Professional Documents
Culture Documents
(3.2)
(3.3)
...
...
(3.4)
STATE SPACE APPROACH 97
...
...
(3.5)
with the corresponding output equation obtained from (3.7) as
... (3.6)
The state space form (3.9) and (3.10) is known in the literature as
the phase variable canonical form.
In order to extend this technique to the general case defined
by (3.5), which includes derivatives with respect to the input, we
form an auxiliary differential equation of (3.5) having the form of
(3.6) as
(3.7)
98 STATE SPACE APPROACH
(3.8)
...
and then apply the superposition principle to (3.5) and (3.11). Since
is the response of (3.11), then by the superposition property
the response of (3.5) is given by
(3.9)
given by
(3.11)
...
! $ ! $
where stands for the th derivative, i.e. .
According to (3.9) and (3.14), the state space model of the above
system is described by the following matrices
100 STATE SPACE APPROACH
/ /01 /01 1 2
(3.13a)
/ /01
/ /01 1 2 (3.13b)
bn
Jb
2
Jb
1
Hu G xn G xn G x2 G x2 G x1 G x1 Jb Iy
Σ 1/s 1/s 1/s Σ
vK (n-1) vK (1)
0
v (n) v
-an-1
-a1
-a0
L M N OPM
(3.15)
104 STATE SPACE APPROACH
and
Q Q R S S R RTS RTS R
R
(3.16)
This form of the system model is called the controller canon-
ical form. It is identical to the one obtained in the previous sec-
tion—equations (3.9) and (3.14). Controller canonical form plays
an important role in control theory since it represents the so-called
controllable system. System controllability is one of the main con-
cepts of modern control theory. It will be studied in detail in
Chapter 5.
It is important to point out that there are many state space forms
for a given dynamical system, and that all of them are related by
linear transformations. More about this fact, together with the
development of other important state space canonical forms, can
be found in Kailath (1980; see also similarity transformation in
Section 3.4).
Note that the MATLAB function tf2ss produces the state
space form for a given transfer function, in fact, it produces the
controller canonical form.
Example 3.2: The transfer function of the flexible beam from
Section 2.6 is given by
U V W
X Y U V W
and
leading to
^ b ^ ^_` a ^_ a
^_` ` ^ b
(3.19)
This relationship can be implemented by using a simulation di-
agram composed of integrators in a cascade, and letting the
corresponding signals to pass through the specified number of in-
tegrators. For example, terms containing should pass through
only one integrator, signals ^_ a and ^_ a should pass
through two integrators, and so on. Finally, signals b and
b should be integrated -times, i.e. they must pass through
all integrators. The corresponding simulation diagram is given
in Figure 3.3.
STATE SPACE APPROACH 107
du(t)
cb cb cb cb
0 1 n-1 n
m m m p
n n n p
... ..
. o o o p
... ... ... ... ...
... ... ... ... pq o ...
p q n pq n pq n p
(3.22)
and
p (3.23)
Example 3.3: The observer canonical form for the flexible
beam from Example 3.2 is given by
and
v
r s t
r s t (3.24)
r s t
z x1 z x1 {k
+ 1/s 1
-p1
wu(t)
+
z x2
1/s
z x2 {k
2
yΣ x y(t)
-p2
z xn z xn {k
+ 1/s n
-pn
| } ~
This form is known in the literature as the modal canonical form
(also known as uncoupled form).
Example 3.4: Find the state space model of a system described
by the transfer function
STATE SPACE APPROACH 111
and the state space form obtained by using (3.19) and (3.20) of the
direct programming technique is
Then, distinct real poles are implemented like in the case of parallel
programming. A second-order transfer function, corresponding
to the pair of complex conjugate poles, is implemented using
direct programming, and added in parallel to the first-order transfer
functions corresponding to the real poles. The simulation diagram
is given in Figure 3.5, where the controller canonical form is used
to represent a second-order transfer function corresponding to the
STATE SPACE APPROACH 113
+ z x1 1/s
z x1
2
-5
wu(t) z x2 z x2 x y(t)
+ 1/s
3 yΣ
-10
8
z x4 z x4 z x3 z x3 8
+ 1/s 1/s
-2
-2
>
The partial fraction form of the above expression is
> @
The simulation diagram for such a system is shown in Figure 3.6.
k11
k1r-1
+ xr xr + x2 x2 x1 x1 k y(t)
1/s 1/s + 1/s 1r Σ
-pr+1
xn xn k
+ 1/s n
-pn
Figure 3.6: The simulation diagram for the Jordan canonical form
Taking for the state variables the outputs of integrators, the state
STATE SPACE APPROACH 115
116 STATE SPACE APPROACH
(3.28)
(3.30)
118 STATE SPACE APPROACH
where
¨=© ¨© ¨©
(3.33)
This transformation is known in the literature as the similarity
transformation. It plays an important role in linear control system
theory and practice.
Very important features of this transformation are that under
similarity transformation both the system eigenvalues and the sys-
tem transfer function are invariant.
Eigenvalue Invariance
A new state space model obtained by the similarity transforma-
tion does not change internal structure of the model, that is, the
eigenvalues of the system remain the same. This can be shown
as follows
¨© ¨©
¨© (3.34)
see Appendix C.
be shown as follows
¬ ¬ ¬ ¬
Note that the pure diagonal state space form defined in (3.104)
can be obtained only in the following three cases.
1. The system matrix has distinct eigenvalues, namely ³ ´
µ .
2. The system matrix is symmetric (see Appendix C).
3. The system minimal polynomial does not contain multiple
eigenvalues. For the definition of the minimal polynomial and
the corresponding pure diagonal Jordan form, see Subsection
4.2.4.
In the above three cases we say that the system matrix is diago-
nalizable.
Remark: Relation (3.104) may be represented in another form,
that is
¶ ³ ¶ ³
or · ·
where · ·
¶ ³
»
»
» »
»
»
º
º
º
¼
½
The study of the Jordan form is quite complex. Much more about
the Jordan form will be presented in Chapter 4, where we study
system stability.
Ã
In such a case the homogeneous equation ,
becomes ¾ Á Á ¾ Ã
or Ä Ä Ä
or Ä Ä ÉËÊ Æ ÄÂ Ã ÉÌÊ Æ
124 STATE SPACE APPROACH