Week 1 Topics (Control Y3 2011-12)

Table of Content
1. Review of the Methods for Analysis of Control Systems
2. Mathematical Model of a spring-cart system (Chens note p4-9)
3. Evaluation of Performance Specifications of the Spring-cart
System (Chens note p2)

-------------------------------------------------------------1. Review of the Methods for Analysis of Control Systems

a. Aim of Analysis
b. Main Steps:
Step 1: Establishing the mathematical model of a
control system.
Step 2: Obtaining system performance specifications.
Step 3: Improving system performance.
c. Main methods learnt
i. T-domain specification analysis
ii. Roth Herwitz Arrays
iii. Root locus method
iv. Frequency method (not)
d. Advanced methods to be learnt in this semester
i. A PID controller
ii. State space method
2. Mathematical Model of a spring-cart System
a. Diagrammatic model
Week 1 - 1

Desired
position
(input)

Actual position
(output)

x(t)
0
M

f(t)

k
B

b. Diagrammatic free body

Fk
M

f(t)

FB
f (t ) Fk FB Ma

m x(t ) B x(t ) k x(t ) f t

c. Laplace transform
ms 2 X ( s ) BsX ( s ) kX ( s ) F ( s )
( ms 2 Bs k ) X ( s ) F ( s )

d. Transfer function
1
X (s)
M
G(s)

F (s) s 2 B s k
M
M

e. Closed loop
Week 1 - 2

Desired
position
(input)
Cart
position
controller

Comparator

Actual position
(output)

x(t)

f(t)

k
B
(Desired)
Input

Comparator

Disturbances

Process

G(s)
H(s)

(Actual)
Output

Feed back

Where H(s)=1.
1
G(s)
M
T ( s)

1 G( s) H ( s) s 2 B s k 1
M
M

3. Evaluation of Performance Specifications of the Spring-cart

System
a. Canonical form of T(s)
T (s)

Kn2
s 2 2 n s n2
Week 1 - 3

b. Performance specifications of T(s)

n

k 1
M

B
2 ( k 1) M

1
k 1

ess

k
k 1

c. Standards for the evaluation of performance specifications

i. Effect of and on the system performance
n

Week 1 - 4

1.5

1.5

1.5

0.5

0.5

0.5

1.5

1.5

1.5

0.5

0.5

0.5

ii.

Standard values of the system performance specifications

0.7

n 2 ~ 4
ess 0

d. Performance specifications and evaluation of an exampled

system with M=3 kg, k=2 Nm-1, B=0.6 Nm-1s
i.

Values of performance specifications

n

k 1

2 1
1
3
Week 1 - 5

B
0. 6

0. 1
2 (k 1) M
2 (2 1)3

1
k 1
k
2
ess

0.7
k 1 2 1
K

ii. Evaluation
Since 1 4 , the systems response time is too long; since
0.1 0.7 , the system tends to be oscillating, and since
e 0.7 0 , the systems steady state error is too big.
It is concluded that the performance specifications of this
system are not satisfactory. So a measure is needed to
improve them.
n

ss

Week 1 - 6