EPE3302

State Space Analysis and Control

in Power Engineering
Dr. Khalid ABIDI
Objectives
The objective of this lecture are as follows:
• The Pole-Placement Controller Design Approach
• Design of Regulator Type Control Systems
• Design of Servo Type Control Systems
Introduction
This lecture discusses state-space design methods based on the pole-
placement method, observers, the quadratic optimal regulator systems,
and introductory aspects of robust control systems.
The pole-placement method is somewhat similar to the root-locus method
in that we place closed-loop poles at desired locations. The basic difference
is that in the root-locus design we place only the dominant closed-loop
poles at the desired locations, while in the pole-placement design we place
all closed-loop poles at desired locations.
Introduction
In State Space, the control design is usually dependent on the type of goal
considered. That goal can be either regulation, servo or reference tracking.
These terms are defined as follows:
Regulation: Maintaining all the states (or output) at a constant or
zero position. Usually regulation is defined as
maintaining the states (or output) at zero.
Servo: If the states (or output) are to be set at a constant
non-zero position then it is termed as a servo control
problem.

Reference Tracking: If the reference states (or output) are time varying,
then the control problem is termed as reference
tracking.
Pole Placement
Assuming that the system is completely State Controllable and that all the
states are measurable the present design technique begins with a
determination of the desired closed-loop poles based on the transient-
response and/or frequency-response requirements, such as speed,
damping ratio, or bandwidth, as well as steady-state requirements.
Let us assume that we decide that the desired closed-loop poles are to be
at 𝑠𝑠 = 𝜇𝜇1 , 𝑠𝑠 = 𝜇𝜇2 , …, 𝑠𝑠 = 𝜇𝜇𝑛𝑛 . By choosing an appropriate gain matrix for
state feedback, it is possible to force the system to have closed-loop poles
at the desired locations.
Pole Placement: Regulation
Consider the State Controllable State Space system given as
𝐱𝐱̇ 𝑡𝑡 = 𝐴𝐴𝐱𝐱 𝑡𝑡 + 𝐵𝐵𝐮𝐮(𝑡𝑡)
Let the control input be selected such that
𝐮𝐮 𝑡𝑡 = −𝐾𝐾𝐱𝐱(𝑡𝑡)
Where 𝐾𝐾 is a 𝑚𝑚 × 𝑛𝑛 matrix called the State Feedback Gain Matrix.
Substitution of this control input into the State Space system, it is obtained
that
𝐱𝐱̇ 𝑡𝑡 = 𝐴𝐴𝐱𝐱 𝑡𝑡 + 𝐵𝐵𝐮𝐮 𝑡𝑡
= 𝐴𝐴𝐱𝐱 𝑡𝑡 − 𝐵𝐵𝐵𝐵𝐱𝐱(𝑡𝑡)
= 𝐴𝐴 − 𝐵𝐵𝐵𝐵 𝐱𝐱(𝑡𝑡)
Pole Placement: Regulation
Therefore the Closed-Loop State 𝐷𝐷
Space system given as
𝐱𝐱̇ 𝑡𝑡 = 𝐴𝐴 − 𝐵𝐵𝐵𝐵 𝐱𝐱(𝑡𝑡) 𝐮𝐮
𝐵𝐵 +
+
𝐱𝐱̇
∫ 𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑
𝐱𝐱
𝐶𝐶 +
+ 𝐲𝐲

where the solution of the State

Equation becomes 𝐴𝐴

𝐱𝐱 𝑡𝑡 = 𝑒𝑒 𝐴𝐴−𝐵𝐵𝐵𝐵 𝑡𝑡 𝐱𝐱 0 −𝐾𝐾

The Closed-Loop system is shown in Fig. 1: Closed-Loop State Space System

Fig. 1. As it can be seen from the
solution of the State Equation. The
performance of the system depends
on the eigenvalues of 𝐴𝐴 − 𝐵𝐵𝐵𝐵.
Pole Placement: Regulation
As it was stated earlier, the closed-loop eigenvalues (poles) of the system
are selected based on some predetermined criteria such as rise time,
settling time, maximum overshoot, etc.
Once the closed-loop eigenvalues are determined, the matrix 𝐾𝐾 is
computed such that the selected eigenvalues are the eigenvalues of the
matrix 𝐴𝐴 − 𝐵𝐵𝐵𝐵.
For general systems, the computation of the matrix 𝐾𝐾 is accomplished by
the direct substitution of 𝐾𝐾 and the computation of the elements of 𝐾𝐾 such
that the eigenvalues of 𝐴𝐴 − 𝐵𝐵𝐵𝐵 match the desired eigenvalues.
Pole Placement: Regulation
The matrix 𝐾𝐾 is not unique for systems with multiple-inputs (𝑚𝑚 > 1) . In
other words, it is possible to find more than one solution for the matrix 𝐾𝐾.
For single-input (𝑚𝑚 = 1) systems, the matrix 𝐾𝐾 is unique and as a result
another approach can be used in addition to direct substitution. This
approach is called Ackermann’s Formula Approach.
Using Matlab, the following command can be used for single-input systems:
𝐾𝐾 = acker(𝐴𝐴, 𝐵𝐵, 𝜙𝜙)
where, 𝜙𝜙 = 𝜇𝜇1 , 𝜇𝜇2 , … , 𝜇𝜇𝑛𝑛 is a vector of the desired eigenvalues. For
multiple-input systems the following command can be used:
𝐾𝐾 = place(𝐴𝐴, 𝐵𝐵, 𝜙𝜙)
When using the place(�) command care must be taken that desired
eigenvalues are all unique.
Pole Placement: Direct Substitution
For simplicity we will present the approach for single-input systems and
then extend it for multiple-input systems.
Consider the single-input State Space system given as
𝐱𝐱̇ 𝑡𝑡 = 𝐴𝐴𝐱𝐱 𝑡𝑡 + 𝐵𝐵𝑢𝑢(𝑡𝑡)
The control input for state regulation is selected as
𝑢𝑢 𝑡𝑡 = −𝐾𝐾𝐱𝐱(𝑡𝑡)
where 𝐾𝐾 = 𝑘𝑘1 , 𝑘𝑘2 , … , 𝑘𝑘𝑛𝑛 . Substitution of the control input in the system
results in a closed-loop system of the form
𝐱𝐱̇ 𝑡𝑡 = 𝐴𝐴 − 𝐵𝐵𝐵𝐵 𝐱𝐱(𝑡𝑡)
Pole Placement: Direct Substitution
The matrix 𝐾𝐾must be computed such that the eigenvalues of 𝐴𝐴 − 𝐵𝐵𝐵𝐵 are
placed in the desired locations. In other words
𝜆𝜆𝜆𝜆 − 𝐴𝐴 − 𝐵𝐵𝐵𝐵 = 𝜙𝜙(𝜆𝜆)
where
𝜙𝜙(𝜆𝜆) = 𝜆𝜆 − 𝜇𝜇1 𝜆𝜆 − 𝜇𝜇2 × ⋯ × 𝜆𝜆 − 𝜇𝜇𝑛𝑛
is called the desired characteristic polynomial and 𝜇𝜇1 , 𝜇𝜇2 , …, 𝜇𝜇𝑛𝑛 are the
desired eigenvalues (poles) for the closed-loop system. For general matrices
𝐴𝐴 and 𝐵𝐵 it is not straightforward to present a single result that computes 𝐾𝐾
for a system of any order. Such a result is only possible if the system is in
Controllable Canonical Form.
Pole Placement: Direct Substitution
We will first show the approach for a system that is not in Controllable
Canonical Form using an example. Then a general result for Controllable
Canonical Systems will be given.

Example:
1 0 1
𝐱𝐱̇ 𝑡𝑡 = 𝐱𝐱 𝑡𝑡 + 𝑢𝑢(𝑡𝑡)
2 3 2
Compute the state feedback gain 𝐾𝐾 such that the control input
𝑢𝑢 𝑡𝑡 = −𝐾𝐾𝐱𝐱(𝑡𝑡)
places the closed-loop eigenvalues at the locations 𝜇𝜇1 = −1 and 𝜇𝜇2 = −2
Pole Placement: Direct Substitution
Solution:
The system
1 0 1
𝐱𝐱̇ 𝑡𝑡 = 𝐱𝐱 𝑡𝑡 + 𝑢𝑢(𝑡𝑡)
2 3 2
is clearly not in controllable canonical form. We must first make sure that
the system is completely state controllable by computing the controllability
matrix
1 1
𝑊𝑊c = 𝐵𝐵 | 𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴 = → 𝑊𝑊c = 6 → rank 𝑊𝑊c = 2
2 8
Therefore, the system is controllable and we can proceed with the
controller design.
Pole Placement: Direct Substitution
The desired eigenvalues (poles) are 𝜇𝜇1 = −1 and 𝜇𝜇2 = −2, therefore, the
desired characteristic polynomial is given as
𝜙𝜙 𝜆𝜆 = 𝜆𝜆 + 1 𝜆𝜆 + 2 = 𝜆𝜆2 + 3𝜆𝜆 + 2
and
1 0 1 0 1
𝜆𝜆𝜆𝜆 − 𝐴𝐴 − 𝐵𝐵𝐵𝐵 = 𝜆𝜆 − + 𝐾𝐾
0 1 2 3 2
1 0 1 0 1 𝑘𝑘 𝑘𝑘
= 𝜆𝜆 − + 1 2
0 1 2 3 2
𝜆𝜆 0 1 0 𝑘𝑘1 𝑘𝑘2
= − +
0 𝜆𝜆 2 3 2𝑘𝑘1 2𝑘𝑘2
𝜆𝜆 − 1 + 𝑘𝑘1 𝑘𝑘2
= = 𝜆𝜆2 + 𝑘𝑘1 + 2𝑘𝑘2 − 4 𝜆𝜆 + 3 − 3𝑘𝑘1
−2 + 2𝑘𝑘1 𝜆𝜆 − 3 + 2𝑘𝑘2
Pole Placement: Direct Substitution
Therefore, we have
𝜆𝜆2 + 𝑘𝑘1 + 2𝑘𝑘2 − 4 𝜆𝜆 + 3 − 3𝑘𝑘1 ≡ 𝜆𝜆2 + 3𝜆𝜆 + 2
If we compare the coefficients then we have two equations:
𝑘𝑘1 + 2𝑘𝑘2 − 4 = 3
3 − 3𝑘𝑘1 = 2
with the solution
1 10
𝑘𝑘1 = and 𝑘𝑘2 =
3 3
In other words, the matrix 𝐾𝐾 is given as
1 10
𝐾𝐾 = 3 3
Pole Placement: Direct Substitution
Let us now explore the general case for a system in Controllable Canonical
Form. Consider the controllable canonical system of the form
0 0
𝐼𝐼
𝐱𝐱̇ 𝑡𝑡 = ⋮ 𝑛𝑛−1 × 𝑛𝑛−1 𝐱𝐱 𝑡𝑡 + ⋮ 𝑢𝑢(𝑡𝑡)
0 0
−𝑎𝑎𝑛𝑛 ⋯ −𝑎𝑎1 1
and if the control law is selected as
𝑢𝑢 = − 𝑘𝑘1 ⋯ 𝑘𝑘𝑛𝑛
The characteristic polynomial can be derived as
𝜆𝜆𝜆𝜆 − 𝐴𝐴 − 𝐵𝐵𝐵𝐵
= 𝜆𝜆𝑛𝑛 + 𝑘𝑘𝑛𝑛 + 𝑎𝑎1 𝜆𝜆𝑛𝑛−1 + 𝑘𝑘𝑛𝑛−1 + 𝑎𝑎2 𝜆𝜆𝑛𝑛−2 + ⋯ + 𝑘𝑘2 + 𝑎𝑎𝑛𝑛−1 𝜆𝜆 + 𝑘𝑘1 + 𝑎𝑎𝑛𝑛
= 𝜆𝜆 − 𝜇𝜇1 𝜆𝜆 − 𝜇𝜇2 × ⋯ × 𝜆𝜆 − 𝜇𝜇𝑛𝑛
Pole Placement: Direct Substitution
Example:
0 1 0
𝐱𝐱̇ 𝑡𝑡 = 𝐱𝐱 𝑡𝑡 + 𝑢𝑢(𝑡𝑡)
2 3 1
Compute the state feedback gain 𝐾𝐾 such that the control input
𝑢𝑢 𝑡𝑡 = −𝐾𝐾𝐱𝐱(𝑡𝑡)
places the closed-loop eigenvalues at the locations 𝜇𝜇1 = −1 and 𝜇𝜇2 = −2
Pole Placement: Direct Substitution
Solution:
The system
0 1 0
𝐱𝐱̇ 𝑡𝑡 = 𝐱𝐱 𝑡𝑡 + 𝑢𝑢(𝑡𝑡)
2 3 1
is clearly in controllable canonical form. We must first make sure that the
system is completely state controllable by computing the controllability
matrix
0 1
𝑊𝑊c = 𝐵𝐵 | 𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴 = → 𝑊𝑊c = −1 → rank 𝑊𝑊c = 2
1 3
Note, that systems in Controllable Canonical Form are always Controllable.
Pole Placement: Direct Substitution
The desired eigenvalues (poles) are 𝜇𝜇1 = −1 and 𝜇𝜇2 = −2, therefore, the
desired characteristic polynomial is given as
𝜙𝜙 𝜆𝜆 = 𝜆𝜆 + 1 𝜆𝜆 + 2 = 𝜆𝜆2 + 3𝜆𝜆 + 2
and
𝜆𝜆𝜆𝜆 − 𝐴𝐴 − 𝐵𝐵𝐵𝐵 = 𝜆𝜆2 + 𝑘𝑘2 − 3 𝜆𝜆 + 𝑘𝑘1 − 2
Equating the coefficients we get
𝑘𝑘2 − 3 = 3
𝑘𝑘1 − 2 = 2
with the solution
𝑘𝑘1 = 4 and 𝑘𝑘2 = 6
In other words, the matrix 𝐾𝐾 is given as
𝐾𝐾 = 4 6
Pole Placement:
Ackermann’s Formula
As stated before, for single-input systems another approach exists for the
computation of the matrix 𝐾𝐾. The computation can be done via a simple
formula given as
𝐾𝐾 = 0 ⋯ 0 1 𝑊𝑊c−1 𝜙𝜙(𝐴𝐴)
where 𝜙𝜙(𝐴𝐴) is the characteristic polynomial in terms of the matrix 𝐴𝐴 and is
given as
𝜙𝜙 𝐴𝐴 = 𝐴𝐴 − 𝜇𝜇1 𝐼𝐼 𝐴𝐴 − 𝜇𝜇2 𝐼𝐼 × ⋯ × 𝐴𝐴 − 𝜇𝜇𝑛𝑛 𝐼𝐼
This formula is called Ackermann’s Formula.
Pole Placement:
Ackermann’s Formula
Example:
0 1 0
𝐱𝐱̇ 𝑡𝑡 = 𝐱𝐱 𝑡𝑡 + 𝑢𝑢(𝑡𝑡)
2 3 1
Compute the state feedback gain 𝐾𝐾 such that the control input
𝑢𝑢 𝑡𝑡 = −𝐾𝐾𝐱𝐱(𝑡𝑡)
places the closed-loop eigenvalues at the locations 𝜇𝜇1 = −1 and 𝜇𝜇2 = −2
Pole Placement:
Ackermann’s Formula
Solution:
The system
0 1 0
𝐱𝐱̇ 𝑡𝑡 = 𝐱𝐱 𝑡𝑡 + 𝑢𝑢(𝑡𝑡)
2 3 1
The controllability matrix is given as
0 1
𝑊𝑊c = 𝐵𝐵 | 𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴 =
1 3
while
2 4 6
𝜙𝜙 𝐴𝐴 = 𝐴𝐴 + 𝐼𝐼 𝐴𝐴 + 2𝐼𝐼 = 𝐴𝐴 + 3𝐴𝐴 + 2𝐼𝐼 =
12 22
Then using Ackermann’s Formula we have
0 1 −1 4 6
𝐾𝐾 = 0 1 = 4 6
1 3 12 22