Control Systems (CS)

Chapter-8
Lead Compensation

1
 Lecture Outline

• Introduction to Lead Compensation

• Electronic Lead Compensator
• Electrical Lead Compensator
• Mechanical Lead Compensator

2
 Lead Compensation
• Lead Compensation essentially yields an appreciable
improvement in transient response and a small change in
steady state accuracy.

• There are many ways to realize lead compensators and

lag compensators, such as electronic networks using
operational amplifiers, electrical RC networks, and
mechanical spring-dashpot systems.

3
 Lead Compensation
• Generally Lead compensators are represented by
following transfer function

, ()

• or

, ()

4
 Lead Compensation

, ()
Pole-Zero Map
Bode Diagram
1
0

Magnitude (dB)
-5

0.5 -10
Imaginary Axis

-15

0 -20
60
Phase (deg)

-0.5
30

-1 0
-10 -8 -6 -4 -2 0 10
-2 -1
10 10
0
10
1 2
10
3
10
Real Axis Frequency (rad/sec)

5
 Electronic Lead Compensator
• Following figure shows an electronic lead compensator using
operational amplifiers.

𝐸 𝑜 ( 𝑠) 𝑅 2 𝑅 4 𝑅 1 𝐶 1 𝑠 +1
=
𝐸 𝑖 (𝑠) 𝑅1 𝑅3 𝑅 2 𝐶 2 𝑠 +1
6
 Electronic Lead Compensator
𝐸 𝑜 ( 𝑠) 𝑅 2 𝑅 4 𝑅 1 𝐶 1 𝑠 +1
=
𝐸 𝑖 (𝑠) 𝑅1 𝑅3 𝑅 2 𝐶 2 𝑠 +1
• This can be represented as
1
𝑠+
𝐸 𝑜 ( 𝑠) 𝑅 4 𝐶1 𝑅 1 𝐶1
=
𝐸 𝑖 (𝑠) 𝑅3 𝐶 2 1
• Where, 𝑠+
𝑅 2 𝐶2
𝑅4 𝐶1
𝑇 =𝑅1 𝐶 1 𝑎𝑇 =𝑅2 𝐶 2 𝐾 𝑐=
𝑅3 𝐶 2
• Then, , ()

𝑅1 𝐶 1 > 𝑅2 𝐶 2 7
 Electronic Lead Compensator
• Pole-zero Configuration of
Lead Compensator

𝑅 1 𝐶 1 > 𝑅2 𝐶 2

8
 Lead Compensation Techniques Based on
the Root-Locus Approach.
• The root-locus approach to design is very powerful
when the specifications are given in terms of time-
domain quantities, such as

– damping ratio
– undamped natural frequency
– desired dominant closed-loop poles
– maximum overshoot
– rise time
– settling time.

9
 Lead Compensation Techniques Based on
the Root-Locus Approach.
• The procedures for designing a lead compensator by the
root-locus method may be stated as follows:

– Step-1: Analyze the given system via root locus.

10
 Step-2
• From the performance specifications, determine the
desired location for the dominant closed-loop poles.

11
 Step-3
• From the root-locus plot of the uncompensated system
(original system), ascertain whether or not the gain
adjustment alone can yield the desired closed loop
poles.

• If not, calculate the angle deficiency.

• This angle must be contributed by the lead compensator

if the new root locus is to pass through the desired
locations for the dominant closed-loop poles.

12
 Step-4
• Assume the Lead Compensator to be:

• Where α and T are determined from the angle

deficiency.
• Kc is determined from the requirement of the
open-loop gain.
13
 Step-5
• If static error constants are not specified, determine the
location of the pole and zero of the lead compensator so that
the lead compensator will contribute the necessary angle.

• If no other requirements are imposed on the system, try to

make the value of α as large as possible.

• A larger value of α generally results in a larger value of Kv,

which is desirable.

• Larger value of α will produce a larger value of Kv and in most

cases, the larger the Kv is, the better the system performance.
14
 Step-6
• Determine the value of Kc of the lead
compensator from the magnitude condition.

15
 Final Design check

• Once a compensator has been designed, check

to see whether all performance specifications
have been met.

• If the compensated system does not meet the

performance specifications, then repeat the
design procedure by adjusting the compensator
pole and zero until all such specifications are
met.
16
 Final Design check

• If the selected dominant closed-loop poles are

not really dominant, or if the selected
dominant closed-loop poles do not yield the
desired result, it will be necessary to modify
the location of the pair of such selected
dominant closed-loop poles.

17
 Example-1
• Consider the position control system shown in following
figure.

• It is desired to design an Electronic lead compensator Gc(s)

so that the dominant closed poles have the damping ratio
0.5 and undamped natural frequency 3 rad/sec.

18
 Step-1 (Example-1)
• Draw the root Locus plot of the given system.

10
G ( s) H ( s) 
s( s  1)

• The closed loop transfer function

of the given system is:

C ( s) 10
 2
R( s) s  s  10

• The closed loop poles are

s  0.5  j 3.1225
19
 Step-1 (Example-1)
• Determine the characteristics of given system using root loci.

C ( s) 10
 2
R( s ) s  s  10

• The damping ratio of the closed-loop

poles is 0.158.

• The undamped natural frequency of the

closed-loop poles is 3.1623 rad/sec.

• Because the damping ratio is small, this

system will have a large overshoot in
the step response and is not desirable.
20
 Step-2 (Example-1)
• From the performance specifications, determine the
desired location for the dominant closed-loop poles.

• Desired performance Specifications are:

 It is desired to have damping ratio 0.5 and undamped natural
frequency 3 rad/sec.
C ( s) n2 9
 2 2
 2
R( s) s  2n s  n s  3s  9

s  1.5  j 2.5981

21
 Step-2 (Example-1)
• Alternatively desired location of closed loop poles can also
be determined graphically
 Desired ωn= 3 rad/sec
Desired
Closed Loop
 Desired damping ratio= 0.5 Pole

  cos1 
60

  cos1 (0.5)  60

22
 Step-3 (Exampl-1)
• From the root-locus plot of the uncompensated system
ascertain whether or not the gain adjustment alone can
yield the desired closed loop poles.

Desired
Closed Loop
Pole

23
 Step-3 (Exampl-1)
• If not, calculate the angle deficiency.
• To calculate the angle of deficiency apply Angle Condition at desired
closed loop pole.

Desired Closed Loop Pole

s  1.5  j 2.5981
 d  180  120  100.8

-2
 d  40.89
-1

100.8o 120o

-2 -1
24
 Step-3 (Exampl-1)
• Alternatively angle of deficiency can be calculated as.

10
 d  180  
s ( s  1) s  1.5 j 2.5981
Where s  1.5  j 2.5981 are desired closed loop poles

 d  180  10  s s 1.5 j 2.5981  ( s  1) s  1.5 j 2.5981

 d  180  120  100.8

 d  40.89 25
 Step-4 (Exampl-1)
• This angle must be contributed by the lead
compensator if the new root locus is to pass through
the desired locations for the dominant closed-loop
poles.

• Note that the solution to such a problem is not unique.

There are infinitely many solutions.

26
 Step-5 (Exampl-1) Solution-1

• Solution-1

– If we choose the zero of the

lead compensator at s = -1 so
that it will cancel the plant pole
at s =-1, then the compensator
pole must be located at s =-3. 40.89

27
 Step-5 (Example-1) Solution-1

• If static error constants are not specified, determine the

location of the pole and zero of the lead compensator so that
the lead compensator will contribute the necessary angle.

40.89

28
 Step-5 (Example-1) Solution-1

• The pole and zero of compensator are determined as

• The Value of can be

determined as 40.89

1
=1 yields 𝑇 =1
𝑇 →

1
=3 yields 𝛼= 0.333
𝛼𝑇 →

29
 Step-6 (Example-1) Solution-1

• The Value of Kc can be

determined using magnitude
condition.

|𝐾𝑐
( 𝑠+1) 10
𝑠+3 𝑠 (𝑠 +1) |
𝑠=−1.5 + 𝑗 2.5981
=1

|𝐾𝑐
10
𝑠( 𝑠+3) |𝑠 =−1.5 + 𝑗 2.5981
=1 40.89

𝐾 𝑐= |
𝑠( 𝑠+3)
10 |
𝑠 =−1.5 + 𝑗 2.5981
=0.9

𝑠+1
𝐺𝑐 ( 𝑠 ) = 0.9
𝑠+3 30
 Solution-1
Final Design Check
• The open loop transfer function of the designed system
then becomes
9
𝐺𝑐 ( 𝑠 ) 𝐺( 𝑠)=
𝑠 ( 𝑠+3)
• The closed loop transfer function of compensated
system becomes.

𝐶 (𝑠) 9
= 2
𝑅 (𝑠 ) 𝑠 +3 𝑠+9
31
 Final Design Check Solution-1

Root Locus Root Locus

5 5

0.158 3.16 3
0.5

Imaginary Axis
0 0

0.5
0.158 3.16 3

-5 -5
-4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 -4 -3 -2 -1 0 1
Real Axis Real Axis
10 9
𝐺 ( 𝑠)= 𝐺𝑐 ( 𝑠 ) 𝐺(𝑠)=
𝑠( 𝑠+1) 𝑠 (𝑠+3)
32
 Solution-1

Final Design Check

• The static velocity error constant for original system is
obtained as follows.
𝐾 𝑣 =lim 𝑠𝐺(𝑠 )
𝑠→0

𝐾 𝑣 =lim 𝑠
𝑠→ 0 [ 10
𝑠 (𝑠+ 1)
=10
]
• The steady state error is then calculated as

1 1
𝑒 𝑠𝑠= = =0.1
𝐾 𝑣 10
33
 Final Design Check Solution-1

Step Response
1.4
Actual System
1.2 Compensated System

0.8
Amplitude

0.6

0.4

0.2

0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14
Time (sec) 34
 Solution-1

Final Design Check

• The static velocity error constant for the compensated
system can be calculated as
𝐾 𝑣 =lim 𝑠 𝐺𝑐 ( 𝑠 ) 𝐺(𝑠)
𝑠→0

𝐾 𝑣 =lim 𝑠
𝑠→ 0 [ 9
𝑠 (𝑠+ 3)
=3
]
• The steady state error is then calculated as

1 1
𝑒 𝑠𝑠= = =0.333
𝐾𝑣 3
35
 Step-5 (Exampl-1) Solution-2

• Solution-2

-2

40.89
-1

90o
49.2 o

-3 -2 -1

36
 Step-5 (Exampl-1) Solution-2

• Solution-2

-2

40.89
-1

90o
49.2 o

-3 -2 -1

𝑠+1.5
𝐺𝑐 ( 𝑠 )= 1.03
𝑠+3.6
37
 Step-5 (Example-1) Solution-3

• If no other requirements are imposed on the system, try to make

the value of α as large as possible. A larger value of α generally
results in a larger value of Kv, which is desirable.

• Procedure to obtain a largest possible value for α.

– First, draw a horizontal line passing through point P, the desired location for
one of the dominant closed-loop poles. This is shown as line PA in following
figure.
– Draw also a line connecting point P and the origin O.

P
A
-2

-1

O
-3 -2 -1
38
 Step-5 (Example-1) Solution-3

• Bisect the angle between the lines PA and PO, as shown in following
figure.

P
A

 -2
2 
2 -1

O
-3 -2 -1

39
 Step-5 (Example-1) Solution-3

• Draw two lines PC and PD that make angles with the the bisector PB.

• The intersections of PC and PD with the negative real axis give the
necessary locations for the pole and zero of the lead network.

P
A
-2

d
2
d -1
2

O
-3 -2 -1
C
B
D

40
 Step-5 (Example-1) Solution-3

• The lead compensator has zero at s=–1.9432 and pole at s=–4.6458.

P
A
-2

d
2
d -1
2

O
-3 -2 -1
C
B
D
• Thus, Gc(s) can be given as

41
 Step-5 (Example-1) Solution-3

• For this compensator value of is

1
=1.9432 yields 𝑇 =0.514
𝑇 →
• Also

1
= 4.6458 yields 𝛼 =0.418
𝛼𝑇 →

42
 Step-6 (Example-1) Solution-3

• Determine the value of Kc of the lead compensator from

the magnitude condition.

10 𝐾 𝑐 ( 𝑠+1.9432)
𝐺 ( 𝑠 ) 𝐺𝑐 ( 𝑠 ) 𝐻 (𝑠)=
𝑠 (𝑠+1)( 𝑠+ 4.6458)

| 10 𝐾 𝑐 ( 𝑠+1.9432)
𝑠 (𝑠 +1)( 𝑠+ 4.6458)| 𝑠 =−1.5+ 𝑗 2.5981
=1
43
 Step-6 (Example-1) Solution-3

• The Kc is calculated as

𝐾 𝑐 =1.2287
• Hence, the lead compensator Gc(s) just designed is given
by
𝑠 +1.9432
𝐺𝑐 ( 𝑠 )= 1.2287
𝑠+ 4.6458

44
 Solution-3
Final Design Check

Desired Desired
Closed Loop Closed Loop
Pole Pole

Uncompensated Compensated
System System 45
 Final Design Check Solution-3

• It is worthwhile to check the static velocity error

constant Kv for the system just designed.

𝐾 𝑣 =lim 𝑠 𝐺𝑐 ( 𝑠 ) 𝐺(𝑠)
𝑠→0

[
𝐾 𝑣 =lim 𝑠 1.2287
𝑠→ 0
𝑠+1.9432 10
𝑠+ 4.6458 𝑠( 𝑠+1) ]
=5.139

• Steady state error is

94
46
 Final Design Check Solution-3

Step Response
1.4
Actual System
1.2 Solution-3

0.8
Amplitude

0.6

0.4

0.2

0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14
Time (sec) 47
 Final Design Check Solution-1
Solution-3
Step Response
1.4
Actual System
1.2 Solution-1
Solution-3
1

0.8
Amplitude

0.6

0.4

0.2

0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 48
 Mechanical Lead Compensator
• Figure shows the mechanical lead compensator.
• Equations are obtained as

• Taking Laplace transform of these equations

assuming zero initial conditions and eliminating
Y(s), we obtain

49
 Mechanical Lead Compensator

• By defining

• We obtain

50
 Exampl-2
• Design a mechanical lead compensator for following
system.
4
s ( s  2)

• The damping ratio of closed loop poles is 0.5 and natural

undamped frequency 2 rad/sec. It is desired to modify the
closed loop poles so that natural undamped frequency
becomes 4 rad/sec without changing the damping ratio.
51
Electrical Lead Compensator

𝑉 𝑖(𝑠) 𝑉 𝑜(𝑠)

𝑉 𝑜 (𝑠 ) 𝑅2 𝑅1 𝐶 𝑠+1
=
𝑉 𝑖( 𝑠) 𝑐 𝑅1 + 𝑅 2 𝑅1 𝑅 2
𝐶 𝑠+1
𝑅1 + 𝑅 2

𝑅1 𝑅2𝐶 𝑅2
C 𝑎𝑇 = 𝑎=
𝑅 1+ 𝑅 2 𝑅1 + 𝑅 2 1 52
 Example-3
• Consider the model of space vehicle control system
depicted in following figure.

• Design an Electrical lead compensator such that the

damping ratio and natural undamped frequency of
dominant closed loop poles are 0.5 and 2 rad/sec.
53
END OF LECTURE

54