Analysis of Dynamic Systems

The tasks of analysis of dynamic systems are defined in the following diagram:
{ }
var state variables
mod
1 1 1 1
by first
principles &

n 2 1 1
( , , , , )
Physical process
x = ( , , , , )
input iables
eling
n m
linearization
Laplace transforma
n m
x f x x u u
f x x u u

'

647 48 647 48
& L L
M
& L L
simple transfer function

lineariz
tion
by

ation


X AX Bu
y CX Du
+

'
+

&
{ }
1

( ) [ ] ( )

inverse Laplace transform
solvin
y s C sI A B D u y t
linear ODE

( )

g linear ODE
analysis
y t of dynamic
behaviors

'

-
( )


state space analysis
y t


non-linear analysis
( : ,
, , etc)

analysis of
dynamic behaviors
such as stability
bifurcation chaos

'

State space models from transfer functions
A simple example of system has an input and output as shown in Figure 1. This class
of system has general form of model given in Eq.(1).
Figure 1

1 1
1 0 1 0 1 1
( ) ( )
n n m
n m n n m
d y d y d u
a a y t b b u t
dt dt dt


+ + + + + K K (1)
Models of this form have the property of the following:
1 1 2 2 1 1 2 2
( ) ( ) ( ) y( ) ( ) ( ) u t u t u t t y t y t + +
(2)
where, (y
1
, u
1)
and (y
2
,u
2)
each satisfies Eq,(1).
Model of the form of Eq.(1) is known as linear time invariant (abbr. LTI) system.
Assume the system is at rest prior to the time t0=0, and, the input u(t) (0t <

)
S
y(t) u(t)
1
produces the output y(t) (0t <

), the model of Eq.(1) can be represented by a

transfer function in therm of Laplace transform variable,s, i.e.:

1
1 0
1
1 0
( ) ( )
m m
m m
n n
n n
b s b s b
y s u s
a s a s a

+ + +

+ + +
L
L
(3)
Then applying the same input shifted by any amount of time produces the same
output shifted by the same amount q of time. The representation of this fact is given
by the following transfer function:
1
1 0
1
1 0
( ) ( )
m m
s m m
n n
n n
b s b s b
y s e u s
a s a s a

_ + + +

+ + +
,
L
L
(4)
Models of Eq.(1) having all
0 ( 0)
i
b i >
, a state space description arose out of a
reduction to a system of first order differential equations. This technique is quite
general. First, Eq.(1) is written as:
( )
( ) ( 1)
( 1)
0 1 1
, ( ), , . , , ;
with initial conditions: y(0)=y , (0) (0), , (0) (0)
n n
n
n
y f t u t y y y y
y y y y

&&&L
& L
(5)
Consider the vector
n
x R
with
( 1)
1 2 3
, , , ,
n
n
x y x y x y x y

& &&L , Eq.(5) becomes:
( )
2
3
( 1)
, ( ), , . , ,
n
n
x
x
d
X
dt
x
f t u t y y y y

1
1
1
1

1
1
1
1
]
M
&&&L
(6)
In case of linear system, Eq.(6) becomes:
[ ]
0 1 n-1
0 1 0 0 0
0 0 1 0 0 0
0 ( ); y(t)= 1 0 0 0
0 0 1
-a -a -a 1
d
X X u t X
dt
1 1
1 1
1 1
1 1 +
1 1
1 1
1 1
] ]
L L
L
O L
L O M
L
(7)
It can be shown that the general form of Eq.(1) can be written as:
2
[ ]
0 1 m
0 1 n-1
0 1 0 0 0
0 0 1 0 0 0
0 ( ); y(t)= b b b 0 0
0 0 1
-a -a -a 1
d
X X u t X
dt
1 1
1 1
1 1
1 1 +
1 1
1 1
1 1
] ]
L L
L
O L L
L O M
L
(8)
and, will be represented in an abbreviation form:
; ; D= X AX Bu y CX Du + +
&
0 (9)
Eq.(9) is known as the controller canonical form of the system.
Transfer function from state space models
We have just showed that a transfer function model can be expressed as a state
space system of controller canonical form. In the reverse direction, it also easy to see
that each linear state space system of Eq.(9) cab be expressed as a LTI transfer
function. The procedure is to take laplace transformation of the both sides of Eq,(9) to
give:
( ) ( ) ( ) ; ( ) ( ) ( ) sX s AX s Bu s y s CX s Du s + +
(10)
so that
[ ]
{ }
1 ( )
( ) ( ) ( ) ( )
( )
n s
y s C sI A B D u s G s u s
d s

+
(9)
(11)
An algorithm to compute the transfer function from state space matrices is given by
the Leverrier-Fadeeva-Frame formula of the sollowing:
3

[ ]
( )
1
1 2
0 1 2 1
1
1 1
0 1 0
1 0 1 2 1
( )
( )
( )
( )
,
( )
1/ 2 ( )

n n
n n
n n
n n
N s
sI A
d s
N s s N s N sN N
d s s d s d s d
where
N I d trace AN
N AN d I d trace AN

+ + + +
+ + + +

+
L
L
( )
1 2 1 1 2
-1 1

1
( )
1
1
0 A
n n n n n
n n n n
N AN d I d trace AN
n
N d I d trace AR
n

_
+

,
_
+

,
L L L L
(12)
Therefore, according to the algorithm mentioned, the transfer function becomes:

( ) ( ) n s CN s B CD +
(13)
or,
( )
( )
( )
CN s B CD
G s
d s
+

(14)
Pades approximation for
s
e

There is a result, known as Runges theorem, that provides that any H(s) that is
analytic in a region of the s-plane can be approximated to uniform accuracy, in that
region, by a rational function. A family of such approximation is known as the Pade
approximants> The basic idea is to expand the given analytic function in a Taylor
series and then choose the coefficients to the rational function so as to match as many
terms of the series as possible. For example,
2 3
2 3
1
1 0
1
1 0
1
2! 3! !

n
s n
m m
m m
m m
m
e s s s s
n
b s b s b
s a s a

+ + + + +
+ + +

+ + +
L L
L
L
(15)
The 2m+1 coefficients (b
0
,b
1
,
L
,b
m
,a
0
,a
1
,
L
,a
m-1
) can then be selected to match the
first 2m+1 coefficients of the Taylor series. Yhe result is known as the Pade
approximation to a pure time delay of duration . The approximation improves with
increasing m.
The Coefficients is calcualated in the following way which takes advantage of the
property of the exponential function:
4
0.5 0.5
0
0.5 0.5
0
; ( 1)
i N
i
s s
i
s i
s s k M
k
k
k
As
e e
e O M N
e e
B s

+ + +

(16)
(16)
Hence,
( )
0.5 0.5
0 0
( 1)
k M k M
s k s k
k k
k k
e B s e A s O M N

+ + +

(17)
Equality holds if
M
k
k
o
B s

is the first M+1 terms in the Taylor expansion of

0.5 s
e

and
N
i
i
o
As

is the first N+1 terms in the Taylor expansion of

0.5 s
e

. This yields the
expression uaually found in texts:
0
0
2
( 1)
!
( )
2
!
n
n N
n
n
s N
M
n
n M
n
s
n
e P s
s
n

_

,

_

,

(18)
A nice property of the Pade approximation of a delay is that the poles are all in LHP,
however, the zeros are all in RHP zeros. This does reflect the fact that delay is often
destabilizing in feedback control loops. The Padapproximation is one of the most
common approximation methods in control systems. It results in finite dimensional
model.
Solving for dynamic responses
Scalar ODE or transfer function systems (omitted)
State variable systems
0
; ; X(0)=X X AX Bu y CX Du + +
&
(19)
The Laplace transform can be obtained from Eq.(19) as:
( ) (0) ( ) ( ) and ( ) ( ) ( ) sIX s X AX s Bu s y s CX s Du s + +
(20)
So that
1 1
0
( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) y s C sI A B D u s C sI A X

1 + +
]
The time response can be found in two ways. The inverse transform of Eq.(20) can ne
taken, or, the response can be obtained by using the state transition matrix
( ) s
,
5
where,
[ ]
1
( ) s sI A

, or, { }
1
( ) ( ) t L s

(21)
Ex1: For example, if a system is given as:
[ ]
0 1 0
C= 8 1 y(0)=10, y(0)= - 4
8 6 1
A B
1 1

1 1

] ]
&
The time response to an input function, u(t), can be calculated as following:
[ ]
1 1
1
2
2
0 1 1
1
( )
8 6 8 6 6 8
6 1
1
=
8 6 8
s
s sI A sI
s s s
s
s s s

1 1

' ;
1 1
+ + +
] ]
+ 1
1
+ +
]
(22)
so,
[ ]
1
2 2
8 1 6 1 0
8
( )
8 1 6 8 6 8
s
s
C sI A B
s s s s s

+ 1 1 +

1 1
+ + + +
] ]
[ ]
1 2
- 1 2
1 2
1 2 2 1 2
- 1 2
( ) 8 ( ) ( )
y(0 ) 8 (0 ) (0 )
and,
( ) 8 ( ) ( )
y(t)=8 ( ) ( ) 8 (t)+ -8x ( ) 6 ( ) (0 )
y(0 )=-8x (0 ) 2 (0 )
y t x t x t
x x
y t x t x t
x t x t x t x t u
x


+
+
+
+ +
+
& & &
&
1,0 2,0
1,0 2,0
1,0 2,0
10 8
1 and x 2
4 8 2
x x
x
x x
+



' ;
+


Then,
[ ]
1
2 2
8 1 6 1 1
10 56
( ) (0)
8 2 6 8 6 8
s
s
C sI A X
s s s s s

+ 1 1 +

1 1
+ + + +
] ]
and,
1 1
2 2
8 10 56
( ) ( )
6 8 6 8
s s
y t L u s L
s s s s

+ +

+
' ; ' ;
+ + + +

The second method for calculating the time response is to use the state transition
matrix
( ) t
. In the previous example,
( ) s
has been found in Eq.(22). Thus, taking
inverse Laplace transform to this
( ) s
gives:
6
2 4 2 4
2 4 2 4
2 0.5 0.5
( )
4 4 2
t t t t
t t t t
e e e e
t
e e e e

1
+ +
]
Then,
{ } { }
{ } { }
1 1
1 1
( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) (0 )
( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) (0 ) ( )
X t L s Bu s L s X
y t CL s Bu s L s X Du t

+
+ +
or,
0
0
( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) (0 )
( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) (0 ) ( )
t
t
X t t Bu d t X
y t C t Bu d C t X Du t

+
+ +

Using the previous example to illustrate the computation, the zero input solution of
the system is given as:
[ ]
2 4 2 4
2 4
2 4 2 4
1 2 0.5 0.5
( ) 8 1 18 8
2 4 4 2
t t t t
t t
t t t t
e e e e
y t e e
e e e e



1 1

1 1
+ +
] ]
On the other hand, the impulse response of the same system can be found as:
{ }
1 2 4
12 22
( ) ( ) 1 8 ( ) ( ) 3 2
t t
I
y t L C s B t t e e

+
As a result, the response to a step input cab be obtained by: the following integral:

2( ) 4( ) 2 4
0
( ) 3 2 1 1.5 0.5
t
t t t t
y t e e d e e

1 +
]
Consider the equation:
0 0
; ( ) X AX X t X
&
It is easy to see that the solution can be given as:
0
( )
At
X t e X
On the other hand, X(s) is obtained as:
[ ]
1
0
( ) X s sI A X

As a result,
[ ]
{ }
{ }
1
1 1
0 0 0
( ) ( ) ( ) X t L sI A X L s X t X

This is to say that ( )
At
t e
and,
7
2 2 3 1
0 0
1 1 1
( ) ( ) ( )
2! 6 ( 1)!
t t
m m
t d t dt H t It At A t A t
m

+
+ + + +
+

L
(24)
Then, the response of the ststem to a step input, u
s
, can be expressed as:

0
t
A(t- )
0
0
0
t
A(t- )
0
0
( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) (0 )
= e ( )
( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) (0 ) ( )
= e ( ) ( )
t
At
t
At
X t t Bu d t X
Bu d e X
y t C t Bu d C t X Du t
Bu d e X Du t

+
+
+ +
+ +

Methods to compute
At
e :
(1). By direct laplace inverse transformation.
(2) By transaction from the infinite series:
2 2 3 3
1 1 1
( ) ( )
2! 3! !
At m m
t e P t I At A t A t A t
m
+ + + + + L (25)
(3) Alternative Methods to compute
At
e
The state transition matrix can also be obtained using the Sylvesters
interpolation formula. For a given minimum polynomial of order n that involves
only distinct roots, one has:

1 2
2 2 2 2
1 2
-1 -1
1 2
1 1 1




n
n
n n
n
I
A
A



L
L
L
L L L L L
L
1 -1
1 2
0

f( ) ( ) ( ) ( )
n n
n
A
f f f A

L
(26)
For example, for
At
e
, the Sylvesters interpolation formula becomes:
8
1
2
3
2 1
1 1 1
2 1
2 2 2
2 1
3 3 3
1
1
1

1
t n
t n
t n
e
e
e

L
L
L
L L L L L
2
2 1
2 1
0


n
t n
n n n
n At
e
I A A A e

L
L
(4)
1
i
n
t At T
i
i
e e v w

;
where,
i
v
and
i
w
are right and left eigenvectors, that is:
i i i
T T
i i
Av v
w A w A

'

It is easy to prove that

i
v
and
i
w
are orthogonal to each others. In other
words,
0
T T
W V V W
. As a result,
1 T
W V

.
1
1
k
T T
i i i
i
A V V V W v w

1
1
i
k
t At t t T T
i i
i
e Ve V Ve W v w e

(27)
Ex 2: A=
0 1
0 2
1
1

]
;
1 2
0, 2
2 2
1 0 1
1 2 2 2 0
t At t
At
e e A I Ae
I A e

+ +
Thus,
2
2
2
1
1 (1 ) 1
2
2
2
0
t
At t
t
e
e A I Ae
e

1
1 +
]
1
]
Ex 3: A=
0 1
1 2
1
1

]
9

( )
1
1
2
2 2
2 2
1 2 1
1
1 2 1 2 1
2 1
( 1) ( 1)

1
( 1) ( 1)
s s
sI A
s s s s
s
s s
s
s s

+
1 1

1 1
+ + +
] ]
+ 1
1
+ +
1

1
1
+ +
]

2 2
1
2 2
2 1
( 1) ( 1) (1 )
1 (1 )
( 1) ( 1)
t t
At
t t
s
s s t e te
e L
s te t e
s s

+ 1
1
+ + 1 +

1

' ; 1
1
]
1

+ +
]
So,
( )
( )
( )
0
(1 )
( ) (0 ) ( )
(1 )
(1 )
t
t t t
t t
t
t e t e te
X t X u d
te t e
t e

1
1 +
+
1
1

+ 1 ]
]

Notice that:
Define: ( )
At
t e and
0
( )
0
( , )
A t t
t t e

, then:
1.
1
0 0
( , ) ( , ) t t t t

2.
0 0
( , ) t t I
;
3.
1
0 0 0 0 0 0
( , ) ( , ) ( , ) ( , ) ( , ) t t t t t t t t t t

4.
2 0 2 1 1 0
( , ) ( , ) ( , ) t t t t t t
Finally, the solution of the state equation:
0 0
; ( ) X AX Bu X t X +
&
is given by:
0
0 0 0
( ) ( , ) ( , ) ( )
t
t
X t t t X t Bu d
1
+ 1
1
]

State space Controllability and Observability

This section deals with the controllability and observability properties of systems
described by LTI state space representations. In particular, we will consider a SISO
10
and LTI system described by Eq.(19).
Controllability
More specially, for system of Eq.(19), there exists a similar transformation that will
diagonalize the system. In other words, There is a transformation matrix Q such that:
-1
or X=Q X QX X
) )
(28)
s.t.
y = C X X Bu X Du + +
) ) ) ) ) )
&
(29)
where,
1
2
0 0
0 0
0
n

1
1
1

1
1
1
]
L
L
O
L
(30)
Notice that by doing the diagonalizing transformation, the resulting transfer function
between u(s) and y(s) will not be altered.
Looking at Eq.(29), if 0
k
b
)
, then
k
x
(t) is uncontrollable by the input u(t), since,
k
x
(t) is characterized by the mode
k
t
e

by the equation:
( ) (0 )
k
t
k k
x t e x

The lake of controllability of the state

k
x
(t) is reflect by a zero k
th
row of
B
)
, i.e.
k
b
)
.
Which, would cause a complete zero row in the following matrix (known as the
controllability matrix), i.e.:
C(A,b)
2 1
1 1 1 1 1 1 1
2 1
2 2 2 2 2 2 2
2 3 n-1
2 1
k k k



A A A A


n
n
n
k k k k
b b b b
b b b b
B B B B B
b b b b

1
]
) ) ) )
L
) ) ) )
L
) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) L L L L L
L L
) ) ) )
L
L L L L
2 1
n n n


n
n n n n
b b b b

1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
]
L
) ) ) )
L
(31)
A C(A,b) matrix with all non-zero row has a rank of N.
In fact,
1
or B Q B B QB

) )
. Thus, a non-singular C(A,b) matrix implies a non-
singular matrix of C(A,b)of the following:
C(A,b)
2 -1

n
B AB A B A B 1
]
L
(32)
11
It is important to note that this result holds in the case of non-distinct eigenvalues as
well.
[Remark 1]
If matrix A has distinct eigenvalues and is represented as a controller
canonical form, it is easy to show the following identity holds, i.e.:

2 1 2 1
1 1 1 1 1 1 1
1 1
n n
A

1 1
] ]
L L
for each i.
Therefore a transpose of so-called Vandermonde matrix V of n column
eigenvectors of A will diagonalize A, i.e.,

2 1
1 1 1
1 2
2 1
2 2 2 2 2 2
1 2
2 n-1
n 1 1 n-1
1 2 n
1 1 1
1
1
1

T
n
n
n
T
n
n n n n
W

1
1
1
1
1
1
1

1
1
1
1
1
]
1
]
L
L
L
L
L
M M M M M
M M M M
L
L
(33)
and

( ) ( )
1 1
T T
or, A= A
T T T T
W A W W W W W A


)
W
[Remark 2]
There is an alternative way to explain why C(A,b) should have rank n for state
controllable, let us start from the solution of the state space system:
0
( )
( ) (0 ) ( )
f
t
At A t
t
X t e X e Bu d

(31)
The state controllability requires that for each X(t
f
) near by X(t
0
), there is a finite
sequence of u(t; t

[to,t
f
]).
12
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
( 1)
0
0
( 1)
1
0
0
( ) ( )
( ) ( )
( )
= ( ) ( )
f
f
f
f
t
At
A
f
t
t
At
A
f
t
t k
n
A
k
t k
t k
i n
i
i
k i
t k
X t e X e Bu d
or
e Bu d e X t X
e Bu t k d
A B u t k

+ +

+
+ +

+
1
+ 1
1
]

+
_
+

,

0
0
0
( 1)
i=n-1
0
i=0 0
1
i=n-1
2 2 n-1
i=0
= ( ) ( )
= AB A B A B
n
t k
k
i
i
k
t k
i
i
n
d
A B u t k d
w
w
A BW B
w

+ +

+
+
1
1
1
1
]
1
1
1
]

L
M
Thus, in order W has non-trival solution, we need that C(A,b) matrix has exact rank n.
* * *
There are several alternative ways of establishing the state space controllability:

The (n) rows of

At
e B
are linearly independent over the real field for all t.

The controllability grammian

0
( , )
f
T
t
At T A
ram o f
t
G t t e BB e d

is non-singular for all

0 f
t t >
.

[Theorem 1] Replace B with b, (i.e. Dim{B}=n

1), a pair [A,b] is non-

controllable if and only if there exists a row vector
0 q
such that

, 0 qA q qb
(32)
To prove the if part:
If there is such row vector, we have:

( )
2 2 2 1
-1 1
0
0
0
0 , , , , 0
and 0

0
n
n n
qA q and qb
qAb qb
q I A
qA b qAb qb q b Ab A b A b
qb
qA b qb

1
; ;
]

L
M
13
Since
0 q
, we conclude that :
2 1
, , , ,
n
b Ab A b A b

1
]
L
is singular, and thus the
system is not controllable.
To prove the only if part:
If the pair is noncontrollable, then matrix A can be transformed into non-
controllable form like:
}
}
,
0 0
C C CC
C
A A r b
A b
A n r
1 1

1 1

] ]
(33)
where, r rank C(A,b) (Notice that Eq.(33) is a well known theorem in linear
system.)
Thus, one can find a row vector has the form [0 ] q z M , where z can be selected
as the eigenvector of
C
A
, (i.e.:
C
zA z
), for then:
[ ] [ ]
0 z 0 qA A z q
(34)
Therefore, we have shown that only if [A, b] is non-controllable, there is a
non-zero row vector satisfying Eq.(32).

In fact, according to Eq.(27),
1
1
i
k
t At t t T T
i i
i
e Ve V Ve W v w e

and,
0
( )
At
X t e X , we have:
( )
( ) ( )
0 0
1 1
0 0
( ) ( ) ( )
i ii
t t
k n
t t At A t T T
i i i i
i i
X t e X e bu d v w e X v w b e u d




+ +


Thus, if b is orthogonal to
i
w
, then the state associated with
i

will not be
controllable, and, hence, the system is not completely controllable.
The another form to test for the controllability of the [A,b] pair is known as the
Popov-Belevitch-Hautus (abbrv. PBH) test is to check if [ ]
rank sI A b n
for all s
(not only at eigenvalues of A). This test is based on the fact that if [ ]
sI A b
has
rank n, there cannot be a nonzero row vector q satisfying Eq.(32). Thus by Throrem 1,
pair [A, b] must be controllable.

14
Referring to the systems described by Eqs.(26) and (27), the state
( )
i
x t
)
corresponding
to the mode
i
t
e

is unobservable at the output

1
y
, if
1
0
i
C
)
for any i=1,2,,n. The
lack of observability of the state
( )
i
x t
)
is reflected by a complete zero (ith) column of
so called observability matrix of the system O( , ) A C
) )
, i.e.:
O
1
( , ) A C
) )
11 12 1 1
1 11 2 12 1 1
1 1 1 1
1 2 12 1 1
n
n n
n n n n
n n
C C C C
C C C C A
C C C C A



1 1
1 1
1 1

1 1
1 1
1 1
] ]
) ) ) )
L
) ) ) ) )
L
M M M M M
) ) ) ) )
L
(35)
An observable state
( )
i
x t
)
corresponds to a nonzero column of O( , ) A C
) )
. In the case of
distinct eigenvalues, each nonzero column increase the rank by one. Therefore, the
rank of O( , ) A C
) )
corresponding to the total number of modes that are observable at the
output y(t) is termed the observability rank of the system. As in the case of
controllability, it is not necessary to transform a given state-space system to modal
canonical form in order to determine its rank. In general, the observability matrix of
the system is defined as:
O
( , ) A C
=
1 n
C
CA
CA

1
1
1
1
1
]
M
= O
1
( , ) ( , ) A C Q A C V

) ) ) )
With Q=V
-1
nonsingular. There, the rank of O
( , ) A C
equals the rank of O( , ) A C
) )
. It is
important to note that this result holds in the case of non-distinct eigenvalues. Thus, a
state-space system is said to be completely (state) observable if its observability
matrix has a full rank n. Otherwise the system is said to be unobservable.
In particular, it is well known that a state-space system is observable if and only if the
following conditions are satisfied:

The (n) column of

At
Ce
are linearly independent over R for all t.

The observability grammian of the following is nonsingular for all

0 f
t t >
:
15
0
,
T
t
A T A
ranm o
t
G e C Ce d

The (n+p)

n matrix
I A
C
1
1
]
bhas rank n at all eigenvalues
i

of A.
Equivalent State-space equations for a linear transfer function
In the previous section, it has been mentioned that a transfer function of Eq.(4) can be
expressed as an controller canonical form of Eq.(8). It has also mentioned that the
state-space equation can be transformed by similar transformation. The two state-
space forms will be equivalent because they have the same transfer functions:
0
; ; (0) X AX bu y CX du X X + +
&
(36)
Let
X TX
)
, where, T is non-singular. Then,
1 1
X T ATX T bu AX bu
y CTX dTu CX du

+ +
+ +
) ) ) ) )
&
) ) ) )
(37)
Notice system of Eq.(36) and system of Eq.(37) have the same transfer function,
as a result, they are equivalent. Thus, the state-space respresentation of a given
transfer function is not unique. For system analysis, we are focusing on those
representations that have canonical forms. They are four main canonical forms to be
studied:
1. Controller canonical form;
2. Observer canonical form;
3. Controllability canonical form;
4. Observability canonical form.
1. Controller canonical for
Consider the transfer function of the following for illustration:
2
1 2 3
3 2
1 2 3
( )
( )
b s b s b y s
u s s a s a s a
+ +

+ + +
(38)
The transfer function is firstly decomposed into two subsystems:
( )
2
1 2 3
3 2
1 2 3
( ) ( ) ( ) 1
( ) ( ) ( )
y s y s z s
b s b s b
u s z s u s s a s a s a
+ +
+ + +
In other wors,
16
3 2
1 2 3
( ) 1
;
( )
z s
u s s a s a s a

+ + +
(39)
2
1 2 3
( )
and
z(s) 1
b s b s b y s + +
(40)
From Eq.(39), it is easy to have the state-space equation of Eq.(41)
3 2
0 1 0 0
0 0 1 0 ;
1
Z Z u
a a a
1 1
1 1
+
1 1
1 1
] ]
&
(41)
and from Eq.(40) and the states in Eq.(41), it is obvious to find:
[ ]
3 1 2 2 1 3 3 2 1
+ b z + b z = b b b Z y b z
Thus for a general transfer function of Eq.(3):
1
1 0
1
1 0
( ) ( )
m m
m m
n n
n n
b s b s b
y s u s
a s a s a

+ + +

+ + +
L
L
the state-space representation can be given as:

0 1
0 1 0 0
0 0 1 0

- -
n
n n n
A
a a a
a a a
1
1
1
1
1
1

1
]
L
L
L L L L L
L L
;
0
0
1
b
1
1
1

1
1
]
M
C=
0 1
0 0 0
0 0
m
b b b
C
a a a
1

1
]
L L
For convenience, we shall let
0
1 and 1 a m n
.
In other words, for system of the following:

1 1
1 2
1
1
( ) ( )
n n
n
n n
n
b s b s b
y s u s
s a s a

+ + +

+ + +
L
L
(42)
we have:
1 2 1
0 1 0 0
0 0 1 0

- -
n n
A
a a a

1
1
1

1
1

1
]
L
L
L L L L L
L L
;
0
0
1
b
1
1
1

1
1
]
M
17
[ ]
1 1

n n
C b b b

L
2. Observer canonical form:
Now, we set n=3 and use Eq.(42) for illustration. Bu assuming all initial values are
zero, Eq.(42) can be written as:
3 2 2
1 2 3 1 2 3
s y a s y a sy a y b s y b sy b y + + + + +
thus,
( ) ( ) ( )
3
2
1
1 1 1
3 3 2 2 1 1
( )
x
x
x
y s s s s a y b u a y b u a y b u



1

1
+ + + + +
' ;
1

]


E5555555555F
E5555555555555555555555555F5
E5555555555555555555555555555555555555555F55
or,
1
1 2 1 1 1 1 2 1
2 3 2 2 2 1 3 2
3 3 3 3 1 3
y x
x x a y b u a x x b u
x x a y b u a x x b u
x a y b u a x b u

+ + +
+ + +
+ +
&
&
&
In other words,
[ ]
1 1
2 2
3
1 0 b
0 1 ; b b ; 0 0 1
0 0 b
a
A a C
a
1 1
1 1

1 1
1 1
] ]
In general,
[ ]
1
2
1 0 0 0
0 1 0
; b= ; C= 1 0 0
1 0
0 0 0 1
n
a
a
A
a
1 1
1 1

1 1

1 1
1 1

1
] ]
L
L M
L
M M M L M
L
3. Controllability canonical form

Again, use Eq.(42) and n=3 as illustration, the controllability form is given as:
[ ]
1
3 2 1
2 3 2 1 1
1
0 0 1 1
1 0 ; b= 0 ; C= b b b 1 0
0 1 0 1 0 0
a a a
A a a
a

1 1 1
1 1 1

1 1 1
1 1 1
] ] ]
18
In general,
1
2
1
0 0
1 0
0 1 0 -
0 0 1 -
n
n
n
a
a
A a
a

1
1

1
1
1
1
1
]
L
L
L
L L L L
L
; b=
[ ]
1
1 2 1
2 3 1
1
1
1
1 0

1 0 0 0 0
1 0 0 0 0
n n
n n
n n
a a a
a a a
b b b
a

1
1
1
1
1
1
1
]
L L
L
L L L
L
[ ]
1 0 0 C L
4. The Observability canonical form:
2 1
0 1 0 0 0
0 0 1 0 0

0 0 0 0 1
-
n n
A
a a a

1
1
1
1
1
1
1

]
L
L
L L L L L
L
L L
;
b
1
1
1
2 1 1
1 2 1
1 0 0 0 0 0
1 0 0 0 0

1 0
1
n n
n
n n
b
a
b
b
a a a
b
a a a

1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1

]
1
]
L L L L L L
M
L
L L
1
C=[ ]
1 0 0 0 L
19