Control System Design - Theory

Download as pdf or txt
Download as pdf or txt
You are on page 1of 69

CONTROL SYSTEM DESIGN

ME4006
ZZZZ
Mathematical Modeling of Physical Systems
Example:
Mathematical Modeling of Physical Systems
Example: Mechanical Systems
Mathematical Modeling of Physical Systems
Example: Mechanical Systems
Mathematical Modeling of Physical Systems
Example: Mechanical Systems
Mathematical Modeling of Physical Systems
Example: Mechanical Systems
Mathematical Modeling of Physical Systems
ANALYSIS
Mathematical Modeling of Physical Systems
HOME WORK
Mathematical Modeling of Physical Systems
HOME WORK

Motor torque is directly proportional to current flowing in


its armature

Back emf of the motor eb is proportional to the speed of


The torque can be written as
the motor
Torsional spring element is ignored because the
motor shaft is assumed rigid and there is no
difference in the angular displacement between
the ends of the shaft
Applying Kirchhoff’s
voltage law to the motor
circuit
Block Diagrams of Control Systems
Block Diagrams of Control Systems
Block Diagrams of
Control Systems
Block Diagrams of Control Systems
Z
Block Diagrams of Control Systems
Block Diagrams of
Control Systems
Block Diagrams of
Control Systems
HOMEWORK
SIGNAL FLOW
GRAPHS
SIGNAL FLOW GRAPHS
SIGNAL FLOW GRAPHS
Forward paths: 02
EXAMPLE
SIGNAL FLOW GRAPHS
LOOP PATHS: 03
SIGNAL FLOW GRAPHS
APPLY MASON’s GAIN FORMULA
HOMEWORK
TIME RESPONE ANALYSIS
TIME RESPONE ANALYSIS
STANDARD TEST SIGNALS

RAMP SIGNAL
STEP SIGNAL
TIME RESPONE ANALYSIS
STANDARD TEST SIGNALS

IMPULSE SIGNAL

PARABOLIC SIGNAL
PRACTISE 1
PRACTISE 2
TIME RESPONSE
SPECIFICATIONS
TIME RESPONSE SPECIFICATIONS
TIME RESPONSE SPECIFICATIONS
TIME RESPONSE SPECIFICATIONS
PERFORMING ERROR ANALYSIS
PERFORMING ERROR ANALYSIS

The steady state error is the difference between the


desired output (input) and the actual output of the system
during steady state (as time approaches infinity)
PERFORMING ERROR ANALYSIS
PERFORMING ERROR ANALYSIS
PERFORMING ERROR ANALYSIS

when the type of the system is increased for a specific


input, the steady state error reduces. This is an important
observation to be made
THE CONCEPT OF STABILITY
THE CONCEPT OF STABILITY

This is commonly called as BIBO


Stability meaning – Bounded Input
Bounded Output Stability
THE CONCEPT OF STABILITY
EXAMPLES 1: poles on the negative real axis

the response approaches zero and the system is stable


THE CONCEPT OF STABILITY
EXAMPLES 2: Poles on positive real axis

The response increases exponentially, and this


means that the system doesn’t settle, and it is
marked as unstable
THE CONCEPT OF STABILITY
EXAMPLES 3: Poles at origin

• If the response slightly decreases with time, then


it eventually settles at zero and the system can be
called stable
• If the response slightly increases with time, the
response increases to infinity eventually and the
system is marked unstable
THE CONCEPT OF STABILITY
EXAMPLES 4: two poles at origin

the response increases without bound and hence the


system is marked unstable
THE CONCEPT OF STABILITY
EXAMPLES 5: Complex pole in the left half of
s-plane

As the response approaches 0 as time increases, the


system is stable
THE CONCEPT OF STABILITY
EXAMPLES 6: Complex poles in the right
half of the s-plane

the oscillation of the response keeps growing in


amplitude and hence the system response becomes
unbound and unstable
THE CONCEPT OF STABILITY
EXAMPLES 7: Poles on the imaginary axis

The condition where in the response is a sustained


oscillation, lies in between being stable and unstable
THE CONCEPT OF STABILITY
SUMMARIZE
Routh-Hurwitz Criterion for Stability
For any system, just find the location of the poles by solving the denominator polynomial (also called the
characteristic equation) of the transfer function and then if all poles lie in the left half of the s-plane, you
call that system stable. Now, you can probably solve a quadratic equation easily. You may also be able to
solve a cubic equation with some difficulty. But, as the order of the characteristic equation increases, it
gets hard for us to solve and find the location of the poles. Hence, the RH Criterion is where we can
determine the stability without solving for the poles

Before going any further, let’s discuss a few points.


Consider a system with characteristic equation,

For a system to be stable, i.e., to ensure that all the poles lie in the left side of the s-plane, it is necessary
that:
1. All the coefficients of the equation q(s) should have the same sign,
The main reason why we get a coefficient of a different sign is because of having a pole in the right
half plane. Try it out!
2. There should be no missing term. This means that there should not be any coefficient with zero value
between the highest power of s and lowest power of s in the equation q(s).
Routh-Hurwitz Criterion for Stability
Generate a Routh Array
Routh-Hurwitz Criterion for Stability
Generate a Routh Array
Routh-Hurwitz Criterion for Stability
EXAMPLE 1

EXAMPLE 2
Routh-Hurwitz Criterion for Stability
HOMEWORK
Routh-Hurwitz Criterion for Stability
Special cases of Routh Hurwitz Criterion

if the first element of any row in a Routh array becomes


zero, then the zero is replaced by a small positive number
which is usually represented by ϵ (pronounced as epsilon)
Routh-Hurwitz Criterion for Stability
Special cases of Routh Hurwitz Criterion

take the polynomial formed by the row above the row of


zeros (this polynomial is known as an auxiliary
polynomial) and then differentiate with respect to s. The
row of zeros is then replaced by the coefficients of the
polynomial obtained after differentiation
Routh-Hurwitz Criterion for Stability
HOMEWORK

K=? for stable


ROOT LOCUS PLOT
EXAMPLE TO UNDERSTAND Let’s vary K from 1 to 10000

the locus of the migration of the roots of the


characteristic equation in the s-plane is called root locus
ROOT LOCUS PLOT
EVANS CONDITION: Consider a generally closed-
loop system
ROOT LOCUS PLOT
EVANS CONDITION: Consider a generally closed-
loop system
ROOT LOCUS PLOT
EXAMPLE
ROOT LOCUS PLOT Zero at s = -3

Zero at s = -1.5

Now the question is - what does this compensator do? It just


adds a zero or a pole or both to the existing open-loop system
and this addition will help us tweak the root locus and make the
system respond closer to the desired response Zero at s = -0.5

Move the zero from s = -3 to s = -1.5 and to s = -0.5, the


root locus further moved away from the imaginary axis at
zero
By using this effect of the addition of zeros and poles on the root
locus, we can shape that root locus of a system as we desire
CONTROLLER AND/OR COMPENSATOR

EXAMPLE:
CONTROLLER AND/OR COMPENSATOR
We term such poles as the dominant poles. We then approximate the system by ignoring poles other
than the dominant ones and using the same time response specifications as seen previously. The pole
zero distribution in the s-plane below shows an example of a higher order system and its dominant poles
CONTROLLER AND/OR COMPENSATOR
Analyses systems which have an added zero or a pole along with its dominant poles
CONTROLLER AND/OR COMPENSATOR

Taken the values of a = 0.5, 1, and


10 and simulated it
CONTROLLER AND/OR COMPENSATOR

Taken the values of a = 0.5, 1, and


10 and simulated it
CONTROLLER AND/OR COMPENSATOR
Effect of addition of a pole in the left half of s plane:
Now, let’s add a pole at s = -a.

Taken the values of a = 0.5, 1, and


10 and simulated it
CONTROLLER AND/OR COMPENSATOR
So, what do we infer from all these additions of a zero or a pole at various locations?
1. As the value of "a" increases i.e., as the zero of the pole moves away from the imaginary axis, its effect on the response
keeps on decreasing. In this analysis, you can see that with a = 0.5, the response is the most affected and with a = 10, the
system is least affected.
2. We can also infer that the analysis of systems of higher order becomes easier with the dominant pole concept. The
dominant poles mostly exist in conjugate pairs and often, the higher order systems are made that way. To consider a pair
of poles as dominant, a general rule that is followed is that the real part of the other poles of the system should be more
than five times the real part of the dominant pole pair.
3. By adding a zero or a pole, we can alter the system's response to make it the desired one. For example, if we need to
make the response faster, observing the plots, we can tell that adding a zero in the left half of the s-plane would work.
Similarly, if we must slow down the system, we can do that by adding a zero in the right half of the s-plane or by adding a
pole in the left half of the s-plane, but in the former – we can see an undershoot as seen in the plots. In this way, seeing
the requirements, we can add a pole or a zero to the system and tweak its response.

We also had the impact on stability by the addition of a pole or a zero with the help of the root-locus plot.
With this, we can tell that the addition of a pole or a zero has the ability to tweak the system response and as well as to
impact the system stability making it the basis of controller design in control systems

You might also like