Solutions To Chapter 11 Problems: Problem 11.1

Lobontiu: System Dynamics for Engineering Students
Solutions: Chapter 11 1
SOLUTIONS TO CHAPTER 11 PROBLEMS

Problem 11.1
Based on Fig. 11.8(a) of Example 11.1 the relationship between the unknown
transfer function of the equivalent unity-feedback control system G(s), the error E
1
(s)
and the output C(s) should be:

1
( ) ( ) ( ) C s G s E s = (P11.1)
Also, from Fig. 11.8(a), the following equations can be written:

1 2
1 3 2
( ) ( ) ( )
( ) ( ) ( ) ( )
A s G s E s
E s A s G s E s
=
(P11.2)
Solving for A(s) from the two Eqs. (P11.2) yields:

1
1
1 3
( )
( ) ( )
1 ( ) ( )
G s
A s E s
G s G s
=
+
(P11.3)
On the other hand, the output signal C(s) is connected to A(s) according to the
feedback diagram of Fig. P11.8(a) as:

2
( ) ( ) ( ) C s G s A s = (P11.4)
Substituting A(s) of Eq. (P11.3) in Eq. (P11.4) results in

1 2
1
1 3
( ) ( )
( ) ( )
1 ( ) ( )
G s G s
C s E s
G s G s
=
+
(P11.5)
Comparison of Eqs. (P11.1) and (P11.5) indicates that

1 2
1 3
( ) ( )
( )
1 ( ) ( )
G s G s
G s
G s G s
=
+
(P11.6)
With the particular transfer functions

1 2 3 2
2 1 1
( ) ; ( ) ; ( )
3 1
G s G s G s
s s s s
= = =
+ + +
(P11.7)
Eq. (P11.6) becomes

4 3 2
2 2
( )
2 6 5 6
s
G s
s s s s
+
=
+ + + +
(P11.8)

Problem 11.2
(a)
The signals and transfer functions of the feedback diagram of Fig. 11.59(a) are
related as follows:
| |
1 3 2
( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) C s G s R s G s C s G s = (P11.1)
Equation (P11.1) allows formulating the following closed-loop transfer function:

1 2
,
2 3
( ) ( ) ( )
( )
( ) 1 ( ) ( )
CL a
G s G s C s
G s
R s G s G s
= =
+
(P11.2)
The closed-loop transfer function of the feedback control system of Fig. 11.6 is

( ) ( )
( )
( ) 1 ( ) ( )
CL
C s G s
G s
R s G s H s
= =
+
(P11.3)
Because G
CL
(s) =G
CL,a
(s), Eqs. (P11.2) and (P11.3) result in

1 2
3
1
( ) ( ) ( )
( )
( )
( )
G s G s G s
G s
H s
G s
=
(P11.4)
(b)
The closed-loop transfer function of the control system of Fig. P11.59(b) is

2
,
2 3
( ) ( )
( )
( ) 1 ( ) ( )
CL b
G s C s
G s
R s G s G s
= =
+
(P11.5)
With the particular transfer functions:

( )
1 2 3
2
1 2
( ) ; ( ) ; ( ) 2
1 2 3
s
G s G s G s
s s s s
+
= = =
+ + +
(P11.6)
the closed-loop transfer functions of Eqs. (P11.2) and (P11.5) become

, 4 3 2
, 3 2
2
( )
3 7 9 4
2
( )
2 5 4
CL a
CL b
s
G s
s s s s
s
G s
s s s
+
=
+ + + +
+ + +
(P11.7)
Figure P10.1 shows the two time responses, c
a
(t) and c
b
(t), obtained under unit step input
and using MATLAB
.

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7

Step Response
Time (sec)
C
o
n
t
r
o
lle
d

r
e
s
p
o
n
s
e
s
c
a
c
b

Figure P11.1 Time response of the controls systems shown in Fig. 11.59 for unit step input

Problem 11.3
A summing point operating with voltages is defined by the following signal
relationship:
( ) ( ) ( )
r s e
V s V s V s = (P11.1)
as shown in Fig. P11.1.

Figure P11.1 Summing point with voltage signals

Let us consider the electrical system of Fig. P11.2, which is formed of three operational
amplifier stages coupled in series.

Figure P11.2 Electrical system as a summing point candidate

The voltage which is the output from the first stage is simply the inverse of the input
voltage to that stage, as shown in Fig. P11.2. For the second stage, the following
equation does apply:

( ) ( ) ( )
( ) ( ) ( )
s r
V s V s V s
Z s Z s Z s
+ = (P11.2)
whereas the voltage relationship connected to the third stage is
( ) ( )
o
V s V s = (P11.3)
Ve(s

+
_
Vr(s)
Vs(s

Ve
+

+

Vs
Z
Z
+

Z
Z
Z
Z
Z
V
Vr
Vs
Combining Eqs. (P11.2) and (P11.3) results in Eq. (P11.1), which proves that the
electrical system of Fig. P11.2 operates as a summing point when the three signals are
voltages on condition all electrical components are identical.

Problem 11.4
Consider the rotary mechanical system of Fig. P11.1, which is formed of three
identical pulleys, four rigid rods and two identical linear-motion springs.

Figure P11.1 Rotary mechanical system as summing point candidate

For small motions, the linear displacements y
1
and y
2
are expressed in terms of the
corresponding rotary motions
1
and
2
as

1 1
2 2
y R
y R
(P11.1)
These linear displacements are transmitted through the rigid rods and the springs to the
upper pulley in Fig. P11.1, whose total rotation is

1 2
z z
R

= (P11.2)
For the situation where the rotary inertia is not taken into account, the two elastic forces
that are transmitted from the springs through the upper rigid rods to the upper pulley
balance out in rotation as
( ) ( )
1 1 2 2
k z y R k z y R = (P11.3)
equation which simplifies to

1 2 1 2
z z y y = (P11.4)
Combining Eqs. (P11.1), (P11.2) and (P11.4) yields
y1 y2
k k
rod rod
pulley
R
pulley pulley
rod
rod
spring spring
1 2

z1 z2
R R

1 2
= (P11.5)
Considering that the inputs are the angles
1
and
2
, and the output is the angle , it
follows from Eq. (P11.5) that the rotary mechanical system of Fig. P11.1 behaves as a
summing point.

Problem 11.5
Consider the operational amplifier electrical system of Fig. 11.1, which is formed of
one capacitor and four identical resistor.

Figure P11.1 Electrical system as a P +D controller candidate

This system is formed of two nonloading cascading stages whose total transfer function
is calculated as the product of the individual transfer functions. With complex
impedances, this (potential controller) transfer function is

2 2 2
1 2 1
( ) ( ) ( )
( )
( ) ( ) ( )
o o
c
i i
V s V s Z Z Z V s
G s
V s V s V s Z Z Z
| | | |
= = = =
| |
\ . \ .
(P11.1)
where Z
1
is the complex impedance of the parallel combination of the resistor and
capacitor

1
1
1
1
R
R
Cs
Z
RCs
R
Cs
= =
+
+
(P11.2)
and

2
Z R = (P11.3)
Substituting the impedances of Eqs. (P11.2) and (P11.3) into Eq. (P11.1) results in the
transfer function
( ) 1
1
c
R
G s RCs
R
RCs
= = +
+
(P11.4)
Taking into account that a P +D controller is defined by the transfer function
C
vo
vi
R
R
R
R
v +

+

( ) ( ) 1
c P D
G s K T s = + (P11.5)
It follows from Eq. (P11.4) that the proportional gain K
P
and the derivative time T
D
are

1
P
D
K
T RC
=
(P11.6)
The minimum derivative time is

,min min min D
T R C = (P11.7)
For the resistance and capacitive ranges of the problem, the minimum derivative time is
T
D, min
=100 x 3 x 10
-6
=3 x 10
-4
s.

Problem 11.6
Problem 11.4 demonstrates that a rotary system formed of two identical pulleys, two
identical translatory-motion springs, and four identical rigid rods, can operate as a
summing point under the assumption of small motions. Figure 11.1 below redraws the
system of Problem 11.4 and considers that the two inputs are the reference rotation angle
r
and the controlled rotation angle
c
, which is fed back at the input.

Figure P11.1 Rotary mechanical system as summing point candidate

As shown in Problem 11.4, the relationship between the three angles of Fig. P11.1 is

e r c
= (P11.1)
Assume the pulley generating the error rotation angle
e
is connected to the rotary
mechanical system sketched in side view in Fig. P11.2.

Figure P11.2 Rotary mechanical system as a unity-feedback control system
y1 y2
k k
rod rod
pulley
R
pulley pulley
rod
rod
spring spring
r c
e
z1 z2
R R
k
kt
e
J
e
N1
N
N2
i
o = c
c
c
o
N3
N3
The output rotation angle
e
from the summing point is transmitted to the gear train
formed of the gears with the number of teeth N
1
, N, and N
2
. The intermediate gear N has
the role of preserving the rotation direction of the input
e
. The following transfer
function defines the gear train:

1
2
( )
( )
( )
i
c
e
s N
G s
s N
= =
(P11.2)
which indicates that the gear train behaves as P controller since the numbers of teeth are
constant. The rotation angle
i
is transmitted to the plant, which is formed of the
torsional spring k
t
and the cylinder of mass moment of inertia J. The dynamics of the
plant are described by the differential equation:
( )
o t o i
J k =
(P11.3)
whose transfer function is

2
( )
( )
( )
o t
p
i t
s k
G s
s Js k
= =
+
(P11.4)
The output rotation angle from the plant,
o
, is also the controlled output angle
c
. This
angle is converted into an angle that is equal and opposite in direction through another
gear pair involving the identical gears denoted by N
3
in Fig. P11.2. The angle
c
is
driven through a shaft to the gear which is the negative input in the summing point
mechanical system of Fig. P11.1. As a consequence, the mechanical system of Figs.
P11.1 and P11.2 behaves as a unity-feedback control system.

Problem 11.7
This problem is defined by a feedback diagram similar to the one of Problem 11.1.
As a consequence, the equivalent open-loop transfer function of the unity-feedback
control system is calculated as

1 2
1 3
( ) ( )
( )
1 ( ) ( )
G s G s
G s
G s G s
=
+
(P11.1)
With the transfer functions:

1 2 3 3 2 3 2
1 1 1
( ) ; ( ) ; ( )
3
G s G s G s
s s s s s
= = =
+ +
(P11.2)
the transfer function of Eq. (P11.1) becomes

6 5 4 2
1
( )
4 3 3
G s
s s s s s
=
+ + + +
(P11.3)
The corresponding closed-loop transfer function of the unity-feedback system is

6 5 4 2
( ) 1
( )
1 ( ) 4 3 5 3 1
CL
G s
G s
G s s s s s s
= =
+ + + + + +
(P11.4)
Its poles are the roots of the denominator and are calculated with MATLAB
as

>> r oot s( [ 1, 4, 3, 0, 5, 3, 1] )

ans =

- 2. 6570
- 1. 9319
0. 5858 + 0. 8526i
0. 5858 - 0. 8526i
- 0. 2914 + 0. 3117i
- 0. 2914 - 0. 3117i

Because two of the poles have positive real parts, the system is unstable.

Problem 11.8
The closed-loop transfer function of the original control system is calculated as

2
3 2
4 3 2
4 3 2
3
( ) 3
3 2
( )
3
1 ( ) ( ) 3 2 3
1
3 2
CL
s
G s s s
s s s
G s
Ks K
G s H s s s s Ks K
s s s
+
+
+ +
= = =
+
+ + + + +
+
+ +
(P11.1)
The closed-loop transfer function of an equivalent unity-feedback control system
identical to the one of Eq. (P11.1) is based on an open-loop transfer function G*(s) and
is determined as

*
*
( )
( )
1 ( )
CL
G s
G s
G s
=
+
(P11.2)
Combination of Eqs. (P11.1) and (P11.2) results in

( )
2
*
4 3 2
3
( )
3 3 3
s s
G s
s s s K s K
+
=
+ + + +
(P11.3)
The stability of the unity-feedback control system is discussed based on the closed-
loop transfer function of Eq. (P11.1) by using the Routh-Hurwitz array

s
4
1 2 3K
s
3
3 K 0
s
2
6
3
K

3K 0
s
1

( ) 21
6
K K
K
+

0
s
0
3K

A. When K >0, the following situations are possible:

a. For 0 <K <6, the coefficient in the first column corresponding to s
1
is negative, all
other coefficients in the first column being positive. It follows there are two sign changes
in the first column and therefore, two closed-loop poles are in the RHP. The analysis is
similar for K 6 in this interval.
b. For K >6 (including the case where K 6), the coefficient of s
2
in the first column is
negative, all other coefficients being positive, and the conclusion is similar to the one at a.
As a conclusion, the system is unstable, with two closed-loop poles in the RHP for
positive gains K.

A. When K <0 (assuming this is possible), the following situations are possible:

c. For K <21, the coefficient in the first column corresponding to s
0
is negative, all
other coefficients in the first column being positive. As a consequence, there is one sign
change in the first column and therefore, one closed-loop poles is in the RHP, which
should be located on the real axis.

d. For 21 <K <0, the coefficients of s
1
and s
0
in the first column are negative. Because
there is only one sign change in the first column, one closed-loop pole is located in the
RHP, on the real axis.

e. For K =21, the row corresponding to s
1
becomes a row of zeroes. The auxiliary
polynomial is built

( )
2 2
( ) 9 63 9 7 P s s s = = (P11.4)
whose s-derivative is
( )
( )
9 2 0
dP s
s
ds
= (P11.5)
and the Routh-Hurwitz array modifies to

s
4
1 2 63
s
3
3 21 0
s
2
9 63 0
s
1
2 0
s
0
63

There is one sign change in the first column and therefore, one closed-loop pole is in the
RHP.
As a conclusion, for K <0, the control system is unstable. This example is interesting
because the system is unstable irrespective of the values (positive or negative) assumed
by the variable gain K.

Problem 11.9
The closed-loop transfer function containing only simple real poles is of the form

( )( ) ( )
1 1 1
1 2 1 2
( )
( ) ...
...
CL
n n
a a a A s
G s
s p s p s p s p s p s p
= = + + +

(P11.1)
Its Laplace transform yields the natural response

1 2
1 1 1
( ) ...
n
p t p t p t
n
c t a e a e a e = + + + (P11.2)
For p
1
<0, p
2
<0, , p
n
<0, the natural time response has the limit
lim ( ) 0
n
t
c t
= (P11.3)
and therefore, the system is stable. Conversely, for p
1
>0, p
2
>0, , p
n
>0, the natural
time response has the limit
lim ( )
n
t
c t
= (P11.4)
and, as a consequence, the system is unstable.

Problem 11.10
The closed-loop transfer function being

( )( )
1
( )
1 1
CL
G s
s s
=
+
(P11.1)
The control system is unstable due to the positive real pole of +1. Because the closed-
and open-loop transfer functions for a unity feedback control system are related as

( )
( )
1 ( )
CL
G s
G s
G s
=
+
(P11.2)
the open-loop transfer function is

2
2
2
1
( ) 1
1
( )
1
1 ( ) 2
1
1
CL
CL
G s
s
G s
G s s
s
= = =

(P11.3)
The addition of a P +D controller having a transfer function
( )
c P D
G s K K s = + (P11.4)
results in the modified open-loop transfer function

*
2
( )
2
P D
c
K K s
G G G s
s
+
= =
(P11.5)
whose closed-loop transfer function in a unity feedback system becomes

*
*
* 2
( )
( )
1 ( ) 2
D P
CL
D P
K s K G s
G s
G s s K s K
+
= =
+ + +
(P11.6)
In order for the modified control system to be stable, the characteristic polynomial of Eq.
(P11.6) needs to have roots with negative real parts only, which means that

1 2
1 2
0
2 0
D
P
s s K
s s K
+ = <
= >
(P11.7)
which is the same as

0
2
D
P
K
K
>
>
(P11.8)
In other words, the derivative gain has to be positive and the proportional gain has to be
larger than 2 in order for the modified unity-feedback control system to be stable.

Problem 11.11
(a)
The element in the first column that corresponds to s
1
is obtained as follows

2 10 5 K xy z
K y

= (P11.1)
where x is the unknown element in the first row, and y and z are the unknown elements
in the second row (going from left to right). The only possibility for Eq. (P11.1) to be
true is when

2
2
x
y K
z
=
(P11.2)
The closed-loop characteristic polynomial is formed of the elements in the first two rows
of the Routh-Hurwitz array, namely:

3 2
( ) 5 2 2
CL
P s s Ks s = + + + (P11.3)
(b)
With the characteristic polynomial of Eq. (P11.3), the following Routh-Hurwitz
polynomial is formed

s
3
5 2
s
2
K 2
s
1
2 10 K
K

0
s
0
2

For K >5, all coefficients in the first column of the array are positive, so the system
has no closed-loop poles in the RHP and is stable. For 0 <K <5, there are two sign
changes in the first column, which signifies there are two closed-loop poles in the RHP
and the system is unstable. For K =5, a row of zero is formed with the coefficients
corresponding to s
1
. The auxiliary polynomial is formed:

2
( ) 5 2 P s s = + (P11.4)

( )
10
dP s
s
ds
= (P11.5)
The coefficients 10 and 0 are used in the row of zeroes, which changes the previous
Routh-Hurwitz array to

s
3
5 2
s
2
5 2
s
1
10 0
s
0
2

Because there are no sign changes in the first column, there are no closed-loop poles in
the RHP. However, there are two closed-loop poles on the imaginary axis since the roots
of P(s), which are also closed-loop poles, are
2
5
j . As a consequence, the system is
marginally stable for K =5.

Problem 11.12
The open-loop transfer function of the control system is

3 2 4 3 2
( ) ( ) ( )
6 11 6 6 11 6
I
P
P I
c p
K
K
K s K
s
G s G s G s
s s s s s s s
+
+
= = =
+ + + + + +
(P11.1)
The resulting closed-loop transfer function of the unity-feedback system is

( )
4 3 2
( )
( )
1 ( ) 6 11 6
P I
CL
P I
K s K G s
G s
G s s s s K s K
+
= =
+ + + + + +
(P11.2)
The Routh-Hurwitz array corresponding to the characteristic polynomial of Eq.
(P11.2) is

s
4
1 11 K
I
s
3
6 K
P
+6 0
s
2
60
6
P
K

K
I
0
s
1

2
54 36 360
60
P P I
P
K K K
K
+

0
s
0
K
I

Assuming K
I
>0, for K
P
<60, we need to have
2
54 36 360 0
P P I
K K K + = in order for
two closed-loop poles to possibly be imaginary. This condition results in

2
3
10
36 2
P
I P
K
K K = + + (P11.3)
The plot of K
I
as a function of K
P
is shown in Fig. P11.1. Because K
P
<60 and because
the polynomial in the right-hand side of Eq. (P11.3) has the roots of 6 and 60, the
maximum value of the same polynomial is at an abscissa K
P
=(6 + 60)/2 = 27, which
corresponds to the maximum of K
I
= 30.25 (as obtained from Eq. (P11.3)); this is
equivalent to
30.25
I
K < (P11.4)

-10 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
-10
-5
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
K
P
K
I

The auxiliary polynomial is

2
60
( )
6
P
I
K
P s s K
= + (P11.5)

60 ( )
3
P
K dP s
s
ds
= (P11.6)
The coefficient of s
1
in the first column of the array is substituted by
60
3
P
K
. Because
for K
P
<60, this coefficient is positive, and K
I
is also positive, so there are no sign
changes in the first column of the array and there are no closed-loop poles in the RHP.
The only possibility is that the two roots of P(s), which are also closed-loop poles be
located on the imaginary axis. As a consequence for 0 <K
P
<60 and K
I
<30.25, two
closed-loop poles are real and two closed-loop poles are imaginary, as per this problems
specification.

Problem 11.13
The differential equation governing the plant dynamics can be written as

0 0 1
2 2 2
a a a
y y y u
a a a
+ + = (P11.1)
or as

2 2
2
n n n
y y y u + + = (P11.2)
The plant transfer function is found by applying the inverse Laplace transform with zero
initial conditions to Eq. (P11.2):

2
2 2 2
( ) 2,500
( )
( ) 2 60 2,500
n
p
n n
Y s
G s
U s s s s s

= = =
+ + + +
(P11.3)
where the numerical values of the problem have been used. The P +I controller transfer
function is
( )
I
c P
K
G s K
s
= + (P11.4)
and the open-loop transfer function is

2 3 2
2,500 2,500 2,500
( ) ( ) ( )
60 2,500 60 2,500
I P I
c p P
K K s K
G s G s G s K
s s s s s s
+ | |
= = + =
|
+ + + +
\ .
(P11.5)
The closed-loop transfer function of the feedback system with H(s) =20 is

( )
3 2
2,500 2,500 ( )
( )
1 ( ) ( ) 60 2,500 1 20 50,000
P I
CL
P I
K s K G s
G s
G s H s s s K s K
+
= =
+ + + + +
(P11.6)
The Routh-Hurwitz array corresponding to the characteristic polynomial of Eq.
(P11.6) is

s
3
1 2,500(1 +20K
P
)
s
2
3 2,500K
I
s
1

3 60
P I
K K +
0
s
0
K
I
0

When the integral gain K
I
>0 and 3 +60K
P
K
I
>0, which is

3
60
I
P
K
K

> (P11.7)
there are no sign changes in the first column of the array and therefore, all closed-loop
poles are in the LHP, the control system being stable. When for K
I
>0 and 3 +60K
P
K
I

<0, which is

3
0
60
I
P
K
K

< < (P11.8)
there are two sign changes in the array, which indicates the system is unstable with two
closed-loop poles in the RHP.
For and 3 +60K
P
K
I
=0, which amounts to

3
60
I
P
K
K

= (P11.9)
there is a row of zeroes in the Routh-Hurwitz array corresponding to s
1
. The resulting
auxiliary polynomial is

2
( ) 3 2,500
I
P s s K = + (P11.10)

( )
6 0
dP s
s
ds
= + (P11.11)
The resulting first column of the Routh-Hurwitz array becomes

s
3
1
s
2
3

s
1
6
s
0
K
I

There are no sign changes in the first column provided K
I
>0 and therefore, there are no
closed-loop poles in the RHP. The system has two closed-loop poles in the LHP and two
closed-loop poles (the roots of P(s) of Eq. (P11.10)) on the imaginary axis, namely
50 3
3
I
K
j , and the control system is marginally stable.

Problem 11.14
(a)
The differential equation governing the controlled plant dynamics can be written as

0 0 1
2 2 2
a a a
c c c r
a a a
+ + = (P11.1)
or as

2 2
2
n n n
c c c r + + = (P11.2)
The closed-loop transfer function is found by applying the inverse Laplace transform
with zero initial conditions to Eq. (P11.2) and using the specified values of the natural
frequency and damping ratio:

2
2 2 2
( ) 14,400
( )
( ) 2 9.6 14,400
n
CL
n n
C s
G s
R s s s s s

= = =
+ + + +
(P11.3)
For a unity-feedback system, the closed- and open-loop transfer functions are related as

( )
( )
1 ( )
CL
G s
G s
G s
=
+
(P11.4)
which means that

( )
( ) 14,400
( )
1 ( ) 9.6
CL
CL
G s
G s
G s s s
= =
+
(P11.5)
Because
( ) ( ) ( )
c p
G s G s G s = (P11.6)
one choice of the controller transfer function is

14,400
( )
c
G s
s
= (P11.7)
Equation (P11.7) indicates the controller is an integrative one with a constant K
I
=
14,400. The second factor of the open-loop transfer function of Eq. (P11.5) is the plant
transfer function

1
( )
9.6
p
G s
s
=
+
(P11.8)
so the plant is a first-order system.

(b)
The maximum overshoot is calculated as

2
1
p
O e
= (P11.9)
and its numerical value is 0.882 (quite high). The altered maximum overshoot is

*
0.7 0.617
p p
O O = = (P11.10)
As a consequence, the modified damping ratio, which is calculated as

( )
( )
*
*
2 2 *
ln
ln
p
p
O
O
=
+
(P11.11)
is
*
=0.152. The settling time is calculated as

4
s
n
= (P11.12)
which, for the original system is
s
=0.833 s. For the altered control system, the settling
time is

*
0.8 0.667s
s s
= = (P11.13)
The altered damping ratio is determined from Eq. (P11.12) as

*
* *
4
39.53rad/ s
n
s

= = (P11.14)

Problem 11.15
(a)
The closed-loop transfer function is:

2
2 2 2
360,000
( )
2 600 360,000
n
CL
n n
G s
s s s s

= =
+ + + +
(P11.1)
which, after identifying the corresponding coefficients, results in a natural frequency
n

= 600 rad/s and a damping ratio = 600/(2
n
) =0.5. The maximum overshoot is
calculated as

2
1
p
O e
= (P11.2)
and its numerical value is 0.163. The altered maximum overshoot is

*
0.8 0.1304
p p
O O = = (P11.3)
As a consequence, the modified damping ratio, which is calculated as

( )
( )
*
*
2 2 *
ln
ln
p
p
O
O
=
+
(P11.4)
is
*
=0.544. The rise time is calculated as

2
1
2
1
tan
1
r
n
| |
|
|
\ .
=
(P11.5)
Its value is
r
=0.002 s. The modified rise time is

*
0.85 0.0017s
r r
= = (P11.6)
The altered natural frequency is determined from Eq. (P11.5) as

( )
( )
2
*
1
*
*
2
* *
1
tan
692.64rad/ s
1
n
r
| |
|
|
|
\ .
= =
(P11.7)
(b)
The following closed-loop transfer functions are of interest

( )
( )
2
2 2 2
2
*
*
2 2
2 * * *
360,000
( )
2 600 360,000
479,750
( )
753.636 479,750
2
n
CL
n n
n
CL
n n
G s
s s s s
G s
s s
s s
= =
+ + + +
= =
+ +
+ +

(P11.8)
Figure P11.1 has been obtained by using the MATLAB
pzmap command applied to

the closed-loop transfer functions of Eqs. (P11.8).
-400 -350 -300 -250 -200 -150 -100 -50 0
-600
-400
-200
0
200
400
600

Pole-Zero Map
Real Axis
I
m
a
g
in
a
r
y

A
x
is
Original system
Modif ied system

Figure P11.1 Closed-poles positions in the complex plane

It can be seen that the closed-loop poles move away from both the imaginary and the real
axes.

Problem 11.16
The original control system is redrawn in Fig. P11.1.

Figure P11.1 Control system with nonincluding feedback loops

The following relationships exist between the transfer functions and the signals of
this system:

1
1
2
2
( ) ( ) ( )
( ) 6 0 ( )
( ) ( ) 9,4 0 0( )
( )
( )
( )
( )
10
E s R s B s
A s E s
E s A s C s
E s
B s
s
B s
C s
s
=
+
(P11.1)
Chain-substituting the last four Eqs. (P11.1) into the first Eq. (P11.1) results in the
following closed-loop transfer function

2
( ) 60
( )
( ) 70 10,000
CL
C s
G s
R s s s
= =
+ +
(P11.2)
The characteristic polynomial is of the general form

2 2
( ) 2
CL n n
P s s s = + + (P11.3)
Comparing the two polynomials of Eqs. (P11.2) and (P11.3) results in
n
=100 rad/s and
= 70/(2
n
) =0.35.

C(s) R(s) A(s) B(s)
1
10 s +

60
9,400
+
_
+
_
1
s

E1(s) E2(s)
Problem 11.17
The original control system block diagram with reference and disturbance inputs is
redrawn in Fig. P11.1.

Figure P11.1 Control system with disturbance input applied after the plant

The following relationships are formulated between the signals shown in Fig. P11.1:

( ) ( ) ( )
( ) ( ) ( ) ( )
( ) ( ) ( )
c p
E s R s C s
A s E s G s G s
C s A s D s
=
= +
(P11.1)
Substituting E(s) from the first Eq. (P11.1) into the second Eq. (P11.1) and then the
resulting A(s) from the second Eq. (P11.1) into the third Eq. (P11.1) yields

( ) ( )
1
( ) ( ) ( )
1 ( ) ( ) 1 ( ) ( )
c p
c p c p
G s G s
C s R s D s
G s G s G s G s
= +
+ +
(P11.2)
For the case where the disturbance is applied between the controller and the plant, as
shown in Fig. 11.40, the Laplace transform of the output is expressed by means of Eqs.
(11.177) and (11.178) as

( ) ( )
( ) ( ) ( )
1 ( ) ( ) 1 ( ) ( )
c p p
c p c p
G s G s G
C s R s D s
G s G s G s G s
= +
+ +
(P11.3)
Equation (P11.3) shows that the plant combines with the disturbance signal (see
numerator of second fraction in right-hand side of equation) in the controlled response
when the disturbance is placed before the plant.
The Simulink
diagram of the control system shown in Fig. 11.64 is given in Fig.

P11.2, whereas the time-domain response of this system is illustrated in Fig. P11.3.
C(s) +
_
R(s)
Gp(s) Gc(s)
D(s)
+
+
E(s) A(s)

Figure P11.2 Simulink
block diagram for control system with disturbance input applied after the plant

plot of time response for control system with disturbance input applied after
the plant

Figures P11.4 and P11.5 show the Simulink
diagram and the corresponding time

response for the control system of Fig. 11.40.

block diagram for control system with disturbance input applied before the
plant

plot of time response for control system with disturbance input applied before
the plant

The responses of the two control systems, as seen in Figs. P11.3 and P11.5, are similar.

Problem 11.18
The control system block diagram with reference and disturbance inputs is shown in
Fig. P11.1.

Figure P11.1 Control system with disturbance input applied after the controller

It has been shown in Example 11.3 that the PZT actuator is also the P controller and
( )
m
c P
a
E A
G s K d
l
= = (P11.1)
With the numerical values of this problem, K
P
=0.144. The mechanical system (the
plant) consists of a mass and two springs in parallel where the input is a force and the
output is the resulting displacement. The plant transfer function was shown to be

2
1
( )
2
p
G s
ms k
=
+
(P11.2)
One beam-springs stiffness is

4 4
3 3 3
12 3 12
64 16
b b
E d Ed EI
k
l l l

= = = (P11.3)
and its numerical value is k =754 N/m. Since m =0.02 kg, the plant transfer function of
Eq. (P11.2) becomes

2
1
( )
0.02 1,508
p
G s
s
=
+
(P11.4)
With the minus sign considered (because the summing point has two positive inputs, as
shown shortly), the feedback (sensor) transfer function is

0
( )
b
v
H s
g
= (P11.5)
Y(s) +
_
Vr(s)
Gp(s)
D(s)
Gc(s)
+
+
H(s)
Vs(s)
Ve(s) Fa(s) F(s)
which is H(s) =5,000.
The Simulink
diagram is in Fig. P11.2 and the plot of the controlled systems time
response (the mass displacement) is plotted in Fig. P11.3. A gain of 25, which is the
ratio of the two resistances R
2
and R
1
is used before the controller, as per the specific
design of the summing point used in Example 11.3.

block diagram for control system with disturbance input applied after the
controller

plot of mass displacement for control system with disturbance input applied
after the controller

Problem 11.19
The lumped-parameter model of the piezoelectric block consists of an equivalent
mass m
PZT,e
, a spring-damper defined by an equivalent stiffness k
PZT,e
and damping
coefficient c
PZT,e
. A force f
PZT
acts on the equivalent mass. The dynamic equation of
motion for this system is

, , , PZT e PZT e PZT e PZT
m u c u k u f = + (P11.1)
Taking into account that the piezoelectric force is the block force, expressed as

, PZT PZT e e
f k dv = (P11.2)
where d is the piezoelectric charge coefficient and v
e
is the actuation (error) voltage
applied by the summing point, Eq. (P11.1) changes to

, , , , PZT e PZT e PZT e PZT e e
m u c u k u k dv + + = (P11.3)
The Laplace transform with zero initial conditions is applied to Eq. (P11.3), which
results in

,
, 2 2
, , , , , ,
( ) 1
( ) ( ) ( )
( )
PZT e
PZT e c p
e PZT e PZT e PZT e PZT e PZT e PZT e
k d
U s
G s k d G s G s
V s m s c s k m s c s k
= = = =
+ + + +
(P11.4)
with:

, 2
, , ,
1
( ) ; ( )
c PZT e p
PZT e PZT e PZT e
G s k d G s
m s c s k
= =
+ +
(P11.5)
Equation (P11.4) demonstrates that the piezoelectric block behaves as both
(proportional) controller and plant.
The lumped-parameter model of the cantilever with input base displacement and
strain gauges was discussed in Chapter 10. The dynamics of the lumped-parameter
cantilever model are described by the equation:

e e e
m y k y m u + = (P11.6)
where m
e
is the cantilever equivalent mass, k
e
is the cantilever stiffness (both parameters
are defined with respect to the free end point) and y =z u is the relative motion
coordinate of the cantilever free end with respect to the base (the moving end of the PZT
block). Application of the Laplace transform with zero initial conditions to the
differential equation (P11.6) results in

( )
2 2
( ) ( )
e e e
m s k Y s m s U s + = (P11.7)
The following relationship between the mechanical strain captured by the strain gauges
and cantilever deflection y was is used in Chapter 10

2
3
2
h
y
l
= (P11.8)
where h and l are the cantilever's thickness and length. The sensed voltage (which is the
same as the output voltage from the Wheatstone bridge with the four strain gauges
connected to it) is related to the mechanical strain as

s g i
v K v = (P11.9)
Combining Eqs. (P11.8) and (P11.9) yields

2
3
2
g i
s
hK v
v y
l
= (P11.10)
whose Laplace transform with zero initial conditions results in

2
3
( ) ( )
2
g i
s
hK v
V s Y s
l
= (P11.11)
Eliminating now Y(s) between Eqs. (P11.7) and (P11.11) generates the transfer function
of the sensor

2
2 2 2
3
( )
( )
( ) 2 2
g i e
s
e e
hK v m s
V s
H s
U s l m s l k
= =
+
(P11.12)
The summing point, which is also necessary in the control diagram represented in
Fig. P11.1, is the one discussed in Example 11.3 and sketched in Fig. 11.14.

Figure P11.1 Block diagram of feedback control system for piezoelectric block with sensing cantilever

Ve(s

+
_
G(s)
Vs(s

Vr(s)
U(s)
H(s)
Problem 11.20
The model of this control system is developed in Problem 11.19. As such, the
proportional controller transfer function is

,
( ) 1,000 1,000
m
c PZT e
a
E A
G s k d d
l
= = (P11.1)
where the 1,000 factor is the amplifying effect of the summing point and is compounded
to the normal transfer function of the controller. With the numerical parameters of this
problem, k
PZT,e
=1.0214 x 10
8
N/m and G
c
(s) =46.
The plant transfer function is

2
, , ,
1
( )
p
PZT e PZT e PZT e
G s
m s c s k
=
+ +
(P11.2)
The equivalent PZT mass is

,
1
3
PZT e PZT a
m Al = (P11.3)
or m
PZT,e
=0.0048 kg. The equivalent viscous damping coefficient is calculated as

, , ,
2
PZT e PZT PZT e PZT e
c m k = (P11.4)
which yields c
PZT,e
=139.71 N-s/m. With these numerical values, the transfer function of
Eq. (P11.2) becomes

2 8
1
( )
0.0048 139.71 1.0214 10
p
G s
s s
=
+ +
(P11.5)
The sensing transfer function was determined to be

2
2 2 2
3
( )
2 2
g i e
e e
hK v m s
H s
l m s l k
=
+
(P11.6)
if the minus sign is omitted since H(s) is driven to the negative input terminal of the
summing point. The cantilever equivalent mass and stiffness are calculated as

3 3
3 3
33
140
3
12 4
e
e
m whl
Ewh Ewh
k
l l
= =
(P11.7)
whose values are m
e
=4.14 x 10
-5
kg and k
e
=5,833.33 N/m. With the other numerical
parameters, the sensing transfer function of Eq. (P11.8) becomes

6 2
8 2
2.2339 10
( )
1.8616 10 2.625
s
H s
s
=
+
(P11.8)
Figure P.11 illustrates the reference signal time history, with the reference voltage
dropping instantly to zero and remaining there for 5s any other time interval can be
used instead of the 5s one. Figures P11.2 and P11.3 show the Simulink
diagram and the

resulting time-domain plot of u(t).

schematic of reference signal

2.2339e-6s
2
1.8616e-8s +2.625
2
Transfer Fcn2
1
0.0048s +139.71s+1.0214e8
2
Transfer Fcn1
46
1
Transfer Fcn
simout
To Workspace
Signal 1
Signal Builder
v_r v_e
u
v_s
f_a

block diagram solving for PZT block displacement

0 1 2 3 4 5 6
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
3.5
4
4.5
5
x 10
-5
Time (sec)
u

(
m
)

Figure P11.3 PZT block displacement as a function of time

Problem 11.21
(a)
The open-loop transfer function has the following poles:

1 2,3
0; 2 p p j = = (P11.1)
Since there are no finite open-loop zeroes, there need be three infinite zeroes and
therefore, three asymptotes. The asymptotes convergence point is

0 2 2 4
3 3
a

= = (P11.2)
and the angles of the three asymptotes are

,1 ,2 ,3
3 5
; ; ;
3 3 3
a a a

= = = = (P11.3)
Because there is one pole on the real axis, there is also one segment of the root locus to
the left of this pole, which is to the left of the origin. With these findings, the root locus
can be sketched and the result (which is actually obtained using MATLAB
r l ocus
command) is shown in Fig. P11.1.

Root Locus
Real Axis
I
m
a
g
i
n
a
r
y

A
x
i
s
-6 -5 -4 -3 -2 -1 0 1
-4
-3
-2
-1
0
1
2
3
4
System: untitled1
Gain: 20.1
Pole: 0.00339 + 2.24i
Damping: -0.00151
Overshoot (%): 100
Frequency (rad/sec): 2.24

Figure P11.1 MATLAB
plot of the root locus

One branch starts from the origin and superimposes over the real axis up to the breaking
point (which is slightly to the right of
a
); from this point, the branch follows one of the
two asymptotes at /3 or at 5 /3 as the gain increases to infinity (see blue color on the
plot). The other two branches start from the two complex open-loop poles given in Eq.
(P11.1). They meet on the real axis at the break-in point; one branch goes to the left
following the real-axis asymptote as the gain increases to infinity (green color); the other
branch (red color) moves to the right on the real axis until it reaches the breakaway point
(the point where the blue branch also left the real axis); it then follows the remaining
asymptote as the gain increases to infinity.

(b)
In order to precisely calculate the breakaway and break-in points, the equation is
considered

3 2
4 5 K s s s = (P11.4)
At these points the gain K is extreme and therefore, its derivative with respect to s is zero,
which yields the equation:

3 2
3 8 5 0
dK
s s
ds
= = (P11.5)
whose roots are s
1
= 5/3 and s
2
=1. The break-in occurs at s
1
for a gain K
1
=1.852,
whereas the breakaway takes place at s
2
for a gain K
2
=2. These gains are calculated
from Eq. (P11.4).
To determine the imaginary axis crossings, the closed-loop transfer function is
determined

3 2
( )
( )
1 ( ) 4 5
CL
G s K
G s
G s s s s K
= =
+ + + +
(P11.6)
The corresponding Routh-Hurwitz array is

s
3
1 5
s
2
4 K

s
1
20
4
K

0
s
0
K 0

The system is stable for K <20. A row a zero corresponding to s
1
of this array is
obtained for K =20. The auxiliary polynomial is:

2
( ) 4 20 P s s = + (P11.7)
Its time derivative is

( )
8 0
dP s
s
ds
= + (P11.8)
and the new array becomes

s
3
1 5
s
2
4 20
s
1
8 0
s
0
20 0

There is no sign change in the first column, so the system cannot be unstable. The
frequency value corresponding to the situation where the closed-loop poles are on the
imaginary axis is found by using s = j in Eq. (P11.7) whose root is 5rad/ s = . The
corresponding gain is K =20.

Problem 11.22
(a)
The open-loop transfer function has the following poles:

1 2,3
1; 1 p p j = = (P11.1)
and, as stated, the only finite open-loop zero is z =1. As a consequence, the open-loop
transfer function is

( )
( )( )( )
( )
( )( )( )
( )
3 2
1 2 3
1 1
( )
1 1 1 3 4 2
K s z K s K s
G s
s p s p s p s s j s j s s s

= = =
+ + + + + + +
(P11.2)

(b)
Because there are three finite open-loop poles and only one open-loop zero, two
zeroes are infinite and therefore, the root locus has two asymptotes. The asymptote
convergence point is

( ) 1 1 1 1
2
2
a

= = (P11.3)
and the angles of the two asymptotes are

,1 ,2
3
;
2 2
a a

= = (P11.4)
Because there is one pole on the real axis, there is also one segment of the root locus to
the left of this pole. With these findings, the root locus can be sketched and the result
(which is actually obtained using MATLAB
r l ocus command) is shown in Fig.

P11.1. The real-axis root locus portion is between the zero of 1 and the pole of 1. The
root locus has three branches. One branch starts from the pole 1 and closes in the zero
of 1. The other two branches start from the two complex conjugated poles and follow the
two asymptotes defined in Eqs. (P11.3) and (P11.4) as the gain increases to infinity.

-2 -1.5 -1 -0.5 0 0.5 1 1.5
-15
-10
-5
0
5
10
15
System: untitled1
Gain: 2.02
Pole: 0.00296
Damping: -1
Overshoot (%): 0
Root Locus
Real Axis
I
m
a
g
i
n
a
r
y

A
x
i
s

Figure P11.1 MATLAB

(c)
The closed-loop transfer function is

( )
3 2
( )
( )
1 ( ) 3 4 2
CL
G s Ks K
G s
G s s s K s K
= =
+ + + + +
(P11.5)

s
3
1 K +4
s
2
3 2 K

s
1
2 5 K + 0
s
0
2 K 0

For positive gains (as the root locus construction assumes), the only variant of having a
row of zeroes is when K =2 in the last row of the array. This condition leads to the
following auxiliary polynomial
( ) ( ) 2 5 9 P s K s s = + = (P11.6)
This polynomial is zero for s = 0, which is the same as = 0 (resulting from s = j), and,
as a consequence, the root locus crosses the imaginary axis for a gain K =2 and a zero
frequency (this is also approximately shown in the plot of Fig. P11.1).

Problem 11.23
The open-loop transfer function is

( )
( )( )( )
( )
3 2
2 2
( )
2 1 3 2 5 6
K s K s
G s
s s s s s s
+ +
= =
+ + +
(P11.1)
The root locus has three branches because it possesses three open-loop poles. There are
two real-axis portions of the root locus; one is between 3 and 2 and the other is
between 1 and 2. There are two infinite open-loop zeroes and therefore, two asymptotes.
The asymptote convergence point is

( ) 3 1 2 ( 2)
0
2
a
+
= = (P11.2)

,1 ,2
3
;
2 2
a a

= = (P11.3)
With these directions, the root locus can be sketched and it should be similar to the
MATLAB
plot shown in Fig. P11.1.

-4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3
-10
-8
-6
-4
-2
0
2
4
6
8
10
System: untitled1
Gain: 3
Pole: 0.000339
Damping: -1
Overshoot (%): 0
Root Locus
Real Axis
I
m
a
g
i
n
a
r
y

A
x
i
s

Figure P11.1 MATLAB

As the plot indicates, there is one breakaway point, which is obtained by first
determining K as

3 2
2 5 6
2
s s s
K
s
+ +
=
+
(P11.4)
resulting from G(s) =1. The gain K is maximum at breakaway so the corresponding
value(s) of s are obtained by solving the equation dK/ds =0, which leads to

3 2
4 4 2 0 s s s + + = (P11.5)
The real root of Eq. (P11.5) is s =0.36 and the corresponding gain for this breakaway
point is obtained from Eq. (P11.4) as K =3.176.

( )
3 2
( ) 2
( )
1 ( ) 2 5 2 6
CL
G s Ks K
G s
G s s s K s K
+
= =
+ + + +
(P11.6)

s
3
1 K 5
s
2
1 K 3
s
1
2 0
s
0
K 3 0

row of zeroes is when K =3 in the last row of the array. This condition leads to the
following auxiliary polynomial
( ) 2 P s s = (P11.7)
This polynomial is zero for s = 0, which is the same as = 0 (resulting from s = j), and,
as a consequence, the root locus crosses the imaginary axis for a gain K =3 and a zero
frequency (this is also approximately shown in the plot of Fig. P11.1).

Problem 11.24

( )( )( )
3 2
( )
1 2 3 6 11 6
K K
G s
s s s s s s
= =
+ + + + + +
(P11.1)
The root locus has three branches because it possesses three open-loop poles. There are
two real-axis portions of the root locus; one is between 3 and and the other is
between 2 and 1. There are three infinite open-loop zeroes and therefore, three
asymptotes. The asymptote convergence point is

( ) 1 2 3 0
2
3
a

= = (P11.2)

,1 ,2 ,3
5
; ;
3 3
a a a

= = = (P11.3)
With these directions, the root locus can be sketched and it should be similar to the
MATLAB

Root Locus
Real Axis
I
m
a
g
i
n
a
r
y

A
x
i
s
-8 -7 -6 -5 -4 -3 -2 -1 0 1
-5
-4
-3
-2
-1
0
1
2
3
4
5
System: untitled1
Gain: 60.4
Pole: 0.00516 + 3.32i
Damping: -0.00155
Overshoot (%): 100
System: untitled1
Gain: 0.385
Pole: -1.42
Damping: 1
Overshoot (%): 0

Figure P11.1 MATLAB


The breakaway point is obtained by first determining K as

3 2
6 11 6 K s s s = (P11.4)
resulting from G(s) =1. The gain K is maximum at breakaway so the corresponding
value(s) of s are obtained by solving the equation dK/ds =0, which leads to

2
3 12 11 0 s s + + = (P11.5)
whose acceptable root is s =1.423; the corresponding gain for this breakaway
point is obtained from Eq. (P11.4) as K =0.385.

3 2
( )
( )
1 ( ) 6 11 6
CL
G s K
G s
G s s s s K
= =
+ + + + +
(P11.6)

s
3
1 11
s
2
6 K +6
s
1
60
6
K

0
s
0
K +6 0

row of zeroes is when K =60 in the row corresponding to s
1
in the array. This condition
leads to the following auxiliary polynomial

2
( ) 6 66 P s s = + (P11.7)
This polynomial is zero for s
2
=11, which is the same as 11rad/ s = (resulting from s =
j), and, as a consequence, the root locus crosses the imaginary axis for a gain K =60
and a frequency of 3.317 rad/s (this is also approximately shown in the plot of Fig. P11.1).

Problem 11.25
The four asymptotes indicate that there are four infinite open-loop zeroes as there are
no finite open-loop zeroes as per the problem's statement. Under the assumption that the
root locus has four branches, and because two open-loop poles are specified, it follows
that there are two more open-loop poles. Moreover, due to the fact that the asymptotes
converge at the origin, it results that the yet-undetermined open-loop poles are located
on the real axis. One such possibility is when these poles are at 1 and 2, which result in
the following open-loop transfer function:

( )( )( )( )
1 4 2
( )
2 1 1 2 5 4
K K
G s
s s s s s s
= =
+ + +
(P11.1)
and Fig. P11.1 illustrates this root locus.
-10 -8 -6 -4 -2 0 2 4 6 8 10
-10
-8
-6
-4
-2
0
2
4
6
8
10
Root Locus
Real Axis
I
m
a
g
in
a
r
y

A
x
is

Figure P11.1 MATLAB
plot of the root locus for the open-loop poles of 2, 1, 1, and 2

Because the asymptote convergence point is located at zero, and because there are no
finite open-loop zeroes, any other design with the sum of the undetermined real-axis
open-loop poles being equal to 3 (because the sum of the known open-loop poles is 3)
satisfies the problem requirements. Consider for instance that the other two open-loop
poles are 3 and 6, the corresponding open-loop transfer function is

( )( )( )( )
2 4 2
( )
6 1 2 3 25 60 36
K K
G s
s s s s s s s
= =
+ + +
(P11.2)
The root locus for this function is shown in Fig. P11.2.
-20 -15 -10 -5 0 5 10 15 20
-20
-15
-10
-5
0
5
10
15
20
Root Locus
Real Axis
I
m
a
g
i
n
a
r
y

A
x
i
s

Figure P11.2 MATLAB
plot of the root locus for the open-loop poles of 3, 2, 1, and 6

For the system defined in Eq. (P11.1) there are two breakaway points, which are
calculated starting from the equation resulting from G
1
(s) =1, namely:

4 2
5 4 K s s = + (P11.3)
At breakaway points, K is maximum, and its s-derivative is zero

3
4 10 0
dK
s s
ds
= + = (P11.4)
which yields the solution of s
1
=1.581 and s
2
=1.581. The gain corresponding to these
two points located on the real axis is calculated from Eq. (P11.3) and is K =2.25.

Problem 11.26
The root locus has no asymptotes. It has two real-axis portions: one between 4 and
2 and the other between 1 and 2 (all points are on the real axis). The root locus has two
branches (because there are two finite open-loop poles). Taking into consideration that
the root locus starts from open-loop poles and ends in open-loop zeroes, it follows that
the two branches start from 1 and 2 on the real axis, which they cover until they meet in
the breakaway point; from that point, the two branches leave the real axis and move,
symmetrically with respect to the real axis, until they meet again on the real axis in the
break-in point, somewhere between 4 and 2. From that point, the branches continue on
the real axis until they reach the open-loop zeroes. The MATLAB
plot is shown in Fig.

P11.1.
Root Locus
Real Axis
I
m
a
g
in
a
r
y

A
x
is
-5 -4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3
-2.5
-2
-1.5
-1
-0.5
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
System: untitled1
Gain: 0.333
Pole: 0.372 + 1.83i
Damping: -0.199
Overshoot (%): 190
System: untitled1
Gain: 0.739
Pole: -0.413 + 2.09i
Damping: 0.194
Overshoot (%): 53.7

Figure P11.1 MATLAB
plot of a root locus without asymptotes

The open-loop transfer function is:

( )( )
( )( )
( )
2
2
6 8
2 4
( )
1 2 3 2
K s s
K s s
G s
s s s s
+ +
+ +
= =
+
(P11.1)
The breakaway and break-in points are determined by solving the equation dK/ds =0
from G(s) =1, which is

2
2
3 2
6 8
s s
K
s s
+
=
+ +
(P11.2)
It follows that

( )
( )
2
2
2
3 3 4 12
6 8
s s
dK
ds
s s
+
=
+ +
(P11.3)
The two roots of the numerator in Eq. (P11.3) are s
1
=1.442 (this is the breakaway point)
and s
2
=2.775 (this is the break-in point). The corresponding gains are calculated from
Eq. (P11.2) and they are K
1
=0.013 and K
2
=18.987.

( )
( ) ( ) ( )
2
2
6 8
( )
( )
1 ( ) 1 3 2 1 2 4 1
CL
K s s
G s
G s
G s K s K s K
+ +
= =
+ + + + +
(P11.4)

s
2
K +1 2(4K +1)
s
1
3(2K 1) 0
s
0
2(4K +1)

The second row contains only zeroes for K =1/2. The auxiliary polynomial is

2
3
( ) 6
2
P s s = + (P11.5)
P(s) is zero for s
2
=4, which indicates that = 2 (this is obtained using s = j). As a
consequence, the j axis crossings occur for a gain K = 1/2 and at a frequency = 2 rad/s.
The characteristic polynomial results from the closed-loop transfer function as
( ) ( ) ( )
2
( ) 1 3 2 1 2 4 1
CL
P s K s K s K = + + + + (P11.6)
Considering this polynomial is written in the standard form of a second-order system

2 2
( ) 2
CL n n
P s s s = + + (P11.7)
the following two conditions need to be used

( )
( )
2
3 2 1
2
1
2 4 1
1
n
n
K
K
K
K
+
(P11.8)
For a damping ratio = 0.2, the system of Eqs. (P11.8) allow solving for the gain. It is
obtained K
1
=0.3336 and K
2
=0.7493. It can be checked (for a quick verification, see the
approximate evaluation of Fig. P11.1), that the valid solution is K
2
=0.7493 because for
K
1
a negative damping ratio of approximately = 0.2 is obtained.

Problem 11.27

( )
( )( )( )
( )
3
4 4
( )
1 2 3 7 6
K s K s
G s
s s s s s
+ +
= =
+ +
(P11.1)
and because there are three poles, the root locus has three branches. The root locus has
two real-segments portions: one is between 4 and 3 while the other is between 1 and 2.
There are two infinite poles and therefore, two asymptotes, which are centered at

( ) 3 1 2 ( 4)
2
2
a
+ +
= = (P11.2)

,1 ,2
3
;
2 2
a a

= = (P11.3)
With these directions, the root locus can be sketched and it is similar to the MATLAB

Root Locus
Real Axis
I
m
a
g
i
n
a
r
y

A
x
i
s
-5 -4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3
-15
-10
-5
0
5
10
15
System: untitled1
Gain: 0.205
Pole: 1.51 + 0.018i
Damping: -1
Overshoot (%): 6.62e+115

Figure P11.1 MATLAB
plot of a root locus

This system is unstable for all positive values of K because two branches of the root locus
start and end in the RHP.
The breakaway point is determined by solving the equation dK/ds =0 from G(s) =
1, which is

3
7 6
4
s s
K
s
+
=
+
(P11.4)
It follows that

( )
3 2
2
2 12 34
4
dK s s
ds
s
+
=
+
(P11.5)
The valid root of the numerator in Eq. (P11.5) is s =1.505 and the corresponding gain is
calculated from Eq. (P11.4) as K =0.205.

Problem 11.28
(a)
The damping ratio is calculated by means of the maximum overshoot as

( )
( )
2 2
ln
ln
p
p
O
O
=
+
(P11.1)
For O
p
= 0.06, the damping ratio is = 0.667.
The open-loop transfer function of the unity-feedback system with proportional
controls is

2
( ) ( ) ( )
4
P
c p
K
G s G s G s
ms cs k
= =
+ +
(P11.2)
where the plant transfer function has been obtained by Laplace transforming the
differential equation:
4 mx cx kx f + + = (P11.3)
as

2
( ) 1
( )
( ) 4
p
X s
G s
F s ms cs k
= =
+ +
(P11.4)
It has been taken into consideration that the 4 beams act as 4 springs in parallel, the
stiffness of each spring being k. the closed-loop transfer function of the unity-feedback
control system is

2
( )
( )
4
1 ( )
P
CL
P
K
G s
m
G s
k K c
G s
s s
m m
= =
+
+
+ +
(P11.5)
The characteristic polynomial of Eq. (P11.5) is typical for a second-order system and
therefore

2
2
4
n
P
n
c
m
k K
m
(P11.6)
From the first Eq. (P11.6) the viscous damping coefficient is determined as c = 2m
n
=
0.0001 N-s/m.
The steady-state error for a unit-step input is expressed as
( )
0
1 4
1 lim ( ) 4
P
s
k
e
G s K k
= =
+ +
(P11.7)
As the natural frequency and the steady-state error are specified, the second Eq.
(P11.6) and Eq. (P11.7) are solved for the beam spring stiffness and the proportional gain,
which are k =0.336 N/m and K
P
=65.895.

(b)

*
* *
2
( ) ( ) ( )
4
P D
c p
K K s
G s G s G s
ms cs k
+
= =
+ +
(P11.8)
and the closed-loop transfer function become

*
*
*
* *
2
( )
( )
4 1 ( )
P D
CL
D P
K K
s
G s
m m
G s
c K k K G s
s s
m m
+
= =
+ + +
+ +
(P11.9)
The steady-state error is
( )
*
* *
0
1 4
1 lim ( ) 4
P
s
k
e
G s K k
= =
+ +
(P11.10)
which enables finding the new proportional gain as

( )
*
*
4
4 133.056
P
k
K k
e
= =
(P11.11)
The new natural frequency is calculated based on Eq. (P11.9) as

*
* 6
4
1.1593 10 rad/ s
P
n
k K
m
+
= = (P11.12)
Eventually, the derivative gain is determined from Eq. (P11.9) where

* *
2
D
n
c K
m

+
= (P11.13)
as

* * 5
2 6.23 10
D n
K m c

= = (P11.14)

Problem 11.29
(a)
Consider the two-stage operational amplifier circuit is shown in Fig. P11.1.

Figure P11.1 Two-stage operational amplifier circuit functioning as an integrative (I) controller

The transfer function of the circuit shown in Fig. P11.1 is:

2 4
1 3
1
( ) 1
( )
( )
o
c
i
V s Z Z Ls
RC
G s
V s Z Z RCs Ls s
| | | |
= = = =
| |
\ . \ .
(P11.1)
Equation (P11.1) indicates that the controller represented in Fig. 11.38 is an
integrative one and its constant is:

1
I
K
RC
= (P11.2)

(b)
By using the complex impedance approach, the following equation is obtained based
on Figure 11.67, which takes into account that the same current passes through the three
electrical components:

2 1 2 3
( ) ( )
o i
V s V s
Z Z Z Z
=
+ +
(P11.3)
The impedances of Eq. (P11.3) are:

1 2 3
1
; ; Z R Z Z Ls
Cs
= = = (P11.4)
Combination of Eqs. (P11.3) and (P11.4) yields the transfer function of the plant:

Z1
Z2
Z3
Z4
v
vi
v
o
L
C
R

L

+

+


2
2
1 2 3
( ) 1
( )
( ) 1
o
p
i
V s Z
G s
V s Z Z Z LCs RCs
= = =
+ + + +
(P11.5)
The transfer function of the controller-plant combination is:

( )
2 2 2 2 2
1 1 1
( ) ( ) ( )
1
c p
G s G s G s
RCs LCs RCs s RLC s R C s RC
= = =
+ + + +
(P11.6)
The system being a type-one system, the steady-state error for a unit ramp input is
constant and is calculated as:

0
1 1
( ) 0.6
lim ( )
v
s
e RC
K sG s
= = = = (P11.7)

Problem 11.30
The nonunity-feedback system is first converted into an equivalent unity-feedback
control system. The relationship between the input R(s) and the output C(s) of the
nonunity-feedback system is

( )
( ) ( )
1 ( ) ( )
G s
C s R s
G s H s
=
+
(P11.1)
whereas for the unity-feedback system, a similar relationship is written as

*
*
( )
( ) ( )
1 ( )
G s
C s R s
G s
=
+
(P11.2)
Comparing Eqs. (P11.1) and (P11.2), the open-loop transfer function of the unity-
feedback system is

( )
2
*
4 3 2
4 3
( )
( )
1 ( ) ( ) ( ) 5 6
K s s
G s
G s
G s G s H s s s s Ks K
+ +
= =
+ + + + +
(P11.3)
so this is a zero-order system. The steady-state error for a unit step is constant, namely:

*
0
1 1
( ) 0.25
1 lim ( ) 1 3
s
e
G s
= = =
+ +
(P11.4)

Problem 11.31
(a)
Figure P11.1 shows the block diagram of a typical nonunity-feedback control system.

Figure P11.1 Nonunity-feedback control system

The following relationships are formulated between the systems signals

( ) ( ) ( ) ( )
( ) ( ) ( )
E s R s C s H s
C s G s E s
=
(P11.1)
Eliminating C(s) between the two Eqs. (P11.2) results in

1
( ) ( )
1 ( ) ( )
E s R s
G s H s
=
+
(P11.2)
According to the final-value theorem, the steady-state error is

0 0
( )
( ) lim ( ) lim
1 ( ) ( )
s s
sR s
e sE s
G s H s

= =
+
(P11.3)
In this section of the problem, G(s) = G
p
(s) because there is no controller. As a
consequence, the steady-state error of Eq. (P11.3) becomes

0 0
( )
( ) lim ( ) lim
1 ( ) ( )
s s
p
sR s
e sE s
G s H s

= =
+
(P11.4)
For the particular plant of the problem (the cantilever with base displacement input),
the lumped-parameter model consists of the equivalent mass m, the equivalent damping
coefficient c, and the equivalent stiffness k. For the input displacement u, the absolute
motion of the lumped mass z, and the lumped mass relative motion z u, the equation of
motion is
( ) mz cz k z u = (P11.5)
E(s) +
_
G(s)
B(s)
R(s)
C(s)
H(s)
Note that damping is considered to take place between the vibrating cantilever and a
fixed reference system whereas the elastic effects are applied relatively between the
cantilever and its moving frame. Laplace transforming Eq. (P11.5) with zero initial
conditions, results in the following plant transfer function

2
( )
( )
( )
p
Z s k
G s
U s ms cs k
= =
+ +
(P11.6)
For H(s) =K
s
, the error of Eq. (P11.4) becomes

( )
( )
3 2
2
0
( ) lim ( )
1
s
s
ms cs ks
e R s
ms cs k K
+ +
=
+ + +
(P11.7)

(b)
When the I controller is added to the plant (with G
c
=K
I
/s), the steady-state error is
expressed by means of Eq. (P11.3) taking into account that G(s) =G
c
(s)G
p
(s), namely

4 3 2
3 2
0
( )
( ) lim ( )
1 ( ) ( )
s
I s
sR s ms cs ks
e R s
G s H s ms cs ks K K k
+ +
= =
+ + + +
(P11.8)
For a unit step input, R(s) =1/s, and

4 3 2
3 2
1
( ) 0
I s
ms cs ks
e
ms cs ks K K k s
+ +
= =
+ + +
(P11.9)
For a unit ramp input, R(s) =1/s
2
, and

4 3 2
3 2 2
1 1
( )
I s I s
ms cs ks
e
ms cs ks K K k s K K
+ +
= =
+ + +
(P11.10)
For a unit parabola input, R(s) =1/s
3
, and

4 3 2
3 2 3
1
( )
I s
ms cs ks
e
ms cs ks K K k s
+ +
= =
+ + +
(P11.11)

Problem 11.32
The steady-state error in this case is

0
( )
( ) lim
1 ( ) ( )
s
c p
sR s
e
G s G s
=
+
(P11.1)
The controller transfer function is

2
2
( )
I I I P I
c P
K K K K s K
G s K
s s s
+ | |
= + =
|
\ .
(P11.2)
The plant transfer function is

2
( )
( )
( )
p
Z s k
G s
U s ms cs k
= =
+ +
(P11.3)
Substituting the transfer functions of Eqs. (P11.2) and (P11.3) in Eq. (P11.1) yields the
steady-state error

( )
2 3
4 3 2 2
0
( ) lim ( )
s
I P I
ms cs k s
e R s
ms cs ks K K ks K k
+ +
=
+ + + +
(P11.4)
For unit step and unit ramp inputs, the steady-state error is zero, and, therefore it is not
sensitive at all to K
P
or to K
I
. For a unit ramp input, R(s) =1/s
3
and the steady-state error
of Eq. (P11.4) becomes

2
1
( )
I
e
K
= (P11.5)
which indicates no sensitivity to K
P
. The sensitivity of e() of Eq. (P11.5) to K
I
is

( ), 4
2
2 ( )
2
1
( )
I
I I I
e K
I I
I
K K K de
S
e dK K
K
| |
= = =
|
\ .
(P11.6)
which shows that the sensitivity of the steady-state error to K
I
is constant.

Problem 11.33
For the control system of Fig. P11.70 the closed-loop transfer function is

( ) ( )
( )
( ) 1 ( )
CL
C s KG s
G s
R s KG s
= =
+
(P11.1)
Its sensitivity to K is

| |
| |
2
, 2
( ) 1 ( ) ( ) ( ) 1
( )
( ) 1 ( )
1 ( )
1 ( )
CL
CL
G K
CL
G s KG s KG s dG s K K
S
KG s
G s dK KG s
KG s
KG s
+
= = =
+
+
+
(P11.2)
which shows that the sensitivity of the closed-loop transfer function to K decreases as the
gain increases.
Figure P11.1 shows the block diagram with the gain relocated between the input
signal and the summing point.

Figure P11.1 Unity-feedback control system with relocated gain

The following signal relationships can be formulated for this system

( ) ( ) ( )
( ) ( ) ( )
KR s C s E s
C s E s G s
=
(P11.3)
Substituting E(s) from the second Eq. (P11.3) into the first Eq. (P11.3) results in

*
( ) ( )
( )
( ) 1 ( )
CL
C s KG s
G s
R s G s
= =
+
(P11.4)
The sensitivity of this modified closed-loop transfer function to K is

*
*
* ,
( ) ( )
1
( )
( ) 1 ( )
1 ( )
CL
CL
G K
CL
dG s K K G s
S
KG s
G s dK KG s
G s
= = =
+
+
(P11.5)
which shows that the sensitivity of the closed-loop modified transfer function is constant.
E(s) +
_
G(s)
R(s)
C(s)
K
Problem 11.34
There are two finite open-loop poles because the open-loop transfer function is
second-order. As there are no asymptotes, there are also two finite open-loop zeroes.
Moreover, because the root locus has two real-axis segments, it means that four open-
loop poles and zeroes (in total) are located on the real axis, but that means all the open-
loop poles and zeroes. The open-loop poles have to be in the LHP because the root locus
starts from them, and the system is stable for small gains. Two apparently-possible root
locus paths are sketched in Fig. P11.1.

Figure P11.1 Variants of root locus

The root locus of Fig. P11.1(a) displays a stable system because the root locus is always
in the LHP, so this is not an acceptable design. The system of Fig. P11.1(b) is
theoretically possible because one path moves into the RHP so the system becomes
unstable for large gains. Another possible root locus configuration is sketched in Fig.
P11.2 for some specific open-loop poles and zeroes.

j

j
(a) (b)
-5 -4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 4
-2.5
-2
-1.5
-1
-0.5
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
Root Locus
Real Axis
I
m
a
g
in
a
r
y

A
x
is

Figure P11.2 Another variant of root locus

However, in either of the possible configurations, the two open-loop poles need to be
in the LHP, which results in a number N
p
=0 of open-loop poles in the RHP. Because the
Nyquist plot displays two clockwise encirclements of 1, it means that N =2. As a
result, the number of closed-loop poles in the RHP is
0 ( 2) 2
z p
N N N = = = (P11.1)
and therefore, the system is unstable for K =1.

Problem 11.35
(a)
The plant transfer function is:

2
2 2 2
( ) 2,500
( )
( ) 2 60 2,500
n
p
n n
Y s
G s
U s s s s s

= = =
+ + + +
(P11.1)
with the numerical values of Problem 11.13. The P +I controller transfer function is

1 500
( ) 1 1
I
c P P P
I
K
G s K K K
s T s s
| |
| |
= + = + = +
| |
\ .
\ .
(P11.2)
where T
i
=0.002 s. The open-loop transfer function is

( )
3 2
2,500 1,250,000
( ) ( ) ( )
60 2,500
P
c p
K s
G s G s G s
s s s
+
= =
+ +
(P11.3)
The root locus corresponding to this transfer function can easily be sketched and is
plotted in Fig. P11.1.
-600 -500 -400 -300 -200 -100 0 100 200 300
-4000
-3000
-2000
-1000
0
1000
2000
3000
4000
System: untitled1
Gain: 0.142
Pole: 0.344 - 54i
Damping: -0.00638
Overshoot (%): 102
Frequency (rad/sec): 54
Root Locus
Real Axis
I
m
a
g
i
n
a
r
y

A
x
i
s

Figure P11.1 Root locus by MATLAB

The system becomes unstable for proportional gains larger than approximately 0.14, as
shown in Fig. P11.1.

(b)
For a proportional gain K
P
=1, the open-loop transfer function is

3 2
2,500 1,250,000
( )
60 2,500
s
G s
s s s
+
=
+ +
(P11.4)
and the corresponding Bode plots are shown in Fig. P11.2.
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
M
a
g
n
i
t
u
d
e

(
a
b
s
)
10
0
10
1
10
2
10
3
10
4
-270
-225
-180
-135
-90
P
h
a
s
e

(
d
e
g
)
Bode Diagram
Frequency (rad/sec)

Figure P11.2 Bode plots by MATLAB

(c)
For the same open-loop transfer function of Eq. (P11.4), the Nyquist plot is given in
Fig. P11.3.
Nyquist Diagram
Real Axis
I
m
a
g
i
n
a
r
y

A
x
i
s
-12 -10 -8 -6 -4 -2 0
-40
-30
-20
-10
0
10
20
30
40
System: untitled1
Real: -7.35
Imag: 0.0256
Frequency (rad/sec): -53.2

Figure P11.3 Nyquist plot by MATLAB

When 7.35 < 1/K
P
<0, which is equivalent to K
P
>1/7.35 =0.136, a test radius
stemming from 1 (the red point) intersects the Nyquist plot in two spots (imagine the
Nyquist plot is enclosed at the top, bottom and on the right of Fig. P11.3). Since the
direction of encircling is clockwise, it means that N =2. The open-loop poles are 0, 30 +
40j, and 30 40j, so there are no poles in the RHP, which means N
p
=0. As a
consequence the number of closed-loop poles in the RHP is N
z
=N
p
N =2, and the
system is unstable. Conversely, for 7.35 > 1/K
P
, which is equivalent to K
P
<0.136,
there are test radii which do not intersect the Nyquist plot, so N =0 and N
z
=N
p
N =0,
the system being stable.

Solutions To Chapter 11 Problems: Problem 11.1

Diunggah oleh

Informasi Dokumen

Judul Asli

Hak Cipta

Format Tersedia

Bagikan dokumen Ini

Bagikan atau Tanam Dokumen

Opsi Berbagi

Apakah menurut Anda dokumen ini bermanfaat?

Apakah konten ini tidak pantas?

Hak Cipta:

Format Tersedia

Solutions To Chapter 11 Problems: Problem 11.1

Diunggah oleh

Hak Cipta:

Format Tersedia

Lobontiu: System Dynamics for Engineering Students

pzmap command applied to

diagram of the control system shown in Fig. 11.64 is given in Fig.

diagram and the corresponding time

diagram and the

schematic of reference signal

block diagram solving for PZT block displacement

plot of the root locus

r l ocus command) is shown in Fig.

plot of the root locus

plot shown in Fig. P11.1.

plot of the root locus

plot shown in Fig. P11.1.

plot of the root locus

plot of the root locus for the open-loop poles of 2, 1, 1, and 2

plot of the root locus for the open-loop poles of 3, 2, 1, and 6

plot is shown in Fig.

plot of a root locus without asymptotes

plot of a root locus

Anda mungkin juga menyukai