Control Engineering: Root Locus Analysis II

1
Dr. Ayman A. El-Badawy

Department of Mechatronics Engineering
Faculty of Engineering and Material Science
Control Engineering
Root Locus Analysis II
German University in Cairo
Example:
An airline is mechanizing a pitch control auto pilot system. The system is
shown below.
Draw the Root-Locus diagram.
Indicate what happens to the system response as K changes.
Find values of K for which the system is stable.
r
u
p
M
+
_
5 4
3
2
+ +
+
s s
s
u
1
s
1
10 + s
K
e
M
+
+
Aircraft dynamics
Elevator servo
2
= 0
r
Setu
u
u
Step 1:
Find T.F.
p
M
( ) 5 4
3
2
+ +
+
s s s
s
10 + s
K
( ) 5 4
3
2
+ +
+
s s s
s
10 + s
K
p
M
( )
( )
( )
( )( )
( )( ) ( ) 3 5 4 10
10 3
10 5 4
3
1
5 4
3
2
2
2
+ + + + +
+ +
=
+
+ +
+
+
+ +
+
=
s K s s s s
s s
s
K
s s s
s
s s s
s
M
p
u
C/C equation=0
( )( ) ( ) 0 3 5 4 10
2
= + + + + + s K s s s s
( )
( )( ) 5 4 10
3
1
2
+ + +
+
+
s s s s
s
K
Step 2:
Put T.F. in proper form;
We must write this as:
( )( ) + + +
5 4 10
2
s s s s
by
( ) = + 0 1 s KG
p
Step 3:
Draw Root-Locus Diagram
( )
( )( )( ) j s j s s s
s
K G
op
+ + + +
+
=
2 2 10
3
3
# of branches =4=#of poles
Asymptote:
( ) ( )
3
11 Re Re
=

=
m n
zero pole
o
( )
=
=
=
=
+
=
300 3
180 2
60 1
1 360 180
l
l
l
m n
l
|
Departure Angle ?
5 . 25
180
1
1
3
1
=
= +

= =
d
i
i
i
i d
|
| |

250.5 45
4
( )( ) ( )
( )( )
( ) 0 3 50 45 14
0 3 5 4 10
0 3 5 4 10
2 3 4
2 2
2
= + + + + +
= + + + + +
= + + + + +
K s K s s s
K Ks s s s s
s K s s s s
1
2
3
4
s
s
s
s
=
=
=
51
41
31
14
1
o
o
o
Step 4:
Find the point where the branches moves to R.H.P
(i.e. system becomes unstable)
We start with the C/C equation:
( )
0
3
50
45
42
32
=
=
+
o
o K
K 0
3K
( )
( )
K
K
K K
K
K
K
3
0 3
3 14 50
3
14
0 1 3 14
14
50 1 45 14
41
31 41
51
31
31
41
32
31
=

=
+
=
=

=
=
+
=
o
o o
o
o
o
o
o
o
0 0 3 > > K K
Hurwitz Criteria:
( )
( ) ( )
( )
> +
> +
>
+
=
< > >
+
=
0 29000 58
0 42 50
14
580
0
3 14 50
580 0 580 0
14
50 45 14
2
31
31
41
31
K K
K K
K K K
K K
K
o
o
o
o
Routh criteria:
5
( )( ) < + < + 0 7 . 201 7 . 143 0 29000 58
2
K K K K
> > +
< <
7 . 201 0 7 . 201
7 . 143 0 7 . 143
K K
K K
< < +
> >
7 . 201 0 7 . 201
7 . 143 0 7 . 143
K K
K K
Two Cases are
Possible for the
Inequality to hold
OR
Violates 0 > K Therefore,
Cant exist
0 0 3 0
51
> > > K K o
7 . 143 0 < < K
( ) ( )
= + + + +
= + + + + +
0 1 . 431 7 . 193 45 14
0 7 . 143 3 7 . 143 50 45 14
2 3 4
2 3 4
s s s s
s s s s
7 . 143 = K
Putting all of the conditions underlined above together gives:
At
=
=
=
78 . 2
22 . 11
72 . 3 0
4
3
2 , 1
s
s
j s
C/C equation:
72 . 3 j s
We solve the poly.
Using an equation
Solver such as roots
In MatLab.
C/C roots
or
Poles
The system crosses the imaginary axis at
6
Example:
An important element of an Intelligent Highway System (IHS) is controlling
the spacing between vehicles on a guideway. Assuming the dynamics of an
automated guiding system can be described by;
r
V
K
+
_
( ) 8
1
2
+ s s
y
5 + s
Desired
spacing
Actual spacing
Between vehicles
Estimate the R.L. Diagram for the system
Solution:
Form suitable for R.L. diagram ( )
( ) 8
5
2
+
+
s s
s K

270 , 90
2
180
5 . 1
2
5 8
= =
=
+
=
|
o
Departure angle from real axis

90
180
= =
q
No. of branches departing from the pt. (since,2poles 2 branches )
7
Example:
Consider the following servo-mechanism with a PD controller:
r
V
K
+
_
( ) 1
1
+ s s
y
1 + s
K
K
r
A. Put the C/C equation in a form suitable for R.L.
C.L.T.F:
( )
( )
( )
( ) K s K s s
K
K
K s K
s s
K
s s
K
s F
r
r
+ + +
=
+
+
+
+
=
1
1
1
1
C/C equation.
r
K
op
G
( )
0
1
1 =
+ +
+
K s s
s
K
r
C/C equation :
( )
0
1
1
1 =
+ +
+
s K s s
K
r
( ) 0 1 = + + + K s K s s
r
If is the control variable:
K If is the control variable:
B. Estimate the R.L. Diagrams
Control Variable:
( ) ( ) | |
0
1
1
1 0
1
1
1 =
+ +
+ =
+ +
+
r r
K s s
K
s K s s
K
K
8
( )
( )
2 , 270 , 90
1
2
1
2
0 1 0
= =
+ =
+
=
m n
K
K
r
r
|
o
| K
Zeros : None
2 poles : 2 branches
Asymptote :
System initially over damped, then it becomes under damped.
|
r
K Poles move further apart from each other, and it takes larger
Values of K to make system underdamped.
variable? control the is if What
r
K
9
Selected Illustrative Root Loci
(P control)
r
V
+
_ 2
1
s
y
p
k
Double integrator TF:
Ex: The control of
Attitude of a satellite
The root locus with respect to controller gain is: 0
1
1
2
= +
s
k
p
Rule 1. The locus has two branches that start at s = 0
Rule 2. There are no parts of the locus on the real axis.
Rule 3. The two asymptotes have origin at s = 0 and are
at the angles of +/- 90
Rule 4. The loci depart from s = 0 at the angles of +/- 90.
Rule 5. The loci remain on the imaginary axis for all values of k
p
Hence the transient would be oscillatory for any value of k
p
Root Locus with PD Control
| |
0
1
1
form locus root in the results which , 1 / as ratio gain select the y arbitraril
moment for the and , define we form, locus root in equation put the To
0
1
1
: is control PD ith equation w stic characteri The
2
2
=
+
+
=
=
= + +
s
s
K
k k
k K
s
s k k
D p
D
D p
The addition of the zero has pulled the locus into the
left half-plane, a point of general importance in
constructing a compensation
10
Lead Compensator
The physical operation of differentiation is not practical and in practice
PD control is approximated by
( )
( )
( ) ( ) ( )
( )
0 1
0 1 1
is controller this plant with / 1 for the equation istic chararcter The
that so /
and defining by form locus root in put be can which
1
2
2
=
+
+
+
= + = +
+
+
=
=
+ =
+
+ =
p s s
z s
K
s KL s G s D
s
p s
z s
K s D
K pk z
pk k K
p s
s k
k s D
p
D p
D
p
Lead Compensation Example
12 , 1 = = p z
4 , 1 = = p z
9 , 1 = = p z
An additional pole moving
in from the far left tends to
push the locus branches to
the right as it approaches a
given locus
11
Design Using Dynamic Compensation
Lead compensation approximates the function of PD control and
acts mainly to speed up a response by lowering rise time and
decreasing the transient overshoot.
Lag compensation approximates the function of PI control and is
usually used to improve the steady-state accuracy of the system.
( )
p z p z
p s
z s
K s D
> <
+
+
=
if on compensati lag and if on compensati lead called is
form the of function transfer a on with Compensati
Design Using Dynamic Compensation
Lead compensation approximates the function of PD control and
acts mainly to speed up a response by lowering rise time and
decreasing the transient overshoot.
Lag compensation approximates the function of PI control and is
usually used to improve the steady-state accuracy of the system.
( )
p z p z
p s
z s
K s D
> <
+
+
=
if on compensati lag and if on compensati lead called is
form the of function transfer a on with Compensati
12
Design Using Lead Compensation
If we apply this compensation to a second-order position control
system with normalized TF
( )
( ) 1
1
+
=
s s
s G
( ) ( )
( ) ( )
( ) ( ) ( ) lines dashed 2 control PD with and
lines solid on compensati with
, 0 1
for loci Root
+ =
=
= +
s K s D
K s D
s G s D
Design Using Lead Compensation
Selecting exact values of z and p is usually done by trial and error.
In general, the zero is placed in the neighborhood of the closed-loop
w
n
, as determined by rise-time or settling time requirements, and the
pole is located at a distance 5 to 20 times the value of the zero
location.
The choice of the exact pole location is a compromise between the
conflicting effects of noise suppression, for which one wants a small
value for p, and compensation effectiveness for which one wants a
large p.
( )
|
|
.
|
\
|
|
.
|
\
|
=
=
<
+
+
=
p z
j s
p z
p s
z s
K s D
e e
|
e
1 1 -
tan tan
by given is at T.F this of phase the example, For lead. phase impart TFs these
signals, sinusoidal to fact that the of reflection a is it since on compensati lead called is it then if
For
13
Selection of the zero and pole of a Lead Compensator
( ) ( ) | |
( ) ( ) ( )
( ) ( ) ( )
( ) ( ) 2 (c)
10 2 (b)
20 2 (a)
: 1 1 , with
cases for three loci Root
+ =
+ + =
+ + =
+ =
s s D
s s s D
s s s D
s s s G
Example
( ) ( ) | |
( )
( )
( ) 10
2
first try will We ts. requiremen e satisfy th will 2 . 7
25 . 0
8 . 1
of
frequency natural a and 0.5 of ratio damping a that estimate We
sec. 0.25 than more no of time rise and 20% than more no of
overshoot provide that will 1 1 for on compensati a Find
+
+
=
~ ~
>
+ =
s
s
K s D
s s s G
n
e
,
Solution
14
Example 2
ions. specificat meet these on to compensati lead a Design
20. n longer tha no be pole lead that the require ts requiremen n suppressio noise The
. 3 5 . 3 5 . 3 at pole a have to system loop - closed the require we Suppose
0
j r + =
The root-locus angle condition will be satisfied if the angle from the lead zero is 72.6. The location of the zero
is found to be z = -5.4 at a gain of 127. Thus
( )
20
4 . 5
127
+
+
=
s
s
s D
Step Response for Example 2
Remember it is not really a second-order system !! Can use RLTOOL in Matlab
15
Step response
To achieve better damping in order to reduce the overshoot in the transient response,
move the pole of the lead compensator more to the left in order to pull the locus in
that direction, and selecting K= 91.
Step response for K = 91 and L(s) =
( )
( )
( ) 13
2
91
+
+
=
s
s
s D
Design Using Lag Compensation
Once satisfactory dynamic response has been obtained, we may discover that
the low-frequency gain the value of the relevant steady-state error constant,
such as k
v
is still too low.
As we saw, the system type, which determined the degree of the polynomial
the system is capable of following, is determined by the order of the pole of the
TF. D(s)G(s) at s = 0
If the system is type 1, the velocity-error constant, which determines the
magnitude of the error to a ramp input, is given by
In order to increase this constant, it is necessary to do so in a way that does not
upset the already satisfactory dynamic response.
( ) ( ) s G s sD
s 0
lim
16
Thus, we want an expression for D(s) that will yield a significant gain at s = 0
to raise k
v
(or some other steady-state error constant) but is nearly unity (no
effect) at the higher frequency
n
, where the dynamic response is determined.
The result is
( )
( )
boosting) requires
gain state - steady which the extent to on the depending value (the 10 to 3
0 yet , with compared small are and of values the where
,
= =
>
+
+
=
p z D p z
p z
p s
z s
s D
n
e
Example
( )
( ) | |
( ) ( ) ( )
( )
( )
( )
( ) ( ) ( ). 01 . 0 05 . 0 Thus
. 7 around dynamics dominant the ng representi locus the of portions on the
effect little have would that so small very and both of values the keeps which
, 05 . 0 at zero a and 01 . 0 at pole a with ed accomplish be can This
5. of factor a by constant velocity the increase order to in 5 with
on compensati lag a require we s, obtain thi To . 70 that require we Suppose
. 14
13
2 91
1
1
13
2
91 lim
lim
is constant velocity the Thus
. 13 2 91 on compensati lead the including and
1
1
For
2
2
0
1
0
1
+ + =
=
= =
=
=
=
=
+ +
+
=
=
+ + =
+
=
s s s D
s D p z
z p
p z
K
s s s
s
s
G sKD K
s s s KD
s s
s G
n
v
s
s
v
e
17
Example continued
Root locus with both lead and lag compensations: (a) whole locus; (b) portion of part (a) expanded
to show the root locus near the lag compensation.

Control Engineering: Root Locus Analysis II

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Control Engineering: Root Locus Analysis II

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

1

Dr. Ayman A. El-Badawy

You might also like