Chapter 14

Controller Design using Root Locus

14.1 PD Control

Root locus is a useful tool to design different types of controllers. Below, we will illustrate
the design of proportional derivative controllers using root locus technique. PD control
shapes the closed-loop transient response of a system by adding a zero to the system
dynamics.

K(s) = kp + kd s
By carefully placing the PD controller zero, the root locus can be shaped to improve
damping, rise time, and stability, without any excessively large gains.
Let us consider an example.
An Example: Consider the following control system.

Figure 14.1: An example

Suppose we use P-control, that is, K(s) = k.

The system is in Evan’s form.

k · s12
Gc (s) =
1 + k · s12

143
Lecture Notes on Control Systems/D. Ghose/2012 144

The open-loop poles are

p1,2 = 0. Since there are no zeros, both poles would go to ∞.

Figure 14.2: Open loop poles

There are no real axis segments.

The asymptotes parameters are,


180o + α360o 
φα =  = 90o , 270o
2 α=0,1
σ=0

To compute the departure angles, assume the poles to be shifted by an infinitesimal

distance along the imaginary axis (see the figure).
Then the departure angles can be shown to be
θd1 = 90o , θd2 = 270o .
(Work this out yourself.)
The root locus is as shown below.

Figure 14.3: Root locus

Observations:
1. The closed loop poles are imaginary for all k.
2. There is no damping for any k.
Lecture Notes on Control Systems/D. Ghose/2012 145

3. Pure critically damped oscillations.

4. We need to add compensator dynamics to move the pole to the left half plane and
get damping.
What happens if we use a PD (proportional derivative) controller of the type

K(s) = kp + kd s

This can be written as,

 
kd
K(s) = kp 1 + s = k (1 + T s)
kp

Where, k = kp and T = kd
kp
.

Let us assume T = 1 and then find the root locus with respect to k.

k · 1+T
s2
s
Gc (s) =
1 + k · 1+T
s2
s

which is already in Evan’s form.

The open-loop poles are p1,2 = 0 and the open-loop zeros are z1 = − T1 = −1.
So, one pole goes to the zero and the other goes to ∞.
Find the real axis segments: The root locus lies on the left of the zero at −1.

Figure 14.4: Open loop pole and zero locations and real axis segment of root locus

Asymptote angle is

180o + α360o 
φα =  = 180o
1 α=0

Since there is only one asymptote, it is irrelevant to compute the centroid.

Angle of departure from the poles = 90o and 270o .
Lecture Notes on Control Systems/D. Ghose/2012 146

Figure 14.5: Root locus

Angle of arrival at the zero = 180o .

Breakaway point is not known, but can be computed.
The example shows that when we use a dynamic compensator of the type given above,
increasing the value of k makes the closed-loop system move from being unstable to stable
but oscillatory and then to stable and overdamped characteristics.
A physical interpretation of why a PD controller performs under this condition would
be something like this: The PD control responds to changes in command error (because
of its derivative component). In a layman’s language, in a way it knows what is coming
next. This is the reason why a PD controller is also described as an anticipatory con-
troller.

Another Example:
1
Let K(s) = k and G(s) = s(T s+1)
.
The closed loop system is
1
k· s(T s+1)
Gc (s) = 1
1+ k · s(T s+1)

which is in Evan’s form.

Use the steps and you will get the following root locus (try this out yourself).
This shows that increasing k takes the system from being neutrally stable to stable and
overdamped and then to stable and underdamped. The oscillations increase and so does
the overshoot with increasing k.
Now consider the same system with PD control K(s) = k(T2 s + 1).
Let T2 < T , and both values are given.
Lecture Notes on Control Systems/D. Ghose/2012 147

Figure 14.6: Root locus with P-control

By using the rules in the root locus technique we obtain the following (use the rules to
get this locus yourself):

Figure 14.7: Root locus with PD-control

Here, increasing k moves the system from being neutrally stable to stable overdamped to
stable underdamped to stable overdamped again.
What are the benefits of PD control?
1. For the same k, PD control provides faster rise time and peak time with smaller
overshoot.
2. One can increase k to decrease steady state error without affecting the transient
response.
Lecture Notes on Control Systems/D. Ghose/2012 148

Figure 14.8: Unit step response

14.2 Lead Control

PD control has a problem that though it improves transient response, the derivative
term amplifies noise (why? – think about this). So, if there is a small but high frequency
disturbance, the PD-control will generate a large control signal.
Lead1 compensation helps to reduce this effect by balancing the PD control zero with
an added pole.

s+z
k(s) = k · , 0≤z<p
s+p

Figure 14.9: Lead compensator poles and zeros

1
What does the word ”lead” imply? This has something to do with the phase lead or increase that
such a control provides in the forward path. We will understand this better when we cover the frequency
response of a LTI system.
Lecture Notes on Control Systems/D. Ghose/2012 149

Lead compensation shifts the root locus to the left. Consider the angle criterion.
 
θz − θp = 180o
Suppose we have two poles as shown in the next figure.

Figure 14.10: A system with two poles subjected to lead control

What do we achieve by shifting the root locus to the left? For the same damping ratio
ζ, we can increase the controller gain k to obtain better steady state response. We can
also have higher ωn for faster rise time.
Example of Lead Control:

2
G(s) =
s(s + 2)

We have the following design specifications to meet:

1. Maximum Overshoot (Mp ) ≤ 0.2

2. Rise time Tr ≤ 0.5 sec
3. Steady state error with ramp input ≤ 0.2 (20 percent)

Let us try P-control first. Then,

2k
Gc (s) =
s2 + 2s + 2k
Lecture Notes on Control Systems/D. Ghose/2012 150

1. From maximum overshoot specification:

− √ πζ
Mp = e 1−ζ 2 ≤ 0.2 ⇒ ζ ≥ 0.46

Now obtain the root locus of the system (shown in the figure below).

Figure 14.11: Root locus

Suppose the point s lies on the root locus so that the damping ratio ζ = sin φ ≥
0.46, then φ = sin−1 0.46 = 27.4o . On every point on the root locus, if we use our
polar representation, the following equation should be satisfied:
 
2 2
0 = 1 + kG(s) = 1 + k =1+k e−j(θp1 +θp2 )
s(s + 2) Rp1 Rp2
 
 2k 
 
⇒  =1
Rp1 Rp2 

For the damping ratio ζ = 0.46, the point on the root locus corresponds to

Rp1 sin φ = Rp2 sin φ = 1 ⇒ Rp1 = Rp2 = 2.17

So, the corresponding value of k is obtained from,

2k = (2.17)2 ⇒ k = 2.36

Note that this is the maximum permissible value of k. since any larger value will
produce a damping ratio less than the prescribed value.
So, from maximum overshoot specification we get

0 < k ≤ 2.36
Lecture Notes on Control Systems/D. Ghose/2012 151

2. From rise time specification:

We should meet Tr ≤ 0.5 sec.
Now,

π/2 + sin−1 ζ
Tr = √ ≤ 0.5
ωn 1 − ζ 2
π/2 + sin−1 ζ
⇒ ωn ≥ √
0.5 1 − ζ 2

Note that the RHS of the above inequality increases as ζ increases and its minimum
value is attained when ζ = 0.46. So substituting ζ = 0.46 in the above inequality,
we obtain,

π/2 + sin−1 0.46

ωn ≥ √ = 4.617
0.5 1 − 0.462

But,

2k = ωn2

and so,

4.6172
ωn ≥ 4.617 ⇒ k ≥ = 10.65
2

So, the rise time specification implies that k ≥ 10.65.

We can immediately see that this contradicts the maximum overshoot specifica-
tions and so both these specifications can never be met using any value of k.
We can actually stop here and say that P-control cannot meet the design specifica-
tions, but just for the sake of completion, let us also look at the steady state error
specification.

3. Steady state error specification:

We want the steady state error to ramp input to be less than 20 percent.
Applying the final value theorem, we get,

1 1 1
e(∞) = lim sE(s) = lim s = lim s · 2 · 2
s→0 s→0 1 + kG(s) s→0 1 + k s(s+2) s
1 1
= lim 2 =
s→0 s + k
(s+2)
k

Then e(∞) < 0.2 ⇒ k ≥ 5.

Lecture Notes on Control Systems/D. Ghose/2012 152

To summarize:
Maximum overshoot specification ⇒ 0 < k ≤ 2.36
Rise time specification ⇒ k ≥ 10.65
Steady state error specification ⇒ k ≥ 5.0
Hence, all the design specifications cannot be met with P-control.
Lead Compensation:
Let us try lead compensation here.
For simplicity let us put the lead compensator zero on top of the system pole. Let,

s+2
K(s) = k ·
s+5

(Note that the pole-zero cancelation is not very desirable, but it is used here to make it
simpler for the root locus to be plotted.)
Thus,
s+2 2 2
K(s)G(s) = k · =k
s + 5 s(s + 2) s(s + 5)

So, all we did was to kick the open loop pole further to the left from (-2 to -5).
The closed loop system is,
2
k s(s+5)
Gc (s) = 2
1 + k s(s+5)

Let us obtain the root locus as shown below:

Figure 14.12: Root locus

Lecture Notes on Control Systems/D. Ghose/2012 153

Using the same reasoning, for the point on the root locus that corresponds to ζ = 0.46
(overshoot specification),
2.5
Rp1 = Rp2 = = 5.44
sin 27.4o
So, the maximum permissible value of k is,

5.442
k= = 14.8
2

So, maximum overshoot specification says that 0 < k ≤ 14.8.

From the rise time specification (as before):

π/2 + sin−1 0.46

ωn ≥ √ = 4.617 ⇒ k ≥ 10.65
0.5 1 − 0.462

From steady state specification:

1 1 1
e(∞) = lim sE(s) = lim s = lim s · 2 · 2
s→0 s→0 1 + kG(s) s→0 1 + k s(s+5) s
1 5
= lim 2 =
s→0 s + k 2k
(s+5)

Then e(∞) < 0.2 ⇒ k ≥ 12.5.

To summarize:
Maximum overshoot specification ⇒ 0 < k ≤ 14.8
Rise time specification ⇒ k ≥ 10.65
Steady state error specification ⇒ k ≥ 12.5
Hence a range of k such that 12.5 ≤ k ≤ 14.8 will meet all the design specifications.