Franklin CH 04 FF

4
BasicProperties
of Feedback
APerspective on the Properties of Feedback
A major goal of control design is to use the tools available to keep the error
small for any input and in the face of expected parameter changes. Al-
though in this book we will focus on the selection of the controller transfer
function, the control engineer must be aware that changes to the plant may
be possible that will greatly help control of the process. It is also the case
that the selection and location of a sensor can be very important. These
considerations illustrate the fact that control is a collaborative enterprise
and control objectives need to be considered at every step of the way from
concept to nished product. However, in this book, we consider mainly
the case of control of dynamic processes and begin with models that
can be approximated as linear, time-invariant, and described by transfer
functions. Discussion of the theoretical justication of this assumption is
deferred until Chapter 9, in which the theories of Lyapunov are introduced.
Given a model, the next step in the design is formulation of speci-
cations of what it is that the control is required to do. While maintaining
the essential property of stability, the control specications include both
static and dynamic requirements such as the following:
The permissible steady-state error in the presence of a constant or
bias disturbance signal.
The permissible steady-state error while tracking a polynomial refer-
ence signal such as a step or a ramp.
The sensitivity of the system transfer function to changes in model
parameters.
PreT
E
X, Inc., Technical Typesetters Tel. (902)454-8111 FAX (902)454-2894 Franklin, Feedback Control of Dynamic Systems, 5e
166
Feedback Control of Dynamic Systems, Fifth Edition,
by Gene F. Franklin, J. David Powell, and Abbas Emami-Naeini.
ISBN 0-13-149930-0. 2006 Pearson Education, Inc., Upper Saddle River, NJ. All rights reserved.
The permissible transient error in response to a step in either the ref-
erence or the disturbance input.
The two fundamental structures for realizing controls are open-loop
control (Fig. 4.1) and closed-loop control, also known as feedback con- Open-loop and closed-loop
control
trol (Fig. 4.3). Open-loop control is generally simpler, does not require a
sensor to measure the output, and does not, of itself, introduce stabil-
ity problems. Feedback control is more complex and may cause stabil-
ity problems but also has the potential to give much better performance
than is possible with open-loop control. If the process is naturally (open-
loop) unstable, feedback control is the only possibility to obtain a stable
system and meet any performance specications at all. Before specic
design techniques such as the root locus are described, it is useful to
develop the equations of systems in general terms and to derive expres-
sions for the several specications in order to have a language describing
the objectives toward which the design is directed. As part of this activity,
a comparison of open-loop to closed-loop control will expose both the
advantages and the challenges of feedback control.
Chapter Overview
This chapter begins with consideration of the basic equations of feed-
back and the comparison of a feedback structure with open-loop control.
In Section 4.1 the equations are presented rst in general form and used
to discuss the effects of feedback on disturbance rejection, parame-
ter sensitivity, and command tracking. In Section 4.2 the steady-state
errors in response to polynomial inputs are analyzed in more detail. As
part of the language of steady-state performance, control systems are
frequently classied by type according to the maximum degree of the
input polynomial for which the steady-state error is a nite constant. In
Section 4.3 the issue of dynamic tracking errors is introduced by con-
sidering a modication of the closed-loop characteristic equation using a
classical structure of proportional, integral, and differential control, the
PID controller. This study will illustrate the interaction of steady-state with
transient performance and will set the tone for the more sophisticated de-
sign techniques to be described in later chapters. Finally, in Section 4.4,
several extensions of the material of the chapter are presented that are
interesting and important, but something of a distraction from the main
issues of the chapter. Issues discussed there are digital controllers, tuning
PIDcontrollers, Truxels formula for error constants, and time-domain sen-
sitivity. The most important of these is the implementation of controllers
in digital form, introduced in Section 4.4.1. If time permits, consideration
of this section is highly recommended because almost all modern con-
trollers are realized by digital logic. A more complete discussion of this
important issue is given in Chapter 8.
PreT
E
167
168 Chapter 4 Basic Properties of Feedback
Figure 4.1
Open-loop control system
y
Controller
D
ol
Plant
G
Input shaping
H
r
U
W
R
4.1 The Basic Equations of Control
We begin by collecting the basic equations and transfer functions that will be
used throughout the rest of the text. For the open-loop system of Fig. 4.1, if we
take the disturbance to be at the input of the plant, the output is given by
Y
ol
= H
r
D
ol
GR +GW (4.1)
and the error, the difference between reference input and system output, is
given by
E
ol
= R Y
ol
(4.2)
= R [H
r
D
ol
GR +GW] (4.3)
= [1 H
r
D
ol
G]R GW (4.4)
= [1 T
ol
]R GW. (4.5)
The open-loop transfer function in this case is H
r
D
ol
G, for which we will use
the generic notation T
ol
(s).
For feedback control, Figure 4.2 gives the basic structure of interest, but
with the disturbance and the sensor noise entering in unspecic ways. We will
take these signals to be at the inputs of the process and the sensor, respectively,
as shown in Figure 4.3. The sensor transfer function is H
y
and may show im-
portant dynamics. However, the sensor can often be selected to be fast and
accurate. If this is the case, its transfer function can be taken to be a constant
H
y
, with units of volts/unit-of-output. The reference input r has the same units
Figure 4.2
Feedback control system
Y
Controller
D
cl
Plant
G
Sensor
H
y
Input shaping
H
r
W
V
R
PreT
E
Section 4.1 The Basic Equations of Control 169
Figure 4.3
Basic feedback control
block diagram
Y
V
Controller
D
cl
Plant
G
Sensor
H
y
Input shaping
H
r
R
W

u
as the output, of course, and the input lters transfer function is H
r
, also with
units of volts/unit-of-output. An equivalent block diagram is drawn in Fig. 4.4,
with controller transfer function D(s) = H
r
D
cl
and with the feedback transfer
function as the ratio H =
H
y
H
r
. It is standard practice, especially if H
y
is con-
stant, to select equal scale factors so that H
r
= H
y
and the block diagramcan be
drawn as a unity feedback structure as shown in Figure 4.5. We will develop the
equations and transfer functions for this standard structure. When we use these
equations later, it will be important to be sure that the preceding assumptions
actually apply. If the sensor has dynamics that cannot be ignored, for example,
then the equations will need to be modied accordingly.
For the feedback block diagram of Figure 4.5, the equations for the output
and the control are
Y
cl
=
DG
1 +DG
R +
G
1 +DG
W
DG
1 +DG
V, (4.6)
U =
D
1 +DG
R
DG
1 +DG
W
D
1 +DG
V. (4.7)
Perhaps more important than these is the equation of the error, E
cl
= R Y
cl
:
E
cl
= R
_
DG
1 +DG
R +
G
1 +DG
W
DG
1 +DG
V
_
(4.8)
=
1
1 +DG
R
G
1 +DG
W +
DG
1 +DG
V. (4.9)
Figure 4.4
Equivalent feedback block
diagram with H
r
included
inside the loop

H
r
D
cl
D G
W
R
Y
V

H
H
r
H
y
PreT
E
Figure 4.5
Unity feedback system
when H
r
= H
y
and
letting D = H
r
D
cl

W
R
Y
V

u Controller
D
Plant
G
This equation is simplied by the denition of the sensitivity function
1
and
the complementary sensitivity function T as
=
1
1 +DG
(4.10)
and
T = 1 =
DG
1 +DG
. (4.11)
In terms of these denitions, the equation for the closed-loop error is
E
cl
= R GW +TV. (4.12)
For future reference, it is standard to dene the transfer function around a loop
as the loop gain, L(s). In the case of Fig. 4.4, we have L = DGH, for example.
4.1.1 Watts Problem of Disturbance Rejection
One of the early uses of the steam engine in Britain was in mining, to pump
water out of mines and to haul wagons loaded with coal. In carrying out these
tasks, the steady-state speed of early engines would change substantially when
presented with added torque caused by a new load. To correct the problem,
Watts company introduced the ying ball governor shown in Fig. 1.11, whereby
the speed of the engine was fed back to the steam chest to change the torque
of the engine. We will illustrate the principles of operation of this feedback
innovation through study of the simple equations of motion of an engine with
speed
e
and external load torque
.
Equation (4.13) describes the dynamics of an engine with inertia J , viscous
friction b, control u, and load torque
(t ):
J
e
+b
e
= A
1
u +A
2
. (4.13)
1
The reason for the name, coined by H. W. Bode, will be given shortly.
PreT
E
If we take the Laplace transform of Eq. (4.13), let the velocity transform be
e
(s) and the transformof the load torque be T
(s), we obtain the transformed

equations of open-loop speed control as
sJ
e
(s) +b
e
(s) = A
1
U(s) +A
2
T
(s), (4.14)
sJ
e
(s) +b
e
(s) = A
1
[U(s) +
A
2
A
1
T
(s)], (4.15)
s
e
(s) +
e
(s) = A[U +W]. (4.16)
In deriving Eq. (4.16), we have dened the parameters = J/b, A = A
1
/b,
and the disturbance variable to be W =
A
2
A
1
T
. In transfer function form the

equation is
e
(s) =
A
(s +1)
U(s) +
A
(s +1)
W(s) (4.17)
= G(s)[U(s) +W(s)] (4.18)
= G(s)W(s) if U(s) = 0. (4.19)
In the feedback case, with no reference input and with control proportional to
error as U = K
cl
e
, the equations of proportional feedback control are
s
e
(s) +
e
(s) = A[K
cl
e
+W], (4.20)
e
(s) = G(s)K
cl
e
(s) +G(s)W, (4.21)
[1 +GK
cl
]
e
(s) = GW, (4.22)
e
(s) =
G
1 +GK
cl
W. (4.23)
In the open-loop case, if the control input is U(s) = 0 and W =
w
o
s
, the nal
value theorem gives
2
ss
= G(0)w
o
= Aw
o
. (4.24)
To make the comparison with the closed-loop case, suppose that G(0) = 1,
w
o
= 1, and just for fun, we take the controller gain to be K
cl
= 99. The steady-
state output in the open-loop case is
ss
= 1, and in the closed-loop case it is
ss
=
1
1+GK
cl
s0
=
1
1+99
= 0.01. Thus the feedback system will have an error
to disturbance that is 100 times smaller than in the open-loop case. No wonder
Watts engine was a success!
2
We assume for the moment that G(0) is nite.
PreT
E
This result is a particular case of application of the error equations. From
Eq. (4.4) the error in the open-loop case is E
ol
= GW, and from Eq. (4.12)
in the feedback case the error is E
cl
= GW = E
ol
.Thus, in every case,
the error due to disturbances is smaller by a factor in the closed-loop case
compared with the open-loop case.
Major advantage of feedback
System errors to constant disturbances can be made smaller with feedback
than they are in open-loop systems by a factor of =
1
1+DG(0)
, where DG(0)
is the loop gain at s = 0.
4.1.2 Blacks Problem: Sensitivity of System
Gain to Parameter Changes
During the 1920s, H. S. Black was working at Bell Laboratories to nd a design
for an electronic amplier suitable for use as a repeater on the long lines of the
telephone company. The basic problem was that electronic components drifted
and he needed a design that maintained a gain with great precision in the face of
these drifts. His solution was a feedback amplier. To illustrate the advantages
he found, we compare the sensitivity of open-loop control with that of closed-
loop control when a parameter changes. The change might come about because
of external effects such as temperature changes, because of aging, or simply
from an error in the value used for the parameter from the start. Suppose that
the plant gain in operation differs from its original design value of A to be
A +A, which represents a fractional change of
A
A
. The open-loop controller
gain is taken to be xed at D
ol
(0) = K
ol
. In the open-loop case the nominal
overall gain is T
ol
= K
ol
A,
3
and the perturbed gain would be
T
ol
+T
ol
= K
ol
(A +A) = K
ol
A +K
ol
A = T
ol
+K
ol
A.
Thus, T
ol
= K
ol
A. To give a fair comparison, we compute the fractional
change in T
ol
, denedas T
ol
/T
ol
for a givenfractional change in A. Substituting
the values, we nd that
T
ol
T
ol
=
K
ol
A
K
ol
A
=
A
A
. (4.25)
This means that a 10% error in A would yield a 10% error in T
ol
. H. W. Bode Sensitivity
called the ratio of T/T to A/A the sensitivity of the gain with respect to
the parameter A. In the open-loop case, therefore, = 1.
The same change in A in the feedback case (Eq. (4.23)) yields the new
steady-state feedback gain
T
cl
+T
cl
=
(A +A)K
cl
1 +(A +A)K
cl
,
3
We use T
ol
and T
cl
for the open-loop and closed-loop transfer functions, respectively. These
are not to be confused with the transform of the disturbance torque T
ol
used earlier.
PreT
E
where T
cl
is the closed-loop gain. We can compute the sensitivity of this closed-
loopgaindirectlyusingdifferential calculus. Theclosed-loopsteady-stategainis
T
cl
=
AK
cl
1 +AK
cl
.
The rst-order variation is proportional to the derivative and is given by
T
cl
=
dT
cl
dA
A.
The general expression for sensitivity of a transfer function T to a parameter
A is thus given by
T
cl
T
cl
=
_
A
T
cl
dT
cl
dA
_
A
A
= (sensitivity)
A
A
.
From this formula the sensitivity is seen to be
T
cl
A
= sensitivity of T
cl
with respect to A
=
A
T
cl
dT
cl
dA
,
so
T
cl
A
=
A
AK
cl
/(1 +AK
cl
)
(1 +AK
cl
)K
cl
K
cl
(AK
cl
)
(1 +AK
cl
)
2
=
1
1 +AK
cl
. (4.26)
This result, which explains our use of the name sensitivity earlier, exhibits an-
other major advantage of feedback:
Advantage of feedback
In feedback control, the error in the overall transfer function gain is less sen-
sitive to variations in the plant gain by a factor of =
1
1+DG
compared with
errors in open-loop control.
As with the case of disturbance rejection, if the gain is such that 1+DG = 100,
a 10% change in plant gain A will cause only a 0.1% change in the steady-state
gain. The open-loop controller is 100 times more sensitive to gain changes than
the closed-loop system with loop gain of 100.
PreT
E
The results in this section so far have been computed for the steady-state
error in the presence of constant inputs, either reference or disturbance. Very
similar results can be obtained for the steady-state behavior in the presence of
sinusoidal reference and disturbance signals. This is important because there
are times when such signals naturally occur, as with a disturbance of 60 Hz due
to power-line interference in an electronic system, for example. The concept is
also important because more complex signals can be described as containing
sinusoidal components over a band of frequencies and analyzed using super-
position of one frequency at a time. For example, it is well known that human
hearing is restricted to signals in the frequency range of about 60 to 15,000 Hz.
A feedback amplier and loudspeaker system designed for high-delity sound
must accurately track any sinusoidal (pure tone) signal in this range. If we take
the controller in the feedback system shown in Fig. 4.5 to have the transfer
function D(s) and we take the process to have the transfer function G(s), then
the steady-state open-loop gain at the sinusoidal signal of frequency
o
will be
|D(j
o
)G(j
o
)| and the error of the feedback system will be
|E(j
o
)| = |R(j
o
)|
1
1 +D(j
o
)G(j
o
)
.
Thus, to reduce errors to 1% of the input at the frequency
o
, we must make
|1+DG| 100 or |D(j
o
)G(j
o
)|
>
100, and a good audio amplier must have

this loop gain over the range 260 215,000. We will revisit this concept
in Chapter 6 as part of the design based on frequency response techniques.
4.1.3 The Conict with Sensor Noise
Finally, it must be noticed that the feedback system error has a term that is
missing from the open-loop case. This is due to the sensor, which is not needed
in the open-loop case. The error due to this term is E
cl
= TV and will be small
if T is small. Unfortunately, keeping both error due to W and error due to V
small requires that in the one case be small and in the other case T be small.
However, Eq. (4.11) shows that this is not possible. The standard solution to this
dilemma is frequency separation. The reference and the disturbance energies
are typically concentrated in a band of frequencies below some limitlets call
it
c
. On the other hand, the sensor can usually be carefully designed so that
the sensor noise V is held small in the low-frequency band below
c
, where the
energy in R and W are substantial.
4
Thus the design should have small where
R and W are large and where V is small, and should then make T be small (and
necessarily larger) for higher frequencies, where sensor noise is unavoidable.
It is compromises such as this that will occupy most of our attention in the
design of controllers in later chapters.
4
The moral of this is that money spent on a good sensor is usually money well spent.
PreT
E
4.1.4 The RADAR Problem: Tracking a Time
Varying Reference
In addition to rejecting disturbances, many systems are required to track a mov-
ing reference, for which the generic problem is that of a tracking RADAR. In
a typical system, electric pulses are sent from a parabolic antenna, the echoes
from the target airplane are received, and an error between the axis of the an-
tenna and the vector pointing to the target is computed. The control is required
to command the antenna pointing angles in such a way as to keep these vectors
aligned. The dynamics of the systemare of central importance. Aconstant-gain
open-loop controller has no effect on the dynamics of the system for either
reference or disturbance inputs. Only if an open-loop controller includes a dy-
namic input lter, H
r
(s), can the dynamic response to the reference signal be
changed, but the plant dynamics will still determine the systems response to
disturbances. On the other hand, feedback of any kind changes the dynamics of
the system for both reference and disturbance inputs. In the case of open-loop
speed control, Eq. (4.17) shows that the plant dynamics are described by the
(open-loop) time constant . The dynamics with proportional feedback control
are described by Eq. (4.23), and the characteristic equation of this system is
1 +GK
cl
= 0, (4.27)
1 +
AK
cl
s +1
= 0, (4.28)
s +1 +AK
cl
= 0, (4.29)
s =
1 +AK
cl
. (4.30)
Therefore, the closed-loop time constant, a function of the feedback gain K
cl
,
is given by
cl
=

1 +AK
cl
, and is decreased as compared with the open-loop
value. It is typically the case that closed-loop systems have a faster response
as the feedback gain is increased and, if there were no other effects, this is
generally desirable. As we will see, however, the responses of higher order
systems typically become less well dampedandeventually will become unstable
as the gain is steadily increased. Thus a denite limit exists on how large we
can make the gain in our efforts to reduce the effects of disturbances and
the sensitivity to changes in plant parameters. Attempts to resolve the conict
between small steady-state errors and good dynamic response will characterize
a large fraction of control design problems. The conclusion is as follows:
Property of feedback
Feedback changes dynamic response and often makes a systemboth faster and
less stable.
PreT
E
4.2 Control of Steady-State Error: System Type
In the speed-control case study in Section 4.1 we assumed both reference and
disturbances to be constants and also took D(0) and G(0) to be nite constants.
In this section we will consider the possibility that either or both of D(s) and
G(s) have poles at s = 0. For example, a well-known structure for the control
equation of the form
u(t ) = k
p
+k
I
_
t
e() d +k
D
de(t )
dt
(4.31)
is called proportional plus integral plus derivative (PID) control, and the cor-
responding transfer function is
D(s) = k
p
+
k
I
s
+k
D
s. (4.32)
In a number of important cases, the reference input will not be constant but
can be approximated as a polynomial in time long enough for the system to
effectively reach steady-state. For example, when an antenna is tracking the el-
evation angle to a satellite, the time history as the satellite approaches overhead
is an S-shaped curve as sketched in Fig. 4.6. This signal may be approximated
by a linear function of time (called a ramp function or velocity input) for a
signicant time relative to the speed of response of the servomechanism. In
the position control of an elevator, a ramp function reference input will direct
the elevator to move with constant speed until it comes near the next oor. In
rare cases, the input can be approximated over a substantial period as having a
constant acceleration. In this section we consider steady-state errors in stable
systems with such polynomial inputs.
The general method is to represent the input as a polynomial in time and to
consider the resulting steady-state tracking errors for polynomials of different
degrees. As we will see, the error will be zero for input polynomials below a
certain degree, and will be unbounded for inputs of higher degrees. A stable
system can be classied as a system type, dened to be the degree of the poly- Denition of system type
nomial for which the steady-state system error is a nonzero nite constant. In
the speed-control example, proportional control was used and the systemhad a
constant nite error to a step input, which is an input polynomial of zero degree;
therefore this systemis called a type zero (type 0) system. If the error to a ramp
or rst-degree polynomial is a nite nonzero constant, such a system is called
type one (type 1), and so on. System types can be dened with regard to either
reference inputs or disturbance inputs, and in this section we will consider both
Figure 4.6
Signal for satellite tracking
Time (sec)
u
s
PreT
E
Section 4.2 Control of Steady-State Error: System Type 177
classications. Determining the system type involves calculating the transform
of the system error and then applying the Final Value Theorem. As we will see,
a determination of system type is easiest for the case of unity feedback, so we
will begin with that case.
4.2.1 System Type for Reference Tracking:
The Unity Feedback Case
In the unity feedback case drawn in Fig. 4.5, the system error is given by
Eq. (4.9). If we consider only the reference input alone and set W = V = 0,
then, using the symbol for loop gain, the equation is simply
E =
1
1 +L
R = R. (4.33)
To consider polynomial inputs, we let r(t ) = t
k
1(t ), for which the transform
is R =
1
s
k+1
. As a generic reference nomenclature, step inputs for which k = 0
are called position inputs, ramp inputs for which k = 1 are called velocity
inputs, and if k = 2, the inputs are called acceleration inputs, regardless of
the units of the actual signals. Application of the Final Value Theorem to the
error gives the formula
lim
t
e(t ) = e
ss
= lim
s0
E(s) (4.34)
= lim
s0
s
1
1 +L
R(s) (4.35)
= lim
s0
s
1
1 +L
1
s
k+1
. (4.36)
We consider rst a systemfor which L has no pole at the origin and a step input
for which R(s) =
1
s
. In this case, Eq. (4.36) reduces to
e
ss
= lim
s0
s
1
1 +L
1
s
(4.37)
=
1
1 +L(0)
. (4.38)
We dene such a system to be type 0 and we dene the constant L(0)

= K
p
as
the position error constant. If L has one pole at the origin, we could consider
both step and ramp inputs, but it is quite straightforward to evaluate Eq. (4.36)
in a general setting. For this case, it is useful to be able to describe the behavior
of the controller and plant as s approaches 0. For this purpose, we collect all
the terms except the pole(s) at the origin into a function L(s), which is thus
PreT
E
nite at s = 0 so that we can dene the constant L
o
(0) = K
n
and write the loop
transfer function as
L(s) =
L
o
(s)
s
n
. (4.39)
For example, if L has nointegrator, then n = 0. If the systemhas one integrator,
then n = 1, and so forth. Substituting this expression into Eq. (4.36), we have
e
ss
= lim
s0
s
1
1 +
L
o
(s)
s
n
1
s
k+1
(4.40)
= lim
s0
s
n
s
n
+K
n
1
s
k
. (4.41)
From this equation we can see at once that if n > k, then e = 0, and if n < k,
then e . If n = k = 0, then e
ss
=
1
1+K
0
, and if n = k = 0, then e
ss
=
1
K
n
. If
n = k = 0, the input is a zero-degree polynomial otherwise known as a step or
position, the constant K
o
is called the position constant, written as K
p
, and
the system is classied as type 0, as we saw before. If n = k = 1, the input is
a rst-degree polynomial, otherwise known as a ramp or velocity, the constant
K
1
is called the velocity constant, written as K
v
, and the system is classied
type 1. In a similar way, systems of type 2 and higher types may be dened.
The type information can be usefully gathered in a table of errors as follows:
TABLE 4.1
Errors as a Function of System Type
Input
Type Step (Position) Ramp (Velocity) Parabola (Acceleration)
Type 0
1
1 +K
p

Type 1 0
1
K
v
Type 2 0 0
1
K
a
The most common case is that of simple integral control leading to a type
1 system. In this case, the relationship between K
v
and the steady-state error Type 2 systems
to a ramp input is shown in Fig. 4.7. Looking back at the expression given
for D
c
G in Eq. (4.39), we can readily see that the several error constants can
be calculated by counting the degree n of the poles of L at the origin (the
number of integrators in the loop with unity gain feedback) and applying the
appropriate one of the following simple formulas
K
p
= lim
s0
L(s), n = 0, (4.42)
K
v
= lim
s0
sL(s), n = 1, (4.43)
K
a
= lim
s0
s
2
L(s), n = 2. (4.44)
PreT
E
Figure 4.7
Relationship between ramp
response and K
v
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
10
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
0
Time (sec)
r, y
r
y
1
K
e
ss

EXAMPLE 4.1 System Type for Speed Control
Determine the system type and the relevant error constant for the speed-control exam-
ple shown in Fig. 4.4, with proportional feedback given by D(s) = k
p
. The plant transfer
function is G =
A
s+1
.
Solution. In this case, L =
kpA
s+1
, and applying Eq. (4.42), we see that n = 0, as there is
no pole at s = 0. Thus the system is type 0, and the error constant is a position constant
given by K
p
= k
p
A.
EXAMPLE 4.2 System Type Using Integral Control
Determine the system type and the relevant error constant for the speed-control exam-
ple shown in Fig. 4.4, with PI feedback. The plant transfer function is G =
A
s+1
, and in
this case the controller transfer function is D
c
= k
p
+
k
I
s
.
Solution. In this case, the transfer function is L(s) =
A(kps+k
I )
s(s+1)
, and as a unity feedback
systemwith a single pole at s = 0, the systemis immediately seen as type 1. The velocity
constant is given by Eq. (4.43) to be K
v
= lim
s0
sL(s) = Ak
I
.
The denition of system type helps us to identify quickly the ability of
a system to track polynomials. In the unity feedback structure, if the process
parameters change without removing the pole at the origin in a type 1 system,
the velocity constant will change, but the systemwill still have zero steady-state
error in response to a constant input and will still be type 1. Similar statements
can be made for systems of type 2 or higher. Thus, we can say that system type
is a robust property with respect to parameter changes in the unity feedback Robustness of system type
structure. Robustness is the major reason for preferring unity feedback over
other kinds of control structure.
PreT
E
Figure 4.8
Block diagram reduction
to an equivalent unity
feedback system
Y D
H 1
G
U E
R
4.2.2 System Type for Reference Tracking:
The General Case
If the feedback H =
H
y
H
r
in Fig. 4.4 is different from unity, the formulas given in
the unity feedback case do not apply, and a more general approach is needed.
There are two immediate possibilities. In the rst instance, if one adds and
subtracts 1.0 from H, as shown by block diagram manipulation in Fig. 4.8, the
general case is reduced to the unity feedback case and the formulas can be
applied to the redened loop transfer function L =
DG
1+(H1)DG
, for which the
error equation is again E =
1
1+L
R = R.
Another possibility is to develop formulas directly in terms of the closed-
loop transfer function, which we call the complementary sensitivity function
T(s). From Fig. 4.4, the transfer function is
Y(s)
R(s)
= T(s) =
DG
1 +HDG
, (4.45)
and therefore the error is
E(s) = R(s) Y(s) = R(s) T(s)R(s).
The reference-to-error transfer function is thus
E(s)
R(s)
= 1 T(s),
and the system error transform is
E(s) = [1 T(s)]R(s) = R.
We assume that the conditions of the Final Value Theoremare satised, namely
that all poles of sE(s) are in the left half plane. In that case the steady-state
error is given by applying the Final Value Theorem to get
e
ss
= lim
t
e(t ) = lim
s0
sE(s) = lim
s0
s[1 T(s)]R(s). (4.46)
PreT
E
With a polynomial test input, the error transform becomes
E(s) =
1
s
k+1
[1 T(s)],
and the steady-state error is given again by the Final Value Theorem:
e
ss
= lim
s0
s
1 T(s)
s
k+1
= lim
s0
1 T(s)
s
k
. (4.47)
The result of evaluating the limit in Eq. (4.47) can be zero, a nonzero constant,
or innite. If the solution to Eq. (4.47) is a nonzero constant, the system is
referred to as type k. For example, if k = 0 and the solution to Eq. (4.47) is
a nonzero constant equal, by denition, to
1
1+K
p
, then the system is type 0.
Similarly, if k = 1 and the solution to Eq. (4.47) is a nonzero constant, then
the system is type 1 and has a zero steady-state error to a position input and
a constant steady-state error equal, by denition, to 1/K
v
to a unit velocity
reference input. Type 1 systems are by far the most common in practice. A
system of type 1 or higher has a closed-loop DC gain of 1.0, which means that
T (0) = 1.
EXAMPLE 4.3 System Type for a Servo with Tachometer Feedback
Consider an electric motor position-control problem, including a nonunity feedback
system caused by having a tachometer xed to the motor shaft and its voltage (which
is proportional to shaft speed) is fed back as part of the control. The parameters corre-
sponding to Fig. 4.4 are
G(s) =
1
s(s +1)
,
D(s) = k
p
,
H(s) = 1 +k
t
s.
Determine the system type and relevant error constant with respect to reference inputs.
Solution. The system error is
E(s) = R(s) Y(s)
= R(s) T(s)R(s)
= R(s)
DG(s)
1 +HDG(s)
R(s)
=
1 +(H(s) 1)DG(s)
1 +HDG(s)
R(s).
PreT
E
The steady-state system error from Eq. (4.47) is
e
ss
= lim
s0
sR(s)[1 T(s)].
For a polynomial reference input, R(s) = 1/s
k+1
, and hence
e
ss
= lim
s0
[1 T(s)]
s
k
= lim
s0
1
s
k
s(s +1) +(1 +k
t
s 1)k
p
s(s +1) +(1 +k
t
s)k
p
= 0 , k = 0,
=
1 +k
t
k
p
k
p
, k = 1.
Therefore the system is type 1 and the velocity constant is K
v
=
k
p
1 +k
t
k
p
. Notice that
if k
t
> 0, this velocity constant is smaller than the unity feedback value of k
p
. The
conclusion is that if tachometer feedback is used to improve dynamic response, the
steady-state error is increased.
4.2.3 SystemType with Respect to Disturbance
Inputs
In most control systems, disturbances of one type or another exist. In practice,
these disturbances cansometimes be usefully approximatedby polynomial time
functions such as steps or ramps. This would suggest that systems also be clas-
sied with respect to the systems ability to reject disturbance inputs in a way
analogous to the classication scheme based on reference inputs. System type
with regard to disturbance inputs species the degree of the polynomial ex-
pressing those input disturbances that the system can reject in the steady state.
Knowing the system type, we know the qualitative steady-state response of the
system to polynomial disturbance inputs such as step or ramp signals. Because
type depends on the transfer function from disturbance to error, the system
type depends on exactly where the disturbance enters into the control system.
The transfer function from the disturbance input W(s) to the error E(s) is
E(s)
W(s)
=
Y(s)
W(s)
= T
w
(s), (4.48)
because, if the reference is equal to zero, the output is the error. In a similar way
as for reference inputs, the system is type 0 if a step disturbance input results
in a nonzero constant steady-state error and is type 1 if a ramp disturbance
input results in a steady-state value of the error that is a nonzero constant. In
general, following the same approach used in developing Eq. (4.41), we assume
that a constant n and a function T
o,w
(s) can be dened with the properties
PreT
E
that T
o,w
(0) =
1
K
n,w
and that the disturbance-to-error transfer function can be
written as
T
w
(s) = s
n
T
o,w
(s). (4.49)
Then the steady-state error to a disturbance input that is a polynomial of degree
k is
y
ss
= lim
s0
_
sT
w
(s)
1
s
k+1
_
= lim
s0
_
T
o,w
(s)
s
n
s
k
_
. (4.50)
From Eq. (4.50), if n > k, then the error is zero, and if n < k, the error is
unbounded. If n = k, the system is type k and the error is given by
1
K
n,w
.
EXAMPLE 4.4 Satellite Attitude Control
Consider the model of a satellite attitude control system shown in Fig. 4.9(a), where
J = moment of inertia,
W = disturbance torque,
H
y
= sensor gain, and
D
c
(s) = the compensator.
With equal input lter and sensor scale factors, the system with PD control can be
redrawnwithunity feedbackas inFig. 4.9(b) andwithPIDcontrol drawnas inFig. 4.9(c).
Assume that the control results in a stable system and determine the system types and
error responses to disturbances of the control system for
(a) System Fig. (4.9)(b) PD control
(b) System Fig. (4.9)(c) PID control
Solution.
(a) We see from inspection of Fig. 4.9(b) that, with two poles at the origin in the plant,
the system is type 2 with respect to reference inputs. The transfer function from
disturbance to error is
T
w
(s) =
1
Js
2
+k
D
s +k
p
(4.51)
= T
o,w
(s), (4.52)
PreT
E
Figure 4.9
Model of a satellite attitude
control: (a) basic system;
(b) PD control; (c) PID
control
(a)
R
D(s)
W
K
K
U
Js
1
s
1
u Y
u
(b)
R
W
Js
2
1
Y
1.0
k
p
k
D
s
(c)
R
W
Js
2
1
Y
1.0
k
p
k
D
s
s
k
I
for which n = 0 and K
o,w
= k
p
. The system is type 0 and the error constant is k
p
,
so the error to a unit disturbance step is
1
kp
.
(b) With PID control, the forward gain has three poles at the origin, so this system is
type 3 for reference inputs, but the disturbance transfer function is
T
w
(s) =
s
Js
3
+k
D
s
2
+k
p
s +k
I
, (4.53)
n = 1, (4.54)
T
o,w
(s) =
1
Js
3
+k
D
s
2
+k
p
s +k
I
, (4.55)
from which it follows that the system is type 1 and the error constant is k
I
, so the
error to a disturbance ramp of unit slope will be
1
k
I
.
PreT
E
EXAMPLE 4.5 System Type for a DC Motor Position Control
Consider the simplied model of a DC motor in unity feedback as shown in Fig. 4.10,
where the disturbance torque is labeled W(s).
(a) Use the proportional controller
D(s) = k
p
, (4.56)
and determine the system type and steady-state error properties with respect to
disturbance inputs.
(b) Let the control be PI, as given by
D(s) = k
p
+
k
I
s
, (4.57)
and determine the systemtype and the steady-state error properties for disturbance
inputs.
Solution.
(a) The closed-loop transfer function from W to E (where R = 0) is
T
w
(s) =
B
s(s +1) +Ak
p
= s
0
T
o,w
,
n = 0,
K
o,w
=
Ak
p
B
.
Applying Eq. (4.50), we see that the system is type 0 and the steady-state error to
a unit step torque input is e
ss
=
B
Akp
. From the earlier section, this system is seen to
be type 1 for reference inputs and illustrates that system type can be different for
different inputs to the same system.
Figure 4.10
DC motor with unity
feedback
W(s)
A
B
1.0
D(s)
s(ts 1)
A
Y R
PreT
E
(b) If the controller is PI, the disturbance error transfer function is
T
w
(s) =
Bs
s
2
(s +1) +(k
p
s +k
I
)A
, (4.58)
n = 1, (4.59)
K
n,w
=
Ak
I
B
, (4.60)
and therefore the system is type 1 and the error to a unit ramp disturbance input
will be
e
ss
=
B
Ak
I
. (4.61)
4.3 Control of Dynamic Error: PID Control
We have seen in Section 4.1 basic properties of feedback control, and in Sec-
tion 4.2 we examined the steady state response of systems to polynomial refer-
ence and disturbance input. At the end of Section 4.1 we observed that propor-
tional control changed the time constant of the simple speed-control system.
In this section the impact of more sophisticated controls on system character-
istic equations is examined in the context of a standard controller structure.
The most basic feedback is a constant Proportional to error. As we saw in Sec-
tion 4.2, addition of a term proportional to the Integral of error has a major
inuence on the system type and steady-state error to polynomials. The nal
term in the classical structure term proportional to the Derivative of error.
Combined, these three terms form the classical PID controller, which is widely The PID (proportional-integral-
derivative) controller
used in the process and robotics industries.
4.3.1 Proportional Control (P)
When the feedback control signal is linearly proportional to the system error,
we call the result Proportional feedback. This was the case for the feedback
used in the controller of speed in Section 4.1, for which the controller transfer
function is
U(s)
E(s)
= D
c
(s) = k
p
. (4.62)
As we saw in Section 4.1.4, the time constant of the feedback system was re-
duced by a factor 1 +Ak
p
by proportional control. If the plant is second order,
as, for example, is a DC motor with nonnegligible inductance, then the transfer
function can be written as
G(s) =
A
s
2
+a
1
s +a
2
. (4.63)
PreT
E
Section 4.3 Control of Dynamic Error: PID Control 187
In this case, the characteristic equation with proportional control is
1 +k
p
G(s) = 0, (4.64)
s
2
+a
1
s +a
2
+k
p
= 0. (4.65)
The designer can control the constant term and the natural frequency, but not
the damping of this equation. If k
p
is made large to get adequate steady-state
error, the damping may be much too low for satisfactory transient response.
4.3.2 Proportional plus Integral Control (PI)
Adding an integral term to the controller results in the Proportional plus Inte-
gral (PI) control equation Proportional plus Integral
control
u(t ) = k
p
e +k
I
_
t
t
0
e() d, (4.66)
for which the D
c
(s) in Fig. 4.5 becomes
U(s)
E(s)
= D
c
(s) = k
p
+
k
I
s
. (4.67)
This feedback has the primary virtue that, in the steady-state, its control output
can be a nonzero constant value even when the error signal at its input is zero.
This comes about because the integral termin the control signal is a summation
of all past values of e(t ). In fact, the integral term will not stop changing until
its input is zero, and therefore if the system reaches a stable steady state, the
input signal to the integrator will of necessity be zero. This feature means that a
constant disturbance w (see Fig. 4.4) can be canceled by the integrators output
even while the system error is zero.
If PI control is used in the speed example, the transform equation for the
controller is
U = k
p
(
ref
m
) +k
I
ref
m
s
, (4.68)
and the system transform equation with this controller is
(s +1)
m
= A(k
p
+
k
I
s
)(
ref
m
) +T W. (4.69)
If we now multiply by s and collect terms, we obtain
(s
2
+(Ak
p
+1)s +Ak
I
)
m
= A(k
p
s +k
I
)
ref
+AsW. (4.70)
Because the PI controller includes dynamics, use of this controller will change
the dynamic response in more complicated ways than the simple speed-up
we saw with proportional control. We can understand this by considering the
PreT
E
characteristic equationof thespeedcontrol withPI control, as seeninEq. (4.70).
The characteristic equation is
s
2
+(Ak
p
+1)s +Ak
I
= 0. (4.71)
The two roots of this equation may be complex and, if so, the natural frequency
is
n
=
_
Ak
I
, and the damping ratio is =

Ak
p
+1
2
n
. These parameters are
both determined by the controller gains. If the plant is second order, then the
characteristic equation is
1 +
k
p
s +k
I
s
A
s
2
+a
1
s +a
2
= 0, (4.72)
s
3
+a
1
s
2
+a
2
s +Ak
p
s +Ak
I
= 0. (4.73)
In this case, the controller parameters can be used to set two of the coefcients,
but not the third. For this we need derivative control.
4.3.3 Proportional-Integral-Derivative Control (PID)
The nal term in the classical controller is derivative control, D, and the com-
plete three-term controller is described by the transform equation we will use,
namely,
D
c
(s) =
U(s)
E(s)
= k
p
+
k
I
s
+k
D
s, (4.74)
or, equivalently, by the equation often used in the process industries, or
D
c
(s) = k
p
[1 +
1
T
I
s
+T
D
s], (4.75)
where the reset rate T
I
in seconds, and the derivative rate, T
D
, also in
seconds, can be given physical meaning to the operator who must select values
for themto tune the controller. For our purposes, Eq. (4.74) is simpler to use.
The effect of the derivative control term depends on the rate of change of the
error. As a result, a controller with derivative control exhibits an anticipatory
response, as illustrated by the fact that the output of a PD controller having a
ramp error e(t ) = t 1(t ) input would lead the output of a proportional controller
having the same input by
k
D
k
p
= T
D
seconds, as shown in Fig. 4.11.
PreT
E
Section 4.3 Control of Dynamic Error: PID Control 189
Figure 4.11
Anticipatory nature of
derivative control
T
D
u(t)
0 1 2 3 4 5
Time (sec)
PD
Proportional
Because of the sharp effect of derivative control on suddenly changing
signals, the D term is sometimes introduced into the feedback path as shown
in Fig. 4.12(a), which would describe, for example, a tachometer on the shaft
of a motor. The closed-loop characteristic equation is the same as if the term
were in the forward path, as given by Eq. (4.74) and drawn in Fig. 4.12(b), if
the derivative gain is k
D
= k
p
k
t
but the zeros from the reference to the output
are different in the two cases. With the derivative in the feedback path, the
reference is not differentiated, which may be a desirable result if the reference
is subject to sudden changes. With the derivative in the forward path, a step
change in the reference input will, in theory, cause an intense initial pulse in
the control signal, which may be very undesirable.
To illustrate the effect of a derivative term on PID control, consider speed
control, but with the second-order plant. In that case, the characteristic equa-
tion is
s
2
+a
1
s +a
2
+A(k
p
+
k
I
s
+k
D
s) = 0,
s
3
+a
1
s
2
+a
2
s +A(k
p
s +k
I
+k
D
s
2
) = 0. (4.76)
Collecting terms results in
s
3
+(a
1
+Ak
D
)s
2
+(a
2
+Ak
p
)s +Ak
I
= 0. (4.77)
Figure 4.12
Alternative ways of
conguring rate feedback
(a)
(b)
1 k
t,D
s
k
p R G(s) Y
k
p
k
D
s R G Y
PreT
E
The point here is that this equation, whose three roots determine the nature
of the dynamic response of the system, has three free parameters in k
P
, k
I
,
and k
D
, and by selection of these parameters, the roots can be uniquely and,
in theory, arbitrarily determined. Without the derivative term, there would be
only two free parameters, but with three roots, the choice of roots of the char-
acteristic equation would be restricted. To illustrate the effect more concretely,
a numerical example is useful.
EXAMPLE 4.6 PID Control of Motor Speed
Consider the DC motor speed control with parameters
5
J
m
=1.13 10
2
N-m- sec
2
/rad, b=0.028 N-m-sec/rad, L
a
=10
1
henry,
R
a
=0.45 ohms, K
t
=0.067 N-m/amp, K
e
=0.067 V-sec/rad. (4.78)
Use the controller parameters
k
p
= 3, k
I
= 15 sec
1
, k
D
= 0.3 sec. (4.79)
Discuss the effects of P, PI, and PID control on the responses of this system to steps
in the disturbance and steps in the reference input. Let the unused controller parameters
be zero.
Solution. Figure 4.13(a) illustrates the effects of P, PI, and PID feedback on the step
disturbance response of the system. Note that adding the integral term increases the
oscillatory behavior but eliminates the steady-state error, and that adding the derivative
term reduces the oscillation while maintaining zero steady-state error. Figure 4.13(b)
illustrates the effects of P, PI, and PID feedback on the step reference response, with
similar results. The step responses can be computed by forming the numerator and
denominator coefcient vectors (in descending powers of s ) and using the step function
in MATLAB. For example, after the values for the parameters are entered, the following
commands produce a plot of the response of PID control to a disturbance step:
numG = [La Ra 0];
denG = [Jm
*
La Ra
*
b + Ke
*
Ke + Ke
*
kD Ra
*
Ke
*
Ke + Ke
*
kp Ke
*
ki];
sysG = tf(numG,denG);
y = step(sysG).
5
These values have been scaled to measure time in milliseconds by multiplying the true L
a
and
J
m
by 1000 each.
PreT
E
Section 4.4 Extensions to the Basic Feedback Concepts 191
6
8
6
4
2
0
2
4
A
m
p
l
i
t
u
d
e
0 1 2 3 4 5 6
Time (msec)
(a)
0
1.8
1.6
1.4
1.2
1.0
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
A
m
p
l
i
t
u
d
e
0 1 2 3 4 5 6
Time (msec)
(b)
P
PI
PID
P
PI
PID
Figure 4.13 Responses of P, PI, and PID control to (a) step disturbance input and (b) step reference input
4.4 Extensions to the Basic Feedback Concepts
4.4.1 Digital Implementation of Controllers
As a result of the revolution in the cost-effectiveness of digital computers, there
has beenanincreasinguseof digital logic inembeddedapplications, suchas con-
trollers in feedback systems. With the formula for calculating the control signal
in software rather than hardware, a digital controller gives the designer much
more exibility in making modications to the control law after the hardware
design is xed. In many instances, this means that the hardware and software
designs can proceed almost independently, saving a great deal of time. Also, it is
easy to include binary logic and nonlinear operations as part of the function of
a digital controller. Special processors designed for real-time signal processing
and known as digital signal processors, or DSPs, are particularly well suited for
use as real-time controllers. While, in general, the design of systems to use a
digital processor requires sophisticated use of new concepts to be introduced
in Chapter 8, such as the z-transform, it is quite straightforward to translate a
linear continuous analog design into a discrete equivalent. A digital controller
differs from an analog controller in that the signals must be sampled and quan-
tized.
6
A signal to be used in digital logic needs to be sampled rst, and then
the samples need to be converted by an analog-to-digital converter, or A/D
converter,
7
into a quantized digital number. Once the digital computer has cal-
culated the proper next control signal value, this value needs to be converted
back into a voltage and held constant or otherwise extrapolated by a digital-to-
6
Acontroller that operates on signals that are sampled but not quantized is called discrete, while
one that operates on signals that are both sampled and quantized is called digital.
7
Pronounced A to D.
PreT
E
analog converter, or D/A, in order to be applied to the actuator of the process.
The control signal is not changed until the next sampling period. As a result
of the sampling, there are more strict limits on the speed or bandwidth of a
digital controller than on analog devices. Discrete design methods that tend
to minimize these limitations are described in Chapter 8 . A reasonable rule
of thumb for selecting the sampling period is that during the rise time of the
response to a step, the input to the discrete controller should be sampled ap-
proximately six times. By adjusting the controller for the effects of sampling,
the sampling can be adjusted to 2 to 3 times per rise time. This corresponds to a
sampling frequency that is 10 to 20 times the systems closed-loop bandwidth.
The quantization of the controller signals introduces an equivalent extra noise
into the system, and to keep this interference at an acceptable level, the A/D
converter usually has an accuracy of 10 to 12 bits. For a rst analysis, the effects
of the quantization are usually ignored. A simplied block diagram of a system
with a digital controller is shown in Figure 4.14.
For this introduction to digital control, we will describe a simplied tech-
nique for nding a discrete (sampled, but not quantized) equivalent to a given
continuous controller. The method depends on the sampling period T
s
being
short enough that the reconstructed control signal is close to the signal that the
original analog controller would have produced. We also assume that the num-
bers used in the digital logic have enough accurate bits so that the quantization
implied in the A/D and D/A processes can be ignored. While there are good
analysis tools to determine how well these requirements are met, here we will
test our results by simulation, following the well known advice that The proof
of the pudding is in the eating.
Finding a discrete equivalent to a given analog controller is equivalent to
nding a recurrence equation for the samples of the control which will approx-
imate the differential equation of the controller. The assumption is that we
have the transfer function of an analog controller and wish to replace it with a
discrete controller that will accept samples of the controller input, e(kT
s
), from
a sampler and, using past values of the control signal, u(kT
s
), and present and
past samples of the input, e(kT
s
), will compute the next control signal to be
sent to the actuator. As an example, consider a PIDcontroller with the transfer
function
U(s) = (k
p
+
k
I
s
+k
D
s)E(s), (4.80)
Figure 4.14
Block diagram of a digital
controller
Sensor
H
U
T
Y R A/D
e(kT) u(kT)
D/A
Digital controller
D(z)
Clock
Plant
G
PreT
E
which is equivalent to the three terms of the time-domain expression
u(t ) = k
p
e(t ) +k
I
_
t
0
e() d +k
D
e(t ) (4.81)
= u
P
+u
I
+u
D
. (4.82)
Using the fact that the systemis linear, the next control sample canbe computed
term by term. The proportional term is immediate:
u
P
(kT
s
+T
s
) = k
p
e(kT
s
+T
s
). (4.83)
The integral term can be computed by breaking the integral into two parts and
approximating the second part, which is the integral over one sample period,
as follows:
u
I
(kT
s
+T
s
) = k
I
_
kT
s
+T
s
0
e() d (4.84)
= k
I
_
kT
s
0
e() d +k
I
_
kT
s
+T
s
kT
s
e() d (4.85)
= u
I
(kT
s
) +{area under e() over one period} (4.86)
= u
I
(kT
s
) +k
I
T
s
2
{e(kT
s
+T
s
) +e(kT
s
)}. (4.87)
InEq. (4.87) theareainquestionhas beenapproximatedbythat of thetrapezoid
formed by the base T
s
and vertices e(kT
s
+ T
s
) and e(kT
s
), as shown by the
dashed line in Fig. 4.15.
The area can also be approximated by the rectangle of amplitude e(kT
s
)
and width T
s
, shown by the solid blue in Fig. 4.15, to give u
I
(kT
s
+ T
s
) =
u
I
(kT
s
) +k
I
T
s
e(kT
s
). These and other possibilities are considered in Chapter 8.
In the derivative term, the roles of u and e are reversed from integration,
and the consistent approximation can be written down at once from Eq. (4.87)
and Eq. (4.81) as
T
s
2
{u
D
(kT
s
+T
s
) +u
D
(kT
s
)} = k
D
{e(kT
s
+T
s
) e(kT
s
)}. (4.88)
Figure 4.15
Graphical interpretation of
numerical integration
t
x
x f (x, u)
x dt
0
t
i
t
i1
x(t
i
)
0
t
PreT
E
As with linear analog transfer functions, these relations are greatly simplied
and generalized by the use of transform ideas. At this time, the discrete trans-
form will be introduced simply as a prediction operator z, much as if we de-
scribed the Laplace transform variable s as a differential operator. Here we
dene the operator z as the forward shift operator in the sense that if U(z) is
the transform of u(kT
s
), then zU(z) will be the transform of u(kT
s
+T
s
). With
this denition, the integral term can be written as
zU
I
(z) = U
I
(z) +k
I
T
s
2
[zE(z) +E(z)] , (4.89)
U
I
(z) = k
I
T
s
2
z +1
z 1
E(z), (4.90)
and from Eq. (4.88) the derivative term becomes the inverse
U
D
(z) = k
D
2
T
s
z 1
z +1
E(z). (4.91)
The complete discrete PID controller is thus described by
U(z) =
_
k
p
+k
I
T
s
2
z +1
z 1
+k
D
2
T
s
z 1
z +1
_
E(z). (4.92)
Comparing the two discrete equivalents of integration and differentiation with
the corresponding analog terms, it is seen that the effect of the discrete ap-
proximation in the z-domain is as if everywhere in the analog transfer function
the operator s has been replaced by the composite operator
2
T
s
z1
z+1
. This is the
trapezoid rule
8
of discrete equivalents:
Trapezoid Rule
The discrete equivalent to D
a
(s) is D
d
(z) = D
a
_
2
T
s
z 1
z +1
_
. (4.93)
EXAMPLE 4.7 Discrete Equivalent
Find the discrete equivalent of the analog controller with transfer function
D(s) =
U(s)
E(s)
=
11s +1
3s +1
, (4.94)
using the sample period T
s
= 1.
8
The formula is also called Tustins Method after the English engineer who used the technique
to study the responses of nonlinear circuits.
PreT
E
Solution. The discrete operator is
2(z 1)
z +1
, and thus the discrete transfer function is
D
d
(z) =
U(z)
E(z)
= D(s)
s=
2
Ts
z1
z+1
(4.95)
=
11
_
2(z 1)
z +1
_
+1
3
_
2(z 1)
z +1
_
+1
. (4.96)
Clearing fractions, we get the discrete transfer function
D
d
(z) =
U(z)
E(z)
=
23z 21
7z 5
. (4.97)
Converting the discrete transfer function to a discrete difference equation by using the
denition of z as the forward shift operator is done as follows: First we cross-multiply
in Eq. (4.97) to obtain
(7z 5)U(z) = (23z 21)E(z), (4.98)
and interpreting z as a shift operator, we nd that this is equivalent to the difference
equation
9
7u(k +1) 5u(k) = 23e(k +1) 21e(k), (4.99)
where we have replaced kT
s
+ T
s
with k + 1 to simplify the notation. To compute the
next control at time kT
s
+T
s
, therefore, we solve the difference equation
u(k +1) =
5
7
u(k) +
23
7
e(k +1)
21
7
e(k). (4.100)
Now lets apply these results to a control problem. Fortunately, MATLAB
provides us with the Simulink capability to simulate both continuous and dis-
crete systems, allowing us to compare the responses of the systems with con-
tinuous and discrete controllers.
EXAMPLE 4.8 Equivalent Discrete Controller for Speed Control
A motor speed control is found to have the plant transfer function
Y
U
=
45
(s +9)(s +5)
. (4.101)
9
The process is similar to that used in Chapter 3 to nd the ordinary differential equation to
which a rational Laplace transform corresponds.
PreT
E
A PI controller designed for this system has the transfer function
D(s) =
U
E
= 1.4
s +6
s
. (4.102)
The closed-loop system has a rise time of about 0.2 sec and an overshoot of about
20%. Design a discrete equivalent of this controller, and compare the step responses
and control signals of the two systems. (a) Compare the responses if the sample period
is 0.07, which is about three samples per rise time. (b) Compare the responses with a
sample period of T
s
= 0.035, which corresponds to about six samples per rise time.
Solution.
(a) Using the substitution given by Eq. (4.93), the discrete equivalent for T
s
= 0.07 is
given by replacing s by s
2
0.07
z 1
z +1
in D(s) as follows:
D
d
(z) = 1.4
2
.07
z 1
z +1
+6
2
.07
z 1
z +1
, (4.103)
= 1.4
2(z 1) +6 0.07(z +1)
2(z 1)
, (4.104)
= 1.4
1.21z 0.79
(z 1)
. (4.105)
On the basis of this expression, the equation for the control is (the sample period
is suppressed)
u(k +1) = u(k) +1.4 [1.21e(k +1) 0.79e(k)]. (4.106)
(b) For T
s
= 0.035, the discrete transfer function is
D
d
= 1.4
1.105z 0.895
z 1
, (4.107)
for which the difference equation is
u(k +1) = u(k) +1.4[1.105 e(k +1) 0.895 e(k)].
A Simulink block diagram for simulating the two systems is given in Fig. 4.16, and
plots of the step responses are given in Fig. 4.17(a). The respective control signals are
plotted in Fig. 4.17(b). Notice that the discrete controller for T
s
= 0.07 results in a
substantial increase in the overshoot in the step response, while with T
s
= 0.035, the
digital controller matches the performance of the analog controller fairly well.
For controllers with many poles and zeros, making the continuous-to-discrete sub-
stitution called for in Eq. (4.93) can be very tedious. Fortunately, MATLAB provides
a command that does all the work. If one has a continuous transfer function given by
PreT
E
Step
Mux
Control
s
s6
PI Control
1.4
Slider K
c
s9
9
Tau 1
Mux1
Output
s5
5
Tau 2
z1
1.21z0.79 Discrete
PI control 1.4
Slider K
d
s9
9
Tau 1
s5
5
Tau 2
Figure 4.16 Simulink block diagram to compare continuous and discrete controllers
D
c
(s) =
numD
denD
represented in MATLAB as sysDa=tf(numD,denD), then the discrete
equivalent with sampling period T
s
is given by
sysDd = c2d (sysDa, T
s
, 't'). (4.108)
In this expression, of course, the polynomials are represented in MATLAB form. The
last parameter in the c2d function given by 't' calls for the conversion to be done using
the trapezoid method. The alternatives can be found by asking MATLAB for help c2d.
For example, to compute the polynomials for T
s
= 0.07 for the preceding example, the
commands would be
numDa = [1 6];
denDa = [1 1];
sysDa = tf(numD,denD)
sysDd = c2d( sysDa,0.07,'t')
0
1.4
1.2
1.0
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5
Time (sec)
(a)
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5
Time (sec)
(b)
0
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
Continuous controller
Digital controller (T 0.07 sec)
Discrete controller (T 0.035 sec)
Continuous controller
Digital controller (T 0.07 sec)
Discrete controller (T 0.035 sec)
Figure 4.17 Comparison plots of a speed-control system with continuous and discrete controllers: (a) output
responses; (b) control signals
PreT
E
4.4.2 ZieglerNichols Tuning of PID Regulators
As we will see in later chapters, sophisticated methods are available to develop
a controller that will meet steady-state and transient specications for both
tracking input references and rejecting disturbances. These methods require
that the designer have either a dynamic model of the process in the form of
equations of motion or a detailed frequency response over a substantial range
of frequencies. Either of these data can be quite difcult to obtain, and the dif-
culty has led to the development of sophisticated techniques of system model
identication. Engineers early on explored ways to avoid these requirements.
Callender et al. (1936) proposeda designfor the widely usedPIDcontroller
by specifying satisfactory values for the controller settings based on estimates
of the plant parameters that an operating engineer could make from experi-
ments on the process itself. The approach was extended by J. G. Ziegler and
N. B. Nichols (1942, 1943) who recognized that the step responses of a large
number of process control systems exhibit a process reaction curve like that
shown in Fig. 4.18, which can be generated from experimental step response
data. The S-shape of the curve is characteristic of many systems and can be
approximated by the step response of Transfer function for a
high-order system with a
characteristic process
reaction curve
Y(s)
U(s)
=
Ae
st
d
s +1
, (4.109)
which is a rst-order system with a time delay of t
d
seconds. The constants in
Eq. (4.109) can be determined from the unit step response of the process. If a
tangent is drawn at the inection point of the reaction curve, then the slope of
the line is R = A/ and the intersection of the tangent line with the time axis
identies the time delay L = t
d
.
Ziegler and Nichols gave two methods for tuning the PID controller for
sucha model. Inthe rst methodthe choice of controller parameters is designed Tuning by decay ratio of 0.25
to result in a closed-loop step response transient with a decay ratio of approxi-
Figure 4.18
Process reaction curve
t
y(t)
L t
d
Lag
t
A
t
A
Slope R
A
t
reaction rate
PreT
E
Figure 4.19
Quarter decay ratio
0.25
1
Period
t
y(t)
mately 0.25. This means that the transient decays to a quarter of its value after
one period of oscillation, as shown in Fig. 4.19. A quarter decay corresponds
to = 0.21 and is a reasonable compromise between quick response and ade-
quate stability margins. The authors simulated the equations for the system on
an analog computer and adjusted the controller parameters until the transients
showed the decay of 25% in one period. The regulator parameters suggested
by Ziegler and Nichols for the controller terms, dened by
D
c
(s) = k
p
(1 +
1
T
I
s
+T
D
s), (4.110)
are given in Table 4.2.
TABLE 4.2
ZieglerNichols Tuning for the Regulator
D(s) = k
p
(1 +1/T
I
s +T
D
s), for a decay ratio of 0.25
Type of Controller Optimum Gain
Proportional k
p
= 1/RL
PI
_
k
p
= 0.9/RL,
T
I
= L/0.3
PID
_
_
_
k
p
= 1.2/RL,
T
I
= 2L,
T
D
= 0.5L
In the ultimate sensitivity method, the criteria for adjusting the parameters Tuning by evaluation at limit of
stability (ultimate sensitivity
method)
are based on evaluating the amplitude and frequency of the oscillations of
the system at the limit of stability rather than on taking a step response. To
use the method, the proportional gain is increased until the system becomes
marginally stable and continuous oscillations just begin, with amplitude limited
by the saturation of the actuator. The corresponding gain is dened as K
u
PreT
E
Figure 4.20
Determination of the
ultimate gain and period
Process r
y
K
u
e
(called the ultimate gain) and the period of oscillation is P
u
(called the ultimate
period). These are determined as shown in Figs. 4.20 and 4.21. P
u
should be
measured when the amplitude of oscillation is as small as possible. Then the
tuning parameters are selected as shown in Table 4.3.
TABLE 4.3
ZieglerNichols Tuning for the Regulator
D
c
(s) = k
p
(1 +1/T
I
s +T
D
s), Based on the Ultimate
Sensitivity Method
Type of Controller Optimum Gain
Proportional k
p
= 0.5K
u
PI
_
k
p
= 0.45K
u
,
T
I
=
P
u
1.2
PID
_
_
k
p
= 0.6K
u
,
T
I
=
1
2
P
u
,
T
D
=
1
8
P
u
Experience has shown that the controller settings according to Ziegler
Nichols rules provide acceptable closed-loop response for many systems. The
process operator will often do nal tuning of the controller iteratively on the
actual process to yield satisfactory control.
10
Figure 4.21
Neutrally stable system
P
u
t
y(t)
10
Tuning of PID controllers has been the subject of continuing study since 1936. A modern
publication on the topic is H. Panagopoulous, K. J. strm, and T. Hagglund, Proceedings of
the American Control Conference, San Diego, CA, June 1999.
PreT
E
Figure 4.22
A measured process
reaction curve
0.0 100.0 200.0 300.0 400.0
Time (sec)
1.2
1.0
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0
y
EXAMPLE 4.9 Tuning of a Heat Exchanger: Quarter Decay Ratio
Consider the heat exchanger of Example 2.13. The process reaction curve of this system
is shown in Fig. 4.22. Determine proportional and PI regulator gains for the systemusing
the ZeiglerNichols rules to achieve a quarter decay ratio. Plot the corresponding step
responses.
Solution. From the process reaction curve, we measure the maximum slope to be
R

=
1
90
and the time delay to be L
= 13 sec. According to the ZeiglerNichols rules of

Table 4.2 the gains are as follows:
y
1.8
1.6
1.4
1.2
1.0
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0
y
400.0
1.8
1.6
1.4
1.2
1.0
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0
300.0 200.0 100.0 0.0
Time (sec)
(b)
400.0 300.0 200.0 100.0 0.0
Time (sec)
(a)
PI PI
Proportional
Proportional
Figure 4.23 Closed-loop step responses
PreT
E
Proportional : k
p
=
1
RL
=
90
13
= 6.92,
PI : k
p
=
0.9
RL
= 6.22 and T
I
=
L
0.3
=
13
0.3
= 43.3
Figure 4.23(a) shows the step responses of the closed-loop system to these two regula-
tors. Note that the proportional regulator results in a steady-state offset, while the PI
regulator tracks the step exactly in the steady-state. Both regulators are rather oscilla-
tory and have considerable overshoot. If we arbitrarily reduce the gain k
p
by a factor
of 2 in each case, the overshoot and oscillatory behaviors are substantially reduced, as
shown in Fig. 4.23(b).
EXAMPLE 4.10 Tuning of a Heat Exchanger: Oscillatory Behavior
Proportional feedback was applied to the heat exchanger in the previous example until
the systemshowed nondecaying oscillations in response to a short pulse (impulse) input,
as shown in Fig. 4.24. The ultimate gain was K
u
= 15.3, and the period was measured
at P
u
= 42 sec. Determine the proportional and PI regulators according to the Zeigler
Nichols rules based on the ultimate sensitivity method. Plot the corresponding step
responses.
Solution. The regulators from Table 4.3 are
Proportional : k
p
= 0.5K
u
= 7.65,
PI : k
p
= 0.45 K
u
= 6.885 and T
I
=
1
1.2
P
u
= 35.
The step responses of the closed-loop system are shown in Fig. 4.25(a). Note that the
responses aresimilar tothose inExample 4.9. If we reduce k
p
by 50%, thenthe overshoot
is substantially reduced, as shown in Fig. 4.25(b).
Figure 4.24
Ultimate period of heat
exchanger
I
m
p
u
l
s
e

r
e
s
p
o
n
s
e
0 20 40 60 80 100 120
0.010
0.008
0.006
0.004
0.002
0.00
0.002
0.006
0.004
0.008
0.010
Time (sec)
PreT
E
y
1.8
1.6
1.4
1.2
1.0
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0
y
400.0
1.8
1.6
1.4
1.2
1.0
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0
300.0 200.0 100.0 0.0
Time (sec)
(b)
400.0 300.0 200.0 100.0 0.0
Time (sec)
(a)
PI
PI
Proportional
Proportional
Figure 4.25 Closed-loop step response
4.4.3 Truxals Formula for the Error Constants
In this chapter we have derived formulas for the error constants in terms of the
system transfer function. The most common case is the type 1 system, whose
error constant is K
v
, thevelocityerror constant. Truxal (1955) derivedaformula
for the velocity constant in terms of the closed-loop poles and zeros, a formula
that connects the steady-state error to the dynamic response. Since control
design often requires a trade-off between these two characteristics, Truxals
formula can be useful to know. Its derivation is quite direct. Suppose the closed-
loop transfer function T(s) of a type 1 system is
T(s) = K
(s z
1
)(s z
2
) (s z
m
)
(s p
1
)(s p
2
) (s p
n
)
. (4.111)
Since the steady-state error in response to a step input in a type 1 system is
zero, the DC gain is unity. Thus,
T(0) = 1. (4.112)
The system error is given by
E(s)

= R(s) Y(s) = R(s)
_
1
Y(s)
R(s)
_
= R(s)[1 T(s)]. (4.113)
PreT
E
The system error due to a unit ramp input is given by
E(s) =
1 T(s)
s
2
. (4.114)
Using the Final Value Theorem, we get
e
ss
= lim
s0
1 T(s)
s
. (4.115)
Using LHpitals rule, we rewrite Eq. (4.115) as
e
ss
= lim
s0
dT
ds
(4.116)
or
e
ss
= lim
s0
dT
ds
=
1
K
v
. (4.117)
Equation (4.117) implies that 1/K
v
is related to the slope of the transfer func-
tion at the origin, a result that will also be shown in Section 6.1.2. Using
Eq. (4.112), we can rewrite Eq. (4.117) as
e
ss
= lim
s0
dT
ds
1
T
(4.118)
or
e
ss
= lim
s0
d
ds
[ln T(s)]. (4.119)
Substituting Eq. (4.111) into Eq. (4.119), we get
e
ss
= lim
s0
d
ds
_
ln
_
K
m
i=1
(s z
i
)
n
i=1
(s p
i
)
__
(4.120)
= lim
s0
d
ds
_
K +
m
i=1
ln(s z
i
)
m
i=1
ln(s p
i
)
_
, (4.121)
or
1
K
v
=
d ln T
ds
s=0
=
n
i=1
1
p
i
+
m
i=1
1
z
i
. (4.122)
We observe from Eq. (4.122) that K
v
increases as the closed-loop poles Truxals formula
move away from the origin. Similar relationships exist for other error coef-
cients, and these are explored in the problems.
PreT
E
EXAMPLE 4.11 Truxals Formula
A third order type 1 system has closed-loop poles at 2 2j and 0.1. The system has
only one closed-loop zero. Where should the zero be if a K
v
= 10 is desired?
Solution. From Truxals formula we have
1
K
v
=
1
2 +2j
1
2 2j
1
0.1
+
1
z
,
or
0.1 = 0.5 +10 +
1
z
.
Therefore, the closed-loop zero should be at z = 0.1.
4.4.4 Sensitivity of Time Response to Parameter
Change
We have considered the effects of errors on the steady-state gain of a dynamic
system and have shown how feedback control can reduce these errors. Since
many control specications are in terms of the step response, the sensitivity of
the time response toparameter changes is sometimes very useful toexplore. For
example, by looking at the sensitivity plot we can tell whether increasing a par-
ticular parameter will increase or decrease the overshoot of the response.
11
The
analysis that follows is also a good exercise in small-signal linearization.
To consider the sensitivity of the output y(t, ) of a systemhaving a param-
eter of interest, , we compute the effect of a perturbation in the parameter,
, on the nominal response by using the Taylors series expansion
y(t, +) = y(t, ) +
y
+ . (4.123)
The rst-order approximation of the parameter perturbation effect is the term
y(t ) =
y
. (4.124)
This function can be generated from the system itself as shown by Perkins
et al, 1991. We assume that the response depends linearly on the parameter
and therefore that the overall transfer function T(s, ) is composed of com-
ponent transfer functions that can be dened to bring out the dependence on
the parameter explicitly. A block diagram of the transfer function in terms of
11
As we shall see in the next chapter, the development of the MATLAB root locus interface
rltool gives the designer a computer aid to this result.
PreT
E
Figure 4.26
Block diagram showing the
dependence of output y on
parameter
u
Y R T
11
T
12
T
22
T
21
X Z V
the components T
ij
(s) can be expressed as shown in Fig. 4.26, where we have
labeled the parameter as and its input signal as Z. In terms of this block
diagram, the equations relating Y and Z to the reference input can be written
immediately:
Y = T
11
R +T
21
Z (4.125)
and
Z = T
12
R +T
22
Z. (4.126)
The perturbed equations are
Y +Y = T
11
R +T
21
( +)(Z +Z) (4.127)
and
Z +Z = T
12
R +T
22
( +)(Z +Z). (4.128)
Multiplying these out and ignoring the small term Z, the expressions for
the perturbations in Y and Z are given by
Y = T
21
(Z +Z) (4.129)
and
Z = T
22
(Z +Z). (4.130)
The solutions to these equations can be best presented as a block diagram,
shown in Fig. 4.27(a). The output of this gure is Y =
y
, and we notice
that the input Z is multiplied by a gain of . Therefore, if we drop the block
, the output will be simply
y
, as shown in Fig. 4.27(b). Finally, to compute

the sensitivity as the variation to a percent change in the parameter, which is
y
ln
=
y(t,)
ln
=
y
, we need only shift the input Z from the output side of

the block to its input as shown in Fig. 4.27(c). We are now in a position to
give the nal block diagram of the system as it is to be implemented, shown in
Fig. 4.28.
PreT
E
Figure 4.27
Block diagrams showing
the generation of (a) Y
and Z, (b)
y
, and
(c)
y
(a)
du dZ
T
22
Z
T
21
u
dY du
u
y
(b)
T
22
Z
T
21
u
u
y
(c)
T
22
Z T
21
u
u
uy
In this gure, it is clear that to compute the sensitivity of the output to a
parameter, one needs to simulate two copies of the system. The input to the
rst systemis the reference input of interest, and the input to the second system
is at the input to the parameter of interest of the variable Z, taken from the
input to the parameter in the original system. The transfer function from the
reference input to the output sensitivity is readily computed to be
T
12
T
21
(1 T
22
)
2
. (4.131)
Response sensitivity
Fromthis function it is clear that to keep the sensitivity of the output signal to a
parameter change low, it is important to have feedback with high gain around
the parameter in question.
Figure 4.28
Block diagram showing
the computation of
y
from the original transfer

function
R Y
u u
Z
V
uy
u
PreT
E
Figure 4.29
Block diagram showing
the computation of the
sensitivity of the output of
the speed-control example
R
K
s 1
A
Y
K
cl
s 1
A
K
cl
Z
K
Y
EXAMPLE 4.12 Time-Domain Sensitivity
Compute the sensitivity of the output of the speed-control example described by
Eq. (4.20) with respect to the control gain, K
cl
. Take the nominal values to be K
cl
= 9,
= 0.01 sec, and A = 1 rad/volt-sec.
Solution. The required block diagram for the computation is given in Fig. 4.29, based
on Fig. 4.28. In MATLAB, we will construct the several transfer functions with T
ij
=
n
ij
d
ij
andwill implement Eq. (4.131). For comparison, we compute the nominal response from
Fig. 4.26 and add 10% of the sensitivity to the nominal response. The instructions to do
the computation in MATLAB are
% script to compute sensitivity for Fig. 4.29
% First input the data for the component transfer functions T
ij
% and the nominal parameter, Kcl for this problem
Kcl = 9; tau = .01;
n11 = 0; d11 = 1;
n12 = 1; d12 = 1;
n22 = [0 1]; d22 = [tau 1];
n21 = 1; d21 = [tau 1];
% Now compute the numerator and denominator polynomials of the transfer
% functions using the convolution function conv to multiply the polynomials
% and put them into system transfer function forms with the MATLAB function tf.
% The overall transfer function is
% Y/R = n11/d11 + (n12
*
n21
*
d22)/(d12
*
d21
*
[d22-Kcl
*
n22]) = sysy
% The transfer function from the reference input to the sensitivity is
% Kcl
*
(dy/dKcl)/R = sysdy
% Now dene the numerators and denominators of several intermediate
% intermediate transfer functions
n1 = Kcl
*
conv(n21,n12);
d1 = conv(d21,d12);
n2 = d22;
PreT
E
d2 = [d22-Kcl
*
n22];
ny = conv(n1,n2);
dy = conv(d1,d2);
% Now put these together to form two intermediate transfer functions
sysy1 = tf(ny,dy);
sysy2 = tf(n11,d11);
% Now construct the nal transfer functions
% The overall transfer function Y/R
sysy = sysy1+sysy2;
% The sensitivity transfer function
ndy = conv(ny,n2);
ddy = conv(dy,d2);
sysdy = tf(ndy,ddy);
% Now use these to compute the step responses and
% plot the output, the sensitivity and a perturbed response
[y,t] = step(sysy);
[yd,t] = step(sysdy);
plot(t,[y yd y+.1
*
yd]);
These instructions are constructed to compute the sensitivity for any system, given the
several transfer functions. The script input is for the specic example. Plots of the output,
its sensitivity, andthe result of a 10%change inthe parameter value are giveninFig. 4.30.
Figure 4.30
Plots of the output, the
sensitivity, and the result
of a 10% change in the
parameter value for the
speed-control example
1.0
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
0 1 2 3 4 5 6
Time (msec)
y
y dy
k
cl
dk
cl
dy
PreT
E
SUMMARY
The system error in a feedback control can be compactly described by
dening the loop gain L, the sensitivity function , and the complementary
sensitivity function T.
Compared with open-loop control, feedback can be used to reduce steady-
stateerrors todisturbances, reducethesystems transfer functionsensitivity
to parameter variations, and speed up the transient response.
Sensor noise introduces a conict between efforts to reduce error caused
by plant disturbances and those caused by the sensor noise.
Classifying a system as type k indicates the ability of the system to achieve
zero steady-state error to polynomials of degree less than but not equal
to k. A stable unity feedback system is type k with respect to reference
inputs if the loop gain L has k poles at the origin, in which case we can
write
L(s) =
(s +z
1
)(s +z
2
)
s
k
(s +p
1
)(s +p
2
)
,
and the error constant is given by
K
k
= lim
s0
s
k
L(s). (4.132)
A table of steady-state errors for unity feedback systems of types 0, 1, and
2 to reference inputs is given in Table 4.1.
Systems can be classied as to type for rejecting disturbances by computing
the system error to polynomial disturbance inputs. The system is type k to
disturbances if the error is zero to all disturbance polynomials of degree
less than k, but nonzero for a polynomial of degree k.
The standard PID controller is described by the equation
U(s) =
_
k
p
+
k
I
s
+k
D
s
_
E(s)
or
U(s) = k
p
_
1 +
1
T
I
s
+T
D
s
_
E(s) = D(s)E(s).
This latter form is ubiquitous in the process-control industry and is the
basic controller in many control systems.
Increasing the proportional feedback gain reduces steady-state errors, but
high gains almost always destabilize the system. Integral control provides
robust reduction in steady-state errors, but often makes the system less
stable. Derivative control usually increases damping andimproves stability.
These three kinds of control combined form the classical PID controller.
PreT
E
End-of-Chapter Questions 211
Useful guidelines for tuning PID controllers were presented in Tables 4.2
and 4.3.
A difference equation describing a digital controller to be used to replace
a given analog controller can be found by replacing s with
2
T
s
z1
z+1
in the
analog controllers transfer function and using z as a forward shift operator
in the sense that if U(z) corresponds to u(kT
s
), then zU(z) corresponds to
u(kT
s
+T
s
).
MATLAB can compute a discrete equivalent with the command c2d.
End-of-Chapter Questions
1. Give three advantages of feedback in control.
2. Give two disadvantages of feedback in control.
3. A temperature control system is found to have zero error to a constant tracking
input and an error of 0.5
C to a tracking input that is linear in time, rising at the rate

of 40
C/sec. What is the system type of this control system and what is the relevant
error constant [K
p
or K
v
or etc.]?
4. What are the units of K
p
, K
v
, and K
a
?
5. What is the denition of system type with respect to reference inputs?
6. What is the denition of system type with respect to disturbance inputs?
7. Why does system type depend on where the external signal enters the system?
8. What is the main objective of introducing integral control?
9. What is the major objective of adding derivative control?
10. Why might a designer wish to put the derivative term in the feedback path rather
than in the error path?
11. Give two reasons to use a digital controller rather than an analog controller.
12. Give two disadvantages to using a digital controller.
13. Give the substitution in the discrete operator z for the Laplace operator s if the
approximation to the integral in Eq. (4.87) is taken to be the rectangle of height
e(kT
s
) and base T
s
.
14. What is the advantage of having a tuning rule for PID controllers?
PreT
E
Problems
Problems for Section 4.1: The Basic Equations of Control
4.1. Consider a system with the conguration of Fig. 4.5, where D is the constant gain
of the controller and G is that of the process. The nominal values of these gains
are D = 5 and G = 7. Suppose a constant disturbance w is added to the control
input u before the signal goes to the process.
(a) Compute the gain from w to y in terms of D and G.
(b) Suppose the system designer knows that an increase by a factor of six in the
loop gain DG can be tolerated before the system goes out of specication.
Where should the designer place the extra gain if the objective is to minimize
the system error r y due to the disturbance? For example, either D or G
could be increased by a factor of six, or D could be doubled and G tripled,
and so on. Which choice is the best?
4.2. Bode dened the sensitivity function relating a transfer function G to one of its
parameters k as the ratio of percent change in k to percent change in G. We dene
the reciprocal of Bodes function as
S
G
k
=
dG/G
dk/k
=
d ln G
d ln k
=
k
G
dG
dk
.
Thus, when the parameter k changes by a certain percentage, S tells us what
percent change to expect in G. In control systems design, we are almost always
interested in the sensitivity at zero frequency, or when s = 0. The purpose of this
exercise is to examine the effect of feedback on sensitivity. In particular, we would
like to compare the topologies shown in Fig. 4.31 for connecting three amplier
stages with a gain of K into a single amplier with a gain of 10.
Figure 4.31
Three-amplier topologies
for Problem 4.2
b
1
R Y K K K
(a)
(b)
(c)
R Y K K K
b
3
R K
K
b
2
K Y
b
2
b
2
PreT
E
Problems 213
(a) For each topology in Fig. 4.31, compute
i
so that, if K = 10, Y = 10R.
(b) For each topology, compute S
G
k
when G = Y/R. [Use the respective
i
values
found in part (a).] Which case is the least sensitive?
(c) Compute the sensitivities of the systems in Fig. 4.31(b, c) to
2
and
3
. Us-
ing your results, comment on the relative need for precision in sensors and
actuators.
4.3. Comparethetwostructures showninFig. 4.32withrespect tosensitivitytochanges
in the overall gain due to changes in the amplier gain. Use the relation
S =
d ln F
d ln K
=
K
F
dF
dK
as the measure. Select H
1
and H
2
so that the nominal system outputs satisfy
F
1
= F
2
, and assume KH
1
> 0.
R
H
1
K
H
1
K F
1
(a)
R
H
2
K K F
2
(b)
Figure 4.32 Block diagrams for Problem 4.3
4.4. A unity feedback control system has the open-loop transfer function
G(s) =
A
s(s +a)
.
(a) Compute the sensitivity of the closed-loop transfer function to changes in the
parameter A.
(b) Compute the sensitivity of the closed-loop transfer function to changes in the
parameter a.
(c) If the unity gain in the feedback changes to a value of = 1, compute the
sensitivity of the closed-loop transfer function with respect to .
(d) Assuming that A = 1 and a = 1, plot the magnitude of each of the preceding
sensitivity functions for s = j using the semilogy command in MATLAB.
Comment on the relative effect of parameter variations in A, a, and at
different frequencies , paying particular attention to DC (when = 0).
Problems for Section 4.2: Control of Steady-State Error
4.5. Consider the second-order plant
G(s) =
1
(s +1)(5s +1)
.
PreT
E
(a) Determine the system type and error constant with respect to tracking poly-
nomial reference inputs of the system for P, PD, and PID controllers (as
congured in Fig. 4.5). Let k
p
= 19, k
I
= 0.5, and k
D
=
4
19
.
(b) Determine the system type and error constant of the system with respect to
disturbance inputs for each of the three regulators in part (a) with respect to
rejecting polynomial disturbances w(t ) at the input to the plant.
(c) Is this systembetter at tracking references or rejecting disturbances? Explain
your response briey.
(d) Verify your results for parts (a) and (b) using MATLAB by plotting unit step
and ramp responses for both tracking and disturbance rejection.
4.6. Consider a system with the plant transfer function G(s) = 1/s(s + 1). You wish
to add a dynamic controller so that
n
= 2 rad/sec. and 0.5. Several dynamic
controllers have been proposed:
1. D(s) = (s +2)/2
2. D(s) = 2
s +2
s +4
3. D(s) = 5
(s +2)
s +10
4. D(s) = 5
(s +2)(s +0.1)
(s +10)(s +0.01)
(a) Using MATLAB, compare the resulting transient and steady-state responses
to reference step inputs for each controller choice. Which controller is best
for the smallest rise time and smallest overshoot?
(b) Which system would have the smallest steady-state error to a ramp reference
input?
(c) Compare each system for peak control effort; that is, measure the peak mag-
nitude of the plant input u(t ) for a unit reference step input.
(d) Based on your results from parts (a) to (c), recommend a dynamic controller
for the system from the four candidate designs.
4.7. A certain control system has the following specications: rise time t
r
0.010 sec,
overshoot M
p
16%, and steady-state error to unit ramp e
ss
0.005.
(a) Sketch the allowable region in the s -plane for the dominant second-order
poles of an acceptable system.
(b) If Y/R = G/(1 + G), what condition must G(s) satisfy near s = 0 for the
closed-loop systemto meet specications; that is, what is the required asymp-
totic low-frequency behavior of G(s)?
PreT
E
Problems 215
4.8. For the system in Problem 4.35, compute the following steady-state errors:
(a) for a unit-step reference input;
(b) for a unit-ramp reference input;
(c) for a unit-step disturbance input;
(d) for a unit-ramp disturbance input.
(e) Verify your answers to parts (a) to (d) using MATLAB. Note that a ramp
response can be generated as the step response of a system modied by an
added integrator at the reference input.
4.9. Consider the systemshowninFig. 4.33. Showthat the systemis type 1 andcompute
the K
v
.
Figure 4.33
Control system for
Problem 4.9
K(as b)
s(s 1)
Y R
4.10. Consider the DC motor control system with rate (tachometer) feedback shown
in Fig. 4.34(a).

u
u
r
(a)
K
p
K
k
1
K
m
s(1 t
m
s)
k
t
s
u
u
r
(b)
K
s(1 t
m
s)
1 k
t
s
Figure 4.34 Control system for Problem 4.10

(a) Find values for K
and k
t
so that the system of Fig. 4.34(b) has the same
transfer function as the system of Fig. 4.34(a).
(b) Determinethesystemtypewithrespect totracking
r
andcomputethesystem
K
v
in terms of parameters K
and k
t
.
(c) Does the addition of tachometer feedback with positive k
t
increase or de-
crease K
v
?
4.11. Consider the system shown in Fig. 4.35, where
D(s) = K
(s +)
2
s
2
+
2
o
.
(a) Prove that if the systemis stable, it is capable of tracking a sinusoidal reference
input r = sin
o
t with zero steady-state error. (Look at the transfer function
from R to E and consider the gain at
o
.)
PreT
E
Figure 4.35
Control system for
Problem 4.11
D(s) Y R
1
s(s 1)
(b) Use Rouths criteria to nd the range of K such that the closed-loop system
remains stable if
o
= 1 and = 0.25.
4.12. Consider the system shown in Fig. 4.36, which represents control of the angle of a
pendulum that has no damping.
Figure 4.36
Control system for
Problem 4.12
W
s
2
1
D(s) R
K
Y
(a) What condition must D(s) satisfy so that the system can track a ramp refer-
ence input with constant steady-state error?
(b) For a transfer function D(s) that stabilizes the system and satises the condi-
tion in part (a), nd the class of disturbances w(t ) that the system can reject
with zero steady-state error.
(c) Show that, although a PI controller satises the condition derived in part (a),
it will not yield a stable closed-loop system. Will a PID controller workthat
is, satisfy part (a) and stabilize the system? If so, what constraints must k
p
,
k
I
, and k
D
satisfy?
(d) Discuss qualitatively and briey the effects of small variations on the con-
troller parameters k
p
, k
I
, and k
D
on the systems step response rise time and
overshoot.
4.13. A unity feedback system has the overall transfer function
Y(s)
R(s)
= T(s) =

2
n
s
2
+2
n
s +
2
n
.
Give the system type and corresponding error constant for tracking polynomial
reference inputs in terms of and
n
.
4.14. Consider the second-order system
G(s) =
1
s
2
+2 s +1
.
We would like to add a transfer function of the form D(s) = K(s +a)/(s +b) in
series with G(s) in a unity-feedback structure.
(a) Ignoring stability for the moment, what are the constraints on K, a, and b so
that system is type 1?
(b) What are the constraints placed on K, a, and b so that the system is stable
and type 1?
(c) What are the constraints on a and b so that the system is type 1 and remains
stable for every positive value for K?
PreT
E
Problems 217
4.15. The transfer function for the plant in a motor position control is given by
G(s) =
A
s(s +a)
.
If we were able to select values for both A and a, what would they be to result in
a system with K
v
= 20 and = 0.707?
4.16. Consider the system shown in Fig. 4.37(a).
(a) What is the system type? Compute the steady-state tracking error due to a
ramp input r(t ) = r
o
t 1(t ).
(b) For the modied system shown in Fig. 4.37(b), give the value of H
f
so that
the system is type 2 for reference inputs, and compute the K
a
in this case.
(c) Is the resulting type 2 property of this system robust with respect to changes
in H
f
(i.e., will the system remain type 2 if H
f
changes slightly)?
Figure 4.37
Control system for
Problem 4.16
(a)
(b)
Y R
s(s 1)
A

R
s(s 1)
A
H
f
s
H
r
4.17. A controller for a satellite attitude control with transfer function G = 1/s
2
has
beendesignedwithaunityfeedbackstructureandhas thetransfer function D(s) =
10(s +2)
s +5
.
(a) Find the system type for reference tracking and the corresponding error con-
stant for this system.
(b) If a disturbance torque adds to the control so that the input to the process is
u+w, what is the system type and corresponding error constant with respect
to disturbance rejection?
4.18. A compensated motor position control system is shown in Fig. 4.38. Assume that
the sensor dynamics are H(s) = 1.
(a) Can the system track a step reference input r with zero steady-state error?
If yes, give the value of the velocity constant.
(b) Can the system reject a step disturbance w with zero steady-state error? If
yes, give the value of the velocity constant.
(c) Compute the sensitivity of the closed-loop transfer function to changes in the
plant pole at 2.
PreT
E
Figure 4.38
Control system for
Problem 4.18
Sensor
Y R

W
1
s(s 2)
Plant
H(s)
s 4
s 30
Compensator
160
(d) In some instances there are dynamics in the sensor. Repeat parts (a) to (c)
for H(s) = 20/(s +20) and compare the corresponding velocity constants.
4.19. Consider the system shown in Fig. 4.39 with PI control.
Figure 4.39
Control system for
Problem 4.19
s
k
P
s k
I
Y
W
U
R
s
2
s 20
10
(a) Determine the transfer function from R to Y .
(b) Determine the transfer function from W to Y .
(c) Use Rouths criteria to nd the range of (k
p
, k
I
) for which the systemis stable.
(d) What is the systemtype anderror constant withrespect toreference tracking?
(e) What is the system type and error constant with respect to disturbance
rejection?
4.20. The general unity feedback system shown in Fig. 4.40 has disturbance inputs w
1
,
w
2
, and w
3
and is asymptotically stable. Also,
G
1
(s) =
K
1
m
1
i=1
(s +z
1i
)
s
l
1
m
1
i=1
(s +p
1i
)
, G
2
(s) =
K
2
m
1
i=1
(s +z
2i
)
s
l
2
m
1
i=1
(s +p
2i
)
.
Figure 4.40
Single inputsingle output
unity feedback system with
disturbance inputs

Y R

W
1
G
1
(s)
W
2
W
3
G
2
(s)
(a) Show that the system is of type 0, type l
1
, and type (l
1
+ l
2
) with respect to
disturbance inputs w
1
, w
2
, and w
3
.
PreT
E
Problems 219
4.21. One possible representation of an automobile speed-control system with integral
control is shown in Fig. 4.41.
Figure 4.41
System using integral
control
W
s
m
V
c
k
1
k
2
s
k
1
E
k
3
k
1
F
V
(a) With a zero reference velocity input (v
c
= 0), nd the transfer function
relating the output speed v to the wind disturbance w.
(b) What is the steady-state response of v if w is a unit-ramp function?
(c) What type is this system in relation to reference inputs? What is the value of
the corresponding error constant?
(d) What is the type and corresponding error constant of this system in relation
to tracking the disturbance w?
4.22. For the feedback system shown in Fig. 4.42, nd the value of that will make the
system type 1 for K = 5. Give the corresponding velocity constant. Show that
the system is not robust by using this value of and computing the tracking error
e = r y to a step reference for K = 4 and K = 6.
Figure 4.42
Control system for
Problem 4.22
R
s 2
K
Y
a
4.23. A position control system has the closed-loop transfer function (meter/meter)
given by
Y(s)
R(s)
=
b
0
s +b
1
s
2
+a
1
s +a
2
.
(a) Choose the parameters (a
1
, a
2
, b
0
, b
1
) so that the following specications are
satised simultaneously:
i. The rise time t
r
< 0.1 sec.
ii. The overshoot M
p
< 20%.
iii. The settling time t
s
< 0.5 sec.
iv. The steady-state error to a step reference is zero.
v. The steady-state error to a ramp reference input of 0.1 m/sec is not more
than 1 mm.
(b) Verify your answer via MATLAB simulation.
PreT
E
4.24. Suppose you are given the system depicted in Fig. 4.43(a), where the plant param-
eter a is subject to variations.
R Y
s a
1
s
1
4
1
x
(a)
R Y G(s)
(b)
E(t)
Figure 4.43 Control system for Problem 4.24
(a) Find G(s) so that the system shown in Fig. 4.43(b) has the same transfer
function from r to y as the system in Fig. 4.43(a).
(b) Assume that a = 1 is the nominal value of the plant parameter. What is the
system type and the error constant in this case?
(c) Now assume that a = 1 + a, where a is some perturbation to the plant
parameter. What is the system type and the error constant for the perturbed
system?
4.25. Two feedback systems are shown in Fig. 4.44.
Y R
K
0
4s 1
(a)
Y
K
0
4s 1
(b)
R K
3
K
2
K
1
s
U U
Figure 4.44 Two feedback systems for Problem 4.25
(a) Determine values for K
1
, K
2
, and K
3
so that both systems
i. exhibit zero steady-state error to step inputs (that is, both are type 1)
ii. whose static velocity error constant K
v
= 1 when K
0
= 1.
(b) Suppose K
0
undergoes a small perturbation: K
0
K
0
+ K
0
. What effect
does this have on the system type in each case? Which system has a type
which is robust? Which system do you think would be preferred?
(c) Estimate the transient response of both systems to a step reference input, and
give estimates for t
s
, t
r
, and M
p
. In your opinion, which system has a better
transient response at the nominal parameter values?
PreT
E
Problems 221
4.26. You are given the system shown in Fig. 4.45, where the feedback gain is subject
to variations. You are to design a controller for this system so that the output y(t )
accurately tracks the reference input r(t ).
Figure 4.45
Control system for
Problem 4.26
Y R D
i
(s)
10
(s 1)(s 10)
b
a
(a) Let = 1. You are given the following three options for the controller D
i
(s):
D
1
(s) = k
p
, D
2
(s) =
k
p
s +k
I
s
, D
3
(s) =
k
p
s
2
+k
I
s +k
2
s
2
.
Choose the controller (including particular values for the controller con-
stants) that will result in a type 1 system with a steady-state error to a unit
reference ramp of less than
1
10
.
(b) Next, suppose that there is some attenuation in the feedback path that is
modeled by = 0.9. Find the steady-state error due to a ramp input for your
choice of D
i
(s) in part (a).
(c) If = 0.9, what is the system type for part (b)? What are the values of the
appropriate error constant?
4.27. Consider the system shown in Fig. 4.46.
Figure 4.46
Control system for
Problem 4.27
Y R
1
(s p
1
)(s p
2
) (s p
q
)
E
(a) Find the transfer function from the reference input to the tracking error.
(b) For this system to respond to inputs of the form r(t ) = t
n
1(t ) (where n < q)
with zero steady-state error, what constraint is placed on the open-loop poles
p
1
, p
2
, , p
q
?
4.28. The feedback control system shown in Fig. 4.47 is to be designed to satisfy the
following specications: (1) steady-state error of less than10%toa rampreference
input, (2) maximum overshoot for a unit-step input of less than 5%, and (3) 1%
settling time of less than 3 sec.
(a) Compute the closed-loop transfer function.
(b) Sketch the region in the complex plane where the closed-loop poles may lie.
(c) What does specication (1) imply about the possible values of A?
PreT
E
Figure 4.47
Control system for
Problem 4.28
Y R
A
s(s 2)
1 k
t
s
(d) What does specication (3) imply about the closed-loop poles?
(e) Find the error due to a unit-ramp input in terms of A and k
t
.
(f) Suppose A = 32. Find the value of k
t
that yields closed-loop poles on the
right-hand boundary of the feasible region. Use MATLAB to check whether
this choice for k
t
satises the desired specications. If not, adjust k
t
until it
does.
(g) Using A = 32 and the value for k
t
computed in part (f), estimate the settling
time of the system. Use MATLAB to check your answer.
4.29. The transfer functions of speedcontrol for a magnetic tape-drive systemare shown
in Fig. 4.48. The speed sensor is fast enough that its dynamics can be neglected
and the diagram shows the equivalent unity feedback system.
Figure 4.48
Speed-control system for a
magnetic tape drive
K
10
0.5s 1
Amplifier
Torque
motor
Torque
Disturbance
torque
1
Js b
Tape
dynamics
m Reference
speed,
r
J 0.10 kgm
2
b 1.00 Nmsec
(a) Assuming
r
= 0, what is the steady-state error due to a step disturbance
torque of 1 Nm? What must the amplier gain K be in order to make the
steady-state error e
ss
0.001 rad/sec?
(b) Plot the roots of the closed-loop system in the complex plane, and accurately
sketch the time response (t ) for a step input
r
using the gain K computed
in part (a). Are these roots satisfactory? Why or why not?
(c) Plot the region in the complex plane of acceptable closed-loop poles corre-
sponding to the specications of a 1% settling time of t
s
0.1 sec and an
overshoot M
p
5%.
(d) Give values for k
p
and k
D
for a PDcontroller that will meet the specications.
(e) How would the disturbance-induced steady-state error change with the new
control scheme in part (d)? Howcould the steady-state error to a disturbance
torque be eliminated entirely?
PreT
E
Problems 223
4.30. Alinear ODEmodel of the DCmotor with negligible armature inductance (L
a
=
0) and disturbance torque w was given earlier in the chapter; it is restated here,
in slightly different form, as
JR
a
K
t
m
+K
e
m
= v
a
+
R
a
K
t
w,
where
m
is measured in radians. Dividing through by the coefcient of

m
, we
obtain
m
+a1
m
= b
0
v
a
+c
0
w,
where
a
1
=
K
t
K
e
JR
a
, b
0
=
K
t
JR
a
, c
0
=
1
J
.
With rotating potentiometers, it is possible to measure the positioning error be-
tween and the reference angle
r
or e =
ref

m
. With a tachometer we can
measure the motor speed

m
. Consider using feedback of the error e and the
motor speed

m
in the form
v
a
= K(e T
D
m
),
where K and T
D
are controller gains to be determined.
(a) Draw a block diagram of the resulting feedback system showing both
m
and
m
as variables in the diagram representing the motor.
(b) Suppose the numbers work out so that a
1
= 65, b
0
= 200, and c
0
= 10. If
there is noloadtorque (w = 0), what speed(inrpm) results from v
a
= 100 V?
(c) Using the parameter values given in part (b), nd k
p
and k
D
so that a step
change in
ref
with zero load torque results in a transient that has an approx-
imately 17% overshoot and that settles to within 5% of steady-state in less
than 0.05 sec.
(d) Derive an expression for the steady-state error to a reference angle input,
and compute its value for your design in part (c), assuming
ref
= 1 rad.
(e) Derive an expression for the steady-state error to a constant disturbance
torque when
ref
= 0, and compute its value for your design in part (c), as-
suming that w = 1.0.
4.31. We wish to design an automatic speed-control for an automobile. Assume that
(1) the car has a mass m of 1000 kg, (2) the accelerator is the control U and
supplies a force on the automobile of 10 N per degree of accelerator motion, and
(3) air drag provides a friction force proportional to velocity of 10 Nsec/m.
(a) Obtain the transfer function from control input U to the velocity of the
automobile.
PreT
E
(b) Assume the velocity changes are given by
V(s) =
1
s +0.002
U(s) +
0.05
s +0.02
W(s),
where V is given in meters per second, U is in degrees, and W is the percent
grade of the road. Design a proportional-control law U = k
p
V that will
maintain a velocity error of less than 1 m/sec in the presence of a constant
2% grade.
(c) Discuss what advantage (if any) integral control would have for this problem.
(d) Assuming that pure integral control (that is, no proportional term) is ad-
vantageous, select the feedback gain so that the roots have critical damping
( = 1).
4.32. Consider the automobile speed-control system depicted in Fig. 4.49.
Figure 4.49
Automobile speed-control
system
Y R
H
y
H
r
k
p
s a
A
s a
B
R
Y
W
Desired speed
Actual speed
Road grade, %
(a) Find the transfer functions from W(s) and from R(s) to Y(s).
(b) Assume that the desired speed is a constant reference r , so that R(s) = r
o
/s .
Assume that the road is level, so w(t ) = 0. Compute values of the gains K,
H
r
, and H
f
to guarantee that
lim
t
y(t ) = r
o
.
Include both the open-loop (assuming H
y
= 0) and feedback cases (H
y
= 0)
in your discussion.
(c) Repeat part (b) assuming that a constant grade disturbance W(s) = w
o
/s is
present in addition to the reference input. In particular, nd the variation in
speed due to the grade change for both the feed forward and feedback cases.
Use your results to explain (1) why feedback control is necessary and (2) how
the gain k
p
should be chosen to reduce steady-state error.
(d) Assume that w(t ) = 0 andthat the gain A undergoes the perturbation A+A.
Determine the error inspeeddue tothe gainchange for boththe feedforward
and feedback cases. How should the gains be chosen in this case to reduce
the effects of A?
PreT
E
Problems 225
4.33. For a system with impulse response h(t ), prove that the velocity constant is given
by
1
K
v
=
_

0
t h(t ) dt,
and the acceleration constant is given by
1
K
a
=
1
2
_

0
t
2
h(t ) dt.
4.34. Consider the multivariable system shown in Fig. 4.50. Assume that the system is
stable. Find the transfer functions fromeach disturbance input to each output, and
determinethesteady-statevalues of y
1
and y
2
for constant disturbances. Wedene
a multivariable system to be type k with respect to polynomial inputs at w
i
if the
steady-state value of every output is zero for any combination of inputs of degree
less than k, and at least one input is a nonzero constant for an input of degree k.
What is the system type with respect to disturbance rejection at w
1
? At w
2
?
Figure 4.50
Multivariable system
W
1
s
1
R
1
Y
1
s 1
1
R
2

s 1
1
s 2
1
W
2
Y
2
Problems for Section 4.3: Control of Dynamic Error: PID Control
4.35. The DC motor speed control shown in Fig. 4.51 is described by the differential
equation
y +60y = 600v
a
1500w,
where y is the motor speed, v
a
is the armature voltage, and w is the load torque.
Assume that the armature voltage is computed by using the PI control law
v
a
=
_
k
p
e +k
I
_
t
0
e dt
_
,
where e = r y.
Figure 4.51
DC motor speed control
block diagram for
Problem 4.35
Y
W
e

a
R
D 600
1500
s 60
1
PreT
E
(a) Compute the transfer function from W to Y as a function of k
p
and k
I
.
(b) Compute values for k
p
and k
I
sothat the characteristic equationof the closed-
loop system will have roots at 60 60j .
4.36. Consider the system shown in Fig. 4.52, which consists of a prelter and a unity
feedback system.
Figure 4.52
Unity feedback system for
Problem 4.36
K
r
s 1
s a

Y R
s(ts 1)
A
(a) Determine the transfer function from R to Y .
(b) Determine the steady-state error due to a step input.
(c) Discuss the effect of different values of (K
r
, a) on the systems response.
(d) For each of the three cases,
(1) A = 1, = 1, (2) A = 10, = 1, (3) A = 1, = 2,
use MATLAB to nd values for K
r
and a so that (if possible)
i. the rise time is less than 1.5 sec,
ii. the overshoot is less than 20%,
iii. the settling time is less than 10 sec, and
iv. the steady-state error is less than 5%.
In cases in which the specications are easily met, try to make the rise time as
small as possible. If the specications cannot be met, nd the design to meet
as many of the specications as possible, in the order given.
4.37. Consider the satellite attitude-control problem shown in Fig. 4.53, where the nor-
malized parameters are
J = 10 spacecraft inertia, N-m-sec
2
/rad.
r
= reference satellite attitude, rad.
= actual satellite attitude, rad.
H
y
= 1 sensor scale factor volts/rad.
H
r
= 1 reference sensor scale factor, volts/rad.
w = disturbance torque N-m.
PreT
E
Problems 227
Figure 4.53
Satellite attitude control
H
y
Js
1
w
H
r
s
1
D(s) u u
r
(a) Use proportional control, P, with D(s) = k
p
, and give the range of values for
k
p
for which the system will be stable.
(b) Use PD control, let D(s) = (k
p
+ k
D
s), and determine the system type and
error constant with respect to reference inputs.
(c) Use PD control, let D(s) = (k
p
+ k
D
s), and determine the system type and
error constant with respect to disturbance inputs.
(d) Use PI control, let D(s) = (k
p
+ k
I
/s), and determine the system type and
error constant with respect to reference inputs.
(e) Use PI control, let D(s) = (k
p
+ k
I
/s), and determine the system type and
error constant with respect to disturbance inputs.
(f) Use PID control, let D(s) = (k
p
+ k
I
/s + k
D
s), and determine the system
type and error constant with respect to reference inputs.
(g) Use PID control, let D(s) = (k
p
+ k
I
/s + k
D
s), and determine the system
type and error constant with respect to disturbance inputs.
Problems for Section 4.4: Extensions to the Basic Feedback Concepts
4.38. Compute the discrete equivalents for the controllers of Problem 4.6 by using the
trapezoid rule of Eq. (4.93). Let T
s
= 0.05 in each case.
(a) D
1
(s) = (s +2)/2
(b) D
2
(s) = 2
s +2
s +4
(c) D
3
(s) = 5
(s +2)
s +10
(d) D
4
(s) = 5
(s +2)(s +0.1)
(s +10)(s +0.01)
4.39. Give the difference equations corresponding to each of the discrete controllers
respectively found in Problem 4.38
(a) For D
1
(s).
(b) For D
2
(s).
(c) For D
3
(s).
(d) For D
4
(s).
4.40. The unit-step response of a paper machine is shown in Fig. 4.54(a), where the
input into the system is stock ow onto the wire and the output is basis weight
(thickness). The time delay and slope of the transient response may be determined
from the gure.
(a) Findtheproportional, PI, andPID-controller parameters byusingtheZeigler
Nichols transient-response method.
PreT
E
Figure 4.54
Paper-machine response
data for Problem 4.40
S
t
e
p

r
e
s
p
o
n
s
e
1.0
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0.0
U
n
i
t

i
m
p
u
l
s
e

r
e
s
p
o
n
s
e
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0.0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0
(b)
Time (sec)
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 0
(a)
Time (sec)
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
(b) Using proportional feedback control, control designers have obtained a
closed-loop system with the unit impulse response shown in Fig. 4.54(b).
When the gain K
u
= 8.556, the system is on the verge of instability. Deter-
mine the proportional-, PI-, and PID-controller parameters according to the
ZeiglerNichols ultimate sensitivity method.
4.41. A paper machine has the transfer function
G(s) =
e
2s
3s +1
,
where the input is stock ow onto the wire and the output is basis weight or
thickness.
(a) Find the PID-controller parameters using the ZeiglerNichols tuning rules.
(b) The systembecomes marginally stable for a proportional gain of K
u
= 3.044,
as shown by the unit-impulse response in Fig. 4.55. Find the optimal PID-
controller parameters according to the ZeiglerNichols tuning rules.
Figure 4.55
Unit impulse response
for paper machine in
Problem 4.41
0.0 5.0 10.0 15.0 20.0 25.0
0.020
0.015
0.010
0.005
0.00
0.005
0.010
0.015
Time (sec)
y
PreT
E
Problems 229
4.42. Prove that for a type 2 system, the acceleration error constant is given by
1
K
a
=
1
2
_
m
i=1
1
z
2
i
i=1
1
p
2
i
_
,
where z
i
and p
i
are the closed-loop zeros and poles of the system.
4.43. For the unity feedback system with proportional control D = k
p
and process
transfer function G(s) =
A
s(s +1)
.
(a) Draw the block diagram from which to compute the sensitivity to changes
in the parameter of the output response to a reference step input. Let the
parameter be = 1/ .
(b) Use MATLAB to compute and plot the sensitivity computed from the block
diagram of part (a) if A = = k
p
= 1.
PreT
E

Franklin CH 04 FF

Caricato da

Informazioni sul documento

Descrizione originale:

Titolo originale

Copyright

Formati disponibili

Condividi questo documento

Condividi o incorpora il documento

Opzioni di condivisione

Hai trovato utile questo documento?

Questo contenuto è inappropriato?

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

Franklin CH 04 FF

Caricato da

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

4

(s), we obtain the transformed

. In transfer function form the

100, and a good audio amplier must have

, and the damping ratio is =

= 13 sec. According to the ZeiglerNichols rules of

, as shown in Fig. 4.27(b). Finally, to compute

, we need only shift the input Z from the output side of

from the original transfer

C to a tracking input that is linear in time, rising at the rate

Figure 4.34 Control system for Problem 4.10

Potrebbero piacerti anche