351 - 27435 - EE419 - 2016 - 1 - 2 - 1 - 0 3 EE419 Lec6,7 Compensation RL
351 - 27435 - EE419 - 2016 - 1 - 2 - 1 - 0 3 EE419 Lec6,7 Compensation RL
351 - 27435 - EE419 - 2016 - 1 - 2 - 1 - 0 3 EE419 Lec6,7 Compensation RL
Lecture 6
Emam Fathy
email: emfmz@aast.edu
http://www.aast.edu/cv.php?disp_unit=346&ser=68525
1
Introduction
• A feedback control system that provides an optimum
performance without any necessary adjustment is rare.
– Overshoot;
– Series Compensation
– Parallel Compensation
Compensator Configurations
• The choice between series compensation and parallel
compensation depends on
– the nature of the signals
– available components
– lag compensators
– lag–lead compensators
Lead Compensation
Lead Compensation
• Lead Compensation essentially yields an appreciable
improvement in transient response and a small change
in steady state accuracy.
𝑇𝑠+1
𝐺𝑐 𝑠 = 𝐾𝑐 𝛼 , (0 < 𝛼 < 1)
𝛼𝑇𝑠+1
• or
1
𝑠+
𝑇
𝐺𝑐 𝑠 = 𝐾𝑐 1 , (0 < 𝛼 < 1)
𝑠+
𝛼𝑇
Electronic Lead Compensator
• Following figure shows an electronic lead compensator using
operational amplifiers.
𝐸𝑜 (𝑠) 𝑅2 𝑅4 𝑅1 𝐶1 𝑠 + 1
=
𝐸𝑖 (𝑠) 𝑅1 𝑅3 𝑅2 𝐶2 𝑠 + 1
Electronic Lead Compensator
𝐸𝑜 (𝑠) 𝑅2 𝑅4 𝑅1 𝐶1 𝑠 + 1
=
𝐸𝑖 (𝑠) 𝑅1 𝑅3 𝑅2 𝐶2 𝑠 + 1
• This can be represented as
1
𝐸𝑜 (𝑠) 𝑅4 𝐶1 𝑠 + 𝑅1 𝐶1
=
𝐸𝑖 (𝑠) 𝑅3 𝐶2 𝑠 + 1
• Where, 𝑅2 𝐶2
𝑅4 𝐶1
𝑇 = 𝑅1 𝐶1 𝑎𝑇 = 𝑅2 𝐶2 𝐾𝑐 =
𝑅3 𝐶2
• Then, 𝑠+𝑇
1
𝐺𝑐 𝑠 = 𝐾𝑐 1 , (0 < 𝛼 < 1)
𝑠+𝛼𝑇
• 𝑵𝒐𝒕𝒊𝒄𝒆 𝒕𝒉𝒂𝒕
𝑹 𝟏 𝑪𝟏 > 𝑹 𝟐 𝑪𝟐
Electronic Lead Compensator
• Pole-zero Configuration of
Lead Compensator
𝑅1 𝐶1 > 𝑅2 𝐶2
Lead Compensation Techniques Based
on the Root-Locus Approach.
• The root-locus approach to design is very powerful
when the specifications are given in terms of time-
domain quantities, such as
– damping ratio
– undamped natural frequency
– desired dominant closed-loop poles
– maximum overshoot
– rise time
– settling time.
Lead Compensation Techniques Based
on the Root-Locus Approach.
• The steps for designing a lead compensator using root-
locus:
– Step-1: Analyze the given system via root locus.
– Step-2: From the performance specifications,
determine the desired location for the dominant
closed-loop poles.
– Step-3: design the compensator.
– Step-4: check your design.
Example-1
• Consider the position control system shown in following
figure.
10
G (s) H (s)
s ( s 1)
C (s) 10
2
R( s ) s s 10
C (s) 10
2
R( s ) s s 10
• The damping ratio of the closed-loop
poles is 0.158.
• The undamped natural frequency of
the closed-loop poles is 3.1623
rad/sec.
• Because the damping ratio is
small, this system will have a large
overshoot in the step response and
is not desirable.
Example-1
• From the performance specifications, determine the
desired location for the dominant closed-loop poles.
C ( s) n2 9
2 2
R( s) s 2n s n s 3s 9
2
s 1.5 j 2.5981
Example-1
• Alternatively desired location of closed loop poles can also
be determined graphically
Desired ωn= 3 rad/sec
Desired
Desired damping ratio= 0.5 Closed Loop
Pole
cos1
60
s 1.5 j 2.5981
-1
d 40
100o 120o
-2 -1
Note
The solution to such a problem is not unique.
There are infinitely many solutions.
Exampl-1 (solution 1)
-2
40
-1
90o
-3 -2 -1.5 -1
𝑠 + 1.5
𝐺𝑐 𝑠 = 1.03
𝑠 + 3.6
Example-1 (solution 2)
P
A
-2
-1
O
-3 -2 -1
Example-1 (solution 2)
• Bisect the angle between the lines PA and PO.
P
A
-2
2
2 -1
O
-3 -2 -1
Example-1 (solution 2)
𝜃𝑑
• Draw two lines PC and PD that make angles ± with the the
2
bisector PB.
• The intersections of PC and PD with the negative real axis give the
necessary locations for the pole and zero of the lead network.
P
A
-2
d
2
d -1
2
O
-3 -2 -1
C
B
D
Example-1 (solution 2)
• The lead compensator has zero at s=–1.9432 and pole at s=–4.6458.
P
A
-2
d
2
d -1
2
O
-3 -2 -1
C
B
D
1
𝑠+ 𝑠+1.9432
𝑇
𝐺𝑐 𝑠 = 𝐾𝑐 1 = 𝐾𝑐
𝑠+𝛼𝑇 𝑠+4.6458
Example-1 (solution 2)
• The Kc is calculated as
𝐾𝑐 = 1.2287
• Hence, the lead compensator Gc(s) just designed is given
by
𝑠 + 1.9432
𝐺𝑐 𝑠 = 1.2287
𝑠 + 4.6458
Example-1 (solution 2)
Desired Desired
Closed Loop Closed Loop
Pole Pole
Uncompensated Compensated
System System
Example-1 (solution 2)
• It is worthwhile to check the static velocity error
constant Kv for the system just designed.
𝑠 + 1.9432 10
𝐾𝑣 = lim 𝑠 1.2287 = 5.139
𝑠→0 𝑠 + 4.6458 𝑠(𝑠 + 1)
1
Amplitude
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14
Time (sec)
Step Response
1.4
Actual System
1.2 Solution-1
Solution-3
1
Amplitude
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14
Example-2
• Consider the model of space vehicle control system
depicted in following figure.
39
Lag Compensation
• Lag compensation is used to improve the steady state error
of the system.
• Generally Lag compensators are represented by following
transfer function
𝑇𝑠+1
𝑐 𝛽
𝐺𝑐 𝑠 = 𝐾 , (β > 1)
𝛽𝑇𝑠+1
• Or 1
𝑠+
𝑐
𝐺𝑐 𝑠 = 𝐾 𝑇
1 , (β > 1)
𝑠+
𝛽𝑇
𝑐is gain of lag compensator.
• Where 𝐾
40
Example-4
• Consider the system shown in following figure.
s = -0.3307 ± j0.5864
47
Example-4
• The static velocity error constant of the plant (𝐾𝑣 𝑢𝑛𝑐𝑜𝑚𝑝 ) is
1.06
𝐾𝑣 𝑢𝑛𝑐𝑜𝑚𝑝 = lim𝑠𝐺(𝑠) = lim 𝑠 = 0.53𝑠 −1
𝑠→0 𝑠→0 𝑠 𝑠+1 𝑠+2
• The desired static velocity error constant (𝐾𝑣 𝑟𝑒𝑞 ) of the
compensated system is 5𝑠 −1 .
𝐾𝑣 𝑟𝑒𝑞 5
𝛽= =
𝐾𝑣 𝑢𝑛𝑐𝑜𝑚𝑝 0.53 𝛽 = 10
1
𝑠+ 𝑍
𝑇
𝐺𝑐 𝑠 = 1 𝛽=
𝑠+ 𝑃
𝛽𝑇 50
Example-4 (solution 1)
• Let the zero s=–0.05 so the pole s=–0.005.
𝑠+0.05 1.06
𝐺𝑐 𝑠 𝐺(𝑠)=
𝑠+0.005 𝑠(𝑠+1)(𝑠+2)
1.06(𝑠+0.05)
𝐺𝑐 𝑠 𝐺(𝑠)=
𝑠(𝑠+0.005)(𝑠+1)(𝑠+2)
51
Example-4 (solution 1)
• Root locus of uncompensated and compensated systems.
𝑠 = −0.31 ± 𝑗0.55
52
Example-4 (Design Check)
• The compensated system has following open loop transfer
function.
1.0235(𝑠+0.05)
𝐺𝑐 𝑠 𝐺(𝑠)=
𝑠(𝑠+0.005)(𝑠+1)(𝑠+2)
1.0235 0.05
𝑣 𝑐𝑜𝑚𝑝 =
𝐾 = 5.12𝑠 −1
0.005 1 2
55
Example-4 (solution 2)
• Place the zero and pole of the lag compensator at s=–0.01
and s=–0.001, respectively.
𝑐
𝑤ℎ𝑒𝑟𝑒 𝐾 = 1.06𝐾 56
Example-4 (Step-5) Solution-2
Root Locus
6
• New Closed Loop poles Actual System
are 4 Compensated System
𝑠 = −0.33 ± 𝑗0.55 2
Imaginary Axis
-2
-4
-6
-8 -6 -4 -2 0 2 4
Real Axis 57
Example-5
• Design a lag compensator for following unity
feedback system such that the static velocity error
constant is 50 sec-1 without appreciably changing the
closed loop poles, which are at 𝑠 = −2 ± 𝑗 6.
58
End of Lec