Ch 9 Design Using The Graphical Tool

618 371 Linear Control Systems

Electronic and Computer System Engineering
Department of Electrical Engineering
Kittithuch Paponpen

Outline
Introduction
Improving
I
i SSE via
i cascade
d compensation
ti
Improving
p
g Transient Response
p via cascade compensation
p
Improving SSE & Transient Response via cascade

compensation
Physical realization of compensation

Improving transient response via cascade

compensation
The objective is to design a response that has a desirable

percent overshoot and a shorter settling time than the

uncompensated
p
system.
y
Improving the transient response of a feedback control

system by using cascade compensation

o 1. Ideal derivative compensator

9 add a pure differentiator to the forward path of the feedback

control system.
9 Add a zero to the forward-path transfer function
9 require an active network for its realization
9 Differentiation is a noisy process
9 Differentiating high-frequency noise yield a large, unwanted
signal.
9 called proportional-plus-derivative (PD) controller

Improving transient response via cascade

compensation
Improving the transient response of a feedback control

system by using cascade compensation

o 2. doesnt use pure differentiation

9 add a zero and a more distant pole to forward-path

ttransfer
f function.
f
ti
9 require a passive network
9 Called
C ll d lead
l d compensator
t

Ideal Derivative Compensation (PD)

Transient response of a system can be selected by choosing an

appropriate closed-loop pole location on the s-plane.

If this point is on the root locus, then a simple gain adjustment is
done to meet the transient response specification.
If the closed-loop pole location is not on the root locus, then the
root locus must be reshaped so that the compensated root locus
through the selected closed-loop pole location.
Poles and zeros can be added in the forward path to produce a new
root locus goes through the design point on the s-plane.
One way is to add a single zero to the forward path.

Ideal Derivative Compensation (PD)

Zero can be represented by a compensator whose transfer function

is

G c ( s ) = s + zc

This function,, the sum of a differentiator and a ppure ggain,, is called

an ideal derivative or PD controller

Choice
Ch i off the
h position
i i off the
h compensator zero can quicken
i k the
h
response over the uncompensated system.
Transient response can be obtained by augmenting the systems
poles and zeros with an ideal derivative compensator.

Uncompensated
p
System
y

Compensated System
add Zero@ s = - 2
TS =

4
= 1.33
1 33 s
3

Tp = =
= 0.46
0 46 s
6.874

Compensated System
add Zero@ s = - 3
TS =

4
= 1.64 s
2.437

Tp = =
= 0.56 s
5.583

Compensated System
add Zero@ s = - 4
4

4
TS = =
= 2.14 s
1.869

Tp = =
= 0.73 s
4.282

Ideal Derivative Compensation (PD)

Each
E h off the
h compensated
d cases h
had
dd
dominant
i
poles
l with
ih

the same damping ratio as the uncompensated case.

%OS will be the same for each case
Compensated dominant close-loop poles have more
negative real parts that the uncompensated dominant
close-loop pole. TS will be shorter
Imaginary
g
yp
parts of the compensated
p
systems
y
are larger.
g
TP will be smaller
As the zero is placed farther from the dominant poles,
compensated dominant poles move closer to the origin and
to the uncompensated dominant closed-loop poles.
An added benefit is the improvement in the SSE, even
though lag compensation was not use.

Ideal Derivative Compensation (PD)

Ideal Derivative Compensation (PD)

Designing ideal derivative compensation to meet

transient response specification.

Evaluate the sum of angle from the open-loop poles and

zeros to a design point that is the closed-loop pole that

yields
ields the desired transient response
response.
The difference between 180o and the calculate angle
must be the angular contribution of the compensator
zero.
Trigonometry is then used to locate the position of the
zero to yield the required difference in angle.

Ex: Ideal derivative compensator design

Problem: Given the system of Figure, design an ideal

derivative compensator
p
to yyield a 16% overshoot,, with a
threefold reduction in settling time.

Uncompensated
p
System
y
%OS = 16% = 0.504
= cos 1 ( 0.504 ) = 59.74D
4

4
Ts =
= =
= 3.320
n 1.205
1 205

Third pole@ K =43.35

=43 35
59.74D

Compensated System
Threefold reduction in TS

33.320
320
Ts =
= 1.107 s
3

real part of the compensated systems

system s dominant pole
Ts =

4
4
=
= 3.613
3 613
Ts 1.107

59.74D

3.613

imaginary part of the compensated systems dominant pole

d = 3.613 tan ( 59.74D ) = 6.193

design point -3.613 j6.193

Compensated System

Sum of angle @desired point

1 6.193 1 6.193

1 6.193
D
1 2 3 = 180 tan
tan
= 275.6
tan
3.613

( 4 3.613)
( 6 3.613)

Angular contribution required from the compensator zero

for the test point to be on the root locus:
275.6D + 4 = 180D

4 = 275.6D + 180D = 95.6D

Compensated
p
System
y
The geometry:
6.193
= tan ( 84.4D )
3.613

= 3.006
3 006

Compensated System

K ( s + 3)
G=
s ( s + 4 )( s + 6 )
K ( s + 3 ) / s ( s + 4 )( s + 6 )
G
TF =
=
1 + GH 1 + K ( s + 3 ) / s ( s + 4 )( s + 6 )

TF =

K ( s + 3)
K ( s + 3)
=
s ( s + 4 )( s + 6 ) + K ( s + 3 ) s ( s 2 + 10 s + 24 ) + K ( s + 3 )

K ( s + 3)
K ( s + 3)
TF = 3
= 3
2
s + 10 s + 24 s + Ks + 3K s + 10 s 2 + ( 24 + K ) s + 3K

from

s 3 + 10 s 2 + ( 24 + K ) s + 3K = 0
s 3 10 s 2 24 s
K=
s+3

@ s = -3.613 + j 6.193 we get: K = 47.45

All pole
poless location @ K = 47.45
47 45 :
s + 10 s + ( 24 + ( 47.45 ) ) s + 3 ( 47.45 ) = 0 s = 3.613 j 6.193, 2.77
3

Compensated System

The second-order
approximate for the
compensated system
my be invalid.

Third pole@ K =47.45

%OS

TR,new

TS,new
TR,old

TS,old

Ideal Derivative Compensation (PD)

How do we implement the ideal derivative
derivative, or PD

controller?
GC(s)

K
GC ( s ) = K 2 s + K1 = K 2 s + 1
K2

K1/K2 is chosen to equal the negative of the compensator zero,

and K2 is chosen to contribute to the required loop-gain value.

Ideal Derivative Compensation (PD)

Drawbacks:
o It requires
q
an active circuit to p
perform the

differentiation.
o Differentiation is a noisy process, the level of the noise is
low, but the frequency of the noise is high compared to
the signal.
Overcome the disadvantages:
o The lead compensator is a passive network is used to
overcome these
th
d
drawbacks.
b k

Lead Compensation
Lead compensation
A single zero cannot be produced
A compensator zero and pole are used
If the pole is farther from the imaginary axis than the

zero, the angular distribution of the compensator is still

positive and thus approximates an equivalent single
zero.
zero
Net angular contribution is positive as for a single PC
controller zero

Lead Compensation
Advantages
Ad
off a passive
i lead
l d networkk over an active
i PD

controller
No additional power supplies are required
Noise due to differentiation is reduced

Disadvantage of a passive lead network

Additional pole does not reduce the number of branches of the

root locus that cross the imaginary axis into the right halfplane, while the additional of the single zero of the PD
controller tends to reduce the ones.

Lead Compensation
Angular contribution required of the compensator

angular contribution @ desired pole location:

2 1 3 4 + 5 = ( 2k + 1)180D
( ) = angular contribution of the lead compensator
2

Lead Compensation
We realize that an infinite number of lead compensators

could be used to meet the transient response requirement.

requirement

Ex: Lead Compensator Design

Problem: Design three lead compensator for the system of Figure
that will reduced the settling time by a factor of 2 while
maintaining 30% overshoot. Compare the system characteristics
between the three designs.

Uncompensated System:
Damping ratio line:
=
=

ln ( %OS / 100 )

2 + ln 2 ( %OS / 100 )
ln ( 30 / 100 )

+ ln ( 30 / 100 )
2

= 0.358
0 358

: = cos 1 0.358 = 69.02D

Settling time:
4
4
Ts =
= =

4
= 3.972
1.007

Compensated System:
Find the design point:
A twofold reduction in Ts :
Ts =

3.972
= 1.986 s
2

Real part of the desired pole location:

- =

4
n = = 2.014
Ts

Imaginary part of the desired pole location:

d = 2.014
.0 tan
ta (110.98
0.98D ) = 5.
5.252
5

Compensated System:

Arbitrarily assume a
compensator zero at -5 on the
real axis as a possible solution:

Compensated System:
Angular distribution @desired point:

5.252
5.252
5.252
1
1
tan
tan
1 2 + 3 4 = 180D tan 1

2 014
2 014
2 014
2.014
4 2.014
5 2.014

5.252
D
172.69
tan 1
=

6 2.014

Angular distribution required from the

compensator pole in order to place the
design point on the root locus:

172.69D 5 = 180D

5 = 172.69D 180D = 352.69D = 7.31D

5
Pc

Compensated System:

5.252
= tan 77.31
31D
pc 2.014

pc = 42.96

K ( s + 5)
G (s) =
s ( s + 4 )( s + 6 )( s + 42.96 )
G (s)
K ( s + 5 ) / s ( s + 4 )( s + 6 )( s + 42.96 )
=
TF =
1 + G ( s ) H ( s ) 1 + K ( s + 5 ) / s ( s + 4 )( s + 6 )( s + 42.96 )
TF =

K ( s + 5)
K ( s + 5)
= 4
s ( s + 4 )( s + 6 )( s + 42.96 ) + K ( s + 5 ) s + 52.96 s 3 + 453.6 s 2 + (1031.04 + K ) s + 5 K

from

s 4 + 52.96 s 3 + 453.6 s 2 + (1031.04 + K ) s + 5 K = 0

s 4 52.96 s 3 453.6 s 2 1031.04 s
K=
s+5

@s = -2.014 + j5.252 we get:

K = 1423

all poles location @K = 1423 :

s 4 + 52.96 s 3 + 453.6 s 2 + (1031.04 + 1423 ) s + 5 (1423 ) = 0

s = 2.014 j 5.252, 43.8, 5.134

Compensated System:

a: ZC @ -5
b: ZC @ -44
c: ZC @ -2

Improving SSE and transient response

To obtain improvement in SSE and transient response

independently.
o 1.
1 First improve the transient response and then
improve the SSE
9 decrease in speed of the response when the SSE is improved

o 2. First improve the SSE and then improve the transient

response
9 Improvement in transient response yields deterioration in the

improvement of the SSE which was designed first

9 The system can be overdesigned with respect to SSE
SSE.

In this class we first design for transient response and then

design for SSE

Improving SSE and transient response

The design can be either active or passive compensators
o 1.
1 Design an active PD controller followed by an active

PI controller
9 ca
called
ed a
ap
proportional-plus-integral-plus-derivative
opo t o a p us teg a p us de vat ve
(PID) controller
o 2. Design
g ap
passive lead compensator
p
and then design
g a
passive lag compensator
9 Called lag-lead compensator

PID Controller Design

PID Controller

2 K1
K2
K3 s +
s+

2
K3
K3
K1s + K 2 + K 3 s
K2

Gc ( s ) = K1 +
+ K3s =
=
s
s
s

PID Controller Design

The design technique consists of the following steps:
1.

2.

3.
4.
5.
6
6.
7.
8.

Evaluate the performance of the uncompensated system to

determine how much improvement in transient response is
required.
Design the PD controller to meet the transient response
specifications. The design includes the zero location and the loop
gain.
gain
Simulate the system to be sure all requirements have been meet.
Redesign if the simulation shows that requirements have not
been meet.
Design the PI controller to yield the required SSE.
Determine the gains K1, K2 and K3
Simulate the system to be sure all requirements have been meet
Redesign
g if simulation shows that requirements
q
have not been
meet.

Ex: PID Controller Design

Problem: Given the system of Figure, design PID controller so
that the system can operate with a peak time that is two-thirds
that of the uncompensated system at 20% overshoot and with zero
y
error for a unit step.
p
steady-state

Step 1: evaluate uncompensated system from root locus

%OS = 20%

=
=

ln
l ( %OS / 100 )

2 + ln 2 ( %OS / 100 )
ln ( 20 / 100 )

2 + ln 2 ( 20 / 100 )

= 0.456
0 456

= cos 1 0.456 = 62.87D

Ts =

Tp =

4
= 0.739 s
5.415

=
= 0.297 s
10.57
d

Step 2: Design PD controller

Reduce Tp to 2/3 of that of uncompensated system Tp = ( 2 / 3) 0.297 s

location of compensated system dominant pole

imaginary part:
real part:

d =

Tp

( 2 / 3)( 0.297 )

d
tan117.13

= 15.87

= 8.13

Angular distribution @ desired point =

Location of compensator zero:

198.37D

198.37
198 37D + = 180D

therefore

= 198.37D + 180D = 378.37D = 18.37D

15.87
zc = 55.92
55 92
= tan18.37D
zc 8.13
G PD ( s ) = ( s + 55.92 )

Step 2: Design PC controller

root locus of PD compensated system

Step 3 & 4: Simulate the PD-compensated system

OK

Stepp 5: Design
g PI controller
ideal integral compensator zero will work, as long as the zero

is placed close to the origin. Choosing the zero location @ - 0.5

s + 0.5
G PI ( s ) =
s

Sketch the root locus for the PIC-compensated system

Step 5: Design PI controller

 Stepp 6: Find K1 K2 and K3

2 K1
K2
K
s
s
+
+

3
K3
K3
K1s + K 2 + K 3 s 2
K2

+ K3s =
=
Gc ( s ) = K1 +
s
s
s

G PD ( s ) = ( s + 55.92 )

s + 0.5
G PI ( s ) =
s

2
K ( s + 55.92
55 92 )( s + 0.5
0 5 ) 4.6
4 6 ( s + 55.92
55 92 )( s + 0.5
0 5 ) 4.6 ( s + 56.42 s + 27.96 )
G PID ( s ) =
=
=
s
s
s

K1 = 259.5
259 5

K 2 = 128.6
128 6

K 3 = 4.6
46

Step 7 & 8: Simulate the PID-compensated system

OK

Lag-lead
Lag
lead Compensator Design
The following
g steps
p summarize the design
g p
procedure:
1. Evaluate the performance of the uncompensated system to

2.

3.
4
4.
5.
6.
7
7.
8.

determine how much improvement in transient response is

required.
required
Design the lead compensator to meet the transient response
specifications. The design includes the zero location, pole location,
and the loop gain.
Simulate the system to be sure all requirements have been met.
Redesign if the simulation shows that requirements have not been
meet.
Evaluate the SSE performance for the lead-compensated system to
determine how much more improvement in SSE is required.
Design the lag compensator to yield the require SSE.
Simulate the system to be sure all requirements have been met
met.
Redesign if the simulation shows that requirements have not been
met.

Lag-lead
Lag
lead Compensator Design
Problem: Design a lag-lead compensator for the system of Figure
so that the system will operate with 20% overshoot and a twofold
reduction in settling time. Further, the compensated system will
exhibit a tenfold improvement in steady-state error for a ramp
input.

Step1: Evaluate the performance of the uncompensated system

%OS = 20%

= 0.456

4
Ts =
= 2.23
2 23 s
1.794

= cos 1 0.456 = 62.87D

Step2: Design the lead compensator

2.23
A twofold reduction in settling time: Ts = 2 = 1.11 s
R l partt off the
Real
th dominant
d i t pole:
l d = 4 /1.11
/
= 3.588

Imaginary part the dominant pole:

d = d tan117.13D = 3.588 tan117.13D = 7.003

Angular
g distribution @
@desired ppole = 164.65D
Compensator pole location:
choose zero @ s = - 6
164.65D = 180D
- coincident with the open-loop
p
p ppole at -6
= 164.65D 180D = 15.35D
- leave the lead-compensated system with
7.003
three ppoles
t 15 35D
p 3.588 = tan15.35
c

pc = 29.1

Step2: Design the lead compensator

Step3 & 4 : Simulate the lead-compensated system

Step 5 : Evaluate the SSE performance for the lead-

compensated
p
system.
y
open loop uncompensated system TF (@K=192.1)
192.1
G (s) =
s ( s + 6 )( s + 10 )

K v = 3.201

open loop lead compensated system TF (@K=1977)

1977
G LC ( s ) =
s ( s + 10 )( s + 29.1)

K v = 6.794

lead
l d compensation
i has
h improved
i
d the
h SSE bby a ffactor: 6.794 / 3.201 = 2.122
lag compensation has improved the SSE by a factor: 10 / 2.122 = 4.713

Step 6 : Design the lag compensator

Choose the lag compensator pole at - 0.01,

0 01 which then places
the lag compensator zero at -0.04713
s + 0.04713)
(
G lag ( s ) =
( s + 0.01)

lag-lead compensated systems

system s open loop TF
K ( s + 0.04713)
G LLC ( s ) =
s ( s + 10 )( s + 29.1)( s + 0.01)

Improving SSE and transient response

Step 6 :

Step
S 6 : Design the lag compensator

Step 7 : Simulate the lead-lag

lead lag compensated system

Lead-compensated

Lead-lag compensated

Physical Realization Of Compensation

Active-circuit
Acti e circ it reali
realization
ation

Vo ( s )
Z2 ( s )
=
Vi ( s )
Z1 ( s )

Physical Realization Of Compensation

Lag-lead compensator implemented with operational amplifier

Ex: Implementing a PID controller

Problem: Implement the PID controller of Example
E ample 9.5
95
TF of PID controller is
Gc ( s )

Can be put in form

s + 55.92 )( s + 0.5 )
(
=
s

27.96
G c ( s ) = s + 56.42
56 42 +
s

R2 C1
+
= 56.42
56 42
R1 C2
R2C1 = 1

1
= 27.96
R1C2

 There are four unknowns and three equations

Select a practical value for one of the elements.
Select C2 = 0.1 F
The remaining values are R1 = 357.65 k
R2 = 178,891 k
C1 = 5.59 F

Physical Realization Of Compensation

Passive-circuit realization

Lag-lead compensator with isolation

Lag-lead TF:

1
1
s
+
s
+

T
T
1
2
Gc ( s ) =

s
+
s
+

T
T

1
2

Ex: Realizing a lead compensator

Problem: Realize
R li th
the lleadd compensator
t ddesigned
i d iin EEx.9.4
94
(compensator b)
TF of lead compensator

s+4
Gc ( s ) =
s + 20.09

1
=4
R1C
1
1
+
= 20.09
R1C R2C

R1C = 0.25
R2C = 0.0622
0 0622

C = 1 F
R1 = 250 k
R2 = 62.2 k