SYSTEMS & CONTROL

Basic Control Concepts

Closing the loop In order to control a process we have to 1. Model the system dynamics of G(s) 2. Measure the output we want to control and try and regulate it in some way. A general control system has the following:
R(s) + Cm(s) H(s) E(s) K G(s) C(s)

Here:
- G(s) is the plant or process that we are trying to control - H(s) is the measurement system - R(s) is the reference/regulated input - C(s) is the controlled output - K is the controller gain ( this may be within the plant G(s) )

We can show that:

C ( s ) = KG ( s ) E ( s ) E ( s ) = R( s ) C m ( s) C m ( s) = H ( s )C ( s )
Combining these in terms of C(s) gives:

C ( s ) = KG ( s )[ R ( s ) H ( s )C ( s )]

Created By Dr Grant Covic for paper: Systems & Control 1998: Document 1 of 3

resulting in the closed loop transfer function:

C (s) KG ( s ) = R ( s ) 1 + KG ( s ) H ( s )
Nb: KG(s)H(s) must be dimensionless

For unity feedback systems H(s) = 1, thus:

C ( s) KG ( s ) = R( s ) 1 + KG ( s )

In many systems the dynamics of H(s) are much faster than that of G(s) so that Cm(s) is a good measure of the output C(s). This is true for most applications: ie H(s) may simply be a filter. In such cases the system may be thought of as a unity feedback system as shown below:
R(s) + E(s) K G(s)H(s) Cm(s)

Why do we need closed loop control? Open loop systems:

U(s) K G(s) Y(s)

To determine the steady state output, we can use the final value theorem for Laplace transforms:

lim f (t ) = lim sF ( s )
t s 0

Created By Dr Grant Covic for paper: Systems & Control 1998: Document 1 of 3

Ex:
G (s) = b s+a

y (t ) ss = lim s[ KG ( s )U ( s )]
s 0

If U(s) is a unit step input (1/s) then:

y (t ) ss = Kb a so that the final value of the output will grow with K.

A problem is that the plant dynamics may change from what we expect due to uncertainty. For instance parameter changes due to temperature (etc) may change the values of b and a. Under such circumstances, increasing K simply amplifies the uncertainty in the output, and will contribute to output error. Closed loop systems: Here the feedback is used to help remove this uncertainty in the response of the output. Consequently we can use feedback control to force the output to track a controlled input. Ex: If we have a unity feedback system as K increases:
C (s) KG ( s) KG ( s) = 1 Kincrea sin g KG ( s ) R ( s) 1 + KG ( s)

Hence, changes in the plant G(s) have much less effect. In practice we have made the system less sensitive to plant variations by the factor (1+KG(s)). We can define the closed loop system sensitivity (unity feedback) as:

S = (1 + KG ( s )) 1

Created By Dr Grant Covic for paper: Systems & Control 1998: Document 1 of 3

What sort of control is necessary? There are two approaches to controlling a plant (chap 7) Servo Control: Here we are interested in the performance of the system when it has to follow changes in the reference or demand signal. Thus the control system is designed based on transient and steady state performance objectives in the time and frequency domain. Applications include torque and variable speed controlled drives, vehicles, cranes etc. Process Control: Here we are interested in the performance of the loop as a regulator. The input is generally a set point and the system is designed to try and avoid the effects of disturbances. Applications include petrochemical, food, steel, glass, pulp&paper and energy systems. In both control systems the difference between the reference input R(s) and the feedback signal Cm(s) is important. This signal is called the error signal; E(s). In a general system the error signal can be defined as:
E ( s ) = R ( s ) Cm ( s ) = R ( s ) C ( s ) H ( s )
E ( S ) = R ( s ) E ( s ) KG ( s ) H ( s )

resulting in:
E (s) = R( s) 1 + KG ( s ) H ( s )

Ideally we want e(t) 0 under both transient and steady state conditions.

Created By Dr Grant Covic for paper: Systems & Control 1998: Document 1 of 3

Time Domain Performance Considerations In a purely open loop system we can look at the performance and stability of the system by looking at the position of the fixed poles in the plant and apply our time domain performance specifications Example:
G(s) = 1 s+a

For a step input we have: y (t ) =

K 1 e at a

With variations in K we can only vary the steady state output, not the time constant of the system, and as discussed previously we are dependent on the plant dynamics and stability for good performance.

Figure 3.8 (Golten & Verwer)

Created By Dr Grant Covic for paper: Systems & Control 1998: Document 1 of 3

G( s) =

1.2 s +1

and G ( s) =

6 ( s + 1)( s + 5)

General Systems Most complex systems have dominant features that typically can be approximated by either a first or second order system response. Thus an understanding of both first and second order system responses is very useful. Dominant First order systems First order systems have monotonic step response. The response to a unit step input can be expressed as:

y (t ) = 1 e

The response time is often redefined for first order systems as time to rise to 63% of the final value (tr = ) A 5% settling time results in: ts = ln(0.05) 3
Created By Dr Grant Covic for paper: Systems & Control 1998: Document 1 of 3

Dominant Second order systems The step response of a stable second order system (ie underdamped) is defined by the pole locations in the s-plane resulting from a complex pole pair. Since the following is true in the s-domain:
Fig 4.3 Dazzo & Houpis (Linear Control System Analysis & Design)

G( s) =

k ( s + a + jb)(s + a jb) k = 2 s + 2as + (a 2 + b 2 )

2 K n = 2 2 s + 2 n s + n

d: (damped natural frequency) is the distance along the imaginary axis. : (the rate of decay) is the distance along the real axis : (the damping factor) Cosine(angle from origin to the complex pole)

Where: n: (undamped natural frequency) is the distance from the origin.

For such a system the transient response to a step input (Golten & Verwer 3.7 & 3.8) can be written as:

y ( t ) = Re n t cos( d t + )
The time to first peak is half the oscillation period (ie the damped natural frequency d) and the rise time is approximately half of this. hence

tp =

1 2 = 2t r 2 d d

Created By Dr Grant Covic for paper: Systems & Control 1998: Document 1 of 3

The decay ratio can be determined from the ratio of the times to two positive/negative peaks mk+2/mk: Decay ratio =

2 / 1 2

The absolute exponent of this is called the logarithmic decrement The percentage overshoot is also given by the above expression for the ratio of consecutive peaks. The first overshoot peaks m1 units above the steady state value hence: % overshoot = 100
m1 m 0 =100

/ 1 2

rearranging for damping factor:

= ln(%O.S .) 2 + ln (%O.S .)
2 2

ex: if we want no more than 18% O.S. if 10% overshoot is acceptable then

0.479 ( 0.5) 0.591 ( 0.6)

The settling time is mainly governed by the time for the exponential envelope to decay to within a set tolerance band. This is directly related to the exponential decay in the transient response:

=e

n t

Similar to the first order system the 5% settling time is:

3 3 = ts 3 = n

Created By Dr Grant Covic for paper: Systems & Control 1998: Document 1 of 3

Design Regions on the s-plane using Time Domain Performance Specifications The step performance criteria are related to the position of the poles on the s-plane. Intuitively, we know that a best damping ratio will exist for any second order system, since lightly damped systems will overshoot (possibly many times) before settling and heavily damped systems will be sluggish. The optimum damping ratio for a given settling time is the minimum damping ratio which can be used without the overshoot exceeding the tolerance limit. eg the 5% settling time is optimised when the % overshoot = 5%, giving a damping ratio of 0.69. The percentage overshoot or decay ratio must generally be required to be within some specified limits. For our second order system this corresponds to poles located between two lines of constant damping ratio (figure 3.13) The settling time (as determined by , the real part of the poles) may have a maximum desirable value in which case the system poles must lie to the left of a vertical line on the s-plane (representing this maximum - figure 3.13). The rise time depends on the damped natural frequency d, thus if this time is to be limited the upper half plane pole must lie above a horizontal line (figure 3.13).

Created By Dr Grant Covic for paper: Systems & Control 1998: Document 1 of 3

Figure 3.13 (Golten & Verwer)

Created By Dr Grant Covic for paper: Systems & Control 1998: Document 1 of 3

Performance Specs Applied to Closed Loop Systems In a closed loop system the position of the new system poles now change as K varies. This affects both the transient and steady state response in the time and frequency domains, so that the system can be made to respond much faster, but if were not careful we could make it poorly damped or even go unstable. Because of this the system performance and stability must be investigated with changing K. Usually by looking at how the new poles vary with K in the S-plane. Nyquist/Bode analysis techniques are also used to obtain an overall picture of system behaviour in the frequency domain, however we cant measure a frequency response if the system is already unstable, whereas we can determine this by looking to see if any poles exist in the right half plane (RHP) of the S-plane. The poles of the closed loop system are now defined by: 1 + KG(s)H(s) = 0 This is called the systems Characteristic Equation. The poles of C(s)/R(s) are the roots of this equation. Examples: 1. A First order system Using the original plant with unity feedback and series gain K:
G ( s) = 1 s+a
K C ( s) K CLTF = = s+a = R( s) 1 + K s + ( K + a) s+a

Created By Dr Grant Covic for paper: Systems & Control 1998: Document 1 of 3

the root locus:

j

the time response:

c (t ) =
K increasing K=0 -a

K 1 e ( K + a )t K +a

The time response

Practical Systems In a more practical system we have disturbances and measurement inaccuracies (noise):
D(s) R(s) + Cm(s) + M(s) E(s) K U(s) G(s) + C(s)

Created By Dr Grant Covic for paper: Systems & Control 1998: Document 1 of 3

we can define the closed loop transfer function (complementary sensitivity) as:
T= KG ( s ) 1 + KG ( s )

Thus if we want: T 1 K must be Large to keep the effect of M small: T 0 K must be small to keep the effect of D small: S K must be large
C (s) = R(s)

As the control effort to the plant is:

U (s) = K R(s) 1 + KG ( s )

A large K results in large control effort to the plant. In practice this may exceed the available drive energy, causing actuators to limit (saturate), thereby possibility exciting non-linear modes of behaviour.
Created By Dr Grant Covic for paper: Systems & Control 1998: Document 1 of 3

2. A Second Order System: A seperately excited DC servo drive with proportional control

If Rf Ra Va Ia La Lf

Vf

m= d/dt J B

As the time constant of the armature winding (La/Ra) is small, then:

Ia Va Ra

and using the torque equation with Te = K t I a

K t / Ra Km Km / ( s) = = V (s) s( Js + B) s(s + 1) s( s + 1 / ) a

Va d d 2 Kt =J 2 +B dt Ra dt

If we now add a proportional controller then:

R(s) = ref + E(s) K U(s)

Km s(s + 1 )

C(s) =

Created By Dr Grant Covic for paper: Systems & Control 1998: Document 1 of 3

K=0

K=0

Fig 7.3 Dazzo & Houpis (Linear Control System Analysis & Design)

Nb: This second order system is unconditionally stable with K, however damping becomes very poor. Thus K must be selected to give a desirable damped response.

Created By Dr Grant Covic for paper: Systems & Control 1998: Document 1 of 3

Higher Order Systems In higher order closed loop systems, the possibility of instability grows. Hence we must determine bounds on K. eg:
R(s) + E(s) K
1 s (1 + sT1 )(1 + sT2 )

C(s)

CLTF =

The characteristic equation is:

T1T2 s 3 + (T1 + T2 ) s 2 + s + K = 0

K s (1 + sT1 )(1 + sT2 ) + K

For stability, a necessary but not sufficient condition is that all the terms of the characteristic equation have the same sign and all consecutive s terms be non-zero. With varying K the complex plane gives a better picture of the stability of the system.

Created By Dr Grant Covic for paper: Systems & Control 1998: Document 1 of 3

Identifying the Closed Loop Systems Dominant Poles (Chap 3.11 - Golten & Verwer) We must eventually fix K (and therefore the position of the closed loop poles). To do this we need to identify those poles that have the dominant effect on the time domain response. Fixed Poles Assume K has already been fixed resulting in the following CLTF:
K g ( s + z1 )( s + z 2 )... C (s) = G( s ) = ( s + p1 )( s + p2 )( s + p3 )... R(s)

z1, z2 ... are the zeros of the CLTF, p1, p2 ... are the poles of the CLTF. The positions of p1, p2, p3 ... in the complex plane are most important not only because they determine the stability of the system, but also because they determine the form of the time response of the output c(t) to an input r(t). eg. Suppose r(t) is a unit step function u(t) [ie R(s) =1/s] using partial fractions we obtain:
C ( s) = A B C D + + + + ... s s + p1 s + p2 s + p3

and taking the inverse Laplace Transform results in: c(t ) = Au (t ) + Be p1t + Ce p 2 t + ... A,B,C can be determined for a known system, however we want to control the values of the p1, p2, p3 ... in order to optimise the time response of the closed loop system to give a well damped fast response with transient terms which quickly die away.

Created By Dr Grant Covic for paper: Systems & Control 1998: Document 1 of 3

Fixing K using the locus of the Dominant System Poles The CLTF poles are functions of K, therefore we need to try and identify the dominant root locus branches that will have the largest influence on the time response. The usual objective when designing a system is to try and fix our dominant closed loop pole positions such that the transient time response approximates that of a second order system, with a pair of complex poles that are suitably damped. If we can do this then the transient response to a step input will approximate:

C ( t ) D ( t ) + Ee t sin( t + )
If there is one complex pair locus that will be dominant for all relevant values of K then the above objective is easily possible and we can simply use the relationshiips between the second order time domain specifications and the pole locations to fix these poles somewhere on that locus that gives acceptable damping, response and settling times (by fixing K). The necessary conditions for the time response of a high order closed loop system to be dominated by one pair of complex poles requires a pole-zero pattern (with K fixed) that has the following characteristics: - All other poles and any zeros must be far to the left of the dominant poles, so that the transients due to these are small in amplitude and die out quickly - Any pole which is not far to the left of the dominant complex poles must be near a zero so that the magnitude of the transient term due to that pole is small.

Created By Dr Grant Covic for paper: Systems & Control 1998: Document 1 of 3

Ex:
Fig 10.2 Dazzo & Houpis (Linear Control System Analysis & Design)

As shown in the above figure, peak overshoot (Mp), risetime (tr), settling time (ts), damping () etc, can all be approximated from the dominant poles positions as for a second order system. Multiple Complex Poles In order to identify the effect of several complex poles, the damping ratio should be taken into account. The distance from the imaginary axis to a pole is called the pole attenuation. This attenuation can be used to determine which poles have a lasting effect, however the radius from the centre point is usually a better guide to the pole(s) overall dominance. Poles which are at a radius of more than three times that of the dominant pole(s) will have only a small contribution. When modelling higher order systems by the dominant features, poles with negligible contribution can be neglected providing their steady state gain contributions are retained. Assume we have a higher order system that has the following fixed set of poles:
G ( s ) = 100 ( s 2 + s + 1)( s 2 + s + 9)( s + 3)

then the system poles are located at:

s = 0. 5 j 0. 886, 0 . 5 j 2. 96, and 3

Created By Dr Grant Covic for paper: Systems & Control 1998: Document 1 of 3

Dominant poles have smallest radius. - the first complex pair is dominant, - all other poles have a radius > 3 times that of the dominant poles - we can simplify the system model by approximating non-dominat poles with their steady state gain only. The simplified model is therefore:
G( s) = 100 9 3( s 2 + s + 1)

Figure 3.19 (Golten & Verwer)

Created By Dr Grant Covic for paper: Systems & Control 1998: Document 1 of 3

Mixed Dominant Systems (Golten & Verwer 3.11)

If there is not a single pole or pole pair which is dominant then the response will be a mix of the individual pole contributions and will always be slower than each poles attenuation suggests.

Pole-Pole Mix
A dominant mix of a complex pole pair with a single real pole causes the system response to appear as a filtered second order response (Fig 3.18). The extent of this filtering depends on how close the real pole is to the j axis.

Figure 3.11 (Golten & Verwer)

Figure 3.17 (Golten & Verwer) Created By Dr Grant Covic for paper: Systems & Control 1998: Document 1 of 3

Pole-Zero Mixes
The effect of adding a dominant zero to a system (ie, a zero with a small radius) is equivalent to modifying the input function as shown in Fig 3.20. Here a step appears to receive an additional "kick", as the zero contributes an impulse with a weighting determined by its attenuation (recall derivative action). If the zero is in the right half plane this "kick" will be in the opposite direction to the input function and initially the system response will tend to move in the opposite direction to its final steady state value.

Figure 3.20 (Golten & Verwer)

Figure 3.21 (Golten & Verwer) Created By Dr Grant Covic for paper: Systems & Control 1998: Document 1 of 3

Created By Dr Grant Covic for paper: Systems & Control 1998: Document 1 of 3

Created By Dr Grant Covic for paper: Systems & Control 1998: Document 1 of 3

Control System Error in Unity Feedback Systems Not only are we interested in the transient performance of practical feedback systems, but we also want to know how good their system response is after the transient has died away. ie their steady state response to the reference input. Three standard inputs, which approximate most command inputs, are: - unit step (1/s) - unit ramp (1/s2) - unit acceleration. (1/s3) We will consider the steady state error response of several common stable system types. Let the open loop transfer function take on the general form:
G ( s) = K (1 + sT1 )(1 + sT2 ) K (1 + sTm ) s n (Ta s 2 + Tb s + 1)(1 + sTc ) K (1 + sT p )

where

sn = multiple pole at the origin of the complex plane n = system type number = no of integrations in the transfer function.

In a unity feedback system:

E (s) = R(s) 1 + G (s)

&

e(t ) ss = lim e(t )

t

Thus:
s n [(Ta s 2 + Tb s + 1)(1 + sTc ) K (1 + sT p )]R ( s ) e(t ) ss = lim s n 2 s0 s [(Ta s + Tb s + 1)(1 + sTc ) K (1 + sT p )] + K [(1 + sT1 )(1 + sT2 ) K (1 + sTm )]

The most common (practical) system types are type: 0, 1 and 2.

Created By Dr Grant Covic for paper: Systems & Control 1998: Document 1 of 3

Unit Step Input Response From our definition of e(t)ss then:

e(t ) ss = lim
1 s (1 / s) = s 0 1 + KG ( s ) 1 + lim KG ( s) s0

Thus if we define a step (position) co-efficient as: K p = lim KG ( s )

s 0

then:

e(t ) ss =

1 1+ K p

The response of each system type to this input is summarised below:

System Type No Kp e(t)ss

Unit Ramp Input Response

1 s (1 / s 2 ) = lim e(t ) ss = lim s0 s ( KG ( s )) s 0 1 + KG ( s )

if we define a ramp (velocity) co-efficient as: K v = lim s ( KG ( s ))

s 0

thus:

e(t ) ss =

1 Kv

Created By Dr Grant Covic for paper: Systems & Control 1998: Document 1 of 3

The system response follows as:

System Type No Kv e(t)ss

Unit Acceleration Input Response

1 s(1 / s 3 ) = lim 2 e(t ) ss = lim s0 s ( KG ( s )) s 0 1 + KG ( s )

We define a parabolic (acceleration) co-efficient as: K a = lim s 2 ( KG ( s ))

s 0

thus:

e(t ) ss =

1 Ka

The system response follows is:

System Type No Ka e(t)ss

Example of error calculation for a Type 1 system:

Created By Dr Grant Covic for paper: Systems & Control 1998: Document 1 of 3

(a) with step input (b) with ramp input (c) with acceleration input

Figure 3.28 (Golten & Verwer)

Created By Dr Grant Covic for paper: Systems & Control 1998: Document 1 of 3