Republic of the Philippines

JOSE RIZAL MEMORIAL STATE UNIVERSITY

The Premier University in the Province of Zamboanga del Norte
Gov. GuadingAdasa St., Sta. Cruz, Dapitan City
Province of Zamboanga del Norte

EE 324 FEEDBACK AND CONTROL SYSTEM

LABORATORY 8

CRISHA KEN A. AYSON

BACHELOR OF SCIENCE IN ELECTRICAL ENGINEERING

ENGR. GILLERT M. BONGCAC

Lab 8 Design via Root Locus
1. Objective
To perform a trade-off study for lead compensation. To design a PI controller and see it’s
the effect upon steady-state error.
2. Minimum required software packages
MATLAB, and the Control System Toolbox
3. Prelab
a. How many lead compensator designs will meet the transient response specifications of a
system?
The number of lead compensator designs that can satisfy the transient response
specifications of a system varies depending on factors such as the system's specific
requirements and the limitations imposed on the compensator design.

b. What differences do the lead compensators of Prelab 1 make?

Compensators add poles and zeros to the system, adjusting the root locus to reach desired
pole positions and improving specific system characteristics such as transient response and steady-
state error. Differentiation enhances transient response, while integration reduces steady-state error
when added to the forward path.
c. Design a lead compensator for a unity negative feedback system with a forward transfer
𝐾
function G(s) = 𝑠(𝑠+3)(𝑠+6) to meet the following specifications: percent overshoot = 20%;
settling time = 2 seconds. Specify the required gain, K. Estimate the validity of the second order
approximation.
d. What is the total angular contribution of the lead compensator of Prelab 3?

Based on the information provided in Figure 1, the lead compensator in Prelab 3 contributes a total
angular value of Ph = 47.5063 degrees.
e. Determine the pole and zero of 2 more lead compensators that will meet the requirements of
Prelab 3.
f. What is the expected steady-state error for a step input for each of the lead-compensated
system?
The steady-state error for a step input in a lead-compensated system depends on the transfer
function of the system and the specific design parameters of the lead compensator. To determine
the steady-state error, we need to consider the open-loop transfer function and the closed-loop
transfer function of the system.
g. What is the expected steady-state error for a ramp input for each of the lead-compensated
system?
The steady-state error for Lead Compensator Design 1 is 0.5484, according to Matlab
data. The estimated steady-state error for design 2 is 0.3931. However, the design 3 has a
0.2741 error.
h. Select one of the lead-compensator designs above and specify a PI controller that can be
cascaded with the lead compensator that will produce a system with zero steady-state error for
both step and ramp inputs.
f. What is the expected steady-state error for a step input for each of the lead-compensated
system?
The estimated steady-state error for a phase input for each system, all of which are type 1
systems, system with lead compensation is zero. Phase input and Type 1 have a zero steady-
state connection.

g. What is the expected steady-state error for a ramp input for each of the lead-compensated
system?
According to MATLAB data, the Lead Compensator Design 1 steady-state error is 0.5484.
Design 2's estimated steady-state inaccuracy is 0.3931. Design 3 has a 0.2741 mistake, though.

4. Lab
a. Using the SISO Design Tool, create the design in Prelab 3 and plot the root locus, step
response, and ramp response. Take data to determine the percent overshoot, settling time,
and step and ramp steady-state errors. Record the gain, K.
b. Repeat Lab 1 for each of the designs in Prelab 5
c. For the design selected in Prelab 8, use SISO Design Tool and insert the PI controller. Plot the
step response and measure the percent overshoot, settling time, and steady-state error. Also, plot
the ramp response for the design and measure the steady-state error.
The lab.m script file is run with design 1 transfer function. Design specifications are set:
20% overshoot and 2 seconds settling time (Ts). The root locus and step response are
displayed. By adjusting the pole, overshoot and settling time are matched. The Preview
Pane shows the value of K and step response displays overshoot and settling time. Design
2 and 3 add a lead compensator, adjusting pole to match overshoot and settling time. K is
found in the Preview pane. Design 4 adds a real zero compensator for the PI controller,
following the same process.

d. Plot the step and ramp responses for two more values of the PI controller zero.

5. Postlab

a. Make a table showing calculated and actual values for percent overshoot, settling time,
gain, K, steady-state error for step inputs, and steady-state error for ramp inputs. Use the
three systems without the PI controller and the single system with the PI controller from
Lab 3.

Table 1 Calculated values

Table 2 Actual values from Control System Designer (SISO design tool)
b. Itemize the benefits of each system without the PI controller.

First, we will focus on reducing steady-state error and then improve the transient response
design. However, one drawback of this approach is that enhancing the transient response
can sometimes lead to a deterioration of the initially improved steady-state error.
Enhancements in transient response often result in a decrease in steady-state errors.

c. Choose a final design and discuss the reasons for your choice.

Due to the system's steady-state error being close to zero at 0.2741, we will select Lead
Compensator Design 3 as our final design. This design is also stable and operates within a
closed-loop system.