Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 96 views

    Pid 2

    Uploaded by

    Sanyaolu Adebodun
    The document describes the use of PID control for a spring-mass-damper system. It analyzes the system using proportional, PI, PD, and PID control through root locus analysis and step response simulations. Proportional control results in steady-state error, while PI control removes error but increases settling time. PD control decreases settling time but requires a high derivative gain. PID control removes steady-state error with reasonable transient response and settling time.

    Copyright:

    Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Pid 2

    Uploaded by

    Sanyaolu Adebodun
    96 views5 pages
    The document describes the use of PID control for a spring-mass-damper system. It analyzes the system using proportional, PI, PD, and PID control through root locus analysis and step response simulations. Proportional control results in steady-state error, while PI control removes error but increases settling time. PD control decreases settling time but requires a high derivative gain. PID control removes steady-state error with reasonable transient response and settling time.

    Original Title

    PID 2

    Copyright

    © Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)

    Available Formats

    PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    The document describes the use of PID control for a spring-mass-damper system. It analyzes the system using proportional, PI, PD, and PID control through root locus analysis and step response simulations. Proportional control results in steady-state error, while PI control removes error but increases settling time. PD control decreases settling time but requires a high derivative gain. PID control removes steady-state error with reasonable transient response and settling time.

    Copyright:

    Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf or txt
    96 views5 pages

    Pid 2

    Uploaded by

    Sanyaolu Adebodun
    The document describes the use of PID control for a spring-mass-damper system. It analyzes the system using proportional, PI, PD, and PID control through root locus analysis and step response simulations. Proportional control results in steady-state error, while PI control removes error but increases settling time. PD control decreases settling time but requires a high derivative gain. PID control removes steady-state error with reasonable transient response and settling time.

    Copyright:

    Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf or txt
    of 5

    ME 4710 Motion and Control PID Control of a Spring-Mass-Damper Position (Root Locus Analysis)

    o Fig. 1 shows a spring-mass-damper (SMD) system with a force actuator for position control. The spring has stiffness k , the damper has coefficient c , the block has mass m , and the position of the mass is measured by the variable x . o The transfer function of the SMD with the actuating force Fa as input and the position x as output is
    x
    k

    c
    Actuator

    Figure 1. Spring-Mass-Damper System with Force Actuator

    X 1 (s) = 2 Fa ms + cs + k

    (1)

    o Assuming ideal actuator and sensor responses, the closed-loop position control of the SMD can be described using the following block diagram. Here, X d represents the desired position, and Gc ( s) represents the transfer function of the controller.

    X d ( s) +

    Controller

    SMD

    Gc ( s)

    Fa

    1 2 ms + cs + k

    X ( s)

    o For the following analyses, it is assumed the SMD parameters are: m = 1 slug , c = 8.8 (lb-s/ft) , and k = 40 (lb/ft) . This represents an under-damped, second-order plant with

    n = 40 = 6.325 (rad/s) 1 (Hz)

    = 8.8 = 0.696 0.7


    2 40

    Proportional Control o For proportional control, Gc ( s ) = K , and the loop and closed-loop transfer functions are
    GH ( s ) = K s 2 + 8.8s + 40

    X K (s) = 2 Xd s + 8.8s + (40 + K )

    (2)

    o Using GH ( s ) , the RL diagram for the closed-loop system for K 0 is shown in Fig. 2. Note that as the value of K is increased, the closedloop poles move straight up/down, indicating that the natural frequency is increased and the damping ratio is decreased as K is increased. o This is a type-zero system and hence will have a finite steady-state error for a step input. Using the finalvalue theorem and the closed-loop transfer function, xss the final value of x(t ) to a unit step command is

    Figure 2. RL Diagram for Proportional Control

    K K xss = lim s 1 2 / s = 40 + K < 1 / s + 8.8s + (40 + K ) s 0


    o Eq. (3) indicates that large values of K lead to small steady-state error; however, they also lead to a faster, less damped responses. o This conclusion is verified in Fig. 3 which shows the closed-loop step responses for gains K of 100, 500, and 2000. Clearly, it is not possible to achieve low steady-state error and good transient response using only proportional control. To remove the steady-state error and have better response, integral and/or derivative terms must be included.

    (3)

    Figure 3. Step Response for Proportional Control for Various Gains


    2

    Proportional-Integral (PI) Control


    o For proportional-integral (PI) control: Gc ( s ) = K p +
    K I K p ( s + a) = s s

    (4)

    o Here, K P and K I represent the proportional and integral gains, and a = K I K P is the ratio of the integral and proportional gains. In this case, the loop and closed-loop transfer functions are
    GH ( s ) = K P (s + a) s ( s + 8.8s + 40)
    2

    X K P ( s + a) (s) = 2 Xd s ( s + 8.8s + 40) + K P ( s + a )

    (5)

    o Using integral control makes the system type-one, so the steady-state error due to a step input is zero. This can be verified using the final value theorem to show that xss = 1 when the input is a unit step function. o Fig. 4 shows the RL diagram for the closed-loop system with a = 3 . It also shows the location of the closed-loop poles for a proportional gain K P 50 . Fig. 5 shows the closed-loop step response for a = 3 and K p = 25 , 50, and 75. o Integral control has removed the steady-state error and improved the transient response, but it has also increased the system settling time.

    Figure 4. Root Locus Diagram for PI Control (a = 3)

    Figure 5. Step Response for PI Control (a = 3) for Various Proportional Gains

    Proportional-Derivative (PD) Control


    o For proportional-derivative (PD) control: Gc ( s) = K p + K D s = K D ( s + a)

    (6)

    o K P and K D represent the proportional and derivative gains, and a = K P K D is the ratio of the proportional and derivative gains. The loop and closed-loop transfer functions are X K D ( s + a) K (s + a) GH ( s ) = 2 D (7) (s) = 2 Xd ( s + 8.8s + 40) + K D ( s + a) s + 8.8s + 40 o Without integral control, this is a type-zero system, and hence will have a finite steadystate error to a unit step input. Using the final-value theorem and the closed-loop transfer function, xss the final value of x(t ) to a unit step command is
    K D ( s + a) K Da KP xss = lim s 1 2 / s / ( s + 8.8s + 40) + K ( s + a ) = 40 + K a = 40 + K < 1 s 0 D D P

    (8)

    As with proportional control, the larger the proportional gain, the smaller the steadystate error.
    o Fig. 6 shows the RL diagram for the closed-loop system with a = 10 . It also shows the location of the closed-loop poles for K D 25.6 . Fig. 7 shows the closed-loop step response for a = 10 and derivative gains of K D = 10 , 27, 50, and 75. o The PD controller has decreased the system settling time considerably; however, to control the steady-state error, the derivative gain K D must be high. This decreases the response times of the system and can make it susceptible to noise.

    Figure 6. Root Locus Diagram for PD Control ( a = 10)

    Figure 7. Step Response for PD Control ( a = 10) for Various Derivative Gains
    4

    Proportional-Integral-Derivative Control
    o For proportional-integral-derivative (PID) control:

    KI K D ( s 2 + as + b) Gc ( s ) = K p + + KDs = s s

    (9)

    o K P , K I , and K D represent the proportional, integral, and derivative gains, a = K P K D is the ratio of the proportional and derivative gains, and b = K I K D is the ratio of the integral and derivative gains. In this case, the loop and closed-loop transfer functions are

    K D ( s 2 + as + b) GH ( s ) = s ( s 2 + 8.8s + 40)

    X K D ( s 2 + as + b) ( s) = 2 Xd s ( s + 8.8s + 40) + K D ( s 2 + as + b)

    (10)

    o Again, with integral control, the system is type-one and has zero steady-state error for a step input. o Fig. 8 shows the RL diagram of the closed-loop system for a = 15 and b = 50 . The location of the closed-loop poles for K D 15.8 is also shown. o Fig. 9 shows the step response of the closed-loop system for a = 15 , b = 50 , and various derivative gains. o The PID controller has removed steady-state error and decreased system settling times while maintaining a reasonable transient response.

    Figure 8. Root Locus Diagram for PID Control (a = 15, b = 50)

    Figure 9. Step Response for PID Control ( a = 15) (b = 50) for Various Derivative Gains

    You might also like