Scribd
Upload
70 views35 pages

Controller Design

The document discusses techniques for pole placement controller design using state feedback. There are three main methods: 1) direct substitution for systems with 3 or fewer states, 2) Bass-Gura approach that works for any system by transforming it to companion form, and 3) Ackermann's formula that calculates the state feedback gain matrix directly from the desired closed loop poles. Pole placement allows designing controllers to improve performance by placing poles at desired locations while ensuring stability. An example demonstrates applying the three methods to calculate the state feedback gain matrix for a specific system.

Uploaded by

Oreste Hernandez
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PPTX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
70 views35 pages

Controller Design

The document discusses techniques for pole placement controller design using state feedback. There are three main methods: 1) direct substitution for systems with 3 or fewer states, 2) Bass-Gura approach that works for any system by transforming it to companion form, and 3) Ackermann's formula that calculates the state feedback gain matrix directly from the desired closed loop poles. Pole placement allows designing controllers to improve performance by placing poles at desired locations while ensuring stability. An example demonstrates applying the three methods to calculate the state feedback gain matrix for a specific system.

Uploaded by

Oreste Hernandez
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PPTX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 35

Controller and Observer

Design
(Design of Control System in State Space)
(Design of Control System in State Space by Pole
placement)
References
• Dr. Radhakant Padhi, Asstt. Prof, IISC, Bangalore, through NPTEL
• Modern Control Engineering by Katsuhiko Ogata, PHI Pvt. Ltd New
Delhi
Pole Placement
Controller Design
Pole Placement Technique
• Poles of a control system (stable/unstable) can be place at desired
location by pole placement technique. This is done to
• Improve the performance of the system
• Make the system stable
• Increase the damping
• Increase the response time
• Etc
Pole Placement Technique
• Assumptions are
1. The system is completely state controllable
2. The sate variable are measureable and available for feedback
3. Control input (u) is unconstrained and single

Note: For multi input system, the state feedback gain matrix is not unique
Pole Placement Technique
• Objective:
• The closed loop poles should lie ,…. Which are their “desired locations”.
• Difference from classical approach:
• Not only the dominants poles, but “all poles” are forced to lie at specified
desired locations.
• In classical approach only dominants poles are placed at desired location
• Necessary and Sufficient condition:
• The system is completely state controllable
Philosophy of Pole placement control
design
• Let a system is represented by
• ---(1)
• Put input u as
• , put in equation (1)
• K is called state feedback gain matrix (1xn) and X is state vector (nx1)
• So KX will be scalar (=> single input)

• ---(2)
• New closed loop state transition matrix
• Its time response
• ---(3)
Philosophy of Pole placement control
design …
˙
𝑋
∫
X
˙
𝑋
∫
X B ++
B +
u +
u A
A

Fig 1: Open loop Control system -K

Fig 2: Closed loop Control system


With u=-KX

• Philosophy: The matrix K is designed such a way that the two


characterize equations are having same poles
Placement control design (Controller
Design)
• There are three method:
• Method 1: Direct substitution method (when order of system n≤3)
• Method 2: Bass-Gura Approach
• Method 3: Ackermann’s formula
Controller Design by method 1:
• Let the system is steps are
• Step 1: Check controllability of the system
• Step 2: Put u=-KX where
• So
• Step 3: Write characteristic equations of above new system

• Step 4: Write Desired characteristic equation

• Step 5: Compare above two characteristic equations and solve for k 1, k2,
k3 by equating the power of s on both sides
Controller Design by method 2:
• Let the system is steps are
• Step 1: Check controllability of the system
• Step 2: Put u=-KX where
• Step 3: Let the system is in first companion form (Controllable
canonical form) i.e
Controller Design by method 2…
• Step 4: after putting the value of u in given system, now system will
become . So

---(4)
Controller Design by method 2…
• Step 5:

---(5)
Controller Design by method 2…
• Step 6: Comparing equations (4) & (5) we have
What if the system is not given in first
companion form?
• Answer is to convert it into Companion Form as follows
• Define a transform
• put the value of

• Select the value of T such that is in first companion form


• Put T=MW
• Where is the controllability matrix
What if the system is not given in first
companion form?...
Controller Design using Method 2: Bass-
Gura Approach
• Step 1: Check controllability of the system
• Step 2: Form the characteristic equation using matrix A
• …+ find ai’s
• Step 3: find the transformation matrix T if system is not in first companion T=MW
• Step 4: Write the desired characteristic equation

• Step 5: The required state feedback matrix is

• Note: Above approach is for any system (controllable canonical form or not). If
system is in controllable canonical form put T=I (identity matrix)
Controller Design using Method
3:Ackermann’s Formula
• Let
• Desired characteristic equation
•
• Caley-Hamilton theorem states that every matrix A satisfies it own characteristic
equation. So

• For case n=3 consider the following identities


Controller Design using Method
3:Ackermann’s Formula …
• Multiplying the above identities with respectively and adding them

---(6)
Controller Design using Method
3:Ackermann’s Formula …
• From Caley-Hemilton theorem for

• Also we have for A

• Putting the values & of in equation (6)

0
Controller Design using Method
3:Ackermann’s Formula …
• =>

• Since system is completely controllable inverse of the controllability


matrix exists we obtain

=> ---(7)
Controller Design using Method
3:Ackermann’s Formula …
• Pre multiplying both sides of the equation (2) with [0 0 1]
Controller Design using Method
3:Ackermann’s Formula …
• Hence
• For an arbitrary positive integer n ( number of states) Ackermann’s
formula for the state feedback gain matrix K is given by

are the coefficients of desired characteristic polynomial


Example
• Example 1: Consider the system defined by where
•
• By using the state feedback control u=-KX, it is desired to the closed
loop poles at and s=-10. Determine the sate feedback gain matrix K.
• Solution:
• First check the controllability of above system
Example ..
• Controllability matrix
• so rank of M =3. Hence system is completely state controllable.
• Now we will solve this problem with previous three methods
Example ..
• Method 1: Direct substitution method
• Put u=-KX where
• So
• Write characteristic equations of above new system
Example…

• Desired Characteristic equation

• comparing above two characteristic equations


• k1 = 199, k2 = 55, k3 = 8
• So
Example
• Method 2: Characteristic equation of the given system

• Comparing with

• a1 = 6, a2 = 5, a3 = 1
Example…
• Desired Characteristic equation

• Sate feedback gain matrix K is


•
• Where T= I (identity matrix as system is in controllable canonical form)
Example…
• Method 3: Ackermann’s Formula
Example…
• So
Choice of closed loop poles:
• Don’t choose the closed loop poles far away from the open loop
poles, otherwise it will damage high control effort.

• Don’t choose the closed loop poles very negative, otherwise the
system will be fast reacting (i.e it will have a small time constant)
• In frequency domain it will lead to large bandwidth and hence noise get
amplified.
Controller for multi input system
• The state feedback gain matrix (K) becomes a matrix of mxn (Not
vector of 1xn unlike single input system)
• m = no of inputs and n = no of states
• The state feedback gain matrix (K) is not unique
Summary wise
• Define a linear combination of
control variables as new control
cariable. i.e

• Figure Reference:
• www.optisyn.com
Next: Observer Design

Thanks

You might also like