
47.26 9.452
F ( s) = = 3
5s + 90s + 260s + 200 s + 18s 2 + 52s + 40
3 2

The simulation setup of Fig. 5.13 below presents the designed system and its response to a step
reference input.
Compliance with the steady-state error requirements. Steady-state error requirements can
further complicate the design procedure.
A. Tracking error for a step reference does not constitute a problem. It can be seen from the
above design procedure that the additional gain, C, introduced in the reference channel, allows for
scaling the reference effects such that the tracking error will be equal to zero.
B. Steady-state error caused by a step disturbance. Recall that the disturbance signal is
applied directly to the controlled plant and the steady-state error caused by a unit step disturbance is
defined through the transfer function of the plant and the transfer function of the feedback controller
as:

191
 Figure 5.13

N (0)
G(0) D(0)
εd = =
1 + G(0) P( 0) N ( 0) H (0)
1+ ⋅
D(0) N (0)
N (0)
D(0) N (0) N (0)
= = =
N (0) D(0) + H (0) Q(0)
1+
D(0)

N (0) b0
and finally, taking into account expressions N(s), D(s), H(s), and Q(s), ε d = = , where b0
Q(0) q0

and q0 are zero-order terms of polynomial N(s) and Q(s) correspondingly.

Assume that the list of chosen closed-loop poles, roots of the polynomial Q(s), includes K
real poles, pi, i = 1, 2, …, K, and 2×L complex conjugate poles, pi = αi ± βi j, i = 1,2,…, L, so that K
+ 2×L = n. Then one can obtain the following expression for the zero-order terms of polynomial
Q(s):

( )( )( ) (
q0 = ( − p1 )( − p2 )( − p3 ) L( − p K ) α12 + β12 α 22 + β22 α 32 + β32 L α L2 + βL2 )
and finally:

192
 b0
εd = (5.17)
(− p1 )( − p2 )( − p3 ) L( − pK )(α 1
2
)( )( ) (
+ β12 α 22 + β22 α 32 + β32 L α L2 + βL2 )
This result is very informative: it indicates that the steady-state error caused by a step
disturbance can be reduced to the allowable limits by the appropriate selection of the closed-loop
system poles during the pole placement. While the dominant poles are fixed due to the required
dynamics, the absolute values of non-dominant poles can be intentionally increased to achieve this
goal.
Example 5.7
Assume that conditions and design specifications of the above problem of Example 5.6 are
supplemented by the requirement that th steady-state error caused by unit step disturbance Z(t) = u(t)
shall not exceed 0.1 (abs. units).
Solution: First, let us evaluate steady-state error in the already designed system:
M ( 0) 200
εd = = = 4.23
Q(0) 47.26

Let us verify this result by applying formula (5.17):

200 200
εd = = = 4.25
( 2
1 + 133
. 2 2
4 +12
)( 2.77 × 17)
(Some round-off errors are obvious.)
One can realize that this result is completely unacceptable: the designed system is more
sensitive to disturbance than to the reference!
Let us replace non-dominant poles, which were originally selected as p3, 4 = −4 ± j , by

200
p3, 4 = −5 ± 10 j . The new value of the steady-state error is ε d = = 0.58 (units) which is
2.77 × 125
still unacceptable.
One can gradually increase the absolute value of the non-dominant poles and keep calculating
the steady-state error until the required result will be achieved. Of course, there is a different
approach that utilizes formula (5.17) directly. Assume that non-dominant poles are p3, 4 = α ± βj ,

then:
200 200
εd = = 01
. or 2 = 0.277 or α 2 + β 2 = 722
(
2.77 α + β
2 2
)
α + β 2

For simplicity assume that α = β , then α = β = 19 and p3, 4 = −19 ± 19 j . The resultant

193
closed-loop characteristic polynomial is:
Q( s) = ( s + 1 + 133
. j )( s + 1 − 133
. j )( s + 19 + 19 j )( s + 19 − 19 j )
= s 4 + 40s 3 + 800s 2 + 1550s + 2000
This selection of closed-loop poles requires to redefine coefficients of polynomial H(s) as
follows:
h3 = 3
h2 = 796
h1 =1546
h0 =1989
The feedback controller and the filter are:
37s 3 + 796s 2 + 1546s + 1989
P( s) =
5s 3 + 90s 2 + 260s + 200
7.4s 3 + 159.2s 2 + 309.2s + 398
=
s 3 + 18s 2 + 52s + 40
2000
F ( s) = 3 2
5s + 90s + 260s + 200
400
= 3 2
s + 18s + 52s + 40
Simulation setup of Fig. 5.14 presents the redesigned system and shows its responses to the
reference (unchanged comparing with Fig. 5.13) and disturbance signals.
C. Complete elimination of the steady-state error caused by a step disturbance.
This problem can be successfully solved by placing an integrator in the input of the controlled
plant, and building the control system for the “plant & integrator” combination. Note that this
integrator constitutes a part of control circuitry, and the disturbance will still be applied directly at
the input of the controlled plant. Therefore, as far as the disturbance is concerned, we are dealing
with a control system that has the transfer function of the controlled plant, G(s), in the forward path
and the transfer function W(s)H(s)/s in the feedback. Since this system has one integrator in the
feedback, its steady-state error caused by step disturbance is equal to zero.
Note that introduction of an integrator results in the increase of the order of the system and the
entire pole placement procedure must be performed from the very beginning, for a completely
G ( s)
different controlled plant G * ( s) = .
s

194
 Figure 5.14

Example 5.8
Given transfer function of the controlled plant:
s 3 + 17s 2 + 36s + 20
G ( s) =
s 4 + 3s 3 + 4s 2 + 4s + 11
and design specifications: overshoot of step response P ≤ 10%, and settling time Tset ≤ 4 sec. It is
required that steady-state error caused by a step disturbance be equal to zero. Design a control
system.
Solution: Introduce an additional integrator in the system. Define the “plant & integrator”
transfer function G * ( s) as:

G ( s) s 3 + 17s 2 + 36s + 20
G * ( s) = = 5
s s + 3s 4 + 4s 3 + 4 s 2 + 11s
Cancellation of plant's zeros can be achieved by introducing the filter:
1
W ( s) = 3 2
s + 17s + 36s + 20
As per Example 5.7, closed-loop dominant poles are: p1, 2 = −1 ± 133
. j.

195
 The total number of poles is 5, therefore non-dominant poles can be selected as p3, 4 = −4 ± j

and p5 = −5.
Define the desired characteristic polynomial of the closed-loop system as:
Q( s) = ( s + 1 + 133
. j )( s + 1 − 133
. j )( s + 4 + j )( s + 4 − j )( s + 5)
= s 5 + 15s 4 + 85.78s 3 + 23514
. s 2 + 328.46s + 236.3
Define coefficients of the feedback controller H(s):
3 + h4 = 15 → h4 = 12
4 + h3 = 85.78 → h3 = 8178
.
4 + h2 = 23514
. → h2 = 23114
.
11 + h1 = 238.46 → h1 = 317.46
0 + h0 = 236.3 → h0 = 236.3

Therefore, H ( s) = 12s 4 + 8178

. s 3 + 23114
. s 2 + 317.46s + 236.3 .
Define the feedforward gain: C = 236.3.
The resultant system is (note that “z” is the disturbance signal):

z
R y
C _ W(s) 1/s G(s)

H(s)

Figure 5.15
This system could be transformed into:

z
R y
CW(s)/s G(s)
_

H(s)W(s)/s

Figure 5.16
that results in the following definition of the feedback controller P(s) and the filter in the reference
channel F(s):
H ( s)W ( s) 12s 4 + 8178
. s 3 + 23114. s 2 + 317.46s + 236.3
P( s) = =
s (
s s 3 + 17s 2 + 36s + 20 )

196
 W ( s) 236.3
F ( s) = C =
s (
s s 3 + 17s 2 + 36s + 20 )
Let us define the steady-state error caused by a step disturbance. This error is equal to the final
value of the system response to a step disturbance:

G ( s) 1
ε d = lim s ⋅
s→ 0 1 + G( s) P( s) s

s 3 + 17s 2 + 36s + 20
s 4 + 3s 3 + 4s 2 + 4s + 11 1
= lim s ⋅
s→ 0 3 2
s + 17s + 36s + 20 12s + 8178 4 3
. s + 23114 . s + 317.46s + 236.3 s
2
1+ 4 ⋅
s + 3s 3 + 4s 2 + 4s + 11 (
s s 3 + 17s 2 + 36s + 20 )

= lim s
(
s s 3 + 17s 2 + 36s + 20 )
s→ 0
( ) (
s s 4 + 3s 3 + 4s 2 + 4s + 11 + 12s 4 + 8178
. s 3 + 23114
. s 2 + 317.46s + 236.3 )
εd = 0
D. Steady-state error caused by a ramp disturbance.
It could be seen that an additional integrator must be introduced in the control loop to assure the
ability of a control system to "handle" a ramp disturbance. Let us investigate the steady-state error
caused by a ramp disturbance z(t) = δ t in the system designed in Example 5.8. This error is equal to
the final value of the system response to a ramp disturbance:

G ( s) δ
ε d = lim s ⋅ 2
s→ 0 1 + G( s) P( s) s

s 3 + 17s 2 + 36s + 20
s 4 + 3s 3 + 4s 2 + 4s + 11 δ
= lim s 3 2 4 3 2
⋅ 2
s→ 0 s + 17s + 36s + 20 12s + 8178 . s + 23114. s + 317.46s + 236.3 s
1+ 4 ⋅
3 2
s + 3s + 4s + 4s + 11 3 2
(
s s + 17s + 36s + 20 )

= lim
(
s s 3 + 17s 2 + 36s + 20 ) ⋅
δ
s→ 0
( 4 3 2
) (
s s + 3s + 4s + 4s + 11 + 12s + 8178 4
. s + 23114 3
. s + 317.46s + 236.3 2
) s

20δ
εd =
236.3
Recall that 236.3 = q0 is the zero-order term of the desired characteristic polynomial of the
closed-loop system defined by choosing closed-loop poles, see formula (5.17). One can realize that

197
 a) Introduction of an integrator in the input of the controlled plant and consequent pole-
placement design result in a finite steady-state error caused by a ramp reference, and
b) The value of the steady-state error caused by a ramp reference can be manipulated by the
selection of non-dominant closed-loop poles.
Example 5.9
s + 0.5
Given transfer function of a controlled plant, G( s) = 2
. Design a controller to satisfy
s +s+5
the following specifications: Tset ≤ 4 sec, P ≤ 25%, steady-state errors caused by unit step and unit
ramp disturbances shall not exceed 0.01 (units).
Solution: First define the filter responsible for cancellation of the zero of the controlled plant:
1
W ( s) = . Then introduce an integrator in the control loop, the “plant & integrator” transfer
s + 0.5
1
function is: G * ( s) = . Based on the required system dynamics, dominant poles should
(
s s2 + s + 5)
have real part of −1. Damping ratio, corresponding to 25% overshoot, is 0.4, therefore, imaginary

1 − 0.4 2
parts of dominant poles are ± = ±2.29 . One non-dominant pole is selected to be −10.
0.4
Define closed-loop characteristic polynomial:
Q( s) = ( s + 1 − 2.29 j )( s + 1 + 2.29 j )( s + 10) = s 3 + 12s 2 + 26.25s + 62.5
The feedback controller is defined as:
H ( s) = h2 s 2 + h1 s + h0
Parameters of H(s) can be defined by equating:

( )
Q ( s) = s s 2 + s + 5 + H ( s )

or s 3 + 12s 2 + 26.25s + 62.5 = s 3 + s 2 + 5s + h2 s 2 + h1s + h0

which yields: h2 = 11, h1 = 21.25, and h0 = 62.5.
The steady-state error caused by unit step disturbance Z(s) is equal to:
s + 0.5
s +s+52 1 s( s + 0.5)
lim s ⋅ = lim 2 =0
s→ 0
1+
2
. s + 62.5 s
11s + 2125 s → 0
(
s s + s + 5 + 11s 2 + 2125 ) (
. s + 62.5 )
(
s s2 + s + 5 )
The steady-state error caused by unit ramp disturbance is equal to:

198
 s + 0.5
2
s +s+5 1 s( s + 0.5) 1
lim s ⋅ 2 = lim 2 ⋅
s→ 0
1+
2
11s + 2125
. s + 62.5 s (
s→ 0 s s + s + 5 + 11s 2 + 2125
) (
. s + 62.5 s )
(
s s2 + s + 5 )
0.5
= = 0.008 (units)
62.5
It can be seen that the designed system satisfies the design specifications.
E. Tracking error for ramp reference.
Assume that the controlled process is defined by the transfer function G(s) = N(s)/D(s), where
N(s) is an m-th order polynomial numerator and D(s) is a n-th order polynomial denominator:
N ( s) = bm s m + bm− 1 s m− 1 + bm− 2 s m− 2 + L + b1 s + b0

D( s) = s n + a n − 1 s n − 1 + a n − 2 s n − 2 + L + a1 s + a n
a feedback controller:
hn − 1 s n − 1 + hn − 2 s n − 2 + L + h1 s + h0
P( s) =
bm s m + bm− 1 s m− 1 + bm− 2 s m− 2 + L + b1 s + b0
and feedforward controller:
C
F ( s) = m− 1
m
bm s + bm− 1 s + bm− 2 s m− 2 + L + b1 s + b0
are defined by the pole placement procedure.
First, let us determine the tracking error for the case when the reference signal is a ramp
function:
v
r (t ) = vt or R( s) = :
s2
and the closed-loop characteristic polynomial is defined as:
Q( s) = N ( s) + H ( s) = s n + qn − 1 s n − 1 + qn − 2 s n − 2 + L + q1s + q0
The tracking error is "the difference between the reference and the system response to this
reference", i.e.:

[ ] [
E ( s) = R( s) − G R ( s) R( s) = 1 − G R ( s) R( s) = 1 − G R ( s) ] sv
2

 N ( s) C 
 ⋅
 G ( s)  v  D( s) N ( s)  v
or E ( s) = 1 − F ( s)  2 = 1 − 
 G ( s ) P( s )  s 
1 +
N ( s ) ⋅
H ( s )  s2
 D( s) N ( s) 


199
  C 
 D( s)  v   v
  = 1 − C
= 1−  2
 H ( s)  s 2
 D( s) + H ( s)  s
 1 +
 D( s) 

 C  v Q ( s) − C v
or E ( s) = 1 −  2 = Q s ⋅ s2
 Q( s)  s ()
Recall that coefficient C is defined as the “zero-order term of polynomial Q(s)”, i.e., C = q0. In
this situation, expression E(s) can be rewritten as:

Q( s) − q0 v s n + qn − 1 s n − 1 + q n − 2 s n − 2 + L + q1 s + q0 − q0 v
E ( s) = ⋅ 2 = ⋅ 2
Q( s) s s n + qn − 1 s n − 1 + qn − 2 s n − 2 + L + q1 s + q0 s

= n
s n + qn − 1 s n − 1 + qn − 2 s n − 2 + L + q1 s v
⋅ =
[ ]
s n − 1 + qn − 1 s n − 2 + qn − 2 s n − 3 + L + q1 s v
⋅
s + qn − 1 s n − 1 + qn − 2 s n − 2 + L + q1 s + q0 s 2 s n + qn − 1 s n − 1 + qn − 2 s n − 2 + L + q1 s + q0 s 2

s n − 1 + qn − 1 s n − 2 + qn − 2 s n − 3 + L + q1 v
or E ( s) = ⋅
s + qn − 1 s + q n − 2 s + L + q1 s + q0 s
n n− 1 n− 2

Now the steady-state tracking error for ramp reference can be defined as:

s n − 1 + qn − 1 s n − 2 + qn − 2 s n − 3 + L + q1 v q
lim sE ( s) = lim s ⋅ = 1 ⋅v (5.18)
s→ 0 s→ 0 s + qn − 1 s + qn − 2 s + L + q1 s + q0 s q0
n n− 1 n− 2

Steady-state tracking error for a ramp reference is finite. It is equal to the slope of the ramp
times the ratio between coefficients of s1 and s0 of the closed-loop characteristic polynomial.
Is it possible to control the value of the steady-state tracking error? It can be seen that ratio
q1/q0, responsible for the error value, can be affected by the choice of non-dominant poles.
However, it is difficult to establish an expression that could be used for the error control.
F. Manipulating the tracking error for ramp reference.
While the traditional control system schematic, facilitating pole placement, does not provide for
error manipulation, consider somewhat different system configuration shown below. This
configuration is formed by placing an integrator in the input of the controlled plant, introducing a
filter W(s)=1/N(s) cancel zeros of the plant, and a module H(s) that is a polynomial such that sD(s) +
H(s)=Q(s) where Q(s) is the desired characteristic polynomial of the closed-loop system.
The transfer function of this system for reference input is:

200
 R H(s) 1 N(s) y
_ N(s) s D(s)

Figure 5.17

N ( s) 1 1
1
G ( s) W ( s) H ( s) ⋅ ⋅ ⋅ H ( s)
s D( s) s N ( s)
G ( s) =
R
=
1 + G ( s) W ( s) H ( s) 1 + ( ) ⋅ 1 ⋅ 1 ⋅ H ( s)
1 N s
s D( s) s N ( s)

1 H ( s)
⋅
s N ( s) H ( s) H ( s)
= = =
1 H ( s) sD( s) + H ( s) Q( s)
1+ ⋅
s N ( s)

Then the tracking error of this system for a unit step and a ramp reference r(t) = vt can be defined as
follows:
 H ( s)  v
[ ]
E ( s) = 1 − G R ( s) R( s) = 1 − ⋅
 sD( s) + H ( s)  s

 sD( s) + H ( s) − H ( s)  v  sD( s)  v D( s)
= ⋅ s =  Q s ⋅ s = Q s ⋅v
 sD( s) + H ( s)   ( ) ()

 H ( s)  v
[ ]
E ( s) = 1 − G R ( s) R( s) = 1 − ⋅ 2
 sD( s) + H ( s)  s

 sD( s) + H ( s) − H ( s)  v  sD( s)  v D( s) v
=  ⋅ 2 =  ⋅ 2 = ⋅
 sD( s) + H ( s)  s  Q ( s)  s Q( s) s

The steady-state errors are equal to zero – for a step reference and for a ramp reference, too.
D(0) d
εT = v ⋅ = v⋅ 0 (5.19)
Q(0) q0

Recall that the zero-order term of the desired characteristic polynomial Q(s) could be

201
conveniently expressed through all assigned closed-loop poles as:

( )( )( ) (
q0 = ( − p1 )( − p2 )( − p3 ) L( − p K ) α12 + β12 α 22 + β22 α 32 + β32 L α L2 + βL2 )
Then it is clear that the above approach allows for the manipulation of the steady-state tracking error
for a ramp reference.
The ability to control the steady-state tracking error for a ramp reference does not come without
a price: according to the expression GR(s) = H(s)/Q(s), we are loosing the control over the overshoot
of the system's step response. The value of overshoot now depends on the roots of polynomial H(s)
which serves as the zeros of the closed-loop transfer function. How to assess the arising situation? -
− Note that a ramp reference can be represented by a sequence of steps and the entire issue
of having a ramp reference could be dropped in many practical situations. Therefore, a
system, designed by pole placement for a step reference will perform well.
− Recall that system overshoot is defined exclusively for a step input, and it is often
unnoticeable for a ramp input. Assume that a system is designed using pole placement for a
ramp reference and configured as shown in the block diagram above. Then the overshoot
would not result in a problem, providing that a system works primarily with ramp-type
reference signals.
− Pole placement allows for a certain degree of freedom when dominant and non-dominant
poles are being selected, which can be utilized in an attempt to find a polynomial H(s) with
"suitable" roots.
Example 5.10
s 2 + 2s + 3
Given transfer function of a controlled plant, G( s) = . The design specifications
s3 + s 2 + s + 6
call for the settling time of 2 sec, 10% overshoot of step response, and steady-state tracking error for
ramp reference r(t) = 0.3t being under 0.01 (unit). Steady-stat errors for step and ramp, z(t) = 0.2t,
disturbance signals shall not exceed 0.02 (units).
Solution: First let us attempt to solve this problem without introducing an additional integrator
1
in the control loop. Introduce filter W ( s) = 2
responsible for the cancellation of plant's
s + 2s + 3
zeros. Select dominant closed-loop system poles: −2 ± 2.67j which allow for the required overshoot
and settling time. The non-dominant pole is selected to be −8. The required characteristic
polynomial is:
Q( s) = ( s + 2 − 2.67 j )( s + 2 + 2.67 j )( s + 8) = s 3 + 12s 2 + 4313
. s + 89.04

202
 Assume that H(s) = h2s2 + h1s + h0 and zeros of the plant are cancelled, then the characteristic
polynomial is defined as: Q(s) = s3 + (1 + h2)s2 + (1 + h1)s + (6 + h0). Equating both definitions of
Q(s) yields: H(s) = 11s2 + 42.13s + 83.04
It could be seen that constant gain C = 89.04 should be introduced in the reference channel.
Finally, the feedback controller and the filter in the reference channel are defined as:
11s 2 + 4213
. s + 83.04
P( s) = 2
s + 2s + 3
89.04
F ( s) = 2
s + 2s + 3
Simulation setup of Fig. 5.18 shows the designed system and its response to step and ramp
reference signals. Fig. 5.19 illustrates the system response to step and ramp disturbance signals.
Analysis of the system responses indicates that
− steady-state tracking error for step reference is zero
− steady-state tracking error for ramp reference is equal to 0.15 (units)
− steady-state error for step disturbance is equal to 0.033

Figure 5.18

203
 Figure 5.19

− steady-state tracking error for ramp disturbance is equal to infinity

Let us verify these results analytically. The following are two closed-loop transfer functions of
the designed system, for the reference input and for the disturbance input:
F ( s )G ( s) 89.04
G R ( s) = = 3
1 + G( s) P( s) s + 12s + 4313
2
. s + 89.04

G ( s) s 2 + 2s + 3
and G D ( s) = = 3
1 + G( s) P( s) s + 12s 2 + 4313
. s + 89.04
While the investigation of the tracking error for step reference is a trivial task, the tracking error
for ramp reference, r = 0.3t, is defined as:

 89.04  0.3
[ ]
E ( s) = 1 − G R ( s) R( s) = 1 − 3 2
 s + 12s + 4313
⋅
. s + 89.04  s 2

=
s 3 + 12s 2 + 4813
. s + 89.04 − 89.04 0.3
⋅ =
[
s 3 + 12s 2 + 4813
. ss] 0.3
⋅ 2
3 2 2 3 2
s + 12s + 4313. s + 89.04 s s + 12s + 4313 . s + 89.04 s

204
 s 3 + 12s 2 + 4813
. 0.3
= ⋅
3 2
s + 12 s + 4313 . s + 89.04 s
0.3 ⋅ 4313
.
lim sE ( s) = = 0145
.
s→ 0 89.04
The disturbance-caused errors are defined as follows:

s 2 + 2s + 3 1 3
E ( s) = G D ( s) R( s) = ⋅ and lim sE ( s) = = 0.0336
3 2
s + 12s + 4313. s + 89.04 s s→ 0 89.04

s 2 + 2s + 3 0.2
E ( s) = G D ( s) R( s) = 3 2
⋅ 2 and lim sE ( s) = ∞
s + 12s + 4313. s + 89.04 s s→ 0

These results, fairly close to the simulation results, indicate that the design system does not, and
in the case of the ramp-type disturbance, cannot satisfy the design specifications.
Let us redesign the system placing an integrator in the input of the controlled plant. The filter
1
responsible for the cancellation of plant's zeros is still W ( s) = 2
. Dominant closed-loop
s + 2s + 3
system poles are the same: –2 ± 2.67j. Since the order of the “plant & integrator” combination is
four, the non-dominant poles are selected to be –8 ± j. The required characteristic polynomial is:

Q( s) = ( s + 2 − 2.67 j )( s + 2 + 2.67 j )( s + 8 − j )( s + 8 + j ) = s 4 + 20s 3 + 140s 2 + 438s + 723

Under the assumption that the feedback controller is:

H(s) = h3s3 + h2s2 + h1s + h0
and zeros of the plant are cancelled:
Q(s) = s4 + (1 + h3)s3 + (1 + h2)s2 + (6 + h1) + h0
Then:
H(s) = 19s3 + 139s2 + 432s + 723
and the constant gain C = 723 should be introduced in the reference channel. After the equivalent
transformation of the system block diagram, the feedback and feedforward controllers are:

19s 3 + 139s 2 + 432s + 723 19s 3 + 139s 2 + 432s + 723

P( s) = =
(
s s 2 + 2s + 3 ) s 3 + 2s 2 + 3s

723 723
F ( s) = = 3
( 2
s s + 2s + 3 )
s + 2s 2 + 3s

Simulation setup of Fig. 5.20 shows the designed system and its response to step and ramp

205
 Figure 5.20
reference signals. Fig. 5.21 illustrates the system response to step and ramp disturbance signals.
Analysis of the system responses indicates that
− steady-state tracking error for step reference is zero
− steady-state tracking error for ramp reference is equal to 0.2 (units)
− steady-state error for step disturbance is equal to zero
− steady-state tracking error for ramp disturbance is equal to 0.0008 (units)
As it was expected, we are having difficulty in controlling the steady-state tracking error for
ramp reference. Its value could be defined analytically using the formula (5.18):
q1 438
ε T = 0.3 × = 0.3 × = 018
. (units)
q0 723
that is quite close to the simulated result. Note, that if a different set of closed-loop poles would
be chosen, it is expected that both q1 and q0 coefficients will change and the change in the steady-
state error value will be difficult to predict.
Finally, we will design the system represented by the block diagram of Fig. 5.17 that could
be specifically recommended for the situations when the steady-state tracking error for ramp
reference is of importance.

206
 \
Figure 5.21
d0
Recall that according to formula (5.19), ε T = v ⋅ , where v = 0.3 is the slope of the ramp
q0
reference, d0 = 6 is the zero-order term of the polynomial denominator of the controlled plant, and q0
is the zero-order term of the desired characteristic polynomial of the control system that could be
defined through the specified closed-loop poles.
Let us define q0 through the allowable error equation:
d0 6
εT = v ⋅ = 0.3 × ≤ 0.01 → q0 ≥ 180
q0 q0

While dominant poles are unchanged, p1,2 = −2 ± 2.67j, the non-dominant poles, p3,4 = α ± βj,

( )( ) ( )
. α 2 + β 2 : α 2 + β 2 ≥ 16.2 .
will be found from the condition 180 ≤ 2 2 + 2.67 2 α 2 + β 2 = 1113

One can see that the previously chosen non-dominant poles, p3,4 = –8 ± j, is a suitable choice of
non-dominant poles for this system configuration, therefore we can utilize previously defined H(s) =
19s3 + 139s2 + 432s + 723.
The resultant system, consistent with the block diagram of Fig. 5.17, is represented by the
simulation setup below (the integrator is included in the controller block), see Fig. 5.22.
It could be seen that the tracking error for the ramp reference is negligibly low, but the overshoot
of the step response is in the order of 20% that may or may not be tolerated by the customer.

207
 Figure 5.22

SYSTEM BANDWIDTH AND DISTURBANCE REJECTION AS DESIGN SPECS

In some instances, the controller is required to assure that the output of the controlled plan
will follow an arbitrary reference signal whose frequency content does not exceed some maximum
frequency ωBW (rad/sec) with sufficient accuracy. This frequency is known as the bandwidth of the
control system. The system ability to withstand the disturbance effects could be defined in terms of
disturbance rejection and expressed in decibels. Both the system bandwidth and disturbance
rejection requirements could be easily redefined in terms of dominant poles and the steady-state
error for a step disturbance. Note, that since high overshoot is an undesirable system feature, the
dominant poles are typically chosen to assure the damping ratio of 0.7 − 0.8
Example 5.11
3s 2 + 3s + 2
Given transfer function of a controlled plant: G( s) = . Design a controller
s 3 + 6s 2 + 8s + 21
such that the resultant system would have the bandwidth of 5 rad/sec and the disturbance rejection of
45 dB.

208
 1
Solution: The first task is to introduce a filter W ( s) = 2
responsible for canceling
3s + 3s + 2
zeros of the controlled plant.
Recall that required bandwidth of 5 rad/sec is typical for a second order system with the natural
frequency of 5 rad/sec and the constant gain of one. Since the damping ratio of 0.75 is
recommended, the dominant poles will be defined as:

− 5 × 0.75 ± 5 × 1 − 0.752 j = −3.75 ± 331

. j
From formula (5.17) the steady-state error for a unit step disturbance is equal to:

b0 2 2
= =
q0 ( 2
3.75 + 331
. 2
α 25α )
where α is the absolute value of the non-dominant closed-loop pole.
Convert the disturbance rejection, taken with minus, into absolute value: 10(-45/20) = 0.0056, then
2
the α value could be found from the condition, = 0.0056 → α = 14.3 .
25α
Therefore, the non-dominant pole is equal to –14.3. Note that 14.3/3.75 = 3.8 ≈ 4, otherwise the
absolute value of the third pole should be arbitrarily increased to assure its non-dominance).
Finally, the desired characteristic polynomial of the control system is:
Q( s) = ( s + 3.75 − 331
. j )( s + 3.75 + 331
. j )( s + 14.3) = s 3 + 218
. s 2 + 132.3s + 357.8
Then, since Q(s) = s3 + 6s2 + 8s + 21 + H(s):
H(s) = s3 + 21.8s2 +132.3s + 357.8 − s3 − 6s2 − 8s − 21
= 15.8s2 + 126.3s + 336.8.
Now the feedback and feedforward controllers are defined as:
15.8 s 2 + 126.3s + 336.8 357.8
P( s) = 2
and F ( s) = 2
3s + 3s + 2 3s + 3s + 2
Since the system was specified by the bandwidth and disturbance rejection, the design should be
validated by obtaining and inspecting closed-loop frequency response for the reference and
disturbance channels of the resultant system:
F ( s)G( s) G ( s)
G R ( s) = and G D ( s) =
1 + G ( s ) P( s ) 1 + G( s) P( s)

See Figs. 5.23 and 5.24.

Analysis of the above frequency responses indicates that while the bandwidth requirement

209
 Figure 5.23
has been successfully met, the required disturbance rejection is assured only within the low-
frequency range that may or may not be acceptable to the customer. In the next section of this
Chapter we will show how frequency response of a system could be selectively modified to achieve
the compliance with design specs.

Figure 5.24

210
 FREQUENCY-DOMAIN DESIGN

Frequency-domain design is used primarily when the controlled plant is defined by its frequency
response, rather than its transfer function, and/or design specifications are expressed through the
desired system frequency response. Frequency-domain design often implies that the desired closed-
loop system performance (frequency response) is translated into the desired open-loop frequency
response. Then special dynamic blocks (filters or compensators) are introduced in the control loop
in order to appropriately modify the frequency response of the existing part of the system.

PHASE-LEAD COMPENSATOR

A compensator is a dynamic system that could be introduced in a control loop in order to modify
the open-loop frequency response of the entire system within a particular preselected frequency
range.
Transfer function of a phase-lead compensator is:
C( s + z )
H ( s) =
s+ p
where the absolute value of the pole, p, is greater than the absolute value of the zero, z, i.e. p > z.
Following the established convention, transfer function H(s) is presented as:
k (1 + aτ s)
H ( s) = (5.20)
1+ τs

where k = Cz/p, a = p/z, a > 1, and τ = 1/p.

Bode plot of a phase-lead compensator for k = 1, a = 10, and τ = 0.002 (this implies that p =
500, z = 50 and C = 10) is shown in Fig. 5.25 below.
When k = 1, a phase-lead compensator does not affect the frequency response of a system at low
frequencies (ω < z), and it adds 20log(a) dB at high frequencies (ω > p). Within the z − p frequency
range the magnitude plot is a ramp with the slope of +20 dB/dec. The phase plot has a noticeable
positive peak at the frequency ω peak = zp . The peak magnitude is defined as:

 a − 1
ϕ peak = sin − 1   (5.21)
 a + 1

Note that the value of the phase peak cannot exceed 90°, therefore, if necessary, a compensator
could comprise several cascades. Also, remember that the magnitude at the peak frequency,

( )
A ω peak , is equal to 10 log(a) or a in abs. units.

211
 Figure 5.25

Parameter τ is “responsible” for the value of the peak frequency:

1
ω peak = (5.22)
τ a
It is good to memorize that parameter “a” of the phase-lead compensator transfer function is
always greater than one, and is placed in the numerator of the transfer function.
The inspection of Fig. 5.25 indicates that:
 9
− the phase peak is 55°, indeed sin − 1   = sin − 1 ( 0.82) = 54.9°
 11

1
− the peak frequency is 158 rad/sec, indeed 50 × 500 = 158, also
0.002 × 10 0.5
1
= = 158 .
0.002 × 316
.
− the magnitude increase at high frequencies is 20 dB, indeed 20log(10) = 20 dB.
A phase-lead compensator with a constant gain k = a−1 provides an instrument for dropping the
magnitude of an open-loop system frequency response by –20log(a) dB at low frequencies, ω < z,
without affecting the frequency response at high frequencies, ω > p.

212
 PHASE-LAG COMPENSATOR

Transfer function of a phase-lag compensator also is:

C( s + z )
H ( s) =
s+ p
but the absolute value of the zero, z, is greater than the absolute value of the pole, p, i.e., z > p.
Following the established convention, transfer function H(s) is presented as:
k (1 + τ s)
H ( s) = (5.23)
1 + aτ s

where k = Cz/p, a = z/p, a > 1, and τ =1/z.

Bode plot of a phase-lead compensator for k = 1, a = 15, and τ = 0.03 (this implies that p = 2.22,
z = 33.3 and C = 0.067) is shown in Fig. 5.26 below.

Figure 5.26

When k = 1, a phase-lag compensator does not affect the frequency response of a system at low
frequencies (ω < p), and it adds −20log(a) dB at high frequencies (ω > z). Within the p − z
frequency range the magnitude plot is a ramp with the slope of −20dB/dec. The phase plot has a

noticeable negative peak at the frequency ω peak = zp . The peak magnitude is defined as:

213
  a − 1
ϕ peak = − sin − 1   (5.24)
 a + 1

Note that the absolute value of the phase peak cannot exceed 90°, therefore, if necessary, a
compensator could comprise several cascades. Also, remember that the magnitude at the peak
1
( )
frequency, A ω peak , is equal to −10 log(a) or
a
in abs. units.

Again, parameter τ is “responsible” for the value of the peak frequency:

1
ω peak = (5.25)
τ a

Please memorize that parameter “a” of the phase-lag compensator transfer function is always
greater than one, and is placed in the denominator of the transfer function.
The inspection of Fig. 5.26 indicates that:

 14 
− the phase peak is −61°, indeed sin − 1   = sin − 1 (0.875) = 61°
 16 

1
− the peak frequency is 8.6 rad/sec, indeed 2.22 × 333
. = 8.6, also
0.03 × 150.5
1
= = 8.6
0.03 × 387
.

− the magnitude increase at high frequencies is −23.5 dB, indeed −20log(15) = −23.5 dB.
A phase-lag compensator with a constant gain k = a provides an instrument for increasing the
magnitude of an open-loop system frequency response by 20log(a) dB at low frequencies, ω < p,
without affecting the frequency response at high frequencies, ω > z.

LEAD-LAG and LAG-LEAD COMPENSATORS

A phase lead-lag compensator consists of a phase-lead and a phase-lag cascades and has transfer
function:

H ( s) = k
(1 + aτ1 s)(1 + τ 2 s) (5.26)
(1 + τ1 s)(1 + aτ 2 s)
1 1
where τ1 > τ 2 , which implies that ω1 peak < ω 2 peak , with ω1 peak = and ω 2 peak = .
τ1 a τ2 a

214
 When k = 1, this compensator is applied to increase the magnitude of the system frequency
response within a selected range of frequencies, ω1 peak − ω 2 peak , by approximately 20log(a). Note

that in the case when frequencies ω1 peak and ω 2 peak are “too close to each other”, the actual

magnitude peak is less than 20log(a).

Fig. 5.27 presents the magnitude and phase plots of a lead-lag compensator with transfer
function:

H ( s) =
(1 + 7 × 0.025s)(1 + 0.0002s)
(1 + 0.025s)(1 + 7 × 0.0002s)
A phase lag-lead compensator consists of a phase-lag and a phase-lead cascades and has transfer
function:

H ( s) = k
(1 + τ1 s)(1 + aτ 2 s) (5.27)
(1 + aτ1 s)(1 + τ 2 s)
1 1
where τ 1 > τ 2 , which implies that ω1 peak < ω 2 peak , with ω1 peak = and ω 2 peak = .
τ1 a τ2 a

Figure 5.27

215
 Figure 5.28

When k = 1,this compensator is applied to decrease the magnitude of the system frequency
response within a selected range of frequencies, ω1 peak − ω 2 peak , by approximately 20log(a). Note

that in the case when frequencies ω1 peak and ω 2 peak are “too close to each other”, the actual

magnitude reduction is less than 20log(a).

Fig. 5.28 presents the magnitude and phase plots of a lag-lead compensator with transfer
function:
H ( s) =
(1 + 0.2s)(1 + 13 × 0.00001s)
(1 + 13 × 0.2s)(1 + 0.00001s)
Example 5.12
A control system exhibits a diverging oscillatory step response (see Fig. 5.29). The open-loop
frequency response of this system is shows in Fig. 5.30. Introduce a compensator to assure the
system stability with the stability gain margin (SGM) of 12 dB.
Solution: The open-loop frequency response indicates that the phase of −180° is reached at the
frequency of 2 rad/sec, the magnitude at this frequency is equal to 2 dB that indicates that the closed-
loop system is unstable. Note that the frequency of transient oscillation is approximately 2 rad/sec.
There are several ways to assure the required SGM. One of them is to reduce the magnitude of the

216
 Figure 5.29

open-loop system frequency response at ω = 2 rad/sec to −12 dB without changing the phase value at
1+ τ s
this frequency. This could be done by introducing a phase-lag compensator, H ( s) = with
1 + aτ s

purposely chosen parameters a and τ. First, that the magnitude reduction caused by such a
compensator is 20log(a). Since the present magnitude value of 2 dB must be reduced to −12 dB:
− 20 log(a ) = −14dB and a = 5.01 (abs)
Note that the phase peak introduced by this compensator is equal to:
 4.01
ϕ peak = − sin − 1   = −418
. °
 6.01

Let us reiterate that the compensator shall not change the phase value at ω = 2 rad/sec, otherwise
our attempt to achieve the required SGM will turn into a “vicious circle” situation. Therefore,
parameter τ should be chosen such that the peak frequency be sufficiently far to the left from ω = 2
rad/sec. Using the “trial-and-error” approach, it was found that τ = 25 results in the peak frequency

217
 Figure 5.30

of 0.018 rad/sec and in this case ω = 2 rad/sec the compensator will change the phase of the open-
loop system only by −0.8°, see Fig. 5.31. Fig. 5.32 presents the resultant open-loop frequency

Figure 5.31
218
 Figure 5.32

response of the system indicating that the SGM of 12 dB has been achieved. Finally, the step
response of the resultant system is shown in Fig. 5.29.
Example 5.13
Given open-loop transfer function of a control system:
2000( s + 75)
GOL ( s) =
( s + 1)( s + 6)( s + 19)( s + 50)
Introduce a compensator to achieve stability phase margin (SPM) of 60°.
Solution: a) First obtain the open-loop system frequency response, see Fig. 5.33. It can be seen
that the existing system frequency response reaches the phase of −120° at ω = 3.8 rad/sec. The
magnitude at this frequency is 15 dB. One can realize that if the magnitude at this frequency would
be reduced to zero db without changing the phase, then the SPM of 60° will be achieved. This could
be accomplished by introducing a phase-lag compensator in the control loop. Parameter “a” of this
compensator should be chosen from the condition −20log(a) = −15dB, then a = 5.62. The phase
 4.62 
peak of this compensator is defined as ϕ peak = − sin − 1   = −44° . When the peak frequency is
 6.62 

selected it is important not to change the original phase value at ω = 3.8 rad/sec (beware of the
vicious circle). The peak frequency of 0.05 rad/sec was chosen, this results in the following value of

219
the parameter τ = 8.44. Then the transfer function of the compensator is:
1 + 8.44s 1 + 8.44s
H ( s) = =
1 + 5.62 × 8.44s 1 + 47.41s
It can be seen from the Bode plot of the compensated system that the required SPM has been
successfully achieved, see Fig. 5.34.
Solution: b) Note that the frequency response of Fig. 5.33 reaches the magnitude of zero dB at
ω = 11 rad/sec and the phase at this frequency is –180°. It could be seen that if the phase at this
frequency would be increased to –120° without changing the magnitude, then the required SPM of
60° will be achieved. This could be accomplished by introducing a phase-lead compensator in the
control loop with the phase peak of 60° and the peak frequency of 11 rad/sec. Parameter “a” of this
compensator should be chosen from the condition:
a −1
( )
sin ϕ peak =
a +1
= sin(60°) = 0.866 → a = 1392
.

It is important that the phase peak of 60° be introduced at 11 rad/sec, this is accomplished by
choosing parameter τ appropriately: τ = 0.024. Again, it is important not to change the original
magnitude value of 0 dB. Recall that a phase-lead compensator contributes the magnitude of

Figure 5.33

220
 Figure 5.34

10log(a) = 10log(13.92) dB at the peak frequency. This value, equal to 3.731 in abs. units, must be
1
offset by introducing the constant gain k = = 0.268 .
3731
.
The transfer function of the compensator is:
1 + 1392
. × 0.024s 1 + 0.33s
H ( s) = 0.268 = 0.268
1 + 0.024s 1 + 0.024s
It can be seen from the Bode plot of the compensated system, Fig. 5.35, that the required SPM
has been successfully achieved.
However, our solution has a quite important flaw: introduction of the compensator has
resulted in the reduction of the overall constant gain of the system by:
–10log(13.92) = –11.44dB
Potentially, this may have a negative effect on the system’s steady-state errors. Recall that
introduction of an additional phase-lag compensator with the constant gain of 11.44 dB = 3.73 (abs),
parameter a = 3.73 and the peak frequency ω peak << 11 rad/sec would restore the overall constant

gain of the system to its original value. Choose ω peak = 0.2 rad/sec, then τ = 2.6.

The transfer function of this additional compensator is:

221
 Figure 5.35

1 + 2.6s 1 + 2.6s
H ( s) = 3.73 = 373
.
1 + 3.73 × 2.6s 1 + 9.655s
Fig. 5.36 below presents the final result of the compensation. One can see that the required SPM

Figure 5.36

222
of 60° has been achieved without the change of the constant gain of the entire system, compare Figs.
5.36 and 5.33.
In some practical cases a control system must be designed for a plant specified by its frequency
response rather than transfer function. The following example presents such a case.
Example 5.14
Given frequency response of a controlled plant G(jω):

Figure 5.37

Design a controller to achieve the bandwidth of 10 rad/sec.

Solution: Based on the required bandwidth chose the desired closed-loop frequency response
consistent with the frequency response of a second order system:
100
G M ( s) = 2
s + 14s + 100
shown below in Fig. 5.38.
This response could result from a unity feedback system with the transfer function of the
k
forward path G 0 ( s) = 2
providing that k + m = 100 and the gain in the reference input
s + 14 s + m
100
C= , indeed:
k

223
 Figure 5.38

k
G 0 ( s) 2
GCL ( s) = C ⋅ = C ⋅ s + 14s + m
1 + G ( s)
0
1+ 2
k
s + 14s + m

100 k 100
⋅ 2 = 2
k s + 14s + m + k s + 14 s + 100

Our design effort will be aimed at the selection of such a compensator, H(s), that being
introduced in the control loop would result in the open-loop system frequency response:

G( jω ) × H ( jω ) ≈ G 0 ( jω )

G 0 ( jω )
that allows for the definition of the compensator as H ( jω ) ≈ or by taking the advantage of
G ( jω )

Bode plots:

A H ( jω ) = A0 ( jω ) − AG ( jω ) and ϕ H ( jω ) = ϕ 0 ( jω ) − ϕ G ( jω )

where A H ( jω ) , A 0 ( jω ) , A G ( jω ) , ϕ H ( jω ) , ϕ 0 ( jω ) and ϕ G ( jω ) are magnitudes (dB) and phases

of the particular frequency responses. Note that this subtraction could be performed graphically.

224
 Note that at low frequencies magnitude 20 log G( jω ) = 28.3 dB = 26 (abs) and magnitude

 k k
20 log G 0 ( jω ) = 20 log  . In order to simplify the design task, let us make sure that = 26 that
 m m

in combination with the k + m = 100 requirement results in k = 96.3 and m = 3.7.

The desired open-loop system frequency response G 0 ( jω ) is shown in Fig. 5.39, and the
difference between the desired open-loop frequency response and the frequency response of the
controlled plant, H(jω), is shown in Fig. 5.40.
Now we will try to establish the transfer function of the compensator following its frequency
response. First, note that the magnitude A H ( jω ) is close to zero dB at low frequencies and the

phase ϕ H ( jω ) exhibits a negative peak of –30° at ω = 0.52 rad/sec. This indicates that H(s) must

include a phase-lag compensator with the parameters that could be defined as follows:
a −1 1
= sin(30°) = 0.5 → a = 3 , then 0.52 = → τ = 111
. ,
a +1 τ 3
therefore, the first cascade of H(s) could be defined as:
1 + 111
. s
H1 ( s) =
1 + 333
. s

Figure 5.39

225
 Figure 5.40

Define the frequency response of the second cascade of the compensator:

H ( jω )
H 2 ( jω ) ≈
H1 ( jω )

This frequency response is shown in Fig. 5.41 on the next page. Note that at low frequencies
both the magnitude and phase of this frequency response are close to zero. It could be seen that at ω
≈ 2 rad/sec H2(jω) exhibits a magnitude increase of approximately 20 dB/dec and the phase increase
from zero to 90°. This behavior is consistent with the inverse of frequency response of a first order
2
system with transfer function , therefore, we can assume:
s+2

s+2
H 2 ( s) =
2

Finally, we suggest approximating the compensator by the following expression:

H APP ( s) = H1 ( s) H 2 ( s) = 0.5
( s + 2)(1 + 111
. s)
1 + 333
. s

226
 Figure 5.41

The following Fig. 5.42 presents frequency responses H APP ( jω ) and H ( jω ) :

Figure 5.42

227
 Figure 5.43

And Fig. 3.43 shows the closed-loop response of the designed system.

228
 ASSIGNMENTS (HOMEWORK #9)

s + 01
.
9.1. Given transfer function of a controlled plant, G( s) = 0.5 2
. The design specifications
s + s + 20
are: Tset ≤ 1 sec, overshoot of the step response P ≤ 25%. Design a controller using pole/zero
cancellation and properties of second order systems. Verify your design by computer
simulation.
s + 01
.
9.2. Given transfer function of a controlled plant, G( s) = 0.5 2
. The design specifications
s + s + 0.3
are: Tset ≤ 2 sec, overshoot of the step response P ≤ 10%.
a) Apply pole placement to design the system
b) Verify your design by computer simulation
c) Evaluate steady-state error caused by a unit step disturbance by computer simulation
d) Use computer simulation to evaluate the maximum value of the control effort when the
system responds to the unit step reference
s + 0.7
9.3. Given transfer function of a controlled plant, G( s) = 5 2
. The design specifications
s + 3s + 66
are: Tset ≤ 1 sec, overshoot of the step response P ≤ 1%, steady-state error caused by a unit step
disturbance should not exceed 0.001 (units)
a) Apply pole placement to design the system without introducing additional integrators
b) Verify your design by computer simulation
c) Evaluate steady state tracking error for reference R(t) = 0.5t
s + 0.7
9.4. Given transfer function of a controlled plant, G( s) = 5 2
. The design specifications
s + 3s + 66
are: Tset ≤ 1 sec, overshoot of the step response P ≤ 15%, steady-state tracking error for
reference R(t) = 0.2t shall not exceed 0.001, Steady-state error caused by a disturbance D(t) .5t
shall not excee.002.
a) Apply pole placement to design the system
b) Verify your design by computer simulation
c) Evaluate steady-state error caused by a unit step disturbance by computer simulation
s 2 + 4s + 01
.
9.5. Given transfer function of a controlled plant, G( s) = 0.5 3 2
. The design
s + 6s + 3s + 0.4
specifications are given in the frequency domain: bandwidth = 25 rad/sec, disturbance rejection

229
is 25 dB.
a) Apply pole placement to design the system
b) Verify your design by computer simulation
c) Apply the final value theorem to evaluate steady-state errors caused by disturbance signals
D(t) = u(t) and D(t) = 0.1t, and steady-state tracking error for reference R(t) = 0.5t.

230
 HOMEWORK #10

10.1. Given transfer function of the forward path of a control system,

5( s + 0.7)
G ( s) = . The system has a constant gain k in the feedback. Use the
(s 2
)(
+ 10s + 30 s 2 + 3s + 66 )
root locus procedure to achieve a reasonable compromise between settling time, overshoot of
step response, and steady-state error caused by a disturbance D(t) = u(t). Verify your design by
computer simulation.
10.2. Design a compensator with the following characteristics:
a) phase peak ϕ peak = 45° , peak frequency ω peak = 250 rad/sec, and magnitude A(ω) = 6 dB

at ω = 50 rad/sec . Verify the result using a software tool.

b) phase peak ϕ peak = −100° , peak frequency ω peak = 500 rad/sec, and magnitude A(ω) = 0

dB at ω = 50 rad/sec . Verify the result using a software tool.

c) magnitude A(ω) = 0 dB at ω ≤ 2 rad/sec and at ω ≥ 5000 rad/sec, and magnitude A(ω) ≤ −
40dB at 100 ≤ ω ≤ 200 rad/sec. Evaluate phase peaks and peak frequencies. Verify the
result using a software tool.
100( s + 1)
10.3. Given transfer function of a controlled plant, G( s) = , and of controller,
( s + 8)( s 2 + 6s + 33)
6
H ( s) = . Introduce a compensator to assure that the system has:
s
a) SPM = 45°. Verify the result by MATLAB
b) SGM = 14 B. Verify the result by MATLAB
160
10.1. Given transfer functions of a controlled plant, G( s) = , and
( )(
s + 30s + 400 s 2 + 01
2
. s + 400 )
k
of controller, H ( s) = .
s+4
a) Determine constant gain k using root locus to assure stability of the system
b) Evaluate the magnitude and frequency of high frequency oscillatory transient terms in the
system step response. Verify your finding by obtaining the open-loop system frequency
response
c) Design a compensator to reduce high frequency oscillations. Obtain open-loop frequency
response of the system with the compensator

231
 d) Verify your design by computer simulation.
12
10.1. Given transfer function of a controlled plant: G( s) = 2
.
s +s+2
a) Introduce a controller (compensator) such that the closed-loop system would have the
bandwidth of 20 rad/sec.
b) Verify your design by obtaining the open-loop and closed-loop (assume unity feedback)
frequency responses of the designed system
c) Obtain step response of the designed system by computer simulation (assume unity
feedback)

232
 EXAMPLE OF A ONE-HOUR TEST

1
PROBLEM #1 Given transfer function of a controlled plant, G( s) = . Introduce a PI controller
s +1
and use pole-zero cancellation to design a system with 10% overshoot of the step response, 0.5 sec
settling time, and steady-state errors for step reference and step disturbance equal to zero. Show
system block diagram (Note 10% overshoot corresponds to the damping ratio of 0.6).

s +1
PROBLEM #2 Given transfer function of a controlled plant, G( s) = 2
. Use pole placement
s + s +1
to design a system with 10% overshoot of the step response, 0.5 sec settling time, and steady-state
errors for step reference and step disturbance equal to zero. Evaluate steady-state tracking error in
this system for a ramp reference r(t) = 0.2t. Show system block diagram.

PROBLEM #3 Given transfer function of the forward path of a unity feedback control system,
10
G ( s) = . Introduce a phase-lead or phase-lag compensator
s + 7s 2 + 16s
3

− to obtain SGM of 12 dB
− to obtain SPM of 45°

PROBLEM #4 Design a compensator which would

− not affect magnitude of the frequency response of a dynamic system at ω ≤ 10 rad/sec
− increase magnitude of the frequency response by 15 dB at 100 ≤ ω ≤ 500 rad/sec
− decrease magnitude of the frequency response by 7 dB at 2000 ≤ ω ≤ 5000 rad/sec
− not affect magnitude of the frequency response at ω ≥ 100000 rad/sec

233
 CHAPTER 6

INTRODUCTION TO DIGITAL CONTROL

Advances in computer technology have resulted in high reliability, high throughput and
reasonable cost of microprocessors and relevant electronic devices. It became both convenient and
practical to utilize microprocessors for the implementation of control laws. Computer-based
controllers are capable of implementing and/or updating the most sophisticated control procedures
programmatically, i.e., without the penalty of cost and weight of additional hardware. Many so-
called high-tech areas of engineering made a complete transition from analog to digital control. A
practicing electrical or computer engineer is expected to understand principles and methods of digital
control. The following material presents basic concepts of digital control.
Consider a linear dynamic system with a transfer function G(s). Assume that the system is
driven by a continuous-time signal x(t) and we are interested in its continuous-time response y(t)
under zero initial condition. As you know, this problem is routinely solved by:
− taking Laplace transform of the signal x(t), i.e., representing it by:
X ( s) = L {x (t )}

− utilizing the s-domain signal/system description and representing the Laplace transform
of the system response in the form:
Y ( s) = G ( s) X ( s)

− converting Y(s) into y(t) by performing inverse Laplace transform

y(t ) = L-1 {Y ( s)}

Let us modify the problem. Assume that signal x(t) is generated by a computer. This implies
that this signal
− is represented by a sequence of numbers
− each number represents the numerical value of the signal at the particular moment of
time
− each number represents the numerical value of the signal with some predefined accuracy
dependent on the available number of digits
− the “real” signal applied to the process is generated by an interface device, converting the
sequence of numbers into a physical signal
Therefore, some specific methods must be utilized for

234
 − mathematical description of signals represented by a sequence of numbers
− mathematical description of the system as “it is seen by the sequence of numbers”
− analyzing the response of a dynamic system driven by a sequence of numbers through the
interface device
− modification of the system dynamics by introducing feedback mechanisms implemented
in a computer.
These issues will be considered below.

DISCRETE-TIME REPRESENTATION OF CONTINUOUS SIGNALS

Assume that a continuous-time signal x(t) is represented by a discrete-time signal xD(t) defined
as follows:
x D (t ) = x( t ) , if t = 0, T, 2T, 3T, ..., kT, ...
where k = 0, 1, 2, 3, ... is a discrete-time index, and T is a time discretization step that is assumed to
be constant.
One can realize that xD(t) does not uniquely represent signal x(t). The sequence of values xD(t) =
x(kT) = x(k), k = 0, 1, 2, 3, ... provides absolutely no information about “what is happening” with
signal x(t) between discrete time values kT, i.e., at time kT < t < (k + 1)T, k = 0, 1, 2, 3, ...
Assume, for example, that x(t) = 0 for any time between discrete time values kT, i.e., at kT < t <
(k + 1)T. This assumption results in the definition of a “sampled signal”:
x * ( kT ) = x * ( k ) = x D ( t )

x*(1)

x*(0) x*(2)

x*(3)

x*(4)
x*(5)
x*(6)
k=7 k=8 k=9 k=10 k=11
k=0 k=1 k=2 k=3 k=4 k=5 k=6
t
x*(7) x*(8) x*(11)
x*(10)
x*(9)

Figure 6.1

235
i.e., a discrete-time signal x * ( k ) that, as shown above, should be visualized as a series of infinitely
“thin" pulses with magnitudes x(T).
Signal x * ( k ) could be produced by introducing a sampler connected to the output of a sensor in
an analog system. This sampler should be viewed as a switch operating at the frequency f = 2π/T
(rad/sec) that stays closed for a very short period of time. It could be seen that if this switch is
closed only when time:
t = kT, k = 0, 1, 2, 3, ...
It is important to understand that x * ( k ) is a fictitious signal that only represents the “real” signal
x(t). One should realize that even if time step T becomes infinitely small, the “gaps” between pulses
x * ( k ) do not disappear, and therefore:

lim x * ( kT ) ≠ x (t )
T→ 0

i.e., even if time step T approaches zero, fictitious signal x * ( k ) does not become equal to x(t).
Let us consider a discrete-time signal xZOH (t) = xZOH(kT) = xZOH(k) that could be viewed as a
sequence of rectangular pulses with magnitudes x * ( k ) and duration T (sec):

x ZOH (t ) = x * (t ) , if kT ≤ t < (k + 1)T

It is clear that signal xZOH(kT) is defined not only at discrete time moments, t = kT, k = 0,
1,2,3,..., but also “in between”. Signal xZOH(t) is a discontinuous signal: its values change instantly at

XZOH
x*(0)

x*(1)

x*(2)

x*(3)
x*(4)
x*(5)
k=7 k=8 k=9 k=10 k=11
k=0 k=1 k=2 k=3 k=4 k=5
t
x*(6) x*(7)
x*(8) x*(10)
x*(9)
Figure 6.2

236
t = kT, k = 0, 1, 2, 3, ...; unsurprisingly, signal xZOH(t) is known as a “staircase” signal, this makes it
different from x(t), see Fig. 6.2.
Note that signal xZOH(t) does not contain “gaps” between pulses and because of this:
lim x ZOH ( k ) ≠ x( t )
T→ 0

ZOH
Signals such as x (t) are not found in nature, they are definitely “man-made”. Such a signal
could be physically generated by applying a sampled sequence x * ( k ) to the input of a so-called
“zero-order-hold”, i.e. a device that maintains in its output constant during every time interval kT < t
< (k + 1)T, k = 0, 1, 2, 3, .... Mathematically, signal xZOH(t) can be defined as follows:

[ ] [ ] [ ]
x ZOH (t ) = x * (0) u(t ) − u(t − T ) + x * (1) u(t − T ) − u(t − 2T ) + x * (2) u(t − 2T ) − u(t − 3T ) + L

where u(t) is a unit step function.

Z-TRANSFORM AND ITS PROPERTIES

Recall that if x(t) is a continuous-time signal represented by a sequence of discrete-time values,

x(kT), k = 0, 1, 2, 3, ..., then Z-transform of this signal is defined as:
∞
X (z ) = Z {x (kT )} = ∑ x (kT )z − k (6.1)
k =0

where z = λ + jµ is a complex variable.

Note that this transform could be performed if and only if signal x(k) satisfies some conditions,
quite natural for most realistic signals. Comparing (6.1) with the definition of Laplace transform:
∞
X (s ) = ∫ x (t )e − st dt (6.2)
t =0

where s = α + jω also is a complex variable, results in a good way to memorize the relationship
between variables z and s:
z − k = e − st = e − skT (6.3)
and therefore:
ln( z )
z = e sT or s =
T
or z = λ + jµ = e sT = eαT + jωT = eαT e jωT

= eαT cos(ωT ) + jeαT sin(ωT )

or λ = eαT cos(ωT ) and µ = eαT sin(ωT )

It is good to remember that:

237
 lim X ( z ) ≠ X ( s)
T→ 0

The inverse Z-transform results in the conversion of a Z-domain signal definition, X(z), into a
discrete-time signal (sampled sequence) x ( kT ) = x * ( kT ) :

x ( kT ) = Z −1 { X ( z )}

PROPERTIES OF Z-TRANSFORM

1) Z {x (t ) y (t )} = Z {x (t )}Z { y (t )}

2) Z { Ax (t )} = AZ {x (t )}

3) Z {x (t + kT )} = z k Z {x (t )}

4) Z {x (t − kT )} = z − k Z {x (t )}

X ( z)
k→ ∞ z→ 1
( )
5) lim x ( kT ) = lim 1 − z − 1 X ( z ) = lim( z − 1)
z→ 1 z
Engineering approach to obtaining Z-transforms and inverse Z-transforms:
a) by the use of a detailed table containing various x(t), X(s), and X(z) functions
b) by the use of a table of typical functions in combination with the partial function expansio
c) by the use of a software tool (MATLAB, CC, etc.)
Some additional but time-consuming techniques, commonly presented in Signals and Systems
and Digital Signal Processing courses, could be also utilized.

Typical Time Functions and Their Transforms

x (t ) X ( s) = L {x (t )} {
X ( z ) = Z x * ( kT ) }
u(t )
1 z
s z −1
a aTz
at
s2 ( z − 1) 2
δ (t − kT ) e − kTs z−k
1 z
e − aT
s+a z − e − aT
1 Tze − aT
te − aT
( s + a )2 (z − e )
− aT 2

a z (1 − e )− aT
− aT
1− e s( s + a ) ( z − 1)( z − e ) − aT

238
 x (t ) X ( s) = L {x (t )} {
X ( z ) = Z x * ( kT )}
b ze − aT sin(bT )
e − aT sin(bt )
(s + a)2 + b2 z 2 − 2 ze − aT cos(bT ) + e − 2 aT
s+a z 2 − ze − aT cos(bT )
e − aT
cos(bt )
(s + a)2 + b2 z 2 − 2 ze − aT cos(bT ) + e − 2 aT

Example 6.1
3s 2 + 5s + 30
Given Laplace transform of a signal X ( s) = , obtain Z-domain equivalent of
s 3 + 12s 2 + 16s + 50
this expression assuming time step T = 0.05 sec.
Solution:
a) represent X(s) by a sum of partial fractions:

s + 40.89 2.96
X ( s) = 0.037 +
( s + 0.52) 2
+ 2.07 2 s + 10.96

s + 0.52 40.37 2.96

= 0.037 + 0.037 +
( s + 0.52) 2
+ 2.07 2
( s + 0.52) 2
+ 2.07 2 s + 10.96

s + 0.52 2.07 2.96

= 0.037 + 0.72 +
( s + 0.52) 2
+ 2.07 2
( s + 0.52) 2
+ 2.07 2 s + 10.96

b) Convert each partial fraction to the z-domain using the above table:

z 2 − ze − 0.52T cos(2.07T )
X ( z ) = 0.037
z 2 − 2 ze − 0.52T cos(2.07T ) + e − 1.04T

ze − 0.52T sin(2.07T ) z
+ 0.72 + 2.96
2
z − 2 ze − 0.52 T
cos(2.07T ) + e − 1.04 T
z − e − 10.96T

c) With T = 0.05 sec this results in:

z 2 − 0.96 z z z
X ( z ) = 0.037 + 0.072 2 + 2.96
2
z − 192
. z + 0.949 z − 192
. z + 0.949 z − 0.58
Application of a CC software tool results in a much faster solution:
z 2 − 191
. z + 0.93
X ( z) = 3
( 2
)
. z + 0.949 ( z − 0.58)
z − 193

239
Example 6.2
6s 2 + 12s + 120
Given Laplace transform of a signal Y ( s) = ,
(
s( s + 4) s 2 + 2s + 12)
a) obtain Z-transform of this signal using partial fraction expansion for T =0.1 sec
b) obtain Z-transform of this signal using pole-zero mapping for T = 0.1 sec
c) obtain Z-transform of this signal using a software tool for T = 0.1 sec and T = 0.3 sec
d) obtain steady-state value of this signal using the Z-domain final value theorem for Z-
transforms obtained in a), b), and c), compare these results with the final value obtained
using the s-domain final value theorem.
Solution:
a) Represent Y(s) by a sum of partial fractions:

2.5 0.4s + 3.2 21

.
Y ( s) = − 2 −
s s + 2s + 12 s + 4

2.5 s+8 21
.
or Y ( s) = − 0.4 −
s ( s + 1) + 332
2
. 2 s+4

2.5 s +1 2.8 21
.
or Y ( s) = − 0.4 − −
s ( s + 1) + 332
2
. 2
( s + 1) + 332
2
. 2 s + 4

Using the table of typical Z-transforms, convert each fraction in the z-domain, then:

z z 2 − ze − T cos(332
. T)
Y ( s) = 2.5 − 0.4 2
z −1 z − 2 ze cos(332
−T
. T ) + e − 2T

ze − T sin(332
. T) z
− 2.8 − 21
.
z − 2 ze cos(332
2 −T
. T) + e − 2T
z − e − 4T

where T = 0.1 sec, therefore:

z z 2 − 0.855z − 2.8(0.295z ) z
Y ( s) = 2.5 − 0.4 − 21
.
z −1 2
z − 1711
. z + 0.819 z − 0.67

z z 2 − 1681
. z z
= 2.5 − 0.4 2 − 21
.
z −1 z − 1711
. z + 0.819 z − 0.67

b) Represent Y(s) by a sum of partial fractions:

240
 2.5 0.4(s + 8) 2 .1
Y (s ) = − 2 −
s s + 2 s + 12 s + 4
2 .5
The first partial fraction, , has an s-domain pole equal to 0, and its z-domain equivalent is e0 =
s
0.4(s + 8)
1. The second partial fraction, − , has an s-domain zero equal to −8, and s-domain
s 2 + 2 s + 12
poles equal to −1 ± 3.32j, their z-domain equivalents are e−0.8 = 0.449, and e−0.1[cos(0.332 ±
2 .1
sin(0.332)j] = 0.855 ± 0.295j. The third partial fraction, − , has an s-domain pole equal to −4,
s+4
and its z-domain equivalent is e−0.4 = 0.67.
Therefore:
2 .5 z 0.4(z − 0.449 ) 2.1z
Y (s ) = − −
z − 1 (z − 0855) + 0.295
2 2
z − 0.67
c) According to a software tool, for T = 0.1 sec:
0.5 z (z 2 − 1.64 z + 0.82 )
Y (z ) =
(z − 1)(z 2 − 1.71z + 0.82 )(z − 0.67 )
and for T = 0.3 sec:
1.18 z (z 2 − 0.436 z + 0.533)
Y (z ) =
(z − 1)(z 2 − 0.807 z + 0.549)(z − 0.3)
d) Let us obtain the steady-state value of y(kT)
using the expression from a):

 z z 2 − 1.681z 2.1z 
lim y (kT ) = lim(z − 1)  2.5 − 0.4 2 −  z = 2.5
k →∞ z →1
 z −1 z − 1.711z + 0.819 z − 0.67 

using the expression from b):

 z z − 0.449 2.1z 
lim y (kT ) = lim(z − 1)  2.5 − 0.4 −  z = 2.5
k →∞ z →1
 z −1 (z − 0.855) + 0.295 z − 0.67 
2 2

using the expression from c) for T = 0.1 sec:

 0.5z (z 2 − 1.64 z + 0.82) 

lim y (kT ) = lim(z − 1)   z = 2.48 ≈ 2.5
k →∞ z →1
 (z − 1)(z 2 − 1.71z + 0.82 )(z − 0.67 )

using the expression from c) for T = 0.3 sec:

241
  1.18 z (z 2 − 0.436 z + 0.533) 
lim y (kT ) = lim(z − 1)   z = 2.5
k →∞ z →1
 (z − 1)(z 2 − 0.807 z + 0.549 )(z − 0.3)
Let us obtain the steady-state value by using the final value theorem of the Laplace transform:

6 s 2 + 12 s + 120
lim y (t ) = lim sY (s ) = lim s = 2 .5
t →∞ s →0 s →0
s (s + 4 )(s 2 + 2 s + 12 )

REPRESENTATION OF A DISCRETE-TIME SIGNAL BY A NUMBER SEQUENCE

Consider a sequence of discrete-time measurements x * (k ) , k = 0, 1, 2, ..., representing a

continuous-time signal x(t). One should realize that x * (k ) are analog quantities, generated by a
“sensor-sampler” combination. In order to be manipulated by a computer, these quantities must be
represented by numbers. This implies that each quantity should be digitizes, i.e., represented by an
integer number of pre-determined steps δ.
Assume that a voltage signal v(t), generated by the sensor, represents a physical variable x(t).
Variable x(t) varies within some limits of feasibility, XMIN ≤ x(t) ≤ XMAX. Consequently, voltage v(t)
varies between VMIN and VMAX. Note that the sensor is typically chosen such that within the interval
[XMIN, XMAX] signal x(t) is linearly represented by the voltage v(t), therefore, the gain of the sensor is
defined as:
X MAX − X MIN
K= (units/volt)
V MAX − V MIN
Assume for example that physical variable x(t) should be represented numerically with the
accuracy of 0.01 (abs. units). Then the total number of steps covering interval [XMIN, XMAX] with the
required accuracy is:
X MAX − X MIN
N=
0.01
and the quantization step is:
V MAX − V MIN
δ=
N
On can realize that physical variable x(t) will be represented in a computer by a sequence of
numbers xNUM(k), k = 0, 1, 2, ..., defined as follows:
 v (k ) 
x NUM (k ) = 0.01 × K × Int  
 δ 

242
 Figure 6.3

where operator Int{...} indicates rounding the quantity {...} to the nearest integer number.
It is understood that quantization results in a special error:
e(kT ) = x (kT ) − x NUM (k )
that could be viewed as an oscillatory process dominated by the harmonic corresponding to the
sampling frequency 2π/T and magnitude of 0.5δK, see Fig. 6.3 below.

DISCRETE-TIME-DOMAIN DESCRIPTION OF DYNAMIC SYSTEMS

Now our goal is to obtain a system response y(t) to a discrete-time signal x(k). To be consistent
with the definition of the input signal, we will concentrate on the definition of the values of y(t) at

243
the particular discrete moments of time, y(kT) = y(k), where k = 0, 1, 2, ... In principle, this problem
could be solved by using Laplace and inverse Laplace transforms and the system transfer function.
However, this approach would result in unnecessary complications. Application of Z-transform to
this problem results in a much simple solution.
First, it should be noted that in any realistic system, discrete-time domain input signal x(k) is a
staircase-type signal. This implies that the controlled plant is driven by a number sequence,
generated by a computer, transformed into a physical signal by a digital-to-analog converter acting
as a zero-order hold (ZOH). A z-domain transfer function of a continuous plant driven through a
ZOH is defined as:
z − 1  G (s ) 
G ZOH (z ) = Z 
z  s 
Example 6.3
Given an s-domain transfer function of a controlled process:
6 s 2 + 2 s + 12
G (s ) =
s 3 + 6s 2 + 8s + 15
a) obtain s-domain and z-domain poles of this system assuming T = 0.3 sec
Solution: s-domain poles could be easily obtained by a software tool, p1, 2 = −0.5 ± 1.658 j , and

p3 = −5. One can realize that, potentially, the process could be represented by more than one transfer
function, for example by G1(z) intended for a sampled sequence input and G2(z) intended for a
staircase-type input. Let us utilize a software tool to obtain both transfer functions:

0.420011(z 2 − 1.736098 z + 0.9048374 )(z + 1)

G1 (s ) =
(z 2
− 1.512748 z + 0.7408182)(z − 0.2231302 )

and
0.8135563(z 2 − 1.73493z + 0.9091589)(z + 1)
G1 (s ) =
(z 2
− 1.512748 z + 0.7408182)(z − 0.2231302 )
It could be seen that while numerators of both transfer functions are different, the denominators
are identical ant therefore z-domain poles are the same: p1, 2 = 0.756 ± 0.411 j and p3 = 0.223.

Recall that an s-domain pole p s = α ± jω could be easily converted into a z-domain pole pz via

the relationship p z = e p T = eαT cos(ωT ) + jeαT sin (ωT ) . Compute the following quantities:
s

e −0.5×0.3 = 0.861

244
 cos(1.658 × 0.3) = cos(28.5°) = 0.88
sin (1.658 × 0.3) = sin (28.5°) = 0.477
now the z-domain poles are:
0.861 × 0.88 ± 0.861 × 0.477 j = 0.757 ± 0.411 j

and e −5×0.3 = 0.223

Note that this result is consistent with the one obtained using a software tool.
b) assume that this system is driven by a sequence of pulses with magnitudes:
x * (k ) = 3k + u (k )
Define the system response Y(z), y(k), and y(∞), where k = 0, 1, 2, 3, ..., and T = 0.3 sec.
Solution: Define:
z (z − 1) + 0.9 z z (z − 0.1)
X (z ) = Z { x* (k )} =
z 3Tz
+ = =
z − 1 (z − 1) (z − 1)2 (z − 1)2
2

Recall that transfer function G1(z) is intended for a sampled sequence input, therefore the system
response is defined as:
0.42(z 2 − 1.736 z + 0.9 )(z + 1) z (z − 0.1)
Y (z ) = ⋅
(z 2 − 1.5z + 0.741)(z − 0.223) (z − 1) 2
Represent Y(z) by the sum of partial fractions as follows:
0.72 z 2 0.9 z 0.468 z 2 − 0.06 z 0.13z
Y (z ) = − + +
(z − 1) z − 1 (z − 0.756) + 0.411 z − 0.223
2 2 2

Then particular fractions could be converted into the discrete-time domain as follows:
0.72 z 2 0.3z
1) = 2.4 z → 2.4(k + 1)
(z − 1) 2
(z − 1) 2
0 .9 z
2) → − 0 .9
z −1
0.468 z 2 − 0.06 z 0.468 z 0.06 z
3) =z −
(z − 0.756) 2
+ 0.4112 z 2 − 1.512 z + 0.74 z 2 − 1.512 z + 0.74
To process these two terms let us compute the following quantities (see the z-transform table):
e −0.6 a = 0.74 → a = −0.5
1.512 = 2e −0.15 cos(0.3b ) → cos(0.3b ) = 0.878 = cos(28.5°)

 28.5°   3.1415 
→ b =   ⋅   = 1.66
 180 °   0.3 

245
 sin (0.3b ) = sin (28.5°) = 0.477
0.468 0.06
= 0.979 and = 0.126
0.477 0.477
Finally the discrete-time-domain expression is as follows:

0.979e −0.5(k +1) sin[1.66(k + 1)] − 0.126e −0.5k sin (1.66k )

= 0.36e −0.5k sin (1.66k + 1.66) − 0.126e −0.5k sin (1.66k )

013z
4) → 0.13e −5k
z − 0.223

To evaluate the final value, y(∞), one could use the z-domain final value theorem:
Y (z ) 0.42(z 2 − 1.736 z + 0.9)(z + 1) z (z − 0.1)
y (∞ ) = lim(z − 1) = lim ⋅ =∞
z →1
z z →1
(z 2 − 1.5z + 0.741)(z − 0.223) (z − 1) 2
c) Assume that this system is driven by a “staircase-type” signal with magnitudes of particular
steps:
x (k ) = 3k + u (k )
Define system response Y(z), y(k) and y(∞), where k = 0, 1, 2, 3, ... and T = 0.3 sec.
Solution: Note that Z-transform cannot distinguish a sampled sequence signal from a staircase-
z (z − 0.1)
type signal, and X (z ) = .
(z − 1)2
Recall that transfer function G2(z) is intended for a staircase-type input, therefore the system
response is defined as:
0.8(z 2 − 1.73z + 0.91)(z + 1) z (z − 0.1)
Y (z ) = ⋅
(z 2 − 1.5z + 0.741)(z − 0.223) (z − 1) 2
Represent Y(z) by the sum of partial fractions as follows:
0.72 z 2 1 .3 z 0.36 z 2 − 0.07 z 0.21z
Y (z ) = − + +
(z − 1) 2
z −1 (z − 0.76) 2
+ 0.411 2
z − 0.223
Then particular fractions could be converted into the discrete-time domain as follows:
0.72 z 2 0.3z
1) = 2.4 z → 2.4(k + 1)
(z − 1) 2
(z − 1) 2
1 .3 z
2) → − 0 .9
z −1

246
 0.36 z 2 − 0.07 z
→ 0.75e −0.5(k +1) sin[1.66(k + 1)] − 0.147e −0.5k sin (1.66k )
3) (z − 0.756) 2 2
+ 0.411
= 0.27e − 0.5 k
sin (1.66k + 1.66) − 0.147e −0.5k sin (1.66k )
0.21z
4) → 0.21e −5k
z − 0.223

To evaluate the final value, y(∞), one could use the z-domain final value theorem, however, it is
quite clear that y(∞) = ∞.
Example 6.4
10
Investigate step response of a system with transfer function G (s ) = to
2
s + 2 s + 10
a) continuous-time signal x(t) = sin(6.3t)
 x (t ) if t = kT
b) sampled sequence x * (kT ) =  with time step T = 0.1 sec and T = 0.02
0 if kT < t < (k + 1)T
sec
c) staircase-type signal x (kT ) = x (t ) if kT < t < (k + 1)T with time step T = 0.1 sec and T = 0.02
sec

Figure 6.4

247
 Figure 6.5

The solution is presented in Fig. 6.4 above for T = 0.1 sec and in Fig. 6.5 for T = 0.02 sec. One
can realize that “the amount of energy” carried by a sampled sequence-type signal increases at the

Figure 6.6

248
“gap” between pulses decreases. Therefore, the magnitude of the system responses to signal x * (kT )
is greater at T = 0.02 than at T = 0.1 (sec), it could be said that the amount of energy “works as a
constant gain”. At the same time, magnitude of the system response to a staircase-type input is
generally consistent with the response to a continuous-time input x(t), see Figs. 6.4, 6.5, and 6.6.
Fig. 6.6 illustrates the fact that a staircase-type input signal is applies with a delay equal to the time
step; this delay is responsible for the difference between the system responses obtained for different
T values.
Fig. 6.7 provides an additional insight in the nature of discrete-time control. It could be seen
that the original input signal is a sinusoid with the frequency of 1 Hz (6.3 rad/sec). This signal is
applied via a sampler-ZOH combination that is responsible for an additional frequency component at
the sampling frequency of 4 Hz (25 rad/sec). However, the dynamic system acts as a low-pass filter
and “filters out” this additional high-frequency term.

Figure 6.7

ANALYSIS OF DISCRETE-TIME CONTROL SYSTEMS

Analysis of discrete-time control systems includes stability analysis, analysis of steady-state

errors, and analysis of system dynamics. Practicing control engineers perform system analysis tasks
using readily available software tools.

249
 Example 6.5
Investigate stability of a control system shown below that includes a continuous-time controlled
plant with transfer function:

G (s ) =
(s 2
+ 3s + 8)(s + 7 )
(s 2
+ s + 12 )(s 2 + 2 s + 12 )
driven through a zero-order hold, digital feedback controller and a filter in the reference channel
with transfer functions correspondingly:

D
R
F (z) ZOH Plant

P(z) S AM PL ER

1.08 z 3 − 2.643z 2 + 2.202 z − 0.631

P (z ) = 7.69
z 3 − 2.147 z 2 + 1.535z − 0.352
z 3 + 7.2 z 2 + 4.65z + 0.267
F (z ) = 0.01
z 3 − 2.147 z 2 + 1.535z − 0.352
The digital circuitry operates with the time step T = 0.1 sec.
Solution: Stability analysis of this system requires that the z-domain equivalent of the transfer
function of the controlled plant be obtained assuming the ZOH option:
z 3 − 2.147 z 2 + 1.535z − 0.352
G p (z ) = 0.13
z 4 − 3.5z 3 + 4.797 z 2 − 3.015z + 0.741
Then the closed-loop system transfer function is obtained as follows:

F (z )G p (z )
GCL (z ) =
1 + F ( z )G p ( z )

 z 3 + 7.2 z 2 + 4.65z + 0.267   z 3 − 2.147 z 2 + 1.535z − 0.352 

 0.01  ⋅  0.13 
 z 3 − 2.147 z 2 + 1.535z − 0.352   z 4 − 3.5z 3 + 4.797 z 2 − 3.015z + 0.741
=
 z 3 + 7.2 z 2 + 4.65z + 0.267   z 3 − 2.147 z 2 + 1.535z − 0.352 
1 + 0.01  ⋅ 0.13 
 z 3 − 2.147 z 2 + 1.535z − 0.352   z 4 − 3.5z 3 + 4.797 z 2 − 3.015z + 0.741

250
  z 3 + 7.2 z 2 + 4.65z + 0.267   z 3 − 2.147 z 2 + 1.535z − 0.352 
0.01 3  ⋅ 0.13 4 
 z − 2.147 z + 1.535z − 0.352   z − 3.5z + 4.797 z − 3.015z + 0.741
2 3 2

=
 1.08 z 3 − 2.634 z 2 + 2.202 z − 0.631 
1+  
 z − 3.5z + 4.797 z − 3.015z + 0.741
4 3 2

 z 3 + 7.2 z 2 + 4.65z + 0.267 

= 0.01 ⋅
 z 3 − 2.147 z 2 + 1.535z − 0.352 
 z 3 − 2.147 z 2 + 1.535z − 0.352 
 0.13 
 (z 4 − 3.5z 3 + 4.797 z 2 − 3.015z + 0.741) + (1.08 z 3 − 2.643z 2 + 2.202 z − 0.631)

z 3 + 7.2 z 2 + 4.65z + 0.267

= 0.0013
z 4 − 2.42 z 3 + 2.147 z 2 − 0.813z + 0.11

Now let us obtain closed-loop poles of this system:

p1,2 = −0.802 ± 0.163 j , p3 = −0.368 , and p4 = −0.449

Note that the absolute values of all poles are less than 1, indeed:

0.8022 + 0.1632 = 0.808 < 1 , 0.368 < 1, and 0.449 < 1

Recall that p = eαT , where
p is absolute value of a z-domain pole,

α is real part of the corresponding s-domain pole,

and T > 0 is the time step value.
One should realize that absolute value of a z-domain pole could be less than 1 if and only if real
part of the corresponding s-domain pole is negative. Therefore, our analysis indicates that all system
poles have s-domain equivalents with negative real parts, and therefore, the system is stable.
Stability of a discrete-time system rule: A discrete-time system is stable, if and only if, all its z-
domain poles are located inside the unit circle with the center in the origin.
Example 6.6
Evaluate stability margins of the above system.
Solution: Recall that stability gain and phase margins are obtained by inspecting the open-loop
frequency response of the system in question defined by Bode or Nyquist plots. Also recall that
Bode / Nyquist techniques are applicable if and only if the open-loop system is stable that could be

251
assured if all poles of the system components are located in the left-hand-side of the complex plane –
for s-domain poles, and inside the unit circle with the center in the origin – for z-domain poles.
Therefore, first let us verify this condition for our system:
 z 3 − 2.147 z 2 + 1.535z − 0.352   1.08 z 3 − 2.643z 2 + 2.202 z − 0.631
GOL (z ) = 0.13 ⋅
  7.69 
 z 4 − 3.5z 3 + 4.797 z 2 − 3.015z + 0.741  z 3 − 2.147 z 2 + 1.535z − 0.352 
1.08 z 3 − 2.634 z 2 + 2.202 z − 0.631
=
z 4 − 3.5z 3 + 4.797 z 2 − 3.015z + 0.741
Inspection of this expression leads to the conclusion that the characteristic polynomial of GOL(z) is
equal to the characteristic polynomial of the plant transfer function and, since the controlled plant is
stable (just review the Gp(s) expression), GOL(z) is expected to have all its poles within the unit
circle. This conclusion clears the way for the application of Bode plots-based analysis of stability
margins.

Figure 6.8
As can be seen in Fig. 6.8, the system has stability gain margin of approximately 6 dB, and
stability phase margin of 45°.
Example 6.7
Evaluate steady-state errors for unit step reference (tracking error) and unit step disturbance
in the above-described system.

252
 Solution: First, recall that a tracking error is defined as “the difference between the reference
and the system response to this reference”, then the steady-state tracking error is:
 z − 1
lim  [1 − GCL (z )]R (z )
z →1
 z 

 z − 1  z 3 + 7.2 z 2 + 4.65z + 0.267   z 

= lim   ⋅ 1 − 0.0013 ⋅ 
z →1
 z   z − 2.42 z + 2.147 z − 0.813z + 0.11  z − 1
4 3 2

 z 3 + 7.2 z 2 + 4.65z + 0.267 

= lim 1 − 0.0013  = 0.289 (abs)
z →1
 z 4 − 2.42 z 3 + 2.147 z 2 − 0.813z + 0.11

Then, using the definition of the disturbance-caused error as “the system response to the error”,
and realizing that the disturbance is applied directly to the input of the plant, the steady-state error
caused by step-type disturbance is:
 z − 1 D
lim  GCL (z )D (z )
z →1
 z 

 z − 1 G p (z )  z 
= lim   ⋅ ⋅ 
z →1
 z  1 + G p (z )P(z )  z − 1

z 3 − 2.147 z 2 + 1.535z − 0.352

0.13 ⋅
z 4 − 3.5z 3 + 4.797 z 2 − 3.015z + 0.741
= lim
z →1
z 3 − 2.147 z 2 + 1.535z − 0.352 1.08 z 3 − 2.643z 2 + 2.202 z − 0.631
1 + 0.13 ⋅ ⋅ 7.69 ⋅
z 4 − 3.5z 3 + 4.797 z 2 − 3.015z + 0.741 z 3 − 2.147 z 2 + 1.535z − 0.352

z 3 − 2.147 z 2 + 1.535z − 0.352

0.13 ⋅
z 4 − 3.5z 3 + 4.797 z 2 − 3.015z + 0.741
= lim
z →1
1.08 z 3 − 2.643z 2 + 2.202 z − 0.631
1+
z 4 − 3.5z 3 + 4.797 z 2 − 3.015z + 0.741

0.13 ⋅ (z 3 − 2.147 z 2 + 1.535z − 0.352 )

= lim
z →1
(z 4
− 3.5z 3 + 4.797 z 2 − 3.015z + 0.741) + (1.08 z 3 − 2.643z 2 + 2.202 z − 0.631)

z 3 − 2.147 z 2 + 1.535z − 0.352

= lim 0.13 ⋅ = 0.195
z →1
z 4 − 2.42 z 3 + 2.147 z 2 − 0.813z + 0.11

253
 Z-DOMAIN DESIGN OF CONTROL SYSTEMS

Design of a digital control system is follows the same pattern as in the case of an analog system:
1. The system configuration and its components should be understood and represented by a
block diagram showing the controlled plant, actuator, servo-mechanism, sensor, and all
relevant system hardware, and then, the computer and all system components implemented in
software.
2. The mathematical description of the “analog” part of the system has to be obtained and
represented by the “overall” s-domain transfer function GA(s).
3. The time step of all computer-based operations, T, must be established. It is good to verify
that the magnitude of the frequency response G A ( jω SAMP ) is quite small, perhaps 40 dB

2π
lower than its value at low frequencies, where sampling frequency ω SAMP = .
T
4. It should be understood that the analog part of the system will be driven by a “staircase”
type signal with time step T (sec) and therefore, the “analog” part of the system has to be
represented by the appropriately defined z-domain transfer function:
z − 1  G (s ) 
G A (z ) = Z 
z  s 
It is recommended to obtain this result using a software tool performing the “s-domain to z-
domain conversion under the ZOH option” for time step T.
5. Now it is time to consider the design specifications. The closed-loop transfer function of the
designed system, the “model” transfer function GM(s), is expected to be of the same order as
GA(s). Therefore, its characteristic polynomial can be defined in the s-domain using
dominant and non-dominant poles. Transfer function GM(s) should not have zeros, and its
constant gain should assure that
GM(0) = 1
6. The resultant control system will be driven by a staircase-type signal with time step T (sec)
and therefore, the “analog description” of this system, GM(s), also has to be represented by a
z-domain transfer function:
z − 1  G M (s ) 
G (z ) =
M
Z 
z  s 

Again, it is recommended to obtain this result using a software tool performing the s-domain

254
 to z-domain conversion under the ZOH option for time step T. Do not be surprised, that
transfer function:
N M (z )
G M
(z ) =
D M (z )

where N M (z ) and D M (z ) are polynomial numerator and denominator, will have both poles
and zeros.
7. Represent the analog part of the system by a z-domain transfer function in the form:
N A (z )
G (z ) =
A

D A (z )

where N A (z ) and D A (z ) are polynomial numerator and denominator.

8. Place a digital filter responsible for the cancellation of the zeros of the controlled plant with
transfer function:
1
F (z ) =
N A (z )
in the input of the controlled plant as shown in Fig. 6.9. (Note that this design approach is
recommended only for common situations when all zeros of the s-domain transfer function of
the controlled plant are located in the left-hand-side of the complex plane.)

R
1/NA(z) NA(z)/DA(z)
-

H(z)

Figure 6.9

9. Introduce a polynomial feedback controller H(z) as shown in Fig. 6.9. Polynomial H(z) has
the order equal to the “order of the plant minus 1”.
Then the characteristic equation of the closed-loop system can be defined as follows:
1 N A (z ) 1
1 + G A (z ) H (z ) = 1 + H (z )
N A (z ) D A (z ) N A (z )

H (z ) D A (z ) + H (z )
= 1+ = =0
D A (z ) D A (z )

or just D A (z ) + H ( z ) = 0

255
 Finally, the characteristic polynomial of the closed-loop system is D A (z ) + H (z ) .
10. Equate the characteristic polynomial of the closed-loop system to the desired characteristic
polynomial of the closed-loop system, i.e., the characteristic polynomial of the model:
D A (z ) + H ( z ) = D M (z )
and define polynomial H(z) as:
H ( z ) = D M (z ) − D A ( z )
11. Move the summing junction of the control loop of Fig. 6.9 so that in the resultant system the
forward path be represented just by the controlled plant, the feedback be represented by a
controller with the transfer function:
H (z )
P (z ) =
N A (z )
and the filter in the reference channel be:
1
F (z ) =
N A (z )
12. Modify the filter in the reference channel. The new transfer function of this filter is:
N M (z )
F (z ) =
N A (z )
One can realize that the transfer function of the resultant system is

N A (z )
G A (z ) N M (z ) D A (z )
G RES
(z ) = =
1 + G A (z )P (z ) N A (z ) N A (z ) H (z )
1+
D A (z ) N A (z )

1
D A (z ) N M (z ) N M (z )
= N M (z ) = =
H ( z ) D A ( z ) + H (z ) D M (z )
1+
D A (z )

The resultant system is depicted in Fig. 6.10 below.

It could be seen that while the control effort is applied via the zero-order hold (ZOH), the
disturbance acts directly on the controlled plant. The feedback information is obtained by sampling
the output of the plant 1/T times per second.

256
 D
R
F(z)=NM(z)/NA(z) ZOH Plant
-

P(z)=H(z)/NA(z) SAMPLER

Figure 6.10

The following example illustrates the application of the system design approach.
Example 6.8
Given transfer function of a controlled plant that encompasses all analog components of the
system:

G p (s ) =
(s 2
+ 3s + 8)(s + 7 )
(s 2
+ s + 12 )(s 2 + 2 s + 12)
It is required to design a digital control system operating at the clock frequency of 10 Hz, i.e. the
time step is 0.1 sec. The design specifications are:
− settling time = 2 sec, and
− overshoot of step response ≤ 5%

Solution: First, convert the transfer function of the plant into z-domain assuming ZOH option
and the time step T = 0.1 sec:
z 3 − 2.147 z 2 + 1.535z − 0.352 z 3 − 2.147 z 2 + 1.535z − 0.352
G p (s ) = 0.13 = 0.13
(z 2
− 1.79 z + 0.9)(z 2 − 1.7 z + 0.82 ) z 4 − 3.5z 3 + 4.79 z 2 − 3.015z + 0.741
The desired closed-loop system transfer function is:
640
G m (s ) =
(s 2
+ 4 s + 8)(s + 10)(s + 8)
or in the z-domain (T = 0.1 sec):
z 3 − 7.2 z 2 + 4.65z − 0.267
G (s ) = 0.0017
m

(z 2
− 1.6 z + 0.67 )(z − 0.449 )(z − 0.368)

z 3 − 7.2 z 2 + 4.65z − 0.267

= 0.0017
z 4 − 2.42 z 3 + 2.147 z 2 − 0.813z + 0.11

257
 Note that in order to eliminate the undesirable effect of system zeros, the desired closed-loop
transfer function Gm(s) was suggested without zeros. However, its z-domain equivalent, Gm(z), does
have zeros.
First, introduce filter:
1 7.69
F (s ) = =
0.13(z − 2.147 z + 1.535 z − 0.352 )
3 2 3 2
z − 2.147 z + 1.535z − 0.352
responsible for canceling zeros of the plant transfer function. Then a polynomial controller:

H (z ) = h3 z 3 + h2 z 2 + h1 z + h0

should be introduced in the system feedback (recall that the order of this polynomial is defined
as the “order of the controlled plant minus 1”). Recall that the desired closed-loop polynomial of the
system must be equal to the sum of H(z) and the characteristic polynomial of the controlled plant,
i.e.:
z 4 − 2.42 z 3 + 2.147 z 2 + 2.202 z − 0.631

= h3 z 3 + h2 z 2 + h1 z + h0 + z 4 − 3.5 z 3 + 4.79 z 2 − 3.015 z + 0.741

and therefore: H (z ) = 1.08 z 3 − 2.643z 2 + 2.202 z − 0.631

The consequent block diagram transformation results in the system that has the controlled plant
in the forward path, feedback controller:

1.08 z 3 − 2.643z 2 + 2.202 z − 0.631

P (z ) =
z 3 − 2.147 z 2 + 1.535 z − 0.352

and the filter F(s) in the reference channel. Now, the closed-loop transfer function of this system
would be lacking only one thing: the zeros of the desired closed-loop transfer function Gm(z). This
could be easily corrected by modifying filter F(z) as follows:

0.0017(z 3 + 7.2 z 2 + 4.65 z + 0.267 )

F (z ) = 7.69
z 3 − 2.147 z 2 + 1.535 z − 0.352

z 3 + 7.2 z 2 + 4.65 z + 0.267

F (z ) = 0.013
z 3 − 2.147 z 2 + 1.535z − 0.352

The simulation setup of Fig. 6.11 provides a complete implementation of the designed system
and the validation of the design.

258
 Figure 6.11

Example 6.9
Redesign the controller for the plant of Example 6.8 so that the resultant system be able to
withstand the effects of ramp and step disturbance.
Solution: First, let us investigate the effects of ramp and step disturbance on the previously
designed system. These effects are represented by Fig. 6.12. It could be seen that the steady-state
error for step disturbance is approximately equal to 0.2 (abs. units) and is equal to infinity for a
ramp-type disturbance.
Recall the role of “analog” integrators introduced in the control loop – a digital integrator has the
same impact on the system properties. Consider the z-domain transfer function of the “plant &
integrator” combination that could be obtained just by multiplication of the z-domain transfer
function of the plant by the z-domain transfer function of integrator:
z 3 − 2.147 z 2 + 1.535z − 0.352 z
F (z ) = 0.132 ⋅
(z 2
− 1.792 z + 0.905)(z 2 − 1.71z 0.819) z − 1

259
 Figure 6.12

z 4 − 2.147 z 3 + 1.535z 2 − 0.352 z

GP& I (z ) = 0.132
z 5 − 4.5z 4 + 8.29 z 3 − 7.8 z 2 + 3.756 z − 0.741
Note that the order of the system is expected to increase by 1, and therefore the order of the
“model” transfer function will be increased by adding one non-dominant real pole:
7680
G m (s ) =
(s 2
+ 4 s + 8)(s + 10)(s + 8)(s + 12 )

We will proceed with the system design by first, designing the system shown in Figs. 6.13 a) and
then 6.13 b).

z 4 + 15.173z 3 + 22.116 z 2 + 4.9 z + 0.104

G (z ) = 0.00037
m

(z 2
− 1.6s + 0.67 )(z − 0.449 )(z − 0.368)(z − 0.3)

z 4 + 15.173z 3 + 22.116 z 2 + 4.9 z + 0.104

= 0.00037
z 5 − 2.723z 4 + 2.877 z 3 − 1.46 z 2 + 0.356 z − 0.033

7.576
F (z ) =
z 4 − 2.147 z 3 + 1.535z 2 − 0.352 z

260
 DIGITAL
F(z) PLANT
INTEGRATOR
-

a) H(z)

DIGITAL PLANT
F(z)·M(z)
INTEGRATOR
-

DIGITAL
b) INTEGRATOR
F(z)·H(z)

Figure 6.13

H (z ) = 1.777 z 4 − 5.413z 3 + 6.34 z 2 − 3.4 z + 0.708

1.777 z 4 − 5.413z 3 + 6.34 z 2 − 3.4 z + 0.708 z

P (z ) = 7.576 ⋅
z 4 − 2.147 z 3 + 1.535z 2 − 0.352 z z −1

1.777 z 4 − 5.413z 3 + 6.34 z 2 − 3.4 z + 0.708

= 7.576
(z 3
− 2.147 z 2 + 1.535z − 0.352)(z − 1)

1.777 z 4 − 5.413z 3 + 6.34 z 2 − 3.4 z + 0.708

= 7.576
z 4 − 3.147 z 3 + 3.682 z 2 − 1.887 z + 0.352

0.00037(z 4 + 15.173z 3 + 22.116 z 2 + 4.9 z + 0.104) z

F ′(z ) = 7.576 ⋅
z 4 − 2.147 z 3 + 1.535z 2 − 0.352 z z −1

z 4 + 15.173z 3 + 22.116 z 2 + 4.9 z + 0.104

= 0.0028
z 4 − 3.147 z 3 + 3.682 z 2 − 1.887 z + 0.352

The resultant control system is represented by the simulation setup of Figs. 6.14 and 6.15
presenting the step response of the reference channel, and the response of the disturbance channel to
a step and ramp-type disturbance.

261
Figure 6.14

Figure 6.15

262
 ASSIGNMENTS (HOMEWORK #11)

s +1
11.1. Given transfer function of a controlled plant, G p (s ) = . Design a digital control
s 2 + s + 10
system operating at the clock frequency of 20 Hz to achieve
− the system settling time of 2 sec
− the overshoot of step response of 10%
− the steady-state error to ramp disturbance, D(t) = 0.3t, under 0.2 (abs. units)
11.2. Implement your design in VISSIM software. Investigate your design by computer
simulation:
− show the system response to step, R(t) = u(t), and ramp, R(t) = 0.3t, reference,
including the control efforts
− show the system response to step, D(t) = u(t), and ramp, D(t) = 0.3t, disturbance,
including the control effort

263
 REFERENCES

1. Kuo, B.C., Automatic Control Systems, Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ, 1995
2. Kuo, B.C., Digital Control Systems, Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, Publishers, FL, 1992
3. Dorf, R.C. and Bishop, R.H., Modern Control Systems, Addison-Wesley Publishing
Company, Reading, MA, 1995
4. VISSIM, Visual Solutions, Inc., MA, 1999
5. MATLAB/Simulink, The MathWorks, Inc., MA, 1996

264