IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON AUTOMATIC CONTROL, VOL. 59, NO.

7, JULY 2014

1803

Quadratically Parameterized Root Locus Analysis

Brandon J. Wellman and Jesse B. Hoagg

AbstractClassical affine root locus applies to controllers that

are linear in a parameter k and yield affinely parameterized
closed-loop denominator polynomials. This paper presents root
locus rules for controllers that are rational in k and yield quadratically parameterized closed-loop denominator polynomials. We
show that the quadratic root locus has several advantages relative
to the classical affine root locus. Specifically, the quadratic root
locus is high-parameter stabilizing for minimum-phase systems
that are relative degree 1, 2, or 3. Moreover, the quadratic root
locus admits a wider variety of asymptote angles, which provides
more controller design flexibility. The quadratic root locus is
illustrated on several examples that are difficult to handle using
affine root locus, such as high-parameter stabilization of the triple
integrator.
Index TermsAffine root locus, quadratic root locus,
stabilization.

I. I NTRODUCTION

LASSICAL affine root locus is an established technique

for controller design as well as control system analysis
[1][7]. The root locus is the set of achievable closed-loop poles
for all real values of a root-locus parameter k. For example,
consider the loop transfer function kL(s) = kz(s)/p(s), where
z(s) and p(s) are coprime monic polynomials. In this case, the
affine root locus (ARL) is the set of all achievable poles of the
closed-loop transfer function 1/(1 + kL(s)) for all real values
of k. Extensions to classical ARL include: multivariable root
locus [8][12], root locus for time-varying systems [13],
root locus for fractional-order systems [14], and logarithmic
root locus [15].
In ARL, the loop transfer function kL(s) = kz(s)/p(s) is
linear in k, and the closed-loop denominator polynomial p(s) +
kz(s) is affine in k. In this case, the ARL can be characterized without explicit dependence on k. More specifically,
the positive ARL is the set of points in the complex plane
such that L() = (2n + 1), where n is an integer; and the
negative ARL is the set of points in the complex plane
such that L() = 2n, where n is an integer. These angle
characterizations lead to the classical ARL rules. However,
ARL rules apply if and only if the closed-loop denominator
polynomial is affine in k.
In this paper, we develop rules that characterize the root
locus for controllers that are rational functions of k and result in closed-loop denominator polynomials that are quadratic
in k. For example, consider the plant z(s)/p(s) and the
Manuscript received August 31, 2013; revised January 31, 2014; accepted
March 27, 2014. Date of publication April 1, 2014; date of current version
June 19, 2014. Recommended by Associate Editor D. Arzelier.
The authors are with the Department of Mechanical Engineering, University
of Kentucky, Lexington, KY 40506-0503 USA (e-mail: bjwell3@g.uky.edu;
jhoagg@engr.uky.edu).
Digital Object Identifier 10.1109/TAC.2014.2314519

controller k 2 /(s + k). In this case, the closed-loop denominator

polynomial is sp(s) + kp(s) + k 2 z(s), which is quadratic in k.
Controller constructions, which depend nonlinearly on a parameter k, are considered in [16][19]. However, the results of
[16][19] do not characterize the locations of the closed-loop
poles for different k. Consequently, the goal of this paper is to
characterize the closed-loop pole locations for all positive k.
For a denominator polynomial that is affine in k, the ARL
rules describe: (i) the behavior of the roots for small k; (ii) the
symmetry of roots about the real axis; (iii) the segments of the
real axis that are on the root locus; (iv) the behavior of roots
for large k; and (v) the points where the root locus crosses the
real axis (i.e., break-in and breakaway points). In this paper,
we develop analogous rules for the quadratic root locus (QRL),
that is, the root locus for a polynomial that is quadratic in k.
Early results on QRL are given in [20], which presents realaxis and asymptote rules for the QRL. However, [20] does
not provide proofs of these rules, and the asymptote rule is
inaccurate. Preliminary versions of results in this paper appear
in [21]. However, [21] focuses on a special class of polynomials
that are quadratic in k, whereas the present paper develops QRL
rules for a general class of polynomials that are quadratic in k.
QRL shares certain features with ARL but possesses other
features that differ from ARL. For example, a point on the real
axis that is on the QRL may be double covered, meaning that
there exist two distinct values of k > 0 such that the point is a
closed-loop pole. This cannot occur in ARL. Moreover, QRL
admits a wider variety of asymptote angles, that is, the angles
by which roots diverge to infinity.
To demonstrate a potential benefit of QRL, recall that ARL
is not high-parameter stabilizing for systems, where the relative
degree exceeds two. In this case, high gain causes at least one
closed-loop pole to diverge to infinity through the open-righthalf complex plane. In contrast, QRL can be high-parameter
stabilizing for minimum-phase systems that are relative degree
one, two or three. The relative-degree-three case is examined in
more detail in Section IV.
Section II provides rules that describe the starting points,
symmetry, real axis properties, asymptotic properties, and
break-in and breakaway points for the QRL. Examples are
given in Section III. Section IV specializes the QRL rules to
a class of controllers that are rational in k and demonstrates
controller design using the QRL rules. Conclusions are given in
Section V.
II. Q UADRATIC -ROOT-L OCUS RULES
Consider the polynomial

pk (s) = k 2 1 q(s) + k2 r(s) + t(s)

0018-9286 2014 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission.
See http://www.ieee.org/publications_standards/publications/rights/index.html for more information.

(1)

1804

IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON AUTOMATIC CONTROL, VOL. 59, NO. 7, JULY 2014

where q(s), r(s), and t(s) are monic polynomials over the
reals; 1 R and 2 R are positive; and 0 deg q(s)
deg r(s) deg t(s). We use the following definition of the
positive QRL.

Definition 1: The quadratic root locus is = { C :

pk () = 0, where k > 0}. Furthermore, C is on the
quadratic root locus if .
This paper considers the QRL for k > 0. The techniques
in this paper can be used to develop QRL rules for k < 0.
Furthermore, we focus on the case where 1 and 2 are positive;
however, the techniques of this paper can be used to address
1 > 0 and 2 < 0; 1 < 0 and 2 > 0; or 1 < 0 and 2 < 0.
In this section, we present five facts that describe the QRL.
Proofs of these facts are in Appendix A. Facts II.1 and II.2
describe the QRL starting points and symmetry, respectively.
These facts are consistent with ARL.
Fact II.1: As k 0, the roots of pk (s) approach the roots
of t(s).
Fact II.2: The quadratic root locus is symmetric about the
real axis.
We now determine the segments of the real axis that are on
the QRL. First, define

contrast, parts (i) and (ii) of Fact II.3 imply that if R is

on the QRL, then there exists either one or two distinct k > 0
such that pk () = 0.
We now describe the asymptotic properties of the QRL, that
is, the properties for sufficiently large k > 0.
Define

w(s) = 22 r(s)2 41 q(s)t(s)

(2)

which is the discriminant of pk (s) with respect to k. The

polynomial w(s) is not necessarily monic. Furthermore, if deg
r(s)2 deg q(s)t(s), then the leading coefficient of w(s) can
be negative. The following real axis rule for the QRL depends
on the roots of q(s), r(s), t(s), and w(s), and the leading
coefficient of w(s).
Fact II.3: R is on the quadratic root locus if and only if
any of the following statements hold:
(a) q()t() < 0.
(b) q() = 0 and r()t() < 0.
(c) w() 0 and q()r() < 0.
Furthermore, if R is on the quadratic root locus, then the
following statements hold:
(i) If q()t() 0 or w() = 0, then there exists exactly
one k > 0 such that pk () = 0.
(ii) If w() > 0, q()r() < 0 and q()t() > 0, then there
exist two distinct k > 0 such that pk () = 0.
Part (a) of Fact II.3 implies that the real axis to the left of
an odd number of real roots of q(s)t(s) is on the QRL. Part (b)
of Fact II.3 implies that the real roots of q(s) that are to the
left of an odd number of real roots of r(s)t(s) are on the QRL.
Part (c) of Fact II.3 implies that if the discriminant of pk (s) with
respect to k is nonnegative, then the real axis to the left of an
odd number of real roots of q(s)r(s) is on the QRL.
In contrast to ARL, a real root of q(s), r(s) or t(s) can be
on the QRL for finite k > 0. Specifically, part (b) of Fact II.3
implies that if R, q() = 0 and r()t() < 0, then .
Part (a) of Fact II.3 implies that if R, r() = 0 and
q()t() < 0, then . Part (c) of Fact II.3 implies that if
R, t() = 0 and q()r() < 0, then .
In ARL, if R is on the ARL, then there exists exactly
one k > 0 such that is a root of the ARL polynomial. In

l = deg q(s),

d1 = m l,

m = deg r(s),

n = deg t(s)

d2 = n m,

d = d1 +d2 = nl

(3)
(4)

and let q R, r R and t R denote the sum of the roots

of q(s), r(s) and t(s), respectively. The following definition
characterizes an asymptotic approximation of a root of pk (s).
Definition 2: Let 1 > 0, 2 0, > 0, [0, 2),
[0, 2), and C. Define

k = 1 k ej + 2 k 2 ej +

(5)

and

(n 1),
(2m l 1),

if
if

d2 ,
> d2 .

Then, k is an asymptotic approximation of a root of pk (s) if

limk pk (k )/k = 0.
Before describing the asymptotic properties of the QRL, we
show that Definition 2 captures the ARL asymptote angles and
r(s)+ t(s), where r(s)
center. In ARL, we consider pk (s) = k

= deg t(s),
and t(s) are monic polynomials, m
= deg r(s), n

m.
Note that the ARL notation is consistent with
and d2 = n
the QRL notation, but we use hats to distinguish the ARL
from the QRL. The ARL asymptote rule implies that for i =
1, . . . , d2 and sufficiently large k > 0, d2 roots of pk (s) are ap 1/d2 ji
where i = (2i)/d2 ,
i,k =
k
e + ,
proximated by

= (
t
r )/d2 , and
t and
r denote the sum of the roots
i,k satisfies
of t(s) and r(s), respectively. For i = 1, . . . , d2 ,
Definition 2 with pk (s) replaced by pk (s), where 1 = 1, 2 =
n=n
, m = m,
d2 = d2 , and = (
n
0, = 1/d2 , = i , = ,
1,k , . . . ,
are asymptotic approximations of
1)/d2 . Thus,
d2 ,k
roots of pk (s), and Definition 2 is consistent with the asymptotic approximations given by ARL.
The following fact characterizes the asymptotic properties of
the QRL.
Fact II.4: As k , l roots of pk (s) converge to the roots
of q(s), and the d remaining roots of pk (s) satisfy the following
statements:
(a) Assume d1 < d2 2, and for i = 1, 2, . . . , d, define

i,k = 1d k d eji +

(6)

where

i =

2i
,
d

t q
.
d

(7)

Then, 1,k , . . . , d,k are asymptotic approximations of

the d remaining roots of pk (s).

WELLMAN AND HOAGG: QUADRATICALLY PARAMETERIZED ROOT LOCUS ANALYSIS

(b) Assume d1 = d2 2, and for i = 1, 2, . . . , d, define

1
d

i,k = 1 k d eji + i

(8)

1805

(e) Assume d1 = d2 + 1. For i = 1, 2, . . . , d1 , define


d1
1 1 d1 ji

i,k =
k 1e +
2

(18)

where
2i
,
i =
d

(1)i1 2
t q
i =
+j
.
d
1 d

where
(9)

Then, 1,k , . . . , d,k are asymptotic approximations of

the d remaining roots of pk (s).
(c) Assume d1 = d2 1, and for i = 1, 2, . . . , d, define

1
2
1

d
2
i,k = 1 k d eji + d1 k d ejd2 i +
(10)
d1d
where
2i
i =
d

(11)

2 (l2 + n2 l n 2md)
t q
+ 2
.
d
2d3 1

(12)

Then, 1,k , . . . , d,k are asymptotic approximations of

the d remaining roots of pk (s).
(d) Assume d1 = d2 , and for i = 1, 2, . . . , d1 , define

1
 

 d1
1 

2 4 

i,k =
+

2
1
2

2
2

d2 +i,k

k d eji +

1
 

 d1
1 

2


4
2
1
2

2
2
d

k e

ji

i =

d1

r q
1
+
d1
d1 22

d1 +i,k = 2d2 k d2 eji +

(19)

(20)

where

i =

2i
,
d2

t r
1

.
d2
d2 22

(21)

Then, 1,k , . . . , d,k are asymptotic approximations of

the d remaining roots of pk (s).
(f) Assume d1 > d2 + 1. For i = 1, 2, . . . , d1 , define

d1
1 1 d1 ji

i,k =
k 1e +
(22)
2
where

i =

2i
,
d1

r q
d1

(23)

and for i = 1, 2, . . . , d2 , define

d1 +i,k = 2d2 k d2 eji +

(14)

(15)



+ 2 (t r ) 2 + 22 41
(16)

= 21 (q t )




+ 2 (t r ) 2 22 41





2d1 + 2 d2 2 22 41 .

(24)

where

= 21 (q t )




2d1 + 2 d2 2 + 22 41

2i
,
d1

and for i = 1, 2, . . . , d2 , define

(13)

where



2i + arg 2 22 41

i =

(17)

Then, 1,k , . . . , d,k are asymptotic approximations of

the d remaining roots of pk (s).

i =

2i
,
d2

t r
.
d2

(25)

Then, 1,k , . . . , d,k are asymptotic approximations of

the d remaining roots of pk (s).
Part (a) of Fact II.4 states that if d1 < d2 2, then the
asymptotic properties of the QRL are the same as the asymptotic properties of an ARL. Specifically, as k tends to infinity, d
roots of pk (s) diverge along asymptotes centered at with angles 1 , . . . , d , where and 1 , . . . , d are the ARL asymptote
center and angles for 1 k 2 q(s) + t(s).
Part (b) of Fact II.4 states that if d1 = d2 2, then the
QRL asymptote angles are the same as the ARL asymptote
angles, but the QRL asymptote center is different from the
ARL asymptote center. Specifically, as k tends to infinity, d
roots of pk (s) diverge along asymptotes with angles 1 , . . . , d ,
which are the ARL asymptote angles for relative degree d.
However, it follows from (9) that 1 = 3 = . . . = d1 , 2 =
4 = . . . = d and 1 = 2 , which implies that there are two
asymptote centers. The real parts of 1 , . . . , d are the same as
the ARL asymptote center associated with 1 k 2 q(s) + t(s), but
the imaginary parts of 1 , . . . , d are nonzero and depend on d,
1 and 2 .
Part (c) of Fact II.4 states that if d1 = d2 1, then the
asymptotic properties of the QRL differ from ARL. Specifically, as k tends to infinity, d roots of pk (s) are approximated

1806

IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON AUTOMATIC CONTROL, VOL. 59, NO. 7, JULY 2014

by 1,k , . . . , d,k , which have two terms that diverge to infinity.

1/d
The first term of i,k is 1 k 2/d eji , which is related to the
2
ARL associated with 1 k q(s) + t(s), and the second term is
proportional to k 1/d ejd2 i , which has no counterpart in ARL.
Part (d) of Fact II.4 states that if d1 = d2 and 22 < 41 ,
then as k tends to infinity, d1 roots of pk (s) diverge along
asymptotes centered at with angles 1 , . . . , d1 , and d2
roots of pk (s) diverge along asymptotes centered at with
angles 1 , . . . , d1 . In addition, (16) and (17) imply that
and are complex conjugates with nonzero imaginary parts.
Moreover, (13) and (14) imply that for i = 1, . . . , d1 , i,k and
d2 +i,k are complex conjugates.
Part (d) of Fact II.4 states that if d1 = d2 and 22 41 ,
then the QRL asymptote angles are given by the asymptote
angles for a relative-degree-d1 ARL and the reflection across
the real axis of the asymptote angles for a relative-degree-d1
ARL. Specifically, as k tends to infinity, d1 roots of pk (s)
diverge along asymptotes with angles 1 , . . . , d1 , and d2 roots
of pk (s) diverge along asymptotes with angles 1 , . . . , d1 ,
where 1 , . . . , d1 are the ARL asymptote angles for relative
degree d1 .
Parts (e) and (f) of Fact II.4 state that if d1 > d2 , then the
QRL asymptotic behavior is related to the superposition of
two ARLs. More specifically, as k tends to infinity, part (f) of
Fact II.4 implies that d1 roots of pk (s) diverge along asymptotes
centered at with angles 1 , . . . , d1 , where and 1 , . . . , d1
are the ARL asymptote center and angles associated with
(1 /2 )kq(s) + r(s). Moreover, as k tends to infinity, d2 roots
of pk (s) diverge along asymptotes centered at with angles
1 , . . . , d2 , where and 1 , . . . , d2 are the ARL asymptote
center and angles associated with 2 kr(s) + t(s). Part (e) of
Fact II.4 is similar to part (f) of Fact II.4, but the asymptote
centers and are shifted by +1 /(d1 22 ) and 1 /(d2 22 ),
respectively.
Next, we examine the QRL break-in and breakaway points.
We use the following break-in and breakaway point definition.
Definition 3: Let R be on the quadratic root locus. Then,
is a break-in or breakaway point if, for all  > 0, there exists
such that | | < , and the imaginary part of is
nonzero.
For i = 1, 2, define i : { R : q() = 0} C by

i1
w()
2 r() + (1)
(26)
i () =
21 q()

the roots of pk (s) are symmetric about the real axis. The
third rule of QRL provides conditions such that R is on
the QRL. Specifically, if (a) q()t() < 0; (b) q() = 0 and
r()t() < 0; or (c) w() 0 and q()r() < 0, then is on
the QRL. The fourth rule of QRL is that if d > 0, then d roots of
pk (s) are asymptotically approximated by 1,k , . . . , d,k given
by Fact II.4, where 1,k , . . . , d,k depend on 1 , 2 , d1 , d2 ,
q , r , and t . Finally, the fifth rule of QRL is that R,
where q( ) = 0, is a break-in or breakaway point if and only
(a) 1 ( ) > 0 and d1 ()/d|= = 0; or (b) 2 ( ) > 0 and
d2 ()/d|= = 0.

which maps the real numbers excluding the real roots of q(s)
to the complex numbers. Note that if 1 () > 0 or 2 () > 0,
then there exists k > 0 such that pk () = 0, and thus .
We now present a fact that characterizes the QRL break-in
and breakaway points.
Fact II.5: Let R be on the quadratic root locus, and
assume q( ) = 0. Then, is a break-in or breakaway point if
and only if either of the following statements holds:
(a) 1 ( ) > 0 and d1 ()/d|= = 0.
(b) 2 ( ) > 0 and d2 ()/d|= = 0.
We now summarize the QRL rules given by Facts II.1II.5.
The first rule of QRL is that for k = 0, the roots of pk (s)
start at the roots of t(s). The second rule of QRL is that

III. E XAMPLES OF THE Q UADRATIC ROOT L OCUS

We now present three examples that demonstrate the realaxis and asymptote rules of QRL. More specifically, the first
example demonstrates the real-axis rule and asymptotic properties for d1 < d2 2. The second example demonstrates the
real-axis rule and asymptotic properties for d1 = d2 , and the
third example demonstrates the real-axis rule and asymptotic
properties for d1 > d2 + 1.
Example 1: Consider the polynomial (1), where q(s) =
s + 10, r(s) = (s + 40)2 , t(s) = (s + 20)7 , and 1 = 2 = 1,
which implies that l = 1, m = 2 and n = 7. Thus, d1 = m
l = 1, d2 = n m = 5 and d = d1 + d2 = 6.
In order to determine the segments of the real axis that are
on the QRL, note that w(s) = 4(s + 22.9)(s + 10.0)(s +
22.1 + j2.2)(s+22.1j2.2)(s + 19.7 + j3.3)(s + 19.7j3.3)
(s + 16.8 + j1.9)(s + 16.8 j1.9), which has real roots at
22.9 and 10.0. We apply Fact II.3 to determine the segments
of the real axis that are on the QRL. Part (a) of Fact II.3 implies
that (20, 10) is on the QRL. Part (b) of Fact II.3 implies
that 10 is not on the QRL. Part (c) of Fact II.3 implies that
[22.9, 10) is on the QRL. Combining parts (a)(c) of
Fact II.3 implies that [22.9, 10) is on the QRL.
Furthermore, part (i) of Fact II.3 implies that for all
{22.9} [20, 10), there exists exactly one k > 0
such that pk () = 0. Part (ii) of Fact II.3 implies that for all
(22.9, 20), there exists two distinct k > 0 such that
pk () = 0. A close-up view of the real axis of the QRL is
shown in Fig. 1.
Next, we examine the asymptotic properties of the QRL.
Since d1 < d2 2, part (a) of Fact II.4 implies that six roots
of pk (s) diverge to infinity along asymptotes centered at =
21.7 with angles /6, /2, 5/6, 7/6, 3/2, and 11/6
radians. The QRL is shown in Fig. 2, which confirms the
asymptote angles.

Example 2: Reconsider Example 1, where r(s) = (s + 40)4

instead of r(s) = (s + 40)2 . Thus, l = 1, m = 4, n = 7, d1 =
3, d2 = 3, and d = 6.
In order to determine the segments of the real axis that are
on the QRL, note that w(s) = 3(s + 28.7)(s 93.9)(s +
23.2 + j24.2)(s + 23.2 j23.2)(s + 27.6 + j10.2)(s + 27.6
j23.2)(s + 28.5 + j4.2)(s + 28.5 j4.2), which has real roots
at 28.7 and 93.9. Part (a) of Fact II.3 implies that (20, 10)
is on the QRL. Part (b) of Fact II.3 implies that 10 is not
on the QRL. Part (c) of Fact II.3 implies that [28.7, 10) is
on the QRL. Combining parts (a)(c) of Fact II.3 implies that

WELLMAN AND HOAGG: QUADRATICALLY PARAMETERIZED ROOT LOCUS ANALYSIS

Fig. 1. The QRL for pk (s) = k2 q(s) + kr(s) + t(s), where q(s) = s +
10, r(s) = (s + 40)2 , and t(s) = (s + 20)7 , shows that [22.9, 10) is on
the QRL.

Fig. 2. The QRL for pk (s) = k2 q(s) + kr(s) + t(s), where q(s) = s +
10, r(s) = (s + 40)2 , and t(s) = (s + 20)7 , shows that six roots of pk (s)
diverge to infinity along the asymptotes centered at = 21.7 with angles
/6, /2, 5/6, 7/6, 3/2, and 11/6 radians.

[28.7, 10) is on the QRL. Furthermore, part (i) of Fact II.3

implies that for all {28.7} [20, 10), there exists
exactly one k > 0 such that pk () = 0. Part (ii) of Fact II.3
implies that for all (28.7, 20), there exists two distinct
k > 0 such that pk () = 0. A close-up view of the real axis of
the QRL is shown in Fig. 3.
Next, we examine the asymptotic properties of the QRL.
Since d1 = d2 , part (d) of Fact II.4 implies that three roots of
pk (s) diverge to infinity along asymptotes centered at 21.7
j16.4 with angles 4/9, 10/9, and 16/9 radians, and three
roots of pk (s) diverge to infinity along asymptotes centered
at 21.7 + j16.4 with angles 4/9, 10/9, and 16/9
radians. Note that the asymptote angles are not equally spaced
between 0 and 2 radians. The QRL is shown in Fig. 4, which
confirms the asymptote angles.

1807

Fig. 3. The QRL for pk (s) = k2 q(s) + kr(s) + t(s), where q(s) = s +
10, r(s) = (s + 40)4 , and t(s) = (s + 20)7 , shows that [28.7, 10) is on
the QRL.

Fig. 4. The QRL for pk (s) = k2 q(s) + kr(s) + t(s), where q(s) = s +
10, r(s) = (s + 40)4 , and t(s) = (s + 20)7 , shows that three roots of pk (s)
diverge to infinity along asymptotes centered at 21.7 j16.4 with angles
4/9, 10/9 and 16/9 radians. Furthermore, three roots of pk (s) diverge
to infinity along asymptotes centered at 21.7 + j16.4 with angles 4/9,
10/9 and 16/9 radians.

Example 3: Reconsider Example 1, where r(s) = (s + 40)5

instead of r(s) = (s + 40)2 . Thus, l = 1, m = 5, n = 7, d1 =
4, d2 = 2, and d = 6.
In order to determine the segments of the real axis that are on
the QRL, note that w(s) = (s + 64.3)(s + 31.4)(s + 50.4 +
j17.3)(s + 50.4 j17.3)(s + 37.1 + j13.8)(s + 37.1 j13.8)
(s + 32.9 + j7.9)(s + 32.9 j7.9)(s + 31.7 + j3.6)(s + 31.7
j3.6), which has real roots at 64.3 and 31.4. Part (a) of
Fact II.3 implies that (20, 10) is on the QRL. Part (b)
of Fact II.3 implies that 10 is not on the QRL. Part (c) of
Fact II.3 implies that [31.4, 10) is on the QRL. Combining
parts (a)(c) of Fact II.3 implies that [31.4, 10) is on the
QRL. Furthermore, part (i) of Fact II.3 implies that for all
{31.4} [20, 10), there exists exactly one k > 0

1808

IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON AUTOMATIC CONTROL, VOL. 59, NO. 7, JULY 2014

Fig. 7.

Diagram of the closed-loop system consisting of (27)(29).

IV. C ONTROLLER S YNTHESIS U SING

Q UADRATIC ROOT L OCUS
In this section, we present a controller architecture that yields
a closed-loop denominator polynomial that is quadratic in k.
Moreover, we specialize the QRL rules of Section II to address
this controller architecture. Finally, we present two controller
synthesis examples using QRL.
Consider the single-input single-output linear time-invariant
system
Fig. 5. The QRL for pk (s) = k2 q(s) + kr(s) + t(s), where q(s) = s +
10, r(s) = (s + 40)5 , and t(s) = (s + 20)7 , shows that [31.4, 10) is on
the QRL.

y(s) = G(s)u(s)

(27)

where G(s) = zp (s)/pp (s); u(s) is the input; y(s) is the output; R; and zp (s) and pp (s) are coprime monic polynomials, where deg zp (s) < deg pp (s). Next, consider the control
u(s) =

1
Gk (s) [v(s) y(s)]

(28)

k 2 zc (s)
(s + k)pc (s)

(29)

where

k (s) =
G

v(s) is an external signal; R; > 0; zc (s) and pc (s)

are monic polynomials, where deg zc (s) deg pc (s) + 1; and

z(s) = zp (s)zc (s) and p(s) = pp (s)pc (s) are coprime.

The closed-loop transfer function from v to y is

k (s) =
G

Fig. 6. The QRL for pk (s) = k2 q(s) + kr(s) + t(s), where q(s) = s +
10, r(s) = (s + 40)5 , and t(s) = (s + 20)7 , shows that four roots of pk (s)
diverge to infinity along asymptotes centered at = 47.5 with angles /4,
3/4, 5/4, and 7/4 radians. Furthermore, two roots of pk (s) diverge to
infinity along asymptotes centered at = 30 with angles /2 and /2
radians.

such that pk () = 0. Part (ii) of Fact II.3 implies that for all
(31.4, 20), there exists two distinct k > 0 such that
pk () = 0. A close-up view of the real axis of the QRL is
shown in Fig. 5.
Next, we examine the asymptotic properties of the QRL.
Since d1 > d2 + 1, part (f) of Fact II.4 implies that four
roots of pk (s) diverge to infinity along asymptotes centered at
= 47.5 with angles /4, 3/4, 5/4, and 7/4 radians.
Furthermore, two roots of pk (s) diverge to infinity along
asymptotes centered at = 30 with angles /2 and /2
radians. The QRL is shown in Fig. 6, which confirms the
asymptote angles.

=
=

k (s)
G(s)G
k (s)
1 + G(s)G
k 2 z(s)

k 2 z(s)
+ kp(s) + (s )p(s)

k 2 z(s)
pk (s)

(30)

where pk (s) is given by (1), where 1 = 1, 2 = , and

q(s) = z(s),

r(s) = p(s)

t(s) = (s )p(s).

(31)
(32)

A diagram of the closed-loop system is given in Fig. 7.

We now present four facts that characterize the QRL of the
k (s), which has the denominaclosed-loop transfer function G
tor polynomial pk (s). The results of this section rely on the
QRL results given in Section II. Facts IV.1 and IV.2 describe
the starting points and symmetry of the QRL. These facts follow
immediately from Facts II.1 and II.2.
Fact IV.1: As k 0, the roots of pk (s) approach the roots
of (s )p(s).

WELLMAN AND HOAGG: QUADRATICALLY PARAMETERIZED ROOT LOCUS ANALYSIS

Fact IV.2: The quadratic root locus is symmetric about the

real axis.
Next, it follows from (1), (2), (31), and (32) that
w(s) = p(s) 4(s )p(s)z(s).
2

(33)

Fact IV.3 describes the segments of the real axis that are on
the QRL. The proof of Fact IV.3 relies on Fact II.3 and is given
in Appendix B.
Fact IV.3: R is on the quadratic root locus if and only if
either of the following statements hold:
(a) and p()z() < 0.
(b) < , p() = 0 and w() 0.
Furthermore, if R is on the quadratic root locus, then the
following statements hold:
(i) If , p()z() 0 or w() = 0, then there exists
exactly one k > 0 such that pk () = 0.
(ii) If < , p()z() < 0 and w() > 0, then there exists
two distinct k > 0 such that pk () = 0.
Part (a) of Fact IV.3 shows that the real axis to the right of
is consistent with ARL. Specifically, is on the QRL if
and only if lies to the left of an odd number of real roots of
p(s)z(s). In contrast, part (b) of Fact IV.3 shows that the real
axis to the left of differs from ARL. It follows from part (b) of
Fact IV.3 that real roots of w(s) that have odd multiplicity and
lie to the left of are boundary points that separate segments
of the real axis that are on the QRL from segments of the real
axis that are not on the QRL. Furthermore, part (b) of Fact IV.3
implies that real zeros (i.e., real roots of z(s)) can be closedloop poles (i.e., roots of pk (s)) for finite k. These features are
not present in ARL.
We now describe the asymptotic properties of this QRL.

First, define l = deg q(s), m = deg r(s), n = deg t(s) = m+1,

d1 = m l, d2 = n m = 1, and d = d1 + d2 = n l,
which are consistent with (3) and (4) from Section II. Note that
d1 is a nonnegative integer and d2 = 1. Let z R and p R
denote the sum of the roots of z(s) and p(s), respectively.
Fact IV.4 characterizes the asymptotic properties of this QRL
and follows from Fact II.4.
Fact IV.4: As k , l roots of pk (s) converge to the roots
of z(s), and the d remaining roots of pk (s) satisfy the following
statements:
(a) Assume d = 1, and define

1,k = k 2 k +
where

2 (l2 n2 3l + n + 2ln)
+ p z
+
.
d
2d3

Then, 1,k is an asymptotic approximation of the remaining root of pk (s).

(b) Assume d = 2, and define

1
1,k = | + 2 4|kej + ,
2

1
2,k = | 2 4|kej +
2

1809

where

= arg(

2 4),


2( + p z ) ( + 2 4)

,
=
2 4 + 2 4

2 4)
2( + p z ) (

=
.
2 4 2 4

Then, 1,k and 2,k are asymptotic approximations of

the two remaining roots of pk (s).
(c) Assume d = 3, and define


k
k

+ , 2,k = j
+ ,
1,k = j

3,k = k + 2

where

p z + 2
.
2

Then, 1,k , 2,k , and 3,k are asymptotic approximations

of the three remaining roots of pk (s).
(d) Assume d 4, and for i = 1, 2, . . . , d 1, define
1

d1
k

i,k =
eji +

where

i =

2i
,
d1

p z
d1

and define

d,k = k + .
Then, 1,k , . . . , d,k are asymptotic approximations of
the d remaining roots of pk (s).
Parts (b)(d) of Fact IV.4 differ from ARL. In particular, part
(b) of Fact IV.4 implies that if d = 2, then as k tends to infinity,
two roots of pk (s) diverge through the open-left-half complex
plane with angles and . Parts (c) and (d) of Fact IV.4
imply that if d 3, then as k tends to infinity, one root of pk (s)
diverges to minus infinity and d 1 roots of pk (s) diverge to
infinity along the ARL asymptotes for relative degree d 1.
Specifically, part (d) of Fact IV.4 implies that d 1 roots of
pk (s) diverge to infinity along asymptotes centered at with
angles 1 , . . . , d1 , where and 1 , . . . , d1 are the ARL
center and angles associated with kz(s) + p(s). Part (c) of
Fact IV.4 is similar to part (d) of Fact IV.4, but the asymptote
center is shifted by + 2 /2.
We now present two examples to demonstrate controller
design using the QRL. In ARL, systems where the relative
degree exceeds two are not high-parameter stabilizable, that is,
stable for sufficiently large k > 0. In contrast, QRL can highparameter stabilize minimum-phase systems that are relative
degree one, two or three. Now, we consider the triple integrator,
which is relative degree three.

1810

IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON AUTOMATIC CONTROL, VOL. 59, NO. 7, JULY 2014

Fig. 8. The QRL shows that the triple integrator G(s) = 1/s3 is high-gain
k (s) = k2 (s + 10)(s + 15)/((s + 5 + k)(s +
stabilized by the controller G
30)). In fact, the closed-loop system is asymptotically stable for all k > 1, 414.

Fig. 9. The ARL shows that for sufficiently large k > 0, the two closed-loop
poles diverge along asymptotes centered at 5 with angles /2 and /2
radians.

Example 4: Consider the system (27), where = 1 and

G(s) = 1/s3 , which is minimum phase and relative degree 3.
Part (c) of Fact IV.4 states that the asymptote angles for d = 3
are /2, /2, and radians and that = (p z + 2 )/2.
k (s),
Thus, if < 0, then the closed-loop transfer function G
given by (30), is high-parameter stable. We consider the feedback (28) and (29), where pc (s) = s+30, zc (s) = (s+10)(s+
15), = 1, and = 5. Thus, d = 3 and = 2. Note that
does not impact the asymptote center or asymptote angles for
k (s) = k 2 (s+10)(s+
d = 3. Thus, the controller (29), where G
15)/((s+5+k)(s+30)), high-parameter stabilizes the closed k (s), where G(s) is the triple integrator.
loop transfer function G
To draw the QRL, we apply the QRL rules. Fact IV.1 implies
that the QRL begins at the roots of (s+5)p(s). Next, Fact IV.3
specifies the segments of the real axis that are on the QRL.
Since p(s)z(s) has no roots in the open-right-half complex
plane and 0 is a root of p(s), part (a) of Fact IV.3 implies
that [0, ) is not on the QRL. Since [5, 0) is to the left of
an odd number of real roots of p(s)z(s), part (a) of Fact IV.3
implies that [5,0) is on the QRL. Now, part (b) of Fact IV.3 is
used to determine the segments of the real axis to the left of
that are on the QRL. Note that w(s) = s3 (s+30)(s+29.0)(s
8.47)(s+2.76+j2.16)(s+2.76j2.16). Thus, (, 30)
[29.0, 5) is on the QRL, while [30, 29.0) is not on the
QRL. Furthermore, since for all (29.0, 15)(10, 5),
p()z() < 0 and w() > 0, part (ii) of Fact IV.3 implies that
for all (29.0, 15)(10, 5), there exists two distinct
k > 0 such that pk () = 0. The QRL is plotted in Fig. 8, and
k (s)
the plot confirms that the closed-loop transfer function G
k (s) is asymptotically stable
is high-parameter stable. In fact, G
for all k > 1, 414.

In ARL, a relative-degree-two system has two closed-loop

complex-conjugate poles that diverge to infinity along asymptotes with angles /2 and /2 radians. The real part of
these poles converge to the asymptote center, which is finite
and determines the settling time associated with the poles. In
contrast, the QRL for a relative-degree-two system has two

closed-loop complex-conjugate poles that diverge to infinity

along asymptotes with angles that can be selected by choice
of . We demonstrate this feature in the following example.
Example 5: Consider the inverted pendulum (g/)
sin = u, where is the angle from the inverted position, g is
the acceleration due to gravity,  is the length of the pendulum,
and u is the control torque. Let g/ = 100 s2 , and assume that
The linearized
the output is the angular velocity, that is, y = .
transfer function from u to y is G(s) = s/((s 10)(s + 10)).
First, we consider the controller
u(s) =

k(s + 5)
[v(s) y(s)]
(s 5)(s + 20)

where v(s) is an external signal. The ARL shown in Fig. 9

demonstrates that two closed-loop poles diverge along asymptotes centered at 5 with angles /2 and /2 radians. The
closed-loop system is asymptotically stable for sufficiently
large k > 0, but the real parts of the diverging poles cannot be
changed by choice of k.
Next, we consider the controller (28) and (29), where = 1,
zc (s) = s + 5, pc (s) = s 5, = 1, and = 20. The QRL
shown in Fig. 10 demonstrates that two closed-loop poles
diverge along asymptotes, which are determined using part
(b) of Fact IV.4 and are centered at 5 j8.66 with angles
2.09 and 2.09 radians, respectively. The closed-loop system is
asymptotically stable for sufficiently large k > 0. Furthermore,
the settling time associated with the diverging poles can be
reduced relative to the settling time of the diverging poles in
the ARL, which is shown in Fig. 9.

V. C ONCLUSION
We presented rules for constructing the QRL for a polynomial that is quadratic in k. These QRL rules describe: (i) the
behavior of the roots for small k; (ii) the symmetry of roots
about the real axis; (iii) the segments of the real axis that are on

WELLMAN AND HOAGG: QUADRATICALLY PARAMETERIZED ROOT LOCUS ANALYSIS

Fig. 10. The QRL shows that for sufficiently large k > 0, two closed-loop
poles diverge along asymptotes centered at 5 j8.66 with angles 2.09
radians, respectively.

the root locus; (iv) the behavior of roots for large k; and (v) the
break-in and breakaway points.
We provided a controller synthesis using a control architecture that yields a closed-loop denominator polynomial that
is quadratic in k. The QRL rules for this control architecture
are derived from the general QRL rules in Section II. With
this architecture, we designed a controller that high-parameter
stabilizes the triple integrator.
The QRL rules can be implemented on a computer to generate QRL plots. Specifically, the QRL for pk (s) can be generated
using 1 , 2 , q(s), r(s), t(s), and w(s).
The techniques of this paper could be extended to address
cubic or quartic root loci. For example, the specialized cubic
root locus results in [22] could be extended using the techniques
in this paper. The general QRL rules are developed using the
quadratic discriminant but do not explictly use the solution to
the quadratic equation. Similarly, [22] suggests that a cubic root
locus could be developed using only the cubic discriminant
rather than the solution to the cubic equation. Moreover, [22]
shows that the cubic root locus can be high-parameter stabilizing for minimum-phase systems with relative degree less than 5.
Nevertheless, general rules for a cubic or quartic root locus is
an open problem.
A PPENDIX A
P ROOFS OF FACTS II.1II.5
Proof of Fact II.1: If k = 0, then pk (s) = t(s).

Proof of Fact II.2: Since for all k > 0, pk (s) has real coefficients, it follows that the roots of pk (s) are either on the real
axis or occur in complex conjugate pairs.

Proof of Fact II.3: First, we show that (a), (b) or (c) is
necessary for R to be on the QRL. Assume R is
on the QRL and consider four cases: (A) q()t() < 0; (B)
q() = 0; (C) t() = 0; and (D) q()t() > 0. First, assume
(A) q()t() < 0, which implies (a). Next, assume (B) q() =
0, which implies from (1) that pk () = 2 kr() + t(). Since

1811

, it follows that there exists k > 0 such that pk () = 0.

Thus, t()/(2 r()) > 0, which implies that r()t() < 0
because 2 > 0, which implies (b). Next, assume (C) t() = 0,
which implies from (1) that pk () = k(k1 q() + 2 r()).
Since , it follows that there exists k > 0 such that
pk () = 0. Thus, 2 r()/(1 q()) > 0, which implies that
q()r() < 0 because 1 2 > 0. Furthermore, since t() = 0,
it follows from (2) that w() = 22 r()2 0, which implies
(c). Finally, assume (D) q()t() > 0. Since , it follows
that pk () has at least one positive root. Since 1 > 0 and
q()t() > 0, it follows that 1 q()t() > 0. Therefore, part
(a) of Lemma 1 in Appendix C implies that pk () does not
have exactly one positive root. Thus, pk () has two positive
roots. Therefore, parts (b) and (c) of Lemma 1 in Appendix C
imply that w() 0 and q()r() < 0, which implies (c).
Conversely, assume (a), (b) or (c) holds. First, assume
(a) holds. Since 1 > 0 and q()t() < 0, it follows that
1 q()t() < 0. Thus, part (a) of Lemma 1 in Appendix C
implies that there exists exactly one k > 0 such that pk () = 0.
Therefore, .
Next, assume (b) holds. Since q() = 0, it follows that
pk () = 2 r()k + t(). In addition, since r()t() < 0 and
2 > 0, it follows that 2 t()/r() > 0. Thus, there exists
exactly one k > 0 such that pk () = 0, and .
Finally, assume (c) holds. We consider four cases: (c.1)
q()r() < 0 and w() = 0; (c.2) q()r() < 0, w() > 0 and
q()t() < 0; (c.3) q()r() < 0, w() > 0 and q()t() = 0;
and (c.4) q()r() < 0, w() > 0 and q()t() > 0. First, assume (c.1) q()r() < 0 and w() = 0. Since w() = 0, 1 > 0,
2 > 0, and q()r() < 0, it follows from (2) that t() = 0.
Since 1 q() = 0, t() = 0, w() = 0, and 1 2 q()r() < 0,
part (b) of Lemma 1 in Appendix C implies that pk (s) has
repeated positive roots, which implies that there exists exactly
one k > 0 such that pk () = 0. Thus, . Next, assume (c.2)
q()r() < 0, w() > 0 and q()t() < 0. Since 1 > 0 and
q()t() < 0, it follows that 1 q()t() < 0. Therefore, part (a)
of Lemma 1 in Appendix C implies that there exists exactly
one k > 0 such that pk () = 0. Thus, . Next, assume (c.3)
q()r() < 0, w() > 0 and q()t() = 0. Since q()t() = 0
and q()r() < 0, it follows that t() = 0. Therefore, pk () =
k(1 q()k+2 r()). Since 1 > 0, 2 > 0 and q()r() < 0, it
follows that 2 r()/(1 q()) > 0, which implies that there
exists exactly one k > 0 such that pk () = 0. Thus, .
Finally, assume (c.4) q()r() < 0, w() > 0 and q()t() >
0. Since 1 > 0, 2 > 0, q()r() < 0, and q()t() > 0,
it follows that 1 2 q()r() < 0 and 1 q()t() > 0. Since
w() > 0, 1 2 q()r() < 0 and 1 q()t() > 0, part (c) of
Lemma 1 in Appendix C implies that there exists two distinct
k > 0 such that pk () = 0. Therefore, .
To show (i) and (ii), assume R is on the QRL. First, we
show (i). Assume q()t() 0 or w() = 0, and consider four
cases: (i.1) q()t() < 0, (i.2) q() = 0, (i.3) t() = 0, and
(i.4) w() = 0. First, assume (i.1) q()t() < 0. Since 1 > 0
and q()t() < 0, it follows that 1 q()t() < 0. Thus, part (a)
of Lemma 1 in Appendix C implies that there exists exactly one
k > 0 such that pk () = 0. Next, assume (i.2) q() = 0, which
implies that pk () = 2 r()k + t(). Since and pk ()
has one nonzero root, it follows that there exists exactly one

1812

IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON AUTOMATIC CONTROL, VOL. 59, NO. 7, JULY 2014

k > 0 such that pk () = 0. Next, assume (i.3) t() = 0, which

implies that pk () = k(1 q()k + 2 r()). Since and
pk () has one nonzero root, it follows that there exists exactly
one k > 0 such that pk () = 0. Finally, assume (i.4) w() = 0,
which implies that pk () has repeated real roots. Since
and pk () has repeated real roots, it follows that the roots
are positive. Thus, there exists exactly one k > 0 such that
pk () = 0. Therefore, cases (i.1)(i.4) confirm (i).
Next, we show (ii). Assume w() > 0, q()r() < 0 and q()
t() > 0. Since 1 > 0, 2 > 0, q()r() < 0, and q()t() > 0,
it follows that 1 2 q()r() < 0 and 1 q()t() > 0. Since
w() > 0, 1 2 q()r() < 0 and 1 q()t() > 0, part (c) of
Lemma 1 in Appendix C implies that there exists two distinct

k > 0 such that pk () = 0, which confirms (ii).
Proof of Fact II.4: To show that l roots of pk (s) converge to
the roots of q(s), it follows from (1) that
2 r(s) t(s)
pk (s)
+ 2
= 1 q(s) +
k2
k
k
which implies that for sufficiently large k > 0, pk (s)/k 2
1 q(s). Thus, as k , l roots of pk (s) converge to the roots
of q(s).
Next, write
q(s) = sl + a1 sl1 + . . . + al
r(s) = sm + b1 sm1 + . . . + bm
t(s) = sn + c1 sn1 + . . . + cn

(34)
(35)
(36)

where a1 , a2 , . . . , al , b1 , b2 , . . . , bm , c1 , c2 , . . . , cn R. Note

that a1 = q , b1 = r and c1 = t . Define k = 1 k ej +

2 k /2 ej + , where 1 > 0, 2 0, > 0, [0, 2),
[0, 2), and C. Thus

l

lk = 1 k ej + 2 k 2 ej +



= 1l ejl k l + l1l1 ej(l1) 2 k 2 ej + k (l1)

l(l 1) l2 j(l2)
1 e
+

 2 2 j2

2 k e + 22 k 2 ej + 2 k (l2)
l 


l lh j(lh)
+
e
h 1
h=3

h

2 k 2 ej + k (lh)
(37)
where

l
h

= 1m1 ej(m1) k (m1)

m1
k
m1
 m 1

+
1mh ej(mh)
h
h=2

h1 (mh)

2 k 2 ej +
k
(40)
n
n jn n
k = 1 e k



+ n1n1 ej(n1) 2 k 2 ej + k (n1)

n(n 1) n2 j(n2)
1 e
+

 2 2 j2

2 k e + 22 k 2 ej + 2 k (n2)
n 


n nh j(nh)
+
e

h 1
h=3

h

2 k 2 ej + k (nh)
(41)
n1
n1 (n1) j(n1)
e
k = 1 k



+ (n 1)1n2 ej(n2) 2 k 2 ej + k (n2)

n1 

n 1 nh j(nh)
+
1 e
h
h=3

h1 (nh)

2 k 2 ej +
k
.
(42)
Next, since n = l + d, note that
2 + 2l/d =

1 + 2m/d (2n 3)/d.

= 1l1 ej(l1) k (l1) + (l 1)1l2 ej(l2)

l1
k



2 k 2 ej + k (l2)

l1 

l 1 lh j(lh)
+
1 e
h
h=3

h1 (lh)

2 k 2 ej +
k
m
m jm m
k = 1 e k



+ m1m1 ej(m1) 2 k 2 ej + k (m1)

m 


m mh j(mh)
+
e

h 1
h=2

h

2 k 2 ej + k (mh)

1/d

1 k 2 q(i,k ) = 1d ejli k

2n
d
(n1)

+ (l + a1 )1 d ej(l1)i k
 (2n3)
+O k d
 (2n3)
2 kr(i,k ) = O k d
(n1)
d

ej(n1)i k

(45)
(46)
(2n2)
d

(47)

where O(f (k)) is big O notation, that is, we write g(k) =

O(f (k)) if there exists c0 > 0 and k0 > 0 such that for all
k > k0 , |g(k)| c0 |f (k)|. Therefore, it follows from (1) and
(45)(47) that for i = 1, . . . , d
n

pk (i,k ) = 1d ejli (1 + ejdi )k

(n1)

(39)

(2n2)
d

2n
d

+ (n + c1 )1
 (2n3)
+O k d

(38)

(44)

Thus, it follows from (34)(44), with 1 = 1 , 2 = 0,

= 2/d, = i , and = , that for i = 1, . . . , d

t(i,k ) = 1 ejni k

(43)

To show (a), assume d1 < d2 2, and let 1,k , . . . , d,k

be given by (6) and (7). Since d1 < d2 2, it follows that
d + 2m = n + m + d1 n + m + (d2 3) = 2n 3, which
implies that

n
d

= l!/(h!(l h)!). Similarly

2n
.
d

2n
d

(2n2)

d
+
ej(l1)i k d
1

l + a1 + ejdi (n + c1 )
 (2n3)
.
+O k d

(48)

WELLMAN AND HOAGG: QUADRATICALLY PARAMETERIZED ROOT LOCUS ANALYSIS

For i = 1, . . . , d, it follows from (7) that 1+ejdi = 0. Furthermore, since a1 c1 = t q and d = nl, it follows from
(7) that l + a1 +ejdi (n+c1 ) = a1 c1 d = 0. Thus, (48)
implies that for i = 1, . . . , d, pk (i,k ) = O(k (2n3)/d ). Therefore, for i = 1, . . . , d, limk pk (i,k )/k (2n2)/d = 0. Thus,
Definition 2 implies that 1,k , . . . , d,k are asymptotic approximations of roots of pk (s), which confirms (a).
To show (b), assume d1 = d2 2, and let 1,k , . . . , d,k
be given by (8) and (9). Since d1 = d2 2, it follows that
d + 2m = n + m + d1 = n + m + (d2 2) = 2n 2, which
implies that
k

1+2m/d

=k

2(n1)
d

1813

To show (c), assume d1 = d2 1, and let 1,k , . . . , d,k be

given by (10)(12). Since d1 = d2 1, it follows that d+2m =
n+m+d1 = n+m+(d2 1) = 2n1, which implies that

1 k 2 q(i,k ) = 1d ejli k

(49)

(51)

ej(n1)i (ni + c1 )k
 2(n2)
.
+O k d

pk (i,k ) = 1 ejli 1 + ejdi k

(52)

2n
d

n
d

t(i,k ) = 1 ejni k

+ejdi (ni +c1 ) +O k

2(n2)
d

2n
d

(2n2)
d

(57)

2 (n1)
d

+ n
 d1
1
d1d

2(n1)
d

ej(l1)i

(2n1)
d

2 +m1)i
ej(d
 (2n3) k
+O k d

+ 1
ej(l1)i k

(1d2 )
li + a1 + 1 d 2 ej(d1 +1)i

ej(d2 +n1)i k

(d1 +1)
d

li + a1 + 1
2 ej(d1 +1)i + ejdi (ni + c1 )

1
= a1 c1 + j(1)i1 2 /12 di

ej(n1)i

Therefore, it follows from (1) and (56)(58) that for i = 1,

...,d
1 (nm+l1)
+ 1 d
2
d
(2n1)
ej(nm+l1)i [d + l + nejdi ]k d

(n1)
2
+1 d ej(l1)i l+a1 +(n+c1 )ejdi + 22
2d 1

(l2 +n2 ln+2mdejdi )
 (2n3)
(2n2)
.
(59)
k d +O k d
n

Thus, (53) and (54) imply that for i = 1, . . . , d, pk (i,k ) =

O(k 2(n2)/d ). Therefore, for i = 1, . . . , d, limk pk (i,k )/
k 2(n1)/d = 0. Thus, Definition 2 implies that 1,k , . . . , d,k are
asymptotic approximations of roots of pk (s), which confirms (b).

(n1)
d

(l2)
n(n 1)1 d 22 j(2d2 +n2)i
+
e
2d2
 (2n3)
(2n2)
k d +O k d
.
(58)

pk (i,k ) = 1d ejli [1 + ejdi ]k

(54)

(2n1)
d

+ (n + c1 )1

(53)

For i = 1, . . . , d, it follows from (9) that 1+ejdi = 0. Since d1 =

d2 2, it follows that d = d1 +d2 = 2d2 2, which implies that
(1d2 )/d = 1/2. Furthermore, since a1 c1 = t q and
for i = 1, . . . , d, ej(d1+1)i = ejdi /2 = ej(i/2) = (1)i1 j,
it follows from (9) that

= 0.

(n1)
d

22 (m1)
d

+ m
 d1
1
d1d

2(n1)
d

Therefore, it follows from (1) and (50)(52) that for i = 1,

...,d

(n1)
d

2 kr(i,k ) = 1d 2 ejmi k

(n1)
d

(2n1)
d

(l2)
l(l 1)1 d 22 j(2d2 +l2)i
+
e
2d2
 (2n3)
(2n2)
k d +O k d
,
(56)

(50)

2n
d

+ 1

n
d

ej(d2 +l1)i k

2(n1)

ej(l1)i (li + a1 )k d
 2(n2)
+O k d
 2(n2)
m
2(n1)
2 kr(i,k ) = 1d 2 ejmi k d +O k d
t(i,k ) = 1 ejni k

+ (l + a1 )1

(n1)
d

n
d

2n
d

2 (n1)
d

+l
 d1
1
d
d1

2n
d

+ 1

(55)
1/d

1/d

1 k 2 q(i,k ) = 1 ejli k

Thus, it follows from (34)(43) and (55), with 1 = 1 , 2 =

d /d
2 /(d1 1 ), = 2/d, = i , = d2 i , and = , that for
i = 1, . . . , d

Thus, it follows from (34)(43) and (49), with 1 = 1 ,

2 = 0, = 2/d, = i , and = i , that for i = 1, . . . , d
n
d

(2n1)
d

k 1+2m/d = k

2n
d

1814

IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON AUTOMATIC CONTROL, VOL. 59, NO. 7, JULY 2014

For i = 1, . . . , d, it follows from (11) that 1+ejdi = 0, which

implies that d+l+nejdi = d+ln = 0. Furthermore, since
a1 c1 = t q , it follows from (11) and (12) that

By repeating the above argument with = (1/2)(2

22 41 ) and , given by (17), used in place of , it follows
that d1 +1,k , . . . , d,k are asymptotic approximations of roots
of pk (s), which confirms (d).
To show (e), assume d1 = d2 + 1, and let 1,k , . . . , d,k be
given by (18)(21). First, we show that 1,k , . . . , d1 ,k are
asymptotic approximations of roots of pk (s). Since 2d1 + l =
d1 + m = 2m l, it follows that

22
(l2 + n2 l n + 2mdejdi )
2d2 1
2
= d + a1 c1 + 22 (l2 + n2 l n 2md)
2d 1
= 0.
(60)

l+a1 +(n+c1 )ejdi +

Thus, (59) and (60) imply that for i = 1, . . . , d, pk (i,k ) =

O(k (2n3)/d ). Therefore, for i = 1, . . . , d, limk pk (i,k )/
k (2n2)/d = 0. Thus, Definition 2 implies that 1,k , . . . , d,k are
asymptotic approximations of roots of pk (s), which confirms (c).
To show (d), assume d1 = d2 , and let 1,k , . . . , d,k be
given by (13)(17). First, we show that 1,k , . . . , d1 ,k are
asymptotic approximations of roots of pk (s). Since d + 2m =
2d2 + 2m = 2n, it follows that
2n

(61)
k 1+2m/d = k d .


Let = (1/2)(2 + 22 41 ), and it follows from

(34)(43) and (61), with 1 = ||1/d1 , 2 = 0, = 2/d, = i ,
and = , that for i = 1, . . . , d1
l

1 k 2 q(i,k ) = 1 || d1 ejli k

2n
d

+ 1 
(a1 + l)||

2(n2)
+O k d
2 kr(i,k ) = 2 ||

m
d1

ejmi k

(l1)
d1

t(i,k ) = ||

ejni k

2(n1)
d

(62)

2n
d

+ 2 
(b1 + m)||

2(n2)
+O k d
n
d1

ej(l1)i k

(m1)
d1

ej(m1)i k

2(n1)
d

(63)

2n
d
(n1)
d1

+ (c1+ n)||

2(n2)
.
+O k d

ej(n1)i k

2(n1)
d

(64)

It follows from (15) that for i = 1, . . . , d1 , = ||ejd1 i and

2 = (||ejd1 i )2 = ||2 ejdi . Therefore, it follows from (1)
and (62)(64) that for i = 1, . . . , d1
l

pk (i,k ) = d1 [1 + 2 + 2 ]k
(l1)

2n
d

2(n1)

+  d1 k d

1 (l + a1 ) + 2 (m + b1 ) + 2 (n + c1 )
 2(n2)
.
(65)
+O k d

Since = (1/2)(2 + 22 41 ), it follows that 1 +
2 + 2 = 0. Furthermore, since a1 = q , b1 = r and
c1 = t , it follows from (16) that
1 (l + a1 ) + 2 (m + b1 ) + 2 (ni + c1 )
= (l1 + m2 + n2 ) + (1 a1 + 2 b1 + 2 c1 )
= 0.
(66)
Thus, (65) and (66) imply that for i = 1, . . . , d1 , pk (i,k ) =
O(k (n2)/d1 ). Therefore, for i = 1, . . . , d1 , limk pk (i,k )/
k 2(n1)/d = 0. Thus, Definition 2 implies that 1,k , . . . , d1 ,k
are asymptotic approximations of roots of pk (s).

k 2+l/d1 = k 1+m/d1 = k

(2ml)
d1

(67)

Furthermore, since d1 = d2 +1, it follows that n = 2ml1,

which implies that
n

k d1 = k

(2ml1)
d1

(68)

Thus, it follows from (34)(42), (67), and (68), with 1 =

(1 /2 )1/d1 , 2 = 0, = 1/d1 , = i , and = , that for
i = 1, . . . , d1

dl
1 1 jli (2ml)
2
1 k q(i,k ) = 1
e k d1 + 1 (l + a1 )
2

2+ (l1)
d1
(2ml1)
1
ej(l1)i k d1

2

(2ml2)
+ O k d1
(69)

dm
1 1 jmi (2ml)
2 kr(i,k ) = 2
e
k d1
2

(m1)
d1
1
+ 2 (m + b1 )
ej(m1)i

2
 (2ml2)
(2ml1)
(70)
k d1
+ O k d1

dn
1 1 jni (2ml1)
t(i,k ) =
e
k d1
2 

(2ml2)
.
(71)
+ O k d1
Therefore, it follows from (1) and (69)(71) that for i = 1,
. . . , d1

dl
(2ml)
1 1 jli
pk (i,k ) = 1
e [1 + ejd1 i ]k d1
2

(l1)
1 d1 j(l1)i (2ml1)
+ 1
e
k d1

2

l + a1 + (m + b1 )ejd1 i


(d+1)
d1
1
1
j(d+1)i
+1
e
2
 (2ml2)
.
(72)
+ O k d1
For i = 1, . . . , d1 , it follows from (19) that 1 + ejd1 i = 0.
Since d + 1 = d1 + d2 + 1 = 2d1 , it follows that (d + 1)/
d1 = 2. Furthermore, since a1 b1 = r q and for i =
1, . . . , d1 , ej(d+1)i = ej(4i2) = 1, it follows from (19) that

(d+1)
d1
1
ej(d+1)i
2
= a1 b1 + 1 /22 d1 = 0.

l + a1 + (m + b1 )ejd1 i + 11

(73)

WELLMAN AND HOAGG: QUADRATICALLY PARAMETERIZED ROOT LOCUS ANALYSIS

Thus, (72) and (73) imply that for i = 1, . . . , d1 , pk (i,k ) =

O(k (2ml2)/d1 ). Therefore, for i = 1, . . . , d1, limk pk (i,k)/
k (2ml1)/d1 = 0. Thus, Definition 2 implies that 1,k , . . . , d1 ,k
are asymptotic approximations of roots of pk (s).
We now show that d1 +1,k , . . . , d,k are asymptotic approximations of roots of pk (s). Since d2 = n m, it follows that
n

k 1+m/d2 = k d2 .

(n1)
d2

are asymptotic approximations of roots of pk (s), which

confirms (e).
To show (f), assume d1 > d2 + 1, and let 1,k , . . . , d,k be
given by (22)(25). First, we show that 1,k , . . . , d1 ,k are
asymptotic approximations of roots of pk (s). Since d1 > d2 +1,
it follows that
n 2m l 2.

(74)

Furthermore, since d1 = d2 + 1, it follows that 2d2 + l = d2 +

d1 + l 1 = n 1, which implies that
k 2+l/d2 = k

1815

Thus, it follows from (34)(42), (67) and (81), with 1 =

(1 /2 )1/d1 , 2 = 0, = 1/d1 , = i , and = , that for
i = 1, . . . , d1


(75)
2

1/d
2 2 ,

Thus, it follows from (34)(42), (74) and (75), with 1 =

2 = 0, = 1/d2 , = i , and = , that for i = 1, . . . , d2
l
d2

(n1)
d2

ej(m1)i (m + b1 )k
 (n2)
+ O k d2
+ 2

t(d1 +i,k ) = 2 e

(n1)
d2

(77)

ej(n1)i (n + c1 )k
 (n2)
.
+ O k d2

[1 + e

(78)

jd2 i

]k

n
d2

+ 2
ej(m1)i

(1d)
1 2 d2 ej(1d)i + m + b1

+ (n + c1 )ejd2 i k
+O k

(l1)
d
1

ejli

ej(l1)i

+ 1

(n1)
d2

(79)

For i = 1, . . . , d2 , it follows from (21) that 1+ejd2 i = 0.

Since 1d = 1d1 d2 = 2d2 , it follows that (1d)/d2 =
2. Furthermore, since b1 c1 = t r and for i = 1, . . . , d2 ,
ej(1d)i = ej(4i+2) = 1, it follows from (21) that
(1d)

1 2 d2 ej(1d)i + m + b1 + (n + c1 )ejd2 i
= b1 c1 + 1 /22 d2 = 0.

m
d1

1
2

(2ml)
d1

(m1)
d
1

(82)
ejmi

ej(m1)i

(80)

Thus, (79) and (80) imply that for i = 1, . . . , d2 , pk (d1 +i,k ) =

O(k (n2)/d2 ). Therefore, for i = 1, . . . , d2, limk pk (d1 +i,k)/
k (n1)/d2 = 0. Thus, Definition 2 implies that d1 +1,k , . . . , d,k

(83)
(84)

Therefore, it follows from (1) and (82)(84) that for i = 1,

. . . , d1
pk (i,k ) = 1

(n2)
d2

(2ml)
d1

(m + b1 )k d1
 (2ml2)
+ O k d1
 (2ml2)
.
t(i,k ) = O k d1

(n1)
d2

1
2

(2ml1)

(n1)
d2

Therefore, it follows from (1) and (76)(78) that for i = 1,

. . . , d2
pk (d1 +i,k ) = 2 e

1
2


+ 2

(n1)
d2

jmi


2 kr(i,k ) = 2

n
d2

+ 2

n
d2

(2ml1)

jni

dl

(l + a1 )k d1
 (2ml2)
+ O k d1

(76)

2 kr(d1 +i,k ) = 2d2 ejmi k d2

n
d2

1
2


+ 1

1 k q (d1 +i,k ) = 1 2 e k
 (n2)
+ O k d2
n

1 k q(i,k ) = 1

(n1)
d2

jli

(81)

1
2


dl

1
2

ejli (1 + ejd1 i )k

(l1)
d
1

(2ml)
d1

ej(l1)i

 (2ml1)

l + a1 + (m + b1 )ejd1 i k d1
 (2ml2)
.
(85)
+ O k d1
For i = 1, . . . , d1 , it follows from (23) that 1+ejd1 i = 0. Furthermore, since a1 b1 = r q , it follows from (23) that l+
a1 +(m+b1 )ejd1 i = a1 b1 d1 = 0. Thus, (85) implies
that for i = 1, . . . , d1 , pk (i,k ) = O(k (2ml2)/d1 ). Therefore,
for i = 1, . . . , d1 , limk pk (i,k )/k (2ml1)/d1 = 0. Thus,
Definition 2 implies that 1,k , . . . , d1 ,k are asymptotic approximations of roots of pk (s).
We now show that d1 +1,k , . . . , d,k are asymptotic approximations of roots of pk (s). Since d1 > d2 + 1, it follows that
2d2 + l d1 + d2 + l 2 = n 2.

(86)

1816

IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON AUTOMATIC CONTROL, VOL. 59, NO. 7, JULY 2014

1/d

Thus, it follows from (34)(42), (74) and (86), with 1 = 2 2 ,

2 = 0, = 1/d2 , = i , and = , that for i = 1, . . . , d2
 (n2)
(87)
1 k 2 q(d1 +i,k ) = O k d2
n

2 kr (d1 +i,k ) = 2d2 ejmi k d2

(n1)
d2

ej(m1)i (m + b1 )k
 (n2)
+ O k d2
+ 2

n
d2

t (d1 +i,k ) = 2 k

n
d2

(n1)
d2

(88)

jni

(n1)
d2

ej(n1)i (n + c1 )k
 (n2)
.
+ O k d2
+ 2

(n1)
d2

(89)

Therefore, it follows from (1) and (87)(89) that for i = 1,

. . . , d2
n

pk (d1 +i,k ) = 2d2 k d2 ejmi [1 + ejd2 i ]

(n1)

(n1)

+ 2 d2 k d2 ej(m1)i


m + b1 + (n + c1 )ejd2 i
 (n2)
.
+ O k d2

(90)

For i = 1, . . . , d2 , it follows from (25) that 1 + ejd2 i = 0.

Furthermore, since b1 c1 = t r , it follows from (25) that
m + b1 + (n + c1 )ejd2 i = b1 c1 d2 = 0. Thus, (90)
implies that for i = 1, . . . , d2 , pk (d1 +i,k ) = O(k (n2)/d2 ).
Therefore, for i = 1, . . . , d2 , limk pk (d1 +i,k )/k (n1)/d =
0. Thus, Definition 2 implies that d1 +1,k , . . . , d,k are asymptotic approximations of roots of pk (s), which confirms (f). 
Proof of Fact II.5: Let R be on the QRL, and assume q( ) = 0. Since , it follows from (1) and (26)
that 1 ( ) > 0 or 2 ( ) > 0. We consider three cases: (A)
1 ( ) > 0 and 2 ( ) > 0, (B) 1 ( ) > 0 and 2 ( ) 0, and
(C) 1 ( ) 0 and 2 ( ) > 0. First, assume (A) 1 ( ) > 0 and
2 ( ) > 0. It follows that there exists a R and b R such
that: (a, b); there is at most one break-in or breakaway
point on (a, b); for all (a, b), q() = 0; and for all
(a, b), 1 () > 0 and 2 () > 0. It follows from Definition 3
that is a break-in or breakaway point if and only if is the
minimizer or maximizer of 1 () or 2 () on (a, b). Furthermore, is the minimizer or maximizer of 1 () or 2 () on
(a, b) if and only if d1 ()/d|= = 0 or d2 ()/d|= =
0, respectively. Thus, is a break-in or breakaway point if and
only if d1 ()/d|= = 0 or d2 ()/d|= = 0.
Next, assume (B) 1 ( ) > 0 and 2 ( ) 0. It follows that
there exists a R and b R such that: (a, b); there is at
most one break-in or breakaway point on (a, b); for all
(a, b), q() = 0; and for all (a, b), 1 () > 0. It follows
from Definition 3 that is a break-in or breakaway point if and
only if is the minimizer or maximizer of 1 () on (a, b).
Furthermore, is the minimizer or maximizer of 1 () on
(a, b) if and only if d1 ()/d|= = 0. Thus, is a breakin or breakaway point if and only if d1 ()/d|= = 0.

Finally, assume (C) 1 ( ) 0 and 2 ( ) > 0. Using the

same argument as the previous case yields that is a break-in or
breakaway point if and only if d2 ()/d|= = 0. Combining
these three cases yields that is a break-in or breakaway point
if and only if part (a) or (b) from Fact II.5 holds.

A PPENDIX B
P ROOF OF FACT IV.3
Proof of Fact IV.3: First, we show that (a) or (b) is necessary
for R to be on the QRL. Assume that R is on the
QRL, and it follows from (31) and Fact II.3 that at least one
of the following holds: (A.i) > and p()z() < 0; (A.ii)
< and p()z() > 0; (B) < and z() = 0; (C.i) ,
p()z() < 0 and w() 0; or (C.ii) < , p()z() < 0
and w() 0. Assume (A.i) or (C.i) holds, and it follows that
and p()z() < 0, which implies part (a) of Fact IV.3.
Next, assume (A.ii) or (C.ii) holds, and it follows from (33)
that < , p() = 0 and w() 0, which implies part (b) of
Fact IV.3. Finally, assume (B) holds, and it follows that < .
Since z() = 0 and p(s) and z(s) are coprime it follows that
p() = 0. Thus, (33) implies that w() = 2 p()2 > 0. Therefore, < , p() = 0 and w() 0, which implies part (b)
of Fact IV.3.
Conversely, assume (a) or (b) of Fact IV.3 hold. First, assume
part (a) of Fact IV.3 holds and consider two cases: (a.i) >
and p()z() < 0; or (a.ii) = and p()z() < 0. First,
assume (a.i) > and p()z() < 0, and it follows from (31)
that q()t() < 0. Thus, part (a) of Fact II.3 implies that .
Next, assume (a.ii) = and p()z() < 0, and it follows
from (31) and (33) that q()r() < 0 and w() = 2 p()2 > 0.
Thus, part (c) of Fact II.3 implies that .
Next, assume part (b) of Fact IV.3 holds and consider
three cases: (b.i) p()z() > 0; (b.ii) z() = 0; and (b.iii)
p()z() < 0. First, assume (b.i) p()z() > 0. Since < ,
it follows from (31) that q()t() < 0. Therefore, part (a) of
Fact II.3 implies that . Next, assume (b.ii) z() = 0, and
it follows from (31) that q() = 0. Furthermore, since <
and p() = 0, it follows that from (31) that r()t() < 0.
Thus, part (b) of Fact II.3 implies that . Finally, assume (b.iii) p()z() < 0, and (31) implies that q()r() < 0.
Since, in addition, w() 0, part (c) of Fact II.3 implies that
.
Next, we show (i) and (ii). Let R be on the QRL. To show
(i), assume , p()z() 0 or w() = 0. First, assume
. Since and , it follows from (a) and (b) that
p()z() < 0, and (31) implies that q()t() 0. Thus, (i) of
Fact II.3 implies that there exists exactly one k > 0 such that
pk () = 0. Next, assume p()z() 0. Since p()z() 0
and , it follows from (a) and (b) that < , and (31)
implies that q()t() 0. Thus, (i) of Fact II.3 implies that
there exists exactly one k > 0 such that pk () = 0. Finally,
assume w() = 0, and (i) of Fact II.3 implies that there exists
exactly one k > 0 such that pk () = 0.
To show (ii), assume < , p()z() < 0 and w() > 0. It
follows from (31) that q()r() < 0 and q()t() > 0. Since,
in addition, w() > 0, it follows from part (ii) of Fact II.3 that

there exists two distinct k > 0 such that pk () = 0.

WELLMAN AND HOAGG: QUADRATICALLY PARAMETERIZED ROOT LOCUS ANALYSIS

A PPENDIX C
R ESULT ON Q UADRATIC P OLYNOMIALS
Lemma 1: Consider the polynomial a(k) = a2 k 2 + a1 k +
a0 , where a2 , a1 , a0 R, a2 = 0, and a0 = 0. Then, the following statements hold:
(a) a(k) has exactly one positive root if and only if
a2 a0 < 0.
(b) a(k) has repeated positive roots if and only if a21
4a2 a0 = 0 and a2 a1 < 0.
(c) a(k) has two distinct positive roots if and only if a21
4a2 a0 > 0, a2 a1 < 0 and a2 a0 > 0.
R EFERENCES
[1] W. R. Evans, Graphical analysis of control systems, AIEE Trans.,
vol. 67, pp. 547551, 1948.
[2] W. R. Evans, Control system synthesis by root locus method, AIEE
Trans., vol. 69, pp. 6669, 1950.
[3] W. R. Evans, Control System Dynamics. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1954.
[4] A. M. Krall, The root locus method: A survey, SIAM Rev., vol. 12, no. 1,
pp. 6472, 1970.
[5] W. Krajewski and U. Viaro, Root-locus invariance, exploiting alternative
arrival and departure angles, IEEE Control Syst. Mag., vol. 27, no. 1,
pp. 3643, 2007.
[6] A. M. Eydgahi and M. Ghavamzedeh, Complementary root locus revisited, IEEE Trans. Education, vol. 44, no. 2, pp. 137143, 2001.
[7] M. L. Nagurka and T. R. Kurfess, Gain and phase margins of SISO
systems from modified root locus plots, IEEE Control Syst. Mag., vol. 12,
no. 3, pp. 123127, 1992.
[8] R. W. Brockett and C. I. Byrnes, Multivariable nyquist criteria, root
loci, and pole placement: A geometric viewpoint, IEEE Trans. Autom.
Control, vol. 26, no. 1, pp. 271284, 1981.
[9] H. Kwakernaak, Asymptotic root loci of multivariable linear optimal
regulators, IEEE Trans. Autom. Control, vol. 21, no. 3, pp. 378382,
1976.
[10] R. W. Brockett and C. I. Byrnes, On the algebraic geometry of the
output feedback pole placement map, in Prod. IEEE Conf. Dec. Control,
Fort Lauderdale, FL, 1979, pp. 754757.
[11] C.-T. Chen, Linear System Theory and Design, 3rd ed. Oxford, U.K.:
Oxford Univ. Press, Inc., 1998.
[12] S. Sastry and C. Desoer, Asymptotic unbounded root loci-formulas and
computation, IEEE Trans. Autom. Control, vol. 28, no. 5, pp. 557568,
1983.
[13] S. S. Broussev and N. T. Tcharmov, Time-varying root-locus of largesignal LC oscillators, IEEE Trans. Computer-Aided Design Integr.
Circuits Syst., vol. 29, pp. 830834, 2010.

1817

[14] F. Merrikh-Bayat and M. Afshar, Extending the root-locus method

to fractional-order systems, J. Appl. Math., vol. 2008, 2008, Article
ID 528934.
[15] J. Glaria, R. Rojas, and M. Salgado, Logarithmic root loci for
continuous-time loops, IEEE Control Syst. Mag., vol. 14, no. 2, pp. 47
52, 1994.
[16] I. Mareels, A simple selftuning controller for stably invertible systems,
Syst. Control Lett., vol. 4, pp. 516, 1984.
[17] J. B. Hoagg and D. S. Bernstein, Direct adaptive stabilization of
minimum-phase systems with bounded relative degree, IEEE Trans.
Autom. Control, vol. 52, pp. 610621, 2007.
[18] J. B. Hoagg and D. S. Bernstein, Direct adaptive command following and
disturbance rejection for minimum phase systems with unknown relative
degree, Int. J. Adapt. Control Sig. Proc., vol. 21, pp. 4975, 2007.
[19] D. E. Miller and E. J. Davison, An adaptive controller which provides an
arbitrarily good transient and steady-state response, IEEE Trans. Autom.
Control, vol. 36, pp. 6881, 1991.
[20] K. Gher and G. Kta, Root loci in the case of A(p) + xB(p) +
x2 C(p) = 0, Periodica Polytechnica, Electric Eng., vol. 11, no. 3,
pp. 175190, 1967.
[21] B. J. Wellman and J. B. Hoagg, Root locus for a controller class that
yields quadratic gain parameterization, in Proc. Amer. Control Conf.,
Washington, DC, 2013, pp. 18491854.
[22] B. J. Wellman and J. B. Hoagg, Root locus for a controller class
that yields cubic gain parameterization, in Prod. Amer. Control Conf.,
Washington, DC, 2013, pp. 66406645.

Brandon J. Wellman received the B.S. and M.S.

degrees in mechanical engineering from the University of Kentucky, Lexington, in 2011 and 2013,
respectively, where he is currently pursuing the Ph.D.
degree in mechanical engineering (with a focus in
mechanical control systems).
His research interests include multiagent dynamic
systems and unmanned-vehicle trajectory-planning
algorithms.

Jesse B. Hoagg received the B.S.E. degree in civil

and environmental engineering from Duke University, Durham, NC, in 2002 and the Ph.D. degree
in aerospace engineering from the University of
Michigan, Ann Arbor, in 2006.
He is an Assistant Professor in the Department
of mechanical engineering at the University of
Kentucky, Lexington. His research interests include
adaptive control, decentralized control, and system
identification.