You are on page 1of 8

# Question 2

Consider system X with the forward-path transfer function be given by the linear difference equation;

## i) The block diagram that represent System X;

Figure1

ii) Assuming , the new block diagram that represent system X with parameter estimator using recursive square algorithm;

Figure 2

## 0.1s 0 100 0 0 0 0 100 0 0 0 0 100

With the input power u(k) = 10 And the error power e(k) = 0.0001 The results of the estimated parameters using MATLAB/Simulink;

## Figure 3: Simulation results

Results discussion and analysis The aim of parameter estimation is to obtain the coefficients of the transfer function of the plant to be control, in this case to obtain the value of , . Figure 3 shows that by simulation using MATLAB/Simulink, the recursive least squares algorithm has successfully estimated the coefficients of transfer function given according to the assumption that the actual parameters are given as . Choosing the right parameters for simulation In order to choose the right sampling time and the noise level for e(k) and u(k), an analysis need to be done on the simulation results by varying the said parameters to see how the system will be affected. The information needed from the simulation results are the percentage of overshoot (%OS) as it indicate the relative stability of the system and the settling time ( indicate how much time a system need to become stable. ) as it

Table 1, 2 & 3 shows the data obtained and calculated from the simulation results by varying noise level e(k) from 0.001 to 0.0001, noise level u(k) from 1 to 100 and sampling time ( ) from 0.01s to 1s. For
Noise Power e(k) Noise Power u(k) Sampling time max overshoot a1 %OS T peak a1 Settling time a1 max overshoot a2 %OS T peak a2 Settling time a2 max overshoot b1 %OS T peak b1 0.001 1 1 0.200 5 200.5 2 105 0.500 4 100.0 8 2 4 0.125 2 12.52 1 0.001 10 1 0.183 5 183.5 2 6 0.005 1 1.02 3 4 0.059 5 5.95 1 0.001 100 1 0.053 2 53.2 5 5 0.046 4 9.28 4 4 0.020 7 2.07 2 0.000 1 1 1 0.072 2 72.2 5 5 0.004 3 0.86 5 4 0.011 8 1.18 2 0.000 1 10 1 0.065 6 65.6 4 5 0.001 5 0.3 16 4 0.015 6 1.56 2 0.000 1 100 1 0.059 7 59.7 5 5 0.000 5 0.1 7 4 0.006 3 0.63 2

a1

a2 b1

b2

## 3 0.027 2 27.2 5 292

3 0.009 6 9.6 5 21

1 0.003 1 3.1 5 5

1 0.030 6 30.6 3 21

1 0.021 21 3 5

1 0.001 1 5 5

Table 1 For
Noise Power e(k) Noise Power u(k) Sampling time max overshoot a1 %OS T peak a1 Settling time a1 max overshoot a2 %OS T peak a2 Settling time a2 max overshoot b1 %OS T peak b1 Settling time b1 max overshoot b2 %OS T peak b2 Settling time b2 0.001 1 0.1 0.075 1 75.1 1 35.8 0.018 7 3.74 1.9 0.4 0.014 3 1.43 1.4 0.1 0.028 8 28.8 0.3 35.9 0.001 10 0.1 0.068 68 0.5 0.5 0.002 1 0.42 1.8 0.4 0.002 9 0.29 0.1 0.1 0.000 9 0.9 1 0.5 0.001 100 0.1 0.062 5 62.5 0.5 0.5 0.000 7 0.14 0.5 0.4 0.001 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.000 3 0.3 1 0.5 0.000 1 1 0.1 0.183 5 183.5 0.2 0.6 0.000 5 0.1 0.6 0.4 0.059 5 5.95 0.1 0.3 0.009 6 9.6 0.5 0.7 0.000 1 10 0.1 0.053 2 53.2 0.5 0.5 0.046 4 9.28 0.4 0.4 0.020 7 2.07 0.2 0.1 0.003 1 3.1 0.5 0.5 0.000 1 100 0.1 0.055 7 55.7 0.5 0.5 0.196 6 39.32 0.4 0.4 0.006 7 0.67 0.1 0.1 0.001 1 0.5 0.5

a1

a2

b1

b2

Table 2

For
Noise Power e(k) Noise Power u(k) Sampling time max overshoot a1 %OS T peak a1 Settling time a1 max overshoot a2 %OS T peak a2 Settling time a2 max overshoot b1 %OS T peak b1 Settling time b1 0.001 1 0.01 0.704 704 0.02 1.05 3.393 8 678.7 6 0.02 0.05 0.229 6 22.96 0.02 0.04 0.001 10 0.01 0.519 519 0.04 0.06 2.734 4 546.8 8 0.06 0.05 0.069 1 6.91 0.02 0.04 0.001 100 0.01 1.635 5 1635. 5 0.04 0.05 1.017 5 203.5 0.17 0.05 0.021 5 2.15 0.01 0.01 0.000 1 1 0.01 0.223 223 0.02 0.06 0.853 4 170.6 8 0.04 0.04 0.067 6 6.76 0.02 0.03 0.000 1 10 0.01 0.120 5 120.5 0.04 0.05 0.806 7 161.3 4 0.06 0.05 0.021 4 2.14 0.01 0.01 0.000 1 100 0.01 0.477 6 477.6 0.04 0.05 0.309 1 61.82 0.05 0.05 0.006 8 0.68 0.01 0.01

a1

a2

b1

## 0.473 5 473.5 0.04 0.05

b2

Table 3

Sampling Time ( ) The analysis data in Table 1, 2 & 3 shows that the settling time ( ) is increase by

increasing the sampling time ( ). In other words, by choosing the lowest sampling time as possible, the parameter estimator can estimates the actual parameter much faster thus, improving the performance of the estimator. This can also be prove by comparing the simulation results in Figure 3 which using and simulation results in Figure 4 that using .

## Figure 4: Simulation results using

A system is said to be good if the response met the specification set for the system. For example, a system that involves with precise positioning should have no overshoot at all but for some other system, overshoot is allowed but need to achieve immediate stability. In this assignment, since there are no specifications given for the system, we assume that the specification is set for the system to have maximum allowable overshoot 60% of the setpoint and achieve stability less than 1s. From the data in Table 1,2 & 3, only two combinations of noise level e(k), noise level u(k) and sampling time ( ) that satisfy the specification set. They are; When noise level e(k) = 0.0001, noise level u(k) = 10 is sampled at When noise level e(k) = 0.0001, noise level u(k) = 100 is sampled at and,

The first combination is chose since it needs less input power to meet the specification set.