II.

FEEDBACK CONTROL SYSTEMS

II.A Advantage of Feedback

Idealized performance of control system:
Output Y(s) = Desired performance R(s)
(Up to possibly a scaling constant)
R(s)
1

Control
System

Y(s)
1

Use Step input here for illustration

II.A.1. Performance Sensitivity to Parameter Variations

Process parameters change due to environment, aging, etc
Process transfer function G(s) changes with time
Process G(s) inside block diagram of overall system
System transfer function T(s)
Process

R(s)

G(s)

Y(s)

G(s) variations T(s) variations System output variations

 System Sensitivity:
When G ( s ) G ( s ) G ( s )
T (s) T (s) T (s)

Def: S T
G

T
G

T
G

Very small G

T G
T
SG
G T

(% change in T over % change in G

for small incremental change)
Lower/higher(?) sensitivity is better
system output less affected by variations in parameter
variations

 Generally,
- Open loop system:

R(s)

G(s )

Y(s)

T ( s ) G ( s ) S GT 1
- Closed loop system: R(s)

G(s )

Y(s)

H (s )

G
1
T
T (s)
SG
1 GH
1 GH
- Normally |1+GH(s)|>>1 for s values of our interest (Later!)
S GT 1 i.e., closed loop system much lower
sensitivity (to variations in G)

 Example 4.1 Feedback Amplifier

(a) In open loop configuration

Vin

Gain

Ka

Vo

V0 K aVin
T Ka
S KT a 1 If Ka changes by 10%, T and

hence Vo changes by 10% for

same Vin

(b) In feedback configuration

R2

Rp

Vin

V0 K a (Vin V0 )
Ka
T
(1 K a )
1
S KT a
(1 K a )

Vo

Vin

Gain

Ka

With 0.1

Vo
Rp

Ka

R2

Vo

K a 10 4
S KT a

1
If Ka changes by 10%, T and Vo changes
999

by

10%
0.01%
999

for same Vin

 Note: Other kind of Sensitivity, e.g., for closed loop system:

Sensitivity due to variations in H(s):
R(s)

G( s )
H (s )

T
SH

Y(s)
For 1+GH>>1

T T H GH 1
H
H T
1 GH
H

This means:

S GT 1 variation in G(s) has small effect on T(s)

S HT 1

variation in H(s) has strong effect on T(s)

Hence, important to have small variations in feedback loop for

closed loop system

 For T ( s ) depending on parameter i.e., T ( s ) T ( s , )

Sensitivity due
to variation in

S T

T T

For T ( s ) depending on G(s) depending on

S T T S GT S G
T

 Example: Armature-controlled DC Motor

- Recall: Block diagram with L a (Reduced Model)
Speed

(s )

Position

1
s

(s )

Nature induced
Feedback

- Let Output=angular speed (s) (not angle position )

- Va is input voltage to DC motor

Step input of E (volts) with

potentiometer factor k2
(Eqn. 4.40 in textbook)

Ek 2
s
- Here, we just use Va as output of controller block
- For simplicity, we also set Kb=0 in deriving the equations
- In Textbook,

Va

- Open loop speed control:

R(s)
Desired
performance

Ka

Armature-controlled
DC Motor

Va(s)

Speed

(s )
Kb=0

- Ka is open loop controller gain to be designed

- Transfer function:
KK
R1
( s ) 1 a R( s )
Td ( s )
( 1s 1)
( 1s 1)
where
Ra J
Km
Ra
1
, K1
, R1
( Ra b K m K b )
( Ra b K m K b )
( Ra b K m K b )
Kb=0

Kb=0

Kb=0

- Closed loop speed control

Armature-controlled
DC Motor

Va

Kb=0

- Ka is closed loop controller gain to be designed

- Transfer function:
K a K1
R1
( s)
R( s )
Td ( s )
( 1s 1 K a K1 K t )
( 1s 1 K a K1 K t )
- Typical values for speed control motor:
K1=2, Kt=1, Ka large (from 40100)

(XX)

Td(s)

- Derivation of (XX):

R(s)

+
_

P(s)

q(s) G(s)

(s)

H(s)

- Td(s)=0,

PG ( s )
( s)
R( s)
(1 PGH ( s ))

- R(s)=0,
G( s)
( s ) G ( s ) q( s )
Td ( s )
( s)
(1 PGH ( s ))
q( s ) PH ( s ) ( s ) Td ( s )
PG ( s )
G( s)
R( s)
Td ( s )
(1 PGH ( s ))
(1 PGH ( s ))
- (XX) obtained by P( s ) K a K m , G ( s ) 1 , H ( s ) 1
Ra
Js b

- Hence, ( s )

 Sensitivity analysis for Armature-controlled DC motor

- Let disturbance torque Td 0
- Open loop speed control

T(s)

K1 K a
R( s )
( s)
( 1s 1)
ol

* Ka -- control gain that we set

* K1 -- motor gain that varies (slightly) with each unit and time
* T(s) changes with change in K1:
Sensitivity with
respect to motor gain

S KT1

K1

T 1
K
1

* Hence, 10% change in K1

10% change in T(s)
10% change in ol ( s ) T ( s ) R( s )

- Closed loop speed control

cl ( s)

T(s)

K1 K a
R( s )
( 1s 1 K1 K a K t )

* T(s) change with change in K1:

Sensitivity with
respect to motor gain

T
K1

1s 1

( 1s 1 K1 K a K t )

* Typical values: K1=2, Kt=1, Ka large (from 40100)

T
K 1 K a K t from 80 200 S K 1 1
cl
* Change in K1 yield vey small change in ( s ) T ( s ) R( s )

- Results consistent with previous sensitivity analysis on

OL and CL system

 Specific case study for sensitivity analysis

- For step input, desired steady state ( ) 1
- Open loop speed control
* With step input R(s)=1/s, output given by
K1K a
K1K a
( s)
R( s)
( 1s 1)
s( 1s 1)
ol

* Output steady state value using FVT

ol () lim s ol ( s) K a K1
s 0

ol (t )

OL speed
control system

1
t

K a K1
t

* Hence, upon knowing K1, one can let K a 1 K to

1
ol
achieve desirable steady state value () 1

* For example, when motor gain K1=2, we can set gain Ka=0.5
so that
ol () K a K1 0.5(2) 1
* However, if K1 were to change value by 10%, i.e., K1 2.2 ,
without our knowledge, so we still kept Ka=0.5 as before, then

ol () K a K1 (0.5)( 2.2) 1.1

10% change
in ol ()

* Any change in K1 will result in same percentage of

change in steady state value of ol () (because SKT 1
1
in this case)
* Open loop control can attain desired steady state value
only if K1 is known and unchanged!

- Closed loop speed control

K1K a
1
cl
(
)

* With R( s) ,
s( 1s 1 K1K a K t )
s
* Steady state value using FVT
cl () lim s cl ( s)
s 0

1
t

CL speed
control
system

K1 K a
1 K t K1 K a
cl (t )
K1K a
1 Kt K1K a

* One can set Ka large so that K 1 K a K t 1 to yield

close-to-desirable cl () 1
* For example, when K1=2, Kt=1, Ka =50, K 1 K a K t 100
K1 K a
100
( )

0.99009 1
1 K t K1 K a 101
cl

* In this case, if K1 were to change by 10%, i.e., K1 2.2

(2.2)50
110
cl
( )

0.99099 1
1 (2.2)50 111

cl () quite insensitive to variations in K1!

* Hence, if K1 stays constant forever, OL speed control is
better in steady state value because ol () 1 always
* On the other hand, CL speed control yields only cl () 1
but the steady state value is insensitive to change in motor
gain K1
* Life is always changing, CL speed control is better overall
Summary: 1st advantage of CL system over OL system:
Lower sensitivity in system parameter variations (of G(s)
in forward loop)

II.A.2. Improving Transient Response

Process
Can we adjust for good transient response?
Open loop speed control (Td=0 still)
K1 K a
(s)

R( s ) ( 1s 1)
1
R
(
s
)

- With R(s) a step function

s
- Open loop speed response:
K a K1
ol
(s)
s( 1 s 1)

- Open loop speed response:

K a K1
(s)
s( 1 s 1)
ol

- Inverse Laplace Transform: ol (t ) K K (1 e

a 1

- Time constant 1 , hence transient response, fixed by

process parameter and cannot be changed
- Typically, 1 10 sec for speed control motor
Time to reach steady state long
(roughly 40-50 sec) for ol (t )

 Closed Loop Control (Td=0 still)

(s)

K1 K a

R( s ) ( 1s 1 K1 K a K t )

- With R(s) a step function

- Closed loop speed response:
K1 K a
( s)
s( 1s 1 K1 K a K t )

Time constant for

closed loop system

- Inverse Laplace transform:

cl (t )

where cl

K1 K a
(1 e
(1 K1 K a K t )

1
1 K1K a K t

t
cl

is adjustable by K a and K t

- With 1 K 1 K a K t 1
1
cl
much smaller than 1
1 K1 K a K
response to final value much faster
- Specifically, with
1 10 sec and
K 1 K a K t 100

Summary: 2nd advantage of CL system over OL system:

Transient adjustable and faster with closed loop system

II.A.3. Ability to Reject Disturbance

Open loop speed control

( s)

K1 K a
R1
R( s )
Td ( s )
( 1s 1)
( 1s 1)

Governing transient and

steady state performance

Undesirable Error
E(s) if Td 0
D

- For step disturbance torque Td ( s )

s
R1 D
ol
E ( s)
s( 1s 1)
- Steady state error due to disturbance

e ol ( ) lim sE ol ( s ) R1 D
s 0

(By FVT)

Recall

Ra
R1
( Ra b K m K b )

 Closed loop speed control

K a K1
R1
( s)
R( s )
Td ( s )
( 1s 1 K a K1 K t )
( 1s 1 K a K1 K t )
Governing transient and
steady state performance

- For step disturbance Td ( s ) D

Undesirable Error
E(s) if Td 0

R1 D
E (s)
s( 1s 1 K a K1 K t )
Hence,
cl

R1 D
e ( ) lim sE ( s )
e ol ( )
s 0
(1 K a K1 K t )
cl

(By FVT)

cl

K a K1 K t 1

Summary: 3rd advantage of CL system over OL system:

Effects of disturbance much smaller in CL system

II.A.4. Disadvantages of Feedback

Require feedback signal:
more instrumentations (sensors, comparators, etc.)
system more complex, cost, maintenance
May have small steady state error: not reaching desired value
DC motor example
OL Final value=1
CL Final value=0.99

Va(t) for OL and CL speed control

Require more powerful actuators from DC Motor example:

motor input is 50 times more for CL control than OL control

Ka=0.5

Time (sec)

System may be unstable due to improper controller assignment

and system uncertainties, etc. require proper design

II.A.5. Design Example: Disk Drive Read System (CL Position Control)
Motor and arm G(s)
Armature-current controlled
Va(s)

Output y(t) = head position = (t) from DC Motor

Zero back emf: Kb=0
Parameters:

 Close Loop Performance (using Full Model)

Disturbance

D(s )
R(s)

Y (s )

Y ( s)

K a G1 ( s )G2 ( s )
G2 ( s )
R(s)
D( s )
1 K a G1 ( s )G2 ( s )
1 K a G1 ( s )G2 ( s )

5000 K a
s 3 1020s 2 20000s 5000 K a

R(s)

s 1000
D(s )
s 3 1020s 2 20000s 5000 K a

Response due to R(s) governing

transient and steady state performance

Undesirable Error
Due to D(s)

 Performance due to R(s) only

- R(s)=1/s (Step), D(s)=0
(Textbook Fig. 4.36)

- Transient changeable by Ka
* Ka=10 too slow?
* Ka=80 too oscillatory?

 Error due to disturbance D(s) only

- R(s)=0 (No input), Disturbance D(s)=1/s (Step)
(Textbook Fig. 4.37)

- Disturbance error for Ka=10 is 8 times the

disturbance error for Ka=80

 Performance with BOTH input and disturbance

- Overall motor response with R(s)=1/s and D(s)=0.1/s

Design issue Best value of Ka?