Modern Control Sys-Lecture Vi PDF

MODERN CONTROL
SYSTEMS ENGINEERING
COURSE #: CS421
INSTRUCTOR:
DR. RICHARD H. MGAYA
Date: October 25th, 2013
Digital Compensator Design

Techniques Employing the z-Transform
Governing difference equation algorithm:
u (k ) an e(k ) an 1e(k 1) a0 e(k n)
bn 1u (k 1) b0u (k n)
Design problem:
Selection of the coefficients ai and bi once the sampling interval T is
specified
Note: The control system designer must know whether the actuating
hardware will be able to respond to the magnitude of the control effort
generated by the algorithm in the digital processor
Modeling and digital simulations of the control system
Examination of the control effort required
Dr. Richard H. Mgaya

General PID Direct Digital Control Algorithm
Recap:
Proportional Control
Steady-state error was necessary in order to have a steady-state output
Proportional plus Integral

Integrator reduces the steady-state error to zero
However, integrator in the loop can create instability or overshoot i.e.,
poor system dynamics
Proportional plus Integral plus Derivative

Steady-state error reduced to zero
Improvement in system dynamics

Time domain PID Controller
t
de
u (t ) K p e(t ) K i edt K d
dt
0
Digital Control Algorithm for PID

Approximation
Integral Trapezoidal integration
Derivative Backward difference equation
KT K
u (k ) uk 1 K p i d ek
2
T
2K d
Kd
K iT
Kp
ek 2
ek 1
T
T
2

Compensator transfer function:
U ( z ) U ( z ) z 1 E ( z ) E ( z ) z 1 E ( z ) z 2
U ( z ) z 1 z 2 z 2 z
D( z )
1
E( z)
1 z
z ( z 1)
where
K iT K d
2
T
KT
2K d
i Kp
2
T
Kp
Kd
T

Compensator transfer function:
The compensators numerator is quadratic
May be chosen to cancel the slow pole
Approximation algorithm: Appropriate algorithm produces causal

control effort algorithm
Noncausal algorithms produces future values in the control effort
General PI
D( z )
where
U ( z ) z
E( z)
z 1
Kp
K iT
2
K iT
Kp
2

Example: Consider the thermal system given in the figure
below. Design a PI controller to have a steady-state error of
zero to step input
D( z )
U ( z) ( z / )
E( z)
z 1
Cancel the slow pole:

D( z )
( z 0.952)
z 1

Let be the controller gain:
Through trial-and-error plus root locus design = 2.5 for closed-loop
damping ratio of = 0.7 and T = 0.25
Root Locus
2
1.5
System: sys
Gain: 2.5
Pole: 0.705 + 0.221i
Damping: 0.706
Overshoot (%): 4.35
Frequency (rad/sec): 1.72
Imaginary Axis
0.5
-0.5
-1
-1.5
-2
-5
-4
-3
-2
-1
Real Axis

Control algorithm:
uk uk 1 2.5(ek ek 1 )
Step Response
1.4
1.2
Amplitude
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
Time (sec)

Ziegler Nichols Tuning Procedure for PID
Process for determining the gain Kp, Ki and Kd for the
controller parameters , and
Experimental evaluation of the step responses of the plant to
be controlled
R the slope of the response
L the plant lag to the response
Tuning strategy:
Relationship between PID parameters to the values of R and L

Ziegler Nichols Tuning Procedure for PID
PI Controller:
Kp
0.9
RL
Ki
1
0.272
Kp
3.3L
RL2
PID Controller:
0.9
RL
1
0.6
Ki
Kp
2L
RL2
Kp
0.6
K d 0.5 LK p
R

Example: Use Ziegler-Nichols tuning strategy to design PI
controller for the thermal system with the following transfer
function same thermal system, in continuous form
G( s)
T ( s)
1
2
U ( s ) s 2.75s 0.5
Open-loop step response:

Step Response
Step Response
2
1.8
1.8
1.6
1.6
1.4
1.4
1.2
Amplitude
Amplitude
1.2
1
0.8
1
0.8
0.6
0.6
0.4
System: sys
Time (sec): 0.47
Amplitude: 0.0763
0.2
0
L 0.47 s
0.4
0.2
10
15
Time (sec)
20
25
30
R 0.37
10
15
20
25
30
Time (sec)

Example:
Calculations for PI parameters:
Kp
0.9
0.9
5.175
RL 0.37 0.47
Ki
0.272
0.272
0.330
2
2
RL
0.37 0.47
Step Response
1.6
Using T = 0.25:
1.4
5.592 and 4.758
Control algorithm:
uk uk 1 5.592ek 4.758ek 1
1
Amplitude
5.592( z 0.85)
D( z )
z 1
1.2
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
Time (sec)

Example:
Decreasing the gain decreases the overshoot but slows down
the response
0.5 and 0.425
Step Response
1.4
1.2
Amplitude
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
10
15
Time (sec)
20
25
30

Direct Design Method of Ragazzini
Closed-loop transfer function of a controlled system, M(z)
M ( z)
Y ( z)
G ( z ) D( z )
R( z ) 1 G ( z ) D( z )
If the desired closed-loop transfer function M(z) and the plant

transfer function G(z) are known, Then,
1
M ( z)
D( z )
G( z) 1 M ( z)

Fundamental issues to consider:
Causality:
Current control effort depends only on the current and past inputs and
the past control effort
Causal M(z), must have a zero at infinity same order as the zero of the
plant, G(z), at infinity
M(z) must have as many pure delays as the plant G(z)
Zero at infinity in time domain implies that the pulse response of G(z) has
delay at least one sample interval
Causal controller current effort does not dependent on the future values
of the error

Stability:
Necessary conditions for stability:
Closed-loop characteristic equation
1 G ( z ) D( z ) 0
Let D(z) = c(z)/d(z) and G(z) = b(z)/a(z) the closed-loop characteristic
polynomial:
a ( z ) d ( z ) b ( z )c ( z ) 0
Let a common factor (z - ) be in the numerator D(z) and the denominator
of G(z). If the factor is the pole of G(z), (z - )a to be cancelled then,
( z )a ( z )d ( z ) ( z )c ( z )b( z ) 0
( z )a ( z )d ( z ) c ( z )b( z ) 0

Stability:
Common factor remain a factor of the characteristic polynomial
If is outside the unit circle, then the system is unstable
Therefore, if D(z) is not to cancel the poles of G(z) then the factors of
a(z) must be the factors of 1 M(z)
Similarly, if D(z) is not to cancel the zeros of G(z) such zeros must be
factors of M(z)
Constraints summary:
1 - M(z) must contain as zeros as all poles of G(z) that lies on or
outside the unit circle
M(z) must contain as zeros as all zeros of G(z) that lie on or outside the
unit circle

Steady-State Accuracy:
Final value theorem - steady-state error for unit step
E ( z ) R( z )[1 M ( z )]
z
ess lim z 1 1 z
[1 M ( z )]
z 1
1 M (1)
1
For zero steady-state error
M (1) 1

Steady-State Accuracy:
Final value theorem - steady-state error for ramp
Tz
1
ess lim z 1 1 z
[1 M ( z )]
2
Kv
z 1
M (1) 1
1
LHopital rule to evaluate the limit z approaching 1
dM
dz
dM
dz
1
Kv
1
K vT
z 1
z 1

Example: Consider the thermal plant transfer function for T = 0.25
G( z)
0.025( z 0.816)
z 2 1.48 z 0.5026
Design a controller to have closed-loop poles at 0.4 j0.4, i.e., d =

rad/s, = 0.58, zero steady-state error for a step input and a velocity
constant of Kv = 10/T
Soln:
Closed-loop transfer function from specs
b0 b1 z 1 b2 z 2 b3 z 3
M ( z)
1 0.8 z 1 0.32 z 2

Example:
Causality: b0 = 0 plant has one step pure delay
M ( z)
b1 z b2
1 0.8 z 1 0.32 z 2
Steady-state step response requirements:
M (1)
b1 b2
1
0.52
(i)
Velocity constant requirements
dM
dz
z 1
( z 2 0.8 z 0.32)b1 (b1 z b2 )(2 z 0.8)

1
0.1
2
2
( z 0.8 z 0.32)
K vT

Example:
Velocity constant requirements
dM
dz
z 1
0.52b1 (b1 b2 )(1.2)

0.1
2
0.52
But b1 + b2 = 0.52 from eqn (i)

Then
b1 1.148
b2 0.52 b1 0.628
Closed-loop transfer function:
M ( z)
1.148 z 0.628
1 0.8 z 1 0.32 z 2

Example:
Controller form
D( z )
1
M ( z)
G( z ) 1 M ( z )
Substitution
D( z )
Controller :
1.148 ( z 0.528)( z 0.952)

z 0.547
0.025
z 0.816
( z 1)( z 0.948)
Cancels Plant Dynamics
Corrects Closed-loop Poles and Error Constant
45.92( z 3 2.027 z 2 1.3122 z 0.2749)

D( z )
z 3 1.132 z 2 0.6416 z 0.7736

Example:
Step Response

Ripple Free Design:
Plant must be stable
For finite settling time, M(z) must be finite polynomial in z-1
Transfer function from the reference input R(z) to the control effort
U(z) must be of finite settling time in z-1
U ( z) M ( z)
R( z ) G ( z )
M(z) must be selected such that it has a factor to cancel finite

zeros of G(z), i.e., no poles of
M ( z)
G( z)

Ripple Free Design:
Example: Design a zero-ripple, finite settling time controller
for the thermal plant which will yield zero steady-state error to
a step reference input
0.025( z 0.816)
0.025 z 1 (1 0.816 z 1 )
G( z) 2
z 1.48 z 0.5026 1 1.48 z 1 0.5026 z 2
Soln:
Since G(z) has no free integrator in the form of 1 - z-1, then for zero
steady-state error M(z) must have that factor
1 M ( z ) (1 z 1 )(a0 a1 z 1 )
(i)

Ripple Free Design:
Example:
Plant is stable and hence for zero ripple controller M(z) must have a
factor for numerator terms of G(z)
M ( z ) (1 0.816 z 1 )d1 z 1
1 M ( z ) 1 d1 z 1 0.816 z 2
(ii)
Solve a set of linear equation from i and ii
a0 1
a1 a0 d1
a1 0.816d1
a0 1, a1 0.4493, d1 0.5507

Example:
Closed-loop transfer function:
M ( z ) 0.5507 z 1 0.4493z 2
Controller
1 1.48 z 1 0.5026 z 2
0.5507 z 1
D( z )
0.025 z 1
(1 z 1 )(1 0.4493z 1 )
22.028( z 2 1.48 z 0.5026)
D( z )
z 2 0.5507 z 0.4493
Confirming U(z)/R(z)
U ( z ) M ( z ) 22.028( z 2 1.48 z 0.5026)
R( z ) G ( z )
z2

Example:
Step response:
Step Response
1.4
1.2
Amplitude
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0.5
1.5
2.5
3.5
4.5
Time (sec)
State-Space Representation
Solution to the State Vector Differential Equation
Consider the first-order differential equation
Laplace
dx
ax(t ) bu (t )
dt
sX ( s ) x(0) aX ( s ) bU ( s )
X ( s)
Inverse
Note:
x(0)
b
U ( s)
sa sa
t
x(t ) e at x(0) e a ( t )bu ( )d

0
2 2
k k
a
t
a
t
e at 1 at

2!
k!
Solution to the State Vector Differential Equation Cont
Consider the state vector differential equation
x Ax Bu
Laplace
sX ( s ) x(0) AX ( s ) BU ( s )
( sI A) X ( s ) x(0) BU ( s )
Pre-multiply (sI A)-1

X ( s ) ( sI A) 1 x(0) ( sI A) 1 BU ( s )
Inverse
x(t ) e At x(0) e A( t ) BU ( )d
0
The expression eAt is called Transition Matrix (t)

Represents the natural response of the system: ( s ) ( sI A) 1
Solution to the State Vector Differential Equation Cont
Alternatively:
Thus,
A2t 2
Ak t k
(t ) 1 At

2!
k!
t
x(t ) (t ) x(0) (t )(t ) BU ( )d

0
The 1st term is the response to initial conditions

The 2nd term represent response to a forcing function
Characteristic equation:
( sI A) 0
Discrete Solution to the State Vector Differential Equation
Discrete solution to state equation:
T
AT
A
x(k 1)T e x(kT ) e Bd u (kT )
0
General form:
x(k 1)T A(T ) x(kT ) B(T )u (kT ) and y (kT ) Cx(kT )
Note: A(T ) A and B(T ) B

A(T ) (T ) e AT
A2T 2
Ak T k
A(T ) 1 AT

2!
k!
T
Ak T k
AT
B(T ) e Bd
BT
k 0 ( K 1)!
0
AT 2 A2T 3
Ak T k 1
B(T ) 1T

B
2!
3!
(k 1)!
Example: The state-space equation for a mass damper system is
given as follows
x1 0
x 2
2
1 x1 0
u
3 x2 1
Evaluate:
(a) Characteristic equation, its roots, n and
(b) Transition matrix (s) and (t)
(c) Transient response of state variables from initial conditions
y(0) = 0 and y`(0) = 0.1
(a) Characteristic equation, its roots, n and
s 0 0
( sI A)
0 s 2
1 s
3 2
1
s 3
( sI A) s ( s 3) (2) s 2 3s 2 0
Roots: s = -1, -2
s 1, 2
Natural frequency and damping ratio

n2 2, n 1.414rad / s
2 n 3, 1.06
A1
Adjoint A
det A
( s ) ( sI A) 1
s 3 2
Minor
( s)
1
s
s 3 2
Cofactor ( s )
s
1
(s) is given as
s3
( s 1)( s 2)
( s)
1
( s 1)( s 2)
( s 1)( s 2)
( s 1)( s 2)
Partial fraction of (s):
2
1
1
1

s 1 s 2
s 1 s 2
( s)
2 1 1 1 2
s 1 s 2 s 1 s 2
Inverse Laplace:
2e t e 2t
(t )
t
2t
2 e e
e 2t
e t 2e 2t
(c) Transient response of state variables from initial conditions
y(0) = 0, y`(0) = 0.1, x1(0) = 1, and x2(0) = 0
Transient response:
x(t ) (t ) x(0)
2e t e 2t
x(t )
t
2t
2
e
e 2t
e t 2e 2t
1

0
x1 (t ) 2e t e 2t
x2 (t ) 2(e t e 2t )
Controllability
The possibility to drive the system from some arbitrary initial
condition x(0) to some specified final state x(n) in n sampling
intervals
Consider the general system
x(k 1) Ax(k ) Bu (k )
State at the kth time step

k 1
x(k ) A x(0) Ak i 1 Bu (i )
k
Similarly,
i 0
n 1
x(n) An x(0) An i 1 Bu (i )
i 0
x(n) An x(0) An 1 Bu (0) An 2 Bu (1) AB(n 2) BAu (n 1)

Controllability
Matrix form:
u (0)
u (1)
x(n) An x(0) An 1 B An 2 B B

u
(
n
1
)
Set of n linear equation in mn unknowns

The left hand side quantities are known
Solution exists if the rank of matrix coefficient is same as the

unknown
rank An 1 B An 2 B AB B n
The matrix is called the Controllability matrix

Controllability
Example: A linear discrete system is given as follows
x1 (k 1) 1
x (k 1) 0.4
2

0.2 x1 (k ) 1
u (k )
0.4 x2 (k ) 1
Examine the controllability of the system

Controllability matrix:
rank AB B
1
AB
0.4
0.2 1 0.8

0.4 1 0.8
0.8 1
rank AB B rank
1
0.8 1
Thus, uncontrollable
Observability
The possibility to determine the states and the control effort
from measured output at different time intervals
Consider the general system
x(k 1) Ax(k ) Bu (k )
y (k ) Cx(k )
Can the initial state x(0) be determine from the sequence of

measurements y(0), y(1), y(n-1)output
x(1) Ax(0) Bu (0)
Similarly,
y (1) Cx(1) CAx(0) CBu (0)

k 1
y (k ) CA x(0) CAk i 1 Bu (i )
k
i 0
Observability
In matrix form:
y (1) CBu (0) CAx(0)

y (2) CBu(0) CBu(1) CA2 x(0)
n 1
n 2 i
n 1
y
(
n
1
)
C
A
Bu
(
i
)
CA
x(0)
i 0
Output relationship: Set of nr linear equation with n unknown

y (0) C
y (1) CA
2
y (2) CA

y (n 1) CAn 1
Observability
Solution exists if the rank of the observability matrix is n
C
CA
2
rank CA n

CAn 1
Example: Determine the observability of the inertial plant with

state equation given as
2
T
x1 (k 1) 1 T x1 (k )
x (k 1) 0 1 x (k ) 2 u (k )
2 T
2

x1 (k )
y (k ) 0 1
x
(
k
)
2
Observability
Observability matrix:
CT
0 1
rank T rank
1
0 1
C A
The system is unobsevable

Modern Control Sys-Lecture Vi PDF

Загружено:

Сведения о документе

Исходное описание:

Оригинальное название

Авторское право

Доступные форматы

Поделиться этим документом

Поделиться или встроить документ

Параметры публикации

Этот документ был вам полезен?

Это неприемлемый материал?

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

Modern Control Sys-Lecture Vi PDF

Загружено:

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

MODERN CONTROL

Date: October 25th, 2013

Digital Compensator Design

Dr. Richard H. Mgaya

Digital Compensator Design

Proportional plus Integral

Proportional plus Integral plus Derivative

Digital Compensator Design

Digital Control Algorithm for PID

Dr. Richard H. Mgaya

Digital Compensator Design

Digital Compensator Design

Approximation algorithm: Appropriate algorithm produces causal

Dr. Richard H. Mgaya

Digital Compensator Design

Cancel the slow pole:

Digital Compensator Design

Dr. Richard H. Mgaya

Digital Compensator Design

Dr. Richard H. Mgaya

Digital Compensator Design

Dr. Richard H. Mgaya

Digital Compensator Design

Dr. Richard H. Mgaya

Digital Compensator Design

Open-loop step response:

Dr. Richard H. Mgaya

Digital Compensator Design

5.592 and 4.758

Dr. Richard H. Mgaya

Digital Compensator Design

Dr. Richard H. Mgaya

Digital Compensator Design

If the desired closed-loop transfer function M(z) and the plant

Dr. Richard H. Mgaya

Digital Compensator Design

Digital Compensator Design

Digital Compensator Design

Digital Compensator Design

For zero steady-state error

Dr. Richard H. Mgaya

Digital Compensator Design

LHopital rule to evaluate the limit z approaching 1

Dr. Richard H. Mgaya

Digital Compensator Design

Design a controller to have closed-loop poles at 0.4 j0.4, i.e., d =

Digital Compensator Design

Steady-state step response requirements:

Velocity constant requirements

( z 2 0.8 z 0.32)b1 (b1 z b2 )(2 z 0.8)

Digital Compensator Design

0.52b1 (b1 b2 )(1.2)

But b1 + b2 = 0.52 from eqn (i)

Closed-loop transfer function:

Digital Compensator Design

1.148 ( z 0.528)( z 0.952)

Corrects Closed-loop Poles and Error Constant

45.92( z 3 2.027 z 2 1.3122 z 0.2749)

Digital Compensator Design

Dr. Richard H. Mgaya

Digital Compensator Design

M(z) must be selected such that it has a factor to cancel finite