Control Systems II: Examination Formulae

2.2

Feedback control design

Closed-loop performance [2.4]

Frequency domain performance

Gain and phase margins

Typical Nyquist plot of the loopshape:

See RS I

Im

0.5

L(j180 )

1
GM

PM

Re

= +
0.5

L(jc )
0.5

L(j)

Loop transfer function:

Sensitivity function:
Complementary sensitivity function:
Maximum sensitivity peak:
Lower bound on gain margin:
Lower bound on phase margin:
Performance specification on S:

L(s) = G(s) K(s)

Figure 5: Typical Nyquist plot of L(j) for stable
1
S(s)
(I +
L(s))
plant=with
PM
and GM indicated. Closed-loop instability occurs if L(j) encircles the critical point 1
T (s) = I S(s) = (I + L(s))1 L(s)
MS := max |S()| = kS()k
R

2-5

MS
GM
MS 1 

1
1
P M 2 arcsin

[rad.]
2MS
MS
kwP Sk < 1

Typical performance weight for S:

wP (s) =

s/M + B
,
s + B A

where,

A = low frequency upper bound on S()

M = high frequency upper bound on S()
B = lower bound on bandwidth for S()
Robustness specification on T :

kwT T k < 1

Typical robustness weight for T :

wT (s) =

s
BT

1
,
MT

where,

MT = low frequency upper bound on T ()

BT = upper bound on bandwidth of T ()
Z
Bode integral formula:
0

ln |S()| d =

Np
X
i=1

real(pi ), where Np = # RHP poles of L(s)

SISO performance limitations

RHP pole interpolation constraint:

If L(p) = , real(p) > 0, then T (p) = 1 and S(p) = 0.

RHP zero interpolation constraint:

If L(z) = 0, real(z) > 0, then T (z) = 0 and S(z) = 1.

Maximum modulus (f (s) analytic):

kf (s)k = max |f ()| |f (s0 )| s0 RHP.

R


1
B (1 A) < z 1
, where L(z) = 0, real(z) > 0.
M
MT
BT > p
, where L(p) = , real(p) > 0.
MT 1
|z + p|
kSk c, kT k c, where c =
|z
p|
4.2 Classes of uncertainty
[7.2]

RHP zero bandwidth limit on S:

RHP pole bandwidth requirement on T :
Limits from a RHP pole, p, and zero, z:
Sensitivity limit from delay, seconds:

c < 1/.1. Parametric uncertainty. Here the structure of

Tracking speed of response constraint:

|S()| 1/R,

Disturbance rejection speed of response:

|S()| 2.1/|G
for all
R where
|Gd ()| > 1
Neglected
unmodelled
dynamics
d ()|, and

Input constraint (disturbance rejection):

|G()| > |G
dynamics,
1, for allusually
Rat high frequencies,
ofd ()|
missing

Input constraint (reference tracking):

|G()| > Rlack

1,of understanding
for all ofr , thephysical
R process.

Phase lag constraint:

c < u , (where u is the frequency where 6 G() = 180o )

the model (including the order) is known, but

for all r , R
some of the parameters are uncertain.
uncertainty. Here the model is in error because
either through deliberate neglect or because of a

Uncertainty and robustness for SISO

Any model of a real system will contain this

source of uncertainty.

3. Lumped uncertainty. Here the uncertainty

description represents one or several sources of
systems
parametric and/or unmodelled dynamics
uncertainty combined into a single lumped
perturbation of a chosen structure.

Multiplicative uncertainty:
! wI
"

Multiplicative uncertainty weight:

Gp

! I

!"
!+ ! G
+

Gp (s) = G(s)(1 + wI (s)I (s)), kI k 1.


Figure 33: Plant 
with
|Gpmultiplicative
() G()|uncertainty
|wI ()| max
for all R
4-3
Gp
|G()|

Additive uncertainty:

! wA ! A
"

Gp :

(a)

wiA

!+ "
!+!

Gp (s) = G(s) + wA (s)A (s),

Additive uncertainty weight:
Robust stability (multiplicative uncertainty):
Robust performance (multiplicative uncertainty):

!+ "
!+ !

kA k 1.

wI |G
I G()|
!p ()
|wA ()| !max
for all R

"

Gp

|wI ()T ()| < 1,

!+ "
!!

for all + R

|wP ()S()| + |wI ()T ()| < 1,

2

(b)

! wO ! O

wiI

!+ "
!+

for all R

iA

(d)

iI

(e)

wiO

Linear system theory

System response, x(t), t 0,
Transfer function representation:

Observable canonical form for:

G(s) =

n1 sn1 + + 0
sn + n1 sn1 + + 0

x(t) = eAt x0 +

eA(t ) B u( ) d.

0
1

G(s) = C(sI A)

n1

n2

..
.

G(s) =

B +D

..

..
.

n1

n2

..
.

Controllability matrix:

C =

Observability matrix:

O =

Poles of G(s) (state-space):

All for which () = det(I A) = 0.

Poles of G(s) (t.f. matrix):

The pole polynomial, (s), is the least common denominator of

all non-identically zero minors of all orders of G(s)
"
#
zI A B
All z for which det
= 0.
C
D

Zeros of G(s) (state-space):

Zeros of G(s) (t.f. matrix):

B

C

AB

A B

n1

B
T

(CA)

2 T

(CA )

n1 T

(CA

The zero polynomial, z(s), is the greatest common divisor of all

numerators of all order-r minors of G(s) (r = normal rank of
G(s)) when the minors have been adjusted to have the pole
polynomial as their denominators.

H -norm:
kG(s)k = sup max (G())
R

= max kGdk2
kdk2 =1

H2 -norm:

kG(s)k2 =

=

1
2

1
2

|G()|2 d

1/2
(SISO case)

trace(G() G() d

1/2
(MIMO case)

Multivariable control
Push-through rule:

G1 (I G2 G1 )1 = (I G1 G2 )14.2
G1

Condition number:

(M ) =

Sensitivity/Complementary sensitivity relationship:

S(s) + T (s) = I, for all s C

RHP pole interpolation constraint:

If at p C, real(p) > 0, y T (p)L(p) = ,

then S(p)y(p)
0 model i
uncertainty.
Here =
the

RHP zero interpolation constraint:

If at z C, real(z) > 0, y T (z)L(z) = 0,

thenthrough
y T (z)Tdeliberate
(z) = 0 neglec
either
Robust stability and performance (S&P chap. 8)
lack of understanding of the ph
Number of ccw encirclements of 0 by,

max (M )
min (M )

Classes of uncertainty

1. Parametric uncertainty. He
the model (including the order)
some of the parameters are unc
2. Neglected and unmodelled

of missing dynamics, usually at

Multivariable Nyquist criteria:

6.4.8

Any model of a real system wil

A general control configuration

more
general
control structure
Loopshape, L(s) is stabilizable and detectable. Robustness:
det(I a +
L(s))
= # unstable
poles source
of L(s)of uncertainty.
including
model
uncertainty
[3.8.8]

closed-loop system is stable.

3. Lumped uncertainty. Here t

The general control configuration in Figure 63 may

description represents one or se
be extended
to include
model uncertainty. Here theR
Nominal sensitivity function performance:
max (w
P ()S()) < 1, for all parametric
and/or unmodelled
matrix is a block-diagonal matrix that includes all
uncertainty
combined into a sin
possiblekw
perturbations
(representing uncertainty) to
Robust stability (output multiplicative perturbation):
SISO example:
I T k < 1
perturbation
of a choseninput
structm
the system. It is normalized such that !! 1.

Generalized plant:

! wI

"

"

u
!
!
!

Figure 33: Plant with multiplicat

v
"

Figure 70: General control configuration for the case

with model uncertainty

"

z = Fu (N, ) w
=

N22 + N21 (I N11 )

N12 w

General robust stability analysis structure:

!
!

z
!

6-42

Figure 71: General block diagram

for analysis with
!
uncertainty included
y

u
"

Small gain robust stability (M and stable):

Inputs
w
Spectral radius robust stability (M and stable):

Figure 76:IfM-structure
for robust stability
analysis
(M ()())
< 1, for
all
!1

max
!2

then closed-loop
Outputs is stable.

!1
z
!2
System
Ifwith
(M ()()) =
!
If we Actuators,
also pullSensors
out the controller K, we get3!the
4
max
|
(M
()())|
generalized
plant iP , as ishown in Figure 74. <
For1,
and Controller

>

analysis ofthen
the uncertain
system,
we use the
closed-loop
isw stable.
N
N -structure
in!Figure 75.
!
3

for all R,
z

(a)

!z

Uncertain closed-loop interconnection:

! I

(b)

Figure 72: Rearranging a system with multiple perturbations4into the N -structure

 := { | = diag(1 , . . . , n ) }

Block structured :

(M ()) < 1, for all R,

Structured singular value:

closed-loop interconnection is stable

for all , max () 1.

Structured singular value (upper bound):

If there exists D, such that D = D

for all and,

max (D()M ()D1 ()) < 1, for all R,

then the closed-loop interconnection is stable
for all , max () 1.

Some Laplace and Z Transforms

F (s)

f (nT )

F (z)

1
s

1(nT )

1
s2

z
z1

nT

1
s+a

eanT

a
s(s + a)

1 eanT

a
+ a)

s2 (s

Tz
(z 1)2

z
z eaT

z(1 eaT )
(z 1)(z eaT )

z[z(aT 1 + eaT ) + (1 (1 + aT )eaT )]

a(z 1)2 (z eaT )

(anT 1 + eanT )/a

Sampled data control (sample period T )

Pole mapping from s-domain to z-domain:

zi = esi T

Nyquist frequency:

Zero Order Hold Equivalence:

GZOH (z) = (1 z 1 )Z

Discrete Approximations
Bilinear

s=

2 (z 1)
T (z + 1)

Prewarped Tustin

s=

0
(z 1)
tan(0 T /2) (z + 1)

T


G(s)
s