Control Systems II

Improving Transient Response & Steady-State Error

by Mr L. Simukonda
 Improving Transient Response & Steady-State
Error
Transient Response vs. Steady-State Error
• Transient Response: Refers to the system's behavior during the
initial period after a disturbance or input change. It is typically
characterized by factors like rise time, overshoot, and settling
time.
• Steady-State Error: Represents the difference between the
desired output and the actual output after the system has reached
a stable state.
 Improving Transient Response & Steady-State
Error
Gain Adjustment Limitations
• Increasing gain can improve transient response (faster rise time,
reduced settling time) but often leads to higher overshoot and
increased steady-state error. Conversely, decreasing gain can
reduce overshoot and steady-state error but results in slower
transient response.
• Achieving both desired transient response and steady-state error
using gain adjustment alone is often challenging, especially when
they have conflicting requirements.
Improving Transient Response & Steady-State
Error

• The root locus typically allows us to

choose the proper loop gain to meet a
transient response specification.
• As the gain is varied, we move
through different regions of response.
Setting the gain at a particular value
yields the transient response dictated
by the poles at that point on the root
locus.
• Thus, we are limited to those
responses that exist along the root
locus.
Improving Transient Response & Steady-State Error

• Desired transient response (overshoot, settling time) and

increased steady-state error cannot be achieved using
simple gain adjustment within the existing root locus.
• The desired transient response (overshoot and settling
time) is represented by point B. However, due to
limitations of the current root locus, only point A (with
slower settling time) can be achieved through simple gain
adjustment.
• The goal is to speed up the response to point B without
affecting the overshoot and steady-state error. This
cannot be done with simple gain adjustment because
pointt B is not on the current root locus.
• what is the solution?
 Improving Transient Response & Steady-
State Error
• System Compensation:
– Introduce additional poles and zeros to the system to modify its root locus and intersect
the desired design point.
• Benefits:
– Faster response without affecting overshoot.
– It is a power-efficient solution, a particular solution or component can be added to a
system in a way that consumes minimal energy. This is particularly important for systems
that are battery-powered or have limited power resources.
– Can be achieved using passive(No external power needed eg resistors, capacitors, and
inductors) or active networks(external power needed .eg amplifiers or transistors).
• Challenges:
– Increased System Order: Adding poles and zeros can increase system complexity and potentially
affect the desired response.
– Higher-Order Poles: Determining the location of higher-order closed-loop poles can be challenging,
requiring simulation for evaluation.
 Improving Transient Response & Steady-State
Error
Compensators can be used to improve both transient response and
steady-state error in a system.
• Problem: adjusting gain to improve one aspect often
compromised the other.
• Solution: Dynamic compensators allow for simultaneous
optimization of transient response and steady-state error.
• Steady-State Error Improvement: Adding an open-loop pole at
the origin (integrator) in the forward path increases the system
type and reduces steady-state error.
 Improving Transient Response & Steady-State
Error
Dynamic Compensators
Dynamic Compensators are electronic circuits or software algorithms that are
used to modify the behavior of a control system. They are typically added to the
system's feedback loop(not always) to improve its performance in terms of
transient response, steady-state error, or other desired characteristics.
• Flexibility: These networks offer greater flexibility in shaping the system's
response compared to simple gain adjustment.
• Tailored Design: Dynamic compensators can be designed to address
specific transient response and steady-state error requirements.
• Simultaneous Optimization: By carefully selecting the components and
parameters of the compensator, it is possible to improve both aspects of the
system's performance.
 Improving Transient Response & Steady-State
Error
Dynamic Compensators Techniques:
Common dynamic compensation techniques include:
• Lead Compensators: Introduce a zero and a pole to improve
transient response and reduce overshoot.
• Lag Compensators: Introduce a zero and a pole to improve
steady-state error without significantly affecting transient
response.
• Lead-Lag Compensators: Combine the benefits of lead and lag
compensators to address both transient response and steady-
state error.
 Dynamic Compensators
Dynamic Compensators Configurations:
• Cascade compensation(a)
• Feedback compensation(b)
 Dynamic Compensators
Ideal vs. Passive Compensators
Ideal Compensators are those that use pure integration for
improving steady-state error or pure differentiation for improving
transient response. These require active networks, such as those
employing amplifiers and additional power sources.
• Advantages of Ideal Integral Compensators:
• Achieve zero steady-state error for step inputs.
• Electromechanical Ideal Compensators:
• Tachometers are often used to improve transient response due to their
easy interface with the plant.
 Dynamic Compensators
Ideal vs. Passive Compensators
Passive Compensators: These use passive elements like resistors and
capacitors and do not use pure integration or differentiation to improving
steady-state error and transient response respectively.
• Advantages:
• Simpler design and implementation.
• No need for external power sources.
• Generally more reliable and less prone to noise.
While ideal compensators offer certain advantages, passive compensators may
be more practical in some applications due to their simplicity and reliability..
 Improving Steady-State Error via Cascade
Compensation
One objective is to improve the steady-state error without affecting the transient
response.
• The first technique is ideal integral compensation, which uses a pure
integrator to place an open-loop, forward-path pole at the origin, thus
increasing the system type and reducing the error to zero.
– While this first technique reduces the steady-state error to zero, the compensator must
be implemented with active networks, such as amplifiers.
• The second technique does not use pure integration. This compensation
technique places the pole near the origin, and although it does not drive the
steady-state error to zero, it does yield a measurable reduction in steady-
state error.
– Although this technique does not reduce the error to zero, it does have the advantage
that it can be implemented with a less expensive passive network that do not require
additional power sources.
 Improving Steady-State Error via Cascade
Compensation
• Systems that feed the error forward to the plant are called
proportional control systems. Systems that feed the integral of
the error to the plant are called integral control systems. Finally,
systems that feed the derivative of the error to the plant are called
derivative control systems.
• Thus, we call the Ideal integral compensator a proportional-
plus-integral (PI) controller, since the implementation, consists of
feeding the error (proportional) plus the integral of the error
forward to the plant.
 Improving Steady-State Error via Cascade
Compensation
Ideal integral compensator
• Integral compensation is a valuable technique for
improving the performance of control systems.
• By introducing a pole at the origin, it effectively eliminates
steady-state errors for step inputs without significantly
affecting the transient response.
• This makes it a popular choice for applications where
precise control and accurate tracking of setpoints are
essential.
 Improving Steady-State Error via Cascade
Compensation
Ideal integral compensator
• Steady-state error can be improved by placing an open-loop pole at the
origin, because this increases the system type by one. Study the diagram
below and explain what has happened
 Improving Steady-State Error via Cascade
Compensation
Ideal integral compensator
• If we add a pole at the origin to increase the system type, the root locus no
longer goes through point A, as shown before. To solve the problem, we also
add a zero close to the pole at the origin
• A compensator with a pole at the origin
and a zero close to the pole is called an
ideal integral compensator.
 Improving Steady-State Error via Cascade
Compensation
Ideal integral compensator
• Improves the steady-state error of a control system.
• May achieve zero steady-state error for step inputs.
• Method:
• Introduces a pole at the origin in the transfer function of the compensator.
• This creates a higher Type system, which has a built-in integrator.
• The integrator compensates for errors over time, driving the output towards the desired setpoint.
• Effects:
• Transient Response:
• Remains approximately the same as the uncompensated system.
• Settling time may initially increase due to the integrator's slow action.
• Steady-State Error:
• Significantly reduced compared to the uncompensated system.
• Approaches zero for step inputs.
 Improving Steady-State Error via Cascade
Compensation
Implementing the Ideal integral compensator
• A method of implementing an ideal integral compensator is shown below
 Improving Steady-State Error via Cascade
Compensation
Implementing the Ideal integral compensator
 Improving Steady-State Error via Cascade
Compensation
Implementing the Ideal integral compensator
 Improving Steady-State Error via Cascade
Compensation
Lag Compensation
• Although the ideal compensator drives the steady-state error to zero, a lag
compensator with a pole that is not at the origin will improve the static error
constant.
• There also will be a minimal effect upon the transient response if the pole-
zero pair of the compensator is placed close to the origin.
• Lag compensation achieves this improvement by introducing a pole-zero pair
close to the origin of the s-plane, which modifies the system's frequency
response and shifts its steady-state characteristics towards the desired
target.
• Lag compensation can increase the static error constant without significantly
affecting the transient response.
 Improving Steady-State Error via Cascade
Compensation
Lag Compensation
• The gain, K, is about the same for the uncompensated and compensated
systems.
• The new static error constant is given by

• Where KvN is the new static error constant and Kvo is the old static error
constant.
• The static error constant improves by a factor of zc/pc , where zc is the zero
location and pc is the pole location.
 Improving Steady-State Error via Cascade
Compensation
Lag Compensation
• Comparison to Ideal Integral Compensation:
• Ideal Integral Compensation: Drives the steady-state error to zero but requires an active
integrator.
• Lag Compensation: Provides a less drastic improvement in steady-state error but can be
implemented using passive networks.
• Effects of Lag Compensation:
• Transient Response: Minimal impact if the pole-zero pair is placed close together.
• Static Error Constant: Improves by a factor of zc/pc, where zc is the zero location and pc is the
pole location.
• Required Gain: Remains relatively unchanged.
 Improving Steady-State Error via Cascade
Compensation
Lag Compensation

• The diagrams above show the effect on the root locus of adding the lag compensator.
• Notice that Lag Compensation does not change the system type
 Improving Steady-State Error via Cascade
Compensation
Lag Compensation
• Given closed loop system below, improve the steady-state error by a
factor of 10 if the system is operating with steady state error of 0.108
and Kp=8.23
 Improving Steady-State Error via Cascade
Compensation
Lag Compensation
Design a lag compensator in MATLAB using the system below
Improving Transient Response via Cascade Compensation
• Transient response of a system is selected by choosing an appropriate
closed-loop pole location on the s-plane.
• If the selected point is on the root locus, a simple gain adjustment
will meet the transient response specifications.
• If the closed-loop pole is not on the root locus, it must be reshaped
by adding poles or zeros to the system.
• Adding poles and zeros to the system can alter the root locus, allowing
for precise control of transient response. A simple method to speed up
the system is to add a zero to the forward path (compensator).
• The compensator's transfer function, 𝐺𝑐(𝑠)=𝑠+𝑧𝑐​ , is called an ideal
derivative (PD) controller, which helps quicken system response.
Improving Transient Response via Cascade Compensation
• The first technique we will discuss is ideal derivative compensation.
With ideal derivative compensation, a pure differentiator is added to
the forward path of the feedback control system.
• We will see that the result of adding differentiation is the addition of a
zero to the forward-path transfer function.
• This type of compensation requires an active network for its
realization.
• The second technique does not use pure differentiation. Instead, it
approximates differentiation with a passive network by adding a zero
and a more distant pole to the forward-path transfer function.
• We use the name PD controller interchangeably with ideal derivative
compensator, and we use the name lead compensator when the
cascade compensator does not employ pure differentiation.
Improving Transient Response via Cascade Compensation
Ideal Derivative Compensation (PD)

Using ideal derivative compensation: a. uncompensated; b. compensator zero at -2;

Improving Transient Response via Cascade Compensation
Ideal Derivative Compensation (PD)

c. compensator zero at -3; d. compensator zero at -4.

Improving Transient Response via Cascade Compensation
Implementing the Ideal Derivative compensator
• A method of implementing an ideal derivative compensator is shown below
Improving Transient Response via Cascade Compensation
Implementing the Ideal Derivative compensator
Improving Transient Response via Cascade Compensation
Lead Compensation
• Lead compensation is an approximation of an active ideal derivative
compensator using a passive network.
• A passive lead compensator results in both a zero and a pole, unlike a
single zero from an active PD (Proportional-Derivative) controller.
• The key factor is ensuring that the pole is placed farther from the
imaginary axis than the zero, to maintain a positive angular
contribution, which improves the system's transient response.
• While it reduces noise compared to PD controllers, it does not have the
same effectiveness in controlling system stability as a PD controller
Improving Transient Response via Cascade Compensation
Comparing Lead and PD Controllers
Lead Compensator
• No additional power supply is needed.
• Reduced noise due to differentiation.
• Does not reduce the number of branches crossing the imaginary axis
on the root locus.
PD Controller
• Requires an external power source.
• More effective in reducing the number of root locus branches crossing
into the right half-plane (which could cause instability).
 Improving Transient Response via Cascade
Compensation
Lead Compensation
Design a lead compensator in MATLAB using the previous MATLAB
system example
 Improving Steady-State Error and Transient Response
• The design can use either active or passive compensators, as
previously described.
• If we design an active PD controller followed by an active PI
controller, the resulting compensator is called a proportional-
plus-integral-plus-derivative (PID) controller.
• If we first design a passive lead compensator and then design a
passive lag compensator, the resulting compensator is called a
lag-lead compensator.
• We first design for transient response and then design for steady-
state error.
 Improving Steady-State Error and Transient Response
Implementing the PID Controller Design
 Improving Steady-State Error and Transient Response
Lag-Lead Compensator Design
• We design the lead compensator to improve the transient
response. Next we design the lag compensator to meet the
steady-state error requirement.
• Design a lag-lead compensator for the system below in MATLAB