Daniel Abebe Modern Control Systems Lecture Note

3.5 Examples
1. Given a continuous time system
   
1 2 0
ẋ =   +  u
3 1 1
h i
y= 1 3 x

discuss controllability and observability of the system.

Solution
Check for controllability
 
h 0 2
i
Co = B AB =  
1 1

which has rank 2, hence it is completely controllable.

Check for observability
   
C 1 2
Ov =  = 
CA 7 10

which has rank 2, hence it is completely observable.

If we use control law u = [3 1]x + ν check controllability and observability of
the closed loop system.
   
1 2 0
ẋ = (A − BKf )x + Bν ⇒ ẋ =  x +  u
0 0 1

heck for controllability

 
h 0 2
i
Co = B AB =  
1 0

which has rank 2, hence it is completely controllable.

Check for observability
   
C 1 2
Ov =  = 
CA 1 2

the rows of Ov are are not linearly independent,hence rank of Ov is 1, hence

it is not completely observable.

Chapter 3 69
Daniel Abebe Modern Control Systems Lecture Note

2. Given a continuous time system

(s − 1)(s + 2)
H(s) =
(s + 1)(s − 2)(s + 3)
is that possible to convert H(s) to
s−1
G(s) =
(s + 2)(s + 3)
if possible determine state feedback gain matrix Kf .

Solution
We have to cancel zero at z = −2 by a pole at p = −2, cancel the pole at
p = −1 by a zero at z = −1, cancel pole at p = 2 by a zero at z = 2and add
one pole at p = −2 to get G(s) from H(s).
 
(s + 1)(s − 2) (s + 1)(s − 2) (s − 1)(s + 2)
G(s) = H(s) =
(s + 2)2 (s + 2)2 (s + 1)(s − 2)(s + 3)
(s − 1)(s + 2)
=
(s + 2)2 (s + 3)

Since the degree of the numerator is less than the degree of the denominator
it is possible to have such a kind of compensator. Hence it is possible to get
G(s) from H(s).
The state-space representation of H(s) is
   
−2 5 6 1
   
ẋ =  1 0 0 x + 0 u
   
   
0 1 0 0
h i
y = 1 1 −2 x

We need state feedback control law u = −Kf x that convert the system H(s)
to G(s), hence the desired location of poles of closed loop system are at p =
−2, p = −2, p = −3. Using Base-Gura method,
det(sI − A + BKf ) = (s + 2)2 (s + 3)
      
s 0 0−2 5 6 1
     h i
det 0 s 0 −  1 0 0 + 0 k1 k2 k3  = s3 + 7s2 + 16s + 12
      
      
0 0 s 0 1 0 0

 
s + 2 + k1 −5 + k2 −6 + k3
 
3 2
det  −1 0  = s + 7s + 16s + 12
 
s
 
0 −1 s
s3 + (2 + k1 )s2 + (−5 + 6)s + (−6 + k3 ) = s3 + 7s2 + 16s + 12

Chapter 3 70
Daniel Abebe Modern Control Systems Lecture Note

2 + k1 = 7 ⇒ k1 = 5, −5 + 6 = 16 ⇒ k2 = 21, −6 + k3 = 12 ⇒ k3 = 18
h i h i
Kf = k1 k2 k3 = 5 21 18

The closed loop dynamics of the system with full state feedback gain matrix
Kf is

ẋ = (A − BKf )x
       
ẋ −2 5 6 5 21 8 x
 1       1 
ẋ2  =  1 0 0 − 0 0 0 x2 
       
       
ẋ3 0 1 0 0 0 0 x3
    
ẋ −7 −17 −2 x1
 1   
ẋ2  =  1
    
0 0  x2 
    
ẋ3 0 1 0 x3

3. For IPC dynamic system on 1.3.4 with parameters mc = 0.5, mp = 0.2, b =

0.1, l = 0.3, I = 0.5mp l2 , g = 9.81, Find a feedback gain matrix that place the
poles of the closed loop system at p1 = −1, p2 = −2, p3 = −1−i, p4 = −1+i.

Solution
To check for complete controllability of IPC dynamic system use Co = ctrb(A, B),and
rank(Co ) commands on MATLAB to check controllability and the rank of con-
trollability matrix respectively. With the given parameters
   
0 1.00 0 0 0
   
0 −0.17 2.31
   
0  1.75
ẋ = 

x + 
  u

0 0 0 1.00  0 
   
0 −0.39 26.93 0 3.92
h i
y= 1 0 1 0 x

which result in controllability matrix Co , with rank 4.

 
0 1.76 −0.31 9.11
 
1.76 −0.31 9.11 −3.2 
 
Co =  
3.92 −0.69 105.73 
 
 0
 
3.92 −0.69 105.73 −22.21

To design Khf at the desired locations use

i MATLAB command Kf = place(A, B, p),
where p = −1 −2 −1 − i −1 + i . Which result in feedback gain matrix
h i
Kf = −0.10 −0.36 9.46 1.39

Chapter 3 71
Daniel Abebe Modern Control Systems Lecture Note

The closed loop dynamics of the system with full state feedback gain matrix
Kf is

ẋ = (A − BKf )x
       
ẋ 0 1.00 0 0 0 0 0 0 x
 1       1 
ẋ2  0 −0.17 0  −0.18 −0.64 16.7 2.46 x2 
       
2.31
  =  −   
       
ẋ3  0 0 0 1.00  0 0 0 0  x3 
       
ẋ4 0 −0.39 26.93 0 −0.41 −1.41 37.11 5.46 x4
    
ẋ 0 1 0 0 x
 1    1
−14.39 −2.46 x2 
    
ẋ2  0.18 0.46
 =  
    
ẋ3   0 0 0 1  x3 
    
ẋ4 0.41 1.02 −10.18 −5.46 x4

Figure 3.4: Closed loop response of IPC for impulse input with Kf

Chapter 3 72
Daniel Abebe Modern Control Systems Lecture Note

4. For the following system determine a feedback gain matrix, that place the
closed loop poles of the system at p = −2 ± 2i.
   
1 0 0 1
   
ẋ = 1 −1 1  x + 1 u
   
   
0 0 −2 0
h i
y= 1 0 0 x

Solution
As shown in chapter two example 3 the system is not completely control-
lable.Hence all states are not controllable, so we have to decompose the system
to controllable and uncontrollable modes as shown in chapter two example 3.
So we can design state feedback controller for controllable mode (A11 , B1 ).

∥sI − A11 + B1 Kf ∥ = (s + 2 + 2i)(s + 2 − 2i)

   
s−1 0 1 h i
  +   k1 k2 = s2 + 4s + 8
−1 s + 1 1
 
s − 1 + k1 k2
  = s2 + 4s + 8
−1 + k1 s + 1 + k2

(s − 1 + k1 )(s + 1 + k2 ) − k2(−1 + k1 ) = s2 + 4s + 8
s2 + (k1 + k2 )s − 1 + k1 = s2 + 4s + 8
k1 − 1 = 8 ⇒ k1 = 9 k1 + k2 = 4 ⇒ k2 = −5
h i
Kf = 9 −5

what happens if we want to design a full state feedback controller for as a

whole? Let us assume the third pole be at p = α, then

||sIA + BKf || = (s + α)(s2 + 4s + 8)

     
s 0 0 1 0 0 1
     h i
0 s 0 − 1 −1 1  + 1 k1 k2 k3 = (s + α)(s2 + 4s + 8)
     
     
0 0 s 0 0 −2 0
   
s−1 0 0 k k k
   1 2 3
 −1 s + 1 −1  + k1 k2 k3  = (s + α)(s2 + 4s + 8)
   
   
0 0 s+2 0 0 0

which result in

(s + 2)(s − 1 + k1 )(s + 1 + k2 ) − k2 (1 + k1 ) = (s + α)(s2 + 4s + 8)

Chapter 3 73
Daniel Abebe Modern Control Systems Lecture Note

hence the system require the stability of uncontrollable mode only. k3 has no
effect on the system. If the uncontrollable mode is stable, the feedback gain
corresponding to the uncontrollable mode has no effect on the system closed
loop dynamics. This example clearly proof this scenario.

From Kalman decomposition we have

 
A − B1 k1 A12 − B1 k2
 11 
0 A22
The system only require the stability of uncontrollable mode, no need to design
feedback gain Kf for uncontrollable mode, even if the uncontrollable mode is
not stable. We cannot pose any effect on the uncontrollable mode (that is why
it is said uncontrollable mode).

The closed loop dynamics of the system with full state feedback gain matrix
Kf is
ẋ = (A − BKf )x
 
      x1
ẋ 1 0 0 9 −5 k3  
 1       x2 

 
ẋ2  = 1 −1 1  − 9 −5 k3  
     
       
. . .
ẋ3 0 0 −2 0 0 0  
x3
.
  
  −8 5 .. −k3 x
ẋ1  1
.

   −8 4 .. 1 − k3   x2 
 
  
ẋ2  = 
   . . . . . . ...
  
 
. . .  . . .
ẋ3 
.
 
0 0 .. −2 x3

5. Determine a full state feedback matrix for the following second order system
such that the closed loop system have settling time ts = 4sec and peak time
tp = 1.813sec.
   
1 0 1
ẋ =  x +  u
1 1 0
h i
y= 1 0 x
Solution
From given time domain specifications
4 4
ξωn = = = 1
ts 4
π 3.14
ωd = = = 1.732
tp 1.813
p
ωn 1 − ξ 2 = 1.732 ⇒ 1 − ξ 2 = 3ξ 2
⇒ ξ = 0.5 ⇒ ωn = 2

Chapter 3 74
Daniel Abebe Modern Control Systems Lecture Note

Thus the closed loop system

√ has characteristics
√ equation of s2 + 2ξωn + ωn2 =
s2 + 2s + 4 = (s + 1 + 3i)(s + 1 − 3i). The state feedback controller gain
must locate the closed loop system poles at s = −1 ± i. We determine Kf as
follows

∥sI − A + BKf ∥ = s2 + 2s + 4
   
s−1 0 k k
  +  1 2  = s2 + 2s + 4
−1 s − 1 0 0
 
s − 1 + k1 k2
  = s2 + 2s + 4
−1 s−1
s2 + (−2 + k1 )s + 1 − k1 + k2 = s2 + 2s + 4
− 2 + k1 = 2 ⇒ k1 = 4 1 − k1 + k2 = 4 ⇒ k2 = 7

h i
Kf = 4 7

The closed loop dynamics of the system with full state feedback gain matrix
Kf is

ẋ = (A − BKf )x
       
ẋ1 1 0 4 7 x
  =  −   1 
ẋ2 1 1 0 0 x2
    
ẋ −3 −7 x1
 1 =   
ẋ2 1 1 x2

Chapter 3 75
Daniel Abebe Modern Control Systems Lecture Note

3.6 Exercises
1. Consider a system
   
−1 −2 1
ẋ =  x +  u
2 −4 3
find a feedback gain matrix Kf such that the closed loop system has eigenvalues
at −4 and −5.
2. For LTI system
   
1 0 −1 1
   
ẋ = 1 2 1  x + 0 u
   
   
2 2 3 1
find state feedback gain matrix Kf such that the eigenvalues of closed loop
system at −1, −1 ± 2i.
3. For the dynamic system
   
0 1 0 1 0
   
ẋ = 0 0 1 x + 0 1 u
   
   
6 −11 6 1 1
find state feedback gain matrix Kf such that the eigenvalues of closed loop
system at 1,2 and 3, then check for stability of the system with the control
law.
4. Determine whether the system described by
   
−1 0 3 1
   
ẋ =  0 −3 0  x +  1  u
   
   
1 0 −3 −1
is c.c. and show that under linear feedback of the from u = αx1 + βx3 ,
the closed loop system, has two fixed eigenvalues, one which is equal to −3.
Determine the second fixed eigenvalues and also values of α and β such that
the third closed loop eigenvalue is −4.
5. Determine the range of values of k, the linear dynamic system
 
0 1 0
 
ẋ =  0 1 x
 
0
 
−k −1 −2
h iT
is asymptotically stable. If k = −1 and control term 0 1 0 u is added,
find linear feedback gain Kf that makes the closed loop system to have poles
at −1.

Chapter 3 76
Daniel Abebe Modern Control Systems Lecture Note

6. For the control system described by

ẋ1 = x1 − x3 + u
ẋ2 = x1 + 2x2 + x3
ẋ3 = 2x1 + 2x2 + 3x3 + u

find a suitable feedback matrix Kf such that the closed loop system has eigen-
values −1 and −1 ± 2i.

7. For the control system described by

ẋ1 = x2 + u1
ẋ2 = x3 + u2
ẋ3 = 6x1 − 11x2 + 6x3 + u1 + u2

find a suitable feedback matrix Kf such that the closed loop system has eigen-
values −1 and −2 ± i.

8. For the following system find a state feedback controller gain matrix so that
the closed-loop system has maximum percentage overshoot mp = 14% and rise
time tr = 1.25sec.
   
0 −1 0
ẋ =  x +  u
−3 −2 1

9. Let A is n × n and B is n × 1, given any arbitrary set Λ = {θ1 , θ2 , . . . , θm } of

complex numbers(appearing i conjugate pairs), there exist a feedback matrix
Kf such that the eigenvalues of A − BKf are the set Λ.

10. Find linear feedback control u = −Kf x for

   
1 0 −1 1
   
ẋ = 1 2 1  x + 0
   
   
2 2 3 1

that place closed loop poles of the system at −1, −1 ± 2i. Does this verify
problem number 9?

Chapter 3 77
Chapter 4

State Estimators/Observers
Design for LTI systems

To design a full-state feedback control for a given system, all the states of the
system must be available as output (must be measured directly). But in many real
world problems all states of the system are not available as output. If the system
is completely observable the states of the system are related to the output of the
system in someway. So we can recover the unavailable states from the output of
the system. The method of recovering these states from the output of the system
is called observer or state estimator design problem. If all states are required to
be observed or estimated the problem is a full state observer problem, if we can
measure some states directly and the others are to be observed or estimated then
the problem becomes reduced-order state observer/estimator.

If the system is partially observable we can design an observer for observable mode
of the system. Since we cannot say an thing about the relation between the output
of the system and unobservable mode of the system, we cannot design an observer
for unobservable mode of the system.

4.1 Full Order State Observer Design

Consider a completely observable dynamic system
ẋ = Ax + Bu (4.1)
y = Cx (4.2)
Assume the state vector x is given by its estimate x̂
x̂˙ = Âx̂ + B̂u + Lc y (4.3)

The matrices Â, B̂ are unknown.

In full state observer design problem x and x̂ has equal dimension. The deviation
(estimation error) x̃ = x − x̂, will be
x̃˙ = ẋ − x̂˙
x̃˙ = Ax + Bu − Âx̂ − B̂u − Lc y
x̃˙ = Ax + Bu − Âx̂ − B̂u − Lc Cx (4.4)

78
Daniel Abebe Modern Control Systems Lecture Note

replacing x̂ by x − x̃, which leads to

x̃˙ = Ax + Bu − Â(x − x̃) − B̂u − Lc Cx

x̃˙ = (A − Â − Lc C)x + Âx̃ + (B − B̂)u (4.5)

If we need x̃ to become zero independent of x and u, is only possible if and only

if B̂ = B,  = (A − Lc C) and  is stable. If this condition is fulfilled, the error
dynamics x̃ becomes

x̃˙ = Âx̃ = (A − Lc C)x̃ (4.6)

Thus the design problem is finding suitable Lc such that the estimation error dy-
namics goes to zero as t → ∞, or determining suitable Lc that place the closed loop
eigenvalues of estimation error dynamics x̃˙ = (A − Lc C)x at the desired location.
Replacing  with A − Lc C in the full state observer equation on 4.3 we have

x̂˙ = Ax̂ + Bu + Lc C(x − x̂)

x̂˙ = Ax̂ + Bu + Lc C x̃ (4.7)

which is called Luenberger observer.

The full state observer state equation (full order state observer dynamics ) is
      
˙x̂ A Lc C x̂ B
 =   +  u
x̃˙ 0 A − Lc C x̃ 0

If the system is represented in observable canonical form,

x̃˙ T = (Ao − Lc Co )T xT = (ATo − CoT LTc )xT ⇔ ẋT = (Ac − Bc Kf )xT (4.8)

Hence, we can use methods we used to determine Kf ,

Lc = KfT (4.9)

This implies that if estimation error dynamics is expressed in an observable canonical

form, the feedback matrix Lc can be determined from full state feedback matrix Kf
for the corresponding controllable canonical form representation of estimation error
dynamics just by transposing Kf and vise-versa.

If the desired poles of x̃˙ = (A − Lc C)x and ẋ = (A − BKf )x are the same. For
system expressed in observable canonical form Lc equal to the transpose of full
state feedback matrix KfT , that place the close loop eigenvalues of corresponding
controllable canonical form representation of the same system at the desired location.
Since x̂ = x ⇒ x̃ = 0 ⇒ x̂˙ = Ax̂ + Bu + Lc C x̃ = ẋ = Ax + Bu.

An LTI system defined by (A, C) is detectable, if there exists a matrix Lc such that
(A − Lc C) has a strictly negative real part.

Chapter 4 79
Daniel Abebe Modern Control Systems Lecture Note

The block diagram representation of full order state observer is shown in figure
4.1.

u + x +
B + ʃ C
y
+

A
+
Lc
--
x̂
+ ʃ C
ŷ
A
Figure 4.1: Block diagram representation of full order state observer

4.2 Reduced Order State Observer Design

Consider a completely observable system in which m states are measured directly
from the output and n − m state are those which cannot measured directly. Let η1
sates are measured directly and η2 states cannot be measured directly from outputs.
   
x x
 1  m+1 
 x2   xm+2 
   
   
η1 =  x3  , η2 =  xm+3 
   
 ..   .. 
   
 .   . 
   
xm xn−m

The states to be estimated are related to output so, the output of the state estimator
is η̂2 = Lc y + ω, where ω is the state of reduced order dynamics. In-terms of η1 and
η2 , the dynamic system can be decomposed to directly measured state dynamics
and directly unmeasured state dynamics as follows,

η̇1 = A11 η1 + A12 η2 + B1 u

η̇2 = A21 η1 + A22 η2 + B2 u
y = η1 (4.10)

Since η1 states are directly measured, the estimated state is equal to output, which
means

η̂1 = η1 = y (4.11)

Chapter 4 80
Daniel Abebe Modern Control Systems Lecture Note

But the remaining required states are determined from y

η̂2 = Lc y + ω (4.12)
η̂˙ 2 = Lc ẏ + ω̇ (4.13)

Equation 4.12 is called state observer output equation.

The estimation error is

     
η̃ η − η̂1 0
 1 =  1 =  (4.14)
η̃2 η2 − η̂2 η2 − Lc η1 − ω

Let ω̇ = Jω + N y + M u which is called minimum order state observer dynamics,

the estimation error dynamics becomes

η̃˙ 2 = η̇2 − η̂˙ 2

= (A21 η1 + A22 η2 + B2 u) − (Lc ẏ + ω̇)
= (A21 η1 + A22 η2 + B2 u) − (Lc A11 η1 + Lc A12 η2 + Lc Bu + Jω + N η1 + M u)
(4.15)

replacing for ω = η2 − Lc η1 − η̃2 , then we have

η̃˙ 2 =(A21 η1 + A22 η2 + B2 u) − (Lc A11 η1 + Lc A12 η12 + Lc B1 u)

− (Jη2 − JLc η1 − J η̃2 + N η1 + M u)
η̃˙ 2 =(A12 − Lc A + JLc − N )η1 + (A22 − Lc A12 − J)η2
+ (B2 − Lc B1 − M )u + J η̃2 (4.16)

For estimation error dynamics to go to zero independent of x and u, the following

conditions should be full-filled

A12 − Lc A11 + JLc − N = 0 ⇒ N = A21 − Lc A11 + JLc

B2 − Lc B1 − M = 0 ⇒ M = B2 − Lc B1
A22 − J − Lc A12 = 0 ⇒ J = A22 − Lc A12

If this conditions are full-filled the estimation error dynamics becomes,

η̃˙ 2 = J η̃2
η̃˙ 2 = (A22 − Lc A12 )η̃2 (4.17)

as we can see Lc is the state feedback gain matrix that locate the estimation error
dynamics closed loop poles at the desired location. The reduced order observer state
equation will be,

ω̇ = Jω + N η1 + M u
ω̇ = (A22 − Lc A12 )ω + (A21 + JLc − Lc A11 )η1 + (B2 − Lc B1 )u (4.18)

If J has eigenvalues with a negative real part, the error dynamics go to zero asymp-
totically. So we determine Lc such that the closed-loop error dynamics A22 − Lc A12

Chapter 4 81
Daniel Abebe Modern Control Systems Lecture Note

has poles at the desired location (i.e. the poles of the reduced-order observer loca-
tion). In determining Lc , A22 and A12 take a role of A and C is full order observer
respectively.

Finally the combined system state equation (state dynamics) with reduced order
observer dynamic equation (state equation) is given as
      
η̇1 A11 A12 0 η1 B1
      
= + u
      
η̇2   A21 A22 0  η2   B2
      
ω̇ [A12 + JLc − Lc A11 ] 0 [A22 − Lc A12 ] ω [B2 − Lc B1 ]
(4.19)

The block diagram representation of reduced order state observer is shown in Figure
4.2.

u + 1 y
B1 ʃ
+

+ A11
+

A12

A21
+ +
A22

+
x2
+
B2 ʃ

N
Lc

ω ̂ 2
M + ʃ +

Figure 4.2: Block diagram representation of reduced order state observer

Chapter 4 82
Daniel Abebe Modern Control Systems Lecture Note

4.3 Continuous Time Kalman Filtering

Consider a dynamical system

ẋ =Ax + Bu + Gω(t)
y =Cx + ν(t) (4.20)

ω(t) and ν(t) are stochastic disturbances, which are estimated to be white noises
with zero means and co-variance with x(0) = N ∼ (0, X0 ), given as

E{ω(t)ω(t)T } = Qδ(t − τ )
E{ν(t)ν(t)T } = Rδ(t − τ ) (4.21)

White noise is an abstraction of the derivation of Brownian motion process b(t),

which means b(t) is the integral of ω(t) white noise. The dynamic system on equation
4.20 becomes,

ẋ = Ax + Bu + Gḃ(t) (4.22)

Using conditional expectation:

x̂ = E{(x(t) − x̂(t))T (x(t) − x̂(t))} (4.23)

Which coincides with the optimal estimation which minimize the sum of the error
variances:

J = E{(x(t) − x̂(t))T (x(t) − x̂(t))} (4.24)

and the error co-variance in the sense of positive definiteness of

E{(x(t) − x̂(t))T (x(t) − x̂(t))} (4.25)

The Kalman filter equation dictate the dynamical evolution of x̂ are

x̂˙ = Ax̂ + Lk (y − C x̂) + Bu

= (A − Lk C)x̂ + Lk y + Bu (4.26)

where Lk = P C T R−1 which result in riccati equation

Ṗ = AP + P AT + GT QG − P C T R−1 CP (4.27)

The steady state solution, in case A,G, Q and R are constants for LTI system and
the noise
p statistics are constant under the assumption that (A, C) is observable and
(A, G Q) is controllable the steady state solution Pss = lim ∞ϑ of the differential
t→
riccati equation is in fact unique. Since P is constant for LTI systems Ṗ = 0 which
leads to:

0 = AP + P AT + GT QG − P C T R−1 CP (4.28)

further, the estimation error x̃ = x − x̂ dynamics is:

x̃˙ = (A − Lk C)x̃ (4.29)

Chapter 4 83
Daniel Abebe Modern Control Systems Lecture Note

are stable (if the eigenvalues of A − Lk C has strictly negative real parts).
Note that ẋ = Ax doesn’t need to be stable and in the filter above

x̂˙ = (A − Lk C)x̂ + Lk y + G1 u (4.30)

If A has eigenvalues with a positive real part, the state evolution can still be com-
bined and dictated by input. If the input is chosen according to u = −Kf x̂, with Kf
chosen so that (A−BKf ) is stable. The closed-loop system is stable with eigenvalues
of the union of (A − BKf ) and (A − Lk C).

4.4 Closed Loop State Feedback Controller De-

sign with Full State Observer
Consider a completely observable and completely controllable system

ẋ = Ax + Bu
y = Cx (4.31)

with state observer

x̂˙ = Ax̂ + Bu + Lc (y − C x̂) (4.32)

and control law

u = −Kf x̂ (4.33)

Replacing x̂ with x − x̃ the system becomes

ẋ = Ax − BKf x̂
ẋ = (A − BKf )x + BKf x̃ (4.34)

and

x̃˙ = (A − Lc C)x̃ (4.35)

This shows that Kf and Lc can be designed independent of each other. if (A, B)
is controllable Kf can be chosen in a way that the poles of the closed-loop system
are at the desired location and if (A, C) is observable Lc can be chosen so that the
error dynamics goes to zero rapidly. This property where the two design problems
(observer design problem and state feedback design problem of a system) can be
handled independently is called the separation principle. The dynamics of the closed
loop system of full state feedback with full order state observer is then,
    
ẋ A − BKf BKf x
 =  
x̃˙ 0 A − Lc C x̃

Chapter 4 84
Daniel Abebe Modern Control Systems Lecture Note

The block diagram representation of full state feedback with full order state
observer is shown in Figure 4.3.

+ u + x
xd
-
B + ʃ C
y

A
+
Lc
-
+ ʃ
x̂ C
ŷ
A

Kf

Figure 4.3: Block diagram representation of full state feedback controller with full
order state observer

4.5 Closed Loop State Feedback Controller De-

sign with Reduced Order State Observer
In this case, we use the same control law as full state observer controller design
u = −Kf x̂, the only difference is x̂ which is the reduced-order state observer. The
compensator for the states that cannot measured directly (minimum order state
observer dynamics (state equation)) is ω̇ = Jω + N y + M u. This means the control
law becomes

u = −Kf (S1 η1 + S2 η̂2 )

= −Kf (S2 η1 + S2 (η2 − η̃2 )) (4.36)

where S1 and S2 are weighing matrices.

With this control law, the state dynamics

η̇1 = A11 η1 + A12 η2 + B1 (−Kf S1 η1 − Kf S2 η̂2 )

= A11 η1 + A12 η2 − B1 Kf S1 η1 − B1 Kf S2 (η2 − η̃2 )
= (A11 − B1 Kf S1 )η1 + (A12 − B1 Kf S2 )η2 + B1 Kf S2 η̃2 (4.37)
η̇2 = A21 η1 + A22 η2 + B2 (−Kf S1 η1 − Kf S2 η̂2 )
= A21 η1 + A22 η2 − B2 Kf S1 η1 − B2 Kf S2 (η2 − η̃2 )
= (A21 − B2 Kf S1 )η1 + (A22 − B2 Kf S2 )η2 + B2 Kf S2 η̃2 (4.38)

Chapter 4 85
Daniel Abebe Modern Control Systems Lecture Note

and

η̃˙ 2 = (A22 − Lc A12 )η̃2 (4.39)

The closed loop dynamics (closed loop state equation) of the system with reduced
order observer (reduced order observer state equation) is
    
η̇ A − B1 Kf S1 A12 − B1 Kf S2 0 B1 Kf S2 η
 1   11   1
η̇2  A21 − B2 Kf S1 A22 − B2 Kf S2 0
    
B2 Kf S2  η2 
 =   (4.40)
˙    
η̃1   0 0 0 0  η̃1 
    
˙η̃2 0 0 0 A22 − Lc A12 η̃2

The block diagram representation of full state feedback with reduced order state
observer is shown in Figure 4.4.

xd + u + 1 y
B1 ʃ
- +

+ A11
+
A12
+
Kf S1
+ A21
+ +
A22

+ + x2
B2 ʃ

Lc

 ̂2
M + ʃ +

S2

Figure 4.4: Block diagram representation of full state feedback controller with re-
duced order state observer

Chapter 4 86
Daniel Abebe Modern Control Systems Lecture Note

4.6 Examples
1. For dynamic system
  
0 1 0
ẋ =  x +  
−1 −2 1
h i
y= 0 1 x

Design a full state observer with poles at p1 = −0.25, p2 = −0.5.

Solution
Check for observability of the system
   
C 0 1
Ov =  = 
CA −1 −2

Which has a rank 2 hence the system is observable.

The characteristic of the observer is (s + 0.25)(s + 0.5) = s2 + 0.75s + 0.125.
The poles of (A − Lc C) must be at the desired poles. so

det(sI − A + Lc C) = s2 + 0.75s + 0.125

      
s 0 0 1 L1 h i
det  −  +   0 1  = s2 + 0.75s + 0.125
0 s −1 −2 L2
 
s −1 + L1
det   = s2 + 0.75s + 0.125
1 s + 2 + L2
s2 + (2 + L2 )s + (1 − L1 ) = s2 + 0.75s + 0.125

The state observer gain matrix that puts the poles of the state observer at the
desired location is then,

2 + L2 = 0.75 ⇒ L2 = −1.25, 1 − L1 = 0.125 ⇒ L1 = 0.875

   
L1 0.875
Lc =   =  
L2 −1.25

Chapter 4 87
Daniel Abebe Modern Control Systems Lecture Note

The full state observer (Luenberger state observer) dynamics is

      
˙x̂ A Lc C x̂ B
 =   +  u
x̃˙ 0 A − Lc C x̃ 0
..
      
˙x̂1 0 1 . 0 0.875 x̂ 0
 1  
..
  
˙  
 x̂2  −1 −2 . 0 −1.25  x̂2   1 
   
      
. . . =  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  . . . + . . . u
      
..
      
˙      
 x̃1   0 0 . 0 0.125   x̃1   0 
..
      
x̃˙ 2 0 0 . −1 −0.75 x̃2 0

2. For dynamic system

 
 
0 1 0 0
   
ẋ =  0 1  x + 0
   
0
   
−4 −4 −1 1
h i
y= 1 0 0 x

Determine the gain Lc that result in estimation error dynamics with poles at
p1 = −1, p2 = −2, p3 = −3 and closed loop dynamics of the system with full
state feedback using full state observer, if the feedback gain Kf required to
place the closed loop poles of the system at s = −2, s = −2 ± 2i.

Solution
Check for observability of the system
   
C 1 0 0
   
Ov =  CA  = 0 1 0
   
   
2
CA 0 0 1

which has rank 3 hence the system is observable.

The characteristic of the observer is (s + 1)(s + 2)(s + 3) = s3 + 6s2 + 11s + 6.

The poles of (A − Lc C) must be at the desired poles. so

det(sI − A + Lc C) = s3 + 6s2 + 11s + 6

Chapter 4 88
Daniel Abebe Modern Control Systems Lecture Note
     
s 0 0 0 1 0 L
     1 h i
3 2
det 0 s 0 −  0 1  + L2  1 0 0  = s + 6s + 11s + 6
      
0
      
0 0 s −4 −4 −1 L3

 
s + L1 −1 0
 
3 2
det  L2 −1  = s + 6s + 11s + 6
 
s
 
L3 + 4 4 s + 1

s3 + (1 + L1 )s2 + (L1 + L2 + 4)s + (4L1 + L2 + L3 + 4) = s3 + 6s2 + 11s + 6

The state observer gain matrix that puts the poles of the state observer at the
desired location is then,

1 + L1 = 6 ⇒ L1 = 5,
L1 + L2 + 4 = 11 ⇒ L2 = 2
4L1 + L2 + L3 + 4 = 6 ⇒ L3 = −20
   
L 5
 1  
Lc = L2  =  2 
   
   
L3 −20

The full state observer (Luenberger state observer) dynamics is

      
˙x̂ A Lc C x̂ B
 =   +  u
x̃˙ 0 A − Lc C x̃ 0
..
      
˙x̂1 0 1 0 . 5 0 0 x̂ 0
 1  
..
  
˙  
 x̂2   0 0 1 . 2 0 0   x̂2   0 
   
..
      
 x̂3  −4 −4 −1 . −20 0 0   x̂3   1 
      
      
. . .  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  . . . + . . . u
=
      
..
      
˙  
−5 1
   
 x̃1   0 0 0 . 0   x̃1   0 
..
      
˙  
−2 0
   
 x̃2   0 0 0 . 1   x̃2   0 
..
      
x̃3 0 0 0 . 16 −4 −1 x̃3 0

Chapter 4 89
Daniel Abebe Modern Control Systems Lecture Note

The state feedback gain matrix Kf can be determined as

∥sI − A + BKf ∥ = (s + 2)(s + 2 + 2i)(s + 2 − 2i)

     
s 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0
     
2
0 s 0 −  0 1  +  0 0 0  = (s + 2)(s + 4s + 8)
     
0
     
0 0 s −4 −4 −1 k1 k2 k3
 
s −1 0
 
−1  = s3 + 6s2 + 16s + 16
 
 0 s
 
4 + k1 4 + k2 s + 1 + k3
s(s(s + 1 + k3 ) + 4 + k2 ) + 4 + k1 = s3 + 6s2 + 16s + 16
s3 + (1 + k3 )s2 + (4 + k2 )s + 4 + k1 = s3 + 6s2 + 16s + 16
1 + k3 = 6 ⇒ k3 = 5 4 + k2 = 16 ⇒ k2 = 12 4 + k1 = 16 ⇒ k1 = 12
h i h i
Kf = k1 k2 k3 = 12 12 5

The closed loop dynamics with full order state observer based state feedback
control is
    
ẋ A − BKf BKf x
 =  
x̃˙ 0 A − Lc C x̃

Replacing for the matrices, we have

..
    
ẋ1 0 1 0 . 0 0 0 x1
..
    
 ẋ2   0 0 1 . 0 0 0   x2 
    
.
    
 ẋ3  −16 −16 −6 .. 12 12 5   x3 
    
    
. . . =  . . . . . . . . . . . .
    
. . . . . . . . .  . . .
..
    
˙  
−5 1
 
 x̃1   0 0 0 . 0   x̃1 
..
    
˙  
−2 0
 
 x̃2   0 0 0 . 1   x̃2 
..
    
x̃˙ 3 0 0 0 . 16 −4 −1 x̃3

Chapter 4 90
Daniel Abebe Modern Control Systems Lecture Note

3. For dynamic system

     
ẋ 0 1 0 0
 1    
ẋ2  =  0 1  x + 0
     
0
     
ẋ3 −4 −4 −1 1
 
x
h i  1
y = 1 0 0 x2 
 
 
x3

Design a reduce order state observer for the system that has poles at p1 =
−5, p2 = −5 and closed loop dynamics of the system with full state feedback
using reduced order state observer, if the feedback gain Kf required to place
the closed loop poles of the system at s = −2, s = −2 ± 2i.

Solution
Decomposing the system into a state that can be measured directly from the
output and that can’t be measured directly from the output,
..
   
0 . 1 0 1
   
   
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
A= 
..

 , B =  
 
0 . 0 1 0
..
   
−4 . −4 −1 0
.
h i
C = 1 .. 0 0

We have
h i
A11 = 0, A12 = 1 0 B1 = 1 C1 = 1
     
0 0 1 0 h i
A21 =   A22 =   B2 =   C2 0 0
−4 −4 −1 0

As we can see from the decomposition of the system x2 and x3 can’t be mea-
sured directly, while x1 can be measured directly. So the observer is designed
for x2 and x3 .

The characteristic of the observer is (s + 5)(s + 5) = s2 + 10s + 25. The poles

of (A22 − Lc A12 ) must be at the desired poles. Checking for the obervability
of the pair (A22 , A12 )
 
1 0
Ov =  
0 1

Chapter 4 91
Daniel Abebe Modern Control Systems Lecture Note

which have rank 2, hence it is completely observer.

det(sI − A22 A + Lc A12 ) = s2 + 10s + 25
      
s 0 0 1 L h i
det  −  +  1  1 0  = s2 + 10s + 25
0 s −4 −1 L2
 
s + L1 −1
det   = s2 + 10s + 25
4 + L2 s + 1

s2 + (1 + L1 )s + (L1 + L2 + 4) = s2 + 10s + 25

The state observer gain matrix that puts the poles of the state observer at the
desired location is then,
1 + L1 = 10 ⇒ L1 = 9, L1 + L2 + 4 = 25 ⇒ L2 = 12
   
L1 9
Lc =   =  
L2 12

The matrices
 
−9 1
J = A22 − Lc A12 =  
−16 −1
 
−69
N = A21 + JLc + Lc A11 =  
−160
 
0
M = B2 − Lc B1 =  
10

The minimum order state observer dynamics is

        
ω̇ −9 1 ω −69 0
 1 =    1 +   x1 +   u
ω̇2 −16 −1 ω2 −160 10

The reduced order state observer output equation is then

 
x
 1
x 
 
 2
..
    
 
x̂2 9y + ω1 9 0 0 . 1 0  x3 
 = =
..
 
 
x̂3 12y + ω2 12 0 0 . 0 1 . . .
 
 
 ω1 
 
ω2

Chapter 4 92
Daniel Abebe Modern Control Systems Lecture Note

The combined open loop system dynamics of the system and reduced order
observer dynamics is given as,
..
      
ẋ 0 1 0 . 0 0 x 0
 1   1  
..
 ẋ2   0 0 1 . 0 0   x2   0 
      
..
      
 ẋ3   −4 −4 −1 .
      
0 0   x3   1 
 =   +  u
      
. . .  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  . . . . . .
..
      
 ω̇1   −69 0 −9
      
0 . 1   ω1   0 
..
      
ω̇2 −160 0 0 . −16 −1 ω2 1

Since we have already calculated the feedback gain kf in example 2, the closed
loop dynamics of the system with reduced order observer is
    
η̇1 A11 − B1 Kf S1 A12 − B1 Kf S2 0 B1 Kf S2 η
     1
η̇2  A21 − B2 Kf S1 A22 − B2 Kf S2 0
    
B2 Kf S2  η2 
 =    (4.41)
˙    
η̃1   0 0 0 0  η̃1 
    
η̃˙ 2 0 0 0 A22 − Lc A12 η̃2

h i
A11 − B1 Kf S1 = 0 − 12 12 5 S1
h iT
which imply S1 is 3 × 1 matrix, Let S1 = 1 1 1 , with this
 
1
h i 
A11 − B1 Kf S1 = 0 − 12 12 5 1 = −29
 
 
1

h i h i
A12 − B1 Kf S2 = 1 0 − 12 12 5 S2
 T
1 1 1
which imply S2 is 3 × 2 matrix, Let S2 =   we have,
1 1 1
 
1 1
h i h i  h i h i h i
A12 − B1 Kf S2 = 1 0 − 12 12 5 1 1 = 1 0 − 29 29 = −28 −29
 
 
1 1

 
1 1
h i  h i
B1 Kf S2 = 12 12 5 1 1 = 29 29
 
 
1 1

Chapter 4 93
Daniel Abebe Modern Control Systems Lecture Note
 
   1  
0 0 h i   0
A21 − B2 Kf S1 =   −   12 12 5 1 =  
 
−4 0   −4
1

 
   1 1
  
0 1 0 h i  0 1
A22 − B2 Kf S2 =   −   12 12 5 
1 1 = 
 
−4 −1 0   −4 −1
1 1

 
  1 1  
0 h i   0 0
B2 Kf S2 =   12 12 5 1 1 = 
  
0   0 0
1 1

    
0
9 h i −9 1
1
A22 − Lc A12 = −  1 0 = 
−4 −1 12 −16 −1

Finally the close loop system with reduced state observer is

.. .. ..
 
−29 . −28 −29 . 0 . 29 29
 
 ... ... ... ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
 
.. .. ..
 
    0 . 0 1 . 0 . 0 0  

η̇1 
.. .. ..
 η1
   −4 . −4 −1 . 0 . 0 0 
 
    
η̇2   η
  2

  =  ...

... ... ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  
˙    η̃ 
η̃1   .. .. ..  1
   0 . 0 0 . 0 . 0 0  
η̃˙ 2 

 η̃
 2
 ... ... ... ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
.. .. ..
 
−9 1 
 
 0 . 0 0 . 0 .
.. .. ..
 
0 . 0 0 . 0 . −16 −1
h iT
Replacing η1 = x1 (directly measured states)and η2 = x2 x3 (estimated

Chapter 4 94
Daniel Abebe Modern Control Systems Lecture Note

states) we have,
. . ..
 
−29 .. −28 −29 .. 0 . 29 29
    
ẋ  ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... . . .  x1
 
 1 
.. .. ..
 
 ẋ2   0 . 0 1 . 0 . 0 0   x2 
    
.. .. ..
    
 ẋ3   −4 . −4 −1 . 0 . 0 0   x3 
    
    
. . . =  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
    
. . .  . . .
.. .. ..
    
˙    
 x̃1   0 . 0 0 . 0 . 0 0   x̃1 
    
˙    
 x̃2   . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   x̃2 
.. .. ..
    
x̃˙ 3 −9
 
 0 . 0 0 . 0 . 1  x̃3
.. .. ..
 
0 . 0 0 . 0 . −16 −1

4. For dynamic system

     
ẋ 0 1 0 0
 1    
ẋ2  =  0 1  x + 0 u
     
0
     
ẋ3 −4 −4 −1 1
 
x
h i  1
y = 0 1 0 x2 
 
 
x3

Design a reduce order state observer for the system that has poles at p1 =
−5, p2 = −5and closed loop dynamics of the system with full state feedback
using reduced order state observer, if the feedback gain Kf required to place
the closed loop poles of the system at s = −2, s = −2 ± 2i.

Solution
Check controllability of the system
 
0 0 1
 
0 1 −1
 
 
1 −1 −3

having rank 3 hence the system is completely controllable.

Check observability of the system

 
0 1 0
 
 
0 0 1
 
−4 −4 −1

Chapter 4 95
Daniel Abebe Modern Control Systems Lecture Note

having rank 3 hence the system is completely observable.

Let us arrange the dynamic equation as follows, to simplify the problem

      
ẋ2 0 0 1 x 0
     2  
ẋ1  =  1 0  x1  + 0 u
      
0
      
ẋ3 −4 −4 −1 x3 1
 
x
h i  2
y = 1 0 0 x1 
 
 
x3
Thus the measurable state is η1 = x2 and unmeasurable state (to be estimated)
h iT
is η2 = x1 x3 , which is straight forward (similar way as above)
..
   
0 . 0 1 0
..
      
   
η̇  . . . . . . . . . .  η1 . . .
 1 =    +  
.
 1 .. 0
   
η̇2 0  η2 0
..
   
−4 . −4 −1 1
 
i η1
.
h
y = 1 .. 0 0  
η2
h i
A11 = 0 A12 = 0 1 B1 = 0 C1 = 1
     
1 0 0 0 h i
A21 =   A22 =   B2 =   C2 = 0 0
−4 −4 −1 1
we have
η̇1 = A11 η1 + A12 η2 + B1 u
η̇2 = A21 η1 + A22 η2 + B2 u
With estimation error η̃2 = η2 − η̂2 , state observer output equation η̂2 = Lc y +
ω = Lc η1 +ω and minimum order state observer dynamics ω̇ = Jω +N y +M u,
then the estimation error dynamics becomes,
η̂˙ 2 = Lc η̇1 + ω̇
η̂˙ 2 = Lc (A21 η1 + A22 η2 + B2 u) + Jω + N η1 + M u
Which implies
η̃˙ 2 = η̇2 − η̂˙ 2 = η̇2 − Lc η̇1 + ω̇
η̃˙ 2 = A21 η1 + A22 η2 + B2 u − Lc (A11 η1 + A12 η2 + B1 u) − Jω − N η1 − M u
η̃˙ 2 = A21 η1 + A22 η2 + B2 u − Lc (A11 η1 + A12 η2 + B1 u) − J(η2 − η̃2 − Lc η1 ) − N η1 − M u
η̃˙ 2 = (A21 − Lc A11 + JLc − N )η1 + (A22 − Lc A12 − J)η2 + J η̃2 (B2 − Lc B1 − M )u

Chapter 4 96
Daniel Abebe Modern Control Systems Lecture Note

η̃2 should tend to zero at t → ∞ irrespective of η1 , η2 , u and J should have

strictly negative real part eigenvalues, hence,
A22 − Lc A12 − J = 0 ⇒ J = A22 − Lc A12
A21 − Lc A11 + JLc − N = 0 ⇒ N = A21 − Lc A11 + JLc
B2 − Lc B1 − M = 0 ⇒ M = B2 − Lc B1
The value of the reduced observer matrix gain Lc that place the poles of
estimation reduced order state observer error dynamics at the desired location
is,
∥sI − J∥ = s2 + 10s + 25
∥sI − A22 + Lc A12 ∥ = s2 + 10s + 25
     
s 0 0 0 l h i
 −  +  1  0 1 = s2 + 10s + 25
0 s −4 −1 l2
 
s l1
  = s2 + 10s + 25
4 s + 1 + l2
s2 + (l2 + 1)s − 4l1 = s2 + 10s + 25
 
−6.25
l2 + 1 = 10 ⇒ l2 = 9 − 4l1 = 25 ⇒ l1 = −6.25 Lc =  
9
then
 
0 6.25
J = A22 − Lc A12 =  
−4 −10
 
57.25
N = A21 − Lc A11 + JLc =  
−69
 
0
M = B2 − Lc B1 =  
1
The reduced order state observer output equation is
 
x
  1
.

0 −6.25 0 .. 1 0 x2 
       
x̂ −6.25y + ω1 −6.25x2 + ω1 
..
 
 1 =  = =
0 1
 
0 . 0 0 x3 
x̂3 9y + ω2 9x2 + ω2 
..
 
 
0 9 0 . 0 1 ω1 
 
ω2
The minimum order state observer dynamics is
        
ω̇1 0 6.25 ω1 57.25 0
 =   +   x2 +   u
ω̇2 −4 −10 ω2 −69 1

Chapter 4 97
Daniel Abebe Modern Control Systems Lecture Note

The open loop system dynamics combined with minimum state observer dy-
namics is
..
      
ẋ 0 1 0 . 0 0 x 0
 1   1  
..
 ẋ2   0 0 1 . 0 0   x2   1 
      
..
      
 ẋ3  −4 −4 −1
      
. 0 0   x3   0 
 =   +  u
      
. . .  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  . . . . . .
..
      
      
 ω̇1   0 0 57.25 . 0 6.25  ω1   0 
..
      
ω̇2 0 0 −69 . −4 −10 ω2 1
h i
Since matrix B is not changed Kf = 12 12 5 , the closed loop dynamics of
the system with reduced order observer is
    
η̇ A − B1 Kf S1 A12 − B1 Kf S2 0 B1 Kf S2 η
 1   11   1
η̇2  A21 − B2 Kf S1 A22 − B2 Kf S2
    
0 B2 Kf S2  η2 
 =   (4.42)
˙    
η̃1   0 0 0 0  η̃1 
    
η̃˙ 2 0 0 0 A22 − Lc A12 η̃2

h i
A11 − B1 Kf S1 = 0 − 12 12 5 S1
h iT
which imply S1 is 3 × 1 matrix, Let S1 = 1 1 1 , with this
 
1
h i 
A11 − B1 Kf S1 = 0 − [0] 12 12 5 1 = 0
 
 
1

h i h i
A12 − B1 Kf S2 = 0 1 − [0] 12 12 5 S2
 T
1 1 1
which imply S2 is 3 × 2 matrix, Let S2 =   we have,
1 1 1
 
1 1
h i h i  h i
A12 − B1 Kf S2 = 0 1 − [0] 12 12 5 1 1 = 0 1
 
 
1 1

 
1 1
h i  h i
B1 Kf S2 = [0] 12 12 5 1 1 = 0 0
 
 
1 1

Chapter 4 98
Daniel Abebe Modern Control Systems Lecture Note
 
   1  
1 0 h i   1
A21 − B2 Kf S1 =   −   12 12 5 1 = 
  
−4 1   −33
1

 
    1 1  
0 0 0 h i  0 0
A22 − B2 Kf S2 =   −   12 12 5 
1 1 = 
 
−4 −1 1   −33 −30
1 1

 
  1 1  
0 h i   0 0
B2 Kf S2 =   12 12 5 1 1 = 
  
1   29 29
1 1

   
 
0 −6.25 h0 i 0 6.25
A22 − Lc A12 = −  0 1 = 
−4 −1 9 −4 −10

Finally the close loop system with reduced state observer is

.. .. ..
 
0 . 0 1 . 0 . 0 0
 
 ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... 
 
.. .. ..
 
    1 . 0 0 . 0 . 0 0  

η̇1 
.. . ..
 η1
   −33 . −33 −30 .. 0 . 29 29  
 
    
η̇2   η
  2

  =  ...

... ... ... ... ... ... ... ...  
˙    η̃ 
η̃1   .. ..
   0 . 0 0 . 0 ... 0
 1
0  
η̃˙ 2 

 η̃
 2
 ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... 
.. .. ..
 
 
 0 . 0 0 . 0 . 0 6.25
.. .. ..
 
0 . 0 0 . 0 . −4 −10

Chapter 4 99
Daniel Abebe Modern Control Systems Lecture Note

h iT
Replacing η1 = x2 (directly measured states)and η2 = x1 x3 (unmeasured
states) we have,
.. .. ..
 
0 . 0 1 . 0 . 0 0
    
ẋ  ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... . . .  x2
 
 2 
.. .. ..
 
 ẋ1   1 . 0 0 . 0 . 0 0   x1 
    
.. .. ..
    
 ẋ3  −33 . −33 −30 . 0 . 29 29   x3 
    
    
. . . =  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
    
. . .  . . .
.. .. ..
    
˙    
 x̃2   0 . 0 0 . 0 . 0 0   x̃2 
    
˙    
 x̃1   . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   x̃1 
.. .. ..
    
x̃˙ 3
 
 0 . 0 0 . 0 . 0 6.25 x̃3
.. .. ..
 
0 . 0 0 . 0 . −4 −10

5. For dynamic system

     
ẋ1 0 1 0 0
     
ẋ2  =  0 1  x + 0 u
     
0
     
ẋ3 −4 −4 −1 1
 
x
h i  1
y = 0 0 1 x2 
 
 
x3

Design a reduce order state observer for the system that has poles at p1 =
−5, p2 = −5and closed loop dynamics of the system with full state feedback
using reduced order state observer, if the feedback gain Kf required to place
the closed loop poles of the system at s = −2, s = −2 ± 2i.

Solution
Check controllability of the system
 
0 0 1
 
0 1 −1
 
 
1 −1 −3

having rank 3 hence the system is completely controllable.

Check observability of the system
 
0 0 1
 
−4 −4 −1
 
 
4 0 −3

Chapter 4 100