1

Root Locus Design Example #4

A. Introduction The plant model represents a linearization of the heading dynamics of a 250,000 ton tanker ship under empty load conditions. The reference input signal R(s) is the desired heading angle for the ship ref (s), and the output signal Y (s) is the actual heading (yaw) angle (s). In this example, angles will be expressed in degrees. The input to the plant, U (s), is the commanded rudder angle rcom (s) that is used to control the heading of the ship. The transfer function for the system is Gp (s) = 3.2587 104 (s + 2.551 102 ) (s) Y (s) = = 2 ) (s + 6.8624 103 ) U(s) s (s + 0.3333) (s + 5.3288 10 rcom (s) (1)

The gain 3.2587 104 , the poles at s = 5.3288 102 and s = 6.8624 103 , and the zero at s = 2.551 102 describe the dynamics of the system between the actual rudder angle and the rate of change in heading angle. The pole at s = 0 provides the integration from the rate of change in heading angle to the heading angle itself. The pole at s = 0.3333 models the hydraulic actuator dynamics between the commanded rudder angle rcom (s) and the actual rudder angle r (s). The negative sign associated with the gain indicates that a negative rudder angle produces a positive rate of change in heading angle. This is from the usual convention of how a coordinate system is xed to the ship, a step that is analogous to assigning directions of positive current ow within an electrical circuit. Because of this sign convention used in ship steering, the sign of the compensator gain must also be negative, meaning that a positive heading angle error produces a negative rudder angle. The performance specications that are imposed on the system are: Percent overshoot to a step input must satisfy P O 20%; Settling time for a step input must satisfy Ts 200 seconds; Steady-state error in the closed-loop ramp response must not exceed 2 degrees. B. Evaluating Gp (s) Relative to the Specications The rst step in determining what type of compensation is needed is to evaluate the plant model relative to the specications. Since the specications are given in terms of percent overshoot and settling time, root locus will be the design method. Therefore, the desired location of the dominant closed-loop pole s = s1 must be determined. Since the plant is not second-order, it is not reasonable to assume that the second-order system equations will be valid, so a conservative approach will be used. The values used for percent overshoot and settling time will be P Ospec = 4%, Tsdesign = 0.75 Tsspec = 150 sec (2) 5 Using these design values and the equations for second-order systems, the dominant closed-loop pole is calculated to be P Odesign = h i P Odesign Ln 100 = r h i2 = 0.7156 P Odesign 2 + Ln 100 4 s1 = 1 + j tan cos1 () = 2.6667 102 + j2.6026 102 Tsdesign

(3)

(4)

Figure 1 shows the root locus and step response plots for the uncompensated system Kc0 Gp (s) with Kc0 = 1. This gain of 1 is included with the plant at this point so that the positive root locus methods (K > 0) can be used. The actual gains of the nal compensator and the plant will be negative. Kc0 is only used in the evaluation of the uncompensated system. Unity feedback is assumed, so H(s) = 1. The upper right plot in Fig. 1 clearly shows that the root locus does not go through the point s1 , and the step response plot clearly shows that the overshoot and settling time specications are not satised. Therefore, some form of compensation is needed. The angle of the plant and compensator at s1 must be computed. 2.6026 102 0 2.6026 102 0 1 Kc0 Gp (s1 ) = tan tan (5) 2.6667 102 2.551 102 2.6667 102 0 2.6026 102 0 2.6026 102 0 1 1 tan tan 2.6667 102 0.3333 2.6667 102 5.3288 102 2.6026 102 0 1 tan 2.6667 102 6.8624 103 = 92.545 135.70 4.8515 44.353 127.27 = 219.62 140.38
1

Gc (s1 ) = 180 Kc0 Gp (s1 ) = 39.62

(6)

Since the required phase shift of the compensator at s1 is positive, the compensator will be phase lead. C. Compensator Designs 1) Overview: The compensator design technique discussed in the text1 which calculates both the pole and zero angles at s1 will be used. This requires computing the phase angle of the point s1 , which is 2 0 1 2.6026 10 = 135.70 (7) s1 = tan 2.6667 102 0

The lead compensator will be designed using this method. Once that design is completedwhich hopefully will result in the transient performance specications being satisedthe steady-state error of the plant/compensator combination will be checked. If the error is too large, then a special lag compensator will be designed to satisfy that specication. If the transient performance specications are not satised by the lead compensator, several options exist to try and correct the problem. Some of these are shown below.

Choose another value for s1 , using either more conservative or less conservative choices for percent overshoot and settling time. Choose different locations for the compensator zero and pole. Recongure the original design into the Proportional+Derivative with Derivative on Output Only (PD-DOO) version.

Only the last option, the PD-DOO conguration, will be used in this example. In general, any or all of these options can be used together to try and obtain a compensator design that satises all specications.
1

K. Ogata, Modern Control Engineering, 4th Edition, Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ, 2002.

Uncompensated Root Locus 0.6 0.4 0.05 0.2 Imag Axis 0 0.2 0.05 0.4 0.6 0.1 0.1 Imag Axis 0 s 0.1

Zoomed View

0.5

0 Real Axis

0.5

0.05

0 Real Axis

0.05

0.1

Uncompensated Step Response 1.5

Heading Angle (deg)

0.5

PO = 43.8%, T = 450.8 sec

s

50

100

150

200

250 Time (s)

300

350

400

450

500

Fig. 1.

Root locus and step response for the uncompensated system.

2) Design of the Lead Compensator: Using the method in the text, the phase angles from the compensator zero and pole to the point s1 are computed rst, then the distances from the projection of s1 on the real axis to the zero and pole locations are computed. The angles are (s1 + zcd ) = (s1 + pcd ) = 135.70 + 39.62 s1 + Gc (s1 ) = = 87.66 2 2 (8)

135.70 39.62 s1 Gc (s1 ) = = 48.04 (9) 2 2 Note that (s1 + zcd ) (s1 + pcd ) = 39.62 = Gc (s1 ) as required. The distances from s1 to the zero and pole are dzcd = dpcd = 2.6026 102 Im [s1 ] = = 1.0635 103 /180) tan ( (s1 + zcd )) tan (87.66 (10)

2.6026 102 Im [s1 ] = = 2.3405 102 (11) tan ( (s1 + pcd )) tan (48.04 /180) Since both of these distances are positive, both the pole and zero of the lead compensator are to the left of s1 . The zero is located at s = 2.773 102 , and the pole is located at s = 5.0071 102 . At this point in the design, the lead compensator is Kc (s + 2.773 102 ) GcLead (s) = (12) (s + 5.0071 102 ) Now that the lead compensators pole and zero have been placed to satisfy the root locus phase angle criterion, the gain must be computed to satisfy the magnitude criterion at s1 . The gain is |Kc | = |s1 + 5.0071 102 | |s1 | |s1 + 0.3333| |s1 + 5.3288 102 | |s1 + 6.8624 103 | |s1 + 2.773 102 | |3.2587 104 | |s1 + 2.551 102 | |Kc | = 2.2099 Kc = 2.2099 (13)

Note that the sign on the gain is negative. The forward path transfer function is now GcLead (s)Gp (s) = 7.2015 104 (s + 2.551 102 ) (s + 2.773 102 ) s (s + 0.3333) (s + 5.3288 102 ) (s + 5.0071 102 ) (s + 6.8624 103 ) (14)

D. Evaluation of the Design The design will be evaluated by examining the step response of the lead-compensated system. The total forward transfer function is given in (14). The root locus and step response plots are shown in Fig. 2. The root locus plot shows that the point s1 is on the root locus as it should be. The closed-loop poles are located at s = 2.6667 102 j2.6026 102 , s = 2.4707 102 j2.1592 102 , and s = 0.34077. The step response plot shows that neither of the transient performance specications has been satised. The overshoot of approximately 30% is not acceptable, and the settling time of 230 seconds is too long. The various options that may be used to try and correct this problem were mentioned earlier. The only option that will be described in this example is the Proportional+Derivative (PD) form of the compensator with the Derivative on Output Only (PD-DOO) conguration. The steady-state error of this system for a ramp input is ess = 1 1 = 11.98 = Kv lims0 [s GcLead (s)Gp (s)] (15)

so a special lag compensator would be needed in order to satisfy that specication. However, before that is done, the transient response specications need to be satised. There is no point in designing the special lag compensator until the transient performance is satisfactory. E. PD Compensator with Derivative on Output Only The gains and time constant of the Proportional+Derivative (PD) controller are zcd 1 , Kp = |Kc | , Kd = (|Kc | Kp ) (16) pcd pcd and the values are = 19.971 sec, Kp = 1.2239, and Kd = 19.693, so if the PD compensator was to be placed in series with the plant it would be 19.693s (17) GcP D (s) = 1.2239 + 19.971s + 1 =

where the negative sign in GcP D (s) is required since the controller gain is negative. The PD-DOO conguration is [Gp (s)]

(18) Kd s 1 + [Gp (s)] s + 1 4 3.988 10 (s + 5.007 102 ) (s + 2.551 102 ) = s (s + 3.37 101 ) (s + 1.482 102 ) (s + 4.584 102 j2.761 102 ) where the negative sign of the compensator is now included with the plant transfer function. The step response of the system with the PD-DOO conguration is shown in Fig. 3. Both the percent overshoot and the settling time satisfy the transient response specications. The steady-state error specication does have to be checked to see if a special lag compensator is needed. F. Design of the Special Lag Compensator The steady-state error for a ramp input with the PD-DOO conguration 1/ lims0 [sGDOO (s)] = 28.07 (increased from 11.98 by the change in congurations), and the specied value is 2. Therefore, the error must be reduced by a factor of g = essactual 28.07 zcg = = 14.035 = essspec 2 pcg (19)

GDOO (s) = Kp

This value for g reduces the steady-state error to the correct value by separating the special lags pole and zero by the same factor. Using the rule of thumb discussed in class, the compensator zero is placed to the right of s1 by a factor of 100, and as always pcg = zcg /g , so the special lag compensator is (s + 2.6667 104 ) (20) (s + 1.9 105 ) The step response is shown in Fig. 4. The overshoot and settling time are both very close to the values in Fig. 3, and they still satisfy the specications. Therefore, the special lag compensator did not disturb the transient response very much. The ramp response of the nal version of the compensated system is shown in Fig. 5. The graph illustrates the very long time that it might take for the ramp response to settle to essentially a constant slope. At t = 10000 seconds, the error is still larger than 3 . Even though it taking a long time to reach steady-state with the ramp response, the steady-state error does have the correct value after the special lag compensator is included. GcSpecLag (s) =

Compensated Root Locus 0.6 0.4 0.05 0.2 Imag Axis 0 0.2 0.05 0.4 0.6 0.1 0.1 Imag Axis 0 s 0.1

Zoomed View

0.5

0 Real Axis

0.5

0.05

0 Real Axis

0.05

0.1

Compensated Step Response 1.5

Heading Angle (deg)

0.5

PO = 29.6%, T = 230.0 sec

s

50

100

150

200

250 Time (s)

300

350

400

450

500

Fig. 2.

Root locus and step response for the lead-compensated system in the normal conguration.

Compensated Step Response with PDDOO Configuration 1.4

1.2

1
Heading Angle (deg)

0.8

0.6

0.4

PO = 17.6%, Ts = 186.5 sec 0.2

50

100

150

200

250 Time (s)

300

350

400

450

500

Fig. 3.

Step response for the compensated system in the PD-DOO conguration.

Compensated Step Response with PDDOO Configuration and Special Lag Compensator 1.4

1.2

1
Heading Angle (deg)

0.8

0.6

0.4

PO = 18.7%, Ts = 192.3 sec 0.2

50

100

150

200

250 Time (s)

300

350

400

450

500

Fig. 4.

Step response for the compensated system in PD-DOO conguration with special lag compensator included.

Compensated Ramp Response 10000 9000 8000 7000 6000 5000 4000 3000 2000 1000 0

Heading Angle (deg)

1000

2000

3000

4000

5000 Time (s)

6000

7000

8000

9000

10000

Zoomed View 10000 9999 9998 9997 9996 9995 9994 9993 9992 9991 9990 9990

Heading Angle (deg)

9991

9992

9993

9994

9995 Time (s)

9996

9997

9998

9999

10000

Fig. 5.

Ramp response for the compensated system in PD-DOO conguration with special lag compensator.