5.

K ( s + 1) 2
a. The characteristic equation is given by 1 = 0 or
s 2 + 2s + 2
(1 K ) s 2 + (2 2 K ) s + (2 K ) = 0 . The Routh array is

s2 1 K 2K
s 2 2K

1 2K

For K > 0 , the first column of the Routh array will have no sign changes when either K < 1 or

when K > 2 . The system is closed loop unstable in the range 1 < K < 2 .
b. There are no asymptotes in this root locus. To calculate the break-in and breakaway points, let
2 + 2 + 2
K= 2 . Then
+ 2 + 1
dK ( 2 + 2 + 1)(2 + 2 ) ( 2 + 2 + 2 )(2 + 2 ) 2( + 1)
= = So the only
d ( 2 + 2 + 1)2
( 2 + 2 + 1)2
break-in point occurs when = 1 .

It is helpful to calculate directly the root positions from the characteristic equation. The closed loop
2 + 2 K 4(1 K ) 2 4(1 K )(2 K ) 1 + K K 1
poles are located at s1, 2 = =
2(1 K ) 1 K

It can be seen that when K < 1 , both poles are complex conjugate with a real part =-1; when

K > 2 the two poles are real.

The root locus is:

c. When K = 1 the poles are at . When K = 2 , the solution of the quadratic equation above
gives s = 0,2
23.

(-1 -2 -3 -4) - (0) 5 (2k+1) 3 5 7

a. Asymptotes: int = 4 = - 2 ; Angle = 4 =4 , 4 , 4 , 4

b. Breakaway: -1.38 for K = 1 and -3.62 for K = 1

c. Root locus crosses the imaginary axis at j2.24 for K = 126. Thus, stability for K < 126.
d. Search 0.7 damping ratio line (134.427 degrees) for 1800. Point is 1.4171134.427 =
- 0.992 j1.012 for K = 10.32.
e. Without the zero, the angles to the point j5.5 add up to -265.074o. Therefore the contribution of
5.5
the zero must be 265.074 - 180 = 85.074o. Hence, tan 85.074o = z , where - zc is the location of the
c
zero. Thus, zc = 0.474.

f. After adding the zero, the root locus crosses the imaginary axis at j5.5 for K = 252.5. Thus, the

system is stable for K < 252.5.

g. The new root locus crosses the 0.7 damping ratio line at 2.7318134.427o for K = 11.075

compared to 1.4171134.427o for K = 10.32 for the old root locus. Thus, the new system's settling

time is shorter, but with the same percent overshoot.

41.
a. Search j = j10 line for 180o and find -4.533 + j10 with K = 219.676.
219.676 x 6
b. Ka = 20
c. A settling time of 0.4 seconds yields a real part of -10. Thus if the zero is at the origin, G(s)
K
s(s+20) , which yields complex poles with -10 as the real part. At the design point, -10 + j10, K =
200.
5.
a. Uncompensated: Searching along the 126.16o line (10% overshoot, = 0.59), find the operating
45.72 20
point at -2.03 + j2.77 with K = 45.72. Hence, Kp = 2 x 4 x 6 = 0.9525. An improvement of 0.9525

s + 0.21
= 21.0 is required. Let Gc(s) = . Compensated: Searching along the 126.16o line (10%
s + 0.01
overshoot, = 0.59), find the operating point at - 1.98+j2.71 with K = 46.04. Hence, Kp =

46.05 x 0.21
= 20.14.
2 x 4 x 6 x 0.01
b.

c. From (b), about 28 seconds

9.
%OS
- ln ( 100 )
4
a. n = T = 2.5; = = 0.404. Thus, n = 6.188 rad/s and the operating
s %OS
2 + ln2 ( 100 )

point is - 2.5 j5.67.

b. Summation of angles including the compensating zero is -150.06o. Therefore, the compensator
pole must contribute 150.06o - 180o = -29.94o.
5.67
c. Using the geometry shown below, p - 2.5 = tan 29.94o. Thus, pc = 12.34.
c
d. Adding the compensator pole and using -2.5 + j5.67 as the test point, K = 357.09.
e. Searching the real axis segments for K = 1049.41, we find higher-order poles at -15.15, and -1.186.
f. Pole at -15.15 is more than 5 times further from the imaginary axis than the dominant poles. Pole at
-1.186 may not cancel the zero at -1

g.

A simulation of the system shows a percent overshoot of 37.5% and a settling time of 2.12 seconds.
Thus, the specifications were not met because pole-zero cancellation was not achieved. A redesign is
required.
21.
a. For the settling time to be 2.86 seconds with 4.32% overshoot, the real part of the compensated
4 4
dominant poles must be T = 2.86 = 1.4. Hence the compensated dominant poles are -1.4 j1.4.
s
Assume the compensator zero to be at -1 canceling the system pole at -1. The summation of angles to
the design point at -1.4 j1.4 is -176.19o. Thus the contribution of the compensator pole is
1.4
176.19o - 180o = 3.81o. Using the geometry below, p - 1.4 = tan 3.81o, or pc = 22.42.
c

Adding the compensator pole and using -1.4 j1.4 as the test point, K = 88.68.
b. Uncompensated: Search the 135o line (4.32% overshoot) and find the uncompensated dominant
1.11 4 4
pole at - 0.419 + j0.419 with K = 1.11. Thus Kv = 3 = 0.37. Hence, Ts = = 0.419 = 9.55
n
 88.68
seconds and %OS = 4.32%. Compensated: Kv = 22.42 x 3 = 1.32 (Note: steady-state error

4 4
improvement is greater than 2). Ts = = 1.4 = 2.86 seconds and %OS = 4.32%.
n

c. Uncompensated: K = 1.11; Compensated: K = 88.68.

d. Uncompensated: Searching the real axis segments for K = 1.11 yields a higher-order pole at -3.16
which is more than five times the real part of the uncompensated dominant poles. Thus the second-
order approximation for the uncompensated system is valid.
Compensated: Searching the real axis segments for K = 88.68 yields a higher-order pole at -22.62
which is more than five times the real part of the compensated dominant poles' real part. Thus the
second order approximation is valid.
e.

Step Response
Uncompensated

0.9

0.8

0.7

0.6
Amplitude

0.5

0.4

0.3

0.2

0.1

0
0 5 10
Time (sec.)
 Ramp Response
Uncompensated
80

70

60

50

Amplitude
40

30

20

10

0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80
Time (sec.)

Step Response
Compensated

0.9

0.8

0.7

0.6
Amplitude

0.5

0.4

0.3

0.2

0.1

0
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5
Time (sec.)
 Ramp Response
Compensated
80

70

60

50
Amplitude

40

30

20

10

0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80

Time (sec.)
24.
a. Uncompensated: Search the 135o line (4.32% overshoot) for 180o and find the dominant pole at
3 + j3 with K = 10.
Lag Compensated: Search the 135o line (4.32% overshoot) for 180o and find the dominant pole at -
2.88 + j2.88 with K = 9.95.
10
b. Uncompensated: Kp = 2 x 4 = 1.25

9.95 x 0.5
Lag compensated: Kp = 2 x 4 x 0.1 = 6.22

c. %OS = 4.32% both cases;

4 4 4
Uncompensated Ts = = 3 1.33 seconds; Compensated Ts = 2.88 = 1.39 seconds
n

d. Uncompensated: Exact second-order system; approximation OK

Compensated: Search real axis segments of the root locus and find a higher-order pole at -0.3. System
should be simulated to see if there is effective pole/zero cancellation with zero at - 0.5.
e.
The compensated system's response takes a while to approach the final value.
f. We will design a lead compensator to speed up the system by a factor of 5. The lead-compensated
dominant poles will thus be placed at 15 j15. Assume a compensator zero at - 4 that cancels the
open-loop pole at - 4. Using the system's poles and the compensator's zero, the sum of angles to the
design point, -15j15 is 131.69o. Thus, the angular contribution of the compensator pole must be
131.69o - 180o = - 48.31o. Using the geometry below, pc = 28.36.

K(s+0.5)(s+4)
Using the compensated open-loop transfer function, Ge(s) = (s+2)(s+4)(s+0.1)(s+28.36) and using

the design point 15 j15, K = 404.1.The time response of the lag-lead compensated system is

shown below.